К содержанию номера журнала: Вестник КАСУ №1 - 2011
Автор: Феоктистова Елена Александровна
training, capable of successful management of a sustained business in the
conditions of world economic crisis, is one of the priority trends of
specialists training by the universities, oriented for innovation development.
In spite of the
importance and great significance of entrepreneurs training in the framework of
the state, this issue is not enough worked out , in our opinion, on the point
of programs evaluation and curricula design in the sphere of specialists
training for entrepreneurship and business management.
Based on the
experience of organization and running of Kazakh-Korean Higher school of
innovative entrepreneurship, cooperation with Hoseo university that has world
important and famous Graduate school of entrepreneurship and which trains CEOs
of many world famous and global companies and also on the basis of literature
analysis we made an attempt to design a model of entrepreneurship education.
To our mind,
entrepreneurship education depends on many factors: approaches to education,
skills and capabilities, necessary for the entrepreneur, means of stimulating
entrepreneur’s creativity (questions, activities, and assignments), techniques
and activities for class efficiency, etc.
of entrepreneurship vary in nature. Entrepreneurship can be a way of thinking
and behaving that is opportunity based and holistic in approach (Timmons,
1999). Then, entrepreneurship results in creation, enhancement, realization and
renewal of value, not just for business owners, but also for all participants
and stakeholders (Timmons; 1999). Entrepreneurs are individuals who manage the
uncertainties of the entrepreneurial environment, and embrace the chaos and
ambiguity of change. Entrepreneurship occurs in all firms, in all enterprises and
in all sectors, imposing demands for organizations and individuals to develop
entrepreneurial skills to cope with this uncertain and complex business
It is widely held
view that entrepreneurs are action oriented and that much of their learning is
experimentally based (Rae and Carswell, 2000). Furthermore, entrepreneurs
‘learn by doing’ and ‘trial and error’ as well as problem solving and discovery
(Deakins and Freel, 1998; Young and Sexton, 1997).
Many programs for
entrepreneur training adopt a learning approach that required cognitive
flexibility (Spiro et al., 1991), where learning results from the interaction
between people having different experiences and perspectives (Goldman-Segall
and Rao, 1998).
learning approach is sometimes chosen to entrepreneurs’ education because it
offers a high potential for collaborative learning between participants (Siebenhuner
and Hoffman, 2002). The synergetic learning approach is grounded in
constructivist learning theory; that is, the learner is actively involved in
the joint enterprise of learning with the educator and together they create new
meanings (Atherton, 2003). This approach allows for the articulation and interaction
between different perceptions, interpretations and arguments by the
participants involved. These interactions might result in discovery of concrete
solutions to problems, the development of new ideas and the resolution of complex
decision-making scenarios, and is therefore an appropriate approach for
learning makes use of participatory methods. The following were used in the
discovering entrepreneurship program by Kanji and Greenwood (2001):
- Cooperation, where
all participants together determine priorities; the responsibility to direct
the process lay with entrepreneurs and facilitators;
where all participants shared knowledge and created new understandings and
worked together to form plans of action;
where nascent entrepreneurs’’ opinions were sought and existing entrepreneurs
and facilitators analyzed and decided on the course of action;
action, where nascent entrepreneurs set their own agendas and then carried out
the action without direction from existing entrepreneurs and facilitators.
involved in the delivery had to be willing and comfortable with risk taking and
‘shifting goal posts’, and had to possess good communication and sound conflict
resolution skills (Kanji and Greenwood, 2001), with an emphasis on being a
co-learner rather than the expert.
Luke Pittaway and
Jason Cope also support the idea that a holistic approach can be used in
entrepreneurship education, but it needs to be developed that can present to
some extent multiple levels of analysis. Foe example, this thematic model
suggests that study on pedagogy at the level of individual programs is
inherently embedded in a wider context of the institution and government policy
on entrepreneurship education. Inevitably, therefore, debates about appropriate
pedagogy sit within the context of what entrepreneurship education is
understood to ‘mean’ or what entrepreneurship education ‘is’ or what it trying
to ‘do’ , axioms that are themselves guided by contextual factors. It is also
inevitable that these contextual factors are further influenced by the wider
society and particularly its culture.
It is also
possible to understand entrepreneurship education systemically; in the sense of
being able to identify contextual factors; inputs into system; educational
processes; and, outputs. The systemic nature of entrepreneurship education is,
however, complicated by the fact that there is little clarity about what the
outputs are designed to ‘be’. This lack of clarity about the intended outputs
leads to significant diversity surrounding the inputs. In this sense the idea
of ‘entrepreneurship education’ as one thing would appear to be rather
problematic suggesting further effort is required to begin the development of
detailed taxonomies and typologies based on current international practice.
entrepreneurship education, as a research domain, while gathering some momentum
has a great deal more to do to integrate understanding across the different levels
of research endeavor and needs to be better linked into general debates on
adult learning, management learning and role of HE in general.
It is important to
mention that there are some differences between Business school approach and
entrepreneur real world approach, which are reflected in the table:
It is necessary to
point out that entrepreneurs’ training on the basis of both Hoseo University
Graduate School of Entrepreneurship (South Korea) and East-Kazakhstan state
technical university Kazakhstan-Korean high school of innovative
entrepreneurship (Kazakhstan) entrepreneur real world approach is used. Most of
the professors of Hoseo university who give lectures to entrepreneurs are the
owners and CEOs of real business, they have necessary experience and can share
it with the students. It is very important, in our opinion, that future and
present entrepreneurs can get real experience that can be applied in real
entrepreneurship skills are reflected in table 2. The most important, in our
opinion, is creativity. Timmons (1994) has argued that creativity should be
central to entrepreneurship education provision, and the concept of creativity
has been a constant focus of educational thinking and practice (Torrance and
Rockenstein, 1988). Furthermore, Gibb (1996) proposes that certain basic
stimuli for entrepreneurial behavior lie naturally within the culture, talk
structure and learning environment in higher education.
(2000) opinion, systematic approaches to the development of creativity amongst
higher education students appear to be limited, particularly in the UK. The
consequence is that prospective lectures and students find themselves with
little practical guidance to action.
To develop future
entrepreneur’s creativity it is necessary to aim the education to:
capabilities of personal and team creativity;
understanding of the nature and role of creativity within a student’s individual
social and economic contexts;
barriers to the creative process;
frameworks within which to evaluate creative, entrepreneurial opportunities;
communication and presentation skills;
- and improve team
building and working abilities.
is the innovatory process involved in the creation of an economic enterprise
based on a new product or service which differs significantly from products or
services in the way its production is organized or in its marketing.
creativity is a process of becoming sensitive to or aware of problems, deficiency,
and gaps in knowledge for which there is no learned solution; brining together
existing information from the memory storage or external; defining the
difficulty or identifying the missing elements; searching for solutions, making
guesses; producing alternatives to solve the problem; testing and re-testing
these alternatives; and perfecting them and finally communicating the results.
action there can be no entrepreneurship. It is proposed that one key to
unlocking the potential of entrepreneurship within an individual member of
society, and the degree to which their personal creativity exists or can be
stimulated, may be through appropriate educational interventions. The above
definition suggests that such interventions should focus on the nurturing of
innovation and creation, towards commercial application, through the
heightening of personal qualities of reflecting, doing, valuing, and feeling,
behaving and relating to others. They would aim to sensitize potential
entrepreneurs to the value of a disposition to personal creativity as related
to entrepreneurship, and develop skill in using creative techniques in relation
to business idea generation and problem-solving. This contrasts quite sharply
to traditional higher education curricula that emphasize sequences of
instruction and examination in bodies of subject knowledge, and their associated
methodologies, frequently organized within established disciplinary frameworks
and leading to a university degree in a given subject of subjects (Johnston and
In the present
article we would like to share the experience of entrepreneurs’ training on
the basis of MBA international program which was started with contract
concluding on December, 29, 2008.
Graduate School of Global entrepreneurship
at Hoseo University was started in March, 2005.
The purpose of
this school is to teach a systematic theory on starting new business and foster
entrepreneurship to raise global talents for starting new business and
consulting through special courses.
The goals of
Graduate School of Global entrepreneurship are promoting global entrepreneurship,
raising global consultants for starting new business and the scope of study,
support the activities of starting new business, promoting the capabilities to
coordinate with overseas enterprises and concerning organizations.
Higher School of Innovative Entrepreneurship at East-Kazakstan State technical university in honor of D. Serikbayev (EKSTU) was established in April, 2009.
students were enrolled on September, 1, 2009.
According to the
contract and the agreement between the universities the students study during
their first year at EKSTU with participation of Hoseo university professors.
They come to EKSTU to deliver lecturers 3 times a year. During the first year
EKSTU organizes advanced training in English and Korean. At the end of the
first year master students have to complete master dissertation on the topic of
some business venture and with successful completion of studies get a diploma
of master of management from EKSTU. During the second year the students of
EKSTU study at Hoseo University and present a business plan of a start-up
Kim, the dean of Graduate School of Global Entrepreneurship conducts lectures
on the discipline of Innovative Entrepreneurship.
His lectures are a
great stimulus for future entrepreneurs to start new businesses. They can
obtain new ideas from the lectures and come up with their own new ones.
The contents of
the lectures include:
- The questions
every entrepreneur must answer: Goals, strategies, capacity;
- How to write a
great business plan;
entrepreneurs craft strategies that work;
- Milestones for
successful venture planning;
- Strategies vs.
Tactics from a venture capitalist;
technology what the best company do, etc.
Atherton, J.S. (2003) ‘Learning and teaching Constructivism’ [Online] UK, available at http://www.dmu.ac.uk/~jamesa/learning/constructivism.htm,
accessed 26 March 2004.
Deakins, D. and Freel, M. (1998) ‘Entrepreneurial Learning and the Growth
Process in SMEs’, The Learning Organization 5(3): 144-55.
Gibb, A. (1996) ‘Entrepreneurship and small business management: Can we afford
to neglect them in the 21st century business school?’, British Academy of management 7: 309-21.
Goldman-Segall, R. and Rao, S.V. (1998) ‘A Collaborative On-line Digital Data
Tool fro Creating Living Narratives in Organizational Knowledge Systems’, in
System Sciences 1998. Proceedings of the Thirty-First Hawaii International
Conference, 6-9 January, available at: http://orion.njit.edu/
merlin/publications/publicmain.html, accessed 25 May 2006.
Johnston, B. & Morrison A. (1997) ‘Developing Undergraduate Creative
Thinking for Entrepreneurship: A pilot Class’, paper presented at the
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior’s Enterprise and learning
conference, university of Paisley, Uk, September.
Kanji, N. and Greenwood, L. (2001) Participatory Approaches to Research and Development
IIED: Learning from Experience. London: International Institute for Environment
Rae, D. and Carswell, M. (2000) ‘Using a Life-story Approach in Entrepreneurial
Learning: The Development of a Conceptual Model and its Implications in the Design
of Learning Experiences’, Education and Training 42 (4/5): 220-7.
Siebenhuner, B. and Hoffman, E. (2002) ‘Participatory Learning Process in the Development
of Sustainable Products’, paper presented at the Towards Sustainable Product
Design 7th International Conference, 28-29 October, British
Timmons J.A. (1999) New Venture Creation: Entrepreneurship for the 21st Century. London: McGrawHill.
Timmons, J. (1994) New Venture Creation. Chicago: Irwin.
Torrance, E. & Rockenstein, Z. (1988) ‘Styles of Thinking and
Creativity’, in R. Schmeck (ed.) Learning strategies and learning styles. New York: Plenum Press.
Young, J. E. and Sexton, D. L. (1997) “Entrepreneurial Learning: A Conceptual
Framework’, Journal of Enterprising Culture 5(3): 223-48.
К содержанию номера журнала: Вестник КАСУ №1 - 2011