This thesis is an autoethnography that explores an emergent topic within business and management that is the overlap between the fields of corporate entrepreneurship, organisational learning and organisational change. The research presented here is not something that occurs independently in a linear world; it has emerged from the involvement of different actors, with different social constructions 'existing' in a dynamic, fluid world, and as the researcher I have a key role within this. So, by means of this autoethnography, I hope to provide narratives of both the research itself and my experiences as a student undertaking a doctoral research project. Neither one of these is completely separate form the other. I hope to have captured some of the energy, uncertainty and realities associated with the doctoral research process and research into the culture of 'intraprelearning' in two Welsh NHS Trusts through this autoethnography. The research spans the three broad fields of corporate entrepreneurship, organisational learning and organisational change. Corporate entrepreneurship is entrepreneurship that occurs within or from a large organisation. Organisational learning is any learning that occurs within an organisation, and by its members. Organisational change is any form of change within an organisation. Following a critique of the relevant research literature, I highlight a form of synergy that appears to exist between the three constructs. For simplicity I have named the possible interrelationships between these three constructs as intraprelearning.
My autoethnography takes the reader on a journey. Firstly, a set of theoretical models are offered that may possibly explain intrapreleaming. 11 research questions are formulated informed by the set theoretical models. I describe getting access into the NHS Trusts, and the ethical considerations that have been integral to the project. I also provide details of how a quality of research has been achieved through all stages of the process, but most especially through collecting and analysing the data. Through the empirical data collection (interviews with 21 strategic leads and 29 corporate entrepreneurs, observations and document analyses) I construct the cases of the two Trusts, which I have anonymised to Aberash and Brynbeth Trusts. Throughout the thesis, I flow to and from the research and my experiences of conducting the research, highlighting insights, making connections with the existing body of knowledge and proposing questions and areas for future research agendas. Key findings identify two different forms of entrepreneurship in the two different Trusts: enforced (Aberash) and empowered (Brynbeth). The entrepreneurs themselves are characterised as determined, able to communicate at all levels, change agents and proactive learners. An unexpected finding, because of its contradiction with existing research is that Trust entrepreneurs do not have high levels of self-confidence and they look to their champions for providing them with the confidence behind their entrepreneurship. Champions provide the entrepreneurs with legitimate power (French and Raven, 1959), and protect the entrepreneurs from blame, risk-taking and failure. Champions are important in overcoming people who resist and block entrepreneurial efforts. Often resistors and blockers will constitute one senior consultant or nurse, or a group of subordinate staff who have accumulative power because of their numbers. Another finding is the significant role of learning and education is important in trying to shift resistance to entrepreneurship. A form of entrepreneurial learning referred to in the start-up entrepreneurship literature as Critical Learning Experiences have been identified as providing Trust entrepreneurs with an integrative world view. This world view appears to enable the identification and realisation of entrepreneurial opportunities. The research has identified that Trust entrepreneurs are active learners and provides details of the wide range of formal and informal learning activities that are undertaken. It also proposes that intraprelearning does not encompass all learning, but does include reading articles, teamwork, attending conferences, networks, working on the nursing bank and postgraduate study. Intraprelearning can be in work, at work (Sambrook, 2003) or away from work.
This study makes several original contributions to knowledge. It offers two sets of models that are theoretical attempts to address some of the weaknesses in the corporate entrepreneurship literature and intraprelearning literatures respectively. Developing the set of intraprelearning models, an empirical model describing intraprelearning within NHS trusts is offered. The model is an outcome of this extensive project and highlights the critical role of the champion in linking organisational learning, organisational change and corporate entrepreneurship. It illustrates the emergence and drivers of empowered and enforced entrepreneurship and sub-constructs within organisational learning and organisational change. The research enriches the extant knowledge base on Trust facilitators to and barriers of entrepreneurship, providing a useful platform for further research. A methodological contribution is made in terms of an alternative approach to reporting upon the methodology of a qualitative project. The use of spreadsheets as a calendar offers a useful way of providing a plausible and pragmatic account of the research process. Finally, in terms of contributions to practice, this research has identified significant implications for HRM, HRD, and strategic policy within NHS Trusts; it also has implications for the development and delivery of management and leadership training and development.