Ebookfinal - Com/?p 18396: With-Endogenous-Enterprises-Firms-Markets-And-Organizations-1st-Edition-Daniel-F-Spulber
Ebookfinal - Com/?p 18396: With-Endogenous-Enterprises-Firms-Markets-And-Organizations-1st-Edition-Daniel-F-Spulber
ebookfinal . com/?p=18396
Daniel F. Spulber
Northwestern University
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo, Delhi
A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library
Introduction 1
1 The Consumer 11
1.1 The Intermediation Hypothesis and the Scope of the Firm 12
1.2 Consumer Characteristics 26
1.3 Consumer Cooperation and Transaction Benefits 28
1.4 Consumer Coordination and Transaction Costs 35
1.5 Consumer Organizations and the Separation Criterion 40
1.6 Conclusions 61
2 The Firm 63
2.1 The Separation Criterion 64
2.2 Firms Create and Manage Markets 76
2.3 Firms Create and Manage Organizations 88
2.4 The Development of the Firm 102
2.5 The Social, Legal, and Political Context of the Firm 117
2.6 Conclusions 123
v
vi Contents
12 Conclusion 458
12.1 The Firm 458
12.2 The Entrepreneur 460
viii Contents
References 465
Author Index 503
Subject Index 511
Preface and Acknowledgments
This book presents a general theory of the firm. The Theory of the Firm seeks
to explain (1) why firms exist, (2) how firms are established, and (3) what firms
contribute to the economy. The book addresses the foundations of microeconomics
by making institutions endogenous. In the models presented in the book, the
following are endogenous: entrepreneurs, firms, markets, and organizations.
The general theory of the firm begins with the individual consumer. The charac-
teristics of consumers are the theory’s exogenous data. Consumers can do practically
anything without firms. Consumers can produce goods and services by operating
technology. Consumers can transact directly with each other through bilateral
exchange. Finally, consumers can form organizations such as clubs, buyers’ coop-
eratives, workers’ cooperatives, and basic partnerships.
The firm is an economic institution that differs fundamentally from a consumer
organization. This book introduces a new definition of the firm that is highly useful
in developing the theory: The firm is a transaction institution whose objectives are
separate from those of its owners. Consumer organizations such as clubs and basic
partnerships are not firms. The objectives of consumer organizations cannot be
separated from those of their owners.
Why do firms exist? The Theory of the Firm shows that firms exist only when they
improve the efficiency of economic transactions. The efficiency of firms is compared
to the alternative of direct exchange between consumers. Direct exchange between
consumers involves search, bargaining, barter, and contracts. Direct exchange
between consumers also can involve forming consumer organizations. To be eco-
nomically viable, firms must improve on the efficiency of what consumers can
achieve without firms.
How are firms established? Individual consumers can choose to become
entrepreneurs and establish firms. The Theory of the Firm thus makes the
entrepreneur endogenous in microeconomics. Because entrepreneurs establish
firms, the firm also is endogenous in microeconomics. Entrepreneurs and firms
arise based on the underlying characteristics of consumers who possess the judg-
ment, knowledge, skills, and technology that are needed to set up a firm. Individuals
ix
x Preface and Acknowledgments
provide the effort, investment, and planning that are needed to start up a business.
If firms will enhance economic efficiency, entrepreneurs can earn a return from
establishing a firm.
What do firms contribute to the economy? Firms are institutions that coordi-
nate transactions by acting as intermediaries. Among the many instruments that
firms use to coordinate transactions are two major ones. First, firms intermediate
exchange by creating and operating markets. This makes markets endogenous in
the theory of the firm. Firms create markets by marketing and selling goods and
services, by setting up facilities such as stores and Web sites, and by arranging
exchanges for commodities and financial assets. Firms adjust prices to balance their
purchases and sales and thereby clear markets. Second, firms create and manage
organizations that employ personnel and financial capital; intermediate transac-
tions; internally allocate capital, labor, and resources, and carry out production.
This makes organizations endogenous in the theory of the firm.
The theory of the firm constitutes a unified field with its own set of questions.
The analysis departs from the neoclassical general equilibrium framework that takes
both firms and markets as given exogenously and that does not consider either
entrepreneurs or organizations. The theory of the firm incorporates advances
in the study of firms from industrial organization, contract theory, game theory,
law and economics, institutional economics, the economics of organizations, and
finance.
The general theory of the firm is not based on a specific “silver bullet” theory of
why firms exist. The general theory of the firm includes the full range of transaction
costs, including the absence of a double coincidence of wants, communication costs,
search costs, bargaining costs, moral hazard, adverse selection, contracting costs,
and free riding.
Microeconomics seeks to address the purpose and functions of firms, mar-
kets, and organizations. Understanding why firms exist, how firms are established,
and what firms contribute to the economy is essential to this task. The framework
develops some critical empirical implications that require further investigation. In
addition, the general theory of the firm helps to understand management decision
making. The field of management strategy seeks to develop policies for man-
agers, which require a framework that can evaluate the effectiveness of alternative
strategies.
A general theory of the firm also is useful for teaching economics. Economics
courses, including principles of economics, intermediate microeconomics, and
graduate microeconomics, rarely mention entrepreneurship. In the neoclassical
economics course, firms and markets are given exogenously. Firms lack an explicit
organizational structure and are fully described by their production technology.
Markets are operated by an invisible hand. Students are often perplexed, because
firms are said to be price-takers and yet, at the same time, firms often are said to
adjust prices in response to surpluses or shortages, an obvious contradiction to
price-taking behavior. The theory of the firm contributes to teaching economics
Other documents randomly have
different content
King Kojong of the Late Yi Dynasty of Korea
One of them opened his sack to give his donkey fodder at the
lodging place and he saw his money put on top of his load.
He said to his brothers, “My money has been returned. Look, it is on
top of my load.” Their hearts quaked. Each one looked astonished at
his brother and said, “What is this that God has done to us?”
They came to their father Jacob in the land of Canaan and they
recounted to him everything that had happened to them and said to
him,
“The man, the lord of the land, spoke with us harshly. He considered
us spies of the land.
We said to him, ‘We are upright; we are not spies.
We are twelve brothers, sons of our father, but one is no longer. The
youngest is with our father today in the land of Canaan.’
The man, the lord of the land, said to us, ‘By this I will know that you
are upright: leave one of your brothers with me. Take the produce for
the famished of your households and go.
Then bring your youngest brother to me and I will know that you are
not spies, but that you are upright. I will give back your brother to
you and you can do business in the land.’”
When they were emptying their sacks, there was the money-bag of
each of them on top of their load. They and their father looked at
their money-bags and became afraid.
Their father Jacob said to them, “You have left me destitute. Joseph
is no longer. Simeon is no longer. You will take Benjamin. All these
things end badly for me.”
Rubel said to his father, “You can put to death my two sons if I do
not bring him back to you. Hand him over to me and I will return
him to you.”
He said, “My son will not go down with you for his brother is dead.
He alone remains for his mother. 1 Misfortune could happen to him
on the way that you are going and you will bring down my old age in
misery to Sheol.”
Ch.
1 The Peshiṭta adds the negator. See the Introduction: Divergent Readings.
2 Absent in the MT.
3 The Peshiṭta has an awkward translation because Joseph swears on Pharaoh’s life,
52 2. Biomass—a resource for environmental bioremediation and bioenergy
TABLE 2.9 SWOT analysis of biorefineries processes (de Jong et al., 2009).
Strengths Weaknesses
• adds value to the sustainable use of biomass • broad undefined and unclassified area
• maximizes biomass conversion efficiency—minimizing • needs involvement of stakeholders from different market
raw material requirements sectors (agro, energy, chemical, etc.) over the full
• produces a spectrum of bio-based products (food, feed, biomass value chain
materials, chemicals) and bioenergy (fuels, power, and/or • most promising biorefinery processes/concepts not clear
heat) feeding the full bio-based economy • most promising biomass value chains, including
• strong knowledge of infrastructure available to tackle any current/future market volumes/prices, not clear
nontechnical and technical issues potentially hindering • still at a stage of studying and concept development
the deployment trajectory instead of real market implementation
• is not new, and in some market sectors (food, paper, etc.) • variability of quality and energy density of biomass
it is common practice
Opportunities Threats
• make a significant contribution to sustainable • biorefinery is seen as hype that still has to prove its
development benefits in the real market
• challenging national, European and global policy goals— • economic change and drop in fossil fuel prices
international focus on sustainable use of biomass for the • fast implementation of other renewable energy
production of bioenergy technologies filling market needs
• biomass availability is limited so the raw material should • no level playing field concerning bio-based products and
be used as efficiently as possible—that is, development of bioenergy (assessed to a higher standard)
multipurpose biorefineries in a framework of scarce raw • global, national and regional availability and
materials and energy contractibility of raw materials (e.g., climate change,
• international development of a portfolio of biorefinery policies, and logistics)
concepts, including designing technical processes • high investment capital for pilot and demonstration
• strengthening of the economic position of various market initiatives difficult to find, and existing industrial
sectors (e.g., agriculture, forestry, chemical, and energy) infrastructure is not depreciated yet
• fluctuating (long-term) governmental policies
• questioning of food/feed/fuels (land use competition)
and sustainability of biomass production
• goals of end users often focused upon single product
Reproduced with the permission of IEA Bioenergy Task Leader, Dr. Ed de Jong.
action and/or importance in time (agricultural because these systems are characterized by
development, raw material costs, production some particularities that need to be considered
scale, competing markets evolution, their in evaluating the processes on an LCA basis
demands and access, waste recovery and recy- and to ensure correct results in terms of eco-
cling alternatives, storage and production costs, efficiency (e.g., sometimes it is not obvious
distribution costs, etc.), which could be associ- which product should be the main output)
ated with the components of a complex system (Hong Chua and Steinmuller, 2010; Laser et al.,
with various boundaries (Fig. 2.17) (Demirbas, 2009). Further the system boundaries could be
2010; Kim and Dale,2005). different if the biorefineries are nonintegrated
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is an espe- or integrated and this can determine the selec-
cially useful tool to investigate the envi- tion of system boundaries, which could also
ronmental performance of product and/or affect the eco-efficiency results, while alloca-
technologies. The problem to be solved in tion issues in particular are both important
the case of biorefineries is not a simple one, and somewhat controversial (Fig. 2.12). A very
FIGURE 2.17 Boundaries of an integrated biorefinery system (Kim and Dale, 2005). Source: Reproduced with the permis-
sion of the author of PowerPoint presentation, Prof. Bruce E. Dale.
common approach considers that all biomass is manipulation of data and opportunities for sys-
local, since this could improve the selection of tem integration and waste utilization could be
crops and cropping systems for local biorefi- better exploited (Kim and Dale, 2005). The func-
neries, reduces opportunities for agenda-driven tional unit could be chosen as unit area of land
Eco-efficiency
indicators Equation Terms
Overall
P
Biorefinery energy EETEC;i 5 PRi = TECi 5 PRi =ðRECI 1 RECII 1 RECIII 1 NRECI 1 NRECII 1 NRECIII Þ PRi , total profit from all productions sold (country
consumption (EETEC,i) currency)
P
Biorefinery material EETMC;i 5 PRi = TMCi 5 PRi =ðRMCI 1 RMCII 1 RMCIII 1 NRMCI 1 NRMCII 1 NRMCIII Þ NRECi , total nonrenewable energy consumption of
consumption (EETMC,i) biorefinery
P
Biorefinery GHG EEGHG;i 5 PRi = GHGi 5 PRi =ðGHGI 1 GHGII 1 GHGIII Þ RECi , total renewable energy consumptio
emissions (EEGHG,i)
P
Biorefinery EEAP;i 5 PRi = APi 5 PRi =ðAPI 1 APII 1 APIII Þ n of biorefinery (megajoules)
acidification emissions
(EEAP,i)
P
Biorefinery EEEP;i 5 PRi = EPi 5 PRi =ðEPI 1 EPII 1 EPIII Þ RMCi , total renewable material consumption of
eutrophication biorefinery (kg)
emissions (EEEP,i)
NRMCi , total nonrenewable material consumption of
biorefinery (kg)
Energy consumption
P
Total energy EETEC;ij 5 PRij = TECij 5 PRij =ðRECI 1RECII 1RECIII 1NRECI 1NRECII 1NRECIII Þj PRij , allocated profit from productions sold (country
consumption (EETEC;ij) currency)
P
Nonrenewable energy EENRE;ij 5 PRij = NRECij 5 PRij =ðNRECI 1NRECII 1NRECIII Þj NRECij , allocated nonrenewable energy consumption
consumption (EENRE;ij) associated with the production of bioproduct from
feedstock and biorefinery integration levels
Renewable energy EEREC;ij 5 EETEC 1=EETEC 2 1=EENRE 3 100%
(Megajoules)
consumption rate
(EEREC;ij) RECij , allocated renewable energy consumption
associated with the production of bioproduct and
biorefinery integration levels (Megajoules)
Material consumption
P
Total material EETMC;ij 5 PRij = TMCij 5 PRij =ðRMCI 1RMCII 1RMCIII 1NRMCI 1NRMCII 1NRMCIII Þj PRij , allocated profit from productions sold (country
consumption currency)
(EETMC;ij)
P
Nonrenewable EENRM;ij 5 PRij = NRMCij 5 PRij =ðNRMCI 1NRMCII 1NRMCIII Þj RMCij , allocated renewable materials consumption
material consumption associated with the production of bioproduct and
(EENRM;ij) biorefinery integration levels (kg)
Renewable material EERMC;ij 5 EETMC 1=EETMC 2 1=EENRM 3 100% NRMCij , allocated nonrenewable materials
consumption rate consumption associated with the production of
(EERMC;ij) bioproduct and biorefinery integration levels (kg)
Greenhouse gases
P
Greenhouse gas EEGHG;ij 5 PRij = GHGij 5 PRij =ðGHGI 1GHGII 1GHGIII Þj PRij , allocated profit from productions sold (country
emissions (EEGHG) currency)
Acidification potential
P
Acidification EEAP;ij 5 PRij = APij 5 PRij =ðAPI 1APII 1APIII Þj PRij , allocated profit from productions sold (country
emissions (EEAP) currency)
Eutrophication potential
P
Eutrophication EEEP;ij 5 PRij = EPij 5 PRij =ðEPI 1EPII 1EPIII Þj PRij , allocated profit from productions sold (country
emissions (EEEP) currency)
Notations i refer to the level of integrations of the biorefinery; j refers to the product from the refinery.
56 2. Biomass—a resource for environmental bioremediation and bioenergy
allocated for crop biomass for a certain time Moreover, biorefineries could compete with
period, since cropping systems play an impor- food requirements and needs, which would
tant role in the environmental performance of limit the land allocated to biomass for biorefi-
bio-based products, while impacts assessment neries. As a result, the future of biorefineries
could address global warming potential, non- should consider the use of nonedible biomass
renewable energy, crude oil consumption, and the advanced processing of biomass waste,
water use, acidification, eutrophication, biode- and land which could not normally be used for
gradability, less toxicity, etc. (Demirbas, 2010; agriculture. This type of land could be used for
Laser et al., 2009). In their study, Hong Chua microalgae cultures or renewable plants. Other
and Steinmuller (2010) have identified the fol- sources of raw material for biorefineries could
lowing main environmental influences for a be found on waste from the food industry and
biorefinery: energy consumption, material con- urban organic waste. The processing of this raw
sumption, GHG emissions, acidification, and matter can be successfully and eco-efficiently
eutrophication. The eco-efficiency indicators carried out through the development of enzy-
used to account for these environmental influ- matic systems and engineered microorganisms
ences are as shown in Table 2.10. capable of separating useful compounds from
waste.
The development of these technologies
2.10 Concluding remarks and should also consider the important issue of
perspectives costs, since, currently, oil-based refineries offer
more cost-effective solutions at the expense of
Bioresource use in the forms of new and environmental degradation and pollution.
waste biomass is a great opportunity for both
environmental bioremediation and biorefinery,
and a challenge for the future, since it offers Acknowledgments
the chance of replacing fossil fuels for the This work was supported by the two grants of the
production of energy carriers, materials and Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research,
specialty chemicals and diminishing the mar- CNCSUEFISCDI, project number PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-
ket pressure and environmental impacts in an 0559, Contract 265/2011, and project number PN-III-P4-ID-
almost carbon neutral way. PCE-2016-0683, Contract nr. 65/12.07.2017.
Environmental bioremediation by using
living plants (for phytoremediation), micro-
organisms and low cost sorbents (mainly References
agricultural waste) (for biosorption and bioac- Akar, T., Tunali, S., Kiran, I., 2005. Botrytis cinerea as a
cumulation) offers advantages over the con- new fungal biosorbent for removal of Pb(II) from aque-
ventional practices. ous solutions. Biochem. Eng. J. 25, 227235.
Alakangas, E., Mäkinen, T., 2008. BioRefine programme
Industrial biorefineries are seen as one of
20072012. Yearbook 2008, Tekes Review 293/2008, VTT
the most promising directions toward a sus- Technical Centre of Finland, Tekes, Finnish Funding
tainable bio-based economy. Fully developed Agency for Technology and Innovation, Helsinki.
biorefineries combine biological and physico- Alothman, Z.A., Bahkali, A.H., Khiyami, M.A., Alfadul, S.
chemical processes. A weakness of biorefi- M., Wabaidur, S.M., Alam, M., et al., 2019. Low cost bio-
neries as an alternative to conventional oil sorbents from fungi for heavy metals removal from
wastewater. Sep. Sci. Technol. #32. Available from:
refineries consists in the fact that the former [Link]
are based on biofeedstock, which can require Al-Zuhain, S., 2007. Production of Biodiesel: possibilities
an intensive cultivation and land use. and challenges. Biofuels Bioprod. Bioref. 1, 5766.
Das, D., Das, N., Mathew, L., 2010. Kinetics, equilibrium Developments in Thermochemical Biomass Conversion.
and thermodynamic studies on biosorption of AG(I) Springer Science 1 Business Media, Dordrecht,
from aqueous solution by macrofungus Pleurotus platy- pp. 803816.
pus. J. Hazard. Mater. 2010 (1), 765774. Field, C.B., Behrenfeld, M.J., Randerson, J.T., Falkowski, P.,
de Jong, W., Marcotullio, G.L., 2010. Overview of biorefi- 1998. Primary production of the biosphere: integrating
neries based on coproduction of furfural, existing con- terrestrial and oceanic components. Science 281,
cepts and novel developments. Int. J. Chem. React. Eng. 237240.
8:Article A69. Fu, Y.Q., Li, S., Zhu, H.Y., Jiang, R., Yin, L.F., 2012.
de Jong, E., van Ree, R., 2006. Biorefineries - International Biosorption of copper(II) from aqueous solution by
Status Quo and Future Direction. Wagenigen mycelial pellets of Rhizopus oryzae. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 11,
University. Available from: ,[Link]/ 14031411.
fileadmin/biorefinery/docs/publications/presenta- FitzPatrick, M., Champagne, P., Cunningham, M.F.,
tions-kickoff/-2-current-status-on-biorefineries-IEA42- Whitney, R.A., 2010. A biorefinery processing perspec-
[Link].. tive: treatment of lignocellulosic materials for the pro-
de Jong, E., van Ree, R., Kwant, I.K., 2009. Biorefineries: duction of value added products. Bioresour. Technol.
adding value to the sustainable utilization of biomass. 101, 89158922.
IEA Bioenergy . Available from: ,[Link] Gadd, G.M., 2010. Metals, minerals and microbes: geomi-
[Link]/[Link]?id 5 6420.. crobiology and bioremediation. Microbiology 156,
Demirbas, M.F., 2009. Biorefineries for biofuel upgrading: a 609643.
critical review. Appl. Energy 86, S151S161. Gao, J., Andreson, D., Levie, B., 2013. Saccharification of
Demirbas, A., 2010. Biorefineries: For Biomass Upgrading recalcitrant biomass and integration options for lignocel-
Facilities. Springer, Dordrecht, Heidelberg-London- lulosic sugars from Catchlight Energy’s sugar process
New York. (CLE Sugar). Biotechnol. Biofuels. 6, 10. Available from:
de Sa, D.O.J., 2004. Applied Technology and Instrumentation [Link]
for Process Control. Taylor & Francis, New York and Gavrilescu, M., 2004. Removal of heavy metals from the
London. environment by biosorption. Eng. Life Sci. 4, 219232.
Devi, L., Ptasinski, K.J., Janssen, F., 2003. A review of the Gavrilescu, M., 2005. Fate of pesticides in the environment
primary measures for tar elimination in biomass gasifi- and its bioremediation. Eng. Life Sci. 5, 497526.
cation processes. Biomass Bioenergy 24, 125140. Gavrilescu, M., 2010. Biosorption in environmental remedi-
de Wild, R.J., 2011. Biomass Pyrolysis for Chemicals (PhD ation. In: Fulekar, M.H. (Ed.), Bioremediation
Thesis). Rijksu University Groningen, The Netherlands. Technology Recent Advances. Springer Nature,
Dey, U., Chatterjee, S., Mondal, N.K., 2016. Isolation and Switzerland, pp. 3599.
characterization of arsenic-resistant bacteria and possi- Gavrilescu, M., 2014. Biomass potential for sustainable
ble application. Biotechnol. Rep. 10, 17. environment, biorefinery products and energy. In: Visa,
Dodson, J.R., Parker, H.L., Munoz Garcia, A., Hicken, A., I. (Ed.), Sustainable Energy in the Built Environment -
Asemave, K., Farmer, T.J., et al., 2015. Bioderived mate- Steps Towards nZEB. Springer International Publishing,
rials as a green route for precious and critical metal Switzerland, pp. 169194.
recovery and re-use. Green Chem. 17, 19511965. Gavrilescu, M., 2011. Sustainable Industrial Production.
Dursun, A., Uslu, G., Cuci, Y., Aksu, Z., 2003. Ecozone Press, Iasi, Romania.
Bioaccumulation of copper(II), lead(II) and chromium Gavrilescu, M., Chisti, Y., 2005. Biotechnology sustain-
(VI) by growing Aspergillus niger. Process Biochem. 38, able alternative for chemical industry. Biotechnol. Adv.
16471651. 23, 471499.
EEA, 1999. Making sustainability accountable: eco- Gavrilescu, M., Pavel, L.V., Cretescu, I., 2009.
efficiency resource productivity and innovation Topic Characterization and remediation of soils contaminated
report NO11/1999. Proceedings of a workshop on the with uranium. J. Hazard. Mater. 163, 475510.
occasion of the Fifth Anniversary of the European Gavrilescu, M., Demnerova, K., Aamand, J., Agathos, S.,
Environment Agency (EEA) 2830 October 1998, Fava, F., 2015. Emerging pollutants in the environment:
Copenhagen, Denmark. present and future challenges in biomonitoring, ecologi-
Evans, R., Milne, T., 1987. Molecular characterization of the cal risks and bioremediation. New Biotechnol. 32,
pyrolysis of biomass. Energy Fuels 1, 123137. 147156.
Evans, R.J., Milne, T.A., 2010. Chemistry of tar formation Goransson, K., Soderlind, U., He, J., Zhang, W., 2011.
and maturation in the thermochemical conversion of Review of Syngas production via biomass DFGs.
biomass. In: Bridgwater, A.V., Boocock, D.G.B. (Eds.), Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 15, 482492.
Functions of an Entrepreneur
An entrepreneur is an agent who buys various factors of production with
a view to combining them into a finished product which can be sold in the
market. While doing so, he has to perform the following basic functions:
Enterpreneu( , 11_
1. Risk Assumption Function
2. Business Decision-making Function
3. Managerial Function
4. Function of Innovation
1. Risk Assumption Function: An entrepreneur has to necessarily act
as a 'risk-bearing' agent of production since he has to bear a greater amount
of uncertainties in business. The term uncertainty refers to more than an
ordinary risk. Ordinary risk can be measured and insured whereas risk due to
uncertainty cannot be insured and it is incalculable also. For instance, risks
due to the possibility of changes in the taste of customers, change in fashion
and technique of production, new inventions etc. cannot be ensured, But, an
entrepreneur has to undertake and face such uncertainties. The
entrepreneur assumes this risk and tries to reduce these uncertainties by his
initiative, skill and admirable ability.
2. Decision-making Function: From the very inception of the business
till its development, an entrepreneur has to take decisions at various stages.
He has to decide the nature and type of goods to be produced, the size of the
business, its location, technique of production etc. A successful entrepreneur
is one who takes sound decisions at the appropriate time so that his business
may succeed.
3. Managerial Function: An entrepreneur has to perform the
managerial functions also. Managerial functions are nothing but functions of
coordination, organisation and supervision. An entrepreneur is one who
combines the land of one, the labour of another and the capital of yet another,
and, thus, produces a product. While undertaking an enterprise, he has to
perform all managerial functions starting with planning and ending with
controlling.
4. Function of Innovation: Innovation is an important function of an
entrepreneur, In this context, one should know the distinction between an
investor and an innovator. The person who discovers new methods, new
materials and machines is called an inventor. But, the person who utilises
these inventions so as to make new combinations of products is called an
innovator. Innovation is a never ending process and in fact it is an ongoing
function. Thus, an entrepreneur has to be always on the lookout to introduce
a new product or a new production technology or open a new market hitherto
untapped or discover a new source of supply of new material. Innovators are
always successful in their ventures.
Entrepreneur Manager
1. Owner: An entrepreneur is owner i. Servant: A manager is acting in the
of the enterprise which he the capacity of a servant in the
establishes himself. enterprise.
2. Profit: The reward for an 2. Salary: The reward for a manager
entrepreneur is profit which is is salary and his salary is highly
uncertain. certain and fixed.
3. Full risk bearing: As a owner, the 3. No risk bearing: As a servant, the
entrepreneur has to bear all manager need not bear any risk and
uncertainties involved in running risks involved in the enterprise.
the business.
4. All functions: An entrepreneur has 4. Managerial functions only: A
to perform many functions in order manager renders only the
to run the enterprise successfully. managerial services in an enterprise.
5. Innovator: An entrepreneur mainly 5. Executor: A manager mainly acts as
acts as an innovator and prepares an executor of plans prepared by
plans for execution. the entrepreneur.
Entrepreneur Intrapreneur
1. Independent: An entrepreneur is an 1. Dependent: On the other hand an ,
independent person in his business intrapreneur is completely depend- .
operations. ing on the entrepreneur for everything
in the organisation. He cannot take
any decision by himself.
2. Need not be highly educated: It is 2. Highly educated: An intrapreneur
not necessary that an entrepreneur enters into an existing organisation
should have a high education. He can with a high education and qualifica-
learn everything by experience pro- tion. He is indeed a business
vided he has the basic qualities of a specialist in the chosen field.
successful entrepreneur.
3. Fund raising: An entrepreneur him- 3. No fund raising: An intrapreneur is
self raises funds necessary for start- completely free from the botheration
ing and establishing his enterprise. of raising funds.
4. Risk bearing: An entrepreneur has 4. No risk bearing: An intrapreneur
to bear all the risks involved in the need not bear any risk involved in the
business by himself. business.
5. Routine work: An entrepreneur is 5. Specialist: An intrapreneur acts as
more concerned with doing routine a specialist in his chosen field and
work and sometimes he may not serves as an outside professional.
know the important details of his own
business.
6. Operation from outside: An entrepre- 6. Operation from inside: But, an
neur always operates from outside. intrapreneur operates from within the
The owner is different and the enter- organisation itself. He is a part and
prise he owns is different. parcel of the organisation.
7. Strong authoritarian: Generally, an 7. Less authoritarian: On the contrary,
entrepreneur operates with a strong intrapreneur is less authoritarian. He
authoritarian back-up. is more "adaptable" in the
organisation.
Classification/Types of Entrepreneurs
There are various ways by which entrepreneurs have been classified.
Different authorities have classified entrepreneurs differently at different times.
The most popular classification has been given by Clarence Danhof on the
basis of his study of the American agriculture. According to him an
entrepreneur may be classified as follows:
1. Innovative Entrepreneur
2. Adoptive or Imitative Entrepreneur
3. Fabian Entrepreneur
4. Drone Entrepreneur
1. Innovative Entrepreneur: An innovative entrepreneur is one who is
able to foresee potentially viable and profitable opportunities through
innovation. This type of entrepreneur is highly motivated and talented and
"innovation" is his key function. According to Peter F. Drucker an innovating
entrepreneur is one "who always searches for change, responds to it, and
exploits it as an opportunity." He creates new values or increases the value of
what already exists.
An innovative entrepreneur may exhibit his talents of innovation in any
one of the following forms:
(a) Introduction of a new product or introduction of a new quality of an
existing product.
(b) Introduction of a new method of production.
(c) Opening of a new market.
(d) Discovery of a new source of supply of raw materials or semi·
finished goods. '
(e) Reorganisation of the enterprise so as to achieve monopoly or to
break up the monopoly position.
One should not confuse the terms 'innovator' and 'inventor' at this
juncture. An entrepreneur is not an inventor. An inventor discovers new
methods and new materials. But an innovator commercialises these
inventions to produce new and better goods. Thus, an innovating
entrepreneur implements the inventor's ideas.
2. Adoptive or Imitative Entrepreneur: Imitative entrepreneur is one
who is ready to adopt the successful innovations already inaugurated by
innovating entrepreneurs. In other words, an imitative entrepre~eur does not
Enterpreneur . 11_
innovate anything by himself, but, he only imitates techniques and
technologies innovated by others. He follows the innovators after carefully
observing how the latter fare and to what extent their innovation has caught
the imagination of the society. For example, the Cochin Shipyard has been
constructed by using the innovative technology provided by the Mitsubishi
Heavy Industries Ltd. of Japan.
This type of entrepreneur has a vital role to play in developing countries.
Innovative entrepreneurs are scarce in developing countries. To add fuel to
fire, there is also a problem of scarcity of capital and skilled labour in these
countries, which hinder innovative entrepreneurship. In this context, the
imitative entrepreneur fills up this gap very admirably by simply imitating the
technology, skill and technique already developed by innovative
entrepreneurs in developed countries. Hence, developing countries need
imitators who are responsible for the development of their countries with the
limited resources available in these countries.
3. Fabian Entrepreneur: Fabian entrepreneur is one who adopts a
great caution and scepticism in introducing any change in the business.
Normally, he has neither the will to introduce any new changes nor the desire
to adopt new methods. He is ready to imitate only when it becomes perfectly
clear that failure to do so would definitely result in heavy loss for him. He is
dominated more by customs, religions, traditions and past practices and he is
not ready to take any risk at all.
4. Drone Entrepreneur: Drone entrepreneur is one who blindly follows
the traditional methods of production even when it causes loss to him. He is
not prepared to introduce any change under any circumstances in the method
of production he has already introduced. He continues to carry out his
business in the traditional way even when he suffers losses. For example, the
coir industry in Kerala is dominated by drone entrepreneurs .
.Cole's Classification
Arthur H. Cole classifies entrepreneurs as follOWS:
1. Empirical Entrepreneur
2. .Rational Entrepreneur and
3. Cognitive Entrepreneur
1. Empirical Entrepreneur: An empirical entrepreneur is one who never
introduces anything revolutionary in his method of production or business. He
simply follows the [Link] of rule of thumb. He is similar to a drone
entrepreneur.
2. Rational Entrepreneur: A rational entrepreneur is one who is ready
to introduce even revolutionary changes on the basis of the general economic
conditions prevailing in that area. He takes rational decisions by himself
depending upon the situation.
Genes: A Very Short Introduction
VERY SHORT INTRODUCTIONS are for anyone wanting a stimulating
and accessible way into a new subject. They are written by experts, and
have been translated into more than 45 different languages.
The series began in 1995, and now covers a wide variety of topics in
every d
iscipline. The VSI library currently contains over 700 volumes—a
Very Short Introduction to everything from Psychology and Philosophy of
Science to American History and Relativity—and continues to grow in
every subject area.
[Link]
The theory of the firm microeconomics with
endogenous enterprises firms markets and
organizations 1st Edition Daniel F Spulber