136 SECTION CRTlNG THE ENTREPRENEURI ORGANIZATlON

!. Building Block. for Corporal. J i,:Creatng tIIeEnlrepren.unal 111. Achlovlng and Sustalnlng
Entrepreneurship
Entrepreneurial Performance
Section Introduction
Now that the reader has a grasp of the basc
blocks ofcorporate entrepreneur
we tum to the quesnon "how do you actually make entrepreneurship happen in
establshed organizations?" The five chapters in Seetion II explore major elements that
must come together to create work environments that not oruy support, but actually
encourage, entrepreneurial behavior from employees. Human resources, strategy, struc
ture, and culture all form the critieal aspects that must be addressed by any organization
seeking to find the pathway to entrepreneurial activity.
CHAPTER 6
HUMAN RESOURCES AND THE
ENTREPRENEURIALORGANIZATION:
THE CREATIVE INDIVIDUAL
Introduction
al! the element\ necessary for sucCl'Ssful cotporate entrepreneurslllp the individual
01' "corporate entrepreneur" is the most critica!. Without the lead
and persistence demonstrated by this individual, httle would be accomplished.
Someone must come up with a concept, vision, or drealll. lllust translate this drealll
into vroduct\ and processes within some sort of organizational context. They must cham
the concept to a wide range of publics and partners. They must aclapt the concept
tl1e realities encountered within the envimnment. And they must persevere in
overcorning the normal and the arbitrary obstades that are tllrown into their paths.
This chapter will examine ways in which people can develop breakthrough ideas
on the job. Specifically, we will explore the nature of individual and group creativity in
organizations. Our interest is both in identifYing ways for employees to think about their
OWll creatvity and ways for managers to facilitate employee creativity. Also in this
ter, we will examine what is known about entrepreneurial individuals. Their personality
characteristics will be explored from both a positive and negadve persvective. Types
of entrepreneurs will be identified. A mode! will be presented that captures the set of
variables that leads an individual to pursue an Whie m6st of the/re$earch on
individual characterisncs and behaviors has been done on start-up or independent entre
preneurs, many parallels can be drawn for eorporate entrepreneurship. Unique differences
of individuals who do entrepreneurial things in larger companies will also be explored.
The Creative Individual in a Company
Creativity is the soul of entrepreneurship. It is vital for spotting the pattems and trends that
define an opportunity. It is needed to deve!op innovatve business concepts. Most
tandy, the corporate entrepreneur has to be high1y creative in gettng asponsor, building and
using a network, obtaining management buy-in for the concept, forming a team, coming
up with resources, and overcorning the obstades that will be thrown into his or her
While many perspectves exist, creativity can be defined as the applicaton of a per
son's mental abiltv and curiosity to discover something new. lt is the act of relating
138 SECTlON 2 CREATlNG THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ORGANIZATION
nn"vinmlv unrelated [n fact, much of the work on creativity tends to focus on
to relate and conneet, to put things together in novel ways. while
entrepreneurship is about making things happen, and deals with practical mlple:rne:n
tarion, creativity is the capacity to develop new ideas, concepts, and processes.
People are inherently creative. Some act on that crearivity al! the time, others stifle
it, and most of 1.15 are somewhere in betweell. The reality is that employees often do
not realize when or how they are Leng creative. Further, they fail to the
many opportunities for creacivity that arise within their jobs on a daly bass. Miller
notes that we are all creative in many different ways. Table 6-1 $Ulllmarizes
seven general ways in which people are ereatve.
The Arenas in Which People are Creative at Work
William Miller argues that people often do not recbgnize when they are being
creative, and they frequently overlook opportunities to be creative. He suggests that the
path to creativity begins by first recognizing all of the ways in which we are or can be
creative. People in organizations can channel their creativity into seven different arenas:
Idea Creativity-thinking up a new idea or concept, such as an idea for a new
product or service or a way to solve a problem.
Material Creativity-nventng and building a tangible object, such as a product,
an
Organization Creativity-orga
new organization form or approach to
izing a project, starting a new type of venture,
work group, and changing the policies and rules of a group.
Relationship Creativity-innovative approaches to achieving collaboration,
cooperation, and win-win relationships with others. The person who handles a
difficult situation well or deals with a particular person in an especia!!y effective
manner is being creative in a relationship or one-on-one contexto
Event Creativity-producing an event or occasion, such as an awards ceremony,
team outing, or annual meeting. Finding a way to bring two opponents together.
The creativity here also encompasses dcor, ways in which people are involved,
sequence of happenings, background, and so fortb.
Inner Creativity-changing open to new approaches to how
we do things and thinking about ourselves in Achievng a change
of heart, or fndng a new perspective or tha! is a
departure from how one has traditionally
Spontaneous Creativity-acting in a spontaneous or spur-of-the-moment manner, such
as coming up with a witly response in a meeting, an off-the-cuff speech, a quick and
simple way to setlle a dispute, or an innovative appeal when trying to clase a sale.
SOURCE: Adapted from W. C. Miller, Flash of Brillia1J(e, Reading, Massachusetts: Persells
Books, 1999.
CHAPTER 6 Human Re,ourcel and Ibe Entrepreneurial Organization: The Creative Individual
In a business context, creativity is more than There is apragmatc dimension,
in that creative approaches or solutions must also be useful and actionable in the context of
the company and its competition situation. Amabile (1998) suggests that there are three
components of successful creativity in organizations: motivation, and creative
thinking skills. Expertise encompasses what a person kllOWS and can do. lt defines the intel
lectual space used to explore and solve problems. Motivation can be extrinsic (Ileed or desre
to achieve company rewards) or intrnsc (drven by more internal, intangible factors), with
the latter being the most critical. [ntrnsic motivation refer:; primarily ca passion alld inter
est, or the individual 's internal desire to do somethng. The person is drivenby the chal
and joy ofaocomplishment alld the senSt ofself-fulfillmcnt. Creativc tliIkilw ski/ls refer
assumptions,
individuals approaeh problems and SOIUtiOlls, and the
use tor ooJang at a problem differentlv. seeking insie:hts &om other field,
iml)ot1:ant condusions trOI1l Amabile's
work is that managers can influence all three ofthese eomponents organ
izacion must emphasize managerial practices that result in employees
that provide them with freedom, and that give them access to resourees. Similarly, practices
that result in well-designed, mutually supportve and diverse work teams are likely to spur
creativity. Also valuable is encouragement from supervisors for creative outputs, and rein
forcement in terros of the values, systems, and structures of the organization.
The Creative Process
Individual is too oiten assocated with brainstorming. That is, people must simply
let everything go, apply no be poSitive, generate as
many ideas as possible. Out of this activity will come a creativ
important to recognze that creativity s much more than brainstorming.
ing is but one of many tools or technques that can be useful in creacive
On one leve!, creativity is messy, random, and nnscentific. On another leve!, structure
plays a role in creacivity, and those who approach creativity from- a more systematic
perspective tend to come up with a lot more great ideas. The key to ths distinction is to
recogrze that creativity involves heuristics, not algorithms. Algorithms are complete
mechanical rules or formulas for solving a problem 01' dealing with a simation. Heurstics
are ineomplete guidelines or rules ofthumb that can lead to learning or discovery. There
is no clear path; the employee must ereate one.
the appropriate path to a creative solution is nueh easier if the employee /irst
approaches creativity as a logieal proeess, and then utilizes some of the available ereative
problem-solving technques when d1e process. While it is
accepted among researchers and eonsultants tbat a proeess s involved, there are different
opinions regarding the nature ofthat process. Table 6-2 summarzes .leven views
I
140 SECTION 2 CREATING THE ENTREPRENEUR1AL ORGAN1ZAT10N CIIAPTER 6 Human Resonrees and Ihe Entrepreneurial Organization: Th. Creativilndividual ... - 141
dle steps of stages involved in successful creativity. On further examination, these
perspeictives have much in commOI1. Accordingly; we believe the fol!owing
captnres the essence of:ill of them.
The process with a or or challenge. What is labeled prepa
mtion is a stage where the individual attempts to define the informa
cion, and is looking for the answer. Too often, people for the
solution without reaUy understanding the real problem or guestion. In many instances,
the different individuals in a work group think they are all solving the same problem,
bm becallse of their differing interpretations and asslll11ptions, they are efl:ectively
solving difterent problems. This s why Hrshberg (1998) suggests one must first ask
creative questions before up with creatve at1Swers. He encourages
tbat are sUrPrsing, Drovocative. destabilizing, emanate 11-0111 skewed vantage
can serve to get around
get to the root of the true
As a rule, the creative solution does not come. In faet, the path one pursues in
to come up widl the solution s otten circuitolls, confi.lsing, and offtrack. It leads to
a series of dead ends that seem further and further removed from a viable solution, and the
frustratiol1 stage sets in. This frustration is caused and magnified by a set of creative blocks, a
to wruch we will shortly retum. It is at the fi'ustration stage that many people give
up, or settle for a solution that is rather nncreative and doser to the status quo.
Consciously stepping away from the probletn and putting it ori the back bumer
describes the inrubation stage. The employee is, in effect, non-intention:illy on the
Further, the employee is either consciously
blocks. There also may be more data
intencional. InsiglltS can be fonnd in areas, pursuits, or accivities that are lar aneldQt the actu
al problem, and may be removed from one's own background or field
One neA't sees a ray oflight, a thread,or a piece ofa possible solution. There may be an
"aha" moment. Trus stage, called llumil1atiol1, involves the employee, coming up with the
oudine or core of an answer. The answer often needs to be refined, adapted, expanded
upon, tested, and further reVsed. Not only are there likely to be pragmatic problems in
the solution, but the employee has to make changal in order to sel! the
idea to management. This is the stage of elaboration.
Ofcourse, the process is
of incubation throughout, with some of them
short. There may be feedback leads one to discard
a principIe or assumption made at an eadier point, sllggesting a need to go back and
l110ve in a direction that was earlier rejected. There may also be several smal! "eurekas"
'"
E
g. e g
..... :;c
o u.2 .!!: '$ te '':; lo... e

!V!! ro--" ::: Q) e g.
@Q.l::)



..o u
-i V
g

-
e
.g ro
-E
!--+

g t
1-
c:
'2
..::
25 So--+
ea


';
\)
>-
g 1)()


V :>'- >-._ rec....

tij
a. ro

" "


I t
.g



" " g.g
ro ro
Ue E
ig S

.'2 --+- v c: --+- '5 --+



1-"0
]

f
'O 0.$
Q

g] V

<
.:;ij
Q.l



e
"
,g
g g
t
o,n .S ID
u :
"'O >"'';:: :5
ro,

.2

Q
c:
O
c c:
gg

:;: ID --+- "g
ttI
.,_-",
U
-6,_

c:
" ro
>
ro
'"
(I '"
<.> -'"
O
...
..
Cl.
...
(I
c:
"ro_

... "C
t: S;
U
(I -"'ro
_;,u
..c
....

'O
'"

(I
:>
:2
....
c: Q
u
(I
O
...
c


E 'i

c.
- "
55
>->
e
g
----...


o..
( 18..0--"" OJ

"
- E
.. Vl"C

-CE-vVl


ce ..... Q) re

] e..c: 0.0
u
e e e
i g
jg ----... .s --..
E
g..2
,- ID
142 SECTION 2 CREATING TMB ENTREPRENEURlAL ORGAN1ZATION
along the way, and these come together to form an overall solution, rather than a
big moment in the jllumination
As one moves through the creative process, it is also helpful to think of the stages in
tenns of divergence and convergence (Leonard Jnd Swap, 1999). Divergence js breaking
from familiar, established ways ofseeing and doing. It is coneerned with generating lots of
OptiOl1S and truly novel ideas, regardless of their practicality. Convergence is the achieve
ment of some agreement regarding the merits of a given idea and the value in pursuing
that idea. It is areality check in terms ofthe implementation issues. An individual 01' group
goes back and forth fi'om divergence to convergence when successfully managing their
Elfective creativity requires balance, or equal tinle for divergence and COIlver
gence. In fact, the failu1'e to produce highly creative answers 11lay be linked to groups that
either spend too much tiJ11e generaring alld discussing options, or, alternatively, devote 1110St
of their elfort to taking an idea to task and arguing detailed implementation ssues.
The Creative Blocks
People do not need to be creative fo!' 1110st of what they do in a given day. In faet, they
develop pattel11s and routines without which their lives would be in chaos. They then
attitudes that are consstent with maintaining the status quo. However, the same
type of thinking that aliows a person to function efficiently on a day-to-day basis
becomes a major eonstraint when trying to be creative. That s, the guidelines and rules
people find so valuable in everyday life beeome the blocks on their own creative poten-
The ability to master the creative process on an ongoing bass s very much linked
to removing the blocks.
Roger von Oech (1998) argues that there are ten critica! blocks. These are sunnnarized
in Table 6-3. In essence, he is arguing that employees are more likely to come up with
breakthrough ideas if they look for mulriple solutions, are illogieal and impractical, break
eX:sting rules, are playful and not worried about looking foolish, embrace ambiguity, and
reeognize that fmure is a sigo of progress. Two additional blocks are especaliy relevant
for eorporate entrepreneurship. People miss creative opportunities because they are too
narrow and focused in their jobs. stating "that's not my area;' possibilities are igoored
because they do not fit a person's job description, or are outside of a person's education,
and professional fidd. As von Oech (1998, p. 106) notes, "its hard to see
the dynamite idea behind you by looking twice as hard in front of you." The Iies in
a willingness ro look beyond one's field or job responsibilities, to explore how other dis
ciplines approach similar problems, and to adopt dilferent fi'llmes of reference, languages,
and assumptions. Creative individuals are explorers, looking in other areas for ideas.
find hisrory in a hardware store, 01' fashion in a steel factory. They hobbies, and
read publications in diverse fields, and then bring all of this to bear on job-related
CHAI'TER 6 Human Resouree, .nd tite Entrepreneuri.l Org.niz.tion: Thc Creative lnruvidual 143
The Creative Blocks
"The Rieht Answer" The fallacy Ihat there is only one correet solution
to a problem
"That's not The belief that logic is fine for the development of
ideas but stifles creativity
"Be practical" The tendency lo allow practical considerations to
ki 11 concepts, halt the search for ideas, and deter
one from considering alternatives.
"Follow Ihe rules" the fact that most revolutionary ideas are
OlSnmIlVf' violations of existine systems and beliefs
"Avoid on a
situation
liTo err is wrong
ll
Failure to see the eonnection between error and
innovalion: when you fail, you learn what
work and can adjust
"Playis
power
to acknowledl!e the creative
"That's not my Reslriction of creativity through Ihinkine thatis
overly narrow and focused
IIDon't be fool ish" Unwillingness to think unconventionally out of
fear of appearing foolish
IIl'm not creative" The worst of the blocks: self-condemnation that
trumps talen!, opportunity, and
SOURCE: Adapted &om Roger von Oech, A Whack on /he Side cif the Head;New)'or:k:Warner
Books, 1998: 9.
.1
chalienges. Lasdy, the worst of the blocks is "]' m not creative;' A dilferene between
people who are eonsistendy creative and thase who are not is that the former think of
themselves as creative, while the latter assume they are not. The latter come to depend
on the former anytime a creative salution is needed. The objective evidence suggests that
everyone is rieh in creative potential, regardless ofwhat we believe about ourselves.
From where do these blocks originate? Consider three sources. As the
discussiol1 makes clear, employees impose the blocks on themselves based on their own
perceptions. Second, fellow employees impose them on their co-workers. Refrairs
such al "that's not your job;' "don't be foolish;' and "that's not logical" are cornmonly
heard in team meetings, planning sessions, and haliway conversations. Even where the
employee does not actually hear such phrases, he or she may perceive a need to not look
foolish or step beyond job responsibilities in front of co-workers. Finaliy, the workplace
itself is a source of blocks. Certain companies may not tokrate failure, penalize rule
bending or breaking, or people to jobs with extremely narrow job descriptions.
I
145 144 SECTIO!\ 2 CREATING THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ORGANIZATlON
Creativity Techniques and Creative Quality
A treasure trove oftechnigues and methods are available for use at different stages in the
creative process. Techniques exist for generating creative concepts and ideas
playing, mind mapping), overcoming negativity (the "yes and" rather than
but" rule, which states thar concerns about new ideas must be in ways that
finds the positive in them), and reacbing convergence (e.g., backcasting or imagining
future scenanos and backing up to dle present). The list is virtually tndless, as can be
seen in such books as Michalko's Thinkcrtol's
or Rickards' Crcati!Jilyal vvlrk (1988). Table 6-4
The value of these techniques and exercises is likely to vary based on an employee's
or problem-solving style. People with a particular thinking style (see the
qu;dr;mts in Figure 6-1) may respond more to certain technigues or stimuli than will
dlOse with a thinking style.
The purpose of these types of exercises and techniques, and ultimately of approacliil1g
r
creativty in a more systematic malmer, to improve the qualty of the creative output.
In producing a higher quantily of creative ideas s not of much value unless the end
result is higher qualitl' in terms of the ultimate concept or solution. This is an important
point. While creativ:ity itselfis not one can see 01" fee! or touch, the quality of
an individual's or group's creativty can be judged. While many criteria are available for
one's creativity, a good beginning point is to consider the following three standards:
Overt bentifil-To what e2."tent does the idea or concept convey a clear benefit
ot advantage to a user or customer? In what ways does it create value, and how
mueh value is being created?
linking Stages in the Process to Probiem-Solving Approaches
Creativity Stage Activity Cogntive Processes
Interest Environmental scanning
Preparation the expedition
Incubation "Mulling things over"
lIIumination The "eureka" experience
Elaboration/verification Market research
Exploitation lmnlement and compete
SOURCE:Adapted from J. J. Kao, Ellfrcprcncurship,
Cliffi: Prentice-Hall, 1989: 17.
!ntuition/emotion
Details/planning
!ntuition
Intuition
Detailslrationality
Details/rationality
ond OlJlllnizalioll, Englewood
CHAl'TER 6 Human Resources and the Enttepreneurial Organization:The Creative1lndividual
Reaso!1 lo believe--What supporting evidence are you able to provide, and is a user Ol"
customer likely to accept, that the coneept or idea will deliver the sume leve! of
benefits that you claim?
Dramatk d!fference--How 01" different is your concept 01' idea from current
or conventional solutions? Is it an incremental 01" breakthrough advance' Can it
be meaningfully diHerentiated from existne: solutions on a sustainable basis'
fllLlIUU;l1 creativity will always be an art, organizations need not view it as unmanage
able. There is a role for structure, standards, e:\.-pectations,
Clearly, creativity often happens inadvertently, and employees are fi'equently not conscious
of the fact that they are being creative. Even so, their creative produetivity is apt to be
enhanced where they recognize the many ways in which they are currently creative,
understand their immense creative potential, and adopt systematic approaches for
that potential.
The Entrepreneurial Personality
Ir is not enough; however, for employees to be creative. They must be able to think and
aet as entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship requires tllat the employee take ownership of the
creative idea, and assume responsibility fOl" its implementation. The process ofimplemen
tation reguires further in overeoming obstacles and finding critical resources.
To understand the challenge ofbeing a corporate entrepreneur, let lIS review what is
known about entrepreneural individuals. The most researmed question within the
field of entrepreneurship is, "Who is the entrepreneur?" A variety oC conflict
findings have been produced regarding the' psychologialarfd sociqlpgjcalmakeup
of entrepreneurs. Many of these studies sufrer from significant methodological prob
lems. Nonetheless, there are a few characteristics around wruch a consensus has emerged.
On the psychalogieal there is sorne agreement on at least sDi: characteristics
6-5 for a more comprehensive list of psychological traits with the
entrepreneurial personality). The first of these concerns motivation. The available
evidence identifies entrepreneurs as being more motivated by acruevement than power,
money, status, aeceptance, ar other motvators. They are driven by the task, the challenge;
the opportunity to accomplsh what others said could not, would not, or should not be
done. Money certainly counts, but it is a by-producto Financial rewards serve as a score
card, telling the entrepreneur that he or she is making progress.
Entrepreneurs also demonstrate a strong internallocus of control. Unlike those who
believe that external events control their lives and dictate what happens around
entrepreneurs are agents. They fundamentally be!ieve that. with enoueh time
146
147
SECTION 2 CREATlNG THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ORGANIZATION
Common Traits and Characteristics Associated with the Entrepreneuriallndividual
Orive lo achieve
Internal locus of control
Calculated risk
Independence
Self-confidence and optimism
Tolerance for failure
Persistent problem
Opportu nity orientation
Integrityand
energy level
Resourcefulness
Creativity and innovativeness
Vision
Team building
SOURCE: From Entreprcneursltip:A Contemporar)' Approach, 7ed by Kuratko, Donald Eand
Richard M. Hodgetts. 2007. Reprnted with permisson of a division of Thomson Learnng:
www.thomsonrights.com. Fax 800 730-2215.
and effort and their own involvement, they can
their workplace, their
and their industries-in short. their environments.
Entrepreneurial individuals are calculated risk takers. The enrrepreneur tends to be
about a 5.5 on a lO-point scale, where 1 :::: risk avoidant and 10 = bold
Calculated risk taking can be defined as pursuit of a course of action that has a reason
able chance of costly failure, where failure is a significant negative difference between
anticipated and actual results. lt is calculated in the sense that (a) the individual has
considered and attempted to estimate (at least conceptually) the likelihood and magnitude
of the key risk factors, and (b) he or she has attempted to manage or mitigate the key risk
factors tbrough good planning and managerial decision
The very nature of the entrepreneurial process demands that the entrepreneur
demonstrate a high "tolerance of ambiguity."Things do not have to fit a pre-cast mold
or foUow an exact pattern. In fact, they are often messy and imprecise, and there is
tremendous uncertainty regarding whether one is on the right path, and what unantic
ipated obstacles lie around the next bend. The entrepreneurial process will inherently
CHAPTER 6 Human Resources aud !he Entrepreneuriat Organization:Tbe Creative Individual

move in new and unanticipated directions. Most successful entrepreneurs find that, if
their concept is implemented and achieves mccess, it ellds up looking quite different
than the concept they first started with, This is not because of pOOl' conceptualizing or
it is the fundamental nature of the game.
Entrepreneurs are self-motivated, self-reliant, alld prefer a degree of autonomy when
accomplishing a task. The perception that they have room to maneuver in affeeting
their own destiny is highly valued. FinaJly, it is generaJly agreed that entrepreneurs are
tenacious and demonstrate significant perseverance. Otller COlllinOll findings, about which
there is less consensus, suggest mat entrepreneurs are versatile, persuasive, well-organized,
exrremeJy hard-working, and competitive (Morris, 1
Perhaps the two most significant conclusions that can be drawn from attempts to
understand the traits and characteristics of the entrepreneur are mat entrepreneurs are
r
not born and that no single prototype of the entrepreneur exists. Although filled with
controversy, 'the research makes it clear mat' traits associated wim entrepreneurial
r
behavior are strongly iIifluenced by the environment and are developed over time.
The list of traits and eharacteristics in Table 6-5 does not contain items that are (
genetic, such as intelligence, physical prowess, or artstic talent. The tendencies to be
self-confident, have an internallocus of control, be achievement motivated, etc., are the
result of family, educational, social, and work experiences. Further, there is entrepre
, neudal potential in everyone. Our second concluson concerns the tendency to look
for a single profiJe of the entrepreneur. In reality, entrepreneurs differ signifieantly in
terms of their risk profiJes, need for independence, loeus of control, and other charac
teristcs. It would seem, instead, that there are different types of ertreprenJurs. We shall
discuss sorne of the major types that have been identified Iater in the
. . / ,j ,.
Charaeteristics such as the ones we have mentioned have important :1mplications
for entrepreneurship within eorporations. While entrepreneurs will differ markedIy
on a given charaeteristic, recognizing the key characteristics helps managers and
employees know where to foeus in developing a given individual's enrrepreneurial
potential. While it may not be possible to teach people to be entrpreneurs, it is cer
tainly possible to help them develop their achievement motivation, tolerance ofambi
guity, or appreciation for calculated risk taking. In addition, implcations can be drawn
for the design of the workenvironment. As managers make decisions about compa
ny structure, controls, rewards, policies, and other areas that define the work environ
ment, the decisions must be made in a manner that is compatible with the types of
characteristics associated with entrepreneurship. A work environment that does not
allow a of autonomy, penalizes risk tabng. and discourages individual action
is not one in which employees are likely to discover and act on their entrepreneuria
potential.
148
SECTION 2 CREATING TIIE ENTR,EPRENEURlAL ORGANIZATlON
Motivating Entrepreneurial Behavior
The willingness of an employee to pursue entrepreneurial concepts and to devote one
self to a concept over time is directly related to an entrepreneur's personal makeup. In
an interesting attempt to explain the motivational process that drives entrepreneurial
behavior, Naffziger, Hornsby, and Kuratko (1994) propose the dynamic model that
appears in
6-1 . Let's apply this 1110del in a corporate context.
The decisioIl to behave entrepreneurally results from the interaction of several
factors. An individual has an idea or recognizes an opportunty. The tendency to act
on it (as well as the manner in which he or she acts) is the result of the
between his or her personal characteristics, the individual', personal goal set, his or her
personal environment, the 'current business environment, and the nature of the innova
Intrinsic/extrinsic
rewards

Rrm

outcomes
tve idea (Reuber and Fischer, 1999).
AModel o Entrepreneurial Motivation
Expectation/
,
outcome
L
comparison





Decislon
to behave
entrepreneuriaJly
-.
Implementation!
outcome
1..
percepton
KEY; PC: Personal Characteristics bf fue Entrepreneur
PE: Personal EnvilOnment of the Entrepreneur
PG: Personal Goals of the Entrepreneur
BE: Business Environment fol' the Entrepreneurial Idea
IDEA:The Entrepreneuralldea
SOURCE: Naffzgel', D. W, Hornsby,J. S., and Kuratko, D. E1994. HA PIOposed Research
Model ofEntrepreneurial Motivaton;' EI/lreprel/CJ/rshiv Tltearv nlld Pl't/etiee, Sprng, p. 33.
Entrepreneurial
1-+
Entrepreneurlal
strategy management
CHAI'TER 6 HumaD Resources and fue EDlrepreneudal Organzation:The Creative Individual 149
However, before actually acting on the the individual takes into account two
additional considerations. The first involves a comparison of his Or her perceptions
of the probable outcomes should the idea be successfully implemented with the
personal outcomes he or she has in mind. In a corporate setting, this comparison is
intluenced by the past experiences of the individual within the company, and the expe
riences of others with which the individual s familiar. Next, an individuallooks at the
relationship between the implementation approach that would be required and
outcomes from that approach. Rere, the potential entrepreneur is concerned with what
it will take to garl1er resources and support, overcome obstades, and ensure the final
concept meets user requirements. Again, the comparson is intluenced by past experi
ences. Further, the more times the individual has attempted to pursue new ideas in the
company, the 1110re Iikely he or she has developed implementarion approaches that
work.
Assuming the concept is pur.sued, tlle strategy and managerial approaches of the
corporate. elltrepreneur res.ult insome sort of outcome within the firmo This could
range from a h ugely successful new product, process, or market to a glorious failure. It
could also result in concepts that are perpetually in limbo within the company, or that
never get out of the development process, regardless of how much has been spent.
According to the model, the entrepreneur's e},:pectations are finally compared with
these actual firm outcomes. Future entrepreneurial behavior is based on the results of
alI of these comparisons. When outcomes meet or exceed e:,,'pectations, the entrepreneur
al behavor is positively reinforced, and the individual is motivated to continue to behave
entrepreneurially, either within the current venture or possibly through the inita
ron of additional ventures, depending on the existing entrepreneunal When
outcomes fail to meet expectations, the entrepteneur's motivation will :.pe lower and
wiIl have a corresponding impact on the decsion to continue to act
These perceptions also affect subsequent implementation methods relied upon by the
corporate entrepreneur.
Are Corporate Entrepreneurs DifferenH
The discussion up to this point has concentrated on what s known about entrepre
neurs in general, and how this knowledge might apply in a corporate contexto
However, just as the corporate setting is very different from the start-up setting, the
corporate entrepreneur (or"intrapreneur") is also a different kind ofperson. Corporate
entrepreneurs are not necessarily the inventors of new products, services, or processes
(although they oiten are), but they turn ideas or prototypes into profitable realites.
They are the drivers behind the implementation of innovative are team
builders with the comm:itment and necessary drive to ideas become realities.
Importantly, are very ordinary people who tend to do extraordinary things.

151
iD
SECTION 2 CREATlNG THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ORGANIZATION
Entrepreneurial acton can be tbought of in tenll5 of conCi!pttlalization and tben
implementatio/!. From tbe employee's perspective, we can think oftbese as tbe stages of "dream
ing" and "doing." There are many people in an organization tbat dream, or come up witb new
ideas. The issue from an entrepreneurial perspectve coneerns how much responsibility
take not only for refining tbeir ideas into a workable or viable funn, but for selling these ideas,
overcoming resistance, and following through on implementation. The shortage in rnost com
s not of dreamers, but of doers. Figure 6-2 cbaracterzes dilferent types of people in
organizations on tbe extent ro which they focu.1 on the conceptualization part of thing;, or
on making it happen. Thus, inventors and plalmers dentiiY possiblties, while convencional
managers focus on an acrion agenda. Corporate entrepreneul's represent a mix ofstrong vi,ion
and deptb ofacton. They are tbe dreamers who do.
The corporate entrepreneur begins with an idea. This idea typically starts as a vsion,
which rnight be firly loosely defined. In a sense, he or she goes through a"daydreaming
The entreprelleur mentally explores tbe process he or she will have to follow
to take the idea from concept to sllccessful implementaton. Different pathways are
thought through, and potencial obstacles and barriers are mentally exarnined. The cor
porate entrepreneur behind the innovatve Fiero automobile, made by Ponciac sorne years
ago, provides an example. When Hullci Aldikacci firsr came up with the idea for the Fiero
he was unsure of what tbe car should look
so he built a wooden rnock-up of the
The Corporate Entrepreneurial Framework
i

1:
;
Artist
InvJntor
I
Intrapreneur

E
Planner
ro
ji!
o
Manager
r:fer
J
Depth of Actlon
CHAI'TtR 6 Human Resources and Ihe Entrepreneutial Organization:The Creative Individual
passenger compartment. He tben sat in the model and imagined what it would [eel like
to drive the finished caro This heloed him develop and perfect the final product.
Corporate entrepreneurs can move quickly to get are
oriented, willing to do whatever it takes to achieve their obJectlves.
a combnaton ofthnker, doer, planller, and worker. Dedication to the new idea s para
rnount, as ther acrion orientation must be balanced against perseverance and tenacity.
must struggle ro an idea alive, often after higher-level managers, cOl1ll11ittees,
and others have "killed" ir two or three times. Corporate entrepreneurs ofien expect the
itnpossible fi'Ol11 thel1lselves and consider no setback too great to make their venture
successful. They are seJf-determined pursuers of a vision who go beyond the call of
duty in achieving their goals.
When faeed with failure or setback, corporate entrepreneurs tend ro aClopt an
optirnistic approach. First, they do not admit they are beaten; they view falure as a tem
porary setback to be'learned fi'om anddealt with. It is not seen as areason to
Second, they view themselves as responsible for tbeir own desciny. They do not blame
their failure on otbers but il1stead focus 011 learning how they might have done better.
By objectively dealing with tbeir own mistakes and [ailures, corporate entrepreneurs
learn to avoid making the same mistakes again, lnd this, in turn, s part of whilt
make tbem successful.
Ir could be argued tbat the previous discussion could be equally applied ro tbose who
. start new independent ventures and those who champion innovarion in larger companies.
And yet, tbere are important dilferences between tbese two individuals. Table 6-6 draws a
r
fairly detailed comparison between the characteriscics and skills of tbe corpornte entrepre
neur, those ofthe start-up or independent entrepreneur, and of managers.
An examination of the teros in Table 6-6 reveals some important insigh'into the
natore of tbe corporate entrepreneur. These individuals are closer to the traditional start
up entrepreneur tban to the tradicional corporate manager, but they have certain t:hings in
common witb both. They desire a degree ofauronomy, but also want;rccess to corporate
resources. Security matters to tbem, and tbey respond to corporate rewards and recogni
cion. At tbe same time, they are cynical about many of the processes and systems within
the cornpany, but also oprimistic tbat they can find ways around tbe rules and bureaucracy.
They are more politically adept than the typical start-up entrepreneur, and more
than the typical manager to get their hands dirty and do whatever task needs to be done.
Categories of Entrepreneurs
Earlier, we noted that there is no single prototype of the entrepreneur. The same is true
of the corporate entrepreneur. There may actually be a number of different types. & an
eXJmple, Kao (1991) differentiated between "creative or charismatic" and "conventional"
153
152 SLCTION 2 CREATING THE ENTREPRENEUl.lAL OailANlzATI0N
TABLE 6-6
Who Is the Corporate Entrepreneur?
Traditional
Characterstc Manager
motives
corporate rewards;
power motivated
Time
orientation
Corporate
Entrepreneur Entrepreneur
Wants access
the next promotion
or transler
Tendency Delegates acton;
to action supervising and
reporting take most
energy
Sklls Prolessonal manage
CHTER (, Human Resources and Ihe The Creativo > >
.'. .
oriented,
sell-relant, and
sell-motivated
as
takes action now
to move to next
step along the way
Get hands dirty;
may upset
employees by
suddenly dong
their work
Knows business
ment; ofien
business-school
uses abstract
technically
trained il in technical
business; may have had
to corporate resources;
goal orented and
self-motivated, but
also responds to
corporate rewards
and recongnition
End goal 013- to
1
ven
to meet
and
corporate timetables
Gets hands dirty;
may know how to
delegate but, when
necessary, does what
needs to be done
Very much like the
leur, but the
demands
greater to prosp
perwithin
needs help with this
Attitude
toward risk
Useof
market
research
Attitude
toward
status
Atttude
toward
failure and
mstakes
Decison-
Who serves
Attitude
toward
the system
Problem
style
Cautious
Has market
studies done to
discover needs
and guide product
conceptualization
Cares about status
symbols (comer
office, and so onl
Strives to avoid
mistakes and
surprises;
postpones
recognizing
lailure
Agrees with those
Pleases others
Sees system as
nurturing and
nrC\tArti\le seeks
wthin it
Works out
problems within
the system
Likes moderate risk; Likes moderate risk;
invests heavily but generally not afraid
expects lo succeed 01 being fred, so sees
> risk
Creates needs; Does own market
creates products research and intu
that ofien cannot be tive market eval ua
tested with market tion, like the
research; potential entrepreneur
customers do not
yet undersland
them; talks to
customers and
forms own opinions
sitting on Considers tradtional
an orange crate f status
Deals with Senstive to need to
mistakes and appear
failures as attempts to
experiences rsky projects Irom
view so as to learn
Irom mistakes
without political
cost 01 public fai!ure
Follows private
vison; decisive,
action orented
others
Pieases self and Pleases customers,
customers and sponsors
May rapidly Dislikes the system
advance in a system; but learns
lhen, when Irus- to manipulate it
trated, may reject
the system and form
own company
works out
in large and formal lems within the
structures by
and starting I
alone leaving
(C01!tiI1HCd)
Atttude Sees others being in
toward charge 01 his or her
courage and destiny; can be forcelul
and ambitious but
be learful olothers'
ity lO do him or her in
Focus 01 Primarily on events
attenlon inside corporation
formal prolit-and-Ioss
responsibility in the
company
Self-confident,
nntim;,ti. and
courageous
on
technolgy and
marketplace
Self-confident and
courageous; many are
cynical about the
but
their
outwit
60th inside and
sells insiders on needs
of venture and market
place but also focuses
on customers
(Col1tllued)
154 SECTION 2 CRIlATING TRE ENTREPRENEURIAL ORGANIZATION
Who Is the Corporate Entrepreneur?
Traditional Corporate
Characteristic Manager Entrepreneur Entrepreneur
Socioeconomic Middle dass Lower dass in some Middle dass
background early studies; middle
dass in more recent
ones
Educational educated Less well educated Often highly
level in earlier studies; educated, partic
some graduate work ular in technical
but not Ph.D. in fields, but some
later ones times not
Perceives Perceives transac- Perceives transac
with others hierarchy as basic tians and deal tions within hierar
relationshp making as basic chy as basic
relationship relationship
SOURCE: Adapted from Gifford Pinchot 1II, lnlrapreneuring, 1985: 54-56. Copyright 1985
by Gifford Pinchot III. Adapted by permisson of Harper Collins Publisher.
entreprel1eurs. The former tend to do something that is more innovative, have a higher
risk profile, and are more growth-oriented than the Jatter.
AlternativeJy, Miner (1996) concludes that four different types of entrepreneurs exist.
Each type achieves success by approaching entrepreneurship from a different route. These
types inelude:
The Persol1al Achiever (the classic entrepreneur):
need for achievement
-need for performance feedback
-desre to plan and set goals
-strong ndividual nitative
-strong personal conunitrnent and identification with organizatiol1
-internallocus of control
-belief that work should be guided by personal goals, not those of others
The Super-Salesperson (achieves suecess through networking, selling, and people ,kills):
-capacity to understand and fee! with another, to empathize
-desire to help others
-be1ief that social processes, interaction, and re!ationships are important
-need to have strong positive relationships wth others
-belief that the sales force is crucial to carrying out company strategy
-background often includes selling experence
J
I
CHAPTER 6 Human Resources and tbe Entrepreneurial Organization:The Creative individual
155
I
I
The Real
(strong managerial skills combined with aggressive growth
orientaton):
-desre to be a corporate leader
--desire to compete
--decsveness
--desire fOI power
-positive attitudes to aumomy r
-desire to stand out from the crowd
Tlie EJ.:pert Idea Generato/' (expertise + creativity):
I
-desre to innovate
-love of deas, curious, open-minded
-belief that new product 01' service development s the most crucial
component of company strategy
-intelligenee and novel thinking is at center of their entrepreneurial approach
-intelligence is viewed as a souree of eompetitve advantage
-desre to avoid taking risks
If we apply his scheme to the corporate context, personal achievers would be the
type ofbpld, visionary, risk takers that are typica1ly associated with the classic entre
preneur. Super-salespeople wOllld be entrepreneurial employees who successfully
push concepts as a funccion of their networking and people skills. Real managers are
more power-oriented, and tend to systematica!ly and aggressively grow an internal
venture. Expert idea generators, or techno-preneurs, are inventors or creators,
ca!ly with a strong techncal background. While they will champion a new idea
wthin the organization and through the implementation process, th:y most enjoy
the opportunity to go back and invent more things. They re more
risk averse.
There can be roany kinds of entrepreneurs in companies. However; this frarnework
provides a beginning point for recognizing some of them. The critica! point here is that
corporate enttepreneurs take on various forros and exhibit different styles. They can
differ in terros of ther relative risk profiles, sources of motivaton, rnanagerial
ties, and other characteristics.
Critical Roles in Corporate Entrepreneurship
Entrepreneurship can happen anytime and anywhere in a company. The managerial
challenge concerns how to make it sustainable-how to roaintain the desired frequen
cy and degree of entrepreneurship on an ongoing basis. Achieving continuous entre
preneurship requres that the firm recognize the specfic that must be filled for an
entrepreneurial event to successfully oceur. Further, an environment must be created
157
.156 SECTlON 2 CItEATING Tl' ENTREPRENEURIAL ORGANIZATION
where peopie are expected to take on one or more ofthese roles on a regular basis. The
key roles are defined as follows:
Initiator-trggers a new entrepreneurial event, either by recognizing sorne external
threat or opportunity, identifYing sorne internal needs, or pursuing sOl1le ongoing
innovaron initatives. This role is often, but not always, filled by che chal1lpion.
Sponsor/Faci1itator--the eader or a major of the nitiative,
acceptance and completion, playing a major advising or mentoring
and protecting it. This high-level person in the company as buffer, protector, and
modifier of rules and polices and helps the venture obt,1in che needed resources.
Champion-takes the lead in driving and directing che project, overseeing the
implementation process, adapting key aspects of the concept along the way, stlstaining
the project as obstacles :lnd opposition arise, and bringing it through to completion.
Innovation Midwife-serves as a translator between the language, culture, and
needs of the sponsor's world and the language, culture, and need, of the champoll
world. The rnidwife, as identified byVincent (2005), nurtures, develops, and inte
grates llnovations that might be rejected by the orgallzation's core.
Supporter-augments the team, playing a secondary 01' more minor role, lnd
providing expertse, intelligence, analysis, and marketing plans/programs on behalf
of the initiative.
Reactor-plays more of a devl's advocate role, provding market intelligence and
insght that serve to either pinpoint weak:nesses in the entrepreneurial idea, possible
ways in which it should be revsed or re/lned, and reasons it should 01' should not
be
While aII of these roles need to be filled, the two most critica! ones are the champion
and the sponsor. The focal point of any entrepreneurial nitiative is the chatnpon. The
unique demands ofthe corporate envronrnent require that the individual filling the cham
pon role must be able to wear rnany hats at the sarne time. However, he or she cannot be
expected to wear aII the necessary hats, and chis is why a well-constructed tearo and strong
network are important. Fifteen key roles that frequently must be filled by the champion
and rus/her team in order to bring an entrepreneural concept to frution include:
Researcher/analyzer: Gathers intelJigence, assesses evaluates key factors in
the market
Interpreter/strategis/: Identifies patterns, trends, and future developments and draw
implications for project development
Visionar,/inventory: Provides creativity, intuton, and judgment n recognizing
opportunties and ways to capitalize upon them
. CHAPTER 6 Resources .and tite Entrepreneurial. Organizatian: 'f.he
al' leader: PfQlvdes motivation and impetus for a project off the
Provides top-Ieve! support for the entreprelleurial concept and lends
to the pursuit of the concept by the project champion
a collaborative role on the project with
frol11 other
Team
areas
Assists with informational, human, financial, and other resource
opport1.lnity
Resource
or challenge that the innovaton
Pro/lem solver: Responds to a particular
team encounters along the way
Coordinator: Helps to together and integrate key inputs and resources over till1e
Negotator: Bridge, differences an10ng various llvolved regarding what the
project or concept should consist of, scope, its resource cornmitment levels, al1d ts
timetable
Poli/lean: Helps Qvercome internal resstance and top management support
Change manager: Oversees any redirection, modfication of infrastructure,
and employee training or reorentation necessary to il1lplement a new initiative
Missionar)': Motivates and inspires management and all relevant interest groups
regarding ongoing need for innovation
to emerging developments; provides new drection if
Reacts
necessary
f1aws, downsde rsks, and likely impacts ol}. other parts
CrliclJudge: Identifies
of the business.
In terms of their skili set, corporate entrepreneurs often approach internal
initiative as specialists. That is, the individual may specalize in one area, such as market
ing or research and development, but once the entrepreneurial initiative gets underway,
he or she is forced to learn other faeets ofthe venture. The corporate entrepreneur soon
becomes a generalist with many skilis.
With all we have covered about corporate entrepreneurs, there still eXsp numerous
about these individuals in organizations. Let's examine a few of the more popular myths.
Myths about Corporate Entrepreneurs
Just as a number of myths have been popularized about entrepreneurship in
(see Chapter 2), the entrepreneur inside of a company is ofren subject to misconcep
tions and false assumptions. That is, supervisors and peers in an organization have
158 SECTION 2 CREATING THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ORGANIZATION
a tendency to stereotype employees that demonstrate strong entrepreneurial proclivi-
ties. Consider the following six myths, together with the countervailing reality;
o Myth: The primary motivation of corporate entrepreneurs is a desire for wealth;
hence, money is the prime objective.
o Fact: The primary motivation of corporate entrepreneurs is the process of innova-
tion: The freedom and ability to innovate are the prime motivators. Money is only a
tool and a symbol of success.
Myth: Corporate entrepreneurs are high risk takers-they are gamblers who play
for high stakes.
Fact: Moderate risk -taking is a more realistic description of entrepreneurial behavior
within established corporations. Because of their insatiable desire to achieve, smail,
calculated, and analyzed risks are the preferred stepping-stones of these individuals.
Myth: Because corporate entrepreneurs lack analytical skills, they "shoot from the
hip." This has led to a philosophy of "luck is all you
o Fact: Corporate entrepreneurs are fairly analytical. Although it may appear they are
lucky and shoot from the hip, in truth, they arc well prepared, innova-
tion, and perceive market needs very well.
Myth: Corporate entrepreneurs do not appreciate the importance of being a team
player within the company, and often act as the proverbial "bull in a china shop."
Fact: Corporate entrepreneurs often demonstrate strong political skills and are adept
at working around rules, procedures, and constraillts imposed by the company hier-
archy without stepping on toes; they develop their innovative concepts "below the
radar screen."
Myth: Corporate entrepreneurs lack morals or ethics due to their strong desire to
succeed. They do not care how they succeed, just as long as they do succeed.
Fact: In to day's demanding, educated, and critical society, where companies and
their actions tend to be visible to the public, corporate entrepreneurs tend to be
highly ethical and have moral convictions consistent with society's expectations.
If they do not have these convictions, they do Itot survive.
Myth: Corporate entrepreneurs have a power-hungry attitude and are most interested
in building an empire. They want the venture to grow as big and as fast as it can.
o Fact: Most entrepreneurial initiatives are small and relatively conservative. The
individual is more interested in the profit and growth of the concept or venture
than in empire building. The focus is on doing things right rather than doing
them big.
. CHAPTER 6 Human Re.ources and the EnlIepreneurial Organization:The Creative Individual
Many inside the organization view entrepreneurial individuals as threatening. They
disturb comfort zones and create change. fu, a result, there is a tendency to cling to such
stereotypes, or otherwise negatively portray the motives and actions of the entrepre-
neurial employee. For this reason, it is vital that senior executives clearly defIne the
nature and rok of the internal champion, communicate to everyone in the company
the importance of this role, and publicly reinforce those who fill this role with recog-
nition and rewards.
A Final Thought: Are You a Corporate Entrepreneur?
Before we leave this discussion regarding the nature of entrepreneurial individuals, it be
helpful for you to assess your own entrepreneurial profile. Gilford Pinchot (1985) proposes
the following short set of items as a quick test (answer yes or no to the each question):
1. Does your desire to make things work better occupy a.s much of your time as
fulfilling your duty to maintain them the way they are)
2. Do you get excited about what you are doing at work?
3. Do you think about new business ideas while driving to work or taking a shower'
4. Can you visualize concrete steps for action when you consider ways to make a
new idea happen?
5. Do you get in trouble from time to time for doing things that exceed yoUr
authority?
r
6. Are you able to your ideas under cover, suppressing your urge to tell everyone
about them until you have tested them and developed a pran f6r imp1itne,ntation?
7. Have you successfully pushed through bleak times when something yo; were
working on looked as ifit might fail?
8. Do you have a network of friends at work that you can count on for help?
9. Do you get easily annoyed by others' incompetent attempts to execute parts of
your ideas?
10. Can you consider trying to overcome a Itatural perfectionist tendency to do all
the work yourself and share the responsibility for your ideas with a team?
11. Would you be willing to give up some salary in exchange for the chance to try
out your business idea if the rewards for success were adequate?
Pinchot suggests that if an employee answers "yes" more times than "no," the chances
are he or she is already behaving like an entrepreneur.
I
I
159
I
I
160
SeCTION 2 CREATING THE ,ENTREPRENEUR.laL ORGaNIZATION ..
THE INNOVATOR'S NOTEBOOK
The Corporate Entrepreneur Persona
Given that innovation is the lifeblood of any business, the corporate entrepreneur
is the heart that keeps pumping innovation into the business. At Ideo, management
has developecl1 0 personas for innovation that employees are encouraged to play
in order to spur innovative solutions. The goa/ at Ideo is to discourage those
employees that often take the contrarian position when new ideas are presented,
better known as devil's advocates. Following are the ten personas grouped into
three categories: learning-personas focused on challenging their perspectives as
well as those of the organization; organizing-personas focused on the time,
resource, and attention limitations caused by introducing a new concept and how
to effectively maneuver around them; and bUilding-personas focused on lever-
aging the insights provided by the learning personas and the strategy provided by
the organizing personas.
The Learning Personas
The Cross-Pollinator searches for new learning that can fit the unique needs of an
organization by exploring other industries and cultures. An example of a cross-
pollinator in action can be seen in the development of the Mujirushi Ryohin
chain, a 300-store, billion-dollar retail empire. The business was based on a
Japanese businesswoman finding a generic beer in a U.5. supermarket that she
liked, which led to her building a retail chain based on offering only "no brand"
products.
The Anthropologist observes human behavior in order to gain an understand-
ing of how people interact physically and emotionally with products, services, and
spaces and then introduces that learning into the organization. Employees at Ideo,
known as human-factors people, act as anthropologiSts when they observe
customers outside of the office-for instance, one employee stayed for 48 hours
in the hospital room of an elderly patient undergoing surgery.
The Experimenter continuously prototypes new ideas in order to learn through
triaJ-and-error and, in turn, to improve his or her success rate by taking calculated
risks based on those lessons. Experimentation was clearly at work when BMW
opted to develop short films for bmwfilms.com rather than using traditional adver-
tising channels. The success of the initiative highlights the rewards that can be
recognized by experimenters.
CHAPTER 6 Human Resaurces and,the Organizatian:The Cre.tive Individual
The Organizing Personas
The Hurdler is not only of the roadblocks that line the path to innovation,
but also possesses the agility required to circumvent those obstacles: When it
came to the invention of masking tape at 3M, the employee responSible for Its
development was hindered by his $100 authorization limit By submitting a series
of $99 purchase orders to avoid attracting attention so that he could hiS
project, this hurdler was able to bend the rules and provide 3M one of Its signa-
ture products, which has generated billions of dollars in profits for the company.
The Director is both adept at casting teams and in directing the members of
those teams to bring their talents to light A Mattei executive assembling a team
of designers and project leaders, sequestering them for three months: and pro-
ducing a new $100 million toy platform epitomizes a director In action,
The Collaborator serves to bring diverse groups together by usually leading
from within the team in order to facilitate the creation of new combinations and
solutions, Collaborators were at work when Kraft Foods and Safeway set out to
eliminate the traditional barriers between suppliers and retailers. One strategy
that on the surface appeared to be merely a method to streamline the transfer of
goods between the companies not only saved labor and carrying costs, but led
to the sales of Capri Sun juice drinks increasing by 167 percent.
The Building Personas
The Storyteller specializes at building internal morale and external awareness
through the use of narratives that impart a basic human. wlue/lr an
element of the company's culture. Medtronic's culture IS defined by Its most
effective storytellers, patients that have had their lives changed or even saved by
the company's products and that provide firsthand narratives to the employees.
The Caregiver strives to move the company beyond customer service into a
more intimate customer relationship known as "customer care." Best Cellars, a
profitable wine retailer, has demonstrated the caregiver role by removing the mys-
tery and snobbery out of wine in order to make the experience fun for its customers,
The Set Designer builds a stage that will allow innovation team members to do
their best work. For the Cleveland Indians, building a new stadium led to a
renewed winning ability for the team.
The Experience Architectgoes beyond the obvious needs of customers in order
to uncover their unexpressed needs, By turning the preparation of a frozen dessert
161
163
162 Sf.CII0N 1 GREATrNG THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ORGANIZA'rION
into a fun experience with which the customer could gel involved, Cold Stone
Creamery developed a successful new customer experienee, whieh has allowed
it to prices.
SOURCE: Adapted from T. Kelley, "The 1OFaees of Innovation," Fast Company,
Issue 99, October 2005: 4.
Summary and Conclusions
is the foundation upon whch entrepreneurship is built. The corporate entre
preneur requires creative solutions to an array of challenges ancl obstacles as a concept
goes from conceptualization to implementation. In the end, entrepreneurship in
organizations cannot happen without lechnical creativity, resource
creativity, marketing creativity, and more.
Creativity brings with il a fresh start, a new way, a freedom from the constraints of
what was, and a path lo what can be. It is a manifestation of Ihe human spiril, such that
the act of successful creativity is by itself a tremendous source of employee motivation
and pride. To create is to matter, to eount, to make a difference, to have an impact, and
to be a source of value.
The entrepreneurial personality takes on many forms. While there are some charac
teristics common to most entrepreneurial individuals, such as achievement motivation,
internal locus of control, calculaled risk taking, and toleran ce for ambiguity, there is no
profile or prototype, Further, entrepreneurs are no! born. The entrepreneurial poten
tial is rich in every employee in a company, no matter what Iheir background or position.
In this chapter, we also explored the concept of entrepreneurial motivation.
Characteristics that distinguish corporate entrepreneurs from independent or start-up
enlrepreneurs, as well as from conventional managers, were identified. While there
are also simlarities among these three types, the corporate enlrepreneur is closer in
nature lo the start-up entrepreneur than lo the conventional manager. Just as importanl is
the need to recognize Ihe different kinds of enlrepreneurs Ihal can be found in a corpo
rate setting, and an attempt was made to describe at leasl four different types.
Sustainable entrepreneurship is dependent on Ihe ongoing ability of companies to fill
a set of key roles, the two most important of which are the champion and lhe sponsor.
Champions must wear many hats, and a number of their responsibilities were identified.
CHAI'TER 6 Human Resources and tbe EntrepreneuriaLOrganization:The c;reative Individual
The nature and scope of these responsibilties makes it c1ear that corporate entrepreneur
does not happen without teams, where other individuals can wear some of the
hats. When seeking someone to serve as sponsor, one must strive to achieve a fit
not only between the champion and the targeted person, bu! also between the entrepre
neurial concept and the type of sponsor selected.
References
Amabij:, T. 1998."Haw ro KIl Crettviry," Ht1(I(/m Bllsi/lCSS Rrl1iew, 76 (Septcmber-October): 77-1f1.
in L1fb"t!' Orgalliz:uiom:
!3ulicoitt:, L, and
and Heuristic); 10
Garmer, W.lt 1989. "50me Sl.lggcstiom for Research 00 Entrepreneurial Trait.,> :md Ch:lIilCu:rinlcs," Emrrprrut'IIr$1tip Tlhw)'
P'd"i,, (f.\lI): 27-3H.
Hall, D. 1995.JwIIJI 5fi1rl )1mr Br.tiu (NcwYork: WilrnC(' Uooks).
1992. "The Entreprt'neur and (he Inriation ofNtwVenturc; bUllen Acrivities," Emti'm'IH'lIri/,ip
1111:1J')' tl/ld
Hlnhberg,j. 1998. Tile Cr;trlit1t' Pritm",y (NewYork: Hnrper :Boob).
ofEmrepreoeurship:Thc CastO of Achievemcnt Motivatioo md che
Kao,j.]. 1991. Tb/! ElllrepfCtlellr (Englewood Cliffi: Prentice Hall): 1fJl-198,
Kao,lJ. 1989, ElllrcprelJeursltip. Crcttli!/i/)' mili OrgaH/'ztttoH (Ellglewood Cl1m:
1997. "An Exannation ofOwner's Goal, in SU$(aioing Enttprclleurship."
Leonard, D., and Smu$, S, 1997, "Putting the Whoie Brain ro Work," Hm)(lm Busilless Rc!/iCtl',
75 (July-Augustj: 111-121.
Leonard, D.. 3nd Sw.p, W 1999. l1li"" Sparns FI)' (Bos<on: Harvard Bunno>, School Pr"").
MilIcr, W. C. 1999. Plasl, of B,iIIi,,,,, (Reading, Mas,.: Perseus Books).
Michalko, M. 1991. TIri"k"'''Yi (llerkeley CA:Ten Speed Pressj.
Miner,]. B. 1996. TIII,> Follr Rol/lCS te Etltreprem:uri<1 Suaess (San Fr.:tncisdo. CA: Berrett-Kohler), :
Mortis, M. H. 1998. El1treprelIeuria/l/ltc!lsl)' (Westport, CT: Quorum Books),
"A Proposed Research Model ofEmreptel1eurial Monvarion,'"
Pinchot. Ill, G. 1985.111tM'prc/lcuring (NewYork: Harpec & Row).
Rcuber.A R., aod Fischer, E.1999. "Understanding me Conseqences
M(magcllIeur (Feb.): 30--45.
Rickards,T. 1988, Crea'v;'r al 1%.. (Brookfield,Vermont Gower Publi,hing).
Sha\"ec, K. G., and Scott, L R. 1991, 'Perron, Process, Chaice:The Psycnology of NewVenture Creanon." E'lfreple1/cmslu"p
Tlreory allJ malee (Winter): 23-45.
lf
Vim:ent, L. 2005. "Innovanon Midwlves: Sustaining Innovatioo Streams in E'stabli.med Campanes. ReseMc/1 TcclllllJlogr
MillllIgemc1Ii, 48(1): 41-49,
von Oech,(l, 1998. A Hr'1/(lck (,ji IlIe Sirle '!frlle Hetld (NewYark: Warner Books).
von Oech, R, 1986. A Kick in tlle Sral (1tlu: Pol/ts (NewYork: Harpcr alld Row).
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
I