P R O F E S S I O N A L
A N D
V E T
L E A R N I N G
Becoming an Entrepreneur
Becoming an Entrepreneur
P R O F E S S I O N A L
Susanne Weber
Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Germany
Fritz K. Oser
University of Fribourg, Switzerland
Frank Achtenhagen
Georg-August University Göttingen, Germany
Michael Fretschner
Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Germany
and
Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Germany
This book provides new insights into the important field of Entrepreneurship Education. The editors pick up Fayolle’s invitation: “How can we learn from ‘institutional’
culture?” and translate it to a variety of aspects of learning to start-up. From the
perspective of Human Resource Education and Management (Wirtschaftspädagogik)
the authors shed light into the socio-cultural system of entrepreneurship education. They start with mapping out its challenges. They discuss context factors like
political regimes affecting entrepreneurial activities, consider goals including moral awareness, introduce ideas of modeling entre- and intrapreneurial competencies,
suggest teaching-learning-strategies, discuss evaluation procedures and introduce
case studies of entrepreneurship education in different countries for different study
levels. All in all this book stimulates and supports the challenges of educators,
students, and practitioners (human resource managers, consultants, principals,
teachers, and trainers) to introduce into the varying contexts of entrepreneurship
education content specific, procedural, causal elements necessary for starting and
maintaining an enterprise.
ISBN 978-94-6209-594-6
SensePublishers
PAVL 3
Susanne Weber, Fritz K. Oser, Frank Achtenhagen, Michael Fretschner and Sandra Trost (Eds.)
Sandra Trost (Eds.)
Spine
17.501 mm
A N D
V E T
L E A R N I N G
Becoming an
Entrepreneur
Susanne Weber, Fritz K. Oser,
Frank Achtenhagen, Michael Fretschner
and Sandra Trost (Eds.)
Becoming an Entrepreneur
PROFESSIONAL AND VET LEARNING
Volume 3
Series Editors
Susanne Weber, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München, Germany
Frank Achtenhagen, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany
Fritz Oser, Universität Freiburg, Freiburg, Switzerland
Scientific Board
Filip Dochy, Centre for Educational Research on Lifelong Learning and Participation,
University of Leuven, Belgium
James W. Pellegrino, Learning Sciences Research Institute, University of Illinois at Chicago,
USA
Thierry Volery, Swiss Research Institute for Small Business and Entrepreneurship, University
of St. Gallen, Switzerland
Friederike Welter, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung, Bonn, Germany; SME Management &
Entrepreneurship, University of Siegen, Germany
Scope
“Professional and VET Learning” is a book series that focuses on professional competencies
and identities, but also on conditions and societal frames of job performances. It includes
education in economics, medicine, handicraft, ICT, technology, media handling, commerce
etc. It includes career development, working life, work-integrated learning and ethical aspects
of the professions.
In recent years the learning in the professions and through vocational education has become
a central part of educational psychology, educational politics and educational reflections in
general. Its theoretical modeling, practical application and measurement standards are central
to the field. They are also specific for a new research realm which is until now, especially in the
US, minor developed. For Europe the dual system, learning in the professional school and – at
the same time – learning in the firm, can be a model for studying how issues of professional
belonging, professional life meaning, professional biographies, professional change, but also
especially professional competencies and sovereignties respectively securities are generated.
The books in this series will be based on different theoretical paradigms, research
methodologies and research backgrounds. Since the series is internationally connected, it will
include research from different countries and different cultures. The series shall stimulate a
practical discourse and shall produce steering knowledge for political decisions in the field.
We invite contributions, which challenge the traditional thinking in the field. Professionals
who are accountable, available and certificated shall receive through this series a fundamental
support, but also new horizons and broadened perspectives of the domain.
Becoming an Entrepreneur
Edited by
Susanne Weber
Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Germany
Fritz K. Oser
University of Fribourg, Switzerland
Frank Achtenhagen
Georg-August University Göttingen, Germany
Michael Fretschner
Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Germany
and
Sandra Trost
Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Germany
A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.
ISBN: 978-94-6209-594-6 (paperback)
ISBN: 978-94-6209-595-3 (hardback)
ISBN: 978-94-6209-596-0 (e-book)
Published by: Sense Publishers,
P.O. Box 21858,
3001 AW Rotterdam,
The Netherlands
https://www.sensepublishers.com/
Printed on acid-free paper
All Rights Reserved © 2014 Sense Publishers
No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming,
recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the
exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and
executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements
vii
Part I Introduction and Overview
Becoming an Entrepreneur: Mapping Challenges in the
Field of Entrepreneurship Education
Susanne Weber, Fritz Oser, Frank Achtenhagen, Michael Fretschner &
Sandra Trost
3
Part II Becoming an Entrepreneur
Entrepreneurship Education: A Gramscian Approach
Josef Aff & Gerhard Geissler
Identification of Entrepreneurial Challenges as Essential Condition for
Modeling Entrepreneurial Competence
Holger Benninghoff & Susanne Weber
17
35
Identifying Knowledge, Skills and Abilities of Successful Entrepreneurs
Matthias Hofmuth
55
Prior Knowledge of Potential Entrepreneurs
Bärbel Fürstenau, Hartmut-A. Oldenbürger & Iris Trojahner
77
Context and Ideology of Entrepreneurship Education in Practice
Leona Achtenhagen & Bengt Johannisson
91
Entrepreneurship Education at the University of Graz: Illustrated
by the Example of the Master Curriculum for Business
Education and Development
Peter Slepcevic-Zach, Michaela Stock & Georg Tafner
From “Chalk-and-Talk” to Starting New Ventures: An Overview of
Entrepreneurship Education Programs in Higher Education Institutions
Susan Müller
Entrepreneurial Intentions in Initial Vocational Education and Training
Doreen Holtsch
Can Entrepreneurship Be Taught to Vocational Students?:
An Intervention Study
Thierry Volery, Fritz Oser, Susan Müller, Catherine Näpflin &
Nuria del Rey
v
109
123
139
161
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A Research- and Evidence-Based Entrepreneurship Education
Program at Ludwig-Maximilians University (LMU), Munich
Susanne Weber & Sabine Funke
Ethical and Moral Considerations on Entrepreneurship Education
Karin Heinrichs, Gerhard Minnameier & Klaus Beck
Conceptualization of “MODE³” as an Innovative Model for the Evaluation
of Entrepreneurship Education at Universities from the Perspective of
Gründungsdidaktik
Ulrich Braukmann, Daniel Schneider & Andreas Voth
177
197
217
“Arzt und Zukunft” – An Example of Entrepreneurship at the Faculty of
Medicine at Ludwig-Maximilians University (LMU), Munich
Matthias Siebeck, Katrin Rauen, Jobst von Einem
243
Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior in Entrepreneurship
Education Research: An Introduction and Review of Impact Studies
Michael Fretschner
249
Intrapreneur: An Entrepreneur within a Company – An Approach on
Modeling and Measuring Intrapreneurship Competence
Susanne Weber, Sandra Trost, Michaela Wiethe-Körprich,
Christine Weiß & Frank Achtenhagen
279
Part III Summary, Discussion and Reflection
Becoming an Entrepreneur – Epilog: Summing Up, Reflections and
Further Questions
Susanne Weber, Fritz Oser, Frank Achtenhagen,
Michael Fretschner & Sandra Trost
List of Authors
vi
305
319
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Starting point of this volume was our agreement that we treat Entrepreneurship
Education under the perspective of Human Resource Education and Management
(Wirtschaftspädagogik). Under this point of view the authors shed light into the
sociocultural system of entrepreneurship education. They start with mapping
out its challenges. They discuss context factors like political regimes affecting
entrepreneurial activities, consider goals including moral awareness, introduce
ideas of modeling entre- and intrapreneurial competencies, suggest teachinglearning strategies, discuss evaluation procedures and introduce case studies of
entrepreneurship education in different countries for different study levels.
We are very grateful that we could collect important contributions to this topic –
under the mentioned specification. We collected articles not only from Germany but
also from Austria and Switzerland and even from Sweden. Furthermore, we received
a contribution from the fields of medicine where the preparation of young medical
doctors for opening their own practice marks an important step to a successful career.
We have to thank all authors for their endeavor and also their patience. We also
thank the reviewers for their excellent work. We hope that this book with its many
ideas and suggestions stimulates the discussion about Entrepreneurship Education
and contributes to its progress.
Munich, Fribourg, Göttingen, December 2013
Susanne Weber, Fritz K. Oser, Frank Achtenhagen,
Michael Fretschner, Sandra Trost
vii
PART I
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
SUSANNE WEBER, FRITZ OSER, FRANK ACHTENHAGEN,
MICHAEL FRETSCHNER & SANDRA TROST
BECOMING AN ENTREPRENEUR:
MAPPING CHALLENGES IN THE FIELD OF
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION
INTRODUCTION
Competent entrepreneurial activity seems to be indispensable as it significantly
affects the quality of people’s lives: Several studies show that entrepreneurship
behavior stimulates economic growth, social welfare and human cohesion, but it also
upholds individual employability, as well as the autonomy of the stakeholders. Thus,
entrepreneurial activity is declared as one of the key competencies for lifelong learning.
During the last decade various entrepreneurship education programs were
implemented across educational levels (secondary education, vocational education
and training (VET)) and across academic disciplines, e.g. business administration,
engineering, medicine, etc. It includes – for developing entrepreneurial mindsets and
behaviors – facets of economic literacy, risk taking acts and self-reliance feelings.
But there is also a dark side of the story: We are confronted with a high mortality rate
of start-ups within their first years. Thus, it does not wonder that there are various
upcoming calls for rigorous and sustainable evaluations on these programs and
initiatives. In addition, the increasing number of literature reviews and meta-analyses
dealing with the impact of such entrepreneurial endeavors demonstrate various
conceptual and methodological shortcomings. With other words: the programs show
a lack of clearly set learning goals; teaching methods are mainly named in a broad
overarching way; the conceptualizations of observable evidences, regarding key
entrepreneurial behavior as output, are often diffuse so that solid inferences and
predictions are rare; the performed evaluation designs and methods are rather weak.
This volume tries to overcome at least partly these shortcomings. It accepts that
various disciplines deal with entrepreneurship. But this multi-science approach does
not hide the fact that most of these disciplines treat the process of “becoming an
entrepreneur” as a black box. (a) Politicians set up various context conditions (e.g.
political acts, laws, taxes) to support a climate for entrepreneurial education and
to provide means, e.g. by financing professorships, installing programs to foster
entrepreneurial education (e.g. Tempus Program in Europe, EXIST in Germany,
APPRENDRE À ENTREPRENDRE or YES in Switzerland) on different system
levels. (b) Economists try to measure the impact of such means and interventions
by relating input resources (like the sum of invested money, the amount of courses
S. Weber et al., (Eds.), Becoming an Entrepreneur, 3–13.
© 2014 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.
S. WEBER, F. OSER, F. ACHTENHAGEN, M. FRETSCHNER & S. TROST
provided) to output/outcome variables (often measured by the amount of venture
creations, the length of time they remain on the market, drop-outs, the amount of
hired employees). (c) Business people are dealing with entrepreneurship education
mainly by focusing on the meso-level, whether the participation in an entrepreneurship
course is linked to new ventures, but without looking into the processes of teaching
and learning. (d) Psychologists try to figure out individual differences in traits,
knowledge, skills and attitudes and whether those are related to entrepreneurial
behavior and/or may predict entrepreneurial success. (e) Educationalists are
engaging in legitimizing the goals of entrepreneurship education from a humanistic
point of view (Heid, 2004): assuming an antinomic relationship between economic
rationality and individual demands (Aff, 2008) or seeing a coincidence of economic
and educational rationality (DFG, 1990). A second educational focus is related
to the identification of an adequate pedagogy for entrepreneurship education. (f)
Philosophers engaging in entrepreneurship education discuss ethical and moral
issues of entrepreneurial behavior. Such behavior might be realized in the creation
of wealth for others, as well as finding better ways to utilize resources, reduce waste,
and produce jobs for others – on the basis of ethical/moral and legal rules (Vesper,
1980; Homann, 2008). Most of these views do not elicit the inner process, do not
overcome the mentioned black box, and do not see the single entrepreneur with all
the difficulties, risks, dangers of failure and the dark sides.
INTENTION OF THE BOOK
One major goal of this book is to shed light on Entrepreneurship Education
from the perspective of Economic and Business Pedagogy (in German called
Wirtschaftspädagogik (Human Resource Education & Management [HRE&M])). By
this engagement we want to open up the “black box” of becoming an entrepreneur
and foster the development of the field. In particular, we follow Unger’s et al. claim
(2011) to take a dynamic view of human capital in entrepreneurship, by separately
investigating inputs, processes, outputs/outcomes and contexts of entrepreneurial
teaching, learning, and development, combined with the transfer to authentic
entrepreneurial tasks (see Figure 1). Approaches departing from Human Capital
Theory – simply stating that human capital investments, like time for schooling or
attending training programs, the extent of time in practice, the amount of course
fees paid for an educational offer etc., improve knowledge, skills, and experiences,
or develop entrepreneurial behavior (Becker, 1964) – do not seem to lead plausibly
and in a biunique way to the expected positive effects, e.g. economic growth, social
welfare etc., as a meta-analysis by Unger, Rauch, Frese & Rosenbusch (2011) has
shown.
We, therefore, pick up Fayolle’s invitation within the third volume of his
Handbook of Research in Entrepreneurship Education: “How can we learn from
‘institutional culture?’”1 (2010, p. 6) or in other words, how can we capture the inner
life of an entrepreneurial growth? Teaching and learning business and economics,
4
BECOMING AN ENTREPRENEUR
as well as teaching entrepreneurial and intrapreneurial competencies have been
traditionally a topic of the mentioned Human Resource Education and Management
(HRE&M), which is a study subject at university level (master and doctorate)
in the German-speaking countries: Austria, Switzerland and Germany. It is an
ambition that goes back to the foundation of “Handelshochschulen” (Universities
for Business and Commerce), mainly at the end of the 19th century, which educated
the youth in business and entrepreneurial behavior and mindset for mastering
the complex and holistic challenges of a merchant/tradesman (Zabeck, 2009)2.
One major reason was the increasing need for well-educated business people
within the economically exploding “Gründerzeit” (foundation time) at the end
of the 19th century. Nearly all “Handelshochschulen” were merged together into
faculties or schools of business and economy at full universities in the 1960s with
the subjects business education and management (Zabeck, 2009). This also included
the scientific discipline of Wirtschaftspädagogik in the German-speaking countries
with its tasks of educating and managing human resources for the industry and
administration, as well as training teachers for commercial schools. And all of them
did rather look at the inner dynamic of entre- and intrapreneurship, thus opening up
the black box.
OPENING THE “BLACK BOX” OF BECOMING AN ENTREPRENEUR
What is an entrepreneur? What is entrepreneurial activity? What is entrepreneurship
competence? We describe an entrepreneur as a person who brings production and
service ideas into practice. This requires creativity, innovation, risk taking as well as
planning and prevailing to reach the intended goals. Entrepreneurial activity enables
the individuals to recognize their work, and personal environment and to exploit
opportunities. Entrepreneurial activity is the basis for running a firm (European
Commission [EC], 2004). Linking the phenomenon of entrepreneurial competence
to the current international discussion on “competence” (Weinert, 2001; Winterton,
2009), entrepreneurial competences are understood as “cognitive prerequisites
which are achieved by an individual or a group of individuals or can be learned
for successfully meeting complex demands and tasks as well as the corresponding
motivational, ethical, volitional and social components to solve problems in
variable situations successfully and responsibly” (Weinert, 2001, pp. 62-63, and
2002, pp. 27-28; translation: S.W.). This holistic integrative model of competence perceiving competencies as both “input” (the attributes a person must acquire) plus
their “output” (their demonstration by performance), is common in work-related
learning and human resource development (Baethge, Achtenhagen, Arends, Babic,
Baethge-Kinsky & Weber, 2006; Winterton, 2009). It also leads the focus to learning
and acquisition processes. In fact, the entrepreneurial doing is more than just a
competence, it is a competence profile, including a couple of partial competences,
all guided by the unique and comprehensive task, namely to found, to sustain and to
enlarge a company (Oser, 2011).
5
S. WEBER, F. OSER, F. ACHTENHAGEN, M. FRETSCHNER & S. TROST
From the point of view of learning and teaching, the conceptualization of causeand-effect relationships is much more complex, than usually seen. There exists
neither an overarching model of effective teaching and learning for entrepreneurship
(Braukmann, Bijedic, & Schade, 2008), nor a unique model, which turns each and
every trainee into a successful entrepreneur (Fayolle, 2010, p. 2). But empirical
evidence shows that for supporting manifold and complex learning and developmental
processes, the enhancement of expected output and outcome, and also the evoking
of new solutions, which have not been there before, especially, in unforeseeable
situations by collective agency, are central. Such overview studies arise (a) from
the field of general education like e.g. “How people learn” (Bransford, Brown &
Cocking, 2000); “Quality of Instruction” (Helmke, 2003); “Anchored Instruction”
(CTGV, 1997); (b) from the field of higher education: e.g. “Problem Based Learning”
(Dochy, Segers & van den Bossche, 2003); or (c) from the field of workplace learning:
e.g. “Ten Steps to Learning” (van Merriënboer & Kirschner, 2013); “Expansive
Learning” (Engeström, 1987; 1999; 2004; Engeström & Sannino, 2010) or from the
Choreographies of teaching (Oser & Baeriswyl, 2005) and the theories of advance
organizers (Weber & Funke, 2012) and others. These complex learning process
concepts are embedded into more holistic input-process-output-heuristics, as such of
Ditton (2002), Scheerens (2000), Doll & Prenzel (2004) or Baethge, Achtenhagen,
Arends, Babic, Baethge-Kinsky & Weber (2006) (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. Sociocultural macrosystem.
6
BECOMING AN ENTREPRENEUR
Learning heuristics mostly assume systemic interrelationships between various
input factors (e.g. trainees’ prior knowledge, experiences, occupational interests),
process factors (e.g. learning goals set for a particular course, instructional methods
and media, amount and quality of coaching), output factors (e.g. amount of acquired
knowledge, skills, experiences made, or more sustainable outcomes, like occurred
learning transfer) and context conditions (e.g. entrepreneurial climate).
But the success of these learning concepts is given when a program has succeeded
in developing an entrepreneur, or in educating an individual with regard to
entrepreneurial behavior, or in building facets of entrepreneurial competencies. This
can finally only be answered when we get evidence that human capital has – through
this learning – been successfully transferred into the situation of the business owner
“to increase success” (Unger et al., 2011). For capturing this phenomenon – or at
least to approach it as close as possible – we can only make inferences on the impact
of a particular entrepreneurship program or teaching and learning activity if (1)
solid evaluation and assessment designs are conducted: using rigorous methods and
sophisticated research designs like pre-post-experimental-control group designs,
including follow-up studies (e.g. Schneider et al., 2007; Oser et al., 2012); if (2)
quantitative and/or qualitative instruments are used to secure objective, reliable
and valid representations and evidences of entrepreneurial behavior, respectively
facets of entrepreneurial competencies (e.g. Shavelson, 2012; Kanning, 2009), and
if (3) complex authentic, real-life tasks and problems have to be solved for showing
entrepreneurial competence facets and behavior (e.g. McClelland, 1973; Gulikers,
Bastiaens & Kirschner, 2004; Achtenhagen, 2012).
In line with this conceptualization of developing competence profiles and
producing results from teaching-learning theory, we answer central questions in
this volume, along the sociocultural macrosystem for modeling, developing and
measuring entrepreneurship.
Starting with the context-related aspects the Austrian contribution of Aff
and Geissler demonstrates a counter-hegemonic entrepreneurship education
project supported by the EU Tempus Program in Russia and Tajikistan. For this
project, the authors rely on Gramsci’s considerations dividing the state into (a) the
‘political society’ where the ruling class exercises its power and forces (e.g. by
dictatorship or coercion), and (b) into the ‘civil society’ where elites impose their
ideas, values and norms with a certain amount of autonomy, but simultaneously
balancing the different positions in a way to support the governed. The idea of this
entrepreneurship endeavor is to educate students as responsible entrepreneurs and
business professionals – primarily for social business, non-profit enterprises and
as intrapreneurs – to promote and change civil society. In their article, the authors
introduce a concept and a curriculum for an entrepreneurship education program at
secondary schools in Russia and Tajikistan.
It will be demonstrated that entrepreneurial competencies have to be developed
with regard to typical situations and challenges entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial
teams are acting in, and are faced with. Benninghoff and Weber map out such
7
S. WEBER, F. OSER, F. ACHTENHAGEN, M. FRETSCHNER & S. TROST
situations and challenges, by using Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) for
the start-up phase of entrepreneurs. The results clearly indicate a diversity of voices
in many situations, as well as different challenges of double bindedness, which can
be localized by and within this theoretical approach
With regard to the input factors it will be demonstrated, that knowledge, skills
and attitudes are needed and have to be developed in entrepreneurship programs.
The question, which prior knowledge learners already bring into entrepreneurship
courses, is up for discussion.
In his article, Hofmuth runs an electronically based extended literature review
to identify entrepreneurial characteristics, which have been proved as statistically
significant in prior studies on entrepreneurship. His systematic review covers
empirical studies from 1990 up to 2012. By using the classification scheme of
O*NET the author works out decisive facets of entrepreneurial competencies (traits/
attitudes, knowledge, skills, experiences) which are necessary to successfully master
entrepreneurial situations and challenges.
As learning-theoretical assumptions show unanimously that the diagnostics
of prior knowledge is a pre-requisite for successful instruction, Fürstenau,
Oldenbürger and Trojahner strive to identify prior knowledge of potential
entrepreneurs by using a knowledge network tool. Thereby, they reconstruct the
complexity of prior academic knowledge of students in the field of engineering
sciences. By combining qualitative and quantitative analyses the authors can figure
out students’ existing business knowledge for start-ups but also shortcomings – such
as lacks of decisive academic discipline areas, as well as of personal and external
context factors.
Contexts can be viewed as multilayers. Especially organizational context factors,
influencing entrepreneurial teaching and learning processes, will be discussed.
In the Swedish contribution, Achtenhagen and Johannisson introduce the EPASaccredited master program “Strategic Entrepreneurship” at Jönköping International
Business School (JIBS). This program is not a course, a unit or a study track within an
overarching program, but rather a program that is fully dedicated to entrepreneurship
education. The goal is to support knowledge and understanding of entrepreneurial
issues, to foster skills and to develop abilities, as well as to critically reflect and
judge scientific, social, and ethical aspects of entrepreneurship. The corresponding
pedagogy focuses less on business planning, rather on learning about, for and in
various entrepreneurial environments (e.g. by lectures, dialogues, connected science
parks, international companies abroad – in individual but also in collective activity
systems) to prepare the students for conducting entrepreneurial activities in different
settings.
Slepcevic-Zach, Stock and Tafner introduce an entrepreneurship education
master program and its implementation into the context of Business Education
and Development at the University of Graz, Austria. They have developed their
curriculum along the broad notion of entrepreneurship of Tramm and Gramlinger
(2006), with covering business formation (entrepreneurs), thinking and acting in an
8
BECOMING AN ENTREPRENEUR
entrepreneurial manner as employees (intrapreneurs), holding up employability and
keeping individual autonomy. After having presented the masters’ curriculum, the
authors discuss the incompatibility and contradictions between the logic of business
and economics on the one hand, and the logic of humanistic ideas and education on
the other hand – resuming that entrepreneurship can function as a mediator between
these two logics.
Coping with the teaching and learning interaction, the issue is on how
entrepreneurial competence can be taught and learned. The view that founding is
just a matter of personality and that people are born as “entrepreneurs” is critically
discussed. Thereby decisive goals and didactical methods are presented.
With regard to the existing confusion about the “right” goals, content and
pedagogy for entrepreneurship programs, Müller uses European and American largescale surveys to provide an extended overview on the goals that are set on, on the
implied content and learning approaches, applied in currently run entrepreneurship
programs on higher education level around the world. By her analysis she highlights
two streams: (1) the endeavors of traditional entrepreneurship programs by teaching
already known and codified knowledge, skills, and attitudes, and by predicting an
impact on entrepreneurial intentions, nascency and venture creation, and (2) the
endeavors of new entrepreneurship programs, facing non-predictable, non-linear,
uncertain, and ambiguous entrepreneurial environments. Facing these challenges,
individual action taking, co-construction and collective agency seem to be
necessary. Some promising learning approaches like effectuation, experimentation
and discovery are suggested.
In her contribution, Holtsch picks up “entrepreneurial intention” as the mostly
used output variable of entrepreneurship education, as it is found to be the first and
only predictor of future entrepreneurial behavior. She scaled up more than 1,300
trainees across four apprenticeship programs in Mecklenburg-West Pomerania,
Germany,– a region which is ridden by a high rate of youth unemployment – with
regard to this latent construct. As the results show differences with regard to gender,
perceived feasibility, desirability, time phases, as well as the quantity and quality
of role models, the author claims for more made-to-measure programs. For this
purpose, she suggests the use of an entrepreneurship education portfolio, based on
the growth-share matrix of the Boston Consulting Group, to classify target groups
in advance.
The article by Volery, Oser, Müller, Näpflin and del Rey presents an
entrepreneurial intervention study in five Swiss vocational schools. By their
intervention the authors intend to foster different facets of entrepreneurial
competence, like personal traits, beliefs, knowledge and skills, but also
entrepreneurial intention. Therefore, they imply goal-appropriated instructional
tools, as e.g. worked-out examples, inspiration activities by on-site-firm visits, and
a toolbox, providing specific disciplinary business knowledge. The most important
pedagogical technique is the self-development and self-realisation of a product or an
entrepreneurial mean-idea with all its details over a time span of four months. The
9
S. WEBER, F. OSER, F. ACHTENHAGEN, M. FRETSCHNER & S. TROST
use of a strong methodology leads to the result that, whereas knowledge has a very
powerful effect, beliefs and interpersonal variables change only moderately. But in
general, a positive, albeit limited impact on entrepreneurship-related human-capital
assets becomes visible. The study is interesting with regard to the competenceoriented curriculum and the measurement variables. It demonstrates also schoolspecific effects on entrepreneurial interventions.
The contribution of Weber and Funke introduces a research- and evidencebased entrepreneurship education program of the Munich School of Management at
Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, on the bachelor’s level. They demonstrate
the process of creating an entrepreneurship program along the process elements
of the curriculum-instruction-assessment triad. Thereby, they move step-by-step,
considering existing elements of teaching and learning theories and results of metastudies, and present promising hints for the program design. In a first overarching
program evaluation, the authors can show that their course runs stable every year
over a period of altogether four years. They also refer to deeper analyses on selected
learning outcomes (e.g. networking, teamwork, intention).
The article of Heinrichs, Minnameier and Beck discusses questions of morality
within the context of entrepreneurial education: Is it legitimatized to offer obligatory
or optional entrepreneurship courses? How is it possible to enable the learner to
become morally responsible (e.g. by teaching moral standards)? Are there diagnostic
instruments like objective, reliable and valid tests to monitor moral achievement?
Is it reasonable to send out students for hands-on training in real start-ups? After
having discussed such questions, the authors create five morally critical and relevant
situations start-ups usually face, and analyze them along a neo-Kohlbergian taxonomy.
Under the output/outcome perspective we ask how we can assume or make
inferences on a good instruction, as well as on achieved entrepreneurial behavior
resp. competencies. The question is, if entrepreneurial activity is necessarily linked
to founding an own firm or company.
The starting point of Braukmann, Schneider and Voth consists in the
presentation of the theory of Gründungsdidaktik (didactics of foundation) and
the latest results in entrepreneurship education research: the development of the
“Model for Didactical Evaluation of Entrepreneurship Education (MODE3)”. With
this model, they offer a heuristic and practical tool for screening and categorizing
the complexity of didactical decisions and actions in entrepreneurial learning
environments. Thus, this model can be used for visualizing a variability within
existing entrepreneurship programs, can give valuable hints for an efficient and
effective didactical construction of entrepreneurship education units, but can also
be used for evaluating entrepreneurship courses against set reference criteria, or for
judgments on the quality of interventions, used in overarching impact studies.
As medical doctors do not seem to be well prepared for business aspects
of practicing medicine, Siebeck, Rauen and von Einem have initiated an
entrepreneurship education course at the Faculty of Medicine, of the LudwigMaximilians University, in Munich. The aim of this one-semester voluntary course
10
BECOMING AN ENTREPRENEUR
is to develop and to present a business plan for self-employed medical doctors. The
students are supported by coaches, and business experts. The evaluation shows that
students have increased their entrepreneurial business knowledge significantly,
especially with regard to law and tax regulations, as well as marketing strategies.
Although there are tremendous financial investments in running entrepreneurship
programs on the one hand, there is still a huge gap of rigor evaluations on the other.
Existing reviews on the impact of entrepreneurship education highlight shortcomings
and inconsistencies, especially with regard to the conceptualization of independent
and dependent variables, the study design, methodological rigor, and the underlying
theoretical approaches. Fretschner tries to bridge this research gap by conducting a
systematic literature review on the output variable “entrepreneurial intention” and its
antecedences, according to Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior (TPB). His results reveal
that the majority of impact studies still make use of ‘weak’ pre-experimental designs,
reinforcing the ‘old’ need for more methodological rigor. He further finds mixed results,
regarding the impact of entrepreneurship education on TPB’s outcome variables. Finally,
he highlights the need to go beyond mean values, as well as the need to control finer
grained instructional variables (e.g. such as target group, kind of intervention, duration)
to make a solid and clear suggestion for further research and program development.
Fostering a culture of entrepreneurship in organizations, promoting innovation
and creativity amongst all citizens – which is especially relevant for young people
(ECOTEC, 2010) – and focusing on the claims of political, business and educational
areas, make it necessary to see entrepreneurship education in a broader sense: selfreliance as venture creation, entrepreneurial thinking and acting as an employee,
but also keeping the own employability and individual autonomy, we add therefore
a chapter of Weber, Trost, Wiethe-Körprich, Weiß and Achtenhagen on
“intrapreneurship” within German dual apprenticeship. In their study, they match the
demands for intrapreneurship on the labor market with the supply of intrapreneurship
competencies, delivered by the apprenticeship system. The results show a promising
balance between labor market needs and educational outcomes.
SUMMING UP SO FAR
Developing an entrepreneur and building up/educating entrepreneurial mindsets is a
necessary, but no easy way to go for start-up educators – especially when opening up the
“black box” of teaching and learning processes. Entrepreneurship was, is, and will be
tackled by various disciplines. Wirtschaftspädagogik (Human Resource Education &
Management) as a traditional “hyphen”-subject, historically rooted within this tensionladen junction between economic, political, social and business interests on the one
hand, and the goals of individual humanistic growth and education on the other,, might
balance between these partially contradictory goals and claims. Within this volume, we
try to pick up various contributions from selected issues of entrepreneurship education,
in order to make the learning processes transparent and to enhance the discussion about
fostering entrepreneurship education across the disciplines.
11
S. WEBER, F. OSER, F. ACHTENHAGEN, M. FRETSCHNER & S. TROST
Additionally, we add a summarizing chapter for stimulating reflection, discussion,
deeper dialogue, and collective activities in entrepreneurship education at the end of
this volume (Weber, Oser, Achtenhagen, Fretschner and Trost).
NOTES
1
2
We highlight this concept of ‘institution’ as we follow its interpretation sensu Fayolle (2010, p. 6):
institutions as “socio-politic systems, such as countries, universities, private organizations which
secrete and instill norms and values. These institutions and their culture have a strong influence
on education and contribute to orientate and shape entrepreneurial education in its different
components. We are convinced that there are learning opportunities everywhere and for everyone
from the study of such systems and related cultures”. Here we interpret the scientific discipline of
“Wirtschaftspädagogik” (HRE&M) as such an institution, respectively “socio-politic system, having
instilled its own norms and values”.
“Handelshochschulen” were founded in Germany (e.g. Leipzig, Nuremberg, Berlin), in Switzerland
(St. Gallen), in Austria (Vienna), but also in Finland (Helsinki, Turku) and in Sweden (Stockholm).
REFERENCES
Achtenhagen, F. (2012). The curriculum-instruction-assessment triad. Empirical Research in Vocational
Education and Training, 4, 5–25.
Aff, J. (2008). Pädagogik oder Wirtschaftspädagogik? Anmerkungen zum Selbstverständnis der
Disziplin. bwp@, Spezial 3, 1–14. Retrieved September 9, 2013, from www.bwpat.de/ATspezial/
aff_atspezial.pdf
Baethge, M., Achtenhagen, F., Arends, L., Babic, E., Baethge-Kinsky, V., & Weber, S. (2006). VET-PISA.
Feasibility-Study. Stuttgart: Steiner.
Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to
education. Chicago, IL and London, UK: The University of Chicago Press.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn. Brain, mind,
experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Braukmann, U., Bijedic, T., & Schade, C. (2008). Unternehmerische persönlichkeit—eine theoretische
Rekonstruktion und normaldefinitorische Konturierung. Wuppertal: Schumpeter School of Business
and Economics.
CTGV. (1997). The Jasper project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional
development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [DFG]. (1990). Berufsbildungsforschung an den Hochschulen der
Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Denkschrift. Weinheim: VCH.
Ditton, H. (2002). Evaluation und qualitätssicherung. In R. Tippelt (Hrsg.), Handbuch Bildungsforschung
(pp. 775–790). Opladen: Leske+Budrich.
Dochy, F., Segers, M., & van den Bossche, P. G. D. (2003). Effects of problem-based learning: A metaanalysis. Learning and Instruction, 13, 533–568.
Doll, J., & Prenzel, M. (2004). Das DFG-Schwerpunktprogramm Bildungsqualität von Schule
(BIQUA): Schulische und außerschulische Bedingungen mathematisscher, naturwissenschaftlicher
und überfachlicher Kompetenzen. In J. Doll & M. Prenzel (Hrsg.), Bildungsqualität von Schule:
Lehrerprofessionalisierung, Unterrichtsentwicklung und Schülerförderung als Strategien der
Qualitätsverbesserung (pp. 9–23). Münster et al: Waxmann.
ECOTEC. (2010). Towards greater cooperation and coherence in entrepreneurship education. Brussels:
European Commission.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental
research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsulit.
12
BECOMING AN ENTREPRENEUR
Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström,
R. Miettinen & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19–38). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y. (2004). New forms of learning in co-configuration work. Journal of Workplace Learning,
16, 11–21.
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future
challenges. Educational Research Review, 5(1),. 1–24.
European Commission [EC]. (2004). Helping to create an entrepreneurial culture—A guide on good
practices in promoting entrepreneurial attitudes and skills through education. Luxembourg: Office
for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Fayolle, A. (2010). Insights from an international perspective on entrepreneurship education. In A.
Fayolle (Ed.), Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education, Vol. 3, international perspectives
(pp. 1–9). Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, MA, USA: Elgar.
Fretschner, M., & Weber, S. (2013). Measuring and understanding the effects of entrepreneurial awareness
education. Journal of Small Business Management, 51 (3), 410–428.
Gulikers, J., Bastiaens, T., & Kirschner, P. (2004). A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment.
Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 67–85.
Heid, H. (2004). Kapital und kompetenz. In H. Gruber, C. Harteis, H. Heid, & B. Meier (Hrsg.), Kapital und
Kompetenz. Veränderungen der Arbeitswelt und ihre Auswirkungen aus erziehungswissenschaftlicher
Sicht (pp. 13–23). Wiesbaden: VS.
Helmke, A. (2003). Unterrichtsqualität. Erfassen, Bewerten, Verbessern. Seelze: Kallmeyer.
Homann, K. (2008). Die Ethik in der Wirtschaft. In H. May (Hrsg.), Lexikon der ökonomischen Bildung
7. Auflage (pp. 199–201). München: Oldenbourg.
Kanning, U. P. (2009). Diagnostik sozialer Kompetenzen, 2. Auflage. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
McClelland, D. C. (1973). Testing for competence rather than testing for “intelligence.” American
Psychologist, 28(1), 1–14.
Oser, F., del Rey, N., Näpflin, C., Mosimann, S., Volery, T., & Müller, S. (2012). Abschlussbericht.
Entrepreneurship Programm: Initiative Zukunft. Eine Interventionsstudie zur Erhöhung des
unternehmerischen Kompetenzprofils bei Lernenden der Sekundarstufe II. KMU-HSG, Universität
St. Gallen: St. Gallen, Departement Erziehungswissenschaften, Universität Freiburg: Freiburg.
Scheerens, J. (2000). Improving school effectiveness. Paris: UNESCO: International Institute for
Educational Planning. Fundamentals of Educational Planning-Series No. 68. Retrieved from
September 9, 2013, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001224/122424e.pdf
Schneider, B., Carnoy, M., Kilpatrick, J., Schmidt, W. H., & Shavelson, R. J. (2007). Estimating causal
effects. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Shavelson, R. J. (2012). Assessing business-planning competence using the collegiate learning assessment
as a prototype. Empirical Research in Vocational Education and Training, 4(1), 77–90.
Tramm, T., & Gramlinger F. (2006). Lernfirmenarbeit als Instrument zur Förderung beruflicher und
personaler Selbständigkeit. bwp@, Ausgabe 10. Retrieved September 9, 2013, from http://www.
bwpat.de/ausgabe10/tramm_gramlinger_bwpat10.pdf
Unger, J., Rauch, A., Frese, M., & Rosenbusch, N. (2011). Human capital and entrepreneurial success: A
meta-analytical review. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(3), 341–358.
Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013). Ten steps to complex learning. A systematic approach
to four-component instructional design, (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Vesper, K. H. (1980). New venture strategies. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Weber, S., & Funke, S. (2012). An instructional perspectve on entrepreneurship education. Empirical
Research in Vocational Education and Training, 4(1), 49–72.
Weinert, E. (2001). Concept of competence: A conceptual clarification. In D. S. Rychen & L. H. Salganik
(Eds.), Key competencies for a successful life and a well-functioning society (pp. 45–65). Seattle
et al: Hogrefe & Huber.
Weinert, E. (Hrsg.). (2002). Leistungsmessungen in Schulen, 2. Auflage. Weinheim & Basel: Beltz.
Winterton, J. (2009). Competence across Europe: Highest common factor or lowest common denominator?
Journal of European Industrial Training, 33, 681–700.
Zabeck, J. (2009). Geschichte der Berufserziehung und ihrer Theorie. Paderborn: Eusl.
13
PART II
BECOMING AN ENTREPRENEUR
JOSEF AFF & GERHARD GEISSLER
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION: A GRAMSCIAN
APPROACH1
INTRODUCTION
More than twenty years after the collapse of the “real socialist” social systems, the
overall findings of transition studies are sobering: while most transition countries
in East-Central Europe have, despite some interim crises, successfully coped with
the social transformation, all the ex-Soviet constituent republics are at present far
removed from a transition towards market economy and democracy (BTI, 2012;
Russland-Analyse, 197/2010; Merkel, 2009). One explanation frequently put
forward is that the upheaval in the Soviet Union in the 1990s was an elite project
conceived by the former Soviet nomenclature, rather than something undertaken by
civil society (Gustafson, 1999; Kryshtanovskaya, 2005). And the resignation and
political apathy of the post-Soviet population has changed little so far (RusslandAnalyse, 95/2006; Schauff, 2004).
With the EINSEE2 project, sponsored by the EU Tempus programme, the Institut für
Wirtschaftspädagogik (Institute for Business Education) at the Wirtschaftsuniversität
Wien (Vienna University of Economics and Business) has been working since 2010
to introduce innovations in the education systems of the Russian Federation and
Tajikistan. Based on the model of entrepreneurship education conceived by the
Institute for Business Education in Vienna, the project is aimed – in terms of both its
structure and the actors involved – at encouraging “economic literacy”, and at shaking
the population out of its widely-observable passivity, in order to sow the seed for the
long-term implementation of emancipatory projects. Inspired by Antonio Gramsci’s
theory of society, the project seeks to develop, by means of business education, a
“counter”-hegemony to the autocratic rule of Emomalii Rahmon in Tajikistan or to
the “managed democracy” of the hegemonic tandem of Vladimir Putin and Dmitry
Medvedev in the Russian Federation.
NOTES ON THE WORK OF ANTONIO GRAMSCI
In contrast to his wide-ranging influence in various areas of social sciences on an
international level,3,4 Antonio Gramsci has as yet received little attention in Germanlanguage business education. Gramsci’s multi-faceted works, however, offer many
approaches which “are usable for the understanding of the current situation, and
provoke intervention and praxis” (Candeias, 2007, p. 15). His “philosophy of
S. Weber et al., (Eds.), Becoming an Entrepreneur, 17–33.
© 2014 Sense Publishers. All rights reserved.
J. AFF & G. GEISSLER
praxis”, which embodies a “substantial project of renewal” (Haug, 1995, p. 1209)
and can be read as pedagogical in nature, offers a fruitful point of reference for
business education, which can also be conceived as a creative, political science.
Gramsci began by seeking the reasons for the stability of Western capitalist
society, despite repeated, massive crises and inner contradictions. He found an
explanation in the cohesive forces of bourgeois socialization. For the analysis of
this phenomenon, he divided society into socio-economic base and superstructure,
or structure and superstructures, as Gramsci calls these areas of society, then carried
out a further, methodologically motivated differentiation of the superstructures into
“political society” and “civil society”. Gramsci thus overcame the rigid determinism
of the Marxist schema of base and superstructure; he arranged the functional
connection of the various social forces in this “integral state” as an interpenetrative
reference, whereby he postulated that the concrete-practical interlocking of the
three levels, “socio-economic base” – “political society” – “civil society” was
historically determined (Kebir, 1991, p. 62) and described them as a “historical
bloc” (Haug, 1995, p. 1215). The complementary relationship of the dualisms which
are to be found in various contexts in Gramsci’s reflections, and which are always
to be conceived as units: political society, coercion/dictatorship/authority/war of
position/passive revolution on the one hand and civil society/consensus/hegemony/
leadership/war of manoeuvre/active revolution on the other hand (Bieling, 2006, p.
446; Anderson, 1979, p. 18) was summed up by Gramsci with the formula: “State =
political society + civil society, in other words hegemony protected by the armour of
coercion” (Gramsci, 1999, p. 532).
Gramsci understood political society to mean the totality of the political, judicial
and military power structures institutionalized by the state, in other words that part
of the state in which the ruling class exercises its power by force, i.e. by dictatorship
or coercion. Civil society encompasses the ensemble of social institutions and
organizations and people’s social and cultural relationships and activities, in other
words that part of the state by means of which the existing political situation is
hegemonically secured.
Hegemony – originally a slogan (“gegemonija”) of the 19th century Russian
social democrats (Anderson, 1979, p. 20) – is a key term in Gramsci’s theory, used to
designate a largely coercion-free means employed by leading elites within a political
system to establish and maintain power. In hegemonic conditions, these elites are
able to impose their ideas, values and norms in such a way that, due to extremely
powerful cultural forces of cohesion in civil society, the governed internalize these
as being in the general interest, and that there are, within society, widely shared
ideas about the situation and the way it is developing. “Thus hegemony produces a
‘consensus of the governed’” (Brand, 2005, p. 9).
Hegemony can never be produced solely by force or coercion on the part of the
governing, but is always dependent on the consent of the governed. Hegemony is
therefore an all-embracing material praxis which arises both from active consent
and from passive acceptance. Here, consensus is by no means to be understood
18
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION: A GRAMSCIAN APPROACH
as a harmonious balancing of interests, but as the result and process of complex
mechanisms of social debate in civil society. In societies with a well-developed
civil society, in which hegemonic consensus is also relatively pronounced, social
changes can only be achieved in the slow form of the “war of position” (Gramsci,
1999, p. 291), which leads to a cultural, moral, political and particularly intellectual
permeation of society. Such “molecular changes which in fact progressively modify
the pre-existing composition of forces, and hence become the matrix of new changes”
(Gramsci, 1999, p. 292), were referred to by Gramsci as “passive revolution”. In
response to a crisis, and usually after public discussions, the elite make concessions
in order to prevent an “active revolution”, which can be the extreme form of the
“war of position” in an under-developed civil society – Gramsci pointed here to the
October Revolution of 1917.
The production and reproduction of a hegemonic social consensus was, in
Gramsci’s view, the task of the intellectuals, though he did assume that intellectuals
did not form a self-contained group, because they fulfilled different functions in
society. In a seamless continuation of his reflections on the integral state, Gramsci
distinguished between “traditional” and “organic” intellectuals.
“Traditional” intellectuals are the helpmates of the ruling group, because their
function is primarily to preserve power and stabilize the system. They seem to
“represent an historical continuity uninterrupted even by the most complicated and
radical changes in political and social forms” (Gramsci, 1999, p. 137). Gramsci cited
the clergy as the most important representatives of traditional intellectuals.
“Organic intellectuals” arise from a particular social milieu, because “every
social group, coming into existence on the original terrain of an essential function
in the world of economic production, creates together with itself, organically, one or
more strata of intellectuals which give it homogeneity and an awareness of its own
function not only in the economic but also in the social and political fields” (Gramsci,
1999, p. 134). Gramsci ascribed an educative function to the organic intellectuals,
describing them as the “educators of the masses”. For him, they are the trailblazers
of a new historical bloc, and thus potential agents of alternative strategies or
counter-hegemonic projects. As his first example of an organic intellectual, Gramsci
cites the entrepreneur whose innovations provide vital stimuli (Gramsci, 1999, p.
135). Through active involvement in practical life, as constructors, organizers and
“permanent persuaders” (Gramsci, 1999, p. 142), organic intellectuals aim at the
ideological conquest (Gramsci, 1999, p. 142) of the opposing elites, and lead to a
new hegemony. Since leadership is mainly transmitted via pedagogical practices,
this is the background for the development of the political/pedagogical reflections
in Gramsci’s works.
ANTONIO GRAMSCI’S POLITICAL PEDAGOGY
Gramsci postulated that the individual was an ensemble of social relations, in which
the “idea of becoming”, which points towards both the past and the future, is inscribed.
19
J. AFF & G. GEISSLER
He assumed that the conditions in which the individual lives form his common sense,
with which he then exerts a reciprocal influence on those social circumstances which
have shaped him. This process of “catharsis”, “that is the superior elaboration of the
structure into superstructure in the minds of men” (Gramsci, 1999, p. 691), through
which the objective gives way to the subjective, is a central point of reference for the
concept of “the pedagogical” in Gramsci’s work.
A typical aspect of the primitive “philosophy of common sense” (Gramsci, 1999, p.
640) is its unsystematic, eclectic, contradictory character, based on the sediment left
by previous experiences, which “offers practical orientation to the respective strata”
(Scherrer, 2007, p. 74). This orientation allows people to undertake interpretations
of the world and to carry out and legitimate their own actions. Education (social and
academic) is supposed to counteract common sense through the political/ethical,
cultural and ideological production of meaning. Following the basic intention of
his work, Gramsci presented the interplay of social and academic education as a
sphere which gives shape to society, in which hegemony and counter-hegemony can
be produced simultaneously. Thus, education operates in an ideologically charged
terrain within civil society – intrinsically the realm of pedagogy, which Gramsci,
assuming a mutually influential, interpersonal teacher-student relationship,
constructed as a structural relationship of society as a whole (Merkens, 2004, p. 8).
Education (both social and academic) aims at forming, shaping and developing
individuals who are meant to correspond to the conception, dominant ideas and
ideological foundations of the society in which they operate. In this sense, education
contributes to the production of hegemony, whereby the pedagogical relationship
represents a key political means of regulation. With recourse to reformatory
pedagogical approaches of his time, and to Marx’s theses on Feuerbach, Gramsci
nonetheless emphasized the dialectics of the pedagogical relationship, in which
he saw potential for counter-hegemonic projects, since one is meant to strive to
“be one’s own guide, refusing to accept passively and supinely from outside the
moulding of one’s personality” (Gramsci, 1999, p. 627).
On the way to this critical understanding of maturity and autonomy, growing
individuals must first be educated in such a way that they become fit for society, i.e.
capable of operating in society such as it exists, in order to ensure that people are
able to cope with the challenges of their particular society. For this they must process
the conditions of social conformity in an act of “know thyself” (Gramsci, 1999, p.
628), reflecting in a distanced, critical way on how their own self has become what
it is. This approach is necessary because people are unable to develop a critically
coherent understanding of the world if they do not make themselves aware of the
totality of relationships whose “connection centre” they are (Gramsci, 1999, p.
628), and recognize that their views contradict other views or elements of other
views. Thus, education is both a condition for the reproduction of society and an
opportunity for the production of alternative societies, because active engagement
with the historical-social ensemble offers opportunities for the “spirit of cleavage”.
(Gramsci, 1999, p. 203)
20
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION: A GRAMSCIAN APPROACH
This interdependence of integration and liberation is indissoluble. It is a
prerequisite for emancipatory processes which can lead to the termination of
consensus and the overcoming of the existing cultural and political order; the catalyst
for this intellectual and cultural self-potentialization is education.
With education, the individual can overcome the randomness of his existence,
and convert the contingency of his supposed social predestination into autonomy,
because it is a cultural force with which the individual can place himself in an active,
self-determined relationship to the world. Education may in the first instance serve
social reproduction and thus the preservation of the existing hegemony, but the
human power of judgement can be significantly reinforced with education, in such
a way that hegemonic consent and its foundations can be systematically examined
and questioned.
In Gramsci’s work, education is not primarily to be understood as the transmission
of knowledge, whereby it would remain external, but as an experience-led process
of self-empowerment, an active process of intellectual discovery of the world,
by connecting all educational processes with the constitutive social context,
which allows it to be internalized. This requires, in the schools and universities, a
learning culture which is based on practices of knowledge instead of relying on the
reproduction of teaching formulae, for learning must be understood as a creative
act, to enable learners to participate in the life of society as critical actors (Merkens,
2004, pp. 19ff.).
This also, however, requires school and university teachers, who must develop a
comprehensive set of pedagogical skills. These should enable them, on the one hand,
to assert their claim to leadership in the pedagogical relationship. On the other hand
they should possess sufficient self-reflexivity to be able to transform this mutually
influential interpersonal teacher-student relationship into reciprocal relations of
teaching and learning, in order to overcome it, for “only then is the relationship one
of representation and then there can take place an exchange of individual elements
between the rulers and ruled, leaders [dirigenti] and led, and the shared life can
be realized which alone is a social force—with the creation of the historical bloc”
(Gramsci, 1999, p. 768).
Thus, as Gramsci argued in an appeal to all organic intellectuals, what is needed in
order to be attractive to as many teachers as possible is “1. a philosophy (Gioberti),
which offers to its adherents an intellectual “dignity” providing a principle of
differentiation from the old ideologies which dominated by coercion, and an element
of struggle against them; 2. an academic programme, an educative principle and
original pedagogy” (Gramsci, 1999, p. 285).
BRIEF LOOK AT THE TRANSFORMATION PROCESS WITH SPECIAL ATTENTION
TO GRAMSCI’S PERSPECTIVE
Despite a number of social imbalances in both the economic and the political
sphere (Gorzka & Schulze, 2004; Buhbe & Gorzka, 2007), which could lead to the
21
J. AFF & G. GEISSLER
development of a broad spectrum of political opinions and to the presence of a culture
of protest and opposition, in order to achieve positive social changes, the Russian
population5 shows a low level of active political involvement. More recent survey
results6 also confirm that the awareness of democracy is very under-developed,
and that an increase in “prosperity” or “order and stability” are the highest social
priorities.
Alongside difficult starting conditions in the area of the socio-economic base
(Clement, 2003; Bleck, 2011), the unbalanced interplay of superstructures in the
post-Soviet union – to the advantage of political society or to the disadvantage
of civil society – is probably retarding the transition process towards democracy
and market economy. And yet the mechanism of hegemony construction in
Tsarist Russia, in the Soviet Union, and in the post-Soviet union is based on an
ideological continuity which needs to be dealt with in the framework of a counterhegemonic business education project. After all, social ideologies are transmitted
to subjects as “Weltanschauungen” (Gramsci, 1991, p. 93), through experiences
of socialization; political/cultural and, linked with these, economic/cultural
patterns of thought, attitude and behaviour and are learnt on an individual level
and are played out on a societal level in the form of different political patterns
of participation and economic styles of action. This process is affected by both
political or economic everyday experiences and the collective memory, which can
be conceived of as a social store of knowledge with an influence on the individual
(Berek, 2009, p. 67).
Studies in the field of cultural history which work on the assumption that economic
and/or political cultures, despite the historical dimension of change, generally tend
to stabilize and solidify (Pelinka, 2006, p. 227; Höhmann, 1999), often offer, as an
attempt to explain the passivity of the Russian population, the special character of
Russian culture which finds expression in the collective memory of the Russian
Federation. Since culture is a pluralistic concept with overlapping reference systems
(Herrmann-Pillath, 2004, p. 28), there is some cross-referencing. Nonetheless,
analysis can distinguish certain key cultural determinants in the Russian Federation:
centuries-old traditions which live on in the present as a legacy of the past, and
orientations which continue to show evidence of the socialist heritage.
Legacies with an ongoing formative influence include the special features of
Orthodox Christian thought, which considers reality not as the result of human
actions, but as a divine plan (Zweynert, 2002), and significant historical events, from
which Andreas Kappeler infers culture-determining continuities in the state systems
of Russia: the fact that whoever is ruling has a monopoly on power (tsar, Communist
Party, Putin’s party “United Russia”), the personalization of authority (tsar worship,
cult of personality), the significance of imperial and national ideologies, a high
degree of centralization and a largely passive and atomized society (Kappeler,
2005, p. 52). This is the breeding ground on which, in the repressive period of
“real socialism”, values “suited to the system” such as assimilation, inhibition and
coercion became so firmly entrenched that they now contribute to the acceptance of
22
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION: A GRAMSCIAN APPROACH
a government which has acted with increasing authoritarianism since the 1990s, for
which democratic procedures usually have a purely symbolic character, and which
limits freedom of opinion and freedom of the press.
In Russia a public extending beyond the circles of the elite – in Gramsci’s work,
public opinion mediates between political society and civil society – developed in
the course of the 19th century. Since then all the myths about the special features
of Russian culture have been instrumentalized time and time again to legitimize
the current form of authority. This is manifested in the 19th century debate – to
some extent influential even today – between “Slavophiles” and “Westerners”, in
the indoctrination efforts in the Communist period, and finally in the speeches of
Vladimir Putin, in which he emphasizes, for example: “Russia is a social state which
differs fundamentally from the West” (Putin, 2008). In this way, the traditional
images of history, together with the resulting implications such as calls for order,
stability and law, have always been and still are the object of contemporary
public discourses, which represent social praxis and contribute to the restoration,
relativization or justification of the status quo (Wodak et al., 1998, p. 42). Through
these discourses they take effect on society as everyday experience, and are passed
on by way of agents of socialization such as media or schools. Through this process
they come to have a critical role in the production and reproduction of social
relations, and become a key component of hegemonic relations, so that there is
thought to be no alternative to the society that currently exists, and “the majority
of people are satisfied with it and/or have resigned themselves to it” (Brand,
2005, p. 10).
AIMS AND STRUCTURE OF THE EU TEMPUS PROJECT EINSEE
Informed by the knowledge that education plays a key role in social processes of
transformation, the European Union’s Tempus programme was established in 1990
with the aim of supporting measures to modernize the educational sector in the
transition countries of the former Eastern bloc.
Within the framework of this support programme, the Institut für
Wirtschaftspädagogik (Institute for Business Education) at the Wirtschaftsuniversität
Wien (Vienna University of Economics and Business) is responsible for the
management of the EINSEE project. The objective of the project is to develop,
over a three-year period, long-lasting structures for economics education, on three
levels. The first level aims at establishing “economics” as an independent subject
in years 10 and 11 of general schools on the basis of a skills-oriented curriculum.
The objective of the second level is to establish comprehensive programmes of
further training and development to enable teachers who are unfamiliar with the
subject to teach “economics”. On the third level, a programme of study in business
education is to be implemented at various universities in the Russian Federation
and Tajikistan.
23
J. AFF & G. GEISSLER
Figure 1. Aims and structure of the EU TEMPUS project EINSEE.
The EINSEE project works on the assumption that the economic and the social
are produced by means of discourses and thus by means of hegemonic debates about
the implementation of certain actions and meanings. In this context the project is
oriented towards the goals of an eco-social market economy and takes into account
the fact that change, in a highly differentiated society, can only be brought about
in the form of dynamic stability (Luhmann, 1997, pp. 492ff.). Against this backdrop,
the project shares Antonio Gramsci’s belief in the possibilities of emancipatory
action, unfolding within the still embryonic civil society of the Russian Federation
and Tajikistan and allowing the production of hegemonic consensus through the
active consent of the governed. This requires a comprehensive pedagogical plan.
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION AS A CURRICULAR PRINCIPLE AND AN
INNOVATION IN SOCIETY AND EDUCATIONAL POLICY
The understanding of entrepreneurship education underlying this cooperative
educational project is based on the empirical findings of a five-year-long pilot
project (cf. Aff & Lindner, 2005; Aff, 2008). There is a frequent tendency to assume
a rather narrow concept of entrepreneurship education, for example in the definition
given by Rispas: “In general terms, the main goal of entrepreneurship education is
to train people who would like to found a new company” (Rispas, 1998, p. 217).
24
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION: A GRAMSCIAN APPROACH
This understanding is rooted in the approach of Schumpeter, who, in his numerous
writings, underlined the core role of dynamic entrepreneurs for the economic
development of a country, thus contributing, in contrast to the formal models of
microeconomics, to a “resubjectivization” of economics. Even if Josef Schumpeter
can still be regarded today as the guiding spirit of entrepreneurship education, the
primary focus on the founding of companies which he espoused is too narrow
for a comprehensive understanding of entrepreneurship, since it largely ignores
the relevance of professional autonomy, i.e. the perspective of “the employee as
entrepreneur” (cf. Wunderer, 1999), and also overlooks the significance of social
entrepreneurs for a dynamic civil society and for successful non-profit enterprises
and organizations. Thus for example one of the comments made by the Nobel Peace
Prize recipient and economist Muhammad Yunus, in an interview with the Austrian
weekly Falter, was: “Whenever I’ve seen a problem somewhere, I’ve wanted to
solve it with the help of a business idea. It is difficult to express this approach in
words, because most people don’t believe that one can help with business.” In this
interview Yunus stresses that, in his opinion, modern capitalism is supported by only
one pillar, as it were, the “profit pillar”, while the second pillar, which would give
society stability, i.e. the “problem-solving pillar”, is completely under-developed.
According to Yunus, the second pillar could be termed ‘social business’, and its
business idea consists of solving problems by founding companies. In recent years
Yunus has been able to demonstrate the credibility of this approach very convincingly
with his idea of microfinance loans, and, in connection with this, the establishment
of the Grameen Bank. In Gramsci’s terms, entrepreneurs, like Yunus, are organic
intellectuals, and function, together with their business ideas, as educators of the
population. Entrepreneurs like Yunus are agents of alternative strategies, i.e.
representatives of “counter-hegemonic” projects, because they, amongst other things,
add a counter-hegemonic “responsibility pillar” to the hegemonic “profit pillar”.
The following figure offers an illustration of the basic model of entrepreneurship
education on which the Tempus project is founded.
The first level aims at the transmission of knowledge and skills which are important
for starting a company or business, and also for professional autonomy. While
core knowledge of business plans is a great advantage for starting a business, the
promotion of professional autonomy, along with more advanced business knowledge,
aims at promoting techniques and instruments such as project management, in order
to strengthen the role of employees as intrapreneurs.
Level II shows that every version of entrepreneurship education is embedded in a
social/economic framework which can take very different economic and democratic/
political forms. Since entrepreneurship education, like every pedagogical concept,
requires normative reflection, this level thematizes the essence of a market economy
and the diverse forms it can take, ranging from a neoclassically inspired market
economy to an eco-social market economy.
Level III makes it clear that entrepreneurship training goes far beyond Schumpeter’s
focus on the founding of companies, because not only the economy but also civil
25
J. AFF & G. GEISSLER
Level IV: Entrepreneurship – promoting an“entrepreneurial spirit”
Level III: Entrepreneurship – promoting civil society (social
entrepreneurs)
Level II: Entrepreneurship – economics education
(context and conditions of market economy)
Level I: Entrepreneurship–business education
Entrepreneurial
autonomy
• Founding companies
• Setting up businesses
Professional
autonomy
Employees as
co-entrepreneurs
…Understanding market economy – introduction to micro and
macroeconomics & economic policy
...through development of pedagogic objectives such as maturity, responsibility &
a well-informed outlook
i.e. attitudes suchas independence, assumption of responsibility etc.
Figure 2. Entrepreneurship education between entrepreneurial/professional autonomy and
promotion of civil society.
society needs innovative individuals who intervene in society on their own initiative,
proposing “social business ideas” to ease the social and ecological problems which
afflict the world. This category includes the many people establishing and working
in non-profit organizations. As in the case of classic entrepreneurs, attitudes such as
initiative and stamina are called for. While entrepreneurs in the Schumpeter tradition
or employees in companies with an “entrepreneurial spirit” (intrapreneurs) are
indispensable for a functioning dynamic market economy, a lively civil society is
dependent on many social entrepreneurs. In many cases – complementing the “social
business idea” – these create large numbers of jobs. Hermann Gmeiner from Austria,
for example, devised the idea of the SOS Children’s Villages and founded a global
non-profit enterprise employing numerous people. The concept of entrepreneurship
on level III constitutes, in Gramsci’s terms, a chance to bring forth alternative
societies, and thus implies an aspect of liberation, since on this level the classical
concept of founding a business on the basis of profitability is expanded to include
the idea of a social business, i.e. founding a company to further the development of
civil society.
The fourth level of figure 2 emphasizes the importance of promoting attitudes
such as personal responsibility, motivation, a spirit of innovation, curiosity,
taking responsibility for society etc. Considered from a didactic perspective, the
26
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION: A GRAMSCIAN APPROACH
implementation of level IV demands the deployment of a variety of student-activating
methods, with practice firms constituting a particularly suitable teaching and learning
arrangement for connecting business know-how with these “entrepreneurial virtues”.
For those schools where more than three hours per week are set aside for improving
students’ economic literacy, our proposed curriculum for the subject “economics”
therefore includes the establishment of practice firms. It is important to note that
these attitudes and skills are not only essential for a dynamic economy, but also
for a lively civil society. When students who have completed economics education
go on to become involved in the spectrum between social business and non-profit
organizations and/or clubs and associations, this benefits civil society.
The model of entrepreneurship education sketched in figure 2 is able to cover the
spectrum of counter-hegemonic action outlined by Gramsci in broad areas, because
the aim is to promote the spirit of innovation and creative/organizational skills not
just in the economic context, but also in various spheres of activity in civil society.
From the perspective of educational theory, the model of entrepreneurship
education is oriented towards the aims of economics education in the tradition of a
critical/constructive didactics, as developed by Klafki (1980). These aims include,
on the one hand
– critically highlighting the current flaws in the structure of the Russian market
economy – amongst other things, the under-representation of dynamic small and
medium-sized enterprises or inadequate standards in justice and administration –
and on the other hand
– constructively presenting alternatives.
This basic didactic orientation, with its inherent contradiction, is compatible
with Gramsci’s work; he always stressed that passive (hegemonic) consent of the
governed is not enough for a lively democracy and civil society – on the contrary,
it is necessary to devise alternatives, i.e. counter-hegemonic projects. For example,
in economics teaching in Gramsci’s tradition the present economic and societal
situation in which the “financial markets” have hegemony should be met with
constructive criticism – by showing alternative reformatory concepts for restoring
the primacy of politics over the financial sector/the economy.
In the EU Tempus project “EINSEE”, the model of entrepreneurship education
presented in figure 2 was taken as the basis for the development of the curriculum
for the subject economics at secondary schools in Russia and Tajikistan (years 10
and 11).
Within the curriculum development process, as illustrated in figure 3, the structure
and content of the curriculum is oriented towards the aims of entrepreneurial
and professional autonomy. The business plan serves as a curricular reference
point to visualize key elements of business management knowledge and the way
they interconnect in matters ranging from the choice of legal form to financing
and marketing. Thus, in year 10 an overview of the business plan is given, and
subsequently the central components of the business plan are presented in detail.
27
J. AFF & G. GEISSLER
Thus, the business plan, as an important instrument in entrepreneurship education,
becomes the guiding curricular principle in an introduction to business studies.
Economics teaching at secondary schools is not focused solely on business
matters, since economic literacy also requires the teaching of (macro)economics.
Level II therefore functions as the second key element for determining the contents
of the curriculum for the subject economics. This curriculum is constructed in
such a way that economics education begins with an introduction to the market
economy and then – after an explanation of the economic/social framework and of
the fundamental principles for operating in a market economy – goes on to present
a business plan. This curricular structure ensures that content relating to business
management is linked with economics content.
Figure 3. “Principles of construction” for the curriculum for the subject economics at
secondary schools in RU and TJ on the basis of the four-level model of entrepreneurship
education.
One way in which level III is taken into account is that the implementation of
the didactic principle of entrepreneurship education, as stipulated in the curriculum,
is not carried out merely through the discussion of classic “success stories” of
businesses in the local region, but also through the presentation of successful social
business initiatives or non-profit organizations. Complex learning and teaching
arrangements such as project-based teaching, excursions etc. provide a framework
28
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION: A GRAMSCIAN APPROACH
for the application of techniques such as project management, and are very effective
in giving students access to spheres of activity in the social and environmental
sectors in their region. Designing methods which activate students in this way
enables them to learn, amongst other things, to play an active role in shaping society
and to experience the importance of civil society virtues.
The objectives of level III, however, cannot be achieved merely on the level
of method, but also require a critical and constructive engagement with economic
and social contexts, i.e. education for maturity and responsibility. To avoid a
situation where excessively high social, economic and didactic aims, such as those
formulated on level III, “circle like aeroplanes and never land”, it is vital that
didactic materials are produced which allow the “landing process in the classroom”
to take place. This is why, in the EINSEE project, we attach great importance to
the production of course materials to equip teachers with appropriate skills. This
subject-specific didactic development work will be carried out by our Russian
and Tajik partners, and the Viennese Institute for Business Education will conduct
“subject-specific didactic monitoring”. In this context it should be noted that the
EINSEE project presented in this paper is the follow-on project from a previous
EU Tempus project (cf. Aff & Fortmüller, 2010; Geissler & Kögler, 2010), which
was primarily concerned with the implementation of entrepreneurship education in
two Russian regions. Numerous didactic materials were produced in this project
and are also being used for the curricular development work now in progress.
This note makes it clear that the relevance of entrepreneurship education for
economic education is something which the authors have advocated for a long
time (cf. Aff, 2000). Thus, entrepreneurship education has been integrated into the
master’s programme in business education at the WU Wien (Vienna University of
Economics and Business), and since 2007 a system of economics education based
on entrepreneurship education has been intensively implemented in Russia in the
framework of EU Tempus projects.
The promotion of entrepreneurial virtues not only demands teaching which is
varied in content and methods, but also teachers whose own lifes serve, at least in
part, as more or less convincing examples of these aims. For this reason, the EU
Tempus projects attach great importance to equipping teachers with the requisite
skills and attitudes – and not just contents and methods. On the contrary, it is
necessary to encourage teachers to be curious, and to see change not only as a threat,
but (also) as an opportunity.
CONCLUSION
Transition processes are based on economic contexts and conditions, and yet the
reference to Antonio Gramsci has shown that such processes are primarily expressed
and (partially) determined by culture. In the EINSEE project, the insights of Antonio
Gramsci’s social theory were chosen as a reference for the aim of the project, but
his now historical concept for implementing this theory – that of a counter-culture
29
J. AFF & G. GEISSLER
developed through the workers’ movement – has been interpreted in a more modern
way in order to achieve the project’s goals.
A business education project which has set itself the task of speeding up slow
transition processes such as those in the Russian Federation or in Tajikistan, and
of dealing with contradictory developments in the establishment of democracy
and market economy, must include the realm of civil society, since emancipatory
initiatives in civil society have an influence on political society. Since civil society
always includes the whole ensemble of social institutions and organizations, and
people’s social and cultural relationships and activities, Antonio Gramsci’s concept
of hegemony allows counter-hegemony to come about only in subsections of civil
society – education is a highly suitable terrain for this.
Education systems are always embedded in the referential context of society as
a whole. Thus, changes which start on the political/structural level of the education
system can only proceed slowly, because they always have to be connected to the
constitutive social context which is meant to be changed. If this is not the case, the
power of the cultural level would be underestimated: public discourses gradually
leave traces of this cultural level in people’s common sense; this is one of the things
we need to work on. Changes in the education system must therefore also – indeed
primarily – begin on a pedagogical and individual level, and take into account certain
conditions applicable to any cultural movement which seeks to replace common
sense and old views of the world: “1. Never to tire of repeating its own arguments
(though offering literary variation of form): repetition is the best didactic means for
working on the popular mentality.
2. To work incessantly to raise the intellectual level of ever-growing strata of
the populace, in other words, to give a personality to the amorphous mass element.
This means working to produce élites of intellectuals of a new type which arise
directly out of the masses, but remain in contact with them to become, as it were, the
whalebone in the corset” (Gramsci, 1999, p. 652).
For the EINSEE project, this means starting with the teachers who can be
engaged by the concept of entrepreneurship education and who appear as initiators
of counter-hegemony, connected with the hope that the students will, in the spirit of
entrepreneurship education, develop critical attitudes which will enable them to take
an active role in implementing their concerns.
Although entrepreneurship education is often seen as a subject-specific didactic
approach focused on implementing a purely neo-classical, narrowly normative image
of humanity and understanding of the economy in schools, the four-level model of
entrepreneurship education clearly shows the emancipatory potential of this approach.
This potential consists, among other things, in linking a form of economics education
bound to the principles of sustainability and interconnectedness with education for
citizenship or, to keep to Gramsci’s terms, positioning entrepreneurship education as
a counter-hegemonic project.
30
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION: A GRAMSCIAN APPROACH
NOTES
1
2
3
4
5
6
This text has been published slightly different as “Entrepreneurship education as a counter-hegemonic
project” by J. Aff, J. & G. Geissler (2013). In J. Aff & R. Fortmüller (Eds.), EntrepreneurshipErziehung im wissenschaftlichen Diskurs. Beiträge zu gesellschaftspolitischen, lernpsychologischen
und fachdidaktischen Aspekten einer modernen Entrepreneurship-Erziehung in Russland und
Tadschikistan (pp 3-20). Wien. Manz.
“EINSEE” stands for the project title: Entwicklung und Implementierung nachhaltig wirksamer
Strukturen zur Entrepreneurship Erziehung (Development and Implementation of enduringly effective
structures for entre-preneurship education) in the Russian Federation and Tajikistan – this paper will
mainly focus on Russia, because Tajikistan has a completely different status of social and economic
development and a very different cultural and religious tradition, and is thus quite unlike Russia in
many issues.
Gramsci’s theory was carried on fruitfully, for example in the regulation theory of Aglietta, Lipietz,
Jessop and Hirsch, in the discourse-analysis hegemony theory of Laclau, Mouffe and Marchart, or
in the post-operaismo of Negri, Hardt, Birkner and Foltin. Neo-Gramscian approaches by Cox, Gill,
Rupert or Bieling play an important part in both international political economy and international
politics.
Gramsci’s work is not uncontroversial. Criticism of Gramsci’s concept of dialectics, for example, can
be found in the work of Janne Mende (Müller, 2009), while Hans-Jürgen Bieling criticizes Gramsci
for his historicism and his focus on the philosophy of praxis (Brodocz & Schaal, 2006).
For want of sufficient data, the following remarks refer solely to the Russian Federation. Given the old
connection to the Soviet Union, however, it can be assumed that a similar pattern of political culture
has developed in Tajikistan.
All data were taken from the press archive of the Levada Center in Moscow. The surveys on democratic
awareness bring together the following aspects: “what the Russian population expects of the political
system”, “understanding of democracy”, “willingness to take part in protest actions” and “trust in the
government and the opposition”. The Levada Center is a state-independent opinion polling institute
which regularly conducts surveys throughout Russia. The survey results are used internationally and
are regarded as reliable.
REFERENCES
Aff, J. (2008). Entrepreneurship education—didaktische “Zeitgeistformel” oder Impuls für die
ökonomische Bildung? In H. Kaminski & G.-J. Krol (Eds.), Ökonomische Bildung: Legitimiert,
etabliert, zukunftsfähig, Stand und Perspektiven (pp. 297–324). Bad Heilbrunn. Klinkhardt.
Aff, J. (2000). Thesen zum Forschungsforum: Perspektiven der Berufbildungsforschung in Mittel- und
Osteuropa. In Perspektiven der Berufsbildungsforschung in Mittel- und Osteuropa, conference papers,
Paderborn September 15–17, 1999, pp. 76–89. St. Petersburg. Vita.
Aff, J., & Lindner, J. (2005). Entrepreneurship education zwischen “small and big ideas”—Markierungen
einer entrepreneurship education an wirtschaftsberuflichen vollzeitschulen. In J. Aff & A. Hahn (Eds.),
Entrepreneurship-erziehung und begabungsförderung an wirtschaftsberuflichen Vollzeitschulen
(pp. 138–161). Innsbruck. Studienverlag.
Aff, J. (2011). Lehrplan für das Fach Wirtschaft für die 10. und 11. Schulstufe an allgemeinbildenden
Schulen in Russland, erweiterter Entwurf. Developed in the EU TEMPUS project “EINSEE”.
Aff, J., & Fortmüller, R. (2010). Wettbewerbsfaktor entrepreneurship—Eine studie aus pädagogischer
und psychologischer perspektive. In J. Aff, & R. Fortmüller (Eds.), Entrepreneurship erziehung in der
russischen föderation (pp. 15–32). Wien: Manz.
Anderson, P. (1979). Antonio gramsci. Eine kritische würdigung. Berlin: Verlag Olle & Wolter.
Bernhard, A. (2006). Antonio gramscis verständnis von erziehung und bildung. Utopie kreativ,
183(1), 10–22. Retrieved September 9, 2013, from http://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/rls_uploads/
pdfs/183Bernhard.pdf
31
J. AFF & G. GEISSLER
Berek, M. (2009). Kollektives gedächtnis und die gesellschaftliche konstruktion der wirklichkeit. Eine
theorie der erinnerungskulturen. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
Bieling, H. J. (2006). Die politische theorie des neo-marxismus: Antonio gramsci. In A. Brodocz & G.
S. Schaal (Eds.), Politische theorien der gegenwart (2nd ed., vol. 1, pp. 435–466). Opladen: Leske
+ Budrich.
Bleck, S. (2011). Klein- und mittelständische Unternehmen als volkswirtschaftlicher Stabilisierungsfaktor
in der Russischen Föderation—aktuelle Entwicklungen und Zukunftsaussichten. In Deutsches Institut
für Bankwirtschaft—Schriftenreihe, (vol. 6) (02/2011). Retrieved September 9, 2013, from http://
www.deutsches-institut-bankwirtschaft.de/schriftenreihe.html
Brand, U. (2005). Gegen-hegemonie, perspektiven globalisierungskritischer strategien. Hamburg: VSA
Verlag.
BTI. (2012). Bertelsmann transformation index, bertelsmann stiftung. Retrieved September 9, 2013, from
http://www.bti-project.de/laendergutachten/pse/rus
Buhbe, M., & Gorzka, G. (Eds.). (2007). Russland heute. Rezentralisierung des Staates unter Putin.
Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag.
Candeias, M. (2007). Gramscianische konstellationen. Hegemonie und die durchsetzung neuer
produktions- und lebensweisen. In A. Merkens & V. Rego Diaz (Eds.), Mit Gramsci arbeiten. Texte
zur politisch-praktischen Aneignung Antonio Gramscis (pp. 15–32). Hamburg: Argument Verlag.
Clement, H. (2003). Die wirtschaftsstruktur Russlands. In Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung (Ed.),
Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte (pp. 11–21).
Faltin, G., & Zimmer, J. (1998). Versäumte lektionen: Entrepreneurship. In G. Faltin, S. Ripsas & J.
Zimmer (Eds.), Entrepreneurship, Wie aus Ideen Unternehmen werden (pp. 245–267). München:
Verlag C. H. Beck.
Geissler, G., & Kögler, G. (2010). Wirtschaftsdidaktische Entwicklungsarbeit im Spannungsfeld
zwischen Beratung und Respekt vor landesspezifischen traditionen. In J. Aff & R. Fortmüller (Eds.),
Entrepreneurship Erziehung in der Russischen föderation (pp. 33–46). Wien: Manz.
Gramsci, A. (1991). Il materialismo storico e la filosofia di Benedetto Croce. Rom: Editori Riuniti.
E-Book of the University of Michigan.
Gramsci, A. (1999). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. In Qu. Hoare(Trans.) & G.
N. Smith (Eds.). London, UK: ElecBook.
Gorzka, G., & Schulze, P. W. (Eds.). (2004). Wohin steuert Russland unter Putin? Der autoritäre Weg in
die Demokratie. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.
Gustafson, T. (1999). Capitalism Russian-style. Cambridge University Press.
Haug, W. F. (1995). Introduction to Gefängnisheft 6. In K. Bochmann, & W. F. Haug (Eds.), Gefängnishefte:
Kritische Gesamtausgabe in 10 Bänden (pp. 1195–1221). Hamburg: Argument Verlag.
Herrmann-Pillath, C. (2004). Was ist und wie betreibt man wirtschaftskulturelle Transformationsforschung?
In H. Höhmann & H. Pleines (Eds.), Wirtschaftskultur in Osteuropa. Bremer Ansatz und Bremer
Projekte, Forschungsstelle Osteuropa Bremen. Arbeitspapiere und Materialien. Retrieved September
9, 2013, from www.forschungsstelle.uni-bremen.de/UserFiles/file/06-Publikationen/Arbeitspapiere/
fsoAP61.pdf
Kappeler, A. (2005). Russische Geschichte (5th ed.). München: Verlag C. H. Beck.
Klafki, W. (1980). Die bildungstheoretische Didaktik im Rahmen kritisch-konstruktiver
Erziehungswissenschaft. In H. Gudjons, R. Teske, & R. Winkel (Eds.), Didaktische Theorien
(pp. 10–27). Hamburg. Verlag Bergmann + Helbig.
Kebir, S. (1991). Gramsci’s Zivilgesellschaft. Alltag, Ökonomie, Kultur, Politik. Hamburg: VSA Verlag.
Kryshtanovskaya, O. (2005). Anatomie der russischen Elite. Die Militarisierung Russlands unter Putin.
Köln: Verlag Kiepenhauer & Witsch.
Levada Center. (2012). Russian Public Opinion—2012. Retrieved September 9, 2013, from http://
en.d7154.agava.net/sites/en.d7154.agava.net/files/Levada2011Eng.pdf
Luhmann, N. (1997). Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft (vol. 1). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.
Mende, J. (2009). Ideologie, Basis-Überbau und Wahrheit. Dialektische Kategorien bei Antonio
Gramsci? In S. Müller (Ed.), Probleme der Dialektik heute, Frankfurter Beiträge zur Soziologie und
Sozialpsychologie (pp. 113–138). Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag.
32
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION: A GRAMSCIAN APPROACH
Merkel, W. (2009). Systemtransformation: Eine Einführung in die Theorie und Empirie der
Transformationsforschung (2nd ed.). Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag.
Merkens, A. (2004). Erziehung und Bildung im Denken Antonio Gramscis. Eckpunkte einer intellektuellen
und politischen Praxis. In A. Merkens (Ed.), Antonio Gramsci, Erziehung und Bildung (pp. 15–46).
Hamburg: Argument Verlag.
Pelinka, A. (2006). Die Politik der politischen Kultur. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft
(ÖZP), 35(3), 225–235.
Putin, W. (2008). Speech at the party conference of the “United Russia” party 21.11.2008. Retrieved
September 9, 2013, from www.russland.ru/reden
Ripsas, S. (1998). Elemente der entrepreneurship education. In G. Faltin, S. Ripsas, & J. Zimmer (Eds.),
Entrepreneurship, Wie aus Ideen Unternehmen werden (pp. 217–233). München: Verlag C. H. Beck.
Russland-Analyse. (2010). Russland in politikbezogenen Länderrankings. Retrieved September 6, 2013,
from http://www.laender-analysen.de/russland/pdf/Russlandanalysen197.pdf
Russland-Analyse. (2006). Russische Zentralasienpolitik. Soziales Protestpotential. Retrieved September
6, 2013, from http://www.laender-analysen.de/russland/pdf/Russlandanalysen95.pdf
Schauff, F. (2004). Zum gesellschaftlichen Ursprung des russischen Parteiensystems—Ein Vergleich. In
G. Gorzka & P. W. Schulze (Eds.), Wohin steuert Russland unter Putin? Der autoritäre Weg in die
Demokratie (pp. 243—267). Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.
Scherrer, C. (2007). Hegemonie: empirisch fassbar? In A. Merkens & V. Rego Diaz (Eds.), Mit Gramsci
arbeiten. Texte zur politisch-praktischen Aneignung Antonio Gramscis (pp. 71–84). Hamburg:
Argument Verlag.
Wiesenthal, H. (2010). Erfolge und Misserfolge im Postsozialismus? Erträge und Lehren der
vergleichenden Transformationsforschung. In IWH, Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung Halle (Ed.),
20 Jahre Deutsche Einheit. Von der Transformation zur europäischen Integration (pp. 417–432).
Retrieved September 9, 2013, from http://www.iwh-halle.de/d/publik/sh/PDF/SH_10-3.pdf
Wodak, R. (1998). Zur diskursiven Konstruktion nationaler Identität. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag
Suhrkamp.
Wunderer, R. (Ed.). (1999). Mitarbeiter als Mitunternehmer, Grundlagen, Förderinstrumente,
Praxisbeispiele. München: Verlag Luchterhand.
Yunus, M. (2011). Wir müssen die Macht der Finanzindustrie brechen. The Austrian weekly Falter, 46, 16.
Zweynert, J. (2002). Eine Geschichte des ökonomischen Denkens in Russland 1805–1905. Marburg:
Metropolis Verlag.
33