Constructing the study: research design and methods choices
4.1 Research design: case study as a means for exploration
Seeing the nature of the object of study, where I aim at looking into the applicability and potential specific features of KIE as a theoretical concept when applying it to a new context, as well as enriching KIE with the theories of entrepreneurial intentions, this research takes an exploratory format (Eisenhardt, 1989). Research design literature suggests that qualitative research methods are well suited when attempting explorative research, in that they open up for the discovery of new ideas and concepts as opposed to focusing on affirming beforehand decided factors of analysis (cf. Eisenhardt, 1989; Gioia et al., 2013). Previous literature on KIE further points at the need of qualitative studies to further enhance the knowledge of different industries in relation to the concept, and also to start testing the applicability of the theories
proposed (Malerba & McKelvey, 2018b). Qualitative research methods therefore fit well with the purpose of this dissertation.
Because I am interested in what factors affect fashion design graduates with regards to their views of whether or not entrepreneurship could be a potential pathway post- graduation, this research takes on the format of a single phenomenon case study (Yin, 2003; Eisenhardt, 1989). The phenomenon to be studied is that of fashion design graduates as potential entrepreneurs in fashion. The single case study format is chosen as I seek to explore the applicability of a given theory, in this case KIE, in a specific context. Given the overall purpose and research questions, a single case study is also desirable due to the longitudinal aspect (cf. Yin, 2003). Below, I give a more detailed account for how the specific case to be studied was chosen.
In order to understand more about KIE entrepreneurship in fashion and whether or not it differs to any greater extent from the general view held forward in the literature so far, there is a need to explore these specific actors in more detail. This fills a purpose both from a perspective of testing and enriching existing theory, by exploring whether or not KIE is applicable across sectors and industries, as well as from a policy and industry perspective in creating plans and policies that are rooted in the specificities of the object at hand. One sector that has been highlighted in previous literature on KIE as being underexplored is the creative industries, to which the fashion industry belongs (cf. Lassen et al., 2018). While creative industries to date have received limited, albeit increasing, attention in entrepreneurship literature in general, they are also highlighted as both hosting great potential for future development of economies and societies, and also for traditionally being held forward as governed by other value propositions than the economic, not least from the perspective of creative entrepreneurs themselves (McKelvey & Lassen, 2018; Nielsen et al., 2018).
Chapter 1 gave an introduction to the phenomenon of interest for this research, namely that of understanding more about how creative individuals think and act in relation to entrepreneurship. Seeing the vastness of the so-called creative industries, a crucial aspect in order to get a feasible object of study was to narrow down the scope. For this purpose, I have chosen to focus on the fashion industry, which in my interpretation is an interesting fit for the question at hand as it relies on the creative output of designers and at the same time constitutes an industry structure with high pace of renewal. Though many different actors can attempt to become entrepreneurs within fashion, I argue that there is one group that possesses a special role, and which fits the purpose of examining creative individuals, namely fashion designers. When looking at already existing fashion companies, it soon becomes evident that the designers active are plentiful, and their backgrounds very different. To be able to narrow things down even further, some limitations as to what type of fashion designers to look at therefore needed to be made.
KIE focuses on ventures with high knowledge intensity, and consequently knowledge becomes a clear means of delimitation. Knowledge can be defined in many ways and deal with various aspects (cf. McKelvey & Lassen, 2013). However, when it comes to design, one type of knowledge stands out, namely the creative. Malerba & McKelvey (2018b) give insights on how to apply KIE as a concept in research. The authors point at the advantages of conducting case studies in capturing not only what happens after the actual formation of the new venture, but also what leads up to this point. They further point at results from previous research on entrepreneurship suggesting that founder characteristics and traits have effect not only on the actual formation of the new venture, but also on its further development. One interesting potential question they see based on this is that of what role the founder’s educational background plays with regards to opportunity recognition. Though knowledge can be acquired in many different ways, a means of delimitation, which also makes sure that all the informants have been given access to the same type of knowledge, is educational level. This also falls well in line with previous research on KIE, which points at higher education as an important source of knowledge for this specific type of entrepreneurs (McKelvey & Lassen, 2013). Consequently, I chose to focus on fashion design graduates, that is, individuals who have obtained a BA or MA in fashion design.
As explained in Chapter 3, for a venture to be classified as a KIE, there are four key characteristics that need to be fulfilled: 1) new firms; 2) innovative; 3) significant knowledge intensity; and 4) exploitation of innovative opportunities (Malerba & McKelvey, 2015). Below each of these characteristics is addressed in relation to the case at hand.
New firms: New firms are defined as firms that are younger than 8 years and which
are not part of already existing organisations. This criterion can be considered to be met by default in that this study deals with individuals about to enter industry, meaning that the companies, if in existence, will only be in their cradle. In fact, most of the data deals with what precedes the actual venture creation, something that is also highlighted in previous research on KIE as an interesting and important point of analysis (Malerba & McKelvey, 2015).
Innovative: In terms of being innovative, this refers to the reasoning that the outcome
of the firm should not only be novel, but there should also be a goal of making economic profits based on it. Seeing that this study focuses on fashion design graduates, the focus of innovation can be assumed to lie on aesthetics, the goal being to successfully commercialise new, boundary pushing designs.
Significant knowledge intensity: By significant knowledge intensity, it is meant that
knowledge should play a key role in the firm and its activities. Knowledge is here not exclusively referring to science and technology, but also for example design and
creativity. The latter types of knowledge are also what is in focus in this study. Seeing the educational background of the interviewed individuals, it is safe to assume that their design knowledge base is high, and that this is also where they differ from other actors within the industry who lack this formal training. To successfully apply this knowledge in a business context would therefore be a good way of attaining the innovation goal stated above.
Exploitation of innovative opportunities: The exploitation of innovative
opportunities relates to how the knowledge intensity, and thereby the potential for innovation, is actually adopted in the firm’s activities, where the goal should be to have a business plan constructed in such a way that the goal for the firm is to work innovatively in the essence of the word innovation, that is, to reach successful commercialisation. In my study, this comes down to see whether the informants have the intention to bring new ideas to the market and also commercialise these, balancing the creative and monetary value creation in the design output.