Guest editors' introduction: alternative perspectives on entrepreneurship research

Peter L. Jennings, Lew Perren, Sara Carter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This article emphasizes the need for alternative perspectives in entrepreneurship research. Burrell and Morgan's classic text Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis is as relevant now as it was when first published a quarter of a century ago. Central to Burrell and Morgan's thesis is the idea that all theories of organization are based upon a philosophy of science and a theory of society. Either explicitly or implicitly, researchers base their work on a series of philosophical assumptions regarding ontology, epistemology, and human nature, which have methodological consequences. Within each of these assumptions, the extreme positions are reflected in sociological positivism and, in opposition, German idealism. Similarly, researchers hold differing views about the nature of society, underpinned by further assumptions, and reflected in Burrell and Morgan's distinction between regulation and radical change. Researchers adhering to the regulation perspective attempt to explain society in terms that emphasize its underlying cohesiveness. Their concerns are with the status quo, social order, consensus, social integration, solidarity, individual or system needs satisfaction, and actuality. In contrast, the radical change perspective is concerned with explaining structural conflict, modes of domination, contradiction, emancipation, deprivation, and potentiality. Assumptions that researchers make, both about the philosophy of science and the theory of society, represent two independent dimensions which, taken together, delineate four distinct paradigms: Functionalist, Interpretive, Radical Humanist, and Radical Structuralist. These paradigms reflect basic metatheoretical assumptions that underpin the shared philosophy, perspective, mode of theorizing, and approach of researchers who operate within them.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)145-152
Number of pages8
JournalEntrepreneurship: theory & practice
Volume29
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2005

Fingerprint

entrepreneurship
editor
theory of society
philosophy of science
paradigm
philosophical idealism
organizational analysis
need satisfaction
regulation
positivism
social integration
emancipation
social order
deprivation
domination
epistemology
ontology
solidarity
opposition
organization

Bibliographical note

The definitive version is available at www.blackwell-synergy.com

Cite this

Jennings, Peter L. ; Perren, Lew ; Carter, Sara. / Guest editors' introduction: alternative perspectives on entrepreneurship research. In: Entrepreneurship: theory & practice. 2005 ; Vol. 29, No. 2. pp. 145-152.
@article{cbfd989b699f4b0cac24af0457bae4c0,
title = "Guest editors' introduction: alternative perspectives on entrepreneurship research",
abstract = "This article emphasizes the need for alternative perspectives in entrepreneurship research. Burrell and Morgan's classic text Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis is as relevant now as it was when first published a quarter of a century ago. Central to Burrell and Morgan's thesis is the idea that all theories of organization are based upon a philosophy of science and a theory of society. Either explicitly or implicitly, researchers base their work on a series of philosophical assumptions regarding ontology, epistemology, and human nature, which have methodological consequences. Within each of these assumptions, the extreme positions are reflected in sociological positivism and, in opposition, German idealism. Similarly, researchers hold differing views about the nature of society, underpinned by further assumptions, and reflected in Burrell and Morgan's distinction between regulation and radical change. Researchers adhering to the regulation perspective attempt to explain society in terms that emphasize its underlying cohesiveness. Their concerns are with the status quo, social order, consensus, social integration, solidarity, individual or system needs satisfaction, and actuality. In contrast, the radical change perspective is concerned with explaining structural conflict, modes of domination, contradiction, emancipation, deprivation, and potentiality. Assumptions that researchers make, both about the philosophy of science and the theory of society, represent two independent dimensions which, taken together, delineate four distinct paradigms: Functionalist, Interpretive, Radical Humanist, and Radical Structuralist. These paradigms reflect basic metatheoretical assumptions that underpin the shared philosophy, perspective, mode of theorizing, and approach of researchers who operate within them.",
author = "Jennings, {Peter L.} and Lew Perren and Sara Carter",
note = "The definitive version is available at www.blackwell-synergy.com",
year = "2005",
month = "3",
doi = "doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00073.x",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "145--152",
journal = "Entrepreneurship: theory & practice",
issn = "1540-6520",
number = "2",

}

Guest editors' introduction: alternative perspectives on entrepreneurship research. / Jennings, Peter L.; Perren, Lew; Carter, Sara.

In: Entrepreneurship: theory & practice, Vol. 29, No. 2, 03.2005, p. 145-152.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Guest editors' introduction: alternative perspectives on entrepreneurship research

AU - Jennings, Peter L.

AU - Perren, Lew

AU - Carter, Sara

N1 - The definitive version is available at www.blackwell-synergy.com

PY - 2005/3

Y1 - 2005/3

N2 - This article emphasizes the need for alternative perspectives in entrepreneurship research. Burrell and Morgan's classic text Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis is as relevant now as it was when first published a quarter of a century ago. Central to Burrell and Morgan's thesis is the idea that all theories of organization are based upon a philosophy of science and a theory of society. Either explicitly or implicitly, researchers base their work on a series of philosophical assumptions regarding ontology, epistemology, and human nature, which have methodological consequences. Within each of these assumptions, the extreme positions are reflected in sociological positivism and, in opposition, German idealism. Similarly, researchers hold differing views about the nature of society, underpinned by further assumptions, and reflected in Burrell and Morgan's distinction between regulation and radical change. Researchers adhering to the regulation perspective attempt to explain society in terms that emphasize its underlying cohesiveness. Their concerns are with the status quo, social order, consensus, social integration, solidarity, individual or system needs satisfaction, and actuality. In contrast, the radical change perspective is concerned with explaining structural conflict, modes of domination, contradiction, emancipation, deprivation, and potentiality. Assumptions that researchers make, both about the philosophy of science and the theory of society, represent two independent dimensions which, taken together, delineate four distinct paradigms: Functionalist, Interpretive, Radical Humanist, and Radical Structuralist. These paradigms reflect basic metatheoretical assumptions that underpin the shared philosophy, perspective, mode of theorizing, and approach of researchers who operate within them.

AB - This article emphasizes the need for alternative perspectives in entrepreneurship research. Burrell and Morgan's classic text Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis is as relevant now as it was when first published a quarter of a century ago. Central to Burrell and Morgan's thesis is the idea that all theories of organization are based upon a philosophy of science and a theory of society. Either explicitly or implicitly, researchers base their work on a series of philosophical assumptions regarding ontology, epistemology, and human nature, which have methodological consequences. Within each of these assumptions, the extreme positions are reflected in sociological positivism and, in opposition, German idealism. Similarly, researchers hold differing views about the nature of society, underpinned by further assumptions, and reflected in Burrell and Morgan's distinction between regulation and radical change. Researchers adhering to the regulation perspective attempt to explain society in terms that emphasize its underlying cohesiveness. Their concerns are with the status quo, social order, consensus, social integration, solidarity, individual or system needs satisfaction, and actuality. In contrast, the radical change perspective is concerned with explaining structural conflict, modes of domination, contradiction, emancipation, deprivation, and potentiality. Assumptions that researchers make, both about the philosophy of science and the theory of society, represent two independent dimensions which, taken together, delineate four distinct paradigms: Functionalist, Interpretive, Radical Humanist, and Radical Structuralist. These paradigms reflect basic metatheoretical assumptions that underpin the shared philosophy, perspective, mode of theorizing, and approach of researchers who operate within them.

U2 - doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00073.x

DO - doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00073.x

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 145

EP - 152

JO - Entrepreneurship: theory & practice

JF - Entrepreneurship: theory & practice

SN - 1540-6520

IS - 2

ER -