Entrepreneurial talent consists in the ability to discover new market opportunities in a context of uncertainty. It is not confined to the sphere of production and self-employment. It exists and is a positive resource in all spheres, from creative consumption to any working activity. Research in psychology and sociology links entrepreneurial talent to certain personality traits, including creativity, imagination, willingness to take risks, and self-esteem.
Yet entrepreneurial talent does not depend uniquely on innate characteristics; it can be acquired through education, whether individual learning or social emulation. Empirical findings show indeed that, once differences in institutional context are taken into account, both educational endowment and the access to social networks play a decisive role in the decision to engage and succeed in entrepreneurial activities. Areas of theoretical and empirical application are:
a) the formation of entrepreneurial preferences for innovation;
b) the relationship between entrepreneurial capabilities and different socio-institutional contexts;
c) the role of education in the formation of entrepreneurial human capital in complex decision-making environments;
d) the measurement of entrepreneurial human capital and of the supply of entrepreneurial capabilities;
e) intrinsic versus extrinsic motivations in job choices.
This research field starts from the premise that the most challenging among human decisions are those relating to activities, which Tibor Scitovsky defined 'creative', whose aim is to create new, positive and long lasting states of well being rather than merely to satisfy recurrent needs. Two features characterize these activities: they are highly time-consuming and their outcome in terms of pleasure is uncertain. These two features might explain why recent surveys of time use show that individuals are frustrated about the way they spend their lives. In particular, they seem to consider leisure time as a sort of chimera that they fail to reach in spite of ever increasing income levels.
The aim of this research field is to try to explain why human beings fail to optimize their allocations of time. In particular the research center will: 1. promote the definition of economic models in which individuals have to choose among time-consuming activities whose outcomes in terms of pleasure are unpredictable; 2. collect and elaborate on those data capable of describing both how individuals actually employ their lives and their assessment of the choices they make; 3. define some new welfare institutions, whose aim is to support individuals when they want to take active choices affecting the allocation of their time among different activities.
This research field is based on the following premises: a) consumers are active producers of their well-being; b)individuals’ satisfaction needs stimulation, novelty and variety; c) consumption experience and skills matter. In the traditional theory of consumption, consumers, once they reach satiety, simply stop. Yet there is a mental satiety that is more unsettling. Mental satiety implies boredom and boredom can cause unrest and a desire to change. Satiety and boredom are undermined by creative activities.
Thus, the pleasure of listening to music does not diminish with repeated consumption and the same can be said of spending time with friends or engaging in the arts. Nonetheless, not everything is so positive. There are numerous activities whose enjoyment, as in the case of listening to music, does not decrease with consumption, but that, unlike music, are harmful. Drug use and gambling are examples. This research field explores:
a) the distinction between positive and negative addictions;
b) how technological change, by making available different allocations of time and allowing for different skills, can effect the production of positive addictions;
c) social interdependencies in consumption: fashions, social competition, and communities of consumers.
The starting point of this field of research is the idea (originally conceived by the economist Tibor Scitovsky and psychologists Deci and Ryan) that there are two forms of satisfaction in consumption, those deriving from comfort-activities that ease and free life from pain and bother, and those which yield stimulation and are self-rewarding. These are the creative activities that provide most of life’s pleasure. This second form of consumption also has deep and cumulative effects, since it gives rise to new activities and novelty. However, it is also more immediately costly since it requires, in order to be appreciated, training and skills. Comfort instead has more transitory effects, and tends to induce repetition and social competition, though it does require less costly investments in appreciation skills.
How people choose between these two forms of consumption is worth researching because both individuals’ economic circumstances, and their extra-economic motivations, such as their personal and social identity, come into play. Both psychology and sociology can contribute to this understanding.
A related research field is the problem of decision and performance on the job. Extra-economic motivations play a significant role here too. Psychologists have shown that activities for which the more challenging components of novelty and stimulation dominate repetition and routines are more rewarding for workers.