Entrepreneurial Intention amo reneurial Intention ...

th

7 International Conference on Humanities manities and Social Sciences “ASEAN ASEAN 2015: Challenges and Opportunities” Opportunities

Entrepreneurial Intention among Undergraduate Students in Songkhla, Thailand 1. Siriluck Thongpoon, Dr.,, Entrepreneurship, Strategic Management, Hatyai Business School, Hatyai University, E-mail mail: [email protected] 2. Kumpee Thongpoon, Lecturer, Conflict and Peace, Political Science, Hatyai University, E-mail: mail: [email protected] 3. Pattarin Thangrattanasuwan, Lecturer, Strategic Management, Hatyai Business School, Hatyai University, E-mail: mail: [email protected]

Abstract Entrepreneurial intention has been seen as important issue in the entrepreneurship field. It can promote new entrepreneur and sequentially enhance economic growth of the country. Under the umbrella of capital, human capital and social capital are realized as powerful predicting factors of entrepreneurial intention. This study therefore aimed to investigate the level of entrepreneurial intention as well as to test the differences of human capital and social capital among undergraduate undergraduate students in Songkhla. Four hundred questionnaires were distributed to the students of five universities in Songkhla. Result revealed that their intention to be entrepreneur was considered as high. In addition, it highlighted that human capital and social capital also significantly distinguished students who pursued to be entrepreneur from those who did not. Regarding to these the results, it contributed to those who were policy makers makers especially in the university, business development agency, and scholars alike.

Keywords: Entrepreneurial Intention, Human Capital, Social Capital, Undergraduate Students, Songkhla

Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University, University June 6th, 2015 1

th


ntrepreneurial intention has the great entrepreneurial

Background Recently,,

almost

graduated

impact to the decision in becoming an

students who finished bachelor’s degree

entrepreneur and starting a new firm in

are

the future (Liñán & Chen, 2009).

facing

half

with

the

of

unemployment

(Ministry of Labor, 2014). Both Office of the Higher Education and University recognize this problem. They try to support and encourage current students to get more knowledge and skills with specific curriculums and activities. With the hope pe that students who graduate can get a good job in the future. Otherwise, they can move into the entrepreneurship. Regarding

to

the

later

approach,

entrepreneurial activity has been seen as an

engine

developing

of

both developed

countries

due

to

and the

contribution to business dynamics in all economies (Engle et al., 2010). And under the phenomenon of entrepreneurship, intention plays as a significant role in the beginning of entrepreneurial process. It has

become

a

best

predictor

Previously, Rittippant et al. (2011) studied the intention of undergraduate students to be entrepreneur in Thailand. They found that the intention was high. However, students in the South recorded as the lowest level of entrepreneurial intention comparing with those students from other regions. Therefore, this study endeavored to study entrepreneurial

intention

among

undergraduate students in order to see whether they want to be entrepreneur e or not. The results of this study were anticipated to serve as recommendation to policy makers, curriculum developer, scholars,

and

business

development

agency.

of

The organization of this paper was

entrepreneurship (Krueger ueger and Carsrud,

provided as follow, next sections was

1993).

literature reviews, research questions and

Since intention is a state of mind directing a person’s attention toward a specific object or a path in order to achieve something

(Bird,

1988),

objectives, research methods, findings, discussions

and

recommendations

respectively.

therefore


th


1) Attitude toward entrepreneurial entrepreneur

Entrepreneurial Intention

behavior refers to the degree to ntentions model has been proven as Intentions

which a person has a favorable or

powerful predictor of future behavior. It is

unfavorable

better than individual or situational

appraisal

variables in explaining entrepreneurial behavior (Krueger, Reilly, & Carsrud,

of

the

of

behavior

in

question. 2) Subjective norm refers to the

2000). Katz and Gartner (1988) also

perceived

defined entrepreneurial intention as a

social

pressure

to

perform or not to perform the

process of information searching which can be used to achieve a new venture. In

evaluation

behavior. 3) Perceive behavioral control c refers

this sense, intention becomes a central

to the perceived eived ease or difficulty

factor to perform a given behavior. This is

of performing the behavior of

because intention is indication of how

interest.

hard people are willing to try and how much effort they are planning to exert in

Human and Social Capital

order to perform such behavior (Ajzen, Capital apital refers to valuable resources which

1991).

could be both in tangible and intangible Previous studies have shown several

forms.

models of entrepreneurial intention, but

accumulated in materialized form or

the important early contribution is the

embodied form (Bourdieu, 1986). Clearly,

theory of planned behavior (TPB) (Ajzen,

capital

1991). It is a form of attitude toward

possession of valuable resources which, in

behavior,, social norm, and perceived

turn, are produced, reproduced, and

behavioral control.

accumulated (Lin & Erickson, 2008).

When this model is applied to the

Since human capital and social capital play

entrepreneurship,

an important role in predicting firm

three

conceptually

It

indicates

represents

(Anderson

that

capital

investment

&

Miller,

is

and

determinants of intention are clarified as

creation

2003 2003)

the following;

especially in the beginning stage of entrepreneurial process (Liñán ( & Santos,


th


2007). Referring to human capital, it refers

of investment in human relationship. In

to

entrepreneurial perspective, social capital

knowledge,

skills,

and

abilities

(Davidsson &Honig, 2003). It can be

provides

invested

through

opportunities such as information and

schooling as well as on-the--job training,

resources. Davidsson and Honig (2003)

and other types of experience (Becker,

proposed that social capital comprises of

1962). Kim, Aldrich, & Keister (2006) also

bridging and bonding social capital.

pointed out that human capital is vital for

Bridging ng capital refers to weak ties of

the entrepreneurial process because the

individuals’

potential ntial

gain

network and associations. While, bonding

significant advantage if they possess high

social capital refers to strong ties of

levels of human capital. Commonly, in the

individuals’ interactions as family, close

entrepreneurship research it uses formal

relatives, and friend. Hence, individuals

education,

and

can recognize opportunities rtunities and exploit

experience as the proxies of human

them through the assistance of social

capital (Davidsson &Honig, 2003; Unger et

capital.

and

accumulated

entrepreneurs

training

can

program,

networks

that

relationship

as

facilitate

business

al., 2011). As the results,, this current study applied college years, program, and work experience to represent the human capital invested and accumulated by

With regard to the target sample of this study was undergraduate students who have mostly spent their time with family, relatives, and friends; therefore, bonding

undergraduate students.

social capital was applied ed to measure the Hypothesis 1: Difference in human capital

social capital.

can distinguish entrepreneurial eneurial intention among

undergraduate

students

in

Hypothesis 2: Difference in social capital can distinguish entrepreneurial intention

Songkhla.

among With regard to social capital, it is a made

undergraduate

students

in

Songkhla.

up of the relationships generated by individuals in their interaction with others (Liñán & Santos, 2007). Then, it i is a result


th


Research Questions

Research Methodology

The study focused on the questions that;

This study has tended to be quantitative

1. What is the level of entrepreneurial

with

intention of undergraduate students in

Questionnaire was adopted from Liñán &

Songkhla?

Chen (2009), using 5-point point rating scale.

2. Do differences of human capital and

The

social capital distinguish istinguish entrepreneurial

Cronbach’s Alpha. It was between .87 - .90

intention among undergraduate students?

which considered as high (Nunnally,

the

cross--sectional

reliability

was

tested

data.

through

1978). Research Objectives he objectives As the research questions, the

The

of this current paper were developed as

students of five universities in Songkhla;

two folds.

Prince

1.

To o

investigate

entrepreneurial

the

intention

level

population

of

was

Songkla kla

undergraduate

University

(PSU),

of

Rajamangala University of Technology

among

Srivijaya (RMUTSV),, Thaksin University

undergraduate students in Songkhla. Songkhla

(TSU),, Songkhla Rajabhat University (SRU),

2. To test the significant differences of

and Hatyai University (HU). This was

human capital and social capital on the

because there were all types of university

entrepreneurial urial

(public,

intention

among

undergraduate students in Songkhla. Songkhla

autonomous,

and

private

universities) located in the province. Within public university, not only PSU, but

As discussed above, research framework was conceptualized as shown in figure 1.

also the RMUTSV and RSU were included. TSU U

was

the

representative

of

autonomous university, while HU was private university (www.inter.mua.go.th). In

addition,

majority

of

student

enrollment in southern ern universities is in Songkhla (www.mua.go.th). The 400 undergraduate students were the Figure 1:: Research Framework

surrogates es participating in this study.


th


Quota sampling was employed to get 80

them were female (63%) with the age

students

The

between 20 – 22 years (58%). Their race

accidentally

was Thai (93.30%). They were from

distributed to students in each university.

Business siness or Economics program (34%) (34

All were collected and usable.

studying first irst year (31.50%). They T had no

from

each

questionnaires

university.

were

any business or work experience (69.50%), Findings

while their family (59.80%) and relatives

Students who participated were equally

(77%) had. The detail showed in Table 1.

from five universities. The majority of Table 1: Respondents’ profile (n = 400) Variable Frequency Percentage Gender Male Female Age Less than 20 years 20-22 years 23-25 years Race Thai Chinese Program Business/ Economics Engineer Arts/Humanities Sciences & IT Education Sciences Political Sciences Others

148 252

37.00 63.00

113 234 53

28.30 58.40 13.30

373 27

93.30 6.70

136 39 65 27 41 10 10 72

34.00 9.80 16.30 6.80 10.30 2.40 2.40 18.00

Variable College Years st 1 year nd 2 year rd 3 year th 4 year Others University TSU RMUST SKRU PSU HU Experience Yes No Family Business Yes No Relatives Business Yes No

Frequency

Percentage

126 70 109 88 7

31.50 17.50 27.30 22.00 1.70

80 80 80 80 80

20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00

122 278

30.50 69.50

239 161

59.80 40.20

308 92

77.00 23.00

In order to answer the research questions, question

considered as high,, while attitude toward

the level of entrepreneurial intention and

entrepreneurship was 3.93, subjective

differences of human and social capital of

norm was 3.73, and perceived behavioral

undergraduate students were tested. tested

control was 3.46 as shown in table 2.

Firstly, the mean score showed 3.84 for entrepreneurial

intention

which


th


Table 2: Descriptive Statistics of Variables Variables Entrepreneurial Intention Attitude toward Entrepreneurship Subjective Norm Perceived Behavioral Control Secondly,

S.D. .77 .70 .81 .80

were

business, t(398) = 5.09, p = .001, and

employed to analyze the differences of

relatives business t(398) (398) = 5.17, p = .001,

human and social capital that students

with students who had family and

possessed. Referring to the human capital,

relatives business receiving higher scores

results demonstrated that the students

of entrepreneurial intention than those

who had business or work experience (M

who had no business environment from

= 4.20, SD = .56) significantly showed

family and relatives.

t-test

and

Mean 3.84 3.93 3.73 3.46

ANOVA

higher level of entrepreneurial intention than those who had no experience (M = 3.68, SD = .80), t(398) (398) = 6.51, p = .001. Additionally, there was significant effect of program on entrepreneurial trepreneurial intention at the p-value value of .001 for the eight programs [F (7, 392) = 5.52, P = .001]. A post hoc comparison using the Scheffe was tested. It indicated that the mean score for business program (M M = 4.08, SD = .62) was significantly different than engineer program (M = 3.57, SD = 1.06) and educational program (M M = 3.49, SD = .84) respectively. Meanwhile, difference of college years did not appear any

Discussions It seems to be a choice for undergraduate students to make a decision of choosing a career in the future. One may choose to be employed with the organization, while the other one may want to be selfself employed. According to this study, its main aim was to test the level of entrepreneurial intention as well as a to test the differences of human and social capital on the intention. intention Results reported that students had high intention to be entrepreneur in the future. This was in line

with

Rittippant

et

al.

(2011).

Importantly, the results showed the

significant result.

significant differences erences of human and social With regard to the social capital, there

capital. It can distinguish students who

was

wanted to become entrepreneur entr from

a

significant

effect

for

famil family


th


those who did not. Student who has had

policy makers especially in the university,

experience may gain more knowledge and

curriculum

skills of doing business and work in a firm

business development agency may apply

from on-the-job job training (Becker, (Beck 1962).

this

Moreover, students who passed through

environment

the business program in their schooling

entrepreneurship among undergraduate

may help them to easily recognize

students particularly in Songkhla.

business

opportunities

better

result

developer,

to

scholars

promote in

and

valuable supporting

than

students who stepped into another schools. Regarding to social capital, family and relatives business ess can promote the business environment. Hence, the results of interaction between students and their family or relatives may influence on the entrepreneurial decision of students. As Davidsson and Honig (2003) proposed that close contact of strong ties can

However, this study has some limitations. The convenience sampling may not get equal proportion of students from various programs. The sample was only on undergraduate students in Songkhla that may not represent the students of the south. Therefore, future study may take this limitation mitation to improve and validate the results.

facilitate information, inspiration, and Acknowledgement

resources to individuals.

We appreciate and thank the anonymous Recommendations

reviewers for their valuable comments

According to the results, it is difficult to

and

provide business for all students’ family.

improvement and clarification of this

However, the business environment may

paper.

suggestions

which

help

the

promote in the university. It can be done through hrough

curriculums

and

activities.

References

Generally, intention was reported as high

Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned

level in this study. Instead of business

Behavior. Organizational Behavior and

school, other schools can offer business

Human Decision Processes,

related subject to their students. As

211.

50(2), 179-

expected in the beginning of the article,


th


Anderson, A.R., and Miller, C.J. (2003).

Katz, J., and Gartner, W. (1988). Properties

“Class Matters”: Human and Social Capital

of emerging organizations. Academy of

in the Entrepreneurial Process. Journal of

Management Review,, 13, 429–441. 429

Socio-Economics, 32, 17-36. Kim, P.H., Aldrich, H.E., and Keister, L.A. Becker, G.S. (1962). Investment in Human

(2006). The Impact of Financial, Human,

Capital: A Theoretical Analysis.

and Cultural Capital on Entrepreneurial Entrepre

The

Journal of Political Economy, 70 (5), 9-49. 9

Entry in the United States. Small Business Economics, 27 (1), 5-22 22.

Bird,

B.

(1988).

Implementing

Entrepreneurial Ideas: The Case for

Krueger, N., and Carsrud, A. (1993).

Intention.

Entrepreneurial intentions: Applying the

Academy

of

Management

theory

Review, 13(3), 442-453.

of

planned

behavior.

and

Regional

Entrepreneurship Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital.

Development, 5, 315–330 330

In J. E. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory of Research for the Sociology of

Krueger, N.F., Reilly, M.D., and Carsrud,

Education (pp. 241-258). 258). New York:

A.L.

Greenwood Press.

Entrepreneurial Intentions. Journal of

(2000).

Competing

Model

of

Business Venturing, 15 (5), 411-432. 411 Davidsson, P., & Honig, B. (2003). The role of social and human capital cap among

Lin, N. and Erickson, B. H. (Eds.). (2008).

nascent

Social Capital: An International Research

entrepreneurs. ntrepreneurs.

Journal

of

Program New York: Oxford University

Business Venturing, 18(3), (3), 301-331. 301

Press. Engle, R.L. et al. (2010). Entrepreneurial Intent:

Twelve-Country Country

Evaluation

of

Liñán,

F.,

and

Chen,

Y. Y.-W. (2009).

Ajzen’s Model of Planned Behavior.

Development

and

International Journal of Entrepreneurial

Application of a Specific Instrument to

Behavior & Research, 16(1), 35-57. 35

Measure

Entrepreneurial

Cross Cross-Cultural

Intentions.

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


th


Liñán, F. and Santos, F.J. (2007). Does Social

Capital

Affect

Entrepreneurial

Intention? Int Adv Econ Res, (13), 443-453. 443 Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2 ed.). New York: McGraw Hill. Rittippant,

N,

Kokchang,

W,

Vanichkitpisan, and Chompoodang, S. (2011).

Measure

of

Entrepreneurial

Interntion of Young Adults in Thailand. EPPM, Singapore, 20-21 21 Sep 2011. Unger, J.M., Rauch, A., Frese, M., and Rosenbusch, N. (2011). Human Capital and Entrepreneurial

Success:

A

Meta Meta-

Analytical Review. Journal of Business Venturing, 26, 341-358.
