Question
Why do people who haven't started their own company call themselves entrepreneurs?
Answer
The skeptics are right. About 80% of those who use the term are not entrepreneurial at all, but looking for the cachet. It is now another resume-builder buzz-word like "systems thinker" and "goal-oriented."
And this includes those who HAVE started their own company. Just starting a company is extremely easy (takes a phone call and $100). A lot of those companies are pure vanity companies.
But Nick Punt is right, there is need for a term to connote "risk-taking, innovative, get-it-done effort." I also agree that you should eliminate people whose risk is purely financial (i.e. investors) and close-up spectators like first-employees (I've done that, and it isn't the same as being employee 0, i.e. the entrepreneur).
But even with these qualifications, I don't like using the unqualified term 'entrepreneur.'
I think you need modified terms for other contexts, for precision. I've been referred to (and referred to myself as) both 'intrapreneur' and 'entrepreneur-in-residence' (EiR). The latter is currently my formal title. It's basically entrepreneurship inside a larger organization. Other such terms include "social entrepreneur", "civic entrepreneur" etc.
Another VERY good term is "eaglepreneur" -- a micro-scale 1-person business. This term was coined by Dan Miller in "No More Mondays" and it accurately captures the difference between a 1-person freelancer/free agent/self-employed person and somebody going solo in an entrepreneurial way. The big difference here is that you are rarely risking other people's financial lives or handling more money than you need yourself.
I have an eaglepreneurial business (yup, incorporated, so in paperwork terms, I am an entrepreneur) around my blog that makes a modest amount of money.
Overall, this whole language issue is very similar to being a published author vs. self-publishing vs. being published via the institution you are with vs. vanity publishing. The 4 types correspond to being VC/angel-backed, eaglepreneurship, intrapreneurship and fake-entrepreneurship.
I'd like to propose the term "vanity entrepreneurship" for those using the term without taking commensurate risks or actually getting something novel and innovative done and delivered.
And this includes those who HAVE started their own company. Just starting a company is extremely easy (takes a phone call and $100). A lot of those companies are pure vanity companies.
But Nick Punt is right, there is need for a term to connote "risk-taking, innovative, get-it-done effort." I also agree that you should eliminate people whose risk is purely financial (i.e. investors) and close-up spectators like first-employees (I've done that, and it isn't the same as being employee 0, i.e. the entrepreneur).
But even with these qualifications, I don't like using the unqualified term 'entrepreneur.'
I think you need modified terms for other contexts, for precision. I've been referred to (and referred to myself as) both 'intrapreneur' and 'entrepreneur-in-residence' (EiR). The latter is currently my formal title. It's basically entrepreneurship inside a larger organization. Other such terms include "social entrepreneur", "civic entrepreneur" etc.
Another VERY good term is "eaglepreneur" -- a micro-scale 1-person business. This term was coined by Dan Miller in "No More Mondays" and it accurately captures the difference between a 1-person freelancer/free agent/self-employed person and somebody going solo in an entrepreneurial way. The big difference here is that you are rarely risking other people's financial lives or handling more money than you need yourself.
I have an eaglepreneurial business (yup, incorporated, so in paperwork terms, I am an entrepreneur) around my blog that makes a modest amount of money.
Overall, this whole language issue is very similar to being a published author vs. self-publishing vs. being published via the institution you are with vs. vanity publishing. The 4 types correspond to being VC/angel-backed, eaglepreneurship, intrapreneurship and fake-entrepreneurship.
I'd like to propose the term "vanity entrepreneurship" for those using the term without taking commensurate risks or actually getting something novel and innovative done and delivered.