Entrepreneurship and UK's Economic Recovery and Growth Essay

Entrepreneurship and UK's Economic Recovery and Growth - Essay Example The private sector has been turned with the express aim of replacing the employment opportunities that have been surrendered in the public service due to job cuts and for the emphasis on starting up of businesses in order to create jobs rather than lose them. Entrepreneurship is indeed the answer to the United Kingdom’s economic recovery and growth. For many a decade, British sociologists have been puzzled by entrepreneurship values atavistic persistence and about the aspirations of the labour force. This is despite the decrease in return on investment of entrepreneurial role and the dwindling numbers of new entrepreneurs in the UK. Given the laissez-faire traditions of the United Kingdom as far as business is concerned, entrepreneurial ambition is easier to understand as residual of the culture of the by-gone economic era. Max Webber, who founded the entrepreneurship research, has laid claim to the fact that Puritan theology once encouraged all its believers to adopt the role of the entrepreneur and define anew the content of the role. As a result, European form of capitalism, including the United Kingdom’s, was given a stimulus which gave it the chance to move its focus the restraints of guild traditionalism, which had earlier frustrated the development of capitalism in other regions of the world. Webber was able to identify a significantly causal form of entrepreneurship since he linked a determinant that was not economic, theology, to entrepreneurial supply. Webber was also of the belief that huge bureaucratic organizations were the future model of business (Soe, 2009 p88). This particular view can be construed as anti-entrepreneurial since most of these mammoth organizations are not in need of many entrepreneurs. His supposition that the twentieth century’s victorious capitalism did not need the support of any kind of religious asceticism was also significant at the time. His work tried to imply that capitalism, which could be consider ed mature, was reliant, upon, signals from the market that could be relied upon to provide entrepreneurs needed from a materialistic idealized population. This would result in the provision of entrepreneurs by the market, which was in place to replace the role of the wider society in providing these entrepreneurs. Webber’s vision took the presumption that capitalism had matured enough and had moulded a crucial labour force where there was cultural enshrinement and legitimization of entrepreneurship (Soe, 2009 p65). In the wake of this shift in culture in the United Kingdom, entrepreneurship has become an elastic, fungible, and inexhaustible commodity of labour. He concluded that entrepreneurship had lost the connection it historically had to supply sources that were of a non-economic nature, and, therefore, had lost its significance causally. Schumpeter expressed the theory that entrepreneurship can be distinguished from economic innovation by treating entrepreneurship as one of the ways via which economic innovation can occur (Soe, 2009 p89). He supposed that professionally managed, large, and corporately organized firms had the impetus to replace owner-operated small firms as the industrial combination that was dominant in societies with advanced markets. However, management of giant corporations would take the duties of entrepreneurship. Professional managers thus would take over the tasks of entrepreneurs in plan execution, risk evaluation, and innovation planning. Karl Marx who was uninterested in