Thematic Review of Motivational Factors, Types of Uncertainty, and Entrepreneurship Strategies of Transitional Entrepreneurship among Ethnic Minorities, Immigrants, and Women Entrepreneurs

Abstract

The current study examines the motivational factors, types of uncertainty, and entrepreneurship strategies of transitional entrepreneurship among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs, drawing insights from an extensive literature review. To understand the dynamics of transitional entrepreneurship, a thematic review, a qualitative research tool, was used to analyze the research problem and provide answers to the research questions. Three insightful findings emerged from the thematic review. First, six broad themes emerged as catalysts for transitional entrepreneurship among the three focused entrepreneurs, namely, the institutional environment, push factors, pull factors, ethnic resource dependence, cultural inheritance, and gender identity issues. Specific elements of each of the six themes are explicated. Moreover, two levels of uncertainty (Levels 1 and 2) confront transitional entrepreneurs depending on countries and institutional contexts. Level 1 uncertainty presents a clear future with likelihoods, possibilities, and probabilities of success, while Level 2 uncertainty presents several alternate paths and trajectories with a blurred possibility of success for these entrepreneurs. Finally, transitional entrepreneurs leverage optioned and adaptive entrepreneurship strategies in different ways to cope with the two types of uncertainty in their host countries. Given the prospects of TE, the paper provides implications on how to remove the institutional barriers facing transitional entrepreneurs for more balanced socioeconomic inclusion in host countries. It further explicates a need to leverage the motivational factors and entrepreneurship strategies for economic development. By providing a theoretical-based framework of motivations, types of uncertainty, and entrepreneurship strategies, the paper bridges the gaps in the literature and contributes to a better way of understanding TE among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs in the period of transition.

1. Introduction

Entrepreneurship is a rapidly evolving field of knowledge and practice that touches on social entrepreneurship, transnational entrepreneurship, commercial entrepreneurship, Schumpeterian and non-Schumpeterian entrepreneurship, nascent entrepreneurship, smart entrepreneurship, medical entrepreneurship, digital entrepreneurship, necessity-driven entrepreneurship, and opportunity-driven entrepreneurship (Dacin et al. 2011; Stam and Van Stel 2011; Rae and Wang 2015; Surugiu and Surugiu 2015; Brezoi 2018; Dilli et al. 2018; Raimi 2019; Hysa and Mansi 2020; Obschonka and Audretsch 2020; Vasile et al. 2020; El Chaarani and Raimi 2021; Stephan et al. 2020; Gupta and Matharu 2022). The aspect of business venturing that is unique and requires more focus from policy and academic circles is transitional entrepreneurship (TE) because of its transformative value to business and society. The concept of TE within transitional economies and developing and developed economies has recently gained traction in the entrepreneurship literature because of its importance in both policy and academic circles (Vuong et al. 2016; Raimi and Aslani 2019; Ivy and Perényi 2020). According to Pidduck and Clark (2021), “transitional entrepreneurship is concerned with how, why, and when entrepreneurial actors from a given marginalized group may discover, enact, evaluate, or exploit opportunities because or in light of their position/s of adversity”. TE is a phenomenon that cannot be ignored because the human subjects involved, such as immigrants, refugees, women, and ethnic minorities, have created several businesses, products, and services with beneficial spillover impacts on their host countries, home countries, and global entrepreneurship ecosystems (Bashir 2019; Raimi and Aslani 2019). Remarkably, the transitioned entrepreneurs in the UK, US, Australia, Canada, and other countries generate self-employment, create employment for others, produce essential goods and services, pay taxes, and add to the gross domestic product of their host countries (Man 2004; McMichael and Manderson 2004; Chang 2016; Pisani 2019). It is also true that immigrants, refugees, women, and ethnic minorities from economically distressed communities suffer from a lack of financial capital and social and human capital, including knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs). Resource scarcity puts them at an enormous disadvantage to compete for employment in regular job markets in their home and host countries. Consequently, these groups of people resort to entrepreneurship as a viable career choice and a necessity (Sutter et al. 2019).

Pidduck and Clark (2021) define transitional entrepreneurs as “actors socially, institutionally, culturally, or resourcefully marginalized by community membership pursuing new ventures as a vehicle for positional advancement”. The extant literature has revealed that transitional entrepreneurs have continued to make significant contributions to the ecosystems of developed countries such as the United States, Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Unfortunately, the notion of TE among economically distressed groups has not been well understood and investigated by researchers and policymakers. From previous studies, the phenomenon of TE largely explicates in theory and practice the social, institutional, cultural, and economic adversities facing marginalized entrepreneurial actors in the process of pursuing new venture creation and achieving positional advancement and how these different marginalized groups cope with these issues (Pidduck and Clark 2021). In terms of the gap being filled in the extant literature, this research facilitates a deep understanding of transitional entrepreneurship from both conceptual, theoretical, and empirical perspectives by emphasizing TE dynamics among minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs in developed and developing countries. Furthermore, the paper builds on the agelong concept of nascent entrepreneurship that is narrow and limited to a particular type of entrepreneurship and context. However, transitional entrepreneurship embraces different types of entrepreneurialism that are transitional in different contexts.

The scope of TE spans developed, transitional, and emerging economies, as several studies in this growing field have touched all types of economies. Therefore, TE is a distinct area of entrepreneurship venturing that examines socially constructed constraints and adversity issues specifically facing entrepreneurs from marginalized groups, minorities, and economically distressed communities in entrepreneurship venturing or launching their ventures. From the above arguments, this study focuses on transitional entrepreneurs such as ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women because these three groups have been the most affected by the socially constructed constraints and adversities in their host countries and transitional economies. Therefore, specifically, the study seeks to answer the following research question (RQs):

RQ1: What are the motivational factors driving TE among ethnic minorities, women, and immigrants?

RQ2: What are the uncertainties hindering TE among ethnic minorities, women, and immigrants?

RQ3: What entrepreneurship strategies are leveraged by ethnic minorities, women, and immigrants to cope with the ravages of uncertainties?

We raise the research questions and objectives because answers to these questions have not been critically analyzed and harmonized in previous studies. This research facilitates a deep understanding of transitional entrepreneurship, emphasizing the dynamics of TE among minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs in both developed and developing countries. Since entrepreneurship is increasingly expected to focus on helping people to overcome poverty or desperate conditions, this research of TE will examine the phenomenon to contribute to further development of the field while suggesting eleven propositions, six theoretical perspectives, and sixteen entrepreneurship strategies.

Apart from the introduction (Section 1) above, this paper is structured into five sections. Section 2 discusses the methods and approach. Section 3 focuses on the literature review that covers important thematic issues such as TE definition, theoretical perspectives, motivational factors for TE, types of uncertainty, and entrepreneurship strategies for coping in the transition period. Section 4 presents findings and discussions of thematic issues. Section 5 summarizes the findings, implications, and limitations, including further research directions.

2. Method and Approach

A thematic review was used to understand the research problem’s intricacies and dynamics. Thematic review/approach is a qualitative research tool often applied for setting the basis for understanding and analyzing trends and happenings in a particular field (Hu 1996; Hargood et al. 2008). Thematic review is particularly valuable in organizational sciences and management for the identification, accumulation, evaluation, synthesizing, and reflective interpretation of previous empirical evidence related to a research problem/issue (Rousseau et al. 2008; Davidson et al. 2012; Davidson 2015). Horn (2010) views TR as a template analysis that analyses text, words, and interviews based on emerging themes and codes identified based on grounded theory insights. In particular, the adoption of TA in the current study is guided by the quest to provide an explicit method for the critical review of extant literature that focuses on the four themes of TE, namely, ethnic minorities, women, immigrants, and refugees.

The methodological approach of TA has also been described as a systematic review of scholarly research articles purposely to describe the dynamic relations between two or more phenomena, particularly when insights and facts about such relationships are fragmented in the literature (Pittaway et al. 2004). The process of using thematic review, according to Spender et al. (2017), entails selecting a set of articles and relevant papers that cover the themes of investigation, and a critical evaluation of papers is carried out using thematic analysis based on which description and informed conclusions are made. This approach makes it easy to identify the boundaries of TE and contribute qualitatively to theory advancement. The findings extracted from diverse studies on the subject from different contexts (called qualitative meta-data) are integrated and sorted into themes, and the observed trends provide an explanatory theory or model that explains the phenomenon being investigated in a better and richer way (Finlayson and Dixon 2008). To forestall biases in selecting scholarly articles, texts, and internet resources, the authors searched three databases (Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar) for academic publications that discuss five topical streams, namely, transitional entrepreneurship, motivational factors for entrepreneurship venturing, ethnic minority entrepreneurship, immigrant entrepreneurship, and women entrepreneurship. From over 130 publications generated by the databases, Web of Science produced the highest number of search queries of 57, Scopus produced 43 search queries, and the remaining 30 search queries were produced by Google Scholar. From the publications generated by the databases, a sample of 117 relevant publications covering the investigation’s themes was selected, critically reviewed, evaluated, and synthesized based on which integrated findings were reported. Regarding the steps involved in carrying out TR, the current study followed a seven-stage approach as follows:

(1)

Searching the database for suitable literature: The three databases were used to search the definition of TE, motivation for TE, and four segments of TE, namely, ethnic entrepreneurship, women entrepreneurship, immigrant entrepreneurship, and refugees. Several titles, abstracts, and full articles covering the four TE typologies were methodically previewed from the most basic to the most complex.

(2)

Defining geography of literature: Searched articles published in English that covered developed, developing, and transitional economies to gain richer insights on the subject of inquiry.

(3)

Sampling and inclusion–exclusion criteria: The decision on the number of articles to be included and excluded after the literature search was based on purpose (objective of the study), relevance to the four TE typologies, compatibility with the issues of the research problem, and recency of the articles, particularly if they fell within 2000–2021. An exception was given to pioneering works that are vital for theory understanding. The above selection criteria strongly support the purposive sampling technique, which is useful when randomization is impossible, the population is very large (Etikan et al. 2016), and when data sought requires expert opinions and insights of knowledge and experience (Cresswell and Plano Clark 2011; Palinkas et al. 2015). All 57 articles from the Web of Science and 43 articles from Scopus were selected because of their quality, while 17 articles were selected from the Google Scholar database.

(4)

Theme reporting structure: The thematic report structure was developed based on three frameworks adopted from the literature on TE motivational factors, types of uncertainties, and resilience entrepreneurship strategies. The thematic report structure also indicated the key information needed.

(5)

Appraisal of the literature: The selected articles were appraised by critically comparing the views to balance the emerging insights. This step is necessary to draw rich and meaningful information for making informed and evidence-based findings in line with the qualitative meta-synthesis tradition.

(6)

Quantifying the themes in frequencies and percentages: From the critical appraisal, the themes that emerged from the critically reviewed articles were quantified in frequencies and percentages and presented in tables.

(7)

Analysis and synthesis of themes: From the quantified themes in the tables, further explanations and fact-based inferences were made on the motivational factors for transitional entrepreneurship among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs.

3. Literature Review

This section of the paper explores the conceptual review, theoretical review, and empirical review to enhance the quality and diversity of the information used for the thematic review.

3.1. Conceptual Review

This section explores the extant literature on TE to address the first research question: What is transitional entrepreneurship and its scope and benefits for host countries and transitional economies?

3.1.1. Defining Transitional Entrepreneurship/Entrepreneur

Transitional entrepreneurship is the concept that explicates in theory and practices the social, institutional, cultural, and economic adversities facing marginalized entrepreneurial actors in the process of pursuing new venture creation and achieving positional advancement and how these different marginalized groups cope with these issues (Pidduck and Clark 2021). Viewed from a contextual focus, Bruton et al. (2021) define TE as a perspective that focuses on helping marginalized groups and disadvantaged entrepreneurs overcome dire and desperate conditions in mature economies where they find themselves. Furthermore, TE describes a set of entrepreneurs who launch a series of business ventures in their host countries to accomplish significant life aspirations or career transitions (Old Dominion University 2021). However, Nair and Chen (2021) define TE simply as a unique form of entrepreneurship venturing found among members of communities who were able to overcome significant adversity and challenges to launch new ventures as pathways to substantive life transitions.

There needs to be more academic work on who is a transitional entrepreneur. However, inferences on the explanations of TE give some insights. From the viewpoint of Nair and Chen (2021), a transitional entrepreneur is an entrepreneur from a disadvantaged community who overcomes life adversity and challenges by establishing a new venture to improve their life transition or career. A transitional entrepreneur sets up a business venture to accomplish significant life aspirations or career transitions (Old Dominion University 2021). Several insightful studies have described transitional entrepreneurs as nascent entrepreneurs who follow the four stages of conception, gestation, infancy, and adolescence in creating new ventures in their operating environments or climes (Delmar and Davidsson 2000; Wagner 2006). From the perspective of transitional justice as explained by Madlingozi (2010), transitional entrepreneurs are viewed as a set of marginalized and traumatized entrepreneurs operating in an environment with noninclusive transitional justice. They cannot hence make decisions about the future that render them largely incapable of making optimal positive contributions.

The four groups focused on in this study also qualify as necessity entrepreneurs and nascent entrepreneurs. The latter is a concept that loosely refers to people who independently commit personal resources, ideas, and time to establishing new businesses on their own despite all odds (Wagner 2006). The six driving forces of nascent entrepreneurs throughout their transitional stages are self-realization, financial success, roles, innovation, recognition, and independence (Carter et al. 2003). Furthermore, it is proven that nascent entrepreneurs flourish and get their businesses up and running because they are motivated by nonfinancial outcomes, perceived support from social networks/contacts, and the institutional environment (Zanakis et al. 2012).

3.1.2. Transitional Policy Environment and Uncertainties

The success or failure of TE is largely influenced by the transitional policy environment and the uncertainties arising from the policy. Irrespective of contexts, it is affirmed that higher-level institutions shape what is done at lower levels, including the entrepreneurial actions of individual and corporate entrepreneurs. Consequently, all entrepreneurial actions follow four conceptual levels with different approaches to economizing: the top level is influenced by the norms and culture of society; the second level is influenced by political regulations and policies; the third level is shaped by governance, organizations, and long-term contracting; and the fourth level is influenced by routine bidding for resources in the market (Bylund and McCaffrey 2017). Consequently, the transitional policy environment controlled by higher-level institutions affects all enterprises (small, medium, large, and multinationals), but the effects and coping capabilities differ. From the previous points, transitional entrepreneurs such as other corporate entrepreneurs operate within an environment characterized by social, environmental, and policy uncertainties.

The phenomenon of uncertainty in entrepreneurship is a situation that makes it impossible for entrepreneurs (at both the individual and firm levels) to assign objective probabilities or make informed choices to each of the outcomes, including limitations in predicting the direction of events and opportunities (Magnani and Zucchella 2018). Borrowing from the field of strategies management, scholars noted that uncertainty can be classified into four levels or degrees based on the ambiguity regarding future paths, options, and trajectories: Level 1 uncertainty has a clear future around which likelihoods, possibilities, and probabilities can be established; Level 2 uncertainty presents several alternate paths and trajectories; Level 3 uncertainty manifests a range of futures that could be pursued; and Level 4 uncertainty reflects true ambiguity with paths, futures, and probabilities (Courtney 2001; Courtney et al. 1997; Doh and Pearce 2004). Entrepreneurs, irrespective of climes, face market uncertainty and institutional uncertainty, and they leverage entrepreneurial strategies to mitigate uncertainty through market and institutional actions (Bylund and McCaffrey 2017; Vrontis et al. 2022; Verma and Mehta 2022). Similarly, Dorado and Ventresca (2013) noted that institutions strongly influence entrepreneurship because of “institutional conditions that facilitate or hinder entrepreneurial engagement”. In periods of uncertainty, institutional conditions must be supportive and conducive to productive entrepreneurship, without which entrepreneurship would impair and negatively impact economic performance and growth (Carree and Thurik 2010; Bylund and McCaffrey 2017; Gigauri and Bogacz-Wojtanowska 2022; Arranz et al. 2019).

Proposition 1.

Transitional entrepreneurship among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs in different climes largely contends with social, environmental, and policy uncertainties.

3.1.3. Transitional Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneurship Strategies

The three categories of TE focused on in this study require entrepreneurship strategies to cope with the ravages of uncertainties. Four entrepreneurial strategies that have long been identified in the CE literature include preemptive, optioned, synchronized, and adaptive entrepreneurial strategies (Doh and Pearce 2004). How are transitional entrepreneurs such as ethnic minorities, immigrants, refugees, and women affected by the socially constructed constraints and adversities of the transitional policy environment explained under the four entrepreneurial strategies shown in Figure 1 below?

The common ways corporate entrepreneurs react under periods of certainty that present huge economic opportunities are called preemptive strategies. Preventive strategies are aggressive first-mover options where entrepreneurs make a high level of resource commitment to purposely have a strong, defensible competitive position in the market. This strategy when used has the likelihood of generating the highest return when the outcomes of policy transitions can be predicted with high levels of certainty. It is an appropriate strategy under three conditions: (a) where the level of uncertainty is relatively low, (b) when first-mover positioning is valuable, and (c) when market lockout opportunities are well defined (Doh 2000; Sarkar et al. 2001; Doh and Pearce 2004). An empirical study confirmed that the alliance entrepreneurship of small firms leveraging preemptive strategies has a stronger effect on performance in unstable market environments (Sarkar et al. 2001).

Proposition 2.

Transitional entrepreneurs in different climes adopt preventive strategies when there is a strong likelihood of generating high returns and the outcomes of the policy environment can be predicted with high levels of certainty.

Second, the optioned strategies are used by corporate firms and strategic entrepreneurs when there are temporal entry barriers in the policy environment. The optioned strategies are those adopted by making an initial and incremental investment to take advantage of the currently limited opportunity in the uncertain policy environment (Page West and DeCastro 2001; Doh and Pearce 2004). Optioned strategies present a means of making an initial investment despite current limitations and risks with the prospect of expanding the value of the optioned investment in the future (Karsak and Özogul 2002). Optioned strategies have proven to be appropriate when the level of uncertainty in the business environment is moderate with clearly identified alternate paths that may generate the highest returns (Doh and Pearce 2004). When entrepreneurs lack internal resources and capabilities to gain a competitive advantage in the policy environment, optioned, strategic investments are proposed to overcome resource weakness and distinctive inadequacies (Page West and DeCastro 2001).

Proposition 3.

Transitional entrepreneurs in different climes adopt optioned strategies when there are temporal entry barriers and a modest level of uncertainty in the policy environment. However, there are clear alternate paths that may generate the highest returns.

Synchronous strategies are strategic options that entrepreneurs adopt to avert the high-risk options of preemptive (first-mover positioning) and optioned (cost savings) strategies by synchronizing their investments and resource commitments with postdecision and preactivation policy changes in periods of uncertainty. It is a strategy that is most effective when the level of policy uncertainty is moderate with a low second-entry cost and a range of clearly identified paths and possibilities. It is very good because it allows entrepreneurs making investment decisions to be focused and comparatively less speculative (Doh and Pearce 2004).

Proposition 4.

Transitional entrepreneurs in different climes adopt synchronous strategies when there are high risks with modest uncertainty in the policy environment for first-mover advantage. However, a range of alternative paths is available with a lower second-entry cost.

Adaptive strategies are survival options that entrepreneurs adopt to constantly and continuously adjust their actions and resource investments in response to a rapidly changing set of conditions in the policy environment. Adaptive strategies are operationally effective when policy uncertainty is blurred by ambiguity without clear alternate paths and trajectories. They are mostly adopted when entrepreneurs require a high level of flexibility to adjust and adapt to market, industry, and environmental changes and when entrepreneurs are faced with risky opportunities with high potential returns/pay-offs (Alexander 2000; Doh and Pearce 2004).

Proposition 5.

Transitional entrepreneurs in different climes adopt adaptive strategies when there are rapidly changing sets of conditions, ambiguity, and uncertainty in the policy environment without clear alternate paths and trajectories.

3.2. Theoretical Review of Entrepreneurship Venturing

Theories abound in entrepreneurship and strategic management that provide logical explanations for why and how individuals within different contexts (with or without opportunities) act to become entrepreneurs in planned or unplanned manners. For this paper, the relevant theories identified and reviewed are (a) the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship, (b) the desperation perspective of entrepreneurship, (c) the utility maximization theory of entrepreneurship, (d) the push–pull theory of entrepreneurship, (e) the regulatory focus theory (RFT), and the market disadvantages theory (MDT).

The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship (KST) provides a logical explanation for the debatable and raging question of why individuals choose to become entrepreneurs by integrating contemporary management theories and economic growth theories with thoughts of entrepreneurship geography and strategy. The KST is premised on the reasoning that environmental contexts where decision making on venturing is initiated and decided largely influence an individual’s determination to become an entrepreneur by establishing a new firm or creating a spin-off from an incumbent firm (Acs et al. 2013). The proponents further stated that knowledge spillover comes into play in entrepreneurship venturing because an environmental context rich in knowledge (knowledge-driven and knowledge-propelled) allows ideas to flourish, which individuals and groups convert to entrepreneurial opportunities and full-scale commercialization. The theory underscores the triple roles of an entrepreneur in the commercialization of ideas as (a) acting as a catalyst or conduit for the spillover of knowledge from idea to commercialization, (b) ensuring innovative activity, especially the generation of ideas and the creation of value, and (c) enhancing economic performance through resource allocation. Another empirical study of Vietnamese entrepreneurs in transition suggests that those with knowledge and insights (acquired through past business experience and networking engagement) have better creative performance and innovative capacity in entrepreneurship (Vuong et al. 2016). On the strength of the preceding insights on the KST, the following is proposed:

Proposition 6.

Transitional entrepreneurship venturing among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs is largely motivated by a knowledge-driven environmental context that allows people to convert their ideas into entrepreneurial opportunities and new ventures.

Desperate entrepreneurship (DE) is an entrepreneurship perspective that is based on desperate optimism (otherwise called nonentrepreneurship); it provides an empirical explanation for the question of why and how individuals become entrepreneurs despite unfavorable situations (Mühlböck et al. 2018; Papageorgiou 2020). From an empirical standpoint, Mühlböck et al. (2018) discovered the phenomenon of desperate entrepreneurs or nonentrepreneurship in European countries, where several desperate entrepreneurs without access to entrepreneurial opportunities and with poor skills and low entrepreneurial resources and capabilities end up becoming entrepreneurs with flourishing new ventures in crisis-shaken conditions caused by economic crises, economic downturns, and rising unemployment. It is a distinct typology of entrepreneurship different from necessity-based entrepreneurship.

Proposition 7.

Transitional entrepreneurship among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs is motivated by desperation and crisis-shaken conditions that force desperate people to set up new ventures to cope with economic downturns and rising unemployment.

The utility theory of entrepreneurship (UTE) is important because entrepreneurship is one of the factors of production in mainstream economics. Specifically, the UTE explicates that the fundamental decision of entrepreneurship venturing or becoming an entrepreneur can effectively be explained within microeconomic analysis as a utility-maximizing career choice made by an individual (Douglas and Shepherd 2000). Within rational behavior, individuals and groups choose to be self-employed or entrepreneurs if the total utility (monetary and nonmonetary satisfaction) they anticipate deriving from the decision to become entrepreneurs is greater than the anticipated utility from their best employment option. The anticipated utility is measured in terms of income, independence, risk bearing, work effort, and other valuable perquisites from self-employment/entrepreneurship (Douglas and Shepherd 2000; Douglas and Shepherd 2002).

Proposition 8.

Transitional entrepreneurship venturing is motivated by comparing the total utility of becoming entrepreneurs and the anticipated utility of the best employment option for ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs.

Pull–Push Theory, Regulatory Focus Theory, and Market Disadvantages Theory

Pull and push theory entrepreneurial motivations are often explained in terms of positive motives and negative motives for becoming entrepreneurs and starting businesses in society (Kirkwood 2009). The two categorizations of the motives for entrepreneurship venturing are not mutually exclusive and are very important for entrepreneurship policy design and implementation in recessionary periods (Dawson and Henley 2012). Pull factors are perceived as positive motivations that attract individuals to become entrepreneurs and consequently establish new ventures. The “pull” factors include the need for achievement, the desire to be independent, and opportunities for social development (van der Zwan et al. 2016). This pull factor phenomenon is called opportunity entrepreneurship by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) (Reynolds et al. 2001). In contrast, push factors are negative motivations that force entrepreneurs to establish new ventures. The push factors that precipitate the formation of new ventures include the risk of unemployment, family pressure, and individuals’ general dissatisfaction with their current situation and quest to improve economic wellness (van der Zwan et al. 2016). Like the former, the push factor is also called necessity entrepreneurship by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) (Reynolds et al. 2001). Furthermore, the framework explains firm creation in correlation with the business cycle (Atkins 2021).

Proposition 9.

Transitional entrepreneurship among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs is motivated by a combination of pull and push factors, such as the need for achievement, the desire to be independent, opportunities for social development, the risk of unemployment, family pressure, and individuals’ general dissatisfaction with their current situation and quest to improve economic wellness.

The regulatory focus theory (RFT) that Higgins developed (Higgins 1997) explains how two distinct different self-regulation systems drive individuals who become entrepreneurs to gain favorable outcomes by aligning two individual self-regulation systems: (a) prevention focus and (b) promotion focus processes. Regarding entrepreneurship, Brockner et al. (2004) explained that the two different self-regulation systems (promotion focus and prevention focus) were found to influence the quest to become entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial venture outcomes. An individual seeking to be an entrepreneur requires a greater promotion focus for aspects of the entrepreneurial process, such as idea generation, development, and rollout/launching. However, a greater prevention focus is necessary for aspects of the entrepreneurial process, such as conducting due diligence for screening ideas and avoiding social and environmental problems (Brockner et al. 2004; Fischer et al. 2018). Promotion-focused entrepreneurs with a quest for personal growth and development need to align their standards and goals, increasing the salience of potential gains to be attained/positive outcomes. Prevention-focused entrepreneurs with a quest for security and safety need to align their standards and goals, which consequently increases the salience of potential losses to be avoided/adverse outcomes (Brockner et al. 2004).

Proposition 10.

Transitional entrepreneurship among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs is motivated by a combination of two self-regulation systems, promotion focus and prevention focus, and both largely influence the quest to become entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial venture outcomes.

Market disadvantages theory (MDT), otherwise called the iron cage perspective, is traced to the pioneering works of Weber (1930) and Light (1979), who both affirmed that racial discrimination in employment engenders employment disadvantages or exclusion from economic activities. The MDT explains the degree of immigrant integration into the labor market in the host countries when measured in terms of immigrant composition, the number of employees, and occupational status in the host countries (Jünger 2021). The MDT is beneficial for explaining transitional entrepreneurs, such as immigrants, ethnic groups, and minorities, who take up entrepreneurship as an economic survival strategy in foreign countries (Light 1979; Smith-Hunter and Boyd 2004; Chrysostome 2010). In clear terms, the MDT posits that immigrants and individuals from minority ethnic groups that find themselves in foreign countries face many regulatory restrictions and institutional barriers that prevent them from entering the job markets of their host countries. To cope with the scourge of unemployment and underemployment in their desperate situation, they turn to self-employment through business venturing as a viable alternative for livelihood (Chrysostome 2010; Smith-Hunter and Boyd 2004).

Proposition 11.

Transitional entrepreneurship among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs is motivated by the desire to overcome the market disadvantages and institutional barriers in the job markets of host countries. To cope with unemployment and underemployment, self-employment through business venture is a viable alternative.

4. TE and Entrepreneurial Motivation

In understanding TE, the influence of entrepreneurial motivation cannot be downplayed. TE is a phenomenon shaped by transitional entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurial motivation.

4.1. Ethnic Minority Entrepreneurship

Ethnic entrepreneurship and immigrant entrepreneurship are used interchangeably in the literature, as ethnic minorities are often immigrants in Europe, the US, and other climes (Lofstrom and Wang 2019; Wang and Lofstrom 2020; Jones and Ram 2021). Ethnic/immigrant entrepreneurship is reported to be transformational and beneficial to labor market integration because ethnic and immigrant entrepreneurs have made significant contributions to economic growth, product innovation, and self-employment in developed countries (Lofstrom and Wang 2019). Ethnic entrepreneurship refers to business venturing and ownership among ethnic groups with common cultural heritage, ethnic communities, and ethnic immigrants in developed countries (Aldrich and Waldinger 1990; Indarti et al. 2021). In trying to understand the catalysts for ethnic entrepreneurship, a combination of pull and push factors explained why ethnic minorities venture into entrepreneurship. Some compelling pull factors of racial discrimination that prevent them from getting jobs are their new host communities, cultural predilections, institutional hindrance, underemployment, and a quest for survival, among others (Phizacklea and Ram 1995; Atkins 2021). Similarly, ethnic minorities in South Texas take up self-employment by creating diverse businesses to supplement their meager incomes, support families, and improve lifestyles (Pisani 2019).

In addition, Gomez et al. (2015) discussed the exploits of ethnic entrepreneurship based on four factors: access to social capital, reciprocity (social interaction among ethnic minorities), principled motivation (sense of conviction), and instrumental motivations (inner self-interest). Ramadani et al. (2014) identified several factors influencing the entry of ethnic entrepreneurs into entrepreneurship. Key factors include self-employment, social networks, policy factors, and environmental context, especially socioeconomic, institutional, and cultural contexts. Masurel et al. (2002) explained that the pull and push factors that motivate ethnic entrepreneurship venturing include unemployment, sociocultural support networks, information acquisition, unique capital lending procedures, basic ethnic skills, and the influence of policy support measures in host countries. Indarti et al. (2021) shared the same view with previous studies concerning the balance of pull and push factors as motives for ethnic entrepreneurship. Key influences for starting businesses in developed countries include access to social networks, human capital, foreign niche markets, the quest for better social welfare, gender exclusion in the case of women, discrimination, hereditary social learning, and opportunities for ethnic products and services. In Britain, the ethnic Indians and the Chinese opted for self-employment by setting up business ventures because of unemployment and limited opportunities (Clark and Drinkwater 2010).

With particular reference to Europe, Jones and Ram (2021) argue that ethnic entrepreneurship that is widely practiced by ethnic groups is shaped by the push factors of external business environment, market, state, and ethnic resource dependence, but the heavy dependence on self-employment by ethnic/immigrant entrepreneurs is a transitional phenomenon that disappears as this marginalized group acquires the required human capital to compete for desirable employment in the host countries and communities. Apart from developed economies, ethnic entrepreneurship thrives in other developing and transitional economies where opportunities are identified. Moreover, Koning and Verver (2013) found that cultural values and strong intraethnic networks have largely supported the visibility and business success of ethnic Chinese entrepreneurs in Bangkok, Thailand. However, as far back as Blackburn (1993) established, the positive rather than the negative propels ethnic minorities to the decision to set up a business. The fascinating push factors include economic climate, the operating environment, and management practices, a higher level of business support services for ethnic businesses in the UK than in France, collective associations, family and co-ethnics, and the utility of familial labor (Blackburn 1993; McEvoy and Jones 1993; Phizacklea and Ram 1995). The empirical study of Masurel et al. (2002) found that ethnic minorities (Turkish, Indian/Pakistani, and Moroccan groups) in Amsterdam ventured into businesses for seven combinations of push–pull factors: the desire to be their boss in new countries, need for achievement, financial progress, unemployment, dissatisfaction with their current job, the continuation of their family business tradition, and discrimination. A survey of 338 nascent entrepreneurs indicated that they could get their businesses running because of motivational factors such as a quest for nonfinancial outcomes, perceived support from social networks/contacts, and the institutional environment (Zanakis et al. 2012).

4.2. Immigrant Entrepreneurship

Several studies underscored that immigrant entrepreneurs are making far-reaching impacts in their host countries by establishing businesses because of their cultural inheritance, resources, social networks, immigrant group characteristics, and, more importantly, opportunity structure/demand–supply defined as things customers want to buy and what immigrants can provide (Lyons and Snoxell 2005; Oliveira 2007; Achidi Ndofor and Priem 2011). Immigrants from less-developed countries seeking greener pastures in developed countries, especially in Europe, have been described as unsung heroes because of their dual contributions to their host countries—initially as suppliers of cheap and low-skilled labor. Nevertheless, as employment opportunities dwindle, they are motivated to start their own businesses for livelihood (Rath 2010). Much earlier studies by Wilson and Portes (1980) and Kloosterman et al. (1998) found high levels of unemployment, social exclusion, and marginalization as pull factors for immigrant entrepreneurship, while the push factors include informal production, absorption of new immigrants in the local labor market, social acceptance, fragmentation of consumer markets, emergence of the demand for ethnic products and the creation of slots in indigenous markets. Peterson and Roquebert (1993) identified the pull factors of creating an enclave economy or a self-closed immigrant community. Moreover, the host country’s labor market and institutional and regulatory framework are other restraining or motivational factors for immigrant entrepreneurship venturing and success (Oliveira 2007). In addition, Yoo (2000) and Yoo (2014) noted that Korean immigrant entrepreneurs in the US are disadvantaged and handicapped to fit into regular employment because of language deficiency, a lack of resources, a lack of labor market experience, and marginality in their occupational positions; they, therefore, resort to self-employment/entrepreneurship as a passageway to economic mobility and economic affluence, similar to other immigrants. Another survey of 40 businesses owned by Igbo immigrants revealed that Igbo entrepreneurs are motivated to establish new ventures by strong social capital through ethnic-based unions/associations in host communities/countries and secondarily by high vocational abilities acquired through apprenticeship (Onyima et al. 2016).

Further studies explained that long-established social networks and the associated social capital of immigrant communities motivate new immigrants to become entrepreneurs in the Netherlands, the United States, the United Kingdom, and other developed countries (Gold 1995; Kloosterman et al. 1999). Similarly, Achidi Ndofor and Priem (2011) found that the capital endowments (economic, human, and social capital) and social identities of immigrant entrepreneurs are the main motivational factors for entrepreneurship choice and venture strategy that ultimately shape venture performance across two generational categories. Similarly, Turkina and Thi Thanh Thai (2013) found that social capital in networking, interpersonal trust, and institutional trust motivates immigrant entrepreneurship across countries. However, Razin (2017) found that the motivational factors for immigrant entrepreneurship are social mobility, the quest for economic advancement, class resources, institutional characteristics, and locational areas of immigrant groups. All the motivational factors explicated above are reinvented as social and human capital resources that eventually influence the social embeddedness of immigrants as entrepreneurs in their host countries.

4.3. Women Entrepreneurship

The field of women entrepreneurship has attracted growing attention across the globe and particularly in Anglo-Saxon countries because of its transformational impacts on economic growth, career success, gender equality, and enterprise development (Tlaiss 2019; Sarfaraz et al. 2014; Bastian et al. 2018). The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD 2004) noted that the state of affairs of women entrepreneurship differs in transitional, developing, and developed economies. There are comparatively fewer women entrepreneurs than their male counterparts, but their contribution to societal welfare through entrepreneurship venturing is higher than the activity of men (Minniti 2010; El Chaarani and Raimi 2022). Worse still, women entrepreneurs suffer several social, economic, cultural, and institutional barriers in the process of setting up their businesses in transitional economies that are most often characterized by a lack of an enabling regulatory environment, poor protection for the private sector, weak legislation on private property rights, and inadequate business incentives for supporting women enterprises (Zhu et al. 2019; Boufares Tayaa and Bouzaabia 2022). The study of Longoria (2018) affirmed that women’s entrepreneurship in transitional and developing economies is motivated by necessity/push factors strongly linked to the lack of employment opportunities, dissatisfaction with existing employment, the need to support families, and the quest to succeed despite the lack of access to education and business support interventions, among others. However, women in developed countries are motivated by pull factors such as the quest to pursue opportunities, high capabilities for entrepreneurship, high-level education, innovativeness, managerial experience from their previous occupation, and access to business capital/funding support. A comprehensive review of the extant literature by Panda (2018) revealed that women entrepreneurs in developing countries are driven by motives such as gender discrimination, work–family conflict, difficulty in raising capital, unstable business, economic, and political (BEP) environments, and a lack of training and education, among others.

Furthermore, De Vita et al. (2014) explained that, for most migrant women from developing countries, following the entrepreneurial path is the most effective survival strategy for coping with double discrimination as women and as migrants in their host countries. Moreover, Itani et al. (2011) explained that the motivating factors that contribute to pushing and pulling women into entrepreneurship are many and diverse. The pushing factors that force women to set up businesses include job dissatisfaction, job loss, aimlessness, unemployment, wage gap, professional discrimination, divorce, inadequate family income, job redundancy, glass ceiling, and economic recessions with associated financial stress. The pulling factors included the need for accomplishment, the quest for independence, self-fulfillment, precarious social status, the discovery of market opportunity, and personal interest in the business.

In the developing context of India, Datta and Gailey (2012) explained that the role of social networks, particularly membership in cooperatives, offers a sound explanation for women’s entrepreneurship venturing. In specific terms, they noted that belonging to women’s cooperatives influences self-employment opportunities, social inclusion, and empowerment in a society where institutional factors are hostile to women. Therefore, the collective form of women’s entrepreneurship provided by the cooperative society assists women in three mutually reinforcing ways: the provision of economic security, the development of women’s entrepreneurial behavior, and the enhancement of women’s contributions to the families. However, Eddleston and Powel (2008) explained that becoming entrepreneurs offers women a good platform for career satisfaction (status-based satisfiers), self-expression, and fulfillment even though women-owned businesses may be smaller than men-owned businesses. Taking up self-employment through entrepreneurship empowers women as individuals (Jamali 2009; Gigauri et al. 2022).

In a narrated life story of a female laboratory technician who transitioned from a working career to becoming a serial entrepreneur (cattle breeding, reforesting the fields, stone processing, and other arbitrary projects), it was explained that the motivation for the transition to entrepreneurship is underpinned by several factors: an individual’s motivation and identity (continuity and social change); skills, expertise, and knowledge; recognizing opportunities provided in the environment; relationships with colleagues and friends to gain visibility, access to new opportunities, information, and reputation; and intervention support for the European Union (Sinisalo and Komulainen 2008).

A recent study in China and Vietnam found that the key motives for women entrepreneurship venturing are the quest to earn more to support families, the need for personal satisfaction and freedom, the desire to reduce work–family conflict, the desire to gain public recognition, and the possession of managerial skills (Zhu et al. 2019). In Poland, the situation of women entrepreneurs is largely positive because pull factors drive them in their entrepreneurship venturing, essentially reported as economic freedom, private property rights to own firms, women’s entrepreneurial abilities and ambition, personal skills, and managerial skills, among others (Wasilczuk and Zieba 2008). In emerging/transitional economies, women venture into family-owned businesses based on three key influences: the risk-taking propensity, entrepreneurial intensity, and opportunity recognition of these women entrepreneurs. However, women’s success (products, services, processes, value creation) in family-owned businesses in the marketplace depends on their businesses’ innovative orientation and sustainability (Gundry et al. 2014). It is important to emphasize that the motivational factors for women’s entrepreneurship evolve systematically into capabilities and tangible assets that enhance the quality of life of women and boost their economic and social status in the society where they operate.

5. Findings and Discussion of Thematic Issues

The findings that emerged from the thematic review of 117 selected articles are reported below under three segments: motivational factors for TE among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs; types of uncertainties and entrepreneurship strategies leveraged by ethnic minorities, women, and immigrants to cope with the ravages of the policy environment and different forms of uncertainty.

Generally, the research findings have facilitated a deep understanding of transitional entrepreneurship from conceptual, theoretical, and empirical perspectives by emphasizing TE dynamics among minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs in developed and developing countries. Furthermore, the paper builds on the agelong concept of nascent entrepreneurship that is narrow and limited to a particular type of entrepreneurship and context. However, transitional entrepreneurship embraces different types of entrepreneurialism that are transitional in different contexts. Since entrepreneurship is increasingly expected to focus on helping people to overcome poverty or desperate conditions, this research of TE will examine the phenomenon to contribute to further development of the field while suggesting eleven propositions, six theoretical perspectives, and sixteen entrepreneurship strategies. The specific findings are reported hereunder according to the research questions.

RQ1: What are the motivational factors driving TE among ethnic minorities, women, and immigrants?

The answers to the first research question are presented in

Table 1. Motivational factors for ethnic entrepreneurship.

Theme that Emerged from TR	Number of Articles (NoA)	Supportive Theory
Institutional environment: racial discrimination, host reciprocity, economic climate, the operating environment, good management practices, and higher level of business support services for ethnic businesses.	14 Articles	Knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship (KST) Desperate entrepreneurship (DE) Utility theory of entrepreneurship (UTE) Pull–Push theory The regulatory focus theory (RFT) Market disadvantages theory (MDT)
Push factors: necessity entrepreneurship, the quest for survival, underemployment, lack of good jobs, unemployment.
Pull factors: opportunity entrepreneurship, business support, self-motivation/need for achievement, ethnic products, foreign niche market, desire to be their boss, freedom for paid employment.
Ethnic resource dependence/social networks, social capital, human capital, cultural values and strong intraethnic networks, common cultural heritage, ethnic communities, and quest to continue the family business tradition.
Total	14

Source: Thematic analysis conducted by authors.

,

Table 2. Motivational factors for TE among immigrant entrepreneurs.

Theme that Emerged from TR	Number of Articles (NoA)	Supportive Theory
Cultural inheritance: immigrant identity, resources and social networks, personal resources, strong social capital, capital endowments, vocational abilities	17 Articles	Knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship (KST) Desperate entrepreneurship (DE) Utility theory of entrepreneurship (UTE) Pull–Push theory The regulatory focus theory (RFT) Market disadvantages theory (MDT)
Push factors: unemployment, social exclusion and marginalization, language deficiency, lack of resources, lack of labor market experience, and marginality in the occupations
Pull factors: opportunity structure/demand–supply gap, informal production, local labor market, demand for ethnic products and indigenous markets, the quest for economic affluence
Institutional environment: social acceptance, business support in host countries
Total	17

Source: Thematic analysis conducted by authors.

and

Table 3. Motivational factors for TE among women entrepreneurs.

Theme That Emerged from TR	Number of Articles (NoA)	Supportive Theory
Gender identity issues: women’s self-identity, social network, women cooperatives, social inclusion, status-based satisfiers, self-expression and fulfillment, and the quest for recognition, among others.	17 Articles	Knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship (KST) Desperate entrepreneurship (DE) Utility theory of entrepreneurship (UTE) Pull–Push theory The regulatory focus theory (RFT) Market disadvantages theory (MDT)
Push factors: unemployment, dissatisfaction with current employment, quest to succeed despite lack of education and business support, quest to reduce family conflicts, wage gap, divorce, inadequate family income, job redundancy, glass ceiling, economic recessions with associated financial stress.
Pull factors: the pursuit of opportunities, high capabilities for entrepreneurship, high-level education, level of innovativeness, managerial experience from previous occupation, access to funding support, need for accomplishment, the quest for independence, self-fulfillment, precarious social status, the discovery of market opportunities, skills, expertise, and knowledge (SEK), personal interest in the business.
Institutional environment: gender discrimination, professional discrimination, socioeconomic and cultural barriers, poor protection, weak legislation on private property rights, inadequate business incentives for women enterprises.
Total	17

Source: Thematic analysis conducted by authors.

. In Table 1, four themes emerged as catalysts for ethics entrepreneurship from 14 critically reviewed articles. Six theories of entrepreneurship venturing support these factors. We, therefore, accept propositions 6–10 and conclude that transitional entrepreneurship venturing among ethnic entrepreneurs is motivated by a combination of factors such as institutional environment (racial discrimination, host reciprocity, economic climate, the operating environment, good management practices, higher level of business support services for ethnic businesses); push factors (necessity entrepreneurship, quest for survival, dissatisfaction, underemployment, lack of good jobs, unemployment); pull factors (opportunity entrepreneurship, business support, self-motivation/need for achievement, ethnic products, foreign niche market, desire to be their boss, freedom for paid employment); and ethnic resource dependence (social networks, social capital, human capital, cultural values and strong intraethnic networks, common cultural heritage, ethnic communities, and quest to continue family business tradition).

In Table 2 below, a total of four themes emerged as catalysts for immigrant entrepreneurship from 17 reviewed articles. The identified factors are supported by six theories of entrepreneurship venturing. We therefore accept propositions 6–10 and conclude that transitional entrepreneurship among immigrants is motivated by factors such as cultural inheritance (immigrant identity, resources and social networks, personal resources, strong social capital, capital endowments, vocational abilities); push factors (unemployment, social exclusion and marginalization, language deficiency, lack of resources, lack of labor market experience, and marginality in the occupations); pull factors (opportunity structure/demand–supply gap, informal production, local labor market, demand for ethnic products and indigenous markets, quest for economic affluence); and institutional environments such as social acceptance and business support in host countries (Comes et al. 2018; Bunduchi et al. 2019; Vasile et al. 2019).

In Table 3, a total of four themes emerged as the motivational factors for women entrepreneurship from 17 reviewed articles. These factors are supported by six theories of entrepreneurship venturing. We therefore accept propositions 6–10 and conclude that transitional entrepreneurship venturing among women is motivated by factors such as gender identity issues (women’s self-identity, social networks, women cooperatives, social inclusion, status-based satisfiers, self-expression and fulfilment, and quest for recognition, among others); push factors (unemployment, dissatisfaction with current employment, quest to succeed despite lack of access to education and business support, quest to reduce family conflicts, wage gap, divorce, inadequate family income, job redundancy, glass ceiling, economic recessions with associated financial stress); pull factors (quest to pursue opportunities, high capabilities for entrepreneurship, high-level education, level of innovativeness, managerial experience from previous occupation, access to business capital/funding support, need for accomplishment, quest for independence, self-fulfillment, precarious social status, discovery of market opportunities, skills, expertise, and knowledge (SEK), personal interest in business); and the institutional environment such as double discrimination as women and as migrants, professional discrimination, social, economic, cultural, and institutional barriers in settings up businesses, poor protection, weak legislation on private property rights, and inadequate business incentives for women enterprises (Stefan et al. 2021).

RQ2: What are the uncertainties hindering TE among ethnic minorities, women, and immigrants?

A thematic review of the extant literature revealed that TE faces several challenges that impose different degrees of uncertainty on the three types of transitional entrepreneurs (ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women) focused on in this study. In particular, socioeconomic and institutional challenges constrained ethnic, immigrant, and women entrepreneurs in making informed choices and predicting the direction of events and opportunities in their host communities and countries. Despite the socioeconomic, cultural, and institutional barriers, transitional entrepreneurship practiced by ethnic, immigrant, and women entrepreneurs has enhanced economic progress, wealth creation, employment generation, and the production of beneficial goods and services in host countries and communities. The positive entrepreneurship outcomes of TE indicate that ethnic, immigrant, and women entrepreneurs face Level 1 and 2 uncertainty. Level 1 uncertainty presents a clear future with likelihoods, possibilities, and probabilities of success for ethnic, immigrant, and women entrepreneurs in their operating environment, usually in developed countries such as the UK, the US, Canada, and Australia, where there are new market opportunities and strong support for transitional entrepreneurship. Furthermore, Level 2 uncertainty presents several alternate paths and trajectories of ethnic, immigrant, and women entrepreneurs in Western European countries that are particularly successful in integrating ethnic minorities and immigrants (Jünger 2021). Some of the reported types of uncertainty facing transitional entrepreneurs in Britain, Scotland, and by extension other Western countries that largely influence the success or failure of transitional entrepreneurship include racial discrimination, drop-in paid employment, insufficient economic reward in self-employment, language difficulties, business venturing risk, restrictive immigration policy, low participation in postcompulsory education, the level of entrepreneurial ambitions, demographic change, lower returns in retail and small businesses, rising competition in business venturing, and globalization waves (Jones and Ram 2003; Blanchflower 2004; Deakins et al. 2007; Siqueira 2007; Clark and Drinkwater 2010; Li et al. 2003).

RQ3: What entrepreneurship strategies are leveraged by ethnic minorities, women, and immigrants to cope with the ravages of uncertainties?

The insights from the review literature revealed that the two most frequently used entrepreneurship strategies by ethnic minorities, women, and immigrants to cope with the ravages of uncertainty in their host countries are optioned and adaptive strategies. Propositions 3 and 5 are therefore valid and acceptable, as depicted in Figure 2 below.

The optioned strategies are used by ethnic, immigrant, and women entrepreneurs in different climes across the globe because of temporal entry barriers in the transitional policy environment. In the quest for economic survival and the discovery of new opportunities, these transitional entrepreneurs adopt optioned strategies by making an initial investment to take advantage of the current limited opportunity in the uncertain policy environment; as the institutional barriers flatten and the policy environment becomes more receptive, they make more incremental investments in their host countries. Therefore, transitional entrepreneurs in different climes adopt optioned strategies when there are temporal entry barriers and a modest level of uncertainty in the policy environment. Nevertheless, there are clear alternate paths that may generate the highest returns. Similarly, adaptive strategies are used by ethnic, immigrant, and women entrepreneurs in different climes across the globe to tap risky opportunities with high potential returns. Adaptive strategies entail constantly and continuously adjusting entrepreneurial actions and resource investments in response to a rapidly changing set of conditions, high policy uncertainty, and a lack of clear alternate paths and trajectories in their host countries. Therefore, transitional entrepreneurs in different climes adopt adaptive strategies when there are rapidly changing conditions, ambiguity, and uncertainty in the policy environment without clear alternate paths and trajectories.

Related to the above, the specific entrepreneurship strategies that have strengthened the capacities and abilities of transitional entrepreneurs such as ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women to cope with risks and all types of uncertainty include determination and commitment, premigration entrepreneurial mentality, risk-taking skills, ethnic network, human capital, social capital, dynamic capability, ethnic market niche, risk management, managerial skills, innovative ideas, and institutional support from government pro-immigrant business programs (Siqueira 2007; Chrysostome 2010). The importance of experiences, network connectivity, and the capability to leverage social capital as entrepreneurial strategies for the success of women entrepreneurs has been underscored in previous studies. The entrepreneurship exploits of Brazilian immigrants in the United States are particularly linked to human capital and family social capital (Siqueira 2007). Moreover, Deakins et al. (2007) observed that ethnic minority businesses (EMBs) are distinctive and succeeded in Scotland by social capital gained through strong informal networks (family and social ties). The same intangible assets of human capital, social capital, and gender identity were reported by Hindle et al. (2009) as determinants of entrepreneurial intentions.

The success and failure of women entrepreneurs in different climes and racial lines are largely shaped by access to human capital, financial capital, and network structures (Smith-Hunter 2006). A more recent study by Neumeyer et al. (2019) on women entrepreneurs in the US found that network connectivity and the distribution of social capital are connected to entrepreneurial success among men and women as well as across racial lines. Male entrepreneurs have a higher comparative advantage in bridging social capital in aggressive- and managed-growth venture networks. Nevertheless, women entrepreneurs are better than men in bridging social capital in lifestyle and survival venture networks. Experienced white women entrepreneurs exhibited a higher degree of network connectivity and bridging social capital than less experienced nonwhite women entrepreneurs. From the thematic review, Figure 3 below presents 16 specific entrepreneurship strategies that transitional entrepreneurs have leveraged to cope with transitional policy uncertainty and blurred trajectories in their host countries.

6. Conclusions

This study examines the motivational factors, types of uncertainty, and entrepreneurship strategies of transitional entrepreneurship among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs, drawing insights from an extensive literature review. At the outset, the study proposed eleven propositions and six theoretical perspectives for explaining the dynamics of TE among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs in developed and developing economies. These propositions and theoretical perspectives were explored within the thematic review and were found to be apt and sound. Regarding the strengths of propositions and theories, the six (6) broad themes that emerged as catalysts for transitional entrepreneurship among the three focused entrepreneurs are institutional environment, push factors, pull factors, ethnic resource dependence, cultural inheritance, and gender identity issues. Specific elements of each of the six themes are explicated. Moreover, two levels of uncertainty (Levels 1 and 2) confront transitional entrepreneurs depending on countries and institutional contexts. Finally, transitional entrepreneurs leverage optioned and adaptive entrepreneurship strategies that cut across 16 specific strategies to cope with the ravages of uncertainties in their host countries. This study has two types of implications—theoretical implications and practical implications.

6.1. Theoretical Implications

From the theoretical perspective, the current paper has laid a theoretical foundation for researchers interested in the exploitation of and barriers to transitional entrepreneurship. It has provided future researchers with eleven (11) propositions and six (6) theoretical perspectives as relevant approaches for explaining the dynamics of transitional entrepreneurship among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs in developed and developing economies. By providing a theoretical-based framework of motivations, types of uncertainty, and entrepreneurship strategies for survival, the paper bridges the gaps in the literature. It contributes to a better understanding of transitional entrepreneurship among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs during the transition. The paper also validates the applicability of several theories of entrepreneurship venturing to explain transitional entrepreneurship’s motivational factors, types of uncertainty, and entrepreneurship strategies.

6.2. Managerial Implications

From a practical lens, the paper provides implications for removing the pervasive institutional barriers to entrepreneurship venturing among ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs for more balanced socioeconomic inclusion in host countries. It further explicated a need to leverage motivational factors and entrepreneurship strategies for economic development. Specifically, it proposed a multidimensional framework that can help transitional entrepreneurs, policymakers, nongovernmental organizations, and entrepreneurship development agencies understand the prospects and barriers facing ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs to work collaboratively on changing the transitional policy environment through the adjustment of immigration policies, development of better socioeconomic inclusion policies, and design of business support programs for transitional entrepreneurs and friendly legal and regulatory environments that meet the expectations of transitional and nontransitional entrepreneurship. The paper facilitates a deep understanding of transitional entrepreneurship, emphasizing TE dynamics among minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs in developed and developing countries. Since entrepreneurship is increasingly expected to focus on helping people to overcome poverty or desperate conditions, the insights from the paper would therefore be helpful to policymakers in developing policies that would optimize the contributions of transitional entrepreneurs in developed and developing countries.

6.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions

The study’s main limitation is that the analysis and interpretation of the findings are based on the thematic review of previous scholarly works, which were derived only from Google Scholar. However, this theoretical approach provides rich qualitative findings that are merely promising and insightful in both academic and policy circles. Future research directions are suggested to provide richer insights that can be generalized. Therefore, the theoretical model and propositions explicated in the current study need to be empirically tested. In that regard, the options of a survey and case study are proposed. A cross-sectional survey may be conducted using a large sample to elicit the views of transitional entrepreneurs and test the empirical validity of the proposed theoretical model. Another option is to carry out a multiple-case study for the same target population to empirically understand the motivational factors, types of uncertainty, and entrepreneurship strategies of ethnic minorities, immigrants, and women entrepreneurs. Finally, since transitional entrepreneurship is a cross-phenomenal, female, ethnic, immigrant, and refugee entrepreneurs should be included in the study.