INTRODUCTION

Startup is the most widespread term in present era. It has great impact on economy of the

country. People who have innovative idea are starting their startups with minimum resources.

Skills are the only way to create our economy healthy while starting a new business setup

Entrepreneurs seeks helps. These helps can be further divided into three categories Technical

help, Financial help and Managerial help. Institutions like MPFC, SIDBI, MSME are there to

help a startups, some of the private supports are known as Angle Investors, Venture

Capitalists. In India on 26th January 2015 Hon'ble Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has

enthusiastically announced "Standup India-Startup India" under this scheme Government of

India wishes to arouse Entrepreneurs to become Startup and help existing startups. The

implementation part of this scheme is taken care by Department of Industrial Planning and

Promotion (DIPP). According to DIPP, the definition of Startup would be Innovative and

carry technology alongwith website, mobile application etc. The objective of this scheme is

to implement the action plan based on three important pillars to enable funding support, make

the process easy and develop Acadmic- Industry Partnership like Incubation. Startup India

Hub supports the Startup in terms of Managerial and Financial whereas Incubation centres

provides Technological as well as Mangerial supports. A corpus fund of Rs. 10,000 crore

have been created for financial support. Tax exemption on capital gains , waived till 3 years

of setup.The eligibility criteria for startup would be five years of incorportation, financial

turnover should not exceeds Rs.25 crore and It should be driven by Technology or

Intellectual property toward Innovation for commercialization of new products, services.

1.1 Conceptual Framework

To study entrepreneurship is an important in contributing the growth and creative

transformation in our society. Moreover it provides wings to an innovator to make the society

fly high leaving the poverty back and to creates employments others. Each year every new

1
venture offers promise of wealth and prosperity to the entrepreneur who can take intrinsic

risk. New business is always responsible to bring growth in economy and improves the living

standard of the community. Several innovations have changed our lives from Radio to

television to mobile. In the medical sciences, manufacturing, we experienced the

technological transformation which is known that Innovation brings prosperity as a whole.

Financial Institutions encourage entrepreneurs to face the financial challenges and

meet up entrepreneurial activities. A bigger perceptive of entrepreneurship and its drivers is

important to the constant development of our economy. It is only through the reading of new

ventures and their founders that we will discover the drive to start a company and realize the

entrepreneurial process, the funding of these ventures, the hurdle entrepreneurs deals, and the

policies and institutions that persuade better entrepreneurial movement. The Ewing Marion

Kauffman Foundation has committed major resources toward this effort at an educational

level, working with economists and others who study this key facts. In addition to helping

research on the topic, we have sponsored fresh efforts to collect data on entrepreneurial

action. These efforts have proven successful. There has been bigger concentration to

entrepreneurship among academics in latest years. The power of the work in this literature

testifies to the increasing awareness in this work among academics from a diversity of

perspectives.

Finance for entrepreneurial startup is a change in creative and innovative minds of

today. The term ―Startup‖ is extensively debatable, nevertheless most definitions are similar

to what the U.S. Small Business Administration explains as a "business that is typically

technology oriented and has high growth potential". (1)

1
"Startups & High-Growth Businesses | The U.S. Small Business Administration | SBA.gov". www.sba.gov.
Retrieved 2016-01-26.

2
 This research is a descriptive study, which will throw light on the financial policies of

Indian Government as well as finance policies private bodies which can be availed by new

entrepreneur for establishing their startup or business.

Before 1991, Indian business was based more on political connection rather than the

market competition. This was the period when people were unwilling to take risks and they

looked for employment stability. During this era India had very few success stories and the

capital was also limited.

The Indian government liberalized the economy in 1991 this not only changed the

competitive landscape but family business faced competition from the global players which

had the upper hand in technology, finance and better manage resources. This liberalization

cultivated many small scale businesses to large scale enterprises. This was the outcome of

efficient capital allocation, strong execution and a customer orientation.

In present scenario, India is facing problem of job hunting due to the growing

population. It is estimated that over the next 35 years India will suffer from a severe shortage

of jobs. According to the Asia-Pacific Human Development Report, India has employed less

than half of the labors seeking for jobs in the labor market since 1991 to 2013. Another

insight, by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) the same period 1991 to 2013 the

size of ―working age‖ population increased by 300 million.

According to N.R Bhanumurthy professor of economics at the national institute of Public

Finance and Policy the reason for creation of fewer jobs between 1991-2013 was mainly

because of the nature of growth the Indian economy experienced.

3
The crisis of unemployment and poor economic growth can be resolved by entrepreneurship,

self employment and enterprise development. But people who opt for these three solutions

have to face several challenges and such new business enterprises have a high rate of failure.

The failure is caused due to lack of capital, price rises, and disadvantages due to small size

terms of scale economies

This issue has been understood and taken seriously by the Mr. Narendra Modi

government. For strengthening the country‘s economy and for generating employment Indian

government has launched a scheme nationally called as – ―Start-up India". By this scheme,

government can generate employment; promote new idea, innovation and creativity of

entrepreneur by providing them financial back up.

According to the definition of the entrepreneur, they are first generation businessmen

who have dream and hopes of start-up without any kind of business background. This

inexperience becomes the main reason for the failure of entrepreneur in their early stage as

they lack managerial skill, technical support and finances. For managerial skill and technical

support education and knowledge plays a vital role. Whereas financial assistance is offered

by the family and friends as they encourage the young entrepreneur to take their business to

new heights. Sometime the saving and money laundered by family and friend is not enough.

So in this case money lender is being preferred a lot because of easy availability, low

documentation process and personal references. But for availing this finance, the

entrepreneur mortgages the property and bears the high rate of interest charged by the money

lender. Due to which an unorganized financial market is being promoted by them.

4
1.2 Defining Entrepreneur

The term ―entrepreneur‖ or ―entrepreneurship‖ is defined in a variety of ways. Yet no

consensus has been arrived on the precise skills and abilities that make a person a successful

entrepreneur. The concept varies from country to country as well as from period to period and

the level of economic development thoughts and perceptions. A review of research done in

different disciplines over the years would improve our understanding of the concept of

entrepreneur.

The word ―entrepreneur‖ is derived from the French verb ―entreprendre‖ which means

―to undertake‖. In the early 16th century, the Frenchmen who organized and led military

expeditions were referred to as ―entrepreneurs‖. Around 1700 A.D., the term was used for

architects and contractors of public works. The term ―entrepreneur‖ was applied to business

initially by French economist, Cantillon in the 18th century to designate a dealer who

purchases the means of production for combining them into marketable products.

The New Encyclopedia Britannica considers an ―entrepreneur‖ as an individual who

bears the risk of operating a business in the face of uncertainty about the future conditions.

According to Francis A. Walter, the true ―entrepreneur‖ is one who is endowed with more

than average capacities in the task of organizing and coordinating the various other factors of

production.

An entrepreneur is a person who only provides capital without taking active part in the

leading role in enterprise, described Adam Smith ―Entrepreneur‖ was regarded as a social

parasite by Marx. Bernard Belidor applied entrepreneurship to the function of buying

labour and material at uncertain prices and selling the resultant product at contracted price.

Joseph A Schumpeter recognized a person who introduces innovation changes as an

―entrepreneur‖. He treated ―entrepreneur‖ as an integral part of economic growth. An

―entrepreneur‖ is described as a change agent by Frank Young.

5
 Noah Webster thinks ―entrepreneur‖ is one who assumes the responsibility of the risk

and management of business.

An ―entrepreneur‖ is one who always searches for change, respond to it and exploit it as an

opportunity. Innovation is the specific tool of ―entrepreneur‖, the means by which they

exploit change as an opportunity for a different business or service. -Peter F Drucker

Arthur Dewing conceptualized the function of ―entrepreneur‖ as one that promotes

ideas into business.

―Entrepreneur‖ is described by Clarence H. Dentrof as a person who makes

decisions under alternative courses of action.

Robert D. Hisrich says ―The person who is going to establish a successful new

venture must also be a visionary leader - a person who dreams great dreams.‖

Brad Feld – Founder of TechStars, Investor, Author – Startup Communities “An

entrepreneur is someone who creates a new company from scratch.”

Caleb Wojcik – Blogger with ThinkTraffic.net and Pocketchanged.com ―An

entrepreneur is a starter, not just a dreamer.

Anybody can think up an idea for a business, but not everyone can put rubber to the road

and actually grow something that both matters and earns money. Taking action is the

difference between entrepreneurs and non-entrepreneurs.

1.3 Entrepreneur and Entrepreneurship

1.3.1 Entrepreneur in India

India can be an entrepreneurial nation because of these reasons freedom of speech ,

high caliber human capital, functioning of capital market and easy availability of venture

capitatlist, the rebellious young generation, easy entry of global competitors in India, lack of

legacy, technologies, unique market structure with consumers needs and their purchasing

6
powers, excellent Insitutions their Infrastructures and dedication towards Entrepreneurship,

science and technical eduction.The main focus of this study was on Etrepreneurship and its

growth in Independent India.

Problem faced by women entrepreneurs, entrepreneurship advances and with small

business. Government must reduce administrative burden through which more doors can

welcome entrepreneurship.

Before 1991 Bureaucratic control and hurdles for new establishinf firms has been

removed through economc reform in 1991. Government of India has support in this direction

with largely focused on banking & finance industry to manufacturing sector. In 2006,

Government of India established the ministry of Micro,Small and Medium Entreprises whose

aim is to provide financial infrastructural resources, training and tax benefits realted supports.

Cultural shifts, disparity ,foreign influence,lack of success stories, social entrepreneurship

and funding.Despite many challenges, the entrepreneurial oppurtunities in India are

substantial.

1.4 Defining Startup Financing

1.4.1 Startup Ecosystem

Nowadays, India shift towards startup friendly culture and environment thus

introduced helpful policies.To beat unemployment and arouse young generation creates

entrepreneurial ecosystem for producing more and more business oppurtunities.

Condfederation of Indian Industry (CII) has vision to build startup eco system which assist

industries through state & central government. Seeking opportunities for a developing nation

is quit easy as compare to other countries. Issues arrises day by day needs solutions where

new business models takes birth in affordable circumstances but due to lack of awareness

about formal sources of fund.

7
 The entrepreneur seeks funds from three fools- family,friends and relatives.To

improve this as a country have to provide those circumstances in which a startup gets

nourishment.(2)

A startup ecosystem involve entrepreneur, financial & technical support system,

mentoring supports including incubation centre. It also comprises programs, government

policies and research interface with academia.

The startup ecosystem dramatically emerged in India recently In 1982, the National

Science and Technology Entrepreneurship Development Board (NSTEDB) has introduced it

and gradually by the late 20's fortunately got so many opportunities after liberalization where

IT professional share their work with European and American benefited by their experience

and expertise. This boasts India's confidence to trade high quality technological products

easily which was a trigger point for techno startup in India.(3)

According to World Bank ease of doing business 2015, reports that India suffered

from accessing credit and paying tax and improved in starting a business and dealing with

basic amenities however from 1 July 2017 GST( Goods & Services Tax) applicable in all

over India and help entrepreneur to get rid of complicated tax regimes therefore, holds

substantial promise to ease taxation policies for business.(4)

1.4.2 Startups and Entrepreneurs

Startup are new venture this startup generally create employement and after growth

opputunity by introducing innovation as well as replicable models. Startups have the potential

to achieve scale growth with exclusive cashflow with the right kind of person.

In the last five years, India approved the tremendous growth of technology based startups

success stories. India has vast Industry market of micro and small enterprises across different

2
Mr. S Gopal Krishna,X-President & Chairman,Innovation & Entrepreneurship Council 2015-16,in CII Startup
Conclave.
3
Source: H K Mittal,Advisor & Head, NSTEDB at CII Startup Conclave.
4
Source: NITI Ayog 2015, report of expert committee on Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

8
sectos, small technology companies achieve great success to solve customers problem by

providing innovation idea. During last financial year (2015-16) "98473 companies were

incorporated in India" According to a recent study by Nasscom," India has around 4400

startups that employ around 85000 employees with a total funding around $6.5 Billion till

2015".(5)

Technology and traditional startup ecosystem has shown their quick growth in Indian market.

a. Linking Skills to Entrepreneurship & a Startup Economy Finding adequately skilled

labour is an often mentioned challenge for startups today. The lack of appropriate

skills is a result of mismatched education at three levels: •At school where

education methods focuses on rote learning, rather than creative thinking and

analytical ability •In vocational training, where curricula and technology used is

often out of date and not adapted to modern industry or startups. •At universities,

which produces many graduates not fit for employment. This results in a young

workforce unequipped with the right skills to join modern industry, and a large cost

for the private sector on training or retraining new employees.

Startups

E-commerce

Aggregators

Consumer

Hyper local

Analytics

IOT

Payments

fig.1 (Source: Panel at CII Startup Conclave - Niti Aayog, 2015, Report of the Expert Committee on

Innovation and Entrepreneurship)

According to compass, startup eco system India has introduced on world's 3rd rank in

Global Startup Ecosystem 2015.These stratup's focused on IT enabled products and e-

5
Source: Nasscom & Zinnov 2015

9
commerce,online payments, analytics and internet service based. However most of the

startups have their banker & financiers located in Delhi,Banglore and Mumbai.

1.4.2.1 The Technology Startup Bias

According to CII startup conclave panel,The ecosystem has grown tremendously in

technology and mobile solution enterprises.Around 80% of investors are looking for these

kinds of startup where incubation facilities target teir 1/2 cities for facilitates these

technology startup's. Whereas these startup is totally based on technology based solution

where the whole intention is to minimize the number of employees.Under these

circumstances we have to create and focus more on some non technology sectors. This report

gives very clear direction to move forward with major scopes.

1.4.2.2 Women & Startup

As per Nasscom & Zinnov,2015 report "Women tech entrepreneur has double in last

five years where the percentage of female founder is only 9%". A study over 200 females

entrepreneurs in Banglore revealed that 14% focusing on manufacturing, 18% were located in

Industrial Area and almost half of the companies are knowledge based.

1.4.3 Finance Gear to Startups

Most common and important task of every startup to get finance.There are many ways

to get finance for startups like debt and equity, loans, saving and investment through friends

and family. Nasscom study also posits "The total funding in technology startups were $2.2

billion in 2014 and to reach $4.9 billion in 2015" these figures are on tech and digital

startups.

In the mean time funds investing in India grew 40% in 2013-14 from 338 to

436.Growth of half of the first time investment.However funds are flowing in to the startup

ecosystem but very less reaches upto startups as far as technology and e-commerce funding

are concerned, angle and seed funding remains the problem as it is. Whereas venture

10
capitalists are interested to invest in a revenue generating model which is a late period of

startups around after 3-4 years.

"The total value of venture capitals and private equity deals in 2014 was $15.2 billion,

with the largest investments in consumer technology, real estate and banking/financial

services/insurance"(6) Likewise India-based investors prefer to make a few relatively large

investments of around Rs.3 cr to Rs.5 cr.(7) rather than spreading smaller investments across

large numbers of firms.

Generally banks are primary finance provider of debt to startups but they are unable to

finance because of lack of estimating risk,inadequate collateral,limited cash flow."in 2012,

the International finance corporation estimated that there is Rs.353 Cr gap in debt finance for

MSME's in India. Often startup require non financial support,including technical services

,improvement in marketing startegies ,infrastructures, basic facilities , accounting and legal

advice.This non- financial supports reduces the risk."As Nasscom stats on digital

startups,India has approximately 10 Incubators and Accelerators in India."

Incubators works with statrtups to improve their entrepreneurial skills their business

strategies on idea and built a prototype for better experiencing the market. It is a long term

activity around couple of years where before giving any kind of advice on Incubator

understands the startup completely.Whereas accelators are work with startup for a short

period and intensively focused on the product,market and oppurtunities.

Incubators sometimes focuses on individual facility like technology, they provide

every technical solution to the new startups.If they concentrate on infrastructure then they

provide solution related to infrastructure related to all kinds of problems like co-working

space where the space is fully furnished have telephone connection,internet,desk,chairs and

some place is being offered to many businessmans/entrepreneurs they work mutually or

6
Bains(2015) Indian Private Equity Report 2015.
7
NITI Ayog,2015 Reports of the experts committee on Innovation and Entrepreneurship

11
according to their time with this way the rent of space comes down to negligible,technology

incubators platform is good example of sharing cloud platform for startups at google India.

Incubators generally support the early stage startups mentor them, fund them, networking for

them and provide and environment to nurturing the startups.Similarly, A Delhi based law

practice venture provide assistance to startups in guiding them in various legal rules and

regulation named impact law ventures. Support service providers are also having services like

Internal audit, tax audit and other tax letigation support there are at small and medium level

enterprises.

While nowadays a huge number of educational institutes offers entrepreneurship

courses and provide incubation facilities to promote Startup ecosystem but many time the

starup complains that whatever the research activity happens in university is not practically

applicable or accessible to startups ecosystem. Networking startups are the great networking

platforms providers quick access to information and network members like ASSOCHAM,

Association of 400 chambers and trade associations..

1.5 Present scenario of startups in India, Govt initiative

Indian Government initiative to enabling ecosystem realises the need to improve the

facility environment and funding to startup and has taken several initiative which include

these three efforts.

1. Improving entrepreneurial environment

2. Providing direct supports to the basic needs of startups

3. Provide entrepreneurial skills

These new policies have been announced by MSME and ministry of Skill

Development and Entrepreneurship. Supporting to this strategy present government our

Prime Minister Mr.Narendra Modi has announced new startup policy launched on Janaury

2016.

12
 Additionally many state government are implementing and drafting the startup

policies and programmes supporting entrepreneurship for example

Telangana,Kerala,Karnataka,Rajasthan and Gujrat.

1.5.1 New Startup Support

"Startup India, Standup India"

On the occasion of Independence Day 15th August 2015,The Prime Minister has

announced launch of "Startup India" and "Stand up India". In this speech they assure that

government will promote bank financing for startups also offer incentives to encourage

entrepreneurship and employment creation. This vision of government is expected to

facilitate the entrepreneurs in setting up startup network in the country.In the field of

innovation and entrepreneurship the finance Ministry announced the requirement to upgrade

the schemes across Ministries they also assure to include the remote area of country and

encourage innovation in terms of new mwthods and new products.

The Budget 2014-15 speech promises-

 To create a techonology centre network

 A programme for multiple value chain backward and forward network

 District level incubation and acceleration centre

According to NITI Ayog, 2015 report of "the expert Committee on Innovation and

Entrepreneurship". The department for science and technology setup technology based

incubators who promote innovation and entrepreneurship among faculty and students.The

Department of Bio Technology established the incubators to focus on Biotech startups.

Department of Electronics & IT has started the incubator in academic institutions previous

government has setup Innovation policy and programmes sectoral and state innovation

council under Naitonal Innovation Council.

13
 Startup India aims to create a strong eco-system for promoting sustainable economic

growth, large scale employment opening, innovation and design. To accomplish the aim of

this movement government has come up with an ―Action Plan‖ which will accelerate this

movement. This movement will include digital/ technology sector, agriculture,

manufacturing, social sector, healthcare, education etc.

They have further divided this action plan as the existing 1 cities to tier 2 and tier 3

cities including semi- urban and rural areas. The purpose is to generate a single point of

contact for the entire startup ecosystem so that young startup can get access to fund,

knowledge, guidance and they can reach to their full potential. ―The startup India Hub‖ will

be a prime stakeholder in this ecosystem.

This ecosystem will include and promote the involvement of central and state

government, Indian and foreign Venture Capitalist, universities, angel networks, banks,

incubators, legal partners, consultants, universities and R&D institutions and so on.

This ―The Startup India Hub‖ will be a mentor, guide, friend, advisor for the new

startup so that they can be natured properly. This research will also analyze the Corpus funds

and Credit Guarantee Funds under the Startup finance scheme. A start-up is a business entity

―which did not exist before during a given time period (new), which starts hiring at least one

paid employee during the given time period (active), and which is neither a subsidiary nor a

branch of an existing firm (independent)‖ (8)

8
Luger, M. & Koo, J., 2005. Defining and Tracking Business Start-Ups. Small Business Economics, (24), pp.17-
28 & p.19

14
1.6 Startup

A startup is a juvenile, energetic company built on know-how and innovation in which

the founders try to capitalize on initiating a product or service for which they think there is a

demand of it. Currently, due to the personality and complexity involved in the Indian start,

the precise definition of 'startup' is not present.

Assuming the various standards related to any business, such as their level of level of

living, the amount and level of the amount received, the amount of income generated, the

operating area etc. Some conceptual definitions are available in public areas. This

information has been received to find a place for readers.

The Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) is also operating around a

clear definition for startups and is usual to make it open in due course.(9) A startup is a young

company that is developing and growing, is in the first stage of operation and usually has a

small group of individuals or individuals. It can be an entrepreneurial venture or a new

business, a partnership designed to look for a repetitive and scalable business model or

temporary business organization. This unknown business model searches for disrupting

existing markets or making new ones. It is a dynamic company based on early life,

technology and innovation, in which the founders have tried to keep an eye on developing a

product or service for which they have a demand or demand .

A startup company is define as an establishment. If-

 For three years or less

 At a funding stage of Series B or less

 An entrepreneurial enterprise / partnership or a temporary operate organization

9
Nasscom Startup report 2015

15
  In the development, production or distribution of new products, processes or

services; New and existing for more than five years, revenue of about 25

crores has not been made by the division or reconstruction , establishment

through division or reconstruction.

Startups are fresh businesses. New types of new opportunities that provide growth and

employment opportunities are generally considered new, dynamic, and scalable. These are

big challenges for startup, cash flow and finding the right people and increasing their

abilities. However, using current survey they focus on early learning techniques. Therefore,

focus is on introducing India in the beginning, focusing on new companies, small companies

which primarily use technology to solve customer problems. Startups usually require other

support apart from finance, which include special technical services such as capacity

building, management advice, better business plans and networking and accounting or legal

advice. Non-financial or other support is a way to reduce the risk of financial aid.

According to the NASCOM report on digital startup, India now has about 110

incubators and accelerators in India. Incubators work with entrepreneurs to create a business

around a concept, create a prototype and develop skills such as understanding and

understanding the market. Incubator programs can run for more than a year. Accelerators

usually offer smaller, more intense programs to support business models, market

opportunities and production.(10)

1.6.1 Startup India Policy

Development of New Startups government has intiated with 30 Startups in India,

Standup India The Prime Minister announced the initiation of ―Start-up India‖ and ―Stand-up

India‖ during the speech of Independence Day on August 15, 2015. The government will

10
Nasscom report 2015

16
encourage bank financing for start-ups and offer monetary motivation to increase

entrepreneurship and employment creation. This proposal is expected to offer improved

support for entrepreneurship and assist in setting up of a system of start-ups in the country.

Further, the Ministry of Finance announced the need to introduce new schemes for

newly created and entrepreneurial sectors; To include the accessible parts of the country;

Encourage new activities in terms of new products and processes. The Budget Speech 2014-

15 promised to generate a technology hub system ,A programme to assist forward and

Backward linkages within several value sequence and Setting up incubation and acceleration

centers at district level.(11)

The "Startup India" action plan was launched by the Hounorable Prime Minister

starting of 2016 . Different ministries have properly incorporated the startup mission and

have enabled ease of doing business to in support of the articulated visualization of making it

easier for the entrepreneurs to perform business effortless.

1.6.2 Definition of startup notified by Government of India(12)

Currently there is no definitive definition of "Startup" in Indian context and "Startup".

Consider the various elements, such as the amount of funds available to any business related

to their life cycle, the amount of funds and levels, the amount of revenue, operating room,

etc., as some conceptual definitions in the public domain. They are found below and

explained to provide an indicator to understand the readers' space. Department of Industrial

Policy and Promotion (DIPP) working on a clear definition of Startup as it is required by the

public.(13)

11
Source: Presentation by Jyotsna Sitling, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship at CII
Startup Conclave
12 http://dipp.nic.in/English/Investor/startupindia/Definition_Startup_GazetteNotification.pdf
13
http://www.grantthornton.in/globalassets/1.-member-firms/india/assets/pdfs/grant_thornton-startups_report.pdf

17
 A startup is a juvenile, energetic company built on know-how and innovation in which

the founders try to capitalize on initiating a product or service for which they think there is a

demand of it.

Honourable Prime Minister Mr. Narendra Modi has reconstructed the definition of

finance by the word ―Startup‖ to defeat the problem of unorganized financial market.

A Start-up is a unit (Private Limited Company or Registered Partnership Firm or

Limited Liability Partnership) shall be considered a ―Startup‖ – It should follow in these

guidlines

- Upto 5 years from the date of its incorporation/ registration, and

- Its turnover for any of the fiscal years has not exceeded INR 25 crore, and

- Is working on renewal, expansion, distribution or commercialization of new

products, processes or services operated by technology or intellectual property.

- The unit should not be formed by the construction or reorganization of existing

trade.

- A proprietorship or a public limited company is not entitled as startup. A one person

company, being a private limited company is allowed to be recognized as a

'startup'.(14)

Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) has created frequently asked

questions on the Start-up India Programme with aim to address common queries, ranging

from definition of Startup, to the procedure for listing, papers required, process etc to gain tax

and IPR benefits, establishment of Inter-Ministerial Board etc. Online Portal and Mobile

Application for Registration are two Dedicated online portal for the Startups was launched by

Government in April. The portal includes information on various benefits under the Startup

India program. New and existing institutions will now be able to apply for start-up

14 http://startupindia.gov.in/MSME_Relaxed_Norms_for_Startups_10_03_2016.pdf 10

18
registration by filing an online application. Once registered, the program will be able to apply

for various benefits and plans declared under the program.(15)

NASSCOM supports the registration of startup :

- NASSCOM Warehouses helps in collaboration with State Governments will be a

acknowledged agency to give a letter of support for innovative startups, as

mandatory for listing under the startup India.

- Tax benefits: In the current finance policy, the Finance Ministry has given the

following tax benefits according to the Startup India Action Plan.

 Long term capital gains: If you invest more than 24 months in unlisted

companies, there will be no tax on long-term capital gains. The time taken in

the last 36 months has been reduced.

 Income tax exemption for three consecutive years, including "limited liability

partnership" engaged in a legitimate business. A startup can apply for a tax

rebate on or after the registration. Approval is required from the Inter Common

Board to be eligible for profit.

- Enabling IPR Protection

 IP Assistance -

i. Intellectual property and related rights have been provided in the Indian Patent

Office for understanding and assistance regarding patent, design and trademark

protection, various procedures and requirements.

 IP facilitation(16) -

a. Scheme for facilitation of IPR filing for Start-ups Scheme for facilitating

"Startups Intellectual Property Protection (SIPP)" been launched on a

15 http://startupindia.gov.in/
16
http://www.ipindia.nic.in/Whats_New/startups_IPRFacilitation_22April2016.

19
 pilot basis for one year17. In this scheme, Startups concerned in filing a

patent, trade mark or design can look for the support for filing from list

of patents, trademark & design facilitators, and operating expense for

these services will be bear by the Government for eligible startups. For

startups to be qualified for this facilitation, a sanction from the

Interministerial board is required.

b. Expedited test of Patent request- According to the Startup India Action

Plan, the Indian Patent Office has notified the Patent Amendment Rules,

2016, in which any IPR applicant has been given a quick examination of

IP applications for the first time.This is expected to run into the timelines

of estimation on a need basis.

- Relaxation in Public Procurement standard – In the MSME Manufacturing and Services

Sector, the MSME Ministry has suggested to create a level playing field for startup, that

they have suggested prior experience or pre-business mandatory requirements under the

Public Purchase Policy. Technical and quality requirements.

- Initiation of Grand Innovation Challenge - With the purpose to find low cost solutions

to the India's key growth challenges and desires, the NITI Aayog has launched the

Grand Innovation Challenge. In Phase I, The government is looking for the inputs from

the citizens from the challenges of the citizens, which need immediate attention for the

development of society. In Phase II, based on the inputs received, The government will

list the issues and give priority to them and will look for new solutions from the public

on the following questions. The Government will accept and provide development of

the proposed measures.

17
http://startupindia.gov.in/SIPP_IPR_Scheme.pdf 6

20
 - Self-Certification for compliance with Labor Laws – With the aim of making

it easier to run their business smoothly, the Ministry of Labor and Employment has

issued a notification in which the burden of avoiding the necessary regulatory approval

for youth can be avoided, which must be obeyed by various labor laws. According to

this notification, startup can now certify itself for compatibility with various labor laws.

It suggests that allow any rebate on physical checks required by law to be established

for their establishment.

- Release of environmental clearance for white category industries - The

Ministry of Environment and Forests has re-classified the industries on the basis of

pollution index in four categories of red, orange, green and white. White has been given

a new category for non-polluting industries, in which it is not necessary to obtain

environmental recognition and consent. In the past, many state governments have given

such freedom to IT and ITES enterprises by obtaining ecological approval from their

State Pollution Control Board.

1.6.3 Present Scenario of Startups in India

Startup funding in India Funding based on age of company Family and friends

Angel/Seed funds/VC/PE VC/PE/ Banks Public market/PE Early stage Growth stage Average

Age of a firm (in years) 1 year family and friends, 3 years angle/seed funds/vc/PE, 5 years

VC/PE/Banks, 8 years public market and PE.

Venture capital invests in both stages of company based on the following criteria: Early

stage: Includes first or second round of institutional investments into companies:

• Average of less than five years old

• Not a part of big corporates

• Investment amount

21
 According to a latest study by Nasscom , India has about 4400 startups that occupy

around 85,000 employees. Total financial support till 2015 in startups is estimated to be Rs.

650 crore. This excludes funding in startups incorporated before 2010, such as Flipkart,

Practo, Zomato Quickr, and Inmobi, which, if taken in account, will additional increase the

investment figure(18). Both environmental and traditional startups are growing rapidly in the

environment or ecosystem. A new startup policies has been developed by the ministries and

this policies go beyond economic and non-economic assistance for network with a

collaborative platform. It also include the relation of Public, Nonprofit, Private and the

Academic Sector. Government understands the need for improving the business environment

including fast approvals and other government services. Enabling implementation of new

projects Draft or File. Good amount of new initiatives have been announced by the

government which consist efforts to develop the business environment, give direct support

for startups , provide skill set for entrepreneurship.

Furthermore, several state governments are adopting or drafting new policies and

programmes developing startups and entrepreneurship. For example, Karnataka, Gujarat,

Kerala, Rajasthan have announced levy incentives for startups whereas Telangana is

preparing new policies, while Karnataka is the first state to present a startup policy. Likewise,

Kerala has effectively supported incubation drives for startups counting Kochi's Startup town

and Thiruvananthapuram's Technopark. Rajasthan financed incubator Startup Oasis as well as

the Rajasthan Venture Capital Fund, and Odisha has announced the Odisha Youth Innovation

Fund to give confidence among 27 young entrepreneur and develop entrepreneur. Where the

government is adoptting new policies includes Bankruptcy- An provisional Report of the

Bankruptcy Law Reform Committee consider it to make exit easier. For example by

protecting investors and workers in case of bankruptcy by ensuring salary spending that are

18
Nasscom report 2015

22
due, whereas, not making it compulsory for companies to continue in company only to keep

away from unemployment, and revise sections of Companies Act 2013 to make insolvency

method quicker.

In Income Tax, several startups include companies overseas to help from their more

open-minded duty policies. The money bill(2015) now does not care for such companies as

overseas and makes it mandatory for such companies to pay returns like Indian companies

(new section 285A) For Listing related relaxation Securities Exchange and Exchange Board

of India (SEBI) has tranquil rules for 29 startups to register in Indian stock market, and for

investor who can sell their holdings of such startups.(19)

1.7 Stages of the startup lifecycle

- Discovery- Find potential scale product / service idea for a large target market

- Validation -The product or service openly hits the market, looking for the first

customer willing to pay for it.

- Maintenance Increasing profit and facing troubles derived from the worldwide

dimension that the company has achieved.

- Sale or Renewal The choice is to sell the startup to a huge or obtain giant resources

that the brand will need to grow continuously.

- Efficiency The entrepreneur begins to name his business model and looks for conduct

to raise client base.

- Scale Pushing the expansion of the business aggressively while rising its capability to

nurture in a sustainable style.

19
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/PM-Modi-Announces-Start-Up-India-Initiative-toEncourage-
Entrepreneurship/2015/08/15/article2976065.ece

23
1.8 Startup ecosystem-

India is the third leading startup ecosystem across the world, with three- four startups

originating every day. The Hub will work as a nodal stage and will allow users to tie with

ecosystem investors, access free knowledge resources, equipment & templates on HR, legal,

book-keeping & regulatory issues and forums for discussion. More than fifty relevant Govt

programs has also been aggregated by The Hub. In the next phase, the platform will also

aggregate schemes available across various state governments. To provide a better customer

friendly experience, a smart intelligence platform have been provided along with Chatbots to

automatically assemble, revise information and reply to queries. The promotional event of the

Hub was accelerate by a symposium on ‗Navigating the Startup Landscape‘ with a

representative from each of the key elements of ecosystem like startup, accelerator,

shareholder, incubator, and mentor communities. "The discussion was followed by an address

by Shri Ramesh Abhishek Secretary, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion with a

presentation on a range of initiatives taken up under the Startup India Initiative."(20)

Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman mentioned about the need of gathering whole ecosystem on

one platform that Startup India Virtual Hub is an attempt to develop a marketplace where all

the investors can interact, exchange information, and allow each other to raise. It will

streamline the lifecycle of existing and potential startups, helping to access them the right

resources at the accurate point. She also encouraged all entrepreneurs in India to make use of

this gateway and all enabling investors and supporters to contribute to the policy as much as

possible. The Minister also mentioned a new drive, wherein a Startup exchange program

amongst the SAARC nations would be structured. In the final comments, Joint Secretary

Shri Rajiv Aggarwal requested every participants cum stakeholders of the ecosystem to

register themselves on the Hub.

20
http://www.grantthornton.in/globalassets/1.-member-firms/india/assets/pdfs/grant_thornton-startups_report.pdf

24
 India is currently making a fundamental change in the start-up friendly policy and in

the business environment friendly environment. To do this, it is necessary to create

opportunities for a large number of youth to create employment opportunities for India as

well as for employment opportunities for India. In order to pursue this challenge, the Indian

Industry Association (CII) has stressed on building a strong early ecosystem in the country

with national and state governments and industry and other stakeholders.

The theme of this year's Startup Conclave was the development of the start-up eco

system in India, which inspires the Prime Minister's speech from India's 69th Independence

Day and Startup India, which progresses in the campaign of India. In the startup ecosystem,

accelerating non-financial assistance, including entrepreneur, various types of financial and

non-financial assistance such as loan finance, equity investment and subsidies, and

incubation, acceleration, consulting and technical experts. It includes government policies

and programs that are initially related to academic and other organizations, and platforms

interact with each other in different ways or support startups. Indian startup ecosystem

evolution has evolved to more than a startup environment in India.

In 1982 when the National Science and Technology Entrepreneurship Development

Board (NSTEDB) came into existence, there was no background of promoting

entrepreneurship and no ecosystem to talk about.

After the liberalization of the economy, in 1995 and 1996, and as an IT professional,

India has got many experience and expertise with the maximum young people going to

America and Europe. India's confidence in the ability to deliver high-quality technology

products has increased and specially efforts are being made in the field of technology to start

new ventures for thousands of years.(21)

21
Source: HK Mittal, Adviser & Head, NSTEDB at CII Startup Conclave.

25
 For Ease of perform Business "Unique Enterprise Number (UEN)" is regularized for

enrollment including taxes, labour laws and social security. To getting the clearance and

approval an online form procedure has been started by government authorities. To make

existing system easy 'Single Window System' concept has been adopted for approvals,

clearance and applications. Providing more flexibility in human resource management like

hiring and retaining for startups during first three years. Usually winding up a business or

setup is bigger than starting it. Thus considering these element into mind government

promote easy exit to stratups that have been in function for less than three years.(22)

1.9 Madhya Pradesh Inititative for Startups

MP Incubation & Startup Policy 2016 is ready with 3 central guidelines focus areas which are

essential for a startup to develop as an enterprise. These are as follows:

i. accessibility of ‗Plug & Play‘ Incubation Facility

ii. financial support & Incentives

iii. Startup assistance and caring

Co-operative vacancies are shared offices, especially open positions and offer desk

spaces, as well as other facilities such as administrative support or services such as courier.

Apart from this, there may be a formal or informal network of consultants or entrepreneurs on

the basis of cooperative workplace. There are many cooperative seats in India's largest cities.

Renowned Engineering/Technology, Administration or Management , Professional Institutes

and Research & development Institutes in the state of Madhya Pradesh are known as Host

Institute which focus on Incubation, Innovation and entrepreneurial development activities.

22
Source: Presentation by Jyotsna Sitling, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship at CII Startup Conclave

26
1.9.1 Incubator-

Incubator provides advice and advanced technology to encourage development during

the initial period. Indian incubators and investor incubators are setting up a new model, which

is focusing on introducing the most suitable techniques for startup, so entrepreneurs can focus

on startup. To set up Madhya Pradesh as favourite destination of Startups & Incubation

Centres by giving the most enabling ecosystem to strengthen entrepreneurial traditions in the

state.(23)

1.9.1.1 Technology Incubator Platform-

To begin Google Indiana, the cloud platform starts with $ 100,000 to use the Google

Cloud Platform, from which apps can launch their applications initially. The program helps

create and scale startups. The services comprise: As a computer platform service, the cloud

platform can be used by Google's applications to store large data analysis, connectivity, and

firebase storage – a platform program that enables developers to create mobile and web apps

to store and sync data. Apart from this, Google is preparing a forum so that entrepreneurs can

help in fixing this issue by adding MSMEs. Programs for entrepreneurs provide guidance and

other support resources in resources resources such as pitch management.(24)

Department of Science and Technology established the technology business incubator

in educational institutions to support the introduction of technology; The academic

institutions, students and teachers have established the Innovation Entrepreneurship

Development Cell of the Department of Indian Development and strong development in the

power of improvement programs and thought, to encourage entrepreneurship and innovation

overall areas help. Biotech Startups, the establishment of the inkyubetarsaci department is

beginning to provide scientific department and industrial research support related patents. In

23
http://aiggpa.mp.gov.in/images/files/KAIR/MP-STATE-POLICIES/INDUSTRY/MP%20Incubation%20Startup%20Policy%202016.pdf
24
Source: Presentation by Anuja Shukla, India Sales Lead, Google Cloud Platform for Startups, at CII Startup Conclave.

27
educational institutions, electronics and IT technology are incubation centers. Under the

previous government, the National Innovation Council to enable innovation in regional policy

and programs and to establish a council of state for innovation.

1.9.1.2 Innovative Incubation Network

To facilitate the 'Plug and Play' models for young entrepreneurs / students, the

emphasis will be on setting up of incubation centers in engineering colleges, management

institutes and professional colleges. These egg centers will be encouraged to develop an

innovative egg network to create an associate platform, in which the host institution /

incubator tool can be used to learn best practices and to understand beginner / entrepreneurial

requirements. Selected organizations will be encouraged to host the incubator in their

discipline or skill area. An online portal will be developed to bring all state-based incubators

on one network. This network will also provide a platform for academic or industry national /

international consultants. These incubation networks will play an important role in starting

fundraising aid, legal aid and government regulatory support.

1.9.1.3 Angel Investors/Venture Capitalist Network

To select and recognize angle inverstors or venture capitalist is a critical process in the

journey of every startup considering this factor state government shall encourage them

statewised to make a system so that it can link between startup and seed funding.This kind of

network will also perform a significant role of an ‗Accelerator‘ for Startups in the state.

1.9.2 Incentives

1.9.2.1 Incentives to Incubators

Incubators and startup shall also be entitled for incentive as per policy which will be

applicable from end of 31st march 2021. "MP Laghu Udyog Nigam" will be entitled as a

nodal agency which will promote Incubators, Startups, Accelerators and to encourage Host

28
Institutes to make entrepreneurial ecology within the boundaries of state as per the demand of

Government of Madhya Pradesh and Department of Micro, Small, Medium Enterprise

(MSME). Host incubation institutes will be responsible to provide all the technical facilties

like 'plug & play' with a computer and broadband connectivity workspace alongwith

commonly used administration space as well as trainng & mentoring facilities like Marketing,

legal, Financial and technical training. For building such user friendly environment state

government will help for initial three years which is expandable upto 5 year depends upon the

performance at the end Incubators is desired to be self dependent.

Capital assistance upto INR 50 lacs which will be included in maximum 50%

expenses is available for a period 2 years,for Incubators as incentives and for capacity

exapansion.For managing operating expenses support of upto Rs.10 lacs shall be provided for

3 years. Stamp duty full waiver on the purchase or lease of land, office or building for

eligible Incubators upto 2 years operating period. Menotring help of Rs. 2 lacs will be given

to the eligible Incubatees for coordinating intellacts, Prominent academicians and Indusrty

leaders.

1.9.2.2 Incentives to Startups/Entrepreneurs

Those startups who are working in Incubators needs to registered themselves within

six months before applying for incentives. Subsidy of 5% per year for a period of 3 years on

received loan from scheduled banks maximum limit is of Rs. 5 lacs per year. Subsidy of 25%

reimburse i.e., Rs. 10 lacs for the lease and rental 3 years expenses of startup operated from

IT park/Clusters or Incubators who are situated within the state boundaries. Subsidy of Rs.2

lacs and Rs. 5 lacs for domestic and international patent respectively, depending upon the

receiving certificate for maximum 3 patens or quality ceritifications. Marketing assistance of

Rs. 10 lacs maximum, Assistance for Credential Development are provided by this Cell

29
which will act as ‗One stop solution‘ for all Startup/Incubators queries alongwith liaison with

Government departments. Monitoring and time to time evaluation is part of this policy.

1.9.3 Innovation & Invention

Idea is the source of entrepreneurs. Thoughts can be fair or wild. In any case, they need

to be filtered and the niche in which the business has the ability to generate its nutrients

(Sahay, 2011). Although new to mankind as new, despite its apparent importance, he does not

have enough interest in scholars. Economists see direct changes during technology and

economic development. If the economist settled while distributing the source of innovative

resources and its financial results, this process was more neglected. In recent years the role of

research, economic and social change, especially on social science and discipline (Fagerberg,

2003). Management Guru's fundamental principles of competitive advantage over innovation.

The World Bank has spread through social development-based knowledge. Overall, the role

of innovation (Rao, 2007). Various authors have define innovation and innovation in a variety

of ways.

According to Drucker, the new venture is that the entrepreneur has created a new

wealthy resource or has provided current resources with an increased capacity to earn money.

In the developed countries of the West, the firm is at the forefront of new and innovative, but

developing countries find it difficult to compete in the field of technology. The innovation is a

new product or service that the customer wants and is a new way to do things like search and

commercialization, is a new knowledge that can be related to a technical or market. Often new

products or services are known as innovations, if its price is low, its properties have improved

or now there are new properties that have never been before, which shows new technology or

market knowledge. An innovation, ideas should be converted into a product or service

(Selvanayakam, 2007). The innovation is the development process. This application has an

idea translation (Ghosh,2000).

30
 Creation of Results in new
Invention something new knowledge

Transformationof Results in new

Innovation an idea into
useful
products, serices
or process

Fig. 2 Conceptualization of Invention and Innovation

Self developed

Figure 2.4: Inventions and new initiatives (source: self-creation) New conclusions

"Concepts concepts in the form of an idea, a study or objective that one person or another has

adopted an entity." These lectures emphasize the "renewal" magnitude and "productivity"

magnitude by Schumpeter. Putting the views of Schumpeter and Rogers, Pastakia (1998)

together it describes the characteristics of innovation as follows:

a. There is a new and important way of doing things in new ventures.

b. It is essentially related to cost, effort or better productivity or saving time.

c. An idea can be considered as innovation by a custom or product developer or

external supervisor.

d. The concept of innovation affects people.

Schumpeter (1939) recognized in three types of creative activities - searching,

innovation and copying. Accordingly, the search is a new product or process or a new idea.

Innovative research is the process of creating a product or service. This is a commercial

exploitation of discovery. Copy is a innovation by such a firm (Manimala, 1992a;

Selvanayakam, 2007). In this way, there can be a scientific discovery. The newcomer has

identified five major types of innovation by his econo operator. Introduction of a new product

or service (or current improvements); Introduction to the new method of production process;

New market development; Exploitation of new sources of supply or semi-manufactured

goods; Reconstruction of an industry's work Schumpeter (1939). The innovative concept of

31
the shampoos is quite extensive because any new thing or new things in it contain old things.

The modern concept of innovation is the process, which is the initial stage known as Invention

(Glaister, 1989).

It is noticed in ‗India Innovation Survey‘ which is mutually conducted by

Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) and Boston Consulting Group (BCG), that most

Indian companies have a strategic focus. As high as 89% respondents, explained the

importance of innovation over last ten years. A 39% of the respondents felt that innovation

today has become critical to their organization and as high as 91% said innovation was

amongst the top three strategic priorities. Gupta explained that creativity in India particularly

in science and technology is grossly underestimated. While dealing "the Information and

Library Network‘s (INFLIBNET) National Online Union Catalogue (which secures database

of Indian doctorate research studies)" found No significant work is available to create

innovation and innovative entrepreneurship and to create entrepreneurship and to take

initiative for education system.

According to Rathod (2010), Foreign researchers have influenced new operating

systems and company performance. Extensive research works include entrepreneurship,

incubator, interdisciplinary fundamentals of innovative internationalization. Rathod has also

found that other researchers have discovered research work and strategic human resource

management (SHRM) China is considered to be important for innovation and

entrepreneurship, which is to coordinate between entrepreneurship and innovation. Studies

have seen that entrepreneurship and innovation reach institutional success; They are not

limited to starting new ventures, but they are entrepreneurs and innovative organizations in

dynamic and complete processes. Especially less innovative studies are found in Indian

innovators in India.

32
1.10 Types Of Startup

1.10.1 Small Business Startups

It is a actuality that the huge majority of startups are at present the alike previous small

businesses. Storefronts, plumber, electricians, tour agents, carpenters, consultants etc are a

few of the types of startups that lies in this kind. It is a truth that these kind of startups suffers

to dominate the attention of the famous media but the reality is that the owners work as hard

as any other startups.The best thing about these startups is that they mainly employ local

talents and thus add to the local financial system. The intention of these startups are to make

sufficient money to nourish their families. Small business entrepreneurs hardly ever build it

to the media cover but they do participate a important responsibility in the financial growth of

the nation.

1.10.2 Lifestyle Startups

We are now seeing a rising quantity of startup who are brighten the line between zeal

and occupation. For example, people, who are obsessive about sketching, are initiation

cartoon begin companies as it gives them the ideal chance to do what they do top. People who

have few plane of know-how in sky jumping are now contributing sky jumping tution or

guidance as well; this is a further type of lifestyle startup. Lifestyle Startup is all about

pursuing ones zeal and discover a way to make cash throughout.

1.10.3 Buyable Startups

Mobile-based or cost-based web-based application developed and went down greatly

and it is known that a new breed called Purchase has given startup company to start the

growth of the new breed. The choice of these startup companies is not finding anything but

they are trying to raise your starting funding to the conventional activities capitalist

crowdfunding Conection Search. However, in return for profit, this type of startup is usually

33
sold to some third parties. This type of startup is getting traction and it is likely to become

more popular in the next few years.

1.10.4 Social Startups

Like other types of startup, social initiatives are not motivated by profit, but they run

because of a powerful reason. Since social entrepreneurs are struggling for some reason, this

does not mean that they have given adverse reactions to success or profitability. Like

traditional startup companies, most social startups are making the world a better place,

however, there are some social initiatives that are in the form of wealth building.

1.10.5 Scalable Startups

Despite a very minor startups, scalable startups are very different from the start of

small business. Compared to small business startup, scalable startup targets are high, they

believe that Facebook, Twitter, Skype and their likes scalable startup revolve around a simple

but powerful concept and they always seek financial investors.(25)

1.10.6 The Automizer

The features are being determined on customers, attracting customers who express

interest in a product, rapid action, general automatization processes that were earlier

performed manually, a large market, thrash about on the existing market, new technologies is

being used, powerful technology-oriented developers.(26)

1.10.7 The Social Transformer

These start-ups typically require new ways of connecting business people thus need

more capital and teams get more often meetups from IT-oriented in such start-up.They

25
Recommended Books for Building a Startup Company
The Toilet Paper Entrepreneur by Mike Michalowicz | For a summary according to Mike
Startupland by Mikkel Svane | For a summary according to Mikkkel
Virtual Freedom by Chris Ducker | For a summary according to Chris
Hooked by Nir Eyal | For a summary according to Nir
Pocket Man by Scott Jordan | For a summary according to Scott

26
Manner, Hermann and Berman (2011)

34
belongs to the start-ups that are characterized by the presence of a significant mass, increased

subscriber development, and networking.

1.10.8 The Integrator

Those startups who targets small marke , small and medium size enterprises getting

early profits and significantly high chances to have small teams even after growth or

expansion.

1.10.9 The Challenger

This type of startup is more customer friendly, giving high figures in sales although in

rigid market. Business oriented team generates repeated sales. When they scale up they get

more users and need large team. Financing and collection of investments at the early stage of

growth, as well in the extension phase will depend on the features and characteristics of each

type of project.(27)

1.11 Sources of Funds

1.11.1 Bootstrapping

A method of transforming human capital into financial. occasionally it is fine to try to

find uot start-up companies by yourself, without any third party funding, which is called

bootstrapping "to pull oneself up by one's bootstraps". Bootstrapping implies that the

entrepreneur has definite earnings in the starting, which is only probable if the start-up

doesn't need a big investment and if no financial investment given by third parties. The

benefit of this approach is that entrepreneurs have complete control of their startup.(28) While

on conventional methods of financing the start-ups was like if the start-up project founders

don't have their own monetary sources and couldn't separately raise the start-up without

outside money they generally rotate to the usual financing sources such as loans from bank,

27
Cassar (2004)
28
Worrell (2002)

35
3F's (i.e. Friends, Family and Fools), beginning investments known as seed capital, angel

investors and venture capitalist.(29)

1.11.2 Bank loans

Loans from bank is most traditional way to get finance but due to complex procedures

and their criteria of lending loan which is dependent on their credit history and property of

the person. Usually startups are founded by young people who are mostly first generation

entrepreneur, in many cases they don't own any property thus it hard to get finance. A study

on correlation between bank loan and startup's sustainiability was conducted in 2003 by

Astebroa and Bernhardt's and result found negatively correlated this is because of increasing

many of the startup companies that get the other typr of investments . A comparative

research was conducted on High tech startups and other kind of startups which is getting bank

loan easier and harder over 9,715 companies were examine in the period 2007-2009 it possits

that high-tech start-ups are not likely to apply bank loan and it is very hard for them in

comparison of other industries.(30)

1.11.3 3F - Friends, Family and Family Relatives

Before moving towards external official funding sources entrepreneurs should make

an effort to collect the initial capital from those who are nearest and well-known to them such

as friends and family.(31) This is the "primary line" of investors and it is usually called "Fools"

because they have invested into the startup without considering the fact that a large number

of startups fails in their early stage which is off three year period. However, before turning to

big and more powerful investors, it is essential that the startup receive initial money. This

shows that the entrepreneur have faith in his idea and so do the family, friends and relatives.

29
Kovacic (2011)
30
Brown, Degryse, Hoewer, Penas, 2012
31
Krishnan, 2010

36
Possible risks of such a financing are disagreements that may happen in the relations if the

idea fails.(32)

1.11.4 Seed finance

Seed funds are also known as primary investments that help startup in escalating their

business. Early funds helps startup companies in their growth and development of their

products since startups is busy in rapid change in technology.(33)

A very famous way to receive seed fund by reaching those investors who wants to

invest in pontential startup ideas of a successful business.(34) In the early stage fundaraising is

done by entrepreneurs before commencing any business from friends and family.(35) All the

expenses while doing product development , proof of concept or market research or to bear

administrative expenses to starting the startup are provided in seed finance. The startup‘s

objective in this phase is to test the market, start the feasibility of the business idea, and

calculate interest and attract the investors.

1.11.5 Angel Investors

Business angels are investors who help out the entrepreneurs to apprehend their ideas.

In addition, angels helps in sharing their expertise, experience and finance not only with

startups but also with established entreprises that already have a set-up but are momentarily

in monetary crisis. The utmost worth of angels is the so-called "smart funding" that includes

offering skills, knowledge and market contacts, whereas most general reasons for giving

funds are gaining profit, cheering entrepreneurship, trade activity and creating new worth.

The Angel Investors will be registered with Stock Exchange Board of India or listed Bank or

supposed reknown Institution like Indian Institute of Teachnology or Indian Institute of

Management or Department of Science & Technlogy or Government of Madhya Pradesh

32
Lopac, 2007
33
Brezak Brkan, 2010
34
Brezak Brkan, 2010
35
smallbusiness.chron.com, 2013

37
permitted Incubators. Early stage funding is provided by Angel Investors to entrepreneurs or

startups.

1.11.6 Venture Capitalist

Venture Capital investments or risk capital investments can come from persons,

groups, companies or funds that invest in startups to help in their development. Venture

Capital investments are not like as bank loans because after financing Venture funds hunt for

a equivalent part of the possession in the startup , whereas bank funds for interest for pre

define period. Venture Capitalist are not affected by startup's in and out flow cash and it

doesn't make any costs, while bank loans are constantly time bound and in the entire

repayment duration they trouble the business cash flow.(36) It also known as risk capital fund

according to Croatian legislation.

Venture capital funds are determined on high- risk and high return projects for their

investment they provide managerial, technical and financial assistance to help the startup

sometime they looking after all the managerial decisions like purchasing or raw material,

fixing the vendors and so on. Venture capitalist are always seek young talent, their creative

and innovative ideas which can be a startup.(37) Usually, it refers to financing a firm in the

starting as well as the growth stages of improvement.(38)

1.11.7 Seed Accelerators

New methods of financing the startup as seed accelerators that offer financial push and

mentoring and stand for an chance for all startups and teams. Although there is no reasonable

intensity of study and literature is available about these new financing method, some study

shows that nowadays accelerators are more than startups themselves and it is considered as a

positive transform in the financial structure of the high-tech companies.(39)As per

36
Rakar, 2006
37
Jozic, 2011
38
Cvijanovic, Marovic and Sruk, 2008
39
Lopac,2007

38
Christiansen (2009) theory three elements for identifying the successful eccelerators. These

are- the junction of highly experienced people that are skilled both in operating startups and

investing as angel, focuses on technology or industry, a very diverse and convincing reason

for reality.

1.11.8 Seedcamp

To enabling early stage development Seedcamp an investment program is organised

which offers an chance of mentoring various startups by intellactuals and experts in the field

seed financing which will help the early stage development. This event also offers experts in

the field of product development, human resources management , maintaining Public

Relation, strategic marketing, legal advise, media coverage, etc.(40)

1.11.9 Start-up bootcamp

It is a well design and organised accelerator program for startup companies and it is

being held at different European locations many times in a year like Copenhagen, Dublin,

Amsterdam, Madrid and London. It gathers a wide network of mentors, partners and

investors which help selected startup in implementation of their idea. Startups raise money

through an online portal for collecting investments into undersized companies, i.e. it is a form

of collecting contributions for charities in interesting projects in general. Every entrepreneur

can raise funds from prospect clients before the project is even commercialized. In case of a

failure, funding is returned to those who contributed, while startups ensures that all the

dealings are made honestly.(41)

An alternative economic system indicates developing an ecological system to help

rural industries, entrepreneurs and innovations. Such an incubator is a ground-based

innovators is GIAN, It helps innovation with Micro Venture Innovation Fund (MVIF)

40
Christiansen, 2009
41
Lopac, 2007(M. Klacmer Calopa, J. Horvat, M. Lalic: Analysis of financing sources for start-up companies)

39
Maintains various types of entrepreneurship with various types of equipment or supporting

equipment. It gives a complementary financial support (Sonne, 2010). GIAN is a registered

trust like MVIF with Stock Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to render the Innovators. GIAN

is unique, it's an innovative proponent, whose ideas are but not finance, who have eyes but do

not have a business plan and which products are capable of offering. This is India's first

ground incubator, which has a support system in India, which has innovated in rural India,

has given great energy, less efficiency and efficiency. Such deficiencies can lead to logical

reasons, such as lack of confidence in entrepreneur or financial aid (Nageswaran, 2003).

GIAN is an exception because there is no provision for enterprise processing subsidies for its

resources. It provides financing for the beginning of rural programs to support newly created

people at the grassroots level (Gupta, 1999).

1.12 Stages of Startup Finance

Startup Phase To start the phase of finance, funding for the development of products,

some initial marketing and some administrative overhead. These types of financing are

usually given to organized companies or they are in business for some time, but they have not

sold their product in the market. At this stage, startup companies often combine significant

management, making a fair business plan and product or service to take proper care of market

management.

■ Bootstrap stage ■ Seed stage ■ Startup stage ■ Late stage ■Liquidation stage ■

Venture Capital ■ Crowdfunding

1.12.1 Early stage

The initial phase is necessary to "early" the level of financial aid are usually 2-3 years

in business, and the company has started. Management team has been established, in this

phase, business operations have been started. Financing in this phase also strengthens the

possibility of production, sales and marketing. Expansion of traditional business expansion

40
platform requires the expansion of those companies who are already selling products or

services. Seeds and product development Investment companies, employees, and customers

looking to build a team for the acquisition of capital as a formal policy in the initial round of

customers. Seed companies are focusing at the level of product development, but beta

product testing with initial phase-conditions and most of the users can be improved, changes

in their market-to-market structure and sales channels are made.

1.12.2 Second stage

Second Stage is the expansion of companies or products that are selling capital finance

products or services will be easy. At this point, a company raises additional equity capital to

expand its engineering, technology platform, sales, marketing and product capability. Most

companies in this phase are still not profitable and use financing in the forum to meet

working capital requirements and cooperate with the organization's overhead and inventory

expenses.

1.12.3 Third stage

Third stage funding, if necessary, provides development of large expansion projects

such as plant expansion, integrated marketing programs, large scale sales organization and

new product development. At this level, the company is generally or profitable or close.

1.12.4 Mezzanine financing

Traditional late-stage financial requirement Mezenine financing phase is a financial

business for the mezzanine financing startup and is used for the company's expansion. This

type of financial assistance can also be done by the company. At this point, the company does

not want to demand additional recurring equity equity investment, and Magazine may prefer

a hybrid form of debt / equity financing. Apart from this, entrepreneurs can not take

traditional bank loans in this phase. Mezzanine Loans Investors can take higher quality

41
protection than normal investment in equities because they have the right, the borrower is

better than the shareholders.

The third phase financing expansion plans, such as plant expansion, integrated

marketing programs, large-scale sales organization development and advanced product

development.

1.12.5 Bridge financing

Bridge financing targets are given to those companies who require bridge financing, it

is necessary to enjoy short-term debt financing for mature, beneficial and for a period of six

months to one year. Prior to using public offering or some other major restructuring program,

money is often used to meet different needs. Often, bridge financing is structured so that it

can be repaid by the initial public offering (IPO) amount. Bridge financing may include

reconstruction of large shareholder positions through secondary transactions. The initial

investor will be the bridge manager due to changes in managers who want to lower or lower

their position. It enables the founders to buy back shares from the former management and

individuals (friends, relatives, co-operatives, etc.) before the IPO.

Livelihood status Business life style is the only way to work as a cycle of life, even for

beginners, even the most successful entrepreneurs have succeeded beyond their imagination.

Those activities that come in all ways, "how and when" those "exclusion" questions can be

compulsory. By entering the initial stages of the beginning, there is no shortage of

"investment banking" specialists in Wall Street and Wall Street West, which is called

liquidity, does not offer you your services and money. Take good care at this point - Sell

yourself a lot of fluid mergers and acquisitions, buy an IPO or buy a leverage buyout.

Traditional sources of start-up capital financing are highly positioned in the global

recession of 2008, and entrepreneurs are most likely to meet the most serious glob al financial

crisis. For all banks traditional bank financing has become easy, but the borrower is not very

42
small on qualified credit and traditional capital investment. Thus, it is important for startup

entrepreneurs to understand that there has been a rapid change in the traditional method of

budget (which has provided services since late 20th to early 2008). Most of these global

control restrictions are outside their control.

Now we are entering a new era in the world of start-up finances, where the obvious

methods of financing are developing rare. Before financing the cost-cutting of precious

resources, a startup can only be seen in financial resources, drawing on the hybrid

combination, and the news agency's priority of understanding as a startup funding, it can

source a scheduled order We believe that it is still important to be familiar with it. Financing

of the seed funding phase is often the most difficult for investors in the enterprise to fund

start-up. This is where the financial situation is Startup installers are usually booting their

enterprise on personal savings and credit cards. After reaching this point, the founders

realized that there is a lot of capital. Often, friends, family and well-known co-workers have

provided more financial provisions. At this time, StartUp Reggae could consider "D" private

placement memorandum to raise capital from the initial group of "investor". There are issues

of private placement memorandum or private stock offer submission, for which necessary

startup capital required for stock ownership exchange.

The private placement is a private representation of the memorandum or share issues,

which is necessary capital for the startup share ownership exchanges. Private investors are

evaluated on plesamentamadhila so that opportunities can be demanded on their investment

10% to 30%, but management of the company, they generally have not said. Apart from this,

today's uncertain economic environment can not take returns on investment returns for high

risk capital. Issuing a private appointment memo is just a process and an experienced

securities lawyer is required. This memo is being released into a private placement and is a

process and requires an experienced security aetarnici. Although exempted from SEC

43
registration, the offers of Reg 'D' are still considered securities and some regulatory

requirements are required to be met.

1.12.6 Angel investors

Angel investor often provides for the payment of the necessary penalty for startup

reaching the initial stage of profit. In most cases, in the beginning, the exposure range of the

angel has been ignored for their financial needs. Some educational institutions give seeds of

capital resources to the fairy investors in the category and other devasthan investors are

recognized as they are paying dividends for seed phase capital and venture capital. Angel

Investments In fact, there is a hybrid between the two. Angel investor is often successful

entrepreneurs, such as rich people who are engaged in the industry with the help of next-

generation start-up. There is no money to inspire angel investors; It is also satisfied to provide

necessary and valuable guidance for startup management. Startup installers will need to keep

in mind their needs and requirements because angels enter personal contracts with investors

because they expect more control over their companies. Angel investors need to return to

invest in their initial investment 20-30times investment After the slow growth or "lifestyle"

business goes up 40% or more annually, these investors come into the business. Unlike

Venture Capitalists (VC), many angels have not calculated returns from investors (RRs) and

other investment fund measures.

Angels often rely on betting grounds. While waiting for returns with investors, there

may be expectations of changing toys in the initial times when investors decide. Angel

investor insists on the selection process of investors. Angels generally focus on factors such

as entrepreneurial enthusiasm, reliability and experience.

44
 1.12.7 Crowdfunding

Two types of crowdfunding are well-built with start-up investments. For hardware

startups and creative projects, called 'Reward-based mobilization', where there are global

awareness like kickstarters and Indigo. Users can return to their choice projects and get back

some material (physical or digital products and services), companies or companies holding

such goods can not get any shares. Other types of equity deposits are deposited. The name

suggests, in this case, the companies (investors) are the equity exchanges, so that the

shareholders of the companies and the future work together in the investment becomes such

an expected platform to return to such an attached platform and not only You will be able to

choose your initial investment, you will be able to see which transactions you have are

inviting per deal fees.(42)

1.12.8 Late Stage

Late-state companies generally show viability as a current concern and are usually a

well-known product with a strong market presence. Late-firms are generally reaching a

positive cash flow level and have started experimenting in the technical markets. There is a

great risk of investment in unrelated, initial stages and late phase companies. The famous

production has successfully penetrated into its early market and proceed and learn further.

Cash fashion can be positive and its product can be presented in the Tangail market. Investors

are demanding your locking because the company reserves the right in acquisition or initial

public offering. In the beginning of the life of a company, investments usually require a long

time and may lead to dangerous relationships by late limbs. Accurately capture risks related

to investment-related risks and returns, there is information about the status of life-breaks.(43)

42
https://startupxplore.com/en/blog/types-startup-investing/
43
https://microventures.com/early-stage-vs-late-stage

45
 1.12.9 Liquidation Stage

The priority of liquidity with potential investments during fund raising is an important

negotiation and your earnings can be significant in successful earnings. In order to

communicate well, the founders need to understand why investors need these terms and how

they behave in different exit scenarios.

While launching VC investment, they are betting. This situation can not be reduced by

them or startup can be Facebook or Google next. But what happens when the results are

small? Not a complete failure, but not a big success, especially, the VC will not get any

money back or less, any income in this transaction will be shared with the shareholders and

the movements of investors will be reduced. In order to optimize their outcomes in this low-

and-run situation, the investor will negotiate their preferred stock for vulnerability

preferences.(44)

44
https://tools.ltse.com/funding-your-startup-a-founders-guide-to-liquidation-preferences-e7db39469463

46
 LITERATURE REVIEW

Manocha Sanjay (2012) Innovation fulfils the ever changing needs of clients. It is

also important for longevity of a business. Completions have a positive impact on invocation.

Especially small businesses contribute in economy since it is directly associated with

community. In this study the objective is to focus on entrepreneurship and invocation while

examining the role of innovative entrepreneur in economy as well. It was descriptive a

research design which used data from secondary sources. Here the finding of the study was

that invocative entrepreneurship effects economy at three different levels i.e., aggregate level,

consumer level and firm level. It also indicates that increase in jobs new investments and

income comes under aggregate level. It consumer level, products were improvised though

innovation as per consumers need with low prices. And for competing with other company

innovation is to be need at firm level. Innovation is an important trait in entrepreneurial skills.

The least likely sources of innovation are from new knowledge bright ideas.

Gulati Kapil & Sharma Suniel (2013) India can be entrepreneurial nation because of

freedom of speech, high caliber, given capital, function of capital market and easy availability

of venture capitalist, the rebels‘ young generation, easy entry of global competitor in India,

lack of legacy technologies, unique market structure with consumers need and their

purchasing power. Excellent institutional infrastructure and dedication towards

entrepreneurship, science and technical education are majorly indicating the innovation.

The main focus of this study was on entrepreneurship and its growth in independent

India. Challenges faced by women entrepreneurs, Entrepreneurship & Advertising and

Entrepreneurship with small business. Social attitudes, lack of capital, inadequate physical

infrastructure and lack of government support are main elements of hindrance. Venture

capitalists and Angel Investors must be increased in India. Government must reduce

administrative burden more doors can be opened for entrepreneurship in India.

47
 Dubey Ritu (2014) before 1991 bureaucratic control had suppress the private

enterprises and created hurdles for establishing new entities. Bureaucratic control and

hurdles for new establishing firms has been removed through economic reform in 1991.

Government of India has support in this direction with largely focused on banking & finance

Industries to manufacturing sectors. In 2006, Government of India has established the

Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises with the aim is to provide financial,

infrastructural resources and training and tax benefits related supports. Cultural shift,

Disparity, foreign influence, lack of success stories, social entrepreneurship and funding.

Despite many challenges the entrepreneurial opportunities in India are sustained.

Al-Mubaraki & Busler (2015) Innovation play very crucial role as main drivers for

sustaining economic growth from practitioners perspectives such as Government, Policy

makers and funded foundation and academic Institution. Innovative indicators consists basic

research, applied research, development and commercialization with contributing

productivity improvements for economic benefits. Al-Mubaraki and Busler , Indicated that

Innovation programs will help the young firms especially in their early stage startup and

maintain the balance between economic, social ,organisational and political factors to define

the success of innovation system while contributing the development and practising new

technologies. This study focused on incubators programs in France, Spain, Netherland,

Luxemburg and Portugal. Author discovered the strengths of each program through SWOT

analysis in consideration of their missions and objectives with future possibilities and

performance of individual program.

Sharifi Omid, Hossein B K (2015) Small and Medium Scale financial Enterprises

have asset guarantee pattern where entrepreneur fails to pay the fees of various procedural

aspects such as guarantee fee, valuation fee, asset registration fee which is too high. If the

entrepreneurs try to fulfills the mortgage requirements which again consist several difficult

48
tedious processes. Moreover, the high risk, high cost, and limited profits make it more

difficult for small and medium enterprises to apply for a loan from the bank. The capital

market and other private financial institutions develop gradually in India. In this study main

financing resources of startup has highlighted as venture capitalist private and Government

with the different problem facing by a venture capitalist. The author finds the difficulties to

get finance and suggested that entrepreneur must do rigorous homework before pitching their

startup.

Thibault Adnot (2012) This study is about Project Management usages in startups.

According to this study three main points covered in Project Management. Its benefits to

Small & medium scale enterprises its application for startups. Author also studied the cases

of start up‘s representatives. SCRUM method is also been discussed for start up‘s strategy

formulation. Start up‘s should ―Balance the need for global consistency against the need for

local flexibility‖ (Baron & Hannan, 2002, pg.32). This study was an inductive and

interpretive in nature was conducted in Stockholm region.

Allen and Rahman (1985) have asserted that the Incubator facility play an important

role when a newly establish enterprises suffers from management problems, under

capitalization and lack of business expertise. The incubator assistance fulfills the knowledge

gap, reduces early-stage operational costs such as rent and service fees, and establishes

entrepreneurs in a local enterprise support network. They concluded that incubators provides

a sheltered environment and sound investment opportunities for local individuals and young

firms.

Birley (1985) argued that during the starting of a new firm, the entrepreneur requires

lots of resources apart from equipments, space, and money. The managerial support which is

received either by formal or informal networks. However, the entrepreneurs are usually

49
ignorant about the formal sources and it is important to awaken this community with such

sources and other type of sources for help as well.

Brooks (1986) describes that an incubator not only provides inexpensive space but

also provide a shared pool of services and professional and managerial assistance at a reduce

cost. It also provides access to or assistance in acquiring seed capital. Dunne, Roberts, and

Samuelson (1988) Supports that most of the new venture fails during their early stage of

development. Lumpkin and Ireland (1988) advised that most of the time entrepreneur succeed

in minimizing potential clients with Critical Success Factors. If they join incubator and get

benefited with management team, financial strength, Market and Personal factors.

Allen and Weinberg (1988) defined incubator success as a ratio expressed in the

following terms: Number of Firms Exiting the Incubator:: Number of Firms Discontinuing

Operations While Still a Tenant. Hisrich and Smilor (1988) showed how incubator supports

the development of new technology companies by helping them build credibility, shorten the

learning curve, solve problems faster, and by providing access to entrepreneurial networks.

Johannisson (1988) recommended that the Entrepreneurial success can be guaranteed by the

skill sets of developing personal network, sustaining them and to manage the enacted

environment. Allen (1988) stated that, there are three stages during the development of the

incubator: Start up, Business Development and Maturation these are the three stages include

real estate, managing tenant firms and sophisticated enterprise support network respectively.

Each stage has its own traits and for an incubator to succeed it should manage all its

challenges.

Scherer and McDonald (1988) observed that a common failure among small

technology based businesses is ―the underestimation of the time and resources required to

successfully commercialize the first product before moving on to the development of second-

generation products‖. A well managed incubator should be able to provide assistance in

50
balancing these two forces in a manner that does not strain the incubatees‘ resources while

regularly upgrading their competitiveness.

Flynn (1993) stated that in the earliest stages of development of a new firm,

sponsorship blocks out external environmental threats and is considered to be most effective,

but as the firm matures it benefits decreasingly from the buffering effects of sponsorship

since it must expose itself to the competitive and environmental factors. According to

Markley and McNamara (1994), there is no single formula for creating a successful business

incubator, but several elements like selection of a competent and dynamic manager, access to

business services and business assistance, availability of management consulting services,

flexibility in space, graduation and rental policies, and networking are important to success.

Markley and McNamara (1995) arrived at the conclusion that business incubators support

business survival and growth and generate jobs such that the cost of creating these jobs is

competitive with those costs associated with attracting manufacturing investment into a local

community.

Sherman (1999) examined the effectiveness of business incubation programs on

helping startup businesses to survive and to grow and summarized results with four

implications. The first is that incubator managers and sponsors need to reach consensus

regarding realistic outcomes their programs are trying to achieve. Second, business

incubation programs can be an important part, but only one part, of an overall entrepreneurial

development program. Third, sponsors need to recognize the importance of incubator

management to the success of the incubation program. Finally, incubation programs (as well

as all economic development programs) need to do a better job in explaining and in justifying

their programs. Lewis (2001) was of the view that new venture failure in a vast majority of

cases is due to lack of financing, weak management skills and poor understanding of market

51
needs and that business incubators can ensure the survival of graduate firms at a significantly

higher rate than general population of new ventures.

Cassim (2001) described business incubation as a means by which vision of new

businesses are turned into reality with reduced risks. Hellmann and Puri (2002) opined that

new firms need external finance for development and the typical sources of capital are

business angels, venture capital and public subsidies. Among them, venture capital firms are

very important as they contribute to the firm‘s development by covering their financial needs

as well as professionalizing organizational structure and managerial processes by supporting

companies to build their human resource and exercising control. Etzkowitz (2002) explained

Incubation as a triple helix model of university–industry–government relations and found that

a synergy among the university, industry, and the government achieved by the incubators

allows creation of a less costly development strategy.

Lofsten and Lindelof (2002) examined the added value of science parks to tenant

performance by employment growth, sales growth and profitability through an analysis of

273 firms on and off Science Parks in Sweden and found some differences between the

experience of firms in respect to innovation and marketing issues. The study concluded that

initiatives to promote New Technology Based Firms (NTBFs) on Science Parks will yield a

higher rate of job creation than policies to help NTBFs in general. Kakati (2003) revealed that

entrepreneur quality, resource-based capability and competitive strategy are the critical

determinants of a start-up‘s viability and achievement.

Harayama (2003) identified the incubator manager‘s capability and interpersonal

networking as the key determinant to the quality and performance of an incubator. Wiggins

and Gibson (2003) argued that the value added services becomes a vital differentiator

between successful and unsuccessful incubators. Moodley (2003) in a study of fashion

incubator revealed that the major problems encountered by the entrepreneurs were of

52
acquiring capital and machinery, marketing of the micro enterprise, renting of suitable

premises, non-payment by customers, acquiring of raw materials, building up a client base,

and lack of sufficient business skills and that there was a strong support for incubation and

majority of the incubates considered mentoring from the incubator system as invaluable in

the progress of their business. Wiggins and Gibson (2003) reported that since 1980, incubated

companies created more than 250,000 jobs which increased the tax base, occupied additional

commercial real estate space, contributed to the local business infrastructure, and lead to

additional job creation in other sectors.

Headd (2003) concluded that there are few traits that lead to a true business failure or

to a business that closes unsuccessfully. The result of their study suggested that potential

entrepreneurs, particularly those planning very small ventures, have less to fear than what is

commonly believed. Alistair (2003) put forth the view that in both the developed and

developing countries, many new ventures fail for the few that survive and grow and the

challenge is to transform the traditional ways of supporting small enterprises in order to make

them more cost effective for today's competitive environment. Lalkaka (2003) concurred with

the view that business incubator is one instrument to help tackle the obstacles faced by

entrepreneurs and counter the high start-up failure rate. Wilber and Dixon (2003) found that

business incubators, when adequately utilized, have attributed to managers and owners of

small businesses acquiring managerial skills that are necessary for survival in a competitive

environment.

Davidsson and Honig (2003) in their study found that bridging and bonding social

capital, consisting of both strong and weak ties, was a robust predictor for nascent

entrepreneurs, as well as for advancing through the start-up process. Delmar and Shane

(2003) recognized that business planning is an important precursor to action in new ventures

and reduces the likelihood of venture disbanding.

53
 Sung, Gibson and Kang (2003) emphasized the need to recognize the prevalence of

both linear and non-linear-based venture businesses and devise appropriate support policy for

these types of ventures. They suggested that incubators should pinpoint services to each

venture business and government should base their policy to support those services that the

venture businesses want and not on what government thinks is necessary for venture

businesses. Rouwmatt (2003) studied Estonian incubators in terms of their set-up and

operations, functions, income and sustainability and found that sub-critical size of incubators

was making sustainability more difficult, business models were unclear and incubators

provided only basic services to their clients. Wiggins and Gibson (2003) prescribed that

business incubators must accomplish five tasks well in order to succeed: (1) establish clear

matrices for success; (2) provide entrepreneurial leadership; (3) develop and deliver value

added services to member companies; (4) develop a rational new-company selection process;

and (5) ensure that member companies gain access to necessary human and financial

resources.

Remedios and Cornelius (2003) recommend that in order to develop a

comprehensive performance evaluation model of incubators, the performance of new

ventures entering and graduating from that incubator must be tracked. Von Zedtwitz (2003)

opined that by offering shared office services and equipment, business incubators at a

minimum level provide opportunities to reduce costs and to save time for entrepreneurs who

want to start their businesses immediately.Hannon (2005) was of the view that Incubators are

established and supported to reduce start-up and early stage operational costs, and the risk of

doing business by providing a protective environment for start-ups. Wynarczyk, P. and A.

Raine (2005) affirmed that Incubators do play an important role in nurturing business and

creating jobs and that the hands on support provided by the incubator and advisors are found

to be vital for firm survival especially in the early stages of the business.

54
 Bollingtoft and Ulhoi (2005) proposed that Business Incubators can be seen as

attempts to address market failures and the problem of a three-dimensional liability of

newness: one dimension related to administrative support; the second dimension related to

age and related lack of visibility on the market; and the third related to being on your own

versus being in a ‗community‘ of peers. They believed that networks can give entrepreneurs

the necessary legitimacy, skills and resources needed when launching a new venture and thus,

the ability to connect up to strategically important clusters of networks is a critical managerial

skill.

(Calopa & Horva,2015) identified ,what were the different sources which were

correlated to the different development stage of Croatian startup along with the preference of

financing source of Croatian entrepreneurs. Started with two hypothesis, first significant

relationship between the level of development of the company and mode of finance used and

second, significant relationship between professional experience of startup manager and their

financing preference. Three stages of development been highlighted of any startup by

Maurya(2012). The three phases are the Problem/Solution Fit, Product/Market Fit and Scale.

The primary sources of financing are as follows: loans, business angels, and venture capital

funds. In the stage of growth venture capitalist and loan means at the buyout stage, private

equity money plays main role. The Croatian start-up companies prefer conventional and

unofficial financial sources with stress on personal financing and financial support from

friends and family. After surviving the initial experimental phase, the entrepreneurs gain

enough daring to find financial assistance from other funding sources, such as business angels

and seed investments, although the stage of company development and the experience of

entrepreneurs are not necessary related with the financing modes. The study also helped to

describe the profile of start-up founders, financing patterns and the expansion stage of

Croatian start-ups.

55
 (Gavin Cassar,2004)The objective of this study to identifies the factors of capital

structure and types of financing used around business start-ups utilizing a survey that

decreases the perplexing effects of survivorship bias. In particular, the influence of start-up

size, asset structure, organization type, increase orientation, and owners‘ characteristics are

examined both in the choice and in the scale of finance use. The results are regular with the

hypothetical models incorporating issues, such as information transaction costs, asymmetries

and agency theory. The result also shows the linkages among providers of funds, maturity of

assets, and the capital configuration of start-ups. While the results provide insights into

business finances near the time of establishment, some recommendations for future research

also have discussed. There are several factors that are not capable to be controlled due to data

deficiencies."This study also cannot consider the role of personal collateral, varying interest

rates, or the owners‘ previous relationships with financiers. All of these factors influence the

demand and supply of outside financing (Storey, 1994; Cressy, 1996; Coleman, 1998)."

(Hildegard Schick, Sandra Marxen and Jürgen Freimann,2002) This study

represents the start-up processes which were developed to discover whether there are any

opportunities for implementing more sustainable business practices in early stage of business.

It was identified that Start-up entrepreneurs have to fulfil with a variety of external demands.

Business advisers, institutions, banks as well as market situation often hinder with the pursuit

of ecological business practices. Institutions that sustain start-ups never provide information

related to ecology. Consider Entrepreneur as crucial factor among both ecologically oriented

and traditional start-ups. The basic assumption of this study project is that new startup are

mostly initiate on new ideas, because they be short of an already existing organisational

culture; consequently, it should be easier to begin. The start-up processes of conservative and

of sustainability-oriented start-ups are analysed with the intention of determine how they

vary. It is also an aim of the study to recognize the triggers that direct to the execution of

56
more sustainable business practices in the new ‗green‘ business ventures. Some of the critical

issues facing new entrepreneurs are need of information., want to have focus on company

advisers, several start-up entrepreneurs are not completely awake of the possible market

opportunities, the role of society funding in promoting sustainable enterprises is often ignore.

(Andrew Atherton, 2010) This study posits different patterns of new venture

financing with its dynamisms through case study method to overcome the international

challenges of new venture. Study limits with small numbers of cases to identify the huge

divergence between over and undercapitalised startups. Many of the startups start with low

capitalization which reduces the chances of survival as financing deficit. The research starts

with debt-equity capitalisation (Verheul and Thurik,2001) indicates the initial financing

pressure leads an startup to bankruptcy which increase pressure when debt level is too high.

Debt-equity or pecking order affects financing patterns where losing control over business

decreases their interest to go for external sources like equity. New venture prefers retained

earnings to cover establishment costs rather than opting debt or equity in the starting period.

(Harisson et.al ,2004)proposed bootstrap financing is an another non formal source of

finance like credit card debt late payments, minimizing accounts receivable ,resource sharing

by which new venture secures "resources at no cost" . Informal debt and equity includes

founders own savings and funds of family, friends and relatives. Funding involves different

sources at a single stage which shows 'bundling' where bundles are bunch of two or more

financing source. Pecking order theory, preference of long term or short term debt is missing

in this study whereas experiential learning of the founder with its iterative uncertainty and

unpredictable dynamics come across.

(Nancy Huyghebert) studied to identify the various determinants and dynamics of

trade credit since startup has no established relationship with banks and suppliers at the

starting time risk of failure and constraints to finance are quite high. Usually suppliers can be

57
delayed for some period, industry or trade credit pops up as an important component of books

and consider as a major source of financing.(Perterson and Rajan,1997) and (Danielson and

Scott,2002) According to their studies firms hesitates into get bank credit thus they more rely

on trade credit.(Deloof and Jegers,1996) concluded that to deal with financial stretch firms

prefers payment transaction in intra group trading. (Nilsen,2002) find that during bank credit

period small firms goes for borrowing from their supplier whereas (Breig,1994) demonstrate

that developed market and firms fails on this ideology.

(Perterson and Rajan,1997) indicates that higher profit margins attracts higher level

of accounts receivables it is an another indirect type of source to get industry credit. Thus

results indicate that firms needs time to build relation with bank and suppliers. Those firms

who pay high rate of interest to bank credit, here suppliers have good opportunity where they

can enjoy credit interest by financing high risk startups. Firms whose inventory rotation are

high or majorly consists raw material are advantageous for suppliers. It has been concluded in

first ten year of their business cycle firms may rely on trade credit further high risk startup

need frequent replacement of raw material which can be a benefit for supplier and finally

transaction cost of paying bill can be controlled in trade credit system.

(Diana M. Hechavaria, Charles H. Matthew, Paul D. Reynolds 2015) This study

brings different entrepreneurial dynamics with the measurement of startup financing with

respect to time. This study starts with question that's why few entrepreneurs starts their

venture so fast, few shuts their venture so fast and why few accept their failures and still

hopeful to implement new firm. Startup speed calculation involves the time between

conceiving an idea and creating a venture. Event history helps study to analyse the

relationship between startup financial structure and time up outcomes. Risk regression

applied which same event occurs many times and similarly new events happens at a unit time

both risk regression (Cox 1972)

58
 (Fine and Gray 1999) indicates towards the faster or slower decision making

capacity. Moral hazards which indicates the different value for founder and investor and

adverse selection problem arises when founder has more information than the investor. Both

of these moral hazard and adverse selection the basis of pecking order and agency theory

could be the factor to trigger the speed of startup. This study includes independent variables

as startup team size, founder's growth aspiration, business planning, financial projections,

Innovativeness. It presents that external equity is inversely proportional to the ownership

shares and external equity doesn't accelerates time to quitting whereas internal funds helps

entrepreneurs to keep on trying which is somewhere again increase the percentage of

ownership. This theory benefited to pecking order theory and firm performance in the nascent

context.

(Smeltzer, Larry R.; Van Hook, Barry L.; Hutt, Roger W, 2015) This research

project is a step towards understanding the use of consultants during startup. Both theoretical

and implied effect in the results are the first group of research questions related to network

relations. There is an important elemental effect in the results of this sector because the

number of weaker connections increases, the amount of information received increases.

However, the quality of the information received is not very important with the strength of

the relationship. This means that the relatively unknown advisor (weak linkage) is more

important than the quantity of information but not the quality. There are two frequently used

resource accountants and lawyers, these two sources are generally considered to be the

necessary advisors to establish a new project. However, both sources can be understood as a

weak relationship. It is possible that entrepreneurs are getting information that is considered

as a standard of information, but not of quality, from accountants and lawyers.

59
 As with most research designs, it is important to know about results while concluding

results. The main limitations of this study are related to the various approaches used by the

respondents by answering the questions.

(Amit Paradkar, John Knight , Paul Hansen, 2015) tested 12 startup studies located

in New Zealand which conclude in identifying entrepreneurship in the early stages of the

development of a small independent economy. We are dependent on the successful

commercialization availability of innovative supplemental assets and capacity-based tools,

especially dynamic capacities, other tangents and early benefits compared to tangible assets

have more impact on competitive advantage. In order to successfully search innovations,

entrepreneurship needs significant resources for many initial resources in the beginning of

development. Important to choose from inside Fainam is a significant potential for these

resources and ways and competitive advantage in start-ups is an important and decisive one.

Our findings of study. First, the second complementary asset innovations depend on the

commercialization of initials, the initial capabilities of the source, particularly the utilization

of their dynamic capabilities, the other is not touching and competitive advantage compared

to tangible assets. Entrepreneurs should initially focus their efforts on developing and holding

such intangible assets and capabilities. Our studies initially demonstrated the ability to

retrieve the local, but their growth prospects were limited, what had to be fought

internationally?

In (Anu Wadhwa,Corey Phelps, Suresh Kotha,2015 ) study, the idea that we are the

owner of reach there depends on the drawing and depth of the knowledge and the content of

which is based on the content of innovative Faimitr portfolio diversity on our basic

assumptions that the portfolio of portfolio diversification has a reverse U-shaped effect, if

initially the new dimension Increasingly, it is worthwhile for new innovations, but eventually,

beyond negative, was negative. Instead of researching in future our results in this study

60
suggests some interesting opportunities which is a comprehensive set of formal and informal

external relationships that can include an Aitim, investing only in corporate venture capital.

Our best corporate venture capital distance was inspired by investing research, which can be

found in the significant differences between the alliance and M and between the MNC and

the corporate venture capital are different from some methodological benefits provided by the

corporate venture capital investment corporate venture capital investment and other external

knowledge-based initiatives, which are how to combine the contextual portfolios of type

interface Post-Navinulans innovations together adds Fireman its portfolio portfolio Nurse,

capacity and other characteristics may influence the performance of the (Lark, 2007).

Secondly, even if we show portfolios does not mean that the innovative variety of

investors, the failure of new results will be used as the investment strategy for future failure

of corporate venture capital and show success of corporate venture capital investment, non-

production knowledge, investment strategy.

(Joachim Wagner, 2007) As far as we know nothing about the entrepreneur who

came to New Year ten years ago, the majority of the projects are related to the World

Entrepreneurship Monitor (Gems) Group, thanks in association with the researcher, Now

sharing our innovative entrepreneurship but reliable information is the population of a large

number of countries; Due to the spacing and time differences in this stock, it is considered

less. In addition to this, we know something true about sub-groups about innovative

entrepreneurial promotions. Those who are new entrepreneurs and have less knowledge about

the time of activity. There is no lack of comparability during the many experimental studies

of any conclusion in different countries: It has been impossible to make it failless because of

crossing the border between related and youth entrepreneurship, it takes the border between

right and attractive entrepreneurship to keep the same conclusions. Artistic fact researchers,

policy makers can be reached by researchers for comparative and pre-learning reproduction

61
and expansion in the country, based on many studies results using large, comprehensive,

longitudinal data chairs, which can be reduced by entrepreneurship and past, but at least,

more valuable to new entrepreneurs. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and Panel

Study of Entrepreneurial dynamics (PSED) and these data collected data are important steps

for this purpose.

(Supradeep Dutta ,Timothy B. Folta, 2015) study contributed that there should be

an active enagement of research department to evaluate the difference between angels and

venture capitalists. In order to reduce the issues surrounding the moral hazard to study the

investment structure and venture capitalism and information intermediary, administration,

and assimetric information with Venture Capitalist contributes and the role of financial role

to study. The result shows that the early-stage activities of the Angel Group and date

innovation rate speed provide a similar result, the previous research in Capitalist is just

Venture Capitalist.

However, our results show that Enterprise Group Venture Capitalist is quite high

when results of successful commercialization through innovation or efficiency are

significantly higher. Theoretical arguments and experimental findings contribute to your

understanding of the results of our app options and complement various sources of private

equity. Furthermore, there are important sample implications, entrepreneurs, private equity

investors and policy-making conclusions to focus more on traditional activities of Capitalists.

Entrepreneurs have to face the significant expenditure of private equity investment demand,

and it is important to understand how adding value to various private equity investors by

striving to capitalize beyond capital education.

(Atul Mishra, 2005 ) contributed by ending all the debates between development

economists as he concluded that the establishment of micro and small enterprises in the rural

non-agricultural economy is the reason. Many debates have arisen between development

62
economists since the establishment of micro and small enterprises in the rural non-

agricultural economy, but because of the reasons behind pushing it, it is impossible to

discontinue sexual intercourse due to the reason of the push, the inability of agriculture, the

growth of other non-agriculturally high values, even if the reasons for push are , Then

identify the macro component Ye these two opposite factors that can be helpful, it is

recognizable for the micro and small entrepreneurs in rural non-farm economy and the

existence mayakrona factor. Through this study, it is understood that it is possible to build

inspiration in a rich category to understand the beginning and existence of micro and small

entrepreneurs in rural non-agriculture.

This is especially so because of the different entrepreneurial reasons, those problems

are different. Data is collected according to a survey conducted by the micro and small scale

industries in a variety of artificial forms. The study uses a cross-departmental survey for new,

failed and potential entrepreneurs. Use factor factor to reduce the number of variables.

Similarly, entrepreneurial motives for different industries in rural areas are different. Take

only a few hands-on hands, because it is a family tradition that has led to the misuse of

agriculture for other people because of their economic opportunities. The same limitations

divide the infrastructure and credit limitations naturally.

(Andy Ley, 2011) Over the past decade, the number of venture capital companies in

the capital market and financing of entrepreneur capital markets across the world has

increased in both. In spite of this there is a growing trend in the fact that 'Fencing gap' is in

the beginning of the new firm development initiatives. This study is a preliminary inquiry of

crowd-hunting, it is known that for this start-up equity-financing event, what is the available

capitalized pool for new (pre-commercial) enterprises that can be used properly? An agency's

principle approach is used to identify agency-contract machinery for emerging bank

accounting model. While looking at a pragmatic approach to the investment process,

63
investors provide a proper lens to accept the possibility of crowdfunding in the initial stages

of the venture capitalists' retention of the dynamics of the agency related to investors. This

information can be useful for investments of venture capitalists or other stakeholders in the

context of the cost and control of pre and post-agency agencies. By doing this, Facebook

bookbug can provide access to social embedded capital that is not usually available for many

entrepreneurs.

However, the use of crowdfunding access to capital is the subject of restrictions set by

the use, thus providing a new bridge for the cap and facilities can be used to help finance

finances break the equity financing. Market participants represent only one shareholder in the

initial funding of capitalists. Therefore, it is recommended to inform informal providers of

initial finance and explanation and exploration of entrepreneur ideas and the Futing model

rush.

(Karish Manchanda,Pushkala Muralidharan, 2014) This is a new trend relatively

comparable in alternative financing, which is intended to examine the concept of founding

the package, it can be described in crowd-futures and its advantages and disadvantages with

the main focus on equity fashioning investment as it is to work on the principle analysis of

material. In addition, because of the financial crisis, increasing the doubts and doubts of the

financial crisis may be dependent on the capital industry of equity crowd-funding, we have a

theoretical argument in which both of these financing techniques - venture capital and equity

crowdfunding can go together with each other to congratulate the conclusion of this finding.

Explain the concept of a crowd-funding concept with a focus on equity freedering We have

also been interested in the relationship that we have also tried to further with the relationship,

which can be shared between VC and Equity crowdfunding, in light of the above reasons,

we believe that the industry does not have a refund for increased growth in equity

fasebooking. In order to gain access to Venture Capitalist are best dealer, it is easy to learn

64
about any opportunity for them, the internet-based financial platform, which makes them

wrong and both go to the industry.

(Troy A. Voelker, Robert McGlashan, 2013) Crowdfunding has emerged as a

unique method for small and small businesses to avoid any shortfall in capital-related

acquisition. Kickstered has emerged as a major platform for crowdfunding, available for $

50,000 in capital, for $ 688 million. Using a kickstarter as a foundation of this paper, it

checks the crowd-funding incident. We have to identify a kickstart storm for future business

owners, small business owners, researchers and teachers. We also have a view to integrating

kickstarters into entrepreneurship courses. Eventually, the crowdfunding movement adds a

new element in the typical capital search. In the current media, these products and pre-sale of

benefits have been emphasized, but once the Jobs Act can not be fully implemented, then

crowd-funding can also open the door for a more traditional capital sourcing. For coaches,

students and small business and entrepreneurship researchers, the Parliament Sourcing

Movement is a recent prize.

A table of opportunities, reveals itself to the researchers and teachers, with both the

kickstarters and the mobilization movement, if the researchers and teachers lack the data for

small business, then the transparency of the kickstarters has been reversed. A simple survey

of projects, both the present and the past, thousands of small business expectations and the

scope of dreams. Some of these existing businesses have expanded their business volume,

other optimistic startups, projects and institutions details, information money and small

business access to the success and failure of the project fund. Although there are many search

guidelines available, two are more clear and necessary.

(Uschi Backes-Gellner Arndt Werner, 2007) Contrary to traditional beginnings,

innovative startups and their respective market participants, there is a serious problem of

asymmetric information due to pre-production history and lack of reputation. Here, we can

65
help by the study of entrepreneurship notation education and innovative entrepreneurs

suggest their potential to banks and potential employees. We propose that the quality of

innovative entrepreneurs marks their merits. In particular, we hope to use an innovative

startup to accept the degree of an entrepreneur's university when the job or prospective

employee decides the quality signal, and we mean in connection with a more accurate

indicator study of banks, which means that a standard installer is making an indication of the

actual length when deciding to raise the credit Expect to be used, as opposed to standard new

companies in the traditional field We do not expect that asbestos deal with problems like this,

so banks do not expect that banks get the same signal from employees. Students were put out

jointly, many of whom had the goal of making new stalls on the glamorous innovative start-

up-skit.

However, experiential results reflect traditional educational footprints and values, such

as completing one's education and one at a time, are also important for innovative markets in

comparative markets, where credible quality indicators are available.

(Ingram, Amy E; Hechavarria, Diana M; Matthews, Charles H, 2014) This study

looks at how the new entrepreneur influences the value of money and money by human,

social and cultural princesses. From the second panel of entrepreneurship dynamics before

enterprise data entry, the sole proprietary initial group is used to check the source of various

funding used in the relationships of human, social and cultural capital. Conclusions show that

cultural capital is an important element in getting money from human or social capital. This

study shows the importance of an innovative entrepreneur's human capital, social capital and

cultural capital goods, and to what extent this resource is only for the owner to unify and

distance between the new initiatives in the initial stage financial. It also posits that CC's stock

will affect the amount of money from individual funds and one The only ownership

inequality is inequality Supported debt. Similarly, testimony also indicates that the stock of

66
scheduled caste people will have a positive effect on money problems from family and

friends. Finally, the data also provides evidence that HC stock has a positive effect on debt

from credit card debt, individual bank loans, and other sources of sole ownership. Therefore,

the retrospective role of data includes endowments of capital resources and confirms that the

new enterprise will be involved in the manufacturing process.

(Hamilton, Robert T; Fox, Mark A, 2016) The total demand of small companies

counterpart but raw meanings will always be able to raise its funds to banks and other

institutions and which will not be eligible for monetary funding to demand a reduction in the

form of grant. The difference in the supply of money, especially the institutional capital, last

local research (Coopers and Lybrand, 1993), while the supply of funds is instead pointing to

the small firm owner's market attributes the most failures in the market. The owners have

been described as inability to understand the capital (debt versus equity) adequacy form and

to meet the unrealistic expectations of new equity , so this is the result of the restrictions of

the election which are meant to increase the debt burden. We used our research objectives

and methods of study.

The profile is a sample of the small companies used in the study. Instead of starting

and running funding priorities, discussions may be made to finance the financial needs of

small companies that look at the discussion, making business owners decide for financial

decision-making. Regarding the need for the financier's finances, it is of the view that without

explaining the financial finances or the space, without explaining the small financial financial

structures, no one can argue that small companies will be a part of the consequence of any

clear difference rather than the priority of the owners.

(Zacharakis, Andrew L; Meyer, G Dale; DeCastro, Julio, 2016) Using the

Attribution Principle approach, this study examines new business objectives from both point

of view of entrepreneur and enterprise capital. According to the attribution principle,

67
entrepreneurs are thinking that their business is failing due to internal reasons. It is important

and important to address the failure of entrepreneurs to address the problems associated with

entrepreneurs and new initiatives by VC. However, the question is whether laboratory

research is possible or not, once venture fails, it is difficult to find many secondary sources of

data for the most privately organized companies. It is difficult to contact the entrepreneurs

despite being an entrepreneur and may participate in the pain of failure. The question is how

to overcome this obstacle, clearly, our inter-visuals help organize properly, but anonymous

and confidential surveys can reduce the "halo effect". The interview can be biased, interesting

part of this study is the inconsistency between entrepreneurs and VCs Overall, this study

highlights the dangers of wrong attributes. Incorrect evaluation of entrepreneurs, wrong

credentials in entrepreneur companies will fail. Hope this study will create a high level of

awareness about this loss.

(E. Holly Buttner ; Benson Rosen, 1989) In recent years, the number of big

companies is increasing for women to start their own business. However, they were not

successful at the same rate as their men's counterpart. There is a potential hurdle for potential

new business startup capital. Ignoring the female evidence indicates that your business is

starting a debt decision, this study is systematically examining women entrepreneurs accused

banks counteroffers, is likely to pay an official loan and in similar situations for male

entrepreneurs, there is a big counter for male entrepreneurs. One of these findings is that

women need to find an opportunity to meet the loan officers to present their professional

proposals to women. In reciprocity, women get the opportunity to answer questions of

motivation and ability. On the other hand, if the banker rely solely on information on

business plan, then make more punishable decisions, where the maximum weight of financial

considerations is ultimately, the result shows that students are generally limited in courses

studying as a proxy for bank loan officers.

68
 (Frederick C. Scherr Timothy F. Sugrue Janice B. M, 1993) Capital research

capitalization of large companies is abundant in financial literature, small companies are not

short-lived, and the initial structure of start-up is not nearly the same. In the same letter, we

present empirical evidence about the start-up capital structures of small companies. The

percentage of this check we have on our boss and the hopeful company expects you to use

positive loans from the income of the employer and the age of the owner is related to the use

of negative loan. You find that if the owner of the business is married, if he receives a

maximum loan, and that is black, then it is less. Likewise, more loans are available between

the traffic and utility's start-up companies compared to other industries. When loans other

than financial institutions are taken, then factors like gender, experience, education and

expectation of firm size have to be played in the initial capital.

(Manuchehr Shahrokhi Craig, 2014) During the last decade, the development and

development of e-finance is incomparable. To implement Internet technologies around the

world and develop key control measures such as electronic signature and cross-border

contacts in e-commerce and development. Financial Services Industry Information

Technology is an e-business e-finance sector connected to each other through an initial

adapter. E-business development in the financial services industry is slow due to inter-

organizational relationships, rules, security concerns, standards reduction and the complexity

of loyalist principles.

E-Finance creates new business models and processes and demands new patterns and

software so that funds will be clearly available as a service center within the organization.

The advantages of e-finance are many and include: Decreasing transaction processing costs,

expansion of account management and financing instructions, enhancing finance department

suggestions and improving the quality of financial information. However, to understand what

these benefits are, financial professionals must focus on the new technology and allocate

69
them, the traditional accounting mindset and the skill set restoring, focusing on the process

change initiatives and value-added in the organization focus on providing services. Besides,

they need to understand and implement the concrete understanding of the technical platform.

(W. David Allen, 2009) There are companies with the new technology's high

technology initiatives required for the development and development of modern technology.

The entrepreneurs of such companies have often demanded external capital to explore and

develop external capital, to increase production or to increase product offerings and service

offerings. Enterprise capital is a well-known source, but in order to attract investment types,

entrepreneurs (and any other existing owners should give up financially) should capitalize on

how much equity your enterprise is to protect? To inspect the key points in the negotiation of

entrepreneurs and investors, we developed a stable financial model of a private private equity

market, which emphasized on resource acquisition as an essential entrepreneurial motivation.

This model enables a strict concept of balance value after it left The comparative-stable

analysis of value labor has been analyzed that this sh Important factors for investing in the

investor-entrepreneur relationship include: Investors' expenditures, entrepreneurial profits,

entrepreneurial production and initial entrepreneurial assets. It also shows in the model that

they are directly and indirectly restricted at the financing level, and overall the equity-

financing process provides a formal conceptual setting for future experiential research.

(Bindiya Kunal Soni, P. K. Priyan,2013) To explore funding preferences of Gujarat

entrepreneurs. In the early stages of enterprise development, these entrepreneurs inform that

family and friends used personal savings and money. In the initial years, they have practiced

bootstrap very well. Financial difficulties such as awareness awakening from outside such

entrepreneurs and adventure funds have not been found to be low in many cases. In order to

strengthen the role of initial incubation centers, the funding and support mechanism in

Gujarat has come up with a variety of study phases to address the various tips for organizing

70
capital base business planning competition and risk (equity) entrepreneurship, awareness of

these types of educational, research institutes and incubation centers, expatriate to raise more

partners Starting through / running the VC's financial venture The immediate need is to

increase the awareness and sense the economic literacy. To increase the number of business

incubation and entrepreneurship opportunities in various policy options to check the

significant amounts of need. Entrepreneurs can capitalize on the entrepreneurship of banks as

a large business opportunity. Many of the entrepreneurs will think financially and sources

that they have made the bank's attitude towards financial expansion in the future.

(Soniya Billore, 2011) In this study, the ability of Indian immigrants to compete with

their experience and challenges faced by those seeking independence and perseverance

abroad. In Japan, Indian foreign women are strong and have a very strong view of their life.

An analysis of case studies shows that even though these educated females reached Japan

with their husbands, including their husbands, they were able to tell their image from time to

time, used to use their talents and diversify their different roles with sacred moral duty. They

have not only succeeded in making a mark for themselves but also have created employment

opportunities for them from the native and abroad. Improvement in their relationship between

Native Client, Employee and Supplier means that they should also be an important source of

financial resurgence and generally have a strong motivation factor for the population. There

have been some difficulties in all three - i.e, a neutral behavior of Japanese, racial prejudice,

sex speech and Japanese government and support agency. Cultural optimism, racism, fear of

foreign people in the local community can be entrenched in the spirit of entrepreneur.

On the other hand, problems arising out of prejudices based on religion or gender were

absent. There was a high expectation of discovery of new opportunities, high capacity of skill

and fear of failure. As business expansion, there has been a high increase in the revenue

received from trade and private funding. An interesting aspect is that the lenders succeed in

71
their enterprises without making any major changes to their marketing policies. Not only this,

the number of employees and the number of employees of the organization and the external

business agency are also associated with them.

(John Freeman Jerome S. Engel, 2007) This type of venture capitalist helps

entrepreneur to study focus on focusing on show that promotes an important role in the value

of the venture because they are rapidly developing an innovative process and reflecting the

equality building expenses. This transition is another aspect of the equity structure, which is

attracting much attention from the young company who is understanding the main interest of

business entrepreneur community is a fun free service that is good for business entrepreneurs.

In this kind of meditation, others are imitating the introduction and are competing with the

existing adult companies. Less competition faster than competitive rivals. Another interesting

paradox of this model is that the success of the business is often better than replacing the

experienced top managers.

This is the result of increasing the complexity of structural and business process

complexes. More advanced skills are required for managerial work and they develop over

time. When Twenty-Two Thousand Workers Two Thousand companies may be unable to

manage twenty-two employees when the employee is unable to manage the company, when

the entrepreneur capable of managing a company is leading the probability of succession. In

the end, these processes of development include making changes to the company itself. When

such companies succeed, they themselves turn into companies. Professional systems,

organizational designs and highly trained managers, who create an organization designed to

run them efficiently. Enhanced enterprise scalability and enhancing competition enhances

this efficiency.

72
 (A Vinay Kumar, Mohinder N Kaura, 2003) Indian venture capital industry is one

of the major players in South Asian countries. The new fund has opened its shops and

continues to provide more funds. India has a sea change in the focused industry, so there is

not a country with a low cost production base, but not a high tech and global outsourcing

center.In the current study there are four factors that are kept by the enterprise entrepreneurs

on the screen of the new enterprise. Using Kendall's study analysis, this study has brought

strong support among many variable pairs. Detailed analysis shows that,They are alert when

they are involved in the details.Successful enterprise groups have always tried to target target

markets.These teams are special in dealing with the risks of their past experience.Indian

venture capitalists do not like tech-savvy activities; Some of the least financing ventures do

not show signs of having high technology. The ability to evaluate and respond to Risk,

earnings, Market share, Examine details. Risk identification is the area where the failed

enterprises fail. The successful team focuses on the established markets and carefully markets

market markets to get market shares, they get the expected return.Future research can detect

screening and evaluation processes by examining other techniques such as qualitative

techniques and techniques with cognitive technology.

Entrepreneurship aspect of introspection of venture capitalists will be an interesting

part of study. Unless we are further researched in the cognitive process of venture capitalists'

decision, our perception will be incomplete.

(Rafiq Dossani, 2012) Allowing the development of enterprise to allow

environmental development and start to change the environment of the development of us as

well as other organizations and co-operatives. In India, the courage still remains a difficult

environment. Even in 2001 the Indian government was bureaucratic and highly controlled.

The activities need to be further stimulated to stimulate the growth of capital, and it is likely

that the government will continue its efforts in promoting and encouraging investment

73
investment. The role of the government can not be avoided: It is, it is necessary to know the

legal and currency exchange policies, because many activities are financially due to the effect

of courage and companies. If you manage the high-risk financial institution managers

organized by the public capital, the venture capital will need to create a mechanism to reduce

risk risk. India is an example that how much useful action can be in the National System F

innovation is the perfect environment resources and long-term consequences.

The final decision of adventure industry fate was not taken until the end of 2001.

During the boom 'period rapidly grew during 2000's early global internet funded adventure,

even when its current growth does not guarantee. In the first period in February 2000, when

the first period in February 2000 will not provide resources for the creation of new

companies, investment in the terms of venture capital funding will be deleted from the

capitalist industry and less efficient competitors. The entire firm of both the firm and the

industry will be tested critically.

(Anuradha Basu and Simon C. Parker, 2001) This paper has tried to fill the gap

between knowledge and expansion of nature in our business. A simple two agent

optimization model was developed to understand the financial objectives of the family, and

the South Asian used, the introduction of participating determinants that were a unique data

to the origins of British entrepreneurship, and the family had been recognized financially. For

the purpose of explaining the involvement of family, financial consequences, selfish and self-

interest group members of Prarthwad, who had been found to be eligible to participate in the

funding required by the participants. In addition, the major explanation was the age-old, the

number of working hours in the early days, other sources of financial, the use of Asian groups

within the ethnic group, industrial area, and labor-intensive industry use. Banks have had

some steps that can find the rest of the theoretical model of future research that has no

evidence of setting up our data debt to inspire the family credit grant. In this uncertainty, the

74
deal can take place only with the family's information; Many family borrows looking for

problem; And to provide a home loan relative to a debt deal in practice, it would be useful to

know more about the right borrower's family Heshvier called for the members of the group

'Desire to return home' to investigate moral hazard impact and finance.

(Prema Basargekar, 2010) Social capital formation and usage are considered to be

emerging devices Development program is important as an important link to physical change

Analyze the meaning of capital paper with social mediation of small amounts And social

capital and efforts with specific references to minority programs To measure the effect of

women's empowerment with the help of laboratory Check - The result is based on the

primary data received from 217 women self-help. Groups of self help were organized using

random sampling method From Forbes Marshal Company Limited, a leading production

company in Pune, India, as an initiative of Corporate Social Responsibility in Maharashtra,

India A lecture scale Self help group members are used to change the assumption

Microphones program has established relationships with 15 lives in your life Creating

awareness, raising capacity and active and collective criteria Participate in social and political

life to bring the desired change. The conclusion is that microfinance programs have been

implemented in the organization, the social capital on Self help group members has a strong

influence. Paper It has been found that social capital formation is not an automatic result

Especially for the purpose of nurturing and rearing organizations by implementing them

Capacity building program policies, developing decision-making capabilities.

(I. M. Pandey 2012) This study examines the development process of venture capital

in India's developing country. India's Venture Capital Concept of Venture Capital Fund

Technology Development and Information Company of India (TDICI) was developed and

signed in India. The history of the capital of a modern industry in India has a recent income;

It returns from the mid-1980s. In the early years, Venture Capital Firms (VCFs) in India find

75
it very difficult to develop their business. In Teideisiai deep case studies, learning that this

tool is also such a business, and found an initial interruption to learning experience. There is a

problem collecting money and evaluating potential initiatives. High technology was focused

on investing in the business, but gradually focused on only the second potential high-

endeavor and high-end high-tech firms. It was also noted that TIDCI had made several

commercial development initiatives to make Venture Capital popular in India. For faster

decision-making facilities, a simple organizational structure has been created and new

financial and financial procedures have been prepared.

(Lina Sonne, 2015) It discusses financial alternatives intiatives in newspapers that it

is the establishment of an innovative ecosystem for overall innovation and social

entrepreneurship. The only innovation of social entrepreneurs is growing in India. However,

these businesses are suffering from lack of finance because the banks are capable in the

system and regional macrophones are real or funded. However, recent financial initiatives

have been taken to overcome this gap. It specifically underlines two tools that are used in

traditional innovation support: business support and business capital. In this article we

highlight many types of financial institutions with banking system, which is from this

widespread use of various resources to integrate innovations and social entrepreneurs in

India. In particular, two types of innovation have been supported: Keep a commercial

vaccination and a subtle provincial capital. The Villgro design can provide financial support

for non-financial assistance, such as a prototype and test in the incubator, as a market

research, and collect viable business plans, receives extra financing.

Innovation is a subtle actor of capital organization, who invests in more force and

sometimes predicts those businesses which are essential for the most important financial

assistance and non-financial assistance with little hands. In the current invention, non-

76
financial help is to make the business more efficient and to make it more attractive for the

next round of financial assistance from external finanaciers.

(Frederick C. Scherr Timothy F. Sugrue Janice B.Ward, 1993) Although the

academic research is rich in the capital structure financial products of large companies, the

original capital structure of small business studies is somewhat smaller and it is investigated.

In this list, we have presented experimental evidence for emerging capital formation of small

companies. This is based on the investigation owner and firm features. We know the

percentage of goods revenue that can be obtained from the company as the credit union's age

and the age of the owner is linked to negative negative usage. We found that if the maximum

loan is received, the business owner is married and is black, then the decrease. Similarly,

there is more credit in the traffic and public services sector than in other industries. If the loan

is drawn from other financial institutions, there is also a part of the structure for the reasons

such as gender, experience, education and the size of the occupation expected.

(Julia Rouse, Dilani Jayawarna, 2010) Workers in the labor market are encouraged

to start business at the international level. This strategy is based on the concept of rapid social

involvement. In this letter, we define the 'enterprise innovation' strategy that results in

situations that help a deprived person to start a viable business in a business and overcome

strong obstacles in the enterprise. We try to attract a resource-oriented approach that entails

viable business ownership resources. We ignore social factors related initial

vittasanstheparyanta pravesayogyatasi primary business resources, we have the social

integration theory, as it gives a complex pattern of reported economic boycott as logic, so far,

according to the various social sector based mutual-related concepts, this business

vittapuravathyatuna skip the class-based paraphrased Eca support. New research and policy

has been underlined on the topic.

77
 (Antonio Davila, George Foster, Ning Jia, 2010) The following main ideas in this

article are concluded: Sometimes the development of a company, somewhere between 50 to

100 employees, requires the management style to change from the personal management

style, which is the beginning of early-start-up entrepreneur companies that have become more

professional style. Some companies and their CEO are unable to make these changes and

entrepreneurs fail to call crisis. Combining management infrastructure is related to high

growth and shortcomings of CEOs. The presence of professional investors (as venture

capitalism) has been linked to high growth because these investors have invested in the

interest for development and if the entrepreneur is unable to change the nature of the

manager, then the chief executive may cause the transit. These systems are actively accepted

when the management team promotes the boundaries of the organizational management style

when related management management or adverse reactions to bad results or errors have

been made. These systems have many roles that can provide them with adequate management

facilities. Finally, the special needs of the adoption index company are contingent.

(Lars Hornuf, Armin Schwienbacher, 2015) The Internet-based contraceptive

market in Europe has evolved since the beginning of 2007 and has become an alternative

source for small investors to finance the sale of securities through internet. There are a variety

of platform designs and converter formats used by this FordInvesting platform in this market.

By analyzing the more detailed, hand-collected data of successful and unsuccessful

demographic campaigns operating in Germany, this article examines how different platforms

and methods of contracting affect physical partnership. The results show that when the

minimum ticket size is small, the crowd participation is large, the crowd gathers in a financial

vehicle and the crowd offers to invest in profitable loans. In addition, many systems achieve

successful campaigns and increase the chances of a large increase.

78
 (Gary J. Castrogiovanni, 2010 )Although explored and often contradictory, it is

advisable for prospective business executives to develop a formal plan of the proposed

business in general. According to this advice, some scholars have suggested that the pre-start

plan could reduce the mortality of new small businesses. However, there is an emerging

opinion that the value of employment is context-dependent. This view has been expanded

here because it applies to new small businesses. Firstly, the pre-startup plan which may be

able to facilitate may be limited, relevant references are given. Finally, instructions have been

given that show how to use in the future to increase the body of research and knowledge.

(Christian Korunka, Hermann Frank, Manfred Lueger, Josef Mugler, 2003)The

purpose of this interdisciplinary analysis is to analyze entrepreneurship personality in terms

of configurable perspectives based on resources, environment and start-up process. A study

focusing on the startup process has developed a questionnaire to measure the configuration

part of personality, personal resources, environment and organizational events. 1,169 new

entrepreneurs and new business owners - samples of manager representatives were examined.

Three startup configurations have been found that reveal different types of personality

features. These patterns are defined in terms of environmental, resources and aspects of the

initial process.

(Atul Teckchandani, David Obstfeld, 2016 ) This article focuses on podcast's

educational quality and discusses the use of podcasts in the classroom: the radio reporter who

wins the initial startup podcast business trip. The podcast episode can be used to engage

students and improve their ability to develop concepts in entrepreneurship, human resources,

leadership, and organizational behavior. In order to facilitate its use in the classroom, a

particular way in which a podcast can be used in a classmate. If startup is used in the

entrepreneur curriculum, we recommend using a guest speaker or two starting with a chance

to ask students the opportunity to ask questions and to watch independently.Ultimately,

79
getting involved in the training is an early initiative In their classes, students are motivated to

think deeply about entrepreneurship, organizational behavior and leadership.

(Craig E. Armstrong, 2007)Entrepreneurial skills are the ability to assess whether

entrepreneurial education is growing rapidly, a skill that requires students to develop business

skills, whether they have a market for their new product or service or not. How "Ash

Maurya‘s Running Lean and Eric Ries‘s Lean Startup" got absorbed in the recognition of

recognized education to determine exactly what it is supposed to do, how to work in the

recent popular business books such as startup and ash. It allows business build students to go

through the exercise MBA candidates in your high experiential classroom allows you to go

through on a ree-shaped-full "education framework cycle. This practice is a five-section

retailing center for individual customers, value-consuming canvas, a map, a minimum viable

product use And the five models are running, the session can be completed. Students

"Slender Runs," A. C Learn how to determine the market for new products or services and

how they later introduce these skills to new projects or established companies.

(Fred Block, 2013) In financial considerations, financial institutions are not preferred,

but if any policy of bringing contemporary economies under democratic control is the finance

department's democracy center. This letter is an attempt to conceptualize a series of practical

improvements, which can weaken the financial resources of financial institutions as financial

financial institutions and financially viable financially. While paying attention to the

American economy, certain ideas are relevant in other national contexts. The main purpose of

reforming ideas is to promote governmental and governmental aggregation of entrepreneurs

to create a network that is expanding non-governmental organizations, which is to mislead

the development of clean energy, small and medium enterprises, and infrastructure. Will do

it.

80
 (Francesca Di Pietro, Andrea Prencipe, Ann Majchrzak, 2017) Creating an

investor network during an equity-based Facebook base campaign can contribute to the

success of the startup firm. A qualitative study of 60 European startups, input type provided

by equity investors, performance rush identifies the startup and founder features and start-up

usage of the network after start-up, after two years through this article, who do not take

advantage of the rush against the start, or the possibility of production, rush to succeed Get

market or market knowledge. It increases the existing research on the apparent transformation

and start-up relationships by gathering conclusions and the input provided by the success

related to the success of the equity investor after the crowd invested on the transformed

platform.

(Tobias Weiblen, Henry W. Chesbrough, 2015 )When fast, when big companies

start out early, big companies sit on resources, startups can only dream. The combination of

entrepreneur activity with corporate capabilities seems like a perfect match, but to look at this

article, big companies in the technical industry can start to change the entrepreneurship in the

beginning. The main examples are usually used to get a set of four models used to connect

with the early days and describe their characteristics, challenges and rationality. Although

Corporate Equity is the core mechanism of a more established model, the equity is more

inclusive with shared technology to reduce organizational costs and to connect with more

speed and agility across the world. In this article, a typography of the corporate system is

presented so that the speed of the startup can be speed and grip control and strategically

oriented, in the way companies can overcome the gap between themselves and the startup

world.

(Mary Lynn Young,Candis Callison , 2017)This article is based on Ethonographic

Studies of women-led journalism, which has been known as North American digital and data

propellants. The start-up study of journalism has focused on showing growth and has

81
emphasized technological innovation, traditional rules and practices. Participants in this field

of study while studying and focusing more on media science such as computer science,

sociology newsrooms and media representation and other technological business criticism of

sensory science and technology study sensibilities are more focused.

This study posits feminist, colonization, and the study of science and technology

studies add to understanding us to start journalism by reducing this ethnography. Our

innovations show innovation, gender, gender, business, journalism, technology, and industry

and financial difficulties and potential possibilities to change them as well as stereotypes. We

are there to argue that journalism is an important question of digital journalism, essential

understanding of the relationship between unexpected power within the law and the moral

role in the beginning of the unexpected ways, important questions and re-contribute to the

terms of gender and colonization.

(Jianqiang Wang, Yougang Bian, Biao Xu, Hongmao Qin, Manjiang Hu, Bin

Huang, 2015) In the signal intersection, the traffic delay during the startup process is due to

inefficient vehicle operation and driver deviation. To resolve this problem, we offer a V2I-

based driver support system that can achieve the status of current traffic signals and offer

startup support to drivers. This article presents architecture and algorithm proposed system,

two types of driver help methods, support: indicator startup and auto start control. Automated

startup control mode based on fuzzy logic control is valid in the simulation test. We also

apply startups using the sample system and agree to its performance in the field test. The

results of the test show that it may help to start their vehicles with the proposed help

algorithmic drivers to reduce the delays that the traffic will significantly improved.

82
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 The Study:

The methodology for the study is quantitative in nature. The direction for the research

have been drawn out from a review of literature and startups of various sectors have been

interviewed to gain insight about the startup finance. It covers the nature of study, research

design, and sample description, tools for data collection and tools for data analysis.

Study is focused on factors affecting Startups Finance implementation and financial

preferences of startups. The study also reveals the preferred reasons for applying other

financial institutions. The research also discussed the important criteria to get startup finance

from Government Policy, Private Institutions like Venture capitalists.

3.2 The Design:

The study is carried out with random sampling. An extensive study is done on the

variables before taking into consideration for study. The study is from the Startup's

perspective so opinion of eminent key persons from various Government and Private

Institution were taken before taking variables in the study.

3.2.1 The Sample Design

3.2.1.1 Population: Our target population are startups in financial year 2015-

2016(interpreted as 01st April 2015-31st March 2016) in Indore City through

census method. The population for the study was the entrepreneurs who have

started their business (startups) of one city Indore and also those who are

recognized as Startups by DIPP i.e, Department of Industrial Policy and

Promotion.

3.2.1.2 Sample Size: The overall sample size for the study was 200 startups. The

sample was divided into two groups on the basis of Startup finance provider

and receiver as discussed above under the study design heading. The ratio of

83
 Institution: Startups are 1:10 thus over 20 Instituion available in Indore City

200 startups have chosen.

3.2.1.3 Sample Element: Individual startup was used as the sampling element of the study.

3.2.1.4 Sampling Technique: Non Probability, purposive convenient, census method

sampling technique was used.

3.2.1.5 Tools for Data Collection: Self designed questionnaire on all three variables of the

study were used to collect responses of the startups in India. The data were collected

on five point likert scale.

 Primary Data: The primary data was collected from 200 startups. It was from

Indore city in central India.The primary data was collected through structured

instrument. There were two questionnaire, one for "startups" and another for

"Financial Institutions". Questionnaies were designed using 5 point likert scale.

Self administered questionnaire were administered through email, mail and

personal interview.

 Secondary Data: In order to validate and substantiate the primary data many

sources of secondary data were also relied upon. Relevant published various

journals, articles, and reports of government and from various agencies associated

with startup finance.

3.2.1.6 Tools Used for Data analysis: Data was collected using self administered

questionnaire as the research instrument by sample survey method. The startups

were selected from all three categories Product, Service and Mixed. Internal

consistency of measures was established through item to total correlation. The

reliability of all the three measures was computed by using SPSS software. Face

validity of all three variables were ensured while selecting the statements( elements)

for the measures. Content validity was established through factor analysis and

84
 support referenceing alongwith T-test, Common factor Analysis, CHI

Square,ANOVA one- way, Karl Pearson Correlation Analysis and Spearsman Rank

Correlation Analysis.

There were two different Questionnaires having cover page mentioning the

purpose of the research and proper guideline for filling the questionnaire.The

Questionnaires were divided into three sections. The first section was about the purpose

and introduction of researcher, The second section is about the demographic questions

and responses to scale items measured in different scales. The third section is about the

opinions responses to scale items measured on a five point likert scale anchored

between "Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree". The variables taken for factor were

derived from Review of literature and personal visits and interaction with Institutions

and Startups.

3.3 Item Analysis: Total correlation was calculated and all the items were found to be

having significant relationship with the total. Hence all the items were retained.

All the startups are operating into three different categories like product based ,

service based and mixed of both service and product.Informations was taken by Startups

India websites, Reports and Government Institutions. Startups in Indore was approached

personally visiting for their follow ups. Follow ups was started soon after mailing the

questionnaire by phone calls and reminders. Reposnes was good private departments. Few

government gave officials permission and said that they will send the questionnaire

personally to the registered startups. And for Institutional questionnaires, they send the

questionnaire to their Head Offices and get it done after long follow-ups.

After having their email address questionnaires were sent them following by a phone

calls. The incomplete and incorrectly filled questionnaires were screened out and final sample

85
of 200 respondents was drawn form the total number of questionnaires received, keeping in

mind all the categories proportions taken into study.

3.4 Research Objectives

To answer the research questions as highlighted in the table above, following specific

research objectives have been set for the study.

1. To understand the main financing resource of start-ups in India and evaluate its need

in market.

2. To study government policy regarding to the Project Finance in India.

3. To examine the procedure of Startup finance.

4. To study the customers` satisfaction levels towards Startup Finance.

5. To understand the choices of customers between the private finance and startup

finance.

6. To understand about the policies and practices of financial institution under the

scheme startup finance.

3.5 Hypothesis

H0.1 : There is no significant impact of technical viability of project on startup financing.

H1 : There is a significant impact of technical viability of project on startup financing.

H1.1: There is a significant impact of work experience on startup financing.

H1.2: There is a significant impact of education on startup financing.

H0.2 : There is no significant role of equity asset ratio of project on startup financing.

H2 : There is a significant role of equity asset ratio of project on startup financing.

H2.1: There is a significant impact of debt-equity involved in project on startup financing.

H2.2: There is a significant impact of return on investment of a project on startupfinancing.

H2.3: There is a significant impact of breakeven point of a project on startup financing.

86
H0.3:There is no significant role of managerial skills of entrepreneur on startup

financing.

H3 :There is a significant role of managerial skills of entrepreneur on startup financing.

H3.1 : There is a significant impact of innovativeness of an entrepreneur on startup

financing.

H3.2 : There is a significant impact of leadership of an entrepreneur on startup financing.

H3.3 : There is a significant impact of risk taking ability of an entrepreneur on startup

financing.

3.5 Expected Outcome from proposed work

Many businesses start with a dream, but it takes more than just a dream for them

to grow into successful businesses including the tenacity to overcome the many challenges

facing startups today. Startups take time, effort, and energy. Funding is a major concern for

startups and small businesses. When the economy tanked, it made it harder to convince

investors and banks alike to part with the cash that s essential for growth in the early days of a

business. Credit today is tight, and it s not clear precisely when it will become more readily

available.

Indeed, there is a growing trend of smaller initial investments in early stage startups.

Intensifying the challenge of raising funds, major leaps in technology have led investors

to raise the bar in terms of how much legwork entrepreneurs are expected to do before

even pitching their companies in Indore.

87
 DATA ANALYSIS

1. FIELD SURVEY OF STARTUP

Frequency Table

Age
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid Upto-30 years 87 43.5 43.5 43.5
31-40 years 72 36.0 36.0 79.5
41- 50 years 33 16.5 16.5 96.0
51- 60 years 5 2.5 2.5 98.5
Above 60 years 3 1.5 1.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.1 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.1 of frequencies are showing age group segregation of 200 respondents. There are 87
respondents from 200 are in up to 30 years age group, where 72 respondents are between
31years to 40 years age. Approximately 80 % respondents are below 40 years age group.
Approximately 20% respondents are above 41 years age group.

Gender
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Male 186 93.0 93.5 93.5
Valid Female 13 6.5 6.5 100.0
Total 199 99.5 100.0
Missing System 1 .5
Total 200 100.0
Table 1.2 Source: Field Survey

In Table 1.2 of frequencies are showing gender ratio of 199 respondents where 1 respondent
had not given this information. Here 93.5 % are male which indicates 186 respondents from
199. Around 6.5 % are female which indicates 13 females among 199 respondents.

88
 Qualification
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid Below graduation 9 4.5 4.5 4.5
Graduation 63 31.5 31.5 36.0
Post Graduation 65 32.5 32.5 68.5
Professional 63 31.5 31.5 100.0
Degree
Total 200 100.0 100.0

Table 1.3 Source: Field Survey

In Table 1.3 of frequencies are showing the Qualification analysis of 200 respondents.
Approximately 191 means 95% respondents are having graduation degree of more. Where 65
means 32% are Post graduates and 63 means 31% are professionals. We couldn‘t neglect the
9 respondents i.e., around 4.5% from 200 are having below graduation qualification.

Experience
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly
46 23.0 23.0 23.0
Disagree
Valid Disagree 46 23.0 23.0 46.0
Neutral 108 54.0 54.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.4 Source: Field Survey

Table shown that 46% are Disagree with having experience and 54% are neutral on this topic.

89
 Family Background
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Business 50 25.0 25.0 25.0
Service 104 52.0 52.0 77.0
Valid
Agriculture 46 23.0 23.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.5 Source: Field Survey

Frequencies of 200 respondents family background are shown in Table 1.5 where 52 % i.e.,
104 respondents have service class family and 50 among them having business background
which is around 25% and 46 respondents which is around 23% are having agriculture
background. It shows that around 150 means 75 % respondents don‘t have business exposure
and they are first generation entrepreneurs45.

Startup based on
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Percent
Product 65 32.5 32.5 32.5
Service 52 26.0 26.0 58.5
Valid
Mixed 83 41.5 41.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.6 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.6 shown that 41.5% startups are based upon mixed product line it means Product
alongwith service. 32.5% are based on Product and 26% based upon services.

45
Fraboni, Maryann & Saltstone, Robert. (2018). First and second generation entrepreneur typologies: Dimensions of
personality.. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality. 105-113.

90
 Startup has
Valid
Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent
Percent
Website 93 46.5 47.0 47.0
Mobile App 46 23.0 23.2 70.2
Valid MIS/ERP 33 16.5 16.7 178.8
None 26 13.0 13.1 91.9
Total 198 99.0 100.0
Missing System 2 1.0
Total 200 100.0
Table 1.7 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.7 shown 46.5% have website and 23% startups have Mobile Application and rest
have MIS/ERP.

Annual Income
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Upto- 250000 87 43.5 43.9 43.9
250001- 500000 42 21.0 21.2 65.2
500001- 750000 22 11.0 11.1 76.3
Valid
750001-1000000 12 6.0 6.1 82.3
Above Rs.1000001 35 17.5 17.7 100.0
Total 198 99.0 100.0
Missing System 2 1.0
Total 200 100.0
Table 1.8 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.8 shown that upto 43.5% have annual income upto Rs.250000, 21% have income
level between Rs.250001 to Rs.500000 and 11% have income level between Rs.500001 to
Rs.750000, rest of them are in income level above Rs.750001.

91
 Try New Ideas
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly
14 7.0 7.0 7.0
Disagree
Disagree 11 5.5 5.5 12.5
Valid Neutral 25 12.5 12.5 25.0
Agree 74 37.0 37.0 62.0
Strongly Agree 76 38.0 38.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.9 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.9 Frequencies of trying new ideas are Strongly agree respondents 14, Disagree 11,
Neutrals 25, Agree 74 and Strongly agree 76 this shows 75% respondents are agree with
Innovation, trying new ideas over 200 respondents.

Experiments with Projects

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly
8 4.0 4.0 4.0
Disagree
Disagree 4 2.0 2.0 6.0
Valid Neutral 22 11.0 11.0 17.0
Agree 78 39.0 39.0 56.0
Strongly Agree 88 44.0 44.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.10 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.10 shown 83% are agree with experimenting with projects. 6% are Disagree and 11%
are neutral with experimenting.

92
 Access to Finance Easy
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly
76 38.0 38.0 38.0
Disagree
Disagree 55 27.5 27.5 65.5
Valid Neutral 41 20.5 20.5 86.0
Agree 26 13.0 13.0 99.0
Strongly Agree 2 1.0 1.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.11 Source: Field Survey

Access to finance figure shown in this table 1.11 where the opinion of respondents have
given quit pondering results. 65% respondents are strongly disagree, 20.5% are neutral and
14% are agree with the finance ease.

First Idea become project

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Strongly Disagree 18 9.0 9.0 9.0

Disagree 50 25.0 25.0 34.0
Neutral 64 32.0 32.0 66.0
Valid
Agree 43 21.5 21.5 87.5
Strongly Agree 25 12.5 12.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.12 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.12 shown 32% are agree with first idea always become project, 34% are disagree and
32% are neutral with this opinion. 34% understand that one should must have never give up
attitude which shows always first idea become project not possible.

93
 Taking Risk
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly Disagree 1 .5 .5 .5
Disagree 5 2.5 2.5 3.0
Neutral 31 15.5 15.6 18.6
Valid
Agree 96 48.0 48.2 66.8
Strongly Agree 66 33.0 33.2 100.0
Total 199 99.5 100.0
Missing System 1 .5

Total 200 100.0

Table 1.13 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.13 shown 81% are agree with taking risk, 15.5 % are neutral and 3% are disagree.

Using New Technology enhance Creativity

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative

Percent Percent
Valid Strongly 2 1.0 1.0 1.0
Disagree
Disagree 6 3.0 3.0 4.0
Neutral 37 18.5 18.5 22.5
Agree 96 48.0 48.0 70.5
Strongly Agree 59 29.5 29.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.14 Source: Field Survey

In this table 1.14, Enhancing creativity by using new technology is measured. Around 80%
are agree with this approach and give importance to new technology alongwith creativity for
their business growth. 4% are disagree, 18.5% are neutral on this.

94
 Take Problem and complaints as Opportunity

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative

Percent Percent
Valid Disagree 3 1.5 1.5 1.5

Neutral 22 11.0 11.0 12.5

Agree 80 40.0 40.0 52.5
Strongly 95 47.5 47.5 100.0
Agree
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.15 Source: Field Survey

Opportunity seeker is very important factor of managerial skills. This table 12 shows the
opinion about taking problem as Opportunity where 87.5% are agree with this and 11% are
neutral and only 1.5% disagree and the interesting fact is no one has choosen strongly
disagree.

Freedom to express suggestions

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent
Valid Neutral 15 7.5 7.5 7.5
Agree 84 42.0 42.0 49.5
Strongly Agree 101 50.5 50.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.16 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.16 shown 92.5% are agree with freedom to express suggestions.7.5% are neutral.

95
 Accept team decisions and responsibility
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Percent

Disagree 3 1.5 1.5 1.5

Neutral 13 6.5 6.5 8.0

Valid Agree 99 49.5 49.5 57.5
Strongly Agree 85 42.5 42.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.17 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.17 shown 92% are agree with accept team decisions and responsibility. 6.5% are
neutral.

Support Open Communication

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent
Valid Disagree 2 1.0 1.0 1.0
Neutral 5 2.5 2.5 3.5
Agree 107 53.5 53.5 57.0
Strongly Agree 86 43.0 43.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.18 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.18 shown 96.5% are agree thode who are supporting open communication.

Leadership Skills

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent
Valid Agree 53 26.5 26.5 26.5
Strongly Agree 147 73.5 73.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.19 Source: Field Survey

96
Table 1.19 shown 100% are agree with leadership skills are important for every startups.

Paper Formalities while sanctioning loan

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly Disagree 9 4.5 4.5 4.5
Disagree 28 14.0 14.0 18.5
Neutral 54 27.0 27.0 45.5
Valid
Agree 83 41.5 41.5 87.0
Strongly Agree 26 13.0 13.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.20 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.20 shown 54.5% are agree with paper formalities while sanctioning loans, 28.5% are
disagree and 14% are neutral.

Using Latest Technology

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly
3 1.5 1.5 1.5
Disagree
Disagree 15 7.5 7.6 9.1
Valid Neutral 57 28.5 28.8 37.9
Agree 79 39.5 39.9 77.8
Strongly Agree 44 22.0 22.2 100.0
Total 198 99.0 100.0

Missing System 2 1.0

Total 200 100.0

Table 1.21 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.21 shown 62.5% are agree with using latest technology, 28.5% are neutral with this
fact.

97
 Cost saving by using Old Technology

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly Disagree 17 8.5 8.5 8.5
Disagree 63 31.5 31.5 40.0
Neutral 65 32.5 32.5 72.5
Valid
Agree 44 22.0 22.0 94.5
Strongly Agree 11 5.5 5.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0

Table 1.22 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.22 shown 32.5% are neutral with cost saving with using old technology, 27.5% are
agree, 40% are Disagree with think about Cost saving by using old technology.

Duration Taken by Bank

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly Disagree 54 27.0 27.0 27.0
Disagree 73 36.5 36.5 63.5
Neutral 50 25.0 25.0 88.5
Valid
Agree 21 10.5 10.5 99.0
Strongly Agree 2 1.0 1.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.23 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.23 shown 65% are Disagree with duration taken by bank, 25% are neutral and 12%
are agree with this duration.

98
 Availability of finance
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly Disagree 3 1.5 1.5 1.5
Neutral 10 5.0 5.0 6.5
Valid Agree 84 42.0 42.0 48.5
Strongly Agree 103 51.5 51.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.24 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.24 shown 93% are agree with ample availability of finance.

Availability of Venture Capital

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly Disagree 61 30.5 30.5 30.5
Disagree 72 36.0 36.0 66.5
Neutral 49 24.5 24.5 91.0
Valid
Agree 16 8.0 8.0 99.0
Strongly Agree 2 1.0 1.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.25 Source: Field Survey
Table 1.25 shown Disagree opinion 66.5% about availability of venture capital and 24.5% are
neutral and 9% are agree.

Availability of Suitable labour

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 13 6.5 6.5 6.5
Disagree 78 39.0 39.0 45.5
Neutral 59 29.5 29.5 75.0
Agree 45 22.5 22.5 97.5
Strongly Agree 5 2.5 2.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.26 Source: Field Survey

99
Table 1.26 shown the availability of suitable labour 45% are Disagree, 25% are Agree and
30% are neutral.

Availability of Raw Material

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Strongly Disagree 5 2.5 2.5 2.5
Disagree 38 19.0 19.0 21.5
Neutral 73 36.5 36.5 58.0
Valid
Agree 72 36.0 36.0 94.0
Strongly Agree 12 6.0 6.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0

Table 1.27 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.27 shown Availability of Raw Material 42% are Agree, 36.5% are Neutral and 21.5%
are Disagree.

Imparting Training is Important

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Percent
Disagree 4 2.0 2.0 2.0
Neutral 25 12.5 12.5 14.5
Valid Agree 103 51.5 51.5 66.0
Strongly Agree 68 34.0 34.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.28 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.28 shown Imparting Training is Important 85.5% are Agree, 12.5% Neutral rest are
Disagree.

100
 Expected Break even time

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Percent

0-1 year 44 22.0 22.0 22.0

1-2 years 67 33.5 33.5 55.5

2-3 years 64 32.0 32.0 87.5
Valid 3-4 years 14 7.0 7.0 94.5
4-5 years 7 3.5 3.5 98.0
Above 5 years 4 2.0 2.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.29 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.29 shown that Break-even point comes under 3 years 87.5% according to Startups.

Owner's capital investment

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Upto Rs.250000 50 25.0 25.0 25.0
250001-500000 28 14.0 14.0 39.0
500000-750000 25 12.5 12.5 51.5
Valid
750001-1000000 30 15.0 15.0 66.5
Above 1000001 67 33.5 33.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.30 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.30 shown Owner's capital investment Upto Rs.2.5 lacs 25%, Above Rs.10 lacs 33.5%
and rest of them are between Rs.2.5 Lacs to Rs.10 lacs.

101
 Value Proposition
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Quality 101 50.5 50.5 50.5
Price 13 6.5 6.5 57.0
Quantity 5 2.5 2.5 59.5
Variety 27 13.5 13.5 73.0
Valid
Pre/Post Purchase
12 6.0 6.0 79.0
Services
Value Added Services 42 21.0 21.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.31 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.31 shown Differ value startups are offering considers 50.5% are believing in
Quality,13.5% are in variety and 21% are value added services.

Government finance scheme available for your project

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Percent
Yes 90 45.0 45.2 45.2
Valid No 109 54.5 54.8 100.0
Total 199 99.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0
Table 1.32 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.32 shown 45% has Government finance scheme available for projects startups.
Whereas 54.5% thinks no scheme is available.

102
 Current ownership/equity situation

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent

Sole Propriertorship 14 7.0 7.0 7.0

Partnership with few

33 16.5 16.6 23.6
other individuals
Limited Liability
Valid
Company not publicly 143 71.5 71.9 95.5
traded
other 9 4.5 4.5 100.0
Total 199 99.5 100.0

Missing System 1 .5

Total 200 100.0

Table 1.33 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.33 Shown the current ownership 71.5% are under Limited Liability Company not
publicly traded, 16.5% Partnership with few other individual, 7% are Sole Proprieetorship.

Marketing Strategies

Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative

Percent Percent
Valid Direct Marketing 37 18.5 18.5 18.5
Business 2 Customer 36 18.0 18.0 36.5
Business 2 Business 63 31.5 31.5 68.0
Personal Selling 17 8.5 8.5 76.5
Online Marketing 47 23.5 23.5 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.34 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.34 shown Marketing strategies 18.5% doing Direct Marketing, 18% doing Business
to Customer, 31.5% Business to Business and 23.5 % doing Online Marketing and 8,5% are
depends on personal selling.

103
 Difficulties found while starting a business

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent

To get Financing 113 56.5 56.5 56.5

To establish contacts with

37 18.5 18.5 75.0
customers
To get payment for
4 2.0 2.0 77.0
outstanding invoices
To price my
6 3.0 3.0 80.0
goods/services
To find suitable personnel 6 3.0 3.0 83.0
To use Information
Valid 6 3.0 3.0 86.0
Technology effectively
To deal with
legal/govt/admin 16 8.0 8.0 94.0
matters(registration,taxes)
To be alone as an
8 4.0 4.0 98.0
entrepreneur
To get backing from my
4 2.0 2.0 100.0
spouse/family
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.35 Source: Field Survey

Table 1.35 shown that around 56.5% feels that getting finance is a major difficulty for any
startup. Whereas 18.5% feels that to established contact with new customer is a another major
difficulty. Remaining 25% have experienced differently.

104
105
 Table 1.36 shows the factor analysis of all the major variables. It shows that how

much factor loads another. So that, Important factors cannot be avoided. It shows the

correlation matrix between all the managerial skills sub factors like Try new ideas and

Experiments with projects is strongly significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r =

.391, Change in one variable shows the strongly significant moderate positive change in

another at a significant level. Try new ideas and First Idea become project is significant

moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = .23. Try new ideas and Taking risk in projects is a

significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = .15. Try new ideas and Take problem

and complaints as Opportunity is a significant moderate negative relationship: Pearson r = -

.0.23. Try new ideas and Freedom to express suggestions is a significant moderate positive

relationship: Pearson r = .152. Try new ideas and Accept team decisions and responsibility is

a significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = .152. Try new ideas and Support

Open Communication is a significant less positive relationship: Pearson r = .026. Try new

ideas and Leadership skills are a significant moderate negative relationship: Pearson r = -

.0.21.

Experiments with projects and First Idea become project is significant moderate

negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.045. Experiments with projects and Taking risk in

projects is a significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = . 0.183. Experiments with

projects and Take problem and complaints as Opportunity is a significant moderate positive

relationship: Pearson r = 0.095. Experiments with projects and Freedom to express

suggestions is a significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.175. Experiments

with projects and Accept team decisions and responsibility is a significant moderate negative

relationship: Pearson r = -0.093. Experiments with projects and Support Open

Communication is a significant less negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.095. Experiments

106
with projects and Leadership skills are a significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r

= 0.116.

First Idea become project and Taking risk in projects is a significant moderate

positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.167. First Idea become project and Take problem and

complaints as Opportunity is a significant moderate negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.109.

First Idea become project and Freedom to express suggestions is a significant moderate

negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.173. First Idea become project and Accept team

decisions and responsibility is a significant moderate negative relationship: Pearson r = -

0.061. First Idea become project and Support Open Communication is a significant less

negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.072. First Idea become project and Leadership skills are

a significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.087

Taking risk in projects and Take problem and complaints as Opportunity is a

significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.223. Taking risk in projects and

Freedom to express suggestions is a significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r =

0.158. Taking risk in projects and Accept team decisions and responsibility is a significant

moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.2. Taking risk in projects and Support Open

Communication is a significant less positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.071. Taking risk in

projects and Leadership skills are a significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r =

0.229

Take problem and complaints as Opportunity (Opportunity seeker) and Freedom to

express suggestions is a significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.408. Take

problem and complaints as Opportunity and Accept team decisions and responsibility is a

significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.281. Take problem and complaints

as Opportunity and Support Open Communication is a significant less positive relationship:

107
Pearson r = 0.262. Take problem and complaints as Opportunity and Leadership skills are a

significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.231

Freedom to express suggestions and Accept team decisions and responsibility is a significant

moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.316. Freedom to express suggestions and

Support Open Communication is a significant less positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.279.

Freedom to express suggestions and Leadership skills are a significant moderate positive

relationship: Pearson r = 0.283

Accept team decisions and responsibility and Support Open Communication is a

significant less positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.324. Accept team decisions and

responsibility and Leadership skills are a significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r

= 0.228

Support Open Communication and Leadership skills are a significant moderate

positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.121

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .617

Approx. Chi-Square 237.508

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity df 36
Sig. .000
Table 1.37 Field Survey

Table 1.37 "Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Test is a evaluate of how appropriate your

statistics is for Factor Analysis. The test process sampling capability for each variable in the

model and for the complete model. The value is a measure of the ratio of variance among

variables that might be common variance. The lower the ratio, the more appropriate your

facts is to Factor Analysis".(46) Here 0.617 measurement shows a general proportion of data.

46
http://www.statisticshowto.com/kaiser-meyer-olkin/

108
 Chi-Square focuses is called Goodness of Fit Test. It indicates the data collected from

sample matches the entire population here, 237.508 is the value it shows the moderate fit of

data.47

Formula 1

Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared

Loadings
Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance

1 2.281 25.341 25.341 2.281 25.341

2 1.563 17.362 42.703 1.563 17.362

3 1.160 12.887 55.590 1.160 12.887

4 .959 10.660 66.250

5 .766 8.506 74.755

6 .689 7.659 82.414

7 .633 7.035 89.449

8 .532 5.912 95.361

9 .417 4.639 100.000

Table 1.38 Field Survey

Table 1.38 Total variance explained by first three components are better in among nine
variables. These are Try New Ideas, Experiments with Projects and First Idea become project.

47
http://www.statisticshowto.com/probability-and-statistics/chi-square/

109
 Chart 1- Field Survey

Chart 1 shows an Eigen values of all nine components above 1.0 are Try New Ideas,

Experiments with Projects, First Idea become project and below 1.0 are Taking Risk, Take

Problem and complaints as Opportunity, Freedom to express suggestions, Accept team

decisions and responsibility, Support Open Communication and Leadership Skills shown in

table 1.39.

Component Correlation Matrix

Component 1 2 3

1 1.000 .089 .045

2 .089 1.000 .099

3 .045 .099 1.000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Oblimin with Kaiser Normalization.
Table 1.39 Field Survey

110
Factor Analysis
Correlation Matrixa
Using New Using Cost saving Imparting Availabi Availabi
Technology Latest by using Training lity of lity of
enhance Technol Old is Raw Suitable
Creativity ogy Technology Important Material labour

Using New
Technology
1 0.291 -0.031 0.095 0.014 0.197
enhance
Creativity
Using Latest
0.291 1 -0.248 0.173 0.154 0.19
Technology
Cost saving
by using Old -0.031 -0.248 1 -0.164 0.084 0.136
Technology
Correlation
Imparting
Training is 0.095 0.173 -0.164 1 0.03 -0.125
Important
Availability
of Raw 0.014 0.154 0.084 0.03 1 0.388
Material
Availability
of Suitable 0.197 0.19 0.136 -0.125 0.388 1
labour
Using New
Technology
0 0.331 0.092 0.424 0.003
enhance
Creativity
Using Latest
0 0 0.007 0.015 0.004
Technology
Cost saving
by using Old 0.331 0 0.011 0.12 0.028
Sig. (1- Technology
tailed) Imparting
Training is 0.092 0.007 0.011 0.339 0.04
Important
Availability
of Raw 0.424 0.015 0.12 0.339 0
Material
Availability
of Suitable 0.003 0.004 0.028 0.04 0
labour
a. Determinant = .598

Table 1.40 Field Survey

111
 Table 1.40 shows the factor analysis of all the major variables. It shows that how

much factor loads another. So that, Important factors cannot be avoided. It shows the

correlation matrix between all the technical skills sub factors like Using New Technology

enhance Creativity and Using Latest Technology is strongly significant moderate positive

relationship: Pearson r = .291. Using New Technology enhance Creativity and Cost saving by

using Old Technology is strongly significant moderate negative relationship: Pearson r = -

.031. Using New Technology enhance Creativity and Imparting Training is Important is

strongly significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.095. Using New

Technology enhance Creativity and Availability of Raw Material is strongly significant

moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.014. Using New Technology enhance Creativity

and Availaibility of Suitable labour is strongly significant moderate positive relationship:

Pearson r = 0.197.

Using Latest Technology and Cost saving by using Old Technology is strongly

significant moderate negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.248. Using Latest Technology and

Imparting Training is Important is strongly significant moderate positive relationship:

Pearson r = 0.173. Using Latest Technology and Availability of Raw Material is strongly

significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.154. Using Latest Technology and

Availaibility of Suitable labour is strongly significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson

r = 0.19.

112
 KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling
.532
Adequacy.
Approx. Chi-Square 99.712
Bartlett's Test of
df 15
Sphericity
Sig. .000
Table 1.41 Field Survey

Table 1.41 The value is a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of the ratio of variance among

variables that might be common variance. The lower the ratio, the more appropriate your

facts is to Factor Analysis. Here 0.532 measurement shows a general proportion of data.

Chi-Square focuses is called Goodness of Fit Test. It indicates the data collected from sample

matches the entire population here, 99.712 is the value it shows the significant fit of data.

Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of

Squared Loadings
Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance
1 1.640 27.339 27.339 1.640 27.339
2 1.431 23.843 51.181 1.431 23.843
3 .949 15.809 66.991
4 .862 14.371 81.362
5 .589 9.814 91.175
6 .529 8.825 100.000
Table 1.42 Field Survey

Table 1.42 Total variance explained by first two components are better in among six

variables. These are Using New Technology enhance Creativity and Using Latest

Technology.

113
 Chart 2- Field Survey

Chart 2 of Eigen values of all six components above 1.0 are Using New Technology enhance

Creativity and Using Latest Technology and below 1.0 are Cost saving by using Old

Technology, Imparting Training is Important, Availability of Raw Material and Availaibility

of Suitable labour.

Component Correlation Matrix

Component 1 2
1 1.000 -.038
2 -.038 1.000
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Oblimin with Kaiser Normalization.

114
 Factor Analysis
Correlation Matrixa
Access to Cost saving Duration Availability of Expected Owner's
Availability of
Finance by using Old Taken by Venture Break even capital
finance
Easy Technology Bank Capital time investment

Access to
1 0.069 0.483 -0.119 0.393 -0.101 -0.232
Finance Easy
Cost saving by
using Old 0.069 1 0.106 -0.153 0.095 0.099 0.026
Technology
Duration Taken
0.483 0.106 1 -0.094 0.402 -0.043 -0.203
by Bank
Correlation Availability of
-0.119 -0.153 -0.094 1 -0.284 0.094 0.171
finance
Availability of
0.393 0.095 0.402 -0.284 1 -0.041 -0.235
Venture Capital
Expected Break
-0.101 0.099 -0.043 0.094 -0.041 1 0.205
even time
Owner's capital
-0.232 0.026 -0.203 0.171 -0.235 0.205 1
investment
Access to
0.165 0 0.047 0 0.077 0
Finance Easy
Cost saving by
using Old 0.165 0.067 0.015 0.091 0.081 0.359
Technology
Duration Taken
0 0.067 0.093 0 0.271 0.002
by Bank
Sig. (1-
Availability of
tailed) 0.047 0.015 0.093 0 0.094 0.008
finance
Availability of
0 0.091 0 0 0.281 0
Venture Capital
Expected Break
0.077 0.081 0.271 0.094 0.281 0.002
even time
Owner's capital
0 0.359 0.002 0.008 0 0.002
investment
a. Determinant = .453
Table 1.43 Field Survey

115
 Table 1.43 shows the factor analysis of all the major variables. It shows that how

much factor loads another. So that, Important factors cannot be avoided. It shows the

correlation matrix between all the Financial skills sub factors like Access to Finance Easy and

Cost saving by using Old Technology is strongly significant moderate positive relationship:

Pearson r = 0.069.

Access to Finance Easy and Duration Taken by Bank is strongly significant moderate

positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.483. Access to Finance Easy and Availability of finance

is strongly significant moderate negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.119. Access to Finance

Easy and Availability of Venture Capital is strongly significant moderate positive

relationship: Pearson r = 0.393. Access to Finance Easy and Break-even year is strongly

significant moderate negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.101. Access to Finance Easy and

Owner's capital investment is strongly significant moderate negative relationship: Pearson r =

-0.232.

Cost saving by using Old Technology and Duration Taken by Bank is strongly

significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.106. Cost saving by using Old

Technology and Availability of finance is strongly significant moderate negative relationship:

Pearson r = -0.153. Cost saving by using Old Technology and Availability of Venture Capital

is strongly significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.095. Cost saving by using

Old Technology and Break-even year is strongly significant moderate positive relationship:

Pearson r = 0.099. Cost saving by using Old Technology and Owner's capital investment is

strongly significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.026.

Duration Taken by Bank and Availability of finance is strongly significant moderate

negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.094. Duration Taken by Bank and Availability of

Venture Capital is strongly significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.402.

Duration Taken by Bank and Break-even year is strongly significant moderate negative

116
relationship: Pearson r = -0.043. Duration Taken by Bank and Owner's capital investment is

strongly significant moderate negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.203.

Availability of finance and Availability of Venture Capital is strongly significant

moderate negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.284. Availability of finance and Break-even

year is strongly significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = 0.094. Availability of

finance and Owner's capital investment is strongly significant moderate positive relationship:

Pearson r = 0.171.

Availability of Venture Capital and Break-even year is strongly significant moderate negative

relationship: Pearson r = -0.041. Availability of Venture Capital and Owner's capital

investment is strongly significant moderate negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.235. Break-

even year and Owner's capital investment is strongly significant moderate positive

relationship: Pearson r = 0.205.

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling
.687
Adequacy.
Approx. Chi-Square 154.968
Bartlett's Test of
df 21
Sphericity
Sig. .000
Table 1.44 Field Survey

The value is a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of the ratio of variance among variables that

might be common variance. The lower the ratio, the more appropriate your facts is to Factor

Analysis. Here 0.687 measurement shows a general proportion of data.

Chi-Square focuses is called Goodness of Fit Test. It indicates the data collected from sample

matches the entire population here, 154.968 is the value it shows the significant fit of data.

117
 Total Variance Explained
Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of
Squared Loadings
Total % of Cumulative Total % of
Variance % Variance
1 2.155 30.785 30.785 2.155 30.785
2 1.187 16.956 47.741 1.187 16.956
3 1.042 14.890 62.631 1.042 14.890
4 .809 11.556 74.186
5 .740 10.577 84.763
6 .556 7.941 92.704
7 .511 7.296 100.000
Table 1.45 Field Survey

Table 1.45 Total variance explained by first three components are better in among seven

variables. These are Access to Finance Easy, Cost saving by using Old Technology and

Duration Taken by Bank.

Chart 3

Chart 3 of Eigen values of all seven components above 1.0 are Access to Finance Easy, Cost
saving by using Old Technology and below 1.0 are Duration Taken by Bank, Availability of

118
finance, Availability of Venture Capital, Expected Break even time, Owner's capital
investment

Component Correlation Matrix

Component 1 2 3

1 1.000 -.149 -.198

2 -.149 1.000 .031

3 -.198 .031 1.000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Oblimin with Kaiser Normalization.

Table 1.46 Field Survey

Descriptive
Descriptive Statistics

N Mean Std. Deviation Skewness

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error

Experiments with
200 4.17 .983 -1.503 .172
Projects

Taking Risk 199 4.11 .790 -.758 .172

Leadership Skills 200 4.73 .442 -1.073 .172

Take Problem and

complaints as 200 4.33 .732 -.850 .172
Opportunity

Freedom to express
200 4.43 .630 -.646 .172
suggestions

Valid N (listwise) 199

Table 1.47 Field Survey

119
 This table 1.47 is showing the standard values of major factors of Managerial skills

like Experiments with Projects mean is 4.17, standard deviation .983 and skewness is -1.503

at standard error .172. Taking risk mean is 4.11, standard deviation .790 and skewness is

-.758 at standard error .172. Leadership skills mean is 4.73, standard deviation .442 and

skewness is -1.073 at standard error .172. Take Problem and complaints as Opportunity mean

is 4.33, standard deviation .732 and skewness is -.850 at standard error .172. Freedom to

express suggestions as Opportunity mean is 4.43, standard deviation .630 and skewness is -

.646 at standard error .172.

Descriptive
Descriptive Statistics
N Mean Std. Deviation Skewness
Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error
Using Latest
198 3.74 .941 -.450 .173
Technology
Availability of Suitable
200 2.76 .959 .233 .172
labour
Availability of Raw
200 3.24 .915 -.216 .172
Material
Using New Technology
200 4.02 .833 -.777 .172
enhance Creativity
Valid N (list wise) 198
Table 1.48 Field Survey

This table 1.48 is showing the standard values of major factors of Technical skills like

Using Latest Technology mean is 3.74, standard deviation .941 and skewness is -.450 at

standard error .173. Availability of Suitable labour mean is 2.76, standard deviation .959 and

skewness is .233 at standard error .172. Availability of Raw Material mean is 3.24, standard

deviation .915 and skewness is -.216 at standard error .172. Using New Technology enhance

Creativity mean is 4.02, standard deviation .833 and skewness is -.777 at standard error .172.

120
Descriptive
Descriptive Statistics
N Mean Std. Skewness
Deviation
Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std.
Error
Access to Finance Easy 200 2.12 1.090 .569 .172
Duration Taken by
200 2.22 .993 .447 .172
Bank
Availability of finance 200 4.42 .725 -1.792 .172
Availability of Venture
200 2.13 .974 .528 .172
Capital
Expected Break even
200 2.43 1.132 .829 .172
time
Owner's capital
200 3.18 1.616 -.173 .172
investment
Valid N (listwise) 200
Table 1.49 Field Survey

This table 1.49 is showing the standard values of major factors of Financial skills like

Access to Finance Easy mean is 2.12, standard deviation 1.090 and skewness is .569 at

standard error .172. Duration Taken by Bank mean is 2.22, standard deviation .993 and

skewness is .447 at standard error .172. Availability of finance mean is 4.42, standard

deviation .725 and skewness is -1.792 at standard error .172. Availability of Venture Capital

mean is 2.13, standard deviation .974 and skewness is .528 at standard error .172. Expected

Break even time mean is 2.43, standard deviation 1.132 and skewness is .829 at standard

error .172. intial money invested before asking mean is 3.18, standard deviation 1.616 and

skewness is -.173 at standard error .172.

121
Correlations
Correlations
Gender Taking
Risk
Pearson
1 -.063
Correlation
Gender
Sig. (2-tailed) .377
N 199 198
Pearson
-.063 1
Taking Correlation
Risk Sig. (2-tailed) .377
N 198 199
Table 1.50 Field Survey

Table 1.50 indicates the significant correlation between Gender and Taking risk factor

moderate negative relationship :Pearson r = -.063, Change in one variable shows the

significant negative change in another.

Correlations
Try New Difficulties found while
Ideas starting a business
Pearson
1 -.130
Correlation
Try New Ideas
Sig. (2-tailed) .067
N 200 200
Pearson
Difficulties found -.130 1
Correlation
while starting a
Sig. (2-tailed) .067
business
N 200 200
Table 1.51 Field Survey

122
 Table 1.51 indicates the significant correlation between Try new ideas and Difficulties

found while starting a business variable low negative relationship :Pearson r = -.130, Change

in one variable shows the significant negative change in another.

Correlations
Correlations
Duration Taken by Difficulties found while
Bank starting a business
Pearson Correlation 1 .372**
Duration Taken
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
by Bank
N 200 200
Difficulties found Pearson Correlation .372** 1
while starting a Sig. (2-tailed) .000
business N 200 200
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 1.52 Field Survey

Table 1.52 indicates the significant correlation between Duration Taken by Bank and

Difficulties found while starting a business variable high positive relationship :

Pearson r = .372, Change in one variable shows the significant high positive change in
another at significant 0.01 level.

Correlations
Correlations
Difficulties found while Qualification
starting a business

Difficulties found Pearson Correlation 1 -.054

while starting a
Sig. (2-tailed) .448
business
N 200 200

Pearson Correlation -.054 1

Qualification
Sig. (2-tailed) .448
N 200 200
Table 1.53 Field Survey

123
 Table 1.53 indicates the significant correlation between Qualification and Difficulties

found while starting a business factor moderate negative relationship :Pearson

r = -.054, Change in one variable shows the significant negative change in another at .448
significant level.

Correlations
Correlations
Difficulties found Experience
while starting a
business
Difficulties found Pearson Correlation 1 -.024
while starting a Sig. (2-tailed) .737
business N 200 200
Pearson Correlation -.024 1
Experience Sig. (2-tailed) .737
N 200 200
Table 1.54 Field Survey

Table 1.54 indicates the significant correlation between Difficulties found while

starting a business and Experience factor low negative relationship :Pearson r = -.024,

Change in one variable shows the significant low negative change in another at .737

significant level.

Correlations
Correlations
Startup has Ease in access finance
Pearson Correlation 1 .016
Startup has Sig. (2-tailed) .818
N 198 198
Ease in Pearson Correlation .016 1
access Sig. (2-tailed) .818
finance N 198 200
Table 1.55 Field Survey

124
 Table 1.55 indicates the significant correlation between Startup has technological

platform and Ease in access finance factor low positive relationship : Pearson r = 0.16,

Change in one variable shows the significant low positive change in another at .818

significant level.

Correlations
Correlations
Experiments with Expected Break even
Projects time

Pearson Correlation 1 -.115

Experiments with
Sig. (2-tailed) .105
Projects
N 200 200

Pearson Correlation -.115 1

Expected Break even
Sig. (2-tailed) .105
time
N 200 200
Table 1.56 Field Survey

Table 1.56 indicates the significant correlation between Experiments with Projects
and Expected Break even time factor low negative relationship : Pearson r = -.115, Change in
one variable shows the significant low negative change in another at .105 significant level.

Correlations
Correlations
Expected Break Owner's capital
even time investment
Pearson Correlation 1 .205**
Expected Break even
Sig. (2-tailed) .004
time
N 200 200
Pearson Correlation .205** 1
Owner's capital
Sig. (2-tailed) .004
investment
N 200 200
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 1.57 Field Survey

125
 Table 1.57 Indicates the significant correlation between Expected Break even time

and intial money invested before asking factor positive relationship: Pearson r = .205, Change

in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at .01 high significant level.

Correlations
Correlations
Leadership Taking
Skills Risk
Pearson
1 .229**
Leadership Correlation
Skills Sig. (2-tailed) .001
N 200 199
Pearson
.229** 1
Correlation
Taking Risk
Sig. (2-tailed) .001
N 199 199

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 1.57.1 indicates the significant correlation between Leadership Skills and Taking Risk
factor positive relationship : Pearson r = .229, Change in one variable shows the significant
positive change in another at .01 high significant level.
Correlations
Correlations
Cost saving by Using Latest
using Old Technology
Technology
Cost saving by Pearson Correlation 1 -.248**
using Old Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Technology N 200 198
Pearson Correlation -.248** 1
Using Latest
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Technology
N 198 198
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 1.58 Field Survey

126
 Table 1.58 indicates the significant correlation between Cost saving by using Old

Technology and Using Latest Technology factor significant strong negative relationship :

Pearson r = -.248, Change in one variable shows the significant strong negative change in

another at .01 high significant level.

Correlations
Correlations
Ease in Duration Taken
access by Bank
finance
Pearson
1 .483**
Correlation
Ease in access finance
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
Pearson
.483** 1
Duration Taken by Correlation
Bank Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 1.59 Field Survey

Table 1.59 indicates the significant correlation between Ease in access finance and

Duration Taken by Bank factor significant strong positive relationship : Pearson r = .483,

Change in one variable shows the significant strong positive change in another at .01 high

significant level.

127
Correlations
Correlations
Paper Formalities while Startup based
sanctioning loan on
Pearson
1 .006
Paper Formalities while Correlation
sanctioning loan Sig. (2-tailed) .937
N 200 200
Pearson
.006 1
Correlation
Startup based on
Sig. (2-tailed) .937
N 200 200
Table 1.60 Field Survey

Table 1.60 indicates the significant correlation between Paper Formalities while

sanctioning loan and Startup based on different line factor significant low positive

relationship : Pearson r = .006, Change in one variable shows the significant low positive

change in another at .937 significant level.

128
Correlations
Correlations
Availability Availability of Availability of Availability of
of finance Venture Suitable labour Raw Material
Capital

Pearson -.077
1 -.284** -.054
Correlation
Availability of
Sig. (2- .279
finance .000 .451
tailed)
N 200 200 200 200
Pearson -.024**
-.284** 1 .233**
Correlation
Availability of
Sig. (2- .737
Venture Capital .000 .001
tailed)
N 200 200 200 200
Pearson .394
**
-.054 .233 1
Correlation
Availaibility of
Sig. (2- .000
Suitable labour .451 .001
tailed)
N 200 200 200 200
Pearson 1
-.077 -.024 .394**
Correlation
Availability of
Sig. (2-
Raw Material .279 .737 .000
tailed)
N 200 200 200 200
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 1.61 Field Survey

Table 1.61 indicates the significant correlation between Availability of finance and

Availability of Venture Capital factor significant negative relationship : Pearson

r = -.284, Change in one variable shows the strong significant negative change in another at

129
.01 significant level. Availability of finance and Availability of Suitable labour factor

significant negative relationship : Pearson r = -.054, Change in one variable shows the

significant negative change in another at .01 significant level. Availability of Venture Capital

and Availability of Suitable labour factor significant positive relationship : Pearson r = .233,

Change in one variable shows the strong significant positive change in another at .01

significant level.

Availability of Raw Material and Availability of Finance factor significant high

negative relationship : Pearson r = -.077, Change in one variable shows the significant high
negative change in another at .279 significant level. Availability of Raw Material and
Avaibility of venture capital are negatively correlated with Pearson r = -.024 at significant
level. Availability of Raw Material and Availability of Suitable labour significant moderate
positive relationship : Pearson r = .394, Change in one variable shows the strongly significant
moderate positive change in another at .01 significant level.

130
Correlations

131
 Table 1.62 shows the correlation matrix between all the managerial skills sub factors

like Try new ideas and Experiments with projects is strongly significant moderate positive

relationship: Pearson r = .391, Change in one variable shows the strongly significant

moderate positive change in another at .01 significant level. Try new ideas and Access to

finance ease significant low positive relationship: Pearson r = .014, Change in one variable

shows the strongly significant low positive change in another at significant level. Try new

Ideas and First Idea become project significant low positive relationship: Pearson r = .23,

Change in one variable shows the significant low positive change in another at significant

level. Try new ideas and Taking risk is highly significant positive relationship: Pearson r =

.150, Change in one variable shows the strongly significant positive change in another at .01

significant levels. Try new ideas and Using new technology enhances creativity significant

moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = .136, Change in one variable shows the strongly

significant low positive change in another at significant level.

Try new ideas and Take Problem and complaints as Opportunity significant low

negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.021, Change in one variable shows the strongly

significant low negative change in another at significant level. Try new ideas and Freedom to

express suggestions with projects is strongly significant positive relationship: Pearson r =

.148, Change in one variable shows the strongly significant positive change in another at .01

significant levels. Try new ideas and Accept team decisions and responsibility suggestions

with projects is significant low positive relationship: Pearson r = .008, Change in one variable

shows the significant low positive change in another at significant levels. Try new ideas and

Support Open Communication is significant low positive relationship: Pearson r = .022,

Change in one variable shows the significant low positive change in another at significant

levels. Try new ideas and Leadership skills are strongly significant positive relationship:

132
Pearson r = .024, Change in one variable shows the strongly significant positive change in

another at 0.01 significant levels.

Experiments with Projects and Access to finance ease significant low negative

relationship: Pearson r = - .145, Change in one variable shows the strongly significant low

negative change in another at .05 significant level. Experiments with Projects and First Idea

become project significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -.045, Change in one variable

shows the significant low negative change in another at 0.01 significant level.

Experiments with Projects and Taking risk is significant positive relationship: Pearson

r = .183, Change in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at

significant levels. Experiments with Projects and Using new technology enhances creativity

significant low negative relationship: Pearson r = -.066, Change in one variable shows the

strongly significant low negative change in another at 0.05 significant level. Experiments

with Projects and Take Problem and complaints as Opportunity significant low positive

relationship: Pearson r = 0.095, Change in one variable shows the strongly significant low

positive change in another at .01 significant level.

Experiments with Projects and Freedom to express suggestions with projects is

significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .173, Change in one variable shows the

significant positive change in another at significant levels. Experiments with Projects and

Accept team decisions and responsibility suggestions with projects is significant negative

relationship: Pearson r = -.094, Change in one variable shows the significant negative change

in another at .05 significant levels. Experiments with Projects and Support Open

Communication is significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -.096, Change in one

variable shows the significant negative change in another at .01 significant levels.

Experiments with Projects and Leadership skills are significant positive relationship: Pearson

133
r = .116, Change in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at

significant levels.

Ease Access to Finance and First Idea become project significant positive

relationship: Pearson r = .253, Change in one variable shows the significant low positive

change in another at 0.01 significant level. Ease Access to Finance and Taking risk is

significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .032, Change in one variable shows the

significant positive change in another at .05 significant levels. Ease Access to Finance and

Using new technology enhances creativity significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .147,

Change in one variable shows the strongly significant positive change in another at

significant level. Ease Access to Finance and Take Problem and complaints as Opportunity

significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.099, Change in one variable shows the

strongly significant negative change in another at significant level.

Ease Access to Finance and Freedom to express suggestions with projects is

significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -.021, Change in one variable shows the

significant negative change in another at .05 significant levels. Ease Access to Finance and

Accept team decisions and responsibility suggestions with projects is significant positive

relationship: Pearson r = .114, Change in one variable shows the significant positive change

in another at significant levels. Ease Access to Finance and Support Open Communication is

significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .056, Change in one variable shows the

significant positive change in another at significant levels. Ease Access to Finance and

Leadership skills are significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -.051, Change in one

variable shows the significant negative change in another at .05 significant levels.

Taking Risk and Using new technology enhances creativity significant positive

relationship: Pearson r = .111, Change in one variable shows the strongly significant positive

change in another at significant level. Taking Risk and Take Problem and complaints as

134
Opportunity significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .223, Change in one variable shows

the strongly significant negative change in another at .05 significant level. Taking Risk and

Freedom to express suggestions with projects is significant positive relationship: Pearson r =

.158, Change in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at .01

significant levels. Taking Risk and Accept team decisions and responsibility suggestions with

projects is significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .2, Change in one variable shows the

strongly significant positive change in another at significant levels. Taking Risk and Support

Open Communication is significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .071, Change in one

variable shows the significant positive change in another at .05 significant levels. Taking

Risk and Leadership skills are significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .229, Change in

one variable shows the strong significant positive change in another at .01 significant levels.

First Idea become project and Taking risk is significant positive relationship: Pearson

r = .167, Change in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at

significant levels. First Idea become project and Using new technology enhances creativity

significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .062, Change in one variable shows the strongly

significant positive change in another at .01 significant level. First Idea become project and

Take Problem and complaints as Opportunity significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -

.109, Change in one variable shows the strongly significant negative change in another at .01

significant level.

First Idea become project and Freedom to express suggestions with projects is

significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -.173, Change in one variable shows the

significant negative change in another at significant levels. First Idea become project and

Accept team decisions and responsibility suggestions with projects is significant negative

relationship: Pearson r = -.061, Change in one variable shows the strongly significant

negative change in another at .01 significant levels. First Idea become project and Support

135
Open Communication is significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -.072, Change in one

variable shows the significant negative change in another at .01 significant levels. First Idea

become project and Leadership skills are significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .087,

Change in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at significant levels.

Using New Technology enhance Creativity and Take Problem and complaints

as Opportunity significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .022, Change in one variable

shows the strongly significant negative change in another at significant level. Using New

Technology enhance Creativity and Freedom to express suggestions with projects is

significant low positive relationship: Pearson r = .003, Change in one variable shows the

significant positive change in another at significant levels. Using New Technology enhance

Creativity and Accept team decisions and responsibility suggestions with projects is

significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .187, Change in one variable shows the strongly

significant positive change in another at .05 significant levels. Using New Technology

enhance Creativity and Support Open Communication is significant positive relationship:

Pearson r = .138, Change in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at

significant levels. Using New Technology enhance Creativity and Leadership skills are

significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .055, Change in one variable shows the

significant positive change in another at significant levels.

Take Problem and complaints as Oppurtunity and Freedom to express suggestions

with projects is significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = .405, Change in one

variable shows the significant moderate positive change in another at .05 significant levels.

Take Problem and complaints as Oppurtunity and Accept team decisions and responsibility

suggestions with projects is significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .277, Change in one

variable shows the strongly significant positive change in another at significant levels. Take

Problem and complaints as Oppurtunity and Support Open Communication is significant

136
positive relationship: Pearson r = .258, Change in one variable shows the significant positive

change in another at significant levels.

Take Problem and complaints as Oppurtunity and Leadership skills are significant

positive relationship: Pearson r = .229, Change in one variable shows the significant positive

change in another at significant levels.

Freedom to express suggestions and complaints as Oppurtunity and Accept team

decisions and responsibility suggestions with projects is significant positive relationship:

Pearson r = .319 , Change in one variable shows the strongly significant positive change in

another at significant levels. Freedom to express suggestions and Support Open

Communication is significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .282, Change in one variable

shows the significant positive change in another at .05 significant levels. Freedom to express

suggestions and complaints as Opportunity and Leadership skills are significant positive

relationship: Pearson r = .285, Change in one variable shows the significant positive change

in another at .05 significant levels.

Accept team decisions and responsibility and Support Open Communication is

significant moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = .327, Change in one variable shows

the significant positive change in another at significant levels. Accept team decisions and

responsibility and Leadership skills are significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .23,

Change in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at significant levels.

Support Open Communication and responsibility and Leadership skills are significant

positive relationship: Pearson r = .123, Change in one variable shows the significant positive

change in another at significant levels.

137
Correlations
Correlations
Current ownership/ Difficulties found while
equity situation starting a business
Pearson
Current 1 -.042
Correlation
ownership/equity
Sig. (2-tailed) .560
situation
N 199 199
Pearson
-.042 1
Difficulties found while Correlation
starting a business Sig. (2-tailed) .560
N 199 200
Table 1.63 Field Survey

Table 1.63 shows the correlation matrix between sub factors like Current ownership/equity

situation and Difficulties found while starting a business is significant negative relationship:

Pearson r = -.042 , Change in one variable shows the strongly significant negative change in

another at .5 significant level.

Correlations
Correlations
Difficulties found Paper Formalities
while starting a while sanctioning
business loan
Pearson Correlation 1 .088
Difficulties found while
Sig. (2-tailed) .214
starting a business
N 200 200
Pearson Correlation .088 1
Paper Formalities while
Sig. (2-tailed) .214
sanctioning loan
N 200 200
Table 1.64 Field Survey

138
Table 1.64 shows the correlation matrix between sub factors like Difficulties found while

starting a business and Paper Formalities while sanctioning loan is significant positive

relationship: Pearson r = .088 , Change in one variable shows the strongly significant positive

change in another at .214 significant level.

Correlations
Correlations
Marketing Try New Startup
Startup has
Strategies Ideas based on
Pearson Correlation 1 -.151* -0.061 0.117
Marketing
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.033 0.387 0.099
Strategies
N 200 198 200 200
Pearson Correlation -.151* 1 0.071 .007*
Startup has Sig. (2-tailed) 0.033 0.322 0.922
N 198 198 198 198
Pearson Correlation -0.061 0.071 1 0.036
Try New Ideas Sig. (2-tailed) 0.387 0.322 0.612
N 200 198 200 200
Pearson Correlation 0.117 0.007 0.036 1
Startup based on Sig. (2-tailed) 0.099 0.922 0.612
N 200 198 200 200
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 1.65 Field Survey

Table 1.65 shows the correlation matrix between sub factors like Marketing Strategies

(Marketing strategy) and Startup has (Technical platforms) is significant negative

relationship: Pearson r = -.151 , Change in one variable shows the significant negative change

in another at .05 significant level.

139
Startup has (Technical platforms) and Try New Ideas i.e., innovativeness is significant

positive relationship: Pearson r = .071 , Change in one variable shows the significant positive

change in another at significant level.

Try New Ideas and Startup based on i.e., product line is significant positive relationship:

Pearson r = .036 , Change in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at

significant level.

Startup has (Technical platforms) and Startup based on i.e., product line is significant low

positive relationship: Pearson r = .007 , Change in one variable shows the significant low

positive change in another at .05 significant level.

Correlations
Correlations
Imparting Difficulties found
Training is while starting a
Important business
Pearson
1 .077
Imparting Training is Correlation
Important Sig. (2-tailed) .276
N 200 200
Pearson
.077 1
Difficulties found while Correlation
starting a business Sig. (2-tailed) .276
N 200 200
Table 1.66 Field Survey

This table 1.66 has shown the correlation between Imparting Training is Important and

Difficulties found while starting a business i.e., difficulties in setting up startups is significant

positive relationship: Pearson r = .077 , Change in one variable shows the significant low

positive change in another at significant level.

140
Correlations
Difficulties found while Value
starting a business Proposition
Pearson
1 -.029
Difficulties found while Correlation
starting a business Sig. (2-tailed) .681
N 200 200
Pearson
-.029 1
Correlation
Value Proposition
Sig. (2-tailed) .681
N 200 200
Table 1.67 Field Survey

This table 1.67 has shown the correlation between Difficulties found while starting a business

i.e., difficulties in setting up startups and Value offering is significant negative relationship:

Pearson r = -.029 , Change in one variable shows the significant low positive change in

another at significant level.

141
Correlations
Government Paper Formalities Difficulties
finance scheme while sanctioning found while
available for your loan starting a
project business
Pearson
Government finance 1 .037 -.042
Correlation
scheme available for
Sig. (2-tailed) .602 .556
your project
N 199 199 199
Pearson
Paper Formalities .037 1 .088
Correlation
while sanctioning
Sig. (2-tailed) .602 .214
loan
N 199 200 200
Pearson
Difficulties found -.042 .088 1
Correlation
while starting a
Sig. (2-tailed) .556 .214
business
N 199 200 200
Table 1.68 Field Survey

This table 1.68 has shown the correlation between Government finance scheme

available for your project and Paper Formalities while sanctioning loan is significant negative

relationship: Pearson r = .037 , Change in one variable shows the significant low positive

change in another at significant level. Government finance scheme available for your project

and Difficulties found while starting a business i.e., difficulties facing by startups is

significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -.042, Change in one variable shows the

significant negative change in another at significant level. Paper Formalities while

sanctioning loan and Difficulties found while starting a business i.e., difficulties facing by

startups is significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .088, Change in one variable shows

the significant positive change in another at significant level.

142
 Correlations
Using New
Experiment First Idea
Try New Taking Technology Leadership
Age s with become
Ideas Risk enhance Skills
Projects project
Creativity
Pearson
1 0.09 0.04 -0.067 -0.064 -0.056 0.047
Correlation
Age Sig. (2-
0.206 0.578 0.348 0.368 0.433 0.508
tailed)
N 200 200 200 200 199 200 200
Pearson
0.09 1 .391** 0.23 0.15 .136** -0.024
Correlation
Try New Sig. (2-
Ideas 0.206 0 0.001 0.035 0.055 0.738
tailed)
N 200 200 200 200 199 200 200
Pearson
0.04 .391** 1 -0.045 .183** -0.066 0.116
Experime Correlation
nts with Sig. (2-
Projects
0.578 0 0.525 0.01 0.356 0.103
tailed)
N 200 200 200 200 199 200 200
Pearson
-0.067 .230** -0.045 1 .167** 0.062 0.087
First Idea Correlation
become Sig. (2-
project
0.348 0.001 0.525 0.018 0.383 0.22
tailed)
N 200 200 200 200 199 200 200
Pearson
-0.064 .150* .183** 0.167 1* .111** 0.229
Correlation
Taking Sig. (2-
Risk 0.368 0.035 0.01 0.018 0.118 0.001
tailed)
N 199 199 199 199 199 199 199
Using Pearson
New
-0.056 0.136 -0.066 0.062 0.111 1 0.055
Correlation
Technolo Sig. (2-
gy 0.433 0.055 0.356 0.383 0.118 0.436
enhance tailed)
Creativity N 200 200 200 200 199 200 200
Pearson
0.047 -0.024 0.116 0.087 0.229 0.055 1
Correlation
Leadershi Sig. (2-
p Skills 0.508 0.738 0.103 0.22 0.001 0.436
tailed)
N 200 200 200 200 199 200 200
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 1.69 Field Survey
This table 1.69 has shown the correlation matrix between Age and Try new ideas i.e,

innovativeness is significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .09 , Change in one variable

shows the significant low positive change in another at significant level.

143
Age and Experiments with projects is significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .04 ,

Change in one variable shows the significant low positive change in another at significant

level. Age and first idea become project i.e,never give up attitude is significant negative

relationship: Pearson r = -.067 , Change in one variable shows the significant low negative

change in another at significant level. Age and Taking Risk is significant negative

relationship: Pearson r = -.064 , Change in one variable shows the significant low negative

change in another at significant level. Age and Using New Technology enhance Creativity is

significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -.056 , Change in one variable shows the

significant negative change in another at significant level. Age and Leadership Skills is

significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .047 , Change in one variable shows the

significant positive change in another at significant level.

Try new ideas i.e, innovativeness and Experiments with projects is significant

moderate positive relationship: Pearson r = .391 , Change in one variable shows the

significant low moderate positive change in another at .01 significant level. Try new ideas i.e,

innovativeness and first idea become project i.e,never give up attitude is significant positive

relationship: Pearson r = .23 , Change in one variable shows the significant positive change in

another at significant level. Try new ideas and Taking Risk is significant positive

relationship: Pearson r = .15 , Change in one variable shows the significant low positive

change in another at significant level. Try new ideas and Using New Technology enhance

Creativity is significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .136 , Change in one variable

shows the significant positive change in another at .01 significant level. Try new ideas and

Leadership Skills is significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -.024 , Change in one

variable shows the significant negative change in another at significant level.

144
Experiments with Projects and first idea become project i.e,never give up attitude is

significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -0.045, Change in one variable shows the

significant negative change in another at significant level.

Experiments with Projects and Taking Risk is significant positive relationship:

Pearson r = .183 , Change in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at

.01 significant level. Experiments with Projects and Using New Technology enhance

Creativity is significant negative relationship: Pearson r = -.066 , Change in one variable

shows the significant negative change in another at .01 significant level. Experiments with

Projects and Leadership Skills is significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .116 , Change

in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at significant level.

First Idea become project and Taking Risk is significant positive relationship: Pearson

r = .167 , Change in one variable shows the significant positive change in another at .01

significant level. First Idea become project and Using New Technology enhance Creativity is

significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .062 , Change in one variable shows the

significant positive change in another at significant level. First Idea become project and

Leadership Skills is significant positive relationship: Pearson r = .087 , Change in one

variable shows the significant positive change in another at significant level.

Taking Risk and Using New Technology enhance Creativity is significant positive

relationship: Pearson r = .111 , Change in one variable shows the significant positive change

in another at .01 significant levels. Taking Risk and Leadership Skills is significant positive

relationship: Pearson r = .229 , Change in one variable shows the significant positive change

in another at significant level.

Using New Technology enhance Creativity and Leadership Skills is significant

positive relationship: Pearson r = .055 , Change in one variable shows the significant positive

change in another at significant level.

145
ANOVA One-way
 Managerial Skills Vs. Gender
o ANOVA
ANOVA (Managerial Skills Vs. Gender)
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Between Groups 3.861 1 3.861 2.856 .093
Try New Ideas Within Groups 266.290 197 1.352
Total 270.151 198
Between Groups .606 1 .606 .628 .429
Experiments
Within Groups 190.238 197 .966
with Projects
Total 190.844 198
First Idea Between Groups .984 1 .984 .735 .392
become Within Groups 263.770 197 1.339
project Total 264.754 198
Between Groups .492 1 .492 .783 .377
Taking Risk Within Groups 123.064 196 .628
Total 123.556 197
Using New Between Groups .006 1 .006 .008 .929
Technology Within Groups 137.914 197 .700
enhance
Total 137.920 198
Creativity
Take Problem Between Groups .171 1 .171 .322 .571
and Within Groups 104.593 197 .531
complaints as
Total 104.764 198
Opportunity
Freedom to Between Groups .025 1 .025 .063 .802
express Within Groups 78.668 197 .399
suggestions Total 78.693 198
Accept team Between Groups .595 1 .595 1.339 .249
decisions and Within Groups 87.516 197 .444
responsibility Total 88.111 198
Support Open Between Groups .319 1 .319 .913 .340

146
Communicatio Within Groups 68.887 197 .350
n Total 69.206 198
Between Groups .024 1 .024 .121 .729
Leadership
Within Groups 38.861 197 .197
Skills
Total 38.884 198
difficulties Between Groups 11.070 1 11.070 1.960 .163
while starting Within Groups 1112.668 197 5.648
a business Total 1123.739 198
Table 1.70
Table 1.70 explain the ANOVA one-way analysis on all the factors on Gender. The

value of F and sig. denotes the p value and in every case p value should be greater than .05

alpha value (sig. value) so, we accept the null hypothesis. Here, F= 2.856 < .093 sig. Try new

ideas, F= .628 < .429 sig. experiments with projects, F= .735 < .392 sig. first Idea become

project, F= .783 < .377 sig. taking risk, F= .008 > .929 sig. using new technology enhance

creativity, F= .322 > .571 sig. take problem and complaints as opportunity, F= .063 > .802

sig. freedom to express suggestions, F= 1.339 < .249 sig. Accept team decisions and

responsibility, F= .913 < .340 sig. supports open communication, F= .121 > .729 sig.

leadership skills and F=1.960 < .163 sig. difficulties while starting a business.

Hypothesis: ANOVA
H0 : Managerial skills has no significant impact on Gender.
H1 : Managerial skills has a significant impact on Gender.

147
Sub Factors:
Null Hypothesis Alternative Hypothesis Values Results
Try new ideas has no Try new ideas has a F value < Sig. Accept the Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Gender Gender
Experiments with Projects Experiments with F value < Sig. Accept the Null
has no significant impact Projects has a significant hypothesis
on Gender impact on Gender
First Idea become project First Idea become project F value < Sig. Accept the Null
has no significant impact has a significant impact hypothesis
on Gender on Gender
Taking Risk has no Taking Risk has a F value < Sig. Accept the Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Gender Gender
Using New Technology Using New Technology F value > Sig. Reject the Null
enhance Creativity has no enhance Creativity has a hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on
Gender Gender
Take Problem and Take Problem and F value > Sig. Reject the Null
complaints as Opportunity complaints as hypothesis
has no significant impact Opportunity has a
on Gender significant impact on
Gender
Freedom to express Freedom to express F value > Sig. Reject the Null
suggestions has no suggestions has a hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on
Gender Gender

148
ANOVA One-way
 Managerial Skills Vs. Qualification
ANOVA
Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Between Groups 6.550 3 2.183 1.623 .185
Try New Ideas Within Groups 263.605 196 1.345
Total 270.155 199
Between Groups 5.763 3 1.921 2.019 .113
Experiments with
Within Groups 186.457 196 .951
Projects
Total 192.220 199
Between Groups 12.425 3 4.142 3.217 .024
First Idea become
Within Groups 252.330 196 1.287
project
Total 264.755 199
Between Groups 2.060 3 .687 1.102 .350
Taking Risk Within Groups 121.508 195 .623
Total 123.568 198
Using New Between Groups .769 3 .256 .366 .777
Technology Within Groups 137.151 196 .700
enhance Creativity Total 137.920 199
Take Problem and Between Groups 11.322 3 3.774 7.767 .000
complaints as Within Groups 95.233 196 .486
Opportunity Total 106.555 199
Between Groups 5.371 3 1.790 4.765 .003
Freedom to express
Within Groups 73.649 196 .376
suggestions
Total 79.020 199
Accept team Between Groups 6.723 3 2.241 5.390 .001
decisions and Within Groups 81.497 196 .416
responsibility Total 88.220 199
Between Groups 1.677 3 .559 1.619 .186
Support Open
Within Groups 67.678 196 .345
Communication
Total 69.355 199

149
 Between Groups 1.126 3 .375 1.945 .124
Leadership Skills Within Groups 37.829 196 .193
Total 38.955 199
Using Latest
Between Groups 6.268 3 2.089 2.411 .068
Technology
Within Groups 168.076 194 .866
Total 174.343 197
Cost saving by
using Old Between Groups 9.546 3 3.182 3.047 .030
Technology
Within Groups 204.649 196 1.044
Total 214.195 199
Between Groups 15.798 3 5.266 4.317 .006
When will you find
Within Groups 239.077 196 1.220
Break even
Total 254.875 199
Between Groups 8.724 3 2.908 1.499 .216
Doing Marketing
Within Groups 380.271 196 1.940
how
Total 388.995 199
what difficulties Between Groups 18.127 3 6.042 1.071 .363
you find when Within Groups 1105.868 196 5.642
starting up business Total 1123.995 199
Table 1.71
Table 1.71 explain the ANOVA one-way analysis on all the factors on Qualification.

The value of F and sig. denotes the p value and in every case p value should be greater than

.05 alpha value (sig. value) so, we accept the null hypothesis. Here, F= 1.623 < .185 sig. Try

new ideas, F= 2.019 < .113 sig. experiments with projects, F= 3.217 < .024 sig. first Idea

become project, F= 1.102 < .350 sig. taking risk, F= .366 > .777 sig. using new technology

enhance creativity, F= 7.767 < .000 sig. take problem and complaints as opportunity, F=

4.765 < .003 sig. freedom to express suggestions, F= 5.390 < .001 sig. Accept team decisions

and responsibility, F= 1.619 < .186 sig. supports open communication, F= 1.945 < .124 sig.

150
leadership skills, F= 2.411 < .068 sig. Using latest technology, F 3.047 < .030 sig. Cost

saving by using old technology,F= 4.317 < .006 sig. Break even point,F= 1.499 < .216 sig.

Marketing Strategies, F= 1.071 < .363 sig. Difficulties while starting up business.

Hypothesis: ANOVA
H0 : Managerial skills has no significant impact on Qualification.
H1 : Managerial skills has a significant impact on Qualification.

Sub Factors:
Null Hypothesis Alternative Hypothesis Values Results
Try new ideas has no Try new ideas has a F value < Sig. Accept the
significant impact on significant impact on Null
Qualification Qualification hypothesis
Experiments with Projects Experiments with Projects F value < Sig. Accept the
has no significant impact on has a significant impact on Null
Qualification Qualification hypothesis
First Idea become project has First Idea become project F value < Sig. Accept the
no significant impact on has a significant impact on Null
Qualification Qualification hypothesis
Taking Risk has no Taking Risk has a F value < Sig. Accept the
significant impact on significant impact on Null
Qualification Qualification hypothesis
Using New Technology Using New Technology F value > Sig. Reject the
enhance Creativity has no enhance Creativity has a Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Qualification Qualification
Take Problem and Take Problem and F value < Sig. Accept the
complaints as Opportunity complaints as Opportunity Null
has no significant impact on has a significant impact on hypothesis
Qualification Qualification
Freedom to express Freedom to express F value < Sig. Accept the
suggestions has no suggestions has a significant Null
significant impact on impact on Qualification hypothesis

151
Qualification
Accept team decisions and Accept team decisions and F value < Sig. Accept the
responsibility has no responsibility has a Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Qualification Qualification
Support Open Support Open F value < Sig. Accept the
Communication has no Communication has a Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Qualification Qualification
Leadership Skills has no Leadership Skills has a F value < Sig. Accept the
significant impact on significant impact on Null
Qualification Qualification hypothesis
Using Latest Technology has Using Latest Technology F value < Sig. Accept the
no significant impact on has a significant impact on Null
Qualification Qualification hypothesis
Cost saving by using Old Cost saving by using Old F value < Sig. Accept the
Technology has no Technology has a Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Qualification Qualification
When will you find Break When will you find Break F value < Sig. Accept the
even has no significant even has a significant Null
impact on Qualification impact on Qualification hypothesis
Marketing Strategies has no Marketing Strategies has a F value < Sig. Accept the
significant impact on significant impact on Null
Qualification Qualification hypothesis
Facing difficulties while Facing difficulties while F value < Sig. Accept the
starting a business has no starting a business has a Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Qualification Qualification

152
ANOVA One-way
 Financial Skills Vs. BEP
ANOVA (Financial Skills Vs. BEP)
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Cost saving by Between Groups 7.531 5 1.506 1.414 .221
using Old Within Groups 206.664 194 1.065
Technology Total 214.195 199
Between Groups 5.487 5 1.097 2.145 .062
Availability of
Within Groups 99.233 194 .512
finance
Total 104.720 199
Availability of Between Groups 3.229 5 .646 .676 .642
Venture Within Groups 185.391 194 .956
Capital Total 188.620 199
Between Groups 7.630 5 1.526 1.688 .139
Availability of
Within Groups 175.365 194 .904
Suitable labor
Total 182.995 199
Between Groups 12.109 5 2.422 3.044 .011
Availability of
Within Groups 154.371 194 .796
Raw Material
Total 166.480 199
Imparting Between Groups 6.596 5 1.319 2.658 .024
Training is Within Groups 96.279 194 .496
Important Total 102.875 199
initial money Between Groups 27.753 5 5.551 2.190 .057
invested Within Groups 491.767 194 2.535
before asking Total 519.520 199
Doing Between Groups 15.863 5 3.173 1.650 .149
Marketing Within Groups 373.132 194 1.923
how Total 388.995 199
Between Groups 57.601 5 11.520 2.096 .068
what difficulties
you find when Within Groups 1066.394 194 5.497
starting up business
Total 1123.995 199
Table 1.72

153
 Table 1.72 explain the ANOVA one-way analysis on all the financial factors on BEP.

The value of F and sig. denotes the p value and in every case p value should be greater than

.05 alpha value (sig. value) so, we accept the null hypothesis. F 1.414 < .221 sig. Cost saving

by using old technology, F= 2.145 < .062 sig. Availability of finance, F= .676 < .642 sig.

Availability of Venture Capital, F= 1.688 < .139 sig. Availability of suitable labor, F= 3.044

< .011 sig. Availability of Raw material, F= 2.658 < .024 sig. Imparting Training, F= 2.190 <

.057 sig. Initial money invested , F= 1.650 < .149 sig. Marketing Strategies, F= 2.096 < .068

sig. Difficulties while starting up business.

Hypothesis: ANOVA
H0 : Financial skills has no significant impact on BEP.
H1 : Financial skills has a significant impact on BEP.

Sub Factors:
Null Hypothesis Alternative Hypothesis Values Results
Cost saving by using Old Cost saving by using Old F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Technology has no significant Technology has a hypothesis
impact on BEP significant impact on BEP
Availability of finance F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Availability of finance has no
has a significant impact hypothesis
significant impact on BEP
on BEP
Availability of Venture Capital Availability of Venture F value < Sig. Accept the Null
has no significant impact on Capital has a significant hypothesis
BEP impact on BEP
Availability of Suitable labor Availability of Suitable F value < Sig. Accept the Null
has no significant impact on labor has a significant hypothesis
BEP impact on BEP
Availability of Raw Material Availability of Raw F value < Sig. Accept the Null
has no significant impact on Material has a significant hypothesis
BEP impact on BEP

154
 Imparting Training is has no Imparting Training is has F value < Sig. Accept the Null
significant impact on BEP a significant impact on hypothesis
Important BEP Important
initial money invested F value < Sig. Accept the Null
initial money invested before
before asking has a hypothesis
asking has no significant
significant impact on
impact on BEP
BEP
Marketing Strategies has F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Marketing Strategies has no
a significant impact on hypothesis
significant impact on BEP
BEP
Difficulties while starting F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Difficulties while starting a
a business has a hypothesis
business has no significant
significant impact on
impact on BEP
BEP

ANOVA One-way
 All Factors Vs. Difficulties faced by Startups
ANOVA
Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Between Groups 4.999 8 .625 .766 .633
Age Within Groups 155.876 191 .816
Total 160.875 199
Between Groups .395 8 .049 .799 .604
Gender Within Groups 11.755 190 .062
Total 12.151 198
Between Groups 9.535 8 1.192 1.509 .156
Qualification Within Groups 150.845 191 .790
Total 160.380 199
Between Groups 3.266 8 .408 .593 .783
Experience Within Groups 131.514 191 .689
Total 134.780 199
Between Groups 7.903 8 .988 1.363 .215
Startup based on
Within Groups 138.477 191 .725

155
 Total 146.380 199
Between Groups 31.066 8 3.883 2.265 .025
Startup has Within Groups 324.025 189 1.714
Total 355.091 197
Between Groups 23.564 8 2.946 2.281 .024
Try New Ideas Within Groups 246.591 191 1.291
Total 270.155 199
Between Groups 13.688 8 1.711 1.830 .074
Experiments with
Within Groups 178.532 191 .935
Projects
Total 192.220 199
Between Groups 48.457 8 6.057 6.157 .000
Access to Finance
Within Groups 187.898 191 .984
Easy
Total 236.355 199
Between Groups 21.538 8 2.692 2.114 .036
First Idea become
Within Groups 243.217 191 1.273
project
Total 264.755 199
Between Groups 10.797 8 1.350 2.274 .024
Taking Risk Within Groups 112.771 190 .594
Total 123.568 198

Using New Between Groups 9.403 8 1.175 1.747 .090

Technology Within Groups 128.517 191 .673

enhance Creativity Total 137.920 199

Take Problem and Between Groups 4.996 8 .625 1.175 .316

complaints as Within Groups 101.559 191 .532
Opportunity Total 106.555 199
Between Groups 2.836 8 .354 .889 .527
Freedom to express
Within Groups 76.184 191 .399
suggestions
Total 79.020 199
Accept team Between Groups 6.374 8 .797 1.859 .069
decisions and Within Groups 81.846 191 .429
responsibility Total 88.220 199
Between Groups 4.806 8 .601 1.778 .084
Support Open
Within Groups 64.549 191 .338
Communication
Total 69.355 199

156
 Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Between Groups 5.554 8 .694 3.970 .000
Leadership Skills Within Groups 33.401 191 .175
Total 38.955 199
Paper Formalities Between Groups 11.994 8 1.499 1.436 .184
while sanctioning Within Groups 199.401 191 1.044
loan Total 211.395 199
Between Groups 14.936 8 1.867 2.214 .028
Using Latest
Within Groups 159.408 189 .843
Technology
Total 174.343 197
Cost saving by Between Groups 7.981 8 .998 .924 .498
using Old Within Groups 206.214 191 1.080
Technology Total 214.195 199
Between Groups 46.331 8 5.791 7.375 .000
Duration Taken by
Within Groups 149.989 191 .785
Bank
Total 196.320 199
Between Groups 6.578 8 .822 1.600 .127
Availability of
Within Groups 98.142 191 .514
finance
Total 104.720 199
Between Groups 31.601 8 3.950 4.805 .000
Availability of
Within Groups 157.019 191 .822
Venture Capital
Total 188.620 199
Between Groups 19.586 8 2.448 2.862 .005
Availability of
Within Groups 163.409 191 .856
Suitable labor
Total 182.995 199
Between Groups 7.472 8 .934 1.122 .350
Availability of Raw
Within Groups 159.008 191 .833
Material
Total 166.480 199
Between Groups 5.072 8 .634 1.238 .279
Imparting Training
Within Groups 97.803 191 .512
is Important
Total 102.875 199
Between Groups 19.050 8 2.381 1.929 .058
When will you find
Within Groups 235.825 191 1.235
Break even
Total 254.875 199

157
 initial money Between Groups 40.798 8 5.100 2.035 .044
invested before Within Groups 478.722 191 2.506
asking Total 519.520 199
Between Groups 21.664 8 2.708 .615 .765
What differ value
Within Groups 841.116 191 4.404
you are offering
Total 862.780 199
Government Between Groups 3.439 8 .430 1.781 .083
finance scheme Within Groups 45.858 190 .241
available for your
Total 49.296 198
project
Current Between Groups 11.153 8 1.394 2.533 .012
ownership/equity Within Groups 104.555 190 .550
situation Total 115.709 198
Between Groups 38.429 8 4.804 2.617 .010
Doing Marketing
Within Groups 350.566 191 1.835
how
Total 388.995 199
Table 1.73
Table 1.73 explain the ANOVA one-way analysis on all the factors on Difficulties

faced by Startups. The value of F and sig. denotes the p value and in every case p value

should be greater than .05 alpha value (sig. value) so, we accept the null hypothesis. F =.766

< .633 sig. Age, F= .799 < .604 sig. Gender, F= 1.509 < .156 sig. Qualification, F= .593 >

.783 sig. Experience, F= 1.363 < .215 sig. Startup based on, F= 2.265 < .025 Startup has, F=

2.281 < .024 sig. Try New Ideas, F = 1.830 < .074 sig. Experiments with Projects, F = 6.157

< .00 sig. Access to Finance Easy, F =2.114 < .036 First Idea become project, F = 2.274 <

.024 Taking Risk, F = 1.747 < .090 Using New Technology enhance Creativity, F = 1.175 <

.316 sign.Take Problem and complaints as Opportunity, F = .889 < .527 sig. Freedom to

express suggestions, F = 1.859 < .069 sig. Accept team decisions and responsibility, 1.778 <

.084 sig. Support Open Communication, F = 3.970 < .000 sig. Leadership Skills, F = 1.436 <

.184 sig. Paper Formalities while sanctioning loan, F = 2.214 < .028 sig. Using Latest

Technology, F = .924 < .498 sig. Cost saving by using Old Technology, F = 7.375 < .000

158
sig.Duration Taken by Bank , F = 1.600 < .127 sig. Availability of finance, F = 4.805 < .000

sig. Availability of Venture Capital, F = 2.862 < .005 sig. Availability of Suitable labor, F=

1.122 < .350 sig. Availability of Raw material, F= 1.238 < .279 sig. Imparting Training, F=

2.035 < .044 sig. Initial money invested , F= .615 > .765 sig. Value Offerings, F= 1.781 <

.083 sig. Availability of Governent Financial schemes, F = 2.533 < .012 Ownership Status, F

= 2.617 < .010 sig. Marketing Strategies.

Hypothesis: ANOVA
 H0 : All the skills has no significant impact on Difficulties faced by Startups
 H1 : All the skills has a significant impact on Difficulties faced by Startups
.
Sub Factors:
Null Hypothesis Alternative Hypothesis Values Results
Age has no significant Age has a significant F value < Sig. Accept the Null
impact on Difficulties impact on Difficulties hypothesis
faced by Startups faced by Startups
Gender has no F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Gender has a significant
significant impact on hypothesis
impact on Difficulties
Difficulties faced by
faced by Startups
Startups
Qualification has no Qualification has a F value < Sig. Accept the Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Experience has no Experience has a F value > Sig. Reject the Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Startup based on has no Startup based on has a F value < Sig. Accept the Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups

159
Startup has has no Startup has has a F value < Sig. Accept the Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Try New Ideas has no Try New Ideas has a F value < Sig. Accept the Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Experiments with F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Experiments with
Projects has no hypothesis
Projects has a significant
significant impact on
impact on Difficulties
Difficulties faced by
faced by Startups
Startups
Access to Finance Easy Access to Finance Easy F value < Sig. Accept the Null
has no significant impact has a significant impact hypothesis
on Difficulties faced by on Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
First Idea become First Idea become project F value < Sig. Accept the Null
project has no significant has a significant impact hypothesis
impact on Difficulties on Difficulties faced by
faced by Startups Startups
Taking Risk has no Taking Risk has a F value < Sig. Accept the Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Using New Technology Using New Technology F value < Sig. Accept the Null
enhance Creativity has enhance Creativity has a hypothesis
no significant impact on significant impact on
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Take Problem and Take Problem and F value < Sig. Accept the Null
complaints as complaints as hypothesis
Opportunity has no Opportunity has a

160
significant impact on significant impact on
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Freedom to express Freedom to express F value < Sig. Accept the Null
suggestions has no suggestions has a hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Accept team decisions Accept team decisions F value < Sig. Accept the Null
and responsibility has no and responsibility has a hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Support Open Support Open F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Communication has no Communication has no hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Leadership Skills has no Leadership Skills has a F value < Sig. Accept the Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Paper Formalities while Paper Formalities while F value < Sig. Accept the Null
sanctioning loan has no sanctioning loan has a hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Using Latest Technology Using Latest Technology F value < Sig. Accept the Null
has no significant impact has a significant impact hypothesis
on Difficulties faced by on Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Cost saving by using Old Cost saving by using Old F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Technology has no Technology has a hypothesis

161
significant impact on significant impact on
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Duration Taken by Bank Duration Taken by Bank F value < Sig. Accept the Null
has no significant impact has a significant impact hypothesis
on Difficulties faced by on Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Availability of finance Availability of finance F value < Sig. Accept the Null
has no significant impact has a significant impact hypothesis
on Difficulties faced by on Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Availability of Venture F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Availability of Venture
Capital has no hypothesis
Capital has a significant
significant impact on
impact on Difficulties
Difficulties faced by
faced by Startups
Startups
Availability of Suitable Availability of Suitable F value < Sig. Accept the Null
labor has no significant labor has a significant hypothesis
impact on Difficulties impact on Difficulties
faced by Startups faced by Startups
Availability of Raw F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Availability of Raw
Material has no hypothesis
Material has a significant
significant impact on
impact on Difficulties
Difficulties faced by
faced by Startups
Startups
Imparting Training is Imparting Training is F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Important has no Important has a hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
When will you find When will you find F value < Sig. Accept the Null
Break even has no Break even has a hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on

162
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
initial money invested initial money invested F value < Sig. Accept the Null
before asking has no before asking has a hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
value offering has no value offering has a F value > Sig. Reject the Null
significant impact on significant impact on hypothesis
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Government finance Government finance F value < Sig. Accept the Null
scheme available for scheme available for hypothesis
your project has no your project has a
significant impact on significant impact on
Difficulties faced by Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups
Current F value < Sig. Accept the Null
ownership/equity Current ownership/equity hypothesis
situation has no situation has a significant
significant impact on impact on Difficulties
Difficulties faced by faced by Startups
Startups
Doing Marketing how Doing Marketing how F value < Sig. Accept the Null
has no significant impact has a significant impact hypothesis
on Difficulties faced by on Difficulties faced by
Startups Startups

163
Crosstabs
 Financial Preference Vs. Failure Reasons
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Preference * Failure
200 100.0% 0 0.0% 200 100.0%
Reasons

Preference * Failure Reasons Cross tabulation

Failure Reasons
Knowle Experi Techn Fina Othe
Legal Total
dge ence ology nce rs
Count 0 4 0 0 0 0 4
Banks
Expected Count 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.9 0.2 4
Govt. & Count 0 4 10 2 0 0 16
Private
Expected Count 2.6 3 3 2.6 3.8 1 16
Prefe Institutions
renc Trust & Count 11 6 4 7 1 0 29
e Society Expected Count 4.8 5.5 5.5 4.6 6.8 1.7 29
Private Count 6 13 19 20 13 12 83
Body Expected Count 13.7 15.8 15.8 13.3 19.5 5 83
Family & Count 16 11 5 3 33 0 68
Friends Expected Count 11.2 12.9 12.9 10.9 16 4.1 68
Count 33 38 38 32 47 12 200
Total Expected
33 38 38 32 47 12 200
Count
Table 1.74

164
 Table 2.40 shows the correlation through cross tabulation tool between Financial

preferences by startups and Reasons behind failures. In total 4 Out of 38 who prefer Bank

thinks experience is the main factor behind failure of any startup. 10 out of 38 who thinks

technology, 4 out of 38 thinks Experience and 2 out of 32 thinks finance are the reasons

behind failure in total 16 prefers Government & Private Institution for funds. 11 out of 33

consider knowledge, 6 out of 38 consider experience, 4 out of 38 consider technology, 7 out

of 32 consider finance and 1 out of 47 consider legal in total 29 all of them prefer Trust &

Society for funds. 6 out of 33 consider knowledge, 13 out of 38 consider experience, 19 out

of 38 consider technology, 20 out of 32 consider finance and 13 out of 47 consider legal and

12 others reasons in total 83 all of them prefer Private body for funds. 16 out of 33 consider

knowledge, 11 out of 38 consider experience, 5 out of 38 consider technology , 3 out of 32

consider finance and 33 out of 47 consider legal in total 68 all of them prefer Family &

Friends for funds.

Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
a
Pearson Chi-Square 113.234 20 .000
Likelihood Ratio 114.548 20 .000

Linear-by-Linear Association 8.193 1 .004

N of Valid Cases 200

a. 17 cells (56.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected
count is .24.
Table 1.75

Chi Square test is shown in table 1.75, in which 56.7% are less than expected counts has the
value 113.234 which is goodness of fit.

165
Symmetric Measures
Value Asymp. Std. Approx. Approx. Sig.
a b
Error T
Interval by
Pearson's R .203 .058 2.916 .004c
Interval
Ordinal by Spearman
.185 .071 2.655 .009c
Ordinal Correlation
N of Valid Cases 200
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.
b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
c. Based on normal approximation.
Table 1.76
Hypothesis :
H0: Preference to finance has no significant impact on the reasons behind failure
of any startup.
H1: Preference to finance has a significant impact on the reasons behind failure of
any startup.

Interpretation :
Interval by Interval table, Pearson's R value .203 (-1 to +1 )and it is rejecting the null
hypothesis, it shows the possitive correlation between Preference to finance and reasons
behind failure of any startup.

Chart 3

166
Chart shows maximum startups who consider legal issues as a reason behind failure prefer
family and friends for finance.
ANOVA One-way
 Demographic Factors Vs. Financial Preference

ANOVA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 1.049 4 .262 .320 .864
Age Within Groups 159.826 195 .820
Total 160.875 199
Between Groups .553 4 .138 2.313 .059
Gender Within Groups 11.598 194 .060
Total 12.151 198
Between Groups 3.170 4 .793 .983 .418
Qualification Within Groups 157.210 195 .806
Total 160.380 199
Between Groups 1.060 4 .265 .387 .818
Experience Within Groups 133.720 195 .686
Total 134.780 199
Between Groups .480 4 .120 .245 .912
Family
Within Groups 95.440 195 .489
Background
Total 95.920 199
Table 1.77
Hypothesis:
H0 : Demographic factor has no significant impact on Financial preference.
H1 : Demographic factor has a significant impact on Financial preference.

Null Hypothesis Alternative Hypothesis Values Results

Age has no significant Age has a significant F value > Sig. Reject Null
impact on Financial impact on Financial value Hypothesis
Preference Preference
Gender has no Gender has a significant F value < Sig. Accept Null
significant impact on impact on Financial value Hypothesis

167
Financial Preference Preference
Qualification has no Qualification has a F value < Sig. Accept Null
significant impact on significant impact on value Hypothesis
Financial Preference Financial Preference
Exerience has no Experience has a F value > Sig. Reject Null
significant impact on significant impact on value Hypothesis
Financial Preference Financial Preference
Family Background has Family Background has a F value > Sig. Reject Null
no significant impact on significant impact on value Hypothesis
Financial Preference Financial Preference

ANOVA One-way
Financial Skills Vs. Financial Preference
ANOVA
Mean
Sum of Squares df F Sig.
Square
what difficulties you Between Groups 24.096 4 6.024 1.07 0.37
find when starting up Within Groups 1099.899 195 5.641
business Total 1123.995 199
Between Groups 48.964 4 12.241 5.52 0
Failure Reasons Within Groups 432.216 195 2.216
Total 481.18 199
Between Groups 8.903 4 2.226 1.76 0.14
When will you find
Within Groups 245.972 195 1.261
Break even
Total 254.875 199
initial money Between Groups 17.783 4 4.446 1.73 0.15
invested before Within Groups 501.737 195 2.573
asking Total 519.52 199
Government finance Between Groups 0.251 4 0.063 0.25 0.91
scheme available for Within Groups 49.045 194 0.253
your project Total 49.296 198
Duration Taken by Between Groups 2.838 4 0.709 0.72 0.58
Bank Within Groups 193.482 195 0.992

168
 Total 196.32 199
Between Groups 1.586 4 0.396 0.75 0.56
Availability of
Within Groups 103.134 195 0.529
finance
Total 104.72 199
Between Groups 9.485 4 2.371 2.58 0.04
Availability of
Within Groups 179.135 195 0.919
Venture Capital
Total 188.62 199
Paper Formalities Between Groups 3.652 4 0.913 0.86 0.49
while sanctioning Within Groups 207.743 195 1.065
loan Total 211.395 199
Table 1.78
Hypothesis:
H0 : Financial skills has no significant impact on Financial preference.
H1 : Financial skills has a significant impact on Financial preference.

Null Hypothesis Alternative Hypothesis Values Results

Difficulties while Difficulties while starting F value < Sig. value Accept Null
starting up has no up has a significant impact Hypothesis
significant impact on on Financial Preference
Financial Preference
Failure Reasons has no Failure Reasons has a F value < Sig. value Accept Null
significant impact on significant impact on Hypothesis
Financial Preference Financial Preference
Break even has no Break even has a F value < Sig. value Accept Null
significant impact on significant impact on Hypothesis
Financial Preference Financial Preference
initial money invested initial money invested has F value < Sig. value Accept Null
has no significant a significant impact on Hypothesis
impact on Financial Financial Preference
Preference
Availability of Govt. Availability of Govt. F value > Sig. value Reject Null
finance scheme has no finance scheme has a Hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on

169
Financial Preference Financial Preference
Duration Taken by Duration Taken by Bank F value < Sig. value Accept Null
Bank has no significant has a significant impact on Hypothesis
impact on Financial Financial Preference
Preference
Availability of finance Availability of finance has F value < Sig. value Accept Null
has no significant a significant impact on Hypothesis
impact on Financial Financial Preference
Preference
Availability of Venture Availability of Venture F value < Sig. value Accept Null
Capital has no Capital has a significant Hypothesis
significant impact on impact on Financial
Financial Preference Preference
Paper Formalities has Paper Formalities has a F value < Sig. value Accept Null
no significant impact significant impact on Hypothesis
on Financial Preference Financial Preference

ANOVA One-way
 Managerial Skills Vs. Age

ANOVA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 5.549 4 1.387 1.022 .397
Try New Ideas Within Groups 264.606 195 1.357
Total 270.155 199
Between Groups 12.543 4 3.136 3.403 .010
Experiments
Within Groups 179.677 195 .921
with Projects
Total 192.220 199
Between Groups 2.052 4 .513 .819 .514
Taking Risk Within Groups 121.516 194 .626
Total 123.568 198
Using New Between Groups 2.129 4 .532 .764 .550
Technology Within Groups 135.791 195 .696

170
 ehance
Total 137.920 199
Creativity
Between Groups 1.217 4 .304 1.572 .183
Leadership
Within Groups 37.738 195 .194
Skills
Total 38.955 199
Take Problem Between Groups 3.407 4 .852 1.610 .173
and complaints Within Groups 103.148 195 .529
as Oppurtunity Total 106.555 199
Freedom to Between Groups .821 4 .205 .512 .727
express Within Groups 78.199 195 .401
suggestions Total 79.020 199
Table 1.79
Hypothesis:
H0 : Managerial skills has no significant impact on Age.
H1 : Managerial skills has a significant impact on Age.

Null Hypothesis Alternative Hypothesis Values Results

Try New Ideas has no Try New Ideas has a F value < Sig. value Accept Null
significant impact on significant impact on Hypothesis
Age Age
Experiments with Experiments with F value < Sig. value Accept Null
Projects has no Projects has a Hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on
Age Age
Taking Risk has no Taking Risk has a F value < Sig. value Accept Null
significant impact on significant impact on Hypothesis
Age Age
Using New Technology Using New Technology F value < Sig. value Accept Null
ehance Creativity has ehance Creativity has a Hypothesis
no significant impact significant impact on
on Age Age
Leadership Skills has no Leadership Skills has a F value < Sig. value Accept Null
significant impact on significant impact on Hypothesis

171
Age Age
Take Problem and Take Problem and F value < Sig. value Accept Null
complaints as complaints as Hypothesis
Oppurtunity has no Oppurtunity has a
significant impact on significant impact on
Age Age
Freedom to express Freedom to express F value > Sig. value Reject Null
suggestions has no suggestions has a Hypothesis
significant impact on significant impact on
Age Age

Skewness with Frequencies

Statistics
Try New Experiments Access to First Idea become
Ideas with Projects Finance Easy project
Valid 200 200 200 200
N
Missing 0 0 0 0
Skewness -1.163 -1.503 .569 .070
Std. Error of
.172 .172 .172 .172
Skewness
Table 1,80

Chart 4 Skewness Self developed Chart 5 Skewness Self developed

172
Chart 6 Skewness Self developed Chart 7 Skewness Self developed

Statistics
Taking Using New Take Problem Freedom to
Risks Technology and complaints express
enhance as opportunities suggestions
Creativity
Valid 199 200 200 200
N
Missing 1 0 0 0
Skewness -.758 -.777 -.850 -.646
Std. Error of Skewness .172 .172 .172 .172
Table 1.81

Chart 8 Skewness Self developed Chart 9 Skewness Self developed

173
Chart 10 Skewness Self developed Chart 11 Skewness Self developed

Statistics
Accept team Support Open Leadership Paper Formalities
decisions and Communication Skills while sanctioning
responsibility loan
Valid 200 200 200 200
N
Missing 0 0 0 0
Skewness -.800 -.654 -1.073 -.505
Std. Error of Skewness .172 .172 .172 .172
Table 1.82

Chart 12 Skewness Self developed Chart 13 Skewness Self developed

174
Chart 14 Skewness Self developed Chart 15 Skewness Self developed

Statistics
Using Latest Cost saving by using Duration Taken Availiablity of
Technology Old Technology by Bank finance
Valid 198 200 200 200
N
Missing 2 0 0 0
Skewness -.450 .152 .447 -1.792
Std. Error of
.173 .172 .172 .172
Skewness

Chart 16 Skewness Self developed Chart 17 Skewness Self developed

175
 Chart 18 Skewness Self developed Chart 19 Skewness Self developed

Statistics
Availiability of Availaibility of Availability of Imparting Training is
Venture Capital Suitable labour Raw Material Important
Valid 200 200 200 200
N
Missing 0 0 0 0
Skewness .528 .233 -.216 -.602
Std. Error of
.172 .172 .172 .172
Skewness

Chart 20 Skewness Self developed Chart 21 Skewness Self developed

176
Chart 22 Skewness Self developed Chart 23 Skewness Self developed

Frequencies
Statistics
Innovative Easeof Qualification Experience Family
Finance Background
Valid 20 20 20 20 20
N
Missing 0 0 0 0 0
Skewness -.945 -.945
Std. Error of
.512 .512 .512 .512 .512
Skewness

Chart 24 Skewness Self developed Chart 25 Skewness Self developed

177
Chart 26 Skewness Self developed Chart 27 Skewness Self developed

Chart 28 Skewness Self developed

Statistics
Latest Duration Experimenting Leadership CostSavingBy
Technology Skills UsingOldTech
Valid 20 20 20 20 20
N
Missing 0 0 0 0 0
Skewness .000 .000 .000
Std. Error of
.512 .512 .512 .512 .512
Skewness
Table 1.83

178
Chart 29 Skewness Self developed Chart 30 Skewness Self developed

Chart 31 Skewness Self developed Chart 32 Skewness Self developed

Chart 33 Skewness Self developed

179
 Statistics
SuitableLabor AvailabilityofR TrainedOwner TrainedWorkfo
awMaterial rce
Valid 20 20 20 20
N
Missing 0 0 0 0
Skewness .000 .000
Std. Error of Skewness .512 .512 .512 .512
Table 1.84

Chart 34 Skewness Self developed Chart 35 Skewness Self developed

Chart 36 Skewness Self developed Chart 37 Skewness Self developed

180
Frequencies
 FinancialPreference
 FailureReasons
Statistics
FinancialPreference FailureReason
Valid 200 200
N
Missing 0 0
Mean 3.98 3.29
Std. Deviation .995 1.555
Variance .989 2.418
Skewness -.940 .009
Std. Error of Skewness .172 .172
Table 1.85
Frequency Table
Financial Preference
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Banks 4 2.0 2.0 2.0
Govt_Private 16 8.0 8.0 10.0
Trust_Society 29 14.5 14.5 24.5
Valid
Private Body 83 41.5 41.5 66.0
Family_Friends 68 34.0 34.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.86
Table 1.86 shows the frequencies data about financial preference 41.5% i.e., 83 out of 200

prefer Private body and 34% i.e.,68 out of 200 prefer family and friends for finance.

Preference to Bank and Government is still at very low numbers,the reasons could be the

administrative formalities or due to awareness.

181
 Failure Reason
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Knowledge 33 16.5 16.5 16.5
Experience 38 19.0 19.0 35.5
Technology 38 19.0 19.0 54.5
Valid Finance 32 16.0 16.0 70.5
LegalIssues 47 23.5 23.5 94.0
Other 12 6.0 6.0 100.0
Total 200 100.0 100.0
Table 1.87
Table 1.87 shows the statistics of Reasons behind failures legal issues is 23.5% i.e., 47 out of
200 has failed due to this reason. Experience and Technology are at 19% ie., 38 out of 200
cases and Knowledge & Finance has almost same numbers ie.,16 % which is 33 out of 200
startups.

Bar Chart

Chart 38 Bar graph Self developed

Chart 39 Bar graph Self developed

182
Factor Analysis
 Managerial Skills

Communalities
Initial Extraction
Try New Ideas 1.000 .589
Experiments with Projects 1.000 .761
First Idea become project 1.000 .774
Taking Risk 1.000 .483
Take Problem and complaints as
1.000 .496
Oppurtunity
Freedom to express suggestions 1.000 .623
Support Open Communication 1.000 .391
Leadership Skills 1.000 .370
Accept team decisions and responsibility 1.000 .516
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Total Variance Explained

Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared
Loadings
Total % of Cumulative Total % of Cumulative
Variance % Variance %
1 2.281 25.341 25.341 2.281 25.341 25.341
2 1.563 17.362 42.703 1.563 17.362 42.703
3 1.160 12.887 55.590 1.160 12.887 55.590
4 .959 10.660 66.250
5 .766 8.506 74.755
6 .689 7.659 82.414
7 .633 7.035 89.449
8 .532 5.912 95.361
9 .417 4.639 100.000
Table 1.88

183
 Chart 40 Screeplot PCA Self developed

Component Matrixa

Component

1 2 3
Try New Ideas .197 .731 -.127
Experiments with Projects .247 .668 -.504

First Idea become project -.089 .480 .732

Taking Risk .478 .369 .345

Take Problem and complaints as Oppurtunity .679 -.157 -.107

Freedom to express suggestions .731 -.038 -.296

Support Open Communication .522 -.330 .092

Leadership Skills .541 .068 .269

Accept team decisions and responsibility .620 -.278 .234

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.a

a. 3 components extracted.

Table 1.89

184
 Chart 41 Component graph Self developed

2. FIELD SURVEY OF INSTITUTIONS

Frequencies
Statistics
Startup Technical Finance Security Tax
BasedOn Platform Limit TowardsFinance Return
Valid 20 20 20 20 20
N
Missing 0 0 0 0 0
Mean 2.60 3.50 3.20 2.00 1.30
Std. Deviation .503 .513 1.609 1.026 .470
Sum 52 70 64 40 26
Table 2.1 Field Survey

The table 2.1 has shown the frequencies information about demographical factors,

Institutions who have given support to the startups are based upon mean value 2.6 (service),

technical platform 3.2(MIS/ERP) , finance limit 3.2( Rs. 5,00,000- Rs.7,50,000) , security

towards finance 1.02 (Assets), Tax return .470 (equal response).

185
Statistics
ValueOfferings BEP OwnershipType MarketingStrategy StartupType
Valid 20 20 20 20 20
N
Missing 0 0 0 0 0
Mean 1.00 3.50 4.00 1.50 1.00
Std. Deviation .000 .513 .000 .513 .000
Sum 20 70 80 30 20
Table 2.2 Field Survey

Table 2.2 shown opinion about other scale questions like Value offering mean 1(Quality),

Break-Even point mean (1-2Yr to 2-3Yr), Ownership/equity situation mean 4( Limited

liability company, publicly traded), Marketing Strategies mean 1.5 (Direct marketing/

Business to Customer), Startup type/category mean 1(Completely new

enterprises/business/project/activity).

Statistics
ChallengeForStartups DebtEquity Innovative EaseofFinance Qualification
Valid 20 20 20 20 20
N
Missing 0 0 0 0 0
Mean 1.50 2.50 4.70 3.70 4.00
Std. Deviation .513 .513 .470 .470 .000
Sum 30 50 94 74 80
Table 2.3 Field Survey

Table 2.3 shown the other factors like Challenges mean 1.5 (To get Finance), Debt-Equity

mean ( 30 -40% of the total Project Cost), Innovation is the most prefer aspect among

startups having mean 4.70 which is agree to strongly agree. Ease of Finance mean 3.7

( Neutral) and Qualification mean 4.0( agree).

186
Statistics
Experience FamilyBackground LatestTechnology Duration Experimenting
Valid 20 20 20 20 20
N
Missing 0 0 0 0 0
Mean 4.00 4.00 3.50 2.50 4.00
Std. Deviation .000 .000 .513 .513 .000
Sum 80 80 70 50 80
Table 2.4 Field Survey

Table 2.4 has shown the other factors like Experience mean 4 (Agree), FamilyBackground

mean 4 (Agree), Latest Technology having mean 3.50 which is neutral to agree. Duration

mean 2.5 (Disagree to neutral) and Experimenting mean 4.0( agree).

Statistics
Leadership Cost Saving Suitable Availability Trained Trained
Skills ByUsing Old Tech Labor of Owner Workforce
RawMaterial
Valid 20 20 20 20 20 20
N
Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mean 4.50 3.00 4.50 3.50 4.00 4.00
Std. Deviation .513 .000 .513 .513 .000 .000
Sum 90 60 90 70 80 80
Table 2.5 Field Survey

Table 2.5 shown the other factors like Leadership Skills mean 4.5 (Strongly Agree), Cost

Saving ByUsing Old Tech mean 3 (Neutral) , Suitable Labor having mean 4.50 which is

neutral to strongly agree. Availability of RawMaterial mean 3.5 (neutral to agree) , Trained

Owner mean 4.0( agree) and Trained Workforce 4 (agree).

187
 StartupBasedOn
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Service 8 40.0 40.0 40.0
Valid Mixed 12 60.0 60.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.6 Field Survey

Table 2.6 has shown the frequency data of StartupBasedOn (Product line) 40% has service

based and 60% mixed.

TechnicalPlatform

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

MIS/ERP 10 50.0 50.0 50.0

Valid
None 10 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.7 Field Survey

Table 2.7 shown the frequency data of Startup has (TechnicalPlatform) 50% has MIS only

among 20 responses.

FinanceLimit
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Upto 5 Lacs 4 20.0 20.0 20.0
5-10 lacs 4 20.0 20.0 40.0
10-15 lacs 3 15.0 15.0 55.0
Valid
15-20 lacs 2 10.0 10.0 65.0
Above 20 lacs 7 35.0 35.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.8 Field Survey

188
 Table 2.8 shown the frequency data of FinanceLimit 20% are upto Rs.5 lacs, 20% are

between Rs.5 lacs to Rs. 10 lacs, 15% are between Rs.10 lacs to Rs. 15 lacs, 10% are between

Rs.15 lacs to Rs. 20 lacs and remaining 35% has finance limit of Above Rs.20 Lacs.

SecurityTowardsFinance
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Collateral Security 10 50.0 50.0 50.0
Not Required
Valid 10 50.0 50.0 100.0
Anything
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.9 Field Survey

Table 2.9 shown the frequency data of Institutions who ask collateral that is security towards

Finance 50% has demaded only among 20 responses..

TaxReturn
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Yes 14 70.0 70.0 70.0
Valid No 6 30.0 30.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.10 Field Survey

Table 2.10 shown the frequency data of Institutions who Tax return towards Finance 70% has

demaded among 20 responses.

ValueOfferings
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Quality 20 100.0 100.0 100.0
Table 2.11 Field Survey

189
 Table 2.11 shown the frequency data of Institutions who prefer value offerings

towards Finance 100% has demaded among 20 responses.

BEP
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
2-3 years 10 50.0 50.0 50.0
Valid 3-4 years 10 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.12 Field Survey

Table 2.12 shown the frequency data of Institutions who consider Time duration for

Break-even 50% consider 2-3 years and remaining 50% consider 3-4 years among 20

responses.

OwnershipType
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Limited liability
Valid company, publicly 20 100.0 100.0 100.0
traded
Table 2.13 Field Survey

Table 2.13 shown the frequency data of Institutions who prefer Limited liability

company, publicly traded towards ownership of the startup 100% perefered among 20

responses.

190
 MarketingStrategy
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent

Direct Marketing 10 50.0 50.0 50.0

Valid Business 2 Customer 10 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.14 Field Survey

Table 2.14 shown the frequency data of Institutions who prefer different marketing

stragtegies consider Direct marketing consider 50% and remaining 50% consider Business 2

Customer among 20 responses.

StartupType
Freque Percent Valid Cumulative
ncy Percent Percent
Completely new
Valid 20 100.0 100.0 100.0
enterprises/business/project/ activity
Table 2.15 Field Survey

Table 2.15 shown the frequency data of Institutions who prefer Limited liability

company, publicly traded towards ownership of the startup 100% perefered among 20

responses.

ChallengeForStartups
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
To get financing 10 50.0 50.0 50.0
To establish contacts
Valid 10 50.0 50.0 100.0
with customers
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.16 Field Survey

191
 Table 2.16 shown the frequency data of Institutions who feels that Startups are facing

different challenges consider To get financing is 50% and remaining 50% consider To

establish contacts with customers among 20 responses.

DebtEquity
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
10-20% of the total Project
10 50.0 50.0 50.0
Cost
Valid 20-30% of the total Project
10 50.0 50.0 100.0
Cost
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.17 Field Survey

Table 2.17 shown the frequency data of Institutions who consider two different Debt -

Equity ratio that Startups having 10-20% of the total Project Cost consider 50 % and Startups

having 20-30% of the total Project Cost consider 50% among 20 responses.

Innovative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Agree 6 30.0 30.0 30.0
Strongly
Valid 14 70.0 70.0 100.0
Agree
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.18 Field Survey

Table 2.18 Institutions view point towards Innovativeness of Startups, 30% are agree

and 70% are strongly agree that means 100% are agree with Innovation.

192
 EaseofFinance
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Neutral 6 30.0 30.0 30.0
Valid Agree 14 70.0 70.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.19 Field Survey

Table 2.19 Insitutions view point towards Ease of Finance of Startups, 30% are neutral and

70% are agree.

Qualification
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Agree 20 100.0 100.0 100.0
Table 2.20 Field Survey

Table 2.20 shown the frequency data of Institutions who prefer Qualification towards

eligibility of the startup 100% agree among 20 responses.

Experience
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Agree 20 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 2.21 Field Survey

Table 2.21 shown the frequency data of Institutions who prefer Experience towards eligibility
of the startup 100% agree among 20 responses.

FamilyBackground

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Agree 20 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 2.22 Field Survey

193
Table 2.22 shown the frequency data of Institutions who prefer Family Background towards

eligibility of the startup 100% agree among 20 responses.

LatestTechnology
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Neutral 10 50.0 50.0 50.0
Valid Agree 10 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.23 Field Survey

Table 2.23 shown the frequency data of Institutions who prefer Use Latest Technology

towards eligibility of the startup is important 50% are neutral and 50% are agree among 20

responses.

Duration
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Disagree 10 50.0 50.0 50.0

Valid Neutral 10 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.24 Field Survey

Table 2.24 shown the frequency data of Institutions who consider Duration of sanctioning the

loan 50% are neutral and 50% are disagree among 20 responses.

Experimenting
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Agree 20 100.0 100.0 100.0
Table 2.25 Field Survey

194
 Table 2.25 shown the frequency data of Institutions who prefer Experimenting

towards eligibility of the startup 100% agree among 20 responses.

LeadershipSkills

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Agree 10 50.0 50.0 50.0
Valid Strongly Agree 10 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.26 Field Survey

Table 2.26 Insitutions view point towards Leadership Skills of Startups, 50% are

agree and 50% are strongly agree that means 100% are agree with Leadership Skills.

CostSavingByUsingOldTech

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Neutral 20 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 2.27 Field Survey

Table 2.27 shown the frequency data of Institutions who are 100% neutral about Cost saving
by using Old Technology among 20 responses.

SuitableLabor
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Agree 10 50.0 50.0 50.0

Valid Strongly Agree 10 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.28 Field Survey

Table 2.28 Insitutions view point towards availability of suitable labor for Startups, 50% are

agree and 50% are strongly agree that means 100% are agree with this as an important factor.

195
 AvailabilityofRawMaterial
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Neutral 10 50.0 50.0 50.0
Valid Agree 10 50.0 50.0 100.0
Total 20 100.0 100.0
Table 2.29 Field Survey

Table 2.29 Insitutions view point towards availability of Raw Material for Startups,

50% are neutral and 50% are agree with this as an important factor

.
TrainedOwner

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Agree 20 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 2.30 Field Survey

Table 2.30 shown the frequency data of Institutions who are 100% agree about

Trained Owner among 20 responses.

TrainedWorkforce
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Agree 20 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 2.31 Field Survey

Table 2.31 shown the frequency data of Institutions who are 100% agree about

Trained Work Force among 20 responses.

196
Correlations
Correlations
Innovative LeadershipSkills Experimenting
Pearson Correlation 1 .655** .b
Innovative Sig. (2-tailed) .002 .
N 20 20 20
Pearson Correlation .655** 1 .b
LeadershipSkills Sig. (2-tailed) .002 .
N 20 20 20
Pearson Correlation .b .b .b
Experimenting Sig. (2-tailed) . .
N 20 20 20
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
b. Cannot be computed because at least one of the variables is constant.
Table 2.32 Field Survey

Table 2.32 shows the correlation table between Innovative and Leadership Skills is .655

significantly positive correlated.

Correlations
Descriptive Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N

Qualification 4.00 .000 20

Experience 4.00 .000 20
LatestTechnology 3.50 .513 20
SuitableLabor 4.50 .513 20

AvailabilityofRawMaterial 3.50 .513 20

TrainedOwner 4.00 .000 20

TrainedWorkforce 4.00 .000 20
Table 2.33 Field Survey

197
Table2.33 shown the Descriptive statistics mean for following factors Qualification,

Experience, Latest Technology, Suitable Labor, Availibility of Raw Material, Trained Owner

and Trained Workforce between 3.5 to 4.

Correlations
Qualification Experience LatestTechnology
Pearson Correlation .a .a -1.000**
Suitable Labor Sig. (2-tailed) . . .000
N 20 20 20
Pearson Correlation .a .a -1.000**
Availability of
Sig. (2-tailed) . . .000
RawMaterial
N 20 20 20
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 2.34 Field Survey

Table 2.34 Correlation between Availability of Suitbale Labor and Latest Technology is -1
which is Significantly Highly Negative. Availability of Raw material and Latest Technology
is -1 which is Significantly Highly Negative.

Correlations
Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

EaseofFinance 3.70 .470 20

FamilyBackground 4.00 .000 20

CostSavingByUsingOldTech 3.00 .000 20

BEP 3.50 .513 20

DebtEquity 2.50 .513 20

Table 2.35 Field Survey

Table 2.35 shown the Descriptive statistics mean for following factors Ease of

Finance, Family Background, Cost Saving By Using Old Technology, BEP, DebtEquity

between 2.5 to 4.

198
RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS
―Defining Startups are not easy. Every day inventions creating new products which
focuses on solving the problem. Startups have idol of Successful Enterprises under MSME.
According to Mr. Amitabh Kant CEO NITI Ayog , focusing on the startup zone. He also
explained that digital India is major for quick development for the accomplishment of the
startup India Movement.
This research work focused on identifying influencers of eligibility of startup to get finance
under Startup India that affects the performance of the start-ups and analysed the effects of
each factor in achieving the startup objectives. Further, the possibility of Innovation playing
the role in establishment of any startup and all the key result were validated with a assembly
of domain experts. This chapter conclude findings and implications apart from limitations of
the study and future research recommendations.

Conceptual Model
S. No Factors Independent Eigen
Variable Values
1 Try new Ideas 2.281
2 Experiments with Projects Managerial 1.563
3 First Idea Become project 1.16
4 Using New Technology enhance Technical 1.64
creativity
5 Using latest Technology 1.431
6 Access to finance easy 2.155
7 Cost saving by using old technology Financial 1.187
8 Duration Taken by Bank 1.042

199
 Skills EligibilityModel for Startup Financing

Risk Taking

Managerial Innovativeness
Skills

Creativity

Techinical
know-how
Eligibility to get
Startup Finance Technical Skills
Using Latest
Technology

Debt - Equity
Ratio

Return On
Financial Skills Investment

Break Even Point

Conceptual Model Self Developed

200
5.1 FINDINGS

This section provides a summary of findings from the study.

 There are 87 respondents from 200 are in up to 30 years age group, where 72

respondents are between 31 years to 40 years age. Approximately 80 % respondents are

below 40 years age group. Approximately 20% respondents are above 41 years age

group.

 Frequencies are showing gender ratio 93.5 % are male and around 6.5 % are female.

 Frequencies are showing the qualification 95% respondents are having graduation degree

of more. Where 32% are post graduates and 31% are professionals.

 Frequencies of 200 respondents family background 75% respondents don‘t have business

exposure and they are first generation entrepreneurs.

 Table shown 46.5% have website and 23% startups have mobile application and rest

have mis/erp.

 Frequencies of trying new ideas 75% respondents are agree with innovation, trying new

ideas over 200 respondents.

 Table shown 83% are agree with experimenting with projects.

 Access to finance 65% respondents are strongly disagree

 34% understand that one should must have never give up attitude.

 81% are agree with taking risk is important.

 Around 80% are agree with enhancing creativity by using new technology is measured.

 Opportunity seeker is very important factor of managerial skills 87.5% are agree with

this.

 92.5% are agree with freedom to express suggestions.

 92% are agree with accept team decisions.

 96.5% are agree those who are supporting open communication.

201
 100% are agree with leadership skills are important for every startups.

 62.5% are agree with using latest technology.

 65% are disagree with duration taken by bank

 93% are agree with ample availability of finance.

 Opinion of 66.5% disagree availability of suitable labour.

 Imparting training is important 85.5% are agree.

 Break-even point comes under 3 years 87.5% according to startups.

 Startups differ on value startups are offering considers 50.5% are believing in

quality,13.5% are in variety and 21% are value added services.

 45% has government finance scheme available for projects startups. Whereas 54.5%

differs with scheme is not available.

 Around 56.5% feels that getting finance is a major difficulty for any startup. Whereas

18.5% feels that to established contact with new customer is a another major difficulty.

 The factor analysis of all the major variables. It shows the correlation matrix between all

the managerial skills sub factors like try new ideas and experiments with projects is

strongly significant moderate positive relationship: pearson r = .391.

 Taking risk in projects and take problem and complaints as opportunity is a significant

moderate positive relationship: pearson r = 0.223. Taking risk in projects and leadership

skills are a significant moderate positive relationship: pearson r = 0.229

 Take problem and complaints as opportunity (opportunity seeker) and freedom to

express suggestions is a significant moderate positive relationship: pearson r = 0.408.

 Freedom to express suggestions and accept team decisions and responsibility is a

significant moderate positive relationship: pearson r = 0.316.

 Accept team decisions and responsibility and support open communication is a

significant less positive relationship: pearson r = 0.324. Accept team decisions and

202
 responsibility and leadership skills are a significant moderate positive relationship:

pearson r = 0.228

 "Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test is a evaluate of how appropriate your statistics is

for factor analysis 0.617 measurement shows a general proportion of data.

 Chi-square focuses is called goodness of fit test. It indicates the data collected from

sample matches the entire population here, 237.508 is the value it shows the moderate fit

of data.

 Variance explained by first three components are better in among nine variables. These

are try new ideas, experiments with projects and first idea become project.

 Chi-square focuses is called goodness of fit test. It indicates the data collected from

sample matches the entire population here, 99.712 is the value it shows the significant fit

of data.

 Variance explained by first two components are better in among six variables. These are

using new technology enhance creativity and using latest technology.

 Ease in access finance and duration taken by bank is strongly significant moderate

positive relationship: pearson r = 0.483. Ease in access finance and availability of

venture capital is strongly significant moderate positive relationship: pearson r = 0.393.

 Duration taken by bank and availability of venture capital is strongly significant

moderate positive relationship: pearson r = 0.402.

 The value is a kaiser-meyer-olkin measure of the ratio of variance among variables that

might be common variance. The lower the ratio, the more appropriate your facts is to

factor analysis. Here 0.687 measurement shows a general proportion of data.

 The standard values of major factors of managerial skills like experiments with projects

mean is 4.17, standard deviation .983 and skewness is -1.503 at standard error .172.

Taking risk mean is 4.11.

203
 Duration taken by bank shows the significant high positive change in difficulties you

find when starting up business at significant 0.01 level correlation r = .372

 There is a significant correlation between Expected Break even time and intial money

invested before asking factor positive relationship: pearson r = .205, at .01 high

significant level.

 There is a significant correlation between leadership skills and taking risk factor positive

relationship : pearson r = .229, at .01 high significant level.

 There is a significant negative correlation between cost saving by using old technology

and using latest technology factor: pearson r = -.248, at .01 high significant level.

 There is a significant correlation between Ease in access finance and duration taken by

bank factor significant strong positive relationship : pearson r = .483, at .01 high

significant level.

 Correlation between try new ideas and experiments with projects is strongly significant

moderate positive relationship: pearson r = .391 at .01 significant level.

 Correlation between try new ideas and taking risk is highly significant positive

relationship: pearson r = .150 at .01 significant levels.

 Correlation between try new ideas and freedom to express suggestions with projects is

strongly significant positive relationship: pearson r = .148 at .01 significant levels.

 Correlation between try new ideas and leadership skills are strongly significant positive

relationship: pearson r = .024 at 0.01 significant levels.

 Experiments with projects and using new technology enhances creativity significant low

negative relationship: pearson r = -.066, change in one variable shows the strongly

significant low negative change in another at 0.05 significant level.

204
 Correlation between taking risk and take problem and complaints as opportunity

significant positive relationship: pearson r = .223 at .05 significant level.

 Correlation between taking risk and accept team decisions and responsibility suggestions

with projects is significant positive relationship: pearson r = .2 at significant levels.

 Correlation between first idea become project and using new technology enhances

creativity significant positive relationship: pearson r = .062 at .01 significant level.

 Correlation between first idea become project and take problem and complaints as

opportunity significant negative relationship: pearson r = -.109 at .01 significant level.

 Correlation between first idea become project and accept team decisions and

responsibility suggestions with projects is significant negative relationship: pearson r = -

.061 at .01 significant levels.

 Correlation between first idea become project and support open communication is

significant negative relationship: pearson r = -.072 at .01 significant levels.

 Correlation between startup has (technical platforms) and try new ideas i.e.,

innovativeness is significant positive relationship: pearson r = .071 at significant level.

 Correlation between try new ideas and startup based on i.e., product line is significant

positive relationship: pearson r = .036 at significant level.

 Correlation between startup has (technical platforms) and startup based on i.e., product

line is significant low positive relationship: pearson r = .007 at .05 significant level.

 The correlation between government finance scheme available for your project and paper

formalities while sanctioning loan is significant negative relationship: pearson r = .037 at

significant level.

 Correlation between government finance scheme available for your project and

Difficulties found while starting a business i.e., difficulties facing by startups is

significant negative relationship: pearson r = -.042 at significant level.

205
 Correlation between paper formalities while sanctioning loan and Difficulties found

while starting a business i.e., difficulties facing by startups is significant positive

relationship: pearson r = .088 at significant level.

 The correlation between age and try new ideas , experiments with projects i.e,

innovativeness is significant positive relationship: pearson r = .09 & .04 respectively at

significant level.

 The correlation between age and taking risk is significant negative relationship: pearson r

= -.064 at significant level.

 The correlation between age and using new technology enhance creativity is significant

negative relationship: pearson r = -.056 at significant level.

 The correlation between age and leadership skills is significant positive relationship:

pearson r = .047 at significant level.

 The correlation between try new ideas i.e, innovativeness and experiments with projects

is significant moderate positive relationship: pearson r = .391 at .01 significant level.

 The correlation between try new ideas i.e, innovativeness and first idea become project

i.e,never give up attitude is significant positive relationship: pearson r = .23 at significant

level.

 Institutions who have given support to the startups are based upon technical platform i.e.,

mis/erp and finance limit Rs. 5,00,000- Rs.7,50,000 and based on collateral and

sometimes it requires tax return.

 Institution prefers those startups who are offering values that too in quality, achieve

break-even point between 2yr to 3yr, whose ownership/equity situation is limited

liability company, publicly traded and prefer direct marketing/ business to customer as

marketing strategies should be completely new enterprises/ business/ project/ activity.

206
 The major challenges is to get finance, should have invested atleast 30 -40% of the total

project cost and innovation is the most prefer aspect among with relevant qualification

required.

 Factors affecting the eligibility of getting finance are experience, family background,

usage of latest technology and experimenting to finding innovative ways.

 Leadership skills, availability of suitable labor, raw material with requires training plays

very significant role.

 Innovative and leadership skills of startups is important and highly correlated with each

other.

 Correlation through cross tabulation tool between Financial preferences by startups and

Reasons behind failures. In total 4 Out of 38 who prefer Bank thinks experience is the

main factor behind failure of any startup.

 Correlation through cross tabulation tool between Financial preferences by startups and

Reasons behind failures 10 out of 38 who thinks technology, 4 out of 38 thinks

Experience and 2 out of 32 thinks finance are the reasons behind failure in total 16

prefers Government & Private Institution for funds.

 Correlation through cross tabulation tool between Financial preferences by startups and

Reasons behind failures 11 out of 33 consider knowledge, 6 out of 38 consider

experience, 4 out of 38 consider technology, 7 out of 32 consider finance and 1 out of 47

consider legal in total 29 all of them prefer Trust & Society for funds.

 Correlation through cross tabulation tool between Financial preferences by startups and

Reasons behind failures 6 out of 33 consider knowledge, 13 out of 38 consider

experience, 19 out of 38 consider technology, 20 out of 32 consider finance and 13 out of

47 consider legal and 12 others reasons in total 83 all of them prefer Private body for

funds.

207
  Correlation through cross tabulation tool between Financial preferences by startups and

Reasons behind failures 16 out of 33 consider knowledge, 11 out of 38 consider

experience, 5 out of 38 consider technology , 3 out of 32 consider finance and 33 out of

47 consider legal in total 68 all of them prefer Family & Friends for funds.

 Reasons behind failures legal issues is 23.5% i.e., 47 out of 200 has failed due to this

reason. Experience and Technology are at 19% ie., 38 out of 200 cases and Knowledge

& Finance has almost same numbers ie.,16 % which is 33 out of 200 startups.

 Possitive correlation between Preference to finance and reasons behind failure of any

startup.Pearson's R value .203 (-1 to +1 ).

5.1.1 Key Findings

The following are the key findings on success of startup finance and eligibility beyond

eligibility:

i. ‗Gaining relevant qualification and experience is very important in the process of

getting finance‖.

ii. ‗Access to financial support‘ becomes easy when startup holds assets and capital

involved.

iii. ‗Incubators and accelerators‘ would enhance the success of the startup.

iv. DIPP is authorised to get eligibility check of any startup. After approval the bank of

government financial institution plays the role.

v. Institution prefers major three factors these are- managerial skills, technical skills,

financial skills before giving funds.

vi. Innovativeness, Communication skills, Risk taking behaviour, Creative, Problem

solver, leadership skills are considered sub factor of one of the major factor

managerial skills.

208
 vii. Using latest technology including digital platform, Relevant training, availability of

raw material- labour- finance and product viability in market are some of the

considered sub factors of another major factor technical skills.

viii. Return on investment, cost saving behaviour, capital invested and analytical ability to

calculate break-even point considered in Financial skills.

ix. 83 out of 200 still prefers Private body for funds the reason could be awareness, paper

formalities.

x. Availability of govt. Finance scheme has a significant impact on financial preference

xi. Take problem and complaints as opportunity has a significant impact on gender

xii. Freedom to express suggestions has a significant impact on gender

xiii. Using new technology enhance creativity has a significant impact on qualification

xiv. Experience has a significant impact on difficulties faced by startups

xv. Value offering has a significant impact on difficulties faced by startups

xvi. The possitive correlation between preference to finance and reasons behind failure of

any startup.

xvii. Age has a significant impact on financial preference

xviii. Experience has a significant impact on financial preference

xix. Family background has a significant impact on financial preference

xx. Availability of govt. Finance scheme has a significant impact on financial preference

xxi. Freedom to express suggestions has a significant impact on age

xxii. From the above, it is very apparent that all the Primary and Secondary objectives of

the study have been achieved and all the related postulations are found to be valid.

The following are significant inferences arrived at upon testing of the model

proposed:

209
xxiii. The opinion of institutions respondents on significance assigned to Access to finance

positively relates to the postulation that Startups can play the role of open accelaration

hubs. Further, it desires to be noted that this accelerator role could eventually lead to

success of startups.

xxiv. There is a need to convey in Government / policy makers in order to help linkages

with startups. The continuous technology and innovation needs some genuine and

flexible size of procurement budgets available with stratups, this might strength in

significant value to the table.

5.2 IMPLICATIONS OF STUDY

5.2.1 For Practitioners

The research would help startup to understand the relative merits and demerits of their

service offering. Eventually, this considerate would help them to optimise the financial

service mix of funding process variables.

Research will help new startup understand initial finance with environmental success

factors and guide them to suitable strategies for their operational environment. This study will

help the planning of monitor results, policy makers, allocate resources and evaluate the right

tools. The model developed as a outcome of the study might be of help to the startups,

incubators, researchers and students to comprehend the persuade of each of the factors on the

performance of the startup finance and financial outcomes.

Government agencies, which promote incubation and incubation partnership, can

provide enough opportunities for networking in industries, incubators, academic institutions

and potential start-ups. These opportunities will, of course, create a network of friendly

relations-friendly relationships.

210
 Generally, the study business helps in the management of the incubator for the

incubation industry. This is the provision for the overall combination of new capabilities and

related opportunities. The success of financing startup depends mainly on the functional and

financial autonomy provided to financial institutions.

5.2.2 For Academic Researchers

There is a need to develop locally relevant commercial and operational models for the

start. Even if the financial institutions consider adopting these models, they have to align with

their respective industrial ecosystem. For this it is necessary to estimate the effectiveness of

the theoretical model, the study of the adjustment of local commercial practices, and their

effectiveness to adopt them. Management skills are required in the incubation profession.

Internship for formal certification and education programs, follow-up trainees and interested

professionals. Again, this training requires research in the areas of curricular development

and the effect of such interventions.

5.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

It was based on the performance of research institutes and was limited to capturing

opinions of twenty respondents (administrators of institutions) besides the invited experts for

elite interviews. A larger and more representative sample can give broad representation for

the measurement of factors that affect the startup. The data collected for the study is less or

less of the same group of new companies and institutions and therefore, the estimation of the

results of the government group can be a challenge. The industry in which several business

incubators are operating, operating in different industries. Although there are many other

factors, such as industrial environments, device mobility, equipment capacity, which can

affect performance. This study is limited to the service.

211
 Young entrepreneur who have started their business in Business Services in the

financial year 2015-2016(interpreted as 01st April 2015-31st March 2016) in Indore City

through census method considered in the Indore city.

The study postulated to identify the startup finance eligibility and factors affecting it,

further Policy maker of Startup Finance must considered various different factor with the

perspective of Banks and Financial institution. Startups should also consider these factor as a

key to be eligible for Starup Finance.

A very detailed approach was not available with this new proposal. The respondents and the

experts were quite familiar. As an innovation in the business model, the vast majority of

institutional initiatives are less than a decade old worldwide.

It is only in the last six to eight years that many aspects of open innovation are

researched, tested, used and practiced. However, almost all research efforts are in large

corporate companies. We still have to see reliable data in Indian context, including corporate

sector, leaving incubation of companies and new companies alone. In India, the pace of

incubation initiatives has increased in the last five years and is expected to reach a significant

mass in the near future. Then, It could take very quantitative information.

Following are certain general limitations of this study:

 "Startup India-Stand up India" scheme for Startups financing limits the research.

 Respondents' behavior was unexpected while completing the questionnaire. There is a

possibility that the bias data of the responder will occur in the absence of respondents

due to non-sample errors

212
 A lack of time and resources for restrictions. Sampling errors and selection bias can

affect this study to some extent.

 In this study, factors like experience and risk of institution (respondents) were not given

great importance.

 Startups registered with DIPP between the financial year 2015-2016 taken into

consideration.

 Institution availability was convenience in this study.

 First generation entrepreneurs considered in this study.

 SPSS 20.0 is used T Test (SPSS), Factor Analysis, CHI square, ANOVA one-way, Karl

Pearson's Correlation and Spearman Rank Correlation Tools was used.

 Eigen Value more than 1 is considered for model development.

 Limitation of sub factors or sub dependent variables under Managerial, Technical and

Financial Skills.

213
5.4 CONCLUSION

Research will help new startup understand initial finance with environmental success

factors and guide them to suitable strategies for their operational environment. This study will

help the planning of monitor results, policy makers, allocate resources and evaluate the right

tools. The model developed as a outcome of the study might be of help to the startups,

incubators, researchers and students to comprehend the persuade of each of the factors on the

performance of the startup finance and financial outcomes.

Customer acceptance and corporate performance in the market have been subordinated to all

other objectives and help start-up to obtain customer acceptance. To make a successful start,

institutions should consider providing access to financial support as an important and

compulsory service. It will affect the results of incubation, in addition to its other proposals

of basic and value-added services such as consulting and financing. Since the success of the

incubated companies will ultimately portray the success of the incubation programs.

To strengthen access to financial aid, the incubator should consider building a strong

partnership with the industry or in a special set of incubator which focus on certain areas of

motion. This will help you to play the role of innovation mediators and help them to become

a model centre. Experience and Family Background affects the Financial Preference of an

Entrepreneur.

A group approach may be necessary to achieve an important mass. It can be done

through an open innovation platform or even by managing a leading incubator through the

Apex Incubator Association, which manages this forum. When the network's personal

incubator network connects with the companies individually and regulates open access to

innovation, their services will be included in consultation, infrastructure, talent and funding

along with access to the market. It is necessary to implement a series of pilot initiatives and

their results are normalized before a particular model.

214
5.5 SCOPE FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Although many limitations can trigger future studies and new problems, here are some

specific research opportunities that open up research. Since this study has incubators,

financial institutions and new companies are a targeted group, so it is important to consider

new companies.

 Do the tutorial and the comprehensive incubator make more rational when expanding

the training template?

 If the need for incubation environment decreases?

The lack of risk correction can be a major hindrance to promoting high tech and high growth

companies. The comments received from experts on "Access to government support‗

provide a pointer and raises an issue to work with:

 Do most of the new businesses fail because of their inability to understand and address

the needs of the clients?

The findings related to "Access to government support‗ lead to further questions such as:

 Does the role of incubator offer only some clues from your network for beginners / beta

clients?

 Incubators who focus on special areas like biotechnology / agricultural products also

provide access to market support?

 Should business coaching be combined with access to market support in start-up in

their product-market strategy development?

 What is the best way to get the best out of the economy through incubators?

These questions eventually open up some future research directions in the business

incubation domain.

215
 REFERENCES

 Aswath Damodaran, Valuing Young, Start-up and Growth Companies: Estimation

Issues and Valuation Challenges, SSRN Electronic Journal 06/2009;

 Allen, W. D., Huntsville, A., & Hall, T. W. (2009). Entrepreneurs , Investors , and

Equity Financing : A Resource-Economic Analysis.

 Announcements, G. (n.d.). Update on Enabling the „ Startup India ‟ Programme, 3–5.

 Au, K., & Kwan, H. K. (2009). Start-up capital and Chinese entrepreneurs: The

role of family. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(4), 889-908.

 Authors, F. (2014). E-finance : status , innovations

 Backes-gellner, U., & Werner, A. (2007). Entrepreneurial Signaling via Education : A

Success Factor in Innovative Start-Ups, 173–190. Biz, S. (2014). Funding for Online,

(September).

 Baird, M. L. (2002). On the Side of the Angels.

 Benjamin, G., & Margulis, J. (2005). Angel Capital.p(25)

 Blank, Steve (May 2013). Why the Lean StartUp Changes Everything, in Harvard

Business Review

 Bootlaw Retrieved May 18, 2012. "Bootlaw – Essential law for startups and emerging

tech businesses – Up, Up and Away. Should You be Thinking About Venture Debt?"

 Brown, B. C. M. (2016). Sisterhood Angels businesses, (February), 61–66.

 Bureau, P. I., Change, C., & Prakash, S. (2016). Environment Ministry Releases New

Categorisation Of Industries Environment Ministry Releases New Categorisation Of

Industries Page 2 of 4, 1–4.

 Calopa, M. K. (2014). Analysis of Financing Sources for Start-Up. Analiza Izvora

Financiranja Start-Up Poduzeća., 19(2), 19–44.

216
 Capital, A., Robert, R., Startupfactory, P., & Stage, E. (n.d.). An Introduction to Startup

Financing and a New Approach.

 Cassar, G. (2004). The financing of business start-ups. Journal of Business Venturing,

19(2), 261–283

 Chang, S. J. (2004). Venture capital financing, strategic alliances, and the initial public

offerings of Internet startups. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(5), 721–741.

 Colombo, M. G., & Grilli, L. (2005). Start-up size: The role of external financing.

Economics Letters, 88(2), 243–250.

 Colombo, M. G., & Grilli, L. (2007). Funding gaps? Access to bank loans by high-tech

start-ups. Small Business Economics, 29(1–2), 25–46

 Ross, Westerfield, Jaffe. (2008) Corporate Finance, 8th Edition. McGraw-Hill

publishing,

 Damodaran, Aswath (April 2012). Investment Valuation: Tools and Techniques for

Determining the Value of Any Asset, Wiley, ISBN 978-1118011522, 3rd edition

 Douglas McGregor. Theory X Theory Y employee motivation theory. Accel-team.com.

Retrieved on 2013-07-21.

 Deininger, K., & Liu, Y. (2013). Evaluating program impacts on mature self-help

groups in India. World Bank Economic Review, 27(2), 272–296.

 Delhi, N. (2015). A Snapshot of India ‘ s Start-up Ecosystem.

 Delhi, N. E. W. (2016) The Finance Act , 2016 An Act to give effect to the financial

proposals of the Central Government for the financial year 2016-2017 ., (Dl).

 Delhi, N., & Act, E. Z. (2017).,256(i), 5–9.

 Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion. (2015). Department of Industrial

Policy and Promotion Ministry of Commerce and Industry Government of India

Consolidated FDI Policy. Direct.

217
 Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion. (2015). Department of industrial policy

and promotion ministry of commerce and industry government of india consolidated fdi

policy. Direct.

 Durrani, M. (2006). Venture Capital, Islamic Finance and SMEs. Finance.p(16)

 Dutta, S., & Folta, T. B. (2015) Comparison of the effect of angels and venture

capitalists on innovation and value creation. Journal of Business Venturing.

 Eckhardt, J. T., Shane, S., & Delmar, F. (2006). Multistage Selection and the Financing

of New Ventures. Management Science, 52(2), 220–232.

 Financing, E. (2012). How should entrepreneurs finance their company ‟ s growth ?

Usasbe, 1–21.

 Florin, J., Dino, R., & Huvaj, M. N. (2013). Research on angel investing: a multilevel

framework for an emerging domain of inquiry. Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance,

15(May 2013), 37–41

 Frydrych, D., Bock, A., Kinder, T., & Koeck, B. (2014). Exploring entrepreneurial

legitimacy in reward-based crowdfunding. Venture Capital, 16(3), 247–269.

 Gartner, W. B., Frid, C. J., & Alexander, J. C. (2012). Financing the emerging firm.

Small Business Economics, 39(3), 745–761.

 Gladstone, D., & Gladstone, L. (2004). Venture Capital Investing - the Complete

Handbook for Investing in Private Business for Outstanding Profits , p 120-126

 Golis, C. C., Mooney, P. D., & Richardson, T. F. (2009). Enterprise and Venture

Capital: Enterprise and Venture Capital, 329.

 Graham, Paul (September 2012). Startup Equals Growth, in Graham's Essays on

entrepreneurship

 Guidance, M., Services, P. I., & Services, B. A. (n.d.). Section A: Main Observations,

169–183.

218
 Graham, Paul (September 2012). Startup Equals Growth, in Graham's Essays on

entrepreneurship

 Gupta, S. P. (2002). India Vision 2020. New Delhi Planning Commission (Vol. 16).

Retrieved from http://agrit.in/articles/pl_vsn2020.pdf

 H. L. (2007). Handbook of Research on Venture Capital. Retrieved on 2017 03rd

January

 Handy, F., & Kassam, M. (2007). To Profit or Not to Profit Women Entrepreneurs in

India, 17(4).

 Handy, F., Kassam, M., & Renade, S. (2002). Factors Influencing Women

Entrepreneurs of NGOs in India. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 13(2), 139–

154.

 Hill, B. E., & Power, D. (2001). Insides secrets to Venture Capital.

 Huggett, B. (2011). NEWS IN brief New startup models emerge as investor. Nature

Biotechnology, 29(12), 1066–1067. http://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1211-1066c

 Ibrahim, D. (2009). Financing the Next Silicon Valley. Wash. UL Rev. Retrieved from

Inci, E., & Parker, S. C. (2013). Financing entrepreneurship and the old-boy network.

Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 22(2), 232–258.

 Incubation, B., Entrepreneurship, C., & Analysis, F. W. (n.d.). Role of Business

Incubation Centres Entrepreneurship – Factor Wise Analysis in Promoting, 107–131

 Incubation, B., Entrepreneurship, C., & Analysis, F. W. (n.d.). Role of Business

Incubation Centres Entrepreneurship – Factor Wise Analysis in Promoting, 107–131.

 Innovation, P. (n.d.). In association with Operates Fund of Funds under Government of

India ‘ s Scheme for.

 Insights, T., & Services, R. (2016). Startup India – Action Plan.

219
 Introduction, I., & Bowling, a. (2006). Venture Capital Financing. Entrepreneurship

The Engine of Growth, 2(47), 1–22.

 Kim, J. (2016). Early-Stage Entrepreneurial Financing : A Signaling Perspective.

Journal of Banking and Finance, 67(303), 1–38

 Kim, J. (2016). Early-Stage Entrepreneurial Financing : A Signaling Perspective.

Journal Of Banking Finance, 67(303), 1–38.

 Kon, F., Cukier, D., Melo, C., Paulo, S., Hazzan, O., & Technion, H. Y. (2015). A

Conceptual Framework for Software Startup Ecosystems : 1 Introduction, (June), 1–37.

 Kowalsky, M. (2012). Start up! Bilanz, 68–77.

 Kressel, H. (2010). Investing in dynamic markets.p (84)

 Kumar, N. (n.d.). Startup India Standup India A Revolutionary Action Plan Of PM

Narendera Modi, 1188–1194.

 Kuti, M., & Madarász, G. (2014). Crowdfunding. Public Finance Quarterly, 59(3),

355–366.

 Lal, A. K., & Clement, R. W. (2005). Economic Development In India : ( And

Entrepreneurial Spirit ), 12(2), 81–99.

 Laws, K., & Zankel, Z. (n.d.). Articles Funding Innovation : Regulating Seed

Financing, 1–23.

 Ley, A. (n.d.). Investigating the agency dynamics of crowdfunding in start-up capital

financing, 17(1), 85–111.

 Ley, A., & Weaven, S. (n.d.). Exploring Agency Dynamics Of Crowdfunding In Start-

Up Capital Financing, 17(1), 85–111.

 Manchanda, K., Pilani, S., Campus, D., Muralidharan, P., Pilani, S., & Campus, D.

(2014). Crowdfunding : A New Paradigm In Start-, 9(1), 369–375.

 Minister, I., & Sitharaman, S. N. (2017). DIPP launches the Startup India Hub, 2017.

220
 Minister, P., Plan, A., Plan, T. A., Plan, T. A., Schemes, P., & Support, F. (2016).

Action Plan on ‘ Startup India ‘, (January).

 Mishra, A. (2016). Entrepreneurial Motivations in Start-up and Survival of Micro- and

Small Enterprises in the Rural Non-Farm Economy Entrepreneurial Motivations in

Start-up and Survival of Micro- and Small Enterprises in the Rural Non-Farm

Economy, 6331(May).

 Mission, A. I. (2016). Guidelines for Scale-up support to Established Incubation

Centers under Atal Innovation Mission, (May), 1–13.

 Mission, A. I. (2016). Guidelines for setting up of Incubation Centres under Atal

Innovation Mission - ‗ Atal Incubation Centres ,‘ (May), 1–21.

 Mission, A. I. (2016). Guidelines for setting up of Tinkering Laboratories under Atal

Innovation Mission – ‗ Atal Tinkering Laboratories ,‘ (May), 1–21.

 Note, A. C. (n.d.). Guidelines for Corporates to set up Incubators.

 Overview, A., Business, I., & Centres, I. (2000). An Overview of Global and Indian

Business Incubation Centres, 69–103.

 Papulov, Z., & Mokro, M. (n.d.). Importance of managerial skills and knowledge in

management for small entrepreneurs.

 Petrova, K. (2012). Part-time entrepreneurship and financial constraints: Evidence from

the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics. Small Business Economics, 39(2), 473–

493

 Prasad, V. K., Naidu, G. M., Ehrhardt, K., Winkel, D. E., & Murthy, B. K. (2011).

Exploring Entrepreneurial Fulfillment for Women in India: an Empirical Study. Journal

of Enterprising Culture, 19(03), 287–314.

 Report Information from ProQuest. (2016), (May).

 Retrieved 2015-06-03. "Marketing like a start-up".

221
 Ronstadt, R. C. (1991). Chapter 1 Entrepreneurship Development in India The

Evolution of Entrepreneurship, (January), 45–61.

 Ruhnka, J.C., Young, J.E. (1987). "A venture capital model of the development process

for new ventures". In: Journal of business venturing. Volume: 2, Issue: 2 (Spring 1987),

pp. 167–184.

 Rupeika-Apoga, R. (2014). Financing in SMEs: Case of the Baltic States. Procedia -

Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150, 116–125.

 Sahu, P., & Khan, S. (2015). Women Entrepreneurship in Rural Area of India :

Opportunities and Issues in 3 Districts of Bhopal ( Madhya Pradesh ), 2(January), 39–

44.

 Scherr, F. C., Sugrue, T. F., & Janice, B. M. (1993). Financing the Small Firm Start-

Up : Determinants of Debt Use, 3(1), 17–36.

 Schick, H. (2002). Sustainability Issues for Start-up Entrepreneurs. Greener

Management International, (38), 59

 Sciences, S. (2013). Exploring the financing gap between native born women- and

immigrant women-owned firms at the start-up stage, 5(2), 157–173.

 Sharifi, O., & Hossein, B. K. (n.d.). Understanding The Financing Challenges Faced By

Startups In India, 1002–1010.

 Sharifi, O., & Hossein, B. K. (n.d.). Understanding The Financing Challenges Faced By

Startups In India, 264–272.

 Shrivastava, P. V. (n.d.). Financial Inclusion Of Rural Women In India- A Case Study

Of Mann DeshiMahila Bank, 51–59.

 Smeltzer, L., Hook, B. Van, & Hutt, R. (1991). Analysis of the use of advisors as

information sources in venture startups. Journal of Small Business …, 29(3), 10–20.

222
 Soni, B. K., & Priyan, P. K. (n.d.). Funding Preferences of Young Entrepreneurs of

Gujarat : An Empirical Study.

 S.X. Zhang and J. Cueto (2015). "The Study of Bias in

Entrepreneurship".Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice.

 Startup India Plan, A. (2015). Action plan.

 Startup India Policy, I. (2015). Annual Report 2015-16.

 Startup India Policy, I. (2016). Annual Report 2016-17.

 Startup India Policy, I. (2016). Government notifies Revised Startup Definition,

180(February).

 Startups, F. F. O. R. (2009). The angel in your pocket tt I reof oH, (November).

 The financing process in innovative startup firms. (2015), (December).p(92-102)

 Thompson, R. (2008). Real Venture Capital: Building International Businesses, 225.

 To, H. O. W., Startup, G. E. T., Investments, S., & Your, F. (2012). $250,000.

 Venturing, B., Carolina, N., Carolina, N., & Hill, C. (1989). Funding New Business

Ventures : Are Decision Makers Biased Against Women Entrepreneurs ?, 9026(July).

 Voelker, T. A., & Mcglashan, R. (2013). What is Crowdfunding ? Bringing the Power

of Kickstarter to Your Entrepreneurship Research and Teaching Activities, 9(2), 11–22.

 "Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act Spotlight". SEC.GOV. Retrieved July

1,2014.

 (Ed) Howell Major, Claire and Savin-Baden, M. (2010). New Approaches to

Qualitative.

223
 WEBLIOGRAPHY

 Access to freedom of expression is important (2011) retrieved from

https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2013/03/why-is-access-to-freedom-of-expression-

important/, June 14, 2017 12:30:02 PM

 Au, K., & Kwan, H. K. (2009). Start-up capital and Chinese entrepreneurs: The

role of family. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(4), 889-908., Jun 08,2017

10:00:00 PM

 Behavior model Rating (2009) retrieved from

https://hr.nd.edu/assets/17442/behavior_model_4_ratings_3_.pdf., June 14, 2017

12:50:20 PM

 Barking mad: Can office dogs reduce stress? - CNN.com. Edition.cnn.com. Retrieved

on 2013-07-21.

 Chi Square Test Retrieved from http://www.statisticshowto.com/probability-and-

statistics/chi-square/., Apr 30,2018 01:49:40 AM

 Definition of leadership skills (2016) retrieved from

https://searchcio.techtarget.com/definition/leadership-skills., Dec 23,2017 09:34:23

PM

 Defintition of Startup by Governement of India in Gazette Notification (2016)

retrieved from

http://dipp.nic.in/English/Investor/startupindia/Definition_Startup_GazetteNotificatio

n.pdf 2. (2016), (i), 8–9. Jan 20, 2016 11:50:48 PM

 Design of Experiments Its Importance In The Efficient Project Management retrieved

from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256439001_Design_Of_Experiments_Its_I

mportance_In_The_Efficient_Project_Management., Apr 23,2018 09:19:20 PM

224
 Design of experiments its importance in the efficient project management(2017)

retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256439001, Oct 12, 2016

08:40:33 AM

 Early stage Vs Late Stage (2014) retrieved from https://microventures.com/early-

stage-vs-late-stage., Mar 20,2018 09:08:20 PM

 Funding your startup a founder guide to liquidation preferences (2011) retrieved from

https://tools.ltse.com/funding-your-startup-a-founders-guide-to-liquidation-

preferences-e7db39469463., Jul 07,2018 02:19:20 PM

 Grant Thornton report (2017) retrieved from

http://www.grantthornton.in/globalassets/1.-member-

firms/india/assets/pdfs/grant_thornton-startups_report.pdf., Aug 30,2016 05:12:11 PM

 Grant Thornton Startup Report (201) retrieved from

http://www.grantthornton.in/globalassets/1.-member-

firms/india/assets/pdfs/grant_thornton-startups_report.pdf., Dec 27,2017 09:45:56 PM

 "Investor.gov". Securities and Exchange Commission. Retrieved July 1, 2014

03:00:34 PM

 Kaiser Meyer Olkin Analysis retrieved from http://www.statisticshowto.com/kaiser-

meyer-olkin/., Apr 30,2018 11:09:46 PM

 List of communication skills (2003) retrieved from

https://www.thebalancecareers.com/communication-skills-list-2063779., June 14,

2017 12:58:34 PM

 Method of Raising capital retreived from

http://www.archive.india.gov.in/business/starting_business/methods_raisingcapital.ph

p., May 03,2017 01:04:23 AM

225
 MP Incubation Startup Policy (2016) retrieved from

http://aiggpa.mp.gov.in/images/files/kair/mp-state-

policies/industry/MP%20Incubation%20Startup%20Policy%202016.pdf., Aug

30,2016 07:30:34 PM

 MSME relaxed norms for startups (2016) retrieved from

http://startupindia.gov.in/MSME_Relaxed_Norms_for_Startups_10_03_2016.pdf.,

Dec 27,2017 09:00:09 PM

 PM Modi Announces startup India Inititative to encourage Entrepreneruship (2015)

retrieved from http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/PM-Modi-Announces-Start-

Up-India-Initiative-toEncourage-Entrepreneurship/2015/08/15/article2976065.ece.,

Feb 19, 2016 04:34:12 PM

 Report on creative potential (2014) retrieved from

http://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/youth/news/2014/documents/report-creative-

potential_en.pdf on Nov 20, 2015 9:55:48 PM

 Report on creative potential retrieved from

http://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/youth/news/2014/documents/report-creative-

potential_en.pdf., Apr 29,2018 06:33:40 PM

 SIPP IPR Scheme for Startups (2016) retrieved from

http://startupindia.gov.in/SIPP_IPR_Scheme.pdf ., Mar 03,2016 02:30:40 PM

 Sources of Finance retreived from

http://www.archive.india.gov.in/business/starting_business/source_finance.php.,

Sepetember 23,2017 10:34:23 PM

 Starting Business retrieved from

http://www.archive.india.gov.in/business/starting_business/pricing.php., May 13,2018

01:04:23 AM

226
 "Startups & High-Growth Businesses | The U.S. Small Business Administration |

SBA.gov". www.sba.gov. Retrieved 2016-01-26.

 "Startups Remain Cloudy on the New General Solicitation Rule". Bloomberg

Businessweek. Retrieved September 20, 2013.

 "Startups, VCs Now Free To Advertise Their Fundraising Status". The Wall Street

Journal. Retrieved September 23, 2013.

 Startups India Government of India Intitiative (2016) retrieved from

http://startupindia.gov.in/ ., Dec 27,2017 09:34:33 PM

 Startups IPR Facilitation (2016) retrieved from

http://www.ipindia.nic.in/Whats_New/startups_IPRFacilitation_22April2016.

 The Hindu Business Line, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/info-tech/india-

lacks-enough-angel-investors-to-fund-startups-nasscom/article7817740.ece, Printable

version , Nov 20, 2015 9:50:48 PM. "Private Company Knowledge Bank". Sept 19 ,

2017 07:45:20 PM

 "The ban has lifted: Here's what these 6 companies think about general

solicitation".Venturebeat. Retrieved September 23, 2013.

 Types of financial needs retrieved from

http://www.archive.india.gov.in/business/starting_business/types_financialneeds.php.,

Jun 08,2016 02:34:00 PM

 Types os Startup Investing (2014) retrieved from

https://startupxplore.com/en/blog/types-startup-investing/

 Why risk is important (2014) retrieved from https://www.liveplan.com/blog/why-risk-

takers-are-winners-and-why-all-entrepreneurs-should-take-risks.pdf June 14, 2017

12:08:02 PM

227
 Youth Softskills Enthusiasm (2016) retrieved from

https://www.dol.gov/odep/topics/youth/softskills/Enthusiasm.pdf, June 14, 2017

12:00:02 PM

228
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Aga, D. A., Noorderhaven, N., & Vallejo, B. (2016). Transformational leadership and

project success: The mediating role of team-building. International Journal of Project

Management, 34(5), 806–818.

 Alexy, O. T., Block, J. H., Sandner, P., & Ter Wal, A. L. J. (2012). Social capital of

venture capitalists and start-up funding. Small Business Economics, 39(4), 835–851.

 Aswath Damodaran, Valuing Young, Start-up and Growth Companies: Estimation

Issues and Valuation Challenges, SSRN Electronic Journal 06/2009

 Acworth, E. B. (2008). University–industry engagement: The formation of the

Knowledge Integration Community (KIC) model at the Cambridge-MIT Institute.

Research Policy, 37(8), 1241–1254

 Adam, T. R. (2002). Risk management and the credit risk premium. Journal of Banking

& Finance, 26(2–3), 243–269.

 Adams, P., Fontana, R., & Malerba, F. (2013). The magnitude of innovation by demand

in a sectoral system: The role of industrial users in semiconductors. Research Policy,

42(1), 1–14.

 Adrien, M., Kirouac, M. S., & Sliwinski, M. A. (2000). Women ` s Entrepreneurship in

Canada : All that Glitters is not Gold, (38).

 Afful-Dadzie, E., Oplatková, Z. K., & Nabareseh, S. (2015). Selecting Start-Up

Businesses in a Public Venture Capital Financing using Fuzzy PROMETHEE. Procedia

Computer Science, 60, 63–72.

 Afridi, F. (2005). Midday Meals in Two States: Comparing the Financial and

Institutional Organisation of the Programme. Economic and Political Weekly, 40(15),

1528–1535.

229
 Afrin, S. (n.d.). Microcredit and Rural Women Entrepreneurship Development in

Bangladesh : A Multivariate Model, 9–37.

 Agarwal, R., & Shah, S. K. (2014). Knowledge sources of entrepreneurship: Firm

formation by academic, user and employee innovators. Research Policy, 43(7), 1109–

1133.

 Agrawal, A. K. (2013). The impact of investor protection law on corporate policy and

performance: Evidence from the blue sky laws. Journal of Financial Economics,

107(2), 417–435.

 Aguinis, H., & Lawal, S. O. (2012). Conducting field experiments using eLancing‘s

natural environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(4), 493–505.

 Aguinis, H., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2014). An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of

cure: Improving research quality before data collection. Annual Review of

Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 569–595.

 Aguinis, H., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2014). An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of

cure: Improving research quality before data collection. Annual Review of

Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 569–595.

 Aharonson, B. S., Baum, J. A. C., & Plunket, A. (2008). Inventive and uninventive

clusters: The case of Canadian biotechnology. Research Policy, 37(6–7), 1108–1131.

 Ahl, H., & Nelson, T. (2015). How policy positions women entrepreneurs: A

comparative analysis of state discourse in Sweden and the United States. Journal of

Business Venturing, 30(2), 273–291.

 Ahlers, G. K. C., Cumming, D., Günther, C., & Schweizer, D. (2015). Signaling in

Equity Crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(4), 955–980.

 Ahmed, S., & Cozzarin, B. P. (2009). Start-up funding sources and biotechnology firm

growth. Applied Economics Letters, 16(13), 1341–1345.

230
 Aidis, R., & van Praag, M. (2007). Illegal entrepreneurship experience: Does it make a

difference for business performance and motivation? Journal of Business Venturing,

22(2), 283–310.

 Aidis, R., Estrin, S., & Mickiewicz, T. (2008). Institutions and entrepreneurship

development in Russia: A comparative perspective. Journal of Business Venturing,

23(6), 656–672.

 Akbar, H., & Mandurah, S. (2014). Project-conceptualisation in technological

innovations: A knowledge-based perspective. International Journal of Project

Management, 32(5), 759–772.

 Akinbami, C. A. O., Aransiola, J. O., Abiola, C., & Qualitative, J. O. A. (2016).

Qualitative exploration of cultural practices inhibiting rural women entrepreneurship

development in selected communities in Nigeria, 6331(April).

 Alalade, Y. S. A. (2014). The International Journal Of Business & Management

Patterns of Growth Financing Strategies of Small-Scale and Micro Business Enterprises

in Silang Municipality , Cavite , Philippines Abstract :, 2(12), 181–203.

 Alarcón, L. F., & Ashley, D. B. (1998). Project management decision making using

cross-impact analysis. International Journal of Project Management, 16(3), 145–152.

 Aldrich, H. E. (2012). The emergence of entrepreneurship as an academic field: A

personal essay on institutional entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 41(7), 1240–1248.

 Aldrich, H., Kalleberg, A., Marsden, P., & Cassel, J. (1989). In pursuit of evidence:

Sampling procedures for locating new businesses. Journal of Business Venturing, 4(6),

367–386.

 Alina, B. (2011). Start-Up Financing Sources : Does Gender Matter ? Some Evidence

for EU and Romania. The Annals of the University of Oradea. Economic Sciences.,

1(July Special), 207–213.

231
 Al-Laham, A., & Souitaris, V. (2008). Network embeddedness and new-venture

internationalization: Analyzing international linkages in the German biotech industry.

Journal of Business Venturing, 23(5), 567–586.

 Allen, F., & Faulhaber, G. R. (1989). Signalling by underpricing in the IPO market.

Journal of Financial Economics, 23(2), 303–323.

 Allen, W. D., Huntsville, A., & Hall, T. W. (2009). Entrepreneurs , Investors , and

Equity Financing : A Resource-Economic Analysis.

 Almeida, P., Dokko, G., & Rosenkopf, L. (2003). Startup size and the mechanisms of

external learning: increasing opportunity and decreasing ability? Research Policy,

32(2), 301–315

 Alonso-Almeida, M. del M. (2013). Influence of gender and financing on tourist

company growth. Journal of Business Research, 66(5), 621–631.

 Alonso-Nuez, M. J., & Galve-Górriz, C. (2012). the Impact of Public Programs on the

Survival and Profits of Startups: Evidence From a Region of Spain. Journal of

Developmental Entrepreneurship, 17(2), 1

 Ambad, S. N. A., & Damit, D. H. D. A. (2016). Determinants of Entrepreneurial

Intention Among Undergraduate Students in Malaysia. Procedia Economics and

Finance, 37, 108–114.

 Amesse, F., & Cohendet, P. (2001). Technology transfer revisited from the perspective

of the knowledge-based economy. Research Policy, 30(9), 1459–1478.

 Amira, K., & Muzere, M. L. (2011). Competition among stock exchanges for equity.

Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(9), 2355–2373.

 Amit, R., Brander, J., & Zott, C. (1998). Why do venture capital firms exist? theory and

canadian evidence. Journal of Business Venturing, 13(6), 441–466.

232
 Analysis, A. N. (2015). Indian Institute of Management Indore By Ankit Sharma March

2015 Thesis Advisory Committee : Prof . L V Ramana ( Chair ) Prof . Keyur Thaker (

Member ) Prof . Siddhartha K . Rastogi ( Member ).

 Anderson, E. G., & Parker, G. G. (2013). Integration and Cospecialization of Emerging

Complementary Technologies by Startups. Production and Operations Management,

22(6), 1356–1373.

 Anderson, R. (2008). Organizational Entrepreneurship And The Organization USASBE

2008 Proceedings - Page 7. Europe, 7–33.

 Andrieu, G. (2013). The impact of the affiliation of venture capital firms: a survey.

Journal of Economic Surveys, 27(2), 234–246.

 Article: The New Argonauts, Global Search And Local Institution Building. Author :

Saxeninan and Sabel

 "All-comers join web party for a punt on best start-ups". Financial Times. Retrieved

September 26, 2013.

 ABC News. Retrieved September 24, 2013."Newly Legal: Buying Stock in Start-Ups

Via Crowdsourcing".

 Blank, Steve (2013). What I Wish I Knew About Startups - Steve Blank, Consulting

Associate Professor at Stanford University (video, 30-min). The audience is composed

of the CEOs of the portfolio companies of Khosla Ventures. Talk given in May 2013,

posted on the official You Tube channel of Khosla Ventures in May 2014.

 Barnir, A., & Mclaughlin, E. (2011). Parental Self-Employment, Start-Up Activities

and Funding: Exploring Intergenerational Effects. Journal of Developmental

Entrepreneurship, 16(03), 371–392.

233
 Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. a. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in

social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.

Ournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.

 Barry, C. B., & Mihov, V. T. (2015). Debt financing, venture capital, and the

performance of initial public offerings. Journal of Banking & Finance, 58, 144–165.

 Bartz, W., & Winkler, A. (2015). Flexible or fragile? The growth performance of small

and young businesses during the global financial crisis — Evidence from Germany.

Journal of Business Venturing, 31(2), 196–215.

 Bloomberg. Retrieved September 24, 2013 "Levine on Wall Street: Chrysler's

Unwanted IPO".

 Bielecki, T., & Rutkowski, M. (2004). Credit Risk Modeling, Valutation and Hedging.

 Casamatta, C. (2003). Financing and Advising: Optimal Financial Contracts with

Venture Capitalists. Journal of Finance, 58(5), 2059–2086.

 Cassar, G. (2004). The financing of business start-ups. Journal of Business Venturing,

19(2), 261–283.

 Cassar, G. (2014). Industry and startup experience on entrepreneur forecast

performance in new firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 137–151.

 Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in

ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems.

Research Policy, 43(7), 1164–1176.

 David, P. A., & Hall, B. H. (2006). Property and the pursuit of knowledge: IPR issues

affecting scientific research. Research Policy, 35(6), 767–771.

 David, P. A., Hall, B. H., & Toole, A. A. (2000). Is public R&D a complement or

substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence. Research Policy,

29(4–5), 497–529.

234
 Davidsson, P. (1989). Entrepreneurship — And after? A study of growth willingness in

small firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 4(3), 211–226.

 Eckermann, M. (2006). Venture Capitalists Exit Strategies under Information

Asymmetry Evidence from the US Venture Capital Maricet.

 Fallis, A. . (2013). No Title No Title. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling,

53(9), 1689–1699

 Florida, R. L., & Kenney, M. (1988). Venture capital-financed innovation and

technological change in the USA. Research Policy, 17(3), 119–137.

 Florida, R., & Kenney, M. (1988). Venture capital and high technology

entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 3(4), 301–319.

 Gladstone, D., & Gladstone, L. (2004). Venture Capital Investing - the Complete

Handbook for Investing in Private Business for Outstanding Profits.

 Golis, C. C., Mooney, P. D., & Richardson, T. F. (2009). Enterprise and Venture

Capital: Enterprise and Venture Capital, 329.

 Graham, J. R., Harvey, C. R., & Puri, M. (2015). Capital allocation and delegation of

decision-making authority within firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 115(3), 449–

470.

 Graham, Paul (September 2012). Startup Equals Growth, in Graham's Essays on

entrepreneurship pg (56), 324-423.

 Griffiths, M., & O‘Callaghan, T. (2002). International Relations: The Key Concepts.

p(32) 381.

 Gupta, A. K., & Sapienza, H. J. (1992). Determinants of venture capital firms‘

preferences regarding the industry diversity and geographic scope of their investments.

Journal of Business Venturing, 7(5), 347–362.

235
 Gupta, D. D. (2013). The Effect of Gender on Women-led Small Enterprises: The Case

of India. South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, 2(1), 61–75.

 Hänggi, H., Roloff, R., & Rüland, J. (2006). Interregionalism: a new phenomenon in

international relations. Interregionalism and International Relations.

 Heister, P. (2010). Finanzierung von Social Entrepreneuship durch Venture

Philanthropy and Social Venture Capital.

 Hill, B. E., & Power, D. (2001). Insides secrets to Venture Capital.

 Holden, C. (2001). To Kathryn, you‘re the inspiration, and to Diana and Jimmy, with

joy and pride, 1–168.

 Ivanov, V. I., & Xie, F. (2010). Corporate Venture Capital. Venture Capital: Investment

strategies, structures and Policies.

 Kaur, S. (2007). Raising Venture Capital Finance in Europe. A Practical Guide for

Business Owners, Entrepreneurs and Investors, 1–336

 Kaur, S. (2007). Raising Venture Capital Finance in Europe. A Practical Guide for

Business Owners, Entrepreneurs and Investors, 1–336.

 Kazanjian, R. K., & Drazin, R. (1990). A stage-contingent model of design and growth

for technology based new ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 5(3), 137–150.

 Keh, H. T., Nguyen, T. T. M., & Ng, H. P. (2007). The effects of entrepreneurial

orientation and marketing information on the performance of SMEs. Journal of

Business Venturing, 22(4), 592–611

 Kenney, M. (1986). Schumpeterian innovation and entrepreneurs in capitalism: A case

study of the U.S. biotechnology industry. Research Policy, 15(1), 21–31.

 Korn, R., Korn, E., & Kroisandt, G. (2010). Monte Carlo methods and models in

finance and insurance.

236
 Life, I., Times, N. Y., Post, T. W., & Chronicle, H. (2011). The media ‘ s watching

Vault ! Here‘ s a sampling of our coverage . Sites The Journal Of 20Th Century

Contemporary French Studies.

 Luger, M. & Koo, J., 2005. Defining and Tracking Business Start-Ups. Small Business

Economics, (24), pp.17-28 & p.19

 Mason, C. M. (2004). Private equity and venture capital in the UK (Vol. LIX).

 McKaskill, T. (2009). Raising Angel & Venture capital finance. An Entrepreneur‘s

Guide to Securing Venture FinAnce, 1–238.

 Meyer, T., & Mathonet, P. (n.d.). Beyond the J-curve.

 Nikkonen, A. I. (2013). Venture Capital. Problems of Economic Transition, 56(6), 9–

14.

 Pearce, R., & Barnes, S. (1989). Raising venture capital. Journal of Chemical

Information and Modeling (Vol. 53).

 Preece, S. B., Miles, G., & Baetz, M. C. (1999). Explaining the international intensity

and global diversity of early-stage technology-based firms. Journal of Business

Venturing, 14(3), 259–281.

 Problems, I. (2006). The venture capital industry in India. Journal of Small Business

Management, (April), 1–8.

 Rajasekar, S., Philominathan, P., & Chinnathambi, V. (2006). Research Methodology.

Methods.

 Reid, G. C., & Smith, J. a. (2007). Risk Appraisal and Venture Capital in High

Technology New Ventures. The British Accounting Review (Vol. 44).

 Slaughter, A.-M. (2012). International Law and International RelationTheory.

International Organization.

 Thompson, R. (2008). Real Venture Capital: Building International Businesses, 225.

237