govern the conduct of people in a society | My Assignment Tutor

QUESTION 01 (Course Material) – University book File = B205b Block 03 Week 04 Describe the institutional context in which Africa Felix Juice LLP was created in Sierra Leone (15 Marks). Institutional context: This refers to the formal and informal political, economic, legal and socio-cultural rules that govern the conduct of people in a society. Formal rules are political and economy-related rules which create or restrict opportunities for entrepreneurship and innovation. A formal institution can be an organization, such as government ministries, regulatory bodies and local government offices that develop and/or implement policies. Formal institutions can also take the form of laws and regulations for market entry and exit, intellectual property rights, employment, competition, rules encouraging/restricting access to government support. Informal rules tend to operate through established social norms and perceptions of legitimacy and social desirability which include the norms and attitudes of a society, influence opportunity recognition of (potential) entrepreneurs as well as opportunity exploitation and access to resources. For example, although some countries have equal laws for both men and women, research suggests that men tend to have more preferences than women due to societal perceptions of women as housewives. Entrepreneurs need to be aware of these different components of an institution to be able to make decisions that enhance their chances of success. Explain context and examine how different type of contexts can influence entrepreneurial innovation. Academics who study entrepreneurship and innovation have provided various definitions and types of context and explained how each type of context can affect entrepreneurship and innovation. Based on the studies, a framework which identifies types of context and associated contextual influences on entrepreneurship and innovation as following: First Study by Zahra, Wright and Abdelgawad (2014) Examines the relationship between context and entrepreneurial behavior. The authors define context as the ‘natural setting’ of an enterprise or an entrepreneur, which helps us ‘to understand the origins, forms, functioning and diverse outcomes of entrepreneurial behavior’. They identify six dimensions of context (temporal, spatial, social, industry, organizational, institutional) each of which can affect entrepreneurial behavior. The study depicts entrepreneurial behavior as the perceptions, beliefs, motivation, judgement or actions of an entrepreneur in deciding to pursue an entrepreneurial opportunity, when and how to create a new enterprise, and what expected goals or outcomes to target. Second Study by Welter (2011) Examines the contexts in which entrepreneurship take place and defines context as the ‘circumstances, conditions, situations, or environments that are external to the respective phenomenon and enable or constrain it’. According to Welter, context matters because it affects entrepreneurial and innovative behavior by providing a combination of entrepreneurial opportunities, challenges and risks to individual entrepreneurs. This means that context can either be an asset (enabling individuals to identify and pursue entrepreneurial and innovative opportunities) or a liability (posing challenges and risks to entrepreneurship and innovation). Welter distinguishes between the ‘where’ and ‘when’ dimensions of context: ‘Where’ signifies the place of an entrepreneur, enterprise or innovation (e.g. country, political system, local neighborhood).‘When’ signifies temporal and historical contexts (e.g. historical influences on the nature and extent of an enterprise and changes over time). The third study by Autio, Kenney, Mustar, Siegel, and Wright (2014) Argue that the effects of context on entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial behavior in turn determine the types of innovation the entrepreneur undertakes and/or the performance of the enterprise created. The fourth study, according to Garud, Gehman and Giuliani (2014) Context can be used to identify and explain the conditions and possibilities for undertaking entrepreneurial innovations. Here an entrepreneurial innovation can be a new enterprise, a new or upgraded product or service, a new approach to achieving the survival or growth of an enterprise. These studies suggest that some features of a given context represent entrepreneurial opportunities that are awaiting discovery.Entry behavior then includes discovering and pursuing the opportunity and choosing a particular type of new venture to create. Once the new enterprise is operating, context can affect the outcomes (success or failure) by opening up additional opportunities and/or posing challenges and risks. Here post-entry behavior includes the strategic choices made by the entrepreneur, such as whether to undertake other types of innovation and/or expand the size of the business. The third and the fourth studies both examined technology context as distinctive to those mentioned earlier. examine how context affects entrepreneurial innovation through influences on the entry and post-entry behaviors of entrepreneurs. What evidence of entrepreneurial innovation can you identify in the case study providing explanation of the challenges faced by Africa Felix Juice LLP and how they were overcome? (25 Marks) Temporal context: This concerns the effects of time and history on entrepreneurial behavior and innovation. To understand the role of temporal context, look for changes that have occurred in an enterprise over time, the reasons for the changes and the associated effects on the enterprise. For example, consider the stages of an enterprise life-cycle described in Reading 2.5 (Block 2). As an enterprise evolves from start-up, establishment and growth, existing sources of financing may no longer be accessible and the entrepreneur may need a new source of venture financing. There may also be changes in ownership and governance of the enterprise, which can affect the way decisions are made in the enterprise. Changing regulations and market conditions require entrepreneurs to adapt what they do to be able to succeed. It is important to recognize that not all entrepreneurs wait for changes to occur before taking actions. Research shows that the actions of some entrepreneurs can also change the temporal content of their enterprises (Autio et al., 2014). Spatial or geographic context: This dimension highlights the role of geography on entrepreneurial behavior and innovation. Geography has two components. The first is the location of an enterprise in communities, neighborhoods, regions (e.g. rural vs. urban), nations or global reach. Individuals have to make choices about where to set up a new enterprise and this depends on the attractiveness of the location (e.g. the presence of key stakeholders such as customers, partners and suppliers) and access to resources (e.g. financing and government support). Some countries are well placed geographically and thus, benefit from the advantages that come from their location. Other countries are located in less attractive regions which deprive them of key resources, factors of production or international markets. The second component of the geographic context is the localization or concentration of favorable regulations, laws and networks that support and encourage entrepreneurship and innovation. For example, the European Union supports cross-cultural learning, trade, outsourcing and collaborative ventures among entrepreneurs across member countries. Industry and technology context: Industry contextincludes industry sectors and industry structures and affects the scope for entrepreneurial entry, the nature of entrepreneurial activities and the strategies that entrepreneurs adopt to sequence their entry into industries and markets. Knowing when to enter an industry can affect new venture survival and success. For example, Garud, Gehman and Giuliani (2014) show how the nature and scope of opportunities in the software industry are very different from those in the pharmaceutical industry. Software developers believe that the number of transistors on a silicon wafer is expected to double every 18 months and this is what guides the sequencing of their activities. In contrast, the pharmaceutical industry focuses on the Food and Drug Authority’s regulatory requirements when producing and commercializing pharmaceutical products. Technology contextis the architectural attributes of the technology around which the entrepreneurial action takes place. Social context: The immediate social setting in which a person (or people) live, where an enterprise is created and operates or where an innovation takes place. A social context can be networks in entrepreneurship and innovation. Networks consist of relationships that members within a given society or community have developed over time and which guide relationships among and between people. Industry clusters, industry parks and industry associations are examples of formal networks that are regulated by governments. Enterprises within these networks benefit from sharing facilities and infrastructure that support operations, interactions that facilitate organizational learning and collaborative activities (e.g. between universities, research centers and local industries) that enable the development of innovations and new venture creation. Another example of networks are community associations in which people from given communities or ethnic groups voluntarily come together to mobilize resources to develop their home towns or local communities. A third category of networks is household and family networks, which influence an individual’s ability to identify and pursue entrepreneurial opportunities. A good illustration of this is family businesses in which family members can leverage resources to identify and pursue a range of entrepreneurial opportunities. Entrepreneurs can use their membership in the three categories of networks to access start-up or working capital and information about potential clients for their enterprises (e.g. Ngoasong and Kimbu, 2016). Organizational context: This dimension captures the culture, practices, knowledge and skills within an organization and how each of these affects the entrepreneurial innovation of the owners, managers and/or employees and their working relationship with the rest of society (e.g. Autio et al., 2014). The focus here is on organization, ownership and governance. Different organizations have different objectives, resources and capabilities, which have implications for the nature of entrepreneurial and innovative activities. For example, given the social mission of social enterprises, their ownership and governance may prevent venture capital companies from investing. In terms of ownership, private and listed corporations (including initial public offerings), family and non-family firms, venture capital (VC) or private equity ownership, non-VC or private equity ownership, and single and group ownership structures are all distinct. There are also variations in ownership structures within each of these categories. The choice of ownership affects the ways in which the enterprise is structured and governed. For example, an enterprise that is founded by two unrelated individuals (co-founders) may approach succession decisions differently compared to a family business. Similarly, as an organization evolves, different demands arise regarding the nature of governance of the venture and, in particular, the role and composition of the board of directors. Question Two (Course Material) – University book File = B205b Block 03 Week 04 There is an existing debate about the best way to run a commercial business. Explain family business and corporate business; provide advantages and disadvantages for both models from literature and textbook. Family firms vs. corporations – reviewing the evidence Many small companies, which thrived as private firms but then chose to raise some capital by floating on the stock exchange, could get round the two-thirds share capital rule quite easily. They could either issue types of securities which had limited voting powers (such as debentures or preference shares), or issue themselves with special shares which had increased voting rights (such as founders’ shares or ‘A’ shares) Brewery companies were particularly good at this kind of thing, with brewery debentures as popular as government bonds in the 1890s – despite having no voting rights.Companies such as Marks and Spencer and Rank Organization had non-voting shares well into the twentieth century.The Savoy Hotel fought off bids by Trust House Forte (THF) in the 1980s by issuing lots of voting shares to the family owners. Despite holding a majority of shares, THF could not get a majority of voting shares.Most family firms, including Marks and Spencer, eventually diluted control as they equalized share voting rights and returned time and again to the stock market for new injections of capital.Family members often don’t have the funds to take up rights issue after rights issue.Loss of control makes the firm vulnerable to takeover. Are family businesses better than corporations are? Support your answer by evidence from research and literature provided for you in your textbook and/or external sources.Attention has been given to the German small and medium firm sector, the family-controlled Mittelstand (refers to small and medium-sized enterprises in German-speaking countries, especially in Germany, Austria and Switzerland), which appears to have suffered less in the latest recession than US stock-market funded companies.Another type of ownership which looks promising is that of the long-standing cooperative firms in the Basque region of Spain, often linked through family connections and protected from takeovers. By working together, they have managed to get access to funds without having recourse to the stock market. QUESTION 03 (Course Material) – University book File = B205b Block 03 Week 02 Explain with examples the following two cultural dimensions (15 marks) Masculinity Vs. FemininityThis dimension is based on a form of gender stereotyping (label).In masculine cultures (Austria, Italy), performance is what counts, ambition is the driving force, and high earnings, money, material standards and the opportunity to achieve are valued.The manager is assertive (self-confident & aggressive), decisive, a decision maker who is looking for facts rather than a group leader.Sex roles are clearly differentiated with men expected to be assertive & dominating, and women to be caring and nurturing (fostering, encouraging).This dimension is based on a form of gender stereotyping (label).In feminine cultures (Netherlands, Sweden) there is an emphasis on the quality of life where people and the environment are important.The manager is less visible, intuitive rather than decisive, and accustomed (adapted and familiarized) to seeking consensus.Collectivism Vs. IndividualismIndividualism versus collectivismThis dimension concerns the degree to which the culture encourages individual, as opposed to collectivist or group, concerns.In individualist cultures (USA, Britain), identity is based on the individual where individual achievement and initiative is emphasized (highlighted).Individuals are entitled (allowed) to their privacy and personal opinion.Job training which increases commitment to the company carries little value.In collectivist cultures(Pakistan, Peru), there is a tight social framework where extended families and social groups are important.The emphasis here is on belonging to the group, and on accepting the values and decisions of the group.Direct confrontation is considered impolite, because they disturb the harmony of the social environment. Explain two cultural dimensions impact on innovation and entrepreneurship for nations indicating which dimension is better (take a country as an example on each dimension for illustration). Support your answer with evidence from textbook and literature (20 marks)How do the cultural dimensions affect entrepreneurship and innovation?These findings were echoed in another study, which analyzed datasets of culture and innovation from 62 countries over a period of more than two decades (Taylor and Wilson, 2012).It identified a strong association between innovation and measures of Individualism, even after controlling for other influences. However, the authors also found that certain forms of collectivism (i.e. patriotism and nationalism) appeared to promote innovation at the national level.Lastly, there are a few studies that have attempted to examine the impact of culture at multiple levels of analysis.For example, Rauch et al. (2013) looked at both national culture and the cultural orientations of owners, finding that each of them could help to explain variations in levels of innovation and growth.Huggins and Thompson (2015) focused on local cultures, taking Wales as a reference region, comparing the country with other UK regions and analyzing cultural differences in localities within Wales.They found considerable variability, across both regions and localities and highlighted the role played by other factors, including Wales’s industrial heritage.As with Autio et al. (2013), the findings suggest that efforts to encourage innovation and entrepreneurship need to be sensitive to local conditions, and also recognize that economic growth is not the only goal.It is not necessarily clear that the success of a locality or region should be entirely based upon economic measures of success,Whereas some place-based cultures may not encourage the development of a complementary thriving business and enterprise culture, they may provide lifestyle benefits captured only in broader well-being measures


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.