Entrepreneurial Career Intentions Among Malay Ethnic University Students in Malaysia

7/27/2019 Entrepreneurial Career Intentions Among Malay Ethnic University Students in Malaysia

1/17

WORLD ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & APPLIED SCIENCES-MARCH-OCTOBER 2013 EDITION

363

Entrepreneurial Career Intentions among Malay Ethnic

University Students in Malaysia

Dr.Nor Khasimah Aliman (Corresponding author)1

& Dr.Hayati Abdul Jalal2

1. Associate Professor, Faculty of Business & Management

2. Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Business & Management

Universiti Teknologi Mara (Perak), 32610 Seri Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia

Accepted 17 October 2013

Abstract

This research explores the associations between demographic characteristics (i.e. gender and family background),

personality traits of innovativeness, entrepreneurship knowledge, environment, and entrepreneurial career

intentions among undergraduate university students in Malaysia. Written questionnaire were completed by 230

students and exploratory factor analysis of the constructs created one new interpretable component for

entrepreneurial factor (i.e. attitude towards entrepreneurship). The results indicate that more than 70 per cent of

the respondents have favourable attitude towards entrepreneurship. The results also provide evidence that genderand family background, personality traits of innovativeness, entrepreneurial knowledge, environment and

attitude towards entrepreneurship are important predictors for entrepreneurial career intentions. Attitude towards

entrepreneurship was found to be the most important predictor to entrepreneurial career intentions, followed by

innovativeness, entrepreneurial environment and knowledge. These findings will be a value addition in Malaysia

scenario and are likely to help Malaysian government in evaluating the success implementation of

entrepreneurship program among undergraduates.

Keywords: Entrepreneurship, Innovativeness, Entrepreneurial Intentions, Demographics

1. Introduction

Graduate unemployment due to difficulties in securing jobs that correspond to academic background and

expectation has consequently become a major object of intense both academic and manager evaluations. The

imbalances ratio between labor market demand and the number of undergraduates applying for jobs further

contribute to a substantial amount of unemployment rate (Ismail, 2011). Entrepreneurship is considered to be

an engine for creating job opportunities, economic growth, and social adjustment through the creation of

nonmonetary rewards of self-independence (Bianchi, 2012). A considerable agreement exists on the importance

of promoting entrepreneurship to stimulate economic development and employability (Ahmed, Nawaz, Ahmad,

Shaukat, Usman, Wasim-ul-Rehman & Ahmad, 2010; Turker & Selcuk, 2009; Luiz & Mariotti, 2008).

Evidence from the literature also suggests that entrepreneurship and self-employment are the best solution in

transforming the joblessness or unemployed graduates (Ahmed et al., 2010; Turker & Selcuk, 2009; Luiz &

International Journal of Business & Management (IJBM) October 2013 VOL.1, No.8


2/17


364

Mariotti, 2008). Thus, one possible approach in this direction is to embrace entrepreneurship and encourage

self-employment that may create job independence for satisfaction (Bianchi, 2012). The better understanding of

the nature of business supported by the policy maker is among forces that may drive the joblessness among

graduates successfully make the transition into business. Governmental efforts through the critical agenda

program of entrepreneurship may initiate path for the undergraduates to choose entrepreneurship as a convincing

career choice. Nevertheless, entrepreneurship requires consistent efforts in relation to individual personality traits,

demographic characteristics, and entrepreneurship education (Ahmed et al., 2010; Car & Sequeira, 2007;

Davidsson, 1995; Frank & Luthje, 2004; Linan et al., 2011; Pihie & Afsaneh, 2009; Shapero & Sokol, 1982). The

literature also acknowledged the importance of innovativeness as the core personality traits of entrepreneurs

(Davidsson, 1995; Drucker, 1985). The primary focus of this study is to enhance understanding on the underlying

factors of entrepreneurial career intentions among undergraduates. In particular, this research explores

determinants (i.e. demographic characteristics, personality traits of innovativeness, entrepreneurship knowledge

and environment) contributing to the entrepreneurial career intentions among undergraduates in Malaysia. The

main objective of this study is to investigate the relationship between demographic characteristics,

innovativeness, entrepreneurial knowledge and environment on the entrepreneurial career intentions among

university students.

2. Literature review

Entrepreneurship is said to be function of various factors e.g. personality traits, education, experience, social and

economic conditions, law and order and many other issues. According to the Institutional Economic Theory, the

contextual factors were determinants of entrepreneurship. Those factors included political and economic rules

and contract, codes of conduct, attitudes, values, norms of behavior, and conventions (Veciana, Aponte & Urbano,

2005). Luthje and Franke (2003) incorporated both personality traits and contextual factors as determinants of

entrepreneurial intentions. The study by Turker, Onvural, Kursunluoglu and Pinar (2005) also considered the

impacts of both internal factors (motivation and self-confidence) and external factors (perceived level of

education, opportunities and support) on entrepreneurial propensity of university students. In short, there was a

general agreement that attitudes towards the entrepreneur, entrepreneurial activity, and its social functions were

determinant factors for university students to decide an entrepreneurial career (Erich, Malgorzata, Daniel, &

Robert, 2009; Frank & Luthje, 2005; Segal, Borgia, & Schoenfeld, 2005)

2.1 Entrepreneurial Intentions

Entrepreneurial intent has proven to be a primary predictor of future entrepreneurial behavior (Krueger, Reilly, &

Carsrund, 2000). This variable examines how much a respondent is interested to be an entrepreneur either in

present scenario or may be some time later in future. Entrepreneurial intentions are an important first step in the

entrepreneurship process. In social psychology, intention is considered as the most immediate and important

antecedent of behavior (Abraham & Sheeram, 2003). Ajzen (1991) and Bagozzi and Yi (1989) both indicatedthat intention is a strong predictor of entrepreneurial activity. Linan, Carlos, and Jose (2008) concluded that

entrepreneurial intentions as one of the strongest predictor for startup decisions.

2.2 Demographic and Entrepreneurial Intentions

According to Shapero and Sokol, (1982), exogenous influences including demographics, skills and society, traits,

financial support, and culture affect the attitudes and also the intentions indirectly and behaviors to become

entrepreneurs. Socio-demographic factors have an indirect influence on entrepreneurial intention (Kolvereid,

1996). However, there is a lack of agreement on the variables that determine the individuals decision to start a

venture. Therefore, there is a need to clarify which elements play the most influential role in shaping the personal

decision to start a firm (Linan et al., 2011).


3/17


365

2.2.1 Gender differences and entrepreneurial intentions

Several researchers found that males have a higher preference for entrepreneurship behavior than females

(Delmar & Davidsson, 2000; Matthews & Moser, 1995). Ghazali, Ghosh and Tay (1995) found gender

differences in the self-employment rate among non-professional degree holders (science, computer science, arts,

and business) but not for professional degree holders (engineering, medicine, law, accountancy). Kolvereid (1996)

found that males have significantly higher preference for self-employment than females. Wang and Wong (2004)

revealed that besides family business experience and educational level, gender was a significant factor in

explaining entrepreneurial interest in Singapore. Pihie and Afsaneh (2009) found a significant difference between

male and female students in Malaysia on entrepreneurial intention where the male students obtained higher mean

score. Ahmed et al. (2010) however discovered that gender does not have significant affect on entrepreneurial

intentions of students in Pakistan.

2.2.2 Family background and entrepreneurial intentions

Parents act as initial role models and the parents active in a family business influence the future entrepreneurial

intentions through changing attitudes and beliefs (Shapero & Sokol, 1982, Krueger et al.,2000). Exposures to

entrepreneurship both from the family side and personal have an impact on entrepreneurial intentions (Carr &

Sequeira, 2007; Basu & Virick, 1993). Raijman (2001) pointed that self-employment experience was directly

related with entrepreneurial intentions of students. Other researchers discovered that family characteristics have

implication on emergence of new business, recognition of opportunity, start up decisions and resource

mobilizations (Wang & Wong, 2004; Aldrich & Cliff, 2003; Ghazali et al., 1995; Scott & Twomey, 1988). The

involvement of family members in business symbolized for entrepreneurship and can be in assistance for both

financial and non-financial. These factors have direct influence on individuals entrepreneurial intentions.

Further, Ahmed et al. (2010) revealed that prior business experience and family business experience are one of

the important predictor of entrepreneurial intentions. In addition, Wang, Lu and Millington (2011) claimed that

family business background will contribute to the formation of entrepreneurial intentions. Athanasios,

Hadjimanolis, Panikkos, and Poutziouris (2011) claimed that there was a statiscally significant correlation

between a family business background and the intention to start a new business.

2.3 Entrepreneurial innovativeness and entrepreneurial intentions

Personality via psychological traits shown to have impact on entrepreneurial intentions (Davidsson, 1995; Frank,

Lueger & Korunka, 2007; Lu, Wang & Millington, 2010; Wang et al., 2011). Yosuf, Sandu and Jain (2007)

revealed that there is a positive relationship between personality traits and entrepreneurship intentions. Drucker

(1985) indicated that the innovation is the most basic role of entrepreneur. A few researchers claimed that

innovativeness as one of the most important trait of entrepreneurs (e.g. Ang & Hong, 2000; Ahmed et al., 2010).

Carland and Carland (1991) found that successful entrepreneurs are much more innovative than

non-entrepreneurs. Sexton and Bowman-Upton (1986) claimed that students who opt entrepreneurship as theirmajor (specialization) appeared more innovative than students of business administration. Goldsmith and Kerr

(1991) discovered that students who have gone through from the entrepreneurship courses proved to be much

more innovative than the other students of business. The researchers who employed Kirtons (1996) scale also

found entrepreneurship students were more innovative than general business management students (Goldsmith &

Kerr, 1991). Ahmed et al. (2010) suggested that there was a strong relationship between students innovativeness

and their intentions to become entrepreneur in future.

2.4 Entrepreneurial knowledge and entrepreneurial intentions

Dyer (1994) has suggested that entrepreneurship courses, or training in relation to establishment of new business,

contributes towards starting a new business and gives confidence and courage to the students. Lack of


4/17


366

entrepreneurial educations leads to low level of entrepreneurial intentions of students (Franke & Luthje, 2004).

Entrepreneurial education program are source of entrepreneurial attitude and overall intentions to become future

entrepreneur (Souitaris, Zerbinati, & Al-Laham Andreas, 2007). Entrepreneurship education has been considered

one of the key instruments to increase the entrepreneurial attitudes of both potential and nascent entrepreneurs

(Linan et al., 2011).

According to Ahmed et al. (2010), entrepreneurial subjects were not determinants of entrepreneurial intentions of

students. However, the researchers found that study year was an important predictor of entrepreneurial intentions,

suggesting that the higher the level of awareness and knowledge about the field and market, the higher students

preferences to become entrepreneurship will be.

2.5 Entrepreneurial environment and entrepreneurial intentions

In previous research, personal and environment-based had been identified as determinants of entrepreneurial

intent (Davidsson, 1995; Franke & Luthje, 2004; Segal, Borgia & Schoenfeld, 2005). Entrepreneurial

environment covers both the university and outside university environment. Luiz and Mariotti (2008) grouped

the environment into two: campus environment and country environment. Both environments contributed to

positive entrepreneurial intentions. Turker and Selcuk (2009) on the other hand classified the environment into

three: Educational support (university), relational support (family and friends) and structural support (private,

public and non-government organizations). The research findings identified that all the three supports were

related to entrepreneurial intentions. Erich, Malgorzata, Daniel and Robert (2009) recognized university

environment as significant predictor of students entrepreneurial intentions in Austria. However, the researchers

did not found significant impact of financial support for entrepreneurs or bureaucratic procedures related to

opening a firm on entrepreneurial intentions.

3. Methodology

3.1 Theoretical FrameworkThis research is based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (Azjen, 2002; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). The theory

explains that intents towards a specific behavior are subject to influence from different factors. For this study,

both internal and external factors are considered as predictors of entrepreneurial career intentions.

Figure 1: Conceptual Research Model

Demographic

characteristics

Gender

Famil Back round

Entrepreneurial

Entrepreneurial

Entrepreneurial

Entrepreneurial

Career


5/17


367

3.2 Research Hypotheses

H1: Demographic characteristics determine entrepreneurial career intentions.

H1 (a): Gender influences entrepreneurial career intentions.

H1(b): As compared to female, male students have higher intentions to be entrepreneurs.

H1(c): Family background influences entrepreneurial career intentions.

H1(d): Students with family background in business have higher intentions to be entrepreneurs.

H2: Entrepreneurial innovativeness has an impact on entrepreneurial career intentions.

H3: Entrepreneurial knowledge has an impact on entrepreneurial career intentions.

H4: Entrepreneurial environment will determine entrepreneurial career intentions.

3.3 Sample

The targeted sample size for this study was 300 students. 350 survey questionnaires were distributed to the

diploma and degree students from business and non-business background at a public university known as

Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Perak. Purposive convenience sampling was employed to select the

respondents. This sampling method was used to ensure that research respondents consist of male and female

students who pursue their studies at both Diploma and Degree level in various programs offered by the

university. This sample size is consistent with other research conducted in other countries such as Linan et al.

(2011) that used 354 students in Spain, Ahmed et al.s research (2010) used 276 Pakistani business graduate

students, Turker and Selcuks (2009) and Eileens (2008) research both utilizing 300 university students in

Turkey, and 273 students in Ireland respectively.

3.4 Instrument and measurement

The survey questionnaire consists of three sections. Section 1 consist six (6) questions in relation to

entrepreneurship. In Section 2, the survey instrument was based on scales constructed from previous studies.

Likert five-point scales were used to measure the predictors and criterion variables. An entrepreneurial career

intention (dependent variable) was measured using 11 items adapted from Pihie (2009), Linan and Chen (2009),

and Linan et al. (2011). Entrepreneurial environment was measured using 9 items adapted from Luiz andMariotti (2008), entrepreneurial knowledge was measured using 10 items adapted from Linan et al. (2011), and

entrepreneurial innovativeness was operationalized using 10 items adapted from Jackson (1994) Jackson

Personality Inventory. In Section 3, four (4) questions on demographic variables were asked.

3.5 Data Analysis and Hypotheses Testing

Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the completed data. Exploratory Factor Analysis

with orthogonal varimax rotation was used to define the basic structure and to determine each dimension forming

this structure separately as well as to increase the interpretability of factor rotation (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, &

Black, 1998). KMO value and Barletts test of sphericity were used to examine the strength of relationship

among factors. The reliability test using Cronbachs alpha was applied for each of emerged factor to determine


6/17


368

which items within the scale most reliably represented each construct. Hypotheses were tested using cross

tabulation and regression analysis.

4. Results

4.1 Respondents Profile

Based on the 230 sample of UiTM (Perak) students, the percentage of male and female respondents are 32.2

and 67.8 per cent respectively. While majority of the respondents are below 20 years old (i.e. 52.6 per cent of

total respondents), another 47.4 per cent are within the age range of 20 to 25 years old. 31.3 per cent of the

sample is in Year 1, whilst those in Year 2 and Year 3 make up 52.6 per cent and 16.1 per cent of the total sample

respectively. In term of study program, students are pursuing their studies in business administration,

accountancy, computer science, statistics, office management, art and design, actuarial science, town planning,

architecture, quantity survey, building, geometric science both at the Diploma and Degree levels. 42.1 per cent of

them are science students and 57.9 per cent are social science students (see Appendix-Table 1).

When Section 1 of the survey questionnaire is examined (see Appendix Table 2), 42.2 per cent of the students

have attended entrepreneurial course. Majority (72.2 per cent) of the participants have a favorable attitude

towards entrepreneurship. Unfortunately, 87 per cent of them have no financial support (i.e. money) to start the

business. While 48.3 per cent of the total sample has business experience, respondents that have family business

oriented background (i.e. parents involve in business) account for 27.4 per cent.

4.2 Pilot test

Results from the pilot testing with 20 respondents show that majority of the items has more than 3.50 mean score

(see Appendix Table 3). As such, similar questionnaire were distributed to the targeted sample.

4.3 Cross tabulation

Cross-tabulation was run to examine whether there is a significant difference between demographic variables and

entrepreneurial intentions. Table 4 of the cross-tabulation results (refer to Appendix) indicate that all variables

have significant positive relationship with entrepreneurial intentions but the relationship is quite weak/low

(contingency coefficient are less than 0.50).

A comparison between male and female respondents on entrepreneurial intentions was also examined. A

significant different between gender (=0.00) suggests that female students have higher intentions to be an

entrepreneur. Thus, H1 (b) is rejected. The present finding however, was inconsistent with Pihie and Afsanehs

(2009), and Wang and Wongs (2004) research, which were conducted in Malaysia and Singapore respectively.

This may be due to the ethnic homogeneity effect as all respondents are Malay students. Furthermore, more than

60 per cent of the respondents are female.

A significant different between students who have parents involve in business and those who are not on the

entrepreneurial intentions (=0.00) indicates that family-business oriented value do not influence the

respondents career intentions. Students who brought up in the non-business oriented parents have higherintentions to become entrepreneurs. As such, Hypothesis H1(d) is rejected. However, previous research suggests

this is not always the case (for example Wang and Wong (2004) Singapore, Drennan et al. (2005) Australia,

Mariano et al. (2007), and Hadjimanolis, et al. (2011) Cyprus).In Malaysia, those who have parents involve in

business usually may have more advantages to success in their lives. The findings of the present study however,

may suggest that female students are very ambitious, venturing themselves into the business and become

entrepreneurs for living despite no family (i.e. parents) business orientation values are nourished.

4.4 Factor Analysis and Reliability

Exploratory factor analysis had identified the Eigenvalue, KMO and Barletts Test score. The varimax rotation

method was performed and the numbers of factors was determined based on the eigenvalue criterion ( > 1).


7/17


369

Barletts Test of Sphercity was statistically significant (5180.86, p = 0.00) and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO)

value was 0.930. Factor loadings for all predictor items were shown in Appendix Table 5.

Principal component analysis revealed the presence of seven factors with eigenvalues exceeding more than 1,

explaining 61.08 per cent of the total variance, which exceeds the 60% threshold used in social sciences (Hair et

al., 1995). Factor 1, Factor 2, Factor 4 and Factor 5 are predictor variables. Factor 1 clearly represents

Entrepreneur Knowledge that comprises eight items, explaining 36.73 percent of the variance with eigenvalues

of 14.70. Factor 2 contributes 6.40 percent of the total variance with eigenvalues of 2.56 is known as

Entrepreneur Environment consisting of nine items. While Factor 4 is considered as Entrepreneur Innovativeness

that comprises nine items, a newly emerged factor 5 consisting of four items, was renamed as Attitude towards

Entreprenership. They both are explaining 3.92 and 2.69 percent of variance with eigenvalues of 1.57 and 1.15

respectively. According to Autio et al. (1997), there is a positive impact of attitude toward entrepreneurship on

entrepreneurial conviction. Krueger et al. (2000) and Erich et al. (2009) indicate that attitude toward

entrepreneurship acts as a primary determinant of students willingness to be self-employed. Franke and Luthje

(2004) suggest that the more students value the entrepreneurial career path, the stronger the interest to start a

business will be. Factor 3 (criterion variable) represents Entrepreneurial Career Intentions consists seven items,

explaining 5.92 percent variance with eigenvalues of 2.37. Factor 6 and 7 were dropped from subsequent

analysis due to less than three items loaded in both factors and the alpha score is too low.

The alpha values were calculated (see Table 5) to assess the internal consistency reliabilities of the scales. Alpha

values for predictors and criterion variables are as follows: Factor 1- entrepreneurial knowledge (=0.803),

Factor 2 entrepreneurial environment (=0.887), Factor 4entrepreneurial innovativeness (=0.766), Factor 5

attitude towards entrepreneurship (= 0.774), and Factor 3 entrepreneurial career intentions ( = 0.883). All

variables had above 0.70 Cronbachs alpha values. According to Sekaran and Bougie (2013), the closer

Cronbachs alpha is to 1, the higher its internal consistency reliability. A reliability less than 0.60 is considered

poor, those in the 0.7 range, is acceptable and over 0.80 is good.

4.5 Regression Analysis and Discussion

The hypotheses of the study were tested using hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Overall, the model was

fit (F-change=99.97; F-sig=0.00). There was a strong relationship between demographics characteristics,

entrepreneurial innovativeness, entrepreneurial knowledge, entrepreneurial environment, attitude towards

entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intentions (R=0.82). 66.6 per cent of the changes in entrepreneurial

intentions were explained by the predictors (R2=0.666) refer Table 6.

In Model 1, the demographic variables of gender and family background were regressed towards entrepreneurial

career intentions. The results showed in Table 6 suggest that both gender and family background are significant

predictors to entrepreneurial career intentions. Both gender (=0.269; t=2.955; =0.003) and family background

(=0.262; t=2.748; =0.006) have positive significant relationship with entrepreneurial career intentions. Thisfinding is consistent with previous researches in this area (Ahmed et al., 2010; Carr & Sequeira, 2007; Wang &

Wong, 2004; Aldrich & Cliff, 2003; Ghazali et al., 1995; Scott & Twomey, 1988). Thus, H1, H1 (a) and H1 (c)

are all supported.

In Model 2, other predictors (entrepreneurial innovativeness, entrepreneurial knowledge, entrepreneurial

environment and attitude toward entrepreneurship) were entered into the model. The results showed that

innovativeness, entrepreneurial knowledge, entrepreneurial environment and attitude toward entrepreneurship

have significant influence on entrepreneurial career intentions. Attitude toward entrepreneurship (=0.346;

t=7.087; =0.000) is identifiedas the most important predictor for entrepreneurial career intentions. This finding

provides support to the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 2002) and other researchers general agreement that


8/17


370

attitudes towards entrepreneurship is a determinant for university students to decide an entrepreneurial career

(Veciana et al.,2005; Linan et al., 2011).

Innovativeness (=0.462; t=6.584; = 0.00) is identified as the second mos t important predictor for

entrepreneurial career intentions. This finding supports Ahmed et al.s (2010) research. The third significant

determinant is entrepreneurial knowledge (=0.109; t=2.429; =0.016). It lends support to the research

conducted by Linan et al. (2011), Souitaris et al. (2007), and Franke and Luthje (2004), however, it contradicts to

Ahmed et al.s findings (2010). The fourth significant determinant is entrepreneurial environment (=0.125;

t=2.404; =0.017).The result supports other researchers findings in this area such as Turker and Selcuk (2009)

and Luiz and Mariotti (2008). In summary, these findings provide support to H2, H3, and H4, suggesting that

all predictors have positive and significant relationship with entrepreneurial career intentions.

5. Conclusion

This study confirmed the importance of demographic variables (i.e. Gender and family background),

entrepreneurial knowledge, environment, innovativeness, and individuals attitude towards entrepreneurship for

entrepreneurial career intentions. The present evidence also suggests that financial support (i.e. money) for

venturing into business is vital as majority of the respondents have favorable attitude towards entrepreneurship.

Financial constraints may impede the increase of the business profits, but an increased in the value of being

independence is highly regarded for job satisfaction (Bianchi, 2012). Thus, the university educators and

administrators as well as policy makers should further develop students interest towards entrepreneurship,

promoting successful entrepreneurial role models and conducting entrepreneurship educational programs for job

creation and growth. The attainment of this objective is undeniable for the long run, provided that initiative to

nurture positive attitude towards entrepreneurship among individuals, aligning them to the business-fit venture,

as well as providing the necessary supports are well developed. This is because individuals, firms and supports

are the three important balancing ingredients in creating remarkable entrepreneurs. Conducive entrepreneurial

environment is also vital in creating business growth. All involved parties should critically think of removing

bureaucratic procedures or regulatory constraints for business start-ups, willingly to offer more incentives (such

as training, mentor-mentee approach, etc.) to the young entrepreneurs, and promoting social acceptance of less

fortunate entrepreneurs. The government program of implementing incubator entrepreneurs should be supported

and promoted to the young generations. Students should also be exposed to the real business environment for

increasing their self-confidence level and further develops their risk taking attitude. Academic trips to the

industries and well-structured industrial attachment are among the initiatives that should be planned for the

students. Hence, university and industrial linkages provide important platforms for motivating and nourishing the

creative and innovative values among students. For example, a contribution in relation to funding from the

organization for students to present their innovative ideas in both local and internationals is highly regarded.

Specifically, this research highlights the importance of knowledge, innovativeness, environment, and attitudetowards entrepreneurship for entrepreneurial career intentions. However, as with any research, issues came to

light through the course of the study which imposed limitation. This related to the sample as only one ethnic of

multiracial Malaysia in Perak state is selected (i.e. Malays ethnic of UiTM (Perak) undergraduate students).

Future research can extend the present study in several directions. One possible direction would be to replicate

the same questionnaire with other UiTM state campuses at the undergraduate level. One could also conduct the

same study on undergraduate students in other public and private universities in Malaysia. In addition to that,

future research may consider self-confidence as a moderating variable between predictors and intentions.

Attitude towards entrepreneurship may also be considered as mediating variable between predictors and

intentions.


9/17


371

References

Ahmed, I., Nawaz, M. M., Ahmad, Z., Shaukat, M. Z., Usman, A., Wasim-ul-Rehman & Ahmad, N. (2010).

Determinants of Students Entrepreneurial Career Intentions: Evidence from Business Graduates.

European Journal of Social Sciences, 15 (20), 14-22.

Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived Behavioral Control, Self-Efficacy, Locus Control, and the Theory of Planned

Behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32 (1), 1-20.

Ang, S. H., & Hong, D (2000). Entrepreneurial spirit among East Asian Chinese. Thunderbird International

Business Review, 42, 285-309.

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

embeddedness perspective.Journal of Business Venturing, 18, 573-596.

Athanasios, Hadjimanolis, Panikkos and Poutziouris (2011). Family business background, perceptions of barriers,

and entrepreneurial intentions in Cyprus,International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, Vol 3, No. 2,

168-182.

Basu, A., & Virick, M. (2008). Assessing entrepreneurial intentions amongst students: A comparative study. 12th.

Annual Meeting of the National Collegiate of Inventors and Innovators Alliance, Dallas, USA.

Bianchi, M. (2012). Financial development, entrepreneurship, and job satisfaction. The Review of Economics and

Statistics, 94(1), 273-286.

Carland, J. C., & Carland, J. W. (1991). An empirical investigation into the distinctions between male and female

entrepreneurs and managers.International Small Business Journal, 9(3), 62-72.

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

entrepreneurial intent: A theory of Planned Behavior approach. Journal of Business Research, 60,

1090-1098.

Davidsson, P. (1995). Determinants on entrepreneurial intentions. RENT IX, Workshop in Entrepreneurship

Research, Piacenza, Italy.

Delmar, F., & Davidsson, P. (2000). Where do they come from? Prevalence and characteristics of nascent

entrepreneurs.Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 12, 1-23.

Drucker, P. (1985).Innovation and entrepreneurship: Practice and Principles. New York: Harper and Row.

Dyer Jr., G. W. (1994). Towards a theory of entrepreneurial careers.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19(2),

7-21.

Eileen, S. (2008). An exploration of female undergraduates attitudes towards and perceptions of

entrepreneurship.Masters Thesis, Waterford Institute of Technology.http://repository.wit.ie/1052/13 June

2012

Erich, J. S., Malgorzata, A. W., Daniel, A. A., & Robert, J. B. (2009). The effects of attitudes and perceivedenvironment conditions on students entrepreneurial intent: An Austrian perspective.Education + Training,

51(4), 272-291.

Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and

research. New York: Addison-Wesley.

Frank, N., & Luthje, C. (2004). Entrepreneurial intentions of business students: a benchmark study.

International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 1 (3), 269-288.

Frank, H., Lueger, M., & Korunka, C. (2007). The significance of personality in business start-up intentions,

start-up realization and business success.Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 19 93), 227-251.

Ghazali, A., Ghosh, B. C., & Tay, R. S. T. (1995). The determinants of self-employment choice among university
http://repository.wit.ie/1052/http://repository.wit.ie/1052/http://repository.wit.ie/1052/http://repository.wit.ie/1052/


10/17


372

graduates in Singapore.International Journal of Management, 12 (1), 26-35.

Goldsmith, R. E., & Kerr, J. R. (1991). Entrepreneurship and adaption-innovation theory. Technovation, 11 (6),

373-382.

Hair, J. F. and Anderson, R. E. (1995).Multivariate Data Analysis, Prentice Hall International, Inc.

Hair, J. F.., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th

Edition,

Prentice Hall International, Inc.

Ismail, N. A. (2011). Graduates characteristics and unemployment: A study among Malaysian graduates.

International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(16), 94-102.

Jackson, D. N. (1994). Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised Manual. Port Heron, MI: Sigma Assessment

Systems, Inc.

Kirton, M. J. (1976). Adaptors and innovators: A description and measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61,

759-762.

Kolvereid, L. (1996). Organizational employment versus self employment: reasons for career choice intentions.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 20 (3), 23-31.

Krueger, N. Jr., Reilly, M. and Carsrund, A. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions.Journal of

Business Venturing, 15 (5/6), 411-532.

Linan, F., Cohard, J. C. R., & Guzman, J. (2008). Temporal Stability of Entrepreneurial Intentions: A

Longitudinal Study, 4th

European Summer University Conference on Entrepreneurship Bodo Graduate

School of Business and Nordiand Research Institute 22nd

to 25th, August, Bodo, Norway.

Linan, F., & Chen, Y. W. (2009). Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure

entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593-617.

Linan, F., J., Carlos, R., & Jose, M. R. (2011). Factors affecting entrepreneurial intention levels: A role for

education.International Entrepreneurship Management Journal, 7, 195-218.

Lu, W., Wang, J. W., & Millington, J. K. (2010). Comparison of entrepreneurial intentions among college

students in the US and China. InternationalJournal of Pluralism and Economics Education, 1, 327-342.

Luiz, J., & Mariotti, M. (2008). Perceptions regarding entrepreneurship in an emerging and culturally diverse

economy: A South Africa survey. Working Paper No. 95, University of Witwatersrand and Australian

National University.

Luthje, C., & Frank, N. (2003). The making of an entrepreneur: Testing a model of entrepreneurial intent among

engineering students at MIT.R&D Management, 33(2), 135-147.

Matthews, H., & S. Moser (1995). The impact of family background and gender on interest in small firm

ownership: A longitudinal study. Paper presented at ICSB 40th

World Conference, Sydney, June 19-21.

Pihie, Z. A. L. (2009). Entrepreneurship as a career choice: An analysis of entrepreneurial self-efficacy and

intention of university students.European Journal of Social Sciences, 9(2), 338-349.Pihie, Z. A. L., & Afsaneh, B. (2009). Entrepreneurial intention of university students: An analysis of gender and

ethnic groups. The International Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change Management, 9 (4). Pp.

49-60.

Raijman, R. (2001). Determinants of entrepreneurial intentions: Mexican immigrants in Chicago. Journal of

Socio-Economics, 30, 393-411.

Scott, M. G., & Twomey, D. F. (1988). The long-term supply of entrepreneurs: Students career aspirations in

relation to entrepreneurship.Journal of Small Business Management, 26 (4), 5-13.

Segal, G., Borgia, D., & Schoenfeld, J. (2005). The motivation to become an entrepreneur. International Journal

of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, 11(1), 42-57.


11/17


373

Sekaran, U. (2006).Research Method for Business: A Skill Building Approach. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Sekaran, U. & Bougie, R. (2013). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach. John Wiley &

Sons, Ltd. West Sussex, UK.

Sexton, D. L., & Bowman-Upton, N. B. (1986). Validation of personality index: Comparative psychological

characteristics analysis of female entrepreneurs, managers, entrepreneurship students and business

students. In R. Ronstadt, J. Hornaday, R. Peterson, & K. Vesper (Ed.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship

research, Wellesley, MA: Babson College.

Shapero, A., & Sokol, L. (1982). Social dimensions of entrepreneurship. In Kent, C., Sexton, D. & Vesper, C.

(Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall,

Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S., & Al-Laham Andreas (2007). Do entrepreneurship programmers raise entrepreneurial

intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources,Journal of

Business Venturing, 22, 566-591.

Turker, D., Onvural, B., Kursunluoglu, E., & Pinar, C. (2005). Entrepreneurial propensity: A field study on the

Turkish university students.International Journal of Business, Economics and Management, 1(3), 15-27.

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

of European Industrial Training, 33(2), 142-159.

Veciana, J. M., Aponte, M., & Urbano, D. (2005). University students attitudes towards entrepreneurship: A two

countries comparison.International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1(2), 165-182.

Wang, C. K., & Wong P. K. (2004). Entrepreneurial interest of university students in Singapore. Technovation, 24,

163-172.

Wang, W., Lu, W., & Millington, J. K. (2011). Determinants of entrepreneurial intention among college students

in China and USA.Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, winter & spring, 1 (1), 35-44.

Yosuf, M., Sandu, M. S., & Jain, K. K. (2007). Relationship between psychological characteristics and

entrepreneurial inclination: A case study of students at university Tun Abdul Razak. Journal of Asia

Entrepreneurship and Sustainability, 3 (2), 12-19.

APPENDIX

Table 1: Respondents characteristics (n=230)

Frequency % Frequency %

GENDER

Female

Male

156

74

67.8

32.2

PROGRAM

Science and

Technology

Social Science

97

133

42.1

57.9

AGE

Below 20

20-25

121

109

52.6

47.4

YEAR OF STUDY

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

72

121

37

31.3

52.6

16.1

230 100.0 230 100.0

Table 2: Related Information on Entrepreneurship (n=230)


12/17


374

Frequency % Frequency %

Entrepreneurial

courses attended

YesNo

97133

42.257.8

Money to start business

YesNo

30200

13.087.0

Business

experiences

Yes

No

111

119

48.3

51.7

Favorable attitude

towards entrepreneurship

Yes

No

166

64

72.2

27.8

Entrepreneurial

parents

Yes

No

63

167

27.4

72.6

Table 3: Descriptive Statistics for Pilot Test (n =20)

Min. Max. Mean Std. Deviation

Entrepreneurial Intentions

CI1 3.00 5.00 4.10 .718CI2 3.00 5.00 4.40 .598

CI3 3.00 5.00 4.60 .598

CI4 1.00 5.00 4.05 1.050

CI5 1.00 5.00 3.70 1.128

CI6 4.00 5.00 4.15 .366

CI7 2.00 5.00 3.90 .718

CI8 3.00 5.00 4.35 .670

CI9 2.00 5.00 4.00 .858

CI10 3.00 5.00 4.30 .656

CI11 2.00 5.00 3.70 .864

Innovativeness

IN1 3.00 5.00 4.00 .458

IN2 3.00 5.00 4.15 .489

IN3 3.00 5.00 4.10 .640

IN4 3.00 5.00 3.60 .680

IN5 1.00 4.00 2.50 .945

IN6 2.00 5.00 3.65 .670

IN7 3.00 5.00 4.05 .394


13/17


375

IN8 2.00 5.00 3.80 .695

IN9 3.00 5.00 4.00 .561

IN10 3.00 5.00 3.80 .695

Entrepreneurial Knowledge

EK1 3.00 5.00 3.95

.

.686

EK2 1.00 5.00 3.80 .833

EK3 2.00 5.00 3.80 .833

EK4 2.00 5.00 3.65 .745

EK5 2.00 5.00 3.75 .910

EK6 2.00 5.00 3.70 .732

EK7 3.00 5.00 3.90 .640

EK8 3.00 4.00 3.55 .510

EK9 3.00 5.00 3.75 .550

Entrepreneurial Environment

EE1 3.00 5.00 4.05 .686

EE2 3.00 5.00 4.15 .587

EE3 2.00 5.00 3.75 .716

EE4 2.00 5.00 4.25 .786

EE5 4.00 5.00 4.40 .502

EE6 2.00 5.00 4.20 .767

EE7 3.00 5.00 4.10 .718

EE8 3.00 5.00 4.00 .458

EE9 3.00 5.00 4.30 .732

EE10 2.00 5.00 3.85 .875

Note : Likert scales 1-5 points was employed

Table 4: Cross-tabulation (Demographic variables and intentions)

Gender

Total

Female

Male

Intentions:

Low 88

24 112

High 68

50 118

Pearson Chi-Square 11.55

Sig. 0.00**


14/17


376

Contingency coefficient 0.219

Family as entrepreneur

Total

YesNo

Intentions:

Low 21

91 112

High 42

76 118

Pearson Chi-Square 8.20

Sig. 0.00**

Contingency coefficient 0.185

Table 5: Factor Analysis and Reliability Analysis of the variables (n=231)

Factor Eigenvalues Factor

Loading

%

Variance

Explained

Factor 1: Entrepreneur Knowledge ( = 0.803) 14.70 36.73EK2 I know how to develop an entrepreneurial project. 0.649

EK3 I know the necessary practical details to start a business. 0.665

EK4 I have some knowledge related to young entrepreneur

training.

0.681

EK5 I have the ability to make networking and professional

contacts.

0.416

EK6 I have some knowledge related to the financing aid to

start a business.

0.728

EK7 I have some knowledge on associations related to

entrepreneurship.

0.710

EK8 I have some knowledge related to the technical aid to

start a business.

0.757

EK9 I have some knowledge on support organizations related

to entrepreneurship.

0.665

Factor 2: Entrepreneur Environment ( = 0.887) 2.559 6.398

EE1 My country government support entrepreneurs. 0.715

EE2 Entrepreneurial examples are included in classes. 0.520

EE3 A small amount of grant would encourage 0.457


15/17


377

entrepreneurship.

EE4 There is many entrepreneurial opportunities in Malaysia. 0.708

EE5 My university encouraged to pursue entrepreneurship

ventures.

0.763

EE6 More business sector interaction would encourage

entrepreneurship.

0.610

EE7 Having a mentor would help students to pursue

entrepreneurship ventures.

0.620

EE8 Private sectors support for student entrepreneurs would

result in more university based business start-up.

0.488

EE9 Ministry of Higher Education promotes entrepreneurship

programs to university students.

0.715

Factor 3: Entrepreneur Career Intentions ( = 0.883) 2.368 5.920

CI3 I want to be a boss to my own business. 0.636

CI4 I will start my business in the next 5 years. 0.607

CI6 Im determined to create a business in the future. 0.689

CI7 I am prepared to do anything to be an entrepreneur. 0.612

CI8 I have a strong intention to start a business someday. 0.621

CI9 Ill make every effort to start and run my own business. 0.630

IN10 I am willingly to take risk and start a new business

venture.

0.505

Factor 4: Innovativeness ( = 0.766) 1.569 3.922

IN1 I value new ideas. 0.661

IN2 I like to improvise. 0.719

IN3 I prefer challenging activities. 0.674

IN4 I am a creative individual. 0.667

IN5 I am a conservative thinker.(R) -0.495

IN6 I am an inventive individual. 0.515

IN7 I like to try new technology. 0.603

IN8 I am able to produce original thought. 0.411

IN9 I am motivated to develop new solutions to problems. 0.469

Factor 5: Attitude towards entrepreneurship ( = 0.774) 1.147 2.868

CI1 I will choose a career as an entrepreneur. 0.530

CI2 I put effort to make more money. 0.497

CI11 I have thought seriously to start my own business after

completing my study.

0.543


16/17


378

EE10 A programmed to defer student loan payments would

encourage more students to pursue a business after graduation.

0.650

Factor 6 ( = 0.211) - deleted 1.086 2.715

EK1 I have some knowledge about business opportunities. 0.648

CI5 I will start my business in the next 10 years. 0.562

Factor 7 - deleted 1.002 2.506

CI10 I prefer to be an entrepreneur rather than be an employee

in a company.

0.431

KMO 0.930

Barletts Test 5180.86

Sig. 0.00

Total variance 61.08%

Table 6: Result of hierarchical regression on entrepreneurial intentions

Model 1 B t Sig.

Gender

Family background

0.269

0.262

0.189

0.176

2.955

2.748

0.003**

0.006**

R

R2

F-change

F-sig

0.258

0.067

8.097

0.00**

Model 2 B t Sig.

Gender

Family background

Innovativeness

Entrepreneurial knowledge

Entrepreneurial environment

Attitude toward

entrepreneurship

0.008

0.098

0.462

0.109

0.125

0.346

0.005

0.066

0.339

0.119

0.125

0.382

0.136

1.685

6.584

2.429

2.404

7.087

0.892

0.093

0.000**

0.016*

0.017*

0.000**

R

R2

F-change

0.816

0.666

99.97


17/17


379

F-sig0.00**

Notes: Significant at 0.05 level (*p

Entrepreneurial Career Intentions Among Malay Ethnic University Students in Malaysia

Documents

Transcript of Entrepreneurial Career Intentions Among Malay Ethnic University Students in Malaysia