Entrepreneurial Responses to Chronic Adversity

Front matter

Dean A. Shepherd Vinit Parida Joakim Wincent

Entrepreneurial Responses to Chronic Adversity The Bright, the Dark, and the in Between palgrave macmillan

Entrepreneurial Responses to Chronic Adversity

Preface

Throughout their lives, people face adversity and have to respond. Whether this adversity comes as a natural disaster, an organizational crisis, or a disruptive technology, for those facing adversity, the changed conditions are generally characterized by high uncertainty and time constraints and tend to be highly consequential. These contextual attributes are also common with entrepreneurial action. Indeed, entrepreneurial responses to challenging situations appear to facilitate individuals’ resilience or recovery and often help those confronting adverse events. While adversity is often thought of in terms of an event that captures people’s attention (both that of those affected and of scholars), it can also be chronic. Chronic adversity refers to negative conditions that began long ago, continue in the present, and are unlikely to end passively (or even with modest effort) in the future. For example, chronic adversity includes enduring poverty for many people living in developing countries throughout the world, groups of people who face ongoing discrimination and prejudice, and individuals without a homeland. While the chronic nature of such adversity does not mean it cannot be resolved, many people who face chronic adversity attempt to improve their lives within their adverse contexts rather than overcoming the underlying (and, many times, institutional) constraints. In such cases, individuals can harness entrepreneurial action as a tool to improve their lives despite facing chronic adversity.

y vi PREFACE

As with any tool, however, entrepreneurial action can be harnessed for both good and evil. Indeed, a person can take entrepreneurial action to overcome the chronic adversity in his or her own life but at the expense of others. Thus, in this book, we examine both the bright and dark sides of entrepreneurship in the context of chronic adversity to better capture the inherent complexity. In particular, we present and reflect on the experiences of individuals living under chronic adversity and their use of entrepreneurship as a means to deal with such adversity. We note that our choice of “bright” and “dark” indicates our normative evaluation of the outcomes of entrepreneurial action. Yes, we believe that the entrepreneurial process of trafficking women and girls into the sex industry against their wishes is bad (Chapter 6). However, our goal is not to equivocate on this “badness” but to explain how entrepreneurship’s bright and dark sides arise and unfold. Suppose we (as scholars and people) cannot fully clarify the reasoning and activities behind the bright and dark sides of entrepreneurial action. If so, we have little (or no) basis for a prescription of what can be done to improve the lives of those facing chronic adversity.

Although all the members of the authorship team have faced some difficulties in life, we have not experienced anything like the chronic adversity faced by the individuals we discuss throughout this book. This lack of direct experience may make us seem less qualified to write the current book; however, we argue that our lack of such experience offers a number of research advantages. Namely, each chapter of this book is based on a peer-reviewed inductive research study. The goal of such inductive research is to allow the data to “speak” to reveal participants’ lived experiences while minimizing researchers’ application of their personal knowledge. As such, this book does not tell our story of entrepreneurial responses to chronic adversity; rather, it is the aggregation of the entrepreneurial decisions and activities of individuals living in various contexts characterized by chronic adversity.

While each chapter of this book is based on an inductive study, we realize that most readers will be more interested in the details of these individuals’ entrepreneurial responses to chronic adversity than in the research processes used to garner these details. Thus, we do not include much information about the research methods used throughout the book. However, we do provide the source article for each chapter for readers who want additional information about sample selection, coding, analysis, and other aspects of the research method and findings. Moreover,

PREFACE vii three chapters have additional co-authors other than the co-authors of this book. These additional co-authors contributed significantly to the original studies, and the corresponding chapters would not have been possible without them.

Bloomington, USA Dean A. Shepherd Lulea, Sweden Vinit Parida St. Gallen, Switzerland Joakim Wincent

Acknowledgments Dean, Vinit, and Joakim would like to thank Ali Ferguson for helping to construct the book and Marcus Ballinger for helping to publish the book.

Contents

Making Do with the Resources at Hand to Improve One’s Life and Others’ Lives

Our Context—Jugaad in Rural India

Entrepreneurs Alleviating Poverty Through Educating Their Children

Index

Fig.

Fig.

Fig.

Fig.

Fig.

Fig.

Fig.

Fig.

Fig.

1.1

3.1

3.2

4.1

5.1

6.1

7.1

T2

LIST OF FIGURES

Jugaad model of creative problem solving under resource constraints (Figure is from Shepherd et al., 2020)

A model of slum entrepreneurs’ alleviation of poverty (this figure is from Shepherd et al. [2021])

Key dynamics of refugees’ entrepreneurial actions

to enhance integration and resilience (Figure

from Shepherd et al., 2020)

A refugee entrepreneurship model of resilience

to substantial and persistent resilience (Figure

from Shepherd et al., 2020)

A well-being model of women’s entrepreneurship

at the base of the Pyramid

A personal adversity model of justifying the costs

of entrepreneurial action

Organizing the exploitation of vulnerable individuals

for labor

An organizational framework of the flow of corruption payments

A model of organizing corruption

196 200 xi

Chapter 1

Making Do with the Resources at Hand to Improve One’s Life and Others’ Lives

Creative individuals can help both organizations and communities improve their performance. While Western theories of individuals’ creativity in organizations tend to stress the importance of access to resources for such improvement (Bradley et al., 2011), the other side of this effect is that individuals without adequate resources are unlikely to realize the creativity needed to develop solutions and are thus destined to achieve poor performance. As an extension of this logic, people in resource-poor environments are the least able to mobilize the resources needed to formulate creative solutions, which is troublesome since these individuals are most in need of creative solutions to problems (to improve their lives). Contrasting this emphasis on resources for generating creative solutions, bricolage refers to individuals’ actions to develop creative solutions in environments with resource constraints (Baker & Nelson, 2005). Indeed, as the old saying goes, “necessity is the mother of invention,” but despite evidence that such actions generate creative solutions, researchers question how beneficial bricolage and the resulting solutions are for firms.

This chapter is based on Shepherd et al. (2020). For more details about this chapter’s literature, methods, and analyses, we direct the reader to the source article.

© The Author(s) 2022 1 D. A. Shepherd et al., Entrepreneurial Responses to Chronic Adversity, https: //doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04884-5_1

However, in the context of resource-poor environments, the firm level of analysis may be less suitable for elucidating the benefits of individual creative problem solving. Along these lines, instead of focusing on firm growth as a beneficial outcome of creative activities, scholars investigating resource-poor areas in the East have started to call for more research on inclusive growth. These scholars argue that exclusively focusing on firm performance is not inclusive enough to capture the benefits of creative problem solving for improving the social and economic well-being of marginalized members of society (George et al., 2012). Thus, in this chapter, we go beyond traditional Western theories of firms’ competitive advantage to explore how creative problem solving in resource-poor environments affects other types of performance.

To do so, we investigate outcomes of creative problem solving in the highly resource-poor context of rural India. In particular, we theorize on the outcomes stemming from an Indian cultural source of creative problem solving known as jugaad. Jugaad is a process relying on individuals’ assertive defiance to engage in trial-and-error experiential learning so they can recombine at-hand resources for new purposes to devise frugal quick-fix solutions. Based on an inductive interpretive case study of individuals engaged in jugaad—called jugaadus—we build a model of how jugaad impacts firm and inclusive growth. While we show that jugaad entails a behavioral component consistent with the concept of bricolage (ie., “making do by applying combinations of the resources at hand to new problems and opportunities” [Baker & Nelson, 2005]), we also demonstrate that jugaad is a broader concept in that it also comprises an attitudinal dimension (assertive defiance) and an experiential dimension.

From our investigation of the antecedents and consequences of jugaad, we offer two main insights into creative problem solving under resource scarcity and poverty. First, we demonstrate that jugaad generates a duality of outcomes—namely, low firm growth (i.e., minimal [if any] sustainable competitive advantage for a firm) and high inclusive growth (i.e., improved well-being for marginalized members of society). This insight has implications for the literature on creativity, entrepreneurship, and regional development. In particular, while scholars have recognized that solutions can be and are developed in spite of (or because of) resource constraints, many have also questioned the usefulness of these solutions for firms (Baker & Nelson, 2005). We show that although the solutions generated through jugaad tend to be challenging to market, scale, and protect (and are therefore unlikely to create sustainable competitive advantage for firm growth), they do typically have a positive impact on the individuals who develop them (i.e., the jugaadus) and their communities. These varying outcome attributes help explain the “mixed findings” in prior research on solutions developed in resource-poor environments and stress the value of going beyond the firm level of analysis to explain this impact. Thus, by providing a deeper understanding of the East’s focus on problem solving and the subsequent effects on individual and community growth, this chapter provides a counterweight to the West’s focus on sustainable competitive advantage and its effects on firm growth. In other words, we offer a broader and more inclusive view of the impact of solutions.

Second, studies exploring inclusive growth have mainly focused on the roles multinationals, governments, and non-governmental organizations play in delivering solutions to help people living in resource-poor regions overcome their problems (Ansari et al., 2012; Khavul & Bruton, 2013). Extending this earlier, more Western line of research, in this chapter, we specifically explore Jocal sources of inclusive growth and the associated implications for growth at the individual and community levels instead of exclusively (or primarily) at the firm level. Even though the creative problem-solving process of jugaad does not typically result in commercializable solutions, the panacea for firm growth, it does often lead to creative solutions that ultimately enhance community members’ lives, the basis for inclusive growth.

Inclusive Growth

An emerging stream of research has started to explore the notion of inclusive growth. Emphasizing the question of who benefits from innovations, this research stream investigates the extent to which innovations “improve the social and economic well-being of communities that have structurally been denied access to resources, capabilities, and opportunities” (George et al., 2012: 661)—inclusive innovations. Such inclusive innovations can include policy changes implemented by governments as well as new products, services, processes, and/or business models (typically) implemented by large, established organizations (e.g., Halme et al., 2012). When inclusive innovations like these are implemented, not only can the respective innovative organizations grow markets and generate profits (Prahalad, 2006), but the poor also become “enfranchised as customers, employees, owners, and community members” (George et al., 2012: 662). Thus, previous research on inclusive growth has increased understanding of the intra-organizational processes driving the development of inclusive innovations and how organizations can achieve both firm growth and inclusive growth. However, we know less about how local individuals create solutions that, although not necessarily commercializable, still contribute to inclusive growth. We discuss such processes later in the chapter.

Creative Problem Solving Under Resource Scarcity

Instead of highlighting the role abundant resources play in facilitating creativity (at least for low to moderate levels of slack resources [Bradley et al., 2011]), research on bricolage has typically focused on the behaviors individuals undertake to overcome their environmental constraints. Bricolage refers to “making do by applying combinations of the resources at hand to new problems and opportunities” (Baker & Nelson, 2005: 333). While there are undoubtedly many benefits to bricolage, it appears that engaging in more of such behaviors may not be unambiguously positive. For instance, Baker and Nelson (2005) found that individuals who engage in bricolage for most aspects of their business operations (i.e., parallel bricolage) tend to face substantial obstacles to firm growth. Moreover, many researchers believe bricolage results in poor firm performance because it entails “making do,” which implies the resulting innovations are “second-best solutions” that are barely (or not quite) good enough to solve the corresponding problems (Lanzara, 1999: 347). Indeed, bricolage may even negatively influence firms due to (1) wasted effort from implementing a series of temporary solutions to handle complex problems, (2) lack of focus on developing more permanent (or at least more durable) solutions to problems, and (3) opportunity costs from not developing relationships with stakeholders and suppliers who could help improve firm performance (Senyard et al., 2013).

Along with bricolage, scholars have also offered jugaad as another source of creative problem solving in resource-constrained environments, predominately at the individual level. Since jugaad is both a term in a common language and an increasingly popular concept in scholarship (largely in commentaries), many definitions for the concept have arisen. Although these definitions vary slightly, they all indicate that jugaad entails making do with whatever resources are at hand to devise frugal quick-fix solutions to overcome constraints (Prabhu & Jain, 2015; Rangaswamy & Densmore, 2013). In addition, scholars have argued that jugaad produces a broad set of benefits for jugaadus (e.g., customized machines and vehicles to meet their individual needs) as well as costefficient solutions for critical problems, including healthcare, power, and infrastructure problems (Sekhsaria, 2013).

Scholars have investigated jugaad to more fully understand “the Indian” way of solving problems, the accomplishments of prominent Indian organizations, and the leadership approaches of top management in Indian firms like Infosys and Wipro (e.g., Gulati, 2010; Hammonds, 2003). In these investigations, jugaad is often described as a native cultural asset rooted in a unique, complex, and genius approach of doing more with less in a society characterized by scarcity and is seen as an asset that could potentially be exported to other countries (Lamont, 2010). As with bricolage, many laud the benefits of jugaad; however, it too may have negative consequences. In particular, jugaad has been linked to systematic risk, dangerous solutions that breach international standards, digital piracy, and other illicit activities (Birtchnell, 2011; Rangaswamy & Densmore, 2013; Sundaram, 2010). In the areas of transportation and machinery, for example, jugaad has led to injuries and death (Husain et al., 2009) as individuals alter vehicle engines (i.e., jugaad gadi) to increase mileage and use kerosene in vehicles instead of gasoline, resulting in higher pollution. In addition, farmers have been accused of applying beverages like Pepsi and Coke to crops instead of pesticides. Some people even create make-shift pistols (i.e., katta) out of the steering bores of cars for illegal activities (Kumar, 2011). Thus, against this background, we examine how the process of jugaad and the resulting creative solutions to problems in resource-poor environments affect both firm growth and inclusive growth.

OUR CONTEXT—JUGAAD IN RURAL INDIA

This chapter is based on our study of the impact of jugaad in resource-poor environments. We decided to explore this topic in rural India because this region represents an extremely resource-poor environment. Rural India is “home to roughly one-quarter of the world’s poor (those living on less than $1.25/day)” (Jacoby, 2016: 159), and approximately 70% of India’s total population resides there. For additional details of the sample, research method, and analysis, we refer readers to the source article by Shepherd et al. (2020). Based on the findings of our study, in this chapter (and in the article), we present the dual-outcome model of jugaad that emerged from the data. As illustrated in Fig. 1.1, the individuals we studied lived in resource-poor environments that necessitated creative solutions. They were able to recognize salient problems in their environments, and they had in-depth knowledge of technologies but not of markets. As explained earlier, jugaad entails individuals’ assertive defiance to engage in trial-and-error experiential learning so they can recombine available resources for new purposes to devise frugal quick-fix solutions. In our study, these jugaad solutions resulted in a duality of outcomes—namely outcomes related to both firm growth and inclusive growth. Regarding firm growth, the jugaad solutions created little value for the jugaadus’ firms, at least when generating a sustainable competitive advantage for firm growth. Specifically, while these solutions did typically lower users’ costs (a valuable outcome), the jugaadus’ firms could not capture that value. Value capture was challenging mainly because the impact on Jugaadu’s Firm

Reduced Operating Cost Poor Marketability Non-Scalable Expenencing a —————— Adversity Highly Imitable Jugaad i 3 a Firm Growth Problematzng © Assertive Defiance | (Failure) e Combining Resources e iterative (expenental learning) Inclusive Growth Knowing (Success) (Technology but * , not markets) > jj m PA FEEN i impact Others’ Wellbeing i impact Jugssdu's : Helps Other Users { —————| | ! o eu ' Satisfaction with | | Fosters Self-Employment i Problem Solving i l © ll ' [Fosters Others’ Jugaad ' Social Benefits è Network Broker ‘ Feelings of Self-Worth LGateMienensadeneeae Clitcoussuuakeaded Antecedents of Jugaad Jugaad Outcomes

Fig. 1.1 Jugaad model of creative problem solving under resource constraints (Figure is from Shepherd et al., 2020)

jugaad solutions were difficult to commercialize: They were difficult to market, scale in terms of production, and safeguard against imitation.

Regarding inclusive growth, other individuals often benefited from imitating solutions developed by other jugaadus, including starting new businesses. These benefits for other individuals and businesses provided further value to the local community, and as a result, the community came to respect the jugaadus. In turn, the jugaadus benefited from their activities in the form of improved psychological well-being from fulfilling their intrinsic need to solve challenging problems, the ability to “do good” for others, and increased feelings of self-worth.

Stimulating Creativity: Experiencing Adversity

According to our findings, the jugaadus were embedded in an adverse environment. As explained above, rural India is characterized by significant resource constraints, which directly contribute to jugaad as a form of creative problem solving. Indeed, many of the individuals we interviewed mentioned the notion of necessity being the mother of invention. For instance, Malik, who invented an electric compost machine to cultivate mushrooms, indicated this popular belief about necessity when talking to us:

People who have money cannot make new things because they don’t feel the need; they have money to satisfy their needs. People who don’t have money will keep trying to fulfill their needs. The thinking of a rich man is different from us. I am a common man and not so rich. My thinking is different.

Similarly, Kotari explained, “Only if the person faces trouble sometimes... then he would learn the necessity of such things.” Verma likewise discussed his motivation for engaging in jugaad to make a production process more efficient:

In the village, people form a cooperative society. About 50 to 60 villagers are members and run such factories. The manual process was very complex—the material needed to be in 20 kg bundles, which is labor oriented. The process was tedious and long, transporting from one city to another. The ginning process, being long, used to last until the end of June when the rainy season started. This was leading to material wastage.

Drying use to take lot of time, and it was a wasteful process. For all these reasons, a speedy process was required. This is how I started the project. Money making was not the motive behind it. It should make life easy for everyone.

The jugaadus had also faced other personal hardships that seemed to push them into jugaad. For example, Sharma had health-related issues that required him to take action to remedy his situation and ultimately pushed him to develop a gas-powered three-wheel vehicle, as one of his family members explained:

First thing is he has a hearing disability. He used to drive a three-wheel rickshaw. He used to transport nine to 10 cylinders at a time, one weighing a minimum 30 kg. It used to pressure his knees tremendously. So, it was absolutely necessary to make something that will work as buying a new vehicle was not affordable.

Although we found evidence that adversity triggered jugaad, our findings do not indicate that this adversity hindered the creative problem-solving process. Indeed, only one jugaadu lamented his resource-poor environment. Singh, who developed organic fertilizers and adapted vegetable varieties, told us, “I did some experiments with cow dung fertilizers. It was successful, but due to space constraints, I could not continue it.”

From a Knowing Perspective

While the jugaadus had developed in-depth knowledge of the problems that people in their region faced and how technologies worked, they knew little about up-to-date business practices and processes. For instance, Sharma had extensive knowledge about machines and gas stoves and was thus able to solve a problem innovatively:

I used to supply gas at Prem Gas Agency. I made a vehicle, a three wheeler. I did not need to go to the petrol pump for 20 years. People used to look curiously at it. Now there are many like it, but at the time of my invention, there were none. I tried to run it on gas, and I succeeded ... in just two months. I used a domestic regulator. I can show you the photo. I used to repair gas stoves. I was a mechanic looking at the instruments to run an engine, the air and fuel it uses. I made some assumptions and tried to use l1 MAKING DO WITH THE RESOURCES AT HAND... 9 gas for it.... It worked, as in the engine started, but it did not last. I found a solution for it in one to two months. I made a knitted part, so when the engine is raised, the knitted part is adjusted accordingly.

While the jugaadus had deep knowledge about certain technologies, processes, and problems (that they either personally faced or observed), they generally lacked business knowledge, particularly of markets and marketing. For example, Saini created a remote device for operating firecrackers, but as one of his family members noted, he was “somehow lacking business skills to make a finished product. He had done a series of innovations during his days.” Notably, most jugaadus distinguished between a person who develops a solution and a person who markets a solution. They tended to emphasize the former over the latter, believing that over time, people will realize the value of a solution, as captured by Patel: “You will use [it], and only then will you know it.” Indeed, the jugaadus’ mindset reflected the old adage that if you build a better mousetrap, the world will beat a path to your door. Patel, for instance, shared the following:

If the machine makes life easier, for example, before washing machines came, clothes were hand washed, but when you know the convenience of using a machine, you do not have to sell it. Same with this machine [Patel’s invention]; when people saw its efficiency, my business started growing.

Similarly, Kotari proudly explained,

I have not done any publicity. But, when nearby villagers saw it, two more farmers approached me and asked me to make the machine for them. After that, another four people approached me to make the machine for them. Like this, the word was spread around. People saw that it works well ... so they started approaching me.

Some of the other jugaadus continued searching for solutions that others would ultimately purchase. For instance, after some of his previous solutions failed to gain market acceptance, Panchal developed numerous additional solutions: “I made an electrical machine, which was not accepted. Then I prepared a hand-operated model, which is accepted.” Nevertheless, our findings reveal that the jugaadus cared little about markets or marketing.

To Problematize the Situation

Based on their deep knowledge of different domains, the jugaadus searched for and identified problems in various spheres. First, they sometimes identified problems from their own experiences. For example, Kataria was inspired to develop a rain-protection system due to a problem he repeatedly experienced, as one of his family members explained: “It was seen and noticed many times that our clothes get wet when it rains when we are not home. So he thought something like this should be made so that the clothes don’t get wet from the rain.” Second, the jugaadus sometimes identified problems from their family members’ or co-workers’ experiences. Jagani’s novel multi-purpose farming vehicle, for instance, was inspired by a problem he noticed for his workers in an earlier agricultural process: “See, earlier, we used to sow the groundnut, and the laborers had to carry the pump on their shoulders. So, their shoulders used to ache.” Third, the jugaadus sometimes identified problems from strangers. Gajjar exemplified this third path well—he developed numerous solutions based on strangers’ problems, including an electrical rotating drum, a cultivation machine, and a basic tong tool for home cooking. For example, when telling us about the electrical drum, he explained,

I make nagada [a kettle drum and bell], which people use to worship God in the temple.... Actually the kettle drum gets fixed in one place and two sticks come from the upper side and beat the drum and create sound. After two to four years, the stick beats the same area of the drum, and it becomes weak on that side. Then, they said to turn the drum, but who will go to the temple to change the location of the drum? Then, I felt that instead of turning the drum manually, it should turn automatically... It should turn every day, so then I decided to make a drum that rotates every day.

According to our findings, the jugaadus were driven by intrinsic motivation as they seemed to enjoy identifying problems and finding solutions to them. However, prosocial motivation—“the desire to expend effort to benefit other people” regardless of whether one personally benefits or not (Grant, 2008: 50)—also seemed to drive their endeavors. Accordingly, some jugaadus were inspired to identify (and eventually solve) problems that caused substantial difficulty in others’ lives. For example, Patel was motivated to keep children from working in fields so they could go to school, so he developed a cotton-stripping machine:

I am proud that I could improve the studies of the kids in this area. The manual process that I explained to you, each kid had to do it, 2 kg, 5 kg, 7 kg. Even if he [or she] had an exam, it was compulsory. That is the reason that the education level was very poor in our area. Only one or two kids could become engineers and become successful. Otherwise, most of the kids were working in the field. Now the kids do not have to do the manual labor.... Now kids can focus on studies and become doctors, engineers, go abroad for studies. I feel proud.

Panchal, who developed a mechanical incense stick maker, went out of his way to seek contexts in which he could apply his observation skills to identify new problems that required solutions:

We get a lot of time to think like this. We wander every day to see new things. It is also about passion, which forces me to do new things. I always travel by road for this. I don’t take the train usually. By road, the journey gives me a chance [to observe]. Just now, I visited Bhubaneswar by car, around 2000 km. We stop anywhere in a small village and meet different people.

Jugaad: Creative Problem Solving

Our findings of creative problem solving—jugaad—in the resource-poor environment of rural India reveal not only a behavioral dimension that is somewhat in line with the notion of bricolage but also attitudinal. Namely, the jugaadus demonstrated a particular attitude, what we labeled assertive defiance, and an orientation toward experiential learning, both of which are interlinked with and complement the behavioral dimension.

As discussed earlier, jugaad comprises a behavioral dimension related to combining and recombining readily available resources in new ways to generate solutions. In particular, our findings show that the jugaadus acted by “making do.” For example, when defining jugaad, Patel explained, “You take different ideas and make it work.” Similarly, Kataria described how the jugaadus used resources at hand: “If we need any dimension and it is not available, we have to gather that from the garbage and other places; we adjust that thing to make it work.” Moreover, the jugaadus could modify and adjust resources by combining them in new ways, as Patel indicated: “In my opinion, it’s a combination of ideas” (Patel). These and similar findings about the jagaadus’ behaviors align with the concept of bricolage—“making do by applying combinations of l2 D. A. SHEPHERD ET AL.

resources at hand to new problems and opportunities” (Baker & Nelson, 2005: 333). Overall, these behaviors highlight the jugaadus’ deliberate propensity to disregard the limitations of agreed-upon definitions of resources and constraints (Baker & Nelson, 2005: 334). While the behavioral dimension of combining and recombining available resources reflects the actions involved in developing creative solutions, it does not fully capture the attitude among the jugaadus that was connected to these actions and tendencies, to which we now turn.

We called this attitudinal dimension of jugaad assertive defiance. As we were the first to explore and document this dimension formally, prior literature has not discussed this concept. The closest construct we were able to find was chutzpah, a Yiddish term used in the United States, meaning “boldness, assertiveness, to defy tradition, a willingness to demand what is due, to challenge authority, to raise eyebrows” (Dershowitz, 1992: 18). For the judaadus, assertive defiance entailed substantial “confidence that by trying certain things you will receive desired results” (Patel) and the beliefs that “nothing is impossible.... Whatever challenges you face, you can find a way” (Singh) and that a person can “do work [find solutions] that others can’t do” (Gajjar). Thus, we define assertive defiance as an attitude of boldness; self-belief; and disregard for tradition, conventions, rules, and regulations.