From a Deliberative to an Implementing Mindset a Process-oriented View of the Formation of Academic Entrepreneurial Intention

Abstract

Background: Previous intention-based research has not considered whether participants are in the motivational or in the actional phase. In turn, this creates a gap of knowledge concerning the cognitive and motivational processes involved in the formation of Entrepreneurial Intention (EI). By applying the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), the present study addresses the formation of EI to commercialize research knowledge, focusing on the transition from motivation to implementation in the context of academia. Methods: Drawing on cross-sectional data of 490 researchers, segmented regression analysis was conducted to analyze the influence of entrepreneurial engagement on EI-growth. Multi-group Structural Equalization Modeling (SEM) was then used to test the moderation effects of engagement on the relationship between motivational factors and entrepreneurial intention. Results and Discussion: The analysis revealed a direct influence of engagement on EI, as well as a threshold of EI-growth per the context of a Rubicon crossing after the initiation of the first gestation action. Our data also show a growing influence of endogenous factors (e.g., attitudes and perceived behavior control) on EI during the venture creation process. The second part of the study contributes by testing the effects of entrepreneurial rewards on TPB-antecedents moderated by engagement. Conclusion: Until today, research mostly relied on cross-sectional data to predict and measure the strength of EI in the phase preceding the launch of a new business without considering whether participants are in the motivational or in the actional phase. Our finding highlights the need to shift from focusing entrepreneurship research solely on intentions to now on the process and implementation perspective.

An action phase theory approach to the configuration of entrepreneurial goal and implementation intentions

“…In contrast, in samples mostly made up of nascent entrepreneurs or undecided individuals (e.g. students) a significant relationship could be expected (Kautonen et al, 2013(Kautonen et al, , 2015Feola et al, 2019;Blaese and Liebig, 2021;Ndofirepi, 2022). Nevertheless, given that SNs reflect the environmental influence (Santos et al, 2016), this effect may be highly dependent on the cultural context.…”

“…, 2013, 2015; Feola et al. , 2019; Blaese and Liebig, 2021; Ndofirepi, 2022). Nevertheless, given that SNs reflect the environmental influence (Santos et al.…”

“…Several studies find a moderating role of attitude (motivational beliefs regarding the expected outcomes of starting up) on the intention-action relation (Delano€ e-Gueguen and Liñ an, 2019; Blank and Gabay-Mariani, 2023) and suggest ATE might be more important in predicting EGI at the nascency stage, as found by certain authors (Urban and Chantson, 2019;Blaese and Liebig, 2021). Other studies, in turn, find PBC to be more influential in explaining EGI (Feola et al, 2019;Ndofirepi, 2022).…”

“…Other studies, in turn, find PBC to be more influential in explaining EGI (Feola et al, 2019;Ndofirepi, 2022). Similarly, there is controversy regarding whether SN is a significant predictor of EGI (Blaese and Liebig, 2021;Feola et al, 2019) or whether it is not (Goethner et al, 2012;Lee-Ross, 2017).…”

“…, 2019; Ndofirepi, 2022). Similarly, there is controversy regarding whether SN is a significant predictor of EGI (Blaese and Liebig, 2021; Feola et al. , 2019) or whether it is not (Goethner et al.…”