Volume1Issue4Winter2011

EntrepreneurialIntentionsofMBAStudentsAStudyin Hyderabad
MoizMohammed1 CentreforKnowledge,CultureandInnovationStudies(CKIS), UniversityofHyderabad,Hyderabad,India M.P.Aparna2 SchoolofManagement, UniversityofHyderabad,Hyderabad,India

Abstract Thereisagrowingbodyofliteraturearguingthatentrepreneurialintentionsplayaveryrelevant roleinthedecisiontostartanewfirm.Theimportanceofcognitivevariablesinunderstanding this personal decision has been highlighted by Baron (2004) or Shaver & Scott (1991), among other researchers. In their view, this cognitive focus provides additional insights into the complex process of entrepreneurship, over and above those offered by others. Given the impressive success of a cognitive approach in other fields (e.g., psychology, education), there are grounds for predicting that it may also yield positive results when applied to the field of entrepreneurship (Baron, 2004:237). This paper focuses on entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurship intensions among students, the entrepreneurial selfefficacy ofthe students andtheperception/opinionofentrepreneurshipamongthestudentswithinanIndiansetting. It is apparent that entrepreneurial intentions in India continue to face limitations in terms of societalpressuresandselfefficacyconstraints.Entrepreneurshipeducationmaymitigatethese limitationsforthoserespondentswithentrepreneurialaspiration.Inthisway,entrepreneurship educationcanbepositionedasanequalizer,possiblyreducingthelimitingeffectsoflowself efficacyandultimatelyincreasingthechancesforsuccessfulventurecreationbymotivatingthe studentstotakeanentrepreneurshipcourse. Keywords:Entrepreneurship,India,intension,students
1

CorrespondingAuthor:MoizMohammed,PhDisaResearchScholaratCKISandhecanbecontactedat

moiz.sts@gmail.com
2

CorrespondingAuthor:M.P.Aparna,PhDisaResearchScholarintheSchoolofManagementattheUniversityof Hyderabadandhecanbecontactedatshannuaparna@rediffmail.com

20

Introduction
Entrepreneurship is a key factor for economic development. Public, private and governmental organizations are taking various measures to promote entrepreneurship in different countries. Worldclassuniversitiesandcollegeshave implemented various postgraduate, undergraduate and diploma courses on small business management and entrepreneurship. In a developing country like India, the role of entrepreneurship development is more important than that in developed countries so far as the creation of self employmentopportunitiesandreduction of unemployment situations are concerned.Entrepreneurialintentionhas emerged as a foremost construct within the entrepreneurship literature over the last few decades (Drennan, Kennedy, & Renfrow, 2005). There is an increased rate of MBA students across developed anddevelopingcountriesconsideringthe issueofselfemploymentorwhetheritis a choice or a necessity for a preparation of new venture (Pietrobelli, Rabellotti, & Aquilina, 2004). Such an increasing trend is even more evident for developing countries than for developed countries. Entrepreneurial orientation has extensively been studied in the US context, but its investigation in the emerging developing country context is very limited (Tang, Tang, Zhang, & Li, 2007). In developing countries, self employment intention may represent evidence of an emerging entrepreneurial cohortneededtosurmountaneconomic depression. There is an emerging body of entrepreneurship research literature arguingthatintentionsareverypertinent

and important for stimulating ones decision to start a new venture. The personal decision can be understood through cognitive variables which are explained by Shaver & Scott (1991). The behavioural and cognitive focus helps us in providing ancillary insights into the multifaceted processes of entrepreneurship. The cognitive approachcanbeappliedasapredictorof outcomes and also may yield positive results when applied to the field of entrepreneurship(Baron,2004:237).

Thereisanincreasedrateof MBAstudentsacrossdeveloped anddevelopingcountries consideringtheissueofself employment

Inparallelwiththedevelopinginterestin entrepreneurship throughout the world, India has also witnessed an increasing interest in entrepreneurship among academic scholars, government policy makers and business leaders. Some universities and vocational training institutes in India have incorporated entrepreneurship and small business management in their course curriculum so as to provide the necessary exposure for students to the entrepreneurial and industrial climate of the country. While the literature on entrepreneurship in Indiaisgrowing,nostudyhassofartried to explain the relative contribution of personality factors and socio demographic background factors in pursuinganentrepreneurialcareerthere. It is predominantly accepted that the educationalsystemofuniversitieshaveto providearigorousacademicenvironment

21

thatmayserveasacatalystforemerging enterprisesbuttheacademictraditionof entrepreneurshipinIndiaislimited.Even now, fostering innovations and new product development through entrepreneurship has not been regarded as a crucial task of universities (Drucker, 1994). The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor GEM (Reynolds, Bygrave, and Autio, 2004) provides reports and highlights on the current importance of entrepreneurship. GEM provides annual survey results on entrepreneurial activity inforty(40)countries.AccordingtoGEM, entrepreneurshipactivitiesinanycountry boost economic development, jobs, investments, and growth through knowledge, venture dynamics and innovation. GEMdevelopedtwotypesof important indexes for measuring active venture startups: one is the total entrepreneurial activity index and the secondisafirmentrepreneurialactivity

investigated the value entrepreneurshiptosociety.

of

LiteratureReview
It is notable that early researchers examining factors that influence individuals' entrepreneurial activities found no substantive differences between entrepreneurs and other individuals (Brockhaus & Horwitz, 1986; Gartner, 1985; Gartner, 1989). Their research focused on personality traits that encompassed locus of control, risk taking propensity (Brockhaus, 1980), needforachievement(McClelland,1961) and tolerance of ambiguity (Schere, 1982), followed by the inclusion of personal background and situational factors (Moore, 1986). Unfortunately these variables failed to satisfactorily explain why particular individuals are entrepreneurial, so researchers turned their focus towards entrepreneurial behavioursandattitudes(Gartner,1989). To explain and predict entrepreneurial behaviours, Fishbein & Ajzen (1975) offered their development of intentions models. Grounded in the field of social psychology (Ajzen, 1985; Triandis, 1980), intentions models of entrepreneurship are those in which intentions have been identified as the most immediate and important antecedent of behaviour (Abraham & Sheeran, 2003) such as starting one's own business (Krueger, Reilly, & Carsrud, 2000). Attitudes, in turn,havebeenshowntoexplainaround 50% of variance in behaviour (Autio, Keeley, Klofsten, & Ulfstedt, 1997). Intentions, thus, serve as important mediating variables between the act of starting a business and potential exogenous variables. Although several conceptual models of entrepreneurial

Evennow,fostering innovationsandnewproduct developmentthrough entrepreneurshiphasnotbeen regardedasacrucialtaskof universities

index. These both help in providing a measure of activity in starting new ventures, and also helps in explaining about firms that expect to have an innovative impact on the market and growth. Apart from the European Commission and GEM (Reynolds et al., 2004), various researchers have

22

intentionshavebeendeveloped(Autioet al., 1997; Bird, 1988; Davidsson, 1995; Shapero, 1985; Shapero & Sokol, 1982), the model adopted in this study is that developed by Shapero (1985) and operationalisedbyKrueger(1993).Inthis model, intentions are a function of the perceived feasibility and the perceived desirability of starting a business, and exogenous variables influence intentions onlythroughthesemediatingvariables.

EntrepreneurialIntention
Katz and Gartner (1988) define entrepreneurial intention as the search for information that can be used to help fulfill the goal of venture creation. Kolvereid (1996) examined the employment status choice intentions of Norwegian business students and revealed that approximately fortythree percent (43%) preferred to be self employed, however, only seven percent (7 %) of all respondents estimated the chance to become entrepreneurs to be seventyfivepercent(75%)orhigher. The methodologies used to study entrepreneurial intentions have been changing over the years. Most of the studies in the past researched on traits anddemographicvariablesexplainingthe differentiation between entrepreneurs and nonentrepreneurs (Gartner, 1985). Researchers have identified important relationships among some traits and the demographic characteristics of the individual, and the fulfilment of entrepreneurial behaviours. However, thepredictivenatureofthosevariablesis very partial (Reynolds, 1997). Many authors have criticized these approaches from a theoretical perspective (Baron, 1998) with most of these methodologies

andtheirtheoreticallimitationsproviding lowexplanationability. The formation of entrepreneurial (or intrapreneurial) intentions by the individual depends on the perceived desirability and the perceived feasibility of the entrepreneurial behaviour (Krueger,1993;Krueger&Brazeal,1994). Perceived desirability of an action depends upon the individuals attitudes towards the outcomes of that action. In the case of entrepreneurial action, the outcomes include income, autonomy, ownership, risk taking and work effort required. The intention to behave entrepreneurially has been examined fromthreemainviewpoints,whichfocus, respectively, on the individuals human capital, individual cognitions and motivations,andperceivedselfefficacy.

intentionsareafunctionofthe perceivedfeasibilityandthe perceiveddesirabilityof startingabusiness

Humancapitalischaracterisedasgeneral or specific (to the intention under review).General human capital is commonly measured by age, experience, education, and gender (Becker, 1964; Gifford, 1993; Gimeno, Folta, Cooper, & Woo, 1997: Shane, 2000; Davidsson & Honig,2003). Specific human capital, such as prior business experience, prior self employment, and having relatives who have been selfemployed, is also argued to be a determinant of the intention to behave entrepreneurially (Shane, 2000: Davidsson & Honig, 2003; Dimov &

23

Shepherd, 2005). Social capital, such as networks of people and membership of organisations, is also associated with individuals forming a predilection for entrepreneurship(Coleman,1990;Birley, 1985: Greene & Brown, 1997; Aldrich, 1999;Shane,2000). Shane (2003) suggests that psychological factors influence the likelihood that people will exploit new venture opportunities. These factors may be categorised into three general areas: motivationalfactors,coreselfevaluation, and cognitions. Motivational factors includeneedforachievement,risktaking propensityanddesireforindependence.

thosewithhighselfefficacyfor acertaintaskaremorelikelyto pursueandthenpersistinthat task

Core selfevaluation factors include locus of control and selfefficacy. Cognitions are beliefs and attitudes that influence howapersonthinksandmakesdecisions, and are largely situational specific and much less stable over time than are motives or core selfevaluation (Shane, 2003: 97). In specific situations, the causation runs from beliefs to attitudes, to intentions, to behaviour. (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975; Bird, 1994). Conversely, behaviourcanbepredictedbyintentions, which in turn is predicted by attitudes andbeliefs(Drnovsek&Erikson,2005). SelfEfficacy Selfefficacy,orselfconfidenceinagiven domain, is based on an individuals' self perceptionoftheirskillsandabilities.This conceptreflectsanindividual'sinnermost

thoughts on whether they have the abilities perceived as important to task performance, as well as the belief that they will be able to effectively convert those skills into a chosen outcome (Bandura, 1989, 1997). As one group of researchershasnoted,wearemotivated throughout our lives by perceived self efficacy, rather than by objective ability, and our perceptions deeply affect both our affective states and our behaviors (Markham, Balkin, & Baron, 2002). Research in this area has consistently emphasized the importance of self efficacy as a key factor in determining human agency (Bandura, 1989), and has convincingly shown that those with high selfefficacy for a certain task are more likely to pursue and then persist in that task(Bandura,1997). Anumberofmodelshavebeenproposed to explain the relationship between an individuals personal characteristics and subsequent intentions (eg. Ajzen, 1987; Shapero, 1982; Bird, 1988; Krueger & Brazeal, 1994; Boyd & Vozikis, 1994). Ajzens theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen,1991)suggeststhreekeyattitudes that predict intentions; attitude towards the act, social norms and perceived behavioural control. Krueger & Brazeal (1994) suggest that the perceived behavioural control construct overlaps with the selfefficacy construct of Bandura (1986), and outlined a model of potential entrepreneurship that incorporated entrepreneurial intentions. Basing their model on Ajzens theory of planned behaviour and Shaperos model of the entrepreneurial event (Shapero, 1982), their model included potential for both new ventures and corporate ventures and was comprised of three

24

constructs; perceived desirability, perceived feasibility and propensity to act. Regarding the perceived feasibility of entrepreneurial action, this has been showntodependontheindividualsself efficacy (Bandura, 1982; Ajzen, 1991 Krueger&Brazeal,1994,Boyd&Vozikis, 1994; Markman, Balkin & Baron, 2002). Selfefficacy is related to ones human capital (Becker, 1964) which may be general or specific to the tasks contemplated(Davidsson&Honig,2001). Selfemployed entrepreneurship is likely torequiredifferenttasks,orsimilartasks thataredifferentincomplexity,scopeor duration, as compared to employed intrapreneurship. Foreseeing this, we should expect the individual to consider ones own selfefficacy (and underlying human capital) when contemplating entrepreneurial action, and for self efficacy to be instrumental in the subsequentformationoftheintentionto become a selfemployed entrepreneur ratherthananemployedintrapreneur. Whilesubstantialresearchhasfocusedon the antecedents and the formation of entrepreneurial intentions, very little attention has been allocated to the formation of intrapreneurial intentions. Littleisknownaboutwhatmotivatesthe individual to behave intrapreneurially, and thus, little is known about how managers and policy makers might motivate increased intrapreneurial behaviour. In this study we examine the dependence of both entrepreneurial and intrapreneurial intentions on attitudinal differences and selfefficacy differences among individuals. This paper offers the

following main contributions to the literature. Entrepreneurial intentions have been shown to depend on perceived self efficacy (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994: Crick, Greene & Chen, 1998; de Noble, Jung & Erlich, 1999; Markman, Balkin & Baron, 2002). Selfefficacy is measured by the strength of an individuals belief that he/she can accomplish a specific task or seriesofrelatedtasks.Itisrelatedtoself confidence and individual capabilities, and these are dependent on prior experience, vicarious learning, social encouragement, and physiological issues (Bandura,1982;Bandura&Wood,1989).

weshouldexpectthe individualtoconsiderones ownselfefficacy(and underlyinghumancapital) whencontemplating entrepreneurialaction

The stronger a persons selfefficacy in relation to a specific task or series of tasks,suchasthoseinvolvedinstartinga new venture, the greater the probability that the individual will subsequently engageinthatspecifiedbehaviour(Crick, Greene&Chen,1998). Empirical evidence has shown that the abovementioned attitudes impact, to varying degrees, when individuals form the intention to be a selfemployed entrepreneur. Substantial research indicates that entrepreneurial individuals are generally more risk tolerant and desire more independence than less entrepreneurial individuals (e.g. Caird,

25

1991;Begley,1995;SextonandBowman, 1984). Douglas and Shepherd (2002) found that attitudes to independence, risk and income are related to the individuals intention to be self employed. Similarly, Fitzsimmons and Douglas (2005) found evidence that attitudetoownership,independenceand

simplyput,"learningby doing,"appearstobebasicin determiningourselfconfidence tosuccessfullyperformfuture tasks

income were related to the individuals intention to engage in entrepreneurial behaviour.Someevidencewasfoundthat suggested morerisktolerant individuals are more likely to form the intention to beselfemployed,whilenoevidencewas foundtosuggestthatmoreworktolerant individuals have greater intentions to be selfemployed. EntrepreneurshipCareer A robust body of research in the field of entrepreneurship has explicitly investigated the relationship between entrepreneurial selfefficacy and entrepreneurialcareerpreferences.Clear patterns emerge: Individuals with higher entrepreneurial selfefficacy have higher entrepreneurial intentions (Chen et al., 1998; DeNoble et al., 1999; Krueger, Reilly,&Carsrud,2000;Scott&Twomey, 1988; Segal, Borgia, & Schoenfeld, 2002; Wang, Wong, & Lu, 2002). Respondents with high entrepreneurial selfefficacy also have higher degrees of belief that they possess a viable idea for a new business. In short, those with high

entrepreneurial selfefficacy are more likely to believe they also have an actionableidea. Thecareerpsychologyliteratureprovides a substantial amount of evidence that gender is a significant variable in understanding differences in career self efficacy (Lent & Hackett, 1987; Nevill & Schleckler, 1988). Overall, empirical evidence suggests that women are likely tohavelowerexpectationsthanmenfor success in a wide range of occupations (Eccles, 1994). Not surprisingly, significantly lower levels of selfefficacy among women have been found in careers historically perceived as "nontraditional" for women (Bandura et al., 2001; Betz & Hackett, 1981; Scherer, Brodzinski,&Wiebe,1990). EntrepreneurshipEducation Theory indicates that targeted education can play an important role in developing levels of selfefficacy. Bandura (1992) suggests that selfconfidence in our abilities to successfully perform specific tasks comes from four key sources: mastery experiences, modelling, social persuasion, and judgments of our own physiological states. This mastery experience, or simply put, "learning by doing," appears to be basic in determining our selfconfidence to successfullyperformfuturetasksthatare perceived to be similar or related (Cox, Mueller,&Moss,2002). Despite the theoretical connections between entrepreneurial education and outcomes, extensive work that has attempted to examine the effectiveness offormalentrepreneurshipeducationhas been inconclusive (Coxet al., 2002). One

26

reason may be that research on entrepreneurship education has been limited by the educational "preoccupations"oftheresearchers,and that socialcognitive and psychocognitive perspectives have been underexplored (Bechard & Gregoire, 2005). It also may be that the lack of clear positive connections between entrepreneurship education and outcome is linked to methodological issues. Specifically, the outcomemeasuresusedinmanystudies, such as student satisfaction and performance in the course, may be insufficient indicators of educational effectiveness(Coxetal.,2002). Interestingly,selfefficacyisrarelyusedas an outcome measure. Although a small number of studies have examined the effectiveness of entrepreneurship programs in enhancing selfefficacy (Chowdhury & Endres, 2005; Cox et al., 2002),thesestudieshavebeenlimitedin scope and, as mentioned earlier, inconclusiveintheirfindings.Inonesuch study, Peterman (2000) found that participation in an entrepreneurship programsignificantlyincreasedperceived feasibility of starting a business. In addition, those who perceived their entrepreneurship education to be a positiveexperienceshowedhigherscores of perceived feasibility than those who thoughttheireducationalexperiencewas negative. And, importantly for our research, a recent but limited study examining the role of education on entrepreneurial selfefficacy has suggested a gender interaction, with education playing a more significant role forfemalesthanformales(Chowdhury& Endres,2005).

Bowen (1980) suggests that higher educationisresponsibleforthefollowing effectsonsociety: A society of educated people to be more cognizant of the inadequacy of existing conditions andtoencouragenewandbetter waysofmeetinghumanneeds. Wider participation and greater accountability of government to becitizens High inhuman values and social responsibilities Knowledge, technology and resourcestobewidelydiffusedfor thebenefitofthesociety Need for increased international understanding

The impact on the society may be felt in termsofdecreasedcrimerates,improved health, increased graciousness of living and a greater appreciation of cultural activities. Objectivesofthestudy 1. Tostudytheentrepreneurship intensionsamongstudents 2. Toidentifytheentrepreneurial selfefficacyofthestudents 3. Tounderstandtheperception/ opinionofentrepreneurship amongthestudents Methodology This study aims to analyse the entrepreneurial intentions of students. The researcher assumed that certain entrepreneurial intentions and their demographic background motivate

27

persons to become entrepreneurs. In order to access the relevance of the introduction of entrepreneurship intention in the curriculum of higher education, it was considered appropriate to administer a structured questionnaire to the students. A structured questionnairewasdesignedtogatherthe data required for this research. The research instrument was structured into two parts. The first part included socio demographic variables (personal background of the respondents) and the second part included variables to measure entrepreneurial selfefficacy, entrepreneurial intention, education and perception/opiniononentrepreneurship. A total of 258 students were chosen for the study. A list of institutions offering MBA, MCA, Engineering and Polytechnic intheHyderabadareawasdrawnupand using a random sampling technique, colleges were chosen for the study. The study was based on both secondary and primary sources of data. Primary data was collected from 258 students. Data

collected was content analysed and presented in the form of a graph and given a simple statistical treatment. Secondary data was collected from books, journals, websites and other literatureavailable. TheFindingsoftheStudy 1. SocioDemographicBackground Thesurveyincludeditemsinquiringabout the age, gender, fathers occupation, work experience, and profession attraction. The majority of the respondents are between 2327 years (44%) old followed by the age of 1822 years (34%) and 2832 years (22%). The genders of the respondents were male (52%) and females (48%). The vast majority of the students fathers occupations are employed in private and public sectors (56%) with the remaining runningabusiness(38%)orunemployed/ retired (6%) (See figure 1). The respondents professional attraction (Figure2)inthemediumandlongerterm,

Figure 1: Father's Occupation

Private and Public Sector Ow n Business Other Unemployed/Retired

28

considering all advantages and disadvantages, indicated salaried work (56%)followedbyliberalprofession(28%) and entrepreneurs (16%). The lower response for professional attraction to entrepreneurship is significant given the largernumberoffatherswhoarerunning a business and the influence this might have on the student. Does having an entrepreneur as a father support or hinder the attraction to be an entrepreneur? 2. EntrepreneurialSelfEfficacy Entrepreneurial selfefficacy (Figure 3) was measured by a 5 item assessment scale. The items on this scale represent competencies related to business and entrepreneurial success, and were developed based on expert interviews with business leaders (Marlino and Wilson, 2003). In the sample, the respondents were asked to compare themselves to others in the business world.Theitemsincludedbeingableto solve problems, making decisions, managing money, being creative, getting people to agree with you, and beingaleader.Managingmoneyand beingaleaderarethemajorselfefficacy competencies of the respondents (26%), followedbybeingabletosolveproblems (16%), making decisions (12%), being creativeandgettingpeopletoagreewith you(10)%.Selfefficacyorselfconfidence in a given domain, is based on the individualsselfperceptionsoftheirskills and abilities. This concept reflects the individuals belief as to whether they have the abilities perceived as important toperformance,aswellasthebeliefthat they will be able to efficiently convert those skills into a chosen outcome (Bandura,1989,1997).

Figure 2: Student's Professional Attraction

Salaried Work Liberal Profession Entrepreneurs

29

Figure 3: Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy

Managing Money Being a Leader Problem Solving Making Decisions Creativity Getting People to Agree
Forthemajorityoftherespondents,the selfefficacy measures that were most identified are also those that are not necessarily specific entrepreneurial, i.e. they are critical success factors in businessasawhole.Competenciesmore specific to an entrepreneurial venture such as being creative were not as commonlyidentifiedbytherespondents. 3. EntrepreneurialIntentions In regards to entrepreneurial intensions (Figure 4) the careers most respondents wanted were in business management (38%), followed by government services (20%), scientist/engineer (15%), selected medical sciences profession (12%), starting / owning your own business (10%)andartist(5%).Clearly,theresults indicatethattherespondentsweremore inclined to pursue public and private sector careers and that entrepreneurial intentionappearstobelimited. 4. EntrepreneurshipEducation A majority of the respondents in responding to education in their MBA, choseamajorinFinance(38%),followed by Marketing and Management Information Systems (28%), Accounting (12%), Entre preneurship (11%), international business and business strategy (11%) respectively (Figure 5). Theanalysisindicatesthatthemajorityof the respondents are pursuing an education with a focus on finance. A much smaller percentage of the respondents were enrolled as entrepreneurshipmajors.

30

Figure 4: Entrepreneurial Intentions

Business Management Government Professional Ow n Business Artist

5. Perception/Opinion When asked about a career as an entrepreneur the majority of the respondents(Figure6)indicatedno(68%) withthebalanceindicatingyes(32%),not surprising given the lower percentage of respondents pursuing an entre preneurship education. When asked to

explain why there was no interest regarding an entrepreneurship career, theresponseswerenomotivation(32%), lack of support from parents (18%) , gender (18%), not interested (14%) and duetolackofentrepreneurialskills(14%) (See figure 7). The results suggest that

Figure 5: Education in their MBA

Finance Marketing/MIS Accounting Entrepreneurship International Business/Strategy

31

the majority of the respondents felt that there was no motivation to pursue a careerasanentrepreneurasopposedto being just not interested. Of greater concern is the number of respondents who chose not to pursue an entrepreneurship career because of the lack of parental support or because they felt their gender was a limiting factor. Thislatterresultappearstobeconsistent with the findings of other researchers in addressing the impact of gender on self efficacy.

Figure 6: Career as Entrepreneur

Yes No

Conclusion This study has provided some useful insights into the entrepreneurial intention among the students in the HyderabadareaofIndia.Itwasdesigned to determine the entrepreneurial self efficacy and entrepreneurial intention, entrepreneurship education and perception/opinion of entrepreneurship. Mostentrepreneurialselfefficacyorself confidence lies with the students perceivedabilitytomanagemoneyorbe a leader. The results imply that self efficacy may play an important role in shaping (or limiting) perceived career

options as most respondents also indicated interest in corporate or governmentcareers. While access to education for the students in specific entrepreneurial competencies is important it may not be sufficient. The students need to perceive that those competencies have been mastered (Krueger, 1993). The key issue thenistheeffectivenessoftheeducation in raising selfefficacy levels and societal support for entrepreneurship. Even thoughonlyslightlymorethanonetenth of the respondents were pursuing

32

entrepreneurship majors nearly one thirdofthestudentsindicatedaninterest in an entrepreneurship career. Why the difference? Much of the influence on those who chose not to be interested appears to be related to social pressures related to family pressures and gender discrimination.Inconclusion,theauthors were motivated by a belief in the

importanceofavibrantpipelineoffuture entrepreneurs to the success of Indian business and with the desire to better understand entrepreneurial intentions. Theresultsofthisstudysuggesttheneed foranincreaseinmotivationforstudents topursueanentrepreneurialcareer.

Figure 7: Why No Interest in Being an Entrepreneur?

No Motivation to Do So Lack of Parental Support Gender No Interest Lack Entrepreneurial Skills Other

The observed entrepreneurial intention might also have been the result of some recent changes in economic conditions but it is apparent that entrepreneurial intentions in India continue to face limitations in terms of societal pressures andselfefficacyconstraints. Entrepreneurshipeducationmaymitigate these limitations for those respondents with entrepreneurial aspiration. In this way, entrepreneurship education can be positioned as an equalizer, possibly reducing the limiting effects of low self efficacy and ultimately increasing the chances for successful venture creation by motivating the students to take an entrepreneurshipcourse. Support is required from parents, government and industry to encourage entrepreneurialintentionwithaplatform to promote voices for change and to be inspirationalforotherstudents.

33

References
Anna, A., Chandler, G., Jansen, E., & Mero, N. (1999). Women business owners in traditional and non traditional industries. Journal of BusinessVenturing,15,279303. Aronsson,M.(2004).Educationmatters but does entrepreneurship education?AninterviewwithDavid Birch. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3(3), 289 292. Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in socialcognitive theory. American Psychologist,44,11751184. Bandura, A. (1992). Exercise of personal agency through the selfefficacy mechanism. In R. Schwartzer (Ed.), Selfefficacy: Thought control of action (pp. 338). Washington, DC: Hemisphere. Bandura, A. (1997). Selfefficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman. Bandura,A.,Barbaranelli,C.,Caprara,G., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Selfefficacy beliefs as shapers of children's aspirations and career trajectories. ChildDevelopment,72(1),187206. Bechard, J. & Gregoire, D. (2005). Entrepreneurship education research revisited: The case of higher education. Academy of Management Learning and Education,4(1),2243. Betz, N. & Hackett, G. (1981). The relationship of careerrelated self efficacy expectations to perceived career options in college men and

women, Journal of Counseling Psychology,28,399410. Betz, N. & Hackett, G. (1983). The relationship of mathematics self efficacy expectations to the selection of sciencebased college majors. Journal of Vocational Behavior,23,329345. Bird, B. (1988). Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: The case for intention.AcademyofManagement Review,13(3),442453.

Boyd, N. & Vozikis, G. (1994). The influence of selfefficacy on the development of entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,18(4),6377. Chen, C., Greene, P., & Crick, A. (1998). Does entrepreneurial selfefficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers? Journal of Business Venturing,13,295316. Chowdhury, S. & Endres, M. (2005). Gender difference and the formation of entrepreneurial self efficacy. Presented at the United StatesAssociationofSmallBusiness (USASBE) Annual Conference, IndianWells,CA. Cliff, J. (1998). Does one size fit all? Exploringattitudestowardsgrowth, genderandbusinesssize.Journalof BusinessVenturing,13,523542. Cox,L.,Mueller,S.,&Moss,S.(2002).The impactofentrepreneurship educationonentrepreneurialself efficacy.InternationalJournalof EntrepreneurshipEducation,1,2.

34

DeNoble,A.,Jung,D.,&Ehrlich,S.(1999). Entrepreneurialselfefficacy:The developmentofameasureandits relationshiptoentrepreneurship.In P.D.Reynolds,W.D.Bygrave,S. Manigart,C.M.Mason,G.D.Meyer, H.J.Sapienza&K.G.Shaver(Eds.), Frontiersofentrepreneurship research(pp.7387).Wellesley, MA:BabsonCollege. Dyer,W.G.,Jr.(1994).Towardsatheory ofentrepreneurialcareers. EntrepreneurshipTheoryand Practice,19(2),721. Eccles,J.(1994).Understandingwomen's educationalandoccupational choices.PsychologyofWomen Quarterly,18,585609. Eddleston,K.,Veiga,J.,&Powell,G. (2006).Explainingsexdifferencesin managerialcareersatisfier preferences:Theroleofgender selfschema.JournalofApplied Psychology,91(2),437445. Estes,V.(1999,November18).Women andbusinessdevelopment: Promotingeconomicgrowthand jobcreation.USAID/Europeand EurasiaBureau. Fiet,J.(2000).Thepedagogicalsideof entrepreneurshiptheory.Journalof BusinessVenturing,16,101117. Gatewood,E.,Shaver,K.,Powers,J.,& Gartner,W.(2002).Entrepreneurial expectancy,task,effortand performance.Entrepreneurship TheoryandPractice,27(Winter), 187206. Hackett,G.&Betz,N.(1981).Aself efficacyapproachtothecareer

developmentofwomen.Journalof VocationalBehavior,18,326339. Hollenbeck,G.&Hall,D.T.(2004).Self confidenceandleader performance.Organizational Dynamics,33(3),254269. Jalbert,S.E.(2000).Women entrepreneursintheglobal economy.Washington,DC:Center forInternationalPrivateEnterprise. Jones,K.&Tullous,R.(2002).Behaviors ofpreventureentrepreneursand perceptionsoftheirfinancialneeds. JournalofSmallBusiness Management,40(3),233250. Kickul,J.&D'Intino,R.(2004,January). Measureformeasure:modeling entrepreneurialselfefficacyonto instrumentaltaskswithinthenew venturecreationprocess.Presented attheUnitedStatesAssociationfor SmallBusinessand EntrepreneurshipConference, Dallas,TX. Kickul,J.,Gundry,L.,&Sampson,S.(in press).Womenentrepreneurs preparingforgrowth:theinfluence ofsocialcapitalandtrainingon resourceacquisition.Journalof SmallBusinessand Entrepreneurship. Kickul,J.,Wilson,F.,&Marlino,D.(2004, January).Aremisalignmentsof perceptionsandselfefficacy causinggendergapsin entrepreneurialintentionsamong ournations'teens?Presentedat USASBEAnnualConference,Dallas, TX.

35

Kourilsky,M.(1995).Entrepreneurship Education:OpportunityinSearch. ofCurriculum.BusinessEducation Forum,50(10),1115. Kourilsky,M.&Walstad,M.(1998). Entrepreneurshipandfemale youth:Knowledge,attitudes, genderdifferencesandeducational practices.JournalofBusiness Venturing,13,7788. Krueger,N.(1993).Theimpactofprior entrepreneurialexposureon perceptionsofnewventure feasibilityanddesirability. EntrepreneurshipTheoryand Practice,18(1),521. Krueger,N.,Reilly,M.,&Carsrud,A. (2000).Competingmodelsof entrepreneurialintentions.Journal ofBusinessVenturing,15,411432. Lent,R.&Hackett,G.(1987).Careerself efficacy:Empiricalstatusandfuture directions.JournalofVocational Behavior,30,347383. Low,K.,Yoon,M.,Roberts,B.,&Rounds, J.(2005).Thestabilityofvocational interestsfromearlyadolescenceto middleadulthood:Aquantitative reviewoflongitudinalstudies. PsychologicalBulletin,131(5),713 737 Markham,G.,Balkin,D.,&Baron,R. (2002).Inventorsandnewventure formation:Theeffectsofgeneral selfefficacyandregretfulthinking. EntrepreneurshipTheoryand Practice,27(2)149165. Marlino,D.&Wilson,F.(2003).Teengirls onbusiness:Aretheybeing empowered?BostonandChicago:

SimmonsSchoolofManagement andTheCommitteeof200. Minniti,M.,Arenius,P.,&Langowitz,N. (2005).2004Reportonwomenand entrepreneurship.InGlobal entrepreneurshipmonitor. Wellesley,MA:TheCenterfor Women'sLeadershipatBabson College. Nevill,D.&Schleckler,D.(1988).The relationofselfefficacyto willingnesstoengagein traditional/nontraditionalcareer activities.PsychologyofWomen Quarterly,12,9198. Reynolds,E,Carter,N.,Gartner,W., Greene,P.,&Cox,L.(2002).The entrepreneurnextdoor, characteristicsofindividuals startingcompaniesinAmerica. KansasCity,MO:EwingMarion KauffmanFoundation. Scherer,R.,Brodzinski,J.,&Wiebe,F. (1990).Entrepreneurialcareer selectionandgender:A socializationapproach.Journalof SmallBusinessManagement,28(2), 37. Scott,M.&Twomey,D.(1988).Thelong termsupplyofentrepreneurs: Students'careeraspirationsin relationtoentrepreneurship. JournalofSmallBusiness Management,26(4),513. Segal,G.,Borgia,D.,&Schoenfeld,J. (2002).Usingsocialcognitivecareer theorytopredictselfemployment goals.NewEnglandJournalof Entrepreneurship,5(2),4756.

36

Shapero,A.&Sokol,L.(1982).Thesocial dimensionsofentrepreneurship.In C.Kent,D.Sexton,&K.Vesper (Eds.),Theencyclopediaof entrepreneurship(pp.7290).New York:PrenticeHall. Shaver,K.,Gatewood,E.,&Gartner,W. (2001,August).Differing expectations:Comparingnascent entrepreneurstonon entrepreneurs.Presentedat AcademyofManagement, Washington,DC. Spector,P.E.(1981).Researchdesigns. NewburyPark,CA:Sage Publications. Wang,C.,Wong,P.,&Lu,Q.(2002). Tertiaryeducationand entrepreneurialintentions.InP. Phan(Ed.),Technological entrepreneurship(pp.5582). Greenwich,CT:InformationAge Publishing. Wilson,F.,Marlino,D.,&Kickul,J.(2004). Ourentrepreneurialfuture: examiningthediverseattitudesand motivationsofteensacrossgender andethnicidentity.Journalof DevelopmentalEntrepreneurship, 9(3),177198. Wilson,Fiona,Kickul,Jill,Marlino, Deborah,Gender,entrepreneurial selfefficacy,andentrepreneurial careerintentions:implication,2007

37