Improving Entrepreneurial Competency in Low-Income Segments: The Impact of Entrepreneurial Development Agents

  • René Díaz-PichardoEmail author
  • Nicolás Gutiérrez
  • Juan Arriaga-Múzquiz
Part of the International Studies in Entrepreneurship book series (volume 29)


Micro-enterprises, with fewer than ten employees, are responsible for most new jobs in emerging economies. Unfortunately, low-income entrepreneurs frequently lack enough entrepreneurial competency to survive and expand. The research presented in this chapter aims to evaluate the importance of entrepreneurial development agencies at the base of the pyramid. Structural equation modelling with survey data from enterprises participating in an entrepreneurship education process in Mexico provides evidence of the positive and significant impact of entrepreneurial development agencies on performance, with the mediating effect of market-product innovation and market orientation.


Contextual Factor Market Orientation Entrepreneurial Orientation Corporate Entrepreneurship Entrepreneurship Education 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker, W. E., & Sinkula, J. M. (2009). The complementary effects of market orientation and entrepreneurial orientation on profitability in small businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(4), 443–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barney, J. B. (1991). Firms resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Basso, O., Fayolle, A., & Bouchard, V. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation: The making of a concept. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 10(4), 313–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhalla, A. S., & Lapeyre, F. (2004). Poverty and exclusion in the global world (2nd ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Broad, M. L., & Newstrom, J. W. (1992). Transfer of training: Action packed strategies to high payoff from training investments. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  7. Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D. & Obloj, K. (2008). Entrepreneurship in emerging economies: Where are we today and where should the research go in the future. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 32(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
  8. Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS. Basic concepts, applications, and programming (Multivariate Applications Series; 2nd edn.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  9. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1971). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNall.Google Scholar
  10. Chablé Sangeado, J. J., & Aragón, A. (2009). Análisis estratégico para el desarrollo de la micro, pequeña y mediana empresa del Estado de Tabasco. Villahermosa: Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco.Google Scholar
  11. Covin, J. G., & Miles, M. P. (1999). Corporate entrepreneurship and the pursuit of competitive advantage. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 23(3), 47–63.Google Scholar
  12. Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1988). The influence of organization structure on the utility of an entrepreneurial top management style. Journal of Management Studies, 25(3), 217–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cummins, R. A. (2006). Personal wellbeing index (4th ed.). Melbourne: International Wellbeing Group, Australian Centre on Quality of Life, Deakin University.Google Scholar
  15. Davidsson, P., Delmar, F., & Wiklund, J. (2006). Entrepreneurship and the growth of firms. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Desai, P. S., Kalra, A., & Murthi, B. P. S. (2008). When old is gold: The role of business longevity in risky situations. Journal of Marketing, 72(1), 95–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dess, G. G., & Robinson, R. B. (1984). Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately held firm and conglomerate business unit. Strategic Management Journal, 5, 265–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Espinosa, A. (2007). Formación de capital humano y energía social en el campo mexicano. Mexico: Fundación Miguel Alemán, Comité de Evaluación del Programa de Desarrollo Rural.Google Scholar
  19. Gotteland, D., & Boulé, J. M. (2006). The market orientation-new product performance relationship: Redefining the moderating role of environmental conditions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 23(2), 171–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Han, J. K., Kim, N., & Srivastava, R. K. (1998). Market orientation and organizational performance: Is innovation a missing link? Journal of Marketing, 62(4), 30–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the SAS system for factor analysis and structural equation modelling. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
  22. Holton, E. F., Bates, R. A., & Ruona, W. E. (2000). Development of a generalized learning transfer system inventory. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11(4), 333–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hopwood, C. J. (2007). Moderation and mediation in structural equation modeling: applications for early intervention research. Journal of Early Intervention, 29(3), 262–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hunt, S., & Morgan, R. (1995). The comparative advantage theory of competition. Journal of Marketing, 59(2), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hunt, S., & Morgan, R. (1996). The resource-advantage theory of competition: Dynamics, path dependencies, and evolutionary dimensions. Journal of Marketing, 60, 107–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Khandwalla, P. N. (1976/1977). Some top management styles, their context and performance. Organization and Administrative Sciences, 7(4), 21–51.Google Scholar
  27. Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990). Market orientation: The construct, research propositions, and managerial implications. Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kreiser, P. M., Marino L. D. & Weaver, K. M. (2002). Assessing the psychometric properties of the entrepreneurial orientation scale: A multi-country analysis. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 26(4), 71–94.Google Scholar
  29. Lessof, C. & Jowell, R. (2000). Measuring social exclusion. Working Paper 84. Centre for Research into Election Social and Trends, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  30. Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(5), 429–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meade, A. W., Watson, A. M. & Kroustalis, C. M. (2007). Assessing common method bias in organizational research. Paper given at the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Miles, J. (2003). A framework for power analysis using a structural equation modeling procedure. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 3(27) (n.p.). Retrieved April 15, 2013, from
  33. Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(4), 599–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Narayan, D., Chambers, R., Shah, M., & Petesch, P. (2000). Voices of the poor. Crying out for change. Oxford: OUP for the World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nieuwenhuis, L. F. M. (2002). Innovation and learning in agriculture. Journal of European Industrial Training, 26(6), 283–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pearce, J. A. I., Robbins, D. K., & Robinson, R. B. (1987). The impact of grand strategy and planning formality on financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 8, 125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Prahalad, C. K., & Hart, S. (2002). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid. Strategy + Business, 26, 2–14.Google Scholar
  39. Pyysiäinen, J., Anderson, A., McElwee, G., & Versala, K. (2006). Developing the entrepreneurial skills of farmers: Some myths explored. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior Research, 12(1), 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Runyan, R., Droge, C., & Swinney, J. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation versus small business orientation: What are their relationships to firm performance? Journal of Small Business Management, 46(4), 567–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1994). Does competitive environment moderate the market orientation-performance relationship? Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1995). Market orientation and the learning organization. Journal of Marketing, 59(3), 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Steffens, P., Davidsson, P., & Fitzsimmons, J. (2009). Performance configurations over time: implications for growth and profit-oriented strategies. Entrepreneurship: Theory and. Practice, 33(1), 125–148.Google Scholar
  44. Subramanian, R., Kumar, K. & Strandholm, K. (2009). The relationship between market orientation and performance under different environmental conditions: the moderating effect of the top management team’s risk-taking behaviour. The Free Library, 1 January. Retrieved May 12, 2010, from The relationship between market orientation and performance under…-a0219010990.
  45. West, G. P., Bamford, C. E., & Marsden, J. W. (2008). Contrasting entrepreneurial economic development in emerging Latin American economies: Applications and extensions of the resource-based view. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 32(1), 15–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: A configurational approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(1), 71–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • René Díaz-Pichardo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Nicolás Gutiérrez
    • 2
  • Juan Arriaga-Múzquiz
    • 3
  1. 1.Groupe ESC TroyesTroyesFrance
  2. 2.Economics DepartmentUniversidad de las Américas PueblaPueblaMexico
  3. 3.Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Family BusinessEGADE Business School-Tecnológico de Monterrey San Pedro Garza GarcíaMexico

Personalised recommendations