Content Analysis of the Elements of Isenberg’s Model of an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem in the context of Agricultural Higher Education System

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Agricultural Extension & Education, Faculty of Agricultural Economics and Development, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran

2 Department of Entrepreneurship and Rural Development, Faculty of Agricultural, Ilam University, Ilam, Iran.

Abstract

The present research was conducted with the purpose of content analysis of the elements of Isenberg’s model of an entrepreneurial ecosystem in the context of agricultural higher education system. This study was led with an inductive approach, using a qualitative content analysis method. This study with using purposive sampling, startup activists were analyzed in two sections of private and public sector. The MAXQDA12 software was used to manage and analyze data. First, the semantic units were extracted from the interview transcripts. Then these units were categorized according to their common themes. And finally, based on their correlations, the categories were put into seperate classifications called “themes”. According to the findings, the subcomponent of “alignment of universities with the ecosystem” from the component of human capital, the subcomponent of “access to various financial resources” from the component of financial capital, the subcomponent of “market access” from the component of market, the subcomponents of “entrepreneurial attitude” and “entrepreneurship culture” from the component of culture, the subcomponent of “providing infrastructure” from the component of support, and the subcomponent of “legislation” from the component of policy were found to be of the highest level of importance. Moreover, the components of policy and human capital were found to have the first and second priorities respectively, followed by the components of culture, support, market and financial resources which came after considering the level of importance. In the other words, governments, through legislation, and universities, through educational capacities, have the main roles in the development of ecosystem and consequently, the development of the country's entrepreneurship.

Keywords


Extended Abstract

Objectives

        In recent years, universities are increasingly required to prioritize a third mission, namely entrepreneurship, along with their traditional missions of education and research (Compagnucci & Spigarelli, 2020). Adopting an approach emphasizing entrepreneurial ecosystems by universities can considerably contribute to this mission (Toledano & Urbano, 2008) as universities are the second most important factor in entrepreneurial ecosystems, behind entrepreneurs. Consequently, much of the research has been focused on universities as the hub in such ecosystems (Schaeffer & Matt, 2016). Campanella et al. (2013) highlight the essential role of universities in producing entrepreneurs as university graduates have a greater ability and broader insights to become entrepreneurs. Given this significance, Mack and Mayer (2016) state that the ability to foster an entrepreneurial ecosystem is a crucial requirement for universities.

Daniel Isenberg, a professor at Babson College, proposed a comprehensive model for studying entrepreneurial ecosystems. Isenberg’s entrepreneurial ecosystem model is most popular among policymakers (Stam & Spigel, 2016) as indicated by the fact that this model is more commonly cited compared to other similar models (Maleci, 2018). Moreover, the Isenberg’s model is the base model for studying the concept of ecosystems, which comprises hundreds of elements that can be categorized into the six main areas of policy, culture, human capital, support, market and financial capital. The present research was conducted with the purpose of content analysis of the elements of Isenberg’s model of an entrepreneurial ecosystem in the context of agricultural higher education system.

 

Method

This study was led with an inductive approach, using a qualitative content analysis method. This study with using purposive sampling, startup activists were analyzed in two sections of private and public sector. The MAXQDA12 software was used to manage and analyze data. First, the semantic units were extracted from the interview transcripts. Then these units were categorized according to their common themes. And finally, based on their correlations, the categories were put into separate classifications called “themes”.

 

Results

 According to the findings, the subcomponent of “alignment of universities with the ecosystem” from the component of human capital, the subcomponent of “access to various financial resources” from the component of financial capital, the subcomponent of “market access” from the component of market, the subcomponents of “entrepreneurial attitude” and “entrepreneurship culture” from the component of culture, the subcomponent of “providing infrastructure” from the component of support, and the subcomponent of “legislation” from the component of policy were found to be of the highest level of importance. Moreover, the components of policy Although entrepreneurial ecosystems have been gaining popularity, the concept of the entrepreneurial ecosystem still lacks a clear definition and human capital were found to have the first and second priorities respectively, followed by the components of culture, support, market and financial resources which came after considering the level of importance.

 

Discussion

Entrepreneurship has become the driving force behind the socio-economic development of any nation. Creating an effective entrepreneurial ecosystem is considered to be a regional economic development strategy, which focuses on creating supportive environments that promote sustainable startups. So, building a dynamic and effective entrepreneurial ecosystem has received great attention from many national leaders. Hence, many nascent ecosystems worldwide need a theoretical framework for developing their communities to progress toward a successful and sustainable ecosystem.

Iranian universities possess great human capital for success in entrepreneurship and fostering start-ups. The large number of students and graduates as well as easy and fast access to new technologies have resulted in suitable levels of technical knowledge. However, Iran does not have a good global standing in terms of entrepreneurship, risk-taking by young people, and their confidence for starting businesses. Also, despite the attractiveness of this field for university students and graduates, they are not equipped with adequate management and marketing knowledge and do not possess the necessary teamwork mentality. Growth in entrepreneurship requires the availability of cultural and social factors, as well as collaboration between education, administrative, and financial systems. The economic, cultural, social, and legal factors associated with entrepreneurship should be concurrently considered during the development of policies aimed at expanding entrepreneurship. In other words, expansion of entrepreneurship requires a network of elements, which has been termed the entrepreneurial ecosystem by Isenberg.

According to the results, governments, through legislation, and universities, through educational capacities, have the main roles in the development of ecosystem and consequently, the development of the country's entrepreneurship.

Ahookhosh, P. & Alibeigi, A.H. (2017). The factors influencing on educational burnout in students of agriculture and natural resources field in Razi University. Journal of Agricultural Education Administration Research, 40, 44-55. (In Persian) 
Aliabadi, V., Movahedi, R. & Papzan, A. (2018). Measure the relative efficiency of the entrepreneurial ecosystem of Agricultural Extension and Education Faculty with the knowledge generation approach of entrepreneurs (Application of Gray Relationship Analysis). Journal of Agricultural Education Administration Research, 44, 27-40. (In Persian) 
Abedi, B., Bradaran, M., Khosravi Pour, B., Yaghobi, J. & Yazdanpanah, M. (2012). Identification the Barriers to Establishing an Entrapreneurial University of Agriculture and Natural Resources Using Basic Theory.  Agricultural Extention and Education Research, 10(1), 41-52. (In Persian)
Abdullah Zadeh, Gh., Sharifzadeh, A., Arabioun, A. & Talaee, M. (2012). Identify and Prioritize the Topics and Content of Entrepreneurship Training Courses Based on Business Functions. Journal of Higher Education, 5(18), 113-89. (In Persian)
Azizi, M., Shafizadeh, E. & Akbarzadeh, N. (2013). Identification of Entrepreneurial Competencies Required by University Administrators. Entrepreneurship Development, 6(2), 27-54. (In Persian)  
Bengtsson, M. (2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlusOpen, 2, 8-14.
Bizhani, M., Fallah Haghighi, N., Karami, Gh., Asgari Ghods, M. & Zand, M. (2015). Investigation of Entrepreneurial Psychological Characteristics and Factors Promoting and Preventing Entrepreneurship in Agricultural Colleges (Case Study: Units of District 5 of Azadeh Islamic University). Journal of Agricultural Extension and Education Research, 29, 79-94. (In Persian)
Brown, R. & Mason, C. (2017). Looking inside the spiky bits: a critical review and conceptualisation of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Small Bus Econ, 49, 11–30.
Davari, A., Sefiedbari, L. & Baghersad, V. (2017). The factors of the Iranian entrepreneurship ecosystem are based on the Eisenberg model. Entrepreneurship Development, 10(1), 101-120. (In Persian)
Dickson, P. H., Solomon, G. T. & Weaver, K. M. (2008). Entrepreneurial selection and success: does education matter?. Journal of small business and enterprise development, 15(2), 239-258.
Erlingsson, C. & Brysiewicz, P. (2017). A hands-on guide to doing content analysis. African Journal of Emergency Medicine, 7(3), 93-99.
Feld, B. (2012). Startup communities: building an entrepreneurial ecosystem in your city. Hoboken: Wiley.
Forfas, F. (2009). Entrepreneurial Ecosystem: South West Ireland, rethinking entrepreneurship. Baseline Data and Analysis. South West Ireland. Dublin. 26. Available at: www.forfas.ie.
Fridlund, B. & Hildingh, C. (2000). Health and qualitative analysis methods. In Fridlund, B. & Hildingh, C. (Eds.). Qualitative research, methods in the service of health: Studentlitteratur.
Graneheim, U. H. & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse education today, 24(2), 105-112.
Hadizadeh , J., Saghafi , M. & Fathi , A. (2013). Education and Entrepreneurship Development. National Conference on Entrepreneurship (knowledge-based industry), Babolsar, Mazandaran University, May-May. (In Persian)
Hejazi, Y., Hashemi, S. M., and Malek Mohammadi, E. (2008). Iranian agricultural graduates and agri-business ventures. American Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Science, 4(3), 311-317.
Isenberg, D. (2010). How to Start an Entrepreneurial Revolution, Harvard Business Review.
Isenberg, D. (2011). The entrepreneurship ecosystem strategy as a new paradigm for economic policy: principles for cultivating entrepreneurship. Presentation at the Institute of International and European Affairs, May 12, 2011, Dublin Ireland. Available on line at http://entrepreneurialrevolution.com/.1-32
Kantis, H. D. & Federico, J. S. (2012). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in Latin America: the role of policies. In International research and policy roundtable (Kauffman Foundation). Liverpool: UK.  
Krippendorff, K. (2012). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage.
Lee, S. M., and Peterson, S. J. (2000). Culture, entrepreneurial orientation, and global competitiveness. Journal of world business, 35(4), 401-416.
Marjaei, S.H. & Poorasati, M. (2016). Application of University Entrepreneurship in Iranian Universities as a Problem. Iranian Journal of Social Problems, 7(2), 251-268. (In Persian)
Martin, R. & Sunley, P. (2003). Deconstructing clusters: chaotic concept or policy panacea?. Journal of Economic Geography, 3(1), 5–35.
Mason, C. & Brown, R. (2014). Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Growth Oriented Entrepreneurship. Final Report to OECD, Paris, 30(1), 77-102.
Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and Prey: A New Ecology of Competition. Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 75-86.
Morris, M. H., Kuratko, D. F. & Cornwall, J. R. (2013). Entrepreneurship programs and the modern university. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Naderi, N.,  Yousefi, Z. & Rezaei, B. (2016). Identifying Strategies to Overcome Barriers to Starting a New Farming Business with a Phenomenological Approach. Journal of Technology Development, 4(2), 127-150. (In Persian)
Napier, G. & Hansen, C. (2011). Ecosystems for Young Scaleable Firms, FORA Group.
Polit, D. F. & Beck, C. T. (2004). Nursing research: Principles and methods. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Richards, L. & Morse, J. M. (2012). Readme first for a user's guide to qualitative methods. Sage.
Regele, M.D. & Neck, H.M. (2012). Entrepreneurship education sub-ecosystem in the United States: opportunities to increase entrepreneurial activity. Babson College, USASBE, 52-69.
Sharifzadeh, M. SH. & Abdollahzadeh, Gh. (2015). Components of Entrepreneurial Education Development in Higher Agricultural Education System. Journal of Agricultural Education Administration Research, 32, 96-112. (In Persian)
Suresh, J. & Ramraj, R. (2012). Entrepreneurial Ecosystem: Case Study on the Influence of Environmental Factors on Entrepreneurial Success.
Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Regional Policy: A Sympathetic Critique. European Planning Studies, 1759–1769.
Stam, E., & Spigel, B. (2016). Entrepreneurial Ecosystems. . In R. Blackburn, D. De Clercq, J. Heinonen, & Z. Wang (Eds.). Handbook for Entrepreneurship and Small Business. London, UK: Sage.
Toledano, N. & Urbano, D. (2008). Promoting entrepreneurial mindsets at universities: a case study in the South of Spain. European Journal of International Management, 2(4), 382-399.