entrepreneurial literacy: empirical evidence · pdf file ·...

1

Entrepreneurial Literacy: Empirical Evidence

Andreas Oehler*

Chair of Finance, Bamberg University, Germany

[email protected]

Tel.: +49 951 863 2537

Fax: +49 951 863 2538

Andreas Höfer

Department of Finance, Bamberg University, Germany

[email protected]

Henrik Schalkowski

Department of Finance, Bamberg University, Germany

[email protected]

Abstract

In this paper we examine the current state of entrepreneurial literacy among potential business founders. By

analyzing a unique data set which comprises responses of N=386 undergraduate students we find evidence that

potential business founders evaluate schools’ imparting of relevant knowledge for entrepreneurs as rather

moderate. Consistent with evidence in the literature, understanding in the areas of finance, accounting, and

management accounting as well as corporate planning and management is considered to be momentous for

entrepreneurs. Since, however, subjects assess their know-how with respect to these categories as well as

professional, social and personal competences as merely averagely we can infer an obvious gap between

subjects’ actual perceived expertise and the knowledge in the aforementioned fields that is considered to be

momentousness for business founders. Based on our findings on the current state of entrepreneurial literacy we

convey implications for different stakeholders.

Key Words: Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneur Competencies and Skills, Literacy, Financial

Literacy

* Corresponding author

2

1 Introduction

Policy makers in the United States and in Europe regard entrepreneurship as a driving

force to boost economic growth and innovation. Studies in the extant literature show that in an

environment of more sophisticated entrepreneurial activities greater economic development

and exposure is obtained (Rosa et al., 1996; Acs et al. 1999; Bruyat and Julien, 2001; Lee and

Wong, 2007; Blenker et al. 2006). In fact, major reasons for failure of business start-ups range

from inconsistent management accounting, funding gaps and indecisive leadership to

insufficient market adjustment as well as tax and law-related aspects (Bradley and Cowdey,

2004; Kearney, 2009). Policy makers therefore attempt to promote entrepreneurship at the

macro level through education as they believe that a greater understanding is likely to create

more adept entrepreneurs. In the last few decades intensified research on literacy in general

and financial literacy in particular has been conducted to explore people’s level of knowledge

in terms of, e.g., financial decision-making and the interconnection to wealth accumulation or

retirement planning (Lusardi and Mitchell, 2011). Research on entrepreneurial literacy which

is associated with the structured imparting of knowledge at universities and at other research

institutions has been widely left unsought.1

It is foremost our motivation to holistically analyze the level of relevant knowledge

that potential business founders, such as students, have obtained to draw inferences on the

extant of entrepreneurial literacy. Hereby we examine a unique data set which is not biased by

program-specific effects. We give attention to subjects’ understanding of aspects that play a

crucial role in business start-up in order to identify specific gaps in entrepreneurial literacy

and relevant professional, social and personal competences. Based on these findings on the

status quo of entrepreneurial literacy in Germany we convey implications that are relevant for

1 Note that there is no single definition of entrepreneurial literacy or literacy (Scribner 1984) and since the terms

entrepreneurial literacy and entrepreneurial education are often used synonymously, in the course of this paper

entrepreneurial literacy is regarded as structural knowledge that is relevant when someone is setting up a

company.

http://dict.leo.org/ende?lp=ende&p=ziiQA&search=synonymously&trestr=0x8004

3

certain stakeholders (policy makers, private educational institutions and potential

entrepreneurs).

In this paper we find that potential business founders evaluate schools’ imparting of

relevant knowledge for entrepreneurs as being moderate. Furthermore, understanding in the

areas of finance, accounting, and management accounting as well as corporate planning and

management is considered to be momentous for entrepreneurs. Since, however, subjects

assess their know-how with respect to these categories as merely averagely we can infer an

obvious gap between subjects’ actual perceived expertise and the knowledge in relevant fields

that is considered to be momentousness for business founders. Interestingly, a similar pattern

applies in the case of professional competences which involve specialized expertise and

proficiency. In our sample a surprisingly large share of students (more than 40% of subjects in

our sample) aspires to become entrepreneurs in the future.

The paper is organized as follows: the next section includes an overview of related

literature and provides a critical discussion on findings with respect to financial and

entrepreneurial literacy. Section 3 introduces the data and methodology used in this research

while Section 4 outlines and discusses the results and presents implications for relevant

stakeholders. Section 5 concludes.

2 Related Research on Entrepreneurial Literacy

In general, company founders are confronted with a variety of tasks in which a certain

understanding is crucial – for instance with respect to numeric skills and competences in

management and leadership. Findings from the extant literature show that insufficient

knowledge, in particular in the areas of finance and management accounting, is a major

reason for corporate crises or insolvencies (Bradley and Cowdey, 2004; Kearney, 2009). Thus

far, however, scholars have analyzed several data sets globally in which causal relationships

between educational efforts on high school or university and entrepreneurial activities are

4

presented (Matlay, 2008). Hereby, certain longitudinal and cross-sectional studies suggest a

positive relationship between entrepreneurial education and self-employment, whereas other

studies present contrarian findings (Lee and Wong, 2008). It is prevalently argued that

entrepreneurship education on secondary schools or universities does not match the respective

needs of potential company founders (Thompson et al., 2010). From a methodological point

of view many studies emphasize on class-room questionnaires or experiments where

typologies of potential entrepreneurs are stressed. For instance, Raposo et al. (2008) examine

entrepreneurs' characteristics and the general knowledge of the potential business founders.

However, most questionnaires that have been used and designed fail to address critical

questions and relevant implications. That is, studies in the extant literature focus on certain

(interdisciplinary) educational programs and analyze subjects’ overall level of knowledge

before and after the respective class. As a rather general level of knowledge is tested for, it

remains undiscovered whether potential company founders’ knowledge lacks in the field of,

e.g., finance, accounting, management accounting, taxation, or law. Therefore, detailed

evidence on the level of entrepreneurial literacy with inferences on the imparting of

knowledge on common education institutions is scarce. A major explanation for this

limitation is that a substantial fraction of surveys evaluates very specific educational programs

and initiatives by examining program-related data. For instance, many studies present

coincident evidence which suggests that educational attainment is positively related with

entrepreneurial activities (Dickson et al., 2008). On the contrary, van der Sluis et al. (2004)

and Le (1999) discuss an inverse relationship by arguing that the well-educated ones are

likely to attain high paid wage employment in countries with sound economic opportunities.2

As many studies use data from very specific programs or initiatives questions in particular

with regard to external validity arise. Furthermore, it is difficult to draw conclusions upon

2 In addition, further work presents a non-linear relationship between the level of literacy and selection into

entrepreneurship (Minniti et al., 2004; Neck et al., 2003; Dickson et al., 2008).

5

causality between the educational program and literacy and between literacy and

entrepreneurial activities.

3 Data and Methodology

In November and December 2011 we conducted an empirical study to analyze in-

depth the current state of entrepreneurial literacy among students. That is, we carried out a

survey with N=386 business administration undergraduate students of the Bamberg

University, Germany by using a standardized questionnaire with primarily closed-ended

questions. We carefully designed the questionnaire by taking findings of the extant literature

into account and, for instance, set defaults, introduced consistency and unambiguous

questions. By following this approach we obtain a unique data set that allows deep insights

into the status quo of entrepreneurial literacy among potential business founders. Furthermore,

as we handed out the questionnaire at the beginning of the academic turn, the data is not

biased by lecture-related aspects. The original questionnaire is written in German, an English

translation is attached in the appendix. In addition to general questions with regard to the

personal environment and knowledge (Questions 1-15), subjects were asked to evaluate the

transfer of competences and the imparting of knowledge in certain fields (e.g. finance,

accounting, human resource management, etc.) by the organization that students attended

before starting their studies (Questions 16 and 19). Furthermore, subjects assessed their

individual knowledge as well as the momentousness of competences for business founders

and subjects’ understanding in relevant areas (e.g., Questions 17, 19, 20, 21). In the latter part

of the questionnaire accumulated needs with regard to educational institutions and areas of

expertise are stressed (Questions 22, 23). We conduct our empirical analysis as follows:

Firstly, we compute the median values of the aforementioned questions of interest and report

the respective significance levels by applying Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney-tests. In the case of a

significant Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney-test, it is very likely that the samples represent

6

populations with statistically different median values. This approach is chosen as we deal with

ordinal data. The questionnaire’s response options range from 0 (No) to 1 (Yes), from 1 to 5

(1=very important, 2=important, 3=neutral, 4=rather not important, 5=not important) or from

1 to 5 (1=very good, 2=good, 3=satisfactory, 4=fair, 5=insufficient). The latter system is

consistent with the grading scheme at German universities. Secondly, in order to gain a

deeper insight into subjects’ response pattern we report Spearman’s rank correlation

coefficients. Spearman's correlation provides a measure of a monotonic relationship between

two items and can be used with ordinal data and is – contrary to Pearson's correlation – robust

to outliers. By following this approach, we can describe the relationship between the assessed

items more thoroughly.

4 Results

4.1 Descriptive Statistics

Our respondents are undergraduates who are on average 22 years old and who study

business administration in the third semester. The gender distribution is counterbalanced

between male (50.7%) and female students (49.3%). Roughly 93% of the students graduated

from secondary school before starting directly with academic studies whereas the remaining

students have obtained an advanced technical college entrance qualification to study at

university or have already completed other studies. With regard to a regular number of six

semesters needed to complete a course, the majority of subjects is in the third term which

approves the average age of 22. One-third of the students (34.2%) even gained professional

experience during internships and commercial traineeships before starting their studies.

Interestingly, a fractional amount (almost 4%) of the students in our data set is self-employed,

mostly in sales (1.1%) and events (0.9%). Most students are acquainted with people who are

self-employed, especially in the personal and family environment, for example parents

(35.4%) or friends (31.2%).

http://dict.leo.org/ende?lp=ende&p=ziiQA&search=college&trestr=0x8001

http://dict.leo.org/ende?lp=ende&p=ziiQA&search=qualification&trestr=0x8001

7

Merely 38.5% of the respondents read up about business foundation by using

information sources like news & reports (32.4%), information in school (25.7%), and

information at universities (19.7%). Almost one third (32.4%) of the respondents look into the

subject on their own. It is interesting to note that subjects self-evaluate their knowledge on

issues that are relevant for entrepreneurs on average as rather poor. Moreover, 42.7% of the

students report that the prior education on issues that are relevant for entrepreneurs was rather

diminutively.

4.2 Results and Discussion

Table 1 provides an overview of results which indicate the gap between subjects’

actual perceived expertise and the knowledge in relevant fields that is considered to be

momentousness for business founders. This inference can be drawn as students assess their

own knowledge in the areas of finance, accounting and auditing, corporate planning and

management, management accounting, marketing, human resource management, basic law,

fiscal and economic issues as merely satisfactory (Question 21).3 In contrast, the students

evaluate knowledge in these fields as very important or important, respectively (Question 20).

In addition, these findings become even more relevant when the transfer of knowledge on

secondary schools is evaluated. Thereby, subjects evaluate the imparting of know-how that is

relevant for business founders as merely fair (Question 19).

[Insert Table 1 here]

Table 2 (Panel A) displays in detail our findings on students’ assessment of the

imparting of relevant knowledge. Thereby, in all relevant areas the transfer of knowledge on

secondary schools is assessed as rather moderately. Merely the transfer of know-how with

3 These fields are chosen as findings in the extant literature show that insufficient knowledge of founders in these

areas is likely to result in corporate crisis or even insolvencies (Bradley and Cowdey, 2004; Kearney, 2009).

8

regard to economic aspects is evaluated as satisfactory. Furthermore, tests of equality clarify

this picture as many median values with respect to finance, accounting and auditing, corporate

planning and management, management accounting, marketing, and human resource

management are not significantly different to each other. This also indicates a rather

homogeneous response pattern with regard to these areas of competences. With respect to

these findings it is obvious that secondary schools are considered to fall short of transferring

relevant knowledge for business founders.

Table 2 (Panel B) reports Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients. By evaluating the

results substantially greater coefficients in primarily quantitative areas such as finance,

accounting and auditing as well as corporate planning and management and management

accounting become obvious. This indicates that subjects, who assess the transfer of

knowledge on educational institutions with respect to e.g. finance as rather unsatisfactory,

tend to evaluate the aforementioned numeracy-related fields in a similar manner. A possible

explanation for this finding can be that these areas of competences are taught in one subject at

school, possibly even by the same teacher.


In contrast to the previous results, when subjects are asked to evaluate their own

knowledge with regard to the aforementioned categories, a different picture becomes obvious

(see Table 3, Panel A). Generally, in all management and law-related fields and in those

where numeric skills are crucial, the median values are at least one grade higher compared

with the previous question. Furthermore, Table 3 (Panel A) exhibits that most median values

with regard to Question 21 are statistically different to each other. This indicates that the

responses with respect to the areas of competences are rather independent to each other. The

above findings show that subjects evaluate their knowledge in these categories higher than the

9

respective transfer of knowledge on secondary schools. In this respect, one explanation can be

that due to further academic education and the time that has been passed since completing

school, subjects’ consider their knowledge to be superior.

Table 3 (Panel B) exhibits a higher correlation among numeracy-related fields and a

higher correlation between fiscal aspects and law issues. As these areas are based

predominantly on hard facts, subjects who believe to have competences in judicial issues

(law, regulation) tend to evaluate their knowledge in finance, accounting and corporate

planning in a similar manner. As the latter are closely related we can figure that our overall

results are likely to be plausible (robustness). Most interestingly, subjects’ knowledge in

quantitative fields such as finance tends to be unrelated with knowledge in creative areas

including marketing and human resource management.


In order to draw inferences on entrepreneurial literacy the students were asked to

evaluate the importance of knowledge in the aforementioned nine categories for business

founders (see Table 4, Panel A). In fact, the students evaluate knowledge in these fields as

very important or important, respectively. As the most median values are statistically different

to each other indicates that student’s responses with respect to the areas of competences are

rather independent to each other.

Table 4 (Panel B) emphasizes that quantitative areas tend to exhibit greater correlation

coefficients, indicating that subjects who find competences in finance as important tend to

evaluate knowledge in accounting and auditing or management accounting as rather important

as well. A potential explanation for this observation is likely to be subjects’ specialization

towards certain fields of expertise (e.g. numeracy-related fields such as finance, corporate

planning and management accounting). This specialization process begins sometimes already

10

in school. Intensified by the Bologna Process in Europe, students are directed to emphasize

on certain fields of competences at an early stage. For this reason specialized education

pushes broader education aside. In addition, when correlation tests between quantitative and

those areas that require creatively and strategically thinking – such as human resource

management or marketing – are conducted, lower correlation coefficients are obtained. This

indicates that subjects’ evaluation on the importance of knowledge in quantitative fields, in

particular in finance and corporate planning and management, tends not to be related with the

perceptions on the importance of knowledge in, for instance, marketing or human resource

management.


The findings of our analysis contribute to the discussion on entrepreneurial literacy

because we have gained an insight into the level of subjects’ understanding in the relevant

areas as well as subjects’ assessment of momentousness of know-how in these crucial areas

for business founders. In detail, understanding in the categories finance, tax, and corporate

planning and management are considered as most relevant which is consistent with results in

the extant literature (Bradley and Cowdey, 2004). As subjects, however, evaluate their

individual knowledge merely as satisfactory, there is an obvious gap between relevant know-

how and the actual expertise in the fields of finance, tax and corporate planning and

management. That is, we can infer that subjects regard themselves in terms of these three

categories as not to be literate enough to start a business. A similar but less strong picture can

be observed for the further six categories. These findings indicate very clearly the existing

lack of entrepreneurial literacy which is a result of the difference between subjects’ individual

assessment of understanding and their evaluation of importance of relevant disciplines. In

sum, these findings contribute to the extant literature because the respective gap in literacy in

11

the aforementioned areas becomes clearly obvious. Additionally, on average subjects indicate

that in particularly schools and universities should catch up in entrepreneurial education in

general and the areas finance, management accounting as well as issues on taxation in

particular.

An identical response pattern can be observed when professional, social and personal

competences are examined. Table 5 exhibits an overview of the results which indicate that

schools’ imparting of knowledge on professional competence which involves expertise and

proficiency is evaluated on average as satisfactory whereas the transfer of social and personal

competences is evaluated as good (see Question 16). Although the students finished their

schooldays on average one and a half years ago, a similar picture comes to light when they

appraise their individual competences. Particularly, the professional competences are assessed

to be merely satisfactory whereas social and personal competences are regarded more

positively (see Question 18). As these two competences are associated with soft skills such as

the ability to work in teams, self-motivation, capability of conflict management, self-

dependence or one’s own initiative, subjects are more prone to regard themselves more

positively (Oskamp, 1965; Camerer and Lovallo, 1999). In terms of literacy, an interesting

finding comes to light when students’ evaluation of their own competences and the respective

momentousness of these competences (see Question 17) for entrepreneurs are examined

altogether. Particularly, Table 5 displays that the students appraise their individual skills and

abilities in terms of the competences that they regard to be important for entrepreneurs rather

moderately. Thus, it is likely that the subjects believe that they do not possess the relevant

skills to become business founders.4

Note that the above presented findings even hold when sub-samples are formed. That

is, we divided the entire sample into 1) founder and non-founder, 2) students who aspire to

4 With respect to the three competences that are stressed in Questions 16-18 Spearman’s rank correlation

coefficients were also computed (but are not reported in detail). Interestingly, subjects’ that evaluate the transfer

of social competences on secondary schools as good tend to exhibit an identical response pattern towards

personal competences.

12

become self-employed and those who do not or 3) female and males. It is interesting to note

that the results show merely marginal variations and no distinct effects (e.g. gender effects).


4.3 Implications

Generally, entrepreneurial literacy is relevant for many stakeholders, e.g. policy

makers, private educational institutions, public educational institutions, creditor investors or

potential entrepreneurs. However, we focus on policy makers, private educational institutions

and potential entrepreneurs because they are most affected by the implications that are based

upon our findings.

As formers and regulators, policy makers are responsible for – and have an interest in

– a sound business environment. From their perspective the findings on the expectations of

potential business founders are interesting with respect to political planning in future. The

answer pattern shows that 55.7% of the students do not have the objective to start a business,

whereas a high stake of 44.3% aspires to become self-employed. In reference to the first

group of students policy makers shall attempt to inform students as potential founders in

principle (e.g. road shows at high-schools and universities; internet portals; advertising) to

raise the attention to the issue. With regard to the second group of students that aims to

become self-employed, policy makers can support potential founders more elaborately, for

example by facilitating consulting activities, providing a wide range of information, launching

subvention funds or issuing other grants.

From the perspective of private educational institutions the findings on both students’

understanding of the topic and their motivation to become self-employed highlight the interest

in more information and superior education. Thereby, potentially more literate business

founders can be formed. Beyond the interest in more information there is a demand for

13

education that can be accommodated by private educational institutions. These aspects are

highly relevant as they point out the potential for the business model of private educational

institutions. Hence, this stakeholder is able to organize and adjust future educational programs

or enlarge current programs in form and content. By taking findings from our study into

account, private educational institutions should focus to assist potential entrepreneurs with

professional competences, particularly in fields where numeric skills are required.

In the view of potential entrepreneurs’, literacy is a crucial pillar of success. If they are

endowed with more literacy, further decisions are made intentionally as a result of more and

superior information. That is, they are more likely aware of the individual strengths and

weaknesses and are potentially able to assess the prospective success of a business.

5 Conclusion

Policy makers are aware of the momentousness that entrepreneurial activities play to

stimulate economic growth and innovation in national economies. In order to analyze the

current state of entrepreneurial literacy we examine a unique data set which is not biased by

program-specific effects. We examine subjects’ understanding of aspects that play a crucial

role in business start-up in order to identify specific gaps in entrepreneurial literacy and

relevant professional, social and personal competences. Based on our findings on the current

state of entrepreneurial literacy in Germany we convey implications that are relevant for

certain stakeholders.

In this paper we find that potential business founders evaluate schools’ imparting of

relevant knowledge for entrepreneurs as rather moderate. Furthermore, understanding in the

areas of finance, accounting, and management accounting as well as corporate planning and

management is considered to be momentous for entrepreneurs. Since, however, subjects

assess their know-how with respect to these categories as merely averagely we can infer an

obvious gap between subjects’ actual perceived expertise and the knowledge in relevant fields

14

that is considered to be momentousness for business founders. Another remarkable finding is

that an identical pattern applies in the case of professional competences which involve

specialized expertise and proficiency. In our sample a surprisingly large share of students

(more than 40% of subjects in our sample) aspire to become entrepreneurs in the future.

Therefore, their assessment of the transfer of knowledge and competences on institutions and

their self-evaluation in these fields clearly highlight the gap in entrepreneurial literacy. It

should therefore be policy makers’ objective that business founders have a more advanced

understanding in crucial areas in order to become more sophisticated entrepreneurs.

Further research is required in several facets. First, data sets should be extended by

students who will be finishing their studies shortly (advanced undergraduate students) in order

to measure their (individual) development, experiences and expectations. Second, research on

entrepreneurial literacy can be ameliorated by studies on founders who have already started

up their business lately (Early-Stage). Thereby, practical inferences on an adequately designed

and structured education for entrepreneurs can be drawn.

15

Fields of Competences

Appendix

Table 1: Overview of Results on Questions 19 - 21

Median Values

Finance

Accounting

and Auditing

Corporate Planning and

Management

Management

Accounting Marketing

Human Resource

Management

Basic Law Issues,

particularly

Legal Forms

Fiscal Aspects, Subventions,

Subsidies

Economic

Aspects

Assessment of Education in the following Areas at the Institution

that was attended before starting Bachelors studies (Question 19) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3

Importance of Knowledge in the following Areas of Expertise for

Start-ups (Question 20) 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2

Assessment of own Knowledge in the following Areas of

Expertise (Question 21) 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 3

In this Table median values from Questions 19, 20 and 21 are reported. The response option for Questions 19 and 21 range from 1 to 5 (1=very good, 2=good, 3=satisfactory, 4=fair, 5=insufficient). The response option for Question 20 ranges from 1 to 5 (1=very important, 2=important, 3=neutral, 4=rather not important, 5=not important).

Questions

16

Table 2: Assessment of Education at the Institution that was attended before starting Bachelors studies (Question 19)

Panel A

Tests of Equality

Fields of

Competences Finance

Accounting

and Auditing


Management

Management


Human Resource

Management

Basic Law Issues,

particularly

Legal Forms

Fiscal Aspects,

Subventions,

Subsidies

Economic

Aspects

Median Values 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3

Finance ** *** *** ***

Accounting and

Auditing *** ** *** *** ***

Corporate

Planning and Management

*** *** ***

Management

Accounting *** * ***

Marketing ** *** ***

Human Resource

Management *** * ***

Basic Law Issues, particularly Legal

Forms

*** **

Fiscal Aspects,

Subventions, Subsidies

***

Economic Aspects

The symbols ***, **, and * denote significance at the one, five, and ten percent level, respectively.

Panel B

In this Panel we report Spearman's rank correlation coefficients for the pairwise comparison of the students' assessment of the quality of education in the

given fields of competences at the institution that was attended before starting bachelor studies. All correlation coefficients are significant at the one percent. level.

Fields of

Competences Finance

Accounting

and Auditing


Management

Management


Human Resource

Management

Basic Law Issues,

particularly

Legal Forms

Fiscal Aspects,

Subventions,

Subsidies

Economic

Aspects

Finance 0.72 0.71 0.72 0.56 0.58 0.51 0.53 0.50

Accounting and Auditing

0.70 0.80 0.58 0.58 0.52 0.44 0.51

Corporate


0.78 0.64 0.66 0.53 0.57 0.45

Management

Accounting 0.66 0.61 0.48 0.51 0.46

Marketing 0.76 0.50 0.47 0.47

Human Resource

Management 0.50 0.49 0.45

Basic Law Issues,

particularly Legal Forms

0.57 0.53

Fiscal Aspects,

Subventions,

Subsidies

0.47

Economic Aspects

17

Table 3: Assessment of own Knowledge (Question 21)

Panel A

Tests of Equality

Fields of Competences Finance


Corporate

Planning and

Management

Management Accounting

Marketing

Human

Resource

Management

Basic Law

Issues, particularly

Legal Forms

Fiscal

Aspects, Subventions,

Subsidies

Economic Aspects

Median Values 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 3

Finance *** *** *** *** *** ***


*** *** *** ** *** *** ***

Corporate

Planning and

Management

* *** *** *** *** ***

Management

Accounting *** *** ** *** ***

Marketing *** *** ***

Human Resource

Management *** *** ***

Basic Law Issues,


***

Fiscal Aspects, Subventions,

Subsidies

***

Economic Aspects


Panel B

In this Panel we report Spearman's rank correlation coefficients for the pairwise comparison of the students' assessment of their own knowledge in the given

fields of competences. All correlation coefficients are significant at least at the five percent level.

Fields of Competences

Finance Accounting

and Auditing

Corporate

Planning and

Management


Marketing

Human

Resource

Management

Basic Law

Issues,


Fiscal

Aspects,


Economic Aspects

Finance 0.32 0.49 0.44 0.12 0.15 0.24 0.34 0.25

Accounting and

Auditing 0.31 0.33 0.16 0.18 0.34 0.21 0.30


Management

0.47 0.26 0.29 0.31 0.41 0.29


0.16 0.12 0.29 0.29 0.15

Marketing 0.49 0.12 0.12 0.22

Human Resource

Management 0.18 0.20 0.20

Basic Law Issues,


0.43 0.32

Fiscal Aspects,

Subventions,

Subsidies

0.23

Economic Aspects

18

Table 4: Importance of Knowledge (Question 20)

Panel A

Tests of Equality

Fields of Competences Finance


Corporate

Planning and

Management


Marketing

Human

Resource

Management

Basic Law

Issues, particularly

Legal Forms

Fiscal

Aspects, Subventions,

Subsidies

Economic Aspects

Median Values 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2

Finance *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***


*** *** *** ***

Corporate

Planning and

Management

*** *** *** *** *** ***

Management

Accounting *** ** ** ***

Marketing ** ***

Human Resource Management

* ***

Basic Law Issues,


***

Fiscal Aspects,


***

Economic Aspects


Panel B

In this Panel we report Spearman's rank correlation coefficients for the pairwise comparison of the students' assessment with regard to the importance of

knowledge in the given fields of competences. All correlation coefficients are significant at least at the one percent level.

Fields of

Competences Finance

Accounting

and Auditing

Corporate


Management


Human

Resource Management

Basic Law Issues,

particularly

Legal Forms

Fiscal Aspects,

Subventions,

Subsidies

Economic

Aspects

Finance 0.34 0.36 0.35 0.19 0.10 0.27 0.21 0.16


0.32 0.42 0.14 0.22 0.37 0.31 0.30


Management

0.41 0.21 0.31 0.29 0.31 0.25

Management

Accounting 0.36 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.35

Marketing 0.39 0.26 0.25 0.34

Human Resource Management

0.20 0.18 0.37

Basic Law Issues,

particularly Legal

Forms

0.57 0.36

Fiscal Aspects,

Subventions,

Subsidies

0.34

Economic Aspects

19

Questions Competences

Table 5: Overview of Results on Professional, Social and Personal Competences (Questions 16-18)

Median Values Test of Equality

Professional

Competence Social Competence Personal Competences 1 vs. 2 1 vs. 3 2 vs. 3

Assessment of the Transfer of Competences by the Institution that was

attended before starting Bachelor studies

(Question 16)

3 2 2 *** ***

Importance of the following Competences

(Question 17) 1 1 1 *** *** ***

Assessment of own Competences

(Question 18) 3 2 2 *** *** ***

In this Table median values from Questions 16, 17 and 18 are reported. The response option for Questions 16 and 18 range from 1 to 5 (1=very good, 2=good, 3=satisfactory,

4=fair, 5=insufficient). The response option for Question 17 ranges from 1 to 5 (1=very important, 2=important, 3=neutral, 4=rather not important, 5=not important). The symbols ***, **, and * denote significance at the one, five, and ten percent level, respectively.

20

Entrepreneurial Literacy

1) Your age: Years ___

2) Your gender: Female Male

3) Your highest academic qualification:

University of applied sciences/ Technical college

University-Entrance Diploma

Academic Qualification (if so, which degree: __________________)

Others __________________

4) Where have you graduated and received your currently highest degree?

State __________________ Region / Geographical area __________________

5) Semesters of Study: ___ Major: ____________________

6) Do you have any working experience (also apprenticeship)?

No Yes

If so, which business / job / in which apprenticeship? __________________

7) Are there any self-employed persons (freelancer, tradesman, self-employed persons)

in your personal environment?

Yourself

Parents

Brothers and sisters

Spouse

Friends

Others __________________

Nobody

8) Have you already found a corporation/business/firm?

No Yes

If so, which branch? __________________

9) Have you already dealt with “entrepreneurial literacy“ in the past?

No Yes

If so, where or how?

Current news, coverage in the press

Topics at School

Topics at University

Seminar at adult education center

Research on your own

Others __________________

10) How do you assess your knowledge with regard to this topic?

Very

good

Poor

Knowledge concerning “entrepreneurial literacy” o o o o o

21

11) Are you interested in more detailed information?

No Yes

12) Do you aspire to become self-employed (as a freelancer, tradesman or self-employed person)

during your career/working life?

No Yes

13) In which institution of education should entrepreneurship literacy be taught?

School

University of applied sciences / Technical college

Cooperative State University

University

Adult education center

Institutions, e.g., consumer organizations, foundations __________________

Others __________________

14) Do you know any (academic) institutions that offer further trainings/qualifications?

No Yes

If so, which? __________________

15) What part has entrepreneurial literacy taken during your entire education (quantitative and

qualitative)?

High

part

No

part

Part of entrepreneurship literacy o o o o o

16) How do you assess the transfer of competence by the organization you visited BEFORE your

Bachelors program?

Very

good

Poor

Professional competences (know-how, expertise)

o o o o o

Social competences (teamwork, motivation etc.) o o o o o

Personal competences (one’s own initiative, self-

dependence, goal orientation etc.)

o o o o o

Others: __________________

o o o o o

17) How important are the following competences for founders of a new business/start-ups?

Very

impor-

tant

Not

impor-

tant


o o o o o




o o o o o

Others: __________________

o o o o o

22

18) How do you assess your own competences?

Very

good

Poor


o o o o o




o o o o o

Others: __________________

o o o o o

19) How do you assess the education in the following areas of expertise by the organization you

visited BEFORE your Bachelors program?

Very

good

Poor

Finance o o o o o

Accounting and Auditing o o o o o

Corporate Planning and Management o o o o o

Management Accounting o o o o o

Marketing o o o o o

Human Resource Management o o o o o

Basic Law Issues, particularly Legal Forms o o o o o

Fiscal Aspects, Subventions, Subsidies o o o o o

Economic Aspects o o o o o

Others: __________________

o o o o o

20) How important is knowledge in the following areas of expertise for start-ups?

Very

impor-

tant

Not

impor-

tant

Finance o o o o o




Marketing o o o o o





Others: __________________

o o o o o

23

21) How do you assess your own knowledge concerning these areas of expertise?

Very

good

Poor

Finance o o o o o




Marketing o o o o o





Others: __________________

o o o o o

22) In which institutions do you see accumulated needs in entrepreneurship education?

High Low

Schools o o o o o

Cooperative State University o o o o o

University of applied sciences/ Technical college o o o o o

University (Bachelor) o o o o o

Adult education center o o o o o

Institutions, e.g., consumer organizations, foundations

__________________

o o o o o

Others: __________________

o o o o o

23) In which areas of expertise do you see accumulated needs in entrepreneurship education?

High Low

Finance o o o o o




Marketing o o o o o





Others: __________________

o o o o o

Thank you for your support and cooperation!

24

Bibliography

Acs, Z., Dana, L. and Jones, M., (1999) “Toward New Horizons: The Internationalisation of

Entrepreneurship”, Vol.1, No. 1, pp. 5-12.

Bayer, P. J., Bernheim, B. D. and Scholz, J.K. (1996), “The Effects of Financial Education in the

Workplace: Evidence from a Survey of Employery, “ NBER Working Papers 5655, National

Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

Bernheim, B. D., Garett, D. M. and Maki, D. M. (2001), “Education and Saving: The Long-Term

Effects of High School Financial Curriculum Mandates”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol.

80, No. 3, pp. 435-65.

Blenker, P., Dreisler, P. and Kjeldsen, J. (2006) “Entrepreneurship Education: The New Challenge

Facing the Universities: A Framework for Understanding and Development of

Entrepreneurial University Communities”.

Bradley, D. B. and Cowdey, C. (2004), “Small Buisiness: Causes of Bankruptcy“, University of

Central Arkansas.

Bruyat, C., Julien, P. A (2001), “Defining the field of Research in Entrepreneurship”, Journal of

Business Venturing 16, No. 2., pp. 165-180.

Camerer, C. and Lovallo, D. (1999) "Overconfidence and Excess Entry: An Experimental

Approach", The American Economic Review, Vol. 89, (1.), pp. 306-318.

Dickson, P, Solomon, G. and Weaver, K. (2008) "Entrepreneurial selection and success: does

education matter?", Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 15 ( 2), pp.

239 – 258.

Duflo, E. and Saez, E. (2003), “The Role of Information And Social Interactions In Retirement Plan

Decisions: Evidence From A Randomized Experiment”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics,

118, pp. 815-42.

25

Hilgert, M., Hogarth, J. and Beverly, S. (2003), “Household financial management: the connection

between knowledge and behaviour”. Federal Reserve Bulletin, 89, pp. 309-322.

Kearney, M.-L. (2009), Higher Education, Research and Knowledge 2001-2009 Higher Education,

Research and Innovation, in Lynn, M., Teichler, U., Kearney, M.-L. (eds), Higher Education,

Research and Innovation: Changing Dynamics. Kassel: UNESCO Forum on Higher

Education.

Lee, L. and Wong, P. K. (2003), “Attitude towards entrepreneurship education and new venture

creation“, Journal of Enterprising Cultur, Vol. 18, No.3, pp. 339-57.

Le, A. T. (1999), “Empirical studies of self-employment”, Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 13,

No. 4, pp. 381-416.

Lusardi, A. and Mitchell, O. (2009), “How Ordinary Consumers Make Complex Economics

Decisions: financial Literacy and Retirement Readness”. NBR Working Paper No. 15350.

Lusardi, A. and Mitchell, O. (2011) “Financial literacy and planning: implications for retirement

wellbeing, forthcoming”, in Lusardi, A. and Mitchell, O. (eds), Financial Literacy:

Implications for Retirement Security and the Financial Marketplace. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, forthcoming.

Martin, M. (2007), “A Literature Review on the Effectiveness of Financial Education”, Working

Paper 07-03, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.

Matlay, H. (2008) "The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial Outcomes",

Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 382-96.

Minniti, M. and Bygrave, W. (2001), “Global Entrepreneurship Monitor”, Kauffman Center for

Entrepreneurial Leadership, Kansas City, MO.

Neck, H. M., Zacharakis, A. L. Bygrave, W. D. and Reynolds, P. D. (2003), “Global

Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2002 Executive Report”, Babson College, Babson MA.

26

Oskamp, S. (1965) “Overconfidence in case-study judgments“, Journal of Consulting Psychology,

Vol 29 (3), pp. 261-265.

Raposo, M., Paco, A. And Ferreira, J. (2008) “Entrepreneur's profile: a taxonomy of attribu tes and

motivations of university students“, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development,

Vol. 15 (2), pp.405 – 418.

Rosa, P., Carter, S. and Hamilton, D. (1996), “Gender As a Determinant of Small Business

Performance: Insights From a British Study“, Small Business Economics, Vol. 8, pp. 463-

478.

Scribner, S. (1984), “Literacy in three metaphors“. In Kintgen, E.R. , Kroll, B.M and Rose, M. (eds),

Perspectives on literacy (pp. 71-81). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Sorensen, J. B. and Chang, P. M. (2006), “Determinants of Successful Entrepreneurship: A Review

of the Recent Literature”.

Thompson, P., Jones-Evans, D. and Kwon, C. (2010) “Education and entrepreneurial activity: A

comparison of White and South Asian Men“, International Small Business Journal, Vol.

28 (2) pp. 147-162.

Van Rooij, M., Lusardie, A. and Alessie, R. (2007), “Financial Literacy and Stock Market

Participation”, NBR Working paper 13565.

Yoong, J. K. and Hung, A. (2010), “Survey And Experimental Evidence on Financial Advice and

Behavior Change”, Working Paper.

entrepreneurial literacy: empirical evidence · pdf file ·...

Documents