Search results

This chapter draws its findings from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) data set for 2016 to 2019 to provide a comprehensive albeit concise overview of the evolution of entrepreneurship activities in Qatar.

The results indicate that Qatar experienced an increase in the entrepreneurship activities with a significant percentage of adults starting or running new businesses. Data also revealed that, despite an equal proportion of women and men involved in early-stage entrepreneurial activities, women experience a lower transformation rate into established business ownership. In addition, to the gender gap, this study revealed that transforming new businesses into established business ownership is one of the main challenge to be addressed to develop the impact of entrepreneurship in the country further. Finally, the chapter shows that Qatar has created an entrepreneurial ecosystem of very high quality as demonstrated by its third place in the National Entrepreneurship Context Index and by having secured the first place in the MENA region.

This chapter concludes by outlining a number of recommendations for policymakers to further foster the entrepreneurial activities in Qatar especially among the younger population.

This study examines the role of social and cultural acceptance of new ideas and the fear of failure in emerging economies within the context of entrepreneurship and growth (Romer Growth Model, 1986). Using data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor and the Panel Regression Analysis methodology for a sample of 22 emerging countries over the period 2008–2014, this study finds that perceived opportunities, knowledge of peers involved in startups, and media attention to startups, all indicators of the social acceptance of entrepreneurship, are statistically significant determinants of growth as measured by per capita Gross Domestic Product and reduction in unemployment. This influence is persistent even after controlling for time effects, despite the liquidity crunch and credit squeeze that occurred during the financial crisis starting in 2008. The fear of failure factor did not have a statistically significant influence on growth, confirming the notion that entrepreneurs in emerging economy environments, in particular, are prepared to pursue their goals doggedly, even in the face of less than 50:50 odds of succeeding.

How general can a “general” theory of entrepreneurship be? Abstraction is a necessity but is it possible to include venture opportunity variation in a general theory of entrepreneurship building on two contrasting perspectives such as equilibrium economics and disequilibrium economics. Two important boundaries need to be explicated. First, defining entrepreneurship as the creation of new economic activity includes both the creation of new means – ends (cf. Schumpeter, 1934) – as well as optimizing within known means – ends frameworks (cf. Kirzner, 1997). Second, such a theory includes an opportunity – actor nexus because it is the first tangible or intangible evidence of existing venture opportunities. Formal models of entrepreneurship often start with a person and at some point in time an exchange of persons with firms take place which is confusing because both levels of analysis and outcome are mixed with each other. Apparently, there is no such thing as entrepreneurship without actors, but if we want to create knowledge about the creation of economic activity, we need to frame our boundary around the nascent initiative instead of single actors and/or teams of actors because value can only be assessed in relation to the costs of services withdrawn. Analogous to this is, for example, the theory of firm and the theory of organizations with boundaries well beyond single actors or groups of actors. Another factor behind a venture-based theory of entrepreneurship comes from empirical evidence from the Swedish PSED, which suggests that approximately 16% (n=97) nascent entrepreneurs are exchanged during the start-up process. Formal models of entrepreneurship could therefore start with the nexus of venture opportunities and enterprising actors as suggested by Shane (2003) or with resources as suggested by Davidsson (2000) and progress forward in the entrepreneurial process. Entrepreneurship models built around the economic activity itself needs to be dynamic allowing different outcomes and feedback loops because resource combinations alter our perception of value and diffuses information, which may lead to additional resource combinations (Hayek, 1945).

We advance entrepreneurship research by developing a theoretical model of how founding teams form. Our neo-Carnegie model situates nascent founders in particular network-structural milieus, engaging in aspiration-driven search for and evaluation of prospective co-founders. The formation of co-founding ties between nascent founders can be divided into four theoretical steps, which we label activation, evaluation, approach, and reciprocation. Successful founding team formation is a consequence of mutually favorable evaluations by nascent founders in a multi-sided matching process. Nascent founders with higher and less flexible aspirations are more likely to undertake distant search for co-founders by seeking referrals, forming ties with strangers, and forming new ties to social foci where they might meet potential co-founders. Churn in newly formed founding teams emerges as a consequence of shifting dominant coalition dynamics in the founding team caused by organic venture evolution and intentional changes in strategic direction. Our theoretical model provides new insights on the formation pathways of founding teams, their initial task and relational resource endowments, and initial team dynamics.

In this chapter, we examine two theorized approaches to entrepreneurial activity: experiential versus prediction based strategies. We empirically assess the comparative performance of several commonly recommended approaches – researching customer needs, researching the competitive landscape, writing a business plan, conceptually adapting the business plan or experimentally adapting the primary business activity. We found that the majority of nascent entrepreneurs began with a business plan, but only about a third adapted their plan in later stages. We also found that talking with customers and examining the competitive landscape were normative activities. Those who started a plan were more likely to create a venture, although the effects much stronger for those who changed their plan later on, as well as for those who researched customer needs.

Our results show that the selection of these activities is both ubiquitous and driven by pre-start-up experience and new venture characteristics. The activities themselves do not robustly link with successful new venture foundation. Hence, pre-start-up experiences, venture characteristics, and the institutional environment are more important in explaining successful performance than recommended activities. Implications for research, practice, and pedagogy are discussed.

This study examined the effect that venture creation action has on the outcomes of nascent entrepreneurship. A conceptual model was developed which proposes action as a fundamental mechanism in venture creation. Thus, action should rightly be considered as a means which transmits the effects of venture resource endowments on to venture creation outcomes. This conceptual model was empirically supported in a random sample of nascent ventures. Ventures with higher levels of human or social capital were found to be more active in venture creation. In turn, more active venture attempts were more likely to achieve improved venture creation outcomes. Further, human and social capital, on their own, exhibit little direct influence on the venture outcomes achieved. These findings confirm action's central place in the venture creation process.

This chapter seeks to advance ongoing research concerning entrepreneurial commitment. While the concept of commitment has been addressed time and again in organizational literature, few entrepreneurship scholars have used it to understand entrepreneurial behaviors. In line with recent developments in entrepreneurial psycho-social literature (Fayolle & Liñán, 2014; Adam & Fayolle, 2015; Van Gelderen, Kautonen, Wincent, & Biniari, 2018), this conceptual chapter aims to advance understanding of the concept of commitment in the context of emerging organizations. Building on Meyer and Allen’s three-component model of commitment (TCM), it addresses how this multidimensional concept, developed in the organizational setting, is a lens through which one can investigate volitional phases of the entrepreneurial process (Van Gelderen, Kautonen, & Fink, 2015). Our work also explores how the TCM could be specifically adapted for emerging organizations, drawing on its main evolutions and re-conceptualizations since the 1990s. In this way, it uncovers potential avenues for further research on how to operationalize entrepreneurial activity. In doing so, it enhances knowledge of the entrepreneurial process and can improve training and support techniques for nascent entrepreneurs. It also contributes to broader discussions on the TCM and how it should be adapted in order to foster self-determined processes.

This study aims to investigate the effect of the crisis on entrepreneurial activities and how it can be relieved. Specifically, we explore how the positive effects of the human capital (self-confidence, opportunity alertness, and risk willingness) on startup activities are changed after the global financial crisis. Additionally, we explore how knowing an entrepreneur boosts up these relationships. We applied data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) about prospective women entrepreneurs in China in 2006–2007 (precrisis time) and 2009–2010 (postcrisis time). Results show a sharp drop in effect size of self-confidence and opportunity recognition upon women's entrepreneurial actions; however, the global financial crisis nullified the effect of fear of failure on potential women entrepreneurs' business activities. Furthermore, knowing an entrepreneur has no significant moderating effect. Theoretical and practical implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Whether or not nascent entrepreneurs should spend time developing a business plan is still an issue of debate for both scholars and practitioners. This chapter contributes to a better understanding on the uses and expectations of planning among business start-ups by taking a deeper and more granular approach than previous research. The chapter examines not only if planning is used but also how it is used and how this changes over time. Contrary to current thinking, the research suggests that for most firms the issue of planning may be a question of choice more than a request from institutional pressure. The insights developed in this chapter provide a foundation for future theorizing about the antecedents and effects of business planning for start-ups.

This chapter uses discourse analysis to explain why entrepreneurship has become a primary response to Africa’s youth employment challenge. It analyses almost 20 years of academic literature and publications from one of the world’s foremost authorities on entrepreneurship: the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM). The study found that youth were positioned within a discourse of entrepreneurial essentialism; where entrepreneurship was narrativised as the only option for youth employment; and youth were framed as entrepreneurship being the natural solution for them. Youth were concurrently framed within numerous contradictory entrepreneurial discourses which were used to elevate and legitimise entrepreneurship as the key pathway for addressing Africa’s youth employment challenge. An important finding in this study was that the dominant model of entrepreneurship being promoted by GEM to address the challenge is a mainly skills-based pathway to self-employment and low-growth microenterprise development. This is concerning for two reasons: firstly, global evidence does not demonstrate much support for such an approach, and secondly, it undermines other responses to youth unemployment, particularly those which seek to address more structural, demand-side barriers to employment.