This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
Entrepreneurship lies more in the ability to minimize the use of the factors of production and to explore them to maximum advantage. It is the process of the activities of the entrepreneur who wants to start a new business. So, entrepreneurs tend to be more creative and innovative than the average person. They should be self- confident, thrive in a challenging environment and have a tremendous need to be in control. They are the risk takers; welcome responsibility and willing to take decision Marwaha et al. (2006). Fostering entrepreneurship has become a topic of the highest priority. In times of increasing concern about technological advancement and strong international competition, entrepreneurial activities are regarded as a driving force for innovation (Drucker, 1999).
The numbers of studies were conducted to find out entrepreneurial attitude orientation (EAO) among the students but the EAO variable is not fit for students. So, after extensive literature review we explore a new variable which we think is best to describe the entrepreneurial attitude among the students. Robinson et al. (1991) also concluded that EAO among students does not generalize into real world. The attitude of the students is derived by number of factors. So we use the word entrepreneurial drive to study the attitude of the students.
Entrepreneurial drive (ED) is an individual's perception of the desirability and feasibility to proactively pursue opportunities and creatively respond to challenges, tasks, needs, and obstacles in innovative ways. Individuals with high levels of entrepreneurial drive are generally high achievers, possess high self efficacy, and have a preference for innovative solutions. The entrepreneurial drive is the combination of qualities, skills and attitudes (Florin, 2007).
Although the numbers of studies were conducted to predict the future entrepreneurial intentions but the work of Robinson et al. (1991) was one of the first to incorporate an attitudinal scale to predict entrepreneurial activity. An advantage of using an attitudinal approach is that it can be more domain-specific, which increases the correlation with actual behavior and reduces unexplained variability. Attitudes tend to change across time and situations through an interactive process with the environment, and once a person's attitude has been measured, a prediction can be made about the person's future actions (Carlson, 1985). Based on prior research on personality, demographics and entrepreneurship, and Carlson's attitude consistency model, Robinson et al. (1991) developed the entrepreneurial attitudes orientation (EAO) model to predict entrepreneurial activity. The subscales of the EAO measure individuals' attitudes across four constructs:
(1) Achievement in business (referring to the results of starting and growing a business venture);
(2) Innovation in business (using innovative methods in business activities);
(3) Perceived personal control of business outcomes (individual's control and influence on his/her business); and
(4) Perceived self-esteem in business (self-confidence and perceived competency in business affairs).
The most of the studies on entrepreneurial intentions tended to focus on several perspectives, using demographics, personality characteristics or traits. The entrepreneurial process includes an examination of the role of behavioral and situational factors (Gartner, 1985) and demographic variables (Davidsson, 1995) on the intentions to start a new business venture. Interestingly, these past personality theories frequently lose its effectiveness in measuring the qualities, skills, attitudes and demographic variables that enhance the ability to predict future entrepreneurial drive. These variables help to foster the entrepreneurial drive among the individuals who wants to start the business. Current business students are future business leaders, and it is important to continually study and refine their entrepreneurial profile to explore about their entrepreneurial drive. So, we conducted a study to examine the effect of entrepreneurial drive on the attitude of the students at Lovely Professional University, Punjab.
Review of Literature
The numbers of studies are conducted to find out the entrepreneurial intention among the students. But all these studies mainly focused on the demographic factors to find out entrepreneurial orientation among students. But interestingly the result shows no significant relationship between these two. So, in order to explore about the entrepreneurial attitude of the students we conducted a research. The purpose of our study is to examine the entrepreneurial drive of business students at Lovely Professional University and the affect of demographic variables on their attitudes. Entrepreneurial drive is important for identifying individuals who have the potential to become successful entrepreneurs, and for discriminating between owner-managers operating in mature and early stages of venture creation and growth. Florin et al (2007) identifies attitudinal dimensions of entrepreneurial drive (ED), proposes a model, and develops and tests an instrument to measure it. Results show that students differentiate among five attitudes that have been found to promote entrepreneurial behavior in prior research, namely, preference for innovation, nonconformity, proactive disposition, self-efficacy, and achievement motivation. Getley's (1979) powerful call, directed mostly toward corporate trainers, has had minor impact outside practitioner journals that continue to use this concept in a variety of ways. However, the three dimensions proposed as drivers of entrepreneurial behavior-qualities, skills, and attitudes-have received considerable attention in entrepreneurship research as independent constructs.
Personality and attitudes are closely linked when applied to the same goal: the prediction of behavior (Hatten & Ruhland, 1995). Given the failure of personality research in identifying an entrepreneurial personality and our emphasis on developing entrepreneurial minds, the attitudinal approach to the study of entrepreneurial drive provides the focus we need. Although the numbers of studies were conducted to predict the future entrepreneurial intentions but the work of Robinson et al. (1991) was one of the first to incorporate an attitudinal scale to predict entrepreneurial activity. An advantage of using an attitudinal approach is that it can be more domain-specific, which increases the correlation with actual behavior and reduces unexplained variability. Attitudes tend to change across time and situations through an interactive process with the environment, and once a person's attitude has been measured, a prediction can be made about the person's future actions (Carlson, 1985).
The entrepreneurial intentions among an individual can be derived from the number of factors such as risk taking propensity, self-efficacy, Preference for innovation, Achievement Motivation, Non-Conformity and Pro- active Disposition. The tripartite attitude model suggests ways of initiating change by influencing thoughts, feelings, and behavioral intentions (Rosenberg, 1960) with regard to entrepreneurship and related attitudes such as innovation, achievement, self-esteem, and personal control (Robinson et al., 1991).
Achievement motivators are the real factors to boost up the performance of an individual. An individual gets motivated to perform much better after achieving the pre-set standards. The achievement in business refers to the concrete results which are mainly associated with the establishment and growth of a new business project. The motivational factors are intrinsic in nature which purely depends upon the attitude of a person. The achievement motivation depends upon the attitude model of entrepreneurship which is tested empirically by Robinson et al, (1991). It was found out that there is significant difference between the drive of entrepreneur and non-entrepreneur. The multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was run to test whether entrepreneurs had higher attitude subscale values than non-entrepreneurs. Entrepreneur characteristics inherent in someone may be linked with the attitude to establish a business as presented by researchers such as McClelland (1961) (need for achievement), Brockhous (1982) (attitude to take self internal control and risk), Schere (1982) (compromising with uncertainty), Greenberger and Sexton (1998) (need for personal control). However there are also background factors, which relate to individual personality such as previous employment (Ronstadts, 1985), family background (Matthews & Moser, 1996), gender (Buttner & Rosen, (1989), education (Storey, 1982) and ethnicity (Aldrich, 1980) which is also linked to the attitude to establish a business.
Innovation in business is related to perceiving and acting upon business activities in new and unique ways. Innovation follows the concept originally set out by Joseph Schumpeter (1934) in conjunction with economic development as the primary function of entrepreneurship. He distinguished between managers who merely operate an established business and the entrepreneur who innovates. Empirically, major consequences of entrepreneurship are innovativeness and growth (Schumpeter, 1934). Many scholars have mistakenly cited India's religion as an impediment to innovativeness and growth (Weber, 1905). They believe the caste system in India inhibits social mobility and Hindu spiritualism inhibits pursuit of material growth (Anstey, 1952; Morris, 1967). Many empirical studies also indicated a generally low level of innovativeness amongst both men and women entrepreneurs; exemplified by the fact that most entrepreneurs in India were less likely to develop new products or new production methods (Shivani et al, 2006 as cited in Gupta, 2008).
Perceived self-esteem in business pertaining to the self-confidence and perceived competency of an individual in conjunction with his or her business affairs (Robinson et al. 1991). Sharif et al (2009) explores that there is significant overall difference between entrepreneur undergraduates and non-entrepreneur undergraduates for self-esteem subscale (F1 = 97.817, p <0.05). Alain et al (2006) tried to explain the relationship between entrepreneurship programs and individual characteristics, such as need for achievement and locus of control (Hansemark, 1998) or the perception of self-efficacy (Ehrlich et al., 2000). They found that entrepreneurship education had a positive impact, enhancing these characteristics and the likelihood of entrepreneurial action at some point in the future.
The core concept in social-cognitive theory is self-efficacy, defined as task-specific self-confidence (Bandura, 1997). Self-efficacy reflects not only past experience and attainment but, more important, the conclusion one draws about one's capacity for performance attainment from these past experiences. Self-efficacy indicates feelings of capability, so it is a useful indicator of action in the entrepreneurship setting in which outcomes are highly uncertain. Those individuals who are confident that they have the requisite entrepreneurship capabilities (in terms of risk-taking and business expansion) are more likely to choose an entrepreneurship career (C. C. Chen, Greene, & Crick, 1998 as cited in Baum et al 2004). A research conducted by Baum et al. ( 2004) to measure the self-efficacy of entrepreneur-CEO in 1993 with two 8-point self-assessment scale questions. The most important finding of this study is that the specific component variables of entrepreneurs' traits, skill, and motivation categories are significant direct or indirect predictors of venture growth. The positive effects for goals and self-efficacy are consistent with the results of hundreds of performance studies. Passion and tenacity had no direct effect on venture performance suggests that the weak results of previous studies of entrepreneurial traits may not have been caused by studying the wrong traits but by the fact that the traits have indirect rather than direct effects. Harris et al. (2008) explored that majority of student possessed entrepreneurial attitudes. Specifically male students scored higher on both personal control and innovation and students with family business experience had more developed entrepreneurial attitudes. Rotter's (1996) theories of control emphasizes on individual's perception of the outcomes of events as being either within or beyond their control and understanding some studies have disputed findings different entrepreneurs from non-entrepreneurs solely on the basis of locus of control. Research has demonstrated that perception of control act in concert with other attitudes and in such combination do serve to differentiate entrepreneurs (Solymossy, 1998). A research conducted by Wyk et al. (2002) explored that personal control sub-scale of sales representative scored higher than administrative personnel & engineers while administrative personnel showed higher personal control than engineers.