academic knowledge doesn’t just affect academics, it affects everyone, writing assignment

Anonymous
timer Asked: Oct 16th, 2016
account_balance_wallet $15

Question Description

In-Class Essay 1

In academics, journal articles are critical tools for sharing research and ideas. However, academic knowledge doesn’t just affect academics, it affects everyone. Discoveries and theories made in labs and libraries directly influence daily life (medicines, economics, politics, etc). But before they get to the mainstream, they are shared within specific fields using very specific language and very specific formats. This Essay Couple is designed to help you find these discoveries, learn how to read them, and learn how to interpret and analyze how they are written.

Assignment:

For the In-Class essay, you will summarize the article and discuss what you consider to be the most important points and ideas.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Cooney ENG 112 In-Class Essay 1 In academics, journal articles are critical tools for sharing research and ideas. However, academic knowledge doesn’t just affect academics, it affects everyone. Discoveries and theories made in labs and libraries directly influence daily life (medicines, economics, politics, etc). But before they get to the mainstream, they are shared within specific fields using very specific language and very specific formats. This Essay Couple is designed to help you find these discoveries, learn how to read them, and learn how to interpret and analyze how they are written. Assignment: For the In-Class essay, you will summarize the article and discuss what you consider to be the most important points and ideas. Remember the organization we discussed in class: Paragraph 1 • Summary (or key points) Paragraph 2 • Key points (or summary) Paragraph 3 (many options) • • • • Explaining where the key points appear in the article Brief discussion of what makes the article difficult or easy to read Early conclusions about whether the article is successful or not Writer’s choice Formatting: • • • • • Double spaced (typed or handwritten) Title Reference to article must be included in the first paragraph (title, author, journal name) If you use a sentence directly from the article, you MUST use quotations marks and a citation If you paraphrase a sentence from the article, you must use a citation In-text Citation styles • • MLA (last name page number) Example: (Cooney 19) APA (last name, year, page number) Example: (Cooney, 2016, p. 1) Goals: • • • • Develop skills in prewriting and drafting Writing for a specific audience Understanding a rhetorical situation Conducting research ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

Gaka
School: UT Austin

Attached.

Running head: ARTICLE ANALYSIS

1

Article Analysis
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

ARTICLE ANALYSIS

2
Article Analysis

In the article under review, Holm and Ankarkrona (2016) discussed the issue of
entrepreneurship ecosystems in the context of a developing country, whereby they analyzed the
supports that small businesses receive in Nairobi, Kenya. Primarily, the research focuses on the
influence that startup support organizations (SSOs) have on the development and subsequent
sustainability of startup businesses in the city. This analysis is dependent on the theory that a
strict dependence on the entrepreneurial spirit for economic empowerment also requires
continuous SSO activity. As a result, the focus shifts from analyzing individual companies and
determining the necessary measures and onto an ecosystem approach that creates networks and
constantly provides these companies with new opportunities. However, this also results in a
geographical clustering of entrepreneurial networks, which companies can capitalize on by
developing knowledge economies that encourage the growth of upcoming companies (Holm &
Ankarkrona, 2016). As a result, these improvements in knowledge are constrained to individual
communities that serve as the bases for the dissemination of this knowledge to the stakeholders
that do not have access to the requisite engineering or scientific resources.
Using a qualitative methodology, the research reveals that the interactions between
entrepreneurial ecosystems and SSOs revolve around policy frameworks, availability and skills
of the human capital involved, and the attitudes that SSOs have towards financing (Holm &
Ankarkrona, 2016). These interactions are also highly dependent on the government’s awareness
of these ecosystems’ needs to ensure that the policy guidelines controlling the institutions
responsible also ensure that they can maintain an environment conducive to startup growth. With
the example of Nairobi, the article illustrates the ripple effect of large companies making
substantial investments in entrepreneurial ecosystems. According to Holm and Ankarkrona

ARTICLE ANALYSIS

3

(2016), the technological advancement in Kenya has led to an increase in innovative capital,
which requires the input of SSOs that can engage their networks and introduce early adopters to
the global market. This leads to conclusions that the entrepreneurial ecosystem in the country
developed solely through investment in the ICT sector. However, this also points towards
underdevelopment in other sectors and their capacity to support SEO activity, which makes it
necessary for the government to engage proactive strategy changes to ensure comparable growth
across the entire economy.
The article’s presentation provides a clear presentation of the authors’ expectations
regarding the study’s objectives as well as the scholarly evidence supporting these objectives.
Moreover, the use of a qualitative approach enhances the quality of the conceptual framework
and subsequent theory formation regarding SSOs in Nairobi. This also improves its capacity to
make comparisons to the growth of companies in other economies since it offers an analytical
review of the factors that form entrepreneurial ecosystems regardless of countries’ development
status. The article also discusses other issues such as spillover as a result of ecosystem saturat ion
in the areas that receive initial investment, which is also evident in other startup environments. In
their review, the authors are quick to point out the benefits and shortcomings of this approach,
while also pointing out its potential as a facilitator of socioeconomic development. Granted, the
research can yield different results when reviewing a different environment, requiring other
studies to analyze the influence that different stakeholder combinations have on startup
outcomes. Overall, the article presents, argues out, and validates its opinions on the issue and
demonstrates scientific rigor in analyzing entrepreneurial ecosystems and their supportive
frameworks.

ARTICLE ANALYSIS

4
References

Holm, K., & Ankarkrona, G. (2016). The Entrepreneurship Ecosystem and its supports in
Nairobi - A Qualitative study of their relationships. Lund Faculty of Engineering.

Attached.

The Entrepreneurship Ecosystem and its supports in Nairobi
A qualitative study of their relationships

Authors
Gustaf Ankarcona
Knut Holm

Supervisor
Ola Alexandersson
Lund Faculty of Engineering

June 2016

Abstract
Title

The Entrepreneurship Ecosystem and its supports in Nairobi A Qualitative study of their relationships

Authors

Gustaf Ankarcrona, Mechanical Engineering class of 2016,
Lund University, Faculty of Engineering; Knut Holm, Industrial
Engineering and Management class of 2016, Lund University,
Faculty of Engineering

Supervisor

Ola Alexandersson, Department of Industrial Management and
Logistics. Production Management, Faculty of Engineering,
Lund University

Background

Kenya is facing social and economic problems related to the
high unemployment rate the country has suffered since
independence. The Kenyan government are placing a lot, if not
all, eggs in one basket and betting on entrepreneurship to
solve these problem. For entrepreneurship to thrive there
needs to be an ecosystem facilitating it and inherent in this
ecosystem are support organisations.

Purpose

The purpose of this thesis is to explore the domains of the
entrepreneurship ecosystem in Nairobi and to find out how it
effects or how it is being effected by the startup support
organisations in the area. By highlighting these
interconnections, actors may take appropriate steps in further
facilitating the establishment and growth of ventures on the
scene in Nairobi.

Delimitations



First and foremost, the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem in
this thesis is limited geographically to Nairobi and the
barriers of the ecosystem are discussed in the
theoretical framework.



Interviewees are limited to management or higher
ranking employees of the startup support
organisations, their closest associates and startups.

II

Method

This thesis is based on qualitative interviews with people
active on the startup scene. The results of the interviews will
be complemented by a literature review and analysed using a
theoretical framework.

Conclusions

The ICT-sector enjoys a far more developed ecosystem than
the rest of the sectors. This points to the fact that the
ecosystem started to gain foothold in ICT and has expanded to
include other sectors which now are evolving. But some
generalities were found that applies to all sectors, that there
are three more critical domains. Those are;




Finance
Human capital
Policy

These connections were found between the ecosystem and
the support organisations.
The EE’s effect on the SSOs:







Policy – Existing governmental policies limits the SSOs
opportunities to markets in Kenya and to the world
outside.
Finance – When the SSO loose financing they tend to
move their value proposition further away from the
young startups which need the SSOs services the most.
Culture – The culture creates a demand for SSOs and
enables their business.
Human Capital – The existing knowledge is poor
which gives the SSOs a hole to fill and is definitely
altering

The SSO’s effect on the EE:





Policy – The SSO has today little or no ability to affect
governmental policy making.
Finance – The SSOs has as an intermediary
opportunity to reduce the gap between startups and
investors but has yet not succeeded.
Culture – The SSOs empower entrepreneurs and are
making entrepreneurship socially accepted towards
markets and the society at large.
III





Keywords

Human Capital – SSOs can further educate
entrepreneurs and are making the EE more customer
centric.
Markets – Through networking SSOs can facilitate
early adopters and let entrepreneurs reach global
market through international companies established in
Nairobi.

Entrepreneurship Ecosystem, Incubator, Accelerator,
Coworking Spaces, Nairobi, Kenya

IV

Sammanfattning
Titel

Det Entreprenöriella ekosystemet och dess
stödorganisationer i Nairobi – en kvalitativ studie av deras
samband

Författare

Gustaf Ankarcrona, Maskinteknik 2016, LTH; Knut Holm,
Industriell ekonomi 2016, LTH

Handledare

Ola Alexandersson, Institutionen för produktionsekonomi,
LTH

Bakgrund

Kenya står inför både sociala och ekonomiska problem
relaterade till hög arbetslöshet, problem som landet har lidit
av sedan självständigheten 1963. Den kenyanska staten
försöker lösa många av dessa problem genom att utöka och
utveckla entreprenörskap. För att entreprenörskap ska
utvecklas krävs det ett ekosystem som underlättar dess
tillväxt och inneboende i detta ekosystem är
stödorganisationer.

Syfte

Syftet med denna uppsats är att utforska det entreprenöriella
ekosystemet i Nairobi. Genom att utforska ekosystemet kan
samband mellan ekosystemet och de inneboende
stödorganisationerna belysas och förklaras. Förhoppningen är
att aktörer på marknaden kan ta steg till att ytterligare stödja
etableringen och tillväxten av företag på scenen i Nairobi.

Avgränsningar



Först och främst är det ekosystemet i Nairobi som
denna uppsats avser undersöka. Hur detta ekosystem
definieras och begränsas diskuteras i det teoretiska
ramverket.



Intervjuobjekten är begränsade till management
och/eller högre rankade anställda på
stödorganisationerna och organisationer som är aktiva
i anslutning till dessa.

V

Metod

Den här uppsatsen är baserad på kvalitativa intervjuer med
människor aktiva på startup-scenen i Nairobi. Resultaten av
dessa intervjuer kommer att kompletteras med en litteratur
studie och analyseras med hjälp av ett teoretiskt ramverk.

Slutsatser

ICT-sektorn åtnjuter ett mycket mer utvecklat ekosystem i
jämförelse med andra sektorer. Detta tyder på att ekosystem
etablerades inom just ICT och har sedan dess expanderat och
inkluderar nu andra sektorer som nu står under utveckling.
Det finns dock generaliseringar som gäller för alla sektorer –
att det är tre domän som är mer kritiska än andra. Där kritiska
domäner är domäner med större påverkan på interrelationen
mellan ekosystemet och stödorganisationer. De är




Finance
Human capital
Policy

Dessa kopplingar mellan ekosystem och stödorganisationer
hittades.
Exosystemets påverkan på stödorganisationerna:







Policy – Existerande policys limiterar
organisationerna möjlighet att verka på vissa
marknader i Kenya och i resten av världen.
Finance – När stödorganisationer tappar finansiering
tenderar de att ändra sin value proposition bort från
deras kärnverksamhet - att stödja startups.
Culture – Kulturen skapar ett behov av
stödorganisationer och möjliggör deras existens.
Human capital – Det nuvarande humana kapitalet är
undermåligt vilket skapar ett hål som
stödorganisationerna måste fylla.

Stödorganisationernas påverkan på ekosystemet:



Policy – Stödorganisationerna har idag liten till ingen
möjlighet att påverka statens arbete med policy.
Finance – Stödorganisationerna har möjlighet att
påverka domänen genom att verka som intermediärer
mellan startups och investerare.

VI






Nyckelord

Culture – Stödorganisationer gör entreprenörskap
socialt accepterat i marknader och samhället i stort.
Human capital – Stödorganisationerna utvecklar
entreprenörernas kunskap och påverkar hela
ekosystemet genom att göra det mer kundfokuserat.
Markets – Genom nätverkande faciliterar
stödorganisationer för early customers och låter
entreprenörer i Nairobi nå global marknader, oftast
genom de internationella företagen etablerade i
Nairobi

Entreprenöriella ekosystemet, Affärsinkubator, Accelerator,
Coworking utrymmen, Nairobi, Kenya

VII

Abbreviations
ANDE

Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs

EAC

East African Community

EE

Entrepreneurship Ecosystem

GDP

Gross Domestic Product

NGO

Non-governmental Organisation

NIS

National Innovation System

SME

Small and Medium-sized Enterprises

SSA

Sub-Saharan Africa

SSO

Startup Support Organisation

VIII

Acknowledgments

Without our supervisor at Lund University you would not be holding this thesis in your
hands. His time efficiency, open door policy and insights provided us with
encouragement throughout. So Ola Alexandersson - thank you.
We would also like to thank the Swedish International Development Agency who have
sponsored this thesis through their Minor Field Study Scholarship and thereby given us
a chance to explore and hopefully affect the magnificent country of Kenya and its
people. We are grateful to the people on sight in Nairobi that took us in and pointed us
in the right direction. To all the interviewees that took the time to sit down with us and
guide us through the complex ecosystem, especially to Roy whose straightforward
answers confirmed our suspicions.

_________________________

_________________________

Gustaf Ankarcrona

Knut Holm

IX

Table of Contents
1.

Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.1
Problem background ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2
Main purpose ......................................................................................................................... 2
1.3
Research questions ................................................................................................................ 2
1.4
Delimitations.......................................................................................................................... 3
1.5
Target audience ..................................................................................................................... 3
1.6
Outline of thesis ..................................................................................................................... 3

2.

Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 5
2.1
Research approach ................................................................................................................ 5
2.1.1 Analytical approach ........................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Systems Approach ............................................................................................................. 5
2.1.3 Actors Approach ................................................................................................................ 6
2.1.4 This thesis .......................................................................................................................... 6
2.2
Research Method ................................................................................................................... 6
2.2.1 Study Classification ........................................................................................................... 6
2.2.2 This Thesis ......................................................................................................................... 7
2.2.3 Research logic.................................................................................................................... 7
2.2.4 This Thesis ......................................................................................................................... 7
2.2.5 Quantitative or Qualitative ............................................................................................... 7
2.2.6 This thesis .......................................................................................................................... 8
2.3
Strategy of the thesis ............................................................................................................. 8
2.3.1 Methods of data collection ............................................................................................... 8
2.4
Research sample .................................................................................................................. 10
2.5
Credibility of the research .................................................................................................... 10
2.5.1 This thesis ........................................................................................................................ 10

3.

Theory ............................................................................................................................... 11
3.1
The Entrepreneurship ecosystem......................................................................................... 11
3.1.1 History ............................................................................................................................. 11
3.1.2 The Entrepreneurship Ecosystem ................................................................................... 12
3.2
Startup support organisations ............................................................................................. 17
3.2.1 The Business incubator history ....................................................................................... 17
3.2.2 Startup support organisations ........................................................................................ 18
3.3
Explaining the framework.................................................................................................... 20

4.

The country of Kenya ......................................................................................................... 22

5.

Literature study ................................................................................................................. 25
5.1
Policy .................................................................................................................................... 25
5.2
Finance................................................................................................................................. 27
5.2.1 Alternatives for finding capital ........................................................................................ 28
5.3
Culture ................................................................................................................................. 30
5.4
Supports ............................................................................................................................... 31
5.4.1 Infrastructure .................................................................................................................. 31

X

5.4.2 Digital infrastructure ....................................................................................................... 32
5.4.3 Non-Government Institutions ......................................................................................... 33
5.5
Human Capital ..................................................................................................................... 33
5.6
Markets................................................................................................................................ 35
5.7
Startup support organisations ............................................................................................. 37
6.

Field study results .............................................................................................................. 39
6.1
Survey population ................................................................................................................ 39
6.2
Areas of interest/ the six domains ....................................................................................... 40
6.2.1 Policy ............................................................................................................................... 40
6.2.2 Finance ............................................................................................................................ 41
6.2.3 Culture ............................................................................................................................. 42
6.2.4 Supports .......................................................................................................................... 44
6.2.5 Human capital ................................................................................................................. 44
6.2.6 Markets ........................................................................................................................... 45
6.3
SSO trends ............................................................................................................................ 46

7.

Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 49
7.1
Policy .................................................................................................................................... 49
7.2
Finance................................................................................................................................. 50
7.3
Culture ................................................................................................................................. 51
7.4
Supports ............................................................................................................................... 52
7.5
Human Capital ..................................................................................................................... 53
7.6
Markets................................................................................................................................ 54
7.7
SSO trends ............................................................................................................................ 55
7.8
Extended analysis ................................................................................................................ 57

8.

Discussion.......................................................................................................................... 58
8.1
The ecosystem and the domains ......................................................................................... 58
8.1.1 Finance ............................................................................................................................ 58
8.1.2 Policy ............................................................................................................................... 59
8.1.3 Human capital ................................................................................................................. 59
8.2
Exploring discrepancies ....................................................................................................... 59
8.3
Beyond Nairobi .................................................................................................................... 60
8.4
Thoughts on research methodology .................................................................................... 60
8.5
Further research .................................................................................................................. 61

9.

Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 62
9.1
The maturity of the ecosystem and highlighted domains ................................................... 62
9.2
The interrelation of the SSOs and EE. .................................................................................. 62
9.2.1 The EE’s effect on the SSOs ............................................................................................. 62
9.2.2 The SSO’s effect on the EE .............................................................................................. 62

References................................................................................................................................. 64
R1. Interviews ................................................................................................................................... 64
R2. Bibliography................................................................................................................................ 65
Appendix ................................................................................................................................... 69

XI

A1. Interview guide ........................................................................................................................... 69

List of Tables
Table 1 - Kenya facts (The Central Intelligence Agency, 2016)

23

Table 2 - African govornance and Ease of doing business (World Bank, 2016)

26

Table 3 – Policies (Ronge & Nyangito, 2000)

27

Table 4 - Explanasion to chart 2 (World Bank, 2015)

32

Table 5 - LPI Rank (World Bank, 2015)

32

Table 6 - SSOs of Nairobi

38

Table 7 - Study SSO

39

Table of Figures
Figure 1 – Research Approach (Arbnor & Bjerke, 1994)

5

Figure 2 - Strategy of this thesis

8

Figure 3 – The six domains of the EE

14

Figure 4 – The policy domain

15

Figure 5 – The finance domain

15

Figure 6 - The culture domain

16

Figure 7- The supports domain

16

Figure 8 - The human capital domain

16

Figure 9 - The markets domain

17

Figure 10 - Startup support organisation

19

Figure 11 - the four levels of the EE environment

20

Table of Charts
Chart 1- Kenyas FDI (World Bank, 2015)

28

Chart 2 - LPI comparison (World Bank, 2015)

31

Table of Pictures
Picture 1 - Map of Kenya

23

Picture 2 - Map of Nairobi

37

XII

1. Introduction
The following chapter will let the reader contextualise the problem in the background and
familiarize itself with the setting in Kenya. It also contains the main purpose of the thesis
along with the research questions and the chapter will finally conclude with the
delimitations and the general outline of the thesis.

1.1 Problem background
Establishing new ventures is problematic to say the least, irrespective of which country
one should start it in. This fact is even more present on the African scene where the
number of unknowns is even greater and the environment surrounding the ventures
might not be as developed (Iarossi, 2009). In these settings it is important to
understand the setup of the support system found in the environment and how it is
evolving. Especially in a country as such Kenya where a lot of money and effort are
being placed on entrepreneurship to solve both social and economic problems (BBC,
2013).
Kenya is the forerunner in East Africa and affects the region as a whole both regarding
economy and transport. A region which is both plagued by poverty and despair as well
as some of the world’s fastest growing economies and hope for the future. Between
years 2011 and 2015 seven of the world’s fastest growing economies were in the SubSaharan Africa (SSA), with Tanzania and Ethiopia being neighbours to Kenya (The
Economist, 2011). Kenya may be the shining star in the region but still struggles with
problems descendent from its colonial heritage (Fahnbulleh, 2015). For example in
Kenya alone a big portion of the able population are unemployed in regards to the
formal sector and the numbers are even higher for the youth. The unemployment
amongst the youth is a consequence of fast demographic shifts and the economic
growth has not led to decent jobs for all. The overall employment rate for the youth is
double the rate of the rest of the population and this in combination with a high
population growth rate of the past makes the problem even more potent (Undp, 2013).
Following is the 43, 4 % of the population living below the poverty line, which is
declining but at a very slow pace (The Central Intelligence Agency, 2016).
The problem with aid is that it does not create any resources and furthermore it is not
an enabler of any sort which restricts the space of opportunity (Acemoglu & Robinson,
2014). Though one cannot underplay the importance of aid in a humanitarian sense, the
economic challenges must be met in a different way, a way in which people are enabled
to direct a change. Or as the World Bank’s former lead economist in Nairobi said:
In Kenya as in other emerging economies it is high time to rethink the old aid model, where the
North channels money to the South to finance discrete development projects (…) Donors should
not seek to build their own successes but instead to identify local success stories and help amplify
them.(Fengler, 2011)
1

And the Kenyan government has recognised that entrepreneur’s natural course of
action in the founding of small businesses is undoubtedly one, if not the greatest source
of job creation and eventually a way out of aid enslavement (Nallari, Griffith, Wang,
Soamiely Andriamananjara, & Bhattacharya, 2011)(EY, 2015).
The government has, sometimes in cooperation with different non-governmental
organisations (NGO) and companies, tried to remove or lower barriers regarding the
establishment and development of new ventures. These efforts has led Kenya to become
a centre for innovation and entrepreneurship and that a wave of foreign investments
has engulfed the country (World Bank, 2015). Following is the establishment of an
entrepreneurship ecosystem (EE) and inherent with that is support organisations in
different forms performing different functions.
The EE itself consists of many different actors, the interrelationship between these
actors and the rules the play by. This summed makes up a complicated system which
contains extraordinary possibilities. These intrinsic possibilities in combination with
the Kenyan people´s aptitude, ambition and inclination to adopt innovations and
relative strong economy makes the Kenyan case a platform for change. The authors
solemnly believe that entrepreneurship is one of many keys in moving away from being
a developing country.
This is where the thesis fits in and where the authors’ interest began. Around the year
2010 there were a boom in the establishment of startup support organisations (SSO) in
Nairobi, an integral part of the EE. These organisations are working directly against
startups and are trying to facilitate a strong development amongst them. The authors
believe that since the boom they are now evolving and trying to find their own position
or function to thrive in. They are trying to do this in an ever-changing ecosystem. This
development is interesting for a number of stakeholders, including the entrepreneurs
and companies or organisations who are thinking about tapping in to the great potential
of this market. With this thesis we want to explore the characteristics of the EE and how
this might affect the SSOs and vice-versa.

1.2 Main purpose
The purpose of this thesis is to explore the entrepreneurship ecosystem in Nairobi and
to find out how it effects or how it is being effected by the startup support organisations
in the area. By highlighting these interconnections, actors may take appropriate steps in
further facilitating the establishment and growth of ventures on the Nairobian scene.

1.3 Research questions
There are two questions the authors are trying to answer with this thesis:


What are the characteristics of the entrepreneurship ecosystem in Nairobi?
2



What types of startup support organisations are found in Nairobi and how are
they working?

1.4 Delimitations


First and foremost the EE in this thesis is limited geographically to Nairobi and
the barriers of the ecosystem is discussed in the theoretical framework.



Interviewees are limited to management or higher ranking employees of the
SSOs, their closest associates and startups.

1.5 Target audience
Whereas many may find this thesis interesting the intention is to appeal to student and
researchers alike, incubators, incubator affiliations and entrepreneurs active in the
entrepreneurial ecosystem in Nairobi.





Students and researchers
Startup support organisations
Incubator affiliations
Entrepreneurs

For students and researchers this thesis may encourage additional research because the
thesis is exploratory and will hopefully indicate multiple directions of interest. This
thesis may be a valuable source of information for already established incubators as
they try to find their own niche or for new ones trying to establish, when the thesis
highlights the most critical domains. For the companies affiliated with incubators this
thesis can provide insight into what services and support the incubators might need in
the future and how to best accommodate them. Last but not least entrepreneurs ought
to better understand the environment surrounding their businesses' by reading this
thesis.

1.6 Outline of thesis
Chapter one gives the reader context and introduce the subject. It also contains the
purpose of the thesis and who the potential beneficiaries are.
Chapter two explains in detail the different methodological approaches chosen in order
to make the thesis replicable. Described first is the overall research approach and why
this approach was chosen. Following is a discussion on which type of study this thesis is.
Thirdly is a description of the method chosen, explaining how the study was conducted.
The chapter is concluded with a description on the strategy and on the overall
credibility of the thesis.

3

Chapter three defines different actors connected to the study and specifies the
theoretical framework used. The framework is used to analyse and discuss the findings
of the study. Main theories are the notion of the EE and the evolvement of business
incubators. The chapter concludes by putting the different theories into a framework.
Chapter four gives a short history of Kenya and summary of the state of the nation as of
today. This chapter intends to give the reader further understanding to the nature of the
problem and also establish a ground for contextualisation in the latter parts of the
thesis.
Chapter five contains the result of the literature review, which is divided into the six
domains of the entrepreneurial ecosystem and a short review of the SSOs active on the
scene.
Chapter six presents the findings from the minor field study, the results are presented
in a similar fashion as chapter five.
Chapter seven analysis presents the outcome of both studies compared to each other
and highlighted by the theoretical framework.
Chapter eight contains the discussion of the analysis, the possible future for SSOs in
Nairobi and the effects beyond Nairobi. Also included are thoughts on the methodology
of the research and areas of interest for further research.
Chapter nine presents the authors' conclusions and final remarks.

4

2. Methodology
The main purpose of this chapter is to facilitate reproducibility. The chapter contains
descriptions of the chosen approaches and methodologies used during this study and at
the same time justifies them. Concluding the chapter is a discussion and evaluation
regarding credibility, which is made up from three components; validity, reliability and
objectivity.

2.1 Research approach
In any scientific research it is important to declare which approach is used for the study.
The choice of approach depends on the researcher’s view of the problem and goal of the
research. For a business study Arbnor and Bjälke states that there are roughly three
general approaches: analytical approach, systems approach and actors approach.
(Arbnor & Bjerke, 1994). Figure 1 – Research Approach shows the correlation between
these approaches and their knowledge output.
Analytical
Approach
Systems
Approach
Actors
Approach

Explanatory

Understanding

Knowledge

Knowledge

Figure 1 – Research Approach (Arbnor & Bjerke, 1994)

2.1.1 Analytical approach
The analytical approach is the historical scientific approach and is still the dominant
approach in western scientific studies, it is derived from the classical analytical
philosophy. The approach is of a summative character, the whole is the sum of its parts.
In order to analyse the total picture, you first research the different parts and then unite
the individual pictures. It is a pragmatic approach which is independent of any
subjective experiences (Arbnor & Bjerke, 1994).
2.1.2 Systems Approach
The Systems approach was first introduced in the 1950s and has now become a wide
known way of studying things and its applications is increasing. As opposed to the
analytical approach the systems approach supposes that reality is arranged in such a
5

way that the whole differs from the sum of the parts. When researching with the
systems approach the relationship between these parts becomes interesting since it is
considered to affect the whole. The systems approach explains or understands the parts
by the characteristics of the whole(Arbnor & Bjerke, 1994).
2.1.3 Actors Approach
The actors approach, which is the newest of the three, started being applied in the late
1960s. Unlike the analytical and systems approach the actors approach has no
explanatory interest, instead it is used to understand the social entireties by looking to
the individual actors. The approach emphasizes the meaning of key-actors actions in a
social context. The observer in the actors approach is considered to be a constituent to
reality, hence the observer do affect the system it is observing (Arbnor & Bjerke, 1994).
2.1.4 This thesis
This thesis concerns the entrepreneurship ecosystem of Nairobi and startup support
organisations and how these two affect each other. Since the startup support
organisations is a part of entrepreneurship ecosystem a systems approach was chosen
for this study. Moreover, the relations between the domains of the EE are of great
importance when trying to understand the EE which might suggest that the actors
approach could be of interest, but as this thesis is a first step in filling the knowledge
gap the systems approach were found to be more suitable. Further research extending
from...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Top quality work from this guy! I'll be back!

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors