Examining Market Behavior and Firm Risk Patterns: An Empirical Analysis On Hispanic Female-Owned Businesses Enterprises

International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences, 2(6) June 2013, Pages: 363-378
TI Journals
International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences
ISSN
2306-7276
www.tijournals.com
Examining Market Behavior and Firm Risk Patterns:

An Empirical Analysis on Hispanic Female-owned
Business Enterprises
D. Anthony Miles
1
Texas A&M University-San Antonio, United States.
AR TIC LE INF O
Keywords:
Hispanic female-owned businesses
women-owned businesses
market patterns
economic patterns
risk patterns
endogenous variables
exogenous variables
AB STR AC T
The research on Hispanic-owned businesses is exceedingly limited. What is more apparent is the
dearth of research on Hispanic female-owned business enterprises (HFB). The purpose of this
study is to examine market behavior and economic risk patterns of Hispanic female-owned
business enterprises (HFB). This study is a continuation of a prior study on Female-owned business
enterprises and small business enterprises (SME). A sample of 103 HFBs in 11 industries was
examined for this study. Two independent studies were conducted on a sample. The objective of
this study is two-fold: (a) examine market behavior of Hispanic female-owned business enterprises
(HFB); and (b) to determine if HFBs exhibited particular entrepreneurial risk patterns. This study
examined two significant economic factors: endogenous variables and exogenous variables. Two
researcher-developed instruments were used for the study. A One-way ANOVA, one sample t-Test
and Pearsons correlation were used to analyze the data variances. The results of the study
indicated that HFBs exhibited minimal market behavioral and risk pattern differences as a
subgroup of business enterprises. These results were discussed in light of relevant literature and
some recommendations were made.
2013 Int. j. econ. manag. soc. sci. All rights reserved for TI Journals.
1.
Introduction
This study is a continuation of prior research on market and behavioral patterns with small business enterprises (SME) (Miles, 2011). The
specific objectives of the study were to determine characteristics of Hispanic female-owned businesses (HFB) in terms of: (a)
entrepreneurial risk patterns; and (b) market behavior dynamics. The economic dynamics of HFBs is an under-researched area. There is
particularly a dearth of research in the area of HFBs. For this study, the researcher took a different approach by examining HFBs for their
own specific characteristics rather than compare them to their Hispanic male counter parts. Also for the study, there was a consideration
whether or not there were any market behavioral differences with HFBs. In terms of industry sectors, market segmentation and competitor
intensity. In particular, we seek to explore the following research questions: (a) RQ1: What are the most prevalent entrepreneurial risk
patterns in Hispanic female-owned business enterprises (HFB); and (b) RQ2: What are the most significant market behavioral
characteristics of HFBs?
For HFBs, we focus specifically on a diverse group of industry sectors, firms, and customer turnover dynamics. The researcher wanted to
examine analytics with certain firm dynamics. HFBs have particular dynamics that needs to be investigated. In particular, this paper aims to
identify why the HFBs exhibit particular characteristics that could lead to business failure. For this we examine Entrepreneurial risk
orientation (ERO) levels. The paper provides an overview of the HFB data sources and methodology used in the study; also the study
presents the key findings and discusses the implications of the findings with regard to HFB market behavior and entrepreneurial risk
patterns. This study examined cases for both start-up ventures and established ventures. This paper is organized in four sections: (a)
background of the study; (b) literature review, which reviews the prior research and basis for the theoretical and conceptual models; (c)
methodology and results; and (d) discussion and conclusions, will elaborate on the findings of the study.
*Author: D. Anthony Miles

Email address: drderekx@yahoo.com
364
D. Anthony Miles.
Int ernational Journal of Ec onomy, Mana ge ment and Soci al Sc iences , 2(6) June 2013
2.
Review of the Literature
One of most obvious problems with the literature is that there is a strong lack of prior research on Hispanic-owned business enterprises
(HOB). There is even less research on Hispanic-Female-owned business enterprises (HFB). One of the prevailing issues with the literature
is the dearth in the research on HFBs. At best, the research has been extremely scarce not been any significant studies prior 20 years on
HFBs, so the research has been extremely scarce. This study attempts to fill a gap in prior research. As stated, this is a continuation of a
prior study on Hispanic-owned business enterprises and small business enterprises (SME) (Miles, 2011; Miles, 2012).
Over the last couple of decades a body of literature has been developed on the business practices of Hispanic-owned businesses has been
limited. Some of the prior studies that primarily focused on Hispanic-owned businesses were the following: Carmona (2000); Reilly
(2002); Tienda and Raijman (2004); Conrad (2007); Hull (2010); and Daz, Rietdorf, and Dornberger (2011). As illustrated in the prior
studies, there is a dearth concerning research on HOBs that needs to be addressed. This study attempts to fill a gap in prior research in the
field of entrepreneurship and Hispanic-owned business enterprises by investigating market behavior patterns of Hispanic-owned business
enterprises. However, concerning the Hispanic-female-owned businesses, there have only been four known studies of merit.
In reviewing earlier literature, the studies on Hispanic female-owned business enterprises have suggested they have unique factors have
been found to differentiate them from their male counter-parts. Interestingly, Latina-owned businesses increased by 103 % during the
period 1987-1999.' and Latina-owned business accounted for a large share of this increase During the 1990s, Latina small businesses grew
by 209 %, compared to the overall growth of Latino businesses in the United States (Robles, 2004). Shim (1998) provided one of the
earliest known studies specifically on Hispanic-female entrepreneurs. The conclusions of this study were: (a) Hispanic female business
owners were less likely to be married than their male counterparts is consistent with previous studies indicating that female business owners
in general were less likely to be married than male business owners; (b) Hispanic female business owners had less experience in their
businesses than their male counterparts; and (c) Hispanic female business owners were more likely to express a slightly higher incidence of
business problems in several financial areas, including capital management and debt management. Estimates from 2002 show there were
more than 470,000 Latina-owned businesses in the United States (Robles, 2004).
From 1990 to 2000, the number of Latina entrepreneurs and business owners has exploded (Fitzgerald, 2003). Businesses owned by Latina
have sales by $29.4 billion between 1997 and 2002. There were six identified states where HFBs were highly populated. The greatest
shares of the Hispanic female-owned businesses were in the following six states: New Mexico (20%), Texas (18%), California (17%),
Florida (16%), New York (14%), and Arizona (13%).
Other findings indicate that Latina entrepreneurs often do well. Self-employed Latinas are estimated to earn more than observationally
similar non-minority white female entrepreneurs and slightly less than observationally similar wage/salary-employed Latinas (Lofstrom &
Bates, 2009). There has been more recent research on characteristics of HFBs in terms of business ownership behavior. Young and Flores
(2011) concluded that Hispanic female entrepreneurs: (a) had more businesses in the wholesale area than men; (b) had a greater need for a
business plan and methods to generate sales than their male counterparts and lastly (c) mentioned the need to improve English and
computer skills.
This study attempts to build on the limited prior studies on HFBs. This is a continuation of prior research work on small business
enterprises (SME). Compared to previous studies examining the unique firm dynamics of Hispanic-owned business enterprises this study
attempts to open a new inquiry to the previous research on HFBs; and thus add to the body of knowledge.
Examining Market Behavior and Firm Risk Patterns: An Empirical Analysis on Hispanic Female-owned Business Enterprises
365
Internat ional Jour nal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Social Sciences , 2(6) June 2013
3. Theoretical Framework and Conceptual Model of the Study

The following theoretical model is presented in more detail with the specific variables for the research. The model that follows gives the
both the 22 endogenous and exogenous variables and thus appropriated separated by the two factors. The terms for market behavior and
entrepreneurial risk variables is illustrated (see Figure 1). Figure 2 illustrates conceptual model of the study.
FACTOR 1ENDOGENOUS FACTORS
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
V16-Owner Time Dependency Risk

V17-Labor/Intensity Risk
V18-Overhead Costs Risk
V19-Equipment/Systems Invest. Risk
V20-Internet/Technology Use Risk
V21-Experts/Team of Advisors Risk
V22-Intellectual Property Risk
V23-Velocity of Profit Risk
V24-Customer Activity/Turnover Risk
V25-Customer Credit Risk
V26-Line of Credit Risk
FACTOR 2 EXOGENOUS FACTORS
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
19)
20)
21)
V27-Market Potential Risk

V28-Barriers to Market Entry/Exit Risk
V29-Competition Intensity Risk
V30-Economic Risk
V31-Government Regulation Risk
V32-Social Responsibility Risk
V33-Environment/Climate Risk
V34-Security/Crime Vulnerability Risk
V35-Terrorism Vulnerability Risk
V36-Energy/Dependency Risk
22) V37-Globalization Threat Risk
Figure 1. Theoretical Model of the Study
FACTOR 1ENDOGENOUS
FACTORS
MARKET BEHAVIOR and

ECONOMIC PATTERNS of
Hispanic Female-owned
Business Enterprises (HFB)
FACTOR 2EXOGENOUS
FACTORS
Figure 2. Conceptual Model of the Study
ENTREPRENEURIAL RISK
ORIENTATION
(ERO) LEVEL
LOW/HIGH
366
D. Anthony Miles.
Methodology
4.1 Research Design Strategy
This study used a survey research design. Some characteristics of survey research gives it an advantage over other research methods: (a)
survey research is guided by logical constraints (Allen & Yen, 1979; Babbie, 1973; Campbell & Stanley, 1963; Dunn-Rankin et al., 2004);
(b) survey research is deterministic when a researcher attempts to explain the reasons for and sources of observed events (Keppel, 1982;
Kerlinger, 1985); (c) survey research is economical when a researcher can carefully examine the relevance of each variable; and (e) survey
research is precise (Afifi & Clark, 1984; Converse, & Presser, 1986).
4.2 Instruments Used for the Study
The Entrepreneurial Risk Survey (ERS). The scale is researcher-developed pilot instrument used for the first study. It consists of a
multidimensional and 32-item scale in order to identify and predict market behavior and risk patterns in business enterprises. The
Entrepreneurial Risk Assessment Scale (ERAS). This scale was the further development of the instrument by the researcher for the second
study. It consists of a 37-item scale that identifies and predicts market behavior and risk patterns in SMEs. After further development of the
instrument, three variables were added: (a) line of credit risk, (b) customer credit risk; and (c) economic risk. Analyses were made through
total scores obtained from the scale. ERAS is applied to the SMEs. Both studies primarily used a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly
Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree). The Likert Scale was most appropriate for this research because: (a) the likelihood of producing a highly
reliable scale; and (b) the capability to measure more data. These strategies attempt to maximize accessing the highest number of
participants through multiple data sources and multiple sites (Zikmund, 2003).
4.3 Sampling and Data Collection and Analysis
All data were collected by means of online survey collection (SurveyMonkey.com), telephone interviews, and through in-person
administration. For both studies, the researcher sent out an email to the target population (HFBs) with a link to the survey instruments.
Included in the email were: (a) a brief explanation of the study; (b) instructions for survey completion; and (c) the link to the survey
instrument URL. The researcher was able to get the assistance and support from the following agencies and organizations: Small Business
Administration (SBA), Small Business Development Center (SBDC), Service Corps of Retired Executives (SCORE), and local chambers
of commerce.
The study used SPSS Version 17.0, and SAS Version 9.1 software for the descriptive statistics (e.g., mean, median, standard deviation,
skewness, and coefficients) and inferential statistics (ANOVA, Pearson correlation, t-Test). Both software packages were used for
computing the descriptive statistics, inferential statistics and multivariate statistics. This was used for examining firm characteristics of
HFBs. This study also used the software for the inferential statistics such as bi-variate correlations between the variables. In a categorical
format, the HFB respondents were asked to indicate their personal information such as marital status, education, age, industry experience,
time length of business ownership, and capital investment. Business characteristics (for example, type of business entity, industry type, and
major target customers) were measured in as a categorical variable format (see Tables 1 and 2 for specific categories for responses). These
questions were related to enterprise characteristics, economic risk patterns, market forces and variables.
4.
Results of the Study
All manuscripts must be in English, and be submitted electronically in PDF format. Prepare your paper using an A4 page size. This section
presents the statistical analyses of the data and the results of the research questions that were investigated. The findings of both of the
studies are organized into two sections. The first section illustrates the descriptive statistical findings and general data demographics. The
second section illustrates the inferential statistical findings in the data of both studies. Lastly, the third section focuses on the discussions of
the results and the paper closes with conclusions of the research.
Data for this study are drawn from prior studies on Hispanic-owned businesses and small business enterprises (Miles, 2011; Miles 2012).
This study was taken from a sample of 14,000 Hispanic-owned businesses. The Survey also includes personal information on age,
education level, time-length of business ownership, industry experience, and marital status. Tables 1 and 2 provide information on both
personal and firm characteristics of HFBs. The sample was restricted to firms owned by women because the researcher wanted to examine
HFBs more closely as opposed to just Hispanic-owned businesses. Also, the researcher wanted to examine firm characteristics that are
unique to HFBs without comparing them to their male counterparts.
367
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for Study 1 of Personal Characteristics of Hispanic Business Owners (HFB)
Demographic Variables
Frequency
% of Sample
19.6
Married
25
54.3
Divorced
17.4
Widowed
4.3
Separated
4.3
18 to 24
4.3
25 to 35
11
23.9
36 to 46
12
26.1
47 to 57
16
34.8
10.9
6.5
Marital Status
Single (never been married)
Age
57 and over
Education Level
Did not finish high school
High school diploma
8.7
Some college
18
39.1
Bachelors
14
30.4
Graduate degree
15.2
Post graduate degree or higher
27
58.7
19.6
10
21.7
Consumer Monopoly-Type Industry
6.5
Consumer Competitive-Type Industry
19.6
Time Length of Business Ownership

Less than 1 year
1 - 3 years
4 years or more
Industry Type
Semi-Commodity-Type Industry
10.9
29
63.0
0 to $50,000
19.6
$50,001 to $100,000
10.9
17
37.0
Commodity Type-Industry/Product
Capital Investment Amount
$100,001 to $500,000
$500,001 to $900,000
$900,001 and over
(N = 46)
8.7
11
23.9
D. Anthony Miles.
368
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics Study 2 of Hispanic Business Owners (HFB)
Frequency
% of Sample
Marital Status
Single (never been married)
10.5
Married
41
71.9
Divorced
8.8
Widowed
1.8
Separated
7.0
Age
18 to 24
1.8
25 to 35
13
22.8
36 to 46
27
47.4
47 to 57
14
24.6
3.5
57 and over
Education Level
Did not finish high school
1.8
High school diploma
14
24.6
Some college
23
40.4
Bachelors
14
24.6
Graduate degree
7.0
Post graduate degree or higher
1.8
1 year or less
20
35.1
2 to 5 years
20
35.1
6 to 10 years
8.8
11 to 15 years
12.3
21 years or more
8.8
Agriculture
1.8
Communications
3.5
Construction
8.8
Finance
3.5
Manufacturing
1.8
Time Length of Business Ownership
Industry Type
Retail Trade
7.0
24
42.1
Technology
7.0
Transportation
1.8
Wholesale
3.5
11
19.3
Services
Other Industry
(N = 57)
369
Table 3. Descriptive Statistics Study 2 of Hispanic Business Owners (HFB) (continued)
Frequency
% of Sample
Corporation
15.8
Limited Liability Corporation or LLP
5.3
Partnership
10.5
37
64.9
3.5
1 year or less
20
35.1
2 to 5 years
20
35.1
6 to 10 years
8.8
11 to 15 years
12.3
16 to 20 years
8.8
21 years or more
55
96.5
$50,001 to $100,000
1.8
$100,001 to $500,000
1.8
$500,001 to $900,000
$900,001 and over
Business Entity Type
Sole Proprietorship
Other
Industry Experience
Capital Investment
0 to $50,000
(N = 57)
D. Anthony Miles.
370
5.1 Results of One Sample t-Test

A one-sample t-Test was used to examine means and standard deviation of HFBs across both endogenous and exogenous factors. For
Study 1, a sample of 46 HFBs from the Bexar County Metropolitan area participated in the study. The sample mean of was significantly
different from 50, t(19.9) = 4.07 p = .000 for the endogenous variables. The 95% confidence interval for endogenous variables (M = 3.07;
SD = 1.451); for the exogenous variable: (M = 2.30; SD = 1.331). Below Table 4 shows the distribution of both endogenous and exogenous
scores. The results indicate that HFBs exhibited somewhat higher entrepreneurial risk patterns than average.
Table 4. Study 1: Results of One Sample t-Test for Hispanic Female-Owned Business Enterprises (HFB) (N = 46)
Variables
t-value
df
SD
FACTOR 1 Endogenous Risks
Confid. Interval
Lower
Upper
V9-Expertise Industry Risk
15.37
45
.000
3.43
1.515
2.98
3.88
V10-Business Entity Risk
19.19
45
.000
3.98
1.406
3.56
4.40
V11-Capital Investment Risk
9.37
45
.000
1.61
1.164
1.26
1.95
V12-Time Intensity Risk
13.10
45
.000
3.11
1.609
2.63
3.59
V13-Labor Risk
16.11
45
.000
2.91
1.226
2.55
3.28
V14-Equipment Risk
15.44
45
.000
2.67
1.175
2.33
3.02
V15-Diseconomies of Scale Risk
14.32
45
.000
3.07
1.451
2.63
3.50
V16-Protection Devices Risk
15.98
45
.000
3.85
1.633
3.36
4.33
V17-Intellectual Capital Risk
19.98
45
.000
4.07
1.389
3.65
4.48
9.67
45
.000
2.46
1.722
1.95
2.97
V19-Customer Turnover Risk
14.79
45
.000
3.07
1.405
2.65
3.48
8.96
45
.000
1.78
1.348
1.38
2.18
V21-Market Entry/Exit Risk
16.33
45
.000
3.20
1.327
2.80
3.59
V22-Competition Risk
18.23
45
.000
3.87
1.439
3.44
4.30
V23-Business Climate Risk
18.95
45
.000
2.39
.856
2.14
2.65
12.53
45
.000
2.72
1.471
2.28
3.15
V25-Social Risk
9.52
45
.000
1.85
1.316
1.46
2.24
12.47
45
.000
2.37
1.289
1.99
2.75
V27-Security Risk
11.74
45
.000
2.30
1.331
1.91
2.70
V28-Terrorism Risk
13.01
45
.000
2.33
1.212
1.97
2.69
V29-Inflation/Energy Risk
11.60
45
.000
1.72
1.004
1.42
2.02
V30-Globalization Risk
10.99
45
.000
2.35
1.449
1.92
2.78
FACTOR 2 Exogenous Risks
**p <.01. *****p < .001.
371
Again, a one-sample t-Test was used For Study 2 to examine means and standard deviation of HFBs across both endogenous and exogenous factors. The
sample mean of 54.63 (SD = 10.33) was significantly different from 50, t(29.4) = 4.14, p = .000. The 95% confidence interval for endogenous variables
mean ranged from 2.10 to 4.33; for the exogenous variable: 2.10 to 4.27. Below Table 5 shows the distribution of both endogenous and exogenous scores.
The results indicate that HFBs exhibited somewhat more entrepreneurial risk patterns than average.
Table 5. Study 2: Results of One Sample t-Test for Hispanic Female-Owned Business Enterprises (HFB) (N = 57)
Variables
t-value
df
SD
Confid. Interval
Lower
Upper
14.03
56
.000
2.88
1.548
2.47
3.29
23.35
56
.000
3.67
1.185
3.35
3.98
20.25
56
.000
2.72
1.013
2.45
2.99
V19-Equipment/Systems Invest. Rk
18.76
56
.000
3.11
1.249
2.77
3.44
17.66
56
.000
3.21
1.372
2.85
3.57
V21-Experts Team/Advisors Risk
13.75
56
.000
2.81
1.540
2.40
3.22
V22 Intellectual Property Risk
11.80
56
.000
2.53
1.616
2.10
2.96
22.84
56
.000
3.98
1.316
3.63
4.33
V24-Customer Activity/Turn. Risk
21.23
56
.000
3.33
1.185
3.02
3.65
V25-Customer Credit Risk*
14.41
56
.000
2.39
1.250
2.05
2.72
V26-Line of Credit Risk*
14.65
56
.000
2.61
1.346
2.26
2.97
21.82
56
.000
3.91
1.353
3.55
4.27
V28-Barriers to Market Entry/Exit
16.17
56
.000
2.75
1.266
2.41
3.10
29.04
56
.000
4.14
1.076
3.85
4.43
V30-Economic Risk*
25.68
56
.000
3.79
1.114
3.49
4.09
15.66
56
.000
3.11
1.496
2.71
3.50
V32-Social Entrepreneurship Risk
10.78
56
.000
1.61
1.130
1.31
1.91
16.43
56
.000
2.82
1.297
2.48
3.17
V34-Security/Crime Vulner. Risk
16.60
56
.000
2.51
1.297
2.16
2.85
15.81
56
.000
2.77
1.323
2.42
3.12
23.25
56
.000
3.54
1.151
3.24
3.85
18.62
56
.000
3.58
1.451
3.19
3.96
**p <.01. *****p < .001. Note: *Denotes the variables V25, V26, and V30 were added to this research.
D. Anthony Miles.
372
5.2 Results of ANOVA

For Study 1, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was calculated on HFBs and the endogenous and exogenous factors. Because there
is only one independent variable (ethnicity: Hispanic female business owners), this analysis is referred to as a one-way ANOVA. Below
Table 6 illustrates the descriptive information and an ANOVA summary table. The significant variable for the endogenous factor was V16Protection Devices Risk; the most significant variable was the V22-Competition Risk. This indicates the two variables are the most
significant that affect HFBs in terms of entrepreneurial risk patterns.
Table 6. Study 1: Results of One-Way ANOVA for Hispanic Female-Owned Business Enterprises (HFB) (N = 46)
Variables
SS
df
MS
V9-Expertise Industry Risk
103.304
45
2.417
.250
.861
V10-Business Entity Risk
88.978
45
2.078
.272
.845
V11-Capital Investment Risk
60.957
45
1.305
1.574
.210
V12-Time Intensity Risk
116.457
45
2.419
2.048
.122
V13-Labor Risk
67.652
45
1.539
.649
.588
V14-Equipment Risk
62.109
45
1.413
.651
.587
V15-Diseconomies of Scale Risk
94.804
45
1.993
1.854
.152
V16-Protection Devices Risk*
119.935
45
1.717
9.286
.000
V17-Intellectual Capital Risk
86.804
45
1.678
3.248
.031
133.413
45
2.912
1.273
.296
V19-Customer Turnover Risk
88.804
45
2.044
.481
.697
81.826
45
1.652
2.508
.072
V21-Market Entry/Exit Risk
79.239
45
1.659
1.919
.141
V22-Competition Risk*
93.217
45
.064
471.2
.000
V23-Business Climate Risk
32.957
45
.762
.420
.740
97.326
45
2.280
.230
.875
V25-Social Risk
77.935
45
1.762
.741
.534
74.717
45
1.751
.226
.877
V27-Security Risk
79.739
45
1.863
.271
.846
V28-Terrorism Risk
66.109
45
1.543
.279
.840
V29-Inflation/Energy Risk
45.326
45
1.058
.286
.835
94.435
45
2.169
.511
.677
*Notice: p < .005
373
For Study 2, another one-way ANOVA was calculated on HFBs and the endogenous and exogenous factors. Below Table 7 illustrates the
descriptive information and an ANOVA summary table. There were no significant variables for both endogenous and exogenous factors.
The most significant variable was V20-Internet/Technology Use Risk (p = .029) but did not meet our standard of p < .005.
Table 7. Study 2: Results of One-Way ANOVA for Hispanic Female-Owned Business Enterprises (HFB) (N = 57)
Variables
SS
df
MS
134.140
56
2.686
.395
.942
78.667
56
1.490
.678
.739
57.509
56
1.120
.532
.858
V19-Equipment/Systems Invest. Risk
87.368
56
1.610
.827
.605
105.474
56
1.533
2.280
.029
V21-Experts Team/Advisors Risk
132.877
56
2.341
1.075
.400
V22 Intellectual Property Risk
146.211
56
2.222
1.980
.058
96.982
56
1.632
1.343
.237
V24-Customer Activity/Turn. Risk
78.667
56
1.546
.489
.889
V25-Customer Credit Risk*
87.509
56
1.627
.777
.650
101.509
56
1.783
1.093
.387
102.561
56
2.026
.462
.906
V28-Barriers to Market Entry/Exit
92.561
56
1.875
.337
.966
54.877
56
1.024
1.738
.101
V30-Economic Risk*
69.474
56
1.342
.577
.824
125.368
56
2.325
.793
.635
V32-Social Entrepreneurship Risk
71.509
56
1.393
.534
.857
94.246
56
1.603
1.280
.270
V34-Security/Crime Vulner. Risk
94.246
56
1.753
.777
.650
98.035
56
1.740
1.035
.431
74.140
56
1.280
1.192
.321
117.895
56
2.272
.589
.815
*Notice: p < .005 Note: *Denotes the variables V25, V26, and V30 were added to this research.
D. Anthony Miles.
374
5.3 Examining Customer Turnover: Hispanic Female-Owned Business Enterprises

Table 8 illustrates the results of customer turnover Risk with Hispanic Female-owned business enterprises (HFB) for Study 1. As indicated
below, the descriptive statistics of the customer turnover Risk are as follows: (a) the low frequency is only 4.3% of HFBs had a customer
turnover of 5 or less customers per day; and (b) the high frequency is 74.0% of HFBs had a customer turnover of 20 or more customer per
day. This Risk was used to make estimation on the sales generated. The profitability of the business enterprises was estimated due the lack
of financial data that was available to the researcher.
Table 8. Study 1: Results of Customer Turnover Risk with HFBs (N =46)

Customer Turnover
Frequency
% of Sample
20 or more customers per day
34
73.9
15 customers or less per day
6.5
Neutral or unknown
8.7
10 or less customers per day
6.5
5 or less customers per day
4.3
46
100.0
Total
Table 9 illustrates the results of Customer Turnover Risk with the HFBs that was only conducted for Study 1. The customer turnover Risk
of HFBs did reveal significance in this variable. HFBs had a mean (M = 3.07) and standard deviation of (SD = 1.405)
.
Table 9. Study 1: Results of Customer Turnover Risk of HFBs (N = 46)
Market Behavior and Risk Factors
Customer Turnover Risk
Hispanic Female-Owned Businesses (HFB) (N =48)

p
df
SD
.000
14.80
45
3.07
1.405
5.4 Examining Correlations with the Data

A Pearson correlation was performed to assess if there are any relationships existed between the both endogenous and exogenous factors in
the study. For Study 1 and Study 2, the correlations are presented in Tables 10 and 11. The Pearson correlation coefficient represents
standardized covariance, for which the variance of each item is fixed to 1.00 (Bryant & Yarnold, 1995). The benchmark for a Pearson
Correlation is: (a) .3 < r < .5 is considered poor, (b) r < .5 is considered moderate, and (c) r > .5 is considered strong (Bryant & Yarnold,
1995). The correlations in Tables 10 and 11 are between factor scores for the two factors. Correlations in both studies were low to moderate
as expected. There were not strong positive correlation coefficients among variables (see Tables 10 and 11).
375
Int ernational Journal of Ec onomy, Mana ge me nt and Soci al Sc iences , 2( 6) June 2013
Table 10. Study 1: Results of Pearson Correlation of Hispanic Female-Owned Businesses (HFB) (N = 46)
Note. All coefficients are significant at p < 0.01
(a) r < .3 is considered poor;
(b) r = .5 is considered moderate;
V9-Expertise Industry
V10-Business Entity Rk
V11-Capital Investment
V12-Time Intensity
V13-Labor Risk
V14-Equipment Risk
V15-Disnomies of Scale
V16-Protection Devices
V17-Intellectual Capital
V18-Velocity of Profit
V19-Customer Turnover
V20-Market Potential
V21-Market Entry/Exit
V22-Competition Risk
V23-Business Climate
V24-Government Reg.
V25-Social Risk
V26-Environment/Clim.
V27-Security Risk
V28-Terrorism Risk
V29-Inflation/Energy
V9
--.244
-.317
.090
.200
-.056
.118
.288
.388
-.061
.258
-.208
-.099
-.014
.072
.066
.045
.144
.186
.284
-.005
.051
V10
V11
V12
V13
V14
V15
V16
V17
V18
V19
V20
V21
V22
V23
V24
V25
V26
V27
V28
V29
V30
---.182
.021
.012
-.125
.001
.086
.240
-.271
.158
.079
-.224
.042
.118
-.315
-.134
.041
.099
-.257
-.225
-.149
---.226
.116
.311
-.340
-.441
-.296
.058
-.188
.143
.094
-.230
.200
.090
.468
-.064
.107
-.018
.074
.122
--.106
-.134
.140
.201
.295
.038
.095
-.112
-.260
.371
.001
-.099
-.034
.130
-.057
.187
-.116
.079
--.335
.303
-.096
.212
.177
.042
.015
.161
.062
-.475
.306
.253
.147
.425
.124
.377
.168
--.130
-.073
-.218
-.168
-.243
-.004
.227
-.013
.-091
.447
.398
.243
.349
.061
.354
.173
--.314
.130
.121
-.100
-.254
-.088
.313
-.128
.040
-.018
.153
.323
.253
.440
.221
--.504
.009
.159
-.379
-.335
.493
.330
-.213
-.104
.038
.063
.104
-.095
-.024
--.266
.271
-.147
-.007
.316
.146
-.002
-.067
-.001
.085
.106
-.066
.165
--.346
-.224
.184
-.029
-.018
.096
.257
-.128
-.052
.076
.372
.069
--.043
-.162
-.051
.311
-.131
.090
.072
.025
.144
-.239
.054
--.049
-.257
-.098
-.211
.069
.022
.075
.031
.069
.051
---.173
-.128
.564
.183
-.069
.003
-.123
.259
.045
--.115
-.049
-.210
.110
-.130
-.001
-.088
.150
---.193
-.005
-.215
-.165
.067
-.256
.067
--.310
.174
.170
-.034
.231
.078
--.099
.331
.157
.371
.192
---.581
.320
-.089
-.035
--.309
.132
.013
--.242
.010
--.161
---
(c) r > .5 is considered strong (Bryant & Yarnold, 1995).
D. Anthony Miles.
376
Internati onal Journal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Soc ial Sciences , 2( 6) June 2013
Table 11. Study 2: Results of Pearson Correlation of Hispanic Female-Owned Businesses (HFB) (N = 57)
V16
V16-Owner Time Depend.
V19-Equipment/Sys.Invest.
V20-Internet/Techno. Use
V21-Experts Team/Adv.
V22 Intellectual Property
V24-Customer Activi/Turn.
V25-Customer Credit *
V28-Barr. to Mrkt Ent/Ext
V29-Competition Intensity
V30-Economic Risk*
V31-Government Regul.
V32-Social Entrepren.
V33-Environment/Climate
V34-Security/Crime Vuln.
V35-Terrorism Vuln.
V36-Energy/Dependency
V17
V18
V19
V20
V21
V22
V23
V24
V25
V26
V27
V28
V29
V30
V31
V32
V33
V34
V35
V36
V37
----.065
.296
.229
.399
.327
.305
.139
.529
.385
.654
.361
.353
.182
.202
.160
.115
.238
.085
.204
-.032
-.079
----.129
.133
-.022
.258
-.093
.053
.131
.088
.108
-.152
.109
.107
-.122
.060
.222
.101
-.039
.167
-.061
-.114
----.461
.236
.193
.059
-.124
-.055
.228
.181
.177
.028
.250
.026
.055
.200
.234
.070
.178
.118
-.118
Note. All coefficients are significant at p < 0.01

(a) r < .3 is considered poor;
(b) r = .5 is considered moderate;
(c) r > .5 is considered strong (Bryant & Yarnold, 1995).
----.404
.280
.167
-.021
.024
.157
.194
.164
.306
.188
.299
.367
.308
.199
.021
.080
.133
-.113
----.341
.344
-.037
.220
.264
.528
.452
.404
.052
.228
.302
.168
.172
.019
.214
.141
-.062
----.443
.263
.408
.262
.523
.292
.381
.070
.278
.179
.182
.135
.041
.346
.262
.027
----.298
.364
.313
.399
.226
.132
-.064
.202
.161
.074
.326
-.002
.015
.151
-.163
----.359
.037
.026
.109
-.034
.292
.071
-.008
-.089
.082
.183
-.013
.113
-.284
----.418
.563
.275
.395
.145
.392
.111
.084
.387
.074
.254
.048
.062
----.408
.295
.238
-.134
.188
.092
.208
.219
.086
.205
.025
-.194
----.265
.491
-.110
.219
.242
.217
.247
.155
.301
.023
-.057
----.326
.143
.296
-.004
.094
.184
-.025
.238
.283
.208
----.219
.250
.441
.327
.263
.248
.260
.237
.087
----.114
.179
.060
.235
.089
.060
.139
.039
----.206
.147
.135
-.196
-.045
.230
.110
----.257
.092
.138
.075
.070
-.045
----.355
.465
.394
.315
.128
----.267
.216
-.007
-.011
----.527
.051
-.017
----.165
.293
----.108
-----
377
6. Conclusions and Critical Observations

This purpose of this study was to identify if Hispanic-female-owned business (HFB) exhibited any unique market behavioral characteristics
and risk patterns that influence business failure. The analysis confirms the existence of some significant behaviors with HFBs. Using the
two instruments, the Entrepreneurial Risk Survey (ERS) and the Entrepreneurial Risk Assessment Scale (ERAS), data were collected from
103 HFBs in the South Texas area. An ANOVA, one sample t-Test and a Pearson correlation were used to analyze the data.
This study did not find a significant positive association between market behavior and gender. HFBs exhibited no more risk patterns or
differences than their male-counterparts or non-minority business ventures. Furthermore, each of the two factors (endogenous and
exogenous) did not indicate a strong association between ethnicity and business enterprises risk patterns.
The strongest variance was with the competition intensity variable. HFBs seem to have and intense level competition in the industries in
which they operate in. Competitive risk is high in Study 1. However, in Study 2 the competition intensity seemed to be normal. That could
be attributed to the instrument differences between the two studies.
Another factor that could explain the lack of a clear relationship between gender and ethnicity may have been with the risk patterns.
According to the analyses, neither played a role in the risk dynamics of HFBs. Thus, as exhibited by the risk patterns they are no more
prone to failure than both their male and non-minority counterparts. In summary, the findings of this research provide support for building a
case that HFBs are just as likely to be successful as any other minority group.
In conclusion, despite the limited research in the literature, again gender and ethnicity does not affect market behavior patterns or risk
patterns with HFBs. The main implication in this study is that despite the obstacles that HFBs experience, it did not show up in the
statistical analyses. This research represents another step forward in building a foundation of research on HFBs and contributing to the
body of knowledge. More research needs to be conducted on HFBs to further examine their market behavior and firm characteristics.
6.1 Limitations and Future Research

Several limitations must be considered when interpreting the results of this study. Firstly, the sample was selected solely from the Bexar
County area. The results cannot be generalizable to because of the sample size of both studies. However this is a start. Future research that
examines firm characteristics and risk patterns of Hispanic female-owned business enterprises (HFB) is still much needed. Future research
should also examine business failure and competition intensity among HFBs.
Secondly, the industry sectors were a limitation. More research in terms of industry analysis of HFBs is needed to further examine firm
dynamics. For this study, the industry sectors were limited in the data collected. .Lastly, the results would not be conducive to a
longitudinal approach for HFBs. As HFBs become more prevalent as a segment there is still a dearth in the research on them. A
longitudinal study would be more appropriate as the number of HFBs increases and have more firm longevity. Despite the limitations, this
study represents one of the few investigations on HFBs. This study can be a baseline for more research to address the dearth concerning
HFBs.
As this writing this study is one of the few that empirically examines market behavior and risk patterns of HFBs. As this study was a
continuation of prior research on small business enterprises (SME), it represents a platform for more research on HFBs. In conclusion, the
evidence from this research attempts makes a notable contribution to the body of research on Hispanic-owned business enterprises. In
addition, this research can be an impetus for further study on market behavioral patterns of HFBs. This study supports the previous
literature and findings that exist with respect to market behavior of HFBs. There is still a wealth of opportunities to conduct further research
on HFBs and their market behavior.
D. Anthony Miles.
378
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
Afifi, A. & Clark, V. (1984). Computer-aided Multivariate Analysis. Belmont, CA: Lifetime Learning Publications.
Allen, J. & Yen, W. (1979). Introduction to Measurement Theory. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Inc.
Babbie, E. (1973). Survey Research Methods. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company Inc.
Bryant, F. & Yarnold, P. (1995). Principal-components analysis and exploratory and
confirmatory factor analysis. In L. Grimm & P. Yarnold
(Eds.), Reading and Understanding Multivariate Statistics (pp. 99-134). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Bryant, F. & Yarnold, P. (1995). Principal-components analysis and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In L. Grimm & P. Yarnold (Eds.),
Reading and Understanding Multivariate Statistics (pp. 99-134). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Campbell, D. & Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Boston,MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Carmona, J. L. (2000). Hispanic-owned SBA loans triple since 1992. Caribbean Business, 28(17), 33.
Conrad, L. (2007). Hispanic Demographic Commands Top Attention. U.S. Banker, 117(3), 44.
Converse, J. & Presser, S. (1986). Survey Questions: Handcrafting the Standardized Questionnaire, 5(1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,
Inc.
Dunn-Rankin, P., Knezek, G., Wallace, S. & Zhang, S. (2004). Scaling Methods (2nd ed.) Hilllsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers.
Fitzgerald, M. (2003). Rompiendo Barreras - Breaking Barriers - The number and size of businesses launched by Latina entrepreneurs has exploded.
Now, these members of la explosion demografica are ready to pass on the family firm. Will mainstream finance
institutions be ready to help? American Demographics. 25(9), 38.
Hispanic-owned company named one of America's `25 most successful smaller manufacturers'. (1999). Diversity Suppliers & Business Magazine,
7(1), 6.
Jones, K., & Tullous, R. (2002). Behaviors of pre venture entrepreneurs and perceptions of their financial needs. Journal of Small Business
Management, 40(3), pp. 233-248.
Keppel, G. (1982). Design and Analysis: A Researchers Handbook (2nd ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Kerlinger, F. (1985). Foundations of Behavioral Research (3rd ed.) New York, NY: Holt Rinehart and Winston, Publishers.
Miles, D. A. (2011). Assessing business risk: Development of the Entrepreneurial Risk Assessment Scale. University of the Incarnate Word.
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses http://search.proquest.com/docview/854859878?accountid=7058 (854859878). pp.1-231
Miles, D. A. (2012) Are Hispanic-owned businesses different? An empirical study on market behavior and risk patterns of Hispanic-owned business
ventures. Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship. Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Retrieved on April 15, 2013 from
HighBeam Research: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-2878428911.html
Reilly, P. (2002). Comerica Sets Up Dallas Hispanic Board To Woo Small Biz. American Banker, 167(69), 3.
Shim, S., & Eastlick, M. A. (1998). Characteristics of Hispanic Female Business Owners: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Small Business
Management. 36(3), 18.
Small Business Administration (1992). Facts About Hispanic-Owned Businesses.' Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Tienda, M., & Raijman, R. (2004). Promoting Hispanic Immigrant Entrepreneurship in Chicago. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 9(1),
pp. 1-21.
Young, M. & Flores, I. (2011). Characteristics and needed assistance of Hispanic women business owners: Emerging entrepreneurs. Small Business
Institute Journal, 1(7), pp. 80-105.
Vogt, P. (1993). Dictionary of Statistics and Methodology. New Jersey: Sage Publications.
Zikmund, W. (2003). Business Research Methods (7th ed.) New York, NY: Thomson- Southwestern.

Examining Market Behavior and Firm Risk Patterns: An Empirical Analysis On Hispanic Female-Owned Businesses Enterprises

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Examining Market Behavior and Firm Risk Patterns: An Empirical Analysis On Hispanic Female-Owned Businesses Enterprises

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences, 2(6) June 2013, Pages: 363-378

International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences

Examining Market Behavior and Firm Risk Patterns:

Texas A&M University-San Antonio, United States.

*Author: D. Anthony Miles

Review of the Literature

3. Theoretical Framework and Conceptual Model of the Study

FACTOR 1ENDOGENOUS FACTORS

V16-Owner Time Dependency Risk

FACTOR 2 EXOGENOUS FACTORS

V27-Market Potential Risk

Figure 1. Theoretical Model of the Study

MARKET BEHAVIOR and

Figure 2. Conceptual Model of the Study

Results of the Study

Post graduate degree or higher

Consumer Monopoly-Type Industry

Consumer Competitive-Type Industry

Time Length of Business Ownership

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics Study 2 of Hispanic Business Owners (HFB)

High school diploma

Post graduate degree or higher

Time Length of Business Ownership

Table 3. Descriptive Statistics Study 2 of Hispanic Business Owners (HFB) (continued)

Limited Liability Corporation or LLP

$900,001 and over

Business Entity Type

5.1 Results of One Sample t-Test

FACTOR 1 Endogenous Risks

V9-Expertise Industry Risk

V10-Business Entity Risk

V11-Capital Investment Risk

V12-Time Intensity Risk

V15-Diseconomies of Scale Risk

V16-Protection Devices Risk

V17-Intellectual Capital Risk

V18-Velocity of Profit Risk

V19-Customer Turnover Risk

V20-Market Potential Risk

V21-Market Entry/Exit Risk

V23-Business Climate Risk

V24-Government Regulation Risk

FACTOR 2 Exogenous Risks

**p <.01. *****p < .001.

FACTOR 1 Endogenous Risks

V16-Owner Time Dependency Risk

V18-Overhead Costs Risk

V20-Internet/Technology Use Risk

V21-Experts Team/Advisors Risk

V22 Intellectual Property Risk

V23-Velocity of Profit Risk

V24-Customer Activity/Turn. Risk

V25-Customer Credit Risk*

V26-Line of Credit Risk*

V27-Market Potential Risk

V28-Barriers to Market Entry/Exit

V29-Competition Intensity Risk

V31-Government Regulation Risk

V32-Social Entrepreneurship Risk

V34-Security/Crime Vulner. Risk

V35-Terrorism Vulnerability Risk

FACTOR 2 Exogenous Risks

5.2 Results of ANOVA

p <.01. ***p < .001.