Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Diagnostic Toolkit
Entrepreneurial EcosystemDiagnostic ToolkitDecember 2013Supported by:
Table of ContentsIntroduction.1Studying the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem.2A Synthesis of Existing Frameworks.5Guidelines for Conducting an Assessment of an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem.8Conclusion.10AppendicesAppendix I: Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Assessment Frameworks.11Appendix II: Indicators for Assessing Entrepreneurial Ecosystem.14Appendix III: Ecosystem Survey Instrument Introduction.17Appendix IV: List of Entrepreneurship Datasets (Summary).27
IntroductionThe past decade has seen a significant reduction in conflict, improved political and macroeconomicstability, a number of economic reforms, and considerable economic growth across countries inemerging markets.However, the wages and livelihoods of many developing country citizens have not kept up, and lagbehind the rest of the world. Entrepreneurship has the potential to address this gap, if it is able toevolve beyond the informal, necessity-based entrepreneurship that is currently prevalent in manyemerging economies. Opportunity-based firm creation led by managers that intend to grow theirbusinesses can generate increased employment and sustainable income for the poor.1 Developmentfinance institutions can play an important role in enabling entrepreneurship in emerging markets.A first step to stimulating entrepreneurship is mapping and measuring the existing entrepreneurialecosystem. This analysis allows for diagnosis of potential challenges and opportunities that can beaddressed through specific interventions. To support mapping efforts, this toolkit has been developedby the Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs (ANDE), with the support of the UK Departmentfor International Development (DFID). It provides methodological guidance on assessing the currentstate of entrepreneurial ecosystems and offers a set of resources and tools that can be used bydevelopment practitioners. This toolkit does not aim to be exhaustive, but is intended to serve as abasis for other organizations to build upon.To develop this toolkit, ANDE conducted a comprehensive review of publicly available literatureon entrepreneurial ecosystems and identified nine evaluative frameworks. We assessed theseframeworks and synthesized key elements and indicators. ANDE encourages practitioners to use thistoolkit as a resource guide that can be adapted and modified to fit the local and/sectoral context.ANDE Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Diagnostic Toolkit1
Studying the Entrepreneurial EcosystemThe process of developing an enabling ecosystem for entrepreneurship has received considerableattention from governments, development agencies, and academics. Organizations like the Councilon Competitiveness (CoC) in the United States, the GSM Association, the Organisation for EconomicCo-operation and Development (OECD), the World Bank, and the World Economic Forum havedeveloped comprehensive diagnostic tools for assessing and tracking the development of theecosystem. Additionally, there have been similar evaluative frameworks developed by successfulventure capitalists, development consultants, and universities. ANDE reviewed nine separateapproaches as part of this synthesis:1. Babson College - Babson Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Project2. Council on Competitiveness - Asset Mapping Roadmap3. George Mason University - Global Entrepreneurship and Development Index4. Hwang, V.H. - Innovation Rainforest Blueprint5. Koltai and Company - Six Six6. GSM Association – Information and Communication Technology Entrepreneurship7. Organisation Economic Co-operation and Development - EntrepreneurshipMeasurement Framework8. World Bank - Doing Business9. World Economic Forum - Entrepreneurship EcosystemThese approaches vary widely, and can be classified based on the geographic unit of analysis, theirlevel of detail, and their sectoral or domain focus. For example, some approaches, such as theOECD’s Entrepreneurship Measurement Framework, the World Bank’s Doing Business ranking,and George Mason University’s Global Entrepreneurship and Development Index, are national levelassessment frameworks, that can be used to make cross-country comparisons. In contrast, theCouncil on Competitiveness’ Asset Mapping Roadmap and the Innovation Rainforest Blueprint arespecifically aimed at local ecosystems. Some frameworks such as the Babson EntrepreneurshipEcosystem Project and the Koltai Six Six may be used at a national or sub-national level.The Asset Mapping Roadmap is the most comprehensive and detailed framework in our review, withover 150 individual indicators, across eight domains. The OECD framework is also extensive, listing57 key indicators to measure the determinants of entrepreneurship in a country, framed acrosssix domains. Other approaches, such as the Babson model, and the Koltai framework, are moreconceptual, and do not prescribe a common set of indicators, but focus on key domains (e.g., policy,finance, culture), and specific actors (e.g., banks, incubators, venture capital). These frameworkscan be implemented based on available data sources, and allow for more flexibility in assessingthe entrepreneurial ecosystem. It should also be noted that not all of these frameworks are in thepublic domain, and some may have additional proprietary characteristics that are not covered in thissynthesis. We also recognize the complexities associated with assessing entrepreneurial ecosystems,and that many of the frameworks reviewed have not been previously tested in a developing country.Finally, some of the frameworks reviewed focused on a limited number of domains, or sectors.For example, the World Bank’s Doing Business framework specifically focuses on policy and the2Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs
enabling environment, the Rainforest Blueprint focuses on developing an entrepreneurial culture,and the GSM Association’s approach is targeted at the information and communication technologysector (ICT). A summary of the various domains and the extent to which they are discussed in eachframework is presented in Table I.Table I: A Review of Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Diagnostic ToolsDomainBabson CoCGEDIRainforest 6 6Policy Finance Infrastructure Markets Human Capital Support / Services /Connections Culture R&D / Innovation Quality of LifeMacroeconomicConditions OECDDoingWEFBusiness GSMA(ICT) Nine approaches were evaluated categorized based on two criteria: Geographic Unit of Analysis andComplexity (indicated by the number and type of prescribed indicators). Figure I provides a mappingof these nine approaches, based on their geographic unit of analysis (horizontal axis), and the levelof detail, based on the number and extent of the prescribed indicators (vertical axis). The domainsQuality of Life and Macroeconomic Conditions each occur in only one of these approaches. Asmentioned previously, the Council on Competitiveness and the OECD are the most detailed, and focuson the local and national levels, respectively.ANDE Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Diagnostic Toolkit3
Figure I: Comparing Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Assessment FrameworksHigh Level of Complexity (# of indicators)OECDCouncil onCompetitivenessGEDIBabsonLocal/Sub-NationalDoing BusnessKoltaiNational/Cross-CountryGSMA (ICT)WEFRainforestLow Level of Complexity (# of indicators)Much of the research on entrepreneurialecosystems in developed and developingcountries emphasizes the need to take a multidimensional approach to measurement, takinginto account all the various domains that canaffect entrepreneurship in a region, and howthey interact with each other. Since two ofthe measurement frameworks in our revieware primarily focused on a limited number ofdomains (Doing Business primarily measurespolicy, and to some extent, infrastructure;the Rainforest framework largely focuses onentrepreneurial culture and human capital),our analysis focuses on the remaining sevenapproaches. Complete summaries of each ofthese approaches are provided in Appendix I.4Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs1. Babson College - BabsonEntrepreneurship Ecosystem Project2. Council on Competitiveness - AssetMapping Roadmap3. George Mason University - GlobalEntrepreneurship and Development Index 4. Koltai and Company - Six Six5. GSM Association – Informationand Communication TechnologyEntrepreneurship6. Organisation Economic Co-operationand Development - EntrepreneurshipMeasurement Framework7. World Economic Forum - EntrepreneurshipEcosystem
A Synthesis of Existing FrameworksEntrepreneurship is often considered a means to specific socio-economic development goals,which suggests that there is a need to measure the level of entrepreneurship, the factors thatdetermine these levels, and ultimately, the impact of the entrepreneurial activity. This perspectiveis reflected in the OECD’s Entrepreneurship Measurement Framework, which was supported by theKauffman Foundation. The OECD’s Statistics Directorate developed the Entrepreneurship IndicatorsProgramme, which explicitly recognizes the role that entrepreneurship can play in addressingspecific issues such as economic growth, job creation, or poverty reduction.2 The frameworkidentifies three broad elements that are important in assessing the entrepreneurial ecosystem:determinants, entrepreneurial performance, and impact. These three elements make sense as astarting point for ecosystem assessment.While there are a limited number of indicators for measuring impact and entrepreneurialperformance, the number of potential determinants is fairly extensive. Finally, some of theseimpacts, and aspects of entrepreneurial performance, may also feed back into the determinants for example, economic growth may boost access to finance for small firms.3 Figure II illustrates howthese elements align, and provides examples of potential indicators.Elements of Assessing Entrepreneurial Ecosystems1. Entrepreneurship determinants refers to the various factors that affectentrepreneurship, which is the primary focus of the seven ecosystem mappingtools reviewed in this paper. Despite the varied sources for these evaluativeapproaches, they are relatively consistent in terms of broad themes and actorsthat would be considered determinants of entrepreneurship, such as specificpolicies, amount of venture capital financing deployed, and the availability ofbusiness development services.2. Entrepreneurial performance refers to the specific activities that entrepreneursperform that will ultimately deliver the impacts. Indicators such as the totalnumber of formal businesses in an economy, the number of high-growth firms(gazelles), employment figures, and enterprise survival and death rates are allconsidered measures of entrepreneurial performance.3. Impact refers to the value created by entrepreneurs, and entrepreneurship,which may be measured in terms of macroeconomic variables, such as GDPgrowth, employment, Gini coefficients (to measure income distributions), orthe size of the formal sector vs. the informal sector. The authors of the OECDframework note that most of these indicators are used extensively for economicresearch, and are comparable across countries.ANDE Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Diagnostic Toolkit5
Figure II: Entrepreneurship Measurement ssIndustryNetworksTax RatesDomesticSalesGraduationRatesAccess esQuality ofEducationAccess toElectricityAccess toGrantsLegal/AccountingServicesCost toStartBusinessTargetMarket SizeAccess toInfrastructureAccess toAngelsStockMarketsEntrepreneurial thJobCreationPovertyReductionSource: Adapted from OECD EurostatANDE suggests that a comprehensive evaluative framework for entrepreneurial ecosystems shouldfocus on the following eight domains, and the key actors associated with each area (Table II). Thisanalysis focuses on domains that recur in at least two of the frameworks reviewed, thus excludingQuality of Life and Macroeconomic Conditions from our synthesis. However, it should be noted thatnot all of these domains will affect the growth of entrepreneurship directly. We suggest that thesedomains can be placed on a spectrum, ranging from a direct influence (through finance, businessdevelopment services), partially direct influence (through policy, markets, human capital), andindirect influence (culture). While these are not rigid classifications, this classification can helpdevelopment agencies to prioritize domains based on their mandate and capabilities, and betterunderstand the extent to which entrepreneurial growth can be attributed to a program in a specificdomain.6Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs
Table II: Entrepreneurial Ecosystem - Domains for torsPartially versitiesGovernment CorporationsprovidersPublicResearchCenters rnationalTrainingGovernment CorporationsInstitutesPrivateResearchCenters h &DevelopmentCultureIndustryLocalAssociations ons(Mobile, onNetworksCommunityCollegesOther utilityproviders Public CapitalExperts l OrganizationsMarketingNetworksCredit RatingAgenciesGovernmentThe effects of some policies or investments ininfrastructure are possible to measure, whenthey are directly targeted at enterprises (e.g.,providing reliable electricity to an industrialcluster). However, these effects may be indirector diffused in some cases, and more difficult tomeasure when they have several objectives. Forexample, an investment in road infrastructurecan generate several benefits, in addition to itseffects on entrepreneurship in the region. Whilesome domains such as culture may be importantdeterminants of entrepreneurial activity in theregion, interventions in these cases are relativelydifficult to evaluate. Finally, it is important toexamine how various domains interact witheach other, which is likely to vary dependingon the specific local context. Understandingthese interactions is critical to assessing theentrepreneurial ecosystem, and designingappropriate interventions.In addition to identifying the key domains foranalysis, we reviewed over 200 indicators ofentrepreneurial determinants, performance andimpact from the seven evaluative frameworks,and identified the most relevant indicators forconducting ecosystem analyses in developingcountries. A comprehensive list of 65 indicatorsacross these domains is provided in Appendix II.ANDE Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Diagnostic Toolkit7
It is important to recognize that not all of theseindicators will be applicable in every context. Weprovide guidance on selecting the most relevantindicators based on the relevance, availability,and quality of data.The firm level survey instrument provided inAppendix III is designed to provide a holisticassessment of the ecosystem from theperspective of the firm. The survey combinesentrepreneurial perceptions of the businessenvironment with objective measures of firmperformance and open-ended questions whichenable a nuanced understanding of local firmcapacity and needs.The survey may also be combined with sectorrelevant questions as needed. A significantnumber of questions used in the World Bank’sEnterprise Surveys5 have been included, whichwill allow comparison of the local ecosystem toan established database of firm-level informationfrom that country. In order to be most accurateand actionable, ANDE recommends conductingthe survey at a local or metropolitan region level,though it may also be used on a larger scale.To be most effective, it is essential to identifycomparable regions or benchmarks againstwhich the region of interest is compared.Finally, there is a large number of existingdata sources that can provide valuable inputin assessing entrepreneurial ecosystems. Wereviewed 25 datasets on entrepreneurship, theentrepreneurial climate, and workforce whichcollectively can support a deep assessment ofthe policy and enabling environment as well asfirm-level performance. Overall, fifteen global(cross-country) datasets and ten country-leveldatasets from Africa on firms and households(from Ghana, Tanzania, Kenya, Morocco, Ethiopia,and South Africa) were identified. Appendix IVprovides a summary of the datasets, in terms ofthe unit of analysis, type of data, availability, andsampling methodology.The World Bank’s Enterprise Surveys are themost comprehensive, and wide-ranging datasetsavailable, with information on over 130,000firms from 135 countries. Key data pointsinclude firm characteristics, sales, finances,R&D, entrepreneur/top manager, governmentrelations, quality of infrastructure, competitionand workforce, employee characteristics, impacton communities, and entrepreneurial motivation/culture. Other country-level datasets also provideconsiderable detail on firm characteristics andactivity, but the Enterprise Surveys offer theopportunity to draw effective cross-countrycomparisons due to the consistent methodology.Guidelines for Conducting an Assessment of anEntrepreneurial Ecosystem1. Geographic Unit of Analysis: As a first step, it is essential to identify the geographic region forstudy, which may be a metropolitan region, a state or province, or the entire country. A numberof the frameworks reviewed focus on measuring entrepreneurial indicators at the national level.However, the economic diversity of most countries makes national assessments less actionable.Instead, assessments of specific regions within a country (e.g. a metropolitan area) and specificsectors (eg, tourism), are likely to be a more effective approach to guide program developmentand specific interventions. Based on the geography and sector focus selected, evaluators shouldalso select comparable regions or standardized benchmarks, to draw meaningful comparisons.8Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs
2. Depth of Analysis: Project scoping should also include the level of analysis that is neededto provide actionable recommendations to the relevant stakeholders. The Council onCompetitiveness suggests 3 levels of analytical depth: Asset Identification: Reviewing existing research and data sources, and obtaining inputfrom local leaders of key public, private, academic and nonprofit entities. Basic Evaluation: Assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the ecosystem, andidentifying gaps, with comparisons to relevant benchmarks or comparable regions. Comprehensive Assessment: A complete examination of the underlying businessculture in the region, including understanding the linkages between the variousdomains and key actors within each domain.3. Domains of Interest: While the ecosystem is inherently interconnected, there may be someelements that are of more interest than others, based on the kinds of interventions that areplanned and/or possible. For example, international development agencies may have lessinflue
determinants, entrepreneurial performance, and impact. These three elements make sense as a starting point for ecosystem assessment. While there are a limited number of indicators for measuring impact and entrepreneurial performance, the number of potential determinants is fairly extensive. Finally, some of these
entrepreneurial mindset. Based on the researcher's observation, the management has been neglecting developing an entrepreneurial mindset through training to promote an entrepreneurial culture and mindset. Entrepreneurial culture or entrepreneurial environment provides a place where entrepreneurial mindset/spirit can be enhanced/developed.
entrepreneurial mindset as indispensable to the success of SMEs in Nigeria. Entrepreneurial competencies are skills, values, and attitudes that are well-thought-out necessary for the success of small and medium scale businesses. Entrepreneurial mindset refers to a specific state of mind which orientates human conduct towards
EcoSystem Bus and supports system programming All EcoSystem Bus programming is completed by using the EcoSystem Programmer, GRAFIK Eye QS Control Unit with EcoSystem Lighting Control System, or QuantumTM Software EcoSystem Bus Wiring EcoSystem Ballast Bus terminals only acc
The entrepreneurial ecosystem of South Africa: A strategy for global leadership South Africa is an entrepreneurial leader in sub-Saharan Africa. The country has made significant progress to overcome structural factors and produce some of the most innovative and successful enterprises on the continent.
Entrepreneurial ecosystem models typically categorize the ecosystem elements into domains. The number and type of ecosystem domains vary from one model to another. There is a general consensus regarding the inclusion of some domains such as human capital, policy, and finance; other domains such as market access and quality of life are .
Part A: Perspectives of Entrepreneurial Marketing 1. Entrepreneurship and Marketing Interface Research – A Synopsis and Evaluation Audrey Gilmore, Andrew McAuley, Damian Gallagher and David Carson 3 2. The Interrelationships Between Entrepreneurial Experience, Explanatory Style, Effectuation, and Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy
A question within entrepreneurial education that never seems to go out of fashion is “Can entrepreneurship be taught?”. To address this question, this thesis adopts the view that becoming entrepreneurial requires direct experience, and explores how learning-by-doing can be put to use in entrepreneurial education through action-based approaches.
AngularJS is an extensible and exciting new JavaScript MVC framework developed by Google for building well-designed, structured and interactive single-page applications (SPA). It lays strong emphasis on Testing and Development best practices such as templating and declarative bi-directional data binding. This cheat sheet co-authored by Ravi Kiran and Suprotim Agarwal, aims at providing a quick .
