Education + Training

Examining the entrepreneurial attitudes of US business students

Michael L. Harris Shanan G. Gibson
Article information:
To cite this document:
Michael L. Harris Shanan G. Gibson, (2008),"Examining the entrepreneurial attitudes of US business
students", Education + Training, Vol. 50 Iss 7 pp. 568 - 581
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00400910810909036
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

Downloaded on: 22 November 2014, At: 04:28 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 67 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 2557 times since 2008*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Duygu Turker, Senem Sonmez Selcuk, (2009),"Which factors affect entrepreneurial intention of university
students?", Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 33 Iss 2 pp. 142-159
Roger Henderson, Martyn Robertson, (2000),"Who wants to be an entrepreneur? Young adult attitudes
to entrepreneurship as a career", Career Development International, Vol. 5 Iss 6 pp. 279-287 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/13620430010373755
Yonca Gürol, Nuray Atsan, (2006),"Entrepreneurial characteristics amongst university students: Some
insights for entrepreneurship education and training in Turkey", Education + Training, Vol. 48 Iss 1 pp.
25-38 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00400910610645716

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 512739 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0040-0912.htm

ET
50,7 Examining the entrepreneurial
attitudes of US business students
Michael L. Harris and Shanan G. Gibson
568 Department of Management, East Carolina University, Greenville,
North Carolina, USA

Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to examine the entrepreneurial attitudes of undergraduate students
enrolled in the Small Business Institutew (SBI) program at multiple universities in the USA. Research
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

has encouraged a continuous study and refinement of the entrepreneurial profile, particularly for
young adults. Past studies have linked certain personality constructs and entrepreneurship, and
shown a connection between entrepreneurial intentions and past business experience.
Design/methodology/approach – A total of 216 students completed the entrepreneurial attitudes
orientation (EAO) survey. The EAO provides a composite score based on four attitude subscales:
achievement in business; innovation in business; perceived personal control of business outcomes; and
perceived self-esteem in business. In addition, participants were asked to provide demographic
information and past entrepreneurial experience.
Findings – Results indicated that the majority of students possessed entrepreneurial attitudes.
Furthermore, both student characteristics and entrepreneurial experience were found to be associated
with certain entrepreneurial attitudes. Specifically, male students scored higher on both personal
control and innovation, and students with family business experience had more developed
entrepreneurial attitudes.
Practical implications – The SBI and other similar training/education programs provide the
opportunity for direct entrepreneurial exposure. Their ability to impact attitudes toward
entrepreneurship provides a venue for career opportunities. Further discussion centers on the
relationship between entrepreneurial attitudes and degree of past experience.
Originality/value – The paper provides an examination of entrepreneurial attitudes that focuses on
both demographics and past experiences for a unique educational program that helps promote
entrepreneurship as a viable career option.
Keywords Attitudes, Entrepreneurs, Education, Gender, United States of America
Paper type Research paper

Education þ Training
Vol. 50 No. 7, 2008
pp. 568-581
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0040-0912
DOI 10.1108/00400910810909036
Introduction
As noted in the 2006 Results Report from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor,
entrepreneurs throughout the world are pursuing new ventures out of both opportunity
and necessity. These ventures not only benefit individual investors, but also serve to
improve overall market efficiency and innovativeness. While these numbers indicate
that the entrepreneurial spirit is alive and well internationally, research indicates
that many more people have entrepreneurial potential than ever actually become
entrepreneurs (Kent, 1990; Thompson, 2004).
Early research on entrepreneurial intentions tended to focus on trait or personality
characteristics (McClelland, 1961; Wortman, 1987). Other studies on the
entrepreneurial process included an examination of the role of behavioral and
situational factors (Gartner, 1985) and demographic variables (Davidsson, 1995) on the
intentions to start a new business venture. Interestingly, past studies have not shown
 that demographic variables enhance the ability to predict future entrepreneurial Attitudes of US
intentions (Gasse, 1985; Hatten and Ruhland, 1995). business
The work of Robinson et al. (1991) was one of the first to incorporate an attitudinal
scale to predict entrepreneurial activity. An advantage of using an attitudinal approach students
is that it can be more domain-specific, which increases the correlation with actual
behavior and reduces unexplained variability. Attitudes tend to change across time
and situations through an interactive process with the environment, and once a 569
person’s attitude has been measured, a prediction can be made about the person’s
future actions (Carlson, 1985). Based on prior research on personality, demographics
and entrepreneurship, and Carlson’s attitude consistency model, Robinson et al. (1991)
developed the entrepreneurial attitudes orientation (EAO) model to predict
entrepreneurial activity. The subscales of the EAO measure individuals’ attitudes
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

across four constructs:

(1) achievement in business (referring to the results of starting and growing a
business venture);
(2) innovation in business (using innovative methods in business activities);
(3) perceived personal control of business outcomes (individual’s control and
influence on his/her business); and
(4) perceived self-esteem in business (self-confidence and perceived competency in
business affairs).

The purpose of the current study is to examine the entrepreneurial attitudes of

business students at US universities, and the affect demographic variables and past
business experience has on their attitudes. Research shows that entrepreneurial
attitudes and skills can be developed and refined within the framework of
entrepreneurship education programs (Robinson et al., 1991; Mitra and Matlay, 2004),
and that education and skill differentials can help explain why certain people engage in
entrepreneurial activities and are more successful than others (Farmer, 1997; Gatewood
et al., 2002; Carter et al., 2003). Current business students are future business leaders,
and it is important to continually study and refine their entrepreneurial profile (Hatten
and Ruhland, 1995; Hisrich, 2000; Steyaert, 2004). Many college-educated young adults,
especially between the ages of 25 and 34, are interested in venture creation, and are
likely to engage in entrepreneurial activities (Minniti et al., 2005a).
A more thorough understanding of students’ entrepreneurial attitudes can also be
used to develop more relevant education programs, particularly in regards to
entrepreneurship education. Thompson (2004) points out that support programs for
potential entrepreneurs need to be carefully targeted around their needs on key issues.
Florin et al. (2007) suggest that attitudes are more likely influenced by educational
programs than are personality traits since they are learned and experience based.

Literature review
Prior research has examined various attitude and personality constructs, though not in
tandem as proposed by Robinson et al. (1991). McClelland (1961) asserts that need for
achievement is a strong entrepreneurial trait, and Gasse (1985) found that
entrepreneurs often possess a greater internal locus of control than the general
population. Higher self-efficacy has also been linked to entrepreneurship and business
 ET creation (Krueger and Brazeal, 1994; Frazier and Niehm, 2006). In addition, research by
50,7 Robinson (1987) suggests that entrepreneurs have a high level of self-esteem and
confidence, while Douglas and Shepherd (2002) found that a more positive attitude
toward risk and independence leads to stronger entrepreneurial intentions. Although
entrepreneurs tend to be more self-confident, some studies have shown that
self-confidence and motivation can be affected by past failures (Gatewood and Shaver,
570 1991; Busenitz, 1999).
The theory of planned behavior argues that attitudes are precursors to intentions
which are antecedent to behaviors (Ajzen, 1991). More specifically, attitudes have a
behavioral component (along with affective and cognitive components) that consists of
behavioral intentions and predispositions to act in a particular way toward some
subject (Shaver, 1987). Prior studies have shown that these intentions play a crucial
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

role in understanding the entrepreneurial process (Shapero and Sokol, 1982; Krueger,
1993; Krueger and Brazeal, 1994). Shapero and Sokol (1982) argue that attitudes are
linked with entrepreneurial intentions, especially in perceived feasibility and
desirability. They suggest that attitudes are partly derived from prior exposure to
entrepreneurial activities, including both breadth and positiveness of prior activities.
Later, research by Krueger (1993) and Krueger and Brazeal (1994) supports Shapero’s
propositions about entrepreneurial intentions. Krueger (1993) found that prior
entrepreneurial exposure impacted intentions through perceived feasibility and the
positiveness of past experiences influenced perceived desirability to start a new
venture. The entrepreneurial intentions model developed by Krueger and Brazeal
(1994) suggests that entrepreneurial characteristics can be learned and often vary
based on personal characteristics and situations.
Since the entrepreneurial process is experiential in nature, it is plausible to study the
influence of past experiences on an individual’s understanding of entrepreneurship
(Robinson et al., 1991; Sullivan, 2000; Minniti and Bygrave, 2003; Politis, 2005).
As suggested by Robinson et al. (1991) and Hatten and Ruhland (1995), attitudes about
entrepreneurship can be measured and changed. The possibility of change is higher in
a nurturing learning environment, as Gatewood et al. (2002) found that individuals
receiving positive feedback about their entrepreneurial abilities had higher
entrepreneurial expectations.
Research has shown that entrepreneurial skills can be learned (Robinson et al., 1991;
Mitra and Matlay, 2004; Kuratko, 2005), which has lead to an increase in the number of
entrepreneurship programs at colleges and universities (Kuratko, 2005; Matlay, 2005).
One of the more established programs is the Small Business Institutew (SBI), initiated
in 1972 through a cooperative agreement between the US Small Business
Administration (SBA) and select colleges and universities. Currently, the SBI
operates independently of the SBA and is generally housed in business schools. The
primary objective of the program is to provide students an opportunity to work with
real businesses through a field-based consulting project. Although not all of the
participating businesses are categorized as entrepreneurial in the sense of growth
potential, owners often match the definition of “entrepreneur” in that they create and
innovate to build something of value out of opportunities (Bolton and Thompson,
2000). Student teams develop comprehensive reports aimed at resolving their clients’
most critical business problems. Programs like the SBI not only provide an experiential
learning opportunity for students, but also often help participating business owners
 gain advantages that can positively influence their ability to grow and innovate Attitudes of US
(Chrisman, 1999; Chrisman and McMullan, 2000). business
students
Hypotheses
Hatten and Ruhland (1995) first used the EAO model to examine the entrepreneurial
attitudes of business students in the SBI over a decade ago. Based on a sample from
SBI programs at multiple universities, They found that students who possessed an 571
internal locus of control developed a more positive attitude toward entrepreneurship
after participation in the program. However, no significant differences were found
among the other three scales of the EAO. In addition, no differences were evident based
on the demographic variables of gender, age, parent(s) as entrepreneur(s), work
experience, years of work experience, grade expected, or degree requirement.
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

While the findings of Hatten and Ruhland indicate no link between demographic
characteristics and entrepreneurial attitudes of college students, another study found
that male African American college students had a more positive attitude toward
entrepreneurship than their female counterparts (Ede et al., 1998). Past research also
suggests that females (Hisrich and Brush, 1987; Carter, 2000; Thomas, 2001) and
minorities (Kourilsky and Esfandiari, 1997; Heilman and Chen, 2003) are faced with
more obstacles in the entrepreneurial process, such as less education and business
experience, limited resources, and fewer mentors and advisors. Other research has
shown that females are less interested in business creation (Kourilsky and Walstad,
1998) and are more likely to fail when they start a new business (Carter et al., 1997;
Boden and Nucci, 2000; Robb, 2002). These barriers seem to be common in many
countries as men are twice as likely to engage in entrepreneurial activities as women on
a global scale (Minniti et al., 2005a).
In addition to gender, students’ choice of academic major (discipline of study) has
been linked to their aptitude for the subject as well as job availability and earnings
potential (Pritchard et al., 2004). This implies that students may choose to take
entrepreneurship courses because of a heightened interest or skill level in that area.
Interestingly, studies have shown that undergraduate business students and recent
business graduates often look for extrinsic rewards in their initial jobs and view large
corporations as a more attractive alternative because of better pay and career
advancement (Teo and Poon, 1994; Moy and Lee, 2002). However, within the business
field, those who primary discipline is management have been shown to possess a more
favorable view of careers in the small business arena, particularly since the working
environment allows them to play a greater role in decision making (Grubb et al., 2006).
Based on these prior findings, we offer the following hypotheses:
H1a. Male business students will have stronger entrepreneurial attitudes than
female business students.
H1b. Caucasian business students will have stronger entrepreneurial attitudes than
non-Caucasian business students.
H1c. Business students majoring in management will have stronger
entrepreneurial attitudes than non-management business students.
Past research has established a link between entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions
and past business experience and exposure. This may include direct experience in
 ET starting a business or indirect experience through a family business. Past studies have
50,7 shown that both work experience with a small business (Peterman and Kennedy, 2003)
and with a family business (Reitan, 1996) can have a positive impact on perceptions of
new venture feasibility and desirability. All attitudes, including entrepreneurial
attitudes, can change (Robinson et al., 1991), and prior work experience or other forms
of contact may play a significant role in shaping these attitudes. As such, we
572 hypothesize:
H2. Past entrepreneurial experience and exposure to entrepreneurial activities will
result in stronger entrepreneurial attitudes for those students that have
experienced them than for those who have not.
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

Methodology
Participants and procedure
Participants were 216 individuals enrolled in the undergraduate SBI course at one of
multiple universities in the USA. The institutions included in the study represented a
variety of geographical regions, including the Northeast, Southeast, Southwest, and
Midwest areas of the USA. Approximately, half of the participants were male
(51 percent), and a large percentage of the participant population was Caucasian
(80 percent). Participants ranged in age from 19 to 48 years old, with an average age of
23.8 years. Management majors made up 54 percent of the sample population, and
other business disciplines accounted for the remaining 46 percent.

Procedure
Faculty teaching undergraduate courses as part of the SBI program received an e-mail
letter from the national secretary of the SBI and the research team requesting their
voluntary participation in a study conducted by the researchers. The stated purpose of
the study was to assess the role that demographic characteristics and business
experience might play in entrepreneurial attitudes. Faculty were asked to request that
their students complete an anonymous online survey during the first two weeks of the
semester. Survey completion was entirely voluntary and no identifying information
was recorded. A reminder e-mail was sent out after the first week had passed to
encourage participation.

Measures
We measured entrepreneurial attitudes with the EAO survey instrument (Robinson
et al., 1991). The EAO is theoretically well-grounded and provides a composite score
based on four attitude subscales. The subscales of the EAO measure individuals’
attitudes on four constructs:
(1) achievement in business (Cronbach’s a ¼ 0.84; referring to the results of
starting and growing a business venture);
(2) innovation in business (Cronbach’s a ¼ 0.90; using innovative methods in
business activities);
(3) perceived personal control of business outcomes (Cronbach’s a ¼ 0.70;
individual’s control and influence on his/her business); and
(4) perceived self-esteem in business (Cronbach’s a ¼ 0.73; self-confidence and
perceived competency in business affairs).
 The EAO has participants respond using a ten-point Likert-type scale to items in terms Attitudes of US
of how much they agree with the statement, where 1 – strongly disagree and business
10 – strongly agree. Examples of items include: “I enjoy being able to use old business
concepts in new ways,” “I make a conscientious effort to get the most out of my students
business resources,” and “I believe that to succeed in business it is important to
get along with the people you work with.” Utilizing a sample of 54 entrepreneurs and
57 non-entrepreneurs, Robinson et al. (1991) found that the four subscales were able to 573
accurately predict entrepreneur classification in 77 percent of cases.
In addition to completing the EAO, participants provided demographic information
including academic discipline/major, gender, and ethnicity. Owing to large in-equities
in sample size, all academic majors except management (e.g. finance, accounting,
economics, etc.) were grouped together as “Other business majors” for purposes of the
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

results below, and all ethnic groups except Caucasian (e.g. African American, Asian
American, Hispanic, etc.) were collectively categorized as well.
In order to measure exposure to entrepreneurial initiatives, three questions were
asked related to this:
(1) Have you ever worked for a small business?
(2) Has your family ever owned a small business?
(3) Have you ever owned your own small business?

Data analysis
All hypotheses were tested using independent-samples t-tests and determinations of
significance were based upon a p , 0.05 standard.

Results
Overall, the majority of study participants were classifiable as having attitudes
consistent with entrepreneurs (as opposed to non-entrepreneurs) on three of the four
subscales. Specifically, 180 (84 percent) possessed achievement in business attitude
scores that were entrepreneurial, 173 (81 percent) possessed personal control of
business outcomes attitude scores that were entrepreneurial, and 182 (85 percent)
possessed innovation in business attitude scores that were entrepreneurial. The one
exception to this trend was that only 34 (16 percent) possessed self-esteem in business
attitude scores that were entrepreneurial.
H1a proposed that male business students would have stronger entrepreneurial
attitudes than did their female counterparts. This hypothesis was partially supported.
The independent t-test analysis indicated that males had a mean score of 6.85 for
personal control attitudes, females had a mean of 6.49, and the means differed
significantly (t(214) ¼ 1.65, p , 0.05). Similarly, a statistically significant difference
was found for innovation in business attitudes, males had a mean of 7.08 versus 6.72
for females (t(214) ¼ 2.97, p , 0.05). Neither achievement in business (a male mean of
7.87 versus female mean of 7.66) nor self-esteem in business (5.76 versus 5.75)
supported H1a at the p , 0.05 level.
H1b stated that Caucasian business students would possess stronger
entrepreneurial attitudes than their non-Caucasian peers. This hypothesis was not
supported at the p , 0.05 level for any of the business attitudes of interest. For
achievement attitudes, Caucasian students possessed a mean score of 7.72, whereas
 ET non-Caucasian students possessed a mean of 7.95; for innovation attitudes the means
50,7 were 6.85 and 7.10, respectively, for personal control the mean scale scores were 6.56
versus 6.76, and for self-esteem, Caucasians had a mean score of 5.74 versus 5.81 for
non-Caucasians. In fact, although not statistically different significant, and in direct
opposition to the hypothesis, the non-Caucasian students possessed stronger business
attitudes across all variables than did their Caucasian peers.
574 H1c anticipated that business students majoring in management would have
stronger entrepreneurial attitudes than did their non-management student cohort. The
mean achievement attitudes score for management majors was 7.83, versus 7.70 for
non-management students; the mean innovation attitude score for management majors
was 6.92, versus 6.89 for non-management majors, the mean personal control attitude
scale score for management majors was 6.65, versus a mean score of 6.55 for
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

non-management students; and the mean self-esteem score of management majors was
5.67, versus a mean score of 5.86 for other business majors. In no instance was H1c
supported; no significant differences in attitudinal strength existed at the p , 0.05
level.
Although entrepreneurial attitudes were anticipated to be stronger for those with
previous exposure to entrepreneurial enterprises, the findings were not completely
consistent with H2. In particular, the degree to which one has had exposure to previous
entrepreneurial activities appeared to play a role in how many and which attitudes
were impacted.
Analyses indicated that those who had worked for a small business in the past had
a mean self-esteem attitude of 5.64, whereas those who did not have this experience had
a mean self-esteem attitude scale score of 6.21. While this attitudinal difference was
significant (t(214) ¼ 2 3.63, p , 0.05), it ran counter to H2. No other differences at the
p , 0.05 level were found between attitudes of those that had worked for a small
business when compared with those who had not; the mean achievement attitude score
was 7.81 for those with experience working in a small business and 7.58 for those who
lacked it, mean innovation score of those with the experience was 6.93 versus a mean of
6.79 for those without, and personal control mean scores were 6.52 and 5.64,
respectively.
H2 received greater support when the form of previous exposure was having a
small business in one’s family. In this instance, attitudes related to achievement in
business (mean score of 8.00 versus 7.56; t(214) ¼ 3.47, p , 0.05), innovation in
business (mean score of 7.10 versus 6.74; t(214) ¼ 3.02, p , 0.05), and perceived
personal control of business outcomes (mean score of 6.74 versus 6.48; t(214) ¼ 2.20,
p , 0.05) were all significantly stronger for those who reporting having a small
business in their families. Only self-esteem scores were not significantly stronger for
those who had exposure via a small family business (5.74 versus 5.77 for those without
a family business).
In further support of H2, having owned one’s own business was found to be
significantly related to differences in two of the entrepreneurial attitudes measured as
part of the EAO. Those that had previously owned a small business of their own had
mean achievement scores of 8.28 (versus 7.72 for those that had not; t(214) ¼ 2.35,
p , 0.05), and mean personal control scores of 7.17 (versus 6.55; t(214) ¼ 2.79,
p , 0.05). Statistically, significant differences were not found at the p , 0.05 level for
innovation attitudes (mean of 7.17 for those who had owned a small business versus
 6.88 for those that had not) and self-esteem attitudes (mean of 5.61 for those who had Attitudes of US
owned a small business versus 5.75 for those who had not). business
students
Discussion
It was not surprising to find that business students enrolled in SBI program were,
overall, likely to have attitudes that are characteristic of entrepreneurs. This course 575
tends to attract those students that either have already been exposed to entrepreneurial
businesses or have hopes of one day starting or acquiring their own business. As such,
these courses are seen as a means of obtaining exposure to and skills necessary for
later career success. While it was surprising that so few students were categorized as
having high self-esteem in business attitudes, this may possibly be explained by
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

consideration of how attitudes develop. In particular, attitudes of self-confidence and

competency are likely to be strongly influenced by having had positive past
experiences or success in the entrepreneurial domain. Because so very few members of
the current sample had ever owned their own business (17 respondents, approximately
8 percent), the experiences that would be necessary to build strong esteem attitudes
were likely lacking.
Although collectively these students were characterized as having attitudes
associated with entrepreneurship, few differences existed when examining more
specific student characteristics. One area of interest, however, was the differences
associated with gender, where male students scored higher on both personal control
and innovation. The 2006 Results Report from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor
lauded entrepreneurs for their ability to improve innovation in the marketplace (Bosma
and Harding, 2006). Our findings indicate that female students, while entrepreneurial
in general, may be less inclined to enter into innovative ventures. Past research has
shown that the retail and service sectors are particularly attractive for new business
owners because of low entry barriers, and it seems as if female students may be
targeting these industries. However, the failure rate is typically higher in these sectors
(Brush and Chaganti, 1999).
Because attitudes are often shaped by past experiences, it was logical that students
with direct exposure to entrepreneurial activities in the past would have stronger
entrepreneurial attitudes. While, Hatten and Ruhland (1995) found no link between
experience and attitudes in an earlier study on SBI students, our results showed that
family business experience had a significant effect on students’ entrepreneurial
attitudes. Those students whose family owned a business had a greater sense of
achievement, innovation, and personal control as a result of interacting and working
within the business. This provides additional support for research on the importance of
family business experience and how this experience can positively impact perceptions
of venture feasibility and desirability (Reitan, 1996; Peterman and Kennedy, 2003).
While involvement with a family business had an overall positive impact on
entrepreneurial attitudes, it was interesting to find that it did not impact the students’
self-esteem, and that work experience with a small business actually had a negative
effect on self-esteem. Frazier and Niehm (2006) suggests that exposure to a family
business can lower entrepreneurial intentions because it shows the less attractive side
of business ownership, such as the financial commitment, demanding schedule, and
high-stress level. Our mixed findings may indicate that students coming from a family
 ET business background have both strong entrepreneurial attitudes as well as a realistic
50,7 view of the challenges associated with starting and operating a business.
Starting one’s own small business is often viewed as the epitome of
entrepreneurship, and therefore should have the greatest impact on entrepreneurial
attitudes. In the current sample only two attitudes were impacted by having owned a
small business, but as previously stated, it is difficult to draw conclusions because of
576 the small proportion of the group which fell into this category. However, the two
attitudes which were impacted – achievement and personal control – intuitively make
sense as being likely to evolve as a result of first hand entrepreneurial experience.
One’s level of direct personal involvement is highest at this end of the experience
continuum. Starting a new business requires a great investment of time, resources, and
commitment, which is bound to have an impact on one’s attitude of the entrepreneurial
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

process.
As noted in the 2005 Report on Women and Entrepreneurship from the Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor, men are twice as likely to engage in entrepreneurial
activities as women. One plausible explanation for these differences has to deal with
the development of attitudes (Minniti et al., 2005b). Attitudes are frequently the result
of past experiences or past behaviors (Bohner and Wanke, 2001); if certain groups have
had less exposure to entrepreneurial experiences, then it would make sense that they
would have less developed attitudes related to this. Historically, this has been the case
with regard to women entrepreneurs as they tend to lag behind men in resources,
business experience, and human and social capital (Heilman and Chen, 2003), often
causing them to be less optimistic in their expectations of business success (Carter,
2000).
A system of support and resources can help encourage more female participation in
the entrepreneurial process. Institutional theory emphasizes the importance of
blending social, political, and economic systems to provide legitimacy for venture
creation. An inadequate infrastructure can negatively impact the attitudes and
intentions of nascent female entrepreneurs, possibly impeding their ability to take
advantage of business opportunities. Educational programs can help fill this void and
encourage more women to consider business ownership. Research has highlighted the
importance of female involvement in entrepreneurship, and as indicated in a 2001
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor report, there is perhaps no better way for a country
to accelerate its entrepreneurial pace than to “encourage more of its women to
participate” (Reynolds et al., 2001).
In this particular instance, both a sense of control and knowledge of how to act in
business settings are likely to develop over time and with positive past experiences in
an educational or business setting. The positive side of this is that in the future, any
gap that exists among men and women should shrink since more women are beginning
to view entrepreneurship as a viable career option (MacRae, 2005). In fact, the number
of ventures started by women has steadily increased during the past decade, with
projections that currently 30 percent of small businesses in the USA are owned by
women or minorities (Bergman, 2006), and that number possibly approaching
50 percent sometime in the near future. Specifically, the number of female-owned
businesses grew by 17 percent between 1997 and 2004, approximately twice the
national average during that time period (Center for Women’s Business Research,
2005).
 Practical implications Attitudes of US
While not the primary objective of this study, a significant derivative of it has been to business
offer evidence as to the value of entrepreneurship education programs like the SBI.
Research shows that individuals aged 25-34 are often interested in new venture students
creation, and those individuals with post-secondary academic experience are more
likely to be entrepreneurial (Minniti et al., 2005a). This makes it critical for colleges and
universities to offer relevant entrepreneurship education programs since many young 577
adults interested in business ownership will attend these institutions.
For those students with limited or no direct entrepreneurial exposure, especially
females and non-Caucasian groups, the SBI program offers an opportunity to gain real
business experience via interaction with local entrepreneurs. It cannot only help
students recognize entrepreneurship as a viable career choice, but also equip them with
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

a better skill set for business development. As suggested by Brindley (2005), women
entrepreneurs need support networks that can help them build confidence and better
understand entry barriers so they can see themselves as viable candidates for business
ownership. Participation in the SBI, and similar programs, can provide such an
experience since students have direct exposure to the entrepreneurial process.
No matter the level of current success, the SBI and other entrepreneurship education
programs must constantly analyze the needs of its students and be willing to use this
information to modify the curriculum. As pointed out by Thompson (2004), talent and
temperament are vital for entrepreneurs, and talent can be improved through
participation in support programs. In fact, if you can assess whether or not someone
has the temperament to be an entrepreneur, then learning can be “relatively quick and
easy” when appropriate training is provided (p. 246). Programs aimed at meeting
specifically identified needs can be quite effective for those already possessing an
entrepreneurial temperament.
College courses, particularly ones with experiential activities and high-faculty
involvement, can better enable students to reach their entrepreneurial potential via
skill attainment and increased expectations for success. In addition, these programs
may be attractive for non-business students interested in business ownership. Many
other academic departments help students obtain competency skills for their chosen
profession, but fail to effectively teach the necessary skills for business creation.
Business schools would be wise to partner with other departments on their campus to
prepare future entrepreneurs, regardless of the type of venture.

Conclusions and future research

Because one’s attitudes are likely to lead to one’s intentions, and these, in turn, to
behaviors, future research should continue to consider what factors are related to and
may impact entrepreneurial attitudes. For example, it would be of interest to know if
entrepreneurship education programs like the SBI have an effect on entrepreneurial
attitudes. Are attitudes shifted such that they are more entrepreneur-like as a result of
exposure in this format? Future studies should focus more intently on students that
have specifically chosen to enroll in entrepreneurial courses that are geared toward
learning how to effectively develop and manage a business venture. Longitudinal
studies can also be beneficial and perhaps provide more evidence of the value of such
courses. Also, in order to more fully examine the role of academic major and ethnicity
in entrepreneurial attitudes, a larger population must be sought that would allow for
 ET meaningful comparisons to be made and better reflect the diversity of entrepreneurs in
50,7 society.
Another area of interest is the relationship between entrepreneurial attitudes and
entrepreneurial aptitude. For many individuals, positive attitudes are associated with
behaviors that they are skilled at and vice-versa. An examination of this linkage would
provide insight into improving the educational experiences of those seeking training
578 related to starting and running an entrepreneurial enterprise.
The small business sector is likely to be the primary source of future employment
for many countries. Specifically, these businesses are expected to provide
approximately 75 percent of the future net jobs added to the American economy
(SBA, 2006). As this entrepreneurial spirit continues to flourish, an understanding of
those factors that promote it is necessary. The present examination of attitudes
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

associated with entrepreneurship helps us understand one part of this equation.

References
Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior & Decision Processes,
Vol. 50, pp. 179-211.
Bergman, M. (2006), Women-owned Businesses Grew at Twice the National Average, United
States Census Bureau, Washington, DC, available at: www.census.gov/pressrelease/www/
releases/archives/business_ownership/006351.html (accessed July 1, 2007).
Boden, R. and Nucci, A. (2000), “On the survival prospects of men’s and women’s new business
ventures”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 347-62.
Bohner, G. and Wanke, M. (2001), Attitudes and Attitude Change, Psychology Press, Florence, KY.
Bolton, W.K. and Thompson, J.L. (2000), Entrepreneurs: Talent, Temperament, Technique,
Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford.
Bosma, N. and Harding, R. (2006), Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2006 Results Report, Babson
College, Wellesley, MA.
Brindley, C. (2005), “Barriers to women achieving their entrepreneurial potential: women and
risk”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol. 11 No. 2,
pp. 144-61.
Brush, C.G. and Chaganti, R. (1999), “Businesses without glamour? An analysis of resources on
performance by size and age in small service and retail firms”, Journal of Business
Venturing, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 233-57.
Busenitz, L.W. (1999), “Entrepreneurial risk and strategic decision-making: it’s a matter of
perspective”, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 325-40.
Carlson, S.D. (1985), “Consistency of attitude components: a new approach for an old problem”,
Dissertation Abstracts International, Vol. 46 No. 09B, p. 3261.
Carter, N.M., Williams, M. and Reynolds, P.D. (1997), “Discontinuance among new firms in retail:
the influence of initial resources, strategy, and gender”, Journal of Business Venturing,
Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 125-45.
Carter, N.W., Gartner, W.B., Shaver, K.G. and Gatewood, E.J. (2003), “The career reasons of
nascent entrepreneurs”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 13-39.
Carter, S. (2000), “Improving the numbers and performance of women-owned businesses: some
implications for training and advisory services”, Education þ Training, Vol. 42 Nos 4/5,
pp. 326-34.
 Center for Women’s Business Research (2005), Top Facts about Women-owned Businesses, Attitudes of US
Center for Women’s Business Research, Washington, DC, available at: www.
womensbusinessresearch.org/topfacts.html (accessed July 1, 2007).
business
Chrisman, J.J. (1999), “The influence of outsider-generated knowledge resources on venture students
creation”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 42-59.
Chrisman, J.J. and McMullan, W.E. (2000), “A preliminary assessment of outsider assistance as a
knowledge resource: the longer-term impact of new venture counseling”, Entrepreneurship 579
Theory & Practice, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 37-54.
Davidsson, P. (1995), “Determinants of entrepreneurial intentions”, paper presented at the
RENT IX Workshop in Entrepreneurship Research, Piacenza, November 23-24.
Douglas, E.J. and Shepherd, D.A. (2002), “Self-employment as a career choice: attitudes,
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

entrepreneurial intentions, and utility maximization”, Entrepreneurship Theory &

Practice, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 81-90.
Ede, F.O., Panigrahi, B. and Calcich, S.E. (1998), “African American students’ attitudes toward
entrepreneurship education”, Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 73 No. 5, pp. 291-7.
Farmer, H.S. (1997), “Gender differences in career development”, in Farmer, H.S. (Ed.), Diversity
and Women’s Career Development, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 127-60.
Florin, J., Karri, R. and Rossiter, N. (2007), “Fostering entrepreneurial drive in business education:
an attitudinal approach”, Journal of Management Education, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 17-42.
Frazier, B.J. and Niehm, L.S. (2006), “Predicting the entrepreneurial intentions of non-business
majors: a preliminary investigation”, paper presented at the USASBE/SBI Conference,
Tucson, AZ, January 14-17.
Gartner, W.B. (1985), “A conceptual framework for describing the phenomenon for new venture
creation”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 696-706.
Gasse, Y. (1985), “A strategy for the promotion and identification of potential entrepreneurs at
the secondary school level”, in Hornaday, J.A., Shils, B., Timmons, J.A. and Vesper, K.H.
(Eds), Frontiers of Entrepreneurship, Babson College, Wellesley, MA, pp. 538-59.
Gatewood, E.J. and Shaver, K.G. (1991), “Expectancies for success and attributes for failure:
toward a theory of entrepreneurial persistence”, paper presented at the Academy of
Management, Miami, FL.
Gatewood, E.J., Shaver, K.G., Powers, J.B. and Gartner, W.B. (2002), “Entrepreneurial expectancy,
task effort, and performance”, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, Vol. 27 No. 2,
pp. 187-206.
Grubb, W.L., Harris, M.L. and MacKenzie, W.I. (2006), “Business students’ perceptions of
employment in small and medium-sized enterprises versus multinational corporations:
investigating the moderating effect of academic major, gender, and personality”, Journal of
Small Business Strategy, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 27-36.
Hatten, T.S. and Ruhland, S.K. (1995), “Student attitude towards entrepreneurship as affected by
participation in an SBI program”, Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 70 No. 4,
pp. 224-8.
Heilman, M.E. and Chen, J.J. (2003), “Entrepreneurship as a solution: the allure of
self-employment for women and minorities”, Human Resource Management Review,
Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 347-64.
Hisrich, R.D. (2000), “Can psychological approaches be used effectively: an overview”, European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 93-6.
 ET Hisrich, R.D. and Brush, C.G. (1987), “Women entrepreneurs: a longitudinal study”, in Ronstadt, R.,
Hornaday, J.A., Peterson, R. and Vesper, K.H. (Eds), Frontiers of Entrepreneurship, Babson
50,7 College, Wellesley, MA, pp. 187-9.
Kent, C.A. (1990), “Introduction: educating the heffalump”, in Kent, C.A. (Ed.), Entrepreneurship
Education: Current Developments, Future Directions, Quorum Books, New York, NY,
pp. 1-27.
580 Kourilsky, M.L. and Esfandiari, M. (1997), “Entrepreneurship education and lower socioeconomic
black youth: an empirical investigation”, The Urban Review, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 205-15.
Kourilsky, M.L. and Walstad, W.B. (1998), “Entrepreneurship and female youth: knowledge,
attitudes, gender differences, and educational practices”, Journal of Business Venturing,
Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 77-88.
Krueger, N. (1993), “The impact of prior entrepreneurial exposure on perceptions of new venture
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

feasibility and desirability”, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 5-21.
Krueger, N. and Brazeal, D. (1994), “Entrepreneurial potential and potential entrepreneurs”,
Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 91-4.
Kuratko, D. (2005), “The emergence of entrepreneurship education: developments, trends, and
challenges”, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 577-97.
McClelland, D.C. (1961), The Achieving Society, Van Nostrand, New York, NY.
MacRae, N. (2005), “Women and work: a ten year retrospective”, Work, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 331-9.
Matlay, H. (2005), “Researching entrepreneurship and education: what is entrepreneurship and
does it matter?”, Education þ Training, Vol. 47 Nos 8/9, pp. 665-77.
Minniti, M. and Bygrave, W.D. (2003), Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2003 Executive Report,
Babson College, Wellesley, MA.
Minniti, M., Allen, I.E. and Langowitz, N. (2005a), Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2005 Report
on Women and Entrepreneurship, Babson College, Babson Park, MA.
Minniti, M., Bygrave, W.D. and Autio, E. (2005b), Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2005
Executive Report, Babson College, Babson Park, MA.
Mitra, J. and Matlay, H. (2004), “Entrepreneurial and vocational education and training: lessons
from eastern and central Europe”, Industry and Higher Education, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 53-69.
Moy, J.W. and Lee, S.M. (2002), “The career choice of business graduates: SMEs or MNCs?”,
Career Development International, Vol. 7 Nos 6/7, pp. 339-47.
Peterman, N.E. and Kennedy, J. (2003), “Enterprise education: influencing students’ perception of
entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 129-44.
Politis, D. (2005), “The process of entrepreneurial learning: a conceptual framework”,
Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 399-424.
Pritchard, R., Potter, G. and Saccucci, M. (2004), “The selection of a business major: elements for
influencing student choice and implications for outcomes assessment”, Journal of
Education for Business, Vol. 79 No. 3, pp. 152-7.
Reitan, B. (1996), “Entrpreneurial intentions: a combined models approach”, paper presented at
the Nineth Nordic Small Business Research Conference, Lillehammer, May 29-31.
Reynolds, P.D., Camp, S.M., Bygrave, W., Autio, E. and Hay, M. (2001), Global Entrepreneurship
Monitor 2001 Executive Report, Kauffman Foundation, Kansas City, MO.
Robb, A.M. (2002), “Entrepreneurial performance by women and minorities: the case for new
firms”, Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 383-97.
Robinson, P.B. (1987), “Prediction of entrepreneurship based on attitude consistency model”,
Dissertation Abstracts International, Vol. 48, p. 2807B.
 Robinson, P.B., Stimpson, D.V., Huefner, J.C. and Hunt, H.K. (1991), “An attitude approach to the Attitudes of US
prediction of entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, Vol. 15 No. 4,
pp. 13-31. business
SBA (2006), Small Business Statistics, Small Business Administration – SBA, Washington, DC, students
available at: www.sba.gov/aboutsba/sbastats.html (accessed July 15, 2007).
Shapero, A. and Sokol, L. (1982), “Social dimensions of entrepreneurship”, in Kent, C.A., Sexton, D.L.
and Vesper, K.H. (Eds), Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 581
pp. 72-90.
Shaver, K.G. (1987), Principles of Social Psychology, 3rd ed., Winthrop, Cambridge, MA.
Steyaert, C. (2004), “Entrepreneurship without entrepreneurs? Reclaiming another”, Psychology of
Entrepreneurship Studies, RENT XVIII Conference, Copenhagen, November.
Sullivan, R. (2000), “Entrepreneurial learning and mentoring”, International Journal of
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 160-75.

Teo, H.A. and Poon, J.T.F. (1994), “Career choice of undergraduates and SMEs in Singapore”,
The International Journal of Career Management, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 20-6.
Thomas, P. (2001), “Women entrepreneurs opt for equity ahead of growth”, Wall Street Journal,
Vol. B2, February 27.
Thompson, J.L. (2004), “The facets of the entrepreneur: identifying entrepreneurial potential”,
Management Decision, Vol. 42 Nos 1/2, pp. 243-58.
Wortman, M.S. (1987), “Entrepreneurship: an integrating typology and evaluation of the
empirical research in the field”, Journal of Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 259-79.

Further reading
Acs, Z., Tarpley, F.A. and Phillips, B.D. (1998), The American Evolution: The Role and Impact of
Small Firms, SBA Office of Advocacy, Washington, DC, available at: www.sba.gov/advo/
stats/econ_arch/evol_pap.html (accessed July 1, 2007).
Chen, C.C., Greene, P.G. and Crick, A. (1998), “Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish
entrepreneurs from managers?”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 295-316.
Perry, S.C. (2002), “A comparison of failed and non-failed small businesses in the United States:
do men and women use different planning and decision making strategies”, Journal of
Developmental Entrepreneurship, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 415-28.
Reynolds, P.D. and White, S.B. (1997), The Entrepreneurial Process: Economic Growth, Men,
Women, and Minorities, Quorum Books, Westport, CP.
SBA Office of Advocacy (2002), Small Business by the Numbers, Small Business Administration
Office of Advocacy – SBA Office of Advocacy, Washington, DC, available at: www.sba.
gov/advo/stats/sbfaq.pdf (accessed July 1, 2007).

Corresponding author
Michael L. Harris can be contacted at: harrismi@ecu.edu

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
 This article has been cited by:

1. Zullina H. Shaari, Amzairi Amar, Azamudin Badri Harun, Mohamed Radzi Zainol. 2015. Technical
and Business Undergraduates' Self-Efficacy in Entrepreneurship. Journal of Economics, Business and
Management 3, 417-420. [CrossRef]
2. Afsaneh Bagheri, Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie. 2014. The moderating role of gender in shaping
entrepreneurial intentions: Implications for vocational guidance. International Journal for Educational and
Vocational Guidance 14, 255-273. [CrossRef]
3. Rafael Alcaraz-Rodriguez, Mario M. Alvarez, Marcia Villasana. 2014. Developing entrepreneurial
competences in students in the life sciences: the Lifetech Ad-Venture program. On the Horizon 22:3,
182-191. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. Malcolm J. Beynon, Paul Jones, Gary Packham, David Pickernell. 2014. Investigating the motivation for
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

enterprise education: a CaRBS based exposition. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour &
Research 20:6, 584-612. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
5. Rachid Zeffane. 2014. Does collectivism necessarily negate the spirit of entrepreneurship?. International
Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research 20:3, 278-296. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
6. Mery Citra Sondari. 2014. Is Entrepreneurship Education Really Needed?: Examining the Antecedent of
Entrepreneurial Career Intention. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 115, 44-53. [CrossRef]
7. Harry Matlay Professor, Dehghanpour Farashah Ali. 2013. The process of impact of entrepreneurship
education and training on entrepreneurship perception and intention. Education + Training 55:8/9,
868-885. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
8. Harun Sesen. 2013. Personality or environment? A comprehensive study on the entrepreneurial intentions
of university students. Education + Training 55:7, 624-640. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
9. Jorge López Puga, Juan García García. 2012. A Comparative Study on Entrepreneurial Attitudes Modeled
with Logistic Regression and Bayes Nets. The Spanish journal of psychology 15, 1147-1162. [CrossRef]
10. Dawn Langkamp Bolton, Michelle D. Lane. 2012. Individual entrepreneurial orientation: development
of a measurement instrument. Education + Training 54:2/3, 219-233. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
11. Vassilis Kostoglou, Errikos Siakas. 2012. Investigating higher education graduates’ entrepreneurship in
Greece. Annals of Innovation & Entrepreneurship 3. . [CrossRef]
12. Z.A. Lope Pihie, A. Bagheri. 2011. Are Teachers Qualified to Teach Entrepreneurship? Analysis of
Entrepreneurial Attitude and Self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Sciences 11, 3308-3314. [CrossRef]
13. Afsaneh Bagheri, Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie. 2011. Entrepreneurial leadership: towards a model for
learning and development. Human Resource Development International 14, 447-463. [CrossRef]
14. Bagheri. 2011. On Becoming an Entrepreneurial Leader: A Focus on the Impacts of University
Entrepreneurship Programs. American Journal of Applied Sciences 8, 884-892. [CrossRef]
15. Z.A. Lope Pihie, A. Bagheri. 2011. Malay Secondary School Students’ Entrepreneurial Attitude
Orientation and Entrepreneurial Self-efficacy: A Descriptive Study. Journal of Applied Sciences 11, 316-322.
[CrossRef]
16. Sandra Ma Sánchez Cañizares, Fernando J. Fuentes García. 2010. Gender differences in entrepreneurial
attitudes. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 29:8, 766-786. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
 17. Ghulam Nabi, Rick Holden, Andreas Walmsley. 2010. Entrepreneurial intentions among students:
towards a re‐focused research agenda. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 17:4, 537-551.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
18. Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie, Afsaneh Bagheri. 2010. Entrepreneurial attitude and entrepreneurial
efficacy of technical secondary school students. Journal of Vocational Education & Training 62, 351-366.
[CrossRef]
19. Mário Franco, Heiko Haase, Arndt Lautenschläger. 2010. Students' entrepreneurial intentions: an inter‐
regional comparison. Education + Training 52:4, 260-275. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
20. Afsaneh Bagheri, Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie. 2010. Entrepreneurial Leadership Learning: In Search
of Missing Links. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 7, 470-479. [CrossRef]
21. Erich J. Schwarz, Malgorzata A. Wdowiak, Daniela A. Almer‐Jarz, Robert J. Breitenecker. 2009. The
effects of attitudes and perceived environment conditions on students' entrepreneurial intent. Education
Downloaded by University of British Columbia At 04:28 22 November 2014 (PT)

+ Training 51:4, 272-291. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

22. Leyla Tulunay, Semra Güney, M. Kemal ÖktemEntrepreneurship Readiness in Turkey: 415-426.
[CrossRef]