College

 In-­Corporation:  
A  Model  for  the  Future  of  Corporate  Entrepreneurship  
 
We   are   at   the   start   of   a   millennium   that   is   increasingly   being   defined   by   global   connectivity,  
breakthrough   innovations   and   a   fast   changing   world.   Instrumental   to   leading   these   changes   and  
progress   are   the   large   multi-­‐national   companies.   They   have   the   extensive   reach   beyond   national  
boundaries  and  capabilities  to  create  products  and  services  that  are  already  setting  the  pace  for  a  
competitive  and  vibrant  economy.  

In   this   new   competitive   era,   qualities   such   as   adaptability   and   innovative   minds   are   key   to   survival  
and  these  can  be  found  in  an  “entrepreneur”.  In   1934,  Schumpeter1  explained,  “…entrepreneurs  are  
prime   movers   of   economic   change”.   Undeniably,   today’s   powerhouse   corporations   were   once  
created   by   individual   entrepreneurs   such   as   Steve   Jobs   of   Apple   and   Thomas   Edison   of   General  
Electric.   As   these   companies   grow,   the   concept   of   spreading   the   founders’   entrepreneurial   spirit  
across  the  entire  company  and   through  time  is  hard  to  conceive.  Indeed,  to  those  who  view  large  
companies  as  being  bureaucratic  and  risk  adverse  in  nature,  the  term  “corporate  entrepreneurship”  
is  an  oxymoron  and  a  huge  challenge.      

Despite  the  obvious  challenges  for  large  companies,  it  would  also  be  a  great  misconception  to  say  
that  these  organisations  are  not  at  all  capable  of  being  entrepreneurial.  In  fact,  a  large  company’s  
reputation,  human  capital  and  existing  technologies  can  empower  their  employees  to  innovate  and  
create  at  a  much  faster  pace  and  at  a  greater  complexity.  For  example,  it  would  be  nearly  impossible  
for  an  individual  entrepreneur  to  build  the  Airbus  A380.  So,  when  we  think  of  a  large  company  with  
the  right  people,  process  and  corporate  positioning,  entrepreneurship  can  thrive  and  lead  the  pace  
of   innovation   globally.   Today,   the   revolutionary   Post-­‐it   Notes   have   colourfully   filled   our   office  
spaces  and  it  is  fondly  attributed  to  Art  Frye,  an  “intrapreneur”  from  3M.    

Any  entrepreneurial  organization  geared  up  to  make  changes  and  innovations  must  above  all  be  a  
learning   organisation.   Senge2   once   explained,   “As   the   world   becomes   more   interconnected   and  
business   becomes   more   complex   and   dynamic   …   it   is   no   longer   sufficient   to   have   one   person  
learning   for   the   organisation”.   What   we   call   a   learning   organisation   surely   has   its   roots   in  

                                                                                                               
1
Schumpeter,  J.  A.  (1934).  The  Theory  of  Economic  Development.  Cambridge,  MA:  Harvard  University  Press.
2
Senge,  P.  (1990).  The  Fifth  Discipline:  The  Art  and  Science  of  the  Learning  Organisation,  New  York:  Currency  Doubleday.
something   we   all   have   experienced   –   our   education   in   colleges.   We   were   old   enough   to   be  
independent   and   yet,   free   enough   to   lead   initiatives   that   allowed   us   to   imagine   the   impossible.   This  
culture   of   exploration,   learning   and   collaboration   has   in   fact   become   a   birthplace   of   not   only  
research  and  education,  but  also  many  business  ideas.  It  is  hardly  surprising  that  companies  such  as  
Google,  Yahoo,  SUN,  Cisco  Systems  and  HP  were  once  a  start-­‐up  from  the  Stanford  University,  one  of  
the  leading  learning  organizations  in  the  world.  
 
Hence,  the  learning  and  innovative  culture  of  colleges  can  be  incorporated  within  large  companies.  
And   this   inverted   pyramid   framework   is   what   I   term   as   the   “College   In-­‐Corporation”   of   3   Ps   –  
People,   Process,   and   Positioning.   The   people   of   the   company   are   the   fore-­‐runners   of   the  
corporation   just   like   the   students   in   colleges,   the   process   or   systems   within   the   business   are   much  
like  education  curriculum  that  makes  things  fall  into  place  and  finally,  the  faculty  or  the  corporate  
positioning   provides   the   leadership   support   and   vision   for   the   company’s   future.   The   rest   of   my  
essay  will  detail  how  large  companies  can  utilise  the  3Ps  to  inculcate  corporate  entrepreneurship  
within  their  organisation.  
 

Figure  1:  The  framework  of  College  In-­‐Corporation  

 
PEOPLE  
 
The   framework   of   “College   In-­‐Corporation”   places   the   people   at   the   top   of   the   pyramid.   Any  
college’s  ultimate  pride  is  the  student  body  and  similarly  any  company’s  pride  must  ultimately  be  
their  employees  because  they  are  the  ones  creating  the  products  and  systems  that  further  expand  
the   company’s   vibrancy   and   expertise.   Richard   Branson3,   the   CEO   of   Virgin   Group   beautifully  
explained  the  importance  of  employees.  He  said,  “Convention  dictates  that  a  company  should  look  
after   its   shareholders   first,   its   customers   next   and   last   of   all   worry   about   its   employees.   Virgin   does  
the   opposite.   For   us,   our   employees   matter   most…   if   you   start   off   with   a   happy,   well-­‐motivated  
workforce,   you’re   much   more   likely   to   have   happy   customers.   And   in   due   course   the   resulting  
profits  will  make  your  shareholders  happy.”  Hence,  once  the  focus  is  on  the  people,  their  sense  of  
belonging  and  pride  automatically  contributes  to  the  productivity  and  a  healthy  innovative  culture  
in  the  organisation.    

One  obvious  factor  linked  to  the  employees  is  time.  The  workaholic  world  of  corporations  is  viewed  
to   be   fixated   with   “9   to   5   jobs”   and   endless   overtime.   This   hardly   leaves   room   for   any   play   and  
experimentation.   If   a   company   is   serious   about   making   innovation   and   having   new   products   and  
ideas   as   part   of   their   culture,   “time”   is   a   resource   they   must   free   up   for   their   employees.   In   the  
“Time-­‐Pressure/Creativity   Matrix”4   as   shown   below,   the   high   likelihood   of   creative   thinking   occurs  
when  there  is  a  low  time  pressure5.    

Figure  2:  The  Time-­‐Pressure/Creativity  Matrix  

Corporations   such   a   Google   and   3M   have   already   realised   this   importance   of   time.   Google   allows  
their   engineers   20%   of   their   time   to   work   on   own   projects,   build   prototypes,   share   their  
experiments   and   collaborate   with   other   teams.   It   is   hardly   surprising   that   50%   of   Google’s   new  
products   originate   from   this   20%   time6.   Creativity   and   experimentation   is   at   the   heart   of   all   new  
products  and  this  can  only  be  done  if  the  employees  are  left  to  be  free  for  a  period  of  time  just  to  
explore  ideas.    
 

                                                                                                               
3  Branson,  R.  (2005).  Losing  My  Virginity:  The  autobiography.  Three  Rivers  Press.  
4  Teresa  M.  Amabile,  Jennifer  M.  Mueller,  William  B.  Simpson,  Constance  N.  Hadley  Steven  J.  Kramer  and  Lee  Fleming.  (2002).  

Time  pressure  and  Creativity  in  Organisation:  A  longitudinal  Field  Study.  Harvard  Business  School.    
<  http://www.hbs.edu/research/facpubs/workingpapers/abstracts/0102/02-­‐073.html>  
5  Teresa  M.  Amabile,  Constance  N.  Hadley,    Jennifer  M.  Mueller,  Steven  J.  Kramer.  (2003).    Harvard  Business  Review  on  the  

Innovative  Enterprise  –  Article  on  Creativity  under  the  Gun.  United  States  of  America:  Harvard  Business  School  Press.  
6  Mayer,  Marissa,  Google's  Vice-­‐President  of  Search  Products  and  User  Experience.  "MS&E  472  Course:  Entrepreneurial  

Thought  Leaders  Seminar  Series."  (An  audio  link:  http://www.stanford.edu/group/edcorner/uploads/podcast/mayer060517.mp3).  

ETL  Seminar  Series/Stanford  University.  17  May  2006.    
The   second   most   important   people   factor   is   diversity.   Remember   the   times   in   college   when   we  
made   many   friends   across   different   faculties,   projects   and   co-­‐curricular   activities?   This   diversity  
creates  a  tremendous  exchange  of  ideas.  It  stimulates  our  minds  to  rethink  our  perspectives  as  we  
mix   with   different   people.   In   large   companies,   the   chance   to   meet   different   people   is   plenty.   If  
companies  can  implement  systems  that  make  the  employees  reorganise  frequently  on  project  basis,  
without   the   need   to   engage   in   the   inconveniences   of   moving   and   transfer,   it   will   ensure   a   mix   of  
ideas   that   will   pave   the   way   for   innovation.   Three   surest   way   of   creating   diversity   is   to   allow   for  
fluid   movement   of   people   across   teams,   bring   in   outsiders   and   create   diverse   teams   with   various  
expertise   and   talents.   For   example,   Proctor   &   Gamble   continuously   forms   multifunctional   project  
teams  to  run  the  multi-­‐product  company.    

Finally,  if  a  company  truly  believes  in  the  importance  of  its  people,  it  must  also  understand  that  it  is  
impossible   to   have   every   one   of   its   employees   ingrained   with   the   qualities   of   an   entrepreneur.   In  
fact,  the  company  must  recognise  it  does  not  need  only  entrepreneurial  employees.  As  a  new  idea  
or  product  goes  through  its  phases  of  birth  to  implementation,  it  will  need  champions  to  start  off  
the  idea,  technologists  to  build  the  product,  implementers  to  execute  the  project,  quality  control  for  
product   certification   and   finally   marketers   to   publicise   the   product.   This   shows   that   an  
organization   should   be   holistically   entrepreneurial   and   this   by   nature   will   have   places   for   people  
who  have  different  talents  for  different  tasks  and  positions.    
 
 
PROCESS  
 
The   second   layer   in   the   pyramid   of   “College   In-­‐Corporation”   is   the   second   P   of   Process.   With   the  
employees  at  the  forefront  of  execution,  there  have  to  be  proper  channels  and  systems  in  place  to  
guide   them   and   make   it   easy   for   ideas   to   sieve   through   the   organisation.   Corporate  
entrepreneurship  must  be  backed  by  processes  that  make  innovation  a  common  part  of  the  culture.  
Furthermore,  they  should  allow  all  ideas  an  easy  avenue  to  be  expressed  and  above  all,  ideas  from  
all   sources   must   be   equally   encouraged.   I   will   go   onto   to   explain   how   this   already   being   done  
through  the  different  processes.  
 
First   and   foremost,   any   process   linked   to   “corporate   entrepreneurship”  must  become  a  norm  of  the  
company   culture.   Being   innovative   and   creative   must   be   part   of   daily   business   operations   and  
should  not  be  seen  as  something  extraordinary.  Hence,  no  extra  importance  should  be  given  to  the  
culture  of  creativity  just  like  the  company’s  culture  of  safety  assurance,  risk  management  or  project  
execution.   Once   innovation   and   creativity   become   part   of   daily   operations,   these   small   seeds   of  
“normal  changes”  will  start  to  create  ripples  of  initiatives  within  the  organisation.  This  process  of  
being   “normal”   is   what   Drucker7   calls     “systematic   abandonment   policy   at   all   times,   sloughing   off  
the  past  so  that  resources  are  available  for  the  future”.    Companies  have  to  put  processes  in  place  to  
maintain  this  constant  engagement  in  creativity  and  innovation  as  part  of  their  normal  operations.  
 
Secondly,  there  must  be  processes  in  place  to  allow  the  expression  of  ideas  at  the  inception  stage  
and  these  must  reach  the  top  management  quickly.  In  the  daily  operations  of  large  companies,  the  
demands  of  current  product  deliverables  and  customer  requests  can  kill  off  a  new  idea  before  it  can  
reach   the   right   people   and   stage   of   development.   To   combat   this,   companies   can   implement   both  
internal   and   external   sharing   systems   to   constantly   engage   in   the   recognition   and   expression   of  
these   ideas.   IBM’s   Alpha   Works8   is   one   such   platform   that   allows   the   engineers   to   put   up   their  
emergent   technologies   for   any   worldwide   developers   to   download   and   collaborate   on   the  
possibility  of  a  commercial  product.  This  type  of  an  open  platform  allows  ideas  to  reach  the  right  
people  and  opens  the  doors  to  new  business  ventures.  
 
The   last   touch   in   the   process   of   innovation   is   the   encouragement   of   all   types   of   ideas   within   the  
company.   No   company   should   have   the   view   that   the   innovation   responsibility   lies   only   with   the  
R&D   department   and   its   engineers.   Research   and   ideas   on   new   business   practices   are   just   as  
important   as   research   on   new   technologies.   In   fact,   new   ways   of   working   within   various  
departments   like   human   resource,   audit   and   finance   can   synergize   with   the   new   products   to  
improve   the   company’s   culture   and   performance.   A   2006   CEO   Survey9   found   that   companies   that  
spent   more   on   business   operation   innovations   tend   to   outperform   their   peers.   Hence,   every  
employee   in   any   department   has   an   equal   role   to   play   to   increase   the   innovative   scale   of   the  
company.  
 
 
 
                                                                                                               
7  Drucker,  P.  F.  (1980).  Managing  for  Tomorrow:  Managing  in  turbulent  times.  Industry  Week,  20(1),  54-­‐64.    
8  IBM’s  online  database  for  emergent  technologies:  http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/  
9  2006  CEO  Survey  by  IBM  Global  Business  Services  (“Expanding  the  Innovation  Horizon”)  

PDF  Link:  http://www-­‐935.ibm.com/services/de/bcs/pdf/2006/ceostudy_engl.pdf  

POSITIONING  
 
The  bottom  layer  of  the  pyramid  of  “College  In-­‐Corporation”  is  the  third  P  of  Positioning.  It  occupies  
the  least  area  on  the  inverted  pyramid  and  yet  it  is  responsible  for  the  strategic  overview  and  the  
focus  of  the  company.  
 
For   any   corporate   entrepreneurship   to   be   successful,   the   CEO   and   the   senior   management   must  
champion  it.  Gone  are  the  days  where  the  senior  management  goes  on  a  retreat  for  a  few  days  and  
comes   back   with   the   magic   strategic   formula   for   the   company.   The   leadership   of   the   company  
should  engage  the  subordinates  to  formulate  the  strategic  and  long-­‐term  direction  of  the  company,  
and   provide   continuous   support   for   employee   endeavors.   This   leadership   in   effect   will   set   the  
company  in  the  path  of  corporate  entrepreneurship.  
 
The  next  step  for  the  leaders  is  to  provide  autonomy  for  its  employees.  The  larger  the  company,  the  
greater  is  the  complexity  of  tasks.  At  this  stage,  as  Morris  and  Kurato10  explained,  it  becomes  even  
more  important  for  managers  to  “give  up  control  to  gain  control”.  This  can  be  implemented  through  
“cellular”   units   of   independent   teams.   Miles,   Snow,   Mathew,   Miles   and   Coleman11   borrowed   the  
term   “cellular”   to   further   detail   that   each   cell   has   similar   characteristics   of   the   larger   organism.  
However,  when  the  cells  are  combined,  the  synergy  and  interaction  with  other  cells  create  a  richer  
and   vibrant   culture.   Similarly,   companies   must   implement   the   support   for   teams   that   are   self-­‐
resourcing  and  self-­‐managing  to  lead  their  own  entrepreneurial  ventures.    
 
The  final  aspect  of  corporate  positioning  is  the  portfolio  balance  of  new  and  existing  products.  An  
entrepreneurial  firm  typically  has  more  risky  and  new  products  than  its  peers.  This  phenomenon  
can  be  noted  in  3M,  where  a  quarter  of  its  annual  revenues  are  generated  from  products  that  are  
less   than   5   years   old.   Similarly,   at   any   time   Google   has   70%   of its products supporting   the   company’s  
core  business,  20%  are  emerging  technologies  and  the  remaining  10%  are  speculative  experiments.  
James  March12  refers  to  this  concept  as  “exploiting  the  present  and  exploring  the  future”.    
 
 
                                                                                                               
10  Morris,  M.  H.  and  Kurato,  D.F.  (2002).  Corporate  Entrepreneurship,  Fort  Worth:  Harcourt  College  Publishers.  
11  Miles,  R.E.,  Snow,  C.,  Mathews,  J.,  Miles,  G.,  &  Coleman,  H.,  Jr.  (1997).  Organising  in  the  knowledge  age:  Anticipating  the  cellular  

form.  Academy  of  Management  Executive,  11(4),  7-­‐20.  

12  March,  J.  (1991).  Organisation  Science.  Article  on  “Exploitation  and  Exploitation  in  Organisational  Learning.  
CONCLUSION  
 
Today,   the   concept   of   “corporate   entrepreneurship”   is   thankfully   not   a   new   one   for   the   world   of  
business.  By  the  mid-­‐1980s,  the  singular  model  of  creativity  and  research  taking  place  only  within  
the  R&D  labs,  were  no  longer  accepted  as  companies  started  to  realise  the  importance  of  innovation  
in   every   division   of   the   company.   Many   companies   already   started   to   have   innovation   initiatives.  
For  example,  DuPont  has  Business  Builders,  Cisco  has  EMTG  (Emerging  Market  Technology  Group)  
and  IBM  has  Emerging  Business  Opportunities.    
 
As   we   head   into   the   future,   more   companies   are   engaging   in   business   ventures   and   research   into  
the  policies  of  corporate  entrepreneurship.  This  awareness  of  “College  In-­‐Corporation”  will  spread  
and   lead   global   change,   innovation   and   growth.   The   concept   of   future   innovation   will   definitely  
have  its  inception  in  what  we  call  the  “corporate  entrepreneurship”.    
 
(2088  words)  
BIBLIOGRAPHY:  
 
[1] Harvard  Business  Review  on  The  Innovative  Enterprise,  (HBR  Publishing,  2003)  
 
[2] Birkinshaw,  Julian.  Entrepreneurship  in  the  Global  Firm.  (Sage  Publications,  2000)  
 
[3] Meyer,  Heppard.  Entrepreneurship  as  Strategy,  (Sage  Publishing  Inc,  2000)  
 
[4] Wolcott,  Lippotz.  Grow  From  Within  –  Mastering  Corporate  Entrepreneurship  and  
Innovation.  (McGraw-­‐Hill,  2010)  
 
[5] Burns.  Corporate  Entrepreneurship  –  Building  The  Entrepreneurial  organisation,  
(Palgrave  Macmillan,  2005)  
 
[6] Sathe.  Corporate  Entrepreneurship  –  Top  Managers  and  New  Business  Creation.  
(Cambridge  University  Press,    2003)  
 
[7] MacMillan,  Block.  Corporate  Venturing  –  Creating  New  Businesses  within  the  Firm.  
(Harvard  Business  School  Publishing,  1993)  
 
[8] Chesbrough.  Open  Business  Models  –  How  to  Thrive  in  the  New  Innovative  Landscape.  
(Harvard  Business  School  Press,  2006)  
 
[9] Hitt,  Ireland,  Camp,  Sexton.  Strategic  Entrepreneurship  –  Creating  a  New  Mindset.  
(Blackwell  Publishers,  2002)  

By Sayanee Basu
Singapore