Do intentions ever die? The temporal stability of entrepreneurial intention and link to behavior

Abstract

PurposeThis study aims to contribute to entrepreneurial intention research by examining the theory of planned behavior model in a longitudinal follow-up of the same individuals from a point at which they were studying until six to eight years after graduation and the link between entrepreneurial intention and actual behavior. The objectives of the paper are as follows: to examine the development and temporal stability of entrepreneurial intention and to examine the link between entrepreneurial intention and actual start-up behavior in a longitudinal setting.Design/methodology/approachThe data for this research originate in Finland and consist three data collection waves between years 2008 and 2018. In the second wave, 282 respondents were reached, and in the third wave, 89 respondents were reached. For examining the stability of entrepreneurial intention, latent growth curve modeling was used. In addition, a logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine the link between intention and behavior.FindingsThe results suggest that entrepreneurial intention is a stable construct over time. High and low levels of entrepreneurial intention remain quite stable. Entrepreneurial intention measured during study time significantly explains entrepreneurial behavior both after one to three years (Exp (B) 2,069***) and after six to eight years (Exp (B) 1,830*). Gender and role models are significant factors in predicting entrepreneurial behavior.Originality/valueThis study provides new information on the stability of entrepreneurial intention in a rare longitudinal setting. The study verifies the value of intention measures in predicting entrepreneurial behavior in the long term.

Learner profile mapping: Stimulating autonomous motivation in entrepreneurship education

“…Students, as agents of power, can be selective in interpreting and assimilating information that is most relevant for them (Kyrö, 2015). The teacher, as a social actor, becomes a support for collective learning by trying to establish a conducive context for its occurrence (Joensuu-Salo et al, 2020).…”

“…In this case it should be noted that extrinsic motivation was implemented as a construct in direct opposition to intrinsic motivation and this does not align with the reasoning of SDT, according to which it can vary in the extent of its autonomy (Taylor et al, 2014). A key influence of Hytti et al’s study (2010) was the requirement for us as educators to avoid preconceptions about student motivation while it also provided us with the encouragement to experiment with new methods that could better satisfy a plurality of needs (Joensuu-Salo et al, 2020). It is believed that, in doing so, we have more opportunities to appeal to higher-quality motivational types (those more associated with identification, integration and intrinsic regulation), which have been shown to benefit from a greater likelihood of producing positive outcomes such as increases in self-esteem, learning, interest and even academic performance (Mageau and Vallerand, 2003).…”

“…Others will go beyond this acceptance and actively embrace the uncertainty and inherent riskiness of trying new things that can enhance interest and engagement. Although our focus is on stimulating motivation in the learner, it is the teacher who can create an environment which is conducive to this, whether through the activities and material they provide or how they speak and act (Joensuu-Salo et al, 2020). Therefore, for EE, much work needs to be done to discover the best ways for teachers to enhance students’ levels of self-determination.…”

“…New discoveries can arguably be useful for both the ‘narrow’ (new business creation) and more expansive (enterprising competencies) forms of EE (Hägg and Gabrielsson, 2020). The main premise of the current ‘best practice’ paper is constructed with the belief that, as entrepreneurial educators, we have influence over this subject-related motivation and, as a consequence, the entrepreneurial development of students thereafter (Joensuu-Salo et al, 2020). Motivation, for us, is broadly considered to be the energy and direction of behaviour (Pintrich, 2003), the subject matter of which being the processes – needs, cognitions, and external events – that give rise to its strength and purpose (Reeve, 2018).…”

The Moderating Role of Individual Cultural Values on the Relation between TPB Predictors and Entrepreneurial Intention: Evidence from Egypt and Scotland, UK

“…Entrepreneurial intention is quite dynamic and has the power to predict actual entrepreneurial behavior (Fayolle and Linan, 2014;Kautonen et al, 2015;Ligouri et al, 2018). Meanwhile, Linan et al (2011) and Joensuu-Salo et al (2020), in longitudinal studies, found that entrepreneurial intention is stable over time, hence proves its strength to predict subsequent behaviour and even alter previous behaviour tendencies. This is in consonance with Krueger et al (2000, p. 411) who stated that "intentions have proven the best predictor of planned behavior, particularly when that behavior is rare, hard to observe, or involves unpredictable time lags".…”