
Minority Business
By: Frances Henry
From: Currents Spring 1983 pp.29-33
© 1983 Urban Alliance on Race Relations
The study Visible Minority Business in Metropolitan Toronto,
commissioned by the Ontario Human Rights Commission and the
summary in the Winter 1983 issue of Currents by the author
of the study, Dr. Darla Rhyne, has provoked considerable reaction.
In continuing this important discussion, the following three
articles clearly demonstrate the need to recognize and remedy the
difficulties encountered by non white entrepreneurs which appear
to be far more serious than the Ontario Human Rights Commission
study suggests.
IN TORONTO: Further Comments
Rhyne's article, "Some Issues Facing Non-White Entrepreneurs in
Toronto", raises more questions than it answers. The general
findings are that entrepreneurs, including visible minority
members, have had little difficulty in obtaining capital, although
a few of the visible minority entrepreneurs thought that their
applications were scrutinized more carefully and that they had to
put up more collateral than persons from other ethnic groups.
Similarly, problems associated with "suppliers, employees,
customers and expanding the market"(1) were seen as common to all
businesses and were not especially affected by race or racial
discrimination.
These findings generally contradict the commonly held view, that
visible minority business persons do experience far more
difficulty in establishing and maintaining a business than do
members of the majority population. The American evidence
certainly supports the view, that access to capital is a maior
problem for Black entrepreneurs and there is no reason to believe
that such access is easier to obtain in Canada.
The controversial study has already elicited a highly critical
editorial in Contrast(2), as well as an accompanying
article in which other entrepreneurs interviewed by the newspaper
maintained that minority business people face a considerable
amount of racial discrimination. Reactions in other quarters have
been equally critical. If the study is evaluated both
methodologically and substantively, its problems can be put into
perspective.
From a methodological perspective, the study relied on only 49
minority business people and only 12 entrepreneurs of British or
European origins. (One immediately wonders why no Canadians were
included, in the study!) This small sample was used despite the
fact that as of 1973-74 there were at least 213 West Indian owned
businesses in Toronto and the number of South Asian businesses has
increased substantially in the last few years. And one need only
count the number of Chinese restaurants in the city, even
excluding other Chinese operated businesses, to get an idea of how
many are in Toronto. It is quite obvious that the smalI numbers
sampled in the study can not offer a representative picture of
business activity in the city. Although the author cautions that
the findings are "not generalizable beyond the experiences of
those interviewed," one must ask why a study based on such an
inadequate sample could have been released in the first place.
Since the article does not tell us how these small numbers were
chosen-e.g., was there at least an attempt at random selection-it
makes interpreting the results even more difficult.
Secondly, the entrepreneurs interviewed were "well established
proprietors of small and medium sized firms." This suggests that
only those successful at least to the point of remaining in
business were included in the sample. No information on their
earlier business experiences are included, so that we do not know
if they had problems earlier in their careers, but were successful
in overcoming them. While these methodological problems seriously
undermine the validity of the findings, other more substantive
criticisms are equally relevant.
Rhyne chose variables from among the six "main aspects of business
activity" as defined by A.H. Cole in a book entitled "The Business
System". These six features of business activity may very well
reflect the main concerns of mainstream or majority entrepreneurs,
but for visible minority members who are for the most part
immigrants to this society, other factors or issues may have even
greater salience. Success or failure for minority people in
business may well relate to many variables, other than those
derived from the experiences of majority business people and used
by Rhyne in this study.
Poole(1), in a study of West Indian entrepreneurs in Toronto found
that the key element was the degree to which the potential
entrepreneur was able to use and manipulate his or her kinship
network. Poole's analysis. while it did not survey Chinese,
Japanese or South Asians, did investigate all the West Indian
owned businesses in Toronto in 1973-74. Their experience as
immigrant entrepreneurs is probably very similar to the other
visible minority groups included in Rhyne's small sample. Poole's
analysis revealed a number of other significant factors which
influence success or failure in business life. These included:
[ I ] West Indians were influenced or restricted by the
currency regulations of their countries of origin which prevented
the out flow of capital. This was particularly true of Jamaicans
during the seventies when currency controls allowed only a modest
$200 to be taken out of the country. Thus, access to capital may
in certain cases be controlled by the country of origin.
[ 2 ] Some West Indian entrepreneurs were successful
because they maintained two business outlets, one in the West
Indies and one in Canada. Maintaining connections in the West
Indies was particularly important for those in the retail food and
record importing business, who must rely on local West Indian
suppliers for their produce or records. Often, these local
suppliers are kin. Thus, for immigrant entrepreneurs the problems
with suppliers have to do with the effectiveness of their networks
at home.
[ 3 ] The ability to acquire capital through the kin
network, usually interest free or at very modest rates of
interest, was instrumental to many in Poole's sample. Initial
capitalization came from relatives and/or from the entrepreneur
maintaining his or her job while the business was operated by
relatives.
[ 4 ] Maintaining a business operation depended also on
the use of unpaid spouses and other relatives for labour, as well
as very long hours for the proprietors themselves. By using
spouses, children and other relatives, the entrepreneur does not
have to pay employees and the net profits of the business are used
to maintain the family.
Poole concludes that, "access to capital, (although he means here
through the kin network rather than the bank) and maintenance of
networks especially kin-based ones, were of overriding importance
in the success of a business; factors of a changing market,
location, seasonality and knowledge of business practices were of
less importance."(4) By relying on standard North American factors
involved in business success such as those favoured by Cole,
Rhyne's study neglects the very special circumstances that ethnic
and immigrant people experience in becoming entrepreneurs.
Footnotes:
1. D. Rhyne. "Some Factors Facing Non-White Entreprenures in
Toronto. Currents. Vol, 1, No. 1, 1983.
2. Contrast, January 28, 1983.
3. G. Poole, Development in the West Indies and Migration to
Canada. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, McGill
University, 1979.
4. Ibid.