IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eur/ejesjr/260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Analysis on the Required Commercial Competences for Women Entrepreneurship Development in Selected Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Asya Pandzherova

    (Ph.D)

  • Dimitar Krastev

Abstract

The scientific report is based on a desk research and an on-line survey done within an Erasmus + project, under Key Action 2 - Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of good practices, High Education Sector, named European Partnership for Social Inclusion and Creation of Skills for Women Entrepreneurship E-learning. The project is realized by three partner countries and it is focused on the social inclusion of women wishing to develop their own business in the area of trade and logistics through integration into entrepreneurship, acquiring practical skills and competences in order to generate financial, cultural and social value. A comparative analysis of the trade competences required for the development of women's entrepreneurship in the three partner countries is done. In the analysis, a study of the necessary literature in order to establish the theoretical and methodological framework of the study was initially carried out. Via a study of the existing competency models in the field of trade, the key necessary competencies for the realization of a trader have been identified. They serve to develop a questionnaire and they are the basis for the comparative analysis between the three partner countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Asya Pandzherova & Dimitar Krastev, 2019. "A Comparative Analysis on the Required Commercial Competences for Women Entrepreneurship Development in Selected Countries," European Journal of Economics and Business Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 5, ejes_v5_i.
    • Handle: RePEc:eur:ejesjr:260
    DOI: 10.26417/ejes.v5i3.p21-24
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://brucol.be/index.php/ejes/article/view/5509
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://brucol.be/files/articles/ejes_v5_i3_19/Pandzherova.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26417/ejes.v5i3.p21-24?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    3. Daniel Kahneman, 2003. "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1449-1475, December.
    4. Edward P. Lazear, 2000. "Performance Pay and Productivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(5), pages 1346-1361, December.
    5. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(3), pages 489-520.
    6. Chambers,Robert G. & Quiggin,John, 2000. "Uncertainty, Production, Choice, and Agency," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521622448, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mark Schneider & Mikhael Shor, 2016. "The Common Ratio Effect in Choice, Pricing, and Happiness Tasks," Working papers 2016-29, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    2. Hajdu, Tamás & Hajdu, Gábor, 2011. "A hasznosság és a relatív jövedelem kapcsolatának vizsgálata magyar adatok segítségével [Examining the relation of utility and relative income using Hungarian data]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 56-73.
    3. Semjén, András, 2017. "Az adózói magatartás különféle magyarázatai [Various explanations for tax compliance]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 140-184.
    4. Basieva, Irina & Khrennikova, Polina & Pothos, Emmanuel M. & Asano, Masanari & Khrennikov, Andrei, 2018. "Quantum-like model of subjective expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 150-162.
    5. Dalton, P.S. & Gonzalez Jimenez, V.H. & Noussair, C.N., 2015. "Paying with Self-Chosen Goals : Incentives and Gender Differences," Discussion Paper 2015-021, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    6. Pokorny, Kathrin, 2008. "Pay--but do not pay too much: An experimental study on the impact of incentives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 251-264, May.
    7. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.
    8. Sanjit Dhami & Narges Hajimoladarvish, 2020. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Tax Evasion: Theory and Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 8606, CESifo.
    9. Barberis, Nicholas & Huang, Ming, 2009. "Preferences with frames: A new utility specification that allows for the framing of risks," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1555-1576, August.
    10. Ravi Kanbur & Jukka Pirttilä & Matti Tuomala, 2008. "Moral Hazard, Income Taxation and Prospect Theory," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 110(2), pages 321-337, June.
    11. Neckermann, Susanne & Yang, Xiaolan, 2017. "Understanding the (unexpected) consequences of unexpected recognition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 131-142.
    12. Levon Barseghyan & Francesca Molinari, 2023. "Risk Preference Types, Limited Consideration, and Welfare," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(4), pages 1011-1029, October.
    13. Jou, Rong-Chang & Chen, Ke-Hong, 2013. "An application of cumulative prospect theory to freeway drivers’ route choice behaviours," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 123-131.
    14. Chi, Yichun & Zheng, Jiakun & Zhuang, Shengchao, 2022. "S-shaped narrow framing, skewness and the demand for insurance," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 279-292.
    15. Haven, Emmanuel & Khrennikova, Polina, 2018. "A quantum-probabilistic paradigm: Non-consequential reasoning and state dependence in investment choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 186-197.
    16. Gilles GROLLEAU & Naoufel MZOUGHI & Sophie THOYER, 2015. "Les incitations monétaires dans la politique agro-environnementale : peut-on faire mieux avec moins ?," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 96(2), pages 241-258.
    17. Aleksandr Alekseev, 2022. "Give me a challenge or give me a raise," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 170-202, February.
    18. Nathalie Etchart-Vincent & Olivier l’Haridon, 2011. "Monetary incentives in the loss domain and behavior toward risk: An experimental comparison of three reward schemes including real losses," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 61-83, February.
    19. Cédric Gutierrez & Tomasz Obloj & Douglas H. Frank, 2021. "Better to have led and lost than never to have led at all? Lost leadership and effort provision in dynamic tournaments," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 774-801, April.
    20. F. Knobloch & J. -F. Mercure, 2016. "The behavioural aspect of green technology investments: a general positive model in the context of heterogeneous agents," Papers 1603.06888, arXiv.org.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eur:ejesjr:260. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Revistia Research and Publishing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://revistia.com/index.php/ejes .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.