COLLEGE OF BUSINESS, ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES                                                                                                                                                                              COURSEWORK SUBMISSION COVERSHEET – 2017/18                                                                                                                                                             Coursework MUST be submitted online via Blackboard Learn under the relevant modular/study block/assessment block course page.                                                                                                                                      Student Number:     1640253   Module Code:     MG5592   Module Title:   Entrepreneurship (2017/8)     Module Tutor:   Cristina Stoian     Assessment Number/Name: e.g.

Coursework 1, Coursework 2, Presentation, Final Assessment     Written Coursework        I confirm that I understand a complete submission of coursework is by one electronic copy of my assignment via Blackboard Learn.  I understand that assignments must be submitted by the deadline in order to achieve an uncapped grade.  Separate guidelines apply to reassessed work.  Please see the University Late Submission Policy for details.   Any coursework or examined submission for assessment where plagiarism, collusion or any form of cheating is suspected will be dealt with according to the University processes which are detailed in Senate Regulation 6.

  You can access information about plagiarism here.   The University regulations on plagiarism apply to published as well as unpublished work, collusion and the plagiarism of the work of other students.   Please ensure that you fully understand what constitutes plagiarism before you submit your work.   I confirm that I have read and understood the guidance on plagiarism. I also confirm that I have neither plagiarised in this coursework, nor allowed my own work to be plagiarised.    The submission of this coversheet is confirmation that you have read and understood the above statements.

 The role of modern information and communication technology for entrepreneurial firm startup and growth IntroductionModern technologies and innovations give faster access and higher quality of data. Email is the most common use of information technologies, so that people and associations can connect with each other in a financially savvy way. A second imperative use of modern information technology and advances is the World Wide Web that empowers individuals to access information. Information communication technology (ICT) can possibly enter underserved zones, encourage the improvement of local capacity and give faster the progress of data about technical assistance and, human needs such as nourishment, wellbeing, scholars of late decades, the principle main impetus of business visionaries in financial improvement and his part is to advance or make new blends of materials.

As indicated by Schumpeter, the business visionaries basically have a management or basic leadership and decision-making role. An entrepreneur is somebody who has new thoughts and innovation, and through the foundation of a business (organization) and acknowledge the risk, presenting new products or service to the mankind.Information and communication technologies(ICTs) are a core driver of the economy. The accelerating pace of technological progress continues to challenge our individual, societal             and institutional responses and this adaptation         process – or lack thereof– is responsible for the wide variation of ICT impact across nations. To get a thorough understanding of role of networks for entrepreneurial firms, this essay will explain the importance of and what factors are involved in determining the role of modern information and communication technology in entrepreneurial firms.The role of Micro, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (MSMEs) in supporting economic development and employment creation is well established. As of late, tech MSMEs and new businesses have been pushed into centre, with governments looking to empower household tech environments and support home-developed advanced items and administrations, including on the web commercial centres which make it simpler for organizations to execute with clients locally and abroad. ICT administrations have empowered the more extensive MSME populace as a rule, yet have additionally made exceptional open doors for new contestants to present items what’s more, administrations which are changing customary businesses.

Tech MSMEs have brought another dimension to the discussion, with ‘startups’ picking up notoriety in the standard talk. Fuelled by fairy-tale stories of organizations accomplishing billion-dollar valuations in the time of a couple of years, the startup rage has swept the world moving in another age of entrepreneurship. With governments trying to economic development, the ICT part hoping to obtain the following disruptive innovation and investors looking for big ways out, high-development potential tech new businesses and MSMEs have never been more in demand, nor trickier.   Role of the ICT segment in supporting tech MSMEs The ICT part is a key partner of tech new companies and MSMEs. Tech startup advancements would not be conceivable without fundamental ICT systems, administrations and applications, which give an establishment for development and advancement. The ICT segment additionally encourages the startup biological community in other critical ways.  ICT organizes as a worldwide establishment for tech items ICT-empowered new companies require fast Internet or versatile systems to disseminate substance and administrations.

In the meantime, clients of startup items require access to broadband and mobile phone systems. These systems empower the stages made by ICT-empowered MSMEs to interface purchasers and dealers. The stages can be summed up as 1) on-request/sharing economy, for example, a ride sharing administration that joins travelers with drivers; 2) coordinating administrations in territories, for example, land, work, travel, dating, speculation, and so forth.; and 3) e-commerce business and digital payments, for example, auction sites The growth impact can be acknowledged from both the demand and supply sides of the economy.

The impact from the supply side incorporates activities intended to deliver data and communication goods and services. These activities, all by themselves, contribute specifically to GDP development. ICT investments, particularly when they accept the type of capital input, add to capital-extending and work efficiency in different divisions.

Moreover, investments in ICT should serve to expand total factor productivity(TFP), mostly by method for the intangible resources, for example, as organizational or managerial skills that ICT personnel acquire as part of their formation (Dramani and Laye, 2013). Contemporary hypotheses of development normally consider investment to incorporate advancement of human capital (Dramani and Laye, 2013). Human capital development, particularly when it includes education, training, and social health care, has gigantic positive externalities that constantly add to general monetary development. Moreover, investments in ICTs frequently create complementary innovations, which tend to reinforce the productivity of enterprises and services employing information and related technologies. Finally, ICTs can add to economic development just by creating extra income producing avenues for people or groups.This does not imply that ICTs are without concerns. The generally referred article by Solow (1957), which brought forth the idea of ‘Solow’s productivity paradox,’ gives some food for thought. Solow’s critism of new technologies is especially helpful here on the grounds that it was directed particularly at the Computer.

Solow’s paradox passes on the possibility that some modern technologies have delivered far short of what they promised when they were at initially launched. Subsequently, by definition, Solow’s paradox is the distinction between the sum put resources into information technology and the monetary returns coming back from this technology at the national level (Wetherbe et al., 2007). Some modern technologies have the potential for disruption. This is evident when another innovation requires that laborers learn new abilities, which may lead, at any rate at first, to a decrease in efficiency as specialists are constrained to execute assignments in new ways. At times, the presentation of another innovation can bring about laborers with customary aptitudes losing their occupations.

In different cases, the loss of occupations may basically be the immediate result of another new technology supplanting human work. These worries must be weighed against the gigantic positive commitments of new advancements to improvement all over the place. In spite of the fact that ICTs have for some time been around, efforts to segregate their particular contribution to development are of moderately late vintage, dating to the mid 2000s.

These works can be divided into two classifications in view of their primary discoveries. In one camp are works that revealed a positive connection between the two variables. Works in this camp concentrated for the most part on European Union countries (e.

g., OECD, 2003; Jalava and Pohjola, 2002; Daveri, 2002; Colecchia and Schreyer, 2001), and North America (e.g., Stiroh, 2002 ; Jorgenson and Stiroh, 2000). In the other camp are works that focused around developing countries. These works uncovered a negative connection amongst ICT and development (e.g.

, Bollou and Ngwenyama, 2008; Ng’ambi, 2006; Bollou, 2006 ; Ngwenyama et al., 2006). One study that seemed to have dispersed any questions that ICTs were fit for contributing positively to macroeconomic growth in development, however not in creating, nations was Pohjola’s (2001). The investigation utilized an expanded variation of the neoclassical development model to break down the effect of ICTs on economic development in 39 nations.

The outcomes demonstrated no positive relationship between the two factors. In any case, an definite positive association was revealed once the investigation was limited to include 23 solely OECD nations. Why were developing nations unfit to duplicate the aftereffects of their developed counterparts, which reliably revealed a positive connection amongst ICT and (macroeconomic) development? One possible explanation behind the error is the absence of ICT-complimenting investments in developing nations (Samoilenko and Osei-Bryson, 2007). Another is the absence of the infrastructute necessary to benefit from ICT’s productive capacity (Landauer, 1995). There are additionally quantitative and qualitative limits to human capital in developing countries. Besides, ICT penetration was at a to a great degree low level to have registered any huge effect on macroeconomic development in Africa in the mid 2000s. The low levels of cell phone subscription, constitute just a single part of this attestation. For instance, short of what one percent of Ethiopia’s populace had a cell phone in 2005.

However, some early investigations revealed a positive connection between interests in ICT and macroeconomic improvement in African nations. Bollou (2006), for instance, found that ICT framework had a noteworthy positive effect on GDP in Côte d’Ivoire.The discoveries of later examinations are giving empirical support to what were once theories by a few (e.g., Pohjola, 2001; UNDP, 2001) that developing countries were on a way to leap frog’ the regular phases of economic development into the digital future.

Utilizing semi-logarithmic regression models, Ndinga (2013) found that ICTs represented obvious financial changes in the People’s Republic of Congo. The study additionally uncovered that ICT encouraged access to information and knowledge, and all the more imperatively, promoted citizen participation in community affairs. In explaining his fundamental discoveries, Ndinga (2013: 8) stated: ICT adds to enhancing individuals’ prosperity by empowering them to broaden their wellsprings of pay through access to information on different income generation opportunities. Reverberating Ndinga’s discoveries, Dramani and Laye (2013) disclosed a positive connection between investments in ICT and development in work in Senegal, contradicting Bollou (2006), whose investigation of a same country seven years earlier found no positive relationship between the two variables. The disclosure by Dramani and Laye (2013) proposes that Bollou’s study was embraced before ICT had enough time to start yielding any positive results in that country. Dramani and Laye were emphatic in contending that as a flow of capital, ICT investments have “an immediate effect on the development of national product as a factor of production as well as by its multiplier and quickening agent impacts” (Dramani and Laye, 2013: 1). As noted above, studies by specialists and international organisations supporting the theory of a positive connection amongst ICTs and development are steadily increasing. A legitimate study authorized by the World Bank and the African Development Bank, which attributed some of Africa’s economic gains and picks in recent years to ICTs, embodies this trend (World Bank/AfDB, 2012).

This study noted especially that the take-up in ICTs was partially in charge of the continent’s current expanded economic boom, which is particularly remarkable in light of the fact that the development occurred amid the recovery from the worldwide money related emergency (global financial crisis). A limitation of this and different studies is that they don’t distinguish among the comparative contributions of different ICTs to a country’s improvement. The focus has essentially been on the effect of mobile communication (e.

g., World Bank/AfDB, 2012; Aker and Mbiti, 2010). Nonetheless, a few studies have explored the effect of ICTs on some specific development activity, for example, money related administrations in Senegal and Kenya, livestock in Namibia, and water irrigation system in Egypt (World Bank/AfDB, 2012: 46– 47). The studies recommending a positive relationship amongst ICTs and development in Africa are lacking on three fronts. To start with, they have a miniaturized scale focus by inspecting ICT’s impact on one segment at any given moment. Second, they have analysed one country at once, and are thusly, not transnational in nature. Finally, they have typically operationalized the concept of development as far as economic growth. This leaves much to be desired because defining development strictly in terms of economic growth discounts other important dimensions of the development construct (cf.

, Seers, 1969). One objective of the study is to address lacks, for example, this in past investigations. We achieve this objective through the accompanying two stages. Initially, it was embraced as a cross-sectional, rather than a longitudinal, study of the connection amongst ICTs and development in every single African country. Second, the study the effect of ICTs on another measurement of development, operationalized as far as the human improvement list (HDI) was done. Conclusion        The vital disclosures of this essay, that fundamental ICTs are emphatically connected with advancement, have an instinctively engaging ring.

While there is a major positive connection between settled telephone membership and ICT, the affiliation isn’t measurably noteworthy. ICT systems are basic empowering influences of the tech startup biological community. Creating nations need to receive systems to support broadband speeds and upgrade get to. In spite of the fact that versatile is drawing nearer omnipresence, there are still holes especially among poor people. This ought to be cured especially since low-pay sections remain to profit by social business and startup administrations utilizing versatile cash. – In addition to broadband and mobile networks, startups need other critical Internet infrastructure such as data centers. Countries should enhance strategies for building world-class facilities to grow their startup ecosystems.– ICT companies are important sources of inspiration and support for the tech startup ecosystem.

Countries should encourage national ICT firms to be involved through funding, app marketplaces, ecosystem support, etc. Close relationships should be fostered between ICT companies and the startup community through hubs, network events and competitions. Many tech startups use models that are dependent on online payments.

Countries should remove barriers to online payment systems and electronic transactions.Limited ICT sector support for ecosystems discourages startups and risks their migrating to other countries where ecosystems are more attractive.