The Corridor Principle

This article discusses how many entrepreneurs create multiple ventures, and thereby apparently lengthen the duration of their entrepreneurial careers. A new concept, called the Corridor Principle, is proposed as a possible explanation of the multiple venture phenomenon. The Corridor Principle states that the mere act of starting a venture enables entrepreneurs to see other venture opportunities they could neither see nor take advantage of until they had started their initial venture.The Corridor Principle presents an alternative model to the linear single venture career model, embodied by such celebrity entrepreneurs as Ray Kroc of MacDonald' s and Kenneth Olsen of Digital Equipment Corp. Six hypotheses test expectations about the timing and duration of entrepreneurial careers, as well as the relationship between entrepreneurial career length and the creation of multiple ventures.The findings strongly support: • the position that entrepreneurship is a dynamic, multi-venture process for a great many entrepreneurs the rule, rather than the exception. • the existence of a positive correlation between finding at least a second venture and realizing a longer entrepreneurial career. Though there are a variety of explanations for this, and the patterns include both sequential and overlapping ventures, the net effect of creating multiple ventures appears to produce a longer entrepreneurial career. • the position that significant numbers of entrepreneurs create their second venture very early in their entrepreneurial careers especially when contrasted to the group of ex-entrepreneurs, who create multiple ventures (if at all) at a slower rate and later in their careers.Overall, these observations reinforce the notion of the Corridor Principle. Though who can and cannot take advantage of the Corridor Principle is not entirely revealed by the data, some indication exists that an entrepreneurs ability to use Corridor Principle strategy to prolong his or her career is related both to age at startup, and to conscious anticipation and preparation for an entrepreneurial career.The main implications for entrepreneurship practitioners, advisors, researchers, teachers and students are these: Whether studying the entrepreneurial process or planning to start an entrepreneurial career, a long-term view should be taken, one that includes the likely possibility of multiple ventures. The minimum economic returns of earlier ventures can be lower than previously thought if these ventures provide entry to subsequent ventures that possess higher (more acceptable) returns to the entrepreneur. The evidence thus far available indicates that the creation of subsequent ventures occurs relatively quickly when corridors of opportunity become visible and attainable after earlier ventures are established. The likelihood of career failure, as opposed to venture failure, may be lowered if one selects earlier ventures based on their potential to reveal follow-on-venture opportunities that the entrepreneur can investigate and possibly pursue.     

Venture capitalists and serial entrepreneurs

Habitual entrepreneurship is receiving growing attention, much of which has focused on entrepreneurs who have started more than one venture. This paper examines the importance of habitual entrepreneurs to the venture capital industry, with particular emphasis on those who have exited from an initial investment in the venture capitalist's portfolio, termed serial entrepreneurs. As venture capital markets mature, increasing numbers of entrepreneurs are likely to exit from their initial enterprises, creating a pool of entrepreneurs with the potential for embarking on subsequent ventures. Venture capitalists making investments may invest both in entrepreneurs starting new ventures and those who purchase a venture through a management buy-out or buy-in. On this wider basis, the paper develops a classification of types of serial venture. A number of issues are raised for venture capitalists, notably the relative attractiveness of reinvesting in exited entrepreneurs and the policy they adopt in tracking and assessing such individuals.The paper addresses venture capitalists' perspectives on investing in serial entrepreneurs based on a representative sample of 55 UK venture capitalists (a response rate of 48.7%, and a follow-up survey of those who had more extensive experience of serial entrepreneurs (23 respondents). The results of the survey show that despite a strong preference for using an entrepreneur who had played a major role in a previous venture, the extent to which exiting entrepreneurs are funded from their own portfolio again is limited, though there is more extensive use of such individuals in a consultancy capacity. In screening entrepreneurs exiting from previous ventures for subsequent investments, venture capitalists scored attributes relating to commercial awareness, experience in a particular sector, and personal ambition of the entrepreneur most highly.Venture capitalists do make extensive use of serial entrepreneurs who have exited from other venture capitalists' portfolios, primarily to lead management buy-ins. Indications from the survey are that venture capitalists rarely assess entrepreneurs formally at the time of exit and that it is unusual to maintain formal links with entrepreneurs after they have exited. These apparent shortcomings suggest that perhaps investment opportunities are being missed. Those venture capitalists preferring serial entrepreneurs generally had a larger volume of funds under investment and were rather older than those venture capitalists who do not prefer to use serial entrepreneurs, reflecting the possibility that longer established venture capitalists have had more opportunity and experience in relation to second-time entrepreneurs.Investment appraisal factors were subject to a principal components analysis to identify underlying dimensions/relationships between them. With respect to the general investment appraisal factors, five factors were identified. Two factors were related to track record; one of these reflected ownership experience, while the other represented management experience. The third factor was related to personal attributes such as age, knowledge, and family background. The fourth factor represented links to the funding institution, and the final factor (a single variable factor) concerned financial commitment. The principal components analysis for screening factors on management buy-ins produced a single factor comprising all variables. These factors were then subject to a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), with preference for use of a serial entrepreneur as the independent variable. The results suggest that there are significant differences between venture capitalists who prefer serial entrepreneurs and those who do not in respect to their business ownership experience, the length of their entrepreneurial careers, and the number of their previous ventures.The results of the study have implications for practitioners. First, the findings emphasize the importance of not considering previous venture experience in isolation but in the context of other key investment criteria. Second, the lack of strongly greater performance from serial, versus novice, entrepreneurs further emphasizes the care to be taken in assessing experienced entrepreneurs. Third, the relatively low degree of formal and rigorous post-exit assessment and monitoring by venture capitalists suggests that important opportunities to invest in experienced entrepreneurs may be missed.     

Progress without a venture? Individual benefits of post-disruption entrepreneuring

Entrepreneurial action only rarely results in the full transition to venture creation. Yet, extant research has focused almost exclusively on explaining how entrepreneurial action influences venture performance outcomes such as emergence and growth. Therefore, to advance theory, there is a need to uncover other outcomes of entrepreneurial action by decoupling it from venture creation. In this study, we begin such decoupling by exploring how entrepreneurial action can create individual benefits irrespective of venture emergence and financial success. We collected longitudinal data from a group of individuals who, due to forced migration, experienced significant disruption and then engaged in entrepreneurial action with the general goal of adapting to a new (to them) context. From this data, we integrated theory on entrepreneuring to develop a grounded model of post-disruption entrepreneuring. This model has three main components: (a) disruption assessment impact—interpretation of how the disruption will influence one's ability to pursue tasks and goals that provide meaning in life; (b) use of entrepreneuring—function and application of entrepreneuring activities in addressing opportunities or threats; and (c) projected goals—anticipated outcomes that provide meaning, motivation, and purpose. These attempts at assessing the contextual conditions provide individuals with an objective way of framing their situation. Thus, entrepreneuring can serve as an accessible mental structure that facilitates adaptation. In elaborating on post-disruption entrepreneuring, this study contributes to the literature by demonstrating the generative capacity of entrepreneurial action even in the absence of venture creation.     

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.     

Women business owners in traditional and non-traditional industries

Small businesses continue to grow in importance to the national economy. According to the Small Business Administration, America's 22 million small businesses generate more than half of the nation's Gross Domestic Product and are the principal source of new jobs. The National Foundation for Women Business Owners reported that between 1987 and 1994, the number of women-owned businesses grew by 78% and women-owned firms accounted for 36% of all firms. Although the growth in the number of women-owned businesses is encouraging, the size of such businesses remains small in terms of both revenues and number of employees, especially in comparison to male-owned businesses. One explanation for this disparity is that female business ownership is concentrated primarily in the retail and service industries where businesses are relatively smaller in terms of employment and revenue as opposed to high technology, construction, and manufacturing.One of the most fruitful streams of research in women's occupational choice has been based on social learning theory. Specifically, self-efficacy has been found to relate to both type and number of occupations considered by college men and women, and with regard to traditional and non-traditional occupations. Entrepreneurship researchers have also used social learning theory to study entrepreneurial intentions. This study builds on that background of women's career development and entrepreneurial intentions to examine differences between traditional and non-traditional women business owners. We examine 170 women business owners in various traditional and non-traditional businesses in Utah and Illinois. Questionnaires were the primary method of collecting data, in addition to 11 in-depth interviews from a sample of the survey respondents. Using a careers perspective, based on social learning theory, we hypothesized that women in these two different categories of industries would differ on levels of self-efficacy toward entrepreneurship or venture efficacy, their career expectations and their perceived social support. A second analysis was also done that explored the relationship between the same independent variables and success or performance of the business. The results offer support for using this integrative model to understand differences between women in traditional and non-traditional industries. The first analysis revealed that significant differences exist between the two groups on several of the independent variables. Traditional business owners had higher venture efficacy for opportunity recognition, higher career expectations of life balance and security and they reported that the financial support received from others was more important to them than those in non-traditional businesses. On the other hand, the non-traditional owners had higher venture efficacy for planning and higher career expectations for money or wealth than the traditional group.The second analysis explored whether success, as measured by sales, was affected by differences in venture efficacies, career expectations, or perceived support received by women in traditional businesses as compared to those in non-traditional ones. This analysis revealed that traditional women business owners might have different factors that contribute to their success than non-traditional owners. Specifically, for the traditional owners, venture efficacies for opportunity recognition and economic management as well as the career expectation of autonomy and money (or wealth) were positively related to sales. For the same group efficacy toward planning and the need for security were negatively related to sales. For the non-traditional women, venture efficacy toward planning and the career expectation of autonomy were positively related to sales while the expectation of money or wealth was negatively related. Also for the same group, the perceived importance of the emotional and financial support was negatively related to sales.In the past, most of the entrepreneurial research has used predominantly male samples of entrepreneurs. Those that include women entrepreneurs generally are comparative, between men and women. This study's comparison of two groups of women entrepreneurs offers a unique contribution to the field.Future research is recommended to further understand how venture efficacy and career expectations affect the decision to start a new business in a particular industry. It would be particularly beneficial to study venture efficacy and career expectations of prospective women entrepreneurs prior to the start of the business. Similarly, greater attention should be given to understanding how venture efficacy develops in different individuals.     

Entrepreneurial inception: The role of imprinting in entrepreneurial action

Recent research highlights that founders' early decisions and the environmental conditions at founding each imprint upon a new venture in ways that affect growth and survival. However, we know much less about how the entrepreneur is imprinted and how the outcome of this imprinting process influences the entrepreneur and the venture. Through semi-structured interviews and content analysis, our study examines entrepreneurs' formative experiences during sensitive periods of transition, which we refer to as sources of imprint. We illustrate how these sources of imprint impact entrepreneurial decision making and explain how they guide entrepreneurs' decisions as they progress through their entrepreneurial careers. In doing so, we improve our understanding of how entrepreneurs navigate the entrepreneurial process.     

Personal value systems of men and women entrepreneurs versus managers

Many have suggested that the type of individual who becomes an entrepreneur is psychologically distinguishable from the type of individual who becomes a manager. Moreover, it has been argued that within these occupations men and women are fundamentally different. This paper discusses a study that evaluated the accuracy of these characterizations by comparing the personal value systems of men and women entrepreneurs and managers. This information should prove useful to a variety of audiences.First, individuals exploring career alternatives can evaluate the appropriateness of entrepreneurial and managerial careers for themselves by determining whether or not their own value systems match those of individuals already in these roles. Second, venture capitalists, bank loan officers, and individuals in organizations who are in positions to support women's entrepreneurial and managerial pursuits will be able to determine whether or not women and men in these roles are “made from the same cloth” and thus deserve the same consideration. Third, the current research will also shed some light on the compatibility of the entrepreneurial and managerial roles, a role transition that entrepreneurs make as their businesses mature. Finally, by studying the values of individuals in these two fields an assessment of the basic nature of these individuals can be made.Two hundred fifty-five men and women entrepreneurs and managers rank-ordered 15 terminal (desired end states) and 15 instrumental (methods used by individuals to achieve desired end states) values using a modified version of the Rokeach (1973) Value Survey. The results of the study revealed that individuals' gender had very little influence on their value systems. Women valued the terminal value of equality more than men, and men valued “family security” more than women. In contrast, managers and entrepreneurs had vastly different value systems. Entrepreneurs gave significantly greater weight than managers to the following terminal values (listed from most to least important): self-respect, freedom, a sense of accomplishment, and an exciting life, and the following instrumental values (listed front most to least important): being honest, ambitious, capable, independent, courageous, imaginative, and logical. In contrast, managers gave greater weight than entrepreneurs to the terminal values of (listed from most to least important): true friendship, wisdom, salvation, and pleasure, and the instrumental values of (listed from most to least important): being loving, compassionate, forgiving, helpful, and self-controlled.The results of the present study suggest that entrepreneurs want something different out of life than managers. Whereas the latter prefer to enjoy the pleasures that life has to offer, entrepreneurs want to be free to achieve and actualize their potential. Overall, it appears that knowing whether an individual is an entrepreneur or a manager appears to be a better indicator of his/her values than knowing whether an individual is male or female. These results suggest that men and women who become entrepreneurs or, alternatively, secure jobs in the management profession, are more similar to members of the opposite sex within their profession than they are to members of their own sex in a complementary profession. These findings suggest that customers, subordinates, superiors, bank loan officers, and venture capitalists—or in other words, anyone who is involved with men and women entrepreneurs or managers—should be careful not to categorize them according to traditional sex-role stereotypes. As was demonstrated here, these stereotypes are not applicable across the board. Moreover, previous research has shown that they can result in sex discriminatory decisions.Finally, once a business is well underway, managing the operation becomes central to its success. The results of the present study suggest that this change in role emphasis may not be satisfying to the entrepreneur, because the value system of individuals who are committed to the managerial role is at odds with the value preferences of entrepreneurs. This may help explain why many entrepreneurs become less interested and motivated in their ventures once the entrepreneurial component of their job is overtaken by the management aspect.     

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.     

Giving up the hats? Entrepreneurs' role transitions and venture growth

At the start of a venture, most entrepreneurs wear many hats. However, entrepreneurs often cannot remain involved in every aspect of the venture process, and so they face important decisions about which roles to give up, which roles to retain, and which new roles to adopt. For many, this process is particularly difficult as roles represent more than just something entrepreneurs do but also an important part of who they are (role identities). Through an inductive field study, this research reveals how and why entrepreneurs add, subtract, or retain roles. We find three mechanisms—perceiving the entrepreneur as someone who ‘gives up the hats,’ discovering new meaning (new role identities) within the venture, and role identity imprinting—lead to a narrowing of one's role set, which ultimately influences venture growth.     

Location choice of academic entrepreneurs: Evidence from the US biotechnology industry

Where knowledge-based firms are located is important because entrepreneurship, firm creation and innovation are typically associated with regional economic development, wealth creation and increased employment. In this paper we examine where academic entrepreneurs locate their firms. We begin by developing a theoretical model that examines the location choice of the academic entrepreneur within the standard utility maximization theory. Academic entrepreneurs are assumed to maximize their utility by allocating their efforts between academic and entrepreneurial pursuits which, in turn, determine their future streams of income and end-period wealth. Optimal allocation turns out to be a function of both personal and external factors that condition the relevant payoffs and such factors can be empirically observed. We then use several candidate explanatory variables to examine those factors that may influence the firm location choice for 187 biopharmaceutical firms started by 275 academic entrepreneurs in the US. From our empirical analysis we find that location-specific factors such as proximity to certain knowledge assets and to the funding venture capital firms, affect the firm location choice of academic entrepreneurs. Nevertheless, entrepreneur-specific characteristics, such as their age, seem to dominate the choice of firm location.     

Applying Person‐Environment Fit Theory to Identify Personality Differences between Prospective Social and Commercial Entrepreneurs: An Explorative Study

Research has started to investigate personality traits of social entrepreneurs because such traits in commercial entrepreneurs have been found to affect new venture creation/success. In this exploratory study, we apply the person‐environment fit theory and analyze specific social entrepreneurial personality dimensions (i.e., altruism, empathic concern, personal distress, compassion), and classical entrepreneurial personality dimensions (i.e., need for achievement (nAch), entrepreneurial self‐efficacy (ESE), general self‐efficacy, risk‐taking propensity) to identify differences between prospective social and commercial entrepreneurs. Using a sample of 85 prospective entrepreneurs, results show that prospective social entrepreneurs differ from prospective commercial entrepreneurs in the personality dimensions of personal distress, nAch, ESE, and risk‐taking propensity.     

Passion for entrepreneurship or passion for the product? A conjoint analysis of angel and VC decision-making

Passion is important to venture investors, but what specifically do they want entrepreneurs to be passionate about? This study theorizes that angel investors and venture capitalists consider both entrepreneurs' passion for activities related to the product or service the venture provides (i.e., product passion) and passion for founding and developing new ventures (i.e., entrepreneurial passion). We demonstrate that both types of passion become more appealing when the investor perceives that the entrepreneur is highly open and receptive to feedback, suggesting that openness to feedback mitigates potential concerns associated with passion in its extremes. We further find that venture investors differ in their consideration of passion; angel investors and venture capitalists with more investing experience place greater emphasis on the combination of product passion and openness to feedback, whereas those with more entrepreneurial experience emphasize the combination of entrepreneurial passion and openness to feedback.     

Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions

Why are intentions interesting to those who care about new venture formation? Entrepreneurship is a way of thinking, a way of thinking that emphasizes opportunities over threats. The opportunity identification process is clearly an intentional process, and, therefore, entrepreneurial intentions clearly merit our attention. Equally important, they offer a means to better explain—and predict—entrepreneurship.We don't start a business as a reflex, do we? We may respond to the conditions around us, such as an intriguing market niche, by starting a new venture. Yet, we think about it first; we process the cues from the environment around us and set about constructing the perceived opportunity into a viable business proposition.In the psychological literature, intentions have proven the best predictor of planned behavior, particularly when that behavior is rare, hard to observe, or involves unpredictable time lags. New businesses emerge over time and involve considerable planning. Thus, entrepreneurship is exactly the type of planned behavior Bird 1988, Katz and Gartner 1988 for which intention models are ideally suited. If intention models prove useful in understanding business venture formation intentions, they offer a coherent, parsimonious, highly-generalizable, and robust theoretical framework for understanding and prediction.Empirically, we have learned that situational (for example, employment status or informational cues) or individual (for example, demographic characteristics or personality traits) variables are poor predictors. That is, predicting entrepreneurial activities by modeling only situational or personal factors usually resulted in disappointingly small explanatory power and even smaller predictive validity. Intentions models offer us a significant opportunity to increase our ability to understand and predict entrepreneurial activity.The current study compares two intention-based models in terms of their ability to predict entrepreneurial intentions: Ajzen's theory of planned behavior (TPB) and Shapero's model of the entrepreneurial event (SEE). Ajzen argues that intentions in general depend on perceptions of personal attractiveness, social norms, and feasibility. Shapero argues that entrepreneurial intentions depend on perceptions of personal desirability, feasibility, and propensity to act. We employed a competing models approach, comparing regression analyses results for the two models. We tested for overall statistical fit and how well the results supported each component of the models. The sample consisted of student subjects facing imminent career decisions. Results offered strong statistical support for both models.(1) Intentions are the single best predictor of any planned behavior, including entrepreneurship. Understanding the antecedents of intentions increases our understanding of the intended behavior. Attitudes influence behavior by their impact on intentions. Intentions and attitudes depend on the situation and person. Accordingly, intentions models will predict behavior better than either individual (for example, personality) or situational (for example, employment status) variables. Predictive power is critical to better post hoc explanations of entrepreneurial behavior; intentions models provide superior predictive validity. (2) Personal and situational variables typically have an indirect influence on entrepreneurship through influencing key attitudes and general motivation to act. For instance, role models will affect entrepreneurial intentions only if they change attitudes and beliefs such as perceived self-efficacy. Intention-based models describe how exogenous influences (for eample, perceptions of resource availability) change intentions and, ultimately, venture creation. (3) The versatility and robustness of intention models support the broader use of comprehensive, theory-driven, testable process models in entrepreneurship research (MacMillan and Katz 1992). Intentional behavior helps explain and model why many entrepreneurs decide to start a business long before they scan for opportunities.Understanding intentions helps researchers and theoreticians to understand related phenomena. These include: what triggers opportunity scanning, the sources of ideas for a business venture, and how the venture ultimately becomes a reality. Intention models can describe how entrepreneurial training molds intentions in subsequent venture creation (for example, how does training in business plan writing change attitudes and intentions?). Past research has extensively explored aspects of new venture plans once written. Intentionality argues instead that we study the planning process itself for determinants of venturing behavior. We can apply intentions models to other strategic decisions such as the decision to grow or exit a business. Researchers can model the intentions of critical stakeholders in the venture, such as venture capitalists' intentions toward investing in a given company. Finally, management researchers can explore the overlaps between venture formation intentions and venture opportunity identification.Entrepreneurs themselves (and those who teach and train them) should benefit from a better understanding of their own motives. The lens provided by intentions affords them the opportunity to understand why they made certain choices in their vision of the new venture.Intentions-based models provide practical insight to any planned behavior. This allows us to better encourage the identification of personally-viable, personally-credible opportunities. Teachers, consultants, advisors, and entrepreneurs should benefit from a better general understanding of how intentions are formed, as well as a specific understanding of how founders' beliefs, perceptions, and motives coalesce into the intent to start a business. This understanding offers sizable diagnostic power, thus entrepreneurship educators can use this model to better understand the motivations and intentions of students and trainees and to help students and trainees understand their own motivations and intentions.Carefully targeted training becomes possible. For example, ethnic and gender differences in career choice are largely explained by self-efficacy differences. Applied work in psychology and sociology tells us that we already know how to remediate self-efficacy differences. Raising entrepreneurial efficacies will raise perceptions of venture feasibility, thus increasing the perception of opportunity.Economic and community development hinges not on chasing smokestacks, but on growing new businesses. To encourage economic development in the form of new enterprises we must first increase perceptions of feasibility and desirability. Policy initiatives will increase business formations if those initiatives positively influence attitudes and thus influence intentions. The growing trends of downsizing and outsourcing make this more than a sterile academic exercise. Even if we successfully increase the quantity and quality of potential entrepreneurs, we must also promote such perceptions among critical stakeholders including suppliers, financiers, neighbors, government officials, and the larger community.The findings of this study argue that promoting entrepreneurial intentions by promoting public perceptions of feasibility and desirability is not just desirable; promoting entrepreneurial intentions is also thoroughly feasible.     

Start‐up Motivations and Growth Intentions of Minority Nascent Entrepreneurs

Firm growth is widely considered to be a measure of success for entrepreneurial businesses. Data indicate that there are systematic differences between minority and nonminority‐owned firms with respect to growth. Black entrepreneurs are 50 percent more likely to engage in start‐up activities than white entrepreneurs, however, black‐owned firms are smaller and less profitable than their white‐owned counterparts. Following the effort–performance–outcome–logic of expectancy theory and using data from the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED), our paper investigates the differences between black and white entrepreneurs' motivations to start and intentions to grow a new venture. Findings indicate that there are significant differences in motivations between black and white entrepreneurs both in starting and in their intentions to grow the new venture. Implications for future research are discussed.     

National culture,effectuation, and new venture performance: global evidence from student entrepreneurs

Studies examining the relationship between national culture and entrepreneurial activity have largely ignored the influence of culture on individual decision-making. Recent years have witnessed considerable interest in cognitive logics employed by entrepreneurs. A growing body of literature examines factors contributing to the relative reliance on causal and effectual reasoning as entrepreneurs attempt to launch and grow new ventures, with evidence suggesting expert entrepreneurs engage more heavily in effectual reasoning than do novice entrepreneurs. The present study examines the mediating role of cognitive logic in explaining venture performance in differing cultural contexts. A series of hypotheses are tested using a sample of 3411 new ventures started by student entrepreneurs from 24 countries based on the Global University Entrepreneurial Spirit Students’ Survey. The findings indicate that both venture cognitive logics have positive effects on new venture performance and serve as mediators in the culture-performance relationship. Based on these findings, we conclude entrepreneurial reasoning is shaped not only by personal characteristics of entrepreneurs but also by aspects of the cultural context.     

Who become serial and portfolio entrepreneurs?

“Serial entrepreneurs” run multiple businesses in sequence while “portfolio entrepreneurs” run multiple businesses in parallel; they differ from “novice entrepreneurs” who have so far operated only one venture. The present paper is the first to model occupational choices between all three entrepreneurial types: It goes on to discuss its theoretical predictions in the light of independent evidence about serial and portfolio entrepreneurship from the extant literature.     

Stigma and business failure: implications for entrepreneurs’ career choices

We use data from global entrepreneurship monitor to examine the act of entrepreneurial reentry by entrepreneurs who exit a failed business. We study reentry by mode of entry and by form of organizing. We find that, in countries where the levels of stigma and regulatory conveyance of stigma markings were at their highest, entrepreneurs who exited failed businesses were less likely to reenter into entrepreneurial activity. Our finding suggests that negative social and economic sanctions that are associated with stigma markings speak only to one side of the entrepreneurship phenomenon. On the other side, stigma can function as a stimulus for entrepreneurs to defy the illegitimacy of the failed business and to actively seek out and engage in innovative behaviors that contribute to the overall diversity of entrepreneurial activities in their country.     

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.

     

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.     

Perceived progress variability and entrepreneurial effort intensity: The moderating role of venture goal commitment

Drawing on entrepreneurial motivation and goal striving literatures, we examined the dynamic relationship between momentary perceived progress, or an ongoing sense of how one is doing in the pursuit of one's venture goal, and entrepreneurial effort intensity among early-stage entrepreneurs who are based in business incubators. We also examined how perceived progress variability over time predicted entrepreneurial effort intensity, and whether venture goal commitment moderated this link. Experience-sampling data collected from over one hundred early-stage entrepreneurs indicated that perceived progress predicted greater effort intensity. Moreover, perceived progress variability over time negatively predicted entrepreneurial effort intensity, and venture goal commitment attenuated this negative relationship. Theoretical and practical implications of our study to entrepreneurial motivation and goal striving research are discussed.