Educational Entrepreneurship and Covisionary Multisectorism

This paper introduces the concept of "educational multisectorism" as the belief that drawing on the resources and strengths of all three economic sectors (private not-for-profit, private for profit, and public/government sectors) can be of significant benefit to the pursuit of educational reform. Multisectorism (rather than "unisectorism") - and the covisionary entrepreneurial thinking and social entrepreneurship that are its implementation alter egos - is suggested as a powerful paradigm for innovation and change.

Dr. Kourilsky and Dr. Hentschke begin by defining educational entrepreneurship and discussing how manifestations of educational entrepreneurship may vary with the three levels of the entrepreneurial spectrum pyramid: entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial behavior, and entrepreneurism. Dr. Kourilsky and Dr. Hentschke then describe the evolutionary changes that are fostering the growth of educational entrepreneurship in K-12 education: 1) increasing publicly expressed dissatisfaction with public education, 2) increasing reliance on multiple sources of revenue, 3) changing organizational frameworks: from centralized public models to decentralized market models, 4) increasing inter-penetration by education service providers of historically protected markets, 5) changing relationships between the 'policy end' and the 'operation end' as educational organizations move from compliance to performance, and 6) increasing reliance on technology for service delivery, organization and operation.

The next section of the paper focuses on the education "industry" today, highlighting its historical antecedents, the current trends that are shaping it, and its expanded modern presence well beyond traditional schools, colleges, and universities. Dr. Kourilsky and Dr. Hentschke point out that as K-12 education rapidly evolves into a three-sector domain, each sector enjoys certain comparative advantages relative to various types of educational objectives, organizations and ventures. The government/public sector has a comparative advantage in the areas of core learning, social justice initiatives, and holistic anchoring of the student. The private not-for-profit sector has a comparative advantage in the areas of core value (filling unmet social needs), having access to the "hearts" of individuals and organizations that value K-12 education, and filling gaps in public market failure. Finally, the private for profit sector has a comparative advantage in the areas of identifying market niches, accessing investment capital, and building compelling and innovative business models. Additionally, Dr. Kourilsky and Dr. Hentschke identify the comparative advantage arenas of the private sector in general (including both not-for-profit and for profit sectors): 1) specialty education services, 2) new school alternatives such as start-up charter schools and teacher cooperatives, and 3) educational laboratories.

Dr. Kourilsky and Dr. Hentschke conclude that entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial thinking can emerge in any sector of an economy. In the not-for-profit private sector, the lion's share of the focus is on the educational social vision and mission - how best to achieve impact in the targeted areas of social need. In the for profit private sector, the pursuit of the social mission has to be balanced responsibly against the economic obligations of the venture. In the public arena, the educational social mission is nominally center stage with the additional imperative to provide minimally acceptable levels of service for the relevant governmental jurisdiction(s). Dr. Kourilsky and Dr. Hentschke argue that the most successful K-12 educational leaders will be "innovative, opportunity-oriented, resourceful, value-creating change agents" who pursue their social mission across sector lines, pooling the strengths of each sector through covisionary "multisectorism" to achieve simultaneously enhancements of performance outcomes and of social justice in the K-12 space.

Summary of Questions & Answers and Suggestions for Modifications/Enhancements

Dr. Kenney began by asking Dr. Kourilsky and Dr. Hentschke what needs to happen to create an environment conducive to covisionary multisectorism. Dr. Hentschke responded that so far multisectorism has occurred on a small scale due to "tough times and hard problems." Alliances across the sectors tend to form when nothing else appears to be working. Dr. Kourilsky added that a way to encourage and facilitate further alliance-building is to develop demonstration models.

Ms. Downing asked the presenters what suggestions they had to incentivize collaboration between the three economic sectors. Dr. Hentschke speculated that collaboration will most likely happen in urban areas before rural ones, because in urban areas there is a high population density and greater social capital. Therefore, in urban areas, there is a critical mass of people with complementary interests.

Mr. Slavkin commented that in urban areas, such as Los Angeles, there are already examples of multisectorism when the public schools work with foundations and private companies. Dr. Kourilsky responded that while some examples exist, in reality there are very few. Thus far, efforts have been very ad hoc, with each sector specializing in components of the educational system. The goal of the model she and Dr. Hentschke have presented is to have a more systematic, organized way of determining the comparative advantage of each sector.

Dr. Kent commented that research on cooperatives has shown that they are successful because they have tremendous tax advantages. He asked the presenters if they predicted the same would be true for teacher cooperatives. Dr. Kourilsky responded that the advent of teacher cooperatives is so new that it is difficult to predict their success. It is such an embryonic field, that the research thus far has only focused on listing the various structures it could take rather than on empirical studies on the trade-offs between the different structures.

Dr. Dees asked if covisionary multisectorism became widely accepted, how might it change policy-making or the actions of social entrepreneurs? Dr. Kourilsky responded that one major change would be that productivity would be enhanced. Dr. Hentschke added that there would be a change in the culture and behavior of schools of education. Dr. Kourilsky agreed, adding that we may decide that the current, university-centered structure for teacher education may not be the best. There may also be an increase in the number of non-traditional administrators. Finally, the covisionary multisectorism model would encourage new dialogues to take place.

Dr. McNeil commented that he once heard the expression: "Don't let schools get in the way of education." He felt that this was especially apt in light of the current discussion. He further wondered if for-profit organizations could help in ensuring that schools do not hinder learning. Dr. McNeil also asked how we could encourage teachers to use for-profit activities in their classroom? Dr. Kourilsky responded that the Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership has been working to change the mentality of schools so that individuals understand that they have the option to make a job rather than simply taking a job.

Ms. Downing asked how a transition could be made between the current system where most teachers do not see themselves as innovators and creators, to a system in which teachers are entrepreneurs, particularly in light of the fact that any potential teacher entrepreneurs that the system might have had, would probably have been driven out by now due to pure frustration. Dr. Kourilsky responded that entrepreneurial teachers are actually the silent majority. She has met many of them through her Mini-Society program. They have been socialized to hide their "inner child," but it still exists. All that needs to happen is to let this silent majority know that it is alright for them to be entrepreneurial. Dr. Hentschke added that a book has been written which includes 22 case histories of people who began as teachers and later became educational entrepreneurs.

Dr. Osborne asked if there is any way that covisionary multisectorism could be jumpstarted within the large educational bureaucracy by carving out a special set of resources to allow it to happen. In other words, can covisionary multisectorism occur in a place like the Los Angeles Unified School District, or it is impossible for entrepreneurship to happen within that kind of enterprise? Dr. Hentschke responded that while you may not be able to completely change a district like LAUSD, you could spin-off organizations with different sets of incentives. One example is through the charter school movement. Dr. Kourilsky added that in time, school districts will come to realize that it does not make sense for them to do everything "in house," a lesson which corporations and foundations have already learned. She also commented that fear of vouchers may incentivize school districts to find ways to provide more choice within their existing frameworks by adopting a multisectorist approach.

Back to Top