Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Francisco Liñána
University of Seville, Spain
Summary
Despite the widespread development of entrepreneurship education initiatives in the last decades, a
consensus definition about it has not been reached. As a consequence, there is also a lack of consistent
classifications of educational activities. In this paper, our main objective is to develop a view of
entrepreneurship education based on entrepreneurial intention models. Given the wide variety of this kind
of training programmes being implemented, and their different effects on participants, it is also important
for the proposed definition to allow the establishing of a useful classification. Finally, a preliminary test
has been carried out, both on the validity of intention models and on the subsequent derived classification.
Empirical results tend to validate the theoretical approach adopted.
1. Introduction
and even primary ones. At the university level, programmes are being developed
starting to appear. Outside the educational system, there are courses and programmes
carried out for specific audiences, especially for different subgroups of the unemployed
and/or minorities.
Taking into account all this widespread development, one should think that the
not the case. The absence of an accepted definition poses important problems, such as
the controversy arising from the different objectives and varieties of entrepreneurship
a
F. Liñán, Associate Professor - Dept. of Applied Economics (Economía Aplicada I), University of
Seville, Av. Ramón y Cajal, 1, E-41018 Seville (Spain); Tel.: +34954554487; Fax: +34954551636; email:
flinan@us.es
1
education considered in the various studies. In fact, depending on the initial
assumptions, these studies may reach opposite results. Or they may be referring to very
Authors such as Sexton & Bowman (1984) have claimed that entrepreneurship
attempt to define the former has to be based on a view of the latter. However, there is no
based. In this sense, intention models seem to be a very good starting point. There is a
entrepreneur and to carrying out specific behaviours after the start-up phase.
devote the following section to describing that entrepreneurial intention model. Section
presents some empirical results that constitute a partial test on the validity of this
approach. Firstly, we have tested intention models themselves, to see if they qualify as
the basis for describing entrepreneurship. Secondly, we have checked the influence of
2
2. Intention models
Over the years, the decision to become an entrepreneur has been analysed using very
different methodologies. Authors began looking for the existence of certain personality
traits that could be associated with the entrepreneurial activity (McClelland, 1961).
Later on, other studies have pointed to the importance of different characteristics such
as age, gender, origin, religion, level of studies, labour experience, and so on (Reynolds
et al., 1994; Storey, 1994). These are usually called “demographic” variables (Robinson
et al., 1991). Both lines of analysis have allowed the identification of significant
relationships among certain traits or demographic characteristics of the person, and the
very limited (Reynolds, 1997). From the theoretical point of view, those approaches
have been criticized (Gartner, 1989; Robinson et al., 1991; Krueger et al., 2000; Liñán
et al., 2002), both for their methodological and conceptual problems and for their low
explanatory capacity.
reasonable to analyze how that decision is taken. In this sense, entrepreneurial intention
behaviours (Fayolle & Gailly, 2004; Kolvereid, 1996). In turn, the intention to carry out
a given behaviour will depend on the person's attitudes towards that behaviour (Ajzen,
1991). A more favourable attitude would increase the intention of carrying it out. In this
manner, this “attitude approach” would be preferable to those traditionally used, such as
the trait or the demographic approaches (Robinson et al., 1991; Krueger et al., 2000).
Thus, attitudes would measure the extent to which an individual positively or negatively
3
evaluates something. Attitudes are relatively stable, but they change according to time
and situation.
recent research. In the first place, Shapero & Sokol’s (1982) theory of the
“entrepreneurial event” and, secondly, the much more highly structured theory of
“planned behaviour” (Ajzen, 1991). These two models present a high level of mutual
compatibility (Krueger et al., 2000). Our work, therefore, starts from an integration of
both.
The theory of the entrepreneurial event considers firm creation as the result of the
interaction among contextual factors, which would act through their influence on the
Kennedy, 2003). People’s answers to that external event will depend on their
perceptions about the available alternatives. There are two basic kinds of perceptions:
personally able to carry out that behaviour. The presence of role models, mentors or
In turn, both types of perceptions are determined by cultural and social factors
through their influence on the individual's value system (Shapero & Sokol, 1982).
Therefore, external circumstances would not determine behaviours directly, but rather
they would be the result of (conscious or unconscious) analysis carried out by the
4
person about the desirability and feasibility of the different possible alternatives in that
situation.
Along the same line, but much more detailed, Ajzen (1991) develops a
nearly all voluntary behaviours and it provides quite good results in very diverse fields,
including the choice of professional career (Ajzen, 2001; Kolvereid, 1996). According
to it, a narrow relationship would exist between the intention of carrying out a given
behaviour and its effective performance, as Figure 1 shows. Intention becomes the
fundamental element towards explaining behaviour. It indicates the effort that the
person will make to carry out that behaviour. And so, it captures the motivational
behaviour within their reach, this makes them try harder. More specifically, “perceived
fulfilment of the behaviour of interest (Ajzen, 1991). It is, therefore, a concept quite
similar to self-efficacy, though some authors consider it to be wider (Fayolle & Gailly,
2004). And it is also very similar to Shapero & Sokol’s (1982) “perceived feasibility”.
In all three instances, the important thing is the sense of capacity regarding the
realism in the perceptions. Some people may have a wrong impression of their own
5
capacity to carry out a behaviour (Ajzen, 2002). This could be due to some new
they could try to perform the behaviour even though their actual capacity is negligible,
or they could fail to attempt it although the objective probabilities of success are very
On the other hand, the remaining elements of the model are much more intuitive.
The first of them is attitude towards the behaviour: this refers to the degree to which the
norms would measure the perceived social pressure to carry it out -or not. These two
elements, together with perceived control, would make up the explanatory variables of
in the model, as it may change from case to case. In particular, in the sixteen empirical
studies analyzed by Ajzen (1991), subjective norms tended to contribute very weakly to
the intention of carrying out different behaviours. Finally, the model assumes the
Sokol (1982), we can see that perceived feasibility -as mentioned above- corresponds
quite well with perceived behavioural control. On the other hand, the willingness to
carry out that behaviour (perceived desirability) could be understood as composed of the
6
attitude towards it and subjective norms. In this sense, it may be recalled that Shapero &
provide a greater awareness about the existence of that professional option, and will
make the intention to become an entrepreneur more credible. Figure 2 summarizes the
Just as the interest towards entrepreneurship has been growing since the seventies,
both in the academic and political circles, entrepreneurship education has also
experienced a rapid increase all over the world (Loucks, 1988; European Commission,
instruments (Liñán & Rodríguez, 2004). In this sense, entrepreneurial education could
be pointed out as a potentially very effective strategy (Liñán, 2004). However, it would
entrepreneurship education.
In this sense, there have been numerous attempts to conceptualize this educational
form. The simplest one identifies it with training for firm creation. This is the case, for
example, of McIntyre & Roche (1999, p. 33), when they affirm that it is «the process of
providing individuals with the concepts and skills to recognize opportunities that others
7
have overlooked, and to have the insight and self-esteem to act where others have
On the other hand, wider conceptions are comprised of a number of objectives and
of different stages that usually include action during the whole educational system. The
lifelong learning. One of its more salient characteristics is the division into five stages
which are formally independent and that would be developed without the need of a tight
five stages may have a very remarkable effect on the level of entrepreneurial spirit of a
society, on firm creation rates, and also on their survival and their subsequent
Commission (2002).
education. However, the objective almost always consists of trying to promote effective
firm creation. The contents of these programmes tend to be very basic, and normally
include training on a specific occupation at the same time as they promote the
8
In our opinion, the following conception would be wide enough to embrace those
mentioned above: «the whole set of education and training activities -within the
educational system or not- that try to develop in the participants the intention to
perform entrepreneurial behaviours, or some of the elements that affect that intention,
for those of working age, entrepreneurship education would seek the effective creation
makes it useful as a reference framework for analysis and classification of the different
existing initiatives. In the first place, it seeks to include all education activities and not
only those developed within the educational system. Secondly, it includes broader
It also tries to increase the degree of dynamism of entrepreneurs; that is to say, the
entrepreneurial quality (Guzmán & Santos, 2001). Thirdly, the role of educators would
education and management training. A typical instance of the latter would be university
business studies. Management training is not usually concerned with traits, skills,
attitudes or intentions of the participant, but mainly with the necessary technical
9
knowledge for business administration. Similarly, management training would not be
McMullan & Gillin (1998), based on the theoretical outline previously developed by
education project: a) objectives that are pursued; b) faculty or teaching team who will be
imparting it; c) participant students; d) content of the course; e) teaching methods; and
As Brockhaus (1992) points out, objectives are the fundamental question, under
which all other elements should be placed. Therefore, in this paper, we have used those
aims as the main classifying criteria. In this sense, Curran & Stanworth (1989) try to
define the main types of objectives that can be pursued by entrepreneurship education.
Their classification has been widely assumed by Garavan & O'Cinneide (1994) or Liñán
(2004). In our opinion, though the general idea may be valid, some changes have to be
option. Thus, this educational category would not directly pursue the creation of
desirability or feasibility), but not directly on intention. One example of this type of
10
initiatives would be courses imparted at universities. They are usually optional
transform students into entrepreneurs, but only allow them to make their future
professional career choice with a greater perspective. This kind of courses fits very
schools (Garavan & O'Cinneide, 1994). In fact, many of the start-up or self-
– Education for start-up. It would consist of the preparation to be the owner of a small
conventional business, as are the great majority of all new firms. It would be centred
on the specific practical aspects related to the start-up phase: how to obtain
Participants in this type of courses are usually highly-motivated about the project.
So, they tend to show much interest in course contents. Frequently, the selection
criteria rely excessively on already having a viable business idea. In this sense, these
However, in practice, it is very common for them to select persons showing a high
previous level of intention, and concentrate on the practical questions for start-up
(self-selection bias).
entrepreneurial behaviours after the start-up phase. Therefore, their objective would
not only be to increase the intention of becoming an entrepreneur, but also the
operation. However, the conventional forms of education do not allow for the
11
development of entrepreneurial quality (Guzmán & Santos, 2001), thus it would be
Some examples of this kind of educational programmes are described by Garavan &
O'Cinneide (1994b).
– Continuing education for entrepreneurs. This would be the fourth and last type of
this type of programmes, since they tend to consider these initiatives as too general
for the particular needs of their firms. A possible way to overcome this difficulty
could be linking this category with the above-mentioned modalities. In this sense,
effectiveness and to advance towards the achievement of all their potential (Curran &
Stanworth, 1989). In any event, there is some agreement in considering education for
entrepreneurial dynamism as the most relevant category (Garavan & O'Cinneide, 1994;
Liñán, 2004).
Given the characteristics of intention models, for empirical analysis to provide valid
and useful results, the situation needs to be studied before the entrepreneurial behaviour
has been performed (Noel, 2002). It is also necessary to include both individuals with
12
and without entrepreneurial intention (Krueger et al., 2000). Therefore, last year
university students constitute a highly suitable community, used for example by Fayolle
& Gailly (2004). In the first place, they are about to face a professional career choice.
Secondly, within this group one can expect to find people with all kinds of preferences
and intentions. Thirdly, few of them will have developed entrepreneurial behaviours, so
we can study their intention before the fulfilment of that behaviour. Besides, young
between intention and subsequent behaviour. In this sense, longitudinal studies offer
much more satisfactory results, even when only demographic variables are used in the
analysis (Liñán et al., 2002). Our purpose is to carry out such longitudinal studies
For this study, a questionnaire was given to students of last year subjects in two
within it. The situation in two very different centres within the region has, therefore,
been analyzed. The University of Seville is large (more than 60.000 students), old, and
located in the biggest metropolitan area in the region. The University of Jaen is small
The questionnaire used was developed under a research project financed by the
regional government1 and divided into six sections: personal data; education and
13
enterprises; and contact data. These latter data will allow a longitudinal follow up of
interviewees over a period of time. The items included in the first five parts have been
measured using 5-point likert-type scales, or by means of ordinal scales with three or
In classrooms where the questionnaire was used, answer rates were above 95%.
Thus, the total number of valid answers reached 166. Of them, 141 filled in contact data
(84.9%), so they could ideally be traced for the longitudinal follow-up. Our sample is
made up of 93 students from the University of Seville, and 73 from that of Jaen. 43.4%
of the sample are women, while 68.0% of it belongs to the age interval from 22 to 25.
62.1%).
some minor differences exist between them. In the first place, those surveyed in Seville
students of other degrees to take subjects at the business school. Besides, those other
degrees tend to be shorter (3 years). Therefore, this would help to explain the existing
difference with respect to age in both sub-samples and also with respect to the length of
studies2.
14
The second significant difference refers to gender. In Jaen, the proportion of women
within the sample (52.1%) is well above that of Seville (36.6%). This difference seems
to correspond to the general situation in both universities. In Seville there are relatively
fewer women studying, while in Jaen they represent a slight majority, not only in
With respect to other characteristics, there is not any significant difference regarding
the following features: income level, parents' level of studies, labour experience, or
whole.
The results obtained can be considered on two different levels. In the first place, the
relationships established among the analyzed variables seem to confirm the validity of
the intention model for studying the entrepreneurial phenomenon. Secondly, different
intentions.
the behaviour itself (Ajzen, 1991; Kolvereid, 1996). That effect would be only indirect,
through their influence on the antecedents of intention. The model developed in section
According to this, one should expect intention to be better predicted through those
antecedents. To test this hypothesis, the Partial Least Squares (PLS) technique was
15
used. This is a multivariate analysis technique. Gefen et al. (2000) indicate that PLS is
more adequate than covariance-based techniques, such as LISREL, when carrying out
exploratory analysis and working with small sample sizes. In this case, two different
sets of explaining variables were compared. The first of them considers only external
variables, while the second uses the above-mentioned antecedents. Detailed results are
included in the appendix, as well as the indicators used in each of the constructs.
being an entrepreneur. In simple linear models with only one endogenous (dependent)
variable, PLS results are equivalent to those obtained with Ordinary Least Squares
only 21.2% of the variance in intention. Only four of those variables are significant,
significantly improved. Figure 4 presents those findings. In this case, the proportion of
the explained variance in intention rises to 47.3%. That is, nearly half of the change in
towards entrepreneurship and perceived feasibility make the largest contributions, and
Social norms, on the other hand, contribute very weakly to explaining intention.
This is consistent with other studies that have applied the theory of planned behaviour
2000). Yet, , Kolvereid (1996) found a direct significant effect of social norms on
intention. However, in Fayolle & Gailly’s (2004) study, a close replication of the latter,
16
those social norms were not significant. Further analysis of this relationship is surely
A high correlation was also found between attitude and feasibility. Nevertheless, as
the literature is not clear on the sense of this relationship, it has not been included in the
final model. In any case, when that relationship was included, it helped increase the
other antecedents of intention, but also the theory predicted, as a direct influence on it.
expected. Knowing an entrepreneur, and being familiar with the business environment,
makes students more confident about their own capacity of becoming entrepreneurs.
Knowledge alone explains 17.2% of the variance in feasibility. On the other hand, its
17
Please insert Table 2 around here
The addition of external or demographic variables to the model in Figure 4 does not
change coefficients appreciably. Table 2 shows the change in explained variance after
relatively small. The highest effect is produced on feasibility and, to a lesser extent, on
social norms. The demographic characteristics are probably too general to explain
is still limited to little more than business-plan courses, which could be classified as
education for start-up. This is the case in the University of Jaen. In Seville, however,
different effect of each of those categories on the variables included in the intention
model.
18
Please insert Figure 5 around here
The awareness education course centres on the analysis of the role of entrepreneurial
agents in economic development and highlights their importance. For that reason, it
could contribute to increasing a perceived social valuation of those agents. Our results
seem to confirm this hypothesis. The start-up course, on the other hand, centres on the
We have also found a higher direct relationship between participation in the start-up
course, on the one hand, and perceived attraction and level of intention, on the other.
However, as other researchers have pointed out (Noel, 2002; McMullan & Long, 1987),
this is probably due to the so-called “self-selection bias”. That is, those students with a
lines.
5. Conclusions
entrepreneurship. In particular, this work has integrated Ajzen’s (1991) and Shapero &
Sokol’s (1982) theories into an entrepreneurial intention model. This, in turn, has been
used as the basis to define entrepreneurship education and to classify it. The
19
intention of performing entrepreneurial behaviours, or any of the variables determining
that intention.
This allows for a clear distinction from conventional management training, which is
mainly concerned with technical knowledge for business administration. It also enables
could be considered as the most relevant category. It not only tries to promote the
A partial empirical test has been carried out about the validity of the entrepreneurial
intention model. However, as this work is part of a wider research project, the
questionnaire was not designed to allow for a full validation of that model.
Undoubtedly, this makes up a serious limitation. Therefore, even though the results
In the first part of the empirical analysis carried out, the entrepreneurial intention
model has offered much better predictions of intention than external or demographic
variables alone. What is more, when these latter variables are added to the former, the
joint model -despite being substantially more complicated- does not offer much better
Similarly, we have found that the influence of each course on the variables
20
result is consistent with the classification developed. Nevertheless, only awareness and
start-up courses have been considered. In future research, a test on the four categories
should be implemented.
Natural extensions of this work would include, in the first place, the reformulation
of the questionnaire to allow for a thorough validation of the theory. Secondly, we plan
Acknowledgements
The author wants to thank comments by participants at the IntEnt 2004 Conference, where a
previous version of this paper was presented. In particular, Alain Fayolle helped me clarify the
position of “entrepreneurial knowledge” as a previous element within the entrepreneurial
intention model. I am also indebted to an anonymous referee for his/her interesting comments
and suggestions.
Notes
1
Ref. No.: ACC-953-SEJ-2002, Programa Acciones Coordinadas, III Plan Andaluz de
Investigación. The questionnaire is available from the author upon request.
2
University studies in Spain are either “diplomatura” (3-year degree) or “licenciatura” (4- to
5-year degrees). In Seville, the “licenciatura” in business administration lasts 5 years, while
in Jaen it is 4.
References
Ajzen, I., “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Ajzen, I., “Nature and operation of attitudes”, Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 52, pp. 27-58,
2001.
Ajzen, I., “Residual effects of past on later behavior: habituation and reasoned action
perspectives”, Personality and Social Psychology Review, vol. 6 (2), pp. 107-122, 2002.
Westport, 1990.
21
Brockhaus, R.H., “Entrepreneurship education: a research agenda”, IntEnt92 Conference,
Curran, J. & Stanworth, J., “Education and training for enterprise: some problems of
classification, evaluation, policy and research”, International Small Business Journal, vol. 7
European Commission, Final report of the expert group «best procedure» project on education
Fayolle, A., “Using the theory of planned behaviour in assessing entrepreneurship teaching
Fayolle, A. & Gailly, B., “Using the theory of planned behaviour to assess entrepreneurship
July, 2004.
Garavan, T.N. & O’Cinneide, B., “Entrepreneurship education and training programmes: a
review and evaluation”, Journal of European Industrial Training, vol. 18 (8), pp. 3-12,
1994.
Garavan, T.N. & O’Cinneide, B., “Entrepreneurship education and training programmes: a
review and evaluation - Part II”, Journal of European Industrial Training, vol. 18 (11), pp.
13-21, 1994b.
Gefen, D.; Straub, D.W. & Boudreau, M.C., “Structural equation modelling and regression:
guidelines for research and practice”, Communications of the Association for Information
22
Guzmán, J. & Santos, F.J., “The booster function and the entrepreneurial quality: an application
to the province of Seville”, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, vol. 13 (3), pp.
211-228, 2001.
Krueger, N.F., Reilly, M.D. & Carsrud, A.L., “Competing models of entrepreneurial
2004.
Liñán, F. & Rodríguez, J.C., “Entrepreneurial attitudes of Andalusian university students”, 44th
Liñán, F., Martín, D. & González, R., “Characteristics of nascent entrepreneurs in Germany”,
Loucks, K.E., Training entrepreneurs for small business creation, I.L.O., Ginebra, 1988.
McClelland, D., The achieving society, The Free Press, London, 1961.
McIntyre, J.R. & Roche, M., University education for entrepreneurs in the United States: a
critical and retrospective analysis of trends in the 1990s, Center for International Business
Education & Research, Working Paper Series 99/00-021, Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, 1999.
McMullan, W.E. & Gillin, L.M., “Developing technological start-up entrepreneurs: a case study
McMullan, W.E. & Long, W.A., “Entrepreneurship education in the nineties”, Journal of
23
Peterman, N.E. & Kennedy, J., “Enterprise Education: influencing students’ perceptions of
entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 28 (2), pp. 129-144, 2003.
Reynolds, P.D., “Who start new firms? – Preliminary explorations of firms-in-gestation”, Small
Reynolds, P., Storey, D.J. & Westhead, P., “Cross-national comparison of the variation in new
Reynolds, P.D., Bygrave, W.D., Autio, D. & Hay, M., Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. 2002
Robinson, P.B., Stimpson, D.V., Huefner, J.C. & Hunt, H.K., “An attitude approach to the
prediction of entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 15 (4), pp. 13-
30, 1991.
S.B.A., Building the Foundation for the new century. Report on the implementation of the White
Scherer, R.F., Brodzinsky, J.D. & Wiebe, F.A., “Examining the relationship between
Sexton, D.L. & Bowman, N.B., “Entrepreneurship education: suggestions for increasing
efectiveness”, Journal of Small Business Management, vol. 22 (2), pp. 18-25, 1984.
Shapero, A. & Sokol, L., “Social dimensions of entreprenurship”, in Kent, C.A., Sexton, D.L. y
(NJ), 1982.
Storey D.J., Understanding the small business sector, Routledge, London, 1994.
Weinrauch, J.D., “Educating the entrepreneur: understanding adult learning behavior”, Journal
24
Figure 1 - Theory of planned behaviour
Attitude
towards the
Subjective
Norms Intention Behaviour
Perceived
Behavioural
Control
Entrepreneurial
Knowledge
Perceived
Desirability
Personal Entrepreneurial
Attitude Intention
Perceived
Social Norms
Perceived Feasibility
(self-efficacy)
25
Table 1 - Sample characteristics
Age
0.087
Gender 0.162*
Degree studied
0.025
26
Figure 4 - Influence of internal variables on intention
Attitude
0.086
0.272** 0.418***
0.068 Social
Norms 0.041
0.204 0.042
Intention
Knowledge
0.164* 0.473
0.415*** 0.314***
Feasibility
0.172
* Significant regression coefficients, p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
27
Figure 5 - Differing effects of entrepreneurship education courses
Entrepreneurial
Knowledge
Perceived Feasibility
0.397** (self-efficacy)
Start-up
0.242*
education Entrepreneurial
Intention
0.327**
Perceived Desirability
Personal Attitude
Awareness
education Perceived
Social Norms
0.288**
28
Appendix
==========================================================
29
Model B - Internal variables on intention
30