The XII. European Congress of Work
and Organizational Psychology



            PREDICTING ENTREPRENEURIAL
            INTENTION FROM THE THEORY OF
            PLANNED BEHAVIOR


       Juan A. Moriano, José F. Morales & Francisco J. Palací
         Department of Social and Organizational Psychology
        Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED)

                 ISTAMBUL 13th MAY 2005
INTRODUCTION
The study of entrepreneurship within Psychology field is characterized by:
    •   A lot of descriptive and partial studies  “Entrepreneurial Personality”

    •   These studies have received several methodological and theoretical critiques
        (Baron, 2002; Gartner, 1988; Robinson, Stimpson, Huefner y Hunt, 1991;
        Shane y Venkataraman, 2000; Shaver y Scott, 1991)

    •   Lack of solid theories that consolidate the previous studies




       Therefore comes the necessity to go deeper into the study of
   entrepreneurship and to apply models from Social Psychology field.
       These models need to take into account not only the personal
      characteristics, but also the social variables and the interaction
   between them in order to explain and predict entrepreneurial behavior.
WORK GOALS

    To analyze the applicability of a Social Psychology Model
   in order to explain and predict the entrepreneurial intention




                            Subjective
Attitudes                                           Self-Efficacy
                              Norms




                         Entrepreneurial
                            Intention
THEORETICAL REVIEW
ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTION

 Entrepreneurship is the type of planned behavior for which intention
   models are ideally suitable (Bird, 1988; Katz and Gartner, 1988)


INTENTION MODELS:
 • Shapero’s Model of the “Entrepreneurial Event” (SEE) (Shapero, 1975)
 • Model of Implementing Entrepreneurial Ideas (Bird, 1988)
 • The Expectancy Theory Model (Vesalainen and Pihkala, 1999)
 • The Utility Maximization Model of Career Choice (Douglas, 2002)
 • Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991)
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
                      Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991)

                      Attitude




                      Subjectiv
                       e Norm
                                             Intention          Behavior



                      Perceived
                      Behavior
                      al Control




                                          Regression Coefficients           Adjusted R²
           Study                                Subjective                 Entrepreneurial
                                   Attitude                       PBC
                                                  Norm                        Intention
Tkachev & Kolvereid (1999)          .11*          .28*           .44*            .45

Autio et al. (2001)                 .24***        .02*          .36***           .30
METHOD
Participants
                The sample size was   2190 Spanish students
                41.1% were men and 57.9% were women
                The average age was 22 years old
                The students were mostly university students
                 (63.3%) and technical college students (26.8%)
                Most of the participants were unemployed and
                 dedicated only to their studies (84.5%)
METHOD

Measures
 Personal data: Gender, age, level of education and work situation

 Entrepreneurial intention

   a) Direct measure

        What is your career intention? (in a scale from 1 to 10)
        a) Start your own business or work on your own
        b) Work as an employee in a private company
        c) Work as a government employee
   f)   Indirect measure
        A scale consisted of 6 items which evaluate in an indirect way the
        entrepreneurial intention.
        For example, “I have a specific idea for starting a new venture”
METHOD
Measures
 Attitudes scales
    General attitude towards Self-Employment
    Attitude funtions of Self-Employment (Grande, 2001)
    Specific attitudes towards: Achievement, Innovation, Independence,
      Change, Risk and Salary (EAO, Robinson et al., 1991)
2. Subjective Norm
   a) Social legitimacy of Entrepreneurship
   b) Social Support
   c) Entrepreneurship Support from the Educational Center

3. Perceived Behavioral Control

  Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy Scale (De Noble, Jung, Ehrlich, 1999)
RESULTS: ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTION
•   The entrepreneurial intention obtained the lowest average score.
•   Only 13.5% of the participants have higher intention of working as self-employed
    than as employed.
                                                    Figure 1. Career Intention


                                                                                                          Entrepreneur
                                          5.24
           Career Intention




                                                                                                          Government Employee
                                                     5.98
                                                                                                          Employee in private
                                                                                 7.69                     company


                              4              5               6               7               8
                              Note. 10-point scale ranging from 1 (not interested) to 10 (totally interested).
                              *** Mean differences significant at p < .001


•   Differences between men and women:
     a) Men: Higher entrepreneurial intention
     b) Women: Higher intention to work in a private company or for the government
18.5% of the men prefer to become an entrepreneur in compare with 9.8% of the women
RESULTS: ATTITUDES
                                                                                               Correlation with
                                                          Reliability
       Variable               Factors          Items                        Mean        SD     Entrepreneurial
                                                         Coefficients
                                                                                                  Intention
                          Government
 General attitude                                 3            .64          4.01       0.65           .170**
                          level
 towards Self-
 Employment               People level            2            .51          3.56       0.72           .259**

                          Personal
                                                  8            .73           3.85      0.48           .229**
                          development
                          Community
 Attitude funtions                                3            .44           3.61      0.55           .100**
                          contribution
 of Self-
 Employment               Disadvantages           6            .56           3.50      0.43           .084**

                          Social status           3            .57           3.10      0.76           .084**
                    Achievement                   6            .59           4.02      0.43           .087**
                    Innovation                    5            .56           3.76      0.52           .177**
                    Independence                  5            .59           3.21      0.61           .154**
 Specific attitudes
                    Risk                          4            .41           3.34      0.63           .154**
                    Initiative                    2            .32           3.48      0.79           .187**
                    Salary                        5            .60           3.16      0.70           .068**
Note. 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) ** Coefficients significant at p < .01
RESULTS: SUBJECTIVE NORM
                                                                                         Correlation with
                                                         Reliability
       Variable                Factors        Items                       Mean    SD     Entrepreneurial
                                                        Coefficients
                                                                                            Intention

 Social legitimacy
 of                                  -           2             -           3.21   0.93       .071**
 Entrepreneurship


                           Family                3            .75          4.16   0.81        .191**
 Social Support
                           Friends and
                                                 3            .60          3.67   0.56        .099**
                           professors


 Entrepreneurial           Encouraging           3            .75          1.96   0.87        .165**
 Support from
 Educational
 Centers                   Activities            2            .54          1.76   0.75        .062**


Note. 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)
** Coefficients significant at p < .01
RESULTS: PERCEIVED BEHAVIORAL CONTROL
                                                                                             Correlation with
                                                       Reliability
       Variable                 Factors         Items                      Mean       SD     entrepreneurial
                                                      Coefficients
                                                                                                intention
                          Developing new
                                                  4            .75             3.15   0.59        .205**
                          products

                          Initiating investor
                                                  6            .75             3.39   0.53        .189**
                          relationships

                          Developing critical
                                                  4            .68             3.15   0.65        .132**
                          human resources
 Entrepreneurial
 Self-Efficacy            Building an
                          innovative              3            .66             3.38   0.60        .191**
                          environment
                          Defining core
                                                  4            .58             3.32   0.73        .177**
                          porpose
                          Coping with
                          unexpected              2            .40             3.01   0.65        .179**
                          changes
Note. 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)
** Coefficients significant at p < .01
STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING
                                                               Figure 2. Intention model from Theory of Planned Behavior

THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR (TPB)                               e1    AG     ,65
                                                                           ,66    General
                                                                                                        res1
                                                               e2    AP           attitude

                                                                     ID
Model Fit
                                                       ,16     e3           ,80
                                                                                                 ,73
                                                               e4    ES    ,13
                                                        -,17                ,27   Attitude
Indexes: RMR (.03), GFI (.93), AGFI (.91) and                  e5    IN    ,50    funtions        ,87
                                                                                                          ATTITUDE
                                                               e6    CC
RMSEA (.04)                                     -,27
                                                               e7    LP     ,59           res2   ,88
                                                               e8    IT     ,63
                                                                           ,16
                                                               e9    IL           Specific
                                                                                                                             ,32
Standardized Regression Weights                                            ,40    attitudes
                                                                                                               ,24
                                                                                                                                         res5
                                                               e10   CR    ,39

Attitude: .32 ***                                              e11   INI
                                                                                          res3
                                                                                                                                                .27
                                                                                                                     ,46
Subjective Norm: .15 *                                                                                                     ,15
                                                                                                                                   INTENTION

                                                               e13   NF             ,55

Perceived Behavioral Control: .21 **                           e14   CP
                                                                                    ,60                  SUBJECTIVE
                                                                                                           NORM
                                                                                                                                   ,52      ,78

                                                                                   ,17
                                                                                                                                    IE      IA
                                                               e15   AA            ,19                                     ,21
                                                        ,36
                                                               e16   EA
Explained Variance by the Model                                                                                ,23
                                                                                                                                    e23    e24


                                                               e17   DP
27% of entrepreneurial intention variance                      e18   IR
                                                                                   ,67
                                                                                   ,74
                                                               e19   RH            ,58
                                                                                                          PERCEIVED
                                                                                   ,61                   BEHAVIORAL
                                                               e20   EI                                    CONTROL
                                                                                   ,62
                                                         ,30
                                                               e21   LC            ,49

* p<.05 ** p <.01 *** p < .001                                 e22   TE
STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING
THEORY OF REASONED ACTION (TRA) Figure 3. Intention model from Theory of Reasoned Action
                                                         e1     AG     ,66
 Modelo Fit                                                           ,66    General
                                                                                                  res1
                                                         e2     AP           Attitude

 Indexes: RMR (.04), GFI (.95), AGFI (.93)   ,16
                                                          e3    ID     ,79
                                                                                            ,75
                                                          e4    ES    ,12
 and RMSEA (.04)                              -,27
                                                         -,17
                                                                       ,28   Attitude
                                                          e5    IN           Funtions
                                                                      ,51                   ,88
                                                                                                    ATTITUDE
                                                          e6    CC

                                                          e7    LP     ,59
 Standardized Regression Weights                                       ,63
                                                                                     res2 ,87
                                                                                                                 ,33
                                                                                                                              res5
                                                          e8    IT
 Attitudes: .33 ***                                       e9    IL
                                                                      ,16
                                                                             Specific
                                                                                                                               .18
                                                                      ,40    Attitude
 Subjective Norm: .21 **                                 e10    CR    ,39                                ,24           INTENTION


                                                         e11    INI                                             ,21
                                                                                     res3
                                                                                                                       ,42     ,96


 Explained Variance by the Model                         e13    NF             ,57
                                                                                                                        IE    IA

                                                                              ,58                  SUBJECTIVE
 18% of entrepreneurial intention                        e14    CP
                                                                              ,15
                                                                                                     NORM               e23   e24


 variance                                          ,36
                                                         e15    AA            ,18

                                                         e16    EA




* p<.05 ** p <.01 *** p < .001
RESULTS: MULTIPLE-GROUP ANALYSIS
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN

 Model Fit for Men Group                       Model Fit for Women Group
 Indexes: RMR (.04), GFI (.89), AGFI (.87) y   Indexes : RMR (.03), GFI (.95), AGFI (.94) y
 RMSEA (.05)                                   RMSEA (.04)


 Standardized Regression Weights               Standardized Regression Weights
 Attitudes: .32 ***                            Attitudes: .34 ***
 Subjective Norm: .18 *                        Subjective Norm: .18 **
 Perceived Behavioral Control: .20 **          Perceived Behavioral Control: .14 *


 Explained Variance by the Model               Explained Variance by the Model
 31% of entrepreneurial intention variance     24% of entrepreneurial intention variance




* p<.05 ** p <.01 *** p < .001
CONCLUSIONS
How is the entrepreneurial intention of Spanish students?
•   The participating Spanish students have low entrepreneurial intention in general.
    Their favorite occupational choice is to work in a private company.

Is the Theory of Planned Behavior able to explain entrepreneurial
intention?
•   The model proposed by the TPB explains 27% of the variance in the
    entrepreneurial intention.
•   The alternative model proposed by the TRA explains only 18% of the variance in
    the entrepreneurial intention.
•   The TPB model was validated in groups of men and women. However, the
    explained variance of entrepreneurial intention was bigger in men group.

What is the best predictor of entrepreneurial intention?
•   Attitude is the most influential component with the biggest impact on the
    entrepreneurial intention in every group (women and men)
CONCLUSIONS
How is the subjective norm towards entrepreneurial behavior?
•   This variable shows the lowest impact on entrepreneurial intention
•   There is a low social legitimacy of entrepreneurship in Spain.
•   Social support has a positive effect on the entrepreneurial intention. Especially,
    when this support comes from the family.
•   Entrepreneurship Support from the Educational Center has a positive effect as
    well. However, the participating students indicate that there is not enough
    encouragement for the entrepreneurship as an occupational choice in their
    educational centers.

How is the Perceived Behavioral Control?
•   Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy is an important predictor of entrepreneurial intention.
•   If this component is eliminated from the model then the entrepreneurial intention
    explained variance goes down from 27% to 18%.
•   This variable has a bigger impact on entrepreneurial intention in men group than in
    women group.
Thank you !
   ¡ Muchas gracias !


Juan A. Moriano
E-mail: jamoriano@psi.uned.es

Predicting Entrepreneurial Intention Presentation

  • 1.
    The XII. EuropeanCongress of Work and Organizational Psychology PREDICTING ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTION FROM THE THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR Juan A. Moriano, José F. Morales & Francisco J. Palací Department of Social and Organizational Psychology Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED) ISTAMBUL 13th MAY 2005
  • 2.
    INTRODUCTION The study ofentrepreneurship within Psychology field is characterized by: • A lot of descriptive and partial studies  “Entrepreneurial Personality” • These studies have received several methodological and theoretical critiques (Baron, 2002; Gartner, 1988; Robinson, Stimpson, Huefner y Hunt, 1991; Shane y Venkataraman, 2000; Shaver y Scott, 1991) • Lack of solid theories that consolidate the previous studies Therefore comes the necessity to go deeper into the study of entrepreneurship and to apply models from Social Psychology field. These models need to take into account not only the personal characteristics, but also the social variables and the interaction between them in order to explain and predict entrepreneurial behavior.
  • 3.
    WORK GOALS To analyze the applicability of a Social Psychology Model in order to explain and predict the entrepreneurial intention Subjective Attitudes Self-Efficacy Norms Entrepreneurial Intention
  • 4.
    THEORETICAL REVIEW ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTION Entrepreneurship is the type of planned behavior for which intention models are ideally suitable (Bird, 1988; Katz and Gartner, 1988) INTENTION MODELS: • Shapero’s Model of the “Entrepreneurial Event” (SEE) (Shapero, 1975) • Model of Implementing Entrepreneurial Ideas (Bird, 1988) • The Expectancy Theory Model (Vesalainen and Pihkala, 1999) • The Utility Maximization Model of Career Choice (Douglas, 2002) • Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991)
  • 5.
    THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991) Attitude Subjectiv e Norm Intention Behavior Perceived Behavior al Control Regression Coefficients Adjusted R² Study Subjective Entrepreneurial Attitude PBC Norm Intention Tkachev & Kolvereid (1999) .11* .28* .44* .45 Autio et al. (2001) .24*** .02* .36*** .30
  • 6.
    METHOD Participants  The sample size was 2190 Spanish students  41.1% were men and 57.9% were women  The average age was 22 years old  The students were mostly university students (63.3%) and technical college students (26.8%)  Most of the participants were unemployed and dedicated only to their studies (84.5%)
  • 7.
    METHOD Measures  Personal data:Gender, age, level of education and work situation  Entrepreneurial intention a) Direct measure What is your career intention? (in a scale from 1 to 10) a) Start your own business or work on your own b) Work as an employee in a private company c) Work as a government employee f) Indirect measure A scale consisted of 6 items which evaluate in an indirect way the entrepreneurial intention. For example, “I have a specific idea for starting a new venture”
  • 8.
    METHOD Measures  Attitudes scales  General attitude towards Self-Employment  Attitude funtions of Self-Employment (Grande, 2001)  Specific attitudes towards: Achievement, Innovation, Independence, Change, Risk and Salary (EAO, Robinson et al., 1991) 2. Subjective Norm a) Social legitimacy of Entrepreneurship b) Social Support c) Entrepreneurship Support from the Educational Center 3. Perceived Behavioral Control Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy Scale (De Noble, Jung, Ehrlich, 1999)
  • 9.
    RESULTS: ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTION • The entrepreneurial intention obtained the lowest average score. • Only 13.5% of the participants have higher intention of working as self-employed than as employed. Figure 1. Career Intention Entrepreneur 5.24 Career Intention Government Employee 5.98 Employee in private 7.69 company 4 5 6 7 8 Note. 10-point scale ranging from 1 (not interested) to 10 (totally interested). *** Mean differences significant at p < .001 • Differences between men and women: a) Men: Higher entrepreneurial intention b) Women: Higher intention to work in a private company or for the government 18.5% of the men prefer to become an entrepreneur in compare with 9.8% of the women
  • 10.
    RESULTS: ATTITUDES Correlation with Reliability Variable Factors Items Mean SD Entrepreneurial Coefficients Intention Government General attitude 3 .64 4.01 0.65 .170** level towards Self- Employment People level 2 .51 3.56 0.72 .259** Personal 8 .73 3.85 0.48 .229** development Community Attitude funtions 3 .44 3.61 0.55 .100** contribution of Self- Employment Disadvantages 6 .56 3.50 0.43 .084** Social status 3 .57 3.10 0.76 .084** Achievement 6 .59 4.02 0.43 .087** Innovation 5 .56 3.76 0.52 .177** Independence 5 .59 3.21 0.61 .154** Specific attitudes Risk 4 .41 3.34 0.63 .154** Initiative 2 .32 3.48 0.79 .187** Salary 5 .60 3.16 0.70 .068** Note. 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) ** Coefficients significant at p < .01
  • 11.
    RESULTS: SUBJECTIVE NORM Correlation with Reliability Variable Factors Items Mean SD Entrepreneurial Coefficients Intention Social legitimacy of - 2 - 3.21 0.93 .071** Entrepreneurship Family 3 .75 4.16 0.81 .191** Social Support Friends and 3 .60 3.67 0.56 .099** professors Entrepreneurial Encouraging 3 .75 1.96 0.87 .165** Support from Educational Centers Activities 2 .54 1.76 0.75 .062** Note. 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) ** Coefficients significant at p < .01
  • 12.
    RESULTS: PERCEIVED BEHAVIORALCONTROL Correlation with Reliability Variable Factors Items Mean SD entrepreneurial Coefficients intention Developing new 4 .75 3.15 0.59 .205** products Initiating investor 6 .75 3.39 0.53 .189** relationships Developing critical 4 .68 3.15 0.65 .132** human resources Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy Building an innovative 3 .66 3.38 0.60 .191** environment Defining core 4 .58 3.32 0.73 .177** porpose Coping with unexpected 2 .40 3.01 0.65 .179** changes Note. 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) ** Coefficients significant at p < .01
  • 13.
    STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING Figure 2. Intention model from Theory of Planned Behavior THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR (TPB) e1 AG ,65 ,66 General res1 e2 AP attitude ID Model Fit ,16 e3 ,80 ,73 e4 ES ,13 -,17 ,27 Attitude Indexes: RMR (.03), GFI (.93), AGFI (.91) and e5 IN ,50 funtions ,87 ATTITUDE e6 CC RMSEA (.04) -,27 e7 LP ,59 res2 ,88 e8 IT ,63 ,16 e9 IL Specific ,32 Standardized Regression Weights ,40 attitudes ,24 res5 e10 CR ,39 Attitude: .32 *** e11 INI res3 .27 ,46 Subjective Norm: .15 * ,15 INTENTION e13 NF ,55 Perceived Behavioral Control: .21 ** e14 CP ,60 SUBJECTIVE NORM ,52 ,78 ,17 IE IA e15 AA ,19 ,21 ,36 e16 EA Explained Variance by the Model ,23 e23 e24 e17 DP 27% of entrepreneurial intention variance e18 IR ,67 ,74 e19 RH ,58 PERCEIVED ,61 BEHAVIORAL e20 EI CONTROL ,62 ,30 e21 LC ,49 * p<.05 ** p <.01 *** p < .001 e22 TE
  • 14.
    STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING THEORYOF REASONED ACTION (TRA) Figure 3. Intention model from Theory of Reasoned Action e1 AG ,66 Modelo Fit ,66 General res1 e2 AP Attitude Indexes: RMR (.04), GFI (.95), AGFI (.93) ,16 e3 ID ,79 ,75 e4 ES ,12 and RMSEA (.04) -,27 -,17 ,28 Attitude e5 IN Funtions ,51 ,88 ATTITUDE e6 CC e7 LP ,59 Standardized Regression Weights ,63 res2 ,87 ,33 res5 e8 IT Attitudes: .33 *** e9 IL ,16 Specific .18 ,40 Attitude Subjective Norm: .21 ** e10 CR ,39 ,24 INTENTION e11 INI ,21 res3 ,42 ,96 Explained Variance by the Model e13 NF ,57 IE IA ,58 SUBJECTIVE 18% of entrepreneurial intention e14 CP ,15 NORM e23 e24 variance ,36 e15 AA ,18 e16 EA * p<.05 ** p <.01 *** p < .001
  • 15.
    RESULTS: MULTIPLE-GROUP ANALYSIS DIFFERENCESBETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN Model Fit for Men Group Model Fit for Women Group Indexes: RMR (.04), GFI (.89), AGFI (.87) y Indexes : RMR (.03), GFI (.95), AGFI (.94) y RMSEA (.05) RMSEA (.04) Standardized Regression Weights Standardized Regression Weights Attitudes: .32 *** Attitudes: .34 *** Subjective Norm: .18 * Subjective Norm: .18 ** Perceived Behavioral Control: .20 ** Perceived Behavioral Control: .14 * Explained Variance by the Model Explained Variance by the Model 31% of entrepreneurial intention variance 24% of entrepreneurial intention variance * p<.05 ** p <.01 *** p < .001
  • 16.
    CONCLUSIONS How is theentrepreneurial intention of Spanish students? • The participating Spanish students have low entrepreneurial intention in general. Their favorite occupational choice is to work in a private company. Is the Theory of Planned Behavior able to explain entrepreneurial intention? • The model proposed by the TPB explains 27% of the variance in the entrepreneurial intention. • The alternative model proposed by the TRA explains only 18% of the variance in the entrepreneurial intention. • The TPB model was validated in groups of men and women. However, the explained variance of entrepreneurial intention was bigger in men group. What is the best predictor of entrepreneurial intention? • Attitude is the most influential component with the biggest impact on the entrepreneurial intention in every group (women and men)
  • 17.
    CONCLUSIONS How is thesubjective norm towards entrepreneurial behavior? • This variable shows the lowest impact on entrepreneurial intention • There is a low social legitimacy of entrepreneurship in Spain. • Social support has a positive effect on the entrepreneurial intention. Especially, when this support comes from the family. • Entrepreneurship Support from the Educational Center has a positive effect as well. However, the participating students indicate that there is not enough encouragement for the entrepreneurship as an occupational choice in their educational centers. How is the Perceived Behavioral Control? • Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy is an important predictor of entrepreneurial intention. • If this component is eliminated from the model then the entrepreneurial intention explained variance goes down from 27% to 18%. • This variable has a bigger impact on entrepreneurial intention in men group than in women group.
  • 18.
    Thank you ! ¡ Muchas gracias ! Juan A. Moriano E-mail: jamoriano@psi.uned.es