The purpose of this paper is to identify the key domains of entrepreneurial behaviour among business
owner in food processing industry. The study utilized a deductive research design and quantitative
method. There are twenty-one statements about entrepreneurial behaviour to discover a core action
associated with entrepreneurial behaviour. An entrepreneurial behaviour is defined as small family
business strategic behaviour that captures specific entrepreneurial aspects (Walker and Brown, 2004).
In additions, it is the actions taken by the small business owner to achieve business performance
(Delmar, 1996). According to Kirkley (2015), entrepreneurial behaviour as self determined human
action is based on a specific set of values which the individual uses to make decisions about how to
behave in situations that a meaningful to their business. The questionnaires focused primarily on the
meaning of entrepreneurial behaviour as self-determination to be succeed in business. There were 70
respondents were selected by simple random sampling. The data were analysed by Exploratory Factor
Analysis (EFA) and categorised into relevant domains. The result shows four specific domains of
entrepreneurial behaviour business owner in food processing industry, namely, leadership, proactiveness,
committed and risk taking. The finding items to each of these domains are consistent with
the small family business perspective. The practical implication is the presence of the specific core
action associated with entrepreneurial behaviour. The business owner should employ the four core
action to sustain the business. The result of this study is importance to academician in small business
area, business advisor from government and non government sectors, and small family business owner.
This paper seeks to illustrate how empowerment theory can be applied as a critical approach which
could heighten power and capacity in community development. This is because empowerment is not
just viewed through theory or philosophy only, but as an active approach which could be applied to
enhance individual, oganizational or even communal prosperity. Many communal issues discussed by
scholars such as poverty, health, women, people with disability, single mothers, youth, leadership, organization and many others utilises the empowerment approach. This is because it is the most
effective approach in resolving issues by empowering individual or target group to take effective action
through ability and potential, which have been developed. Discussion will ensue with definition of
empowerment, which will be elucidated, with the concept of power. In the context of community
development, empowerment refers to a mechanism where individual, organization and community will
amass control on life and related issues affecting them such as economy, social, psychology and
politics. To understand this concept clearly, discussion of empowerment concept will be closely
examined to view the definition from two different dimensions, which is whether empowerment can be
ascertained as a process, benefit or outcome. By using the qualitative approach, which is through
analysing content, books, journals and other references, a few steps or process have been unearthed to
apply empowerment as an approach, which could be practiced in the context of community
development specifically in rural areas.
Artikel ini meneliti desentralisasi kuasa dan hubungnya dengan penglibatan komuniti Iban dalam Skim
Pembangunan Kesejahteraan Rakyat (SPKR). Bagi tujuan pengumpulan data kajian, kaedah temu bual
berstruktur menggunakan borang soal selidik telah dijalankan ke atas 260 Ketua Isi Rumah (KIR)
rumah panjang di Daerah Song, Sarawak. Penemuan kajian menunjukkan desentralisasi kuasa dalam
program di bawah SPKR berada pada tahap sederhana. Analisis Ujian Khi Kuasa Dua pula
menunjukkan terdapat perhubungan yang signifikan (p ≤ 0.05) antara tahap desentralisasi kuasa dengan
penglibatan masyarakat Iban dalam pelaksanaan dan penilaian program di bawah SPKR. Ini
menggambarkan semakin tinggi tahap desentralisasi kuasa yang diterima oleh masyarakat, maka
semakin tinggi tahap penglibatan mereka dalam aktiviti pelaksanaan dan penilaian program di bawah
skim tersebut. Sebaliknya, perhubungan tersebut adalah tidak signifikan (p ≥ 0.05) dari segi tahap
penglibatan dalam membuat keputusan dan berkongsi manfaat daripada program di bawah SPKR.