Entrepreneurial opportunity discovery dimensions and growth of non-governmental organizations in Kenya

Abstract

Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) play a critical role in addressing social ills like poverty, employment, and food insecurity; therefore, their growth prospects enhance their ability to address these social ills. Discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities amongst the agro-based NGOs has not got the desired attention, and it is the least researched area in social entrepreneurship. This study investigated the relationship between Entrepreneurial Opportunity Discovery Dimensions and Growth of Non-Governmental Organizations in Kenya. It employed correlation design and was anchored on the Kirznerian Entrepreneurship Theory. The target population was 135 agro-based NGOs in Kenya. A mixed-method approach was used, combined qualitative and quantitative techniques. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 21 and Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS graphic-25) aided in the analysis. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) using AMOS and Simple linear regression analysis were the primary analysis techniques used to evaluate the relationship between entrepreneurial opportunity discovery dimensions and the growth of NGOs. The results indicated that alertness0.372, p=0.033)and prior knowledge (0.163, p=0.031) have a significant favorable influence on growth, while social networks 0.047, p=0.713) showed an insignificant effect on the growth of NGOs. Investing in acquiring alert individuals and helping them gain relevant knowledge in the 21sttechnologies and emerging issues can lead to increased NGO ability to continue serving the community effectively and be engines of development for the general good of Kenya.

Keywords: {'name': 'Opportunity Discovery'}, {'name': 'Kirzner Theory'}, {'name': 'Structural Equation Model'}, {'name': 'NGOs'}

Authors & affiliations

Olive Kamane Ndeveni
Affiliation not supplied

Kenneth Lawrence Wanjau
Affiliation not supplied

George Mbugua Kariuki
Affiliation not supplied

Joseph Muchiri
Affiliation not supplied

Deposited references

Supplied references, not a list of publications citing this article.

DOI: 10.1177/0266242617747667

DOI: 10.1111/apce.12188

DOI: 10.1111/etap.12078

DOI: 10.1016/S0883-9026(01)00068-4

DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2011.01009.x

DOI: 10.2307/41166496

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sage focus editions, 154, 136- 136.https://books.google.co.ke/books?hl=en&lr=&id=FvIxxeYDLx4C&oi=fnd&pg=PA136&dq=Brown,+M.,+%26+Cudeck,+R.+(1993).+Alternative+ways+of+assessing+model+fit.+K.+Bollen+and+J.&ots=_M-Ey1YHwQ&sig=rFvUot7aoWo_zAciNP1nTiFsUBw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

DOI: 10.1016/S0149-2063_03_00013-8

DOI: 10.4324/9780203807644

DOI: 10.1177/1098214006296245

Craig, J., & Lindsay, N. (2001). Quantifying ‘gut feeling’in the opportunity recognition process. Frontiers of entrepreneurship research, 124-137.

DOI: 10.1177/0967010612457975

DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00092.x

Fatima, S., Iqbal, S., Rehman, F. U., & Ali, M. (2011). A study of factors affecting opportunity recognition process—case study of Pakistan, an opportunity recognition process framework. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(8), 1106-1125.

DOI: 10.1007/s11365-014-0347-y

DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.10.032

Grecu, I. (2014). Factors of Entrepreneurial Opportunity Recognition: A Systematic Review of Evidence in the Last Decade (Master’s thesis) Retrieved from http://projekter.aau.dk/projekter/en/studentthesis/factors-of-entrepreneurial-opportunityrecognition-a-systematic-review-of-empirical-evidence-in-the-last-decade (3d177ae2- e758-4902-9c54-d23c3b5efff9).html

Grim, J., Hora, J., Boček, P., Somol, P., &Pudil, P. (2010).Statistical Model of the 2001 Czech Census for Interactive Presentation, Journal of Official Statistics, 26(4), 67). retrived from:https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jii_Grim/publication/228859684_Statistical_Model_of_the_2001_Czech_Census_for_Interactive_Presentation/links/0fcfd507c02045c730000000/Statistical-Model-of-the-2001-Czech-Census-for-Interactive-Presentation.pdf

DOI: 10.1108/IJEBR-05-2015-0110

Israel, G. D. (2012).Sampling: Determining sample size. University of Florida IFAS Extension: http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pd006

Kirzner, I. M. (1997). Entrepreneurial discovery and the competitive market process: An Austrian approach. Journal of economic Literature, 35(1), 60-85.

Kirzner, I. M. (2015). Competition and entrepreneurship. University of Chicago press.

DOI: 10.1177/073428299801600407

DOI: 10.4324/9781410610904

DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00093.x

DOI: 10.1007/s11187-011-9399-3

DOI: 10.1037/1082-989X.4.1.84

DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00209.x

DOI: 10.1007/s11365-014-0347-y

Miller, J. (2007). An effective performance measurement system: Developing an effective performance measurement system for city of Elmira sub-grantees. Unpublished manuscript, New York: Binghamton University, State University of New York.

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1967). Psychometric theory (Vol. 226). New York: McGraw-Hill. Retrieved from : http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1979/A1979HZ31300001.pdf

DOI: 10.1007/978-94-024-1144-7_16

DOI: 10.1177/097135570601600102

Razali, N. M., & Wah, Y. B. (2011). Power comparisons of shapiro-wilk, kolmogorov-smirnov, lilliefors and anderson-darling tests. Journal of statistical modeling and analytics, 2(1), 21-33. Retrieved from : https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bee_Yap/publication/267205556_Power_Comparisons_of_Shapiro-Wilk_Kolmogorov-Smirnov_Lilliefors_and_Anderson-Darling_Tests/links/5477245b0cf29afed61446e1/Power-Comparisons-of-Shapiro-Wilk-Kolmogorov-Smirnov-Lilliefors-and-Anderson-Darling-Tests.pdf

DOI: 10.1207/S15327906MBR3604_06

DOI: 10.5465/amr.2000.2791611

DOI: 10.1016/S1053-4822(03)00017-2

DOI: 10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0129

DOI: 10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2