International Journal of Management and Applied Science, ISSN: 2394-7926 Volume-3, Issue-12, Dec.

-2017
http://iraj.in
FACTORS INFLUENCING SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURIAL
INTENTION: A THEORETICAL MODEL
ANH T.P. TRAN

University of Koblenz-Landau
E-mail: tran@uni-koblenz.de

Abstract - Entrepreneurial intention plays a major role in entrepreneurship academia and practice. The already existing
literature on entrepreneurial intention demonstrates a high level of theoretical as well as empirical diversity. However,
intentions of entrepreneurs in the social area of venture creation are still understudied. It is surprising because social
entrepreneurship is an emerging field with a growing importance. Seeking to fill the gap in the social entrepreneurial
intention literature, this paper proposes a model of social entrepreneurial intention based on the Social Cognitive Career
Theory with two main factors influencing entrepreneurial intention namely self-efficacy and outcome expectation.
Moreover, motives, goals, and plans do not arise from empty nothingness. However, they are shaped by interacting with the
environment. Hence, situation factors including entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurship experience, extracurricular
entrepreneurship activity, role model as well as perceived support are considered as the antecedents of social entrepreneurial
intention.

Keywords - Entrepreneurial intention, social cognitive career theory, social entrepreneurial intention, social
entrepreneurship.

I. INTRODUCTION answer, researchers study about intentions of

The world today is plagued by a variety of problems
such as climate change, environmental pollution,
natural disasters, diseases, poverty and so forth. It
raises a question for the whole community that, what
and how should we do to deal with all of such
confronted hazards. Fortunately, social
entrepreneurship can be the best healer for our society
as it ‘‘creates innovative solutions to immediate
social problems and mobilizes the ideas, capacities,
resources, and social arrangements required for
sustainable social transformations” [1]: p.262. Social
entrepreneurship emphasizes on problem-solving and
social innovation. Activities in the context of social
entrepreneurship blur the traditional boundaries
between the public, private and non-profit sector.
They focus on the hybrid model of for-profit and non-
profit activities [2]: p.1. Social entrepreneurship
borrows methods from the world of business (hybrid)
in order to address a certain social problem and
possibly, in the end, can make money in the process.
It means that social entrepreneurs “use the principles
of enterprise – business principles and even
capitalism itself – to create social change by
establishing and managing a venture” [3]: p.10.
However, notably social entrepreneurship aims to
create social value and to address social issues by
innovative solutions. It is the explicit and central
point of SE and the distinction from SE to business
entrepreneurship [4].
However, “why some people become entrepreneurs
while others do not’’ and “whether entrepreneurs are
made or born’’ [5]. These questions have been
appealed researchers in many decades. And it is still
the concerning topic right now. To figure out the
individuals to become entrepreneurs. It can be
explained since intention may still be the best single
predictor of behavior, including entrepreneurial
behavior [6]-[9]. The entrepreneurial intention is also
considered as a mental process that orients and directs
individuals' planning as well as implementing
business plans [10]. In the context of social
entrepreneurship, there is a lack of studies in
intentions of becoming a social entrepreneur. Here,
just some publications can be listed: Mair & Noboa,
2003 [11]; Nga & Shamuganathan, 2010 [12], Ernst,
2011 [13]; İrengün & Arıkboğa, 2015 [14].
Therefore, this paper pursues to fill in the gap by
identifying factors which influence social
entrepreneurial intention as well as proposing a
conceptual model of social entrepreneurial intention
formation.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
A. Definition of Key Terms
Social entrepreneurship (SE): “SE is about finding
new and better ways to create and sustain social
value” [15]. Robinson adds, that SE is “…a process,
that includes: the identification of a specific social
problem and a specific solution (or a set of solutions)
to address it; the evaluation of the social impact, the
business model and the sustainability of the venture;
and the creation of a social mission-oriented for profit
or a business-oriented non-profit entity that pursues
the double (or triple) bottom line” [16]. Remarkably,
the explicit and central point of SE and the distinction
from SE to other forms of entrepreneurship is to
create social value or to address social issues by
innovative solutions [4], [15]. Social entrepreneurial
intention (EI-SE): Thompson refers entrepreneurial

Factors Influencing Social Entrepreneurial Intention: A Theoretical Model

38
International Journal of Management and Applied Science, ISSN: 2394-7926
http://iraj.in
intention as “a self-acknowledged conviction by a
person that they intend to set up a new business
venture and consciously plan to do so at some point
in the future” [17]: p676. More simply, an
entrepreneurial intention is stated as an individual’s
desire and determination to engage in new venture
creation [18]. Similarly, in the context of social
entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurial intention (EI-
SE) can be understood as a belief, desire, and
determination of a person to set up a new social
enterprise.
Social entrepreneurial self-efficacy (SE-SE):
Entrepreneurial self-efficacy is described as people’s
degree of belief or confidence in their abilities to start
a new business successfully [19]. Following this idea
and applying it in social entrepreneurship context, we
define social entrepreneurial self-efficacy (SE-SE) as
the dynamic set of beliefs about one’s capacity to
start a new social venture and succeed in carrying it
out.
Social entrepreneurial outcome expectations (OE-
SE): according to Bandura, outcome expectations
involve the imagined consequences of performing
particular behaviors ‘‘If I do this, what will happen?’’
[20]. Therefore, in social entrepreneurship field, we
can understand that social entrepreneurial outcome
expectation (OE-SE) is ones’ belief about the
consequences they can achieve if they are social
entrepreneurs.
B. Review of Intentional studies in Social
Entrepreneurship
Studies of social entrepreneurial intention have not
yet fully been undertaken. The following is some
typical studies in social entrepreneurship intentions:
Mair & Noboa, 2003 [11]: is the first intention model
for social entrepreneurship. Based on Theory of
Planned Behaviour-TPB [6] and the model of
Entrepreneurial Event of Shapero-SEE [46], Mair &
Noboa follow the idea that social entrepreneurial
intention is shaped by the perceived desirability and
perceived feasibility of forming a social enterprise.
However, they extend the classical model TPB by
proposing antecedents for these two main dependent
constructs. They suggest perceived feasibility is
influenced by self-efficacy and social support.
Similarly, empathy and moral judgment positively
influence perceived desirability. Mair & Noboa seem
to be initiatives for the approach of building a social
entrepreneurial intention model based on previously
tested models taken from business entrepreneurship
research.
Nga & Shamuganathan, 2010 [12]: this study aims to
explore the relationship between the Big Five
personality factors (agreeableness, conscientiousness,
extraversion, neuroticism & openness) and social
entrepreneurial intention. Nevertheless, in the end,
Factors Influencing Social Entrepreneurial Intention: A Theoretical Model
39
Volume-3, Issue-12, Dec.-2017
they refer to other aspects such as social vision,
sustainability, social networks innovation and
financial returns instead of intentions. So it can say
that this work cannot prove any specific effects on
social entrepreneurial intentions.
Ernst, 2011 [13]: is a Ph.D. thesis with a desire to
formulate a well-organized social entrepreneurial
intention model. He again adopts the classical model
of the TPB [6] with a belief, that three variables
including attitude towards a behavior, perceived
control and subjective norms in case of becoming a
social entrepreneur are positively significant with
social entrepreneurial intentions. In addition, he
extends the model with suggesting antecedents of
these TPB constructs which are listed below: 1) social
entrepreneurial personality (e.g. the traits of risk-
taking propensity, innovativeness, need for
achievement, need for independence, pro-activeness;
and the pro-social personality including the
dimensions of empathy and social responsibility); 2)
social entrepreneurial human capital (e.g. perceived
social entrepreneurial knowledge/experience and
perceived social entrepreneurial skills); and 3) social
entrepreneurial social capital (e.g. perceived
knowledge of institutions, perceived network, and
perceived support).
İrengün & Arıkboğa, 2015 [14]: This study pursues
testing the research proposed by Nga &
Shamuganathan [12] with data collected from
students of Business Administration in Istanbul. So it
has the same problem with Nga & Shamuganathan
that, it does not really have contributions to the
research field of social entrepreneurial intentions.
As mentioned above, there are just four typical
studies focusing on finding what factors influencing
on an intention of someone to be a social
entrepreneur. Nonetheless, the work of neither Nga &
Shamuganathan nor İrengün & Arıkboğa does not
have any contributions to entrepreneurial intention
literature because, these authors mentioned about
relationships between the Five Big Personalities and
social vision, sustainability, social networks
innovation and financial returns, instead of intentions.
The two others [11] & [13] formulate their models
based on the Theory of Planned Behavior-TPB [6].
According to this theory, the intention to become a
social entrepreneur is decided by an individual’s
perceived feasibility and desirability. It means that
research about intention in the context of social
entrepreneurship is still in an infancy. In other words,
it calls for more research in this field.
III. PROPOSAL HYPOTHESES AND
FRAMEWORK MODEL
A. Hypotheses Based on the Classical SCCT
According to a review of studies about social
entrepreneurial intention, surprisingly no research
International Journal of Management and Applied Science, ISSN: 2394-7926
http://iraj.in
which uses the Social Cognitive Career Theory-
SCCT [22] as a theoretical background. It is a
missing in the social entrepreneurship literature as
SCCT is recently suggested as an inclusive
framework of factors affecting entrepreneurial
intentions [18]. Especially, the usefulness of the
SCCT model in predicting individual’s intention to
become an entrepreneur was supportive by the
empirical research of Segal [21].
The Social Cognitive Career Theory – SCCT [22] is
based on the general social cognitive theory of
Bandura [20]. The SCCT is a vocational psychology
theory, which has been used extensively to explain a
decision-making behavior related to a career of
someone. The theory emphasizes that one’s career
development is influenced by cognitive-person
factors (e.g. self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and
goals/intent). Here, goals are specified in terms of
one’s determination to engage in a specific behavior.
Self-efficacy is ‘‘people’s judgments of their
capabilities to organize and execute courses of
actions required to attain designated types of
performance’’ (‘‘I know I can do it’’) [20]: p.391.
And outcome expectation is ones’ belief about the
consequences or effects of performing particular
behaviors (‘‘If I do it, what will happen’’). So the
SCCT theory argues that, individuals’ determination
or intention to take an action in a given domain based
on their judgments of capabilities per se to organize
and execute courses of these actions (self-efficacy) as
well as their probable and imagined consequences of
performing particular behaviors (outcome
expectation) [20], [22].
Particularly, in case of social entrepreneurship,
establishing a new social venture is not for
entertainment, but rather is a career-related decision
in accordance with the magnitude of problems faced
by the whole nations which need sympathetic and
realistic solutions [23]. Thus, together with this
unique context, understanding the individual, socio-
cognitive as well as environmental characteristics
influencing on such a challenging career decision is
really critical. People are more likely to engage
themselves in social businesses if they see their
capacities to do it successfully as well as they have
strong beliefs in outcomes they can get afterward.
Moreover, it is suggested that there is a relationship
between self-efficacy and outcome-expectations.
Self-efficacy is seen as the ‘’predominant casual
factor’’ as well as the ‘’partial determinant’’ of
outcome-expectation (Lent et al., 1994, p.84).
Outcomes people expect are largely influenced by
their judgments of what they can accomplish. “In
most social, intellectual, and physical pursuits, those
who judge themselves highly efficacious will expect
favorable outcomes, whereas those who expect poor
performances of themselves will conjure up negative
outcomes” (Bandura, 1997, p.24). The averagely
Factors Influencing Social Entrepreneurial Intention: A Theoretical Model
40
Volume-3, Issue-12, Dec.-2017
weighted correlation of .49 between self-efficacy and
outcome expectations was found in an early meta-
analysis in 1994 by Lent and his co-authors (Lent et
al., 1994). The agreement with this interrelation has
been confirmed by a lot of empirical research later
on, for instances Fouad & Smith (1996); Segal et al
(2002); Lent et al (2008); Lent et al (2015) etc.
Typically, the work of Segal et al (2002)
demonstrates the positively correlated between
outcome-expectation and self-efficacy with Pearson
correlation coefficient of 0.392, t-statistic of 4.533
(p<.001). It means that higher self-efficacy lead to
higher outcome expectation to be self-employed.
For that reason, three main following hypotheses are
proposed:
H1: Social entrepreneurial self-efficacy (Self) has a
positive effect on social entrepreneurial intention (Ei)
H2: Social entrepreneurial outcome expectation (OE)
has a positive effect on social entrepreneurial
intention (Ei)
H3: (Self) has a positive effect on OE
B. Hypotheses Based on Extending the SCCT
In the original SCCT, Lent et al. referred that,
“sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations”
are one part of the model. Self-efficacy and outcome
expectations are influenced by environmental factors.
Goals and plans do not grow from empty nothingness
[24]. Otherwise, they are shaped by interacting with
the environment as well as persons themselves.
Additionally, there are numerous meta- analysis
studies which also support for that argument [25]-
[28]. These work focus more specifically on testing
the relationships between entrepreneurship intention
and some narrower and more concrete variables like
entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurship
experience, extracurricular entrepreneurship activity,
role model, perceived support. Thus, this paper will
limit itself with paying attention to such antecedents.
Entrepreneurship education (Ed)
Education and entrepreneurial training are really
important in promoting entrepreneurial activities.
Especially, it has been considered as one of the
important factors affecting entrepreneurial intention.
Because formal education is the basis for knowledge
and skills, in the sense of a passage to
entrepreneurship [29], [30]. It develops and fosters
the entrepreneurial process, enhances entrepreneurial
judgments as well as provides all tools needed for
starting up new ventures [31]. People are less likely
to be entrepreneurs if they are with limited education
[32]. Contrarily, they would be more motivated to do
something or able to consider a career or self-
employment if they feel they have relevant skills
[33]. There are a lot of statistical studies prove for
this argument. For example, Kolvereid & Moen [34]
find out that, students with a major in
International Journal of Management and Applied Science, ISSN: 2394-7926
http://iraj.in
entrepreneurship have higher intentions to initiate
new businesses. Zhao et al [26] also explore that,
perceptions of formal learning from entrepreneurship-
related courses as well as practices in
entrepreneurship education have a positive
relationship with entrepreneurial intention through a
mediation of entrepreneurial self-efficacy. In
addition, Newbold .K [35] recently shows the result
in his work that, students after participate in
entrepreneurship education course scored higher in
entrepreneurial self-efficacy, entrepreneurial outcome
expectancy, and entrepreneurial intention. Therefore,
here we expect that all of these findings can be
applied in the context of social entrepreneurship as
well. We propose:
H4a: Ed has a positive effect on Self
H4b: Ed has a positive effect on OE
H4c: Ed effects Ei positively and indirectly through
Self
H4d: Ed effects Ei positively and indirectly through
OE
Entrepreneurship experience (Ex)
Dyke et al. [36] stated that people make decisions and
perform businesses based on their past business
experiences. They start doing businesses usually
related to things they did before [37]. Specifically,
entrepreneurship is a process consisting of identifying
opportunity, collecting resources, organizing them
and adapting strategies so that opportunity can be
exploited [38]. The experiences, knowledge and skills
people obtained through previous jobs will likely
improve both competencies and expected returns for
exploiting the opportunities [39] Moreover, Bill
Drayton [40] in his interview with Meehan said that
entrepreneurial experiences are the first stepping
stone for social entrepreneurship because it can
strengthen particular cognitive abilities concerning
new ventures. Hereby, we expect:
H5a: Ex has a positive effect on Self
H5b: Ex has a positive effect on OE
H5c: Ex effects Ei positively and indirectly through
Self
H5d: Ex effects Ei positively and indirectly through
OE
Extra-curricular entrepreneurship activity (Ea)
Extra-curricular entrepreneurship activities (Ea) are
described here as all those activities offered inside
and outside of universities with regard to
entrepreneurship [41]. They include clubs,
confraternities, associations, and campus events as
well. These activities refer to business plan/business
idea contests, entrepreneurship clubs,
entrepreneurship forums and entrepreneurship
conferences etc. They contribute a significant
function to develop students’ entrepreneurial
competencies, interests, passions; and to provide
Factors Influencing Social Entrepreneurial Intention: A Theoretical Model
41
Volume-3, Issue-12, Dec.-2017
practical insights into entrepreneurship that curricular
education sometimes cannot or does not yet offer
[42]. Therefore, these activities gently direct students
to be more engagement in entrepreneurship. Recently,
some empirical studies supported for this argument.
Researchers find out that, students are more confident
in their capacities to do business, more positive in
their expectation of outcomes as well as more likely
to start their own businesses if they involve
themselves more in extracurricular entrepreneurship
activities ([28], [43]-[45]). So, here in the context of
social entrepreneurship, we propose:
H6a: Ea has a positive effect on Self
H6b: Ea has a positive effect on OE
H6c: Ea effects Ei positively and indirectly through
Self
H6d: Ea effects Ei positively and indirectly through
OE
Role model (Rm)
Literature suggests that role models play an important
role in the decision to start a business [46]-[47].
Especially, Alan Carsrud and his colleagues presume
that role models can change individuals’ critical
attitudes such as self-efficacy perceptions, in turn, it
can promote entrepreneurial thinking [48]. Delmar’s
work adds that: the greater similarities the observers
assume from the role models, the more persuasive
successes and failures they get [49]. Role models are
expected to enhance intentions. Watching others
perform a task may gain a positive and confident
attitude towards the behavior, especially if there are
similarities between the observer and the observed
person [29]. Thus, we suggest:
H7a: Rm has a positive effect on Self
H7b: Rm has a positive effect on OE
H7c: Rm effects Ei positively and indirectly through
Self
H7d: Rm effects Ei positively and indirectly through
OE
Perceived support (Ps)
Perceived support (Ps) is understood as the expected
encouragement and assistance of individual's close
surroundings to become a social entrepreneur. The
close environment’s support leads people to believe
that, they have adequate and more feasible abilities
for an entrepreneurial career [50]. Generally,
entrepreneurship is facilitated when information
comes from a wide range of trustworthy personal
contacts in a personal network [51]. Especially, in the
beginning of a venture, people use networks to
exchange ideas and advice, generate new ideas,
pursue visions and collect resources, rather than
decrease uncertainty as in case of general
management [52]. Therefore, the optimism or
pessimism of the social entrepreneur’s network often
influences the idea development as well as the
International Journal of Management and Applied Science, ISSN: 2394-7926
http://iraj.in
solution discussions. Here, important factors are not
only direct contacts, but also numerous potential
linkages to lawyers, bankers, venture capitalists,
accountants, technical consultant, academics,
customers, suppliers, or trade associations [48]. The
perceived support from the currently existent business
opportunities (e.g., access to capital, availability of
business information) orients people to be more likely
to make the decision of starting a new business. To
conclude, we suppose that perceived support has a
significant impact towards entrepreneurship as a
career choice. So we propose:
H8a: Ps has a positive effect on Self
H8b: Ps has a positive effect on OE
H8c: Ps effects Ei positively and indirectly through
Self
H8d: Ps effects Ei positively and indirectly through
OE
C. Framework Model
As elaborated beyond, the model of social
entrepreneurial intention formation is mainly
constructed by adapting and extending the SCCT
theory. Remarkably, this model will take over the
idea that social entrepreneurial intentions are
influenced by two main cognitive constructs named
social entrepreneurial self-efficacy and social
entrepreneurial outcome expectation. Additionally,
antecedents such as entrepreneurship education,
entrepreneurship experience, extracurricular
entrepreneurship activity, role model and perceived
support are also taken into account in this model. The
following figure will formalize all of the hypotheses
which are discussed above into a framework model
for this work.
Fig. 1 represents a model of Social Entrepreneurial Intention
formation
CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION
Social entrepreneurship was recently considered as a
career appealing a lot of people when all nations over
the world are facing diversities of social problems
such as poverty, disease, violence, disabilities and so
on. Thus, based on the idea that social
entrepreneurship is a career, this paper has proposed
the Social Cognitive Career Theory as the main
theory for understanding about social
Factors Influencing Social Entrepreneurial Intention: A Theoretical Model
42
Volume-3, Issue-12, Dec.-2017
entrepreneurship intention together with taking
consideration of linkages between their cognitive
constructs (i.e., social entrepreneurial self-efficacy,
social entrepreneurial outcome expectation and social
entrepreneurial intention) with situational factors. The
model illustrates that entrepreneurship education,
entrepreneurship experience, extracurricular
entrepreneurship activity, role model and perceived
support will influence intention to become a social
entrepreneur in two ways. In one hand, they can have
direct effects on the intention. In another hand, they
influence self-efficacy and outcome expectation, then
turn to impact a person’s intention of becoming a
social entrepreneur.
This framework has important implications for theory
and practice. In theory, it is the first model offering
the SCCT as the background of formation for social
entrepreneurial intentions. The model itself
contributes a distinct perspective of social
entrepreneurship as a career. It also uses and
combines many of the supported relationships
between antecedents and cognitive constructs found
in existing theoretical models of intention. In
practice, this framework provides a broad view of
factors that could contribute to the success of the
would-be a social entrepreneur. Based on that
suggested links, those people who work with
individuals pursuing to choose social
entrepreneurship as their career (e.g., policy makers,
professors, consultants) will have more tools and tips.
For instance, macro, micro policies; curriculums for
teaching and training; consultancy as well as support
community services with aiming to encourage people
to become social entrepreneurs will be more oriented
and more effective.
This paper result is expected to open a new approach
for the future social entrepreneurial intention research
however, it is just a model. As a consequence, its
validity should be tested.
REFERENCES
[1] Alvord, S. H., Brown L. D., & Letts C. W. (2004). Social
Entrepeneurship and Societal Transformation: An
Exploratory Study. The Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science.
[2] Johnson, S. (2003). Literature Review of Social
Entrepreneurship.
[3] Durieux, M. B., & Stebbins, R. A. (2010). Social
entrepreneurship for dummies. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.
[4] Martin, Roger L. & Osberg, Sally. (2007). Social
Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition. Stanford Social
Innovation review.
[5] Shane, S. (2000). Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of
Entrepreneurial Opportunities. Organization Science,
11(4), 448–469.
[6] Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
50(2), 179–211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
[7] Davidsson, P. (1995). Determinants of Entrepreneurial
Intentions. Paper prepared for the RENT IX Workshop,
Piacenza, Italy, No. 23-24.
International Journal of Management and Applied Science, ISSN: 2394-7926
http://iraj.in
[8] Krueger, N. F., & Reilly, Micheal D. & Carsrud, Alan L. [27]
(2000). Competing Models of Entrepreneurial Intentions.
Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 411–432.
[9] Shepherd, Dean A. & Krueger, Norris F. (2002). An
Intentions-Based Model of Entrepreneurial Teams' Social [28]
Cognition. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(2),
167–185. [29]
[10] Gupta, Vishal K. & Bhawe, Nachiket M. (2007). The
Influence of Proactive Personality and Stereotype Threat
on Women's Entrepreneurial Intentions. Journal of
Leadership and Organizational Studies, 13(4).
[11] Mair, Johanna & Noboa, Ernesto. (2003). Social [30]
Entrepreneurship: How Intentions to create a social
enterprise get formed. Working paper No 521.
[12] Nga, Joyce Koe Hwee & Shamuganathan, Gomathi.
(2010). The Influence of Personality Traits and [31]
Demographic Factors on Social Entrepreneurship Start Up
Intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, 259–282.
[13] Ernst, K. K. (2011). Heart over mind – An empirical
analysis of social entrepreneurial intention formation on
the basis of the theory of planned behavior (Doctoral). [32]
Schumpeter School of Business and Economics,
University of Wuppertal – Bergische Universität
Wuppertal. [33]
[14] İrengün, O., & Arıkboğa, Ş. (2015). The Effect of
Personality Traits on Social Entrepreneurship Intentions:
A Field Research. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 195, 1186–1195.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.172 [34]
[15] Peredo, A. M., & McLean, M. (2006). Social
entrepreneurship: A critical review of the concept. Journal
of World Business, 41(1), 56–65.
doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2005.10.007 [35]
[16] Mair, J., & Robinson, Jeffrey & Hockerts, Kai (Eds.).
(2006). Navigating Social and Institutional Barriers to
Markets: How SocialEntrepreneurs Identify and Evaluate [36]
Opportunities: Palgrave Macmillan.
[17] Thompson, Edmund R. (2009). Individual Entrepreneurial
Intent: Construct Clarification and Development of an
Internationally Reliable Metric. Entrepreneurship Theory [37]
and Practice, 33(3), 669-694. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-
6520.2009.00321.x
[18] Doan, Winkel, Jeff Vane and Kyle Ehrhardt. (2011). An
Organizing Framework for Entrepreneurial Intentions [38]
Research: An Integration and Extension of Dominant
Intent Based Models Using Social Cognitive Career [39]
Theory. USA: Small Bisiness Journal, 12.
[19] Campo, J. L. M. (2010). The propensity for
entrepreneurship: Psychological and Social Factors. The [40]
propensity for entrepreneurship: Psychological and social
factors, 6(10), 51–76.
[20] Bandura, A. (1986a). Social foundation of thought and [41]
action: A social cognitive theory: Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
[21] Segal G., e. a. (2002). Using Social Cognitive Career
Theory to Predict Self-Employment Goals. New England [42]
Journal of Entrepreneurship, 5(2).
[22] Lent, R. W., & Brown, Steven D. & Hackett, Gail. (1994).
Toward a Unifying Social Cognitive Theory of Career and
Academic Interest, Choice, and Performance. Journal of [43]
Vocational Behavior, 45, 79–122.
[23] http://www.youthkiawaaz.com/2012/03/social-
entrepreneurship-as-a-career-the-time-is-right/
[24] Huuskonen, P. J. (1997). Model-based explanation of plant [44]
knowledge (Doctoral thesis). Department of Electrical
Engineering, University of Oulu.
[25] Sesen, H. (2013). Personality or environment?: A
comprehensive study on the entrepreneurial intentions of [45]
university students. Education + Training, 55(7), 624–640.
doi:10.1108/ET-05-2012-0059
[26] Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., & Hills, G. E. (2005). The
mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of
entrepreneurial intentions. The Journal of applied [46]
psychology, 90(6), 1265–1272. doi:10.1037/0021-
9010.90.6.1265
Factors Influencing Social Entrepreneurial Intention: A Theoretical Model
43
Volume-3, Issue-12, Dec.-2017
Liñán, F. (2008). Skill and value perceptions: How do they
affect entrepreneurial intentions? International
Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 4(3), 257–272.
doi:10.1007/s11365-008-0093-0
Nguyen (2016). Nghiên cứu các nhân tố tác động đến tiềm
năng khởi sự kinh doanh của sinh viên đại học-PhD thesis
Cooper, S. Y., & Park, J. S. (2008). The Impact of
`Incubator' Organizations on Opportunity Recognition and
Technology Innovation in New, Entrepreneurial High-
technology Ventures. International Small Business
Journal, 26(1), 27–56. doi:10.1177/0266242607084658
Teixeira, Aurora A.C. (2010). Attitudes of higher
education students to new venture creation: The relevance
of competencies and contextual factors. Industry and
Higher Education, 24(5), 1-19.
McMullen, J. S. & Shepherd, D. A. (2006).
Entrepreneurial Action and the Role of Uncertainty in the
theory of the entrepreneur. Academy of Management
Review, 31(1), 132–152.
doi:10.5465/AMR.2006.19379628
Varghese, T., & Hassan, A. (2012). Youth’s
Entrepreneurial Attitudes in Oman. World Journal of
Social Sciences, 2(7), 302–325.
Blackford, Benjamin J.; Sebora, Terrence C.; & Whitehill,
Todd. (2009). The effects of Collegiate Entrepreneurship
Education on Post-Graduation Startup of New Ventures: A
first look. International Review of Entrepreneurship
7(3),1-26.
Kolvereid, Lars & Moen, Øystein. (1997).
Entrepreneurship among business graduates: does a major
in entrepreneurship make a difference?, Journal of
European Industrial Training, 21 (4), 154 - 160.
Newbold, Kenneth. (2014). Influence of Entrepreneurship
Education on Entrepreneurship Development in Post-
secondary Education. PhD thesis
Dyke, L. S., Fischer, E., & Reuber, A. R. (1992). An Inter-
Industry Examination of the Impact of Owner Experience
on Firm Performance. Journal of Small Business
Management, 30(4), 72-87.
Cooper, Arnold C. (1985). The role of incubator
organizations in the founding of growth-oriented firms.
Journal of Business Venture, 1(1). 75-86.
doi:10.1016/0883-9026(85)90008-4
Shane, S. (2003). A General Theory of Entrepreneurship:
The Individual-Opportunitz Nexus: Edward Elgar.
Davidsson, Per & Honig, Beson. (2003). The role of Social
and Human Capital among Nascent Entrepreneurs. Journal
of Business Venturing, 18(301-331).
Drayton, B. (2004). Leading Social Entrepreneurs
Changing the World (Activist Biographies): Ashoka
Innovators for the Public.
Giudice, Manlio Del; Peruta, Maria Rosaria Della Peruta;
& Carayannis, Elias G. (2014). Student Entrepreneurship
in the Social Knowledge Economy: Successful cases and
Management Practices
Lilischkis, Stefan; Volkmann, Christine; Gruenhagen,
Marc; Bischoff, Kathrin; & Halbfas, Briggite. (2015).
Supporting the Entrepreneurial Potential of Higher
Education. European Commission-Final report
El-Khasawneh, Bashar S. (2008). Entrepreneurship
Promotion at Educational Institutions: A Model Suitable
for Emerging Economies. Wseas Transactions on Business
and Economics, 2(5).27-35.
Frodin, Juan; Karri, Ranjan; & Rossiter, Nancy. (2007).
Fostering Entrepreneurial Drive in Business Education: An
Attitudial Approach. Journal of Management Education,
31(1). 17-42.
Luthje, C., & Franke, N. (2003). The 'making' of an
entrepreneur: Testing a model of entrepreneurial intent
among engineering students at MIT. R and D
Management, 33(2), 135–147. doi:10.1111/1467-
9310.00288
Shapero, Albert & Sokol, Lisa. (1982). The Social
Dimensions of Entrepreneurship. Encyclopedia of
International Journal of Management and Applied Science, ISSN: 2394-7926 Volume-3, Issue-12, Dec.-2017
http://iraj.in
Entrepreneurship, 72–90. Retrieved from [50] Liñán, Francisco & Santos, Francisco Javier. (2007). Does
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1497759 Social Capital Affect Entrepreneurial Intentions?
[47] Krueger, Norris F. & Carsrud, ALan L. (1993). International Advances in Economic Research, 13(4),
Entrepreneurial intentions: Applying the theory of planned 443–453. doi:10.1007/s11294-007-9109-8
behavior. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 5, [51] Johannisson, B. (1991). University training for
315–330. entrepreneurship: Swedish approaches. Entrepreneurship
[48] Carsrud, Alan L. and Johnson, Robyn W. (1989). & Regional Development, 3(1), 67–82.
Entrepreneurship: A social psychological perspective. doi:10.1080/08985629100000005
Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 1(1), 21–31. [52] Johannisson, B. (2000). Networking and Entrepreneurial
doi:10.1080/08985628900000003 Growth. The Blackwell Handbook of Entrepreneurship.
[49] Delmar, F. (1996). Entrepreneurial Behavior and Business
Performance. Stockholm School of Economics EFI.



Factors Influencing Social Entrepreneurial Intention: A Theoretical Model

44