Pull up a chair: why students belong at EEUK 

By the Bangor University delegates (Rebecca Jones, Suzy Clarkson, Hanxiong Zhang, Stephanie Steventon, Sebastian Medina Caballero, Lizzie Richards) 

Figure 1: Welsh delegates at IEEC 2026 (left-right: Sebastian Medina Caballero, Lizzie Richards, Suzy Clarkson, Rebecca Jones, Stephanie Steventon, Ruth Rowe, Hanxiong Zhang, Alex Hubbard, Steve Aicheler [Vicky Matthers Photography]) 

If we want students to take enterprise seriously, we need to show them that we do too. 

That is one of the reasons we at Bangor University have been so keen to bring students to the Enterprise Educators UK (EEUK) conference. We work hard to embed enterprise and employability throughout the student experience, creating opportunities for students to develop and recognise their enterprising skills both in and outside of the curriculum. But there is also value in taking that learning beyond the university and giving students the opportunity to see the wider enterprise education community in action.  

Last year, we brought our Students’ Union President, Yakubu Jidda, and this year, we brought two of our Student Career Coaches (Student Career Coaches are trained student peer mentors who provide practical, peer-to-peer employability support to fellow students), Lizzie Richards and Sebastian Medina Caballero. Each experience has reinforced for us the importance of giving students a seat at the table, rather than simply talking about them around it. Interestingly, taking a seat at the table was also a theme we explored at this year’s conference. It prompted some valuable conversations about what meaningful involvement in enterprise education looks like. We need to consider whether students are simply participants in activities designed for them, or are we creating opportunities for them to shape, influence and contribute to the enterprise agenda? For us at Bangor University, it is the latter. Indeed, this is why we brought our students along with us. For us, giving students a genuine seat at the table is not simply an aspiration, it is embedded in how we work, and this commitment to embedding and responding to student voice and working in partnership was recognised as one of the commendations in our most recent Quality Enhancement Review. 

Bringing our students to EEUK gives them the opportunity to see first-hand the scale, ambition and professionalism of enterprise education across the sector. They can meet enterprise educators, hear different perspectives and understand the investment that universities are making in developing enterprising graduates. By bringing students into these professional spaces, we demonstrate that their ideas, experiences and perspectives have value. 

Sometimes, the best way to demonstrate the value of enterprise is not to explain it, but to pull up a chair, make room at the table and invite students to join the conversation. Perhaps we actually need to make the table longer and keep pulling up more chairs.  

Yakubu Jidda said: 

‘Attending the EEUK25, I wasn’t entirely sure what to expect. It was a conference largely of a community of people genuinely committed to helping students succeed. I listened to inspiring conversations about employability, innovation, and the future of higher education, and I saw firsthand how universities are working together to prepare learners for a rapidly changing world. As the only student participant, I felt welcomed throughout the conference and it reminded me how valuable student voices can be in these discussions. In my opinion many of the ideas being explored could be richer if more learners were part of them. Beyond the sessions, the networking opportunities were invaluable. I connected with people whose work focuses on research, sustainability, energy, and skills development, and I learned how collaboration across these areas can create meaningful benefits for local communities. Those conversations continue to inspire me. I arrived as a participant but left with new ideas, connections and renewed sense of what’s possible’ 

Figure 2: Yakubu at the2025 Conference (Will Johnston Photography) 

Sebastian Medina Caballero said:  

‘Attending the 20th International Entrepreneurship Educators Conference (IEEC) at Nottingham Trent University was an incredibly enriching experience. As a student delegate, it was a genuine privilege to contribute to conversations actively shaping the future of enterprise education. 

What stood out to me was the diversity of perspectives across track sessions: from creative board-game dynamics to the underlying philosophy of enterprise education, all the way to cutting-edge AI-enterprising platforms being actively deployed across universities in the UK. Particularly, a session on entrepreneurship through acquisition (ETA) was eye-opening, broadening my perspective on the various ways modern enterprise can take. 

Beyond the formal sessions, the relaxed barbecue and the gala dinner created an environment where authentic conversations could take place. Connecting with educators, practitioners, and stakeholders from across the UK, Ireland, and beyond made the experience truly special. 

I came away with a much deeper appreciation for how educator communities are innovating to meet evolving student needs. The warmth, openness, and collaborative spirit of the EEUK community left me feeling inspired and motivated to further pursue my academic journey.’  

Figure 3: Sebastian and Hanxiong engaging in a game of Founders with other IEEC delegates, a game-based simulation to develop entrepreneurial mindset by Diana Lee (Vicky Matthers Photography) 

  Lizzie Richards said:  

‘Attending the International Entrepreneurship Educators Conference was a fantastic opportunity to learn and think creatively about enterprise for students in our university. As both a member of the team and a postgraduate student, I aimed to bring a student’s perspective to the talks and interactive sessions held across the week at Nottingham Trent University. I held in mind my experience of supporting students within the careers service, reflecting on how the new ideas and perspectives could support the students in Bangor. 

It was extremely valuable to learn more about triadic peer coaching, as it offers the opportunity for students to learn and grow from each other, in a supportive environment. I believe that building confidence through peer coaching and offering the opportunity for students to recognise their strengths can open opportunities to grow.  Building connections with professionals throughout the conference enabled the formulation of ideas that will support students in our university, by learning what works in other universities around the UK. I particularly valued the opportunity to talk about neurodiversity and enterprise coaching, ensuring spaces are welcoming and accessible to all students. 

I believe that involving students within conferences can inspire new and engaging ways to support enterprise at the university. I have been inspired by the event, and I am grateful for the opportunity to attend.’ 

Figure 4: Lizzie Richards engaging in a game of Founders with other IEEC delegates 

Our attendance at the International Entrepreneurship Educators Conference was kindly covered by the Welsh Government Delivery of Entrepreneurship in Higher Education.  

Recently, we have seen an increase in youth unemployment, reports of declining number of graduate opportunities, and large number of applicants applying to the same roles, standing at 140 applicants per vacancy. At the same time, good news is that degrees remain very valuable when it comes to employability. Additionally, skills that students and graduates have matter!  

In others and more recently, in a report by the National Foundation for Education Research, the range of transferable skills were identified as important for employability, such as communication skills, collaboration, information literacy, organising, planning and prioritising, problem solving and decision making, and creative thinking. In his EEUK blog, Bolton discusses the differences between enterprise and employability skills, and how they are interlinked, noting the importance of both when it comes to career prospects of students and graduates.  

Enterprise and entrepreneurship education have an important role to play when it comes to the wider challenges. A diagram below from the report by Edwards and Jordan (2024) neatly summarises the breadth of contributions of enterprise and entrepreneurship education.  

Research has recognised that enterprise and entrepreneurship education – expectedly – has an important influence on skills, knowledge and attitudes towards venture creation, graduate business startups and overall job creation (Carpenter and Wilson, 2022; Cui and Bell, 2022; Maragh, 2024). However, enterprise and entrepreneurship education can lead to entrepreneurial skills development and an increase in social capital and self-efficacy (Maragh, 2024). Importantly, entrepreneurial competencies can support employability and help people succeed in various career pathways.  

At the beginning of this month, I attended the International Enterprise Educators Conference held at Nottingham Trent University, and it was fantastic to see so many different and innovative examples of the activities that are aimed at developing entrepreneurial skills of students – but that are not necessarily aimed at venture creation – happening in classrooms in the curricular and extra-curricular spaces. Some of the examples were employment opportunities within startups. Rebmann and Stephen (2021) note the importance of offering work opportunities in small companies due to the interesting and challenging nature of work. Some were activities designed for skills development – workshops, hackathons, interactive self-paced activities – and empowering students to undertake their own skills development journey.  

While the impact of these can be difficult to track and measure directly at times, all those activities remain immensely important, and are likely to be even more important in the context of challenges outlined at the beginning.  

Diana Pasek-Atkinson
Enterprise Advisor Manager at Nottingham Trent University

***

That headline refers to Community of course, but I hope that I’ve got your attention, for a little while at least? I know you’re busy, but we all need a space for a bit of reflection in our roles!

I want to give you my take, after just over ten years of working in this field, on what makes the #ented community so special. Then ask if you agree or have anything to add?

People are the power of any community, and the field of enterprise education is made up of amazing people doing incredible things. It brings together academics, educators, practitioners, researchers and ecosystem partners, but this community isn’t defined by institution, job title or discipline, it’s defined by the way it behaves.

My introduction to the #ented community, from the very start (back in 2017, at my first International Enterprise Educators Conference in Glasgow) was like a warm embrace as I was made so welcome by veterans and newbies alike and I remember the support, sharing and inspiration from all sides. I felt this as the kind of inclusive network I was going to enjoy being a part of even then!

I am proposing my 5 Cs of enterprise education; community; connection, collaboration, curiosity and candour. Continuing with my C word theme…

Community

The #EntEd community at its strongest feels less like a professional network and more like a group of people who genuinely want each other to succeed. Whether you’re new to it all or you’ve been around for years, there’s usually someone willing to share ideas, answer questions and offer encouragement.

Connection

Many of the opportunities, collaborations and friendships in enterprise education start with a conversation. The connections we make through EEUK events and special interest groups and IEEC have helped me and my colleagues to arrange study visits, hop on calls to discuss issues and successes and remind us that we’re part of something bigger than our own organisation’s world.

Collaboration

Enterprise educators are generally quick to work out ways to work together, help each other, improve on what’s already there. From sharing resources (thank you for the expertise, intelligence, frameworks and contacts that have been so generously shared with me over the years!) and co-hosting events (memorable amongst them two around freelancing) to tackling sector-wide challenges (how I love those folks who’ve shared approaches to data collection and reporting).

Curiosity

The community is filled with people who are interested in new ideas and open to learning from others. We visit each other’s set ups, participate in pilot sessions outside our comfort zones (Prototyping with AI a recent one for me!) and ask questions not because we have all the answers, but because we’re always looking for better ways to support the people for whom we want to make a difference through enterprise and entrepreneurship.

Candour

Perhaps the most valuable quality of all is candour. Enterprise educators are refreshingly honest about what has worked, what hasn’t and what they’re still trying to work out. That willingness to share challenges as well as successes creates a trust that helps us all to learn and adapt, pivot and change and navigate the necessary political sensitivity in some spheres in increasingly challenging times.

Community, connection, collaboration, curiosity and candour. Together they capture what makes the #EntEd community. It’s the kind of space I strive to create elsewhere, it’s inclusive, people learn from and with each other, they support each other and no one is afraid to have honest conversations along the way.

What’s key to this community for you? What’s missing? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

The biggest concentration of the gorgeous people involved in #ented is the annual conference. This year hosted at Nottingham Trent University #IEEC 2026. If you have your ticket I’ll see you there, please say Hello! If not, there are still some available if you’re quick!

This blog is the first in a series of three arising from discussions during and reflections after a REntEd SIG ISBE/EEUK webinar called “Research vs Scholarship”. 

If your job requires you to “do Scholarship”, you have probably noticed two things. First, nobody quite agrees on what that means. Second, asking for clarification feels oddly risky and shameful, and that the question would somehow reveal your ignorance on a topic about which everyone else is an expert. 

But you are not alone in feeling confused when it comes to knowing what “Scholarship” means in Higher Education. 

The search for a definition

The REF 2029 defines research (see Section 4, 5.3.2 in Eligible outputs) as “a process of investigation leading to new insights, effectively shared.”. Professor Hannah Cobb of the University of Manchester’s definition of scholarship which we really like is “evidence-based systematic practice that positively impacts student outcomes or experience and is disseminated for critical review and, where appropriate, adoption by others.” 

Both are valid and reasonable but not that helpful if you’re trying to distinguish Scholarship from Research in your Performance Review or promotion application. The trouble is that both can be used to define a great deal of the same activity. Where there is a difference, it is less about the work itself and more about who it serves and which institutional category of recognition it falls into. 

The REF definition of research is very broad. Definitions of scholarship aren’t less clear or defined — they’re just less established as norms. 

From Boyer’s seminal work defining four scholarships (1990 – see Chapter 2)  to Braxton, Luckey & Helland’s (2002) inventory of scholarly activities (see Appendix B)  and the DARSHE framework (Gann & Hulme, 2025) to name only a small selection, there is plenty of academic literature engaged with the question of defining the full range of academic work beyond what typically counts as “Research”. None of it converges on a single answer as you might expect of such a diverse range of activities, but we argue that it doesn’t need to. 

Problematic ambiguity

The problem is that Research work has well-established metrics: citations, grant income, outputs in top journals, completed PhD supervisions, for example, and Scholarship work does not. This asymmetry creates a hierarchy in which Scholarship feels like the “other” thing, the thing that isn’t proper “Research”. Scholarship is often not as highly valued in institutions because it is arguably more complicated to measure, it is less clearly linked to REF funding, and ways to measure it haven’t been around as long.  It feels a bit like the qualitative versus quantitative debate where researchers can agree which sort of research they do but disagree on which sort is better. 

Education-focused colleagues in our webinar clearly felt this way. Some described a need for permission to do what felt like “play,” a sense of being watched, or waiting to be found out for working on something they cared about. Some described guilt about publishing when their contract gives them no formal research time, and an urge to be secretive, or at least not to broadcast activities that were not teaching, administrative, or marking.  

Asking a different question

Instead of trying to find a global and objective definition of “Scholarship”, just find a working definition for your own context.  Every institution will have its own vocabulary when it decides what counts and uses that information to make decisions.  

In practice that means: 

• Finding your institution’s definition of Scholarship – usually embedded in promotion criteria somewhere  

• Noticing the words it uses, and adopting them yourself to describe your “non-research” work 

• Pairing your work with a published framework, using the literature to validate and legitimise your categorisation. 

In these ways you can translate your activity in your context to so that it is legible to and consequently valued in your own institution. 

You have to be a bit of a shape shifter for your work to be understood in your own context 

Does this approach actually help?

In our recent webinar for the REntEd SIG (EEUK / ISBE), participants’ average self-rated clarity on the difference between Research and Scholarship rose from 3.2 to 4.3 out of 5 and their confidence in explaining it to others rose from 3.0 to 4.3. We think this improvement didn’t come from having access to new information; it came from being given a structure for thinking it through.

You can access the webinar slide deck here. 

Find out more 

Dr Kelly Smith and Dr Lucy Hatt have also created a companion one-page guide to give you a starting point using three lenses (contract, progression, identity) supported by some useful frameworks.  

Watch out for the next post in this series where we look at how to make the work itself more visible once you have the language to describe it. 

Higher education is one of the last environments where we can meaningfully influence entrepreneurial aspirations before students enter the labour market. If we want more women to pursue entrepreneurship, we need pedagogical approaches that actively support confidence, belonging, entrepreneurial identity development and participation. Authentic Leadership Pedagogy is one such approach. 

Why Do So Many Talented Women Still Not See Themselves as Entrepreneurs? 

Over the past few years, we have noticed a recurring pattern across both undergraduate and postgraduate entrepreneurship and management programmes. While female students often perform just as strongly as their male peers academically, they are frequently less likely to volunteer entrepreneurial ideas, participate in pitching activities, or view entrepreneurship as a realistic career pathway for themselves. This is not a question of capability. Rather, it raises an important question for enterprise educators: why do so many talented women still struggle to see themselves as entrepreneurs? 

Part of the answer may lie in how entrepreneurship continues to be portrayed and experienced. Entrepreneurship is often associated with characteristics such as competitiveness, assertiveness, individualism and risk-taking, while successful entrepreneurs remain disproportionately represented by men. As a result, many women may struggle to identify with entrepreneurial stereotypes despite possessing the skills, creativity and potential required to succeed. 

This matters because entrepreneurship is not only a pathway to venture creation, but also a mechanism for innovation, economic development, social impact and value creation. If significant numbers of capable women do not see entrepreneurship as something that is relevant or attainable for them, we risk overlooking ideas, perspectives and entrepreneurial talent that could benefit our communities, economies and wider society. 

Confidence Before Competence? 

This is particularly important because the barriers many women face are not necessarily related to capability or academic performance, but to confidence, self-belief and whether they perceive entrepreneurship as a pathway in which they can belong and succeed. If we want more women to pursue entrepreneurship, we need pedagogical approaches that actively support belonging, participation and entrepreneurial identity development. Authentic Leadership Pedagogy offers one potential approach for creating these conditions. 

As educators, we often focus on building entrepreneurial knowledge and skills. However, women are unlikely to engage fully with entrepreneurial opportunities if entrepreneurship continues to be perceived as a pathway that is not open or relevant to them. Increasing participation therefore requires more than developing entrepreneurial capability. It also requires creating learning environments that challenge stereotypes and broaden understandings of who can become an entrepreneur. 

Creating Space for Future Entrepreneurs   

Authentic Leadership Pedagogy focuses on self-awareness, reflection, relational support, transparency and inclusion. Rather than focusing solely on entrepreneurial knowledge acquisition, it encourages students to explore their strengths, values and aspirations while developing confidence in their own capabilities. Like experiential and project-based learning approaches, it supports entrepreneurial capability through active participation, practical application and exposure to authentic entrepreneurial experiences. Importantly, however, it also creates opportunities for students to see themselves as potential entrepreneurs and to engage with entrepreneurship in ways that feel personally meaningful and authentic. 

In our own teaching, this includes reflective activities, collaborative teamwork, purpose-driven entrepreneurial challenges linked to social impact, sustainability and value creation, mentoring, open dialogue, exposure to diverse entrepreneurial role models, and signposting students to enterprise incubator opportunities within and beyond the University. We also seek to build trusting relationships with students and create inclusive learning environments where diverse perspectives are valued, and students feel comfortable sharing ideas, challenging assumptions and learning from mistakes. Reflective discussions can further encourage students to consider how entrepreneurship is shaped by different cultural contexts and social expectations, helping to challenge assumptions about what successful entrepreneurship looks like.

While Authentic Leadership Pedagogy is not a complete solution, it offers one approach for creating more inclusive entrepreneurial learning environments and broadening who sees entrepreneurship as a viable pathway. 

If we are serious about increasing women’s participation in entrepreneurship, we need to move beyond simply teaching entrepreneurial skills. We must also create learning environments that help students develop confidence, belonging and entrepreneurial identities while challenging the stereotypes and assumptions that continue to shape who sees entrepreneurship as a viable pathway. 

Perhaps the challenge for enterprise educators is not how we teach entrepreneurship, but who feels that entrepreneurship is for them. Until more women can genuinely see themselves as entrepreneurs, we risk losing entrepreneurial talent long before it reaches the market.

EEUK Director and Co-founder of Enterprise Educators UK’s Sustainable Society SIG, Catherine Brentnall from Manchester Metropolitan University, reflects on the recent ‘Co-operative Catalyst’ event, held at the University of Salford.

Last week, Enterprise Educators UK supported an event which brought together educators, co-operative practitioners and ecosystem partners for a ‘Co-operative Catalyst’ event to explore how enterprise education can support a thriving co-operative economy. The backdrop for the event is policy interest in expanding the co-operative economy and a recent government call for evidence on how this could be achieved. Co-operatives UK highlight cultural and educational barriers as a significant hindrance to co-operative growth, making the role of education and enterprise educators a vital one.

In science, a catalyst is a substance or agent that speeds up a reaction and makes a process happen faster. We could think of ‘co-operative catalysts’ as enterprise educators or partners who accelerate a shift towards co-operative thinking and business models, helping democratic enterprise ideas grow faster. The ‘co-operative catalyst’ day created a timely space for reflection and action on this. Throughout the day, contributors returned – explicitly and implicitly – to a question that continues to gather momentum in enterprise education: what forms of enterprise are students typically invited to imagine?

We began with a panel discussion on “Why co-ops? Why now?”, bringing together voices from across practice – from worker co-operatives to community-led housing and energy initiatives. These conversations grounded the day in lived experience, surfacing how co-operative models respond to contemporary challenges not simply through innovation, but through participation, power sharing and democratic structures that enable real, material improvements in people’s lives. As the day unfolded, we moved from rationale to practice. Mark Simmonds from Co-op Culture offered a rich account of what supporting co-operative start-up and development looks like on the ground, highlighting both the strengths of co-operative approaches and the gaps in mainstream enterprise support. This was complemented by a series of shorter sessions exploring how co-operative thinking can be translated into educational practice – from embedding ownership and regenerative thinking in the curriculum, to developing frameworks and tools that move beyond growth-led models and towards a co-operative and commons imagination. My colleague Dr Nor Yusup and I shared the potential of the ownership element of regenerative business theory to help elevate the question of ‘who owns it?’. You can read an accessible summary of this on page 17 of the spring edition of the Teaching Business and Economics journal. Across these exchanges, a consistent theme emerged: when we shift the questions we ask – towards ownership, participation, and who benefits – new possibilities for enterprise education begin to open up.

In the afternoon, Mark Simmonds took us through a sociocratic dialogue, where participants collectively explored what it means to become a ‘co-operative catalyst’ in their own context – surfacing both opportunities and barriers, and experimenting with more democratic approaches to structuring conversation and decision-making. What became visible through the day was that this question – ‘what do you need to be a co-operative catalyst?’ – is especially vital during these times of intensifying social and ecological pressures. Alongside the policy attention on expanding the cooperative economy, the idea of being a ‘cooperative catalyst’ feels less like a

niche interest and more like an existential one in the context of extreme wealth and social inequality, and the depletion of the communities and biosphere on which human society depends.

If co-operatives offer credible pathways towards more sustainable, democratic and place-responsive forms of economic activity, then the challenge for enterprise educators is not only to advocate for them, but to actively cultivate the conditions in which they can emerge and thrive. This calls for reflection – on how we teach, support and legitimise enterprise – but also for action: to experiment with new practices, redistribute voice and agency, and re-orient entrepreneurial aspiration towards collective wellbeing. In this sense, becoming a co-operative catalyst is not a fixed identity, but an ongoing commitment to reshaping the possibilities of enterprise in ways that are more aligned with the futures we urgently need.

On the day of the event, the event highlighted co-operatives not as a singular solution, but rather as a broader invitation: to expand the repertoire of organisational forms, ownership models and value logics that we make visible to students. As Suneel Kunamaneni reflects in his follow-up to the event, many of the challenges our students are drawn to – across food, housing, energy and community wellbeing – are not simply problems of innovation, but of coordination, governance and collective action. The conversations at the co-operative catalyst event resonated strongly with this perspective, suggesting that a fuller version of enterprise education may depend on how far we are willing to engage with these questions. You can read Suneel’s full reflection here: What forms of enterprise are students invited to imagine? And please join the Sustainable Society SIG to take part in this ongoing conversation and bring your reflections and actions to this agenda.

It is a common misconception that enterprise education is all Dragon’s Den-style pitches, pop-up shops, and hackathons. Great activities, but ones that colleagues may or may not deem relevant for their students. That can be a barrier to learner engagement, especially in FE when enterprise activities are predominantly booked for groups by lecturers or progress coaches. At Bridgend College, all enterprise activities are mapped to the Welsh Government’s ACRO Model of enterprise skills and the College’s ‘Core Skills for Success’, for which learners can be awarded digital badges. Although these are useful ways of demonstrating impact, broadening the scope of activities on offer to capture the imagination of both staff and learners has proved an even more effective way to increase awareness and widen participation. Essentially, realising that enterprise education could be murder was a game-changer. 

David Bolton highlighted leadership, decision-making and initiative as key enterprise skills in his Director’s Blog. Immerse students in an interactive, fictitious crime-solving activity that develops these, in addition to gamifying the Welsh Government’s ACRO skills and you’ve created a compelling pedagogical tool.

Designed to shine a light on core entrepreneurial behaviours, the ACRO model comprises four pillars – Attitude, Creativity, Relationships and Organisation. A ‘cold case’ simulation can be mapped onto this framework and is a particularly useful way of encouraging learners to reflect on their preferred methods of learning and team roles in a post-activity debrief. 

Attitude: Investigators rarely receive data in a clean, linear fashion. When assessing how successful the team was in solving the crime, learners must reflect on their own contribution to the overall result, analysing the levels of self-confidence, self- belief, motivation and determination they displayed and how these contributed to the outcome. This increases their self-knowledge and ensures that all the ACRO skills in the Attitude category are considered.

Creativity: Solving a cold case requires lateral thinking and it is by it’s very nature a problem to to solve. Teams must generate diverse hypotheses, look at seemingly mundane details or objects from unexpected angles, and connect disparate pieces of information to construct a viable theory. Finding a suspect with means, motive and opportunity requires both creative and critical thinking.  

Relationships: Working together against the clock with no clear instructions about where to start except to find all the evidence needed for a thorough investigation, is a great way to identify participants’ preferred team roles. How each individual reacts when they inevitably hit dead ends or get distracted by a red herring can also be a very helpful way to support learners to start articulating their transferable skills, something with which FE learners often struggle. 

Organisation: Crime scenes represent high-volume, chaotic information environments. Teams must systematically plan strategies, delegate tasks, prioritise critical evidence, and manage scarce time efficiently to deliver results. A lack of organisation is very likely to result in frustration and an unsolved crime so this ACRO area can prove crucial.

In addition to developing ACRO skills,muerder mystery activities also align with the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Guidance for Higher Education Providers.It defines enterprise education as cultivating the “behaviours, attributes, and competencies” that enable students to transition smoothly from ideas to practical action. The QAA emphasizes decision-making supported by critical analysis and reflective judgement. By placing students in a challenge-led simulation, educators shift them from being passive recipients of risk theory to being active practitioners of real-world evaluation.

The Ultimate Post-Mortem

The true breakthrough in learning occurs during the structured, facilitator-led debrief—the educational post-mortem.This critical reflection of the simulated detective work allows learners to reflect on communication failures, leadership dynamics, and cognitive biases in a safe environment. Affording students the opportunity to analyse the skills they used in a fun and engaging, yet deceptively complex activity is all the proof I need that enterprise education can be murder.

References 

The ACRO model outlined in the Youth Entrepreneurship Strategy 

The QAA Guidance QAA Guidance 

• Communication
• Teamwork
• Time management
• Problem-solving
• Reliability
• Adaptability
• Professionalism
• Digital literacy

• Creativity and innovation
• Leadership
• Decision-making
• Risk assessment
• Financial awareness
• Strategic thinking
• Negotiation
• Initiative and self-motivation

• Employability skills help you get and keep a job.
• Enterprise skills help you create opportunities and drive innovation.

Creativity is not a luxury in today’s rapidly evolving world, it is essential to survive the working landscape. The ability to have a skillset that allows you to be able to pivot and be agile will be paramount, but how is that linked to creativity?

Creativity is a mindset; those who think like this are defined as lateral thinkers. You can learn this through entrepreneurship activities and processes; creatives and business owners process information in this way.

Lateral thinking—a term first coined by Edward de Bono in 1967- refers to a person’s capacity to address problems by imagining solutions that cannot be arrived at via deductive or logical means.

The ability to develop original answers to difficult questions. This is the essence of creativity, and all organisations benefit from it at times of change, when, by definition, traditional solutions are unlikely to get the desired result. Phil Lewis: Former Editor at Forbes.

Whether you’re launching a business, designing a new course, or reimagining how students engage with learning, creativity fuels innovation and opens doors for people from every background and discipline.

Creative minds tend to be energetic (but focused), playful (but disciplined), and realistic (but imaginative). Such traits seem like contradictions, but according to psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, it’s this exact contrast that helps inspire the most creative of minds.

Why Creative Paradoxes Matter: A Short Explanation of Csikszentmihalyi’s Theory.

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, one of the most influential psychologists of the last century, argued that highly creative people don’t fit neatly into personality categories. Instead, they embody dynamic contradictions—pairs of traits that seem opposite but work together to fuel original thinking.

Csikszentmihalyi observed that creative individuals often display dualities such as:

energetic and focused. Playful and disciplined. Imaginative and realistic. Independent and collaborative. These aren’t inconsistencies—they’re flexible cognitive strategies.

Creative people shift between modes depending on what the work demands.

At the intersection of entrepreneurship and higher education lies a powerful opportunity: to cultivate environments where curiosity thrives, ideas collide, and students feel empowered to participate fully, regardless of their subject area or starting point or background.

By introducing creativity as a learnable process rather than a talent, this could help students across all subjects feel included and capable. By showing examples of analytical, visual, collaborative, and experimental thinking to validate different ways of approaching problems.

Present, authentic challenges that invite multiple solutions, encouraging students to draw from their unique backgrounds and skillsets. Encourage iteration over perfection, so they feel safe to experiment. Reflect on their thought processes, helping them to recognise their creative strengths and growth areas.

These insights have implications: Curriculum design can encourage both experimentation and rigour. Interdisciplinary learning naturally cultivates paradoxical thinking. Innovation ecosystems (labs, incubators, maker spaces) thrive when students can transition between divergent and convergent thinking.

Assessment models that reward curiosity, iteration, and reflection help students develop these dual capacities. Therefore, we can intentionally create environments where these paradoxes aren’t just accepted—they’re leveraged.

Creative paradoxes help people enter flow because they balance: keeping the mind engaged without tipping into boredom or anxiety. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, speaks about this particularly within his theory of flow.

By embracing creativity as a shared practice rather than a niche skill, it transforms who feels welcome to participate and makes it more inclusive for all to explore, collaborate and generate new ideas. Building a sense of belonging that has no parameters, but that encourages inclusive student participation and engagement.

Conclusion: Creativity as a Shared Space for Everyone

In a world defined by rapid change, creativity is no longer a specialist skill — it is a universal capacity that helps people adapt, innovate, and thrive.

What makes this mindset so powerful is that it is learnable. When we understand creativity not as a rare talent but as a flexible way of thinking, we begin to see ourselves as capable contributors, regardless of our background or subject area.

Education has an opportunity to nurture this mindset. By presenting authentic challenges, encouraging experimentation, and validating diverse cognitive styles — analytical, visual, collaborative, or exploratory — educators can help students recognise their own creative strengths.

Environments that balance freedom with structure, challenge with skill, and novelty with clarity mirror the very paradoxes that fuel creative flow.

These conditions make learning more inclusive, giving everyone permission to explore, iterate, and imagine new solutions.

Cultivating communities where creativity becomes a shared practice rather than an exclusive domain.

Csikszentmihalyi’s work reminds us that nurturing creativity means nurturing complexity.

References

The Use of Lateral Thinking (1967) Edward de Bono, London: Jonathan Cape.

Phil Lewis: Former Editor at Forbes – Published Mar 20, 2020

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s book Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention (1996)

Written by Jennie Baptiste, Industry & Engagement Manager at University of Westminster

Jennie has some of her creative photography work currently on show at The V&A East Museum’s inaugural exhibition, The Museum is Black: A British Story. Opens 18^th April- 3^rd January 2026.