top of page


Exit is an important component of the entrepreneurship process that is complex and demands further exploration into uncovering some of its untold aspects. Both the entrepreneurship and exit literatures over the previous decade place a significant focus on the ‘unicorns’ or ‘gazelles’ of entrepreneurship that encompass only a fraction of what entrepreneurship and entrepreneurs are. My research moves beyond the quantitative, organisational foundations of the entrepreneurial exit academic literature to draw attention to the ‘average’ entrepreneur that operate under typical resource constraints in micro and small businesses. Qualitative research provides an opportunity to probe further into the entrepreneur’s narrative to better understand whether their emotions impact the exiting process.

Topics explored in the entrepreneurial exit process include:

  • Exit Process Stages

  • Dynamic Decisions

  • Wellbeing

  • Social Networks (Weak and Strong)

  • Socioemotional Wealth

  • Exit Strategy

Family Business

Being a 5th generation entrepreneur, I understand the value of transferring tacit knowledge relating to business operations. Family business research emphasizes using trusted advisors in the succession process, which is relatable to entrepreneurial exits regarding the attempt to navigate and rationalize the unknown factors within the exit process. In both family and nonfamily businesses, there is a mounting support that networks play a key role in collective decision-making, with considerable contributions coming from the role of the spouse in the decision-making process. This review highlights the need to explore the role of networks in the entrepreneurial exit process as they may influencers in exit decision-making that translates into alternative or unplanned results. My research on family businesses focuses on the factors surrounding succession, continuity of the business, and successor business understanding. I am currently exploring succession within the lobster fishing industry in the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland, and Prince Edward Island (funded by the Ireland Canada University Foundation).

Indigenous Entrepreneurship

We know that Indigenous populations around the world suffer (poverty, education, health), but efforts are rebuilding their nations through entrepreneurial enterprise (Pedro et al., 2004). Hindle and Moroz (2010) identify Indigenous Entrepreneurship as a legitimate, well-defined sub-field of research showing a rooting in social ties that relies on immediate available resources involving internal economic activity with no transaction and informality (Dana, 2015). The aim of my research is to contribute through the historical perspectives of entrepreneurs from the Mi’kmaq Nation on Prince Edward Island that highlight a contrasting approach to business from traditional Western practice. With this research, I hope to help support, foster, and build sustainable communities.


  • Dana, L. P. (2015). Indigenous entrepreneurship: an emerging field of research. International Journal of Business and Globalisation, 14(2), 158-169.

  • Hindle, K., & Moroz, P. (2010). Indigenous entrepreneurship as a research field: developing a definitional framework from the emerging canon. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(4), 357-385.

  • Peredo, A. M., Anderson, R. B., Galbraith, C. S., Honig, B., & Dana, L. P. (2004). Towards a theory of indigenous entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 1(1-2), 1-20.


Students are selectively negligent, and successful students neglect the right stuff (Gibbs, 2014) highlights the pressing time facing students, which forces them to be highly selective. Is it really the case that students are being strategically selective or is it laziness? Are incoming students not prepared to combat the stress and workload of higher education? Is lacking quality assurance oversight in curriculum development, delivery, and assessment causing “tells” or “signals” of irrelevant course material that is not evaluated or in line with strategic learning outcomes?


In terms of undergraduate education in Australia, Peat (2011, p. 53) claim, “Many of the students arrive with an expectation of being spoon-fed, having been conditioned to using a surface approach to learning in high school.” Similarly, Thompson (2003) found students conducting research chose the path of least resistance (in this case the internet) instead of conducting an appropriate review of literature that would include books, textbooks, grey literature, and other hard to find information. Are we conditioning our youth (because of the fast-paced world we live in) to be deliberate and selective? I do not think it is simply a case of being overwhelmed with information, rather how students are being taught and information presented.


My current research explores the adoption of Open Educational Resource (OER) Textbooks in entrepreneurship courses.


  • Gibbs, G. (2014) ‘53. Powerful Ideas All Teachers Should Know About’, Students are selectively negligent, and successful students neglect the right stuff,, pp. 1-3.

  • Peat, M. (2011) 'Online Self-Assessment Materials: Do These Make a Difference to Student Learning?', Research in Learning Technology, 8(2).

  • Thompson, C. (2003) 'Information Illiterate or Lazy: How College Students Use the Web for Research', portal: Libraries and the Academy, 3(2), pp. 259-268.

bottom of page