Institutional framing for entrepreneurship in sub‐Saharan Africa: a case of Uganda
| Date | 12 July 2013 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/WJEMSD-01-2013-0016 |
| Published date | 12 July 2013 |
| Pages | 133-154 |
| Author | Joseph Mpeera Ntayi,Henry Mutebi,Susan Kamanyi,Kenneth Byangwa |
| Subject Matter | Public policy & environmental management |
Institutional framing for
entrepreneurship in sub-Saharan
Africa: a case of Uganda
Joseph Mpeera Ntayi and Henry Mutebi
Makerere University Business School (MUBS), Kampala, Uganda, and
Susan Kamanyi and Kenneth Byangwa
Business Development and Research Consultants (BDR), Kampala, Uganda
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to examine institutional framing for entrepreneurship in a
sub-Saharan context and provide policy input required in solving the daunting problem of the existing
low levels and high failure rate of business start-ups in Uganda.
Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected from a sample of 659 SMEs from two
districts of Uganda in Jinja and Mukono which were scientifically selected for this study. Appropriate
analytical data techniques were applied.
Findings – Results reveal the presence of implicit regulative, explicit regulative, constitutive
cognitive and normative institutions which affect entrepreneurial activities in Uganda. These findings
and their policy implications are fully discussed in the pap er.
Originality/value – This research parallels the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) 2004 study
that reports high total entrepreneurship activity (TEA) from Uganda and presents the impor tance
of understanding the institutional framing for entrepreneurship. There is a paucity of research
addressing institutional framing for entrepreneurship from a sub-Saharan context, creating a need
to study and systematically document the prevailing suppo rting institutions as a framework for
promoting entrepreneurship in Uganda.
Keywords Entrepreneurship, Institutions, Frame, Cognitive, Normative, Uganda,
Entrepreneurialism, Organizations
Paper type Research p aper
Background to the study
Institutional framing refers to specific ways of conceptualizing institutions by
entrepreneurs from different perspectives (Chong and Druckman, 2007). The choice
of institutional frame determines its impor tance, priority and urgency attached to
its conceptualization as well as how relationships among institutio nal templates are
understood (Poteete, 2012). Actions within an institutional frame tend to stabilize,
while being caught between frames may destabilize entrepreneurs and the associated
entrepreneurship actions. This creates tension between institutional frames or “situation
transcending phenomena” held by entrepreneurs (Linell, 2009) which are beyond their
control. Entrepreneurs simply “ [y] assess correctly what the situation ought to be
and then act accordingly” (Goffman, 1974, pp. 1-2). The materiality of frames is situated
in psychological expectations (Goffman, 1974), which if clearly understood result into
improved entrepreneurial actions. In this study, we argue that entrepreneurs hold
several institutional frames and/or templates that affect entrepreneurship action
in Ugandan.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/2042-5961.htm
World Journal of Entrepreneurship,
Management and Sustainable
Development
Vol. 9 No.2/3, 2013
pp. 133-154
rEmeraldGroup Publishing Limited
2042-5961
DOI 10.1108/W JEMSD-01-2013- 0016
This research study was supported by a grant from ICBE (joint project of TrustAfrica
and IDRC).
133
Institutional
framing
This study parallels previous studies in the mainstream econo mics which have
largely ignored the entrepreneurship construct due to dominant methodological and
formal tools of mathematical economics approach (Henrekson, 2007; Baumol, 1968;
Barreto, 1989; Machovec, 1995). This in economic models is arguably understandable
since entrepreneurship as a facto r of production is scarce both quantitatively and
qualitatively and unequally distributed among the population. Sec ond, the vitality
and actions of entrepreneurs largely depend on incentives associated with economic
freedom (Adam Smith) an issue that makes the entrepreneursh ip factor of production
difficult to be neatly packaged within a “mechanistic, dete rministic microeconomic
model or theory of a firm” (Barreto, 1989, pp. 115, 141).
A study based on institutional framing is important because the reflective frames
constructed by SME entrepreneurs in Uganda and their subsequent action are neither
known nor understood. Yet, entrepreneurship actions and development are associated.
Baumol (1968, p. 66) contends that: “if we seek to explain the success of those economies
which have managed to grow significantly with those that have remained relatively
stagnant, we find it difficult to do so without taking into consideration differences in
the availability of entrepreneurial talent and in the motivational mechanism which
drives them.” North (1990), assert that development is a result of an incentive structu re
that encourages individual effort to invest. Investments are determined by “the rules
of the game in society” or the institutional setup. This means that entrepreneurial
actions and or behaviors largely depend on institutional frames that ei ther promote or
constrain behavior. Estrin and Mickiewicz (2010) and Henrekson (2007) aver that
entrepreneurship can only be meaningfully analyzed within a well-defined institutional
context.
This research parallels previous studies and attempts to contribute to the current
debate that inefficient institutional arrangements c haracterized by costly, complex
and inefficient legal proceedings discourage business activity (Fafchamps, 1998;
Kiryabwire, 2010; Ntayi et al., 2011). It specifically explores institu tional frames for
entrepreneurship in the Ugandan context, which has been the most neglected area
of economic inquiry, with significant normative impli cations for the general
understanding of how entrepreneurial endeavors function. This is further supported
by the view that Uganda scores poorly in terms of failing to have an institutional
framework that governs the starting and successfully r unning SME businesses
(Kiryabwire, 2010; Katono et al., 2010; World Bank, 2007). Such an environment makes
Uganda a breeding ground for the rapidly growing informal sector which has become
the “sponge” that provides job avenues to all categories of labor, including skilled
workers and accelerating the achievement of wider economic and socio-economic
objectives, including poverty alleviation.
Previous studies have tended to examine total entrepreneurship activity (TEA)
(Walter et al., 2004; Namatovu et al., 2010), entrepreneurship traits (Kawuki, 2011) and
constraints or barriers to start-ups in Uganda. For example, Katono et al. (2010) used
data from Uganda to demonstrate that negative societal perceptions (of family, peers
and colleagues), attitude, subjective norms and p erceived behavioral control exert a
direct effect on intention to start business. Additional studies from the developing
world context have found absence of enterprise culture (Schoof, 2006; ); entrepreneurship
education (Schoof, 2006; Nafukho, 1998); inadequate affordable financing (Greene, 2005;
Owualah, 1999); inadequate relevant business development services and supports as key
factors that discourage entrepreneurial activity. Unfortunately, most of these studies to a
large extent ignore the role of institutional framing. Yet there is consensus among
134
WJEMSD
9,2/3
To continue reading
Request your trial