*** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

Surviving to Long-Term Thriving Through Augmented Entrepreneurial Resourcefulness

An Extension to “Real Growth Through Entrepreneurial Resourcefulness: Insights on the

Entropy Problem from Andy Weir’s The Martian”

DANIEL R. CLARK*
University of Western Ontario
Email: dclark@ivey.ca

MATTHIAS A. TIETZ
University of St. Gallen
Email: matthias.tietz@unisg.ch

* Corresponding Author

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank Jeff McMullen for his support and constructive
comments regarding this draft. We would also like to thank the staff at Knoxville’s Calhoun’s On The
River for continuing to fill our beverages, and not kicking as out, as we spent hours developing our
model.

1
 *** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

Abstract

Artificial intelligence and abiotic growth mechanisms such as 3-D printing, crystalline growth,

and nano reproduction are resources that are increasingly available to entrepreneurs. These

resources can fundamentally define the entrepreneurial resourcefulness model play allowing the

entrepreneur to significantly reduce the entropy of their own efforts and become much more

efficient. Expanding on the McMullen (2022) model, we argue that these resources can, through

repeated iterations, allow the entrepreneur to retain additional value from their labour for their

own benefits. This value that will compound through iterations; facilitating, even in a closed

system, wealth creation such that the entrepreneur is no longer struggling to survive, but

potentially working to thrive.

Introduction

In his recent article, McMullen (In Press) uses the Andy Weir novel and the adapted film The

Martian to propose a thought experiment of a closed system entrepreneurial growth model. However, due

to limitations originating in the source material1, the model was constrained to a sustentative growth

system. We propose that by compensating for those limitations and by better reflecting what would likely

exist in the constrained Martian environment of today that a continuous and exponential growth model,

even within a closed environment, is both possible and a better reflection of entrepreneurial motivations.

By embracing the inputs available today and, consequently, undeniably available in 2035, we

foresee outcomes that are significantly enhanced vis-à-vis those in the McMullen paper, and consequently

adjust and enhance the model accordingly. Specifically, we argue for three adaptations to the McMullen

1
Likely to enhance dramatic tension, astronaut Mark Watney is deprived of two aids that realistically any astronaut
in 2035 would have access to: Artificial Intelligence and abiotic growth mediums (e.g., 3-D Printing, crystalline
growth). It is likely that Wier wanted to avoid the tropes previously employed in similar mediums (e.g., Stanley
Kubrick’s 2001, and Duncan Jones The Moon) where the AI plays the role of dramatic foil. Further, it is worth
noting that when The Martian was written in 2011, both AI and 3D printing were in their infancy.

2
 *** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

model. First, we propose that Artificial Intelligence (Watney had processing power and electricity, but no

AI) and a basic 3-D printer2 can productively substitute labor and just as importantly, generate knowledge.

Second, we relax the assumptions that humans seek mere survival and propose more ambitious goals:

comfort seeking, conveniences, and slack labor by-products. With these alternations, we envision a third

adaptation, allowing the model to extend beyond T1 into a potentially infinite Tn.

The presence and combination of these three adaptations can facilitate three different types of

growth in new wealth not considered in the McMullen model: (1) labor substitution, (2) independent

knowledge generation, and (3) structural capital transformation. In combination, these three types of

growth enable a system where wealth creation (not just value creation), in line with the expected

motivations of entrepreneurs is entirely possible, even within an entirely closed system (see figure 1).

---------------------------------
Insert Figure 1, about here
---------------------------------
Labour Substitution

Labour is effectively a limited operational input factor. Labor is constrained on one side by

Watney’s motivation to work and on the other his physical capability to do so (i.e., exhaustion or pain).

Except, we posit, that human history is partially the story of the search for labour substitutes or what Zipf

(1949) calls the “Principle of Least Effort”, whereby individuals develop tools to maximize labour

efficiency, find shortcuts for labour avoidance, and design machines for labour transference (Osiurak &

Heinke, 2018). The Martian deals with this in the most limited manner as Watney is provided with

adequate labour substitutes to facilitate innovation and ingenuity for natural capital creation and human

capital preservation. Between T0 and T1, Watney’s focus is ‘naturally’ on the creation of the necessary

natural capital required to allow him survival and get him to evacuation (Weir, 2011). This is a limitation

of the fixed end-point growth model proposed by McMullen. Relaxing this end-point logic, Watney could

be thought to exist in a perpetual cycle of natural capital and biotic resource development and would

2
It is notable that even today, a basic 3-D printer can produce, from base substrates, the components required for
sequentially better models of 3-D printers. Effectively, with knowledge generation, a 3-D printer can represent an
evolutionary regenerative mechanical input to any closed system.

3
 *** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

eventually have applied his ingenuity towards labour savings (Zipf, 1949): the elimination of unnecessary

steps (labour avoidance), the development of new labour saving tools (labour efficiency), and ultimately

automation (labour transference). It is important to note that while these developments are likely a

product of the same Resourceful Transformation of Production Systems modelled in McMullen (In

Press), the purpose is not the creation of additional biotic resources, but labour substitutes.

For our first adaptation, 3-D printing and AI would play a vital role. 3-D printing (in Figure 1

represented by abiotic growth) would facilitate the construction of tools or machines (for a review, see

Shahrubudin, Lee & Ramlan, 2019), with AI able to develop and maintain any novel automation agents

(Shaik, Tao, Higgins, Li, Gururajan, Zhou & Acharya, 2023). Indeed, tools and eventually machines and

robots from a 3-D printer would not change Watney’s labour per se but would support the augmentation

of labor for a given task or support the reallocation of labor (through automation) to new tasks. This is in

line with Raisch and Krakowski (2023) who propose that both augmentation and automation should be

considered together in the work with AI. Thus, with enough innovation iterations (as labour efficiency 

∞) there is the potential for Watney to extract sufficient labour dividends (i.e., not work) effectively

removing labour from the entropy equation.

Illustratively, consider the possibility of a 3D printed, solar powered, AI-supervised potato growth

plant, that generates enough food and has surplus potatoes that can serve as input for the organic printing

material used by the 3D printer: this is not a ridiculous concept as 3-D printing is being explored heavily

for food production (e.g., Sun, Zhou, Huang, Fuh, & Hong, 2015). In such a scenario, we propose that

because labour can theoretically cease to be a source of entropy in the value-creation model that labour

substitutes represent a coexisting input within the perpetual (TN) model that can, given enough time and

sufficient trial and error learning, either supplement or replace the labour category as it currently exists 3.

In effect, when the biotic resource production necessities had been achieved (and they never were in the

3
The labour releasing component of automation is a well-known, but rarely conceptualized as freeing a sole agent
from production activities.

4
 *** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

story), labour substitution would be the logical and indeed next necessary focus of the protagonist (e.g.,

work smarter not harder, and potentially not at all) to increase his utility/comfort.

In effect, at this point, the model as it exists at T1 is maintained without any “real” labour and

might perpetuate productively. This frees up Watney’s time and energy to further optimize the search and

design of labor substitutes, so that eventually he may create a surplus feeding back into the larger system,

i.e., going beyond the substitution of labor towards the generation of independent knowledge.

Independent Knowledge Generation

Watney is rich in knowledge resources. In addition to his botany knowledge, his training at

NASA provided him both necessary mechanical and survival knowledge (Weir, 2011). Knowledge

insufficiency was not an issue in the world of the Martian. This is a suspension of disbelief issue. In

reality, there are limitations to human knowledge, and it is unlikely one would possess all the knowledge

needed (to survive and prosper). McMullen (In Press) allows for learning, the application of needed and

the transference of unneeded knowledge from the system. However, there are two additional knowledge

pathways that are important: a) new knowledge consumption and b) knowledge creation not a product of

human innovation processes. We address both in turn.

The first, knowledge consumption, is arguably inadequately captured in the model—e.g., if there

is a book or an encyclopedia in the computer on the spaceship, there is additional knowledge stored that

can be accessed and read, but this requires labour; such that labour is transformed into knowledge

resources (van Leeuwen & van Praag, 2002). The latter however is absent from the model. With

additional labor substitution, possible as per the arguments above, the potential for converting more of our

labor into knowledge rises, hence speeding up the labor substitution capacity, allowing for less labor

invested into hard work and more into smart work (learning), and therefore strengthening/hastening the

improvement process further (Sujan, Weitz & Kumar, 1994). We propose this thus becomes a self-

strengthening up-cycling of labor argument.

The second, knowledge creation not a product of human innovation processes is captured by our

adaptation of introducing AI and has the potential not only to generate but also to challenge new ideas

5
 *** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

(Bag, Gupta, Kumar & Sivarajah, 2021). The computer-aided recombination of facts serves as a mental

playground to substitute much of the trial-and-error learning process that characterises the slower, more

human and humble development cycle (Amabile, 2020). More importantly, AI offers the potential to

independently assess and examine those ideas (Maher & Fisher, 2012—thereby further freeing up more

labor—and potentially (after numerous iterations) even execute some of those ideas independently;

admittedly, likely requiring a multi-agent systems framework (Langley, 2006). All that is already

happening today at speeds that exceed human capacity for generation of knowledge, albeit not necessarily

exceeding its quality.

In the Martian, while Watney’s knowledge is sufficient to achieve his primary goal of survival

until evacuation, in an open-ended system it is unlikely that his knowledge would be sufficient for tasks

and challenges still ahead of him. Namely, considering the fire that destroyed his crops, what would have

happened had he not made his exit attempt. Supplementing his knowledge stores first through labor

intensive learning, and later purposeful trial error, are certainly fruitful (Callander, 2011); yet at the same

time also very wasteful activities in terms of non-renewable resources, thus increasing entropy. Hence, the

development of independent AI knowledge creation facilities (i.e., running AI engines like Chat GPT,

perpetually) would cost only Watney’s, presumably, unlimited solar energy (as do his potatoes) and slack

processing power, and potentially yield the benefits of knowledge creation with quickly diminishing and

potentially zero labor inputs. Effectively the AI, under direction from Watney, would not only generate the

innovation ideas to support the increased labor efficiency described above, but also generate and

eventually execute the plans to implement those ideas.

Assuming a sufficient stock of initial knowledge, AI could with time develop new technologies,

designs, and innovations (Ghoreishi & Happonen, 2020—it could even produce medication, Elbadawi et

al., 2021)—to accelerate McMullen’s proposed sustentative growth (to offset resource depletion and

entropy offsets) to enrichening growth, where the base condition of the entrepreneur is transformed into

something, presumably, more desirable; and indeed the entrepreneur’s input to the system (as an

innovator, knowledge provider, source of ingenuity) was not needed much beyond the initial input and

6
 *** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

early guidance. As such, we propose that because knowledge can theoretically be created (or at least

accessed) independent of purposeful innovation, using only already existing structural capital and free

energy resources, that purposeful knowledge generation, productive or independent of labour, is a

separate process from Resourceful Transformation of the System of Production resulting in new

knowledge levels between points in time.

Structural Capital Transformation

In the world of The Martian, Watney has three pieces of structural capital: the habitat, the rover,

and the escape capsule. It is a precondition of the story (Weir, 2011), and the McMullen (In Press) model,

that Watney has neither the materials (and the ability to produce them) nor the knowhow to engage in

elaborate architecture, structural design, materials development, mechanical engineering, etc.; fortunately,

Watney does not need them in the story. However, in an open-ended model, as T  N, there is no reason

to believe, given the above, that AI, with guidance from Watney, and feeding into 3-D printing could not

supplement these shortfalls and enable Watney to transform some of his initial structural capital to be

more suitable for his situation. In doing so, Watney would achieve a primary goal of entrepreneurship, to

improve his quality of life (Kautonen, Kibler & Minniti 2017; Marcketti, Niehm & Fuloria, 2006),

developing potentially a new more secure habitat, new comforts, and other structural enhancements

(Pidduck & Clark, 2021).

Consider for instance the possibility that Watney melts down some of the metals at his disposal to

forge new structures, expand his habitat, or create more comfortable living conditions (Hunde &

Woldeyohannes, 2022; Jawad, Bezbradica, Crane & Alijel, 2019). He already worked with the fuel in his

spaceship to create water from hydrogen, so he might also reverse the process to create hydrogen from

water. With Mars’ atmospheric humidity at night substantially higher than during the day (Samenov,

2012), he could capture additional water with nets to trap humidity at night and eventually design an

expended irrigation system, a mud-brick-production, or his own waste-water management. Finally, his

natural resources, i.e., potatoes as the most emblematic of the story, provide him with more than food,

where freeze drying the potato stalks outside overnight would allow for the creation of powder for

7
 *** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

construction or for additional fuel for the 3-D printer. This is not to say there are no limits to what 3-D

printing can accomplish—e.g., to our knowledge certain electronic components cannot be printed,

although Watney has a large stock that can presumably be repurposed—but as the technology has

developed the inputs have become progressively more basic (i.e., can be found in any environment), and

the outputs more diverse.

Granted, it is generally accepted that these advances require an open-ended system as an

individual barters their value creation in form of structural capital transformation for that of others, but

this is not inherently required. Individuals with access to resources, possessing adequate knowledge, and

having (freed up) excess labor capacity can produce this value for themselves as a secondary value

creation activity. Given that it is generally unreasonable to believe the requirements (resources,

knowledge, labor) are available in a closed system, the entrepreneur must create them, and AI and 3-D

printing (especially from organic/recycled/upcycled material or organically grown crystals; Braga &

Grepioni, 2006), together with the relaxation of the assumption that humans only want to survive, and an

expended horizon for the purpose of modeling, make this possible. As such, we propose that at T N

structural capital is an additional outcome (alongside Manufactured Capital) of the growth model.

Conclusion

McMullen faithfully created the model of entrepreneurial growth employed by Mark Watney

within the limitations and assumptions of “The Martian”. However, by (realistically) adapting the growth

model—including AI and 3-D Printing within the system, and assuming an open-ended, human comfort

propelled, multiple innovation iterations time perspective—in Figure 1 we propose three meaningful

extensions to the model culminating in a reconceptualization of outcomes. Where the McMullen model

proposes growth as limited by entropy, the inclusion of AI and 3-D printing causes a reduction of entropy

loss and enables first, labor substitution and then independent knowledge creation. Where human efforts

were focused on survival (and extraction) in the McMullen model, the inclusion of humanity’s quest for

comfort and convenience (Choi, 2006), given time, allows for the inclusion of structural capital

transformation.

8
 *** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

Indeed, these adaptations, we think, better reflect the shared experience of both the

entrepreneurial and human journeys: at first the entrepreneur is focused on ensuring survival for their

venture, and as real growth approaches venture survival, motivation shifts to work for growth for larger

motivations. We use the term enrichment in the figure, but indeed any growth that is returning value to the

entrepreneur is a form of enrichment even if their motivations are more prosocial.

Further, we find reason to reconsider two of McMullen’s conclusions, such that when energy and

particular inputs are unlimited (as in “The Martian”) both biotic and abiotic resources can have the

potential for “costless” renewal and (2) that the unique contributions of AI and 3-D printing can indeed

compensate for the present unavailability of resources. The consequence is that with these available

technological innovations, entrepreneurs can be their own very satisfied customers.

9
 *** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

References

Amabile, T. M. (2020). Creativity, artificial intelligence, and a world of surprises. Academy of

Management Discoveries, 6(3), 351-354.
Bag, S., Gupta, S., Kumar, A., & Sivarajah, U. (2021). An integrated artificial intelligence framework for
knowledge creation and B2B marketing rational decision making for improving firm
performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 92(1), 178-189.
Bhatt, S., Sheth, A., Shalin, V., & Zhao, J. (2020). Knowledge graph semantic enhancement of input data
for improving AI. IEEE Internet Computing, 24(2), 66-72.
Braga, D., & Grepioni, F. (2006). Making Crystals by Design: Methods, Techniques and Applications.
John Wiley & Sons.
Callander, S. (2011). Searching and learning by trial and error. American Economic Review, 101(6),
2277-2308.
Choi, B. C. K. (2006). Health and social consequences in the quest for comfort, convenience and
pleasure. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 60(11), 922-922.
Elbadawi, M., McCoubrey, L. E., Gavins, F. K., Ong, J. J., Goyanes, A., Gaisford, S., & Basit, A. W.
(2021). Harnessing artificial intelligence for the next generation of 3D printed
medicines. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 175, 113805.
Ghoreishi, M., & Happonen, A. (2020). New promises AI brings into circular economy accelerated
product design: a review on supporting literature. In E3S web of conferences (Vol. 158, p. 06002).
EDP Sciences.
Hunde, B. R., & Woldeyohannes, A. D. (2022). Future prospects of computer-aided design (CAD)–A
review from the perspective of artificial intelligence (AI), extended reality, and 3D
printing. Results in Engineering, 100478.
Jawad, M. S., Bezbradica, M., Crane, M., & Alijel, M. K. (2019). AI cloud-based smart manufacturing
and 3D printing techniques for future in-house production. In 2019 International Conference on
Artificial Intelligence and Advanced Manufacturing (AIAM) (pp. 747-749). IEEE.
Kautonen, T., Kibler, E., & Minniti, M. (2017). Late-career entrepreneurship, income and quality of
life. Journal of Business Venturing, 32(3), 318-333.
Langley, P. (2006). Cognitive architectures and general intelligent systems. AI Magazine, 27(2), 33-44.
Maher, M. L., & Fisher, D. H. (2012). Using AI to evaluate creative designs. In DS 73-1 Proceedings of
the 2nd International Conference on Design Creativity Volume 1.
Marcketti, S. B., Niehm, L. S., & Fuloria, R. (2006). An exploratory study of lifestyle entrepreneurship
and its relationship to life quality. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 34(3), 241-
259.
McMullen, J. S. (In Press). Real Growth Through Entrepreneurial Resourcefulness: Insights on the
Entropy Problem from Andy Weir’s The Martian. Academy of Management Review.
Osiurak, F. & Heinke, D. (2018).‘’Looking for Intoolligence: A Unified Framework for the Cognitive
Study of Human Tool Use and Technology, American Psychologist, 73(2), 169-185.
Pidduck, R. J., & Clark, D. R. (2021). Transitional entrepreneurship: Elevating research into marginalized
entrepreneurs. Journal of Small Business Management, 59(6), 1081-1096.
Raisch, S., & Krakowski, S. (2021). Artificial intelligence and management: The automation–
augmentation paradox. Academy of Management Review, 46(1), 192-210.
Samenov, J. (2012). The weather and climate on Mars for NASA Curiosity rover. In The Washington
Post, published on Aug 6th 2012. Retrieved online on July 3rd 2023 under
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/the-nasa-curiosity-rover-and-
weather-on-mars/2012/08/06/a1303d4c-dfdc-11e1-a19c-fcfa365396c8_blog.html
Shahrubudin, N., Lee, T. C., & Ramlan, R. J. P. M. (2019). An overview on 3D printing technology:
Technological, materials, and applications. Procedia Manufacturing, 35, 1286-1296.

10
 *** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

Shaik, T., Tao, X., Higgins, N., Li, L., Gururajan, R., Zhou, X., & Acharya, U. R. (2023). Remote patient
monitoring using artificial intelligence: Current state, applications, and challenges. Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 13(2), e1485.
Sujan, H., Weitz, B. A., & Kumar, N. (1994). Learning orientation, working smart, and effective
selling. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 39-52.
Sun, J., Zhou, W., Huang, D., Fuh, J. Y., & Hong, G. S. (2015). An overview of 3D printing technologies
for food fabrication. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 8, 1605-1615.
van Leeuwen, M. J., & van Praag, B. M. (2002). The costs and benefits of lifelong learning: The case of
the Netherlands. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13(2), 151-168.
Weir, A. (2011). The Martian. Ballantine Books.
Zipf, G.K. (1949). Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort. Addison-Wesley Press.

Biographies

Daniel R. Clark is an Assistant Professor of Entrepreneurship at Ivey Business School, University of

Western Ontario. He obtained his PhD at Indiana University and previously worked at IE
University (Spain). He is an associate editor at Journal of Small Business Management. His
research is complexity in entrepreneurial cognition.

Matthias A. Tietz is an Assistant Professor at the St. Gallen Institute of Management in Asia (SGI-HSG)
where he leads the Competence Center for Entrepreneurship. He received his PhD from Ivey
Business School and previously taught at IE University (Spain). His research takes place in the area
of entrepreneurial decision making.

11
 *** Authors’ version before final publication acceptance ***

Figure 1: Adapted (McMullen, In Press) model of open-ended entrepreneurial growth.

Note: Additions to original McMullen (In Press) article are in blue. 3-D printing is here conceptualized as a form of abiotic growth, other forms of
abiotic growth would include crystalline growth or nanoreplication.

12