The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2752-9819.htm

“Revealing the hidden” – Challenges

facing early
challenges facing early digital DEs in Jordan

entrepreneurs in Jordan
Samer Abaddi
The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan, and
Received 26 February 2023
Moh’d Anwer AL-Shboul Revised 20 May 2023
Business Administration Department, Princess Sumaya University for Technology, 22 May 2023
23 May 2023
Amman, Jordan Accepted 24 May 2023

Abstract
Purpose – Digital entrepreneurship is the key to economic survival and the lantern of jobs in developing
countries. The debate about the challenges facing early digital entrepreneurs (DEs) in developing countries is
still ambiguous. This study attempts to fulfill the gap with an in-depth examination of Jordan.
Design/methodology/approach – Referring to a digital start-up database hosted by the Ministry of Digital
Economy and Entrepreneurship in Jordan, the study interviews a random sample of (n 5 45) early (less than
one-year seniority) DEs. Thematic analysis is carried out facilitated by NVivo 20 software. E-Commerce,
agriculture technology, data and artificial intelligence and entertainment were at the top of the interviewed
start-ups.
Findings – Nine challenges were observed, critically analyzed and discussed. The challenges are (1) the lack of
realistic funding in terms and guarantees; (2) the negligence of guidance and advisory of incubators and
entrepreneurship centres; (3) the emergence of unexpected risks; (4) the stringent economic situation;
(5) competition; (6) legal and legislative obstacles; (7) obstacles to accessing markets; (8) team management and
finally (9) disorganization in the entrepreneurial environment. The study sets recommendations to support
early DEs in their journey.
Practical implications – This study highlights the significant implications for aspiring DEs by focusing on
some challenges that might face their start-ups such as institutional, technology and local dimensions of
context and measures to develop the entrepreneurial and digital competencies. This includes sustainable
funding, poor direct guidance and advisory, unexpected failures/risks, and economic obstacles. This study
might be considered a road map for the decision-makers to build their strategies for eliminating the main
barriers for early DEs and start-ups.
Originality/value – Although recent literature discussed the challenges of entrepreneurs in Jordan, this is the
first that identifies early DEs’ challenges and uses 45% samples of the community.
Keywords Digital entrepreneurs, Entrepreneurship challenges, Early start-ups, Artificial intelligence,
Developing countries
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Entrepreneurship deflates poverty (Ifeoma et al., 2018) and unemployment based on the
Schumpeter effect in developing countries (Ghavidel et al., 2011). The unemployment rate
crossed the threshold of 23% in the third quarter of 2022 in Jordan (Department of Statistics,
2022), compared to 15.27% in 2016 (International Labour Organization, 2016).
High unemployment rates have an adverse consequence on new business initiation.

Author contribution: Samer Abaddi (First and Corresponding Author): Conceived the presented idea,
developed the theoretical framework, selected the study design, collected the data (conducted
interviews), analyzed data using NVivo, developed the results (including figures/tables) and wrote the
Management & Sustainability: An
entire manuscript. The first author was also responsible for the communication with the journal through Arab Review
the submission life cycle. Moh’d Anwer AL-Shboul (Second Author): Provided critique and guidance for © Emerald Publishing Limited
2752-9819
the first author and worked on the revisions during the peer review. DOI 10.1108/MSAR-02-2023-0011
MSAR Effects vary depending on geography, sector and other factors (Rom
an et al., 2013).
According to Apaydin (2018), there is an inverse relationship between entrepreneurship and
unemployment. Individuals endeavour seeking to get out of the unemployment tunnel
through the entrepreneurship portal as one of the feasible solutions, however, the trip
encountered various challenges (Massar et al., 2020).
As a result of the digital transformation during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)
pandemic, the demand for digital artefacts has increased (Liu et al., 2021), The pandemic has
secured new opportunities for Digital Entrepreneurs (DEs) and accelerated their access to the
market (Modgil et al., 2022). Therefore, DEs differ from entrepreneurs because the pandemic
has created new opportunities for them to enter the market and has given them advantage
over other entrepreneurs. However, new risks and challenges have emerged for DEs swaying
the success of their start-ups such as market change, technical readiness and infrastructure,
and financial subsidization (Qian Qiu and Mok Kim Man, 2021).
In Jordan, among the main challenges facing entrepreneurial projects are financing,
high taxation and continuous divergence in regulations and laws (Alharbi, 2020). Despite
the leads in the vision for digital transformation drawn up to 2025, the government and
the relevant sectors need to accelerate the employment of technology and facilitate
procedures for entrepreneurs (Adaileh and Alshawawreh, 2021). Furthermore,
entrepreneurs by necessity and opportunity raised other administrative and cultural
barriers (Zighan, 2020).
Due to the scarcity of studies on the challenges facing DEs in developing countries in
general, Jordan in particular, this paper addresses the challenges facing early DEs (whose
start-up is less than 1 year old) in Jordan. This study raises the following questions:
(1) What are the challenges facing early DEs in Jordan?
(2) What are the recommendations to vanquish these challenges?
To answer the above questions, a qualitative approach using thematic analysis based on
semi-structured interviews is adopted. A random sample of 45 early DEs was picked, they
work in various fields such as agriculture, food, education, financial, entertainment, gaming
and e-Commerce.
This study tries to provide a profound descriptive and quantitative analysis, taking the
characteristics of entrepreneurs into consideration, which include information and
communications technology (ICT) skills, their level of technological awareness, skill-based
resources, financial status, and perceptions and attitudes towards society and technology.
Additionally, it tries to present in-depth discussions that need to be mentioned concerning the
external environment, which includes the government, market challenges and opportunities
for digital entrepreneurship, e-readiness, level of trust in society, the financial market, and
supporting industries’ e-readiness (Samara and Terzian, 2021).

2. Theoretical background and literature review

2.1 Entrepreneurship
Previous studies broached different concepts of entrepreneurship (Landstr€om et al.,
2012). According to Shane and Venkataraman (2000), entrepreneurship is defined as how
new opportunities are created. It is often associated with establishing a new institution
or restructuring an existing one (Rusu et al., 2012). Drucker (1985) linked
entrepreneurship to innovation, interpreting that it includes innovative actions that
boost the benefit from the available resources to achieve wealth. Other studies have
pegged entrepreneurship to opportunities and initiative (Kaish and Gilad, 1991;
Stevenson and Jarillo, 2007).
 The beginning of the use of “entrepreneur” term dates to the middle of the eighteenth Challenges
century. According to Cantillon (1755), an entrepreneur buys goods and sells them after a facing early
while for one purpose or another. Lazear (2005) defines him as one who exploits limited
resources for his benefit. Panda (2000) argued that the entrepreneur is capable to work in
DEs in Jordan
various environments and is characterized by innovativeness and taking risks. Usually, the
entrepreneur’s journey triggers off by searching for problems and turning them into
opportunities on the ground (Sexton and Bowman-Upton, 1991).
The term “entrepreneur” has evolved over the past years, and studies have discussed the
characteristics of successful entrepreneurs. The personality of an entrepreneur is
distinguished by being unique and possessing many qualities, for example, patience, a
positive mindset and scintillating communication skills (Rusu et al., 2012). When it comes to
leadership and team building, the entrepreneur has a distinctive personality that enchants
(Johnson, 2001).
There are distant types of entrepreneurs (Salmony and Kanbach, 2021; Andersson et al.,
2009). Grandori and Giordani (2011) classified entrepreneurs according to their personalities.
Filion (2004) divided them into operators and visionaries. Operators did not launch their
product or have not grown their start-up as required, they usually go through six main steps:
select, perform, assign, allocate, monitor and adjust. On the other hand, visionaries tend to
focus on defining the problem and planning for the long-term vision to solve it, they focus on
defining the steps that should be taken and then developing plans to manage human power.
Visionaries’ activities are usually a combination of learning, setting vision, designing,
animating and monitoring. Although entrepreneurs differ in their classifications and the
nature of their businesses, they often have a goal, which is launching innovative solutions to
the problems facing humans (Tidd and Bessant, 2021).
Previous literature mentioned the “push and pull” entrepreneurship in a theoretical
context (Dawson and Henley, 2012; Zgheib, 2018; Al Matroushi et al., 2020). According to
Amit and Muller (1995), push entrepreneurship is usually associated with the reasons that
compel a person to initiate his/her entrepreneurial activity, including dissatisfaction with the
current job, which encourages the search for self-employment. Negative events force
individuals towards the practice of push entrepreneurship (van der Zwan et al., 2016). On the
other hand, pull entrepreneurship is associated with initiative, financial reward and desire to
succeed. In the second type, the entrepreneur is the one who takes the initiative to search for a
problem and find solutions (Amit and Muller, 1995). There are differences in the motivators
for both entrepreneurship types between gens and nations (Zgheib, 2018).

2.2 Digital entrepreneurship

A digital start-up employs technology in its early business model in at least one of its major
operations (Ojala, 2015). DEs fall under more than one category in business classifications
(Richter et al., 2017) as they are closely associated with ICT (Rashidi et al., 2013). According to
Giones and Brem (2017), digital entrepreneurship term is used for project opportunities that
utilize technology to solve a specific problem. Digital entrepreneurship is a new phenomenon
in which digital tools, methods and infrastructure congregate to exploit opportunities and
solve emerging issues (Nambisan, 2017).
Recent studies have investigated the relationship between digital entrepreneurship and
digital transformation (Antonizzi and Smuts, 2020; Bican and Brem, 2020; Jawad et al., 2020;
Corvello et al., 2021; Nambisan et al., 2019). The relationship is associated with the elements of
supply and demand. The supply expresses individuals who can fill entrepreneurial roles in
various environments. However, the demand component expresses the jobs that
entrepreneurs can occupy (Thornton, 1999). Entrepreneurs may benefit from the activities
resulting from digital transformation (Hull et al., 2007).
MSAR The COVID-19 pandemic opened a new horizon for entrepreneurship, it reshaped the
ecosystem in the way of thinking and seizing chances (Garcez et al., 2021). Recently, there is a
significant increase in studies that discuss the trends of digital transformation and
innovation (Gao et al., 2022).

2.3 Digital entrepreneurship in Jordan

This study relied on the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) as it takes the cognitive
and mental side of DEs in order to understand their motives in engaging in digital
entrepreneurship. In addition, this theory is widely used to describe the factors and processes
that lead to adopting entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intention. This theory discusses
the variables that affect people’s intentions, which in turn regulates the actual behaviour that
will be impacted towards an activity. The theory will therefore make it clearer how
entrepreneurs’ intention to engage in digital entrepreneurship may be influenced by their
perception and thought processes when other forces are present.
The significance of the current study stems from the fact that there is a lack of specialized
research that is designated to a particular developing country that discusses the challenges of
digital entrepreneurship. Therefore, this study is considered significant due to the reason that
it does not only examine the challenges that face digital entrepreneurship in all developing
countries but specifically in Jordan while taking into consideration the financial and legal
regulations and infrastructure. In addition, cultural connotations and location considerations
need to be taken into account as ideas, services and products differ based on these
considerations (Ratten, 2023). In addition, this study contributes to the literature by adopting
a qualitative approach to data collection by utilizing a semi-structured questionnaire, while
similar studies have adopted the quantitative approach. Therefore, the qualitative is
considered beneficial since it can disclose new aspects that might be hidden if a quantitative
approach was used (Schoonenboom, 2023).
Middle Eastern countries, including Jordan, one of the developing countries in the region,
resort to consolidating a culture of entrepreneurial work to reduce the high levels of
unemployment among youth (Aljuwaiber, 2020). From the early emergence of the term
entrepreneurship in Jordan, there have been increasing endeavours towards backing the laws
and regulations concerning it (Alrawadieh and Alrawadieh, 2018).
In conjunction with the paths of encouraging entrepreneurial work to create job
opportunities and reduce unemployment rates, Jordan’s rank in the Global Entrepreneurship
Index has jumped from 72nd place in 2014 to 49th in 2018. Jordanian entrepreneurs recorded
good scores in start-up skills, product innovation and networking compared to nearby rich
countries such as Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates (MoDEE, 2022) as shown in
Figure 1.
In 2019, 27 Jordanian start-ups participated in the World Economic Forum, which
gathered the top 100 start-up companies in the Arab region (Abukumail, 2019). Aligning with
fostering the entrepreneurship climate and promoting digitization in the country, the
Ministry of Digital Economy and Entrepreneurship (MoDEE) became the major umbrella of
entrepreneurial activities in substitution of the Ministry of Information and Communications
Technology. This step came intending to confirm the role of technology as a major player in
business operations and to stimulate the entrepreneurial spirit by start-up reinforcement,
enhancing opportunities for partnership and networking and unleashing financing arms
(MoDEE, 2019).
The fact is that Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Jordan are responsible for 96%
of the Jordanian economy. The government realizes the importance of this sector; therefore, it
focused on developing it to overcome employment challenges (Global Entrepreneurship
Monitor, 2020). Decision-makers in the field cooperate to remove obstacles and sustain a
 Challenges
facing early
DEs in Jordan

Figure 1.
Jordan’s position for 14
components of the
global
entrepreneurship index
between nearby
countries (higher
scores are better)

friendly environment that encourages the entrepreneurial intentions of youth. Today, more
than 20 private, public and non-profit institutions provide various programmes to
entrepreneurs in Jordan. iPark specializes in accelerating the work of start-up companies,
providing incubation opportunities and registering intellectual property rights. The Queen
Rania Center for Entrepreneurship (QRCE) provides various services to support digital
entrepreneurship in cooperation with its partners. QRCE focuses on providing awareness,
networking and financing entrepreneurial projects. Oasis 500 is a private company that
provides investment, mentorship and incubation for early and medium-stage start-ups,
usually its investments are directed towards entrepreneurial projects that employ technology
(Caputo et al., 2016).
The unemployment problem in Jordan was exacerbated during COVID-19, at a
microscopic view, the unemployment rate among youth reached about 50%, and the
number of new companies registered in Jordan decreased during the same period (The World
Bank, 2022b). Figure 2 shows the number of registered limited liability companies (LLCs) and
New Business Density (NBD) between 2010 and 2020 in Jordan.
According to The World Bank (2022a), NBD is “the number of newly registered
corporations per 1,000 working-age people (those ages 15–64)”. The NBD has decreased to
nearly half in 2020 compared to 2013; moreover, there is a decreasing trend in the number of
new registered LLCs in Jordan between 2018 and 2020. Despite the harsh conditions of
COVID-19 on the business environment and the economy in Jordan, digital entrepreneurship
remained within the top rankings of the Middle East and North Africa, as many Jordanian
start-ups have successfully brought venture capital (Abukumail, 2019). Most developed
countries including the Americas and Europe have started adopting digital entrepreneurship
by utilizing e-readiness and the availability of suitable infrastructure for DE. However, the
MSAR Registered LLCs and NBD in Jordan from 2010 to 2020
5000 1
4442 4356
4500 4141 4175 0.9

Number of Registered LLCs 4000 3759 3654 3659 0.8

3499
3500 3286 0.7
3078

Business Density
3000 2778 0.6

2500 0.5

2000 0.4

1500 0.3

1000 0.2

500 0.1

Figure 2. 0 0
The number of 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
registered LLCs and Year
NBD between 2010 and Registered LLCs New Business Density
2020 in Jordan
Source(s): Authors’ own creation. The World Bank (2022a)

literature also mentioned the dramatic change in global business due to the technological
transformation that occurred and it is still taking place (Paul et al., 2023).

3. Methodology
3.1 Study road map
This study explores the challenges facing DEs. It adopts the qualitative method in the data
collection process and utilizes the thematic analysis as shown in the road map in Figure 3.
Qualitative interviews are characterized by their ability to understand the beliefs,
backgrounds and opinions of individuals about a particular phenomenon (Mann, 2010).

3.2 Study sample and data collection

The study sample consisted of (n 5 45) DEs who were selected randomly from the Startups
Jordan database, which has 100 early DEs (less than 1 year age) and 355 start-ups in total.
Startups Jordan database is managed by the Information and Communications Technology
Associations, supported by the Innovative Startups and SMEs Fund and hosted by the
MoDEE. Start-up Jordan plays a pivotal role in connecting investors and key players in the
entrepreneurship field with DEs, while also providing significant information about each
company, including its area of expertise and founding date. Moreover, the platform opens
opportunities for cooperation between entrepreneurs themselves, with a focus on digital
projects working in various fields such as agriculture, food, education, financial, 3D printing,
blockchain, Artificial Intelligence (AI), e-Commerce and other fields (Startups JO, 2022).
Synchronous communication of time and asynchronous communication of place
techniques such as phone calls and videoconferencing were used in the data collection, as
they were more flexible compared to synchronous communication of time and place
techniques (Opdenakker, 2006; Redlich-Amirav and Higginbottom, 2014). Semi-structured
interviews were conducted with one of the founding members of each start-up as they provide
flexibility in inquiries and keep the door open towards conveying interviewees’ feedback
freely (Bell et al., 2022). Notes were recorded during and immediately after the completion of
 Reviewing Literature
Challenges
facing early
DEs in Jordan
Startups Jordan 355 Digital
Selection off Databases
D
Platform Startups

Filtration by 100 Digital

Specify DEs that Ali
Align with the Study
Startup Age Startups

Ensure Saturation Random S

Sampling 45 Digital
Startups

Semi-structured
Interviews Data Collection
ll

NVivo 20 Thematic
i Analysis Themes

Discussion of Results Conclusion

Figure 3.
Road map of the study
Source(s): Authors’ own creation

the interviews to ensure that no information was forgotten. In the end, the interviewees were
asked about the notes that were recorded to ensure the validation and accuracy of data before
treatment and analysis.
The early DEs were split into two groups according to their physical location; the first one
works from independent incubators and the second operates from entrepreneurship and
innovation centres in public and private universities in Jordan. The sector, number of LLCs
and average interview time varied for the 45 interviews as shown in Table 1.
The sample of the study included 45 DEs, 60% of them were males and 40% were females.
The ages of the entrepreneurs varied as shown in Figure 4, 31.12% of them were between 18
and 24 years old (undergraduate level), while 48.89% of the ages ranged between 25 and
33 years and the remaining proportion was 34 years and above.
At the time of the study, all the start-ups were less than 1 year old, 66.7% have not
registered/licensed their business and 33.3% were registered. According to the legal type,
registered businesses fall under three main categories: sole proprietorship, LLC and
corporation as shown in Figure 5.
Participants work in various fields, most notably e-Commerce, agriculture technology,
data and AI, entertainment, health technology and cybersecurity. When the DEs were asked
if they have another source of income, 44% answered that they work in other jobs as
freelancers or under part-time or full-time contracts, while 56% stated that they only depend
on their entrepreneurial projects and family support for living.

3.3 Data analysis and interpretation

Thematic analysis is applied to this study as suggested by Rubin and Rubin (2012). Scanning
begins by writing transcripts and making sure that all notes are recorded during and after the
interview. NVivo 20 software was the main tool of analysis and Microsoft Word helped
MSAR (No. of companies interviewed, Average interview time
Digital start-ups sector no. of LLC) (in min.)

3D Printing (2, 1) 68
Agriculture Technology (5, 1) 70
Creative Art, Media and Design (3, 0) 63
Cybersecurity (3, 0) 55
Data and Artificial Intelligence (4, 0) 71
E-Commerce (8, 1) 66
Education Technology (2, 0) 57
Entertainment (4, 0) 78
Financial Technology (2, 0) 51
Food Technology (1, 0) 60
Gaming (1, 0) 45
Health Technology (3, 0) 57
Social Media (1, 0) 74
Sports Technology (1, 0) 63
Supply Chain and Logistics (1, 0) 61
Table 1. Travel and Tourism (1, 0) 72
The evidence of data Other Sectors (3, 1) 69
collection Source(s): AL-Shboul (2019), with modifications on numbers and categories

Figure 4.
Distribution of DEs by
age and gender

through the comment feature. In NVivo, statements were labelled under codes, the colour and
frequency properties helped in categorizing the codes. All the codes for the 45 interviews were
sorted in a way that enables the analyst to distinguish the data for each interview. Finally, the
main themes were exported from the nodes containing sundry codes. In this study, verbatim
was not extensively used and only focused on the shared points of the interviewees.
 Challenges
facing early
DEs in Jordan

20.0%

66.7% 33.3%

8.9%

4.4%
Figure 5.
Digital start-ups
interviewed by legal
Not registered Sole proprietorship Limited liability company Corporation type and business
registration status
Source(s): Authors’ own creation

4. Results and discussion

DEs are fraught with risks that vary with place and time. Nine challenges were outlined
directly during the interviews as described in Table 2 and others were highlighted at a lower
level of importance and frequency. The descending order of the nine challenges by
importance is lack of sustainable funding with realistic terms and guarantees, poor direct
guidance and advisory, unexpected risks/failures, economic obstacles, competition, legal
obstacles, struggles in accessing the market, team management issues and the
disorganization in the entrepreneurial work environment in Jordan. Regarding comparing
DE in different countries such as Africa, the literature assures that African DE has slow
growth potential, finds difficulty in attracting venture capital, has a low potential for
international growth, does not contribute to the digital infrastructure, and does not disrupt
traditional products and industries. Which is quite similar to the Jordanian context as
mentioned in the manuscript. Additionally, the African DE can be characterized by
entrepreneurial learning, which requires a consistent change in plans and procedures
(Friederici et al., 2020). This can be seen as a challenge in the African DE as well as the

Challenge Frequency* Percentage**

Lack of sustainable funding with realistic terms and guarantees 33 73.33%

Poor direct guidance and advisory 25 55.56%
Unexpected failures/risks 22 48.89%
Economic obstacles 18 40.00%
Increasing local and global competition 16 35.55%
Legal and legislative obstacles 11 24.44%
Obstacles to accessing markets 9 20.00%
Team management issues 9 20.00% Table 2.
Disorganization in the entrepreneurial environment 5 11.11% The percentage and
Note(s): * The frequency of each challenge is calculated for (n 5 45) frequency of major
** Percentage is calculated out (n 5 45) challenges facing DEs
Source(s): Authors’ own creation in Jordan
MSAR Jordanian DE, which was mentioned as one of the nine challenges the manuscript has stated.
Other challenges included changes in plans and business models and decreased team
enthusiasm. The top five challenges constitute more than three times the remaining risks on
the list; consequently, they are analysed in-depth.

4.1 Challenge 1: lack of realistic and guaranteed funding

It was found that 73.33% of the interviewees suffer from the problem of poor funding and
difficulties in reaching guaranteed pipelines. Although funding for some digital start-ups
may be low, other projects require larger funds to operate and develop their products. The
participants mentioned:
I often hear that the capital of digital startups is the laptop and the Internet. Unfortunately, this
thinking is superficial ∼ (K)
Digital startups require financing because they have to purchase software licenses, servers and
domains, and advanced hardware, especially those that employ AI and cloud computing. Non-digital
startups may not require all these costs ∼ (M)
The amount of financing depends on the size of the idea, the software, and the hardware needed. We
must not forget the marketing and operating costs ∼ (B)
Early DEs find it difficult to understand the requirements for financing their projects, the
steps they must follow and the guarantees they should obtain. In the interviews, several
apprehensions were highlighted regarding the mechanism for selecting the project
eligible for the fund, interviewees claimed that the process is ambiguous and does not
provide evidence of integrity and transparency standards. In the same context,
they added:
The amount of financing depends on the size of the idea, the software, and the hardware needed. We
must not forget the marketing and operating costs ∼ (S)
Some financiers require obtaining a share from the company, which may cause resentment of the
founding team ∼ (D)
Institutions do not give you funding for the colour of your eyes or your charming smile . . . They are
fully aware of the extent of their benefit ∼ (T)
Applying for a bank loan during this period is risky, it is known that the Jordanian dinar is pegged to
the US dollar, and this makes the interest rates high locally in line with the procedures of the US
Federal Bank ∼ (R)
Accordingly, many DEs prefer to rely on themselves in financing their start-ups,
while others tend to participate in small challenges that offer grants and prizes. Two
interviewees said:
I participate in challenges to find some monetary sources; else I have to wait longer looking for new
supporters and financers ∼ (H)
Startups funding is a dilemma where a person must choose between two evils ∼ (Z)
One of the biggest challenges faced by entrepreneurs is related to obtaining capital for their
start-ups. They recourse to various resources to overcome the financial challenges they face,
as project financing encounters obstacles in the research and development stages (Pasumarti
and Patnaik, 2020). DEs in Asian countries are facing problems with funding their projects.
Uncommon methods are applied to solve their scarce cash flow trouble (Vandenberg
et al., 2020).
4.2 Challenge 2: poor direct guidance and advisory Challenges
The challenge of poor direct guidance and counselling is the second highest challenge from facing early
the DEs’ point of view as shown in Table 2. All the DEs are in independent or university-
affiliated incubators. However, many of them raised the issue of perfunctory supervision. In
DEs in Jordan
the same context, the participants reported:
From the outside picture, the university is trying to promote the culture of entrepreneurship through
the centres of entrepreneurship and incubators . . . when you delve into the details, you find that the
DE fights alone ∼ (M)
In my incubator, there is no supervisor! . . . Yes, without exaggeration, that’s why I visit it at events ∼ (D)
During the interviews, the issue of poor or non-valid experience for some supervisors was
highlighted, this reflects in the performance of DEs and could increase their time spent on
finding solutions for the issues they face rather than concentrating on the development of the
product. The interviewees stated:
Supervising incubators require a variety of experiences, in addition to technical knowledge, because
it is the spirit of digital entrepreneurship ∼ (R)
The supervisor of the incubator at my university is a student in her final year, so she doesn’t have
adequate knowledge in many entrepreneurship topics or technical matters such as coding, moreover
sometimes she is busy preparing for her exams and working on her graduation project ∼ (K)
Previously, I needed technical assistance in my digital project; unfortunately, I didn’t find the right
specialist. Furthermore, many supervisors in these incubators hadn’t practised entrepreneurship or
don’t have sufficient academic or practical experience ∼ (M)
DEs often turn to external parties for assistance, such as their close friends, nearby
entrepreneurs, experienced indirect networks and family members. Although this may
contribute to their network and communication skills, however, it is time-consuming:
As a young entrepreneur, the main goal of my participation in the incubator is to bridge the
knowledge and technical gaps, it will be difficult to accept the idea of not getting assistance ∼ (S)
I spend a lot of time asking for help and correspondence to arrange meetings, I will make something
wonderful if I invest this time in my product ∼ (Z)
The rapid changes in the business world and the accelerating development of new technology
(such as AI, Internet of Things, blockchain, etc.) require providing frontline advisory to
support DEs and develop their skills. Universities play a big role in fostering the capabilities
of entrepreneurs during the digital revolution (Dominici and Gagnidze, 2021).

4.3 Challenge 3: unexpected failures/risks

Unexpected/sudden obstacles appeared clearly during the (n 5 45) interviews, as they
constituted 48.8%. There are constant fears among DEs about unexpected risks.
Entrepreneurship is about taking risks, and this is what we do literally ∼ (T)
Risks surround us in all aspects, including technical risks, market risks, financing risks and
geopolitical risks in the region ∼ (B)
Unexpected risks from the interviewees’ point of view include technical risks. These may be
sudden product failures, problems in programming (errors and bugs) and hardware
malfunctions as alluded to in the following extracts:
I inspected a website before I went to a meeting with a client, and when I arrived and we started
discussing the work, I presented it and found it not working. It was a difficult and unexpected
situation, and I still don’t know what happened at that time ∼ (A)
MSAR I find myself busy correcting errors more than the development processes ∼ (D)
Technical errors are not expected because you are dealing with programming and heavy files.
Sometimes I write more than 50 lines of code a day, and some write more. There is room for error and
surprise ∼ (H)
DEs suffer from problems in the IT infrastructure, which may deprive them of investment
opportunities. Start-ups seek to improve the digital infrastructure and take advantage of
golden cooperation opportunities to control these problems (Samara and Terzian, 2020).
Digital difficulties afflict many entrepreneurs and make them delay launching their products
or taking advantage of early expansion opportunities (Salamzadeh and Ramadani, 2021).

4.4 Challenge 4: economic obstacles

This challenge is related to external factors such as the economic situation. According to
almost 40% of the interviewees, the economic challenges not only impact their digital start-up
but also potentially give rise to additional obstacles. For instance, some interviewees
mentioned:
Sometimes, I study the price offer more than 3 times before I present it to the customer because I
know very well that price is the main consideration for a large segment of customers ∼ (R)
The size of the market in Jordan does not affect DEs the same as the economic situation ∼ (S)
The economic dimension is not confined internally but extends to the global scale ∼ (Z)
The severe economic situation tights the purchasing power of customers in many countries,
including the Middle East region, and many customers reconsider buying the necessary
needs. Digital products that utilize AI and advanced technology have higher costs than
simpler digital services due to the huge effort in development and integration, this is reflected
in the product price:
Browse the prices of products that deploy AI . . . We target a specific segment, and we accept many
people not understanding the price of AI products ∼ (A)
The operating costs of advanced technology are high on the DEs themselves, and this will be
reflected on the customers ∼ (T)
Digital entrepreneurship and the economy are two sides of a coin. Entrepreneurial companies
play an essential role in economic development and economic fluctuations affect DEs. Jonek-
Kowalska and Wolniak (2021) confirmed that there is a significant impact of the economic
conditions on emerging companies. Furthermore, a lower significant role of business
incubators in stimulating start-ups was observed. Due to the importance of understanding
the financial obstacles that entrepreneurial companies experience, such as economic
conditions, emphasis has been placed on the need to coach the financial culture of DEs to help
them quash future challenges (Rahmandoust et al., 2011).

4.5 Challenge 5: competition

The interviewees agreed that working within the digital space means openness to all forms of
competition. Competition is not limited to internal competitors; it includes DEs abroad.
Although start-up skills are present for many start-ups, they face difficulties in competing
with big businesses internally and externally. The interviewees stated:
Big digital sharks are around us, so more than 50% of new DEs leave their project within the
first year ∼ (K)
External competitors are an important part of the game ∼ (Z)
 It is impossible for me to compete with big website/ App builders because I spend many hours in Challenges
programming, modification, and design. However, those websites use hundreds of ready-made
templates, and some of them charge customers for hosting services only ∼ (D) facing early
DEs in Jordan
Being a DE requires a continuous reforming of the business model because the needs of the
market and customers are constantly evolving, therefore the solution that works in one
country may not be suitable for another, which poses additional challenges to DEs.
Employing technology in your startup is not enough because technology is evolving ∼ (H)
Reliance on advanced technology is a competitive advantage, but it is not sufficient with the presence
of competitors ∼ (M)
Look at the big companies . . . They don’t stop making updates, so how do you expect the smaller
companies to act! ∼ (S)
The challenges faced by DEs’ companies are not limited to the competition factor, the search
for funding sources and economic considerations, but other challenges affect emerging
digital start-ups. The leadership of human resource management in start-ups play a
prominent role in the company’s success. Many companies face challenges in overcoming the
various administrative difficulties among team members, which threatens its continuity and
expansion (Zaech and Baldegger, 2017). DEs in their early stages execute many changes to
their business models. They usually incur extra costs for developing these models, which
adds insult to injury (Chammassian and Sabatier, 2020).
New challenges could be those related to DE workforce and talent, where the study can
talk about the challenges that DEs encounter regarding searching for internationally skilled
talents (such as software engineers) who are specialized in rare yet demandable domains
(i.e. Internet of Things, FinTech, algorithms . . . etc.) (Friederici et al., 2020).

4.6 Supporting early DEs

Digital entrepreneurship has a promising future especially with the massive digital
dependency during the COVID-19 pandemic. DEs are trying to integrate technology into their
projects and take advantage of globalization to enhance their presence (Antonizzi and Smuts,
2020). Despite this, many early DEs face challenges in developing countries because of poor
funding, economic situation, poor guidance, high competition and unexpected risks.
Consequently, DEs strive to discover techniques to eliminate the jeopardies and boost the
chances of their projects’ survival.
The analysis revealed that some entrepreneurs are escaping the spectre of unemployment
with self-employment, which may reduce pressure on public and private employers.
However, early DEs face challenges related to financing their projects and accessing venture
capital. Early DEs are looking for easy, uncomplicated and clear-cut financing opportunities.
Many investors require strict conditions, which may be a burden on new entrepreneurs and
may slow their progress of growth and improvement.
The Arab world still lacks the needed support and awareness regarding digital
entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship and innovation in general, specifically in Jordan
(Alawamleh et al., 2019). Therefore, this study stresses the need to support DE, which can
reduce unemployment and open new doors for improvement and growth both economically
and socially. Providing sufficient guidance and advice for entrepreneurs is critical. The rapid
growth and expansion of DEs’ activities may develop their project and open new horizons,
thus increasing the number of workers and reducing unemployment levels. Entrepreneurs
can transfer their digital experience to different scopes in the Jordanian business
environment, which will widen the competitive advantage of many players towards
innovation and sustainability. However, this study will be expanded by another one to come
MSAR up with new results and insights that can reflect the unique Arab context or the regional
digital entrepreneurship context.
The picture cannot be aggregated without stressing the role of incubators in training DEs
on the principles of risk management and assessment. They should become familiar with
assessing the probability and impact of risks and developing emergency plans.

5. Conclusion
The digital transformation during the COVID-19 pandemic and the high unemployment rates
in Jordan encouraged them to become DEs. However, challenges facing this segment started
to unfold. Qualitative research is implemented to investigate the problem.
Early DEs are looking for realistic and clear funding opportunities, most of them are
trying to invest in developing their digital platforms, enhancing their market presence and
improving the competitive advantage of their projects, which requires funding. Building and
accelerating the digital start-up contributes to reducing unemployment rates, relieves
pressure on the authorities concerned with employment affairs, and helps open prospects for
foreign investment in the local digital environment that will enhance the indicators of
entrepreneurship and the digital environment in Jordan. This study calls for enhancing
investment and financing opportunities for early DEs by opening new financing funds,
facilitating procedures and providing grants. The study recommends that entrepreneurship
incubators and centres provide adequate advice, direct guidance and cooperation with
external specialists. In the digital era, the improvement of laws and legislation governing the
registration of companies is a necessity, with the urgent need to focus on developing and
regulating the entrepreneurship environment.
Although this study was specialized in Jordan, it is possible to generalize some of the
results to other developing countries that are experiencing similar situations, especially those
with high unemployment rates. Finally, in light of previous reviews and analyses, there are
still opportunities to verify the interpersonal and intrapersonal challenges and motives for
DEs with a focus on understanding the impact of each more deeply.

5.1 Theoretical and practical implications

This study is an extension of a number of studies that dealt with the most important obstacles
facing DEs, especially in developing countries. It should be taken seriously by executives and
decision-makers in order to reduce costs, raise its efficiency and effectiveness, as well as
improve its overall performance (Ghobakhloo and Tang, 2013; Okolo and Obidigbo, 2014). By
focusing on nine challenges dimensions, this study extends the entrepreneurial research on
the role of context in entrepreneurship (Autio et al., 2014; Zahra et al., 2023) to the increasingly
important field of digital entrepreneurship, digital business and start-ups by revealing
how DEs respond to context as asset (opportunities) versus context as a liability (challenges)
(e.g. Marvel, 2011).
Based on the results of this study, a number of important practical and managerial
implications emerged to encourage digital entrepreneurship and start-up businesses to take
into account the most important obstacles and challenges that may appear before or during
the launch of their business. First, working to finance start-up projects in a sustainable
manner by facilitating and speeding procedures through the development of the
infrastructure for communication and information technology, which was brought about
by the revolution in banking and digital services using broadband Internet, and thus enabled
the technological context to act as an opportunity, and enable digital businesses to access
services Internet Banking (Beck et al., 2009), this is demonstrated by the experience of mPesa
in Kenya. Similar government policy intervention has led to an increase in the number of
Internet-enabled SMEs in India due to the increasing penetration and adoption of ICTs and Challenges
the Internet. Lessons learned from these two countries, if adapted to Cameroon, could facing early
strengthen the linkages of the local institutional-technological context, lead to lower research
costs, and increased market access in regions where logistics challenges restrict physical
DEs in Jordan
access to markets.
Secondly, the results of this study indicate that there is a need for specialized training in
the field of direct and smooth financing, its sustainability and speed of procedures, guidance
and guidance of entrepreneurs and their assistance in public and private technical matters.
This study recommends modernizing ICT incubators to raise their current efficiency such as
Activespaces (Gathege and Moraa, 2013), confronting economic constraints as well as
modernizing regulations and legislation governing and in force at the present time, and
accessing investment capital (Ngoasong et al., 2015). Similarly, IT groups enhance human
capital and entrepreneurial vigilance while increasing access to technology alliances and
networks for business development (Kasabov, 2015), and access to customers and third-party
logistics providers (Porter, 2014). This would ensure that the technological context serves
more as an asset than a liability.

References
Abukumail, A. (2019), “Digitalizing a pathway to growth in Jordan”, Blogs.worldbank.org, Arab Voices,
27 June, available at: https://blogs.worldbank.org/arabvoices/digitalizing-pathway-growth-
jordan (accessed 18 August 2022).
Adaileh, M. and Alshawawreh, A. (2021), “Measuring digital transformation impact in Jordan:
a proposed framework”, Journal of Innovations in Digital Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 14-26.
Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Al Matroushi, H., Jabeen, F., Matloub, A. and Tehsin, M. (2020), “Push and pull model of women
entrepreneurship: empirical evidence from the UAE”, Journal of Islamic Accounting and
Business Research, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 588-609.
Al-Shboul, M.A. (2019), “Supply chain of energy resources and its alternatives due to the Arab spring:
the case of Egyptian natural gas flow to Jordan”, IEOM Society 4th North American
International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Toronto,
Canada, IEOM Society International, October 25, 2019, ISBN: 978-1-5323-5950-7ISSN/E-ISSN:
2169-8767.
Alawamleh, M., Bani Ismail, L., Aqeel, D. and Alawamleh, K.J. (2019), “The bilateral relationship
between human capital investment and innovation in Jordan”, Journal of Innovation and
Entrepreneurship, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Alharbi, M.M.H. (2020), “Entrepreneurship and job creation in Jordan: challenges and prospects for
start-ups”, Journal La Bisecoman, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 1-10.
Aljuwaiber, A. (2020), “Entrepreneurship research in the Middle East and North Africa: trends,
challenges, and sustainability issues”, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies,
Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 380-426.
Alrawadieh, Z. and Alrawadieh, Z. (2018), “Exploring entrepreneurship in the sharing accommodation
sector: empirical evidence from a developing country”, Tourism Management Perspectives,
Vol. 28, pp. 179-188.
Amit, R. and Muller, E. (1995), “‘Push’ and ‘pull’ entrepreneurship”, Journal of Small Business and
Entrepreneurship, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 64-80.
Andersson, T., Curley, M.G. and Formica, P. (2009), “Types of entrepreneurs”, Knowledge-Driven
Entrepreneurship, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 131-152.
MSAR Antonizzi, J. and Smuts, H. (2020), “The characteristics of digital entrepreneurship and digital
transformation: a systematic literature review”, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12066,
pp. 239-251.
Apaydin, Ş. (2018), “The relations between unemployment and entrepreneurship in Turkey:
schumpeter or refugee effect?”, Fiscaoeconomia, Vol. 2 No. 2, doi: 10.25295/fsecon.2018.
02.001.
Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D. and Wright, M. (2014), “Entrepreneurial innovation: the
importance of context”, Research Policy, Vol. 43 No. 7, pp. 1097-1108.
Beck, T., Demirg€
uç-Kunt, A. and Honohan, P. (2009), “Access to financial services: measurement,
impact, and policies”, The World Bank Research Observer, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 119-145.
Bell, E., Bryman, A. and Harley, B. (2022), Business Research Methods 6E, Oxford Univ Press, S.L.
Bican, P.M. and Brem, A. (2020), “Digital business model, digital transformation, digital
entrepreneurship: is there A sustainable ‘digital’?”, Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 13, p. 5239.
Cantillon, R. (1755), An Essay on Commerce in General, History of Economic Thought Books.
Caputo, A., Mehtap, S., Pellegrini, M.M. and Alrefai, R. (2016), “Supporting opportunities for female
entrepreneurs in Jordan”, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. 27
Nos 2/3, p. 384.
Chammassian, R.G. and Sabatier, V. (2020), “The role of costs in business model design for early-stage
technology startups”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 157, 120090.
Corvello, V., De Carolis, M., Verteramo, S. and Steiber, A. (2021), “The digital transformation of
entrepreneurial work”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, Vol. 28
No. 5, pp. 1167-1183, doi: 10.1108/ijebr-01-2021-0067.
Dawson, C. and Henley, A. (2012), “‘Push’ versus ‘pull’ entrepreneurship: an ambiguous
distinction?”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, Vol. 18 No. 6,
pp. 697-719.
Department of Statistics (2022), “23.2% Unemployment Rate during the Third Quarter of 2021”,
Department of Statistics, 22 December, available at: http://dos.gov.jo/dos_home_e/main/archive/
Unemp/2021/Q3_2021.pdf (accessed 1 February 2023).
Dominici, G. and Gagnidze, I. (2021), “Effectiveness of entrepreneurial universities: experiences and
challenges in digital era (a systemic approach)”, Interdisciplinary Description of Complex
Systems, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 13-30.
Drucker, P.F. (1985), “The discipline of innovation”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 63 No. 3, pp. 67-72.
Filion, L.J. (2004), “Operators and visionaries: differences in the entrepreneurial and managerial
systems of two types of entrepreneurs”, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small
Business, Vol. 1 Nos 1/2, p. 35.
Friederici, N., Wahome, M. and Graham, M. (2020), Digital Entrepreneurship in Africa: How a
Continent Is Escaping Silicon Valley’s Long Shadow, The MIT Press.
Gao, P., Wu, W. and Yang, Y. (2022), “Discovering themes and trends in digital transformation and
innovation research”, Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 17
No. 3, pp. 1162-1184.
Garcez, A., Silva, R. and Franco, M. (2021), “Digital transformation shaping structural pillars for
academic entrepreneurship: a framework proposal and research agenda”, Education and
Information Technologies, Vol. 27, pp. 1159-1182.
Gathege, D. and Moraa, H. (2013), ICT Hubs Model: Understanding the Key Factors of the Activspaces
Model, in Buea, Cameroon, draft report, IhubResearch, Nairobi.
Ghavidel, S., Farjadi, G. and Mohammadpour, A. (2011), “The relationship between entrepreneurship
and unemployment in developed and developing countries”, Journal of Economic Behavior,
Vol. 1 No. 1, doi: 10.14276/2285-0430.1940.
Ghobakhloo, M. and Tang, S.H. (2013), “The role of owner/manager in adoption of electronic Challenges
commerce in small businesses: the case of developing countries”, Journal of Small Business and
Enterprise Development, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 754-787. facing early
Giones, F. and Brem, A. (2017), “Digital technology entrepreneurship: a definition and research
DEs in Jordan
agenda”, Technology Innovation Management Review, Vol. 7 No. 5, available at: https://ssrn.
com/abstract52984542 (accessed 18 August 2022).
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (2020), Jordan 2019/2020 National Report, GEM Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor, Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, available at: https://www.
gemconsortium.org/index.php/report/50904 (accessed 18 August 2022).
Grandori, A. and Giordani, L.G. (2011), Organizing Entrepreneurship, Routledge. doi: 10.4324/
9780203815830.
Hull, C.E., Hung, Y.T.C., Hair, N., Perotti, V. and DeMartino, R. (2007), “Taking advantage of digital
opportunities: a typology of digital entrepreneurship”, International Journal of Networking and
Virtual Organisations, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 290-303.
Ifeoma, A.R., Purity, N.- O. and Yusuf, A.E. (2018), “Effect of entrepreneurship development on
poverty alleviation in Nigeria”, Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 80-87.
International Labour Organization (2016), “Jordan”, Www.ilo.org, available at: https://www.ilo.org/
gateway/faces/home/ctryHome?locale5EN&countryCode5JOR&_adf.ctrl-state51ewbjifaz_4
(accessed 17 August 2022).
Jawad, M., Naz, M. and Maroof, Z. (2020), “Era of digital revolution: digital entrepreneurship and
digital transformation in emerging economies”, Business Strategy and Development, Vol. 4 No. 3,
pp. 220-228, doi: 10.1002/bsd2.145.
Johnson, D. (2001), “What is innovation and entrepreneurship? Lessons for larger organisations”,
Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 135-140.
Jonek-Kowalska, I. and Wolniak, R. (2021), “The influence of local economic conditions on start-ups
and local open innovation system”, Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and
Complexity, Vol. 7 No. 2, p. 110.
Kaish, S. and Gilad, B. (1991), “Characteristics of opportunities search of entrepreneurs versus executives:
sources, interests, general alertness”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 45-61.
Kasabov, E. (2015), “Start-up difficulties in early-stage peripheral clusters: the case of IT in an
emerging economy”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 727-761.
Landstr€om, H., Harirchi, G. and 
Astr€om, F. (2012), “Entrepreneurship: exploring the knowledge base”,
Research Policy, Vol. 41 No. 7, pp. 1154-1181.
Lazear, E.P. (2005), “Leaders and entrepreneurs: where they produce the most value”, Allied Social
Science Associations Annual General Meeting, Vancouver, Philadelphia.
Liu, H., Li, X. and Wangb, S. (2021), “A bibliometric analysis of 30 years of platform research:
developing the research agenda for platforms, the associated technologies and social impacts”,
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 169, 120827.
Mann, S. (2010), “A critical review of qualitative interviews in applied linguistics”, Applied Linguistics,
Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 6-24.
Marvel, M.R. (2011), “Human capital and search-based discovery: a study of high-tech
entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 403-419.
Massar, K., N€
ubold, A., vanDoorn, R. and Schelleman-Offermans, K. (2020), “Picking up the reigns: the
crucial role of psychological capital in the transition from long-term unemployment to
entrepreneurship”, Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, Emerald Publishing,
Bingley, pp. 147-170.
MoDEE (2019), Welcome Note - Minister of Digital Economy and Entrepreneurship, Modee.gov.jo, The
Ministry of Digital Economy & Entrepreneurship, available at: https://www.modee.gov.jo/EN/
Pages/Welcome_Note (accessed 18 August 2022).
MSAR MoDEE (2022), Jordan’s National Entrepreneurship Policy Executive Summary, Ministry of Digital
Economy and Entrepreneurship, Jordan, pp. 1-54.
Modgil, S., Dwivedi, Y.K., Rana, N.P., Gupta, S. and Kamble, S. (2022), “Has Covid-19 accelerated
opportunities for digital entrepreneurship? An Indian perspective”, Technological Forecasting
and Social Change, Vol. 175, 121415.
Nambisan, S. (2017), “Digital entrepreneurship: toward a digital technology perspective of
entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 1029-1055.
Nambisan, S., Wright, M. and Feldman, M. (2019), “The digital transformation of innovation and
entrepreneurship: progress, challenges and key themes”, Research Policy, Vol. 48 No. 8, 103773.
Ngoasong, M.Z., Korda, A. and Paton, R. (2015), “Impact investing and inclusive business
development in Africa: a research agenda”, IKD Working Paper No. 76, The Open
University, Milton Keynes.
Ojala, A. (2015), “Business models and opportunity creation: how IT entrepreneurs create and develop
business models under uncertainty”, Information Systems Journal, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 451-476.
Okolo, V. and Obidigbo, C. (2014), “Boosting small and medium enterprises performance in Nigeria
through mobile commerce”, European Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 6 No. 9,
pp. 134-141.
Opdenakker, R. (2006), “Advantages and disadvantages of four interview techniques in qualitative
research”, Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 7 No. 4,
doi: 10.17169/fqs-7.4.175.
Panda, N.M. (2000), “What brings entrepreneurial success in a developing region?”, The Journal of
Entrepreneurship, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 199-212.
Pasumarti, S.S. and Patnaik, A. (2020), “Challenges in obtaining finance for SME startups”, High
Technology Letters, Vol. 26 No. 09, pp. 972-979.
Paul, J., Alhassan, I., Binsaif, N. and Singh, P. (2023), “Digital entrepreneurship research: a systematic
review”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 156, 113507.
Porter, G. (2014), “Transport services and their impact on poverty and growth in rural Sub-Saharan
Africa: a review of recent research and future research needs”, Transport Reviews, Vol. 34 No. 1,
pp. 25-45.
Qian Qiu, C. and Mok Kim Man, M. (2021), “The challenges and solutions for digital entrepreneurship
platforms in enhancing firm’s capabilities”, International Journal of Business and Management,
Vol. 16 No. 11, p. 21.
Rahmandoust, M., Shah, I.M., Norouzi, M., Hakimpoor, H. and Khani, N. (2011), “Teaching Financial
Literacy to Entrepreneurs for Sustainable Development”, Papers.ssrn.com, Rochester, NY, 30
December, available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract51982850 (accessed 31 August 2022).
Rashidi, R., Yousefpour, S., Sani, Y. and Rezaei, S. (2013), “Presenting a butterfly ecosystem for digital
entrepreneurship development in knowledge age”, International Conference on Application of
Information and Communication Technologies. doi: 10.1109/icaict.2013.6722798.
Ratten, V. (2023), “Entrepreneurship: definitions, opportunities, challenges, and future directions”,
Global Business and Organizational Excellence, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 1-12, doi: 10.1002/joe.22217.
Redlich-Amirav, D. and Higginbottom, G. (2014), “New emerging technologies in qualitative research”,
The Qualitative Report, Vol. 19, pp. 1-14.
Richter, C., Kraus, S., Brem, A., Durst, S. and Giselbrecht, C. (2017), “Digital entrepreneurship:
innovative business models for the sharing economy”, Creativity and Innovation Management,
Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 300-310.
Rom
an, C., Congregado, E. and Mill
an, J.M. (2013), “Start-up incentives: entrepreneurship policy or
active labour market programme?”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 151-175.
Rubin, H.J. and Rubin, I.S. (2012), Qualitative Interviewing: the Art of Hearing Data, Google Books,
Third., SAGE.
Rusu, S., Isac, F., Cureteanu, R. and Csorba, L. (2012), “Entrepreneurship and entrepreneur: a review of Challenges
literature concepts”, African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 6 No. 10, doi: 10.5897/ajbm11.2785.
facing early
Salamzadeh, A. and Ramadani, V. (2021), “Entrepreneurial ecosystem and female digital
entrepreneurship – lessons to learn from an Iranian case study”, The Emerald Handbook of
DEs in Jordan
Women and Entrepreneurship in Developing Economies, Emerald Publishing, Bingley,
pp. 317-334.
Salmony, F.U. and Kanbach, D.K. (2021), “Personality trait differences across types of entrepreneurs: a
systematic literature review”, Review of Managerial Science, pp. 713-749, doi: 10.1007/s11846-
021-00466-9.
Samara, G. and Terzian, J. (2020), “Challenges and opportunities for digital entrepreneurship in
developing countries”, Digital Entrepreneurship, Springer, Cham, pp. 283-302, ISBN: 978-3-030-
53913-9.
Samara, G. and Terzian, J. (2021), “Challenges and opportunities for digital entrepreneurship in
developing countries”, Digital Entrepreneurship, Vol. 283, pp. 283-302.
Schoonenboom, J. (2023), “The fundamental difference between qualitative and quantitative data in
mixed methods research”, Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social
Research, Vol. 24 No. 1, 1.
Sexton, D.L. and Bowman-Upton, N.B. (1991), Entrepreneurship: Creativity and Growth, MacMillan
Publishing Company.
Shane, S. and Venkataraman, S. (2000), “The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 217-226.
Startups, J.O. (2022), “Startup Directory j StartupsJo”, Startups JO, July, available at: https://startupsjo.
com/ (accessed 30 August 2022).
Stevenson, H.H. and Jarillo, J.C. (2007), A Paradigm of Entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial
Management*, Entrepreneurship, pp. 155-170.
The World Bank (2022a), “Entrepreneurship”, World Bank, available at: https://www.worldbank.org/
en/programs/entrepreneurship (accessed 18 August 2022).
The World Bank (2022b), “Overview”, World Bank, 26 May, available at: https://www.worldbank.org/
en/country/jordan/overview (accessed 18 August 2022).
Thornton, P.H. (1999), “The sociology of entrepreneurship”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 25, pp. 19-46.
Tidd, J. and Bessant, J.R. (2021), Managing Innovation : Integrating Technological, Market and
Organizational Change, 7th ed., Wiley, Hoboken.
van der Zwan, P., Thurik, R., Verheul, I. and Hessels, J. (2016), “Factors influencing the entrepreneurial
engagement of opportunity and necessity entrepreneurs”, Eurasian Business Review, Vol. 6
No. 3, pp. 273-295.
Vandenberg, P., Hampel-Milagrosa, A. and Helble, M. (2020), “ADBI working paper series financing of
tech startups in selected Asian countries Asian development bank institute”, available at:
https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/579766/adbi-wp1115.pdf (accessed 31
August 2022).
Zaech, S. and Baldegger, U. (2017), “Leadership in start-ups”, International Small Business Journal,
Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 157-177.
Zahra, S.A., Liu, W. and Si, S. (2023), “How digital technology promotes entrepreneurship in
ecosystems”, Technovation, Vol. 119, 102457.
Zgheib, P. (2018), “Multi-level framework of push-pull entrepreneurship: comparing American and
Lebanese women”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, Vol. 24
No. 3, pp. 768-786.
Zighan, S. (2020), “Challenges faced by necessity entrepreneurship, the case of Syrian refugees in
Jordan”, Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol. 15
No. 4, pp. 531-547.
MSAR About the authors
Eng. Samer Abaddi is an Industrial Engineer extraordinaire with an insatiable passion for
entrepreneurship and innovation. Armed with his exceptional talent, he emerged victorious as
Jordan’s sole representative in the prestigious global entrepreneurship challenge by Techstars, where
his groundbreaking business idea “Smart Detect - SD” made it to the elite top 20 projects combating
COVID-19. Eng. Abaddi’s expertise extends beyond accolades as he has been a guiding force, shaping
countless business plans, consulting aspiring entrepreneurs, and empowering teams in local and global
challenges. With research interests spanning industrial and systems engineering, technology,
digitalization, and social entrepreneurship, Eng. Abaddi seeks to be a true force driving innovation
forward. He is based on the IDentity Research, Amman, Jordan. Samer Abaddi is the corresponding
author and can be contacted at: eng.sameralabbadi@gmail.com
Dr. Moh’d Anwer AL-Shboul is currently an associate professor in Business Administration
Department at Princess Sumaya University for Technology (PSUT), Jordan, since 2018, and previously
was working in Logistics Sciences Department at German Jordanian University (GJU), Jordan. He has
published many articles in leading international journals in the areas of SCM, logistic sciences,
operations management and its implementations, Jordan in particular, and Arabic and regional
countries in general. Dr AL-Shboul earned his Ph.D. from Bradford University, UK (2012); MBA from
Yarmouk University in Jordan (2002); additionally, AL-Shboul has a double major (B.Sc.) in the areas of
Electrical Engineering/Telecommunication from JUST (1992) and Business Administration from
Yarmouk University (2000), Jordan. Dr AL-Shboul has long academic and professional experience in the
areas of teaching as an instructor in Business and Electrical Engineering; had worked at Jordan Customs
for more than ten years and more than ten years in Electrical Engineering in several Jordanian
companies. His current research interests include lean and agile supply chain, supply chain
management, logistics sciences, supply chain responsiveness, and operations management.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com