Week 2 Reading Reflection

     In chapter 1 of Entrepreneurship: Theory, Process, and Practice I was surprised to learn that “about half of all start-ups last between five and seven years” (Kuratko 19). My belief was more in line with the myth that 85% of all start-ups failed within the first year. I would assume that is because a vast majority of start-ups that I have had the chance to know of, failed in such a short period of time, usually within the first two years.

     I found the section in which the author mentioned the entrepreneurial assessment approach to be a little confusing. He didn’t go into much detail and I was left wondering how the approach actually worked. The topic is supposed to be covered more in the next chapter so I hope to gain a little more insight.   

     I would be interested in knowing which view the author considered to be more significant, the macro or micro view of entrepreneurship. The author mentions which school of thought is more widely recognized but doesn’t seen to weigh the two sides as a whole against each other. With the information provided I would consider the micro view to be more significant. Something else I would be interested in knowing is if the author thinks that someday there will be too much entrepreneurship. In the chapter he says that entrepreneurship is a catalyst, a driving factor, and I wonder if there could ever be too much entrepreneurship to a point where change is happening too fast or if change will eventually plateau and we will see no change despite the increase in entrepreneurs.

     In the discussion about entrepreneurial schools-of-thought, specifically the displacement school-of-thought, the author stated, “[a] group hinders a person from advancing or eliminates certain critical factors needed for that person to advance”(Kuratko 9). To a small degree I can see where the author was coming from when he made the statement but for the most part I believe a group is good for entrepreneurs because it allows them to receive feedback more instantaneously when compared to having to go out and find individuals to use in a focus group. The main issues I have with this idea is that the author suggests that an individual “will not peruse a venture unless they are prevented or displaced from doing other activities” (Kuratko 10), which I find to be false. Numerous successful ideas/inventions were the result of someone’s hobby and the individual didn’t start the hobby because he/she didn’t have anything else to do.