Internal Validity

In this section we will touch upon the validity of the conceptual framework and the data process. Our study presents a high validity. The reason for this is due to the fact that we conducted a research and went through a data collection process from a short field research.

In this process we started with two separate interview guides, one for Syrian entrepreneurs and the other for national and international organizations. Having a guide permitted us to have semi-structured interviews. In other words, following a conventional red thread while keeping a certain flexibility in order to venture into interesting topics. For the structure of our data findings we made use of Alreawadieh et al. (2018) typology. This typology suited well in terms of enabling us to structure many of the relevant topics we developed through our data. The four main challenges led us into creating subtopics and topics extracted from our data in the coding process. This enabled us to answer our first sub question which aimed to list the barriers the Syrian entrepreneurs face in the formal sector. To answer our second sub question we were able to choose one main challenge; the socio-cultural challenge, in which we applied the social network theory. The aim was to analyse to what extent the entrepreneurs' social network helped them overcome the challenges they faced in the Turkish context. Making use of Alrawadieh et al. (2018) typology of challenges of refugee entrepreneurship, enabled us to structure our data findings. Some of the data we had collected, such as the suggestions made by the Syrian entrepreneurs and the national and international organizations proposed, could not be integrated into this typology. This

restricted us from incorporating all of the data we had collected on the study. Hence, this section does not fit the typology and in this case can be a study for itself. The typology did not ‘fit’ our data completely since some topics that could belong under certain challenges had to be moved into others. The typology was initially created by Alrawadieh et al. (2018) in a study in order to point out the key challenges experienced by Syrian refugee entrepreneurs in the tourism and hospitality industry in Istanbul. We are aware that if their research had focused on other industries, perhaps other challenges would have arised.

Nonetheless, the small amount of data that we were able to collect, did ‘fit’ into these challenges. Our findings presented some gaps, for instance some questions were not asked resulting in our interpretation of the overall data collected. The reason behind this was due to some interview themes only appearing with time, such as COVID-19 and the Turkish media. Another reason was due to the interviewer reading the entrepreneurs ‘energy’ and through instinct decided if some questions could be asked or not. Some gaps were encountered in terms of their support system. Looking into the advantages or disadvantages they could face in terms of their support system when it came to overcome the barriers, would have given us more data to analyse the networks. Moreover, there were gaps in terms of the Turkish language, more specifically on how the lack of the same affected the Syrian entrepreneurs' interaction with public institutions, organizations and the Turkish society in general. As well as how this affected their business. Additionally, there is a gap in terms of complementary data around how exactly the Syrian community helped the entrepreneurs overcome barriers related to integration, entrepreneurial journey, overcoming discrimination and so on.

We uncovered that some entrepreneurs were able to access different forms of help from their family and friends. Nevertheless, we were unable to find specific examples of how the monetary support was acquired from these ties. For example, if they made use of their own social network to acquire this help for the entrepreneur. Additionally, we did not look into how the barriers the entrepreneurs faced were overcome with the monetary support that was given to the entrepreneurs through their social networks.

Due to the imbalance of traditional genders in our data, we were restricted to research if there was a difference between the barriers that female and male Syrian refugee entrepreneurs faced in the Turkish context. Moreover, the difference between female and male networks

and their significance for the growth of the given business. All of the Syrian entrepreneurs we interviewed have a high educational background. It would have been interesting to have a more varied group of interviewees to research on whether support, networks and barriers encountered were different or similar in the formal sector. Finally, our research contains the perspective of Syrian entrepreneurs, national and international organizations. Yet, acquiring the perspective from public institutions would add value to the data collected. For instance, by having a perspective on financial incentive provisions related programs provided from the government, public institutions that work with business formalization and language institutions. We encountered that having no specific chosen theory prior to the interviews, limited the collection of relevant data. Once the theory was chosen, we encountered hindrance to carry out follow up interviews due to time constraint. Consequently, we were unable to ask more into depth into the role and influence of their network in acquiring the resources needed.

During the analysis there were trends in terms of intertwinement between different challenges, for instance, language showed to play a role in most of the barriers the entrepreneurs encountered. As well as discrimination, when interacting with both Turkish institutions and the Turkish society. A trend was noticed regarding the elements of the social network theory. Specifically the element of positioning and how it was utilized by the entrepreneurs. This utilization of positioning occurred despite their unattentiveness to it, and was used as a natural response in the process of accessing the needed resources or support.

Additionally, regardless if the entrepreneur was making use of the support from family or friends, they still made use of the Syrian community to overcome some of the found barriers.

Moreover, the study was unable to analyse which ties within their networks were stronger in the entrepreneurs perspective and why. Furthermore, we were unable to go in depth in regards to the relationship between the interviewed entrepreneurs and the help they bring to each other in the process. The study presents information in terms of how religion helped the entrepreneur with their integration into the Turkish society. Nonetheless, by not having more data from the other interviewees this prevented us from understanding if religion played a role in them accessing Turkish customers or networks due to this similarity.

In addition, we were unable to analyze the possibility of differences in barriers encountered from the entrepreneurs of different sectors. As the analysis points out, the entrepreneurs with

import/export activity have shown an extensive inner and external network compared to other entrepreneurs interviewed. It would have been interesting to have details of how they made use of these different networks to access relevant resources and overcome the barriers encountered. Enabling us to compare and contrast a variation of networks, nonetheless, given the data in our possession this was not addressed. The theory posed a limitation in terms of allowing us to look into the role and importance of the ties the entrepreneurs had.