This study aims to examine the effects of educational level on selfefficacy, perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention among Polish students in the context of industry 4.0. By collecting data from 553 Polish students at universities and colleges in Poland, author would employ the quantitative approach such as certain descriptive statistics, explorative factor analysis, correlation coefficient analysis, ANOVA test and multiple... Đề tài Hoàn thiện công tác quản trị nhân sự tại Công ty TNHH Mộc Khải Tuyên được nghiên cứu nhằm giúp công ty TNHH Mộc Khải Tuyên làm rõ được thực trạng công tác quản trị nhân sự trong công ty như thế nào từ đó đề ra các giải pháp giúp công ty hoàn thiện công tác quản trị nhân sự tốt hơn trong thời gian tới.
c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 SELF-EFFICACY, PERCEIVED BEHAVIORAL CONTROL AND ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTION AMONG POLISH STUDENTS IN THE CONTEXT OF INDUSTRY 4.0: ASSESSING THE EFFECT OF EDUCATION LEVEL Duong Cong Doanh, MBA MSc Assoc Prof Dr Nguyen Ngoc Huyen National Economics University Abstract This study aims to examine the effects of educational level on self-efficacy, perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention among Polish students in the context of industry 4.0 By collecting data from 553 Polish students at universities and colleges in Poland, author would employ the quantitative approach such as certain descriptive statistics, explorative factor analysis, correlation coefficient analysis, ANOVA test and multiple linear regressions to analyze the relationship between educational level, selfefficacy, perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention In addition, Chisquare and Cramer’s V tests are implemented to indicate the difference of educational level in entrepreneurial intention The research results show that there is a positive relationship between educational level and entrepreneurial intention, while self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control also have positive effects on entrepreneurial intention Moreover, Chi-Square and Cramer’s V test report that there is a strong evidence of educational level in entrepreneurial intention but no differences in self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention Keywords: self-efficacy, perceived behavioral control, educational level, entrepreneurial intention, Polish students Introduction The reasons why students or not intent to run their own business have interested many researchers in entrepreneurship literature (Iakowleva et al., 2014; Moriano et al., 2012; Krueguer et al., 1994; Kolvereid, 1996) Entrepreneurs play a crucial role in developing the national economy, well-being of a society (Iakowleva et al., 2014), innovation and employment (Kelley et al., 2011) Guerrero et al (2008) state that entrepreneurship is seen as an innovative and creative process, which play the potential role in creating added and new value to products/services, increasing productivity, creating new job opportunities, revitalizing and diversifying markets, improving social welfare, and developing the national economy Historically, the establishment of new market, the relationship with profit orientation and capital investment (Schumpeter, 1975) led to the beliefs of economics regarding the responsibility of entrepreneurship for economic growth (Code, 1965; Weber, 1930) Market economy in Poland was established only after 1989 As a consequence of the imposition of the Communism ideology after World War II, with the control of economy and social life modeled upon the Soviet Union, the entrepreneurship issue was not a concern Poland and many other Central European countries functioned as a 215 c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 system of centrally planned economies where the importance of profit-oriented sector was minimized as much as possible As a consequence of political and economic principles, private and profit-seeking entities were almost entirely rejected Entrepreneurship was not as common in the centrally planned system as it was the case in other market economies in Europe As mentioned in UNCTAD 2017 World Investment Report, despite FDI, Poland is among the most attractive nations in Europe FDI inflows into Poland showed a reduction of USD 2.1 billion from USD 13.5 billion in 2015 to only USD 11.4 billion in 2016 This trend reflects the global economic crisis and the economic slowdown effectuated by the Eurozone crisis of 2012-2013 According to World Bank (2017), GDP growth reached nearly 4.0% in 2017, compared to only 2.7% in 2016 However, as a result of the impact of lower economic activity in Europe and labor shortages on the domestic market, the economy in Poland is predicted to be slowing down in 2018 In addition, Industry 4.0 is seen as a chance for Polish traditional industries Indeed, the results of survey made by Boston consulting Group reported that there was high level of consciousness among Polish managers of big companies in terms of chances provided by Industry 4.0 solutions (Figure 1) However, the government should encourage them in investing in such solutions focusing on costbenefits analyses Unsolved problem in Poland is the approach and readiness to implement Industry 4.0 solutions in smaller companies Objectives of Polish managers are similar to government’s targets in connecting with implementation of Industry 4.0 solutions Coordination impact will foster transformation process and facilitate cooperation between private and public sector Figuge The results of survey made by Boston consulting Group, Poland Are you going to invest in Industry 4.0 solutions? When you plan these investments? 11% 25% 64% 18% 82% In next two years Yes No In next five years not defined yet Source: Survey by Boston consulting Group According to Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) in Poland (2017), there is an increase in the percentage of individuals finding opportunities to start up their own business in 2016 Noticeably, it is the first time in GEM research, and Poland reached a result better than the average level in EU However, the fear of failure in business was still seen as the largest obstacle in developing entrepreneurship in Poland since 48% of the Polish citizens recognize the business opportunities in the environment and not decide to start up their own business, in comparison with only 41% among the EU residents Even though the concept of entrepreneurship has become more universal in the world, almost all entrepreneurial intention studies conducted in the developed countries, in which the entrepreneurial ecosystem and the market economy has been developed 216 c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 There is lack of studies of entrepreneurship performed in the developing middle European countries, such as Poland, especially in the investigation of the effects of entrepreneurial intention studies among the students Thus, the loophole in this research needs to be fulfilled The principal objective of this study is to examine the impact of the education level on entrepreneurial self-efficacy, perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention This study also provides a useful insight of young entrepreneurs of policy makers, education managements and governments with the goal of fostering students’ entrepreneurship, developing entrepreneurial ecosystem and enhancing the business environment In addition, the author also hopes that this study will bring an interesting insight to researchers and academic staffs This study is organized in the following manner: Firstly, the theoretical background related to entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial intention, self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control and hypotheses will be introduced Secondly, the research method, research model and ways to collect data will be described Thirdly, the author will discuss the research results Finally, conclusions and recommendations for further researchers will be performed Literature review 2.1 Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneur There are many definitions for entrepreneurship developed over the few recent decades Schumpeter (1975) considered that entrepreneurs are people who create new products or services in new or existing market and entrepreneurship becomes one of the most important factors in countries’ economic growth (Schumpeter, 1975; De Bruin et al., 2006, p 686) “The environment itself creates entrepreneurship” (Bernat et al., 2016, p 271), the reason is that operating organizations have the knack for reacting quickly to unanticipated changes, but also “to adapt to unpredicted outcomes of the predicted changes” (Timmons, 1990) Kirzner (1985) defined that an entrepreneur is a person who might optimize information in such a way that we are able to discover the new and improved business opportunities Talpas (2014, p.198) consider entrepreneurship as a process that can be recognized throughout business activities by showing effective leadership within uncertain market, risks and competitive conditions, while Zimmer and Scarborough (1996, p.19) claimed that entrepreneurs can also be known as owners who, with skillful manner, are able to associate various factors of production, transforming a smaller economic resources into a bigger platform effectively and rising profits Also, Entrepreneurship is the process of creating and building new venture and new business organization (Shane, Venkataraman, 2000), that not only provides goods and services, creates job opportunities but also contribute to the development of economy and the national income Linda et al (2017) argued that “it is the process of designing, launching and running a new business”, and it also tend to some topics such as policy, government programs, entrepreneurial training, funds, and many others that does not only promote the development of starting a new business but it also supports entrepreneurs in their business activities In addition, OECD (2006) stresses that entrepreneurship is defined as a process, which entrepreneurs establish and develop 217 c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 enterprises to supply new products and services, or create additional value to products and services 2.2.Entrepreneurial intention Krueger & Brazeal (1994) has defined entrepreneurial intention as the intent to set up a new business, or the intent to be self-employed (Douglas & Shepherd, 1997) or the intent to own a business (Crant, 1996) There are many reasons such as personal circumstances, social and political issues and business environment, which might become either big obstacles or motivated factors to transform this intent becoming a reality Thus, entrepreneurial intention is perceived as an essential and fundamental condition to be a nascent entrepreneur Whereas entrepreneurship is determined as the emergent process of an organization (Gartner et al., 1992), an individual’s intention to pursue an entrepreneurial career is crucial to this process (Lee et al., 2011, p.126) Moreover, entrepreneurial intention is considered the first step in a series of action to found an organization (Bird, 1988), yet Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) argued that intentions toward a behavior can be seen as important indicators of that behavior In other words, intentions are still seen as the best predictor of individual behavior (Krueger, 2008) According to Ajzen (1991), who introduced Theory of Planned Behavior, intentions are determined by social/subjective norms and perceived behavioral control Social norms are considered individual’s perception of his or her behavior that is consistent with significant thoughts of others, while perceived behavior control is the range of the target behavior within the ability of a decision maker (Esfandiar et al., 2017) Do and Dadvari (2016) also defined entrepreneurial intention as an attentive state of mind that reflects personal experience, awareness and interest toward planned entrepreneurial activity In the context of Poland, the effects of educational level on entrepreneurial intention should be investigated H1 Entrepreneurial intention is positively affected by educational level 2.3 Self-efficacy Cognitive issues reflect individual’s knowledge and skills related to performing and operating a new venture (Baughn et al., 2006) A person’ perception of his or her capabilities of carrying out a specific action is a necessary component of motivation Desirability of creating a new business can be involved in Bandura (1986) the construction of self-efficacy Thus, self-efficacy is an individual’s judgment of his or her capability of executing a targeted behavior (Ajzen, 1987) and entrepreneurial intention might also be affected by self-efficacy factors (Bandura, 1986; Chen et al., 1998) Self-efficacy becomes a useful concept to explain human behavior and it also plays a considerable role in identifying the choice, effort level, and perseverance of individuals (Chen et al., 2004) Bandura (1997) also considered that a person who has high self-efficacy for a particular task is likely to engage and then persevere in that task than an individual who shows low self-efficacy Prior researches have seen self-efficacy as a key predictor to identify entrepreneurial intentions (Lee et al., 2011), self-efficacy either has direct effects on entrepreneurial intention or affect indirectly through 218 c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 perceived feasibility (Krueger, 1993; Krueger et al., 2000) In this study, the relationship between educational level and self-efficacy, the degree to which selfefficacy influences directly on entrepreneurial intention in the context of transitional economy in Poland will be considered H2 Entrepreneurial intention is positively affected by self-efficacy H3 Self-efficacy is positively affected by educational level H4 Perceived behavioral control is positively affected by self-efficacy 2.4 Perceived behavioral control Perceived behavioral control refers to the extent to which a personal control belief in terms of the activities being studied (Solesvik et al., 2012), while Liñán & Chen (2006, p.4) has defined perceived behavioral control as “the perception of easiness or difficulty in the fulfillment of the behavior of interest” This construct consists of not only being able to have the essential skills to run a business and achieve success (Miranda et al., 2017), but also the perception about controllability of the behavior (Liñán & Chen, 2009) Entrepreneurship research emphasizes the importance of perceived behavioral control as a mechanism for overcoming awareness of the greater technological, financial, legal uncertainties which are often related to new ventures (Obschonka et al., 2010; Silveira-Perez et al., 2016) Schaegel & Koenig (2014) consider that controllability perception has positive effect on the intention to become a founder Ajzen (1991) has divided perceived behavioral control into two components, which include the availability of resources required to conduct the behavior and the focal point of individual’s self-confidence in the capacities to perform the behavior In addition, Ajzen & Code (2008) argue that perceived behavioral control is identified by controlled beliefs involving in the availability of factors (market opportunities, resources, role models, social capitals) which might facilitate or impede performance Thus, the hypothesis is proposed to examine the influence of educational level on perceived behavioral control and the relationship between perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention as well in the context of transitional economy in Poland H5 Perceived behavioral control is positively affected by educational level H6 Entrepreneurial intention is positively affected by perceived behavioral control Methodology This study mainly focuses on investigating the effect of educational level on entrepreneurial self-efficacy, perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention among Polish students in the context of Industry 4.0 In terms of research techniques, quantitative method such as certain descriptive statistics, KMO and Bartlett test, correlational coefficient analysis and multiple regression throughout SPSS 20.0 in order to show the relationship between educational level, self-efficacy, perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention Moreover, the Chi-Square and Cramer’s V Tests are also used to illustrate the educational level difference in self-efficacy, perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention 219 c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 Even though more than 1000 questionnaires were distributed among the students at universities in Poland, only 553 students (N=553) have fulfilled completely The surveys are divided into sections, which is based on the purpose of the study, theoretical background and hypotheses In the first section, demographic questions are designed to obtain respondents’ information such as gender, age group, educational level and the willingness level to take risks In the second section, the questions are designed to allow respondents providing their viewpoint regarding self-efficacy, perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention, which based on the previous studies (Baughn et al., 2006; DeNoble et al., 1999; Liñán and Chen, 2009; Maresch et al., 2015; Liñán & Chen, 2009; Adekiya & Ibrahim, 2016) The questionnaires are based on the Liker scale with self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control (0= Strongly disagree, 1=Disagree, 2= Slightly disagree, 3= Slightly agree, 4= Agree, 5= Strongly agree) and entrepreneurial intention (1= Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree, 3= Agree, 4= Strongly agree) Figure Research framework Self-efficacy 0.055 0.103** 0.725** Educational level 0.199** Entrepreneurial intention 0.063 Perceived Behavioral Control 0.133** Results 4.1 Demographic profile Demographic information of respondents is presented in table Table Descriptive Statistics of Sample Demographics Demographic variables Age 18 - 19 years old 20-24 years old Over 24 years old Gender Male Female Education High School University/College Master Type of current Only studying professional Studying and working for a company (working) activities Studying and running own business Studying and looking for a job Note: N=553; F: Frequency; %: Percent F 92 420 41 169 384 21 395 137 110 74 360 % 16.6 75.9 7.4 30.6 69.4 3.8 71.4 24.8 19.9 13.4 1.6 65.1 Mean Std Deviation 1.9078 0.48210 1.6944 0.46108 1.2315 0.54569 3.1917 2.14243 Source: Authors’ elaborations based on research study 220 c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 The results of descriptive statistics of demographic layouts indicates the major proportion of respondents aged from 20 to 24 years old, compared to only 16.6% and 7.4% respondents who aged from 18 to 19 years old, and over 24 years old respectively However, the percentage of female respondents reaches 69.4%, which is twofold higher than that of male respondents (just 30.6%) In addition, the figure for university/college students accounts for 71.4%, followed 24.8% master students and 3.8% high school students In terms of type of current professional (working) activities, 65.1% students consider that they are studying and looking for a job, 19.9% students are only studying, 13.4% students are studying and working for a company, and only 1.6% of them are studying and running a business Figure Respondents’ willingness to take the risks Very low 9.00% Low 19.00% Neutral 44.70% High Very high 20.60% 6.70% Note: N= 553, 1= very low, 2= low, 3= neutral, 4= high and 5= very high Source: Authors’ elaborations based on research study The author also examines the willingness level to take risks among Polish students, which is represented in figure Overall, only 27.3% students believe that their willingness level to take risks are high and very high (20.6% at high level, and 6.7 % at very high) respectively However, the considerable percentage of respondents argues that their willingness levels to take risks are 44.70% neutral and 28.0 % at low and very low level 4.2 Reliability and explorative factor analysis for variables Table Reliability test and descriptive statistics for independent variables Variables, items Mean Self-efficacy (SE) (Baughn et al., 2006; DeNoble et al., 1999) SE1 I can identify potential capital sources for the venture SE2 I can develop relationship with people who connect to sources of funds SE3 I can react quickly to unexpected changes SE4 I know how to legally protect a new venture SE5 I can identify new areas for potential growth in the 221 Std Deviation Cronbach's Alpha 0.809 3.1212 1.71464 2.75016 1.48895 0.805 0.766 2.7595 3.7844 3.0814 0.776 0.796 0.791 1.43141 1.31399 1.32925 c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 future SE6 I can manage my time effectively 3.2355 1.45182 0.777 SE7 I can manage risks effectively 2.6239 1.50589 0.799 SE8 I can communicate effectively with others 2.9837 1.52466 0.788 Perceived behavioral control (PBC) (Liñán & Chen, 0.771 2009; Maresch et al., 2015) PBC1 To start a firm and keep it working would be easy 3.0271 1.37827 0.731 for me PBC2 I am prepare to start a viable firm 2.8807 1.47695 0.733 PBC3 I can control the creation process of a new firm 3.2839 1.40420 0.730 PBC4 I know the necessary practical details to start a firm 1.9186 1.69256 0.754 PBC5 I know how to develop an entrepreneurial project 2.3699 1.61031 0.757 PBC6 If I tried to start a firm, I would have a high 3.1808 1.48050 0.738 probability of succeeding PBC7 I am usually able to protect my personal interests 2.9402 1.59800 0.755 Note: N=553, 0= Strongly disagree, 1=Disagree, 2= Slightly disagree, 3= Slightly agree, 4= Agree, 5= Strongly agree Source: Authors’ elaborations based on research study Table reports that the values of Cronbach’s Alpha for independent variables such as self-efficacy (SE) and perceived behavioral control (PBC) represent for 0.809 and 0.771, which are higher than 0.7 These values are high, indicating good reliability Table Reliability test and descriptive statistics for dependent variable Variables, items Entrepreneurial intention (EI) (Liñán & Chen, 2009; Adekiya & Ibrahim, 2016) EI1 I am ready to anything to be an entrepreneur EI2 My professional goal is to become an entrepreneur EI3 I will make every effort to start and run my own firm EI4 I am determined to create a firm in the future EI5 I have very seriously thought of starting a firm EI6 I have the firm intention to start a firm someday EI7 It is my plan to start my own business within five years after graduating EI8 If I had the opportunity and resources, I’d like to start a firm EI9 I am ready to make any form of sacrifice to become an entrepreneur EI10 Among various options, I would rather be an entrepreneur Note: N=553, 1= Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree; 3= Agree, 4= Strongly agree Mean Std Cronbach's Deviation Alpha 0.785 2.0942 2.5054 2.4601 2.6467 2.5308 2.7554 2.3593 0.83384 0.83697 0.83820 0.88762 0.94252 0.88748 0.95045 0.774 0.767 0.763 0.758 0.760 0.768 0.777 2.3993 0.98734 0.762 2.8877 0.88856 0.765 2.5172 0.89604 0.772 Source: Authors’ elaborations based on research study Table shows the value of Cronbach’ Alpha for dependent variable (Entrepreneurial intention-EI), which reaches 0.785 This value is also high, thus, the reliability of scale is good 222 c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 Table KMO and Bartlett’s Test Type of variables Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy Approx Chi-Square Bartlett's Test of Sphericity df Sig Independent 0.870 3018.847 105 0.000 Dependent 0.837 1070.455 45 0.000 Source: Authors’ elaborations based on research study The results of KMO and Barlett’s Test for independent and dependent variables are introduced in table KMO and Bartlett’s test provides report on important test that the data is suitable for Factor Analysis and KMO provides a measure of whether the distribution of values in the variables is suitable The values for independent and dependent variables are 0.870 and 0.837 respectively, which are rather high Technically, as the size of sample making up 553, thus, the factor loading of EFA in this study is 0.30 The significance value of both independent and dependent variables is 0.000 which is excellent 4.3.Correlation coefficients between variables Table Correlation coefficients between variables Educational Level SE Pearson Correlation Sig (2-tailed) Pearson Correlation Sig (2-tailed) Educational Level SE 0.055 0.200 PBC PBC Pearson Correlation Sig (2-tailed) 0.063 0.140 0.725** 0.000 EI Pearson Correlation Sig (2-tailed) 0.199** 0.000 0.103* 0.016 0.133** 0.002 EI Note: N=553; *: p < 0.05, **: p , 0.01 (2-tailed) Source: Authors’ elaborations based on research study Table presents the correlation coefficients between variables including educational level, self-efficacy (SE), perceived behavioral control (PBC), and entrepreneurial intention (EI) In terms of research framework, the model focuses on examining the effect of educational level on self-efficacy, perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention The result indicates that there is a positive relationship between educational level and entrepreneurial intention (r = 0.199, p-value = 0.000) Moreover, with the lower significance level, self-efficacy (r = 0.055, p-value = 0.200) and perceived behavioral control (r = 0.063, p-value = 0.140) are positively affected by educational level Self-efficacy also has the positive effects on perceived behavioral control (r = 0.725, p-value = 0.000) and entrepreneurial intention (r = 0.103, p-value = 0.016) Finally, perceived behavioral control influences on entrepreneurial intention positively (r = 0.133, p-value = 0.002) 223 c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 4.4 Multiple Linear Regression Multiple regression are used to predict the value of entrepreneurial intention given the value of educational level, self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control Table Model summaryb Model R 0.233a R-Square 0.054 Adjusted R Square 0.09 Std Error of the Estimate 0.52627 a Predictors: (Constant), Educational Level, SE, PBC b Dependent Variables: EI According to table 6, the overall Pearson coefficient between educational level, selfefficacy (SE), perceived behavioral control (PBC) and entrepreneurial intention (EI) is provided The result shows that the multiple correlation only reach at 0.233 (R=0.233) and so the Adjust R Square is just 0.054 (Adjusted R2=0.054) which proves that only 5.4 of variation of entrepreneurial intention can be explained by the model comprised of three variables (educational level, self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control) Table ANOVAa Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square Regression 8.730 2.910 Residual 152.053 549 0.277 Total 160.783 552 a Dependent Variable: EI b Predictors: (Constant), Educational Level, SE, PBC F 10.507 Sig 0.000b Table (ANOVA) reports the significance of regression model In this study, the Sig associated with the F-Test is 0.000 which is highly significant, which confirms that the model can explain a significant amount of variation in the entrepreneurial intention Moreover, the Mean Square column also confirms that very much of the variance is explained by the Regression line than by the Residual (2.910 compared to 0.277) This reinforces the conclusion that the model is rather good Table Coefficientsa Model (Constant) Educational Level SE Unstandardized Coefficients B Std Error 2.088 0.089 0.190 0.041 0.006 0.034 0.062 0.033 Standardized Coefficients Beta 0.192 t Sig 23.454 4.609 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.865 0.170 PBC 0.113 0.061 1.879 a Dependent Variable: EI Table (Coefficients) represents the coefficients for the regression equation, which is: Entrepreneurial intention = 2.088 + 0.190* educational level + 062* perceived behavioral control + 0.006 * self-efficacy 224 c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 Particularly, the Standardized Coefficients Beta reports the contribution each variable makes to the model In this study, educational level is the most important: a variation of % in educational level would lead to a change of 19.0% in entrepreneurial intention (ߚଵ=0.190, p=0.000) Similarly, perceived behavioral control has the second strongest effect on entrepreneurial intention (ߚଶ=0.062, p=0.061> 0.005), followed by selfefficacy (ߚଷ=0.006, p=0.865> 0.005) 4.5 Chi-Square and Cramer’s V Tests Chi-Square and Cramer’s V Tests are employed to report the difference of educational level in self-efficacy, perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention Chi-Square and Cramer’s V Tests for educational level difference in entrepreneurial self-efficacy Table Chi-Square and Cramer’s V results for educational level difference in entrepreneurial self-efficacy Chi-Square Tests Symmetric Measures Value df Asymp Sig (2-sided) Value Approx Sig a Pearson Chi-Square 98.912 123 0.946 Phi 0.423 0.946 Likelihood Ratio 98.429 123 0.950 Cramer’s V 0.244 0.946 Linear-by-Linear Association 1.644 0.200 Note: N=553, a 131 cells (78.0%) have expected count less than The minimum expected count is 0.02 Source: Authors’ elaborations based on research study The Chi-Square Tests in table shows that the probability of differences this larger or larger occurring by chance is 0.946, which is higher than the normal 0.05 criterion level used (95% significance) Thus, there are no evidences of educational level difference in self-efficacy Moreover, Cramer’s V change between and 1, with referring to no association and showing the perfect association, the result in table indicates that the value is 0.423, it means that the association between the educational level and entrepreneurial self-efficacy makes up the moderate level Table 10 Chi-Square and Cramer’s V results for educational level difference in perceived behavioral control Chi-Square Tests Symmetric Measures Value df Asymp Sig (2-sided) Value Approx Sig Pearson Chi-Square 77.831a 105 0.978 Phi 0.375 0.978 Likelihood Ratio 89.636 105 0.858 Cramer’s V 0.217 0.978 Linear-by-Linear Association 2.176 0.140 Note: N=553, a 109 cells (75.70%) have expected count less than The minimum expected count is 0.02 Source: Authors’ elaborations based on research study Analogously, table 10 presents that there is no difference between educational levels in perceived behavioral control and the association is moderate (Sig = 0.978 > 0.05, φ =0.375) 225 c9a417 0b4 d8a11 b80ab1e6 c33b6675 3729 f333 dc77b9 3c2 f6 db4dded bd1 c8 f28 8660a5a6 0b51 e2074 856 f7f04b5 9e1b5b4 c3aa55 0c3 7b25 6d3 2e0d5 d6e2 4fcf3 ce9c3949fb9 4f8 3551 02f711abff4 f67aa 2615a5ff 34f9600 b62ae b9f6156e bf 1da48a c4e16 895e6 6ef5 7c4 7a331 c1d2043 7b5 df1 751d0a68 f6749 433 b18a02 b 44df15cd31 f100 6be8 9685 d2a0bca9b2d4 87129 b85 b3f4392 42457 c8 f9ba 7f4 c f0425 4b78 de97 15f304a0 5e7e3 6e497 429db7 c5d8 499 c8ac13f0dd7 4b7e f3a d0 50e81ad473dd5b0de2 83a00 4f3 3ae686 3e03e 10cb054 df6 9cd4152 d0 f7c9b0a2 91aa1bcdd1d9 f30 dd1b47b7f2 fa1e4 d28e7 1c7 7592 67e74 613e6 ddbd15 7435 c7 54a27b1 3b3 4b19 4ffaf996 f69 7d4a0 7dc719 76d0 f5a5 5a6516 9be6a e0e4 b64c4 c25a4 c369 7927 6f8a9 4e55a 755 f899 bcdbfa3 b118 2c3 8b0a4 f99 c9 cc9 4738 074 a828be5 f8 d6b4 f8 d00aa46 43d3a 0175 c68 22c2a6dd03b49030 1f0 7772 36637a b6d07 c03 8e73 ba4d6a 03d9 d95 c602 50e1a 18912 b038 52c0104 b5e6 195a4 dbb2c b75349 f6 b85e0 03a1e1 ba29 deff6d0 10d86a134 3f9 866 c20d6f0 e1a636 75b1 5b d5978 cc6b96 326d7adbd7e1 f3a5 0bae0 6ac4e e78d5b2a2 99f2b5fbae 77c3 9f9 5cc4a 550 db9 f34a8 7e6e f14 f7877a 9ff80c696 db69 75e17 0b40 d11e f9 f1dc68 f 3f016a f21 862b1055 ffdf59 81cc83 1a0c3 12c6f2fb b26 b2f9faa05 ddad048a4 5a46b1 bf1 1b2 cda1 c22 b97 cfba4f5 fcb89 bdee dff256 ddace98aa49 f85 04aa4 f 1347ba4 c11 9e44 d2db8b4 dd8 0ed1 d98e 9771 c2b7e57 f020 cd6f1e f07 989 c686e eedd49 9ed c46 b45d0dab1f3ff4a 42a03a 02e75 8872 b80e5 2bdc51 b87 d225 fe0a e02c7 f72 25874 2c4 b7ae b8e7 da20a78 54de 7b2 b53 f784a f70 b619 d695 c0a83 d3 84c29 b84ff9 d2e4a 9611 b36b8f9a d7d6e004 b5d71b1 1170 c4a9e 582b8f0 f1 b28 181622 f41 d3df3fb4 f27 c6ab8ec5 89e00 99f2e3a0 f45 b011 1d19 3f8 478d4436 b c9b3 f48 1f4 2eb c2b9 6a46e0 6345 d8dbdbbaa9b50c4b70 f0a5 b8 c7295 8d8 4f7 f0 6c7c31c5c8 e63 f8287 4cd4705 3f0 6e0a9 b2c0fcda12 9c7 81df0c2520 8a725 d6b 7b8ff5b9eeb4 b01a3a 05c76bc35 c92e 3675 f6d883d013d29b58818 65bb049 894 1d6d9 c80 1227ff9 1b95 e6958 28c605e2a e49bb61 770c794a7 4db4782 b0d2 7dc2 Table 11 Chi-Square and Cramer’s V results for educational level difference in entrepreneurial intention Chi-Square Tests Symmetric Measures Value df Asymp Sig (2-sided) Value Approx Sig Pearson Chi-Square 112.473a 84 0.021 Phi 0.451 0.021 Likelihood Ratio 96.514 84 0.165 Cramer’s V 0.260 0.021 Linear-by-Linear Association 21.941 0.000 Note: N=553, a 85 cells (73.3%) have expected count less than The minimum expected count is 0.02 Source: Authors’ elaborations based on research study Finally, the strong evidences in educational differences in entrepreneurial intention and the association is rather high (Sig = 0.021