E

Title: The impacts of social capital on entrepreneurial intentions

PL
M
SA
Introduction

Lots of benefits are attached to the entrepreneurial activities, such as propelling

innovation, generating new employment opportunities, contributing to social welfare and
economic wealth (Chen et al., 2015). Thus, individuals or groups should be encouraged
to make use of resources to initiate entrepreneurial ventures. As for entrepreneurial
intention, the strong it is, the more likely individuals can start up their own new
businesses, irrespective of delays caused by various other activities (Krueger et al., 2000).
Thus, it is important to study the EI to predict individuals’ entrepreneurial activities. The
concept of social capital has been widely applied to various fields, ranging from

E
sociology to economics, psychology and public heath (Hawkins & Maurer, 2010). It
refers to the co-operative relationship within humans' families and communities
PL
(Hawkins & Maurer, 2010). Thus, social capital depends on people's social network. In
recent years, social capital has been incorporated into the models about factors
influencing the entrepreneurial intentions as it provides access to lots of resources, such
as physical or human capital (Linan, F., Santos, 2007). This finding suggests that social
M
capital can influence people's entrepreneurial intentions indirectly. To further examine
the relationship between social capital and entrepreneurial intentions, it is necessary to
SA

explore the models about entrepreneurial intentions. This essay is to discuss the impacts
of social capitals on the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. It holds the statement
that individuals are more likely to hold stronger entrepreneurial intentions (EI) and
initiate entrepreneurial ventures with stronger supports from social capitals. It will
discuss the influential factors of EI and then discuss the relationship between social
capitals and the influential factors. In addition, it will review findings from other scholars
to evaluate the relationship between EI and social capitals. In the end, how social capital
is related to EI will be discussed.

Entrepreneurial intentions

Definition
Entrepreneurial intention is defined as the conviction, preparation and commitment to
the establishment o a new enterprise or the creation of additional value (Thompson, 2009).
This definition suggests that entrepreneurs need to make preparations for and be
committed to start up their own new businesses. From another perspective,
entrepreneurial process is to recognize opportunities which create future goods/services
with activities of discovering, evaluating and exploiting (Prodan & Drnovsek, 2010).
Thus, the capability to identify and grasp opportunities is the first step to participate in
entrepreneurial activities.

As shown in Figure 1, this conceptual model highlights self-efficacy which refers to

individuals' beliefs about their competences to mobilize the motivation, cognitive
resources and activities with the aim of exercising control in their lives. The self-efficacy

E
is conceived to play a significant role in entrepreneurial intentions as it influences
individuals' attitudes and activities (Prodan & Drnovsek, 2010).
PL
M
SA

Figure 1: conceptual model of academic entrepreneurial intentions

Source: Prodan & Drnovsek (2010)

The EI can be categorized into different types: classical, alternative (enterprisers through
inheritance or acquisition) and entrepreneurial (enterprisers through internal promotion),
which have different professional requirements (Lans et al., 2010). This suggests that
different kinds of enterprisers will have different needs of resources and capitals. As
social capital benefits individuals or groups by providing resources and capitals, the
social capital will have different influence on different types of enterprisers.

There are two constructs of entrepreneurial intentions, including perceived desirability

(PD) and perceived feasibility (PF), the former measuring the extent of attraction an
individual holds towards a specific behavior and the latter referring to perceptions about
their own capability to conduct a specific behavior (Shapero & Sokol, 1982). In this
model, the specific behavior can be interpreted as becoming an entrepreneur. When
analyzing which factors influence the EI, it can be started to evaluate which factors
influence PD and PF as these two dimensions directly shape decisions about EI.

Influential factors

E
There are two important dimensions of EI, namely techniques or skills (e.g. management
skills, knowledge of entrepreneurship) and psychological aspects (e.g. internal focus of
PL
control, risk-taking propensity, self confidence, pursuit of achievements, tolerance for
uncertainties and innovativeness) (Ferreira et al., 2012).In addition, previous studies
about entrepreneurial intentions emphasize the demographic features such as age, gender,
M
religion, ethnic groups, education, professional experience, etc. (Linan & Santos, 2007).
Accordingly, it depends on individuals’ internal features and their subjective judgment
about individual features to decide whether to take the entrepreneurial activities or not.
SA

Individuals make such decisions on the evaluation of their self capabilities and
competences.

However, according to the planned behavior theory which is widely applied to study
intentions, attitude, social norm and controlled behavior are all influential factors to
predict the intentions of a specific action (Zhang et al., 2005). This finding proposes that
external forces can shape people’s intentions. In fact, this finding did not echo with the
finding of Ferreira et al. (2012) since these external forces can influence people’s
psychological status and then influence their intentions.

But Ferreira et al. (2012) focused on individuals' internal features, such as psychological
characteristics, personality traits. Similarly, according to the planned behavior theory,
when observing intentions towards actions, attitudes and social norms can be influential
(Krueger et al., 2000). Individuals’ EI can be influenced by lots of psychological traits
such as risk propensity, self-confidence and need for achievement, but the factors of
tolerance for ambiguity, locus of control and innovativeness are found to have no
relationship with EI (Dinis et al., 2013).

The influential factors of EI can be divided into two dimensions: contextual (e.g.
perceived support of barriers) and personal background (demographic, education, traits)
(Herman & Stefanescu, 2017). This finding can be seen as a summary of aforementioned
studies of the influential factors of entrepreneurial intentions.

Social capitals

Definition

E
Social capital is often defined as the resources and values derived from social relationship
PL
of individuals or groups (Gedajlovic et al., 2013). Lin (2003) defined social capital as the
capital obtained from various forms of social relationship. Both versions of definitions
outlined that social capital endows people with resources or capitals on the basis of
relationship. However, it is not easy to have favorable social capitals as it takes both time
M
and resources as investments to build human relationship (Lin, 2003). This statement
implies that social capital can be deliberately constructed for the attainment of its
SA

resources and capitals.

Social capital can be divided into three constructs: structural (e.g. networking, network
configuration), relational (e.g. trust, recognition, standards, obligations and expectations)
and cognitive (e.g. shared codes, languages and discourses (Chia & Liang, 2016).
According to these constructs, how to build social capitals can be understood. For
example, family-based social capital belongs to the relational dimension due to
obligations. Social capitals obtained from friendship belong to cognitive due to shared
discourses, interests, etc.

The social capital is generally conceived to be conducive. The social capital has
multidimensional effects, such as improved income levels for individuals (Dakhli & de
Clerq, 2004), entrepreneurial start-up or firm success (Davidsson & Honig, 2003) and
higher efficiency (Putnam, 1993). With social capitals, individuals or groups will find it
easy to access to information, whittle down transaction costs, facilitate collective decision
making (Grootaert & van Bastelaer 2001). The finding proposed by Davidsson & Honig
(2003) highlights the positive relationship between social capitals and entrepreneurial
activities. The findings of Grootaert & van Bastelaer (2001) also illustrates that the
potential entrepreneurs may find it easier to start up a new business with more favorable
social capitals.

How social capitals are related to EI’s influential factors

The influence of social capitals on EI’s influential factors can be explained by associating
with the planned action theory (PAT) as this theory describes the influential factors of

E
intentions, namely social norms or subjective norms, attitudes and controlled behaviors
(Chia & Liang, 2016). According to the PAT, EI can be influenced by social or subjective
PL
norms, attitudes about EI and controlled behaviors. These three dimensions can be
influenced by social capitals. Thus, social capitals can influence EI in an indirect way.

As social norms, culture, political or economic routines will influence how social capitals
M
are treated and viewed by potential enterprises. The subjective norms are usually
demonstrated in forms of approval or disapproval of friends or families, which influence
individuals' decisions to be an entrepreneurs or not (Misoska et al., 2012). As friends,
SA

family and the community are included as part of subjective norms, they play a role in
influencing individuals' EIs. In general, it is not easy for new entrepreneurs to acquire
needed resources, which might impede their EI (Zhang, 2015). The difficulty to access to
needed resources can be determined by the political, economic and social status.

For example, in less developed regions or countries, it will be difficult for individuals or
groups to acquire loans from the banks, making them difficult to start up entrepreneurial
activities on their own. In this way, the informal source of supports is outlined by specific
norms, which can be derived from social capitals. For example, in China, students from
Guangzhou city are found to have higher EI than those from Hong Kong as they can
receive more support from their parents' personal network to address challenges from the
self-employment (Bickenbach et al., 2017). In addition, in China's mainland, the central
government has pledged more favorable policies to encourage entrepreneurial activities
(Bickenbach et al., 2017). The comparative study between Guangzhou and HK in China
illustrates the influence of social norms and political support on EIs. It also indicates that
the influence of social capital on EIs might be greater than the economic status since the
general economic status of the HK is better than those in Guangzhou. Accordingly, it can
be assumed that students in China tend to favor the supports and resources from social
capitals rather than to start new businesses in regions with better economic status.

As for individuals' attitudes about EI, they are influenced by intrinsic and extrinsic cyber
entrepreneurial motivations according to the Big Give personality traits, the former of
which is influenced by conscientiousness, openness to experience and agreeableness and
the latter of which is impacted by the extraversion, conscientiousness and neuroticism

E
(Wang et al., 2016). Reviewing the influential factors of intrinsic and extrinsic
entrepreneurial motivations, some of them are related to social capitals. One is openness
PL
to experience which can be achieved when individuals grow up in families with
enterprises. Individuals are able to learn from the role models and accumulate specific
experience. As for conscientiousness, it is related to stronger achievement orientation
M
with task-related goals and better self-regulation capability (Denissen & Penke, 2008;
Judge et al., 1999). Lots of findings unravel the relationship between individuals'
personality with the family background (Bolu-Steve & Sanni, 2013), with their parents'
SA

education and involvement in children's education (Steinmayr et al., 2010). This implies
that people's personality is influenced or shaped by the family or their relationship with
parents. For example, children with higher educational parents tend to pursue higher
achievement. Thus, it is known that individuals' attitudes about EIs can be influenced by
their personality, which is shaped by the social relationship. In this way, the relational
social capitals have influences on individuals' attitudes about EIs.

However, it is criticized that individuals' personality has been fixed when they grow up
and the influence of parents on personality will be minimum (Steinmayr et al., 2010). In
this way, the influence of parents through relational social capital will be static, but the
EIs have been dynamic and changing. In this way, parents' consistent influence through
relational social capital on intrinsic and extrinsic entrepreneurial motivations will have
limitations.

Influence of social capitals

Availability of capitals and resources

The availability of informal financial sources from business ties has greater influences on
EIs (Zhang, 2015). This is understandable as entrepreneurs need financial sources to
support the entrepreneurial activities. In case of limited access to formal financial support,
the informal financial support from social capitals can be decisive for individuals to
decide whether to participate in the entrepreneurial activities or not. It is proved that with
family financial capitals, individuals tend to participate in the entrepreneurship (Bird &

E
Wennberg, 2016). This statement echoes with Zhang (2015), both of which indicates that
relational social capitals can enhance EIs with solider financial support.
PL
However, there are counter-arguments against the proposition that family-based social
capitals can propel entrepreneurial activities. When individuals have higher level of
economic interdependence with family members, they are more likely to exit to paid
M
employment (Hammarstedt, 2009). This suggests that the enterprisers who are propelled
by family financial support to initiate their own businesses are more likely to exit and
SA

give up their businesses in case of failures. They are less resist to the ups and downs in
the businesses, though their EIs at the very initial can be high. This counter-argument
suggests that relational social capitals can promote short-term EIs, but have negative
influence on sustaining EIs in case of difficulties or failures.

In addition to the relational social capitals, other types of social capitals also influence EI.
For example, the structural social capitals involve various forms of social organizations,
such as roles, rules, precedents, which are often the essential element in the creation and
development of entrepreneurial ventures (Hoang & Antoncic, 2003). The structural social
capitals involve the participation of organizations in the entrepreneurial activities, which
is quite different from how the relational social capitals influence the EI. In addition, the
cognitive process is related to individuals' decisions to become an entrepreneur (Baron,
2004). The cognitive social capitals can be interpreted as the values and beliefs individual
acquired from the social network, which has influence on the EIs (Putnam, 2001). The
cognitive social capitals can be obtained from individuals' direct learning of information
from the social network, or indirect learning of experience from acquaintance. In all,
individuals' self-learning process is critical to form the cognitive process to have EI
sprouted and developed.

Comparing with other kinds of social capitals, the influence from cognitive social capitals
requires the individuals to have awareness to develop entrepreneurial related values and
beliefs. It is noted that social capitals derived from families and friends all stem from
one's close environment with shared language, narrative and values (Kuratko & Mathews,
2004). This suggests that there are limitations of the relational social capitals due to the
close environment. But the shared values, narratives and language make it easier to

E
acquire needed resources and capitals to trigger EI.
PL
Findings reveal that the immigrants in Netherlands who are exposed to those self-
employed have higher probability to start up their own business than those who have
access to bridging social capitals (Kanas et al. 2009). This aspect reveals that the
cognitive social capitals might have greater influence on EIs. This can be explained by
M
the fact that bridging social capitals, namely relational social capitals, belong to close-end
environment. However, the cognitive social capitals involve open-end environment,
SA

which might involve more resources and capitals from various aspects. However, this
assumption is challenged by the statement that what determines which kind of social
capitals is more influential is the degree to which individuals are exposed to the
supportive environment of EI (Liñán, 2008). This suggests that even though he relational
social capitals are close-end, they can be more influential when the environment provides
stronger supports for individuals. Thus, individuals exposed to the supportive
environment can be influenced greater than those exposed to less supportive environment.

From another perspective, the weak ties are found to provide a variety of new ideas and
new information in comparison with the redundant information elicited from strong ties
(Partanen et al., 2011). The relational social capitals belong to strong ties, which
contribute fewer innovative ideas than the weak ties. This finding further indicates that
the relational social capitals can be less influential than other social capitals in promoting
creative ideas for EI.

Lots of findings all reveal that social capitals influence entrepreneurial self-efficacy due
to offering of information (e.g. market information, new opportunities) and some tangible
resources (e.g. human resource, financial resource) and intangible resources (e.g. social
support, problem solving) (Walter et al., 2006). These factors are all desired for the new
entrepreneurs with which they can start up the businesses more fluently and successfully.
Associating with definition and related concepts about EI, it can be found that social
capitals facilitate easier opportunity recognition which cannot otherwise be obtained,
resulting in higher EI. In addition, as self-efficacy is identified as one construct to
influence EI, social capital can influence EI due to its influence on self-efficacy.

E
Psychological benefits from social capitals
PL
Geographic proximity to family members can result in immigrants’ potential to remain in
entrepreneurship, usually in the low-knowledge-intense industries (Bird & Wennberg,
2016). This finding implies that family members’ support prompts individuals to take
M
entrepreneurial ventures, but such supports have limitations in helping them extend to
knowledge-intense industries. This indicates that the supports may be not knowledge-
based.
SA

On the other hand, the influence of social capitals can be beyond geographic proximity.
Smith et al. (2017) propose that social network system (SNS) with feature of affordance
can provide a distinct context for understanding networks, relationships and social
capitals. Accordingly, individuals might build social capitals through computer-based
network irrespective of distance or geographic proximity. The social capitals can nourish
people's confidence, or help them launch, grow and support ventures with minimized
investment of time, efforts and money (Smith et al., 2017). This finding demonstrates that
people can save time and energy to make better use of social capitals through the online
communication platforms. Due to specific features of SNS such as instant communication,
generating content , sharing information, the SNS provides ideal platform for individuals
to acquire information and grasp opportunities to initiate entrepreneurial activities.
As discussed by Herman & Stefanescu (2017) and Ferreira et al. (2012), there are
personal features such as personalities, psychological features, education, etc. influencing
their EIs. These personal factors can be influenced by social capitals. Due to masculinity-
dominated culture, the males can receive more social supports, which helps them build up
confidence and remain optimistic to face uncertainties and risks, but the females are more
reluctant to encounter uncertain prospects (Zhou & Wang, 2014). This finding suggests
that social capitals can influence individuals' psychological features about EI, being
either optimistic or pessimistic, being risk-taking or risk-aversive. It also implies that how
social capitals influence EI can be influenced by cultural factors.

Influential factors about how social capitals influence EI

E
The diversity of social networks influenced how the social capitals influences EI. In
general, the more the network diversity is, the greater or more positive the effects on
PL
performance of social capitals (Stam et al., 2014). This is understandable as the more
diverse the social network is, the more likely for individuals to acquire various sources of
resources or capitals. For example, good relationship with the government officials might
contribute to acquirement of better resources due to more familiarity with relevant
M
policies and easier access to relevant resources.

How social capitals influence EI can be influenced by some demographic features. For
SA

example, the residents from urban areas are found to be more capable to deploy social
capitals in a flexible way than those from the countryside and are more determined to
perceive opportunities (Arenius & Clercq, 2005). This finding suggests that individuals'
geographic feature can influence their capability to utilize the social capitals. This
finding echoes with the proposition of Linan & Santos (2007) as ethnic groups are
identified as influential factors of EI. Previous studies about entrepreneurial intentions
emphasize the demographic features such as age, gender, religion, ethnic groups,
education, professional experience, etc. (Linan & Santos, 2007). For example, females
are found to have less EIs in South Korean and China (Zhou & Wang, 2014), which
might be explained by the masculinity culture.
However, empirical studies denied the influence from family's financial capital,
manpower capital (using indicator of family size) and human capital on career intentions
of students (Sharma, 2014). This implies that students are not influenced by their family
background on the career intentions. However, this finding challenges previous findings
of Bird & Wennberg (2016) and Zhang (2015) as they all propose that family's financial
and other resources can enhance EIs. According to Sharma's finding, students' career
intentions will not be influenced by their parents and thus parents' resources in specific
fields might be less useful for them. Further studies need to be conducted to identify the
relationship between influence of social capitals on EIs, and the consistency between
students and their parents' entrepreneurial fields.

In addition, cultural and social norms can influence the way social capitals influence EI.

E
The autonomy which features in flexibility for personal and family life will encourage
individuals to be involved in entrepreneurial activities (Zhou & Wang, 2014). This
PL
implies that the influence of social capitals can be greater than those in the non-
autonomous cultures. In addition, in specific cultures, individuals hold stronger desire for
self-realization and self-achievement, which drives them to be more risk-taking (Zhou &
M
Wang, 2014). Accordingly, it is learned that cultures that promote achievement and self-
realization of values will make individuals hold stronger EIs. Thus, in such cultures, the
influence of social capitals can be greater. However, whether the formation of social
SA

capitals can be influenced in such cultures and whether such influence can change the
way social capitals influence EI remain uncertain.

Currently, a new trend has been raised due to the advancement of information and
communication technologies. It was found that social networking enables students to
enhance confidence through social activities, resulting in higher EI (Solesvik et al., 2014).
Associating with the psychological features which influence EI, it can be seen that
students with enhanced confidence will be more willing to adventure entrepreneurial
opportunities. In addition, social networking enables students to extend their social
capitals from offline world to online world (Solesvik et al., 2014). As mentioned before,
the diversity of social capitals influences how social capitals influence EI. Thus, the
social networking can propel the enhancement of EI.
On the other hand, it was found that the scale and size of enterprises can influence how
social capitals influence the EI. For the small-size firms, social capitals are more
important as they provide complement of scarce resources (Partanen et al., 2011). This is
understandable as large-size firms usually have more resources, but these firms are rare
for the new enterprisers.

Conclusion

In conclusion, theoretically, social capital can enhance people's EIs due to easier
availability of tangible and intangible capitals and resources. Among various social
capitals, the relational social capitals, which is often related to kinship and families, are
most widely discussed to have great influence on individuals. However, whether social

E
capitals can great influence EI is related to how supportive the environment created by
the social network is for entrepreneurial activities. Associating with the TPA, it was
PL
found that social capitals have great influence on social or subjective norms, individuals'
attitudes about EI and controlled behaviors. Thus, social capitals can influence EIs in an
indirect way. Besides, the influence of social capitals on EI can be demonstrated in two
dimensions, availability of resource and capitals, and Psychological benefits from social
M
capitals. This paper also discussed that how social capitals influence EI can be shaped by
other forces such as the diversity of social capitals, the demographic features, cultural
SA

forces, etc.

According to these findings, some recommendations can be proposed for individuals with
personalities and psychological features to start up new ventures. The relational social
capitals with strong ties can be more supportive for their EIs. Thus, individuals can seek
for complementary from such social ties to acquire scarce resources. Simultaneously, it is
necessary for them to seek for opportunities to be exposed to more diverse and wider
social capitals with the aim of exploring more innovative ideas. This can be achieved by
making use of digital technologies to expand the social network. Thirdly, individuals
need to consider whether the general environment is favorable for new ventures, such as
the government's supportive policies, demographic features, etc.
Reference:
Audretsch, D. B. (2007). Entrepreneurship capital and economic growth. Oxford Review
of Economic Policy, 23 (1), pp. 63-78

Baron, R. A. (2004). The Cognitive perspective: A valuable tool for analysing

entrepreneurship's basic "why" questions. Journal of Business Venturing, 19 (2), pp. 221-
239.

Bird, M., Wennberg, K. (2016) Why family matters: The impact of family resources on
immigrant entrepreneurs' exit from entrepreneurship, journal of business venturing, 31,
687-704.

Bickenbach, F., Dohse, D., Liu, W.H. (2017) University Students’ Entrepreneurial
Intentions: A Comparative Analysis of Hong Kong and Guangzhou. China & World

E
economy, 25(2), 60-84.
PL
Bolu-Steve, F.N., Sanni, W.O. (2013). Influence of Family Background on the Academic
Performance of Secondary School Students in Nigeria, Life Psychologia, 23, 78-93.

Chia, C.C., Liang, C.Y. (2016) Influence of Creativity and Social Capital on the
Entrepreneurial Intention of Tourism Students, Journal of Entrepreneurship,
M
Management and Innovation, 12(2), 151-168.

Chen, S.C., Hsiao, H.C., Chang, J.C., Chou, C.M., Chen, C.P., Shen, C.H. (2015) can the
SA

entrepreneurship course improve the entrepreneurial intentions of students? International

entrepreneurial management, 11, 557-569.

Davidsson, P., & Honig, B. (2003) The role of social and human capital among nascent
entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18, 301–331.

Dakhli, M., & de Clercq, D. (2004). Human capital, social capital and innovation: A
multicountry study. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 16, 107–128

Denissen, J. J. A., & Penke, L. (2008). Motivational individual reaction norms underlying
the five-factor model of personality: First steps towards atheory-based conceptual
framework. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(5), 1285–1302.

Dinis, A., Paco, A., Ferreira, J., Raposo, M., Rodrigues, G.R. (2013) Psychological
characteristics and entrepreneurial intentions among secondary students, education +
training, 55(89), 763-790.
Ferreira, J.J., Raposo, M.L., Rodrigues, G.R., Dinis, A., Paco, A.D. (2012) a model of
entrepreneurial intention: An application of the psychological and behavioral approaches,
journal of small business and enterprise development, 19(3), 424-440.

Grootaert, C., & van Bastelaer, T. (2001). Understanding and measuring social capital: A
synthesis of findings and recommendations from the social capital initiative. The World
Bank, Social Capital Initiative, Working paper no. 24

Gedajlovic, E., Honig, B., Moore, B.C., Payne, R.G., Wright, M. (2013) social capital
and entrepreneurship: a schema and research agenda. Entrepreneurship Theory And
Practice, 455-479.

Hawkins, R.L., Maurer, K. (2010) Bonding, Bridging and Linking: How Social Capital
Operated in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, British journal of social work, 40,

E
1777-1793.
PL
Hammarstedt, M., (2009). Intergenerational mobility and the earnings positions of first-,
second-, third-generation immigrants. Kyklos 62 (2), 275–292.

Herman, E. & Stefanescu, D. (2017): Can higher education stimulate entrepreneurial

intentions among engineering and business students? Educational Studies, 1-17.
M
Judge, T. A., Higgins, C. A., Thoresen, C. J., & Barrick, M. R. (1999). The big five
personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span.
SA

Personnel Psychology, 52(3), 621–652.

Kanas, A., van Tubergen, F., van der Lippe, T. (2009). Immigrant Self-Employment:
Testing Hypotheses About the Role of Origin- and Host-Country Human Capital and
Bonding and Bridging Social Capital. Work and Occupations, 36 (3), pp. 181-208

Krueger, F.N., Reilly, D.M., Carsrud, A.L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial
intentions. journal of business venturing, 15, 411-432.

Lans, T., Gulikers, J., & Batterink, M. (2010). Moving beyond traditional measures of
entrepreneurial intentions in a study among life-sciences’ students in the Netherlands.
Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 15(3), 259-274.

Liñán, F. (2008) Skill and value perceptions: how do they affect entrepreneurial
intentions? International entrepreneurial management journal, 4, 257-272.
Linan, F., Santos, J.F. (2007) does social capital affect entrepreneurial intentions,
International advanced economic research, 13, 4443-453.

Misoska, A.T., Dimitrova, M. & Mrsik, J. (2016) Drivers of entrepreneurial intentions

among business students in Macedonia, Economic Research- Ekonomska Istraživanja,
29:1, 1062-1074

Partanen, J., Chetty, S.K., Rajala, A. (2011) Innovation Types and Network Relationships,
entrepreneurship theory and practice,1027-1056

Prodan, I., Drnovsek, M. (2010) conceptualizing academic-entrepreneurial intentions: an

empirical test, Technovation, 30, 332-347.

Roxas, B. (2014) Effects of entrepreneurial knowledge on entrepreneurial intentions: a

longitudinal study of selected South-east Asian business students, Journal of Education

E
and Work, 27:4, 432-453,
PL
Stam, W., Arzlanian, S., Elfring, T. (2014) Social capital of entrepreneurs and small firm
performance: A meta-analysis of contextual and methodological moderators, Journal of
Business Venturing, 29, 152-173.

Sharma, L. (2014) Impact of family capital & social capital on youth entrepreneurship – a
M
study of Uttarakhand state, India, Journal of global l Entrepreneurship Research, 4(14),
1-18.
SA

Shaw, E., Lam, W., & Carter, S. (2008). The role of entrepreneurial capital in building
service reputation. The Service Industries Journal, 28, 899-917

Shapero, A., & Sokol, L. (1982) Social dimensions of entrepreneurship. In C. A. Kent, D.

L. Sexto , & K. H. Vesper (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of entrepreneurship. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall

Steinmayr, R., Dinger, F.C., Spinath, B. (2010) Parents’ Education and Children’s
Achievement: The Role of Personality, European journal of personality, 24, 535-550.

Smith, C., Smith, J.B., Shaw, E. (2017) Embracing digital networks: Entrepreneurs'
social capital online, journal of business venturing, 32, 18-34.

Solesvik, M., Westhead, P., Matlay, H. (2014) Cultural factors and entrepreneurial
intention, education +training, 56(8/9), 680-696.
Thompson, E. R. (2009). Individual entrepreneurial intent: Construct clarification and
development of an internationally reliable metric. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,
33(3), 669-694.

Walter, A., Auer, M., Ritter,T. (2006).The impact of network capabilities and
entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business
Venturing, 21,541–567.

Wang, Y.S., Lin, S.J., Yeh, C.H., Li, C.R., Li, H.S. (2016) What drives students’ cyber
entrepreneurial intention: The moderating role of disciplinary difference, thinking skills
and creativity, 22, 22-35.

Zhang, P.Y., Wang, D.D., Owen, C.L. (2005) A Study of Entrepreneurial Intention of
University Students, competitive research article, 5(1): 61–82

E
Zhang, Y.L. (2015) The contingent value of social resources: Entrepreneurs' use of
PL
debt-financing sources in Western China, Journal of Business Venturing, 30, 390-406.

Zhou, J., Wang, Z.M. (2014). Entrepreneurial Intention and Outcome Expectancy:
Evidence from South Korea and China, Contemporary Management Research, 10(3),
251-270.
M
SA