South Asian ethnic minority small and medium enterprises in the UK: a review and research agenda.
View/
authorFinalVersionForRepository.pdf (463.8Kb)
Download
Publication date
2015Rights
© 2015 Inderscience. Reproduced in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy.Peer-Reviewed
yesMetadata
Show full item recordAbstract
It is argued in this paper that: ethnic minority population and their enterprises, predominated by South Asians, are growing faster than their mainstream counterparts in the UK; past research paid more attention to either South Asian ethnic minority SMEs based in and around London only or owned by Indian entrepreneurs only than South Asian ethnic minority SMEs elsewhere in the UK or owned by Pakistani and Bangladeshi entrepreneurs. Further, scholarly investigation is needed to explain: the relationship between educational levels and entrepreneurial orientation; and intra-ethnic minority entrepreneurial differences between South Asian ethnic minority entrepreneurs in the UK by expanding the research scope both geographically and contextually.Version
final draft paperCitation
Haq M (2015) South Asian ethnic minority small and medium enterprises in the UK: a review and research agenda. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 25 (4): 494-516.Link to publisher’s version
http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2015.070222Type
ArticleCollections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
The Role of Intangible Human Factors in Business Success in South Asian Ethnic Minority Small BusinessesExtant scholarship has paid considerable attention to exploring the impact of people-dependent intangible resources on business success but in large organisations only. Research about the role of these resources in small businesses, in general, and in ethnic minority small businesses, in particular, is scarce. The current study attempts to narrow this gap. Since it is impossible to study all the ethnic minority small businesses, this study uses a case study strategy that focuses on South Asian ethnic minority small businesses that deal in fashion. The study adopts a qualitative research methodology, it uses the semi-structured in-depth interview method to collect data, and it espouses an inductive thematic technique for coding/analysis of the data. Five overarching themes emerged from the interview data. These are: business success; compassionate customer service; relationships; knowledge, experience, training and education; and ethnic culture and the wider economic and political environment. Discussion of these themes leads to the formation of the culture-induced entrepreneurship model. According to this model, the continued success of these businesses is driven by the ethnic culture, while the existence of these businesses helps to maintain the culture in return. However, overdependence on the coethnic base might risk the future success of these businesses. This thesis concludes by highlighting its theoretical contributions to the culturalist view and the mixed embeddedness model of ethnic minority entrepreneurship and small business literature. The implications of this study for researchers, practitioners, and policy-makers, as well as its limitations and the possible future research paths, are also discussed.
-
A systematic review to identify research priority setting in Black and minority ethnic health and evaluate their processesBackground: Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities suffer from disproportionately poorer health than the general population. This issue has been recently exemplified by the large numbers of infection rates and deaths caused by covid-19 in BAME populations. Future research has the potential to improve health outcomes for these groups. High quality research priority setting is crucial to effectively consider the needs of the most vulnerable groups of the population. Objective: The purpose of this systematic review is to identify existing research priority studies conducted for BAME health and to determine the extent to which they followed good practice principles for research priority setting. Method: Included studies were identified by searching Medline, Cinnahl, PsychINFO, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, as well as searches in grey literature. Search terms included “research priority setting”, “research prioritisation”, “research agenda”, “Black and minority ethnic”, “ethnic group”. Studies were included if they identified or elicited research priorities for BAME health and if they outlined a process of conducting a research prioritisation exercise. A checklist of Nine Common Themes of Good Practice in research priority setting was used as a methodological framework to evaluate the research priority processes of each study. Results: Out of 1514 citations initially obtained, 17 studies were included in the final synthesis. Topic areas for their research prioritisation exercise included suicide prevention, knee surgery, mental health, preterm birth, and child obesity. Public and patient involvement was included in eleven studies. Methods of research prioritisation included workshops, Delphi techniques, surveys, focus groups and interviews. The quality of empirical evidence was diverse. None of the exercises followed all good practice principles as outlined in the checklist. Areas that were lacking in particular were: the lack of a comprehensive approach to guide the process; limited use of criteria to guide discussion around priorities; unequal or no representation from ethnic minorities, and poor evaluation of their own processes. Conclusions: Research priority setting practices were found to mostly not follow good practice guidelines which aim to ensure rigour in priority setting activities and support the inclusion of BAME communities in establishing the research agenda. Research is unlikely to deliver useful findings that can support relevant research and positive change for BAME communities unless they fulfil areas of good practice such as inclusivity of key stakeholders’ input, planning for implementation of identified priorities, criteria for deciding on priorities, and evaluation of their processes in research priority setting.
