Prof. Ethan Mollick studies innovation and entrepreneurship, with a special emphasis on how to give everyone more opportunities to be innovative and entrepreneurial. His papers have been published in top management journals and have won best paper awards from multiple divisions of the Academy of Management. His work on crowdfunding is the most cited article in management published in the last five years. Prof. Mollick is a Schultze Distinguished Professor and Kauffman Foundation Junior Faculty Fellow.
Prof. Mollick is also the Academic Director and co-founder of Wharton Interactive, which aims to transform business school teaching using games and simulations. He has had a long interest in using games for teaching, and co-authored a book on the intersection between video games and business that was named one of the American Library Association’s top ten business books of the year, and has studied the way that games can be used to motivate performance and to educate. His simulations and games are used by tens of thousands of students around the world.
Prior to his academic career, he was co-founder of a company and a management consultant. Prof. Mollick has worked with organizations ranging from DARPA to General Mills on innovation and entrepreneurship.
Ethan Mollick received his PhD (2010) and MBA (2004) from MIT’s Sloan School of Management and his bachelor’s degree from Harvard University, magna cum laude, in 1997.
Abstract: Entrepreneurship scholars have commonly focused on antecedents of entrepreneurial entry while paying much less attention to the consequences of entrepreneurial experience. We examine the returns to entrepreneurship, by assessing the earnings ex-founders receive when they re-enter paid employment. Building on the mobility perspective to entrepreneurship, we conceptualize moves from entrepreneurship back to paid employment as career shifts. Casting re-entry into paid employment as a career move, we propose that – like other career moves – entrepreneurship will yield higher returns when experience and skills gained during entrepreneurial spell are closely matched with employer demands. Using the survey-based, career-history data collected on a large sample of alumni of a North American University, we find support for our claims among the 74% of ex-entrepreneurs who reenter paid employment. First, we demonstrate that, upon returning to paid employment, ex-founders are more likely than other movers to switch to positions that match entrepreneurial experience: they switch to (a) jobs with more generalist skills; (b) positions of higher-ranked and greater responsibility; (c) smaller-size employers. Moreover, we find that these career switches are associated with higher payoffs for ex-founders in paid employment. Finally, consistent with skill acquisition, our study offers some evidence that the benefits of finding a match in paid employment are higher for ex-founders whose ventures were successful and reduced for ex-founders whose ventures failed. Our study thus contributes to the entrepreneurship and career studies by developing and evaluating a matching theory of payoffs to entrepreneurship.
Jason Greenberg and Ethan Mollick (Working), Sole Survivors: Solo Ventures Versus Founding Teams.
Abstract: A widespread scholarly and popular consensus suggests that new ventures perform better when launched by teams, rather than individuals. This view has become so pervasive that many of the foremost investors rarely, if ever, fund startups founded by a solo entrepreneur. Despite this belief in the superiority of teams in the startup process, little empirical evidence has been used to examine this key question. In this paper, we examine the implications of founding alone versus as a group by using a unique dataset of crowdfunded companies that together generated approximately $358 million in total revenue. We show that companies started by solo founders survive longer than those started by teams. Further, organizations started by solo founders generate more revenue than organizations started by founder pairs, and do not perform significantly different than larger teams. This suggests that the taken-for-granted assumption among scholars that entrepreneurship is best performed by teams should be reevaluated, with implications for theories of team performance and entrepreneurial strategy.
Abstract: We use data on 27,082 individuals from 45 countries playing the Startup Game, a roleplaying simulation of early-stage startup funding, to examine theorized causes for the gap in startup funding for female entrepreneurs. By using features of the game, such as random assignment, we conduct a natural experiment to understand how social processes such as homophily and discrimination shaped startup equity funding and company valuation. We examine the results of the game and compare them against “gender-blind” results to explain the root causes of gender inequality in venture capital (VC) funding. The results show that women randomly assigned to the role of “founder” systematically received 7% less equity capital and traded 4% more shares relative to men, resulting in 11% lower valuations for the same startups. Taste-based discrimination among male VCs favoring male founders accounts for the majority of this gap, implying that the gender composition of the investor pool holds the key to bridging the gap. Consistent with this explanation, we find that increasing the proportion of female VCs by 1% was associated with decreasing the gender gap by 272%.
Jason Greenberg and Ethan Mollick (2016), Activist Choice Homophily and the Crowdfunding of Female Founders, Administrative Science Quarterly, Forthcoming. 0001839216678847
Abstract: In this paper, we examine when members of underrepresented groups choose to support each other, using the context of the funding of female founders via donation-based crowdfunding. Building on theories of choice homophily, we develop the concept of activist choice homophily, in which the basis of attraction between two individuals is not merely similarity between them, but rather perceptions of shared structural barriers stemming from a common social identity based on group membership. We differentiate activist choice homophily from interpersonal choice homophily that is based on the perceived similarity between two individuals, as well as from “induced homophily,” which reflects the likelihood that those in a particular social category will affiliate and form networks. Using lab experiments and field data, we show that activist choice homophily explains why women are more likely to succeed at crowdfunding than men and why women are most successful in industries in which they are least represented.
Ethan Mollick (2016), Filthy Lucre? Innovative Communities, Identity, and Commercialization, Organization Science, Forthcoming.
Abstract: Online communities play an increasingly important role in developing innovation. However, relatively little is known about the ways in which community affiliation is associated with innovations and products generated in these communities are commercialized. By examining Open Source Software (OSS) as an example of an innovation community, and using both a quasi-experiment and a longitudinal survey, I seek to shed light on this issue. In the quasi-experiment using the launch of the Apple App Store, I find a lower propensity towards commercialization among individuals associated with online community innovation. I then examine the mechanisms for this lower commercialization with a novel longitudinal survey of OSS community members. Despite the history of OSS as an anti-commercial community, I do not find that anti-commercial attitudes play a role in commercialization decisions. Instead, differences in self-identity between community-based innovators and entrepreneurs have large significant effects on the propensity to commercialization. I conclude with a discussion of the implications of these findings for both the literatures on entrepreneurial identity and community innovation.
Ethan Mollick and Venkat Kuppuswamy, “Crowdfunding: Evidence on the Democratization of Startup Funding”. In Revolutionizing Innovation: Users, Communities, and Open Innovation, edited by Dietmar Harhoff and Karim Lakhani, (Cambrige: MIT Press, 2016)
Ethan Mollick and Alicia Robb (2016), Democratizing Innovation and Capital Access: The Role of Crowdfunding, California Management Review, 58 (2).
Abstract: This paper focuses on if, and how, crowdfunding might democratize the commercialization of innovation. We examine research in three key areas related to democratization. First, we examine how crowdfunders decide what effort to support, and compare the decision-making process of the crowd to that of experts. Second, we investigate whether crowdfunding democratizes access to capital by asking whether or not groups that have historically been underrepresented in capital markets, on both the supply side and demand side, gain additional access to capital markets through crowdfunding. Finally, we investigate whether crowdfunding leads to the growth of new firms in the same way that traditional funding does. Taken together, these questions point at a potentially vast alternative infrastructure for developing, funding, and commercializing innovation. By offering some early glimpses into how this world operates, we hope to inform researchers, managers, and policy makers.
Jason Greenberg, Ethan Mollick, Venkat Kuppuswamy (Under Review), Second Thoughts About Second Acts: Gender Differences in Serial Founding Rates.
Abstract: Men are far more likely to start new ventures than women. We argue that one explanation of this gap is that women respond differently to signals of past entrepreneurial success due to the “male hubris, female humility” effect. We argue that as a result women are disproportionately less likely to persist in second founding attempts than men when they have succeeded or failed by large margins. Using a data set of serial founders in crowdfunding, we find evidence supporting this prediction. We then turn to a unique survey of founders in crowdfunding in order to examine alternative explanations. We find support for a variety of systematic differences between male and female founders, but the persistence effect remains. While decreased persistence in the face of low quality opportunities benefits women individually, we argue that it disadvantages women as a group, as it leads to 25.3% fewer female-led foundings in our sample than would have occurred if women reacted similarly to men.
Matthew Bidwell and Ethan Mollick (2015), Shifts and Ladders: Comparing the Role of Internal and External Mobility in Executive Careers, Organiztion Science, 26 (6), pp. 1629-1645.
Abstract: Workers can build their careers either by moving into a different job within their current organization or else by moving into a new job within a different organization. We use matching perspectives on job mobility to develop predictions about the different roles that those internal and external moves will play within their careers. We propose that internal and external mobility are associated with very different rewards: upwards progression into a job with greater responsibilities is much more likely to happen through internal mobility, but external moves will nonetheless offer similar increases in pay, as employers seek to attract external hires. We also examine how these predictions change when moves take workers across job functions as well as when external mobility happens involuntarily. Analyses of data on the careers on MBA alumni are used to support these arguments. Despite growing interest in boundaryless careers, our findings indicate that internal and external mobility play very different roles in executives’ careers, with upwards mobility still happening overwhelmingly within organizations.
MGMT 801 is the foundation coures in the Entrepeurial Management program. The purpose of this course is to explore the many dimensions of new venture creation and growth. While most of the examples in class will be drawn from new venture formation, the principles also apply to entrepreneurship in corporate settings and to non-profit entrepreneurship. We will be concerned with content and process questions as well as with formulation and implementation issues that relate to conceptualizing, developing, and managing successful new ventures. The emphasis in this course is on applying and synthesizing concepts and techniques from functional areas of strategic management, finance, accounting, managerial economics, marketing, operations management, and organizational behavior in the context of new venture development. The class serves as both a stand alone class and as a preparatory course to those interested in writing and venture implementation (the subject of the semester-long course, MGMT 806). Format: Lectures and case discussions Requirements: Class participation, interim assignments, final project
Designed for students with a serious interest in entrepreneurship, this course will provide you with an advanced theoretical foundation and a set of practicaltools for the management of startups and entrepreneurial teams in fast-changing and innovative environments. Building on the skills of MGMT 801, every class session is built around an experience where you have to put learning into practice, including the award-winning Looking Glass entrepreneurial simulation, role-playing exercises, and a variety of other games and simulations. The goal is to constantly challenge you to deal with entrepreneurial or innovative experiences, as you learn to navigate complex and changing environments on the fly, applying what you learned to a variety of scenarios. MGMT 802 is built to be challenging and will require a desire to deal with ambiguous and shifting circumstances. Format: Lectures, discussion, interim reports, class participation, readings report, and presentations, and an innovation assessment in PowerPoint format.
This advanced course on entrepreneurship focuses on developing a validated opportunity or concept into a venture that is ready for seed financing and/or launching the product or service. Participants in this course must previously have developed a validated opportunity, either in a previous course or through independent efforts. Students may participate as a team of up to three people. Ideally, participants are commited to pursuing their opportunity commercially, or at least to seriously explore that possibility. The course provides a practical guidance for developing the product or service, forming the entity, raising capital building the team, establishing partnerships, and sourcing professional services. After completing the course, you will be "pitch ready" - whether submitting to campus venture competitions or to outside investors. Most coursework is focused on applying concepts and frameworks to project tasks in developing the venture. Students must have successfully completed MGMT 801 before enrolling in this course. Students must have successfully completed MGMT801 before enrolling in this course. Format: Highly interactive Requirements: Class participation, interim assignments.
WIEP features short-term courses that focus on various industries and feature visits to businesses, lectures, extracurricular activities, and networking opportunities with alumni. Students must apply online: https://undergrad-inside.wharton.upenn.edu/wiep/
Ethan Mollick and Justin Gary (2018), The Breakthrough Game. A card/board game for 3-6 people that walks players through the scientific approach to developing new innovations.
Ethan Mollick and Sarah Toms (2018) ARC: Disruption. A Looking Glass/ARC simulation teaching strategy, crisis management, and team optimization.
Ethan Mollick (2016) ARC: Entrepreneurship. A Looking Glass/ARC simulation teaching entrepreneurial management.
Ethan Mollick (2016) IdeaMachine. Online student engagement tool for building interactive learning communities and applying active learning pedagogical techniques.
Ethan Mollick (2014) The Startup Game. Entrepreneurship simulation for 20-86 players, played by over 20,000 students from around the world.
Three Philadelphia startups competed for investors in 'The Pitch' podcast, which recorded its first live event recently at Wharton. Who will win?Knowledge @ Wharton - 2018/12/13