Though Knowledge based entrepreneurship (KBE) is yet an evolving concept and globalization is without an acceptable concept globally, their tenets represent sound methods and strategies for socioeconomic development. Inextricably, KBE and globalization phenomena could be seen as mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive in exploiting socioeconomic development capital. In this paper, the authors investigated and found out that the defining role of both KBE and globalization was to relate as correlates for the wealth of nations, and also was in an invaluable relationship. KBE is defined as variables that engender innovation, creativity, entrepreneurial culture and orientation with science and technology to underpin optima value creation. These include measurable inputs such as micro, small and medium enterprises (MSME) performance and literacy rates at a given time period in the economy. Globalization on the other hand is a multifaceted, multidisciplinary and complex phenomenon that is proxy on economic, political and social globalization indexes, and internet penetration at a given time period in the same economy. This paper tested two hypotheses to prove the construct that KBE and globalization were correlates for wealth of nations with very significant results using secondary data. Research triangulation was also performed to pragmatically prove the results using primary data. Both meta-analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS 21 software on the main model, the multiple regression, a confirmatory model and the chi-square. Finally, the paper called for policy for improving training and education of science and technology content to the entrepreneurs, while taking a 360 degrees approach to promote and intensify globalization practices in Nigeria, and by extension, to other global economies.
The importance of knowledge-based entrepreneurship (KBE) and globalization has attracted many seminal researchers and scholar-practitioners globally. However, there is no catholic concept of KBE and globalization among the theorists as these phenomena are continuously undergoing paradigmatic evolutions. But their varying conceptual approaches possess common meaning on thematic and terminological grounds. The root of KBE is the entrepreneur, that factor of production, which possesses varying dictions seen from different theoretic according to ideological bases of the theorists. Globalization still remains the most controversial, but generally viewed from three major varying ideological bases due to its complexity: the realists, the liberals, and the Marxists. But functionally, globalization is the most challenging phenomenon in human civilization history, a force of change, and a law of competitive advantage and competitive collaboration.
Knowledge-based entrepreneurship (KBE) is a very important socio-economic phenomenon that drives innovation, economic growth and development [
The great need for knowledge-based entrepreneurs in our society for obvious invaluable reasons that altogether accrues the wealth of any nation’s economy remains [
In the climes of globalization, however, the Millennium Report succinctly declares that “the greatest challenge faced today is to ensure that globalization becomes a positive force for all the world’s people, ... Inclusive globalization must be built on the great enabling force of the market, but market forces alone will not achieve it. It requires a broader effort to create a shared future, based upon our common humanity in all its diversity” [
“Globalization has been used rather loosely to stand for a variety of things: the shrinking of the world into a global village, the awesome changes brought about or mandated by the revolution in information technology, the collapse of boundaries between different worlds, expanding connectivity of all forms of interaction. Globalization facilitates the removal of barriers among nations of the world, thereby giving social relations unhindered access. Its unique characteristics often includes increased capital mobility, decline in costs of transportation, computing and communications. Other aims of globalization from the economic perspective include: (a) internationalization of production accompanied by changes in the structure of production, (b) expansion of international trade and services, and (c) widening and deepening of international capital flows. All these imply a more connected world. In essence, globalization has a major aim of diffusion of cultures, commerce and communication among countries of the world in order to bring about homogenization. Globalization reveals the interconnectedness within and across regions of the world due to the growing social, economic, political networks, education, information, and communications technology of different groups of people. It reveals the extent to which the actions of one group of humans exert either positive or negative impact on others” [
More so, globalization has created the dearth of distance as new communication technologies have triggered a virtual spatial revolution in terms of the geography of production [
Entrepreneurs are important to us: they create jobs, they innovate, they challenge the existing industry and business community, and their activities even impact the gross domestic product of nations [
“Education is the clearest path to individual opportunity and societal growth, and entrepreneurship education is especially vital to fuelling a more robust global economy. Entrepreneurs bring new ideas to life through innovation, creativity and the desire to build something of lasting value. Therefore, we must continually foster educational cultures within our companies, governments and communities to keep the entrepreneurship pipeline filled for generations to come” [
The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) further reiterated that, while education is one of the most important foundations for economic development, entrepreneurship is a major driver of innovation and economic growth. “Entrepreneurship education plays an essential role in shaping attitudes, skills and culture...We believe entrepreneurial skills, attitudes and behaviours can be learned, and that exposure to entrepreneurship education throughout an individual’s lifelong learning path, starting from youth and continuing through adulthood into higher education, as well as reaching out to those economically or socially excluded, is imperative” [
The tenet of globalization is the driving force of technological, economic, social and political advancements aiding global integration and global network ecosystems through technological revolution. While there are many different aspects to the technological revolution, the advent of the microprocessor combined with its application in telecommunications have altered the economic meanings of national borders and distance making the world very much smaller and more integrated planet [
Education is undergoing constant changes under the effects of globalisation. The effects of globalisation on education bring rapid developments in technology and communications and foreseeing changes within school systems across the world as ideas, values and knowledge, changing the roles of students and teachers, and producing a shift in society from industrialisation towards an information-based society [
This paper would deduce from the foregoing that knowledge based entrepreneurship (KBE) and globalization are power twain and a couple in any economy. Poverty eradication, flexibility and competitiveness, access to existing and new market, technology diffusion and transfer, trade rate explosions with improved balance of payments (BOT) and balance of trade (BOT) accounting, information and communication technology (ICT) diffusion and advancements, improved education and learning among other quality outcomes are many benefits of KBE and globalization respectively. Additionally, other benefits such as improved business opportunities, improved business processes, improved manufacturing, and lowering of labor and products unit costs, improved pace for innovation and creativity, and improved network economics for global interconnectedness and competitive collaborations are the respective rents of KBE and globalization. The common ground of KBE and globalization posited by this paper is improved gross domestic product (GDP), a measure of the wealth of nations; they are by no means mutually exclusive but altogether complimentary.
Finally, this inquiry explores the relationships existing within the KBE and globalization landscapes. It also traced whether and/or how both correlates together, and whether they could together be exploited to enhance the wealth of nations with Nigeria as a case study. As a result, the paper is written in five sections with the foregoing introduction, the inquiry’s problem, questions, and objectives in section one; and considered also two stated hypotheses that the paper scientifically tested. Section two discussed the literature of theoretical/or conceptual underpinning of thematic issues. Section three handled the methodology for data harvesting and model specification, while section four analyzed data and model for congruence and fit with results discussions. Section five closed the study with conclusion, recommendations and policy issues.
GEM estimated that 388 million salient entrepreneurs worldwide were actively engaged in starting and running new businesses in 2011 [
The force of globalization has already brought considerable wealth to areas of the world long accustomed to only poverty, and even more wealth to areas that were doing quite well already by improving balance of trade- BOT and balance of payment-BOP accounting, improved mobility of labor and technology transfer. For example, the East-Asian and South-East Asian countries have turned to export-based economies to propel themselves up the development ladder. In the coastal regions of China, global market-oriented businesses have helped raise living standards for millions of people. This whirlwind of economic activity has brought many benefits and wealth for many people of the world [
Nigeria, the case study of this paper has recently recorded a gross domestic product (GDP) value 522.64 billion US dollars in 2013 [
The answers to these research questions solve the problems of the inquiry with this central question; how would KBE and globalization correlate to create or improve the wealth of nations? Other minor or sub-questions to answer by this paper are as follows:
1) Can KBE and globalization improve and create respectively the wealth of nations?
2) Are KBE and globalization really correlates?
3) How would Nigeria adopt and adapt the tenets of KBE and globalization?
This paper formulated hypotheses to be tested in order to confirm or prove theory underlying the propositions. The “positive” economist, Milton Friedman, posted that “a theory, or a hypothesis, that is not verifiable by appeal to empirical evidence may not be admissible, as a part of scientific enquiry” [
H01: KBE and globalization does not create the wealth of nations.
H02: KBE and globalization are not correlates for wealth creation.
The overarching objective of this paper is to exploit the socioeconomic benefits that underlie the KBE and globalization phenomena. These benefits would not only improve the HDI and GDP of economies through cloning socioeconomic development congruencies, but also, bridge the socioeconomic divide gaps globally. Other objectives to serve by this paper include:
1) To explore the capital that underlies KBE and globalization phenomena for wealth creation in Nigeria.
2) To develop a policy framework for adopting and adapting the KBE and globalization phenomena for value optimization in Nigeria.
3) To make an original contribution to the body of knowledge in KBE and globalization fields of study.
The absence of acceptable theory on globalization, and difficulty of a theory on knowledge based entrepreneurship (KBE) is a theoretical challenge of this study [
The framework in
As earlier posited, KBE has no catholic theory. Though many seminal researchers conceptualize it from different constructs, but the common grounds of their concepts remains that there is first an entrepreneur, who traditionally and otherwise is a factor of production in the economy [
sion of knowledge that has been generated within the fields of science, technology and otherwise in anticipation of commercial application. In particular the emphasis is on the development of new technologies and the introduction of new products and processes, and the actors, such as; new firms, universities and sources of external finance [
Specifically, Kanellos holds similar conceptual view with many scholars that a better term for “knowledge based entrepreneurship” would be “Innovative Entrepreneurship” because this type of entrepreneurship involves the development and diffusion of product innovations or process innovations. He succinctly opines that, any form of entrepreneurship is based on exploitation of some knowledge, from basic to advanced types of knowledge, even when it comes to arbitrage opportunities [
Entrepreneurship development (ED) is the main variable of KBE; and involves all efforts tailored toward making the entrepreneur (factor of production) enhanced in the economy. This process requires someone to be first identified as an entrepreneur. The entrepreneur then undergoes transformation through education and experiential training, imbuement of entrepreneurship culture and business management acumen to possess entrepreneurship orientation, and to become mentally and psychologically equipped for the entrepreneurial market and commercial value creation; the landscape of KBE. Change is a paradigm shift, hence entrepreneurship presents a phenomenon of a paradigm globally [
The second element of the paradigm, new venture performance includes the development and implementation of new venture strategy, the nature of the external environment munificence and industry structure, the accumulation of resources, building of an organization including developing distinctive competences, establishing strategic networks, capturing customers, and establishing an organization culture and values. Robert Carton further opined that, while entrepreneurial activity growth is not a sufficient condition to remain in the entrepreneurship paradigm, it is inherent in reaching self-sustainability. When a firm or company reaches self-sustainability, it exits the entrepreneurship paradigm. At that time, the organization is generally not dependent upon the founding team, risk has been reduced, sustainable competitive advantage(s) have been created, the rate of change has drastically reduced, and repetition in the functions of the organization has occurred. The venture must have also achieved financial success sufficient to fund on-going growth [
Research shows that the success of a company and entrepreneurship ventures in the 21st century will be determined by the extent to which it creates and utilises knowledge, which is considered to be the most important source of a firm’s sustainable competitive advantage [
Entrepreneurship and organizations are bio-corporate and exists in an ecological setting, creating and gathering knowledge using a variety of methods and mechanisms. Through data gathering to process information of customers, markets, products and stakeholders; careful information and corresponding measurement are made of planned activities. Through trial and error (i.e. experimentation) and feedback from stakeholders and environment in general, experience (wisdom) is gained. The KBE, through this entrepreneurial learning, learns and adjusts behaviours to reflect that learning by making effective decisions in creating new business processes and changing environmental patterns. The value chain of KBE knowledge management involves four stages: knowledge acquisition, knowledge storage, knowledge dissemination and knowledge application [
Finally, current trends are by no means exhausted and that makes society all the more complex. And if society becomes more complex, then the business environment of the average entrepreneur also becomes more complex. The entrepreneur must deal with these developments and will have to make better and smarter use of technological, organisational and marketing competencies in order to stay ahead of all these complexities. An important means to reduce these complexities is using knowledge [
Globalization phenomenon is complex because the main accounts of world politics all see globalization differently; some treat it as a temporary phase in human history, others see it as the latest manifestation of the growth of western capitalism and modernization; and others see it as representing a fundamental transformation of the world politics, one that requires new ways of understanding [
1) For the realist, globalization does not alter the world significantly, such as the territorial division of the world into nation-states. The increased interconnectedness between economies and societies only makes for more dependence on one another, the same cannot be said about states-system. States still remain sovereignty, and globalization does not render obsolete the struggle for political powers between the states. It does not also undermine the importance of the threat of the use of force, or the importance of the balance of power. Globalization, then, may affect economic, social, and cultural lives, but does not transcend the international political system of states.
2) For the liberals, they tend to see globalization as the end of long-running transformation of the world politics. According to them, the states are no longer as central actors as they once were. In the place of states a myriad of actors of different importance according to the issue area concerned. Liberals are concerned particularly with the revolution in technology and communications represented by globalization. This economically and technologically increased interconnectedness between societies result in a different pattern of the world political relations from that which has gone before. States are no longer sealed units, if ever they were, and as a result the world looks like a cobweb of relations.
3) For the Marxists, globalization is a bit of sham. There is really nothing new but the latest stage in the development of international capitalism. It does not mark a qualitative shift in world politics, and nor does it render all our existing theories and concepts redundant. Above all it is a western-led phenomenon which basically simply furthers the development of international capitalism. Rather than make the world alike, it further deepens the existing divide between the core, semi-periphery, and the periphery.
On the whole, these schools represent the rightists and leftists positions about globalization phenomenon. The rightists’ supports globalization, whilst the leftists oppose it because the rightists’ looks at the “soft side” while the leftists takes to only the “hard side” of globalization. This paper considers globalization from the “soft side” that is clime to its capability to increase and create the wealth of nations. Therefore in this conceptual lens, ‘globalization’ is “that on-going trend whereby the world in many respect and at a generally accelerating rate become one relatively borderless sphere. Territorial spaces remain significant, to be sure, but the geography of the world politics is now no longer reducible to territoriality” [
1) The pace of increased economic transformation.
2) Information and communication technology (ICT) revolution.
3) Creation of a global culture.
4) Increased homogeneity of the world.
5) The death of time and space.
6) Emerging global polity.
7) Development of a cosmopolitan culture which people ‘think globally and act locally.
8) Transfer of risky cultures (AIDS, pollution, terrorism and etc.).
Finally, the globalization phenomenon as earlier mentioned is underpinned by the force of change, and is an irreversible process in accord with natural laws [
Microsoft Encarta dictionary defines “correlate” as a “transitive and intransitive verb meaning to have or show mutual relationship. This implies having a mutual or complementary relationship, or showing that two or more things such as a cause and an effect have mutual or complementary relationship.” In this view, this inquiry investigates in order to find out whether KBE and globalization are correlates as the two phenomena carries the capacity for increasing and creating the wealth of nations. More so, some studies shows that there are many factors that determine growth, and globalization (measured by trade) empirically as well as entrepreneurship, and both having a positive impact on economic growth [
Furthermore, education is the bedrock of KBE that in turn is the bedrock of socio-economic growth and it is the core of entrepreneurship education all over the world. Collaborating this view, Othman, Othman and Ismail studied the “impact of globalization on entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial skills in Higher Education Institutions” [
Another research posited the phenomenon of KBE to be linked to the first three key aspects of entrepreneurship. First is the process of creation, that is, the process of creating something new that has value for both the entrepreneur and for the consumers. Second is the time and effort required to create something functionally new. Finally, the third important aspect of entrepreneurship that stands out from the above definition is to assess the risks involved in the process of creating a business venture [
1) New firms.
2) Innovative firms.
3) Firms which have a significant knowledge-intensive in their activities.
4) Firms that exploit innovative opportunities not only in high-technology sectors but in diverse sectors.
KBE is therefore not only related to new firms (start-ups), but it is also referring to new and innovative firms with high knowledge intensity in their activities involved in a process of transforming knowledge into innovation. These firms transform knowledge into new or significantly improved goods and services that may enter in market. They are also companies that exploit innovative opportunities in various sectors and achieve, through their strategy, a sustainable competitive advantage [
This article used quantitative mixed-model because of the need for triangulation and to satisfy the theory of pragmatism in research. Started by American philosophers, Charles Sanders Peirce and John Dewey, the philosophy of pragmatism says that researchers should use the approach or mixture of approaches that works the best in a real world situation. In short, what works is what is useful and should be used, regardless of any philosophical assumptions, paradigmatic assumptions, or any other type of assumptions [
Furthermore, data gathering for the MRM is secondary source data from Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) for loans remissions to MSMEs, and gross domestic product (GDP) statistics figures. Other secondary data is from National Bureau for Statistics (NBS) for literacy rate in Nigeria. The secondary data for globalization penetration and Information Technology (ICT) penetration in Nigeria are from World Economic Forum (WEF) and International Telecommunication Union (ITU) respectively. The secondary data collected being a time series data, a meta-analysis using a MRM for inferential statistical hypotheses testing is preferred. The MRM is clearly stated in equation 1 with all variables defined. The secondary data covered a time period from 2000-2013. The primary data elicits behaviours of executive and managers of MSME entrepreneurship firms and other firm’s executives from other corporations with respect to KBE and globalization practices. The primary data was scored and collected through structured questionnaires. The questionnaire was constructed in a 10 point scoring format and ranked: rank A-Highest scores (8 - 10), rank B-Moderate scores (4 - 7), rank C-Low scores (1 - 3), and rank D-Zero score (0). This is a bivariate frequency or contingency table [
The two generic models used for the meta-analysis to test hypotheses H01 and H02 are the MRM and CSM; and for all of the models, the level of confidence is 95% with a chance probability or level of significance at P (0.05). This is because, the regression is a technique that makes inference from a sample to a population, whilst the chi- square test evaluates the level of statistical significance attained by a bivariate relationship in the cross-tabula- tion. The chi-square procedure assumes that there is no relationship between the two variables in the population and determines whether any apparent relationship obtained in a sample cross-tabulation is attributable to chance [
The general MRM model for this work is;
KBE and globalization have several predictors and each with a separate coefficient that defines the prediction relationship. The predictors of KBE are the Medium Scale, Small Scale and Micro Scale Enterprises Nigeria, and literacy rates (Lit.rate). From the secondary data collected, Small and Medium Scale Enterprises (SME) were categorized in one group, whilst Micro Scale Enterprises (ME) have different categorization. Thus, the KBE section becomes [SME + MSE + Lit.rate]. Also, Globalization have predicators such as openness to the world defined as economic, political and social aspects of globalization and Internet penetration (Int.P) measured by their penetration indexes respectively (i.e. GloIE, GloIP and GloIS). Thus, the Globalization section becomes [GloIE + GloIP + GloIS + Int.P]. So, each predictor variable has its own coefficient, and the outcome variable is predicted from the combination of all the variables multiplied by their respective coefficient plus a residual term [
where, W is the wealth that is created by KBE and Globalization in an economy. Wealth creation is a measure of GDP as the total nominal output in a given year expressed as a percentage weight of the total GDP values obtained at a given time period. The KBE tradition here is taken as a proxy of the combination of MSME (X1, X2) and Literacy rate (X3). While, Globalization tradition is taken as a proxy of the combination of respective economic, political and social aspects (X4, X5, X6), and the internet penetration index (X7) aids the globalization. These variables are defined as below.
X1 = Commercial Banks Loans to Small and Medium Enterprises from 2000 to 2013.
X2 = Microfinance Banks Loans and Advances to Micro-enterprises from 2000 to 2013.
X3 = Literacy rate measured as a percentage weight of the total population having obtained basic or elementary education as a foundation for KBE and globalization from 2000 to 2013.
X4 = Economic Globalization Index measured as a weight of increasing economic interdependence of national economies across the world through a rapid increase in cross-border movement of goods, service, technology and capital that propels globalization from 2000 to 2013.
X5 = Political Globalization Index measured as a weight of reducing the importance of nation states and extending national functions to facilitate international agreement, and to influence public policy across national boundaries, propelling globalization from 2000 to 2013.
X6 = Social Globalization Index measured as a weight of the transmission of ideas, meanings and values around the world in such a way as to extend and intensify social relations, marked by the common consumption of cultures that have been diffused by the Internet, popular culture media, and international travel.total population exposure to internet, ICT friendliness and global integration that propels globalization from 2000 to 2013.
X7 = Internet penetration index measured as a weight of total population exposure to internet, and ICT friendliness that propels KBE and globalization from 2000 to 2013.
Finally, this model is statistical or functional because the outcome (in this case, wealth of nations measured by the GDP) is a function of KBE and globalization, and the decision parameters to be extracted from the model are Pearson correlation (r), coefficient of multiple determination (R2), coefficient of multiple correlation (R), (t) and (F) statistics and β values. For decision issues, if the values of t and F calculated from the sample data exceeds the appropriate minimum (critical) values taking into account the degrees of freedom (df) and a statistical level of significance (in this case, α = 0.05); the null hypothesis is rejected, otherwise it is accepted [
The primary data values for triangulation are as shown in the multivariate contingency table (
The expected frequencies are calculated from the formula:
H01: KBE and Globalization does not create wealth | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ranks | High (7 - 10) | Moderate (4 - 6) | Low (1 - 3) | Zero (0) | Total |
MSMEs | 35 | 55 | 35 | 25 | 150 |
Managers | 30 | 20 | 19 | 31 | 100 |
Others | 12 | 11 | 11 | 16 | 50 |
Total | 77 | 86 | 65 | 72 | 300 |
H02: KBE and Globalization are not correlates | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ranks | High (7 - 10) | Moderate (4 - 6) | Low (1 - 3) | Zero (0) | Total |
MSMEs | 25 | 53 | 51 | 21 | 150 |
Managers | 33 | 28 | 19 | 20 | 100 |
Others | 15 | 12 | 13 | 10 | 50 |
Total | 73 | 93 | 83 | 51 | 300 |
where
Ri = the sum of frequencies in the row i
Ci = the sum of frequencies in column j
N = the sum of the frequencies for all cells.
These conditional restrictions of row cells and column cells determine the degrees of freedom (df) to be (r ? 1) (c ? 1), where r is the number of rows and c is the number of columns [
Primary and Secondary data for meta-analyses are as shown in
year | GDP (W) Naira (000) | SME Loans (X1) Naira (000) | ME Loans (X2) Naira (000) | Lit.rate (X3) % | GloIE (X4) % | GloIP (X5) % | GloIS (X6) % | Int. P (X7) % |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2000 | 4,582,127.29 | 44,542.30 | 3666.60 | 54.94 | 60.36 | 83.78 | 16.99 | 0.06 |
2001 | 4,725,086.00 | 52,428.40 | 1314.00 | 54.88 | 60.27 | 84.04 | 15.85 | 0.09 |
2002 | 6,912,381.25 | 82,368.40 | 4310.90 | 54.83 | 62.65 | 84.97 | 15.03 | 0.32 |
2003 | 8,487,031.57 | 90,176.50 | 9954.80 | 54.77 | 63.6 | 87.54 | 16.23 | 0.56 |
2004 | 11,411,066.91 | 54,981.20 | 11,353.80 | 54.03 | 62.45 | 88.9 | 15.41 | 1.29 |
2005 | 14,572,239.12 | 50,672.60 | 28,504.80 | 53.29 | 57.87 | 88.07 | 18.06 | 3.55 |
2006 | 18,564,594.73 | 25,713.70 | 16,450.20 | 52.56 | 61.02 | 89.21 | 19.14 | 5.55 |
2007 | 20,657,325.00 | 41,100.40 | 22,850.20 | 51.82 | 58.21 | 88.86 | 20.99 | 6.77 |
2008 | 24,296,329.29 | 13,512.20 | 42,753.06 | 51.08 | 60.11 | 88.9 | 23.55 | 15.86 |
2009 | 24,794,238.66 | 63,300.70 | 58,215.66 | 56.21 | 62.52 | 89.23 | 24.27 | 20.00 |
2010 | 29,108,020.00 | 60,424.70 | 52,867.50 | 61.34 | 68.58 | 89.78 | 24.99 | 24.00 |
2011 | 55,827,900.00 | 60,298.45 | 52,853.56 | 61.34 | 66.23 | 90.14 | 25.19 | 28.43 |
2012 | 66,644,900.00 | 60,172.21 | 52,839.63 | 61.34 | 66.81 | 90.64 | 31.19 | 32.80 |
2013 | 83,622,400.00 | 60,045.96 | 52,825.69 | 61.34 | 67.36 | 90.95 | 34.27 | 38.00 |
Sum | 374,205,639.92 | 759,737.32 | 410,760.40 | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
The secondary data values went through unit conversion in order to attain common units. The GDP, and SME loans and ME loans variables were converted to percentages and the GDP total was used as a common denominator since both variables are constituents of GDP from accounting (shown in
The results output showed correlations in
The highest correlation values being 0.94 for Internet penetration and social globalization with political and economic globalizations scores are 0.75 and 0.69 respectively. Micro entrepreneurship and literacy level correlates with scores of 0.78 and 0.75 respectively with small and medium entrepreneurship correlating with scores of 0.036. All these values are significant (P < 0.05). The results output also showed none zero (0) correlation indicating that there is correlation among the predictor variables from the MRM based on the available data in appendix A. This implied that for all cases (i.e. predictors and dependent variable, and among predictors themselves),
Year | GDP (W) % | SME Loans (X1) % | ME Loans (X2) % | Lit.rate (X3) % | GloIE (X4) % | GloIP (X5) % | GloIS (X6) % | Int.P (X7) % |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2000 | 0.120 | 0.012 | 0.001 | 54.94 | 60.36 | 83.78 | 16.99 | 0.06 |
2001 | 1.260 | 0.014 | 0.0004 | 54.88 | 60.27 | 84.04 | 15.85 | 0.09 |
2002 | 1.850 | 0.022 | 0.0012 | 54.83 | 62.65 | 84.97 | 15.03 | 0.32 |
2003 | 2.280 | 0.024 | 0.0027 | 54.77 | 63.6 | 87.54 | 16.23 | 0.56 |
2004 | 3.050 | 0.015 | 0.0031 | 54.03 | 62.45 | 88.9 | 15.41 | 1.29 |
2005 | 3.890 | 0.014 | 0.0076 | 53.29 | 57.87 | 88.07 | 18.06 | 3.55 |
2006 | 4.970 | 0.006 | 0.0045 | 52.56 | 61.02 | 89.21 | 19.14 | 5.55 |
2007 | 5.530 | 0.011 | 0.0061 | 51.82 | 58.21 | 88.86 | 20.99 | 6.77 |
2008 | 6.510 | 0.004 | 0.0114 | 51.08 | 60.11 | 88.9 | 23.55 | 15.86 |
2009 | 6.530 | 0.017 | 0.0156 | 56.21 | 62.52 | 89.23 | 24.27 | 20.00 |
2010 | 7.790 | 0.016 | 0.0141 | 61.34 | 68.58 | 89.78 | 24.99 | 24.00 |
2011 | 15.930 | 0.016 | 0.0141 | 61.34 | 66.23 | 90.14 | 25.19 | 28.43 |
2012 | 17.840 | 0.016 | 0.0141 | 61.34 | 66.81 | 90.64 | 31.19 | 32.80 |
2013 | 22.450 | 0.016 | 0.0141 | 61.34 | 67.36 | 90.95 | 34.27 | 38.00 |
Sum | 100.000 | 0.203 | 0.1100 | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
Correlations | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GDP | SMELoans | MELoans | Lit.rate | Glo.IE | ||
Pearson Correlation | GDP | 1.000 | 0.036 | 0.775 | 0.752 | 0.686 |
SMELoans | 0.036 | 1.000 | −0.065 | 0.430 | 0.433 | |
MELoans | 0.775 | −0.065 | 1.000 | 0.620 | 0.578 | |
Lit.rate | 0.752 | 0.430 | 0.620 | 1.000 | 0.912 | |
Glo.IE | 0.686 | 0.433 | 0.578 | 0.912 | 1.000 | |
Glo.IP | 0.754 | −0.122 | 0.811 | 0.437 | 0.510 | |
Glo.IS | 0.938 | −0.082 | 0.870 | 0.698 | 0.642 | |
Int.P | 0.944 | 0.004 | 0.912 | 0.792 | 0.745 | |
Sig. (1-tailed) | GDP | . | 0.452 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
SMELoans | 0.452 | . | 0.413 | 0.062 | 0.061 | |
MELoans | 0.001 | 0.413 | . | 0.009 | 0.015 | |
Lit.rate | 0.001 | 0.062 | 0.009 | . | 0.000 | |
Glo.IE | 0.003 | 0.061 | 0.015 | 0.000 | . | |
Glo.IP | 0.001 | 0.339 | 0.000 | 0.059 | 0.031 | |
Glo.IS | 0.000 | 0.390 | 0.000 | 0.003 | 0.007 | |
Int.P | 0.000 | 0.494 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.001 | |
N | GDP | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 |
SMELoans | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
MELoans | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
Lit.rate | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
Glo.IE | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
Glo.IP | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
Glo.IS | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
Int.P | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 |
Correlations | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Glo.IP | Glo.IS | Int.P | ||
Pearson Correlation | GDP | 0.754 | 0.938 | 0.944 |
SMELoans | −0.122 | −0.082 | 0.004 | |
MELoans | 0.811 | 0.870 | 0.912 | |
Lit.rate | 0.437 | 0.698 | 0.792 | |
Glo.IE | 0.510 | 0.642 | 0.745 | |
Glo.IP | 1.000 | 0.749 | 0.763 | |
Glo.IS | 0.749 | 1.000 | 0.973 | |
Int.P | 0.763 | 0.973 | 1.000 |
Sig. (1-tailed) | GDP | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
---|---|---|---|---|
SMELoans | 0.339 | 0.390 | 0.494 | |
MELoans | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
Lit.rate | 0.059 | 0.003 | 0.000 | |
Glo.IE | 0.031 | 0.007 | 0.001 | |
Glo.IP | . | 0.001 | 0.001 | |
Glo.IS | 0.001 | . | 0.000 | |
Int.P | 0.001 | 0.000 | . | |
N | GDP | 14 | 14 | 14 |
SMELoans | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
MELoans | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
Lit.rate | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
Glo.IE | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
Glo.IP | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
Glo.IS | 14 | 14 | 14 | |
Int.P | 14 | 14 | 14 |
Coefficientsa | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | ||
B | Std. Error | Beta | ||||
1 | (Constant) | −33.304 | 20.364 | −1.635 | 0.153 | |
SMELoans | 195.397 | 59.259 | 0.152 | 3.297 | 0.016 | |
MELoans | −1162.104 | 128.267 | −0.996 | −9.060 | 0.000 | |
Lit. rate | 0.175 | 0.200 | 0.097 | 0.874 | 0.416 | |
Glo.IE | −1.014 | 0.184 | −0.510 | −5.510 | 0.002 | |
Glo.IP | 1.090 | 0.179 | 0.376 | 6.080 | 0.001 | |
Glo.IS | −.462 | 0.222 | −0.410 | −2.086 | 0.082 | |
Int.P | 1.131 | 0.160 | 2.267 | 7.076 | 0.000 |
Coefficientsa | |||
---|---|---|---|
Model | 95.0% Confidence Interval for B | ||
Lower Bound | Upper Bound | ||
1 | (Constant) | −83.132 | 16.525 |
SMELoans | 50.396 | 340.399 | |
MELoans | −1475.963 | −848.245 | |
Lit.rate | −.315 | 0.665 | |
Glo.IE | −1.464 | −0.563 | |
Glo.IP | 0.651 | 1.529 | |
Glo.IS | −1.004 | 0.080 | |
Int.P | 0.740 | 1.522 |
aDependent Variable: GDP.
Model Summaryb | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | R | R Square | Adjusted R Square | Std. Error of the Estimate | Change Statistics | |
R Square Change | F Change | |||||
1 | 0.997a | 0.994 | 0.987 | 0.7633481 | 0.994 | 145.602 |
Model Summaryb | |||
---|---|---|---|
Model | Change Statistics | ||
df1 | df2 | Sig. F Change | |
1 | 7a | 6 | 0.000 |
aPredictors: (Constant), Int.P, SMELoans, Glo.IP, Glo.IE, MELoans, Lit.rate, Glo.IS; bDependent Variable: GDP.
ANOVAa | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
1 | Regression | 593.895 | 7 | 84.842 | 145.602 | 0.000b |
Residual | 3.496 | 6 | 0.583 | |||
Total | 597.392 | 13 |
aDependent Variable: GDP; bPredictors: (Constant), Int.P, SMELoans, Glo.IP, Glo.IE, MELoans, Lit.rate, Glo.IS.
Ranks * Category Crosstabulation | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Count | |||||
Category | Total | ||||
Exacutives | MSMEs | Others | |||
Ranks | High | 30 | 35 | 12 | 77 |
Low | 19 | 35 | 11 | 65 | |
Moderate | 20 | 55 | 11 | 86 | |
Zero | 31 | 25 | 16 | 72 | |
Total | 100 | 150 | 50 | 300 |
Chi-Square Tests | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Value | df | Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | Exact Sig. (2-sided) | |
Pearson Chi-Square | 15.107a | 6 | .019 | .019 |
Likelihood Ratio | 15.303 | 6 | .018 | .020 |
Fisher's Exact Test | 15.142 | .018 | ||
N of Valid Cases | 300 |
a 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 10.83.
Category * Ranks Crosstabulation | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ranks | Total | ||||||
High | Low | Moderate | Zero | ||||
Category | Exacutives | Count | 33 | 19 | 28 | 20 | 100 |
Expected Count | 24.3 | 27.7 | 31.0 | 17.0 | 100.0 | ||
MSMEs | Count | 25 | 51 | 53 | 21 | 150 | |
Expected Count | 36.5 | 41.5 | 46.5 | 25.5 | 150.0 | ||
Others | Count | 15 | 13 | 12 | 10 | 50 | |
Expected Count | 12.2 | 13.8 | 15.5 | 8.5 | 50.0 | ||
Total | Count | 73 | 83 | 93 | 51 | 300 | |
Expected Count | 73.0 | 83.0 | 93.0 | 51.0 | 300.0 |
Chi-Square Tests | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Value | df | Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) | Exact Sig. (2-sided) | |
Pearson Chi-Square | 15.887a | 6 | .014 | .014 |
Likelihood Ratio | 16.220 | 6 | .013 | .014 |
Fisher’s Exact Test | 16.116 | .012 | ||
N of Valid Cases | 300 |
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 8.50.
shows the extent of the contribution of each predictor to the model. Positive values of B indicates positive relationship, while negative values of B indicates negative (inverse) relationship and defines what degree of effect the predictors have on the outcome (prediction). Based on the results output of B values as shown in
Thus, the decision rule for hypothesis H01 is that since
The KBE and globalization component variables are positively correlated as the results from the output as presented;
values of [−1.64 3.30 −9.10 0.97 −0.51 0.38 −0.41 2.27] respectively are significant at < 0.05. Therefore, reject both H01 and H02becauseKBE and globalization are correlates and also relate mutually exclusive to create wealth of nations.
Triangulation to parallel using different methods and/or models to achieve the same purpose, with a view to providing corroborating evidence, and also “tap different domains of knowing,” to encourage or allow expression of different facets of knowledge or experience uses the CSM as shown in the results output in
The Cronbach Alpha for this survey data is valid and reliable at 0.857 which is satisfactory as 0.7 Alpha is required in social science. The Chi square calculated from the data in
The reliability Alpha for this field data in
The results from the MRM and triangulation CSM, a pragmatist positioning, produced are quite convincing for the hypotheses tested. The MRM model produced a nonzero value for correlation coefficients and unstandardized beta (B) values for of all independent variables in the model. Whilst all correlation coefficients are positive, the beta (B) values are mixed (some are negative and others are negative). The combined spearman coefficient (R), the combined coefficient of determination (R2), and the combined F values of 0.997, 0.994 and 145.602 were found at a chance P < 0.001. The F change is also significant with a value of 0 at a chance of P < 0.001. Since these values of R and R2 are closer to 1, the explanatory power of the model is close to perfection. That means the data values of the independent variables are explained almost perfectly by the model.
These results both proved that KBE and globalization are correlates for the wealth of nations as they proved hypothesis H01 and H02 respectively. This happened because the results showed that all data of independent variables are 99.4% explained by the model with low multicollinearity, positive correlation coefficients and beta values of independent variables are not equal to zero. The combined F value is significant with 145.602 and with 0 value of F change which is unlikely to happen by chance (P < 0.001), meaning the model significantly improved the prediction of outcome variables. In the climes of results triangulation, the pragmatist analytic, the primary data obtained (
This paper made an original contribution to knowledge by first attempting a concept definition of knowledge based entrepreneurship (KBE) as “a phenomenon driven mainly by the climes of information-knowledge philosophy which is characterized by high value innovation and creativity, deploying technology, information and communication technology (ICT) epistemologies for product and services giving commercial or market value.” Thus, it fulfils the third objective of this paper. Globalization on the other hand, in this paper is being adopted conceptually from Baylis and Smith as, “that on-going trend whereby the world in many respect and at a generally accelerating rate become one relatively borderless sphere. Territorial spaces remain significant to be sure, but the geography of the world politics is now no longer reducible to territoriality” [
Lastly, this paper analysed relevant primary and secondary data in Nigeria and found that, “KBE and globalization phenomena are mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive for the wealth of nations and are inextricably and intrinsically invaluable correlates in wealth creation. In other words, train the entrepreneurs through life-long learning provided by structured education and unstructured experiential learning to acquire tacit knowledge, and to transform the tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge within the ethos of relevant science and technology, innovation and creativity, and ambidextrous entrepreneurial culture. Also, encourage and increase globalization philosophy through same education, technological acquisition, increased socioeconomic and political integration, and Internet penetration in that economy. Then, the continuous marginal streams of benefit flows that will accumulate the sum of wealth become the dominant wealth creation character and charter in that economy. This is the third original contribution to the body of knowledge by this paper confirming objective 3.
The answer to question 1 has been given and objectives 1 fulfilled by these results from the two tested hypotheses. But how can these are achieved in Nigeria? The answer is to consider policy issues in sub-question 2 and objective 2: to develop a policy framework for adopting and adapting the KBE and globalization phenomena for value optimization in Nigeria. Thus recommended policy issues by this paper will involve first, a revisit to the Nigerian Content Bill for reengineering and improved implementation at all levels in order to boost indigenous participation in product extraction, development and export trade. High innovative products required for export markets would require high-tech and high innovative products and services that KBE philosophy acquire should have sway in the economy. Second, the Small and Medium Entrepreneurship Development (SMEDAN) Act should also be reengineered to perform its mandate by realistically becoming a “one-stop-shop” for entrepreneurship development in Nigeria. This would create more participation for the MSMEs in all sectors and levels of the economy in product development and service delivery, enable increased access to finance and “doing business” in Nigeria. Integrative learning from technology-led and online education (E-learning) and entrepreneurship education (both structured and unstructured types) should be encouraged and empowered. Technology improvement and increased e-commerce participation vide creation of networks with firms of global positioning and with globalization content should be part of entrepreneurship in Nigeria. Third, the leadership and policy governance in Nigeria should stop been clueless but chart policy directions with implementation monitoring and evaluation, and with feedback in order to realize the objective of fostering KBE and globalization with high business activity level in the economy. This will involve public governance that will remove institutional disconnects, procedural bottle-necks, favoritisms and partialities, and operational wastages by enthroning best business practices, lean management and meritocracies to boost empowerment and participation in all sectors of the economy in Nigeria. Fourth, striving for an entrepreneurial and globalized economy in Nigeria where entrepreneurship venturing will be well, continuous and flourishing. This will involve a total turn around and mental revolution of top policy makers and implementers; to stop playing lips services with policy, but use its instrumentality for explosive KBE and globalization for wealth creation in Nigeria.
Finally, this paper is silent about the weight and direction of correlation and relationship of KBE and globalization with wealth because they are both outside its object, though very much invaluable, thus further research in that direction is recommended. Due to factors of multiple causation, multicollinearity and spurious relationships that are usually associated with multiple regression models, a more competent meta-analytic approach to prove or/and possibly extend this work is also recommended. Multi causation is the position that a phenomenon can have several causes, multicollinearity is where two independent variables significantly overlaps, and spurious relationship is that relationship between two variables that is caused by a third variable [
Paul T.Akuhwa,Cephas A.Gbande,Benedict S.Akorga,Zachariah S.Adye, (2015) Knowledge-Based Entrepreneurship and Globalization: Correlates for the Wealth of Nations and Perspectives from Nigeria. Open Journal of Applied Sciences,05,460-484. doi: 10.4236/ojapps.2015.58046