Análisis del emprendedor potencialIntegración de factores socio-demográficos, cognitivos y relacionales

  1. Matilde Ruiz Arroyo 1
  2. María del Mar Fuentes Fuentes 1
  3. Jenny María Ruiz Jiménez 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Granada.
Revista:
Gestión Joven

ISSN: 1988-9011

Año de publicación: 2014

Número: 12

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Gestión Joven

Resumen

El emprendimiento es crucial para el crecimiento económico y el progreso social. Sin embargo, por encima del número de emprendedores o el de nuevas empresas creadas, resulta más indicativo de la capacidad emprendedora de una sociedad medir su emprendimiento potencial. En este trabajo nos centramos en analizar la influencia de posibles factores (socio-demográficos, cognitivos y relacionales) en la formación de una intención emprendedora en el individuo. Sobre una muestra española de 27.880 individuos aplicamos un análisis de regresión logística, y obtenemos que todas las variables consideradas (excepto el nivel educativo) ejercen una significativa influencia sobre la probabilidad de ocurrencia de emprendimiento potencial individual. Específicamente, el grupo de variables cognitivas resulta ser el de mayor poder explicativo, en línea con una de las tendencias actuales en el área. La intención emprendedora se compone así tanto de factores objetivos, como subjetivos y contextuales.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • ACS, Z.; DESAI, S.; KLAPPER, L. (2008). What does entrepreneurship data really show? Small Business Economics, vol. 31, n. 3, pp. 265-281.
  • ALDRICH, H. (1999). Organizations Evolving. London: Sage Publications.
  • ALDRICH, H.; ZIMMER, C. (1986). Entrepreneurship through Social Networks. In: SEXTON, D.; Smilor, D.O. (Eds) The Art and Science of Entrepreneurship. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing, pp. 3-23.
  • ALSOS, G.A.; LJUNNGGREN, E. (1998). Does the business start-up process differ by gender? A longitudinal study of nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Enterprising Culture, vol. 6, n. 4, pp. 347.
  • ARDICHVILI, A.; CARDOZO, R., SOURAV, R. (2003). A theory of entrepreneurial opportunity identification and development. Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 18, n. 1, pp. 105-123.
  • ARENIUS, P.; DE CLERCQ, D. (2005). A network-based approach on opportunity recognition. Small Business Economics, vol. 24, n. 3, pp. 249-265.
  • ARENIUS, P.; MINNITI, M. (2005). Perceptual variables and nascent entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, vol. 24, n. 3, pp. 233-247.
  • AUDRETSCH, D.B.; KEILBACH, M.; LEHMANN, E.E. (2006). Entrepreneurship and Growth. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • BARON, R.A. (2004). The cognitive perspective: A valuable tool for answering entrepreneurship’s basic ‘‘why’’ questions. Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 19, n. 2, pp. 221- 239.
  • BAUMOL, W.J. (2004). Entrepreneurial enterprises, large established firms and other components of the free-market growth machine. Small Business Economics, vol. 23, n. 1, pp. 9- 21.
  • BIRD, B.; BRUSH, B. (2002). A gendered perspective on organizational creation. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice, vol. 26, n. 3, pp. 41-65.
  • BLANCHFLOWER, D. (2004). Self-employment: More may not be better. Swedish Economic Policy Review, vol. 11, n. 2, pp. 15-74.
  • BOWEN, H.P.; DE CLERCQ, D. (2008). Institutional context and the allocation of entrepreneurial effort. Journal of International Business Studies, vol. 39, n. 1, pp. 1-21.
  • BOYD, N.G.; VOZIKIS, G.S. (1994). The influence of self-efficacy on the development of entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 18, n. 4, pp. 63-77.
  • BURKE, A.E.; FITZROY, F.R.; NOLAN, M.A. (2002). Self-employment wealth and job creation: The roles of gender, non-pecuniary motivation and entrepreneurial ability. Small Business Economics, vol. 19, n. 3, pp. 255-270.
  • BURT, R. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  • COHEN, W.M.; LEVINTHAL, D.A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 35, n. 1, pp. 128-152.
  • DAVIDSSON, P.; HONIG, B. (2003). The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 18, n. 3, pp. 301-331.
  • DAVIDSSON, P.; WIKLUND, J. (2001). Levels of analysis in entrepreneurship research: Current research practice and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 25, n. 4, pp. 81-100.
  • DeMARIS, A. (2004). Regression with Social Data: Modeling Continuous and Limited Response Variables. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  • DIMOV, D.; CORNELISSEN, J.; VAN BURG, E.; GRÉGOIRE, D.A. (2013). The mind in the middle: Taking stock of cognition research in entrepreneurship for future development. Call for papers. International Journal of Management Reviews. Disponible en: http://www.bam.ac.uk/news/ijmr-special-issue-call-papers-mind-middle-taking-stock-cognitionresearch-entrepreneurship-fut
  • DOUGLAS, E.J. (2013). Reconstructing entrepreneurial intentions to identify predisposition for growth. Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 28, n. 5, pp. 633-651.
  • ECKHARDT, J.; SHANE, S.A. (2003). Opportunities and entrepreneurship. Journal of Management, vol. 29, n. 3, pp. 333-349.
  • GRÉGOIRE, D.A.; CORBETT, A.C.; McMULLEN, J.S. (2011). The cognitive perspective in entrepreneurship: An agenda for future research. Journal of Management Studies, vol. 48, n. 6, pp. 1443-1477.
  • GRILO, I.; IRIGOYEN, J.M. (2006). Entrepreneurship in the EU: To wish and not to be. Small Business Economics, vol. 26, n. 4, pp. 305-318.
  • HARADA, N. (2005). Potential Entrepreneurship in Japan. Small Business Economics, vol. 25, n. 3, pp. 293-304.
  • HECHAVARRIA, D.M.; REYNOLDS, P.D. (2009). Cultural norms and business start-ups: The Impact of national values on opportunity and necessity entrepreneurs. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, vol. 5, n. 4, pp. 417-437.
  • HERNÁNDEZ, R.; CODURAS, A., VAILLANT, Y.; BATISTA, R.M.; SOSA, S.; MIRAS, I.; MARTÍNEZ, J. (2013). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Informe GEM España 2012. Santander, España: Centro Internacional Santander Emprendimiento (CISE); Cáceres, España: Fundación Xavier de Salas.
  • HOANG, H.; ANTONCIC, B. (2003). Network-based research in entrepreneurship. A critical review. Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 18, n. 2, pp. 165-187.
  • KOELLINGER, P.; MINNITI, M.; SCHADE, C. (2007). “I think I can, I think I can”: Overconfidence and entrepreneurial behaviour. Journal of Economic Psychology, vol. 28, n. 4, pp. 502-527.
  • KRUEGER, N.F.; BRAZEAL, D.V. (1994). Entrepreneurial potential and potential entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 18, n. 3, pp. 91-10.
  • KRUEGER, N.F. (2000). The cognitive infrastructure of opportunity emergence. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 24, n. 1, pp. 5-23.
  • KRUEGER, N.F.; REILLY, M.D.; CARSRUD, A.L. (2000) Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 15, n. 5, pp. 411-432.
  • LANGOWITZ, N.; MINNITI, M. (2007). The entrepreneurial propensity of women. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 31, n. 3, pp. 341-364.
  • LAZEAR, E.P. (2002). Entrepreneurship. National Bureau of Economic Research. Cambridge, MA, working paper no. 9109.
  • LEE, S.H.; WONG, P.K. (2004). An exploratory study of technopreneurial intentions: A career anchor perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 19, n. 1, pp. 7-28.
  • LEVESQUE, M.; MINNITI, M. (2006). The effect of aging on entrepreneurial behavior. Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 21, n. 2, pp. 177-194.
  • LÓPEZ, J.; GARCÍA, J. (2011). Optimismo, pesimismo y realismo disposicional en emprendedores potenciales de base tecnológica. Psicothema, vol. 23, n. 4, pp. 611-616.
  • LUMPKIN, G.T.; DESS, G.G. (1996). Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of management Review, vol. 21, n. 1, pp. 135-172.
  • MARKMAN, G.D.; BALKIN, D.B.; BARON, R.A. (2002). Inventors and new venture formation: The effects of general self-efficacy and regretful thinking. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 27, n. 2, pp. 149-166.
  • McGRATH, R.G. (2001). Entrepreneurship, small firms, and wealth creation: A framework using real options reasoning. In: Pettigrew, A.M.; Thomas, H.; Whittington, A. (Eds.), Handbook of Strategy and Management. London, UK: Sage Publications Ltd., pp. 299-326.
  • MINNITI, M. (2005). Entrepreneurship and network externalities. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, vol. 57, n. 1, pp. 1-27.
  • MINNITI, M. (2009). Gender issues in entrepreneurship. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, vol. 5, n. 7-8, pp. 497-621.
  • MINNITI, M.; NARDONE, C. (2007). Being in someone else’s shoes: Gender and nascent entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, vol. 28, n. 2, pp. 223-239.
  • MITCHELL, R.K.; BUSENITZ, L.; LANT, T.; McDOUGALL, P.; MORSE, E.A.; SMITH, J.B. (2002). Toward a theory of entrepreneurial cognition: Rethinking the people side of entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 27, n. 2, pp. 93-104.
  • PRAHALAD, C.; BETTIS, R. (1986). The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance. Strategic Management Journal, vol. 7, n. 6, pp. 485-501.
  • RAMOS-RODRÍGUEZ, A.R.; MEDINA-GARRDIO, J.A.; LORENZO-GÓMEZ, J.D.; RUIZNAVARRO, J. (2010). What you know or who you know? The role of intellectual and social capital in opportunity recognition. International Small Business Journal, vol. 28, n. 6, pp. 566- 582.
  • REYNOLDS, P.; BOSMA, N.; AUTIO, E.; HUNT, S.; DE BONO, N.; SERVAIS, I.; LÓPEZGARCÍA, PP.; CHIN, N. (2005). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: Data collection design and implementation 1998-2003. Small Business Economics, vol. 24, n. 3, 205-231.
  • REYNOLDS, P.D.; BYGRAVE, B.; HAY, M. (2003). 2003 Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Report. Kansas City, MO: E. M. Kauffmann Foundation.
  • SÁNCHEZ, J.C.; CARBALLO, T.; GUTIÉRREZ, A. (2011). The entrepreneur from a cognitive approach. Psicothema, vol. 23, n. 3, pp. 433-438.
  • SHANE, S.; VENKATARAMAN, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, vol. 25, n. 1, pp. 217-226.
  • SHAPERO, A. (1981). Self-renewing economies. Economic Development Commentary, n. 5, pp. 19-22.
  • SINGH, R.; HILLS, G.E.; HYBELS, R.C.; LUMPKIN, G.T. (1999). Opportunity Recognition through Social Network Characteristics of Entrepreneurs. In: Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. Wellesley, MA: Babson College, pp. 228-241.
  • UHLANER, L.; THURIK, R. (2007). Postmaterialism influencing Total Entrepreneurial Activity across nations. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, vol. 17, n. 2, pp. 161-185.
  • WEBER, E.U.; MILLIMAN, R.A. (1997). Perceived risk attitudes: Relating risk perception to risky choice. Management Science, vol. 43, n. 2, pp. 123-144.
  • WIKLUND, J.; DAVIDSSON, P.; DELMAR, F. (2003). What do they think and feel about growth: An expectancy-value approach to small business managers’ attitudes toward growth. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 27, n. 3, pp. 247-270.
  • XAVIER, S.R.; KELLEY, D.; KEW, J.; HERRINGTON, M.; & VORDERWÜLBECKE, A. (2013). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. 2012 GEM Global Report. Babson Park, MA: Babson College; Santiago, Chile: Universidad del Desarollo; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Universiti Tun Abdul Razak, y London, UK: London Business School.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet