Effects Of The Theory Of Planned Behavior On Entrepreneurial Intention Of Students

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare the effects of the theory of planned behavior (TPB) on the entrepreneurial intention of Turkish and Danish undergraduate students. This study was conducted on 110 Turkish and 110 Danish undergraduate students. Frequency distribution analyses, factor analyses, reliability analyses, correlation analyses, multiple regression analyses and paired sample t-tests were conducted to the data. According to the results of multiple regression analyses, the planned entrepreneurial behavior positively affects entrepreneurial intention of undergraduate students in Turkey and Denmark. Personel Attitude has the highest increasing effect on entrepreneurial intention in Turkey and Denmark. Subjective norm and perceived behavioral control are higher but personal attitude is lower in Turkey than Denmark. According to the results of paired samples t tests, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control of Turkish students are higher than Danish students. On the other hand, entrepreneurial intention and personal attitude of Danish students are higher than Turkish students.

Keywords: Theory of planned behaviorEntrepreneurial intentionTurkish undergraduate studentsDanish undergraduate students

Introduction

Being an entrepreneur is a popular career choice for undergraduate students in developed and developing countries. There are cross-cultural studies in the literature that compare the effects of the theory of planned behavior (TPB) on entrepreneurial intention of undergraduate students based on cultural classification of Hofstede. Hofstede (1980) classified cultures of the countries based on the levels of uncertainity avoidance, power distance, individualism and masculinity. The TPB has the following three dimensions: personal attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control. Personal attitude and perceived behavioral control can affect entrepreneurial intention of students in individualistic countries whereas subjective norm can affect entrepreneurial intention of them in collectivistic countries. The purpose of this study is to compare the effects of TPB on the entrepreneurial intention of Turkish and Danish undergraduate students. First literature review related to entrepreneurial intention, culture and TPB will be summarized. Then, methodology and research findings will be presented. Finally, conclusion will be explained.

Literature Review

According to Crant (1996), entrepreneurial intention is judgement of a person about the likelihood of starting his own business. Entrepreneurial intention is a conscious state of mind that leads attention, experience and action toward a goal or its means. It is the main predictor of entrepreneurial behavior (Krueger Jr, Reilly, & Carsrud, 2000; Schwarz et al., 2006; Finisterra do Paço Ferreira, Raposo, Rodrigues, & Dinis, 2011).

Researches about the effects of national culture on entrepreneurship are based Hofstede’s (1980, 2011) framework. Literature shows that entrepreneurship is facilitated by cultures that has low uncertainty avoidance and power distance but high individualism and masculinity (Shane, 1993; Hayton, George, & Zahra, 2002). Most of the cross-cultural studies of entrepreneurial intentions reveal significant differences between countries (Nguyen et al., 2009; Pruett et al., 2009; Giacomin et al., 2011; Shneor, Camgöz, & Karapinar, 2013).

There is a difference between individualistic and collectivistic societies related to the roles of people and groups (Hofstede et al., 2010). People in collectivistic cultures like group membership, cohesion and group compliant behavior. Entrepreneurial role models are important for entrepreneurial intention (Hofstede, 1980; Malach-Pines & Kaspi-Baruch, 2008). On the other hand, people in individualistic cultures like freedom, autonomy and independence from groups and organizations (Hofstede et al., 2010). They rely on their entrepreneurial experiences for entrepreneurial intention (Mueller, Zapkau, & Schwens, 2014).

Hofstede and McCrae (2004) propose two perspectives for studies combining entrepreneurship and culture; aggregate psychological traits perspective and dissatisfaction perspective. They claim that cultures with low power distance and uncertainty avoidance and high masculinity and individualism lead more people have entrepreneurial values and become entrepreneurs based on aggregate psychological traits perspective (Davidsson & Wiklund, 1997). Dissatisfaction perspective proposes that cultures with high power distance and uncertainty avoidance and low masculinity and individualism lead entrepreneurial people choose entrepreneurship as their careers due to facing difficulties to do things in their ways in the companies they are employed (Shneor et al., 2013).

Busenitz and Lau (1996) believe that cultures that have high power distance and low uncertainity avoidance facilitate entrepreneurship and lead to a higher self-employment rate. Busenitz and Lau (1996) state that high power distance encourages entrepreneurial activity. Mitchell, Smith, Seawright and Morse (2000) reveal that power distance affect ability, arrangement, and willingness cognitions that influence start up decisions. Hofstede (1980) points out that collectivist cultures usually do not have high rates of entrepreneurship. Cultures that have high uncertainity avoidence socially discourage entrepreneurial career. Shane (1993) showed a negative relationship between uncertainity avoidence and innovation. Kreiser, Marino, Dickson, and Weaver (2010) highlighted that there was a negative relationship between uncertainity avoidence and risk taking. Essential qualities for business including entrepreneurship can be considered as masculine (Heilman, 2001; Gupta et al., 2009). Busenitz and Lau (1996) claim that cultures that have high masculinity and power distance facilitate entrepreneurial activity (Shinnar, Giacomin, & Janssen, 2012).

The results of Turkey and Denmark based on Hofstede’s dimensions are as follows respectively: Power distance is 66 and 18; individualism is 37 and 74; masculinity is 45 and 16 and uncertainity avoidance is 85 and 23 (https://geert-hofstede.com/turkey.html). Turkey has higher power distance, masculinity and uncertainity avoidance levels but lower individualism level than Denmark.

Ajzen claims that a person’s behavior can be predicted based on their attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and intentions in TPB. The TPB reveals that attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control affect intention directly (Pickett et al., 2012).

Beliefs about the consequences of the behavior (behavioral beliefs), beliefs about the normative expectations of other people (normative beliefs), and beliefs about the presence of factors that may increase behavior performance (control beliefs) guide a person’s action in TPB. Behavioral beliefs cause a favorable or unfavorable attitude toward the behavior, normative beliefs cause perceived social pressure (Subjective Norm), and control beliefs improve perceived behavioral control (the perceived difficulty or ease performing the behavior). An attitude toward the behavior, subjective norm, and perception of behavioral control form the behavioral intention. When the attitude and subjective norm are more favorable, the perceived behavioral control is greater and the intention of a person to perform the behavior becomes stronger. At a sufficient degree of actual control over the behavior, when the opportunity occurs, people carry out their intentions (Hrubes, Ajzen, & Daigle, 2001, pp. 166-167).

Liñán and Chen (2009) developed Entrepreneurial Intention Questionnaire (EIQ) to search TPB on entrepreneurial intention of undergraduate students in Spain and Taiwan. They (2009) found that EIQ properties were satisfactory and there was a strong support for the model.

Shneor et al. (2013) conducted a study to figure out the differences between effect of TPB on entrepreneurial intention of undergraduate business students in Norway and Turkey. Shneor et al. (2013) believed that Turkish people were expected to have higher levels of entrepreneurial intentions, perceived behavioral control and subjective norms but lower levels of personal attitude than Norwegian people. They (2013) found that Turkish students had higher levels of entrepreneurial intention and perceived behavioral control. They (2013) couldn’t find significant difference between Turkish and Norwegian students in levels of subjective norms. They (2013) believed that they supported Hofstede et al.’s (2004) suggestion that a culture that had low individualism, low power distance, high uncertainty avoidance and high masculinity encouraged entrepreneurship. Norway and Denmark have same characteristics based on Hofstede’s dimensions.

Bagheri and Pihie (2015) conducted a research to find out factors that affected entrepreneurial intentions of Malaysian undergraduate students by using TPB. They (2015) found that personal attraction and perceived control affected entrepreneurial intention. They (2015) added that subjective norms and valuation of entrepreneurship in the social and close environment affected personal entrepreneurship attraction. They (2015) revealed that subjective norms affected entrepreneurial intention through its influence on perceived control over the entrepreneurial tasks’ performance and personal entrepreneurship attraction.

Methodology

The purpose of this study is to compare the effects of TPB on the entrepreneurial intention of Turkish and Danish undergraduate students. The author was inspired by the study conducted by Liñán and Chen (2009).

Research Model of the Study

The research model is as follows (see figure 1 ):

See Full Size >

Conclusion

According to the results of multiple regression analyses, personal attitute, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control positively affect entrepreneurial intention in Turkey and Denmark. Thus, the planned entrepreneurial behavior positively affects entrepreneurial intention of undergraduate students in Turkey and Denmark. Personel Attitude has the highest increasing effect on entrepreneurial intention in Turkey and Denmark. Subjective norm and perceived behavioral control are higher but personal attitude is lower in Turkey than in Denmark. According to the results of paired samples t tests, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control of Turkish students are higher than Danish students. On the other hand, entrepreneurial intention and personal attitude of Danish students are higher than Turkish students. Undergraduate students plan to be entrepreneurs and have entrepreneurial intentions in Turkey and Denmark. The findings of this research support TPB of Ajzen on entrepreneurial intention. Also, they support the findings of Liñán and Chen (2009). This research will make contributions to researches that will be conducted in this field in the future.

Acknowledgments

This paper is funded by Istanbul Commerce University.

References

1. Bagheri, A., & Pihie, Z. A. L. (2015). Factors influencing students’ entrepreneurial intentions: The critical roles of personal attraction and perceived control over behaviour. The International Journal of Management Science and Information Technology, 16, 16-28.
2. Busenitz, L. W., & Lau, C.-M. (1996). A Cross-Cultural Cognitive Model of New Venture Creation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 20(4), 25–40
3. Crant, J. (1996). The Proactive Personality Scale as a Predictor of Entrepreneurial Intention. Journal of Small Business Management, 34(3).
4. Davidsson, P., & Wiklund, J. (1997). Values, beliefs and regional variations in new firm formation rates. Journal of Economic Psychology, 18, 179-199. 
5. Finisterra do Paço, A. M., Ferreira, J. M., Raposo, M., Rodrigues, R. G., & Dinis, A. (2011). Behaviours and entrepreneurial intention: Empirical findings about secondary students. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 9, 20-38.
6. Giacomin, O., Janssen, F., Guyot, J. L, & Lohest, O. (2011). Opportunity and/or necessity entrepreneurship? The impact of the socio-economic characteristics of entrepreneurs.
7. Hayton, J. C., George, G., & Zahra, S. A. (2002) National Culture and Entrepreneurship: A Review of Behavioral Research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26, 33-52.
8. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills CA: Sage.
9. Hofstede, G., & McCrae, R.R. (2004). Culture and personality revisited: Linking traits and dimensions of culture. Cross-cultural Research, 38(1), 52-88.
10. Hofstede, G., & Minkov, M. (2010) Long-versus short-term orientation: new perspectives. Asia Pacific Business Review, 16(4), 493-504
11. Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1).
12. Hrubes, D., Ajzen, I., & Daigle, J. (2001), Predicting hunting intentions and behavior: An application of the theory of planned behaviour. Leisure Sciences, 23, 165-178.
13. Krueger Jr, N. F., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing Models of Entrepreneurial Intention. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5-6), 411-432.
14. Liñán, F., & Chen, Y-W. (2009). Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593–617.
15. Malach-Pines, A., & Kaspi Baruch, O. (2008). The role of culture and gender in the choice of a career in management. Career Development International, 13(4), 306-319. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430810880808
16. Mitchell, R., Smith, J., Seawright, K. W., & Morse, E. (2000). Cross-Cultural Cognitions and the Venture Creation Decision. The Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 974-993.
17. Mueller, J., Zapkau, F. B., & Schwens, C. (2014). Impact of prior entrepreneurial exposure on entrepreneurial intention-cross-cultural evidence. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 22(3), 251-282.
18. Nguyen, T. H., Alam, Q., Perry, M., & Prajogo, D. (2009). The Entrepreneurial Role of the State and SME Growth in Vietnam. JOAAG, 4(1), 60-71.
19. Pickett, L. L., Ginsburg, H. J., Mendez, R. V., Lim, D. E., Blankenship, K. R., Foster, L. E., Lewis, D. H.,
20. Ramon, S. W., Saltis, B. M., & Sheffield, S. B. (2012). Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior as it relates to eating disorders and body satisfaction. North American Journal of Psychology, 14(2), 339-354.
21. Pruett, M., Shinnar, R., Toney, B., Llopis, F., & Fox, J. (2009). Explaining entrepreneurial intentions of university students: a cross-cultural study. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 15(6), 571-594.
22. Schwarz, E. J., Wdowiak, M. A., Almer-Jarz, D. A., & Breitenecker, R. J. (2009). The Effects of Attitudes and Perceived Environment Conditions on Students' Entrepreneurial Intent. Education + Training, 51, 272-291.
23. Shane, S. (1993). Cultural influences on national rates of innovation. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 59-73.
24. Shinnar, R. S., Giacomin, O., & Janssen, F. (2012). Entrepreneurial perceptions and intentions: The role of gender and culture. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(3), 465-493.
25. Shneor, R., Camgöz, S. M., & Karapinar, P. B. (2013). The interaction between culture and sex in the formation of entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 25(9-10), 781-803. http://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2013.862973