Journal of Business and Economics, ISSN 2155-7950, USA September 2013, Volume 4, No. 9, pp. 866-880 Academic Star Publishing Company, 2013 http://www.academicstar.us
Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in
Finland—An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year
Teemu Rantanen, Eeva Järveläinen (Laurea University of Applied Sciences, Finland)
Abstract: In the Helsinki-Uusimaa region of Finland, 2012 was the year of entrepreneurship, with the central aim of promoting entrepreneurship among young people. Throughout the year, some 80 events took place and various separate events were organised in schools. This report will evaluate the impact of the theme year and its events. The research behind this study is framed around Icek Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour. The study will examine the changes to the entrepreneurial intentions of young people and the factors influencing such intentions that have taken place over the theme year. The first set of survey data (N = 873) was collected in early 2012 and the second set of data (N = 725) was collected in early 2013. The results indicate the challenging nature of trying to influence entrepreneurial intentions. Keywords: entrepreneurship; entrepreneurial intention; theory of planned behaviour JELcodes: D00, I25, M13
1. Introduction
The importance of entrepreneurship has been highlighted in many recent resolutions, both in Finland and elsewhere in Europe, such as the Small Business Act 2008 and the Government’s establishment of the policy programme for work, entrepreneurship and worklife in 2007. At the same time, the promotion of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education has emerged as an important activity in society. There has been considerable research activity in the field of entrepreneurship education since the early 1980s (Kuratko, 2005), but reliable research data on the influence of entrepreneurship education and various different types of activity promoting entrepreneurship is still in short supply. In terms of promotion of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education, the Finnish context has some unique characteristics. To begin with, according to international comparative studies the entrepreneurial willingness among the Finnish population is below the European average (Stenholm, Heinonen, Kovalainen & Pukkinen, 2011), even though it has risen in the 2000s (Flash Eurobarometer 283, 2009). Furthermore, Finland has a comprehensive and uniform public school system and around 90% of 16-18-year-olds study either in high school or in a vocational high school (City of Helsinki, 2009, p. 15), which also allows for large-scale entrepreneurship promotion campaigns to be rolled out among young people. In turn, discussion on Finnish
Teemu Rantanen, Ph.D., Adjunct Professor, Principal Lecturer, Laurea University of Applied Sciences; research areas: attitude research, social psychology of entrepreneurship, research-oriented development. E-mail: [email protected]. Eeva Järveläinen, MA in Social Services, Senior Lecturer, Laurea University of Applied Sciences; research areas: education, expertise, entrepreneurship. E-mail: [email protected].
249 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year entrepreneurship education has been dominated by the question of internal and external entrepreneurship. It has been emphasised that entrepreneurship education should not just focus on external entrepreneurship. It has also been emphasised that entrepreneurship education is not a separate field; rather it is part of a broader civic education (e.g., Ikonen, 2006). This study looks at the promotion of entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa region. Geographically speaking, Uusimaa is a small region in southern Finland (3% of the land area of Finland), but the region is home to a significantly large part of the population and economic activity of Finland. The Helsinki region has a little over one million inhabitants and the total population for the whole Uusimaa region is 1.5 million, which is almost 30% of the Finnish population (Central Statistical Office of Finland, 2013). Uusimaa’s economic structure is dominated by services. Nonetheless, many large industrial companies are also registered and have their headquarters in Uusimaa. According to the 2012 Entrepreneurship Review (Ministry of Employment and the Economy 2012, p. 152), Uusimaa accounts for 48.4% of the whole country’s revenue. In this context, promotion of entrepreneurship taking place in Uusimaa is significant activity also for the whole of the national economy. This study will evaluate the impact of the youth entrepreneurship theme year held in Helsinki-Uusimaa in 2012 on the entrepreneurship attitudes and entrepreneurial willingness of school students. The impact assessment is based on Ajzen’s (1991; 2001) theory of planned behaviour. This study is part of the “Promoting Young Entrepreneurship in Helsinki-Uusimaa Region - EER 2012” project (European Entrepreneurial Region, 2012)1.
2. The “Young Entrepreneurship” Theme Year in Uusimaa
The starting point for the entrepreneurship theme year is that the Committee of the Regions of the European Union2 named Uusimaa as one of the European Entrepreneurial Regions for 20123. The reason for its selection is that Uusimaa is among the European regions that are best placed in promoting entrepreneurship for the future and its strength is the strong reciprocal partnership between businesses, universities and the public sector. The promotion of young entrepreneurship was chosen as the focus of the Helsinki-Uusimaa theme year, which was coordinated by the Uusimaa Regional Council4 and supported by many local universities, schools, development agencies and businesses. To support the theme year, an ESF project was established, coordinating in practice a large number of the theme year events. In addition, appropriations from the region’s development fund were
1 Anneli Rantanen, Pertti Vuorinen, Sanna Heinonen, Mari-Anne Lehtola, Viivi Grönlund, Ronja Rantanen and Sanna Suonsyrjä have helped in conducting the research in many ways. We wish to thank them all. 2 The Committee of the Regions (CoR) is the voice of regions and cities in the European Union. The CoR has 344 members from the 27 Member States of the European Union, representing local and regional authorities (Article 263 of the EC Treaty). Within the European legislative process the European Commission is required to consult the CoR on policy areas that directly affect local and regional authorities in the following policy areas based on the EU Treaties, such as Employment, vocational training, economic and social cohesion, social policy and health, Education and culture, Environment, climate change, energy, Transport and trans-European network and Civil protection and services of general interests. CoR has 6 plenary sessions a year, they make more than 50 opinions a year on EU legislation, almost 40 stakeholders’ consultations each year and organizes more than 300 events a year (European Union–Committee of the Regions, 2013). 3 Helsinki-Uusimaa Region EER activities and communication for the EER 2012 year was organized according to their respective roles in the process on the following three levels: World class entrepreneurial excellence level, Entrepreneurial commitment & co-operation level and also in Entrepreneurial activation level. The entrepreneurial excellence level focuses on the implementation of the Small Business Act principles, Baltic Sea and European co-operation activities, the dissemination of the world-class excellence of the Region, launching of new initiatives, and exchange of best practices within the European Union. Entrepreneurial commitment & co-operation refers, e.g., to activities guaranteeing support during the business life cycle. Entrepreneurial activation denotes introducing and promoting entrepreneurship, e.g., in schools, training programs and universities (European Union–Committee of the Regions, 2013). 4 The Uusimaa Regional Council is a joint regional authority formed by the municipalities in the region.
867 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year allocated to help the execution of the theme year. The main target groups of the theme year were young people and new entrepreneurs, secondary-level students and university students, especially those from creative study backgrounds. Over the course of the theme year, the aim was to boost interest in entrepreneurship, promote entrepreneurial activity, develop business know-how, and raise awareness of business and innovation activity in Uusimaa. The theme year was structured around active entrepreneurship events and inter-network cooperation. Through entrepreneurship cooperation, an international entrepreneur network was developed with other EER regions, thereby strengthening mutual know-how and exchange of information. During the theme year, almost 80 events were organised in the Helsinki-Uusimaa region, ranging from functions and conferences with several hundred participants to smaller networking events. The events were aimed are different target groups: political decision-makers, business people, students and entrepreneurship education organisers. The events fostered closer cooperation between the education sector and business, inspired dialogue between different actors and boosted the internationalisation of students and entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs and students met at various events such as the Student to Entrepreneur events organised by development agencies for students and young entrepreneurs at the large expo-style Young entrepreneur–Own choice day, as well as a seminar on a cruise ship and recurring small-scale networking events. Over the year, entrepreneurship events were also organised in seven schools, with more than 700 students and teachers taking part. The events created an inspiring and positive atmosphere to try to engender optimistic attitudes towards entrepreneurship and their core message was that entrepreneurship is a career option and it can also be a path to success. The starting point for the events was about building stronger self-awareness, as well as increasing entrepreneurial activity. The events encouraged students to work hard in pursuing their dreams in the future. The entrepreneurship events in schools were organised according to two slightly-different concepts. Both concepts were implemented during the school event days and a main feature of both was expert presentations in which local and more widely known entrepreneurs presented their own entrepreneurial backgrounds. Furthermore, both events encouraged interaction and online activities. Concept A included a theme day aimed at school students and a separate day aimed at teachers, featuring discussion on the significance of entrepreneurship to society and consideration of interesting ways in which entrepreneurship could be portrayed to students. In addition to the expert presentations, the theme day included an open “business café”, where young people had the chance to talk about entrepreneurship-related issues with trained people. Support also came in the form of complementary interactive online services (Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, blogs, Flickr). In addition to the expert presentations, concept B included group work on entrepreneurship topics. The event provided online teaching materials, which included entrepreneurs’ backgrounds and experiences of entrepreneurship and concrete tools for innovation, creating a business plan and establishing a business.
3. Entrepreneurship Attitudes and Intentions as a Research Subject
In this study, the key concept is entrepreneurship intention, which can be described as the intention of a young person to act as an entrepreneur in the future. We study this from the perspective of attitude theory. In attitude research, intentions are measured in different ways and with different questions. Intention is related not just to planning but also to the desirability of the object and how likely the person believes attainment of the
868 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year object to be (Armitage & Conner, 2001). Different arrangements of questions also give a substantially different picture of the strength of an entrepreneurship intention. For example, according to Kari Paakkunainen’s (2007, p. 71) Finnish research, 69% of young people were considering to set up a business in the future but only 2.6% were seriously planning this in the near future. One question that measures entrepreneurship intentions, and that has been used in international comparative studies (Flash Eurobarometer 283, 2009), relates to whether the person would prefer to be an entrepreneur or an employee if they could choose freely. The attitudes that explain entrepreneurial intention have been studied from different perspectives. People often talk about entrepreneurial orientation, which means the kind of general orientation that facilitates success as an entrepreneur. In different studies, it has been attributed slightly different characteristics (Rauch, Wiklund, Lumpkin & Frese, 2009). Traditionally, entrepreneurial orientation has been associated with a willingness to take risks, innovativeness and a proactive nature (Covin & Slevin, 1991) as well as an aggressive competitiveness and independence (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). In this study, our interest is focused on attitudes towards entrepreneurship and not the entrepreneurial nature of attitudes.5 We are concerned with how positively the young people of Uusimaa relate to entrepreneurship6. A positive attitude towards entrepreneurship is not a guarantee of being classed as an entrepreneur. In fact, many social psychological studies have found that there is a particularly poor correlation between attitudes and behaviour. Within attitude theory, different specific models of the relationship between attitudes and external behaviour have been developed. A particularly successful model has been IcekAjzen’s (1991; 2001) theory of planned behaviour. It asserts that behavioural intention is affected by three elements: attitude towards behaviour, subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control (Figure 1). According to Ajzen’s theory, a young person’s entrepreneurial intention is therefore affected by his/her personal valuation of entrepreneurship, the valuations and expectations of his/her peers and the young person’s estimation of his/her own competency as an entrepreneur.
Figure 1 Theory of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen, 1991)
Attitude is a concept with many aspects, and it does not have a single consistent definition. Typically, attitude is defined as a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some dimension (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993). Ajzen’s (1991, 2001) starting point is that an activity taking place in a certain context must be studied in terms of the specific attitudes that apply to this activity. Such attitudes define and predict
5 In this study, we also studied the entrepreneurial orientation of the young people, according to Covin and Slevin’s theory. However, the reliability of entrepreneurial orientation-related measures remained quite low. Similarly, the correlation between entrepreneurial orientation and entrepreneurship intention was not as high as the correlation between intention and perceived control and the subjective norm. As such, this article will not consider any variables related to entrepreneurial orientation. 6 A number of Finnish research studies have differentiated between positive and critical entrepreneurial attitudes (Nevanperä, 2003, pp. 143-144; Räty, Komulainen and Korhonen, 2010, p. 113). These attitudes are also listed separately in the survey data for this study. Nonetheless, this article will look only at positive entrepreneurial attitudes. There were no significant changes in the critical entrepreneurial attitude during the theme year (Rantanen et al., 2013).
869 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year behaviour noticeably better than general attitudes. However, Ajzen’s concept of attitudes, whereby the subject of the attitude is a person’s own behaviour, has a fundamental problem: when each activity has its own related attitude, the concept of the attitude becomes narrower and simultaneously its explanatory power decreases. Such an interpretation of attitudes also deviates from the concept of attitude in traditional attitude theory. Some social psychologists have even rejected the entire concept of attitude (e.g., Potter & Wetherell, 1987). In this study, we will also modify Ajzen’s concept of attitude with a slightly more generalised concept of attitude. Behavioural intention is also fundamentally affected by social environment. The subjective norm means the belief of how one’s close peers value the desirability of a particular behaviour. From the perspective of the subjective norm, the main significance is in which social context the young person associates his/her future business activity and whose valuations the young person considers important in that context. Depending on the social context, it may be the expectations of the parents, the peer group or the general expectations of the industry that hold the most sway. Perceived behavioural control is related to how the young person evaluates how he/she will fare in various different tasks and responsibilities related to entrepreneurial activity and establishing such activity. Behind this concept is Albert Bandura’s (1982) social learning theory and its related concept of perceived self-efficacy. In relation to this, Bandura (1982, p. 140) talked of expected outcomes. In the context of this study, perceived self-efficacy is related to how the young person believes he/she would fare in completing entrepreneurial tasks. Outcome expectancy, in turn, relates to how well the young person believes he/she would succeed as an entrepreneur. In this study we use the concept of perceived control when talking simultaneously about behavioural and outcome-related control. The theory of planned behaviour is a general model that explains planned behaviour. According to several studies, it has also been proven viable for explaining entrepreneurial intentions and behaviour. Likewise, it has also been used in the evaluation of entrepreneurship education programmes: According to the results of Alain Fayolle and Benoit Gailly (2004) a short-term entrepreneurship education programme can be used to influence entrepreneurial intentions. In turn, K. Mark Weaver et al. (2012) demonstrated that a five-week intensive entrepreneurship programme can influence not just intention but also attitude, perceived behavioural control and subjective norm. An impact study by Fayolle et al. (2006) on a three-day entrepreneurship programme gave a qualified account of the impact of entrepreneurship education: entrepreneurial intention became significantly more positive only among those respondents whose entrepreneurial intentions began at a low level. Through the theory of planned behaviour we can also locate the challenges in promoting Finnish entrepreneurship. For example, based on Paula Kivelä’s (2002) study, the belief of Finnish students in their own success as entrepreneurs was strong, but support from their families was less: two out of three believed that they would be able to bear the risks and responsibilities related to entrepreneurship (Kivelä, 2002, p. 82). Similarly, two out of three believed that they would succeed as an entrepreneur if they decided to establish a business. In contrast, only 20% of parents believed that the children in their families were supported with regard to entrepreneurship (Kivelä, 2002, p. 72).
4. Research Questions and Hypotheses
According to Finnish studies, influencing entrepreneurial willingness is a challenging task for education. Studies by Jussi Pihkala (2008) and Marja-Liisa Kakkonen (2010) on university-level students showed that
870 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year entrepreneurial intentions are relatively fixed throughout education. According to Kaarina Laisi and Inkeri Liimatainen (2004), professional education increases young people’s entrepreneurial intentions only slightly. The starting point of this study is the question of how young people’s entrepreneurial intentions can be influenced. In this study we will attempt to determine the extent to which the EER 2012 theme year has had an impact in terms of promoting entrepreneurship7. In particular, we will ask: How have the entrepreneurial intentions, subjective norm, perceived control and entrepreneurship attitude of students in vocational school and high school changed during the EER 2012 theme year? How have the entrepreneurial intentions, subjective norm, perceived control and entrepreneurship attitude of participants in entrepreneurship schools events (concept A; concept B) changed during the EER 2012 theme year? Regarding our first research setting, we formed the following hypotheses: Hypothesis 1: The entrepreneurial intentions, subjective norm, perceived control and entrepreneurship attitude of students in vocational school are greater at the end of the theme year than they were previously. Hypothesis 2: The entrepreneurial intentions, subjective norm, perceived control and entrepreneurship attitude of students in high school are greater at the end of the theme year than they were previously. Change in the entrepreneurial intentions of participants in the schools’ entrepreneurship events (7 schools) is compared with changes among those who have not taken part in the schools’ campaign (5 schools)8. It was not possible to reliably identify those people who had participated in the events and so the comparison is made here on a school basis.9 We will separately study three groups: Group A: Schools in which concept A-based activity promoting entrepreneurship was conducted (5 schools) Group B: Schools in which concept B-based activity promoting entrepreneurship was conducted (2 schools) Control group: Schools in which no activity promoting entrepreneurship was conducted (5 schools) We consider the following hypotheses: Hypothesis 3: The entrepreneurial intentions, subjective norm, perceived control and entrepreneurship attitude in group A schools are greater at the end of the theme year than they were previously. Hypothesis 4: The entrepreneurial intentions, subjective norm, perceived control and entrepreneurship attitude in group B schools are greater at the end of the theme year than they were previously. In addition, we will also study change in the control group, where no intervention took place.
5. Data and Research Methods
Over the course of the research process, two sets of survey data were collected in which the subject organisations were six high schools and six vocational schools across a total of eight municipalities around the region of Uusimaa. Expectations were set in such a way that they would apply to the whole region. Participating from the vocational schools were cultural, economics, social and healthcare, technology and transport departments.
7 This study is concerned with statistical change, not individual-level change. Data was collected from second-year students at one-year intervals. In practice, therefore, the survey respondents were different people. 8 In an experimental impact study, a control group should be selected at random. In this study, the requirement of random selection was not fulfilled. Participation in the campaign was voluntary for the schools and therefore some of the schools declined to participate. Those schools that declined included schools that did not participate on the basis of already having an established entrepreneurship education programme and that they were confident in those programmes. 9 From the perspective of entrepreneurial intention, the subjective norm is of central importance and it is therefore possible that the campaign may have an indirect on the young person via classmates or teachers, even though the person may not have participated in any entrepreneurship events.
871 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year
The respondents were second-year students (mainly 17-18-year-olds). Data was collected via an electronic survey10 during class time. The first set of survey data (N = 873) was collected in the period January-March 2012 and the second set of data (N = 725) was collected in the period January-March 2013. The final schools’ entrepreneurship events took place in October 2012 and therefore the intermittent period between the last event and latter survey was at least three months. When compiling the questionnaire, previous, mainly Finnish research studies were used as reference points (e.g., Vesala, 1996; Nevanperä, 2003; Hyytinen & Pajarinen, 2005; Flash Eurobarometer 283, 2009), but the measures used in previous studies were not used. The first survey comprised 72 questions, which mainly took the form of Likert-scale indications (1 = completely disagree, ..., 5 = completely agree). Before the survey was adopted, it was tested on 19 university-level students. The second survey comprised 89 questions. The questions11 were related to the following topics: respondent’s background information, entrepreneurial intention, attitudes and concepts of entrepreneurship, subjective norm and perceived control12. The first survey was completed by 464 high school and 409 vocational school students and the response rate was 71.0% (high schools 79.1%; vocational schools 63.7%). For the second survey, the number of respondents was 431 for high school and 289 for vocational school students. The response rate to the second survey was 46.0% (high schools 54.6%; vocational schools 37.3%). The poorer response rate in vocational schools was influenced by absences and student work placements. The lower response rate to the second survey among high schools was due to the fact that, for practical reasons, not all student groups were able to complete it, particularly in large high schools. Of the respondents to the first survey, 71.1% and 68.4% of respondents to the second survey were from the Helsinki Metropolitan Area (68.6% in the population) and the rest were from elsewhere in the Uusimaa region. The proportion of Swedish-speaking13 respondents was 6.8% for the first survey and 9.1% for the second (8.5% in the population). The share of vocational school students was 47.2% for the first set of survey data and 40.0% for the second set. Overall, the representativeness of the second survey was good. During the survey, no unexpected problems were encountered regarding the questionnaire, the questions or any of the answers. Based on the received feedback, the electronic data collection was suitable for the target group. Analysis of the data was mostly carried out using simple statistical methods. The variables were set using factor analysis. The normality of distributions was checked using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. The distribution for entrepreneurial intention was not completely normal and it is therefore subjected to non-parametric methods in this study. Because the distributions were nonetheless close to normal and the size of the data set was sufficient, the differences between mean values have been examined using the t-test. During the course of the research project, the directors or entrepreneurship education teachers of the participating schools were also interviewed (Rantanen et al., 2013). The interview data has not been processed systematically in this report.
10 The survey was completed on paper forms in one school in 2012 and in two schools in 2013. 11 In the electronic questionnaire, respondents were obliged to complete all response fields, with the exception of one open response field. In those schools in which the study was conducted using the paper-form survey, respondents naturally tended to leave some questions unanswered. 12 The form also included questions relating to societal values and attitudes, which are reported separately (Rantanen &Toikko, 2012; Rantanen & Toikko, 2013). 13I n Swedish-speaking school, the survey was delivered via a form in the Swedish language.
872 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year 6. Measures and Preliminary Analysis
This study looks at four sum variables: Entrepreneurial intention includes questions relating to intention to conduct entrepreneurial activity, but also questions that cover the young person’s evaluation of how likely he/she believes that he/she will act as an entrepreneur in the future. Subjective norm relates to the expectations and support of the young person’s close peers, parents, friends and industry. Perceived control includes questions on survival as an entrepreneur (perceived behavioural control) and questions related to success as an entrepreneur (expected outcome). Questions on entrepreneurship attitude were related to the significance and valuation of entrepreneurship in society. Each studied characteristic was addressed through 4-5 questions. According to Ajzen’s theory (1991), it is expected that attitude, subjective norm and perceived control influence entrepreneurial intention. These sum variables that influence intention are formed using a factor analysis based on the first survey (Table 1).
Table 1 Factor Analysis (Explanatory Ratio: 55.4%) Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Question 29,0 % 13,9 % 12,5 % 27. Entrepreneurs are ideal citizens - - 0.541 31. Entrepreneurs are typically hard-working and responsible - - 0.572 35. Entrepreneurs’ work is valuable for the entire society - - 0.760 39. Entrepreneurs play a key role in the success of society - - 0.650 56. My close environment encourages me towards entrepreneurship - 0.717 - 57. I trust I am capable of working as a small entrepreneur 0.818 - - 58. I believe I could succeed as an entrepreneur 0.841 - - 60. In my field (or my desired professional field), entrepreneurship is a valued career option - 0.430 - 61. I believe I could learn the skills required for entrepreneurship 0.673 - - 62.I believe I could make a living as an entrepreneur 0.763 - - 64. My parents encourage me towards entrepreneurship - 0.820 65. I trust I would be able to cope with the issues connected to setting up an enterprise 0.761 - - 66. Succeeding as an entrepreneur is not too challenging for me 0.698 - 68. My friends would find it great if I became an entrepreneur - 0.514 - 69. I believe I would have the qualifications to work as the manager of a small enterprise 0.705 - -
In this way, the questions were factored particularly clearly among three of the factors of Ajzen’s theory. It is interesting that factor 1 included questions related to perceived behavioural control as well as questions related to control over outcome. It appears that young people believe that the ability to act as an entrepreneur and success as an entrepreneur are very closely linked. The formed variables were proven to work and their reliability in both data sets was reasonably good (Table 2).
Table 2 SumVariables and Their Reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha) 2012 (N = 873) 2013 (N = 725) Sum variable Questions Mean Sd Alpha Mean Sd Alpha Entrepreneurial intention 4 2.59 1.03 0.899 2.73 1.00 0.899 Subjective norm 4 2.77 0.86 0.781 2.88 0.83 0.775 Perceived control 7 3.28 0.91 0.924 3.30 0.94 0.933 Entrepreneurship attitude 4 3.60 0.65 0.740 3.61 0.63 0.705
873 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year
According to the theory of planned behaviour, subjective norm, perceived control and entrepreneurship attitude explain entrepreneurial intention. In this data set, correlations that fit the theory are also evident. The subjective norm and perceived control correlate very strongly with entrepreneurial intention. The correlation between entrepreneurship attitude and entrepreneurial intention is also significant.
Table 3 Correlations between Sum Variables and Entrepreneurial Intention 2012 (N = 873) 2013 (N = 725) Sum variable Rho p Rho p Subjective norm 0.717 0.000 0,737 0.000 Perceived control 0.620 0.000 0.632 0.000 Entrepreneurship attitude 0.229 0.000 0.274 0.000
As indicated by Table 3, the correlation between attitude and intention is clearly smaller than the two other correlations. This is probably due to the fact that this study focuses on general entrepreneurship attitude and not on attitude towards one’s one activity. According to Ajzen (1991), general attitudes fare particularly badly in explaining an individual’s behaviour in a specific situation. According to the results, Finnish young people have a fairly positive attitude towards entrepreneurship. For example, 37.7% of respondents agree that “entrepreneurs are ideal citizen”, while 12.2% disagree. Compared to this, the subjective norm is quite low. Only 26.8% of respondents agree with the statement “my close environment encourages me toward entrepreneurship” while 36.8% disagree. The young people’s belief in their ability to work and succeed as entrepreneurs is slightly stronger than the subjective norm (Table 2).
7. Changes during the Theme Year
Here we will study the changes in entrepreneurial intention that took place. Table 4 shows that a change occurred over the course of the year in relation to questions on entrepreneurial intention regardless of whether those questions touched on the assessment of a likely future career as an entrepreneur or entrepreneurial intention. Furthermore, the change is evident in the numbers of both respondents that agree and respondents that disagree (Table 4). Table 4 Questions Concerning Entrepreneurial Intention 2012 2013 Question Agree Disagree Agree Disagree N Mean Sd N Mean Sd % % % % If I could freely choose, I’d rather be an 873 34,0 38,3 2,95 1,25 723 38,7 31,7 3,08 1,20 entrepreneur than an employee My aim is to become an entrepreneur in the 873 18,8 48,9 2,53 1,17 722 23,3 40,0 2,70 1,15 future I am going to make a living as an 873 13,6 49,1 2,42 1,12 721 15,7 44,0 2,52 1,10 entrepreneur For me, entrepreneurship is a probable 873 17,1 51,3 2,45 1,16 723 19,9 41,9 2,62 1,11 career choice
The young people’s entrepreneurial willingness appears particularly different depending on the structure of the questions used, which corresponds with previous Finnish research results (Paakkunainen, 2007). For example, almost 39% of respondents agreed with the statement “if I could freely choose, I’d rather be an entrepreneur than an employee”, whereas just 16% agreed with the statement “I am going to make a living as an entrepreneur” (2013 survey data).
874 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year
It is interesting to compare the results against results obtained from the adult population in Finland. In this study, 16% of young people indicated that they intended to work as entrepreneurs. Among others, the 2010 GEM study indicated that in Finland 25% of people were potential entrepreneurs but only 6% had a genuine intention of starting up as an entrepreneur within the next three years (Stenholm et al., 2011). In this study, 39% of young people indicated that they would prefer to be an entrepreneur than an employee, with 32% disagreeing, whereas the Flash Eurobarometer 283 (2009) study showed that 41% of Finns would rather be an entrepreneur than an employee, with 54% preferring to be an employee. A direct comparison of these percentages is not possible due to the different control groups and the different scales used. It does appear, however, that the entrepreneurial willingness of young people in Uusimaa is generally higher than that of all Finnish adults. Furthermore, this difference appears to have come about during the EER 2012 theme year. At the beginning of 2012, employed work was still a more popular option among young people than entrepreneurship. We will look at this difference between the data sets in entrepreneurial intention and its related factors: Where is it localised and how is it explained? Table 5 shows the changes occurring amongst high school and vocational school students during the EER theme year. The variables studied are the four variables of the theory of planned behaviour presented above (Table 5).
Table 5 Changes Occurring During the Theme Year (High Schools and Vocational Schools) 2012 2013 Sum variable School t p N Mean Sd N Mean Sd High School 464 2.57 1.00 429 2.68 0.99 1.59 0.111 Entrepreneurial intention Vocational School 391 2.57 1.05 289 2.82 1.01 3.13 0.002 High School 464 2.71 0.82 429 2.81 0.83 1.84 0.067 Subjective norm Vocational School 391 2.80 0.89 289 2.98 0.83 2.63 0.009 High School 464 3.40 0.85 429 3.37 0.95 0.42 0.672 Perceived control Vocational School 391 3.12 0.96 289 3.19 0.93 0.88 0.379 High School 463 3.70 0.61 428 3.66 0.63 0.91 0.363 Entrepreneurship attitude Vocational School 391 3.49 0.68 289 3.53 0.64 0.84 0.404
High school students’ answers showed an increase in entrepreneurial intention over the course of the EER 2012 theme year. Nonetheless, the difference between 2012 and 2013 was still small enough to be statistically significant. Otherwise, there was no difference between the mean values for 2012 and 2013 among high school students. For vocational school students, the change in entrepreneurial intention was greater than that of high school students and was also statistically significant. Likewise, Table 5 shows that the subjective norm average underwent a significant change among vocational school students. In 2013, vocational school students’ close environment provides greater support for entrepreneurship than it did one year before. The results obtained suggest that the entrepreneurial willingness of vocational school students has increased during the EER 2012 theme year. However, it must be remembered that this study does not take into account individual change, but statistical change. Furthermore, the change is partly explained by factors related to a depleted sample. The number of social and healthcare students participating in the 2013 survey (7.8%) is noticeably smaller than in the 2012 survey (18.4%), which was due to the large-scale organisational changes made in the social and healthcare faculty and the related challenges in organising the survey (incl. at the time of the data collection deadline many students were on work placements). As entrepreneurial willingness in social and
875 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year
healthcare is lower than in other fields, this change in the demographic of respondents influenced the average entrepreneurial intention. When social and healthcare students are taken separately from other vocational school students, it can be seen that the entrepreneurial intention of both groups in the 2013 survey data was greater than in the 2012 survey data. However, those differences are not significant (social and healthcare students: t = 0.99, p = 0.323; other vocational students: t = 0.61, p = 0.542).
8. Study of the Impact of Schools Entrepreneurship Events
Here we will study the impact of events promoting entrepreneurship in schools. Firstly, in those schools in which an entrepreneurship campaign was not conducted, there was no significant difference in entrepreneurial intention from 2012 to 2013. In all other respects, there were no notable changes in these schools (Table 6). The table also indicates that no significant changes took place during the year in those schools in which concept A-type activity for promoting entrepreneurship was conducted.
Table 6 Changes During the Theme Year: Schools in Which Activity for Promoting Entrepreneurship (A or B) Was Conducted and Control Group Schools 2012 2013 Difference Sum variable Intervention N Mean Sd N Mean Sd t p - 349 2.71 1.04 334 2.76 0.99 0.56 0.578 Entrepreneurial intention concept A 260 2.74 1.01 264 2.78 1.01 0.52 0,604 concept B 239 2.24 0.93 125 2.55 1.00 2.94 0.003 - 349 2.85 0.82 334 2.90 0.83 0.85 0.394 Subjective norm concept A 260 2.95 0.84 264 2.97 0.78 0.24 0.812 concept B 239 2.45 0.84 125 2.63 0.87 2.00 0.047 - 349 3.44 0.86 334 3.40 0.95 0.62 0.537 Perceived control concept A 260 3.30 0.86 264 3.25 0.90 0.66 0.512 concept B 239 3.02 0.94 125 3.13 0.97 1.06 0.289 - 348 3.69 0.64 335 3.69 0.64 0.05 0.959 Entrepreneurship attitude concept A 260 3.56 0.68 264 3.55 0.64 0.23 0.818 concept B 239 3.53 0.63 123 3.52 0.57 0.18 0.858
The results indicate that a concept B-based entrepreneurship campaign would have been influential for young people’s entrepreneurial willingness. However, this analysis does not give a clearer picture of how this influence came about. On the basis of the almost-significant change in the subjective norm, it could be expected that a decisive factor has been the establishment of a supportive atmosphere among the young people and in their close peer groups. We will look more closely at those schools in which concept B-type entrepreneurship promotion took place. Table 7 shows the changes in these two schools. School 1 is a social and healthcare vocational school in Helsinki. It appears not to have undergone any significant changes. However, this school’s response rate in 2013 was extremely low (25.0%). School 2 is a high school in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area and its response rate accounted for almost all of the sample responses. For the 2013 survey data, the response rate was lower (47.5%), but it also accounted for
876 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year
almost the entire average of the sample. School 2 shows a significant change both in entrepreneurial intention and in subjective norm.
Table 7 Changes During the Theme Year: Schools in Which Concept B-Type Activity for Promoting Entrepreneurship Was Conducted 2012 2013 Difference Sum variable school N Mean Sd N Mean Sd t p school 1 120 2.17 0.95 41 2.29 0.97 0.69 0.489 Entrepreneurial intention school 2 119 2.30 0.92 84 2.67 1.00 2.74 0.007 school 1 120 2.41 0.87 41 2.27 0.83 0.90 0.368 Subjective norm school 2 119 2.49 0.81 84 2.82 0.84 2.77 0.006 school 1 120 2.84 1.02 41 2.79 1.07 0.25 0.800 Perceived control school 2 119 3.19 0.82 84 3.29 0.88 0.80 0.423 school 1 120 3.46 0.64 41 3.48 0.56 0.10 0.922 Entrepreneurship attitude school 2 119 3.60 0.60 82 3.54 0.58 0.67 0.504
Then why is the change evident in school 2? It would appear that the entrepreneurial intention in this high school was at a very low level at the beginning of the theme year, which facilitated a change. Based on interviews conducted in autumn 2011 (Rantanen et al., 2013), the school board cautiously accepted the suitability of entrepreneurship education in high school. We can expect that the entrepreneurship education at this school was not at the same level as in many of the other schools in this study. This assumption is also supported by the study of the background variables of a research survey (2012). In school 2, only 5.0% of respondents believed that “school education has increased my interest (intention) in becoming an entrepreneur”, whereas the corresponding value for the other high schools was 19.7%. Therefore, this school offered a very good context for activity promoting entrepreneurship. School 2 shows a clear and statistically significant change also in the expectations of one’s close peer group. Agreement with the statement “My close environment encourages me towards entrepreneurship” increased from 13.4% to 22.9% during the year and disagreement with the statement fell from 58.8% to 37.3%. It would appear that the change in entrepreneurial intention over the year is related to the change in the relationship of the person’s close environment with entrepreneurship. Therefore, we can assume that school 2 did not just see change at the individual level but also a change towards a more supportive atmosphere for entrepreneurship. The statement “my parents encourage me towards entrepreneurship” saw an increase in agreement from respondents and the number of respondents in disagreement fell during the theme year at this school. However the change was not significant. This was expected because the theme year did not include any activity aimed at the parents of the students.
9. Conclusions and Discussion
Throughout the EER 2012 theme year, the themes of youth and entrepreneurship have been evident in many ways in Uusimaa. During 2012, many events of different scale were organised for different target groups in Uusimaa, at the heart of which were close cooperation between public organisations, schools and businesses, and regional development. We can ask what impact these various theme year events have had. In the 2013 survey data, the entrepreneurial willingness of young people was higher than it had been in 2012. However, this result can partly be explained by factors related to the sample. When the significance of these
877 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year factors is removed, the result is almost only indicative. Furthermore, it should be remembered that any possible changes may have been influenced by outside factors during 2012, such as factors relating to the economic situation in Finland and in Europe. Overall, the results of this study do not provide as positive a view of the impact of a short-term entrepreneurship education programme as did the study by Alan Fayolle and Benoit Gailly (2004). However, the difference may also be explained by differences in the design of the study. Fayolle and Gailly took final data immediately after the end of the event, whereas this study looked at statistical changes over a longer interval. Invariability in entrepreneurial intention is not a surprising result, as previous Finnish studies have shown that entrepreneurial intention remains relatively constant throughout study (Pihkala, 2008; Kakkonen, 2010). The promotion of entrepreneurship is a long-term activity and short-term projects or campaigns can achieve only limited change. Results show that the best opportunity for impact is among those student groups whose entrepreneurial intention is low to begin with. In this sense, the results are consistent with those of Fayolle et al. (2006). K. Mark Weaver et al. (2012) showed that an intensive entrepreneurship programme can be used to influence entrepreneurial intention and the factors that influence it. We can ask whether it would have been more appropriate, from an impact perspective, to focus on intensive entrepreneurship education rather than diversified events. On the other hand, a broader regional development project can, at least in principle, influence the creation of a wider, more entrepreneurship-positive atmosphere and therefore the subjective norm, as well as just individuals. In fact, based on the results, the core challenges of promoting entrepreneurship are related to this: Finnish young people find that their close environment does not support them towards entrepreneurship. Almost ten years ago, the Finnish Ministry of Education set the target of developing a positive culture and atmosphere for entrepreneurship at the national and regional level (Ministry of Education, 2004). This target can still be considered to be of foremost importance. This study has focused on entrepreneurial intention, leading us to ask the following question: does intention lead to entrepreneurship in practice? According to Ajzen, the strength of the connection between intention and behaviour is affected primarily by how far away something is in the future. For high school students, working life may appear to be quite a long way off, whereas for students at vocational schools questions of the transition into working life and, possibly, running their own businesses are clearly in the much-nearer future (the survey data was collected in the second study year and therefore just over a year before qualification to professional working life). Another factor weakening the connection between intention and behaviour is any possible deficiencies that young people may have in their readiness for life in entrepreneurship (Ajzen, 1991, pp. 184-185). On the basis of the results of this study, there are a certain number of deficiencies in their perceived entrepreneurial readiness. Furthermore, perceived self-efficacy and outcome expectancy (Bandura, 1982) are very strongly connected in these data sets. This means that, for young people, the command of the skills necessary for entrepreneurship and success as an entrepreneur have a very direct correlation. The young people did not perceive the significance of uncertainty regarding the external operating environment to successful entrepreneurial activity, which can be seen as relating, to a certain extent, to an insufficient understanding of the nature of entrepreneurship. Overall, this study showed concretely how challenging it is to evaluate the impact of promotional activity for entrepreneurship. Challenges came in the analysis of different kinds of external factors and in the sample itself. Without the close analysis of the background variables and influencing mechanisms, we can end up with an overly simplistic view of the impact of the activity. In any case, the theory of planned behaviour proved consistent with
878 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year previous research studies (Fayolle & Gailly, 2004; Fayolle, Gailly & Lassas-Clerc, 2006; Weaver et al., 2012) as a functional starting point for the evaluation of the impact of promotional activity for entrepreneurship.
References: Ajzen I. (1991). “The theory planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 179-211. Ajzen I. (2001). “Nature and operation of attitudes”, Annual Reviews Psychology, Vol. 52, pp. 27-58. Armitage C. J. and Conner M. (2001). “Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review”, British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 471-499. Bandura A. (1982). “Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency”, American Psychologist, Vol. 37, pp. 122-147. Central Statistical Office of Finland (2013). Available online at: http://www.stat.fi. City of Helsinki (2009). “Nuorten koulutus Helsingissä”, Tilastoja 38, Helsinki. Covin J. G. andSlevin D. P. (1991). “A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior”, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 7-25. Eagly A. H. andChaiken S. (1993). The Psychology of Attitudes, Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Fayolle A. andGailly B. (2004). “Using the theory of planned behaviour to assess entrepreneurship teaching programs: A first experimentation”, in: 14th Annual IntEnt Conference, University of Napoli Federico II. Fayolle A., Gailly B. and Lassas-Clerc N. (2006). “Effect and counter-effect of entrepreneurship education and social context on student’s intentions”, Estudiosde Economia Aplicada, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 509-523. Flash Eurobarometer 283 (2009). “Entrepreneurship in the EU and beyond”, Analytical Report European Commission, available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/facts-figures-analysis/eurobarometer/fl283_en.pdf. European Union - Committee of the Regions (2013). Available online at: http://cor.europa.eu/en/Pages/home.aspx. “Government’s establishment of the policy programme for work, entrepreneurship and worklife” (2007), available online at: http://valtioneuvosto.fi/tietoarkisto/politiikkaohjelmat-2007-2011/tyo-yrittaminen-tyoelama/ohjelman-sisaeltoe/fi.pdf. Hyytinen A. and Pajarinen M. (2005). “Yrittäjäksi ryhtyminen ja yrittäjyysasenteet Suomessa: Havaintoja kyselytutkimuksesta”, The Research Institute of the FinnishEconomy, 2005, DiscussionPapers No. 990, Helsinki. Ikonen R. (2006). “Yrittäjyyskasvatus. Kansalaisen taloudellista autonomiaa etsimässä”, SoPhi 102, Jyväskylä: Minerva. Kakkonen M. L. (2010). “International business students’ attitudes of entrepreneurship”, Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 67-77. Kivelä P. (2002). “Ammattikorkeakouluopiskelijoiden suhtautuminen yrittäjyyteen”, Pirkanmaan ammattikorkeakoulun julkaisusarja A. Tutkimukset ja selvitykset. Nro 3, Tampere. Kuratko D. F. (2005). “The emergence of entrepreneurship education: Development, trends, and challenges”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 29, No. 5, pp. 577-598. Laisi K. and Liimatainen I. (2004). “Ammatillisessa koulutuksessa opiskelevien nuorten yrittäjyysintentio Päijät-Hämeessä”, Pro gradu. Jyväskylän yliopisto, taloustieteiden tiedekunta. Jyväskylä. LumpkinG.T. andDessGregory G. (1996).“Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance”, Academy of Management, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 135-172. Ministry of Education (2004). “Opetusministeriön yrittäjyyskasvatuksen linjaukset ja toimenpideohjelma”, Opetusministeriön julkaisuja 2004: 18. Koulutus- ja tiedepolitiikan osasto, available online at: http://www.minedu.fi/export/sites/default/OPM/Julkaisut/2004/liitteet/opm_169_opm18.pdf?lang=fi. Ministry of Employment and the Economy (2012). “Yrittäjyyskatsaus 2012”, Työ-ja elinkeinoministeriön julkaisuja. Työ ja yrittäjyys. 46/2012. Nevanperä E. (2003). “Yrittäjyys Suupohjan opiskelijanuorten ajattelussa. Tutkimus Suupohjan seudun nuorisoasteen opiskelijoiden yrittäjyysnäkemyksistä sekä yrittäjyysopetuksen opetussuunnitelman kehittämispyrkimyksistä”, Jyväskylän yliopisto, taloustieteiden tiedekunta. Paakkunainen K. (2007). “Alkaisinko yrittäjäksi? Tutkimus nuorten yrittäjyyspoliittisista kirjoituksista ja asenteista”, Yksityisyrittäjäin Säätiö, Kerhokeskus, Koulutyön tuki ry, Nuorisotutkimusverkosto. Nuorisotutkimusseura. Pihkala J. (2008). “Ammattikorkeakoulutuksen aikaiset yrittäjyysintentioiden muutokset”, Opetusministeriön julkaisuja,Vol. 1, Koulutus- ja tiedepolitiikan osasto. Potter J. and Wetherell M. (1987). Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behaviour, London: Sage. Rantanen T., Rantanen A., Vuorinen P., Järveläinen E. and Lehtola M. A. (2013). “Nuorten yrittäjyysintoa Uudellamaalla. Tutkimus nuorten yrittäjyyshalukkuudesta, yrittäjyyskasvatuksesta sekä EER 2012—yrittäjyysvuoden vaikuttavuudesta”, Laurea Julkaisut:
879 Promotion of Youth Entrepreneurship in the Helsinki-Uusimaa Region in Finland —An Evaluation of the Impact of the Theme Year 14,Laurea-ammattikorkeakoulu,Helsinki: Edita Prima Oy. Rantanen T. andToikko T. (2012). “Young people’s attitudes towards entrepreneurship in Finnish society”, International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanity Studies, Vol. 4, No. 1. Rantanen T. and Toikko T. (2013). “Social values, societal entrepreneurship attitudes and entrepreneurial intention of young people in the Finnish welfare state”, Poznań University of Economics Review, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 7-25. Rauch A., Wiklund J., Lumpkin G. T. and Frese M. (2009). “Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 761-787. Räty H., Komulainen K. and Korhonen M. (2010). “Menestystä, kilpailua, tasa-arvoa. Vanhempien sosiaaliset tulkinnat koulun yrittäjyyskasvatuksesta”, Julkaisussa Katri Komulainen, Seija Keskitalo-Foley, Maija Korhonen & Sirpa Lappalainen (toim.) “Yrittäjyyskasvatushallintana”, Vastapaino, Jyväskylä, pp. 100-123. Small Business Act (2008). “Think small first: A ‘Small Business Act’ for Europe”, Communication from the commission to the council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 25.6.2008, COM (2008) 394 final, available online at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0394:FIN:EN:PDF. Stenholm P., Heinonen J., Kovalainen A. and Pukkinen T. (2011).“Global entrepreneurship monitor”, Finnish 2010 Report, Turku School of Economics, University of Turku, Centre for Research and Education, Series A Research Reports A1, Turku. Vesala K. M. (1996). “Yrittäjyys ja individualismi. Relationistinen linjaus”, Helsingin yliopiston sosiaalipsykologian laitoksen tutkimuksia 2/1996, Yliopisto, Helsinki. Weaver K. M., Liguori E. W., Hebert K. and Vozikis G. S. (2012). “Building leaders in secondary education: An initial evaluation of an entrepreneurial leadership development program”, Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 19-26.
880