SUMMARY
Nowadays, the world is facing an aging problem. Because of advances in medical sciences and nutrition people live longer and face less medical problems. This development has been made possible through the economic growth the world is experiencing. The result from this development is that the world has to be able to generate the same growth with fewer people. A solution can be that the government stimulates people, and entrepreneurs specifically, to work longer to compensate for the aging of the world’s workforce. In this light, it becomes interesting to research the personality of entrepreneurs. What are important characteristic of a successful entrepreneur and does this personality change over time? With this knowledge, it becomes easier for the government to develop special programmes to retain serial entrepreneurs or to link young entrepreneurs with an older more experienced entrepreneur. Consequently, the objective of this study is to research empirically, if there are differences in personality between young and more older entrepreneurs and what the causes are for these differences. In order to reach this objective, the following research question will be addressed:
Does the entrepreneurial personality change over time and why?
The systematic literature review that is performed will provide proof for 9 hypotheses of the characteristics and capabilities of the E-scan of Driessen and Zwart (2006). The researched characteristics and capabilities are need for achievement, need for autonomy, need for power, social orientation, self belief, endurance, creativity, flexibility and market awareness. The 9 hypotheses will be tested by adopting a mixed method approach to empirical research. Quantitative research will be carried out by analyzing the E-scan tests of 65,536 aspiring entrepreneurs. These analyses will provide answers on the 9 hypotheses. In order to be able to explain the results of the quantitative research, a qualitative research of 16 interviews will be executed.
The results of the quantitative research support the conclusion that on average each of the researched characteristics and capabilities change during the life of a random entrepreneur. 3 from the 9 hypotheses could be accepted. These hypotheses assumed an inverted U-shaped relationship between age and the need for achievement, the need for power and self belief. Next to this, 4 of the 9 hypotheses could be only partially accepted. The results for the need for autonomy, social orientation, endurance and market awareness show increasing scores until middle age and remain fairly stable afterwards. The remaining hypotheses for creativity and flexibility could be rejected. The scores from the quantitative analysis follow the same trend as the 4 characteristics mentioned
explain the changes in the several characteristics are the character of the entrepreneur, the acquired (life) experience and the role that a person has within a firm or as an entrepreneur. The character of a person is named often by the interviewees to indicate a stable level of scores on a particular trait.
Because of this fact, this reason is not considered as one of the reasons that explain changes in the entrepreneurial personality. The other two reasons are considered as the reasons that explain the changes in the researched characteristics and capabilities.
The first recommendation that can be used in practice is that governments develops new policies for entrepreneurship. The government could stimulate partnerships between young and more older entrepreneurs, which makes it possible for young entrepreneurs to benefit from the social orientation and market awareness that is well developed with older entrepreneurs. Furthermore, the government could also make it more easy for older entrepreneurs to continue their business, giving the economy more time to benefit from these entrepreneurs. Scientific research could benefit from the following two recommendations. First, scientific research could benefit from following young entrepreneurs until they retire. With this approach, it is possible to map the whole development of the characteristics and capabilities during the whole career from one entrepreneur. Finally, there was little research available that researches the relationships between the entrepreneur’ age and the characteristics and capabilities of the E-scan.
There are 4 limitations that have played a role during this research. First, there was a lack of specific literature that could serve as foundation for the proposed hypotheses. Secondly, the sample used with the quantitative research did not contain one type of entrepreneur. Instead of researching for example serial entrepreneurs only, the majority of the sample was formed by aspiring entrepreneurs without any previous entrepreneurial experience. Besides this, there was also too little information of the background of the entrepreneur available. If this background information was available, it was possible to make a distinction between aspiring and serial entrepreneurs. Thirdly, there were time constraints during the process of selecting the entrepreneurs for the interviews. If there was more time available, there were possibly more serial entrepreneurs involved. Finally, there were time constraints during the interviews. A few of the entrepreneurs did not have enough time to make it possible for the interviewer to ask more in-depth questions besides the questions from the questionnaire. More time during the interviews could make the answers on the questionnaire more reliable. Furthermore, the respondents were asked to look back at their career so far. Obviously, it is difficult to remember and compare objectively the current scores on the traits of the E-scan and the scores that a respondent might have scored 30 years earlier.
INDEX
1. INTRODUCTION...5
2. SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW ...8
2.1 Phase 1: Planning the review...8
2.2 Phase 2: Conducting the review ...10
2.3 Phase 3: Reporting the results...17
2.3.1 E-scan and the entrepreneurial personality...17
2.3.2 Influence of age on the entrepreneurial personality...22
2.3.2.1 Age and the need for achievement ...23
2.3.2.2 Age and the need for autonomy ...24
2.3.2.3 Age and the need for power ...24
2.3.2.4 Age and social orientation...25
2.3.2.5 Age and self belief ...25
2.3.2.6 Age and endurance...26
2.3.2.7 Age and creativity...26
2.3.2.8 Age and flexibility ...26
2.3.2.9 Age and market awareness ...27
3. METHODOLOGY...28
3.1 Research approach...28
3.2 Research sample and data collection ...28
3.3 E-scan ...29
3.4 Questionnaire ...30
3.5 Data analysis ...30
4. RESULTS...32
4.1 Quantitative research: analysis E-scan database ...32
4.1.1 Descriptive statistics ...32
4.1.2 Age and need for achievement ...36
4.1.3 Age and the need for autonomy ...37
4.1.4 Age and the need for power ...38
4.1.5 Age and social orientation...39
4.1.6 Age and self belief ...40
4.1.7 Age and endurance...41
4.1.8 Age and creativity...42
4.1.9 Age and flexibilty...43
4.1.10 Age and market awareness ...44
4.2 Qualitative research: interviews E-scan respondents ...45
4.2.1 Age and need for achievement ...46
4.2.2 Age and the need for autonomy ...48
4.2.3 Age and the need for power ...50
4.2.4 Age and social orientation...51
4.2.5 Age and self belief ...53
4.2.6 Age and endurance...55
4.2.7 Age and creativity...56
4.2.8 Age and flexibility ...58
4.2.9 Age and market awareness ...59
5. DISCUSSION...62
6. CONCLUSION ...71
6.2 Recommendations for practice and research ...72
6.3 Research limitations...73
REFERENCES ...74
APPENDICES...81
Appendix A: Summaries identified literature ...81
Appendix B: Reports 16 interviews E-scan respondents ...107
Appendix C: Questionnaire E-scan respondents...203
Appendix D: Results quantitative research in tables...208
1. INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, the world is facing an aging problem. According to an ageing report of the United Nations (United Nations, 2010) the proportion of people, above the age of 60, has risen from 8% in 1950 to 11% in 2009. The expectation is that in the year 2050 this percentage has doubled up to 22% of the total world population. Because of advances in medical sciences and nutrition people live longer and face less medical problems (Baumol et al., 2007; Breyer et al., 2010). On the other side because of this fact people also have fewer children, who were in the past necessary to earn money for the family. This development has been made possible through the economic growth the world is experiencing. In 2007, Baumol et al. state that “…while growth certainly helped contribute to the aging of the world, it is going to be desperately needed to help pay for the medical care and income support promised to the elderly...” (2007: 29). Bloom et al. (2010: 584) add to the argument of Baumol that, “…with increasing longevity and ageing populations, retirement policy, pension and health-care finance, the efficiency of labour and capital markets, and the structure of regional and global economic systems are likely to adjust…” Following these quotes, it can be assumed that, to finance the above mentioned adjustments, the world has to be able to generate the same growth with fewer people.
A solution can be that the government stimulates people, and entrepreneurs specifically, to work longer to compensate for the aging of the world’s workforce. Especially entrepreneurs can be a driving force for the economy, since they start to let small businesses grow into large corporations (Wiklund et al., 2009; Baumol et al., 2007). These businesses create both growth and employment. In this light, it becomes interesting to research the personality of entrepreneurs more in-depth. Which characteristics are in particular important for entrepreneurs? And do these characteristics change over time? Assuming that people change over time, it becomes relevant to know more about the reasons that some characteristics of entrepreneurs change. If there is knowledge about the reasons why certain crucial characteristics and traits change, the government can take measures accordingly.
The government might, for example, develop programs to retain serial entrepreneurs for the economy or can hire these entrepreneurs as educational counselling for starting entrepreneurs.
Surprisingly enough, little is known in the literature about the development of the entrepreneurial personality (Weber and Schaper, 2004). Up till now, research is focussing mainly on exploring the entrepreneurial personality and not on changes in this personality that may occur and the implications they may have. The entrepreneurial personality has been researched from the viewing point of venture survival (Ciavarella et al., 2004), varying entrepreneurial traits across different
an entrepreneur is managing (Dvir et al., 2010), the Big Five personality model (Zhao and Seibert, 2006; Shane et al., 2010) and the differences between entrepreneurs and managers in traits that are considered to be connected to entrepreneurial activity and success (Tan, 2001; Stewart and Roth, 2007; DeMartino et al., 2006; Wagener et al., 2010).
Besides the focus on the exploration of the entrepreneurial personality, there are some scholars who have doubts about the role of personality in predicting entrepreneurial behaviour and success. For example Gartner (1989) point out that it is difficult to label people as an entrepreneur on the base of their characteristics. Problems with this trait approach stem from the wide range of definitions formulated and used in several studies. These varying definitions make research results often unreliable. Instead of focussing on traits and characteristics, Gartner argues to use a behavioural approach in which the personality is ancillary to the behaviour of the entrepreneur. Next to this, there are scholars who recognize the value of personality in predicting entrepreneurial behaviour, but do not think that there is an ideal entrepreneurial personality. Miner (1997) identifies in his article The Expanded Horizon for Achieving Entrepreneurial Success four types of entrepreneurs: the personal achiever, the empathic super salesman, the real manager and the idea generator. Miner also identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the distinct types of entrepreneurs. Müller and Gappisch (2005) adopted the same approach in explaining the variance in personality between entrepreneurs. They identified five distinct personality types among entrepreneurs: the creative acquisitor, the controlled perseverator, the distant achiever, the rational manager and the egocentric agitator.
As mentioned before, the entrepreneurial personality is explored by many researchers. This suggests that the difficulties around the used definitions and consequently the gathered data are solved. One of the most important techniques to overcome the mentioned problems are the use of meta analysis. Among others Rauch and Frese (2007) and Stewart and Roth (2007) have used meta analysis to produce reliable ‘trait-based’ contributions to literature. Strangely enough, the evolving literature on the existence of an entrepreneurial personality does not provide clear answers to the impact of age on this personality. Lévesque and Minniti (2006) talk in this light about the dynamic interplay between age, wealth and risk aversion that influences the decision to become entrepreneur. At relatively lower age the wealth of most people is below the wealth of people of middle age. These young entrepreneurs are logically not that risk averse because they have less to lose than other people, who often have the responsibility to take care of a family. A problem in this process can be the lack of experience they often encounter.
Although, interest in the old entrepreneur is growing in the last decade (Weber and Schaper, 2004;
Singh and DeNoble, 2003; Kautonen, 2008), there is still a lack of empirical evidence on the role of age on the entrepreneurial personality. Consequently, the objective of this study is to research empirically, if there are differences in personality between young and more older entrepreneurs. In order to reach this objective, the following research question is addressed:
Does the entrepreneurial personality change over time and why?
This article starts with an evaluation of the entrepreneurial personality literature and the E-scan of Driessen and Zwart (2006) by applying a systematic literature review. The goal of this systematic approach is to provide a clear picture of the empirical evidence of the last decade. The steps taken and the choices made in this systematic approach are described in the next section. The outcomes of the systematic literature review are used to develop 9 hypotheses for each of the 9 characteristics and capabilities of the E-scan.
After the development of the hypotheses, the methodology and data collection process will be discussed, followed by the findings of the quantitative and qualitative empirical research. This article concludes with a discussion and conclusion of the literature and the empirical data, and a discussion of the research limitations and implications for future research.
2. SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW
In order to identify relevant literature about the entrepreneurial personality and the influence of age, a systematic literature review is applied. The process of a systematic literature review is first described by Brereton et al. in 2007. The systematic literature review can be subdivided in ten tasks, that can be grouped in three main phases: planning the review, conducting the review and reporting the results. The purpose of this literature review is to describe clearly what steps were taken during the review, what adds transparency to the identification of relevant literature. Figure 1 below shows the ten tasks and the three main phases.
FIGURE 1
Systematic literature review process
2.1 Phase 1: Planning the review
The first step in the planning of the review is regarded by Brereton et al. (2007) as the most critical one. The specified research question should not be changed after the validation of the review protocol. As already mentioned in the introduction, this study aims to answer the following research question:
Phase 1:
Plan Review
Phase 2:
Conduct Review
Phase 3:
Document Review
1. Specify Research Questions 2. Develop Review Protocol 3. Validate Review Protocol
4. Identify Relevant Research 5. Select Primary Studies 6. Assess Study Quality 7. Extract Required Data 8. Synthesise Data
9. Write Review Report 10. Validate Report
Source: Brereton et al
.,
Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain, 2007.To guarantee the quality of the reviewed articles, only articles from scholarly (peer reviewed) journals are included in this review. All articles are found in the EBSCO host, that is accessible via the University of Groningen. The EBSCO host consists of multiple databases, from which Business Source Premier has produced the most search results. This study aims to focus the review on recent literature. For this purpose, a temporal parameter is added to the search for literature: only literature between January 2000 and August 2011 is included in the review. An exception on the rule above, is the literature that is used for the backing of the E-scan. The E-scan of Driessen and Zwart (2006) provides most of the data for this study. Because of the fact that the scientific justification of the E-scan is mostly based on literature from before 2000, this literature is regarded as an exception and is not taken into account with the systematic literature review.
The aim of this study is to find out what role age plays in the entrepreneurial personality. In structuring this review, the words ‘entrepreneur’, ‘personality’ and ‘age’ play accordingly all an important role. Based on the words mentioned above, three search strings are applied within the EBSCO host. The first is entrepreneur and age, the second is entrepreneur and personality and the last one is personality and age. The expectation is that these words cover all the relevant literature for this study. The exception is again for the same reason, the literature that is the basis for the E- scan of Driessen and Zwart (2006).
Finally, after removing duplicate studies, the three search strings resulted in a huge sample of 705 potentially relevant articles published between January 2000 and August 2011. Table 1 presents an overview of the relevant articles, subdivided by search string. The generated sample of 705 articles is further processed in the next step of this systematic literature review.
TABLE 1
Overview of the search results
Search string Date of search Date range Results
Entrepreneur and age August 30, 2011 January 2000 – August 2011 107 Entrepreneur and personality August 30, 2011 January 2000 – August 2011 66
Personality and age August 30, 2011 January 2000 – August 2011 542
2.2 Phase 2: Conducting the review
The second phase of the systematic literature is the conducting of the review. First, it is necessary to identify relevant literature. For this purpose, all abstracts of the articles are read in detail. The sample of 705 potential relevant articles is reduced by using the inclusion and exclusion criteria defined in Table 2.
TABLE 2
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria
1. Articles that contribute to the theory about the entrepreneurial personality in relation to the characteristics and traits used for the development of the E-scan 2. Articles that contribute to the theory
about the relationship between the entrepreneur and the age of the entrepreneur
3. Articles that contribute to the theory about the influence of age (20+ years) on one’s personality.
4. Empirical and meta-analysis studies
1. Articles about the entrepreneurial personality that do not contribute to the theory that is used for the E-scan
2. Articles that contribute to the theory about the influence of age on one’s personality in a specific context
3. Articles in non-English languages
4. Review articles without any (new) empirical evidence
First, it is important to review the literature about the entrepreneurial personality. Unfortunately, there is no agreement among scholars about the characteristics that are part of the entrepreneurial personality. Most of the researchers see the entrepreneurial personality as a cluster of characteristics that make the possessors more eager to move into entrepreneurship (Cromie, 2000).
Cromie (2000: 25) adds to the discussion about the entrepreneurial personality that “..attributes are important but not all pervading determinants of behaviour..” Because of this important role in predicting entrepreneurial behaviour, the decision is made to include the literature about the entrepreneurial personality in this review. The focus in this review lays on characteristics and traits that are studied for the development of the E-scan. The reason for this focus is that the available empirical data stem from this E-scan. This makes it unnecessary to review all characteristics and
After this, the relationship between entrepreneurs and their age is researched. The aim of this search is to identify differences that appear between young and old entrepreneurs in for example risk behaviour (Rai, 2008). These differences are important because they can lead to differences in business success (Harada, 2003). The last search theme is the influence of age on one’s personality.
The decision is made to focus on literature that describes differences in personality in the adult age.
Changes in personality in childhood are less interesting, because normally people become entrepreneur only when they reach an adult age. The last inclusion criteria is the requirement that a study has to produce new empirical evidence or that a study generates new evidence based on a meta-analysis.
As already explained, literature about characteristics and traits of the entrepreneurial personality which are not included in the foundation of the E-scan is not reviewed. The second exclusion criterion is that literature about the influence of age on personality in a specific context is not included. The reason is that specific events, for example a traumatic event like the loss of a friend or relative or the influence of alcohol, can have great impact on someone’s personality. However, these experiences can have such an impact that might result in changes in personality that might not have taken place if this event has not occurred. Finally, articles in non-English languages and review articles will be excluded from this systematic literature review.
In addition to the whole inclusion/exclusion process, it is also important to judge the quality of the primary studies. The quality of the selected studies can add some weight to the importance of some studies in favour of others (Brereton et al., 2007). The intention of this study was to include studies of top (entrepreneurship) journals only. It became evident soon that this intention could not led to enough valuable data. The conclusion was that it was better to include valuable studies of less established journals also in the systematic literature review. In the end, the conclusion can be that the whole review process brought up studies from high quality journals and a few from less established journals.
After the whole inclusion and exclusion process 27 articles remain relevant for the study aim. This means that 3,8 % of the initial sample is reviewed thoroughly. Next to the 27 identified articles, I will also consider the articles that form the justification for the E-scan. The 27 relevant articles are read and reviewed in detail. To add transparency to the whole review process, all 27 articles are summarised by using the following headings: Aim, Research Methods, Results and Conclusions. These summaries can be read in appendix A. In addition, data are taken from all articles to give an overview of the identified literature. The extracted data include information about research methods, sample
sizes and response rates, longitudinal study (Y/N), country of origin and research themes. The data are summarised in Table 3.
Most of the reviewed studies (17) make use of a questionnaire or a psychometric test to gain their data. Only five of them make use of two research methods, besides a questionnaire or a psychometric test also a personal interview or regression tests. The remaining five studies have carried out a meta-analysis. The sample sizes and response rates vary considerable, from a huge sample of 1,267,218 (Soto et al., 2011) to a small sample of 70 participants (Rai, 2008).
Unfortunately, for some studies it is impossible to calculate response rates because of a lack of necessary data. Five of the identified studies have a longitudinal character, which add reliability to the acquired data. Ten studies have acquired their data in the United States of America. Other countries involved in this systematic literature review are among others Singapore, Germany and the United Kingdom. The most important data are the key themes of the articles. These themes are discussed in the next section, the results section of this review.
TABLE 3
Overview of reviewed articles
Article Journal Research
methods
Sample size (response rates)
Longitudinal study (Y/N)
Country of origin Key themes
Ayala Calvo, J.C. &
Manzano Garciá, G.
(2010)
Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship
Questionnaire 596 (100%) N Spain Entrepreneur and personality:
Characteristics of successful entrepreneurs
Bönte, W., Falck, O.
& Heblich, S. (2009
Economic Geography
Poisson regressions &
Standard-effect regressions
31 samples N Germany Entrepreneur and age:
Age of starting entrepreneurs
Ciavarella, M.A., Buchholtz, A.K., Riordan, C.M., Gatewood, R.D. &
Stokes, G.S. (2004)
Journal of Business Venturing
Questionnaire 242 (45,9%) N United States of America
Entrepreneur and personality:
Big Five differences and venture survival
Cromie, S. (2000) European Journal of Work &
Organizational Psychology
Psychometric test
Unknown N United Kingdom Entrepreneur and personality:
Traits of entrepreneurs
DeMartino, R., Barbato, R. &
Jacques, P.H (2006)
Journal of Small Business Management
Questionnaire 5,800 (42%) N United States of America
Entrepreneur and personality:
Achievement motivation of entrepreneurs
Dvir, D., Sadeh, A. &
Malach-Pines, A.
(2010)
Journal of High Technology Management Research
Questionnaire 88 (100%) N Israel Entrepreneur and personality:
Personality and ventures fit of entrepreneurs
Harada, N. (2003) Japan & the World Economy
Questionnaire 5,911 (Unknown) N Japan Entrepreneur and age:
Differences in business success
Helson, R., Kwan, V.S.Y & Jones, C.
(2002)
Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology
Psychometric test and personal interview
600 (97,2%) Y United States of
America
Personality and age:
Differences in personality with increasing age
Helson, R. & Soto, C.J. (2005)
Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology
Psychometric test
135 (91%) Y United States of
America
Personality and age:
Differences in personality with increasing age
Jackson, J.J., Bogg, T., Walton, K.E., Wood, D., Harms, P.D., Lodi-Smith, J., Edmonds, G.W. &
Roberts, B.W. (2009)
Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology
Psychometric test and personal interview
781 (Unknown) N United States of
America
Personality and age:
Differences in conscientiousness with increasing age
Jones, C., Livson, N.
& Peskin, H. (2003)
Journal of Personality Assessment
Psychometric test
229 (Unknown) Y United States of
America
Personality and age:
Differences in personality with increasing age
Kautonen, T., Luoto, S. & Tornikoski, E. T.
(2010)
Small Business Economics
Questionnaire 560 (23,2%) N Finland Entrepreneur and age:
Influence of work history on entrepreneurial intentions Koe Hwee Nga, J. &
Shamuganathan, G.
(2010)
Journal of Business Ethics
Questionnaire 200 (90,5%) N Malaysia Entrepreneur and personality:
Personality traits of social entrepreneurs
Lee, D.Y. & Tsang, E.W.K. (2001)
Journal of Management Studies
Questionnaire 210 (80%) N Singapore Entrepreneur and personality:
Traits of entrepreneurs
Rauch, A. & Frese, M. (2007)
European Journal of Work &
Organizational Psychology
Meta-analysis - N - Entrepreneur and personality:
Relationship between
personality traits and business success
Rai, S.K. (2008) Journal of Services Research
Questionnaire 70 (Unknown) N India Entrepreneur and age:
Differences in risk behaviour, ownership and investment
Reynolds, P.D., Carter, N.M., Gartner, W.B. &
Greene, P.G. (2004)
Small Business Economics
Questionnaire and phone interview
64,622 (48,4%) Y United States of America
Entrepreneur and age:
Data of nascent entrepreneurs
Roberts, B.W., Caspi, A. & Moffitt, T.E.
(2001)
Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology
Questionnaire 1019 (96,1%) Y United States of America
Personality and age:
Differences in personality with increasing age
Roberts, B.W., Walton, K.E. &
Viechtbauer, W.
(2006)
Psychological Bulletin
Meta-analysis 92 samples N - Personality and age:
Differences in personality with increasing age
Soto, C.J., John, O.P., Gosling, S.D. &
Potter, J. (2011)
Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology
Questionnaire 1,267,218 (Unknown)
N English speaking
countries
Personality and age:
Differences in Big Five dimensions with increasing age
Srivastava, S., John, O.P., Gosling, S.D. &
Potter, J. (2003)
Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology
Psychometric test
132,515 (Unknown)
N United States of
America & Canada
Personality and age:
Differences in personality with increasing age
Stewart, W.H. &
Roth, P.L. (2007)
Journal of Small Business Management
Meta-analysis - N - Entrepreneur and personality:
Achievement motivation differences between
managers and entrepreneurs Van der Velde,
M.E.G. & Van den Berg, P.T. (2005)
Journal of Business and Psychology
Questionnaire 522 (52,0%) N The Netherlands Personality and age:
Differences in flexibility with increasing age
Wagener, S., Gorgievski, M. &
Rijsdijk, S. (2010)
Service Industries Journal
Questionnaire 480 (40,4%) N The Netherlands Entrepreneur and personality:
Traits of entrepreneurs
Warr, P., Miles, A, &
Platts, C. (2001)
Journal of Occupational &
Questionnaire and phone
8214 from 4 samples
N United Kingdom Personality and age:
Differences in personality with
Organizational Psychology
interview (Unknown) increasing age
Zhao, H. & Seibert, S.E. (2006)
Journal of Applied Psychology
Meta-analysis 23 samples N - Entrepreneur and personality:
Big Five differences between managers and entrepreneurs Zhao, H., Seibert,
S.E. & Lumpkin, G.T.
(2010)
Journal of Management
Meta-analysis 60 samples N - Entrepreneur and personality:
Personality traits and entrepreneurial intentions and performance
2.3 Phase 3: Reporting the results
In the final phase of the systematic literature review the results of this review are reported. The main goal, of the systematic literature review, is to identify the key themes in the literature about the entrepreneurial personality and the role of increasing age in this personality. The results of the review are used as input for the conceptual model and hypotheses.
The results of the systematic literature review can be subdivided in three categories: entrepreneur and age, entrepreneur and personality and personality and age. These three categories are the result from the search strings that are used in section 2.1. Every identified article has at least a link with one of the three categories in order to be relevant. The first subsection of this review will be about the E- scan from Driessen and Zwart (2006). This is an important part of the review, because data of the E- scan will be used in the empirical part of this study. The theory behind the E-scan will be discussed and updated with more recent literature. The second subsection is about the role of age in the entrepreneurial personality. Because of the lack of literature on this subject, I will use a lot of literature from psychologists to discuss the role of age in the development of the identified traits and capabilities of the entrepreneurial personality.
2.3.1 E-scan and the entrepreneurial personality
The E-scan is a self-reflection tool for entrepreneurs and people who have the ambition to be an entrepreneur. Driessen and Zwart (2006: 8) explain the purpose of the test as follow:
“The purpose of the test is to objectively provide insight in the entrepreneurial competencies of the respondent. Based on the answers on an online survey a personalised report is automatically generated. This report specifically discusses the entrepreneurial competencies of the respondent. Advices and practical tips in the personal report are based on the respondent’s scores. The individual scores are presented in a spider diagram and compared to the norm profile of the sector the respondent selected at the beginning of the questionnaire”.
The norm profiles of the different sectors are assessed by consultants who are active in the sector for which they assessed a norm profile. The results of the E-scan can be used by entrepreneurs to identify the weak points in their competencies in order to train these competencies to become a better entrepreneur. Next to this, entrepreneurs can select a capable successor with results of the E- scan. For aspiring entrepreneurs the results of the test can also be helpful to identify their weak competencies. They can solve their weak points in two ways. They can either train their weak points or find a partner that complements their less developed competencies.
The E-scan is scientifically based on competence theory. A competence is a talent, which enables someone to excel in a particular job. According to Lahti (1999) a competence is a collection of knowledge, capabilities, characteristics and attitudes that is necessary to perform well as for example entrepreneur. The E-scan measures the capabilities and characteristics of the entrepreneur. Driessen and Zwart (2006) have developed constructs for every characteristic and capability. The constructs, using seven-point Likert-scales for the three capabilities are based on the work of Quinn (1988) and Lorrain and Dussault (1988). The construct for internal locus of control is based on the work of Paulhus (1983) and the other constructs are based on the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule, created in 1959. The motivation of an entrepreneur can be assessed in a personal interview. The knowledge part of the entrepreneurial competence is not taken into account, because this information can be derived from a business plan.
The attitude towards in this case entrepreneurship, the motivation, is crucial for an aspiring entrepreneur. If someone lacks the motivation to become entrepreneur, other capabilities and knowledge become insignificant because it is not likely that this person will use these capabilities and knowledge. Driessen and Zwart (2006) distinguish two different motivations to start a business. Push factors are externally driven motives to start a business. An example of such a factor is unemployment. The other, internally driven motive, are named pull factors. If someone has a good idea and always wanted to have their own business, this person is ‘pulled’ into entrepreneurship. The knowledge that an entrepreneur possesses is also important for an entrepreneur (Driessen and Zwart, 2006). Knowledge about finance, marketing and sales can be the difference between success and failure. In addition to knowledge, also experience plays an important role in the entrepreneurial competence. Experience in a certain sector or company can generate knowledge advantages for an entrepreneur.
The third component of the entrepreneurial competence are the capabilities of the entrepreneur.
The difference between capabilities and characteristics is that a capability can be developed by training and a characteristic is more or less stable (Driessen and Zwart, 2006). There are seven capabilities that contribute to the success of an entrepreneur (Lorrain and Dussault, 1988; Brinkman, 2000). The most important capabilities for a starting entrepreneur are market awareness, creativity and flexibility (Driessen and Zwart, 2006). For this reason these capabilities are incorporated in the E- scan and discussed in detail below. The last component of the competence theory is the characteristics of the entrepreneur. As mentioned earlier, characteristics are more or less stable traits that make people suitable for in this case entrepreneurship. Scholars have identified several
the six most important traits in their test to assess the entrepreneurial competency of an aspiring entrepreneur. These six traits are need for achievement, need for autonomy, need for power (dominance), social orientation (need for affiliation), endurance and self belief (internal locus of control). Another important characteristic is the risk taking propensity of an entrepreneur. The two authors have decided to leave this trait out of the test, because of problems with the development of a reliable construct. All traits are discussed in detail below.
One of the most researched traits in entrepreneurship literature is the need for achievement, also called achievement motivation. Achievement motivation underlies the commitment and perseverance necessary for the entrepreneurial endeavour (Stewart and Roth, 2007). In more simple words, it is the desire to do well to attain a feeling of accomplishment (McClelland, 1961 in Stewart and Roth, 2007). DeMartino et al. (2006) contribute to the discussion by stating that male entrepreneurs have a significantly higher achievement motivation than male non-entrepreneurs.
Surprisingly, they also discovered that female entrepreneurs do not have a higher achievement motivation than female non-entrepreneurs. This finding may suggest that women, independent of the fact of being an entrepreneur or not, have a higher intrinsic achievement motivation than men.
In addition to the findings of DeMartino et al., Stewart and Roth (2007) also find in their meta- analysis that entrepreneurs have a higher achievement motivation than non-entrepreneurs.
Although, not supported by every research I may assume that entrepreneurs possess more achievement motivation than non-entrepreneurs. The results of the effect of achievement motivation on business creation and success gives the same image. Lee and Tsang (2001) confirm that the need for achievement positively influences business success. While the above mentioned conclusions are based on samples in Asia, which can be a disturbing factor, the results of a meta- analysis of Rauch and Frese (2007) also confirm that the need for achievement may be part of an entrepreneurial personality. In addition to this, Dvir et al. (2010) find that the commitment and the need for achievement of entrepreneurs active in high novelty and high technological uncertain ventures, is higher than the commitment of entrepreneurs active in low novelty and low technological uncertain ventures. The personality of the entrepreneurs seems to correspond with the ventures they manage. Finally, Ayala Calvo and Manzano Garciá (2010) find that a high need for achievement positively influences the business success of an entrepreneur.
The second trait of considered in the E-scan is the need for autonomy, closely linked to independence. Where independence is taking responsibility for one’s own judgement instead of following the judgement of others (Wagener et al., 2010), the need for autonomy is the need of people and entrepreneurs in particular to be in control of their own decisions, avoiding restricting
environments and rules of others. Rauch and Frese (2007) find that the need for autonomy influences both business creation and business success in a positive way. Wagener et al. (2010) find comparable proof for high levels of independence. While being regarded as part of the entrepreneurial personality, the need for autonomy is also often the number one reason for entrepreneurs to start their venture. This can explained in both a negative and a positive way. The negative explanation is the inability to function in a restricted environment with a superior who tells you what to do. The positive explanation is the lack of freedom and opportunities within for example a company. This restricted environment can prevent someone to develop their own ideas, an ability that, through innovations, can benefit the whole society.
The third trait that is considered in the E-scan is the need for power, also called dominance.
According to Helson and Soto (2005) dominance is the social assurance and the need to have power over, and make decisions for, a group of people. This trait seems important for an entrepreneur because as an entrepreneur you are responsible for your firm and your employees. This dominant position requires a person who is comfortable and confident in this role to be able to make the best possible decisions.
The next characteristic measured in the E-scan is someone’s social orientation or need for affiliation.
Unfortunately, the systematic literature review process has not delivered any relevant scientific literature. However, the need for affiliation is related to agreeableness, one of the Big Five personality dimensions. People who score high on agreeableness are trusting, forgiving, caring, altruistic, and gullible (Zhao and Seibert, 2006). They have cooperative values and share a preference for positive interpersonal relationships. This seems a good characteristic for an entrepreneur, because they need other people to make a success of their business. If an entrepreneur can create positive relationships with people, the chance that the entrepreneur’s firm will be accepted will be more apparent. This assumption is confirmed by Koe Hwee Nga and Shamuganathan (2010) who find that agreeableness positively influences (social) entrepreneurship. Contrary to the results above, Zhao, Seibert and Lumpkin (2010) find no relationship between agreeableness and entrepreneurial intentions and performance. They argue that it is good to be able to communicate with others and create partnerships. However, an entrepreneur can also be to social which makes him easy exploitable by others.
The fifth trait that is considered important for the entrepreneurial personality is the internal locus of control, named self belief in the E-scan. Entrepreneurs with an internal locus of control believe in
venture (Rauch and Frese, 2007). This seems an important trait because the entrepreneur is the one who needs to be confident of his ability to make his venture a success. This assumption is justified by empirical evidence (Lee and Tsang, 2001; Rauch and Frese, 2007; Ayala Calvo and Manzano Garciá, 2010). Lee and Tsang (2001) find in their study that an internal locus of control enhances venture growth. The problem with this study is the sample size that is used. The sample is national oriented, so the findings can not easily be generalised. The results of the study of Rauch and Frese (2007) can give their conclusions more weight. They also conclude that an internal locus of control is crucial for business creation and business success.
The last characteristic that is measured is the endurance of an entrepreneur. Unfortunately, the systematic literature review process has not delivered any relevant scientific literature. However, comparable with the need for affiliation, also endurance can be related to one of the Big Five personality dimensions. In this case, the dimension of conscientiousness is comparable with endurance. According to Zhao and Seibert (2006: 261), “conscientiousness indicates an individual’s degree of organization, persistence, hard work, and motivation in the pursuit of goal accomplishment.” Ciavarella et al. (2004) find in their research that conscientiousness positively influences the chances of a firm to survive. The assumption can be made that endurance is a vital characteristic for every entrepreneur because entrepreneurship is a continuous battle to survive with ups and downs. Besides this, Dvir et al. (2010) find that also the market in which an entrepreneur is active, says something about the level of endurance of an entrepreneur. Entrepreneurs who are active in high novelty and high technological uncertain have a higher endurance than entrepreneurs active in low novelty and low technological uncertain markets. Finally, Ayala Calvo and Manzano Garciá (2010) find that the resilience of an entrepreneur influences the chances of business success positively. Resilience can be regarded as part of the overall endurance of an entrepreneur.
The first capability that the E-scan measures is creativity. According to Cromie (2000) creativity is a process encompassing stages such as the accumulation of knowledge, reflection, developing, and evaluating an idea, and creative people tend to exhibit certain characteristics. They tend to think in non-conventional ways, challenge existing assumptions, and they are flexible and adaptable in their problem solving. Dvir et al. (2010) find that entrepreneurs have greater creativity when they are active in a high novelty and high technological uncertain markets. It seems that the level of creativity of the entrepreneur fits perfectly with the venture they manage. Creativity seems to be a ‘must- have’ skill for a starting entrepreneur because entrepreneurs have to launch new ideas and products in order to become an entrepreneur anyway. A lack of creativity can therefore be an obstacle for many starting entrepreneurs in their pursuit of business success.
Next to creativity, entrepreneurs have to flexible to be able to react on changing circumstances.
Entrepreneurs who score high on flexibility are people who do not need to live a structured life. In addition, they are open to new ideas or ways of doing things (Helson, Jones and Kwan, 2002). As a starting entrepreneur, it is important to let initial plans go if the situation requires a different approach. Therefore, it is possible to assume that flexible entrepreneurs are often the most successful one’s also.
The last capability that is part of the E-scan is market awareness or market orientation. An entrepreneur who is market oriented has “an understanding of potential customer needs, provides superior customer value and responds to changing customer needs and competitor activities in order to exploit opportunities and circumvent threats” (Morgan and Strong, 1998; in Wagener, Gorgievski and Rijsdijk, 2010: 1518). Also this capability seems to be a key capability for every starting entrepreneur. Great invented products only become a success if the customer buys these products. If there is no market for a product a firm is doomed to go bankrupt right away. Besides the customer side, it is also crucial to keep in touch with competitors to be able to react on the latest developments in the market as soon as possible. Finally, Zhao, Seibert and Lumpkin (2010) find a positive relationship between business success and the openness to new experiences. The openness to new experiences is the Big Five factor that is related to both creativity and market awareness, which makes it possible to think ‘’out-of-the-box’’ and come up with innovative solutions.
2.3.2 Influence of age on the entrepreneurial personality
Before addressing the question if the E-scan characteristics and capabilities of the entrepreneurial personality changes with age, it is important to know when most entrepreneurs start their business.
This is important because, besides the entrepreneurial personality, also contextual factors like education, previous work experiences and the family situation play a role in the decision to become an entrepreneur. These factors have all the property to change with age. Reynolds et al. (2004) find that men between 25 and 34 years are most likely to start their own business. A finding that is supported by the findings of Rai (2008). It can be assumed that at this life stage potential entrepreneurs have acquired a few years work experience and ideas to do a particular job more efficient. Besides this they have often less properties than older people with the consequence that they have less to lose. Rai (2008: 216) says about the dilemma of experience and properties that the
“…age of the entrepreneur is very important because on the one hand, age increases individual ability to exploit opportunities. On the other hand, however, opportunity costs and therefore
reluctance to bear risk increases with age…” Kautonen et al. (2010) find that people over the age of 50 are less likely to start a firm in comparison with their younger colleagues. Especially, when these people work in so called ‘blue collar’ industries they enjoy less social support of their spouse, friends and acquaintances. Besides this they often lack confidence in their own abilities also. Aging seems to bring improved ability to exploit opportunities while the opportunity costs increase equally.
However, Harada (2003) finds in his study that aging has a negative effect on business success, while related business experience has a positive effect on business success. These results seem to contradict with each other and the findings of Rai (2008), however it explains that increasing age is an advantage only if the entrepreneur has acquired related business experience also. Finally, Bönte, et al. (2009) find an inverse U-shaped relationship between age and entrepreneurship. With this finding they support the finding of Reynolds et al. (2004) that most people become entrepreneur when they are in their late twenties and early thirties. In the sections below the relationship between the characteristics and capabilities of the E-scan and age will be discussed.
2.3.2.1 Age and the need for achievement
The systematic literature review did not provide literature about the need for achievement from entrepreneurs throughout their lives. However, the concept of achievement is studied a lot by several psychologists. Helson et al. (2002) find that achievement via independence, the drive to do well by taking individual initiatives, increases strongly in the twenties and reaches a top around the age of 50. This finding is supported by several other studies (Helson and Soto, 2005; Jackson et al., 2009; Jones et al., 2003). In addition to this, Warr et al. (2001) find that achievement via independence decreases in the late fifties and sixties. Combining the findings of Helson et al. (2002) and Warr et al. (2001), it can be assumed that the need for achievement has an inverted U-shaped relationship with age. This assumption corresponds with the general relationship between entrepreneurship and age (Bönte et al., 2009). A possible weakness of this assumption is that the relationship between age and the need for achievement of entrepreneurs is not researched explicitly. However, the need for achievement is assumable for all people higher in the working part of our life. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1: There is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the need for achievement of entrepreneurs and age.
2.3.2.2 Age and the need for autonomy
The systematic review did not provide any literature about the relationship between the need for autonomy and the age of entrepreneurs. However, several psychologists research the concept of independence, which can be regarded as related to the need for autonomy. Helson et al. (2002) find a peak of independence in middle age. After the age of 50, the scores on independence slowly decreases. Other researchers draw the same conclusions in their studies (Jones et al., 2003). Roberts et al. (2006) agree with a strong increase of independence in early adulthood, but they could not find any evidence that supports the conclusion of Helson et al. (2002), that the need for independence decreases after the age of 50. In spite of this, there is enough evidence to assume that there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the need for autonomy and the age of entrepreneurs. This assumption corresponds also with the general relationship between entrepreneurship and age (Bönte et al., 2009). Again, the assumption is based on independence scores of average people. This might be a problem, although entrepreneurs are also part of the general population. To conclude, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H2: There is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the need for autonomy of entrepreneurs and age.
2.3.2.3 Age and the need for power
Also for the need for power, the systematic review did not provide any literature about the relationship between the need for power and the age of entrepreneurs. However, several psychologists research the concept of dominance, which can be regarded as related to the need for power. Helson et al. (2002) find also for dominance a peak in middle age. After the age of 50, the scores on dominance slowly decreases. Other researchers draw the same conclusions in their studies (Jones et al., 2003; Helson and Soto, 2005). Roberts et al. (2006) agree with a strong increase of dominance in early adulthood also, but they could not find any evidence that supports the conclusion of Helson et al. (2002), that the scores on dominance decreases after the age of 50. In spite of this, there is enough evidence to assume that there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the need for power and the age of entrepreneurs. This assumption corresponds also with the general relationship between entrepreneurship and age (Bönte et al., 2009). Again, the assumption is based on dominance scores of average people. This might be a problem, although entrepreneurs demonstrate in general a higher need for power than the general population. Because of this higher
need for power, there is in return also more space for a decrease in the need for power of older entrepreneurs. To conclude, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H3: There is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the need for power of entrepreneurs and age.
2.3.2.4 Age and social orientation
Also for this relationship, no literature is found that describes the relationship between the social orientation and the age of entrepreneurs. Roberts et al. (2001) find that people become considerable more sociable between the age of 18 en 26 years. This finding suggests that people become more oriented on other people, redirecting their focus from themselves to other people. A concept related to social orientation, is the Big Five factor agreeableness. Srivastava et al. (2003) find that people score higher on this factor throughout their whole life, in other words people become more agreeable when they get older. This finding is supported by Soto et al. (2011). Although, the findings do not say something about the relationship between social orientation and the age of entrepreneurs directly, there is enough evidence to assume that the social orientation of entrepreneurs will rise when they get older. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4: There is a positive relationship between the social orientation of entrepreneurs and age.
2.3.2.5 Age and self belief
Again, the systematic review have not provided literature that directly researches the effect of age on the self belief or internal locus of control of entrepreneurs. In spite of this, many psychologists have researched the level of social confidence and self-acceptance of people. These two concepts, the feeling of being confident in interaction with others and the self-projection of being competent (Helson et al. (2002), can be related to the self belief of entrepreneurs. Warr et al. (2001) find that people stay their whole life at a stable level of social confidence. This finding is not supported by Helson et al. (2002). They find that social confidence reaches a peak in middle age and self acceptance decreases with age. If these findings are combined, I can assume that there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the self belief and the age of entrepreneurs. Again, this assumption corresponds with the general assumption about entrepreneurship and age (Bönte et al., 2009). As a result, the following relationship is proposed:
H5: There is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the self belief of entrepreneurs and age.
2.3.2.6 Age and endurance
There were no studies that reported about the relationship between the endurance of entrepreneurs and their age. However, the Big Five factor conscientiousness and persistence are related to the endurance of entrepreneurs. Jackson et al. (2009) find that conscientiousness, for entrepreneurs the goal-directing behaviour to achieve, increases especially in early and middle adulthood with age. This finding is supported by Srivastava et al. (2003) and Helson and Soto (2005), who find that people become a lot more persistent in their early and middle adulthood. Rai (2008) finds in his study that the willingness to take risks decreases after the age of 50. This reluctance to take risks may influence the endurance of entrepreneurs in a negative way. Combining these findings, there may be an inverted U-shaped relationship between the endurance of entrepreneurs and their age. To conclude, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H6: There is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the endurance of entrepreneurs and age.
2.3.2.7 Age and creativity
The review did not provide literature about the development of creativity throughout the life of entrepreneurs. Psychologists have studied a related Big Five factor, namely the openness to new experiences and ideas. Although, this openness to new experiences can enhance creativity of entrepreneurs, it is difficult to see this openness as the deciding factor in the development of creativity. The findings about the development of the openness to new experiences are mixed. Both, Srivastava et al. (2003) and Roberts et al. (2006) find an inverted U-shaped relationship, while Helson and Soto (2005) find an U-shaped relationship between openness and age. Evidence is not convincing about the development of the openness to new experiences and its relation with creativity. It seems that creativity is a capability that is improvable by exercise. However, it seems not possible to experience a decrease in creativity. These assumptions lead to the following hypothesis:
H7: There is no relationship between the creativity of entrepreneurs and age.
2.3.2.8 Age and flexibility
Also for flexibility, there was a lack of literature that researches the relationship between flexibility and the age of entrepreneurs. However, flexibility is researched by many scholars the last decade.
The results of these studies are mixed. Helson et al. (2002) find for example a positive and Helson and Soto (2005) an U-shaped relationship between flexibility and age. The most evidence is found for a negative relationship between flexibility and age (Jones et al., 2003; Warr et al., 2001) In addition,
Van den Berg and Van der Velde (2005) find a decreasing willingness to be flexible of workers in a passenger transport firm. Of course these findings are not automatically applicable to the flexibility of entrepreneurs. However, these findings can be a starting point for further research. As a result of the findings above, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H8: There is negative relationship between the flexibility of entrepreneurs and age.
2.3.2.9 Age and market awareness
The review did not provide literature about the development of market awareness throughout the life of entrepreneurs. Just as with creativity, the Big Five factor openness to new experiences and ideas is the most related concept that is studied by several psychologists. The openness to new experiences can improve the market awareness of entrepreneurs, since new experiences can lead to new ways to serve the market. The findings about the development of the openness to new experiences are mixed. Both, Srivastava et al. (2003) and Roberts et al. (2006) find an inverted U- shaped relationship, while Helson and Soto (2005) find an U-shaped relationship between openness and age. Rai (2008) find that experience is an important benefit of getting older. However, at a certain stage there is less willingness to experience these new experiences (Srivastava et al., 2003;
Roberts et al., 2006). A combination of these findings lead to an assumable inverted U-shaped relationship between the market awareness of entrepreneurs and their age. The following hypothesis is proposed:
H9: There is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the market awareness of entrepreneurs and age.
3. METHODOLOGY
In order to test the hypotheses that will provide an answer to the research question, data of entrepreneurs that have filled in the E-scan of Dr. Driessen are assessed. Besides the quantitative analysis of the E-scan data, the research is completed with a qualitative component of 16 phone interviews. These phone interviews cover the why part of this research. The remainder of this section is used to describe the methodology that is used to execute this combined quantitative and qualitative research.
3.1 Research approach
This study adopts a mixed approach in which both quantitative and qualitative research is executed.
The approach of two or more research methods is called triangulation. Triangulation is simultaneously using multiple research methods or measures to test the same hypothesis or finding (Abowitz and Toole, 2010). According to Abowitz and Toole (2010: 114), “…mixing qualitative and quantitative methods allows researchers to combine research styles whose strengths and weaknesses are counterbalanced…” Murray Thomas (2003: 1) adds to this argument that
“…qualitative methods involve a researcher describing kinds of characteristics of people and events without comparing events in terms of measurements or amounts. Quantitative methods, on the other hand, focus attention on measurements and amounts of the characteristics displayed by people and events that the researchers studies…”
The conclusion of the above can be that the proposed two methods are complementary to each other. The quantitative research of the filled in E-scans provide empirical proof for the acceptance or rejection of the proposed hypotheses. With this data it is possible to create a general picture of the development of characteristics and capabilities of entrepreneurs throughout their life. In addition to this general picture, the qualitative interview part adds depth to the findings of the quantitative research. It is possible to generate a picture of the context in which the development of the characteristics and capabilities have taken place. In other words, there is an ideal opportunity to
search for the reasons that underlie the importance of certain traits in a particular period in time.
3.2 Research sample and data collection
The research sample of the quantitative research consists of 65,536 filled in E-scans from the period between 2005 and 2009. The E-scans are filled in at the Rabobank establishments in the Netherlands,
as part of the screening of the applicant entrepreneurs, and on the website of Dr. Driessen (www.ondernemerstest.nl).
For the qualitative research, 8 male and 8 female entrepreneurs, who have filled in the E-scan, in the age between 50 and 59 are chosen for the interviews. The reason for this selection is that these people can look back at their career and the development they went through in terms of the characteristics and capabilities of the E-scan. According to Miles and Huberman (1994), this sampling strategy is both homogeneous and stratified purposeful. The focus on a particular age group and the selection of both males and females makes it possible to compare these subgroups properly. Further the selection of males and females is made, because this distinction can discover contextual variables that influences the development of male and female entrepreneurs throughout their lives.
The first 8 males and 8 females on the data list who are willing to participate and are part of the target group are selected for the interviews. The respondents are approached via e-mail, after which an appointment is made for a phone interview. In the end, to create the total sample of 16 respondents, 261 people who have filled in the E-scan are approached for an appointment. The interviews took place between December 22nd 2011 and January 17th 2012. During the interviews, field notes are taken by the interviewer, as recommended by Eisenhardt (1989) and Miles and Huberman (1994). These notes are directly transformed into full reports of each interview, which can be found in appendix B.
3.3 E-scan
Like mentioned above, the E-scan is a psychometric self-reflection tool for entrepreneurs and people who want to become an entrepreneur. The questionnaire consists of 111 statements that measure the respondents scores on ten characteristics: Need for achievement, need for autonomy, need for power, need for affiliation, internal locus of control, endurance, creativity, flexibility, market awareness and risk taking propensity. Also the entrepreneurial style is measured (pioneer, salesman, expert or manager) (Herrmann, 1996). All statements are measured on a seven-point Likert scale. All the scores on the 111 statements are converted into a percentage between 1 and 100. The risk taking propensity is not considered in this research, because this characteristic is not included in the available data set.
