The role of institutional support structure in shaping social entrepreneurial intention

Abstract

Objective: The present study aims to investigate the role of institutional support structure in shaping intention to form a social business using the model of Mair and Noboa (2006).

Research Design & Methods: This study utilized Structural Equation Modelling with a sample of 516 students in Vietnam to examine the hypotheses.

Findings: The finding shows that institutional support structure is positively associated with empathy, social entrepreneurial self-efficacy and perceived social support. In addition, institutional support structure also increases social entrepreneurial intention through enhancing empathy, social entrepreneurial self-efficacy and perceived social support.

Implications & Recommendations: Policymakers need to develop a complete legal framework, and policies to support potential social entrepreneurs to start a business such as tax support, competitiveness, and loans... to help increase self-efficacy, empathy and perceived social support for those who wish to become social entrepreneurs.

Contribution & Value Added: This study highlight the interesting role of institutional support structure in increasing intention to form a social business. The results of this study contribute to the social entrepreneurship literature in understanding factors that lead to social entrepreneurial intention.

Keywords

institutional support structure, social entrepreneurial intention, empathy, social entrepreneurial self-efficacy, perceived social support, moral obligation

Author Biography

Le Thi Loan

PhD student in Business and Management (2020, National Economics University, Vietnam). Her research interests include entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship and green consumption.

References

1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
2. Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665-683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x
3. Aldrich, H.E., & Fiol, C.M. (1994). Fools Rush in? The Institutional Context of Industry Creation. The Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 645-670. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-48543-8_5
4. Altinay, L., Madanoglu, M., Daniele, R., & Lashley, C. (2012). The influence of family tradition and psychological traits on entrepreneurial intention. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(2), 489-499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.07.007
5. Birley, S. (1985). The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(1), 107-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(85)90010-2
6. Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit. Sage Publications.
7. Bui Ngoc Tuan, A., & Pham, M. (2022). The role of mindfulness and perceived social support in promoting students’ social entrepreneurial intention. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 10(1), 145-160. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2022.100110
8. Canestrino, R., Ćwiklicki, M., Magliocca, P., & Pawełek, B. (2020). Understanding social entrepreneurship: A cultural perspective in business research. Journal of Business Research, 110, 132-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.01.006
9. Decety, J., & Jackson, P.L. (2004). The functional architecture of human empathy. Behavioural and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 3(2), 71-100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534582304267187.
10. Doanh, D.C., & Bernat, T. (2019). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and intention among vietnamese students: a meta-analytic path analysis based on the theory of planned behavior. Procedia Computer Science, 159, 2447-2460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.420
11. Ertz, M., Karakas, F., & Sarigöllü, E. (2016). Exploring pro-environmental behaviors of consumers: An analysis of contextual factors, attitude, and behaviors. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 3971-3980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.06.010
12. Farashah, A.D. (2015). The effects of demographic, cognitive and institutional factors on development of entrepreneurial intention: Toward a socio-cognitive model of entrepreneurial career. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 13(4), 452-476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-015- 0144-x
13. Fayolle, A., & Liñán, F. (2014). The future of research on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Research, 67(5), 663-666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.11.024
14. Gawell, M. (2012). Social Entrepreneurship: Action Grounded in Needs, Opportunities and/or Perceived Necessities?. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 24(4), 1071-1090. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-012-9301-1
15. GEM - Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (2019). Entrepreneurial framework conditions. Retrieved September 15, 2019 from https://www.gemconsortium.org/data.
16. Gerbing, D.W., & Anderson, J.C. (1988). An Updated Paradigm for Scale Development Incorporating Unidimensionality and Its Assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(2), 186. doi:10.2307/3172650.
17. Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., & Fayolle, A. (2014). Entrepreneurial activity and regional competitiveness: evidence from European entrepreneurial universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(1), 105-131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-014-9377-4
18. Haines, R., Street, M.D., & Haines, D. (2008). The influence of perceived importance of an ethical issue on moral judgment, moral obligation, and moral intent. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(2), 387-399. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9502-5
19. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: International version. Pearson Education.
20. Hockerts, K.(2015). The Social Entrepreneurial Antecedents Scale (SEAS): A Validation Study. Social Enterprise Journal, 11(3), 260-280. https://doi.org/10.1108/SEJ-05-2014-0026
21. Hockerts, K.(2017). Determinants of social entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(1), 105-130. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12171
22. Honig, B., & Davidsson, P. (2000). The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1, B1-B6. doi:10.5465/apbpp.2000.5438611
23. Kedmenec, I., & Strašek, S. (2017). Are some cultures more favourable for social entrepreneurship than others?. Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 30(1), 1461-1476. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2017.1355251
24. Lacap, J.P.G., Mulyaningsih, H.D., & Ramadani, V.(2018). The mediating effects of social entrepreneurial antecedents on the relationship between prior experience and social entrepreneurial intent: The case of Filipino and Indonesian university students. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 9(3), 329-346. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-03-2018-0028
25. Liang, C., Chang, C.-C., Liang, C.-T., & Liu, Y.-C. (2017). Imagining future success: Imaginative capacity on the perceived performance of potential agrisocio entrepreneurs. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 23, 161-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.12.007
26. Liñán, F., & Chen, Y.W. (2009). Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593-617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00318.x
27. Mair, J., & Noboa, E. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: How intentions to create a social venture are formed. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230625655_8
28. Mustafa, M.J., Hernandez, E., Mahon, C., & Chee, L.K. (2016). Entrepreneurial intentions of university students in an emerging economy. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 8(2), 162-179. https://doi.org/10.1108/jeee-10-2015-0058
29. Nicholls, A. (2010). The Legitimacy of Social Entrepreneurship: Reflexive Isomorphism in a Pre-Paradigmatic Field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 611-633. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00397.x
30. North, D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press.
31. Nowiński, W., Haddoud, M., Wach, K., & Schaefer, R. (2020). Perceived public support and entrepreneurship attitudes: A little reciprocity can go a long way! Journal of Vocational Behavior, 121, 103474. https://doi.org /10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103474
32. Preacher, K.J., & Hayes, A.F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. doi:10.3758/brm.40.3.879
33. Reynolds, R.W., Rayner, N.A., Smith, T.M., Stokes, D.C., & Wang, W. (2002). An Improved In Situ and Satellite SST Analysis for Climate. Journal of Climate, 15(13), 1609-1625. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015<1609:AIISAS>2.0.CO;2
34. Shapero, A., & Sokol, L. (1982). The Social Dimensions of Entrepreneurship. In C.A. Kent, D.L. Sexton, & K.H. Vesper (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship (pp. 72-90). Prentice-Hall.
35. Sobel, M.E. (1986). Some New Results on Indirect Effects and Their Standard Errors in Covariance Structure Models. Sociological Methodology, 16, 159. https://doi.org/10.2307/270922
36. Sousa-Filho, J.M. de, Matos, S., da Silva Trajano, S., & de Souza Lessa, B. (2020). Determinants of social entrepreneurial intentions in a developing country context. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 14, e00207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2020.e00207
37. Wach, K., & Bilan, S. (2021). Public support and administration barriers towards entrepreneurial intentions of students in Poland. Administratie si Management Public, 36(1), 67-80. https://doi.org/10.24818/amp/2021.36-04
38. Wach, K., & Bilan, S. (2022). Creativity of students in favour of their entrepreneurial intentions: Empirical evidence from Poland. Creativity Studies, 15(2).
39. Zaremohzzabieh, Z., Ahrari, S., Krauss, S.E., Samah, A.A., Meng, L.K., & Ariffin, Z. (2019). Predicting social entrepreneurial intention: A meta-analytic path analysis based on the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business Research, 96, 264-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.030