20

Opinion-Volume 1, No. 1, December 2011

Culture as a Factor in Entrepreneurship Development: A Case Study of the Kamba Culture of Kenya
Henry M. Bwisa* Johnson Muthoka Ndolo**

Abstract
The question of why some nations are rich and others are poor and some regions in a nation can be rich while others are poor has been at the center of economic debate for over two centuries. While the post-WWII Keynesian-dominated discussion of economic development focused on and emphasized the importance of such factors as foreign aid and government planning, it is now widely agreed that the entrepreneur is the prime driver of economic progress (Kasper & Streit, 1998: 1-23; Leff, 1979). It is also accepted that the institutions that economic agents (including entrepreneurs) operate in political, legal and cultural directly influence their activity and hence economic development (Baumol, 1990; Olson, 1996). In recent years, a growing awareness of the importance of entrepreneurial activity for economic development has triggered research on the fundamentals of entrepreneurship in the developing countries. Cross-national differences in levels of entrepreneurial activity have been observed and explained by a wide range of economic, technological, cultural and institutional factors. Differences in value systems and cultural orientations towards entrepreneurship have been argued to affect entrepreneurship. This paper examines the role of culture on entrepreneurship development with reference to the Kamba culture in Kenya. It explains the cultural attributes of the Kamba and how they affect their entrepreneurial behavior. The paper is a result of a masters research project undertaken at the Jomo Kenyatta university of Agriculture and Technology in Kenya. Keywords: Economic development, Entrepreneure, Kamba, Kenya

Introduction
Max Weber first emphasized the influence of culture on entrepreneurship at the beginning of the twentieth century. As Weber famously argued, Protestantism encouraged a culture that emphasized individualism, achievement motivation, legitimating of entrepreneurial vocations, rationality, asceticism, and self-reliance. This ethic was

a fundamental element of the spirit of modern capitalism (Weber, 1976). However, Weber felt that this ethos of rational individualism was absent in other spiritual traditions. For instance, he argued that a rational economic ethic would not develop in Hinduism owing to its belief in the caste system, fate and rebirth, excessive ritualism and reliance on magic (Weber, 1958). Culture

*Associate Professor, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture & Technology (JKUAT), Nairobi, Kenya

Culture as a Factor in Entrepreneurship Development: A Case Study of the Kamba Culture of Kenya

21

is greatly influenced by religion since religion determines a persons basic values and beliefs. Hofstede (1991), on the other hand, argues that religion alone does not shape culture. Hoftstede (1991) defines culture as a collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another. In other words, he regards culture as a collective phenomenon that is shaped by individuals social environment, not their genes. Cultural differences are the result of national, regional, ethnic, social class, religious, gender, and language variations. Values are held to be a critical feature of culture and cultural distinctiveness. Hofstedes research shows how national culture affects workplace values across a range of countries. However, his study ignores the existence of different cultural groups within a country. Agrarian Kenya, for example, has over 70 distinct ethnic groups ranging in size from about seven million Kikuyu to about 500 El Molo who live on the shore of Lake Turkana. The five largest ethnic groups are the Kikuyu, Luo, Luhya, Kamba and Kalenjin and they account for 70% of the countrys population. Of the five largest ethnic groups the Kamba reside in a semi-arid environment that makes agricultural production problematic. That may explain why the Kamba were involved in the long distance trade during the pre-colonial period unlike the rest of the four who engaged in farming. The Kamba people have special skills and a very rich entrepreneurship development potential. The rest of the structure of this paper is as follows. First, we pose the problem statement that led to this research and the objective of the research. Next, we briefly discuss the role of entrepreneurship in Kenya. This is followed by the relevant literature on entrepreneurship, culture, and the relationship between them. We then provide our research findings about the culture of the Kamba in relation to Hofstedes theory. Finally, we discuss the implications of the Kamba culture on entrepreneurship development and offer recommendations.

competitive and prosperous. Nevertheless, factors influencing entrepreneurial activities in this multi-ethnic; multi-cultural nation have not been exhaustively researched. This is particularly the case with cultural aspects. In a country such as Kenya (and indeed in other multi-cultural; multi-ethnic countries) policy makers need to understand these factors in order to design appropriate national and regional policies to promote national entrepreneurship development. Lack of an understanding of the influence of the Kamba culture on entrepreneurship development constituted the problem for this research.

Objectives
The general objective of this study was to assess how the Kamba culture influences entrepreneurship development. This was done with the specific objective of proposing interventions that can add value to the entrepreneurship policy formulation in Kenya. It is hoped that the interventions can be replicated in countries similar to Kenya.

Role of Entrepreneurship in Kenya

Entrepreneurship has received increasing attention in the past three decades and has been shown to be one of the key drivers of economic growth (Acs et al. 2004; Audretsch and Keilbach 2004; Wennekers 2006). Kenya like other developing countries has been grappling with the problems of growth and worsening poverty. The countrys GDP real growth rates have been fluctuating from negative 0.3% in 2000 to 7% in 2008 to 2.6% in 2010. Population living below poverty line increased from 46.3% in 1992 to 56.7% in 2000 and has remained at 50% since 2003. These and other factors have made the Government strongly prescribe to entrepreneurship as the engine of growth. This is particularly evident in the governments Economic Recovery Strategy Paper for Wealth and Employment Creation (ERS) 2003-2007. The recent Government of Kenya (GoK) move to simplify business licenses, the ongoing efforts to amend the Companies Act, the enactment of the Investment Promotion ACT (2004) and the preparation of the Sessional Paper No. 2 of 2005 on Development of Micro and Small Enterprises for Wealth and Employment Creation for Poverty Reduction are some of the efforts expended towards

Statement of the Problem

Kenya has a Vision 2030 which emphasizes the need for appropriate entrepreneurship strategy for wealth creation as one of the means to make the country globally

22

Opinion-Volume 1, No. 1, December 2011

solidifying entrepreneurship as an engine of development for the country. It would however appear that Kenya, like many other developing countries, may be adopting rather than adapting entrepreneurship policies from the advanced nations. Many of these countries including Kenya have simply converted their national SME (Small and Medium Enterprises) policies to become entrepreneurship policies. The curricula of entrepreneurship education have not escaped this cut and paste tendency.

Literature overview
Although several authors on culture and entrepreneurship were covered in our research, in this paper we focus on Geert Hofstedes work. Hofstede is an influential Dutch social psychologist and anthropologist who is a wellknown pioneer in research of cross-cultural groups and organizations. He has played a major role in developing a systematic framework for assessing and differentiating national cultures and organizational cultures. Hofstede defines culture as the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another (1991). The mental programming referred to by Hofstede consists of shared values, beliefs and norms. These mental constructs influence how people socialized within a particular culture perceive events; they also help to determine what behaviors are considered appropriate or inappropriate in various social situations. Since the mental programming is shared, i.e. developed through years of socialization within a culture, it results in relatively predictable responses to commonly experienced social situations or contexts. These characteristic patterns of behavior create differences between cultures that may be observed and the influence of cultural differences on social processes such as entrepreneuring may be predicted if the underlying social values and norms are known. In a massive study encompassing fifty-three countries, Hofstede identified four value-oriented dimensions of culture that may be used to describe and explain aspects of behavior in various cultural groups. These dimensions are: (1) power distance, (2) uncertainty avoidance, (3) individualism, and, (3) masculinity (Russell, 2004). Power distance is a general measure of the degree of interpersonal influence that those who hold power in

a social structure can exert over those who lack power. According to Hofstede, the power distance is the difference between the extents to which a superior in a social hierarchy can determine the behavior of a subordinate compared to the extent that the subordinate can determine the behavior of the superior. Uncertainty Avoidance may be thought to be derived from the thinking that times arrow is aimed inextricably into the future and does not permit reliable forecasts concerning its targets. True, unfolding events are unpredictable by nature, creating ambiguity and anxiety among those experiencing times changes. The level of anxiety experienced by members of a culture due to ambiguous events may vary as a function of the societys values and beliefs. Uncertainty avoidance becomes a measure that indicates a groups level of anxiety regarding future events. It evaluates the degree of tolerance within a culture for the ambiguity that is inherent in a continuously unfolding future. Hofstede finds that cultures differ in their degree of tolerance for uncertainty and notes that methods for coping with ambiguity are at least partially determined by cultural programming. Societies attempt to manage uncertainty through rules, technologies, laws and rituals in order to protect members from anxiety. These devices standardize the behavior of society members and make the outcome of social processes more predictable. The third cultural factor cited by Hofstede is individualism. This is a measure that indicates the degree to which individual identity and self-concept are linked to collective groups within society. In individualistic societies, personal values and goals are the prime determinant of behavior and self-identity. Conversely, in collectivist societies group values and goals predominate and individual desires are considered to be subservient to or derived from group values; consequently, self-identity is derived primarily from group membership rather than individual characteristics. In collectivist societies, the security that derives from group or organizational membership is of great value and loyalty to social groups is emphasized. In contrast, individual autonomy is more important in individualistic societies and staying a member of a single organization is not as highly prized. In general, small organizations are favored in individualistic cultures while large

Culture as a Factor in Entrepreneurship Development: A Case Study of the Kamba Culture of Kenya

23

organizations are more desirable in the collectivist orientation. Hofstedes final cultural dimension is masculinity. Despite its name, this construct does not measure specific differences between male and female; rather, it refers to learned styles of behavior that have been stereotypically applied to males and females. The masculinity measure evaluates the general tendency to act either assertively (masculine) or in a nurturing manner (feminine). In high masculinity societies, individuals tend to set high performance standards and act forcefully to achieve these standards. Achievement motivation is high within these societies and markers of achievement such as earnings, formal recognition and advancement are relatively more important than work climate and relationship issues. Independent rather than group decision-making is preferred. In societies with a low masculinity index, nurturance issues are more prominent. A desirable work environment is defined in terms of high quality social relationships, friendly organizational climates and employment security. Achievement motivation is relatively weak and organizational effectiveness is defined in terms of social climate and the quality of human contact. Group decision-making is preferred over individual initiatives.

Implications to entrepreneurship
It is said that in the economic mythology of the industrialized West, the entrepreneur is seen as an independent, risk-taking maverick who boldly organizes the people and resources necessary for creating new business ventures. For such a role to emerge within a culture, at least two social conditions must exist: (1) entrepreneurs must be granted social acceptance so that the activities associated with new venture formation are accepted as legitimate and socially beneficial, and, (2) entrepreneurs must be able to gain access to and control of financial, material and educational resources necessary to initiate new ventures. Condition one requires that the entrepreneurial role be validated by a set of cultural values that recognizes the legitimacy of the entrepreneurial function; condition two requires social institutions and procedures that provide potential

entrepreneurs access to necessary resources(Russell , 2004). The general consequence of low power distance is greater access to resources and entrepreneurial opportunities restricted opportunities more entrepreneurial initiatives. High power distance makes access to resources and entrepreneurial opportunities restricted hence fewer entrepreneurs emerge. The research of modern day entrepreneurship owes a lot to Joseph Alois Schumpeters contributions. He was probably the first scholar to develop its theories. In the Schumpeterian model, entrepreneurs are instruments for introducing innovative change into the economy they are agents that instigate creative destruction in static economies, sweeping away obsolete products and processes through the introduction of innovation. Entrepreneurship in the Schumpeterian sense always involves high degrees of uncertainty, which is inherent in the processes of initiating, developing and commercializing innovation (Van den Ven, 1986). Entrepreneurs and organizations involved in developing innovations require a high tolerance for ambiguity and a willingness to take risks. These are necessary characteristics for innovative entrepreneurs and members of entrepreneurial organizations, enabling them to navigate the risky and highly uncertain waters of new venture development. Low uncertainty has the consequence of increased willingness to take risks - increased scope for individual initiative more initiation of entrepreneurial ventures. High uncertainty leads to general avoidance of risk taking and to fewer individual entrepreneurial initiatives begun. Hofstedes third cultural dimension individualism is said to be prevalent in the West where activities of the entrepreneur are largely individualistic. Entrepreneurs are often portrayed as mavericks who, rejecting the common view, overcome all opposition to persevere in realizing their own unique vision. Individualistic cultures prize individual initiative and autonomy. Loyalty to organizations is relatively low, taking a back seat to individual interests. As a consequence, independent entrepreneurial behavior is valued and supported by social norms as a means of achieving personal goals. As a result, many individuals

24

Opinion-Volume 1, No. 1, December 2011

Table 1

are likely to be attracted to entrepreneurship as a means of seeking their individual fortune. Low individualism has the consequence of fewer individual entrepreneurs and fewer entrepreneurial ventures emerging. High individualism leads to individual entrepreneurial activities valued resulting in more entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial ventures. Hofstedes final cultural dimension is masculinity. Its relation to entrepreneurship would seem to be through the assertiveness and high need for achievement characteristic of masculine cultures. In fact, McClelland (1961) claims to have found a strong correlation between need for achievement and the level of entrepreneurial activity within a society. In masculine societies, the material success achieved through successful entrepreneurial ventures is valued and entrepreneurs who attain such success are recognized and esteemed. Conversely, in relatively feminine cultures, achievement motivation, at least in the material sense, is relatively weak and success is defined in terms of pleasant human relationships. Consequently, it is presumed that more individuals will be attracted to entrepreneurship as a means of achieving material benefits and social position in masculine cultures while there will be less interest in entrepreneurial activities in feminine cultures. Low masculinity leads to less interest in entrepreneurship as a source of achievement and wealth while high masculinity leads to greater focus on entrepreneurship as a source of achievement and wealth. From this literature review we were able to construct a conceptual framework with culture as an independent variable and entrepreneurship development as the dependent variable.

Hofstede Cultural Dimensions

Hofstedes Cultural Determinants of Entrepreneurship Dimension High power distance people are likely to be Power entrepreneurs. Distance Low power distance people are less likely to be entrepreneurs. Individualism Vs Individualistic people are more likely to Collectivism be entrepreneurs Collectivist people are less likely to be entrepreneurs People with low levels of uncertainty Uncertainty avoidance are more likely to be entrepreneurs Avoidance People with high levels of uncertainty avoidance are less likely to be entrepreneurs People with masculine culture are more likely to be entrepreneurs Masculinity Vs People with feminine culture are less likely to Femininity be entrepreneurs People with short-term Confucian dynamism are less likely to be entrepreneurs.

Source: Adapted from Hosfstede 1980

Figure 1 Conceptual framework

Methodology
The study was conducted by means of observations and interviews to a number of entrepreneurs selected randomly among those operating in Machakos town the capital of the Kamba ethnic group. This was, therefore, mainly a qualitative type of research. The interview and observation guide were constructed from the elements of Hofstedes cultural dimensions. The key variables about which data was collected and analysed included, the Kamba tribe values and traits, Child rearing practices, attitude towards failure and risks, attitude towards responsibility, values from childhood and gender involvement. A factor analysis was done in relation to Hofstedes cultural dimensions.

Findings
Power distance Uncertainty avoidance Individualism/collectivism Masculinity/femininity Entrepreneurship Development

General findings The general finding was that in Kamba culture, the family is central to the life of the community. Before marriage, a man must pay a bride price (known as dowry), made in the form of cattle, sheep and goats, to the family of

Culture as a Factor in Entrepreneurship Development: A Case Study of the Kamba Culture of Kenya

25

the bride. In a rural Kamba community, the man, who becomes the head of the family, undertakes an economic activity such as trading, hunting or cattle herding. He is known as Nau, Tata or Asa. The woman works on the land she is given when she joins her husbands household. She supplies the bulk of the food consumed by her family. She grows maize, millet, sweet potatoes, pumpkin, beans, pigeon peas, greens, arrowroot and cassava. Traditionally, it is the mothers role to raise the children. Very little distinction is made between an individuals own children and the children of their sister or brother. Children address their uncle or aunt as tata (father) or mwaitu (mother). They often move from one household to another with ease, and are made to feel at home by their parents siblings. Grandparents (Susu and Umau) help with the less strenuous chores around the home, such as rope making, tanning leather, cleaning calabashes and making arrows. Older women continue to work the land as their source of food, independence and economic security.

Specific findings
The specific results indicate that Hofstedes models are appropriate to the Kamba as demonstrated by the investigated cultural traits. The Kamba entrepreneurs motivation to engage in business is anchored on an aspiration not only for oneself but for the family as well. In relation to Hofstede cultural dimensions there are important variables that exist in Kamba values for almost all the five cultural dimensions. Since the study envisaged to see if hofstede values and themes can apply to the Kamba community entrepreneurs each of the factors has been discussed in, individualism and collectivism or masculinity and feminist or certainity avoidance among others. With respect to individualism and collectivism, the collected data demonstrated strong family nucleus and extended family ties where in fact children are deemed to belong to the community rather than individual. The calling of an uncle or aunt as father or mother goes on to demonstrate this fact. The Kamba are therefore a collectivistic rather than individualistic ethnic group. In terms of power distance there is strict respect (bordering fear) for the elderly and particularly the men.

The patriarchal family arrangements demonstrate the power given to the father and the elder sons. The phrase, women and children are here to be seen not to be heard closely applies to the Kamba. This therefore implies that power distance is high. The aspect of uncertainty avoidance was also very clear. The Kamba culture does not take failure and responsibility well. As much as there is value for competition in business success and failure is often associated with extraordinary powers rather than deliberate calculated risk planning and taking. Very often traders would invoke evil powers in order to shed off competition and improve innovation and creativity. The opportunity of entrepreneurship is seen as a means of propelling them into higher social classes as fast as possible. However success is not always viewed as a result of handwork but in other forces locally referred to as kamuti, ndumba or tuvisi i.e. supernatural powers. The factor of masculinity was seen mainly through the lenses of the reward system. Generally speaking the Kamba are not strongly materialistic. It is presumed that feminine societies do not value entrepreneurship because it is associated with material rewards rather than nurturance issues. In this regard the Kamba culture can be said to be fairly feministic.
Table 2

Field findings about Kamba cultural dimensions.

Kamba Cultural Aspect Measured Tribe values, traits and culture, Attitude towards business and hard work. % Score Hofstedes Dimension 78% Individualism/ individualism collectivisim Uncertainty avoidance Power distance Masculinity/ femininity

Risks and opportunities incurred, 58% high in Attitude towards responsibility uncertainty and failure. avoidance Parenting style and values from childhood, child rearing practices Gender involvement, Attitude towards entrepreneurship and work, Social status in relation to gender 52.66 on high power distance 52.63 feminine

In summary therefore on Hofstedes dimensions, Kamba culture is largely collectivistic, has moderate power distance, high uncertainty avoidance and moderate masculinity. This is summarized by diagrame 2 below.

26

Opinion-Volume 1, No. 1, December 2011

Figure 2 Aspects of the prevailing Kamba culture measured against hostedes cultural dimensions

Present Kamba Culture

Individualistic Kamba Power Distance Kamba High Uncertainty Avoidance Kamba Power Distance Masculine Feminine Kamba Low Collectivistic

Strong

Weak

Conclusion and Recommendations

Measured against Hofstedes cultural dimensions, the current Kamba culture does not exhaustively support entrepreneurial tendencies (diagrame 2). We do recommend interventions that would make a transistion from the situation in diagrame 2 to the situation in diagrame 3. Figure 3 The desired future Kamba culture to spur entrepreneurship

Desired Entrepreneurial Kamba Culture

Individualistic Kamba Power Distance Kamba High Uncertainty Avoidance Kamba Power Distance Masculine Feminine Kamba Low Collectivistic

Strong

Weak

The Kamba are known to be collectivistic in their culture as is true for many African cultures. Our research findings that places them on high individualistic scale shown in diagrame 2 could therefore be disputed. That said and although literature suggests that individualism is good for entrepreneurship this may not always be the case. Timmons (1994) advanced the team model in entrepreneurship to imply that an entrepreneur needs a team to succeed. If in the Western cultures, entrepreneurship is seen as a highly individualistic endeavour then a very different form is observed in the East and in Africa with a number of entrepreneurial ventures being family, cooperatives, partnerships or community endeavours. Today the worlds strongest economic growth is not occurring in the West but rather in the East and particularly in East Asia (Bwisa, 2005). The Five dragons of Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are each experiencing substantial growth. China is also experiencing enormous growth (Bwisa, op. Cit). Clearly therefore individualistic and collectivistic entrepreneurship could co-exist in the Kamba culture as elsewhere and both should be encouraged. We can see in diagrame 2 that the Kamba have a relatively high power distance dimension. In order to address this observed high power distance among the Kamba (and wherever it exists) we would recommend entrepreneurship sponsorship by deliberate government niche policies. A niche policy is a policy that addresses a specific underprivileged group such as the youth, women, the physically challenged etc. Programs that provide resources to potential entrepreneurs, regardless of social position may need to be implemented. Just as high power distance tendencies of the Kamba have a negative influence on entrepreneurship development so is the high uncertainty avoidance dimension. This dimension has a particular effect on the innovativeness of a people. It leads to slow and/or failure to initiate innovative new ventures and to expand existing ones because the development and implementation of innovative products and processes is inherently uncertain and risky. One possible intervention to alleviate the impact of uncertainty avoiding social values may be one for financial or technical support programs for innovative

Culture as a Factor in Entrepreneurship Development: A Case Study of the Kamba Culture of Kenya

27

entrepreneurs that will reduce both risk and uncertainty for new ventures based on innovation. Tax incentives could be instituted for ventures engaged in innovation. A set of incentives could be designed to encourage innovative competition among firms. Organizational development programs designed to help managers increase their tolerance for ambiguity and risk could be initiated. The Kamba culture is feminist in nature. Need arises to translate it to a more masculinity nature as far as entrepreneurship is concerned. Awareness campaigns about entrepreneurship as a source of achievement and wealth, focusing on materialistic values are

recommended. This recommendation notwithstanding there may be nothing to prevent, however, the creation of new ventures in the Kamba culture with feminine values that respond to social concerns. The focus of entrepreneurship can just as easily be to create a nurturing, socially responsive business enterprise as well as a financially rewarding one. The emergence of large numbers of female entrepreneurs with sociallyresponsive agendas in a number of countries globally is testament to this. In fact, entrepreneurship with a socially responsive face could be a powerful force to achieve social change by focusing on human rather than materialistic values.

References 1. Audretsch, D., Keilbach, M. (2004). Entrepreneurship, capital and economic performance. Regional Studies, Vol. 38, p.949 2. BackesGellner U.and Werner A. (2007) Entrepreneurial Signaling via education: success factor in innovative start-ups Small business economics, Springer Netherlands Vol. 29 No. 1-2 pg. 173 190. 3. Baumol, W.J. 1990. Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive, and Destructive. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 893921. 4. Bwisa, H. M. (2005, October 12) Entrepreneurship Thrives in an Enabling Culture. The East African Standard. Nairobi - Kenya 5. Government of Kenya (1986) Sessional Paper No 1 of 1986, Economic Management for Renewed Growth. Nairobi: Government Printer 6. Government of Kenya (2002 2008) National Development Plan Government Printers 7. Government of Kenya (2003) Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth and Employment Creation Government Printers Nairobi. 8. Government of Kenya (2005) Development of Micro and Small Enterprises for Wealth and Employment Creation for Poverty Reduction. Sessional Paper No 2 of 2005. Nairobi: Government Printer. 9. Government of Kenya, (2002-2008): National Development plan Government printer. 10. Helms M. (2003) Japanese managers: their candid views on entrepreneurship, competitiveness review. 11. Hisrich, R. D., Peters, M. P. (1998) Entrepreneurship. 4th ed., Boston: Irwin / McGraw Hill. 12. Hofstede Greek (1991) Cultures and Organizations, Software of the mind, McGraw Hill Company Limited, England. 13. Hofstede, Greek (1980). Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work-related Values, Beverly Hills, CA.: Sage Publications. 14. Holm, Mogens, (1994) Enterprises in their Socio-Cultural Environment. Project Proposal presented at an IDS informal seminar. Nairobi: University of Nairobi: Institute for Development Studies.

28

Opinion-Volume 1, No. 1, December 2011

15. Holt D. H. (2004) Entrepreneurship: New Venture Creation. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited. 16. Jennings, D. F. (1994) Multiple perspectives on entrepreneurship: text, readings and cases. Cincinatti: South Western. 17. Kasper, W. and Streit, M.E. 1998. Institutional Economics: Social Order and 18. Public Policy. United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing. 19. Kauffman C. (2005) entrepreneurial attitudes and entrepreneurial intentions: Across-cultural study of potential entrepreneurs in India, China, Thailand and Australia. 20. Kolasa Blair J. (1999) Introduction to Behaviour Science for Business, Wiley Eastern Ltd, New Delhi. 21. Kristiansen, S. and Ryen, A. (2002) Enacting their Business Environments: Asian Entrepreneurs in East Africa, African and Asian Studies, 1(3), 16586. 22. Leff, N.A. 1979. Entrepreneurship and Economic Development: The Problem 23. Revisited. Journal of Economic Literature 17, 4664. 24. McClelland, D.C. (1961), The Achieving Society, Princeton, NJ: D. van NostrandCompany Inc. 25. McGrath, R.G., I.C. MacMillan, E. Ai-Yuan Yang & W. Tsai (1992). Does Culture Endure, or Is It Malleable? Issues for Entrepreneurial Economic Development, Journal of Business Venturing, 7, 441-458. 26. Namusonge, Mary Jabeya (2003) Linking Competencies with Strategies: The Case of Small and Medium-Sized Exporting Firms in Kenya. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 27. OECD, (1999). Best Practice Policies for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises In ADB/TA 3150PRC: A Study on Ways to Support Poverty Reduction Projects, Final Report, October 2000 (pp 16). Brock, W.A. and Evans, D.S. (1989), Small Business Economics, Small Business Economics 1 (1): pp 7-20. 28. Olson, M. 1996. Big Bills Left on the Sidewalk: Why Some Nations are Rich and 29. Others Poor. Journal of Economic Perspectives 10, 324. 30. Russell, D,R.(2004). The impact of national culture on the mergence of entrepreneurship. Penn State Harrisburg. 31. Schultz, T. W. (1980), Investing in Entrepreneurial Ability, The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Vol. 82, No. 4 (1980), pp. 437-448 32. Schumpeter, J., (1911), The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. 33. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Translated by 34. R. Opie from the second German edition [1926]. Cambridge: Harvard UniversityPress. 35. Schumpeter, J., (1942), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper and Row. 36. Timmons, J. (1990) New Venture Creation, Irwin. 37. Timmons, J.A. 1994. New Venture Creation: Entrepreneurship for the 21st Century. Fourth edition. Irwin Press, Burr Ridge, IL.

Culture as a Factor in Entrepreneurship Development: A Case Study of the Kamba Culture of Kenya

29

38. UNEP (2000) Overview: outlook and recommendations, Global Environment Outlook 2000, Earthscan, London, 1999, Available: http://grid.cr.usgs.gov/geo2000/ov-e/0012.htm. 39. Van de Ven, A. (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science, 32. 40. Weber, M. (1958). The Religion of India the sociology of Hinduism and Buddhism. New York: Free Press. 41. Weber, M. (1976). The Protestant Ethnic and the Spirit of Capitalism. London: Allen & Unwin. 42. Wennekers, A.R.M. (2006), Entrepreneurship at Country Level: Economic and 43. Non-economic Determinants, Rotterdam: ERIM.