INTEGRATION BETWEEN UNIVERSITY AND STARTUPS IN THE LIGHT OF THE SINGULARITY AND LIMITED RATIONALITY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18226/23190639.v9n2.02Keywords:
Limited rationality, Singularity, Startups, Learning by action, University entrepreneurshipAbstract
The article aims to answer the following research questions: What challenges does the academy face to improve the critical thinking of its entrepreneurial students using the action learning approach? And, what are the reactions and alternatives that students present to the singularity and limited rationality when solving a problem? To this end, a qualitative approach is used through participant observation in three case studies of companies participating in an interdisciplinary project developed at one of the best Brazilian federal university. From the cases, it is possible to perceive points such as: Prevalence of fear of failure by students; Initial research using an optimal and generic solution from the scientific literature or similar examples; Students' understanding that internal organization and learning management are more important than the technical solutions; The singularity of the startup problem, coupled with the limitation of facts and data, led the group to decide more on startup studies than generic bibliographic research on the problem or the benchmarking; and The solution validation process was carried out by the legitimacy of the entrepreneur, instead of statistical or economic validation.
Metrics
References
Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2008). Active learning: effects of core training design elements on self-regulatory processes, learning, and adaptability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 296.
Beni, P. F., Breno, F. R., Villela, L. M., Esteve, R., Jones, G. D. C., & Forte, D. (2017). Processo de ensino-aprendizagem e a interação de professores e alunos em um curso de graduação em Administração de Empresas. Administração: Ensino e Pesquisa, 18(2), 345.
Breen, J. (2014). Exploring criticality in management education through action learning. Action Learning: Research and Practice, 11(1), 4–24.
Corbett, A. C. (2005). Experiential learning within the process of opportunity identification and exploitation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 473–491.
Edmonstone, J. (2015). The challenge of evaluating action learning. Action Learning: Research and Practice, 12(2), 131–145.
Ensslin, L., Giffhorn, E., Ensslin, S. R., Petri, S. M., & Vianna, W. B. (2010). Avaliação do desempenho de empresas terceirizadas com o uso da metodologia multicritério de apoio à decisão-construtivista. Pesquisa Operacional, 30(1), 125–152.
Kassean, H., Vanevenhoven, J., Liguori, E., & Winkel, D. E. (2015). Entrepreneurship education: a need for reflection, real-world experience and action. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research.
Krakauer, P. V. de C., Santos, S. A. dos, & Almeida, M. I. R. de. (2017). Teoria da aprendizagem experiencial no ensino de empreendedorismo: um estudo exploratório. Revista de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas, 6(1), 101–127.
Lacerda, R. T. de O., Ensslin, L., & Ensslin, S. R. (2012). Metodologia de gestão de processos e dynamic capabilities. Revista de Administração FACES Journal, 11(3).
Lacerda, R. T. de O., Ensslin, L., Ensslin, S. R., & Dutra, A. (2014). A constructivist approach to manage business process as a dynamic capability. Knowledge and Process Management, 21(1), 54–66.
Lacerda, R. T. de O., Klein, B. L., Fulco, J. F., Santos, G., & Bittarello, K. (2017). Integração inovadora entre empresas incubadas e universidades para geração contínua de vantagens competitivas em ambientes dinâmicos. Navus-Revista de Gestão e Tecnologia, 7(2), 78–96.
Leonard, H. S. (2015). Understanding the causal path between action, learning, and solutions: maximizing the power of action learning to achieve great results. Action Learning: Research and Practice, 12(1), 22–36.
Leonard, H. S., & Lang, F. (2010). Leadership development via action learning. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 12(2), 225–240.
Lima, T. B. de, Sonaglio, A. L. B., & Godoi, C. K. (2012). Dimensões de um sistema de aprendizagem em ação para o ensino de administração. Administração: Ensino e Pesquisa, 13(1), 9–41.
Marafon, A. D., Ensslin, L., Lacerda, R. T. de O., & Ensslin, S. R. (2015). The effectiveness of multi-criteria decision aid methodology. European Journal of Innovation Management.
Marquardt, M. J. (2005). O poder da aprendizagem pela ação: como solucionar problemas e desenvolver líderes em tempo real. Tradução Anna Lobo. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Senac Rio.
McCarthy, J. P., & Anderson, L. (2000). Active learning techniques versus traditional teaching styles: Two experiments from history and political science. Innovative Higher Education, 24(4), 279–294.
Meyer, A. De, Loch, C. H., & Pich, M. T. (2002). Managing project uncertainty: From variation to chaos.(Executive Briefings). MIT Sloan Management Review, 43(2), 22–24.
Montibeller, G., Belton, V., Ackermann, F., & Ensslin, L. (2008). Reasoning maps for decision aid: an integrated approach for problem-structuring and multi-criteria evaluation. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(5), 575–589.
Olsson, A., Wadell, C., Odenrick, P., & Bergendahl, M. N. (2010). An action learning method for increased innovation capability in organisations. Action Learning: Research and Practice, 7(2), 167–179.
Paton, S., Chia, R., & Burt, G. (2014). Relevance or ‘relevate’? How university business schools can add value through reflexively learning from strategic partnerships with business. Management Learning, 45(3), 267–288.
Pedler, M. (2011). Action learning in practice. Gower Publishing, Ltd.
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.
Ram, M., & Trehan, K. (2010). Critical action learning, policy learning and small firms: An inquiry. Management Learning, 41(4), 415–428.
Roy, B. (1993). Decision science or decision-aid science? European Journal of Operational Research, 66(2), 184–203.
Tasca, J. E., Ensslin, L., Ensslin, S. R., & Alves, M. B. M. (2010). An approach for selecting a theoretical framework for the evaluation of training programs. Journal of European Industrial Training.
Teece, D. J. (2012). Dynamic capabilities: Routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1395–1401.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.
Urias, G. M. P. C., & De Azeredo, L. A. S. (2017). Metodologias ativas nas aulas de administraçao financeira: alternativa ao método tradicional de ensino para o despertar da motivaçao intrínseca e o desenvolvimento da autonomia. Administração: Ensino e Pesquisa, 18(1), 39.
Vieira, S. F. A., Melatti, G. A., Oguido, W. S., Pelisson, C., & de Negreiros, L. F. (2013). Ensino de empreendedorismo em Cursos de Administração: um levantamento da realidade brasileira. Revista de Administração FACES Journal, 12(2), 93–114.
Wang, C. L., & Ahmed, P. K. (2007). Dynamic capabilities: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(1), 31–51.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Rogerio Tadeu de Oliveira Lacerda, Mayara Lucia Bernardes, Ana Maria Simões Ribeiro, Anelise Stangarlin de Camargo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The author must guarantee that:
- there is full consensus among all the coauthors in approving the final version of the document and its submission for publication.
- the work is original, and when the work and/or words from other people were used, they were properly acknowledged.
Plagiarism in all of its forms constitutes an unethical publication behavior and is unacceptable. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Inovação has the right to use software or any other method of plagiarism detection.
All manuscripts submitted to RBGI - Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Inovação go through plagiarism and self-plagiarism identification. Plagiarism identified during the evaluation process will result in the filing of the submission. In case plagiarism is identified in a manuscript published in the journal, the Editor-in-Chief will conduct a preliminary investigation and, if necessary, will make a retraction.
This journal, following the recommendations of the Open Source movement, provides full open access to its content. By doing this, the authors keep all of their rights allowing Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Inovação to publish and make its articles available to the whole community.
RBGI - Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Inovação content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Any user has the right to:
- Share - copy, download, print or redistribute the material in any medium or format, linking to RBGI site.
- Adapt - remix, transform and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
According to the following terms:
- Attribution - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions - You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything that the license permits.
#RBGI
