2 Zijmr Vol10 Issue 2 Feb 2020 PDF

ZENITH International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research ____________ISSN 2231-5780
Vol.10 (2), February (2020), 5-15

Online available at zenithresearch.org.in
EXPLORING THE FACTORS AFFECTING PERFORMANCE OF

WOMEN ENTREPRENEURS: A STUDY WITH REFERENCE TO MSME
SECTOR IN RAJASTHAN
(I) SHRUTI SHASTRI

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR,
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS, BANASTHALI VIDYAPITH, RAJASTHAN.
shastrishruti5@gmail.com.
(II) SWATI SHASTRI

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
Swatishastri21@gmail.com.
(III) ABHISHEK PAREEK

CEO OF ATAL INCUBATION CENTRE, BANASTHALI VIDYAPITH, RAJASTHAN.
Abhishek.pareek@banasthali.in.
(IV) RIDHI SUDAN SHARMA

RESEARCH ASSISTANT,
ridhisharma139@gmail.com.
ABSTRACT
Women in small and medium-sized enterprises are becoming increasingly important not only for
economic growth but also for social development of nations. Unbiased and correct performance
evaluation is vital to grasp women entrepreneurs business success and failure. The purpose of the
present study is to sought the factors affecting performance of women entrepreneurs running
small businesses in Rajasthan.Towards this objective a structured questionnaire was
administered to 248 women entrepreneurs selected from six districts of Rajasthan.The study has
used logistic regression to ascertain the performance of women entrepreneurs and found
significant role of family support and association with a business network. The study therefore
recommends to promote the formal business networks for women that are likely to improve their
business performance.
KEYWORDS: Business Networks,Business Performance,Family Support,Women
Entrepreneurship.
5
Vol.10 (2), February (2020)
INTRODUCTION
The word entrepreneurship portrays an image of innovation, change, risk taking, opportunity
recognition and driving force of economic growth. It is comparatively a new concept in
developing economies. Fundamentally, it is a survival instinct induced by harsh economic
conditions, high unemployment and political or social changes.It has been a male-dominated
phenomenon from early ages however time has changed the ball game and brought women as
today’s most enduring and inspirational entrepreneurs. Remarked by Sakiko Fukuda- Parr,
director of the UN Development Program’s Human Development Report ‘the growing economic
power and influence of women-owned businesses are changing the shape of the global
economy’.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of Indian council for Social Science Research,
New Delhi for providing financial assistance for conducting the study.
Women in small and medium-sized enterprises are becoming increasingly important not only for
economic growth but also for social development of nations. A predilection to do something
positive is an elemental quality of an entrepreneurial women, who is capable of contributing
values in both family and social life. Women entrepreneurial activities are not only a means of
economic survival, but they also have positive social repurcussions for the women themselves
and their social environment (UNIDO 2001). Their development is a vehicle for solving social
problems.Hence, the health of women entrepreneurs is vital for an all-inclusive economic growth
and future solidity of an economy. Due to their contribution in economic development and
unemployment reduction women entrepreniershiphas captivated attention of researchers and
policy makers in many countries.
Womenentrepreneurs in patriarchal societies like that of India go through cultural biasness and
unfair valuation of their businesses which upset their efforts, morals and will for continuation
and growth. Unbiased and correct performance evaluation is vital to grasp women entrepreneurs
business success and failure. Without appropriate means of evaluationfor performance, theory
construction is not possible , and it becomes strenuous toprescribe helpful directions and
suitable policies before women entrepreneurs for improvement of their performances and
growth.
LITERATURE REVIEW
BUSINESS PERFORMANCE
In entrepreneurship literature success , self-employment has no unique definition but mostly
measures used have included employment created, profits, turnover, or creation of financial
assets . Some researchers have attempted to construct a multi-variable measures of success.
Sebora et al. (2009) measure success in terms of growth rate, sales volume, business stability,
customer acceptance, and overall satisfaction of the entrepreneur.Reid and Smith (2000) used
employment growth, rate of return, and productivity as success measures.VanPraag (2003)
states that success in self-employment has no unique definition, and therefore has been
measured differently in business, psychology, and sociology. McCartan-Quinn and Carson
(2003) state that although there is no consensus for the definition of performance, measures
used have included employment created, profits, turnover, or creation of financial assets. Basu
(1998), for instance, measures entrepreneur performance as the annual rate of growth of the
6
business in terms of sales turnover since startup, while Fu et al. (2002) use profits. Some, such
as Kessler (2007), let firms self-identify themselves as successful or not successful. An
interesting approach to measure success by Santos-Requejo and Gonzalez-Benito (2000) is to
define a firm as successful if the firm surpasses the median operating profit margin of its four
digit industry sector. Because one single measure of success is often not apparent, many
authors define multiple measures, andperform separate analyses using each of the measures.
Bruderl and Preisendorfer (1998) separately use three different measures of success: survival,
employment growth, and sales growth. McKelvie and Wiklund (2010), in arguing that the
focus on firm growth should be on growth mode rather than growth rate, perform an extensive
review of the literature of the various components of the firm growth literature, including what
they define as ‘‘Growth as an Outcome.’’ In their review, they conclude that a major hurdle
that needs to be overcome is to determine the appropriate growth indicator to apply.
Researchers have attempted to devise multi-variable measures of success. Entrepreneurship
researchers, however, struggle a lot in assessing adequately business success and failure
(Chakravarthy, 1986). Reliable data areusually difficult to obtain, and the question of
comparability is an persistent problem (Kunkel and Hofer, 1991). Moreover, there is a lack of
information and guidance on performance measurement in the field of entrepreneurship (Brush
and Vanderwerf, 1992; Chandler and Jansen, 1992). Clash of opinions among researchers on the
definition and elucidation about goals of entrepreneurship also generate wide variations in the
definitions and variables used to measure success and failures of business.
FACTORS INFLUENCING BUSINESS PERFORMANCE

A large amount of research has been conducted on determining what leads to successful
entrepreneurship, and the characteristics of the successful entrepreneur (Blanchflower and
Oswald 1998; Evans and Leighton 1989).The Classical economist Jean-Baptiste Say (1803;
1971) states that success in entrepreneurship requires qualities such as "judgement, perseverance
and a knowledge of the world as well as of business" (1803; 1971). Furthermore, success
requires knowledge of the industry and the occupation gathered through experience. But an
entrepreneur may also fail "without any fault of his own". This chance of failure depends on
good luck and general business conditions. The successful entrepreneur as defined by the Neo-
classical economist Alfred Marshall (1890; 1930) has command over general abilities,
specialized abilities, capital and good fortune. General ability depends on family background,
education and talent. Specialized ability involves vast knowledge of a specific trade as well as of
leadership qualities. Additionally, a businessman with own capital surely has an advantage in
running a business. Finally, good fortune is also important for the Marshallian entrepreneur. The
function of Joseph Schumpeter 's (1911; 1934) entrepreneur is to innovate, and firms who cease
to innovate will not survive. Successful innovations require leadership. Success in entre
preneurship requires strong and scarce motivations to innovate, prior to the start of an
entrepreneurial endeavor. Psychological factors are much more important than human human
capital factors, according to Schumpeter.His view thereby almost completely contradicts the
classical views of Say and Marshall. Success as a Knightian entrepreneur requires "the power of
effective control" (1921; 1971) and intellectual capacity. Furthermore, it requires self-confidence
and a disposition on one’s opinion. A successful entrepreneur should also have superior
managerial ability and belief in one’s good luck.
Contemporary empirical knowledge is different from the classical empirical knowledge base
about the person-specific determinants of small business success, several hypotheses result
concerning person-oriented drivers of entrepreneurial success:
7
I. Relevant previous experience (in self-employ ment, the same industry or occupation)
affects success as a business founder (Reuber and Fischer, 1999; Briiderl et al., 1998;
Luk, 1996; Cooper et al., 1994).
II. The younger the business founder is, the better his performance will be, given the level
of relevant experience (Sapienza and Grimm, 1997; Van Praag, 1996).
III. The more own capital is available, the more successful will the small business owner be
(Bruderl et al., 1998; Cooper et al., 1994).
IV. Small business owners that have been pulled into the job, rather than pushed, have
higher chances to be successful. In other words, a positive motivation at the start affects
performance positively, whereas individuals who consider self-employement as their last
resort will be less successful(Van Praag, 1996; Van Praag and Cramer,2001).
V. Higher educated business founder’s perform better (Schiller and Crewson, 1997)
Pirolo and Presutti (2010) argue that social networks are an important determinant of startup
success and that the impact depends upon the position of the startup in the entrepreneur life
cycle. Besser and Miller (2011) examine business networks and find that the characteristics of
a business network matters, particularly the degree of trust.
Sociological theories argue that social structures (workplace, family, and organized social life)
affect women's access to entrepreneurial opportunities and may influence performance
(Aldrich 1989). Occupational segregation, underrepresentation in upper level management
positions, and expectations about family roles may restrict women to certain industrial sectors,
as well as affect motivations and goals for their business ventures (Aldrich 1989).Gupta(2018)
found that the personal, environmental factors and government support affect positively and
significantly to the success of women-owned SMEs in UAE.
Watkins and Watkins (1984) compared 49 female-owned and 43 male-owned businesses in
the U.K. They found that female entreprenuers were much less likely to have had relevant prior
training and experience, which led them to start up businesses in areas and at times that were
less favorable compared to the typical male start up.
Typically business performance is measured in economic or financial terms (Brush and
VanderWerf, 1991). However, there is empirical evidence that suggests that women owned
business earn less money (Hisrich and Brush, 1987; Brush, 1990) and often do not grow as
rapidly as male owned businesses (Kalleberg and Leicht, 1991). Fischer (1992) and Rosa et al.
(1996) for surveys - suggest that women entrepreneurs underperform relative to men as
measured by conventional economic performance measures such as profitability and growth in
sales, value added and Sexton (1989) notes that growth is a choice; it is likely that many
women business owners choose not to grow their businesses, instead pursuing other goals.
Hence the assessment of business performance for women owned businesses should include
not only financial measures, but should incorporate other measures such as employee
satisfaction, social contributions, goal achievement, and effectiveness (Brush,1992). Many
researches shows that Gender has always been a big issue in the entrepreneurial world. Peter
Rosa, Sara Carter and Daphne Hamilton(1996) suggest that the relationship between gender and
small business performance is complex, but that gender still appears to be a significant
determinant even after other key factors are controlled.
Studies about performance of women entrepreneurs are insufficient (Brush 1992), with the
majority of research focused on being comparative among groups of women and men.The intent
8
of this study is to inquire about the factors affecting the performance of women entrepreneurs
working in MSME sectorin Rajasthan.
METHODS
Towards this objective the study has employed a cross-sectional survey design treatingwomen
entrepreneurs as the unit of study. For assembling information, a structured questionnaire was
developed.The questionnaire included questions pertaining to demographic characteristics such
as age, marital status, level of education, work experience, number of family members, number
of children, youngest child age, prior training , help at home etc. and business related
information such as the age of business, number of full time employees, line of business,
turnoveretc.(iii) Challenges faced by women entrepreneurs.
Selection of entrepreneurswas based on the criterion of firm been owned and managed by
women who take their business related decisions independently. The study has used snow ball
sampling – an approach commonly used in studies on women entreprenures (Nchimbi, 2002;
Isagaetal.,2015). The data were acquired by face-to-face meeting with entrepreneurs selected
from the industrial areas of Jaipur, Kota, Ajmer,Bhilwara,Udaipurand Jodhpur districts of
Rajasthan. Initially, 400 potential respondents were contacted for the survey, out of which 350
agreed to be the part of it . A total of 347 valid and complete responses have been used for the
final study with the response rate of around 99 percent.
Responses from all 347 questionnaires were entered into the computer using SPSS software.
Thereafter, descriptive analysis and logistic regression wereexecuted.Logistic regression was
used to predict variables which affect the performance of women entrepreneurs of MSME sector
in Rajasthan. It is often chosen if dependent variable is categorical and predictor variables are a
mix of continuous and categorical variable.
The respondents were asked to indicate the success of their business in terms of increase in
turnover during the last three years.The independent variables taken are
qualification,maritalstatus,help at home,initial capital invested,age of business,no.of permanent
workers, being part of business network,lack of business management skills and lack of self
confidence.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS
Table I reports personal and business related characteristics of selected women entrepreneurs. In
terms of age over half of the respondents (54.75) were between 31 to 40 years, i.e., they were in
their middle age . This supports the argument that people between the age of 25 and 45 are more
likely to engage in entrepreneurial activity(Reynolds et al., 2002). It was found that 91.6 per
cent of the respondents were married. In respect of educational background, 47.3 percent of the
respondents had completed post graduation . The upshot ofrespondents’ family size discloses
that the majority of the respondents(approximately 76%) had 1 to 2 children and 52.7 % live in
family of 4-5 members. This stipulates that most of the female entrepreneurs had caring roles
and confront dual responsibilities of family and business activities. However, 82.5% of women
entrepreneur were having help at home.
9
Table I :Sample Characteristics of Women Entrepreneurs in MSMEs Sector in Rajasthan

Personal Profile Response No.of (%)
Respondents
Age of the Entrepreneur Under 20 1 0.3

20-30 39 11.3
31-40 180 51.8
41-50 105 30.3
51-60 18 5.3
Over 60 years 4 1.2
Education Never attended school 1 0.3

Primary school 12 3.5
Secondary school 15 4.3
Higher secondary 27 7.8
Graduation 128 36.9
Post Graduation 164 47.3
Marital Status Unmarried 29 8.4

Married 318 91.6
Family Structure Nuclear 191 55

Joint 156 45
Number of Family Members 0-3 44 12.7

4-5 183 52.7
More than 5 110 34.7
Number of Children 0 38 11.0

1-2 264 76
3-4 42 12.1
More than 4 3 0.9
Age of the Youngest Child 0-5 105 30.2

6-10 78 22.5
11-15 63 18
More than 15 101 28.9
Help at Home Yes 286 82.5

No 61 17.5
Total 347 100
Source:Author Calculation
Table II shows the preponderance of firms (64.3 %) had been operational for less than 11 years.
Only 10.6 per cent of the firms had been established for more than 20years. In total,77.2per cent
of the female business owners are sole proprietors and 89 percent of the respondents established
their business independently. Manufacturing businesses embraces 50.1 percent of the sample,
while 37.2 and 10.7 percent firms were involved in service and retail business respectively
10
Table II- Characteristics of the Firm
Firm Profile Response No.of (%)

Respondents
Age of the firm

5 years 131 37.9
6-10years 92 26.4
11-15 years 60 17.2
16-20 years 27 7.9
21-25 years 16 4.7
Over 26 year 21 5.9
Industry
Retailing 37 10.7
Wholesale 7 2.0
Service 129 37.2
Manufacturing 174 50.1
Legal status
Sole proprietorship 268 77.2
Partnership 21 6.1
Company (pvt.) 57 16.4
Company (Public Ltd) 1 .3
Creation
of the enterprises 309 89.0
Self 36 10.4
Inherited from family 2 .6
Bought from someone
Source of capital
Personal saving 295 85
Friend/Family 33 9.5
Bank Loan 19 5.5
Others
Number of
permanent workers 193 55.7
1-4 employees(micro) 140 40.6
5-49 employees(small) 14 4.2
50-99 employees(medium)
Number of female workers 34 9.8
0 310 89.3
1-33 3 0.9
34-66 0 0
66 above
Total 347 100
11
RESULTS OF LOGISTIC REGRESSION

Table III shows findings of the logistic regression analysis. The Wald statistics associated with
the parameter estimates for the individual independent variables shows that three variables are
statistically significant (p < .05). Help at home, age of business and being part of a network
positively affect women entrepreneurial performance. The other independent variables
qualification,maritalstatus,initial capital invested,no. of permanent workers and lack of self
confidence do not significantly influence entrepreneurial performance. The odds ratio indicates
the relative importance of each independent variable. For example, after controlling for the effect
of all other variables, the odds of increase in turnover is 1.507 times for being part of business
network.
Table III: Results of Logistic Regression
Variable B S.E. Wald Sig. Odds Ratio

Qualification 0.308 0.458 0.452 0.113 0.121
Marital Status -0.667 0.669 0.995 0.319 0.513
Help at Home 1.025 0.449 5.203 0.023 0.359
Age of Business 0.036 0.024 2.253 0.033 1.036
Initial Capital
0.000 0.000 0.016 0.901 1.000
Invested
No. of
Permanent 0.280 0.048 34.575 0.502 1.324
Workers
Part of Business
0.679 0.302 5.060 0.024 1.507
Network
Lack of
Business
-1.046 0.445 5.513 0.19 0.351
Management
Skills
Lack of Self
-0.085 0.335 0.063 0.801 0.919
Confidence
A statistically significant χ2 value indicates a strong fit between the model and the data. The
Nagelkerke R2 of 50.9 suggests that the model explains 50.9% of variability in turnover of the
firms.
CONCLUSION AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

The present study sought to explore the factors affecting performance of women owned small
and medium enterprises selected from six districts of Rajasthan.The present study relies on
primary data collected through structured questionnaires administered to 248
respondents.Logistic regression is used to determine the significant factors affecting performance
of women entrepreneurs.Increase in turnover of the firm is taken as an indicator of firm
performance and regressed on factors pertaining to human and social capital of the
entrepreneur.The results of logistic regression suggest that help at home,age of business and
12
being a part of business network affect the performance positively and significantly.Results
highlight the importance of family support in women enterprise performance.The women
entrepreneurs who get help at home are more likely to perform better.
The study recommends that initiatives must be taken by the government to form formal women’s
business organizations and networks. Promotion of these networks would help
womenentrepreneurs to learn from each other’s mistakes and share resources and information.
The networking may help women to align their goals with one another, buy from each other thus
creating partnership opportunities. Networks may also facilitate introduction to mentors and
investors and would help women in improving their business performance.
REFERENCES
Alhassan, E.A., Hoedoafia, M.A. and Alhassan, E.A., 2016. Determinants of SMEs Growth in
the Tamale Metropolis using logistic regression. Business and Economic Research, 6(1),
pp.324-336.
Al Saleh, A.Y., 2016. Developing a model to predict the performance of small and medium-sized
enterprises: the case of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Doctoral dissertation, Manchester
Metropolitan University).
Arenius, P. and Minniti, M., 2005. Perceptual variables and nascent entrepreneurship. Small
business economics, 24(3), pp.233-247.
Al-Ansari, Y., Pervan, S. and Xu, J., 2013. Innovation and business performance of SMEs: the
case of Dubai. Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern
Issues, 6(3/4), pp.162-180.
Bardasi, E., Sabarwal, S. and Terrell, K., 2011. How do female entrepreneurs perform? Evidence
from three developing regions. Small Business Economics, 37(4), p.417.
Bosma, N., Van Praag, M. and De Wit, G., 2000. Determinants of successful entrepreneurship.
Besser, T.L. and Miller, N., 2011. The structural, social, and strategic factors associated with
successful business networks. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 23(3-4), pp.113-
133.
Brüderl, J. and Preisendörfer, P., 1998. Network support and the success of newly founded
business. Small business economics, 10(3), pp.213-225.
Brush, C.G., 1992. Research on women business owners: Past trends, a new perspective and
future directions. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 16(4), pp.5-30.
Du Rietz, A. and Henrekson, M., 2000. Testing the female underperformance hypothesis. Small
Business Economics, 14(1), pp.1-10.
Fried, H.O. and Tauer, L.W., 2015. An entrepreneur performance index. Journal of Productivity
Analysis, 44(1), pp.69-77.
Gupta, N. and Mirchandani, A., 2018. Investigating entrepreneurial success factors of women-
owned SMEs in UAE. Management Decision, 56(1), pp.219-232.
13
Katongole, C., Ahebwa, W.M. and Kawere, R., 2013. Enterprise success and entrepreneur’s
personality traits: An analysis of micro-and small-scale women-owned enterprises in
Uganda’s tourism industry. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 13(3), pp.166-177.
Kristiansen, S., 2004. Social networks and business success: The role of subcultures in an
African context. American journal of economics and sociology, 63(5), pp.1149-1171.
Lee, I.H. and Marvel, M.R., 2014. Revisiting the entrepreneur gender–performance relationship:
a firm perspective. Small Business Economics, 42(4), pp.769-786.
Littunen, H., 2000. Networks and local environmental characteristics in the survival of new
firms. Small Business Economics, 15(1), pp.59-71.
Lerner, M., Brush, C. and Hisrich, R., 1997. Israeli women entrepreneurs: An examination of
factors affecting performance. Journal of business venturing, 12(4), pp.315-339.
Lyles, M.A., Saxton, T. and Watson, K., 2004. Venture survival in a transitional
economy. Journal of Management, 30(3), pp.351-375.
Mutoko, W.R. and Kapunda, S.M., 2017. Factors influencing small, medium and micro-sized
enterprises' borrowing from banks: The case of the Botswana manufacturing sector. Acta
Commercii, 17(1), pp.1-9.
Murphy, G.B., Trailer, J.W. and Hill, R.C., 1996. Measuring research performance in
entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Research, 36(1), pp.15-23.
McKelvie, A. and Wiklund, J., 2010. Advancing firm growth research: A focus on growth mode
instead of growth rate. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 34(2), pp.261-288.
Nchimbi, M.I., 2002. Gender and entrepreneurship in Tanzania: a comparative analysis of
Male-females start-up motivation, individual characteristics and perceptions of business
success (Doctoral dissertation, University of Dar es salaam).
Pirolo, L. and Presutti, M., 2010. The impact of social capital on the start‐ ups' performance
growth. Journal of Small Business Management, 48(2), pp.197-227.
Rosa, P., Carter, S. and Hamilton, D., 1996. Gender as a determinant of small business
performance: Insights from a British study. Small business economics, 8(6), pp.463-478.
Reid, G.C. and Smith, J.A., 2000. What makes a new business start-up successful?. Small
Business Economics, 14(3), pp.165-182.
Santos-Requejo, L. and González-Benito, Ó., 2000. Economic success factors in Spanish small
retail businesses. An analysis based on sector-relative definitions. Small Business
Economics, 15(3), pp.209-222.
Santos-Requejo, L. and González-Benito, Ó., 2000. Economic success factors in Spanish small
retail businesses. An analysis based on sector-relative definitions. Small Business
Economics, 15(3), pp.209-222.
Ucbasaran, D., Westhead, P. and Wright, M., 2008. Opportunity identification and pursuit: does
an entrepreneur’s human capital matter?. Small Business Economics, 30(2), pp.153-173.
14
Van Praag, C.M., 2003. Business survival and success of young small business owners. Small
business economics, 21(1), pp.1-17.
Wood, E.H., 2006. The internal predictors of business performance in small firms: A logistic
regression analysis. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 13(3), pp.441-
453.
Yang, F.J., Lin, C.W. and Chang, Y.N., 2010. The linkage between corporate social performance
and corporate financial performance. African Journal of Business Management, 4(4), pp.406-
413.
Zekić-Sušac, M., Šarlija, N., Has, A. and Bilandžić, A., 2016. Predicting company growth using
logistic regression and neural networks. Croatian Operational Research Review, 7(2),
pp.229-248.
15

2 Zijmr Vol10 Issue 2 Feb 2020 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2 Zijmr Vol10 Issue 2 Feb 2020 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ZENITH International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research ____________ISSN 2231-5780

Vol.10 (2), February (2020), 5-15

EXPLORING THE FACTORS AFFECTING PERFORMANCE OF

(I) SHRUTI SHASTRI

(II) SWATI SHASTRI

(III) ABHISHEK PAREEK

(IV) RIDHI SUDAN SHARMA

FACTORS INFLUENCING BUSINESS PERFORMANCE

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table I :Sample Characteristics of Women Entrepreneurs in MSMEs Sector in Rajasthan

Age of the Entrepreneur Under 20 1 0.3

Education Never attended school 1 0.3

Marital Status Unmarried 29 8.4

Family Structure Nuclear 191 55

Number of Family Members 0-3 44 12.7

Number of Children 0 38 11.0

Age of the Youngest Child 0-5 105 30.2

Help at Home Yes 286 82.5

Table II- Characteristics of the Firm

Firm Profile Response No.of (%)

Age of the firm

RESULTS OF LOGISTIC REGRESSION

Table III: Results of Logistic Regression

Variable B S.E. Wald Sig. Odds Ratio

CONCLUSION AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

You might also like