- This topic has 35 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 6 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I hope this gets the support it deserves. There is an undoubted need for skills development in the SME arena in South Africa, as many efforts have failed.
I think the biggest contributor to this failure has been the fact that there appears to be no distinguishing between small business ownership/management and true entrepreneurship. There training requirements are similar in certain respects but simultaneously vastly different in other areas.
Take the classic example of a small business owner/manager – the franchisee. He has no control over strategy and marketing (including pricing)as that is the role of the franchisor. Yet they are able to make good profits and run a profitable business. The bulk of the population tends to fall into this category. Yet we try to make them entrepreneurs.
Rob
Well, according some classical definitions of what entrepreneurs are: pro-active; innovative & with a risk-taking propensity, one could accept that even some (or most) franchisees could be categorised as entrepreneurs. Yet the definitions and conceptualisations of what entrepreneurship really is, seems to be wide-ranging?!
The original meaning of the word was a description of a person who borrowed money to transact, with the clear intent of repaying the loan with interest and keeping the profit. The entrepreneur carried the risk and identified the opportunity. Early explorers such as Vasco da Gama could very well be described as entrepreneurs who borrowed to transact in the Far East.
I do not believe franchisees have this same “drive”. If they were truly entrepreneurial would they not launch their own franchise? Look at the Burch continuum, which requires some updating i believe.
Rob
Chris van Zyl said:Well, according some classical definitions of what entrepreneurs are: pro-active; innovative & with a risk-taking propensity, one could accept that even some (or most) franchisees could be categorised as entrepreneurs. Yet the definitions and conceptualisations of what entrepreneurship really is, seems to be wide-ranging?!To spot an opportunity where an existing business model (as per franchise) provides profit-making ability, is not necessarily less entrepreneurial than when you start an enterprise from scratch?
Dr Rob Smorfitt said:
The original meaning of the word was a description of a person who borrowed money to transact, with the clear intent of repaying the loan with interest and keeping the profit. The entrepreneur carried the risk and identified the opportunity. Early explorers such as Vasco da Gama could very well be described as entrepreneurs who borrowed to transact in the Far East.I do not believe franchisees have this same “drive”. If they were truly entrepreneurial would they not launch their own franchise? Look at the Burch continuum, which requires some updating i believe.
Rob
Chris van Zyl said:Well, according some classical definitions of what entrepreneurs are: pro-active; innovative & with a risk-taking propensity, one could accept that even some (or most) franchisees could be categorised as entrepreneurs. Yet the definitions and conceptualisations of what entrepreneurship really is, seems to be wide-ranging?!Evening Chris & Rob – what do you think of the new logo for the group?
I have an idea for discussion in this group. While as academics and HR people we might theorise about the profiles most appropriate for the SME owner, but in reality in our SA context (not that we are unique) many people have started businesses as a matter of necessity. I recall a statistic that 80% of businesses are SMEs – and I believe that a large proportion of those are family businesses. I’m not sure if my statistics are correct, but the question is: given that large numbers of people – without ideal SME profiles – are running these businesses, how do we go about proving appropriate skills development for that sector?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.