phd analysis

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

Taylor and Francis Online homepage

Cogent Business & Management

Open access

Entrepreneurial intentions among MBA students

1. Introduction

2. literature review and hypothesis development, 3. research methodology, 5. discussion, 6. implications for theory and practice, 7. conclusion, 8. limitations and future research, additional information.

Abstract Formulae display: ? Mathematical formulae have been encoded as MathML and are displayed in this HTML version using MathJax in order to improve their display. Uncheck the box to turn MathJax off. This feature requires Javascript. Click on a formula to zoom.

Increasing entrepreneurial activities in a country start with an intention that leads to increased innovative activities, wealth creation, industrialization, employment generation, economic growth, and development. This paper examines the effect of attitude towards entrepreneurship, subjective norm, locus of control, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and environmental support on entrepreneurial intention of 159 MBA students from two private universities in Ghana. The study uses structural equation modelling (SEM) to analyze the data obtained from the participants. The results show that all the factors but entrepreneurial self-efficacy significantly affects students’ entrepreneurial intentions. The study proffers policy-makers with the opportunity to nurture entrepreneurship in students as a foundation for transforming the intent into practice to address the huge employment gaps in emerging economies.

Intensifying entrepreneurial activities in a country has the possibility of contributing to innovative activities, creating wealth, increasing competition, industrialization, employment generation, and economic growth (Paul & Shrivastava, Citation 2015 ). For developing and emerging economies, entrepreneurial activities could alleviate unemployment especially the case of graduates. Youth unemployment is high in Ghana and quite pronounced among graduates. For example, the rate of graduate unemployment in Ghana rose from 14.7% in 1987 to 40% in 2011 (Baah-Boateng, Citation 2015 ; Zakaria et al., Citation 2014 ). The unemployment scenario is primarily due to lack of skills and entrepreneurial consciousness among the youth. Another reason for the high graduate unemployment situations is the heavy reliance on the government for employment into the public sector. In the words of Johnmark et al. ( Citation 2016 , p. 2), “today’s realities indicate that there is no government of any country that can absolutely provide jobs to absorb all graduates from her tertiary institutions. This means that there is the need for a change in the mindset of graduates from the look for a job syndrome to create a job mentality in order to actualize their educational aspirations”.

In spite of extant research in the area of entrepreneurial intention, data from emerging economies is still insufficient. The majority of research on entrepreneurship has focused on developed countries (Nabi & Linan, Citation 2011 ). For example, studies on entrepreneurial intention focus on developed countries such as Spain (Camelo-Ordaz, Diánez-González, & Ruiz-Navarro, Citation 2016 ; Espiritu-Olmos & Sastre-Castillo, Citation 2015 ), Poland (Nowinski & Haddoub, Citation 2019 ), USA (Hsu et al., Citation 2017 ). Thus, research using data from emerging economies is lacking. What widens this research gap is the over-concentration on public universities to the neglect of private universities whose existence has bridged the access gap to university education tremendously. We address this context gap by focusing this study on two private universities in Ghana. The objective is to determine which factors influence the entrepreneurial intentions of MBA graduates. According to Abiodun and Oyejoke ( Citation 2017 ) intention is seen as the best predictor of entrepreneurial behaviour and intentionality is grounded on cognitive psychology that attempts to explain or predict human behaviour. The main assumption guiding this paper is that we believe the university environment is a fertile ground for breeding future and sustainable entrepreneurial activities needed for economic growth and national development. Hence, there is the need to identify, stimulate, and sustain student entrepreneurial intentions because entrepreneurs are not only born, but are also made.

Motivations for this study stem from prior research that qualifications acquired in postgraduate education influence entrepreneurial prospects through the acquisition of employment-related skills (Greene & Saridakis, Citation 2008 ). According to Prodan and Drnovsek ( Citation 2010 ) entrepreneurial intention is essential for entrepreneurial behaviour in academia. Some private universities including those from emerging economies (such as Ghana) have taken up the challenge by offering business programmes. In Ghana, as at the year 2018, there were 81 private universities (Ofori-Atta, Citation 2019 ). Private universities in Ghana were established among other things, to augment the enrollment deficit in the public universities.

This study purposively selects two private universities to investigate the entrepreneurial intention among the MBA students. In a modified model, we complement the theory of planned behaviour with locus of control and environmental support as framework for the study after consulting extant literature (Oguntimehin and Olaniran, Citation 2017 ; Esfandiar et al., Citation 2019 ; Maes et al., Citation 2014 ; Newman et al., Citation 2019 ; Nowinski & Haddoub, Citation 2019 ; Puni et al., Citation 2018 ; Salami, Citation 2019 ). We follow the recommendations of researchers in the field of psychology (Read et al. Citation 2013 ; Yazdanpanah & Farouzani, Citation 2015 ) who propose the inclusion of supplementary constructs to advance the predictive power of the TPB models. The reasoning for the adoption of the Theory of Planned Behaviour is based on its ability to explain human attitude towards a behaviour. Besides, entrepreneurship is a planned behaviour and cannot be created without sufficient planning (Jena, Citation 2020 ). According to Ajzen ( Citation 1991 ) the intentions to perform behaviours of different kinds can be predicted with high accuracy from attitudes toward the behaviour, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control (entrepreneurial self-efficacy). Some researchers, in predicting entrepreneurial intentions have replaced perceived behavioural control with entrepreneurial self-efficacy (Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ; Miao et al., Citation 2016 ; Moriano et al., Citation 2012 ). Our study, therefore, focuses on entrepreneurial self-efficacy instead of perceived behavioural control. Two other variables (Environmental Support and LOC) that influence entrepreneurial intentions were incorporated in the model. Locus of Control illustrates a closer effect on people’s intention to act (Esfandiar et al., Citation 2019 ; Espiritu-Olmos & Sastre-Castillo, Citation 2015 ). According to Obschonka et al. ( Citation 2018 ) environmental support profoundly influences entrepreneurial intention.

From a structural equation modelling (SEM) approach, the paper reports that, locus of control, attitude towards entrepreneurship, environmental support and subjective norm significantly affect student entrepreneurial mentality. By way of contribution, the study provides a framework for addressing graduate unemployment through detection of students with an entrepreneurial mentality. According to Obschonka et al. ( Citation 2012 ) entrepreneurship seems to be the way of coping with massive unemployment and its attendant social vices among the youth. The study reinforces the Ghana government’s efforts to address youth unemployment through various entrepreneurial-based flagship policies. Some of these interventions and institutions include Ghana Youth Employment Development (GYEEDA), National Youth Employment Programmme (NYEP), Youth Employment Agency (YEA), Youth Entrepreneurship Support (YES), National Entrepreneurship and Innovation Programme (NEIP). At the core of these programs is to nurture the entrepreneurial skills of the young Ghanaian by providing seed money and technical support to start new ventures.

The forgoing deliberations buttress the need to study the entrepreneurial intentions among MBA students among private university students. But unfortunately, no such rigorous study has been carried out among private university students to measure their entrepreneurial intentions. We believe this study may bridge the gaps in the literature and practice.

The organization of this article is as follows. The next section covers literature review and hypothesis development, a theoretical model to depict the various variables influencing entrepreneurial intention. The next section entails literature review and hypothesis development, research methodology, followed by results and discussion and lastly we draw the main conclusions and outline the implications and limitations of our research.

Many authors (e.g., Autio et al., Citation 2001 ; Buli & Yesuf, Citation 2015 ; Carayannis et al., Citation 2003 ; Esfandiar et al., Citation 2019 ; Hisrich & Peters, Citation 2002 ; Kickul & Gundry, Citation 2002 ; Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ; Maes et al., Citation 2014 ; Nowinski & Haddoub, Citation 2019 ; Salami, Citation 2019 ) have examined factors influencing entrepreneurial intentions. Against this backdrop, we have reviewed literature on some of the popular entrepreneurial intentions, using the Theory of Planned Behaviour as the base, to study as part of this paper.

2.1. Entrepreneurial intention

Ajzen ( Citation 2019 ) defines intention as “a person’s readiness to perform a given behavior”. Ajzen ( Citation 1991 ) posits that intention is the immediate determinant of behavior, professing that, “… the stronger the intention to engage in (planned) behavior, the more likely should be its performance” (p. 181). Bird ( Citation 1988 ) indicates that entrepreneurial intention is a state of an individual mind, which directs and guides them towards the development and the implementation of new business concept. Van Gelderen et al. ( Citation 2008 ) highlight entrepreneurial intention as the intentions of setting up one’s business in the future. Prior research has established that entrepreneurial intent is the primary predictor of future entrepreneurs (Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ). Krueger et al. ( Citation 2000 ) suggest that entrepreneurial activity can be predicted more accurately by studying intention rather than personality traits or situational factors. Among the intention-based theories like the Theory of Entrepreneurial Event, Institutional Economic Theory and Theory of Planned Behaviour, the latter has more analytical capability (Diaz-Casero et al., Citation 2012 ). The TPB is the most popular theory to explain the antecedent and consequences of entrepreneurial intention (Iakovlera, Kolvereid & Stephen, Citation 2011 ). Besides, intention-based models contend that entrepreneurial venture creation must be preceded by the development of intentions to establish a start-up and by appreciating intentions we may be in better position to predict venture creation.

Ajzen ( Citation 1991 ) proposes that the intentions to perform behaviours of different kinds can be predicted with high accuracy from Attitudes Toward the behaviour, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control (entrepreneurial self-efficacy). Some researchers, in predicting entrepreneurial intentions have replaced perceived behavioural control with entrepreneurial self-efficacy (Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ; Miao et al., Citation 2016 ; Moriano et al., Citation 2012 ). Our study, therefore, focuses on entrepreneurial self-efficacy instead of perceived behavioural control. Two other variables (Environmental Support and LOC) that influence entrepreneurial intentions were incorporated in the model (Esfandiar et al., Citation 2019 ; Obschonka et al., Citation 2018 ).

2.2. Attitude towards entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intention

Attitude Towards Entrepreneurship (ATE) refers to the degree to which one holds a positive or negative personal valuation about being an entrepreneur (Ajzen, Citation 2001 ; Autio et al., Citation 2013 ; Darren Lee-Ross, Citation 2017 ; Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ; Ozaralli & Rivenburgh, Citation 2016 ). Previous studies by Autio et al. ( Citation 2001 ) and Schwarz et al. ( Citation 2009 ) have revealed that ATE was a major determinant in entrepreneurial intentions among respondents. Moriano et al. ( Citation 2012 ) asserted that a positive attitude towards entrepreneurship was the strongest antecedent of entrepreneurial intentions. Thus, ATE is dominant in determining one’s success or failure to overcome challenges when faced with equivocal situations in life (Darren Lee-Ross, Citation 2017 ). Aragon-Sanchez et al. ( Citation 2017 ) argued that an individual with a more positive attitude towards a given situation (e.g., entrepreneurial intention) is more likely to succeed as a person. Luthje and Frank ( Citation 2003 ) observed that attitude toward entrepreneurship was the most important determinant of the intention to become self-employed and this attitude is influenced by the personality of the respondents. A number of authors (Aragon-Sanchez et al., Citation 2017 ; Fini et al., Citation 2012 ; Moriano et al., Citation 2012 ) have established that the relationship between attitude towards entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intentions is significant and the linkage has been proved in different circumstances. For instance, the small business founder’s attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour has been established to be the major factor of corporate entrepreneurial behaviour (Fini et al., Citation 2012 ). Armitage and Conner ( Citation 2001 ) maintained that there is a positive relationship between attitude towards entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intention. Ayalew and Zeleke ( Citation 2018 ), in studying the entrepreneurial intentions among engineering students in Ethiopia also found that ATE has a positive influence on students’ self-employment. However, Gultom et al. ( Citation 2020 ) established that attitude insignificantly influences intention among citizens of Indonesia, which was consistent with a paper by Zahid and Haji Din ( Citation 2019 ).

H 1 : Attitude Towards Entrepreneurship (ATE) has significant positive influence on entrepreneurial intentions.

2.3. Subjective norm (SN) and entrepreneurial intention

Subjective Norm (SN) is the perceived social pressure to perform or not to perform an entrepreneurial behaviour (Ajzen, Citation 2001 ). Aragon-Sanchez et al. ( Citation 2017 ) define SN as how an individual would behave in a particular setting. Entrepreneurship is associated with numerous changes and risks which may not be easily welcomed in an individual’s lifestyle. This type of pressure could emanate from family members or the generality of society which forces an individual to do or not execute specific tasks. Hussain ( Citation 2018 ) professed that a person would not desire to deviate from the norm and value held by close family members and even friends with whom one interacts on a regularly basis. The subjective norm has been perceived as traditionally weak, with respect to its role in the pattern of relationships in the TPB model, though this alleged weakness is not so clear. Nevertheless, some studies have simply omitted SN (Peterman & Kennedy, Citation 2003 ; Veciana et al., Citation 2005 ), while others found it to be non-significant (Autio et al., Citation 2001 ; Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ). Wijerathna ( Citation 2015 ) showed that subjective norms and attitudes are the greatest factors that influence entrepreneurial intentions among agricultural students in Sri Lanka. However, Kankam and Abukari ( Citation 2020 ) in their research in the eastern region of Ghana noted that attitude and subjective norms seem better predictors of intention than PBC. Linan and Chen ( Citation 2009 ) report that, in the specific area of entrepreneurship research, only 7 out of the 16 studies previously reported included SNs in the analysis but two of them did not perform any regression analysis. Of the remaining five studies, three found SN to significantly explain EI (Kolvereid, Citation 1996 b; Kolvereid & Isaksen, Citation 2006 ; Tkachev & Kolvereid, Citation 1999 ), whereas the other two found SN to be nonsignificant (Autio et al., Citation 2001 ; Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ). Therefore, although there is support for the idea that a direct SN–EI relationship might be established, some controversy remains. Kuada ( Citation 2015 ) professed that certain cultural traits have the tendency of influencing entrepreneurial intentions. Ghana is a highly collectivist country (Hofstede, Citation 2012 ) and Gelaidan and Abdullateef ( Citation 2017 ) suggest that relation support (e.g. emotional support or access to start-up capital from family and friends) is a fundamental ingredient in nurturing entrepreneurial intentions in people. However, in highly collectivist cultures, people’s inclination to become entrepreneurs is less (Autio et al., Citation 2013 ; Takyi-Asiedu, Citation 1993 ). Despite this assertion, collectivist values are necessary in nurturing entrepreneurship through the utilization of the requisite business resources (Lechler, Citation 2001 ; Tiessen, Citation 1997 ), the promotion of consumers’ acceptance of entrepreneurs’ innovations (Rauch et al. ( Citation 2013 ). For instance, support from family and friends would boost people’s confidence in the engagement of entrepreneurial activities, but its absence would serve as a disincentive. Gelaidan and Abdullateef ( Citation 2017 ) in examining the entrepreneurial intentions in Malaysia argue that role models, family members and friends can provide economic and emotional support to the prospective entrepreneur. Gultom et al. ( Citation 2020 ) in a study in Indonesia found that subjective norms have significant and positive influence on intention.

H 2 . Subjective norm significantly and positively influences entrepreneurial intention.

2.4. Locus of control and entrepreneurial intentions

H 3 : Internal Locus of control is positively associated with entrepreneurial intentions

2.5. Entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE) and entrepreneurial intention

Self-efficacy is “an individual’s belief in one’s capacity to organize and execute courses of action required to produce given attainments” (Bandura, Citation 1997 , p. 3). Chen et al. ( Citation 1998 ) define entrepreneurial self-efficacy as the strength of an individual’s belief that he or she is capable of successfully performing the various roles and tasks of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial self-efficacy “measures a person’s belief in their ability to successfully launch an entrepreneurial venture” (McGee et al., Citation 2009 , p. 965) and calls for success in activities like innovation, marketing, management and finance which are relevant to the creation of an entrepreneurial venture (Chen et al., Citation 1998 ; Hsu et al., Citation 2017 ). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy is an important antecedent of entrepreneurial intention (Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ; Newman, Obschonka, Schwarz, Cohen & Nielsen, Citation 2019 ; Salami, Citation 2019 ). Newman et al. ( Citation 2019 ) argued that there is a significant positive relationship between ESE and entrepreneurial intentions of students and working people alike.

Subsequent to the emergence of Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behaviour, a crucial line of research emerged to assess the link between ESE and entrepreneurial intention (Engle et al., Citation 2010 ; Hsu et al., Citation 2019 ; Kickul et al., Citation 2009 ). This is probably due to the fact that empirical studies shown a significant positive relationship between ESE and Entrepreneurial Intentions (Barbosa et al., Citation 2007 ; Chen et al., Citation 1998 ). Prodan and Drnovsek ( Citation 2010 ) emphasized that self-efficacy is the most significant variable in the explanation of academics’ entrepreneurial intentions as compared with other predictors. In conceptual terms, there is no difference between perceived behavioural control and self-efficacy (Ajzen, Citation 2019 ). Authors like Ajzen ( Citation 1991 ), Schwarz et al. ( Citation 2009 ), and Trivedi ( Citation 2016 ) perceive that PBC and Entrepreneurial Self-efficacy constructs as interchangeable. But, Terry ( Citation 1993 ) has proposed that ESE and PBC are not entirely synonymous. For instance, Bandura ( Citation 1992 ) has argued that PBC and ESE are quite dissimilar concepts. That is Self-efficacy is more concerned with cognitive perceptions of control based on internal control factors whereas PBC is more generally an external factor. Bandura ( Citation 1997 ) sees Self-efficacy as close to the “perceived behavioral control” in Ajzen’s model. Perceived Behavioural Control bears a resemblance to the Theory of Perceived Self-Efficacy (Moriano et al., Citation 2012 ) and for this study, PBC is substituted with ESE. This is not uncommon since some researchers (Hockerts, Citation 2017 ; Tran & Von Korflesch, Citation 2016 ) have applied one or more of the exogenous constructs in the TPB-based model. Armitage and Conner ( Citation 2001 ) see Self-efficacy as a stronger predictor of entrepreneurial intentions. There is overwhelming empirical evidence to support a positive relationship between ESE and Entrepreneurial Intentions (Aragon-Sanchez et al., Citation 2017 ; Chen et al., Citation 1998 ; Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ; Luthje & Frank, Citation 2003 ). Some researchers (Krueger & Brazeal, Citation 1994 ; Luthje & Frank, Citation 2003 ; Pittaway et al., Citation 2010 ) have opined that, the greatest the belief that the individual has in their abilities, the greater the entrepreneurial intention. Gielnik, Bledow and Stark ( Citation 2019 )’s paper on Tanzanian and Rwandan students showed that variability and the average in entrepreneurial self-efficacy participants displayed during an entrepreneurial training were positively related to business ownership in the succeeding year. In line with the preposition that self-efficacy helps people to generate the motivation to enhance their intentions, entrepreneurial research has found that nascent entrepreneurs are more likely to start and successfully manage a business when their entrepreneurial self-efficacy is high.

H 4 : Entrepreneurial Self-efficacy is positively related to entrepreneurial intention

2.6. Entrepreneurial intention and Environment Support

The Eurobarometer Survey on Entrepreneurship reports that a lack of business experience, the challenge of raising start-up capital, red tape, the poor economic environment and an innate fear of failure were to be blamed for inhibiting more of Europe’s potential entrepreneurs from venturing into entrepreneurship. Stephen et al. ( Citation 2005 ) point out government support measures and processes as fundamental in the decision to start a firm. According to Van de Ven ( Citation 1993 ), entrepreneurial research without reference to the environment should be considered as insufficient and incomplete. Environmental forces can be a major inhibitor to the creation of an entrepreneurial venture. Prior studies have revealed that significant environmental antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions include access to capital (Luthje & Frank, Citation 2003 ; Ozen Kutanis et al., Citation 2006 ; Schwarz et al., Citation 2009 ), knowledge of potential business sector (Kristiansen & Indarti, Citation 2004 ) and social networks (Sequeira et al., Citation 2007 ). Luthje and Frank ( Citation 2003 ) emphasized that a student might be prepared to establish a company, notwithstanding his relatively bad inclination towards entrepreneurship, because he perceives the founding conditions as very favourable. On the other hand, graduates with a positive attitude towards entrepreneurship may not decide to venture into their own business due to negative perception of critical factors in the environment. Thus, one of the fundamental challenges facing students with an entrepreneurial intention and activities is lack of enabling and supportive environment (Indarti, Rostiani & Nastiti, Citation 2010 ; F. Khan et al., Citation 2014 ). These scholars assert that the correlation between environment and entrepreneurial intention is worth researching into. Access to capital, as a variable of the environment, is undoubtedly one of the important determinants in establishing a new business (Kim et al., Citation 2006 ; Kristiansen & Indarti, Citation 2004 ). A considerable numbers of people have forsaken their nascent entrepreneurial careers because of an inability to access capital (Marsden, Citation 1992 ; Meier & Pilgrim, Citation 1994 ) and in Ghana the situation is even pathetic due to, among other causes the high-interest rates financial institutions charge for loan acquisition. Start-up capital can be procured from personal savings, family, friends, and bank loan or via partnership with an investor (Cetindamar et al., Citation 2012 ). Prior studies in some developing countries propose that the availability of institutional support enhances growth of entrepreneurial firms (Amankwah-Amoah & Debrah, Citation 2017 ; Donbesuur et al., Citation 2020 ; Nakku et al., Citation 2020 ). Urbano et al. ( Citation 2020 ) in a sample of 14 developing countries came out that access to bank credit has a positive effect on entrepreneurship in developing countries. However, Ge et al., Citation 2017 ) suggest that institutional support might not necessarily lead to successful entrepreneurial outcomes. Cetindamar et al. ( Citation 2012 ) have emphasized that regardless of gender, financial capital is a crucial force for any subsequent entrepreneurial activities. Indarti et al. ( Citation 2010 and Yar et al., Citation 2008 ) found in their study that environment is a significant factor in influencing entrepreneurial intentions.

From the abovementioned empirical discussion and evidence from prior studies of various researchers in entrepreneurial intention and environment support, the succeeding hypothesis is framed as follows:

H 5 : Environment support is positively related to entrepreneurial intention

The research design is exploratory research, where the researchers focused on investigating and examining factors influencing students’ entrepreneurial intention. We adopted a quantitative research approach to measure constructs, model the relationships between the variables. The data collection technique is the use of questionnaire. The respondents completed a set of seven items influencing entrepreneurial intentions. With the exception of the demographic characteristics, the entire responses format was a 5-point Likert-type scale. The items included entrepreneurial self-efficacy, perceived behavioural control, subjective norm, attitude towards entrepreneurship, locus of control, environmental support and risk-taking propensity. The seven items constituted the independent variables and the dependent variable was entrepreneurial intention. However, the principal component analysis reduced the independent variables items to five.

3.1. Measures

This research adopted items from previous TBP-based studies (e.g., Chen et al., Citation 1998 ; Greene & Rice, 2007; Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ) to measure the constructs due to their established construct reliability and validity, as well as their relevance to the purposes of this study. In exploratory studies, values ranging from 0.60 to 0.70 are considered acceptable (Hair et al., Citation 2017 ). But according to Feldt and Kim ( Citation 2008 ), a cut-off value of 0.70 is recommended. We followed Eddleston and Powell ( Citation 2012 ) and Powell and Eddleston ( Citation 2013 ) and performed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), which provides a more rigorous test of validity (Cheung & Lau, Citation 2008 )). The application of a multi-item scale is highly recommended over less reliable single-item measures (Armitage & Conner, Citation 2001 ); hence, the variables had more than one item. The instruments used for soliciting information from the participants are described in the following section.

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

Published online:

Table 1. exploratory factor analysis for factors influencing entrepreneurial intention.

Attitude towards Entrepreneurship was measured with an adapted questionnaire by Kolvereid ( Citation 1996 ). The Cronbach Alpha value for Attitude towards Entrepreneurship is 0.720 as depicted on Table 1 , compared to Kolvereid’s ( Citation 1996 ) values which ranged from 0.68 to 0.90, though he used a 7-point Likert-type scale.

Entrepreneurial Self-efficacy was measured with items from Wilson et al. ( Citation 2007 ). The respondents were asked to rate their capabilities against their peers (1 = much worse, 5 = much better) in regards to solving problems, managing money, being creative, getting people’s agreement, being a leader, and making decisions. Wilson et al. ( Citation 2007 ) reported a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.79. For this study, the scale yielded a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.785. It is relevant to state that Perceived Behavioural Control was removed from the model after the running of the Principal Component Analysis. Thus, PBC was dropped because of insignificant contribution to prediction of intentions and because of problems with estimation (low reliability). Other empirical studies have also been unable to test this variable (e.g., Kolvereid & Isaksen, Citation 2006 ; Lortie & Castogiovanni, Citation 2015 ; Simon & Kim, Citation 2017 ).

Locus of Control was measured with a ten-item developed by Mueller and Thomas ( Citation 2001 ) and some of the items were reverse-coded. A sample of the items are ‘when I get what I want, it is usually because I am lucky (Internal Locus of Control) and “success in business is mostly a matter of luck” (External Locus of Control). The Cronbach Alpha value for Locus of Control is 0.843 as depicted on Table 1 .

Subjective Norm was measured with previous research by Kolvereid ( Citation 1996 ), Krueger et al. ( Citation 2000 ), Obschonka et al. ( Citation 2015 ), and Miranda et al. ( Citation 2017 )’s Cronbach Alpha was 0.819. Autio et al. ( Citation 2001 ) reported a Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.70. The Cronbach Alpha value for Subjective Norm is 0.720 as depicted on Table 1 .

To measure Environmental Support, we adopted scales from Autio et al. ( Citation 1997 ) on a five-point Likert-scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). The Cronbach Alpha value for Environmental Support is 0.803 as depicted on Table 1 .

Entrepreneurial intentions served as the dependent variable and ATE, SN, ESE, LOC and ES were the independent variables. Prior studies by Zahid and Haji Din ( Citation 2019 ) and Dalle et al. ( Citation 2020 ) have reported and empirically investigated intentions as a dependent variable. Following prior studies (e.g., Oguntimehin & Olaniran, Citation 2017 ; Esfandiar et al., Citation 2019 ; Jena, Citation 2020 ; Maes et al., Citation 2014 ; Newman et al., Citation 2019 ; Nowinski & Haddoub, Citation 2019 ; Puni et al., Citation 2018 ; Salami, Citation 2019 ) we applied Likert-scale for the dependent and independent variables. Likert scale is used to measure psychological attitude, perception or opinion in a mathematical manner. This provides a more objective approach in measuring constructs, hence its choice in this research.

3.2. Sample and data collection

The population of this study was the students of Valley View University (the first private university in Ghana to charter, Techiman campus (VVU-TC) in the Brong Ahafo region of Ghana and Catholic University College of Ghana (CUCG), Sunyani in the Brong Ahafo region of Ghana. CUCG is affiliated to the Ghana’s premier university (University of Ghana). The population of VVU-TC MBA students was 126 whereas that of CUCG was 76 as at the period of data collection. The respondents were Master of Business Administration (MBA) students with specialization in Banking and Finance, Strategic Management, Human Resource Management and Accounting. According to Krueger et al. ( Citation 2000 ) and Shinnar et al. ( Citation 2012 ) a student sample (e.g., master level students) is appropriate to study entrepreneurial intentions since students face immediate career choices and selecting an entrepreneurial career path is a viable alternative. Besides, relying on a student sample provides variation in terms of entrepreneurial intentions and attitudes (Shinnar et al., Citation 2012 ). Thus, some students’ entrepreneurial propensity will be positive whereas others will be negative.

The sample size was 159 out of the total 202 MBA student population from the two universities representing about 79% response rate. The study adopts a simple random sampling technique thus giving every student an equal chance of being selected. Data for the present study were collected via a self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire was divided into eight sections. The first section (demographic variables) had eight questions, i.e., gender, age, level, marital status, employment status, sector, programme and educational background of respondent’ parents. The response rate was 96% because the respondents answered the questions there and then (in their various lecture halls). Before administering the questionnaire to the students, they were briefed on the survey’s objectives. To avoid bias in the responses, the students were assured of anonymity and confidentiality. Variables measured on a 1 to 5 scale with strongly disagree to strongly agree were used with respect to entrepreneurial intention.

Initially, seven thematic areas of entrepreneurial intention were developed in the questionnaire. In order to reduce these variables, we performed a principal component analysis to extract uncorrelated factors for further analysis (Cohen et al., Citation 2003 ) and to validate the scale after the data collection (Saunders et al., Citation 2009 ). However, before we performed the principal component analysis, we recoded some items (e.g., LOC) to obtain an empirical summary of the data set (Pallant, Citation 2010 ). The PCA reduced the seven thematic areas to five.

3.3. Method of data analysis

The data collected were analysed using SPSS and Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) AMOS 7.0. To test the hypotheses and the proposed conceptual model, we used structural equation modelling (SEM), a tool that provides the appropriate and most efficient estimation technique for a series of separate multiple regression equations estimated simultaneously (Hair et al. ( Citation 2014 )). These authors posit that SEM is an appropriate technique for our study because it enables the usage of multi-item latent variables for an independent or dependent variable. SEM also has superior advantage of addressing measurement errors prevalent in such studies. There was no attrition, no missing data in all the variables. There were no outliers.

3.3.1. Model specification

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

where Z i represents the dependent variable

X 1 … X n are sets of explanatory variables and

Where; EI s  = 1 if a student has entrepreneurial intention

ATE = Attitude towards Entrepreneurship

ESE = Entrepreneurial Self-efficacy

LOC = Locus of Control

SN = Subjective Norm

ES = Environmental Support

Due to the complex nature of the constructs, we used several questions in order to avoid the danger of not covering key concepts of the variables. We employed factor analysis to reduce the number of items into their uncorrelated structures.

The analysis of results covers a description of the demographic characteristics of respondents, factor analysis to reduce the number of constructs to their unobserved structures and analysis of the structural model showing which factors influence student entrepreneurial intention.

4.1. The current situation of MBA Student’s entrepreneurial intentions

This research used two items ( I love to create something different & I am determined to have my own business in the future ) to measure Entrepreneurial intentions. The respondents’ responses were divided into 5 grades (5 =strongly agree, 4 =agree, 3 =neither agree nor disagree, 2 =disagree, 1 =strongly disagree). On the item, I love to create something different , 47.8% and 40.3% went for Agree and Strongly Agree respectively. On the item, I am determined to have my own business in the future 32.1% and 61.0% chose Agree and Strongly Agree respectively. From these two items, we can say that the percentage of students with entrepreneurial intention is relatively high.

4.2. Demographic characteristics of respondents

The respondents were sampled from two private universities in the Brong Ahafo region of Ghana. Approximately 63% of the respondents were sampled from Valley View University-Techiman campus and the remaining 37% were from the Catholic University College of Ghana. Approximately 70% of the respondents were males and the remaining were females. This major disparity in gender at that level of education is not uncommon in Ghana. The highest age category was 30–39, representing 43% whilst the lowest stood at 3% for respondents who were 50 years and over. Approximately 65% of the respondents are married, whereas 35% were single. Approximately 90% of the respondents were Christians. This is understandable because in Ghana, Christianity is the dominant religion in Ghana. Ninety-four percent of the respondents are employed. This is justifiable because one of the entry requirements for most MBA programs in Ghana is work experience. That is, an applicant may be refused admission due to lack of work experience. Approximately 47% of the respondents were in Administration and Managerial positions and 60% were in the public sector. A significant percentage-33% of the respondents’ parents had no formal education.

4.3. Factor analysis

Following previous studies (Hoque & Awang, Citation 2016 ; Hoque et al., Citation 2017 ; Nguyen et al., Citation 2019 ), we employed exploratory factor analysis using principal component factoring to reduce the number of questions suitable for the model. The dimension reduction resulted in two items for attitude towards entrepreneurship and three questions each for the other constructs. The exploratory factor analysis uses the rotated component matrix for varimax to select variables with loadings above 0.7. The results show five components with Eigen values above 1 which explains total variance of 72.81%. We performed reliability analysis for the selected items to check internal consistency of the constructs using the Cronbach alpha values and the results show that all the constructs meet the threshold criteria of above 0.7 (Nunnally & Bernstein, Citation 1994 ). The results can be seen in Table 1 .

Table 1 shows the construct measurement in the exploratory factor analysis covering the five variables used in the model. Apart from attitude towards entrepreneurship which was measured by two questions, all other variables have three questions. Using principal components extraction approach of factor analysis, the items were reduced to five uncorrelated components. The variances explained by each factor can be seen in the second column with a cumulative variance of 72.81%. The results for the measurement of internal consistency can be seen under the reliability column. Each variable has scores above 0.7, therefore indicating good constructs. The factor loadings from the rotated components (Varimax rotation method) shows that each item is above 0.7

where ATE4 = Starting a business will provide me with Independence

ATE5 = Starting a business will provide me with opportunity to be my own boss

ESE3 = Being creative

ESE5 = Being a leader

ESE6 = Making decisions

LOC2 = My life is controlled by accidental happenings

LOC3 = When I get what I want, it is usually because I am lucky

LOC4 = SUCCESS in business is mostly a matter of luck

SN1 = My parents are positively oriented towards my future career as an entrepreneur

SN2 = My friends see entrepreneurship as a logical choice for me

SN3 = I believe that people who are important to me, think that I should pursue a career as an entrepreneur

ES1 = There are not sufficient subsidies available for new companies

ES2 = It is hard to find capital providers in my country

ES3 = Banks do not readily give credit to start-up companies

EI = I love to create something different & I am determined to have my own business in the future

4.4. Structural model

We measured the structural model using structural equation modelling (SEM) with the AMOS software. For the path model, we employed the maximum likelihood estimation technique for SEM-AMOS to generate the coefficients for the measured and latent variables. We performed several goodness of fit analyses to ensure confidence in the structural model.

4.5. Measurement of goodness of fit

The formulation of the model was developed using the AMOS 16.0 software package. This analytical technique permits the evaluation of the overall fit of the proposed model and estimation of all corresponding coefficients simultaneously (Hair et al., Citation 2017 ).

In order to check the absolute model fit, the root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) and the goodness of fit index (GFI) were checked. The results show that GFI (0.932) is greater than 0.9 whilst RMSEA (0.029) is within the acceptable range. Ideally, acceptable RMSEA which indicates a good fit should be <0.08. Our results indicate a good model with root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) less than 0.08 (Byrne, Citation 2010 ). We performed further model fit analyses to check incremental model fit and parsimonious model fit. Apart from AGFI and NFI which are approximately 0.9 (acceptable limit), CFI and TLI are above 0.9 thus indicating that the model passed the incremental fit. The parsimonious model fit result is acceptable. The overall model fit diagnosis shows that the model is good and acceptable.

Table 2. Goodness of fit measurement

With the exception of entrepreneurial self-efficacy, all the constructs show significant relation with entrepreneurial intention. The results show that locus of control has significant but negative relation with entrepreneurial intention

Table 3. Regression weights for SEM

We measured five latent constructs on entrepreneurial intention using the questionnaire carefully developed after reviewing several literatures on the subject. The results show that attitude towards entrepreneurship is the construct that significantly contributes most (68%) in explaining variations in student entrepreneurial intention. This is followed by subjective norm (30%) and environmental support (19%). Interestingly, locus of control shows significant negative relationship with entrepreneurial intention. Overall, the model (all the five constructs) explains 89% of variations in student entrepreneurial intention and this is higher than similar and previous studies. This can be seen in the path model found in Figure 1 . In Trivedi’s study in 2016, the adjusted R for the regression of ATB, SN, PBC and university environment and support on entrepreneurial intention was 0.69 which indicated that the model was highly significant since more than 69% of variation in entrepreneurial intention could be explained by the four predictors.

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

The data for the study were obtained from MBA students from two of Ghana’s private universities and the results are revealing.

5.1. Attitude towards entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intention

From the results, it can be said that Attitude towards Entrepreneurship influences the entrepreneurial intention among the MBA students. These results mirror other studies by Armitage and Conner ( Citation 2001 ) and Kim and Hunter ( Citation 1993 ) whose studies have revealed a positive relationship between attitude towards entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intention. Attitude Towards Entrepreneurship has statistically positive influence on entrepreneurial intentions among tertiary students (Buli & Yesuf, Citation 2015 ; Ferreira et al., Citation 2012 ). Trivedi ( Citation 2016 ) also saw a strong and highly significant relationship between attitude and entrepreneurial intention. Surprisingly, Zhang et al. ( Citation 2015 ) study which was conducted in the USA failed to generate a significant impact on entrepreneurial intention. In fact, we found a high score in the attitude toward entrepreneurship which incidentally happens to be the highest contribution to the entrepreneurial intentions in our model. Thus, this result showed that the influence of attitudes on intention has high explanatory power and extremely important for increasing entrepreneurial intention. Hence, we can argue that the MBA students are more independent and desire to be their own bosses in the near future with respect to their career path, which has the potential of curbing the problem of unemployment in the long run. Bosma and Kelley ( Citation 2018 ) recognize that whenever employment opportunities and well-trodden career paths are scarce, creating a business is one of the few available avenues toward economic prosperity. They posit that the rate of people with the intention to start a business can exceed 60% in developing countries.

5.2. Locus of control and entrepreneurial intention

According to this study, LOC registered a significant but negative impact on the entrepreneurial intention among the MBA students. This finding sharply contradicts a study by Kristiansen and Indarti ( Citation 2004 ) who reported a positive but insignificant relationship between LOC and entrepreneurial intentions among Indonesian students. The authors however, in the same study established a negative and insignificant relationship between LOC and EI among Norwegian students. According to Vodă and Nelu ( Citation 2019 ), prior empirical research studying the relationship between LOC and EIs in European countries has produced contradictory results. For example, Rajh et al. ( Citation 2016 ), in studying the entrepreneurial intentions of 1200 respondents from some European countries, found a positive but insignificant connection between LOC and entrepreneurial intention. Also, Popescu et al. ( Citation 2016 ) in examining undergraduate and master students in Romania found a positive but insignificant relationship between LOC and entrepreneurial intention. Luthans et al. ( Citation 2006 ) asserted that individuals with an internal locus of control are likely to positively face challenges and hindrances and they resolve those inhibitors by seeking productive solutions by displaying achievement motivation.

5.3. Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention

In spite of the overwhelming empirical evidence to support a positive relationship between ESE and Entrepreneurial Intentions (Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ; Luthje & Frank, Citation 2003 ; Puni et al., Citation 2018 ), this study revealed that Entrepreneurial Self-efficacy has no effect on the entrepreneurial intention among the MBA students. This is contrary to Sesen’s ( Citation 2012 ) study that entrepreneurial self-efficacy has a significant impact on entrepreneurial intentions. Laguna ( Citation 2013 ) stated that self-efficacy is positively related to entrepreneurial intention. Also, Douglas and Fitzsimmons ( Citation 2013 ) established a strong relationship between ESE and the intrapreneurial intentions of MBA students. However, some authors (e.g., Boukamcha, Citation 2015 ; Kolvereid & Isaksen, Citation 2006 ) found no evidence of such a relationship. In our study, 60% of the respondents were in the public sector as reported in the descriptive section of the analysis. In Ghana, job security in the public sector is normally guaranteed which inhibit the propensity to venture into entrepreneurial activities. According to Nowinski and Haddoub ( Citation 2019 ) a positive attitude towards entrepreneurship is a necessary but not sufficient in fostering entrepreneurial intentions and they further emphasized that a positive attitude towards entrepreneurship needs to be supported by ESE and inspiring role models. According to McGee and Peterson ( Citation 2019 ) people who believe in their ability to undertake certain activities are more likely to be successful in those activities.

5.4. Environmental support and entrepreneurial intention

It came out from the study that Environmental Support shows a significant relation with Entrepreneurial Intention. According to Sesen ( Citation 2012 ) environmental forces (e.g., access to capital) has a significant impact on entrepreneurial intentions. According to Luthje and Frank ( Citation 2003 ) if students realize a hostile environment for business founders due to perhaps the banks do not readily provide loans or because they perceive the state laws as being overly restrictive, they are less likely to venture into entrepreneurship. In Ghana particularly, the hostile and turbulent nature of the environment at times poses a challenge not only to nascent entrepreneurs but even to the existing ones. This is because entrepreneurial finance accessibility is a critical ingredient for success and one of the most important challenges facing entrepreneurial ventures is access to capital at realistically optimal interest rates. According to Jena ( Citation 2020 ), the support entrepreneurs get from the environment (e.g., Mentor, Government and Financial institutions) could influence entrepreneurial intentions.

5.5. Subjective norm and entrepreneurial intention

The study revealed that Subjective Norm has positive relationship with EI, which contradicted the findings of other researchers (Autio et al., Citation 2001 ; Krueger et al., Citation 2000 ; Linan & Chen, Citation 2009 ; Maes et al., Citation 2014 ) which reported a non-significant relationship. Hiatt et al. ( Citation 2009 ) established that social norms that inspire regulations can strongly affect organizational formation and failure. However, this study extends Ferreira et al. ( Citation 2012 )’s studies on the effect of Subjective Norm, who established that SN has a significant relationship. Interestingly, Nguyen et al. ( Citation 2019 ) did not find the linkage between social norms and entrepreneurial intentions when they examined the factors affecting EIs among the youths in Vietnam. According to Moriano et al. ( Citation 2012 ) subjective norms were significantly related to intentions in only two out of the six countries in their study.

This study was able to apply other operational measures than proposed by Ajzen ( Citation 1991 , Citation 2002 ) to test the robustness of the model in predicting entrepreneurial intentions as suggested by previous studies (Engle et al., Citation 2010 ).

This study highlighted ATE as one of the important determinants of our framework; hence, entrepreneurial attitudes may be influenced by educators, policymakers and successful business owners.

As the adage goes, “every organization is as good as the people in the organisation”, hence the selection and socialization of leaders (especially top management) and most importantly lecturers who share and endorse the idea that entrepreneurs make the difference in every society is very crucial for the continued relevance of private universities. We believe that by virtue of the superior-subordinate power relationship in Ghana, top management in the academic institutions can inspire entrepreneurial intentions and behaviours among their subordinates (e.g., lecturer) which will eventually cascade down to the students.

Since almost all of our respondents fall within the category of the working class, there are practical implications for private, public and voluntary businesses and industries. It is important for management in the various organisations to instil the entrepreneurial spirit and proclivity in the workers to cause transformation and a turnaround in their respective institutions. This orientation is important not only for the incumbent employees but also for prospective ones in their recruitment and selection.

According to Abadi et al. ( Citation 2021 , p. 3), “people are influenced by norms as they go through and interact with those who are around them in social circumstances, the extent to which people face advocating or inhibiting norms determine the likelihood that they take an action or not”. To the extent that SN has proved an important and significant determinant of entrepreneurial intention is refreshing. The positive effect of subjective norms on entrepreneurial intention is probably due to the prevalence of favourable reactions that the students give to the influences of important people, giving rise to positive intentions. We believe these influences have the potential of creating businesses in Ghana to curb the problem of unemployment in Ghana. According to Asiedu and Donkor ( Citation 2018 ), respect for the views of elders and people in one’s close circles is considered an important virtue in Ghanaian culture. These authors emphasize that it is a belief in Ghana that family leaders, community leaders and religious leaders are a repository of great knowledge and wisdom and their counsel is normally held in high esteem. Hence if family associates encourage the respondents to move into an entrepreneurial venture, they are most likely to concede to such an advice (pursuing a career as an entrepreneur). We can infer from the proposition of Asiedu and Donkor ( Citation 2018 ) that societal norms can be institutionalized when they are accepted by individuals and groups and the motivation for the transition into entrepreneurial venture can be enhanced, all other thing being equal.

For policymakers, the findings indicate that high interest rate is counterproductive and serve as a disincentive in the encouragement of entrepreneurship. Most especially for these categories of respondents (MBA students) who are already in gainful employment and feel “safe” in their comfort zones, higher cost of capital can further push them away from an entrepreneurial dream. Probably, the government and other policymakers can collaborate with the private universities to institute start-up incentives in order to improve the students’ entrepreneurial inclination. In recent times, private universities in Ghana have been lamenting over government’s negligence.

The paper examined the entrepreneurial intentions among MBA students of two private universities in the Brong Ahafo region of Ghana. Specifically, we analyzed how locus of control, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, environmental support, subjective norm and attitude determine students’ entrepreneurial intention.

We confirm that TPB-based variables can be adopted in an area in Ghana’s educational sector which seems to be “forgotten” with respect to entrepreneurial intentions research; thus contributing and deepening to previous TPB-based research on EI.

This study registered statistically significant explanatory power of 89% of the variations in Entrepreneurial Intention, due to ATE, SN, ESE/PBC, ES and LOC which is considered to be more robust given most research fall short of this number. Our study adds to existing literature in an area which has barely produced literature in universities in Ghana (particularly private universities) and the overreliance on the developed countries, through empirically testing of Azjen’s TPB-based variables in the context of private universities in Ghana.

This study revealed that the Entrepreneurial Intentions of MBA students are influenced by ATE. This implies that pragmatic strategies and tools should be incorporated in the private MBA curriculum to promote student’s attitudes towards job creation. Unfortunately, the total number of entrepreneurship courses taught in each of the two institutions surveyed is not more than two subjects. According to Bogatyreva et al. ( Citation 2019 ), on the average, students with entrepreneurial intention during schooling are approximately three times more likely to start a business after school, as compared to students without intention. Besides, Entrepreneurial Intentions are the most proximal predictor of individual academics’ engagement in entrepreneurship. However, the universities in Ghana offer few courses related to entrepreneurship. The findings can be used to guide universities in Ghana, government and other stakeholders on how to stimulate entrepreneurial intentions among students.

Entrepreneurial self-efficacy is one of the most important determinants of entrepreneurial intention but this study revealed non-significant relationship; hence, it is recommended that policymakers should allocate resources in a manner that promotes the entrepreneurial self-efficacy of MBA students in the private universities. According to Phong, Thao, and Nguyen ( Citation 2020 , p. 19), “intervention programmes like critical thinking, negotiation, presentation, time management, networking, cross-cultural awareness skills, or even down-to-earth activities related to business skills like basic golf, professional dining, and grooming” can propel entrepreneurial self-efficacy.

Our data were based purely on quantitative and cross-sectional data. For instance, the cross-sectional nature of this study may not give room for stronger causality inferences. We, therefore, suggest that future research should apply both quantitative and qualitative research approaches, and also, the application of longitudinal research designs, as it can make significant contributions.

We examined the MBA students’ perceptions in relation to their future entrepreneurial intentions, but not actual behaviours. Since intentions may not necessarily lead to actions, further longitudinal studies about the factors associated with entrepreneurial intentions and to establish whether the respondents actually “walk the talk”. In fact, entrepreneurial intentions, however, are only a first step toward entrepreneurial action and eventual business ownership. According to Krueger et al. ( Citation 2000 ), intention-based models examine the intent, but not the timing of venture creation. Interestingly, it may take time after intent metamorphoses before a new venture opportunity is even recognized.

The respondents in our study were primarily students from only two private universities in Ghana, which may render our findings less generalizable to other higher institutions of learning. However, our framework can be adopted and applied in different context for future studies in order to verify the authenticity of the model.

Entrepreneurial education undoubtedly is one of the critical to the success in the development of entrepreneurial competences; hence, the need for policymakers to integrate entrepreneurship education in the MBA programs of private universities, since a number of these courses have the potential of enhancing entrepreneurial intention and propensity. According to Puni et al. ( Citation 2018 ), due to the rising rates of unemployment in Sub-Saharan Africa and its attendant economic and social problems, stakeholders are embracing the concept of entrepreneurship education as a major conduit in shaping the quality of human capital for full employment.

Lastly, the constructs used in this study are not the only variables in the determinants of entrepreneurial intentions. Future studies might integrate broader constructs to measure entrepreneurial intentions among university students.

Declaration of interest

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interests with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this paper.

Notes on contributors

Kwaku amofah.

Reprints and Permissions

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

You are not required to obtain permission to reuse this article in part or whole.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations. Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.

Your download is now in progress and you may close this window

Login or register to access this feature

Register now or learn more

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > Entrepreneurship - Practice-Oriented Perspectives

Entrepreneurial Intention: Theory of Planned Behaviour and the Moderation Effect of Start-Up Experience

Submitted: March 24th, 2016 Reviewed: September 6th, 2016 Published: November 9th, 2016

DOI: 10.5772/65640

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Entrepreneurship

Edited by Mario Franco

Chapter metrics overview

4,311 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Overall attention for this chapters

Entrepreneurial activity is considered to be an intentionally planned behaviour. Consequently, entrepreneurial intention (EI) may be evaluated via theory of planned behaviour (TPB). According to Ajzen’s TPB, EI is explained by three antecedents: attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour, perceived social norms and perceived behaviour control in other words, self‐efficacy. Although this model is widely tested empirically, new research regarding moderation effects may be valuable [1]. Moreover, [2] argues that personal factors such as previous start‐up experience are relevant concerning the model. Accordingly, in this study, moderation effect of start‐up experience is added in TPB model from a convenience sample of 528 undergraduate business administration students from the three most economically developed cities in Turkey. Hypotheses are tested by means of hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Coefficients are estimated using ordinary least squares. In order to test the moderator effect, significance values of the interaction term is assessed. According to the results, all of the relations within the model are significant. Ajzen’s TPB holds for the Turkish case. Moreover, for the students with a past start‐up experience, the effect of both self‐efficacy and personal attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour on entrepreneurial intensity increases. This is a promising result for the future studies.

Author Information

Senay sabah *.

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

Entrepreneurship is considered to be the discovery/creation, evaluation and exploitation process of opportunity [ 3 ], and it requires the preparedness to realize and/or create that opportunity [ 4 , 5 ]. Within this perspective, entrepreneurial intention is considered to be the best predictor of this behaviour in comparison with other factors such as, demographic and trait variables. This is because entrepreneurship is taken to be an intentionally planned behaviour likewise all other strategic decisions [ 6 ]. Accordingly, within the entrepreneurship literature, cognitive research gain considerable popularity and most of this attention is given on intention models [ 6 ].

Theory of reasoned action, which is a widely used intention‐based theory, explains intention via a formulation considering subjective norms of significant others and personal attitude towards the related behaviour as the antecedents of intention. Theory of planned behaviour (TPB) is an extended form of theory of reasoned action, with the addition of a new variable, perceived behavioural control (PBC) [ 7 ]. TPB is used extensively within different study areas besides the entrepreneurship literature, and it still provides a rich potential for the area [ 8 ].

In addition to the theoretical importance of TPB, it has also practical importance. According to the model, these perception‐based intentions and beliefs may be learnable not inborn [ 4 ]. Besides, it is a widely accepted fact that personal differences such as past experience, knowledge, etc. may affect the evolution of the intention [ 9 ]. As a result, studying intention may provide policy makers the opportunity to realize the cognitive frameworks of individuals who are considering to engage in entrepreneurial behaviour, which is more beneficial for policy‐making purposes compared to those who have already started up a business [ 10 ]. This is important because entrepreneurial behaviour acts as an important and locomotive force of innovation within an economy [ 11 ].

This paper is following the entrepreneurial intention model of Ajzen’s TPB. There are many studies in the literature following this path; however, it is argued that a lot of work is needed for figuring out the factors effecting entrepreneurial intention [ 12 ]. Moreover, although this model is widely tested empirically, it is argued that new research regarding moderation effects may be valuable [ 1 ]. Additionally, [ 2 ] asserts that personal factors such as cognitive short‐cuts, self‐related concepts and previous start‐up experience are relevant concerning the relation between entrepreneurial intention and perceived behavioural control plus personal attitude towards entrepreneurship. One of the most important factors that are proposed to add the TPB is past experience [ 13 , 14 ]. Accordingly, in this study, moderation effect of start‐up experience is added in TPB model.

Consequently, the aim of this paper is to test the effect of previous start‐up experience on the entrepreneurial intention within a revised model of TPB. Recent studies on TPB take prior actions into consideration [ 15 ]. However, studies considering for moderation effects [ 1 ] and past experience [ 16 ] are still asked for. Because it is claimed that the effect of past behaviour is not a direct one, accordingly, it is suggested to add past behaviour as an indirect factor for intention instead of a direct link [ 17 – 21 ]. This addition is important both theoretically and practically. Theoretically, both examining a widely tested model—TPB—within an eastern cultural context is important for the generalizability of the theory. Moreover, revising the model may also be valuable in order to strengthen the explanation capability of the theory. For this issue, we have rested on the past experience, which is considered to be one of the most important explanatory factors for behavioural intention. Practically, adding the past experience may shed light to practitioners and politicians for new opportunity exploitation activities, such as empowering behavioural experiences of entrepreneurs via initiatives, etc. These issues stand as the theoretical and practical importance of the paper.

Within this study, first TPB will be explained in brief, and then the effect of past behaviour within the TPB model will be discussed. Thereafter, the study held in Turkey, on 528 undergraduate students will be presented. Terminally, conclusion and practical and theoretical implications of the study is initiated.

2. Theory of planned behaviour

Theory of planned behaviour (TPB) that “predicts and explain behaviour in specific contexts” [ 7 ] is a frequently used theory in different disciplines [ 22 ]. This is also true for entrepreneurship research since to become an entrepreneur is considered to be a conscious activity and intention is taken to be a cognitive state [ 22 ]. Moreover, it is argued that entrepreneurial decision is a complex one and need intentional cognitive process [ 18 ]. As a result, instead of personality traits or demographic studies, cognition contains more and significant information regarding the entrepreneurial behaviour, since it is a “closer antecedent” for behaviour [ 6 ,  23 ]. The outcomes of the previous work also suggested that theory of planned behaviour is an applicable theory for entrepreneurial research [ 12 ]. Consequently, intention‐oriented researches within the entrepreneurship literature are gaining popularity.

For infrequent behaviours/unstable contexts (which is true for entrepreneurial context), the explanatory power of intention regarding behaviour is increased [ 16 , 24 – 26 ]. Because, it is argued that strategic entrepreneurship is taken to be an intentionally planned behaviour, and this is true for even necessity motivated and unexpected entrepreneurship [ 16 ]. Therefore, studying the decision‐making process for entrepreneurial behaviour via theory of planned behaviour (TPB) seems reasonable [ 12 ].

There are two known attitudes for individuals that are intuitive and rational [ 27 ], and the main assumption for Ajzen’s intention‐behaviour relation is human behaviour is rational [ 28 ]. Intention means how much a given behaviour is tended to be tried plus how much effort is made for this behaviour [ 7 ] and the stronger the intention the chance of the behaviour to be realized is increase [ 28 ]. Intention provides a link between the beliefs of an individual and corresponding behaviour [ 29 ]. It is considered to be typical for entrepreneurial context, even though the new venture start‐up process may evolve suddenly due to an opportunity realization [ 16 ].

According to TPB, there are two major sources of intention: desirability (motivation to act for the intended behaviour) and feasibility of the given behaviour [ 16 ]. To be more precise, perceived behavioural control (PBC) stands for feasibility; subjective norms and personal attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour together define the desirability part of the entrepreneurial intention. These are three kinds of conceptually independent [ 30 ] beliefs which are behavioural, normative and control beliefs, respectively [ 31 ]. Although this model is a generic one that holds across cultures and contexts, the relative importance of the factors may change [ 7 ]. In generic form, intention may increase when there is a positive attitude towards the behaviour, subjective norms regarding the behaviour is favourable and individual has a belief that he/she can accomplish the behaviour effectively [ 32 ].

Subjective norms (SN) represents the perception of significant others about a given behaviour. The main assumption for adding this factor to the model is the argument that human behaviour is adopted according to other people’s attitude towards given behaviour [ 24 ]. Although the effect is taken to be effectual across cases and cultures, the significant others differ for different individuals [ 4 ]. For instance, for individuals holding a job, the co‐workers or other work‐related networks are important. On the other hand for students, family and friends may be important. The effect of subjective norms within the model is questioned due to insignificant and non‐systematic previous results regarding it. However, it is argued that, when intention is measured appropriately, there appears a strong relation between norms and intention [ 25 ]. By definition, regarding this factor, the belief of others is weighted by individuals’ readiness and willingness to act according to these beliefs [ 17 ]. As a result, it is argued that especially within collectivistic cultures such as Turkey, subjective norms play a positive and important role for explaining the intention [ 2 , 6 , 12 ]. Accordingly following hypotheses are proposed:

H1: Subjective norm positively affects entrepreneurial intention.

Perceived behavioural control (PBC) refers to the “perceived ease or difficulty of performing the behaviour” [ 7 ]. PBC is a perception instead of an actual control and can be operationalized via self‐efficacy [ 7 ]. Self‐efficacy (SE) is considered to be an appropriate measure for PBC since both deals with the “perceived ability to perform a behaviour” [ 7 , 31 , 32 ]. To put it another way, both PBC and SE copes with the perception not the actual skills or abilities [ 33 ]. Self‐efficacy does not only improve goal setting but also provide persistency for the pre‐set goals as a result strengthen the intention [ 34 ]. In other words, self‐efficacy positively affects various stages of entrepreneurial behaviour [ 33 ]. Other factors such as role models effect intention if they affect the self‐efficacy [ 16 ]. It is argued that, the greater the self‐efficacy, the entrepreneurial intention will be stronger. Contrary to subjective norms, self‐efficacy is considered to be an important factor for entrepreneurial intention universally [ 2 ]. Besides, it appears to be the most powerful antecedent of intention within the literature and, moreover, under the conditions intention explains little regarding the entrepreneurial behaviour, perceived behavioural control and self‐efficacy accordingly has an influence for separately predicting the behaviour [ 25 ].

H2: Self‐efficacy positively affects entrepreneurial intention.

Personal attitude refers to the people’s “favourable or unfavourable evaluation of the behaviour in question” [ 7 , 35 ]. In other words, personal attitude explains the “personal” desirability of any given behaviour, in comparison with the subjective norms that refers to the desirability of significant others [ 16 ]. According to the model, personal attitude is not an inherent position for an individual but can be learned [ 17 ]. As a general rule, the favourable the personal attitude towards a behaviour, the stronger the intention to perform that behaviour.

H3: Attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour positively affects entrepreneurial intention.

Insofar, the generic model of TPB is explained and related hypotheses are developed within the entrepreneurial context. Now, the effect of previous start‐up experience will be added as a moderator to the generic model.

3. Effect of previous experience

Learning is an important factor for cognitive theory including Ajzen’s framework [ 24 ]. Accordingly, it is a very common argument that the past behaviour is a strong predictor for the future behaviour. To be more specific, past behaviour is told to explain additional 13% of future behaviour variance [ 26 ] since it serves as the most important “human capital variable” [ 36 ]. However, the formulation of how this may be true within an intention‐based model is controversial [ 32 ]. Past behaviour somehow change the intention [ 37 ] and this relation is told to be not linear and unidirectional [ 38 ]. There appears to be a two way relation, that means attitudes and intentions influence behaviours and behaviours also influence the intentions back [ 38 ].

Effect of past on future behaviour is controversial within the Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour (TPB) also. It is argued that although TPB is a well‐formulated model to explain intention, one major weakness of the model is it does not consider past behaviour [ 26 ]. However, [ 7 ] argues that, the past behaviour is inherently considered within the model since the information gained via past experience is processed on the antecedents of intention. As a result, past behaviour has no helpful value for future behaviour while considering the direct effect of past experience. However, the significant effect of past behaviour for entrepreneurial intention models contradicts this perspective [ 37 ].

To put it briefly, regarding the previous experience‐intention relation, there are two main approaches [ 8 ]: one, which follows Ajzen’s path and argues that past behaviour is irrelevant for the intention model since it is already absorbed via the antecedent factors of intention. Second approach, that is started to be adopted widely argues that past behaviour may be added to the model and improve the explanatory power of the model [ 8 ]. Accordingly, the past knowledge is checked for the inclusion within the entrepreneurial intention and behaviour framework.

This is because it is argued that two kinds of knowledge may be gained from past experience, which are tacit and explicit knowledge [ 8 ]. Although tacit knowledge is embedded in the beliefs (i.e. self‐efficacy/control beliefs, personal attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour/behavioural beliefs and subjective norms/normative beliefs), explicit knowledge may provide more variance that cannot be explained via these beliefs [ 8 ]. And if the situation is not stable, due to reasons such as experience, the intention model may not work well.

Moreover, one’s cognition depends on his own experience providing him/her information regarding the relevant behaviour and its consequences [ 39 ], because, individuals do not realize the worth of all opportunities around them [ 40 ]. In other words, different people discover and realize different opportunities, due to the possession of different prior knowledge and experience [ 40 ]. Besides, this experience provides the related behavioural skills via affording relevant setting for essential training [ 32 ]. Because, direct experience affords different information compared to the indirect one [ 30 ]. Related to entrepreneurial behaviour and value creation context, this relation is significant [ 6 ]. In addition, these cognitions are more stable compared to the cognitions formed via indirect sources of information [ 39 ]. These results support the idea that the previous experience amplifies the relation between entrepreneurial intention and its antecedents, namely self‐efficacy and personal attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour.

It is argued that the relation path that is proposed to be added to the TPB model is not a direct one [ 6 ]. This is because the direct effect is absorbed through the antecedents of intention. Prior start‐up experience does not affect personality or entrepreneurial potential of the individual, but it changes the “individuals’ perceptions about the opportunities available” [ 15 ]. As a result, it may be argued that prior experience provides knowledge that amplifies the relation between both personal attitude and self‐efficacy to entrepreneurial intention. In other words, with the experience, even if the attitude and self‐efficacy levels are same, the cognitive process works different to shape the relation regarding these factors with entrepreneurial intention positively.

For instance, although individual’s attitude towards entrepreneurship may be low, due to past experience he/she may knows that if he/she does not realize the opportunity, someone else will do it [ 8 ]. As a result, without increase in the attitude, intention may increase due to this “explicit” information gained through past experience. Similar situation may also be hold for the SE. for instance, individual may not be “confident” about his/her control regarding the situation but due to past experience he/she may be aware of resources to cope with the situation [ 8 ]. In other words, without an increase in SE, with the knowledge and experience gained through the past behaviour, the intention level may increase. Moreover, with past experience, individuals expend minimal effort for intention although this is not due to an increase in the antecedents [ 20 ].

To sum up, past start‐up experience may provide individuals this explicit knowledge that is not reflected through the antecedents, and the effect of this knowledge and experience on intention is not a direct one, but a moderator effect exists. As a result, following hypotheses are suggested:

H4: With the moderation of start‐up experience, the relation between self‐efficacy and entrepreneurial intention increases.

H5: With the moderation of start‐up experience, the relation between attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour and entrepreneurial intention increases.

4. The study

In this study, the effect of past start‐up experience is added to the Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour (TPB), as a moderator factor between entrepreneurial intention and personal attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour plus self‐efficacy. Table 1 figure out the proposed model and relations of this study. Now, the empirical analysis of the proposed hypotheses will be realized.

Table 1.

Hypotheses.

5. Methodology

5.1. measures.

All of the factors except past start‐up experience is measured by seven‐point scales that ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) in relation to entrepreneurial behaviour. The scales used revealed adequate reliability among undergraduate students in the past studies. For avoiding the response bias, some items for each measure are negatively worded [ 14 ].

For the entrepreneurial intention and personal attitude, Ref. [ 12 ]’s scales are applied. For entrepreneurial intention six items, for personal attitude five items that ask for the level of agreement is used. It is argued that there is a lack for reliable measures for entrepreneurial intention [ 41 ], and this study argues to be statistically robust and theoretically sound for applying different cultures. Related to intention there are three kinds of measures: desire (“I want to…”), self‐prediction (“How likely it is…”) and behavioural intention (“I intend to…”), and the last one is told to have better results for behavioural prediction [ 12 ]. Moreover, for the entrepreneurial intention concept, it is appropriate to measure via a reflective measure not a formative one [ 41 ], which is true for this scale. Accordingly, we also use the behavioural intention measure. For attitude, an aggregate scale is used consistent with Ref. [ 7 ].

For subjective norms, identification of the appropriate significant others is important [ 17 ] and within this study, two questions are formulated that are about the decision of family and friends. These two are considered to be the significant others for undergraduate students. Accordingly, following two items to agree/disagree are asked “My family/friends would see it as very positive if I would start my own business”. For self‐efficacy, Ref. [ 42 ]’s scale, which is widely assessed, is used.

For past start up experience, a direct “yes or no” question asking for “whether they initiate a start‐up experience before” is used. This question is considered to be a dummy variable as a moderator in the classic TPB model.

All of the scales have high reliability scores within the past studies. According to Ref. [ 43 ], 0.80 reliability level is required. This is also true for this study since all constructs’ reliability scores are higher than 0.80 ( Table 2 ).

Table 2.

Constructs’ Cronbach alpha values.

5.2. Sample

Data are collected from a convenience sample of 528 third and fourth year undergraduate business administration students (232 male, 296 female) from the three most economically developed cities in Turkey: Istanbul, Ankara and İzmir. Using a student sample is not an issue for this study because, the study deals with the entrepreneurial intention of “potential entrepreneurs” [ 33 ], which is consistent with our sample.

It is argued that university graduates between 25 and 34 ages are the closest group toward entrepreneurial behaviour, and third and fourth year students which are soon‐to‐graduate are close to this age group since they are close to their career choice [ 6 , 12 , 16 ]. This is because they may see entrepreneurial career as a smart option compared to wage employment [ 11 ]. Moreover, when the time between intention and behaviour is close, the relation may be more reliable [ 44 ] and our sample suits for this issue. This sample is convenient with the previous‐related literature [ 6 ].

5.3. Analysis

Hypothesis are tested by means of hierarchical multiple regression analysis using PASW Statistics 18. Coefficients are estimated using ordinary least squares (OLS). In order to test the moderator effect of start‐up experience, significance values of the interaction term is assessed. Correlation values for the model are presented in the Table 3 .

Table 3.

Correlation results.

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2‐tailed).

Correlations between the constructs are all statistically significant at the p  < 0.01. All of the correlation values between independent variables are ranging between 0.320 and 0.460 that corresponds to low‐moderate correlation levels. This level indicates to ignore the presence of multicollinearity [ 45 ]. Moreover, VIF and tolerance values are checked in order to look for multicollinearity. For all of the factors, these two values indicate for point out for overlooking multicollinearity.

The model’s regression results are given in the Table 4 . According to the Table 4 , all of the relations within the model are significant for the significance value of 0.000 and the adjusted R 2 is 0.457. Previous studies find that the generic TPB model explains 30–45% of the variance for intention [ 46 ] which is consistent with our results.

In order to test for the correlation between the error terms, the Durbin‐Watson value is checked. According to Ref. [ 46 ], the Durbin Watson value needs to be between 1.5 and 2.5, for independency of the observations. It is 1.864 for this study.

Table 4.

Regression results.

Findings of regression analysis supported all of our five primary hypotheses. Both the model of Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour (TPB) and the moderation effect of past experience are supported by our sample. In other words, TPB holds for the Turkish case. Besides, the moderator effect of past start‐up experience between entrepreneurial intention and both self‐efficacy plus personal attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour holds.

In the model, the most influential factor for entrepreneurial intention is personal attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour and self‐efficacy along with subjective norms follows it. The effect of personal attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour and self‐efficacy on entrepreneurial intention is valid for most of the past studies.

According to past research, subjective norms are not hold in general and provide complex results. In other words, some of researches the effect is so small, and for some others, it is insignificant. For this study, subjective norms have a significant effect on entrepreneurial intention. This may be due to the collectivistic nature of Turkish culture. Because, within the collectivistic cultures, the perceptions of significant others are important in general. For the entrepreneurial context, it is also the case [ 2 , 6 , 12 ].

Moreover, the relation between entrepreneurial intention and the attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour is moderated by start‐up experience. Additionally, start‐up experience has a moderator effect on the relation between entrepreneurial intention and self‐efficacy. In other words, for the students with a past start‐up experience, the effect of both self‐efficacy and personal attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour on entrepreneurial intensity increases. We may interpret this result with the existence of explicit knowledge gained through past start‐up experience which provide more variance that cannot be explained via antecedents of entrepreneurial intention [ 8 ]. As far as our research, this moderation effect is not studied within the relevant literature. This is a promising result for the future studies.

7. Discussion

Theory of planned behaviour (TPB) is an extensively adapted model in many different research areas. Besides, there are a lot of studies that tries to modify TPB via adding new antecedents or moderation/mediator effects. Regarding these factors, past behaviour is argued to be one of the most important ones that contain information about the intention. Moreover, although TPB is widely tested empirically, new research regarding moderation effects may be valuable [ 1 ]. Accordingly, within this study, the moderation effect of past experience within the TPB model is evaluated. This issue stands for the theoretical importance of this paper.

The results figure out that the model of theory of planned behaviour is supported via Turkish sample. Moreover, the moderation effect of past start‐up experience between entrepreneurial intention and personal attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour is also supported. For instance, without any increase in individual’s attitude towards entrepreneurship, with past experience he/she may identifies that if he/she does not realize any opportunity, he/she may lost it forever since someone else will do it [ 8 ]. As a result, without increase in the attitude, intention may increase. This happens due to the experience and “explicit” information gained through past experience.

The similar moderation result is gained for past start‐up experience between entrepreneurial intention and self‐efficacy. Accordingly, although individuals are not positive about her/his control over any given situation, past start‐up experience may provide the awareness of the resources to cope with the situation [ 8 ]. Similar to the attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour, the intention level may increase without any increase in the self‐efficacy levels. This also happens due to the knowledge and experience gained through the past behaviour.

As far as our research, with the addition of the past experience as a moderator between the antecedents and the entrepreneurial intention, this study is within the first studies in the entrepreneurial intention literature. These studies are important due to the fact that intention is the most representative antecedent of entrepreneurial behaviour and in order to understand this behaviour specifying the effective factors is essential. As a result, it is hoped that this may be a positive contribution for the relevant literature. These are promising results for the future studies. Additional study is needed in order to sustain the generalizability of the results. More studies within different cultures are also appreciated. Because, our results may be due to cultural factors and as a result for different cultures, they may not hold. Besides, similar studies with non‐student samples would also be fruitful in order to check the results for different sample groups.

General limitation for the intention‐based models of behaviour is hold within our case also. In other words, intention may not always end up with behaviour and sometimes even it does, there may be a significant time lag [ 10 ]. Accordingly, some longitudinal studies are welcomed to check for intention‐behaviour relation [ 32 ].

Besides the academic implications, there are also some practical implications for this paper. The first one is regarding the intention‐based nature of this study. For public policy makers, the initiatives just affect intention and its antecedents will be helpful for new business formation [ 16 ] in order to decrease the perceived barriers for students [ 11 ]. This is because, in order to change behaviour, one needs to change the intention first [ 35 ]. Besides, the perception of the potential and existing entrepreneurs is more important compared to the reality [ 47 ]. As a result, intention‐based studies are helpful for the practitioners.

The sentence beginning 'Because it is argued...' is incomplete. Please check.

Besides, with the addition of past experience effecting the self‐efficacy/entrepreneurial intention relation, practically oriented courses that may be helpful for students to gain entrepreneurial experience may also empower the self‐efficacy and entrepreneurial intention [ 49 ]. Because it is argued that, within the TPB, the explorative power of direct experience is greater compared to the indirect one [ 30 ]. Further, since observing may also increase the self‐efficacy [ 5 ], internship practices may also be helpful regarding entrepreneurial intention.

Above and beyond, since past start‐up experience indirectly effect the entrepreneurial intention, initiating a new business may also be supported via credits and training via public policy makers. Because, supporting potential and existing entrepreneurs will be helpful [ 4 ] according to our model since past experience increases the intention.

To sum up, this study following the antecedent studies has both theoretical and practical implications regarding the entrepreneurial intention literature and to be more specific studies based on the theory of planned behaviour model. Hence more following researches are welcomed.

© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Continue reading from the same book

Edited by Mário Franco

Published: November 9th, 2016

By Şenay Sabah and Akın Koçak

2108 downloads

By Phefumula Nyoni

1654 downloads

By Sonyel Oflazoğlu

2146 downloads

Entrepreneurial intentions: The role of personality traits in perspective of theory of planned behaviour

Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship

ISSN : 2398-7812

Article publication date: 29 November 2018

Issue publication date: 11 December 2018

This study aims to inculcate personality traits in theory of planned behaviour (TPB) and analyze mediation of perceived behavior control (PBC) and attitude toward entrepreneurship.

Design/methodology/approach

Data were collected with the help of a structured questionnaire from students at four universities located in capital city of Pakistan. SmartPLS has been used to run structural equation modeling technique.

Findings of PLS analysis revealed that the relationship between entrepreneurial intentions (EI) and personality traits was mediated by PBC and attitude toward entrepreneurship.

Originality/value

This study contributes toward the understanding of EI of students in Pakistan – a developing economy. More specifically, it sheds light on the vitality of personality traits in determining the antecedents of EI. Leaning on TPB and intention models, the study incorporated personality traits to unveil a unique and testable multidimensional model of EI, which supports the notion that external factors such as personality characteristics can indirectly affect EI. This research also supports the incorporation of personality traits in TPB and suggests that these socio cognitive theories should concede the indirect effect of personality on intention and behavior.

Theory of planned behaviour

Farrukh, M. , Alzubi, Y. , Shahzad, I.A. , Waheed, A. and Kanwal, N. (2018), "Entrepreneurial intentions: The role of personality traits in perspective of theory of planned behaviour", Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship , Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 399-414. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-01-2018-0004

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2018, Muhammad Farrukh, Yazan Alzubi, Imran Ahmad Shahzad, Abdul Waheed and Nagina Kanwal.

Published in Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship . Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

Introduction

From the previous few years, entrepreneurship has become a national priority for various governments ( Mamun and Rajennd, 2018 ) It has been affiliated with enhancement of innovation, productivity boost, employment prospects and economical gains ( Farrukh et al. , 2017 ; Kirkley, 2017 ; Park, 2017 ). Thus, it is imperative to investigate the factors which might affect the entrepreneurial intentions (EI) in a sound theoretical model to develop and apply effective policies. In current era, plethora of researcher has been endeavoring to explore the factors of EI.

The early researches have indicated personality attributes as the only determinants for EI. Prior research mainly focused on predating EI with the help of certain personality traits; however, later on, the inclusion of individual difference (such as achievement motivation) came forth to investigate the EI through cognitive and social psychological models such as theory of planned behavior (TPB) ( Fayolle et al. , 2014 ; Krueger, 2017 ). This has initiated the debate that prediction of EI through personality trait is subject to some mediating variable such as perceptional and motivational factors ( Baum et al. , 2001 ). However, the role of mediating factors for entrepreneurship has remained undisclosed in the literature ( Rauch and Frese, 2007 ).

In the past research on personality traits, perceptional and motivation factors in determining EI had been conducted independently. To date, there are rare studies which integrated these factors in some social cognitive framework such as TPB. In other words, TPB components have scarcely been recognized as a mediating factor for the relation of EI with personality attributes, under the research sphere of entrepreneurship in Pakistani context.

Study of literature showed that despite the importance of entrepreneurship in economic development, most of the past research was inclined to western countries, there is a little empirical research on entrepreneurial motivation, attitude and intentions of students in developing countries such as Pakistan. The present study is an attempt to fill the highlighted gaps and develop a model for assessing the effects of personality traits on EI in perspective of TPB in the context of a developing country.

Literature and theoretical framework

Past literature showed; intentions have been recognized as the best forecaster for planned behaviors. This is found highly true if behaviors are infrequent, hard to recognize and scarce ( Krueger et al. , 2000 ). These attributes are also one of the characteristics of entrepreneurship, which is considered as an intended and deliberated behavior ( Bird, 1988 ).

In the context of entrepreneurship, intention (EI) can be defined as a “self-acknowledged conviction” by any individual that he/she is willing to initiate new business enterprise, and he/she continuously plans to accomplish this in future ( Ridha and Wahyu, 2017 ; Thompson, 2009 ). The EI is considered as first step toward initiating new business ( Kautonen, Van Gelderen and Tornikoski, 2013 ).Thus, it is very important to understand EI to undermine the concept of entrepreneurship ( Krueger and Carsrud, 1993 ). Literature indicates that individual differences have an impact on EI ( Zhao and Seibert, 2006 ). Consequently, personality traits have been well explored by previous researchers ( Karabulut, 2016 ; Leutner et al. , 2014 ; Mustafa et al. , 2016 ). However, studies directed toward trait-based approaches had many limitations which had been criticized for meager explanatory nature( Hisrich et al. , 2007 ; Krueger et al. , 2000 ).

Although personality traits have been shown to have statistical relation with entrepreneurship, its predictive value has remained limited in previous works (Reynolds, 1997). Consequently, the research direction moved toward cognitive models to depict the influence on entrepreneurial behavior ( Scheier et al. , 1994 ). Thus, it was found that through cognitive perspective that the proximal constructs, including perceived behavioral controls (PBC) and attitudes have higher predictive values toward EI ( Karimi et al. , 2013 ).

The social-cognitive model of TPB, introduced by Ajzen (1988, 1991), consists of such proximal constructs. According to TPB model, three constituents are influential for behavioral intentions, including personal assessment of behavior and its outcomes, which is termed as attitude toward the behavior (Ajzen, 1991), alleged social pressure toward a behavior termed as subjective norms (SN) in TPB and the apparent difficulty toward completing behavior. It has been indicated that SN, PBC and favorable attitude toward behavior works together to enhance the intention of completing the behavior, that is known as PBC ( Urban and Ratsimanetrimanana, 2015 ).

There is positive association between Attitude toward entrepreneurship and EI.

There is a positive relationship between SN and EI.

There is a positive impact of perceived behavioral control on EI.

Personality traits and entrepreneurial intentions

Personality traits play a vital role in determining behavior of an individual ( Tran and Von Korflesch, 2016 ). Literature provides supports for personality traits has been a tinted but imperfect predictor of many aspect of entrepreneurship such as intention to start a venture ( Khan and Ahmed, 2011 ) and being an entrepreneur in the existing organizations (Farrukh et al. , 2016a, 2016b). Theory of career choice explains that the individual’s career choice is the expression of his/her personality. Prior researchers have also found a positive association of personality traits and EI ( Zhao and Seibert, 2006 ). Here it is notable that findings of previous researchers have been found inconsistent. For example some studies found personality traits as strong indicator of EI ( Michael Crant, 1991 ; Zhao and Seibert, 2006 ).These studies showed that the individuals who choose entrepreneurship as career are different in personality traits than those who choose employment in organization ( Kolvereid, 1996 ). However, few studies also showed the use of personality characteristics to determine the EI give a small predictive validity, explanatory power and inconsistent results ( Krueger et al. , 2000 ).

Most commonly used personality traits are risk taking propensity, need for achievement and locus of control. Individual having high need for achievement personality traits are not easily satisfied with their performance and achievement and they keep on striving to gain more. A considerable no of studies have shown that individuals having high need for achievement are more inclined toward entrepreneurship that those who have less need for achievement ( Begley and Boyd, 1987 ; DeCarlo and Lyons, 1979 ; Hornaday and Aboud, 1971 ; Entrialgo et al. , 2000 ).

Another important personality trait is locus of control which is described as the perceived ability of an individual to influence his/her life events (Hisrich and Peters, 1998). Locus of control is conceptualized in two forms, internal and external, former is concerned to the self-efficacy of an individual to influence the outcomes and later talks about the influence of external determinants of the outcomes. Research shows that internal locus of control plays a vital role in decision to start a new venture ( Mazzarol et al. , 1999 ; Entrialgo et al. , 2000 ).

There is a positive association between need for achievement and EI.

There is a positive association between locus of control and EI.

There is a positive association between risk taking propensity and EI.

Theory of planned behaviour and personality characteristics

Under TPB, it is evident that external factors, including personality traits can have an impact on a person’s intentions. Chell (2008) has labeled the need for achievement, risk taking tendency and locus of control as “The Big Three”. These three factors are attributed to personality of new business enterprise initiators. Moreover, they have also been related to desire of becoming entrepreneur ( Brockhaus, 1982 ; Ahmed, 1985 ; Robinson et al. , 1991; Shaver and Scott, 1991; Koh, 1996; Reimers-Hild, 2005 ; Gurel et al. , 2010; Frank et al. , 2007).

Motivation toward achievement or need for achievement can be defined as probability of performing something in a better way as compared to others or one’s own previous performances ( Hansemark, 2003 ). The people who have need for achievement are mostly hard working, ambitious and competitive. They always try to enhance their social position and gain better achievements (McClelland, 1961). Risk taking can be defined as the probability of an individual’s exposure toward the risk factors (Rauch and Frese, 2007a). In other words, t he individual who score high on risk taking personality are inclined toward pursuing actions or decision that are uncertain and accompany chances of failure (Jackson, 1994). This factor can be used to differentiate between entrepreneurs and non- entrepreneurs ( Ahmed, 1985 ; Shane, 1996; Stewart and Roth, 2001 ). Locus of control reflects a person’s conceptualization toward the reason of happenings in one’s life. The internal locus of control implements that an individual has control over happenings in his life, whereas external locus of control reflects the believe that the happenings of one’s life are under the influence of external factors (Rotter, 1966; Shook et al. , 2003).

The people who have an internal locus of control are more inclined toward the risks of initiating a new business ( Mueller and Thomas, 2001 ). Consequently, internal locus of control is highly prevalent among entrepreneurs ( Beugelsdijk and Noorderhaven, 2005 ; Lee and Tsang, 2001 ; Nelson, 1991; Perry et al. , 1986). Thus, the present study examines these three personality traits in detail. Additionally, ATE and PBC are thought to have a stronger relation to intentions ( Liñán and Chen, 2009 ; Karimi et al. , 2013a) and personality ( Fini et al. , 2012 ; Obschonka et al. , 2010; Zhao et al. , 2005 ).

Personality characteristics and attitudes toward entrepreneurships

the cognitive consistency perspective;

functional perspective; and

reinforcement perspective.

These theoretical traditions assert that when people feel they are going to expose to some event they get involved in a cognitive process to evaluate their ability to cope up with these events by alternating their attitudes (Rogers, 1975) and develop a favorable or unfavorable behavior toward these events same as described by the TPB.

Relationship between EI and need for achievement will be mediated by attitude toward entrepreneurship.

Relationshp between EI and risk taking propensity will be mediated by attitude toward entrepreneurship.

Relationshp between EI and locus of control will be mediated by attitude toward entrepreneurship.

Personality characteristics and perceived behavioral control

On the first hand, it is expected that the personality traits will have an impact on PBC and EI through PBC while on the other hand, need for achievement increases self-confidence and capability to cope against difficult situations (McClelland, 1965; Slocum et al. , 2002). Hence, it is asserted that increase in motivation toward achievement will result in an increase of confidence in one’s capabilities to initiate new business endeavor, which will lead toward higher EI. Till date, there is no research work which has pointed out the influence of need for achievement on PBC. Consequently, Kiviluoto et al. (2011) have appealed for research on relation of need for achievement with entrepreneurial self-efficacy. The locus of control reflects an individual’s perception about one’s control over life’s situations (Rotter, 1966). The people who are proponents of external locus of control have less self-efficacy and perceive actions taken to be useless ( Bandura, 1977 ).

Consequently, locus of control has been affiliated with self-efficacy. Similarly, the concept of one’s control over environment is also associated with increased self-efficacy ( Phillips and Gully, 1997 ; Wood and Bandura, 1989 ). Thus, it is evident that people who perceive locus of control to be internal tend to have higher self-efficacy ( Phillips and Gully, 1997 ).

Bandura (1986) pointed out that a person’s self-judgment about their physiological states can be considered as a depiction of their self-efficacy. Some studies have also indicated that locus of control exhibits the anxiety factor in situations with high uncertainty (Ray and Katahn, 1968; Archer, 1979).

From general observation it is found that for a person thinking to start a new business as he/she thinks that he/she can control the environment through hihe/sher capabilities and the result of his decisions will depend only on his abilities. Hence, the people having perception of internal locus of control tend to be less anxious and more confident to complete their desired action such as establishing a new business. Although to a limited extent, association of risk taking with PBC has been explored in the literature of entrepreneurship.

Relationshp between EI and need for achievement will be mediated by PBC.

Relationshp between EI and risk taking will be mediated by PBC.

Relationshp between EI and locus of control will be mediated by PBC.

Methodology

Data collection.

Data were collected form 1,350 final semester students (bachelors and masters) with an assumption that they would be more likely to start their own business as they were in their last semester with clearer future plans. In total 1175 questionnaire were received which made response rate 87 per cent. The sample was made up of humanities students (27.2 per cent), computer engineering students (10.8 per cent) engineering students (29 per cent) and business studies 33 per cent. The total number of male students was 646 (which represents 55 per cent), and there were 529 female students (which represents 45 per cent).

Measure of the study

All the items of variables were adopted from the previous studies and a five-point Likert scale point was used. Table I shows the sources of the questionnaire items.

Statistical tools and methods

To test the study model, partial least square method is used, which is a second generation multivariate technique ( Hair et al. , 2014 ). This technique can simultaneously assess the measurement model and structural model by minimizing the error variance ( Hair et al. , 2014 ). SmartPLS version 3 was used to analyze the developed model. Bootstrapping function (5000 resample) was used to assess the significance level of path. The partial least squares technique is a powerful component-based method widely used in prior studies ( Farrukh et al. , 2017 ; Farrukh et al. , 2016a, 2016b; Farrukh et al. , 2017 ; Hussain and Endut, 2018 ; Kazumi and Kawai, 2017 ). Figure 1 shows the graphical representation of the measurement model.

Evaluation of measurement model

All the exogenous and endogenous variables were conceptualized a first order reflective construct. Essentially, an important aspect in PLS model evaluation is the presentation of measurement model results, which focuses on ascertaining of individual item reliability, internal consistency reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity of the measures used to represent each construct (Chin, 2010b; Hair et al. , 2014; Hair et al. , 2011; Henseler et al. , 2009). Table II shows the results of measurement model evaluation.

Discriminant validity.

To establish discriminant validity in this study, Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) criterion was implemented by comparing the correlations among the latent constructs with square roots of average variance extracted as presented in Table III . Furthermore, as a rule of thumb for establishing discriminant validity, Fornell and Larcker (1981) suggested that the square root of the AVE should exceed the correlations among latent constructs.

As presented in Table III , the correlations among the latent constructs were compared with the square root of the average variances extracted (Chin, 1998, 2010a; Fornell and Larcker, 1981 ; Hair et al. , 2014 ; Henseler et al. , 2009). Table further indicated that each of the square root of the average variances extracted has exceeded the correlations among latent constructs. Hence, this suggests that adequate discriminant validity has been achieved.

Assessment of significance of the structural model

After establishing the reliability and validity of the measurement model, the results of the structural model are then presented. In the current study, a bootstrap resampling method has been applied based on 5000 replicates and 295 cases to assess significance of the path coefficients ( Hair et al. , 2014 ; Hair et al. , 2011; Hair et al. , 2012b; Henseler et al. , 2009; Preacher and Hayes, 2008 ). R 2 measures the predictive accuracy of the model (Ang et al. , 2015) and represents the percentage of variance in the dependent variables as explained by the independent variables in the model (Hair et al. , 2010), whereas path coefficients indicate the degree of change in the dependent variable occurred in accordance for each independent variable (Hair et al. , 2010; Hair et al. , 2006; Pallant, 2007 ). Table IV shows the results of bootstrapping and decision taken for each hypothesis.

Mediation analysis

To measure the mediation effect of the variables, this study followed the procedures suggested by Hair et al. (2016) . Results of bootstrapping in Table V show that factors of TPB fully mediate the relationship between personality traits and EI.

The present study has explored the effects of personality on EI with respect to TPBalong with mediating effect of attitude and PBC. Such a relation is found true when entrepreneur is considered desirable and the mentors around the student are encouraging. In such a situation, chances for student to establish new business are more. Thus, it can be said that intention relies on three motivational sources. However, the significance for each source may vary in perspective of intention and PBC has shown to have a stronger affiliation with EI. These findings are in accordance with the work earlier done by Krueger et al. (2000) , Autio et al. (2001) and Karimi et al. (2013a).

The mediating effects of attitudes and PBC on the relation of personality attributes with entrepreneurial intentions have been proven by the formulated model of present study. This implies that a person having characteristics of need for achievement, risk taking tendency and internal locus of control will start a new business only if he/she has confidence, and finds the task worthy. These findings are found in line with the earlier work done by Conner and Abraham (2001) and Wilkinson and Abraham (2004) . Both of these studies have emphasized on inclusion of personality traits in social cognitive models relating to behaviors and intentions.

Findings showed no association between attitude toward entrepreneurship and risk taking propensity. Effects of risk taking propensity in entrepreneurship has been controversial area of research. Some past studies showed that this relation has been subject to cultural context as well (Zahra, 2005). While on the other hand, Rauch and Frese (2007) argued that using different measures of risk taking propensity produces different effect size. Karimi et al. (2012) asserted that weak predictive value of risk taking propensity is because, different individuals perceive risk differently.

To clarify this controversial relation future research might consider a subjective judgment of risk inherited in certain situation, which is accepted as a better predictor of risk than risk propensity by many researchers (Keh et al. , 2002; Simon et al. , 2000). In sum, this study supports the existing assumptions and theories by illustrating that personality traits effect the entrepreneurial intentions, In addition, these personality traits expert their effects through some proximal variables such as cognitive and motivational factor of TPB.

Implications

The present study has some theoretical and practical implications for researchers and policy makers respectively, who wants to provoke the stimulus of entrepreneurship among the students. Moreover, these implications are highly applicable in the context of a developing country. By Drawing on intentions and TPB models, new predictors for EI has been devised by the present study. This is achieved by integrating factor of personality in the proposed model, to validate it. This study theoretically implies that personality attributes has indirect impact on EI ( Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975 ). Moreover, these results provide evidence that personality characteristics can be useful determinants of students’ perceptions and beliefs. Furthermore, it can said that personality attributes can determine students’ beliefs and attitudes. Thus, personality attributes are important part for EI ( Herron and Sapienza, 1992 ; Johnson, 1990).

Specifically, the findings of this research supported for an integration of social cognitive theory-TPB and personality traits. It also suggests that these social cognitive theories should take consideration of indirect effect of personality traits on behavioral outcomes. Thus, this study makes a significant contribution by empirically testing the mediational role of PBC factors between personality and EI.

The findings also showed that PBC has contributed the most in EI prediction. Therefore, the study suggests some practical interventions and strategies to aim PBC of students, some prior studies showed that entrepreneurial education can effect self-efficacy or PBC.

Thus, entrepreneurial role models should be considered while designing the curriculum, as they can increase confidence level in students regarding their capabilities to initiate a new business by rendering them high experience (Karimi et al. , 2013b, 2013c). The personality traits have been found to impact on students’ EI through attitudes and PBC. Thus, these factors should be considered by policy makers when designing strategies of increasing students’ EI and behaviors. It is recommended that the focus should be laid on developing these characteristics in students. According to some researchers, the characteristics such as need for achievement and risk-taking propensity can be developed and change to some extent over a time span (McClelland and Winter, 1969; Miron and McClelland, 1979 ) (Hansemark, 1998). Entrepreneurship education can enhance locus of control and need for achievement. Similarly, in another study, Castro-Torres et al. (2013) found a positive association between entrepreneurship education and risk taking propensity.

Most of the entrepreneurial characteristics can be stimulated in students. However, for this purpose traditional teaching methods cannot be used (Kirby, 2004). The method of teaching is very important. In Pakistan, methods and content related to EI has not been implied. Resultantly, the curriculum of Pakistan has failed to develop entrepreneurial competencies among students ( Yaghoubi, 2010 ). According to Yaghoubi (2010) , important hindrance toward entrepreneurship motivation is caused by improper teaching methods, content, curriculum and evaluation system. Thus, new teaching methods should be applied to stimulate students with EI and competencies.

Limitations and future research

There were some limitations present in the present study. Because of the cross-sectional nature of study, reliable results were not obtained. This study cannot depict a clear picture of EI for Pakistani students ( Maxwell and Cole, 2007 ; MacKinnon et al. , 2011). Thus, a stronger relation can be found existing between EI and entrepreneurship attitudes. The same is found true for the association between entrepreneurship attitudes and personality characteristics. Although the relation between personality attributes and behavioral intentions has a strong theoretical basis, the casual paths has been reversed in the model. However, the results for original model is more applicable. Moreover, this can be explained on stable and unstable nature of personality characteristics and EI, respectively (Caliendo et al. , 2013). Thus, longitudinal research design is required to show relation of personality with EI and TPB. Such a research design would help in understanding EI and the resulting entrepreneurial behavior. Although the relation of intention and behavior has vital significant, it has remained undiscussed in the literature. This research gap can only be filled by a longitudinal approach.

It is recommended that findings of the present study should be tested in other settings. Moreover, the relation of other personality and contextual attributes with EI should also be assessed. According to Caliendo et al. (2013), personality characteristics have an impact on various entrepreneurial tasks. Thus, future researches should assess the influence of personality attributes within the context of TPB.

The model of present study was mediation based where distal variables influence with the help of proximal variables ( Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975 ; Lüthje and Franke, 2003 ; Rauch and Frese, 2007a). Anyhow, moderation model can also be used to relate proximal variables with their respective outcomes. This research angle should be focused by future researchers.

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

Graphical representation of the study factors

Source of questionnaire items

Measurement model quality criteria

Fornell and larcker criteria for discriminant validity

Ahmed , S.U. ( 1985 ), “ nAch, risk-taking propensity, locus of control and entrepreneurship ”, Personality and Individual Differences , Vol. 6 No. 6 , pp. 781 - 782 .

Bandura , A. ( 1977 ), “ Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change ”, Psychological Review , Vol. 84 No. 2 , p. 191 .

Bandura , A. ( 1986 ), “ Fearful expectations and avoidant actions as coeffects of perceived self-inefficacy ”.

Baum , J.R. , Locke , E.A. and Smith , K.G. ( 2001 ), “ A multidimensional model of venture growth ”, Academy of Management Journal , Vol. 44 No. 2 , pp. 292 - 303 .

Begley , T.M. and Boyd , D.P. ( 1987 ), “ Psychological characteristics associated with performence in entrepreneurial firms and smaller businesses ”, Journal of Business Venturing , Vol. 2 No. 1 , pp. 79 - 93 .

Beugelsdijk , S. and Noorderhaven , N. ( 2005 ), “ Personality characteristics of self-employed: an empirical study ”, Small Business Economics , Vol. 24 No. 2 , pp. 159 - 167 .

Bird , B. ( 1988 ), “ Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: the case for intention ”, Academy of Management Review , Vol. 13 No. 3 , pp. 442 - 453 .

Bonnett , C. and Furnham , A. ( 1991 ), “ Who wants to be an entrepreneur? A study of adolescents interested in a young enterprise scheme ”, Journal of Economic Psychology , Vol. 12 No. 3 , pp. 465 - 478 .

Brockhaus , R.H. ( 1982 ), “ The psychology of the entrepreneur ”.

Cassidy , T. and Lynn , R. ( 1989 ), “ A multifactorial approach to achievement motivation: the development of a comprehensive measure ”, Journal of Occupational Psychology.

Castro-Torres , I.G. , López-Velázquez , J.A. , Sánchez-Valle , V. , Martínez-Vázquez , M. , Uribe , M. and Méndez-Sánchez , N. ( 2013 ), “ 693 Prevention of cholesterol gallstones formation by two extracts of Raphanus sativus L. var niger IN MICE ”, Journal of Hepatology , Vol. 58 , p. S281 .

Chell , E. ( 2008 ), The Entrepreneurial Personality: A Social Construction , Routledge .

Conner , M. and Abraham , C. ( 2001 ), “ Conscientiousness and the theory of planned behavior: toward a more complete model of the antecedents of intentions and behavior ”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , Vol. 27 No. 11 , p. 1547 .

DeCarlo , J.F. and Lyons , P.R. ( 1979 ), “ A comparison of selected personal characteristics of minority and non-minority female entrepreneurs ”, Academy of Management Proceedings , Vol. 1979 No. 1 , Academy of Management , Briarcliff Manor, NY , pp. 369 - 373 .

Entrialgo , M. , Fernández , E. and Vázquez , C.J. ( 2000 ), “ Psychological characteristics and process: the role of entrepreneurship in Spanish SMEs ”, European Journal of Innovation Management , Vol. 3 No. 3 , pp. 137 - 149 .

Farrukh , M. , Wei Ying , C. and Abdallah Ahmed , N.O. ( 2016a ), Organizational Commitment: Does Religiosity Matter? Cogent Business and Management , Vol. 3 No. 1 , pp. 1 - 10 , available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2016.1239300

Farrukh , M. , Ying , C. and Mansori , S. ( 2016b ), “ Intrapreneurial behavior: an empirical investigation of personality traits research issue ”, Management and Marketing , Vol. 11 No. 4 , pp. 597 - 609 , available at: https://doi.org/10.1515/mmcks-2016-0018.Introduction

Farrukh , M. , Ying , C.W. and Mansori , S. ( 2017 ), “ Organizational commitment: an empirical analysis of personality traits ”, Journal of Work-Applied Management , Vol. 9 No. 1 , pp. 18 - 34 .

Farrukh , M. , Khan , A.A. , Shahid Khan , M. , Ravan Ramzani , S. and Soladoye , B.S.A. ( 2017 ), “ Entrepreneurial intentions: the role of family factors, personality traits and self-efficacy ”, World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development , Vol. 13 No. 4 , pp. 303 - 317 .

Fayolle , A. , Liñán , F. and Moriano , J.A. ( 2014 ), “ Beyond entrepreneurial intentions: values and motivations in entrepreneurship ”, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal , Vol. 10 No. 4 , pp. 679 - 689 .

Fini , R. , Grimaldi , R. , Marzocchi , G.L. and Sobrero , M. ( 2012 ), “ The determinants of corporate entrepreneurial intention within small and newly established firms ”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice , Vol. 36 No. 2 , pp. 387 - 414 .

Fishbein , M. and Ajzen , I. ( 1975 ), “ Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research ”.

Fornell , C. and Larcker , D.F. ( 1981 ), “ Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and Statistics ”, Journal of Marketing Research , pp. 382 - 388 .

Hair , J. , Hult , T.G. , Ringle , C. and Sarsted , M. ( 2014 ), “ Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) ”.

Hair , J.F. Jr. , Hult , G.T.M. , Ringle , C. and Sarstedt , M. ( 2016 ), A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) , Sage Publications , Thousand Oaks, CA .

Hansemark , O.C. ( 2003 ), “ Need for achievement, locus of control and the prediction of business start-ups: a longitudinal study ”, Journal of Economic Psychology , Vol. 24 No. 3 , pp. 301 - 319 .

Hatten , T.S. and Ruhland , S.K. ( 1995 ), “ Student attitude toward entrepreneurship as affected by participation in an SBI program ”, Journal of Education for Business , Vol. 70 No. 4 , pp. 224 - 227 .

Herron , L. and Robinson , R.B. Jr. ( 1993 ), “ A structural model of the effects of entrepreneurial characteristics on venture performance ”, Journal of Business Venturing , Vol. 8 No. 3 , pp. 281 - 294 .

Herron , L. and Sapienza , H.J. ( 1992 ), “ The entrepreneur and the initiation of new venture launch activities ”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice , Vol. 17 No. 1 , pp. 49 - 55 .

Hisrich , R. , Langan-Fox , J. and Grant , S. ( 2007 ), “ Entrepreneurship research and practice: a call to action for psychology ”, American Psychologist , Vol. 62 No. 6 , p. 575 .

Hmieleski , K.M. and Corbett , A.C. ( 2006 ), “ Proclivity for improvisation as a predictor of entrepreneurial intentions ”, Journal of Small Business Management , Vol. 44 No. 1 , pp. 45 - 63 .

Hornaday , J.A. and Aboud , J. ( 1971 ), “ Characteristics of successful entrepreneurs 1 ”, Personnel Psychology , Vol. 24 No. 2 , pp. 141 - 153 .

Hussain , A.H.M.B. and Endut , N. ( 2018 ), “ Do decent working conditions contribute to work–life balance ”, Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship , Vol. 12 No. 1 , pp. 90 - 104 , available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-04-2018-045

Karabulut , A.T. ( 2016 ), “ Personality traits on entrepreneurial intention ”, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences , Vol. 229 , pp. 12 - 21 , avaiable at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.109

Karimi , P. , Kloshani , M. and Bakhshizadeh , A. ( 2012 ), “ A comparative study on emotional intelligence and cognitive between successful and unsuccessful entrepreneurs ”, Management Science Letters , Vol. 2 No. 6 , pp. 2071 - 2076 .

Karimi , S. , Biemans , H.J.A. , Lans , T. , Chizari , M. , Mulder , M. and Mahdei , K.N. ( 2013 ), “ Understanding role models and gender influences on entrepreneurial intentions among college students ”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , Vol. 93 , pp. 204 - 214 .

Kautonen , T. , Van Gelderen , M. and Tornikoski , E.T. ( 2013 ), “ Predicting entrepreneurial behaviour: a test of the theory of planned behaviour ”, Applied Economics , Vol. 45 No. 6 , pp. 697 - 707 .

Kazumi , T. and Kawai , N. ( 2017 ), “ Institutional support and women’s entrepreneurial self-efficacy ”, Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship , Vol. 11 No. 3 , pp. 345 - 365 , available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-12-2017-041

Khan , M. and Ahmed , I. ( 2011 ), “ Impact of personality traits on entrepreneurial intentions of university students ”, Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business , Vol. 1 No. 4 , pp. 51 - 57 , available at: http://joc.hcc.edu.pk/faculty_publications/jochcc2009_1.pdf

Kirkley , W.W. ( 2017 ), “ Cultivating entrepreneurial behaviour: entrepreneurship education in secondary schools ”, Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship , Vol. 11 No. 1 , pp. 17 - 37 , available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-04-2017-018

Kiviluoto , N. , Brännback , M. and Carsrud , A. ( 2011 ), “ Are firm growth and performance the same or different concepts in empirical entrepreneurship studies? An analysis of the dependent and independent variables ”, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Economic Development , pp. 11 - 29 .

Kolvereid , L. ( 1996 ), Kolvereid(1996b).pdf .

Krueger , N. and Carsrud , A.L. ( 1993 ), “ Entrepreneurial intentions: applying the theory of planned behaviour ”, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development , Vol. 5 No. 4 , pp. 315 - 330 .

Krueger , N.F. ( 2017 ), “ Entrepreneurial intentions are dead: Long live entrepreneurial intentions ”, Revisiting the Entrepreneurial Mind , Springer , Berlin , pp. 13 - 34 .

Krueger , N. , Reilly , M.D. and Carsrud , A.L. ( 2000 ), “ Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions ”, Journal of Business Venturing , Vol. 15 Nos 5/6 , pp. 411 - 432 , available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00033-0

Lee , D.Y. and Tsang , E.W. ( 2001 ), “ The effects of entrepreneurial personality, background and network activities on venture growth ”, Journal of Management Studies , Vol. 38 No. 4 , pp. 583 - 602 .

Leutner , F. , Ahmetoglu , G. , Akhtar , R. and Chamorro-Premuzic , T. ( 2014 ), “ The relationship between the entrepreneurial personality and the big five personality traits ”, Personality and Individual Differences , Vol. 63 , pp. 58 - 63 .

Liñán , F. and Chen , Y.W. ( 2009 ), “ Development and cross‐cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions ”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice , Vol. 33 No. 3 , pp. 593 - 617 .

Lüthje , C. and Franke , N. ( 2003 ), “ The ‘making’ of an entrepreneur: testing a model of entrepreneurial intent among engineering students at MIT ”, R&D Management , Vol. 33 No. 2 , pp. 135 - 147 .

Mamun , A. and Rajennd , M.A. ( 2018 ), “ Effect of economic vulnerability on entrepreneurial competencies among malaysian micro-entrepreneurs ”, Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship , Vol. 12 No. 2 , pp. 222 - 237 , available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-03-2018-0013

Maxwell , S.E. and Cole , D.A. ( 2007 ), “ Bias in cross-sectional analyses of longitudinal mediation ”, Psychological Methods , Vol. 12 No. 1 , p. 23 .

Mazzarol , T. , Volery , T. , Doss , N. and Thein , V. ( 1999 ), “ Factors influencing small business start-ups: a comparison with previous research ”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research , Vol. 5 No. 2 , pp. 48 - 63 .

Michael Crant , J. ( 1991 ), “ The proactive personality scale as a predeictor of entrepreneurial intentions ”, Journal of Small Business Management , Vol. 34 No. 3 , pp. 1 - 11 .

Miron , D. and McClelland , D.C. ( 1979 ). “ The impact of achievement motivation training on small businesses ”, California Management Review , Vol. 21 No. 4 , pp. 13 - 28 .

Mueller , S.L. and Thomas , A.S. ( 2001 ), “ Culture and entrepreneurial potential: a nine country study of locus of control and innovativeness ”, Journal of Business Venturing , Vol. 16 No. 1 , pp. 51 - 75 .

Mustafa , M.J. , Mustafa , M.J. , Hernandez , E. , Hernandez , E. , Mahon , C. , Mahon , C. and Chee , L.K. ( 2016 ), “ Entrepreneurial intentions of university students in an emerging economy: the influence of university support and proactive personality on students’ entrepreneurial intention ”, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies , Vol. 8 No. 2 , pp. 162 - 179 .

Pallant , J. ( 2007 ), “ SPSS ”, Survival manual .

Park , C. ( 2017 ), “ A study on effect of entrepreneurship on entrepreneurial intention ”, Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship , Vol. 11 No. 2 , pp. 159 - 170 , available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-08-2017-024

Phillips , J.M. and Gully , S.M. ( 1997 ), “ Role of goal orientation, ability, need for achievement, and locus of control in the self-efficacy and goal--setting process ”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol. 82 No. 5 , p. 792 .

Preacher , K.J. and Hayes , A.F. ( 2008 ), “ Assessing mediation in communication research ”, The Sage Sourcebook of Advanced Data Analysis Methods for Communication Research , pp. 13 - 54 .

Rauch , A. and Frese , M. ( 2007 ), “ Born to be an entrepreneur? Revisiting the personality approach to entrepreneurship ”, The Psychology of Entrepreneurship , pp. 41 - 65 .

Reimers-Hild , C.I. ( 2005 ), “ Locus of control, need for achievement and risk taking propensity: a framework for the" entrepreneurial" learner of the 21st century ”.

Ridha , R.N. and Wahyu , B.P. ( 2017 ), “ Entrepreneurship intention in agricultural sector of young generation in Indonesia ”, Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship , Vol. 11 No. 1 , pp. 76 - 89 , available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-04-2017-022

Scheier , M.F. , Carver , C.S. and Bridges , M.W. ( 1994 ), “ Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): a reevaluation of the life orientation test ”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , Vol. 67 No. 6 , p. 1063 .

Stewart , W.H. Jr. and Roth , P.L. ( 2001 ), “ Risk propensity differences between entrepreneurs and managers: a meta-analytic review ”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol. 86 No. 1 , p. 145 .

Thompson , E.R. ( 2009 ), “ Individual entrepreneurial intent: Construct clarification and development of an internationally reliable metric ”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice , Vol. 33 No. 3 , pp. 669 - 694 .

Tran , A.T.P. and Von Korflesch , H. ( 2016 ), “ A conceptual model of social entrepreneurial intention based on the social cognitive career theory ”, Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship , Vol. 10 No. 1 , pp. 17 - 38 , available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-12-2016-007

Urban , B. and Ratsimanetrimanana , F.A. ( 2015 ), “ Culture and entrepreneurial intentions of madagascan ethnic groups ”, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies , Vol. 7 No. 2 , pp. 86 - 114 .

Wilkinson , D. and Abraham , C. ( 2004 ), “ Constructing an integrated model of the antecedents of adolescent smoking ”, British Journal of Health Psychology , Vol. 9 No. 3 , pp. 315 - 333 .

Wood , R. and Bandura , A. ( 1989 ), “ Social cognitive theory of organizational management ”, Academy of Management Review , Vol. 14 No. 3 , pp. 361 - 384 .

Yaghoubi , J. ( 2010 ), “ Study barriers to entrepreneurship promotion in agriculture higher education ”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , Vol. 2 No. 2 , pp. 1901 - 1905 .

Zhao , H. and Seibert , S. ( 2006 ), “ The big five personality dimensions and entrepreneurial status: a Meta-Analytical Review ”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol. 91 No. 2 , pp. 259 - 271 , available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.2.259

Zhao , H. , Seibert , S.E. and Hills , G.E. ( 2005 ), “ The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions ”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol. 90 No. 6 , p. 1265 .

Corresponding author

Related articles, we’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

The Impact of Self-Efficacy on Entrepreneurship Performance

Self-efficacy is a person’s belief in one’s own competencies in dealing with difficult and uncertain tasks and difficulties with special needs. Previous research showed that as people’s self-efficacy beliefs increase, behavior change also increases. Self-efficacy can be seen as an explanatory factor of the high performance that people should show in entrepreneurship processes. The aim of this research is to determine the impact of self-efficacy on entrepreneurship performance. This is an empirically designed research. Survey data were collected from 296 randomly selected respondents who started up his or her own actively running businesses in Konya province in Turkey. Data were analyzed by using exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and structural equation modeling path analysis techniques. The findings of this research indicate that self-efficacy has a positive impact on entrepreneurship performance. Results suggest that self-efficacy is a robust predictor of the source of entrepreneurship performance of the people. Thus, great emphasis should be given for increasing the self-efficacy of entrepreneurs.

Keywords : self-efficacy, entrepreneurship performance, entrepreneur

Introduction

The personal view an individual holds of his/her capabilities in successfully completing an undertaking plays an important role in the process of making decisions whether or not to take on new challenges, which may entail coping with obstacles and require perseverance and determination in the face of hindrances (Mauer et al., 2017; McGee & Peterson, 2019). Throughout his/her lifespan, indications of the perception of self-efficacy can be traced in an individual’s performance when choosing to initiate an action and persist on it (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994). More specifically, an individual with high-level self-efficacy is more likely to exhibit initiation behavior, effort, and unwavering determination (McGee & Peterson, 2019).

The construct of self-efficacy is considered to be a determinant factor in mobilizing an individual in the direction of venturing into a new business (Gielnik et al., 2020). More precisely, when one holds higher levels of self-efficacy s/he can highly likely to succeed in the intended undertaking. Self-efficacy more reliably indicates future accomplishments than past records of successes (Chen et al., 1998). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy is used to define an individual’s confidence in his/her abilities, and has a determinant role in shaping entrepreneurial intentions (Li-Yu & Jian-Hao, 2019). In this respect, it can be assumed that the level of entrepreneurial self-efficacy correlates with entrepreneurial intentions (Drnovšek et al., 2010).

The studies in the literature indicate that there exists a strong link between entrepreneurial self-efficacy and the performance of a company started by an entrepreneur. However, there is still a need to investigate this relationship empirically in a country-specific context. Studies have generally been conducted in the western culture, and the cultural environment of the society might have effects on self-efficacy and the entrepreneur’s firm performance (Naktiyok, Karabey, & Gulluce, 2010). Thus, this research aimed to bring a new perspective to the scientific discussion in a Turkish context. In this paper first, the theoretical background to the both construct of self-efficacy and the entrepreneur’s firm performance was discussed. Then findings, results, and implications of the research were given.

1. Theorethical framework

1.1 self-efficacy.

The foundations for the theory of self-efficacy were laid within the framework of locus of control theory by Rotter (1954) and attribution theory by Heider (1944). Self-efficacy is defined as a person’s belief in his or her capability to perform a given task or courses of action needed to exercise control over events in their lives (Bandura, 1994; Boyd & Vozikis, 1994; Chen et al., 1998; Hmieleski & Corbett, 2008; Pajares, 1997). It indicates whether an individual can imagine him/herself attaining the goals set and exhibit the personal qualities required for the completion of that goal (Gallagher, 2012). It is about one’s belief in his ability to activate motivational, cognitive and functional abilities in a given circumstance (Wood & Bandura, 1989).

The personal evaluation of past experiences contributes to how one perceives his/her self-efficacy. The question of whether an individual can perceive her/himself as successfully coping with challenges in her/his future undertakings indicates self-efficacy (Mauer et al., 2017). When an individual holds higher levels of self-efficacy, the likelihood of him venturing into new courses of action for the attainment of a goal is expected to increase. The entrepreneurial spirit is expected to be higher for those individuals with efficacious outlook on his/her potential to act (Drnovšek et al., 2010). It is that kind of attitude which would play an important role for the successful completion of the entrepreneurial undertaking.

Individuals who exhibit higher levels of self-efficacy feeling are likely to readily accept and embark on undertakings that potentially involve challenges in the process of implementing them (Bandura, 1994). They remain steadfast in their commitment to succeed in their goals regardless of the potential failures and resilient enough to get back to their original stance when failures or setbacks occur (Hmieleski & Corbett, 2008).

An individual gradually attains a high level of self-efficacy through time as s/he experiences accomplishments and successfully deals with problems through effort and persistence, which ultimately helps him/her develop a belief in his/her capabilities to successfully invest in motivational and cognitive resources needed (Mauer et al., 2017). Individuals usually avoid engaging in actions in which they expect to have low control and prefer situations with high personal control (Chen et al., 1998). High-level self-efficacy usually comes after the success of an individual experience in an action undertaken that previously involved uncertainties. The sheer experience of success in such uncertain situations helps an individual build a robust belief in self-efficacy (Bandura, 1994).

Self-efficacy beliefs influence behavior through four mediating processes: goal-setting and persistence, affect, cognition, and selection of environments and activities (Bandura, 1994). The influence of self-efficacy can be observed in the selection of goals, goal-oriented actions, effort invested in the process, and determination to succeed despite difficulties. Individuals holding a strong sense of self-efficacy tend to invest more effort in the process to cope with challenges they faced. The sense of self-efficacy greatly influences the ways in which individuals respond to life events, which ultimately affect cognition and action. It also bears heavily on the type and intensity of the effect (Bandura, 1993). An individual’s beliefs about self-efficacy greatly shape type of the goals set and the plans and strategies devised to obtain those goals. It further shapes the development of rules for predicting and influencing events as well as efficiency in solving problems. In situations where individuals have to make sound decisions about whether to engage in a tough task, those who are holding beliefs in their problem-solving abilities, eventually, prove themselves as efficient decision-makers and problem solvers. Individuals tend to prefer engaging in situations in which they expect to accomplish well and avoid situations in which they anticipate that the demands placed on them are likely to overtax their abilities. Apparently, that self-efficacy beliefs greatly influence individuals’ preferences for engaging in situations and activities (Maddux, 1995).

The construct of self-efficacy attempts to explain processes influencing the execution of an action rather than the outcome of the action. It is defined in terms of one’s self-assessment of own abilities to perform according to the requirements of a set goal (Liu et al., 2017; Maddux, 1995). Self-efficacy does not necessarily indicate a usual behavior pattern but rather it defines a certain behavior pattern for a particular activity. It should be noted here that having self-efficacy belief in distinct domains has a positive influence on the self-efficacy belief for new situations. Accordingly, the belief in one’s abilities to cope with challenging situations, convictions for success, and past accomplishments all contributes to self-efficacy (Kulviwat et al., 2014).

According to social cognitive theory, nature of interrelationship among cognition, behavior, and situational events is dynamic and has wider implications in the long run. Social cognitive theory suggests that humans have a capacity for using symbolic cognitive activity. (Wang et al., 2019). This quality of human cognition may explain why humans in advance can visualize possible situations/events, possible emotional and behavioral responses to those situations as well as possible outcomes of their conducts in those situations. Using his/her power of imagination an individual can visualize him/herself as un/successfully dealing with the demands of a possible situation in the future and accordingly form beliefs about her/his own self-efficacy. Similarly, actual experiences or vicarious experiences may form the basis for mental scenarios imagined. However, the actual success or failure experiences influence self-efficacy more than vicarious experiences (Maddux, 1995).

Accomplishments in the past contribute positively to one’s level of self-efficacy while repeated failures lead to lower levels of self-efficacy. Failures negatively affect one’s belief in his abilities and prevent him from performing efficiently (Yıldırım & İlhan, 2010). Yet, accomplishments in the past will help boost one’s belief in self-efficacy and foster success in the future. Having certain abilities to accomplish intended goals is not the sole factor. To put it differently, one’s abilities mediate between his belief in self-efficacy and accomplishment of intended goals. Ultimately, this situation is expected to bring an increase in the tendency for venturing. From this interrelationship, it can be concluded that self-efficacy does not necessarily indicate one’s ability but rather his belief in existing resources (Akkoyunlu et al., 2005). The sources of one’s perception of self-efficacy can be traced back to the resilience and responses they develop when he or she sets goals and attempts to succeed in it even in the face of challenges. Hence, it can be said that as the perception of self-efficacy increases, the number of goals and efforts invested to reach those goals also increases (Çetin & Basım, 2010).

1.2 Entrepreneurship Performance

Most courses of action are initially organized in thought. The perception of self-efficacy greatly affects the process of forming anticipatory scenarios and acting them out in the mind. Individuals with a high level of self-efficacy are expected to set goals involving many challenges and remained determined to accomplish their goals throughout the process. They usually visualize success scenarios, which offer them a framework for the optimum course of action and performance (Bandura, 1994).

Career development theory provides a framework that attempts to examine the role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions and behaviors. It suggests that the level of entrepreneurial self-efficacy at the onset of the career development process has implications on one’s entrepreneurial intentions (Zhao et al., 2005). Also, job experiences one gets in the past shape self-efficacy beliefs through successfully completed feats that require mastery in that area. In regard, it should also be noted that individuals may initially hold entrepreneurial intentions but wait till they reach the level of confidence at which they can expect to succeed in their new business venture. Yet, that type of confidence is gained in the process of enactive mastery. On the other hand, some individuals who are in later stages of career development usually feel the need to realize career growth when they find themselves pushed out of the job market and got unemployed (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994).

Positive consequences of an individual’s actions are expected to boost his/her self-efficacy, while negative ones are expected to lower (Pajares, 1997). If people experience only easy successes, they come to expect quick results and are easily discouraged by failure. A resilient sense of efficacy requires experience in overcoming obstacles through perseverant effort and that may result in a mastery experience (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994; Mauer et al., 2017). Challenges and demanding situations experienced in the process of attaining goals lead to the recognition that success comes from perseverance. Once an individual starts to become aware of his/her potential to succeed, s/he is more likely to endure hardships and quickly recover from failed attempts. The very experience of enduring in the face of challenges would make him/her stronger and more resilient (Bandura, 1994).

The impact of modeling on perceived self-efficacy is strongly influenced by perceived similarity to the models. The greater the assumed similarity, the more persuasive are the models’ successes and failures. We learn through modeling or repeating the behavior of others, that is also called vicarious experience (Bandura, 1994; Mauer et al., 2017).

People seek proficient models who possess the competencies to which they aspire (Bernard et al., 2011). Vicarious experience occurs when a certain social behavior, e.g., entrepreneurship, is informally observed and then adopted by an individual. Hence, the learning occurs by example rather than by direct experience. Proficient role models convey effective strategies for managing situations, and they affect self-efficacy through a social comparison process. That is, people form judgments of their own capabilities by comparing themselves to others (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994).

Presence of a high-performing parent entrepreneur has a positive impact on an individual’s choice of an entrepreneurial career (Rocha & Van Praag, 2020). However, role models do not necessarily have to be actual entrepreneurs or parents although they can be, but a role model always has to be relevant and believable for the situation in which the individual finds himself or herself in. Many of the functions of the mentor relationship may increase entrepreneurial self-efficacy (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994; Mauer et al., 2017).

Social persuasion strengthens people’s beliefs that they have what it takes to succeed. People who are persuaded verbally that they possess the capabilities to master given activities are likely to mobilize greater effort and sustain it than if they harbor self-doubts and dwell on personal deficiencies when problems arise (Bandura, 1994). It is also a possibility that social persuasion may increase self-efficacy beliefs to unrealistic levels. Therefore, social persuasion should incorporate the assignment of tasks that develop self-improvement (mastery experiences) in order to ensure success (Bandura, 2012). In addition, it is important to consider such factors as the credibility, expertise, trustworthiness, and prestige of the persuading person when evaluating the usefulness of persuasive information. Persuaders can play an important part in the development of an individual’s self-beliefs (Pajares, 1997). If the source of social support is a trusted and successful role model to the individual, verbal persuasion may exert an even more profound influence on the development of entrepreneurial self-efficacy (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994).

The relationship between self-efficacy and performance has direct implications for the development of entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Activities and environments are selected by people based on their judgments or perceptions of personal self-efficacy. Activities and situations that are viewed as exceeding their coping abilities are avoided in favor of situations they judge themselves capable of managing. If a person experiences past success on the job may experience greater levels of self-efficacy when faced with similar circumstances in new situations. This individual may set higher personal goals, may be more persistent in overcoming obstacles, and perform better in the long run (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994).

Self-efficacy beliefs help to determine how much effort people will expend on an activity, how long they will persevere when confronting obstacles, and how resilient they will prove in the face of adverse situations – the higher the sense of efficacy, the greater the effort, persistence, and resilience. Self-efficacy beliefs are strong determinants and predictors of the level of accomplishment that individuals finally attain (Pajares, 1997).

Entrepreneurial self-efficacy is an individual’s belief in his or her ability to achieve various entrepreneurial tasks (Chen et al., 1998; Miao at al., 2017). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy affects entrepreneurial career choice and development (Chen et al., 1998). In stable environments, where decision options are more certain due to higher levels of transparency and predictability, overconfidence is less likely to occur. Highly optimistic entrepreneurs who are also high in entrepreneurial self-efficacy will be more successful. This is because the environment is more likely to be in alignment with their past experience, thus reducing the need to consider various decision options in detail. Therefore, they should be able to draw on their confidence in their abilities to move forward to make quick decisions with less negative consequences, because decision alternatives will be more transparent to them in stable environments as compared to dynamic ones (Hmieleski & Baron, 2008).

As entrepreneurs hold strong beliefs in their own abilities to accomplish tasks in entrepreneurial areas, they establish challenging goals, display persistence, invest efforts regarding entrepreneurial tasks, and recover rapidly from failure. The effects of these invested efforts are reflected in performance (Miao et al., 2017).

Performance is both outcome and determinant of self-efficacy. Individuals become more confident after the successful completion of various tasks so it is likely that an entrepreneur’s confidence in their ability to develop their business likely improves as the firms experience sustained success (Chen et al., 1998; McGee & Peterson, 2019). Likewise, altering a new venture’s entrepreneurial orientation to better meet the needs of an evolving marketplace may produce long-term performance benefits. Entrepreneurial orientation’s relationship with performance likely changes over time because entrepreneurs learn what types of firm behavior or strategic posture is most appropriate (McGee & Peterson, 2019).

1.3 Research Hypothesis

Triadic reciprocal determinism indicates that individual, environmental, and behavioral factors are independent from but interact with one another (Zhao et al., 2020). The effect of environmental factors on behavioral factors is latent and becomes substantial only when environmental factors are combined with individual factors and triggered by corresponding behaviors. Moreover, individual and environmental factors are reciprocally determined by each other, and environmental factors positively affect individual factors (Li-Yu & Jian-Hao, 2019).

There is a robust positive relationship between self-efficacy and performance (Hechavarria et al.,, 2012; Hmieleski & Corbett, 2008). Individuals start new businesses primarily for intrinsic reasons, as opposed to extrinsic rewards. Work satisfaction may be an even more important indicator of success for individual entrepreneurs than financial performance. After all, money is only a means through which one may potentially use in the pursuit of finding satisfaction. Lack of money is sure to reduce satisfaction if one’s basic needs cannot be met, but excess amounts of money will not guarantee happiness (Hmieleski & Corbett, 2008).

Self-beliefs of efficacy play a key role in the self-regulation of motivation. People tend to form beliefs about what they can do. They anticipate likely outcomes of prospective actions. They set goals for themselves and plan courses of action designed to realize valued futures. There are three different forms of cognitive motivators: causal attributions, outcome expectancies, and cognized goals. The corresponding theories are attribution theory, expectancy-value theory and goal theory, respectively. Self-efficacy beliefs influence causal attributions, likely outcomes of performance, and cognitive mechanism of motivation. Explicit, challenging goals enhance and sustain motivation. Those who have a strong belief in their capabilities exert greater effort when they fail to master the challenge. Strong perseverance contributes to performance accomplishments (Bandura, 1994).

Self-efficacy influences personal goal setting and goal commitment. People who perceive a high sense of self-efficacy set more challenging goals for themselves and possess a stronger commitment to these goals. These individuals are also more likely to construct or visualize success scenarios that guide performance than people who are low in self-efficacy (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994). The higher the level of people’s perceived self-efficacy the wider the range of career options they seriously consider, the greater their interest in them, and the better they prepare themselves for the occupational pursuits they choose and the greater is their success (Bandura, 1994).

There are enough studies that statistically proven the relationship between self-efficacy and entrepreneurship performance. However, this relationship deserves investigation because the national infrastructure and culture might play notable role in this relationship. For instance, while in the western culture individualism is high and uncertainty avoidance is low, in Turkey collectivism and uncertainty avoidance are high (Naktiyok et al., 2010). Additionally, the literature on exploring this relationship by considering cultural differences is limited. Similarly, such types of researches in the Turkish context are also scarce. Thus, the following hypothesis was proposed:

H: There is a positive impact of self-efficacy on entrepreneurship performance in the context of Turkish culture.

2. Research Method

The purpose of this research was to examine the relationship between entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurship performance. This research was designed quantitatively to find out a generalized pattern of this relationship in the context of Turkey. A questionnaire with three parts was formed to collect primary data. The first part of the questionnaire measured “entrepreneurial self-efficacy”, the second part measured “entrepreneurship performance” and the third part investigated demographic characteristics of participants. Both measures, self-efficacy and entrepreneurship performance, were 5-point Linkert scales ranged from “1 = strongly disagree ” to “5 = strongly agree”.

The measures for the entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurship performance were taken from the study of Buang (2012). The measures were translated and validated in Turkish language by Abdullahi (2017, pp. 32-33). The entrepreneurial self-efficacy measure consisted of 29 items and entrepreneurship performance consisted of 21 items. Cronbach’s Alpha reliability coefficients for internal consistency of the measures “entrepreneurial self-efficacy” and “entrepreneurship performance” were 0.80 and 0.76 respectively. Results of the reliability tests suggested that the internal consistency of the items of the measures were good.

Population of the research was people working in organizations, mainly entrepreneurs, in the province of Konya, in Turkey. Konya is one of the top 5 developed big cities in Turkey. A total of 400 questionnaires were delivered to randomly selected firms, 322 (81%) questionnaires were returned and 296 questionnaires were scrutinized valid for analysis. To see a clear picture of the current situation and to get a general idea about the entrepreneurship performance level, no specific target business group was focused on. When considering the techniques used in the data analysis method it was estimated that the sample size was adequate (Hox & Bechger, 2006). Exploratory Factor Analysis, Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modelling techniques were employed for data analysis.

The questionnaire was first submitted to six practitioners and researchers who were expert in the field of research subject to maintain surface validity. Then, a pilot study was carried out with 40 valid responses to test the preliminary validity of the measures. In the course of analyzing the pilot data, to clarify the understanding of the measure items more, some items were rephrased.

2.1 Demographics

Finding of the descriptive statistics for the demographic characteristics revealed that majority of the respondents were male (97.64%), married (72.97%), in the age group of 36 to 50 years (36.82%), and hold High School and above degrees (54.05%). Most of the participants had 7 to 9 years work experience (25.68%) in their existing organizations. It was observed that majority of participants work at production department (61.15%) at the status of worker. The firms, where the respondents are currently working, are mainly small scaled organizations (78.72%) operating more than 20 years (19.26%) in food and beverage sector (13.85%). More than half of the respondent had experience of started-up of a business (55.74%), and actively owned at least one start-up (56.76%).

2.2 Explanatory Factor Analysis for the Measures

Exploratory factor analysis enables to regroup variables into a limited set of clusters based on shared variance (Bartholomew et al., 2011; Yong & Pearce, 2013). An exploratory factor analysis was conducted for the measure of entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Kaiser-Meyer Olkin (KMO) measures adequacy of the sample and it is used to contrast between the extents and the scales of the observed correlation coefficients in relation to the extents of the partial correlation coefficients. The KMO measure of sampling adequacy suggested that the sample was factorable (KMO= 0.69). The KMO value indicates that the variables are related to each other, share common factor and are patterned relationships between the items (Bartholomew et al., 2011). The Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity tests the hypothesis that the correlation matrix is equal to the unit matrices. It had a statistically significant result (χ2 = 721.157, df = 136, p <000). After determining that the factor analysis for the entrepreneurial self-efficacy structure can be applied, factor analysis based on the “Varimax” rotation with Principal Component Analysis method was performed. Twelve items of the measure generated low loading or close loading in more than one component simultaneously. Therefore, these items were dropped from the analysis. Exploratory factor analysis generated six dimensions for the measure of entrepreneurial self-efficacy. These dimensions explained 57.03% of total variance. Since one component got only two items, this component combined with the close concept covering component. One component was disregarded since Cronbach’s Alpha of this component was below the accepted threshold. Further analysis conducted with the compound variables named persistence, affect, selection, and goal-setting.

An exploratory factor analysis was conducted for the measure of entrepreneurship performance. The KMO measure of sampling adequacy suggested that the sample was factorable (KMO = 0.714). The Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity test had a significant result (χ2 = 839.634, df = 210, p <000), indicating that the factor analysis for the entrepreneurship performance structure can be applied. Explanatory Factor Analysis based on the “Varimax” rotation with Principal Component Analysis method was performed. An item of the measure was eliminated from the analysis. Exploratory factor analysis generated seven dimensions for the measure of entrepreneurship performance. These dimensions explained 54.79% of total variance. Two components got only two items each. These components combined with the other close components. One component was disregarded since Cronbach’s Alpha of this component was below the accepted threshold. Further analysis conducted with the compound variables named patience, revenue, growth, and opportunity.

2.3 Covariance Analysis

Covariance analysis is used to minimize the error variance, increases the strength of the model, and removes the systematic error which could affect the results (Burgazoğlu, 2013, p. 19). It also clarifies the differences between the results of certain characteristics of groups. As depicted in Table 1, covariance among the variables were significantly correlated, and strength of the correlation among the variables were mostly high.

2.4 Structural Equation Modelling

Structural equation modelling (SEM) is a multivariate analysis technique to determine the strength of relationships among constructs. The main application of SEM is path analysis, which hypothesizes between variables and tests the models with linear equation (Liu & Hsiang, 2015, p. 784). Fit indices are used to determine the fitness of the model in SEM (Walker & Maddan, 2013).

Figure 1. Structural Equation Modeling for the Theoretical Model

Figure 1 displays SEM results with standardized values. SEM results for the exogenous construct entrepreneurial self-efficacy contained three components, namely; persistence, selection and goal-setting. The endogenous construct entrepreneurship performance consisted of two components: patience and opportunity. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was executed for both constructs. Results of CFA analysis suggested to drop “affect” component of the exogenous construct and “revenue” and “growth” components of the endogenous construct. SEM model yielded statistically fit indices [χ2 = 3.462 (4), p 0.484; GFI = 0.995; AGFI; 0.982; RMSEA = 0.000] and found a robust positive relationship between the variables entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurship performance (R2 = 0.74, p < 0.001). The proposed hypothesis (H1: β = .860, p < 0.001) was supported.

Conclusion and Suggestions

This research was focused on the relationship between entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurship performance. It was observed that both concepts, entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurship performance, were examined by scholars. However, there is limited research exploring this relationship in the context of Turkish culture.

The results of this research are in parallel with the previous researches. Findings of this research also proved that there is a strong relationship between entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurship performance in the context of Turkish context as well. In other words, one of the most important determinants of entrepreneurship performance is entrepreneurial self-efficacy.

Since entrepreneurial self-efficacy is a dominant predictor for entrepreneurship performance, a strong emphasis should be given on this subject. Research results suggest that if an individual has a high sense of self-efficacy, he or she will have higher entrepreneurial success. Individuals with higher entrepreneurial self-efficacy are more confident in their ability to run their own business with high performance. When people motivated, encouraged, supported, and directed to become an entrepreneur and run their own business, their self-efficacy becomes high, and their desire to attain goals, even under hard obstacles, increases. Therefore, people ought to be trained, motivated, and supported to become entrepreneurs.

This research has its own limitations that offers further research opportunities. The data in the survey was collected via self-reported measures from the participants. Further researches can be carried qualitatively to get deeper knowledge of the concept. Secondly, the present study was carried out in Turkey. Similar research can be conducted in other regions or countries to find out the effect of cultural differences.

peer-reviewed

Related articles:

Leading and managing areas of innovation: the multi-stakeholder and startup perspectives, implementing ja junior achievement company program for vocational colleges in sensationalstem project, entrepreneurial spirit of knowledge workers as a key asset in strategic change, transition from linear to circular business models with service design methodology to drive innovation and growth, embodiment in entrepreneurial learning: dance as a tool for teaching entrepreneurial mindset.

Entrepreneurial Knowledge and its Effects on Entrepreneurial Intentions: Development of a Conceptual Framework

Figures from this paper

figure 1

69 Citations

Entrepreneurial intentions of university students in an emerging economy: the influence of university support and proactive personality on students’ entrepreneurial intention.

Can entrepreneurial knowledge boost the entrepreneurial intent of French students? The mediation role of behavioral antecedents

Impact of training on entrepreneurial intention: an interactive cognitive perspective

How do Institutions Inspire Ambitions? Differentiating Institutional Effects on Entrepreneurial Growth Intentions: Evidence from China

Fostering entrepreneurial intention among engineering students

Impact of Personality Traits and Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial Intentions of Business and Engineering Students

Effect of institutional support and entrepreneurial knowledge on women’s entrepreneurial self-efficacy and venture performance in a developing country

The Influence of Financial Literacy and Environmental on Student Intentions for Social Entrepreneurship

Personal Capabilities and Social Factor towards Entrepreneurial Intention: Empirical Evidence of Science and Technology Undergraduate Students

DETERMINANT FACTORS OF STUDENTS ENTREPRENEURSHIP INTENTION

SHOWING 1-10 OF 93 REFERENCES

Do entrepreneurship programmes raise entrepreneurial intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources

The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions.

The 'making' of an entrepreneur: testing a model of entrepreneurial intent among engineering students at MIT

The Influence of Self-Efficacy on the Development of Entrepreneurial Intentions and Actions

Assessing Entrepreneurial Intentions Amongst Students: A Comparative Study

Impact of Childhood Experiences on the Development of Entrepreneurial Intentions

Enterprise Education: Influencing Students’ Perceptions of Entrepreneurship

Towards a conceptual understanding of entrepreneurial learning

Examining the Impact of Small Business Institute Participation on Entrepreneurial Attitudes

Entrepreneurial intentions: Applying the theory of planned behaviour

Related Papers

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Similar articles being viewed by others

Slider with three articles shown per slide. Use the Previous and Next buttons to navigate the slides or the slide controller buttons at the end to navigate through each slide.

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

The effect of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial intention through planned behavioural control, subjective norm, and entrepreneurial attitude

22 July 2021

Dewie Tri Wijayati, Hujjatullah Fazlurrahman, … Ika Diyah Candra Arifah

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

Entrepreneurial intention among University students in Malaysia: integrating self-determination theory and the theory of planned behavior

10 July 2018

Ibrahim Al-Jubari, Arif Hassan & Francisco Liñán

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

Development of a comprehensive model of social entrepreneurial intention formation using a quality tool

14 June 2019

Vivek Ahuja, Asif Akhtar & O. P. Wali

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

Exploring entrepreneurial intention among engineering students in India: a multiple basket approach

08 June 2020

Rajib Roy & Niladri Das

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

Yes! I want to be an entrepreneur: A study on university students’ entrepreneurship intentions through the theory of planned behavior

01 June 2022

Agyemang Kwasi Sampene, Cai Li, … Richard Kofi Opoku

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

Uncovering dominant characteristics for entrepreneurial intention and success in the last decade: systematic literature review

Tryson Yangailo & Abubaker Qutieshat

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

Role of religiosity, social factors, and perceived subjective norms on entrepreneurial intention: a study on tertiary level students

05 October 2022

Mohammad Tahlil Azim & Md. Mazharul Islam

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

An empirical investigation on the relationship between individual traits and entrepreneurial business intentions: measuring a mediation effect of entrepreneurial self-efficacy through partial least squares structural equation modeling

25 August 2021

Cai Li, Majid Murad, … Sheikh Farhan Ashraf

thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

Impact of attitude towards entrepreneurship education and role models on entrepreneurial intention

19 March 2022

Kwaku Amofah & Ramon Saladrigues

An empirical analysis of the factors affecting social entrepreneurial intentions

Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research volume  7 , Article number:  9 ( 2017 ) Cite this article

19k Accesses

67 Citations

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

The present study aims at identifying the social entrepreneurial intention among undergraduate students in Indian context by using the theory of planned behaviour as the research framework. A 72 item questionnaire was responded by 390 students of premier technical universities of India. A method of sampling used was systematized random sampling. 69% ( N  = 269) of the respondents were male and 31% ( N  = 121) were female and the average age of the respondents was approximately 20 years. The questionnaire measured emotional intelligence, creativity, and moral obligation, attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control. The result shows that the proposed model in the present study explains 47% of the variance, explaining the social entrepreneurship intention. Creativity showed a strongest positive relationship followed by emotional intelligence. This research study contributes to the social entrepreneurship literature by introducing emotional intelligence and creativity as new antecedents that also explains social entrepreneurial intention formation.

Working on a manuscript?

Avoid the most common mistakes and prepare your manuscript for journal editors.

The recent economic crisis and global recession have increased the tremendous need to position social question in the heart of the economy. Entrepreneurship can prove to be an effective instrument for economic value creation and simultaneously a means to deal with various social issues. This dual nature concept seems to be gaining popularity in both spheres of theory and practice, with the rise of a new field of research: “social entrepreneurship” (Nicholls 2010 ). The concept of ‘social entrepreneurship’ has been quickly emerging in the private, public and non-profit sectors over the last few years (Anderson et al. 2006 ). Social entrepreneurship is especially important in developing countries, where gaps in terms of social development and economic discrimination still exist (Chell 2007 ). It can be considered as a catalyst in the form of social capabilities and conquer inequalities across different spheres (social, economic and political) that can bridge the gap by making social and economic development desirable (Light 2006 ; Mair 2008 ; Seelos and Mair 2005 ).

“Social Entrepreneurship” has gained an increasing importance in India in recent years. India has started developing an environment that is supporting social entrepreneurs with incubators, mentoring, and financial support (Ghani et al. 2013 ). Social enterprises provide an ingenious idea towards providing commodities, services and earning opportunities to the economically weaker section of the society. Although an incipience of social enterprises has already started evolving at some locations in India. But the inconsistency of the context for social enterprises is evident in India, and it becomes quite difficult in regions badly seeking the development-focused innovation. This condition acts as a clarion call for many Indians to become social entrepreneurs.

As compared to population growth, the rate of social entrepreneurship is still low in India. The fact that social entrepreneurship growth is low in India is actually a “problem” as the country may have omitted out a novel path to support its citizens (Datta and Gailey 2012 ). Social entrepreneurship is desirable for development of India, however, the current speed is slow. This raises an important question to policy makers as for how can social entrepreneurial activities enriched and increased in India?

Krueger (Krueger 1993 ) suggested that entrepreneurship can only increase if the overall quality and quantity of entrepreneurship is nurtured and this can only be nurtured if entrepreneurship thinking grows. While most of the studies based in the international context are focusing on individual cases offering individual level analysis, they are overlooking the antecedents and prerequisite which are necessary to encourage the social entrepreneurial activities in those regions (Mair and Martí 2006 ; Koe et al. 2010 ). To encourage and support the social enterprises, it is required to closely analyze and understand the factors that affect the thinking process of the individuals. This research is guided by a similar intention to explore the factors that will prove to be helpful in promoting social entrepreneurial activates in India.

This study focuses on identifying how social entrepreneurship intention is created. Academic literature in the field of social entrepreneurship is rather limited this study aims at identifying the effect of emotional intelligence, creativity and moral obligation in predicting social entrepreneurial intention among the young Indian population by using the theory of planned behaviour as the theoretical framework.

The roots of social entrepreneurship lie in the evolution of the private sector. Though for a long time, the symbiosis of government, business, and non-profit organisations addressed the social needs, yet inequalities and loopholes still existed, particularly in the under-developed nations. One such country is Bangladesh where the concept of present day’s social entrepreneurship first developed (Bornstein and Davis 2010 ). Mohammed Yunus, a banker, and a professor brought forward the idea of micro-loans for the poor helping them to turn into entrepreneurs (Yunus et al. 2006 ). Based on his notion of efficient service to the downtrodden, Yunus founded the Grameen Bank. This institution earns through the interest paid by the creditors, thus giving a new definition to ‘non-profit’ service.

Social enterprises offer an innovative approach to bringing the desired change through reconceptualising the mission of the enterprise and rethinking of value creating logic (Brown and Wyatt 2015 ).Social entrepreneurship starts on comprehending a social opportunity, then passes it on into an enterprise model, amasses the necessary resources for execution, gives life to and nurtures the enterprise and eventually reaches the intended destination (Doherty et al. 2014 ). Despite the increasing attention paid to the sector through the availability of capital, a maturing government support system and development of micro-finance model yet a corresponding body of academic work has not emerged to assess or inform practice (Dichter et al. 2013 ).

From the research perception, social entrepreneurship is at present undoubtedly enjoying an “emerging excitement” (Hirsch and Levin 1999 ), however, as an academic area of research, it faces two major challenges. Firstly, social entrepreneurship is considered as a by-product of bigger concepts of social innovation and entrepreneurship, hence there is a lack of theoretical literature related to social entrepreneurship and a lack of consensus regarding how to define social entrepreneurship has not been achieved. Secondly, social entrepreneurship research is caught in between seemingly contradictory demands for significance and intractability (Mair and Martí 2006 ). One of the most prominent questions that cannot be adequately answered is ‘how to define social entrepreneurship’? As several researchers have pointed out that all business is social in the sense that it creates value (Spear 2005 ). Dees (Dees 1998 ) defined the role of the social entrepreneur in the development of society. In brief, this definition can be stated as follows: social entrepreneurs play the role of change agents in the social sector, by

Adopting a mission to create and sustain social value (not just private value),

Recognizing and relentlessly pursuing new opportunities to serve that mission,

Engaging in a process of continuous innovation, adaptation, and learning,

Acting boldly without being limited by resources currently in hand, and

Exhibiting a heightened sense of accountability to the constituencies served and for the outcomes created.

Thus on the basis of literature, “ social entrepreneurship is a process that begins with perceived social opportunity, transfers it into an enterprise model, determines and achieves the wealth essential to execute the enterprise, initiates and grows the enterprise and yields the future upon goal achievement of the enterprise’s goal ” . It can take many forms, from starting a business to expanding an organization to partnering with another firm (Short et al. 2009 ). Researchers identified that social entrepreneurship is a process that can create value by utilizing resources in innovative ways (Shaw and Carter 2007 ). For fulfilling their primary motives, social enterprises explore and exploit opportunities that can create social value by facilitating social change or meeting social needs (Prieto 2014 ).

Development of social entrepreneurship in India

Social entrepreneurs are considered as the key players in delivering basic services and opportunities to the untouched sectors of India. Some are employing innovative, cost-efficient and often technology-driven business models that put forward essential services to those who are short of access. Others are working hard at removing barriers that prevent access (Intellecap 2012 ). These social entrepreneurs are not only recognised in India but also on a global level. Many of these organisations work on an impressive scale – serving millions of low-income households and transforming their quality of life (Khanapuri and Khandelwal 2011 ).

India’s current population is 1.32 billion (132 crores) and it also has world’s second-largest labour force of 516.3 million people. In spite of the fact that the hourly wage rates in India have more than doubled over the few couple of years, the latest World Bank report states that approximately 350 million people in India currently live below the poverty line (Bureau 2015 ). This signifies that every third Indian is deprived of even basic necessities like nutrition, education, and health care and many are still wracked by unemployment and illiteracy (Shaw and de Bruin, 2013 ). Social entrepreneurs can prove helpful in eradicating these issues by placing those less fortunate on a pathway towards a meaningful life (Lans et al. 2014 ). India is set to become the world’s youngest country with 64% of its population in the working age group (Bureau 2015 ). If this major chunk of the young population in India is encouraged to take up social entrepreneurship, it will impact the Indian economy significantly not only addressing the problem of unemployment but also several social problems in an affordable manner.

This motivated the authors to investigate what factors affect the intention formation process so as to encourage young generation toward social entrepreneurship. Social entrepreneurship in the context of India is still an understudied topic with limited research studies that usually fall short of empirical data to support. Research studies have been so far conducted in India mostly used case studies or storytelling approach. They were more focused toward the concept of social innovation through incubators and government initiatives (Sonne 2012 ) and towards cases of social entrepreneurs with the mission of rural development (Yadav and Goyal 2015 ). Selective research studies conducted in India in the field of social entrepreneurship are shown in Table 1 .

Most of the literature available in the field of entrepreneurial intention or more specifically social entrepreneurship came from Europe and other Western countries. Despite the fact that most of the renowned social enterprises work in the South Asian continent but still empirical research in this part of the world is almost negligible. Social set-up and environmental factors affecting the process of social entrepreneurship is very different in this part of the world as compared to the factors covered in the existing research studies. The most familiar socio-cultural factors influencing entrepreneurship are education, religion, caste, family background and social background. In her article Shardha (Shradha et al. 2005 ) felt that sociocultural factors are important in the Indian environment for starting a business. Socio-cultural factors like education, religion, caste, family support and social background were considered by her and empirical results confirm that sociocultural factors are important in the creation of entrepreneurial intentions. Therefore, instead of comparing India to other countries, this research study concentrates on how social entrepreneurship intentions get generated in India. This paper tries to bridge this gap and validate the social entrepreneurial intention model in the Indian context. Ethnically, India has possessed a unique set of sensitivities and socio-psychological mindset.

The objectives of this study are:

To validate the role of the theory of planned behaviour in predicting social entrepreneurial intentions.

To develop a conceptual model and empirically test the effect of emotional intelligence, creativity and moral obligation on social entrepreneurial intentions.

In the present study, the sample population of young undergraduates of a premier technical university in India is taken.

Theoretical background

In the previous sections of this paper, researchers highlighted the meaning of social entrepreneurship and its development in India. In this section, authors discuss the existing social entrepreneurial model and other important research studies dealing with the social entrepreneurial intentions.

The first attempt to develop a model that can capture social entrepreneurial intention formation was done by Mair and Noboa ( 2006 ). In their model, they used individual variables to measure intentions. Mair and Noboa ( 2006 ) in their model of social entrepreneurial intention suggested that intention to start social enterprise develops from perception to desirability, which was affected by cognitive-emotional construct consisting of empathy as an emotional factor and moral judgment as a cognitive factor; and perceived feasibility was affected by enablers consisting of self-efficacy & social Support (Mair and Martí 2006 ). Figure 1 shows Mair and Noboa ( 2006 ) social entrepreneurial intention model.

Social entrepreneurship Intention Model. Mair and Noboa (2006)

This model is considered as the first model that was specifically proposed to measure social entrepreneurial intentions. In this model, Mair and Noboa adopted classical previously tested Shapero’s model of an entrepreneurial event and expanded by adding constructs of perceived desirability and perceived feasibility. Antecedents that distinguish this model from traditional entrepreneurial models are empathy and moral judgment. However, researchers cannot deny the fact that everyone who is exhibiting with empathy and moral judgment becomes a social entrepreneur. But the certain level of empathy and moral judgment is required to trigger social entrepreneurial intention process (Mair and Martí 2006 ). After that, some attempts were made by researchers in predicting social entrepreneurial intention formation. In the next paragraph, we discuss intention studies’ conducted in the field of social entrepreneurship.

VanSandt, Sud, and Marme (VanSandt et al. 2009 ) tried to test social intention formation. In their study, they suggested three critical catalysts that can enhance the effectiveness of any social enterprise. These catalysts were defined as effectual logic, enhanced legitimacy through appropriate reporting metrics, and information technology (IT). They further described that these three catalysts could potentially act as enablers to predict social entrepreneurial intentions (VanSandt et al. 2009 ).

Koe Hwee Nga & Shamuganathan (Hwee Nga and Shamuganathan 2010 ) conducted a research study in Malaysia. They tested the effect of personality traits in predicting the characteristics of social entrepreneurship on a sample of 181 Malaysian students (Hwee Nga and Shamuganathan 2010 ). The big five personality theory used in this paper did not really prove useful in order to predict characteristics of the social entrepreneurs.

Kirby & Ibrahim (Kirby and Ibrahim 2011 ) carried out a research study in order to find out the role of social entrepreneurial education in Egypt. The basic highlight of this research study is that they tried to find out awareness of social entrepreneurship amongst Egyptian students so that policy makers could modify their policies to encourage students to opt for social entrepreneurship as a career choice. A sample of 183 students was used and the result of the study found out that Egyptian students do not have complete and appropriate knowledge about social entrepreneurship.

Ernst (Ernst 2011 ) carried out another research study to test social entrepreneurial intention on a sample of 203 students from four different German universities. She used antecedents like the personality traits, role model, age, gender, education, and experience to predict the social entrepreneurial intention. Effect of these antecedents was mediated by variables taken from the theory of planned behaviour. In Ernst (Ernst 2011 ) study she failed to find out any link between empathy and social entrepreneurial intention. To validate the Mair and Noboa ( 2006 ), model an attempt has been made by Forster and Grichnik (Forster and Grichnik 2013 ). In their paper, they adapt Mair and Noboa ( 2006 ) model and test its applicability on the sample of 159 corporate volunteers. They replaced perceived social support with perceived collective efficacy and defined it as the type of environment and guidance organization provide to explore opportunities and develop social ties (Forster and Grichnik 2013 ).

After this, a few researchers came up with some related models. Kai Hockerts (Hockerts 2015 , 2017) made an attempt to validate the model of Mair and Noboa. He modified the model by removing the mediating variables (perceived desirability and perceived feasibility) from the model and tested the direct effect of moral obligation, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, empathy and perceived social support on social entrepreneurial intention. Kai Hockerts (Hockerts 2015 ) further added construct “prior experience” in the model and the effect of prior experience was mediated by above mentioned four antecedents. He carried out this research study on three different samples and found out some positive relationship with the social entrepreneurial intention (Hockerts 2015 ).

Although few research studies tried to empirically test the effect of antecedents on social entrepreneurial intentions but these studies are mere replications of each other. The major limitations of Ernst (Ernst 2011 ) research study were that in spite of the fact they measure the intention of management graduates of German universities but they fail to capture the type of support they will receive from their university if they opt for social entrepreneurship as a career. This is in accordance with the findings of Tolbert et.al. ( 2011 ) that university support can prove an important tool in boosting social activities among students at the university level (Kirby and Ibrahim 2011 ). Limitation of Forster and Grichnik (Forster and Grichnik 2013 ) model is that they used corporate social volunteers to predict social intention formation process. But comparing corporate volunteers with social entrepreneurship is not advisable (Hockerts 2015 ).

Thus, the basic purpose of this study is to find out the relationship between exogenous factors and intention among undergraduate students of the premier technical university in India. Social entrepreneurship is indeed attracting increasing attention from the academic and managerial bodies, while there are still many aspects that remain unexplored. Hence the particular study aims at discussing some new antecedents of the social entrepreneurial intentions. The identification of appropriate antecedents is based on literature review. Social entrepreneurs used an intellectual framework that motivates them to “thinking outside the box” and come up with creativity solutions. It is true that social entrepreneur takes bold and creative steps but creativity is in turn encouraged by situations. Thus the process of social entrepreneurial activity relies on the course of emotional intelligence followed by creativity, and not on creativity alone.

On the basis of literature, authors propose following theoretical framework to test social entrepreneurial intention among Indian students. (Refer Fig. 2 .)

Hypothesized model. Proposed Social entrepreneurship Intention Model on the basis of literature

Proposed research model

Following section covered explanation of proposed model.

Social entrepreneurial intentions can be deemed as a psychological behaviour of human beings that persuades them to gather knowledge, perceive ideas and execute social business plans to become a social entrepreneur (Mair et al. 2006 ).

In the field of entrepreneurial intention research various intention models were proposed to study the development of intentions. These include the models proposed by Bird ( 1988 ) and developed by Boyd & Vozikis, (Boyd and Vozikis 1994 ), by Shapero ( 1975 ; Shapero & Sokol, 1982 ) which was tested by Krueger (Krueger 1993 ), and by Davidsson’s, (Davidsson 1995 ), which was used and modified by researchers to test intentions in university context. These models are more or less similar in the sense that they all emphasis on the pre- entrepreneurial stage and integrate attitude and behaviour theory (Ajzen 1991 ), and self-efficacy and social learning theory (Bandura and Bandura 1997 ). Therefore, intentions are used as a mediator between influencing factors and behaviour (Krueger 2000 ). Researchers emphasised that these antecedents do not directly affect intention but they affect attitude and which later influence intentions (Krueger 2006 ). These factors/antecedents are categorized as cognitive, motivational/non-motivational or situational (Liñán and Chen 2009 ; Shane et al. 2003 ; Venkataraman and Shane 2000 ).

Shook et al. (Shook et al. 2003 ) suggested researchers should try to examine and integrate different intention models. The two most used models in the field of entrepreneurial intentions are “the theory of planned behaviour” and “Shapero’s theory of entrepreneurial event”. The theory of planned behaviour is Ajzen (Ajzen 1991 ) said that actions are followed by conscious judgments to act in a certain way. According to Ajzen, there are three determinants of intention to act. These are, “attitude toward the behaviour”, “subjective norm”; and “perceived behavioural control”. Whereas Shapero & Sokol’s ( 1982 ) model of the entrepreneurial event presents a process model of new enterprise formation. In relation to the theory, the three major factors that are estimated to influence an individual’s intentions to act in a certain way are “perceived desirability”, “perceived feasibility” and “propensity to act”. Researchers pointed out that these two models are more or less similar to each other (Krueger and Kickul 2006 ). Shapero’s construct of perceived desirability is the combination of Ajzen’s attitude towards behaviour and subjective norms. Perceived feasibility explained by Shapero is similar to perceived behavioural control of TPB. In this paper, the theory of planned behaviour is adopted as a research framework the major advantages of the TPB is explained in the later part of the paper. But of the advantage of TPB is that by splitting perceived desirability into two different variables viz. attitude toward behaviour and subjective norms the theory of planned behaviour provides extra information as desirability is viewed as more differential manner (Mueller 2011 ). Therefore, in this paper, the theory of planned behaviour is adopted as a mediator to measure the result between antecedents and social entrepreneurial intentions.

The theory of planned Behaviour (TPB)

In the field of entrepreneurial intention research, one of the most adopted and used models is Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour (TPB) (Engle et al. 2010 ). TPB is based on the idea that intention to carry out specific behaviour is are shaped by person’s attitude toward behaviour and their ability to carried out that behaviour (Ajzen 1991 ). He also mentioned that these intentions were the outcome of attitudes developed through past experience and individual characteristics (Ajzen 1996 ). According to Ajzen, there are three determinants of intention to act. These are:

Attitude toward the behaviour (the degree to which a person has a good or bad assessment or evaluation of the behaviour in question);

Subjective norm (the perceived social pressure to execute or not to execute the behaviour); and

Perceived behavioural control (the individual’s perception of how easy or hard performance of the behaviour is going to be.)

Although the theory of planned behaviour was initially developed in the field of psychology but due to the wider scope and extensive applicability, TPB is very well adapted and used in various other fields (Iakovleva and Kolvereid 2009 ; Krueger 1993 ; Krueger and Carsrud 1993 ; Fink 2013 ). One of the characteristics that make TPB very attractive is that standard model of TPB can be adapted and changed according to the specific domain of the study (Krueger et al. 2000 ). Ajzen (Ajzen 1996 ) himself emphasised regarding the expansion of the classical model by adding antecedents of ATB, PBC, and SN in order to provide additional insights (Ajzen 1991 ).

Existing factors can be modified according to study’s scope and nature, supplementary factors can be added, and causal links can be tailored (Iakovleva and Kolvereid 2009 ). Modification in the standard TPB model is an essential prerequisite because nature and scope of each study are different (Kolvereid 1996 ). As pointed by researchers these antecedents only effect intentions indirectly (Krueger and Carsrud 1993 ). Therefore, this research study uses a theory-driven approach to testing how exogenous factors (emotional intelligence, creativity, and moral obligation) affect attitudes, intentions, and behaviour.

Hypothesis development

Social entrepreneurial intention (sei).

According to the theory of planned behaviour, the individual behaviour could be predicted from its consequent intentions (Ajzen and Fishbein 1970 ). Researchers have described intention in many different ways. Bird (Bird 1998 ) defines intention as a state of mind that motivates a person toward a certain goal or a path (Bird 1998 ). Intention can be considered as a precondition that governs planned behaviour (Souitaris et al. 2007 ). According to Krueger (Krueger and Brazeal 1994 ), “Entrepreneurial intention can be defined as the commitment of a person towards some future behaviour, which is projected toward starting, a business or an organization”. Various research studies emphasise the importance of intentions as one of the crucial constructs in predicting planned behaviour (Krueger and Brazeal 1994 ). The entrepreneurial intention is thus an indispensable tendency towards formation of an enterprise and is also an emerging research area that attracts a substantial number of researchers. Ziegler (Ziegler 2009 ) mentioned that what prerequisites were contributing to motivate people to act as a social entrepreneur is yet be fully explored (Ziegler 2009 ).

Attitude towards becoming a social entrepreneur (ATB)

The variable ATB refers to the degree to which a person has a good or bad assessment or evaluation of the behaviour in question. ATB refers one’s personal pull towards particular target behaviour. The most sought out construct of intention in the TPB is the attitude toward behaviour (ATB). According to Ajzen and Fishbein (Ajzen et al. 1980 ), ATB is “person’s good or bad assessment toward performing or not to perform certain behaviour” (Ajzen et al. 1980 ). Thus, attitude is different from the traits in respect to the evaluative nature towards certain specific intention (Armitage and Conner 2001 ). In the entrepreneurial intention studies, ATB proved to be an important factor that affects intention in a positive manner (Erikson 1998 ; Koçoğlu and Hassan 2013 ). In many studies, ATB proved as strongest or second strongest predictor of entrepreneurial intentions followed by perceived behavioural control (Krueger and Brazeal 1994 ). Therefore, for the purpose of this research study, we adopt ATB as attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur i.e. the degree to which person posses’ positive or negative assessment toward social entrepreneurship as a career option. Therefore, following hypothesis formed:

H1: Attitude towards becoming a social entrepreneur has a positive effect on social entrepreneurial intentions.

Subjective norms (SN)

It refers to the perceived social pressure to execute or not to execute the behaviour which comprises the pressure of family, friends and other important people. Ajzen defined SN as “the person’s perception of social pressure to perform or not to perform the behaviour under consideration” (Ajzen and Fishbein 1977 ). Researcher unanimously agreed about the societal pressure in carrying out certain behaviour but not aligned regarding the actual source of pressure (Liñán 2004 ). Subjective norms always considered as the most conflicting element in the theory of planned behaviour. Meta-analysis study conducted by (Armitage and Conner 2001 ) found subjective norms as the weak predictor of entrepreneurial intentions.

The role of subjective norms within the theory of planned behaviour has been discussed by many prominent researchers, stating its importance in predicting entrepreneurial intention. One stream of researchers found out that subjective norms have an insignificant role in predicting intentions (Krueger et al. 2000 , Autio, et al. 2001 , Linan, 2008 ), some researchers found out that subjective norms do play a significant role in predicting entrepreneurial intentions (Iakovleva and Kolvereid 2009 ; Kolvereid 1996 ) and some researcher completely ignore subjective norms while measuring the intention process (Peterman and Kennedy 2003 ; Veciana et al. 2005 ).

In the social entrepreneurial intention study, Ernst (Ernst 2011 ) also found the insignificant relationship between subjective norms and the antecedents used in the study. However, a direct relationship between SN and social entrepreneurial intentions found to be a significant one in her study.

India is a society with clear collectivistic traits this means that high preference is given to the social framework. Family, friends and various other associated sub-groups affect individual discussion making process. Thus it is very important to measure the whether or not subjective norms will be helpful in predicting the social entrepreneurial intentions. Therefore, researcher formed the following hypothesis:

H2: Subjective norms have a positive effect on social entrepreneurial intentions.

Perceived Behavioural control (PBC)

PBC can be considered as the antecedent for the actual levels of control (Armitage and Conner 2001 ). More specifically PBC is the individual belief about his/her ability for carrying out the certain task. Hence, PBC encompasses the evaluation of the “do-ability” of the target action (Ajzen and Thomas 1986 ). In entrepreneurial research, PBC is considered as one of the strongest predictors of intention. Liñán and Chen (Liñán and Chen 2009 ) define PBC as “the perception of the ease or difficulty of becoming an entrepreneur” (Liñán and Chen 2009 ). In respect of this definition, the researcher used PBC as ease or difficulty in becoming the social entrepreneur.

In entrepreneurial intention studies, there is an ongoing debate about the fact that self-efficacy and perceived behaviour control are same as they both measure the ability to carrying out a particular activity. In the similar fashion, Ajzen ( 2002 ) consider self-efficacy as the subset of perceived behavioural control. In this research, study perceived behavioural control is not considered as equivalent to self-efficacy. As defined by Ajzen ( 2002 ) perceived behavioural control as the perceived acceptance or difficulty of performing the behaviour, therefore, it includes various activities required to perform that task.

Therefore following hypothesis formed on the basis of above explanation:

H3: Perceived behavioural control has a positive effect on social entrepreneurial intentions

Emotional intelligence (EmIn)

The term emotional intelligence was first popularised by Thorndike in 1920 when he identified the relationship of emotional intelligence with the concept of social intelligence. According to Thorndike emotional intelligence is the ability of individuals in order to manage his/her emotions and feelings wisely (Thorndike, 1937 ). Later on, Gardner (Gardner 2004 ) carried out research and came up with seven intelligence areas known as Multiple Intelligence Theory (Gardner 2004 ). This area attracts the attention of various researchers from the field of sociology and psychology. The concept of emotional intelligence is divided into two schools of thought, first one is of mental ability models (Salovey and Mayer 1990 ) and second one mixed approach (Gardner 2004 ). Ability model of emotional intelligence is based on the concept of emotions and cognitive intelligence. The basic assumption of this is that person will recognize the capabilities of individuals that control their emotions (Salovey and Mayer 1990 ). According to mental ability, models emotional intelligence is defined as capabilities related to emotions and emotional information dispensation (Mayer et al. 2014 ). Whereas emotional intelligence defined by the mixed model is comprised of various personal attributes like the need for achievement and flexibility that will help individuals in order to manage one’s emotions and relationships (Boren 2010 ).

Till date, few researchers in the field of entrepreneurship research tried to find out the effect of emotional intelligence on entrepreneurial intentions. Shepherd ( 2004 ) in his conceptual model of entrepreneurship formation blames emotional factors for the business failure. Zampetakis et al. (Zampetakis et al. 2009 ) tried to find out the effect of emotional intelligence on creativity, proactivity and on attitude toward becoming an entrepreneur. Zampetakis, (Zampetakis et al. 2009 ) in his study found out that emotional intelligence positively affects creativity, proactivity and play an important role in the development of the attitude.

Various research studies emphasised the importance of emotional intelligence regarding managing stress and emotional breakdown (Tsaousis and Nikolaou 2005 ; Slaski and Cartwright 2002 ). Managing stress is often link with a positive attitude toward entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intentions. The role of emotional intelligence in order to predict social entrepreneurial intentions have not been studied yet. Emotional intelligence is also very important for social entrepreneurs as they have to provide a creative solution to the unmet demands of the society. Hence channelling and managing emotions and feelings can provide social entrepreneurs with an important competitive edge. For that reason, it is always good to use emotional intelligence in order to predict social entrepreneurial intentions. Therefore following hypothesis formed on the basis of above explanation:

H4: Emotional intelligence has a positive effect on the attitude towards becoming a social entrepreneur. H4a: Emotional intelligence has a positive effect on the Subjective norms H4b: Emotional intelligence has a positive effect on perceived behavioural control.

Creativity (Cr)

Creativity is normally defined as the process to create something new and valuable. David Bohm (Böhm and Nichol 1998 ) in his book defined that it is very difficult to define creativity in words. Creativity is not a talent to produce out of nothing, but the capability to create new ideas/product by combining or reapplying already existing ideas (Plucker et al. 2004 ). Creativity and innovation go hand in hand and considered as the heart of enterprise development (Yar Hamidi et al. 2008 ). Entrepreneurs as compared to non-entrepreneurs possess an intellectual framework that motivates them for “thinking outside the box” to provide innovative solutions (Sternberg et al. 2004 ). In similar fashion Baron ( 2004 ) highlighted the fact that entrepreneurs should be more creative as compared to others in relation to opportunity recognition. Schumpeter used the term “creative destruction” to define entrepreneurial phenomena (Schumpeter 1942 ). Therefore, creativity is considered as one of the most important elements for the entrepreneurial intention formation. Researchers like Gorman et al. (Gorman et al. 1997 ), Feldman and Bolino (Feldman and Bolino 2000 ) and Hamidi et al. (Yar Hamidi et al. 2008 ) found that high creativity scores positively affect the intention formation process. Zampetakis et al. (Zampetakis et al. 2009 , Zampetakis 2011 ) in their research study proved that creativity not only affects the intention process but also d positively associated with the attitude toward choosing entrepreneurship as a career.

Creativity is an eternal part of social entrepreneur personality. Leadbeater (Leadbeater 1997 ) defined social entrepreneurs as change agents that provide creative and innovative solutions to the most pressing and intractable social problems. Prabhu (Prabhu 1999 ) emphasised the fact that social entrepreneurs used creative ways to manage venture with a social mission. Similar to entrepreneurship creativity is considered as an important facet in social entrepreneurship. Ernst (Ernst 2011 ) tested the role of creativity in predicting social entrepreneurial intentions. In her study creativity showed a strong positive significant relationship with attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur and perceived behavioural control. Ernst (Ernst 2011 ) suggested that creativity as an antecedent of the social entrepreneurial intention required further investigation. Therefore, in this research study, we use creativity as an antecedent to social entrepreneurial intention.

H5: Creativity has a positive effect on the attitude towards becoming a social entrepreneur. H5a: Creativity has a positive effect on the Subjective norms H5b: Creativity has a positive effect on perceived behavioural control.

Moral obligation (MO)

Moral obligation has multiple meanings. Moral obligation is a metaphysical commitment, but in the long run, it is supposed to produce something physical, like action or change. In general moral obligation is defined as the tendency of helping others within religious limits (Bryant 2009 ). Initially, Fishbein used moral element along with attitude toward behaviour and subjective norms to predict intentions (Fishbein 1967 ). Moral obligation in relation to social entrepreneurs is related to the extent to which social entrepreneurs are fully committed to their idea and feel morally obliged to pursue them (Beugré 2016 ).

Mair and Noboa first used moral obligation in their proposed model for social entrepreneurial intention (Mair & Noboa 2006 ). In their research, they suggested that the key element that differentiates social entrepreneurs from business entrepreneurs is the moral obligation. A researcher like Dave Roberts said that social entrepreneur should have high moral values (Roberts and Woods 2000 ). While Hendry (Hendry 2004 ) came up with the “bi-morality” perspective of the society according to which “we have two conflicting sets of guidelines for living.” There are individuals which are more motivated by a sense of duty towards society. In a similar fashion, social entrepreneurs are born within normal people in the urge of doing good for the betterment of the society and for the development of the nation on a whole (Thompson 2008 ). Boschee (Boschee 1995 ) mentioned that social entrepreneurs are one who can balance “moral imperatives and the profit motive” (Boschee 1995 ).

For the purpose of this research study, two prominent studies that tried to find out the relationship between moral obligation and social entrepreneurial intentions are by Mair & Noboa ( 2006 ) and Kai Hockert (Hockerts 2015 ). In the first study conducted by Mair and Noboa ( 2006 ), they adopted moral obligation as the antecedent for social desirability. Mair & Noboa ( 2006 ) followed Kohlberg’s three stage model of moral development. The basic issue with the Kohlberg’s model is that it is morally inclined to find out why a particular individual feels morally obliged toward something. Hockert (Hockerts 2015 ) adopted Haines et al. (Haines et al. 2008 ) model to measure moral obligation. He considered moral obligation as a sub-process of the decision-making process that motivates individual to make a moral judgment before forming moral intentions. We have followed Hockert’s (Hockerts 2015 ) assumption of the moral obligation. According to which moral obligation is considered as the degree to which person feels the sense of responsibility to help underprivileged people in a given situation.

Moral obligation as an antecedent is very important for the social entrepreneur as it conveys the intention that addressing a particular social problem is the appropriate thing to do. Based on the above discussion we next propose the following hypothesis:

H6: Moral obligation towards helping underprivileged people is positively related to attitude towards becoming a social entrepreneur H6a: Moral obligation towards helping underprivileged people is positively related to subjective norms. H6b: Moral obligation towards helping underprivileged people is positively related to perceived behavioural control.

Data collection and sample

Following extensive literature survey, appropriate statistical methods were used to examine the effect of exogenous variables on social entrepreneurial intention. In order to select the sample for the research study, we followed the Krueger’s (Krueger 1993 ) suggestion that to accurately measure the entrepreneurial intentions, the sample should be selected from the population of those who are currently facing major career decisions (Krueger 1993 ). Although various entrepreneurial intention studies used a sample of undergraduate students but no prior Indian study used undergraduate students in order to measure social entrepreneurial intentions. Beside this, we also followed Hair et al., (Hair 2010 ) suggestion that five respondents per variable be analysed for the quantitative analysis. Primary data was collected through distributing the questionnaire to the students of one of the premier private universities in India. The method of sampling used was quota sampling. Responses were collected from final year students of engineering as they are more clear about their professional choices. In the questionnaire, an explanation was prefixed regarding privacy of their response and meaning of social entrepreneurship. Beside these explanations, the researcher has explained the meaning of terms like social enterprise, social entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurial intentions to the participants. Six hundred questionnaire were distributed to the students out of which we received three hundred ninety completed questionnaires corresponding to a 65% response rate. 69% ( N  = 254) of the respondents were male and 31% ( N  = 120) were female and the average age of the respondents was approximately 20 years.

Social entrepreneurial intention

In the literature of entrepreneurial intentions, there are various scales that measure intentions. For this study 9 item scale was used adopted from Krueger, Reilly, & Carsrud (Krueger et al. 2000 ) study. The items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale with 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree. This scale was developed to measure entrepreneurial intentions, and we modified the scale according to the nature of the study. Sample item like “I am determined to create a social enterprise in the future” was used. When all 9-items were used scale showed a Cronbach’s α = 0.61 and also some items showed cross-loadings, therefore, three items’ were excluded from the scale and final 6-items scale was used to measure social entrepreneurial intentions with a Cronbach’s alpha value of α = 0.81.

Independent variable

7.2.2.1.attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur.

To measure attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur authors used scales developed by Ajzen ( 2002 ) and EIQ (Liñán and Chen 2009 ). Pretest of theses scale reduced the items and final scale comprised of 5-items. A sample item to measure attitude toward becoming social entrepreneur “Becoming a social entrepreneur implies more advantages than disadvantages to me” with Cronbach’s alpha value of α = 0.72.

7.2.2.2.Subjective Norms

To measure subjective norms authors used EIQ (Liñán and Chen 2009 ). EIQ consists of two sets of three items that measured the normative belief and motivation to comply. To measure these two sets were multiplied and divided by three to generate an average score (Rueda et al. 2015 ). A sample item to measure subjective norms “Please indicate to what extent you care about what you parents think as you decide on whether or not to pursue a career as a social entrepreneur” and Cronbach’s alpha value of α = 0.69.

7.2.2.3.Perceived behavioural Control (PBC)

To measure PBC researchers used five items scaled developed by Liñán & Chen, (Liñán and Chen 2009 ) and modified by Ernst (Ernst 2011 ). The items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree. A sample item to measure PBC “I can control the creation process of a social enterprise” and Cronbach’s alpha value of α = 0.89.

7.2.2.4.Emotional Intelligence (EmIn)

To measure emotional intelligence authors used the short version of 30-item Trait Emotional intelligence questionnaire. Seven points Likert scale was used to measure the items and out of total 30-items 15 items are negatively coated for example “I usually find it difficult to regulate my emotions”. Validity and reliability of this scale in order to predict entrepreneurial intention were tested by (Zampetakis 2011 ; Zampetakis et al. 2009 ) A sample item to measure emotional intelligence is “I’m usually able to influence the way other people feel” and Cronbach’s alpha value of α = 0.86.

7.2.2.5.Creativity (Cr)

To measure creativity authors used Zhou and George ( 2001 ) 12-item scale. Seven points Likert scale was used to measure the items. A sample item to measure creativity is “I come up with creative solutions to problems” and Cronbach’s alpha value of α = 0.80.

7.2.2.6.Moral Obligation (MO)

The moral obligation was measured using SEAS scale (social entrepreneurial antecedent scale) developed by Hockerts (Hockerts 2015 ). It is newly developed scale in the field of social entrepreneurial research. Various social intention studies (Ernst 2011 ; Forster and Grichnik 2013 ; Hemingway 2005 ; Hwee Nga and Shamuganathan 2010 ) were considered while forming this scale. SEAS scale was validating on three different sample (Hockerts 2015 ). Therefore, to measure moral obligation a four items questionnaire was used. Seven points Likert scale was used to measure the items. A sample item to measure moral obligation is “It is an ethical responsibility to help people less fortunate than ourselves” and Cronbach’s alpha value of α = 0.73.

Data analysis

For data analysis, SPSS version 20 is used.

According to the recommendation given by Anderson and Gerbing (Anderson and Gerbing 1988 ), authors followed two-stage analytical method to test the model. In the first stage, authors fitted measurement model to the data set collected and at the second stage structural equation modelling was used. Structural equation modelling (SEM) was also used to examine the validity and reliability of the each scale used in the study. Moreover, SEM is also suitable to find out the interrelationship in a proposed model (Hair et al. 2009 ). Maximum likelihood procedure was used to analysis the data.

To measure the model fit the chi-square (χ 2 ) value was calculated. The insignificant value of the χ 2 test signifies good fit model where modest variation among sample population and the fitted covariance matrix (Hu and Bentler 1998 ). Absolute fit indices used to identify the relationship between a-priori model and sample data, which demonstrates the most superior fit model are the Chi-Squared test, GFI, AGFI, the RMR, and the RMSEA. The comparative fit index (CFI) is most used fit indices. The value of CFI varies from 0 to one and rule of thumb for the perfect fit model is 0.90 (Cheung and Rensvold 2002 ). Recommended values of the several indices are as follows:

Goodness-of-fit statistic (GFI): The GFI ranges from 0 to 1, with values higher than 0.9 indicating a good fit to the data.

The adjusted goodness-of-fit statistic (AGFI): Similar to GFI, values higher than 0.9 indicate a good fit model.

Root mean square residual (RMR): For the perfect fit model RMR values <0.5 is ideal but values equal to 0.08 are considered acceptable (Bentler and Bonett 1980 ).

Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA): RMSEA .08 to 0.10 indicates a mediocre fit and below 0.08 shows a good fit.

The descriptive analysis was used for data cleaning and interpretation. Normality of data was tested using Shapiro-Wilk test value. If the Sig. the value of Shapiro-Wilk test is greater than 0.05 than data is considered as normally distributed and if it is lesser than 0.05, data is not considered as the normally distributed (Razali and Wah 2011 ). In this research study, Shapiro-Wilk value was 0.538 with df = 0.02. Therefore data is not normal. Beside this, there are three indices that are used to measure the normality of the data i.e. univariate kurtosis, univariate skewness and multivariate kurtosis. Although there are no standard consensuses regarding the acceptable limit for non- normality but non-normal data of univariate kurtosis <7 and univariate skewness <2 are acceptable (Finney and DiStefano 2006 ). Univariate skewness of each variable used in this research study was <.942 and univariate kurtosis value <1.269 in absolute values. Hence non-normality of the data set was not a problem for carrying out further analysis.

Descriptive statistics and correlation are shown in Table 2 . These statistics showed that hypothesis are temporary supported. ATB( r  = .38, p  < .01), Subjective norms( r  = .31, p  < .01), perceived behavioural control ( r  = .45, p  < .01), emotional intelligence ( r  = .46, p  < .01), creativity ( r  = .31, p  < .01) and moral obligation ( r  = .32, p  < .01) were positively correlated with social entrepreneurial intention.

Measurement model

Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted on three control variables viz. gender, family business background and stream (Engineering/ Management) and loads on six exogenous constructs (attitude towards becoming a social entrepreneur, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control, emotional intelligence, creativity and moral obligation).

Summary of derived statistics for measurement model is shown in Table 3 . The χ 2 value was calculated and normally insignificant value of χ 2 considered good for the fit model. χ 2 /df was 1.987, (χ 2 /df < 5.0) which is considered acceptable model (Hair et al. 2009 ). RMSEA value of the measurement model was 0.05 (90% confidence level) and RMR value was 0.04. Derived GFI value were 078 and AGFI = 0.81. Comparative fit indices of measurement model was 0.77 and TLI =0.83. Therefore, it showed that model is moderately fit. Moreover the average variance extracted for each variable was as follows: ATB = 0.773, SN = 0.519, PBC = 0.821, EmIn = 0.668, Cr = 0.633, MO = 0.527, SEI = 0.842. The AVE values showed how much variance an antecedent explained in comparison to the variance explained by measurement error. As suggested by (Fornell and Larcker 1981 ) AVE value should be above 0.50. In this study, AVE of variables ranges between 0.51 and 0.84 which is considered as the good reliability values of the indicators.

Structural model

As shown in the proposed model that social entrepreneurial intention is influenced by student’s attitude towards becoming a social entrepreneur, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control, emotional intelligence, creativity and moral obligation. To test the hypothesized model author used the sequence of simplified models.

The first model tests the relationship between the theory of planned behaviour viz. attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control with social entrepreneurial intention. Hypothesis (H1) i.e. attitude toward becoming social entrepreneur showed the positive significant relationship of medium value (β = .23**, p  < .01). Subjective norms (H2) highlighted the positive significant relationship of small size (β = .11**, p  < .01).The result of subjective norms was similar to previous entrepreneurial intention studies (Engle et al. 2010 ; Heuer and Liñán 2013 ; Rueda et al. 2015 ) where subjective norms showed the weakest relationship with entrepreneurial intention. Perceived behavioural control (H3) disclosed the strongest impact on social entrepreneurial intention (β = .39**, p  < .01). Therefore, TPB factors were explained the moderate percentage of social entrepreneurial variance (R 2  = .42). Alternative Model 1 showed acceptable fit to the data (χ 2 /df = 5.78; RMSEA = 0.049; SRMR = 0.071; NNFI = 0.79; CFI = 0.78; AGFI = 0.81).

Alternative Model 2 was used to test the relationship between emotional intelligence and the attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur (H4), subjective norms (H4a) and perceived behavioural control (H4b). The emotional showed a statistically significant relationship of medium impact with the attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur (β = 0.291**, p  < 0.01), and perceived behavioural control (β = 0.27**, p  < 0.01.). Emotional intelligence does not show significant relations ship with subjective = (β = .145, p  = .479). Hence hypothesis (H4a) rejected. In the previous study of emotional intelligence and entrepreneurial intentions, Zampetakis et al. 2009 measured the effect of emotional intelligence on attitude and did not test its effect on any other variable of TPB. In the previous study of Ernst (Ernst 2011 ), subjective norms showed less to no relationship with the antecedents used in the study. Medium percentage of variance explained by emotional intelligence and three mediators (R 2  = .39). Alternative Model 2 showed acceptable fit to the data (χ 2 /df = 10.961; RMSEA = 0.065; SRMR = 0.081; NNFI = 0.85; CFI = 0.84; AGFI = 0.86).

Alternative Model 3 was used to test the relationship between creativity and the attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur (H5), subjective norms (H5a) and perceived behavioural control (H5b). Creativity showed the statistically significant relationship of medium impact with both the attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur (β = 0.24**, p  < 0.01), and perceived behavioural control (β = 0.35**, p  < 0.01) but showed a weak relationship with subjective norms (β = 0.09, p  < .01). Medium percentage of variance explained by creativity and three mediators (R 2  = .315).Model 3 showed acceptable fit to the data (χ 2 /df = 8.65; RMSEA = 0.051; SRMR = 0.084; NNFI = 0.85; CFI = 0.79; AGFI = 0.84).

Alternative Model 4 was used to test the relationship between moral obligation and the attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur (H6), subjective norms (H6a) and perceived behavioural control (H6b). Moral obligation showed a statistically significant relationship of low impact with the attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur (β = 0.14**, p  < 0.01), and medium value with perceived behavioural control (β = 0.25**, p  < 0.01) but showed a weak relationship with subjective norms (β = .07, p  < .01). A small percentage of variance explained by moral and three mediators (R 2  = .162).Model 3 showed acceptable fit to the data (χ 2 /df = 8.34; RMSEA = 0.063; SRMR = 0.073; NNFI = 0.82; CFI = 0.79; AGFI = 0.86).

Summary of hypothesized models is shown in Table 4 .

As shown in the above Fig. 3 , creativity showed a positive relationship with all the three mediators’ viz. the attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control.

Final Model. Structural Model. Note: N  = 390: Values in rectangles indicate the variance explained (R 2 )

Antecedents

The objective of this study was to assess the effect of emotional intelligence, creativity and moral obligation on social entrepreneurial attitudes and social entrepreneurial intentions. In order to accomplish this research objective, structural equation modelling (SEM) was applied. Many research studies (Hockerts 2015 ; Rueda et al. 2015 ; Zampetakis et al. 2009 ) used SEM for generating an intention based model. This methodology was used to increase the credibility and reliability of the results and also allow for better comparisons. Till today there are few empirical studies conducted in the field of social entrepreneurship. The present research study empirically tested indirect links between emotional intelligence, creativity, moral obligation and social entrepreneurial intentions.

The results of the study suggest that emotional intelligence and creativity are important personality antecedents to social entrepreneurial attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control and social entrepreneurial intentions. A strong relationship between emotional intelligence and social entrepreneurial intentions suggests that the capability of evaluating and assessing the emotions of others situation increases the chance of being involved in solving others problems. This implies that some level of emotional intelligence is necessary for satisfactory social functioning. Emotional intelligence also enables a person to respond more efficiently toward their own feelings and to go for socially adaptive behaviour in order to help other.

Creativity also showed a strong positive significant relationship with attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control. The result of this study is similar to the previous research studies in the field of entrepreneurship. Gorman et al. (Gorman et al. 1997 ), Feldman and Bolino (Feldman and Bolino 2000 ) and Hamidi et al. (Yar Hamidi et al. 2008 ) discovered that high creativity scores exert a positive influence on the process of the intention formation. Creativity is one of the most crucial factors in play behind the formation of the entrepreneurial intention. In addition to impacting the intention process, creativity is also supportively related to the preference of an individual of choosing his career with entrepreneurship (Zampetakis et al. 2009 ; Zampetakis and Moustakis 2006 ). Creativity is an integral and eternal component of social entrepreneur personality. It is true that it is the social entrepreneur who takes bold and creative steps but creativity is in turn encouraged by situations.

Moral obligation showed a strong relationship with attitudes toward becoming a social entrepreneur and perceived behavioural control. The desire to help to those in need affects desirability to take this career path. In simple terms, it is suggested that individuals who want to “do good” are looking for those career opportunities which enable them to follow this passion. The strong relationship of moral obligation with social entrepreneurial intentions also suggests that moral obligation is often considered as the trait which a person inherits from his/her upbringing.

The role of the theory of planned behaviour is also validated in this study. According to the Krueger (Krueger 1993 ), antecedents do not directly affect intention but they affect attitude and which later influence intentions. Therefore in this research study authors used the theory of planned behaviour as the research framework. The result of the theory of planned behaviour is in line with similar studies from entrepreneurship: “attitude toward becoming a social entrepreneur” and “perceived behavioural control” show high significant positive effects on social entrepreneurial intentions. This signifies that the students who are expected to develop a social entrepreneurial intention are those who have a positive perception toward becoming a social entrepreneur. But, fondness toward the idea of becoming a social entrepreneur is not adequate, the conviction that one could actually go through with it is also important. The result of the study also suggests that subjective norms also affect the social entrepreneurial intentions. Findings regarding the result of subjective norms are contradictory to the previous study of Ernst (Ernst 2011 ) where subjective norms did not show any significant relationship with the social entrepreneurship intention. Therefore, the role of subjective norms should be explored further in the collectivist country like India where there exist strong family ties. Exerted pressure from the important people and close surroundings do affect the decision-making process. Hence for the future research subjective norms should be taken as the central factor that not only affects intention process but also controls other factors interaction. With this study, we have contributed to the growing body of empirical literature on social entrepreneurship by synthesising results from the literature on entrepreneurial intentions. This is probably first empirical study conducted in India in the field of social entrepreneurship. This is research study can be proved helpful in this part of the world where social entrepreneurship as a phenomenon is growing at a tremendous speed but research in this field is still struggling to pave their path.

Conclusions

Social entrepreneurs are change agents who provide creative and innovative solutions to the most troublesome and intractable issues of the society. They employ ingenious ways to manage venture with a social aim. In this research study, authors tried to find out an indirect effect of personality traits viz. emotional intelligence, creativity and moral obligation on student’s intention to opt for social entrepreneurship as their career choice. This research study contributes to the social entrepreneurship literature by testing the effect of emotional intelligence and creativity in order to predict social entrepreneurial intention formation. The finding of this study shows that engineering student’s self-perceived creativity is associated with increased levels of social entrepreneurial intent, thus supporting a strong bonding between creativity and social entrepreneurial intentions.

Based on the study findings efforts should be made by policy makers and universities to start such courses that can be helpful in developing emotional intelligence and belongingness among students. To perceive the interventions which might create a friendly ambience for social entrepreneurial behaviour occurring, the social entrepreneurship researchers have to recognise the factors contributing to such behaviour. Policy makers and educators must develop a sufficient understanding of the precursors for social entrepreneurial intentions for encouraging more and more individuals to get them involved in social entrepreneurship. So the perception of social entrepreneurship might be the key to moving closer towards the understanding of social entrepreneurship generation process. Hence, an inspection of the factors that foster or hinder social entrepreneurship and what are the incentives in action for people to become social entrepreneurs seems reasonable.

Limitations and future research

The objective of this research study was to provide an approach towards understanding how attitudes toward social entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurial intentions are affected by emotional intelligence, creativity, and moral obligation. However, there are limitations which must be mentioned and issues that are still open for future research. A possible limitation is that this study was confined to the students from a technical university and it may not give the generalised findings for students from the non-technical streams. The proposed model in this research study also offers room for further modification and addition of more antecedents. A longitudinal research study may provide a better understanding related to the intention formation. However, this research study can prove helpful in this part of the world where social entrepreneurship as a phenomenon is growing at a tremendous speed but research in this field is still struggling to provide answers to the policy makers and academicians.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), 179–211 http://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ajzen, I. (1996). The social psychology of decision making. In E. T. Hi (Ed.), Social psychology: A handbook of basic principles (pp. 297–325). New York: Guilford Press.

Google Scholar  

Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, Self‐Efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned Behavior1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32 (4), 665–683.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1970). The prediction of behavior from attitudinal and normative variables. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 6 (4), 466–487 http://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031 (70)90057-0.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-Behavior Relations : A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84(5), 888–918. http://doi.org/<a data-auto=“link” href=“javascript:__doLinkPostBack(“,‘ss~~DI%20%2210.1037%2F0033-2909.84.5.888%22%7C%7Csl~~rl’,”);” title=“Search for 10.1037/0033-2909.84.5.888” id=“link10.10370033-2909.84.5.888”>10.1037/0033-2909.84.5.888</a>.

Ajzen, I., Fishbein, M., Atomic, I., Agency, E., Federal, T., & Commission, T. (1980). Theory of reasoned action / theory of planned behavior.

Ajzen, I., & Thomas, M. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed Behavior : Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22 (5), 453–474 http://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(86)90045-4.

Anderson, R. B., Dana, L. P., & Dana, T. E. (2006). Indigenous land rights, entrepreneurship, and economic development in Canada:“opting-in” to the global economy. Journal of World Business, 41 (1), 45–55.

Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103 (3), 411.

Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned Behaviour: A meta-analytic review. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 40 (4), 471–499 http://doi.org/10.1348/014466601164939 .

Autio, E. H., Keeley, R., Klofsten, M., GC Parker, G., & Hay, M. (2001). Entrepreneurial intent among students in Scandinavia and in the USA. Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies, 2 (2), 145–160.

Bandura, A., & Bandura, A. (1997). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales (pp. 307–337).

Baron, R. A., & Ward, T. B. (2004). Expanding entrepreneurial cognition's toolbox: Potential contributions from the field of cognitive science. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28 (6), 553–573.

Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88 (3), 588–606 http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588 .

Beugré, C. (2016). Social Entrepreneurship: Managing the Creation of Social Value. Routledge.

Bird, B. (1988). Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: The case for intention. Academy of Management Review, 13 (3), 442–453.

Bird, B. (1998). Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: The case for intention. Academy of Management Review, 13 (3), 442–453.

Böhm, D., & Nichol, L. (1998). On creativity.

Boren, A. E. (2010). Emotional Intelligence : The secret of successful entrepreneurship ? Leadership in Agriculture, 2 , 54–61.

Bornstein, D., & Davis, S. (2010). Social entrepreneurship what everyone needs to know . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Boschee, J. (1995). Social entrepreneurship: Some nonprofits are not only thinking about the unthinkable, they’re doing it – Running a profit. Across the Board, The Conference Board Meeting, 32 (3), 1–25.

Boyd, N. G., & Vozikis, G. S. (1994). The influence of self-efficacy on the development of entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 18 , 63–63.

Brown, T., & Wyatt, J. (2015). Design thinking for social innovation. Annual Review of Policy Design, 3 (1), 1–10.

Bryant, P. (2009). Self-regulation and moral awareness among entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 24 (5), 505–518 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.005 .

Bureau, P. (2015). Population Bulletien (Vol. 70).

Chell, E. (2007). Social Enterprise and entrepreneurship: Towards a convergent theory of the entrepreneurial process. International Small Business Journal, 25 (1), 5–26 http://doi.org/10.1177/0266242607071779 .

Cheung, W. G., & Rensvold, B. R. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of- fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9 (2), 233–255 http://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902 .

Chowdhury, I., & Santos, F. M. (2010). Scaling Social Innovations: The Case of Gram Vikas. Director, 0–35. http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1553070

Datta, P. B., & Gailey, R. (2012). Empowering women through social entrepreneurship: Case study of a Women’s cooperative in India. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 36 (3), 569–587 http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00505.x .

Davidsson, P. (1995). Determinants of entrepreneurial intentions (pp. 1–31).

Dees, J. G. (1998). The meaning of “social entrepreneurship” (pp. 1–6).

Dichter, S., Katz, R., Koh, H., & Karamchandani, A. (2013). Closing the pioneer gap. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 11 (1), 36–43.

Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16 (4), 417–436.

Engle, R. L., Dimitriadi, N., Gavidia, J. V., Schlaegel, C., Delanoe, S., Alvarado, I., et al. (2010). Entrepreneurial intent: A twelve-country evaluation of Ajzen’s model of planned behavior. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 16 (1), 35–57 http://doi.org/10.1108/13552551011020063 .

Erikson, Y. T. (1998). A study of entrepreneurial intentions among a cohort MBAs—The extended Bird model. In 43rd ICSB world conference on “21st century entrepreneurship” in Singapore (pp. 8–10).

Ernst, K. K. (2011). Heart over mind – An empirical analysis of social entrepreneurial intention formation on the basis of the theory of planned behaviour .

Feldman, D. C., & Bolino, M. C. (2000). Career patterns of the self-employed: Career motivations and career outcomes. Journal of Small Business Management, 38 (3), 53.

Fink, M. (2013). Robustness of the theory of planned Behavior in predicting entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 39 (July 2013), 1.

Finney, S. J., & DiStefano, C. (2006). Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A second course, 269–314.

Fishbein, M. E. (1967). Readings in attitude theory and measurement.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, XVIII(August), 382–388.

Forster, F., & Grichnik, D. (2013). Social entrepreneurial intention formation of corporate volunteers. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 4 (2), 153–181 http://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2013.777358 .

Gardner, H. (2004). A multiplicity of intelligences: In tribute to professor Luigi Vignolo. Retrieved February, 11 (1976), 2008 Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.73.364 .

Ghani, E., Kerr, W. R., & O’Connell, S. (2013). Spatial determinants of entrepreneurship in India. Regional Studies, 48 , 1071–1089 http://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.839869 .

Gorman, G., Hanlon, D., & King, W. (1997). Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship education, enterprise education and education for small business management: A ten-year literature review. International Small Business Journal, 15 (3), 56–77.

Haines, R., Street, M. D., & Haines, D. (2008). The influence of perceived importance of an ethical issue on moral judgment, moral obligation, and moral intent. Journal of Business Ethics, 81 (2), 387–399.

Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson College Division.

Hair, J. F. J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate Data Analysis A Global Perspctive (Seventh). Pearson. http://doi.org/10.1038/259433b0

Hemingway, C. A. (2005). Personal values as a catalyst for corporate social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 60 (3), 233–249 http://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-0132-5 .

Hendry, J. (2004). Between enterprise and ethics: Business and management in a bimoral society. Oxford University Press.

Heuer, A., & Liñán, F. (2013). Testing alternative measures of subjective norms in entrepreneurial intention models. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 19 (1), 39–49 http://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2013.054310 .

Hirsch, P. M., & Levin, D. Z. (1999). Umbrella advocates versus validity police: A life-cycle model. Organization Science, 10 (2), 199–212 http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.2.199 .

Hockerts, K. (2015). The social entrepreneurial antecedents scale (SEAS): A validation study. Social Enterprise Journal, 11 (3), 260–280 http://doi.org/10.1108/SEJ-05-2014-0026 .

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3 (4), 424–453 http://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424 .

Hwee Nga, J. K., & Shamuganathan, G. (2010). The influence of personality traits and demographic factors on social entrepreneurship start up intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 95 , 259–282 http://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0358-8 .

Iakovleva, T., & Kolvereid, L. (2009). An integrated model of entrepreneurial intentions. International Journal of Business and Globalisation, 3 (1), 66 http://doi.org/10.1504/IJBG.2009.021632 .

Intellecap (2012). On the Path To Sustainability and Scale: A study of India’s Social Enterprise Landscape. Intellecap Report, (April), 66. Retrieved from www.intellecap.com

Khanapuri, V. B., & Khandelwal, M. R. (2011). Scope for fair trade and social entrepreneurship in India. Business Strategy Series, 12 (4), 209–215 http://doi.org/10.1108/17515631111155179 .

Kirby, D. a., & Ibrahim, N. (2011). The case for (social) entrepreneurship education in Egyptian universities. Education + Training, 53 (5), 403–415 http://doi.org/10.1108/00400911111147712 .

Koçoğlu, M., & Hassan, M. U. (2013). Assessing entrepreneurial intentions of university Students : A comparative study of two different Cultures : Turkey and Pakistani. European Journal of Business and Management, 5 (13), 243–252.

Koe, J., Nga, H., & Shamuganathan, G. (2010). The influence of personality traits and demographic factors on social entrepreneurship start up intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 95 (2), 259–282.

Kolvereid, L. (1996). Prediction of employment status choice intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 21 (1), 47–57.

Krueger, N. (1993). Title: The impact of prior entrepreneurial exposure on perceptions of new venture feasibility and desirability. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 18 (1), 315–330.

Krueger, N. (2000). Entrepreneurial Intentions are Dead : Long Live. In A. L. Carsrud & M.Brännback (Eds.), Understanding the Entrepreneurial Mind, International Studies in Entrepreneurship (pp. 51–72). Springer Science+Business Media. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0443-0 .

Krueger, N. (2006). So you thought the intentions model was Simple ? Cognitive style and the specification of entrepreneurial intentions models cognitive style and the specification of entrepreneurial intentions models. SSRN Electronic Journal, 10 (2006) http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1150881 .

Krueger, N. F., & Brazeal, D. V. (1994). Entrepreneurial Potential and Potential Entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 18 , 91–104.

Krueger, N. F., & Carsrud, A. L. (1993). Entrepreneurial intentions : Applying the theory of planned behaviour. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 5 , 315–330.

Krueger, N. F., & Kickul, J. (2006). So you thought the intentions model was simple? Cognitive style and the specification of entrepreneurial intentions models. Cognitive Style and the Specification of Entrepreneurial Intentions Models (January 24, 2006).

Krueger, N. F., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15 (5–6), 411–432 http://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026 (98)00033-0.

Lans, T., Blok, V., & Wesselink, R. (2014). Learning apart and together: Towards an integrated competence framework for sustainable entrepreneurship in higher education. Journal of Cleaner Production, 62 , 37–47.

Leadbeater, C. (1997). The rise of the social entrepreneur (no. 25). Demos.

Light, B. P. C. (2006). Reshaping social entrepreneurship.

Liñán, F. (2004). Intention-based models of entrepreneurship education. Piccolla Impresa/Small Business, 3 , 11–35 Retrieved from http://congreso.us.es/gpyde/DOWNLOAD/a9.pdf .

Linan, F. (2008). Skill and value perceptions: how do they affect entrepreneurial intentions? International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 4 (3), 257–272.

Liñán, F., & Chen, Y. (2009). Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33 (3), 593–617.

Mair, J. (2008). Social entrepreneurship : taking stock and looking ahead. World Entrepreneurship Forum, IESE Business School, 1–17.

Mair, J., & Ganly, K. (2009). Social Entrepreneurship in Rural India: a Small Step Approach Towards Institutional Change, 3, 1–8.

Mair, J., & Martí, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41 (1), 36–44 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2005.09.002 .

Mair, J., & Noboa, E. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: How intentions to create a social venture are formed. In Social entrepreneurship (pp. 121–135). UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Mair, J., Robinson, J., & Hockerts, K. (2006). Social entrepreneurship . New York: Palgrave MacMillan http://doi.org/10.1057/9780230625655 .

Book   Google Scholar  

Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., Inquiry, S. P., Taylor, P., Erlbaum, L., … Caruso, D. R. (2014). Emotional Intelligence : Theory, Findings, and Implications, 15(3), 197–215.

Mueller, S. (2011). Increasing entrepreneurial intention: Effective entrepreneurship course characteristics. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 13 (1), 55–74.

Nicholls, A. (2010). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: Reflexive isomorphism in a pre-paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34 (4), 611–633.

Peterman, N. E., & Kennedy, J. (2003). Enterprise education: Influencing students’ perceptions of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28 (2), 129–144.

Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn't creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39 (2), 83–96.

Prabhu, G. N. (1999). Social entrepreneurial leadership. Career Development International, 4 (3), 140–145.

Prieto, L. C. (2014). Is Wal-Mart a social Enterprise? An exploration of the relationship between corporate reputation, Corporate Social Responsibility & Financial Performance. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 13 (2), 51–61.

Razali, N. M., & Wah, Y. B. (2011). Power comparisons of shapiro-wilk, kolmogorov-smirnov, lilliefors and anderson-darling tests. Journal of statistical modeling and analytics, 2 (1), 21–33.

Roberts, B. D., & Woods, C. (2000). Changing the world on a shoestring : Th e concept of social entrepreneurship. University of Auckland Business Review, 7 , 45–51 Retrieved from http://www.uabr.auckland.ac.nz/files/articles/Volume11/v11i1-asd.pdf .

Rueda, S., Moriano, J. A., & Liñán, F. (2015). Validating a theory of planned behavior questionnaire to measure entrepreneurial intentions. In A. Fayolle, P. Kyrö, & F. Liñán (Eds.), Developing, shaping and growing entrepreneurship (pp. 60–78). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. http://doi.org/10.4337/9781784713584 .

Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. (1990). Emotional Intelligence. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality., 9 , 185.

Schumpeter, J. (1942). Creative destruction. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 82–5.

Seelos, C., & Mair, J. (2005). Social entrepreneurship: Creating new business models to serve the poor. Business Horizons, 48 , 241–246 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2004.11.006 .

Seth, S., & Kumar, S. (2011). Social entrepreneurship: A growing trend in Indian Business. Entrepreneurial Practice Review, 1 (3), 4–16 Retrieved from http://www.entryerson.com/epr/index.php/jep/article/viewFile/66/49 .

Shane, S., Locke, E. A., & Collins, C. J. (2003). Entrepreneurial motivation. Human Resource Management Review, 13 (2), 257–279 http://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-4822 (03)00017-2.

Shapero, A (1975). The displaced, uncomfortable entrepreneur.

Shapero, A, & Sokol, L (1982). The social dimensions of entrepreneurship.

Shaw, E., & Carter, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 14 (3), 418–434 http://doi.org/10.1108/14626000710773529 .

Shaw, E., & de Bruin, A. (2013). Reconsidering capitalism: the promise of social innovation and social entrepreneurship? International Small Business Journal, 31 (7), 737–746.

Shepherd, D. A. (2004). Educating entrepreneurship students about emotion and learning from failure. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3 (3), 274–287.

Shook, C. L., Priem, R. L., & McGee, J. E. (2003). Venture creation and the enterprising individual: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 29 (3), 379–399.

Short, J. C., Moss, T. W., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2009). Research in social entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3 , 161–194 http://doi.org/10.1002/sej .

Shradha, S., Mukherjee, S., & Sharan, R. (2005). Structural interventions for favourable sociocultural influences on india entrepreneurs.

Shukla, M. (2012). Introduction to Social Entrepreneurship. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–3. http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2071186

Slaski, M., & Cartwright, S. (2002). Health, performance and emotional intelligence: An exploratory study of retail managers. Stress and Health, 18 (2), 63–68.

Sonne, L. (2012). Innovative initiatives supporting inclusive innovation in India: Social business incubation and micro venture capital. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79 (4), 638–647 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2011.06.008 .

Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S., & Al-Laham, A. (2007). Do entrepreneurship programmes raise entrepreneurial intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources. Journal of Business Venturing, 22 (4), 566–591.

Spear, R. (2005). Social enterprise for work integration in 12 european countries : A descriptive analysis * by. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 76 (2), 195–231.

Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., & Singer, J. L. (2004). Creativity: From potential to realization. American Psychological Association.

Thompson, J. L. (2008). Social enterprise and social entrepreneurship: Where have we reached? Social Enterprise Journal, 4 (2), 149–161 http://doi.org/10.1108/17508610810902039 .

Thorndike, R. L., & Stein, S. (1937). An evaluation of the attempts to measure social intelligence. Psychological Bulletin, 34 (5), 275.

Thorndike’s Intelligence Theory What is the Thorndike’s Intelligence Theory for in practice? (n.d.), 1920.

Tolbert, P. S., David, R. J., & Sine, W. D. (2011). Studying choice and change: The intersection of institutional theory and entrepreneurship research. Organization Science, 22 (5), 1332–1344.

Tsaousis, I., & Nikolaou, I. (2005). Exploring the relationship of emotional intelligence with physical and psychological health functioning. Stress and Health, 21 (2), 77–86.

VanSandt, C. V., Sud, M., & Marmé, C. (2009). Enabling the original intent: Catalysts for social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 90 (3), 419–428.

Veciana, M. J., Apontte, M., & Urbano, D. (2005). University students ’ attitudes towards Entrepreneurship : A two countries comparison. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1 , 165–182.

Venkataraman, S., & Shane, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. The Academy of Management Review, 25 (1), 217–226.

Yadav, V., & Goyal, P. (2015). User innovation and entrepreneurship: Case studies from rural India. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 4 (1), 1.

Yar Hamidi, D., Wennberg, K., & Berglund, H. (2008). Creativity in entrepreneurship education. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15 (2), 304–320.

Yunus, O. M., Bank, G., Yunus, M., Prize, N. P., & Bank, T. G. (2006). Concept paper on the Bank of the Poor - Grameen Bank microfinance system.

Zampetakis, L. A. (2011). The measurement of trait emotional intelligence with TEIQue-SF : An analysis based on unfolding item response theory models. In Research on Emotion in Organizations (pp. 289–315). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. http://doi.org/10.1108/S1746-9791 (2011)0000007016.

Zampetakis, L. A., Kafetsios, K., Bouranta, N., Dewett, T., & Moustakis, V. S. (2009). On the relationship between emotional intelligence and entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 15 , 595–618 http://doi.org/10.1108/13552550910995452 .

Zampetakis, L. A., & Moustakis, V. (2006). Linking creativity with entrepreneurial intentions: A structural approach. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 2 (3), 413–428 http://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-006-0006-z .

Zhou, J., & George, J. M. (2001). When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (4), 682–696.

Ziegler, R. (2009). An introduction to social entrepreneurship: Voices, preconditions, contexts. In R. Ziegler (Ed.), An introduction to social entrepreneurship - voices, preconditions, contexts (pp. 1–18). Cheltenham • Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

Download references

There is no funding agency that supported this research. This research study was done by authors only.

Authors’ contributions

PT, AKB and JT were involved in the development of the questionnaire and analysis the data. PT did data collection. All authors were part of manuscript preparation process and approved the final draft of manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Management, Birla Institute of Technology & Science, Pilani, India

Preeti Tiwari, Anil K. Bhat & Jyoti Tikoria

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Preeti Tiwari .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Tiwari, P., Bhat, A.K. & Tikoria, J. An empirical analysis of the factors affecting social entrepreneurial intentions. J Glob Entrepr Res 7 , 9 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-017-0067-1

Download citation

Received : 20 October 2016

Accepted : 18 April 2017

Published : 05 May 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-017-0067-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

IMAGES

  1. Entrepreneurial marketing thesis proposal sample

    thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

  2. Entrepreneurial marketing thesis proposal sample

    thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

  3. (PDF) ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTION AMONG UNDERGRADUATE BUSINESS STUDENTS'

    thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

  4. Entrepreneurial intention model

    thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

  5. (PDF) The Foundation of Entrepreneurial Intention

    thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

  6. (PDF) Role of entrepreneurial motivation on entrepreneurial intentions and behaviour: theory of

    thesis on entrepreneurial intentions

VIDEO

  1. Top 7 Ministries by Budgetary Allocation #UPSC #IAS #CSE #IPS

  2. Research Methodology for Business Decisions PROG #1

  3. Learning a Bayesian structure to model entrepreneurial intentions

  4. Entrepreneur: An Overview l Entrepreneurship Development

  5. Factors That Influence Entrepreneurial Intentions

  6. The 6 Stages of Entrepreneurship (Recorded Webinar)

COMMENTS

  1. PDF The impact of Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial Intention

    specific entrepreneurship education characteristics and their influence on entrepreneurial intention, this study used SEM path analysis for fitness of the overall model instead of regression for separate relationships. The results suggest that the feedback and business plan activities can directly impact on entrepreneurial intention.

  2. (PDF) The Foundation of Entrepreneurial Intention

    An individual's decision to engage in entrepreneurial practice is the theory of planned behaviour which argues that attitude, subjective norms, and perceived control (self-efficacy) predict...

  3. A study on effect of entrepreneurship on entrepreneurial intention

    Yoon (2004) considered entrepreneurial intention as the first step in establishing one's business and a positive attitude and experience toward business start-up should be preceded prior to actually making a decision to start his/her business.

  4. Full article: Entrepreneurial intentions among MBA students

    Bird ( 1988) indicates that entrepreneurial intention is a state of an individual mind, which directs and guides them towards the development and the implementation of new business concept. Van Gelderen et al. ( 2008) highlight entrepreneurial intention as the intentions of setting up one's business in the future.

  5. (PDF) ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTION OF BUSINESS STUDENTS

    Entrepreneurship Intention is the mindset of students to start their own business venture. It depends upon various Psychological and societal factors. On determining the intention, the theory...

  6. Entrepreneurial Intentions of Students: Review of Academic Literature

    Intention Entrepreneurial Intentions of Students: Review of Academic Literature Authors: Glory Swarupa Bhartiya Skill Development University, Jaipur Ravi Kumar Goyal BHARTIYA SKILL...

  7. The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial Intention

    Entrepreneurial intention (EI) is a key construct in research on new ventures creation. However, neither a clear or consistent definition nor a uniform way to measure entrepreneurial...

  8. DETERMINANTS OF STUDENTS' ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTION: AN ...

    Wu & Wu (2008) define entrepreneur-ial intention as a state of mind, in which a person wants to create a new enterprise or a new value driver within an existing en-terprise, i.e. entrepreneurial intention is the driving force of entrepreneurial activities. The intention is an indicator of how much people are willing to try and how much ef-

  9. PDF The Impact of entrepreneurship education programs on entrepreneurial

    This Master thesis is the concluding part for the Master of Science degree in Business and Economics at Erasmus University. Hereby, I would like to express my thankfulness ... on entrepreneurial intentions, the current research draws on the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1991, 2002). Ajzen (1991, 2002) proposed a model of intention that has ...

  10. (PDF) Exploring the Intentions of Social Entrepreneurship. An Empirical

    Based on the above discussion and some empirical evidence from previous researches, it was found that the willingness of social entrepreneurs is related to empathy, moral obligation, self-efficacy...

  11. PDF BACHELOR THESIS The relationship between entrepreneurship education and

    2.2 Entrepreneurship Education and Environment in the Netherlands 2.3 Effect of Entrepreneurship Education Program on Entrepreneurial Intentions 2.4 Entrepreneurial Intentions Models and Theory of Planned Behavior 2.4.1 Subjective Norms 2.4.2 Perceived Behavioral Control 2.4.3 Attitude towards Entrepreneurship Data 3.1 Sample

  12. Entrepreneurial Intention: Theory of Planned Behaviour and the

    Entrepreneurial activity is considered to be an intentionally planned behaviour. Consequently, entrepreneurial intention (EI) may be evaluated via theory of planned behaviour (TPB). According to Ajzen's TPB, EI is explained by three antecedents: attitude towards entrepreneurial behaviour, perceived social norms and perceived behaviour control in other words, self‐efficacy.

  13. Entrepreneurial intentions: The role of personality traits in ...

    In the context of entrepreneurship, intention (EI) can be defined as a "self-acknowledged conviction" by any individual that he/she is willing to initiate new business enterprise, and he/she continuously plans to accomplish this in future ( Ridha and Wahyu, 2017; Thompson, 2009 ).

  14. The Impact of Self-Efficacy on Entrepreneurship Performance

    As entrepreneurs hold strong beliefs in their own abilities to accomplish tasks in entrepreneurial areas, they establish challenging goals, display persistence, invest efforts regarding entrepreneurial tasks, and recover rapidly from failure. The effects of these invested efforts are reflected in performance (Miao et al., 2017).

  15. PDF Attitude toward entrepreneurship, perceived behavioral control, and

    Cantner, 2009), PBC (e.g., Schlaegel & Koenig, 2014), and entrepreneurial intention (e.g., Thompson, 2009) should be considered and treated as multidimensional constructs. One of the research streams in the entrepreneurship literature and, in specific, in the entrepreneurial intention literature has been the role of gender in the formation of

  16. PDF An Empirial Study on the Effectiveness of Entrepreneurship Education in

    Developing Entrepreneurial Intention Among Malaysian University Students system was renamed 'family roles'. The analysis of structural path in the second re-specified model embarked on testing the original model of entrepreneurial intentions. A competing model exhibited a good fit indicating the robustness of the study.

  17. PDF Factors Affecting Entrepreneurial Intentions and Entrepreneurial

    entrepreneurial intention may be influenced by different kinds of opinion leaders, role models, course characteristics, entrepreneurial attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. At the same time, we examined exactly what affects the entrepreneurial attitude of the students towards becoming an entrepreneur during these ...

  18. Entrepreneurial Knowledge and its Effects on Entrepreneurial Intentions

    This study advances the thesis that knowledge gained from a formal entrepreneurship education program will have positive effects on an individual's overall entrepreneurial intentions through the mediating influences of attitudes and social norms favouring entrepreneurial behaviour.

  19. An empirical analysis of the factors affecting social entrepreneurial

    The present study aims at identifying the social entrepreneurial intention among undergraduate students in Indian context by using the theory of planned behaviour as the research framework. A 72 item questionnaire was responded by 390 students of premier technical universities of India. A method of sampling used was systematized random sampling. 69% (N = 269) of the respondents were male and ...

  20. (PDF) The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on the Relationships

    Entrepreneurial intention is the desire to create a business (Nasip et al., 2017;Woo, 2018), and the shaper of individual interest and support in entrepreneurship activities (Mwiya, 2014).