Warning! The directory is not yet complete and will be amended until the beginning of the term.
040017 VK KFK ORPE: Data Analysis in Organization and Personnel II (2012W)
Continuous assessment of course work
Labels
Voraussetzung für diesen Kurs ist die erfolgreiche Teilnahme an Data Analysis I (oder äquivalenten empirischen Kurs aus dem Masterprogramm).
Registration/Deregistration
Note: The time of your registration within the registration period has no effect on the allocation of places (no first come, first served).
- Registration is open from Th 06.09.2012 09:00 to Th 20.09.2012 14:00
- Registration is open from We 26.09.2012 10:00 to Th 27.09.2012 17:00
- Deregistration possible until Su 14.10.2012 23:59
Details
max. 20 participants
Language: English
Lecturers
Classes (iCal) - next class is marked with N
- Tuesday 09.10. 14:00 - 16:00 Seminarraum 1
- Thursday 11.10. 14:00 - 16:00 Seminarraum 1
- Tuesday 16.10. 14:00 - 16:00 Seminarraum 1
- Thursday 18.10. 14:00 - 16:00 Seminarraum 1
- Thursday 25.10. 14:00 - 16:00 Seminarraum 1
- Tuesday 30.10. 14:00 - 16:00 Hörsaal 12
- Tuesday 06.11. 14:00 - 16:00 EDV-Labor 6
- Friday 25.01. 08:00 - 20:00 Seminarraum 1
Information
Aims, contents and method of the course
Assessment and permitted materials
The final grade will be calculated as the weighted average of the grades for the seminar paper (50 %), for the presentation (40%), and for classroom participation (10 %)
Minimum requirements and assessment criteria
Examination topics
(1) There will be an introductory meeting of this seminar on October 9th, 2012 in seminar room 1. During this meeting, we will check the topic assignments. Thus, attendance is absolutely necessary. “No-show”-students may be replaced by students registered on the chair’s “waiting list” who agree to comply with the seminar rules.
(2) Students are supposed to pick one of the topics and corresponding papers from the list below. Please email me your first and second preference until October 9th. No more than two students will be assigned to the same topic.
(3) Seminar papers must not exceed 20 pages (minimum 11 pica letter size; double-spaced typing; 3 cm margins all around; including all figures, tables, and references). They must use appropriate citation and reference rules and obey the general ethical principles of scientific work. Seminar papers are due on the last day of the final presentation on the 25th of January 2013. Every student must individually submit a seminar paper.
(4) Complete attendance of each session of the seminar, including the preparatory meeting, is obligatory. Absolutely no exceptions apply. Leaves will only be granted in cases of illnesses or if the person demanding a leave is required to participate in an official activity of the University, Faculty, or Institute. In the first case, the doctor’s medical certificate must be presented to the Chair immediately (i. e. latest by the first working day following the absence day). Failure to comply with this rule leads to a no-pass grade. Passing grades can generally not be earned by students who miss more than 10% of the total class-time.
(5) The provided study also serves as a starting point for the analyses. Students are expected to search for related articles, situate the research question in the wider context and provide additional individual analyses where deemed appropriate.
(6) The final grade will be calculated as the weighted average of the grades for the seminar paper (50 %), for the presentation (40%), and for classroom participation (10 %)
(2) Students are supposed to pick one of the topics and corresponding papers from the list below. Please email me your first and second preference until October 9th. No more than two students will be assigned to the same topic.
(3) Seminar papers must not exceed 20 pages (minimum 11 pica letter size; double-spaced typing; 3 cm margins all around; including all figures, tables, and references). They must use appropriate citation and reference rules and obey the general ethical principles of scientific work. Seminar papers are due on the last day of the final presentation on the 25th of January 2013. Every student must individually submit a seminar paper.
(4) Complete attendance of each session of the seminar, including the preparatory meeting, is obligatory. Absolutely no exceptions apply. Leaves will only be granted in cases of illnesses or if the person demanding a leave is required to participate in an official activity of the University, Faculty, or Institute. In the first case, the doctor’s medical certificate must be presented to the Chair immediately (i. e. latest by the first working day following the absence day). Failure to comply with this rule leads to a no-pass grade. Passing grades can generally not be earned by students who miss more than 10% of the total class-time.
(5) The provided study also serves as a starting point for the analyses. Students are expected to search for related articles, situate the research question in the wider context and provide additional individual analyses where deemed appropriate.
(6) The final grade will be calculated as the weighted average of the grades for the seminar paper (50 %), for the presentation (40%), and for classroom participation (10 %)
Reading list
Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics II
http://www.psed.isr.umich.edu/psed/home
The Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED) research program is designed to enhance the scientific understanding of how people start businesses. The projects provide valid and reliable data on the process of business formation based on nationally-representative samples of nascent entrepreneurs, those active in business creation. PSED I began with screening in 1998-2000 to select a cohort of 830 with three follow-up interviews. A control group of those not involved in firm creation is available for comparisons. PSED II began with screening in 2005-2006, followed by six yearly interviews. The information obtained includes data on the nature of those active as nascent entrepreneurs, the activities undertaken during the start-up process, and the characteristics of start-up efforts that become new firms.
1) Founding Processes
Lichtenstein, B., N. Carter, K. Dooley, W. Gartner. 2007. Complexity dynamics of nascent entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Venturing, 22(2): 236-261.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S08839026060004622) Entrepeneurial Financing
Reynolds, P., 2011. Informal and early formal financial support in the business creation process: Exploration with the PSED II data set, Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1), 27–54.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2010.00313.x/abstract3) Prevalence of Nascent Entrepreneurs
Reynolds, P. N.Carter, W. Gartner, and P. Greene (2004). The Prevalence of Nascent Entrepreneurs in the United States: Evidence from the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics, Small Business Economics, Volume 23, Number 4, 263-284,
http://www.springerlink.com/content/v75l35rv8638t86u/4) Outcome and Ability Expectation
Townsend, D. M., L. Busenitz, J. Arthurs ,2010. To start or not to start: Outcome and ability expectations in the decision to start a new venture, Journal of Business Venturing, 25(2): 192-202.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S08839026080005785) Founding Team Characteristics
Ruef, M., Aldrich, H.E., Carter, N.M., 2003. The structure of founding teams: homophily, strong ties, and isolation among U.S. entrepreneurs. American Sociological Review 68: 195-222.
http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=howard_aldrich6) Intrapreneurship
Parker, S. (2011). Intrapreneurship or Entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Venturing, Volume 26, Issue 1, Pages 19–34
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S08839026090007437) Social Motives and Entrepreneurship
Renko, M. (2012). Early Challenges of Nascent Social Entrepreneurs, Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, forthcoming
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00522.x/pdf8) Career Reasons
Cassar, G. (2006). Money, money, money? A longitudinal investigation of entrepreneur career reasons, growth preferences and achieved growth, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: An International Journal, Volume 19, Issue 1, pages 89-107
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/089856206010022469) Minority Entrepreneurship
Edelman, L., C. Brush, and T. Manolova (2010). Start-up Motivations and Growth Intentions of Minority Nascent Entrepreneur, Journal of Small Business Management, Volume 48, Issue 2, pp. 174–196
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2010.00291.x/pdf10) Family Entrepreneurship
Brannon, D., J. Wiklund, and J. Haynie (2012). The Varying Effects of Family Relationships in Entrepreneurial Teams, Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, forthcoming
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00533.x/pdf
http://www.psed.isr.umich.edu/psed/home
The Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED) research program is designed to enhance the scientific understanding of how people start businesses. The projects provide valid and reliable data on the process of business formation based on nationally-representative samples of nascent entrepreneurs, those active in business creation. PSED I began with screening in 1998-2000 to select a cohort of 830 with three follow-up interviews. A control group of those not involved in firm creation is available for comparisons. PSED II began with screening in 2005-2006, followed by six yearly interviews. The information obtained includes data on the nature of those active as nascent entrepreneurs, the activities undertaken during the start-up process, and the characteristics of start-up efforts that become new firms.
1) Founding Processes
Lichtenstein, B., N. Carter, K. Dooley, W. Gartner. 2007. Complexity dynamics of nascent entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Venturing, 22(2): 236-261.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S08839026060004622) Entrepeneurial Financing
Reynolds, P., 2011. Informal and early formal financial support in the business creation process: Exploration with the PSED II data set, Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1), 27–54.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2010.00313.x/abstract3) Prevalence of Nascent Entrepreneurs
Reynolds, P. N.Carter, W. Gartner, and P. Greene (2004). The Prevalence of Nascent Entrepreneurs in the United States: Evidence from the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics, Small Business Economics, Volume 23, Number 4, 263-284,
http://www.springerlink.com/content/v75l35rv8638t86u/4) Outcome and Ability Expectation
Townsend, D. M., L. Busenitz, J. Arthurs ,2010. To start or not to start: Outcome and ability expectations in the decision to start a new venture, Journal of Business Venturing, 25(2): 192-202.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S08839026080005785) Founding Team Characteristics
Ruef, M., Aldrich, H.E., Carter, N.M., 2003. The structure of founding teams: homophily, strong ties, and isolation among U.S. entrepreneurs. American Sociological Review 68: 195-222.
http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=howard_aldrich6) Intrapreneurship
Parker, S. (2011). Intrapreneurship or Entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Venturing, Volume 26, Issue 1, Pages 19–34
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S08839026090007437) Social Motives and Entrepreneurship
Renko, M. (2012). Early Challenges of Nascent Social Entrepreneurs, Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, forthcoming
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00522.x/pdf8) Career Reasons
Cassar, G. (2006). Money, money, money? A longitudinal investigation of entrepreneur career reasons, growth preferences and achieved growth, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: An International Journal, Volume 19, Issue 1, pages 89-107
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/089856206010022469) Minority Entrepreneurship
Edelman, L., C. Brush, and T. Manolova (2010). Start-up Motivations and Growth Intentions of Minority Nascent Entrepreneur, Journal of Small Business Management, Volume 48, Issue 2, pp. 174–196
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2010.00291.x/pdf10) Family Entrepreneurship
Brannon, D., J. Wiklund, and J. Haynie (2012). The Varying Effects of Family Relationships in Entrepreneurial Teams, Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, forthcoming
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00533.x/pdf
Association in the course directory
Last modified: Mo 07.09.2020 15:28
We will focus in this course on the domain of entrepreneurial activity and the publicly available dataset PSED 2 that provides by far the best picture of entrepreneurs, entrepreneurial activity, and success. All in all, knowledge gathered in previous methodological empirical classes can be applied to actual data sets and should provide a stepping stone towards future research endeavors, such as an empirical master thesis. The course will be work intensive and involves a substantial part of independent empirical work. Previous successful completion of courses such as Data Analysis I (or equivalent) is highly recommended.