International journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN:2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 4, Issue 12 (December 2017, Part 2), Pages: 206-211

----------------------------------------------

 Review Paper

 Title: A study on application of fuzzy methods in entrepreneurship domain

 Author(s): Norhaidah Abu Haris 1, *, Fauziah Abdul Rahman 2

 Affiliation(s):

 1Malaysian Institute of Information Technology, Universiti Kuala Lumpur, 50300 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 2Malaysian Institute of Industrial Technology, Universiti Kuala Lumpur, 81750 Masai, Johor, Malaysia

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2017.012.036

 Full Text - PDF          XML

 Abstract:

Entrepreneurial culture is receiving a greater amount of attention by academician and practitioners. Various fields of studies on entrepreneurship domain have been analyzed using fuzzy methods for prediction. The fuzzy method’s application is believed could be utilized to obtain meaningful knowledge on the various areas of entrepreneurship domain of studies. 

 © 2017 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: Entrepreneurship, Fuzzy methods, Prediction

 Article History: Received 1 December 2016, Received in revised form 2 September 2017, Accepted 16 October 2017

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2017.012.036

 Citation:

 Haris NA and Rahman FA (2017). A study on application of fuzzy methods in entrepreneurship domain. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 4(12): 206-211

 Permanent Link:

 http://www.science-gate.com/IJAAS/V4I12(2)/Haris.html

----------------------------------------------

 References (53)

  1. Adler M and Ziglio E (1996). Gazing into the oracle: The Delphi method and its application to social policy and public health. Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London, UK.  
  2. Aliei M and Rafiean H (2014). Generating Corporate entrepreneurship based on fuzzy DEMATEL in Iranian institutes. Journal of Engineering Technology, 2: 110-125.     
  3. Alroaia YV, Hemati M, and Javadinia M (2012a). A new approach to develop entrepreneurship of the industry using fuzzy DEMATEL. Management Science Letters, 2(4): 1279-1288. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2012.02.011 
  4. Alroaia YV, Javidnia M, Shahmirzadi MK, and Nabavi SR (2012b). A survey of the effective factors on the entrepreneurial success and its impact on the development of industrial section by use of fuzzy DEMATEL. Caspian Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 1(10): 83-93.     
  5. Angeles GM, Lubiano MA, De Sáa SD, and Sinova B (2015). Analyzing data from a fuzzy rating scale-based questionnaire: A case study. Psicothema, 27(2): 182-191.     
  6. Arafeh L (2016). An entrepreneurial key competencies' model. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 5: 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-016-0048-6 
  7. Bird B (1988). Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: The case for intention. Academy of Management Review, 13(3): 442-453.     
  8. Castillo I, Tomás I, Ntoumanis N, Bartholomew K, Duda JL, and Balaguer I (2014). Psychometricproperties of the Spanish version of the controlling coach behaviors scale in the sport context. Psicothema, 26(3): 409-414. PMid:25069563     
  9. Czinkota MR and Ronkainen IA (1997). International business and trade in the next decade: Report from a Delphi study. Journal of International Business Studies, 28(4): 827-844. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490121 
  10. Dehkordi AM, Sasani A, Fathi MR, and Khanmohammadi E (2012). Investigating the effect of emotional intelligence and personality traits on entrepreneurial intention using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(13): 286-296.     
  11. Delbecq AL, Ven DVAH, and Gustafson DH (1975). Group techniques for program planning: A guide to nominal group and Delphi processes. Scott Foresman, Glenview, USA. PMid:126959     
  12. Ferreira P and Dion sio A (2016). Entrepreneurship rates: The fuzzy-set approach. Eastern European Business and Economics Journal, 2(2): 111-128.     
  13. Gabus A and Fontela E (1972). World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva Research Center, Geneva, Switzerland.     
  14. Gabus A and Fontela E (1973). Perceptions of the world problematique: Communication procedure, communicating with those bearing collective responsibility. Battelle Geneva Research Centre, Geneva, Switzerland. PMid:4777092     
  15. Hejazi S and Seifollahi M (2016). A fuzzy-based model to assess technological entrepreneurship capabilities: Cases of high-tech firms. Asian Journal of Research in Business Economics and Management, 6(8): 1-24. https://doi.org/10.5958/2249-7307.2016.00045.1 
  16. Hornaday RW (1992). Thinking about entrepreneurship: A fuzzy set approach. Journal of Small Business Management, 30(4): 12-24.     
  17. Hwang CL and Yoon K (1981). Multiple atrribute decision making methods and application a state-of-the-art-survey. Springer Heidelberg, Berlin, Germany. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9  PMCid:PMC1214490     
  18. Jang JS (1993). ANFIS: Adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 23(3): 665-685. https://doi.org/10.1109/21.256541 
  19. Kaufmann A and Gupta MM (1988). Fuzzy mathematical models in engineering and management science. Elsevier Science Inc, Atlanta, USA.     
  20. Kaur B and Aggrarwal H (2013). An optimization of a planning information system using fuzzy inference system and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Applications, 10(8): 249-260.     
  21. Khefacha I and Belkacem L (2015). Modeling entrepreneurial decision-making process using concepts from fuzzy set theory. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 5(1): 13-34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-015-0031-x 
  22. Kusan H, Aytekin O, and Özdemir l (2010). The use of fuzzy logic in predicting house selling price. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(3): 1808-1813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.07.031 
  23. Kushwaha GS and Kumar S (2009). Role of the fuzzy system in psychological research. Europe's Journal of Psychology, 5(2): 123-134. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v5i2.271 
  24. Linstone HA, Turoff M, and others (1975). The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. Addison-Wesley, Boston, USA.     
  25. Liu HW, Lin YL, Xu F, and Wang H (2016). Environmental conditions, entrepreneur alertness and social capital on performance. International Business Research, 9(8): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v9n8p1 
  26. Malagoli S, Magni CA, and Mastroleo G (2007). The use of fuzzy logic and expert systems for rating and pricing firms: A new perspective on valuation. Managerial Finance, 33(11): 836-852. https://doi.org/10.1108/03074350710823818 
  27. Mavi RK (2014). Indicators of entrepreneurial university: Fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5(2): 370-387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-014-0197-4 
  28. Mohd RMJ, Saedah S, Farazila Y, Nurulrabihah MN, Zaharah H, and Ahmad Arifin S (2015). Aplikasi teknik Fuzzy Delphi terhadap keperluan elemen keusahawanan bagi pensyarah kejuruteraan Politeknik Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Technopreneurship, 5(1): 135-150.     
  29. Munoz P (2012). A fuzzy set approach to empirical typologies in sustainability entrepreneurship (interactive paper). Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 32(5). Available online at: http://digitalknowledge.babson.edu/fer/vol32/iss5/25     
  30. Munoz P and Kibler E (2016). Institutional complexity and social entrepreneurship: A fuzzy-set approach. Journal of Business Research, 69(4): 1314-1318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.098 
  31. Nikfarjam A, Kiani MR, and Fazli S (2013). Prioritizing entrepreneurial university factors by fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences, 2(10): 876-884.     
  32. Nisel S (2014). An extended VIKOR method for ranking online graduate business programs. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 4(1): 103-107. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2014.V4.378 
  33. Opricovic S (1998). Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade, 2(1): 5-21.     
  34. Opricovic S (2009). Compromise in cooperative game and the VIKOR method. Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research, 19(2): 225-238. https://doi.org/10.2298/YJOR0902225O 
  35. Opricovic S and Tzeng GH (2002). Multicriteria planning of post-earthquake sustainable reconstruction. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 17(3): 211-220. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8667.00269 
  36. Opricovic S and Tzeng GH (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2): 445-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1 
  37. Opricovic S and Tzeng GH (2007). Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 178(2): 514-529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.01.020 
  38. Ragin CC (2000). Fuzzy-set social science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.     
  39. Rezaei J, Ortt R, and Scholten V (2013). An improved fuzzy preference programming to evaluate entrepreneurship orientation. Applied Soft Computing, 13(5): 2749-2758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2012.11.012 
  40. Reznik L (1997). Fuzzy controllers handbook: How to design them, how they work. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK.     
  41. Rihoux B and Ragin CC (2008). Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, Califirnia, USA.     
  42. Rowe G and Wright G (1999). The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: Issues and analysis. International Journal of Forecasting, 15(4): 353-375. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2070(99)00018-7 
  43. Saaty RW (1987). The analytic hierarchy process-What it is and how it is used. Mathematical Modelling, 9(3-5): 161-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8 
  44. Sheela P and Murthy M (2015). The use of fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP) model for the primary screening of business opportunity in the process of entrepreneurial activity. International Journal of Marketing, Financial Services and Management Research, 4(5): 1-14.     
  45. Skulmoski G and Hartman F (2002). The Delphi method: Researching what does not exist (yet). In the IRNOP V Conference on International Research Network on Organization by Projects, Renesse, Netherlands.     
  46. Suárez EP, Mu-iz J, Campillo AÁ, Fonseca PE, and García CE (2013). Assessing organizational climate: Psychometric properties of the CLIOR scale. Psicothema, 25(1): 137-144.     
  47. Tzafestas S, Venetsanopoulos A, and Terzakis S (1994). Fuzzy sets and fuzzy reasoning: An introduction. In: Tzafestas SG and Venetsanopoulos AN (Eds.), Fuzzy reasoning in information, decision and control systems: 3-29. Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin, Germany.     
  48. Tzeng, GH, Teng MH, Chen JJ, and Opricovic S (2002). Multicriteria selection for a restaurant location in Taipei. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 21(2): 171-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-4319(02)00005-1 
  49. Wang LX (1999). A course in fuzzy systems. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, USA.     
  50. Yaghoubi NM, Moloudi J, and Banihashemi SA (2011). Entrepreneurship in organization and social capital: Fuzzy logic approach. China-USA Business Review, 10(12): 79-86.     
  51. Zadeh LA (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3): 338-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X 
  52. Zadeh LA (1975). The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-I. Information Sciences, 8(3): 199-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0255(75)90036-5 
  53. Zhang H and Liu D (2006). Fuzzy modeling and fuzzy control. Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin, Germany.