Rod McNaughton on where entrepreneurship happens

"I did not come to entrepreneurship through the usual route. My earliest academic training was in geography, and the questions that first drew me in were not about ventures or founders, but about the role of place in economic activity.

"My doctoral research examined what was then an emerging industry, venture capital, and its striking spatial unevenness. I was interested in why growth capital clustered so strongly in particular regions, and what that meant for places trying to foster innovation.

"Venture capitalists remain closely involved with their investments, and monitoring is a hands-on and intensive process. That reinforces regional disparities in access to capital. At the time, early forms of investment syndication were emerging, hinting at institutional mechanisms that might ease some of the constraints of distance.

"Even then, it was clear to me that entrepreneurship could not be understood without attention to place and institutions. Markets are always embedded. That concern with context and access has stayed with me ever since.

"Over time, I began to feel that geography alone did not give me all the tools I needed. I wanted to engage more directly with firm behaviour and strategic decision-making, particularly as industries themselves were beginning to change. That led me to complete a second PhD, this time in marketing, with a focus on the digital distribution of software.

"This was a time of profound transition, as software evolved from boxed products sold on disks to digital downloads and later to software as a service. Distribution costs were collapsing, and firms were suddenly able to reach customers far beyond their home markets.

"What struck me most was that digital businesses were beginning to operate globally almost from inception. The barriers to reaching international markets were falling rapidly, but institutional frictions remained. That tension between technological possibility and institutional constraint became a recurring theme in my work.

"These ideas naturally led me towards questions of early internationalisation. As a Professor of Marketing at the University of Otago during the early Internet era, I became increasingly interested in firms that were using digital channels to enter international markets far earlier than prevailing theories suggested was possible.

"The evidence did not fit the dominant models. Stage-based theories of international expansion assumed gradual learning and incremental commitment, yet here were firms operating internationally from the outset.

"The theory lagged behind what technology was enabling. Firms could reach global markets from day one, but our explanations had not caught up. My research during this period contributed to a growing body of work on international new ventures, helping to explain how young firms internationalised rapidly through networks, digital channels, and opportunity recognition rather than gradual learning.

"Over time, however, I became increasingly uneasy with how early internationalisation was being interpreted. While some firms flourished, others struggled, even when they appeared to follow similar strategies.

"That variability mattered. Speed alone was not the answer.

"This prompted a shift in my research towards questions of institutional fit. I became interested in how alignment between firm capabilities and institutional environments shapes entrepreneurial success across borders. Institutional context is not just background. It actively enables and constrains what entrepreneurs can do.

"Pursuing this line of inquiry also required me to revisit some of the assumptions embedded in earlier work, including my own. That reflexivity has been important to me. If research cannot question its own foundations, it risks becoming doctrine rather than inquiry.

"My move to the University of Waterloo at the start of the millennium marked another significant expansion in my thinking about entrepreneurship. There, I helped to found what would become the Conrad School of Entrepreneurship and Business, working across engineering and business education.

"That experience made the ecosystem nature of entrepreneurship unmistakable. Outcomes reflect institutional design as much as individual effort. You could see how capital, talent, pedagogy, and organisational structures interact over time to shape what becomes possible.

"When I returned to New Zealand to join the University of Auckland in 2013, I continued to pursue this system-level perspective. A few years ago, this included helping to establish Ngā Ara Whetū, a transdisciplinary research centre that brings together scholars from across the university to address complex climate and biodiversity challenges.

"The problems that matter most do not respect disciplinary boundaries, and our research should not either.

"As Academic Director of the Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, I have focused on translating research insights into applied learning environments. CIE works across disciplines to support students and staff in developing entrepreneurial capability through experiential engagement.

"One research-informed aspect of this work is my leadership of the Global University Entrepreneurial Spirit Students’ Survey in New Zealand. GUESSS provides systematic insight into students’ entrepreneurial intentions, aspirations, and perceived capabilities. Understanding what students aspire to, and where they feel underprepared, allows us to design learning experiences that build the capabilities they actually need, not the ones we imagine they should have.

"Especially with the advent of generative AI, my research increasingly suggests that judgement under uncertainty is the defining entrepreneurial skill. That is not something that can be learned from templates or offloaded to technology. It has to be developed through experience, reflection, and feedback.

"In recent years, I have become increasingly engaged in public debate, contributing research-informed perspectives to discussions on intellectual property policy, research commercialisation and New Zealand’s productivity challenge through various media and social platforms.

"Entrepreneurship is still widely misunderstood. It is often reduced to starting ventures and motivated by accumulating personal wealth, rather than being recognised as a set of competencies that help people solve problems, make decisions under uncertainty, and adapt to change. Given the economic and societal challenges we face, developing these capabilities more broadly has become essential. For me, engaging publicly is part of helping shift that understanding.

"These conversations often feed back into my research, revealing institutional frictions that are difficult to observe within academia alone.

"Looking ahead, I believe entrepreneurship research must continue to move beyond heroic narratives of successful individuals towards a deeper understanding of systems, institutions, and responsibility in practice.

"The real contribution universities can make is not simply to generate more ventures, but to equip more people across all disciplines with the capability to act thoughtfully and purposefully in uncertain environments.

"For me, the research journey remains ongoing, guided by a sustained conviction that entrepreneurship is inextricably linked to the institutions and environments in which it unfolds."