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: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

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