Building Entrepreneurship Behavioural Intention: An Empirical Examination of the
Areas upon which to Focus
Hasliza Hassan1, Abu Bakar Sade2, Muhammad Sabbir Rahman3
1Faculty of Management, Multimedia University, Cyberjaya, Selangor, Malaysia 2
Putra Business School, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
3Department of Marketing and International Business, North South University, Dhaka, Bangladesh
1hasliza.hassan@mmu.edu.my/liza.hassan@yahoo.com, 2abubakar.sade@putrabs.edu.my / adsade@yahoo.com 3rahman.sabbir@northsouth.edu / sabbiriiu@gmail.com
Article History: Received: 10 November 2020; Revised: 12 January 2021; Accepted: 27 January 2021; Published online: 05 April 2021
Abstract: Entrepreneurship is continuously being emphasized to stimulate socio-economic development and stability.
Although initiatives have been taken to create an entrepreneurship intention among youngsters, as to which initiative is the most worthwhile is still nebulous. Primary data were collected using a survey questionnaire and the data were analysed by structural equation modelling. Based on the research analysis, the entrepreneurship intention among youngsters should be encouraged by emphasizing attitude, perceived behavioural control, entrepreneurial education, and financial support. This research indicates that subjective norm and market availability does not encourage youngsters to venture into entrepreneurship.
Keywords: Attitude; Behaviour; Entrepreneurship Education; Financial Support; Intention
1. Introduction
Entrepreneurship requires the combination of a resource, process, and individual ability to take advantage of an opportunity in the market to generate individual and social value (Hessels & Naudé, 2019). Entrepreneurial activity is important for the communities (Dias, Rodrigues & Ferreira, 2018) since the activity will positively enhance socio-economic development (Dhahri & Omri, 2018). Furthermore, small and medium enterprises are vehicles to drive the entrepreneurship activities (Hessels & Naudé, 2019) by creating jobs and generating income for the community. This can be further enhanced through the usage of information technology, especially in rural areas (Khazaeli, Hanifi, Khazaeil & Hanifi, 2018) to gain market potential not only from the urban market but also as a platform for globalization (Prashantham, Eranova & Couper, 2018). Hence, other than minimizing social, environmental and economic issues (Chikha & Jarboui, 2017), entrepreneurship is very powerful in building a sustainable community (Aquino, Lück & Schänzel, 2018).
The Malaysian government introduced the National Entrepreneurship Policy as an initiative to develop the country as a true entrepreneurial nation by 2030 (The Sun, 2019). In line with this, the Ministry of Entrepreneur Development is targeting to have a million small and medium enterprise entrepreneurs within the next four years by emphasizing those people who come from a low income family. The target is expected to be supported with the wave from the fourth industrial revolution (The Star, 2018) which has enabled entrepreneurs to enter the market through the digital platform with less hassle. For the time being, although there are more than 60 organizations involved in developing local entrepreneurs with more than 150 entrepreneurship development programmes, the existing initiatives are still insufficient. This is because Malaysia is currently ranked poorly at 58th in the Global Entrepreneurship Development Index (Ramasamy, 2019). Accordingly, more initiatives should be given to strengthen the intentional behaviour towards becoming an entrepreneur. This research explores the entrepreneurial intention among youngsters based on attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control, entrepreneurship education, financial support, and market availability.
2. Literature Review
Mind wondering can be divided into intentional and unintentional (Seli, Risko, Smilek & Schacter, 2016). Since becoming an entrepreneur involves decision-making, this research focuses on the intention of youngsters to become an entrepreneur. An individual may venture into entrepreneurship out of necessity or because they are opportunity driven (Ribes-Giner, Moya-Clemente, Cervelló-Royo & Perello-Marin, 2018). The common bases for entrepreneurial intention are positive perceived appropriateness (Adekiya & Ibrahim, 2016), motivation, entrepreneurial skills (Marques, Valente & Lages, 2018), knowledge (Miralles, Giones & Riverola, 2016), or emotional competencies (Fernández-Pérez, Montes-Merino, Rodríguez-Ariza & Galicia, 2019). Although entrepreneurial intention is built through entrepreneurial process, not all entrepreneurial intentions will lead to actual behaviour (Shirokova, Osiyevskyy & Bogatyreva, 2016). Those individuals who have high entrepreneurial
intention emphasize innovation, achievement, and have a strong internal locus of control (Çolakoğlu & Gözükara, 2016).
Attitude is known as the state of mind, mental view, or disposition with regard to a fact or state (Hillson & Murray-Webster, 2017). For this research, attitude refers to the tendency of youngsters to become an entrepreneur. Shaping the entrepreneurship attitude may encourage entrepreneurial intention (Miranda, Chamorro-Mera & Rubio, 2017). This is because the attitude will influence entrepreneurial intention (Law & Breznik, 2017; Yousaf, Shamim, Siddiqui & Raina, 2015). Intrinsic rewards, such as satisfaction, independence, excitement, and challenge (Petkova, 2009) are strong predictors of entrepreneurial attitude (Botsaris & Vamvaka, 2016). There is also research that has found that individualists with high self-enhancement and openness to change have high entrepreneurial intention (Liñán, Moriano & Jaén, 2016). Those who have a positive attitude towards entrepreneurship are very optimistic about the potential financial performance and survival of the future venture (McCann, 2017). Due to this, a sustainable attitude influences sustainable entrepreneurship (Koe, Omar & Sa’ari, 2015). In contradiction, those individuals who have a fear of failure may perceive entrepreneurial behaviour as a barrier (Cacciotti & Hayton, 2015).
The subjective norms capture the opinion of social community references, such as family and friends (Kautonen, Gelderen & Fink, 2015). Due to encouragement from the closest social community, especially family members, those entrepreneurs who come from entrepreneurial family background seem to cope better than those without any entrepreneurial family background (Lee, Lee, Chua & Han, 2017). The effectiveness of entrepreneurship exposure also depends on government initiatives and surrounding culture (Ahmad, Ismail & Buchanan, 2014). The available structure and government support encourage innovative entrepreneurship (Ali, Kelley & Levie, 2019). This may also be extended to those who are non-local but who are living in the same community (Joseph, 2017). Accordingly, the subjective norms through the surrounding social community may encourage entrepreneurial intention (Mat, Maat & Mohd, 2015; Yousaf et al., 2015).
Perceived behavioural control refers to an individual’s perception of their ability to perform a specific behaviour (García-Rodríguez, Gil-Soto, Ruiz-Rosa & Sene, 2015), and is also known as the proxy of perceived competence for a particular task (Krueger, 2017). For this research, the perceived behavioural control refers to the ability and competence of the youngsters to venture into entrepreneurship. An individual may venture into entrepreneurship if there is a perception that it is easy to become an entrepreneur (Ambad & Damit, 2016). Although it might be perceived as easy, there is a need to be independent for those who intend to be an entrepreneur (Barba-Sánchez & Atienza-Sahuquillo, 2018). The encouragement to venture into entrepreneurship is due to the perceived behavioural control (Zapkau, Schwens, Steinmetz & Kabst, 2015) since it is an antecedent for entrepreneurial intention (Feder & Niţu-Antonie, 2017).
According to former research, four out of five entrepreneurs lack the expertise and knowledge at the preliminary entry stage (Lee et al., 2017). Hence, introducing entrepreneurship education is crucial to provide early exposure to potential entrepreneurs. Nevertheless, introducing entrepreneurship education is very complex (Fejes, Nylund & Wallin, 2019) since it appears that the entrepreneurship syllabus and teaching method at polytechnics is ineffective. The main reason for this is because the students need to understand basic management and business as part of the entrepreneurship syllabus instead of just solely learning the entrepreneurship course (Ahmad et al., 2014). Therefore, entrepreneurship education should be based on interdisciplinary and international collaboration instead of standalone (Fellnhofer, 2019). Currently, entrepreneurship is being taught in various programmes at the university level. However, due to the revolutionary digital lifestyle, teaching entrepreneurship through an online platform is suitable to meet the current trend (Al-Atabi & DeBoer, 2014). In fact, entrepreneurship can be learned through either formal or informal channels (Fuentelsaz, González & Maicas, 2019). It is expected that the exposure to entrepreneurship education may encourage entrepreneurial intention (Barba-Sánchez & Atienza-Sahuquillo, 2018), especially among youngsters.
The availability of initial investment is very important to start any business. This financial investment may either be self-funded or provided by others. The easiest way to obtain support for initial investment is through family members. The financial support from the family may enhance the likelihood of entrepreneurship (Bird & Wennberg, 2016). Nevertheless, research has shown that financial support from the family that is perceived as being a gift might, in future, become a poison since it may create even heavier financial and non-financial obligations (Sieger & Minola, 2017). Alternatively, future entrepreneurs may also try to source financial support from microfinance, crowdfunding, or peer-to-peer lending (Bruton, Khavul, Siegel & Wright, 2015). Banks have been a very common source to apply for credit (Black & Strahan, 2002). Most of the time, potential entrepreneurs are being encouraged to start-up the business with short-term credit rather than long term credit
(Leon, 2019). Due to the revolution of the investment industry, many potential entrepreneurs have sought financial support from crowdfunding. Borrowing from peers is also one of the potential ways to acquire the initial investment. However, regardless of the source of financial support, optimistic entrepreneurs always know how to get accessible credit with reasonable financing (Dai, Ivanov & Cole, 2017).
Targeting a suitable market is very important to ensure that the business can be sustained for the long term. Hence, regardless of the product or service, the location is an important part of success (Lee et al., 2017). Entrepreneurs should also have a strong network with the family, business, community, and government to access information and available resources (Chen, Chang & Lee, 2015). The business should also cater to the needs of the surrounding society. For example, in Malaysia, the Klang Valley area is highly synonymous with food and beverages (Lee et al., 2017) due to the urban lifestyle. In line with this, the food and beverage industry has a high tendency to survive in this area, which can be further enhanced through collaboration with food delivery service. Indirectly, the availability of digital technology with information technology related knowledge may encourage cyber entrepreneurial intention (Wang, Lin, Yeh, Li & Li, 2016) to widen the market operations (Castaño, Méndez & Galindo, 2016).
3. Research Methodology
The background finding for this research has been developed based on secondary literature reviews. Four of the constructs – attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioural, and intention – are adapted from the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 2002). As an enhancement, three additional constructs are added in this research, which are entrepreneurship education, financial support, and market availability. Primary data were collected from Multimedia University students as the respondents. The main purpose of collecting data from students as respondents is to identify the youngsters’ intention of becoming an entrepreneur after graduating. In Malaysia, youth are considered as being aged between 15 years and 30 years (Yunus & Landau, 2019). While the average age of the respondents is between 18 years and 25 years. The survey questionnaire has been reviewed by a few academicians and non-academicians to ensure that each of the items in the questionnaire represent the respected construct and that they can be easily understood by the respondents. Since the main objective of this research is to discover the entrepreneurship intention, the intention is placed as the dependent construct. The independent constructs consist of attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control, entrepreneurship education, financial support, and market availability. The research hypotheses are as below:
Hypothesis 1: There is a significant relationship between attitude and entrepreneurship intention.
Hypothesis 2: There is a significant relationship between subjective norms and entrepreneurship intention. Hypothesis 3: There is a significant relationship between perceived behavioural control and entrepreneurship intention.
Hypothesis 4: There is a significant relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurship intention.
Hypothesis 5: There is a significant relationship between financial support and entrepreneurship intention. Hypothesis 6: There is a significant relationship between market availability and entrepreneurship intention.
4. Analysis of the Findings Respondents’ Background
A total of 425 respondents participated in the survey questionnaire. The majority of the respondents are from a management background with 165 respondents (38.8%) and information technology background with 109 respondents (25.6%). This is followed by the respondents with an engineering background with 88 respondents (20.7%) and a creative multimedia background with 55 respondents (12.9%). Only 6 respondents (1.4%) have an applied communications background and 2 respondents (0.5%) are students from another campus. Regardless of their background, all the respondents have been exposed to at least a basic knowledge of entrepreneurship all the way from primary school, high school, to the tertiary level. These respondents are even being taught to prepare a basic business plan at the university level.
Reflective Model Assessment
The analysis shows that the highest loading is 0.928 for EE2 and the lowest loading is 0.722 for SN5. Hence, all the loading items meet the minimum statistical requirement of 0.708 (Hair, Gabriel & Patel, 2014). The value for all the average variance extracted (AVE) also meets the statistical requirement of more than 0.50
with the highest value being 0.805 for intention and the lowest value being 0.678 for attitude. The composite reliabilities (CR) are all more than 0.90. The loadings, AVE, and CR are as shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Loading, AVE and CR
Construct Items Loadings AVE CR
Intention IN1 0.905 0.805 0.961 IN2 0.917 IN3 0.914 IN4 0.902 IN5 0.861 IN6 0.883 Attitude AT1 0.854 0.678 0.927 AT2 0.829 AT3 0.807 AT4 0.851 AT5 0.746 AT6 0.849 Subjective Norms SN1 0.838 0.704 0.934 SN2 0.912 SN3 0.873 SN4 0.901 SN5 0.722 SN6 0.770 Perceived Behavioural Control BC1 0.854 0.764 0.951 BC2 0.898 BC3 0.885 BC4 0.897 BC5 0.903 BC6 0.804 Entrepreneurship Education EE1 0.908 0.792 0.958 EE2 0.928 EE3 0.907 EE4 0.881 EE5 0.837 EE6 0.876 Financial Support FS1 0.739 0.686 0.929 FS2 0.830 FS3 0.860 FS4 0.782 FS5 0.880 FS6 0.870 Market Availability MA1 0.875 0.797 0.959 MA2 0.921 MA3 0.912
MA4 0.922
MA5 0.877
MA6 0.846
Discriminant Validity
The analysis of the findings for the Fornell-Larcker Criterion shows that the discriminant validity is met since the square root of AVE in the diagonal value is larger than the underneath correlation value between the construct and the other constructs in the model; as per Table 2. In parallel, the cross-loading result also shows that each item is loaded with a higher value within the respective construct instead of the other constructs in the model, as per Table 3. There is also no value of 1 in the Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) result; as shown in Table 4. Hence, there is no issue concerning discriminant validity for this analysis.
Table 2. Fornell-Larcker Criterion
Fornell-Larcker Criterion At tit ud e E ntr epre ne urs h ip E du ca tio n F ina nci a l Sup po rt Inte ntio n M a rket Av a ila bil it y P er ce iv ed B eha v io ura l Co ntr o l Su bje ct iv e No rms Attitude 0.824 Entrepreneurship Education 0.694 0.890 Financial Support 0.704 0.705 0.828 Intention 0.809 0.781 0.717 0.897 Market Availability 0.672 0.759 0.788 0.696 0.893 Perceived Behavioural Control 0.802 0.752 0.710 0.864 0.728 0.874 Subjective Norms 0.699 0.636 0.612 0.735 0.591 0.779 0.839
Table 3. Cross-Loading Result
Cross-Loading Result At tit ud e E ntr epre ne urs h ip E du ca tio n F ina ncia l Sup po rt Inte ntio n M a rket Av a ila bil it y P er ce iv ed B eha v io ura l Co ntr o l Su bje ct iv e No rms AT1 0.854 0.654 0.574 0.789 0.585 0.744 0.653 AT2 0.829 0.506 0.534 0.662 0.479 0.634 0.562 AT3 0.807 0.466 0.611 0.525 0.568 0.583 0.496 AT4 0.851 0.542 0.627 0.606 0.572 0.638 0.537 AT5 0.746 0.495 0.536 0.544 0.457 0.528 0.497 AT6 0.849 0.704 0.608 0.785 0.638 0.775 0.661 BC1 0.635 0.592 0.548 0.683 0.604 0.854 0.656 BC2 0.776 0.734 0.646 0.834 0.668 0.898 0.704 BC3 0.665 0.670 0.606 0.746 0.644 0.885 0.703
BC4 0.727 0.680 0.679 0.786 0.676 0.897 0.704 BC5 0.727 0.679 0.646 0.780 0.665 0.903 0.703 BC6 0.664 0.572 0.590 0.683 0.552 0.804 0.610 EE1 0.626 0.908 0.632 0.696 0.696 0.660 0.549 EE2 0.631 0.928 0.623 0.718 0.687 0.666 0.568 EE3 0.643 0.907 0.640 0.733 0.688 0.708 0.619 EE4 0.577 0.881 0.621 0.672 0.642 0.628 0.528 EE5 0.599 0.837 0.590 0.645 0.635 0.644 0.542 EE6 0.630 0.876 0.660 0.703 0.701 0.708 0.587 FS1 0.580 0.536 0.739 0.554 0.589 0.566 0.513 FS2 0.565 0.578 0.830 0.607 0.644 0.578 0.472 FS3 0.596 0.575 0.860 0.562 0.707 0.568 0.514 FS4 0.500 0.481 0.782 0.446 0.569 0.447 0.403 FS5 0.619 0.644 0.880 0.676 0.684 0.656 0.558 FS6 0.622 0.658 0.870 0.669 0.705 0.671 0.556 IN1 0.717 0.689 0.599 0.905 0.586 0.781 0.661 IN2 0.737 0.711 0.673 0.917 0.658 0.807 0.674 IN3 0.739 0.727 0.669 0.914 0.684 0.788 0.685 IN4 0.747 0.702 0.697 0.902 0.649 0.784 0.682 IN5 0.676 0.678 0.606 0.861 0.565 0.728 0.601 IN6 0.734 0.698 0.610 0.883 0.598 0.759 0.650 MA1 0.592 0.686 0.705 0.645 0.875 0.657 0.544 MA2 0.600 0.666 0.724 0.624 0.921 0.679 0.524 MA3 0.629 0.711 0.732 0.678 0.912 0.700 0.547 MA4 0.624 0.712 0.727 0.671 0.922 0.670 0.555 MA5 0.590 0.636 0.683 0.536 0.877 0.586 0.503 MA6 0.559 0.644 0.642 0.549 0.846 0.592 0.483 SN1 0.535 0.530 0.448 0.607 0.462 0.643 0.838 SN2 0.622 0.566 0.515 0.668 0.529 0.684 0.912 SN3 0.580 0.526 0.524 0.641 0.473 0.667 0.873 SN4 0.623 0.613 0.544 0.681 0.557 0.733 0.901 SN5 0.569 0.461 0.525 0.526 0.452 0.573 0.722 SN6 0.596 0.493 0.537 0.564 0.497 0.611 0.770 Table 4. HTMT Result HTMT Result At tit ud e E ntr epre ne urs h ip E du ca tio n F ina ncia l Sup po rt Inte ntio n M a rket Av a ila bil it y P er ce iv ed B eha v io ura l Co ntr o l Attitude Entrepreneurship Education 0.735
Financial Support 0.776 0.754 Intention 0.851 0.823 0.761 Market Availability 0.719 0.798 0.845 0.727 Perceived Behavioural Control 0.854 0.795 0.76 0.911 0.767 Subjective Norms 0.761 0.682 0.672 0.787 0.634 0.841
Structural Model Assessment
All the inner Variance Inflator Factor (VIF) values for the independent variables are less than 5 (Hair, Hult, Ringle & Sarstedt, 2017); as per Table 5. Therefore, there is no issue concerning collinearity in the analysis.
Table 5. Variance Inflator Factor
Constructs Intention Attitude 3.257 Entrepreneurship Education 3.070 Financial Support 3.193 Intention Market Availability 3.519
Perceived Behavioural Control 4.653
Subjective Norms 2.682
According to the hypothesis analysis in Table 6, attitude (β = 0.229, ρ < 0.05), perceived behavioural control (β = 0.423, ρ < 0.05), entrepreneurship education (β = 0.243, ρ < 0.05) and financial support (β = 0.089, ρ < 0.05) have a significant relationship with intention, which explains 81.4% of the variance in intention. Therefore, H1, H3, H4, and H5 are supported, which, indirectly, indicates that the entrepreneurial intention is influenced by attitude, perceived behavioural control, entrepreneurship education, and financial support. The effect size (f2) for perceived behavioural control (0.207) and entrepreneurship education (0.103) is considered as medium since the value is approximately 0.15 (Cohen, 1988). While the effect size (f2) for attitude (0.087), financial support (0.013), subjective norms (0.011), and market availability (0.006) is considered as small since the value is approximately 0.02 (Cohen, 1988). The R2 value of 0.814 is above the 0.26 value suggested by Cohen (1988), which indicates that the model is substantial.
Table 6. Hypotheses Result Hypothesis Standard
Beta
Standard
Error t-value ρ-values Decision f
2 R2 H1 0.229 0.039 5.857 0.0001 Supported 0.087 0.814 H2 0.075 0.047 1.594 0.112 Rejected 0.011 H3 0.423 0.054 7.828 0.0001 Supported 0.207 H4 0.243 0.046 5.228 0.0001 Supported 0.103 H5 0.089 0.041 2.173 0.030 Supported 0.013 H6 -0.064 0.044 1.460 0.145 Rejected 0.006
5. Discussion and Recommendations
This research has found that there is a significant relationship between entrepreneurial attitude and intention to become an entrepreneur (hypothesis 1). The findings are similar to the former research conducted by Law and Breznik (2017), and Yousaf, Shamim, Siddiqui and Raina (2015). The initiative to shape entrepreneurial attitude, especially among students, is expected to enhance the entrepreneurial intention. Although the former findings of Mat, Maat and Mohd (2015), and Yousaf, Shamim, Siddiqui and Raina (2015) indicated that the surrounding encouragement through social norms influence the entrepreneurial intention, this research found that the relationship between the two constructs is not significant (hypothesis 2).
The decision to venture into entrepreneurship should be based on a strong internal locus of control. The analysis of the findings from this research has proven that perceived behavioural control may encourage the youngsters to have an intention to venture into entrepreneurship (hypothesis 3). This is similar to the research conducted by Feder and Niţu-Antonie (2017), and Zapkau, Schwens, Steinmetz and Kabst (2015). Many researchers believe in the importance of entrepreneurship education, and that entrepreneurship exposure through formal education influences the youngsters to venture into entrepreneurship (hypothesis 4), which is similar to the findings of Barba-Sánchez and Atienza-Sahuquillo (2018). Due to this, an initiative to introduce entrepreneurship education to all students is worthwhile.
An initial investment is one of the crucial needs to start any business. In fact, this research has also found that there is a significant relationship between financial support and the intention to become an entrepreneur (hypothesis 5). The financial support actually does enhance the likelihood to venture into entrepreneurship (Bird and Wennberg, 2016). One of the ways to push youngsters to venture into entrepreneurship is by giving them more financial support, especially for those who come from low income families. The continuous strong encouragement through financial support is expected to reduce the income gap between the poor and rich in a community. Although it is believed that the available market, especially the digital platform, may encourage entrepreneurship (Wang, Lin, Yeh, Li and Li, 2016), the findings from this research are somehow not parallel to the former findings (hypothesis 6). This is probably due to the excessive usage of the digital platform by too many entrepreneurs, which creates intense competition, especially by the well-known brands.
This research has been developed based on the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 2002) by looking at the relationship of attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control to the intention to become an entrepreneur. Three additional constructs – entrepreneurship education, financial support, and market availability – have been added as independent constructs to enrich the original theory. Based on this research, it is found that the intention to become an entrepreneur is influenced by attitude, perceived behavioural control, entrepreneurship education, and financial support. Due to this, as an initiative to further enhance the entrepreneurship momentum, the attitude and perceived behavioural control should be shaped through formal entrepreneurship education via school and tertiary education. The theoretical exposure through entrepreneurship education is a good long-term investment to create a future entrepreneurship culture. Strong financial support is also important for initial investment. Thus, it would be a great opportunity if there is financial support from either the government or the private sector, especially through loans, subsidies, or a crowdfunding platform, to gain the initial financial investment from the local society. Since the subjective norms and market availability do not influence the behavioural intention to become an entrepreneur, it is not necessary to emphasize these two factors.
6. Conclusion
Six direct hypotheses have been analysed through this research. Based on the findings, four out of the six hypotheses are supported in this research. According to the findings, the entrepreneurship intention among the youngsters should be encouraged by emphasizing attitude, perceived behavioural control, entrepreneurial education, and financial support. The perceived behavioural control and entrepreneurship education seem to have a higher impact on entrepreneurial intention than attitude and financial support. The findings from this research indicated that subjective norms and market availability do not encourage youngsters to venture into entrepreneurship.
7. Acknowledgement
The deepest appreciation is given to the Ministry of Education Malaysia for funding this research project through the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS) (Project ID: FRGS/1/2018/SS03/MMU/03/2) and the Multimedia University, Malaysia, for the continuous support and motivation.
References
1. Adekiya, A. A., & Ibrahim, F. (2016). Entrepreneurship intention among students. The antecedent role of culture and entrepreneurship training and development. The International Journal of Management Education, 14(2), 116-132.
2. Ahmad, S. Z., Ismail, M. Z., & Buchanan, F. R. (2014). Examining the entrepreneurship curriculum in Malaysian polytechnics. The International Journal of Management Education, 12(3), 397-406.
3. Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self‐efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665-683.
4. Al-Atabi, M., & DeBoer, J. (2014). Teaching entrepreneurship using massive open online course (MOOC). Technovation, 34(4), 261-264.
5. Ali, A., Kelley, D. J., & Levie, J. (2019). Market-driven entrepreneurship and institutions. Journal of Business Research.
6. Ambad, S. N. A., & Damit, D. H. D. A. (2016). Determinants of entrepreneurial intention among undergraduate students in Malaysia. Procedia Economics and Finance, 37, 108-114.
7. Aquino, R. S., Lück, M., & Schänzel, H. A. (2018). A conceptual framework of tourism social entrepreneurship for sustainable community development. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 37, 23-32.
8. Barba-Sánchez, V., & Atienza-Sahuquillo, C. (2018). Entrepreneurial intention among engineering students: The role of entrepreneurship education. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 24(1), 53-61.
9. Bird, M., & Wennberg, K. (2016). Why family matters: The impact of family resources on immigrant entrepreneurs' exit from entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(6), 687-704.
10. Black, S. E., & Strahan, P. E. (2002). Entrepreneurship and bank credit availability. The Journal of Finance, 57(6), 2807-2833.
11. Botsaris, C., & Vamvaka, V. (2016). Attitude toward entrepreneurship: structure, prediction from behavioral beliefs, and relation to entrepreneurial intention. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 7(2), 433-460.
12. Bruton, G., Khavul, S., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2015). New financial alternatives in seeding entrepreneurship: Microfinance, crowdfunding, and peer‐to‐peer innovations. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(1), 9-26.
13. Cacciotti, G., & Hayton, J. C. (2015). Fear and entrepreneurship: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(2), 165-190.
14. Castaño, M. S., Méndez, M. T., & Galindo, M. Á. (2016). Innovation, internationalization and business-growth expectations among entrepreneurs in the services sector. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1690-1695.
15. Chen, M. H., Chang, Y. Y., & Lee, C. Y. (2015). Creative entrepreneurs' guanxi networks and success: Information and resource. Journal of Business Research, 68(4), 900-905.
16. Chikha, I. B., & Jarboui, A. (2017). Impact of incubators on social entrepreneurship intention: an empirical study related to Tunisia. International Journal of Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 4(4), 305-323.
17. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral science. 2nd edition, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18. Çolakoğlu, N., & Gözükara, İ. (2016). A comparison study on personality traits based on the attitudes of university students toward entrepreneurship. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 229, 133-140. 19. Dai, N., Ivanov, V., & Cole, R. A. (2017). Entrepreneurial optimism, credit availability, and cost of
financing: Evidence from US small businesses. Journal of Corporate Finance, 44, 289-307.
20. Dhahri, S., & Omri, A. (2018). Entrepreneurship contribution to the three pillars of sustainable development: What does the evidence really say?. World Development, 106, 64-77.
21. Dias, C. S., Rodrigues, R. G., & Ferreira, J. J. (2018). What's new in the research on agricultural entrepreneurship?. Journal of Rural Studies, 65, 99-115.
22. Feder, E. S., & Niţu-Antonie, R. D. (2017). Connecting gender identity, entrepreneurial training, role models and intentions. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 9(1), 87-108.
23. Fejes, A., Nylund, M., & Wallin, J. (2019). How do teachers interpret and transform entrepreneurship education?. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 51(4), 554-566.
24. Fellnhofer, K. (2019). Toward a taxonomy of entrepreneurship education research literature: A bibliometric mapping and visualization. Educational Research Review, 27, 28-55.
25. Fernández-Pérez, V., Montes-Merino, A., Rodríguez-Ariza, L., & Galicia, P. E. A. (2019). Emotional competencies and cognitive antecedents in shaping student’s entrepreneurial intention: the moderating role of entrepreneurship education. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 15(1), 281-305.
26. Fuentelsaz, L., González, C., & Maicas, J. P. (2019). Formal institutions and opportunity entrepreneurship. The contingent role of informal institutions. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 22(1), 5-24.
27. García-Rodríguez, F. J., Gil-Soto, E., Ruiz-Rosa, I., & Sene, P. M. (2015). Entrepreneurial intentions in diverse development contexts: A cross-cultural comparison between Senegal and Spain. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(3), 511-527.
28. Hair, J. F., Gabriel, M. L. D. da S., & Patel, V. K. (2014). AMOS covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM): Guidelines on its application as a marketing research tool. Revista Brasileira de Marketing, 13(02), 44-55.
29. Hair, J. F., Hult, T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publication.
30. Hessels, J., & Naudé, W. (2019). The intersection of the fields of entrepreneurship and development economics: A review towards a new view. Journal of Economic Surveys, 33(2), 389-403.
31. Hillson, D., & Murray-Webster, R. (2017). Understanding and managing risk attitude. Second Edition, Routledge, New York, USA.
32. Joseph, I. (2017). Factors influencing international student entrepreneurial intention in Malaysia. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 7(04), 424.
33. Kautonen, T., van Gelderen, M., & Fink, M. (2015). Robustness of the theory of planned behavior in predicting entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(3), 655-674.
34. Khazaeli, M., Hanifi, H., Khazaeil, H., & Hanifi, Z. (2018). Survey the role of information technology in agricultural development and rural womens entrepreneurship. Global Journal of Management and Business Research.
35. Koe, W. L., Omar, R., & Sa’ari, J. R. (2015). Factors influencing propensity to sustainable entrepreneurship of SMEs in Malaysia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 570-577. 36. Krueger, N. F. (2017). Entrepreneurial intentions are dead: Long live entrepreneurial intentions.
In Revisiting the Entrepreneurial Mind, pp. 13-34. Springer, Switzerland.
37. Law, K. M., & Breznik, K. (2017). Impacts of innovativeness and attitude on entrepreneurial intention: Among engineering and non-engineering students. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(4), 683-700.
38. Lee, S., Lee, K. S., Chua, B. L., & Han, H. (2017). Independent café entrepreneurships in Klang Valley, Malaysia–challenges and critical factors for success: Does family matter?. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 6(4), 363-374.
39. Leon, F. (2019). Long-term finance and entrepreneurship. Economic Systems, 43(2), 100690.
40. Liñán, F., Moriano, J. A., & Jaén, I. (2016). Individualism and entrepreneurship: Does the pattern depend on the social context?. International Small Business Journal, 34(6), 760-776.
41. Marques, C. S., Valente, S., & Lages, M. (2018). The influence of personal and organisational factors on entrepreneurship intention: An application in the health care sector. Journal of Nursing Management, 26(6), 696-706.
42. Mat, S. C., Maat, S. M., & Mohd, N. (2015). Identifying factors that affecting the entrepreneurial intention among engineering technology students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211, 1016-1022.
43. McCann, B. T. (2017). Prior exposure to entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial beliefs. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 23(3), 591-612.
44. Miralles, F., Giones, F., & Riverola, C. (2016). Evaluating the impact of prior experience in entrepreneurial intention. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12(3), 791-813. 45. Miranda, F. J., Chamorro-Mera, A., & Rubio, S. (2017). Academic entrepreneurship in Spanish
universities: An analysis of the determinants of entrepreneurial intention. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 23(2), 113-122.
46. Petkova, A. P. (2009). A theory of entrepreneurial learning from performance errors. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 5(4), 345-367.
47. Prashantham, S., Eranova, M., & Couper, C. (2018). Globalization, entrepreneurship and paradox thinking. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 35(1), 1-9.
48. Ramasamy, M. (2019). Despite billions spend, Malaysia only 58th in global entrepreneurship index, says
minister. Free Malaysia Today. Retrieved from
https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2019/07/23/despite-billions-spent-malaysia-only-58th-in-global-entrepreneurship-index-says-minister/
49. Ribes-Giner, G., Moya-Clemente, I., Cervelló-Royo, R., & Perello-Marin, M. R. (2018). Domestic economic and social conditions empowering female entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Research, 89, 182-189.
50. Seli, P., Risko, E. F., Smilek, D., & Schacter, D. L. (2016). Mind-wandering with and without intention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(8), 605-617.
51. Shirokova, G., Osiyevskyy, O., & Bogatyreva, K. (2016). Exploring the intention–behavior link in student entrepreneurship: Moderating effects of individual and environmental characteristics. European Management Journal, 34(4), 386-399.
52. Sieger, P., & Minola, T. (2017). The family's financial support as a “poisoned gift”: A family embeddedness perspective on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Small Business Management, 55, 179-204.
53. The Star (2018). Malaysia aims for a million SME entrepreneurs in five years. Retrieved from https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2018/09/05/malaysia-aims-for-a-million-sme-entrepreneurs-in-five-years#4d2I5A8SyAe1jQx6.99
54. The Sun (2019). Malaysia a true entrepreneurial nation by 2030. Retrieved from https://www.thesundaily.my/local/malaysia-a-true-entrepreneurial-nation-by-2030-YK1095032
55. Wang, Y. S., Lin, S. J., Yeh, C. H., Li, C. R., & Li, H. T. (2016). What drives students’ cyber entrepreneurial intention: The moderating role of disciplinary difference. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 22-35.
56. Yousaf, U., Shamim, A., Siddiqui, H., & Raina, M. (2015). Studying the influence of entrepreneurial attributes, subjective norms and perceived desirability on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 7(1), 23-34.
57. Yunus, A., & Landau, E. (2019). 'Youth' now defined as those between 15 and 30, New Straits Times. Retrieved from https://www.nst.com.my/news/nation/2019/07/501288/youth-now-defined-those-between-15-and-30
58. Zapkau, F. B., Schwens, C., Steinmetz, H., & Kabst, R. (2015). Disentangling the effect of prior entrepreneurial exposure on entrepreneurial intention. Journal of Business Research, 68(3), 639-653.
