-
Education + TrainingEmerald Article: Entrepreneurship education
in Italian universities: trend, situation and opportunitiesDonato
Iacobucci, Alessandra Micozzi
Article information:To cite this document: Donato Iacobucci,
Alessandra Micozzi, (2012),"Entrepreneurship education in Italian
universities: trend, situation and opportunities", Education +
Training, Vol. 54 Iss: 8 pp. 673 - 696
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00400911211274828
Downloaded on: 19-11-2012
References: This document contains references to 39 other
documents
To copy this document: [email protected]
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald
subscription provided by Emerald Author Access
For Authors: If you would like to write for this, or any other
Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors
service. Information about how to choose which publication to write
for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comWith over forty years'
experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent
publisher of global research with impact in business, society,
public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275
journals and more than 130 book series, as well as an extensive
range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3
and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico
and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of
download.
-
Entrepreneurship education inItalian universities:
trend,situation and opportunities
Donato Iacobucci and Alessandra MicozziDepartment of Information
Engineering, Management and Automation,
Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of
the present situation and recentevolution of entrepreneurship
education in Italian universities and to discuss whether these
coursesand curricula match the demand for entrepreneurial
competences.Design/methodology/approach The empirical analysis is
based on a census of entrepreneurshipcourses and curricula run by
universities. The information collected through the internet refers
to theacademic years 2003-2004 and 2009-2010.Findings Compared with
the situation observed in the USA and in other European
countries,entrepreneurship education in Italy is rather
underdeveloped. Only a few universities have coursesor specific
curricula dedicated to entrepreneurship. The courses are
concentrated within businessfaculties while very few exist in
science and engineering faculties. The slow pace with which
Italianuniversities are keeping up with the global trend in
entrepreneurship education at university levelseems in vivid
contrast with the need for the Italian economy to change its
industry structure from theso-called traditional to high-tech
sectors. The paper discusses the reasons for this
situation.Research limitations/implications The paper does not
evaluate the impact of entrepreneurshipeducation. A suggestion for
future research could be to analyze the role of these courses
inencouraging entrepreneurial activity of students.Practical
implications Entrepreneurship education at university level can
play an important rolein the Italian economic system, fostering the
creation of new business in knowledge-intensive sectors.Social
implications The exploratory analysis of the state of
entrepreneurship education in Italysuggests the need to develop
these courses and spread the presence, especially in the science
andengineering universities.Originality/value The paper covers a
lack of research on the attitude of higher educationinstitutions
towards entrepreneurship education in Italy.
Keywords Italy, Universities, Curricula, Entrepreneurialism,
Entrepreneurship education,University courses, Intrapreneurship,
Entrepreneurial competences
Paper type Research paper
1. IntroductionThe economic and institutional transformations
experienced by the mainindustrialized countries during the last few
decades have led to a re-evaluation ofthe entrepreneurs role in
economic development and wealth creation (Acs et al., 2008).Some
researchers are convinced that the greater entrepreneurial vitality
is one of thefactors which explains the superior performance of the
US economy in generatinginnovation and employment when compared
with that of European countries (Acset al., 1999). It is a popular
opinion that the recent changes in demand and technologywithin the
main industrialized countries have determined the transformation
fromthe regulated economy of the 1950s and 1960s, dominated by
managerial firms to theentrepreneurial economy of the 1980s and
1990s, dominated by small firms(Audretsch and Thurik, 1999). Since
the end of the 1970s there has also been a shift in
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is
available atwww.emeraldinsight.com/0040-0912.htm
Education TrainingVol. 54 No. 8/9, 2012
pp. 673-696r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0040-0912DOI 10.1108/00400911211274828
673
Italianuniversities
-
attitudes towards the entrepreneurial role in society:
Connotation of the termentrepreneur began to shift from notions of
greed, exploitation, selfishness, anddisloyalty to creativity, job
creation, profitability, innovativeness, and generosity(Vesper and
Gartner, 1997, p. 406).
Other authors underline the importance of entrepreneurial
activity because newfirms make two indispensable contributions to
market economies. First, they are anintegral part of the renewal
process that pervades and defines market economies.Entrepreneurial
firms play a crucial role in the innovations that lead to
technologicalchange and productivity growth. In short, they are
important for competition becausethey are able to change market
structure. Second, new firms are the essentialmechanism by which
millions of people, including women, minorities and
immigrants,access the pursuit of economic success (Kuratko,
2005).
Growth in entrepreneurship research over the past decades has
expanded the scopeof entrepreneurial studies. Nevertheless, they
remain focused on two main issues:opportunity recognition and new
venture creation (Ucbasaran et al., 2001). Despite thedifferences
in definitions, theoretical approaches and cultural contexts, the
widespreadfeeling among researchers and politicians is that
entrepreneurship plays anincreasingly important role in the
development and adaptation of economic systemsat local and national
levels (Wennekers and Thurik, 1999). Several documents bythe EU and
OECD have emphasized the importance of entrepreneurship for
thedevelopment prospects of their member countries (European
Commission, 2008;OECD, 2001).
As a result of these changes, during the last 25 years there has
been an explosion ofinterest in the entrepreneurship field in the
USA that has led to the institutionof courses and degrees at
several levels (undergraduate and graduate). The spread
ofentrepreneurial courses and the institutionalization of the field
have also promoted thecreation of research centres, academic
journals and associations. Most Europeancountries have followed the
same trend, although with some delay. Courses aboutentrepreneurship
have grown steadily in all the main European countries. Moreover,
anincrease in the presence of entrepreneurial courses in university
curricula has also beenadvocated by governmental studies (European
Commission, 2008). Starting from theLisbon Strategy for Growth and
Employment, EU has issued several recommendationsto promote a new
entrepreneurial culture across Europe and to foster
knowledge-basedinnovations. The new EU strategy for research and
innovation (Horizon 2020) stressesthe importance of bringing new
ideas to market and promoting a new entrepreneurialculture which
will be also achieved by incorporating entrepreneurship education
in theexisting curricula (Cotoi et al., 2011).
Recent studies show that entrepreneurship education does play a
significantrole in promoting the spirit of entrepreneurship among
students. Those who haveattended entrepreneurship courses are more
likely to start their own business thanother students (Packham et
al., 2010). Other studies have pointed out thatentrepreneurship
education, especially in scientific and technological universities,
iscrucial to enhance entrepreneurs innovation skills in a context
that changes rapidly(Menzies and Paradi, 2003). Despite the
importance of entrepreneurship education, thelink between
education, training, the intention of students to set up a new firm
andmaking entrepreneurship as their career is a complex and
under-investigated process(Nabi and Holden, 2008).
Considering the increasing attention paid to entrepreneurship
research andeducation, the Italian situation is rather anomalous.
Until a decade ago there were
674
ET54,8/9
-
neither courses of entrepreneurship in Italian universities nor
permanent teachingpositions in this field. In a comparison made in
1996, about the chairs inentrepreneurship in the main European
countries, Italy came up with 0, together withDenmark and Hungary,
far from the first ones in the list: the UK with more than12
chairs, France and Finland with 11 (Frank and Landstrom, 1997).
Moreover, while inalmost all European countries entrepreneurial
courses continued to grow, in the secondhalf of the 1990s, the
Italian situation remained practically unchanged up to thebeginning
of the last decade. Nor is the situation different when we examine
researchrather than teaching in this field. In 2003, there was only
one research centre dedicatedto this field (at the Bocconi
University in Milan). At present, there are only a few: theCentre
of Youthful Entrepreneurship at the University of Verona, the
Centre oftechnological innovation and entrepreneurship at the
University of Bologna, theEntrepreneurial Lab, research and service
centre, at the University of Bergamo andthe Centre for
entrepreneurship and innovation at the Universita` Politecnica
delleMarche.
Given the situation described, this paper has the following
aims: review thepresence and characteristics of entrepreneurship
courses and curricula in Italianuniversities; analyse their
evolution during the last decade; discuss the limitations
andopportunities of entrepreneurial education at university level
in Italy. The paper coversa lack of research on the attitude of
Italian higher education institutions towardsentrepreneurship
education.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the
literature on the presenceand trends in entrepreneurial education
at international level. Section 3 givesinformation about methods
and data. Section 4 reports the results of the empiricalsurvey
about entrepreneurship courses in Italian universities. Section 5
discusses thereasons explaining the limited presence of
entrepreneurship courses in Italianuniversities and makes some
proposals about their characteristics and diffusion.Section 6 draws
the main conclusions.
2. Trends in entrepreneurship educationOne of the first reviews
of entrepreneurial courses in the USA, made at the end of the1970s,
indicated that there were around 130 curricula with one or more
entrepreneurialcourses, more than ten times the 1967 figure
(Vesper, 1982). They were concentrated inthe schools of business
and engineering. During the 1980s and 1990s, curricula
withentrepreneurial courses increased steadily: 250 in 1985, 370 in
1992, around 400 in1995. In 1997, there were about 50 universities
in the USA which offered four or morecourses in entrepreneurship,
allowing students to obtain degrees or to major in thisfield
(Vesper and Gartner, 1997). The number of colleges and universities
that offercourses related to entrepreneurship in the USA has grown
from a handful in the 1970sto 1,600 (Katz, 2003; Solomon, 2007). In
the same period there was a steady increase inthe number of
permanent chairs in the USA in the field of entrepreneurship,
anindication of the fact that it had emerged as a discipline in its
own right. This is alsotestified by the creation of research
centres, academic associations and academicjournals dedicated to
this field. It has been stated that in the USA, at the end of
the1990s, there was a complete educational infrastructure,
consisting of more than 300endowed positions, more than 100
centres, more than 40 refereed academic journalsand more than a
dozen professional organizations (Katz, 2003, p. 295).
Katz (2003) believes that the entrepreneurship education
industry has entered itsmature stage in business schools, while
there is still scope for growth in schools of
675
Italianuniversities
-
engineering, agriculture and science. Other authors disagree
with this conclusion andfeel that there is still scope for
expansion even in American business schools (Kuratko,2005).
Whatever the opinion about the life cycle state of entrepreneurship
educationin the USA, researchers agree on the fact that it is still
a growing field.
Compared with the abundance of studies and research on the
problems ofentrepreneurship education in the USA there are fewer
works dealing with the subjectoutside the USA. This reflects the
delay with which entrepreneurship education hasdeveloped outside
the USA, and the fact that in no other countries (with the
possibleexception of Canada and the UK) has it reached a degree of
development comparablewith that observed in the USA.
Citing previous surveys on the topic, Ibrahim and Soufani (2002)
note that at the endof the 1990s there were 53 Canadian
universities offering courses in entrepreneurshipand small business
management. This survey reveals that Canadianentrepreneurship
courses tend to focus more on the pre-venture creation process
andless on the management of established small businesses.
According to the authors,another weakness is the insufficient
spread of entrepreneurship courses in engineeringschools, given the
roles young engineers could play in developing new
technologyfirms.
Outside North America, the UK is probably the country that has
the highest numberof courses and programmes dedicated to
entrepreneurship education. The relevanceattached to the issue is
documented by the presence of studies addressing theeffectiveness
of entrepreneurship courses and curricula (Matlay, 2008).
Recentliterature explores the challenges and considerations of how
new and innovativeentrepreneurship education programmes may be
included into UKs higher educationinstitutions (Smith et al., 2006)
and the impact that entrepreneurship education canhave on
entrepreneurial outcomes (Matlay, 2008). Entrepreneurship courses
andprogrammes are also present in most north European countries:
Sweden, Finland, theNetherlands, Ireland, etc. Some universities in
these countries host internationallyrecognized entrepreneurship
research centres and also PhD programmes inentrepreneurship.
Interest in entrepreneurship education has also increased
considerably among thetransitional economies of east European
(Mitra and Matlay, 2004) and Asian countries(Dana, 2001).
A study on Polish students found that they had limited prior
entrepreneurialexperience and expectations and welcomed the
opportunity to undertake enterpriseeducation. The findings
suggested that an equal proportion of male and femalestudents aged
18-24 favoured a future entrepreneurial career ( Jones et al.,
2008).Moreover, a quarter of all respondents welcomed an immediate
entrepreneurial careerafter graduation and found value in the
development of a business proposal. Thefindings suggested that
entrepreneurial education informs entrepreneurial intent andcareer
aspirations.
Concerning Asian countries, in general the design of business
school curricula inthese countries has followed the traditional
model, based on functional expertise(strategy, human resource
management, marketing, finance, etc.). Nevertheless,courses about
entrepreneurship, new venture creation and business planning
havebecome more and more common in undergraduate and Masters
curricula. China is aparticularly interesting case given the
exceptional growth rate of its private sectorin the last decade. It
was not until the mid-1990s that MBA courses were introduced
inChinese universities. According to a survey conducted in 2002,
there were 56 business
676
ET54,8/9
-
schools in China that ran accredited MBA programmes (Li et al.,
2003). Like MBAprogrammes in other countries, also in China courses
tend to focus on functional skills.Nevertheless, a survey conducted
on top 26 business schools found that six of themoffered business
venturing programmes and five of them focused on
entrepreneurshipmodules (Li et al., 2003). Recent literature shows
that entrepreneurship education inChina is not widespread and that
there is a need to improve entrepreneurship
curricula,entrepreneurship competition and entrepreneurship
research. However, the situation israpidly improving (Mason,
2011).
Studies on entrepreneurship education in Malaysia (Ismail et
al., 2010; Cheng et al.,2009) conclude that the current practice is
ineffective in matching students skillexpectations with their skill
acquisition and that a new approach is needed.
In a comparative study on entrepreneurship education in Europe,
USA, Asia andLatin America, Mason (2011) shows that socio-economic
factors (such as culture,policy, economic development, history)
have an influence on entrepreneurshipeducation. In advanced
countries, it is viewed as a well-established instrument to
fosterentrepreneurship, while in other regions entrepreneurship
education is a youngdiscipline, and there is a need to set up an
effective model.
Walter and Dohse (2009) show how the effect of entrepreneurship
education onstudents entrepreneurial intentions is influenced by
the mode of education. It alsodepends on role models or work
experience of individuals and is contingent on theregional context.
This is confirmed by a study by Corduras Martinez et al.
(2010):entrepreneurship training is effective when there is a
receptive and fertile socio-economiccontext with adequate
infrastructure, economic stability and technological progress.
Theauthors also analyse several aspects of entrepreneurship
education and training in38 countries that they divide, according
to GEM classification, in factor-driven, efficiency-driven and
innovation-driven countries. They show that in general
entrepreneurshipeducation and training improve the awareness of
entrepreneurship, increase self-efficacyand intentions and have a
positive influence on opportunity identification and reduce fearof
failure. However, in developed economies entrepreneurship education
and trainingincrease entrepreneurial activity, while in factor- and
efficiency-driven economies,investment in education and training
does not have the same effect.
Not only must the economic and social context be considered when
developingentrepreneurship education and training policy, but
according to the endogenous theoryof growth, economic development
is linked with knowledge spill-overs that arelocalized (Ellison and
Glaeser, 1999). Regions differ in their knowledge stocks and
R&Dinvestment that generate knowledge spill-overs. Given that
knowledge spill-oversgenerate entrepreneurial opportunities, some
regions offer more opportunities thanothers (Reynolds, 1994;
Audretsch and Fritsch, 2003), and this influences the impact
ofentrepreneurship education. For this reason there is a need to
contextualize the analysisof the characteristics and impact of
entrepreneurship education. Compared with otherindustrialized
countries there is a lack of knowledge about the Italian situation.
Thispaper has the following aims: provide a first assessment of the
entrepreneurship coursesand curricula in Italian universities and
their recent evolution; discuss the problems andfuture
opportunities of entrepreneurship education in Italian
universities.
3. Data and methodologyThe definition and content of
entrepreneurship education remain controversial. It isstill a
debated question whether entrepreneurship can be considered a
science or anart and to what extent entrepreneurship can be taught
or not.
677
Italianuniversities
-
In this paper, we adopt the following definition:
Entrepreneurial education is theprocess of providing individuals
with the ability to recognise commercial opportunitiesand the
insight, self-esteem, knowledge and skills to act on them. It
includesinstruction in opportunity recognition, commercialising a
concept, marshallingresources in the face of risk, and initiating a
business venture ( Jones and English,2004, p. 416).
The empirical analysis is based on a census of entrepreneurship
courses andcurricula run by Italian universities; we included in
the census all courses andcurricula that explicitly referred to the
issues identified in the previous definition. Theinformation
collected and analysed refers to the academic year 2009-2010. We
alsoprovide a comparison with the situation in the academic year
2003-2004. In so doing wefollow an approach used in other studies
(Nabi and Holden, 2008).
The survey is mainly based on data and information collected
through the internet.We have taken advantage of the fact that the
information about the curricula offered byItalian universities is
collected and organized in a centralized database by the
ItalianMinistry of Education and Scientific Research. The database
is publicly availableand allows a search by keywords. Once a course
or a curriculum was identified, weused the internet to collect
additional information about it. The internet source isappropriate
for the aim of this study as all Italian universities supply
information ontheir curricula and courses through this medium. All
universities give basicinformation about the courses on their web
site, and most of them also supply detailedinformation about the
content of the courses. The information was collected in 2004
forcourses run in the academic year 2003-2004. This academic year
was chosen as itcoincides with the full implementation of the
reformed university curricula. The surveywas repeated in 2010 for
the same courses and curricula run by universities in theacademic
year 2009-2010. In some cases, the internet survey was supplemented
by adirect collection of material on the courses.
This period of analysis is particularly interesting given the
fact that at thebeginning of 2000 the Italian university system
experienced a complete reorganizationof students curricula. With
the exception of medicine and architecture, which retaineda
curriculum of six and five years, respectively, in all the other
fields curricula arebased on a three-year first degree (Laurea
Triennale) and a two-year postgraduatedegree (Laurea Magistrale).
Universities are also allowed to offer Master courses at theend of
the undergraduate degree (first-level Master) or at the end of the
second-leveldegree (second-level Master)[1]. After completing the 3
2 curriculum students canaccess doctoral programmes.
A common problem of surveys about entrepreneurship courses is
the separation ofcourses and curricula specifically devoted to
entrepreneurship from those referring,more generally, to small
business or innovation. In the analysis we included all
thosecourses and curricula that specifically referred to
entrepreneurship. We also retainedcourses and curricula on small
business and the management of innovation when theyhave a
significant part dedicated to entrepreneurship issues.
4. Entrepreneurship education in Italian universitiesTables I
and II show the list of entrepreneurship courses offered in Italian
universitiesin the academic year 2003-2004 at graduate and
postgraduate levels, respectively. Thesame information for the
academic year 2009-2010 is provided in appendices A and
B,respectively. Table III presents a synthesis of that information
by comparing thesituation in the academic year 2003-2004 with the
one in 2009-2010. Given the small
678
ET54,8/9
-
Un
iver
sity
Fac
ult
yC
ours
eti
tle
Cu
rric
ulu
mA
cces
sC
red
its
Ten
ure
Boc
con
iU
niv
ersi
tyE
con
omic
sB
usi
nes
sp
lan
nin
gS
ever
alF
Dan
dP
Gcu
rric
ula
Op
tion
al6
Pro
fess
orL
IUC
C
aste
llan
zaF
ree
Un
iver
sity
Eco
nom
ics
En
trep
ren
eurs
hip
dev
elop
men
tF
Din
man
agem
ent
Op
tion
al5
Pro
fess
or
Pol
yte
chn
icU
niv
ersi
tyof
the
Mar
che
Eco
nom
ics
En
trep
ren
euri
ald
yn
amic
san
db
usi
nes
sp
roje
cts
PG
inm
anag
emen
tC
omp
uls
ory
10P
rofe
ssor
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olog
na
Eco
nom
ics
Bu
sin
ess
pla
nn
ing
PG
inm
anag
emen
t(f
irm
and
inn
ovat
ion
)C
omp
uls
ory
5E
xte
rnal
con
trac
tU
niv
ersi
tyof
Bol
ogn
aE
con
omic
sS
tart
-up
and
smal
lfi
rmm
anag
emen
tP
Gin
man
agem
ent
(fir
man
din
nov
atio
n)
Com
pu
lsor
y5
Ex
tern
alco
ntr
act
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olog
na
Eco
nom
ics
Pri
vat
eeq
uit
yan
dv
entu
reca
pit
alP
Gin
man
agem
ent
(fir
man
din
nov
atio
n)
Com
pu
lsor
y5
Ex
tern
alco
ntr
act
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olog
na
Eco
nom
ics
Man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
nP
Gin
man
agem
ent
(fir
man
din
nov
atio
n)
Com
pu
lsor
y5
Pro
fess
or
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olog
na
En
gin
eeri
ng
Sta
rt-u
pla
ba
FD
man
agem
ent
eng
inee
rin
gO
pti
onal
6E
xte
rnal
con
trac
tU
niv
ersi
tyof
Bol
ogn
a(F
orl`
)E
con
omic
sE
ntr
epre
neu
rsh
ipP
Gin
man
agem
ent
Com
pu
lsor
y4
Pro
fess
orU
niv
ersi
tyof
Flo
ren
ceE
con
omic
sE
ntr
epre
neu
rial
star
t-u
pP
Gin
Fir
ms
gov
ern
ance
Com
pu
lsor
y6
Pro
fess
orU
niv
ersi
tyof
Mod
ena
and
Reg
gio
Em
ilia
Eco
nom
ics
Sta
rt-u
pan
dd
evel
opm
ent
offi
rms
PG
inm
anag
emen
tan
dco
nsu
ltin
gC
omp
uls
ory
4P
rofe
ssor
Un
iver
sity
ofP
eru
gia
Eco
nom
ics
An
aly
sis
ofb
usi
nes
sst
art-
up
PG
inm
anag
emen
tof
firm
sri
sks
Com
pu
lsor
y6
na
Un
iver
sity
ofU
rbin
oE
con
omic
sE
ntr
epre
neu
rsh
ipan
dsm
all
firm
sF
Din
man
agem
ent
(en
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
smal
lfi
rms)
Com
pu
lsor
y5
Ex
tern
alco
ntr
act
Un
iver
sity
ofU
rbin
oE
con
omic
sB
usi
nes
sst
art-
up
FD
inm
anag
emen
t(e
ntr
epre
neu
rsh
ipan
dsm
all
firm
s)O
pti
onal
5E
xte
rnal
con
trac
tU
niv
ersi
tyof
Nap
les
En
gin
eeri
ng
Man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
nF
Din
man
ager
ial
eng
inee
rin
gO
pti
onal
na
Pro
fess
or
Notes:
FD
,fir
std
egre
e(t
hre
e-y
ear
firs
td
egre
eor
Lau
rea
);P
G,p
ostg
rad
uat
ed
egre
e(t
wo-
yea
rp
ostg
rad
uat
ed
egre
eco
urs
eor
Lau
rea
mag
istr
ale
).aT
his
isn
ota
real
cou
rse
bu
ta
lab
orat
ory
acti
vit
yto
assi
stst
ud
ents
ind
evel
opin
ga
bu
sin
ess
pla
n
Table I.Italian universities
offering entrepreneurshipcourses (2003-2004)
679
Italianuniversities
-
number of courses, no statistical analyses have been carried
out, but only a qualitativeanalysis of their content and their
position within the curriculum was made.
Concerning the first academic year analysed (2003-2004), only a
few universities inItaly offered entrepreneurship courses, when
there were researchers interested in thefield. Most of them
(Bologna, Ancona, Urbino, Modena and Reggio Emilia) are locatedin
the so called third Italy, i.e. that part of Italy dominated by
small firms. Theonly university located in the southern part of the
country offering a course onthe management of innovation is the
University of Naples. Only the Universities ofBologna and Urbino
offered more than one course in entrepreneurship. Theseuniversities
had curricula specifically dedicated to entrepreneurship or
innovation.
University Faculty Curriculum title Level Students
Startingyear
PolytechnicUniversity of theMarche
Economics Entrepreneurship andmanagement ofinnovation
Master (oneyear)
15 (degree inmanagement andengineering)
2003
University ofNaples II
Economics Entrepreneurship andinnovation
PhDprogramme(three years)
4 2002
Table II.Universities offeringa curriculum
inentrepreneurship(2003-2004)
Schools2003-2004 2009-2010
Businessand
economics Engineering Other Total
Businessand
economics Engineering Other Total
CoursesCourses inentrepreneurship 9 9 28 2 1 31Courses
inmanagement ofinnovation 2 1 3 32 13 45Courses in businessplanning
4 1 5 8 1 9Total 15 2 17 68 15 2 85CurriculaEntrepreneurship
andmarket 1 1Entrepreneurship andinnovation 2 2Total 3 3Master and
PhDMaster inentrepreneurship 1 1 4 4Master in innovation 5 2 7PhD
inentrepreneurship 1 1Total 2 2 9 2 11
Table III.Entrepreneurshipeducation in Italianuniversities
680
ET54,8/9
-
In the case of Bologna it was a two-year postgraduate course in
management with acurriculum called Firm and innovation. In Urbino
there was a specific curriculumwithin a three-year first degree
called Entrepreneurship and small firms. In all othercases
entrepreneurship courses were part of curricula in general
management.
Looking at the content of the courses, most of them were
dedicated to the variousaspects of start-up: how to develop a
business plan and how to raise funds. Twocourses were dedicated to
the management of innovation in existing firms, withspecific
emphasis on the development of new ventures. Only three courses
dealt withthe general aspects of entrepreneurship, from its role in
the economy to the specificityof entrepreneurship as opposed to
management. However, even these courses devoteda significant amount
of time to business planning.
Above all, three aspects characterized entrepreneurship courses
in Italianuniversities in 2003-2004:
(1) they were present almost exclusively in economics and
management faculties;
(2) their main focus was on the start-up of new businesses;
and
(3) their main aim was to transfer knowledge and competences to
the developmentof the business plan.
Only two universities offered a specific curriculum in
entrepreneurship. MarchePolytechnic University (Ancona) started a
first level Master programme inEntrepreneurship and management of
innovation in 2003. It was addressed tostudents with a first degree
(three-year course) in management or engineering. Despitethe title,
within the curriculum there were just a few modules addressing
specific issuesassociated with entrepreneurship (management of
innovation, business planning). Therest of the Master was organized
around traditional management functions (strategy,marketing,
finance, accounting, etc.).
The PhD programme in Entrepreneurship and innovation at the
University ofNaples II appeared to be the only one specifically
devoted to the subject during theacademic year 2003-2004. This PhD
programme was not confirmed in the following years.
The situation changed during the second half of the decade.
Compared with thesituation in 2003-2004, in the academic year
2009-2010 there was a significant increasein courses and in the
number of schools offering entrepreneurship courses both
atundergraduate and graduate levels. However, the main issue of
these coursescontinues to be the management of innovation rather
than entrepreneurship as such[2](see Table III).
Only a few universities offer a specific curriculum on
entrepreneurship. LUISSUniversity (Rome) provides a curriculum in
Entrepreneurship and market within thefirst degree in economics and
business. The University of Valle DAosta offers a firstdegree in
Entrepreneurial development of tourism districts; the Universities
of Bolzanoand the University of Molise offer postgraduate degrees
in Entrepreneurship andinnovation. The other courses in
entrepreneurship, management of innovation andbusiness planning are
offered by economics and engineering schools within theirgeneral
first degrees or postgraduate degrees. Apart from the latter
schools, the Schoolof Sport and Exercise Science at the University
of Verona offers a laboratory ofentrepreneurship, while the School
of Political Science at the University of Milanprovides a course in
business planning.
The proportion of courses in entrepreneurship and innovation
offered by businessand economics schools[3] and engineering schools
remained almost the same during
681
Italianuniversities
-
this period. In academic year 2003-2004, 13 courses were offered
by eight schools ofeconomics v. two courses offered by two schools
of engineering. In academic year 2009-2010, 68 courses were offered
by 42 schools of economics v. 15 courses offered by nineschools of
engineering.
Concerning the Master programmes, Table III shows that there was
a significantincrease in the supply of curricula during the
observed period. However, these Mastersare proposed mainly by
schools of economics, and most of them refer to themanagement of
innovation. Only the University of Bologna and the University
ofBolzano propose a Master in Innovation within engineering
faculties.
5. DiscussionThe limited presence of entrepreneurship courses
and curricula in Italian universitiesdoes not mean that the issue
of entrepreneurship is completely neglected in theiractivities.
Recognizing the importance of favouring entrepreneurship, several
Italianuniversities have started a number of extra-curricular
initiatives dedicated to stimulatingthe start-up of new firms,
especially among students and researchers. The mostwidespread
activity in this area is the organization of business plan
competitions. Withinthese competitions courses on business planning
are normally offered. In all cases theseinitiatives and courses
continue to be outside the official university curricula[4].
The reasons for the scanty presence of entrepreneurship courses
and curricula inItalian universities and their slow growth after
the university reform that started in2001 can be analysed by
referring to the two sides of the market: demand and supply.We
think that in the Italian situation the latter factor is definitely
more important thanthe former. Moreover, we also believe that the
actual supply of courses and curriculadoes not always respond to
the demand for entrepreneurial competences not only inquantitative
but also in qualitative terms. The slow pace with which
Italianuniversities are following the global trend in the
development of entrepreneurshipcourses and curricula depends on two
main factors related to the supply side: thepresence of a cultural
tradition that does not favour entrepreneurship education, andthe
rigidity of the Italian university system when changing courses and
curricula.
As regards the cultural traditions prevailing in the Italian
university system, the onethat has the greatest impact is the
separation between theoretical and practicalknowledge, the former
being considered superior to the latter. Universities are the
placeswhere theoretical knowledge is developed and transmitted,
with less attention paid to itspractical use. This is reflected not
only in the content of courses but also in the teachingmethodology
which is almost exclusively based on lectures (ex cathedra) with
littleconsideration for the active role of students. This situation
is somewhat different inengineering faculties, given their
technical orientation. In Italy, the distinction betweentheoretical
and practical knowledge regards not only each discipline but is
alsoassociated with the difference between the humanities and
technical and scientificsubjects, as the former is considered
superior because of the more practical orientation ofthe latter[5].
The pre-eminence given to theoretical rather than practical
knowledge andthe association of the former with the humanities is
responsible for the diffidencetowards new fields of knowledge,
especially when they have a practical orientation andare not easily
reconciled with the codified branches of knowledge.
Besides these general reasons, another important factor is the
rigidity of the Italianacademic system, resulting from its strict
definition of the content of scientific fieldsand the codification
of scientific sectors within which courses and curricula
aredesigned. This classification of scientific domains is
officially defined and each
682
ET54,8/9
-
researcher and course must necessarily refer to one of them[6].
The contents of thesesubfields are established at national level by
a ministerial decree and have not beenchanged since 1999. Remaining
within the boundary of a chosen subfield is veryimportant for young
researchers as the recruitment and career system is based onthese
disciplinary fields. Interdisciplinary work receives no incentives,
especially in thecase of young researchers who still have to go
through various stages of their careerthat, with rare exceptions,
will be carried out within the same disciplinary field. Noneof the
disciplinary definitions within economics and business mention the
subject ofentrepreneurship. This does not exclude the possibility
for academics belonging tothese fields to study entrepreneurship
but it exposes young researchers to the riskof investing in a
non-recognized field.
Until the application of the new curricular system in 2001, not
only disciplinaryfields but also the names of courses and curricula
were defined at national level. Thisexcluded any possibility of
introducing entrepreneurship courses that were included aspossible
subjects. This situation changed with the application of the
reform. Since2001, universities have been free to choose the names
of curricula and courses.However, for the latter, the disciplinary
field it belongs to must be indicated as this isimportant to
identify the academics who can run them.
Since entrepreneurship is an interdisciplinary field, it does
not come as a surprisethat the courses on this subject offered in
Italian universities belong to differentdisciplinary subfields of
management and economics. Some of them also belong to thefield of
managerial engineering. As long as the system retains this rigid
definition of,and separation between, disciplinary fields it will
be difficult for entrepreneurship tobecame a recognized field for
research and teaching.
One of the factors explaining the scanty presence of
entrepreneurship courses inengineering and science curricula is
that schools do not have a tradition of co-operationin organizing
university curricula. As a result, schools lacking competences in
thisfield (as is the case of engineering and other scientific
schools) are reluctant to acquirethem from other schools.
To summarize, on the supply side, the main obstacles to increase
courses inentrepreneurship offered by Italian universities are: (a)
centralization andorganizational inertia of the higher education
system; (b) diffidence about practicalknowledge in higher
education; c) only few academics are committed to the subject;
(d)lack of co-operation between schools[7].
On the demand side, a factor that determines the low presence of
entrepreneurshipcourses could be the result of a cultural bias of
Italian university students:most graduate students get degrees in
humanities and attend university with the aimof starting a career
in the public sector or as a professional. According to the
latestdata provided by the Italian Statistics Agency (ISTAT), in
the academic year2009-2010, 44.3 per cent of the students got their
first degree in humanities, comparedwith 41.1 per cent in
scientific fields and 14.6 in economics and statistics.
Moreover,within the scientific fields about half of the graduates
belong to the sectors of medicine,pharmacy and architecture that
are traditionally oriented towards professional careers.
As far as the aims and contents of entrepreneurship courses are
concerned, therecent trend and present situation in Italian
universities raise two main issues:
(1) the role of education as opposed to training; and
(2) the adequacy of university courses to address the needs of
the economicsystem and the changes in entrepreneurial and
management models.
683
Italianuniversities
-
With regard to point (a), the prevalence of courses on business
planning seem tooshort-term oriented, i.e. stimulating the start-up
of firms, rather than addressing amore long-term aim of raising the
entrepreneurship awareness and capabilities ofindividuals. For this
reason some university courses overlap with the
proliferatinginitiatives of other private and publics institutions
(such as chambers of commerce,local authorities and business
associations) dedicated to entrepreneurship training,that typically
focus on business planning skills.
Together with developing specific skills for business start-up,
entrepreneurshipeducation in universities, especially those at
first degree level, should pursue thefollowing objectives:
(1) enhance knowledge about the phenomenon of entrepreneurship
and its role inthe economic system and in society as a whole;
(2) favour a positive attitude to entrepreneurship and, in turn,
to promoteentrepreneurship as a useful and respectable career
prospect for graduates;and
(3) develop those competences, like relational and leadership
competences, thatcan contribute to the development of
entrepreneurship.
Specifically, by referring to Johannissons (1991) taxonomy,
educational programmeson entrepreneurship should aim at developing
the following levels of learning:
. entrepreneurial attitudes, values and motivation;
. ability to develop networks and relational skills in
general;
. creativeness and intuition; and
. knowledge of institutional facts about entrepreneurship.
In a more general perspective, entrepreneurship education should
help studentsincrease their entrepreneurship awareness and enlarge
their perception and vision ofsocial and institutional facts. At a
more advanced level (Master and postgraduatecourses) students can
acquire the technical abilities (use and scope) for the
evaluationof new business opportunities and for new venture
creation. At present, only a fewcourses reflect these contents and
aims.
In our opinion, the construction of an educational model for
university coursesrequires to avoid any mechanistic type of
teaching that gives only techniques andignores the entrepreneurial
attitude of students. According to Gibb (1993) teachingmethods
should not just transfer knowledge, but contribute to the
developing ofentrepreneurial skills and attitudes. The author
suggests to adopt a focus on lifeexperience, on action
(pragmatic/intuitive mode) and on ideas (reflexive/intuitivemode).
Action learning, learning by doing, learning by experience,
learning bymistakes represent the paradigm to build up a teaching
method that improves onesattitude in problem solving and fosters
students entrepreneurial skills.
In addition to stimulating an entrepreneurial career in
university students, we arealso convinced that entrepreneurship
education should aim at a more general change inthe entrepreneurial
attitudes and culture of small Italian firms. Italy is
characterized bythe presence of small firms. The main problem for
those firms is that they are notoriented towards innovation and
growth. The question is not just stimulating start-upand
self-employment but also orienting new entrepreneurs towards
businesses withhigher risks and higher growth potential.
684
ET54,8/9
-
Evidence from entrepreneurship courses reveals that they fail to
address theseproblems. They pay little attention to developing
transversal competences (likerelational competences) while focusing
on technical skills. One of the transversalcompetences which should
be largely developed to solve the problem of thedimensional trap of
small Italian firms is the psychological attitude towards risk.The
entrepreneurship courses in Italian universities seem more oriented
towardsstimulating student self-employment rather than proposing
new social and economicroles for the entrepreneur. A modification
in the latter direction would be helpful in twoways: first, it
would contribute to the long-term change in the cultural attitude
ofentrepreneurs; second, it could develop a pro-active attitude of
managers andemployees within existing firms.
A further reason for the scarce presence of entrepreneurship
courses in Italianuniversities and for their orientation towards
self-employment could be related to thewidespread belief that
entrepreneurship is not a set of learnable skills but rather
apersonality trait, and therefore impossible to transfer by
teaching. Empirical researchshows that entrepreneurial competences
(not associated with functional skills) areacquired through
experience, where informal mechanisms, long-term relationships
andfirm-specific competences prevail. However, entrepreneurship
education could play arole in promoting these competences by
focusing on psychological, behavioural andrelational
competences[8].
Besides the content of entrepreneurship courses,
entrepreneurship education shouldbe aware of, and address, the
present needs of the Italian economic system. The
Italianentrepreneurial system is characterized by the following
weaknesses (Minniti, 1999):
(1) Italy has one of the lowest entrepreneurial rates among
innovation orientedcountries, and declining during the last decade
(Kelley et al., 2011);
(2) after start-up, firms tend to remain small, rather than
pursuing rapid grow;
(3) the latter feature is also the result of the pervasive
family ownership andcontrol in small firms; and
(4) new businesses are concentrated in traditional sectors while
there are too fewstart-ups in high-tech sectors.
One of the ways to stimulate start-ups in high-tech sectors
could be by spreadingentrepreneurship courses in engineering and
science faculties. Even in this case theyshould not be exclusively
focused on business plan development (entrepreneurshipskills) but
rather on enhancing entrepreneurship attitudes and awarenessamong
students. The aim of stimulating start-ups could be better
fulfilled bypostgraduate training programmes and structures, such
as business plancompetitions, incubators, etc., which can be
addressed to more specific targets andbe focused on specific
fields.
Entrepreneurship education in scientific and technical schools
could play a specificrole in promoting academic spin-offs and their
growth prospects. Since 2003, there hasbeen an increasing spread in
this phenomenon in Italian universities and other publicresearch
institutions. An analysis of the survival and growth of Italian
spin-offs hasidentified two main problems: the imbalance of the
sponsor team towards technicalskills and the lack of
entrepreneurial figures. The lack of personnel with
managementskills could be balanced by recruiting staff with
appropriate characteristics. On thecontrary, what cannot be
balanced is the motivation for entrepreneurship, since it is
685
Italianuniversities
-
closely connected with the motivation of the promoters
(Iacobucci et al., 2011).Entrepreneurship education could play a
decisive role in fostering the number ofspin-offs and their
growth.
6. ConclusionsThe economic slowdown experienced by many
industrialized countries hasre-evaluated the role of
entrepreneurship in promoting economic growth. As aresult there has
been an increase in research on entrepreneurship and the
developmentof a wide array of policies and measures to promote and
support entrepreneurship.Among these measures there is the
diffusion of entrepreneurship education andtraining.
The aim of this paper was to analyse the recent trend and
present situation ofentrepreneurship education in Italian
universities. We conducted our study startingwith the premise that
entrepreneurship is something that can be stimulated andlearned.
Moreover, literature provides evidence of the positive relationship
betweenentrepreneurship education and the number of venture
start-ups.
The empirical analysis highlights several weaknesses in the
present situation ofentrepreneurship education in Italy:
. The development of entrepreneurship courses is a recent
phenomenon, almostabsent until 2000.
. The diffusion of entrepreneurship courses in recent years has
mainly involvedfaculties of business and economics. This is due to
a supply side bias as inthese schools there are academics who have
skills to teach entrepreneurship.On the contrary entrepreneurship
courses are more effective and needed intechnological and
scientific schools.
. Another weakness concerns the content of the courses:
entrepreneurshipeducation can include start-up technicalities but
also the development ofpersonal attributes and skills that form the
basis of an entrepreneurial mind setand behaviour: creativity,
sense of initiative, risk-taking, autonomy, self-confidence,
leadership, team spirit, etc. Entrepreneurship education should
raisethe awareness of students about entrepreneurship as a possible
career optionsbesides providing specific business skills and
knowledge on how to start acompany and run it successfully.
The role of universities in this context is to develop new
knowledge and methodologiesfor teaching and carrying out research
on entrepreneurship rather than simply startinga course. One
possible solution could be to establish entrepreneurship centres
that canbe hubs within the universities for research and teaching
in the entrepreneurship field.Indeed, we think that
entrepreneurship courses are more effective when they areincluded
in a set of actions and measures (like the creation of industrial
liaison offices,incubators, etc.) developed inside and outside the
university to promote entrepreneurialculture and foster start-ups
by former students.
Up to a few years ago, the entrepreneurial courses offered in
Italian universitieswere more a result of the individual initiative
of researchers and professors rather thana deliberate strategy of
their member institutions. This is a problem because one of
theconditions to foster the entrepreneurial spirit through
entrepreneurship education isthat this has to be the result of a
strategy and a collective effort not only by universityinstitutions
but which also involves other neighbouring institutions.
686
ET54,8/9
-
The non-systematic way in which most of the attempts at
developingentrepreneurial education were developed within Italian
universities makes itdifficult to evaluate their results. We are
convinced that a major role ofentrepreneurship education, as
previously suggested, might affect entrepreneurialattitudes and
motivations of university students and, as a result, raise the
quantity andquality of entrepreneurs especially in high-tech
sectors. However, we cannot drawconclusions about the most
effective ways to obtain these results, given the specificityof the
Italian situation. Further empirical research should be addressed
to single outthe most important and long-standing experiments in
entrepreneurship education andto evaluate their results in terms of
new venture creation and development. Thisevaluation should take
into consideration not just the number of new
entrepreneurialventures but also their quality in terms of sector
of activity and value creation. Ourresearch agenda includes the
above-mentioned analysis as well as a more thoroughanalysis of the
content of entrepreneurial courses and its relation with the
developedentrepreneurial skills and competences.
Notes
1. Before the reform, Masters were not recognized as part of the
official curricula offered byItalian universities. Master courses
(especially in the field of management) were (and are)offered by a
large number of private and public institutions, sometimes
associated withuniversities. The reform has not changed this
situation. In order to distinguish the Mastercourses offered by
universities from those offered by other institutions, the former
are calledUniversity Masters. Unlike other Master courses, that
have no regulation whatsoever,University Masters are subject to
some general rules set down by the law: for example, theyrequire a
one-year workload.
2. Appendix 1 provides a full table of courses, faculties and
curricula.
3. In Italy, economics and business are traditionally offered
within the same school. Forsimplicity, the term school of economics
will be used to refer to schools of business andeconomics.
4. As a result of a specific act issued in 1999, during the last
decade Italian universities havepaid increasing attention in
promoting and sustaining academic spin-offs (Iacobucci et
al.,2011).
5. The high school which is still considered the best within the
high school curricula is theClassical Lyceum where preeminence is
given to classical humanities (ancient Greek,Latin, literature and
arts). Despite its name, even in the Scientific Lyceum there is
apreeminence of humanities (Latin, philosophy and history) over
scientific subjects. Technicalschools, called Industrial Technical
Institutes, although normally considered good schoolsto achieve a
technical background, were traditionally considered not suitable
for universityentry. Until 1968 only students from the two lyceums
were allowed access to universities.
6. As an example, the field of economics and business is divided
into 13 subfields spanningfrom political economy (01) to
econometrics (05), accounting (07), finance (09), etc.
7. This situation is expected to change after the introduction
of a recent reform (2010) that isexpected to produce substantial
changes in the organization of Italian universities. One of themain
changes is the increased role of departments in the organization of
research andteaching activities and the abolition of schools. At
present there is no evidence whether thiswill or will not favour
more disciplinary interchanges in the design of university
curricula.
8. Concerning this point of view, Gorman and Hanlon reported,
[y] most of the empiricalstudies surveyed indicated that
entrepreneurship can be taught, or at least encouraged,
byentrepreneurship education (Gorman et al., 1997, p. 63).
687
Italianuniversities
-
References
Acs, Z.J., Carlsson, B. and Karlsson, C. (1999),
Entrepreneurship, Small and Medium-SizedEnterprises and the
Macroeconomy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Acs, Z.J., Desai, S. and Hessels, J. (2008), Entrepreneurship,
economic development andinstitutions, Small Business Economics,
Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 219-34.
Audretsch, D.B. and Fritsch, M. (2003), Linking entrepreneurship
to growth: the case of westGermany, Industry and Innovation, Vol.
10 No. 1, pp. 65-73.
Audretsch, D.B. and Thurik, A.R. (Eds) (1999), Innovation,
Industry Evolution and Employment,Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Cheng, M.Y., Chan, W.S. and Mahmood, A. (2009), The
effectiveness of entrepreneurshipeducation in Malaysia, Education
Training, Vol. 51 No. 7, pp. 555-66.
Corduras Martinez, A., Levie, J., Kelley, D.J., Saemundsson,
R.J. and Schott, T. (2010), A GlobalPerpective on Entrepreneurship
Education and Training, GERA, Babson College, BabsonPark, MA.
Cotoi, E., Bodoasca, T., Catana, L. and Cotoi, I. (2011),
Entrepreneurship European developmentstrategy in the field of
education, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 15,pp.
3490-4.
Dana, L.P. (2001), The education and training of entrepreneurs
in Asia, Education Training,Vol. 43 Nos 8/9, pp. 405-15.
Ellison, G. and Glaeser, E.L. (1999), The geographic
concentration of industry: does naturaladvantage explain
agglomeration?, American Economic Review, Vol. 89 No. 2, pp.
311-6.
European Commission (2008), Entrepreneurship in Higher
Education, Especially withinNon-Business Studies. Final Report of
the Expert Group, Enterprise and Industry,Bruxelles.
Frank, H. and Landstrom, H. (1997), Entrepreneurship and small
businesses in Europe economic background and academic
infrastructure, in Landstrom, H., Franck, H. andVeciana, J.M.
(Eds), Entrepreneurship and Small Business Research in Europe,
Avebury,Aldershot, pp. 1-13.
Gibb, A.A. (1993), The enterprise culture and education,
understanding enterprise educationand its links with small business
entrepreneurships and wider educational goals,International Small
Business Management Journal, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 11-34.
Gorman, G., Hanlon, D. and King, W. (1997), Some research
perspectives on entrepreneurshipeducation, enterprise education and
education for small business management: a ten-yearliterature
review, International Small Business Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp.
56-78.
Iacobucci, D., Iacopini, A., Micozzi, A. and Orsini, S. (2011),
Fostering entrepreneurship inacademic spin-offs, International
Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. 12No. 4, pp.
513-33.
Ibrahim, A.B. and Soufani, K. (2002), Entrepreneurship education
and training in Canada: acritical assessment, Education Training,
Vol. 44 Nos 8/9, pp. 421-30.
Ismail, A., Abdullah, A.G.K. and Othman, A.T. (2010), Acceptance
of entrepreneurship culturemodule at the Malaysian institutes of
higher learning: a gender perspective, ResearchJournal of
International Studies, No. 15, pp. 46-54.
Johannisson, B. (1991), University training for
entrepreneurship: a Swedish approach,Entrepreneurship &
Regional Development, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 67-82.
Jones, C. and English, J. (2004), A contemporary approach to
entrepreneurship education,Education Training, Vol. 46 Nos 8/9, pp.
416-23.
Jones, P., Jones, A., Packham, G. and Miller, C. (2008), Student
attitudes towards enterpriseeducation in Poland: a positive impact,
Education Training, Vol. 50 No. 7, pp. 597-614.
688
ET54,8/9
-
Katz, J.A. (2003), The chronology and intellectual trajectory of
American entrepreneurshipeducation, Journal of Business Venturing,
Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 283-300.
Kelley, D., Bosma, N. and Amoro`s, J.E. (2011), Global
entrepreneurship monitor, 2010 globalreport, Babson College, Babson
Park, MA.
Kuratko, D.F. (2005), The emergence of entrepreneurship
education; development, trends andchallenges, Entrepreneurship
Theory & Practice, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 577-98.
Li, J., Zhang, Y. and Matlay, H. (2003), Entrepreneurship
education in China, Education Training, Vol. 45 Nos 8/9, pp.
495-505.
Mason, C. (2011), Entrepreneurship education and research:
emerging trends and concerns,Journal of Global Entrepreneurship,
Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 13-25.
Matlay, H. (2008), The impact of entrepreneurship education on
entrepreneurial outcomes,Journal of Small Business and Enterprise
Development, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 382-96.
Menzies, T.V. and Paradi, J.C. (2003), Entrepreneurship
education and engineering students career path and business
performance, The International Journal of Entrepreneurshipand
Innovation, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 121-32.
Minniti, M. (1999), Global entrepreneurship monitor, executive
report, NationalEntrepreneurship Assessment, The W. F. Glavin
Center for Global EntrepreneurialLeadership, Babson College, Babson
Park, MA.
Mitra, J. and Matlay, H. (2004), Entrepreneurial and vocational
education and training:lessons from Eastern and Central Europe,
Industry and Higher Education, Vol. 18 No. 1,pp. 53-62.
Nabi, G. and Holden, R. (2008), Graduate entrepreneurship:
intention, education and training,Education Training, Vol. 50 No.
7, pp. 545-51.
OECD (2001), Drivers of Growth: Information Technology,
Innovation and Entrepreneurship.Science, Technology and Industry
Outlook, special edition OECD.
Packham, G., Jones, P., Miller, C., Pickernell, D. and Thomas,
B. (2010), Attitudes towardsentrepreneurship education: a
comparative analysis, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice,Vol.
52 Nos 8/9, pp. 568-86.
Reynolds, P. (1994), Autonomous firm dynamics and economic
growth in the United States,1986-1990, Regional Studies, Vol. 28
No. 4, pp. 429-42.
Smith, A.J., Collins, L.A. and Hannon, P.D. (2006), Embedding
new entrepreneurshipprogrammes in UK higher education institutions:
challenges and considerations,Education Training, Vol. 48 Nos 8/9,
pp. 555-67.
Solomon, G. (2007), An examination of entrepreneurship education
in the United States, Journalof Small Business and Enterprise
Development, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 168-82.
Ucbasaran, D., Westhead, P. and Wright, M. (2001), The focus of
entrepreneurial research:contextual and process issues,
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 25 No. 4,pp. 57-80.
Vesper, K.H. (1982), Research on education for entrepreneurship,
in Kent, C.A., Sexton, D.L. andVesper, K.H. (Eds), Encyclopedia of
Entrepreneurship, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,pp.
321-43.
Vesper, K.H. and Gartner, W.B. (1997), Measuring progress in
entrepreneurship education,Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 12
No. 5, pp. 403-21.
Walter, S.G. and Dohse, D. (2009), The interplay between
entrepreneurship education andregional knowledge potential in
forming entrepreneurial intentions, Kiel Working paperNo. 1549,
Kiel, pp. 1-37.
Wennekers, S. and Thurik, A.R. (1999), Linking entrepreneurship
and economic growth, SmallBusiness Economics, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp.
27-55.
689
Italianuniversities
-
Appendix 1
Un
iver
sity
Fac
ult
yC
urr
icu
lum
Cou
rse
titl
e
Lu
iss
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
econ
omic
san
db
usi
nes
s,cu
rric
ulu
men
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
mar
ket
Cor
por
ate
star
t-u
pan
dd
evel
opm
ent
Un
iver
sity
ofF
lore
nce
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
man
agem
ent
Lab
orat
ory
co
mp
any
star
t-u
p
Boc
con
iU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inm
anag
emen
tE
ntr
epre
neu
rial
val
ues
and
man
ager
ial
beh
avio
ur
Del
San
nio
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
scie
nce
PG
inb
usi
nes
sec
onom
ics
En
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
fost
erin
gof
new
com
pan
ies
Lu
iss
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
econ
omic
san
db
usi
nes
s,cu
rric
ulu
men
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
mar
ket
En
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
ven
ture
cap
ital
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olza
no
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
man
agem
ent
ofto
uri
sm,
spor
tan
dev
ents
En
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
dev
elop
men
tof
SM
Es
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olza
no
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
entr
epre
neu
rsh
ipan
din
nov
atio
nE
ntr
epre
neu
rsh
ipA
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olza
no
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
entr
epre
neu
rsh
ipan
din
nov
atio
nE
ntr
epre
neu
rsh
ipB
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olza
no
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
entr
epre
neu
rsh
ipan
din
nov
atio
nS
ocia
len
trep
ren
eurs
hip
Lu
ic-C
aste
llan
zaF
ree
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
bu
sin
ess
econ
omic
s,cu
rric
ulu
mm
anag
emen
tE
du
cati
onto
entr
epre
neu
rsh
ip
Lu
ic-C
aste
llan
zaF
ree
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
bu
sin
ess
law
and
econ
omic
sE
du
cati
onto
entr
epre
neu
rsh
ip
Lu
ic-C
aste
llan
zaF
ree
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
econ
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tE
ntr
epre
neu
rial
stra
teg
y
Cat
toli
caU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inm
ark
etan
dst
rate
gy
En
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
man
agem
ent
ofS
ME
san
dn
op
rofi
tco
mp
anie
sJo
hn
Cab
otU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inb
usi
nes
sad
min
istr
atio
nIn
trod
uct
ion
toen
trep
ren
eurs
hip
(con
tinu
ed)
Table AI.Italian universitiesoffering courses inentrepreneurship
andrelated fields, 2009-2010
690
ET54,8/9
-
Un
iver
sity
Fac
ult
yC
urr
icu
lum
Cou
rse
titl
e
Joh
nC
abot
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
bu
sin
ess
adm
inis
trat
ion
En
trep
ren
euri
alm
anag
emen
t
Un
iver
sity
ofF
lore
nce
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
man
agem
ent
En
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
inn
ovat
ion
(I)
Un
iver
sity
ofF
lore
nce
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
man
agem
ent
En
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
inn
ovat
ion
(II)
Un
iver
sity
ofM
olis
eB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inen
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
inn
ovat
ion
Eco
nom
ics
ofin
nov
atio
n,
entr
epre
neu
rsh
ipan
dS
ME
sU
niv
ersi
tyof
Bol
ogn
aB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inec
onom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
ofco
oper
ativ
ean
dn
op
rofi
tco
mp
anie
sS
ocia
len
trep
ren
eurs
hip
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olog
na
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
man
agem
ent
En
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
tool
sto
dev
elop
an
ewco
mp
any
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olog
na
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
econ
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tM
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
and
entr
epre
neu
rsh
ipU
niv
ersi
tyof
Cas
sin
oB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inm
anag
emen
tan
dco
rpor
ate
fin
ance
Cre
ativ
eec
onom
ics
and
entr
epre
neu
rsh
ip
Un
iver
sity
ofC
atan
iaB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inm
anag
emen
tE
ntr
epre
neu
rsh
ip,s
tart
-up
san
db
usi
nes
sp
lan
nin
gT
orV
erg
ata
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
econ
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tS
tart
-up
san
den
trep
ren
eurs
hip
Un
iver
sity
ofS
aler
no
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
econ
omic
sS
tart
-up
and
man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
ativ
eco
mp
anie
sU
niv
ersi
tyof
Val
leD
aos
taB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
FD
inen
trep
ren
euri
ald
evel
opm
ent
ofto
uri
smd
istr
icts
En
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
tou
rism
Un
iver
sity
ofU
rbin
oB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inm
ark
etin
gan
dco
mm
un
icat
ion
En
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
SM
Es
Un
iver
sity
ofU
rbin
oB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inec
onom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
En
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
SM
Es
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olog
na
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
econ
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tS
trat
egic
con
trol
ofin
nov
ativ
eco
mp
anie
san
dst
art-
up
(con
tinu
ed)
Table AI.
691
Italianuniversities
-
Un
iver
sity
Fac
ult
yC
urr
icu
lum
Cou
rse
titl
e
Del
San
nio
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
Eco
nom
icS
cien
ceP
Gin
bu
sin
ess
econ
omic
sE
con
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
Lu
iss
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
bu
sin
ess
econ
omic
s,cu
rric
ulu
mm
ark
etin
gE
con
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
Lu
iss
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
econ
omic
s,m
ark
et,
fin
anci
alb
rok
er,
curr
icu
lum
pol
itic
alec
onom
ics
Eco
nom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
nL
uis
sU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
FD
inec
onom
ics
and
bu
sin
ess,
curr
icu
lum
entr
epre
neu
rsh
ipan
dm
ark
etM
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
Lu
iss
Un
iver
sity
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
econ
omic
san
db
usi
nes
s,cu
rric
ulu
men
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
mar
ket
Eco
nom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
nL
uis
sU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
FD
inec
onom
ics
and
bu
sin
ess,
curr
icu
lum
e-b
usi
nes
san
dm
anag
emen
tof
info
rmat
ion
syst
ems
Eco
nom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
nan
dn
etw
ork
sU
niv
ersi
tyof
Bol
zan
oB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inen
trep
ren
eurs
hip
and
inn
ovat
ion
Inn
ovat
ion
man
agem
ent
Lu
ic-
Cas
tell
anza
Fre
eU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inb
usi
nes
sec
onom
ics,
curr
icu
lum
econ
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tIn
nov
atio
nan
dp
rod
uct
dev
elop
men
t
Cat
toli
caU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inm
ark
etan
dst
rate
gy
Inn
ovat
ion
,b
ran
dan
dli
cen
ce
Un
iver
sity
ofF
lore
nce
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
man
agem
ent
Lab
orat
ory
in
nov
atio
n
Boc
con
iU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
FD
inb
usi
nes
sec
onom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
Man
agem
ent
ofte
chn
olog
y,in
nov
atio
nan
dop
erat
ion
sU
niv
ersi
tyof
Cag
liar
iB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inm
anag
emen
tE
con
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tof
tech
nol
ogic
alin
nov
atio
nU
niv
ersi
tyof
Insu
bri
aB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
FD
inec
onom
ics,
curr
icu
lum
inec
onom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
Man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
n
Un
iver
sity
ofB
erg
amo
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
bu
sin
ess
econ
omic
sM
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
and
pro
ject
sI
and
II(e
ntr
epre
neu
rsh
ip)
Un
iver
sity
ofP
adov
aB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
FD
inec
onom
ics
and
man
agem
ent,
curr
icu
lum
inte
rnat
ion
alec
onom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
Eco
nom
ics
ofn
etw
ork
san
dm
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
(con
tinu
ed)
Table AI.
692
ET54,8/9
-
Un
iver
sity
Fac
ult
yC
urr
icu
lum
Cou
rse
titl
e
Un
iver
sity
ofP
avia
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
econ
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tM
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
Un
iver
sity
ofP
eru
gia
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
bu
sin
ess
econ
omic
sE
con
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
Un
iver
sity
ofP
eru
gia
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sF
Din
econ
omic
san
dco
rpor
ate
law
Eco
nom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
nU
niv
ersi
tyof
Per
ug
iaB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
FD
infi
nan
cial
econ
omic
sE
con
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
Un
iver
sity
ofP
eru
gia
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
man
agem
ent
Man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
n
Un
iver
sity
ofP
eru
gia
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
fin
ance
and
stat
isti
csM
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
Un
iver
sity
ofP
eru
gia
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
econ
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tM
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
La
Sap
ien
zaU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
FD
inec
onom
ics,
fin
ance
and
corp
orat
ela
wM
anag
emen
t,in
nov
atio
nan
din
tern
atio
nal
izat
ion
La
Sap
ien
zaU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inec
onom
ics
Man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
n
Tor
Ver
gat
aU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
FD
inec
onom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
Eco
nom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
nU
niv
ersi
tyof
Sal
ern
oB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inec
onom
ics
and
inn
ovat
ion
man
agem
ent
Man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
n
Un
iver
sity
ofT
orin
oB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inec
onom
ics
Eco
nom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
nU
niv
ersi
tyof
Ver
ona
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
man
agem
ent
Lea
der
ship
and
inn
ovat
ion
man
agem
ent
Un
iver
sity
ofM
acer
ata
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
man
agem
ent
Eco
nom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
nU
niv
ersi
tyof
Tri
este
Bu
sin
ess
and
econ
omic
sP
Gin
econ
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
Man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
n
(con
tinu
ed)
Table AI.
693
Italianuniversities
-
Un
iver
sity
Fac
ult
yC
urr
icu
lum
Cou
rse
titl
e
Un
iver
sity
ofT
ries
teB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
infi
nan
cial
mar
ket
san
din
nov
atio
nM
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
Un
iver
sity
ofM
oden
aan
dR
egg
ioE
mil
iaB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inm
anag
emen
tB
usi
nes
sp
lan
nin
g
Un
iver
sity
ofM
oden
aan
dR
egg
ioE
mil
iaB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inin
tern
atio
nal
man
agem
ent
Bu
sin
ess
pla
nn
ing
Tor
Ver
gat
aU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inec
onom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
Bu
sin
ess
pla
nn
ing
Un
iver
sity
ofV
enez
iaB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
FD
inb
usi
nes
sec
onom
ics
Cor
por
ate
stra
teg
ies
and
bu
sin
ess
pla
nn
ing
Un
iver
sity
ofT
ries
teB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
inec
onom
ics
and
man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
nB
usi
nes
sp
lan
nin
g
Un
iver
sity
ofT
ries
teB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
PG
infi
nan
cial
mar
ket
san
din
nov
atio
nB
usi
nes
sp
lan
nin
g
Rom
aT
reU
niv
ersi
tyB
usi
nes
san
dec
onom
ics
FD
inm
anag
emen
tB
usi
nes
sp
lan
nin
g
Un
iver
sity
ofC
hie
tiM
anag
emen
tS
cien
ceP
Gin
val
uat
ion
met
hod
s,fo
reca
stan
dco
ntr
olof
soci
al-e
con
omic
syst
ems
Bu
sin
ess
pla
nla
bor
ator
y
Un
iver
sity
ofS
ann
ioE
ng
inee
rin
gP
Gin
eng
inee
rin
gm
anag
emen
tM
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
and
pro
ject
sP
oly
tech
nic
Un
iver
sity
ofM
arch
eE
ng
inee
rin
gP
Gin
auto
mat
ion
eng
inee
rin
gE
con
omic
san
dm
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
Un
iver
sity
ofB
olog
na
En
gin
eeri
ng
PG
inen
gin
eeri
ng
man
agem
ent
Man
agem
ent
ofin
nov
atio
np
roje
cts
Un
iver
sity
ofP
adov
aE
ng
inee
rin
gP
Gin
eng
inee
rin
gm
anag
emen
tM
anag
emen
tof
inn
ovat
ion
and
pro
ject
sU
niv
ersi
tyof
Pal
erm
oE
ng
inee
rin
gP
Gin
eng
inee
rin
gm
anag
emen
tS
tati
stic
alm
eth
ods
for
risk
man
agem
ent
and
inn
ovat
ion
Un
iver
sity
o