In your special report on entrepreneurship you wax way too poetic about this economic function (“Global Heroes,” March 14, 2009). You even introduce your own “narrow” definition of an entrepreneur as “someone who offers an innovative solution to a (frequently unrecognized) problem.”  In his Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (1942), Joseph Schumpeter, one of the pioneers of entrepreneurship in economics whom you quote abundantly, is squarely against you in this regard: “This function does not essentially consist in either inventing anything or otherwise creating the conditions which the enterprise exploits. It consists in getting things done.” Period. Your definition is thus not only narrow but also spurious. It makes a fetish out of innovation, as though it is synonymous with getting things done. In fact, many an innovation never gets off the ground.