This systematic literature review examines data saturation in qualitative research within the context of entrepreneurship studies from 2004 to 2024. Data saturation, a critical concept in ensuring the rigor of qualitative research, remains inadequately defined in terms of sample size and assessment criteria across various studies. This review synthesizes 11 empirical studies, focusing on strategies such as stopping criterion, code frequency counts, and comparative methods for determining saturation. It identifies sample sizes ranging from 7 to 39 interviews, with an average saturation occurring between 10 and 12 interviews. Furthermore, the study explores the influence of different sampling methods and homogeneity of study populations on saturation outcomes. Despite the reliability of existing methods, the findings underscore the need for greater transparency and consistency in reporting saturation criteria. The review offers valuable insights for entrepreneurial researchers aiming to design qualitative studies, emphasizing the importance of tailored saturation standards based on research objectives and methodologies. This research contributes to a clearer understanding of data saturation in entrepreneurial studies and highlights the necessity for further empirical investigation into saturation across diverse qualitative methods.

1. Ashworth, C. J. (2012). Marketing and organisational development in e-SMEs: understanding survival and sustainability in growth-oriented and comfort-zone pure-play enterprises in the fashion retail industry. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 8(2), 165–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-011-0171-6
2. Bathaei, A., & Štreimikienė, D. (2023). Renewable Energy and Sustainable Agriculture: Review of Indicators. Sustainability, 15(19), 14307. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151914307
3. Booth, A., Sutton, An., & Papaioannou, D. (2016). Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review. In Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association / Journal de l’Association des bibliothèques de la santé du Canada (Second Edi, Vol. 34). SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/systematic-approaches-to-a-successful-literature-review/book270933
4. Calheiros-Lobo, N., Palma-Moreira, A., Au-Yong-Oliveira, M., & Ferreira, J. V. (2024). Internationalization of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Best Practices and the Emerging Concept of Foreign Champion, an Empirical Investigation. Administrative Sciences, 14(8), 159. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14080159
5. Carlsen, B., & Glenton, C. (2011). What about N? A methodological study of sample-size reporting in focus group studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-26
6. Che Nawi, N. R., Arshad, M. M., Krauss, S. E., & Ismail, I. A. (2022). Challenges faced by youth social entrepreneurs in Malaysia: career transition to become a social entrepreneur. European Journal of Training and Development, 46(3/4), 317–336. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-02-2020-0021
7. Cresswell, A. M., Pardo, T. A., & Canestraro, D. S. (2006). Digital capability assessment for eGovernment: A multi-dimensional approach. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 4084 LNCS, 293–304. https://doi.org/10.1007/11823100_26
8. Echchakoui, S. (2020). Why and how to merge Scopus and Web of Science during bibliometric analysis: the case of sales force literature from 1912 to 2019. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 8(3), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-020-00081-9
9. Fallah, M. R., & Soori, M. (2023). Presenting a framework for the successful entry of women entrepreneurs into green entrepreneurship. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 14(3), 467–486. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-03-2021-0041
10. Francis, J. J., Johnston, M., Robertson, C., Glidewell, L., Entwistle, V., Eccles, M. P., & Grimshaw, J. M. (2010). What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies. Psychology & Health, 25(10), 1229–1245. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440903194015
11. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine Transaction.
12. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How Many Interviews Are Enough? Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
13. Hennink, M. M., Kaiser, B. N., & Marconi, V. C. (2017). Code Saturation Versus Meaning Saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 27(4), 591–608. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316665344
14. Hennink, M., & Kaiser, B. N. (2022). Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests. Social Science & Medicine, 292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523
15. Howard, S., Alston, S., Brown, M., & Bost, A. (2023). Literature Review on Regulatory Frameworks for Addressing Discrimination in Clinical Supervision. Research on Social Work Practice, 33(1), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315221121827
16. Irani, S., Modarresi, M., & Moghaddam, A. (2024). Unveiling the Drive to Create: Exploring the Motivation of Lifestyle Entrepreneurs in Iran. Interdisciplinary Journal of Management Studies, 17(2), 669–684. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijms.2023.350858.675491
17. Jackson, M., Harrison, P., Swinburn, B., & Lawrence, M. (2015). Using a Qualitative Vignette to Explore a Complex Public Health Issue. Qualitative Health Research, 25(10), 1395–1409. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315570119
18. Jekanyika Matanda, M. (2012). Internationalization of established small manufacturers in a developing economy: A case study of Kenyan SMEs. Thunderbird International Business Review, 54(4), 509–519. https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.21480
19. Kerr, C., Nixon, A., & Wild, D. (2010). Assessing and demonstrating data saturation in qualitative inquiry supporting patient-reported outcomes research. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 10(3), 269–281. https://doi.org/10.1586/erp.10.30
20. Mariani, M. M., Al-Sultan, K., & De Massis, A. (2023). Corporate social responsibility in family firms: A systematic literature review. Journal of Small Business Management, 61(3), 1192–1246. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.1955122
21. Marshall, B., Cardon, P., Poddar, A., & Fontenot, R. (2013). Does Sample Size Matter in Qualitative Research? A Review of Qualitative Interviews in is Research. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 54(1), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2013.11645667
22. Molly, V., Arijs, D., & Lambrecht, J. (2018). Building and maintaining the family business-private equity relationship. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 25(1), 41–63. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-02-2017-0051
23. Morse, J. M. (2015). “Data Were Saturated.” Qualitative Health Research, 25(5), 587–588. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315576699
24. Movahedi, R., & Farani, A. Y. (2012). Analysis of the barriers and limitations for the development of rural women’s entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 15(4), 469. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2012.046476
25. Orobia, L. A., Byabashaija, W., Munene, J. C., Sejjaaka, S. K., & Musinguzi, D. (2013). How do small business owners manage working capital in an emerging economy? Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 10(2), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRAM-02-2012-0008
26. Pan, J., & Lin, J. (2019). CONSTRUCTION OF NETWORK ENTREPRENEURIAL PLATFORM LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS MODEL: BASED ON THE GROUNDED THEORY. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 20(5), 958–978. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2019.10618
27. Samer Ali, A.-S., & Rashid, A. A. (2024). The influencing factors of personality that affect entrepreneurship development among people with disabilities. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 18(3), 576–600. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-09-2022-0138
28. Sandelowski, M. (1995). Sample size in qualitative research. Research in Nursing & Health, 18(2), 179–183. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.4770180211
29. Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., & Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & Quantity, 52(4), 1893–1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8
30. Siksnelyte-Butkiene, I., Streimikiene, D., Balezentis, T., & Skulskis, V. (2021). A Systematic Literature Review of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods for Sustainable Selection of Insulation Materials in Buildings. Sustainability, 13(2), 737. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020737
31. Siksnelyte-Butkiene, I., Streimikiene, D., Lekavicius, V., & Balezentis, T. (2021). Energy poverty indicators: A systematic literature review and comprehensive analysis of integrity. Sustainable Cities and Society, 67, 102756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.102756
32. Sim, J., Saunders, B., Waterfield, J., & Kingstone, T. (2018). Can sample size in qualitative research be determined a priori? International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(5), 619–634. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1454643
33. Suddaby, R. (2006). From the Editors: What Grounded Theory is Not. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 633–642. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.22083020
34. Trotter, R. T. (2012). Qualitative research sample design and sample size: Resolving and unresolved issues and inferential imperatives. Preventive Medicine, 55(5), 398–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.07.003
35. van Rijnsoever, F. J. (2017). (I Can’t Get No) Saturation: A simulation and guidelines for sample sizes in qualitative research. PLOS ONE, 12(7), e0181689. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181689
36. Vasileiou, K., Barnett, J., Thorpe, S., & Young, T. (2018). Characterising and justifying sample size sufficiency in interview-based studies: systematic analysis of qualitative health research over a 15-year period. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 148. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0594-7
37. Vera-Baceta, M.-A., Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2019). Web of Science and Scopus language coverage. Scientometrics, 121(3), 1803–1813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03264-z
38. Ying, L., Fitzpatrick, J. M., Philippou, J., Huang, W., & Rafferty, A. M. (2021). The organisational context of nursing practice in hospitals in China and its relationship with quality of care, and patient and nurse outcomes: A mixed‐methods review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 30(1–2), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15486
39. Yonge, O., & Stewin, L. (1988). Reliability and validity: misnomers for qualitative research. In The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres (Vol. 20, Issue 2, pp. 61–67).