THE COMPLEX RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND ITS CONTEXT

This article aims to demonstrate a broad and complex relationship between entrepreneurship, including the entrepreneur, with the regional and organizational context in which it operates, for which a theoretical review of the context and entrepreneurial competencies was addressed. In this regard, a qualitative research was carried out with the phenomenological method that allowed an exhaustive review of the most relevant literature, books, and articles on the phenomenon. As a result, different theoretical proposals were analyzed, ranging from absolute relevance to the topic to those that highlight contextual elements such as education. Thus, the importance of the regional and organizational context, the behavior and competencies of the individual, the education of the individual, among other aspects of interest, were addressed.


Introduction
There are countries that have developed more than others, even on the same continent, indeed, states within the same country, which have differentiated (Acemoglu and Roinson, 2009). The concern that arises is directly related to the factors that condition this development. Thus, several studies by various authors have attributed this event to different aspects such as geographic location (Diamond, 1998), culture (Weber, 2002) or people (Yunis, 2009), among others; However, there is a common factor in which they converge, which is the human being as an entrepreneur. In this sense, Meyer (2007) ;Su, Xie and Wang (2015) have called for more attention to be paid to the importance of contextual variables in the entrepreneurship phenomenon, even considering unethical phenomena present in the environment that contribute to entrepreneurship (Baron et al. 2018). Yin et al. (2021) carried out a study in China, specifically on returnees who developed business ventures and initiatives, discovering that the initiatives are strongly linked, on the one hand, to the individual attributes of the people and, on the other, to the characteristics of the context regional, especially to phenomena such as regional prosperity, government fiscal spending, tax burden, natural phenomena (climate) and transportation infrastructure. Despite the fact that there is an important variety of studies that have addressed the issue, it is pertinent to have consensus on the definition and scope of the context and its key variables, from where the phenomenon of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship in various regions must be understood (Huang, Liu and Li, 2020;Welter, 2011).
Although relevant, it has not been possible to characterize this issue within a framework that would allow to delimit, in academic terms, the creation of companies. This has led many researchers in this area to focus on the study of more dynamic variables and models that take into account personal and social aspects, as well as the interaction between the two, in order to explain and predict entrepreneurial behavior (Trachev and Kolvereid, 1999;Audet, 2002;Crant, 1996;Douglas and Shepherd, 2002;Krueger, Reilly and Carsrud, 2000).
As is known, entrepreneurs must first face different scenarios in their business building process, as stated by Fayole and Bruyat (2002), who point out that economists have tended to approach the issue considering the functionality of the phenomenon, centered on the entrepreneur's role ("what"); human sciences have placed emphasis on personal aspects ("who" and "why"), while management and organizational sciences have focused on the process ("how"). This study thus addresses the matter considering culture from a phenomenological perspective as well as human sciences, which focus their importance on "who" and "why".
In summary, the objective of this article is to present a broad overview of the environmental conditions that promote entrepreneurship and the competencies of the individual who manage them, which are harmoniously combined for the generation of the company (see figure 1). Thus, to develop the objective, the theoretical reflection review based on the literature review is approached in seven parts: 1) The phenomenology of the entrepreneur; 2) The environment and regional context; 3) The internal locus of control; 4) Competencies of the individual; 5) Business strategy; 6) The individual and the organization; and 7) Education and entrepreneurship.

Metodology
The methodology is presented in three subsections: the first describes the nature, type and cut of the investigation; the second section describes the information collection instrument; and in the third they detail the investigation procedure.

Research method and type
The present study is of a qualitative nature since it emphasizes the importance of the context, the function and the meaning of human acts (Martínez, 2000), in that order in this study it is intended to describe the entrepreneurial phenomenon based on the conditions of the environment and the competences and behaviors of the subject, within the framework of the phenomenological method. Thus, the phenomenological method is based on the study of the lived experiences of the subject regarding an event, in this case the entrepreneur facing the phenomenon of entrepreneurship. This method is used to analyze complex phenomena in human life that can hardly be understood from rigid schematic frameworks. Indeed, phenomenology seeks to understand social facts, for which it is a priority to conceive of realities as a dynamic of factors and actors that make up an organized, interacting and systemic totality, whose study and understanding requires the capture of that internal dynamic structure that defines it (Fuster, 2019).

Instruments
In this research, the data record sheet applied to books and articles, of high impact in the literature of the entrepreneurial phenomenon, on the categories of interest was used as an instrument for collecting information; This instrument allowed the registration and identification of information sources, as well as the collection of data or evidence. In the reading cards, the data of the document are recorded and then the different sections are broken down linearly, oriented towards a comprehensive and critical reading of the text. Indeed, they usually contain very specific guidelines that often seek to interrogate the text from certain topics (Martos, 2008).

Procedures
Initially, the study problem was detected to define the objectives that would allow solving said problem. Theories to support the study were then selected based on the category of study.

Reality and phenomenology of the entrepreneur
To analyze culture as a process within a society and the men who compose it, it is important to acknowledge that, from a philosophical point of view, expressed in the terms of Husserl, phenomenology aims to explain the correlation between people, their reality and the world of things. In other words, the structure of human experience is what has been called phenomenology (Herrera, 1998). For phenomenology, culture is the set of productions that result from the continuous activities of men as a collective, whose permanent spiritual existence lies in the consciousness of the community and which is preserved by tradition (Holes and Vargas, 1996). This notion makes it easier to understand the interaction of society and the individual in the construction of the cultural context. This leads to determine that the set of productions that emanate from the correlation between people and reality create new parameters in different societies (Yunis, 2009). Thus, each region -according to the characteristics of its foundation, of those who founded it or how they further developed-creates different cultures (realities) that establish the best way to deal with different situations because their group of individuals is aware of contexts which the vast majority of people in a certain society are familiarized with.
When analyzing the phenomenon of entrepreneurship within a regional reality, entrepreneurs are a transversal factor which creates culture, the latter which at the same time constitutes an important variable (Orrego, 2009),

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/ 2021 Volume 8 Number 4 (June) http://doi.org/10. 9770/jesi.2021.8.4(13) both for the development of the individual and societies. However, a single person's response to development is not enough. Willpower communities must be built, made up of certain people who have common desires (Husserl, 1987). This way, the influence of a person can be reflected in others and it can make it easier to permeate the subject in all their expressions.
Finding common grounds between individuals in a society can unify ways of thinking that reflect its beliefs. According to Herrera (1998), humans are cultural beings who experience the social world in terms of motivations; accordingly, they behave in a certain way, they adjust to values and, especially, they seek meaning; in turn, they feel determined by positive or negative valuations and are influenced by their fellows.
The previous parameters can allow to determine that each society creates its own concept of "individual" and its own characteristics (in this case of the entrepreneur), which is strengthened in each person's mental scheme (Senge, 2005). Husserl (1987) states that human beings must commit themselves to shaping a truly human culture. Thus, communal values are developed for a specific society. However, this culture or its development result in the definition of the subject as an entrepreneur. It is influenced by the understanding of the reality that everyone has, according to this concept. Herrera (1998) considers that, through experience, reality acquires meaning, and this reality is constructed through knowledge acquired over time. This indicates that each department or State in the country has different growth experiences that, unconsciously, lead to the best way to develop their region according to their own and inherent characteristics or, as in the case of tourism, comparative advantages (natural or human) make the area cultivate its own well-being. To complement each individual's reality, Schutz (2003) states that subjects understand their reality and their common sense, as long as they are part of a particular world, in which there are similar objects and others, where culture and society influence concepts as well as points of view.
When defining the term "reality", Schutz (2003) must make reference to the importance of the subject: a social thing cannot be understood without reducing it to the human activity that created it or without referring to the human activity that drives it. The subject is, thus, a vital part of every society who creates their own definition of the entrepreneur according to their experience and the sum of the experiences of an entire community. Thus, each region is different, having the same need (the development of the entrepreneur), which requires approaching entrepreneurship education in different ways.

The environment and its regional context
Once the reality immersed in a culture that identifies the individuals of a collective is created, the regional context is originated. In fact, territories are developed from unique contexts defined by an industrial, historical, and local configuration, as well as by the pattern of investment in resources that is made over time (Auerswald and Branscomb, 2003).
In particular, it allows to explain the advantages possessed, which are specific to a territory and have to do with both the possession and the ability to acquire or develop a set of resources that competitors or rival areas do not possess (Barney, 1991;Wernerfelt, 1984). Just as each person improves their position, each region must improve their environment. The environment itself contains and, at the same time, supports business activity (Neck et al., 2004).
The development of different contexts for each region, according to its evolution, creates tangible and intangible assets of its own that no other region has and that condition the creation of companies, and provide the basis that allows, from a dynamic perspective, to differentiate those territories that have a differential degree of success in stimulating the company development (West, Bamford and Marsden, 2008). And, due to the diversity of resources (Barney, 1991) that the country's departments possess, each of them can develop various forms of entrepreneurship.
The environment includes a set of variables that generate opportunities and threats for entrepreneurship activities. Kantis defines it as the entrepreneurial development system, which is composed by social and economic conditions, cultural aspects and the educational system, the dynamic and productive structure, the factor markets, the networks -social, productive and institutional-, personal aspects and political regulations. Each of the factors mentioned are developed at different scales, in different areas, indicating that the emphasis must be different and not general for the territories in each of them. Zahra and Wright (2011) and Zahra et al. (2014) have proposed one of the most complete and comprehensive models on the understanding and composition of the contextual environment that exists in the literature. Thus, the authors' model includes the dimensions: temporal, industrial and market, spatial, social and organizational, property and governance of the context. However, it is important to highlight that, due to the cultural diversity of the country, each region can improve or change its reality (culture) to develop a competitive advantage of the company based on the combination and use of the resources available to it. or it can develop (Audretsch et al., 2018;Foss et al., 2007). Although it is important to mention that the resources are systemic and can be durable over time (West and Bamford, 2005;West, Bamford and Marsden, 2008). Increased or decreased by the specific resources that a territory possesses, its natural resources (for example, its climate), such as resources created by the community, whether of generalized use (roads) or specialized (specific research institutes) (Porter, 1991).
The appropriate combination of advanced and specialized resources of nature, mainly intangible, the correct mobilization of these through the establishment of multiple interactions and the difficulty of their acquisition, imitation and replacement, justify the failure of certain initiatives to develop entrepreneurial ecosystems, including although they have studied the structure and set of resources of a model area (Spigel, 2017;West and Bamford, 2005). Each area must educate its potential entrepreneurs according to its limitations and not doing it as a general rule, in this way the failure of entrepreneurship attempts is reduced, as in the case of China and the coastal and inland cities (Yingying and Olivares, 2012).
Regarding the idea of Neck et al. (2004) about the necessary temporal evolution of certain components that interact to form a dynamic system that fuels the creation of companies, each region or country must, from its current combination of resources and long-term established goals, trace its path in order to acquire new resources that complement existing ones and that are especially attractive for the system, which allows the gradual development of its entrepreneurial environment supported by idiosyncratic property advantages (West, Bamford and Marsden, 2008).
The purpose of having efficient variables that allow permeating all sectors of the economy is that individuals in a territory increase their opportunities to develop productive processes that generate employment and wealth, thus improving their quality of life, and that they project themselves as generators of added value to all the processes that are part of the economic and social functioning of the community (Sen, 1998).
Each region is a dynamic social context which acts according to the variations of time and resources derived from the area, which leads to the change of mentality or formation of the individual's personality within their own reality. According to Mucchielli (1985), mentality can be defined as a society or social group's implicit reference system, homogeneous from the point of view of the common spirit. It is a frame of reference that allows people to perceive and interpret reality in a certain way and, therefore, see the reactions and behaviors according to that
Aspects regarding social reality, the human problem, according to geographical location, are set aside. As stated by Hoyos and Vargas (1996), the objective is to save the phenomena, and showing the world intended experiences. In this case, it is to justify the human dimensions related to the transforming mentality and to the ability to generate new ideas, which allows to deduce the relationship with the conviction that is acquired and built, and that is associated with the strengthening of the will.
Finally, there are many approaches that propose alternatives for regional development such as industrial districts, business clusters, innovation systems and business ecosystems, among others. However, from the previous approaches, business ecosystems have received broad support from the academic community due to the articulation of their components such as policies, actors and supporting institutions (Acs et al., 2017;Malecki, 2018).

The reality of the internal locus of control
Considering the person and their behavior, and in order to understand the process of how reality affects the personality and generates traits, the concept of locus of control is used. Locus of control leads the perception that a person has about the source of their destiny (Robbins, 1999). That is, a person is defined in their way of thinking and will be sentenced to act and have mental schemes according to where they are born and developed (Senge, 2005), which make them believe that they are conditioned by the particular way that entrepreneurs are made in that specific region. Ong and Hishamuddin (2008) state that the internal locus of control is defined as the belief that a person has about results through the ability, effort or skills that they have, and not so much about other people's actions. Each individual owns their decisions and their own result: these people consciously assume (Popper, 1972) that they are building their own world and that this world is the best for them, since it is the one, they know. However, these decisions are influenced by the opportunities offered by their environment. In this way, everyone develops skills according to their geographical area.
On the other hand, Miller and Toulouse (1986) mention that a person with internal locus of control believes that the consequences of their behavior come from their own efforts, and a person with external locus of control considers that their life events depend on factors that are out of their control, and are attributable to chance or destiny. External factors are the realities or the culture that surround individuals for the development of their potential as entrepreneurs. Individuals can be influenced through education, for the strengthening of the locus, oriented towards entrepreneurship with the limitations that the environment offers.
Individuals, consciously or unconsciously (Popper, 1972), create psychological traits that characterize their region or the other way around. One of the main factors that must be considered is how much individuals are known (in terms of abilities and skills) to begin to develop their role within society. Dyer (1994) argues that, based on the acceptance of the basic role that these people play in the social environment, it is evident that as, the personal characteristics that define entrepreneurs are better known, they will be in an optimal position to promote business initiatives.
In this regard, there are a series of attributes that are commonly related to entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship, among these stands out the internal locus of control, propensity to take risks, self-confidence, need for achievement, tolerance to ambiguity and innovation (Dinis et al., 2013;Frese and Gielnik, 2014;Ndofirepi, 2020).
When trait theory was developed, prompted by McClelland (1961), the idea that entrepreneurs generally possess characteristics such as the need for achievement, power, affiliation, creativity and imagination, as well as a great capacity of negotiation and high risk propensity, grew popular (Green et al., 1996).
Likewise, Korunka et al. (2003), consider that the entrepreneur's personality must include certain specific features or characteristics. These features are provided by the environment with primary socialization (first nucleus or family), secondary (second nucleus, as it expands to school and close friends) or tertiary (awareness of their choice). Tertiary socialization explains that people are aware of their abilities, but that they decide what to do with those abilities. A proper illustration of this proposal could be someone who smokes and is aware of tobacco damage, yet still decides to smoke. The same happens with people who know they have entrepreneurial abilities, but their fears do not allow them to see beyond. Husserl (1987) takes the capacity of self-consciousness as a starting point to assume a contemplative position regarding acts of self-knowledge, self-assessment and self-determination that lead the subject to adopting intentions and actions. These include entrepreneurship in which the subject requires the will to connect and to participate in the world of productive life.

From the environment to individual competences
Once personality is developed, it helps the individual develop their competences, and it is responsible for ensuring that every person entering the work-field faces the employability of the market. Labor competence is the operative element that links individual and collective capacity to generate value with work processes, so it constitutes a new alternative to improve the performance of individuals and organizations (Sánchez, Marrero and Martínez, 2005). Entrepreneurship is the ability of individuals who proceed with the needs of the environment to meet them in terms of company gestation (entrepreneurship) and development (leadership).
The competences are framed in "three major trends in the study" identified by Mertens (1996): the behavioral current (Sánchez, Marrero and Martínez, 2005); the functionalist current, based on two factors in school development: the person and position or the functions of said position (Mertens, 1996); and a third current developed in France whose main exponent is Claude Levy-Levoyer. The latter states that competencies are a list of behaviors that certain people possess to a greater extent than others and that make them more effective for certain situations.
The current that is closest to entrepreneurship and entrepreneurs' development process is the behavioral current, which focuses on behavioral change, a phenomenon that allows the entrepreneur (Gilder, 1984) achieve objectives, breaking old patterns and creating new ones. These patterns are first created by phenomenology, as each individual thinks how to do things differently (or how the development process of building a company should be). Gibb (2005) proposed a series of business values that allow entrepreneurs to do, organize, feel, communicate, understand, think and learn vital things for their development. Meanwhile, Timmons (2004) makes a different integration with six broad categories: commitment and determination, obsession of opportunity, risk tolerance, ambiguity and uncertainty, creativity, adaptability and self-confidence.
According to Varela and Bedoya (2006, p.149) business competencies are the set of attributes (motivations, attitudes, values, knowledge, skills) of a person, which are manifested in definable, observable and measurable

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/ 2021 Volume 8 Number 4 (June) http://doi.org/10. 9770/jesi.2021.8.4(13) behaviors, which are linked, in casual way, with superior performance in business action. Studies show that empathy is an important antecedent of business intentions, especially in the case of social entrepreneurship, given that empathic individuals are more likely to consider the well-being of other individuals (Dees, 2012;Santos, 2012).
This process of entrepreneurial competencies is clearly shown by Spencer and Spencer (1993) in an investigation conducted in Ecuador, Africa and Asia, in which the different local entrepreneurs had common competencies that allowed them to better implement their work as a company creator or market maker, depending on their business values and their own elementary model. This generic model of competence for entrepreneurs includes the following competences: initiative, logic and problem-solving, personal maturity, influence, direction and control, orientation of others, and other competencies that are specific to Africa. People's development should thus be oriented to these behaviors for there to be a greater probability of success in the creation of companies.
As one of the conclusions of the study, people who have more developed competencies have a greater success factor. Also, entrepreneurs have a greater inclination towards thinking and solving problems, personal maturity, influence, and direction and control. The third conclusion is that history and demographic data do not distinguish the average or superior performance of entrepreneurs, that is, all people, regardless of their demographic position, have equal opportunities to create a business (Prahalad, 2005). The last conclusion points to the consistency of the characteristics, where the competencies found are essentially the same in all the countries in which the study was conducted.

The business strategy of the entrepreneur
When addressing strategy as an entrepreneurial factor, organizational strategy is relevant: it is understood as the framework that guides a company's work; an integral system that deals with the deployment of competitive priorities to ensure the generation of a product or service that meets consumers' expectations; a factor that must be present in the crystallization of the entrepreneur's idea.
Considering the field of knowledge for organizational strategy, it is quite prolific, and its route goes from classic authors to contemporary ones. For example, Mintzberg (1997) defines strategy through several meanings as a plan, a guideline for action, a model, a position, and a perspective. Situation that must be in the entrepreneurship plan. Porter, cited in Mintzberg (1997), states that every industry has economic characteristics that give rise to competitive forces, trends that must be identified at the beginning of the venture. David (1997) states that strategic planning is the art and science of formulating, implementing, and evaluating interfunctional decisions that allow the organization to achieve its objectives. Ogliastri (2000) states that, in management, it has been understood as the configuration of long-term objectives, the criteria for guiding fundamental decisions, and the set of policies to carry out the necessary activities.
When entrepreneurs start the business creation process, the first thing they analyze is the best structure for the company and, in turn, the allocation of resources in search of profit maximization (Fierro, 1994). Chandler (1962) defines strategy as the element that determines a company's basic goals in the long term, as well as the adoption of courses of action and the allocation of the necessary resources to achieve those goals.
The strategist (or entrepreneur in this case) who wishes to position the company with the purpose of influencing the environment in favor of the organization must know the sensitivity of the environment and its trends, i.e., the competitive priorities considered as critical factors of organizational success, for the differentiation of the company and product, and entrepreneurship is more likely to succeed.

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/ 2021 Volume 8 Number 4 (June) http://doi.org/10. 9770/jesi.2021.8.4(13) 243 The internalization of the entrepreneurial structure that entrepreneurs and their teams have is a product of the environment where they have created their way of thinking, that is, the explicit and implicit strategy that every competing company in an industry has, as mentioned by Porter (2007).
As the company grows, it is important that entrepreneurs start assigning responsibilities and strategic business guidance. Johnson and Scholes (1997) affirms there are strategies at the different levels of an organization: Corporate level refers to its global or structural scope, or the way in which resources are allocated to the different operations. A second level is limited to the competitive or business strategy and refers to how to compete in the market, that is, what products or services should be developed and for what markets. The third strategic level is in the operating system of the organization and is where the operational strategies of marketing, finance, operations, among others, are proposed.

The individual within the organization
Entrepreneurship can be developed individually or organizationally (Farrukh, Ying and Mansori, 2016). Entrepreneurship within the organization is called "intrapreneur" (Pinchot, 1985) and includes all those actions of innovation and creativity that are carried out within the organizational environment. Pinchot (1985), cited by Koontz, Weihrich and Cannice (2012), establishes the difference between intrapreneurs and entrepreneurs. While an intrapreneur operates within the organizational environment, focuses on innovation and creativity, and transforms a dream or an idea into a profitable project -sometimes considered a corporate project-, entrepreneurs act outside the organizational scope. The latter can see an opportunity, obtain capital, labor and other necessary supplies, and combine them in a successful operation, and are also willing to take the personal risk of success and failure (Koontz, et al. 2012).
Addressing the specific field of intrapreneurship, Schmelter et al. (2010) found empirical evidence on the strong impact that personnel selection, development and training, and the rewards have on corporate entrepreneurship practices. Wyk and Adonis (2012), citing Barrett, Balloun and Weinstein (2012), state that organizations should proactively identify and strategically align internal factors that could increase corporate entrepreneurship performance and sustain competitive advantage (Kuratko, 2009).
A successful intrapreneurship process calls for the simultaneous attention of innovation and exploitation (Hayton and Kelley, 2006;Zahra, 1996;) and therefore involves a collection of activities and processes. Likewise, corporate entrepreneurship requires the acquisition and development of new resources and new ways to reconfigure those resources, allowing the company to seek new business opportunities (Zahra, Nielsen & Bogner, 1999). Companies can participate in internal innovation in order to introduce new products or services or enter new markets. Ferdousi (2012) warns that interfunctional corporate entrepreneurship teams can be used in an organization as an effective tool and their success will depend on the degree of dependence on tasks, openness, and communication between team members. The author also points out, citing Franco (1989), that intense competition in domestic and international markets requires corporations to introduce new and frequent market innovations. Thus, innovation and product development online, with technological changes and market conditions, are essential for organizations ' survival, diversification, success, andrenewal (Brown andEisenhardt, 1995, cited by Ferdousi, 2012). To win the competitive race, corporations see the opportunities to be seized in corporate entrepreneurship or intrapreneurship practices. According to Ferdousi (2012), corporate entrepreneurship practices essentially help corporations quickly identify opportunities in the market and conceptualize ideas in order to develop products and strategies to support long-term business goals and organizational agility; and corporate entrepreneurship is a different form of the traditional approach to corporate management.

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/ 2021 Volume 8 Number 4 (June) http://doi.org/10. 9770/jesi.2021.8.4(13) Intrapreneurship has a wide scope that can be approached from different perspectives. Thus, you can start from a current company or product to get a new one; make use of the organization's research and development assets and advantages to achieve innovation in new products, services, technologies or processes; the identification of new opportunities to improve the competitive advantage of the company, among others (Alam et al., 2020) According to Kantis and Drucaroff (2009), corporate entrepreneurship is not only limited to internal ventures or corporate venture capital, but also includes organizational renewal and intrapreneurship, instilling a business perspective in employees, particularly behavior aligned with speed and flexibility in actions. Kantis and Drucaroff (2009) emphasize that both individual and corporate entrepreneurship create something new.
Some of the components cited by the authors are the unequal contribution between the different hierarchical levels and new projects, the fact that initiatives usually originate in senior management, the attitude of management in the face of the failure of new projects, internal communication deficiencies, centralization and rigid norms, the fact that superiors seem to not respect the authorship of the initiatives, that the levels of autonomy are very different, the lack of managers' time to identify projects and dedicate themselves to them, the lack of resources and, finally, a broad conferred valuation space for initiatives used by superiors.

The entrepreneur's development and education
For the entrepreneur, training is understood as the structure or improvement of the being. In the words of Vargas (2007), training requires not only the recognition of the anonymous constitutive character of the subject but its culture, but also understanding the foundational structures of the interaction of the world and life, and such transit considers both the formation of singular persons and the foundation of personalities of a higher order -family, community, neighborhood, city, nation, state, community of nations. Realities and experiences allow individuals to strengthen their values to increase the probability of choosing the path of entrepreneurship.
Furthermore, there are other actors in the same scenario. Paraphrasing Orrego (2009), entrepreneurship is explained not only from the self-knowledge, self-assessment and self-determination of entrepreneurial subjects, but the role played by entities or personalities of a higher order that intervenes in the social world, such as the State, organization, family and communities, among others, and the understanding of the interaction generated by entrepreneurship as a possibility of realization of the subject in life with others. This indicates that being an entrepreneur is not spontaneous, but it is an integral process of the human being that is strengthened and linked to its context, to the formation of the individual within it and to the opportunities it offers.
The concern to achieve an entrepreneurial education tends to be increasingly integrated into the government's agenda and includes actions ranging from elementary school to university. In this regard, Dether (2001) considers that people are born entrepreneurs, but education can facilitate the process of materializing good ideas in all fields of our intellectual and professional activities, while it makes us improve our attitudes and aptitudes for new ventures according to their context. Thus, Campos and Méndez (2013) and Saldarriaga and Guzmán (2018) share the idea that education for entrepreneurship must be approached from the didactics of problem-based learning that allows, especially young people to recognize their rights and duties, resolve and address problems in a creative framework as inherent aspects of their entrepreneurial training, linked to regional development in economic, social and environmental terms. Gibb (2005) states that business education must be integral and not fragmented; it must analyze the various elements of business activity in an integral, pragmatic and rational manner, looking at the synergies that may exist, given by the interaction of individual experiences that are marked by people's own reality.

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/ 2021 Volume 8 Number 4 (June) http://doi.org/10. 9770/jesi.2021.8.4(13) Different studies have shown that education can stimulate the development of entrepreneurial behavior in different ways, especially business education has been linked to the emergence of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship (Breznitz and Zhang, 2021). On the one hand, education for self-employment can increase knowledge about business creation and management, and promote personal characteristics associated with entrepreneurs such as achievement motivation, internal locus of control or self-efficacy (Bonnett and Furnham, 1991;Gorman et al., 1997;Hansemark, 1998;Krueger and Dickson, 1994;Rasheed, 2003), however, this would mean the change in the academic framework of an entire country for the teaching of learning. Varela and Bedoya (2006) suggest that entrepreneurial training is a process in which countless social, cultural, psychological and economic variables are involved which contribute, with a set of specific knowledge, to develop a series of skills whose purpose is to make entrepreneurs have a high probability of becoming successful, and the capacity of generating wealth and social development throughout their life. The most important issue is to change and to strengthen the teaching model of entrepreneurship.
As evidenced with these authors, none shows the context for entrepreneurs' development, nor is it influential. The main issue is to understand the effects of these variables on the reality of each country and each sector where entrepreneurship activities are to be encouraged. In this way, business plans can be developed under a coherent framework and it will thus be feasible to propose government actions to support entrepreneurs (Duarte, 2007).
To conclude, education is the main source of entrepreneurial development in a country, while entrepreneurship is an engine of economic development and productivity of the regions (Brandstätter, 2011;Mwobobia, 2012); However, there are external variables that have a positive or negative impact on the process, for this reason it is important to contextualize the education of the entrepreneur according to the different regions.

Conclusions
Reality generates culture, culture generates environment, the environment generates ways of thinking that are activated in individuals' personality, which generates entrepreneurial features demonstrated in their behavior, developing skills that facilitate the path of entrepreneurship. Thus, there must be a change in education: it needs to be renewed based on each territory's needs, which vary according to the region. The entrepreneurial process must be strengthened in local areas, such as Latin American areas which are have disadvantages, oriented towards entrepreneurial development programs which must include components of entrepreneurship development. Also, more favorable environment conditions must be generated for the growth of new companies because the Latin American dynamic enterprises are the ones that face the most unfavorable conditions.
Adopting a systemic approach based on effort complementation is also necessary. The weaknesses identified in the Latin American entrepreneurial context justify the importance of assuming a strategy based on an integral and systemic vision, as it is fundamental to have an adequate evaluation of the functioning of the different factors that affect the entrepreneurial development system in each area.
In summary, the present study provided elements of judgment to broaden the horizon of understanding of the entrepreneurial phenomenon from the analysis of the two proposed dimensions (environment and individual), especially when there is a wide range of studies that address the phenomenon in a fragmentary and isolated, which denatures it and oversimplifies it.
Finally, some drawbacks of the study are related to the research method itself, so in phenomenology the weight assigned by the subject to the actions or factors within the phenomenon cannot be determined, so this remains, in part, to the interpretation and perceptions of the investigator. Consequently, some of the elements that will be analyzed here are considerations that the authors assumed as relevant from the review of documentary sources,