Exploring the Career/Achievement and Personal Life Orientation Differences between Entrepreneurs and Nonentrepreneurs: The Impact of Sex and Dependents

This study explores the career/achievement and personal life orientations of entrepreneurs, specifically the impact of sex and dependent-child status. Although a growing body of research has explored the similarities and uniqueness of women, none have explicitly analyzed entrepreneurs employing a career/achievement and personal life framework. In addition, no studies have sought to explore the career/achievement and personal life orientations of female entrepreneurs with female nonentrepreneurs of similar backgrounds. Consequently, this research explores and compares the career/achievement and personal life orientations of female entrepreneurs with a group of female nonentrepreneurs with similar educational levels, ages, and work experience. It also compares the orientations of male entrepreneurs with a group of male nonentrepreneurs in order to both confirm existing literature and create a means to compare intra-female with intra-male career and personal life orientations. The analysis shows no statistically significant differences in the career/achievement and personal life orientations of women entrepreneurs and similar female nonentrepreneurs. It also finds, confirming existing literature, that male entrepreneurs possess a greater career/achievement orientation as compared with male nonentrepreneurs.     

Beyond social capital: the role of entrepreneurs' social competence in their financial success

Two studies investigated the hypothesis that the higher entrepreneurs' social competence (their ability to interact effectively with others as based on discrete social skills), the greater their financial success. Entrepreneurs working in two different industries (cosmetics and high-tech) completed a questionnaire designed to measure several aspects of their social competence (e.g., accuracy in perceiving others, skill at impression management, persuasiveness). Results indicated that one aspect of social competence (e.g., accuracy in perceiving others) was positively related to financial success for both groups of entrepreneurs. In addition, social adaptability was related to financial success for entrepreneurs in the cosmetics industry, and expressiveness was related to such success for the entrepreneurs in the high-tech industry. The questionnaire employed to assess social competence was cross-validated with a third group of entrepreneurs who completed this measure themselves, and whose social competence was also rated by persons who knew them well. The two sets of ratings agreed closely, thus providing evidence for the validity of this measure. Overall, findings are consistent with the view that a high level of social capital (e.g., a favorable reputation, extensive social network, etc.) assists entrepreneurs in gaining access to persons important for their success. Once such access is attained, however, entrepreneurs' social competence influences the outcomes they experience.     

The Influence of Entrepreneurial Risk Assessment on Venture Launch or Growth Decisions

Entrepreneurs are thought to engage in riskier behavior than nonentrepreneurs, yet little empirical evidence supports that intuitively appealing notion. We argue instead that differences in information, not risk aversion, may explain the decision to launch or grow a venture. We separately test risk taking propensity and risk assessment. We hypothesize that entrepreneurs will not differ from nonentrepreneurs on risk taking propensity. Additionally, we propose and test a model of risk assessment. The sample size for this exploratory study is n=53 with 30 respondents declaring themselves as entrepreneurs and 23 declaring themselves as nonentrepreneurs. The study’s design is a simulation. Each respondent is provided with data on a potential acquisition that would result in either the launch of a new venture or significant growth for an existing firm. Consistent with the hypotheses, the results show no difference between entrepreneurs and nonentrepreneurs on the risk taking measure. We also find that we can predict entrepreneurial behavior based on risk assessment. We close with a discussion of limitations and directions for future research.     

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.     

Does money matter?: Wealth attainment as the motive for initiating growth-oriented technology ventures

The desire to attain personal wealth has long been regarded as the foremost motive for entrepreneurship. Other goals and values, however, may also contribute to entrepreneurial motivation. Thus, the extent to which money matters relative to other motives is an empirical question. In this study we examine the role of wealth as the motive for the decision to found new ventures. Three focal questions guide our research: 1) does money matter more relative to other decision dimensions in deciding to start a new high-technology venture? 2) does money matter more to entrepreneurs compared to non-entrepreneurs? and 3) does money matter in absolute terms, that is, does a decision model that focuses solely on the motive of wealth attainment parsimoniously predict entrepreneurs' start-up decisions?We conducted in-depth interviews with 51 entrepreneurs and a control group of 28 senior managers who decided not to start ventures (non-entrepreneurs) in the high-technology industry in British Columbia to address our research questions. The motives we examined are wealth attainment and an aggregate of other dimensions identified by entrepreneurs and managers. We considered three components of values: participants' ratings of the importance of various decision dimensions, their rating of the salience of these dimensions, and their satisfaction with prior levels of attainment on those decision dimensions. We assessed beliefs as participants' perceived probability of attaining their desired level of a particular decision dimension in each of three alternatives: the position held at the time the venture decision was made, the venture itself, and the next best career alternative at that time. The data were analyzed to compare entrepreneurs' values and beliefs regarding wealth with an aggregate of other decision dimensions (our relative hypotheses), and with those of non-entrepreneurs (our comparative hypotheses).Our findings do not support the common perception that money is the only, or even the most important, motive for entrepreneurs' decisions to start new ventures. Wealth attainment was significantly less important to entrepreneurs relative to an aggregate of 10 other decision dimensions, and entrepreneurs did not rate wealth as any more important than did non-entrepreneurs. Non-entrepreneurs rated wealth as no more important than other motives. Wealth attainment was also significantly less salient to entrepreneurs' decisions to venture than were other motives. Non-entrepreneurs reported that wealth was significantly more salient to their decision against founding a venture than other dimensions. In fact, non-entrepreneurs rated wealth attainment as significantly more salient to their decision against founding than entrepreneurs rated it for their decision to proceed with starting a high-technology business. A significant number of entrepreneurs started businesses even when they believed that doing so offered them a lower probability of obtaining their most desired level of wealth than did one of their other alternatives.Satisfaction ratings and stated beliefs also dispute classical predictions. Just prior to making the decision to venture, the entrepreneurs in our study were as satisfied with wealth as they were with other decision dimensions. The non-entrepreneurs were actually more satisfied with wealth attainment than with other dimensions. A comparison of the groups revealed no difference in satisfaction with wealth attainment levels. Entrepreneurs did believe that their chances of attaining their desired level of wealth were much greater through founding a new high-technology venture than through their other alternatives. This difference in beliefs, however, was not significantly greater than their optimistic beliefs about chances of attaining desired levels of other dimensions. It was significantly higher compared to the non-entrepreneurs' belief difference measures for wealth. In fact, the entrepreneurs' stated beliefs regarding the chances of attaining their desired levels of all dimensions were higher than those of the non-entrepreneurs, suggesting that entrepreneurs were simply more optimistic at the time of their decision than non-entrepreneurs.Salience findings suggest that these optimistic beliefs about wealth did not motivate the founding decision alone.We can distinguish those people who successfully started ventures by their regard for wealth as a less salient factor, and their beliefs in higher chances of a venture producing monetary and other returns. Other motives, such as innovation, vision, independence, and challenge were more important and much more salient to this sample of entrepreneurs.Our findings have implications for practice, teaching, and research. Venture capitalists who partially base their assessment of entrepreneurs on the extent to which they are motivated to make a great deal of money may benefit from reconsideration of this criterion. We have evidence of one group of high-technology entrepreneurs who achieved success without placing much decision weight on attainment of personal wealth. Nascent entrepreneurs and those who teach entrepreneurship can use this empirical finding to argue two main points: 1) not all entrepreneurs found a business for personal wealth reasons, and 2) one need not be motivated by personal wealth attainment to be a successful entrepreneur. Similarly, theoretical models that assume money is the primary motive for entrepreneurial activity require re-examination. Future research in entrepreneurship should focus less on wealth attainment and more on other motives for the venturing decision. A multiple-attribute decision model may be able to more fully explain venturing decisions.     

Entrepreneurs in Turkey: A Factor Analysis of Motivations, Success Factors, and Problems

One hundred and thirty-nine entrepreneurs in Ankara, Turkey were surveyed to determine their motivations for business ownership, the factors contributing to their success, and their problems. Based on survey responses, the primary reasons for starting a business are to increase income, to obtain job security, and to secure independence. According to the factor analysis, small and medium-sized enterprises owners are driven more by income rewards than intrinsic rewards. The most important business success variables are the entrepreneurs' reputation for honesty and friendliness. Social skills and good customer service were also cited as critical success factors. The most serious problem faced by entrepreneurs in Turkey is the complex and confusing tax structure. Other important problems include unreliable employees, the inability to maintain good records, and a weak economy.     

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.     

University services for fostering creativity in high-technology firms

Innovation is commonly hailed as a fundamental factor in ensuring long-term firm survival, which is, in turn, used as a way of measuring business success. This article proposes that creativity is a vital element in the path towards innovation and discusses good practice for publicly funded services designed to support and advise potential and nascent entrepreneurs. It describes the model used by the Ideas Institute for Business Development and Creation and presents three case studies where personalised, individually tailored mentoring has marked the difference in ensuring a competitive edge for its client firms by stimulating creative intelligence among entrepreneurs and by providing the necessary tools to embark upon the road to continuous innovation.     

How Do Risk Attitudes Differ within the Group of Entrepreneurs? The Role of Motivation and Procedural Utility

Starting a business involves risk and, thus, requires a risk‐taking attitude. The concept of risk and entrepreneurship has been widely discussed in the entrepreneurship literature; most studies compare entrepreneurs with nonentrepreneurs such as managers or bankers. So far, little research exists on the risk attitudes of the different types of entrepreneurs—those who pursue a new business because of opportunity and those who do so through necessity. This study aims to fill this gap. Our particular focus is on individuals' motivations to start their businesses and the nonmonetary returns from entrepreneurship. The results show that opportunity entrepreneurs are more willing to take risks than necessity entrepreneurs. In addition, those who are motivated by creativity are more risk tolerant than other entrepreneurs. The study contributes to the literature about both risk attitudes of entrepreneurs and necessity and opportunity entrepreneurship.     

An investigation of hindsight bias in nascent venture activity

We posit that individuals who are actively engaged in activities to develop their own venture will exhibit hindsight bias when recalling their startup experiences. We observe that those who fail to develop their startup activity into an operating business demonstrate substantial hindsight bias concerning the probability of venture formation. In particular, the recalled probability of success, reported after their decision to quit, is lower than the probability of success solicited during the nascent process. We argue that the systematic distortion of the past has important implications for individuals involved in the venturing process. Specifically, we suggest that these individuals are at risk of overestimating their chances of success when starting future nascent activity if they do not correct for their optimistic tendencies. The evidence from this study suggests it is important to recognize that what nascent entrepreneurs believe they experienced, and what they actually experienced, may not be equivalent.     

The questions we ask and the questions we care about: reformulating some problems in entrepreneurship research

Both history of science and creativity research have shown that reformulating the questions we ask can lead to breakthroughs more often than trying harder to search for more rigorous answers. In such a spirit of creative play, I suggest we throw away our obsession with dividing the world into entrepreneurs and nonentrepreneurs and focus instead on categories within entrepreneurs. In particular, (a) those who want to become entrepreneurs but do not suggest compelling research questions about barriers to entrepreneurship; while, (b) those who do become entrepreneurs need to develop expertise, impelling our research to focus on the rubric of design.     

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.     

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.     

Entrepreneurship: From motivation to start-up

The goal of this article is to reveal the origins of entrepreneurial motivation and to identify the logics of action (entrepreneurial projects) associated with each dimension of this attitude. The study looks to answer the following questions: What needs are at the beginning of a business, what are their intensities, and to what extent does entrepreneurial motivation influence projects? Using questionnaires answered by entrepreneurs who have just created their business, we evaluate the characteristics of entrepreneurial motivation (needs and their intensities), identify the antecedents liked to this attitude, and isolate the entrepreneur logics of action (imitation, innovation–adventure, reproduction, and innovation–valorisation). This study is supported by a theoretical framework that is the result of research on motivation and entrepreneurship. A series of causal relations are isolated and then tested. Analysis enables an ensemble of conclusions to be drawn on entrepreneurial motivation. Pathways of motivation lead to logics of action linked to innovative projects and explain the phenomenon of reproduction (or imitation) found in some entrepreneurs. Development objectives and a need for personal independence are identified at the beginning stages of entrepreneurial planning. Creators hope that their business will bring tangible financial and material results. Entrepreneurs are conscious that they must make a commitment across a range of dimensions for their organisation (managerial, commercial, etc.). In their quest for valorisation, entrepreneurs take risks, exploiting advantageous business contexts, thanks to their competences, and show a need for creativity. These two dimensions (competences and creativity) are associated with the objective of independence. The logic of reproduction is characterised by self-confidence (locus of control) and responds to the objective of business development.     

Linking family-to-business enrichment and support to entrepreneurial success: Do female and male entrepreneurs experience different outcomes?

This study used survey data from 253 entrepreneurs who founded small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs) to examine how experiences in their family domain may benefit their experiences in their business domain. Specifically, it hypothesized that affective family-to-business enrichment, instrumental family-to-business enrichment, and family-to-business support would be positively related to entrepreneurial success and that each relationship would be more positive for female entrepreneurs than male entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurial success was assessed by economic measures (business performance, growth in employment) and measures of satisfaction with the entrepreneurial experience (satisfaction with status, satisfaction with employee relationships). Results offered substantial support for the notion that female entrepreneurs benefit from the linkages of family-to-business enrichment and support to entrepreneurial success, whereas they offered no support for the notion that male entrepreneurs benefit from these linkages. Female entrepreneurs may experience such benefits because of their relative lack of access to other resources such as human, social, and financial capital and because the female gender role encourages them to pursue work–family synergies. In contrast, male entrepreneurs may fail to experience such benefits because of the relative abundance of other resources available to them and because the male gender role discourages them from pursuing work–family synergies.     

The Effects of Pre-venture Plan Timing and Perceived Environmental Uncertainty on the Persistence of Emerging Firms

This paper explores the effects of when pre-venture planning occurs (early or late) in the sequence of activities accomplished during the process of new business emergence, and the moderating effects of environmental context (the degree of perceived financial, competitive and operational uncertainty), on the persistence of emerging business startup efforts. Using data from the U.S. Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED), our analyses found a strong main effect for business planning: Nascent entrepreneurs who completed a business plan were 2.6 times more likely to persist in the process of business emergence than those who did not complete a plan. In addition, the likelihood of venture persistence increased when nascent entrepreneurs engaged in planning early in the sequence of start-up activities in perceived uncertain financial and competitive environments, while venture persistence increased when nascent entrepreneurs engaged in planning late in a sequence of activities in perceived certain financial and competitive environments.     

Financing the emerging firm

This study explores the financing choices of 1,214 nascent entrepreneurs in the PSED II dataset. Funding sources are divided into two broad categories: personal and external. We develop a set of hypotheses about the kinds of firm and nascent entrepreneur characteristics that would likely influence which categories of financial resources are used, and the amounts acquired. The majority of financing (57% of all financing) for emerging ventures comes from the personal contributions of its founders, who contributed a median amount of $5,500 per respondent. Firms that more likely to acquire external funding were projected to have higher levels of revenue, were incorporated, and were legally registered. Nascent entrepreneurs with higher levels of education and net worth were significantly more likely to acquire external funding. Results from analyses are presented and discussed. Implications of our findings are provided and suggestions for future research are offered.     

Planning and the Entrepreneur: A Longitudinal Examination of Nascent Entrepreneurs in Sweden

We studied 623 nascent entrepreneurs during a six‐year period, examining how their planning decisions impact venture‐level performance. Our study is unique in that we tracked nascent ventures, examining their planning behavior, including changes to plans. Relying on the theory of legitimacy, this paper adds to the scholarly debate over the merits of business planning by examining, longitudinally, the impact of planning during a six‐year period, accounting for both pre‐emergent nascent activity and post‐emergent success factors. We found that neither formal planning nor changes in the business plan increased venture‐level performance over the six‐year study period.     

Moderating effects of tolerance for ambiguity and risktaking propensity on the role conflict-perceived performance relationship: Evidence from singaporean entrepreneurs

This study investigates the effects of tolerance for ambiguity and risktaking propensity in mediating the relationships between role conflict and perceived performance among 70 entrepreneurs in small and medium-sized businesses in Singapore. Entrepreneurial activity has been widely recognized as a major factor driving Singapore's economic development. Further insights therefore can be gained by this study, which addresses the above issues from the perspective of Singaporean entrepreneurs. As founders of their enterprises, entrepreneurs are often involved with many aspects of activities that create a high potential for conflict, having to play multiple roles, coping with competing and conflicting demands, and overcoming or accommodating to constraints. Role conflict faced by the entrepreneur can impede the entrepreneur's ability to perform effectively. However, the relationship between role conflict and perceived performance is not direct.Many entrepreneurial decisions will also involve ambiguity, because these decisions result in actions that are innovative and original. As entrepreneurs, they will have a significantly greater capacity to tolerate ambiguity than managers have. This suggests that an entrepreneur's tolerance for ambiguity may be able to assist in dealing with, or to moderate, the adverse personal effects of role pressures generated by role conflict. Investigation into this is the thrust of the first part of this research.The literature on entrepreneurship has often portrayed the entrepreneur as a risk-taker with expectation of receiving a profit as reward for this risk-bearing. Many studies on risk-taking behavior among entrepreneurs are focused on the risk-profile of entrepreneurs, that is, whether entrepreneurs are decidedly more risk-taking than nonentrepreneurs. In this second part of research, the investigation examines whether the effects of role conflict on performance outcomes are tempered by the entrepreneur's risk-taking propensity. An entrepreneur with high risk-taking propensity is more likely to succeed in coping with uncertainty and minimizing role stress than one with low risk-taking propensity.Results indicate that Singaporean entrepreneurs higher on tolerance for ambiguity or in risk-taking propensity are better positioned to “neutralize” the effects of role stress in the entrepreneurial role, leading to better performance outcomes. The weaker interactive effects however could be explained by several constraining circumstances: “the stringent control and omnipresence of the government in most businesses” (Tan and Tay 1994); “dominance of MNCs in key industries, and the domination of government-linked businesses in various services” (Boey and Chiam-Lee 1994)—all of which are said to somewhat discourage risk-taking and uncertainty-bearing. Despite the small moderator effects, these findings should be of significance to practitioners, because they suggest that the examination of the relationship between role conflict and performance would be incomplete without also considering the moderating effects of tolerance for ambiguity and risk-taking propensity.     

Novice,portfolio, and serial founders: are they different?

There is growing interest in entrepreneurs who have been involved in more than one venture, yet to date there has been relatively little theoretical development and systematic empirical examination of the topic. In particular, there has been little attention to the potential heterogeneity of habitual entrepreneurship. This study aims to contribute to this emerging area in two ways. First, it outlines a conceptual typology of habitual entrepreneurs who have founded, purchased, or inherited businesses. Second, the empirical part of the study focuses on owner-managers, providing an exploratory analysis of the characteristics and effects of independent business ownership by novice, portfolio, and serial founders. Novice founders are those that have no prior entrepreneurial experience as either a founder, an inheritor, or a purchaser of a business. Portfolio founders retain their original business and inherit, establish, and/or purchase another business. Serial founders are those who sell their original business but at a later date inherit, establish, and/or purchase another business.The study derives propositions suggesting differences among the three types of founders. At the individual founder level of analysis, similarities as well as differences in the personal background, work experiences, reasons leading to the start-up of businesses, and personal attitudes to entrepreneurship of these three types of entrepreneurs are explored. At the organizational level of analysis, finance, employment and performance differences among the businesses owned by the three types of entrepreneurs are presented.The issues are examined using a sample of entrepreneurs who were the principal owner-managers of independent businesses in Great Britain. The sample included 389 novice founders (62.6%), 75 portfolio founders (12.1%), and 157 serial founders (25.3%). No statistically significant differences were found among the three groups of entrepreneurs with regard to the main industrial activity, geographical location, and the age of their businesses. Univariate and multivariate tests were used to examine potential differences between the groups.The results of the study show significant differences between portfolio and serial founders with regard to their parental background, work experience, and their age when they started their first business. Differences were also found with respect to reasons leading to start-up, personal attitudes to entrepreneurship, and sources of funds used during the launch period of the surveyed business. These findings suggest that habitual entrepreneurs cannot be treated as a homogeneous group. The analysis, however, failed to find any significant differences between the performance of the surveyed firms owned by habitual founders and novice founders and between the two types of habitual founders.The findings of the study indicate for researchers that there is a need to carefully define the unit of analysis in any examination of entrepreneurs. In particular, there is a need to take note of the heterogeneity of types of entrepreneur and to consider the entrepreneur as the appropriate unit of analysis rather than simply the firm. Although this study focused on habitual founders of businesses, the theoretical section of the study also identified other types of habitual entrepreneurs, such as serial corporate entrepreneurs and serial management buy-out and buy-in cases. These other types of habitual entrepreneurs would appear to warrant further analysis.The findings of this study have a number of implications for practitioners, especially venture capitalists. The absence of significant performance differences between novice and habitual entrepreneurs, which is consistent with the results from other studies, emphasizes the need for venture capitalists screening potential investees not to rely solely on previous experience.The study also has implications for policy-makers, especially with respect to decisions concerning the allocation of resources to assist nascent entrepreneurs, novice entrepreneurs, and habitual entrepreneurs. The similarities in business performance among novice, serial, and portfolio entrepreneurs suggests that policy-makers need to be careful in targeting scarce resources. Most notably, targeting resources to encourage talented nascent entrepreneurs to become novice entrepreneurs may offer returns which are at least as good as targeting resources to more experienced entrepreneurs.