Triggers of decisions to launch a new venture--is there any difference between pre-business and in-business entrepreneurs?

Liang, Chyi-lyi (Kathleen) ; Dunn, Paul

ABSTRACT

This paper describes the findings of an ongoing study designed to determine the triggers that led pre business and in business entrepreneurs to begin the entrepreneurship process and their relative importance. The findings suggest that the triggers are personal, opportunity/idea, job related, financial, and family/interpersonal. Demographically the two groups studied were different. There were significant differences and some similarities in triggers between the groups and in the degree to which the triggers impacted their decision to embark on entrepreneurship.

INTRODUCTION

Peter and Katarina, a young couple who have excellent education and work experiences in cutting edge medical research earning competitive income, have recently decided to start their own medical information service business. Why would they trade a comfortable life style for the intensive stress and anxiety related to creating a new business? Peter and Katarina are not alone in the entrepreneurial path. Research in entrepreneurship has introduced many aspects of how and why people make decisions in new venture creation (Shane, 2002). Some researchers have characterized entrepreneurs by traits, personalities, preferences and behaviors (Kihlstrom & Laffont, 1979; McClelland, 1961; Shaver & Scott, 1991). These researchers have concluded that entrepreneurial individuals are often motivated by economic and/or psychological factors. Other researchers have examined circumstantial variables of the environment and their influences on individual decisions in new venture formation by considering market forces, employment change and shifting organizational structures (Arrow, 1962; Casson, 1982; Audretsch, 1997). Most scholars have agreed that the entrepreneurial process and theories involve a complex set of variables that are beyond any single aspect. To identify motives and incentives of entrepreneurial activities involves disseminating several layers of relationships between personal factors, external forces and other random events.

Existing literature has provided limited evidence to explain the differences among entrepreneurs by demographics and in different stages of pursuing new venture opportunities, i.e., pre business and in business. It is logical to speculate that the decision to launch a new venture probably includes both endogenous factors in the individuals and exogenous factors in the environment. None of the existing literature discussed the possibility that pre business entrepreneurs (who may not have any experience in starting a new venture) might have different reasons to launch new ventures compared to in business folks. This article presents the results of an on-going study designed to provide additional insight into why pre business and in business entrepreneurs choose to start new venture by considering both endogenous and exogenous factors--a group of triggers. We define triggers as forces in the individuals or in the individuals' perception of their situation that move them toward the entrepreneurial process. It is important to distinguish "triggering factors" and "triggering events" from "triggers". Triggering events and triggering factors have both been commonly applied in many entrepreneurship research (Shane, 2002). Triggering events are more like "something happened as an occasion or an episode that influence individual's assessment on the situation." Triggering factors could be interpreted as "issues or features that influence individual's perspectives about certain situations". Triggers, as defined in this study, are not necessarily to be any event or factor. They could be things that each individual has identified logically or randomly based on feelings, experiences, or interactions with environment or other individuals.

This research is in the exploratory stage. The long term goal is to develop research results to formulate a conceptual theoretical framework using a multivariate equilibrium approach to explain why and how entrepreneurs make decisions. The fundamental research questions are "What triggers were present that stimulated the decisions to start a new venture among pre business and in business entrepreneurs?" and "Are the triggers different/similar for entrepreneurs who are pre business and those who are in business?"

LITERATURE REVIEW

Much entrepreneurship research has been devoted to the characteristics and motivation of the entrepreneurs (Stevenson, Grousbeck, Roberts, & Bhide, 1999; Longenecker, Moore, & Petty, 2000; Scarborough & Zimmerer, 2000; Bhide, 2000; Bygrave, 1994; Kuratko & Hodgetts, 1998; Vesper, 1996; Hodgetts & Kuratko, 1995; Timmons, 1999; Jennings, 1994; Lambing & Kuehl, 1997). A summary of these characteristics of entrepreneurs from various sources includes: high achievement drive, action oriented, internal locus of control, tolerance for ambiguity, moderate risk taking, commitment, optimism, opportunistic, initiative, independence, commitment/tenacity or some form of one or more of these. The motivation related to new venture formation often revolves around the opportunity to gain control over personal lives/independence, to get profits/financial rewards, to enjoy what individuals are doing, to achieve personal goals and recognition, and to make a difference/contribute to society.

Early authors in entrepreneurship and small business recognized some of the reasons entrepreneurs starting new ventures. Baumback, Lawyer, & Kelley (1973), indicated that entrepreneurs started businesses for self-expression, security and income. Longenecker, Moore, Pettit, & Palich (2006) suggested that entrepreneurs wanted to make money, become their own boss, escape a bad situation, enjoy and satisfying life, and contribute to the community.

Kuratko and Hodgetts (2001) provided a brief but meaningful discussion of the macro and micro views of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship. The "macro" view emphasized broad exogenous factors that give rise to entrepreneurship, and included three categories. The Environmental School of Thought developed an explanation of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship by studying the environment(s) that gave rise to entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship. This group focused on the institutions, values, and mores that, grouped together, form the sociopolitical environment that strongly influence the development of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship. The Financial/Capital School of Thought saw entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship based on largely financial issues. Finally, there was the Displacement School of Thought. This school emphasized the displacement of people as the source of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship. Political, cultural, and economic displacement factors nurtured the ideas and actions to entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship.

The "micro" theorists focused "... on the entrepreneurial trait theory, the venture opportunity theory, and the strategic formulation theory." The micro theories emphasized forces internal to the entrepreneurial process that cultivated entrepreneurs and new venture formation. Examples of these internal forces included commitment, seeking opportunities, seeing the demand in the market place, and creation of strategic alliances and networking with others.

Bygrave (1989) discussed entrepreneurship as a process that involved innovation, triggering event, implementation, and growth. In the triggering event stage he suggested that there were personal, sociological, and environmental factors that led to entrepreneurship. Again, both internal and external forces seemed to be at play. The factors suggested by Bygrave are the same or similar to those studied in this research.

Dollinger (1995) discussed what he characterized as the "impetus for entrepreneurship." He discussed the "Sociological Approach" which focused on four factors that led entrepreneurs toward new venture creation. "Negative displacement" was where individuals were marginalized from society, because of who they were or their situation including being fired or not satisfied with their current employment or divorced. "Between things" included individuals between stages of their life. "Positive pull" included other people (potential collaborators, parents, customers) who provided an impetus to entrepreneurship. "Positive push" included entrepreneurs who, because of their education or situation, were pushed toward entrepreneurship. Individual factors or a combination of any of these factors could move the entrepreneur toward new venture creation. Finally Dollinger discussed the "Situational Characteristics" that included "perceptions of desirability" that came from the entrepreneur's culture, family, peers, and so on; and "perceptions of feasibility" that came from role models and examples and a supportive environment. Dollinger seemed to think that the impetus to change was in the individual from their background or environment or outside the individual in the situation.

Haynes, Becherer, Helms,and Jones (1999) studied entrepreneurs who were dissatisfied with their former jobs and found that this dissatisfaction did, in fact, provide an impetus to entrepreneurship. One important conclusion was that dissatisfied entrepreneurs tended to found smaller lifestyle ventures over which they had more control with personal savings.

While the notions of push and pull forces and triggering events have been bandied around, little research has been done to identify the specific triggers involved in the entrepreneurial process and their relative impact on entrepreneurship among both pre business and in business entrepreneurs. This research attempts to provide some specification to those triggers and to their relative strength in the entrepreneurship process among pre business and in business entrepreneurs.

METHODOLOGY

To find out the triggers that lead entrepreneurs to move to start businesses, a questionnaire was developed by asking over 100 entrepreneurs to share the triggers that caused them to consider starting a business, entrepreneurship students were asked to contribute to the list, and the authors and colleagues in entrepreneurship education were asked to share their thoughts. These were compiled into a structured questionnaire. On each question, respondents asked to indicate whether each trigger was very important, important, moderately important or not important to them in their entry into entrepreneurship. The questions were randomized on the questionnaire to avoid list bias. The triggers in the randomized order presented on the questionnaire are shown in Figure 1.

Two samples were used in this research. First, the questionnaire was administered to a convenience sample of entrepreneurs who were in business. The in business respondents were interviewed by students. Students in entrepreneurship classes were given three questionnaires each and asked to administer the questionnaire to a convenience sample of entrepreneurs in north Louisiana during the spring of 2006 semester. Students completed 159 useable questionnaires. Although the sample was convenience, the businesses met the SBA guidelines for small business.

Second, the same questionnaire was administered to participants in a pre business workshop given every three weeks in northeast Louisiana. The questionnaire was administered to the participants at the beginning of the workshop. While some of the participants in the workshop were in business, those in business were removed and only 227 pre business respondents were used in this paper. The workshop participants vary from individuals who are curious to those who are seriously attempting to get a new venture started. There is no way to separate the less serious from the more serious respondents. Questionnaires to both groups were administered during the fall 2005 and spring 2006. While Katrina and Rita both struck Louisiana during that period, none of the respondents was directly impacted by those natural events.

DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE SAMPLES--PRE BUSINESS VERSUS IN BUSINESS

Table 1 outlines the sample demographics of this study for two samples. Pre business respondents had a larger proportion of females compared to more males among in business respondents. Similarly, pre business respondents were younger than in business respondents. There were proportionately more minority individuals among the pre business respondents and more white respondents among in business respondents. More of the pre business respondents were single or single with children compared to more married with and without children among in business respondents. In general, the pre business respondents were less well educated than those who were in business. In business respondents had more experience in the line of business than pre business respondents. Retail and service business predominated among both groups, but in business respondents were significantly more retail and service firms.

To summarize, in business entrepreneurs as a group were significantly more male, older, white, married, more experienced, had more education and were more likely going into retail or service businesses.

FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

Previous entrepreneurship literature suggested many aspects to study the reasons, motives, incentives and certain influential factors for people to start new ventures. Based on existing information, the results of the surveys in this research were categorized into five aspects: Personal Triggers, Idea/Opportunity Related Triggers, Job Related Triggers, Financial Triggers, and Family and Interpersonal Triggers.

PERSONAL TRIGGERS

The findings of the study involved assigning triggers to categories based on the literature review. Personal triggers are individual in nature. The triggers contained in this set seemed to be important to both pre business and in business respondents (Table 2). "Lack of accomplishment" was significantly more important to pre business respondents to in business respondents.

"Wanted control", "wanted to be my own boss", and "could do it better" were all significantly more important to in business respondents than to pre business respondents. It is possible that in business respondents have adjusted their reasons of creating new ventures because they have already accumulated knowledge and experiences in the process. "Wanted independence" and "wanted a challenge" were not significantly different between the two samples. "Wanted to reach my potential", "change in career for satisfaction", and "good at solving problems" were all significantly more important to pre business respondents. "The desire to achieve", "change their situation", or "apply their knowledge and skills" seemed more important to pre business respondents while "control", "being the boss", and "feeling they could do it better" were more important to in business respondents.

IDEA/OPPORTUNITY RELATED TRIGGERS

Table 3 contains the Idea/Opportunity Related Triggers. The most important trigger to both pre business and in business groups, was "saw an opportunity" chosen by 75 percent of both pre business and in business respondents. "Saw a customer need" was the second important choice among all respondents with over 50 percent of both groups making the choice. "Saw an idea and pursued it" was statistically more important for pre business respondents than for in business respondents. "Hobby grew into a business", "idea grew out of my job", and "bought a business" were less important and statistically significant with more pre business respondents making these choices. "Commercialized an invention" did not seem to be important to either pre business or in business respondents in our sample.

JOB RELATED TRIGGERS

A common myth of entrepreneurship relates to "shifts in employment situations". Economists or industry analysts often speculate an inverse relationship between number of available jobs and number of new businesses in the market. Do entrepreneurs really see job related factors to be an important trigger for them to start new businesses? Job related triggers (Table 4) were, in general, less important than personal triggers and idea/opportunity triggers for both groups. Not many respondents (in pre business and in business modes) thought that job related issues drove them into the decisions of new venture formation. "Job boring", "job dissatisfaction", "job not financially rewarding", "job not exciting", "job potential", "laid off", and "disliked coworkers" were important to less than half of the respondents, but were less important to both groups than personal triggers and idea/opportunity related triggers for respondents in both groups. "Disliked job", "boss conflict", "disliked boss" were more important to in business respondents and significantly higher than for pre business respondents.

FINANCIAL TRIGGERS

Financial incentives have been popular research subjects in entrepreneurship. Many scholars have argued that entrepreneurs were not motivated primarily by money. It would be naive to think that entrepreneurs do not seek financial rewards. However money is rarely the primary reason for people to start their own businesses. It is also possible that seeking financial reward could be distractive to entrepreneurial objectives (Barringer & Ireland, 2006). Did our sample respondents agree? "Needed more money" and "wanted to earn some money" were important triggers for over 50 percent of both respondents groups. "Spouse wanted more money" was much less important to both groups. There was no statistically significant relationship between the groups on these triggers. Interestingly, in business respondents were more inclined to want to get rich. "Having money to invest" or "inherited money to invest" were more important triggers for in business respondents than for pre business respondents with statistically significance. Evidently having money or inheriting money were important trigger for in business respondents. Most of our respondents indeed hoped for some financial rewards, but they did not want to (or did not think about) get rich by starting their own businesses.

One interesting observation was that financial triggers were more important than job related triggers, but less important than personal and idea/opportunity triggers with the exception of needed more money and wanted to earn some more money.

FAMILY AND INTERPERSONAL TRIGGERS

Family and interpersonal triggers (Table 6), with the exception of "joined a family business", were not statistically significant between the two groups. More in business respondents than pre business respondents listed "joined family business" as a trigger. "Wanted a flexible work schedule" and "wanted more family time" were two important triggers for both pre business and in business respondents from the family and interpersonal perspectives. "Wanted to work with spouse", "death of a loved one", "divorce", "wanted to be out of the house", "retired-wanted something to do" were important to less than 10 percent of the respondents. "Someone else suggested the business" was important to more than 20 percent of respondents, but was not statistically different between the groups. With the exception of "wanted flexible schedule" and "wanted family time", family and interpersonal triggers were the least important of all the triggers studied for both groups.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Demographically, the pre business entrepreneurs were different from in business entrepreneurs. In business entrepreneurs were significantly more male, older, white, married, more experienced, had more education and were more likely going into retail or service businesses. The results of this preliminary study seem to show that there are statistically significant differences in triggers between pre business and in business entrepreneurs.

Among the personal triggers, pre business entrepreneurs were more likely to feel that they were not accomplishing what they could or realizing their potential, and were changing for more satisfying careers. In business entrepreneurs on the other hand were more likely to want control, be their own boss and felt they could do better than others in business. The personal triggers, as a group, were rated important by both groups of entrepreneurs with a few exceptions for individual items.

Idea/Opportunity triggers were also important for both groups. In business entrepreneurs were more likely to rank idea grew out of job, saw idea, pursued it, hobby grew into a business, and bought business higher than pre business entrepreneurs. Saw a customer need and saw an opportunity, were among the most important triggers chosen by both groups, but not different between the groups.

Job related triggers seemed less important than Personal and Idea/Opportunity triggers among both groups of entrepreneurs. The individual triggers were similarly ranked by both groups with the exception of dislike job, dislike boss, and boss conflict which in business entrepreneurs ranked more important. Job potential, similar to two personal triggers, ranked most important among the job related triggers for both groups.

Financial triggers do not seem as important to both groups as personal, idea/opportunity, and job related triggers. With the exception that in business entrepreneurs had resources available to invest compared to pre business entrepreneurs. Interestingly, the desire to get rich was important to about a third of the respondents. Most entrepreneurs seemed to want to earn more or some money.

Family and interpersonal triggers were not ranked very high among both groups and were statistically similar except that joined the family business was ranked higher among in business entrepreneurs.

Based on these findings, pre business entrepreneurs and in business entrepreneurs, though different demographically, seem to have many similar and some different triggers. The differences that do exist may result from the fact that pre business entrepreneurs sample contains some individuals who are not seriously pursuing entrepreneurship and/or that those who do, in fact, go into business may turn out to be similar to their in business counterparts. Too, it is possible that in business entrepreneurs have forgotten or altered their perception of some of the triggers that prompted them to pursue entrepreneurship.

From the theoretical point of view, this study has given additional specification to the personal and environmental triggers that influence entrepreneurs who embark on new ventures. While there were some statistically significant differences between pre business and in business entrepreneurs on specific triggers, most entrepreneurs seem to have embarked on their enterprise as a result of largely positive personal and idea/opportunity triggers, some negative job related triggers, some desire to earn money, and last, family and/or interpersonal triggers. These findings confirm and give more specification to the work of previous researchers.

From the practitioner point of view, knowing why entrepreneurs are behaving can lead to a better understanding of the information needs of entrepreneurs who are preparing to go into business. In particular, the triggers suggest that entrepreneurs are looking for new venture opportunities and will take action when something comes up. Coupled with negative triggers, such as job dissatisfaction, these triggers could result in precipitous action by entrepreneurs and result in difficulties for the individuals involved. It is important that entrepreneurs take the time to assess and plan their ventures before they start.

LIMITATIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH

This study was limited geographically to north Louisiana and can not be generalized to all entrepreneurs. Broadening the geographic base of the study could lead to different results. More in depth study of the individual triggers and their impact on subsequent actions by entrepreneurs similar to the Haynes et al study. Additional research on the source of these individual triggers can lead to a better understanding of entrepreneurs. A longitudinal study of pre business entrepreneurs and their subsequent behavior may yield better insight into entrepreneurs and the entrepreneurial process.

REFERENCES

Arrow, K. (1962). Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention, in the Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 609-625.

Audretsch, D. (1997). Technological Regimes, Industrial Demography and the Evolution of Industrial Structures, Industrial and Corporate Change, 6 (1), 49-82.

Barringer, B. & Ireland, R. (2006). Entrepreneurship, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Baumback, C; Lawyer, K; & Kelley, P (1973). How to Organize and Operate a Small Business, 5th Edition. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall, pp. 60-61.

Bhide, Amar V. (2000). The Origin and Evolution of New Businesses, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 61.

Bygrave, William (1989), The Entrepreneurial Paradigm: A Philosophical Look at Its Research Methodologies, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, pp. 7-26.

Bygrave, William (1994). The Portable MBA in Entrepreneurship. New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 7 and 20.

Casson, M. (1982). The market for information, in the Entrepreneur, Chapter 11, Oxford: Martin Robertson, 201-218.

Dollinger, Marc (1995). Entrepreneurship Strategies and Resources, Burr Ridge, Illinois, Austin Press/Irwin, pp. 49-54. Dunn, Paul & Liang, Chyi-lyi (Kathleen) (2001). For Better or Worse: The Impact of Starting a Business on Entrepreneurs and Their Family. Association for Small Business & Entrepreneurship Proceedings, pp. 41-48.

Haynes, Becherer, Helms, & Jones (1999). The Accidental Entrepreneur: When Dissatisfaction is the Primary Motivation for Entrepreneurship, Journal of Business & Entrepreneurship, 11(2), 89-104.

Hisrich, Robert & Peters, Michael (1995). Entrepreneurship Starting, Developing and Managing a New Enterprise, 3rd Edition. Chicago, Irwin, p. 60.

Hodgetts, Richard & Kuratko, Donald (1995). Effective Small Business Management, 5th Edition. Fort Worth, The Dryden Press, pp. 32 and 56-60.

Jennings, Daniel (1994). Multiple Perspectives of Entrepreneurship. Cincinnati, South-Western Publishing Company, p. 159.

Kihlstrom, R. & Laffont, J. (1979). A general equilibrium entrepreneurial theory of firm formation based on risk aversion, Journal of Political Economy, 87 (4), August, 719-748.

Kuratko, Donald & Hodgetts, Richard (1998). Entrepreneurship A Contemporary Approach 4th Edition. Fort Worth, The Dryden Press, p. 16, 35, and 107-109.

Kuratko, Donald & Hodgetts, Richard (2001). Entrepreneurship A Contemporary Approach 5th Edition. Fort Worth, The Dryden Press, p. 33-40 and 41.

Lambing, Peggy & Kuehl, Charles (1997). Entrepreneurship, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., pp. 12 and 13.

Longenecker, Justin; Moore, Carlos; & Petty, J. William (2000). Small Business Management, 11th Edition. Cincinnati, South-Western College Publishing, p. 29.

Longenecker, Justin; Moore, Carlos; & Petty, J. William (2006). Small Business Management, 13th Edition. Cincinnati, South-Western College Publishing, p. 8-9.

McClelland, D. (1961). Entrepreneurial behavior and characteristics of entrepreneurs, in the Achieving Society, Chapters 6 and 7, Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand, 205-258, 259-300.

Scarborough, Norman M. & Zimmerer, Thomas W. (2000). Effective Small Business Management, 6th Edition. New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., p. 30.

Shane, S. (2002). The Foundations of Entrepreneurship Vol 1, Massachusetts, Edward Eigar Publishing.

Shaver, K. G. & Scott, L. (1991). Person, Process, Choice: The Psychology of New Venture Creation, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practices, 16, Winter, p. 23-45.

Stevenson, Howard; Grousbeck, Irving; Roberts, Michael; & Bhide, Amarnath (1999). New Business Ventures and the Entrepreneur, 5th Edition, Boston, Irwin McGraw-Hill.

Tate, Curtis; Megginson, Leon; Scott, Charles; & Trueblood, Lyle (1985). Successful Small Business Management. Plano, Texas, Business Publications, Inc., p. 22.

Timmons, Jeffry A. (1999). New Venture Creation, Entrepreneurship for the 21st Century. Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston.

Vesper, Carl (1996). New Venture Experience, Revised Edition, Seattle, Vector Books.

Chyi-lyi (Kathleen) Liang, The University of Vermont

Paul Dunn, The University of Louisiana at Monroe

Table 1. Sample Demographics

 Pre Business In Business

Gender
Male 42.5 66.7
Female 57.5 33.3
N 219 141
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.000
Gamma 0.000

Ethnicity**
White 55.8 73.1
African American 39.3 21.3
Asian/Pacific Islander 3.1 3.8
Hispanic 0.4 1.3
American Indian 1.3 0.6
N 224 160
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.004
Gamma 0.001

Education Level **
<High School 2.7 1.2
High School 26.9 22.4

Some College 38.6 25.5
College 21.1 37.3
Advanced College 10.8 13.7
N 223 161
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.003
Gamma 0.004

Type Business **
Retail 24.9 33.1
Service 41.6 50.0
Manufacture 5.4 0.0
Wholesale/Distribution 3.8 4.0
Construction 2.2 0.0
Other 22.2 12.9
N 185 124
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.008
Gamma 0.005

Respondent Age **
<25 11.0 3.8
25-35 31.7 22.3
36-45 28.2 26.1
46-55 21.6 31.8
56-65 6.6 14.0
>65 0.9 1.9
N 227 157
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.002
Gamma 0.000

Marital Status **
Single 25.6 12.6
Single w Children 19.4 8.2
Married wo Children 8.8 10.1
Married w Children 46.3 69.2
N 227 159
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.000
Gamma 0.000

 Pre Business In Business
Years of Experience **
None 53.5 8.2
1 - 5 years 20.2 32.1
6 - 10 years 10.1 20.9
11 or more years 16.2 38.8
N 228 134
Total 100 100
Chi-Square 0.000
Gamma 0.000

Table 2. Personal Triggers

Lack of Accomplishment **

 Pre In

VI 54.4 41.6
I 17.1 23.0
MI 5.3 10.6
NI 23.2 24.8
N 228 161
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.038
Gamma 0.042

Wanted to be My Own Boss **

VI 48.7 54.7
I 18.0 25.2
MI 8.3 6.9
NI 25.0 13.2
N 228 159
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.022
Gamma 0.033

Change Careers for Satisfaction *

VI 39.5 27.8
I 18.0 19.0
MI 9.6 8.2
NI 32.9 44.9
Total 228 158
N 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.058
Gamma 0.008

Wanted Independence

VI 60.1 61.6
I 18.4 17.6
MI 6.6 8.2
NI 14.9 12.6
N 228 159
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.857
Gamma 0.715

Wanted to Reach My Potential *

VI 55.5 42.9
I 17.6 24.4
MI 4.8 9.0
NI 22.0 23.7
N 227 156
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.058
Gamma 0.047

Could Do It Better **

VI 13.2 21.3
I 8.3 17.5
MI 11.4 17.5
NI 67.1 43.8
N 228 160
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.000
Gamma 0.000

Wanted Challenge

VI 44.7 41.8
I 25.0 29.7
MI 8.3 13.3
NI 21.9 15.2
n 228 158
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.145
Gamma 0.919

Wanted Control **

VI 26.9 49.4
I 17.6 24.7
MI 17.2 10.1
NI 38.3 15.8
n 227 158
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.000
Gamma 0.000

Solving Problems

VI 18.5 11.6
I 12.3 11.6
MI 6.2 12.3
NI 63.0 64.5
n 227 155
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.078
Gamma 0.367

** Significant at .05 and * Significant at .10

VI, Very Important; I, Important; MI, Moderately Important;
NI, Not important

Table 3. Idea, Opportunity Triggers

Idea Grew out of Job **

 Pre In

VI 10.1 20.0
I 11.5 9.3
MI 7.5 12.7
NI 70.9 58.0
N 227 150
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.009
Gamma 0.008

Hobby Grew Into Business **

VI 16.7 26.4
I 8.3 12.6
MI 7.9 6.9
NI 67.1 54.1
N 228 159
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.034
Gamma 0.006

Saw Idea, Pursued It *

VI 29.4 27.2
I 23.2 15.8
MI 11.4 8.9
NI 36.0 48.1
N 228 158
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.084
Gamma 0.073

Commercialized Invention

VI 11.8 9.0
I 4.4 5.8
MI 7.0 4.5
NI 76.8 80.8
N 228 156
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.522
Gamma 0.347

Saw an Opportunity

VI 52.2 53.1
I 22.8 28.1
MI 3.9 5.0
NI 21.1 13.8
N 228 160
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.251
Gamma 0.435

Saw Customer Need

VI 38.2 37.8
I 17.1 21.8
MI 10.5 12.2
NI 34.2 28.2
n 228 156
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.503
Gamma 0.513

Bought Business**

VI 2.6 13.4
I 2.2 12.1
MI 3.9 4.5
NI 91.2 0.7
n 228 157
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.000
Gamma 0.000

** Significant at .05 and * Significant at .10

VI, Very Important; I, Important; MI, Moderately Important;
NI, Not important

Table 4. Job Related Triggers

Job Boring

 Pre In

VI 11.4 7.0
I 12.7 10.8
MI 13.6 17.1
NI 62.3 65.2
N 228 158
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.376
Gamma 0.327

Job Not Exciting

VI 10.1 10.3
I 9.6 16.7
MI 14.0 16.0
NI 66.2 57.1
N 228 156
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.161
Gamma 0.081

Laid Off

VI 6.1 5.1
I 2.6 3.2
MI 1.8 1.3
NI 89.5 90.4
N 228 157
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.935
Gamma 0.748

Dislike Boss **

VI 3.9 9.6
I 3.9 7.6
MI 7.0 7.0
NI 85.1 75.8
N 228 157
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.046
Gamma 0.017

Job Dissatisfaction

 Pre In

VI 21.5 22.4
I 17.1 19.9
MI 11.0 14.7
NI 50.4 42.9
N 228 156
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.461
Gamma 0.282

Dislike Job *

VI 10.5 15.3
I 12.3 12.7
MI 11.0 17.8
NI 66.2 54.1
N 228 157
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.069
Gamma 0.027

Disliked Coworkers

VI 4.8 5.1
I 4.4 6.4
MI 7.9 12.1
NI 82.9 76.4
N 228 157
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.405
Gamma 0.145

Job Not Financially Rewarding

 Pre In

VI 28.1 28.4
I 16.2 11.6
MI 13.2 14.2
NI 42.5 45.8
n 228 155
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.644
Gamma 0.605

Job Potential

VI 38.2 36.4
I 15.8 21.4
MI 8.8 11.7
NI 37.3 30.5
n 228 154
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.296
Gamma 0.585

Boss Conflict **

VI 5.3 17.2
I 4.8 7.6
MI 11.4 8.3
NI 78.5 66.9
n 228 157
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.001
Gamma 0.003

** Significant at .05 and * Significant at .10
VI, Very Important; I, Important; MI, Moderately Important;
NI, Not important

Table 5. Financial Triggers

Needed More Money

 Pre In

VI 46.7 44.1
I 14.1 16.1
MI 8.8 9.3
NI 30.4 30.4
N 227 161
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.934
Gamma 0.757

Wanted to Get Rich

VI 16.7 17.6
I 11.0 20.1
MI 18.4 16.4
NI 53.9 45.9
 228 159
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.078
Gamma 0.102

Spouse Wants More Money

 Pre In

VI 11.0 9.5
I 7.9 13.9
MI 10.1 10.8
NI 71.1 65.8
N 228 158
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.275
Gamma 0.330

Had Money to Invest **

VI 2.6 17.0
I 3.9 11.9
MI 7.9 7.5
NI 85.5 63.5
N 228 159
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.000
Gamma 0.000

Wanted to Earn Some Money

 Pre In

VI 46.5 52.2
I 22.8 20.1
MI 9.2 10.7
NI 21.5 17.0
n 228 159
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.549
Value 0.252

Invest Inherited Money **

VI 1.8 5.1
I 1.8 3.2
MI 0.4 3.8
NI 96.1 87.8
 228 156
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.013
Gamma 0.005

** Significant at .01 and * Significant at .05
VI, Very Important; I, Important; MI, Moderately Important;
NI, Not important

Table 6. Family and Interpersonal Triggers

Wanted Flexible Schedule

 Pre In

VI 25.9 31.3
I 18.0 18.8
MI 10.5 10.0
NI 45.6 40.0
N 228 160
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.636
Gamma 0.196

Death of Loved One

 Pre In

VI 1.3 4.5
I 2.2 1.3
MI 1.3 1.3
NI 95.2 92.9
N 228 155
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.253
Gamma 0.343

Inherited Business

VI 1.8 5.8
I 1.3 1.9
MI 0.9 1.3
NI 96.1 91.0
N 228 156
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.170
Gamma 0.053

Retired--Something to Do

VI 3.9 5.1
I 3.9 4.5
MI 3.1 3.2
NI 89.0 87.3
N 228 157
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.946
Gamma 0.586

Spouse and I work together

 Pre In

VI 13.2 9.6
I 8.4 11.5
MI 7.5 8.3
NI 70.9 70.7
N 227 157
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.560
Gamma 0.883

Wanted to be Out of the House

VI 8.3 7.7
I 4.4 9.0
MI 7.5 7.1
NI 79.8 76.1
N 228 155
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.335
Gamma 0.406

Someone Else Suggested Business

VI 15.8 11.8
I 12.7 11.1
MI 11.4 19
NI 60.1 58.2
N 228 153
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.178
Gamma 0.830

Wanted Family Time

 Pre In

VI 33.3 26.3
I 12.7 18.6
MI 11.4 11.5
NI 42.5 43.6
n 228 156
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.302
Gamma 0.465

Joined Family Business **

VI 3.9 9.6
I 0.9 5.7
MI 2.6 1.9
NI 92.5 82.8
n 228 157
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.004
Gamma 0.005

 Divorce

VI 4.8 3.2
I 0.9 1.9
MI 0.9 2.6
NI 93.4 92.3
n 228 156
Total 100.0 100.0
Chi-Square 0.382
Gamma 0.724

** Significant at .01 and * Significant at .05
VI, Very Important; I, Important; MI, Moderately Important;
NI, Not important

Figure 1. Triggers of Entrepreneurship

I saw an opportunity I didn't like my coworkers
My job was boring My spouse is not satisfied with
 our current financial situation
My spouse or other close person My job was not financially
died rewarding
I had to earn more money I felt I wasn't accomplishing
 all I could
My job was not satisfying I didn't like my job
My boss and I didn't see eye to My job didn't allow me to reach
eye my potential
I got laid off I wanted to earn some money
My job didn't provide excitement I retired and needed something
 to do
I didn't like my boss I wanted a flexible work schedule
I got a divorce I had another job/business and
 this idea grew out of that one
My spouse and I wanted to work I wanted a challenge
together
I watched someone else in this
business and thought I could do My business is based on my
better invention
I saw a business for sale and I saw a customer need for this
wanted to buy it type business
I joined my family business I inherited the business
I wanted to be independent I saw a problem and sought to
 solve it
I wanted to be in control I had a hobby and it grew into a
 business
I had money and wanted to invest it Someone else pointed out a need
 for this type business
I wanted more time with my family I wanted to reach my full
 potential
I always wanted to be my own boss I wanted to change careers for my
 own satisfaction
Thought up an idea and pursued it I wanted to get out of the house
I inherited money and needed to I wanted to get rich
invest it