Constructing agency in entrepreneurial process

Objectives: Entrepreneurs are the interpretive agents (Gilbert-Saad et al., 2018) in the new venture creation process. Hence, studying how individuals make sense of themselves during the process enables to address how action is produced by the entrepreneur (Read et al., 2009). Processual approach enables studying entrepreneurs’ learning (Cope, 2005; Jayawarna et al., 2013), and hence, we try to understand how individuals in entrepreneurial process construct themselves as agents in self-directed and -regulated courses of action (Bandura, 2006; Jones, 2019) close to the moments when the outcomes of action takes place. Accordingly, our research question is how individuals engaged in entrepreneurial process construct their own agency?

Prior Work: In entrepreneurial process the actors, individuals, decide to take action to create something new. Unique feature in this process is the agency according to which individuals perceive being in charge of the process. Agency is related to the sense of control over individuals’ decisions, actions, and outcomes (Baum et al., 2014). However, research has focused on the qualities of entrepreneurs, but this does not enlighten us how individuals perceive their agency when action actually unfolds. Instead, in this study, we apply a relational and social conception of agency and pay special attention to temporal construction of agency in an entrepreneurial process (Emirbayer & Mische, 1998; Flaherty, 2002; Hitlin & Elder, 2007b). Analytically, the study conceptualizes “the self” as an agent; the way a person perceives in a given moment themselves in relation to others and the world affect how they construe being an agent and also influences on how they act (see Harré, 1998).

Approach: We use a novel empirical approach of video diaries (vlogs) produced by students participating in a 14 week long new venture creation course. We use vlogs as personal and experiential narratives and focus on the talk (transcriptions). Drawn from the literature, we pose three questions to the research data: 1) how the narrators assume power and exert influence over actions and events (Riessman, 2001); 2) how the narrators interact and socially position themselves with other agents (Davies & Harré, 1990; van Langenhove & Harré, 2005; Reynolds & Curtin, 2008; Eisenhardt, 2013); and 3) what is said about entrepreneurship and what kind of meanings are given to entrepreneurship (Riessman, 2008; Bruner, 1990; Steyaert, 2004). We focus on vlogs produced by two vloggers, one of which who had an initial idea at the beginning of the course and another without an idea. In answering these questions, the vlogs are also timed with the guided entrepreneurial process at the course.

Results: Our results highlight the way the vloggers constructed their agency through idiosyncratic and recurring talking points which presented discrepancies between what is ideal and what is really happening during the entrepreneurial process (Riessman 1993). These tensions highlighted differences in constructing agency between the vloggers in terms of four dimensions including: temporal telling (short term telling when lacking a business idea; long term telling with a vision of a business), individual learning goals and commitment (less power over events without commitment; more power over events with commitment), social positioning and comparison (negative appraisal in comparison to others caused negative emotions, positive appraisal caused positive emotions), and finally, necessary knowledge and skills (negative appraisal caused by perception of failing; positive appraisal caused by acceptance of one’s capabilities).

Implications and Value: The paper contributes empirically demonstrating that the perceived agency seems to transform over time, but importantly our findings address how to individuals cope with negative aspects of the new venture creation process. These findings imply that the production of entrepreneurial behavior is a complex bundle of motivational and emotional factors that are conceptualized as relational and social issues. Moreover, as much of agency debate is theoretical; our study provides novel empirical findings on the human side of agency. The paper makes also methodological contribution by employing approach that produces rich data on agency and enables investigation the processes of sense making during the moments of change in and/or between educational interventions designed to support the entrepreneurial process.