The nascent entrepreneurship hub: goals, entrepreneurial self-efficacy and start-up outcomes

Entrepreneurship involves human agency. The entrepreneurial process occurs because people are motivated to pursue and exploit perceived opportunities. It is rooted in the theory that action is the result of motivation and cognition. Therefore, this paper applies elements of goal theory and social cognitive theory to develop a motivational model of nascent entrepreneurial start-up outcomes. The objective of this model is to renew attention on motivational constructs in entrepreneurship research. Additionally, it provides predictive value for the likelihood of new firm founding among nascent entrepreneurs. Results suggest that motivational antecedents among nascent entrepreneurs significantly influence the likelihood of quitting the start-up process versus continuing nascent entrepreneurial start-up efforts.     

Entrepreneurship in the Region: Breeding Ground for Nascent Entrepreneurs?

This paper employs data from the German Socioeconomic Panel (SOEP) and data from the German Social Insurance Statistics to study nascent entrepreneurship. In particular, micro data from the SOEP characterizing employees and nascent entrepreneurs is combined with data characterizing the entrepreneurial environment. The principal findings suggest that individuals are embedded in their local entrepreneurial environment which influences an individual especially at the beginning of the decision process about whether to become self-employed. Work and previous self-employment experience is more important than formal education for the likelihood of being a nascent entrepreneur. Furthermore, social capital is an important stimulus for nascent entrepreneurs. Finally, the results indicate that financial assets are less important for nascent entrepreneurs.     

Human capital signals and entrepreneurs’ success in equity crowdfunding

Grounding on research about the role of signals in the attraction of equity finance, this paper studies the effects of diverse human capital signals on entrepreneurs’ success in equity crowdfunding. We argue that the human capital of an entrepreneur, who launches (alone or with other teammates) an equity crowdfunding campaign to finance her start-up, constitutes a set of signals of the start-up quality. The impact of each human capital signal on entrepreneur’s success in equity crowdfunding depends on both signal fit with start-up quality and signal ambiguity. Empirical estimates on 284 entrepreneurs who launched equity crowdfunding campaigns indicate that only entrepreneurs’ business education and entrepreneurial experience, two human capital signals that have both a good fit with start-up quality and a low degree of ambiguity, significantly contribute to entrepreneurs’ success in equity crowdfunding.     

The entrepreneur's mode of entry: Business takeover or new venture start?

We extend the well-known occupational choice model of entrepreneurship by analyzing the mode of entry. Individuals can become entrepreneurs by taking over established businesses or starting up new ventures from scratch. We argue that the new venture creation mode is associated with higher levels of schooling whereas managerial experience, new venture start-up capital requirements and industry level risk promote the takeover mode. A sample of data on entrepreneurs from The Netherlands provides broad support for these hypotheses, and also bears out a prediction that entrepreneurs whose parents run a family firm tend to invest the least in schooling. We go on to discuss the implications for researchers, entrepreneurs and public policy makers.     

Entrepreneurship ecosystems and women entrepreneurs: a social capital and network approach

This study investigates the effects of venture typology, race, ethnicity, and past venture experience on the social capital distribution of women entrepreneurs in entrepreneurial ecosystems. Social network data from two municipal ecosystems in Florida, USA (Gainesville and Jacksonville), suggest that network connectivity and the distribution of social capital are significantly different for men and women entrepreneurs. This difference is contingent on the venture type. Male entrepreneurs show higher comparative scores of bridging social capital in aggressive- and managed-growth venture networks, while women entrepreneurs surpass their male counterparts’ bridging capital scores in lifestyle and survival venture networks. Lastly, experienced women entrepreneurs that self-identified as white showed a higher degree of network connectivity and bridging social capital in the entrepreneurial ecosystem than less experienced non-white female entrepreneurs. Implications for entrepreneurship practice and new research paths are discussed.

     

Having your cake and eating it too? A two-stage model of the impact of employment and parallel job search on hybrid nascent entrepreneurship

Hybrid entrepreneurship, simultaneous employment and entrepreneurship, is increasingly prevalent. We theorize entrepreneurial entry as one possible outcome of a two-stage new employment search process 1) decision to search for a job, attempt a start-up, or both and 2) outcome of start-up attempts. Stage 2 is critically different for hybrid (employed) nascent entrepreneurs who have greater access to resources and experience lower risk but also more salient alternative employment options. Using a novel longitudinal panel of new employment opportunity seekers, we find that employment status matters and that “parallel search” for a new job is detrimental to successful entrepreneurial entry.     

Exploring start-up event sequences

This research analyzed new venture start-up activities undertaken by 71 nascent entrepreneurs. Nascent entrepreneurs are individuals who were identified as taking steps to found a new business but who had not yet succeeded in making the transition to new business ownership. Longitudinal data for the study comes from a secondary data analysis of two representative samples, one of 683 adult residents in Wisconsin (Reynolds and White 1993) and the other of 1016 adult residents of the United States (Curtin 1982). These surveys were conducted between 1992 and 1993, and the nascent entrepreneurs were reinterviewed six to 18 months after their initial interview.Three broad questions were addressed: (1) What activities do nascent entrepreneurs initiate in attempting to establish a new business? (2) How many activities do nascent entrepreneurs initiate during the gestation of the start-up? and (3) When are particular activities initiated or completed?Between the first and second interview, 48% of the nascent entrepreneurs reported they had set up a business in operation. Over 20% had given up and were no longer actively trying to establish a business. Almost a third of the respondents reported they were still trying to establish a firm.As a way to summarize the results and as a springboard toward some insights into the implications of this research for practice and future research, we developed the following activity profiles of the three types of nascent entrepreneurs studied. These profiles are offered as a combination of both fact and some intuition about the findings.STARTED A BUSINESS. Nascent entrepreneurs who were able to start a business were more aggressive in making their businesses real. They undertook activities that made their businesses tangible to others: they looked for facilities and equipment, sought and got financial support, formed a legal entity, organized a team, bought facilities and equipment, and devoted full time to the business. Individuals who started businesses seemed to act with a greater level of intensity. They undertook more activities than those individuals who did not start a business. The pattern of activities seem to indicate that individuals who started firms put themselves into the day-to-day process of running an ongoing business as quickly as they could and that these activities resulted in starting firms that generated sales (94% of the entrepreneurs) and positive cash flow (50% of the entrepreneurs). What is not known is how successful or profitable these new firms will be over time. For example, 50% of the firms that were started had not reached positive cash flow and these firms may have been started by individuals who were foolhardy and rushed into operation of a business that would not be sustainable.GAVE UP. The pattern of activities for the group of entrepreneurs who gave up seem to indicate that these entrepreneurs discovered that their initial idea for their businesses would not lead to success. The finding that the activity of developing a model or prototype differentiated individuals who gave up from those who were still trying would suggest that those who gave up had “tested” their ideas out and found that they would not work according to their expectations. Nascent entrepreneurs who gave up seemed to be similar in their activity patterns compared with those who started their firms, that is, individuals who gave up pursued the activities of creating a business in an aggressive manner at the beginning of the process. But as the business unfolded over time, these entrepreneurs decreased their activities and then ceased start-up activities. This group of individuals might be seen as either having the wisdom to test their ideas out before jumping into something that might lead to failure or lacking the flexibility to find more creative ways to solve the problems that they were confronted with.STILL TRYING. It would seem that those who are still trying are not putting enough effort into the start-up process in order to find out whether they should start the business or give up. Those still trying had undertaken fewer activities than individuals in the other two groups. The still trying entrepreneurs were devoting their short-term efforts toward activities internal to the start-up process (e.g., saving money and preparing a plan) and less effort toward activities that would make the business real to others. The still trying entrepreneurs may be all talk and little action. Or these still trying entrepreneurs might be involved in developing businesses that take longer for these particular opportunities to unfold. (It should be noted that there was no industry effect across the three groups.)Our advice to individuals considering business start-up is that the results seem to provide evidence that nascent entrepreneurs should aggressively pursue opportunities in the short-term, because they will quickly learn that these opportunities will either reveal themselves as worthy of start-up or as poor choices that should be abandoned. Individuals who do not devote the time and effort to undertaking the activities necessary for starting a business may find themselves perennially still trying, rather than succeeding or failing.What entrepreneurs do in their day-to-day activities matters. The kinds of activities that nascent entrepreneurs undertake, the number of activities, and the sequence of these activities have a significant influence on the ability of nascent entrepreneurs to successfully create new ventures. This study suggests that the behaviors of nascent entrepreneurs who have successfully started a new venture can be identified and differentiated from the behaviors of nascent entrepreneurs who failed. We believe that future studies will more precisely identify the kinds of behaviors appropriate for certain new venture conditions. If such contingency information can be generated, entrepreneurship research is likely to have significant benefits for entrepreneurship practice, education, and public policy.     

Intrapreneurship or entrepreneurship?

I explore the factors that determine whether new business opportunities are exploited by starting a new venture for an employer (‘nascent intrapreneurship’) or independently (‘nascent entrepreneurship’). Analysis of a nationally representative sample of American adults gathered in 2005-06 uncovers systematic differences between the drivers of nascent entrepreneurship and nascent intrapreneurship. Nascent entrepreneurs tend to leverage their general human capital and social ties to organize ventures which sell directly to customers, whereas intrapreneurs disproportionately commercialize unique new opportunities which sell to other businesses. Implications of the findings are discussed.     

Roles of Social Capital in Venture Creation: Key Dimensions and Research Implications*

This study was built upon Nahapiet and Ghoshal's three dimensions of social capital—structural, relational, and cognitive. It addresses three research questions: (1) Are there significant differences in social capital between nascent entrepreneurs and the general public (control group)? (2) Are there significant differences in social capital between technology and nontechnology nascent entrepreneurs? (3) How do the three dimensions of social capital interact among themselves across different sample groups? These questions were examined by using the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics data set. Results suggest that there are no significant differences in various dimensions of social capital between nascent entrepreneurs and the general public. What differentiates the two groups is not the amount of social capital but the patterns of association among its different dimensions. Additionally, the authors found that technology‐based nascent entrepreneurs tend to have a higher degree of relational capital than their nontechnology counterparts. Implications and future research directions are discussed.     

Crime,community social capital and entrepreneurship: Evidence from Australian communities

Crime is an anti-social blight on communities that increases the cost of doing business, including for entrepreneurs. Drawing on Australian longitudinal data, this study examines the links between crime rates and the propensity for entrepreneurship within communities. We do so by matching propensity for entrepreneurship with types of crime found at the community level where crime occurs. We find that higher total crime rates, crimes against the person and property crime, significantly lower the propensity for entrepreneurship in communities. We also show that the core facets of community social capital – trust, membership in voluntary organizations and support and cooperation – mediate this relationship.Executive summaryWe comprehensively examine whether higher community crime rates – crime on people and crime on property – cause lower rates of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship research extensively examines how gaining social capital, defined as the social resources one gains within one's community, promotes entrepreneurship. This study considers whether a pervasive community dynamic in crime impedes entrepreneurship. Specifically, we show that the two main kinds of crime – people and property – inhibit entrepreneurship.We show the facets of community social capital that mediate the relationship between crime and entrepreneurship. We inform the role of community-based social capital in promoting entrepreneurship (Kwon et al., 2013) by considering how higher crime lowers social capital and in turn entrepreneurship. We show that core facets of relational social capital – trust, voluntary membership in community bodies, support, and cooperation – mediate the relationship between crime and entrepreneurship. Likewise, communities with more robust reserves of social capital are better able to withstand crime and promote entrepreneurship.Examining the link between crime and entrepreneurship allows us to contribute to the literature on entrepreneurship and social capital. We discuss the various ways in which crime diminishes social capital to shape entrepreneurship. In our framework that is predicated on theory on community social capital, crime creates distrust because it causes citizens to be wearier and more suspicious of each other, impeding sharing of ideas and knowledge for ventures. Crime impedes the efficacy and membership of community-based organizations that allow entrepreneurs to network. Crime reduces the support available for founders to start and sustain businesses in focal communities, as individuals seek opportunities and resources outside their communities. Crime diminishes the extent to which people take pride in and identify with their communities, as evidenced by voluntary membership in community organizations. Crime reduces collaboration because it leads to self-protective behaviors, including flight from high-crime communities, that hinder norms of reciprocity. Crime reduces cooperation as criminals are more likely to resort to coercion, as enforced by monitoring and violence, to solve business problems.Findings rely on a comprehensive database of crime rates across Australian postcodes. Crime is typically a localized phenomenon – it affects business outcomes in local communities. We obtain community-level crime rates from each Australian state and territory police force or relevant government agencies and match these data with entrepreneurship rates by postcode. Our primary identification strategy follows Dustmann and Fasani (2016), who estimate the effect of local area crime on mental health in the United Kingdom (UK). This identification strategy removes the effects of residential sorting and correlates crime with time-varying unobserved entrepreneurship determinants if there is no endogenous migration from local crime. The main findings are robust to instrumenting for local area crime to which movers are exposed and for historical abortion rates in the state or territory where the individual lives, as well as a number of other approaches to obtaining causal inference.The article holds considerable practical relevance for policymakers seeking to promote community entrepreneurship. Our study is highly relevant to community leaders and policymakers working to boost local entrepreneurship. Findings strongly suggest that efforts to reduce crime are a primary mechanism to protect social capital within communities and, therefore, entrepreneurship. Policy initiatives dedicated to creating and expanding social ventures would a) boost entrepreneurship and social capital and b) mitigate the detrimental effects of crime on entrepreneurship (Wry and York, 2017).     

The Influence of Personality Traits and Demographic Factors on Social Entrepreneurship Start Up Intentions

The sheer impact of the recent global financial turmoil and scandals (such as Enron and WorldCom) has demonstrated that unbridled commercial entrepreneurs who are allowed to pursue their short-term opportunities regardless of the consequences has led to a massive depreciation of the wealth of nations, social livelihood and environmental degradation. This article suggests that the time has come for entrepreneurs to adopt a more integrative view of business that blends economic, social and environmental values. Social entrepreneurs present such a proposition through their deep commitment towards the social vision, appreciation of sustainable practices, innovativeness, ability to build social networks and also generate viable financial returns. It could be expected that social entrepreneurs often possess certain distinct personality characteristics which define their behaviours/actions. Personality traits are partly developed by innate nurturing, socialization and education. These tacit traits are also formed values/beliefs held and play an important role in driving social entrepreneurial decision making. Thus, personality traits may influence the intentions and the manner in which the individual acts. We hold that if social entrepreneurship is to be effective and impactful, business and management education can facilitate the development of these critical personality traits. Thus, this study primes at determining the personality traits that influence social entrepreneurs’ start-up intentions. It also reinforces the findings that personality traits do influence entrepreneurship in general. This study examines the influence of the Big Five personality traits on social entrepreneurship dimensions. The findings reveal that agreeableness positively influences all dimensions of social entrepreneurship, whereas openness exerts a positive influence on social vision, innovation and financial returns. Methodologically, this study develops valid and reliable scales for social entrepreneurship and verifies the adopted Big Five personality measure of Schmit et al. (Pers Psychol 53:153–193, 2000) using the five-point Likert scale. The implication of this study is that element of appreciation of social responsibility, sustainability and character development needs to be integrated within the business education curriculum to support social entrepreneurs in realizing genuine value and impact to the causes and communities they serve. Future business leaders also need to be equipped with entrepreneurship skills, while exuding independent and reflective thinking in the pursuit life-long learning. The originality of this study lies in its focus on personality traits on social rather than commercial entrepreneurship. It is hoped that the findings will trigger a paradigm shift towards greater social entrepreneurship through education by nurturing sustainable development values in future business graduates.     

Examining the formation of human capital in entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis of entrepreneurship education outcomes

Effective human capital formation through the medium of entrepreneurship education and training (EET) is of increasing concern for governments, as EET is growing rapidly across the world. Unfortunately, there is a lack of consistent evidence showing that EET helps to create more or better entrepreneurs. We undertake the first quantitative review of the literature and, in the context of human capital theory, find that there is indeed support for the value of EET. Based on 42 independent samples (N = 16,657), we find a significant relationship between EET and entrepreneurship-related human capital assets (r_w = .217) and entrepreneurship outcomes (r_w = .159). The relationship between EET and entrepreneurship outcomes is stronger for academic-focused EET interventions (r_w = .238) than for training-focused EET interventions (r_w = .151). We find evidence of heterogeneity in many of our correlations, and recommend that future studies examine potential moderators to more clearly delineate EET effect sizes. We also find a number of methodological weaknesses among the studies analyzed and that those studies with lower methodological rigor are overstating the effect of EET. Recommendations to improve the quality of future work in the field are provided.     

Part-time entrepreneurship and financial constraints: evidence from the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics

To date, entrepreneurship literature overlooks part-time entrepreneurs, i.e., those who devote time to entrepreneurial ventures and wage employment at the same time. In contrast, recent evidence from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, a large cross-national study on the level of entrepreneurial activity, establishes that 80% of nascent entrepreneurs also hold regular wage jobs. This paper offers a model of entrepreneurial entry under financial constraints where individuals choose between wage employment, part-time, and full-time entrepreneurship. Those who become nascent entrepreneurs must further decide how much capital to invest and what proportion of time to spend in business. I test this model using data from the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics, which covers start-ups and nascent entrepreneurs. My findings show that part-time entrepreneurs are not affected by financial constraints. The analysis suggests that industry barriers, risk aversion, and learning by doing might be other factors worth investigating.     

Start-up incentives: Entrepreneurship policy or active labour market programme?

As several European governments develop new start-up programmes during recessions, the appropriateness of these policies recently has become a hot policy issue. This study suggests that the contribution of these incentives is dubious, if aimed to combat economic and jobs crises as part of the entrepreneurship policy, and can be shaped by various country-specific factors, such as the economic situation and the stringency of labour laws. To provide support for these claims, this paper investigates the underlying determinants of an individual's decision to switch from unemployment to self-employment in Europe and stresses the need to devote special attention to the role of three essential dimensions: (i) the existing heterogeneity within self-employment, by considering self-employed individuals who hire employees (employers) and self-employed individuals without personnel (own-account workers) as separated groups; (ii) the effects of different measures of social capital and network contacts, as forms of micro level institutional factors; and (iii) the explanatory power of cross-country differences in the state of the economy, expenditure on start-up incentives, and the stringency of labour laws, as forms of macro level institutional factors. This study has useful theory and policy implications for entrepreneurship development.     

Institutional work to navigate ethical dilemmas: Evidence from a social enterprise

Social entrepreneurs encounter ethical dilemmas while addressing their social and commercial missions. The literature has implicitly acknowledged the ethical dilemmas social entrepreneurs face; however, the nature and implications of these ethical dilemmas and how social entrepreneurs navigate them are underexplored and undertheorized. We address this by conducting a 36-month field study of a social enterprise operating in a rural resource-constrained environment in India and dealing with a stigmatized product. We found four categories of ethical dilemmas faced by social entrepreneurs: challenges in engaging the community (equality vs. efficiency and fairness vs. care), challenges related to spillover effects (right vs. responsibilities), challenges in balancing diverse stakeholders (emotionally detached vs. emotionally engaged), and challenges related to cross-subsidization efforts (utilitarianism vs. fairness). Further, we identified three types of institutional work social entrepreneurs engage in to address ethical dilemmas: recognition work, responsibilization work, and reflective judgment work. We label these three institutional works as inclusion work - purposive actions of an entity to address ethical dilemmas by implementing its program in a way that supports the most marginalized. Our study makes an important contribution to the literature on ethics in the context of social entrepreneurship by identifying specific ethical dilemmas social entrepreneurs face in managing hybridity (balancing social-commercial objectives) and enhancing social impact (managing social-social objectives). Moreover, through the concept of inclusion work, our research not only integrates insights from ethics and institutional theories but also responds to the recent call to address grand societal challenges through institutional work.     

Joint effects of prior start-up experience and coping strategies on entrepreneurs’ psychological well-being

Drawing on theories from the coping and entrepreneurship literatures, we investigated the relationship between the entrepreneurs’ active and avoidance coping on psychological well-being (PWB) and the moderating role of prior start-up experience on this relationship. Data from 156 entrepreneurs indicate that the use of avoidance coping positively predicted immediate PWB for entrepreneurs with more start-up experience. Notably, this relationship was negative for entrepreneurs with less start-up experience. We also found that over the extended period, entrepreneurs who used avoidance coping had improved PWB only if they also used active coping. Theoretical and practical contributions to the entrepreneurship and coping research are discussed.     

To start or not to start: Outcome and ability expectations in the decision to start a new venture

This study seeks to better understand why some individuals decide to start new businesses and others do not, particularly in light of high base rates of failure. In addressing the question of “Why do some individuals choose to start new ventures?” a common perspective is that potential entrepreneurs with high levels of confidence in potential outcomes are likely to start new ventures. Alternatively, it also may be that firm creation decisions are based largely on individual expectations of one's ability. Hypotheses examining these perspectives are tested using a sample of 316 nascent entrepreneurs with the start-up decision tracked longitudinally. The results indicate that confidence in one's ability to perform tasks relevant to entrepreneurship is a robust predictor of start-up while outcome expectancies appear to play a marginal role. Theoretical and practical implications stemming from these results are discussed.     

The effect of human capital, social capital, and perceptual values on nascent entrepreneurs�� export intentions

This study investigates the influence of human capital, social capital, and cognition on nascent entrepreneurs' export intentions. The results indicate that while human capital and social capital influence the level of intended export, cognitive characteristics, such as self-efficacy and risk aversion, do not seem to influence entrepreneurs' intended level of export. The study makes three original contributions to international entrepreneurship research. The first one is the focus on “Real” Born Globals, i.e. entrepreneurs who express export intentions in the prefounding phase. The second is the focus on the individual-level factors rather than firm-level factors that explain export. Finally, the effect of experience is investigated from a path-dependency perspective rather than a “the-more-the-better” perspective. Our study suggests that it may be productive for researchers to look further into the concept of intention, as entrepreneurs' decision to internationalize presupposes a conscious intention of carrying out the action. Thus, the factors influencing the decision to internationalize may have been present prior to the founding of the venture.     

What Happens to Nascent Entrepreneurs? An Econometric Analysis of the PSED

abstract This article follows the progress of a large and nationally representative sample of American nascent entrepreneurs – identified in the initial interview of the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED) – over the next 12 months of the panel. We develop a novel theoretical framework based on maximisation of expected utility and the value of waiting, and estimate it to reveal which personal and economic characteristics are associated with venture start-up – and which are associated with remaining a nascent entrepreneur, or giving up entirely. The value of waiting turns out to play a key role in helping us understand what happens to nascent entrepreneurs. We discuss the implications of our results for entrepreneurs, lenders, business start-up support agencies and policy-makers.*The authors would like to thank two anonymous referees, as well as participants at Imperial College, London; Palm Springs (USASBE 2005); Babson College (BKERC 2005); and Clemson University (2004 PSED Symposium) and in particular Tom Lumpkin and Kelly Shaver for helpful comments on an earlier draft. The usual disclaimer applies.     

Social support timing and persistence in nascent entrepreneurship: exploring when instrumental and emotional support is most effective

This paper investigates how the timing of social support, both emotional and instrumental support, affects entrepreneurial persistence of nascent entrepreneurs. Drawing on social support theory, we hypothesize that the effectiveness of support depends on when, during the venture development process (number of gestation activities completed), it is provided. We also propose that the impact of social support depends on when during the entrepreneur’s life stage (age) that support is made available. Testing our hypotheses using a longitudinal dataset of nascent entrepreneurs, we find that emotional support is most relevant earlier on during venture development, while instrumental support is most relevant for entrepreneurs who begin their businesses in earlier life stages.