A NEW STRATEGY FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP DEVELOPMENT

A NEW STRATEGY FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP DEVELOPMENT

 

Entrepreneurship Development Strategy (hereinafter, the Strategy) aims at formulating the vision of the desired future state of entrepreneurship sector in Ukraine, as well as at defining the key directions (the course) of the state policy targeted at its achievement.

Strategic goals were formulated based on such vision, which set the vectors for activities and define the focus points for joining resources and efforts.

The Strategy is based upon the recognition of the socially important role of entrepreneurship in ensuring socio-economic development of the country, as entrepreneurial structures contribute the biggest share of value added, satisfy the demand for most goods and services, as well as create the majority of jobs for population.

The Strategy takes into account the unique role of every segment of entrepreneurship in socio-economic life of the country and the need for their balanced development.

Such approach will contribute to building sustainable chains of creating value added, which include small, medium and large enterprises interacting between themselves based on the principles of equal partnership and fair competition.

The Strategy pays considerable attention to facilitating development of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and establishing environment for starting up new businesses.

Competitive ability of SMEs and emergence of new enterprises build the capacity for future economic growth.

These are also the precondition for positive structural changes in economy, which result into decreasing number or transformation of the traditional sectors with outdated technologies, and appearance of the new sectors based on intensive knowledge use and innovation implementation.

The Objectives of the Strategy in the part of facilitating the development of small business are set in accordance with the Small Business Act for Europe that set the main principles of the state policy in this sphere.

The Strategy sets the general framework for the public entrepreneurship development policy in the sectors where the market mechanisms of self-regulation are incapable or for the intensification of certain processes in need of state intervention. Thus, the Strategy involves rational combination of market and state regulation mechanisms.

However, the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) report expects a country at South Africa’s stage of economic development to have a TEA rate around 15%, which is more than 60% greater than its actual rate of 8.9%.

Much of the country’s below-average entrepreneurial performance can be linked to its below-average scores on indicators of entrepreneurial attitudes and perceptions.

An entrepreneurial culture will not exist until a favorable attitude towards entrepreneurship is fostered among South Africans. Nonetheless, the nation has made improvements since 2009 in every category assessed by GEM. For example, its TEA rate has increased significantly from 5.9% to 8.9%, and its new firm activity has increased from 2.5% to 3.9%.

Because of local culture, attitudes, and habits, it can be difficult for these groups to sustain themselves.

We believe it is because of worker’s illiteracy in business matters (many people are in the first or second stage of entrepreneurial development and do not understand why such groups are important or how to sustain them) and cultural hesitancy that these groups fail to sustain themselves if created.

In both challenges, it can be difficult for NGOs like Living Way to start and spin off a networking organization. However, even if the group cannot be successfully spun off, its benefits still remain.

CONCLUSION:

The work of Living Way is front-line and cutting edge. There is little precedent for how to approach these challenges of low education, a disinterested population, welfare-sustained inefficiency, and development of entrepreneurship from the ground up.

However, Living Way and like firms are making progress. We recommend that above all, Living Way see how all its programs and efforts are learning efforts and real-time contributions to economic development.

Further, there is no standard method firms can replicate in a variety of cultural circumstances to develop entrepreneurship. Culture is core to business, and economies, though working towards efficiency, operate differently from one country to the next, or even one providence or the next. Personality and cultural norms, too, play a heavy role in entrepreneurship.

Based on literature, examples, and experience Living Way can craft custom solutions (such as farming tunnels or a bakery) that are unique to Masi’s situation. It should be careful in seeking to replicate programs or successes in other cultures.

 Many minute details which contributed to success might not replicate in Masi. Further, an idea failing in another context should not necessarily discourage Living Way from trying it custom-fit to Masi.

The work is trailblazing, and experiences have success points and opportunities for shaping a better program. In summary, this report provides a new perspective for approaching the problem.

It does not assert this perspective is wholly accurate or that, if so, it is the only perspective. Living Way and its staff should continue seeking new ways to understand and interpret the challenges it faces.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *