An Empirical Juxtapose of the Effects of Self‐image on Entrepreneurial Career along the Spectrum of Nascent to Actual Entrepreneurs

• Date: 01 December 2019
• Author: Spyros Lioukas,Helen Salavou
• Published date: 01 December 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12323

An Empirical Juxtapose of the Effects of Self-

image on Entrepreneurial Career along the

Spectrum of Nascent to Actual Entrepreneurs

HELEN SALAVOU and SPYROS LIOUKAS

Athens University of Economics and Business,Athens, Greece

This empirical study extends beyond efforts to contrast entrepreneurs with non-entrepreneurs and elucidates

comparisons among entrepreneurs.Specifically, it investigates capability and vulnerability self-images among three

groups of entrepreneurs to understand differences in perceptions. Using a sample of 725 graduate young

entrepreneurs, multinomial logistic regression shows that low-intention nascent, high-intention nascent and actual

entrepreneurs perceive their potential and fears differently. The evidence shows that nascent, compared to actual

entrepreneurs have faith in most of their entrepreneurial abilities. In contrast, nascent are sensing more fears while

experiencing the entrepreneurial process. In addition, high relative to low-intention nascent entrepreneurs have

higher creativity, higher networking skills and lower fear of failure. The discussion regarding why entrepreneurs

do not constitute a homogenous population has important implications for both theory and practice.

Keywords: nascent entrepreneurs; entrepreneurial intention; image theory; graduates; multinomial logistic

regression

Introduction

This paper extends beyond the central question in

entrepreneurship research of what makes entrepreneurs

different from the general population and elucidates

comparisons among entrepreneurs. Drawing upon self-

image theory,our empirical study investigatesperceptions

among three groups of entrepreneurs to emphasize: (i)

stages along theentrepreneurial process; and ii)individual

differences in terms of capability and vulnerability self-

images.

Concerning stages along the entrepreneurial process,

this study examines three categories of entrepreneurs,

namely nascent entrepreneurs of different intentionality

and actual entrepreneurs. Nascent entrepreneurs, a

recently burgeoning population in the entrepreneurship

literature (Thompson, 2009), are different from actual

entrepreneurs and different from each other. They are all

attemptingto start a new venture but positioned differently

before real entrepreneurial action, somewhere along the

entrepreneurial process (Brixy et al., 2012). They do not

suggest a homogenous population (Brixy et al., 2012),

because they eithershow interest or have put some of their

ideas into action (Thompson, 2009). Consequently, a

challenge to advance the research on entrepreneurial

intention and nascent entrepreneurship would be to create

subcategories of entrepreneurs (Saravathy, 2004) and

compare them. Evidence on comparisons would provide

input to a very large population pertaining to people

who prefer to be self-employed, or plan to do so; however,

only a small percentage succeeds. This finding indicates

gaps within those actually practicing entrepreneurship

and accelerate efforts towards the pursuit of

entrepreneurship as a professional career choice.

Concerning individual differences in terms of self-

images, this study relies on image theory to advance our

understanding of how nascent entrepreneurs of different

intentionality and actual entrepreneurs think about

themselves. The way individuals understand their

personal identity affects their standing and behaviors

towards entrepreneurship (Allport, 1955; Epstein, 1973).

Self-images, andparticularly opposite ones, are important

to determine actual behavior. What anindividual believes

about himself compared to what is required to succeed in

new venture creation would indicate deviation from

‘prototype’behaviors, proven in practice by those having

confronted the reality of new venturing. Actual

Correspondence: Helen Salavou, Business Administration Department,

Athens University of Economics and Business, 76 Patission Street, 104

34 Athens, Greece.E-mail esalav@aueb.gr

©2018 European Academy of Management

DOI: 10.1111/emre.12323

European Management Review, Vol. 16, –, (2019)

1129 1141