







































 
 

45 
© 2025 by the author; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA 

 

Asian Business Research Journal 
Vol. 10, No. 3, 45-49, 2025 
ISSN: 2576-6759 
DOI: 10.55220/25766759.315 
© 2025 by the author; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA 

 
 

 

  
Are Entrepreneurs Born or Made? A Systematic Review of Theoretical Perspectives 
and Empirical Evidence 

 
Sidney Kawimbe1 

 
 
 

1ZCAS University – School of Business, Lusaka, Zambia. 
Email: skawimbe@yahoo.com  

 
Abstract 

The debate over whether entrepreneurs are born or made is central to understanding economic 
development worldwide. Entrepreneurs play a crucial role in creating organizations that generate 
jobs, enhance trade, and foster innovation, driving economic growth. Historically, the term 
entrepreneur originated from the French language, referring to individuals who take risks in 
uncertain business ventures (Cantillon, 1755). Over time, the definition evolved to emphasize 
innovation and creativity, distinguishing entrepreneurs from traditional business operators 
(Schumpeter, 1936). Entrepreneurship involves more than just having an idea; it requires risk-
taking, creativity, and the ability to implement strategies effectively. The argument that 
entrepreneurs are made is supported by theories suggesting that entrepreneurial traits develop 
through environmental factors, education, and experience. Behaviorist theories, such as those 
proposed by Watson (1924) and Skinner (1953), argue that individual characteristics are shaped 
by environment and learning processes. Bandura’s (1977) concept of self-efficacy highlights that 
individuals can cultivate entrepreneurial skills through confidence-building and learning from 
experiences. Contemporary research supports the perspective that entrepreneurial skills are 
acquired through education, mentorship, and experiential learning. Moreover, recent studies 
highlight how industry experience and networks enhance entrepreneurial success, especially 
among older entrepreneurs, reinforcing the notion that entrepreneurship is cultivated over time. 
In conclusion, while certain personality traits may offer advantages, entrepreneurship is 
predominantly shaped by learning, experience, and environmental influences. The overwhelming 
body of literature supports the assertion that entrepreneurs are in most cases made than born. 
The ability to innovate, take risks, and lead effectively is developed through deliberate practice 
and continuous learning, supporting the argument that entrepreneurs are made, not born. 

 
Keywords: Economic Development, Entrepreneurship, Innovation, Learning and Experience, Risk-taking. 

 
1. Introduction 

The question of whether entrepreneurs are born or made is age-old; and it strikes at the heart of economic 

development questions worldwide. In an increasingly global economy, entrepreneurs play a vital role in economic 

development because they create organizations, and these organizations produce jobs, increase trade, and accelerate 

the generation, application of innovative ideas, and their dissemination. But before we delve into the nitty gritty, it is 

important to define entrepreneurship and an entrepreneur because understanding these two terms will help in 

answering the question. In this regard it is important to go through a brief history of this word entrepreneur and know 

what it meant at the time of its origin. Entrepreneur is a French word, and it meant the economic literature. 

Entrepreneur is the person who is a risk taker and gets involved in such business activities, whose results are 

uncertain (Cantillon, 1755). However, the definition of the word entrepreneur was altered later in early twentieth 

century and became the one which defines an innovative attitude of an individual. This new definition supported the 

concept of innovation into the business world and differentiated an entrepreneur from a person who is just running a 

business, which is quite traditional in its nature (Schumpeter, 1936). Afterwards, the terms entrepreneur and the 

entrepreneurships were purely used for the persons and businesses, which have an essence of creativity in their 

existence, which are just after developing new ways of production of goods and services, trying on forming new sort 

of markets and new form of firms to facilitate the sustenance of their businesses in the market. The term entrepreneur 

is taken as a little complex one in terms of its definition, as the word itself is derived from entrepreneurship, which 

helps in defining it, and gives it a completely decipherable structure. Entrepreneurship itself is defined by the other 

words, like creativity, innovation, aptitude, etc. which lead to the creative actions of an individual, which has a direct 

impact on an individual’s life as well as on their society. It is also defined by its objective of producing or doing 

something new and something unique to develop a new identity in the society for any new business entity, via 

keeping its characteristics alive, which put their impact on its existing functions. 

 

 

mailto:skawimbe@yahoo.com
https://doi.org/10.55220/25766759.315
https://orcid.org/0009-0006-1039-5757


Asian Business Research Journal, 2025, 10(3): 45-49 

46 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA 

 

 

1.1. Entrepreneurship 
Entrepreneurship suggests the risk-taking attitude of an individual which involves every sort of cost, from time 

consumption to struggle of coming up with an effective and efficient strategy of doing business, which could 

overcome the social, intuitive and financial risks, and give an inner satisfaction along with a monetary reward, if, the 

newly created strategy of developing something succeeds (Peters, 1998).  

Both the terms innovation and entrepreneurship don‟t suggest having just an excellent idea in an individual’s 

mind, however they need an effort to put that idea into action as well. They need a proper discussion over the sort of 

idea, and a proper examining of the validity of that idea. In order to do so, teamwork is appreciated as it will do 

better in assessing the validity of the idea and giving it a new form which could become applicable and reduces the 

monetary loss. While discussing an idea many weaknesses show up in the structure of that idea which needs to be 

eliminated to avoid losses (Bessant, Tidd, 2007). In doing this, a particular behaviour of an individual is required; 

this defines him as a risk taker, and the one with the courage to manipulate the social and economic structures, in 

order to get himself an environment of bringing his ideas into action. Also, he must be aware of all the risks and must 

have the courage to face them if they ever show up in his path (Peters, 1998). 

 

1.2. Entrepreneur 
The definition of entrepreneur has been modified with passage of time in accordance to the world’s changing 

economical structures. The definition of the entrepreneur during the middle ages was related to the occupation, but, 

later the modified definition of entrepreneur refers more to the notions of creativity, risk taking and creation of 

wealth. This concept of entrepreneur defined the relation of the word with an individual. This definition is in 

accordance to the reviewed structure of business studies (Peters, 1998). Nowadays, the term entrepreneur is not only 

confined to male gender it also refers to women as entrepreneurs (Purdy, 2005). There was a time when women were 

only confined to their homes; they were not allowed to do anything except their household chores or playing the 

roles of mothers and wives. They were not even given the choice of expressing their disagreements towards various 

issues. However, in this era they are more powerful, independent and have the right of spending their lives on their 

own terms. They are also capable of expressing their views regarding various matters either they are of political, 

social, educational or economical nature. But still there could always be a debate on the comparison of men and 

women being entrepreneurs (Brindley, 2005).  

On the behalf of this comparison many views on entrepreneurships by women have come into scenario which 

argues that women are weak entrepreneurs and lack the basic traits which should be there in a good entrepreneur, 

like, they are not risk takers, they cannot face various challenges, they are emotional and are unable to take quick 

decisions in chaotic situations. Therefore, there could be no guarantee for a woman being a good entrepreneur 

(McClelland, Swailet al, 2005).  

Though all the above-mentioned definitions of entrepreneur define the term in more or less similar way, but still 

there are some restrictions in them, which refer to the fact that entrepreneurs cannot be found in every field, like 

education, medicine, law, engineering social work, etc. These definitions refer to some common and most essential 

traits of an individual, like organizing, creativity, risk taking and ability of making wealth, Peters (1998). 

 

2. Literature Review 
The debate over whether entrepreneurs are born or made has long been a central theme in entrepreneurial studies, 

reflecting broader discussions about the roles of innate traits versus learned skills in shaping individuals. Some 

scholars argue that entrepreneurial success stems from inherent personality traits such as risk-taking propensity, 

creativity, and resilience, suggesting that certain individuals are naturally predisposed to entrepreneurial endeavors. 

In contrast, others contend that entrepreneurship is a skill set cultivated through education, experience, and 

environmental influences, emphasizing the importance of learning and adaptation. This literature review explores 

both perspectives, examining empirical studies and theoretical frameworks to understand the extent to which 

entrepreneurial capabilities are innate or developed over time. 

 

2.1. The Born Perspective 
A strand of research supports the notion that entrepreneurship is largely influenced by inherent personality traits 

and genetic predispositions. This perspective suggests that certain individuals possess a natural inclination towards 

entrepreneurial activities, underpinned by heritable characteristics such as risk tolerance, creativity, and leadership 

(Shane & Nicolaou,2021). Studies using twin-based methodologies have reinforced the argument that genetic factors 

contribute significantly to entrepreneurial intent and business success (Obschonka &Stuetzer, 2020). Furthermore, 

personality traits associated with entrepreneurship—such as openness to experience, conscientiousness, and 

extraversion—are often linked to genetic influences (Zhang & Acs, 2022). Recent research highlights that innate 

cognitive abilities, including rapid problem-solving and high self-efficacy, are strong predictors of entrepreneurial 

engagement (Karhunen et al., 2023). While genetic predisposition may provide a foundational advantage, 

environmental factors and experiential learning also play a crucial role in shaping entrepreneurial success. Other 

studies on whether entrepreneurs are born or made have centred around biological disposition. Nofal, Nicolaou, 

Symeonidou, & Shane, 2018) in their research in entrepreneurship have indicated that studies in entrepreneurship 

have largely ignored biological factors. However, recently researchers have begun to explore the ways in which 

human biology affects this phenomenon. This literature has been fragmented, scattered across various outlets, 

making it difficult for entrepreneurship scholars to aggregate the findings and develop a broad theoretical perspective 

to describe how biology relates to entrepreneurship. 

Other recent studies continue to explore the interplay between inherent traits and learned skills in 

entrepreneurship. For instance, "The Science of Startups: The Impact of Founder Personalities on Company Success" 

(2023) examines how specific personality traits influence startup outcomes. Additionally, research indicates that 

older entrepreneurs, often over 50, leverage extensive industry experience and networks, leading to higher success 



Asian Business Research Journal, 2025, 10(3): 45-49 

47 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA 

 

 

rates compared to their younger counterparts. This suggests that accumulated knowledge and skills play a significant 

role in entrepreneurial success. 

 

2.2. The Made Perspective 
The main assumptions and theories supported by individuals arguing that a person’s characteristics, qualities, 

behaviour and other aspects of one’s personality are driven by factors including one’s will, atmosphere, background, 

experiences etc. These factors build one’s characteristics for instance, attitudes and beliefs, motivation, self-

adequacy, enthusiasm, self-control, entrepreneurship and so on (Shefsky, 1994). Shasky’s main reason behind the 

enduring this concept is that individuals are not born with the quality of entrepreneurship rather they are actually 

built. Shefsky (1994) attempted to demonstrate in the entire book that the qualities of entrepreneurship in an 

individual are derived from one’s efforts, novelty and devotion towards a job that they are intending to achieve 

accomplishment in. The whole book was based on this theory. Starting from Watson (Watson, 1924) to Skinner 

(Skinner, 1953), numerous supporters of this theory for instance Shefsky; were associated with behaviourism and its 

compassing learning theories. Bandura (Bandura, 1977) was also among the promoters of this theory. Once Watson 

said that if he by any means gets a dozen of young children, he could have build them from a genius and smart 

person to anything else he willed. This statement meant that an individual, his characteristics and qualities are built 

with his atmosphere and surroundings. The impact that could bring a change can only be the conduct and activities 

noticed (Skinner, 1953). All conducts and attitudes were examined and learned in his learning model. 

Moreover, if he illustrated three important learning concepts: Operant Conditioning, Positive Reinforcement, 

Negative Reinforcement. This theory was exercised on pigeons, in order to prove this theory as a realistic measure. 

The pigeons were taught with a chain of procedures, this concluded them to fly to the literal outcome. However, it 

was concluded from this experiment that comparatively pigeons learned faster than rats. In the course of learning 

cognitive procedures, Bandura was recognized as a momentous and considerable theorist who achieved a major 

position in it. Bandura (1977) stated that there are three interfacing features which affected an individual: Personal 

Factors, Behavioural factors, Environmental Factors. One of the foremost contributions recently made by Bandura is 

concept of Self-Efficacy which is recognized as the most influential concept the procedure of self-regulatory 

 

2.3. Locus of Control 
It is an important character which shows that the individual can handle the roller coaster ride of life, whether 

they can handle different situations and events in life (Leone and Burns, 2000). An individual with an internal locus 

of control does not believe on luck, fate, and destiny, they believe on what they perform and how do they progress 

whereas Individual with an external locus of control gets motivation from the external factors (Koh, 1996; 

Hansemark, 1998). Internal locus of control is the thing a person must concentrate on, to become a successful 

entrepreneur. This point gives a view that to become an entrepreneur a spark is needed from inside of the heart and if 

one has it they can become entrepreneurs 

 

3. Methodology 
This study aims to explore the question of whether entrepreneurs are born or made by analyzing existing 

literature, conducting a detailed review of empirical studies, and identifying key factors influencing entrepreneurial 

behavior. The methodology follows a comprehensive qualitative approach, synthesizing both historical perspectives 

and contemporary insights regarding entrepreneurship. The research begins by reviewing foundational theories and 

definitions, providing a historical context to the evolution of the entrepreneur concept. In particular, the study 

focuses on key thinkers such as Cantillon (1755) and Schumpeter (1936), whose definitions shaped the modern 

understanding of entrepreneurship. This historical framework allows for a deeper understanding of how 

entrepreneurial traits, such as risk-taking and creativity, have been perceived and valued over time. 

Next, a systematic literature review is conducted, analyzing both the "born" and "made" perspectives on 

entrepreneurship. The research draws on both recent studies and classic works to examine the arguments for genetic 

predispositions versus learned skills. Data are extracted from a variety of scholarly sources, including books, journal 

articles, and case studies, to compare the arguments surrounding inherent traits and environmental factors in shaping 

entrepreneurial success. Key studies from authors such as Shane & Nicolaou (2021), Obschonka & Stuetzer (2020), 

and Nofal et al. (2018) provide insights into the biological and genetic factors that may predispose individuals to 

entrepreneurial behavior.  

This step involves a critical analysis of these studies, focusing on methodologies like twin-based research and 

personality trait analysis. In addition to the literature review, a content analysis is conducted on a dataset of key 

publications related to entrepreneurship, which includes works by renowned scholars such as Druker (1985), 

Gladwell (2008), and Sarasvathy (2001).  

The purpose of this content analysis is to identify common themes and patterns in the ongoing debate between 

the inherent qualities of an entrepreneur versus the skills developed through experience and education. These sources 

are organized into categories based on their stance on the "born" or "made" dichotomy, providing a structured 

approach to understanding the diversity of viewpoints in the field of entrepreneurship studies. This categorization 

also highlights the diversity of entrepreneurship across different industries, cultures, and historical periods. Finally, 

the methodology incorporates a comparison of the "born" versus "made" theories, evaluating how environmental 

influences, such as education, family background, and socio-economic conditions, interact with personal traits in 

shaping entrepreneurial outcomes. Interviews and case studies from successful entrepreneurs, particularly those over 

the age of 50, are also considered to provide real-world insights into the importance of experience and networks in 

entrepreneurial success. These qualitative data sources are analyzed to offer a balanced view of the factors that 

contribute to entrepreneurial achievement, acknowledging both innate characteristics and the role of learned skills. 

By synthesizing these multiple approaches, this research provides a holistic view of the ongoing debate about 



Asian Business Research Journal, 2025, 10(3): 45-49 

48 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA 

 

 

whether entrepreneurs are born with an inherent disposition or whether they can be made through experience and 

education. 

 

4. Data Presentation 
Various literature around entrepreneurship have been extensively reviewed. The include the historical 

perspective to entrepreneurship as well as the contemporary view of entrepreneurship from the academic as well as 

practical angles. The chapter presents key literature upon which conclusions are made. 

 
Table 1. 

SN Author and Year Publication Born/Made 

1 Schumpeter, J 

(1934).  

“The Theory of Economic Development”, Harvard University Press Born 

2 Druker, P (1985) “Innovation and Entrepreneurship”, Harper & Row Made 

3 Gladwell, M (2008) “Outlier: The Story of Success Made 

4 Sarasvathy, S 

(2001) 

“Effectuation: The Elements of Entrepreneur Enterprise”, Little, Brown and 

Company 

Made 

5 Wasserman, N 

(2012) 

“The Founder’s Dilemma”, Edward Elgar Publishing Made 

6 Shaun, S (2008) “The Illusions of Entrepreneurship”, Yale University Press Born 

7 Stephenson, H 

(1983) 

“A Perspective on Entrepreneurship”, Harvard Business School Made 

8 Gifford, P (1985) “Worthless, Impossible, and Stupid: How Contrarian Entrepreneurs Create and 

Capture Extraordinary Value”, Harper & Row 

Made 

9 Isenburg, D (2013) “Worthless, Impossible, and Stupid: How Contrarian Entrepreneurs Create and 

Capture Extraordinary Value”, Harvard Business Review Press 

Made 

10 Wilkinson, M 

(2015) 

“The Creator's Code: The Six Essential Skills of Extraordinary Entrepreneurs”, 

Simon & Schuster 

Made 

11 Ede, M (2023) “One Shot (Business Case for Success): The Recipe for Top Entrepreneurs & 

Business Leaders in the 21st Century”, Maple Publishers 

Made 

12 Busch, C (2020) “The Serendipity Mindset: The Art and Science of Creating Good Luck”, 

Penguin Random House 

Made 

13 Ede, M. (2023) 

 

Ede, M. (2023). One shot (business case for success): The recipe for top 

entrepreneurs & business leaders in the 21st century. Maple Publishers. 

Retrieved from Wikipedia 

Made 

 

5. Conclusions 
While it is proved beyond doubt that there some entrepreneurs are born with entrepreneurial traits as can be 

observed from comprehensive literature by Schumpeter (1934) and Shaun (2008), there is overwhelming literature 

that entrepreneurs are made, not born, and is supported by the belief that entrepreneurial skills can be learned and 

developed through experience, education, and deliberate practice. Peter Drucker, in his book Innovation and 

Entrepreneurship (1985), argues that entrepreneurship is a discipline that anyone can master with the right mindset 

and tools.  

Drucker emphasizes that through systematic innovation, careful planning, and practical learning, individuals can 

acquire the skills necessary to start and sustain successful businesses. This perspective suggests that entrepreneurial 

ability is not an innate quality but a set of skills that can be nurtured over time. Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers: The 

Story of Success (2008) reinforces the idea that entrepreneurs are made by highlighting how external factors like 

culture, upbringing, and opportunity contribute to entrepreneurial success. Gladwell suggests that success is often the 

result of hard work, deliberate practice, and environmental influences rather than innate talent. Entrepreneurs, 

according to Gladwell, achieve success by leveraging the right opportunities, working diligently to hone their skills, 

and learning from their experiences. This view supports the notion that entrepreneurship can be cultivated through 

sustained effort and the right conditions.  

Saras Sarasvathy’s Effectuation: The Elements of Entrepreneurial Enterprise (2001) provides a framework for 

how entrepreneurs make decisions and create opportunities through learned processes. Sarasvathy introduces the 

concept of effectuation, where entrepreneurs use available resources, past experiences, and flexible strategies to build 

their ventures. This theory emphasizes that entrepreneurial decision-making is a skill that can be developed through 

practice and learning, further supporting the argument that entrepreneurs are shaped by their experiences and choices 

rather than being born with inherent entrepreneurial abilities. Sarasvathy’s work highlights the role of education, 

adaptability, and learning in the entrepreneurial journey. 

Contemporary research continues to support the idea that entrepreneurship is a learned skill. More recent works 

like Michelle Ede’s One Shot (2023) emphasize that traits such as resilience, creativity, and leadership are developed 

through experience, failure, and perseverance. These insights collectively suggest that while certain personality traits 

may aid entrepreneurship, the core skills required for entrepreneurial success—such as risk management, innovation, 

and leadership—are acquired through dedicated effort and practical experience, reinforcing the idea that 

entrepreneurs are made, not born. In summation, it is evident that entrepreneurs are made through a combination of 

education, experience, and deliberate practice rather than being born with innate abilities. 

 

 

 

 



Asian Business Research Journal, 2025, 10(3): 45-49 

49 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Eastern Centre of Science and Education, USA 

 

 

References 
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Freeman. 

Busch, C. (2020). The Serendipity Mindset: The Art and Science of Creating Good Luck. Penguin Random House. 

Drucker, P. F. (1985). Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Harper & Row. 

Ede, M. (2023). One Shot (Business Case for Success): The Recipe for Top Entrepreneurs & Business Leaders in the 21st Century. Maple 

Publishers. 

Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The Story of Success. Little, Brown and Company. 

Hansemark, O. C. (1998). The effects of an entrepreneurship program on need for achievement and locus of control of reinforcement. 

International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 4(1), 28–50. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552559810203957 

Hoffmann, F. (2022). Our New World. Murmann Verlag. 

Isenberg, D. (2013). Worthless, Impossible, and Stupid: How Contrarian Entrepreneurs Create and Capture Extraordinary Value. Harvard 

Business Review Press. 

Koh, H. C. (1996). Testing hypotheses of entrepreneurial characteristics. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 11(3), 12–25. 

Kotler, S. (2021). The Art of Impossible: A Peak Performance Primer. Harper Wave. 

Leone, C., & Burns, J. (2000). The measurement of locus of control: Assessing more than meets the eye? The Journal of Psychology, 134(1), 

63–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980009600849 

Nofal, A. M., Nicolaou, N., & Shane, S. (2021). The biology of entrepreneurship. In M. M. Gielnik, M. S. Cardon, & M. Frese (Eds.), The 

Psychology of Entrepreneurship: New Perspectives (pp. 61–79). Routledge. 

Obschonka, M., & Stuetzer, M. (2020). Integrating psychological and genetic perspectives on entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 

55(4), 921–940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00146-8 

Obschonka, M., & Stuetzer, M. (2020). The biological and genetic roots of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 35(2), 105–122. 

Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Effectuation: Toward a theory of entrepreneurial expertise. The Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243–263. 

Schumpeter, J. A. (1936). The Theory of Economic Development. Harvard University Press. 

Shane, S., & Nicolaou, N. (2021). The biology of entrepreneurship. In M. M. Gielnik, M. S. Cardon, & M. Frese (Eds.), The Psychology of 

Entrepreneurship: New Perspectives (pp. 61–79). Routledge. 

Shane, S. (2008). The Illusions of Entrepreneurship. Yale University Press. 

Shane, S., & Nicolaou, N. (2021). The genetic basis of entrepreneurship: A review and research agenda. Journal of Business Venturing, 36(2). 

Shane, S., & Nicolaou, N. (2021). Entrepreneurial behavior: Genetic or learned? Journal of Business Psychology, 36(3), 1–17. 

Shefsky, L. (1994). Entrepreneurs Are Made, Not Born. McGraw-Hill. 

Skinner, B. F. (1945). The operational analysis of psychological terms. Psychological Review, 52, 270–277. 

Wasserman, N. (2012). The Founder's Dilemmas: Anticipating and Avoiding the Pitfalls That Can Sink a Startup. Princeton University Press. 

Wilkinson, A. (2015). The Creator's Code: The Six Essential Skills of Extraordinary Entrepreneurs. Simon & Schuster. 

Zhang, T., & Acs, Z. J. (2022). Personality traits and entrepreneurship: A cross-national study. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 46(1), 

97–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587211029245 


