Intention-based models of entrepreneurship education Francisco Liñán
a University of Seville, Spain
Summary
Despite the widespread development of entrepreneur ship education initiatives in the last decades, a consensus definition about it has not b een reached. As a consequence, ther e is also a lack of consistent classifications of educational activities. In this paper, our main objective is to develop a view of entrepreneurship education based on entrepreneurial intention models. Given the wide variety of this kind of training programmes being implemented, and their di fferent effects on participants, it is also important for the proposed definition to allow the establishing of a useful classification. Finally, a preliminary test has been carried out, both on the validity of intention models and on the subsequent derived classification. Empirical results tend to validate the theoretical approach adopted.
Keywords : entrepreneurship education, intention models, entrepreneurial intention, conceptualization, classification
Conclusions
Intention models seem to be a solid starting point for the analysis of entrepreneurship. In particular, this work has integrated Ajzen’s (1991) and Shapero &Sokol’s (1982) theories into an entrepreneurial intention model. This, in turn, has been used as the basis to define entrepreneurship education and to classify it. Thedifferentiating element of these educational activities would be trying to increase the intention of performing entrepreneurial behaviours, or any of the variables determining that intention.
This allows for a clear distinction from conventional management training, which is mainly concerned with technical knowledge for business administration. It also enablesus to clarify the role of educators, who should concentrate on strengthening participants’ intention of developing those entrepreneurial behaviours. Depending on the specific objective pursued,four categories of entrepreneurship education could be thought of. In particular, education for entrepreneurial dynamism could be considered as the most relevant category. It not only tries to promote the intention of being an entrepreneur, but also of developing dynamic entrepreneurial behaviours after the start-up phase.
A partial empirical test has been carried out about the validity of the entrepreneurial intention model. However, as this work is part of a wider research project, the questionnaire was not designed to allow for a full validation of that model. Undoubtedly, this makes up a serious limitation. Therefore, even though the results obtained are clearly encouraging, they should be considered with caution.
Intention models seem to be a solid starting point for the analysis of entrepreneurship. In particular, this work has integrated Ajzen’s (1991) and Shapero &Sokol’s (1982) theories into an entrepreneurial intention model. This, in turn, has been used as the basis to define entrepreneurship education and to classify it. Thedifferentiating element of these educational activities would be trying to increase the intention of performing entrepreneurial behaviours, or any of the variables determining that intention.
This allows for a clear distinction from conventional management training, which is mainly concerned with technical knowledge for business administration. It also enablesus to clarify the role of educators, who should concentrate on strengthening participants’ intention of developing those entrepreneurial behaviours. Depending on the specific objective pursued,four categories of entrepreneurship education could be thought of. In particular, education for entrepreneurial dynamism could be considered as the most relevant category. It not only tries to promote the intention of being an entrepreneur, but also of developing dynamic entrepreneurial behaviours after the start-up phase.
A partial empirical test has been carried out about the validity of the entrepreneurial intention model. However, as this work is part of a wider research project, the questionnaire was not designed to allow for a full validation of that model. Undoubtedly, this makes up a serious limitation. Therefore, even though the results obtained are clearly encouraging, they should be considered with caution.
In the first part of the empirical analysis carried out, the entrepreneurial intention model has offered much better predictions of intention than external or demographic variables alone. What is more, when these latter variables are added to the former, the joint model -despite being substantially more complicated- does not offer much better results. Therefore, a tentative conclusion would be that the entrepreneurial intention model is a valid explanation of intention.
Full Download : https://congreso.us.es/gpyde/DOWNLOAD/a9.pdf
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar