See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/272337834

Identification of entrepreneurial success factors to determine the content of

entrepreneurship subjects

Article · March 2002

DOI: 10.4314/sajhe.v16i3.25228

CITATIONS READS

19 1,761

2 authors, including:

Cecile Nieuwenhuizen
University of Johannesburg
26 PUBLICATIONS   85 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

1. Nieuwenhuizen, C. and Groenewald, D., 2008. Entrepreneurs’ learning preferences: a guide for entrepreneurship education. Acta Commercii, Volume 8, pp128-144.
View project

Does not belong to a current project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Cecile Nieuwenhuizen on 13 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Identification of entrepreneurial success
factors to determine the content of
entrepreneurship subjects
C Nieuwenhuizen & J Kroon
Technikon SA & Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education
ABSTRACT
The aim of this research was to determine what
the content of entrepreneurship subjects, pro
grammes and curricula should be. The study
involved empirical research to identify the factors
that contribute to the success of small and
medium enterprises (SMEs). The information
was analysed by frequency analysis, the analysis
of relations and a factor analysis. Important
deductions were made and used as guideline
for an extensive literature study. The results of
the literature study and a focus group were used
to provide a framework for focus areas and the
content of subjects and programmes in entre
preneurship.
Currently there is limited consensus in the field of
entrepreneurship on the contents of training
courses and curricula. This article suggests that
post secondary education and training of en
trepreneurs and potential entrepreneurs should
follow a multidisciplinary, holistic and out
comes based approach that focuses on the
development of those skills and abilities identi
fied as success factors of entrepreneurs.
The problem investigated in this study is the
identification of the primary factors that con
tribute to the success of SMEs. The findings can
then be used in the identification of subject and
curricula content in order to develop a framework
for entrepreneurship training courses and quali
fications.
INTRODUCTION
T he level of participation in post secondary
education in a country is strongly related to the
level of entrepreneurial activity in that country. In
addition, the commitment of social, economic and
political institutions in a country encourages the
pursuit of entrepreneurial opportunity (Global En
trepreneurship Monitor 2000 Editor's note. Babson
web page).
S A JH E / SA T HO V O L 1 6 N O 3 2 0 02
This conclusion of the Global Entrepreneurship
Monitor study highlights the importance not only of
education to secure an entrepreneurial culture in a
country, but also the crucial role of social, economic
and political institutions.
The educational system is an excellent starting point:
changes in values are often associated with changes
in the educational system, because changes in
thinking and actions occur during development
(McClelland 1986:9).
According to Schollhammer and Kurriloff (1979:23),
there are certain important subjects regarding en
trepreneurship that can be learned. Examples of these
subjects are systematic approaches to the identifica
tion of business opportunities, risk analysis and
managerial competence. It is thus clear that from a
very early age, learners can learn the important
elements of entrepreneurship. It is also important to
keep in mind that the culture of a country regarding
achievement motivation determines the level of
economic development in the country (McClelland
1986:11).
A holistic approach is essential to foster an entrepre
neurial culture in a society. The educational system
has to be supported by economic and political
institutions to inculcate the entrepreneurial culture
in society and to ensure the facilitation and actual
establishment of enterprises. Economic policies and
the support of an entrepreneurial culture by political
institutions are essential to implement the knowledge
base and culture provided by an entrepreneurially
oriented educational system.
The purpose of this article is to suggest a framework
for the training, education and development of
potential entrepreneurs.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
A major problem currently experienced in the field of
entrepreneurship is the absence of consensus on the
157
I S S N 10 1 1 3 4 87
contents of training courses and curricula. To deter
mine what the focus of these training courses and
curricula should be, the success factors of successful
entrepreneurs must first be determined. Training
courses and curricula should then focus on the
development of these success factors.
The aims of this study are therefore to:
. identify the primary factors that contribute to the
success of small and medium enterprises
. develop guidelines for the content of entrepreneur
ship subjects and curricula.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS
The study consisted of four phases:
. The objective of the first phase was to identify
the success factors of owners of small and
medium industries in South Africa through
empirical research involving interviews, ques
tionnaires and a frequency analysis.
. During the second phase the success factors
identified in the first phase were analysed
statistically involving determination of effect
sizes and the extent of relations between vari
ables and a factor analysis.
. The third phase involved an extensive literature
study to describe each of the identified success
factors or groups of factors.
. In the fourth phase a focus group was used for
the development of guidelines for entrepreneur
ship subjects and curricula based on the results
of the empirical and literature study.
Identification of success factors
A preparatory study and empirical research were
conducted to identify the success factors of success
ful small industries in order to determine what the
focus of the educational system should be to foster an
entrepreneurial culture in the country.
The preparatory study consisted of a total of 20
interviews with senior managers, managers and
advisors of a development corporation and 8 highly
successful entrepreneurs from the same development
corporation. The aim was to identify general success
factors of successful small industries. The 49 success
factors mentioned most often were included in a
questionnaire. Questionnaires were then sent to 90
advisors, managers and owners of successful SMEs;
86 of these questionnaires were completed and
returned. On this basis, 17 possible success factors
of successful small industries were identified.
For the empirical research, a Likert type questionnaire
was compiled from the findings of the preparatory
study, including information on the 17 identified
158
success factors. Four hundred questionnaires were
issued to advisors and managers of three develop
ment corporations who had to evaluate their clients,
who are SME owners, accordingly. One hundred and
sixteen questionnaires (29%) were returned.
The questionnaires were processed and a frequency
analysis was carried out to determine the strength or
intensity of each of the identified success factors. The
combined results of the questionnaires of the pre
paratory study and empirical research were processed
and the percentages, standard deviations and
averages calculated and utilised to draw conclusions.
These results are summarised in table 1. The success
factors in this table appear in order of importance,
according to the results of the empirical research
(shaded column). The frequency analysis was used to
identify the success factors regarded as most im
portant. The identified success factors also served as a
guide for a literature study to determine the meaning
of the identified success factors in entrepreneurship
literature.
Statistical analysis of information gathered
The results of the empirical study were statistically
analysed through effect sizes and the relationship
between variables and a factor analysis.
Effect sizes and the extent of relations between
variables
Descriptive research also involves determining rela
tions between two forms of conduct. The determina
tion of relations between different success factors as
well as between success factors and other variables
was applied, as it contributes to meaningful conclu
sions and results for the study.
The effect size (indicated by w) measures the relation
between two categorical (nominal) variables that are
represented in a two way frequency table. The greater
the value of the effect size, the greater the relation.
The effect size is calculated to reach a conclusion
regarding the significance of relations.
The effect size index, w, measures the discrepancy
between proportions of populations that are grouped
together. As guidelines to evaluate the effect size,
w = 0,1 means a small effect, w = 0,3 a medium
effect and w = 0,5 a great effect. To calculate the
effect sizes Cramer's V was calculated and for this the
Chi quadrant, which compares the frequencies be
tween different categories, was used (Cohen
1977:223).
Cramer's V was calculated as follows (Cohen
1977:223):
 S A JH E / SA T HO V O L 1 6 N O 3 2 0 02

Table 1
Frequency analysis of success factors

Preparatory Empirical research

study n = 86 n = 118

Success factor Freq % HP* % Ave StdD Min Max

Willingness to take risks 34 40 15 88,8 2,043 0,517 1 3

Involvement in enterprise 67 78 42 87,9 4,302 0,700 2 5

Quality work enjoys priority 64 74 13 87,3 4,135 0,612 3 5

Knowledge and skills 46 53 17 83,7 4,03 0,671 1 5

Commitment to enterprise 57 66 35 83,1 4,161 0,691 3 5

Client service 67 78 24 82,0 3,991 0,650 2 5

Perseverance 66 77 24 78,9 4,017 0,665 3 5

Positive attitude and approach 64 74 10 75,4 3,966 0,703 2 5

Sound human relations 61 71 12 73,7 3,906 0,704 2 5

Creativity and innovation 64 74 23 70,7 3,879 0,700 2 5

Knowledge of competitors 54 63 9 69,3 3,803 0,700 2 5

Planning of business 43 50 14 58,1 3,683 0,772 2 5

Bookkeeping for own advan 65 76 22 56,9 3,620 0,809 2 5

tage

Financial knowledge 46 53 12 56,9 3,595 0,864 2 5

Mainly market focused 36 42 8 56,9 3,672 0,656 3 4

Use of experts 52 60 9 56,5 3,643 0,763 1 4

Financial management 52 60 9 55,1 3,621 0,798 3 5

Explanation of abbreviations in table:

HP: Indicated as a high priority by respondents in preparatory study
% 4 or 5: Percentage of the respondents that rated the success factor as good or excellent (4 or 5). In the case
of risk, the scale was only 1 to 3.

Cramer's V = how significant the relation is between each success

factor and the success of the business.

A strong relation is indicated by 0,5, a medium

where r = the smallest of the number of rows or relation by 0,3 and a weak relation by 0,1. The effect
columns sizes that indicate the relations between the success
factors and the success of the enterprise are illustrated
N = the number of respondents in table 2.

There is a strong relation between the success of a

The effect size was calculated as follows (Cohen
1977:223):
w = Cramer's V
The effect sizes of the relation between the success of
the enterprise and the success factors of the business
owners were calculated. This was done to determine
business and the following success factors:
. Creativity and innovation, 0,649
. Financial management, 0,525
. Financial understanding, 0,523
. Bookkeeping for own advantage, 0,479
. Involvement in the business, 0,465
. Willingness to take risks, 0,461

159
I S S N 10 1 1 3 4 87

Table 2
Relations between the success factors and the success of the enterprise

Relations between success factors and success of the enterprise

V3 Creativity and innovation 0,649

V14 Financial management 0,525

V16 Financial understanding 0,523

V2 Bookkeeping for own advantage 0,479

V1 Involvement in business 0,465

V17 Willingness to take risks 0,461

V12 Knowledge of competitors 0,451

V7 High quality work enjoys priority 0,443

V10 Planning of business 0,443

V5 Sound human relations 0,421

V15 Knowledge and skills with regard to the enterprise 0,419

V9 Mainly market focused 0,383

V8 Commitment to enterprise 0,369

V6 Positive attitude and approach 0,320

V13 The use of experts 0,318

V11 Client service 0,293

V4 Perseverance 0,276

. Knowledge of competitors, 0,451 In this study a questionnaire was used with 17

. High quality work enjoys priority, 0,443
. Planning of business, 0,443
. Sound human relations, 0,421
. Skills and knowledge with regard to the enterprise,
0,419.
The effect sizes indicated a strong relation between
the success of an enterprise and 11 of the identified
success factors. The effect size of the remaining 6
success factors indicated a medium relation with the
success of an enterprise. There were also success
factors with a weak relation with the success of an
enterprise.
Factor analysis
questions each representing a success factor to
determine what the success factors of small indus
trialists are. It must be decided whether 17 separate
success factors are measured or whether there is
perhaps a smaller number of basic dimensions that
describe these success factors.
To analyse a correlation matrix, various methods of
factor analysis can be used. The statistical software
package that was used for this research is the SAS
package. This study used the main components with
the varimax rotation method.
After the main components were used, 3 factors were
withdrawn according to the correlation between the
17 success factors. Table 3 illustrates the result after
rotation.

Factor analysis is used to simplify an extensive set of
data by reducing the number of variables and
identifying the underlying structure of the dimension
ality of the data. Factor analysis is a class of statistical
methods with the main aim of summarising a great
number of variables into a smaller set of new variables
(Bischoff 1989:90).
The first factor explains 41,52% of the total variance
of the 17 statements. The second factor explains
8,99% and the third factor 7,05%. The cumulative
percentage of the variance is an important indicator,
because it is an enumerative measure that indicates
how much of the total variance over the 3 factors is
explained by the 17 success factors. In this study the

160
 S A JH E / SA T HO V O L 1 6 N O 3 2 0 02

Table 3
Rotated factor matrix of success factors

Question Success factors Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3

16 Financial understanding 0,807

14 Financial management ,773

2 Bookkeeping for own advantage 0,770

3 Creativity and innovation 0,711

15 Knowledge and skills with regard to the 0,700

enterprise

12 Knowledge of competitors 0,607

10 Planning of enterprise 0,515 0,503

8 Commitment to enterprise 0,499 0,487

4 Perseverance 0,471 0,402

5 Sound human relations 0,815

6 Positive attitude and approach 0,762

11 Client service 0,436 0,630

7 Quality work enjoys priority 0,462 0,564

9 Mainly market focused 0,554 0,474

1 Involvement in enterprise 0,392 0,428

17 Willingness to take risks 0,757

13 Use of experts 0,619

Eigenvalue 7.0581 1.5292 1.1990

Percentage variance 41.52 8.99 7.05

Cumulative percentage variance 41.52 50.51 57.57

* Loadings of between 0,3 and 0,3 were regarded as non significant and indicated with a stop (.).

cumulative percentage of the variance is 57,57%,
which is a reasonable explanation of the total
variance.
Identification of factors
The factors that have been identified must be named.
The naming is determined by the success factors
included in a certain factor. Factor loadings of less
than 0,3 or more than 0,3 have been omitted and are
regarded as non significant. After the initial factor
analysis, 7 success factors were eliminated because
they had a loading of more than one factor. Table 4
indicates the success factors that have been elimi
nated.
After the above success factors were removed, 3
factors were identified. The loading of all the success
factors combined under factors is higher than 0,6,
pointing to a very high significance for interpretation.
This is because the classification of the success
factors is significant.
Factor 1 is ``ingenuity''. The loadings of 6 of the 17
success factors are very significant with regard to the
first factor. Table 5 illustrates the loadings for factor 1.
These success factors indicate the general knowledge
and skills of the small industrialist with regard to the
important business functions, the specific enterprise
and the industry. Creativity and innovation can be

161
I S S N 10 1 1 3 4 87

Table 4
Success factors that were removed from the final factor analysis

Question Success factor

10 Planning of enterprise

8 Commitment to enterprise

4 Perseverance

11 Client service

7 Quality work enjoys priority

9 Mainly market focused

1 Involvement in enterprise

Table 5
Success factors with significant loadings for factor 1

Question Success factor Factor loading

16 Financial understanding 0,807

14 Financial management 0,773

2 Bookkeeping for own advantage 0,770

3 Creativity and innovation 0,711

15 Knowledge and skills with regard to the enterprise 0,700

12 Knowledge of competitors 0,607

applied only if the small industrialist has knowledge
and skills regarding the enterprise and industry, and
the combination of knowledge, skills, understanding
and creativity indicates ingenuity.
Factor 2 is ``leadership''. The loading of 2 of the 17
success factors is very significant with regard to the
second factor. Table 6 illustrates the loadings for
factor 2.
A positive attitude and approach is a prerequisite for
sound human relations. It attracts positive reaction
from others and makes a person more accessible and
easier to like. An individual must accept himself or
herself before being able to build sound relationships
with others. Sound human relations and a positive
attitude and approach are the basis of leadership.
According to a focus group analysis that formed part
of the research, the combination of these success
factors involves the same conduct as leadership. A
good leader is positive, realistic, self confident,
group oriented, a team builder and well adjusted. A
leader seeks solutions, motivates people and gives
individuals responsibility as well as credit for achieve
ment.
Factor 3 is ``calculated risk taking''. The loading of 2
of the 17 success factors is very significant with
regard to the third factor. Table 7 illustrates the
loadings for factor 3.
This factor indicates that small industrialists are
prepared to take risks, but that they use experts to
evaluate and limit risk. Successful small industrialists
take calculated risks, but determine what the risk
entails by evaluating it themselves and with the help
of experts. The use of experts ensures objectivity and
calculated evaluation.

Table 6
Success factors with significant loadings for factor 2

Question Success factor Factor loading

5 Sound human relations 0,815

6 Positive attitude and approach 0,762

162

Table 7
Success factors with significant loadings for factor 3
Question Success factor
17 Willingness to take risks
13 Use of experts
Literature study to describe each of the
identified success factors or groups of factors
A thorough examination of research articles relating
to the identified success factors and results of the
factor analysis were done. Four hundred research
articles and summaries were examined and appro
priate research regarding the success factors of
successful entrepreneurs and owners of enterprises
was identified. Ninety eight articles were used for the
literature review of the success factors and containing
factors involved. The results of the research articles
were used to determine and illustrate every success
factor's relevance. As much relevant information as
possible regarding each success factor was sum
marised and used for further analysis by a focus group
to determine the content of entrepreneurship subjects
and curricula.
The use of a focus group for the development
of guidelines for entrepreneurship subjects
and curricula based on the literature study
The purpose of the focus group analysis was to:
. analyse the identified success factors and deter
mine whether they do in fact contribute to
successful entrepreneurship
. make the elements of the identified success factors
comparable with those factors identified through
other research and eliminate any overlap of terms
. use the analysis of the meaning and content of
each success factor as a guideline for the devel
opment of entrepreneurship subjects and curricula.
Because the risk of the researcher's personal philo
sophy of life influencing the results of the research is
greater in quantitative research (than in qualitative
research) (Joubert 1993:109), a focus group was
used. This ensures more objectivity in the research.
Spencer, McClelland and Spencer (1992:14) confirm
that it is a good idea to use a panel of experts when
analysing success factors.
Analysing the success factors in behavioural elements
The literature study clearly showed that one word is
often used to define a variety of behavioural forms
and concepts. The information that the literature
S A JH E / SA T HO V O L 1 6 N O 3 2 0 02
Factor loading
0,757
0,619
study provided on each success factor was analysed
to determine which meaning and behaviour was
implied by each success factor. To analyse the
meaning of the identified success factors, each
definition was divided into behavioural elements.
Composition of the focus group
The focus group consisted of four members and a
facilitator. Two of the members each have a MCom,
and the other members have a MBL and a DBA,
respectively. All four are closely involved in entrepre
neurship and retail management training and/or
research. The facilitator has a doctorate and is an
expert in the area of test and course development.
Grouping the behavioural elements
The list of success factors, together with the beha
vioural elements of each success factor, was given to
the members of the focus group prior to the meeting.
The members had to make their own conclusions
about which behavioural elements (in respect of each
success factor) belonged together. This was done as
preparation for a focus group meeting.
There were five focus group meetings of one to two
hours each. At the meetings, the grouping of the
related behavioural elements in respect of each
success factor was discussed. The similarities and
differences between the different conclusions made
by members were determined. The facilitator offered
possible reasons for differences and, under his
guidance, consensus was achieved on how the
behavioural elements should be grouped. The group
ing by the focus group of each success factor is used
as a guideline for the content of entrepreneurship
subjects and curricula.
The results in terms of the grouping of the important
success factors by the focus group are as follows:
. The focus group combined the behavioural ele
ment of sound human relations under the heading
of group orientation and team building.
. Creativity and innovation were combined under
the heading of new ways of doing things and
seeking and utilising opportunities.
. Risk was combined under the headings of don't
163
I S S N 10 1 1 3 4 87

rely on luck alone, take calculated risks, utilise
opportunities and be realistic and spread risks.
. Perseverance was combined under the headings of
urgency, patient, determined, persevering and
realistic.
. The behavioural element of a positive attitude and
approach was combined under the headings of
aptitude to learn, seek solutions, positive, realistic
and self confidence.
. The focus group combined the behavioural ele
ment of commitment under the headings of
persistence and dedication.
. The focus group combined the behavioural ele
ment of planning of business under careful plan
ning, decision making and research.
. The behavioural element of understand the en
terprise but use experts when necessary was
combined under the following headings: Self
knowledge, knowledge of the team with whom
they are working, consultation, organising and
understanding the enterprise and industry.
. The focus group combined the behavioural ele
ment of knowledge of the competitors under the
following terms: Quality, know the competitors,
competitive advantage and market share.
. The behavioural element of market focus was
combined under the following terms: Market,
needs of market, profit oriented, competitors and
strategy.
. The focus group combined the behavioural ele
ment of client service under the terms of sensitivity,
quality driven, time management and record
keeping.
. The focus group combined the behavioural ele
ment of bookkeeping for own advantage under
need satisfaction, consultation, competence and
attitude.
. Judicious management of income as a behavioural
element was combined as being economical and
realistic.
. The focus group combined the behavioural ele
ment of insight into income, profit and loss under
the following terms: Profit versus income, costs,
cash, realistic.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The success factors identified by the empirical
research and related information obtained from the
literature study and focus group analysis offers
guidelines for the content of entrepreneurship pro
grammes and curricula.
The empirical research identified important success
factors of successful entrepreneurs that should be
developed in potential entrepreneurs.
The factors identified by the factor analysis provide a
more comprehensive and broader view of the content
need of entrepreneurship programmes.
The focus group analysis points to guidelines on the
detail that should be included in the subjects.
The primary success factors that contribute to the
success of small and medium enterprises have been
identified and are similar to the characteristics of
individuals with a high need for achievement, as
identified by McClelland in his studies. These success
factors should be addressed in the educational system
through the development of adequate training,
development and educational models to establish an
entrepreneurial culture.
Post secondary education and training of entrepre
neurs and potential entrepreneurs should follow a
multidisciplinary and holistic approach that focuses
on the development of those skills and abilities that
were identified as success factors of entrepreneurs.

REFERENCES

Amabile, T M 1996. Unlimited genius. Success 43(7):36 37.

Appiah Adu, K 1997. Market orientation and performance: do the findings established in large firms hold in the
small business sector? Journal of Euromarketing 6(3):1 26.
Barrier, M 1995. The changing face of leadership. Nations Business 83(1):41 42.
Barrier, M 1996. Improving worker performance. Nations Business 84(9):28 31.
Becker, T M 1974. Human relations consulting and smaller enterprises. Journal of Small Business Management
12(1):27 31.
Bhide, A 1996. The questions every entrepreneur must answer. Harvard Business Review:120 130, Nov Dec.
Bird, B J 1989. Entrepreneurial behavior. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman and Company.
Bischoff, C A 1989. Consumer purchasing behaviour in the advanced mechanized irrigation industry a factor
analysis. Pretoria: University of South Africa. (Dissertation M Comm).
Botha, D E 1996a. Entrepreneurship quality: a comprehensive fuzzy set approach Part I. Management Dynamics:
Contemporary Research 5(1):1 14.
Botha, D E 1996b. Entrepreneurship quality: a comprehensive fuzzy set approach Part II. Management
Dynamics: Contemporary Research 5(2):42 56.
Brockhaus, R H 1980b. Risk taking propensity of entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Journal 23:509 520.

164
 S A JH E / SA T HO V O L 1 6 N O 3 2 0 02

Brockhaus, R H 1982. The psychology of the entrepreneur, in Kent, C A, Sexton, D L & Vesper, K H (eds)
Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Budman, M 1997. Do universities stifle entrepreneurship? Across the Board 34(7):32 38.
Buttner, E H 1997. Women's organizational exodus to entrepreneurship: Self reported motivations and correlates
with success. Journal of Small Business Management 35(1):34 46.
Bygrave, D B 1993. Theory building in the entrepreneurship paradigm. Journal of Business Venturing 8:255 280.
Chandler, G N & Jansen, E 1992. The founder's self assessed competence and venture performance. Journal of
Business Venturing 7:223 236.
Clements, N 1990. The people business. Leadership SA 9(6):81 88.
Coccia, S M 1997. Using Internet to level the playing field. Medical Marketing and Media 32(1):30 36.
Coetsee, L D 1992. Psigologiese eienskappe van entrepreneurs, in Kroon, J & Moolman, P L (reds)
Entrepreneurskap. Potchefstroom: Sentrale Publikasies.
Cohen, J 1977. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Revised ed. New York: Academic Press.
Colvin, G 1998. What money makes you do. Fortune 138(4):79 80.
Cook, T D, Cooper, H, Cordray, D S, Hartmann, H, Hedges, L V, Light, R J, Louis, T A & Mosteller, F 1992. Meta
analysis for explanation. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
Cox, C & Jennings, R 1995. The foundations of success: the development and characteristics of British
entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs. Leadership and Organization Development Journal 16(7):4 9.
Crous, M J, Nortje, J D & Van der Merwe, R B 1995. 'n Profiel van suksesvolle kleinsake entrepreneurs in die
Republiek van Suid Afrika: 'n verkenningstudie. South African Journal for Entrepreneurship and Small
Business November:52 62.
David, P 1995. The pizzazz factor: American business. Economist 336(7932):SS14 SS17.
Eggers, J H & Leahy, K T 1995. Entrepreneurial leadership. Business Quarterly 59(4):71 76.
Gallagher, R 1998. Service quality in a growth business. Business Journal Serving Southern Tier 12(5):6SB.
Gibb, A A 1997. Small firms' training and competitiveness: building upon the small business as a learning
organisation. International Small Business Journal 15(3):13 29.
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2000. Editor's note. Available at
www.babson.edu/press/GEM2000 findings.html.
Glynn, M A 1996. Innovative genius: a framework for relating individual and organizational intelligences to
innovation. Academy of Management Review 21(4):1081 1111.
Graham, J R 1998. Fifteen ways to keep your business booming. Agency Sales Magazine 28(2):40 43.
Hailey, L 1997. Client service: strategy for success. Australian Accountant 67(2):45 46.
Herron, L & Robinson, R B Jr 1993. A structural model of the effects of entrepreneurial characteristics on venture
performance. Journal of Business Venturing 8:281 294.
Joubert, S J 1994. Kreatief begaafde studente se belewing van universiteitskultuur: 'n dubbelgevalstudie.
Johannesburg: Randse Afrikaanse Universiteit. (Tesis DEd).
Kroon, J (ed) 1998. Entrepreneurship: start your own business. Pretoria: Kagiso.
Luk, T K 1996. Success in Hong Kong: factors self reported by successful small business owners. Journal of Small
Business Management 34(3):68.
McClelland, D C 1986. Characteristics of successful entrepreneurs. Journal of Creative Behavior 21(3):219 233.
Osborne, R L 1995. The essence of entrepreneurial success. Management Decision 33(7):4 9.
Palich, L E & Bagby, D R 1995. Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk taking: challenging
conventional wisdom. Journal of Business Venturing 10(6):425 438.
Pelham, A M 1997. Mediating the influences on the relationship between market orientation and profitability in
small industrial firms. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 5(3):55 76.
Pelham, A M & Wilson, D T 1996. A longitudinal study of the impact of market structure, firm structure, strategy,
and market orientation culture on dimensions of small firm performance. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science 24(1):27 43.
Pendley, C 1995. In Kinni, T B Leadership up close. Tapping the Network Journal. 5(3):2 4.
Ratnatunga, J & Romano, C 1997. A ``Citation Classics'' analysis of articles in contemporary small enterprise
research. Journal of Business Venturing 12:197 212.
Ray, D M 1994. The role of risk taking in Singapore. Journal of Business Venturing 9:157 177.
Reuber, B & Fischer, E 1998. Small successes. CA Magazine 131(1):36 37.
Reynolds, P D, Hay, M & Camp, S M 1999. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 1999 Executive Report. Babson
College, Kauffman Center, London Business School.
SAS for Windows, release 6.12 1996. Cary, N.C.: SAS Institute.
SAS Procedure Guide, release 6.03 1988. Cary, N.C.: SAS Institute.
SAS User's Guide: Basics, version 5 1985. Cary, N.C.: SAS Institute.
SAS/STAT User's Guide, release 6.03 1988. Cary, N.C.: SAS Institute.
Sashittal, H C & Tankersley, C 1997. The strategic market planning implementation interface in small and
midsized industrial firms: an exploratory study. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 5(3):77 92.

165
 I S S N 10 1 1 3 4 87

Schein, E H 1977. Career anchors and career paths: a panel study of management school graduates, in Van
Manne, J, (ed) Organizational careers: some new perspectives. New York: Wiley.
Schuler, R S 1997. The spirit of entrepreneurship, in Budman, M (ed) Do universities stifle entrepreneurship?
Across the Board 34(7):32 38.
Schumpeter, J A 1934. The theory of economic development. Translated by R Opic. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press.
Schuler, R S 1997. The spirit of entrepreneurship, in Budman, M Do universities stifle entrepreneurship? Across
the Board 34(7):32 38.
Shaw, D 1996. Creativity and innovation. Business Quarterly 61(1):48 49, Autumn.
Simon, H 1996. The secrets of the truly successful. Director 50(3):62 68.
Spencer, L M, McClelland, D C & Spencer, S M 1992. Competency assessment methods. Boston: Hay McBer
Research Press.
STATISTICA for Windows, release 5.1 1996. Tulsa: StaSoft Inc.
Teoh, H Y & Foo, S L 1997. Moderating effects of tolerance for ambiguity and risk taking propensity on the role
conflict perceived performance relationship: evidence from Singaporean entrepreneurs. Journal of Business
Venturing 12(1):67 81.
Zeelie, J 1998. Self confidence and a positive attitude, in Nieuwenhuizen, C (ed) Entrepreneurial skills. Juta & Co,
Ltd: Kenwyn.

166

View publication stats