Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers?

Previous research on the psychology of entrepreneurs found that personality traits such as locus of control failed to distinguish entrepreneurs from managers. In search of an individual characteristic that is distinctively entrepreneurial, we proposed an entrepreneurial self-efficacy construct (ESE) to predict the likelihood of an individual being an entrepreneur. ESE refers to the strength of a person’s belief that he or she is capable of successfully performing the various roles and tasks of entrepreneurship. It consists of five factors: marketing, innovation, management, risk-taking, and financial control. We conducted two studies, one on students and the other on small business executives. Study 1 found that the total ESE score differentiated entrepreneurship students from students of both management and organizational psychology, and that across the three types of students, ESE was positively related to the intention to set up one’s own business. We also found the entrepreneurship students to have higher self-efficacy in marketing, management, and financial control than the management and psychology students. In study 2, we simultaneously tested effects of ESE and locus of control on the criteria of founders vs. nonfounders of current businesses. After controlling for individual and company background variables, the effect of ESE scores was significant, but the effect of locus of control was not. More specifically, it was found that business founders had higher self-efficacy in innovation and risk-taking than did nonfounders. The results of this study demonstrate the potential of entrepreneurial self-efficacy as a distinct characteristic of the entrepreneur. From these results, some important implications can be drawn on entrepreneurial assessment, education, counseling, and community intervention. First, ESE can be used to identify reasons for entrepreneurial avoidance. There may be many individuals who shun entrepreneurial activities not because they actually lack necessary skills but because they believe they do. This is especially true for sectors of the population such as women or those minority groups who are perceived as lacking entrepreneurial traditions. Communities and individuals could benefit from identifying sources of entrepreneurial avoidance by targeting their efforts toward enhancing ESE of particular groups or individuals for specific aspects of entrepreneurship. An additional use of ESE is to identify areas of strength and weakness to assess the entrepreneurial potential of both an individual and a community. Once entrepreneurial potential is identified, resources can be channeled and more effectively used to promote entrepreneurship. Finally, diagnosis and treatment of ESE can be performed on real entrepreneurs. The entrepreneur may be completely avoiding, or performing less frequently, certain critical entrepreneurial activities because s/he lacks self-efficacy. For example, the entrepreneur may be avoiding company growth for fear of losing control. Identification and removal of self-doubt will enable the entrepreneur to be actively engaged in entrepreneurial tasks, more persistent in the face of difficulty and setbacks, and more confident in meeting challenges. Overall, ESE is a moderately stable belief and requires systematic and continuous efforts to be changed. Two broad approaches can be taken toward desired change. One is the micro-approach that directly focuses on people’s beliefs. In designing and conducting entrepreneurship courses, training institutions should not just train students in critical entrepreneurial skills and capabilities but also strengthen their entrepreneurial self-efficacy. The current state of entrepreneurship courses in most management schools may fall short in both respects. Courses focus on commonly identified management skills, but often ignore entrepreneurial skills such as innovation and risk-taking. Furthermore, the teaching of entrepreneurial skills tends to be technical, with insufficient attention paid to the cognition and belief systems of the entrepreneur. Educators should take into account entrepreneurial attitudes and perceptions when designing or assessing their course objectives. Conscious efforts could be made to enhance ESE by involving the students in “real-life” business design or community small business assistance, by inviting successful entrepreneurs to lecture, and by verbal persuasion from the instructor and renowned entrepreneurs. The second approach to enhancing ESE is to work on the environment of potential and actual entrepreneurs. According to the reciprocal causation model, the environment may affect self-efficacy not only directly but also indirectly through performance. An environment perceived to be more supportive will increase entrepreneurial self-efficacy because individuals assess their entrepreneurial capacities in reference to perceived resources, opportunities, and obstacles existing in the environment. Personal efficacy is more likely to be developed and sustained in a supportive environment than in an adverse one. A supportive environment is also more likely to breed entrepreneurial success, which in turn further enhances entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Communities can work toward creating an efficacy enhancing environment by making resources both available and visible, publicizing entrepreneurial successes, increasing the diversity of opportunities, and avoiding policies that create real or perceived obstacles.