Çiftçiler İçin Girişimcilik Ölçeği Geliştirilmesi ve Çiftlik Performansı Üzerindeki Etkisi

Year 2017, Volume: 23 Issue: 2, 323 - 333, 30.12.2017

Gökhan Çınar , Göksel Armağan , Altuğ Özden , Nurçin Çınar

https://doi.org/10.24181/tarekoder.369401

Cited By: 3

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Hian Chye Koh (2006) tarafından geliştirilen girişimcilik ölçeği üzerinden geçerlilik ve güvenilirliği sınanmış Türkçe versiyon yeni bir girişimcilik ölçeği geliştirmektir. Ayrıca yeni geliştirilen bu ölçek yardımıyla girişimciliği oluşturan karakteristik özelliklerin (girişimci oryantasyonu) girişimci performansına etkisini ortaya koyan bir model denemesi üzerinde çalışılacaktır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu Aydın, Manisa, Denizli ve Kütahya bölgelerinde üretim faaliyetlerini sürdüren 273 çiftçi oluşturmaktadır. Ölçme aracının yapı geçerliğini belirlemek amacıyla faktör analizi; güvenirlik için ise Cronbach's Alfa katsayısı incelenmiştir. Nihai olarak ölçme aracının beş alt boyuttan ve 15 maddeden oluştuğu; açıkladığı toplam varyansın ise %78.65 olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Dolayısıyla Hian Chye Koh tarafından geliştirilen 36 maddelik girişimcilik ölçeği 15 maddeye indirgenmiştir. Girişimcilik özelliklerinin performansa etkileri ise yapısal eşitlik modeli ile analiz edilmiştir. Ampirik bulgular çiftçilerin risk ve yenilikçilik özelliklerinin işletme performansına olumsuz katkılar sunduğunu göstermektedir. Öte yandan çiftçilerin başarı ihtiyacı, özgüven ve kontrol odaklılığı eğilimleri ile performans arasında olumlu ilişkiler keşfedilmiştir. Sonuçlar işletmelerin büyümesinde yaşanan sorunların ardında yatan psikolojik etkenleri ortaya koymaktadır. Buna göre Türk çiftçileri muhafazakâr bir yapıda büyümeye çalışmaktadır.

Keywords

Tarımsal girişimci, Girişimci oryantasyonu, Çiftlik performansı, Türkiye

Developing Entrepreneurship Scale For Farmers and Impact on Farm Performance

Abstract

The aim of this research is to develop a new Turkish entrepreneurship scale considering the scale of Hian Chye Koh (2006) which its validity and reliability tested. Also, with the help of this newly developed scale, a model experiment which shows the effect of entrepreneurial characteristics (Entrepreneurial orientation) on entrepreneurial performance will be studied. The study group of the study consisted of 273 farmers who continued their production activities in Aydın, Manisa, Denizli and Kütahya regions. Factor analysis was used to determine the validity of the structure of the measurement tool and Cronbach's Alpha coefficient was used for reliability. Ultimately, it consists of 15 sub-dimensions and five sub-dimensions of the measuring tool; and the total variance explained is 78.65%. Therefore, the 36-item entrepreneurship scale developed by Hian Chye Koh has been reduced to 15 items. The effects of entrepreneurship characteristics on performance were analyzed by the structural equation model. Empirical findings indicate that farmers' risk and innovation characteristics contribute negatively to business performance. On the other hand, positive relationships have been discovered between performance and farmers' tendencies to achievement, self-confidence and control orientation. The results reveal the psychological factors behind the problems in the growth of businesses. Accordingly, Turkish farmers are trying to grow in a conservative structure

Keywords

Agricultural entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurial orientation, Farm performance, Turkey

References

• Abitabile, C., Arzeni, A., Solazzo R. 2017. The internationalization of the Italian organic enterprises, New Medit, 16(3): 47-55. Akçaöz, H., Özkan, B., Karadeniz, C. F., & Fert, C. 2006. Tarımsal üretimde risk kaynakları ve risk stratejileri: Antalya ili örneği. Medıterranean Agricultural Sciences, 19(1), 89-97.
• Alpar, R., 2011. Uyum Analizi. Çok Değişkenli İstatistiksel Yöntemler. Detay Yayın. Ankara. s: 355-380. Barbieri, C., & Mshenga, P. M. 2008. The role of the firm and owner characteristics on the performance of agritourism farms. Sociologia ruralis, 48(2): 166-183.
• Baron, R. A., Tang, J., & Hmieleski, K. M. 2011. The downside of being 'up': entrepreneurs' dispositional positive affect and firm performance. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 5(2): 101-119.
• Bergevoet, R. H. M., Ondersteijn, C. J. M., Saatkamp, H. W., Van Woerkum, C. M. J., and Huirne, R. B. M. 2004, Entrepreneurial behaviour of Dutch dairy farmers under a milk quota system: goals, objectives and attitudes, Agricultural Systems, 80(1): 1–21.
• Chavas, J. P., & Holt, M. T. 1996. Economic behavior under uncertainty: a joint analysis of risk preferences and technology. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 78(2): 329–335.
• Çetin, İ., & Esengün, K. (2012). Amasya İlinde Kuru Soğan Yetiştiren İşletmelerin Risk Davranışına Göre Sosyo-Ekonomik Analizi. Gaziosmanpaşa Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 81-92.
• Çınar, G., Işın, F., & Armağan, G. 2016. Türkiye'de Tarımsal Ürün İhracatı Yapan Firmaların Risk Tercihi Açısından İncelenmesi. JOTAF/Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(1).
• Çınar, G., Işın, F., & Hushmat, A. 2016. How Managers React to Crisis?: A Planned Behavior Theory Approach. The East Asian Journal of Business Management, 6(4), 5-12.
• Collins, C. J., Hanges, P. J., & Locke, E. A. 2004. The relationship of achievement motivation to entrepreneurial behavior: A meta-analysis. Human performance, 17(1), 95-117.
• Covin, JG and Slevin, DP. 1989. Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10: 75–87.
• Çukur, F., Saner, G., Çukur, T., & Kubilay, U. (2008). Malatya ilinde kayısı üreticilerinin riskin transferinde tarım sigortasına bakış açılarının değerlendirilmesi: Doğanşehir ilçesi Polat dere köyü örneği. Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 45(2): 103-111.
• Fitzsimmons, J. R., & Douglas, E. J. 2011. Interaction between feasibility and desirability in the formation of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(4): 431-440.
• Gellynck, X., Cárdenas, J., Pieniak, Z., & Verbeke, W. 2015. Association between innovative entrepreneurial orientation, absorptive capacity, and farm business performance. Agribusiness, 31(1): 91-106.
• Grande, J., Madsen, E.L., and Borch, O.J. 2011. The relationship between resources, entrepreneurial orientation and performance in farm-based ventures, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 23(3–4): 89-111.
• Hian Chye Koh, 1996. Testing hypotheses of entrepreneurial characteristics: A study of Hong Kong MBA students, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 11(3): 12-25.
• Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1): 1-55.
• Koellinger, P., Minniti, M., & Schade, C. 2007. I think I can, I think I can: Overconfidence and entrepreneurial behavior. Journal of economic psychology, 28(4): 502-527.
• Lans, T., Seuneke, P., & Klerkx, L. 2017. Agricultural entrepreneurship. In Encyclopedia of creativity, invention, innovation and entrepreneurship Springer New York. (pp. 1-7).
• Lemmerer, A., Zapilko, M., & Menrad, K. 2015. Senior Management's Influence on New Product Development Projects and Firm Performance in Small and Medium-Sized Food Companies. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 18(4): 105-115.
• Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. 2001. Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of business venturing, 16(5): 429-451.
• Madsen, E. L. 2007. The significance of sustained entrepreneurial orientation on performance of firms–A longitudinal analysis. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 19(2): 185-204.
• McElwee, G. 2006. Farmer's as entrepreneurs: developing competitive skills”, Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 11(3): 69-75.
• Naldi, L., Nordqvist, M., Sjöberg, K., & Wiklund, J. 2007. Entrepreneurial orientation, risk taking, and performance in family firms. Family Business Review, 20(1): 33-47.
• Newbold, P. 1995. Statistics for Business ve Economics. Prentice-Hall International, New Jersey, 867.
• Pindado, E., & Sánchez, M. 2017. Researching the entrepreneurial behaviour of new and existing ventures in European agriculture. Small Business Economics: 1-24.
• Rotter, J. B. 1990. Internal Versus External Control of Reinforcement: A Case History of A Variable. American Psychologist, 45: 489-493.
• Schneider, S. 2005. Thoughts on agricultural law and the role of the American law association. Drake Journal of Agriculture Law, 10: 1-5.
• Shane, S. (2009). Why encouraging more people to become entrepreneurs is bad public policy. Small business economics, 33(2): 141-149. Stewart, W.H.J., Carland, J.C., Carland, J.W., Watson, W.E. and Sweo, R. 2003. Entrepreneurial dispositions and goal orientations: a comparative exploration of United States and Russian entrepreneurs, Journal of Small Business Management, 41(1): 27-46.
• Strickland, B. R. 1989. Internal-External Control Expectancies: From Contingency to Creativity. American Psychologist, 44: 1- 12.
• Szerb, L., Terjesen, S., & Rappai, G. 2007. Seeding new ventures–green thumbs and fertile fields: Individual and environmental drivers of informal investment. Venture Capital, 9(4): 257-284.
• Şimşek, Ö. F. 2007. Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş, temel ilkeler ve lisrel uygulamaları, Ekinoks yayınları, Ankara, 212 s. Veidal, A., & Flaten, O. 2014. Entrepreneurial orientation and farm business performance: the moderating role of on-farm diversification and location. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 15(2): 101-112.
• Verhees, F.J.H.M., Kuipers, A., and Klopcic, M. 2011. Entrepreneurial proclivity and farm performance: the cases of Dutch and Slovenian farmers, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 12(3): 169–177.
• Vesala, H. T., & Vesala, K. M. 2010. Entrepreneurs and producers: Identities of Finnish farmers in 2001 and 2006. Journal of Rural Studies, 26(1): 21-30.
• Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. 2003. Knowledge-based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and medium-sized businesses. Strategic management journal, 24(13): 1307-1314.
• Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. 2005. Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: a configurational approach. Journal of business venturing, 20(1): 71-91.
• Zahra, S. A., & Bogner, W. C. 2000. Technology strategy and software new ventures' performance: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment. Journal of business venturing, 15(2), 135-173.