The effect of entrepreneurial experience and entrepreneurial orientation on social entrepreneurial performance

Article history: Received: August 14, 2020 Received in revised format: November 14 2020 Accepted: November 14, 2020 Available online: November 23, 2020 The objective of this study is to analyze the effect of entrepreneurial experience and social entrepreneurship orientation on social entrepreneurship performance. This survey research was conducted on waste bank entrepreneurship activists in the city of Semarang. Thirty-five respondents were taken using the accident sampling method. Partial Least Square Structural Equation Model (PLS-SEM) is used as an analysis technique. The results showed that entrepreneurial experience and social entrepreneurship orientation had a positive and significant effect on the performance of social entrepreneurship. The contribution of the concept of human capital and the concept of entrepreneurial orientation is needed in building social entrepreneurship. The Semarang government is requested to give more attention to developing waste banks due to their contribution to social, economic, and environmental. © 2021 by the authors; licensee Growing Science, Canada


Introduction
Social entrepreneurship is a form of entrepreneurship to create social value to solve social problems with innovative solutions (Tran & Korflesch, 2017). Social entrepreneurship can be an alternative to solve social problems that have not been fully resolved by existing mechanisms (Ishak, Raflis, & Omar, 2017;Tran & Korflesch, 2017). The government and the people of Indonesia are currently starting to develop social entrepreneurship because this concept is in accordance with the conditions of the Indonesian people in facing various social, economic, education, health, welfare, and environmental problems. (Rostiani et al., 2014;Saragih, 2017;Meitriana, Suwendra, Indrayani, & Suwena, 2019;Rakhmani & Bhinekawati, 2020). With the collaboration of the government, business, and non-profit sectors, companies that create social values can be formed to combat social and economic problems in developing countries. (Ayob et al., 2013). According to Central Bureau of Statistics, Semarang's population is about 1.8 million (BPS, 2020). Which effect to high of the production of both household and industrial waste. The high and growing volume of waste causes social, economic, and environmental problems that cannot only be resolved by the government but also require community involvement. A waste bank is a form of social entrepreneurship implementation that is proven to provide solutions to environmental problems (Widiyanto & Rahab, 2017). A waste bank is a waste control media based on the disposal, management, and utilization of waste that can teach people their behavior to reduce and process their waste with the 3R system, namely Reduce, Reuse and Recycle in everyday life (Diandra, 2019). The more development of the Waste Bank will further empower the community to save the surrounding environment and at the same time become a forum for practicing the principles of business development. In practice, managing a waste bank as part of social entrepreneurship is not an easy job. Abu-Saifan (2012) calling these social entrepreneurs as an unreasonable people or considered "deviant" because they are willing and able to work hard not only for themselves but for the wider environment. It takes hard effort, time, energy, and even money to make social entrepreneurial activities run and successful (Zahra et al., 2019). Previous experience in managing a business as human capital and entrepreneurial orientation as a strategy to identify new opportunities for an entrepreneur are indispensable factors for entrepreneurial success (Rauch & Frese, 2000;Ruiz-Ortega, Parra-Requena, Rodrigo-Alarcón, & García-Villaverde, 2013).
The entrepreneurship experience is the most widely used construct for representing human capital in entrepreneurial research, as it is a way of translating entrepreneurial knowledge into skills, and with that experience, people are aware of the positive and negative consequences of their actions (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994). Entrepreneurial orientation is an effort to be the best, both in product and market orientation, dare to take any risks, and pursue any chance to the beat competitor (Meutia, 2013). Entrepreneurial orientation is the most widely used concept for assessing entrepreneurial success, however, very little has been applied to social entrepreneurship research (Kraus et al., 2017). However, previous researches found different findings (research gap) between the effect of entrepreneurial experience and entrepreneurial orientation on the success of business performance. Sreih, Assaker, & Hallak (2016), Sajilan, Hadi, & Tehseen (2015), Chandler & Hanks (1994) found a significant effect of entrepreneurial experience on business performance. However, Chandler & Jansen (1992) and Lorrain & Dussault (1990) did not find a significant effect of entrepreneurial experience on business performance. Social entrepreneurship research by Meutia (2013) stated that entrepreneurial orientation affects the performance of small and medium enterprises in West Java. SMEs that innovate, accept risks, dare to take opportunities will bring strong competitiveness of SMEs that have a business impact. Previous research by Shin (2018), Shin & Park (2019), Rakhmani & Bhinekawati (2020) also showed that social entrepreneurship orientation has a significant positive effect on social entrepreneurship performance, while research by Hong, J. H., & Cho (2012), Chen, H. L., & Hsu (2013) Khan & Bashir (2020) showed that social entrepreneurship orientation has no significant effect on social entrepreneurship performance. Social entrepreneurship is a relatively new academic subject, although the interest it generates is increasing in literature, a variety of definitions and approaches (Rao, 2020). There are still many arguments about the limits of social entrepreneurship (Rostiani et al., 2014;Rakhmani & Bhinekawati, 2020). Practitioners and researchers are still faced with significant gaps in knowledge about social entrepreneurship, especially in developing countries (Hu & Pang, 2013). Underlying the gap phenomenon and research gap in previous studies, this study aims to analyze the effect of entrepreneurial experience and entrepreneurial orientation on the performance of social entrepreneurs in the waste banks in Semarang City. Research on social entrepreneurship and waste banks is very important because the community has very much beneficial effects on the existence of a waste bank, not only related to economic and social aspects but also a clean and green environment to improve health status (Widiyanto & Rahab, 2017;Wulandari & Alam, 2018;Diandra, 2019).

The Effect of Entrepreneurial Experience on Social Entrepreneurship Performance
Entrepreneurial experience, namely the number of previous new business engagements and the level of management role played in the business, are the factors most significantly related to performance (Stuart & Abetti, 1990). Social networks and entrepreneurial experiences, as well as social network structures, have an effective significance for entrepreneurial success (Park & Sung, 2016). Experience is an aspect that can influence the development of business ideas and the success of starting a business (Deakins et al., 2000). Study results by Park and Sung (2016) demonstrated that the moderating effect of entrepreneurial experience on the relationship between network bonding and entrepreneurial performance is significant. Results of another study by Sumantri, Fariyanti, & Winandi (2013) demonstrate business experience related to sales volume; and education, training, age, and business experience associated with expanding the marketing area. Likewise, research by Sreih, Assaker, & Hallak (2016) found a significant effect of entrepreneurial experience on business performance. Based on this, the first hypothesis is proposed as follows: H1: Entrepreneurial experience has a positive effect on social entrepreneurship performance.

The Influence of Entrepreneurial Orientation on Social Entrepreneurship Performance
Social entrepreneurship orientation is the application of entrepreneurial orientation to non-profit organizations or social entrepreneurs. The concept of entrepreneurial orientation itself comes from three main characteristics, namely: innovative, proactive, and courageous to take risks, which then develop into five characters with the addition of independence and competitive aggressiveness (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). Hu & Pang (2013) in their research concluded that social entrepreneurship orientation is the implementation of social entrepreneurship orientation in non-profit enterprises with the addition of aspects of reciprocity in addition to the three main characteristics of entrepreneurial orientation. Hu & Pang (2013) prove that social entrepreneurial orientation has a positive and significant effect on the performance of non-profit organizations in China. Tindiwensi, Munene, Sserwanga, Abaho, & Namatovu-Dawa (2020) also proved that entrepreneurial orientation has a positive and significant effect on the growth of social entrepreneurship in Uganda. Another study, innovation as an aspect of entrepreneurial orientation, social focus on behavioral characteristics, has tested its effect on performance (Shin, 2018). The results of his research concluded that innovation has a positive and significant effect on the performance of social entrepreneurs. Therefore, the second hypothesis is proposed as follows: H2: Social Entrepreneur Orientation has a positive effect on the performance of social entrepreneurship.

Research Type
This research includes a quantitative survey with an explanatory study approach. The variables of this study consist of two types, namely the independent variable covering entrepreneurial experience and entrepreneurial orientation; and the dependent variable consist of social entrepreneurial performance.

Sample size
The population of this research is the management of the waste banks in Semarang City. The sample used in this study were 35 respondents by accident sampling with the consideration that there were not many business actors of this type.

Research instrument
The entrepreneurial experience instrument in this study was developed based on studies from Hockerts (2017) namely having experience dealing with social problems, volunteering for social organizations, and knowing many things about social organizations. Its operation is based on studies from Zhao, Hills, & Seibert (2005) measured by three items about experiences related to entrepreneurship, namely the experience of developing new businesses, developing new marketing, and developing new products. This study develops the main characteristics of entrepreneurial orientation with four indicators: (1) innovation, namely the tendency to support and implement creativity, new ideas, and the experimental process; (2) proactive, namely the tendency of companies to take the initiative to compete aggressively with other companies; (3) taking risks which constitute a company's tendency to conduct business for new business and uncertainty; and (4) cooperation (Hu & Pang, 2013). The dependent variable in this study is social entrepreneurial performance, with the definition according to the study from Shin (2018) namely, the extent to which social enterprises create value, contribute to society, create jobs, and provide social services. This variable is further measured in five statements: receiving a good evaluation from society, making internal investments in employee income, employees being proud of their work, contributing to positive change in society. All variables in this study were measured on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).

Data analysis method
This study uses the Partial Least Square Structural Equation Model (PLS-SEM) analysis technique, with the consideration of being able to analyze small data, focusing on developing theories, and looking for predictive relationships between variables in the model (Ghozali & Latan, 2015). PLS-SEM can be used to build research models using latent variables with high complexity (Ghozali & Latan, 2014). Evaluation of the measurement model or external model with the construct of reflection in PLS can be started by looking at the value of the reliability indicator, namely the magnitude of the variance of reliability to measure the overall construct reliability. The measure used to measure the reliability of these indicators is by looking at the loading factor value of each construct indicator. The rule of thumb is usually used to assess the loading factor, which must be greater than 0.7 for confirmatory research, and the loading factor value between 0.6 -0.7 is still acceptable for exploratory research. In addition to seeing the reliability of indicators and composite reliability, evaluation of measurement models with reflexive constructs was also carried out to test the average variance extracted (AVE) and compare the square root of AVE with the appearance between constructs in the model. AVE value must be greater than 0.5 to mean that 50% or more of the indicator can show. Furthermore, to compare the square root of AVE for each construct in the model, it is shown that the square root of AVE for each construct is greater than the correlation between constructs in the model (Ghozali & Latan, 2014). The assessment of the structural model or inner model with PLS begins by looking at the percentage of variance described by looking at the R-Squares value for each endogenous latent variable as the predictive strength of the structural model. The values of R Squares or Adjusted R 2 are 0.70, 0.45, and 0.25. It can be concluded that the model is strong, moderate, and weak. The greater this value, it shows that the predictor model is better at explaining variance. Furthermore, to determine the variance of certain exogenous variables against endogenous variables, it can be calculated using the effect size (f 2 ). The values of f 2 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 have interpretations of the small, medium, and large influences at the structural level on endogenous variables. In this study, the PLS-SEM calculation used the WarpPLS 7.0 program, which has 10 model fit measures, including "average path coefficient (APC), average R-squared (ARS), Average adjusted R-squared (AARS), average variance factor (AVIF). ), average full collinearity VIF (AFVIF), Tenenhaus GoF (GoF), Sympson's paradox ratio (SPR), R-squared contribution ratio (RSCR), Statistical suppression ratio (SSR), and Nonlinear bivariate causality direction ratio (NLBCDR)" (Kock, 2020). Table 1 gives a summary of statistics such as minimum, maximum, mean, and standard deviation for all variables. For reflective indicators with a Likert scale from 1 to 7, construct social entrepreneurial performance (EP1) has the highest mean (6.50), and entrepreneurial experience (EE3) has the lowest mean (5.65). The other data show a standard deviation from 0.65 toward 1.35 indicated that the data does not deviate from the mean value.

Measurement model assessment
In connection with the validity of the measurement results, it is necessary to test the validity and reliability of the instrument.
The validity of this study shows the level of research instruments capable of measuring the variables to be measured. Construct validity relates to psychological tests used to measure complex behavioral attributes. This study continued by applying confirmatory factor analysis to confirm the quality of measurement models through the evaluation of convergent and discriminant validity. Convergent validity is a measure of the positive correlation of indicators with its own construct (Hair et al., 2014). The convergent validity of the measurement model can be seen from the view between the indicator correlation score with the construct score (loading factor). Standardized loadings should be greater than 0.7 (Hair et al., 2014), but the minimum level (0.5) is still acceptable (Ghozali & Latan, 2014). Convergent validity testing in this study was carried out on constructs with reflective indicators. The results of the calculations in Table 2 show that the indicators have a loading factor value of > 0.7, except for the loading factor of the SEP1, SEP3, and SEP5 indicator, which value under 0.7. However, this value is still acceptable because it is above the minimum level of 0.5 so it is declared that it meets the criteria for convergent validity. Discriminant validity refers to the extent to which construction is completely different from other constructs with empirical standards (Hair et al., 2014). This study uses the comparison criteria of square roots average variance extracted with the correlation between research variables. The calculation results in Table 3 show that the value The AVE of each factor is higher than the correlation between the research concepts so that it can be concluded that the discriminant validity for all constructs is very good (Ghozali & Latan, 2014). Construction reliability testing can be measured by three criteria, namely composite reliability (CR), and Average Variance Extracted (AVE). A construct is declared reliable if the value of composite reliability minimum levels of 0.7 and AVE needs to obtain 0.5 (Hair et al., 2014). Table 4 shows that the composite reliability greater than 0.70 and AVE is greater than 0.5. So, it can be concluded that all variables have met the criteria for composite reliability.  Fig. 1 is a full model based on the output of WarpPLS 7.0 (Kock, 2020). The multicollinearity test of the structural model is carried out by looking at the Varian Inflation Factor (VIF) value. The results of the calculations in Table 5 show that the VIF value is <3.3 so that it can be explained that there is no perfect relationship between exogenous variables. The next result shows that the R-square social entrepreneurial performance value is 0.180 and the Q-square value is 0.181, indicating that the predictor model has predictive relevance. Furthermore, the value of f 2 ranges from 0.017 to 0.144, thus exogenous variables have a major influence on endogenous variables. Table 5 shows that the model has a good fit, where the p-value value of APC, ARS, AARS <0.05. The resulting AVIF and AFVIF values were <3.3 which means that there is no multicollinearity problem between indicators and between exogenous variables. The resulting GOF is 0.355> = 0.36 which means that the fit of the model is very good. Likewise, with other fit indicators. It was concluded that the model was completely consistent with real data (Ghozali & Latan, 2014).  Based on Table 6, it can be seen that the model has a good fit, where the p-value of APC, ARS, AARS <0.05. The resulting AVIF and AFVIF values were <3.3, which means that there is no multicollinearity problem between indicators and between exogenous variables. The resulting GOF is 0.573> = 0.36 which means that the fit of the model is very good. Likewise, other fit indicators have been met (Kock, 2020). Thus it can be stated that the model is acceptable because it is following the research data.

Hypothesis testing
Hypothesis testing is done by comparing the probability standard value is below 0.05. The results of hypothesis testing using WarpPLS 7.0 in Table 8 shows the two direct effects of the seven relationships supported the hypothesis proposed. The calculation results show the coefficient relationship value of entrepreneurial experience with social entrepreneurial performance is 0.283 with a probability value of 0.030 below 0.05. Thus hypothesis 1 is accepted, meaning that entrepreneurial experience has a significant positive effect on social entrepreneurship performance. Hypothesis 2 based on calculations is also accepted, meaning that social entrepreneurship orientation has a significant positive effect on social entrepreneurship performance. It includes that the relationship between entrepreneurial experience and social entrepreneurial performance was important.

Discussion
Social entrepreneurship is the use of the entrepreneur's creative-innovative resources and solutions to answer social problems that arise in society. Research on social entrepreneurship in Indonesia has been carried out (Rostiani et al., 2014), with the finding that social entrepreneurship does not only focus on social aspects but also develops new businesses by using its profits to fund activities with a major social focus. Bank management does not only buy, sort, and sell waste products from the community, but also take advantage of the profits to make new innovative products such as souvenirs. Based on the results of testing the first hypothesis, it is known that entrepreneurial experience has a positive and significant effect on the social entrepreneurship performance of waste banks in Semarang. Entrepreneurial experience is a flow experience, from following business training until able to manage their own business (Novak et al., 2000). According to Rauch & Frese (2000) Entrepreneurial experience is an aspect of human capital that plays a role in encouraging entrepreneurial success. The higher the entrepreneurial experience, the more the social entrepreneur's performance will be improved. The results of this study corroborate the research findings of Sumantri et al., (2013), Park & Sung (2016), Utomo, Priyanti, Suharti, & Sasongko (2019) which explains entrepreneurial experience related to entrepreneurship. These findings also support the statement that entrepreneurial experience is one of the factors that can contribute to the success of prospective social entrepreneurs (Tran & Korflesch, 2017). Entrepreneurs are more likely to be motivated to be involved in charitable poverty reduction programs if they have previous experience with solving social problems (Hockerts, 2017).
The second finding from this study is that social entrepreneurship orientation has a positive effect on the social entrepreneurship of waste banks in the city of Semarang. This means that the higher the innovation behavior, proactive attitude, courage to take risks, and the ability to maintain cooperation, will increase the performance of social entrepreneurs and their contribution to social change. These findings support the statement of Hu & Pang (2013) stated that the essence of social entrepreneurship is social entrepreneurship orientation. This is a multidimensional construct that includes innovation, proactivity, risk-taking, and reciprocity as a determining factor for organizational effectiveness in increasing the competence and strategies of social entrepreneurs to lead and maintain a competitive advantage on the performance of social entrepreneurs (Hu & Pang, 2013). Previous research conducted by Shin (2018), and Shin & Park (2019) stated that openness and innovation have a direct impact on social performance and economic performance. The results of this study also support the research conducted by Rakhmani & Bhinekawati (2020) which proves that entrepreneurial orientation has a significant effect on organizational performance.

Conclusion
This study tries to overview the effect of entrepreneurial experience and entrepreneurial orientation on the social entrepreneurial performance of the waste bank in Semarang. All hypotheses are accepted and supported by previous studies. The waste bank is an implementation of social entrepreneurship which is in accordance with the conditions of the Indonesian people in facing various social, economic, health, and environmental problems. The Semarang government is requested to give more attention to developing waste banks due to their contribution to society, economy, and environment. The next research is suggested to further expand the research area and increase the number of independent variables or intervening variables.