Millennial social entrepreneurial intent and social entrepreneurial self-efficacy: a comparative entrepreneurship study

Purpose The purpose of this study is to propose and test predictors of millennials’ social entrepreneurial intent (SEI), mediating mechanisms and influential contextual factors. Design/methodology/approach This study includes survey data from 1,890 respondents, 315 each from China, Mexico, Nigeria, Philippines, Russia and the USA. Findings Empirical results show that social entrepreneurial self-efficacy (SESE) mediated the relationship between perseverance and proactive personality and the dependent variable SEI in all six countries. Life satisfaction positively moderated this relationship among US students and negatively moderated it among Chinese students. In China dissatisfaction appears to enhance SEI, while in the US satisfaction appears to do so. Originality/value This paper identifies the mediating role of SESE and the moderating role of life satisfaction when explaining SEI, as well as providing data from millennials in six countries.

The Role of Emotional Intelligence in the Culture-Entrepreneurship Fit Perspective

Values are at the core of cultures, and this view has also dominated research on cross-cultural comparative entrepreneurship. However, empirical evidence relating cultural values and entrepreneurial behaviors has been mixed. Scholars have therefore suggested that cultural values may influence entrepreneurship only indirectly, thereby suggesting the existence of intermediary mechanisms linking cultural values and entrepreneurship. One such mechanism could be through the influence of culture-specific emotional intelligence (CSEI) on entrepreneurial behaviors. CSEI can be explained as culturally driven implicit beliefs rather than it being a direct manifestation of overarching cultural values, several manifestations of which shape entrepreneurial behaviors differently across countries. As such, CSEI has a unique position in the culture-entrepreneurship fit perspective.

Societal Ethics and Social Entrepreneurship: A Cross-Cultural Comparison

Using multilevel modeling and data from 26 countries that include 93,439 individual-level responses on social entrepreneurship for the year 2015, we seek to understand how societal-level ethical orientations impact the likelihood of individuals engaging in social entrepreneurship. We develop a multidimensional representation of societal ethics, in that we draw close parallels between the three institutional pillars—normative, cognitive, and regulatory—with three forms of ethics and use this understanding to predict their effects on the demand for and supply of social entrepreneurs. We find that low behavioral ethics (normative ethics) at the societal level provides opportunities for individuals to become social entrepreneurs. Furthermore, while unselfishness (cognitive ethics) motivates individuals to become social entrepreneurs, high public-sector ethics (regulatory ethics) provides the institutional support for such entrepreneurs to thrive. We contribute to cross-cultural comparative entrepreneurship by providing ethical antecedents of social entrepreneurship through a deeper understanding of the influence of ethics as national-level institutions.

Leadership as a driver of entrepreneurship: an international exploratory study

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of cultural leadership factors (charismatic/value-based, team oriented, participative, humane, autonomous and self-protective) on the rates of opportunity and necessity entrepreneurship.Design/methodology/approachThe study integrates insights from institutional and cultural leadership theories to provide a fresh perspective to advance comparative entrepreneurship research. To test the hypotheses, the authors conduct a multiple regression analysis with observations from 34 countries, using data (from the year 2013) from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor for the dependent variable and from Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness to create leadership factors as independent variables.FindingsThe results show that all the types of leadership considered in the study have a relevant effect on entrepreneurial activity. However, charismatic leadership has a greater effect on entrepreneurial activity, particularly on opportunity entrepreneurship. The research also shows that autonomous leadership has a negative impact on entrepreneurial activity, although, when it is moderated by the humane dimension, this relationship changes.Practical implicationsSince the alternative dimensions facilitate or inhibit the generation of new firm creation, it is critical for researchers, teachers and leaders to learn about and to foster such leadership types.Originality/valueThis research covers a gap in the cross-cultural evidence presented in the literature and suggests the integration of the concepts leadership and entrepreneurship.

Consequences of Cultural Leadership Styles for Social Entrepreneurship: A Theoretical Framework

The purpose of this conceptual article is to understand how the interplay of national-level institutions of culturally endorsed leadership styles, government effectiveness, and societal trust affects individual likelihood to become social entrepreneurs. We present an institutional framework comprising cultural leadership styles (normative institutions), government effectiveness (regulatory institutions), and societal trust (cognitive institutions) to predict individual likelihood of social entrepreneurship. Using the insight of culture–entrepreneurship fit and drawing on institutional configuration perspective we posit that culturally endorsed implicit leadership theories (CLTs) of charismatic and participatory leadership positively impact the likelihood of individuals becoming social entrepreneurs. Further, we posit that this impact is particularly pronounced when a country’s regulatory quality manifested by government effectiveness is supportive of social entrepreneurship and when there exist high levels of societal trust. Research on CLTs and their impact on entrepreneurial behavior is limited. We contribute to comparative entrepreneurship research by introducing a cultural antecedent of social entrepreneurship in CLTs and through a deeper understanding of their interplay with national-level institutions to draw the boundary conditions of our framework.

National Ethical Institutions and Social Entrepreneurship

Using insights from institutional theory, the chapter proposes understanding ethics as national institutions that deeply influence social entrepreneurship. Moreover, the chapter proposes that low behavioral ethical standards (normative ethical institutions) provide opportunities for individuals to establish social enterprises. Furthermore, it proposes that high public-sector ethical standards (regulatory ethical institutions) and values of unselfishness (cognitive ethical institutions) facilitate and motivate individuals to establish social enterprises. The chapter also explores the combined effects of public-sector ethical standards and low behavioral ethics, public-sector ethical standards and societal unselfishness, and low behavioral ethics and unselfishness, on the creation of social enterprises. The chapter contributes to cross-cultural comparative entrepreneurship by suggesting, through a multilevel framework, the effects of societal-level ethical institutions on the creation of social enterprises.

Comparative Entrepreneurship between Western Europe and Latin America

Considering the importance that entrepreneurship takes in the economies of most countries, the aim of this study was to compare two different geographical areas, studying the characteristics and variables of entrepreneurship that act as driving forces in the creation of new businesses. So, two locations from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) database were identified and categorized, namely Latin America (LA) and Western Europe (WE). Nine dimensions were selected, in order to test and clarify distinguishing patterns in these two locations in terms of entrepreneurial propensity. We used a quantitative methodology to analyze and verify 13 variables, using statistical techniques, in particular the tests of Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Mann-Whitney Test, T-test and ANOVA. The results indicate that during the year of 2015 the population demonstrated bolder entrepreneurial characteristics in LA than in WE, however, statistically analyzing a set of variables indicated by the model, the WE countries show a higher mean value than in LA. As a comparative study, we propose that the findings can be used as a starting point in formulating new government policies, in particular in these geographical areas, contributing to the development of the entrepreneurship field.

National Ethical Institutions and Social Entrepreneurship

Using insights from institutional theory, the chapter proposes understanding ethics as national institutions that deeply influence social entrepreneurship. Moreover, the chapter proposes that low behavioral ethical standards (normative ethical institutions) provide opportunities for individuals to establish social enterprises. Furthermore, it proposes that high public-sector ethical standards (regulatory ethical institutions) and values of unselfishness (cognitive ethical institutions) facilitate and motivate individuals to establish social enterprises. The chapter also explores the combined effects of public-sector ethical standards and low behavioral ethics, public-sector ethical standards and societal unselfishness, and low behavioral ethics and unselfishness, on the creation of social enterprises. The chapter contributes to cross-cultural comparative entrepreneurship by suggesting, through a multilevel framework, the effects of societal-level ethical institutions on the creation of social enterprises.