Next Article in Journal
Gender Diversity in Boards of Directors: A Bibliometric Mapping
Previous Article in Journal
Consumer Adoption of Online Food Delivery Ordering (OFDO) Services in Pakistan: The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic Situation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JOItmC
Volume 7
Issue 1
10.3390/joitmc7010011
JOItmC-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Entrepreneurial Intention: Creativity, Entrepreneurship, and University Support

by
Temoor Anjum
1,2,*,
Muhammad Farrukh
2,3,
Petra Heidler
4,* and
Julián Andres Díaz Tautiva
5
1
Center of Post-Graduate Studies, Limkokwing University of Creative Technology Cyberjaya, Selangor 63000, Malaysia
2
Faculty of Management Sciences, Department of Business Administration, LIMA University, Karachi 75190, Pakistan
3
School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100080, China
4
Department of International Business and Export Management, IMC University of Applied Sciences Krems, 3500 Krems an der Donau, Austria
5
Facultad de Economía y Negocios, Universidad Del Desarrollo, Santiago 7610658, Chile
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7(1), 11; https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010011
Submission received: 30 November 2020 / Revised: 26 December 2020 / Accepted: 28 December 2020 / Published: 31 December 2020
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
To study the impact of perceived creativity disposition on entrepreneurial attitude and intentions, based on the theory of planned behavior, a model of the relationship between perceived creativity disposition and entrepreneurial intentions and attitude was constructed, relevant hypotheses were proposed, and the moderation mechanism of perception of university support on perceived creativity disposition and entrepreneurial intentions was also developed and analyzed. The study population included university business students in Pakistan. A sample of 330 students was selected from eight universities in Lahore and Islamabad, Pakistan. A random stratified sampling technique was executed. For this study, a cross-sectional and quantitative research design was used based on the survey process. The two-part questionnaire was used for data collection. Smart-PLS software version 3.2.7 was used to assess the hypothesis of this study. It was found that perceived creativity disposition and attitude toward entrepreneurship has a positive influence on entrepreneurial intention. It was also discovered that the perception of university support moderates the relationship between perceived creativity disposition and entrepreneurial intention. In this study, the moderation effect of perception of university support on the relationship between perceived creativity disposition and entrepreneurial intention was acknowledged. As a policy implication, the government should ensure students with an innovative entrepreneurial environment and well-built perception of university support are supported through different channels. Finally, a conceptual model was proposed based on adopting the theory of planned behavior, and the study ends with a conclusion and implications for future research.

1. Introduction

The field of entrepreneurship is rapidly progressing and now receiving a considerable amount of attention from scholars and researchers, as it is considered the driver of economic growth. Entrepreneurs create wealth not only for themselves but also for others by creating employment. An insight into the making of successful entrepreneurs has over-arching implications for the society. What enforces an individual to be an entrepreneur has been an area of interest for entrepreneurship scholars. In this connection, one of the critical areas of research is investigating factors that predict entrepreneurial intention. We believe that understanding the factors that impact an individual’s intention to be an entrepreneur can accelerate the entrepreneurial process and support the practice and theory. Although there is burgeoning research on EI’s antecedent, the decision process that fosters entrepreneurial behavior remains an open research issue.
The past plethora of studies focused on how individual characters, such as personality traits, foster entrepreneurial intentions [1,2,3,4].The researchers have also highlighted the importance of interaction between the contextual and individual factors in investigating EI [5]. Similarly, scholars have also shown great interest in examining the role of cognitive elements that facilitate individuals to recognize and exploit the opportunities to start a new venture [6]. In this connection, entrepreneurship’s cognitive perspective sheds light on the importance of creativity disposition, which is the inherent quality of an individual to create a novel idea—cultivating EI of individuals. Creativity is recognized as an essential element of entrepreneurship as the individuals have to be creative to identify and exploit the opportunities. Therefore, there is no doubt that an individual’s creative disposition has a strong connection with an individual’s entrepreneurial attitude and intentions. However, we believe that the relationship between creative disposition and entrepreneurial intention might be responsive to certain environmental factors such as the perception of the support, in this study’s context, the perception of university support. However, not much has been written on the role of creative disposition and perception of university support in fostering students’ entrepreneurial intentions. Thus, to fill this research gap, this study focuses on entrepreneurship’s cognitive perspective and purposes that students with a higher level of creative disposition will have a strong attitude toward entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intentions. We also believe that the link between creative disposition and EI is responsive to the environment; thus, the perception of university support may moderate this relationship.
In the following sections, this article presents the conceptual framework of the related literature. It uses quantitative research methods to provide the necessary data collection and evaluation procedures. The results and discussion section sheds light on the findings of the study. This article ends with the contribution and political implications.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Context of the Study

Pakistan’s population is approximately 220 million, with more than 60 percent of residents under the age of 30 years [7]. The country has more than 200 public and private universities, and currently, almost all offer business courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels (HEC Pakistan, 2019). Despite this, the number of unemployed individuals based on Pakistan’s educational level had reached more than 8 million people [8]. This phenomenon is ironic, given that the young, educated generation is jobless, contributing significantly to Pakistan’s unemployment. Interestingly, the rate of open unemployment tends to be higher among the highly educated labor force. Therefore, the remaining graduates accept odd jobs or are underemployed [6,7,8,9]. Among entrepreneurship disciplines, higher education courses have historically been aimed at cultivating positions in large companies. For young graduates, this situation often generates frustration and despair and has brought socio-economic impacts to countries like Pakistan in the face of the growing population of unemployed youth. This situation is due to students lacking adequate support and afraid to take risks and face new challenges [10].
The higher educational institutions have responded to the mandate asserted by governments in teaching entrepreneurship to develop skills necessary for self-employment and meet the demand of business sectors that desire individuals with knowledge and requisite skills to fit into the corporate world [11]. It is increasingly necessary for developing countries to establish graduate entrepreneurship education and programs to encourage new business development and enhance entrepreneurial skills. It may also be beneficial for national competitiveness and economic development [12]. In Pakistan, only a few universities are concerned about the entrepreneurship significance on these grounds [13].
Pakistani higher education institutions (HEI) (including public and private universities) have launched numerous entrepreneurship education programs. To encourage student start-ups, the federal government is investing considerable resources in setting up business incubation programs [13,14]. The main challenges were lack of awareness and support to take the initiative to start a business. Creativity only comes through with a new start-up and with a high risk. Because ofthe lack of resources and funds, universities interested in establishing similar business activities are limited. Therefore, it is necessary to fill the knowledge gaps caused by the lack of established plans of prominent local business schools and the lack of research and efforts on the actual and practical transfer of business awareness.

2.2. Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneurial Intentions

Entrepreneurship should be a comprehensive program because of its immense contribution to the nations’ economic growth through job formation, innovation, creativity, and social development [15,16]. Entrepreneurship is a competitive behavior that drives the new market, employment creation, and innovation [17]. Entrepreneurship is essential as the engine of economic broadening and job creation and as the driver of innovation in a country. As a result, entrepreneurs benefit the economy, innovation itself, and the country’s total productivity [18]. Entrepreneurs have a fundamental contribution to job and wealth creation, modernization, health improvement, and even economic development. Entrepreneurship is identical to self-employment and is considered as a natural approach to solving employability problems, especially among young people [19,20]. Understanding the antecedents of entrepreneurial behavior has been a long-standing interest of scholars, and EI is the single best predictor of entrepreneurial behavior [21].
EI can be described as the process of seeking knowledge that can be used to attain a business drive. People eager to start a company would have a different temperament than someone reluctant to create a new business [22,23,24].Therefore, EI is a strategic determinant of an individual’s tendency to start and operate companies. If an individual is not interested in entrepreneurship, all business process-related matters will seem more severe than those involved in entrepreneurship [25]. They are seen as risk-takers with optimism and ample self-confidence who begin to realize their ideas and want to succeed independently in the business world [26]. Therefore, the unique entrepreneurial idea should be regarded as a substantial economic growth opportunity [27].

2.3. Creative Disposition, Attitude toward Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneurial Intentions

Creativity is to innovate the valuable stuff as a combination and reorganization of knowledge. Creativity is the human ability to think, modify, discover, and create [28,29]. Exploring and exploiting the new opportunities largely depend upon an individual’s abilities to recognize and understand connections among the ideas. The same is the case in the entrepreneurial process, where an entrepreneur has to be creative in identifying and exploiting the opportunities to start a new venture. The literature on creativity shows that creativity plays a significant role in the entrepreneurial process. The people with a higher level of creative disposition can maintain an increased self-confidence and positive attitude in the entrepreneurial process [30]. Past few studies have incorporated creativity to study individuals’ entrepreneurial intentions; for example, Hamidi et al. [31] introduced creativity in the entrepreneurial intention model. They found a positive link between creativity and EI. According to Sternberg [32], entrepreneurs tend to be more creative than non-entrepreneurs, and they also have strong mental frameworks that enforce them to think out of the box.
Similarly, another study [33] found that the higher the perception of individuals regarding the creative disposition, the higher their EI. Feldman and Bolino [34] argued that Individuals with a higher level of creativity disposition are more inclined toward self-employment. Similarly, creative intelligence may significantly impact an individual attitude to start a new venture [33]. Thus, based on these arguments, we propose that
Hypothesis 1 (H1).
There is a significant and positive relationship between Perceived Creativity Disposition (PCD) and Entrepreneurial Intention (EI).
Hypothesis 2 (H2).
There is a significant and positive relationship between Perceived Creativity Disposition (PCD) and Attitude Toward Entrepreneurship (ATE).

2.4. Attitude toward Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneurial Intentions

The creation of a new business was taking place at the time, and the first step in the process was to form entrepreneurial intentions [35]. The three motivation factors of EI in the TPB model, the attitude toward entrepreneurship (ATE) and the perceived behavior control (PBC), have been found with the most robust indication with EI [36]. According to entrepreneurship literature, the SN is less significant to EI than the ATE and the PBC because entrepreneurs can be described as more internally oriented and less socially oriented than non-entrepreneurs [37]. In this model, we only incorporate mediation impact, which is the main strength of EI and is associated with creativity; i.e., ATE. Last shreds of evidence have considered ATE acts as an intermediary variable in a series of relationships that links individual/psychological parameters with business outcomes, such as ATE as an intermediary between personality traits and EI [4]. It is shown that ATE continuously improves EI. Students who have confidence and have the necessary entrepreneurial skills and creative thinking, and are optimistic about starting a business, are more likely to start a new career as an entrepreneur. Therefore, ATE can be a predictor of EI position, while PCD is a distant antecedent. Therefore, it is expected to directly correlate with EI and an indirect relationship between PCD and EI through ATE. Consequently, we develop the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 3 (H3).
There is a significant and positive relationship between Attitude toward Entrepreneurship (ATE) and Entrepreneurial Intention (EI).
Hypothesis 4 (H4).
Attitude toward Entrepreneurship (ATE) mediates the relationship between Perceived Creativity Disposition (PCD) and Entrepreneurial Intention (EI).

2.5. Perception of University Support, Perceived Creative Disposition, and Entrepreneurial Intention

Universities are considered as a source of fostering innovation and entrepreneurial spirit. Universities can play a significant role in positively manipulating students’ intentions and efforts toward entrepreneurship and making them able to develop a new venture [38]. Therefore, we believe that universities are a hub of nurturing entrepreneurial passion in students. It is vital to investigate the extent to which education institutes impact students’ intentions to be entrepreneurs. This, perhaps, could be done by investigating the perception of university support in impacting students’ creative disposition and their EI. Universities can provide support in specific ways by instilling the skills and knowledge necessary for business creation. Universities can also provide targeted support to the students. The targeted support may include support in concept development and business development [39]. Although creativity is conceptualized as personality traits; however, literature advocates that creativity could be responsive to the environment, which means the external factor may influence creativity [38]. Therefore, we believe that creativity may be portrayed as an outcome of personal and environmental/external settings. For example, studies argue that the university context may influence students’ creativity [40]. Thus based on these arguments, we posit the following hypothesis.
Hypothesis 5 (H5).
Perception of University Support (PUS) moderates the relationship between Perceived Creativity Disposition (PCD) and Entrepreneurial Intention (EI) such that this relationship is stronger for those students who have a higher perception of university support.

2.6. Study Framework

A conceptual framework is thus constructed on the basis of the above discussion and hypothesis development as we can see in Figure 1.

3. Methodology

The data were collected from 330 final year students enrolled in a business degree program specializing in entrepreneurship. Eight public and private Pakistani higher education institutes were selected for data collection. The data was collected in the last quarter of 2019. They were situated in Punjab and the capital city of Pakistan (Islamabad). These students were included for two reasons. First, students taking such courses are more likely to start a business. Second, students in their final year of higher education face crucial career choices and are considered to have a good view of their future [16]. For this research, the cross-sectional and quantitative research design was used based on the survey method. Since the educational programs in Pakistan are taught in the English language; thus, the questionnaire was developed in English. Before undertaking the actual data collection, a pilot study was performed. Structural equation modeling (SEM) of partial least squares (PLS) was used to analyze the results and the Smart-PLS software version 3.2.7 to run the PLS-SEM. This method has been in marketing and management literature [41,42,43,44,45,46,47].

4. Data Analysis

4.1. Measures

To elicit information regarding the entrepreneurial intentions of the student EI items were taken from [16]. A scale developed by Liñán and Chen [48] was adopted to collect data about ATE whilePCD and PUS scale were borrowed from the [46,49,50]. All items were tested in the Pakistani context and found to be up to the level value of Cronbach’s α.
PLS-SEM is a two-step process that involves evaluation measurement and structural models [51,52,53,54]. First, by testing the internal consistency reliability (ICR), convergent validity (CV), and discriminant validity (DV), the measurement model should be tested [55,56]. The degree to which ICR test subjects measure latent structures and the evaluation are done through composite reliability (CR) score. The study results showed that all the constructs’ CR scores exceeded the standard threshold of 0.70, indicating that the study’s scale has a high internal consistency [57]. The composite reliability (CR) should be 0.708 or greater, and 0.70 is considered similar enough to be appropriate [56].The threshold value of 0.5 was also met by the average variance extracted (AVE) scores of all constructs, suggesting a good CV [57,58]. The factor loadings (FL), CR, and AVE scores are shown below in Table 1.
The next step for the assessment of the measurement model is the evaluation of discriminant validity. It is a level where one variable differs from the variable in the model. We have three main methods to evaluate the DV, i.e., cross-loading, Fornell–Larcker criterion, and heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT). The cross-loading and the Fornell–Larcker criterion limitations were planned to use the HTMT ratio to test the DV [59]. Thus, we used the HTMT ratio for evaluating the DV in this analysis. The values in Table 2 indicate that all the constructs’ HTMT ratiosare far below the 0.85 thresholds [59].

4.2. Structural Model Assessment

The structural model assessment evaluates the latent constructs’ relationship and checks the conceptual model [60]. The structural model outcomes are then presented after determining the validity and reliability of the measurement model. The path coefficients were evaluated using a bootstrap re-sampling approach based on 5000 replicates and 300 instances. After considering the measurement model, the path coefficient’s significance was analyzed with the bootstrapping function of Smart-PLS to test the hypothesis. The results are shown in Table 3.

4.3. Mediation Analysis (Indirect Effect)

The bootstrapping approach was used to calculate the indirect effect. Bootstrapping will not infer the sampling distribution of the statistical data or the distribution of variables; for small sample sizes, it can also be used confidently [57]. Therefore, for the PLS-SEM method, a bootstrapping strategy to test the indirect effects is very suitable. The results in Table 4 indicate that ATE mediates the interaction between PCD and EI. Both direct and indirect impacts are important and point in the same direction [57]. The method of mediation will be complementary mediation and counted as complementary mediation in the present analysis.

4.4. Moderation Analysis

Moderation defines a condition in which the relationship is not constant between the two constructs but depends on the third variable’s value, called the moderator variable. In the model, the moderator variable adjusts the intensity or direction of the interaction between the two structures. A product indicator approach was used to run the PUS moderation analysis on the relationship between PCD and EI [57]. Table 5 shows the results of the moderation analysis that indicate that PUS moderates PCD-EI linkages. The result of moderation has to compare with the direct impact between PCD and EI, where we can see it has become more assertive with the PUS.
Interpretation of moderation analysis is considered a challenging issue. Therefore, a graphical representation of the relationship may help to conclude. In Figure 2, we present the slope of moderation analysis. The green line represents a high perception of university support, while the red line represents a low perception of university support. We can see that the slope of high perception is steeper than that of low perception. This means that the relationship between PCD and EI is stronger for the high perception of university support.

4.5. Coefficients of Determination (R2)

R2 calculates the model’s predictive precision and, as illustrated by the model’s independent variables, represents the percentage of variance in the dependent variable(s). For each independent variable, path coefficients indicate the degree of change in the dependent variable [57]. Therefore, the R2 value obtained could interpret the structural model’s strength, indicating the exogenous variables’ explanatory variance in the endogenous variable. The combined effect of variables on endogenous latent variable EI is 0.559. On mediator ATE, its value is 0.570, which means that the model’s variables’ total impact shows a good relationship.

5. Discussion: Entrepreneurial Intention and Open Innovation

Drawing the motivation from the theory of planned behavior, this study aims to test the role of perceived creativity disposition and entrepreneurship on students’ entrepreneurial intentions. In addition, the moderating role of perceived university support in the relationship between perceived creativity disposition and EI is tested. Given the growth of new businesses worldwide, entrepreneurship is now seen as a solution to socio-economic growth [61]. However, college students’ intention to start a business has steadily increased, but it has not yet reached the level needed to solve youth joblessness. This is why areas with the highest unemployment rates have seen an increase in entrepreneurs in recent years, particularly across the country [7,62]. In this context, the open innovation (OI) approach was introduced, involving students, teachers, graduates, and companies in decision-making. As a result, motivation, learning, and professional outcomes can be improved [63]. This issue has hardly been functional in prior literature despite being a chance for advanced education. Therefore, the introduction of open innovation (OI) for students, faculty, and stakeholders (universities and companies) will be a motivation and additional benefit [64].
Further, the results also confirm the influence impact of perceived creativity disposition on entrepreneurial attitude and intention. According to Amabile [19], creativity results from different behavior qualities and combinations of sociated creative skills. These findings support the hypothesis proposed in earlier studies [9,24]. The results of H1 showed that PCD has a substantial and positive effect on EI. So PCD is a predictor of EI. The PCD is self-determination, and its impact on the EI effect is prominent because a creative mind has more ideas to start a project. A significant decision is to start a new company, most likely to succeed if you have inbuilt qualities. It is expected that creative temperament of students can be accompanied by creative thinking capacity, creative process, and creative product. Actually, a person’s level of creativity can be taught and improved [65], although it is not acknowledged to what level that creativity can be enhanced. Although the degree to which imagination can be enhanced is uncertain. Therefore help from the university will lead to innovation through several resources [66]. This study also analyzes the link between PCD, ATE, and EI. The study itemized creativity within ATE concept and also within the concept of intention. Results showed that PCD is linked to ATE, and ATE EI is explained by ATE. It means that H2 and H3 were also supported by the study and supported in the literature [67]. In other words, those individuals who are creative will be more inclined toward entrepreneurship [68]. The reason for this association is that self-confidence has a positive impact on attitude. If you have a positive attitude, you have high chances and self-confidence to start a new venture. Entrepreneurs can raise awareness of entrepreneurial roles, sustain a positive and encouraging attitude, stimulate creativity and innovation, and lift common sense to execute the action plan. Governments can also promote successful entrepreneurship cases, create a social environment that welcomes innovation, and stimulate entrepreneurial attitudes [28,69].
As the PCD demonstrated a critical and positive effect on EI via ATE, H4 was also supported. The Smart-PLS bootstrapping results indicate that ATE mediates the association between PCD and EI. The PCD affects the EI through the ATE, and the ATE also affects the EI. It stated the partial mediation effect. These findings can conclude that PCD can improve students’ self-confidence and attitude. H5 examines the moderating role of perception of university support on the relationship between PCD and EI. In Table 5, the interpretation and summary of the outcome are presented. Through the test of moderation hypotheses through the data set of business students, it was found that perception of university support was relevant to EI development. During the studies and university, it is easy to develop strong intentions and divert the intentions toward entrepreneurship. Some researchers have pointed out that in the developing world, entrepreneurship obstacles for graduates include an appropriate climate and business support. Various studies have confirmed that entrepreneurship will contribute significantly to economic growth if the entrepreneur has a supportive environment [70,71]. This will help the students start the business at the end of their educational career rather than looking for a job.
Therefore, advance entrepreneurial education with university support refers to educational curriculums that develop and enhance entrepreneurial creativity, realization, knowledge, and expertise to become a successful entrepreneur. Over the last few years, the benefits of incorporating open philosophy into knowledge-based collaborative learning have been extensively argued in the literature but have not yet reached the preferred point. Social innovation in education is made possible by the model of cooperation [72]. In this regard, while recent empirical reviews have shown a positive relationship between participation in entrepreneurship education programs and the development of entrepreneurial intentions, there is still insufficient evidence to support or refute this claim [62,73]. Open innovation (OI) in the industrial sector has drained additional interest than other areas, for instance, services. This is primarily reflected in the educational environment [63].

6. Conclusions and Study Contribution

The conclusion recommended that there was a positive relationship between perceived creativity disposition and entrepreneurial intention. Moreover, the ATE has a significant mediating effect between perceived creativity disposition and entrepreneurial intention. Considering all the stakeholders responsible for the development of entrepreneurs, based on the determinants of Pakistani university students’ entrepreneurial intentions, we can better understand how EI is produced and how the viewpoint and suggestions of potential entrepreneurs affect their entrepreneurial intentions. The study demonstrated the role of PCD in influencing personal attitudes to increase business goals.
Further, the perception of university support has a vital role in increasing intention and creativity. PUS can provide a stable platform to take the initiative. This study also encourages universities to take over various capacities to initiate and encourage young graduates to start businesses. Therefore, some scholars have suggested that the developing world’s challenges are developing graduate entrepreneurs and providing adequate and supportive environments that will lead to entrepreneurship growth. The university environment can create unique conditions that inspire students’ creative trends and enthusiasm for entrepreneurship, especially recognizing how these key factors can improve the intention to see entrepreneurship as a career choice. Universities should pay more attention to the development of entrepreneurship ecosystems within institutions, introduce or add training programs or courses that cover different aspects of entrepreneurship, and organize seminars on successful companies run by students or graduates in other countries. This will provide students with the knowledge and skills they need to facilitate business formation and management. Students will also learn how to address better the challenges of starting a business and the obstacles common to new businesses and increase their tendency to start a business. Finally, communities and student families should be encouraged to provide active support.
The study should be of interest to researchers, professors, and supporters of entrepreneurship because it clarifies the interaction between the little-exploited concept of the tendency to perceptual creativity and the perception of university aid in the general development of entrepreneurial ideas. To increase students’ willingness and ability to start their businesses, governments and policymakers should focus on fostering the innovative spirit and cultural value of business activities and creating an environment in which this positive vision of entrepreneurship can be disseminated. Besides, they should make more efforts to fund business incubators and reconsider the microfinance programs currently available to graduates on graduation. It is also hoped that this research would direct future studies to investigate the interplay of personal characteristics and environmental circumstances in improving entrepreneurship.
Further, this research presents its contributions in terms of theory, methodology, and practice. Theoretically, this research moves toward the use of TPB to bring forward valuable knowledge relevant to PCD, EI, ATE, and PUS. It adds new findings to the theories by modeling the previously analyzed relationship between PCD and EI.Significantly, this will enable stakeholders responsible for entrepreneurship innovations to have a clearer picture of how EI is produced and how potential venture initiators’ expectations influence their intention to grow a project.Besides, in a unique research setting (developing country), its novelty brings to the approaches in its implementation. There are exceptionally under-studied areas of research on entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intentions in developing countries. Therefore, the study strongly stresses that, in entrepreneurship intentions, the proposed theoretical framework contributes to knowledge adding the factor of perception of university support.

7. Limitations and Directions for Future Research

This study has a few limitations, as many other studies. The initial restriction is related to choosing the sample. For this research, the sample consisted of business students only. It is thus proposed that future research should integrate students from various educational backgrounds and countries. The second limitation is the timeframe since this research was cross-sectional. It does not, therefore, provide a specific relationship of cause and effect between PCD and EI. Mixed-method research will indicate a better understanding of the influence of PCD on EI. Third, the study focused on entrepreneurial motive, which is the critical factor influencing the number of individuals starting businesses. Despite the benefit of concentrating on entrepreneurial intent, new company start-up rates are affected by other factors. Finally, we simply investigated the conclusion of PCD in one of the developing countries; thus, it is possible to perform a multi-country analysis to provide more generalized results. Besides, a creative atmosphere and association with possibilities may also alter the actions of a person. It is also recommended to study in multicultural countries, such as Austria, Iran, or Bangladesh.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.A. and M.F.; data curation, T.A. and M.F.; formal analysis, J.A.D.T.; investigation, P.H.; methodology, T.A. and M.F.; project administration, P.H.; validation, T.A. and J.A.D.T.; writing—original draft, T.A.; writing—review and editing, P.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was partially funded by ILMA University through the university ILMA research grant program.

Data Availability Statement

Data can be provided on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zeffane, R. Trust, personality, risk-taking, and entrepreneurship: Exploring gender difference among nascent and actual entrepreneur in the United Arab Emirates. J. Entrep. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 11, 191–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Farrukh, M.; Khan, A.A.; Shahid Khan, M.; Ravan Ramzani, S.; Soladoye, B.S.A. Entrepreneurial intentions: The role of family factors, personality traits and self-efficacy. World J. Entrep. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 13, 303–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Antončič, B.; Kregar, T.B.; Singh, G.; Denoble, A.F. The big five personality–entrepreneurship relationship: Evidence from Slovenia. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2015, 53, 819–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Farrukh, M.; Alzubi, Y.; Shahzad, I.A.; Waheed, A.; Kanwal, N. Entrepreneurial intentions: The role of personality traits in perspective of theory of planned behaviour. Asia Pac. J. Innov. Entrep. 2018, 12, 399–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Karimi, S.; Biemans, H.J.A.; Mahdei, K.N.; Lans, T.; Chizari, M.; Mulder, M. Testing the relationship between personality characteristics, contextual factors and entrepreneurial intentions in a developing country. Int. J. Psychol. 2017, 52, 227–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Sánchez, J.C. Entrepreneurial intentions: The role of the cognitive variables. In Entrepreneurship: Born, Made and Educated; InTech: Rijeka, Croatia, 2012; pp. 27–50. [Google Scholar]
  7. Zreen, A.; Limkokwing University of Creative Technology; Farrukh, M.; Nazar, N.; Khalid, R. The role of internship and business incubation programs in forming entrepreneurial intentions: An empirical analysis from Pakistan. J. Manag. Bus. Adm. Central Eur. 2019, 27, 97–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. Pakistan Statistical Year Book; Pakistan Beureau of Statistics: Islamabad, Pakistan, 2018; Volume 91, pp. 1–539. [Google Scholar]
  9. Anjum, T.; Ramani Bai, V.; Nazar, N. Mediating role of attitudes to enhance the creativity disposition towards entrepreneurial intention. Int. J. Psychosoc. Rehabil. 2020, 24, 542–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Afridi, S.A.; Afsar, B.; Shahjehan, A.; Rehman, Z.U.; Haider, M.; Ullah, M. Perceived corporate social responsibility and innovative work behavior: The role of employee volunteerism and authenticity. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 1865–1877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Prakash, D.; Jain, S.; Chauhan, K. Supportive government policies, locus of control and student’s entrepreneurial intensity: A study of India. J. Glob. Entrep. Res. 2015, 5, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Nabi, G.; Liñán, F. Graduate entrepreneurship in the developing world: Intentions, education and development. Educ. Train. 2011, 53, 325–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Saeed, R.; Nayyab, H.H.; Rashied, H.; Lodhi, R.N.; Musawar, S.; Iqbal, A. Who is the most potential entrepreneur? A case of Pakistan. Middle East J. Sci. Res. 2013, 17, 1307–1315. [Google Scholar]
  14. Saeed, S.; Yousafzai, S.Y.; Yani-De-Soriano, M.; Muffatto, M. The role of perceived university support in the formation of students’ entrepreneurial intention. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2015, 53, 1127–1145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Riaz, H.; Jabeen, N.; Salman, Y.; Ansari, N.; Moazzam, A. A study of higher education reforms in pakistan: Key reforms and drivers. J. Manag. Stud. 2017, 2, 79–94. [Google Scholar]
  16. Farrukh, M.; Lee, J.W.C.; Sajid, M.; Waheed, A. Entrepreneurial intentions: The role of individualism and collectivism in perspective of theory of planned behaviour. Educ. Train. 2019, 61, 984–1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Anjum, T.; Nazar, N.; Sharifi, S.; Farrukh, M. Determinants of entrepreneurial intention in perspective of theory of planned behaviour. Manag. Theory Stud. Rural Bus. Infrastruct. Dev. 2018, 40, 429–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Abbas, S.D.; Zaidatol Akmaliah, L.P. Modelling of entrepreneurial leadership for effectiveness of schools. Middle East J. Sci. Res. 2016, 24, 1371–1375. [Google Scholar]
  19. Papaleontiou-Louca, E.; Varnava-Marouchou, D.; Mihai, S.; Konis, E. Teaching for creativity in universities. J. Educ. Hum. Dev. 2014, 3, 131–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Trapczyński, P.; Puślecki, Ł.; Jarosiński, M. Competitiveness of CEE Economies and Businesses: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Challenges and Opportunities; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 1–223. [Google Scholar]
  21. Farrukh Qasim Riaz, M. Religion and entrepreneurial intentions: An empirical investigation. Int. J. Adv. Appl. Sci. 2016, 3, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Krueger, N.F.; Carsrud, A.L. Entrepreneurial intentions: Applying the theory of planned behaviour. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 1993, 5, 315–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Krueger, N.; Reilly, M.D.; Carsrud, A.L. Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. J. Bus. Ventur. 2000, 15, 411–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Hsu, D.K.; Burmeister-Lamp, K.; Simmons, S.A.; Foo, M.-D.; Hong, M.C.; Pipes, J.D. “I know I can, but I don’t fit”: Perceived fit, self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial intention. J. Bus. Ventur. 2019, 34, 311–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Esfandiar, K.; Sharifi-Tehrani, M.; Pratt, S.; Altinay, L. Understanding entrepreneurial intentions: A developed integrated structural model approach. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 94, 172–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Davidsson, P. Entrepreneurial opportunities and the entrepreneurship nexus: A re-conceptualization. J. Bus. Ventur. 2015, 30, 674–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Padilla-Meléndez, A.; Fernández-Gámez, M.A.; Molina-Gómez, J. Feeling the risks: Effects of the development of emotional competences with outdoor training on the entrepreneurial intent of university students. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2014, 10, 861–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Anjum, T.; Amoozegar, A.; Nazar, N.; Kanwal, N. Intervening effect of attitudes towards entrepreneurship: Correlation between passion and entrepreneurial intention. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Technol. 2020, 29, 1327–1340. [Google Scholar]
  29. Batchelor, J.H.; Burch, G.F. Creative individuals and entrepreneurship: Is there an inherent attraction? Small Bus. Inst. J. 2012, 8, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  30. Zhao, H.; Seibert, S.K.; Hills, G.E. The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions. J. Appl. Psychol. 2005, 90, 1265–1272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Yar, D.H.; Wennberg, W.; Berglund, H. Creativity in entrepreneurship education. J. Small Bus. Entrep. Dev. 2008, 15, 304–320. [Google Scholar]
  32. Wagner, J.; Sternberg, R. Start-up activities, individual characteristics, and the regional milieu: Lessons for entrepreneurship support policies from German micro data. Ann. Reg. Sci. 2004, 38, 219–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Sarooghi, H.; Libaers, D.; Burkemper, A. Examining the relationship between creativity and innovation: A meta-analysis of organizational, cultural, and environmental factors. J. Bus. Ventur. 2015, 30, 714–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Feldman, D.C.; Bolino, M.C. Career patterns of the self-employed: Career motivations and career outcomes. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2000, 38, 53–68. [Google Scholar]
  35. De Clercq, D.; Honig, B.; Martin, B. The roles of learning orientation and passion for work in the formation of entrepreneurial intention. Int. Small Bus. J. 2013, 31, 652–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Al-Jubari, I. College students’ entrepreneurial intention: Testing an integrated model of SDT and TPB. Sage Open 2019, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Nabi, G.; Walmsley, A.; Liñán, F.; Akhtar, I.; Neame, C. Does entrepreneurship education in the first year of higher education develop entrepreneurial intentions? The role of learning and inspiration. Stud. High Educ. 2018, 43, 452–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Simonton, D.K. Creativity: Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. Am. Psychol. 2000, 55, 151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ali, M.S.Y.; Abou, E.A.E.E. Determinants of entrepreneurial intention among Sudanese university students. Manag. Sci. Lett. 2020, 10, 2849–2860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Elzubeir, M.A.; Rizk, D.E.E. Identifying characteristics that students, interns and residents look for in their role models. Med. Educ. 2001, 35, 272–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Raza, A.; Saeed, A.; Iqbal, M.K.; Saeed, U.; Sadiq, I.; Faraz, N.A. Linking corporate social responsibility to customer loyalty through co-creation and customer company identification: Exploring sequential mediation mechanism. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Faraz, N.A.; Yanxia, C.; Ahmed, F.; Estifo, Z.G.; Raza, A. The influence of transactional leadership on innovative work behavior—A mediation model. Eur. J. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2018, 7, 51–62. [Google Scholar]
  43. Ali, R.; Ahmad, R.R.; Khalid, I.M.; Saeed, B.U. An assessment of corporate social responsibility on customer company identification and loyalty in banking industry: A PLS-SEM analysis. Manag. Res. Rev. 2020, 43, 1337–1370. [Google Scholar]
  44. Ying, M.; Faraz, N.A.; Ahmed, F.; Raza, A. How does servant leadership foster employees’ voluntary green behavior? A sequential mediation model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  45. Ansari, N.; Farrukh, M.; Raza, A. Green Human Resource Management and Employees Pro-Environmental Behaviours: Examining the Underlying Mechanism; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Anjum, T.; Ramzani, S.R.; Nazar, N. Antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions: A study of business students from universities of Pakistan. Int. J. Bus. Psychol. 2019, 1, 72–88. [Google Scholar]
  47. Nazar, N.; Jahan, S.; Amoozegar, A.; Anjum, T.; Raju, V. The effects of total quality management practices on corporate social responsibility using supply chain model: A review of Malaysian hotel industry. Int. J. Supply Chain Manag. 2020, 9, 294–304. [Google Scholar]
  48. Liñán, F.; Chen, Y. Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2009, 33, 593–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Anjum, T.; Phung, S.P. Moderating role of university support on the relationship between effective entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial intention. Test. Eng. Manag. 2020, 83, 16377–16387. [Google Scholar]
  50. Anjum, T.; Ramzani, S.R.; Farrukh, M.; Raju, V.; Nazar, N.; Shahzad, I.A. Entrepreneurial intentions of pakistani students: The role of entrepreneurial education, creativity disposition, invention passion & passion for founding. J. Manag. Res. 2018, 10, 76. [Google Scholar]
  51. Anderson, J.C.; Gerbing, D.W. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol. Bull. 1988, 103, 411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Liu, Z.; Zing, M.; Faraz, N.; Raza, A.; Iqbal, M.K. Influencing mechanism of responsible leadership towards employees’ voluntary green behavior-a multi-theory perspective. Acad. Manag. Glob. Proc. 2019, 2019, 152. [Google Scholar]
  53. Alkipsy, E.; Raju, V. How Islamic work ethics moderates relationships among transformational, transactional leadership styles and managerial effectiveness? Int. J. Bus. Psychol. 2019, 1, 42–53. [Google Scholar]
  54. Farrukh, M.; Kalimuthuan, R.; Farrukh, S. Impact of job satisfaction and mutual trust on employee loyalty in Saudi hospitality industry: A mediating analysis of leader support. Int. J. Bus. Psychol. 2019, 1, 30–52. [Google Scholar]
  55. Chin, W.W. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In Modern Methods for Business Research; Psychology Press: New York, NY, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  56. Hair, J.F.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM); SAGE Publications: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  57. Hair, J.F.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Gudergan, S.P. Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling; SAGE Publications: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2017; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  58. Ullah, M.N. Impact of service quality on patient satisfaction and loyalty in Bangladeshi hospitals. Int. J. Bus. Psychol. 2019, 2, 89–94. [Google Scholar]
  59. Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Wong, K.K.K.-K. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) techniques using SmartPLS. Mark. Bull. 2013, 24, 1–32. [Google Scholar]
  61. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: Global Report 2018/2019; Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: London, UK, 2019; p. 150. [Google Scholar]
  62. Ahmed, T.; Rehman, I.U.; Sergi, B.S. A proposed framework on the role of entrepreneurial education and contextual factors. In Entrepreneurship and Development in the 21st Century; Emerald Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2019; pp. 47–68. [Google Scholar]
  63. Iglesias-Sánchez, P.P.; Jambrino-Maldonado, C.; de las Heras-Pedrosa, C. Training entrepreneurial competences with open innovation paradigm in higher education. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Sharples, M.; Adams, A.; Alozie, N.; Ferguson, R.; Fitzgerald, E.; Gaved, M. Innovating Pedagogy 2016; The Open University: Milton Keynes, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  65. Sukarso, A.; Widodo, A.; Rochintaniawati, D.; Purwianingsih, W. The potential of students’ creative disposition as a perspective to develop creative teaching and learning for senior high school biological science. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019, 1157, 22–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Bahr, M.W.; Walker, K.; Hampton, E.M.; Buddle, B.S.; Freeman, T.; Ruschman, N. Creative problem solving for general education intervention teams: A two-year evaluation study. Remedial Spec. Educ. 2006, 27, 27–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Karimi, S. The role of entrepreneurial passion in the formation of students’ entrepreneurial intentions. Appl. Econ. 2019, 52, 331–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Guerrero, M.; Urbano, D.; Gajón, E. Entrepreneurial university ecosystems and graduates’ career patterns: Do entrepreneurship education programmes and university business incubators matter? J. Manag. Dev. 2020, 39, 753–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Fini, R.; Grimaldi, R.; Marzocchi, G.L.; Sobrero, M. The foundation of entrepreneurial intention. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2009, 36, 387–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Rungsrisawat, S.; Sutduean, C. Entrepreneurial education and entrepreneurial intention: The mediating role of creativity disposition among students in Thailand. Int. J. Innov. Creat. Chang. 2019, 6, 213–232. [Google Scholar]
  71. Anjum, T.; Ramzani, S.R.; Nazar, N.; Shahzad, I.A.; Salman, S. Entrepreneurial intention: Does entrepreneurial education matter in Pakistan? Int. J. Hum. Resour. Stud. 2018, 8, 147–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Cai, Y.; Ma, J.; Chen, Q. Higher education in innovation ecosystems. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Ahmed, T.; Klobas, J.E.; Ramayah, T. Personality traits, demographic factors and entrepreneurial intentions: Improved understanding from a moderated mediation study. Entrep. Res. J. 2019, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Joitmc 07 00011 g001 550
Figure 1. Conceptual framework.
Figure 1. Conceptual framework.
Joitmc 07 00011 g001
Joitmc 07 00011 g002 550
Figure 2. Slope plot for moderation analysis.
Figure 2. Slope plot for moderation analysis.
Joitmc 07 00011 g002
Table
Table 1. Measurement model (FL, CR, and AVE).
Table 1. Measurement model (FL, CR, and AVE).
Latent Variables Factor LoadingCRAVE
Perceived Creativity Disposition 0.9260.612
PCD10.785
PCD20.758
PCD30.715
PCD40.811
PCD50.825
PCD60.857
PCD70.725
PCD80.771
Attitude Towards Entrepreneurship 0.8840.605
ATE 10.756
ATE20.714
ATE3 0.825
ATE 40.854
ATE 50.729
Entrepreneurial Intention 0.8860.611
EI10.718
EI20.799
EI30.714
EI40.816
EI50.850
Perception of University Support 0.8700.572
PUS1 0.751
PUS2 0.723
PUS 30.741
PUS 40.749
PUS 50.814
Table
Table 2. Discriminant validity by heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT).
Table 2. Discriminant validity by heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT).
PCDEIATEPUS
PCD0.0000.0000.0000.000
EI0.3260.0000.0000.000
ATE0.4110.3190.0000.000
PUS0.4070.5570.4180.000
Table
Table 3. Direct effect.
Table 3. Direct effect.
HypothesisPathPath Coefficientt-Statisticsp-Values
H1PCD → EI0.3254.1250.000
H2PCD → ATE0.2152.9870.002
H3ATE → EI0.3794.1250.001
Table
Table 4. Indirect effect.
Table 4. Indirect effect.
HypothesisPathPath Coefficientt-Statisticsp-Values
H4PCD → ATE → EI0.1154.9870.001
Table
Table 5. Moderation effect.
Table 5. Moderation effect.
HypothesisPathPath Coefficientt-Statisticsp-Values
H5 Moderating Effect 1 → EI 0.2782.9700.000
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Anjum, T.; Farrukh, M.; Heidler, P.; Díaz Tautiva, J.A. Entrepreneurial Intention: Creativity, Entrepreneurship, and University Support. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010011

AMA Style

Anjum T, Farrukh M, Heidler P, Díaz Tautiva JA. Entrepreneurial Intention: Creativity, Entrepreneurship, and University Support. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2021; 7(1):11. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010011

Chicago/Turabian Style

Anjum, Temoor, Muhammad Farrukh, Petra Heidler, and Julián Andres Díaz Tautiva. 2021. "Entrepreneurial Intention: Creativity, Entrepreneurship, and University Support" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 7, no. 1: 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010011

APA Style

Anjum, T., Farrukh, M., Heidler, P., & Díaz Tautiva, J. A. (2021). Entrepreneurial Intention: Creativity, Entrepreneurship, and University Support. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010011

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop