CfP MOH: Histories of Entrepreneurship Education

Histories of entrepreneurship education: Exploring its past, understanding its present, and re-imagining its future

Manuscript deadline: 15 June 2023

Management & Organizational History

Special Issue Editor(s)

Christoph ViebigCopenhagen Business School

Christian StutzJyväskylä School of Business and Economics

Anders Ravn SørensenCopenhagen Business School

Entrepreneurship education is a global phenomenon. Over the last decades, we have seen tremendous growth in political and societal support for entrepreneurship education and a steep increase in entrepreneurship courses and programs at higher education institutions (Kuratko & Morris, 2018). At the same time, we are witnessing a scholarly debate about the current status and future direction of entrepreneurship education scholarship (Landström et al., 2021; Neck & Corbett, 2018; Pittaway & Cope, 2007). Most contributions to this debate paint an image of entrepreneurship education as a contemporary phenomenon linked to zeitgeisty agendas of self-fulfillment, grand societal challenges, and ideas about allegedly unprecedented economic and technological transformations (Dimov & Pistrui, 2022; Hägg & Kurczewska, 2021; Ratten & Jones, 2019). While this framing around newness arguably has helped to drive student interest and attract political support for entrepreneurship education on a global scale, it can also be seen as a liability calling into question the field’s academic legitimacy and limiting the ways in which we understand the present and imagine the future of entrepreneurship education (Cummings & Bridgman, 2016; Wadhwani & Viebig, 2021).

Entrepreneurship education is an underexplored historical phenomenon. Extending the dominant framing of entrepreneurship education as a new phenomenon, a recent study has shown that this form of business education has, in fact, a long tradition going back to the early nineteenth century, hence predating the modern business school and research-based university (Wadhwani & Viebig, 2021). While Katz (2003) has highlighted earlier entrepreneurship education initiatives, the conventional historical narrative of entrepreneurship education suggests that entrepreneurship education emerged at US business schools during the 1970s and grew domestically throughout the 1980s and 1990s (Kuratko, 2005). Since the 1990s, entrepreneurship education has expanded into all areas of higher education and especially internationally (Dana, 1992). During the late 1990s and early 2000s, it has turned into a global phenomenon with still growing numbers of students, courses, and programs around the globe (Kuratko & Morris, 2018). Those historical narratives serve an important purpose because our interpretations of the past are constitutive of our understandings and influence how we think about the future. Hence, revisiting the history of entrepreneurship education holds the potential to shape the current debates about entrepreneurship education and stimulate new ways of thinking about its future.

This special issue seeks to begin a more profound conversation about the history of entrepreneurship education by linking the scholarship of entrepreneurship education with the lively debates about the history of business education. Unlike the history of management education and the history of business school (Amdam & Dávila, 2021; Engwall et al., 2016), historical research about entrepreneurship education has been scarce and largely inexistent in the debates about the history of business education (McLaren et al., 2021). Developing new histories of entrepreneurship education requires identifying educational initiatives for entrepreneurs in temporal and regional contexts where the terminology of entrepreneurship may not (yet) exist and making a strong case to show that those educational initiatives can be accounted for as entrepreneurship education. In doing so, we encourage scholars to go beyond today’s definitions of entrepreneurship education and broaden our understanding of what has been an education for, in, and about different forms of entrepreneurship. We believe that by developing new historical perspectives (Bucheli & Wadhwani, 2014; Stutz & Sachs, 2018), this special issue can make a strong contribution to our contemporary understanding of the teaching and learning of entrepreneurship and link this form of education with debates about the history of business education more broadly.

Therefore, we invite empirical and conceptual submissions on the following topics and questions, amongst others.

Revisiting the dominant histories of entrepreneurship education and their effects:

  • What are the current prevailing historical narratives of entrepreneurship education? Which stories, characters, events, and plots do those histories use? Are there dominant narratives in the past that disappeared again? How and why did they appear, exist, and disappear?
  • How have the existent histories of entrepreneurship education been used? Which purposes, aims, and interests did those narratives serve? How do the prevailing histories influence the self-identity of entrepreneurship education research and practice? What can we learn from these histories-and what not (cf. Cummings et al., 2017).

Challenging prevailing narratives with deeper and broader histories:

  • What are underexplored or overlooked aspects of the currently dominant histories of entrepreneurship education? What is the history of entrepreneurship education outside North America and Western Europe? What can we learn from incorporating those aspects into the prevailing narratives?
  • What educational institutions within and outside higher education offered entrepreneurship education? How was their approach different from contemporary or other past forms of entrepreneurship education?
  • What is the historical relationship between management, commercial and other forms of business education with entrepreneurship education? What are the differences and similarities between those forms of education?
  • What is the relationship between different forms of entrepreneurship education and different contexts? Why did entrepreneurship initiatives appear in some contexts and not in others?
  • How have family entrepreneurs been educated? What characterized family entrepreneurship education, and how is that different from contemporary approaches to entrepreneurship education?

History of entrepreneurship thought and pedagogies; historical consciousness:

  • What is entrepreneurship education’s history of thought? What ideas have been influential in the formation of entrepreneurship education initiatives? What other ideas have existed and been forgotten? What can we learn from recovering those (cf. Prieto et al., 2021)?
  • What pedagogies have been used to educate entrepreneurs historically? What advantages and disadvantages did those pedagogies have, and how did they shape the image and results of entrepreneurship education?
  • What, if any, is the pedagogical role of practicing historical consciousness in educating entrepreneurs (cf. Tennent et al., 2020)?

References :

Augier, M., & March, J. G. (2011). The roots, rituals, and rhetorics of change: North American business schools after the Second World War. Stanford Business Books.

Bucheli, M., & Wadhwani, R. D. (Eds.). (2014). Organizations in time: History, theory, methods (First edition). Oxford University Press.

Dana, L. P. (1992). Entrepreneurial education in Europe. Journal of Education for Business68(2), 74–78.

Dimov, D., & Pistrui, J. (2022). Entrepreneurship Education as a First-Person Transformation. Journal of Management Inquiry31(1), 49–53.

Engwall, L., Kipping, M., & Üsdiken, B. (2016). Defining management: Business schools, consultants, media. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Hägg, G., & Kurczewska, A. (2021). Entrepreneurship education: Scholarly progress and future challenges. Routledge.

Katz, J. A. (2003). The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education. Journal of Business Venturing18(2), 283–300.

Khurana, R. (2007). From higher aims to hired hands: The social transformation of American business schools and the unfulfilled promise of management as a profession. Princeton University Press.

Kuratko, D. F. (2005). The emergence of entrepreneurship education: Development, trends, and challenges. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice29(5), 577–598.

Kuratko, D. F., & Morris, M. H. (2018). Examining the future trajectory of entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management56(1), 11–23.

Landström, H., Gabrielsson, J., Politis, D., Sørheim, R., & Djupal, K. (2021). The social structure of entrepreneurial education as a scientific field. Academy of Management Learning & Education.

McLaren, P. G., Bridgman, T., Cummings, S., Lubinski, C., O’Connor, E., Spender, J.-C., & Durepos, G. (2021). From the Editors-New Times, New Histories of the Business School. Academy of Management Learning & Education20(3), 293–299.

Neck, H. M., & Corbett, A. C. (2018). The Scholarship of teaching and learning entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy1(1), 8–41.

Pittaway, L., & Cope, J. (2007). Entrepreneurship education: A systematic review of the evidence. International Small Business Journal25(5), 479–510.

Ratten, V., & Jones, P. (Eds.). (2019). Transformational entrepreneurship. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Social structures and organizations. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of Organizations (pp. 142–193). Rand McNally.

Wadhwani, R. D., & Viebig, C. (2021). Social imaginaries of entrepreneurship education: The United States and Germany, 1800–2020. Academy of Management Learning & Education20(3), 342–360.

CfP: Enterprising York

Call for Papers

Enterprising York: Histories of Business, Management and Society in a City of Heritage

York, England

15-16 September 2023

Deadline for submission: 30 November 2022

More than eight million tourists flock to the city of York each year to celebrate its heritage, gaining brief glimpses into the city’s long history as an important centre of private trade and public enterprise. From bustling mediaeval markets to industrial railways, chocolate manufacturers, and luxurious teahouses, the history of enterprise in the city of York is widely recognized as a valuable resource of particular significance to small businesses and public organisations. Yet unlike larger cities in northern England, York’s business and management history has received very little scholarly attention. Despite being recognized since the Roman conquest of Britain as an important and well-connected commercial city and site of public administration, an important mediaeval and early-modern trading centre, and a pioneering hub at the forefront of 19th-century industrialisation in transport and manufacturing, the city of York is now largely overlooked as a site critical to the development of the British economy. This conference seeks to address the apparent paradox of a city that, economically, always seems simultaneously behind and ahead of its times.

As the institutional home to one of the largest concentrations of business and management historians in the UK, the University of York’s School for Business and Society invites proposals for original research presentations that reconsider the history of York’s private and public enterprise. Possible topics include, but are not limited to:

  • The conflicted legacies of colonialism, slavery and philanthropy in York’s chocolate industries
  • Papers drawing on the rich archival materials of the Borthwick Institute for Archives at the University of York
  • York’s pioneering role in public administration of government, religious, military, and nonprofit enterprises
  • Histories of retailing, hospitality, tourism and consumer culture in York
  • Transportation and trade from the Roman and Viking eras through mediaeval and early-modern commerce, industrialization and to the post-industrial present
  • Gender, race, diversity and inequality in work and employment, labour-management relations, and corporate governance 
  • Entrepreneurship in a local context, including the successes and challenges faced by women, ethnic and religious minorities, and LGBT+ communities
  • The role of rural enterprise and rural development in the North Yorkshire economy
  • The historical relationship between the University of York and local and regional private and public enterprises

Please submit proposals of no more than 500 words and a one-page C.V. to Shane Hamilton ( by 30 November 2022. Conference presenters will be asked to submit complete versions of their papers by 15 August 2023. Presenters will receive accommodation, meals, and compensation for their travel costs. The conference organisers are planning an edited publication based on a selection of revised conference papers. The program committee is composed of Shane Hamilton, Matthew Hollow, Stephen Linstead, Simon Mollan, and Kevin Tennent.

Lou Galambos on 19C entrepreneurial culture

I was very pleased to see a historical piece by the well-known business historian Lou Galambos in the Academy of Management Perspectives recently. His contribution features in an issue that features articles on digital globalization, platform business models, and AI – it is great to see how AOM journals have opened up to a more pluralistic understanding of what management research can be.

The Entrepreneurial Culture: Mythologies, Realities, and Networks in Nineteenth-Century America

Louis Galambos

Academy of Management Perspectives Vol. 35, No. 4

Published Online: 29 Nov 2021


Entrepreneurship is the driving force of capitalism; this article takes an historical lens to explore the culture that sustains that process. Behavioral economics provides an intellectual framework for analyzing the great variety of entrepreneurial enterprises that thrived in nineteenth-century America. Failures abounded, but the search for new opportunities continued and, by 1900, the frontier and the First and Second Industrial Revolutions had brought America to global industrial leadership and to the edge of a challenging cultural, political, and economic transition.

JMH Special Issue on Entrepreneurship Thought and Behavior

Announcement of Special Issue in the Journal of Management History:

Entrepreneurship Thought and Behavior: Reflecting Back and Pushing Forward.


  • Submissions open: August 2021
  • Submission deadline: 1st December 2021 
  • Revisions (expected): February/March 2022 
  • Final decisions (expected): May 2022 
  • Expected publication issue: Vol. 28 No. 4 in 2022 

Entrepreneurship has a long, and in many cases untold, history. Its discovery from the Irish French economist Richard Cantillon as a risk bearer was written around 1730, and ever since, entrepreneurship and the entrepreneur have remained important components of numerous economic and management theories. The entrepreneur plays a key role in the writings of Jean-Baptist Say, John Stuart Mill, Joseph Schumpeter, Frank Knight, and Friedrich Hayek, yet little historical work explores this in more depth. Moreover, while the Journal of Management History has published numerous articles exploring historical facets of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship over the years (cf., Murphy et al., 2006; Murphy, 2009; Smothers et al., 2014; Prieto and Phipps, 2014; Laudone et al., 2015; Prieto et al., 2017), to date no journal has featured entrepreneurship (broadly defined) as a topic of historical study.

Accordingly, this special issue of the Journal of Management History aims to stimulate research relating to entrepreneurship, entrepreneurs, and the historical foundations, assumptions, and roots of entrepreneurship theory and behavior. Themes may include, but are not limited to:

  1. The history and evolution of entrepreneurial thought and behavior
  2. Historical case analyses of entrepreneurs, their journeys, and their impact and influence
  3. Role and development of entrepreneurial ecosystems over time
  4. Evolution of entrepreneurship-relevant theories, their foundational assumptions and tenants, and how they have evolved over time (e.g., Bendickson et al., 2016)
  5. Emergence and history of research streams within entrepreneurship (social entrepreneurship, gender and entrepreneurship, corporate entrepreneurship, technology entrepreneurship, etc.)
  6. Historical foundations and evolution of entrepreneurial policy over time
  7. Mass proliferation of entrepreneurial support organizations (ESOs), their evolution, and impact
  8. Integration and widespread proliferation of entrepreneurship into education over time
  9. Historical role of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship in addressing the world’s biggest challenges (cf., United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, National Academy of Engineering Grand Challenges)

An intended outcome of this issue is to publish work that is relevant and capable of informing future entrepreneurship research and practice. Authors are encouraged to not just explore topics that are historically interesting, but also capable of having contemporary impact and meaningfulness. Accordingly, scholarship that is purely retrospective and offers little to no implications for contemporary entrepreneurship research and practice is likely not a great fit for the issue.

Given the intentionally wide range of topics that fit within this call for papers, and the special attention the editorial team is putting on the ability of accepted papers to inform contemporary theory and practice, prospective authors are encouraged to reach out to the lead special issue editor, Jeff Muldoon (, with any queries they may have relating to topical fit and alignment (extended abstracts are welcome for review and feedback).


Bendickson, J., Muldoon, J., Liguori, E. W., & Davis, P. E. (2016). Agency theory: background and epistemology. Journal of Management History, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 437-449.

Murphy, P.J., Liao, J. and Welsch, H.P. (2006), “A conceptual history of entrepreneurial thought”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 12-35.

Murphy, P.J. (2009), “Entrepreneurship theory and the poverty of historicism”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 109-133.

Smothers, J., J. Murphy, P., M. Novicevic, M. and H. Humphreys, J. (2014), “Institutional entrepreneurship as emancipating institutional work: James Meredith and the Integrationist Movement at Ole Miss”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 114-134.

Prieto, L.C. and T.A. Phipps, S. (2014), “Capitalism in question: Hill, Addams and Follett as early social entrepreneurship advocates”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 266-277

Laudone, R., Liguori, E.W., Muldoon, J. and Bendickson, J. (2015), “Technology brokering in action: revolutionizing the skiing and tennis industries”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 114-134.

Prieto, L.C., Phipps, S.T.A., Osiri, J.K. and LeCounte, J.F. (2017), “Creating an interface: Aiding entrepreneurial success via critical pedagogy and insights from African-American management history”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 489-506.

Video abstract for “Tangled Roots of African Entrepreneurship”

What can I say, with the second lockdown in the UK comes more up-skilling…

Our piece combines historical and fsQCA analysis.

If you’d like to read the full article, it is available open access here:

Decker, S., Estrin, S., & Mickiewicz, T. (2020). The tangled historical roots of entrepreneurial growth aspirations. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal.

If you are preparing video or visual abstract of management & organization history books, articles, chapters or presentations, let us know and we can post them via OHN for you!

Virtual AOM symposium: Temporality of entrepreneurial opportunities

Entrepreneurial opportunities—as situations (e.g., Shane & Venkataraman, 2000), social constructs (e.g., Alvarez & Barney, 2007) and/or objects of entrepreneurial discourse (e.g., Cornelissen and Clarke, 2010)—may have something to do with a contrast between the status quo (i.e. the past) and the imagined future which may be realized through action in the present. But we’ve noticed that the entrepreneurship literature rarely deals explicitly or directly with the relationship between entrepreneurial opportunities and the passage of time. 

Join us on July 24, 2020 at 8 AM Pacific Time for a panel discussion and dialogue on the question—how does an explicit focus on time, temporality or history shape the way you conceptualize and study entrepreneurial opportunity? 

Panelists include Dimo Dimov, David Kirsch, Jacqueline Kirtley, Tanja Leppäaho, Rob Mitchell, Dan Raff, Andrew Smith, Dan Wadhwani and Matt Wood.

Here the link to participate in the session. The meeting ID is 986 4484 7268. The password for the meeting will be ENT&Time. Upon joining the meeting, you will be prompted to provide your consent to participating in a recorded meeting. We will be posting a video recording of this meeting for further discussion and engagement as an asynchronous event of the Academy of Management annual meeting co-hosted by the entrepreneurship and management history divisions.Best regards,Trevor 

OHN returns & CfP “Entrepreneurship and Transformations”

Hello everyone and apologies for the long pause between posts, which was partly due to illness, but also, as you can imagine, due to the extraordinary times we find ourselves in. Many of us had to prepare online teaching at short notice, and many of the events we blog about have been cancelled due to the ongoing pandemic. Going forward, we will only run one blog per week on Fridays, as there simply not as many events and updates as there would usually be.

But today we have some good news, as one of our great editors, Christina Lubinski, is looking for submissions for an exciting new special issue in Business History on historical entrepreneurship.

Stay safe & healthy


Business History Special Issue

Entrepreneurship and Transformations

Special Issue Editor(s)

Deadline: 30 September 2020

Entrepreneurship and Transformations

Research on entrepreneurship has flourished in recent years, and the public interest in it has arguably never been greater. Few would disagree that entrepreneurship is one of the primary drivers of industry dynamics, economic and societal change, and innovation. However, the rapidly growing field of entrepreneurship studies has not displayed great strength in capturing dynamics and evolutions over time, partly due to a lack of historical empirical work of the sort that Schumpeter (1939) has already called for several decades ago. This special issue sets out to bring together an interdisciplinary group of scholars analyzing the links between entrepreneurship and (societal and market) transformations.

The Special Issue “Entrepreneurship and Transformations” takes its starting point in the critique that the field of entrepreneurship studies suffers from a fixation on the micro-processes governing the interaction of individuals and opportunities (Shane 2003), while largely ignoring the macro-dynamics of which entrepreneurship is part. It builds on the growing interdisciplinary dialogue between history and entrepreneurship studies (Wadhwani and Jones 2014, Perchard, MacKenzie et al. 2017, Wadhwani, Kirsch et al. 2020 pre-published online) that has triggered much needed methodological and theoretical reflections on historical entrepreneurship research.

The editors of this SI give an overview of this field of study in their annotated bibliography and encourage authors to engage with (a sub-set of) this literature. In particular, they welcome contributions that build on these insights to empirically explore the links between entrepreneurship and (societal and market) transformations over time. We see a research opportunity for scholars who use historical methods and sources to explore

  1. opportunity recognition and opportunity exploitation as a long-term process. Artur Cole (1959), for example, introduced the idea of an “entrepreneurial stream”—a metaphor highlighting that entrepreneurial opportunities often unfold over long period of time, with one opportunity building on previous ones. These long-term developments easily become hidden if we focus too closely on one individual or one company; however, the question how new opportunities emerge from existing ones, and how (experiential and codified) knowledge travels between individuals and institutions is of great importance for understanding the entrepreneurial process in and between companies (Galambos and Amatori 2016).
  2. the interactions between entrepreneurship and the cultural and socioeconomic environment they are embedded in (Welter and Gartner 2016, Baker and Welter 2018). So far, scholarly approaches to contextualizing entrepreneurship have varied widely. One set of work, drawing on institutional theory and following Baumol (1990), have interpreted contexts as a source of constraints and incentives on entrepreneurial behavior. A second approach, drawing on social movement and social group research, have approached contextualization as a matter of “embedding” entrepreneurial processes within social groups, movements, and networks (Hiatt, Sine et al. 2009). A third approach, drawing on a social constructivist view of contexts, examines how entrepreneurial actors shape and even create the contexts for their actions (Jones and Pitelis 2015). Historical research, particularly work that takes a comparative or international perspective, has long emphasized the role of context in shaping the very definition of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial processes. But how exactly does historical work lead us to reconsider and rethink the conceptualization of context? How can context be operationalized and studied using a historical lens? We believe that non-Western contexts and “deep histories”, in particular, can help us question and revise some of the taken-for-granted assumptions around entrepreneurship and context.
  3. Finally, we specifically encourage interdisciplinary collaborations between historians and scholars from other disciplines that significantly advance our understanding of entrepreneurship and market transformations and develop approaches that are useful to scholars exploring entrepreneurship historically. 


  • Baker, T. and F. Welter (2018). “Contextual Entrepreneurship: An Interdisciplinary Perspective.” Foundations and Trends®in Entrepreneurship 14(4): 357-426.
  • Baumol, W. J. (1990). “Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive, and Destructive.” Journal of Political Economy 98(5): 893-921.
  • Cole, A. (1959). Business Enterprise in its Social Setting. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
  • Galambos, L. and F. Amatori (2016). “The Entrepreneurial Multiplier.” Enterprise & Society 17(4): 763-808.
  • Hiatt, S. R., W. D. Sine and P. S. Tolbert (2009). “From Pabst to Pepsi: The Deinstitutionalization of Social Practices and the Creation of Entrepreneurial Opportunities.” Administrative Science Quarterly 54(4): 635-667.
  • Jones, G. and C. Pitelis (2015). “Entrepreneurial Imagination and a Demand and Supply-Side Perspective on MNE and Cross-Border Organisation.” Journal of International Management 21(4): 309-321.
  • Perchard, A., N. G. MacKenzie, S. Decker and G. Favero (2017). “Clio in the Business School: Historical Approaches in Strategy, International Business and Entrepreneurship.” Business History: 1-24.
  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process, Vol. I. New York and London, McGraw-Hill.
  • Shane, S. (2003). A General Theory of Entrepreneurship:The Individual–Opportunity Nexus. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.
  • Wadhwani, D. R., D. Kirsch, F. Welter, W. B. Gartner and G. Jones (2020 pre-published online). “Context, Time, and Change: Historical Approaches to Entrepreneurship Research.” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal.
  • Wadhwani, R. D. and G. Jones (2014). Schumpeter’s Plea: Historical Reasoning in Entrepreneurship Theory and Research. Organizations in Time: History, Theory and Methods. M. Bucheli and R. D. Wadhwani. Oxford, Oxford University Press: 192-216.
  • Welter, F. and W. B. Gartner, Eds. (2016). A Research Agenda for Entrepreneurship and Context. Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar Publishing.


Submission instructions

We welcome contributions to the outlined research agenda that are based on original research and innovative analysis. We particularly encourage contributions by interdisciplinary teams of authors and those that combine source-based historical analysis with insights, concepts or data from other disciplines.

Papers should not exceed 8,000 words, inclusive of tables and footnotes, and use US spelling. By submitting to the SI, authors confirm that their contributions are not under consideration elsewhere. All proposals should be submitted via ScholarOne, indicating that they are contributions to this Special Issue “Entrepreneurship and Transformations”. All articles will go through a peer-review process. It is the responsibility of the author(s) to ensure that the manuscript fully complies with the publishing guidelines of Business History.

Instructions for authors

Submit an article

For questions about this Special Issue, please contact Christina Lubinski,