New Venture Creation: Ethnicity, Family Background and Gender as Determinants of Entrepreneurial...

ijcrb.webs.com

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 338

AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

New Venture Creation: Ethnicity, Family Background and Gender as Determinants of

Entrepreneurial Intent in a Poor Economy

Corresponding author: Fabian O. Ugwu, PhD

Department of Psychology, Benue State University, Makurdi, Nigeria

Chidi Ugwu

Department of Sociology & Anthropology, University of Nigeria, Nsukka

New Venture Creation: Ethnicity, Family Background and Gender as Determinants of

Entrepreneurial Intent in a Poor Economy

Abstract

Although there have been plenty of studies focusing at entrepreneurial intents of students;

this study is one of the first attempts to examine ethnic/cultural influence of university

undergraduates toward entrepreneurial intent in Nigeria. It presents the results of an empirical

study of the predictive relationships between ethnicity, family business background, family

structure, birth order, gender and entrepreneurial intent. The cross-sectional survey method

was employed and data were analyzed by means of hierarchical regression. Consistent with

authors’ predictions ethnicity, family business background, family structure and birth order

significantly predicted students’ entrepreneurial intent. Contrary to our speculation, gender

was not a significant predictor of entrepreneurial intent. This study helps to elucidate factors

influencing students’ intentions of becoming entrepreneurs in a multi ethnic and

impoverished society. The findings provide insight into the individuals’ entrepreneurial

intentions which may point toward the need to explain entrepreneurial tendencies among

ethnic groups through cross-cultural research endeavours.

Keywords: Ethnicity, family structure, birth order, gender, entrepreneurial intent, Nigeria

1. Introduction

Recent years have witnessed unprecedented economic crisis the world has ever experienced.

The economy of many countries has been crippled. Many people who had jobs have lost

them, and those who are seeking jobs are growing increasingly hopeless as the chances of

getting one grows slimmer by each passing day. To bring this situation under control seems

to have defied all known solutions, and there is no indication that the current circumstances

will lift in the near future. In such downturn, various governments advise the unemployed

that cannot find jobs to undertake entrepreneurial projects that could guarantee them

independence. In response many people no longer depend on employment but are open to

initiating and nurturing their own businesses (Narayanasamy, Rasiah, & Jacobs, 2011).

Entrepreneurship provides one the opportunity for growth and development, the opportunity

to generate wealth, create jobs and ultimately achieve recognition. It also tends to have

freedom of decision making and flexible working hours (Narayanasamy et al., 2011).

Entrepreneurship has some important career implications for individuals, as it presents a

viable option, increasing popular career opportunity (Barnier, Watson, & Hutchins, 2011).

This development makes the concept and study of entrepreneurship an interesting one,

especially in a country like Nigeria that has failed in her contractual obligation to providing

employment for her deserving citizens.

Entrepreneurship has been recognized by Dimov (2007) as a purposeful social process that

creates opportunities through discussion and interpretation, and accounts for the context in

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

which these opportunities emerge. Danes, Lee, Stafford and Heck (2008) describe

entrepreneurs as rugged individuals garnering creative forces of innovation and technology.

Entrepreneurial intention on the other hand is a cognitive representation of the behaviours to

be exhibited by individuals, either to establish independent new ventures or to create new

value within existing companies (Bird, 1988). In the context of the present study, it is an

individual’s cognitive inclination to pursue an entrepreneurial career after leaving school.

As a cornerstone of economic development and recovery strategies for many economies

entrepreneurship has continued to gain the support of a broad spectrum of scholars,

policymakers and governments. Nigeria has joined the rest of the world in the promotion of

entrepreneurship to enhance levels of creativity, innovation and economic growth. This is

because entrepreneurship is seen as a means of revitalizing stagnated economies; stimulating

developing ones and dealing with unemployment challenges by providing new job

opportunities. The nation’s effort to grow the economy is usually emphasized in the

government’s development plans, national budgets and in the current home grown reform

programmes as stated in the National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy

(NEEDS) (Soludo, 2006). The central theme of the policy has been that Nigerians should

engage in small businesses to spearhead the nation’s drive towards economic recovery. A

core element in such development plan is the engagement of universities in the initiatives

using education to increase entrepreneurial knowledge, skills and intention among

undergraduates.

Education offered by universities mostly influences the career choice of students; universities

can be seen as potential sources of future entrepreneurs (Turker & Selcuk, 2009). However,

today’s students are tomorrow’s entrepreneurial giants and this explains why the present

study focuses on graduating university students who will soon leave school to pursue

different economic endeavours. Besides, there is little or no understanding of the factors that

affect students’ intentions of becoming entrepreneurs in Nigeria. Similarly, little or nothing is

known about differences in entrepreneurial intentions and attitudes among students belonging

to different ethnic groups in a multi ethnic country like Nigeria. This paper seeks to

contribute toward narrowing this gap in our knowledge by empirically examining ethnicity,

family background and gender as possible determinants of entrepreneurial intent among

Nigerian university undergraduates.

2. Context: Nigeria

Nigeria is a federal republic that is made up of 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory

(FCT). The nation boasts of over 250 identifiable ethnic groups that mark the cultural

diversity of the Nigerian society. The three dominant ethno-linguistic entities are: the Igbo in

the South-East, the Yoruba in the South-West, and the Hausa-Fulani in the North. The Igbo,

Yoruba, Hausa-Fulani, Tiv, Kanuri, Edo, Nupe, Ibibio and Ijaw groups account for almost 80

per cent of the population (Aito, 2008). The country is eminently one of the largest (923,768

km2), geographically, socially and culturally most diverse countries on the African continent.

It is also the world’s most populous black nation, with an estimated population of about 150

million. Rich in oil and solid mineral resources, her GDP is second only to South Africa’s

(Okonjo-Iweala & Osafo-Kwaako, 2007). Yet, poor economic management has made the

country to experience a prolonged period of economic stagnation, rising poverty levels, and

the decline of its public utilities. In particular, the poor condition of the power sector

illustrates the severity of Nigeria’s infrastructure deficit. Specifically, per capita power

consumption in Nigeria is estimated at 82 kilowatts (kW) compared with an average of

456kW in other sub-Saharan African countries and 3,793kW in South Africa (Okonjo-Iweala

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

& Osafo-Kwaako, 2007). By every standard, human development indicators in Nigeria are

comparable to that of other least developed countries while endemic corruption seems to have

defied all solutions and has continued to impoverish the majority. World Bank (2000) cited in

Aworemi, Abdul-Azeez and Opoola (2010) reported that the poverty in Nigeria has increased

dramatically with 65% of the population living below poverty line as against 43% in 1992.

Oteh (2009) emphasized in her report that over half of Nigeria’s population live on less than

one dollar a day. According to Oteh’s report Nigeria is one of the top three countries in the

world that have the largest population of poor people. In fact, it has been observed that there

is no country in Africa whose deterioration in socio-economic status has been as severe as

that of Nigeria (Aworemi et al., 2010).

Worse still, general unemployment rate has skyrocketed and university graduates are the

worst hit. For instance, the World Bank’s (2009) report cited in Oteh (2009) indicated that

only one in every ten graduates get a job while a recent report by the National Directorate of

Employment (NDE) indicated that over 200,000 Nigerian graduates who completed the

National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) in the last few years, remained unemployed. The

National Institute for Social Research (NISER) revealed that over 55 percent of Nigerians of

working age are unemployed, representing one in five adults (see Oteh, 2009). In the face of

this present economic reality, setting up private venture seems to be the only alternative.

Although the collapse in infrastructure may not give businesses any chance of survival, some

people defy the odds to venture into creating new businesses. Thus, knowing these category

of people that nurse the intention to establish new businesses in a harsh economic

environment and the predisposing factors responsible for such intention is worthy of

investigation. Besides, the literature regarding cross cultural and international comparisons of

entrepreneurship practices remains limited (Lee & Osteryoung, 2001) because most of such

studies utilized samples from developed countries. Therefore such research findings may not

be valid for developing countries and contexts due to differences in economic, institutional

and cultural characteristics. Moreover, entrepreneurship in developing countries remains one

of the least-studied (Lingelbach, De la Viña, & Ase, 2005). By the present study the

researchers hope to bridge this gap by using samples from a developing country with its own

peculiar context.

3. Ethnicity and Entrepreneurial Intent

Ethnicity/culture entails common values, belief system, and practices based on nationality,

common ancestry, and/or common immigration experiences (Hill, Murry, & Anderson,

2005). Ethnic groups are culture-bearing units (Imperia, O’Guinn, & MacAdams, 1985) and

common group values are major contributors to a sense of identity and to peculiar ways of

perceiving, thinking, feeling, and behaving that influence action in everyday life (Chan &

Lee, 2004; Hanson, 2004), including entrepreneurial intent and the actual entrepreneurial

behaviour. Entrepreneurial activity in many societies is heavily influenced by cultural

practices. While some cultures tend to stifle the independent thinking and creative ability,

some other individuals whose culture is supportive tend to be more prolific in initiating

ventures (Urban, 2006). Moreover, previous studies (e.g., Kumar & Kelly, 2006; Steenkamp,

Hofstede, & Wedel, 1999) indicated that an individual’s cultural background determines how

personality traits are exercised, practiced and manifested, which can be implicated in superior

entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurs cannot act in a social vacuum, but are influenced

by the background into which they are born as well as environment in which they are raised

(Göksel & Aydintan, 2011). For instance, a bogus assumption is often made that individuals

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

from the Igbo ethnic group in Nigeria exhibit the highest entrepreneurial tendencies, but this

has remained largely untested.

The relationship between ethnicity and entrepreneurship as conceptualised in many studies

(e.g., Martes, 2000; Sales, 2003) were on the basis of a strategy immigrants adopt to

overcome barriers and life challenges often experienced by people in new settlements. The

conceptualisation of the construct as used in this study represents the patterns of interaction

among people sharing common national background, but whose cultures differ in many

respects. Hofstede (2001) defined culture as “the collective programming of the mind that

distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another” (p. 9). Since

ethnic group/culture determines peculiar way people generally live their lives, the way they

dress, farm, bury the dead, what they eat, what they give attention and priority to, it makes a

theoretical sense to also investigate whether this could determine entrepreneurial intent. It is

therefore hypothesised that:

Hypothesis 1: Ethnicity will significantly predict entrepreneurial intent among Nigerian

university undergraduates; such that the majority ethnic group (Igbo) will exhibit higher

entrepreneurial intent compared to their minority ethnic group (Tiv) counterparts.

4. Family Background and Entrepreneurial Intent

Danes, Lee, Stafford and Heck (2008) asserted that “to ignore ethnic and family contexts that

create the culture from which entrepreneurship emerges is to forge a myopic view of ethnic

businesses owned and operated by their family members” (p. 229). The family, with its own

interpersonal dynamics, acts as the crucible that mixes ethnic groups, and creates culture,

thereby serving as mediator for the entrepreneurial experience (Rogoff & Heck, 2003).

However, little attention has been paid to how families affect the core entrepreneurial process

(Aldrich & Cliff, 2003; Dyer, 2006). Because family is a channel of culture and core cultural

values (Landau, 2007), family background and relationships are even more fundamental to

the understanding of initiation process and management of businesses. As a result, Green and

Pryde (1990) described family as being one of the mediating entities that have promoted or

impeded entrepreneurial opportunities. The family is so vital in the life and activities of any

individual that Rogoff and Heck (2003) stated accordingly that the business of

entrepreneurship cannot ignite and prosper without the mobilisation of family forces. Family

background plays an important role in a variety of contexts. In the present study, family

background features consist of family business background, family structure and birth order.

Researchers have shown considerable interest in how family-owned businesses is transited

(Carr & Sequeira, 2007; Stavrou & Swiercz, 1999), but not many researches consider the role

that family business background plays in encouraging future engagement in entrepreneurship.

Family business background may affect future generation’s intentions to toll the same line

and this may be due to how they were socialised and the financial rewards such business

guarantees them and the psychological development of the whole family in the family

business (Dyer & Handler, 1994). Individuals from families with business background are

likely to be aware of these impacts (Fairlie & Robb, 2005). This might spur them to

incorporate their experiences, such that their attitudes and behaviours towards entrepreneurial

action are shaped towards nursing entrepreneurial intents. It has been found that an individual

whose father is self employed provides strong inspiration for them because at an early age,

the independent nature of self employment is instilled in them (Matthews & Moser, 1996).

Having entrepreneurial parents enables one to behave entrepreneurially and to work with

higher entrepreneurial orientation than those whose parents are employment oriented (Ullah

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

et al., 2011). However, research results on family business background and entrepreneurial

intent or actual entrepreneurial behaviour have been inconsistent. While several research

findings (e.g., Brown, 1990; Crant, 1996; Schiller & Crewson, 1997; Wang & Wong, 2004;

Drennan, Kennedy, & Renfrow, 2005; Ullah et al., 2011) showed that students whose parents

owned businesses demonstrate the highest preference for self-employment, some (e.g.,

Göksel & Aydintan, 2011) reported that family business has no influence on an individual’s

propensity to entrepreneurship. This study will broaden our understanding of family business

background and entrepreneurial intent.

The traditional two-parent-family structure has recently witnessed drastic shake up as single-

parent family structures are a growing phenomenon in many cultures including Nigeria.

Many adolescent children have only one parent, especially the mothers in the household to

attend to their economic and emotional needs. When there is not adequate allocation of

resources within the household due to the absence of one parent during the early childhood

development, the children’s cognitive development is affected, their human capital

accumulation (Ruhm, 2004), and their ability to take critical decisions in later years. It is

therefore germane to examine how the family setting affects the entrepreneurial intent of such

people due to the impact this may potentially have on their skills and future career decisions.

Studies have demonstrated the importance of two parent-household in ensuring overall

development of children (Antecol & Bedard, 2007; Cavanagh & Huston, 2006; Fomby &

Cherlin, 2007; Osborne & McLanahan, 2007). Earlier studies also have focused on the

outcomes of adults who grew up in single-parent households (Antecol & Bedard, 2007;

Corak, 2001; Lang & Zagorsky, 2001). However, there is still much to learn about the impact

of family structure on outcomes for adults’ chosen carrier such as entrepreneurial inclination.

It was Francis Galton (1874), cited in Hartshorne, Salem-Hartshorne and Hartshorne (2009),

who noted that firstborn sons and only sons were over-represented among scientists, making

birth order one of the earliest constructs to be studied in psychology. Ever since then, there

has been renewed interest in birth order research as numerous scientific investigations (e.g.,

Healey & Ellis, 2007; Michalski & Shackelford, 2002) have trailed Galton’s observation

about birth order. This research interest became heightened following Sulloway’s (1996)

famous study, ‘born to rebel’ (e.g., Paulhus, Trapnell & Chen, 1999; Saroglou & Fiasse,

2003). Much of these studies mainly centred on personality, social attitudes and educational

attainment (e.g., Beer & Horn, 2000; Healey & Ellis, 2007; Michalski & Shackelford, 2002;

Paulhus, Trapnell, & Chen, 1999; Saroglou & Fiasse, 2003). The results obtained from such

studies have been very inconsistent. While some studies (e.g., Hauser & Sewell, 1985;

Jefferson, Herbst, & McCrae, 1998) reported no significant birth order effect, others (e.g.,

Gary-Bobo, Prieto, & Picard, 2006) reported significant birth order effect, especially in

academic achievements. However, there is empirical evidence that the flow of investment

tends to be from older to younger siblings in modern societies (Essock-Vitale & McGuire,

1985). In a similar vein, Sulloway (1996) described firstborns as differentially likely to act as

surrogate parents within the family, and that they take on the role of family custodian. In

other words, they take more responsibility and are perceived as high achievers which

researchers (e.g., Robinson, Stimpson, Huefner, & Hunt, 1991) have correlated with being an

entrepreneur. They always have been seen as leaders, high-achievers, ambitious, and

conforming (McGuirk & Pettijohn, 2008). Although birth order has shown to be a standard

variable in psychological research for decades, literature evidence reveals that relatively little

attention has been paid to birth order influence on family related behaviours, and studies

linking birth order to business orientation/inclination are very scarce and need to be given

more empirical attention. From the foregoing therefore, it could be hypothesised that:

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

Hypothesis 2: Family business background will significantly predict participants’

entrepreneurial intent; such that those with a family business exposure will report higher

entrepreneurial intent compared to their counterparts with employment orientation.

Hypothesis 3: Family structure will significantly predict entrepreneurial intent; such that

participants with both parents will report higher entrepreneurial intent compared to their

counterparts with single parents.

Hypothesis 4: Birth order will significantly predict entrepreneurial intent among Nigerian

undergraduate students; such that firstborn children will report higher entrepreneurial intent

compared to laterborn children.

5. Gender and Entrepreneurial Intent

Gender stereotypes can exert a strong influence on cognition and behaviour (Heilman, 2001).

These stereotypes influence in clear terms the careers men and women venture into. They

play a role in many achievement-related domains such as in business (Nosek, Banaji, &

Greenwald, 2002). Plethora of research evidence shows that gender stereotypes influence

men’s and women’s intentions to pursue entrepreneurship, an achievement-oriented career

domain (Gupta, Turban, Wasti, & Sikdar, 2005). Not surprisingly, studies find that current

views about entrepreneurs are heavily weighted toward traits traditionally viewed as

masculine (Ahl, 2006; Lewis, 2006), and these stereotypical beliefs adversely affect the entry

and development of women in entrepreneurship (Marlow & Patton, 2005). It is evident that

men and women differ in their motives and preferences for self-empowerment (e.g., De

Martino & Barbato, 2003), in a particular job or occupation (Bigoness, 1988) or a profession

(Valian, 1998). Studies (e.g., Thebaud, 2010; Yordanova & Tarrazon, 2010) found that

women have lower entrepreneurial intentions than men. But in the case of business

ownership, most men and women share the desire for independence (Sexton & Bowman,

1990).

Buttner and Moore (1997) reported that women have made great strides in recent years

toward closing the entrepreneurship gap. Today, the term entrepreneur is no longer

dominated by males. In this 21st century, the autonomy and power of woman have become

more obvious (Purdy, 2005). In fact, recent years have witnessed dramatic changes in the

number, size, and types of women-owned businesses. Globally, a 2005 report stated that

women represent more than one third of all people involved in entrepreneurial activity

(Minniti, Allen, & Langowitz, 2005). Their ventures are no longer petty trading in the home;

they now run mega businesses. In reality, woman-entrepreneurs are increasingly becoming

significant contributors to the entrepreneurial growth around the world, opening up

economies and creating employment. For instance, it is reported that in advanced market

economies, women own 25% of all businesses and the number of women-owned businesses

in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America is daily increasing (Jalbert, 2000). In the

United States for instance, it is reported that 6.7 million privately held majority women-

owned businesses account for $1.19 trillion in sales and employ 9.8 million people. The

growth rate of women-owned businesses is significant (National Women’s Foundation,

2004). Although Nigerian women may not have attained the status of their American

counterparts, the point remains that the gap between male and female successful

entrepreneurs is rapidly closing or might have been closed.

Besides, due to the present economic reality that has offered no job opportunities to either

group, these positions of male dominance in entrepreneurship may no longer hold as women

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

now challenge and compete effectively with men in virtually all economic ventures. Mueller

and Dato-On (2008) argued accordingly that times have changed and that dramatic social

changes ushered in over the last five decades have given rise to modern economically

advanced societies for which traditional sex roles and social barriers to historically “male”

vocations, including entrepreneurship, are more flexible. It is therefore expected that within

modern societies like Nigeria, differences in entrepreneurial intent between men and women

are marginal or non-existent. Yet, studies that explored this male-female entrepreneurial

supremacy in Nigeria have been largely very scarce. It therefore makes theoretical and

empirical sense to hypothesise that:

Hypothesis 5: Gender will significantly predict entrepreneurial intent among Nigerian

undergraduate students; such that male participants will report higher entrepreneurial intent

compared to their female counterparts.

6. Method

6.1 Participants and procedure

A sample of 425 final year undergraduate students was sampled from the University of

Nigeria, Nsukka and Benue State University, Makurdi. Two hundred and twenty one (221)

and 204 of the participants were selected from the two institutions respectively. They

consisted of 261 (61.41%) males and 164 (38.59%) female students. Their ages ranged from

21 to 50 years, with average age of 29.7 years. One hundred and ninety eight (46.59%) of the

participants were Tiv, a major ethnic group in Benue State that occupies the North central

part of Nigeria while 227 (53.41%) were Igbo, one of the three major ethnic groups in

Nigeria that occupies the South-eastern region. A total of 471 copies of the Individual

Entrepreneurial Intent Scale were administered to the participants in four departments:

Departments of Psychology and Sociology and Anthropology from the University of Nigeria,

Nsukka and departments of Psychology and Geography from Benue State University,

Makurdi. Out of the 256 copies administered in the University of Nigeria, only 243 were

completed and returned representing 94.92% response rate. Out of this number, 22 (9.05%)

copies were lost to improper completion and only 221 (90.95%) were considered for analysis.

On the other hand, a total of 215 copies of the scale were administered in the two departments

in Benue State University, and 100% response rate was achieved. Out of this number, 11

(5.12%) copies were lost to improper completion and only 204 (94.88%) copies were

adequate for analysis. All together, of the 471 copies administered in the two institutions, 458

copies were completed and returned, representing 97.24% response rate. Out of this number,

33 (7.21%) copies were discarded due to poor completion bringing the number of valid

copies to 425 that were eventually used for analysis.

6.2 Instruments

Ethnicity, family business background, family structure, birth order and gender are dummy

variables and such information was obtained through demographic means. However, the most

common measures of socioeconomic status include parents’ income, education or occupation

(Moore, et al., 2010), but income is the most widely used indicator of family’s financial

resources (Chen, Matthews, & Boyce, 2002). Education on the other hand is adjudged the

most stable of these measures (Williams & Collins, 1995). However, recently the measure of

socioeconomic status has shifted to per capita expenditure and assets. Based on these

arguments, the present researchers adopted estimated parents’ income, weekly expenditure,

assets and their educational attainment to categorize the participants into high and low

socioeconomic status. The participants were therefore asked to estimate their parents’

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

monthly income, how much they spend weekly for family upkeep, assets and their

educational attainment. Those whose parents receive as much as ₦100, 000.00 ($700) per

month, whose parents live in upstairs/bungalow/duplex, have a minimum of first university

degree were classified as belonging to the high SES and others to low SES.

Thompson’s (2009) Individual Entrepreneurial Intent Scale (IEIS) was used to measure the

entrepreneurial intent of the participants. The scale is a unidimensional one made up of 10

items, 6 substantive and four distracter items. The 4 distracter items act as red herrings and

are not to be included in scale analyses (Thompson, 2009). Out of the 6 substantive items, 3

are negatively worded items and are inversely scored, whereas 3 items are positively worded

and thus are directly scored. The IEIS was designed in a 6-point Likert-type response format

ranging from 1) = Very untrue to 6) Very true. According to Thompson, the IEIS is

internationally reliable having been developed with people across different countries. The

scale’s Cronbach alpha coefficient of internal reliability for the present study is .88. Sample

items include: “Intend to set up a company in future”, “Never search for business start-up

opportunities”. An individual is expected to obtain scores ranging from 6 to 36. Higher scores

on the scale indicate higher entrepreneurial intent.

7. Statistical Analyses

Analyses were carried out on the data using hierarchical regression in order to assess the

amount of incremental variance explained by each type of predictor variable. We first,

entered the control variables (age, marital status, parent education and socioeconomic status).

Next, we entered the predictor variables in their sequence: ethnicity, family structure, family

business background, birth order and gender.

Table 1 and 2 Around Here

The results of the hierarchical regression analyses reveal that all the control variables

explained 1.6% of the variance in entrepreneurial intent, ΔF (4, 420) = 2.77, p < .02. Among

the four control variables entered, only parent education was significant on individual’s

entrepreneurial intent. Ethnicity explained 4.1% of the variance in the criterion variable over

and above the control variables, ΔF (1, 419) = 11.65, p < .01. In the regression equation

model, ethnicity significantly and positively predicted entrepreneurial intent (β = .17, p <

.01), with majority (Igbo) reporting higher entrepreneurial intent score compared to their

minority (Tiv) counterparts. This is consistent with the first hypothesis that ethnicity will

significantly predict entrepreneurial intent.

Family structure explained 11.3% of the variance in the criterion variable over and above the

control variables and ethnicity, ΔF (1, 419) = 35.27, p < .001. In the regression equation,

family structure significantly and positively predicted entrepreneurial intent (β = .27, p <

.001). This is consistent with the second hypothesis that family structure will significantly

predict entrepreneurial intent. Participants with both parents reported higher entrepreneurial

intent score relative to those with single parent. Family business background explained 14.1%

of the variance in entrepreneurial intent above and beyond the control variables, ethnicity and

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

family structure, ΔF (1, 417) = 14.63, p < .001. In the regression equation model however,

family business background significantly and positively predicted entrepreneurial intent (β =

.20, p < .001). Participants with family business exposure reported higher entrepreneurial

intent score compared to their employment oriented counterparts.

Birth order explained 21.1% of the incremental variance in entrepreneurial intent above and

beyond the control variables, ethnicity, family structure and family business background, ΔF

(1, 416) = 29.36, p < .001. The regression equation model also confirmed the significance of

birth order in predicting entrepreneurial intent (β = .24, p < .001). Thus, firstborn children

reported higher entrepreneurial intent score compared to their laterborn counterparts. This is

also consistent with the fourth hypothesis that birth order will significantly predict students’

entrepreneurial intent. Furthermore, hypothesis 5, which anticipated significant gender

prediction of students’ entrepreneurial intent; such that males will report higher

entrepreneurial intent compared to their female counterparts was not confirmed. As shown in

Table 2, the 6th

hierarchical regression equation model revealed that gender did not

significantly predict entrepreneurial intent.

8. Discussion

The primary objective in this study was to broaden our understanding of some predictor

variables of entrepreneurial intent in a bad economy by testing predicted relationships

between ethnicity, family background, gender and entrepreneurial intent. Results

demonstrated as speculated that ethnicity significantly predicted entrepreneurial intent, such

that majority (Igbo) reported higher entrepreneurial intent score relative to their minority

(Tiv) counterparts. This finding seems to suggest that different cultures determine what is

important and which endeavour should be given priority. The result is consistent with the

findings in many previous studies that ethnicity is essential in self-employment decisions

(Clark & Drinkwater, 1998). It is also in agreement with Göksel and Aydintan (2011), Kumar

and Kelly (2006), Steenkamp, Hofstede and Wedel (1999) that individuals’ cultural

background, where they are born and the environment they are raised, significantly influence

how they behave in a variety of contexts, which includes entrepreneurial inclination.

The result also showed that students’ family business background significantly and positively

predicted entrepreneurial intent. This study confirms the observations of Matthews and Moser

(1996) and Ullah et al. (2011) that individuals whose fathers are self-employed often draw

strong inspiration from them to also strive to own businesses. It is consistent with various

prior studies (e.g., Brown, 1990; Crant, 1996; Schiller & Crewson, 1997; Wang & Wong,

2004; Drennan, Kennedy, & Renfrow, 2005) which separately found that individuals whose

parents owned businesses demonstrate the highest preference for self-employment. Despite

the consistency of the result with several previous studies, it contradicts that of Göksel and

Aydintan (2011) who found that family business has no influence on individuals’ propensity

to entrepreneurship.

Family structure was found to significantly predict individual’s entrepreneurial intent.

Participants with both parents showed higher entrepreneurial tendencies compared to their

counterparts with single parents. This finding has further strengthened our understanding that

when there is depletion in the supply of economic and emotional resources within the

household due to the absence of one parent, the children’s cognitive development is

impaired, which is usually carried over to adulthood and which in turn affect their ability to

take critical decisions such as establishing or owning businesses. The result is consistent with

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

many earlier studies (e.g., Antecol & Bedard, 2007; Corak, 2001; Lang & Zagorsky, 2001)

which observed that adults who grew up in single-parent households often have poor

outcomes in a variety of achievement domains. This result also seems to support the

importance of two parent-household in ensuring overall development of children, which

enhances their skills and ability to take defining decisions in adulthood (Cavanagh & Huston,

2006; Fomby & Cherlin, 2007; Osborne & McLanahan, 2007).

Consistent with hypothesis 5, birth order predicted individual’s entrepreneurial intent, with

firstborns reporting higher entrepreneurial intent score compared to their laterborn

counterparts. The result seems to support the assertion that the flow of investment tends to be

from older to younger siblings (Essock-Vitale & McGuire, 1985). It confirms Sulloway’s

(1996) description of firstborns as most likely to act as surrogate parents within the family

and as a result take up huge and often times, premature financial responsibility on behalf of

the family. They are the armour bearers of the family in times of difficulty, and therefore are

often compelled by circumstances to initiate and pursue entrepreneurial projects. This result

is in line with Gary-Bobo, Prieto and Picard’s (2006) study that birth order effect is related

with some positive outcomes in many achievement domains. However, the result contradicts

many prior findings (e.g., Hauser & Sewell, 1985; Jefferson, Herbst, & McCrae, 1998) which

reported no significant birth order effect in their respective studies.

Furthermore, contrary to our prediction on gender, the result of the study demonstrated that

gender did not significantly predict students’ entrepreneurial intent. Although research

evidence shows that gender stereotypes influence men’s and women’s intentions to pursue

entrepreneurship (Gupta, Turban, Wasti, & Sikdar, 2005), the present finding fails to confirm

supremacy in owning businesses. It contradicts the results of previous studies (e.g., Thebaud,

2010; Yordanova & Tarrazone, 2010) that women perceive themselves as having less

entrepreneurial ambition than their male counterparts. The reason for this contradiction might

be that the present economic turbulence ravaging Nigeria that has offered no job

opportunities to both genders, the position of male dominance in many achievement-oriented

career domains is rapidly fading away. This result shows that men and women share the

desire for prosperity and independence through owning businesses (Sexton & Bowman,

1990), especially when there are no job options. It seems to agree with Mueller and Dato-

On’s (2008) assertion that dramatic social changes that characterize modern societies for

which traditional sex roles and social barriers assigned men and women to specific roles

including entrepreneurship has become more flexible.

9. Implications of the study

Our study provides insight into the entrepreneurial intentions of individuals which may point

toward the need to delineate entrepreneurial characteristics among ethnic groups through

cross-cultural research efforts. In understanding differences among prospective ethnic

entrepreneurs, one implication points toward promotion of greater participation of the

minority Tiv in the ownership of businesses in Nigeria since intentions may sometimes lead

to actual behaviour (Ajzen, 1991); one can hardly deserve what one did not desire. Promotion

in this context means re-orientating through business counselling or training a group of

people to accept taking up the challenge of establishing and growing businesses.

The group’s and individual’s adequate knowledge of the benefits associated with being an

entrepreneur and acquisition of the skills to establish and run successful ventures is likely to

increase their desire to nurse entrepreneurial intentions. With the current economic turbulence

which has stifled job opportunities, taking to entrepreneurship seems to be the only way

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

forward for the Nigerian youth whose involvement is expected to stimulate the economy.

There are limited opportunities for innovative and creative ideas for new entrepreneurs who

may want to get involved, but some factors that make the business of entrepreneurship

attractive such as regular power supply and infrastructural development which have been in

deplorable condition must become government priority.

10. Limitations of the study

The present study like every other human endeavour is under the weight of some limitations.

First, the study focuses on the intentionality and it is obvious that intentions may not often

turn into actual behaviours in the future. Therefore, even if one participant stated a high

entrepreneurial propensity in the survey, they might deviate from actualizing these intentions

if other good opportunities present themselves. This has been a common problem for almost

all studies in the literature but unfortunately there is no other better or accurate way to

measure the tendency for entrepreneurship beside information from respondents about their

entrepreneurial intention.

Second, the problem often associated with all survey research (cross-sectional design) of the

study does not allow for causal inferences. Another limitation of the study was that all data

were collected via self-report measures, which may lead to the problem of common method

bias and inflated the predictive relationships between the study variables. This might not have

adversely influenced the result because as Ajzen pointed out, self-reports are generally quite

accurate when information gathered is not of a sensitive nature (Ajzen, 1988), and no

sensitive information was gathered in this study. All information was as to whether

respondents nurse any intention of becoming entrepreneurs in future.

Third, among about 247 identifiable minority ethnic groups in Nigeria only one (Tiv) was

considered in the study. Similarly, among the three major ethnic groups, only one (Igbo) was

involved. Thus, there is gross under representation of these ethnic groups in the study, which

questions the generalisability of its findings.

11. Further Research

Although several researchers (e.g., Azjen, 1991) expressed strong belief that intentions lead

to actual behaviour, it is imperative to also state that intentions may not often translate into

actual behaviours in the future as individuals are almost likely to deviate from actualising

their stated intentions if other good opportunities present themselves along the way.

Therefore, further studies are of necessity to enrich our knowledge and understanding of the

extent to which these intentions are pursued to its practical end or translate to actual

behaviour.

In this study, the various ethnic groups in Nigeria were under-represented, giving rise to the

question of generalisability. For a more generalisable result to be achieved, future researches

should include as many ethnic groups as possible to ensure a fair representation of multi-

ethnic groups in Nigeria. There is abundant evidence that attitudes such as entrepreneurial

intention could be a function of personality or individual difference characteristics (Armitage,

Norman, & Conner, 2002). Some other attitudinal variables such as perceived desirability and

perceived feasibility, and situational factors such as employability and future commitments

have been reported as mediating and moderating variables on entrepreneurial intents

respectively (Byabashaija & Katono, 2011). Although our study controlled for any effects

that some demographic variables, such as age, marital status, parent education and

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

socioeconomic status may exert, there could also be other individual/student characteristics

we did not control for. Therefore, future research should consider the influence of a wide

range of individual differences, attitudinal and situational variables that could explain

entrepreneurial intent.

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

References

Ahl, H. (2006). Why research on women entrepreneurs needs new directions.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(5), 595–621.

Aito, E. (2008). A glottopolitical appraisal of diversity in nation building in Nigeria. The

International Journal of Diversity in Organizations, Communities and Nations, 8(2),

281-291.

Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality and behaviour. Chicago, Illinois: Dorsey Press.

Ajzen, I. (1991). Theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human

Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

Aldrich, H. E., & Cliff, J. E. (2003). The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship:

toward a family embeddedness perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5),

573–596.

Antecol, H., & Bedard, K. (2007). Does single parenthood increase the probability of teenage

promiscuity, substance use, and crime? Journal of Population Economics, 20, 55-71.

Armitage, C. J., Norman, P., & Conner, M. (2002). Can the theory of planned behaviour

mediate the effects of age, gender and multidimensional health locus of control?”

British Journal of Health Psychology, 7, 299–316.

Aworemi, J. R., Abdul-Azeez, I. A., & Opoola, N. A. (2010). Impact of socio-economic

factors on the performance of small-scale enterprises in Osun State, Nigeria.

International Business Research, 3(2), 92-99.

Barnir, A., Watson, W. E., & Hutchins, H. M. (2011). Mediation and moderated mediation in

the relationship among role models, self-efficacy, entrepreneurial career intention, and

gender. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(2), 270-297.

Bigoness,W. (1988). Sex differences in job attribute preferences. Journal of Organizational

Behaviour, 9, 139–147.

Bird, B. J. (1988). Entrepreneurial behaviour. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, London.

Brown, R. (1990). Encouraging enterprise: Britain’s graduate enterprise program. Journal of

Small Business Management, 28(4), 71–77.

Buttner, E. H., & Moore, D. P. (1997). Women’s organizational exodus to entrepreneurship:

self-reported motivations and correlates with success. Journal of Small Business

Management, 35(1), 34–46.

Byabashaija, W., & Katono, I. (2011). The impact of college entrepreneurial education on

entrepreneurial attitudes and intention to start a business in Uganda. Journal of

Developmental Entrepreneurship, 16(1), 127-144.

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

Cavanagh, S., & Huston, A. (2006). Family instability and children’s early problem

behaviour. Social Forces, 85(1), 551-581.

Carr, J. C., & Sequeira, J. M. (2007). Prior family business exposure as intergenerational

influence and entrepreneurial intent: A theory of planned behaviour approach. Journal

of Business Research, 60, 1090–1098.

Chan, S., & Lee, E. (2004). Families with Asian roots. In E. W. Lynch and M. J. Hanson

(Eds.), Developing cross-cultural competence: A guide for working with children and

their families (pp. 219–298). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Chen, E., Matthews, K. A., & Boyce, W. T. (2002). Socioeconomic differences in children’s

health: How and why do these relationships change with age? Psychological Bulletin,

128(2), 295-329.

Clark, K., & Drinkwater, S. (1998). Ethnicity and self-employment in Britain. Oxford

Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 60(3), 383-407.

Corak, M. (2001). Death and divorce: The long-term consequences of parental loss on

adolescence. Journal of Labor Economics, 19(3), 682-715.

Crant, J. M. (1996). The proactive personality scale as a predictor of entrepreneurial

intentions. Journal of Small Business Management, 34(3), 42–49.

Danes, S. M., Lee, J. Stafford, K., & Heck, R. K. Z. (2008). The effects of ethnicity, families

and culture on entrepreneurial experience: an extension of sustainable family business

theory. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 13(3), 229–268.

De Martino, R., & Barbato, R. (2003). Differences between women and men MBA

entrepreneurs: exploring family flexibility and wealth creation as career motivators.

Journal of Business Venturing, 18(6), 815–833.

Dimov, D. (2007). Beyond the single-person, single-insight attribution in understanding

entrepreneurial opportunities. Entrepreneurship, Theory, and Practice, 31(5), 713–

731.

Drennan, J., Kennedy, J., Renfrow, P. (2005). Impact of childhood experiences on the

development of entrepreneurial intentions. International Journal of Entrepreneurship

& Innovation, 6(4), 231-238.

Dyer, W. G. (2006). Examining the ‘family effect’ on firm performance. Family Business

Review, 19, 253–273.

Dyer, W. G, & Handler, W. (1994). Entrepreneurship and family business: Exploring the

connections. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19(1), 71–83.

Essock-Vitale, S. M., & McGuire, M. T. (1985). Women’s lives viewed from an evolutionary

perspective II patterns of helping. Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 155–173.

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

Fairlie, R. W., & Robb, A. M. (2005). Families, human capital, and small business: Evidence

from the characteristics of business owners survey. Washington, DC: Center for

Economic Studies, Bureau of the Census.

Fomby, P., & Cherlin, A. J. (2007). Family instability and child wellbeing. American

Sociological Review, 72, 181-204.

Gary-Bobo, R., Prieto, A., & Picard, N. (2006). Birth-order and sibship sex-composition

effects in the study of education and earnings. Mimeo, CEPR and THEMA.

Göksel, A., & Aydintan, B. (2011). Gender, business education, family background and

personal traits; a multi dimensional analysis of their affects on entrepreneurial

propensity: findings from Turkey. International Journal of Business and Social

Sciences, 2(13), 35-48.

Green, S., & Pryde, P. (1990). Black entrepreneurship in America. New Brunswick, NJ,

Transactions Publishers.

Gupta, V. K., Turban, D., Wasti, S. A., & Sikdar, A. (2005). Entrepreneurship and

stereotypes: Are entrepreneurs from Mars or from Venus? In K. M. Weaver (Ed.),

Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings. Honolulu, HI: Academy of

Management.

Hanson, M. (2004). Ethnic, cultural, and language diversity in service settings. In E. W.

Lynch and M. J. Hanson (Eds.), Developing cross-cultural competence: A guide for

working with children and their families, (pp. 3–18). Baltimore, MD: Paul H Brookes.

Hartshorne, J. K., Salem-Hartshorne, N., & Hartshorne, T. S. (2009). Birth order effects in

the formation of long-term relationships. Journal of Individual Psychology, 65(2),

156-176.

Hauser, R., & Sewell, W. (1985). Birth order and educational attainment in full sibships.

American Educational Research Journal, 22(1), 1-23.

Healey, M. D., & Ellis, B. J. (2007). Birth order, conscientiousness, and openness to

experience: Tests of the family-niche model of personality using a within-family

methodology. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 28, 55–59.

Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent

women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 657–674.

Hill, N. E., Murry, V. M., & Anderson, V. D. (2005). Sociocultural contexts of African

American families. In V. C. McLoyd, N. E. Hill and K. A. Dodge (Eds.), Diversity in

African American family life: Context, adaptation, and policy, 2, 21–44. New York:

Guilford.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Imperia, G., O’Guinn, T. C., & MacAdams, E. A. (1985). Family decision making role

perceptions among Mexican American and Anglo wives: A cross cultural comparison.

Advances in Consumer Research, 12(1), 71–74.

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

Jalbert, S. E. (2000). Women entrepreneurs in the global economy study. Center for

International Enterprise, Washington, DC.

Jefferson, T., Jr., Herbst, J. H., & McCrae, R. R. (1998). Associations between birth order

and personality traits: evidence from self-reports and observer ratings. Journal of

Research in Personality, 32, 98–509.

Kumar, R., & Kelly, L. (2006). Self-efficacy, social and cultural issues in designing online

technology skills transfer programs: A Mexican context. Journal of Information

Systems and Technology. Special Issue on IT Investments in Emerging Economies.

Landau, J. (2007). Enhancing resilience: Families and communities as agents of change.

Family Process, 46(3), 351–365.

Lang, K., & Zagorsky, J. L. (2001). Does growing up with a parent absent really hurt? The

Journal of Human Resources, 36(2), 253-273.

Lee, S. S., & Osteryoung, J. S. (2001). A comparison of determinants for business start-up in

the U.S. and Korea. Journal of Small Business Management, 39(2), 193–200.

Lewis, P. (2006). The quest for invisibility: Female entrepreneurs and the masculine norm of

entrepreneurship. Gender, Work & Organization, 13, 453–469.

Lingelbach, D., De la Viña, L. and Ase, P. (2005), “What’s distinctive about growth-oriented

entrepreneurship in developing countries?” UTSA College of Business Center for

Global Entrepreneurship. Working Paper No. 1.

Marlow, S., & Patton, D. (2005). All credit to men? Entrepreneurship, finance, and gender.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29, 717–735.

Martes, A. C. B. (2000). Brasileiros nos Estados Unidos: Um Estudo sobre Imigrantes em

Massachusetts [Brazilians in the United States: a study on immigrants in

Massachusetts]. São Paulo: Paz e Terra.

Matthews, C. H., & Moser, S. B. (1996). A longitudinal investigation of the impact of family

background and gender on interest in small firm ownership. Journal of Small Business

Management, 34, 29–43.

McGuirk, E. M., & Pettijohn, T. F. (2008). Birth order and romantic relationship styles and

attitudes in college students. North American Journal of Psychology, 10, 37-52.

Michalski, R. L., & Shackelford, T. K. (2002). An attempted replication of the relationships

between birth order and personality. Journal for Research on Personality, 36, 182–

188.

Minniti, M., Allen, I. E., & Langowitz, N. (2005). Global entrepreneurship monitor report on

women and entrepreneurship. Babson College, The Centre for Women’s Leadership,

and London Business School, London.

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

Moore, S., Daniel, M., Bockenholt, U., Gauvin, L., Richards, L., & Stewart, S. (2010).

Associations among socioeconomic status, perceived neighbourhood control,

perceived individual control, and self-reported health. Journal of Community

Psychology, 38(6), 729-741.

Mueller, S. L., & Dato-On, M. C. (2008). Gender-role orientation as a determinant of

entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 13(1), 3–

20.

Narayanasamy, K., Rasiah, D., & Jacobs, C. J. (2011). An empirical study of factors

influencing gender differences in entrepreneurship. International Business and

Economics Research Journal, 10(10), 17-29.

National Women’s Foundation (2004). Capturing the impact: women-owned businesses in

the United States. Center for Women’s Business Research.

[www.nfwbo.org/pressreleases/ nationalstatetrends/capturingtheimpact.htm].

Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = male, me = female,

therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 44–59.

Okonjo-Iweala, N., & Osafo-Kwaako, P. (2007). Nigeria’s economic reforms: Progress and

challenges. Brooklyn Global Economy and Development.

Osborne, C., & McLanahan, S. (2007). Partnership instability and child well-being. Journal

of Marriage and Family, 69, 1065-1083.

Oteh, A. (2009). The role of entrepreneurship in transforming the Nigerian economy. Paper

presented at the 7th

convocation lecture, Igbinedion University, Okada, Edo State,

Nigeria, 4th

December.

Paulhus, D. L., Trapnell, P. D., & Chen, D. (1999). Birth order effects on personality and

achievement within families. Psychological Science, 10, 482–488.

Robinson, P. B., Stimpson, D. V., Huefner, J. C., & Hunt, H. K. (1991). An attitude approach

to the prediction of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 15(4),

13-32.

Rogoff, E. G., & Heck, R. K. Z. (2003). Evolving research in entrepreneurship and family

business: Recognizing family as the oxygen that feeds the fire of entrepreneurship.

Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 559–566.

Ruhm, C. (2004). Parental employment and child cognitive development. The Journal of

Human Resources, 39(1), 155-192.

Sales, T. (2003). Brazilians away from home. NY: Center for Migration Studies.

Saroglou, V., & Fiasse, L. (2003). Birth order, personality, and religion: A study among

young adults from a three sibling family. Personality and Individual Differences, 35,

19–29.

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

Schiller, B. R. & Crewson, P. E. (1997). Entrepreneurial origins: A longitudinal inquiry.

Economic Inquiry, 35(3), 523–531.

Sexton, D. L., & Bowman-Upton, N. (1990). Female and male entrepreneurs: Psychological

characteristics and their role in gender-related discrimination. Journal of Business

Venturing, 5, 29–36.

Stavrou E. T., & Swiercz, P. M. (1998). Securing the future of the family enterprise: A model

of offspring intentions to join the business. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,

23(2), 19–39.

Steenkamp, J. B. E. M., Hofstede, F., & Wedel, M. (1999). A crossnational investigation into

the individual and national cultural antecedents of consumer innovativeness. Journal

of Marketing, 63, 55–69.

Soludo, C. C. (2006). Can Nigeria be the China of Africa? A lecture delivered at the

Founders’ day of the University of Benin, Benin City, Nigeria, November, 23.

Sulloway, F. J. (1996). Born to rebel: Birth order, family dynamics and creative lives. New

York: Pantheon.

Thebaud, S. (2010). Gender and entrepreneurship as a career choice: Do self-assessments of

ability matter? Social Psychology Quarterly, 73(3), 288-304.

Thompson, E. R. (2009). Individual entrepreneurial intent: Construction clarification and

development of an internationally reliable metric. Entrepreneurship Theory and

Practice, 33(3), 669-694.

Turker, D., & Selcuk, S. S. (2009). Which factors affect entrepreneurial intention of

university students?” Journal of European Industrial Training, 33(2), 142-159.

Ullah, H., Dean, B. S., & Kaleem, M. (2011). A study of owner’s inherited factors affecting

entrepreneurial orientation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-Pakistan. Interdisciplinary

Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(1), 712-725.

Urban, B. (2006). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy in a multicultural society: Measures and

ethnic differences. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 32(1), 2-10.

Valian, V. (1998). Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Wang, C. K., & Wong, P. (2004). Entrepreneurial interest of university students in Singapore.

Technovation, 24, 163–172.

Williams, D. R., & Collins, C. (1995). US socioeconomic and racial differences in health:

Patterns and explanation. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 349-386.

Yordanova, D. I., & Tarrazon, M. (2010). Gender differences in entrepreneurial intentions:

Evidence from Bulgaria. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 15(3), 245-261.

ijcrb.webs.com



AUGUST 2012

VOL 4, NO 4

Results

Table 1: Means, Standard deviation and inter-correlation between study variables

Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Entrepreneurial intent 4.40 1.09 1

Age 25.63 4.34 -.02 1

Marital status 1.12 .33 -.01 .39*** 1

Parents education 1.40 .49 -.15** -.08* -.14** 1

Socioeconomic status 1.51 .50 -.07* -.08* -.11** .63*** 1

Ethnicity 1.49 .50 .16*** - .22*** -.18*** .05 .21*** 1

Family structure 1.74 .44 .26*** -.03 -.03 .03 .08* -.01 1

Family Business background 1.44 .50 .24*** .09* .12** -.47*** -.28*** -.03 .07* 1

Birth order 1.29 .46 .24*** .03 .07* -.00 -.02 -.01 .03 .00 1

Gender 1.38 .49 -.05 -.25*** -.01 .11* .16*** .18*** -.01 -.13** .02 1

Note: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. A total of 425 final year undergraduate students completed the entrepreneurial intent scale. Gender (1 =

male, 2 = female); marital status (1 = single, 2 = married); parents education (1 = low, 2 = high); ethnic group (1= Tiv, 2 = Igbo); family

structure (1 = single parent, 2 = both parents); socioeconomic status (1 = low, 2 = high); parents occupation (1 = employment orientation, 2 =

business orientation); birth order (1= laterborn children, 2 = firstborn children); gender (1 = male, 2 = female). Entrepreneurial intent is coded so

that higher scores indicated higher entrepreneurial intent.

New Venture Creation: Ethnicity, Family Background and Gender as Determinants of Entrepreneurial...

Documents

Transcript of New Venture Creation: Ethnicity, Family Background and Gender as Determinants of Entrepreneurial...