Schumpeter and the Obsolescence of the Entrepreneur
AbstractThe English-language literature of technological change is one of the few areas of economic writing in which Joseph Schumpeter has maintained a following and in which he has been accorded some modicum of the attention he deserves. There has grown up within this literature a standard interpretation of Schumpeter's famous assertion that progress will eventually come to be 'mechanized'. The conventional wisdom goes something like this. The argument in Schumpeter's early writings by which writers invariably mean the 1934 English translation of The Theory of Economic Development -- is really quite different from that in Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. There are, in effect, two Schumpeters: an 'early' Schumpeter and a 'later' Schumpeter. It was the former who believed in the importance of bold entrepreneurs, while the latter envisaged their demise and replacement by a bureaucratized mode of economic organization. Moreover, the reason Schumpeter changed his views is that he was reacting to the historical development of capitalism as he saw it taking place around him. As he moved from the world of owner-managed firms in early twentieth-century Europe to the world of large American corporations in the 1930s and 1940s, his opinions changed appropriately. The paper attempts to make two points. The first is that, as a doctrinal matter, the 'two Schumpeters' thesis, as it is understood in the Anglo-American literature on technological change, is clearly wrong. Equally wrong is the idea that the fundamentals of Schumpeter's thought on entrepreneurship were influenced importantly by any observation of large firms in the United States after 1931. Schumpeter's ideas were remarkably consistent from at least 1926 (five years before he came to the U. S.) until his death. The obsolescence thesis speaks to a distinction between early capitalism and later capitalism, perhaps, but not to an earlier and later Schumpeter. The second, and more important, point is that the obsolescence thesis is wrong. It rests on a confusion -- or perhaps a bait-and-switch -- between two quite different kinds of economic knowledge.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University of Connecticut, Department of Economics in its series Working papers with number 2002-19.
Length: 29 pages
Date of creation: Aug 2002
Date of revision:
Publication status: Forthcoming in Advances in Austrian Economics
Contact details of provider:
Postal: University of Connecticut 341 Mansfield Road, Unit 1063 Storrs, CT 06269-1063
Phone: (860) 486-4889
Fax: (860) 486-4463
Web page: http://www.econ.uconn.edu/
More information through EDIRC
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2002-11-18 (All new papers)
- NEP-CBE-2002-11-18 (Cognitive & Behavioural Economics)
- NEP-COM-2002-11-18 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-ENT-2002-11-18 (Entrepreneurship)
- NEP-IND-2002-11-18 (Industrial Organization)
- NEP-TID-2002-11-18 (Technology & Industrial Dynamics)
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Heinz Kurz, 2012. "Schumpeter’s new combinations," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 871-899, November.
- Reid, Gavin C & Ujjual, Vandana, 2008.
"Firms in Scottish High Technology Clusters: software, life sciences, microelectronics, optoelectronics and digital media – preliminary evidence and analysis on firm size, growth and optimality,"
SIRE Discussion Papers
2008-41, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
- Gavin C. Reid & Vandana Ujjual, 2008. "Firms in Scottish High Technology Clusters: software, life sciences, microelectronics, optoelectronics and digital media – preliminary evidence and analysis on firm size, growth and optimality," CRIEFF Discussion Papers 0804, Centre for Research into Industry, Enterprise, Finance and the Firm.
- Bormotov, Michael, 2009. "Economic cycles: historical evidence, classification and explication," MPRA Paper 19616, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Sophie Boutillier, 2008. "The Russian Entrepreneur Today: Elements of Analysis of the Socialized Entrepreneur," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 131-154.
- Bormotov, Michael, 2010. "Modern Knowledge Based Economy: all-factors endogenous growth model and total investment allocation," MPRA Paper 19932, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Federica Saliola & Antonello Zanfei, 2007. "Multinational firms, global value chains and the organization of technology transfer," Working Papers 0710, University of Urbino Carlo Bo, Department of Economics, Society & Politics - Scientific Committee - L. Stefanini & G. Travaglini, revised 2007.
- Saliola, Federica & Zanfei, Antonello, 2009. "Multinational firms, global value chains and the organization of knowledge transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 369-381, March.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Kasey Kniffin).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.