Available via license: CC BY-ND 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Impact of Entrepreneurial camp on Students’ Entrepreneurial
Attitudes
Tiina Brandt
Haaga-Helia University of Applied Sciences, Helsinki, Finland
Tiina.Brandt@Haaga-Helia.fi
Abstract: Entrepreneurial career choices are impacted by entrepreneurial mindset, family background and cultural values.
Entrepreneurial mindset includes for example innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking capacity, and entrepreneurial
education has been found out useful in enhancing these qualities. Here the interest is to see how the intensive 3-weeks
innovation and entrepreneurial camp impacts on the students’ entrepreneurial attitudes compared to international data
sample. The 95 students representing mostly USA and European countries filled in the questionnaire which focused on
identifying qualities they would need if they would start own business. This data set was compared with the data over 1000
students from various countries. Several differences were found, indicating that those students, who have learnt profoundly
about entrepreneurship emphasize different qualities than those with more general level knowledge.
Keywords: Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurial Education, Innovativeness, Needed Qualities for Entrepreneurship
1. Introduction
Entrepreneurship is defined as an individual’s ability to turn ideas into action (European Commission, 2020).
Entrepreneurial career choices are impacted by entrepreneurial mindset, family background and cultural values
(e.g. Harris & Gibson 2008; Roberts & Robinson, 2010). Entrepreneurial mindset includes innovativeness,
proactiveness and risk-taking capacity.
Studies have contradictory findings about impact of the entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurial
intentions, entrepreneurial attitudes, and self-efficacy. Some have positive results, (e.g. Jones et al. 2008; Bae
et al. 2014), while some studies have findings of negative impact (e.g., Oosterbeek et al., 2010). Similarly, some
of the studies exert positive effects on entrepreneurial self-esteem and propensities (e.g. Jones et al. 2008;
Zhang et al., 2014), while others report a negative impact (e.g., Oosterbeek et al., 2010). It has been found that
entrepreneurial skills can be learned in the context of entrepreneurial behavior (Mayhew et al., 2012; Kuratko
2005). Jones and Iredale (2010) distinguish between enterprise education with a focus on personal attributes
and skills that can be used in a variety of contexts and entrepreneurship education with a focus on starting and
running a business.
Bae et al. (2014) meta-analyzed studies examining the relationship between entrepreneurship education and
entrepreneurial intentions and found a significant but a small correlation between entrepreneurship education
and entrepreneurial intentions. This result was consistent with the findings by Martin et al. (2013), who also
found a small but positive relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial intentions.
The issue of the impact of entrepreneurship education is still very complex (Henry et al., 2004), and there are
plenty of possible reasons for these contradictory results, e.g. culture, gender, self-efficacy, initial level of
intentions, or motivation may have a role in the impact of entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurial
intentions (Packham et al. 2010; Fayolle & Gailly 2013). It may be also that the impact of entrepreneurship
education programs might only become apparent after some time as Fayolle et al. (2006) stated.
Here the interest is to study 1) the students’ innovativeness and proactiveness qualities and entrepreneurial
intentions, and 2) students’ needs for qualities and attitudes for entrepreneurship.
1.1 Innovativeness and Entrepreneurial Mindset
Entrepreneurs are inherently creative and innovative (Schumpeter, 1934). Psychological and personality
characteristics have been shown to be the major determinants that predict the individuals’ innovativeness.
While some believe it is possible for all individuals to be innovative, it appears that due to personality factors,
creating new ideas is easier for some than others. It has been noted that a preference for innovation clearly
differentiates entrepreneurs from managers (Timmons, 1990). Managers tend to be more adaptive (Buttner &
Gryskiewitz, 1993), and to be rewarded for their competence and efficiency (Schein, 1985) rather than for
innovation and creative destruction (Schumpeter, 1934).
148
Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, ECIE 2023
Tiina Brandt
Entrepreneurial mindset includes innovativeness, risk-taking, proactiveness, autonomy and competitive
aggressiveness. Harris and Gibson (2008) found that personal control, innovation, self-esteem and achievement
with respect to business involvement were correlated with intentions to become an entrepreneur.
Entrepreneurial mindset has positive impact for example on firm performance, profitability, growth and product
innovation (Johan & Dean, 2003; Moreno & Casillas, 2008).
Numerous studies have described the attributes of innovators. Innovators are persistent, self-confident, open
to experience, original, independent and they have tolerance for ambiguity (e.g. Hurt et al., 1977; Sandberg et
al., 2013). Innovators are willing to change (Hurt et al., 1977), eager to try new ideas (Rogers & Shoemaker,
1971), and have tendency to advance problem solving (Scott & Bruce, 1994). Additionally, there are positive
correlations with three personality preferences; openness, extraversion, and creativity (Bender et al., 2013;
Hughes et al., 2013).
In a business setting, a preference for innovation refers to a willingness and inclination towards experimentation
and creativity when developing and introducing new products and services (Lumpkin & Dess, 2001). Innovation
alone is not sufficient. There is need for proactive action to progress the ideas further. Proactive individuals scan
the environment for opportunities, show initiative, and persevere until they bring about change (Bateman &
Crant, 1993).
Florin et al. (2007) have studied student attitudes which promote entrepreneurship and found that innovation,
nonconformity, proactive disposition, self-efficacy and achievement motivation are crucial in this regard. Other
researchers studying students used a variety of measures for entrepreneurial attitudes that included a mixture
of attitude and trait measures, often including items referencing risk-taking and innovativeness (Macko &
Tyszka, 2009; Zampetakis et al., 2009; Wanasika et al., 2022) as well as proactivity (Zampetakis et al., 2009).
1.2 Theory of Planned Behaviour and Entrepreneurial Intentions
The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) is one of the models in the study of entrepreneurial intent
in different countries (Liñán & Fayolle, 2015; Moriano et al., 2012). Ajzen (1991) postulates that behaviour is a
function of beliefs that influence a certain behaviour. These beliefs are considered important premises that
determine personal attitude, intention and perceived behaviour control. The more favourable the subjective
norms and attitudes towards behaviour, the greater the perceived degree of control of the individual, leading
to a stronger intention to perform a certain behaviour (Ajzen, 1991).
Previous studies have used TPB to predict certain variables that are related to entrepreneurship. These variables
include entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurial behaviour and entrepreneurial skills and attitudes.
Entrepreneurial skills and attitudes are necessary antecedents in the process of effective entrepreneurship. Skills
and attitudes are developed through learning, experience and environmental factors. Intention plays a central
role in TPB by connecting norms, attitudes and behavioural control with enacted behaviours. Entrepreneurial
intention is the “self-acknowledged conviction by a person that they intend to set up a new business venture
and consciously plan to do so at some point in the future” (Thompson, 2009, p. 676). Entrepreneurial intention
is the first step towards taking entrepreneurial action such as contemplating a start-up. The second variable of
interest is entrepreneurial behaviour. Based on the TPB, intentions are correlated with behaviour and linked to
behavioural control.
The TPB can also be used in evaluating the outcomes of entrepreneurship education. Fayolle et al., (2006) found
that the entrepreneurship education programs assessed had a strong measurable impact on the entrepreneurial
intentions of the students.
2. Methodology
The European Innovation Academy (EIA) (https://www.inacademy.eu/portugal/) is the 3 weeks study camp
fostering innovativeness and entrepreneurship with students. Students will form the enterprise with
international teams during camp. They will get help from mentors with the business background. The best ones
will get rewarded after the final pitch day. The questionnaire about their experiences were sent to them at the
last week of the camp, so they already had knowhow and experience about entrepreneurship. The data was
analyses with statistical program SPSS using t-test.
149
Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, ECIE 2023
Tiina Brandt
2.1 Sample
Totally, 95 students responded to the questionnaire of psychological capital. Altogether the camp includes about
300 students, so the response rate is quite good. 53% of respondents were women and coming from Europe
(62%). Representatives from USA were 38%. Most of the respondents (72%) were between 21 years – 30 years
old. 59% of respondents were students, and 30,5% were students having the job or own company. 80% of
respondents were university students, 10,5% at applied sciences, and 4,2% were having doctor degree. The
interest was to see if the students will have the interest to become entrepreneur after the EIA-camp. Results
were:
• 1,1% will not definitely start own business at the future
• 7,4% will not probably start own business at the future
• 34,7% did not know if they will start own business at the future
• 34,7% will probably start own business at the future
• 21,2% will definitely start own business at the future
The respondents were divided into two groups comparing 1) those with entrepreneurial intentions, and 2) those
without entrepreneurial intentions
2.2 Questionnaires
Innovativeness and proactiveness questionnaire bases on the global questionnaire (see e.g. Brandt et al., 2022)
and here the factor analyses (Varimax) produced two dimensions as it was planned. Alphas were 0,873 for
innovativeness and 0,842 for proactiveness.
Qualities needed for entrepreneurship. The question was “What qualities or attitudes you would think you
would need if you become as entrepreneur”. There were 13 items asked to be rated in Likert-scale 1-7.
3. Results
In the Table 1. the results are presented, in case of innovativeness and proactiveness. When compared to global
dataset (Wanasika et al., 2022) it can be seen that in both cases EIA-students have both the innovativeness and
proactiveness higher. When looking the statistical analysis, the t-test shows that there were statistically
significant differences between the students with entrepreneurial intentions and those without entrepreneurial
intentions. Those EIA-students with entrepreneurial intentions had highest means in both Innovativeness and
Proactiveness than comparison groups. When looking the means, those without entrepreneurial intentions had
still higher means than global dataset.
Table 1: Innovativeness and proactiveness means, comparisons and t-test comparing intention to start the
business
Global
dataset
(n=1081)
Mean
Alldata (n=95)
Mean
YES
Entrepreneurial
intentions (n=53)
NO
Entrepreneurial
intentions
t-test
two-sided
p.
Innovativeness
5,05
5,79
6,03
5,47
<,001**
Proactiveness
4,50
5,08
5,41
4,70
<,001**
When looking the list of the qualities (Table 2), the students with entrepreneurial experience had different
ranking than the global sample (Brandt et al., 2022). The first quality they thought they needed was Team to
build up the business, secondly risk-taking and thirdly Decisiveness. The last quality for them was More
knowledge about entrepreneurship. Ranking with the global sample was 1) Good business idea 2) Motivation
and 3) Mentor to help me.
Table 2: Qualities needed for entrepreneurship EIA-students vs. Global data
EIA-students
Global (n=994)
Difference
(Global-EIA)
Team to build up the business
5,84 (1)*
5,67 (7)
-0,17
150
Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, ECIE 2023
Tiina Brandt
EIA-students
Global (n=994)
Difference
(Global-EIA)
Risk-taking
5,52 (2)*
5,69 (6)
0,17
Decisiveness
5,48 (3)*
5,73 (5)
0,25
Mentor to help me
5,45 (4)
5,21 (3)*
-0,24
Motivation
5,44 (5)
5,93 (2)*
0,49
Persistence
5,44 (6)
5,84 (3)
0,40
Resilience
5,42 (7)
5,62 (10)
0,20
Courage
5,34 (8)
5,74 (4)
0,40
Self-Esteem
5,27 (9)
5,58 (11)
0,31
Innovativeness
5,25 (10)
5,63 (8)
0,38
Good Business idea
5,20 (11)
6,02 (1)*
0,82
Optimism
5,17 (12)
5,30 (12)
0,13
More knowledge about entrepreneurship
5,03(13)
5,63 (9)
0,60
Mean of the qualities
5,37
5,66
0,29
4. Conclusions
This study was focused on the students who were experiencing international entrepreneurship camp at summer
2022. The point was to study, if the camp had impact on their entrepreneurial qualities, when comparing their
results on the international data set. When the students were filling in the questionnaires at the end of the
camp, they already had quite much knowledge about entrepreneurship.
These results confirm earlier results that innovativeness and proactiveness are strongly connected with
entrepreneurial intentions. It seems that students who apply on the camp are more innovative and proactive
than students overall, when comparing to the global dataset. It may be that the intensive entrepreneurial camp
increased those qualities even more. Interestingly, EIA-students with no intention to start own business had still
higher innovativeness and proactiveness when compared to global data set.
When looking the qualities and attitudes needed for entrepreneurship, total means of the global data are higher
than EIA-students, indicating that entrepreneurial camp might decrease the needs and give important qualities
in regard of entrepreneurship. The biggest differences were in Good business idea, Motivation, Persistence,
Courage, Self-esteem and Innovativeness. EIA-students regarded most important the Team to build up the
business, Risk-taking and Decisiveness, when Global data set emphasized Good Business idea, Motivation and
Mentor. It seems that students with EIA-experience think that good team overcomes good business idea. Maybe
they did learn at the camp, that if the team does not work, it is very difficult to do business. Also, their responses
reflect the environment of the camp, where the target was to make global business, thus risk-taking is
necessarily. It may be that students attending to the camp were already having some qualities more than on
average and also, they might had gain those at camp. All in all, this study shows that entrepreneurial camps
might have huge impact on students’ entrepreneurial qualities and attitudes.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behaviour”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), 179-
211.
Bae, T.J., Shanshan, Q., Chao, M. and Fiet, J. (2014), “The relationship between entrepreneurship education and
entrepreneurial intentions: a meta-analytic review.” Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice 38, no. 2: 217-254.
Bateman, T. S., & Crant, J. M. (1993), “The proactive component of organizational behavior: A measure and correlates”,
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14(2), 103-118. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030140202
Bender, S. W., Nibbelink, B., Towner-Thyrum, E., & Vredenburg, D. (2013). Defining characteristics of creative women.
Creativity Research Journal, 25(1), 38–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2013.752190
Brandt, T., Wanasika, I., Dubickis, M., Treacy, S., Pihlajarinne, H., Acocella, R., Militaru, A., Bakker, D., Liu, J., Liu, R., Tsuzuki,
Y., Vo., T. (2022), “Cultural impact on entrepreneurial expectations”, Proceedings of Wurzburg International Business
Forum – 5th International Business Conference, 1-2.9.2022. ISBN: 978-3-949864-04-9.
https://wibf.fhws.de/fileadmin/wibf/Media/WIBF_2022/Conference_Proceedings_2022_WIBF%40RMUTP.pdf
151
Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, ECIE 2023
Tiina Brandt
Buttner, E.H. & Gryskiewicz, N. (1993), “Entrepreneurs’ problem-solving styles: An empirical study using the Kirton
adaptation/innovation theory. Journal of Small Business Management, 31(1), 22-31.
Fayolle, A., Benoit G., and Lassas-Clerc., N. (2006), “Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education programmes: a
new methodology.” Journal of European Industrial Training 30, no. 9: 701-720.
Fayolle, A. and Benoit G. (2013), “The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial attitudes and intention:
hysteresis and persistence.” Journal of Small Business Management
Florin, J, Ranjan K., and Rossiter, N. (2007), “Fostering entrepreneurial drive in business education: An attitudinal
approach”, Journal of Management Education, 31(1): 17–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562905282023
Harris, M.L., & Gibson, S.G. (2008). Examining the entrepreneurial attitudes of US business students. Education + Training,
50(7), 568-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00400910810909036
Hughes, D. J., Furnham, A., & Batey, M. (2013). The structure and personality predictors of self-rated creativity. Thinking
Skills and Creativity, 9, 76–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.10.001
Johan, W., & Dean, S. (2003). Knowledge-based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and
medium-sized businesses. Strategic Management Journal, 24(13), 1307-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.360
Jones, P., Jones, A., Packham, G., and Miller, C. (2008), “Student attitudes toward enterprise education in Poland: a positive
impact.” Education + Training, 50, no. 7: 597-614.
Jones, B., & Iredale, N. (2010), “Enterprise education as pedagogy.” Education + Training 52, no. 1: 7-9.
Liñán, F. and Fayolle, A. (2015), “A systematic literature review on entrepreneurial intentions: citation, thematic analyses,
and research agenda”, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(4).
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The
moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(5), 429-451.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(00)00048-3
Macko, A., and Tyszka, T. (2009), “Entrepreneurship and risk taking”, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 58(3),
469-87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2009.00402.x
Martin, B.C., McNally, J.J., and Kay, M.J. (2013), “Examining the formation of human capital in entrepreneurship: A meta-
analysis of entrepreneurship education outcomes.” Journal of Business Venturing 28, no. 2: 211–224.
Mayhew, M.J., Simonoff, J.S., Baumol, W.J., Wiesenfeld, B.M and Klein, M. (2012), “Exploring innovative entrepreneurship
and its ties to higher education experiences.” Research in Higher Education 53, no. 8: 831-859.
Moreno, A., & Casillas, J. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation and growth of SMEs: a causal model. Entrepreneurship Theory
and Practice, 32(3), 507-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2008.00238.x
Moriano, J.A., Gorgievski, M., Laguna, M., Stephan, U. and Zarafshani, K. (2012), “A cross-cultural approach to
understanding entrepreneurial intention”, Journal of Career Development, 39 (2), 162-185.
Oosterbeek, H., van Praag, M., and Ijsselstein, A. (2010), “The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurship
skills and motivation.” European Economic Review 54, no. 3: 442-454.
Packham, G., Jones, P., Miller, C., Pickernell, D., and Thomas, B., (2010), “Attitudes toward entrepreneurship education: a
comparative analysis.” Education + Training 52, no. 8/9: 568-586.
Roberts, L. & Robinson, P. (2010), “Home-based entrepreneurs, commercial entrepreneurs and white-collar workers: a
comparative study of attitudes toward self-esteem, personal control and business growth”, Journal of Small Business
and Entrepreneurship, 23(3), pp. 333-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2010.10593489
Rogers, E. M., & Shoemaker, F. F. (1971). Communication of Innovations; A Cross-Cultural Approach. 2nd Edition, The Free
Press, New York.
Sandberg, B., Hurmerinta, L., & Zettinig, P. (2013), “Highly innovative and extremely entrepreneurial individuals: what are
these rare birds made of?”, European Journal of Innovation Management, 16(2), 227–242.
Schumpeter, J. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Thompson, E. R. (2009), “Individual entrepreneurial intent: Construct clarification and development of an internationally
reliable metric”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 669-694.
Timmons, J. (1990). New Venture Creation: Entrepreneurship in the 1990s (3rd ed.). Homewood. IL: Irwin.
Wanasika, I., Brandt, T., Dubickis, M., Treacy, S., Pihlajarinne, H., Acocella, R., Militaru, A., Bakker, D., Liu, J., Liu, R., Tsuzuki,
Y., Vo., T. (2022), “Innovation orientation and cultural differences”, Proceedings of 3UAS-conference “Future-proof
Business – System Leadership Competences, 28.4.2022. https://julkaisut.haaga-helia.fi/3uas-konferenssi-
tulevaisuuslukutaito-ja-innovaatiokyvykkyys-bisneksessa/. ISBN 978-952-7474-22-8
Zampetakis, L.A., Kafetsios, K., Bouranta, N., Dewett, T. & Moustakis, V.S. (2009), “On the relationship between emotional
intelligence and entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour &
Research, 15(6), 595-618. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552550910995452
Zhang, P., Wang, D. D., and Owen, C. L. (2015), “A study of entrepreneurial intention of university students”,
Entrepreneurship Research Journal, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 61-82.
152
Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, ECIE 2023