Title of the Paper: Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Socio-cultural Factors in Fashion

Designer Entrepreneurship in Sri Lanka

Authors’ names, titles and affiliations:
1st Author (corresponding author) – Ms. Nisanka Kusumsiri
Postal address: Lecturer, Department of Textile and Clothing Technology, University
of Moratuwa, Moratuwa
e-mail : nisankalk@gmail.com; nisankak@uom.lk
Telephone: +94 11 2640480 ext. 6020
Fax: +94 11 2651787

2nd Author – Professor A.K.W. Jayawardane

Postal address: The Vice-Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor’s office, University of
Moratuwa, Moratuwa
e-mail: akwj@uom.lk
Telephone: +94 11 2651259
Fax: +94 11 2650622
 Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Socio-cultural Factors in Fashion

Designer Entrepreneurship in Sri Lanka

Nisanka Kusumsiri 1*, A.K.W. Jayawardane 2

1
Department of Textile and Clothing Technology, University of Moratuwa, Moratuwa
2
University of Moratuwa, Moratuwa

Abstract: This paper attempts to identify social-cultural influences in entrepreneurial behaviour among fashion designer
entrepreneurs in Sri Lanka. Based on in-depth interview techniques, this paper investigates the influence of prevailing
social-cultural factors in entrepreneurial behaviour as perceived by the interview participants. Study reveals that
social-cultural values and norms, social intimacy, social power and interactions highly influence innovative, proactive and
risk-taking behaviour in fashion designer entrepreneurs. This paper contributes to the creative industries in Sri Lanka and
particularly to the fashion designer entrepreneurship by identifying how the social cultural norms can influence
entrepreneurial behaviour that lead to business success. The study suggests that not only psychological reinforcement and
business training, but also opportunities to develop the social vision, social capital and interactions are necessary to develop
entrepreneurs, particularly in the fashion sector in Sri Lanka. Data collected in this study were restricted to the fashion
designer entrepreneurship. However, the same combination of socio-cultural background would be influencing the other
entrepreneurship sectors, and therefore further exploration of this study is encouraged.

Keywords: Entrepreneurial Behaviour, Proactiveness, Innovation, Risk-taking, Fashion business, Social influence

1. INTRODUCTION
Entrepreneurial activity is a vital source of innovation, employment and economic growth (Katsikis &
Kyrgidou, 2009; Thornton, Ribeiro-Soriano, & Urbano, 2011). Factors that explain how entrepreneurs achieve
business success have been the subject of extensive research (Madsen, Neergaard, & Ulhøi, 2008). In spite of
this growth in the literature, the influence of social and cultural factors on entrepreneurial behaviour remains
understudied.
Fashion designer entrepreneurship is recognized as an important creative industry sector in many
entrepreneurship models (e.g. UNCTAD Classification of Creative Industries, UK DCMS Model, (United
Nations, 2010). Fashion design industry is highly sensitive to prevailing socio-cultural contexts. Social and
cultural factors play a significant role in the development of fashion and other creative industries (Henry, 2007).
‘Although fashion design is typically portrayed as tied to the individual and his or her creativity, the
circumstances that allow design to occur within a commercial context are predominantly social’(Mills, 2011).
Therefore it is important to identify how social and cultural factors influence the fashion industry in order to
develop entrepreneurship activities in this sector.
‘The fashion design industry in Sri Lanka was almost non-existent about three years ago whereas today the
local stores are earning around US Dollar 10 million annually. The local retailers of the local fashion labels have
the potential to reach US Dollar 500 million in the next few years’ (Dias, 2011). Even though fashion design
industry has become a significant creative industry sector, this sector has not attracted systematic academic
research in Sri Lanka. There is a paucity of research exploring the influence of socio-cultural realities in
entrepreneurial behaviour in fashion designer entrepreneurship in a developing country context.

*
Corresponding author. Email: nisankalk@gmail.com, nisankak@uom.lk
 The purpose of the study presented in this paper therefore is to identify how Sri Lankan socio-cultural realities
influence entrepreneurial behaviour in the context of fashion designer entrepreneurship. The paper begins with a
brief discussion of literature on entrepreneurial behaviour, fashion designer entrepreneurship and studies on
socio-cultural factors and entrepreneurship. A conceptual model is presented to assess and compare the
behaviour of six selected fashion designer entrepreneurs in the socio-cultural context of Sri Lanka. A discussion
on findings is presented followed by conclusions and implications.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Fashion Designer entrepreneurship in Sri Lanka
Different countries and regions have defined fashion designer entrepreneurship according to their pertinent
market contexts. This study identifies fashion industry entrepreneurship based on the criteria that ‘firms or
individuals involved in clothing and having a primary focus on design, as distinct from manufacture of clothing’
to include (1) Established fashion labels (2) Lifestyle clothing (3) Niche market brands and (4) Emerging new
designers (Walton & Duncan, 2002).
The fashion industry is a highly competitive industry, where product life cycles are short, economies gained
by product differentiation are built on brand image and product styling can be quickly imitated (Malem, 2008) .
Therefore, it is very important for fashion designer entrepreneurs to be highly innovative and proactive in their
business pursuits. Fashion design is largely defined as tied with the individual designer’s characteristics and
attitudes (Malem, 2008). Furthermore, fashion design industry is highly sensitive to prevailing socio-cultural
contexts (Mills, 2011). Therefore, it is important to consider a behavioural approach and recognize the
influences of socio-cultural context when studying the fashion designer entrepreneurship.

2.2 Entrepreneurial behaviour

The entrepreneurial process comprises attitude and behaviour as components. The behavioural approach
regards entrepreneurship as an output which results from the interaction of internal psychological and external
environmental factors (Tipu & Arain, 2011). Entrepreneurial attitude and behaviour research disperse over such
areas as networking behaviour, entrepreneurial learning and cognition, strategic orientation, managerial
orientation, customer orientation (Tipu & Arain, 2011), and entrepreneurial orientation (EO).
Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) has become a central concept among the many facet of the entrepreneurial
behaviour research (Rauch, Wiklund, Lumpkin, & Frese, 2009). EO has primarily been discussed from a firm
level perspective (Covin & Slevin, 1991; Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). EO is conceptualized as a firm-level
strategy-making process that firms use to enact their organizational purpose, sustain their vision, and creates
competitive advantages. Notwithstanding some studies used EO to predict firm-level performance, the
individual’s attitudes and behaviours (e.g. risk taking, innovativeness) inevitably influence the organisation’s EO
behaviour. Individual-level behaviour on the part of the entrepreneur may affect an organization’s actions, and in
many cases the two will be synonymous (Covin & Slevin, 1991). Furthermore, the EO of a business is typically
investigated through top management (Rauch et al., 2009). The measure is based on self-reports by individuals,
mostly owners and managing directors. While not emphasized explicitly, the measure is in fact a psychological
assessment of individual EO (Krauss, Frese, Frirftich, & Unger, 2005). The smaller the organization, the
greater direct influence can be exerted by top management. For example, when organisational-level EO scale is
used to study a small-firm, the owner-manager’s personal proactiveness, innovativeness, and risk-taking
propensity will be conveyed through the organisation’s approach in proactiveness, risk-taking and innovation.
The study presented in this paper focuses on small and medium firms in the creative fashion industry where the
owner is of critical importance. Therefore, this paper views EO as individual-level behaviour resulting in
firm-performance. The paper considers EO as consisting of measures of risk-taking orientation, innovative
orientation and proactiveness/Personal initiative orientation.

2.2.1 Risk-taking orientation

Being entrepreneurial and venturing into new fields unavoidably involves errors and a certain degree of risk
(Krauss et al., 2005). Some authors argue that successful entrepreneurs probably take calculated risks and they
are risk-managers rather than risk-takers (Krauss et al., 2005). Risk management could be referred to the process
employed by entrepreneurs in order to effectively manage unexpected events and prevent loss (Tipu & Arain,
2011). Risk tolerance is theorised to be both perceptual and related to other behavioural orientations such as
tolerance for ambiguity and self-confidence (McClellend, 1961; Okhomina, 2010). While taking calculated risks
reduces the probability of failure, a generally positive stance towards risk-taking is mandatory in an
environment where risks are inevitable. ‘A positive orientation towards risk-taking should help the owner to take
on unavoidable (and often sought for) challenges and risks’ (Krauss et al., 2005).

2.2.2 Innovative orientation

Innovation is frequently a defining feature of entrepreneurship. Some writers of the Classical School
pointedly distinguish entrepreneurial activity from management activity by insisting that one is no longer an
entrepreneur once the innovative/ creative activity is completed. According to (Schumpeter, 1934), the key
ingredient of entrepreneurship lies in the innovativeness. An innovative orientation simply implies that one has a
positive mind-set toward new ideas with regard to products, services, administration, or technological processes
(Krauss et al., 2005). Social-cultural factors such as networks and relationships with external sources of
information, knowledge and advice and continuous interactive learning foster innovation (Heunks, 1988).

2.2.3 Proactiveness/Personal initiative orientation

Proactiveness is a self-starting, personal initiative, and persistent orientation that attempts to shape
environmental conditions (Krauss et al., 2005). Literature suggests that successful entrepreneurs are proactive,
take personal initiative and they are creative to recognize and respond to opportunities. They often initiate
actions to which competitors then respond, and are frequently first to offer new products to the market (Covin &
Slevin, 1991). Proactiveness is defined as ‘acting in anticipation of future problems, needs, or
changes’(Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). As such, proactiveness is crucial to successful entrepreneurial activity,
because it suggests a forward-looking perspective that is accompanied by innovative or new-venturing activity
(Krauss et al., 2005).

2.2.4 Socio-cultural factors and entrepreneurship

Entrepreneurship as a human activity is a social phenomenon whose essence is the entrepreneur (Gamage,
2004; Thornton et al., 2011). The entrepreneur cannot ignore community and other social actors who are
involved in or impact on his/her entrepreneurial effort. Human reasoning is shaped by culture, and the
underlying contextual value systems on which actions are based. Therefore, research into entrepreneurial
behaviour in developing countries should consider contextual issues and identify the social processes (Gamage,
Cameron, & Woods, 2003).
Socio-behavioural approaches, while recognizing the importance of some of the personality characteristics,
mainly focuses on environment and the influence of culture on individual (Deakins & Freel, 2009; Tipu & Arain,
2011). In one of the earliest studies in this vein, Weber (1930) suggests that development of capitalism and
entrepreneurial drive are largely due to the cultural drives which are dominant in certain cultures (Cunningham
& Lischeron, 1991; Low & MacMillan, 1988). Analyzing other authors’ studies, Thornton et al. (2011) proclaim
that social-cultural influences in entrepreneurship development encompass ‘social embeddedness, social capital,
relational networks and cultural variables’.
Gamage (2004) proclaims that predominant cultural dynamics and the socio-cultural context in Sri Lanka
shape the entrepreneurs’ behaviour and actions. According to Gamage (2004), social collectivism, social
rightness and social values, social power, paternalism and harmony act as underpinning to entrepreneurial
behaviour in Sri Lanka. Innovation and being proactive in recognizing entrepreneurial opportunity was
considered as a social cognitive process rooted in the social value structure. Entrepreneurial risk-management
was considered as a social and value-based process rather than a rational process (Gamage, 2004; Valliere,
2008).
Thrikawala (2011) proclaims that culture has an impact on social networks among entrepreneurs. Sri Lankan
entrepreneurs’ business practices are also influenced by the socio cultural and personal background factor such
as age, ethnicity, religion and education of the decision makers (De Alwis & Senathiraja, 2003).
Hewapathirana and Fernando (2008) suggest that in the Sri Lankan context, personal and social identities of
individuals are expressed in terms of individuals’ popularity, reputation, credibility, worthiness, and power. These
identities prompted entrepreneurs to maintain quality, positive image, and venture into innovations.
Research problem statement of this paper is identified as: How do social cultural factors in Sri Lanka
influence entrepreneurial behaviour. Drawing on the behavioural theory in entrepreneurship and social-cultural
factors, this research problem is depicted in Figure 1. The model highlights how predominant social-cultural
realities impact upon entrepreneurial behaviour among the fashion designer entrepreneurs.

Social-cultural factors
Entrepreneurial behaviour

e.g. Social capital and network, social

Entrepreneurial Orientation (innovation,
rightness, social values, social power and
risk-taking, proactiveness)
recognition, kinship and paternalism

Figure 1. The research model

3. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

3.1 Qualitative Interviewing and the Instrument
There is a remarkable paucity of research in fashion designer entrepreneurship. Even the fewer research in
this aspect has been conducted in developed countries with ‘much larger economies, different market
demographics and considerably more resources for both supporting new enterprises and studying them’ (Mills,
2011). If a concept or phenomenon needs to be understood because little research has done on it, then qualitative
research would be a better approach (Gamage, 2004; Mills, 2011). On the one hand, fashion design is typically
portrayed as ‘tied to the individual and his or her creativity’. On the other hand, ‘circumstances that allow
design to occur within a commercial context are predominantly social’ (Mills, 2011). Therefore, it is important
to consider the subjective and socially constructed reality when selecting suitable methodology. Considering the
aforementioned background, qualitative method of interviewing was used to investigate in-depth how
entrepreneurial behaviour is influenced by the prevailing social-cultural factors in Sri Lanka.

3.2 The Sample

The sampling for qualitative research should be ‘purposive’ rather than random (Mills, 2011). Even though
there is no ideal number of interviews or cases, a number between four to ten interviews is satisfactory
(Gunaratne, 2008). Therefore, a purposive sample of six entrepreneurs was selected for in-depth interviews.
Seeking maximum variation, the sample consisted of three start-up fashion businesses and three established
fashion businesses. Following (Mills, 2011), the start-up phase was defined as being within seven years of label
launch. Table 1 represents an overview of the interviewees participated in the study.

Table 1. Overview of the research participants

Background Rspt A Rspt B Rspt C Rspt D Rspt E Rspt F

Start-up year 2009 2003 1974 2006 1987 2000

Previous experience Yes Yes No Yes No Yes

Designer’s education Bachelors Textile MBA Diploma in Bachelors Fashion Diploma MBA
Technology International Textiles and Design
Business Marketing

Ways of distribution Online, Through Online, retail Retail outlets, Retail outlet, Online, own Service
and selling one retail outlet, outlets, export, bespoke bespoke retail outlet
export, bespoke export

Number of One Four One One Core brand Four

brands/labels/ and five
services diffusion
brands

Products/Services Women’s wear Men’s wear Women’s wear Women’s wear Women’s wear Design
Women’s wear education,
Footwear Design events,
Event service livelihood
development

Speciality Sustainability, Varies Batik and silk Handloom, ‘Classic’ Creative

industry painting textiles with craft industries
post-waste origin

Size of business Small Small-medium Small-medium Small Small-medium Small-medium

3.3 Data Analysis

Interviews were conducted by the first author, with each interview lasting for about 50-60 minutes. The
interviews were conducted in English medium, audio recorded with the verbal consent from the interviewees
and transcribed for analysis purpose. Written transcripts were analysed through a process of comparing and
contrasting to identify significant themes and categories, both common and distinctive, underlying the
respondents’ views (Gamage, 2004; Gunaratne, 2008). Following (Gunaratne, 2008), a four-step process
consisting data organising, generating categories, themes and patterns, comparing and contrasting with the
extant literature and writing of the analysis was followed. The data analysis software tool, 'QSR Nvivo,
Qualitative Data Software' was used to manage data efficiently. A review of the transcribed interviews indicated
repeating ideas, suggesting information saturation (Gunaratne, 2008). Credibility and reliability of data were
achieved through data triangulation. Data source triangulation was achieved through use of multiple sources
such as newspaper articles and television and radio interviews. Research methods were triangulated using
different research methods such as in-field observation, interviews and presenting interview scripts back to the
participants for verification. In the following discussion of results, an interpretative summary, supported with
illustrative quotes has been provided. This is intended to help readers to understand the ways in which
respondents answered the questions and the meanings of the significant themes and categories.

4. DISCUSSION
4.1 Social-cultural factors and entrepreneurship orientation
The analysis emphasized that prevailing social-cultural factors in Sri Lanka has a significant impact
upon entrepreneurial behaviour and entrepreneurial orientation among the participants. Fashion designer
entrepreneurship is influenced not only by orthodox socio-cultural factors, but also by contemporary ‘á la
mode’ socio-cultural values.

4.2 Proactive behaviour and recognizing entrepreneurial opportunity in the Sri Lankan social context
Most entrepreneurs were inspired by socially derived values and norms to recognize business opportunity in
a proactive approach (Gamage, 2004, De Alwis & Senathiraja, 2003). As emphasized by the participant
entrepreneurs, they were motivated not only by anticipating future market trends, but also by being influenced
by social need, empathy, and a feeling of social responsibility. As emphasized by respondent (Rspt) D, he was
highly motivated by his personal values and a sense of social responsibility to upgrade livelihoods of Tsunami
victims among the ‘Marathamuni’ handloom weavers who helped him to weave his collection of fabrics for an
earlier fashion industry competition. As demonstrated in case D:
‘There is an emotional background actually… I used to work with Marathamuni handloom weavers from
Ampara for about four years. So after the Tsunami tragedy, they [weavers] lost everything. Then I went to
see them with donations. Then I couldn’t find my weavers, only few were existing. They have lost
everything. They were in a very very critical situation… As a young designer, I thought if I can give a
hand through my creativity, it could be a great idea and great sustainable starting point. I’m going to tell
the whole true story of these people [artisans] to the world. That was my starting point actually. Still I’m
working with them [artisans]. Now they are rewarded. I get orders and I place orders [to artisans], and they
are very happy about it. Even though it has taken time, it’s actually really worth.’
The proactive attitudes of the participants were subject to change progressively. The initial personal values of
the participant entrepreneur were extended to a higher order which improved the wider social welfare. As
emphasized by the Rspt B:
‘…But we were still missing, like ‘killer brands’, which would go overseas and make an impact. And, I
thought my role and my job won’t be fulfilled and finished unless I use my own personal talents and
instincts to create something which makes international impact…I want my brand to have a very Sri
Lankan identity. The idea was that I wanted to create an international mark for Sri Lanka. And to create
this platform so that everyone to be on that theme [Sri Lankan identity] successful. Now I look back and I
realize that it was that I wanted to give something back to Sri Lanka.’
Gamage (2004) suggests that enhanced values of the entrepreneur influenced proactiveness in opportunity
realisation. Specifically, the entrepreneurs' higher level of social power formed a new order of values that run
parallel to the growth of the business. These higher order values were based on wider social concerns such as
caring for the workforce, creating employment, making a contribution to a particular industry, maintaining
national, traditional or social pride, or a combination of these values.
The analysis emphasized that successful fashion designer entrepreneurs used qualitative information provided
by friends, work-associates and other people they trust to analyse market opportunities and to act proactively
rather than using published data. All the participant entrepreneurs realised market opportunities through their
social interactions, rather than systematic market research and business plans. They acted proactively to secure
their initial capital, information, initial manufacturing support through their family, previous employer and
others in their social network. Gamage (2004) asserts that social interaction and social intimacy allow Sri
Lankan entrepreneurs to enlarge their understanding of opportunities and information levels, to gain access to
critical resources and to deal with business obstacles.
Opportunity recognition was a social persuasive process rather than a proactive action for the participant
entrepreneurs. For example, Rspt C stated that:
‘I was experimenting and collecting few pieces … Then suddenly one of my friends came and he said, “These
items are very nice, why don’t you keep it in my boutique.” And then he took all these pieces and left and within
one month most of it was sold.’ Bhave (1994) highlights this as ‘externally stimulated opportunity’ where
entrepreneurs were influenced by their social interactions and trust.

4.3 Innovation as a socially influenced phenomenon

Innovation and creativity are essential elements in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial and artistic creativity that
lead to successful innovations are essential to be successful entrepreneurs in fashion industry (Mills, 2011). Not
only the mainstream market needs, but also wider social, environmental concerns and personal values also
influenced the innovations in all the participants’ businesses. Rspt A used apparel industry post-waste materials
innovatively with environmental sustainability in mind. As emphasized by Rspt A:
‘I understood as a by-product of the industry there are a lot of left-over materials. Personally I believe
“less is more”. And I don’t waste anything any which way. So it was really easy for me to immediately like
somebody’s left-over fabrics to up-cycle. I wanted to make something that was unfashionable fashionable,
and to make people understand you are allowed to recycle and make something look good.’
Rspt D also asserts that:
‘Even though my sustainable topic or the philosophy is not very new, I think it’s a global requirement and
also a personal requirement and a responsibility. So, rather than going for a very high-end, profiled fashion
designer process, I focused on sustainability, because it was very personal to me. It was very sensitive and
emotional topic for me to work with craft people and artisans.’
In these cases, the participants’ concerns for the environmental and social sustainability resulted in innovative
and sophisticated fashion products. As emphasized by Gamage (2004), the entrepreneurs’ social values
reinforced their ‘socio-cognitive’ (thinking about society) capabilities and in turn it improved their
conceptualising ability.
Fashion is a social-cultural phenomenon. Therefore, the contemporary social-cultural changes have
high-influence over customers’ attitudes in fashion. On the one hand, market research indicates lucrative
opportunities in the local market for self-expressive products. Self-expressive products market in Sri Lanka is
growing over a rate of 30 per cent’ (Thajudeen, 2011). This trend marks exciting opportunities for local fashion
designers to explore into different avenues of fashion, not merely as a piece of clothing, but also as a
self-expressive product. However, on the other hand, fashion is influenced by short-term trends and fast fashion,
which focuses on offering new clothes in comparatively less quality, at cheaper prices and also changing styles
as frequently as possible (Bruce & Daly, 2006). Majority of Sri Lankan consumers’ needs are mainly defined by
use of ‘utilitarian as opposed to aesthetic appeal’ (Fletcher, n.d.). Therefore, clothing has been identified by the
mainstream market as a ‘disposable product’ that can be purchased for a ‘cheaper’ price rather than considering
its aesthetic appeal and quality. These socio-cultural factors have an impact upon innovation in fashion designer
entrepreneurship. The participant entrepreneurs (e.g. Rspt E) have responded to this social factor by
developing sub-brands for ‘younger and price-sensitive market who seek trendy products at lower prices’.
Nevertheless, all the participant entrepreneurs created innovative products and market opportunities by utilizing
their social values, social power and social wisdom. As Rspt D emphasized:
 ‘At that time I started business, the glamour fashion immured the real fashion. My fashion was not
acceptable, because they were not glamorous... Sometimes I wanted to use local fabrics like Batik or
handloom, but nobody wanted to accept it... Some people wanted to see that I’m using imported luxurious
fabrics. I wanted to use real Sri Lankan local materials to create something very ethnic, very local
fashion… And using local materials and also contributing to local trends. I think I have changed that
mindset for certain extent. Now people prefer handloom fabrics, Batik fabrics, local fabrics, and even hand
crafted fabrics. They are worn by very high profile, elite people. I had to make a very big image to show
the value of these local fabrics. My foreign fashion shows and foreign presentations were very helpful for
me to break the traditional mentality of the local people.’
Rspt D has used his social power achieved in overseas presentations to offer innovative fashion that
represented his social value system embedded in social rightness. Gamage (2004) also emphasizes that ‘the
market was not a leading guide for the successful entrepreneurs, so they created market opportunities through
conceptualising power, social wisdom and social cognitive process’.

4.4 Risk-taking and social-cultural factors

Gamage (2004) asserts that risk management measures based on western norms have to be transformed into
socio-cultural subjective norms pertinent to Sri Lankan society. The data suggest that a host of social, cultural
and economical uncertainties in Sri Lanka influence entrepreneurial risk taking. The respondents are challenged
by risks associated with access to quality raw materials and efficient manufacturing technology, trained
workforce, market access and political decisions. Other socio-cultural factors such as customer attitudes,
cultural and family issues also create entrepreneurial risks. The participant entrepreneurs emphasized that Sri
Lankan political environment and bureaucracy in financial organizations have created risky environment for
entrepreneurship. As emphasized by Rspt B:
‘There is a very low-level support to entrepreneurship in design. Because right now the country is geared
towards import oriented and lower-level manufacturing oriented culture. Not for design and value added
sectors’. The entrepreneurs were reluctant in seeking outside funds through financial organisations because
of the risks associated with hidden policies, bureaucracy and cumbersome processes.
De Alwis & Senathiraja (2003) proclaim that unlike in the Western societies, Sri Lankan entrepreneurs
generally do not demonstrate an ‘aggressive’ attitude towards risk-taking. Gamage (2004) also asserts that risk
management as conceptualised in the Western models do not explain entrepreneurial risk-handling behaviour in
the Sri Lankan society. Rather, Sri Lankan socio-cultural norms have influenced a value-based risk-handling
culture (Gamage, 2004). The participant entrepreneurs used the social power and social capital gained through
the business process to overcome the risks caused by business challenges. As emphasized by Rspt C:
‘At that time I didn’t have a boutique, but I had a little shop window at the hotel [name]. During the
Non-aligned Conference, they wanted me to have a fashion show. And it was a great success. I was
privileged enough to dress President Kaunda’s wife, and all these VVIPs. And there, one of the gents said,
“you have beautiful clothing. Why don’t you get a stall at one of the international trade fairs?”... And he
kept to his word. Within six months I was offered a place at the Frankfurt International Trade Fair’.
This entrepreneur used social power and the social capital gained through the business process to eliminate
business risks caused by market access problems. Rspt A, B and D used their professional and personal
networks and reputation to gain access to the international market. The data indicates that loyalty and respect
from supportive authorities were derived from entrepreneurial reputation, professionalism, and trust.
 5. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS
This study qualitatively analyzed the influence of Sri Lankan social cultural realities in the fashion designers’
entrepreneurial behaviour. The western entrepreneurship models identify the entrepreneurial behaviour as a
process of systematic searches and careful strategic planning. Furthermore, the entrepreneur behaves rationally
in a systematic process of business planning. This ignores social values, interactions, and concerns that
influence the entrepreneurial behaviour. This study identifies that the prevailing social-cultural values and norms
highly influence entrepreneurial behaviour in the fashion business. Sri Lankan fashion designer entrepreneurs’
innovative, proactive and risk-taking behaviour is not fully explained through the Western entrepreneurship
models. Entrepreneurial behaviour studies in Sri Lanka therefore should consider the social cognitive process in
innovation, proactiveness, and risk-taking attitude. This paper contributes to the creative industries in Sri Lanka
and particularly to the fashion designer entrepreneurship by identifying socio-cultural influences in
entrepreneurial behaviour. The study emphasizes the necessity of recognizing the importance of social-cultural
factors and how those factors influence entrepreneurial behaviour. Fashion industry and entrepreneurship is
highly sensitive for the social-cultural changes. Therefore, it is important to identify the influences of the
social-cultural factors when determining actions and plans to develop entrepreneurship in the fashion industry
and other creative industry sectors. The study suggests that psychological reinforcement, training and support
are not enough to develop entrepreneurial behaviour in Sri Lanka. The entrepreneur required a well-developed
social vision and opportunities to develop his/her social capital to be a successful entrepreneur. Data collected in
this study were restricted to the fashion designer entrepreneurship. However, the same combination of strategies
and factors would be contributing to other entrepreneurship sectors, and therefore further exploration of this
study is encouraged.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors acknowledge the six respondents for their time and commitment to participate in the study.

REFERENCES
Bhave, M. P. (1994). A process model of enfrepreneurial venture creation. Joumal of Business Venturing, 9, 223–242.
Bruce, M., & Daly, L. (2006). Buyer behaviour for fast fashion. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 10(3), 329
– 344.
Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, 7–25.
Cunningham, B. J., & Lischeron, J. (1991). Defining entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management, 29(1),
45–61.
De Alwis, G. W. P., & Senathiraja, R. (2003). The impact of socio – cultural background of the entrepreneur on management
and business practices of selected small and medium scale businesses in Sri Lanka. Presented at the 9th
International Conference on Sri Lanka Studies, Matara, Sri Lanka.
Deakins, D., & Freel, M. (2009). Entrepreneurship and Small Firms (5th edition.). Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Education.
Dias, S. (2011, December 18). Sri Lankan designers eye US$ 500 mln fashion business. Sunday Times, p. 3. Colombo, Sri
Lanka.
Fletcher, R. (n.d.). The impact of culture on marketing at the bottom of the pyramid: A relationship creation and network
development approach. Retrieved November 20, 2012, from
http://www.unice.fr/crookall-cours/iup_cult/_docs/_Fletcher%20-%20Cultural%20Differences%20marketing%205
687.pdf
Gamage, H. R. (2004, March). Understanding the social realities of entrepreneurial performance in Sri Lanka: An
 alternative paradigm: PhD Thesis. University of Queensland, Australia.
Gamage, H. R., Cameron, D., & Woods, E. (2003). Are Sri Lankan entrepreneurs motivated by the need for achievement?
Matara.
Gunaratne, K. A. (2008). Conceptualising a model to promote post start-up small business growth in Sri Lanka: PhD thesis.
Christchurch: University of Canterbury.
Henry, C. (Ed.). (2007). Entrepreneurship in the Creative Industries: An International Perspective. Glos, UK: Edward Elgar.
Heunks, F. J. (1988). Innovation, creativity and success. Small Business Economics, 10(3), 263–272.
Hewapathirana, G. I., & Fernando, A. W. (2008). Social identity: A strategic dimension of internationalization. In Advancing
Small Businesses and Entrepreneurship from Research to Results. Presented at the International Council for Small
Business World Conference, Nova Scotia, Canada. Retrieved from
http://sbaer.uca.edu/research/icsb/2008/chald24f.html
Katsikis, I. N., & Kyrgidou, L. P. (2009). Entrepreneurship in teleology: The variety of the forms. International Journal of
Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 15, 209–231.
Krauss, S. I., Frese, M., Frirftich, C., & Unger, J. M. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation: A psychological model of success
among Southern African small business owners. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 1–42.
Low, M. B., & MacMillan, I. C. (1988). Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenges. Journal of Management,
14(2), 139–161.
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance.
Academy of Management Review, 21, 135–172.
Madsen, H., Neergaard, H., & Ulhøi, J. P. (2008). Factors influencing the establishment of knowledge-intensive ventures.
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 14, 70–84.
Malem, W. (2008). Fashion designers as business: London. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 12, 398–414.
McClellend, D. (1961). The achieving society. New York, NY: Von Nostrand.
Mills, C. (2011). Enterprise orientations: Making sense of fashion sector start-ups. International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behaviour and Research, 17, 245–271.
Okhomina, D. (2010). Entrepreneurial orientation and psychological traits: The moderating influence of supportive
environment. Journal of Behavioral Studies in Business, 2.
Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: an
assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33, 761–787.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The Theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit interest and the
business cycle. New Jersey: Transaction.
Thajudeen, T. (2011, July 13). Growth in self-expressive products is surging in Sri Lanka. Sunday Times, p. 4. Colombo, Sri
Lanka.
Thornton, P. H., Ribeiro-Soriano, D., & Urbano, D. (2011). Socio-cultural factors and entrepreneurial activity: An overview.
International Small Business Journal, 29(2), International Small Business Journal.
Thrikawala, S. S. (2011). Impact of strategic networks for the success of SMEs in Sri Lanka. World Journal of Social
Sciences, 1, 108–119.
Tipu, S. A. A., & Arain, M. F. (2011). Managing success factors in entrepreneurial ventures: A behavioural approach.
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 17, 534–560.
United Nations. (2010). Creative economy: A feasible development option.
Valliere, D. (2008). Exploring Buddhist influence on the entrepreneurial decision. International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behaviour & Research, 14(3), 172–191.
Walton, M., & Duncan, I. (2002). Creative industries in New Zealand (p. 29). NZ Institute of Economic Research (Inc.).
Retrieved from www.culturenet.cz/res/data/002/000339.pdf