| Literature DB >> 35284375 |
Yousef Mohammadifar1, Nader Naderi1, Ehsan Khosravi1, Faranak Karamian2.
Abstract
Pandemic the COVID-19 is a global threat to rural entrepreneurial businesses with an uncertain ending. Therefore, it is necessary to provide a paradigm model to reduce the negative effects of this crisis, increase the resilience of rural entrepreneurial businesses or even turn this threat into an opportunity for the development of rural entrepreneurial businesses in the long run. This study, using a qualitative approach, investigated the resilience of rural entrepreneurial businesses in dealing with the COVID-19 crisis in Kermanshah province using a paradigm model. Using purposeful and theoretical sampling, 26 cases were selected. The tools used for data collection were open questionnaires (unstructured), individual depth interviews, and taking notes. The results provide a relatively comprehensive model that consists of six basic parts: causal conditions (included economic management, health factors, human resources management, and adaptation factors), the phenomenon (included low resilience of rural entrepreneurial businesses in the face of the COVID-19 crisis), contextual conditions (including social factors; cultural factors and psychological factors), interventing conditions (included business management and legal supports), action strategies (included Planned resilient actions and Unplanned resilient actions), finally, the consequences (included adapting to crisis conditions and increasing resilience in the long run, and also lack of adaptation to crisis conditions and lack of continuity of business survival in the long run). In general, rural entrepreneurial businesses in the face of crisis must, through planned resilience measures, both increase their business resilience in the short term, as well as develop the business and gain a competitive advantage in the long run. Finally, based on the findings and in order to developing resilience in rural entrepreneurial businesses during the COVID-19 crisis, some recommendations were presented.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; business resilience; crisis; rural economies; rural entrepreneurial businesses
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35284375 PMCID: PMC8913521 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.833909
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Figure 1The study area; Kermanshah province, which is located in Western Iran.
Figure 2Paradigm model of Strauss and Corbin (41).
Open and axial coding.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |
| Causal conditions | Aa. Economic Management | 1. Receiving disaster loans (crisis); | 7 |
| 2. Income diversity; | 8 | ||
| 3. Previous financial resources; | 4 | ||
| 4. Liquidity management; | 9 | ||
| 5. Control and reduce costs; | 6 | ||
| 6. Manage and increase sales. | 6 | ||
| Ab. Health factors | 1. Equipping the business environment with various sanitary devices (proper ventilation, etc); | 4 | |
| 2. Providing disposable health tools to personnel in order to comply with protocols (masks, etc); | 9 | ||
| 3. Equipping businesses with early diagnostic tools (Fever gauge, etc). | 6 | ||
| 4. Adherence to health protocols; | 10 | ||
| 5. Daily staff checkup. | 8 | ||
| Ac. Human resources management | 1. Continuous updating of personnel health information in dealing with the corona crisis; | 8 | |
| 2. Improving the skills of personnel in observing health protocols; | 10 | ||
| 3. Time flexibility in the presence of personnel; | 9 | ||
| 4. Flexibility of location in the presence of staff (doing things remotely if possible). | 9 | ||
| Ad. Adaptation factors | 1. Continuous environmental monitoring, continuous planning and adaptation to environmental changes and their timely implementation; | 8 | |
| 2. Provide consistent systematic responses (short, medium and long term); | 7 | ||
| 3. Use of crisis adaptive technologies in business model | 11 | ||
| Intervening conditions (B) | Ba. Business management | 1. Crisis management and proper accountability; | 7 |
| 2. Condition-based planning for the business; | 8 | ||
| 3. Develop and present appropriate strategies for business continuity. | 9 | ||
| Bb. Legal supports | 1) Proper management and policy making; | 12 | |
| 2) Providing infrastructure adapted to crisis situations (increasing antenna coverage in villages in remote areas); | 9 | ||
| 3) Support policies for low-interest (or even non-interest-bearing) lending; | 9 | ||
| 4) Increase partnership and cooperation between enterprises, government and other private organizations; | 8 | ||
| 5) Develop and provide crisis preparedness and management instructions; | 8 | ||
| 6) Government support in providing health services to businesses; | 6 | ||
| 7) Monitoring the proper implementation of health protocols. | 7 | ||
| Contextual conditions (C) | Ca. social factors | 1) Increasing membership in indigenous and non-indigenous social networks with the aim of benefiting from experiences; | 5 |
| 2) Increasing trust, participation and cooperation in observing preventive measures among personnel and customers; | 6 | ||
| 3) Increase cooperation throughout the supply chain in the business. | 4 | ||
| Cb. cultural factors | 1) Strengthening the entrepreneurial culture in business with the aim of providing products or services that are creative and adapt to new conditions and gain a competitive advantage; | 8 | |
| 2) Elimination of incorrect and opposing cultures by controlling and preventing the spread of coronavirus (elimination of handshake, etc.). | 6 | ||
| Cc. psychological factors | 1) Increase staff motivation in relation to business continuity; | 7 | |
| 2) Increase staff resilience in relation to business continuity; | 8 | ||
| 3) Strengthen the motivation of personnel with coronavirus. | 6 | ||
| Phenomenon | Da. Low resilience of rural entrepreneurial businesses in the face of the COVID-19 crisis | 1) Discontinuation of rural entrepreneurial businesses in the face of the COVID-19 crisis | 26 |
| 2) Lack of adaptability of rural entrepreneurial businesses in the face of the COVID-19 crisis | 25 | ||
| Action strategies | Ea. Planned resilient actions | 1. Development and modification of marketing strategies based on crisis conditions; | 10 |
| 2. Human resource training; | 6 | ||
| 3. Develop and provide health instructions; | 7 | ||
| 4. Monitoring the proper implementation of health protocols; | 8 | ||
| 5. Reform of financial management based on crisis conditions; | 8 | ||
| 6. Development of crisis-adapted infrastructure; | 8 | ||
| 7. Exploiting emerging environmental opportunities. | 7 | ||
| Eb. Unplanned resilient actions | 1) Sales of some business equipment and machinery; | 5 | |
| 2) Sale of part of the company's shares; | 5 | ||
| 3) Temporary deactivation of the business; | 6 | ||
| 4) Reducing the quantity of production; | 4 | ||
| 5) Decreased production quality. | 5 | ||
| Consequences | Fa. Adapting to crisis conditions and increasing resilience in the long run | 1) Business continuity; | 8 |
| 2) Recovery of business position; | 8 | ||
| 3) Improvement of business position than before of crisis; | 9 | ||
| 4) Business growth and development; | 7 | ||
| 5) More prepared and developed to face future crises. | 6 | ||
| Fb. Lack of adaptation to crisis conditions and lack of continuity of business survival in the long run | 1) More vulnerability in the long run; | 7 | |
| 2) Bankruptcy and inactivity in the long run. | 6 | ||
References refer to the number of times a concept is coded and emphasized by participants (.
Findings of the study.
Figure 3Paradigm model of the resilience of rural entrepreneurial businesses in the face of the COVID-19 crisis.