Surreal illustration comparing GEM's global, data-driven approach with PSED's focus on the firm creation process.

Startup Showdown: GEM vs. PSED - Which Entrepreneurship Study Reigns Supreme?

Lena Kashyap in Business & Economy August 2025 • 4 min read.

"Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED) are two giants in the field of entrepreneurship research. But how do their approaches, methodologies, and intellectual foundations stack up?"

Entrepreneurship is a driving force of economic growth and innovation. Understanding its dynamics requires rigorous research and comprehensive data. Two international observatories, the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED), have dedicated years to studying entrepreneurship using empirical studies with global scopes.

Since their inception, GEM and PSED have amassed a wealth of scientific production, published in prestigious journals and influencing policy decisions worldwide. While both aim to unravel the complexities of entrepreneurship, their approaches, methodologies, and the intellectual structures underpinning their research differ significantly. Understanding these differences is crucial for anyone seeking to navigate the vast landscape of entrepreneurship research.

This article will explore and compare GEM and PSED, delving into their origins, objectives, methodologies, and the core intellectual influences that shape their findings. By examining their strengths and weaknesses, we can gain a clearer understanding of which study best addresses specific research questions and provides the most valuable insights for different audiences.

GEM vs. PSED: Unpacking the Methodologies and Research Focus

Surreal illustration comparing GEM's global, data-driven approach with PSED's focus on the firm creation process.

GEM, established in 1999 by Babson College and the London Business School, functions as a global observatory of entrepreneurial attitudes and activities. GEM's primary goal is to provide internationally comparable data on entrepreneurship, overcoming the limitations of earlier research. GEM uses surveys of the adult population and expert opinions in each participating country, collecting data on entrepreneurial participation and attitudes towards new firm creation. GEM focuses on broad economic and social factors that influence entrepreneurial activity.

In contrast, PSED has its roots in a 1993 study in Wisconsin and was formalized in 1998 by the Entrepreneurial Research Consortium. PSED focuses on the firm creation process, tracking individuals involved in starting new businesses during their early stages. PSED employs longitudinal surveys, repeatedly interviewing the same individuals over time to gather detailed information about their progress, challenges, and outcomes. This methodology allows PSED to analyze the dynamics of firm creation, identifying the characteristics, activities, and factors that contribute to success or failure. PSED dives deep into the individual experiences of entrepreneurs and analyzes the more cognitive approach.

GEM: Primarily cross-sectional, large-scale surveys. Focus on national-level comparisons and the impact of entrepreneurship on economic growth.
PSED: Longitudinal studies tracking individual entrepreneurs. Focus on the dynamics of the firm creation process and the factors influencing startup success.

The choice between GEM and PSED depends largely on the research question. If the intent is to compare entrepreneurial activity across countries and assess the impact of national-level factors, GEM is the better option. If the intent is to understand the nuances of the firm creation process and identify the individual-level factors that drive success, PSED provides richer insights.

The Future of Entrepreneurship Research: Collaboration and Synthesis

GEM and PSED represent valuable milestones in entrepreneurship research. Their collaborative efforts advance the collective knowledge about entrepreneurship's influence on economic development and innovation. By understanding the characteristics of these projects, we can manage and improve them, and further the research into economics. Future research should explore collaboration and more data to further the field of entrepreneurship. These data points can lead to new conceptual and schools of thoughts.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.1007/s11365-013-0292-1,

Title: Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Versus Panel Study Of Entrepreneurial Dynamics: Comparing Their Intellectual Structures

Subject: econ.gn q-fin.ec

Authors: Antonio Rafael Ramos-Rodriguez, Salustiano Martinez-Fierro, Jose Aurelio Medina-Garrido, Jose Ruiz-Navarro

Published: 18-12-2023

Everything You Need To Know

What is the primary focus of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and how does it differ from the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED)?

The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) primarily focuses on providing internationally comparable data on entrepreneurship, examining broad economic and social factors influencing entrepreneurial activity across different countries. In contrast, the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED) concentrates on the firm creation process, tracking individuals involved in starting new businesses to understand the dynamics of startup success and failure. GEM uses cross-sectional surveys for national-level comparisons, whereas PSED employs longitudinal studies following individual entrepreneurs over time.

Can you explain the key methodological differences between GEM and PSED?

GEM's methodology primarily relies on large-scale, cross-sectional surveys of the adult population in participating countries, along with expert opinions. This approach allows for comparisons of entrepreneurial attitudes and activities at a national level, enabling the study of entrepreneurship's impact on economic growth. PSED, on the other hand, utilizes longitudinal studies. This means that PSED repeatedly interviews the same individuals over time, gathering detailed information about their entrepreneurial journey. This allows for an in-depth analysis of the firm creation process, identifying the factors that contribute to success or failure. PSED dives deep into the individual experiences of entrepreneurs and analyzes the more cognitive approach.

What types of research questions are best addressed by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), and when would the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED) be more suitable?

GEM is most suitable for research questions that require the comparison of entrepreneurial activity across different countries and an assessment of the impact of national-level factors. This is because its methodology allows for collecting data on a broad scale across multiple nations, providing a comprehensive overview of entrepreneurial landscapes. PSED, however, is better suited for research that aims to understand the firm creation process in detail. If the focus is on the individual-level factors that drive startup success or failure, the longitudinal nature of PSED's data collection offers richer insights into the nuances of entrepreneurship.

What are the origins of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED), and how have they contributed to the field of entrepreneurship research?

GEM was established in 1999 by Babson College and the London Business School, with the goal of overcoming limitations in previous entrepreneurship research by providing internationally comparable data. PSED has its roots in a 1993 study in Wisconsin and was formalized in 1998 by the Entrepreneurial Research Consortium. Both GEM and PSED have significantly contributed to the field. GEM has provided crucial data for understanding entrepreneurship across countries and its impact on economic growth. PSED has offered detailed insights into the firm creation process, helping to identify the factors that contribute to startup success and failure. Both have amassed a wealth of scientific production, influencing policy decisions worldwide and advancing the understanding of entrepreneurship's role in economic development and innovation.

How can collaboration between GEM and PSED benefit the future of entrepreneurship research?

Collaboration between GEM and PSED can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of entrepreneurship. By integrating the broad, cross-national data of GEM with the detailed, individual-level insights of PSED, researchers can gain a richer, more nuanced view of the entrepreneurial landscape. This collaboration could involve combining data sets, using complementary methodologies, and jointly addressing research questions. Such efforts can lead to the creation of new conceptual frameworks and schools of thought. By understanding the characteristics of these projects, we can manage and improve them, and further the research into economics. Future research should explore collaboration and more data to further the field of entrepreneurship.