SAMPLE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a

theory of a research study. The theoretical framework introduces and

describes the theory that explains why the research problem

under study exists.

A theoretical framework consists of concepts, together with their

definitions, and existing theory/theories that are used for your particular

study. The theoretical framework must demonstrate an understanding of

theories and concepts that are relevant to the topic of your  research paper

and that will relate it to the broader fields of knowledge in the class you are

taking.

I.  Developing the Framework

Here are some strategies to develop of an effective theoretical

framework:

1. Examine your thesis title and research problem. The research

problem anchors your entire study and forms the basis from which

you construct your theoretical framework.

 2. Brainstorm on what you consider to be the key variables in your

research. Answer the question, what factors contribute to the

presumed effect?

3. Review related literature to find answers to your research question.

4. List  the constructs and variables that might be relevant to your

study. Group these variables into independent and dependent

categories.

5. Review the key social science theories that are introduced to you

in your course readings and choose the theory or theories that can

best explain the relationships between the key variables in your study

6. Discuss the assumptions or propositions of this theory and point

out their relevance to your research.

A theoretical framework is used to limit the scope of the relevant

data by focusing on specific variables and defining the specific viewpoint

(framework) that the researcher will take in analyzing and interpreting the

data to be gathered, understanding concepts and variables according to

the given definitions, and building knowledge by validating or challenging

theoretical assumptions.
 1. Discover Theorists & Theories through Encyclopedias &

Reference Books

Kotler, P. Marketing Management

Integrated marketing communications (IMC), which is “the

coordination and integration of all marketing communication tools, avenues,

and sources within a company into a seamless program designed to

maximize the communication impact on consumers, businesses, and other

constituencies of an organization.
 2. Search in article databases for theories

Job Satisfaction

a. Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of human service staff

satisfaction: Development of the Job Satisfaction Survey. American

Journal of Community Psychology, 13, 693-713.

The Job Satisfaction Survey, JSS is a 36 item, nine facet scale to

assess employee attitudes about the job and aspects of the job. Each facet

is assessed with four items, and a total score is computed from all items. A

summated rating scale format is used, with six choices per item ranging

from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”. Items are written in both

directions, so about half must be reverse scored. The nine facets are Pay,

Promotion, Supervision, Fringe Benefits, Contingent Rewards

(performance based rewards), Operating Procedures (required rules and

procedures), Coworkers, Nature of Work, and Communication. Although

the JSS was originally developed for use in human service organizations, it

is applicable to all organizations. The norms provided on this website

include a wide range of organization types in both private and public sector.
 b. The Job Descriptive Index (JDI) is a 72-item instrument designed to

measure five dimensions of job satisfaction: satisfaction with supervision,

coworkers, pay, promotional opportunities, and the work itself.

The Job Descriptive Index (JDI) was originally developed by Smith,

Kendall, and Hulin (1969) to measure job satisfaction defined as “the

feelings a worker has about his job” (p. 100). This instrument has been

revised in 1985, 1997, and most recently in 2009.

Specifically, JDI measures five facets of job-related satisfaction: work

itself, supervision, pay, promotions, and coworkers. Each scale includes a

checklist of adjectives or adjective phrases, and respondents are asked to

fill the blank beside each item as follows: “Y” (agreement), “N”

(disagreement), and “?” (cannot decide). The original item pool was

generated by means of extensive interviews with employees, content

analyses of existing instruments, and content analyses...

3. Organizations

a. The World Bank/NEDA - Worldwide Governance Indicators

World Governance Indicators (WGI) is a research dataset

summarizing the views on the quality of governance provided by a large

number of enterprises, citizens and expert survey respondents in industrial

and developing countries. These data are gathered from a number of

survey institutes, think tanks, non-government organizations, international

organizations and private sector firms. The WGI is a research project of the

World Bank (WB) since 1996 and covers 211 countries.

The WGI is an aggregate of six dimensions:

1. Voice and Accountability: reflects perceptions of the extent to which a

country’s citizens are able to participate in selecting their government,

as well as freedom of expression, freedom of association, and a free

media

2. Government Effectiveness: reflects perceptions of 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

3. Control of Corruption: reflects perceptions of the extent to which

public power is exercised for private gain, including both petty and

grand forms of corruption, as well as “capture” of the state by elites

and private interests

4. Rule of Law: reflects perceptions of the extent to which agents have

confidence in and abide by the rules of society, and in particular the

 quality of contract enforcement, property rights, the police, and the

courts, as well as the likelihood of crime and violence

5. Regulatory Quality: reflects perceptions of the ability of the

government to formulate and implement sound policies and

regulations that permit and promote private sector development

6. Political Stability and Absence of Violence/ Terrorism: measures

perceptions of the likelihood of political instability and/or politically-

motivated violence, including terrorism

b. DENR/ Environmental Management Bureau

Major Environmental Laws

REPUBLIC ACT 9003 ECOLOGICAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT

OF 2000

REPUBLIC ACT 9275 PHILIPPINE CLEAN WATER ACT OF 2004

REPUBLIC ACT 8749 PHILIPPINE CLEAN AIR ACT OF 1999

REPUBLIC ACT 6969 TOXIC SUBSTANCES, HAZARDOUS AND

NUCLEAR WASTE CONTROL ACT OF 1990

PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 1586 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

STATEMENT (EIS) STATEMENT OF 1978 

Try to identify possible errors/inaccuracies

Sample #1

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to determine the causal relationship between quality

of work life and organizational commitment particularly among a select

group of BPO employees in Lipa City.

The researcher shall attempt to specifically answer the following

questions:

1. How do the respondents assess their quality of work life in terms

of:

1.1. fair and adequate payment;

1.2. safe and healthy workplace;

1.3. provide opportunities for persistent growth and security;

1.4. legalism in the organization of work;

1.5. social dependence of work life;

1.6. total living space;

1.7. integration and cohesion of the organization of work; and

1.8. development of human capabilities?

2. What is the respondents’ level of organizational commitment in

terms of:
 2.1. affective;

2.2. continuance; and

2.3. normative?

3. How do the respondents’ quality of work life relate to their

organizational commitment?

4. How do the respondents’ organizational commitment relate to their

quality of work life?

5. Based on findings, what Human Resource Strategic Programs

may be proposed to enhance the quality of work life of the

employees?

Theoretical Framework

Quality of Work Life (QWL) establishes a major part of any

employee’s life. Extensive researches conducted have shown the

importance of quality of work life to success outcomes in an organization.

According to the theoretical concepts of research and research literature,

the model used in this study was conceptualized by Omar Mahmoudi

(2015). The model has been designed using the Model of Quality of Work

Life by Walton (1974) and the model of Organizational Commitment by

Meyer and Allen (1997). An explanation of this survey is explained as

follows.
 In 1970s, the idea of Quality of Work Life was introduced by Walton in

broader sense than these earlier developments which explains “the values

that were at the heart of these earlier reform movements” and “human

needs and aspirations”. QWL activity gained importance between 1969 and

1974, when a broad group of researchers, scholars, union leaders and

government personnel development shaped interest to know how to

improve the quality of an individual through her /his job experience.

Richard Walton in his theory as one of the comprehensive theories of

quality of work life considers 8 main dimensions as the increase goal, i.e

Quality of Work Life as: fair and adequate payment, safe and healthy

workplace, provide opportunities for persistent growth and security,

legalism in the organization of work, social dependence of work life, total

living space, integration and cohesion of the organization of work; and

development of human capabilities.

As cited by Mahmoudi (2015), organizational commitment was

defined, for the first time, in 1956 by Whyte as follows: “…white collar

employees in large organizations live their lives dominated by the company

life and their commitment. A man of organization not only works for the

organization, but he also commits himself to the organization, and feels as

if he belongs to it”. After Whyte, starting with Porter, extant literature

showed that organizational commitment was further studied by researchers

namely Mowday, Steers, Becker, Allen, and Meyer. These studies made it

an important subject in the area of organizational studies because the term

‘organizational commitment’ explained the employees’ efficiency at

workplace as well as their intention and behavior for quitting work

particularly since 1960’s.

According to Meyer and Allen, organization commitment is a broader

term which can be classified into three major core conditions such as

Affective Commitment,, Continuance Commitment and Normative

Commitment. Further, Allen and Meyer had published more than 15

researches regarding organizational commitment since 1984 and had the

major role in this regard.

Quality of work life then has become an important issue in the field of

research and was associated with other organizational variables. Most of

the studies dealing with the relationship between quality of work life and

organizational commitment have achieved some results regarding

significant association between them.

Further, the theoretical framework is supported by two fundamental

propositions – (1) According to Porter, et.al as cited by Tarmizi (2008) in

her study is the proposition of met expectations whereby an individual

carries sets of expectations to their employment scenario, and their

attitudes and behaviors towards their organization are the outcomes of the

comparison of their expectations and the realities they perceived; (2) The

psychological contract on the other hand as the second proposition

describes the reason behind the individual’s attachment towards the

organization. Hence, employees’ attachment increases upon believing that

the employers fulfill their obligations.

It can be gleaned that as employees achieve a better quality of work

life, they tend to become more attached to the organization. Likewise,

employees reduce their turnover intention as they perceived a satisfactory

level of QWL through the attainment of an increased commitment to both

career and organizational commitment. QWL has been considered as one

of the most important issues in managing human resources in

organizations requiring specific attention. While, commitment in the

workplace is an important issue too. The organization that considers the

quality of work life of employees has committed labor force and high

commitment of labor force which means productivity of labor workforce

(Diraviam 2016). It can be gleaned that if employees are satisfied with their

benefits, they have safe and healthy workplace, opportunity for growth, job

security, constitutionalism, they consider unity and integration and job

reveals their individual capabilities, feel trusted and have work life balance,

their organizational commitment increases and they continue to work with

much interest.

However, recent literature as proposed by Mahmoudi in 2015

explained that Quality of Work Life and Organizational Commitment have a

causal relationship. Hence, to further examine the causal relationship of the

aforementioned variables, this study tailored its framework from

Mahmoudi’s Model as shown in the figure below.

Figure 1.1
Theoretical Framework
Mahmoudi’s Model (2015)
Sample #2

Statement of the Problem

This study endeavored to evaluate the quality management system

according to the upgraded criteria set by International Standard

Organization (ISO) Quality Management System (ISO 9001:2015) and its

relationships to the airport operations’ service quality dimension of the four

terminals of Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) with the objective to

design a quality management framework and devise strategic approaches

as possible interventions to continually improve the airport service

operations gearing towards service excellence.

Specifically, it will seek to answer the following questions;

1. How do MIAA managers evaluate the current quality management

implemented in the four terminals of Ninoy Aquino International

Airport (NAIA) according to the quality criteria set by International

Standard Organization (ISO) Quality Management Principles when

group across terminals:

1.1 Customer Focus,

 1.2 Leadership,

1.3 Engagement of People

1.4 Process Approach

1.5 Improvement

1.6 Evidence-based decision making,

1.7 Relationship Management?

2. Is there any significant difference in the ratings of the MIAA managers

on the current quality management implemented in the four terminals

of Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) according to the quality

criteria set by International Standard Organization (ISO) Quality

Management Principles when group across terminals?

3. What is the level of airport service quality in the four (4) airport

terminals of NAIA as rated by Passengers and Airline Managers

based on Tourism Service Quality Measurement (TOURSERVQ)

using ServQual dimensions when group according to respondent’s

categories and across terminals?

3.1 Tangible

3.2 Reliability

3.3 Responsiveness

3.4 Assurance
 3.5 Empathy?

4. Is there any significant difference between the ratings of the

Passengers and Airline Managers on the level of airport service

quality in the four (4) airport terminals of NAIA based on Tourism

Service Quality Measurement (TOURSERVQ) stated in SOP 3 when

group according to respondent’s categories and across terminals?

5. Is there any significant relationship between the levels of airport

service quality vis-à-vis the current quality management of the four

(4) airport terminals of NAIA?

6. What are issues and concerns encountered by the passengers in the

airport service of NAIA terminals?

7. Based on the results of the study, what quality management

framework and strategic approaches can be designed to continually

improve the airport service operations gearing towards service

excellence?

Theoretical Framework

1. ISO 9001: 2015 Quality Management principles

2. Parasuraman et al. (1988) SERVQUAL
3. Link
Sample #3

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to determine the Causal Relationship between Life

Satisfaction and Work Environment of CABEIHM faculty members at

Batangas State University-Main Campus I.

Specifically, these studies have to answers to the following questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:

1.1Age

1.2Sex

1.3Marital Status

1.4Educational Attainment

1.5Employment status

1.6Academic Rank?

2. How does the respondents describe the ff:

2.1. Level of Life Satisfaction

2.2 Work Environment

 2.2.1. Co-workers and Supervisor

2.2.2. Physical Aspects of the Work Environment

2.2.3. Current Job

2.2.4. Training and Development Opportunities

2.2.5. Communication Practices

2.2.6. Vision and Goals?

3. What is the causal relationship between the aforementioned

variables?

4. What organizational activities and strategies can be proposed to

improve the life satisfaction of the faculty members?

Theoretical Framework

According to Feldman, 2010 and Strawson, 2008, the version of life

satisfaction, the ideal life-plans for some people could consist of various

unconnected episodes lived in completely different ways. These views

would allow people who do not experience their lives as narratives to be

just as happy as anyone else

Factors such as a person's prior standing in a domain, his or her

expectations for the future, and his or her temperament-based reactivity to

positive and negative events might moderate the impact that specific

experiences have on his or her life satisfaction. In support of this idea,

researchers have shown that subjective well-being variables tend to be

moderately to strongly correlate with personality characteristics, such as

extraversion, neuroticism, and self-esteem (Steel et al. 2008). If life

satisfaction is influenced by relatively stable aspects of temperament, then

mean levels of well-being may remain stable over the lifespan or largely

mimic the patterns observed for these related personality traits.

According to Blanchflower and Oswald (2008) used cross-sectional

data from several waves of the General Social Surveys and the

Eurobarometers to test the association between age and subjective well-

being. They found a significant quadratic effect for age such that levels of

happiness seemed to decrease from young adulthood to middle age,

reaching a minimum at around age 47, and then increased throughout

older adulthood.

According to Lea Sell and Bryan Cleal 2011 ,A model of life

satisfaction integrating economic and work environment variables was

developed and used for testing interactions between rewards and work

environment hazards. Data came from a representative panel of Danish

employees. Results showed that psychosocial work environment factors,

like information about decisions concerning the work place, social support,

and influence, have significant impacts on the level of life satisfaction.

Maximizing rewards did not compensate public employees to an extent that

ameliorated the negative effects on life satisfaction of experiencing low

levels of any of these factors whereas influence did not impact life

satisfaction of private employees.

Sample #4

Statement of the Problem

The study assessed the regulations on starting a business, extent of

entrepreneurial activity and their relationship in first- and second-class

municipalities in Batangas with the end in view of proposing an

entrepreneurs’ start-up guide.

Specifically, this study sought answers to the following:

1. How do the respondents assess regulations on starting a business

in terms of:

1.1 Procedures;

1.2 Time; and

1.3 Cost?

2. To what extent do the respondents perform entrepreneurial activity

in terms of:

2.1 Enterprising human activity;

 2.2 Leveraging creativity, innovation and identifying opportunity;

and

2.3 Creation of value?

3. How does regulations on starting a business relate to

entrepreneurial activity?

4. How is service quality of concerned offices in starting a business

be assessed in terms of?

4.1 Reliability;

4.2 Assurance;

4.3 Tangibility;

4.4 Empathy; and

4.5 Responsiveness?

5. Based on the analysis, what entrepreneur’s start-up guide can be

developed?

Theoretical Framework

The study considered the framework being used by WorldBank in

ranking countries on the Ease of Doing Business since 2003 wherein they

quantify the business registration process in over 170 countries. Klapper &

Love (2010) used the same methodology for measuring the effectiveness
of the regulatory framework for firm registration. WorldBank conducted

another series of study which is the Subnational Doing Business report. It

aims to compare the business regulations among the largest business

cities of an economy different from the original study that compares

countries. It produces disaggregated data on business regulations on

locations where information has been non-existent or where national data

are insufficient to fully assess the regulatory environment. The data

produced are comparable across locations within the economy and

internationally, enabling locations to benchmark their results both locally

and globally [ CITATION Abo14 \l 1033 ] . Further, Doing Business investigates the

regulations that enhance business activity and those that constrain it.

Regulations affecting a local business are measured at the subnational

level in the Philippines. These are starting a business, dealing with

construction permits, and registering property. These indicators were

selected because they cover areas of local jurisdiction and practices may

differ unlike the other indicators which are same in one economy. The

indicators are used to identify business reforms and the extent to which

these have been effective in simplifying the procedures, saving time and

lowering the cost of doing business [ CITATION Doi11 \l 1033 ].

 This study utilized Starting a Business as an indicator of doing

business, which if one out of three currently being used in the subnational

level. According to the study of Klapper & Love (2010), and other related

studies, the costs, days and procedures required to start a business are

important predictors of the number of new firm registrations. In addition,

business registration in the country can be grouped into five major phases:

(1) incorporating and registering with the Securities and Exchange

Commission (SEC) or Department of Trade and Industry (DTI); (2)

obtaining the local business permit or mayor’s permit to operate and other

local government offices; (3) obtaining clearances from the Bureau of Fire

Protection; (4) registering to pay taxes with the Bureau of Internal Revenue;

and (5) registering with the Social Security System and Philippine Health

Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth).

In addition, the study used the framework of Ahmad & Seymour

(2008), which sets out the definitions of the entrepreneur, entrepreneurship

and entrepreneurial activity for the purpose of supporting the development

of related indicators. OECD recognized the long history in this area and the

contention and differences that have existed, and that continue to exist,

between academics who have confronted this issue over the last two

centuries. It deliberately adopts a more pragmatic approach based on two

principles: relevance and measurability - resulting in definitions that are

developed from both a bottom-up and top-down approach. Importantly, the

definitions emphasize the dynamic nature of entrepreneurial activity and

focus attention on action rather than intentions or supply/demand

conditions.

Moreover, many definitions have their genesis in a philosophical

perspective (top-down approach) with little concern for measurement. This

approach continues today, even in policy-oriented papers that discuss a

concept of entrepreneurship without attempting to represent or measure it

using concretely defined statistics or indicators. Other papers bypass the

discussion of entrepreneurship definitions altogether, and simply equate

entrepreneurship to a specific empirical measure (bottom-up approach).

Further, the three determinants of top-down approach are enterprising

human activity; leveraging creativity, innovation and identifying opportunity;

and creation of value [ CITATION Ahm08 \l 1033 ] . Hence, the study utilized top-

down approach to measure entrepreneurial activity and applied its three

determinants.

This study also aims to evaluate the service quality based on

experiences of entrepreneurs during the time that they processed permits

and licenses in starting a business. Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry

(1988), defined that service quality is an extrinsically perceived attribution

based on the customer’s experience about the service that the customer

perceived through the service encounter. Regardless of the type of service,

consumers basically use the same criteria to assess quality. Service quality

is a general opinion the client forms regarding its delivery, which is

constituted by a series of successful or unsuccessful experiences.

Managing gaps in service will help the company improve its quality. But

gaps are not the only means clients use to judge a service. They can also

use five broad-based dimensions as judgment criteria: reliability, tangibility,

responsibility, security and empathy. SERVQUAL, later renamed RATER,

is a concise multiple-item scale with good reliability and validity that

retailers can use to better understand the service expectations and

perceptions of consumers and, as a result, improve service. The instrument

has been designed to be applicable across a broad spectrum of services.

As such, it provides a basic skeleton through its expectations/perceptions

format encompassing statements for each of the five service-quality

dimensions. The skeleton, when necessary, can be adapted or

supplemented to fit the characteristics or specific research needs of a

particular organization. RATER Model highlights five areas that customers

generally consider to be important when they use a service. Reliability

refers to the ability to provide the service promised consistently, accurately,

and on time. Assurance is the knowledge, skills and credibility of staff, and

their ability to use this expertise to inspire trust and confidence. Tangibility

is the physical evidence of the service being provided. Empathy refers to

the relationship between employees and customers. Responsiveness is the

ability to provide a quick, high quality service to the customers.

Sample #5

Statement of the problem

This study was conducted to link the capabilities of the entrepreneurs

and entrepreneurial ecosystem in the province of Batangas.

Specifically, this study aimed to determine the following:

1. What is the respondents’ profile in terms of:

1.1 Entrepreneur

1.1.1 Age;

1.1.2 Sex;

1.1.3 Civil Status; and

1.1.4 Educational attainment;

1.2 Business

1.2.1 Number of employees of the business;

 1.2.3 Years of business existence; and

1.2.3 Nature of Business?

2. How may the entrepreneurial capability be assessed in terms of

the following dimensions:

2.1 Sensing;

2.2 Selecting;

2.3 Shaping; and

2.4 Synchronizing?

3. Is there a significant difference on the entrepreneurial capability

when the respondents are grouped according to the entrepreneur’s profile

and business’ profile?

4. How may the entrepreneurial ecosystem be assessed in terms of:

4.1 Policy;

4.2 Markets;

4.3 Human Capital;

4.4 Supports;

4.5 Culture; and

4.6 Finance?
 5. Is there a significant difference on the entrepreneurial ecosystem

when the respondents are grouped according to the entrepreneur’s profile

and business’ profile?

6. Is there significant relationship between the entrepreneurial

ecosystem and entrepreneurial capability?

7. What entrepreneurial ecosystem model maybe proposed based on

the results?

Theoretical Framework

Entrepreneurial capabilities, which were established by Zahra (2010),

consist of four distinct but interrelated dimensions that are anchored in the

pursuit of opportunities: sensing, selecting, shaping, and synchronizing.

The first dimension is about seeing or envisioning market and

technological opportunities, within as well as beyond the confines of an

industry, as in the case of cross-boundary disruptors. Basically, the key

mechanisms for sensing include alert scanning and searching,

experimenting and imagining. Sensing opportunities can originate both

from individuals within an organization such as middle managers or

employees, as well as from a company’s dedicated collectivities such as

its R&D function or unit.

 On the other hand, selecting denotes entrepreneurs and managers’

ability to identify and choose what potential opportunities to pursue; it may

also be embedded in collectively-created systems that contain criteria for

search. Paradoxically, then, entrepreneurial capabilities require both being

open to new ideas, and being willing to forego some possibilities.

Individual or firms always think about new markets they could enter, but it's

only by saying ‘no’ that they can concentrate on the things that are really

important.

Alternatively, shaping refers to the orchestrating of connections

among internally and externally available capabilities and resources for

opportunity realization. The key mechanisms for shaping an opportunity

are bricolage, transposition, and meaning making. Bricolage involves the

mobilization of the resources and capabilities at hand internally and

externally, regardless of their original purpose.

Finally, synchronizing refers to temporally orchestrating a

correspondence of internal and external elements. Internal alignment

involves simultaneous exploration and exploitation of opportunities, while

external alignment is about harmonizing a firm’s actions with the speed of

the environment and the opening and closing of windows of opportunity.

Synchronizing involves both understanding the speeds of the different

elements requiring alignment and integration and actions to harmonize

their “arrival.” While capabilities themselves may be enduring, the co-

occurrence of conditions in optimally matched states may be highly

transient; thus, one of the keys to actual game changing may be

synchronizing skills of the focal individuals or collectives in the firm with

those outside.

These capabilities can then be affected by several factors. One of

these is the entrepreneurial ecosystem. Internally, novelty generation

contributes to imagining the re-shaping of the organization’s processes,

systems, resources, and capabilities necessary to realize and address the

envisioned external disruption. Focused externally, entrepreneurial

capabilities can be channelled towards envisaging changes in industry

architecture (Jacobides, Knudsen, and Augier, 2006) and the

entrepreneurial ecosystem (Teece, 2009: 16).

Conversely, industry architecture denotes the evolving relationships

among value chain participants and determines how labor and surplus are

divided among the types of players involved in it (Jacobides et al., 2006).

This architecture facilitates interactions that allow firms to identify

opportunities for and constraints to change. Knowledge of this architecture

becomes a useful template in the industry for identifying who does what
(the roles) and according to what norms (the rules). The entrepreneurial

ecosystem usually incorporates architecture across multiple industries.

Attending to industry architecture and the business ecosystem

(Teece, 2009) expands the firm’s playing field beyond the boundaries of its

industry value chain. By interacting with existing players in its ecosystem

(e.g., customers and suppliers) and proactively seeking new players (e.g.,

boundary disruptors), a firm can bring about ecosystem transformation.

With this there is a proposition that integrated entrepreneurial capabilities

are positively related to the transformation of a firm’s business ecosystem.

The Babson Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Project (BEEP) by

Isenberg (2010) stems from the observation that in all societies in which

entrepreneurship occurs with any regularity or is self-sustaining, there is a

unique and complex environment or ecosystem. The BEEP finds that there

are approximately a dozen elements that interact in complex ways. Thus in

order to promote entrepreneurship, a holistic approach must be taken. The

BEEP categorizes their framework into six domains: that is, policy looks at

both government regulations and support of entrepreneurship along with

leadership; finance looks at the full spectrum of financial services available

to entrepreneurs; culture accounts for both societal norms along with the

presence of success stories to inspire the next generation of entrepreneurs,

supports examine physical infrastructure, non-governmental institutions

and the presence of supporting professions such as lawyers, accountants

and investment bankers, human capital examines both the quality of higher

education system and the skill level of the work force; and finally, markets

look at both entrepreneurial networks and the presence of early customers.

Fig. 1
Domains of Entrepreneurship Ecosystem (BEEP)

The entrepreneurship ecosystem consists of six domains. Despite of

it having hundreds of specific elements, these were grouped into six

general domains for convenience. These are conducive culture, enabling

policies and leadership, availability of appropriate finance, quality human

capital, venture-friendly markets for products, and a range of institutional

and infrastructural supports. The entrepreneurship ecosystem diagram

shows 50 of these specific components.

Each entrepreneurship ecosystem is unique.  Although any society’s

entrepreneurship ecosystem can be described using the same six domains,

each ecosystem is the result of the hundreds of elements interacting in

highly complex and idiosyncratic ways. Specifying generic root causes of

the entrepreneurship ecosystem has limited practical value. Whereas there

is evidence that education, regulatory and legal frameworks, and well-

functioning capital markets do indeed impact the level of entrepreneurship

in a society. In general the impacts are over a long time frame, and also

weak. The big step changes in entrepreneurship that is witnessed from

time to time are the results of what statisticians call “high order

interactions,” that is, many variables working together.

In fact, a handful of individuals, sometimes one or two, can be the

catalysts without which the step change would not have occurred.  So

whereas it is useful to assess each regional entrepreneurship ecosystem to

specify causal paths at specific points in time, determining generic causal

paths are less useful. Furthermore, what is often thought of as outcomes

can also be causes: in what is called the law of small numbers, it can often

identify one or two more-or-less-random successes that are actually very

causal in evolving the ecosystem.

Entrepreneurship ecosystems become (relatively) self-sustaining.

Because success does breed success by feeding back to enhance the six

domains of the entrepreneurship ecosystem, there is a tipping point at

which government involvement can and should be significantly reduced;

not eliminated, but reduced.  Once the six domains are strong enough, they

are mutually reinforcing, and public leaders do not have to invest quite so

much to sustain them. In fact, it is critical that entrepreneurship programs

are designed to be self-liquidating in order to focus on building

sustainability into the environment (www.forbes.com).