STUDENTS IN SWEDEN BY MEANS OF THE THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR

(1)

Master Thesis

HALMSTAD

UNIVERSITY

Master's Programme (60 credits) in Strategic Entrepreneurship for International Growth

EXPLAINING ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTIONS OF INTERNATIONAL

STUDENTS IN SWEDEN BY MEANS OF THE THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR

International Marketing/Strategic Leadership, 15 credits

Halmstad 2020-11-07

NAHIDA SULTANA, MD. TAZINUR RAHMAN

(2)

1

EXPLAINING ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTIONS OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS IN SWEDEN BY MEANS OF THE THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR

A

^UTHORS

N

^AHIDA

S

^ULTANA

& M

^D

. T

^AZINUR

R

^AHMAN

Abstract

The aim of this paper was to explore the factors behind the entrepreneurial intention (EI) building of international university students of Sweden. With the help of Ajzen’s (1991) Theory of Planned Behavior, this theory has been used by numerous researches to predict intentions, especially EI.

However, in Sweden several studies have been done only on the Swedish students, but no study has done specifically on international students. A conceptual framework was developed for this study from Theory of Planned Behavior, where attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavior control (PBC) were main variables with several indicators of each, to explain what are affecting the most on international university students to build up EI. 18 interviewees of international students of Halmstad University of Sweden were taken. Furthermore, after analyzing their answers authors have found that three of those variables have almost similar effect on building the EI of international university students of Sweden, but not all of their indicators.

Keywords - Entrepreneurial Intention, theory of planned behavior, attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control.

(3)

2

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

Entrepreneurship is generally understood as a financial endeavour taken by one or more individuals to meet various purposes. Researchers have given numerous definitions in the last few decades which are diverse in their aspects of risk taking, innovation, creation of employment and several other factors. Knight (1921) defined an entrepreneur as a man taking risk in a calculative thinking and converting uncertain attempts into productive results. According to luth they are

“entrepreneurs as individuals who exploit market opportunity through technical and/or organizational innovation”, while Drucker (1970) highlighted the risk-taking nature. In quest of defining the features of entrepreneurship, even ninety attributes were found in a popular research in the end of last century (Gartner, 1990). Entrepreneurs are also motivated by their altruistic character, moral values and empathy toward the society to do something beneficial or constructive for other people (Austin et al., 2006; Choi & Majumdar, 2014; Dacin et al., 2011; Miller et al., 2012; Peredo & McLean, 2006; Zahra et al., 2009). Reaching any personal goal or fulfilling a dream through innovation also stimulates entrepreneurship. A man can gain honor and popularity in the society by bringing something innovative in the market as a form of business (Bacq & Alt, 2018). The interpretation of entrepreneurship goes around some characteristics like having courage to do tedious work, strong intention to reach goals, face challenges and establish an organization with the possibility to grow. Entrepreneurship can be explained as a course of actions taken to make difference with doing anything new with the objective to earn financial gains for a person or doing something valuable for the society (Kao, 1993).

There are several ways to describe the idea of entrepreneurship (Bruyat & Julien, 2001), primarily when a person decides to start a new business to support himself, or it is a choice of occupation by someone relying on inventiveness, courage, risk-handling capabilities of his character (van Gelderen et al. 2008). Entrepreneurship can be considered as predetermined behavior (Katz &

Gartner, 1988), and according to some empirical data, EI bear the prospect of setting forth toward a venture (Chrisman, 1997; Reynolds & Miller, 1992). Salman (2016) suggested that a person who creates inventive products to meet the needs of the industry and market and support the growth of the economy of a country thereby. Personal gain is believed to be the main stimulator of entrepreneurship, but the entrepreneur alone is not the benefactor of this. An entrepreneur directly or indirectly makes a positive contribution to the country or society he belongs to, through his organization, transaction, services or product development. For boosting economic growth and productivity of a nation, stimulate innovative activities and create new employments – entrepreneurship is a process which can arrange all in a combination. (Gerba, 2012; Guerrero, Rialp, & Urbano, 2008). The strong interrelationship between economic growth speed and entrepreneurship is found in many researches (Praag & Versloot, 2007). Nevertheless, entrepreneurship is the driving force to restructure the market of a country and entrepreneurs undoubtedly contribute to the social and economic growth of a country.

In the recent few decades, we see a lot of studies about entrepreneurship ascertaining its role in employment and poverty alleviation in a country. Entrepreneurship is a productive way to reduce poverty in the society (McMullen, 2011) and creating a source of income for those who suffer to

(6)

5

bear the expenses of life (Sutter et al., 2019; Bruton et al., 2013). Not only nations thriving to develop, but the developed nations are also keen to study the perceptions, triggering factors and intentions behind the evolution of entrepreneurial minds among their population. Currently studying EI hold a very special position in the field of business innovation and inspiring enterprises (Luthje & Franke, 2003). Slowdown of economic growth and lack of innovation is being observed in the USA and developed countries of Europe. To come out of this situation, nations are promoting start-ups as the most effective tool to broaden the arena of job sector and create new fields for investment. Several ground-breaking studies have analyzed the strong relation between entrepreneurship and macroeconomic environment where there is a deep impact on the growth factors (Huggins & Thompson, 2015; Schwab,2018). According to many studies, entrepreneurs utilize the resources to create products that serves the market, uses human capital of nation, reawake the slow segments of the industries, nourish the regional trade with the neighboring countries, bring innovation in the existing business or create a disruptive entry, create field for research and investments for both the government and the financial institutions (Pradhan et al., 2020).

The acknowledgement of individual, social and national benefits of entrepreneurship creates an urge to study the mind of entrepreneurs. Because entrepreneurship requires inner strength and acceptance to face uncertainty (McMullen & Shepherd, 2006), earlier researches suggested that it can bring immense mental pressure in a person's life (Monsen & Boss, 2009), fear of losing (Mitchell et al., 2011) and sadness due to failure (Jenkins et al., 2014). There are some positive consequences observed in the life of the people who have an enterprise, for example, an apparent fact came out from some studies that individuals who opened a new business and being able to continue their business operations showed high level of job satisfaction, even though often they were working more than others and having less income (GEM, 2013; Frey et al., 2004; Benz &

Frey, 2008a, 2008b). Overall, entrepreneurship is a sensation which puts together the needs of a person, his aims and expectations of life in a single process or activity. So, it can be said that entrepreneurship assists a man to accomplish his psychological goals and thus helps to have happiness in life (Shepherd & Patzelt, 2017b; Williams & Shepherd, 2016). Those who have the core qualities of entrepreneurship usually contains the brave attitude toward unpredictable situations and have the ability to overcome the outcomes of failure. They have the entrepreneurial foresight to detect the opportunities in the environment, proper time to kick-off an idea and pick the right area to affect (Crecente-Romero et al., 2016). Entrepreneurs think of a business when they recognize the demographic scopes or chances to launch a new strategy in the market (Falck, 2007; Grebel, 2007). The reason behind selecting a specific area of expertise by an entrepreneur that he can apply the knowledge, experience, information already available to him and he can make a plan about customers, suppliers, process selection etc. with his educational knowledge or professional skills (Landström, 2008; Landström, Harirchi, & Aström, 2012). In the critical situation, individuals still opt for seeking the opportunities which come under there area of expertise and thinks about becoming self-reliant as a good choice, but the risk to failure slows down the business development process (Crecente-Romero et al., 2016). To inhibit the decrease of entrepreneurial trend due to scarcity of capital the government arranges promotional activities in order to mentally and financially inspire people to continue thinking about having a start-up (Crecente, 2011; Levie, Autio, Acs, & Hart, 2014). After discussing the results of studies and facts

(7)

6

above, it is quite obvious that the mental stimulators and influencing factors are necessary to analyses in order to know how the entrepreneurial process can be made easy and how the trend is developed among individuals.

1.2. Problem Discussion

Delving into the background of entrepreneurship and studying the intentions of a potential young population who carry the caliber to become an entrepreneur has become one of the major studies in the field of business management research. As it is quite irrational to wait for the accidental entrepreneurs to come up and contribute to the economic growth of a country. Rather, entrepreneurs are to be nurtured and to do that it is essential to know what inspires them to be an entrepreneur, the influential factors and what are obstacles. Intent of a person or his entrepreneurial tendency is comprehended as his experience, mental features, how he is influenced from the environment and how he aims to act in order to gain a certain thing in the process of becoming an entrepreneur (Joseph, 2017; Fini et al., 2009). Entrepreneurial qualities can be acquired according to some studies (Kuratko, 2005), and open to the effect of education related to entrepreneurship or influence from the activities of family, friends or peers who are entrepreneurs (Gerba, 2012).

Researchers are seeking the stimulating factors that push a person to become an entrepreneur knowing all the risks and results. Primarily, a person takes an endeavor to earn money to fulfill his needs and have his own business entity. Although businesses serve the society and nation, recent researchers negated the fact that people become entrepreneurs to help the economy and society grow (Kimmitt & Muñoz, 2018). Beside becoming financially affluent, a person often tries entrepreneurship to have personal satisfaction and independence (Dey & Lehner, 2017; Dey &

Steyaert, 2016), and sometimes he wants to reach a high status (Desjardins et al., 2015).

1.2.1 Pertinent studies on EI

Many researches have been done to analyze the entrepreneurial intention of an individual, most recognized models and theories among them are:- “Shapero's Entrepreneurial Event” model – SEE (Shapero & Sokol, 1982); Ajzen's theory of planned behavior – TPB (Ajzen, 1991), the theory of planned behavior entrepreneurial model – TPBEM, discussing the application of Ajzen´s model (Krueger & Carsrud, 1993) and SCCT - the social cognitive career theory , to explain and predict the career behavior(Lent, et al., 1994). Several researches have been done to analyses the entrepreneurial decisional factors of international students (e.g. Frank, et al., 2007; Learned, 1992;

Naffziger, et al., 1994; Segal et al., 2005), but very few of them are concentrated on grasping the influencing factors of entrepreneurial intention in the cross-border context (Giacomin et al., 2011;

Teixeira and Davey, 2009). Developed countries were mostly focused in the earlier researches (Jones, et al., 2008; Schwalb, et al., 1988; Wu and Wu, 2008) and there was lack of comparison between developed and backward countries (Nguyen, et al., 2009; Pruett, et al., 2009), though the necessity of cross-cultural study was addressed (Liña´n and Chen, 2009; Nabi and Holden, 2008).

Entrepreneurship studies mentioned the demand of further cross-cultural analysis to discover the relation between entrepreneurship and behaviors, culture etc. of a person contains (Lingelbach et al., 2005). For the academic researchers it is one of the leading phenomena to study the entrepreneurial intentions and graduates are prioritized as it is convenient to read their behavior and they have more capabilities than others (Krueger et al., 2000). Among many theories concerning the study of entrepreneurial intention, TPB was mostly used theory (van Gelderen, et

(8)

7

al., 2008), and suitable to explain the interaction between environmental and personal factors (Sivarajah, & Achchuthan, 2013). Thus, TPB was chosen for this study to obtain the targeted result of authors.

1.2.2. Previous studies on entrepreneurial intention of university students

Universities are hubs of knowledge distribution and constructing young minds to imply the knowledge to something in real life (Oosterlinck & Leuven, 2002). Universities are acknowledged as an important component in the economy where knowledge processing is a medium of making money (Czarnitzki et al., 2016; Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff, 2000). Beside creating skilled human resources, universities also offer immense effort in research and transferring knowledge which can be valuable to the society and economy. In other words, they are working as a field of technology transfer (Fischer et al., 2019). It is also suggested that the educational arrangement of universities provide an atmosphere where the scholars can work with the knowledge that promotes entrepreneurial activities (Marzocchi et al. 2019). However, universities offer a wide range of diversity in terms of resources and capabilities, which helps to develop entrepreneurship among the young people (Beyhan and Findik 2017; Di Gregorio and Shane 2003).

In recent years, researchers are focusing on the study of entrepreneurial intention of university students (Oosterlinck & Leuven, 2002). While university students are often considered future entrepreneurs, the central variable in predicting the entrepreneurial activity of university students is entrepreneurial intention (Krueger et al., 2000). The determining factors of the entrepreneurial intention of university students are split into two categories, according to the related literature:

individual factors (micro level) and external factors (macro level) (Garavan and O’ Cinneide, 1994). Micro-level variables include individual characteristics, psychological attributes, school experience, entrepreneurial expertise, and skill, while macro-level variables include social cultures and norms, political atmosphere, economic status, personal social network, family context, and entrepreneurial education (ibid). In the previous studies (Shapero and Sokol, 1982; Shaver & Scott, 1992) and intention models, only internal factors were considered by the authors to determine the entrepreneurial intentions (Oosterlinck and Leuven, 2002) . However, later external factors also considered by other authors as they found those are also as important as internal factors (Ajzen, 1991; Shook, 2003). Entrepreneurial purpose can be promoted only when carrier variables (individual factors) and situational variables (external factors) function together, in the TPB model by Ajzen (1991) there is a good combination of them for conducting a research on entrepreneurial intention (Elfving, 2008). However, compared to other models to do study on entrepreneurial intention of students most authors prefer modified TPB as it contains the main variables to identify the main factors behind building the entrepreneurial intention of students (Gird, and Bagraim, 2008; Al-Jubari, 2019; Roy et al., 2017; Maresch, et al., 2016).

This paper regards international university students in Sweden as potential entrepreneurs. At the level of their personal attitude, subjective norms and PBC, this paper mainly focuses on how these or which indicators of those variables of TPB influence more in building EI.

1.2.3. International students in Sweden

Students step into a different atmosphere when they move to a different country, so it is not the same condition as the native citizens. International students in universities have been facing many

(9)

8

shocks which may create hindrances to build up EI of international students. In the McGill Conference at the Chalmers School of Entrepreneurship (CSE) in Gothenburg Identified three reasons as triggers for the difficulties faced by Sweden's foreign students, which might create hinders for their EIs, and those are: the macro-level, in this level international students face problems due to new culture such as language barrier, problem to find out the relevant information, regulations or legal supports, or financial opportunities (Macarthy & Yang, 2017) . Next one is the meso-factor level, these factors happen when international students start their business, but fear of these factors influence much to build up the EIs, those are finding effective financiers, customers, collaborators or suppliers. The last category is the micro-factor level which happens due to the minority of the groups to team building or creating potential bias (ibid). On the other hand, Sohrabpour et al. (2013) divided international students’ shocks into three levels: cultural shock, language shock, and academic shock; they also mentioned these shocks as a disease. However, in this study authors tried to focus on the international students in Sweden, how they build up their EIs despite these barriers by using Ajzen's Theory of Planned Behavior. Realizing the importance of university students´ necessity to select a career path, we find it engaging to the field of business studies to analyse the entrepreneurial tendencies of international students studying in the universities in Sweden.

International students take part in the economy of Sweden when they arrive here and start to spend money for tuition, accommodation and when they enter the job market or have start-ups it means a lot to the country's socio-economic environment. In the study year 2018-19 there were about 23,000 new foreign students studying in Sweden (Internationell studentmobilitet i högskolan 2018/19). Just in Stockholm there were 10,000 international students staying last year (Myklebust, 2019), most of whom were seeking jobs in the city.

According to Sweden´s official statistics (Internationell studentmobilitet i högskolan 2018/19), the incoming of foreign students kept rising till the academic year 2010-11 when tuition fee was introduced. After that, the total number of international students kept going down slightly every year, and in the study year 2018-19 it was 38300, which was considerably less compared to 46700 in 2010-11. In the chart shown, we see the percentage of foreign students studying in Sweden from the study year 2009/10- 2018/19 the figure is shown in the Appendix 1. Here we see that the incoming curve went down but started to rise a little in the recent years. In the next graph we will see the percentage of international students who started for the first time in the universities of Sweden, the figure is shown in the Appendix 2

It shows that the trend of coming to Sweden and studying rose quite high in recent years, after the downfall earlier in the 2011/12 session. It is also notable that in the first year, the percentage of foreign students was quite high, about 34% in 2010/11 and 30% in 2018/19 study year, compared to the overall percentage shown in the earlier figure. More students from outside the European Union or European Economic Association came to study in the universities in Sweden. There were 10,900 first year international students who were from countries inside the EU/EEA in the academic year of 2018/19, which was lower compared to the previous years. Meanwhile, the number of foreign first-year students got higher, according to the statistic the figure of Geographic

(10)

9

distribution of the foreign students in the first year of their program is shown in the Appendix 3 (Internationell studentmobilitet i högskolan 2018/19).

These data are presented to show the depth of international students´ role in the economic environment of Sweden, as well as the gravity of these students´ career adaptation after study if they study in Sweden. Studying the thoughts and intentions of these migrant students is essential to know how many of them are going to stand in the queue for jobs in the highly competitive market and how many of them are planning to become an entrepreneur. In addition, since 1990, when the Swedish Government defined entrepreneurship as a principle that should be implemented across the entire education system, schools and particularly universities have adopted this idea.

The abovementioned discussion illustrates the significance of studying entrepreneurship and researchers´ interest on studying the entrepreneurial intention of university students.

Circumstances are complex for the university students who move to a different country and it seems interesting to examine their inclination toward entrepreneurship. Authors have decided to constrict the research area by focusing on the rise of the number of international students in Sweden and their role in the society and economy of Sweden as well as their own professional life.

1.2.4. Research gap

Doing research on EI has become an expanding field for studying the entrepreneurial behaviour in the recent few decades (Fayolle and Liñán, 2014; Zhang et al., 2015). Many of the researches conducted on EI have used the TPB or its modified version and studying the university students has always been important for the researchers due to various reasons, which are demonstrated above. Previous studies looked for the determining and influencing factors of the EI of the university students, and there are considerable number of studies focused on the cross-cultural or difference among students in different countries. It was found quite common to compare students of developing countries with developed counterparts in the research, where the EI is analyzed.

Substantial number of researchers have mentioned the fact that, university students are the potential entrepreneurs of future as they hold the knowledge, capacity, enthusiasm and graduate youth is more prone to productive activities for an economy (Haase and Lautenschläger, 2011;

Moriano, et al., 2011; Tong, et al., 2011). Davidsson (2006) suggested that young people under 34 years of age are more keen to start their own business; but it might be more inclusive to study the students in general who belong to the young circle, despite their age being a bit higher. A handful of them explore the students of Scandinavian countries and more specifically focus on the Swedish students. Stieglar and Thanhäuser (2016) studied the EI of the Swedish students but it was not focusing on the international students and there was no distinguishing among the research population. Sjöstrand and Shadloo (2013) compared the EI of Swedish students with the Namibian students who are studying in the universities there. Durst and Sedenka (2016) studied the EI of a large number university students where the sample population was mixed but it was dominated by the Swedish locals (85.3%). Beside studying EI, their report also covered vast perspectives such as types of entrepreneurship students are inclined to, and the entrepreneurial education provided by the universities. However, the authors of this research felt that more attention should be paid on specifically studying the EI of the university students who migrate to Sweden. They found it

(11)

10

worthy to do a simplified research aimed to examine the beliefs and influences behind the entrepreneurial tendencies of international university students in Sweden.

1.3. Purpose of the study

The substantial role of entrepreneurship for a specific nation and its association with the university students were demonstrated earlier. The objective of this research is to study the entrepreneurial intentions of international students staying in Sweden, to know about their eagerness to own a business and what are the factors shaping their decisions. Norms, beliefs, and circumstances of foreign students are typically different than the natives, particularly when it is about setting up an entity to generate profit or accomplish a plan. To obtain the actual influencing factors in building or hindering entrepreneurial intention of the international students, authors have decided to analyze the responses of a group of students, by means of Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). This research is purposed to derive the thoughts of the foreign university students by distributing their statements, opinions etc. under some indicators of TPB, as it was done by several previous research. Thus, the findings will be distinct and facile to compare with the earlier studies and discover the variance of result.

1.4. Research questions

Authors have decided to formulate the research question based on the indicators which are used to examine their EI, under the three variables of TPB - Attitude, Subjective norms and Perceived Behavioral control. The perception of the international students about entrepreneurship can be known in a structured way by studying the elements of TPB which come under perceived behaviour control. Their believe about the challenges and rewards of entrepreneurship can be known by examining their opinions or ideas regarding the elements of attitude under the TPB.

University students come from different social and cultural background, and that may influence their thoughts and decisions concerning entrepreneurship. The role of those external pressures can be known by examining the opinions or statements regarding the factors of subjective norms under the TPB. Hence, the authors have drafted these two research questions to understand the EI of the international university students in Sweden:-

1. What are the main indicators of perceived behavioral control and attitudes of international university students that influence more for becoming an entrepreneur in Sweden?

2. Which factors of subjective norms influence the entrepreneurial intention of international students in Sweden?

1.5. Delimitations of the research

In the beginning authors targeted the international students who are studying in the universities of Sweden. Due to the short timeframe and convenience of meeting students, Halmstad University was selected as it is located in the city where the authors live as well. Imminent pandemic situation was also kept in mind and face to face meeting was emphasized for this research.

(12)

11

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The following chapter reviews the literature regarding EI, the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and the major variables. It highlights the major evolvements of EIs. This segment adds value to the chosen pieces of literature by critically discussing and analyzing them.

2.1. Entrepreneurial Intention Model

Study of EI has attracted many researchers. Many researchers have proved the relation between EI and actual entry into self-employment thus, EI is the best predictor of entrepreneurial behaviour (Kolvereid and Isaksen 2006, Liñán and Fayolle, 2015). However, The Entrepreneurial Event Model (Shapero and Sokol 1982) and the adaptation of the Theory of Planned Behavior or TPB (Ajzen 1991) on Entrepreneurial Behavior were the first models to successfully pursue the path of entrepreneurial behavioural intention (Miralles, et al., 2015). The creation of intention-based models for researching entrepreneurship actions has been widely adopted by scholars in the field of entrepreneurship; provided that research findings offer more justification for the use of such models (Liñán et al. 2011; Fayolle and Liñán 2014). However, TPB intention models have become a guide to the study of entrepreneurial actions and purpose (Fayolle et al. 2006; Schlaegel and Koenig 2014). This model focuses on organizational or individual behavior that is influenced by three main factors: Personal attitudes, Subjective norm, and PBC. In addition, TPB was developed by Icek Ajzen in 1991 as an improvement of the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), which was developed to study the behavior of individuals or organizations. It has succeeded in becoming an essential instrument to measure human behavior across scientific clusters, including entrepreneurship. However, TPB was chosen in this research because it has been tested across scientific clusters.

Theory of Planned Behavior was most frequently used in previous studies to understand the EI (van Gelderen, et al., 2008). The interaction between environmental and personal factors are effectively explained in this model (Sivarajah, & Achchuthan, 2013). The antecedents of this theory personal attitude, subjective norms and PBC impact the behavior of individual (Ajzen, 1991; Liñán, 2004). These factors of this theory work as predictors of an individuals’ preparation, how much they could invest into the targeted task. The greater the desire to participate in a specific action, the higher the chance that it will eventually end up practicing that particular behavior.

2.2. Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)

Entrepreneurship researchers have been using Ajzen’s (1991) robust Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to explain EIs for a long time (Liñán & Chen 2009, Entrialgo & Iglesias, 2016, Al-Jubari, 2019). However, nowadays this theory not only is being used in only this field but also other field or researches such as marketing , psychology ,leisure studies, health sciences and so on (Sahut et al, 2015; Schlaegel and Koenig, 2014; Guzmán-Alfonso and Guzmán-Cuevas, 2012; Pavlou and Fygenson 2006; and Shook et al., 2003). This theory actually an extension of Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) by Ajzen and Fishbein (1980), and Theory Planned Behavior was established by Ajzen in 1988 and published as an article in 1991 in the journal 'Advances in Experimental Social Psychology' than it spread everywhere (Stiegler & Thanhäuser, 2016).

(13)

12

In TPB theory it was said that two factors influence human behavior that are internal and external (Purusottama, 2019). Human attitude is an internal factor, what comes from individuals’ insights and experience what they possess, and external factors are those that are individuals influenced by the environment. Furthermore, many previous studies such as Barton et al., (2018), Farooq et al.

(2018), Aloulou (2016), Almobaireek & Manolova (2012) did research by using the TPB model and proved that this theory can be best used for researchers to do study on various forms of behavior. According to Ajzen (2002) the preceding activity of performing a specific behavior is the intention of the individual to perform the behavior, the stronger the intention towards the behavior, the more possibility of success of the actual behavior. Furthermore, most planned behavior predicted only by their intentions (Al-Jubari, 2019; Krueger et al., 2000; Kolvereid &

Isaksen, 2006). According to De Pillis and Reardon (2007), EI is, “the intention to start the business.” On the other hand, according to Wilson et al. (2007), it is a conscious and deliberate decision for an individual to become an entrepreneur and to start his own new business, and requires time, planning and high cognitive processing (Ozaralli & Rivenburgh, 2016). That’s why a career decision to be an entrepreneur is also considered as a planned behavior which can be expelled by the intention model TPB. TPB suggested three interconnected factors that can help to predict entrepreneurial intention, attitudes (personal positive/negative assessment of entrepreneurship), subjective norms (approval or disapproval of action by significant others), and PBC (perception of one’s abilities to perform entrepreneurially) (Ajzen & Sheikh, 2016). There are some brief discussions about the antecedents of TPB and many previous studies have also shown that they have a close influence on EI.

2.2.1. Entrepreneurial Intention

Studies on entrepreneurship have been attracted by the psychology researchers to identify the psychology of entrepreneurs to create new businesses (Usman & Yennita, 2019). In addition, researchers also try to combine the psychology of the entrepreneurs and the situations they face.

However, entrepreneurs’ interest in entrepreneurship is very strong as it combines their psychology and entrepreneurial activities (Sheppard et al., 1988). Many authors have given many descriptions of EI in many articles, such in 1991, Ajzen described the intention refers to "[the] indications of how hard people want to try, how much effort they plan to exert, [and] to carry out actions".

Another author Alferaih (2017) defined EI as the target of a person to start a new business. In addition, Fragoso et al. (2019) said it is a belief of someone to take entrepreneurial career as the best career and take the path to involve himself/herself with a goal of business creation. However, there are a number of researchers have been done on identifying and investigating the behaviour towards EI of students specially university students (e.g., Palmer et al., 2015; Patache & Mitran, 2014). Students, especially those who resort to pursuing business ideas when making decisions to implement the business idea, are obviously related to their level of entrepreneurial intent (Usman

& Yennita, 2019). On the research of Nasip, et al., (2017) found that which students have more tolerance ability about ambiguity they are more likely have the strong intention to start their own start-ups, also suggested that students should be supported and prepared with innovativeness, self- confidence, risk-taking ability, desire for accomplishment and uncertainty to define effective entrepreneurial role models and recognize opportunities for their potential careers. Very recent study has found that EIs are based on two things mainly: passion and creativity (Biraglia & Kadile, 2017). Where, Entrepreneurial passion is a positive feeling that is actively felt when a person carries out business activity in a meaningful way, reinforcing his or her identity as a businessperson

(14)

13

(Cardon & Kirk, 2015). Creativity refers to the development of individuals’ new ideas by interacting between themselves and the environment (Hunter et al., 2007).

In different researches authors chose different indicators to determine the EIs, such as Armitage and Conner (2001) used desire (I want to), self-prediction (how likely it is) and behavioral intention (I intend to) , and in other studied personal attraction were used for measure EI (Fayolle

& Gailly, 2004; Kolvereid, 1996a). However, according to Armitage and Conner (2001), it is difficult to understand the EI clearly, but desire, self-prediction and behavioral intention are much helpful to understand the EIs.

2.2.2. Personal attitude

Personal attitude known as the degree of negative, positive or beneficial/less useful evaluation of behavior of individuals (Liñán & Chen, 2006). Furthermore, persons’ attitude and confidence depend on his/her series of insights or experiences (Fayolle & Gailly, 2015). Personal attitudes can be measured by two indicators: experiential and instrumental attitudes (Ajzen, 2005, Wang et al., 2016). According to Wan et al. (2014) experimental attitude depends on the previous experiences of a person or how an individual evaluates their overall experiences positively or negatively. When a previous action’s result is positive or good, that gives a positive signal to them and vice versa.

On the other hand, when an individual learns any attitude is called instrumental attitude.

Experiential and instrumental attitude in the sense of entrepreneurship is the knowledge and transition of the human experience in conducting business activities (ibid). In the meantime, when individuals got positive and good benefit from the experience and translation of entrepreneurship, it helps to get positive response from the individual, and vice versa (Peng, Lu, & Kang, 2012;

Purusottama, 2019), and attitude can be changed due to change in beliefs (Kautonen et al., 2015).

Thus, in entrepreneurial activities when an individual produce or learns a positive or negative response is called entrepreneurial attitude (Liñán et al., 2011). More elaborately, when individuals get benefits from business, they respond positively and when they don’t, they respond negatively.

On the other hand, in the professional attraction context, attitude can be explained as the intention of an individual to become self-employed, rather than working as an employee in a company (Souitaris et al., 2007). In addition, many researchers have found that entrepreneurial attitude is one of the strongest factors to build EI of students, thus attitude and entrepreneurship have strong relationship (Peng et al., 2012; Remeikiene et al., 2013; Ferreira et al., 2012).

There are many factors that influence the personal attitude toward EI. Douglas and Shepherd (2002) and Kolvereid (1996b) have found that individual’s attitude toward autonomy is related to EI. According to van Gelderen (2008) among most of students, autonomy is highly valued either they want to be entrepreneurs or organizational employees, they prefer more independence or self- governing opportunity on the workplace. Also, Douglas and Shepherd (2002) found that personal attitude toward risk, workload or income have connection with the individual’s entrepreneurial decision. Attitude towards risk is positively related with the entrepreneurial intentions (Caliendo, Fossen, and Kritikos, 2010), Studies have shown that those who have a positive attitude towards risk taking have a more positive attitude towards their own startups (Townsend et al., 2010). On the other hand, attitude towards workload is negatively related with the EI, avoidance of workload one of matters what keep students not to build up the EI, as start-ups need more effort or works than any organizational jobs (van Gelderen et al., 2008). It keeps students choose career to be job holders rather than entrepreneurs. On the other hand, attitude toward income has been proven as

(15)

14

the attractive indicator for students EI. According to Ojiaku et al. (2018) people want to be entrepreneurs as start-ups increase the possibility to earn more money or wealth, where working in any organization means the earning is relatively fixed. In another study by Davidsson (1995) got the result that EI can be influenced by the individual’s attitude toward achievement and towards challenge can relate to EI. Attitude toward challenge means the confidence to overcome the future obstacles by using courage which is an important indicator behind the EI (ibid). However, need for achievement is one of personality traits which encases individual’s inclination towards being successful or reach the desire goal. However, according to Popescu et al. (2017) found that attitude toward achievement significantly influence the students or young generation for start-ups.

2.2.3. Subjective norm

Subjective norm is a social pressure of other social people (family, friends, role models, other people), who approve or disapprove of an individual's behavior (Liñán and Chen 2009, Ajzen, 2005). Normative trust and motivation to comply are used to comprehend and measure subjective norms (Usman & Yennita, 2019). According to Fayolle and Gailly (2004) they tried to understand how the individual’s behavior performance was influenced by using the normative belief indicators, that means the effect of referenced people’s (trusted people) judgement on an individual's behavior. They have found that if an individual got the positive response from the trusted or referenced group, that the behavior is in accordance with the values adopted or trusted, individuals also give a positive response to that and vice versa. Same condition was true on motivations, what the reference group thinks individuals should do (ibid). In the context of entrepreneurship subjective norms are consider as a tool to measure the social pressure on individuals to be entrepreneurs, by asking them to what extent they think about their close ones and how much support they get from close ones ( Tarek, 2016; Liñán et al., 2011; Liñán & Chen, 2009; Ajzen, 2001). According to TPB an individual’s intention can be changed with the close ones’ motivation and views (Ajzen, 2005). According to DINC and Budic (2016) mind set for entrepreneurships of students is made from their cultural and social issues or a result of positive impact of subjective norms.

Family and friends are a very trusted group for individuals to influence their EI (Kolvereid, 1996a;

van Gelderen et al., 2008; Astuti & Martdianty, 2012). According to Meoli et al., (2020) family is very important part for graduate students for their EI building as families are the most effective instrumental supportive to them, they support on the form of moral support, information, contacts, findings and so on. On the other hand, friends or peers are second support to the students, their previous activities or entrepreneurial experience influence them positively towards EI building, and helping them to increase the network, skills, information (Hayter et al., 2017). Furthermore, Drennan et al (2005) parental business experience can be the most inﬂuential indicator for an individual's subjective norm. From parental business experience someone get the experience from childhood which may help them to build up the EI or choose the career of entrepreneurship (Tatarko and Schmidt 2016; Verheul et al. 2012). Thus, parental business experience is considered one of the important indictors of subjective norms which influence the entrepreneurial intention.

On the other hand, Cultural differences have also a strong influence to make EI of individuals (De Pillis & Reardon, 2007). In previous studies (Garcia-Rodriguez et al. 2015; De Pillis and De Reardon, 2007) cultural difference is influence individuals differently, variation of culture effect in building the students EI.

(16)

15 2.2.4. Perceived behavioral control

Perceived behavioral control (PBC) is reflecting the individual’s perceived capabilities that means ease or difficulty of conducting the intended behavior and it is like self-efficacy (Usman &

Yennita, 2019). On the other word, it can be said that it is a factor which relate individual’s actions and intentions with the availability of opportunities and resources, the more resources and opportunity the more behavioral control (Ajzen, 2005). It can be measured by control belief and perceived power (ibid). According to Veciana et al. (2005) control belief is a psychological concept also close to the theory of self-efficacy by Bandura in 1997. According to Bandura self-efficacy is one's belief about his or her ability to do specific performance, which is influenced by his/her feeling, thinking, inspiration or behavior. However, Armitage and Conner (2001) found that individual’s encouragement and discouragement for an action affected by the limitation. Greater limitation tends to low control belief, and high encouragement with low limitation. In entrepreneurship limitations refer to both tangible and intangible. On the other hand, perceived power means the level of difficulty to perform a behavior, the more difficulty the more individual response negatively. Overall, that PBC is linking the EI and behavior (Al-Jubari, 2019; Siu & Lo, 2013; Almobaireek & Manolova, 2012; Moriano et al., 2012). In addition, PBC refers to the level of difficulty for an individual to be an entrepreneur (Liñán et al., 2011), and according to Potishuk and Kratzer (2017) entrepreneurial PBCs of individuals strongly influence individuals toward entrepreneurship.

According to Ajzen (1991) PBC is consistent with the perceived self-efficacy principle of Bandura (1977, 1982), and many researchers have presented empirical support the relationship between self-efficacy and EI (Kolvereid, 1996b, Krueger et al., 2000; Wilson et al., 2007). However, self- efficacy means the individual’s belief about own ability to do specific target, when it is about entrepreneurial activity it is called entrepreneurial self-efficacy (McGee et al., 2009; De Noble et al., 1999). Several researches on relation between self-efficacy and EI proved that they have very positive connection and help to build up the EI of young generation (Adekiya and Ibrahim 2016;

Kristiansen and Indarti 200). In another study by van Gelderen et al., (2008) discovered entrepreneurial alertness (Kristiansen & Indarti, 2004), creativity and perseverance (Armitage &

Conner, 2001) also other strong indicators of PBC which influence EI. However, entrepreneurial alertness means the sense of transforming, selecting or accumulating the information from environment for utilization of entrepreneurial opportunities (Tanget al., 2012). In the study of van Gelderen et al. (2006) showed that one’s entrepreneurial intention enhances the entrepreneurial tendency or intention. On the other hand, creativity is using useful and novel ideas to innovate something new (Amabile, 1996; Zampetakis, 2008). Furthermore, creativity and entrepreneurial intention is closely related, which encouraging individuals towards new start-ups (Hansen et al., 2011). Perseverance is an important component of PBC which indicate the tendency of individual’s that means “I usually ﬁnish what I’ve started”, or the ability of putting continues effort to finish target by facing all challenges (Duckworth, et al., 2007). According to Pendame (2014) higher level of perseverance push towards own start-up, where opposite is true for the low level of perseverance.

The summary of the variables with definitions, indicators and sources which have been discussed before are given in table 1.

(17)

16

Variable Deﬁnition Indicator Sources

Attitude Attitude toward

entrepreneurial behavior, desirability

-autonomy -risk -workload -income

-attitude toward

achievement

-attitude towards challenge

Davidsson (1995) Douglas and Shepherd (2002)

Subjective norm

External inﬂuence (Inﬂuence from outside the individual)

- Cultural differences -Family

-friends

- parental business experience

De Pillis & Reardon (2007)

Astuti & Martdianty, (2012)

Drennan et al (2005)

Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC)

Perception to

entrepreneurial behavior What is needed to set successful business

-self-efficacy

-entrepreneurial alertness -creativity

-perseverance

Kristiansen & Indarti, (2004)

Armitage & Conner, (2001)

Entrepreneurial intention

Intention to be entrepreneur

-Desire

-self-prediction -behavioral intention

Armitage & Conner, (2001)

Table 1: Definitions of variables and their indicators with sources.

(18)

17

2.3. TPB and Entrepreneurial Intention

TPB has become a predictive theory of entrepreneurship due to its strong influence on it, and in advance researches of EI researchers are using this model (Fayolle & Liñán, 2014). In addition, this theory is also used by researchers to examine the individuals or organization’s behavior by using the demographic or geographic measurements as moderate variables (Küttim et al., 2014;

Maes et al., 2014). TPB can assess various facets of entrepreneurial behavior, such as gender effects (Leroy, et al., 2009), nascent entrepreneurship (Nishimura & Tristán, 2011) and comparison with other EI models (Krueger et al., 2000).

A study by Purusottama (2019) on university students in Indonesia to examine their EI and found that entrepreneurship was much influenced by attitudes rather than PBC, where subjective norm had no influence. Moriano et al., (2011) used TPB to examine the EI in their study and found that attitude and PBC more affect the entrepreneurial behavior than the subjective norm. Different countries’ cultures influence the individual’s view about entrepreneurship, which later also influence the individuals’ EIs. However, the same condition was applied in different studies by Maes et al. (2014) by considering the gender matter, also found that individuals’ EIs were influenced by the attitude and PBC than the subjective norm. They found that female students had less EI than male, and they were not influenced by the subjective norm. Furthermore, Paco et al.

(2011) have used the TPB model to find out the factors behind the interest in entrepreneurship of middle-class students. they found that between attitude and PBC, attitude had more influence than PBC and subjective norm had no influence. A study was conducted by Iakovleva et al. (2011) to compare the EI between developed and developing countries by using Theory of Planned Behavior, the result was that EI in developing countries exceeded that of developed countries. In addition, it was also found that three variables in TPB, Attitude, subjective norm and PBC had positive and strong, values and influence in EI. The same result was found by the Miralles et al.

(2016), when they did the study on individuals’ entrepreneurial experience. A study by Robledo et al. (2015) on university students and their findings was, on female university students' positive impact of subjective norm and PBC. Connection among attitude, subjective norm, PBC and EI are shown in Figure 1.

(19)

18

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The following chapter establishes the connection between the different variables in the conceptual model based on the literature review. Accordingly, it formulates assumptions which will be tested with the empirical data.

3.1. Conceptual model

According to Ajzen (1991) intention is the best predictor of behaviour, this study aims to find out the main factors behind building the EI of international students in Sweden by using Ajzen’s (1991) TPB model, how entrepreneurial intention (EI) is determined by one’s personal attitude (PA) toward the entrepreneurship, perceived subjective norms (SN), and perceived behavioral control (PBC) which are influenced by different indicators of factors (Figure 1). However, in this study authors won’t focus on behaviour of TBP model as this study work with students who are intended to be entrepreneurs. In addition, previous researches showed that these three factors have direct or indirect influence on building the EI. Furthermore, different authors found these three factors (personal attitude, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control) of TPB also have different indicators which influence them differently. In these study authors have chosen few indicators by reviewing different previous researches, which are seemed to be effective to research on EI of international students in Sweden. these indicators indirectly influence the individuals’ or student’ EI development.

Autonomy Risk Workload Income

Attitude toward achievement Attitude toward challenge

Cultural differences Family

Friends

Prenatal business experience

Self-efficacy

Entrepreneurial alertness Creativity

Perseverance

Perceived Behavioral

Control Subjective norm

Personal attitude

Entrepreneurial intention

Figure 1: entrepreneurial intention model (Adopted from Azjen’s (1991) TPB model.

(20)

19 3.1.1. Personal attitude and entrepreneurial intention

According to Schlaegel and Koenig (2014) an important predictor of EI is personal attitude toward entrepreneurship. On the hand, personal attitude stands the mindset of someone towards a specific issue, such as venture creation (DINC & Budic, 2016). The personal attitude also refers the positive or negative evaluation of a person, and this psychological characteristic is present in any human being in the context of critical evaluation and appraisal (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993). In the past many researchers also work on the students’ psychology and proved that this personal attitude also influences them towards EI (Paco et al., 2011; Maes et al., 2014, Moriano et al., 2012; Purusottama, 2019). And the greater its understanding, the firmer its aim to practice particular behaviour (DINC

& Budic, 2016). However, after a brief discussion on previous part authors have chosen some important indicators of personal attitude which are seemed to influence students or individuals towards EI. Those are attitude toward autonomy, risk, workload, income which are proven components or indicators by Douglas and Shepherd (2002). In addition, attitude toward achievement and attitude toward challenge were two other indicators of attitude Davidsson (1995).

In the table 1 there is a summary of chosen indicators of the personal attitude one of main variables of TPB for this study.

3.1.2. Subjective norm and entrepreneurial intention

Subjective norm refers to the degree to which specific people or entities accept the performance of a particular activity or do not accept it (DINC & Budic, 2016). It is one of the components of TPB, and in the theoretical framework part there was a discussion on the importance of subjective norms behind the EI building. In research, subjective norms are typically calculated by asking participants to what degree they believe their nearest individuals – family members, friends or colleagues – will help them participate in entrepreneurial (Liñán & Chen, 2009; Ajzen, 2001).

Along with this, Drennan et al (2005) found that parental business experience also an inﬂuential indicator for individual’s subjective norm. Although, many researches didn’t find such strong influence (DINC & Budic, 2016), but some have found great influence of subjective norms on EI in different conditions (Bhuyan & Pathak, 2019). According to De Pillis & Reardon (2007) research they found that different individuals’ EI can also be changed by the influence of their own cultural differences. Since these individual experiences are in their very nature subjective, this aspect is entitled as a subjective norm (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975).

3.1.3. Perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention

Perceived behavior control (PBC) is an individual's understanding of the ease or complexity of carrying out the task of beginning and running a business (DINC & Budic, 2016). Many researchers have found that PBC and EI are positively connected (Armitage & Conner, 2001; Kraft et al., 2005). On the based-on discussion on the previous part in the conceptual model PBC is a significant factor in the theory of planned behaviour. In addition, the theory of planned behavior indicates that PBC may be a strong indicator of an individual's successes in a given area, combined with behavioral intent (Ajzen, 1991). To do research on level of influence of PBC there are some indicators are chosen based on past researches. According to Kristiansen & Indarti (2004) individuals’ self-efficacy and entrepreneurial alertness can influence their PBC toward EI, in another study by Armitage & Conner (2001) found that creativity and perseverance also influence that. Therefore, the contextualized approach of this study reasonably justifies the assumption that

(21)

20

there is a positive connection between PBC towards entrepreneurial behavior. There is more explanation about the indicators on the chapter 2 and there is a summary of the discussion on Table 1.

(22)

21

METHODOLOGY

In this chapter the methodology is described the reasons and justify the choices made as qualitative method. The methodology follows the presentation of the research onion by Saunders et al., 2009 (Figure 2). It demonstrates the various steps that need to be discussed when designing a research strategy. Each of the layers represents the various phases of the research process. This methodology can be used in a number of research methodologies and contexts. In this part of the thesis is presented that is composed of the parts of research philosophy, research approach, Research strategy, Time horizons, Data collection methods, Interview mechanism and data analysis approach.

4.1. Research Philosophy

Where rich insights into a nascent phenomenon were being explored and called for the derivation of subjective meanings rather than the generalization of rules, the researchers had followed the philosophy of interpretivism. This philosophy involved the study of social phenomena in their natural surroundings. The investigators mingled with the phenomena, focused on the phenomena and described their findings. Interpretivist analysis theory can usually be related to qualitative study (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). “Researchers need to make sense of the subjective and socially constructed meanings expressed about the phenomenon being studied” (Saunders et al. 2012, p.

163). Researchers took a stand to explain the social universe (which is continuously evolving unlike the physical world) and from their point of view give it meaning (Sahay, 2016). In this study interpretivism philosophy had been followed by researchers, as it is appropriate for this study because of the phenomenon that specific issue about entrepreneurial intention of international students in Sweden on the based in already established theory and literature. In addition, qualitative research had been used which is related with this study.

4.2. Research approach

There are two different approaches of research in terms of reasoning, deductive and inductive approach (Hyde, 2000; Bryman & Bell, 2011). According to Saunders et al., (2009) inductive approach is focused on collecting data and developing new theory after analyzing the collected data. Whereas, in the deductive approach existing theory is used as the foundation of the research (ibid). The aim of the study is to use the existing theory and do some modification based on the context of international university students in Sweden. Thus, this study follows the deductive approach.

4.3. Research strategy

Research strategy means an overall planning of researchers for a research hoe to conduct along with planning, monitoring, executing and so on. There are six types of research strategies namely:

experimental, survey, case study, grounded theory, ethnography and action research. However, in the survey research there is a list of questions is designed as per the research target to extract information from participants. There are four types of survey those are telephone survey, mail survey, self-administered survey and personal interviews (Gerber-Nel et al., 2005). The primary purpose of the survey study is to catch public's personal feelings (Rossi et al., 2013). The survey strategy is used to find solutions to the issues that have been posed, to get answers to the questions that have been asked and to assess if targets have been accomplished (Glasow, 2005). The survey

(23)

22

design is a type of strategy that uses questionnaires to collect data from a sample size derived from a target population (Visser et al., 2000). As this study is using qualitative approach used a semi structure questionnaire to collect data from sample population by taking face to face interviews from participants.

Figure 2: The research onion from Saunders et al., 2009 4.4. Time horizon

The adjacent layer represents the time period during which the researcher undertakes her study before approaching the heart of the onion. For a study the main time horizon can be longitudinal or cross-sectional (Saunders et al. 2012). This investigation has followed the cross-sectional time horizon, so it is easy to overcome the final goal which requires a structure within a shooter time.

4.5. Data collection methods

The Research Onion 's final layer is techniques and procedures. This is the section where exactly how and why you conduct the study can be made clear. The process employed at this analysis point contributes greatly to the overall reliability and validity of the study (Saunders et al., 2009).

The collection and analysis of data depend on the methodological approach employed (Bryman, 2012). The data can be primary or secondary data, primary data is a direct data and is directly derived from the source, and secondary data is in contrast to primary data, secondary data are indirect data. (UKEssays, 2018). Secondary data have been collected from previous researchers’

work on journals, doctoral papers, or on thesis papers by using numerous bibliographic databases such as Google Scholar, OneSearch, Scopus or Web of Science etc for theory part. However, with regard to qualitative research, primary data is collected by the structure of the interview, there are

(24)

23

three graded layers such as organized, semi-structured, and unstructured interviews (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). Structured interviews are defined by quantifiable as data collected (King, 2004), and unstructured interviews are implemented to acquire universal space without defining questionnaires (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008). Finally, a list of questions and discussion between interviewees and respondents accompanied the semi-structured interview (Saunders et al., 2009). In this paper authors have used semi-structured interview from the interviewees.

4.6. Interview mechanism

The selection criteria for interviewees based on convenience sampling among international students in Sweden and used semi-structured questionnaire to collect data from interviewees. Due to COVID-19 pandemic it was difficult to take interviews from international students of different universities, thus authors have chosen only international students of Halmstad University. At least one question was chosen for each indicator as per the conceptual model of this study (sample questions are showing in the Table 2), more questions were raised during the interviewees to get clear idea about those aspects. 18 individual interviews of international students of Halmstad University have been taken with that semi structured questionnaire to get the deeper, enriched and meaningful understanding entrepreneurial intentions. According to DiCicco-Bloom & Crabtree (2006) most qualitative interviews are taken predetermined open-ended questionnaire and more questions emerging during dialogs between interviewee and interviewer. All dialogs in the interviews were in English as there were interviewees/international students from different countries as well as all interviews were recorded and also noted during the interviews.

Convenience sampling was using as the interviewees were collected/selected from convenience positions from peers or who live in university hostel, moreover who intended to meet interviewers during COVID-19 pandemic situation. This sampling was used when researchers choose samples based on convenience, availability and geographical proximity (Etikan, 2016). In addition, this helps the interviewer to delve deeply into the targeted matter.Researchers have been able to take 11 international students’ interviewees by visiting the university hostel and rest of the 7 students’

interviews were taken by visiting personally (showing in the Appendix 4). Researchers’

interference was minimal, and interviews were taken in a normal situation, thus the study was organized in an unbiased manner.

Variable Indicator Main Questions

Attitude 1. Autonomy 1. Do you think you can work more independently by starting your own business rather than doing a job?

2. Risk 2. What do you think about doing business, is it risky?

(25)

24

3. Do you think that starting your own business in a different country is risky?

3. Workload 4. Do you think that your workload will be high to start your own business?

4. Income 5. What do you think you can earn more by doing your own business?

5. Attitude toward achievement

6. Do you think you will be more successful, or can you easily pursue your desired target by starting your own business?

6. Attitude towards challenge

7. Can you challenge yourself to be a successful businessperson?

Subjective norm 1. Cultural differences

1. Did you grow up in a community or environment where people prefer to become entrepreneurs?

2. Family

2. Do your family members encourage you to start your own business?

3. Friends

3. Do your friends encourage/support you to start your own business?

4. parental business experience

4. Is any of your parents doing business, who influences you to start your business?

Perceived

Behavioral Control (PBC)

1. Self-efficacy 1. Do you think you will be a successful businessperson?

2. Are there any obstacles which can make it difficult for you?

(26)

25 2. Entrepreneurial alertness

3. Do you think you can build trust of other people, if you ever become a businessperson?

4. Do you have the ability to point out the right opportunity to start business?

3. Creativity 5. Do you think you can start your own business in a creative way?

4. Perseverance 6. Do you have that much perseverance to do business until you are a successful businessperson?

Entrepreneurial intention

1. Desire 1. Do you have any aspiration to start your own business in the future or work for others?

2. Self-prediction 2. Have you started planning to start your own business?

3. Behavioral intention

3. Are you determined to start your own business in the next 5 years?

Table 2: Questions of semi-structured questionnaire 4.7. Data analysis approach

The interviewer made field notes during each interview, and this data was used to explain how each interview was performed and to note problems or statements that were not adequately recorded by audio recordings. The analysis of data was helped by that detail. With the permission of respondents, all interviews were audiotaped. Interviews have been transcribed verbatim and audio recordings have been reviewed against the transcripts. In the subsequent review process, the full transcripts were used. Furthermore, for analysing the data in this paper technique of Miles and Huberman (1994) has been used by the authors. That technique has three steps data reduction, data display and conclusion drawing or verification. After collecting the data authors tried to pick and minimize the data that was not suitable for the subject in order to reduce the data. The researcher will therefore take the key points and the important data for this analysis. The researcher presented the information that was previously gathered for the data display. The researcher also aligned the

STUDENTS IN SWEDEN BY MEANS OF THE THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR

Master Thesis

UNIVERSITY

Master's Programme (60 credits) in Strategic Entrepreneurship for International Growth

EXPLAINING ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTIONS OF INTERNATIONAL

STUDENTS IN SWEDEN BY MEANS OF THE THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR

International Marketing/Strategic Leadership, 15 credits

Halmstad 2020-11-07

NAHIDA SULTANA, MD. TAZINUR RAHMAN

A

N

S

& M

. T

R

Abstract

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION

1.2. Problem Discussion

1.5. Delimitations of the research

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Entrepreneurial intention

METHODOLOGY