Your future now!
  • English
  • Bosanski
  • Türkçe
TitleStudents' entrepreneurial orientation intention, business environment and networking: insights from Bosnia and Herzegovina
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2016
AuthorsPalalic, R, Durakovic, B, Brankovic, A, Ridic, O
JournalInternational Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy
Volume11
Issue4
Start Page240
Pagination240-255
Date Published01/2016
Type of ArticleOriginal
Abstract

The study examines 173 students at the International University of
Sarajevo regarding their entrepreneurial intention towards networking and
business environment. The methodology is based on a random sample while
various statistical analyses are used to acquire the empirical results. Findings of
the study revealed that there is a positive relationship between entrepreneurial
orientation dimensions and business environment, and networking. Moreover,
all entrepreneurial dimensions are affected by either business environment or
networking. Practical and educational implications are discussed.

Full Text

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317422146
Students' entrepreneurial orientation
intention, business environment and
networking: insights from Bosnia and
Herzegovina
Article in International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy · January 2016
DOI: 10.1504/IJFIP.2016.10005517
CITATIONS
0
READS
43
4 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
FAMILY ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN TRANSITION AND EMERGING ECONOMIES View project
World Bank Procuring Infrastructure PPPs 2018 in B&H View project
Ramo Palalic
International University of Sarajevo
13 PUBLICATIONS 8 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
B. Durakovic
International University of Sarajevo
10 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Oggi Ridic on 11 June 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
240 Int. J. Foresight and Innovation Policy, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2016
Copyright © 2016 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.
Students’ entrepreneurial orientation intention,
business environment and networking: insights from
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Ramo Palalic*
Management Program,
International University of Sarajevo,
Hrasnicka cesta 15, 7100 Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Email: ramopal@gmail.com
Email: rpalalic@ius.edu.ba
*Corresponding author
Benjamin Durakovic
Industrial Engineering Program,
International University of Sarajevo,
Hrasnicka cesta 15, 7100 Sarajevo,
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Email: bdurakovic@ius.edu.ba
Azra Brankovic
International Business and Finance Program,
International University of Sarajevo,
Hrasnicka cesta 15, 7100 Sarajevo,
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Email: abrankovic@ius.edu.ba
Ognjen Ridic
Management Program,
International University of Sarajevo,
Hrasnicka cesta 15, 7100 Sarajevo,
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Email: oridic@ius.edu.ba
Abstract: The study examines 173 students at the International University of
Sarajevo regarding their entrepreneurial intention towards networking and
business environment. The methodology is based on a random sample while
various statistical analyses are used to acquire the empirical results. Findings of
the study revealed that there is a positive relationship between entrepreneurial
orientation dimensions and business environment, and networking. Moreover,
all entrepreneurial dimensions are affected by either business environment or
networking. Practical and educational implications are discussed.
Keywords: B&H; business environment; entrepreneurship; entrepreneurial
education; entrepreneurial intention; entrepreneurial orientation; IUS;
networking; students.
Students’ entrepreneurial orientation intention 241
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Palalic, R., Durakovic, B.,
Brankovic, A. and Ridic, O. (2016) ‘Students’ entrepreneurial orientation
intention, business environment and networking: insights from Bosnia and
Herzegovina’, Int. J. Foresight and Innovation Policy, Vol. 11, No. 4,
pp.240–255.
Biographical notes: Ramo Palalic, PhD is an Assistant Professor at the
Management Program, Faculty of Business and Administration, International
University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina. His research
interests are entrepreneurship, leadership, marketing and management. He
teaches at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels in the area of
entrepreneurship, leadership, marketing and management. Apart from this, he is
actively involved in business projects, in the area of entrepreneurial leadership
and marketing management, in private and public organisations. Dr Ramo
Palalic has authored and co-authored several articles in the reputable
international journals. Currently, he is serving a few journals as
Reviewer/Editor Board Member.
Benjamin Durakovic, PhD is an Assistant Professor in the Department of
Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Natural Sciences, International University of
Sarajevo (IUS). He received his PhD and MSc in Industrial Engineering and
Management, while BS in energy Engineering was received from the
University of Sarajevo. His research interests include a variety of topics in
System Design and Architecture, Modeling, and Simulation, CAD/CAM,
Product Development, Statistical Process Control, Innovation and Quality. He
has been serving as the Editor-in-Chief for a professional journal ‘Expert’ in
period 2007‒2008. Currently, he is acting as the Managing Editor of the
scientific journal Periodicals of Engineering and Natural Sciences (PEN) at the
IUS.
Azra Brankovic is an Assistant Professor at the Department of International
Business and Finance. Dr Brankovic is the Program Coordinator of the above
department. She teaches at undergraduate and postgraduate level. Dr Brankovic
has served for many years in the Public Administration. Professional
experience is numerous where she attained business experience.
Dr Ognjen Ridic is an Assistant Professor and Program Coordinator at the
Management Program, Faculty of Business and Administration. He teaches
management courses at both undergraduate and postgraduate level. He has
published several articles in international journals. He has a business and
academic experience.
1 Introduction
There are many reasons why people become an entrepreneur. Some do it because of their
personal traits. People who are curious, creative, innovative, self-confident,
communicative, ambitious, hardworking and risk-taking often choose to be an
entrepreneur instead to work for someone else. These people see an opportunity and use
it. However, some theories and researches argue that entrepreneurship does not depend
on personal traits but rather on a national culture people come from. Some
cultures encourage entrepreneurial behavior, and others do not. Cultural theories state
242 R. Palalic et al.
that cultures that are low on uncertainty avoidance encourage entrepreneurship.
Paul and Shrivastava (2015) compared entrepreneurial traits of MBA students, from India
and Japan. India is emerging country with a high coefficient of uncertainty avoidance.
People in India do not like to take risks; they prefer secure jobs and the long-term
employment. That is why people in India prefer governments’ jobs over all other jobs.
They choose to be entrepreneurs out of necessity in order to solve their economic
problem and alleviate poverty. The state does not provide any support for small business,
but contrary, the state has been hindering entrepreneurial activities for a long time, till the
1990s. Moreover, infrastructure is bad, and people do not have access to capital. An
Indian entrepreneur usually starts a business by borrowing money from family and
friends. Conversely, Japan is developed country, where the government has been
supporting small business since the 1950s. The infrastructure is good, and no barriers to
access capital. Paul and Shrivastava (2015) found in their study that entrepreneurial
attitude is greatly influenced by one’s culture, and not innate personality factors to be
untrue. So both Indian and Japanese MBA students demonstrated entrepreneurial
attitudes. They concluded that the entrepreneurial attitude is a function of personal traits
and cultural learning as well.
There are many factors that contribute to the success of small business. Education is
one of the most important (Merkač and Dolinšek, 2013). Many entrepreneurs have
ambition and are willing to take a risk; however, they do not have knowledge how to start
and operate a business. That is why universities today offer undergraduate and
postgraduate courses on entrepreneurship aiming to develop entrepreneurial skills and to
teach students how to start, operate and develop business. Some universities have even
major in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial courses are an obligation in EU. However,
there is a difference in entrepreneurship courses in the USA and Europe. American
professors are more practical. They often have experience in small business and use
experiential learning techniques. European professors use more traditional methods like
lecturing, and they are not linked with the small business practice.
2 Literature background and hypotheses
Entrepreneurship education is present in Finland throughout the school system, from
primary schools to universities. Ronoko and Lepisto (2015) researched attitude of Finnish
student teachers about entrepreneurship education on a sample of 257 student teachers.
The majority of the student teachers (nearly 90%) reacted positively to entrepreneurship
education, both in basic teaching and teacher education. However, the student teachers
who reacted negatively to entrepreneurship education (10%) stated that entrepreneurship
education is politically coloured and a part of the neoliberal politics to promote
capitalistic values.
Spiteri and Maringe (2014) explored the views of students in three universities in the
UK and one in Malta about the teaching of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial education
was found as four components: pedagogy, content, assessment and role model lecturer.
For instance, a role of a lecturer was found as very crucial in inspiring students towards
entrepreneurial spirit. Those lecturers should be intellectually creative backed by
experience in entrepreneurial roles, and a strong academic knowledge to motivate
students in entrepreneurship classes.
Students’ entrepreneurial orientation intention 243
The traditional role of the university as expert or lecturer in entrepreneurship
education has to be changed. Nieminen and Lemmetyinen (2015) explored the innovative
role of higher education providers in supporting the co-creation of entrepreneurial
opportunities through networks. Benefits of cooperation among the members of the
business network were categorised as functional, relational and symbolic. On the
functional level, the entrepreneurs considered important to have an opportunity to meet
and discuss in a stimulating atmosphere. Higher education did not assume the role of
expert or lecturer but that of a facilitator. On the level of relational cooperation, it was
more important to foster relations between the network actors, and the provider’s role
changed to that of a matchmaker. On the symbolic level, entrepreneurs work together to
combine their competences and find new business partnerships. Higher education plays
the role of a co-creator.
Students need information about career options and possibilities on the labour market.
Skok and Dolinsek (2013) conducted research on career counselling centres in Austria,
Slovenia and Croatia examining higher education institution (universities, colleges,
faculties) that are specialised in economic and business education. They concluded that
career counselling for students who would improve their employability competencies, is
in not so present, as one could expect, regarding given situation in the global economy. In
Austria, the higher education institution offers employer presentation, student grant
acquisition, organisational aspects of studying, social networking regarding career,
enabling communications, preparing CV. Also, handling job interviews, improvement of
career mastering skills, career advice and tests, possibility to announce the need for a
workplace, possibility to record the CV in a higher institution database, offer suitable
jobs on the market. Information about Bologna study system, information about
reforming the educational system, information about specific graduate employability,
information and tutoring about the studies. In Slovenia, information about support
gaining scholarships was not introduced as common service. In Croatia, the range of
services is narrow, mostly consists of helping in communication skills improvement,
preparing CV, etc., and providing some information about study process.
In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the higher education system does not provide students
with knowledge how to start up businesses, to work in start-ups or developing businesses
or to work in organisations that assist entrepreneurship growth (Ateljevic et al., 2013).
A recent study by Palalic et al. (2017b) explored the students’ intentions at the
International University of Sarajevo (IUS) towards the entrepreneurship. Results of the
study revealed that students have the ‘entrepreneurial mind-set’ to undertake certain risks
and to start a business. The IUS, besides regular courses at bachelor and graduate level,
offers through the Leadership and Entrepreneurship Center (LEC), various
entrepreneurial leadership education. In this way, it tries to fill the gap in entrepreneurial
education in the country, to make students ready for entrepreneurial action and
employment. Similarly, Li and Liu (2011) surveyed 163 students from the Jilin
University (China). They inspected whether the entrepreneurial education has a positive
impact on employment. The study showed the positive effect of the employment.
The educational background in entrepreneurship is not only benefiting the
participants, but also their families, employers, society, government and even foreign
investors (FI). Hence, the entrepreneurial education is an imperative to B&H and the
Balkan region (Ramadani and Schneider, 2013), which is far behind EU countries and
other world’s developed countries.
244 R. Palalic et al.
2.1 Business environment and networking
Many countries expect that small- and medium-sized companies will contribute to the
economic development, enhance economic growth and reduce poverty. These
expectations were especially high in ex-socialistic countries. However, evidence from
South East Europe, 20 years after transition, show that economic development and
entrepreneurship were stifled by the so-called free market (Ateljevic, 2013). The state did
not help the development of small and medium business, but hinder it with its
bureaucracy that put a lot of obstacles for development and operating of small- and
medium-sized companies. Competition from foreign companies destroyed SME sector in
the almost whole region. Poverty increased as well as the gap between rich and poor.
Ateljevic (2013) states that in many transitional countries ‘clumsy’ economic reform and
often irregular privatisation wiped out most of the manufacturing sector dominated by
large firms. Wide spread corruption and organised crime in many transitional countries
also hinder private initiative. It should be noted that in the very beginning of the state
existence, the ‘sole entrepreneurs’ tried to build the country (Dana 1994; 1999), without
proper entrepreneurial education, and to survive.
According to Ateljevic et al. (2013), there are on the whole, 87,332 enterprises in
Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H). The hotels and restaurants, transport and
communication sectors are dominated by micro-enterprises (82.2 percent of total SMEs),
followed by small (9.3 percent of total SMEs) and medium-sized enterprises (8.5 percent
of total SMEs). The main problem in the functioning of SME sector is derived from the
administrative structure of B&H. B&H has a very complicated and cumbersome
administrative structure. It consists of State of B&H, two entities (B&H Federation and
Republica Srpska), Brcko District (BD) as a separate unit, 10 cantons and 143
municipalities. All these administrative levels are responsible for entrepreneurship and
small- and medium-sized enterprises (SME). There are departments within ministries,
agencies and bodies at state, entity and BD levels, regional development agencies, local
development agencies and economic departments within all municipalities, which deal
with various SME matters. There are also many business associations at
national/entity/regional/local level that takes care of SME matters. There are several
chambers of commerce at the entity and cantonal levels. Ateljevic et al. (2013) identified
several key factors that negatively affect development and operating of SME. Human,
financial and other resources to support entrepreneurs by each of the support institutions
are insufficient in quality, range and scope. Moreover, there is a lack of cooperation and
coordination of activities and information exchange of different actors within the
business support system. There is also insufficient support for innovation and
competitiveness. The cost of starting and operating a business is high. There is a misuse
of government measures to encourage SMEs. There is often a change of legislation
change, and there is no legislation relating to incubation development and management.
Simply, the state should reprogram the current policies to improve the current business
environment in B&H (Palalic et al., 2017a), which draws back every single business
move.
According to Isada et al. (2015), an environment can influence entrepreneurial
intention of students. However, these factors in the business environment differ. In their
study, they surveyed 350 students (Japan, N213; Taiwan, N137). They studied two
environments (from social and cultural and individual perspective) and found that
Taiwan’s environment is greater than the Japanese one. High competition could be one of
Students’ entrepreneurial orientation intention 245
these factors why the Taiwan’s environment is greater than Japanese. A study by Gerba
(2012) also confirmed that entrepreneurial intentions of students (business students vs.
engineering ones) are affected by environment. A business environment creates a special
wink called ‘business networking’. As much as students are exposed to the business
environment, they tend to create their ‘friendly ties’, which by time creates a strong
network for future business. Hypothetically, it will establish a ‘symbiotic’ relationship,
which will nurture the future business activities (Dana et al., 2000; Dana, 2001;
Etemad et al., 2001; Wright and Dana, 2003). Entrepreneurial education can influence
employment of students (Li and Liu, 2011).
So when it comes to the education and the student observation of business and
networking necessary for a start-up, the study proposes the following hypothesis:
H1: Networking and Business environment affect entrepreneurial orientation
intentions of students.
2.2 EO dimensions
From the business perspective, the EO dimensions make business entities competitive,
which gives them self-sustainable in the long term. It is represented by the main three
dimensions, innovativeness, proactiveness and risk-taking (Miller, 1983; Covin and
Slevin, 1988; Wiklund and Shepherd, 2003). Innovativeness is described as the main
pillar of the entrepreneurship (Schumpeter, 1947). In many decades before and up to now
is always viewed as a significant repressor to business performance. In the context of
B&H, it should be mentioned that entrepreneurial education is one of the sources of
innovation because educated students, with developed their entrepreneurial mind-set, can
bring innovation to organisations they work for. Theoretically, a good knowledge mixed
with the practice brings the long-term benefits for its stakeholders. While innovativeness
brings the flexibility of mind-set, the outcome can be seen in proactiveness.
Proactiveness, as a second main pillar of EO, brings companies and organisations
opportunity of being the ‘first mover’ in the market (Trevis et al., 2009; Lumpkin and
Dess, 2001; Wiklund and Shepherd, 2003; Tajeddini, 2010; Palalic and Busatlic, 2015;
Palalic, 2017). Such proclivity to make other organisations peers increases a positive
effect on business performance. Sometimes, to increase business performance, it is
necessary to take a risk. The risk-taking is another important milestone of the EO. The
moves planned for the time ahead (Bhide, 2000) makes organisations dynamic as oppose
to those who follow the strategy ‘wait and see’ (Covin and Slevin, 1989). One may
observe that entrepreneurial mind-sets are very risky since the future is uncertain.
However, it is not acknowledged same by non-entrepreneur and entrepreneur (Simon
et al., 2000).
A strong entrepreneur should have knowledge about these three main milestones of
EO to face entrepreneurial challenges. Education in this field is imperative so that future
generations can build a bright future of the society (Palalic et al., 2017b). Based on the
discussion above, the study proposes the following hypotheses:
H2: Entrepreneurial orientation intention is positively correlated with networking
and business environment.
H3: All EO dimensions are positively correlated with networking and business
environment.
246 R. Palalic et al.
H4: Each EO dimension is affected by either business environment or networking of
students.
3 Methodology
3.1 Data collection
Data collection is done using self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire was
distributed through the email to randomly selected student, from the data base provided
by the Student Affairs Office.
3.2 Instrumentation
The questionnaire is adopted and modified from Taatila and Down (2012).
The questionnaire developed by Covin and Slevin (1989) cannot be used for the students
because it is designed for firms, and thus it is adapted to the students level of their
entrepreneurial intention with 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly
agree). In addition to Taatila and Down’s (2012) questions, it is added ‘business
environment’ as followed by Palalic et al. (2017b).
3.3 Data analysis
To analyse the data, several statistical tools are used like descriptive, test for reliability
(Cronbach’s alpha), correlation and regression analysis.
4 Empirical results and findings
4.1 Data reliability
The reliability test of this survey shows an adequate score and suggests that the test has
acceptable reliability of internal consistency. The value of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is
.712, which observes 71.2% of the questionnaire as reliable while 28.8% not reliable.
4.2 Descriptives
Almost half of the respondents (50.90%) were engineering students (Faculty of
Engineering and Natural Sciences-FENS), followed by 38.7% of business students
(Faculty of Business Administration-FBA). The Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
(FASS) participated with 9.8% only, while the Faculty of Law (FLW) gave the lowest
number of participants as of 0.6%. Additionally, there were students from 11 different
nationalities (22.6%), and local (B&H) students were the majority (77.4%).
Students’ entrepreneurial orientation intention 247
4.3 Hypotheses
To examine proposed hypotheses, the study deployed correlation analysis as well as
multiple regression.
The first hypothesis is as follows:
H1: Networking and Business environment affect entrepreneurial orientation
intentions of students.
To test the hypotheses, the following multiple regression model is used:
Y = β 0 +β1x1 +β 2 x2 +ε
where Y represents EO, x1 represents networking, x2 represents business environment, ε is
error term. β0 is intercepted, β1 is networking coefficient, β2 is business environment
coefficient. The goodness of fit for EO is shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Goodness of fit for EO
Observations 173.000
Sum of weights 173.000
DF 170.000
R2 0.263
Adjusted R2 0.255
R2 indicates that only 26.3% of the EO model variation is explained by networking and
business environment as model predictor variables. It tells that the model is viable and
can be used for analyses. Regression model results are shown in Table 2.
Table 2 Regression model results
Source Value
Standard
error t Pr > |t|
Lower bound
(95%)
Upper bound
(95%)
Intercept 2.427 0.229 10.618 < 0.0001 1.98 2.88
NETWORKING 0.166 0.042 3.982 0.000 0.084 0.248
BUSINESS
ENVIRONMENT
0.218 0.038 5.668 < 0.0001 0.142 0.294
Both independent variables (networking and business environment) in the regression
model are significant contributors in EO as the dependent variable. Thus, the EO model
can be written as follows:
EO = 2.427 + 0.166*NETWORKING + 0.218*BUSINESSENVIRONMENT
248 R. Palalic et al.
The analysis supports the H1 since the networking and business environment positively
affect the entrepreneurial orientation intention of students.
The second hypothesis, H2: Entrepreneurial orientation intention is positively
correlated with networking and business environment, was related to correlations
between the EO and its predictors. To identify the relationship between entrepreneurial
intentions and its repressors, a Spearman’s correlation coefficients are calculated. The
results are presented in the correlation matrix (Table 3).
Table 3 Correlation matrix
NETWORKING BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT EO
NETWORKING 1 0.219 0.352
BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT 0.219 1 0.441
EO 0.352 0.441 1
The numbers from the correlation matrix indicate low to moderate positive relationships
between Entrepreneurial intention (EO) as dependent variable on one side, and
networking and business environment, as independent variables, on the other. Also, there
is a positive negligible correlation between networking and business environment. Thus,
the study accept the H2 because there is a strong tie between EO, and business
environment and networking.
The third hypothesis was proposed as the following:
H3: All EO dimensions are positively correlated with networking and business
environment.
The correlation coefficients in Table 4 represent represents the correlation between the
EO dimensions and networking, and business environment, as well as the correlation
between networking and business environment.
Table 4 Correlation matrix
NETWORKING
BUSINESS
ENVIRONMENT INNOVATIVENESS PROACTIVENESS
RISKTAKING
NETWORKING 1 0.219 0.156 0.379 0.338
BUSINESS
ENVIRONMENT
0.219 1 0.312 0.347 0.422
INNOVATIVENESS 0.156* 0.312 1 0.481 0.421
PROACTIVENESS 0.379 0.347 0.481 1 0.583
RISK-TAKING 0.338 0.422 0.421 0.583 1
*Also, there is a negligible positive correlation between networking and innovativeness.
Correlation matrix indicates low to moderate positive relationships between EO
dimensions and networking and business environment.
Students’ entrepreneurial orientation intention 249
Spearman’s correlation matrix indicates low to moderate positive relationships between
EO dimensions and networking and business environment. The business environment has
a weak positive relationship with networking, risk-taking proactiveness and
innovativeness. Also, the business environment has a very weak relationship with
entrepreneurial orientation. A moderate positive relationship exists between
innovativeness and proactiveness as well as proactiveness and risk-taking. Very weak,
positive correlation between exists between entrepreneurial orientation and
innovativeness, proactiveness, risk-taking and business environment. The outcome leads
to accepting the H3, confirming most of the EO dimensions are positively correlated with
networking and business environment.
The following hypothesis aimed to investigate the effect of business environment and
to network on each EO dimension:
H4: Each EO dimension is affected by either business environment or networking.
The following results are attained through the multiple regression analysis (from
Table 5 to 10).
Table 5 Correlation matrix Goodness of fit statistics (INNOVATIVENESS)
Observations 173.000
Sum of weights 173.000
DF 170.000
R2 0.105
Adjusted R2 0.095
Table 6 Model parameters (INNOVATIVENESS)
Source Value
Standard
error t Pr > |t|
Lower
bound
(95%)
Upper bound
(95%)
Intercept 2.619 0.329 7.953 <0.0001 1.969 3.269
NETWORKING 0.074 0.060 1.243 0.216 −0.044 0.193
BUSINESS
ENVIRONMENT
0.217 0.055 3.920 0.000 0.108 0.326
Table 7 Correlation matrix Goodness of fit statistics (PROACTIVENESS)
Observations 173.000
Sum of weights 173.000
DF 170.000
R2 0.217
Adjusted R2 0.208
250 R. Palalic et al.
Table 8 Model parameters (PROACTIVENESS)
Source Value
Standard
error T Pr > |t|
Lower bound
(95%)
Upper bound
(95%)
Intercept 2.335 0.278 8.388 < 0.0001 1.786 2.885
NETWORKING 0.232 0.051 4.577 < 0.0001 0.132 0.332
BUSINESS
ENVIRONMENT
0.187 0.047 3.988 < 0.0001 0.094 0.279
Table 9 Correlation matrix goodness of fit statistics (RISK-TAKING)
Observations 173.000
Sum of weights 173.000
DF 170.000
R2 0.241
Adjusted R2 0.232
Table 10 Model parameters (RISK-TAKING)
Source Value
Standard
error t Pr > |t|
Lower bound
(95%)
Upper bound
(95%)
Intercept 2.326 0.278 8.359 < 0.0001 1.777 2.875
NETWORKING 0.191 0.051 3.762 0.000 0.091 0.291
BUSINESS
ENVIRONMENT
0.250 0.047 5.337 < 0.0001 0.157 0.342
4.4 Regression of variable INNOVATIVENESS
The model is significant, which can be used for prediction. The R2 indicates that only
10.5% of the model variation in dependent variable is explained by model predictor
variables. A lower value of adjusted R2 indicates that non-significant repressor variables
participate in the model. The results of the regression model are shown in Table 6.
From Table 6, it is observed that p value is significant only for the business
environment, while networking has no significant impact on the innovativeness.
Therefore, the model is a simple regression having only one significant variable and can
be written as:
INNOVATIVENESS 2.619 = + 0.217*BUSINESSENVIRONMENT
4.5 Regression of variable PROACTIVENESS
R2 indicates that only 21.7% of the EO model variation is explained by networking and
business environment as model predictor variables, and tells that the model is viable and
can be used in the prediction. The results of the proactiveness regression model are
displayed in Table 8.
Students’ entrepreneurial orientation intention 251
From Table 8, p values indicate that both repressors (networking and business
environment) in the model are significant contributors to proactiveness. Therefore, the
regression model can be written as follows:
PROACTIVENESS 2.335 0.232 = + * NETWORKING + 0.187 *BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT
4.6 Regression of variable RISK-TAKING
R2 indicates that only 24.1% of the model variation in dependent variable is explained by
model predictor variables. This suggests that the model is viable and can be used for
prediction.
From the table above, p value suggests both networking business environment slope
coefficients have a significant impact on the risk-taking. Therefore, the regression model
can be written as follows:
RISK-TAKING = 2.326 + 0.191*NETWORKING + 0.250 *BUSINESSENVIRONMENT
The final results suggest us to accept H4 because either business environment or
networking affects each of EO dimensions of students.
5 Discussion
Networking and business environment, as proposed by H1 (Networking and Business
environment affect entrepreneurial orientation intentions of students), affects the
entrepreneurial intention of students. If such business environment is mutually helpful
(Dana et al., 2000; Etemad et al., 2001; Wright and Dana, 2003) in creating new
opportunities, probably a strong networking will be created too. Networking, in the end,
is very significant when it comes to business growth (Wasserman and Faust, 1994; Zhao
and Aram, 1995; Renzulli et al., 2000). Students, during their education, can create an
atmosphere where they will create a strong tie within the given environment. Students as
hosts of the future entrepreneurship development will be willing to pursue and create
business opportunities in B&H. Moreover, such business and networking atmosphere can
conceive and increase the students’ entrepreneurial intentions (H2: Entrepreneurial
orientation intention is positively correlated with networking and business environment;
and H3: All EO dimensions are positively correlated with networking and business
environment). Regarding the H4 (Each EO dimension is affected by either business
environment or networking of students), results showed a significant effect of either
business environment or networking towards the entrepreneurial dimensions (Isada et al.,
2016; Gerba, 2012), while entrepreneurial education brings positive benefits to students’
employment (Li and Liu, 2011). Although environment can be very fragile,
entrepreneurial education of students is important to face these challenges. A strong
entrepreneurial educational background and strong entrepreneurial ties in the
environment can change the business environment explanatory variable, which will
create new business opportunity and nurture the entrepreneurship development. For this,
the role of universities is important, and so is the IUS.
252 R. Palalic et al.
6 Conclusion
The age of 20s is the age in which students embrace or decline certain thinks brought by
the surrounding they live in. Since the age is not at maturity stage (the age of 40s), then it
is easy to reshape thoughts and views of students. That is why they are still in the
education process, which in the end brings a lot of savvy from this educational process.
Having in mind such ‘shaky’ views of students, which could be easily changed, the
atmosphere at the University level should be created in such a way that students will be
motivated to pursue their business opportunities. The university’s educational
(entrepreneurial) environment should be established and reflected in the real business
environment, where students will be able to cope with entrepreneurial challenges. In that
case, they can use their networking (ties) to overcome such issues.
The study with the sample size of 173 students, from the International University of
Sarajevo, showed a positive relationship among entrepreneurial orientation intention of
students, business environment and networking. Additionally, the findings suggested that
either business environment or networking affects the EO dimensions (EO intentions of
students). This indicates that students shall work on creating a positive business
environment along with their professors, as well as establishing strong ties in this
business environment. As the first step, the study alludes first to have a strong
educational background in entrepreneurship, which in the long term could be a predictor
of the business environment.
6.1 Educational implications
Appropriate education in the field of entrepreneurship obviously lacks (Umihanic et al.
2013). Academics should take the leadership role more seriously in educating students in
the field of entrepreneurship. Fayolle (2007) narrated that entrepreneurship is an “engine
of the national economy.” Hence, academics should review and project the future
entrepreneurship education to create a generator for socio-economic development of the
country (Palalic, 2017). They should be close to the industry to navigate the right path of
the entrepreneurial education so that they can infiltrate the entrepreneurial spirit into
students. All students regardless of gender and major shall be involved in entrepreneurial
education. As the source of entrepreneurial and theoretical knowledge, educating
‘students-tigers’ in entrepreneurship field will be reflected in the socio-economic
development of the nation.
6.2 Study limitations
Limitations of the study are related to the scope of the research. It would be more
beneficial if the study were taken across the whole B&H to generalise the research
outcome. Moreover, the regional application could be of greater value, which can be one
of the future works.
6.3 Future prospects
Limitations of this study could be turned into prospective future works. At the national
level, it would be good to include all private and public universities and examine
students’ entrepreneurial intentions. This will give more insights and more traces for the
Students’ entrepreneurial orientation intention 253
future development of the entrepreneurial education in the country. Similarly, regional
comparability will give interesting and worthwhile outcomes.
References
Ateljevic, J. (2013) ‘Economic development and entrepreneurship in transition economies: a
contribution to the current scholarly debate’, Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies,
Vol. 15, No. 3, pp.237–239.
Ateljevic, J., O'Rourke, T. and Zolak Poljasevic, B. (2013) ‘Local economic development in Bosnia
and Herzegovina: role of local development agencies’, Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern
Studies, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp.280–305.
Bhide, A.V. (2000) The Origin and Evolution of New Businesses, Oxford University Press, New
York.
Covin, J.G. and Slevin, D.P. (1988) The influence of organization structure on the utility of an
entrepreneurial top management style’, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 25, No. 3,
pp.217–234.
Covin, J.G. and Slevin, D.P. (1989) ‘Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign
environments’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.75–87.
Dana, L.P (1994) ‘The impact on culture on entrepreneurship, innovation, and change in the
Balkans: the Yugopluralist model’, Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Change, Vol. 3, No. 2,
pp.177–190.
Dana, L.P. (1999) ‘Business and entrepreneurship in Bosnia and Herzegovina’, Journal of Business
and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp.105–117.
Dana, L.P., Etemad, H. and Wright, R.W. (2000) ‘The global reach of symbiotic networks’,
Journal of Euromarketing, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp.1–16.
Dana, L.P. (2001) ‘Introduction Networks, Internationalization and Policy’, Small Business
economics, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp.57–62.
Fayolle, A. (2007) Entrepreneurship and New Value Creation the Dynamic of the Entrepreneurial
Process, 1st ed., Cambridge University Press, UK, New York.
Etemad, H., Wright, R.W. and Dana, L.P. (2001) ‘Symbiotic international business networks:
collaboration between small and large firms’, Thunderbird International Business Review, e
global Reach of Symbiotic Networks, Journal of Euromarketing, Vol. 43, No. 4, pp.481–499.
Gerba, D.T. (2012) ‘Impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial intentions of business
and engineering students in Ethiopia’, African Journal of Economic and Management Studies,
Vol. 3, No. 2, pp.258–277.
Isada, F, Lin, H.C. and Yuriko Isada, Y. (2015) ‘Entrepreneurship of university students in Taiwan
and Japan’, Management Research Review, Vol. 38, No. 12, pp.1251–1266.
Li, Z., and Liu, Y. (2011) ‘Entrepreneurship education and employment performance’, Journal of
Chinese Entrepreneurship, Vol. 3, No. 3 pp.195–203.
Lumpkin, G.T. and Dess, G.G. (2001) ‘Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to
firm performance: the moderating role of environment and life cycle’, Journal of Business
Venturing, Vol. 16, No. 5, pp.429–451.
Merkac Skok, M., Dolinšek, T. (2013) ‘Some findings on career counseling in higher education’,
Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol. 7,
No. 1, pp.81–94.
254 R. Palalic et al.
Miller, D. (1983) ‘The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms’, Management Science,
Vol. 29, No. 7, pp.770–791.
Nieminen, L. and Lemmetyinen, A. (2015) ‘A value-creating framework for enhancing
entrepreneurial learning in networks’, Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and
Places in the Global Economy, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.76–91.
Palalic, R. and Busatlic, S. (2015) ‘Exploratory research on relationship between entrepreneurial
orientation styles and business performance and growth of fast and slow growing small and
medium enterprises in Bosnia and Herzegovina’, International Journal of Business and
Management, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp.15–30.
Palalic, R. (2017) ‘The phenomenon of entrepreneurial leadership in gazelles and mice: a
qualitative study from Bosnia and Herzegovina’, World Review of Entrepreneurship,
Management and Sust. Development, Vol. 13, Nos. 2/3, pp.211–236.
Palalic, R., Ramadani, V. and Dana, L.P. (2017a) ‘Entrepreneurship in Bosnia and Herzegovina:
focus on gender’, European Business Review, Vol. 29, No. 4, doi:10.1108/EBR-05-2016-
0071.
Palalic, R., Ramadani V., Dilovic, A., Dizdarevic, A. and Ratten, V. (2017b) ‘Entrepreneurial
intentions of university students: the case of the international university of Sarajevo’, Journal
of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy Information, Vol. 11,
No. 3, doi:10.1108/JEC-12-2016-0046
Paul, J. and Shrivastava, A. (2015) ‘Comparing entrepreneurial communities’, Journal of
Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol. 9, No. 3,
pp.206–220.
Ramadani, V. and Schneider, R.C. (2013) Entrepreneurship in the Balkans, Springer, Berlin
Heidelberg.
Renzulli, L.A., Aldrich, H. and Moody, J. (2000) ‘Family matters: gender, networks, and
entrepreneurial outcomes’, Social Forces, Vol. 79, No. 2, pp.523–46.
Rönkkö, M. and Lepistö, J. (2015) ‘Finnish student teachers’ critical conceptions of
entrepreneurship education’, Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the
Global Economy, Vol. 9, pp.61–75.
Schumpeter, J.A. (1947) ‘The creative responses in economic history’, The Journal of Economic
History, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp.149–159.
Simon, M., Houghton, S.M. and Aquino, K. (2000) ‘Cognitive biases, risk perception, and venture
formation: how individuals decide to start companies’, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 15,
pp.113–134.
Spiteri, S. and Maringe, F. (2014) ‘EU entrepreneurial learning: perspectives of university
students’, Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy,
Vol. 8, No. 1, pp.51–70.
Taatila, V. and Down, S. (2012) ‘Measuring entrepreneurial orientation of university students’,
Education and Training, Vol. 54, No. 8, pp.744–760.
Tajeddini, K. (2010) ‘Effect of customer orientation and entrepreneurial orientation on
innovativeness: evidence from the hotel industry in Switzerland’, Tourism Management,
Vol. 31, No. 2, pp.221–231.
Trevis, S.C., Moss, T.W. and Short, J.C. (2009) ‘Entrepreneurial orientation: an applied
perspective’, Business Horizons, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp.319–324.
Umihanic, B., Tulumovic, R., Omerovic, M., Simic, S. and Markus, R. (2013) GEM BiH 2012:
Poduzetnickimobrazovanjem do (samo)zaposljavanjamladih, Entrepreneurship Development
Centre, Tuzla.
Students’ entrepreneurial orientation intention 255
Wiklund, J. and Shepherd, D. (2003) ‘Research notes and commentaries knowledge-based
resources, entrepreneurial orientation and performance of small and medium-sized
businesses’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 24, No. 13, pp.1307–1314.
Wright, R.W. and Dana, L.P. (2003) ‘Changing paradigms of international entrepreneurship
strategy’, Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.135–152.
Zhao, L. and Aram, J.D. (1995) ‘Networking and growth of young technology-intensive ventures in
China’, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 10, No. 5, pp.349–70.
Wasserman, S. and Faust, K. (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications,
Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
View publication stats