Patterns Of Sustainopreneurship In Green Technology Ventures: The Conceptual Study
Entrepreneurship, when combined with the innovation for sustainability, is otherwise called ‘sustainopreneurship’. The orientation between mission and cause is the main difference between entrepreneurship and sustainopreneurship. This paper examines how innovative solutions to business sustainability challenges are given by green tech entrepreneurs through applying the effectuation theory. This research aims to develop a pattern for entrepreneurs in green technology ventures by investigating case studies in a few of green tech firms in Malaysia that is more appropriated to the green services and products that can vigorously be grown to uncover and form innovations to accustom sustainable-related issues. In this research, sustainopreneurship was considered as the best concept to be used. There has been a growing number of research and developed interest towards understanding the factors behind green growth over the last few years. From the findings of the research, a sustainopreneurship model is developed that may be used with the effectuation theory to aid the sustainable green technology environment. This study developed a model by looking at the different patterns in companies that adopt green tech in ventures and companies that do not adopt green tech. Then, the research goes further by examining case studies in any firm chosen involved in the green tech sector. The concept of sustainopreneurship for green technology ventures is assumed by the theory of effectuation, in which the aim is practice positive social change through building a better environment within a community.
Abrahamsson, A. (2000) Sustainopreneurship - Business with a cause. Conceptualizing Entrepreneurship for Sustainability. [Master thesis, Växjö University].
Ahamat, A. (2013). Entrepreneurial opportunity creation in the biotechnology industry in Malaysia. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Sheffield]. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.1140.0001
Ahamat, A. (2014). Examining how management research learns from research in the physical sciences. GSTF Journal of Law & Social Sciences (JLSS), 4(1), 1-4, 95. https://doi.org/10.7603/s40741-014-0013-2
Ahamat, A. (2017). Is Islamic banking and finance doing enough? Shaping the sustainable and socially responsible investment community. Asian Social Science, 13(3), 170-176. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v13n3p170
Ahamat, A. (2019). Using Structured interviews and personal observation to study entrepreneurial opportunity: A reflection. SAGE Research Methods Cases. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781526490964
Ahamat, A., & Chong, S. C. (2014). Assessment of The Factors Influencing Entrepreneurs on The Biotechnology Business Venture. Proceedings of the 24th International Business Information Management Association Conference - Crafting Global Competitive Economies: 2020 Vision Strategic Planning and Smart Implementation, 2171-2177. https//doi.org/10.13140/2.1.1719.5842
Ahamat, A., & Chong, S. C. (2015). Multi-methodological approaches in qualitative entrepreneurship research. International Business Management, 9(4), 601–612.
Anderson, B. S., Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (2009). Understanding the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and strategic learning capability: An emprical investigation. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(3), 218–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.72
Blanco, S. (2007). How techno-entrepreneurs build a potentially exciting future? Handbook of Research on Techno-Entrepreneurship, 3–25. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781847205551.00007
Brettel, M., Oswald, M., & Flatten, T. (2012). Alignment of market orientation and innovation as a success factor: A five country study. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 24(2), 151-165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0258042X13516595
Clausen, T., & Korneliussen, T. (2012). The relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and speed to the market: The case of incubator firms in Norway. Technovation, 32(9-10), 560-567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2012.05.004
Dewi, S., & Ahamat, A. (2018). The role of entrepreneurial orientation in achieving organization performance through business model innovation and asset relational collaboration. Humanities and Social Science Reviews, 6(2), 100-105. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2018.6212
Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with folks: Triple bottom line of 21st century business. John Wiley & Son Ltd.
Huslan, M. A. A., Ahamat, A., Rajiani, I., & Ahmad, S. (2016). Modelling opportunity creation: The case study of green technology researchers in Malaysia. International Information Institute, 19(8), 3329-3244.
Knight, F. H. (1942). Profit and entrepreneurial functions. Journal of Economic History, 2, 126-132.
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. The Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135-172. https://doi.org/10.2307/258632
Mthanti, T. S., & Urban, B. (2015). Effectuation and entrepreneurial orientation in high-technology firms. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 26(2), 121-133. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2013.850161
Parker, L. D. (2008). Interpreting interpretive accounting research. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 19(6): 909–914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2007.03.013
Pillai, T. R., & Ahamat, A. (2018). Social-cultural capital in youth entrepreneurship ecosystem: Southeast Asia. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 12(2) 232-255. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-08-2017-0063
Read, S., Sarasvathy, S., Dew, N., Wiltbank, R., & Ohlsson, A-V. (2010). Effectual Entrepreneurship (1st ed.). Routeledge.
Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. The Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243-263. https://doi.org/ 10.2307/259121
Schindehutte, M., & Morris, M. H. (2009). Advancing strategic entrepreneurship research: The role of complexity science in the shifting paradigm. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(1), 241-276. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2008.00288.x
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2009). Research methods for business: A skill building approach (5th ed.). John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Smith, J. K. (1992). Interpretive inquiry: A practical and moral activity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(2).
Urban, B., & Barreria, J. (2010), Emprical investigations into firm technology orientation and entrepreneurial orientation. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 7(4), 329-351. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219877010001969
Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. A. (2003). Knowledge-based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and medium sized business. Strategic Management Journal, 24(13), 1307-1314. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.360
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 The Journal of Technology Management and Technopreneurship (JTMT)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-By 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).