FACTORS INFLUENCING SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN …
102
FACTORS INFLUENCING SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN KARIOBANGI, KENYA BY RAPANDO, VINCENT ONG’ATO UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY-AFRICA FALL 2016
Transcript of FACTORS INFLUENCING SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN …
FACTORS INFLUENCING SOCIAL
ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN KARIOBANGI, KENYA
BY
RAPANDO, VINCENT ONG’ATO
UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY-AFRICA
FALL 2016
FACTORS INFLUENCING SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN KARIOBANGI,
KENYA
BY
RAPANDO, VINCENT ONG’ATO
ID NO. 248965
A Research Project Report Submitted to the Chandaria School of Business in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree inMaster of Business Administration
(MBA)
UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY-AFRICA
FALL 2016
i
STUDENT’S DECLARATION
I, the undersigned, declare that this is my original work and has not been submitted to any
other college, institution or university other that the United States International University in
Nairobi for academic credit.
Signed:____________________________ Date:__________________________
Rapando, Vincent Ong’ato (ID No. 248965)
This project has been presented for examination with approval as the appointed supervisor.
Signed:____________________________ Date:__________________________
Dr. Joseph Kamau Ngugi
Signed:____________________________ Date:__________________________
Dean, Chandaria School of Business
ii
COPYRIGHT
Copyright by Rapando Vincent Ong’ato, 2016
@All rights reserved
No part of this project may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical including photocopying, recording, information storage or otherwise
without prior written permission from the author.
iii
ABSTRACT
The main objective of this study was to evaluate factors influencing social entrepreneurship in
Kariobangi, Kenya. The study was guided by the following research objectives: the
relationship between personal attitude and social entrepreneurial intention; the relationship
between subjective norm and social entrepreneurial intention; the relationship between
perceived behavioural control and social entrepreneurial intention and finally examine the
extent to which entrepreneurial environmental factors affects entrepreneurial intention.
Descriptive research design, correlation and regression analysis wereused. The study targeted
11 Community Based Organizations under the umbrella of Raslimali Enterprises Limited in
Kariobangi, where fiftyleaders were identified to be the respondents. Questionnaires were
employed and data collection and Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software was
used to analyse the data. The findings from the study revealed that the relationship between
personal attitude and social entrepreneurial intention depicted some difference in mean
ranking, with the variance being minimal and all the items were negatively skewed. This is an
indicator that the respondents had positive personal attitude towards business. And on the
relationship between each of the entrepreneur’s intention and personal attitudes, most
respondents cited that they were ready to do anything to become entrepreneurs which had
correlation with the challenge of not having adequate resources to start the business, therefore
making most of them live with uncertainty.Looking at the relationship between subjective
norm and social entrepreneurial intention, the findings revealed that the respondents view on
subjective norm were ranked based on mean ranked from the highest to the lowest with
family approval of the decision to start a business taking lead, followed by colleagues and
mates approval of the decision and lastly friends approval of the decision.And looking at the
relationship between perceived behavioural control and social entrepreneurial intention. The
items ranked in order of priority were on the control to create a new business, probability of
succeeding, capacity to start a business, how easy it was to start and maintain a business, and
ability to develop entrepreneurial project. And the last research objective examined the extent
to which the entrepreneurial environment affects the social entrepreneurial intention.The
ranking of the items under entrepreneurial intention was based on the mean and this included;
being determined to create a business in the future, followed by having the business intention
to start a business someday, having a very serious thought of starting a business, making every
effort to start and run their own business. In conclusion, the entrepreneurial environmental
factors have a major effect on the social entrepreneurial intention, which if addressed can help
iv
in the growth of social entrepreneurship in a manner that will help alleviate poverty among
communities besides enhancing their ownership and sustainability.
In future, further research should be carried out by scholars to determine how the social
entrepreneurial intentions impacts on the lives of the beneficiaries in the informal settlements
to determine ownership and sustainability.
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, I would like to thank the Almighty God for His grace was sufficient.
I am sincerely grateful to Dr. Joseph Ngugi and Dr. Paul Katuse both of USIU-A Chandaria
School of Business, my thesis supervisor and reviewerwithout whose guidance and critique this
work would not have been possible. Kind inspiration fromDr. Manu Chandaria,OBE,CBS,EBS
who has been my mentor for over 15years, Mr. Les Baillie the Executive Director of MPESA
Foundation and Chairman Environmental track, members of Corporate Environmental
Roundtable, Global Peace Foundation(GPF) International and Kenya staff for their wise
counsel.
Data analysis would have been a real nightmare had it not been for the guidance from Mr. Paul
Ruto of USIU-A Research department: I am sincerely indebted to him and his team who
tirelessly worked on SPSS software as I analyzed the data.I am equally grateful to my MBA
colleagues at USIU-A Chandaria School of Business whowe were not only able to bond by
working in teams, but also favorably by sharing general life experiences.May God bless you
All.
vi
DEDICATION
I wish to dedicate this projectto my family who were verysupportive by sharing their love,
word of encouragement, memories and experiences with me when I used to spend most of the
evenings in class and sleepless nights away from them.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENT
STUDENT’S DECLARATION ................................................................................................. i
COPYRIGHT ............................................................................................................................. ii
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................... iii
TABLE OF CONTENT ........................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................. xii
CHAPTER ONE .........................................................................................................................1
1.0. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................1
1.1. Background of the Study .......................................................................................................1
1.2. Statement of the Problem .......................................................................................................4
1.3. General Objective ..................................................................................................................5
1.4. Research Objective ................................................................................................................5
1.5. Significance of the Study .......................................................................................................5
1.6. Scope of the Study .................................................................................................................6
1.7. Operational Definition of Terms ............................................................................................6
1.8. Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................................7
CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................................8
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................8
2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................8
2.2. The Relationship between Personal Attitude and Social Entrepreneurial Intention ..............8
2.3. The Relationship between Subjective Norm and Social Entrepreneurial Intention ............12
2.4. The Relationship between Perceived Behavioural Control and Social Entrepreneurial
Intention .....................................................................................................................................17
2.5. Entrepreneurial Environmental Factors and Social Entrepreneurial Intention. ...................21
2.6. Chapter Summary ................................................................................................................25
CHAPTER THREE ..................................................................................................................26
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN ................................................................26
3.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................26
3.2 Research Design....................................................................................................................26
3.3 Population and Sampling Design ..........................................................................................26
3.4 Data Collection .....................................................................................................................28
3.5 Research Procedures .............................................................................................................28
viii
3.6 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................29
3.7 Summary ...............................................................................................................................29
4.0 DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION ............................30
4.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................30
4.2. General Information .............................................................................................................30
4.3. Personal Attitude on Social Entrepreneurship .....................................................................38
4.4. The Relationship between Subjective Norm and Social Entrepreneurial Intention ............49
4.5: The Relationship between Perceived Behavioural Control and Social Entrepreneurial
Intention. .....................................................................................................................................55
4.6. The Extent to Which Entrepreneurial Environmental Factors affects Social Entrepreneurial
Intention. .....................................................................................................................................59
CHAPTER FIVE ......................................................................................................................68
5.0 DICUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. ..................................68
5.1 Introduction .........................................................................................................................68
5.2 Summary of Findings .........................................................................................................68
REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................................78
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: The list of comparison of big-five personality and entrepreneur traits……………………...11
Table 2.2: Entrepreneurial environmental factors that affect individual entrepreneurial behavior
………………………………………………………………………………………………...……….23
Table 3.1:Sample framework….…………………………………………………………...……………27
Table 4.1: Place of residence……………………………..……………………………………………..30
Table 4.2: Age Distribution…………………………………..……..…………………………………..31
Table 4.3: When will you be Graduating………………………..……………………...……….............35
Table 4.4: Work Experience…………………………………………………..………………………...35
Table 4.5: Duration of employment in years……………………………………………………............36
Table 4.6: Duration of self-employed or owner of a small or medium-sized enterprise………..............37
Table 4.7: What can be offered in Entrepreneur Training?......................................................................39
Table 4.8: The Extent to Which Training has helped sharpen their Entrepreneurship
Skills…………………………………..………………………………………..…..………….………..41
Table 4.9: Correlation between the Perception and the Actual Influence of the Training……...............42
Table 4.10a: Personal Attitude in Business………..……………………………………………............43
Table 4.10b: Personal Attitude Item-Total Statistics………………..…….………………….…………44
Table 4.11: Pro-Activeness in Business………………………………….…………..……...….............44
Table 4.12: Response on Innovation……………………………………….………….………………...45
Table 4.13: Principal Component Analysis……………………………………..………………………46
Table 4.14: Relationship between Personal Attitude and Entrepreneurial Intention……….……….48-49
Table 4.15a: Subjective Norm to Start a Business………..…………………………………..…………50
Table 4.15b: Subjective Norm Item-Total Statistics………………………..…….…………..………...50
Table 4.16: Social Valuation of Entrepreneurship……………………………….……..……………….51
x
Table 4.17: Social Approval of Start-up Business………………………………………………………51
Table 4.18: Social Perception on Entrepreneurship……………………….…………….……................52
Table 4.19: Correlation between Social Norms and Social Entrepreneurial Intention………….......54-55
Table 4.20a: Perceived Behavior Control………………………………..……………….……………..56
Table 4.20b. Perceived Behavioral Control (Item-Total Statistics)…………….…………….................56
Table 4.21a: Correlation between Perceived Behavioural Control and Social Entrepreneurial
Intention………………………………………………………………………….……….......................57
Table 4.21b: Entrepreneurial Intention (Item-Total Statistics)……………….………………................58
Table 4.22: Entrepreneurial Intention…….……………………………………………………..............59
Table 4.23: Resources Availability………...………………………………………...………………….60
Table 4.24: Model Summary…..……………………………………………………...………………...61
Table 4.27: Factorability Indicators….…………………………………………..……………………...62
Table 4.28: Personal Attitude……..…………………………………………………………………….65
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: GPF needs assessment 2011……………………………………………………........................3
Figure 2.2.Theory of Planned Behavior model……………….…………………………………………16
Figure 4.1: Gender of the respondents…………………………………………………………………..31
Figure 4.2: Religion of the respondent………………………………………………………………….32
Figure 4.3: Denomination of the respondent…………………………………………………………....32
Figure 4.4: Marital status…….………...………………………………………………………………..33
Figure 4.5: Education level……………………………………………………………………………...33
Figure 4.6: Area of Specialization……………………………..……………………………………….34
Figure 4.7: Have you been in charge of other people?.............................................................................36
Figure 4.8: Do you have a Mentor?.........................................................................................................38
Figure 4.9: Have you been trained on Entrepreneurship………………………………………………..39
Figure 4.10. Confirmatory Factor Analysis………………….………………………………………….63
Figure 4.11. Confirmatory Factor Analysis………….………………………………………………….64
Figure 4.12: Structural Model Path coefficients……..………………………………………………….66
Figure 4.13:Structural Model T-Statistics…………..……………………………………….................67
xii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
BOP - Bottom of the Pyramid
GPF - Global Peace Foundation
HBR - Harvard Business Review
PBC - Perceived Behavioral Control
PA - Personal Attitudes
SE - Social Entrepreneurship
SEWA- Self-Employed Women’s Association
SN - Subjective Norm
NGO - Non Governmental Organization
TPB - Theory of Planned Behavior
UK - United Kingdom
USIU-A United States International University-Africa
1
CHAPTER ONE
1.0. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the Study
The term entrepreneurship is a mixed blessing, on the positive side, it connotes a special,
innate ability to sense and act on an opportunity, combining out-of-the-box thinking with
a unique brand of determination to create or bring about something new to the world.
While on the negative side, entrepreneurship is an ex posts term, because entrepreneurial
activities require a passage of time before their true impact is evident. Most economists
and academicians support the notion that entrepreneurship is becoming a crucial factor in
the development and well-being of societies. Whether the entrepreneurial activities are
practiced in factor driven, efficiency-driven, or innovation-driven economies, the ultimate
results continue to exhibit: i) lower unemployment rates; ii) increased tendency to adopt
innovation; and iii) accelerated structural changes in the economy. And therefore
entrepreneurship offers new competition, and as such promotes improved productivity
and healthy economic competitiveness,(Porter & Nagarajan, 2005).
The lack of a common definition of the term social entrepreneurship hinders research and
raises questions about which social or profit-making activities fall within the spectrum of
social entrepreneurship, (Abu- Dees, 2001).Social enterprise is about changing the world
through business. Social enterprises exist not to maximizeprofit, but to further their social
and environmental aims. In a nut shell, social enterprise is about businesses where
everyone gains. Nicholl(2006)claims that the term social entrepreneur was first
introduced in 1972 by Banks, who noted that social problems could also be solved
bymanagerial practices. Whereas Muhhamad(2009)further argues that social business
provides a necessary framework for tackling social issues by combining business know-
how with the desire to improve quality of life. The social business concept thus, unlike
traditional business operates for the benefit of addressing social needs that enable
societies to function more efficiently.
In Vietnam for example, the social enterprise sector has been stimulated by changes in
international donor behavior, this trend is encouraged by signs of government suspicion
of international donor funding, as evidenced in the provisions of the October 2013
2
Miscellaneous Amendment Bill which prevents ‘public benefit organizations from
receiving more than 15% of their funding from international donors(Darko& Smith,
2014). Hindustan Unilever’s Project Shakti empowerment in India provides another good
example of a social entrepreneurship model. Instead of using its customary wholesaler-to-
retailer distribution model to reach remote villages, the company recruits village women,
provides them with access to microfinance loans, and trains them in selling soaps,
detergents, and other products door-to-door, (HBR,2015).
According to Thuku (2015), Africa continent is endowed with an abundance of natural
resources, commodities, land and human capital but until recently, meeting the social
needs of the people was left in the hands of charities, NGO’s or government through
giving handouts, training and empowerment programs.Social entrepreneurship approach
endeavors to solve societal problems (Dees, 1998). Such problems are often explained by
market failures. Therefore, the role of social entrepreneurship is to help society reduce or
eliminate the causes and consequences of market failures. By gradually embracing the
social enterprise model, Africa’s problems will not be left merely in the hands of
government or foreign institutions. Rather it is the people of Africa; communities and the
entrepreneurs who are placed to tackle social ills and thus create a playing field for Africa
products and services globally(William Davidson Institute, 2008).
Darko and Smith(2014) in their social enterprise report highlighted that the environment
in Kenya for social enterprise exhibited some similarities and differences with Vietnam.
The two uncovered that economic restructuring in the 1980’s and 1990’s led to reduced
government expenditure on social services and safety nets and encouraged a growth in
service provision by non-state actors; NGOs and commercial actors. However, with
competition for donor grant funding, there has been a recent shift within the NGO
community to explore business models to raise revenue.
The Kenyan government too through the vision 2030 has set targets for economic growth
within the framework of inclusive growth which recognizes the important role of the
private sector. While, the vision does not explicitly mention social enterprise, officials
from the Vision 2030 organization believe that if social enterprise could be better defined
and if enterprises could organize to interact collectively with the government, there could
be room for engagement.
3
In 2011, Global Peace Foundation (GPF) and other partners carried out a need assessment
in Kariobangi and its environs on overlapping issues and solutions perceived to be critical
to the community improved quality of life.
Figure 1: GPF needs assessment 2011
Source (GPF, 2011)
The top three key issues of concern were: Sanitation, Jobs, and Access to health and
Security.The majority (70%) of respondents indicated that they anticipate their children
will face the same problems listed above. While most (59%) do not trust the government
to solve these problems, 87% said they do believe that character education would help
against corruption
Subsequently, in the year 2012 the first ever corporate consortium was formed to address
some of these pressing issues using a collective impact approach and hence turning
wastes into treasure project (Community Cooker) was initiatedusing a public private
partnership model of approach. A consortium of corporates formed included;Safaricom
Foundation, the Chandaria Foundation, EABL Foundation, Mabati Rolling Mills, Kenya
Commercial Bank Foundation, Unilever Kenya Ltd, Tetra park, Bamburi Cement, Global
Peace Foundation, World Vision, UNEP,UN-Habitat, Total Eco-Challenge, Community
Cooker Foundation, County Government of Nairobi, Kijabe Environmental volunteers
and Cisco systems.
The Kariobangi Community Cooker Project is aimed at promoting sustainable waste
management by adopting the Community Cooker, a waste to energy technology. It
focuses on instilling entrepreneurship culture among the youth to improve livelihoods of
4
at least 1,000 households in the Kariobangi informal settlement in Kasarani Constituency,
Nairobi County. The project which was implemented through a social enterprise approach
advances the principles of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) including the use
of combustible waste to generate energy for cooking which reduces negative impacts on
forests, cleans immediate environments, provides safe and clean cooking conditions for
households while empowering youth with skills and sources of income to reduce the high
unemployment rates.
The members of the consortium contributed approximately 4.5Million Kenya Shillingin
cash and in kind towards the implementation of the project. This included the overall
construction of the Community Cooker, practical training on waste separation at
household level, fire briquette technology, compositing and plastic recycling for value
addition, capacity building on entrepreneurship, leadership and sustainable peace and
development among other training components.The project which commenced in 2016 is
managed by Raslimali Enterprises Limited, a youth social enterprise umbrella group of 11
youth groups in Kariobangi and its environs under the guidance of the corporate
consortium.
1.2. Statement of the Problem
In spite of manyGovernment Agencies, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) and
Corporates having worked tirelessly to promote local community solutions and local
entrepreneurship, the idea of sustainable entrepreneurship as a remedy to poverty
reduction has been tried but with very little success. Naturally, the question posed is;
what if the solutions to the 4 billion people at the bottom of the pyramid (BOP) who live
on less than $2 per a day is through mobilization of resources, scale and scope of large
firms to create solutions?.This necessitated such a study whose aim was to evaluate how
entrepreneurial environmental factors affect social entrepreneurial intentions. The BOP
must become a key element of the central mission for large private sector firms. The poor
must become active, informed and involved in consumers decisions. Poverty reduction
can result from co-creating a market around the needs of the poor, (Prahalad, 2010).
As the Kenyan scenario emerges, most of the revolving funds for example Youth Fund,
Uwezo Fund and Women Enterprise Fund which were set up by the government
specifically targeting the vulnerable groups in the society, have not achieved their
intended objectives. Because 98% of the money lent out has not been repaid, a very
5
worrying trend which leaves a bitter taste in our leaders mouths as to what could have not
been done right to enable such noble causes achieve their intended objectives.
1.3. General Objective
The general objective of this study was to evaluate extent to which entrepreneurial
environmental factors affect social entrepreneurial intentionamongst Kariobangi
community youth.
1.4. ResearchObjective
The study was guided by the following research objectives:
1.4.1. Toidentify the relationship between personal attitudeand social entrepreneurial
intention.
1.4.2. Toidentify the relationship between subjective normand social entrepreneurial
intention.
1.4.3. Toidentify the relationship between perceived behavioural controland social
entrepreneurial intention.
1.4.4. Toexamine the extent to which entrepreneurial environmental factors affects social
entrepreneurial intention.
1.5. Significance of the Study
This study intends to benefit the following stakeholders:
1.5.1. The Community
The community plays a critical role in the sustainability of a social enterprise.Community
ownership and involvement in all the stages is very important. From society’s
perspective, it does not matter what types of organizations created the value, what matters
is that benefits that are delivered by those organizations—or combinations of
organizations—that are best positioned to achieve the most impact for the least cost.
1.5.2. The Government
Through its Kenya Vision 2030 programs,the government has set ambitious targets for
economic growth within the framework of inclusive growth which recognizes the
important role of the public private partnerships.The Government as a regulators
accomplish much more by focusing on measuring performance and introducing standards
6
and support for technology that would promote innovation, improve the environment, and
increase competitiveness. Thus, the principle of shared value creation cuts across the
traditional divide between the responsibilities of business and those of government or
civil society.
1.5.3. Policy Makers and Researchers
In order for social entrepreneurs to succeed, they require not only an enabling policy
environment, but also, critically, sources of financing and one of the key roles of policy
makers is measurement of impact and outcomes, which is of great importance not just to
social actors but also to social entrepreneurs and the organizations that support them.
1.6. Scope of the Study
The study was limited to a group of 400 youths in Kariobangi area who had formed a
social enterprise company by converting 11 Community based organizations into
Raslimali Enterprises limited company for profit making.
1.7. Operational Definition of Terms
Social Entrepreneur, Social Innovation, Kadogo economy
1.71. Social Entrepreneurship
According to Skoll Foundation(2008) a social entrepreneur is someone who works inside
major corporations or organizations to develop and promote practical solutions to social
or environmental challenges where progress is currently stalled by market failures, in
addition a social entrepreneur is one characterized by an ‘insider-outsider’ mindset and
approach.
1.7.2. Social Innovation
Innovation is the insertion of a new idea to benefit a business, often in a way that
increases output or productivity; for this reason, it is widely recognized that innovation is
central to economic growth. Therefore, social innovation is the creation, development,
adoption, and integration of new concepts and practices that put people and the planet
first (Coughlan, 2014).
7
1.7.3. Kadogo economy
The concept of the “Kadogo” economy gained prominence in the late 1990s when, due to
growing poverty among most Kenyans, manufacturers and retailers started selling goods
in small packages retailing for as little as Sh5 in order not to lose the market of the poor
(Wahome,2011).
1.8. Chapter Summary
This chapter gives an insight of the research study. The key factor of study introduced in
the study are to identify the relationship between personal attitude and social
entrepreneurial intention; to identify the relationship between subjective norm and social
entrepreneurial intention; to identify the relationship between perceived behavioural
control and social entrepreneurial intention and to examine the extend at which
entrepreneurial environmental factors affects social entrepreneurial intention. The
research output is significant to the Non-governmental organizations,Governments,
Corporate organisations involved in community programs through their corporate social
responsibilities initiatives, academia, community based organizations and policy makers.
Other parts outlined are the problem statement of the research, the research objectives.
Chapter two outlines the literature review, chapter three the methodology, chapter four
the findings and the last chapter outlines the discussion,conclusion and recommendations
of the study.
8
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Introduction
This chapter highlights a review of similar studies that have been done by other
researchers/scholars based on the specific research objectives namely: the relationship
between personal attitude and social entrepreneurial intention; the relationship between
subjective norm and social entrepreneurial intention; the relationship between perceived
behavioural control and social entrepreneurial intention; examine the extent to which
entrepreneurial environmental factors affect social entrepreneurial intention. The chapter
also highlights the various theories and models about the topic of study.
Entrepreneurship according to Shane and Venkataraman (2000) is defined as the process
of creating new venture and new organization. Theemphasize that through that process,
some valuable things are created from nothing by contributing time, work effort, money
and risk to get intrinsic and extrinsic rewards (Hisrich & Peters, 2005). Further, Kuratko
and Hodgetts, (2007) maintains that the term entrepreneur originates from the French
word “entreprendre” when translated means to undertake.Essentially, it is entrepreneur
who acts as the middleman to buy at a low price and sell at a higher price.
2.2. The Relationship between Personal Attitude and Social Entrepreneurial
Intention
Ngugi (2011) refer to Personal attitude (PA) as the degree to which a person has a
favorable or unfavorable evaluation appraisal of being an entrepreneur (Ajzen, 1991,
Liñán& Chen, 2009; Kolvereid, 1996). This includes not only sentimental (I like it, it is
attractive), but also evaluative considerations (it has advantages). Degeorge and Fayolle
(2008), maintains that when new issues arise requiring an evaluative response, one draw
on relevant information (beliefs) which is stored in the memories and since, each of these
beliefs carries evaluative implications, attitudes are automatically formed.
According to the theory of planned behavior: intention is a function of three antecedents:
a) attitudes toward the act which is considered as intrinsic and extrinsic personal
outcomes; b)social norms that is considered as extra personal influences on the decision
maker; and c) perceived behavioral control which is considered as behavior feasibility
(Krueger & Brazeal, 1994).Krueger and Carsrud (2000), contends that intention has been
9
proven as the best predictor of planned behaviorsince entrepreneurship is a type of
planned behavior. The rationale behind this statement is that the decision to become an
entrepreneur is considered as voluntary and conscious (Liñánet al, 2009). Aviram (2010)
indicated that entrepreneurs are not created instantly, or by accident and some of the
businesses are deliberate. Schlaegel and Koenig (2013) in their review posits that
entrepreneurial intentions is essential to understanding entrepreneurship as this is the first
step in the process of discovering, creating, and exploiting opportunities. Hence, giving
the impression that intention is very important in entrepreneurship theory and
development (Thompson, 2009).
Wang (1991) highlights entrepreneurship as a part of the company management processes
which focus on investment into new ventures, creating a new venture, building new
organization departments, and supplying new products and services. Low and MacMillan
(1988) thought that entrepreneurship means to build a new venture. WhereasZhang
(2002), defines entrepreneurial attitude according to the following four statements: First,
attitude is a person’s predisposition with persistence and consistency. This feeling could
be inferred by the individual’s behavior. However, the intention in an attitude is not
discerned only through behavior. Attitude comprises of general knowledge and the
cognitive emotions and actions. Secondly, the attitude must have a target. The objective
of attitude is a concrete person or thing and could also be an abstract idea or thought.
Attitude is equivalent to inclination. When people hold a positive attitude toward a given
target, they will hold the same positive attitude towards a similar target. Third, attitude
can be learned .It is a collection of personal traits and its development can be affected by
a person’s cultural traditions; family and educational environment. In addition, external
behavior might be restricted by a situation and an attitude might be reflected only in
thought.
As stated by Huang (1986), attitudecomprises three factors; cognitive composition (brief
and idea), emotion composition (the value and emotion) and behavior composition
(behavior and inclination toward action).He further emphasizes that as a result, attitude is
a biased consciousness that is affected by the environment. It is a kind of lasting
inclination. It can be a habit that could be shaped or changed via experience or study. The
attitude toward entrepreneurship is an individual's concept about entrepreneurship,
assessment and inclination towards entrepreneurial behavior or self-employment. If an
individual has a strong attitude for starting a new venture the relationship between
10
attitude and behavior is strong. Therefore the individual has a strong disposition towards
entrepreneurship.
In the opinion of Greenberger and Sexton (1988) the following are five reasons why
entrepreneurs start enterprises: they take a chance in the market; they believe their
managerial skills are more efficient than those of other people; they believe that their
specialty could be developed into an enterprise; they have already developed a product or
service and believe that it can find a niche’ in the market; and lastly it is the only way out
to start an enterprise as their other options are limited. Ghosh and Kwan (1996)
investigated entrepreneurs from Singapore and Australia and found out several reasons
entrepreneurs started enterprises: the individual wanted personal growth; they liked to be
challenged; there was more freedom in being a business owner; an opportunity to use
one's own knowledge and experience; did not like working for others; family and friends
influenced them to become an entrepreneurs; and lastly, family tradition played a key role
in influencing an individual’s attitude towards entrepreneurship.
Carter, Gartner, Shaver and Gatewood (2003) examined the reasons why budding
entrepreneurs start business ventures and their research result indicated that the main
reasons were; self- realization, financial success, roles, innovation, recognition and
independence. Wang and Wong (2004) analyzed the determinants of interest in
entrepreneurship among university students in Singapore and found out that; gender,
family experience with business and educational level were found to be momentous
factors in entrepreneurial interests.
In Taiwan, the factors that influence entrepreneurs in starting an enterprise are divided
into two, the personal traits and conditions and external factor such as family, friends and
the external environment which are significant elements that influence college and
university student attitudes toward entrepreneurship (Khuong & Huu 1986).Yu (1989)
found out that personality is a person's inherent external behavior; hence the personality
dominates a person’s words, deeds and role in life. Thus, individual actions, looks,
posture and thinking are as a result of the personality. Costa & McCrae (1992) believed
that the personality shows the individual’s degree of preference towards a certain thing or
action. Therefore, personality is a model of consistency that shows thought, emotion and
action. In addition, they thought that personality is different in kind and degree for all
persons. In other words, all people own every kind of personal trait, but the degree that
11
each trait is individually manifested is different.Carter et.al,(2003) observes that the big-
five personality theory is comprised of the following entrepreneurial traits that are
important reasons that an entrepreneur chooses to start an enterprise; Innovation,
independence, self-realization, financial success, roles and recognition as in the table
below. For that reason the big-five personality theory is suitable for measuring individual
personality. Thus, understanding the individual's personal traits could help us know the
potential characteristics required for entrepreneurs.
Table 2.1: The list of comparison of big-five personality and entrepreneur traits
Big-Five Type of
personality Personality characteristic(s) The entrepreneur trait
Agreeableness
Friendly, generous, helpful,
decent, trustworthy
Type-A behavior human
relationship
Conscientiousness Control, regulate, acting
spontaneously
Goal-direction, responsibility
Extraversion
Enjoy being with people full of
energy positive emotions, action-
oriented, enthusiastic
Challenge, attempt, need for
authority, aspiration, need for
achievement confidence
Neuroticism
Tendency to experience negative
feeling such as anxiety, anger or
depression.
locus of controlrisk-taking
Openness to
Experience
Imaginative, creative,
conventional、more aware of art
Innovation independence
Source: (Goldberg, 1993)
Irrespectiveof regional specialty, people will be motivated to createnew business ventures
in environments conducive to entrepreneurship. Those entrepreneurial environments can
be grouped into five broad categories: government policies and procedures,
socioeconomic conditions, entrepreneurial and business skills, financial assistance, and
non-financial assistance,(Gnyawali & Fogel, 1994).
Government policies can influence the market and create entrepreneurship-friendly
culture that promotes people to take risks and start their own businesses. However,
entrepreneurs will be discouraged from building a new firm if they have to keep up with
12
unwarranted numbers of rules and procedures (Fogel, 2001). Second, a positive attitude
of the society toward entrepreneurship and a public support program for entrepreneurial
action will motivate people to start their own businesses,(Gnyawali et al, 1994).Third,
Training programs for start-ups and prospective entrepreneurs are greatly needed in
developing countries, these training program which delivers entrepreneurial skills is
important for its success (Ladzani& Van Vuuren, 2002). Davidsson (1991) revealed that
an entrepreneur’s ability to start and operate a business is highly correlated with business-
related experience and education. Entrepreneurs too need financial support to: diversify
the start-up risk, get start-up capital, and to expand the business (Gnyawali et al, 1994).In
addition, entrepreneurs need non-financial support apart from financial assistance
(Gnyawali et. al, 1994). Non-financial support systems can be an entrepreneurship
incubator. The incubation provides positive environments to the early-stage ventures by
offering, mentorship, rental office space, shared office services, and business counseling
assistance at very low costs (Allen & Rahman, 1985). A good incubator has proved to
provide a great survival rate, a positive impact on the perception of entrepreneurship, and
a structural way to financial markets (Aernoudt, 2004)
2.3.The Relationship between Subjective Norm and Social Entrepreneurial Intention
2.3.1. Subjective Norm; family and close environment
Yau and Chung (2014) described subjective norm (SN) as the person’s perception that
most people who are important to him or her think he/she should or should not. Hence,
the inference that subjective has influence on behavioral intention. Ajzen (2001) argues
that subjective norm is determined by other people’s social pressure. Consequently,
subjective norms are assumed to have two components which work in collaboration; the
beliefs and the outcome evaluations. The beliefs about how other people, who may be in
some way important to the person, would like them to behave and the outcome
evaluations that is positive or negative judgments about each belief.
Degeorge and Fayolle (2008) explain that in France, the failure of a business is negatively
perceived, while in the United States of America, a person can often undergo several
failures and still attempt more. Ali et al. (2010) stated that the impact of Pakistan’s on
entrepreneurial intention is different from Western counterparts; using Hofstede’s cultural
dimension he reasons that uncertainty avoidance and collectivism affects the growth of
entrepreneurial intention. Pakistani society prefers jobs over self-employment thus most
people value collectivism as individualism is still lacking.
13
Subjective norm is also defined as the individual’s perception of the social pressures to
engage (or not to engage) in entrepreneurial behavior (Ajzen, 1991). These consist of two
components: normative beliefs and the motivation to comply with these beliefs (Ajzen &
Fishbein, 1980). While normative beliefs concern the perceived probability that important
referent individuals or groups will approve or reject a given behavior; they set the norm
that specifies how the subject should behave. Whereas motivation to comply reflects a
person’s willingness to conform to these norms: to behave in keeping with the
expectation of important referents. Reliant on the social environment, these pressures can
become a trigger or a barrier to the development of an entrepreneurial career.He further
clarifies that intentions are heavily influenced by personal factors, such as attitudes and
perceived behavioral control.
Contrary, the consistent poor influence of subjective norms on intention supports the
position that behavioral intentions are influenced more by one’s attitudes and perceptions
of control than perceptions of pressure from others (Ajzen, 1991). On the other hand, it
has been argued that the conceptualization of the subjective norm construct is inadequate,
where the narrow focus on perceived social pressure ineffectively captures the impact of
social influences on behavior (White, Terry, & Hogg, 1994).Scholars have advocated that
there may be other types of social influences, such as the effects of group membership on
behavior as outlined by social identity/self-categorization theories, and the effects of
social support which may provide a better explanation of the social influences
determining behavioral intentions and these includes group norms and social identity
influence. The subjective norm construct within the TPB reflects injunctive norms as the
focus is on perceived social pressure from significant others to perform the behavior
(Ajzen, 1991). Group norms, on the other hand, refer to the explicit or implicit
prescriptions regarding one’s appropriate attitudes and behaviors as a member of a
specific reference group in a specific context (White et, al, 2002). As a result, subjective
norms assert general normative pressure to be most influential on the intention-behavior
relationship, whereas social identity theorists (e.g., Hogg & Abrams, 1988; Turner, Hogg,
Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987) argue that the normative influence from an in-group
with whom one identifies, to be most influential.
Terry and Hogg (1996) found that group norms of friends and peers improved prediction
of university student’s intentions to engage in regular exercise, but only for individuals
14
who identified strongly with the group. More recent evidence suggests that the influence
of group norms on behavior are not necessarily dependent on the strength of identification
where it has been found that group norms predict behavioral intentions irrespective of
level of identification (Johnson & White, 2003). Affiliation with a group of physically
active friends Smith(2003), and having more physically active friends (Voorhees et al.,
2005), has been reported as important factors to adolescent participation in physical
activity. In the current study, then, the perceived actions of an important referent group
for adolescents (i.e., school friends) were examined to determine their influence on
physical activity intentions. Social supports, adolescents who engage in physical activity
also report assistance from friends and family to perform the behavior as important
(Sallis, Prochaska, & Taylor, 2000).
Rivis and Sheeran (2003) uphold the correlation between descriptive norms and
intentions implies the possibility of the predictive power of this variable, which gives a
strong motivation for further research in this area. On the contrary, Armitage and Conner
(2001) disagree with the narrow conceptualization of the subjective norms variable,
which results in a weak relationship between normative beliefs and intentions.
Krueger et. al,(2000) also indicated that subjective norms are not correlated with the
intention of individuals to establish their own businesses; subsequently, further research
and improvement on the used measures are significant. Moreover, they affirmed that the
reason for the discrepancies in the significance of the subjective norms variable originates
from the fact that a part of information that this variable contains is already present in the
desirability of undertaking a particular behavior variable. In Kenya, Ngugi (2011)
recommends that learning institutions should offer entrepreneurship courses. This will
enable the learners to develop entrepreneurial intention and further essential skills to be
an entrepreneur.
Several studies have examined the relationship between social provisions and subjective
norms where evidence was found for the conceptual distinctiveness of each component
and the greater influence of social provisions, rather than subjective norms, in predicting
behavioral intentions (Courneya & McAuley, 1995; Rhodes et al., 2002). It has been
argued, however, that social provisions are more of a global measure of social support
and, as such, may only measure a diffuse perception of assistance from others in
undertaking a given behavior (Saunders, Motl, Dowda, Dishman, & Pate, 2004). A more
15
specific measure of perceived assistance from family and friends, in particular, has been
argued to help in the prediction of social support influences on physical activity behavior
(Sallis, Grossman, Pinski, Patterson, & Nader, 1987). Many studies in the exercise
domain have reported on the importance of both family and friends as a source of social
support for adolescents (Anderssen &Wold, 1992; Sallis et al., 2000). Considering the
different conceptualizations of social support, both a global social provisions measure
(i.e., an overall perceived level of assistance exchanged through general social
relationships in performing a given behavior) and specific social support measures (i.e.,
perceived assistance in performing a given behavior from family members and friends)
may be useful to capture the social support influences on adolescent physical activity.
2.3.2. The Theory of Planned Behavior
Ajzen (1998) advanced a second model, the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). The
model is significant in assessing entrepreneurial intentions particularly when it is
espoused by entrepreneurship academia. This model also gives an exposition about
individual behavior (Krueger et al., 2000). In support of this theory, Degeorge et al.,
(2004) further observed that the theory has gained approval in entrepreneurial research as
a result of being successfully applied in envisioning intentions to perform behaviors and
substituted the entrepreneurial trait approach which has evidenced low empirical relations
with behavior in specific conditions. The focus of the theory is on the individuals
intentions to perform a given behavior. Hence, it is an advantageous tool for
understanding the process of new venture creation regardless of cultural differences.
Linan et al., (2009) stated that by changing the three predictors (personal attitude, subject
norm and perceived behavior control), the likelihood of an individual’s intent to do a
desired action can be increased and thus increase the chance of the person actually doing.
16
Figure 2.2.Theory of Planned Behavior model
Source: Ajzen, (2006)
TPB theory was added to the existing Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) by providing a
new construct- perceived behavioral control because this theory predicts deliberate
behavior. Behavior can be intentional and planned it was therefore necessary to overcome
the limitations of TRA in dealing with behaviors over which people have incomplete
volitional control (Liñán et al., 2009). Ajzen (2001) relates this to the idea that if two
people have the same level of intention to engage in a specific behavior but one has more
confidence in their abilities; it stands to reason that the confident person will be more
likely to succeed than the person who has doubts relating to their own abilities. By
changing the three predictors (personal attitude, subject norm and perceived behavior
control), the chance that an individual will intend to do a desired action can be increased
and thus increase the chance of the person actually doing it (Liñán et al., 2009).
2.3.3. Sociological Theories
Sociological theories includes; theory of religious beliefs by Max Weber who believes
that, entrepreneurship is a function of religious belief and the impact of religion shape the
entrepreneurial culture, theory of social change by Everett Hagen who believed that the
entrepreneurs creativity is key element of social transformation and economic growth.
17
These theories pay attention to the socio-cultural factors which have a substantial
influence in creating entrepreneurs as well as accelerating the growth of entrepreneurship
(Islam & Mamun, 2000).A number of theories especially in the economic discipline look
at entrepreneurship as an economic function which is mainly characterized by looking at
the role of entrepreneurship in the economy at an aggregate level rather than at the level
of venture (Bygrave & Minniti, 2000). Kuratko et al., (2007) stated that economists have
for a long period of time recognized the close association between entrepreneurship and
economics and for couple of years they have frequently tried to define their relationships.
2.4.The Relationship between Perceived Behavioural Control and Social
Entrepreneurial Intention
2.4.1. Perceived Behavioral Control
Ajzen (1985) defined Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC) as the perception of level of
easiness in starting owns business. Karlsson and Moberg (2013) termed PBC as
entrepreneurship self-efficacy (ESE). They defined ESE as an individual’s perceived
competence in starting a business. This perception may be accurate or not however, it
helpsan individual to assess themselves. Ayodele(2013) stresses that individual’s strength
of putting thoughts into action lies in their own perception therefore PBC has been found
to have a positive and significant relationship entrepreneurial inclination of individual
(Wu & Wu, 2008, Kolvered, 1996, & Soutaris et.al, 2007). Alfons and Crevas (2012),
mentions that PBC is based in self-efficacy of an individual: A high level of PBC
suggests that an individual believes that they have greater control over their behaviors
(Ajzen,1985, 2002), Rantanen (2013) also clarifies that PBC is linked to the appraisal of
ones capabilities to withstand the obligations associated with desired task.
According to Ajzen, 1991, 2001; Liñán et al., (2009) perceived behavioral control (PBC)-
is the perception of the ease or difficulty of performing entrepreneurship. Hence, the
degree to which an individual feels that performance or nonperformance of the behavior
in question is under his or her volitional control. PBC include not only the feeling of
being able, but also the perception about controllability of the behavior (Liñán et al,
2009). Degeorge et al., (2008), emphasizes that PBC has two aspects; first, how much a
person has control over the behavior and second, how confident a person feels about
being able to perform or not perform the behavior. PBC is therefore determined by
18
control beliefs about the power of both situational and internal factors to deter or expedite
the performing of the behavior.
Ajzen revised and extended perceived behavioral control to the model to account for
times, when people have the intention of carrying out a behavior, but the actual behavior
is impeded because they lack confidence or control over behavior (Miller, 2005). Ajzen’s
Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is a predictive paradigm for human behavior that
connects attitudes with actions (Ajzen, 1991). Specifically, TPB accesses an individual’s
belief towards a particular behavior; belief about the social norms associated with a
particular behavior; and belief regarding the ability to control the outcome of a particular
behavior.The individual’s level of intention to carry out a particular action is as a result of
behavioral beliefs, normative beliefs, and control beliefs. This behavioral intention is
assumed to be a direct antecedent to actual action, and is empirically well-supported in
literature across many behavioral and social domains, including social and cognitive
psychology, advertising, marketing, healthcare, and communications (Chang, 1998;
Hagger & Chatzisantis, 2007; Mathieson, 1991; Walker, Courneya, & Deng, 2006).
Ajzen, (2002), observed that, the theory of planned behavior was introduced to
accommodate the non-volitional elements inherent, at least potentially, in all behaviors.
Additionally, Ajzen (2002) said that, a high level of PBC strengthens an individual
intention to perform that behavior and increase their efforts and perseverance. Thus, the
PBC has its own place in the development of an individual intention towards a creation of
a new enterprise. Wu and Wu (2008), points out that education has two major functions;
knowledge transfer and development of one’s ability. For that reason, education should
change an individual’s perception on the ability to perform the intentional behavior which
is considered to be volitional. Since universities are known to offer higher education
which will help an individual in the career choice selection, and students at this level are
purported to be mature to make informed decision on what they would like to become
both humanistic ally and technically.
Academic concentrations offered in the universities impact different knowledge to the
different individual which may act as a moderating role for entrepreneurship capabilities.
Ferrante and Sabatini (2007) stated that: The connection between education and general
cognitive abilities is a two-way street: the codified knowledge acquired through education
helps people to better understand the general rules which govern the world they live in.
19
Moreover, education enhances the ability to acquire and use the codified information
about specific aspects of working and non-working life.
2.4.2. Entrepreneurship Motivation
According to Wang, Yang, and Wu (2014), entrepreneurial motivation plays a dominant
role in the psychology throughout the entrepreneurial process, any entrepreneurship links
cannot continue without motivation but it is for some motivation, Entrepreneurs can
overcome the difficulties and pressures and continue to bear a series of the "uncertainty",
from this perspective, motivation is the key variable in entrepreneurial behavior. Dejun
(2005), points out that, “Motivation is a very broad and very complex psychological
phenomena” whereas Weiner (1985) asserts that, “it is the psychological dispositions or
motive force which stimulates and sustains activities of individuals and leads the
activities towards a certain goal and this psychological phenomena is the basis of the
constitution of most human behavior’s therefore entrepreneurship is a constantly-evolving
process. After entrepreneurs find opportunities, they will evaluate these opportunities,
then if the opportunities are feasible, they will quest for resources to develop these
opportunities, this series of processes require that people are willing to play this game and
this kind of “willingness” is the entrepreneurial motivation according to (Shane, Locke &
Collins, 2003).
2.4.2. Entrepreneurial Attribute
According to the traits theory (Gartner, 1989), individuals who become entrepreneurs are
endowed with special personality traits or characteristics that predispose them to business
creation. Hence, based on this research, one is either born or made (Kibuka, 2011).
Warren buffet, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Manu Chandaria, Aliko Dangote among others
are the common names that spring to mind for most of us when we think of entrepreneur;
these iconic individuals seemed to burst from the womb with enterprise in their
chromosome. These moguls not only inspire, but they also intimidate. Business experts
and venture capitalists argue that entrepreneurs can emerge at any stage of life and from
any form, and they come in all personality types regardless of any grade point (Robinson,
(2014).He further maintains that the best entrepreneurs share a collection of
characteristics though it is argued that it is the “C” student that becomes entrepreneurs;
from tenacity, passion, tolerance, vision, self believe and rule-breaking that is useful to
20
successful venture.Tenacity: starting a business is an ultra-marathon therefore one has to
be able to live with uncertainty and push through a crucible of obstacles for years on end.
This trait is known by many names--perseverance, persistence, determination,
commitment, resilience--but it's really just old-fashioned stick-to-it-iveness. Passion;most
entrepreneurs believe in changing the world and not driven by money therefore their
ultimate goal is to create impact for example Roulac who launched his company Nutiva
in 1999 said “Passion based on your company's specific mission is an intrinsic drive that
provides the internal reward that can sustain you between paydays”.Tolerance of
ambiguity, this is risk-taking ability to withstand the fear of uncertainty and potential
failure in other words the ability to control fear and humiliation. Vision one of the
defining traits of entrepreneurship is the ability to spot an opportunity and imagine
something where others haven't. Entrepreneurs have a curiosity that identifies overlooked
niches and puts them at the forefront of innovation and emerging fields. They imagine
another world and have the ability to communicate that vision effectively to investors,
customers and staff.
Nonetheless, self-belief self-confidence is a key entrepreneurial trait. You have to be
crazy-sure your product is something the world needs and that you can deliver it to
overcome the naysayers, who will always deride what the majority has yet to validate.
Robinson (2014) defines this trait as task-specific confidence. It's a belief that turns the
risk proposition around--you've conducted enough research and have enough confidence
that you can get the job done that you ameliorate the risk.Flexibility, business survival,
like that of the species, depends on adaptation. Your final product or service likely won't
look anything like what you started with. Flexibility that allows you to respond to
changing tastes and market conditions is essential. "You have to have a willingness to be
honest with yourself, Robinson (2014).Rule-breaking; Entrepreneurs exist to defy
conventional wisdom. A survey by Ross Levine of the University of California, Berkeley
and Rubinstein of the London School of Economics found that among incorporated
entrepreneurs, a combination of "smarts" and "aggressive, illicit, risk-taking activities" is
a characteristic mix. This often shows up in youth as rebellious behavior. That description
would certainly hold true for some of the most famous entrepreneurs of recent years.In
fact, simply starting a business breaks the rules, as only about 13 percent of Americans
are engaged in entrepreneurship, according to a Babson college report (Rubinstein, 2014).
Doing what the majority isn't doing is the nature of entrepreneurship, which is where the
supply of inner resources comes in.
21
It is said that only one in four family businesses make it to the second generation and,
only one in eighteen make it to the third generation. For Comcraft Group, that is what
keeps Dr.Chandaria on the go for 18 hours every day. He has been an entrepreneur for 63
years having joined the family business in 1951. “My life moved from an engineer to a
manager then an entrepreneur”, echoes Dr. Chandaria. The group which started with one
plant-Kenya Aluminum (Kaluworks), a manufacturing plant in Mombasa that made pots
and pans, today, the family has presence in over 45 countries from Papua Guinea to
Brazil(Kimutai,2014).
2.5. Entrepreneurial Environmental Factors and Social Entrepreneurial Intention.
Dana(1987, 1990) points out that studies of entrepreneurial environments of various
countries show that countries that set rules and regulations at a minimum, offer tax and
other incentives,provide training and mentorship services to start-up entrepreneurs
increase the likelihood of new venture start-ups. Factors such as availability of financial
resources, presence of universities for training and research are found to be very
important to increase the rate of new venture creation (Pennings, 1982). Likewise,studies
show that entrepreneurs face several obstacles, such as lack of financial assistance, lack
of information on various aspects of business, excessive taxation, and high rate of
inflation (Young &Weisch, 1993).
EI-Namaki (1988; Goodman 1992;Mokry, 1988; Esper, 1983&Westhead 1990) suggest
several policy options for developing entrepreneurship. These policy options include
provision of venture capital funds, tax-based incentives, and government procurement
programs; protection of proprietary ideas and innovations; investment in education and
research- explicit recognition of, and support for entrepreneurship by government
agencies; fostering of entrepreneurship by educational institutions; and minimization of
entry barriers as a prerequisite to stimulate entrepreneurship.
Long and McMullan (1984), proposed model which has explained the process of
entrepreneurial opportunity recognition, In this model, they believed that individual
factors, satisfaction, contribution, knowledge, lifestyle, training in experience and work
force, market demand, social forces, technological and cultural forces in social factors
could affect the individual entrepreneurship "former vision" (Prevision) and "Vision"
(Vision). There have been some difference between the meaning of the "vision" and
22
entrepreneurial motivation or intention but the essence is the state of entrepreneurship
which has not yet started, this state is influenced by individual factors and social factors
of the double impact.
Therefore all of these research findings have demonstrated that entrepreneurial motivation
is product of interaction of individual factors and environmental factors and in the
individual factors, they contain both personality factors, social characteristics factors and
cognitive characteristics factors. As for environment factors, they include overall
condition of political, economic and cultural in big environmental factors and the
surrounding culture and the supporting degree of the entrepreneurship from the
government, all of these factors could influence entrepreneurial motivation.
According to Gnyawaii et al., (1994) environment is a significant in influencing
entrepreneurs to start an enterprise and these incudes; economic, social culture and policy
factors. The environment affects the entrepreneur’s motivation and the entrepreneur’s
perception which ultimately affect the individual’s attitude toward entrepreneurship.
23
Table 2.2: Entrepreneurial environmental factors that affect individual
entrepreneurial behavior.
Researcher Influential factors of entrepreneurial environmental
Scott & Tomey (1988)
1. Predisposing Factors: roles of parents
2. Triggering Factors: seeking jobs, unemployment and job
alertness
3. Enterprise's ideas
Bird (1988)
1. Society, policy and economic changes
2. Changes of the market
3. rescind the control
Xu S. J (1990) 1. Microeconomic environment
2. The society and political environment
Zhang J. S (1991)
1. Economic chance situation: Three items of economic
chance situation, such as fund supplying, supply of labor
and the market scale
Wang Q. H (1991)
1. Government policies
2. The place of starting an enterprise
3. Industrial structure
4. Market situation
5. The fund and labor
6. Attraction of human
7. Site of factory and products
8. The workforce supply and policy stability
Cai S. Z ( 2001)
1. The industrial structure changes
2. The economic change
3. The changes of the society
4. The government's stability
5. The stability of the political situation is
6. The changes of the law
7. Changes of science and technology
Source (Gnyawaii and Fogel 1994)
24
Bird (1998) upholds that personal traits and environment sways and define
entrepreneurship intention. Though some entrepreneurship scholars maintain that
situational variable such as inflation rate or business regulation and individual variable
such like personal traits have no influence on the formation of entrepreneurship intention
Ajzen (1991) and Reiley (2000). However, in a changing dynamic environment, people
with similar characteristics may behave differently, while some with different traits can
have a same reaction in the correlative environment.
Environmental factors such as loan and capital availability, the possibility to access the
international and local market, human and intellectual capital affect the firm ability
conducting its basic activities. If the future entrepreneurs cannot foresee the availability
of these factors, it is hard for them to make decision to start business or not. This research
helps us to emphasize the fact that when someone wants to start a new business venture, it
is crucial for him or her to have a strong source of capital as well as an overview of how
to contact to their customers, access to their target market and gain market shares.
Moreover, they have to set up a strong and well-organized employee foundation with high
intellectual level. As a consequence, the more future entrepreneurs know about the
availability of these environmental driving forces the higher chances are, to form
entrepreneurial intention.
According to Mazzaro (1999) and Mai (2013) educational curriculum is significant in
nurturing the culture of entrepreneurship development. Moreover, development of
internship programsprovides more opportunities for youth to practice in realworking
professional environment. These inspire them to look for part-time jobs to increase their
knowledge,develop their ability to work with other people, teamworkskill and
communication skill. Besides, there is urgent need to raise awareness about the role
andimportance of entrepreneurship in the growing economy fromthe training process.
Educational Institutions should improve their entrepreneurship teaching curriculum, add
more practical teaching program and concentrate on Entrepreneurship and Small Business
Management Courses.
Shook, Priemand McGee, (2003), designed a complex but dynamic entrepreneurship
model which was based on research results done by Learned (1992), Shane (2003) and
Venkatraman (1997). In the model, for the entrepreneurial individuals, it emerges that
individual psychological characteristics, social characteristics and cognitive
characteristics can influence entrepreneurial intentions, opportunities search, evaluation
25
and development. Research findings from the perspective of entrepreneurial motivation, it
emerged that entrepreneurial motivation was influenced by individual psychological
characteristics, social characteristics and cognitive characteristics. And that
entrepreneurial motivation and entrepreneurial intentions was different for psychological
science. However, this model only analyzed entrepreneurial intentions from the
perspective of the individual entrepreneur but did not take into consideration the
environmental external factors.
Suzuki, Kim and Bae, (2002), on their part believed that entrepreneurial motivation was a
result by an individual variable factors and environmental factors, management skills,
management of resources, market conditions, business culture and policy support which
have an impact on entrepreneurial motivation. Whereas Herron & Robinson
(1993), considered that individual factors in personality, skills, values, background, and
training, could affect entrepreneurial intentions. However the model of entrepreneurial
motivation which is generally accepted was proposed by Kuratko et al., (1998), which
emphasized individual personality traits, individual and commercial environments on
effect of individual entrepreneurial motivation.
2.6. Chapter Summary
This chapter presents existing literature on the relationship between entrepreneurial
environmental factors on social entrepreneurial intention based on the research questions.
The first research theme explores to find out the relationship between personal attitude
and entrepreneurial intention. The second highlights the relationship between subjective
norm and entrepreneurial intention .The third, the relationship between perceived
behavioural control and entrepreneurial intention. The fourth examine the extent at which
entrepreneurial environmental factors affects entrepreneurial intention. The next chapter
is the research methodology and it presents the research design, population and sampling
design, data collection methods, research procedures and data analysis methods used in
the study. Chapter four will presents the findings and last chapter covers the key findings
and discussion.
26
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
3.1 Introduction
This chapter provides the methods and procedures that were used by the researcher to
carry out the study. It provides a discussion on research design of the study, the data
methods used and the techniques employed to analyze the collected data.
3.2 Research Design
Philiber, Shwab, and Samloss (1980), defines research design as a “blueprint” for your
research, dealing with at least four problems: what questions to study, what data are
relevant, what data to collect, and how to analyze the results. According to Nachamias
and Nachamias (1992), a research design is a logical model of proof that allows the
researcher to draw inferences concerning casual relations among the variables under
investigation. In this case a research design deals with a logical problem and not a
logistical problem.
Cooper (2011) defines research design as a blue-print for collection, measurement and
analysis of data, a blueprint that includes experiments, interviews, observations, and
analysis of records, simulation, or some combination of these. Burns and Grove
(2003:195) define a research design as “a blueprint for conducting a study with maximum
control over factors that may interfere with the validity of the findings”. Parahoo (1997)
describes a research design as “a plan that describes how, when and where data are to be
collected and analyzed”.
This study focused on the comparative analysis of Raslimali Enterprises Limited current
state and the perceived expectation of the corporate members who supports the
Kariobangi “waste to treasure” initiative.
3.3 Population and Sampling Design
3.3.1 Population
According to Bless, Smith and Kagee (2006), a population is the entire set of objects or
people which is the focus of the research and about which the researcher wants to
determine some characteristics. Parahoo (1997) defines population as “the total number of
units from which data can be collected”, such as individuals, artifacts, events or
organizations. Burns and Grove (2003:213) describe population as all the elements that
27
meet the criteria for inclusion in a study.The population for this study comprised of 11
Community Based Organizations (CBO’s) under the umbrella of Raslimali Enterprises
Limited in Kariobangi.Three to Five Community leaders from each of the CBO was
contacted in total 50 leaders wereto be involved.
3.3.2 Sampling Design
A sampling design helps a researcher to generate a concrete plan that guides the
generation of a sample from any given population (Talbot 2004). This is presented based
on the sample frame, sampling technique, and sample size.
3.3.2.1 Sample Frame
Bless et.al (2006) defines a sampling frame as the list of all units from which the sample
is to be drawn. To avoid pitfall, an inadequate sampling frame that discards parts of the
target population is the cause of many poor research results.The sampling frame included
community leaders under the umbrella of the Raslimali Enterprises Ltd. Three to Five
Community leaders each from the CBO was contacted. A total number of 50 leaders
participated in the study.
Table 3.1 Sample framework
Name No. of groups No. of leaders per group Total no. of leaders
CBO Leaders 11 3-5 50
Total Population 50
Source (Author 2016)
3.3.2.2 Sampling Technique
Orodho and Kombo (2002) define sampling technique as the procedure a researcher uses
to gather people, places or things to study. It is a process of selecting a number of
individuals or objects from a population such that the selected group contains elements
representative of the characteristics found in the entire group.A census of all group
leaders was conducted and their required information. Trainings on entrepreneurial and
governance had been ongoing for the last two years in the target area so as to enhance the
community ownership, livelihood and sustainability.
28
3.3.2.3 Sample Size
Census was used as indicated in the sample framework
3.4 Data Collection
This is the gathering of specific information aimed at proving or disproving facts. The
researcher must have a clear vision of the instruments to be used, the target respondents
and the selected area in addition, the researcher must have a clear understanding on what
type of data they hope to obtain and how they hope to obtain it (Kombo & Tromp, 2006).
The researcher used primary data that was obtained by use of structured questionnaires
and focus group discussion (FGD) interviews.According to Holloway and Wheeler
(2002) in focus group discussion researchers interview participants with common
characteristics or experience for the purpose of eliciting ideas,thoughts and perceptions
about specific topics or certain issues linked to an area of interest. Parahoo (1997),
defines a focus group discussion as an interaction between one or more researchers and
more than one participant for the purpose of collecting data.
The questionnaire method was convenient, cost effective and attractive for this study,
respondents filled in written forms before the researcher collected the forms with
completed information while in FGD interviews the researcher was required to identify
the target respondents and request them to answer certain questions with specific topic to
be discussed and a tape recorder was used to record the discussion.The questionnaire was
answered by the Raslimali Enterprises Ltd members and corporate members who were
funding the initiative.
3.5 Research Procedures
A researcher obtained a research permit from the Ministry of Education Science and
Technology before embarking on the study. The researcher obtained an approval of the
proposal and tools. This was followed by pilot study to check the reliability and validity
of the instruments which informed the researcher correction of the tool based on the
results of the pilot. Data was collected from the group based on a questionnaire and a
follow up was made to those who were not available for the initial data collection by
questionnaire. All members of the Raslimali Enterprises Ltd were involved.
29
3.6 Data Analysis
According to Polit et al. (2001)data analysis means to organize, provide structure and
elicit meaning. Analysis of qualitative data is an active and interactive process. Data
analysis commenced after data collection. The data collected through questionnaires were
checked to ascertain any anomalies, the data was cleaned, coded and summarized via
excel spread sheets. Data was later imported into social science data analysis software
SPSS Version 21 for analysis. Being a comparative analysis, descriptive, correlation, and
regression were performed. All the output was presented in descriptive, tables and figures
in chapter four.
3.7 Summary
This chapter describes the research methodology highlighting on the research design is to
maximize valid answers to a research question. The researcher main data collection
instruments werequestionnaires. A sample size of 50respondents was used for the study.
The researcher used descriptive and correlation method to analyze collected data. Chapter
4 presents the data analysis and findings in graphs and tables.
30
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION
4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the output of data collected from the field. The data was collected
by use of questionnaires in Kariobangi through census. Of the 50 targeted respondents, 48
participated in the study giving 96% response rate which was good for the study. The
findings were presented in descriptive statistics, using tables and figures, thematically
beginning with the personal information.
4.2. General Information
4.2.1. Secondary Characteristics
In order to understand the characteristics of the business group and environment where
they live, different questions on the residence, religion, and denomination were asked.
Majority(79.2%) of the group members resided in Kariobangi while others, 20.8% resided
outside Kariobangi; Pumwani and general Nairobi region. Others did not indicate their
place of residence.
Table 4.1: Place of residence
Frequency Percent
Did not answer 5 10.4
Kariobangi 38 79.2
Nairobi 3 6.3
Pumwani 2 4.2
Total 48 100.0
4.2.2. Age of the Respondents
Based on the age distribution, the mean age was 29 years; the youngest member of the
group is 21 years while the oldest is 41 years. However, majority of the members are
youths of age 30 as depicted on the median and mode indicated in table 4.3.
31
Table 4.2. Age Distribution
Mean 29.23
Median 30.00
Mode 30
Std. Deviation 4.995
Skewness .539
Std. Error of Skewness .343
Minimum 21
Maximum 41
4.2.3 Gender of the Respondents
Figure 4.1: Gender of the respondents
Among the overall respondents, 31% were female while 69% were male. Since the
sample was drawn at random, it can be concluded that there were more male employees
compared to female employees, who participated in the study.
32
4.2.4. Religion of the Respondent
Figure 4.2: Religion of the respondent
An overwhelming majority (92%) of the respondents were Christians while 8% were
Muslims.
4.2.5 Denomination of the Respondent
Figure 4.3: Denomination of the respondent
Of the Christians, 47% were Protestants while 53% were of Catholic denomination. This
is interesting as it shows least diversity on beliefs, way of life and religious teaching
received which may affect the perception of business. Studies have indicated difference in
ecological environment affects comprehension of the group and the closer the background
characteristics, the closer the belief system.
33
4.2.6. Marital Status of the Respondent
Figure 4.4: marital status
Most, (68%) of the respondents were married while 32% were not married. 4.2.7 Education Level of the Respondent
Figure 4.5: Education level
In relation to the educational levels of the respondents, more than half of the respondents
(61%) had Secondary level certificate, 29% had Diploma certificate. The others were
below 10%: Primary certificate at 7% and only 4% had University Degree. This shows
majority of the youths were secondary school certificate holders.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
YES NO
68.1
31.9
3.6
28.6
60.7
7.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Degree Diploma Secondary Primary
34
4.2.8. Area of Specialization
Figure 4.6: Area of Specialization
The area of specialization of those with more than secondary school education level:
28.6% diploma holders and 3.6% undergraduates was biased in entrepreneurship at 80%.
Others were also strongly in business field with marketing at 16.0% and accounting at
4.0%. Other specialization mentioned by secondary school certificate holders was beauty
and community service (4%) each. None of the other communal specialization was
mentioned be diploma or degree holders.
4.2.9: Are you Still a Student?
Only 11.4% of the individuals were still in school as students at different levels. This
shows majority (88.6%) are not students at any level. All (100%) of those who were still
in school cited that they were part-time students.
4.2.10. When will you be Graduating?
Most (57.1%) of those who were still in school expected to graduate later than 2018 (in 3
years), followed by 2017 (in 1 year) at 28.6% and the least, 14.3% expects to graduate
this year. This shows beginner’s levels are many.
Marketing
16% Accounting
4%
Entrepreneurship
80%
35
Table 4.3: When will you be Graduating?
Frequency Percent
This year (2016) 1 14.3
Next year (2017) 2 28.6
later (2018 or more) 4 57.1
Total 7 100.0
4.2.11. Work Experience
Majority (78.7%)of the respondents had previous work experience compared to (21.3%)
with no previous work experience as indicated in table 4.3.
Table 4.4: Work Experience
Frequency Valid Percent
I have employment
experience 37 78.7
I have not employment
experience 10 21.3
Total 47 100.0
When requested to cite their previous area of work in a bid to establish if there was any
correlation or similarity of organizations, the number of organizations / institutions /
companies were diverse; less than 5% except ‘light industries’ which had been mentioned
several times summing to 8.4%. This shows diversity of previous work experience of the
respondents.
4.2.12. Duration of Employment in Years
Of the 78.7% with work experience, majority had worked for 4 years as indicated in both
mode and mean in table 4.5; duration of operation. The mean number of working in years
was 5.32 with a standard deviation of 3.944, positive skewness of 1.869.
36
Table 4.5:Duration of employment in years
Mean 5.32
Median 4.00
Mode 4
Std. Deviation 3.944
Skewness 1.869
Std. Error of Skewness .388
Minimum 1
Maximum 20
Similar to the diverse working environment, the roles they played in these organizations
were equally diverse. Among those mentioned included: artisan, carpentry, clerk,
messenger, driver, electrician, engineer, machine operator, masonry, maintenance of
warehouse, mechanic, packaging, bindery, marketing/promotion, receptionist, sales,
sewing, shop keeper, supervision, and car washing. Though all the roles were not applied
in their current business structure, however a number of roles and experience were
applicable inclusive of sales, marketing, promotion, packaging, and maintenance among
others.
4.2.13: Have you been in charge of other people?
Figure 4.7.Have you been in charge of other people?
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
yes no
74.4
25.6%
37
When asked if they have been leaders of others, 74.4% were affirmative compared to
25.6% who were not as indicated in.
4.2.14: Duration of Self-Employed or Owner of a Small or Medium-Sized Enterprise
On the business experience, most (64.6%) were self-employed or owner of a small or
medium-sized enterprise while the others (35.4%) had not. Further analysis on this
revealed that the mean age that respondents had been involved in business was 4.52, with
mode of 2 and median of 3. However, there is greater diversity on this as indicated with
the standard deviation of 4.007; the least number of years was 1 and maximum was 15.
Table 4.6: Duration of self-employed or owner of a small or medium-sized enterprise
Mean 4.52
Median 3.00
Mode 2
Std. Deviation 4.007
Skewness 1.454
Std. Error of Skewness .421
Minimum 1
Maximum 15
4.2.15. Do you have a Mentor?
Besides the work experience, and number of years in business, respondents were asked on
mentorship. Majority (87.8%) of the respondents indicated that they had a mentor while
12.2% indicated they didn’t have a mentor as presented. Among the names of the
mentioned as mentors were: Manu Chandaria, Chris Kirubi, Angoli Michael, James
Mwangi, James Ngugi, Keharo, Muchemi, SamiiGathii and Tony Otathi. Some of
respondents opted to mention the position of their mentors which included CEO, Father,
Engineer, Mother, my Boss, Lecturer, Pastor and Teacher.
38
Figure 4.8: Do you have a Mentor?
4.3. Personal Attitude on Social Entrepreneurship
4.3.1. Entrepreneurship Training
In a seven scale measure, 1= totally impossible, 2= strong impossible, 3= slightly
impossible, 4= neutral, 5= slightly possible, 6= strongly possible, and 7 = totally possible.
Respondents were asked as to what knowledge can be offered through entrepreneurship
training. The intentions to be an entrepreneur was highly ranked as being possible with
mean of 5.5 followed by the knowledge about the entrepreneurial environment (Mean =
5.44), the necessary abilities to be an entrepreneur (Mean = 5.3), the preference to be an
entrepreneur (Mean = 5.27) and lastly, the greater recognition of the entrepreneur’s figure
(Mean = 4.84). This shows, all the respondents ranked the response as slightly possible.
Table 4.9 indicates the result
Yes88%
No12%
39
Table 4.7: What can be offered in Entrepreneur Training?
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0 Mean
The intentions to be an
entrepreneur
4.5
20.5
25.0
20.5
29.5 5.5
Knowledge about the
entrepreneurial environment
2.3
2.3
4.7
9.3
23.3
37.2
20.9 5.4419
The necessary abilities to be
an entrepreneur
4.5
4.5
13.6
31.8
25.0
20.5 5.3
The preference to be an
entrepreneur
2.3
9.1
9.1
34.1
29.5
15.9 5.2727
Greater recognition of the
entrepreneur’s figure
4.5
4.5
9.1
15.9
25.0
31.8
9.1 4.8409
4.3.2. Have you been trained in Entrepreneurship?
Figure 4.9: Have you been trained on Entrepreneurship
Majority (89%) of the respondents cited that they had been trained on entrepreneurship as
opposed to 11% who had not. For those who had been trained on entrepreneurship cited
different areas of training. However the areas most mentioned hence emerging theme
were on waste material recycling, waste management, business management,
entrepreneurship, and leadership. Other areas less mentioned were animal feeds, book
keeping, charcoal making, driving, budgeting, business plan, carpentry, catering,
electrician, how to start a business, plumbing, and marketing.
Yes89%
No11%
40
And that these trainings mentioned had been provided by various organizations namely;
Goal Kenya and World Vision which were commonly mentioned. Other organizations
also mentioned at least by one person included; German Foundation for World
Population, Hemco feeds, Jua Kali, KIRDI, Kisumu Policy, Kiwanda Cha Tumaini,
KWPTC, Mabati Rolling Mills, NARIWAMA, YIKE, Youth Empowerment Programme
and ASKILL.
4.3.3: The Extent to Which Training has helped sharpen their Entrepreneurship
Skills.
In trying to determine the extent to which the training had helped the respondents in
developing; knowledge about the entrepreneurial environment, greater recognition of
entrepreneurial figure, preference to be an entrepreneur, necessary abilities to be an
entrepreneur and intention to be an entrepreneur. Using a seven scale measure, (1= Total
extent, 2= Strong extent, 3= Slight extent, 4= Neutral, 5= Slight extent, 6= Strong extent,
7= Total extent), necessary abilities to be an entrepreneur had the highest mean of 4.85
followed by preference to be an entrepreneur (Mean = 4.80), intention to be an
entrepreneur (Mean = 4.46), greater recognition of entrepreneurial figure (Mean= 4.49)
and lastlyknowledge about the entrepreneurial environment (Mean of 4.44). As reflected
on the median result, there is no difference on the scoring. Further, all items had negative
skewness as indicated in table 4.10. This shows minimal variance on how training
influenced respondents on the items.
41
Table 4.8: The Extent to Which Training has helped sharpen their
Entrepreneurship Skills.
Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviation
Skewness Std. Error
of
Skewness
The necessary abilities to be an
entrepreneur 4.8500 5.0000 6.00 1.92886 -.815 .374
The preference to be an entrepreneur 4.8049 5.0000 7.00 2.08829 -.663 .369
The intention to be an entrepreneur 4.4615 5.0000 4.00 1.84742 -.517 .378
Greater recognition of entrepreneur's
figure 4.4878 5.0000 5.00 1.80447 -.570 .369
Knowledge about the entrepreneurial
environment 4.4390 5.0000 6.00 1.98807 -.467 .369
4.3.4. Correlation between the Perception and the Actual Influence of the Training
In trying to find the correlation between the respondents perception and the actual
influence of training revealed minimal correlation. This is an indication that, whatever the
respondents believed in and what they got from the training were different hence a change
in perception after the training. It was only the knowledge about entrepreneurial
environment and the intention to be an entrepreneur that had the highest correlation.
The perception that training offered knowledge about entrepreneurial environment had
significant relationship with the following after the training; knowledge about the
entrepreneurial environment (P=.021), greater recognition of entrepreneurs figure
(P=.031) and the preference to be an entrepreneur (p=.049). Similarly, perception that
training could influence the intention to be an entrepreneur had correlation with the
following after the training; the preference to be an entrepreneur (P=.013), the necessary
abilities to be an entrepreneur (P=.026) and the intention to be an entrepreneur (P=.026).
Table 4.11 outlines the correlation output.
42
Table 4.9. Correlation between the Perception and the Actual Influence of the
Training
To what extent has the training helped you in the aspects of
Knowledge
about the
entrepreneur
ial
environment
Greater
recognition
of
entrepreneur'
s figure
The
preference to
be an
entrepreneur
The
necessary
abilities to
be an
entrepreneur
The
intention to
be an
entrepreneur
Knowledge
about the
entrepreneuri
al
environment
r .372* .351* .326* -.050 .047
p .021 .031 .049 .772 .786
Greater
recognition
of the
entrepreneur'
s figure
r .128 .193 .364* .086 .215
p .438 .240 .025 .613 .201
The
preference to
be an
entrepreneur
r .310 .168 .324* .309 .377*
p .055 .307 .047 .063 .021
The
necessary
abilities to be
an
entrepreneur
r .228 -.111 .298 .206 .204
p .162 .502 .069 .220 .225
The
intentions to
be an
entrepreneur
r .134 -.032 .398* .366* .366*
p .416 .847 .013 .026 .026
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
4.3.5. Personal Attitude in Business
To further understand the personal attitude, respondents were asked to indicate their level
of agreement on specific items based on seven scale measure (1= Total Disagreement, 2=
Strong Disagreement, 3= Slight Disagreement, 4= Neutral, 5= Slight Agreement, 6=
Strong Agreement, 7= Total Agreement). The rank of the items based on mean were; if I
had the opportunity and resources, I would like to start a business (Mean, 6.4), followed
by among various options I'd rather be an entrepreneur (Mean, 6.2), being an entrepreneur
would bring great satisfaction for me (Mean, 6.17), a career as an entrepreneur is
attractive for me (Mean, 5.76) and lastly, being an entrepreneur provides more advantages
43
than disadvantages to me (Mean, 5.54). Despite the difference in mean ranking, the
variance was very small. Also, all the items were negatively skewed with nearly the same
standard deviation. This was indicative that the respondents had positive personal attitude
in business.
Table 4.10a. Personal Attitude in Business
Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviation
Skewness Std. Error
of
Skewness
If I had the opportunity and
resources, I'd like to start a
business
6.4000 7.0000 7.00 1.32116 -2.404 .354
Among various options I'd
rather be an entrepreneur. 6.1957 6.0000 7.00 1.06707 -2.016 .350
Being an entrepreneur would
bring great satisfaction for me. 6.1739 7.0000 7.00 1.16054 -1.782 .350
A career as an entrepreneur is
attractive for me 5.7609 6.0000 7.00 1.49346 -1.244 .350
Being an entrepreneur
provides more advantages than
disadvantages to me.
5.5435 6.0000 6.00 1.58754 -1.389 .350
Using the variance, the assertion that If I had the opportunity and resources, I'd like to
start a business” otherwise referred to as PA1 presented item correlation of .663, while
the assertion that “among various options I'd rather be an entrepreneur” otherwise
connoted as PA2 presented an item correlation to personal attitude of .733. The assertion
that “Being an entrepreneur would bring great satisfaction for me”, otherwise connoted as
PA3 presented an item correlation towards personal attitude of .577, and the assertion that
“A career as an entrepreneur is attractive for me “otherwise connoted as PA4 presented an
item correlation of .775, and lastly the assertion that “Being an entrepreneur provides
more advantages than disadvantages to me “connoted by PA5, presented an item
correlation of .740.
44
Table 4.10b.Personal AttitudeItem-Total Statistics
Scale Mean
if Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance if
Item Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
Overall
Cronbach's
Alpha
PA1 24.6042 16.968 .663 .846 .863
PA2 24.3958 16.925 .733 .822
PA3 23.7292 19.648 .577 .860
PA4 23.9583 18.849 .775 .816
PA5 23.9792 19.893 .740 .828
Further interrogation between attitude in business and demographic information such as
age, gender, marital status, past experience in business and level of study revealed that
there was no statistical significance (P>.05). However past training in business had
statistical significance with ‘A career as an entrepreneur is attractive for me’ (p=.016,
r=.358) and with ‘Among various options I'd rather be an entrepreneur’ (p=.024, r=.336).
These was indicative that, entrepreneurial training significantly influenced career of
respondents and changed their preference to entrepreneurship while age, gender,
education background, marital status and past experience in business did not influence
respondents attitude in business in any way.
4.3.6. Pro-Activeness in Business
Under personal attribute, confidence of the respondents was measured under ‘pro-
activeness’, ‘risk taking’ and ‘innovativeness’ all were measured in seven scale measure
on a scale of 1 to 7: Where 1 is not confident at all and 7 is very confident. The mean was
between 6.4 and 6.04 showing a high level of agreement as indicated in table 4.13.
Table 4.11: Pro-Activeness in Business
Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviation
Skewness Std. Error
Skewness
Identify an opportunity 6.0465 6.0000 7.00 1.15374 -2.143 .361
Put together a team of "right" people 6.0930 6.0000 7.00 1.30592 -2.265 .361
Identify market trends 5.9302 6.0000 7.00 1.24203 -1.661 .361
Manage your own business 6.3721 7.0000 7.00 1.23488 -2.754 .361
45
4.3.7: Innovation
Response on innovation was also ranked based on mean but there was no variance on the
mean as indicated in table 4.14. The variables on innovation were ‘develop a creative
solution to difficult problems with mean of 6.2’, ‘innovative problem solver with mean of
6.07’ and ‘creative in using and controlling resource with mean of, 6.02.’
Table 4.12: Response on Innovation
Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviation
Skewness Std. Error
of
Skewness
Be an innovative problem solver 6.0682 6.0000 7.00 1.22755 -2.111 .357
Be creative in using and
controlling resource 6.0227 6.0000 7.00 1.19083 -1.517 .357
Develop a creative solution to
difficult problems. 6.2045 6.5000 7.00 1.02480 -1.383 .357
4.3.7: Correlation with the Entrepreneurship Intention
Using factorial, the variables under training and perception were reduced based on the
component analysis. The total variances explained were as indicated in table 4.11. The
strongest components were ‘identify an opportunity’; ‘Put together a team of right people’
’identify market trends’ and ‘manage your own business’
46
Table 4.13: Principal Component Analysis
Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Total % of
Variance
Cumulative
%
Total % of
Variance
Cumulative
%
1 6.557 46.838 46.838 6.557 46.838 46.838
2 2.280 16.289 63.127 2.280 16.289 63.127
3 1.660 11.860 74.987 1.660 11.860 74.987
4 1.032 7.372 82.359 1.032 7.372 82.359
5 .601 4.293 86.652
6 .480 3.430 90.083
7 .336 2.400 92.483
8 .252 1.801 94.285
9 .216 1.543 95.828
10 .196 1.401 97.228
11 .140 1.000 98.228
12 .122 .870 99.099
13 .080 .572 99.671
14 .046 .329 100.000
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
4.3.8. The Correlation between Entrepreneurship Environment and Social
Entrepreneurship Intention:
A number of personal attitude items that had no characteristics with the entrepreneurial
intention (P>0.05) were: ‘achieve high growth in your organization’, ‘walk away from a
potential by failure’, ‘Be an innovative problem solver’, and ‘develop a creative solution
to difficult problems’. Others had positive correlation as indicated in following table 4.12.
The outline of the relationship between each of the entrepreneur’s intention and personal
attitudes were: I am ready to do anything to be an entrepreneur had correlation with; Part
a business without adequate resources (r=.458), and live with uncertainty (r=.577). My
professional goal is becoming an entrepreneur had correlation with; Obtaining finance for
a new business (r=.421), Part a business without adequate resources (r=.310), Live with
uncertainty (r=.470), evaluate downside risk (r=.350), Be creative in using and controlling
resource (r=.334), A career as an entrepreneur is attractive for me (r=.295), Being an
47
entrepreneur would bring great satisfaction for me (r=.392), and Among various options
I'd rather be an entrepreneur (r=.472).
I will make every effort to start and run my own business had correlation with only Being
an entrepreneur provides more advantages than disadvantages to me (r=.320). I'm
determined to create a business in the future had correlation with; Evaluate downside risk
(r=.308), Make a large profit when you sell your business (r=.379), Be creative in using
and controlling resource (.327), If i had the opportunity and resources, I'd like to start a
business (.299). I have a very serious thought of starting a business had correlation with;
Make a large profit when you sell your business (r=.360), Being an entrepreneur provides
more advantages than disadvantages to me (r=.374). The last entrepreneurial intention,
I've got the business intention to start a business someday had correlation with only I
Make a large profit when you sell your business (r=.327).
48
Table 4.14: Relationship between Personal Attitude and Entrepreneurial Intention
I'm ready to
do anything
to be an
entrepreneur
My
professional
goal is
becoming
an
entrepreneur
I will
make
every
effort to
start
and run
my own
business
I'm
determined
to create a
business in
the future
I have a
very
serious
thought
of
starting
a
business
I've got the
business
intention to
start a
business
some day
Part a
business
without
adequate
resources
R .458** .310* .213 .275 .122 .252
p .002 .041 .166 .074 .429 .099
Live with
uncertainty
R .577** .470** .192 .223 .026 .192
p .000 .002 .224 .160 .868 .223
Evaluate
downside risk
R .140 .350* .044 .308* .144 .188
Make a large
profit when
you sell your
business
R .095 .235 .299 .379* .360* .327*
p .546 .129 .051 .012 .018 .032
Be creative in
using and
controlling
resource
r -.061 .334* .104 .327* .153 .226
p .693 .027 .502 .032 .322 .140
Being an
entrepreneur
provides more
advantages
than
disadvantages.
r -.118 .264 .320* .230 .374* .134
p .435 .076 .030 .129 .010 .376
A career as an
entrepreneur
is attractive
for me
r -.144 .295* .101 .095 .167 -.016
p .341 .047 .504 .536 .266 .915
If I had the
opportunity
and resources,
I'd like to start
a business
r -.026 .258 .187 .299* .286 .276
p .868 .087 .218 .046 .056 .066
49
Being an
entrepreneur
would bring
great
satisfaction
for me.
r .067 .392** .166 .278 .132 .172
p .660 .007 .269 .065 .383 .252
Among
various
options I'd
rather be an
entrepreneur.
r .161 .472** .274 .246 .212 .142
p .285 .001 .066 .103 .157 .346
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
4.4. The Relationship between Subjective Norm and Social Entrepreneurial
Intention
4.4.1. Subjective Norm on Start of Business
The reliance on other person’s decision/perception may affect business continuity.
Respondents were asked rate how people in their close environment would approve of
their business decision ‘to start a business’. In a seven scale measure (1= Total
Disagreement, 2= Strong Disagreement, 3= Slight Disagreement, 4= Neutral, 5= Slight
Agreement, 6= Strong Agreement, 7= Total Agreement). Respondents view shows
family will approve the decision to start a business (mean, 6.32), followed by colleagues
and mates will approve the decision (Mean, 6.19) and lastly friends will approve the
decision (Mean, 5.83). Comparison on the standard deviation, and skewness showed
similarity in trend hence ‘strong agreement’ on the subjective norm. Table 4.17 projects
this.
50
Table 4.15a: Subjective Norm to Start a Business
Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviation
Skewness Std. Error
of
Skewness
Family will approve the
decision. 6.3191 7.0000 7.00 1.23546 -2.526 .347
Colleagues and mates
will approve the
decision.
6.1915 6.0000 7.00 .94727 -1.203 .347
Friends will approve the
decision. 5.8298 6.0000 7.00 1.29076 -1.063 .347
Table 4.15b.Subjective Norm Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean
if Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance if
Item Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
Overall
Cronbach's
Alpha
SN1 12.0208 4.063 .273 .764 .629
SN2 12.5208 2.766 .593 .277
SN3 12.1667 4.099 .510 .471
The item correlation on subject on the assertion that family will approve the decision was
.273 as connoted in SN1, and the item correlation on the assertion that colleagues and
mates will approve the decision as connoted in SN2 was .593, while the item correlation
on the assertion that friends will approve the decision as connoted in SN3 was .510.
There was no correlation (p>.05) between subjective norm and background information
inclusive of age, gender, marital status, past experience in business, training in business
and level of study. This was indicative of the fact that background information does not
determine subjective norm significantly.
4.4.2. Subjective Norm on Social Valuation
Based on the social valuation, the study findings revealed that, colleagues and mates
highly valued entrepreneurship (Mean, 6.02) compared to how friends value
entrepreneurship (Mean, 5.711) and close family (Mean 5.6667).
51
Table 4.16: Social Valuation of Entrepreneurship
Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviation
Skewness Std. Error
of
Skewness
How is entrepreneurship
valued in your close family 5.6667 6.0000 7.00 1.67874 -1.646 .354
How is entrepreneurship
valued among your friends 5.7111 6.0000 7.00 1.68715 -1.602 .354
How is entrepreneurship
valued among your colleagues
and mates
6.0217 7.0000 7.00 1.57041 -2.053 .350
However, when asked to rank who was to approve of the business when starting more
than the other, family was highly ranked as supportive (Mean, 6.04) followed by
colleagues and mates at (Mean, 6.00) and lastly close friends at 5.67). This was measured
by seven unit scale (1= Total Disagreement, 2= Strong Disagreement, 3= Slight
Disagreement, 4= Neutral, 5= Slight Agreement, 6= Strong Agreement, 7= Total
Agreement). This means family members will strongly agree and support
entrepreneurship followed by colleagues and mates and lastly friends. The variance with
the valuation showed that when starting a business, the family would support more but at
growth, it’s the colleagues and mates who would have more value.
Table 4.17: Social Approval of Start-up Business
Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviati
on
Skewness Std. Error of
Skewness
If you started a business will
your close family approve it 6.0435 7.0000 7.00
1.4446
3 -1.882 .350
If you started a business will
your close your friends
approve it
5.6739 6.0000 7.00 1.2658
7 -.857 .350
If you started a business will
your colleagues and mates
approve it
6.0000 6.0000 7.00 1.3351
4 -1.889 .347
52
4.4.3. Subjective Norm on Social Perception
Respondents also ranked perception on items based on entrepreneurship. In a seven scale
unit of measure (1= Total Disagreement, 2= Strong Disagreement, 3= Slight
Disagreement, 4= Neutral, 5= Slight Agreement, 6= Strong Agreement, 7= Total
Agreement). The respondents’ rates were below 5, as slight agreement. ‘It is commonly
thought that entrepreneurs take advantage of others’ was ranked highly at 4.67 while
entrepreneurial activity clashes with the culture in my religion was ranked at 2.222, as
strongly disagreement.
Table 4.18: Social Perception on Entrepreneurship
Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviation
Skewness Std. Error
of
Skewness
It is commonly thought that
entrepreneurs take advantage of
others
4.6667 5.0000 7.00 2.21565 -.541 .354
Many people hardly consider
acceptable to be an entrepreneur 4.5652 5.0000 5.00 1.77203 -.576 .350
Entrepreneurial activity is
considered too risky to be 4.3864 5.0000 5.00 2.00251 -.435 .357
The entrepreneur's role in the
economy is not sufficiently
recognized
4.2000 5.0000 7.00 2.26234 -.161 .354
Entrepreneurial activity clashes
with the culture in my religion. 2.2222 1.0000 1.00 1.84500 1.407 .354
4.4.4. Combined subjective Norm and Entrepreneurial Intention.
On the relationship between social norm and social entrepreneurial intention, the items
under social norms that did not have positive correlations were as indicated as follows:
‘if you decided to create a business your family will approve the decision’ ‘How is
entrepreneurship valued in your close family’, ‘Entrepreneurial activity clashes with the
culture in my religion’ and ‘Many people hardly consider acceptable to be an
entrepreneur’.
Correlation test showed that entrepreneurial intention had correlation with subjective
norm as follows: I'm ready to do anything to be an entrepreneur had no correlation with
any of the subjective norms. My professional goal is becoming an entrepreneur had
correlation with; How is entrepreneurship valued among your colleagues and mates
53
(r=.291), If you started a business will your colleagues and mates approve it (r=.304), I'm
ready to do anything to be an entrepreneur (r=.537). I will make every effort to start and
run my own business had correlation with; If you decided to create a business your
friends will approve the decision (r=.292), How is entrepreneurship valued among your
friends (r=.332), How is entrepreneurship valued among your colleagues and mates
(r=.389), If you started a business will your close your friends approve of it (r=.330), The
entrepreneur's role in the economy is not sufficiently recognized (r=.439), and I'm ready
to do anything to be an entrepreneur (r=.344).
I'm determined to create a business in the future had correlation with; If you decided to
create a business your friends will approve the decision (r=.302), If you decided to create
a business your colleagues and mates will approve the decision (r=.387), How is
entrepreneurship valued among your friends (r=.522), How is entrepreneurship valued
among your colleagues and mates (r=.632), If you started a business will your close your
friends approve it (r=.356), If you started a business will your colleagues and mates
approve it (r=.355), The entrepreneur's role in the economy is not sufficiently recognized
(r=.413), Entrepreneurial activity is considered too risky to be (r=.438), It is commonly
thought that entrepreneurs take advantage of others (r=.321). lastly, I have a very serious
thought of starting a business and I've got the business intention to start a business some
day; had positive correlation with subjective norms based on friends approval, colleague
approval, and family member approval.
54
Table 4.19: Correlation between Social Norms and Social Entrepreneurial Intention
I'm ready to
do anything
to be an
entrepreneur
My
professional
goal is
becoming
an
entrepreneur
I will
make
every
effort to
start
and run
my own
business
I'm
determined
to create a
business in
the future
I have a
very
serious
thought
of
starting
a
business
I've got
the
business
intention
to start a
business
some
day
If you decided
to create a
business your
friends will
approve the
decision.
r -.129 .026 .292* .302* .473** .433**
p .386 .862 .046 .041 .001 .002
If you decided
to create a
business your
colleagues and
mates will
approve the
decision.
r .083 .133 .239 .387** .342* .577**
p .578 .374 .105 .008 .019 .000
How is
entrepreneurship
valued among
your friends
r .000 .261 .332* .522** .388** .364*
p .999 .083 .026 .000 .008 .014
How is
entrepreneurship
valued among
your colleagues
and mates
r .013 .291* .389** .632** .417** .421**
p .929 .050 .007 .000 .004 .004
If you started a
business will
your close
family approve
of it
r -.060 .131 .166 .266 .289 .382**
p .694 .387 .269 .077 .051 .009
If you started a
business will
your close your
friends approve
of it
r -.033 .159 .330* .356* .490** .500**
p .827 .292 .025 .017 .001 .000
If you started a
business will
your colleagues
and mates
approve of it
r .054 .304* .284 .355* .338* .500**
p .717 .038 .053 .015 .020 .000
The
entrepreneur's
role in the
economy is not
r .245 .042 .439** .413** .308* .305*
p .104 .785 .003 .005 .040 .042
55
sufficiently
recognized
Entrepreneurial
activity is
considered too
risky to be
r -.018 .047 .200 .438** .103 .282
p .907 .761 .192 .003 .505 .064
It is commonly
thought that
entrepreneurs
take advantage
of others
r -.014 -.039 .199 .321* .149 .274
p .927 .798 .190 .033 .328 .069
I'm ready to do
anything to be
an entrepreneur
R 1 .537** .344* .189 .022 .022
p .000 .018 .207 .884 .883
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
4.5: The Relationship between Perceived Behavioural Control and Social
EntrepreneurialIntention.
Different statement regarding entrepreneurship was given to respondents for ranking
based on their understanding and capacity. In a seven scale measure (1= Total
Disagreement, 2= Strong Disagreement, 3= Slight Disagreement, 4= Neutral, 5= Slight
Agreement, 6= Strong Agreement, 7= Total Agreement). In a descending order based on
mean, the highly ranked item was: I can control the process of creating a new business
(Mean, 6.23); followed by If I tried a business, I would have a high probability of
succeeding (Mean, 6.15); I'm prepared to start a viable business (Mean, 6.07); start a
business and keep it working would be easy for me (Mean, 5.89); I know the necessary
practical details to start a business (Mean, 5.72); and I know how to develop an
entrepreneurial project (Mean, 5.60).
56
Table 4.20a: Perceived Behavior Control
Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviation
Skewness Std. Error
of
Skewness
I can control the process of
creating a new business 6.2174 7.0000 7.00 1.05226 -1.415 .350
If I tried a business, I would
have a high probability of
succeeding.
6.1489 7.0000 7.00 1.14168 -1.311 .347
I'm prepared to start a viable
business 6.0652 7.0000 7.00 1.30643 -1.501 .350
Start a business and keep it
working would be easy for
me.
5.8936 6.0000 6.00a 1.20206 -1.356 .347
I know the necessary
practical details to start a
business
5.7234 6.0000 6.00 1.31384 -1.383 .347
I know how to develop an
entrepreneurial project 5.5957 6.0000 7.00 1.42432 -1.074 .347
Table 4.20b. Perceived Behavioural Control (Item-TotalStatistics)
Scale Mean
if Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance if
Item Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
Overall
Cronbach's
Alpha
PBC1 29.8542 23.744 .662 .843 .866
PBC2 29.6458 23.042 .654 .845
PBC3 29.5000 25.191 .627 .850
PBC4 30.0208 24.063 .555 .863
PBC5 30.1458 20.893 .772 .822
PBC6 29.5833 23.525 .727 .833
Looking at the item total correlation of the assertion that “I can control the process of
creating a new business I can control the process of creating a new business” as connoted
by PBC1, was.662, the item correlation of the assertion that “If I tried a business, I would
have a high probability of succeeding” connoted by PBC2 was .845, the item correlation
of the assertion that “I'm prepared to start a viable business” connoted by PBC3 was .627,
the item correlation of the assertion that “start a business and keep it working would be
easy for me” connoted PBC4, was .555, the item correlation of the assertion that “I know
the necessary practical details to start a business” connoted by PBC5 was .772 and lastly,
57
the item correlation of the assertion that “I know how to develop an entrepreneurial
project” connoted by PBC6 was also .772.
Table 4.21a: Correlation between Perceived Behavioural Control and Social
Entrepreneurial Intention
Start a
business
and keep
it
working
would be
easy for
me.
I'm
prepared
to start a
viable
business
I can
control
the
process
of
creating
a new
business
I know
the
necessary
practical
details to
start a
business
I know how to
develop an
entrepreneurial
project
If I tried a
business, I
would have a
high
probability of
succeeding.
My
professional
goal is
becoming
an
entrepreneur
r .125 .093 .166 .174 .107 .344*
p .402 .539 .271 .241 .472 .018
I will make
every effort
to start and
run my own
business
r .488** .606** .386** .124 .250 .508**
p .001 .000 .008 .408 .090 .000
I'm
determined
to create a
business in
the future
r .490** .742** .515** .248 .374* .694**
p .001 .000 .000 .097 .010 .000
I have a
very serious
thought of
starting a
business
r .552** .615** .439** .142 .200 .534**
p .000 .000 .002 .342 .178 .000
I've got the
business
intention to
start a
business
some day
r .347* .622** .568** .166 .245 .402**
p .017 .000 .000 .265 .097 .005
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
On the correlation between perceived behavioural control and social entrepreneurial
intention, there was a positive correlation between all the variables except for ‘I'm ready
to do anything to be an entrepreneur’. The variables with the positive correlation are
indicated in table 4.19. Start a business and keep it working would be easy for me had
58
correlation with; I will make every effort to start and run my own business (r=.488), I'm
determined to create a business in the future (r=.490), I have a very serious thought of
starting a business (r=.552), I've got the business intention to start a business someday
(r=.347). I'm prepared to start a viable business had correlation with; I will make every
effort to start and run my own business (r=.606), I'm determined to create a business in
the future (r=.742), I have a very serious thought of starting a business (r=.615), I've got
the business intention to start a business someday (r=.622).
I can control the process of creating a new business had correlation with; I will make
every effort to start and run my own business (r=.386), I'm determined to create a
business in the future (r=.515), I have a very serious thought of starting a business
(r=.439), I've got the business intention to start a business someday (r=.568). I know how
to develop an entrepreneurial project had only correlation with I'm determined to create a
business in the future (r=.374). Lastly, I know the necessary practical details to start a
business had no correlation with any of the perceived behavior control and if I tried a
business, I would have a high probability of succeeding had correlation with all of the
perceived behavior control outlines.
Table 4.21b. Entrepreneurial Intention (Item-Total Statistics)
Scale Mean
if Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance if
Item Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
Overall
Cronbach's
Alpha
EI1 31.9375 12.528 .302 .826 .788
EI2 31.8542 12.340 .480 .770
EI3 31.4167 10.248 .789 .689
EI4 31.2083 11.871 .693 .726
EI5 31.3125 11.028 .620 .735
EI6 31.2292 13.500 .470 .774
The item total correlation of the assertion that “My professional goal is becoming an
entrepreneur” as connoted E11 was .302, the item correlation of the assertion that “I will
make every effort to start and run my own business” connoted by E12, was .770, the item
correlation of the assertion that “I'm determined to create a business in the future”
connoted by E13 was .693, the item correlation of the assertion that “I have a very serious
thought of starting a business” connoted by E15 was .620 and lastly on the item total
59
correlation of the assertion that “I've got the business intention to start a business
someday”, connoted by E16 was.774.
4.6. The Extent to Which Entrepreneurial Environmental Factors affects Social
Entrepreneurial Intention.
Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement in a seven scale unit of
measure (1= Total Disagreement, 2= Strong Disagreement, 3= Slight Disagreement, 4=
Neutral, 5= Slight Agreement, 6= Strong Agreement, 7= Total Agreement). The highly
ranked was ‘I'm determined to create a business in the future (Mean, 6.57)’ followed by
‘I've got the business intention to start a business someday (Mean, 6.55)’, ‘I have a very
serious thought of starting a business (Mean, 6.468)’, ‘I will make every effort to start and
run my own business (Mean, 6.36)’, ‘My professional goal is becoming an entrepreneur
(Mean, 5.936)’, and least ranked is ‘I'm ready to do anything to be an entrepreneur
(Mean, 5.85). This shows majority of respondents are currently not in business but
looking forward to start business in future.
Table 4.22: Entrepreneurial Intention
Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviation
Skewness Std. Error
of
Skewness
I'm determined to create a
business in the future 6.5652 7.0000 7.00 .83406 -2.378 .350
I've got the business
intention to start a business
some day
6.5532 7.0000 7.00 .71653 -1.676 .347
I have a very serious thought
of starting a business 6.4681 7.0000 7.00 1.06017 -2.657 .347
I will make every effort to
start and run my own
business
6.3617 7.0000 7.00 1.03052 -1.914 .347
My professional goal is
becoming an entrepreneur 5.9362 6.0000 6.00a .96469 -.475 .347
I'm ready to do anything to
be an entrepreneur 5.8511 6.0000 7.00 1.19744 -1.684 .347
60
4.6.1: Resources Availability
Resources are key component for one to run business. Respondents were asked to rate
different measures that support business creation based on their level of knowledge.
Using the seven scale of measure ‘1 as absolute ignorance’ and ‘7 as complete
knowledge’ as the unit of measure.Readily available opportunity to start the business was
highly raked resource with mean of 5.68, followed by favorable policies to start
businesses at 5.40, market accessibility in favorable terms at 5.39, business
center’s/networks at 5.37. Others are consulting services in favorable terms at 5.36, loans
in favorable terms at 5.39, specific training for young people at 5.28 and lastly, technical
aid to start the business at 5.26. This shows the resources are available to start the
business by the respondents are looking at future term similar to entrepreneurial intention
results.
Table 4.23: Resources Availability
Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviation
Skewness Std. Error
of
Skewness
Readily available
opportunity to start the
business
5.6809 6.0000 7.00 1.28717 -.580 .347
Favorable policies to start
businesses 5.4043 5.0000 7.00 1.49869 -.293 .347
Market accessibility in
favorable terms 5.3913 6.0000 7.00 1.51259 -.669 .350
Consulting services in
favorable terms 5.3617 6.0000 7.00 1.50976 -.653 .347
Business center’s/networks 5.3696 5.0000 7.00 1.32260 -.247 .350
Loans in favorable terms 5.3191 5.0000 7.00 1.47599 -.243 .347
Specific training for young
people 5.2826 5.0000 7.00 1.65547 -.720 .350
Technical aid to start the
business 5.2609 5.0000 7.00 1.54106 -.460 .350
4.6.2: Model Summary Outputs
In determining the extent to which entrepreneurial environmental factors affect social
entrepreneurial intention, regression analysis was run. Dependent variable being the
collapsed Social Entrepreneurial Intention (SEI) whiles the independent variable included
the Personal attitude (PA), Perceived behavior control (PBC), and subjective norm (SN).
61
The model summary was positive showing the regression model being fit (P=.001), with
an r square of .318 and adjusted r square of .269. This means, 31.8% of the predictors
could be predicted.
Table 4.24: Model Summary
Model R R
Square
Adjusted
R Square
Std.
Error of
the
Estimate
Change Statistics
R Square
Change
F
Change
df1 df2 Sig. F
Change
1 .564a .318 .269 .60185 .318 6.533 3 42 .001
a. Predictors: (Constant), PBC, PA, SN
b. Dependent Variable: EI
4.6.3. Model specifications
This study used structural equation modeling (SEM) partial least squares (PLS)
approach.PLS was used due to its ability to model latent constructs. It makes no prior
distributional assumptions and is applicable to small sample sizes (Sambamurthy& Chin,
1994). The model was developed and analyzed in two stages. Initially the measurement
model was developed through exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor
analysis (CFA). The second stage involved the development and analysis of the proposed
structural model.
4.6.4. Exploratory factor analysis
Exploratory factor analysis was used to refine the constructs. The data was first run tests
to assess its factorability using these indicators (Kaiser Meyer-Olin Measure of Sampling
Adequacy, Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity and communalities). KMO Measures of Sampling
Adequacy of manifest variables were above the threshold of 0.6 (Kaiser, 1974), and p-
values for Bartlett’s test of Sphericity were significant (below 0.05). Communalities were
above 0.5 signifying satisfactory factorability for all items as indicated in table 4.1
62
Table 4.25 Factorability Indicators
Construct KMO
Communality Bartlett’s Test
of Sphericity
p-
valu
e
Personal Attitude 0.765 0.521 141.06 0.00
Subjective norm 0.632 0.663 29.25 0.00
Perceived behavioural control 0.782 0.595 136.94 0.00
Entrepreneurial intention 0.632 0.595 142.17 0.00
The internal consistency and reliability of items of the construct were estimated using
Cronbach’s Alpha and item to total correlations. The manifest variables with an item to
item correlation of 0.3 and above were maintained for further analysis. Principal
component analysis (PCA) revealed that factor loadings were above the acceptable
threshold of 0.5 (Hair et al., 2006).
4.6.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was then performed using SmartPLS software to
assess the reliability and validity of the measures before using them in the research model
(Anderson &Gerbing1988).
63
Figure 4.10.Confirmatory Factor Analysis
64
Figure 4.11.Confirmatory Factor Analysis
65
4.6.5 Personal Attitude
Personal Attitude (PA) scale comprised of five statements. The scale was rated on a seven
point Likert scale ranging from 1 denoting "Total disagreement" to 7 denoting "Total
Agreement". Average scale ratings ranged from 5.56 to 6.44. Personal Attitude (PA) scale
had factor loadings of between 0.745 and 0.882 and attained item to total correlations of
between0.577 to 0.775. The Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was high at 0.863 as indicated
in table 4.2.
Table 4.26. Personal Attitude
Item Abbreviation Mean Standard
Deviation
Factor
Loading
Item to
total
Correlation
Being an entrepreneur provides
more advantages than
disadvantages to me.
PA1 5.56 1.56 .772 .663
A career as an entrepreneur is
attractive for me PA2 5.77 1.46 .819 .733
If I had the opportunity and
resources,I'd like to start a
business
PA3 6.44 1.29 .745 .577
Being an entrepreneur would
bring great satisfaction for me. PA4 6.21 1.15 .882 .775
Among various options I'd rather
be an entrepreneur. PA5 6.19 1.04 .856 .740
Cronbach Alpha of Personal Attitude scale = 0.863
66
4.6.6 Measurement Model Estimation
The structural or inner model was evaluated using the path weighting or p coefficients
and corresponding p values generated from the SmartPLS analysis. Consistent with Chin
(1998), bootstrapping (500 resamples) was applied to produce standard errors and t
statistics. This enabled the measurement of the statistical significance of the path
coefficients.
Figure 4.12: Structural Model Path coefficients
67
Figure 4.13 Structural Model T-Statistics
4.6.7 Personal Attitude on Entrepreneurial Intention
Personal attitude was found to have a positive and statistically significant relationship
with Entrepreneurial intention. The path coefficient was positive and significant at the
0.05 level (β=0.101, T-value =2.354 p<0.05).
4.6.8 Perceived behavioral control on Entrepreneurial intention
Perceived behavioral control was found to have a positive and statistically significant
relationship with Entrepreneurial intention. The path coefficient was positive and
significant at the 0.05 level (β=0.588, T-value =8.961 p<0.05).
68
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 DICUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
5.1 Introduction
This chapter draws the discussion of the findings, conclusion and recommendation based
on the research findings. The presentation of each is presented thematically based on the
research objectives. The discussion ties the research objective with the literature review
while the recommendation is in two fold; for application and recommendation for further
study.
5.2 Summary of Findings
The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between entrepreneurial
environmental factors on social entrepreneurial intention among the youth in Kariobangi
community. The study was guided by the following research objectives: identify the
relationship between personal attitude and entrepreneurial intention; identify the
relationship between subjective norm and entrepreneurial intention; identify the
relationship between perceived behavioural control and entrepreneurial intention; and
lastly, to examine the extent to which entrepreneurial environmental factors affect
entrepreneurial intention. The study findings will be significant to the community as it
will help them play their critical role in the sustainability of a social enterprise through
ownership and control via their involvement in all the stages. To the government, the
study findings will be significant because it will help in gauging the attainment of the
vision 2030 targets and to the corporates, the study findings will be significant because it
will aid in identifying the convergence between the creation of value for society in the
realm of the environment and economic returns for entrepreneurs with an aim of building
sustainable ventures. And lastly, the significance of this study finding will be to the policy
makers and researchers as for social entrepreneurs to succeed, they require not only an
enabling policy environment, but also, critically, sources of financing and one of the key
roles of policy makers is measurement of impact and outcomes. The study adopted the
use of descriptive research design and 48 target respondents from all members of 11
Community Based Organization under the umbrella of the Raslimali Enterprise Limited
participated in the study. In data collection, questionnaire was employed as the data
collection tool and analysis, SPSS social science analysis software was used and the
findings were presented through charts and frequency tables.
69
5.3. Discussion Summary
5.3.1: Relationship between Personal Attitude and Social Entrepreneurial Intention
In addressing the first research objective which was to determine the relationship between
personal attitude and social entrepreneurial intention, the ranking on personal attitude
based on the mean beginning with the highest were; if I had the opportunity and
resources, I would like to start a business, followed by among various options I would
rather be an entrepreneur, being an entrepreneur would bring great satisfaction for me, a
career as an entrepreneur is attractive for me and lastly, being an entrepreneur provides
more advantages than disadvantages to me in that order. Despite the difference in mean
ranking, the variance was minimal and all the items were negatively skewed. This shows
respondents had positive personal attitude towards business.
On the relationship between each of the entrepreneur’s intention and personal attitudes
revealed that most respondents agreed with the assertion that they were ready to do
anything to become entrepreneurs which had correlation with the challenge of not having
adequate resources to start the business, therefore making most of them live with
uncertainty. Most of the respondent’s professional goal was to become an entrepreneur
which had a strong correlation with the challenge of obtaining finance for a new business,
therefore their businesses lack adequate resources, thus making them live with
uncertainty. And as such they have to evaluate downside risk and be creative in using and
controlling meager resources they have. The respondents agreed with the assertion that a
career as an entrepreneur was attractive for them and therefore being an entrepreneur
would bring great satisfaction for them. The various intentions options that they had was
that they would rather be entrepreneurs and such they would make every effort to start
and run their own business which had correlation with the assertion that being an
entrepreneur would provide more advantages than disadvantages to them. Being
determined to create a business in the future had correlation with the element of
evaluating the downside risk, making a huge profit when they sell their business, being
creative in using and controlling resources, given the opportunity and resources, they
would like to start a business. Having a very serious thought of starting a business had
correlation with making a huge profit when they sell their business, and that of being an
entrepreneur provides more advantages than disadvantages to them. The last
entrepreneurial intention, asserting that they've got the intention to start a business
70
someday had correlation with only making a huge profit when they sell their business.
From the findings in fig. 4.12, personal attitude stands at 10.1%, the SN stands at 14.7%
while the PBC stands at 58.8%. A PA of 10.1% in a project is not sustainable by any
means. This is in line by Degeorge and Fayolle (2008), assertion that when new issues
arise requiring an evaluative response, one draw on relevant information (beliefs) which
is stored in the memories and since, each of these beliefs carries evaluative implications,
attitudes are automatically formed. This is exemplified by the beneficiaries’ lifestyle
whereby they live from hand to mouth and one day at time therefore they do not see the
essence of long term projects whose benefits would not manifest immediately.
5.3.2: The Relationship between Subjective Norm and Social Entrepreneurial
Intention.
The second research objective was to look at the relationship between subjective norm
and social entrepreneurial intention. The respondents view on subjective norm were
ranked based on mean ranked from the highest to the lowest with family approval of
the decision to start a business taking lead, followed by colleagues and mates approval of
the decision and lastly friends approval of the decision. Comparison on the standard
deviation, and skewness showed similarity in trend hence ‘strong agreement’ on the
subjective norm. Further, based on the social valuation, the study findings revealed that,
colleagues and mates valued entrepreneurship highly as compared to how much friends
and close family valued entrepreneurship.
The correlation test revealed that entrepreneurial intention had a correlation with
subjective norm as follows: Being ready to do anything to be an entrepreneur had no
correlation with any of the subjective norms. The professional goal of wanting to become
an entrepreneur had correlation with how entrepreneurship was valued among the
colleagues and mates, If they started a business if their colleagues and mates will
approve of it, being ready to do anything to be an entrepreneur . Making every effort to
start and run their own business had correlation with if they decided to create a business
will their friends approve of the decision, how entrepreneurship was valued among their
friends, how entrepreneurship was valued among their colleagues and mates, If they
started a business will their close friends approve of it. The entrepreneur's role in the
economy was not sufficiently recognized, and they were ready to do anything to become
entrepreneurs. Their determination to create a business in the future had correlation with
if they decided to create a business their friends will approve of the decision, If they
71
decided to create a business their colleagues and mates will approve of the decision, how
was entrepreneurship valued among their friends, how was entrepreneurship valued
among their colleagues and mates, if they started a business will their close friends
approve of it , if they started a business will their colleagues and mates approve of it, the
entrepreneur's role in the economy was not sufficiently being recognized, entrepreneurial
activity was considered too risky to be, it was commonly thought that entrepreneurs took
advantage of others lastly, they had a very serious thought of starting a business and they
had the business intention to start a business some day; had positive correlation with
subjective norms based on friends approval, colleague approval, and family member
approval.
From the findings in fig 4.12, the Social Norm stands at 14.7% which is comparatively
low and almost equal to that of the personal attitude. This can be supported by Ajzen
(2001) findings which assert that subjective norm is determined by other people’s social
pressure, which is quite relevant in this case of Kariobangi youth, living in an informal
settlement where the level of income is low, unemployment rates are high as well as the
rate of crime and as such people there have beliefs in meeting their immediate needs
rather than looking at the long term benefits. They only endeavor to meet their day to day
social provisions which have a big effect in predicting their behavioral intentions
5.3.3. The Relationship between Perceived Behavioural Control and Social
Entrepreneurial Intention
The third research objective was to look at the relationship between perceived
behavioural control and social entrepreneurial intention. The items ranked were on the
control to create a new business, probability of succeeding, capacity to start a business,
how easy it was to start and maintain a business, and ability to develop entrepreneurial
project. In descending order based on mean rank, the highly ranked item was: the ability
to control the process of creating a new business; followed by if they tried a business,
they would have a high probability of succeeding; they were prepared to start a viable
business; starting a business and keeping it working would be easy for them; knowledge
of the necessary practical details to start a business; and knowledge on how to develop an
entrepreneurial project.
On the correlation, Starting a business and keeping it working would be easy for them had
correlation with; making every effort to start and run their own business, being
72
determined to create a business in the future, having a very serious thought of starting a
business, having business intention to start a business someday. Being prepared to start a
viable business had correlation with; making every effort to start and run their own
businesses, being determined to create a business in the future, having a very serious
thought of starting a business, having the business intention to start a business someday.
Controlling the process of creating a new business had correlation with; making every
effort to start and run their own business, being determined to create a business in the
future, having a very serious thought of starting a business, having the business intention
to start a business someday. Knowledge of how to develop an entrepreneurial project had
a correlation only with being determined to create a business in the future. Lastly,
knowledge of the necessary practical details to start a business had no correlation with
any of the perceived behavior control and if they tried a business, they had a high
probability of succeeding had correlation with all of the perceived behavior control
outlines.
The PBC on the other hand according to the findings was high at 58.8%, a fact that can be
attributed to self-efficacy being high because the donor partner is still on site offering
guidance and monitoring the implementation. But the fear is that as soon as the project is
handed over, there are high chances of it collapsing as the beneficiaries believe that they
cannot manage it on their own. This can be supported by Ajzen (2002) study findings
that, a high level of PBC strengthens an individual intention to perform that behavior and
increase their efforts and perseverance, however in this case it is high because of the
donor partners having not handed over the project. Thus, the PBC has its own place in the
development of an individual intention towards a creation of a new enterprise. Equally,
the education levels of the beneficiaries in this project is believed to be low due to the
environment that they live in and as Wu and Wu (2008), points out that education has
two major functions; knowledge transfer and development of one’s ability. For that
reason, education should change an individual’s perception on the ability to perform the
intentional behavior which is considered to be volitional, but lack of it will obviously
impact the project negatively.
5.3.4. Entrepreneurial Environment andSocial Entrepreneurial Intention
The last research objective examined the extent to which the entrepreneurial environment
affects the social entrepreneurial intention. The ranking of the items under entrepreneurial
intention was based on the mean and this included; being determined to create a business
73
in the future, followed by having the business intention to start a business someday,
‘having a very serious thought of starting a business, making every effort to start and run
their own business, ‘their professional goal was becoming an entrepreneur, and least
ranked was being ready to do anything to become an entrepreneur. This was an indicator
that majority of respondents were currently not in business but were looking forward to
starting a business in future. In determining the extent to which entrepreneurial
environmental factors affected the social entrepreneurial intention, regression analysis
was run. Dependent variable was the collapsed social entrepreneurial intention while the
independent variable included: Personal attitude (PA), Perceived behavior control (PBC),
and subjective norm (SN). The regression model output were: model summary was
positive showing the regression model being fit similar to positive ANOVA (p=.001).
However the coefficient indicated only PBC having correlation. This meant that an
increase in PBC affected EI at 3.394. Y= 3.394 + .352 pbc + .111.
It has been proven over time that environmental factors such as loan and ease of access to
cheap capital, the possibility to access the international and local market, human and
intellectual capital can have great effect on success of entrepreneurs. If the future
entrepreneurs cannot foresee the availability of these factors, it is hard for them to make
decision to start business or not.
Another significant factor in nurturing the culture of entrepreneurship development that is
articulated by Mai (2013), is the educational curriculum. In Kenya the 8.4.4 curriculum
was initially meant to inculcate sense of self-reliance, but along the way it was changed
and it dropped some of the key subjects that were meant to drive this agenda. Besides,
lack of practical internship programs for the youth is another impediment to creating
more opportunities for youth to practice in realworking professional environment. As
internships are meant to inspire the beneficiaries to look for part-time jobs so as to
increase their knowledge, develop their ability to work with other people, teamwork skill
and communication skill. Social characteristics as defined in the dynamic
entrepreneurship model Learned (1992), highlights that individual psychological
characteristics, social characteristics and cognitive characteristics can influence
entrepreneurial intentions, opportunities search, evaluation and development. Also
according to Suzuki, Kim and Bae, (2002), on their part believed that entrepreneurial
motivation was a result by an individual variable factors and environmental factors,
74
management skills, management of resources, market conditions, business culture and
policy support which have an impact on entrepreneurial motivation.
Education level as cited by Herron and Robinson (1993), is considered critical as
individual factors in personality, skills, values, background, and training, could affect
entrepreneurial intentions.
5.4. Conclusions
5.4.1The Relationship between Personal Attitude and Social Entrepreneurial
Intention.
It would be worthwhile to conclude from the study findings that personal attitude has a
strong bearing in entrepreneurial intentions, and therefore most respondents are ready to
do anything to become entrepreneurs but the challenge is lack of adequate resources to
enable them start the business, thereby making most of them live with uncertainty.
5.4.2Identify the Relationship between Subjective Norm and Social Entrepreneurial
Intention.
The subjective norm family approval was critical, while based on social valuation,
colleagues and mates valued entrepreneurship more highly as compared to how much
friends and close family did, so their approval of the business would definitely spur the
initiation of a business among the respondents.
5.4.3 The Relationship between Perceived Behavioural Control and Social
Entrepreneurial Intention:
The creation of a new business based on the control process, is capable of generating
high chances of success of the business start- ups, but for this to be actualized, there is
great need for the budding entrepreneurs to have the relevant knowledge of practical
details in starting a business and skills of how to develop an entrepreneurial project.
75
5.4.4 The Extent to which Entrepreneurial Environment affects Social
Entrepreneurial Intentions:
The entrepreneurial environmental factors have a major effect on the social
entrepreneurial intention, which if addressed properly can help in the growth of social
entrepreneurship in a manner that will help alleviate poverty among the target
communities besides enhancing their ownership and sustainability.
5.5 Recommendations
5.5.1. Recommendation of the study
5.5.1.1:The Relationship between Personal Attitude and Social Entrepreneurial
Intention
The study recommendsthat:
Accessibility to capital should be based on the entrepreneur intention, passion to doing
what they envision and capacity to repay the loan. This should inform policy for
accessibility of capital and distribution of government funding. For a budding
entrepreneur to access funding, it is important that they should present a well-articulated
business plan, detailing all that the business will do, how it will be financed, the total cost
and all the strategies that will be used to ensure that the business becomes sustainable.
This would mainly help in loan repayment assessment to avoid such scenarios that have
been recently witnessed in Youth Fund and Women Fund.
Also, all budding entrepreneurs should be assessed based on their entrepreneurial
intention that like having a business plan and a clear knowledge of the market before
being involved in any business.
5.5.1.2: The Relationship between Subjective Norm and Social Entrepreneurial
Intention
It would be prudent to share ideas of starting up a business with colleagues, family and
friends because their approval is likely to give a boost to start-ups majorly in terms of
marketing and may be financial support in terms of initial capital.There is need to
enlighten the target communities on principles of entrepreneurship with a view of
inculcating the mindset change in relation to business operations.
76
5.5.1.3: The Relationship between Perceived Behavioural Control and Social
Entrepreneurial Intention.
Knowledge of the business environment and the business skills is critical for business
success; therefore it would be prudent for relevant authorities to introduce courses on
entrepreneurship that would target different classes of people depending on their
environment and capacity. Consequently, training materials aligned to the entrepreneurial
intention should be developed and provided by different trainers to the budding
entrepreneurs.Second, Universities like USIU-Africa in conjunction Colorado University
should bring back the social enterprise training course on start - ups mainly for trainers of
trainers to help the concept be cascaded to lower echelons of the society to reduce start-up
failure rate. There is need for continuous mentorship and coaching for the start-ups to
ensure sustainability and ownership through the establishment of Business innovation
centre such as the Chandaria Business Incubation Innovation and Incubation Centre at
Kenyatta University at the local level in the Country. In addition, there is need to educate
entrepreneurs on technological business operations.
5.5.1.4: The Extent to which Entrepreneurial Environment affects Social
Entrepreneurial Intentions:
The entrepreneurial environmental factors have a major effect on the social
entrepreneurial intention, the determination and intention of starting a business is very
high in informal settlements, however due to environmental factors such as high poverty
levels, high crime rates, low incomes levels, lack of access to cheap capital, low access to
both the international and local market, lack of both human and intellectual capital kill
these big dreams and intentions. It would be therefore prudent that through social
entrepreneurship, the budding entrepreneurs be trained on the relevant business skills,
linked to financial institutions which understand their backgrounds and can provide cheap
loans, need mentors to walk them through the journey so as to help them identify markets
for their products and also help them enhance their human and intellectual capital so as to
build their self - esteem.
77
5.5.1.5: Academic Knowledge
The findings of this study could be used by other scholars who will be interested
undertaking studies on financing of business start – ups targeting social enterprises so as
to enhance their academic knowledge on the same subject matter.
5.5.1.6: Recommendation for further Research
Further research should be carried out by interested scholars to ascertain how the social
entrepreneurial intentions impacts on the lives of the beneficiaries more so in the informal
settlements so as to gauge its sustainability.
78
REFERENCES
AjzenI (1991). The theory of planned behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, vol. 50,179-211.
Alistair N. (2003).Entrepreneurship and Local Economic Development: Policy
Innovations in industrialized Countries, Paris;OECD
Amaeshi K, Nnodin P, Osuji O. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility
Entrepreneurship & Innovation, Routledge.
Bird, D. (1988) “Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: The case for intention,” Academy of
Management Review, 13, (3), 442-453.
Bles C. Smith H.C & Kagee A (2006). Fundamentals of Social Research methods in
African Perspective, Juta & Cp. Ltd,Cape Town South Africa
Braunerhjelm P. & Ulrika H (2012).Social entrepreneurship– a survey of current
Research
Brooks A C. (2008). Social entrepreneurship [Internet] A modern approach to social
creation.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R)
and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources. Retrieved from http://www.sjdm.org/dmidi/NEO-
FFI.html.
Coughlan.S. (2014, July 30).Report on social entrepreneurship in Ireland (Blog post).
Retrieved from http://socialentrepreneurs.ie/2014/07/30/university-toronto- report
social entrepreneurship-ireland/.
Crisan C (Mitra), Borza A. (2012).Social Entrepreneurship and Corporate Social
Responsibilities. International Business Research.5(2), 106–13.
79
Daniele Roberto &Sheldon J. Puline (2001). Social Entrepreneurship and Toursim.
Honolulu, Hawaii: Oxford Brooks University.
Darko E. & Smith W.(2014). Social Enterprise Report: Constraints and Opportunities –
evidence from Vietnam and Kenya. Retrieved from www.odi.org on 23rd January,
2017.
Dees, J.G (1998). ‘Enterprising Nonprofits: What Do you Do When Traditional Sources
Of Funding Fall short?.’Havard Business Review,76, (1),54-67
Degeorge, J., and A. Fayolle. 2008. ‘Is Entrepreneurial Intention Stable Through Time?
First Insights From a Sample of French Students.’ International Journal of
Entrepreneurship and Small Business 5(1): 7–27.
Dejun,G., (2005). Psychology of Motivation: Theory and Practice. People's Education
press,China.
Ferrance E. (2000). Action Research: Northeast and Islands Regional Education
Laboratory at Brown University
Fitzsimmons, J. R & Douglas, E, J (2011) “Interaction between feasibility and desirability
In the formation of entrepreneurial intention, ‘Journal of Business Venturing,26
(4), 431-440
Fogel, G. (2001), An Analysis of Entrepreneurial Environment and Enterprise
Development in Hungary. Journal of Small Business Management, 39: 103–109.
doi:10.1111/0447-2778.00010
Foley.D, (2008), "Does culture and social capital impact on the networking attributes of
indigenous entrepreneurs?” Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and
Places in the Global Economy,2(3),204-224
Gawell, M (2013). Social Entrepreneurship; Innovation challengers or adjustable
Followers? Social Enterprise Journal,9(2),203-220.
Gethaiga K. (2011). An Examination of factors that influence Entrepreneurial Intention
of High School Students in Kenya (Thesis). Proquest LLC. USA
80
GPF (2011) Global Peace Foundation Report.
Gnyawali, D.R &Foge S.N (1994). Environments for Entrepreneurship Development:
Key Dimensions and Research Implications. Baylor University.
Griffiths, M.D., Gundry, L.K, & J.R., (2013). The socio-political, economic and
culturaldeterminants of social entrepreneurship activity.An empirical
examination.Journalof Small Business and Enterprise Development, 20(2), 341-
357.
Haugh, H. (2011). A Research Agenda for Social Entrepreneurship.
Herron, L. & B. Jnr.,(1993). A structural model of effects of entrepreneurial
characteristics venture performance .Journal Business Venturing, 8,281-294
Hisrich, R & Peters, M (2005). Entrepreneurship, 6th ed., Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Hockerts K. (2007). Social Entrepreneurship. The A-Z of Corporate Social
Responsibility
Ivy J. (2008). International Journal of Educational Management Article information.
Jones AL, Warner B, Kiser PM. (2010). Social Entrepreneurship. Plan High Education.
Kimutai.C., (2014, June.) Inside the Chandaria Family.Management, 18-23
Kombo K.D & Tromp L.A.D (2006). Proposal and thesis writing, Pauline’s Publication
Africa, Nairobi.
Krueger, N.F, Reilly, M.D & Carsrud, A.L (2000).“Competing models of entrepreneurial
intentions,” Journal of Business Venturing,15, (5-6), 411-432.
Kuratko, D.F. & Hodgetts, R.M. (1998). Entrepreneurship: A Contemporary Approach.
4th Edition., The Dryden Press, Fort Worth, TX., USA.
Lee Ungk. (2010).University Students assessment of entrepreneurial environment
(Thesis).Retrievedfromhttp://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=
1013&context=businessdiss
81
Lee, R., & Tuselmann, H. (2013). Entrepreneurship, occupational division and social
Capital differentials.Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Developnement
20(3),661-680
Leitch, C., & Harrison, R. (1999). A process model for entrepreneurship education and
development. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour Research, 5(3),
83–109.
Long W. & W.E. McMullan, (1984). Mapping the New Venture Opportunity
Identification Process. In: Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, Hornaday, J.
(Ed.). Babson College, Wellesley, MA.USA, 567-591.
Low and MacMillan. (1988). Ten years on – Achievements and future directions for
entrepreneurship research. Journal of Management 14(2).P139-161.
Miranda, C. (2015).Business Sustainability: The Triple Bottom Line
Mazzarol, T. Volery, T, Doss, N &Thein, V (1999). “Factors influencing small business
start- ups, a comparison with previous research,” International Journal of
Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 5, (2), 48-63.
Moon J. (2004).Government as a driver of corporate social responsibility.20-2004
ICCSR Research paper series-ISSN 1479-5124
Nancy M. Carter, William B. Gartner, Kelly G. Shaver and Elizabeth J. Gatewood.
(2003). The career reasons of nascent entrepreneurs.Journal of Business
Venturing, 2003, vol. 18, issue 1, pages 13-39
NESST. (2014). Social Entrepreneurship, Thought Leadership.
Nicholls, A. (2006). Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship.Said Business School:
Oxford University Press.
Nidumuli R, Prahalad C.K, & Rangaswami M.R(2009). Why Sustainabilty is now the
Key Driver of Innovation(HBR)
Nito, A. B. E. (2005). Article information : Journal of Small Business and Enterprise
Development, 12(4), 564–578.
82
Orodho AJ, Kombo DK. (2002). Research Methods. Nairobi: Kenyatta University,
Institute of Open Learning.
O’Neil, D. & Kerry, G (2014,January,28).Why Philanthropists and Business should be
there. Retrieved from https://collectiveimpactaustralia.com/2014/01/28/collective-
impact-2014-why-philanthropists-and-business-should-be-there/
Porter, E. G. &Nagarajan, K. V. (2005). Successful women entrepreneurs as pioneers:
Results from a study conducted in Karaikudi, Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of Small
Business and Entrepreneurship.
Prahalad C.K (2010): The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid; Pearson Education Inc.
New Jersey.
Rangan K.V, Chase L & Sohel K. (2015). The Truth about Corporate Social
Responsibility. Harvard Business Review (HBR).
Rahman, M., & Fatima, N. (2011). Entrepreneurship and urban growth: dimensions and
empirical models. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 18(3),
608–626.
Ratten V. (2011).Social entrepreneurship and innovation in sports. Int Journal Social
Entrepreneurship Innovation,1,(1), 42.
Raimi, L., Akhuemonkhan, I., & Ogunjirin, O. D. (2015). Corporate Social Responsibility
and Entrepreneurship (CSRE): antidotes to poverty, insecurity and
underdevelopment in Nigeria. Social Responsibility Journal, 11(1), 56–81.
Rosdi M., Mastura J. & Dahalan N. (2015).Attitude and entrepreneurial intention among
rural community: the mediating role of entrepreneurial opportunity recognition.
EDP Sciences,
Sachs, J. D. (2005).Can extreme poverty be eliminated?Scientific American,293(3),56-65.
Santos, L., & Escanciano, C. (2002). Benefits of the ISO 9000:1994 system. International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 19(3), 321–344.
Schaltegger S. (2011). Sustainability as a driver for corporate economic success.
Sebea M. (2013). Innovative Ways of Financing Social Entrepreneurship.
83
Segal G, Borgia D, Schoenfeld J.&Heilbrunn S. (2008).People and Places in the Global
Economy Factors influencing entrepreneurialintensity in communities,Journal of
Enterprising Communities2, (1),37–51.
Shane, S. Locke, E.A & Collins, C.J (2003). Entrepreneurial motivation. Human
Resource Management. Rev., (13), 257-279.
Shane, S. &Venkataraman, (2000). “The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of
research,” Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217-226.
Shaw E, Carter S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship.Theoretical antecedents and empirical
analysis of entrepreneurial process and outcomes. Journal Small Business
Enterprise Development Vol.14.
Shook, C.L., R.L. Priem & J.E. McGee, (2003). Venture creation and the enterprising
individual: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management (29), 379-399.
Short, S.W., Taticchi, P. & Tonelli, F., (2013). Sustainability as a driver of innovation in
industrial business models:Learning from three Italian cases, European
Operations Management Association EurOMA, 7-12 June 2013, Dublin,
Ireland.1-10.
Simmie J. (2002).Trading places: Competitive cities in the global economy,10, (2),
20114.
Simone J.F.M. Maase, Bart A.G. Bossink, (2010) "Factors that inhibit partnering for
social start‐up enterprises", Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and
Places in the Global Economy, 4 (1), 68 – 84.
Smith, A Y (2015), "Attitude, Subjective Norm, and Perceived Behavioral Control as
Indicators for Nurse Educators’ Intention to Use Critical Thinking Teaching
Strategies: a Structural Equation Model Analysis".
Soontiëns, W. (2002). Managing international trade: an analysis of South African SMEs
and regional exports. Management Decision, 40(7), 710–719.
84
Spitzeck, H., Boechat, C., & Leão, S. F. (2013). Sustainability as a driver for innovation
towards a model of corporate social entrepreneurship at Odebrecht in Brazil.
Corporate Governance, 13(5), 613
Strickland (2014).Survey of trends in Private sector Partnerships for International
Development and modalities for engagement.
Suzuki, K.I., S.H. Kim & Z.T. Bae, (2002). Entrepreneurship in Japan and Silicon
Valley: A comparative study. Technovation, (22),595-606
Wahome M. (2011): High cost of ‘Kadogo’ economy drives many deeper into poverty:
Wang, C., & P, Wong.(2004). Entrepreneurial interest of university students in Singapore.
Technovation, (24), 161–172.
Wei J. & Nora S. (2013): Four Network principles for collaboration success.
Weiner, B., (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion.
Psychol. Rev., (92), 548-573.
William Davistone Institute (2008) Acumen Fund: How to make the greatest impact;
case(1), 428-459.
Yin K. Robert (2009).Case Study Research design method, Sage Publication, Inc. USA
Yunus, M., Moingeon, B.& Lehman-Ortega L. Building Social Business Models: Lessons
From the Grameen Experience (working paper No. 913).Retrieved from
http://www.hec.fr/var/corporate/storage/original/application/4c2fc23d0007ff2424
8fc6f8003d468d.pdf
Zeyen, A., Beckmann, M., Mueller, S., Dees, J. G., Khanin, D., Krueger, N.& Zacharakis,
A. (2012). Social Entrepreneurship and Broader Theories: Shedding New Light on
the “Bigger Picture.” Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1–20.
85
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 : Questionnaire
Entrepreneurial Intentions Questionnaire (EIQ)
The researcher is carrying out a study on enterprise creation by students and alumni. To
do so, the following questionnaire consists of a number of items regarding some aspects.
In the questionnaire value-scales below, some statements are positive while others are
negative. For each statement, you are asked to indicate your agreement with it, (1)
representing total disagreement, and (7) representing total agreement. Please respond to
the items sincerely by marking what you consider to be the appropriate answer, or filling
in the blanks where necessary. Choose only one answer to each question. Thank you
very much for your cooperation.
A) PERSONAL DATA
1. Age: __________
2. Gender:
3. Place of birth (province): __________
Place of residence: ___________
4. Religion:
Christian Muslim Hindu Other Specify ____________
5. Denomination:
Protestant Catholic Orthodox Other Specify ______________
6. Marital status: Married;
Male Female
yes No
86
B. EDUCATION BACKGROUND AND EMPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE
7. What level are you studying?
Degree Diploma Secondary Primary
8. What is your area of specialization/concentration?
Marketing Accounting Entrepreneurship Economics Others
9. Are you a student? Yes NO
Full-time part-time distance/open-learning weekend intensive
10. When do you expect to complete your studies?
This year (2016) Next year (2017) Later (2018 or more)
F) PERSONAL ATTITUDE
11. Indicate your level of agreement with the following sentences
1= Total Disagreement, 2= Strong Disagreement, 3= Slight
Disagreement, 4= Neutral, 5= Slight Agreement, 6= Strong
Agreement, 7= Total Agreement),
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
- Being an entrepreneur provides more advantages than
disadvantages to me
- A career as an entrepreneur is attractive for me
- If I had the opportunity and resources, I’d like to start a
firm
- Being an entrepreneur would bring great satisfactions for
me
- Among various options, I’d rather be an entrepreneur
87
G) SUBJECTIVE NORM
12. If you decided to create a firm, people in your close environment would approve of
that decision. Please mark the “box” that best reflects your response.
1= Total Disagreement, 2= Strong Disagreement, 3=
Slight Disagreement, 4= Neutral, 5= Slight
Agreement, 6= Strong Agreement, 7= Total
Agreement),
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
- Your close family
- Your friends
- Your colleagues and mates
H) PERCEIVED BEHAVIORAL CONTROL
13. To what extent do you agree with the following statements regarding your
entrepreneurial capacity? Value them by marking the “box” that best reflects your
response;
1= Total Disagreement, 2= Strong Disagreement, 3=
Slight Disagreement, 4= Neutral, 5= Slight
Agreement, 6= Strong Agreement, 7= Total
Agreement),
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
- Start a firm and keep it working would be easy for
me
- I’m prepared to start a viable firm
- I can control the process of creating a new firm
- I know the necessary practical details to start a firm
- I know how to develop an entrepreneurial project
- If I tried to start a firm, I would have a high
probability of succeeding
88
I) ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTION
14. Have you ever seriously considered becoming an entrepreneur?
Yes No
15. Indicate your level of agreement with the following statements by marking the “box”
that best reflects your response;
1= Total Disagreement, 2= Strong Disagreement, 3=
Slight Disagreement, 4= Neutral, 5= Slight
Agreement, 6= Strong Agreement, 7= Total
Agreement),
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
- I’m ready to do anything to be an entrepreneur
- My professional goal is becoming an entrepreneur
- I will make every effort to start and run my own
firm
- I’m determined to create a firm in the future
- I have very seriously thought of starting a firm
- I’ve got the firm intention to start a firm some day
