Distinguishing entrepreneurship traits

Introduction
The expectation of this paper is to explore the distinguishing entrepreneurial
characteristics: The relevance of entrepreneurial traits in building innovation capacity and
whether business entrepreneurs are born. That is, they have undeniable, common inherent
traits to develop and succeed as business visionaries or they are the results of the experience
and the knowledge of enterprise that they have been taught in schools and universities. This,
obviously, is not another contention; it has been debated for quite a while and by various
individuals and scholars from different perspectives.
A few parts of this debate will be discussed in the survey. It is enticing, most likely, to
follow in this matter of the open deliberation as well, Alexander Pope’s recommendation on
the types of government and get on with an exchange and investigation of the idea and
ramifications of enterprise without dithering to discover a response to the inquiry whether
business enterprise is a divine being given quality or a man-made antique. However, it is
discovered judicious and even to some degree vital in the matter of talking about the theme of
this study, to take after the wise decree ascribed to the friendly character, Sir Roger de
Coverly of Addison’s Essays, that “much might be said on both sides of the inquiry” .
Abundantly in reality it can be said in regards to the characteristics of enterprise being
embedded in a man by Nature herself as on account of Sir Alan Sugar in UK or Ophrah
Winfry in USA. Moreover, much likewise can be said to counter this perspective with
numerous illustrations of remarkable “entrepreneurial” accomplishment by school taught
‘business visionaries’.

Distinguishing entrepreneurial characteristics 

3

Literature review
Intensive literature has been developed pertaining to how well to excel in business.
However, data concerning the source of entrepreneurship skills has heavily banked on the
assertion that the skills are harnessed through learning. At a Barclays Bank Conference held
in London concerning the aforementioned topic, the conclusion was business entrepreneurs
are made and not born. Cross-sectional studies revealed that only ninety-five percent of an
individual’s abilities are leaned while fiver percent is inherent (Dawson, 2014).
Problem Statement
Over the years, matters pertaining to the questions raised on what it takes for individuals
to become successful business entrepreneurs have been developed. Not only are these
questions stemming from individuals striving to excel in business but even in the classroom
environment. Being a Business major student, some of the key areas of study involve
entrepreneurship and innovation. Research on this study reveals that the modules mentioned
above go hand in hand in innovation. However, despite this being common knowledge to all,
some individuals tend to have a better understanding of various business settings in which
they thrive. Majority of start-up business fail within the first twenty four months upon which
they are opened hence raising the question what is the the relevance of entrepreneurial traits
in building innovation capacity.
Research methodology
The following are the research questions:
Major questions involve
 The relevance of entrepreneurial traits in building innovation capacity

Distinguishing entrepreneurial characteristics 

4

Minor questions that raised are
 Is entrepreneurship learned or inborn?
 What are the necessary traits of a successful entrepreneur?
 Do all business moguls have similar personality traits?
 What impact does experience have on enhancing innovation?

Therefore, the methodological framework of the research is highly inductive. Ary et al.
(2013) posit that in research, inductive approaches refer to methodologies that seek to
determine a given trend among the study sample, which is then related to an entire population
and has probabilistic properties. On the other hand, a deductive approach has findings that are
valid when applied to all subjects of the study population and therefore, has no probabilities
(Gray, 2013; Ary et al., 2013). Additionally, the methodology of this research will also be
based on an interpretivist philosophical view. According to Bernard (2011), the interpretivist
approach involves a considerable contribution of the researcher when collecting data. To
establish the impact of marketing practices on players, their attitudes, experiences and
involvement must be determined; however, to ascertain the level of impact of each practice
on an individual sample subject, deliberative interpretation must be included. Gray (2013)
argues that this leads to subjectivity and is a major weakness of research involving unique
and non-distinct data. Accordingly, to reduce the impact of subjectivity, Bernard (2011)
recommends collecting distinct data for comparison. Therefore, this research will collect both
distinct and non-distinct data.
Research design
The research type that the study will employ will be both qualitative and quantitative.
Quantitative in research involves the collection of measurable data (Bernard, 2011) because
participants give distinct answers/feedback. Ragin (2014) holds that distinct data is a major

Distinguishing entrepreneurial characteristics 

5
advantage of quantitative research because of highly simplified analysis. For instance, the
questions asked in the research will require the entrepreneurs and employees to indicate their
feedback on a low (zero) to a high (five) scale. Consequently, similar answers will be
grouped, and the totals will be compared to arrive at the findings and conclusions. On the
other hand, qualitative research types involve non-distinct data collection, where exploratory
and probing approaches are used when interacting with participants (Bernard, 2011; Ragin,
2014). In this case, the questions to be used will be framed by researchers; however, the
direction of the research will depend on the respondents, whose experiences are distinct at
individual levels.
Accordingly, qualitative research is more involved and requires a keen interest in the
word choice and body language of respondents. The advantage of this research type is that it
provides wide-ranging data that makes the analysis more objective (Ritchie et al., 2013; Gray,
2013). Additionally, Ragin (2014) holds that the qualitative research type is highly flexible
because the researcher can change the direction of the study or explain specific points for
clarity or collection of more reliable data. Gray (2013) posits that there are numerous
methods for the quantitative research type, which include surveys and experiments (quasi or
correlational), among many others. Similarly, the qualitative researches can be realised using
several methods, for example, case studies, interviews, focus groups (Ritchie et al., 2013;
Bernard, 2011) and others. Each of these methods has unique advantages and drawbacks. For
this research, questionnaires will be used to collect quantitative data while in-depth
interviews and focus groups will be employed for non-distinct research.
The Research Method
As pointed out earlier, the research will use questionnaires. Phellas, Bloch and Seale
(2011) note that this method is very common because of the many advantages it has.

Distinguishing entrepreneurial characteristics 

6
Questionnaires are easy to administer because the only work involved is delivering questions
with little explanations to participants (Phellas, Bloch & Seale, 2011). Therefore, they do not
require experts, which significantly reduces costs. Additionally, Bernard and Bernard (2012)
note that data collection in this method is fast because questionnaires can be filled by the
sample population simultaneously without affecting the reliability of collected data.
Accordingly, these advantages and many others make questionnaire administration the most
suitable method for this study. However, questionnaires cannot gauge the feelings, attitudes
and thoughtfulness of participants, which, according to Ragin (2014), if included, reinforce
data validity. Accordingly, given that the study has to understand video players’ experiences,
questionnaires cannot be exclusively used.
Additionally, the research will also include qualitative methods. These methods will be
in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. While the questions listed above require
distinct information, these methods will be explorative and aim to know the reasons for the
choices the entrepreneurs make. As noted before, the main advantage presented by these
methods is capturing participant feelings and attitudes, which increases the validity of
collected data (Ragin, 2014; Bernard & Bernard, 2012). In addition, Gray (3013) and Ary et
al. (2013) point out that the main difference between in-depth interviews and focus groups is
the number of participants, where the former involves one, and the latter has six to eight
participants with similar characteristics that are pertinent to the research. Accordingly, data
collected from focus groups is richer than the one obtained through interviews (Sarantakos,
2012; Bernard & Bernard, 2012).
The Sample
The random sampling technique will be used to choose the study population. Ary et
al. (2013) argue that the technique is ideal when dealing with few participants. One hundred

Distinguishing entrepreneurial characteristics 

7
individuals will be chosen. All the chosen participants must be entrepreneurs or employees
within which are under the leadership of successful entrepreneurs. A questionnaire with the
above-listed questions will be administered to all the participants. The participants will be
allowed to seek for clarifications. In the subsequent stage, from the one hundred participants,
twenty-four individuals will be chosen and divided into three groups, with each having eight
respondents. Furthermore, from the three groups, six individuals will be chosen for in-depth
interviews, two from each. All the participants will be informed about the details of the group
discussion ten days to the set date. Moreover, the six chosen individuals will provide the best
dates for their interviews. The researcher will conduct FGDs lasting for at most twenty
minutes with each of these groups. In the final stage, the researcher will conduct an in-depth
interview with each of the chosen six participants.
Data analysis
SPSS will be main data analysis tool used for this study. While quantitative
investigation programming eg. SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) have been
in vogue amongst specialists for quite a while, subjective investigation programming has
taken a great deal longer to get a crowd of people. In any case, the utilization of programming
with the end goal of subjective investigation can give substantial advantages. Fitting
programming can abbreviate investigation time periods, can give more exhaustive and
thorough coding and understanding, and give analysts upgraded information administration.
Ethical Implications
Numerous ethical implications arise when carrying out the research. Miller et al.
(2012) point out that professionalism requires that the participants understand the intention of
the study. Besides being an ethical requirement that forms the basis for their acceptance to
participate, good comprehension will enable respondents to give focused feedback, which

Distinguishing entrepreneurial characteristics 

8
increases data validity and reliability. Additionally, the participants have to be reassured
about the confidentiality of shared information, whether personal or not (Sarantakos, 2012).
This assurance helps them to be open, which benefits the research by providing rich data.
Furthermore, unless unavoidable, to eliminate errors or inconsistencies and remain focused,
the researcher must strictly follow the developed question structures (Bernard & Bernard,
2012; Ary et al., 2013). In addition, Gray (2013) holds that data falsifications or fabrications
must be avoided completely to guarantee data validity. The researcher must also avoid any
subjectivity by involving at least one additional party when interpreting data. To make the
process even simpler, they can record the group discussions and interviews and afterward,
use a panel for interpretation.

Expected Results

Entrepreneurship success has been a contention debate over a very long period owing to
the success and businesses that have resulted to some of the world’s most influential people.
Scholars and researchers have delved into researching on whether entrepreneurial skills are
inherent or not and many theories have been proposed. However, scientific research proves
that there is no correlation between an individual’s biological make-up and their success in
business ventures. Rather, scholars have concluded that entrepreneurship skills are learned
and differ from one individual to another. Famous business moguls have often been quoted
stating their business success was a result of intensive reading of the market structure and
trends of their business trends that they applied resulting in their success.
In conclusion, distinguishing entrepreneurial traits and especially the impact and
relevance of entrepreneurship in building innovation is a subject that has not been
comprehensively covered. As such, research in the research topic mentioned above will help

Distinguishing entrepreneurial characteristics 

9
in revising the techniques employed by most individuals that are developing their business
and will also aid in the in enriching curriculums to help empower students with the necessary
traits to become successful entrepreneurs. Besides, controversial matters pertaining to
whether entrepreneurship is inborn or learned will be covered in this study.

Distinguishing entrepreneurial characteristics 

10

References

Ary, D., Jacobs, L., Sorensen, C., & Walker, D. (2013). Introduction to research in
education. Boston: Cengage Learning.
Bernard, H. R. (2011). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative
approaches. Maryland: Rowman Altamira.
Bernard, H. R., & Bernard, H. R. (2012). Social research methods: Qualitative and
quantitative approaches. California: Sage.
Dawson, F. (2014). Forbes Welcome. Forbes.com. Retrieved 25 December 2014, from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/freddiedawson/2014/12/25/are-entrepreneurs-born-or-
made/#132cd533832b
Gray, D. E. (2013). Doing research in the real world. California: Sage.
Miller, T., Birch, M., Mauthner, M., & Jessop, J. (Eds.). (2012). Ethics in qualitative
research. California: Sage.
Phellas, C. N., Bloch, A., & Seale, C. (2011). Structured methods: interviews, questionnaires
and observation. Researching Society and Culture. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 181-205.
Ragin, C. C. (2014). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative
strategies. California: Univ of California Press.
Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (Eds.). (2013).Qualitative research
practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. California: Sage.
Sarantakos, S. (2012). Social research. London: Palgrave Macmillan.