We draw from strategic issue interpretation perspective, which suggests the processes that determine what managers heed and ignore in their decision making processes. As responses to societal expectations are ambiguous and require interpretative categorization by managers, we also frame our conversation in the social embeddedness literature. Our overarching argument focuses on the notion that there are measurable payoffs from legitimizing the natural environment inside the firm, and this process of legitimization has increased benefits if it is more thoroughly embedded in the firm. Specifically, the more discretion that manager’s are given in the implementation of natural environmental policies, the greater will be the positive outcomes of innovativeness.

Stewardship theory defines relationships based upon behavioural premises not addressed by the manager-principal interest divergence canvassed in agency theory. In that way, a steward unlike an agent is not motivated by self-interest. His/her motives are allied with the objectives of the principals. Psychological and situational aspects differentiate principal-steward relationships from principal-agent relationships. Stewardship theory has had conceptual but limited empirical development.

Design/methodology/approach – The study relied on purposive sampling and received survey responses from postgraduate students in business and engineering. The 26-item survey was made up of demographic indices and questions from the Schumpeter and Kirzner literature. A total of 242 business and 525 engineering students received the e-mail from academic advisors. Usable responses were received from 36 business students (15 percent response rate) and 67 engineering students (13 percent response rate).

Findings – The research found evidence that individuals with engineering training were not as proficient at recognizing opportunities as their business-trained contemporaries.

Research limitations/implications – This is an exploratory research project which acknowledges the associated limitations. As well as contributing to a deeper understanding of two core entrepreneurship topics these findings have pedagogical and practitioner implications. From a pedagogy vantage point, instructors will be better equipped to frame courses in entrepreneurship if they better understand the propensity of their audience. The results indicate that this is particularly relevant to engineering schools. In practitioner terms, funding groups and various supporters of entrepreneurs (business angels, family financiers, and the like) will be better able to understand and work with individuals if they are aware that they are not, for example, alert to new opportunities.

Originality/value – This paper contributes to a deeper understanding of innovation and opportunity alertness.

Design/methodology/approach – The authors reviewed the literature related to the development of professions in order to establish a sound theoretical base to distinguish disciplines that require stringent criteria, and which potentially would challenge the introduction of a more flexible curriculum that includes contemporary concepts such as entrepreneurship. The research then focused on two other groups of disciplines which lead to entrepreneurial opportunities with distinct needs in (principally) people management and intellectual property law. This discussion was couched in the occupational motivation literature. Semi-structured interviews (n=31) were conducted with individuals randomly selected from three groups associated with an American Land Grant Research University. Additional survey data were collected from 58 respondents.

Findings – The research found support for the categorization of disciplines into the framework of profession-, industry-, or invention-based entrepreneurial ventures.

Originality/value – Although this is an exploratory investigation, the framework sets out clear pathways through the entrepreneurial processes and has crucial implications for a variety of stakeholders. For example: curriculum designers will be better able to understand and address the demands and vagaries of multiple disciplines; critical assumptions (that often plague those involved with technology transfer) will be able to be addressed prior to or in the early stage of the commercialization process because inventors will be better informed and prepared; equity stakeholder negotiations (particularly those that involve government-operated institutions) will be more realistic as both parties, over time, become increasingly “market-savvy”; and students (tomorrow's entrepreneurs) will be better able to plan for an entrepreneurially-focused career.