{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.031421838177533384, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.7407407407407405, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The use and abuse of the 'entrepreneur'

There is ongoing debate and some confusion about definitions and the use of the terms ‘entrepreneur’ and ‘entrepreneurship’ both in academia and in the media. The authors argue that this is likely to be a result of latent historical meanings for the terms, which have subsequently been debunked by academia, prevailing in public perceptions. Measurements of business start-up rates, self employment, etc., designed to inform academia, policy and the public domain, often define what they are measuring as entrepreneurship, and this can cause further confusion. The paper demonstrates where the synonymous use of ‘entrepreneurship’, ‘enterprise’ and ‘business start-up’ can obscure clarity. It also shows that ‘entrepreneurship’ has meaning beyond that which can be exclusively applied to business. Traits and characteristics approaches to defining entrepreneurship are explored and the authors argue that while these have developed examination about what comprises an ‘entrepreneur’, they have not successfully clarified understanding semantically or contextually. The paper gives alternative approaches to understanding ‘the entrepreneur’ and ‘entrepreneurship’ and offers a working definition based on evolved academic commentary.