most chapters, a “teaching and learning” section illustrates how I have applied these principles in my own classes, often relying on collaborative technologies and cloud-based resources to enhance student interaction and engagement. Chapter 1 discusses these principles and how they are applied in more depth.
Another important characteristic of this book is its emphasis on a more dynamic strategic view of business model innovation based on the principles of effectuation (Sarasvathy 2001) and human-centric innovation (such as Business Model Design, Customer Development, Design Thinking and Lean Startup). Many business schools in Europe still prompt entrepreneurship students to write long business plans, often based on dangerously flawed assumptions. We build a case in this book on how a more dynamic approach, based on business model testing and product or service prototyping, is a much more effective way of learning about real innovation opportunities. This does not mean that old-school business planning should be buried and forgotten. Indeed, the initial chapters of this book discuss typical business plan structures and the analytical tools involved in moving from vision to plan. Even though the effectuation approaches discussed in later chapters have proven to be more adapted to the dynamic nature of entrepreneurship and innovation projects, static business plans could be a good starting point to gain an overview of the initial strategic elements, which may help mature the entrepreneur’s vision. The problem with these plans, we argue, is their tendency to become a static reference point for every decision beyond the initial stages of vision development. This danger must be avoided by applying dynamic effectuation approaches such as business modeling and design thinking.
I.1. A humble contribution to strengthening entrepreneurship and innovation in Europe
One of the challenges of writing a book about E&I in Europe is that there are multiple perspectives on a continent so culturally diverse. We do not have the pretension of presenting “the” definitive and comprehensive view of this phenomenon for the continent, but simply “a” perspective from my own experience of teaching European students for over a decade in France.
To illustrate how differently E&I are perceived in Europe, Dodd et al. (2013) analyzed positive and negative metaphors associated with entrepreneurs in a continent-wide survey. Whereas 46% of Greeks had a negative attitude towards entrepreneurs (blood-sucking leeches), in Ireland 82.3% saw them positively (bright and illuminating rainbows). Table I.1 presents these differences.
Table I.1. Different perceptions about entrepreneurs across Europe (adapted from Dodd et al. 2013)
| Positive images | |
|---|---|
| % per country | Predominant metaphor |
| Ireland (82.3%) | Bright and illuminating rainbows |
| The Netherlands (73.8%) | Lubricating oil of economy |
| UK (72.5%) | Poets. They must invent new ideas and turn them into something profitable |
| Italy (70%) | The wings of freedom |
| Cyprus (65.5%) | A ship with a good captain. They know where the ship begins its voyage and where it docks. They have targets |
| Poland (49.3%) | Hunters – they are persistent on their aspirations for a success |
| Greece (41%) | Conductors of the orchestra |
| Negative images | |
| % per country | Predominating metaphor |
| Greece (46%) | Leeches, because they suck the blood of the employees |
| Poland (26.2%) | Stone – insensitive to the needs of others |
| Italy (20.7%) | Leeches |
| Cyprus (20.5%) | Foxes – they try to sell their products in a treacherous way |
| UK (13.5%) | The historical titanic, the discovery shuttle |
| Ireland (7.3%) | Hares, running about all over the place |
| The Netherlands (5.7%) | Profiteer |
If the tools adopted in Europe are the same that are being used in Silicon Valley, creating a new venture in the Old World remains a much harder exercise. According to Henrekson and Sanandaji (2018), Europe overall has an “entrepreneurship deficit” that is largely acknowledged in the public debate. We have a less dense institutional framework for innovation and the venture capital sector is less developed. Europe has fewer innovative firms and lower R&D efforts among startups.
Wright et al. (2007) show that whereas in the USA we have 140 adults per 10,000 in nascent ventures with an expectation of having more than 19 employees in the next five years, this number is much lower for European countries: 70 in the UK, 49 in Sweden, 46 in Germany, 38 in France and 16 in Belgium. This is not just a matter of creating startups, but also scaling them up. Table I.2 shows the number of large firms founded since 1990 in the USA, China and Europe, depicting the vast superiority of the Americans in this domain.
Table I.2. Entrepreneurship and value creation in different countries (adapted from Henrekson and Sanandaji 2018)
| Billionaire entrepreneurs per million | Number of startups valued at 1B+ (unicorns) | Large firms founded since 1990 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| USA | 1.37 | 115 | 60 |
| China | 0.17 | 47 | 22 |
| East Asia | 0.55 | 8 | 19 |
| Eastern Europe | 0.13 | 1 | 2 |
| Western Europe | 0.47 | 22 | 18 |
| Germany | 0.52 | 5 | 3 |
| UK | 0.72 | 10 | 5 |
