Juxtaposing Ubuntu Values, Indigenous Knowledge …jbs-re.com/journals/JBS-02062017(1).pdf · · 2017-06-2925 Author: Elliot Kasu Juxtaposing Ubuntu Values, Indigenous Knowledge

25

Author: Elliot Kasu

Juxtaposing Ubuntu Values, Indigenous Knowledge Systems, and Entrepreneurship:

Antecedents Underpinning Ubuntupreneurship in Communal Wealth Generation

Elliot Kasu

Da Vinci Institute of Technology and Innovation, South Africa

ABSTRACT

There is a long-standing consensus in most developing countries particularly of Southern Africa

that Ubuntu values and indigenous knowledge systems are important tools which influence

entrepreneurship in communal wealth generation. With the majority of people in these developing

countries such as Zimbabwe, living in rural areas, the conventional wisdom is that juxtaposing

entrepreneurship, Ubuntu values, and indigenous knowledge systems forms predators

underpinning Ubuntupreneurship in communal wealth generation. Notwithstanding the increasing

awareness and importance of these antecedents to Ubuntupreneurship, indigenous knowledge

systems have largely remained implicit and scant. Therefore the primary objective of this study is

to fill this void by examining the influence of these predators to Ubuntupreneurship. Four

hypotheses were posited and data from seventy families from the Tangwena community in Nyanga,

Zimbabwe were collected to empirically test the hypothesis. The results showed that ubuntu values,

indigenous knowledge systems and entrepreneurship influences Ubuntupreneurship which has a

potential for increased community wealth generation. Implications of the findings are discussed,

whilst limitations and future research direction are indicated.

KEYWORDS: Entrepreneurship, Ubuntu values, Indigenous knowledge systems (IKS),

Ubuntupreneurship, Communal wealth generation.

Address Correspondence to: Elliot Kasu – Department of Academic Development and Research,

Da Vinci Institute of Technology and Innovation. Email: [email protected]

Journal of Business Sciences (JBS)

Volume 1, Issue 1, pp. 25-42

(ISSN: 2521-5302)

June 2017

JOURNAL OF BUSINESS SCIENCES (JBS)

26

1.0. INTRODUCTION

The role of entrepreneurship has long been acknowledged (Schumpeter, 1947) which is

characterised by an innovative drive. The enthusiasm of a growing multidisciplinary field,

entrepreneurship has generated a profusion of research practices associated with understanding

and fostering entrepreneurial drive (Fayolle & Riot, 2016). The challenge concerns the problem of

navigating the complex landscape of entrepreneurship research output (Murphy, 2011). (Ramose,

1996) argues that the prevailing role of the community in entrepreneurship differs from the

predominantly individualistic thinking of the West contrary to Africa where civilisation is

characterised by solidarity, communitarianism, traditionalism, and participation. (Bhengu, 2010)

envisions a new economic system transcending the division by integrating economic, social,

environmental goals with African oriented practices premised on Ubuntu to create communal

wealth. African humanism is capable of inspiring a wider world by giving a new and profound

meaning of global business (Bhengu, 2010).

An inquiry on entrepreneurship poses an opportunity of the possibility of combining multiple

perspectives in new and innovative ways. Minimum attention has been given to the wealth of

innovations that occur outside mainstream entrepreneurship (Gupta, 2003) making

entrepreneurship a controversial topic in economic theorisation hence justifying the need for this

research. Research that investigate the antecedents of Ubuntupreneurship in communal wealth

generation in the context of developing countries have largely been neglected, hence the need for

this current research.

It is acknowledged that entrepreneurship research output continues to be regarded as a fragmented

and ‘heterogeneous’ multidisciplinary ‘jigsaw’ (Shane & Venkatarama, 2000). Entrepreneurship

research output is an obstacle to the exploitation of theory development opportunities (Fayolle &

Riot, 2016). Socio-political context within a country foster certain conditions which generate only

the opportunities for entrepreneurs and in particular the skills and motivations (Reynolds et al,

2000). He concluded by saying “Indigenous entrepreneurial development is a key factor to fight

unemployment, poverty and prepare societies for globalisation.

Against the backdrop, the purpose of this current study is to fill the void in modern

entrepreneurship framework by exploring the moderating role created by Ubuntu values and IKS

in the entrepreneurship development. This is achieved by fusing Ubuntu values and indigenous

knowledge systems into modern entrepreneurship, ultimately producing Ubuntupreneurship to

achieve communal wealth generation. Furthermore, the study is expected to bring a strong

theoretical and practical contribution to the existing entrepreneurship literature and practice as a

contribution to entrepreneurship development. On the whole, the findings of the study are intended

to contribute new knowledge to the existing entrepreneurial knowledge.

27

Author: Elliot Kasu

The article consists of sections representing literature review, research methodology which

includes data collection and measurement, data analysis and results, research findings, conclusion

together with limitations to study and suggestions for future study.

2.0. LITERATURE REVIEW

In spite the differences in entrepreneurship types, there are some common aspects which enrich

the characteristics of Ubuntupreneurship. (Pinchot, 2000) argues that enterprises interested in

developing and preserving entrepreneurship should strive to create an environment in which those

who believe in attractiveness feel encouraged to pursue it. This prompts the need to constantly

carry out research to remain relevant in order to increase communal wealth.

2.1. Entrepreneurship Forms

Entrepreneurship has a wide range of meanings and is a discipline with a wide knowledge base

theory. Entrepreneurship is a process of action an entrepreneur undertakes to establish his

enterprise with the ability to create and build something from practically nothing (Loss, &

Bascunan, 2011). Drucker (1985) has a view that entrepreneurship is a systematic innovation

which consists of a purposeful and organised search for changes and it is the systematic analysis

of the opportunities. (Schumpeter, 1934; Drucker, 1985; Loss & Bascunan, 2011) have all

endeavoured to add on to the literature on entrepreneurship. (Pinchot, 2000) described the

intrapreneurship the short for intra-corporate entrepreneurship. (Loss and Bascunan, 2011) said

the term social entrepreneurship first came into widespread use in the literature on social change

in the 1960s and 1970s. (Yunus, 2006) added his voice on social entrepreneurship by defining

social entrepreneurship as creating business models around low cost products and services to

resolve social inequalities. Furthermore (Brush & Hirsch, 1999) said that the topic of women

entrepreneurship has been neglected both in society in general and in social sciences. According

to (Loss & Bascunan, 2011) a consistent theory of entrepreneurship is missing, a theory that is

adequate to combine the various strands of literature to come up with an empirically testable

model. A modern approach should also contain theories such as human capital (Schultz, 1975),

social networks (Granovetter, 1985), indigenous knowledge systems and African Humanism

(Bhengu, 2010).

2.2. Ubuntu Values

Africans have a thing called Ubuntu, which is the essence of being human and is part of the gift

that Africa is going to give the world (Tutu, 1995) as such he believes that a person is a person

through other persons. Accordingly, Khoza, (2012) said Ubuntu (in Zulu), botho (in Lesotho),

vhuntu (in Venda), vumunhu (in Xitsanga) and unhu (in Shona) means humanism encompassing

values such as the universal brotherhood of Africans, sharing, treating and respecting other people

as human beings. Nussbaum, (2003) views Ubuntu as a simple big idea which is regarded by many

as the foundation for human relations. Equally Bhengu, (2010) views African humanism as an

alternative which has already been applied in the peripheral context of African villages and is

capable of inspiring a wider world by giving a new and profound meaning to global business. He

also visualises African economic humanism establishing a crucible in which a new economic

system is being forged, one that transcends the division between first and second world, one that


28

integrates social and environmental goals, one that balances shareholder return and one that brings

the heart and soul in the workplace. Khoza, (2012) believes that African humanism overcomes the

deficiency in Western individualistic rationalism but inculcates a collective spirit in business

activities. The all-pervading disease in the modern world is the total imbalance between city and

countryside and imbalances in terms of wealth, power and hope (Kumar, 2013). In Ubuntu we find

elements of entrepreneurship and leadership philosophies that could be applied universally.

Therefore the philosophy of African humanism and related IKS offers a special contribution to the

conduct of business (Bhengu, 2010) and more specifically entrepreneurship.

2.3. Indigenous Knowledge Systems

The concept of Integral Dynamics by Schieffer & Lessem, (2012) advocates that communities

have many aspects that are dynamic but are integral parts of the whole. The world is comprised of

many aspects such as nature, culture, and spirituality that evolve independently of each other

becoming integral and dynamic parts of the whole. There is a large body of literature showing that

indigenous entrepreneurs applied local knowledge resulting in grassroots innovations which hold

great potential for solving contemporary problems such as well as delivering sustainable

development (Gupta, 2003).

Indigenous people view themselves as collective groups that work closely together, being knit

together by common ancestors, history, language, culture, spirituality even tradition (Hindle, &

Lansdowne, 2005). The indigenous people acquire local knowledge systems through the

accumulation of experiences, informal experiments and intimate understanding of the environment

(Rajasekaran, 1993). Hindle, & Lansdowne, (2005) defined indigenous entrepreneurship as the

management and development of initiatives carried out by indigenous people for the benefit of

their communities. The innovations are cost effective, ecosystem friendly and sustainable due to

intimate knowledge of the ecosystem in the locality (Gupta, 2003). Indigenous entrepreneurial

development is a key factor to fight against unemployment, poverty and prepare societies for

globalisation (Reynolds, 1997) and cultural renaissance determines politico-socio-economic

transformation (Steiner, 1999). As such indigenous entrepreneurs use indigenous knowledge to

generate grass root innovations that are need based, simple and cost effective to achieve communal

wealth generation through Ubuntupreneurship.

2.4. Ubuntupreneurship

There is a need to integrate traditional and contemporary management approaches and apply them

in the face of unique challenges (Smit. et al, 2011). African business environment can only be

answered from management perspectives that are rooted solidly a mind-set that is uniquely African

(Visser, 1997). The incongruence of the application of Western principles on the African

environment has resulted in some uniquely African challenges (Smit et al, 2011). By celebrating

diversity and reflecting the fullness of the human being, in the business sphere, a truly unified

society might emanate (Lessem & Nussbaum, 1996). African entrepreneurship is original, has no

limits like the Western one which is survival of the fittest (Kadenge, 2013). African economic

29

Author: Elliot Kasu

humanism establishes a crucible in which new entrepreneurial and economic systems are forged

transcending the division first and second worlds (Bhengu, 2010).

Ubuntupreneurship has a strong base in the humanistic values of Ubuntu that brings forth images

of supportiveness, cooperation, self-reliance, solidarity and communalisation. (Khoza, 2012)

purports that Ubuntu emphasises dignity and regards all people as members of the global

community, overcoming the deficiency in Western individualistic entrepreneurship. At the same

time, entrepreneurship like other human endeavours takes place within a cultural context.

(Hofstede, 1991) holds that culture is always a collective phenomenon, as it is shared between

people who live in the same social setting or context. As such entrepreneurship has to pay attention

to renewal of indigenous cultures and moral values (Mbigi, 1997). The observance of cultural

values in Ubuntupreneurship brings forth good manners, respect, understanding of the good and

an appreciation of the way in which we serve each other (De Pree, 1989).The interconnectedness

of indigenous and exogenous entrepreneurship forms enables people to get out of poverty circles

(Nussbaum & Lessem, 2005), increasing the ability for all to create communal wealth. It is viewed

that Ubuntupreneurship bridges the gap between modern entrepreneurship and the potential of the

opposite paradigm based on Ubuntu and IKS. Therefore Ubuntupreneurship begins in the everyday

life of the local people and grown through the diversity of local projects (Ledwith, 2005).

2.5. Communal Wealth Generation

The dream of African people is to have the disadvantaged becoming Ubuntupreneurs and active

partners in communal wealth generation. Ubuntu certainly rejects the rugged individualism,

(Khoza, 2012), that seems to be encouraged by Western entrepreneurial systems and ideological

persuasion. In Africa, things are quite otherwise, civilization is characterized above all by

solidarity, communitarianism, traditionalism, and participation. Gbadegesin, (1991) urged that a

person’s influence and personality is dependent on the community. Therefore the meaning of one’s

life is measured by one’s commitment to the social ideals and communal existence. Adamson,

(2003) asserts that everything we do is geared towards helping our communities to achieve control

over their entrepreneurial processes, cultural rights and intellectual property. Escobar, (2008)

visualizes the emergence of a new entrepreneurship rooted in the community, cultural tradition,

human psyche, indigenous institutions and models that embody the structure and function of

modernity. He believes that communities offer a reservoir of possibilities and the key development

is to unleash the innovative potential that has in it “vitality of place”. Therefore,

Ubuntupreneurship begins in the everyday life of the local people and grown through the diversity

of local projects (Ledwith, 2005). Development of the community and its entrepreneurs is need

based and achieved through engagement, (Mulgon, 2005) and needs to be seen as a whole life

project rather than merely focussing on economic aspects (Escobar, 2008). In the African context,

all institutions and individuals cooperate within unified societal entity to produce a person, the

community or entity that they will ultimately be proud of. Resultantly, Ubuntupreneurship

promotes collective action where people joins together to tackle problems of common interest

(Coppock & Desta, 2013) to achieve communal wealth generation. The incorporation of

collectivism is a key African humanism, socio-economic and cultural renewal which promotes

workplace democracy. Ubuntupreneurship brings that workplace democracy together with the

rights of the people, their spirituality based on respect for humanity and the harmonising of the

workplace. Most stories of entrepreneurship emanate from individualism with collective wealth


30

generation seldom recognized as an entrepreneurial activity (Champbell et al, 2006) hence the

development of the unique Ubuntupreneurship model.

3.0. CONCEPTUAL MODEL DEVELOPMENT

In order to integrate modern entrepreneurship, Ubuntu values, and IKS as predators of

Ubuntupreneurship in creating communal wealth, a conceptual model is developed premised on

Ubuntupreneurship to accommodate the dream of African people to have the disadvantaged

becoming Ubuntupreneurs and active partners in community wealth generation. Ubuntu certainly

rejects the rugged individualism, (Khoza, 2012), that seems to be encouraged by some

entrepreneurial systems and ideological persuasion. Everything we do is geared towards helping

our communities to achieve control over their entrepreneurial processes, cultural rights and

intellectual property (Adamson, 2003). Escobar, (2008) visualizes the emergence of a new

entrepreneurship rooted in the community, cultural tradition, human psyche, indigenous

institutions and models that embody the structure and function of modernity hence the emergence

of Ubuntupreneurship. Development of the community and its entrepreneurs is need-based and

achieved through engagement, (Mulgan, 2005) and needs to be seen as a whole life project rather

than merely focussing on economic aspects (Escobar, 2008). Entrepreneurship emanates from

individualism with collective wealth generation seldom recognized as an entrepreneurial activity

(Steyaert & Hjorth, 2006) hence the development of the unique Ubuntupreneurship model. As

such, Ubuntupreneurship promotes collective action where people joins together to tackle

problems of common interest (Coppock & Desta, 2013) to achieve community wealth generation.

The model is segmented into four integral Southern, Eastern, Northern and Western worlds, with

their relationships discussed thereafter. Figure 1 depicts the conceptualized research model used.

31

Author: Elliot Kasu

Figure 1: The Ubuntupreneurship Conceptual Model

3.1. Southern Ubuntu values and ubuntupreneurship

Conventional entrepreneurship wisdom is a narrow base drawn from the West (Lessem &

Schieffer, 2010). A dynamic system has to evolve grounded through continuity of traditional

knowledge and contemporary innovations (Hoppers, 2002). The African tree of knowledge stems

from African humanism, traditional democracy and nature which are the wellspring following with

African ontology and epistemology (Ramose, 1994). It is grounded in humanness, traditional

democracy, cooperative production, cultural identity, social relations, self-reliance, cooperation,

solidarity, forgiveness and reconciliation (Khoza, 2012) assumed to drive the Ubuntupreneurship

process. Ubuntu has the capacity to express compassion, reciprocity, dignity, harmony and

humanity into the business environment (Nussbaum, 2003). As such, Ubuntupreneurship

derivation from Ubuntu values and conventional entrepreneurship pillars bring personhood and

relationships (Khoza, 2012). Ubuntupreneurship may become an economic philosophy that

appreciates human needs, dignity and based on the principles of complimentary and solidarity

(Bhengu, 2010) and recognises its harmony with nature for the global economy to be sustained.

The purpose of business lies in the society becoming an organ of the society (Drucker, 1985)

calling for community activation to address their burning desire and issue, as a healing component

to restore relational fabric (Mwamuka, et al; 2014) to release participation potential of the

community (Schieffer, & Lessem, 2014) emerging through IKS.

P1: Grounding in Southern Ubuntu values drives Ubuntupreneurship


32

3.2. Indigenous knowledge systems and the Bridge to prosperity

Little is known about how culture evolves throughout the different stages of life cycle and how

evolution affects these companies’ ability to nature entrepreneurship (Loss & Bascunan, 2011).

Spirituality may elevate and ennoble, degrade and debase and the undiscovered or neglected

indeed despised terrain of African spirituality may hold some answers to some of the material the

world is facing (Soyinka, 2012). Schaffer, (2014) maintained that little consideration has been

given to the role of culture in opening the doors for spirituality. Future research should explore

cultural differences across life cycle stages (Bill & Gasick, 1997) and the role their differences

play in influencing entrepreneurship. Researchers need also to document how beliefs and values

influence employee attitudes and permanent and as a result, entrepreneurship (Rogoff & Heck,

2003).

The perceived inadequacies have given rise to the emergence of Ubuntupreneurship which proffers

an opportunity for entrepreneurship to engage with the dynamics of Ubuntu values, culture, nature,

spirituality and other IKS becoming important for catalysing integral development. The local

knowledge systems help to generate sustainable entrepreneurial solutions delivered from

traditional knowledge systems with the potential to solve contemporary problems. Cultural force

is probably the most revolutionary aspect which demonstrates how indigenous knowledge systems

and an understanding of one’s cultural and societal context as well as that of the other provides for

a sustainable and integrated organisation (Lessem & Schieffer, 2010). The observation of cultural

values ultimately brought back good manners, respect, understanding of understanding of the good

and an appreciation of the way in which we serve each other (De Pree, 1989). Therefore cultural

renaissance or renewal alongside other indigenous knowledge systems may be a foundation that

determines the quality of socio-economic transformation (Steiner, 1999). As such, the

transformation of entrepreneurship to Ubuntupreneurship means that enterprises will carry out

entrepreneurial activities in a manner that is more or less defined by others for the betterment of

communities.

P2: Emerging through indigenous knowledge systems is related to the bridge to prosperity

3.3. Increased level of entrepreneurship (intrapreneurship) and Ubuntupreneurship

In spite of the differences in the definitions and types of entrepreneurship, there are some common

aspects such as risk taking, creativity, innovation, independence, and rewards. Notably most

available studies have focussed on modern entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship and

intrapreneurship and partially on women entrepreneurship. New research is required for successful

entrepreneurship to prevail (Loss & Bascunan, 2011). Locating entrepreneurship in public domain,

where community goals are achieved through engaging in social processes is paramount (Steyaert

& Hjorth, 2006). The current entrepreneurial paradigm has neglected Ubuntu and related IKS as

engines for economic growth. The private entrepreneur is dedicated to profit maximisation, a

33

Author: Elliot Kasu

theory which suffers from a conceptual failure to capture the essence of what is human (Yunus,

2006). Using the indigenous economic and social systems produces more output (Bhengu, 2010).

Businesses need to move to the heart of sustainable development to the benefit of both itself and

also the community within which it operates (Lessem & Schieffer, 2009). This suggests that the

discipline of entrepreneurship is in a stage of flux and in transition.

It can be observed that, today’s entrepreneurship seems to be much rooted in a mechanistic and

individualistic world views strongly influenced by Western viewpoint which neglects the African

viewpoint. In view of the identified gap, the objective of the research is to integrate Ubuntu values

and IKS to influence the entrepreneurial process, resulting in the emergence of Ubuntupreneurship

to co-create with modern entrepreneurship. Then Ubuntupreneurship ultimately engages and

embraces with the dynamics of culture, community, spirituality, nature and related IKS evolving

a new futuristic entrepreneurial approach to creating community wealth.

P3: Increased level of entrepreneurship (intrapreneurship) has positive effects on

Ubuntupreneurship

3.4. Community wealth generation and Ubuntupreneurship

Charity is rooted in the basic human concern for other humans (Yunus, 2006), thus the spirit of

Ubuntu or people-centricity, has survived the constant barrage of individualistic emerging values

dedicating lives to the betterment of communities (Biko, 2013). Furthermore, Hindle and

Lansdowne, (2005) defines indigenous entrepreneurship as the management and development of

initiatives for the benefit of the community. As such Lietaer, (2010) also argued that we need to

collectively and contextually leverage our human wealth earned through our energy and creativity

to achieve individual, family community, society and international integrity. Interconnectedness

in community is a key characteristic of the African way of thinking as the community is reflected

in a binding network of relationships Lessem and Nussbaum, (1996) to create wealth. The purpose

of business must, in fact, lie in society, since a business enterprise is an organ of society (Drucker,

1985). Ubuntu reflects the strong interdependence of human beings as we say a person is a person

through other persons (Mbigi, 1997). The economy is to be embedded in the community and seen

in its interdependent relationship with society and supporting institutions (Polanyi, 2001). An

emergent process rooted in the ground of each community’s history, culture, tradition indigenous

institutions and models embody the structures and functions of modernity (Escobar, 2008).

Community offers a reservoir of possibilities that are the key to Ubuntupreneurship to unleash the

innovative potential that lies in it (Gudeman (2001). Every entrepreneurial effort is geared towards

helping the community achieve control over their own assets (Adamson, 2003). All institutions

and individuals cooperate within a unified societal entity to produce an organisation that they will

be proud of through collectivism (Mbigi, 2000).

Reynolds, (1997) concluded by saying indigenous entrepreneurship has been found to yield

significant economic benefits through social legitimacy of entrepreneurial efforts. In terms of

Ubuntupreneurship, the community concept perceives the business organisation as an integral

community which the individual belongs to, while the whole organisation is a member of the

extended family which is a special contribution to the conduct of business and more specifically


34

entrepreneurship. The activation process requires the community to revisit nature, spirituality,

African Humanism and the role of indigenous entrepreneurs to unearth IKS to yield community

wealth generation, sustainable development, and knowledge creation.

P4: Community wealth generation is achieved through fostering Ubuntupreneurship

4.0. RESEARCH DESIGN

The research was underpinned by the tenets of Integral Research propounded by Lessem and

Schieffer, (2010) and their refinement on the alternating rhythms comprised of the 4Cs (Call,

Context, Co-creation, and Contribution). The guiding theme of Call was to interlink the

Researcher’s calling with the real life community burning issues. The guiding theme underlying

Context was to uncover areas of imbalance and disintegration in the entrepreneurial context. The

purpose of Co-creation was to interweave research path and knowledge following the southern

relational path (Lessem & Schieffer, 2010) which allowed the researcher to passionately involve

his total self with the community. Under Co-creation we adopted the Southern Relational Path,

segmented into the descriptive method, which was used to get in touch with the burning issues,

desire and the context, Phenomenology helped to lay the foundation for new theory, feminism

helped to challenge the short comings of the existing entrepreneurship frameworks and finally

Ubuntupreneurship was tested in practice through Participatory Action Research (PAR) together

with the community. PAR emphasised collective inquiry and experiences of all parties throughout

the whole research process which combined participatory research and action research. The

contribution was meant to distil and share our integral development with the community and

society aiming to transform local and global entrepreneurship frameworks.

The research was a four-fold transformation process which Lessem and Schieffer (2010) coined

Grounding, Emergence, Navigation and effecting (GENE Concept) which illustrated how the

GENE-ius of a social organisation can be realised (Lessem & Schieffer 2009). The integral social

and economic transformation advocated for the integration of all knowledge systems from the four

worlds, the South, East, North and West which help communities to build open societies, alleviate

poverty ultimately renewing societies (Lessem & Schieffer, 2010). We travelled along the path

towards healing the burning issues and desires of the Tangwena community by moving from the

formative to the transformative and origination to transformation to discover the cultural historical

roots and Ubuntu values being essential elements for entrepreneurship.

4.1. Sampling and Data Collection

The social research was based on the real life of the Tangwena community in the Nyanga district

of Zimbabwe. The population was the collection of about two thousand families in the Tangwena

community which the conclusions were drawn from. A sample composed of twelve households

per in each of the seven clusters judgementally selected from the population, totalling eighty four

families, possessing relative characteristics formed part of the research team. Judgement sampling

35

Author: Elliot Kasu

based on the traditional leaders’ expertise about the population was used to select the sample. Data

was collected from all relevant groups including men, women, youths and the disabled from

various income levels, race, education, and neighbourhood. Knowledge of past trends and

experiences enabled us to come up with the conclusions. The burning issue of the population

stemmed from the unusual economic environment where everyone was at varying levels of

economic progress with significant gaps amongst the people due to the prevailing entrepreneurial

environment. The burning desire of the researcher was to liberate the community from the bondage

of poverty and suffering. As such the research linked the community around the burning issue and

desire, linking diverse research ontological perspectives, linking academia and practitioners

linking indigenous wisdom and global external knowledge.

Most strategic initiatives fall short because of lack of effective ecosystems (Lessem & Schieffer

2009). In light of their experiences and knowledge grounded towards social history, a dynamic

and interconnected ecosystem was designed to co-creatively support the transformation data

collection and analysis process. As a community, we accepted that we are highly interdependent

and connected like an extended family. The ecosystem comprised a rich cast of characters grouped

into stewards, facilitators, educators, and catalysts. The stewards included the local Member of

Parliament, councillor, traditional leaders and the eighty-four households. This helped to dig deep

into the cultural, traditional and spiritual grounds of the community and nature. This researcher

assisted by other three fellow researchers who strongly believed in the power of African culture,

spirituality and tradition in building a new form of entrepreneurship performed the catalytic role.

Catalysation helped to dig into the cultural and spiritual grounds of the community. Navigating

knowledge through the community was the role of educators. Da Vinci Institute, Business Training

Development (BTD), and Trans4m based in Geneva were the educators who distributed and

explained explicit knowledge documented through theoretical frameworks and models and

integrated with indigenous knowledge system. The facilitators comprised of Agriculture Extension

Officers (AREX), other government departments and Nyanga Potato Seed Association. They

contributed towards instilling the ‘Ubuntupreneurial spirit of agriculture’ to solve the communal

poverty issues. The ubuntupreneurial spirit of the projects was anchored on traditional agricultural

practices (group work, offering services to another among others) culminating into the emergency

of the Tangwena Traders Association which became a hub centre for trade and communication.

4.2. Measurement Instrument

The hypothesis testing began with the assumption made by the population parameter that Ubuntu

values, IKS, and entrepreneurship are predators of Ubuntupreneurship which result in community

wealth generation (H0). We then collected data, produced sample information to decide how likely

it is that the hypothesised population parameter is correct. The research adopted explanatory

interviews, action research, participation observation, brain storming (Dandaro Theory in the

Shona Language), surveys and correlation of indigenous and exogenous knowledge systems which

afforded an opportunity to experience for real the emotions of the community. These were more

useful to acquire in-depth information about people’s history or perspectives on

ubuntupreneurship. In a bid to become successful Ubuntuneurs the project members established

model households through Ubuntupreneurship activities to combat poverty and achieve

sustainable livelihood through implementing Ubuntu values and IKS which required a

combination of goodwill, determination, honesty and hard work. The community had implicit


36

Knowledge and expertise predating colonial times, spanning the fields of management,

entrepreneurship, governance, philosophy, religion, agriculture, health, health and so on. The

research revealed that a variety of African knowledge systems are of great relevance to

Ubuntupreneurship towards community wealth generation. Almost seventy percent of the project

members achieved the targets they set for themselves at the beginning of the research.

4.3. Validation Measurement

Here we are trying to determine the reliability and validity of the research outcomes. In accordance

with integral research (Lessem & Schieffer, 2010) the two-step research procedure combine

participatory research and action research to confirm the outcomes. PAR is an approach to research

that emphasises participation and action based on reflection, data collection and action through

involving people, emphasising collective inquiry and experience grounded in expertise and social

history. The research sought to understand entrepreneurship by attempting to change it

collaboratively and the following reflection. When participants and researchers are regarded as

partners, the result focus and results can be more relevant (Lock, et al 2007). The research process

encouraged equal participation from researchers and participants who are regarded as experts due

to their lived experiences (Jacobson et al 2005; Lock et al 2007). Power sharing eliminated

inequalities as such research members made collaborative decisions and made changes desired by

the group (Danley et al 1999; Rempfer & Knott2001). The process involves selecting research

outcomes related to dependency, oppression and other inequalities in need of evaluation (Khanlou

& Peter 2005). Ubuntupreneurial characteristics were evaluated and action is taken eventually

achieving social change (Danley, et al 2007; Lock, et al 2007). By involving the participants in the

study, desired changes are achieved by the group (Danley et al 1999; Rempfer & Knott 2001). The

ultimate goal was achieved by using the research results and findings to witness improvement

within the community which resulted in community wealth generation through Ubuntupreneurship

activities. The evaluation was a process rather than a stage in itself since the decisions made during

the preliminary stages impacted the later stages in the process.

4.4. Proposition Evaluations

Hypothesis testing attempts to determine when it is reasonable to conclude from the analysis of a

sample that the population parameter shares the same viewpoint (Levin, 1984) that Ubuntu values,

IKS and entrepreneurship, in particular, intrapreneurship are predators of Ubuntupreneurship. To

test the validity of our assumption, we gathered a sample and embarked on PAR to determine the

hypothesised gathered data and the outcomes. Hypothesis 1 predicts that grounding in Ubuntu

values drives Ubuntupreneurship. PAR supported and demonstrated the view that rooting

Ubuntupreneurship in Ubuntu values and IKS made transformation an immediate driver for

motivating the community. The approach fused the values of solidarity, communitarianism and

participation together with other forms of entrepreneurship. Hypothesis 2 predicts that emerging

through IKS is the bridge to prosperity. Advancing collective desire of the community became a

legacy every Ubuntupreneur thrived to achieve by taking cognisance of traditional value context

37

Author: Elliot Kasu

drawn from nature, spirituality, and culture to emphasise awareness of the needs of others. PAR

promoted oneness and inspired the participants to share their Ubuntupreneurship successes and/or

failures together in a culturally resonate manner. Prolonged reflection was achieved through

“Dandaro Intervention” to brainstorm key strategic issues accompanied by dancing and singing in

promoting the spirit of togetherness. Hypothesis 3 predicts that increased levels of

entrepreneurship (intrapreneurship) have positive effects on Ubuntupreneurship. Economists

generally agree that it is a crucial factor in the diffusion of new technologies, competitiveness and

the creation of new innovations. However entrepreneurial agents are almost invisible in economic

theories embedded in African Economic Humanism. Intrapreneurship gives rise to

Ubuntupreneurship through the intra-organisation innovations to foster economic growth.

However to adequately fuse intrapreneurship into Ubuntupreneurship, requires the organisation to

provide the time, space and resources to turn their ideas into reality. Hypothesis 3 predicts that

community wealth generation is achieved through fostering Ubuntupreneurship. In

Ubuntupreneurship, all institutions and individuals cooperate to produce a person, the community

or organisation. Through community consciousness based on collectivism, a tight network of

interdependent relationship is established. The community becomes the candle of the individual

and his obligations towards the collective are of primary importance. Collectivism stresses the

importance of social units in wealth generation to the point of depersonalising the individual.

Ubuntupreneurship respects the individual and places the importance of working for a common

goal as an integral member in community wealth generation. The creation of Ubuntupreneurship

closes the gap between indigenous entrepreneurship and conventional entrepreneurship.

5.0. RESEARCH FINDINGS

Indeed it was the experience of the community which had strong effects on the research outcomes.

The research enlivened various Ubuntu values, and IKS as a way to achieve Ubuntupreneurship in

community wealth generation. There was no substitute for our cultural roots which were necessary

anchors for ideas from our cultures. People valued their relationships/personhood and gave consent

to a person’s understanding of proper behaviour towards others, ultimately witnessing a

community characterised by a vibrant network of relationships. As such we could not succeed on

our own but needed each other to form an eternal bond of reciprocity/social relations between us.

Traditional values were constantly embraced through a combination of engagement, participatory

action, and local ownership to collectively deal with common problems. We developed our own

motivation to become passionate advocates of self-reliance, ultimately establishing an ethic of hard

work. Cooperation and solidarity were exhibited in the spirit of suffering, drawing strength from

collective spiritual and emotional solidarity. Language, cultural and religious values served to

define the community through a stronger cultural identity. Cultural expression was demonstrated

through Ubuntu values, music, dance, art, drama, and storytelling to support and affirm cultural

identity and team building. We were in the same sense bound by each other by drawing our being

from the collective spirit of humanity as a whole. Every activity was performed in the spirit of

forgiveness and reconciliation. To avoid conflicts, forgiveness became a fundamental precondition

for the creation of a fair and stable community.


38

In the context of this research, entrepreneurship centred on re-energising and enhancing the ability

to be creative and innovative. The major thrust being to develop entrepreneurial spirit within the

organisational boundaries which allows an atmosphere of innovation to prosper. Thus we

promoted innovation among members by giving careful attention to their individual attitudes,

values and behaviour orientations. We revisited IKS enabling the integration of indigenous

exogenous knowledge system to create a new form of Ubuntupreneurship. Despite the differences

between entrepreneurship and Ubuntupreneurship there are some common aspects such as, risk

taking, innovation, creativity, interdependence and rewards. These commonalities together with

Ubuntu values and IKS continue to be the driving forces behind Ubuntupreneurial activities. The

Ubuntupreneurial mentality manifest in the Ubuntupreneurs helped to overcome problems that

other people found insurmountable.

6.0. CONCLUSION

The purpose of the research was to examine the influence of Ubuntu values, IKS and

entrepreneurship on Ubuntupreneurship in communal wealth generation. In particular, four

hypotheses were postulated. To test the hypothesis, data were collected from the Tangwena

community of Nyanga in Zimbabwe. The empirical results supported all the postulated research

assumptions in a significant way. Important to this study is that the juxtaposition of Ubuntu values,

IKS and entrepreneurship have an influence on Ubuntupreneurship to generate communal wealth.

This implies that Ubuntupreneurship is a new form of entrepreneurship which attempts to close

the gap in entrepreneurship existing literature.

6.1. Implications to the study

IKS has the implicit knowledge and expertise predating colonial times spanning the fields of

management, philosophy, religion, agriculture, health, science technology and so on. Nevertheless,

IKS continues to be transmitted orally and retaining the hold on the life of the majority of Africans.

Indeed, it is logical in that Ubuntu values and IKS increase collectivism in communal wealth

generation and closes the gap between indigenous entrepreneurship and exogenous

entrepreneurship. Therefore this implies that Ubuntupreneurs need to prioritise Ubuntupreneurship

to foster improved communal wealth generation in their business ventures.

6.2. Limitations and future research direction

Although the study makes some significant contribution to both academia and practice, it was

limited to Ubuntupreneurship without analysing other fields of management. It revealed that a

variety of the implicit African knowledge still remain of great relevance in transforming

communities. Future studies can also extend to the current study framework by making IKS more

explicit through studying the effects of a larger set of variables. The further research which makes

IKS more explicit to support innovations and development in communities need to be

strengthened. This helps to reconnect with tradition and the aspects of culture and spirituality to

39

Author: Elliot Kasu

develop effective Ubuntupreneurship strategies in order to survive the challenging environment

and build sustainable livelihoods and transformative education in various communities. Further

research should explore the effects cultural differences across the entrepreneurial life cycle stages

and also document how beliefs and values influence employee attitudes. Subsequent research

should consider replicating this study in other developing countries. Above and beyond, this

investigation will contribute to literature to the existing body of knowledge on entrepreneurship,

leadership and management in developing countries such as Zimbabwe and globally.

7.0. REFERENCES

Bewanyi, J. A. I., & Ramose, M. B., (2003). The African ethic of Ubuntu/Botho: Implications of

research on morality. Journal of Moral Education, 39(3), 273-290

Bhengu, M. J. (2010). African economic humanism: The rise of an African economic philosophy.

Farnham: Grower.

Biko, H. (2013). The great African society: A plan for a nation gone astray. Jeppestown, Jonathan

Ball Publishers.

Bill, F. B., & Gasick, E. J., (1997). Social and cultural history. Texas, Kickapoo Journal: 2, 74-

81.

Brush, C., & Hisrich, R. D., (1999). Women owned businesses: Why do they matter? Boston MA,

Kluwer academic publisher.

Coppock, D. L., & Desta, S., (2013). Collective action, innovation and wealth generation among

settled pastoral women in northern Kenya: Rangeland ecology & management Journal

66(1), 95-105.

Danley, K., & Langer, E., (1999). A Handbook for participatory action researchers. Boston,

Center for Psychiatric Rehabilitation.

De Pree, M. (1989). Leadership is an Art. New York, Dell Publishing.

Drucker, P. E. (1985). Innovation and entrepreneurship practice and principles: New York,

Harper & Row.

Escobar, A. (2008). Territories of difference: Place, movements, life, redes. Durham NC, Duke

University Press.

Fayolle, A., & Riot, P., (2016). Rethinking Entrepreneurship: Debating research orientations.

New York, NY, Rutledge.

Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness.

Journal: 9(3), 829-845.

Gudeman, S. (2001). The anthropology of economy, community, market and culture. Oxford,

Blackwell.


40

Gupta, D. (2003). Meeting felt aspiration: Towards a new paradigm of development. New Delhi,

Journal of Labour Economics. 46.

Hindle, K., & Lansdowne, M., (2005). Brave spirits on new paths: Toward a globally relevant

paradigm of indigenous Entrepreneurship research, Journal of Small Business and

Entrepreneurship, 18(2), 131-141.

Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organisations: Software in mind. London, McGraw-Hill.

Hoppers, C. (2002). Indigenous Knowledge Systems. Cape Town, New Africa books.

Jacobson, N., Altenberg, R., Barnes, J., Cussion, R., Rowley, V., & Mckinon, B., (2005). Using

participatory action research to explore recovery with alternatives. Canada, Journal on

Community Mental Health, 24(2), 85-97.

Kadenge, L. (2013). African traditional religion. Zimbabwe, Methodist Theological College

Khanlou, N., & Peter E., (2005). Participatory action research: Consideration for ethical review,

Journal of Social Sciences and Medicine: 60(10), 2333-2340.

Khoza, R. J. (1994). African humanism on ubuntu as a philosophy of life and its potential

application. Johannesburg, Monograph Ekhaya promotions.

Khoza, R. J. (2012). Attuned leadership: African humanism as a compass. Johannesburg, Penguin

books.

Kumar, S. (2013). Soil, soul, society: A trinity for our time. Lewes, Leaping Hare press.

Ledwith, M. (2005). Community development: A critical approach. Bristol, The policy press.

Lessem, R., & Nussbaum, B., (1996). Sawubona Africa: Embracing four worlds in Southern

African management. South Africa, Zebra Press, Struik Publishers.

Lessem, R., & Schieffer, A., (2009). Transformation management towards the integral enterprise.

Farnham, Gower Publishing.

Lessem, R., & Schieffer, A., (2010). Integral research and innovation. Farnham, Gower

Publishing.

Levin, R. I. (1984). Statistics for Management. New Jersey, Prentice/Hall International.

Lietar, B. (2001). The Future of Money. London, Centuary.

Lock, M., Barber. R., Jones, A., & Lovell, J., (2007). Service users’ views of self-help strategies

and research. United Kingdom, Journal of Mental Health, 16(6), 85-97.

Loss, M., & Bascunan, F. L., (2011). Entrepreneurship development. New Delhi, Global village

publishing house.

41

Author: Elliot Kasu

Mbigi, L. (1997). Ubuntu, Johannesburg, Knowledge resources.

Mbigi, L. (1997). Ubuntu: The spirit of African transformation management. Johannesburg,

Knowledge resources.

Mulgan, G. A. (2005). A sense of community resurgence. Journal 172.

Murphy, P. J. (2011). A 2x2 conceptual foundation for entrepreneurial discovery theory:

EntrepreneurshipTheory and Practice Journal: 35(2), 359-374.

Mwamuka, E., Lessem, R., & Schieffer, A., (2014). Integral green Zimbabwe: An African phoenix

rising. Farnham, Gower Publishing.

Nussbaum, B. (2003). African culture and Ubuntu: Reflection on a South African in American

perspectives. World business academy Journal, 17(1).

Nussbaum, B., & Lessem, R., (2005). A South African social entrepreneur turns a new economic

vision into practice: Rekindling the human spirit in business. South Africa, Zebra press.

Pinchot, G. (2000). Intrapreneur ing: Why you don’t have to leave the corporation to become an

entrepreneur. San Francisco, Barrett Koehler.

Polanyi, K. (2001). The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our time.

Boston, MA Beacon.

Rajasekaran, B. (1993). A framework of incorporating indigenous knowledge systems into

agricultural and extension organisations for sustainable agricultural development. India,

Iowa University, paper 10180.

Ramose, M. B. (1996). Ubuntu and communalisation in African philosophy and art. Henk van

Den Heuvel, UNISA Rosenberg edition

Rempfer, M., & Knott, J., (2001). Participatory action research: A model for establishing

partnerships between mental and health researchers and persons with psychiatric

disabilities. Birmingham, Haworth Press, 151-165.

Reynolds, P. (1997). Participation in entrepreneurial process: Estimates of US households.

Wellesley, MA, Babson College, Entrepreneurial Research Consortium.

Rogoff, E. G., & Heck, R. K. Z., (2003). Evolving research in entrepreneurship and family

business: Recognising family as the oxygen that that feeds the fire on entrepreneurship.

Journal of Business Venturing, (18/5), 559-566.

Schafer, P. (2014). The age of culture. Oakville, Ontario, Rock Mills Press.

Schieffer, A., & Lessem, R., (2014). Integral development: Releasing the potential of individuals,

organisations and societies. Farnham, Gower publishing.

Schultz, T. W. (1975). Erratum to: Economics of the family: Marriage, children and human capital.

American Journal, 12(4), 679-679.

Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge University press.


42

Schumpeter, J. (1947). The creative response in economic history. The Journal of Economic

History, Volume 2.

Shane, S., & Venkatarama, S., (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research.

Academy of management review Journal, 25(1).

Smit, P. J., Cronje, G. T., Brevis, T., & Vrba, M. J., (2011). Management principles: A

contemporary edition for Africa. Onizleme, Yok, Juta & company.

Soyinka, W. (2012). Indigenous African religion. Amazon Books.

Steiner, R. (1999). Towards social renewal. London, Steiner Press.

Steyaert, C., & Hjorth. D., (2006). Entrepreneurship and social change. Northants, Edward Elgar.

Tutu, D. (1995). The right of hope: Global problems, global vision. One World Art, NZDL.

Visser, W. (1997). Afrocentric business in Southern Africa. World Business Academy perspectives

Journal, 11(3).

Yunus, M. (2006). Creating a world without poverty. New York, Public Affairs.

Documents

Juxtaposing Ubuntu Values, Indigenous Knowledge …jbs-re.com/journals/JBS-02062017(1).pdf · · 2017-06-2925 Author: Elliot Kasu Juxtaposing Ubuntu Values, Indigenous Knowledge