Historicizing entrepreneurial networks

• Published date: 01 March 2020
• Author: Matthew Hollow
• Date: 01 March 2020
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1345

SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE

Historicizing entrepreneurial networks

Matthew Hollow

The York Management School, University of

York, Freboys Lane, York, UK

Correspondence

Matthew Hollow, The York Management

School, University of York, Freboys Lane,

Heslington, York UK.

Email: matthew.hollow@york.ac.uk

Abstract

Research summary: In recent years, there has been

increased interest in the role of context in different entre-

preneurial processes. This article builds on this line of

research by deploying a microhistorical-informed approach

to contextualize and make sense of the ways in which the

correspondence network of the nineteenth-century British

entrepreneur, Isaac Holden, changed over time. In the pro-

cess, it contributes to our understanding of entrepreneurial

networks by illustrating: (a) how networking activities take

place through specific communication platforms with their

own socio-technical qualities; (b) how entrepreneurs have

the capacity to actively shape and co-create the context

within which their networking activity takes place; and

(c) how entrepreneurial networking activity can take place

in conjunction with—or as a result of—networking activity

in other social movements.

Managerial Abstract: For entrepreneurs, having an effective

network of trusted contacts can be the difference between

success and failure. But what happens to these relationships

when (or if) the entrepreneur achieves commercial success?

Do they change? This article advances our understanding in

this respect by providing an in-depth analysis of how, and

why, the personal network of Isaac Holden—a British wool

manufacturing entrepreneur from the Victorian era—

changed over time. In the process, it provides interesting

insights into how political, social, cultural, and technological

factors have the capacity to shape the way that entrepre-

neurial networks change and evolve over time.

Received: 14 July 2016 Revised: 22 May 2019 Accepted: 21 December 2019 Published on: 5 February 2020

DOI: 10.1002/sej.1345

© 2020 Strategic Management Society

66 wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/sej Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal. 2020;14:66–88.

KEYWORDS

context, entrepreneurship, family business, longitudinal analysis,

microhistory, networks

1|INTRODUCTION

In recent years, there have been renewed calls for scholars of entrepreneurship to pay greater attention to the role

of context in their investigations of various entrepreneurial processes (Baker and Welter, 2018; Welter and Gartner,

2016; Zahra et al., 2014). From a theoretical perspective, these calls have been underpinned by a recognition that

previous studies of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial behavior have often prioritized internal factors specific to

the entrepreneur (personality traits, personal background, motivations, demographic characteristics, cognitive behav-

ior, etc.) over the wider social, spatial, institutional, and temporal contexts within which entrepreneurship and entre-

preneurial activity occurs (Gartner, 1995; Zahra, 2007). This, in turn, has meant that there has been far less written

about the various contextual factors that provide individuals with entrepreneurial opportunities, set boundaries for

their actions, and generally influence the nature and extent of entrepreneurship (Welter, 2011).

One consequence of this increased focus on issues of contextualization has been a growth in interest in the rele-

vance of history, and historical methodologies, to the study of entrepreneurship. Mirroring the so-called “historic

turn”in organization studies (Clark and Rowlinson, 2004), this drive to more fully integrate historical insights into the

study of entrepreneurship has, in part, been driven by a general desire to challenge the ahistorical, hypothesis-testing

natural science methodologies deployed in much mainstream entrepreneurial literature (Forbes and Kirsch, 2011;

Wadhwani and Jones, 2014). At the same time, however, there has also been a growing recognition that historical

perspectives have the potential to enhance our understanding of the role of context in entrepreneurship by not only

allowing for a greater appreciation of change over time (Cassis and Minoglou, 2005), but also by situating the activi-

ties of firms and entrepreneurs in relation to their time and place (Baker and Welter, 2018; Wadhwani, 2016a).

One such area in which the potential of historical contextualization holds particular promise is in relation to the

analysis of entrepreneurial networks. Although a widely studied subfield of entrepreneurship, the academicliterature

on entrepreneurial networks has tended to be dominated by positivist studies that have sought to isolate key, quan-

tifiable variables in order to identify those network formations that produce the most beneficial outcomes for new

ventures (Hoang and Antoncic, 2003; Slotte-Kock and Coviello, 2010). This, in turn, has meant that there has been

less attention given to the role that contextual factors play in the functioning and development of different entrepre-

neurial network formations (Arregle et al., 2015; Hoang and Yi, 2015; Welter and Gartner, 2016). Likewise, while a

number of studies have theorized how entrepreneurial networks develop and evolve (Drakopoulou et al., 2006; Hite

and Hesterly, 2001; Slotte-Kock and Coviello, 2010), there remain comparatively few studies that have applied

detailed longitudinal perspectives in order to get a more in-depth understanding of how specific entrepreneurial net-

works change over time (Hoang and Yi, 2015; Jack, 2010; Vissa and Bhagavatula, 2012).

This article contributes toward rectifying these imbalances in the academic literature, as well as taking forward the

call for greater attention to be given to history in the study of entrepreneurship (Baker and Welter, 2018; Lohrke and

Landström, 2010; Welter, 2011; Zahra and Wright, 2011), by deploying historical contextualization to advance our under-

standing of entrepreneurial networks and their functions. To achieve this goal, this article utilizes a microhistorical-

informed approach (Decker, 2015; Magnússon and Szijártó, 2013) to analyze and look in depth at the ways in which the

personal network of one nineteenth-century British inventor and entrepreneur changed over time. The individual chosen

for this in-depth analysis was Sir Isaac Holden (1807–1897), who pioneered the use of the Square Motion wool-combing

machine in the nineteenth century and whose factories in France were at one time the largest producers of combed wool

in the world (Holden, 2015; Honeyman, 2004; Jennings, 1982a). This more small-scale and focused perspective not only

helps to illustrate the extent to which the content and functions of such networks are socially embedded in time and

HOLLOW 67