Stimulating entrepreneurial efforts in the Dutch Film industry : how important is entrepreneurial education?

(1)

Stimulating entrepreneurial efforts in the

Dutch Film industry

How important is entrepreneurial education?

Max Blomaard (10771182)

Bachelor thesis Economics and Business Business Administration

Willem Dorresteijn Amsterdam, June 2018 10,224 words

(2)

Statement of Originality

This document is written by Student Max Blomaard who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.

I declare that the text and the work presented in this document are 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.

(3)

Abstract

This paper uses a combination of two different techniques to collect data to study the effect of entrepreneurial education on the successfulness of self-employed film producers in The

Netherlands. The first and dominant technique is based on semi structured interviews, the second technique is based on questionnaires. The sample consists of six film producers that are active in The Netherlands. Consistent with a significant portion of existing literature it was found that there are at least some aspects within entrepreneurial education, risk-taking propensity, and locus of control that are beneficial to the successfulness of film producers. In addition, it was furthermore found that passion for film plays a role in the successfulness, the exact magnitude of this factor is not yet fully understood.

(6)

I. Introduction

According the Dutch ‘Centraal plan bureau’ (2015), a Dutch statistical bureau, the number of registered companies in The Netherlands reached a record level of 1.5 million companies in 2015. The main cause for this incredible increase as compared to a few years earlier can mainly be found in the amount of small businesses. The amount of businesses with only one employee rose by a staggering thirty percent, whereas the amount of large companies has decreased.

In a study conducted by Verheul, Thurik, Grilo and Van Der Zwan (2012) it was found that, from the people that were professionally active at the moment of investigation, 49.6 percent of the people would like their next profession to be something in which they are self-employed. On the other hand, only 20 percent of the participants were, at that moment, self-employed. The contrast between people that want to be self-employed and the people that actually are self-employed is striking and indicates that there is a significant difference between preference and realization.

One of several explanations for this gap can be found in the fact that becoming employed is not merely about whether someone does or someone does not want to be

self-employed. Apart from it being a significant risk, being an employee gives a lot more certainty, there are numerous skills and characteristics a person should possess to at least some extent to be able to successfully start a business of their own (Ipcioglu & Taser, 2011). Some of these factors are more or less agreed on, others, such as education, are still heavily debated (Henry, Hill & Leitch, 2005).

The amount of studies that have been conducted on the effect of entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurial success is extremely high, however, these studies do not cover the effect of education on the successfulness of entrepreneurs in creative industries as much as they should. One industry for which empirical evidence on the effect of entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurial success seems to lack is the Dutch film industry. The film industry demands understanding of both creativity and business (filmacademie.ahk.nl, 2017). As creating knowledge is more important than replicating it, trying to increase entrepreneurial efforts by understanding how education affects entrepreneurship in this field can by especially interesting (Chuang, Liu & Shiu, 2013).

As the film industry is a broad segment to examine, this paper will focus on the effect of entrepreneurial education on successfulness of film producers in The Netherlands. The following research question will be investigated: “To what extent can entrepreneurial education be considered a determinant for entrepreneurial successfulness of film producers in The Netherlands?”. The results of this study can be interesting for people that want to become a film producer as well as for teachers and schools trying to educate future film producers.

The vast majority of data will be collected using semi structured interviews with self-employed film producers from The Netherlands. A small portion of data will be collected through

(7)

the use of questionnaires. To be able to answer the research question the data will be analysed using the grounded theory method after the interviews are transcribed.

This paper is structured as follows. First of all, the existing literature on entrepreneurship, film production and entrepreneurial education will be reviewed. after this, the conceptual model will be introduced as well as explained. Thirdly, the methodology that is going to be used to answer the research question, as stated previously, will be thoroughly explained. In the fourth place, the results and findings will be presented. This study will continue with a discussion in which the research limitations, the adjustments to the conceptual model and recommendations for future research are to be thoroughly evaluated. In addition, this paper will be finalized with a brief conclusion in which the main arguments and findings are going to be discussed.

II. Literature review

II.1 What is entrepreneurship?

In 1949 Schumpeter made the first attempt to scientifically define the word entrepreneur (Chattopadhyay & Ghosh, 2002). He defined an entrepreneur as a “catalyst who disrupts the stationary circular flow of economy and thereby initiates and sustains the process of development”. Schumpeter believed that entrepreneurship is an economic function (Chattopadhyay & Ghosh, 2002). Nowadays, the word entrepreneurship is widely used, however, its meaning is still

ambiguous, fragmented as well as context related (Khajeheian, 2017). A possible reason for this is that there are too many definitions that do not fully agree with one another (Khajeheian, 2017). In an attempt by Khejeheian (2017) to define media entrepreneurship, a field that is still

underdeveloped and not understood, the following is proposed: “Media entrepreneurship is taking the risk to exploit opportunities by innovative use of resources in transform of an idea into activities to offer value in a media form that meets the need of a specific portion of market, either in an individual effort or by creation of new venture or entrepreneurial managing of an existing organizational entity and to earn benefit from one of the sources that is willing to pay for.”

II.2 What is a film producer?

According to the Dutch film academy (2017), a film producer is a media entrepreneur in the sense that it is the person who creates opportunities to make a film. In this case, the film is the value offer in a media form that meets the need of a specific portion of the market. A film producer plays a significant role in the business and organizational facets of a film, however, he or she is also able to influence the creative content of a film. A few of the major activities performed by a film producer include; guiding the actual filmmakers, generating and maintaining the budget and finding the right person to write the script or direct the film.

(8)

II.3 What factors predict entrepreneurship?

The predictors of successful entrepreneurship have been widely studied over the past years, yet there is little uniformity (Blanchflower & Oswald, 1998; Schoon & Ducksworth, 2012). There are however factors that reoccur in a large share of studies on the subject such as risk-taking propensity and locus of control (Hisrich & Peter, 1998; Ipcioglu & Taser, 2011; Schoon & Ducksworth, 2012; Chatterjee & Das, 2015). Risk-taking propensity is the degree to which an individual is willing to avoid risks (Chattarjee et al., 2015). Someone’s locus of control determines to what extent someone believes he or she has control over the events that occur in his or her live. An internal locus of control means that someone beliefs that he or she personally controls events in his or her life whilst an external locus of control means that someone believes that the events that happen in their lives are controlled by someone or something else or that his or her life is predetermined (Chattarjee & Das, 2015). Various studies found that successfulness of entrepreneurs is significantly positively related to the degree to which someone is willing to take risks as well as to how internal someone’s locus of control is (Hisrich & Peter, 1998; Schoon & Ducksworth, 2012; Chatterjee & Das, 2015). According to Farmer, Xin and Kate (2011), some people possess certain intrinsic inclinations towards attempting to undertake entrepreneurial activities, others do not have these inclinations at all and will, for this matter, probably not become entrepreneurs. Hisrich and Peters (1998) proposed a model to categorize the various capabilities entrepreneurs should possess. They created three groups of skills of which the first group contains “Technical skills”; communication, technical- and organizing skills. The second group is “Business management skills”, this group includes; planning, decision-making, marketing- and accounting skills. The final group is called “Personal

entrepreneurship skills” this group involves; inner control, innovation and risk-taking.

Furthermore, Hisrich and Peters (1998) argue that inner control, risk-taking, innovativeness are skills that differentiates an entrepreneur from a manager. Another model as used by Schoon and Ducksworth (2012) to predict entrepreneurial capabilities revolves around four individual

competences being; Academic ability, locus of control, self-esteem and social skills. Chattopadhyay and Ghosh (2002) proved that psychological factors such as individualism, achievement value, risk taking propensity and locus of control can predict successfulness of an entrepreneur. In a qualitative study by Overall and Wise (2016) 14 highly-successful entrepreneurs were interviewed which lead to four important factors that contribute to successful entrepreneurship. The four factors found by Overall and Wise (2016) involve: learning, travel, adversity quotient and mentorship. In a research project conducted by the Brunel University, which looked at the influence of creativity in fringe theatre production and commercial success, it was found that fringe producers believe that their passion and commitment to theatre is often enough for them to get them started in the art industry (theguardian.com, 2013).

(9)

Chatterjee and Das (2015) proposed eight psychological factors as predictors for

entrepreneurship; need for achievement, locus of control, self-efficacy, tolerance of ambiguity, risk-taking propensity, innovativeness, independence and autonomy, and optimism. Two of the variables that are being promoted in this study have been proven to positively affect entrepreneurial success, including locus of control and risk-taking propensity. The remaining six variables are variables that exclusively affect the chance of someone being able to become an entrepreneur.

Besides the aforementioned capabilities Blanchflower and Oswald (1998) proved that the probability of becoming self-employed is positively related to whether or not someone ever received an inheritance or gift. Schoon and Ducksworth (2012) studied the effect of early life experience on becoming an entrepreneur or not. In their research they found that having a father who is self-employed himself is an important predictor of entrepreneurial intent for men and that parents’ socioeconomic resources are an important predictor of whether or not women become an entrepreneur (Schoon & Ducksworth, 2012).

In table II.1, which can be found below, a clearer representation of factors that predict entrepreneurship is presented per author. This table only includes psychological factors, hence, environmental factors are excluded.

(10)

Table 1 R isk -taking pr ope nsit y Loc us of c ontrol Innov ati ve ne ss Ne ed fo r ac hi eve ment S elf -e ff ic ac y Tole ra nc e of a mbi guit y Inde pe nde n ce a nd a utono my Optim ism Ac hieve ment v alue Entre pr en eur ial status Individualism Ac ade mi c abil it y S oc ial skil ls Blanchflower & Oswald x x x Chattarjee & Das x x x x x x x x Chattopadhya y and Ghosh x x x x x Hisrich & Peter x x x Ipcioglu & Taser x x x x x x Overall and Wise x x x Schoon & Ducksworth x x x x

II.4 What is the effect of education on entrepreneurship?

Similarly to the effect of personal capabilities, the effect of entrepreneurial education on

entrepreneurial success is heavily debated (Henry, Hill & Leitch, 2005). Klein and Bullock (2006) reviewed some of the major approaches to teaching entrepreneurship and came to the conclusion that there is little connection between these major approaches of education and economists’

understanding of what an entrepreneur does. The ineffectiveness of entrepreneurial education is also found in several other studies (Farhangmehr, Gonçalves & Sarmento, 2016; Ipcioglu & Taser, 2011). Farhangmehr, Gonçalves and Sarmento (2016) did a mixed methods study by combining interviews and a cross-sectional survey on predictors of entrepreneurial motivation among

(11)

effect on the entrepreneurial motivation. In a longitudinal study by Ipcioglu and Taser (2011) it was found that there is no positive relation between business education and students’ entrepreneurial characteristics.

On the other hand there are numerous studies that proved that at least some aspects of entrepreneurship can be improved with proper education. One of such studies is a literature study conducted by Henry, Hill and Leitch (2005) in which it was found that the effect should definitely be taken into consideration even though it is very small. Robinson, Neergaard, Tanggaard and Krueger (2016) also argue that entrepreneurship can be taught, however, they do state that

entrepreneurship education must shift from being teacher led to being student-centred. Furthermore, Robinson et al. (2016) demonstrate how four different types of learning theories can be combined in order to make entrepreneurship education more effective. Additionally, in a longitudinal study by Elert, Andersson and Wennberg (2015) a positive relation between entrepreneurship education and the probability of starting a business was found as well as a positive relation between

entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial incomes. However, Elert et al. (2015) did not find a significant relation between entrepreneurship education and firm survival. In a study conducted by Masakure (2015) on the effect of education on university level on entrepreneurial propensity it was found that there is a positive relation between university level education and entrepreneurial intent. However, this does not mean that studying at university level increases entrepreneurial

successfulness.

In a study conducted by Damasio and Bicacro (2017) it is argued that entrepreneurial education is very important in order to become a successful entrepreneur in the film and media industry. This is mainly because extensive knowledge of management is required but also because leadership skills are of high importance.

II.5 How is entrepreneurial successfulness measured

Baron and Henry (2011) suggest that the problem within entrepreneurial education stems from lack of clarity around the scales that are used to measure entrepreneurial performance. Where

performance indicators are predominantly the go-to scale an increasing number of researchers state that entrepreneurial success depends on a wider range of factors than financial performance itself (Fisher, Maritz & Lobo, 2014; Wach, Stephan & Gorgievski, 2016; Venkatraman & Ramanujam, 1986). This is mostly because, according to Fisher et al. (2014), every individual has a different view on what determines success. However, According to Fisher et al. (2014) only little research on subjective entrepreneurial performance has been conducted; there is no definition that is universally accepted and used

(12)

Wach et al. (2016) define subjective entrepreneurial performance in their study as “the individual understanding and assessment of the achievement of criteria that are personally important to the entrepreneur”. In their study, Wach et al. (2016) tried to solve this problem by creating a model in which both subjective and objective sources are combined. This model is called the “subjective entrepreneurial success-importance scale” or “SES-IS” and consists of fourteen factors that are grouped in 5 categories being; company performance, workplace relations,

community impact, personal financial rewards, and personal fulfilment. These fourteen factors were found through interviewing 185 German entrepreneurs on their personal definition on

entrepreneurial success and include for example: firm profitability, work-life-balance, personal development, personal work flexibility, firm societal contribution, and the ability to afford a lot (Wach et al., 2016).

Fisher et al. (2014) also created a model to assess entrepreneurial performance, however, objective sources are left out completely. This model consists of nine items that comprise

entrepreneurial success. These items were found by using in-depth interviewing with open-ended questions in order to provide the opportunity to understand the entrepreneurs’ “thoughts, feelings, beliefs, values and assumptive worlds” (Fisher et al., 2014). In an additional study by Fisher et al. (2014) it was proven that the measuring model is significantly useful. The factors that resulted from this study include variables such as: personal satisfaction with life and business, firm growth, and exceeding business goals.

(13)

III. Conceptual model

III.1 What factors influence film producers’ successfulness and how is this measured

The conceptual model as used in the research can be found below in figure 1. Figure 1.

III.2 Measures

In this section, a brief description of the different variables/measures from the conceptual model as shown in figure 1 is given.

Locus of control: “locus of control” is someone’s belief of what or who has control over events in their lives. The interviewees’ locus of control will be determined with the aid of Rotter’s locus of control scale. This is an online questionnaire consisting of thirteen short questions resulting in a score between zero and 13. In this case, zero suggests an internal locus of control and 13

suggests an external locus of control.

Risk-taking propensity: “risk-taking propensity” is the propensity someone is willing to avoid risk. This variable will be measured for all interviewees individually using the risk propensity scale, an online questionnaire. In this questionnaire the attendant is asked to exclaim to what degree each of seven statements applied to him or her. This test results in a score between one and nine, where a one means that someone is highly risk averse.

In this conceptual model both “locus of control” and “risk-taking propensity” are independent variables used to assess the individual effect of entrepreneurial education on film

Entrepreneurial education

Film producers’ successfulness • Life/work satisfaction

• Personal development • Exceeding own goals • Financial situation • Organizational growth • Position in the market • Social contribution

(14)

producers’ successfulness. According to Chattarjee et al. (2015) these factors influence

successfulness of entrepreneurs. In their study, Chattarjee et al. (2015) proposed six more variables that have an effect on entrepreneurship, however, these factors predict whether someone has the potential to become an entrepreneur not how successful they will be. As all interviewees have already been self-employed for at least five years these factors are less relevant and are therefore not regarded. The second reason for choosing risk-taking propensity and locus of control is that they are the psychological factors that are included in all papers examined that include

psychological factors which affect entrepreneurial successfulness. These factors are included as they can serve as alternative explanations for differences in film producers’ successfulness.

Entrepreneurial education: Entrepreneurial education is a measure that reveals to what extent an interviewee has enjoyed education with the aim to increase its entrepreneurial capabilities. This variable is measured by analysing interviewees’ answers to questions about their education. This is an independent variable.

Film producers’ successfulness: Film producers’ successfulness is measured through a model consisting of seven factors. These factors were carefully selected from existing models to measure entrepreneurial success qualitatively proposed by Fisher et al. (2014) and Wach et al. (2016). The combined amount of 23 factors were all evaluated on significance level and

applicability to the circumstances. This means that first, all factors with a low significance level were filtered out. Secondly, factors from the SES-IS-model that are immeasurable using interviews were filtered out as well as factors that do not apply to film producers in The Netherlands.

Overlapping factors such as ‘work-life-balance’ and ‘satisfaction with life and business’ were combined into one variable. The respondents’ successfulness will be established through careful analysis and interpretation of answers to specific interview questions. In addition, the seven variables that are being evaluated have the same weight in predicting entrepreneurial successfulness.

IV. Methodology

As found in the literature review, entrepreneurship is not merely about money. For this matter, multiple methods are used to gather data for this research, hence a multi-method approach is going to be adopted. The data will be gathered by making use of interviews and questionnaires.

The qualitative portion of the data is going to be collected through the use of semi-structured interviews, this means that questions will be thought of before the interviews take place but that they function merely as guidelines rather than as a script (Silverman, 2013). Qualitative research is being used as it allows for answers that are more in depth and this type of research is highly

(15)

Furthermore, qualitative research allows to directly examine what people actually do rather than letting people comment upon it (Silverman, 2013). Additionally, in-depth answers and opinions are helpful to evaluate more thoroughly one’s education since existing data on film producers’

education is incomplete. The answers that will be given during the interviews are to be used to discover new insights, for this matter, an inductive approach is going to be used in this part of the study. As there is little existing literature on the effect of entrepreneurial education on the

successfulness of film producers in The Netherlands exploratory research will be used.

The questions that are going to be asked during the interviews are formulated in order to get insight in the attendants’ education and successfulness. Successfulness will be interpreted with the aid of a measuring model comprised of a combination of two different models proposed by Fisher et al. (2014) and Wach et al. (2016). As this part of the study is qualitative the successfulness and education of the interviewed film producers will not be stated in numbers. However, rankings are going to be assigned to each film producer which indicate their successfulness in comparison to the other interviewees.

To analyse the data that will be gathered in the interviews, the “constructivist grounded theory”-method will be used. The “constructivist grounded theory”-method is a type of “grounded theory”-method (GTM) that is, according to Ong (2012), especially useful when one wants to conduct qualitative research. This type of “grounded theory”-method means that all interviews will be transcribed in full length after which the interviews are going to be coded. The first of three steps in the coding process involves open coding, this means that quotations in the interviews are being labelled. Steps two involves the grouping of open codes, these groups are called axial codes. The third and final step is about the creation of selective codes. In this step, the patterns across all interviews that rose from evaluating the axial codes are described in some detail. The coding process will be conducted by hand after transcribing the interviews on computer. In addition, All interviews are going to be conducted in Dutch, this means that the analysis will be performed in Dutch as well. All excerpts from the interviews that are quoted in this paper are therefore translated from Dutch to English and were not literally said by the interviewees.

To ensure ethicality, all interviewees will be thoroughly informed in advance (Denzin & Lincoln, 2008). Furthermore, the privacy of the interviewees will be maintained by changing their names into numbers.

The second portion of the data will be collected through the aid of online questionnaires in order to assess the interviewees’ risk-taking propensity and locus of control.

two online questionnaires being an adaptation of “Rotter’s locus of control scale” and the “Risk propensity scale” are going to be used to assess the participants’ locus of control and risk-taking propensity respectively (Chatterjee & Das, 2015; Meertens & Lion, 2008). The first of two,

(16)

being Roter’s locus of control scale, will be performed by the interviewees themselves using a computer. The version of Rotter’s locus of control scale that is used in this research consists of thirteen questions, seventeen less than the original. The adapted version is being used as it was advised by Adeyemi-Bello (2001) who suggested that some questions from the original

questionnaire were too difficult to answer and were therefore discarded. The risk propensity scale will be performed slightly different in order to enhance its validity. This questionnaire consists of seven statements for which participants must indicate to what extent they agree with each statement on a scale from one to nine and the starting point, or status quo, is five. The presence of a status quo might cause a status quo bias; a bias in which someone prefers the current state of affairs

(Samuelson & Zeckhauser, 1988). For this matter, the interviewer is going to read the statements out loud after which the interviewee will have to indicate to what extent he or she agrees with the statement.

The data that is going to be gathered through the two questionnaires will be evaluated by comparing the scores to scores that correspond with high entrepreneurial capabilities. The benchmark scores have been established by reviewing research by the creators of the

questionnaires, Rotter (1966) and Meertens and Lion (2008), as well as research on the effects of locus of control on entrepreneurial successfulness and risk-taking propensity on entrepreneurial successfulness (Hisrich & Peter, 1998; Ipcioglu & Taser, 2011; Schoon & Ducksworth, 2012; Chatterjee & Das, 2015).

The sample, used for both the interviews as well as for the questionnaires, is made up by six self-employed film producers that have been active in the Netherlands for at least fifteen years. All Interviewees produce feature films and/or documentaries. There has been an ongoing debated for many years concerning the validity of qualitative research (Welsh, 2002). To ensure a

representative sample of the industry, all interviewees will be carefully selected. Personal contacts will be used to connect with potential interviewees. For this matter, purposeful sampling has been used as a technique to draw the sample.

Self-employed film producers that are active in The Netherlands are naturally very different from entrepreneurs in different industries. However, it is very plausible that industries exist that might be more similar to the Dutch film industry than they appear at first glance. To increase external validity an extensive understanding of the practices of film producers from The

Netherlands is essential. This is highly important as it leads to an increase of the usability of this study.

According to the Producers Guild of America (2018) the tasks that belongs to the profession of being a film producer include in the first place taking the initiative to make a film. Furthermore, a self-employed film producer coordinates, supervises and controls all aspects of the production

(17)

process of a movie such as the financing and budgeting. A film producer is part of the whole process including the coordination, supervision and control of all others that are involved in the creation such as writers, directors, actors and agents.

V. Findings

Analysing the data, that was gathered through the interviews, lead to a significant amount of

interesting findings. The most useful, and therefore important, findings are described in this part. As the amount of information is hard to digest at once, the findings are categorized in thirteen themes. The first theme is: Locus of control and risk-taking propensity. In this part, the results from the short questionnaires that were inquired before the interview will be described and analysed. The subsequent themes are all about the interviews. The themes that are used to categorize all findings are: Interviewee information, Educational background, Influence of education, Life/work

satisfaction, Personal development, Exceeding goals, Financial situation, Organizational growth, Position in the market, Social contribution, Entrepreneurial success and Patterns.

(18)

V.1 Locus of control and risk-taking propensity

Table 2

Interviewee 1 2 3 4 5 6

Locus of control 5 5 2 6 5 6

Risk-taking propensity 4.29 5.57 4.86 5.71 4.86 6.29

According to Meertens and Lion (2008), the mean score for the risk propensity scale for women differs from the mean score for men. For female respondents the average risk propensity was found to be between 4.20 and 4.40, whilst the average risk-taking propensity for male respondents turned out to be between 4.80 and 4.90 . A higher score than the mean suggests that one’s predicted entrepreneurial successfulness is also higher. For the Rotter’s locus of control scale, a score lower than seven indicates an internal locus of control. Hence, a locus of control score lower equal to six or lower than six suggests that one’s predicted entrepreneurial successfulness is higher (Rotter, 1966). The most striking findings from both Rotter’s locus of control scale and the risk-taking propensity scale are that interviewee number three has a locus of control that is significantly more internal than other interviewees and that interviewee number six is a lot less risk averse than others. There is not one interviewee with both a locus of control and a risk-taking propensity that is

significantly different from the mean. Interviewees two, four, five and six show a slight internal locus of control as well as slight preference for risk. However, these findings are not very

convincing. Interviewee number one and three are the only interviewees that are found to be more risk averse than average. There are no interviewees with a locus of control that is more external than average.

V.2 Interviewee information

Before the findings from the interviews will be presented, a short background for all interviewees will be presented. As stated earlier, all names are changed in order to maintain their privacy. (1) Interviewee one is a female film producer that has been working for herself for the past 22 years. Furthermore, interviewee one has experience being the former president of the Dutch producer’s association. (2) Interviewee two is male who, in his own words, recently “pre-retired”. He still has a desk at the company he found and is still associated with numerous productions. “I was able to pre-retire” (2). Interviewee two started his own company because it was the easiest way for him to be able to make films “Becoming an entrepreneur has never been my goal. My goal was to make films. Starting my own company was merely because I would be able to make my own plans and realize these plans.” (2). (3) Interviewee three is a male who, together with his business partner, started a

(19)

new production company in 2016 after selling their previous company to a larger production

company. He has been making films for the national and international market since 1987. Before he started to work as a film producer he used to work for the University of Amsterdam as well as for the AMC as a psychologist. When asked by an old friend to help him produce a batch of television-shows he gave up his job “Everybody was very surprised that I quit my regular job and thought: ‘Do you just do something like that?’. And I just thought that I had to do what seems right.” (3). (4) Interviewee four is a female producer who stated that she knew she wanted to be working in the film industry since early in high school. She started her own company back in 2002 after she graduate from the film academy only a year before. Interviewee number four wanted to become a film producer as she was quite good with numbers and kind of creative, plus her father and mother were both active in the film industry. (5) Interviewee five is a 52 year old female producer that grew up in Sittard who makes both documentaries and films. (6) Interviewee six is a male who has been producing films for over thirty years now. He is currently working a company which he found about five years ago. Before the company he is currently working for he used to own two other film production companies. He currently produces a lot of documentaries and slightly more experimental art-house films.

V.3 Educational background

Now that all interviewees have been introduced briefly their educational background is going to be portrayed. Five out of six interviewees finished their high school on the highest level possible in the Netherlands, VWO. Interviewee number two did not finish high school at all: “I did not finish any high school at all, I think I dropped out in the third year of high school.” (2). Half of the

interviewees went to the Dutch film academy of which two, interviewee four and six, followed the program for film producers. One attendee, interviewee number two, started with the

cinematography program and later transferred to the directors program. There is however,

according to interviewee two and six, a significant difference in the film academy from back then and the film academy interviewee number four attended. “The film academy is much more structured nowadays then it was in my time, I had to create my own program. We had to find our own teachers very often.” (2) “When I went to the film academy it was an unstructured mess.” (6). Besides finishing the Dutch film academy, interviewee number four studied Italian language and culture in Italy before trying to get in to the film academy in Rome. After she failed to get in to the program she decided to study law in The Netherlands for a year before starting with the producers program at the Dutch film academy. “I applied for the Dutch film academy, for production, and got accepted, I graduated after four years.” (4). The three respondents that did not attend the film academy did, however, study at university level to at least some extent. Only one of them actually

(20)

graduated. “I studied medicines for two years and after that I studied history at the University of Groningen. However, I did not graduate.” (1). “I then studied medieval literature, but I stopped after two years because I had jobs behind the scenes at theatres and enjoyed those much more.” (5). “After high school I went to Nijmegen to study psychology.” (3) “I graduated for my bachelor and master’s in six years.” (3). Three out of six interviewees also did one or more international film producers’ courses. Interviewee four did the EAVE and ACE program, interviewee five did the EAVE program and interviewee six did ACE and the Binger film institute. These courses focus on making film producers more acquainted with foreign markets. “After the film academy I followed international film production-courses, EAVE and ACE, these courses helped me develop and position myself internationally.” (4). Interviewee one indicated that, while she was working for a film producer, she received an on-the-job education from her employer “I came across a film producer who was able to teach me a lot about being a film producer by accident. I received sort of a private education there.” (1)

V.4 Influence of education

In this category, the influence of education on the interviewees’ work performances as perceived by the interviewees themselves is discussed. One of the most interesting findings within this category must be that almost all interviewees indicated that they did not learn anything about

entrepreneurship during their education. Interviewee four did however indicate that she learned something about having a company at one of the international courses she took. “I cannot

remember that I learned anything about owning a business during my time at the film academy. No. I think they educated me to become a production leader or something. The international courses did teach me something about having a company though!” (4). Furthermore, some interviewees stated that they owe their analytical capabilities to their education, albeit due to their high school or or their university period. “I am very happy that I was able to do VWO, because my high school educationally helped me to evaluate things from other points of view, it taught me to think.” (5) “I notice that I am good at analysing, something I think I learned at gymnasium.” (3) “Studying may not be a prerequisite for a purely creative job, but you have to be able to use your common sense and you have to be able to analyse.” (3). Even though it was stated multiple times that the Dutch film academy did not really teach them how to start and maintain a business it did bring them other things that come in handy during their work as a film producer. “The fact that it helps you to build a network has been very important.” (2). “It has essentially been a really good internship that went on for four years.” (6). This is also confirmed by interviewees who did not go to the film academy. “The big disadvantage for me was that people that did go to the film academy already had a huge

(21)

network with film directors, editors etcetera from their start.” (1). “People that went to the film academy also have a head start of four years in terms of knowledge. Knowledge of technique.” (1)

V.5 Life/work satisfaction

All interviewees indicated that work plays a very significant role in their lives. “My work is my life. You are a film producer for almost one-hundred percent.” (2). “I have my job and my private life and my job does not rule one-hundred percent of my life, it is of course about seventh or maybe eighty percent of my life though.” (6). Apart from work being a large portion of their lives the interviewees suggested that they very much enjoy their work. “I notice that it gives purpose to my life, I am going somewhere. I am making something that other people see, what they can criticize. But in the first place it is something that I support.” (3). However, interviewees one and two did tell that there are certain downsides to the work as well. “We were supposed to have a new project a long time ago already so that we could generate cash, this can be very stressful.” (1). “I am not able to fully enjoy current projects because I already have to focus on the next project. This is in my opinion a big disadvantage.” (2).

V.6 Personal development

The interviewees suggested that they noticed personal growth during their working career to at least some extent. Interviewees three, four and five noticed slightly more development “I am better able to repel projects that threaten to go wrong. I used to feel pity for the filmmakers, but I don’t do that anymore. I became a bit more strict.” (4), one interviewee admitted that she feels as if she not developing as much as she would like to “It is very hard for film producers in The Netherlands to push filmmakers to do better. It sort of feels like as if there is a glass ceiling.” (1). Interviewee six indicated that his personal development stagnated around ten years ago “That growth was quite impressive until ten years ago, after that, exhaustion, boredom and repetitiveness slipped in” (6).

V.7 Exceeding goals

Two out of six attendants, interviewee four and six, were able to give very explicit examples of moments they felt that they exceeded their own expectations and therefore exceeded their own “I sometimes set out a goal for myself and say that I want to make at least one film for television per year, this year we are making two all of a sudden. So we set the bar for that one film and now we are making two. Much quicker than I expected.” (4) “Those are all small competitions, when you submit for four to six plans the goal is to bring in at least one of them, when you bring in more than one you exceed your expectations. This happened surprisingly often in my case.” (6). Interviewees one, two, three and five stated that it does not happen as often as they would like that they exceed their own expectations “It does not happen very often. Most of the times my goals and ambition are

(22)

slightly higher than what we achieve.” (3) “It does not happen often enough. I do set goals for myself. A concrete example would be; being able to finance and realize a film. But then I would achieve my goals, I would not exceed them.” (1).

V.8 Financial situation

Even though interviewee one told that the wages are not too high for people working in a cultural industry “Wages are not very high in general for people working in culture.” (1), all interviewees declared that their personal financial situation is not too bad. Interviewee two and three indicated that they could easily retire without being concerned about their savings. “I sold my previous company a few years ago, that sale covered my retirement.” (3). It is, however, noticeable that one of the interviewees, interviewee four, immediately states that they are unable to judge about how their financial situation will be in a few years “I do not have to complain about my financial situation. I think I can easily live off my income. However, I only know this for this year and next year, after that I have no idea.” (4). According to multiple interviewees, it is hard to maintain continuity in a film producing company “Firms in this industry are very much dependent on subsidies, every film producer who argues that he is independent is lying.” (6). This is a possible explanation of the fact that interviewee four is not able to make statements about her personal financial situation in two years.

V.9 Organizational growth

Most interviewers, except for interviewee number three, were very clear on the growth their

company has been going through “In 2004 we only had this office, in 2007 we were able to rent the office next-door as well and we did. Now, we have around ten people walking around every day, depending on the productions we are doing at that moment.” (5). However, something that is particularly striking is that interviewee number four was very clear about not wanting to grow even further “I think that, in terms of growth, this is the maximum I want to own. I want to stay involved in the process of making films, I do not want to become some sort of manager.” (4). Interviewee one stated that she underwent significant growth but remains ambitious and would like her

company to grow even a bit further “I do think it is quite small (the company), I would like it to be just a bit bigger.” (1).

V.10 Position in the market

Whilst most interviewees, interviewees two, three, four and five, were not able to make a statement about how they view the performance of their own company when asked about this “I think we have our own signature. Although we do let go of this signature sometimes when we need to earn money.” (3), interviewee one was somewhat outspoken about delivering higher quality than direct

(23)

competitors “I think we are running a good company and we deliver, compared to other companies, a very high quality. We are above average.” (1). This statement made by interviewee one was even supported by interviewee number six “Interviewee number one is a good example; she only makes a certain kind of films. Most producers are a bit more whorish. In the sense that if there is an opportunity to make a film that will easily make profit they take it. This taints your image. However you also have to pay rent, that is quite a dilemma.” (6). Interviewee six believes his own revenue is somewhat disappointing compared to competitors “Our revenue is somewhat disappointing. You need at least one-and-a-half million euros in revenue per year and ours is around one million.” (6).

V.11 Social contribution

Especially interviewee two and five were very explicit about their social contribution “A good example is ‘Shouf Shouf Habibi’, a film we made when certain multicultural problems were handled with too much care. Our film ignored that completely and I think it really contributed to the discussion. It is still being used in high schools.” (2) “I think we contribute quite a lot, because of the documentaries we make. These documentaries are about racism, exception and abuse of power. So I think our documentaries provide insight in our society.” (5). Interviewees three and four indicated that they are conscious of their ability to shape one’s point of view and that they try to contribute to society in some other way “I am aware of the fact that we sometimes

unintentionally cast white people because we are white, so I always try to think whether or not such a role can be fulfilled by a black or Moroccan person.” (4). Interviewee one and four stated that they believe that they are not able to change the world in a positive way “Enhance, zero, I fear. I learned that after producing an Idyllic film about refugees and Pim Fortuyn won half the

parliament two weeks after it broadcasted.” (6).V.12 Entrepreneurial success

From the evaluation of all interviews it can be concluded that interviewee four and five are most successful, mainly because both interviewees indicated that they perceive their selves as well as their business to be at least moderately positive on six out of seven factors that shape

entrepreneurial success. The only thing interviewee four was not positive about concerned her social contribution, even though she stated that it is in fact important to her and that she tries her best to act accordingly. Interviewee five was not content with the amount of goals she exceeded. Interviewee two is slightly less successful, yet still well above average. The main reason for this is that interviewee two indicated that he is not quite content with the amount of goals he surpasses and because personal development seems to lack. A possible explanation for the latter could be that this interviewer was just a bit over the average age of the interviewees. Interviewee number also

performs slightly above average yet just underperforms compared to interviewee number two. This participant was, just as interviewee number two, slightly unhappy with both the amount of goals she

(24)

surpasses and her personal development. However, another factor in which she underperforms is the contribution to society. The reason for interviewee number one to still perform slightly above average is because the position of her company in the market is higher than the other interviewees. Interviewees three and six perform slightly worse than average. In both their cases, social

contribution seems to lack. Interviewee three also indicated that the organizational growth is below par and that he does not exceed as many goals as he would like. On the other hand, interviewee number six states that his personal development has stagnated a long time ago and that his position in the market is just below average.

A clearer representation of the ranking can be found below. 1. Interviewee four and five

3. Interviewee two 4. Interviewee one

5. Interviewee three and six

V.13 Patterns

Some interesting patterns, making up for the selective codes, were recognized upon analysing the findings as presented above. The first pattern that was recognized was that the two film producers who were found to be most successful, interviewee four and five, are the ones who followed the EAVE program. According to the fourth interviewee, this is an international course for film

producers who want to develop and position themselves internationally. This statement is supported by the program its website (eave.org). However, their success cannot blindly be assigned to this program. Interviewee number five indicated that she followed the EAVE program only one year ago. As her successfulness cannot be assigned to the year after she did this program, a positive individual effect of EAVE on the successfulness of film producers in The Netherlands cannot be assumed.

The second pattern that stands out is that whether or not someone has been to the Dutch film academy does not seem to affect entrepreneurial successfulness for film producers in the

Netherlands. However, as stated by interviewee number four, who graduated from the film academy in 2001, the Dutch film academy does not really focus on educating entrepreneurial aspects.

Interviewees two and six also went to the film academy and both stated that there was not really an educational system back then. It was quite disordered.

The third pattern that was discovered is that completion of high school or higher education does not seem to be a prerequisite for successful entrepreneurship as a film producer in The Netherlands. This can be concluded from the fact that interviewee two did not finish any high school and is still somewhat successful. Furthermore, interviewee number five, one of the two most

(25)

successful film producers from this sample, only studied at academic level for two years after she dropped out. The one film producer with arguably the most education in the field of becoming a film producer, interviewee number six, is found to be one of two least successful. Additionally, the other participant who turned out to be one of two least successful producers, interviewee two, is the only one from this sample who graduated from university.

The fourth pattern found while analysing the findings is that all interviewees who did not attend the Dutch film academy, interviewees one, three and five, started working in the film and/or tv-industry because of personal interest in film and/or television. It is something the interviewees wanted to do because it was something they enjoyed doing, it was not something they did because they wanted to earn a lot of money.

The fifth pattern that was found is that, even though the sample size is not large enough to draw too much conclusions, there does not seem to be a striking relation between risk-taking propensity and film producers’ successfulness as well as between locus of control and film producers’ success. However, it is obvious that there are no successful film producers with a significantly low risk-taking propensity neither are there interviewees who tend to have an external locus of control. All interviewees seem to fit in with the pattern that entrepreneurs are less risk averse than average and have an internal locus of control rather than an external locus of control.

VI. Discussion

After a detailed description of the most important findings, the research question as proposed in the introduction can now be analysed. From the findings multiple arguments can be derived on whether or not entrepreneurial education enhances film producers’ successfulness in the Netherlands. When existing literature is taken into consideration a more profound view on the matter can be

established.

VI.1 Arguments

First of all, it can be argued that whether someone did or did not go to the Dutch film academy does not influence the successfulness of Dutch film producers. However, This does not mean that if someone wants to become a film producer he or she should not go to the film academy. Multiple interviewees argued that the film academy was useful to start building a network of filmmakers and screenwriters. Another advantage of the film academy is that it will give you a head start in terms of technical knowledge. This result merely suggests that, in the long run, the Dutch film academy is not proven to be of incremental value to one’s entrepreneurial success as a film producer in The Netherlands. It should be noted that, as mentioned by one of the interviewees, the Dutch film academy does not really provide entrepreneurial education. For this matter, the effect of

(26)

entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurial success as a film producer in The Netherlands cannot yet be rejected.

On the other hand, it could be argued that the Dutch film academy leads to earlier access to success for film producers. The premier argument for this is that as interviewee one indicated, a network is highly important in this industry and the film academy functions as a platform where students that are willing to work in the film industry are able to meet each other. Interviewee four is a good example for this. She started her own production company only one year after graduating from the Dutch film academy. Whereas all interviewees who did not go to the film academy spend some time being a film producer for an already existing company.

Secondly, the notion that entrepreneurial education is of high importance in order to become a successful entrepreneur in the film and media industry can, however, be rejected. This notion was made by Damasio and Bicacro (2017). This statement can be rejected as the interviews in this study proved that it is very much possible to become a successful entrepreneur in the film and media industry without any education in entrepreneurship.

That being said, this does still not mean that entrepreneurial education is incapable of positively influencing entrepreneurial success for film producers in The Netherlands. There was only one person among the interviewees who personally said to have had entrepreneurial education. This is interviewee four, the entrepreneurial education this participant was talking about is the EAVE program, an international program which aims at helping film producers improve themselves professionally. As mentioned in the findings section, one other participant, participant number five, followed this specific course as well. However, she followed the course only last year. The fact that interviewee four and five are the most successful film producers from the sample is still striking. Furthermore, interviewee four explicitly stated that the effect of this program on her entrepreneurial capabilities was noticeable. This suggests that entrepreneurial education is able improve certain aspects of entrepreneurship in the film industry. This would be in line with the findings from a literature study conducted by Henry, Hill and Leitch (2005). However, making statements as such with a small sample size will undoubtedly lack truthfulness.

On the other hand, as mentioned earlier, interviewee number five followed the EAVE program just one year ago. Taking this into consideration when analysing her answers to questions about the full range of aspects that shape her entrepreneurial successfulness does not support the previously suggested relationship. This is because interviewee five suggested that her personal growth has been quite constant over the years, there is no evidence that suggests that after doing the EAVE program her personal growth increased. This argumentation is also applicable to the

organizational growth of her company. Secondly, it is highly unlikely that this particular interviewee thanks factors such as her personal wealth solely to the previous year. Thirdly, she

(27)

indicated that she did exceed her own goals in the first eight years but that it rarely happens nowadays, the EAVE program did not contribute on this matter either. In contrast, it could also be argued that the increments from the EAVE program will be noticeable after some more time. The interviewee herself did suggest that the effect of the program had at least some positive effect on her entrepreneurial capabilities.

Another possible reason behind the entrepreneurial success of the interviewees is that they are very passionate about their jobs. First of all, all interviewees declared that they are very happy with their jobs and that they like how it rules their lives. The only interviewee who indicated that, after being in the business for more than thirty years, he started to get tired and bored of the work he is doing was interviewee six. Interviewee six also happens to be one out of the two least successful film producers. There might very well be a positive relation between the passion for film and/or television and being a successful film producer in The Netherlands. This is also supported when analysing the fourth pattern. This pattern suggests that all interviewees started working in either the television- or the film -industry out of personal interest. Furthermore, this is in line with a previous study in which it was found that fringe producers believe that passion and commitment to theatre gives them enough to be able to successfully start their business in the art-industry (the guardian, 2013). Additionally, the effect passion for film has on the successfulness of self-employed film producers in The Netherlands might be even bigger than the effect of entrepreneurial education.

Considering the results from this research it is possible to state that entrepreneurial education is certainly not the deciding factor in the question whether or not someone will be successful as a film producer in The Netherlands. Even though entrepreneurial education is able to enhance certain capabilities that entrepreneurs should possess, the role in predicting successfulness of self-employed film producers in The Netherlands is relatively small. This is supported by a study conducted by Henry, Hill and Leitch (2005) who found that entrepreneurial education can at least enhance some aspects of entrepreneurial capabilities. To answer the research question “To what extent can entrepreneurial education be considered a determinant for entrepreneurial successfulness of film producers in The Netherlands?”, Entrepreneurial education can increase entrepreneurial successfulness for a small fraction, yet it is far from a prerequisite for success.

Additionally, the fifth pattern that arose from analysing the answers from the interviewees suggests that risk-taking propensity and locus of control play a significant role in entrepreneurial successfulness as well. All interviewees have an internal locus of control and four out of six interviewees prefer risks more than average. The two interviewees that do not prefer risks more than average have an average risk-taking propensity.

(28)

VI.2 Adjustments to original conceptual model

A post research analysis of the conceptual model as presented in figure 1 concludes that there is at least one element that could potentially be included. The element that could be included is one which represents film producers’ passion for film. This element should be taken into consideration as this factor was found to positively affect film producers’ successfulness. In addition, including this factor would be in line with findings from previous research.

VI.3 Limitations

After analysing the findings from this research it can be concluded that there are some elements within the methodology that can be regarded as insufficient. To make the extent of usability of this paper clearer, a brief list of limitations is presented. The first limitation to this research has to do with the absence of a second researcher. Including a second researcher to be present while coding the interview transcription, as well as while analysing the codes, can be used as a tool to decrease subjectivism. This subjectivism is due to the fact that interpretation plays such a significant role in the process of coding the interview transcriptions. According to Daniel (2010), coding should be done with at least two people during the whole process after which a third party should review the codes. The second limitation to this research has to do with the fact that the interviews were conducted in Dutch. This means that, although translated as objectively as possible, at least some interpretive errors, or noise, occurred during the translation process. The third and final limitation to the research is that, as it is the case for a lot of qualitative studies, the research is not as strong on external validity as it is on internal validity. However, this study is easily replicable and for this matter very useful as a guideline to conduct the research in other industries.

VI.4 Suggestions for future research

For this matter, the first suggestion for future research is replicating this study in other creative industries to find out whether or not the effect of entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurial success is comparable to the same effect for Dutch film producers. A second suggestion for future research is the effect between passion for film and the successfulness of self-employed film producers in The Netherlands. As it seems, there is a connection between the two, yet it is

impossible to understand the extent of this effect based on the findings that resulted from this study. A final suggestion for future research is to construct a natural experiment to test the relation

between entrepreneurial education and entrepreneurial successfulness of film producers in The Netherlands quantitatively. Conducting such a research could potentially lead to an increase of validity through the use of triangulation.

(29)

VII. Conclusion

This paper is aimed at attempting to explain the effect of entrepreneurial education on the

successfulness of self-employed film producers in The Netherlands. The effect of entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurship in the broader sense is, although still quite heavily debated, a

frequent topic of research. In contrast, research on this particular effect in creative industries seems to be lacking. As different capabilities are required for entrepreneurship in creative industries, the effect of entrepreneurial education is likely to be different as well (filmacademie.ahk.nl, 2017). The research conducted to answer the research question being: “To what extent can entrepreneurial education be considered a determinant for entrepreneurial successfulness of film producers in The Netherlands?” was based on in-depth, unstructured interviews and questionnaires. Hence, a mixed-methods approach was adopted to answer the research question.

As addressed in the discussion section, the effect of entrepreneurial education on

successfulness of film producers in The Netherlands is certainly visible. Even though the effect may not be apparent at first glance, hence entrepreneurial education is not necessarily a prerequisite for successful entrepreneurship in this industry, entrepreneurial education can slightly elevate film producers’ level of successfulness. The effect of the Dutch film academy on successfulness is more apparent. Whether or not someone attended the Dutch film academy does not affect their

successfulness as a self-employed film producer in the long run. However, the Dutch film academy is beneficial for one’s technical knowledge as well as for one’s professional network.

Additionally, there seems to be a relation between passion for film and film producers’ successfulness. This relation was previously found for fringe producers in theatre (theguardian.com, 2013). This relation suggests that a lot of passion for film and television leads to a more successful start of entrepreneurship in the Dutch film industry.

Ideally a laboratory experiment on the effect of entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurial successfulness of Dutch film producers should be conducted. This is, however, very unlikely to be possible. For this matter, a natural experiment in the sense that self-employed film producers that did follow entrepreneurial education are compared with self-employed film producers that did not follow entrepreneurial education was generated. The most important limitations to the study include the absence of a second researcher to reduce subjectivism and, as it is the case for a lot of

qualitative research, that the external validity is not as strong as the internal validity. For this matter, the most important recommendations for future research include duplicating this research in

different creative industries, such as the fashion industry or the music industry.

This paper may have only scraped the surface on the exact magnitude of entrepreneurial education and its effect on entrepreneurial successfulness for film producers in The Netherlands. However, it did become apparent that entrepreneurial education, passion for film, locus of control,

(30)

and risk-taking propensity are all important factors in predicting self-employed film producers’ successfulness. Hence, the conceptual model, as proposed in this paper, could include at least a variable representing passion for film.

(31)

VIII. Bibliography

Attride-Stirling, J., (2001). Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative research, 1(3), 385-405.

Adeyemi-Bello, T., (2001) Validating Rotter’s (1966) Locus of control scale with a sample of not-for-profit leaders. Management research news, 24(6/7), 25-34.

Baxter, P., & Jack, S., (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The qualitative report, 13(4), 544-559.

Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J., (1998) What makes an entrepreneur. Journal of labor economics, 16(1), 26-60.

Charmaz, K., & Belgrave, L. L. (2007). Grounded theory. The Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology. Chattopadhyay, R., & Ghosh, A., (2002) Predicting entrepreneurial success: a socio-psychological

study. The journal of entrepreneurship, 11(1). 21-31.

Chattarjee, N., & Das, N., (2015). Key psychological factors as predictors of entrepreneurial success a conceptual framework. Academy of entrepreneurship journal, 21(1), 102-114. Chuang, T., Liu, Z., & Shiu, W., (2015). Game-based creativity assessment system: the

application of fuzzy theory. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 74(21), 9141-9155.

Damasio, M. J., & Bicacro, J., (2017). Entrepreneurship education for film and media arts: how can we teach entrepreneurship to students in the creative disciplines? Industry and higher education, 31(4). 253-266.

Turner, D. W., (2010) Qualitative interview design: a practical guide for novice investigators. The qualitative report, 15(3). 754-760.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S., (2008). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (Vol. 3). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication.

EAVE (2018). Retrieved from https://www.eave.org

Elert, N., Andersson, F. W., & Wennberg, K., (2015). The impact of entrepreneurship education in high school on long term entrepreneurial performance. Journal of economic behavior & Organization, 111. 209-223.

Farhangmehr, M., & Gonçalves, P., (2016). Predicting entrepreneurial motivation among university students, the role of entrepreneurship education, Education + Training. 58(7/8) 861-881. Farmer, S. M., Yao, X & Mcintyre, K.K., (2011). The Behavioural Impact of Entrepreneur Identity

Aspiration and Prior Entrepreneurial Experience. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 35(2) 245-273.

Fisher R, Maritz A and Lobo A (2014). Evaluating entrepreneurs’ perception of success:

Development of a measurement scale. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 20(5) 478–492.

Stimulating entrepreneurial efforts in the Dutch Film industry : how important is entrepreneurial education?