Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
i
ENTREPRENEURIAL COMPETENCIES AS INDICATORS OF
BUSINESS SUCCESS: Case From Turkey
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO
THE INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
OF
ANKARA YILDIRIM BEYAZIT UNIVERSITY
BY
BABAGELDI HALLYYEV
THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF MANAGEMENT AND
ORGANIZATION
IN
THE DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATION
Ankara, 2019
ii
Approval of the Institute of Social Sciences
(Title and Name)
Manager of Institute
I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Master
of Management and Organization.
(Title and Name)
Head of Department
This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate,
in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Management and
Organization.
(Title and Name)
Supervisor
Jury Members:
Prof. Dr. Nilay ALÜFTEKİN SAKARYA (AYBU)
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ayşegül TAŞ (ÇÜ)
Asst. Prof. Haroon MUZAFFAR (AYBU)
iii
PLAGIARISM PAGE
I hereby declare that all information in this thesis has been obtained and presented in
accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by
these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all materials and results that are
not original to this work; otherwise I accept all legal responsibility.
Name, Last name: Babageldi Hallyyew
Signature:
iv
ABSTRACT
ENTREPRENEURIAL COMPETENCIES AS INDICATORS OF BUSINESS
SUCCESS: Case From Turkey
Hallyyew, Babageldi
Master, Department of Management and Organization
Supervisor: Prof.Dr. Nilay ALÜFTEKİN SAKARYA
July 2019, 76 pages
In the last few decades, the importance of entrepreneurial competencies has increased
because of the strategic role employed by entrepreneurs. Consequently, the purpose of
this research is to investigate the influence of owner entrepreneurial competencies on
business success and the relationship among demographic variables (training,
experience, education) and entrepreneurial competencies. Primary data were gathered in
businesses in Ankara, Turkey. The sample involves 44 private sector business owners.
Entrepreneurial competencies were operationalized as strategic, commitment,
conceptual, opportunity, organizing and leading, relationship, learning, personal, ethical
and social responsibility competencies. Data were analyzed by using simple regression
analysis method. It was found that entrepreneurial competencies influence positively
self-reported satisfaction with business’ financial and non-financial success of
entrepreneurs. It was also concluded that found that demographic variables: training,
experience and education of entrepreneurs do not have impact on the development of
entrepreneurial competencies except master’s degree that has positive effect on the
development of learning competency. Therefore, findings of this research would be
beneficial for entrepreneurs and policy makers. This thesis also, gives some informative
suggestions for future researches on the related topic.
Keywords: Entrepreneurial competencies, Entrepreneurial personality traits, Business
success.
v
ÖZET
IŞLETME BAŞARISININ GÖSTERGELERI OLARAK GİRİŞİMCİLİK
YETKİNLİKLERİ: Türkiye Örneği
Hallıyev, Babageldi
Yüksek Lisans, Yönetim ve Organizasyon Bölümü
Danışman: Prof.Dr. Nilay ALUFTEKİN SAKARYA
Temmuz 2019, 76 sayfa
Son birkaç on yılda, girişimciler tarafından kullanılan stratejik rol nedeniyle girişimcilik
yetkinliklerinin önemi artmıştır. Bu yüzden, bu araştırmanın amacı, işletme sahibi
girişimci yetkinliklerinin işletme başarısı üzerindeki etkisini ve demografik değişkenler
(eğitim kursları, deneyim, eğitim) ile girişimcilik yetkinlikleri arasındaki ilişkiyi
araştırmaktır. Birincil veriler, Türkiye’nin Ankara ilinde yerleşen işletmelerden toplandı.
Çalışma grubu 44 özel sektör işletme sahibini içermektedir. Girişimcilik yetkinlikleri;
stratejik, bağlılık, kavramsal, fırsat, organizasyon ve liderlik, ilişki, öğrenme, kişisel, etik
ve sosyal sorumluluk yetkinlikleri olarak belirlendi. Veriler basit regresyon analizi
yöntemi kullanılarak analiz edildi. Araştırma sonucunda girişimcilik yetkinliklerinin,
girişimcilerin işletmelerinin finansal ve finansal olmayan başarısından duyduğu
memnuniyeti olumlu yönde etkilediği bulundu. Araştırmada aynı zamanda demografik
değişkenlerin (eğitim kursları, deneyim ve girişimcilerin eğitimi) öğrenme yetkinliğinin
gelişimi üzerinde olumlu etkisi olan yüksek lisans derecesi dışında girişimcilik
yetkinliklerinin gelişimi üzerinde bir etkisi olmadığını tespit edilmiştir. Bu nedenle, bu
araştırmanın bulguları girişimciler ve politika yapıcılar için faydalı olacaktır. Bu
araştırmada ayrıca, konuyla ilgili gelecekteki araştırmalar için bazı bilgilendirici öneriler
de bulunmaktadır.
Anahtar kelimeler: Girişimcilik yetkinlikleri, Girişimci kişilik özellikleri, İşletme
başarısı.
vi
DEDICATION
To my family and beloved friends
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am sincerely thankful to my supervisor Prof. NILAY ALUFTEKIN SAKARYA, who
patiently motivates me to conceive and finish the thesis.
My deepest appreciation goes to my family who give me constant encouragement and
love, which I will forever gratitude.
viii
CONTENTS
PLAGIARISM PAGE ....................................................................................................................... iii
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................... iv
ÖZET ................................................................................................................................................. v
DEDICATION .................................................................................................................................. vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................... vii
CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................ xi
CHAPTER 1.......................................................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................1
1.1 Problem statement .....................................................................................................................3
1.2 Research objectives: ..................................................................................................................4
1.3 Research questions ....................................................................................................................5
1.4 Significance of study .................................................................................................................5
1.5 Organizations of chapters ..........................................................................................................5
CHAPTER 2.......................................................................................................................................6
LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................................6
2.1 The importance of small businesses ..........................................................................................6
2.2 External factors .........................................................................................................................8
2.3 Internal factors ..........................................................................................................................9
2.4 Definition of entrepreneur ...................................................................................................... 12
2.5 Personality trait approach ....................................................................................................... 15
2.6 Competency approach ............................................................................................................ 20
2.7 Entrepreneurial competency ................................................................................................... 22
2.8 Component of entrepreneurial competencies ......................................................................... 22
2.8.1 Strategic Competency ..................................................................................................... 26
2.8.2 Commitment Competency ............................................................................................... 27
2.8.3 Conceptual Competency ................................................................................................. 27
2.8.4 Opportunity Competency ................................................................................................ 28
2.8.5 Organizing and Leading Competency ............................................................................. 29
2.8.6 Relationship competency ................................................................................................ 30
2.8.7 Learning Competency ..................................................................................................... 32
2.8.8 Personal Competency ...................................................................................................... 32
ix
2.8.9 Technical Competency .................................................................................................... 33
2.8.10 Ethical Competency ...................................................................................................... 34
2.8.11 Social Responsibility Competency ................................................................................ 34
2.8.12 Familism competency ................................................................................................... 34
2.9 Antecedents of Entrepreneurial competencies ....................................................................... 35
2.10 Outcome of Entrepreneurial competencies .......................................................................... 36
2.11 Motivation to start a business ............................................................................................... 38
CHAPTER 3.................................................................................................................................... 40
METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................... 40
3.1 The universe and Sample of the study ................................................................................... 40
3.2 Development of data collection tool ...................................................................................... 41
CHAPTER 4.................................................................................................................................... 42
EMPRICAL RESULTS .................................................................................................................. 42
4.1 Sample characteristics ............................................................................................................ 42
4.1.2 Age .................................................................................................................................. 42
4.1.3 Gender ............................................................................................................................. 42
4.1.4 Education level ................................................................................................................ 43
4.1.5 Training ........................................................................................................................... 43
4.1.6 Entrepreneurial experience .............................................................................................. 43
4.1.7 Family background .......................................................................................................... 44
4.2 Analysis of Variables ............................................................................................................. 44
4.2.1 The competency measures............................................................................................... 44
4.2.3 The business success measures ....................................................................................... 46
4.2.4 Descriptive statistics ........................................................................................................ 46
4.3 Hypothesis tests of possible effects of key entrepreneurial competencies on success ........... 47
4.4 Hypothesis tests of possible effects of antecedents (training, past experience, education level)
on entrepreneurial competencies .................................................................................................. 53
4.5 Motivations for starting the business ..................................................................................... 56
CHAPTER 5.................................................................................................................................... 57
CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................. 57
5.1 Summary of the study ...................................................................................................... 57
5.2 Limitations and directions for future studies .................................................................... 59
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 60
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... 66
Appendix-A items for measuring entrepreneurial competencies. .............................................. 66
x
Appendix-B: Sample of Questionnaire ......................................................................................... 68
Appendix-C ................................................................................................................................... 74
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Characteristics of Entrepreneurs ......................................................................................... 18
Table 2 Strategic Competency domain: Clusters and Examples of Strategic Behaviors ................ 26
Table 3 Conceptual Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of Conceptual Behaviors ........ 28
Table 4 Opportunity Competency Domain: Clusters and example of opportunity Behaviors. ........ 29
Table 5 Organizing and Leading Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of Organizing and
Leading Behaviors ........................................................................................................................... 30
Table 6 Relationship Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of Relationship Behaviors .... 31
Table 7 Personal Competency Domain: Clusters and examples of Personal Qualities.................... 33
Table 8 Technical Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of Technical Behaviors ............. 33
Table 9 Ethical Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of Ethical Behaviors ...................... 34
Table 10 Familism Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of Familism Behaviors ............ 35
Table 11 Motivational factors among various countries .................................................................. 38
Table 12 Current age of business owner .......................................................................................... 42
Table 13 Gender of the respondents ................................................................................................. 42
Table 14 Education attainment of the entrepreneurs ........................................................................ 43
Table 15 Training received by participants ...................................................................................... 43
Table 16 Past entrepreneurial experience ......................................................................................... 44
Table 17 Family background............................................................................................................ 44
Table 18 Number of employees in businesses ................................................................................ 44
Table 19 Reliability analysis of entrepreneurial competency scales ................................................ 45
Table 20 Correlation of the competency variables .......................................................................... 45
Table 21 Reliability analysis of business success ........................................................................... 46
Table 22 Correlation among success variables ............................................................................... 46
Table 23 Summary of hypothesis results ........................................................................................ 53
Table 24 Summary of independent sample t-test ............................................................................ 54
Table 25 A Summary of All Items to Measure Entrepreneurial Competencies .............................. 66
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Latest developments in study on entrepreneurship have seen increased attention given to
small and medium-sized enterprises, mostly because of the realization that small
businesses play significant role in a country’s economy. The collective influences of
small businesses on economies of both developed and developing countries are
considerable (Ahmad, 2007). To illustrate, in European Union 99.8% of firms are small
and medium sized enterprises, most of them are micro enterprises consisting of 91.8%,
and provide 66.5% of total employment (Abdul, 2018). European Union defines the small
and medium sized enterprises as a backbone of the economy. Respectively, 99%, 99.9%,
99.8% and 99.7% of businesses in Germany, Britain, Belgium and Japan are small and
medium sized enterprises (Şener, 2014; Benzing, Chu and Kara, 2009). In Turkey 91.9
percent of all firms are small and medium sized enterprises, deliver 78 percent of all
employment and represent 55 percent of GDP and 50 percent of entire investment (Başçı,
Durucan, 2017). In developed countries like Australia and Germany small business
activities serve as means to stimulate stagnating industries, whereas in developing
countries like Turkey and Malaysia they are seen as a mechanism to advance the
distribution of income, to stimulate economic growth, and reshape an economic structure
that has been highly dependent on the activities of large firms (Abdullah, 1999).
Given that raising the chances of success among small businesses would have vast
implication for the growth and socio-economic wellbeing of a country and catching the
predictors of success in small businesses is crucial (Ahmad, 2007). The foundation of
successful small businesses could possibly bring new jobs, raise trade and therefore GDP
in the region. Microenterprises significantly contribute to the potential of the region by
generating employment and overall development. Problems like poverty, unemployment
and regional imbalance can be diminished by expanding the small business sector
(Chatterjee, Das, 2016). But, O’Regan and Ghobadian (2004) say that literature on small
businesses demonstrate inconsistency about the key factors which determine business
success. Some researchers highlight the internal factors that contribute to the success
2
especially effect of entrepreneurs, others emphasize the external/environmental factors
such as government policy, nature and supportiveness of infrastructure, state of the
economy and availability of financial support (Ahmad, 2007). Because small firms are
more likely than big businesses to be affected by changes in their internal and external
environments (Man, Lau, 2005). Lack of market power and turbulent nature of newly
emerging market faced by many small businesses often make them more vulnerable to
external effects than larger businesses (Man, 2001).
However, internal factors including organizational variables and especially individual
variables (entrepreneurial competencies) could influence the business performance.
Because entrepreneurs in the small businesses play prominent role and enable to utilize
the businesses’ resources to reach the businesses’ goal. Even though entrepreneurs play
significant role in revealing business performance, attempts to study the unique
contribution of the entrepreneur to performance is still limited (Man, Lau, 2005; Gibb,
2005).
With limited number of studies which examine the effect of the characteristics of the
entrepreneur on business success, two research approaches can be distinguished:
personality and competency approaches (Kyndt, Baert, 2015) most of them accept
personality approach (Pearson, Chatterjee, 2001; Lee, Tsang, 2001), and focused on
demographic variables (Bates, 1995). Scholars tried to differentiate entrepreneurs from
non-entrepreneurs by identifying their personality traits (Xiang, 2009). Studies that start
from the personality trait approach concentrate on mostly inflexible traits and fixed
dispositions of the individual (Kyndt, Baert, 2015). Though attractive for its simplicity,
there are boundaries to the usefulness of the approach, with results reported in literature
showing considerable inconsistency (Begley and Boyd, 1985). After 1990s, the traits
approach was out of favor and scholars started to look at entrepreneurs from a behavioral
and contextual perspective (Xiang, 2009) or competency approach which concentrates
on aspect of entrepreneurship which can be developed (Kyndt, Baert, 2015).
A central thesis of this research is entrepreneurial competencies that is defined as
“underlying characteristics such as generic and specific knowledge, motives, traits, self-
3
images, social roles and skills which result in business birth, survival, and/or growth”
(Bird, 1995, p.51). Even tough it has been difficult to learn why some entrepreneurs fail
while others succeed in similar situations, it is thought that the focus on entrepreneurial
competencies offers a practical means addressing this phenomenon (Ahmad, 2007).
1.1 Problem statement
Without refusing the environmental variables which are effective on firm performance,
there is a need to investigate closely internal factors which might contribute firms`
performance. Because, although significant government assistance and support which
are obtained by small firms, many small firms still fail. Even though huge amount of
money has been allocated to the assistance of small firms by government funding, grants,
provision of consultative services and training, the failure rate for small firms stays quite
high (Ahmad, 2007). The major agency for SME support in Turkey is the Small and
Medium Industry Development Organization (KOSGEB), that is component of the
Ministry of Industry and Trade. Its main goal is to improve SME share and efficiency,
increase competitive capability and charged with enhancing training, managerial skills
and financing of entrepreneurs (Benzing, Chu and Kara, 2009). But, studies demonstrate
that big number of firms enter and exit in markets every year. According to Organization
for Economic Co-operation and Development (2001) the turnover rate for small
businesses was 20% (Ahmad, 2007). According to Turkish statistical institute, the death
rates for employer enterprises had been dramatically increased. For example, in 2011 the
death rate was 7.1%, it increased to 11.3% in 2012. In 2013 the death rate was 11.2%, it
increased to 11.5% in 2014. Furthermore, 31.2% of employer enterprises which were
born in 2014 failed in 2015. It is possible that excessive dependence on government
support, particularly monetary, might deteriorate, instead of strengthening, the ability of
entrepreneur to manage his/her business, and decrease the competitiveness of the firm by
placing responsibility for success on external factors rather than internal, competence
variables (Ahmad, 2007). So, many scholars argue that concentration on internal factors
particularly to those related “people issues” might increase firm success. Consistent with
this view, Ibrahim and Goodwin (1986) found that the factors which contributed most to
business success were related to the abilities and skills of entrepreneurs and external
factors like economic conditions and government policies were the least significant
4
factors. Also, many researchers say that most small firms failed due to lack of
entrepreneurial competencies among business owners as well as lack of abilities and
skills those that hold key positions in the organizations (Ahmad, 2007). Consistently,
Beaver and Jennings (2005) in their study among small businesses in UK uncovered that
small firms failed due to the owner’s “ineffective” behaviors like lack of professional
management action, inability to manage the spending, absence of clear vision and failure
of control system. Wasilczuk (2000) argues that the only way to minimize the destructive
effect of external factors on firms for entrepreneurs is to arm themselves with related
abilities and skills.
Due to the significance of entrepreneurship to the growth, which is widely in consensus
about the positive correlation between economic growth and entrepreneurship, this
research attempts to realize the effects of entrepreneurial competencies and antecedents
of entrepreneurial competencies which have taken attention in literature of
entrepreneurship. Bird (1995) advocates that it is value to look at prior experience,
education, industry experience as aspects which can affect the development of
competencies. Maxwell and Westerfield (2002) in consensus with Bird. They claim that
entrepreneurs’ innovativeness depends on the level of their education level and past
managerial experience. With 127 small businesses in the US, they found out that higher
level of managerial experience and education means higher level of innovation. Past
work experience can advance entrepreneur’s ability and skills, especially in realizing the
opportunities (Krueger, Brazeal, 1994) and to some extent, education contribute to the
business founder’s competency development (Chandler and Jansen, 1992). This research
also looks to effects of training, education and past work experience on competencies.
1.2 Research objectives:
1. To investigate the extent to which entrepreneurial competencies might affect business
success.
2. To investigate the influence of training, education and experience on the development
of competencies.
5
1.3 Research questions
This study is encouraged by the following questions:
1. To what extent do the competency models established in this study foresee business
success?
2. To what extent do training, education and experience influence development of
competencies?
1.4 Significance of study
This research is performed to improve the knowledge about the entrepreneurial
competencies. The results will be useful to business communities, policy makers and
other researchers who need more knowledge on entrepreneurship competencies.
Business communities will be enlightened on essentiality of competencies for their
business management. To policymakers, this research may be instructive in pursuing a
strategy for enhancing the entrepreneurship competencies of citizens.
1.5 Organizations of chapters
This study is organized into five chapters. This chapter includes research background,
problem statement, research questions and objectives and importance of the study.
Second chapter involves the literature review, notion of competency, entrepreneurship
and business success. Third chapter includes methodology. Chapter 4 involves sample
characteristics, model testing and findings and chapter 5 concludes with discussion and
limitations.
6
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 The importance of small businesses
The importance of small businesses is connected largely with their role in fueling in
economic growth. The appearance of SMEs is very important especially in all developing
countries where they assist economic growth; improve income distribution, productivity,
efficiency and economic structure during the economic downturn (Tehseen, Ramayah,
2015). Not only for developing countries but also, they have become important for whole
world due to their flexible and compatible structure (Kayadibi et al., 2013). They play
prominent role in economies by providing large portion of production in the rapidly
changing world because of their adaptability features. Beside the flexibility, they
demonstrate major contribution in the development of the country’s economy like social
uplifting (Tehseen, Ramayah, 2015). Engel and Palacio (2011) say that foundation of
new business is frequent and rapid tool for technology commercialization, innovation,
new market development and business model experimentation. Abdullah and Beal
(2003) emphasized numerous contributions of small businesses. Firstly, SMEs are labor-
incentive and create employment opportunities. Secondly, they play a crucial
complementary role for larger firms. Thirdly, they improve regional development and
generate more equitable income distribution because of their location and continuing
expansion through wider community. Fourthly, the existence of them repress the
monopoly power of bigger businesses and deliver the structure of the economy with
greater flexibility. Finally, they help as a training ground for developing skills of
entrepreneurs and workers.
Başçı and Durucan (2017) signify that the first recognition of the significance of SMEs
on economic growth of countries was during the 1930 crisis, though, after the 1970
petroleum crisis there was a real rise in the number of SMEs, that had a positive influence
especially on regional development. Conversely, for Turkey, researches realizing the
significance of SMEs for the economy began to appear after the 2000s. Since then the
Turkish authorities have recognized that a long-term strategy for Small business calls for
actions across a wide range of policy domains, involving R&D, education, labor market
7
and social policies and government regulations. Harmonizing the many policy elements
with EU rules which resulting in a better environment and a healthy, competitive sector.
In light with these policies, government started providing numerous supports to small
businesses such as financing, non-financing and technology. The actions to be
undertaken in these three areas essentially focus on education and training, creation of
new enterprises, enhancement of SMEs capacity to take advantage of technology and
legislative and regulatory problems. Education and training programs are undertaken
with close co-operation with public bodies, private sector and academia specifically in
the least developed regions and to simplify the creation of small businesses by reducing
the red tape, legislative and regulatory improvements are part of their objectives
(Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, 2004). But, there are still
problems came across by Turkish entrepreneurs that are: (1) confusing and complex tax
structure, (2) the inability to draw and hold good employees, (3) the inability to maintain
accurate accounting records and (4) a weak economy (Benzing, Chu and Kara 2009). In
addition, Ahmad (2007) argue that irrespective to location, small and medium sized
enterprises still come across common problems that impair their survival and
performance and by nature they have limited resources, and this is the single greatest
contributing factor to their vulnerability. Similarly, inadequate financing considerably
hinders the ability of Turkish businesses to grow (Benzing, Chu and Kara, 2009).
According to Ahmad (2007) in the first five years of small businesses, the failure rate is
more than 50% and chance which a small business will survive for the first five years in
United States is about 35% (Kahneman, 2011).
Although the supports mentioned above by government, the failure rate stays high,
31.2% of employer enterprises which were born in 2014 failed in 2015 in Turkey, with
worrying reverberation to the community, individual and the economy. According to
Blackman (2003) and Beer (1984) at an individual level, business failure could be
destructive to the physical and psychological health of entrepreneurs and their families.
At a macro level, the failure has significant influence on national income and
employment rate and asserts that although they create faster jobs than larger businesses,
they remove them faster due to higher failure rate (Ahmad, 2007). Consequently, factors
that influence business success are hot topics in recent years.
8
Researches on success factors in small businesses can be grouped into two broad
categories. The first group emphasizes the role of external factors in uncovering success,
while the second highlights the internal aspects of small businesses, especially, the
characteristics of entrepreneurs (Ahmad, 2007; Benzing, Chu and Kara 2009).
2.2 External factors
Three types of environment are common for every business that are general environment,
industry environment and competitor environment (Hitt, Ireland and Hoskisson, 2016,
12e). According to Ahmad (2007) the researches emphasized the external factors mostly
investigated the role of government in creating the environment which is conducive to
small businesses. The major results of these researches are unavailability of numerous
forms of support like training and financial support. Because by their nature they have
lack of financial and managerial capabilities. Yusuf (1995) found out that provision of
basic infrastructure, government funding policy and protection against competition from
larger firms are areas researched and found that greater volume of bank lending
decreased the failure rate of small businesses. Iakovleva (2002) suggested that those
organizations which are well adapted to their environment would survive, and those
which are not will die. Through this selection mechanism environment will determine
the characteristics of populations of organizations.
In his research Man (2001) indicated that SME competitiveness is heavily affected by
the competitive factors of larger businesses, involving their advantages in finance,
marketing, technology, R&D and distribution. These factors might put small businesses
into less advantageous position if they have got to compete with directly large businesses.
Further external factors involving supporting institutions, fairness in competition,
complementary services, regulations, laws, capital, infrastructure, buyer, availability of
factor of production (Rice, 2000) and competitive advantage of small businesses depends
on external effects involving demanding local competition and the pressure to both utilize
resources efficiently and advance quality (O’Farrell, Hitchens and Moffat, 1992). The
cited external environmental factors are not controlled by businesses and these factors
does not elucidate why small businesses fail or success. For instance, despite dozens of
9
external obstacles to small business success in America, Gaskill, Van Auken, and
Manning (1993) demonstrated that internal factors regularly enable or engage success of
businesses and government supports should not be perceived as a single medicine for
decreasing small businesses dearth rate (Chak, 1998). Likewise, government support,
access to capital and appropriate training are considered as the least important factors by
Turkish entrepreneurs (Benzing, Chu and Kara 2009).
2.3 Internal factors
The second group of research for uncovering the predictors of small business success
emphasized the internal factors and classified into two groups. Individual variables and
organizational variables. Researches which focus on the aspects of individual underlines
the individual factors, like demographic characters, individual characteristics,
competencies. Whereas the study focused on organizational aspects include the resources
of the organization, firm's competence, organizational culture, and structure (Sarwoko,
Surachman, Armanu and Hadiwidjojo, 2013).
The convenience of organizational competencies and resources like plant, equipment,
monetary resources and personnel organizational-level capability (ability to bring new
product to market on time), functional level capability (manufacturing flexibility) and
organizational system (marketing system) could increase the possibility of business
success (Ahmad, 2007).
“Capabilities, resources, and core competencies are the basis of competitive advantage.
Internal resources are bundled to create organizational capabilities” (Hitt, Ireland and
Hoskisson, 2016 page. 107). Some of a business’ resources are intangible whereas others
are tangible. Business’s internal tangible resources are assets which can be quantified
and observed such as distribution centers, manufacturing facilities, production
equipment.
Intangible resources are assets which are rooted in business’ history, and gather over
time, and are comparatively hard to analyze and imitate by competitors. Knowledge,
managerial capability, organizational routines, trust between employees and managers,
10
capacity for innovation, scientific capabilities, brand name, organizational culture,
business’ reputation for its services and goods and how it interacts with people are
intangible resources of a business (Hitt, Ireland Hoskisson, 2016). Businesses bring
together intangible and tangible resources to establish capabilities. Consecutively,
capabilities are utilized to accomplish the organizational tasks necessitated to fabricate
and deliver service or goods to customers for the aim of creating value for them. As a
basis for establishing competitive advantages and hopefully core competencies,
capabilities are developing, carrying, and exchanging information and knowledge
through the firm’s human capital. Core competencies are capabilities which assist as a
source of competitive advantage for a business over its rivals. Core competencies
distinguish a company competitively and reflect its personality (Hitt, Ireland Hoskisson,
2016, p. 111)
Covin and Slevin (1991) claim that a business has greater chances of being successful
when its culture practices empowerment, values new ideas, teamwork and is open to
innovation and change. Beside the culture, studies demonstrate that structure of
organization influence performance. Organizational structure specifies the business’s
formal reporting relationships, procedures, controls, and authority and decision-making
processes (Hitt, Ireland Hoskisson, 2016). Ahmad (2007) is in consensus with that a
business whose organizational structure is low centralized, less formal and less complex
is more probably to outperform than centralized, formal and complex organization. Thus,
some studies have concentrated on the development of competitive factors, which
influence business performance of small businesses throughout distinctive organizational
competences such as human and technological resources, productivity, financial,
organizational system and structure, culture, quality, goodwill, customer service, image
and reputation, flexibility and product/service variety (Man, 2001; Man, Lau and Chan,
2002).
Even though the variables or resources above might be crucial to business performance,
it is imperative to recognize that an entrepreneur works as a doorkeeper. Entrepreneur
allows to utilize the organization`s internal resources to attain organizational success.
The essential nature of this door-keeping role emphasizes the significance of
investigating the skills, knowledge, attitude and behaviors of the entrepreneurs and how
11
these influence the business performance (Ahmad, 2007). Ibrahim and Goodwin (1986)
support this view and provided empirical evidence that entrepreneurial behavior and
managerial skills are perceived as a key success factor in small business and
environmental factors are at least important variables for business success. Additionally,
Resources based view (RBV) defines human capital of a business as prominent factor for
sustainable competitive advantage because they are valuable, rare and difficult to imitate
(Barney, 1991).
Several types of entrepreneurial characteristics have been suggested and investigated for
relationships with business performance (Li, 2009). One category of characteristics is
demographic variables such race, age, sex, ethnicity and educational level of business
owner (Changanti and Parasmaman, 1996; Begley and Boyd, 1985; Bates, 1995) family
background, experience (Litvak and Maule, 1973). A common theme in the literature is
that whether having some certain characteristics will make the business more successful
or less successful (Li, 2009). For instance, Bates (1995) examined both female- and male-
owned businesses in US to investigate distinctions between the survival rates of newly
started franchised and independent businesses in the retail trade industry division and
found out positive link between higher education and possibility of business success. In
another study Boden and Nucci (2000) found out that female-owned businesses have less
propensity to survive than male-owned businesses. Watson’s (2003) research supports
Boden and Nucci’s (2000) findings. Similarly, Watson (2003) noted that female-owned
businesses generally underperform male-owned businesses on a variety of measures like
revenue, profit, growth, and discontinuance rates. The findings of Carter, Williams, and
Reynolds (1997) show that in service and retail businesses that are female-owned have
higher odds of discontinuing than those owned by their male counterparts. On the other
hand, other researches which have tried to approve the gender profile have generated
conflicting results (Ahmad, 2007). For instance, Kallerberg and Leicht (1991) found that
16 percent of businesses operated by men failed, compared to 15 percent of those
operated by women and confirmed that business success was independent from the
business owner’s sex.
12
Other category has concentrated on the personality traits of entrepreneurs. Traits which
have often been linked with successful entrepreneurship are internal locus of control,
high need for achievement and propensity for risk-taking (Ahmad, 2007), tolerance of
ambiguity, type A behavior and innovativeness (Xiang, 2009).
Another category has focused on behaviors or competencies of entrepreneur. Significant
study conducted by Porter (1991) states that external elements like availability of
substitute product, power of suppliers and buyers, the degree of rivalry, barriers to entry
are significant in defining the competitive advantage of a business. To cope with those
threats of business environment, Porter recommend engaging with the suitable strategic
activity which depends on the competencies of the owner. Also, for minimizing the
negative influence of the challenging environment, entrepreneurs act proactively. In the
situation of proactive approach, entrepreneurial competencies come into play (Ahmad,
2007).
According to Xian (2009) competency approach has increasingly become popular means
of researching entrepreneurial characteristics. Entrepreneurial competencies can be
explained as underlying characteristics such as generic and specific knowledge, motives,
traits, self-images, social roles, and skills which result in venture birth, survival, and/or
growth (Bird, 1995).
2.4 Definition of entrepreneur
There are various definitions of entrepreneur and entrepreneurship. This section will
revise current explanations of an entrepreneur and recommend an explanation for this
study.
Originally, the expression “entrepreneur” is derived from the French word
“Entreprendre”, that means “to undertake” (Dana, 2011). In his study called “Essai Sur
La Nature Du Commerce En Général” (abbreviated Essai) which was written in 1730
and published in 1755 Richard Cantillon first introduced the expression. Cantillon
defined the entrepreneur as an individual that purchases a raw material at a known price
to sell it at an unknown price. He divided the society in two principal classes - fixed
13
income wage-earners and non-fixed income earners. According to Cantillon,
entrepreneur is non-fixed income earner that pay known costs of production but earn
uncertain income because of the speculative nature of pandering to an unknown demand
for their product. Additionally, contrasting with later theories of entrepreneurship that
saw the entrepreneur as a disruptive force, Cantillon expected the belief that the
entrepreneur brought equilibrium to a market by correctly predicting consumer
preferences (Richard Cantillon, n.d.).
Nearly one century later, Jean Baptiste Say who was entrepreneur regarded entrepreneur
as being a person who could do new things, who could do more with less, obtain more
by doing something in a new or different way and saw the entrepreneur as an economic
actor whose activities generated an added value (Dana, 2011).
Weber and Hartmann defined entrepreneur as an ultimate source of formal authority in
an organization (Sim, 2005). According to Brockhaus (1980a) an entrepreneur should
not be employed elsewhere and should be major manager and owner of a business. On
the other hand, to some scholars an entrepreneur does not have to be owner of a business.
For example, McClelland (1961) believes that being innovative manager that has
decision making responsibility is an entrepreneur. Nevertheless, innovative managers
might be entrepreneurial, it is probable that not all managers are entrepreneurial, as some
managers may be bureaucratic or administrative in nature. Entrepreneurial activities may
include other activities other than the starting up of companies e.g. expansion of existing
businesses and entering new markets (Sim, 2005, p. 26).
According to Schumpeter, an entrepreneur is “a person who carries out new
combinations, causing discontinuity. The carrying out new combinations can include a
new good or quality of a good, a new method of production, opening of a new market,
conquest of a new source of raw materials or the reorganization of any industry” (Misra
and Kumar, 2000). Gartner (1985) defined the entrepreneur as an individual that
establishes a new organization. Bygrave and Hofer (1991) explained entrepreneur as
“someone who perceives an opportunity and creates an organization to pursue it” (p.14).
Similarly, Kirzner (1985) describes the entrepreneur as someone who sensed profit
14
opportunities and started action to fill currently unsatisfied needs. According to Tehseen
and Ramayah (2015) an entrepreneur is an individual who develops and grows the
businesses through creative and innovative activities, by introducing new products or
services, by improving the existing methods of production or service.
This research chooses the definition of the entrepreneur as an individual that is the
founder or co-founder of a business (Sim, 2005) where there is none before and owner
whose principal aim is growth (Zhao and Seibert, 2006).
Similarly, entrepreneurship has many definitions in literature. For instance, Kaur and
Bain (2013) indicate that entrepreneurship is a purposeful behavioral adaptation launched
for initiating, promoting and maintaining economic activities for the production and
mobilization of monetary resources. The entrepreneurship is a set of behaviors which
initiate and manage the re-allocation of economic resources and whose purpose is the
creation of value by these means (Rusu, Isac, Cureteanu and Csorba, 2012; Herron and
Robinson, 1993). This thesis acceptes behavioral definition of entrepreneurship which is
creation of new organization (Gartner 1985).
In the present era, it is being realized that entrepreneurship contributes to development
of a country in several ways like assembling and harnessing the various inputs, bearing
the risks, innovating and imitating the techniques of production to reduce the cost and
increase its quality and quantity, expanding the horizons of the market, and coordinating
and managing the manufacturing unit at various levels. Moreover, for the rapid economic
development of the society, economic growth and technological change of any country
entrepreneur plays a significant role and directly depends on the development of
entrepreneur` skills & abilities (Kaur, Bains, 2013). Hence, the entrepreneur’s
psychological and behavioral, demographic characteristics, managerial and technical
skills are the most important determinants for the performance and success or failure of
businesses (Tehseen and Ramayah 2015).
15
2.5 Personality trait approach
Early researchers used to identify entrepreneurs through their traits and characteristics
(Tehseen and Ramayah, 2015). Many researchers have found wide-range of certain traits
that entrepreneurs need to have to be successful. They are called as high-level
characteristic; those high-level characteristics are crucial to one’s success in their
performance. These characteristics can be things such as one’s personality traits, skills
or knowledge, which are influenced by the entrepreneur’s demographic beginnings
ranging from their experience, education, training, family background and other
important variables (Lee, Lee, Shim and Lee, 2016).
Personality traits are defined as dispositions to exhibit a certain kind of response across
various situations and personality traits are also enduring and show a high degree of
stability across time (Rauch and Frese, 2007).
So far, much of the studies in entrepreneurship has been founded on the premise that
entrepreneurs represent distinctive personality traits and motives that can be identified
and used to specify a potential for entrepreneurship (Carland, Carland and Stewart,
1996). These distinctive traits differentiate entrepreneurs from non-entrepreneurs,
successful entrepreneurs from non-successful entrepreneurs (Ahmad, 2007) and the traits
are inborn natural capabilities or innate which are acquired in the early years of
individual’s life and they are hard or unfeasible to change by training (McClelland, 1961;
Parry, 1998) and cannot be developed and learned through education (Farhangmehr,
Gonçalves and Sarmento, 2016).
The personality-based research on entrepreneurship started with McClelland`s work on
“need for achievement” and his following work investigated other personality traits like
efficiency orientation, assertiveness, commitment to work contact and systematic
planning. McClelland claimed that need for achievement is culturally taken and key
psychological character of an entrepreneur (Low, MacMillan, 1988). An individual with
a high need for achievement is characterized as (1) having personal responsibility for
decisions, (2) establishing goal and accomplishing them through her/his effort and (3)
possessing desire for feedback (Sexton and Bowman, 1985). Sexton and Bowman (1985)
16
criticized McClelland`s research. According to them need for achievement is applicable
to professional, salespeople and managers as it is to entrepreneurs and did not validate
the link between need for achievement and decision to initiate business. Beside the need
for achievement, researches delineate some other traits like internal locus of control and
risk-taking propensity (Pearson and Chatterjee, 2001). But, later comparative testing of
entrepreneurs and managers led to conflicting results (Sexton and Bowley, 1985). For
example, Low and MacMillan (1988) confirmed that internal locus of control is not
beneficial more than need for achievement in distinguishing entrepreneur from non-
entrepreneur. Similarly, risk-taking propensity does not differentiate entrepreneur from
managers even general population (Low, MacMillan, 1988). Gartner (1988) have found
that when certain psychological traits are carefully evaluated, it is not possible to
differentiate entrepreneurs from managers or from the general population based on the
entrepreneur's supposed possession of such traits. For example, Entrialgo, Fernandez and
Vazquez (2000) examined the influences of need for achievement, internal locus of
control and risk taking on business success by sampling 233 business in Spain and
achieved nonsignificant correlation among personality trait and business success. On the
other hand, Rauch and Frese, (2007) found significantly differences in risk propensity
between managers and entrepreneurs.
Rauch and Frese (2007) found out that, in their quantitative study, personality (risk
taking, internal locus of control, need for autonomy, stress tolerance, self-efficacy,
proactive personality, innovativeness and need for achievement) traits that are matched
to the entrepreneurship task predict business creation and success more than traits which
are not matched and found positive relationship between entrepreneur`s personality trait
and business success. While some researchers are claiming that study on personality
traits have arrived at empirical dead because of too small correlation, Rausch and Frese
(2007) found moderate relationship between them.
Another study which is also the first meta-analytical review (organize the full range of
personality traits which have been investigated in the entrepreneurship literature) of the
relationship between the Big Five personality dimension and entrepreneurial status found
that mean personality scores vary across jobs and occupations. Personality variables used
17
in preceding studies were classified according to the five-factor model of personality
(Zhao and Seibert, 2006). By using Schneider’s (1987) attraction–selection–attrition
(ASA) theory, Zhao and Seibert (2006) explained the association between personality
and entrepreneurial status. Schneider (1987) describes that -attraction- certain
personality traits of an individual might be attracted to entrepreneurial form of
employment. Selection by outside agents (venture capitalists, investment bankers,
suppliers, potential partners and key employees) might prefer individuals having certain
personality traits over others. Attrition- individuals having certain personality traits
might find entrepreneurial activities more enjoyable than other who do not have.
Each personality dimension explains wide-ranging domain of psychological functioning
which is consisted from a set of more narrow and specific traits.
Neuroticism: it represents personal distinctions in emotional stability and adjustment.
People high on Neuroticism incline to experience a several negative emotions involving
hostility, anxiety, impulsiveness, depression, self-consciousness and vulnerability.
Individuals with low on Neuroticism could be characterized as relaxed, tempered, self-
confident and calm. Although workloads, work environment, work-family conflict and
financial risks generate psychological and physical stress, entrepreneurs defined as high
self-confidence and resilience in front of stress. These traits define the low level of
neuroticism (Zhao and Seibert, 2006).
Extroversion: it explains the degree to which individuals are energetic, dominant,
assertive, enthusiastic, active and talkative. People high on Extroversion incline to seek
excitement, stimulation, cheerful and like people and large groups. People low on
Extroversion favor to spend time alone and defined as independent, reserved and quiet.
Due to necessity of more direct social interaction with internal and external constituents,
entrepreneurs are extroversion (Zhao and Seibert, 2006).
Openness to experience: it characterizes individual that is intellectually inquisitive and
inclines to discover novel ideas and pursue new experience. Individual high on openness
18
to experience can be defined as untraditional, imaginative, creative, reflective and
innovative. Individual low on Openness can be defined as unanalytical, narrow in interest
and conventional. Since establishing a business necessitates the entrepreneur to discover
novel ideas, have innovative approach to goods, strategies and use creativity to unravel
problems, entrepreneur are high on openness to experience (Zhao and Seibert, 2006).
Agreeableness: it evaluates someone’s interpersonal orientation. Someone high on
Agreeableness can be defined as gullible, caring, trusting, altruistic and forgiving.
Individual low on Agreeableness can be defined as ruthless, self-centered, manipulative
and suspicious. Due to nature of entrepreneurship, entrepreneurs are low on
Agreeableness (Zhao and Seibert, 2006).
Conscientiousness: it shows someone’s extent of organization, hard-work, persistence
and motivation in the pursuit of goal accomplishment. Hence, entrepreneurs are high on
Conscientiousness (Zhao and Seibert, 2006).
Zhao and Seibert (2006) found out that entrepreneurs get higher scores on Openness to
experience, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, lower on Neuroticism than managers and
no distinction between on Extroversion. But influence sizes for each dimension are small.
Beside those personality traits, many authors identified some other traits which are
summarized in Table. 1.
Table 1 Characteristics of Entrepreneurs Date Author(s) Characteristics Normative Empirical
1848 Mill Risk bearing X
1917 Weber Source of formal authority X
1934 Schumpeter Innovation; initiative X
1954 Sutton Desire for responsibility X
1959 Hartman Source of formal authority X
1961 McClelland Risk taking; need for achievement X
1963 Davids Ambition; desire for independence,
responsibility; self-confidence
X
1964 Pickle Drive/mental; human relations; communication
ability; technical knowledge
X
1971 Palmer Risk measurement X
1971 Hornaday and
Aboud
Need for achievement; autonomy; aggression;
power; recognition; innovative/independent
X
1973 Winter Need for power X
1974 Borland Internal locus of control X
1974 Liles Need for achievement X
1977 Gasse Personal value orientation X
19
1978 Timmons Drive/self-confidence; goal oriented; moderate
risk taker; locus of control, creativity/innovation
X X
1980 Sexton Energetic/ambitious; positive setbacks X
1981 Welsh and White Need to control; responsibility seeker;
selfconfidence/drive; challenge taker; moderate
risk taker
X
1982 Dunkelberg and
Cooper
Growth oriented; independence oriented;
craftsman oriented
X
1982 Holy and
Hellriegel
Preference for technical versus managerial tasks X
1983 Pavett and Lau Conceptual, human, and political competence;
technical familiarity in specialized field
X
1985 MacMillan,
Siegel, and
SubbaNarisimha
Familiarity with the market; a capacity for intense
effort, leadership ability
X
1986 Ibrahim and
Goodwin
Ability to delegate, manage customer and
employee relations; interpersonal skills
X
1987 Aldrich and
Zimmer
Networking with people who control important
resources and who have relevant skills and
abilities
X
1987 Hofer and
Sandberg
Drive to see firm creation through to fruition;
ability to clearly communicate goals; ability to
motivate others to behave in synergistic manner
X
1987 Schein Strong management skills with high levels of
responsibility and authority; specialist versus
general manager
X
1987 Timmons,
Muzyka, Stevenson, and
Bygrave
Ability to recognize and envision taking
advantage of opportunity
X
1989 Wheelen and
Hunger
Ability to implement strategy with programs,
procedures, budgets, evaluations, etc.
X
1992 Chandler and
Jansen
Self-assessed ability to recognize opportunity X
1992 McGrath,
MacMillan, and
Scheinberg
High individualism; poor distance; uncertainty
avoidance; and masculinity
X
Source: Sim 2005.
Although many entrepreneurial characteristics are found to be positively related with
business performance, latest studies raised earnest suspicions as to whether personality
traits play any role in the start-up phase and for business success (Rauch and Frese, 2007).
Ahmad (2007) claimed that there are constraints to the usefulness of the personality trait
approach, with the outcome informed in the literature demonstrating substantial
inconsistency and no definitive or ultimate outcomes of which and how these traits
influence business performance (Li, 2009).
Secondly, Gartner (1985) claimed that entrepreneurs explained with a common definition
compose a vastly assorted group of individuals and, hence, common predictor or
“average entrepreneur” does not exist. Consequently, average personality profile of
20
entrepreneurs cannot be established. In his following work, Gartner (1988) stated that “a
startling number of traits and characteristics have been attributed to the entrepreneur, and
a "psychological profile" of the entrepreneur assembled from these studies would portray
someone larger than life, full of contradictions, and, conversely, someone so full of traits
that (s)he would have to be a sort of generic "Everyman."
Third criticism about personality trait approach is that it considers human potential as
static and incapable of change and development (Herron and Robinson, 1993; Ahmad,
2007). For example, Farhangmehr, Gonçalves and Sarmento (2016) argued that
personality-trait approach highlights the personal characteristics of the individual,
presuming that entrepreneurs have a unique set of features which improve
entrepreneurial activity and these traits are innate and cannot be learned or developed
through education and training.
Scholars believe that a strict trait approach to describing the entrepreneur is likely to be
unprofitable in building a common body of knowledge (Sim, 2005) and the utilization of
a behavioral approach is more productive perspective in studying issues related to
entrepreneurship, especially in connecting individual behavior to business success
(Gartner, 1988).
2.6 Competency approach
In supporting competency approach, initially, it is indispensable to have a clear
understanding of the concept “competency”. In literature there are many definitions of
“competency” and leading to substantial confusion around what exactly is meant by
notion (Ahmad, 2007). The most primary argument belongs to the distinctions between
competence and competency in literature (Mitchelmore and Rowley, 2010; Chouhan and
Srivastava, 2014). Some dictionaries combine them together and introduce them as
interchangeable (Rowe, 1995).
Competency derived from the Latin word “competentia” that means “is authorized to
judge” as well as “has the right to speak”. The English dictionary explains the word
21
“competence” as a condition of being properly sufficient or “sufficiency of skill,
sufficiency of ability” (Chouhan and Srivastava, 2014).
Rowe (1995) recommend using “competence” to mean a skill and standard of
performance whereas “competency” indicate the behavior by which it is achieved. More
simply, former explains “what” people can do whereas latter concentrate on “how” they
do it. For competence there is no grading involved; people are judged either competent
or incompetent while grading system (e.g. 1 to 5) is widely used with competency.
Plurality of competences signifies to the range of skills that are satisfactorily performed;
while competencies signify the behaviors adopted in competent performance (Rowe,
1995).
According to Mitchelmore and Rowley (2010) the idea of competency was developed as
part of an initiative by the American Management Association to find the characteristics
which differentiate superior from average management performance in the 1970s in the
USA.
McClelland (1973) introduced the competency modeling movement by delineating an
alternative to acknowledged intelligence or aptitude tests as a method to predicting
“competence”. While McClelland’s study (1973) concentrated on applications in
educational sector such as primary, secondary and higher education, bigger interest was
displayed in organization or business and industry studies (Chouhan and Srivastava,
2014) and promoted by Boyatzis.
Boyatzis (1982) created his model of managerial competency by building on
McClelland`s (1973) work during a research of two thousand managers. He found about
one hundred potential managerial competencies and classified them into three level:
social role and self-concept; motives and traits; and, role transitions. Boyatzis (1982)
described managerial competencies as underlying characteristics of a person which
results in effective and/or superior performance in a job. Since then, scholars had
developed several models that are primarily based on the research of the competencies
of outstanding managers (Xiang, 2009).
22
Schroder (1989) developed three categories of competencies: entry level competencies,
that include individual characteristics of his model; basic competencies, that consist of
skills and knowledge needed to do the jobs; and high-performance competencies, that
contain behaviors which generate meaningfully superior workgroup performance in
more complex organizational environments. Bartram (2005) developed “The Great Eight
Competencies” model for predicting performance among managers.
Although, competency models mentioned above established for managers, they offer a
theoretical basis for entrepreneurship scholars on the prominent competency fields.
2.7 Entrepreneurial competency
Since managers and entrepreneurs share similar tasks and roles in organizations,
especially in small businesses, scholars in entrepreneurship field can “borrow” the notion
and related theory of competency from the management literature (Xiang, 2009). For
example, with the 21 sampled Chinese owned and managed businesses in Hong Kong,
Snell and Lau (1994) found common important competencies for managers and owners
among small growing businesses in their qualitative study. The important competencies
are: possessing a vivid vision and clear purpose, possessing the ability to form effective
strategy, utilizing a strategic approach to HRM, promoting learning culture, a concern
for quality and keeping closeness to customers. Likewise, cognitive, supervisory,
administrative and communicative competencies are suggested as core competencies by
Parry (1998) which are also important for entrepreneurs. Consequently, the competency
approach has become an increasingly popular means of studying entrepreneurial
characteristics (Xiang, 2009; Man, Lau and Snape, 2008).
Competency can be examined from its input (antecedents to competencies), process
(behavior and task leading to competencies) and outcomes (achieving standards of
competence in functional areas) (Mole et al., 1993). In agreement with this, we will
specify of these features of entrepreneurial competencies in the remaining of this section.
2.8 Component of entrepreneurial competencies
Entrepreneurial competencies can be described as “underlying characteristics such as
generic and specific knowledge, motives, traits, self-image, social roles, and skills which
result in venture birth, survival, and/or growth” (Bird, 1995, p.51) and competencies are
learnable, changeable and attainable via training or coaching and experience (Kyndt and
23
Baert, 2015). For the present research, entrepreneurial competencies are described as
individual characteristics which involve behaviors and attitudes of entrepreneurs
(motives, traits, attitudes, self-image, skills knowledge behaviors) that allow
entrepreneurs to attain and preserve business success.
Beside describing competencies in respect of ownership skills (person‘s ability to
perform a certain task), traits (physical characteristics and consistent responses to
situations or information), knowledge (information and learning resting in a person), self-
concept (person‘s attitudes, values and self- image) and motives (emotions, desires,
physiological needs or similar impulses that prompt action), scholars have endeavored to
organize these entrepreneurial characteristics into key competency areas (Xiang, 2009;
Tucker and Cofsky, 1994 ). For example, Chouhan and Srivastava (2014) organized
competencies into four areas shown by adding fifth identified by Carrol and McCrackin
(1988).
1) Technical (attitudes, knowledge, skills, etc. related with the technology or
functional expertise required to perform the role)
2) Managerial (attitudes, knowledge, skills, etc. necessitated to plan, organize,
mobilize and exploit diverse resources)
3) Human (attitudes, knowledge and skills necessitated to motivate, use and develop
human resources)
4) Conceptual (abilities to visualize the invisible, think at abstract levels and use the
thinking to plan future business).
5) Core (elements of behavior that are important for all employees to possess).
Furthermore, Muzychenko and Saee (2004) distinguished between acquired and innate
faces of competency. Former includes part of acquired at work or via theoretical or
practical learning (skills, knowledge, experience). Inner aspect of competency is
sometimes called “internalized element” and difficult to change. Acquired aspect is often
called “externalized element” and can be acquired via appropriate education, training
programs and need to be practiced (Ahmad, 2007). Baum et.al (2001) differentiate
between general competency and specific competency. General competency involves
opportunity recognition skill and organization skill while specific competency involves
technical skills and industry skill.
24
Chandler and Jansen (1992) identified roles played by entrepreneurs as owner-managers
for exploring the competencies necessitated in managing their own business. Three
prominent roles: entrepreneurial role, managerial role and functional role.
Many tasks relate to the entrepreneurial role, involving forming challenging but
achievable vision, scanning environment, realizing unmet client need, selecting
promising opportunities, formulating strategies, producing superior goods and services
(Chandler and Jansen, 1992; Ahmad, 2007). Entrepreneurial role also necessitates the
ability to recognize and envision having advantages of opportunities which is indicated
as a core of entrepreneurship and commitment and strong dedication which is strong
effort and willingness to work long hours (Chandler and Jansen, 1992).
Second entrepreneur’ role is managerial role that reflects the traditional role of managers
in any business. Managerial role necessitates entrepreneurs to deal with planning,
organizing, directing and controlling several resources in business (Chandler and Jansen,
1992). Planning includes formulating systematic process for achieving the goal of
business, while organizing includes orchestrating resources (people, jobs, facility and
equipment, technology, money, information, materials and supplies) to perform the plan.
Directing involves guiding, leading and motivating workers to reach business goal.
Lastly, controlling includes defining corrective action to be applied if performance
outcomes do not match the plan (Chandler and Jansen, 1992). Carrying out managerial
roles requires entrepreneurs to have conceptual competency which is mental abilities to
organize all business activities, human competency (communication, motivation,
delegation, interpersonal skills, relationship in business) and political competency
(establishment of relationship outside of business such as bankers, lawyers, accountant)
(Chandler and Jansen, 1992).
Third role is technical-functional role which necessitates entrepreneurs to have
technical/functional competency to use procedures, tools, techniques of specialized field
(Chandler and Jansen, 1992). They found significant correlation between competencies
(ability to recognize opportunities, political, conceptual/human and technical/functional)
and business performance (self-report business growth and profitability dimension).
25
On the other hand, Sim (2005) interestingly found no bivariate relationship between key
entrepreneurial competencies and business performance (annual revenue). Sim (2005)
utilized qualitative and quantitative approach to understand the key entrepreneurial
competencies among Chinese entrepreneurs in Singapore. Firstly, eighty-two
entrepreneurial skills (grouped as managerial, social and innovation competencies) were
identified from the literature and added four more skills by reviewing the past interviews.
No more skills found as a result of qualitative approach (interview, open-ended
questions). By utilizing quantitative approach, Sim (2005) explored ten key
entrepreneurial skills (Opportunity Recognition, People Handling Internal, Marketing,
People Handling External Leadership Skills; Networking, Communications, Decision
Making, Judgement Skills; Persuasion and Influence Skills) grouped into three categories
(managerial, social /decision making and persuasion/influencing) which are also not
different from western culture. Based on eleven empirical and three conceptual studies,
Lee et al. (2016) found 141 distinct components, which are mostly alike, of
competencies. By categorizing the components, they came out with five entrepreneurial
competencies: opportunity competencies, administrative competencies, relationship
competencies, personal competencies and commitment competencies.
Using a sample of 213 small businesses in 18 cities of Bangladesh, Rahman et al. (2016)
investigated how entrepreneurial behaviors influence financial and non-financial
performance of business. Four competencies: opportunity, commitment, relationship and
innovative competencies are associated significantly with business`s financial and non-
financial performance.
Another study investigated by Huck and McEwen (1991) was done for identifying
entrepreneurial competencies needed by small businesses in Jamaica. In their work, with
the sample of 54 small business owners twelve competency areas were found.
Competencies: starting a business, planning and budgeting, management, marketing/
selling, advertising and sales promotion, merchandizing, finance and accounting,
personnel relations, purchasing, production, facilities and equipment, and controlling
risks. But, Huck and McEwen (1991) found management, planning/budgeting, and
marketing/selling as the three most prominent competency areas, respectively. In another
quantitative study with 109 owner/manager of small businesses in Sri Lanka, six
26
competency areas were found significantly related business performance. Competencies
are: opportunity, organizing, relationship, strategic, conceptual and commitment
competencies (Wickramaratne, Kiminami et al., 2014).
Ahmad (2007) identified 12 competency areas with qualitative research and validated
quantitatively and cross-culturally while studying entrepreneurs in two different country
Australia and Malaysia comparatively. The twelve areas of competencies that are similar
with existing entrepreneurial competency models were: Strategic, commitment,
opportunity, conceptual, organizing and leading, relationship, technical, personal,
learning, ethical and social responsibility competency areas. One additional familism
competency area was found in the context of Malaysia. In this research, these
competency areas were used.
This model was selected over a collection of alternatives because it was among the most
newly developed models believed, comprehensive and validated in two different culture.
2.8.1 Strategic Competency
Strategic competency indicates “setting, evaluating, and implementing the strategies of
the business” (Ahmad, 2007, p.80). Being the owner/manager of the business, the
entrepreneur must set direction for the whole company. This group of competencies
necessitates the entrepreneur to acquire a vision or big picture on their mind for their
business, to get clear goals to accomplish or to devise and implement strategies to attain
these vision and goals (Man, 2001). Man (2001) describes competencies as the ability to
apply planning skills in dealing with different functional areas with a strategic
orientation. Basically, the competencies shown in Table 2 are related to setting,
evaluating and implementing the strategies of the business. Six clusters and 26 examples
of behaviors identified and summarized in Table 2.
Table 2 Strategic Competency domain: Clusters and Examples of Strategic Behaviors Clusters Example of Behaviors.
Devise strategies 1. Devise strategies to overcome crisis
2. Devise strategies to match current business trend
3. Devise strategy to compete with others
4. Devise strategy to attract customers
5. Devise strategy to boost sale
6. Map ways to reach business goals
27
7. Devise strategy for business production
Develop vision and business
goals
1. Think about the future and develop long run goal
2. Have clear direction
3. Move ahead toward goal systematically
4. Priorities activities with alignment to business goal
Conduct research 1. Conduct research before proceeding with investment
2. Conduct research on business premise
3. Conduct research on potential customers
4. Conduct research on the quality of a product
5. Analyze changes on business environment
Create competitive edge 1. Utilize firm`s capabilities to improve performance
2. Diversify business portfolio or specialized in one portfolio
3. Create good business image and reputation
4. Outsource non-core business activities like marketing
Make strategic adjustment 1. Plan to overcome difficulties during low periods
2. Prepare and plan for the worst scenario
3. Be flexible in developing plans/contingency plans
Weight costs and benefits 1. Consider the benefits of investing in tech and R&D
2. Identify pros and cons to determine strategic actions
3. Evaluate business activities
Ahmad (2007).
2.8.2 Commitment Competency
Commitment competency signifies to behaviors “drive entrepreneurs to move ahead with
the business” (Ahmad, 2007, p.85). Successful entrepreneurs are usually portrayed as
assiduous people with a restless attitude in their work. More simply, entrepreneurs have
got a sturdy competency in totally committing, determining and dedicating, as well as
taking proactive actions towards their duties and responsibilities. Entrepreneurs having
commitment competency will have a strong sense of mission and persist with a sense of
urgency and drive that borders on the obsessive and be proactive orientation or initiative
that drive entrepreneurs to act before being forced or asked by events (Man, 2001). In a
nutshell, commitment competencies are necessitated to sustain the entrepreneur`s
specific aim. Commitment competency has three clusters and 13 examples of behaviors.
But the table of this competency was not released by University of Adelaide Library.
2.8.3 Conceptual Competency
Conceptual competency refers to “different conceptual abilities which are reflected in
the behaviors of entrepreneurs, such as decision skills, absorbing and understanding
complex information, risk taking, and innovativeness” (Ahmad, 2007, p.88). Conceptual
competencies depict a group of competencies that is not identifiable behaviors easily but
are usually cogitated to be significant for entrepreneurial success. They are not easily
28
identifiable behaviors because they have stronger linkage with entrepreneurial traits and
are less directly observable. They encompass high level of conceptual or cognitive
activities such as learning, decision making, analytical thinking, problem solving and
innovating and coping with uncertainty which are reflected in in the entrepreneur`s
behaviors when they conduct analysis, make decision, learn and solve problems (Man,
2001). Hence, Conceptual competency includes six clusters and 19 behaviors and
summarized in Table 3.
Table 3 Conceptual Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of Conceptual
Behaviors Clusters Example of behaviors.
Think analytically 1. Analyze effective ways to overcome hurdles
2. Be analytical in decision making
3. Pay attention to detail before making decision
4. Analyze consequences of any decision to be made
5. Make good business judgements
Assess and take risks 1. Assess and calculate possible risks and challenges
2. Assess risks (do not go blindfolded)
3. Able to manage risks
4. Adopt “just-do-it” approach
Innovate 1. Be innovative and do things differently
2. Be creative in business
3. Reinvent oneself and come out with something new
4. Experiment with new ideas.
Think intuitively 1. Be spontaneous and quick in decision making
2. Make decision based on gut instinct
Be proactive 1. Be proactive and responsive to changes
2. Focus on finding new ideas
3. Take drastic steps in making necessary changes
Manage ambiguity 1. Manage ambiguity
Source: Ahmad (2007).
2.8.4 Opportunity Competency
Opportunity Competency involves behaviors related to “recognizing market
opportunities through various means” that encompass perceiving unmet customer needs,
identifying services and products that clients want, seizing high quality opportunities and
exploring services and products which deliver benefit to client (Ahmad, 2007, p.92).
According to Man (2001), one of the most differentiating competencies for the
entrepreneurs are opportunity related competencies. Seeing and acting on opportunities
and opportunistic thinking are important competency and critical characteristics of
successful entrepreneurs. Similarly, Chandler and Jansen (1992) proposed that one of the
most imperative entrepreneurial roles is the ability to realize and envision taking
29
advantage of opportunities. Opportunity competency consists of four clusters
encompassing 13 behaviors which were indicated and summarized in Table 4.
Table 4 Opportunity Competency Domain: Clusters and example of opportunity
Behaviors. Clusters Examples of behaviors
Identify/recognize
opportunities
1. Recognize and spot quality opportunities
2. Recognize the importance of technology
3. Recognize potential customers
Respond and take actions on
opportunities
1. Respond quickly to opportunities
2. Take a concept and turn it into a profitable outcome
3. Turn ideas into reality
4. Create a niche
Seek business opportunities 1. Scan the environment and look for opportunities
2. Actively search for opportunities
3. Actively search for customers
4. Explore new opportunities 5. Anticipate customer needs and trends to spot
opportunities
6. Visualize available opportunities before they come reality
Source: Ahmad (2007).
2.8.5 Organizing and Leading Competency
Organizing and Leading indicates to “the organization of different internal and external
human, physical, financial, and technological resources, including team building, leading
employees, training and controlling” (Ahmad, 2007, p.95). The organizing and leading
group of competencies are similar to the managerial competencies. For example,
efficiency orientation, concern for high quality work and monitoring should be
necessitated competencies in managing different functional areas in small businesses to
keep the business operating efficiently (Man, 2001). Chandler and Jansen (1992) also
indicate the significance of managerial role of entrepreneur. According to Chandler and
Jansen (1992) managerial role necessitates the ability to develop program, budget,
procedures, evaluate performance, perform other tasks necessary to implement strategy.
Beside those, management of people is a peculiar area of organizing activities for small
businesses and necessitates competencies in leading, delegating, coaching, training and
abilities to work with others (Man, 2001). Additionally, Stringham, Miller and Clark
(2015) highlight the significance of feedback and suggest that, entrepreneurs must seek
feedback and bring with new products not entrepreneurs individually prefer, but what the
clients like most. The organizing and leading behaviors are clustered and summarized in
Table 5.
30
Table 5 Organizing and Leading Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of
Organizing and Leading Behaviors Clusters Examples of behaviors
Plan 1. Plan business activities either formally or informally
2. Plan and utilize resources effectively
3. Plan and develop formal working procedure for guidelines
Organize 1. Organize the financial side of things
2. Organize financial back up
3. Organize important resources effectively
Motivate 1. Motivate staff by providing them benefits and incentives
2. Cultivate entrepreneurial culture that encourage staff be
entrepreneurial in their job
Lead 1. Manage staffs effectively
2. Lead by example
3. Demonstrate strong leadership
Control and monitor 1. Monitor staff and production
2. Monitor the results and progress to keep on track
3. Keep overheads low
4. Manage spending and other financial aspects
5. Keep employees focus on tasks
6. Meet project deadlines
7. Consistently monitor customer feedbacks
Delegate and coordinate 1. Delegate tasks effectively
2. Give autonomy to staff
3. Coordinate tasks and activities in organization
Build teamwork 1. Encourage teamwork in organization
2. Work as team
3. Get team energized to perform task effectively
Identify and recruit staff (the
right people).
1. Identify and recruit the right people on board (i.e., those with
enthusiasm, motivation, and right attitude)
Source: Ahmad, 2007.
2.8.6 Relationship competency
The Relationship Competency represents to skills in “person-to-person or individual-to-
group-based interactions, such as building a context of cooperation and trust, using
contacts and connections, persuasive ability, communication and interpersonal skills”
(Ahmad, 2007, p.98). Entrepreneurs are not working alone, and they are not only facing
with his or her employees. Hence, a significant task for an entrepreneur to carry out is to
use her or his connections and contacts for advantages. For example, Hillman, Withers
and Collins (2009) state that businesses are not autonomous, they are restricted by a
network of interdependencies with other businesses and act to manage external
31
interdependencies. They defined five actions which businesses can take to minimize
dependency (merger/vertical integration, JVs and other interorganizational relationships,
board of directors, executive succession and political actions). To accomplish it
successfully, the entrepreneurs needs to have competencies in communication,
relationship building, persuasive and interpersonal abilities (Man, 2001). Relationship
competency includes 6 clusters and 28 behaviors as shown in Table 6.
Table 6 Relationship Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of Relationship
Behaviors Clusters Examples of behaviors
Build trust and convince
customers
1. Provide good customer service
2. Focus on customer satisfaction
3. Be open and friendly to customers
4. Be persuasive and convincing in
selling ideas product and services
5. Demonstrate to customers that they are
being taken care of
6. Convince customers of your own expertise
7. Impress customers by being alert to their needs
8. Be patient when dealing with difficult customers
9. Show interest in customer needs
10. Give customers good impression to build trust
11. Speak politely to customers with level of
competence.
Possess good interpersonal
skills
1. Communicate effectively with others
2. Relate to others using good interpersonal skills
3. Be diplomatic and kind to others
4. Aware of other`s feelings when dealing with them 5. Mind your personality and attitude when dealing with people
6. Appreciate cultural differences
7. Avoid having bad perception of other people
Develop and maintain
relationship
1. Build and maintain good relationship with staff
2. Develop good relationship with anybody you meet
3. Build and maintain good relationship with customers –
take up the role of “client liaison”
Built network and contacts 1. Develop networks with experts, government agencies
advisors, and financial institutions
2. Surround yourself with supportive and knowledgeable people
3. Seek advice from experts when necessary
4. Select the right people for advice
5. Develop contacts to achieve recommendations or to gain
more information
6. Meet the right people
Discuss and share (to create
positive working climate).
1. Get staff involvement in setting goals and plans
2. Get staff involvements in decision making
32
3. Discuss with employees on their work and problems
4. Create positive working climate through discussion and
problem-sharing
5. Be open to staff and provide useful advice
6. Be open to criticism
Manage conflicts 1. Handle staff conflict
2. Encourage staff to discuss matters/problems openly
3. Manage crises effectively
Negotiate 1. Negotiate with customers
2. Negotiate with suppliers effectively
Source: Ahmad, 2007.
2.8.7 Learning Competency
Learning Competency signifies the ability “to learn from various means, learn
proactively, keep up to-date in the related field, and apply learned skills and knowledge
into actual practices” (Ahmad, 2007, p. 102). In the modern social era new knowledge is
generated and spread quickly therefore, entrepreneurs necessitate the learning
competency to meet the demands of changing environment (Deakins & Freel, 1998) and
changing environment always requires entrepreneurs to learn continuously to meet new
challenges (Man, 2001). Learning is significant for entrepreneurial process because
learning helps the entrepreneurs to decrease risks and uncertainty and to generate the
knowledge. Learning Competency includes two clusters involving 8 behaviors. But its
clusters and behaviors were not released and held in the University of Adelaide Library.
2.8.8 Personal Competency
Personal competency represents the ability to “maintain high level of energy, motivate
self to function at optimum level of performance, respond to constructive criticism,
maintain positive attitude, prioritize tasks to manage time, identify own strength and
weaknesses and match them with opportunities and threats, as well as recognize and work
on own shortcomings” (Ahmad, 2007, p. 104). Similarly, Kaur and Bains (2013) describe
personal competency as crucial personal qualities and abilities of the competencies which
help in building up personal strength and enhance an individual effectiveness in
performing certain challenging tasks like managing one’s own business. Aspects of
personality and attitude are included in this competency. In total, 22 personal qualities
and behaviors were explored and classified in nine clusters that are shown in Table 7.
33
Table 7 Personal Competency Domain: Clusters and examples of Personal Qualities Clusters Example of behaviors and personal qualities
Self-confidence (high
internal Locus of control).
1. Have unquestioning belief in one`s own ability
2. Have strong self confidence
3. Have strong belief that one`s effort influence the business
outcome
High need for achievement 1. Have strong need for achievement
2. Have strong ambition and internal drive to success
Self-motivation 1. Have strong self-motivation
2. Able to deal with pressure and challenges
Organized and self-
motivated (self-
management)
1. Be organized and systematic in performing tasks
2. Manage different things at the same time
3. Work smart
Self-awareness 1. Possess self-identity
2. Aware own abilities, strengths and weaknesses
3. Admit weakness and willing to ask for help
Time management 1. Manage time effectively
2. Avoid procrastination
3. Be disciplined
Energetic 1. Physically and emotionally tough
2. Be active and energetic in doing business
3. Possess energy to work long hours
Positive minded and outward
looking
1. Have a positive attitude when dealing with difficult
situations
2. Be outward looking
Source: Ahmad, 2007.
2.8.9 Technical Competency
Technical Competency signifies to “the ability to use the tools, procedures, and
techniques of a specialized field” (Ahmad, 2007, p. 108). Technical competency involves
the ability to use and adopt technical skills involving the techniques and tools handling
that are relevant to the business. That encompasses having knowledge of instruments and
the functioning of tools, search procedures and content of work Kaur and Bains (2013).
Technical competency includes 4 behaviors in two clusters. They are shown in Table 8.
Table 8 Technical Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of Technical Behaviors Clusters Examples of behaviors
Possess 1. Demonstrate the possession of expertise in technical areas
related to business
2. Demonstrate the possession of good grounding knowledge
before venturing into the business
Apply 1. Apply technical knowledge relevant to business
2. Use specific techniques or tool relevant to business
Source: Ahmad, 2007.
34
2.8.10 Ethical Competency
Ethical Competency specifies the use of “rules, standards, or principles which provide
guidelines for morally right behavior and truthfulness on specific situations” (Ahmad,
2007, p. 112). Ethical competency in business means the ability to understand the ethical
problems, high ethical awareness, power to communicate and possessing confidence to
manage business effectively Kaur and Bains (2013).
Eleven specific behaviors of Ethical Competency were distinguished and grouped in three
clusters as shown in Table 9.
Table 9 Ethical Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of Ethical Behaviors Clusters Example of behaviors
Concern for ethical business
Practices
1. Handle business based on ethical standard philosophical
consideration
2. Avoid being too greedy or money-oriented
3. Handle business based on corporate governance
4. Engage in fair, open, and honest marketing practices
5. Be committed to offering products/services at fair prices
Maintain honesty and
integrity
1. Be honest and transparent in business dealings
2. Be trustworthy
3. Keep promises
4. Hold on to integrity
Take responsibility and be
accountable
1. Take responsibility and be accountable for own actions
2. Admit mistakes and inform the affected party that they have
occurred
Source: Ahmad, 2007.
2.8.11 Social Responsibility Competency
Social Responsibility Competency was defined as “the positive activities a company
undertakes in the society in where it operates” (Ahmad, 2007, p. 115). 10 behaviors
related to Social Responsibility Competency were distinguished and grouped into three
clusters. Identified behaviors were not released.
2.8.12 Familism competency
Familism competency was explained as “affection and concern for family that is
dominant and drives action and daily life”; it is manifested in behaviors in which a
“family supports its members by sharing resources and cooperates with each other to
achieve their common goals” (Ahmad, 2007, p. 118). 7 behaviors related with Familism
Competency were identified and categorized into three clusters that are summarized in
Table 10.
35
Table 10 Familism Competency Domain: Clusters and Examples of Familism Behaviors Clusters Examples of behaviors
Concern for family members 1. Get advice and support from family members
2. Build a platform for the children in the business
3. Cultivate entrepreneurial culture in family
Trust the in-group 1. Allow people who can be trusted to help in business
2. Identify and seek help from employees I that one trust
Cooperate with and support
the in-group
1. cooperate with and help others in business (especially close
associates)
2. Share knowledge and resources (with close associates)
Source: Ahmad, 2007.
2.9 Antecedents of Entrepreneurial competencies
Overall, Xiang (2009) claims that “characteristics leading to competence can be a
person’s motive, trait, aspect of the person’s self-image or social role, skill, or a body of
knowledge which he or she uses.” Particularly, beside the entrepreneurial competency,
entrepreneur’s demographic variables: family background, educations, training and
experience are believed as elements affecting development of competency of
entrepreneur (Herron and Robinson, 1993) and examined in number of studies (Man,
2001; Ahmad, 2007). For example, Krueger and Brazeal (1994) claims that work
experience improves the ability to identify opportunities. However, Boden and Nucci
(2000) did not find any systematic positive and negative effects of managerial experience
on survival likelihood of either men’s and women’s businesses in the first 4 to 6 years.
But, they identified that businesses whose owners had four or more years of college and
10 or more years of experience had more chances to survive. Cooper and Dunkelberg
(1987) examined 890 entrepreneurs for answering the question “How does it happen that
some people become entrepreneurs, while most people do not?”. Consequently, they
explored that 15% of 890 entrepreneurs had foreign-born parents, 50% of them came
from families in which a parent had a business. Regarding to education, 36% of
entrepreneurs had a college degree, 15% had additional education beyond a bachelor`s
degree, 13% had less than high school and 60% had beyond high school degree. Engel
and Palacio (2009) stated that 24% of technology businesses initiated between 1980 and
1998 in Silicon Valley were founded by Chinese and Indian engineers and technologists.
Similarly, Litvak and Maule (1973) examined 39 technological business owners in
Canada and found out interesting results. 62% of entrepreneurs were non-Canadian
(originally immigrated from either U.S and Europe) and more successful than 38%
36
Canadian entrepreneurs and 95% of them defined themselves as a member of a religious
group. 59 percent of entrepreneur held university degree (Litvak and Maule 1973),
spends about fifty hours per week in his/her business (Ibrahim and Goodwin, 1987).
Average of university degree was bachelor’s degree. Respectively, 52 and 39 percentage
of entrepreneurs had work experience and self-employed fathers. Barkham (1993) is in
consensus with Litvak and Maule (1973) and identified influences of education, work-
skills and information on characteristics of entrepreneurs. According to Barkham (1993)
educated entrepreneurs reacts more quickly and computational skill, practical knowledge
about business and industry, knowledge, imagination, communication skill, foresight and
search skill are enhanced by education. In addition, Ahmad (2007) found positive
significant effect of education level on all entrepreneurial competencies mentioned above
except Social Responsibility competency and education improve the skills and
knowledge of entrepreneurs, that in turn can increase the development of competencies.
2.10 Outcome of Entrepreneurial competencies
Performance is something which people actually do and can be observed and by
definition it involves only those behaviors or actions which are relevant to business’
goals and can be scaled (Bartram, 2005). Behavior is a specific observable action or set
of actions on the part of an individual, performance or outcome is the assessment of the
results of that behavior within the specific context (Herron and Robinson, 1993) and
evaluation of all the efforts devoted to achieving the business goals (Yıldız and Karataş,
2012). On the other hand, Bartram (2005) states that performance is not the outcome or
consequence of actions, it is the action itself. Performance is composed of goal-relevant
actions which are under the control of the individual, regardless of whether they are
motor, cognitive, psychomotor and interpersonal. Hence, about all studies researching
the entrepreneurial competency use business performance as the meter of outcome (Li,
2009). Sundry models are advised to elucidate how entrepreneurial influence business
performance (Man et al., 2002; Herron and Robinson, 1993), alongside majority
researches empirically investigate correlation among entrepreneurial competency and
business performance (Chandler and Jansen, 1992).
37
However, literature review evidently demonstrates that researchers are not in consensus
or lack of agreement about what compose the best measure of performance. One group
of scholars support the utilization of financial indicators while another
group of scholar’s supports non-financial measures (Ahmad, 2007). Based on content
analysis of 116 researches on business performance between 2000 and 2012, Yıldız and
Karataş (2012) classified in three methods of business performance measurement. 73 of
the researches used only subjective measures 37 of the studies used only objective
measures and 6 of the researches used both subjective and objective measures.
Venkatraman and Ramanujam (1986) demonstrated that there is high correlation between
subjective and objective measurements and utilizing the both methods simultaneously is
harmonized to performance measurement. According to Yıldız and Karataş’s (2012)
analysis, the most broadly utilized ones among the subjective criteria are profitability,
sales, market share, new product launch success and entire business performance while
the most broadly utilized ones among objectives criteria are Return-on-Asset (ROA),
Return-on-Equity (ROE) Tobin Q Ratio and Sales.
However, some researchers argue that obtaining objective performance data usually
difficult because businesses do not want to release such information or data on
performance of small business may not documented well (Yıldız and Karataş 2012)
beside that success for small businesses is the achievement of personal objectives like
satisfaction with one’s own autonomy, personal involvement, and work-life balance
rather than financial outcome (Ahmad, 2007).
Accordingly, by considering Yıldız and Karataş’s (2012) recommendation of using both
method simultaneously and Ahmad’s (2007) suggestion that both non-financial and
financial measures complement each other and present a richer picture of actual
performance, in this study both financial and non-financial methods were used which
were also utilized by Ahmad (2007). Financial measures involve satisfactions with
market share, return on investment, sales growth, sales turnover and profitability. Non-
financial measures involve owner’ self-satisfaction, owner’s career progress, customer
satisfaction, customer retention, employee satisfaction, relationship with suppliers,
business image, workplace industrial relationship, work and like balance.
38
2.11 Motivation to start a business
Although the purpose of this study was not primarily to analyze the entrepreneurs’
motivation, it was considerable to understand the motivation behind the entrepreneurs’
choices to start up their own businesses. According to Ahmad (2007), entrepreneurs are
motivated by either pull factors (internal needs) or push factors (external circumstances).
Pull factors are attached to the desire for independence, to do enjoyable work, to discover
one’s own creative skills and the desire to “be one’s own boss”. On the other hand, push
factors are linked with essential causes such as insufficient income, redundancy,
frustration with previous employment and unemployment. Similarly, Thaddeus (2011)
and Benzing, Chu and Kara (2009) identified four distinct categories of motivation of
entrepreneurs: independency/autonomy; extrinsic rewards; intrinsic rewards and family
security. Abdul (2018) highlighted that motivation factors changes from place to place
and changes across countries because of distinction of employment opportunities and
income level Benzing, Chu and Kara (2009). Table 11 shows some motivational factors
across countries.
Table 11 Motivational factors among various countries Place Motivation factor
Vietnam
Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh
City
Romania
India, Andhra Pradesh
Chine
Uganda
Kenya, Ghana
Turkey
Turkey, Ankara
Nigeria
UK
Challenge, achievement
Personal satisfaction, growth
Income, job security
Desire for independency/autonomy, to be their own boss and to
raise income
Personal and family security
Making money, autonomy, freedom and independence
Increase income, provide themselves with employment
Work independence, creation of employment, high income,
personal satisfaction, flexibility
Increase income, job security, personal freedom and independence
Creation of jobs
Long-term financial security/gain, to be their own boss, passion to
affect change Sources: Thaddeus, (2011), Abdul, (2018), Benzing, Chu and Kara (2009).
Additionally, ensuring family security and better environment for their family are
important motives among Malaysian entrepreneurs for starting a business whereas
motives like realizing capability, creativity and potential were crucial for Australian
entrepreneurs and independent from the gender (Ahmad, 2007).
39
Based on the literature, we recommend that competencies of entrepreneurs influence the
performance of businesses. Thus, the impact of an owner is thought as crucial. This
research explains individual characteristics which involve behaviors and attitudes as the
entrepreneurial competencies, that enable entrepreneurs to accomplish and maintain
success of a business (Wickramaratne, Kiminami and Yagi, 2014). Operationally, the
classification of entrepreneurial competencies by Ahmad (2007) is used in this research.
There are, namely; strategic, commitment, relationship, learning, technical, ethical,
familism, organizing and leading, opportunity, social responsibility, personal, conceptual
competencies. Also, entrepreneur education, experience and training could be seen as the
antecedents of entrepreneurial competencies. We recommend the following hypothesis
based on the arguments;
H1: Entrepreneurial competencies affect positively business success.
H1a: Strategic competency influences positively financial and non-financial success.
H1b: Commitment competency influences positively financial and non-financial success.
H1c: Conceptual competency affects positively financial and non-financial success.
H1d: Opportunity competency influences positively financial and non-financial success.
H1e: Organizing and leading competency affects positively financial and non-financial
success.
H1f: Relationship competency influences positively financial and non-financial success.
H1g: Learning competency affects positively financial and non-financial success.
H1h: Personal competency influences positively financial and non-financial success.
H1i: Ethical competency has positive effect on financial and non-financial success.
H1j: Social responsibility competency has positive impact on financial and non-financial
success.
H2: Antecedents of entrepreneurs have influence on the development of entrepreneurial
competencies.
H2a: Training on entrepreneurship has influence on entrepreneurial competencies.
H2b: Past experience in entrepreneurship has impact on entrepreneurial competencies.
H3c: Education level has influences on entrepreneurial competencies.
40
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
In the scope of literature review, entrepreneur is defined as an individual who is the
founder or co-founder of a business (Sim, 2005) where there is none before and owner
whose principal aim is growth (Zhao and Seibert, 2006). The sample of the research is
formed with the entrepreneurs whose businesses are located in Ankara. For the purpose
of assessing the association between entrepreneurial competency and business
performance, a survey method of quantitative research method was utilized to gather
primary data.
In this study, we used the survey tool developed by Ahmad (2007) and written in English
to measure the entrepreneurial competency and business success. The scale has high
reliability and validity and translated into Turkish language by professional translator
and checked with a professor. The questionnaire consists of three parts. In the first part,
there are statements formulated in the form of a five-point Likert scale to gauge
entrepreneurial competencies. In the second part, there are fourteen statements prepared
in the form of five-point Likert scale to gauge satisfaction with financial and non-
financial success. Ten questions are placed in the third part of the survey for identifying
demographic characteristics.
3.1 The universe and Sample of the study
The target population of the study is individuals who are founder or co-founder of a
business where there is none before. Our sampling frame is entrepreneurs whose
businesses placed in Ankara. Due to the limitations of accessing the whole of the
population in terms of time and materials, convenience sampling method was used for
this study. Between five and nineteen of March in 2019, mail-out and printed copy of
questionnaire were delivered to entrepreneurs. By sending reminding mails, forty-four
entrepreneur’s responses were gathered successfully. The remining of them either
extracted or did not responded. The data gathered processed by the researcher and were
not shared with any third parties. The participation to the survey was totally voluntary
basis.
41
3.2 Development of data collection tool
The strength of the entrepreneurial competencies and success were measured with five-
point Likert scale. For competency measures: 1 was “very unimportant”, 2 was
“unimportant”, 3 was “neither important nor unimportant”, 4 was “important”, 5 was
“very important”. For success measures: 1 was “not at all satisfied”, 3 was “moderately
satisfied” and 5 was “very satisfied”. During the survey design process,
recommendations were taken into consideration. The tools utilized to measure the
entrepreneurial competencies and success were examined and suitable to be used for the
research. The scales were developed by Ahmad (2007) and used in both Australia and
Malaysia and used in India by Kaur and Bains (2013). The Cronbach’s alpha reliability
and convergent validity of the survey tools were satisfactory in the study of Ahmad
(2007) highly significant correlation between whole competency areas. Additionally,
with ten questionnaires Pilot test was done to check reliability.
The survey consists of three part: the first part is made of statements for measuring
competencies of entrepreneur. Second part consists of statements for measuring the
success dimension. Third part involves 10 questions for demographic characteristics.
By using survey methods for gathering data from the primary source, it is purposed to
get healthier, time saving and cheaper information on the correct sample. The survey was
applied to entrepreneurs in Ankara and results were assessed by SPSS analysis.
42
CHAPTER 4
EMPRICAL RESULTS
4.1 Sample characteristics
This research was conducted to reveal whether there is association between
entrepreneurial competency and business success. In survey, 44 entrepreneurs were
reached in Ankara. Frequency distributions of several characteristics of entrepreneurs are
shown below.
4.1.2 Age
As shown in the table 12, 6.8% of respondents’ age was below 25, 40.9% of them was
between 25-34. 35-44 age group consists of 36.4% and 15.9% of the sample was above
44.
Table 12 Current age of business owner
Age Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
below 25 3 6.8 6.8 6.8
25-34 18 40.9 40.9 47.7
35-44 16 36.4 36.4 84.1
above 44 7 15.9 15.9 100.0
Total 44 100.0 100.0
4.1.3 Gender
The table 13 shows the percentage of gender of entrepreneurs. As we can see, the
percentage of the female (9.1) is much smaller than male (90.1) business owners.
Table 13 Gender of the respondents Gender Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Man 40 90.9 90.9 90.9
Woman 4 9.1 9.1 100.0
Total 44 100.0 100.0
43
4.1.4 Education level
Table 14 demonstrate the education levels attained by the sample. The outcome shows
that 63.6% of whole participants have bachelor’s degree and 18.1% hold doctorate and
master’s degree. 18.2% consist of secondary and associate degrees. These statistics show
that most of the respondents hold higher education.
Table 14 Education attainment of the entrepreneurs
Education degree Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Secondary 4 9.1 9.1 9.1
Diploma 4 9.1 9.1 18.2
Bachelor 28 63.6 63.6 81.8
Master 6 13.6 13.6 95.5
Doctorate 2 4.5 4.5 100.0
Total 44 100.0 100.0
4.1.5 Training
Beside education, respondents were asked whether they had taken any training courses.
61.4% of participants did not have any training courses versus 38.6% had training
courses that is shown in Table 15.
Table 15 Training received by participants Training Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Yes 17 38.6 38.6 38.6
No 27 61.4 61.4 100.0
Total 44 100.0 100.0
4.1.6 Entrepreneurial experience
It is noteworthy to notice that a majority of the entrepreneurs had no past entrepreneurial
experience. According to Ahmad (2007) they can be considered as “novice”
entrepreneurs. 70.5% entrepreneurs did not have prior entrepreneurial experience versus
29.5% who had as shown in Table 16. However, 40.9% of respondents had work
experience relevant business.
44
Table 16 Past entrepreneurial experience Experience Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Yes 13 29.5 29.5 29.5
No 31 70.5 70.5 100.0
Total 44 100.0 100.0
4.1.7 Family background
61.4% of entrepreneurs’ parents did not have businesses and 38.6% of entrepreneurs’
either father or mother had business as shown in Table 17.
Table 17 Family background Parent’
business Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Yes 17 38.6 38.6 38.6
No 27 61.4 61.4 100.0
Total 44 100.0 100.0
Table 18 Number of employees in businesses
Number of
employees Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
0-5 35 79.5 79.5 79.5
6-11 8 18.2 18.2 97.7
21 and above 1 2.3 2.3 100.0
Total 44 100.0 100.0
4.2 Analysis of Variables
The analyses of variables are performed for two key aims. To verify the competency
variables which are going to be used in the following hypothesis test and to give
confirmation of reliability on the competency and success variables.
4.2.1 The competency measures
The reliability of the measures was examined, and all the measures were found reliable
except technical competency and familism competency areas whose Cronbach’s alpha
statistic were below 0.60. We removed technical and familism competencies due to lower
reliability values. In addition, one item was removed from each of commitment,
45
opportunity, relationship, ethical and social responsibility competency areas because of
their weak representation (removed items are shown at appendix-A). Ten competency
areas’ Cronbach’s alpha statistic ranges from 0.60 to 0.876, all of that are over than the
acceptable value 0.60 suggested by Ahmad (2007). Also, the measures were examined
as a whole and Cronbach’s alpha statistic was found 0.96. The table 19 shows results of
reliability analysis.
Table 19 Reliability analysis of entrepreneurial competency scales Competency variables Items Cronbach’ alpha Mean Highest
average
Lowest
average
Strategic competency
Commitment competency
Conceptual competency
Opportunity competency
Organizing-leading
competency
Relationship competency
Learning competency
Personal competency
Ethical competency
Social responsibility
competency
13
4
11
5
13
6
6
9
5
3
0.87
0.70
0.78
0.67
0.80
0.71
0.70
0.77
0.60
0.60
4.105
4.182
4.221
4.218
4.257
4.114
4.223
4.270
4.268
3.629
4.409
4.250
4.432
4.409
4.545
4.409
4.341
4.455
4.477
3.795
3.886
4.091
3.955
4.045
3.955
3.886
4.068
4.068
3.955
3.386
A correlation analysis was done to examine the interrelationship between the variables.
Table 20 shows that there was significant correlation among most competencies. There
were weak correlations between social responsibility and ethical competencies. Table 20
shows the results of correlation analysis.
Table 20 Correlation of the competency variables
Competency area
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Strategic Commitment Conceptual Opportunity Org-lead Relationship Learning Personal Ethical Social respon
1 .597** 1 .800** .377* 1 .678** .689** .433** 1 .760** .583** .615** .622** 1 .733** .696** .679** .664** .625** 1 .539** .461** .572** .446** .674** .412** 1 .808** .593** .702** .654** .683** .731** .584** 1 .618** .383** .418** .527** .662** .377** .521** .588** 1 .666** .328* .718** .492** .622** .597** .474** .544** .241 1
Financial success Non-financial success
.702** .701** .566** .642** .619** .70** .308* .579** 331* .526** 1 .681** .618** .621** .623** .612** .584** .431** .62** .40** .51** .818** 1
Note: ** Correlation is significant at 0.01 level; * Correlation is significant at 0.05 level.
46
4.2.3 The business success measures
In this study, in order to measure business’s financial and non-financial success, fourteen
items were used that were developed and utilized by Ahmed (2007). Five items were
used for measuring financial success. Due to weak representation one item (market share)
was removed. Cronbach’ alpha statistic value of financial success measure was 0.757.
For gauging the non-financial success, nine items were utilized. Cronbach’ alpha statistic
value of non-financial success measure was 0.898. Table 21 summarizes the reliability
analysis.
Table 21 Reliability analysis of business success Business success Items Cronbach’
alpha
Mean Highest
average
Lowest
average
Financial 4 0.757 3.960 4.205 3.864
Non-financial 9 0.898 4.040 4.250 3.727
Inter-correlation among business success measures were examined. It is obvious from
the table 22 that there was significant positive correlation between financial and non-
financial success as shown table 22.
Table 22 Correlation among success variables Business success Financial success Non-financial success
Financial success
Non-financial
success
1
.818** 1
Note: ** Correlation is significant at 0.01 level.
4.2.4 Descriptive statistics
The normality analysis of variables was done by checking the measures of skewness and
kurtosis. The analysis was applied to all variables for the aim of analyzing variables
whether there was any major deviation from normality. According to Sim (2005) kurtosis
and skewness value between ±1.0 is seen excellent but in many cases ±2.0 value is also
acceptable. Ten competency areas mentioned above fall between ±2.0 skewness and
kurtosis level. In other ways, all competencies are close to normal distribution
statistically. Also, financial and non-financial success scales fall between ±2.0 values for
skewness and kurtosis except kurtosis value (3.35) of financial success. The cause of
greater positive kurtosis for normal distribution for financial success is because of the
major number of entrepreneurs rating financial success similarly. Also, all variables were
checked for extreme outliers and taken corrective actions and scatterplot regression
47
analysis was applied to each variable for linearity and no perfect linear relationships
between predictors was found.
4.3 Hypothesis tests of possible effects of key entrepreneurial competencies on
success
By taking entrepreneurial competency theory into consideration, it is hypothesized that
entrepreneurial competencies (strategic, commitment, conceptual, opportunity,
organizing and leading, relationship, learning, personal, ethical, social responsibility)
positively influence financial and non-financial business successes. In addition to the
association, the present research also investigated the impact of selected demographic
variables (education, training and past experience) on competencies.
Hypothesis 1a: Strategic competency influences positively financial and non-financial
success
A simple linear regression was calculated to estimate satisfaction degree with financial
success based on strategic competency. A significant regression equation was found (F(1,
42) = 40.863, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.493. Respondents’ estimated satisfaction degree
with financial success is equal to 0.430 + 0.860 (strategic competency) financial success
when strategic competency is gauged with the importance level. Respondents’ self-
reported satisfaction with financial success raises 0.860 degree for each importance level
of strategic competency.
A significant regression equation was obtained (F(1, 42) = 36.311, p < 0.001), with an
R2 of 0.464. Participants’ estimated satisfaction degree with non-financial success is
equal to 1.132 + 0.716 (strategic competency) non-financial success when strategic
competency is measured with the importance level. The self-reported satisfaction with
non-financial success raised 0.716 degree for each importance level of strategic
competency. Strategic competency can account for .493% and .464% relatively of the
variation in satisfaction degree with financial and non-financial success. Therefore,
strategic competency is significant and influences satisfaction degree with financial and
non-financial successes.
48
H1b: Commitment competency influences positively financial and non-financial success
For commitment competency a simple linear regression was computed to predict
satisfaction degree with financial success based on strategic competency. A significant
regression equation was obtained (F(1, 42) = 40.660, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.492.
Respondents’ predicted satisfaction degree with financial success is equal to 0.566 +
0.812 (commitment competency) success when commitment competency is measured
with the level of importance. Participants’ self-reported satisfaction with financial
success increases 0.812 degree for each importance level of commitment competency.
To predict the satisfaction degree with non-financial success based on commitment
competency, simple linear regression was computed. A significant regression equation
was obtained (F(1, 42) = 25.983, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.382. Predicted satisfaction
degree with non-financial success is equal to 1.502 + 0.612 (commitment competency)
success when commitment competency is measured with the level of importance. Self-
reported satisfaction with non-financial success increases 0.612 degree for each
importance level of commitment competency. Commitment competency can account for
0.492% and 0.382% relatively of the satisfaction degree with financial and non-financial
success. So, commitment competency is significant and affects financial and non-
financial successes.
H1c: Conceptual competency affects positively financial and non-financial success
For conceptual competency a simple linear regression was computed to estimate
satisfaction degree with financial success based on conceptual competency. A significant
regression equation was found (F(1, 42) = 19.790, P < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.320.
Estimated satisfaction degree with financial success of participants is equal to 0.409 +
0.841 (conceptual competency) financial success when conceptual competency is gauged
with the level of importance. Respondents’ self-reported satisfaction with financial
success increases 0.841 degree for each importance level of conceptual competency.
To estimate the satisfaction degree with non-financial success based on conceptual
competency, a significant regression equation was obtained with simple linear regression
(F(1, 42) = 26.339, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.385. Predicted satisfaction degree with
49
non-financial success of respondents is equal to 0.727 + 0.792 (conceptual competency)
non-financial success when conceptual competency is measured with the level of
importance. Self-reported satisfaction with non-financial success raises 0.792 degree for
each importance level of conceptual competency. Conceptual competency can account
for 0.320% and 0.385% of financial and non-financial success relatively. Therefore,
conceptual competency is significant and influences the satisfaction degree with financial
and non-financial successes.
H1d: Opportunity competency influences positively financial and non-financial success
A simple linear regression was computed to estimate the satisfaction degree with
financial success based on opportunity competency. A significant regression equation
was found (F(1, 42) = 29.509, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.413. Participants’ predicted
satisfaction degree with financial success is equal to 0.447 + 0.826 (opportunity
competency) financial success when opportunity competency is measured with the level
of importance. Participants’ self-reported satisfaction with financial success raises 0.826
degree for each importance level of opportunity competency.
A significant linear regression was calculated to predict satisfaction degree with non-
financial success based on opportunity competency. A significant regression equation
was found (F(1, 42) = 26.705, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.389. Predicted satisfaction
degree with non-financial success is equal to 1.116 + 0.688 (opportunity competency)
non-financial success when opportunity competency is gauged with the level of
importance. Self-reported satisfaction with non-financial success increases 0.688 degree
for each importance level of opportunity competency. 0.413% of financial and 0.389%
of non-financial of success can be explained with opportunity competency. Opportunity
competency is significant and affects the satisfaction degree with financial and non-
financial successes.
H1e: Organizing and leading competency affects positively financial and non-financial
success
Simple linear regression was calculated to predict the satisfaction degree with financial
success based on organizing and leading competency. A significant regression equation
was obtained (F(1, 42) = 26.56, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.383. Predicted satisfaction
degree with financial success is equal to -0.590 + 1.069 (organizing leading competency)
50
financial success when organizing and leading competency is measured with the level of
importance. Respondents satisfaction with financial success increases 1.069 degree for
each importance level of organizing and leading competency.
To predict the satisfaction degree with non-financial success based on organizing and
leading competency, a significant regression equation was obtained with simple linear
regression (F(1, 42) = 21.156, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.375. Estimated satisfaction
degree with non-financial success is equal to 0.207 + 0.907 (organizing and leading
competency) non-financial success when organizing and leading competency is
measured with the level of importance. Satisfaction degree with non-financial success
increases 0.907 degree for each importance level of organizing and leading competency.
0.383% of financial and 0.375% of non-financial success can be explained by organizing
and leading competency. Hence, organizing and leading competency is significant and
affects the satisfaction degree with financial and non-financial successes.
H1f: Relationship competency influences positively financial and non-financial success
Simple linear regression was calculated to predict the satisfaction degree with financial
success based on the relationship competency. A significant regression equation was
found (F(1, 42) = 40.125, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.489. Predicted satisfaction degree
with financial success is equal to 0.528 + 0.826 (relationship competency) financial
success when relationship competency is scaled with the level of importance. Satisfaction
degree with financial success of respondents increases 0.826 degree for each importance
level of relationship competency.
Significant regression equation was obtained for predicting the satisfaction degree with
non-financial success based on relationship competency with simple linear regression
(F(1, 42) = 21.735, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.341. Forecasted satisfaction degree with
non-financial success is equal to 1.609 + 0.592 (relationship competency) non-financial
success when relationship is measured with the level of importance. Satisfaction degree
with non-financial success of respondents raises 0.592 degree for each importance level
of relationship competency. 0.489% of financial and 0.341% of non-financial success
can be explained by relationship competency. Relationship competency is significant and
influences financial and non-financial successes.
51
H1g: Learning competency affects positively financial and non-financial success
Simple linear regression was computed to estimate the satisfaction degree with financial
success based on the learning competency. A significant regression equation was
obtained (F(1, 42) = 4.415, p < 0.05), with an R2 of 0.095. Estimated satisfaction degree
with financial success is equal to 2.205 + 0.416 (learning competency) financial success
when learning competency is measured with the level of competency. Satisfaction degree
with financial success of participants increases 0.416 degree for each importance level
of learning competency.
Significant regression equation was found for predicting the satisfaction degree with non-
financial success based on learning competency (F(1, 42) = 9.588, p < 0.05), with an R2
of 0.186. Predicted satisfaction degree with non-financial success is equal to 1.964 +
0.498 (learning competency) non-financial success when learning competency is
measured with the level of importance. Satisfaction degree with non-financial success of
respondents increases 0.498 degree for each importance level of learning competency.
Hence, 0.095% of financial and 0.186% of non-financial success can be explained by
learning competency. Learning competency is significant and influences financial and
non-financial successes.
H1h: Personal competency influences positively financial and non-financial success
To predict satisfaction degree with financial success based on personal competency,
simple linear regression was calculated. A significant regression equation was found
(F(1, 42) = 21.165, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.335. Estimated satisfaction degree with
financial success is equal to 0.136 + 0.896 (personal competency) financial success when
personal competency is measured with the level of importance. Satisfaction degree with
financial success of respondents increases 0.896 degree for each importance level of
personal competency.
Significant regression equation was found for predicting satisfaction degree with non-
financial success based on personal competency (F(1, 42) = 25.834, p < 0.001), with an
R2 of 0.381. Predicted satisfaction degree with non-financial success is equal to 0.571 +
0.819 (personal competency) non-financial success when personal competency is
measured with the level of importance. Satisfaction degree with non-financial success of
participants increases 0.819 degree for each importance level of personal competency.
52
Personal competency can account for 0.335% and 0.381% of the satisfaction degree with
financial and non-financial success relatively. So, personal competency is significant and
affects financial and non-financial successes.
H1i: Ethical competency influences positively financial and non-financial success
To predict the satisfaction degree with financial success based on ethical competency,
simple linear regression was calculated. A significant regression equation was obtained
(F(1, 42) = 5.164, p < 0.05), with an R2 of 0.109. Predicted satisfaction degree with
financial success is equal to 2.131 + 0.429 (ethical competency) financial success when
ethical competency is measured with the level of importance. Satisfaction degree with
financial success of participants increases 0.429 degree for each importance level of
ethical competency. 0.109% of financial success can be explained with ethical
competency.
The regression equation between satisfaction degree with non-financial success and
ethical competency was found (F(1, 42) = 8.074, p < 0.05), with an R2 of 0.161.
Estimated satisfaction degree with non-financial success is equal to 2.165 + 0.446
(ethical competency) non-financial success when ethical competency is measures with
the level of importance. Self-reported satisfaction with non-financial success of
participants rises 0.446 degree for each importance level of ethical competency. 0.161%
of non-financial success can be explained with ethical competency.
H1j: Social responsibility competency influences positively financial and non-financial
success
Simple linear regression was computed to estimate the satisfaction degree with financial
success based on social responsibility competency. A significant regression equation was
found (F(1, 42) = 16.065, p < 0.001), with an R2 of 0.277. Predicted satisfaction degree
with financial success is equal to 2.041 + 0.525 (social responsibility competency)
financial success when social responsibility competency is measured with level of
importance. Satisfaction degree with financial success of respondents increases 0.525
degree for each importance level of social responsibility competency.
Simple linear regression was calculated to predict the satisfaction degree with non-
financial success. A significant regression equation was found (F(1, 42) = 14.477, p <
53
0.001), with an R2 of 0.256. predicted satisfaction degree with non-financial success is
equal to 2.484 + 0.434 (social responsibility competency) non-financial success when
social responsibility competency is measured with the level of importance. Satisfaction
degree with non-financial success of respondents increases 0.434 degree for each
importance level of social responsibility competency. 0.277% of financial and 0.256%
of non-financial success can be explained with social responsibility competency. Social
responsibility competency is significant and affects financial and non-financial
successes.
Table 23 Summary of hypothesis results
*Hypothesized
relationship
p
Hypothesis
supported
**Hypothesized
relationship
p
Hypothesis
supported
H1a: <0.01 Yes
H1b: <0.01 Yes
H1c: <0.01 Yes
H1d: <0.01 Yes
H1e: <0.01 Yes
H1f: <0.01 Yes
H1g: <0.05 Yes
H1h: <0.01 Yes
H1i: <0.05 Yes
H1j: <0.01 Yes
H1a: <0.01 Yes
H1b: <0.01 Yes
H1c: <0.01 Yes
H1d: <0.01 Yes
H1e: <0.01 Yes
H1f: <0.01 Yes
H1g: <0.05 Yes
H1h: <0.01 Yes
H1i: <0.05 Yes
H1j: <0.01 Yes Note: Strategic, commitment, conceptual, opportunity, organizing and leading, relationship, learning,
personal, ethical and social responsibility influence positively *financial and **non-financial success.
4.4 Hypothesis tests of possible effects of antecedents (training, past experience,
education level) on entrepreneurial competencies
H2.a: Training in entrepreneurship has influence on entrepreneurial competencies.
To test the hypothesis that entrepreneurs who had taken training on entrepreneurship and
entrepreneurs who had not taken were associated with significantly statistically different
mean competencies, an independent sample t-test was carried out. The distributions of
variables were sufficiently normal for the aim of conducting t-test. All variables’ kurtosis
and skewness values fall between ±2.0. Also, homogeneity of variance assumption was
tested and satisfied by Levene’s F test.
54
Table 24 Summary of independent sample t-test
ID** DV*
Levene’s test for quality variance
t-test for equality of means
Group mean
Group std. deviation
F Sig. t df Sig.2 tail
A 1 2 B 1 2 C 1 2 D 1 2 E 1 2 F 1 2 G 1 2 H 1 2 I 1 2 J 1 2
1.030 .222 .052 1.098 3.252 .463 5.987 .352 .349 .688
0.316 .640 .821 .301 .079 .500 .019 .556 .558 .688
.691 .091 .874 -.577 .341 .996 -.100 .480 .281 .755
42 42 42 42 42 42 41.414 42 42 42
.494 .928 .387 .567 .735 .325 .921 .634 .780 .455
4.17 4.06 4.19 4.17 4.29 4.19 4.16 4.25 4.28 4.24 4.25 4.09 4.22 4.23 4.31 4.25 4.29 4.25 3.75 3.60
.444
.548
.556
.536
.350
.430
.535
.460
.280
.407
.490
.548
.300
.545
.383
.418
.470
.494
.682
.588 Note: * “ID” refers to independent variable. ** “DV” refers to dependent variable. Letters refers to in turn
in order: strategic, commitment, conceptual, opportunity, organizing and leading, relationship, learning,
personal ethical and social responsibility competencies. 1 indicates the group who had taken training 2
refers the group who had not taken training courses.
As can be seen from the Table 24, there were not significant differences between
entrepreneurs who had taken training courses and who had not taken for affecting all
competencies. For one example, there was not a significant difference in the scores for
those who had taken training (M=4.17, SD=.444) and those who had not taken (M=4.06,
SD=.545) conditions; t (42)=.691, p=.494 for affecting strategic competency. In other
way, the outcome recommend that training does not affect strategic competency as
others.
55
H2.b Past experience has influence on entrepreneurial competencies
On the development of entrepreneurial competencies, there was no indication to confirm
the direct influence of work experience. The results showed a nonsignificant influence of
past experience on the development of all ten entrepreneurial competencies as shown
appendix C.
H2.c Education level has effect on the development on the entrepreneurial competencies
Surprisingly, the influence of education on entrepreneurial competencies was found to
be nonsignificant except learning competency. There was a significant difference of
education level on learning competency at the p<.05 level for the conditions [F(4, 39)
=2.90, p=.035]. Post hoc comparisons showed that the mean score for the master’s degree
condition (M=4.75, SD=.30) was significantly different than secondary education
condition (M=4.16, SD=.623), associate degree (M=4.12, SD=.66) and bachelor
(M=4.12, SD=.36). Doctorate degree was not evaluted due to size.
The result showed that master’s degree has effect on development of learning
competency. According to Ahmad (2007) learning competency is the ability “to learn
from various means, learn proactively, keep up to-date in the related field, and apply
learned skills and knowledge into actual practice”. In the modern era the new knowledge
is generated and spread quickly, therefore entreperneurs necessitate the learning
competency to meet the demands of changing environment and changing environment
requires entrepreneurs to learn proactively to meet the challenes (Deakins and Freel,
1998; Man, 2001). So, entrepreneurs who had master’s degree might be aware from the
factors which make learning competency more important. But, in term of the importance
level of other competency areas they may be thinking in the same way with entrepreneurs
who had secondary, associate, and bachelor education degrees due to possible effect of
the Turkish business environment. To illustrate, in Hostile environment (intense
cometition, severe price war, shortage of critical resources, low customer loyalty) and
Dynamic environment (uncertainty, high-velocity, volatility) entrepreneurs with higher
level of competency accomplish better that entrepreneurs with lower level of competency
(Ahmad, 2007). These two environments may put pressure on entrepreneurs to
demonstrate more entrepreneurial competency. Entrepreneurs in Benign and Stable
environment have tendency to be more relaxed in running their firms (Ahmad, 2007).
56
Secondly, bachelor’ degree did not have effect on development of competencies.
Possible reason could be quality of education at bachelor’ degree. According to Benzing,
Chu and Kara (2009) skills acquired at the universities are not sufficient or adequate to
meet the requirements of prospective employers in Turkey. Turkish businesses showed
that university graduates necessitate more practical experience, communication skills
and computer skills.
4.5 Motivations for starting the business
66% of respondents stated their motivations to start their businesses. The remaining did
not state their motivations. 55% of entrepreneurs motivated by extrinsic motives and 45%
of entrepreneurs motivated by intrinsic motives. Benzing, Chu and Kara (2009) states
that in low income countries, entrepreneurs are motivated by extrinsic motives, while in
higher income countries they are motivated by intrinsic motives. Since Turkey is
relatively low-income country, the result of this study is consistent with Benzing, Chu
and Kara’s (2009) findings.
Short statement of main points is that the first hypothesis developed in the second chapter
is supported by the empirical results, entrepreneurial competencies are predictor of
business success. However, second hypothesis is not supported by empirical results,
demographic variables (training, experience, education) did not have effect on the
development of entrepreneurial competencies except master’s degree that influences
learning competency significantly.
57
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION
5.1 Summary of the study
In this study, it was uttered that the main purpose of this study was to assess the
relationship between entrepreneurial competencies and business’ financial and non-
financial success of small business owners in Turkey. The research used quantitative
approach to test the association between entrepreneurial competencies and business
success using sample of entrepreneurs running in Ankara Turkey. The study also tested
the effects of certain demographic variables on entrepreneurial competencies.
Strategic, commitment, conceptual, opportunity, organizing and leading, relationship,
learning, personal, ethical and social responsibility competencies were used to
investigate the association between entrepreneurial competencies and business’ financial
and non-financial success of business. There were two more entrepreneurial
competencies called technical and familism competencies. They were removed due to
the lack of reliability. The outcome of the study verified that entrepreneurial
competencies were predictor of business’ financial and non-financial success. In other
words, entrepreneurial competencies have a considerable direct effect on business
success and recommend entrepreneurs to involve in skill development as a prominent fist
stage for business success.
The influence of training on development of entrepreneurial competencies was
nonsignificant. In contrast to general understanding of benefits of training on firm
management abilities of entrepreneurs, recent researches demonstrated that people are
not very dedicated to formal training. In its place, people appreciate learning on the job
and life experience (Ahmad, 2007). Additionally, Ahmad (2007) states that small firms
have tendency to concentrate on “informal transfer” of skills in businesses (among
employees) and they see formal training as mostly irrelevant.
58
Also, impact of past experience on entrepreneurial competencies were nonsignificant.
Specifically, it says that past general experience might not be as beneficial with respect
to experience obtained while running business (Ahmad, 2007).
Surprisingly, effect of education on development of entrepreneurial competencies were
nonsignificant except master’ degree on learning competency. Possible explanation
might be indirect effect of business environment. Because, Hostile and Dynamic
environments necessitate entrepreneurs demonstrate more entrepreneurial competencies.
In Benign and Stable environment, entrepreneurs are more relaxed.
The results of this study are consistent with Ahmad’ (2007) findings. According to
Ahmad (2007) entrepreneurial competencies are strong predictors of business success.
This study also gives evidence to back Man’s (2001) finding which states that
entrepreneurial competencies were linked positively with firm success.
With regard to education, our result is inconsistent with Ahmad’ (2007) findings. He
found that educational level had significant positive impact on developing
entrepreneurial competency. Training and past general experience do not have effect on
development of competencies which is consistent with Ahmad’s (2007) findings and
contradict with earlier researches that recognized past experience and training as
prominent for entrepreneurs’ technical knowledge and skills (Wickramaratne et. al,
2014). This is startling and raises questions for assessing the “formal training” taken by
entrepreneurs whether right things were schooled in the training courses provided to
entrepreneurs (Ahmad, 2007).
This study was also interested in identifying the motivations of entrepreneurs for initiating
their business. The outcome demonstrated that extrinsic motives were main motivations
for entrepreneurs to start their businesses.
All in all, this study found that entrepreneurial competencies predict business owner’s
self-reported satisfaction with financial and non-financial success. Also, the study found
out that effect of demographic variables (past experience, training) on development of
entrepreneurial competencies was nonsignificant. Surprisingly, the effect of education
on development of entrepreneurial competencies was nonsignificant except master’
59
degree on learning competency. Master’s degree has significant effect on the
development of learning competency. Finally, this research identified the motivations
(extrinsic motives) of entrepreneurs to start their own businesses.
5.2 Limitations and directions for future studies
However, there are certain limitations in this research. The foremost limitation of this
research is relatively small sample size. This is somewhat because the population amount
in this study is too small to reach great size. Second limitation is that we did not consider
the sectors of entrepreneurs. Therefore, additional research could complement this study
by taking different sectors, local culture, business environment, different stage of
business and gender difference into considerations.
60
REFERENCES
Ahmad N. (2007). A cross-cultural study of entrepreneurial competencies and entrepreneurial
success in SMEs in Australia and Malaysia, Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Adelaide,
Adelaide, Australia.
Abdul, O. E. (2018). Entrepreneurial skills and growth of Small and Medium Enterprise (SMEs):
A comparative analysis of Nigerian entrepreneurs and Minority entrepreneurs in the UK.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(5), 27–46.
Abdullah, M. A. (1999). Small and medium enterprises in Malaysia. Brookfield, USA: Ashgate.
Abdullah, M. A., & Beal, T. (2003). The strategic contributions of small and medium enterprises
to the economics of Japan and Malaysia: Some comparative lessons for Malaysian SMEs. The
Seventh International Conference on Global Business and Economic Development, Strategies
for sustainable Business Response to Regional Demands and Global opportunities, Bangkok,
Thailand, 1337-1354.
Bates, T. (1995). Analysis of survival rates among franchise and independent small business
startups. Journal of Small Business Management, 33(2), 26-36.
Baum, J.R., Locke, E.A. and Smith, K.G. 2001. A multidimensional model of venture
growth.Academy of Management Journal. 44(2), 292–302.
Başçı, S and Durucan, A. (2017) A Review of Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs) in
Turkey: Yildiz Social Science Review:Vol(3), 59-70.
Benzing, C., Chu, H. M., & Kara, O. (2009). Entrepreneurs in Turkey: A Factor Analysis of
Motivations, Success Factors, and Problems. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(1), 58-
91.
Begley, T.M. and Boyd, D.P. 1985. Company and chief executive officer characteristics related
to financial performance in smaller businesses. In Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. MA:
Babson College, 146–165.
Bird, B. 1995. Towards a theory of entrepreneurial competency. Advances in Entrepreneurship,
Firm Emergence and Growth. 2, 51-72.
Blackman, A. J. (2003). Entrepreneurs: Interrelationships between their characteristics, values,
expectations, management practices and SME performance. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Griffith
University, Gold Coast, Australia.
Beer, M. (1984). Managing human assets. New York: Free Press.
Barkham, R. J. (1994). Entrepreneurial characteristics and the size of the new firm: a model and
an econometric test. Small Business Economics, 6(2), 117-125.
Boyatzis, R.E. 1982. The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance. Wiley, New
York.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of
Management, 17(1), 99–120.
61
Boden, R. J., & Nucci, A. R. (2000). On the survival prospects of men's and women's new business
ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(4), 347-362.
Bartram, D. (2005). The Great Eight Competencies: A Criterion-Centric Approach to Validation.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1185-1203.
Bygrave, W. D., & Hofer, C. W. (1992). Theorizing about Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice, 16(2), 13-22.
Brockhaus, Sr., R.H. (1980a). "Risk Taking Propensity of Entrepreneurs." Academy of
Management Journal, September, Vol. 23, Issue 3, p 509-520.
Chatterjee, N., & Das, N. (2016). A Study on the Impact of Key Entrepreneurial Skills on
Business Success of Indian Micro-entrepreneurs: A Case of Jharkhand Region. Global Business
Review, 17(1), 226–237
Carter, N. M., Williams, M., & Reynolds, P. D. (1997). Discontinuance among new firms in
retail: The influence of initial resources, strategy, and gender. Journal of Business Venturing,
12(2), 125-145.
Carland, J. C., Carland, J. W., & Stewart, W. H. (1996). Seeing what's not there: The enigma of
entrepreneurship. Journal of small business strategy, 7(1), 1-20.
Chak, C. M. (1998). Strategic management for small and medium enterprises. Unpublished
Doctor of Philosophy, St Clements University, USA.
Cooper, A. C., & Dunkelberg, W. C. (1987). Entrepreneurial research: Old questions, new
answers and methodological issues. American Journal of Small Business, 11(3), 11-24.
Chouhan, V. S., & Srivastava, S. (2014). Understanding competencies and competency
modeling―A literature survey. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 16(1), 14-22
Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991). A Conceptual Model of Entrepreneurship as Firm Behavior.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(1), 7-26.
Chandler, G. N., & Jansen, E. (1992). The founder's self-assessed competence and venture
performance. Journal of Business venturing, 7(3), 223-236.
Dana, L. (2011). World encyclopedia of entrepreneurship. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
David Deakins, Mark Freel, (1998) "Entrepreneurial learning and the growth process in SMEs",
The Learning Organization, 5 (3), pp.144-155.
Endi Sarwoko, E. S. (2013). Entrepreneurial Characteristics and Competency as Determinants of
Business Performance in SMEs. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 7(3), 31-38.
Entrialgo, M., Fernández, E., & Vázquez, C. J. (2000). Linking entrepreneurship and strategic
management: evidence from Spanish SMEs. Technovation, 20(8), 427-436.
Ebiringa, O. T. (2011). Entrepreneurship venturing and Nigeria’s economic development: The
manufacturing sector in focus. International. Journal of Business Management & Economic
Research, 2(6), 376-381.
Engel, J. S., & Del-Palacio, I. (2009). Global networks of clusters of innovation: Accelerating
the innovation process. Business Horizons, 52(5), 493-503.
62
Engel, J. S., & Del-Palacio, I. (2011). Global Clusters of Innovation: The Case of Israel and
Silicon Valley. California Management Review, 53(2), 27-49.
Farhangmehr, M., Gonçalves, P., & Sarmento, M. (2016). Predicting entrepreneurial motivation
among university students: The role of entrepreneurship education. Education+ Training,
58(7/8), 861-881.
Gaskill, L. R., Van Auken, H. E., & Manning, R. A. (1993). A factor analytic study of the
perceived causes of small business failure. Journal of Small Business Management, 31(4), p.18–
31.
Gartner, W.B. (1985). "A framework for describing the phenomenon of new venture creation."
Academy of Management Review, October, 10(4), p 696-706.
Gartner, W.B. (1988). "Who is an entrepreneur? is the wrong question." American Journal of
Small Business, 12(4), p 11-32.
Gibb, A. A. (2005). The entrepreneur as the core competence of the firm: Implication for
management educators. Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Small business network, Issue 2.
Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hoskisson, R. E. (2016). Strategic Management: Concepts and
Cases: Competitiveness and Globalization. Nelson Education.
Herron, L., & Robinson, R. (1993). The entrepreneur and venture performance. Academy of
Management Proceedings, 1993(1), 75-79.
Huck, J. F., & McEwen, T. (1991). Competencies needed for small business success: perceptions.
Journal of Small Business Management, 29(4), 90.
Hartmann, H. (1959). Managers and entrepreneurs: a useful distinction? Administrative Science
Quarterly, 429-451.
Hillman, A. J., Withers, M. C., & Collins, B. J. (2009). Resource Dependence Theory: A Review.
Journal of Management, 35(6), 1404-1427.
Ibrahim, A. B., & Goodwin, J. R. (1986). Perceived Causes of Success in Small Business.
American Journal of Small Business, 11(2), 41–50.
Iakovleva, T. (2002). Theorizing on entrepreneurial performance. In In 1ère Conférence
Européenne d’été, Valence, France (pp. 1-42).
Jennings, P. L., & Beaver, G. (1995). The managerial dimension of small business failure.
Strategic Change, 4(4), 185–200.
Kalleberg, A. L., & Leicht, K. T. (1991). Gender and organizational performance: Determinants
of small business survival and success. Academy of Management Journal, 34(1), 136-161.
Krueger, N. F., & Brazeal, D. V. (1994). Entrepreneurial Potential and Potential Entrepreneurs.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(3), 91–104.
Kyndt, E., & Baert, H. (2015). Entrepreneurial competencies: Assessment and predictive value
for entrepreneurship. Journal of Vocational Behavior,90, 13-25.
Kayadibi, S., Polat, R., &Fidan, Y. (2013). Small and Medium-Sized Business in Malaysian
Economy: Case of Turkish Entrepreneurs in Kuala Lumpur. Business Economy, 31, 265-281.
63
Kirzner, I. M. (1997). Entrepreneurial discovery and the competitive market process: An
Austrian approach. Journal of economic Literature, 35(1), 60-85.
Kaur, H., & Bains, A. (2013). Understanding the concept of entrepreneur competency. Journal
of Business Management & Social Sciences Research, 2(11), 31-33.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.
Lee, D. Y., & Tsang, E. W. K. (2001). The effects of entrepreneurial personality, background
and network activities on venture growth. Journal of Management Studies, 38(4), 583–602.
LI, Xiang (2009). Entrepreneurial Competencies as an Entrepreneurial Distinctive: An
Examination of the Competency Approach in Defining Entrepreneurs. Dissertations and Theses
Collection (Open Access).
Litvak, I. A., & Maule, C. J. (1973). Some characteristics of successful technical entrepreneurs
in Canada. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-20(3), 62-68.
Lee, H., Lee, J., Shim, K., & Lee, H. (2016, June). Entrepreneurial characteristics: Systematic
literature Review. In PACIS (p. 81).
Low, M. B., & MacMillan, I. C. (1988). Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenges.
Journal of Management, 14(2), 139-161.
Lee, H., Lee, J., Shim, K., & Lee, H. (2016, June). Entrepreneurial characteristics: Systematic
literature Review. In PACIS (p. 81).
Man, T. W. Y. (2001). Entrepreneurial competencies and the performance of small and medium
enterprises in the Hong Kong service sector. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Hong Kong
Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.
Maxwell, J. A., & Westerfield, D. (2002). Technological entrepreneurism characteristics related
to the adoption of innovative technology. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 67(1), 9-21.
McClelland, D.C. (1961). The Achieving Society. Collier-Macmillan, New York, NY and
London.
Misra, S., & Kumar, E. S. (2000). Resourcefulness: A Proximal Conceptualisation of
Entrepreneurial Behaviour. The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 9(2), 135–154.
Ma, D. K., Stolte, C., Kaur, S., Bain, M., & O'Donoghue, S. I. (2013). Visual analytics of
phosphorylation time-series data on insulin response.
Mole, V., Dawson, S., Winstanley, D., and Sherval, J. 1993. Researching managerial
competencies. Paper Presented to the British Academy of Management Annual Conference.
Milton Keynes, September.
McClelland, D.C. 1973. Testing for competence rather than for “Intelligence”. American
Psychologist. 28(1), 1-40.
Man, T. W., Lau, T., & Snape, E. (2008). Entrepreneurial Competencies and the Performance of
Small and Medium Enterprises: An Investigation through a Framework of Competitiveness.
Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 21(3), 257-276.
Mitchelmore, S., & Rowley, J. (2010). Entrepreneurial competencies: a literature review and
development agenda. International journal of entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 16(2), 92-
111.
64
Muzychenko, O., & Saee, J. (2004). Cross-cultural professional competence in higher education.
Man, T. W., Lau, T., & Chan, K. F. (2002). The competitiveness of small and medium
enterprises: A conceptualization with focus on entrepreneurial competencies. Journal of business
venturing, 17(2), 123-142.
O’regan, N., & Ghobadian, A. (2004). Leadership and Strategy: Making it Happen. Journal of
General Management, 29(3), 76–92.
O’Farrell, P. N., Hitchens, D. M. W. N., & Moffat, L. A. R. (1992). The Competitiveness of
Business Service Firms: A Matched Comparison between Scotland and the South East of
England. Regional Studies, 26(6), 519–533.
Pearson, C. A. L., & Chatterjee, S. R. (2001). Perceived societal values of Indian managers: Some
empirical evidence of responses to economic reform. International Journal of Social Economics,
28(4), 368-379.
Porter, M. E. (1991). Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic management journal,
12(S2), 95-117.
Parry, S. B. (1998). Just what is a competency? (And Why should you care). Training, 35(4), 58-
64.
Rice, R. C. (2000). Factors affecting the competitiveness of small and medium enterprises.
Richard Cantillon. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.wikizero.biz/index.php?q=aHR0cHM6Ly9lbi53aWtpcGVkaWEub3JnL3dpa2kvU
mljaGFyZF9DYW50aWxsb24.
Rauch, A., & Frese, M. (2007). Let's put the person back into entrepreneurship research: A meta-
analysis on the relationship between business owners' personality traits, business creation, and
success. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 16(4), 353-385.
Rowe, C. (1995). Clarifying the use of competence and competency models in recruitment,
assessment and staff development. Industrial and Commercial training, 27(11), 12-17.
Rahman, S. A., Ahmad, N. H., & Taghizadeh, S. K. (2016). Entrepreneurial competencies of
BoP entrepreneurs in Bangladesh to achieve business success. Journal of General Management,
42(1), 45-63.
Storey, D.J., Understanding the Small Business Sector (1994). University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign's Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in
Entrepreneurship.
Small and Medium-sized enterprises in Turkey: Issues and Policies. OECD 2004.
Sim, H. C. M. (2005). Key entrepreneurial skills and their acquisition: exploratory study of
successful male Chinese founder entrepreneurs in Singapore (Doctoral dissertation).
Sergiu Rusu. (2012). Entrepreneurship and entrepreneur: A review of literature concepts. African
Journal of Business Management, 6(10).
Sexton, D. L., & Bowman, N. (1985). The entrepreneur: A capable executive and more. Journal
of Business Venturing, 1(1), 129–140.
Snell, R., & Lau, A. (1994). Exploring local competences salient for expanding small businesses.
Journal of Management Development, 13(4), 4-15.
65
Stringham, E. P., Miller, J. K., & Clark, J. (2015). Overcoming Barriers to Entry in an
Established Industry: Tesla Motors. California Management Review, 57(4), 85-103.
Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel psychology, 40(3), 437-453.
Schroder, H.M. 1989. Managerial Competence: The Key to Excellence. Kendal/Hunt, Dubuque,
Iowa.
Thomas W.Y. Man, Theresa Lau, (2005) "The context of entrepreneurship in Hong Kong: An
investigation through the patterns of entrepreneurial competencies in contrasting industrial
environments", Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 12 Issue: 4, pp.464-
481.
Tehseen, S., & Ramayah, T. (2015). Entrepreneurial Competencies and SMEs Business Success:
The Contingent Role of External Integration. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences.
Tucker, S. A., & Cofsky, K. M. (1994). Competency-based pay on a banding platform. ACA
journal, 3(1), 30-45.
Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy
research: A comparison of approaches. Academy of management review, 11(4), 801-814.
Wasilczuk, J. 2000. Advantageous competence of owner/managers to grow the firm in Poland:
empirical evidence. Journal of Small Business Management, 38(2):88-90.
Watson, J. (2003). Failure Rates for Female-Controlled Businesses: Are They Any Different?
Journal of Small Business Management, 41(3), 262-277.
Wickramaratne, A., Kiminami, A., & Yagi, H. (2014). Entrepreneurial competencies and entrepreneurial
orientation of tea manufacturing firms in Sri Lanka. Asian Social Science, 10(18), 50.
Yusuf, A. (1995). Critical success factors for small business: Perceptions of South Pacific
entrepreneurs. Journal of Small Business Management, 33(2), 68-73.
Yıldız, S., & Karakaş, A. (2012). Defining methods and criteria for measuring business
performance: a comparative research between the literature in Turkey and foreign. Procedia-
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 1091-1102.
Zhao, H., & Seibert, S. E. (2006). The big five personality dimensions and entrepreneurial status:
A meta-analytical review. Journal of applied psychology, 91(2), 259.
Şener, Irge. (2014). Kobi destekleri ülke incelemeleri (Almanya, Ingiltere ve Belçika), Ankara,
Turkey: Gümrük ve Ticaret Bakanlığı Yayınları, Atalay.
http://tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=24870
66
APPENDICES
Appendix-A items for measuring entrepreneurial competencies.
Table 25 A Summary of All Items to Measure Entrepreneurial Competencies Competency Area
Items to measure entrepreneurial competencies in this study
(1) Strategic 1) Identify long term issues, problems or opportunities
2) Be aware of the projected directions of the industry and how
changes might impact the firm
3) Prioritise work in alignment with business goals
4) Redesign my business to better meet long term objectives and
changes
5) Align current actions with strategic goals
6) Assess and link short term, day to day tasks in the context of
long term direction
7) Monitor progress toward strategic goals
8) Evaluate results against strategic goals
9) Determine strategic actions by weighing costs and benefits
10) Conduct research before proceeding with an investment
11) Forecast trends and changes in the industry
12) Create competitive edge to compete effectively
13) Design strategy to prepare for the “worst scenario”
(2) Commitment 1) Dedicate to make the business work
2) Refuse to let the business fail
3) Have an extremely strong internal drive
4) Commit to long term business goals
5) Be committed to producing quality goods and services*
(3) Conceptual 1) Understand the broader implications of issues and
observations
2) Translate ideas and observations into the business context
3) Take reasonable job-related risks
4) Monitor progress toward objectives in risky actions
5) Look at problems in new ways
6) Explore new ideas
7) Treat new problems as opportunities
8) Innovate and do things differently
9) Be proactive and responsive to changes
10) Find ways to commercialise ideas
11) Be spontaneous and quick in making decision
(4) Opportunity 1) Identify goods or services that the customer wants*
2) Perceive unmet consumer needs
3) Actively look for products or services that provide real benefit
to customers
4) Seize high quality business opportunities
5) Take a concept and make something out of it
6) Scan the environment to look for opportunities
(5) Organising and
Leading
1) Plan the operations of the business
2) Plan the organisation of different resources
3) Keep the organisation running smoothly
4) Organise resources
5) Coordinate tasks
6) Supervise subordinates
7) Lead subordinates
67
8) Organise people
9) Motivate people
10) Delegate effectively
11) Get the right people on board
12) Energise team to work towards goal 13) Build an entrepreneurial culture in which staff is willing to take risks
(6) Relationship 1) Develop long term trusting relationships with others
2) Negotiate with others
3) Interact with others
4) Maintain a personal network of work contacts
5) Communicate with other effectively
6) Select the right people for advice*
7) Create a positive working climate through discussion and
problem sharing
(7) Learning 1) Learn from a variety of means
2) Learn proactively
3) Learn as much as I can in my field
4) Keep up to date in my field
5) Apply learned skills and knowledge to actual practices
6) Learn the ‘ins’ and ‘outs’ of the industry
(8) Personal 1) Maintain a high level of energy
2) Motivate self to function at an optimum level of performance
3) Respond to constructive criticism
4) Maintain a positive attitude
5) Prioritise tasks to manage my time
6) Identify my strengths and weaknesses and match them with
opportunities and threats
7) Manage my own career development
8) Recognise and work on my own shortcomings
9) Be physically and emotionally tough
(9) Technical-- 1) Possess expertise in technical or functional areas
2) Use specific techniques/tools relevant to business
3) Have good basic knowledge in my business area
4) Utilise technical knowledge relevant to the business
(10) Ethical 1) Keep promises
2) Admit mistakes and tell the truth
3) Engage in fair, open, and honest marketing practices
4) Be honest and transparent in business dealings*
5) Be committed to offering products or services at fair prices
6) Take responsibility and be accountable for own actions
(11) Social
responsibility
1) Forge relationship with charitable organisations
2) Engage voluntarily in community activities
3) Show concern for the staff welfare*
4) Create job opportunities within the local community
(12) Familism-- 1) Cultivate an entrepreneurial culture in my family 2) Cooperate with and help others (especially close associates) in
business
3) Identify and seek help from employees I trust 4) Build a foundation for the next generation to continue the business
5) Get support and advice from family and close associates
6) Share knowledge and resources with others (especially
close associates)
Note. “*” indicates removed items; “—” indicates removed competency areas.
68
Appendix-B: Sample of Questionnaire – Turkish version.
Değerli Katılımcı,
Aşağıda Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü bünyesinde
bulunan İşletme Anabilim dalı Yönetim ve Organizasyon bilim dalı yüksek lisans
öğrencilerinden Babageldi Hallıyev’in çalışması için hazırlanmış anket formu yer
almaktadır.
Lütfen ankette yer alan her bir ifadeye belirtilen kriterler doğrultusunda içtenlikle yanıt
veriniz. Anket sonuçları kişi ya da firma bazında değerlendirilmeyecektir; bu nedenle
herhangi bir şekilde isminizi, bölümünüzü ya da çalıştığınız firmayı belirtmenize gerek
bulunmamaktadır. Anketten elde edilecek bilgiler, yalnızca bilimsel amaçlarla
kullanılacak, kesinlikle hiçbir kişi veya kurumla paylaşılmayacaktır. Değerli vaktinizi
ayırıp araştırmaya katkıda bulunduğunuz için şimdiden teşekkür ederiz.
Saygılarımla,
Babageldi HALLIYEV.
69
Bölüm. A
Aşağıdaki ifadeler firmanızı yönetmek için gereken yetenekleri belirtmektedir. Lütfen her
bir ifadeyi okuyunuz ve her bir ifadeye verdiğiniz önem derecesini temsil eden seçeneği
işaretleyiniz. Doğru ya da yanlış ifadeler yer almamaktadır.
Çok önemsiz Önemsiz Ne önemli Önemli Çok önemli Ne önemsiz 1 2 3 4 5
Firma sahibi olarak, aşağıdaki davranışları verdiğiniz önem derecesine göre değerlendiriniz.
Level of importance
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Diğer insanlar ile etkin biçimde iletişim kurmak
Karşılanmamış müşteri ihtiyaçlarını sezinlemek
Yeni fikirler keşfetmek
Takımı hedef yönünde çalışması için harekete geçirmek
Kaynakları organize etmek
Diğer insanlar ile müzakere yapmak
Stratejik hedeflere ulaşmak için ilerlemeyi izlemek
Alt kademeye önderlik etmek
Kendi alanımda mümkün olan her şeyi öğrenmek
İş ile ilgili makul riskleri almak
İnsanları organize etmek
Sözleri tutmak
İnsanları motive etmek
İşleri firma hedefleri ile uyumlu biçimde koordine etmek
Önceki problemleri yeni yollar ile çözmeye çalışmak
Alt kademeyi denetlemek
Yeni problemleri fırsat olarak tanımlamak
Firmanın operasyonlarını planlamak
Firmanın farklı kaynaklarının organizasyonunu planlamak
Organizasyonun düzgünce çalışmasını sağlamak
Hayırsever organizasyonlar ile ilişki kurmak
Yüksek kaliteli iş fırsatlarını yakalamak
Sosyal faaliyetlere gönüllü olarak katılmak
İş ile ilgili netwörklerde kişisel temasları sürdürmek
Farklı alanlarda yeni bıilgiler edinmek
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
70
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
Etkin bir biçimde yetkilendirmek
Diğerleri ile etkileşimde olmak
Uzun vadeli sorunları, problemleri ve fırsatları belirlemek
Hataları itiraf etmek ve gerçekleri söylemek
Riskli eylemlerde amaca yönelik ilerlemeyi gözlemek
Girişimcilik kültürünü aileme aşılamak
Şimdiki eylemler ile stratejik hedefleri uyumlaştırmak
Pro aktif öğrenmek
Tavsiye almak için doğru insanları seçmek
Sonuçları stratejik hedeflere göre değerlendirmek
Firmada diğerleriyle iş birliği yapmak ve yardım etmek
(özellikle yakın ortaklar ile)
Firmanın işlerine kendini adamak
Firmanın başarısız olmasına izin vermemek
Başarılı olmak için içsel enerjiye sahip olmak
Kendi eksikliklerimin farkına varmak ve üzerinde çalışmak
Kendi alanımda güncel olmak
Uzun vadeli firma hedeflerine bağlı kalmak
Yüksek seviyeli enerjiyi sürdürmek
Öğrenilen beceriler ve bilgileri pratiğe dökmek
İş alanındaki trendleri tahmin etmek
Endüstrideki girdileri ve çıktıları öğrenmek
Adil, açık ve dürüst pazarlama yöntemleri kullanmak
Yapıcı eleştirilere karşılık vermek
Pozitif tutumunu sürdürmek
Zaman yönetimi için görevlerimi koordine etmek
Teknik ve fonksiyonel alanlarda uzmanlığa sahip olmak
Kariyer gelişimimi yönetmek
Görevleri koordine etmek
Kendimi en kötü senaryolara hazırlamak
Kaliteli mal ve hizmet üretmeye bağlı kalmak
Yenilik yapmak ve işleri farklı kılmak
Değişimlere hazır ve duyarlı olmak
Fikirleri ticarileştirmek
Karar vermede spontane, doğal ve çabuk olmak
Fikir almak ve bir şeyleri fark etmek ve anlam çıkarmak
Fırsatlar bulmak için çevreyi taramak
Şirket yönetimine doğru kişileri atamak
İş ilişkilerinde dürüst ve şeffaf olmak
Mal ve hizmet tekliflerinde makul fiyatlara bağlı kalmak
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
71
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
Personelimin mutluluğu için çaba sarf etmek
Aktif olarak müşterilere gerçek fayda sağlayan mal ve
hizmetleri sunmak
Rekabet avantajı yaratmak
Yatırım yapmadan önce araştırma yapmak
Güvendiğim çalışanlarımdan yardım almak
Fiziksel ve duygusal olarak dayanıklı olmak
İşimi uzun vadeli objektif hedeflere ve değişimlere göre
yeniden dizayn etmek
Ortaya çıkan sorunları ve gözlemleri daha geniş ticari
uygulamalar için kullanmak
Eylemlerimin sorumluluğunu almak ve sorumlu olmak
Endüstri için öngörülen değişimlerin işimi nasıl
etkileyeceğinin farkında olmak
Yerel toplumda iş fırsatları yaratmak
Müşterilerin arzu ettiği mal ve ürünleri tanımlamak
Başkaları ile uzun vadeli güvenilir ilişkiler geliştirmek
Risk almaya istekli girişimcilik kültürünü çalışanlarım
arasında yaygınlaştırmak
İşe uygun özel teknik ve araçları kullanmak
İş alanında iyi bir temel bilgiye sahip olmak
İdeal performansda çalışmak için kendimi motive etmek
Kısa vadeli ve günlük görevlerimi uzun vadeli olarak
değerlendirmek
Gelecek kuşağın işi devam ettirmesi için vakıf kurmak
Aileden ve yakın arkadaşlardan destek ve tavsiye almak
Fikirleri, sorunları gözlemleri iş şartlarına uyumlaştırmak
Müzakere ve problem çözümü sayesinde pozitif şartlar
oluşturmak
Güçli ve zayıf yanlarımı belirlemek onları fırsat ve tehditler
ile uyumlaştırmak
İş ile ilgili teknik bilgilerden faydalanmak
Maliyet ve faydaları ölçerek stratejik eylemler belirlemek
Bilgileri ve kaynakları diğerleri ile paylaşmak özellikle yakın
olan arkadaşlarım ile
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
72
Bölüm. B
Lütfen aşağıdaki kriterlerin size önemlilik derecesini belirtiniz ve geçmiş 12 ayda işletme
performansından memnuniyet derecesini belirtiniz.
Çok Önemsiz Ne önemli Önemli Çok önemli Önemsiz Ne önemsiz 1 2 3 4 5
Başarı kriterleri
Kriterlerin önemlilik derecesi
İşletmenin performans memnuniyeti derecesi
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Karlılık
Ciro
Satış büyümesi
Yatırım getirisi
Pazar payı
Kendi memnuniyetiniz
Kariyer ilerlemesi
Müşteri memnuniyeti
Müşteri koruma
Çalışan memnuniyeti
Tedarikçi ile ilişki
Şirket imaji
İşyerindeki endustriyel
ilişkileriniz
İş ve yaşam dengeniz
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
73
Bölüm. C
KİŞİSEL BİLGİLER
Lütfen en iyi cevabı işaretleyin veya kendi yanıtınızı sağlayın.
1. Yaşınız: ..... 25’in altı 25-34 arası 35-44 arası 45 ve üzeri
2. İşletmenin yaşı: 0-4 5-9 10-15 16 ve üzeri
3. Çalışan sayısı: 0-5 6-11 12-20 21ve üzeri
4. Cinsiyetiniz: Erkek Kadın
5. Eğitim durumunuz:
Orta öğretim Ön lisans Lisans
Yüksek lisans Doktora
6. Ailede girişimçi var mı? Evet Hayır
7. Girişimçilikile ilgili eğitim kursu aldınız mı? Evet Hayır
8. İşletmeyi başlatmadan önce girişimcilik ile alakalı iş tecrübeniz oldu mu?
Evet Hayır
9. İşletmeyi kurmadan önce işletme kurma alanında tecrübeniz var mıydı?
Evet Hayır
10. işletmeyi kurma nedeniniz?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…
ANKET BURADA SONA ERMEKTEDİR.
DEĞERLİ VAKTINIZI AYIRDIĞINIZ İÇİN TEŞEKKÜR EDERİZ
74
Appendix-C Group Statistics
İşletmeyi başlatmadan önce
girişimçilik ile alakalı iş
tecrübeniz oldu mu? N Mean
Std.
Deviation Std. Error Mean
strategic Evet 18 4.2521 .48493 .11430
Hayir 26 4.0030 .50722 .09947
conceptual Evet 18 4.3030 .41367 .09750
Hayir 26 4.1755 .38805 .07610
organizing_leading Evet 18 4.3376 .36857 .08687
Hayir 26 4.2012 .35020 .06868
learning Evet 18 4.2778 .43910 .10350
Hayir 26 4.1859 .48150 .09443
personal Evet 18 4.3765 .43643 .10287
Hayir 26 4.1966 .36691 .07196
commitment Evet 18 4.1667 .59409 .14003
Hayir 26 4.1923 .50650 .09933
opportunity Evet 18 4.2222 .58567 .13804
Hayir 26 4.2154 .41153 .08071
relationship Evet 18 4.2500 .55498 .13081
Hayir 26 4.0897 .50603 .09924
ethical Evet 18 4.3667 .51905 .12234
Hayir 26 4.2000 .44900 .08806
socialrespon Evet 18 3.7407 .68175 .16069
Hayir 26 3.5962 .58533 .11479
75
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test
for Equality
of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. df
Sig. (2-
tailed) Mean Difference
strategic Equal variances assumed .043 .836 42 .110 .24918
Equal variances not
assumed
37.770 .108 .24918
conceptual Equal variances assumed .514 .477 42 .303 .12751
Equal variances not
assumed
35.151 .310 .12751
organizing_leading Equal variances assumed .172 .680 42 .221 .13642
Equal variances not
assumed
35.470 .226 .13642
learning Equal variances assumed .006 .940 42 .523 .09188
Equal variances not
assumed
38.800 .516 .09188
personal Equal variances assumed .752 .391 42 .146 .17996
Equal variances not
assumed
32.428 .161 .17996
commitment Equal variances assumed .657 .422 42 .878 -.02564
Equal variances not
assumed
32.771 .882 -.02564
opportunity Equal variances assumed 3.303 .076 42 .964 .00684
Equal variances not
assumed
28.355 .966 .00684
relationship Equal variances assumed .288 .594 42 .326 .16026
Equal variances not
assumed
34.442 .336 .16026
ethical Equal variances assumed .210 .649 42 .263 .16667
76
Equal variances not
assumed
33.130 .277 .16667
socialrespon Equal variances assumed .984 .327 42 .456 .14459
Equal variances not
assumed
32.944 .469 .14459
