ArticlePDF Available

Effective Factors in Improving Iran's Perceived Business Environment

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Evolutionary economics theory and cognitive psychology emphasize that individuals' subjective perceptions will change through learning from the environment. So by managing environmental factors, it's possible to change the entrepreneurs' perception of business environment. A positive attitude toward business environment is a key factor influencing people's intention to create a new venture. Given the uniqueness of social, political, cultural and economic context in every country, there are some important variables that have the most influence on perception of business environment. This study is going to identify the most important elements in Iran that influence PBE by using Delphi method. Through participation of 52 experts as Delphi panelists in three rounds, we found that social capital (in macro-level as good governance and in micro-level as social capital), performance-based culture, economic opportunities, resources and abilities, and macro-level knowledge management, have the most influence on perception of business environment in Iran. Based on analysis of panelists' opinions there are consensus and group stability among them. Kendall's concordance coefficient in third round is nearly high (w=197.0) and the rate of variation in opinions between second and third rounds, is about 4 % .
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Administrative Management,
Education and Training (JAMET)
ISSN: 1823-6049
Volume (12), Special Issue (6), 2016, 378-390
Available online at http://www.jamet-my.org
Citation:
Kh. Safari, H. Danai, M. Mahmoodi. M, M. M. Parhizgar, Effective Factors in Improving Iran’s Perceived
Business Environment, Journal of Administrative Management, Education and Training, Volume (12),
Special Issue (6), 2016, pp. 378-390
Journal of Administrative Management, Education and Training (JAMET)
378
Effective Factors in Improving Iran’s Perceived
Business Environment
Kh.Safari, H.Danai, M.Mahmoodi.M, M.M.Parhizgar
ABSTRACT
Evolutionary economics theory and cognitive psychology emphasize that individuals'
subjective perceptions will change through learning from the environment. So by
managing environmental factors, it's possible to change the entrepreneurs’ perception of
business environment. A positive attitude toward business environment is a key factor
influencing people’s intention to create a new venture. Given the uniqueness of social,
political, cultural and economic context in every country, there are some
important variables that have the most influence on perception of business environment.
This study is going to identify the most important elements in Iran that influence PBE by
using Delphi method. Through participation of

experts as Delphi panelists in three
rounds, we found that social capital (in macro-level as good governance and in micro-
level as social capital), performance-based culture, economic opportunities, resources
and abilities, and macro-level knowledge management, have the most influence on
perception of business environment in Iran. Based on analysis of panelists’ opinions there
are consensus and group stability among them. Kendall’s concordance coefficient in third
round is nearly high (w=

) and the rate of variation in opinions between second and
third rounds, is about
.
Keywords: Perceived Business Environment, Good Governance, Culture, Economic
Opportunities, Resources and Capabilities, Small and Medium Sized Enterprises.
Introduction
Like other emerging economies, Iran faces risks and opportunities as it increasingly participates in
the global market. To minimize risks and capitalize opportunities, Iranian policy makers must focus
on strategic and long-term programs. Current pressures on governments to create job, prosperity,
wealth and welfare have led to increased emphasis on small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs)
and private sector, which are seen as a potential solution to crises of unemployment, poverty, and
inequity and their economic and social benefits are widely recognized (Altenburg & Drachenfels,
2008; Ayyagari, Beck, & Demirguc-Kunt, 2007; Ghanatabadi, 2005; OECD, 2006; Rocha, 2012).
The role of the business environment as a leading factor in the nations’ competitive position and as
an appropriate context for the formation of SMEs is widely accepted today (Bîrsan & Gordan, 2007,
379
p. 297; OECD, 2006; Wennekers, Thurik, van Stel, & Noorderhaven, 2007; World Bank Group,
2016). Based on Austrian and institutional economics it is obvious that improving social, cultural,
economic and political factors, as components of business environment, are key infrastructures for
developing SMEs (Baumol, 1990; D. North, 1995). To start a new business as an entrepreneur or
self-employed person, both “opportunity” and “willingness” are essential (Praag, 1997, p. 39).
Opportunity is “the possibility to become an entrepreneur if one wants to” and it depends on starting
capital, entrepreneurial ability and the economic environment. Willingness to start as an
entrepreneur “depends on both individual preferences for the special features of entrepreneurship
as well as on the alternative available options and their perceived attractiveness” (Wennekers &
Thurik, 1999) also existence of both opportunity and willingness highly depend on business
environment and social context of a country. Baumol (1990) argues that total supply of
entrepreneurs and the productive contribution of the society’s entrepreneurial activities are heavily
influenced by the relative payoffs society offers to such activities (Baumol, 1990). It’s noteworthy
that, the importance of attitudes, both in general and toward entrepreneurship, in explaining
people’s aspiration to create a new venture has been recognized and empirically confirmed in
previous studies (Malhotra, 2003; Schwarz, Wdowiak, AlmerJarz, & Breitenecker, 2009, p. 274).
Entrepreneurial intent has proven to be a primary predictor of future entrepreneurial behavior
(Schwarz et al., 2009, p. 273). According to intention-based models, intention is immediate
antecedent of behavior, while intention is determined by attitudes, and attitudes are affected by
exogenous influences (such as traits, demographics and situational variables) (Botsaris &
Vamvaka, 2016, p. 434). Luthje and Franke (2003) argue that the intentions to become business
founders is influenced both indirectly by steady personality traits and directly by contextual factors,
which are usually easier to modify (Luthje & Franke, 2003, p. 143). Here what is considered as
environment is subjective environment that is perceived by individuals, because people react and
make decision based on what they see and perceive (Robbins, 1990). Also social cognition models
start from the assumption that an individual’s behavior is best understood in terms of his or her
perceptions of the social environment(Conner & Norman, 2005). Perception can be defined as a
process by which individuals organize and interpret their sensory impressions, in order to give
meaning to their environment. However, what one perceives can be substantially different from
objective reality (Robbins, 1990). According to subjectivist theory of entrepreneurship, a given
external environment does not strictly determine decision-making alternatives and choices. There
are substantial possibilities for the creativity and autonomy of individual choice (Kor, Mahoney, &
Michael, 2007, p. 1190) Kore et al. (2007) base on Penrose (1959) elaborate that entrepreneurs’
perceptions and personal knowledge shape a firm’s subjective productive opportunity set and also
explain that entrepreneurial perceptions and knowledge partly originate from entrepreneurs’
experiences in specific business settings such as the firm, the management team, and the industry
(Kor et al., 2007, p. 1187). Baumol (1990) explains that there is almost the same level of
entrepreneurial spirit among people and regions. But due to different contextual factors (business
environment), the entrepreneurs may become productive or unproductive (Baumol, 1990).
According to Mitleton-Kelly (2003), organizations are always co-evolving within a social
ecosystem because each organization is a fully participating agent which both influences and is
influenced by the social ecosystem made up of all related businesses, consumers, and suppliers, as
well as economic, cultural, and legal institutions (Peltoniemi & Vuori, 2005, p. 271). So in order to
continuous improving an ecosystem, we have to manage the entire ecosystem (Power & Jerjian,
Journal of Administrative Management, Education and Training (JAMET)
380
2001, p. 3). Therefore, it is reasonable to focus on the new business creation and entrepreneurial
process as an embedded process in a social, cultural and economic context (Schwarz et al., 2009,
p. 276). It is necessary to account for dynamic interaction between the individual entrepreneur and
the environments (social, financial, technical, etc.) in which new ventures are created, because no
attitude exists in isolation and there are numerous interconnections between attitudes and various
interrelated objects (Robinson et al., 1991). But even if positive attitude toward business
environment is likely to benefit from improvements in all dimensions of the business environment,
addressing all of them at once would be challenging for any government. Thus, understanding the
most important elements and prioritizing them is important in reform efforts. Therefore,
investigating what factors determine the entrepreneurial attitudes in a given country is a crucial
issue in small and medium sized enterprises’ business environment. So a central question that arises
is what factors determine perceived business environment among entrepreneurs and owners of
SMEs in Iran. Literature review shows that many variables are recognized as important exogenous
variables which can shape the perceived business environment (PBE) (attitude toward
entrepreneurship and new business creation) such as the ease of doing business (World Bank Group,
2016), social and institutional context and political system (Baughn & Neupert, 2003, p. 313;
Baumol, 1990; Ferreira, Raposo, Gouveia Rodrigues, Dinis, & do Paço, 2012; S. M. Lee &
Peterson, 2000; D. North, 1995; Wennekers & Thurik, 1999), cultural values and beliefs (Baughn
& Neupert, 2003; Hopp & Stephan, 2012; Santos, Roomi, & Liñán, 2016, p. 49; Schwarz et al.,
2009, p. 276; Verheul, Wennekers, Audretsch, & Thurik, 2002), economic opportunities (Praag,
1997, p. 39; Thai & Turkina, 2014; Wennekers & Thurik, 1999, p. 34), resources and abilities
(Jiménez, Palmero-Cámara, González-Santos, González-Bernal, & Jiménez-Eguizábal, 2015;
Maslow, Frager, Fadiman, McReynolds, & Cox, 1970; Nurmi, 1991; O’Brien, 1986; Thai &
Turkina, 2014), knowledge management (D. Chen & Dahlman, 2005; Malhotra, 2003) and also
numerous other factors But because there are cultural and governmental differences between
countries, implemented programs and policies for improving business environment to support
entrepreneurship and small businesses should be appropriate to the context of each country (J.-W.
Lee & W.Tai, 2010, p. 62).
Literature review:
Here we will explain and review variables that have been proposed and rated by Delphi panelists
as the most important factors that influence the entrepreneurs and SMEs owners’ perception of
business environment in Iran.
Good Governance
Good governance, the benign and efficient management of society via decisions and institutions,
can make a major contribution to the well-being of nations and also promotes not only economic
prosperity, but also freedom, the rule of law, human rights, security, and peace (Rindermann,
Kodila-Tedika, & Christainsen, 2015, p. 98). World Bank researchers have defined good
governance as the quality of public services, the quality of the civil service and the degree of its
independence from political pressures, the quality of policy formulation and implementation, and
the credibility of the government's commitment to such policies. Good governance is measured by
381
six indicators: voice and accountability, political stability and absence of violence/terrorism,
government effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law, and control of corruption (Kaufmann,
Kraay, & Mastruzzi, 2011, p. 221). Economists now generally admit that institutions or governance
matter for the performance of a nation, especially from an economic point of view (Kodila-Tedika,
2012, p. 83). In particular, cross-national research has yielded valuable insights into formal
institutions influencing entrepreneurial behavior (Hopp & Stephan, 2012, p. 917; Stel, Storey, &
Thurik, 2007). Institutions shape the economic environment in which firms and individuals operate,
in particular institutions supply incentives for firms and individuals. It is accepted widely that
enterprise promotion is driven by social and political considerations rather than by economic
reasoning (Ayyagari et al., 2007; Rocha, 2012, p. 337). It is all too clear that when governments
perform poorly, the consequences are wasted resources, undelivered services, and denial of social,
legal, and economic protection for citizensespecially the poor (Grindle, 2004, p. 525). Baumol
(1993) found that institutional arrangements or other social phenomena affect the quantity of
entrepreneurial effort. These structural and cultural factors can also determine the allocation of
entrepreneurship (Wennekers & Thurik, 1999, p. 34) It means, for an entrepreneur, acting as a
productive or unproductive one, heavily depends on the rules of the game that is emerged by
institutions. We know that government as a social institution, plays an important role in creating
favorable conditions for development of efficient institutions and financial situation, so we can
conclude that improved institutional quality is associated with increases in financial development
at least in the short run, and this is particularly true for lower income countries (Huang, 2010, p.
1675). And also some researchers show that, moving toward democracy has a positive effect on
financial development (Girma & Shortland, 2008; Pourrostami, 2011; Yang, 2011).
Culture
Much evidence points to the primacy of human capital for both growth and democratization. The
first order effect comes from human and social capital, which shape both institutional and
productive capacities of a society (Rindermann et al., 2015, p. 99). Some researchers have shown
that cultural norms have indirect effects on new business creation and entrepreneurship (Baughn &
Neupert, 2003; Gathungu & Mwangi, 2014, p. 118; Hopp & Stephan, 2012; Kreiser, Patel, & Fiet,
2013; J.-W. Lee & W.Tai, 2010; Luthje & Franke, 2003; McGrath, MacMillan, & Scheinberg,
1992; Schwarz et al., 2009; Thai & Turkina, 2014, p. 9). Community-level cultural norms impact
important supply-side variables (entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial motivation)
which in turn influence nascent entrepreneurs’ success in creating operational ventures (Baughn &
Neupert, 2003; Hopp & Stephan, 2012).As much as entrepreneurship is a performance-based
behavior and success in the venture creation process is due to the efforts of the nascent entrepreneur,
entrepreneurship is also a behavior contingent on social support through others(Hopp & Stephan,
2012, p. 924; Stephan & Uhlaner, 2010). An environment in which various community actors
actively support business creation efforts is likely to enhance entrepreneurs’ access to resources
and make their venture creation efforts ultimately successful (Hopp & Stephan, 2012, p. 924).
Literature shows that cultures with stronger social capitals, have higher rates of self-efficacy
(Baughn & Neupert, 2003; Hopp & Stephan, 2012) and business creation (Stephan & Uhlaner,
2010). Hopp and Stephan (2012) suggest that the more nascent entrepreneurs perceive community
support to be available, the more they will feel motivated to ‘keep going’ and invest greater effort
in the venture creation process rather than abandon it (Hopp & Stephan, 2012, p. 924). Aldrich and
Journal of Administrative Management, Education and Training (JAMET)
382
Zimmer (1986) have also stressed that individuals cannot be viewed as atomized decision-makers
who operate as autonomous entities. Likewise, the representatives of the attitude approach to the
prediction of entrepreneurship remark that attitudes do not exist “in isolation”. Therefore, it is
reasonable to focus on the entrepreneurial process as an embedded process in a social, cultural and
economic context (Schwarz et al., 2009, p. 276). North (1995) argues that the language and mental
models form the informal constraints that define the institutional framework of the tribe and are
passed down between generations as customs, taboos, myths that provide the continuity that we
call culture and forms part of the key to path dependence (D. North, 1995, p. 4). The perception of
community support and performance-based culture affect the beliefs and will intensify venture
creation process an effort to develop it (Choi & Chang, 2009; Hopp & Stephan, 2012; Stephan &
Uhlaner, 2010).In this study, culture is divided into two categories: supportive culture (social
capital), and performance-based culture, Since we believe that each category has its own impacts
on different phases of business creation process and they are able to build different entrepreneurs’
PBE in a given country.
Economic Opportunities
As mentioned, in order to start as an entrepreneur both willingness and opportunity are essential
(Praag, 1997, p. 39). Opportunity means the possibility to become an entrepreneur if one wants to.
Moreover it depends on starting capital, entrepreneurial ability and the economic environment
(Wennekers & Thurik, 1999, p. 34). In this research, we used Thai and Turkina (2014) definition
of economic opportunities as a factor which includes GDP growth, innovation, financial
development and economic integration, will prepare such situation that entrepreneurs see more
opportunities to create their own business (Thai & Turkina, 2014). They argue that financial
development, innovation and economic advancement significantly boost new business
registrations. A better financial system and economic growth strengthen demand and increase the
availability of credits for newly-registered ventures and of the technological and economic
infrastructure necessary to operate in a formal economy (Thai & Turkina, 2014, p. 497). Other
authors (Badinger, 2005, p. 52; Balassa, 2013; Thai & Turkina, 2014, p. 497) also emphasize that
economic integration enhance economic opportunities. International economic integration can also
foster entrepreneurship by promoting self-reliance and independent action, placing a higher value
on individual accomplishments, nurturing assertiveness and goal achievement, and offering more
opportunities for individual success(Thai & Turkina, 2014, p. 497). Countries that have more
developed financial systems engage in trade and business with other economies thereby provide
more economic opportunities. financial development is Also a tool for innovation and subsequent
economic growth.
Knowledge Management
In today’s increasingly turbulent and competitive environment, knowledge is widely recognized as
the main source of competitive advantage of firms (C.-J. Chen & Huang, 2007, p. 104) and
countries (Malhotra, 2003). in order to create the right business environment, in addition to
monetary assets and physical resources that are provided through economic opportunities, having
383
abilities and capabilities, skills, intellectual capital and knowledge that are provided through
knowledge management, are also essential. besides, somewhat knowlegde is an alternative to
financial and physical assets (J. Chen, Zhu, & Yuan Xie, 2004). Obviously, countries that have
more knowledge assets and intellectual capital will surpass other countries in terms of achieving
high levels of growth and development (Malhotra, 2003). So as envisioned in the UN Millennium
Declaration, for development of national knowledge, societies should encompass social, cultural,
and human development besides economic growth (Malhotra, 2003). Due to the economic change
is strictly connected to learning processes (Rizzello, 2000, p. 132) the economic and institutional
regime of an economy needs to be such that economic agents have incentives for the efficient use
and creation of knowledge, and thus should have well-grounded and transparent macroeconomic,
competition and regulatory policies (D. Chen & Dahlman, 2005, p. 8). Also educational policies
are important for both thespread of basic skills and the emergence of specialists working in
political,economic, and scientific institutions managing processes anddeveloping new
technologies (Rindermann et al., 2015, p. 98). In modern and more complex jobs, learning is a
prerequisite to becoming an effective worker. It is obvious that people with greater cognitive ability
learn from their mistakes and can therefore mimic what works elsewhere(Kodila-Tedika, 2012;
Rindermann et al., 2015, p. 99) knowledge management encompasses the spectrum of management
concerns from knowledge creation or codification to knowledge diffusion and exploitation (C.-J.
Chen & Huang, 2007, p. 104). Consequently, knowledge systems at the national level, including
rules and regulations, frameworks and national infrastructure which can facilitate the usage,
sharing, creating and reconstruction knowledge in order to strengthen socio-economic growth
(Malhotra, 2003)
Resources and abilities
The major challenge in creating an operational venture is to access sufficient resources, both
tangible, such as finance and also intangible such as information and emotional support (Hopp &
Stephan, 2012, p. 924). Resources and abilities, including all individuals’ physical, financial and
non-financial resources such as knowledge and skills that provide subjective and objective support
for business affairs (Klein, Mahoney, McGahan, & Pitelis, 2013; Kor et al., 2007; Thai & Turkina,
2014). For example with better education (Jiménez et al., 2015) and greater personal income, people
both desire and have the means to pursue self-actualization (Maslow et al., 1970; Nurmi, 1991) and
become more goal oriented (Thai & Turkina, 2014). those people with a higher level of education
may also have a greater probability of achieving success and the fulfillment of their personal goals,
not only as owners of firms, but also as employees (Jiménez et al., 2015, p. 206). Furthermore, in
countries with low unemployment and high social security, people tend to strive for performance
improvement and excellence (O’Brien, 1986; Thai & Turkina, 2014, p. 499). Rindermann et al.
(2015) emphasize on cognitive ability and argue that cognitive ability is not only helpful in
navigating the educational selection and competence building process in schools, but also in coping
with conditions in jobs and in everyday life (Kodila-Tedika, 2012; Rindermann et al., 2015, p. 99).
Methodology
The distributed nature of a sector in which authority, legitimacy, resources, and influences are often
highly dispersed and the ambiguous nature of distributed leadership make research on the topic
extremely challenging (Fletcher & Marchildon, 2014, p. 2). Based on importance of social, cultural
Journal of Administrative Management, Education and Training (JAMET)
384
and economic context in relation to perceived business environment and its changing and
evolutionary nature (Robinson et al., 1991; Schwarz et al., 2009, p. 274) implementing a qualitative
approach to identify effective factors that create PBE can be very helpful. This study investigates
experts’ opinion about the most effective factors that influence Iranian entrepreneurs’ PBE by using
Delphi method. We have reached consensus and stability in responses through three rounds.
In the following, Delphi method, the size and sampling procedure and the results of the study are
explained
Delphi method
Delphi is a method or systematic approach to get opinions and professional judgments of an expert
group about an special issue or a question (Fletcher & Marchildon, 2014, p. 3). The main advantage
of the Delphi is the achievement of consensus in a given area of uncertainty or lack of empirical
evidence. The feedback between rounds can widen knowledge and stimulate new ideas and in itself
be highly motivating and educational for the participants (Powell, 2003, p. 377). In this study, to
investigate the Delphi panelists’ opinions about effective factors in PBE by entrepreneurs and
SMEs’ owners, we prepared an integrated questionnaire with the most important elements that we
found in literature review and also we asked the Delphi participants to add any factors that were
important from their point of view. In every Delphi round, after determining the importance of each
factor (in 5 points likert scale), also we wanted participants to rank every factor (1 means the first
important factor). In this regard, after three rounds, to some extent we reached consensus and group
stability in planists’ opinions, therefore we found countinuing the Delphi rounds would not add
new findings (von der Gracht, 2012), so Delphi procedure was stopped after three rounds.
Population and Sampling
The statistical population of experts in business environment have been considered senior executive
managers, experts that work in science and technology parks, management and economics
university professors and Ph.D. students that are working in this field. By using judgmental
sampling, 40 experts from various sectors were selected as panel members. Table 1 shows the
number of experts that contributed in each round and also their participation rates.
Table 1: Sample quantity of participants in different rounds of Delphi method
Rounds
Distributed
Questionnaires
Received
Questionnaires
Participation
Rate
First



Second



Third



Consensus Measurement
To reach the consensus among Delphi participants, at first we eliminated the factors that their
importance were rated less than 4, by using one-sample T test. Therefore we investigated consensus
and group stability by means of importance average and eht proportion of change in standard
deviation between different rounds. Also we used Kendall's coefficient of concordance (w) to
385
investigate consensus in ranking the factors. As we noted before we stopped Delphi method in third
round because we reach the acceptable consensus and group stability. It is noteworthy that the
measurement of consensus alone is not sufficient for Delphi studies, even more since it is not the
primary aim of the Delphi method. Delphi facilitators should definitely test for both stability and
the level of agreement (consensus) in order to fully exploit the data. Hence we have used group
stability instead of individual stability, and a 15% change or lower in any two distributions is
considered a stable situation (von der Gracht, 2012, p. 1533).
Table 2: The results of Delphi method in different rounds
Row
Related factors
First Round
Second Round
Third Round
mean
Std.
Deviation
mean
Std.
Deviation
mean
Std.
Deviation
1
Voice and Accountability






2
Political Stability






3
Government Effectiveness






4
Regulatory Quality






5
Rule of Law






6
Control of Corruption






7
Groups and Networks






8
Trust and solidarity






9
Collective actions and Cooperation






10
Information and Communication






11
Social Cohesion & Inclusion






12
Empowerment & Political action






13
A Conductive Economic and Institutional
Regime






14
Educated and skilled workers






15
effective innovation system






16
ICT infrastructure






17
Economic growth






18
Innovation






19
Financial Development






20
Economic integration






21
Financial Resources






22
Abilities, physical & social resources






23
Future orientation






24
uncertainty avoidance






25
Performance orientation






26
Power distance






27
gender equity






28
Assertiveness






29
Perceived economic environment






30
Perceived institutional environment






31
Perceived regulation environment






32
Perceived social and cultural norms






Total






Change between distributions
(0.51/0.72)-1=0.29
(0.49/0.51)-1=0.04
Table 2 illustrates the average importance and the standard deviation of every factor in different
Delphi method’s rounds. It also shows the eht proportion of change in standard deviation between
second and third rounds has changed only about 4%, so Delphi facilitators decided to stop the
Delphi rounds. Tables 3 and 4 respectively show the Kendall's coefficient of concordance (W) in
different rounds, and the rank of each effective variable in PBE.
Journal of Administrative Management, Education and Training (JAMET)
386
Table 3: Kendall’s Coefficient of Concordance (w) in deferent Delphi Iterations
Delphi Iteration
Kendall’s Coefficient of Concordance (w)
Chi-Square
First


Second


Third


Table 4: Rating of effective variables in PBE
Rating
Variable
Average of importance
1
Social Capital

2
Good Governance

3
Economic Opportunities

4
Resources and Abilities

5
Performance-based culture

6
Knowledge management

Results and discussion
A quick look at the list of economies at the top of the ease of doing business ranking reveals that
the best 30 performers are not those with little regulation but those with good rules that allow
efficient and transparent functioning of businesses and markets while protecting the public interest
(World Bank Group, 2016). It can represent that the consequences of regulations and the
individuals’ perceptions of all institutional context are more important than the regulations
separately. Previous researches that recognized the importance of external influence factors for an
individual’s interest to become an entrepreneur concentrated particularly on a person’s social
networks, the image of entrepreneurs in society, socio-cultural norms, and barriers to
entrepreneurship (Luthje & Franke, 2003; Schwarz et al., 2009, p. 276).Mack and Mayer (201)
argue that interacting components of entrepreneurial ecosystems which foster new firm formation
and associated regional entrepreneurial activities, may remain trapped in a specific phase of growth
or continue to evolve over time (Mack & Mayer, 2016). Therefore, in our studyaccording to social
cognition model and other discussed theories, we believe that the perception of individuals is the
cornerstone of starting a new business as an entrepreneur. Based on literature review and Delphi
participants’ opinion, the perceptions of entrepreneurs and SMEs’ owners are in relation to a wide
range of underlying social factors. Accordingly, good governance, social capital, economic
opportunities, individuals’ abilities and resources, performance-based culture and knowledge
management were determined as the most important factors in shaping an entrepreneur’s PBE in
Iran. The entrepreneurs’ PBE is an extremely important factor, that is able to impulse them to start
new businesses or develop their own businesses, and sometimes it may hamper entrepreneurs from
being productive and therefore incline them toward the view that they should take no action or at a
special stage incline them to abuse the situation. In the path to development and evolution, external
and internal (subjective) factors have mutual influence, and they are able to change each other. As
a result, in every period, so as to facilitate evolution, it is essential to identify and manage the most
important external factors. According to institutional economists, if there are suitable institutional
structures and transparent regulatory systems that reward the productive activities in society that
will result in long-term economic growth and development (Baumol, 1990; D. C. North, 2006; D.
North, 1995). The more the institutional environment of a given country is healthy, the more people
387
have better perception of environment, and therefore they will work more confident and
enthusiastic, and in return, it helps them to improve their institutional environment even better than
before. In order to accelerate and continue economic growth and development, transitional
economies like Iran need more attention to private and SMEs sectors (World Bank, 2014). As ease
of doing business reports by World Bank show, executed programs in Iran have not been that much
successful in improving its business environment until now. So we argue that large part of the
problem relates to lack of long-term and strategic programs and also little attention to social,
political and cultural infrastructures that are needed to attract the participation of most individuals.
It is clear that brain drain (that shows individuals have not a good perception of environment) is
strongly influenced by lack of attention to social, political and cultural infrastructures in a given
country, will reduce intellectual, human and social capital, and lastly it will influence institutional
structures in that country. Based on path dependency theory, where we will be in the future is a
result of what has happened now so we have to consider these elements in a right way that we wish
to be in future. Unfortunately one of the predicaments in the countries that have ample natural
resources, seem to be no motive for learning effective and productive issues, because the social
structures will reward unproductive and rent seeking behaviors(Baumol, 1990). Therefore, it is
necessary to have several simultaneous short-term and long-term programs for improving
institutional environment in order to attract the most participation of all the people, because it has
been proven that without consider social and institutional context, no plan will last for a long time.
According to Nelson and Winter’s evolutionary theory of the firm (1982), over time, the economic
analogue of natural selection operates as the market determines which firms are profitable and
which are unprofitable, and tends to winnow out the latter (Kor et al., 2007, pp. 11881189), we
accept that the business environment that is a small part of institutional and social environment of
a country, can highly determine the capabilities, rules, the path of learning and the other features of
firms and individuals, which, in turn, can lead to special kind of perception or mental model about
business and entrepreneurship in that country - people's mindset about business. So through
strategic planning, it is possible to conduct constituent elements of the business environment in the
long run, and also mental models and attitude toward business environment. Hence it is possible to
incline entrepreneurs toward productive and useful activities and making competitive advantages
for their countries. The results of this study is in accordance with Baumol’s productive and
unproductive entrepreneurship theory (1990) that says while the total supply of entrepreneurs varies
among societies, the productive contribution of the society’s entrepreneurial activities varies much
more because their allocation between productive activities such as innovation and largely
unproductive activities such as rent seeking or organized crime (Baumol, 1990, p. 893). The rule
of the game the reward structure in the economy- determines the kind of the activity that an
entrepreneur will select. In other words, an entrepreneur’s PBE will determine to be productive or
unproductive. Also based on immaturity-maturity theory, keeping people immature is built into the
very nature of the formal organization. So accordingly we can conclude that the reason of
unproductive private and SMEs sectors in a country depends on institutional, governmental, legal,
political and social systems and every factor that influences people’s perceptions and mental
models. To sum up, in order to plan effective long-term programs, it’s necessary to consider
cognitive factors and mental models of the individuals and also the consequences of decisions in
context of society, culture, policy and economy.
Journal of Administrative Management, Education and Training (JAMET)
388
Resources
Altenburg, T., & Drachenfels, C. von. (2008). Creating an enabling environment for private sector development in sub-Saharan
Africa. Vienna. Retrieved from
https://www.unido.org/fileadmin/user_media/Publications/documents/creating_an_enabling_environment_for_private_
sector_development_in_subSaharan_Africa_01.pdf
Ayyagari, M., Beck, T., & Demirguc-Kunt, A. (2007). Small and Medium Enterprises Across the Globe. Small Business
Economics, 29(4), 415434. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-006-9002-5
Badinger, H. (2005). Growth Effects of Economic Integration: Evidence from the EU Member States. Review of World
Economics, 141(1), 5078. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-005-0015-y
Balassa, B. (2013). The Theory of Economic Integration (Routledge Revivals). Routledge.
Baughn, C. C., & Neupert, K. E. (2003). cultural and national Conditions facilating Entrepreneurial Sturt-ups. Journal of
International Entrepreneurship, 1(3), 313330. http://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024166923988
Baumol, W. J. (1990). Entrepreneurship: Productive, unproductive, and destructive. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 893
921. Retrieved from http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-3808(199010)98:5<893:EPUAD>2.0.CO;2-Z
Bîrsan, M., & Gordan, C. (2007). The Business Environment Perceived by Foreign Investors in the Region Transylvania,
Romania. Transition Studies Review, 14(2), 297309. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11300-007-0143-2
Botsaris, C., & Vamvaka, V. (2016). Attitude Toward Entrepreneurship: Structure, Prediction from Behavioral Beliefs, and
Relation to Entrepreneurial Intention. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 7(2), 433460.
http://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-014-0227-2
Chen, C.-J., & Huang, J.-W. (2007). How organizational climate and structure affect knowledge managementThe social
interaction perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 27(2), 104118.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2006.11.001
Chen, D., & Dahlman, C. J. (2005). The knowledge economy, the KAM methodology and World Bank operations. World Bank
Institute Working Paper.
Chen, J., Zhu, Z., & Yuan Xie, H. (2004). Measuring intellectual capital: a new model and empirical study. Journal of Intellectual
Capital, 5(1), 195212.
Choi, J. N., & Chang, J. Y. (2009). Innovation implementation in the public sector: an integration of institutional and collective
dynamics. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 245253. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0012994
Conner, M., & Norman, P. (2005). Predicting health behaviour (second). McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
Ferreira, J. J., Raposo, M. L., Gouveia Rodrigues, R., Dinis, A., & do Paço, A. (2012). A model of entrepreneurial intention.
Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 19(3), 424440. http://doi.org/10.1108/14626001211250144
Fletcher, A. J., & Marchildon, G. P. (2014). Using the Delphi Method for Qualitative , Participatory Action Research in Health
Leadership. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13(200911), 119. Retrieved from
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Gathungu, J., & Mwangi, P. W. (2014). Entrepreneurial Intention, Culture, Gender and New Venture Creation: Critical Review.
International Journal of Business and Social Research, 4(2), 112132. Retrieved from
http://thejournalofbusiness.org/index.php/site/article/view/402
Ghanatabadi, F. (2005, September). Internationalization of small and medium-sized enterprises in Iran. Luleå University of
Technology, Department of Business Administration and Social Sciences, Division of Industrial Marketing and e-
Commerce an unpublished PhD Thesis. Luleå University of Technology.
Girma, S., & Shortland, A. (2008). The political economy of financial development. Oxford Economic Papers, 60(4), 567596.
Grindle, M. S. (2004). Good Enough Governance: Poverty Reduction and Reform in Developing Countries. Governance, 17(4),
525548. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.0952-1895.2004.00256.x
Hopp, C., & Stephan, U. (2012). The influence of socio-cultural environments on the performance of nascent entrepreneurs:
Community culture, motivation, self-efficacy and start-up success. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 24(9-
10), 917945. http://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2012.742326
Huang, Y. (2010). Political Institutions and Financial Development: An Empirical Study. World Development, 38(12), 1667
1677. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.04.001
Jiménez, A., Palmero-Cámara, C., González-Santos, M. J., González-Bernal, J., & Jiménez-Eguizábal, J. A. (2015). The impact of
educational levels on formal and informal entrepreneurship. BRQ Business Research Quarterly.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2015.02.002
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2011). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and Analytical Issues.
Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 3(02), 220246. http://doi.org/10.1017/S1876404511200046
Klein, P. G., Mahoney, J. T., McGahan, A. M., & Pitelis, C. N. (2013). Capabilities and Strategic Entrepreneurship in Public
Organizations. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 7(1), 7091. http://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1147
Kodila-Tedika, O. (2012). Governance and Intelligence: Empirical Analysis from African Data. Journal of African Development,
16(1), 8397. Retrieved from https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/id/eprint/59189
389
Kor, Y. Y., Mahoney, J. T., & Michael, S. C. (2007). Resources, capabilities and entrepreneurial perceptions*. Journal of
Management Studies, 44(7), 11871212.
Kreiser, P. M., Patel, P. C., & Fiet, J. O. (2013). The Influence of Changes in Social Capital on Firm-Founding Activities.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(3), 539568. http://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12039
Lee, J.-W., & W.Tai, S. (2010). Motivators and inhibitors of entrepreneurship and small business development in Kazakhstan.
World Journal of Enterprenuership, Management and Sustainable Development, 6, 6175.
http://doi.org/10.1108/20425961201000006
Lee, S. M., & Peterson, S. J. (2000). Culture, entrepreneurial orientation, and global competitiveness. Journal of World Business,
35(4), 401416. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-9516(00)00045-6
Luthje, C., & Franke, N. (2003). the “making” of an entrepreneur: testing a model of entrepreneurial intent among engineering
students at MIT. R and D Management, 33(2), 135147. http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9310.00288
Mack, E., & Mayer, H. (2016). The evolutionary dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Urban Studies, 53(10), 21182133.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015586547
Malhotra, Y. (2003). Measuring knowledge assets of a nation: knowledge systems for development. In Research Papers prepared
for the Invited Keynote Presentation at meeting „Knowledge Systems for Development (p. 52). Citeseer.
Maslow, A. H., Frager, R., Fadiman, J., McReynolds, C., & Cox, R. (1970). Motivation and personality (Vol. 2). Harper & Row
New York.
McGrath, R. G., MacMillan, I. C., & Scheinberg, S. (1992). Elitists, risk-takers, and rugged individualists? An exploratory
analysis of cultural differences between entrepreneurs and non-entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 7(2),
115135.
North, D. (1995). The New Institutional Economics and Development (pp. 1726).
North, D. C. (2006). Understanding the process of economic change. Academic foundation.
Nurmi, J.-E. (1991). How do adolescents see their future? A review of the development of future orientation and planning.
Developmental Review, 11(1), 159.
O’Brien, G. E. (1986). Psychology of work and unemployment. John Wiley & Sons.
OECD. (2006). Policy Framework for Investment. Retrieved from (OECD (http://stats.oecd.org/).
Peltoniemi, M., & Vuori, E. (2005). Business ecosystem as the new approach to complex adaptive business environments. In
Proceedings of eBusiness research forum (pp. 267281). Chicago.
Pourrostami, N. (2011). THE ROLE OF LEGAL (PUBLIC) AND REGULATORY INSTITUTIONS IN FINANCIAL
DEVELOPMENT-EMPHASIZING BANKING SECTOR. IRANIAN ECONOMIC RESEARCH, 16(48), 5585.
Powell, C. (2003). The Delphi technique: myths and realities. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41(4), 376382.
http://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02537.x
Power, T., & Jerjian, G. (2001). Ecosystem: Living the 12 principles of networked business. Financial Times Management.
Praag, C. M. (1997). Determinants of succesful entrepreneurship. Amsterdam: UVA. Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/11245/1.125630
Rindermann, H., Kodila-Tedika, O., & Christainsen, G. (2015). Cognitive capital, good governance, and the wealth of nations.
Intelligence, 51, 98108. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.06.002
Rizzello, S. (2000). Economic Change, Subjective Perception and Institutional Evolution. Metroeconomica, 51(2), 127150.
http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-999X.00084
Robbins, S. P. (1990). Organization Theory: Structures, Designs, And Applications, 3/e. Pearson Education India.
Robinson, P. B. P. B., Stimpson, D. V, Huefner, J. C., Hunt, H. K., D.V., S., J.C, H., & Hunt. H.K. (1991). An attitude approach
to the prediction of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 15(4), 1331.
Rocha, E. A. G. (2012). The Impact of the Business Environment on the Size of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise Sector;
Preliminary Findings from a Cross-Country Comparison. Procedia Economics and Finance, 4(Icsmed), 335349.
http://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(12)00348-6
Santos, F. J., Roomi, M. A., & Liñán, F. (2016). About Gender Differences and the Social Environment in the Development of
Entrepreneurial Intentions. Journal of Small Business Management, 54(1), 4966. http://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12129
Schwarz, E. J., Wdowiak, M. A., AlmerJarz, D. A., & Breitenecker, R. J. (2009). The effects of attitudes and perceived
environment conditions on students’ entrepreneurial intent. Education + Training, 51(4), 272291.
http://doi.org/10.1108/00400910910964566
Stel, A. Van, Storey, D. J., & Thurik, A. R. (2007). The Effect of Business Regulations on Nascent and Young Business
Entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 28, 171186. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-006-9014-1
Stephan, U., & Uhlaner, L. M. (2010). Performance-based vs socially supportive culture: A cross-national study of descriptive
norms and entrepreneurship. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(8), 13471364.
http://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2010.14
Thai, M. T. T., & Turkina, E. (2014). Macro-level determinants of formal entrepreneurship versus informal entrepreneurship.
Journal of Business Venturing, 29(4), 490510. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.07.005
Verheul, I., Wennekers, S., Audretsch, D., & Thurik, R. (2002). An eclectic theory of entrepreneurship: policies, institutions and
culture. In Entrepreneurship: Determinants and policy in a European-US comparison (pp. 1181). Springer.
http://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47556-1_2
Journal of Administrative Management, Education and Training (JAMET)
390
von der Gracht, H. A. (2012). Consensus measurement in Delphi studies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(8),
15251536. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.04.013
Wennekers, S., & Thurik, R. (1999). Linking entrepreneurship and economic growth. Small Business Economics, 13(1), 2756.
Wennekers, S., Thurik, R., van Stel, A., & Noorderhaven, N. (2007). Uncertainty avoidance and the rate of business ownership
across 21 OECD countries, 19762004. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 17(2), 133160.
World Bank. (2014). Doing Business 2015: Going Beyond Efficiency. World Bank (12th ed., Vol. 2015). Washington: The World
Bank. http://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0351-2
World Bank Group. (2016). Doing Business 2016: Measuring Regulatory Quality and Efficiency (Doing Business, 13th ed.). The
World Bank. Retrieved from http://www.doingbusiness.org
Yang, B. (2011). Does democracy foster financial development? An empirical analysis. Economics Letters, 112(3), 262265.
KHALIL SAFARI, Department of Management, Payame Noor University (PNU), P.O. BOX
19395-3697, Tehran, Iran.
Corresponding Author Email: Kh.safari@pnu.ac.ir
HABIB-ALLAH DANAI, Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Payame Noor
University (PNU), P.O. BOX 19395-3697, Tehran, Iran.
MOHAMMAD MAHMOODI MAYMAND, Associate Professor, Department of Management,
Payame Noor University (PNU), P.O. BOX 19395-3697, Tehran, Iran.
MOHAMAD MEHDI PARHIZGAR, Associate Professor, Department of Management,
Payame Noor University (PNU), P.O. BOX 19395-3697, Tehran, Iran.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Due to its ease of use and convenience, the use of internet and online purchases have become a trend among the younger generation. The increase in online shopping also affect the use of digital coupon. To date, there have not been many studies to investigate the influence of digital coupon use in Malaysia. It is the aim of this study to investigate the factors that influence the use of digital coupon among University students in Kuala Lumpur. A survey method was adopted in this study. A structured questionnaire was developed and used in the data collection. The questionnaires were distributed among students of an International University in Kuala Lumpur.A total of 392 respondents participated in this survey. The findings from the regression analysis showed that all the independent variables explained 50 percent of the variance in intention to use digital coupon. Attitude is the strongest predictor and followed by subjective norm and perceived behavioral control. All the relationships were tested significant at 99 percent significant level. Theoretically, this study lends support to the theory of planned behavior in explaining intention to use digital coupon. From the managerial perspectives, marketing managers should device necessary strategies and tactics to create adequate awareness and convey effective messages about the benefits of digital coupon to consumers so that positive attitude could be developed into actual usage of digital coupon. Thus, the resources used for this type of sales promotion will be converted into an actual increase in sales and profitability for the companies.
Article
Full-text available
Entrepreneurial ecosystems (EE) consist of interacting components, which foster new firm formation and associated regional entrepreneurial activities. Current work on EE however focuses on documenting the presence of system components, which means there is little understanding of interdependencies between EE components and their evolutionary dynamics. To address these issues, the objective of the present study is to develop an evolutionary framework of EE development that integrates important components from prior work and describes how critical elements of an entrepreneurial system interact and evolve over time. The value of this framework in understanding the evolutionary dynamics of EE will be demonstrated by profiling the EE of Phoenix, Arizona. The evolutionary perspective developed is valuable because it provides a sense of how history, culture, and the institutional setting impact EE. It also provides stakeholders with action points to help maintain or propel an EE to the next level. This is a distinct improvement over static approaches that provide a list of EE ingredients with no sense of their relative importance over time. The proposed framework may also be used in a comparative context to compare and contrast the evolutionary trajectory of EE to better understand why particular places remain trapped in a specific phase of growth or continue to evolve over time.
Article
Full-text available
This paper studies the impact of formal education on entrepreneurship rates. We propose that different levels of education not only vary between each other in terms of their impact, but also according to whether we analysis either formal or informal entrepreneurship. Our results show that tertiary education increases formal entrepreneurship as a consequence of the higher self-confidence, lower perceived risk and enhanced human capital. At the same time, tertiary education also has a negative effect on informal entrepreneurship as it increases awareness of and sensitivity to the possible negative repercussions of this kind of activities. In addition, we show that the impact of secondary education on formal entrepreneurship is positive as well, although in this case the effect on informal entrepreneurship is not significant. Even though secondary education also increases awareness of the potential negative repercussions of informal entrepreneurship, this effect is counteracted by a lack of management skills.
Conference Paper
This paper discusses the concept of business ecosystem. Business ecosystem is a relatively new concept in the field of business research, and there is still a lot of work to be done to establish it. First the subject is approached by examining a biological ecosystem, especially how biological ecosystems are defined, how they evolve and how they are classified and structured. Second, different analogies of biological ecosystem are reviewed, including industrial ecosystem, economy as an ecosystem, digital business ecosystem and social ecosystem. Third, business ecosystem concept is outlined by discussing views of main contributors and then bringing authors’ own definition out. Fourth, the emerging research field of complexity in social sciences is brought out due to authors’ attitude to consider ecosystems and business ecosystems as complex, adaptive systems. The focal complexity aspects appearing in business ecosystems are presented; they are self-organization, emergence, co-evolution and adaptation. By connecting business ecosystem concept to complexity research, it is possible to bring new insights to changing business environments.
Book
Printbegrænsninger: Der kan printes 10 sider ad gangen og max. 40 sider pr. session.
Article
The present research investigated the associations among the dimensions of behavioral beliefs, attitude toward entrepreneurship, and entrepreneurial intention. Using a structural equation modeling approach with a sample of 227 Greek tertiary education students (114 males, 113 females), support is provided that entrepreneurial outcomes, viewed as rewards, are distinguished into intrinsic (intangible/psychological/nonpecuniary) and extrinsic (tangible/physical/pecuniary). Our results show further that attitude toward entrepreneurship contains three separable components, one being instrumental or cognitive in nature, the other being experiential or affective, and the third representing opportunity costs, that is, the personal and financial sacrifices one is willing to incur for the sake of the entrepreneurial venture. Concerning intention for entrepreneurship, our findings support a two-factor structure that represents commitment to an entrepreneurial career and nascent entrepreneurship. Evidence is also found for the Fishbein and Ajzen’s expectancy-value model of attitudes: that attitude toward entrepreneurship is predicted by the expectation that entrepreneurship will be followed by a given outcome, as well as the value that the individual assigns to that outcome. Moreover, our results reveal that the intrinsic rewards of entrepreneurship are stronger predictors of entrepreneurial attitude than extrinsic rewards and that the dimensions of attitude toward entrepreneurship exert a differential impact on entrepreneurial intention, with affective attitude appearing to be more strongly related to intention than instrumental attitude.
Article
Good governance or “government effectiveness” (per the World Bank) is seen as a critical factor for the wealth of nations insofar as it shapes political and economic institutions and affects overall economic performance. The quality of governance, in turn, depends on the attributes of the people involved. In an analysis based on international data, government effectiveness was related to the cognitive human capital of the society as a whole, of the intellectual class, and of leading politicians. The importance of cognitive capital was reflected in the rate of innovation, the degree of economic freedom, and country competitiveness, all of which were found to have an impact on the level of productivity (GDP per capita) and wealth (per adult). Correlation, regression, and path analyses involving N = 98 to 201 countries showed that government effectiveness had a very strong impact on productivity and wealth (total standardized effects of β = .56–.68). Intellectual classes' cognitive competence, as indicated by scores for the top 5 percent of the population on PISA, TIMSS and PIRLS, also had a strong impact (β = .50–.54). Cross-lagged panel designs were used to establish causal directions, including backward effects from economic freedom and wealth on governance. The use of further controls showed no independent impacts on per capita wealth coming from geographical variables or natural resource rents. Finally, we discuss background factors and ways in which governance might be improved.
Article
This book is directed at industrial psychologists, human resource managers, consultants and social scientists interested in the psychological effect of employment and unemployment on people. It is an integration of research and theories about this effect. As far as employment is concerned it emphasizes that a significant number of employees have jobs which do not fully use their skills or provide personal satisfaction, and that the long term effects of such jobs include deterioration of employees' self image, personal control, intellectual functioning and social adjustment. The psychological effects are similar in kind to those experienced by people in unemployment - stress, helplessness, fatalism, and the implications for efficiency and motivation at work are serious. The book seeks to do more than give an account of factors affecting or affected by work behaviour - it considers the whole experience of employment, underemployment and unemployment and reviews the current state of our understanding of employment, leisure and retirement, as it relates to work attitudes, goals and performance. The book offers a critique of job design theories and guidance on improving work performance and job satisfaction.