Content area
Full Text
Introduction
Entrepreneurship and innovation are widely regarded as an important basis for competitive advantage in a rapidly changing international business environment, enhancing capabilities for sustainable business growth, economic activity and the wealth of nations (Crossan and Apaydin, 2010; O’Connor, 2013). Entrepreneurship relates to the discovery, evaluation and exploitation of opportunities in the process of business start-up, creation and growth; entrepreneurial dynamism is key to economic renewal and growth (Shane, 2012; Lewrick et al., 2010). Innovation relates to the development, adoption and exploitation of value-added activities in economic and social areas; a key factor for competitiveness and growth (Crossan and Apaydin, 2010; Lewrick et al., 2010).
Embracing and stimulating entrepreneurship and innovation education and training provides nations with more entrepreneurs and innovators (Maritz and Brown, 2013; Donovan et al., 2013). It is, however, the quality of entrepreneurs and innovative activity that meets with interest of programme stakeholders, audiences and governments (Edwards and Muir, 2012; Matlay, 2008; Jones, 2010). Entrepreneurship education programs are defined pedagogical programs or education that aims to develop entrepreneurial attitudes, skills and personal qualities; which are designed to empower individuals with the necessary tools to initiate a new business (Fayolle, 2010). We define innovation education programs as pedagogical programs or education for innovation capabilities and skills, which involve personal, technical and organisational qualities; designed to empower individuals with the necessary tools to undertake innovative initiatives and implement these within an organisation (Lewrick et al., 2010).
Despite the linkages and synergies between the two disciplines, entrepreneurship and innovation education and training remain two distinctively unique disciplines; each with its own separate body of knowledge and outcomes (Shane, 2012; Adams et al., 2006). Such uniqueness is evidenced by various factors, such as: contextualisation (Maritz and Brown, 2013; Matlay, 2005, 2008; Fayolle et al, 2006; Jones et al., 2012); definition (Shane, 2012; Crossan and Apaydin, 2010); typology (Steffens et al., 2012); order of merit (Lewrick et al., 2010; Crossan and Apaydin, 2010); theoretical underpinnings (Ireland et al., 2005); measurement and distinctiveness (Adams et al., 2006; Gregson, 2013); content and pedagogy (Jones, 2010). Table I provides tabulation of these constructs.
Taking cognisance of an extensive review of the literature, the above factors are presented as propositions...