Ardichvili (uses theory building framework, certain circumstances and traits or individual and situational

differences influence the process in opportunity recognition)

Proposition 1: A high level of entrepreneurial alertness is associated with successful opportunity

recognition and development.

Proposition 2: Successful opportunity identification is associated with the existence and use of an
extended social network, which includes the following four elements: weak ties, action set, partnerships,
and inner circle. The lack of any of these elements reduces the probability of such success.

Proposition 3: For successful opportunity identification, a convergence of both the knowledge domains
— special interest knowledge and industry knowledge — is critical. Without this convergence there is a
lower probability of such success.

Proposition 4: Prior knowledge of markets increases the likelihood of successful entrepreneurial

opportunity recognition.

Proposition 5: Prior knowledge of customer problems increases the likelihood of successful

entrepreneurial opportunity recognition.

Proposition 6: Prior knowledge of ways to serve markets increases the likelihood of successful
entrepreneurial opportunity recognition.

Proposition 7: High levels of entrepreneurial alertness are related to high levels of entrepreneurial
creativity and optimism (based on high self-efficacy).

Proposition 8: The opportunity identification process results in enriching the entrepreneur’s knowledge
base and increase in alertness, leading to the identification of future business opportunities. Thus the
greater the number of previously successful opportunity identification events, the higher the probability
of future successful opportunity identification events.

‘‘Accidental’’ discovery may result from heightened entrepreneurial alertness while the entrepreneur is
in a mode we call ‘‘passive search.’’ In that mode, the entrepreneur is receptive, though not engaged in
a formal, systematic search process. One might hypothesize that, in a state of ‘‘passive search,’’
entrepreneurs with higher EA would be more likely than those with lower EA to experience an
‘‘accidental’’ discovery of an opportunity. EA appears to be a more powerful determinant of discovery —
accidental or purposive — than level of activeness of search. Therefore, we include entrepreneurial
alertness rather than search in our model. Supporting Shane’s proposal that accidental discovery is
possible in passive search and has higher chance of occurrence when entrepreneurs are more “alert”

Ramos-Rodriguez the role of intellectual and social capital in opportunity recognition, Hypothesis 1:
Individuals with a university education are more likely to recognize good business opportunities in the
area where they live than the rest of the population. Individuals who are convinced they possess the
knowledge and skills needed to start their own business are more likely to recognize good business
opportunities in the area where they live than the rest of the population. Individuals who own and
manage a firm are more likely to recognize good business opportunities in the area where they live than
the rest of the population. Individuals who have provided personal funds to help others start a business
are more likely to recognize good business opportunities in the area where they live than the rest of the
population. Contraru to cognition-based theory the difference between individuals capable of
recognizing good business opportunities and those not capable is due more to the individuals’
relationships with other entrepreneurs than to their personal knowledge and experience. Although the
intellectual capital factors do have a positive impact, individuals’ access to external knowledge through
the social networks in which they participate proves to be fundamental for developing the capacity to
recognize new business opportunities.

Dew In essence, serendipity involves the interaction of three elements: a resource (sagacity), an event
(contingencies), and an activity (the individual
isalreadyonajourney).Figure1usesaframeworkthatcapturesthesethreeelements
asthreedomainsandrelatesthemtodifferenttypesofopportunitydiscovery (domain of search, domain of
prior knowledge and domain of contingencies) Serendipity can be the result of active search,
contingencies and prior knowledge. Flexibility to changing business plans is advised in serendipity

Renko Entrepreneurial opportunity can be perceived serendipitously or as the result of active search.
That both objective opportunities in the marketplace and entrepreneur’s subjective perception of these
opportunities are incorporated into our model has some interesting implications for aspiring
entrepreneurs as well as educators. Essentially, the key to entrepreneurial success lies in spotting sizable
opportunities in the objective sense (the gap between market needs and currently available solutions is
significant) and perceiving these opportunities as accurately as possible. Here, business planning and
market research remain important tools for entrepreneurs. However, perception of an opportunity also
entails imagining future scenarios where the opportunity is put into use, and this creative part of
perception may be harder to communicate and nail down in a business plan.
P2. Perceptions about potential entrepreneurial opportunities can be acquired experientially or via
research. Perceptions about market needs are influenced by actual market needs.
P4. Perceptual filters moderate the relationship between actual market needs and perceived market
needs.
P5. Perceptions about the means to satisfy market needs are influenced by actual means.
P6. Perceptual filters moderate the relationship between actual means to satisfy market needs and
perceived means

Fiet entrepreneurs can improve their search effectiveness by systematically restricting their searching to
known domains, consideration sets, signals and signal processing. Occam’s razor approach. Third,
entrepreneurs are not equally equipped to discover venture ideas, therefore a systematic search for
opportunity can guide their way and narrow the search. Use of “personalized consideration sets to
restrict the domain of systematic search”

Ronstadt The Corridor Principle states that the mere act of starting a venture enables entrepre- neurs to
see other venture opportunities they could neither see nor take advantage of until they had started
their initial venture. the position that entrepreneurship is a dy~mic~ multi-venture process for a great
many entrepreneurs the rule, rather than the exception. l the existence of a positive correlation
between jnding at feast a second venture and realizing a longer entrepreneurial career. Though there
are a variety of explanations for this, and the patterns include both sequential and overlapping ventures,
the net effect of creating multiple ventures appears to produce a longer entrepreneurial career. l the
position that significant numbers of entrepreneurs create their second venture very early in their
entrepreneurial careers especially when contrasted to the group of ex-entrepreneurs, who create
multiple ventures {if at all) at (I stower rate and kFer in their careers. Whether studying the
entrepreneurial process or planning to start an entrepreneurial career, a long-term view should be
taken, one that includes the likely possibili~ of multiple ventures.
The minimum economic returns of earlier ventures can be lower than previously thought if these
ventures provide entry to subsequent ventures that possess higher (more acceptable) returns to the
entrepreneur. The evidence thus far available indicates that the creation of subsequent ventures occurs
relatively quickly when corridors of opportunity become visible and attainable after earlier ventures are
estabi~.~hed.
The likelihood of career failure, as opposed to venture failure, may be lowered if one selects earlier
ventures based on their potential to reveal follow-on-venture opportunities that the entrepreneur can
investigate and possibly pursue.

Baron insists that intelligence and creativity plays central roles in opportunity recognition. Cognition
based. The entrepreneur is born and innate. Their level of experience hones entrepreneurial skills.
Contrary to Ardichivili, Baron claims that a young entrepreneur’s optimism may cause him to fall in love
with his own ideas and stilt his vision. Experience makes up cognitive structures of an individual.
Experience and training hones pattern recognition and develops entrepreneurial alertness

Tang scaling entrepreneurial alertness, scanning and search, association and connection, evaluation and
judgment. Opportunities emerge after prior experiences, personal disposition, environment changes,
gaining specific information or information asymmetry, experience as a frustrated user. Creativity.

Ozgen reliance on a mentor is good? Informal social networks, professional forums,

Corbett on general human capital (needed in maturation of business ventures) and specific human
capital (more needed in opportunity recognition) and experiential knowledge positively correlates to
oportunity recognition, extending Shane and Ardchivli’s prior research on opportunity recognition.
Learning asymmetries exist and affects opportunity recognition. Supports Baron and Shane in cognition-
based entrepreneurship research. Experience and branching out on other fields is needed (general
human capital) during maturation of business ventures to keep an advantage and continue recognizing
business opportunities.

Shane (information asymmetry) (research on the effect of prior knowledge in the technology industry
psotitively affects opportunity recognition) differences in prior information influence who discovers
entrepreneurial opportunities to exploit new technology. Finally, the results show that efforts to
centralize opportunity discovery will meet with difficulty. Some researchers have argued that a
decentralized economy will have difficulty in fully exploiting the growth returns of general purpose
technologies. Exploitation by multiple entrepreneurs in different fields creates duplication of effort,
reduces the economies of scale and scope from coordination, and creates contracting problems
(Bresnahan and Trajtenberg 1995). However, decentralization has offsetting advantages in the discovery
of opportunities. Nelson (1987) argues that uncertainty combined withdifferences in knowledge among
experts makes the efforts to plan and coordinate the development of new technology ineffective.
PROPOSITION 1. All individuals are not equally likely to recognize a given entrepreneurial opportunity.
PROPOSITION 2. People can and will discover entrepreneurial opportunities without actively searching
for them. . 3aPeople’s prior knowledge about markets will influence their discovery of which markets to
enter to exploit a new technology. 3b People’s prior knowledge about markets will influence their
discovery of which markets to enter to exploit a new technology 3c People’s prior knowledge of
customer problems will influence their discovery of products and services to exploit a new technology.

Ward. Cognition, creativity, and entrepreneurship. “Creative cognition approach” is a bit different to
Baron’s proposals that centers around the entrepreneur’s prior knowledge and experience having
positive influence in opportunity recognition. Forms of creative thinking that inhibits outlandish
novelties: Combining concepts, Analogical reasoning and other processes, Abstraction, problem
formulation, and originality. Constraining one’s creativity can be detrimental in recognizing opportunity.
Ward claims that by careful application of a variety of basic cognitive processes, it is possible to put
knowledge to more effective use and improve entrepreneurial creativity.

Chanlder’s effectuation (experimentation, affordable loss, and flexibility) and causation. Both are
antecedents to business ventures that are encourgaed by pre-commitments Causation is less uncertain,
effectuation’s expeementation is more uncertain. Causation is more pre-planned strategy while
effectuation is “emergent or non-predictive” “ a set of means is available in affectuation and possible
effects that can be created out of them is chosen” Sarasvathy (behavioral) effectuation and causation

Fisher Entrepreneurs who identify opportunities based on the resources under their control will more
readily act on the identified opportunities compared with entrepreneurs who identify opportunities
based on an evaluation of the external market. Entrepreneurs who seek to solve problems by taking
action will be more likely to arrive at a workable solution compared with entrepreneurs who seek to
solve problems conceptually. Entrepreneurs who actively engage a community of potential customers
will (1) be more likely to launch a product or service, (2) create more appealing products or services, and
(3) experience higher levels of venture growth once a product or service is launched compared with
entrepreneurs who do not engage a community of potential customers. Entrepreneurs who operate
under signifucant resource constraints will demonstrate higher levels of creativity in the creation of their
product and their ventures compared with entrepreneurs who do not face significant resource
constraints. (Behavioral theory and bricolage) opportunity recognition can be resource driven.
A journey that opens up along the way

Serendipity

Causation and effectuation

Networks

Experiential knowledge

Contingencies

Weak ties

Entrepreneurs are born with intrinsic creativity and intelligence also supported by Robert Baron and his
Relevance of Shane and study in tech industry. Assist in accounting management. Accountants, business
coach and tech support I guess. Started in 2013. A rising tide raises all boats by kennedy. Technology,
people, and process. Educating small business managers and implementing systems. Covid was a crisis
they cashed on I suppose. Uncertainty for business owners boosted demand for digit’s services. Pro
bono financial forecast, nice. Analysis of cash flow and employment during covid put them on the
spotlight. Was it serendipity. It was serendipity since covid was a contingency nobody predivcted. I’m
sure mr. Erkins is a repeat entrepreneur.

Small towns encourage creativity Baron supports that creativity and intelligence is innate in an
entrepreneur however whether the guest speaker did not really take a concrete stance on the nature vs.
nurture argument of the making of an entrepreneur so we’ll let that slide
Trust in the community
Serendipitous moment with the what if? Slogan
Prior knowledge with computers, visual art and graphic design, through video games prior knowledge
with problem-solving and overcoming challenges through technology? Mining engineering degree
shifted to IT and business (e-commerce). Has prior General and industry specific knowledge before
starting the business venture. Interest in marketing and architecture. Erkin’s Holden Caulfield-phase as a
mining engineering student prompted him to reevaluate his life and aspirations.
Early on showed deviant propensity from status quo. I guess.

Entropic. First business resembles Dew’s deifinition of a sponatenous recognition of oportunity. The
money from the DJ roommate though. Could have been proof of market needs being exogenous and
discrete from the entrepreneur. The entrepreneur’s recollection is also remarkably serendipitous. He
recalls being pleasantly surprise in receiving money from the DJ roommate. Erkin had both domain
knowledge and contingency but was not actively searching. It was

Gained experiential knowledge in terms of business operations of web design, graphic design and
marketing (web work)

Bought into a second business (Web in a Box) which echoes the Corridor Principle which states that a
business venture is more often a life sentence. This means that more ventures open up organically once
an entrepreneur starts one venture. Tech support. More entrepreneurial opportunities. Had falling out
who are not very entrepreneurial.
Renewed strategy into online business customized systems. Built platform of cloud-based accounting
platform for the commercial real estate industry. Experienced failure in raising funds.

Spent time with Startups in New York which is a social network and was energized. Was inspired by
startups I guess. Serendipitous now since he had three aspects which is domain knowledge, contingency
factor and prior business activity. This supports Dew’s elucidation of serendipity. However, Erkin’s
business venture happened by chance when someone offered him money for his service in graphic
design. The way the entrepreneur told the story suggests that he recognized opportunity
serendipitously. Renko’s claim that market demand is “exogenous and discrete to the entrepreneur” is
also true for Enrik.

The rising traction of Xeno inspired digit. This Analogous reasoning (Ward) between Xero and Erkin’s
business venture further pushed Erkin into seeing and acknowledging the opportunity and seizing it.
They later abstracted Xero’s business model and incorporated Digit’s own original ideas and business
model formulation. This makes sense since Erkin already has prior business ventures in the same
industry and therefore the core values is already there, only needs tanslation into the new venture.

Digit did a lot of research so they went of learning more about it. Baron and Hensly once stressed on
experiential knowledge impacts pattern recognition, however, Corbett added the importance of
experiential learning of opportunity recognition. Learning asymmetries. Not everyone has experienced
business failure and therefore. Learning patterns and more suitable strategies. Moat for security: early
adapters (comparative advantage over cloud technology), offshore team, protective proprietary
systems, human connection focus, thought leadership to propel innovative initiatives, maintaining
startup mindset of what if and not being content with stability.

Opportunity recognition

Pattern recognition through social networks and information acquisition as Erkin called “gaps” and
asking about gaps to form a pattern. This supports the asymmetry of information and knowledge. There
are people who see and understand more than others. Experience also plays a role which is supported
by Baron who concluded repeat entrepreneurs tend to recognize opportunity through pattern
recognition. Prototype and exemplary models of pattern recognition. Intrinsic value. Future proof,
sustainability of the opportunity. Effectuation and causation? Scalable solution. Domain knowledge

What’s next (forward thinking,

Help business adapt Robotic process automation, human advisory bookeepers and accountants, industry
consulting

Do you agree with Baron’s stance of new entrepreneurs being in love with their own ideas and can be
detrimental to business venture.

Very creative. The Corridor Principle.

Making mistakes at a young age. Mentors in maturity

Quite extensive social network of businessowners helps in testing ideas. But did not answer about
opportunity recognition,

First business venture propelled other ventures which align with the Corridor Principle.

Erkin echoes Baron’s lament over new entrepreneurs being in love with their own ideas that can be
detrimental in objectively recognizing opportunity and viability of a business venture. Then decided to
change the business. When things go wrong.

Causation in recognizing opportunity when Erkin changed their services offered. Digit’s presence in
software technology, the right people, considerable social network could have been bricolaged into his
new ventures.

Purpose and vision and clear values. Gut instinct. Creativity. Opportunities pop up unexpectedly.
opportunity is everywhere but the right one is rare. Organic opportunity. Risk-taking bloke.

Better assess digit’s ability or a personal consideration set

Formal education is a bit not very helpful in entrepreneurial ventures. Formal education helped provide
Erkin with some principles and frameworks he still utilizes but he’s not very convinced of it being central
to recognizing opportunity.

Xero is serendipity

Believes in experimentation and by extension, effectuation. Moat.