CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 114Entrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFirm Innovation and GrowthMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Renascent entrepreneurship

Open access
Stam, Erik, Audretsch, David, Meijaard, Joris·2008·Journal of Evolutionary Economics
DOI 10.1007/s00191-008-0095-7
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Why should individuals who have exited their firm consider re-entering into entrepreneurship, i.e. become renascent entrepreneurs? According to the logic of economic models of firm dynamics there is no reason to re-enter into entrepreneurship following firm failure. In contrast, research on nascent entrepreneurship has shown the positive effect of entrepreneurial experience on planning a new firm start. Based on empirical evidence from a database consisting of ex-entrepreneurs, this study shows that renascent entrepreneurship is a pervasive phenomenon. Next to passive learning, active learning plays an important role in the explanation of entrepreneurial preferences subsequent to firm exit. This study provides new insights into the role of prior knowledge and firm exit in the entrepreneurial process.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00191-008-0095-7

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Entrepreneurs and employees of new ventures who successfully exit can reinforce the norms they created by returning to the ecosystem as investors, mentors, or serial entrepreneurs.

    “In this way, entrepre -neurs and employees of new ventures who successful exit can reinforce the norms they created by returning to the ecosystem as investors, mentors, or serial entrepreneurs ( Spigel & Vinodrai, 2020; Stam et al., 2008).”

    From Toward an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Research Program (2022) · cites this paper as Stam et al., 2008

    The Results (§5.3; page unavailable) link success of a prior firm to a greater likelihood of considering entrepreneurship again, and the Discussion (§6; page unavailable) reports a positive effect of selling a successful firm on later entrepreneurial preferences. The paper does not establish that former employees return as investors or mentors, or that any of these activities reinforce norms they created. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 46

  1. Arenius P, De Clercq D (2005) A network-based approach on opportunity recognition. Small Bus Econ 24:249–265 · DOI
  2. Audretsch DB, Keilbach M, Lehmann E (2006) Entrepreneurship and economic growth. Oxford University Press, New York · DOI
  3. Bates T (2005) Analysis of young, small firms that have closed: delineating successful from unsuccessful closures. J Bus Venturing 20:343–358 · DOI
  4. Blanchflower D, Oswald A (1998) What makes an entrepreneur? J Labor Econ 16:26–60 · DOI
  5. Blanchflower DG, Oswald A, Stutzer A (2001) Latent entrepreneurship across nations. Eur Econ Rev 45:680–691 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Bosma N, Van Praag M, Thurik R, De Wit G (2004) The value of human and social capital investments for the business performance of startups. Small Bus Econ 23:227–236 · DOI
  7. Bruce D, Schuetze HJ (2004) The labor market consequences of experience in self-employment. Labour Econ 11(5):575–598 · DOI
  8. CBS (2005) Faillissementen: Oorzaken en schulden in 2004. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, Voorburg/Heerlen
  9. Davidsson P (2006) Nascent entrepreneurship: empirical studies and developments. Found Trends Entrep 2:1–76 · DOI
  10. Davidsson P, Honig B (2003) the role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. J Bus Venturing 18:301–331 · DOI
  11. Ericson R, Pakes A (1995) Markov-perfect industry dynamics: a framework for empirical work. Rev Econ Stud 62:53–82 · DOI
  12. European Commission (2002) Bankruptcy and a fresh start: stigma on failure and legal consequences of bankruptcy. DG Enterprise, Brussels
  13. Evans D, Jovanovic B (1989) An estimated model of entrepreneurial choice under liquidity constraints. J Polit Econ 97:808–827 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Evans D, Leighton L (1989) Some empirical aspects of entrepreneurship. Am Econ Rev 79:519–535
  15. Forbes DP (2005) Are some entrepreneurs more overconfident than others? J Bus Venturing 20:623–640 · DOI
  16. Headd B (2003) Redefining business success: distinguishing between closure and failure. Small Bus Econ 21:51–61 · DOI
  17. Holmes TJ, Schmitz JA (1990) A theory of entrepreneurship and its application to the study of business transfers. J Polit Econ 98:265–294 · DOI
  18. Jacobs J (1961) The death and life of great American cities. Vintage Books, New York
  19. Jovanovic B (1982) Selection and the evolution of industry. Econometrica 50:649–670 · DOI
  20. Jovanovic B (1994) Firm formation with heterogeneous management and labor skills. Small Bus Econ 6:185–192 · DOI
  21. Kim PH, Aldrich HE, Keister LA (2006) Access (not) denied: the impact of financial, human, and cultural capital on entrepreneurial entry in the United States. Small Bus Econ 27:5–22 · DOI
  22. Klepper S (2002) The capabilities of new firms and the evolution of the US automobile industry. Ind Corp Change 11:645–666 · DOI
  23. Knight FH (1921) Risk, uncertainty and profit. Houghton Mifflin, New York
  24. Kolvereid L, Isaksen E (2006) New business start-up and subsequent entry into self-employment. J Bus Venturing 21:866–885 · DOI
  25. Lazear EP (2004) Balanced skills and entrepreneurship. Am Econ Rev 94:208–211 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Lévesque M, Minniti M (2006) The effect of aging on entrepreneurial behavior. J Bus Venturing 21:177–194 · DOI
  27. Lippman SS, Rumelt RP (1982) Uncertain imitability: an analysis of interfirm differences in efficiency under competition. Bell J Econ 13:441–438 · DOI · Paper page
  28. McGrath RG (1999) Falling forward: real options reasoning and entrepreneurial failure. Acad Manage Rev 24:13–30 · DOI
  29. Parker S (1996) A time series model of self-employment under uncertainty. Economica 63:459–475 · DOI
  30. Parker S (2004) The economics of self-employment and entrepreneurship. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge · DOI
  31. Parker S (2005) The economics of entrepreneurship. Found Trends Entrep 1:1–55 · DOI
  32. Phillips DJ (2002) A genealogical approach to organizational life chances: the parent-progeny transfer among Silicon Valley Law firms, 1946–1996. Adm Sci Q 47.3:474–506 · DOI
  33. Reynolds PD, Carter NM, Gartner WB, Greene PG (2004) The prevalence of nascent entrepreneurs in the United States: evidence from the panel study of entrepreneurial dynamics. Small Bus Econ 23:263–284 · DOI
  34. Ronstadt R (1986) Exit, stage left why entrepreneurs end their entrepreneurial careers before retirement. J Bus Venturing 1(3):323–338 · DOI
  35. Ronstadt R (1988) The corridor principle. J Bus Venturing 3:31–40 · DOI
  36. Sarasvathy S, Menon A (2006) Failing firms and successful entrepreneurs: serial entrepreneurship as a temporal portfolio.Paper for the workshop on Firm Exit and Serial Entrepreneurship, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Jena, 13–14 January 2006
  37. Stam E, Schutjens V (2006) The fragile success of team start-ups. In: Oakey R, During W, Kauser S (Eds) New technology-based firms in the new millenium. Vol. V. Elsevier Science, Oxford. pp. 219–233
  38. Stokes D, Blackburn R (2002) Learning the hard way: the lessons of owner-managers who have closed their businesses. J Small Bus Enter Dev 9:17–27 · DOI
  39. Tamasy C (2006) Determinants of regional entrepreneurship dynamics in contemporary Germany: A conceptual and empirical analysis. Reg Stud 40(4):365–384 · DOI
  40. Thornhill S, Amit R (2003) Learning about failure: Bankruptcy, firm age and the resource-based view. Organ Sci 14:497–509 · DOI
  41. Van Gelderen MW (1999) Ontluikend ondernemerschap. EIM, Zoetermeer
  42. Van Praag CM (2003) Business survival and success of young small business owners. Small Bus Econ 21:1–17 · DOI
  43. Wagner J (2003) Taking a second chance: Entrepreneurial re-starters in Germany. Appl Econ Q 49:255–272
  44. Wagner J (2005) Nascent and infant entrepreneurs in Germany. Evidence from the Regional Entrepreneurship Monitor (REM). University of Lueneburg Working Paper Series in Economics, No. 1 · DOI
  45. Wagner J, Sternberg R (2004) Start-up activities, individual characteristics, and the regional milieu: Lessons for entrepreneurship support policies from German micro data. Ann Reg Sci 38:219–240 · DOI
  46. Wright M, Robbie K, Ennew C (1997) Serial entrepreneurs. Br J Manage 8:251–268 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Toward an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Research Program

    Wurth, B., Stam, E., & Spigel, B. (2022) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/1042258721998948 · Cited by 789

    “In this way, entrepreneurs and employees of new ventures who successful exit can reinforce the norms they created by returning to the ecosystem as investors, mentors, or serial entrepreneurs (Spigel & Vinodrai, 2020; Stam et al., 2008).”
    Self-citation

Metadata

Authors
Stam, E., Audretsch, D., & Meijaard, J.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Society (DE)
  • Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Stam, Erik
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Evolutionary Economics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2008-04-18
Volume
18
Issue
3-4
Pages
493-507
ISSN
  • 0936-9937 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1386
DOI
10.1007/s00191-008-0095-7
OpenAlex
W4254861268
Cited by
114
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
FWCI
9.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Journal of Evolutionary Economics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (RES-331-27-0005)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Firm Innovation and Growth
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Keywords
firm exit, entrepreneurial experience, active learning, prior knowledge, entrepreneurial preferences, firm dynamics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review