ارائه مدلی با رویکرد شبکه‌ای به خط‌مشی‌گذاری کارآفرینی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استاد دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی

2 دانشجوی دکترا دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی

3 استادیار دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی

4 استاد دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی

چکیده

هدف از انجام پژوهش، طراحی و اعتبارسنجی مدل مناسب برای خط‌مشی‌گذاری شبکه‌ای در حوزه کارآفرینی است. روش تحقیق ازنظر هدف کاربردی و به لحاظ روشی توصیفی و همبستگی است. ابزار تحقیق در بخش کیفی، مصاحبه و در بخش کمی پرسشنامه بود. تحلیل داده‌ها در بخش کیفی از طریق تحلیل تم و در بخش کمی از معادلات ساختاری انجام گرفت. پس از ترسیم مدل اولیه، پرسشنامه تحقیق به همراه ابعاد مشخص‌شده بین 240 نفر از کارشناسان و مدیران وزارت تعاون، کار و رفاه اجتماعی، توزیع شد. پایایی پرسشنامه با استفاده از روش‌های محاسبه آلفای کرونباخ و ضریب پایایی مرکب (CR) تأییدشده و روایی آن نیز با روش‌های روایی محتوا و روایی همگرا (AVE) تأیید شد. درنهایت، 31 مؤلفه در چهار بعد ضرورت، ساختاری، رفتاری و زمینه‌ای شناسایی شد؛ بنابراین ضروری به نظر می‌رسد که وزارت تعاون، کار و رفاه اجتماعی، به‌منظور توسعه حوزه کارآفرینی، در سیاست‌گذاری‌های کارآفرینی به نقش و اهمیت این عوامل توجه نموده و تفکر شبکه‌ای در سیاست‌گذاری را جایگزین تفکر سلسله مراتبی نماید.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Providing a Model with a Network Approach to Entrepreneurship Policy

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fattah Sharifzadeh 1
  • Atiyeh Sadat Haghi 2
  • Davoud Hoseinpoor 3
  • Mohammad Mirmohammadi 4
1 Professor at faculty of management and accounting
2 PhD candidate at faculty of management and accounting Allameh Tabataba'i University
3 Professor at faculty of management and accounting, Allameh Tabataba'i University
4 Professor at faculty of management and accounting, Allameh Tabataba'i University
چکیده [English]

Abstract
The purpose of the research is to validate and design a suitable model for networking in the field of entrepreneurship. The research tool was in the qualitative section, interview and in the quantitative part of the questionnaire. Data analysis was done in the qualitative section through theme analysis, and in the quantitative part of the structural equations. After designing the original model, the research questionnaire with dimensions was distributed among 240 experts and managers of the Ministry of Cooperatives, Labor and Social Welfare. Finally, 31 components were identified in four dimensions: necessity, structural, behavioral and background. Therefore, it seems necessary for the Ministry of Cooperatives, Labor and Social Welfare to focus on the role and importance of these factors in entrepreneurship policy development, in order to develop the field of entrepreneurship, and to replace the network thinking in policy making with hierarchical thinking.
Introduction
Entrepreneurship is an area where interdependencies are very high, and the establishment of collaborative relationships such as networks in it is more of a management imperative than is desirable. Therefore, a network approach in the entrepreneurial policy-making process, which leads to the involvement of key stakeholders and entrepreneurs and the acquisition of legitimacy for policies developed in this area, is among the mechanisms that potentially improve the policy process in Entrepreneurship is effective. The purpose of the research is to design, validate and design a suitable model for networking in the field of entrepreneurship.
Case study
Data analysis was done in the qualitative section through theme analysis, and in the quantitative part of the structural equations. After designing the original model, the research questionnaire with dimensions was distributed among 240 experts and managers of the Ministry of Cooperatives, Labor and Social Welfare.
Materials and Methods
Reliability of the questionnaire was verified using Cronbach's Alpha and Composite Reliability (CR), and its validity was confirmed by Convergent Validity and Convergent Validity (AVE) methods. Finally, 31 components were identified in four dimensions: necessity, structural, behavioral and background. Therefore, it seems necessary for the Ministry of Cooperatives, Labor and Social Welfare to focus on the role and importance of these factors in entrepreneurship policy development, in order to develop the field of entrepreneurship, and to replace the network thinking in policy making with hierarchical thinking.
Discussion and Results
Among the components gathered for the structural dimension of the entrepreneurial policy network, respectively, the power of the policy-making system in empowering the network actors and the degree of concentration / decentralization in the structure of the policy-making system had the greatest impact on network performance. The organizational status of network actors was not recognized as an important and influential factor in the network performance of the entrepreneurial policy. Thus, it can be said that some actors have more power and influence than any other player for reasons such as personality traits or knowledge and expertise in a particular field. They are within the network and their views are confronted with acceptance from the network members.
Conclusion
In conclusion, with regard to the capabilities of the private sector (stakeholders and actors in the field of entrepreneurship) in the field of expert and experimental knowledge, it is suggested that the comments and experiences of this section in the policy development process and identifying the problems and methods of facilitating the startup processes, to be used. In this way, policy making in the field of entrepreneurship (N8) and socio-political legitimacy (N5) is more likely to be achieved through the use of entrepreneurship policy network.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Policy Making
  • Network Approach
  • Entrepreneurship
  • Model
1-Azar, A., Momeni, M. (2002), Statistics and its Application in Management, Organization for the Study and Compilation of Humanities Books of Tehran University. (In Persian)

2-Alvani, S. M. and Sharifzadeh F., (2006) Policy Making Process, Allameh Tabataba'i University Press (RA), Fourth Edition, (In Persian)

Alvani, S.M.  & Danayifard, H. (2001). Discussions on governmental organizations theories. Saffar Publications. (In Persian)

3-Borg, R., Toikka, A., & Primmer, E. (2015). Social capital and governance: a social network analysis of forest biodiversity collaboration in Central Finland. Forest Policy and Economics, 50,pp. 90-97.

4-Chaiton, A., Dibbits, T., Paquet, G., Roy, J., & Wilson, C. (2002) The Collaborative Challenges OF Regional Governance, policy issues for Canada and beyond, p.111

5-Fischer, M. (2013). Policy network structures, institutional context, and policy change. Post- doctoral researcher, Swiss institute for aquatic science and technology, Department of environmental social sciences.

6-Frederickson, H. G. (1997). The Spirit of Public Administration. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

7-GEI (2018). https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index.

8-Harris, J. K., Leider, J. P., Carothers, B. J., Castrucci, B. C., & Hearne, S. (2016). Multisector Health Policy Networks in 15 Large US Cities. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 22(6),520–528. http://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000000401

9-Hooman, H. A., (2014) Structural Equation Modeling Using LaserL Software, Organization for the Study and Compilation of Humanities Books of Universities, (In Persian)

10-Henry, A. D., Lubell, M., & McCoy, M. (2011). Belief systems and social capital as drivers of policy network structure: The case of California regional planning. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(3),pp. 419-444.

11-Isett, K. R., Mergel, I. A., LeRoux, K., Mischen, P. A., & Rethemeyer, R. K. (2011). Networks in public administration scholarship: Understanding where we are and where we need to go. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(1), pp.157-173.

12-Ingold, K., & Leifeld, P. (2018). Structural and Institutional Determinants of Influence Reputation : A Comparison of Collaborative and Adversarial Policy Networks in Decision Making and Implementation, (May), 1–18. http://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu043

13-Jakobi, A. P. (2009) Policy Networks in Comparative Politics and International Relations: Per- spectives, Typologies and Functions. Retrieved March 31st 2015, from http://www.econstor.

eu/bitstream/10419/27916/1/60506282X.PDF.

14-Kenis, P. (2003) Why do Community-Based Organizations Co-ordinate at the Global Level? In Ronit, K. & Schneider, V. (eds). Private Organizations in Global Politics. London: Rout- ledge.

15-Kim, K. (2016). How Do Public Policy Processes Influence Public Fiscal Choices Tax Politics and Policy Outcomes? Retrieved:http://purl.flvc.org/fsu/fd/FSU_FA2016_Kim_fsu_0071E_13599

16-Kwak, C. -G. (2016). Understanding Network Change and Its Impact on Policy Performance: Policy Networks, EECBG Grants, Local Networks and "Green Development" in Florida. Retrieved from:http://purl.flvc.org/fsu/fd/FSU _2016SP_KWAK_fsu_0071E_13013

17-Leider, J. P., Castrucci, B. C., Harris, J. K., & Hearne, S. (2015). The Relationship of Policymaking and Networking Characteristics among Leaders of Large Urban Health Departments. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(8), 9169–9180. http://doi.org/10.3390 /ijerph120809169

18-Lim, Seunghoo, Berry, Frances Stokes, Lee, Keon-Hyung, Barrilleaux, Charles J., Brower, Ralph S., (2015). Florida State University, College of Social Sciences and Public Policy, School of Public Administration and Policy . Three Essays on Policy Network Ties in the Dynamic Process of Conflict Resolution, Retrieved from http://purl.flvc.org/fsu/fd/FSU_2016SP_KWAK_fsu_0071E _13013

19-Lundström, A., Vikström, P., Fink, M., Meuleman*, M., Głodek, P., Storey, D., & Kroksgård, A. (2017). Measuring the Costs and Coverage of SME and Entrepreneurship Policy: A Pioneering Study. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(4), 941–957. http://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12037

20-Mirzai Ahrandani, H. And Sarlak, M., (2005). A look at organizational epistemology: the evolution, schools and management applications. Quantum Peak Light, 3. (In Persian)

21-Monitoring and Improving the Entrepreneurship System of Iran (2016) Ministry of Cooperatives, Labor and Social Welfare, Entrepreneurship Development and Entrepreneurship Development Entrepreneurship Dept. (In Persian)

22-OECD (2017). Promoting entrepreneurship in South Eastern Europe: Policies and tools. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org.

23-Provan, K.G. & Milward, H.B. (1995)."A preliminary theory of interorganizational network effectieness"; a comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative science quarterly, 40(1), pp.1-33.

24-Peterson, J. (2003) Policy Networks. Retrieved March 17th 2015, from http://www.ihs.ac.at/pub- lications/pol/pw_90.pdf.

25-Ra’naee, H. (2006). Examining the possibility of policy-making networks in policy making system: a study on policymaking system for agricultural researches, Ph.D. thesis. (In Persian)

26-Reinicke, W. H. (1997) Global Public Policy. Foreign Affairs 76(1), pp.127-138.

27-Resh, W., Siddiki, S., & McConnell, W. R. (2014). Does the network centrality of government actors matter? Examining the role of government organizations in aquaculture partnerships. Review of Policy Research, 31, 584

28-Deputy of Economic Research Committee in Islamic Republic of Iran’s Parlement, (2013), Report on "Reviewing and Comparing the Requirements and Laws of Entrepreneurship and Business in Iran and USA". (In Persian)

29-Rhodes, R., Moran, M., & Goodin, R. (2006). Policy network analysis. The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy , pp.423-45

30-Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1999). The advocacy coalition framework: An assessment. Theories of the policy process, Boulder, CO Westview Press.

31-Slaughter, A. (2001) Global Government Networks, Global Information Agencies, and Disaggre- gated Democracy. Retrieved April 31st 2015,.from:https://www.princeton.edu/̃slaughtr/Arti- cles/GlobalNetworks.pdf.

32-Slaughter, A. (2004) A New World Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Stone, D. (2008) Global Public Policy, Transnational Policy Communities, and Their Networks. The Policy Studies Journal. 36(1). 19-38.

33-Stone, D. (2008) Global Public Policy, Transnational Policy Communities, and Their Networks. The Policy Studies Journal. 36(1). 19-38.

34-Sharifzadeh, F., Kamali, M. J., (2008) A Model for Networking Policies in Naja, Journal of Science and Research, Knowledge Enforcement, Year 10, Number 3 and 4, Autumn and Winter, (In Persian)

35-Whitall, D.R. (2007). Network analysis of shared governance system. A thesis Doctor of philosophy in public administration and policy, Portland State University.

36-Whitall, D. R. (2012, January). Sustaining communities of practice, place and culture through shared governance. In Leadership in Sustainable Development Conference, Portland State University, OR, viewed (Vol. 18).

37-Yan, W., and G. Yin. (2014). “A Review of Policy Network Theory.” The Journal of Yunnan AdministrationCollege 2,pp:122–126.

38-Yi, H. (2012). Policy Networks, Environmental Impacts and Economic Consequences of Clean Energy in the U.S.: A National, State and Local Investigation. Retrieved from http://purl.flvc.org/fsu/fd/FSU_migr_etd-5291