The approach taken to design and develop the case studies was guided by four central questions: (1) What are the opportunities and challenges to support business incubation in the community? (2) What can we learn about entrepreneurship development in and out of business incubation? (3) Are there other potential opportunities for two-year technical colleges to participate in the economic development of the community? and (4) What are the experiences and perspectives of minority and female entrepreneurs as they participate in business opportunities?[1]
The second component of the case study approach was drawn from a combination of what Stake (1994) called the "collective study" design. Under this design, each case is reviewed in depth to develop a better understanding of the issue under consideration in order to build a theory around the guiding questions. Based on this premise, each case study per se played a secondary role in facilitating our understanding of entrepreneurship and the opportunities for two-year technical colleges to participate in economic development in the community. Our interest was in examining a variety of cases describing different contextual situations and perspectives to develop insights about both particular conditions and general applications across cases. This approach allowed us to (1) examine similarities across case studies in a variety of contexts, (2) examine opportunities for participation in economic and entrepreneurship development unique to certain places, (3) characterize the experiences of key stakeholders functioning under different circumstances, and (4) describe the perspectives of minority and female entrepreneurs in different settings.
Since the purpose of the case study design was to develop an understanding of a "bounded" system and features common across the system (see Stake, 1994), we selected nine sites representing various contexts and levels of two-year college involvement. The selection process included the review and screening of 25 incubators with primary sponsorship from community colleges and 20 community colleges which offer a coherent series of courses on entrepreneurship identified through a review of related literature or nominations by experts in the field (e.g., NBIA executive staff and state directors of postsecondary technical education).
Site selection criteria included the presence of a comprehensive approach to education and training on entrepreneurship to foster economic development in the community through business incubation, courses on entrepreneurship, or a combination of both. Additional criteria included program stability (i.e., years of continuous operation and commitment from sponsoring organizations), evidence of established partnerships with industry, site location (urbanicity and geographical distribution), the integration of elements relevant to school-to-work opportunity programs, and provisions to serve minority and female entrepreneurs. Incubators were also screened based on the presence of comprehensive services on consulting, education, and training services; and on their linkages with community/technical colleges (see Appendices A and B).
Selected sites included seven two-year technical colleges representing various levels of involvement in economic development efforts in the community through either support of business incubation or entrepreneurship courses offered to the general public. Two business incubators with primary sponsorship from community organizations featuring a systematic approach to delivery of education/training services were also selected. Selected sites represented urban, suburban, and rural locations located in major regions of the country (West, Midwest, East, and South).
Questions to guide the data collection process were developed around four areas: (1) individual understanding of entrepreneurship, (2) personal or institutional experiences in the promotion of entrepreneurial skills, (3) training and educational opportunities designed around college coursework or business incubation programs, and (4) efforts to serve minority and female entrepreneurs at various stages of business development. With slight variations, this set of guiding questions served as the basis for developing instruments for interviews and focus groups with college administrators, instructors, students, business incubator staff, and in-house and external clients. These guiding questions were pilot tested at a business incubator sponsored by a two-year technical college, and further feedback was obtained from an advisory group in terms of content and wording. The modified versions for each of the instruments used to conduct interviews and focus groups with various stakeholders are presented in Appendices C and D.
After access was granted by a contact person, the primary means for data collection were individual interviews and focus groups. At community/technical colleges, interviews and focus groups were conducted whenever possible with all stakeholder groups, including college administrators, instructors, and students. At business incubators, interviews were conducted on an individual basis with incubator managers and selected staff (e.g., coordinator of instruction), and focus groups were held with in-house and external clients. The average size of focus groups was five participants representing various backgrounds (e.g., ethnicity, gender, education, and type of business).
With the exception of one site, all site visits were conducted by a team of two researchers. Prior to each interview or focus group, participants were informed about the purpose of their participation, the nature of the inquiry, and the intended use of the information. To stimulate rapport between interviewers and interviewees, and to encourage candid sharing of experiences, all participants were assured confidentiality of their input, and no identifiers of particular sites, staff, nor of any of the participants in this study are used in this report. The interview protocols served as semistructured guides, and additional probes were developed ad hoc according to the nature of the responses and particularities of the events and/or experiences described by the participants. Interviews and focus groups were tape recorded with the verbal consent of the participants.
During each site visit a tour of the college and/or business incubator facilities was conducted to familiarize researchers with the contextual circumstances of the setting. At this point, personal notes were taken to describe particular characteristics and further complement the information gathered on the site. After site visits, the visiting team compared notes and exchanged observations on the characteristics of the site and events of the day to begin developing patterns in light of the questions guiding the case study design.
One overarching question guided the development of each case study: "What is to be learned from events and experiences described at each single site?" Information compiled from each site included promotional materials, articles published in journals and business magazines, and transcriptions of interviews and focus groups. To summarize and provide for balanced descriptions of key characteristics of participant sites, the narrative of each case is presented in four sections. The first section provides a background of the setting, circumstances, and reasons which led to the establishment of the business incubator or entrepreneurship program at the college. The second section describes the vision of the business incubation or college program on entrepreneurship, and strategies to manage and operate the program. The third section includes a description of the education and training component. Finally, the fourth section provides insights on entrepreneurial development based on business incubation or experiences with entrepreneurship courses.
The cross-analysis was designed in two levels. The first level was completed on the involvement of two-year technical colleges in community and entrepreneurship development. The intent was to provide an overview of the pattern of efforts across sites and identify key issues around the potential participation in economic development of the community. Based on the framework of involvement identified on the first level of analysis, the second level involves the participation of the reader/user to identify key elements, issues, opportunities, and limitations to implement particular efforts aimed at fostering economic development.
Users, such as administrators, instructors, and students, will benefit from an analytical reading of the material based on their own needs and objectives. Administrators may be interested in discovering potential opportunities and limitations for implementation purposes, while instructors and students may be interested in learning applications. In both instances, their own cross-analysis will, without a doubt, enhance what they learn from and how they utilize the case studies.
[1] Throughout this document the term "client" will also be used to refer to entrepreneurs using business incubator or college services.