ADHD Symptoms: not all bad or not bad at all?
The Relationship between ADHD Symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action
Explained by Creativity, BIS/BAS Sensitivity and Resilience
Name Esther Rebecca Feodora Spanjaard
Student number 10382321
Date August 2018
Study MSc. in Business Administration – Entrepreneurship & Innovation Track
University University of Amsterdam
Statement of Originality
This document is written by Esther Spanjaard who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
Table of Contents
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY ... 2
ABSTRACT... 4
INTRODUCTION ... 5
LITERATURE REVIEW... 10
DATA AND METHOD ... 21
RESULTS ... 25
DISCUSSION ... 32
CONCLUSION ... 42
REFERENCES ... 44
Abstract
This research addresses the question whether the hyperactive and inattentive symptoms of ADHD are positively related to Entrepreneurial Action. It further investigates six mediating factors within these relationships: Creativity, Behavioural Approach System and Behavioural Inhibition System, expressed by BAS-Drive, BAS-Fun Seeking, BAS-Reward Responsiveness and BIS, and Adversity Resilience. In a survey study conducted among 260 students or recent
graduates from the University of Amsterdam, two main effects were found between both the hyperactive symptoms and the inattentive symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action. Furthermore, for the hyperactive symptoms Creativity was a significant positive and Adversity Resilience a significant negative mediator. For the inattentive symptoms, Creativity, BAS-Drive, BIS and Adversity Resilience were significant mediators, the first two positive, the latter negative. The research contributes to the literature as it made a dispersion between hyperactive and inattentive symptoms, of which the inattentive symptoms were not previously found in relation to (a form of) entrepreneurship. Furthermore, the found mediating factors are a great contribution to the existing literature, as they either were circumstantial, contradictory to earlier findings, or not researched yet.
Key words: Entrepreneurship; Entrepreneurial Action; ADHD; ADHD Symptoms; Creativity; BIS/BAS; Adversity Resilience
Introduction
The choice people make to engage in entrepreneurship is a question that intrigues both policy makers and academic scholars. Entrepreneurship can be defined as “The capacity and willingness to develop, organize and manage a business venture along with any of its risks in order to make a profit. The most obvious example of entrepreneurship is the starting of new businesses. In economics, entrepreneurship combined with land, labor, natural resources and capital can produce profit. Entrepreneurial spirit is characterized by innovation and risk-taking, and is an essential part of a nation's ability to succeed in an ever changing and increasingly competitive global marketplace.” (BusinessDictionary.com, 2018). Entrepreneurial activity is an important driver behind employment creation, innovation and economic growth (Thurik, Stam & Audretsch, 2013). Or as Baron (2007:167) states it “In the absence of action by individual entrepreneurs, there would simply be no entrepreneurship and no new ventures.” Hence, entrepreneurs prove a vital element in new venture creation (Baron, 2007). Lerner (2015) states that entrepreneurs are needed to break economic inertia and break through uncertainty. They should be able to make bold and risky moves and create something novel out of the ordinary. The question remains what promotes entrepreneurial activity and why some people are more inclined towards entrepreneurship than others. Thus, shedding light on the determinants to entrepreneurial action, can facilitate the policy makers and steer programs directed to stimulate entrepreneurship.
One of those determinants stems from an unexpected angle: Richard Branson (Virgin Group), David Neeleman (JetBlue) and Ingvar Kamkrad (Ikea), famous and successful
entrepreneurs, all share a distinct and surprising feature with one another: They all suffer from Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Antshel, 2017). ADHD is a clinical
Psychiatric Association, 2013). It is believed that ADHD is a neurodevelopmental condition, meaning that ADHD behaviour stems from certain malfunctions in how the brain works (Littman, 2018). Every brain needs a certain amount of stimulation in order to be receptive to the environment, to choose an adequate response and engage in goal-directed behaviour. The hormone responsible for this behaviour is dopamine. People without ADHD can regulate their brains and have control over their behaviour. For people with ADHD, the brain works slightly different. An “ADHD brain” is chronically under stimulated of dopamine. For this reason, ADHD brains are constantly seeking optimal stimulation and arousal to get to the right level of dopamine. This makes it harder or even impossible for people with ADHD to have complete control over their behaviour and inhibit the urge for dopamine they are driven by. The result of this disinhibition, is that ADHD brains seek more and more stimulation within themselves and within their environment, resulting in two types of behaviours: hyperactive and inattentive behaviour (Littman, 2018). An example of hyperactive behaviour would be to squirm with your hands or rapidly move your feet up and down. An example of inattentive behaviour would be to constantly think about something else and be distracted by a lot of stimuli. People with ADHD cannot inhibit the need to engage in these behaviours, their disinhibition thus results in either the hyperactive, or the inattentive symptoms. This distinction between hyperactive and inattentive symptoms will be used throughout this research. Usually, the onset of ADHD is in childhood and symptoms are persistent in time, at least into early adulthood (Wilens, Faraone & Biederman, 2006). ADHD negatively influences a myriad of behaviours, amongst which
behaviour in the workplace is no exception: Halbesleben, Wheeler & Shanine (2013) found that employees with ADHD had the lowest work performance compared to their non-ADHD colleagues, especially for task-related work. Prior research has focused mainly on the negative consequences of ADHD in the workplace, such as lack of commitment and impulsive risk-taking
leading to failure (Fiore, Schooler, Linville & Hasher, 2001). However, more recent research also shows ADHD bears hopeful prospects: Bozionelos & Bozionelos (2013) also found people with ADHD to have a lower work performance than their non-ADHD colleagues, but propose they might be a better fit for jobs that require fast decision making and creativity, two qualities also relevant for entrepreneurship.
ADHD will not be measured as a full-blown psychiatric disorder, but rather as a continuum of symptoms which are indicative of ADHD. ADHD is typically characterized by mostly hyperactive and/or inattentive behaviours. The symptoms that are referred to, are thus the hyperactive and inattentive symptoms that characterize ADHD but cannot be interpreted as ADHD itself. ADHD is a clinical condition which is clinically assessed and diagnosed by a clinical psychologist, psychotherapist or psychiatrist. The aim is not to diagnose individuals suffering from ADHD, but rather relate to the symptoms. This is in line with prior research addressing ADHD in the organizational setting where a more disposition-type approach has been taken. By doing so, feasibility and generalizability are improved. Next to this, it allows for more applicability of the research in various organizational settings because it merits possibilities to provide a parameter estimate of a well-established effect generalizable to the overall population, instead of an effect that is narrowed to the people who have officially been diagnosed on ADHD by a clinical practitioner.
Following the discovery of the aforementioned entrepreneurs with ADHD, many popular news outlets, such as Forbes (2014), copied each other’s headlines and wrote about the superpower that is ADHD and its relationship with entrepreneurship. This main relationship between ADHD and entrepreneurship was indeed also widely found by scholars in the field of entrepreneurship and clinical psychology (a.o. Dimic & Orlov, 2014; Lerner, Verheul & Thurik, 2018; Verheul, Rietdijk, Block, Franken, Larsson & Thurik, 2016), meaning that the probability
of people to engage in e.g. entrepreneurial activities or have entrepreneurial intentions is higher when they are clinically diagnosed with ADHD or exhibit ADHD symptoms. However, within this relatively new field of research, with a vast amount of the research only done in the past two years, what induces this relationship is still up for debate. The current thesis addresses this research gap.
The purpose of this study therefore is to, firstly, examine the relationship between ADHD symptoms, both hyperactive as inattentive, and entrepreneurship, which will be narrowed to Entrepreneurial Action (EA). Secondly, six mediating factors will be researched: Creativity, Behavioural Approach System/Behavioural Inhibition System, expressed as BAS-Drive, BAS-Fun Seeking, BAS-Reward Responsiveness and BIS, and Adversity Resilience, which will be further addressed in the literature review. It will be researched in the form of a survey study, conducted among students and recent graduates of the University of Amsterdam, and analysed in SPSS by means of PROCESS (Hayes, 2009).
Aside from bridging a research gap in the literature, this research might also help
destigmatize ADHD and highlight opportunities to those suffering from it. By bringing ADHD symptoms into a positive daylight, connecting it to Entrepreneurial Action and further
explaining this relationship, the presented findings can create awareness for those people who suffer from ADHD and its symptoms and who do not always conform to the organizational work-environment norms. Subsequently, it can inspire them that an entrepreneurial career might be just the perfect fit. It can also help decision-makers decide who should be hired/allocated to certain tasks based on their psychological profile. Since the condition of ADHD affects
approximately 5% of adults based on data from the United States (Schwarz & Cohen, 2013) and between 2.8% and 4.2% of adults in the Netherlands (Michielsen, Semeijn, Comijs, Van de Ben, Beekman, Deeg & Kooij, 2012) and ADHD costs an employer 4500 US$ per employee
with ADHD per year (Kessler, Lane, Stang & Van Brunt, 2009), every positive notion towards the condition, albeit in the form of the ADHD symptoms, can be of help and merit the
investigation in a society wide context.
The most important theoretical contributions will be that, firstly, a dispersion will be made between the hyperactive and inattentive ADHD symptoms, to which the previous research findings are circumstantial. Secondly, all six mediating variables have not been researched yet, even though they are expected to play an important role theoretically in the ADHD symptoms – EA relationship. The findings can further deepen the existing knowledge and refute or confirm expectations laid out by earlier researchers, all of which will be discussed in further sections.
In the next paragraph, the core constructs will be further defined, and an overview of the literature will be given to provide theoretical grounding for the research questions. Subsequently, the data, research methods and results of the research findings will be reviewed. A discussion section will elaborate on the implications of the research findings for both theory and practice and provide limitations and suggestions for future research. At last, a conclusion section will summarize the research question, theory, approach, results and discussion.
Literature Review
Main relationship ADHD symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action
Clinical ADHD and entrepreneurship
There are different reasons to assume a positive relationship between ADHD symptoms and entrepreneurship. In a chronological order, Dimic & Orlov (2014) were the first researchers to examine a relationship between clinical ADHD and entrepreneurship thoroughly and found that people suffering from ADHD had a significantly higher probability of being entrepreneurs than people without ADHD. They also found that people with ADHD scored higher on need for achievement, autonomy, creative tendency, and risk taking, which they understood as important characteristics of an entrepreneur. Lerner, Verheul and Thurik (2018) also found the relationship between clinical ADHD and entrepreneurship in a large-scale study to be true: Clinical ADHD was positively related to both entrepreneurial intention as well as action. Entrepreneurial intention and action increased with respectively 1.7 times (60-80%) and almost 2 times (almost 100%) in students clinically diagnosed with ADHD as opposed to regular students. Furthermore, the relationship between clinical ADHD and entrepreneurship is also confirmed by a qualitative study, executed by Wiklund, Patzelt and Dimov (2016), who investigated 14 successful entrepreneurs with ADHD, and stated that impulsivity was the main driver behind their entrepreneurial action. It is of importance to highlight that an alternative explanation might also be at bay: Someone with ADHD might not actually be a better entrepreneur but might be forced (directly or indirectly) into self-employment sooner because they face more difficulties in the regular work setting than people without ADHD (Halbesleben, Wheeler & Shanine, 2013).
From clinical ADHD to ADHD symptoms
Verheul, Rietdijk, Block, Franken, Larsson and Thurik (2016) found the same ADHD-entrepreneurship relationship on a systemic level, by using a sample of no less than 13,112 students. They moved away from ADHD as a clinical condition and investigated people who scored high on ADHD symptoms and found it was positively related to self-employment. Verheul, Block, Burmeister-Lamp, Thurik, Tiemeier and Turturea (2015) furthermore found that individuals who exhibit ADHD-like behaviour are more likely to have entrepreneurial intentions, meaning they regard independent self-employment as a better work environment fit for themselves than regular work in a wage job.
Entrepreneurship and the chosen facet of Entrepreneurial Action
Conclusively, in the entire entrepreneurial process from the identification of a new venture opportunity until actually becoming an entrepreneur, in prior research, clinical ADHD and ADHD symptoms seem to be positively related to entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is a process that involves motives, actions and venturing outcomes (McMullen and Dimov, 2013) and should be conceptualized as a number of activities rather than one single act. However, not the entire entrepreneurial process can be researched in this study. In this study, entrepreneurial action (EA) will be used to demonstrate the level of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial Action can be defined as the combined result of opportunity identification, opportunity evaluation and opportunity exploitation (Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). The entrepreneurial process starts when a person identifies an opportunity for a new product or a new venture (opportunity identification). The opportunity is then evaluated to see whether it is feasible to pursue the idea and what resources will be necessary (opportunity evaluation). Lastly, when the new venture or product will be launched, an entrepreneur is born (opportunity exploitation). The chosen survey of EA also encompasses these three aspects.
Dispersion between the hyperactive and inattentive symptoms of ADHD
Only the research by Verheul et al. (2016) divided their findings into either the hyperactive symptoms or the inattentive symptoms of ADHD. In two studies they found the hyperactive symptoms to be positively related to self-employment, and the relationship between the inattentive symptoms and self-employment to be insignificant in the first study and negative in the replication study. Because of this irregularity, it merits to investigate both symptoms in this research as well. ADHD symptoms will thus be divided into hyperactive and inattentive symptoms in this study. The hyperactive symptoms seem to be the dominant player in the relationship between ADHD symptoms and entrepreneurship. A significant relationship between the inattentive symptoms and EA is not expected. The hypothesis following this and the
aforementioned, is thus:
H1 There is a positive relationship between the hyperactive ADHD symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action
The mediating role of Creativity
ADHD (symptoms) & creativity
One of the factors proposed as a mediator in the ADHD symptoms - EA relationship is creativity. Not all characteristics of people suffering from ADHD are of a negative influence. One of those characteristics is their alleged heightened level of creativity: A positive relationship between ADHD and creativity is found, amongst others, by Abraham, Windmann, Siefen, Daum and Güntürkün (2007), White and Shah (2006), and White and Shah (2011). Because people with ADHD have a lower tolerance for boring, repetitive tasks, an appetite for the novel and seek new impulses all the time, they are constantly thinking outside the box and stimulating their sense of creativity (White and Shah, 2006). Results however were somewhat complex. Even
though in White and Shah’s (2006) research, ADHD groups scored higher on certain creativity tasks, for instance a task where as many unusual uses for two common household objects had to be generated, they also scored lower on tasks where more cognitive processing was involved. This could indicate that ADHD enhances creativity, but only to a certain amount. Results from a later study (2011) were clearer, as White and Shah then found that adults with ADHD scored higher on creative thinking verbally and also had a higher preference for idea generation. No research has been done that investigated the relationship between ADHD symptoms, both hyperactive and inattentive, and creativity.
Creativity & Entrepreneurial Action
Furthermore, creativity is of importance for entrepreneurship, in all stages of the entrepreneurial process: Kruger, Millard and Pretorius (2005) describe that “creativity is clearly part and parcel of the entrepreneurial skills required to successfully start a venture (p.56).” Hypothesized is that creativity is needed to identify novel and exciting opportunities for new ventures (Fillis & Rentschler, 2010). As such, creativity is positively related to entrepreneurial intention (Yar Hamidi, Wennberg, & Berglund, 2008), entrepreneurial orientation
(Khedhaouria, Gurău & Torrès, 2015), and entrepreneurial action, as Hull, Bosley and Udell, found that business owners scored higher on creativity than people who did not own a business (1980). Ultimately, Shane and Nicolaou (2015) found that people who scored higher on creativity, where indeed more likely to identify business opportunities and start businesses.
ADHD symptoms, creativity and Entrepreneurial Action
Furthermore, in prior research linking ADHD to entrepreneurship, creativity is mentioned by Wiklund et al. (2016) as well. Wiklund et al. (2016) interviewed fourteen entrepreneurs clinically diagnosed with ADHD. In these interviews, Wiklund et al. (2016) learned that all entrepreneurs considered themselves as more creative than others and mentioned
this was to their benefit. Wiklund et al. (2016) chose not to include the factor in their proposed model as it did not fit well. It does however indicate that creativity could be an important mediator in the relationship between ADHD (symptoms) and EA. Next to this, Thurik et al. (2016) found that ADHD & Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) are positively linked, and that creativity was also linked to EO and lastly, Verheul et al. (2015) proposed that an entrepreneurial career might be a better fit for individuals with ADHD because, amongst others, they think more creatively.
Theoretically, one can expect creativity to be a positive mediator in the ADHD
symptoms – EA relationship, because of the disinhibition that ADHD is typically characterized by, which influences both ADHD and creativity. Disinhibition underlies both the hyperactive as inattentive symptoms of ADHD, leading to the ability to act impulsively without regard of the consequences, and to think uninhibited, which creates the ability to mind-wander and to cognitively explore ideas which are ‘outside the box.’ (Lerner, 2015). Indeed, an ‘uninhibited imagination’ is a great initiator of creative and innovative thinking (Carson, Peterson & Higgins, 2003). Both risk taking and novel thinking are conditions necessary for entrepreneurship. This disinhibition thus has positive sides such as creativity and the ability to feel comfortable in new, exciting environments. This is however, a double-edged sword: The disinhibition also presents difficulties in self-organizing, creating structure and working in a stable manner when boring or repetitive tasks befall the entrepreneur (Lerner, 2016; Verheul et al., 2015).
Conclusively, prior research has been circumstantial and the role of creativity as a
mediator has not been researched yet. Based on prior research and the theoretical argumentation, the assumption is that ADHD symptoms are positively related to creativity, which in turn stimulates a person to engage in EA. Creativity will be investigated as a mediator, leading to the following hypotheses:
H2 The positive relationship between hyperactive ADHD symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action is positively mediated by Creativity
The mediating role of BIS/BAS Sensitivity
Disinhibition
Most entrepreneurship literature focuses on Entrepreneurial Action being a deliberate process of rational logics, where people consciously decide to engage in several entrepreneurial activities. Less research has focused on the alternative explanation: the underlying logic of disinhibition leading towards entrepreneurship (Lerner, 2010; 2016), even though it could explain why entrepreneurs engage in their entrepreneurial endeavours, despite the uncertainty they face, the risks they need to be willing to take and the inertia they need to break (Lerner, 2015). Indeed, Lerner, Hunt & Dimov (2018) also move beyond the intendedly-rational logics of entrepreneurship, and state that non-deliberative impulsive-driven behavioural logics might be the basis for business venturing. ADHD, inhibition, disinhibition, impulsivity – they all play a role in a complex relationship, that is still being researched and understood in a myriad of ways.
Behavioural Approach System and Behavioural Inhibition System
One of the theories addressing and theoretically conceptualizing disinhibition is Gray’s Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST), of which the core is formed by the Behavioural Approach System (BAS) and the Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS) (Carver & White, 1994), two psychophysiological systems that regulate motivation and can be explained as follows: BAS is an action-oriented motivational system and is sensitive to stimuli of reward and relief from punishment. This means it stimulates behaviours that may lead to positive outcomes, thus facilitating greater proneness to engage in goal-directed efforts. The basis of BAS lies in impulsivity. BIS is an aversive motivational system, and is sensitive to stimuli of punishment,
non-reward, novelty and fear. This means it inhibits behaviour that may lead to negative or painful outcomes and thus leads to an increase in avoidance. (Carver & White, 1994). Recent updates in research add that BIS is also responsible for conflict detection and risk assessment (Geenen, Urbig, Muehlfeld, Witteloostuijn & Gargalianou, 2015). The basis of BIS lies in anxiety. Simply put – BAS stimulates action out of impulsivity and BIS inhibits action out of fear. Greater sensitivity to one or the other systems results in differences in (dis)inhibition between individuals (Carver & White, 1994; Geenen et al., 2015; Mitchell & Nelson-Gray, 2006). BAS can be divided into three aspects: BAS-Drive (BAS-D), meaning the ability of an individual take proactive action, BAS-Reward Responsiveness (BAS-RR), meaning the level to which an individual is triggered by the possibility of a reward for his or her action, and BAS Fun Seeking (BAS-FS), meaning the level of excitement an individual pursues (Geenen et al., 2015).
ADHD symptoms & BIS/BAS
Relating this to ADHD forms a challenge: Impulsivity is a core element that is used to explain both BAS and ADHD (Mitchell & Nelson-Gray, 2005; Wiklund & Patzelt, 2017). This raises questions about correlation and causation. That ADHD is correlated with BIS/BAS however, is certain. Mitchell & Nelson-Gray found that overactive BAS activity is related to the hyperactive symptoms of ADHD because of disinhibition (2005). Furthermore, they do not rule out it is also related to the inattentive symptoms, for whom the assumption only held true for females and when the hyperactive-impulsive symptoms were partialed out. Furthermore, Hundt, Kimbrel, Mitchell and Nelson-Gray (2007) found that high BAS and low BIS predicted the hyperactive-impulsive symptoms of ADHD and high BIS the inattentive ADHD symptoms. BAS was not divided into different categories. In an older research by Johnson, Turner and Iwata (2003), BAS was divided into different categories, and individuals with a lifetime diagnosis of
ADHD had higher levels of BAS-D than their non-ADHD counterparts. BAS-RR, BAS-FS and BIS were not found to be significantly related to ADHD.
BIS/BAS and Entrepreneurial Action
How does BIS/BAS further relate to EA? Geenen et al. (2015) investigated the
relationship between BIS/BAS and entrepreneurial intent in two studies and found BAS-RR has a negative and BAS-FS has a positive association with entrepreneurial intent. This makes sense: the reward of one’s initial entrepreneurial endeavours will be low, negatively influencing BAS-RR and not favouring the action to engage in entrepreneurial activity. The idea pursuing one’s own ideas and ventures is, however, more thrilling, positively influencing BAS-FS. Subsequently, they found BAS-RR to be negatively and BAS-D to be positively related to entrepreneurial experience. No significant interactions with BIS were found. In a very recent study, Lerner, Hatak, and Rauch (2018) investigated the relationship between BIS/BAS and entrepreneurial action. They found BAS-D to be positively related to entrepreneurial action and not significantly related to venture performance. BIS was significantly positively related to venture performance and not significantly related to entrepreneurial action. BAS-RR and BAS-FS yielded no significant interactions. Theoretically, one can relate BAS-D to impulsivity quite well. The findings in that sense, are in line with a qualitative study done by Wiklund, Patzelt and Dimov (2016) who found ADHD positively influences EA because of impulsivity, and a study by Wiklund, Yu, Tucker and Marino (2017) where the relationship between ADHD and Entrepreneurial Preferences and Action is explained through the significant mediation of impulsivity.
In conclusion, the role of BIS/BAS is unambiguously, which is why it will be further investigated as a mediator in the ADHD symptoms - EA relationship, simultaneously shedding light on the assumed underlying significant relationships between BIS/BAS and ADHD and BIS/BAS and EA. The hypotheses following the previously described theory and studies are:
H3 The positive relationship between hyperactive ADHD symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action is positively mediated by a) BAS-D and not mediated by b) BAS-RR and c) BAS-FS
H4 The positive relationship between hyperactive ADHD symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action is negatively mediated by BIS
The mediating role of Adversity Resilience
The last mediating factor that will be researched in the ADHD symptoms - EA
relationship is that of Adversity Resilience (AR). For this study, AR can be defined as the ability to bounce back after setbacks and to cope effectively with failure, thus being able to quickly recover from stress (adapted from Smith, Dalen, Wiggins, Tooley, Christopher & Bernard, 2008).
ADHD & Adversity Resilience
In the research literature, it is unclear to state whether ADHD is predominantly positively or negatively related to AR. Theoretically, it can be hypothesized both ways: ADHD usually sets back individuals from their childhood on – Children with ADHD achieve less at school that their non-ADHD friends (Loe & Feldman, 2007) and adults with ADHD usually underperform for their colleagues without ADHD in a traditional work setting too (Halbesleben, Wheeler & Shanine, 2013). This in turn leads them to have lower self-esteem and a lower feeling of self-efficacy, the belief to successfully achieve your goals (Shaw-Zirt, Popali-Lehane, Chaplin & Bergman, 2005). This could make people who have ADHD symptoms, an indication of ADHD, less resilient, as they do not believe in their ability to achieve their goals. Furthermore, in a neurobiological sense, to be able to cope with stress effectively and to handle your emotions effectively, you have to be able to think deliberately about all the positive sides or opportunities
there are. This is done by the prefrontal lobe, which is negatively affected by ADHD (Rosenkranz, Moore & Grace, 2003).
On the other hand, adversity may also foster resilience: having been confronted with failure from an early age one, people with ADHD might have developed better coping strategies for failure (Seery et al., 2010; 2013)and are better able to achieve success even when faced with great uncertainty (Wilmshurst, 2011). Indeed, Verheul et al. (2015) propose that students with high levels of ADHD behaviour perceive an entrepreneurial career as a better fit because they are more resilient to disappointment. Wiklund, Patzelt & Dimov (2016) add that overcoming the challenges of ADHD in the first place may be a strengthening factor and provide entrepreneurs with the resilience needed to move forward in times of adversity. Lastly, Lerner, Verheul and Thurik (2018) also mention resilience might play a positive role in the relationship between ADHD and entrepreneurship, because they expect people with ADHD to be more resilient, which is needed to cope with the uncertainty of an entrepreneurial career.
Adversity Resilience and Entrepreneurial Action
It is important for an entrepreneur to be resilient in times of adversity: In the
entrepreneurial process there are more obstacles and there is more uncertainty than in a regular work-environment (Evans & Leighton, 1989). As an entrepreneur, you need to be able to cope with these obstacles and uncertainty. Furthermore, it is of vital importance to be able to persevere as an entrepreneur, even though resource constraints and huge risks are confronting you (Markman, Baron & Balkin, 2005). Indeed, Hayward, Forster, Sarasvathy, Fredrickson (2010) find that highly-confident entrepreneurs are better at starting and succeeding in building a new venture than entrepreneurs with less self-esteem. A positive relationship between AR and EA can thus be expected.
In summary, the literature relating ADHD to creativity is inconclusive. Despite the researchers who claim resilience as a positive aspect of people who have been clinically diagnosed with ADHD or have ADHD symptoms, the theoretical grounding expecting a negative mediator is assumed stronger. The setbacks in life, the lower self-esteem, and the malfunction of the prefrontal lobe, result in the following hypotheses:
H5 The positive relationship between hyperactive ADHD symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action is negatively mediated by Adversity Resilience
The research model following the hypotheses is thus as follows:
Figure 1 Research model
Inattentive ADHD symptoms (Total) Entrepreneurial Action X Hyperactive ADHD symptoms (Total) BAS-D Adversity Resilience Entrepreneurial Action Creativity BIS BAS-FS BAS-RR + + + + + - - - + X X X X
Data and Method
Design and participants
In total, 400 respondents were gathered as participants. They were reached out to via e-mail, flyers in the cafeteria of the Roeterseiland Campus at the University of Amsterdam (UvA) and social media. Of all 400 respondents, 260 respondents were eligible to participate in the research and completed it entirely. The remaining 140 respondents were deleted because they either indicated that they were not recently graduated, which automatically redirected them to the end of the survey or did not complete the entire survey. Within the final sample of 260 respondents, 192 were current students of the UvA (73.8%) and 68 were recent graduates, who had graduated in the past two years (26.2%). A specific group was identified in the research design. In this way, it is clear what comprises the sample. Participants were divided over the different faculties as follows: Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences (41,2%), Economics and Business (38,5%), Faculty of Science (8,5%), Faculty of Medicine (6,5%), Faculty of
Humanities (3,8%) and Amsterdam Law School (1,5%). In total, there were 102 men (39,2%), 156 women (60%) and 2 people who did not identify with a specific gender (.8%). The age ranged from 17 to 42 (M= 24.17 year, SD=3.55 year).
Procedure
All participants filled in a questionnaire, which was made with Qualtrics software. The questionnaire took approximately 6 minutes in time to fill in. As a participant, you had the chance to win several gifts, such as 50€ Bol.com coupon or a plant. The participants were recruited in the course of two weeks. The results of the questionnaire were downloaded from Qualtrics and anonymized.
Materials
Entrepreneurial Action
Entrepreneurial Action was measured using an index of 22 entrepreneurial behaviours, to which participants indicated a yes or a no, which was created by Farmer, Yao and
Kung-McIntyre (2011). The behaviours were all aimed at starting or co-starting a venture, i.e. “I have defined products or services for a business” and “I have applied for a patent, copyright, or
trademark related to the business.” Reliability of the scale was high with Cronbach’s α = .94. The cumulative answer on the scale indicated the amount of Entrepreneurial Action. It was
statistically approached as a scale, meaning each score was interpreted relative to the scores of others.
ADHD Symptoms
ADHD symptoms were measured using the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS-v1.1), developed by Adler, Kessler and Spencer (2003). This scale consists of 18 items, 9 items representing the hyperactive symptoms ADHD is characterized by and 9 items representing the inattentive symptoms ADHD is characterized by. Participants rated themselves on items, such as “How often do you feel restless or fidgety” for the hyperactive symptoms and “How often do you have difficulty keeping your attention when you are doing boring or repetitive work” for the inattentive symptoms on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 - never to 5 - very often. Reliability of the scales were high with Cronbach’s α = .82 for the hyperactive symptoms and Cronbach’s α = .85 for the inattentive symptoms, which was in line with previously found reliabilities. The symptoms were approached as a continuum, as a scale, meaning no cut off score was used, but scores were interpreted relative to one another.
Creativity
Creativity was measured as a reflective construct with 4 items, such as “I generate ideas revolutionary to the field” which were scored on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 – strongly disagree to 7 – strongly agree. The 4-item model showed a good fit in research by Tierney, Farmer & Graen (1999). Indeed, reliability for this scale was also high, with Cronbach’s α = .80. A factor analysis showed reliability could be ameliorated to Cronbach’s α = .81 by taking out the item “I seek new ideas and ways to solve problems.” Since this was a minor improvement, the scale was left as it was.
BIS/BAS
BIS/BAS was measured with a 12-item scale adjusted by Lerner, Hatak and Rauch (2018) of the original 20-item scale by Carver & White (1994). All four aspects were measured with three items, to which participants answered on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 – Very false for me to 4 – Very true for me. BAS-Drive was measured with items such as “I go out of my way to get the things I want” and had a reliability of Cronbach’s α = .74. BAS-Reward
Responsiveness was measured with items such as “When I get something I want, I feel excited an energized” and had a reliability of Cronbach’s α = .68. A factor analysis showed that by leaving out the item “When I’m doing well at something I love to keep at it”, reliability could be increased to Cronbach’s α = .75. This would however mean that the scale would then consist of two items. A good conceptual scale in general needs a minimum of three items (Field, 2013), so it was left as it was. BAS-Fun Seeking was measured with items such as “I’m always willing to try something new if I think it will be fun” and had a reliability of Cronbach’s α = .46, which was low and will be discussed in the discussion section. Lastly, BIS was measured with items such as “If I think something unpleasant is going to happen I usually get pretty “worked up”,” and had a reliability of Cronbach’s α = .69.
Adversity Resilience
Adversity Resilience was measured with the Brief Resilience Scale by Smith, Dalen, Wiggins, Tooley, Christopher and Bernard (2008). It consisted of six items, such as “I tend to bounce back quickly after hard times,” and were scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 – strongly disagree to 5 – strongly agree. Three items were reverse coded. Reliability of the scale was high with Cronbach’s α = .78.
Control variables
Age influences the decision to start a new venture (e.g. Brockhaus, 1982) and will thus be examined and added as a covariate in the research. Furthermore, gender also plays a role, as men are twice as likely to become entrepreneurs (Acs & Varga, 2005), and will also be examined and added as a covariate in the research.
Data-analysis
Firstly, the data was checked on outliers and quality. Secondly, reliability tests of the variables were performed, and scales were formed. Subsequently, tests were done to test the assumptions needed for regression analyses and descriptive statistics were investigated. A
regression analysis was performed to test the main effect between ADHD symptoms and EA. Six regression analyses were run to test the different effects of the mediators, divided into ADHD hyperactive to EA, via respectively creativity, BIS/BAS and resilience, and ADHD inattentive to EA, via respectively creativity, BIS/BAS and resilience. The regression analyses are done with PROCESS by Hayes (2009). Significance of the mediators will be assessed by looking at the confidence intervals of the indirect effect of X on Y for every mediator. If the confidence interval does not contain zero, this indicates a significant mediator (Field, 2013).
Results
Descriptive statistics
The means, standard deviations, and Pearson’scorrelations between the researched variables are displayed in Table 1. In line with prior research, age correlated significantly with EA (r = .18, p = <.05) and gender correlated significantly with EA (r = .39 and p = <.05). Both age and gender will be further discussed under control variables. Furthermore, significant
correlations occurred between all the mediating variables as well. As these mediating variables were independent of each other, they were also analysed independent of each other. That is to say, resilience, creativity and BIS/BAS were analysed independently. BAS-D, BAS-FS, BAS-RR, and BIS were analysed together, since they are part of the same conceptual theory and thus should be approached as such. There were no correlations with a high value, which is considered
r > .5 (Field, 2013), except for the scale ADHD hyperactive symptoms and ADHD inattentive
symptoms, with a correlation of r = .62. As these scales are part of the same ADHD spectrum of symptoms, this was within expectations and not a disturbing statistic. Furthermore, there were some medium-sized correlations, of which the most were correlated to BAS-FS. Seeing its reliability at Cronbach’s α = .46, this is not surprising, as a lower reliability means a scale can correlate with other factors more easily.
Control variables
An independent t-test showed gender had a significant influence on EA (t(256) = -7.50, p < .001), and a simple regression analysis showed age also had a significant influence on EA (F(1,258) = 14.80, p = <.001. This indicated that older participants are more likely to engage in EA and males are more likely to engage in EA. To control for the effect this might have on the relationship between ADHD symptoms and EA, they will be included as covariates in all the analyses.
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics and Correlations
M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1. ADHD hyperactive 2.95 .04 - 2. ADHD inattentive 2.70 .04 .62** - 3. Creativity 4.91 .07 .16** .32** - 4. BAS-Drive 2.80 .04 .11 .33** .36** - 5. BAS-Fun Seeking 2.98 .04 .43** .47** .42** .33** - 6. BAS-Reward Responsiveness 3.33 .03 .10 .17** .12* .29** .31** - 7. BIS 2.84 .04 .19** .17** -.11 -.08 -.02 .09 - 8. Resilience 3.39 .68 -.19** -.10 .30** .18** .12 .07 -.48** - 9. Entrepreneurial Action 5.54 5.90 .16** .30** .39** .29** .21** .01 -.22** .23** - 10. Age 24.17 3.55 .04 .03 .16** .10 .06 -.01 -.06 .13* .18** - 11. Gender 1.41 .03 .07 .06 .16** .18** .04 -.06 -.39** .24** .39** .22** -
Assumptions
Before testing the hypotheses, it was important to test whether the assumptions necessary for doing a regression analysis were met. To be able to perform all the regression analyses the assumptions of normality of distribution, homoscedasticity, linearity and multicollinearity need to be met. The normal P-P plots and scatterplots show that the assumptions of normality of distribution, homoscedasticity and linearity were met. As the tolerance was above >.1 and VIF was below <10, there was also no multicollinearity. The assumptions needed for regression analyses were thus met for both the regression-analyses that were performed between ADHD hyperactive symptoms and EA and ADHD inattentive symptoms and EA (Field, 2013).
To test for Common Method Bias (CMB), which is a bias that can occur when all variables are tested at the same moment with the same method, a Harman’s single factor test was carried out (Podsakoff, 2003). A factor analysis was carried out with all variables loading one on factor. Common Method Bias is absent when the total % of variance explained is below 50%. With a total of 26,62% of variance explained by all the models, it can be concluded that there was no CMB.
Testing the hypotheses
Main relationship ADHD symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action
Hypothesis 1 tested the main effect of the hyperactive ADHD symptoms and EA. To test this hypothesis, a simple regression analysis was executed with EA as a dependent variable and the hyperactive ADHD symptoms as independent variable.
Hyperactive symptoms and EA
The analysis showed that the hyperactive ADHD symptoms were a significant predictor of EA, β = .16, t(258) = 2.61, p = .010. This confirmed H1: There is a positive relationship between hyperactive ADHD symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action.
Inattentive symptoms and EA
No relationship was expected between the inattentive ADHD symptoms and EA, which is tested in a second simple regression analysis. This analysis showed that the inattentive ADHD symptoms were also a significant and even stronger predictor of EA, with β = .30, t(258) = 5.13,
p < .001. As the inattentive symptoms are significantly of influence on EA, the mediating effects
of creativity, BIS/BAS and resilience will also be investigated for this independent variable.
The mediating role of Creativity
The role creativity played in the ADHD symptoms – EA relationship was investigated with a mediation analysis, model 4 in Process by Hayes (2009).
Hyperactive symptoms
The first mediation analysis showed creativity was a significant mediator in the
relationship between the hyperactive symptoms of ADHD and EA (b = .40, SE = .22 with 95% CI [.0408; .9071]), as the confidence intervals did not contain a zero and confirmed H2: The positive relationship between hyperactive ADHD symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action is positively mediated by Creativity.
Inattentive symptoms
The second mediation analysis showed creativity was also a significant mediator in the relationship with EA (b = .65, SE = .20 with 95% CI [.3081; 1.1039]).
The mediating role of BIS/BAS Sensitivity
BIS/BAS was further investigated as a mediating variable in the relationship between ADHD symptoms and EA to test H3 and H4. All four aspects of BIS/BAS, that is to say: BAS-Drive, BAS-Fun Seeking, BAS-Reward Responsiveness and BIS were added together in the mediation analysis as they are conceptually theoretically related.
Hyperactive symptoms.
H3 stated that the positive relationship between hyperactive ADHD symptoms and Entrepreneurial Action was mediated by a) BAS-D, and not mediated by b) BAS-RR and c) BAS-FS. This hypothesis was partially confirmed: contrary to what was expected, BAS-D was not a significant mediator (b = .17, SE = .13 with 95% CI [-.0176; .5211]), and in line with
expectations, BAS-FS ( b = .36, SE = .24 with 95% CI [-.1267; .8289]), and BAS-RR (b = -.06,
SE = .08 with 95% CI [-.3357; .0252]) were not significant mediators either. Furthermore, H4
stated the hyperactive symptoms and EA were negatively mediated by BIS. This hypothesis was rejected, as BIS was not a significant mediator in the relationship between the hyperactive ADHD symptoms and EA (b = -.20, SE = .14 with 95% CI [-.5722; .0157]).
Inattentive symptoms
The hypotheses were however confirmed theoretically, not by the hyperactive symptoms but by the inattentive symptoms, for which BAS-D and BIS were indeed significant mediators in the relationship with EA, and FS and RR were not. Mediation analyses showed BAS-D was a significant mediator (b = .38, SE = .17 with 95% CI [.0910; .7640]), BIS was a significant negative mediator (b = -.22, SE = .13 with 95% CI [-.5703; -.0240]), and BAS-FS and BAS-RR were not significant mediators: (b = .14, SE = .17 with 95% CI [-.3624; .6445]; b = -.09, SE = .11 with 95% CI [-.3955; .0619]).
The mediating role of Adversity Resilience
The role adversity resilience played in the ADHD symptoms – EA relationship was investigated with a mediation analysis, model 4 in Process by Hayes (2009).
Hyperactive symptoms
Hypothesis 5 predicted a negative mediation by Adversity Resilience in the relationship between hyperactive ADHD symptoms and EA. Results showed Adversity Resilience was indeed
a significant and negative mediator, (b = -.30, SE = .15 with 95% CI [-.6788; -.0807]), thus confirming H5.
Inattentive symptoms
Adversity Resilience is also investigated as a mediator in the relationship between the inattentive ADHD symptoms and EA. Adversity Resilience was also a significant negative
mediator in this relationship (b = -.16, SE = .11 with 95% CI [-.4560; -.0044]). All found effects can be viewed in figure 2 and figure 3, respectively for the hyperactive symptoms and the
inattentive symptoms. Red indicates a non-significant mediation. Green indicates a significant mediation.
Exploratory analyses
Extra exploratory analyses were executed with an ADHD scale with the hyperactive and inattentive symptoms combined. These analyses showed the same significant main effect between ADHD and EA, and showed creativity, BAS-D, BIS and resilience were significant mediators in the ADHD – EA relationship. The found effects for the inattentive symptoms can thus be interpreted for the whole spectrum of ADHD.
Figure 2 Mediation model of the relationship between the hyperactive symptoms of ADHD and Entrepreneurial Action and the mediators creativity, BAS-D, BAS-FS, BAS-RR, BIS and adversity resilience. Significant mediations are marked green, non-significant mediations are marked red.
Hyperactive ADHD symptoms (Total) BAS-D Adversity Resilience Entrepreneurial Action Creativity BIS BAS-FS BAS-RR B = .25 P = .014 B = .10 P = .101 B = .44 P <.001 B = .08 P = .105 B = .22 P <.001 B = .21 P = .001 B = 1.58 P <.001 B = 1.80 P = .001 B = .82 P = .147 B = .72 P = .284 B = -.92 P = .086 B = 1.40 P = .007 Total effect: B = 1.16, p = .021
Direct effect: - Creativity: B = .76, p = .114 - BIS/BAS: B = .89, p = .111 - Resilience: B = 1.46, p = .004
Figure 3 Mediation model of the relationship between the hyperactive symptoms of ADHD and Entrepreneurial Action and the mediators creativity, BAS-D, BAS-FS, BAS-RR, BIS and adversity resilience. Significant mediations are marked green, non-significant mediations are marked red.
Discussion
Findings
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between ADHD symptoms, both hyperactive as inattentive, and Entrepreneurial Action, and the mediating roles of creativity, BIS/BAS and resilience. Two significant positive main effects were found for both the
hyperactive as the inattentive symptoms on EA. Furthermore, creativity significantly mediated the relationship between hyperactive symptoms and EA positively, and resilience significantly
Inattentive ADHD symptoms (Total) BAS-D Adversity Resilience Entrepreneurial Action Creativity BIS BAS-FS BAS-RR B = .49 P <.001 B = .29 P < .001 B = .46 P <.001 B = .13 P = .005 B = .18 P =.001 B = -.11 P = .055 B = 1.31 P <.001 B = 1.31 P = .019 B = .30 P = .586 B = -.70 P = .288 B = -1.21 P = .021 B = 1.40 P = .004 Total effect: B = 2.34, p <.001
Direct effect: - Creativity: B = 1.69, p = .001 - BIS/BAS: B = 2.13, p = .001 - Resilience: B = 2.49, p <.001
mediators. As the relationship between the inattentive symptoms and EA was significant, the mediating factors were also investigated for this relationship. In this relationship, creativity, resilience, BAS-D and BIS were significant mediators. Creativity and BAS-D were positive mediators and resilience and BIS negative. BAS-FS and BAS-RR were non-significant as mediators.
Theoretical implications and contributions
The trend in prior research is that ADHD as a clinical condition, as well as ADHD symptoms, are positively related to several facets of entrepreneurship (a.o. Dimic & Orlov, 2014; Lerner, Verheul & Thurik, 2018; Verheul, Rietdijk, Block, Franken, Larsson & Thurik, 2016). The two found main effects in this research, being that both hyperactive symptoms and
inattentive symptoms of ADHD are significant, positive predictors of entrepreneurial action, are in line with that trend. However, the first contribution of this research was the dispersion between the hyperactive and the inattentive symptoms of ADHD. For the hyperactive symptoms, the positive relationship with EA was in line with expectations and in line with previous research. The inattentive symptoms however, were expected to be an insignificant predictor for EA, as they were for self-employment in the research by Verheul et al. (2016). This was not the case, and even more so, the inattentive symptoms were a stronger predictor for EA than the hyperactive symptoms were. This is of importance to future research, as it is generally assumed that the hyperactive symptoms play the most important role in all the relationships between clinical ADHD, ADHD symptoms and various aspects of entrepreneurship. It underlines the notion that ADHD is comprised of both aspects and should be considered as such. An explanation for the positive relationship between the inattentive symptoms and EA is that, for opportunity identification it might actually be an asset: The underlying attention-deficit that leads to the inattentive symptoms, creates the opportunity for the mind to wander and to
think outside the box, which are necessary prerequisites to come up with a business idea that is both novel and imperative. As EA starts with opportunity identification, this could explain the positive relationship between the inattentive symptoms and EA. Another explanation would be that the inattentive symptoms usually lead to malfunctioning in work (Halbesleben, Wheeler & Shanine, 2013). For this reason, an entrepreneurial career might be considered as a better fit for the individuals who exhibit these traits and might thus foster the motivation to engage in EA more. All in all, both the hyperactive symptoms as the inattentive symptoms are important predictors of EA and should be both taken into consideration.
Secondly, Entrepreneurial Action as a dependent variable was not researched in the context of ADHD symptoms yet. EA is a measure that comprises different aspects of the entrepreneurial journey, from opportunity identification and opportunity evaluation, which relates to entrepreneurial intentions, to opportunity exploitation, which relates to actually becoming or being an entrepreneur. For this reason, it can be seen as an “all-encompassing” entrepreneurship measure, which make the found results also better to generalize to a broader spectrum of entrepreneurship, rather than just specific facets.
In line with expectations, creativity was a significant and positive mediator in the relationship between hyperactive ADHD symptoms and EA. This was both true for the hyperactive symptoms, as for the inattentive symptoms. The hyperactive symptoms might be a catalysator in going from opportunity identification to exploitation, as it promotes action. The inattentive symptoms might be the driver for opportunity identification. As was stated before, the attention deficit creates the opportunity for the mind to wander, leading to the ability to think outside the box. Indeed, in previous research disinhibited thinking proved to stimulate creative thinking (Carson, Peterson & Higgins, 2003).
Thereafter, the mediating role of BIS/BAS sensitivity was investigated. This contributed to the literature as it clarified both the relationship between ADHD symptoms and BIS/BAS sensitivity, as the relationship between BIS/BAS an EA, which was partially not researched before, and partially contradictory in findings. For the hyperactive symptoms, all three factors of BAS, and BIS were not significant. Prior research indicated a significant relationship between BAS and the hyperactive symptoms of ADHD (Michell & Nelson-Gray, 2005; Hundt, Kimbrel, Mitchell & Nelson-Gray, 2007). Looking closer at the underlying relationships, teaches us, that the hyperactive symptoms only correlated significantly with BAS-FS, and the correlations with BAS-FS should be interpreted cautiously, which is further discussed in the discussion section. An explanation for the absence of further significant relationships, could be that impulsivity
underlies both ADHD and BAS, which makes it hard to say if BAS causes ADHD or if ADHD causes BAS. Furthermore, low BIS was predicted to relate to the hyperactive symptoms in prior research (Hundt et al., 2007). This relationship between the hyperactive symptoms of ADHD and BIS was indeed significant. BIS was just not a significant mediator in the ADHD
hyperactive symptoms-EA relationship. Moving towards the relationship between the inattentive symptoms and EA, it is found that BAS-D and BIS were significant mediators and BAS-RR and BAS-FS were not. That BAS-D was a positive mediator in the inattentive symptoms of ADHD and EA, is another contribution of this research. It was expected by Mitchell and Nelson-Gray (2005), but only confirmed for females. Furthermore, in a research were ADHD was taken as a whole, of which the inattentive symptoms are a part, by Johnson, Turner and Iwata, individuals with clinical ADHD scored significantly higher on BAS-D (2003). In the exploratory analyses, ADHD total was researched in relationship to EA. Here the significant mediations by BAS-D and BIS stayed significant. Looking at the specific underlying relationships, it is clear that the inattentive symptoms are significantly positively related to BIS and BIS is significantly negatively
related to EA. This means that the more inattentive ADHD symptoms someone has, the more he or she avoids possible negative outcomes, which in turns makes it less probable for that person to engage in any entrepreneurial action. This is in line with the expectations laid out in the theory, albeit that there was no hypothesis directed at it. In prior research, high BIS was correlated with the inattentive symptoms of ADHD (Hundt et al., 2007). There was no prior research that found a significant relation between BIS and EA. Only Lerner, Hatak and Rauch (2018) investigated the relationships between BIS/BAS and EA. They found BAS-D to be the only significant mediator for EA, a finding that was thus replicated, and BIS to be insignificant. The significant underlying relationship between BIS and EA is thus another contribution to prior research.
Lastly, Adversity Resilience was found to be a significant negative mediator in the
ADHD symptoms – EA relationship, for both the hyperactive as the inattentive symptoms. This contributes greatly to the literature, as it contradicts all three articles hypothesizing resilience could play a positive role in the relationship between ADHD (symptoms) and (aspects of) entrepreneurship (Verheul et al., 2015; Wiklund, Patzelt & Dimov, 2015; Lerner, Verheul & Thurik, 2017). The relationship was there, it was however, exactly the other way around. The mediation was negative, meaning the higher a person scores on ADHD symptoms, the less resilient he or she is, which in turn is a negative influence on EA.
Conclusively, this study adds to the existing literature of this blooming research area in various ways. A dispersion was made between the hyperactive and inattentive symptoms, with both factors being important predictors of entrepreneurial action. And, even though most attention has focussed on the hyperactive symptoms of ADHD, which were considered the most dominant symptoms, the inattentive symptoms deserve to be put right beside the hyperactive symptoms. Furthermore, EA was used as the dependent variable, a measure that can be viewed as
an extensive measure for entrepreneurship, meaning the found effects between ADHD and ADHD symptoms and (aspects of) entrepreneurship, can now be generalized to a broader spectrum of entrepreneurship than before. The mediating factor of creativity, which so far, has proven to be a circumstantial concept, was highly significant, shedding light on both the
relationships between ADHD symptoms and creativity, and on creativity and EA. Furthermore, the complex relationships between ADHD and BIS/BAS and BIS/BAS and EA were
investigated, which contributes to the existing literature as it deepened the existing knowledge on the underlying relationships of these factors. We now know that BAS-D and BIS can be seen as the most crucial mediating factors, but they were only true for the inattentive symptoms.
However, in exploratory analyses, these two mediators also emerged for the scale which was made for both symptoms of ADHD together, which does make them broader generalizable. And lastly, the finding of adversity resilience as a significant, negative mediator was novel and contradictory to the expectations of earlier researchers, which makes this finding a valuable addition to the existing literature as well.
Practical implications and contributions
Firstly, this research can help destigmatize ADHD. There is still great taboo surrounding ADHD, and people who suffer from the condition are often perceived as bustling, hard to work with or lazy (Bozionelos & Bozionelos, 2013). Breaking this stigma, would be very helpful for those who suffer from it. Although current research is focussed on the symptoms of ADHD and not on the clinical condition of ADHD, it is a positive note that people who exhibit these symptoms more, are more likely to engage in entrepreneurial action, which, as stated before, is essential to the prosperity of a society, as it is an important driver behind employment creating, innovation and economic growth (Thurik et al., 2013). Creativity as a positive mediator in this the relationship between ADHD symptoms and EA, is also beneficial to this account.
Furthermore, the finding of the two main relationships can help decision-makers decide upon who should be hired or allocated to certain tasks based on their psychological profile. In this way, the best person-job fit can be found for each person, independent of whether they score high on the spectrum of ADHD symptoms.
Furthermore, the finding of resilience as a negative mediator in the relationship between ADHD symptoms and EA can also have interesting practical implications. In a regular work setting, managers can help stimulate entrepreneurial activities within the organisation with the right amount of support and stimulation, for example by setting up mentorship programmes for people with ADHD (symptoms) and entrepreneurial plans. They can also lower the barriers that are now causing employees to drop out of these regular work settings, e.g. by adding more variety in the job tasks or making sure they aid in dealing with the ADHD symptoms that are not beneficial to the people who suffer from them, instead of punishing them for it.
Lastly, in the non-regular work setting, policy makers or job coaches who want to stimulate entrepreneurship and do something for people suffering from the symptoms of ADHD, could win on both ends by creating an environment where the resilience, which this research shows, can be a constraining factor, can be build. An example of this would be to provide Stress Management and Resilience Training (SMART), which has given great results in building resilience so far (Loprinzi, Prasad, Schroeder & Sood, 2011).
Limitations
The first limitation of this study is that it approaches ADHD as a behavioural tendency, a continuum on which people can score a certain amount on both the hyperactive and/or the inattentive symptoms of ADHD. However, the symptoms are an indication of ADHD, but do not predict being affected by the actual condition of ADHD. ADHD is a clinical condition, diagnosed by a certified psychologist, psychotherapist or psychiatrist and is more than a set of
symptoms, as suffering from it, is what makes it a clinical condition. Only when this research has been retested in a setting with people who are clinically diagnosed with ADHD, they can be generalized to the condition of ADHD. This research approached the ADHD symptoms as a continuum, meaning no cut off score was used to assess a level of either high or low. This can influence the results as well. However, even though the results cannot be generalized to a population of people who are clinically diagnosed with ADHD, investigating ADHD as a continuum of symptoms, is not completely negative either. Because it was researched by looking at the symptoms in a normal sample, the findings of this study can be generalized in various organizational settings and can provide a parameter estimate of a well-established effect generalizable to the overall population.
Secondly, a sampling bias could be in place. Participants were approached in real life, via e-mail and via social media in specific groups. This might have attracted people with certain characteristics more than others, e.g. when they felt intrigued by the title of the research or filled in the survey as a favour. The sample might also have been influenced by a proximity bias, meaning people who were nearby filled in the survey more. Indeed, the responses from both the faculty of Behavioural Sciences and of Business & Economics are greater than those from other faculties, as these faculties are more central in the university complex were the survey was distributed. The expectation is that if a sampling bias is in place, this cannot have a large influence on the outcome of this study, as the question is general in nature to the extent that there should not be much variation in between participants aside from what is being researched.
Thirdly, the scale of BAS-FS misses one item of the official scale, which was not
incorporated in the Qualtrics survey. This means the BAS-FS scale consisted only of two items, lowering its reliability. When interpreting the results relating to BAS-FS, this should thus be
considered. As BAS-FS has not been a significant factor in previous research addressing ADHD or EA, the assumption is that no important findings were missed.
Lastly, Lerner, Hunt & Verheul (2018) state that “it is difficult to draw meaningful conclusions about how (entrepreneurial) intentionality relates to action and, in turn, how action relates to entrepreneurial outcomes” (p. 11) and “a thorough investigation of ADHD and
entrepreneurship must involve the entire entrepreneurial process” (p. 12). Even though the scale of Entrepreneurial Action is an extensive one, incorporating opportunity identification,
evaluation and exploitation, it doesn’t divide between the different phases and doesn’t represent factors over time. For this reason, future studies should focus on the whole entrepreneurial cycle, relate this to ADHD and provide information on whether the found effects hold true in each phase of the entrepreneurial cycle separately.
Future research directions
For future research, the first recommendation is to replicate this study and other prior studies relating to ADHD symptoms and various aspects of entrepreneurship with a sample of people who are clinically diagnosed with ADHD. Only then, the findings can help destigmatize ADHD as a clinical condition and truly highlight the positive aspects of the condition. For now, it is assumed that the symptoms give a good indication of actually having ADHD (Adler, Kessler & Spencer, 2003), but generalizations from a normal population to a clinical population, should always be made with caution.
The second research direction is that in all the prior research, as well as this research, performance of the entrepreneur has not been considered. It could well be that people with ADHD symptoms initially favour the idea of self-employment but fall back somewhere later along the entrepreneurial journey. For example, in the qualitative research by Wiklund, Patzelt and Dimov (2016), some entrepreneurs indicated that they started their businesses alone, but
later did need help with the more mundane tasks, such as bookkeeping. For this reason, the whole entrepreneurial cycle should be investigated in relationship to ADHD and ADHD symptoms, and (individual) performance should be integrated in that cycle as well.
Finally, ADHD, and BIS/BAS have proven to be conceptually related constructs, but the causal directions are not always clear. Furthermore, there might be factors underlying the found relationships, such as disinhibition or impulsivity. Investigating these relationships more
specifically or conceptualizing a theoretical model where the interrelations between these
constructs are made clear, merits further consideration, as it is now still a question of which came first: the chicken or the egg?
Conclusion
The present study has investigated the relationship between the hyperactive and inattentive symptoms of ADHD and Entrepreneurial Action. Within this relationship, six mediating factors have been analysed: creativity, the Behavioural Approach System and the Behavioural Inhibition System, expressed by BAS-Drive, BAS-Fun Seeking, BAS-Reward Responsiveness and BIS, and adversity resilience. A survey study was conducted amongst 260 students and recent graduates of the University of Amsterdam. Results showed both hyperactive and inattentive symptoms were significantly positively related to Entrepreneurial Action, which contributed to the existing literature as it was the first study to disperse between hyperactive and inattentive symptoms and to find a significant relationship for the inattentive symptoms.
Furthermore, for the relationship between hyperactive symptoms and EA, creativity and resilience were significant, respectively positive and negative, mediators. For the inattentive symptoms, creativity, BAS-D, BIS and resilience were significant mediators. The first two mediators positive, the latter negative. These mediators prove an interesting theoretical
contribution to the existing literature, as prior research was either circumstantial or contradictory to current findings, and none of the relationships were previously researched in this manner. Practically, the current study could help destigmatize ADHD symptoms, and aid managers, policy makers and job coaches, to stimulate and support in the best way possible, for example by providing resilience training or setting up mentorship programmes for people with ADHD (symptoms) and entrepreneurial plans. It can also help decision-makers to decide upon the best person-job fit, because they could hire/allocate people towards certain tasks, based on their psychological profile. It is important for future research to enrich this field of research by replicating current findings with a sample of people who are clinically diagnosed with ADHD. Furthermore, future research could incorporate the whole entrepreneurial cycle, including
(individual performance). And lastly, it would be interesting to further investigate all the
interrelationships between ADHD, BIS/BAS and EA, and underlying constructs of disinhibition and impulsivity.
