AN EXAMINATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN

EMPLOYEES’ ENTREPRENEURIAL ATTITUDES AND

OPPORTUNITY RECOGNITION

Ms. Nor Nazeranah Omar Din1

Senior Lecturer, Department of Management & Marketing, Faculty of Business, Nilai
University, Nilai
No 1, Persiaran Universiti, Putra Nilai, 71800 Nilai, Negeri Sembilan,
Malaysia.
nornazeranah@nilai.edu.my
+60176829201

Rachelle Guizella Salva-Blas2

Deputy Programme Leader – School of Extension Studies and Evening Programme,
Olympia College,
Pan Global Building, Jalan Tandang, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia
rachelleguizellablas@yahoo.com
+60172761235

Md. Shuhel Miah, PhD Candidate3

University Kuala Lumpur
Jalan Gurney, kampung Datuk Keramat, 54000, Kuala Lumpur
Wilayan Persekutuan Kuala
Lumpurmd.shuhel@gmail.com
+60142870126

Paper presented to the

ASIAN CONFERENCE ON ENTREPRENEURSHIP (ACE 2018)
22 & 23 March 2018
Nilai Springs Resort Hotel
PT 4770, Nilai Springs, 71800 Putra Nilai, Negeri Sembilan
Malaysia
ABSTRACT
Background:
In an innovation-driven country like Malaysia, many entrepreneurial people are
working as employees in MNC’s (Multi-National Companies) or SME (Small-Medium
Enterprise) and pursuing opportunities as corporate entrepreneurs. In this changing
environment, an employee’s ability to recognize opportunities can provide a
competitive advantage towards a sustainable development. This research will focus on
the employees opportunity recognition linked with their entrepreneurial attitudes.
Purpose
The aim of this research study is to examine the relationship between employee’s
entrepreneurial attitudes and their ability to recognize opportunities, resulting to
creation of competitive advantage to the company - leading to company growth. It also
aims to understand how entrepreneurial attitude affects the performance of SME’s in
Malaysia. From a business standpoint, it will help corporate leaders understand the
need of encouraging employees’ entrepreneurial initiatives.
Design/methodology/approach
To study the relationship between employees’ entrepreneurial attitudes and opportunity
recognition, we have chosen qualitative approach to address the aims of the study and
provide complex textual descriptions. In-depth semi-structured questionnaire were
carried out to interview 50 sustainable entrepreneurs based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
mainly from manufacturing and service industries. Data were analyzed by means of
thematic analysis.
Findings
As Patzelt and Shepherd (2011) proposed in “A Model of Recognition of Sustainable
Development Opportunities”, the findings of this research indicate that sustainable
entrepreneurs are influenced in their opportunity recognition by their entrepreneurial
attitudes and knowledge such as motivation, knowledge of the natural/communal
environment and Innovation. Furthermore, this research found that socialization
enhance entrepreneur’s knowledge of environments while prior jobs create
entrepreneurial knowledge.

Originality/value
2
Although the literature has explored various backgrounds that influence opportunity
recognition, there is limited empirical research that has examined the linkage between
employees’ entrepreneurial opportunity recognition and potential outcome variables.
The process of entrepreneurial opportunity recognition is being viewed as “black box”.
Patzelt and Shepherd’s (2011) model has been tested in which this paper makes major
contributions to the literature on sustainable entrepreneurship which is a stepping stone
for further theory development on sustainable opportunity recognition.
Research limitations/implications
Individual characteristics and traits cannot fully explain the entrepreneurial opportunity
recognition process because the data were limited to SME’s. Future studies need to
validate these findings in other industries.
Findings of this study suggest that to increase employees’ innovation performance, it is
critical for SME’s to invest in developing and enhancing employees’ entrepreneurial
opportunity recognition ability.
Keywords:
Competitive advantage, entrepreneurial attitude, innovation-driven, opportunity
recognition, sustainable entrepreneurship.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Entrepreneurship is the “capacity and willingness to develop, design, organize, launch

and manage a new business venture, which is often initially a small business, along
with any of its risks in order to make a profit” (Yetisen, et. al, 2015) .
Entrepreneurship contributes to the economic development of a nation as it boosts the
economic development of a nation by increasing per capita output and income of the
territory (Linan, Rodriguez-Cohard, & Rueda-Cantuche, 2005). Entrepreneurial spirit
is an essential part of a nation’s ability to succeed in an ever changing and increasingly
competitive local and global marketplace.

According to Short, Moss and Lumpkin (2010), “without an opportunity there is no

entrepreneurship”. Consequently, “opportunity recognition is widely seen as a key step
3
of the entrepreneurial process” (Baron, 2006). To understand why some people
succeeded in recognizing opportunities while others do not, Entrepreneurship is gaining
importance as an academic field. The most important ability of successful
entrepreneurs is identification of opportunities (Ardichvili, et. al, 2003).

In the Malaysian scene, entrepreneurship has taken the central stage playing an
important role as a vital economic contributor to the Malaysian economy towards the
higher value chain. The primary catalyst for economic growth is recognizing the role
of an entrepreneur. The SME Annual Report 20016 reveals that SMEs accounted for
97.3% of total business establishments while the contribution of the SME sector to
Malaysia’s real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was 32.7%. SMEs have also
contributed significantly to employment, providing jobs for over 5.6 million workers
and were accounted for 56% of total employment (SME Annual Report 2013).

For over the past 20 years, creative industries and new ventures are increasingly
contributing to global economy. The “new creative industries embody a new form of
economic sectors which promote social inclusion, cultural diversification, revenue
creation, trade and innovation trough producing economic and employment benefits in
related services and manufacturing sectors”(DCMS, 2001; Creative Economy Report
2010).

Not all business start-ups were successful and managed to survive. This study aims to
understand how entrepreneurial attitude affects the opportunity recognition of
employees of SME’s in Malaysia. The result of this study can serve as a reference for
relevant researchers to better align their efforts in enhancing entrepreneurial
performance.

1.1 Background of Study

Entrepreneurship is a potential means to maintain and promote competitive advantages
and innovation performance (De Carolis & Saparito, 2006).

In an innovation-driven country like Malaysia, many entrepreneurial people are

working as employees in MNC’s (Multi-National Companies) or SME (Small-Medium
Enterprise) and pursuing opportunities as corporate entrepreneurs. In this changing
4
environment, an employee’s ability to recognize opportunities can provide a
competitive advantage towards a sustainable development. This research will focus on
the employees opportunity recognition linked with their entrepreneurial attitudes.
This study defines entrepreneurial opportunity recognition as a process where
individuals identify and discover potential opportunities to create and develop new
business ventures. Insights and ability to recognize profitable opportunities may enable
an individual to see and exploit potential industrial opportunities that other competitors
are not aware of.

1.2 Problem Statement

According to Adcroft, et. al. (2004), the process of entrepreneurial opportunity
recognition has long been viewed as a “black box” despite the rise of entrepreneurial
recognition as a core construct and independent research area. There is a considerable
disagreement among scholars regarding how individuals recognized opportunities and
scholars have drawn upon different disciplines to create theoretical frameworks to
explain the nature and process of entrepreneurial opportunity recognition.

In the entrepreneurial opportunity recognition literature, its background covered a wide

range of factors. However, this research merely put stress on discussing the employee
individual factors including entrepreneurial attitudes and knowledge such as
motivation, knowledge of the natural/communal environment and Innovation.

This study has made a unique contribution by investigating employees’ entrepreneurial

attitudes that affect their entrepreneurial opportunity recognition. Entrepreneurial
opportunity recognition is viewed as a dependent variable.

1.3 Research Objective

The aim of this research study is to examine the relationship between employee’s
entrepreneurial attitudes and their ability to recognize opportunities, resulting to
creation of competitive advantage to the company - leading to company growth.

It also aims to understand how entrepreneurial attitude affects the performance of

SME’s in Malaysia. From a business standpoint, it will help corporate leaders
understand the need of encouraging employees’ entrepreneurial initiatives.
5
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

According to Baron (2006), Entrepreneurship is “a process model describing

entrepreneurs to create and operate viable new companies through vigorous application
of their ideas, skills, knowledge and talent. (Baron, 2006). While, Shane and
Venkataraman (2000), viewed entrepreneurship as the “study of by whom, how and
what affects opportunities to create future goods and services are discovered, evaluated
and exploited” (Shane, et.al, 2000).

Entrepreneurial attitude and opportunity recognition are interrelated in a way that

entrepreneurial opportunity recognition is rooted in the entrepreneurship literature.
Before a business venture can be launched, an aspiring entrepreneur needs first to spot,
evaluate and act on seen opportunities which are viable. Therefore, it is important that
opportunity recognition cannot be underestimated where goods and services including
the unique organizing methods are introduced and to be sold at a profit later (Davidsson,
Per, and Benson Honig, 2003).

It is a vital entrepreneur’s skill to recognize and select the right opportunities for new
venture. Recognizing high potential opportunities can lead to considerable gains in
profit, growth and competitive positioning. No entrepreneurs succeeds in every
business venture. A successful entrepreneur fails at least once and how they learn from
and utilize such failures is what matters because in entrepreneurship attitude is
everything.

Undoubtedly, entrepreneurial attitudes plays important roles in opportunity recognition.

Although there were extensive research carried out on relation between entrepreneurial
attitude and opportunity recognition, there was however, little discussion which covers
adequately which entrepreneurial attitudes leads to opportunity recognition.

Attitudes, according to Fishbein and Azjen (1957) are “learned predisposition to

respond in a consistently favorable and unfavorable manner with respect to a given

6
object.” It reflects the individual’s global positive or negative evaluations of performing
a particular behaviour.

Many researches have been conducted to determine entrepreneurial attitude. Robinson,

Stimpson, Huefner, & Hunt (1991), viewed that entrepreneurial attitude can be
explained by the multilateral model which examines attitudes in different dimensions
such as affective, cognitive, and behavioural.
 Affective  associated with feelings about an object which involves values and
emotions.
 Cognitive  non-criteria beliefs and thoughts of a person toward an attitude.
 Behavioural  habitual behaviour patterns derived from the past and as
inclination and predisposition to act in a certain direction (Robinson, et. al.,
1991).

Taken together, entrepreneurial attitudes can be well established by the following major
factors towards successful venture.
1. Adopting to change  being open minded for everything especially on new
business ideas, place, technologies, and people.
2. Innovative  According to Feeny and Rogers (2003), innovation can be defined
in five different ways:
 Develop new product or change existing products qualitatively
 Developing new methodology for an existing industry area.
 Opening new market.
 Developing new supplies for raw materials and other inputs.
 Changes in the organization (Feeny & Rogers, 2003)
3. Drive and courage  will and courage to take extreme risk to do whatever it
takes to turn his/her concept into reality and not only bring it to market, but
make it a viable product and/or service that people want or need. An individual
must not be afraid of failure.
4. Decision making in time  should be wise enough to decide what and when to
do and at the same time, plan things an organized way.
5. Ethical  adopt and follow business ethics, and a role model.

7
 6. Motive to pursue self-employment  motivated to become self-employed with
the strength of his abilities and attitudes to elements provided by
entrepreneurship like autonomy, risk, work effort, income and net prerequisites.
7. Management, leadership and interpersonal skills  basic skills to hire others,
develop a vision and inspire employees, and ability to establish and maintain
positive relationships with customers, employees, financial lenders, investors,
lawyers and accountants.
8. Positive attitudes  high degree of motivation, energy and capacity to push
ahead, and head & heart qualities. These will help an individual to stay
optimistic under tough conditions. Imbibing optimistic behaviour will help a
person exhibit the drive and energy to progress towards realization of goals.

Opportunity recognition is difficult to define. Various researchers attempted to give

its meaning in various ways and they all differ. In principle, it is the discovery of an
idea to create new business and the search for information regarding market and
technological possibilities (Ozgen, 2003). It also means “identifying the potential for
new profit through the founding and formation of a new business venture or significant
enhancement of an existing venture” (Christensen & Peterson, 1990). Furthermore,
Shane (2000) proposes that prior knowledge adds significant insights to better
opportunity recognition.

Based on the aforementioned, it is the person’s one’s unique motivation, prior

knowledge and social networks that may distinguish entrepreneurial opportunity
recognition. Therefore, it is vital to investigate outcome variable at the individual level.
In recognition of the above theory, an initial framework emerges as shown below:

Prior
Knowledege

Social
Motivation
Networks

Opportunity
Recognition

8
Underlying the motivation to behave entrepreneurially is the strengths of the
individual’s abilities and attitudes toward elements provided by entrepreneurship which
include autonomy, risk, effort, income and other prerequisites. According to
McClelland (1961), an individual that possesses this need is said to be inclined in
exploratory efforts and be able to become a successful entrepreneur. This is the same
characteristics as self-satisfaction, readiness to face challenges, and the freedom in
determining the amount of effort needed to succeed as an entrepreneur. (McClelland,
1961).

“Prior knowledge refers to an individual’s distinctive information about a particular

subject matter which may be a result of work experience” (Gimeno, et. al., 1997),
education or other means (Shane, 2000). With the stock of information and knowledge
gained through life experiences, opportunity recognition is related to their available
information.

Past research strongly suggests that the increase of likelihood for opportunity
recognition is attributed to:
 Prior knowledge provides an absorptive ability to facilitate gaining of additional
information about markets, production processes and technologies;
 Stock of information influences the person’s abilities to see solutions when
encountering problems (Yu, 2009).

Venkatamaran (1997), stressed that “each person’s distinctive prior knowledge creates
a knowledge corridor that allows the entrepreneur to recognize certain opportunities but
not others.” With increased knowledge, individuals become increasingly more efficient
in their task and more intuitive during the decision process (Venkatamaran, 1997).

In addition, Singh, et. al., (1999), highlighted that “social networking was a very
important source of information in discovering opportunities.” Qing (2009), also stated
in his review that half of the business opportunity is recognized from social network
with which 62% come from business associates, friends, and family.

9
A Baron (2006), further explains that there are three factors that play a role in
entrepreneurial opportunity recognition:
1. Engaging in an active search for opportunities;
2. Alertness to opportunities;
3. Prior knowledge of a market, industry, or customers.

He further explains that many studies indicate that access to appropriate information
plays a key role in opportunity recognition, as further agreed by Ozgen & Sanderson
(2006) that exposure to information is significantly related to opportunity recognition
(Baron, 2006; Ozgen & Sanderson, 2006).

Over the years, social networks has been one of the key forerunners to entrepreneurial
opportunity recognition since entrepreneurial activities do not exist in a vacuum, rather
it is embedded in cultural and social context which facilitates entrepreneurial process
by linkages among entrepreneurs, resources and opportunities (Singh, 1998.)

According to Ozgen (2003), through social network, an entrepreneur gains access to

support information and assistance while revealing how individuals are connected to
each other.

Studies have shown that networks are associated with the number of new opportunities
an entrepreneur perceives and depending on the network which they are embedded in.
According to earlier studies, “the quantity and nature of the social ties are the major
source of information and ideas” (Granovetter, 1973).

Additionally, Patzelt and Shepherd (2011), proposed that the key determinants for
sustainable opportunity recognition are knowledge of the natural/social environment,
perception of threats of the natural/social environment and altruism towards others.

Knowledge of the natural/social environment (e.g., biodiversity, ecosystems, and

sources of soil) and social knowledge (e.g. culture, health, life expectancy) influences
the identification of sustainable opportunities. Therefore, a promising entrepreneur
needs awareness for sustainable development. (Lourenço, 2012) In particular, an
aspiring entrepreneur needs to increase his knowledge of the natural environment by
10
conducting his own research into sustainable building before launching his firm. At the
same time, knowledge of social difficulties and problems in a community can be a
source for the identification of sustainable opportunities (Nga, & Shamuganathan,
2010).

The entrepreneurs’ perception of threat to the natural/social environment is positively

associated with the identification of sustainable opportunities. Thus, when an
individual perceives natural resource degradation, pollution, loss of biodiversity, and
threatened physical and psychological well-being, they can direct their attention
towards sustaining the natural/social environment and take a defensive posture
(Munasinghe, 2003).

Altruism towards others is the individual’s motivation to enhance the welfare of other
people without self-interest. An altruist is generally generous and kind. The feeling of
empathy and sympathy for other people motivates a person to improve the welfare of
the individuals in need. He understands their sorrows and be motivated to help them
by attending to opportunities that may change their situation, triggering the
identification of sustainable opportunities (Hoffman, 1981; Simpson & Willer, 2008).

The above theories can be viewed in the figure below:

Figure 1:

Source: Patzelt and Shepherd (2011)

11
The process of discovering opportunities depends on individual ability and willingness
to discover such (Stevenson and Gumpert, 1985). Only those who recognize the
existence of opportunities and value them can then earn profits from these new
opportunities. Under circumstances of information lopsidedness, only individuals with
special insight and knowledge to recognize entrepreneurial opportunities will succeed,
while others only see the risk of failure (Ulhøi, 2005).

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Sampling and Data collection

To study the causal relationship between employees’ entrepreneurial attitudes and
opportunity recognition, we have chosen qualitative approach to address the aims of the
study and provide complex textual descriptions. In-depth semi-structured questionnaire
were carried out to interview 50 sustainable entrepreneurs based in Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia, mainly from manufacturing and service industries. Data were analyzed by
means of thematic analysis.

The survey was undertaken with 10 questions for analyzing characteristics of an

entrepreneur in terms of Organization and Personal Information, and 32 questions for
analyzing the relationship between employees’ entrepreneurial attitudes and
opportunity recognition. Data were analyzed by means of thematic analysis.

3.2 Data analysis

To analyze the data, descriptive statistics on sample are obtained based on their 7
demographic characteristics (Gender, Age, Marital Status, Educational Qualification,
Current Occupation, Working Experience (years), Manufacturing Firm or Service
Industries).

In this research, tables are constructed to disseminate data collected in the survey made
which involves minimum data processing and analysis. Certain amount of data are
provided as absolute frequencies of observations that made it difficult to discern the
main differences. In this case where more analytical reports focused on the relationships
between entrepreneurial attitudes and opportunity recognition are prepared, additional
12
processing and analysis are developed where the differences between respondents by
gender become visible.

In this qualitative research, only a sample of 30 from the 50 respondents are selected
using quota sampling. The criteria we choose allow us to focus on people we think
would be most likely to experience, know about, or have insights into the research topic.

This study opted for a qualitative research technique with a face-to-face structured
interview approach to have a firsthand knowledge of the respondents' feelings,
perceptions and opinions about entrepreneurial attitudes in relation to their opportunity
recognition. This study used the structured questions which we called questionnaire
guide. The essence of the questionnaire guide was to have a clear and apparent focus
and call for an explicit answer.

The interviews were conducted once and only for 15 minutes for each interview and
these were then transcribed, coded and analyzed to drive the key themes on
entrepreneurial attitudes which are associated with opportunity recognition.

The descriptive analysis of data involves the calculation of simple measures of

composition and the distribution of variables by gender, out of which, it facilitates
straightforward comparisons between different groups of population. The measures
may be in proportions, rates, ratios or average, depending upon the type of data. In the
case of sample survey made, measures of association between the variables presented
are used to decide whether the differences observed are statistically significant or not.
The above mentioned indicators are used to specify how differently one group performs
by comparison to a reference group.
1. Number of respondents by gender

13
The chart above depicts that the male respondents outnumbered the fe male respondents
which males represented 58%, while females accounted for 42 % of the study
population. This indicates that there are more female respondents because of the nature
of the study which demands more of a masculine strength and understanding.

ii. Number of respondents by age

iii. Number of respondents by marital status

iv. Number of respondents by educational qualifications

14
 v. Number of respondents by current occupation

vi. Number of respondents by age

4.0 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

From the interviews, the entrepreneurial attitudes were identified. Our major objective
is to link entrepreneurial attitude to opportunity recognition. From the interviews
conducted, it was indicated that sustainable entrepreneurs are influenced in their
opportunity recognition by their entrepreneurial attitudes and knowledge, motivation,
and knowledge of the natural/communal environment. These attitudes have been the
most frequently highlighted attitudes of the participants.

Ninety-two percent of the respondents reported that they recognize entrepreneurial

opportunities, because of the attitudes and knowledge they have as they excel at

15
identifying opportunities, confident that they would succeed if they started their own
business, personally consider entrepreneurship to be a highly desirable career
alternative for people with my education, it would be easy for them to start their own
business as nothing is more exciting than seeing their ideas turn into reality, enjoy
facing and overcoming obstacles to their ideas and all of them prefer to be an
entrepreneur, rather than a large firm employee.

Similarly, this is also consistent with interviewees who mentioned that in recognizing
entrepreneurial opportunities, an individual should feel that starting own business
sounds attractive to them, have the skills and capabilities required to succeed as an
entrepreneur and to start own company would probably be the best way for them to
take advantage of their education.

Moreover, seventy-eight percent strongly agrees that employee motivation has a great
impact on opportunity recognition as they primarily believe that the below factors are
the prime motivators:
1. Extrinsic motivation (Salary, Monetary Incentives and Compensation Package) is a
dominating factor in recognizing entrepreneurial opportunity.
2. Job enrichment and performance appraisal is a very important psychological
motivating factor.
3. Work environment motivates employees to improve performance.
4. Responsibilities motivate employees to recognize entrepreneurial opportunities.
5. Relationships and security is also a dominating factor for motivating employees.
6. Authority to make decision motivates employees to recognize entrepreneurial
opportunities.

Motivation and innovation provides an additional explanation beyond knowledge for

why some individuals recognize meaningful patterns in their environment that
constitute entrepreneurial opportunities and others do not (cf. Baron & Ensley, 2006;
Shane, Locke, &Collins, 2003).

Apart from the above, respondents believe that there is an impact of knowledge of the
natural/communal environment on opportunity recognition. The same 78% strongly
agrees and the remaining 22% still agrees that an aspiring entrepreneur must be familiar
16
and well adept on issues on environmental sustainability towards the pursuit of
economic values. They further believe that manager’s personal values influence
decisions that entrepreneur’ assessment of the attractiveness of opportunities. As well
as, an Entrepreneurial self-efficacy is a pro-environmental values, management’s
beliefs regarding the employee value and advisability of entrepreneurial actions
influences opportunity recognition and perception of threat and motivation of altruism
on natural/ communal environment encourages opportunity recognition.

Therefore, entrepreneurs with knowledge of the natural and communal environment are
likely to focus their attention on those environments, thus discovering opportunities that
sustain them. Recognizing sustainable development opportunities requires that
entrepreneurs go beyond personal economic gain as suggested by the literature on the
recognition of opportunities (Baron & Ensley, 2006; Kirzner, 1979).

Lastly, respondents believe that innovation influences entrepreneurial opportunity

recognition. Eighty-four percent of the respondents strongly agree that:
1. Innovation is the key factor that will help Malaysia to move towards smart,
sustainable, inclusive growth, and along the way to tackle its pressing societal
challenges
2. Entrepreneurial creativity influences entrepreneurs’ ability to create new venture.
3. The heart of new venture creation in creative industries are the creative entrepreneurs.
4. Creative industries entail high market uncertainty and common oversupply of
creative products and services.
5. Innovation represents entrepreneurs’ ability to identify potential market niche and
consumer preference.
6. Innovation is the ability to retrieve environmental resources necessary for converting
creative ideas and identified opportunities into feasible business initiatives.

In addition, Patzelt and Shepherd model hypothesizes that perceived personal threats
and altruism can explain why some individuals, more than others, recognize sustainable
entrepreneurial opportunities. Personal threat is a motivation for “necessity
entrepreneurship,” which refers to entrepreneurial action responding to threats toward
individual economic well-being (Hendrickson, 2005; Ho & Wong, 2007).

17
The findings from this study have relevance for entrepreneurs, educators, managers,
and human resource professionals. Entrepreneurial attitudes towards entrepreneurial
opportunity recognition have become more important in the modern business world,
which has encouraged many colleges, universities and governmental agencies to
develop and extend programs and curriculum to include knowledge around
entrepreneurship education (Adcroft et al., 2004; Binks et al., 2006).

5.0 CONCLUSION
This article adds to the entrepreneurial attitudes and opportunity recognition literature
by emphasizing how entrepreneurial attitudes and knowledge of the natural/communal
environment, motivation and innovation are important antecedent to the recognition of
opportunities.

This study investigates how the entrepreneurial attitude is relevant to opportunity

recognition. It demonstrates how the issue of entrepreneurial opportunity recognition
might be better understood by providing more insight. Our qualitative analysis result
reveals that sustainable entrepreneurs are influenced in their opportunity recognition by
their entrepreneurial attitudes and knowledge, motivation, and knowledge of the
natural/communal environment.

Overall, our findings revealed that entrepreneurial attitudes and knowledge, motivation,
and knowledge of the natural/communal environment are very significant for the
recognition of entrepreneurial opportunities which is also relevant from a practical
standpoint since it would provide some useful guidelines for prospective entrepreneurs,
educators in the field of entrepreneurship development, university authorities and the
policy-makers in which the attitudes and knowledge can be improved toward making
their entrepreneurial opportunities a reality.

The findings would also assist in enhancing the entrepreneurship educational

programmes in any universities. It is being suggested that further studies on
entrepreneurial attitudes and knowledge, should be replicated in business environments
or settings in order to further validate the findings of this study.
18
6.0 REFERENCES
 Adcroft, A., Willis, R. and Dhaliwal, S. (2004), “Missing the point? Management
education and entrepreneurship”, Management. Decision, Vol. 42 Nos. 3/4, pp. 512-
21.
 AK Yetisen; LR Volpatti; AF Coskun; S Cho; E Kamrani; H Butt; A
Khademhos\\seini; SH Yun (2015). "Entrepreneurship". Lab Chip. 15 (18): 3638–
3660.
 Ardichvili, A., R. Cardozo and S. Ray, 2003. A theory of entrepreneurial opportunity
identification and development. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(1): 105–123.
 Baron, R.A. & Ensley, M.D. (2006). Opportunity recognition as the detection of
meaningful patterns: Evidence from comparisons of novice and experienced
entrepreneurs. Management Science,52, 1331–1344
 Baron, R.A. (2007). Entrepreneurship: A process perspective. In J.R. Baum, M. Frese,
and R. A. Baron (Eds.), The psychology of entrepreneurship. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum. pp: 19-39.
 Baron, Robert A. (2006) “Opportunity Recognition as Pattern Recognition: How
Entrepreneurs ‘Connect the Dots’ to Identify New Business Opportunities.” Academy
of Management Journal 20.1: 104–119.
 Binks, M., Starkey, K. and Mahon, C.L. (2006), “Entrepreneurship and the business
school”, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 1-18.
 Christensen, P. S., & Peterson, R. (1990). Opportunity identification: mapping the
sources of new venture ideas, in Proceedings of 10th Annual Babson Entrepreneurship
Research Conference, Aarhus University Institute of Management, Denmark.
 Davidsson, Per, and Benson Honig. (2003) “The Role of Social and Human Capital
among Nascent Entrepreneurs.” Journal of Business Venturing 18.3: 301–331.
 DCMS (2001). Creative Industries Mapping Document. London: DCMS.
 De Carolis, D.M. and Saparito, P. (2006), “Social capital, cognition, and
entrepreneurial opportunities: a theoretical framework”, Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 41-56.
 Department of Statistics Malaysia 2013, SME Annual Report 2013, Malaysia.
 Feeny, S. and Rogers, M, 2003, “Innovation and Performance: Australian Firms”, The
Australian Economic Review, vol. 36, no. 3, pp.253-64.
 Gimeno, Javier et al. (1997) “Survival of the Fittest ? Human Entrepreneurial Capital
and the Persistence of Firms Underperforming.” Administrative Science Quarterly
42.4: 750–783.

19
 Granovetter, Mark. (1973)“The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of
Socialogy 78.6: 1360–1380.
 Henrekson, M. (2005). Entrepreneurship: A weak link in the welfare state? Industrial
and Corporate Change,14, 437–467.
 HKU (2010). The Entrepreneurial Dimension of the Cultural and Creative Industries.
Netherlands: Hogeschool voor de Kunsten.
 Ho, Y.-P. & Wong, P.-K. (2007). Financing, regulatory costs and entrepreneurial
propensity. Small Business Economics, 28, 187–204.
 Hoffman, M.L. (1981) Is altruism part of human nature? Journal on Personal, Social,
and Psychology. 40, 121–137.
 Kirzner, I. (1979). Perception, opportunity and profit. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
 Leadbeater, C., & Oakley, K. (1999). The Independents: Britain's new cultural
entrepreneurs. Demos.
 Linan, F, Rodriguez-Cohard, JC & Rueda-Cantuche, J M 2005, ‘Factors affecting
entrepreneurial intention levels’, in 45th Congress of the European Regional Science
Association, Amsterdam.
 Lourenço, F. (2012) Promoting sustainable development: The role of entrepreneurship
education. Int. Small Bus. J. 841–865
 McClelland, D. C. (1961). The achieving society. Reinhold: Princeton.
 Munasinghe, M. (2003) Analysing the Nexus of Sustainable Development and Climate
Change: An Overview; OECD, Munasinghe Institute for Development (MIND):
Colombo, Sri Lanka.
 Nga, J.K.H.; Shamuganathan, G. (2010) The influence of personality traits and
demographic factors on social entrepreneurship start up intentions. J. Bus. Ethics, 95,
259–282.
 Ozgen, E., & Sanderson, S. (2006). Do Men And Women Entrepreneurs Differ In Their
Reliance On Sources Of Information In Opportunity Recognition In Technical Fields?
Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(2), 47-65.
 Ozgen, Eren. (2003) “Entrepreneurial Opportunity Recognition: Information Flow,
Social and Cognitive Perspectives.”
 Patzelt, H.; Shepherd, D.A. (2011). Recognizing opportunities for sustainable
development. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice.
 Qing, M. (2009). The Nature of Opportunity Recognition in the Entrepreneurship of
SMEs.
http://www.seiofbluemountain.com/upload/product/200911/2006zxqyhy16a8.pdf

20
 Rae, D. (2007). Creative Industries in the UK: cultural diffusion or discontinuity.
Entrepreneurship in the Creative Industries: An International Perspective, Edward
Elgar, 54-71.
 Review, Vol. 63 No. 2, pp. 85-94.
 Robinson, P. B., Stimpson, D. V., Huefner, J. C., & Hunt, H. K. (1991). An attitude
approach to the prediction of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,
15(4), 13-31.
 Rodgers, C. (2010) Sustainable entrepreneurship in SMEs: A case study analysis.
Corporate Social Responsibility Environment Management. 17, 125–132
 Shane, S., Locke, E.A., & Collins, C.J. (2003). Entrepreneurial motivation. Human
Resource ManagementReview,13, 257–279.
 Shane, Scott, and Sankaran Venkataraman. (2000) “The Promise of Entrepreneurship
as a Field Entrepreneurship.” Academy of Management Review 25.1: 217–226.
 Shane, Scott. (2000) “Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial
Opportunities.” Organization Science 11.4: 448–469.
 Short, J.C., T. Moss and G.T. Lumpkin, 2010. The concept of opportunity in
entrepreneurship research: Past accomplishments and future challenges. Journal of
Management, 36(1): 40-65
 Simpson, B.; Willer, R. (2008) Altruism and indirect reciprocity: The interaction of
person and situation on prosocial behaviour.
 Singh, Robert Paul. (1998) “Entrepreneurial Opportunity Recognition through Social
Networks.” N. p.
 Stevenson, H.H. and Gumpert, D.E. (1985), “The heart of entrepreneurship”, Harvard
Business
 Ucbasaran, Deniz, Paul Westhead, and Mike Wright. (2009) “The Extent and Nature
of Opportunity Identification by Experienced Entrepreneurs.” Journal of Business
Venturing 24.2: 99–115.
 Ulhøi, J.P. (2005), “The social dimension of entrepreneurship”, Technovation, Vol. 25,
pp. 939-46.
 United Nations (2010). Creative Economy Report 2010. Geneva: United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development.
 Venkataraman, Sankaran. (1997) “The Distinctive Domain of Entrepreneurship
Research.” Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth 3: 119–138.
 Yu, Fu-lai Tony. (2009) “Towards a Structural Model of a Small Family Business in
Taiwan.” Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship 4.4: 413–428.

21
22
APPENDICES
Gender Age Marital Status Educational Qualification Current Occupation Working Experience Department
No Post- Service >5 years but above 10
Participants Male Female 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 above 40 Single Married Separated Divorced Education Primary Secondary Tertiary Graduate Others Manufacturing Company <3 years 3-5 years < 10 years years
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Admi ni s tra ti ve
2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ope ra ti on
3 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ope ra ti on
4 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ope ra ti on
5 1 1 1 1 1 1 Admi ni s tra ti ve
6 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma rke ti ng
7 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma rke ti ng
8 1 1 1 1 1 1 Admi ni s tra ti ve
9 1 1 1 1 1 1 Admi ni s tra ti ve
10 1 1 1 1 1 1 Accounti ng
11 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fi na nce
12 1 1 1 1 1 1 Purcha s i ng
13 1 1 1 1 1 1 Purcha s i ng
14 1 1 1 1 1 1 Admi ni s tra ti ve
15 1 1 1 1 1 1 Admi ni s tra ti ve
16 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma rke ti ng
17 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma rke ti ng
18 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma rke ti ng
19 1 1 1 1 1 1 HR
20 1 1 1 1 1 1 HR
21 1 1 1 1 1 1 HR
22 1 1 1 1 1 1 Admi ni s tra ti ve
23 1 1 1 1 1 1 Accounti ng
24 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ope ra ti on
25 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ope ra ti on
26 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ope ra ti on
27 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ope ra ti on
28 1 1 1 1 1 1 HR
29 1 1 1 1 1 1 HR
30 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ope ra ti on
31 1 1 1 1 1 1 Te a chi ng
32 1 1 1 1 1 1 Te a chi ng
33 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma na ge r
34 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma na ge r
35 1 1 1 1 1 1 HR
36 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fi na nce
37 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma na ge r
38 1 1 1 1 1 1 Purcha s i ng
39 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma rke ti ng
40 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma rke ti ng
41 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cons ul ta nt
42 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cons ul ta nt
43 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma na ge r
44 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma na ge r
45 1 1 1 1 1 1 Supe rvi s or
46 1 1 1 1 1 1 He a d
47 1 1 1 1 1 1 He a d
48 1 1 1 1 1 1 Accounti ng
49 1 1 1 1 1 1 He a d
50 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ma rke ti ng
Total 29 21 13 10 17 8 2 18 29 1 2 0 0 1 29 20 0 10 40 4 12 17 17
24
 Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5 Column 6 Column 7 Column 8 Column 9 Column 10
Column 1 1
Column 2 0.365652 1
Column 3 -0.23184 -0.02018 1
Column 4 -0.17264 0.059596 0.431039 1
Column 5 -0.17264 0.059596 0.431039 1 1
Column 6 -0.17264 0.059596 0.431039 1 1 1
Column 7 -0.17264 0.059596 0.431039 1 1 1 1
Column 8 -0.17264 0.059596 0.431039 1 1 1 1 1
Column 9 -0.17264 0.059596 0.431039 1 1 1 1 1 1
Column 10 -0.17264 0.059596 0.431039 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

mean = 0.606174

cronbach = 6.06174
0.938994
6.455566

25
SUMMARY OUTPUT - Motivation

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.242559
R Square 0.058835
Adjusted R Square-0.06494
Standard Error 14.28861
Observations 50

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 6 612.6166 102.1028 3.000607 0.015414368
Residual 48 9799.883 204.1642
Total 54 10412.5

Coefficients
Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%
Intercept -14.8904 23.40447 -0.63622 0.527654 -61.94828825 32.16740247 -61.94828825 32.16740247
X Variable 1 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 2 8.449883 4.878049 1.732226 #NUM! -1.358092192 18.25785909 -1.358092192 18.25785909
X Variable 3 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 4 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 5 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 6 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0

SUMMARY OUTPUT - Knowledge of Natural/communal environment

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.242558699
R Square 0.058834723
Adjusted R Square -0.044106221
Standard Error 14.2886052
Observations 50

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 5 612.6165501 122.5233 3.000607 0.020447969
Residual 48 9799.88345 204.1642
Total 53 10412.5

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%
Intercept -14.89044289 23.40447224 -0.63622 0.527654 -61.94828825 32.1674025 -61.94828825 32.16740247
X Variable 1 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 2 8.44988345 4.878049384 1.732226 #NUM! -1.358092192 18.2578591 -1.358092192 18.25785909
X Variable 3 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 4 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 5 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
SUMMARY OUTPUT - Innovation

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.102070824
R Square 0.010418453
Adjusted R Square -0.114364496
Standard Error 14.65152001
Observations 50

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 6 108.4821429 18.08036 0.505351 0.800840943
Residual 48 10304.01786 214.667
Total 54 10412.5

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%
Intercept 6.053571429 27.43378238 0.220661 0.826292 -49.10574495 61.2128878 -49.1057449 61.21288781
X Variable 1 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 2 4.017857143 5.65194655 0.71088 #NUM! -7.346143039 15.3818573 -7.34614304 15.38185732
X Variable 3 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 4 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 5 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 6 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0

SUMMARY OUTPUT - Entrepreneurial attitudes

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.594843897
R Square 0.353839262
Adjusted R Square 0.163069418
Standard Error 12.22760873
Observations 50

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 10 3684.351311 368.4351 6.160529 1.46183E-05
Residual 45 6728.148689 149.5144
Total 55 10412.5

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%
Intercept -65.66455125 25.39279556 -2.58595 0.013019 -116.8082668 -14.5208357 -116.8082668 -14.52083567
X Variable 1 1.215218668 2.749920119 0.441911 0.66067 -4.323404762 6.7538421 -4.323404762 6.753842099
X Variable 2 3.56829205 3.408982142 1.046732 0.300813 -3.297750436 10.4343345 -3.297750436 10.43433454
X Variable 3 8.778537565 2.532595439 3.466222 0.001172 3.677628509 13.8794466 3.677628509 13.87944662
X Variable 4 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 5 7.236354569 4.203030169 1.721699 #NUM! -1.228982737 15.7016919 -1.228982737 15.70169188
X Variable 6 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 7 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 8 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 9 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0
X Variable 10 0 0 65535 #NUM! 0 0 0 0

27