University Essay: Fundamentals of Entrepreneurship and Policy

This essay delves into the fundamentals of entrepreneurship, exploring its core concepts, characteristics, and the role of government intervention in fostering a thriving entrepreneurial ecosystem. It examines how government policies, regulations, and support mechanisms influence small business performance, innovation, and risk-taking. The essay discusses various types of entrepreneurs, including classical, innovative, social, and serial entrepreneurs, and analyzes the importance of entrepreneurial ecosystems in supporting new ventures. It also highlights the impact of government intervention through policies, regulations, and financial measures. The essay concludes by emphasizing the challenges entrepreneurs face and the importance of government support, including the need for a balanced approach to policy interventions to promote sustainable growth and development within the entrepreneurial landscape.

Running head: FUNDAMENTALS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
FUNDAMENTALS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1FUNDAMENTALS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Introduction
Due to fact that the entrepreneurship could be considered as modern concept in context of
business market as well as increasing awareness is there for its importance along with
contribution to community, evidence is there of centers and institutions set up for promoting
spirit of entrepreneurship, enhance the activities as well as practice this in field. This paper
introduces entrepreneurship’s concept in the paper and how the government intervention could
promote this in achieving effective performance. Small businesses are dependent upon traditional
styles, technology of low level within business management as well as traditional processes of
marketing for promoting their services and products (Westhead, Wright and McElwee 2011).
Small organizations are susceptible for competitiveness which stem from the foreign
organizations as the foreign organizations have outstanding quality and high technology. Desire
in stimulating job and economic growth through application of innovation as well as
entrepreneurship has been common theme for government policy.
Business Performance
There is wide difference between performance measures of the organizations which leads
to great diversity within outcome of relationship. Objective data, in such regard, is tough in
acquiring as the respondents are quite hesitant in releasing private data to public. Though, firm
performance’s subjective evaluation is volunteered readily by managers and owners, however it
lacks strong reliability (Yoon et al. 2018). On other hand, the performance could be deemed in
having multiple dimensions. Hence, this is much more beneficial in combining several objective
and subjective performance measures for accurately measuring performance.

2FUNDAMENTALS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Characteristics of Entrepreneurship
Characteristics of entrepreneurship are several as well as varied. Self-confidence,
ambition, resourcefulness, determination and passions spring in mind, however so do tolerance
of sleepless nights and risk taking. This could be challenging in keep going when customers do
not materialize and funding does not come through. Though it is possible in succeeding without
entrepreneurial spirit. Entrepreneurship’s main feature is willingness in taking risks (Malone and
Lusk 2016). This is no secret that about half of startups of small business survive for many years.
Determination goes with risk taking. One of most underrated characteristics of entrepreneurship
is perspective. This is one thing to be passionate of the business.
Several entrepreneurs select this lifestyle for autonomy and freedom this offers. Such
things are quite meaningless of balance of work and life is not right. Store owners, auto
mechanics, plumbers, hair stylists and restaurant owners are entrepreneurs, however they are
backbone of community of entrepreneurship. Classical entrepreneurs usually are has worked in
respective industry for few years and feels in starting business of their own. Those having idea
for next My Fitness Pal, Dropbox and Facebook fall under innovative entrepreneur’s category
(Chen et al. 2018). Such people mainly think to build business which would scale up rapidly so
they could sell this to one of big corporations in huge amount of money. They come often from
technical or science background as well as are adept to spot customer trends as well as new
technologies. The approach is quickly developing products and ideas for meeting the new
requirements.
Social entrepreneurs are driven by desire for creating positive change within their society
and communities at large. Businesses are started by them for helping people and be force for
good in world. Success is not measured by them with respect to profit only. Sole job of serial

3FUNDAMENTALS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
entrepreneurs is entrepreneurship. There would be several organizations for serial entrepreneurs.
Such entrepreneurs don’t get invested for their business to cruise speed, sell them then and use
profit for starting new venture. Serial entrepreneurs develop strategy, secure investment,
manufacture or distribute product, mobilize teams and set up management and operational
function. Major difference among serial entrepreneur and other entrepreneurs is exit strategy (Jia,
Lan and i Miquel 2019). The serial entrepreneur plans in exiting their venture before starting
them. Solopreneur is one man band who operates the business alone as well as manages every
aspect of business. Freelancers are under this category. They focus to create lifestyle they like.
Entrepreneurial Ecosystems
Ecosystems’ idea is central for way businesses are operated today. The effective policies
should reflect it. Today, the new organizations tend in clustering around platform of single
technology while independently operating, they complement each other while creating the shared
offerings for the end users. Ecosystem of entrepreneurship, as different form ecosystem of
innovation, is essentially collection of the stakeholders. Such stakeholders might be the venture
capitalists, R&D agencies, educators, support agencies and service providers. No clear hierarchy
is there in ecosystem, each stakeholder operates less or more independently (Okeke-Uzodike,
Okeke-Uzodike and Ndinda 2018). Ecosystems of entrepreneurship deliver two major services.
They facilitate as well as support types of innovative along with new organizations that are
growth oriented. They help in identifying which of the ventures work by resources’ trial and
error allocation. Ultimate result for the process is entire ecosystem’s enhanced productivity.
Successful ecosystem of entrepreneurship should be able in realizing new ventures’ full
potential, support the entrepreneurial experimentation as well as be able in reallocating resources

4FUNDAMENTALS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
and human capital from the struggling ventures for those looking for success. It presents
challenge for the policymakers. Ecosystems of entrepreneurship create ecosystem service by one
to one interactions between stakeholders of the ecosystem. This could be tough for external
policymaker in identifying where bottlenecks of system are and where the policy effort must be
allocated. Traditional approach of top down policy for addressing structural failures and static
market is unlikely going to work within ecosystems (Etzkowitz and Zhou 2017). It is as failures
of ecosystem are not static, but dynamic. From outside, this could be tough for the policymakers
in understanding the working procedure of given ecosystem or how in formulating policies
which would impact this. Just entrepreneurship changed, the approaches to the policy should
change too.
Effective Policymaking
Characteristics of individual level are categorized in ability, aspirations and attitudes,
loosely correlating into following styles for policy intervention as well as venture’s stage they
are suited to boosting in where policies to maximizing degree for which the new ventures could
realize the growth potential. Buffering in where policies seeking fir maximizing quality of the
new ventures as well as shelter them in lives early on. Bridging in where policies encourage
individuals of high potential in becoming entrepreneurs. In startup system, startups of
opportunity driven are to be encouraged by light burden. Scale ups with eye on export market
should have access for experienced and competent managers. Life cycle of new venture is
covered by three sections, from the formation, to scale up and to startup. They define also
ecosystem’s productive potential as whole. If standup system fails in encouraging individuals of
high potential in pursuing entrepreneurship, startups this produces might not be of high quality

5FUNDAMENTALS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
for even reaching stage of scale up (Bozhikin, Macke and da Costa 2019). Policymakers should
consider balance of the three systems for ecosystem as whole for benefit. Few lessons for the
policy are more one moves to activities of scale up, less effective organization specific,
interventions of supply push policy are to be, look beyond scale ups and startups of individual to
functioning of ecosystem, addressing the bottlenecks which might hamper system as whole.
Policies for addressing structural and market failures still have role to be played with regions
having limited infrastructure of entrepreneurship. Customized, firm specific interventions must
be designed for driving firms of high growth. Ecosystem initiatives must facilitate identification
by the participants with broader ecosystem, as well as strengthen commitment between
stakeholders for coordinating the actions (Blackburn 2016). Stakeholders should be engaged
actively, approach of top down would unlikely work in non-hierarchical ecosystem. Ecosystem
approach for policy of entrepreneurship must be coordinated closely with the project under smart
policy framework. Approach of long term is required for facilitating ecosystem. The successful
interventions must be coordinated by committed, credible organization (Dallago and Tortia
2018). Operating in partnership through regional organizations would help in overcoming
challenges inherent within approach of ecosystem to policy.
Government Intervention
Despite small business’s considerable growth, entrepreneurial activity’s rate is of
moderate level. Key role is there for government to promote entrepreneurship notwithstanding
entrepreneurship’s level. Government interventions such as regulations and legislations are
among determinants to promote entrepreneurship. Actions of entrepreneurship are affected by
regional environments by identifying the principal factors such as culture, societal rules,

6FUNDAMENTALS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
procedure of government and conditions of economy. Government legitimizations and
enactments are among significant drivers and major effects for promotion of entrepreneurship
(Varady, Kleinhans and Van Ham 2017). In entrepreneurship’s context, exterior factors influence
flow decision of entrepreneurial adoption among the small businesses. It is found that
government interventions are among factors which influence SMEs in adopting new activities of
entrepreneurship.
Government interventions lead to higher inclination between SMEs in performing better
within industry sector. Intervention of government is significant factor which affects adoption of
entrepreneurship. Government interventions such as reduction in taxes and subsidies must be
focused for expediting performance of small business. Intervention is referred to influence of
government institutions over businesses. Interventions’ effect over adoption of entrepreneurship
is unexplored largely (Alhnity, Mohamad and Ishak 2016). Relationship among activities of
entrepreneurship and contextual factors of institutions are still far between.
Informal institutions such as normal culture as well as formal institutions such as
political, regulatory and economic environments antecede context where there is implementation
of strategic plans. Interventions from government affect businesses’ outcomes and uncertainties
over availability of investments of government, capital and programs of finance influence the
businesses. Fiscal measures like exemptions or reductions in tax also play role. Positive
intervention of government shows consensus throughout region concerning best practices for
implementation of activities of entrepreneurship (Henry, Hill and Leitch 2017). Entrepreneurs
knowing in employing strategies which are not risky are able in coping with competiveness
within market. Good intervention of government indicates if entrepreneurs in area views
activities of entrepreneurship as positive thing, they would be much more inclined for them as

7FUNDAMENTALS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
well as would likely receive support. Environmental and organizational factors must be
examined for moderating effects over relationship among the performance. Relationship among
performance of small business and innovativeness is moderated by intervention of government
(Godfrey and Pourmojib 2017). Relationship among performance of small business and risk
taking is moderated by intervention of government. Relationship among performance of small
business and proactiveness is moderated by intervention of government.
Conclusion
Being entrepreneur is quite tough. Challenges faced by entrepreneurs are either external
or internal. When entrepreneur starts his journey, he should believe in himself and look for
motivation for going on own. Entrepreneurs are looking always for the opportunities in system
which could give them advantage. One of such systems is government. As one of key players
within ecosystem of entrepreneurship, laws are enforced by policymakers which make this tough
or possible to thrive for the entrepreneurs. Government principles and policies are essential for
entrepreneurship for succeeding. There are regulations which me this possible for existence of
small businesses in parameters which are unrestrictive to growth. Governments which support
entrepreneurs develop as well as implement structures for growth which allow development of
enterprise.

8FUNDAMENTALS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
References
Alhnity, H., Mohamad, A. and Ishak, A.K., 2016. Impact of entrepreneurial orientation on small
business performance: Moderating role of government intervention. International Review of
Management and Marketing, 6(7S), pp.95-100.
Blackburn, R.A., 2016. Government, SMEs and entrepreneurship development: Policy, practice
and challenges. Routledge.
Bozhikin, I., Macke, J. and da Costa, L.F., 2019. The role of government and key non-state
actors in social entrepreneurship: A systematic literature review. Journal of cleaner production.
Chen, M.W., Chen, Y., Wu, Z.H. and Zhao, N., 2018. Government Intervention, Innovation, and
Entrepreneurship (No. 2018-15). University of Graz, Department of Economics.
Dallago, B. and Tortia, E. eds., 2018. Entrepreneurship and Local Economic Development: A
Comparative Perspective on Entrepreneurs, Universities and Governments. Routledge.
Etzkowitz, H. and Zhou, C., 2017. The triple helix: University–industry–government innovation
and entrepreneurship. Routledge.
Godfrey, A.B. and Pourmojib, S., 2017, October. Innovation, entrepreneurship and textiles.
In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 254, No. 21, p. 212003).
IOP Publishing.
Henry, C., Hill, F. and Leitch, C., 2017. Entrepreneurship education and training: the issue of
effectiveness: the issue of effectiveness. Routledge.

9FUNDAMENTALS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Jia, R., Lan, X. and i Miquel, G.P., 2019. Doing Business in China: Parental Background and
Government Intervention as Determinants of Entrepreneurship.
Malone, T. and Lusk, J.L., 2016. Brewing up entrepreneurship: Government intervention in
beer. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy.
Okeke-Uzodike, O.E., Okeke-Uzodike, U. and Ndinda, C., 2018. Women entrepreneurship in
Kwazulu-Natal: a critical review of government intervention politics and programs. Journal of
International Women's Studies, 19(5), pp.147-164.
Varady, D., Kleinhans, R. and Van Ham, M., 2017. The potential of community entrepreneurship
for neighbourhood revitalization in the United Kingdom and the United States.
In Entrepreneurial Neighbourhoods. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Westhead, P., Wright, M. and McElwee, G. eds., 2011. Entrepreneurship: Perspectives and
cases. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Yoon, H.D., Kim, N., Buisson, B. and Phillips, F., 2018. A cross-national study of knowledge,
government intervention, and innovative nascent entrepreneurship. Journal of Business
Research, 84, pp.243-252.