Provide a response to the below post using at least 450 words. Response must be supported with at least 2 peer-reviewed sources and include 1 biblical application/integration.
What are the independent and dependent variables in this study?
The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor or GEM Study has been conducted every year since 1999. Today the annual data collection focuses on variables attributed to the Total Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) which fulfills the role as the dependent variable. Maturing significantly since its initiation, the GEM Study expanded data collection from ten to fifty different economies in the GEM 2019-2020 Global Report. The 2001 GEM Conceptual Framework mirrors the picture in the GEM Study in Exhibit C-GEM 11 (Schindler, P., 2022). From this exhibit, the major dependent variable is economic growth (Reynolds, P., et al., 2005). Criterion is set by the two major independent variables represented by Entrepreneurial Capacity and Opportunities. These primary predictors are influenced by the designated countrys General National Framework Conditions which include openness, government, financial markets, technology, research and development, infrastructure, management skills, labor markets, and institutions. The second set of predictors are represented by the Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions which includes financial government policies, government programs, education & training, research and development transfer, commercial legal infrastructure, internal market openness, access to physical infrastructure, and cultural and social norms.
What are some of the intervening, extraneous, and moderating variables that the study attempted to control with its ten-nation design?
The independent variables listed under General National Framework and those listed under the Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions were characteristics weighted based upon the economic conditions perceived by a selected panel of national economic experts in their country of origin. Moderating variables listed by the General National Framework category are those variables which have a significant effect on the dependent variable (Schindler, P., 2022). Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions like financial government policies, government programs, education & training, research and development transfer, and commercial legal infrastructure are extraneous variables responsible for positively or negatively effecting economic growth, the GEM Study criterion. Internal market openness, access to physical infrastructure, and cultural and social norms are intervening variables which are less concrete but may still influence the dependent variable. The degree of influence of an intervening variable may, in part, be purely human perception, but including these variables improves model accuracy (Arenius, P., & Minniti, M., 2005). In fact, the GEM is unique in its approach of valuing human perceptions over quantitative data normally associated with business research (Bosma, N., et al., 2020).
Can you do a causal study without controlling intervening, extraneous, and moderating variables?
The GEM Studys volume of subjective variables would make it incredibly difficult to control. Likely, an attempt to manage controls associated with this monumental task would fail because of the volume and level of subjectivity, and as a result, erroneous data would create false conclusions (Farooq, R., & Vij, S., 2017); however, the GEM Study is a causal study. GEM uses panels comprised of at least thirty-six subject matter experts to achieve the greatest consistency to analyze the impact of descriptive and subjective variables to entrepreneurship activity. As part of the GEM Research Design, the panel member candidates are surveyed and given an extensive interview. Upon acceptance to the study as a representative for their respective country, the subject matter expert panel members each assign weighted values to each GEM Framework variable effecting the entrepreneurship activities in their country. The panel members scores are then averaged to define the GEM Framework Condition for their country (Bosma, N., et al., 2020).
What is the impact on study results of using national experts (key informants) to identify and weigh entrepreneurial framework conditions?
As indicated earlier, entrepreneurship activities are significantly influenced by a host of factors. National experts, like those assigned to the GEM panels, recognize many economic predictors are common around the globe in multiple economies, but the impact exercised by independent variables may be increased or decreased depending upon the laws and regulations of the nation or republic. Cultural and socioeconomic differences are influential as well and include moderators like population density and the concentration of preexisting entrepreneurial businesses in the region (Crecente-Romero, F., et al., M., 2019). National experts recognize whether the influencing variables present a positive or negative factor and whether they encourage or discourage entrepreneurial development. Perfecting the research process by engaging in an honorable concern for improving economic advantage for the benefit of others maintains the fabric of the world (New American Bible Revised Edition, 1970/2010, Sirach 38:34).
Can you do a causal study when much of the primary data collected is descriptive opinion and ordinal or interval data?
The GEM study presents insight by modeling the relationships between the various factors contributing to changes in entrepreneurial activity and to what degree. This cause-and-effect analysis is a textbook definition of a causal-explanatory study (Schindler, P., 2022). The GEM Study identifies trends and associates those trends with changes in ordinal or interval data by comparison through a longitudinal study. Annual comparisons based on GEM Study results offer a measure for analysts to review the effectiveness of any changes to legislation instituted by the government to stimulate new business. Likewise, causal explanations may be drawn from other variables identified with social, economic, or cultural changes which may have stimulated or retarded entrepreneurial activity.
References
Alvarez, C., Urbano, D., & Amoros, J. (2014). GEM Research: Achievements and Challenges.
Small Business Economics, March 2014, v. 42, issue 3, pp. 445-65
Arenius, P., & Minniti, M. (2005). Perceptual Variables and Nascent Entrepreneurship
Small Business Economics. Apr2005, Vol. 24 Issue 3, pp. 233-247
Bosma, N., Hill, S., Ionescu-Somers, A., Kelley, D., Levie, J., & Tarnawa, A.. (2020). Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor 2019/2020 Global Report. Published by the Global
Entrepreneurship Research Association, London Business School, Regents Park, London NW1 4SA, UK
Crecente-Romero, F., Gimnez-Baldazo, M., & del Val-Nez, M. (2019). Competitiveness
and Entrepreneurship Rate in Europe during the Economic Recovery Phase, 2012-2016. International Entrepreneurship
and Management Journal, June 2019, v. 15, issue 2, pp. 455-70
Farooq, R., & Vij, S. (2017). Moderating Variables in Business Research. IUP Journal of Business Strategy. Dec2017, Vol. 14 Issue 4, pp. 34-54
New American Bible Revised Edition. (2010). NABRE application. https://play.google.com/
store/apps /dev?id=7507170841118710284. (Original work published 1970)
Reynolds, P., Bosma, N., Autio, E., Bosma, N., Autio, E., Hunt, S., De Bono, N., Servais, I., Lopez-Garcia, P., & Chin, N. (2005).
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: Data Collection Design and Implementation 1998-2003. Small Business Economics.
Apr2005, Vol. 24 Issue 3, pp. 205-231
Schindler, P. (2022). Business Research Methods, Fourteenth Edition. McGraw Hill LLC
