Title: Empirical evidence to represent Cultural and Creative Entrepreneurship: Proposal of a taxonomy from the French context

Abstract

Introduction
In this article, we present a classification of the forms of Cultural and Creative Entrepreneurship (CCE), as defined by "the triad of creativity, opportunity, and value creation" (Schulte-Holthaus, 2018, p. 100), within the geographical scope of the French context.
Our RQ stands as follow : “How do cultural and creative entrepreneurs implement individual professionalization and the structuring of their projects? What forms of CCE result from these efforts?”
Starting from these interrogations, our research is built from an original exploratory analysis of cultural firms and their founders’ entrepreneurs. The qualitative study enables us to shape various forms of CCE that resonate with creative individuals and artists. To make the described activities comprehensible as conveyed by the entrepreneurs and interpreted through our observations, we employ a tool from entrepreneurial literature, the Business Model. Here, the Business Model (BM) is comprehended as an instrument capable of facilitating the representation of activities among stakeholders and constructing a framework through the comparison of the different BM’s components.
Outcomes of our research are several: Firstly, it offers a taxonomy of CCE that adds to the existing CCE literature. Secondly, it outlines with empirical evidence the ongoing transformation in the context of the French cultural policies which is shifting from a cultural policy aimed at protecting CCIs, to a discourse that, through entrepreneurial rhetoric, embraces economic liberalism. Thus challenges the principle of the well-known French Cultural Exception. Consequences of this aspect are a reduction in public support for creation which results show as perceived as a damper to CCE. Finally, the theme of entrepreneurial support emerges from the interviews as central and worthy of further research. Despite this theme being already addressed, existing forms of support of CCE still appears inadequate to meet the needs of CC entrepreneurs.

Methodology
We propose qualitative research which take into consideration existing literature (Yin, 1984) through a multiple case study approach (Eisenhardt, 1989). The cases belong to the cultural and creative industries (CCIs) sectors as defined by national and European statistics (Eurostat, Unesco, 2008) and all fall within the first circle of Throsby's concentric model (which includes central creative domains, such as performing arts, visual arts, literature, and music) (Throsby, 2001). These cases include (1) A cultural association dedicated to theatrical creation for children’s audience; (2) A private independent theater, a space for the creation, promotion, and diffusion of live performances; (3) A former dancer and henceforth technician in the performing arts (costumer); and (4) A painter and sculptor nationally recognized.
The analysis method is based on data collected through semi-structured interviews with each leader who has been involved in drafting the business models (BM) of the cultural projects he/she leads. We conducted two interviews per case, each lasting an average of two hours.. The interviews were recorded and fully transcribed. They have been reported in the form of BMs, enabling a better understanding of the complexity of each case, and facilitating inter-case comparisons. Successively, the BM derived from the interviews analysis was shared with direct participants to gather their feedback and to ensure a complete understanding considering the accuracy of the designed BM.
The geographical focus i.e. France is of interest as the French cultural policy influences European cultural policy, notably through the concept of Exception Culturelle (Cultural Exception) (Menger, 2003; Lazzarato, d’Hallivillée, Holmes, 2003). This polysemic notion is employed here as a concept that encapsulates justifications for financial support to artistic creation and the exclusion of such support from market rules.

Literature Review
Literature review presents CCI definition from which CCE derives. It presents the ongoing debate around CCE definition and how it resonates within Shane and Venkataraman (2000) illustration of how difficult is defining entrepreneurship. The review of existent literature is enriched by the examination of Schulte-Holthaus (2018) framework for entrepreneurship research in the CCI as well as by the comparison made by Bujor and Avasilcai (2016) between Gordon (2012) list of essential entrepreneurial skills and Howkins (2001) rules for successful creative entrepreneurs. Thus, we conclude adopting Parkman et al. (2012) following definition of Cultural and Creative Entrepreneurs: All artists and creative individuals who are striving to add economic value to their artistic creativity These individuals are engaged in a process of professionalization, aiming to sustain their artistic activities over time and make a livelihood from them.

Results
Our research participates to the existing CCE literature as it proposes a taxonomy of CCE of four typologies derived from two axes: the degree of structuring (professionalization) of the entrepreneurial project on one hand, and the contextual mechanisms, notably cultural policy, capable of boosting or conversely of hindering the entrepreneurial project, on the other hand.
Secondly, the research shows that as the structuration of the entrepreneurial project increases, public support for creation reduces. Thus, this appears to be a barrier to the acceptance of entrepreneurial discourse within the realm of Cultural and Creative Industries and seems to betray the principles of Exception Culturelle as outlined earlier. At the same time, the rhetoric of CCE is changing the disposition of CCI’s project leaders towards entrepreneurship, leading to the evolution of the professionalization of the creative classes.
From an academic viewpoint, this contribution participates in the ongoing debate surrounding the definition of CCE. The concept has become so broad that it is now at risk of becoming unusable for research as well as for future public policies. The use of the taxonomy can assist in identifying four categories of CC entrepreneurial activities going beyond the sectoral categorizations which are the common rule since David Throsby's concentric circles model of Cultural Industries (CI) in 2001 and reproposed in 2008.
From a managerial perspective, exploiting BM to propose a taxonomy of CCE can enable CC leaders to adopt this tool and facilitate their own identification as entrepreneurs.
Finally, a result surprised us as deserving attention for public policies and future research. The exploratory investigation allowed us to focus on the question of CCE profiles and their structuring around a central topic in entrepreneurship literature: that of entrepreneurial support. Indeed, during the interviews, the systematic conversation of professionalization and structuring brought us to address two aspects. Firstly, there were always thoughts about opportunities for training, workshops, forums, and other events available to CC project leaders dedicated to entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial skills. These activities typically take place in incubators and innovation hubs (training, coaching, Business Model definition, etc.) and seem from our results still insufficient to sustain CCE. The other recurrent topic in the interviews, is the one of the monetary supports understood as the set of policies in support of the creation and in protection of CC workers. This being historically significant in French cultural policy, even if only for some sectors of the CCI.
Our conclusions underline the opportunity to test our taxonomy proposal through the application of the exploratory exercise of defining the BM with CC entrepreneurs from domains of the CCE other than the four domains addressed in our research, leaving this way a room for future research from ours.

Completeness of our contribution
In the final version of the paper, the presented results will be complemented by the following figures and illustrations. The 4 BM of the cases here under consideration will be included, presented in the form of the BM GRP (Jouison, Verstraete, 2009). A figure representing the two axes enabling the construction of the taxonomy i.e. support/structuring will also be integrated. Finally, a table summarizing our taxonomy of four typologies of CCE, with its four quadrants and their characteristics, will complete our contribution.