The future of management education: The role of entrepreneurship education and junior enterprises

The International Journal of Management Education xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

The International Journal of Management Education journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijme

The future of management education: The role of entrepreneurship education and junior enterprises João Almeida, Ana Dias Daniel∗, Cláudia Figueiredo Research Unit on Governance, Competitiveness and Public Policies (GOVCOPP), University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

A R T IC LE I N F O

ABS TRA CT

Keywords: Management education Entrepreneurial education Entrepreneurial intention Junior enterprises Future skills Practical education

This study assesses the effect of entrepreneurship education and the participation in junior enterprises (JA) on the entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions of higher education students. A selfreport instrument was answered by 139 management and economics students enrolled in Portuguese universities. The results show that students enrolled in JEs show higher levels of perceived behavioural control than students not involved in such extra-curricular activity. Additionally, students enrolled both in JEs and entrepreneurship education reported a higher entrepreneurial intention than those students that are only members of a JE. These findings suggest that deeper integration of extra-curricular activities and entrepreneurship education on management education curricula is crucial for the development of dynamic managerial capabilities. Moreover, it was observed that extra-curricular activities, like participating in a junior enterprise, complement rather than substitute entrepreneurship education. Several suggestions to make management education more impactful on students’ managerial capabilities and skills are also provided.

1. Introduction In an increasingly globalised, fast-changing and uncertain environment, organizations must be able to make decisions quickly to adapt constantly to new market realities. To face these challenges, the role of managers is crucial due to their strong influence on organizations' life and strategy (Anderson, Hibbert, Mason, & Rivers, 2018). Therefore, managers have to have a set of skills and knowledge to be capable of answering not only to organizations' needs, but also to contribute effectively to society's transformation through their business practices (Hillmann, Duchek, Meyr, & Guenther, 2018; Warwick, Wyness, & Conway, 2017). Management education (ME) is critical for providing this set of skills and knowledge, not only to current managers, through lifelong learning initiatives, but, more importantly, to future managers so that they can be better equipped to deal with upcoming challenges (Pina e Cunha, Vieira da Cunha, & Cabral-Cardoso, 2004; Sharma, 2017). However, ME has been criticized for focusing too much on theoretical content and not promoting the development of students' skills and competencies (Hillmann et al., 2018), or for being too simplistic in the approach when compared to the reality of companies’ context (Pina e Cunha et al., 2004). Therefore, a broader understanding of concepts, combined with collaborative and practical teaching methodologies, is essential for developing a more effective ME that can respond to the needs of the future managers and to the societal challenges that affect the life of firms (Anderson et al., 2018). Some of the skills needed by future managers include alertness, opportunity recognition, creative problem solving, pro-activity and resilience (Gebauer, 2013; Hillmann et al., 2018) which are skills associated to entrepreneurial behaviour, suggesting that a ∗

Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (A.D. Daniel).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2019.100318 Received 30 November 2018; Received in revised form 23 August 2019; Accepted 3 September 2019 1472-8117/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: João Almeida, Ana Dias Daniel and Cláudia Figueiredo, The International Journal of Management Education, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2019.100318

The International Journal of Management Education xxx (xxxx) xxxx

J. Almeida, et al.

closer integration between the development of entrepreneurial skills and ME may contribute for improving ME learning outcomes. The importance of entrepreneurship education (EE) has been recognized by both researchers (Gibb, 1987; Kuratko, 2005; Pittaway, Hannon, Gibb, & Thompson, 2009; Vazquez, Lanero, Gutierrez, & Garcia, 2011) and policymakers (European Commission, 2012, 2006; Wilson, 2008). Despite the extensive research on this topic, there are still doubts regarding which approaches, contents, and methods are more effective for developing students’ entrepreneurial skills and behaviours (Blenker, Korsgaard, & Neergaard, 2011; Egerová, Eger, & Mičík, 2018; Fayolle, 2005). Many authors suggest the use of new teaching methodologies in EE courses (Daniel, 2016; European Commission, 2008), being the learning-by-doing or experience-based learning two of the more relevant methodologies explored (González, Castro, González, & Cendón, 2016; Thompson, Scott, & Gibson, 2010). Extra-curricular activities, such as junior enterprises (JEs), can provide the adequate context for implementing these methodologies (European Commission, 2012; Pittaway, Rodriguez-Falcon, & King, 2011; Thompson et al., 2010). JEs are non-profit organizations, which are implemented and managed exclusively by higher education students and that aim at providing services to external stakeholders. By doing so, those organization support learning-by-doing experiences which enable the consolidation of theoretical knowledge, fostering an entrepreneurial spirit and enhancing the employability of their members (JADE, 2017). Our contribution to this debate is to provide shreds of evidence regarding the role of formal and informal entrepreneurial learning initiatives, such as entrepreneurship education and the participation in JEs, in the development of an entrepreneurial behaviour among ME students, through assessing students’ entrepreneurial intention (EI) and its antecedents. Many studies show that EI, and its consequent entrepreneurial behaviour, can be enhanced through the exposure to EE or in a context where students experience entrepreneurial activities, such as in the case of JEs (Morris, Webb, Fu, & Singhal, 2013; Schelfhout, Bruggeman, & Maeyer, 2016). Therefore, it is relevant to understand how EE courses and participation in extra-curricular activities, such as JEs, can improve entrepreneurial skills and behaviour (Binks, Starkey, & Mahon, 2006). The main objective of this paper is to contribute to the design of future ME programs that better equip students with the skills needed to deal with future business challenges, through understanding the relevance of entrepreneurial teaching initiatives for the development of ME students’ entrepreneurial intention and behaviour. Thus, this paper aims to answer the following research question: Is the participation in entrepreneurship training courses and/or in JEs important for the development of entrepreneurial behaviour of management students? The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In section 2, it is presented the review of the relevant literature related to the main topics of the paper. Section 3 outlines the methodology of the research. In section 4, it is presented the findings and its discussion. Finally, in section 5 there are presented the main conclusions, highlighting some key limitations in our analysis and suggesting directions for further research. 2. Literature review 2.1. The future of skills: the case of future managers Challenges related with the increasing globalisation, demographic and technological changes, as well as political and economic uncertainty, and environmental sustainability are surely shaping the future of our society (Bakhshi, Downing, Osborne, & Schneider, 2017). To overcome those challenges it will be necessary, on the one hand, a constant adaptation and resilience of citizens, which reflects the need for developing new skills and knowledge, especially among young people that soon will enter the labour market (Volkmann et al., 2009). In fact, as mentioned in the report The Future of Skills: Employment in 2030, future labour force should be equipped with a set of new skills, such as innovative problem-solving practices, as well as the capacity to create new alternatives, and to detect changes or new opportunities in the environment (Bakhshi et al., 2017). Also, competencies like long-term visioning, critical thinking, and interpersonal skills are considered crucial requirements to future job performance (Hillmann et al., 2018; Schumacher & Mayer, 2018). On the other hand, organizations need to become increasingly flexible to anticipate, adapt to, and/or rapidly recovering from negative events that may occur (Lengnick-Hall, Beck, & Lengnick-Hall, 2011), as well as to take advantage of market opportunities that may arise. In this case, managers will have a greater responsibility due to their strong influence on organizations' strategy (Anderson et al., 2018). Managers are key actors in promoting the organization's strategic orientation (Adner & Helfat, 2003; Carmeli, Friedman, & Tishler, 2013), resilience (Gebauer, 2013; Hillmann et al., 2018; Shin, Taylor, & Seo, 2012) and innovation (Kearney, Harrington, & Kelliher, 2018), since they possess to some extent dynamic managerial capabilities which enable them to create or modify the firm's resource base and competencies (Helfat & Martin, 2015). Several studies have related managers' dynamic managerial capabilities with the ability of firms to adapt and strive under conditions of change (e.g. Boyd, Haynes, Hitt, & Ketchen, 2012; Peteraf & Reed, 2007). A study conducted by Buil-Fabregà, Alonso-Almeida, and Bagur-Femenías (2017) show that managers' individual dynamic capabilities help them to detect changes in the market earlier and to promote business sustainability. Thus, firms with strong dynamic capabilities are intensely entrepreneurial, which means that “they not only adapt to business ecosystems, but also shape them through innovation and through collaboration with other enterprises, entities, and institutions” (Teece, 2007, p. 1319). According to Adner and Helfat (2003), dynamic managerial capabilities are rooted in three underlying factors: managerial cognition, managerial social capital, and managerial human capital. The first factor, managerial cognition, is related to managerial beliefs and mental models that serve as a basis for decision making (Walsh, 1995). In turn, managerial social capital results from social relationships and can confer influence, control, and power (Adler & Kwon, 2002). Finally, managerial human capital refers to skills acquired through education and training, as well as prior work experience (Khanna, Jones, & Boivie, 2014). These factors may act combined or separately to influence the strategic and operational decisions of managers. For instance, education, training, and 2

The International Journal of Management Education xxx (xxxx) xxxx

J. Almeida, et al.

work experience affect also managerial cognition (Corrêa, Bueno, Kato, & Silva, 2018), and managerial social capital. Thus, management education (ME) plays a central role in equipping students with the dynamic managerial capabilities needed for them to succeed as future managers (Almoharby, 2008; Hillmann et al., 2018). ME has been criticized, during the last decades, for failing in providing students with the learning experiences that foster the development of new competencies (Gebauer, 2013; Hillmann et al., 2018; Waddock, 1991). Mintzberg and Gosling (2002, p. 65) point out that business schools educate “managers with a 1908 product that uses a 1950 strategy” which highlights the traditional teaching approach followed in current ME programs. Other authors argue that traditional ME focus too much on what content to teach instead of what skills and capabilities students need to learn (Hillmann et al., 2018). New teaching approaches, curricula, contents or methodologies, are being currently used and tested in ME to equip future managers not only with the theoretical content but also with new competencies (Schumacher & Mayer, 2018). For instance, Schumacher and Mayer (2018) propose a workshop to teach design thinking principles supporting that this will “enable future managers to become creative designers and understand turbulent contexts (…) as spaces for innovation” (p.517). Hillmann et al. (2018) propose a lecture on scenario planning, finding a positive influence on resilience capabilities and superior learning outcomes compared to other business students that did not participate in the lecture. Also, the search for enablers (such as entrepreneurship education, institutional support, etc.) of business students’ entrepreneurial behaviour and skills has been discussed and reported by many authors (Maresch, Harms, Kailer, & Wimmer-Wurm, 2016; Misoska, Dimitrova, & Mrsik, 2016). Nevertheless, the use of entrepreneurial approaches in ME is raising interest among researchers. As an example, Binks et al. (2006) proposed a creative problem-solving framework as an integrative learning approach, transversal to various contexts, which captures the knowledge, behaviour and various thinking styles needed at different stages and contexts. These authors pointed out that entrepreneurship education (EE) should be included in ME to foster the development of competencies that are most relevant to future managers, not only for managing companies or institutions but also for the creation of new businesses (Binks et al., 2006). Despite the increasing interest, it is necessary a better understanding on how to make ME more impactful to students, increasing their managerial human capital, managerial cognition, and, therefore, respond to the needs of future managers (Anderson et al., 2018). 2.2. Entrepreneurial competencies and education Entrepreneurship has been acknowledged as the main driver of economic growth, through fostering innovation and employment (Kuratko, 2005; Obino Mokaya, Namusonge, & Sikalieh, 2012). Nevertheless, there is a lack of consensus in the literature regarding the definition of entrepreneurship, which is mainly due to its multidimensional nature. As a consequence, researchers have different perspectives when addressing this concept, and end up at defining it in different ways (Obino Mokaya et al., 2012). One of the most consensual perspectives is the one that considers entrepreneurship as a process of value creation, more than mere businesses creation (Kuratko, 2005). The Danish Foundation for Entrepreneurship & Young Enterprise in 2012 develop a definition that has been used since then by the European Commission: “entrepreneurship is when you act upon opportunities and ideas and transform them into value for others. The value that is created can be financial, cultural, or social” (Moberg, Fosse, Hoffman, & Junge, 2015, p. 14). Since an early stage of concept development, it became clear that entrepreneurship can be taught (Kuratko, 2005) and, due to its increasing importance, training and educating people in this field has become a priority in the last decade (Lyons & Zhang, 2018). This effort has been a way of developing entrepreneurial competencies and promoting students’ entrepreneurial behaviour (European Commission, 2012; Kuratko, 2005; Pittaway et al., 2009). Entrepreneurial competencies are defined as knowledge, skills and attitudes that are key for starting or growing a business (Mitchelmore & Rowley, 2010) and, in a broader perspective, to “perform the entrepreneurial job of new value creation” (Lackéus, 2015, p. 12), as well as to successfully introduce and manage change. This has led to increasing demand for entrepreneurial skills by employers since it can add value to organizations (Binks et al., 2006). To answer this increasing demand for entrepreneurial competencies, many efforts are being made to map the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that make someone entrepreneurial, being a good example of this the EntreComp framework developed by the European Commission in 2016 (Bacigalupo, Kampylis, Punie, & Van den Brande, 2016). EntreComp is a framework which stresses entrepreneurship as a key competence for lifelong learning, and it defines specific actions to improve the entrepreneurial capacity of European citizens and organizations. In this framework, vision, creativity, ability to spot opportunities and taking initiative or coping with uncertainty and risk, are some of the skills crucial for entrepreneurs (Bacigalupo et al., 2016). Other authors had also suggested different entrepreneurial competencies frameworks (Bird, 1995; Man & Lau, 2005; Mitchelmore & Rowley, 2010; Plumly et al., 2008). These skills are rooted in personal background and can be enhanced through work, training or education. According to Welsh, Tullar, and Nemati (2016), the exposure to EE enhances students' skills, like flexibility, adaptability, resilience, preparing them to overcomefailure. Also, Lackéus (2015) argues that the main goal of EE is the development of entrepreneurial skills . Finally, EE also helps to bridge the gap between entrepreneurial attitudes and actions (Geldhof et al., 2013; Rauch & Hulsink, 2015), through having a positive impact on entrepreneurial intention (EI), which is the individual's propensity to start a new venture that predict the actual entrepreneurial behaviour (Krueger & Carsrud, 1993). These effects have fuelled the research in this field, as well as boosted the implementation of EE programs in many educational institutions worldwide (Egerová et al., 2018; Küttim, Kallaste, Venesaar, & Kiis, 2014). Despite the importance of EE being recognized by both researchers (Gibb, 1987; Kuratko, 2005; Pittaway et al., 2009; Vazquez et al., 2011) and politics (European Commission, 2006, 2012; Wilson, 2008), there is still the need to clarify the best approaches, 3

The International Journal of Management Education xxx (xxxx) xxxx

J. Almeida, et al.

Fig. 1. Experiential learning and entrepreneurial impact (Adapted from Thompson et al., 2010).

contents and pedagogical methods to be used (Blenker et al., 2011; Egerová et al., 2018; Fayolle, 2005). Some perspectives highlight the importance of learning initiatives where students experience and perform real work to enhance entrepreneurial skills and behaviour (Daniel, 2016; Morris et al., 2013; Schelfhout et al., 2016). As an example, Thompson, Scott, and Gibson's (2010) conceptual model suggest that experience-based learning leads to higher competency-building outcomes, increase students' professional network, and better preparing them for an entrepreneurial career (Fig. 1). Other authors argue that EE is a process of learning-by-doing (Kariv, Cisneros, & Ibanescu, 2018; Papadaki, Novák, & Dvorský, 2017; Welsh et al., 2016), where students must experience entrepreneurship to actually grasp the true nature of entrepreneurship (Plumly et al., 2008). Thus, the knowledge accumulated at university should be combined with the experience gained through extracurricular activities (European Commission, 2012; Pittaway et al., 2011; Toutain, Fayolle, Pittaway, & Politis, 2017). Examples of these activities are the participation in student clubs, sports, non-profit organizations and junior enterprises (JEs). JEs are considered an initiative that promotes learning-by-doing and experiential learning and it may complement the traditional methods of EE in universities by bridging the gap between academia and business environment (European Commission, 2012; Kuratko, 2005). Despite many evidences of the benefits of engaging in extra-curricular training activities (Vazquez et al., 2011), in the case of promoting students’ entrepreneurial behaviour and intention there is still a lack of knowledge regarding the benefits of complementing formal EE training with extra-curricular activities (Pittaway, Gazzard, Shore, & Williamson, 2015).

2.3. Junior enterprises A Junior Enterprise (JE) is a non-profit civil society organization, formed and managed exclusively by undergraduate and postgraduate higher education students. JEs provide services for companies, institutions and society, under the guidance of teachers and professionals, aiming to consolidate and enhance the knowledge and skills of their members. JEs are similar to real companies, guided by principles of corporate governance, having a management council and executive board, and following a specific regulation. A JE aims at fostering the entrepreneurial spirit of its members, not just to ensure its personal and professional development, but also to promote business sustainability and the enlargement of JE's national networks (JADE, 2017). According to JADE (2017), the main benefit of JEs is their capacity to promote a business-education approach through a learningby-doing philosophy where students learn how to strategically manage and develop a company by working in one. Also, JEs contribute to the development of specific skills, such as the ability to recognize opportunities, to plan and implement actions, and, in the end, to measure results. Thus, JEs are considered labs that enhance students' employability, and, at the same time, create an impact in society by fostering the growth of local SMEs that benefit from JEs’ services. The research carried out around JEs is scarce and some of the few articles published focus on the impact of some processes or use JEs as a case study (Costal, Turrioni, & Martins, 2013; Michaelis, Wagner, & Schweizer, 2015). Despite the lack of research, the few studies that focused on JEs’ impact on students concluded that activities carried out in JEs enable its members to gain practical experience (Bogo, Henning, Schmitt, & Marco, 2014), to contact with the business world (helping them in building their professional network) (Bogo et al., 2014; Costa & Saraiva, 2012), to develop their entrepreneurial and managerial skills (Gruber-Muecke & Kailer, 2011), improve their employability (Bogo et al., 2014; Pennarola, Pistilli, & Dawson, 2016) and fostering their entrepreneurial spirit (Costa & Saraiva, 2012; Gruber-Muecke & Kailer, 2011). Beside, JEs have being recognized over the last years as a best practice in practical education. The European Commission and OECD have highlighted the role of JEs in several relevant events and reports, such as the Lisbon Strategy: governing strategy of EU in 2000–2010, and in the EU strategy for 2010–2020 (Council of the European Union, 2009). A survey carried out by the European 4

The International Journal of Management Education xxx (xxxx) xxxx

J. Almeida, et al.

Commission showed that 25% of the Alumni of JEs are (very) likely to start their own business within the next ten years, compared to 16% of students that have taken EE formal courses, and to 10% of students who have not received any kind of EE. Also, it was observed that 78% of JADE Alumni find a job right after graduation, compared to 66% of other students that have taken EE courses, and to 59% of students who have not received any kind of EE (European Commission, 2012). Given the number of JEs around the world in the area of business and economics, which are more than one-third of the total JEs according to Junior Enterprise Global Council (2018), it is relevant to study the impact of JEs on the skills of management and economics students. 2.4. Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education The impact assessment of EE or extracurricular activities in students' behaviour remains a matter of extensive debate in this research field (Fayolle, 2005; Pittaway et al., 2011; Vaicekauskaite & Valackiene, 2018). Most studies argue that EE influences students' behaviour and it raises students' future intention of creating a new business, as shown in Bae, Qian, Miao, and Fiet's (2014) review of 73 studies. Many authors consider intention as a consciously planned behaviour (Bird, 1988; Krueger, Reilly, & Carsrud, 2000), being entrepreneurial intention (EI) considered as an antecedent of the actual entrepreneurial behaviour (Fayolle, Gailly, & Lassas-Clerc, 2006). Within the EI literature, two theoretical models have received most of the research attention: Ajzen (1991) Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and Shapero and Sokol (1982) Entrepreneurial Event Model (EEM) (Daniel & Castro, 2018; Kuehn, 2008). Despite some conceptual similarity, TPB differs from EEM because it was initially proposed to explain planned behaviour in general, while EEM was developed to explain the entrepreneurial behaviour specifically. The TPB model was developed by Ajzen (1991), and it is one of the most used and validated theoretical frameworks to predict and explain human behaviour in specific contexts. The relationship between EE and students’ EI using TPB has gained considerable interest among researchers in this field (Galvão, Marques, & Marques, 2018; Kariv et al., 2018; Küttim et al., 2014; Miranda, Chamorro-Mera, & Rubio, 2017). According to the TPB framework, the intention that precedes any type of planned behaviour is determined by three factors: attitude towards the behaviour and subjective norm, both reflecting the perceived desirability of the behaviour, and perceived behavioural control, that reflects the feasibility of the behaviour (Krueger et al., 2000). Attitude toward the behaviour is “the degree to which a person has a favourable or unfavourable evaluation or appraisal of the behaviour in question” (Ajzen, 1991, p. 188). In turn, an attitude is a predisposition toward an action, formed through the experience and perceptions acquired over a person's life. Therefore, it is a composite variable comprising both cognitive and affective elements that support the development of a mindset towards entrepreneurship, such as a lifestyle, career or an activity. This construct assesses perceptions of the personal desirability for performing a behaviour, and it depends on the expectations and beliefs about the impact it may have in the person (Daniel & Castro, 2018; Krueger et al., 2000). Subjective norm refers to “the perceived social pressure to perform or not perform the behaviour” (Ajzen, 1991, p. 188). This social factor is influenced not only by broad cultural attitudes toward entrepreneurship but also by particular individuals, groups and networks, such as family, friends, peers and significant ‘others’, expectations and expected support (Krueger et al., 2000). Perceived behavioural control “refers to people's perception of the ease or difficulty of performing the behaviour of interest” (Ajzen, 1991, p. 183), and it is a key part of this theory, differentiating it from other theories (e.g. theory of reasoned action) (Ajzen, 1991). Although the intention of creating a new business is the most commonly used variable to assess the impact of EE, it is far from being the only outcome. EE also develop communication skills, teamwork, critical thinking and decision-making capabilities (Volkmann et al., 2009), trigger political ideologies (Lackéus, 2017), social network acquisition (Huang, 2017), and increases school engagement and motivation to work in innovative companies or to manage a private company (Moberg et al., 2015). 3. Methodology 3.1. Participants The sample encompasses 139 students enrolled in management and economics higher education courses in Portugal, being 115 (82.7%) at bachelor level, and 24 (17.2%) at master level. Respondents’ age range between 18 and 45 years old, being the mean age 20.98 (SD = 3.93). Regarding gender, 58 were males (41.7%) and 81 were females (58.3%). Only 34 of the respondents (24.5%) had participated in entrepreneurship education initiatives. The iniciatives identified as formal entrepreneurship training courses, followed different course syllabus, teaching approaches and duration (between 2 and 180 h with a mean of 27 h (SD = 42.27)). Finally, 75 of the respondents (54.0%) were involved in a JE, and among those, 27 (36.0%) had participated in an entrepreneurship training initiative, and 48 had not (64.0%). 3.2. Procedures and instruments Data was collected using a questionnaire that was distributed to students through online platforms and face-to-face in Portuguese universities between March and May 2018. The questionnaire was developed based on Liñán and Chen (2009) Entrepreneurial Intention Questionnaire, that was developed solely to measure entrepreneurial intention and its determinants. This measure was rooted in Ajzen (1991) theory of planned behaviour (Liñán, Urbano, & Guerrero, 2011). 5

The International Journal of Management Education xxx (xxxx) xxxx

J. Almeida, et al.

Table 1 Reliability analysis of the questionnaire scales.

Attitudes Toward Behaviour Being an entrepreneur implies more advantages than disadvantages to me. A career as entrepreneur is attractive for me. If I had the opportunity and resources, I would like to start a business. Among various options, I'd rather be an entrepreneur. Being an entrepreneur is the best option for my future. I'd rather run my own business than earning a great salary working for someone. Perceived Behavioural Control Starting a firm and keeping it working would be easy for me. I am prepared to start a viable business. I can control the creation process of a new business. I know the practical details necessary to create a firm. I know how to develop an entrepreneurial project. If I tried to run a business, I'd have high chances of success. Social Norms My closest family would find it positive if I followed an entrepreneurial career. My closest friends would find it positive if I followed an entrepreneurial career. Other important people would find it positive if I followed an entrepreneurial career. Entrepreneurial Intention I am ready to do anything to become an entrepreneur. My professional goal is to become an entrepreneur. I will make any effort necessary to create and run my own business. I am determined to create a firm in the future. I have very seriously thought about creating a firm. I have the intention to start a business in the future.

M

SD

r

α

5.86 5.36 5.78 4.91 4.31 4.53

1.12 1.39 1.47 1.41 1.44 1.69

.47 .77 .75 .82 .75 .72

.89

3.97 3.63 3.73 3.48 3.76 3.86

1.38 1.54 1.44 1.63 1.54 1.28

.65 .79 .84 .81 .76 .75

.92

5.06 5.44 5.30

1.34 1.12 1.08

.61 .77 .83

.85

4.51 4.04 4.49 4.44 4.61 4.55

1.48 1.54 1.69 1.77 1.69 1.83

.74 .81 .91 .91 .74 .87

.94

Note: Means (M); standard deviations (SD); item-total correlation (r); and Cronbach's Alpha (α).

Apart from demographic and JEs characterization questions, the questionnaire contained 21 items divided into the following variables: (1) attitude towards the behaviour, (2) social norms, (3) perceived behavioural control, and (4) entrepreneurial intention. All of the items were measured using a seven-point Likert scale with options ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The items were translated to Portuguese, followed by a back translation to English done by an English native speaker. The final items were considered after solving any concern or discrepancy and confirming the translation of the original scales, as well as the conceptual meaning of the questions (DeVellis, 2012). Questionnaires were anonymousand participation was voluntary The reliability of the measures was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha. Alphas values range from .852 to .943, being 0.65 the cutoff value according to DeVellis (2012). Thus, we assume a very good internal consistency of the scales. All items are positively and significantly associated the other items of the summated score. Table 1 shows the summary of the means, standard deviations and item-total correlation of each item, and the internal consistency of each scale. Data collected were statistically analysed utilizing IBM® SPSS (v.25 for Windows). Mean group differences were computed using a One-way ANOVA procedure. In association with this test, the effect size was calculated using eta squared (η2) (Field, 2009; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). The association between two numeric variables was assessed using Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient. Since the significance of these statistic represents the probability of that value be observed in the population, in order to interpret the coefficient it was used the cut-offs suggested by Cohen, Cohen, West, and Aiken (2003): (1) small effect size: r≥.10; (2) medium: r≥.30; e (3) large: r≥.50.

Table 2 Differences in EI and its antecedents by participation in a JE. Factors

Participation in a JE

N

M

SD

F (1, 137)

p

η2

Attitude towards behaviour (ATB)

Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No

75 64 75 64 75 64 75 64

5.10 5.15 4.11 3.30 5.12 5.44 4.40 4.49

1.19 1.11 1.24 1.09 1.05 1.02 1.58 1.35

0.056

.813

.001

16.691

< .001

.109

3.361

.069

.024

0.133

.716

.001

Perceived behavioural control (PBC) Social Norms (SN) Entrepreneurial intention (EI)

Note: Means (M); standard deviations (SD); one-way Anova (F); p-value (p) and effect size (η2). 6

The International Journal of Management Education xxx (xxxx) xxxx

J. Almeida, et al.

Table 3 Means (M) and standard deviations (SD) of the factors from the participants enrolled in a junior enterprise by training on entrepreneurship, OneWay Anova (F) and effect size (η2). Factors

Training on entrepreneurship

N

M

SD

F (1, 73)

p

η2

Attitude towards behaviour (ATB)

Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No

27 48 27 48 27 48 27 48

5.31 4.99 4.29 4.01 5.16 5.10 4.88 4.13

1.12 1.23 1.27 1.22 1.02 1.07 1.45 1.60

1.238

.270

.017

0.859

.357

.012

0.062

.803

.001

4.038

.048

.052

Perceived behavioural control (PBC) Social Norms (SN) Entrepreneurial intention (EI)

Note: Means (M); standard deviations (SD); one-way Anova (F); p-value (p) and effect size (η2).

4. Results and discussion Considering the two groups of students: those involved in a JE (n = 75; 54.0%) and those not involved (n = 64; 46.0%), we tested the mean differences regarding the EI, as well as its antecedents. Table 2 shows that the two groups have differences statistically significant in the variable perceived behavioural control, F(1, 137) = 16.691; p < .001, η2 = 0.024. Therefore, students' participating in JEs reported higher perceived behavioural control than those who did not participate, suggesting that this extra-curricular activity, while giving students’ practical experiences and knowledge of the business world, increase their perception that they are capable of acting as an entrepreneur. This result challenges past findings that did not find this relationship (Souitaris, Zerbinati, & AlLaham, 2007), and it is in line with Arranz, Ubierna, Arroyabe, Perez, and Arroyabe (2017) that found a positive impact of extracurricular activities on perceived behavioural control. The relationship between the participation in JEs and the other constructs was not significant. When considering only the students that were involved in a JE, it is possible to distinguish two groups: (1) those enrolled in entrepreneurship training (n = 27; 36.0%); and (2) those that didn't participate in any training (n = 48; 54.0%). It was observed that the students who had training reported significant higher EI, F(1, 73) = 4.038; p = .048, η2 = 0.052. This result confirms the positive relationship between EE and EI reported on Bae, Qian, Miao, and Fiet (2014) review. Moreover, these results suggest that even for students participating in extra-curricular activities, such as JEs, EE is important to increase their propensity to start a new venture. Extra-curricular activities provide limited theoretical background about entrepreneurship (Arranz, Ubierna, Arroyabe, Perez, & Fdez. de Arroyabe, 2017), and, therefore, extra-curricular activities complement rather than substitute EE (Vazquez et al., 2011). The two groups showed no significant differences in the other three factors: attitudes towards behaviour, perceived behavioural control and social norms (Table 3). These results are in line with Maresch et al. (2016) who observed an influence of EE in EI, but not in its antecedents. Other recent studies also reported similar findings (Galvão et al., 2018; Passaro, Quinto, & Thomas, 2018). Since ATB, PBC, and SN are considered as antecedents of the EI, we went on further exploring the relationship between these variables. Considering the limited sample size, we conducted two correlation matrixes to explore the pattern of association. Table 4 shows the two matrices. The pattern of association is similar between the groups, being the highest association, considered as a large effect, between attitudes towards behaviour and EI. The smallest correlation is, in both groups, between social norms and perceived behavioural control. These correlations have a medium effect size for the group that had training on entrepreneurship (r = 0.311) and a small effect on the group that had not (r = 0.274). When comparing the correlations with the variable EI, the results show that the associations with perceived behavioural control and social norms are not similar in the two groups. For the group who had the training, social norms have a correlation with large effect size (r = .541) and perceived behavioural control with medium effect size (r = 0.436). This pattern inverts in the other group, with the variable more associated with EI being the perceived behavioural control with large effect size (r = .576). The correlation between EI and social norms, in this last group, have a medium-size effect (r = 0.435). The larger correlation between social norms and EI in the group with EE can be interpreted as the students' perception that, because they are enrolled in entrepreneurship training Table 4 Correlation matrix between the factors in the two groups of training. Training on entrepreneurship Yes (n = 27)

Attitude towards behaviour (1) Perceived behavioural control (2) Social Norms (3) Entrepreneurial intention (4)

No (n = 48)

1

2

1 .368 .627** .732***

1 .311 .436*

Note: **p < .01; *p < .05. 7

3

1

2

3

1 .541**

1 .465** .600** .787**

1 .274 .576**

1 .435**

The International Journal of Management Education xxx (xxxx) xxxx

J. Almeida, et al.

courses, their family and friends will more easily accept their intention to start a new venture (Souitaris et al., 2007). The decrease of the correlation between perceived behavioural control and EI in the group with EE do not follow previous results (Peterman & Kennedy, 2003). Although it can be explained by the positive impact of the participation in JEs on students’ perceived behavioural control found in the previous analysis of this study. Students participating in JEs reported a high perceived behavioural control (M = 4.11) which may not allow EE to have a high impact on the correlation between this construct and EI. Consistently with previous research the three constructs – attitude towards behaviour, perceived behavioural control and social norms – are significant correlated with EI (Francisco Liñán & Chen, 2009; Maresch et al., 2016; Marques, Ferreira, Gomes, & Rodrigues, 2012) among our sample, having attitude towards behaviour the strongest correlation with EI (Ajzen, 1991). We also found no influence of demographic variables (gender, age and family background) on any construct, following Kolvereid (1996). 5. Conclusions In order to manage change and to deal with the complex challenges in today's world, managers need to develop a new set of competencies, not just to be capable of answering to organizations' needs, but also to contribute effectively to society's transformation through their business's practices (Hillmann et al., 2018; Warwick et al., 2017). The research in this field highlights the link between dynamic managerial capabilities and a company's performance, especially in contexts of change. Due to the direct impact of education and training in managerial human capital, it is expected that ME plays a crucial role in equipping future managers with the right competencies and learning experiences (Pina e Cunha et al., 2004; Sharma, 2017). Some of these knowledge, skills and attitudes are associated with entrepreneurial behaviour, suggesting that closer integration between EE and the ME should be encouraged. The main goal of this research was to assess the differences regarding ME students' profile that participates in formal and informal entrepreneurial learning initiatives, such as entrepreneurship training courses and the involvement in JEs, by using Ajzen (1991) well-established TPB. Following the review of the literature and the results of the survey, we can conclude that students involved in a JE have a higher perceived behavioural control, which is an important antecedent of EI. Therefore, students that are enrolled in a JE perceive that becoming an entrepreneur is an easy behaviour for them. Additionally, it was observed that students who participate in a JE and simultaneously participate in initiatives of EE show a higher entrepreneurial intention. Thus, those students have a higher propensity to start a new venture in the short-term. 5.1. Implications Our findings suggest that students who participate both in EE and in a JE have a higher entrepreneurial intention, suggesting that the integration of EE and this type of extra-curricular activity will have a higher impact on the propensity of students to become entrepreneurs. Therefore, the curricula of ME courses could be enriched through the inclusion of EE and entrepreneurial related extra-curricular activities since it will bring innovative forms of learning (Padilla-Angulo, 2017), boosting students’ managerial capabilities through raising its entrepreneurial intention and attitudes. This study contributes to the theory of planned behaviour by confirming the correlation between EI and its antecedents (ATB, SN and PBC) through the application of this theory in a new context - junior entrepreneurs - and by analysing the effect of external influences (the participation in JEs and EE) on attitudes and intentions. Our study also confirms a recommendation of the European Commission (2012) about the importance of including practical training, such as Junior Enterprises, in education programs. The results have important implications for higher education institutions, especially business schools. Despite many of them provide entrepreneurship training courses they should encourage students to join extra-curricular activities to complement their skills’ development. Participation in extra-curricular activities can be promoted by business institutions in many ways, for example, by allowing students to obtain academic credits for their participation or through supporting financially or logistically the organizations that promote these activities. 5.2. Limitations of the study As with any empirical investigation, the present study has several limitations. First, the survey was carried out on a relatively small sample of Portuguese management and economics' students. Further studies are needed to confirm the results in a broader population and in other countries. Second, the study addressed attitudes and intentions, but not actual behaviour due to the time lag problem. Third, there is also the risk of self-reported bias on the answers due to social desirability bias, for example. Fourth, in the survey was only asked if students had participated in some entrepreneurship training course, which can be an external training or a subject on their course, causing that EE of the sample a measure not homogenous. Finally, because JEs have their own recruitment process, there is a possible ‘self-selection problem’ of students who might have previously developed some of entrepreneurial attitudes and skills assessed by the questionnaire. 5.3. Recommendations for future research On the one hand, future studies could apply this model in a larger sample and/or using a longitudinal design to evaluate the impact of participating in JEs over several years and on actual entrepreneurial behaviour. Also, research on the impact of JEs on the development of specific skills, and not only in the intention to create new businesses, is important for assessing the impact of these activities in developing not only future entrepreneurs but better professionals. Future research could also explore different extra8

The International Journal of Management Education xxx (xxxx) xxxx

J. Almeida, et al.

curricular activities since the impact on EI may vary depending on the type and objectives of activities. It is also relevant to investigate the relationship between university or country differences and EI to determine what the impact of the context is. On the other hand, it is recognized that some future skills needed by managers need more experimental learning methods. Future studies should explore other connection points between extracurricular activities, as JEs, and ME. Acknowledgments This work was financed by FEDER - Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional funds through the COMPETE 2020 Operacional Programme for Competitiveness and Internationalisation (POCI), and by Portuguese funds through FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia in the framework of the project PTDC/IVC-PEC/5514/2014. References Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S.-W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.979087. Adner, R., & Helfat, C. E. (2003). Corporate effects and dynamic managerial capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1011–1025. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj. 331. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91) 90020-T. Almoharby, D. (2008). Business education: Addressing the “what” question. Industry and Higher Education, 22(6), 431–440. Anderson, L., Hibbert, P., Mason, K., & Rivers, C. (2018). Management education in turbulent times. Journal of Management Education, 42(4), 423–440. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1052562918779421. Arranz, N., Ubierna, F., Arroyabe, M. F., Perez, C., & Fdez de Arroyabe, J. C. (2017). The effect of curricular and extracurricular activities on university students' entrepreneurial intention and competences. Studies in Higher Education, 42(11), 1979–2008. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1130030. Bacigalupo, M., Kampylis, P., Punie, Y., & Van den Brande, G. (2016). EntreComp: The entrepreneurship competence framework. Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2791/593884. Bae, T. J., Qian, S., Miao, C., & Fiet, J. O. (2014). The relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial intentions: A meta-analytic review. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 38(2), 217–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12095. Bakhshi, H., Downing, J. M., Osborne, M. A., & Schneider, P. (2017). The future of skills: Employment in 2030. London: Pearson and Nesta. Binks, M., Starkey, K., & Mahon, C. L. (2006). Entrepreneurship education and the business school. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(1), 1–18. https:// doi.org/10.1080/09537320500520411. Bird, B. (1988). Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: The case for intention. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 442–453. https://doi.org/10.2307/258091. Bird, B. (1995). Towards a theory of entrepreneurial competency. Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence and growth (pp. 51–72). . Blenker, P., Korsgaard, S., & Neergaard, H. (2011). The questions we care about: Paradigms and progression in entrepreneurship education. Industry and Higher Education, 25(6), 417–427. https://doi.org/10.5367/ihe.2011.0065. Bogo, A. M., Henning, E., Schmitt, A. C., & Marco, R. G. De (2014). The effectiveness of junior companies from the viewpoint of engineering students at a Brazilian. IEEE global engineering education conference (EDUCON) (pp. 745–750). . Boyd, B. K., Haynes, K. T., Hitt, M. A., & Ketchen, D. J. (2012). Contingency hypotheses in strategic management research: Use, disuse, or misuse? Journal of Management, 38(1), 278–313. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311418662. Buil-Fabregà, M., Alonso-Almeida, M. del M., & Bagur-Femenías, L. (2017). Individual dynamic managerial capabilities: Influence over environmental and social commitment under a gender perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 151, 371–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.081. Carmeli, A., Friedman, Y., & Tishler, A. (2013). Cultivating a resilient top management team: The importance of relational connections and strategic decision comprehensiveness. Safety Science, 51, 148–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2012.06.002. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Corrêa, R. O., Bueno, E. V., Kato, H. T., & Silva, L. M. de O. (2018). Dynamic managerial capabilities: Scale development and validation. Managerial and Decision Economics, 1–13https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.2974. Costal, G. C. S. Z., Turrioni, J. B., & Martins, R. A. (2013). Adaptation of a wiki to computerize quality management system documentation. Gestão & Produção, 20(4), 963–978. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-530X2013000400015. Costa, A. de S. M., & Saraiva, L. A. S. (2012). Hegemonic discourses on entrepreneurship as an ideological mechanism for the reproduction of capital. Organization, 19(5), 587–614. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508412448696. Council of the European Union (2009). Council Resolution of 27 November 2009 on a renewed framework for European cooperation in the youth field (2010-2018). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/. Daniel, A. D. (2016). Fostering an entrepreneurial mindset by using a design thinking approach in entrepreneurship education. Industry and Higher Education, 30(3), 215–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950422216653195. Daniel, A. D., & Castro, V. R. de (2018). How to measure the impact on nascent entrepreneurs. Advances in business strategy and competitive advantage (ABSCA) (pp. 85– 110). Hershey PA: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2936-1.ch004. DeVellis, R. (2012). Scale development: Theory and applications (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Egerová, D., Eger, L., & Mičík, M. (2018). Does entrepreneurship education matter? Business students ’ perspectives. Tertiary Education and Management, 23(4), 319–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2017.1299205. European Commission. (2006). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Implementing the Community Lisbon Programme: Fostering entrepreneurial mindsets through education and le. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. European Commission. (2008). Survey of entrepreneurship in higher education in Europe. (Brussels). European Commission. (2012). Effects and impact of entrepreneurship programmes in higher education. (Brussels). Fayolle, A. (2005). Evaluation of entrepreneurship education: Behaviour performing or intention increasing? International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 2(1), 89–98. Fayolle, A., Gailly, B., & Lassas-Clerc, N. (2006). Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education programmes: A new methodology. Journal of European Industrial Training, 30(9), 701–720. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2015-0216. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications. Galvão, A., Marques, C. S., & Marques, C. P. (2018). Antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions among students in vocational training programmes. Education and Training, 60(7–8), 719–734. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-03-2017-0034. Gebauer, A. (2013). Mindful organizing as a paradigm to develop managers. Journal of Management Education, 37(2), 203–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1052562912458573. Geldhof, G. J., Porter, T., Weiner, M. B., Malin, H., Bronk, K. C., Agans, J. P., et al. (2013). Fostering youth entrepreneurship: Preliminary findings from the young entrepreneurs study. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 24(3), 431–446. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12086.

9

The International Journal of Management Education xxx (xxxx) xxxx

J. Almeida, et al.

Gibb, A. (1987). Designing effective programmes for encouraging the business start-up process: Lessons from U.K experience. Journal of European Industrial Training, 11(4), 24. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb002229. González, L. S., Castro, R. F., González, M.Á. C., & Cendón, J. A. (2016). A learning experiment based in collaborative project implementation for the development of entrepreneurship. 2016 international symposium on computers in education (SIIE)Salamanca: IEEEhttps://doi.org/10.1109/SIIE.2016.7751859. Gruber-Muecke, T., & Kailer, N. (2011). Developmental networks and professional identity: A survey of active and former junior enterprise members. 8th ESU conference on entrepreneurship (pp. 1–18). Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla. Helfat, C. E., & Martin, J. A. (2015). Dynamic managerial capabilities: Review and assessment of managerial impact on strategic change. Journal of Management, 41(5), 1281–1312. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314561301. Hillmann, J., Duchek, S., Meyr, J., & Guenther, E. (2018). Educating future managers for developing resilient organizations: The role of scenario planning. Journal of Management Education, 42(4), 461–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562918766350. Huang, K.-P. (2017). Entrepreneurial education: The effect of entrepreneurial political skill on social network, tacit knowledge, and innovation capability. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(8), 5061–5072. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00982a. JADE (2017). JADE homepage. Retrieved November 6, 2017, from http://www.jadenet.org/. Junior Enterprise Global Council (2018). Global report (Brussels). Kariv, D., Cisneros, L., & Ibanescu, M. (2018). The role of entrepreneurial education and support in business growth intentions: The case of Canadian entrepreneurs. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2018.1468974. Kearney, A., Harrington, D., & Kelliher, F. (2018). Executive capability for innovation: The Irish seaports sector. European Journal of Training and Development, 42(5–6), 342–361. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-10-2017-0081. Khanna, P., Jones, C. D., & Boivie, S. (2014). Director human capital, information processing demands, and board effectiveness. Journal of Management, 40(2), 557–585. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313515523. Kolvereid, L. (1996). Prediction of employment status choice intentions. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 21(1), 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 104225879602100104. Krueger, N. F., & Carsrud, A. L. (1993). Entrepreneurial intentions : Applying the theory of planned behaviour Entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 5(October), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985629300000020. Krueger, N. F., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(98), 411–432. Kuehn, K. W. (2008). Entrepreneurial intentions research: Implications for entrepreneurship education. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 11, 87–98. Kuratko, D. F. (2005). The emergence of entrepreneurship education: Development, trends and challenges. Entrepreneurship. Theory & Practice, 577–597. Küttim, M., Kallaste, M., Venesaar, U., & Kiis, A. (2014). Entrepreneurship education at university level and students' entrepreneurial intentions. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110, 658–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.910. Lackéus, M. (2015). Entrepreneurship in education: What, why, when, how. Entrepreneurship360, 1–45https://doi.org/10.1515/kbo-2016-0075. Lackéus, M. (2017). Does entrepreneurial education trigger more or less neoliberalism in education? Education and Training, 59(6), 635–650. https://doi.org/10.1108/ ET-09-2016-0151. Lengnick-Hall, C. A., Beck, T. E., & Lengnick-Hall, M. L. (2011). Developing a capacity for organizational resilience through strategic human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 21(3), 243–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.07.001. Liñán, F., & Chen, Y. (2009). Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship. Theory & Practice, 593–617. Liñán, F., Urbano, D., & Guerrero, M. (2011). Regional variations in entrepreneurial cognitions: Start-up intentions of university students in Spain. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 23(3), 187–215. Lyons, E., & Zhang, L. (2018). Who does (not) benefit from entrepreneurship programs? Strategic Management Journal, 39, 85–112. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2704. Man, T. W. Y., & Lau, T. (2005). The context of entrepreneurship in Hong Kong. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 12(4), 464–481. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/14626000510628162. Maresch, D., Harms, R., Kailer, N., & Wimmer-Wurm, B. (2016). The impact of entrepreneurship education on the entrepreneurial intention of students in science and engineering versus business studies university programs. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 104, 172–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.11. 006. Marques, C. S., Ferreira, J. F., Gomes, D. N., & Rodrigues, R. G. (2012). Entrepreneurship education: How psychological, demographic and behavioural factors predict the entrepreneurial intention. Education + Training, 54(8/9), 657–672. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-10-2014-0124. Michaelis, B., Wagner, J. D., & Schweizer, L. (2015). Knowledge as a key in the relationship between high-performance work systems and workforce productivity. Journal of Business Research, 68(5), 1035–1044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.10.005. Mintzberg, H., & Gosling, J. (2002). Educating managers beyond borders. The Academy of Management Learning and Education, 1(1), 64–76. https://doi.org/10.5465/ AMLE.2002.7373654. Miranda, F. J., Chamorro-Mera, A., & Rubio, S. (2017). Academic entrepreneurship in Spanish universities: An analysis of the determinants of entrepreneurial intention. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 23(2), 113–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2017.01.001. Misoska, A. T., Dimitrova, M., & Mrsik, J. (2016). Drivers of entrepreneurial intentions among business students in Macedonia. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja, 29(1), 1062–1074. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2016.1211956. Mitchelmore, S., & Rowley, J. (2010). Entrepreneurial competencies: A literature review and development agenda. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 16(2), 92–111. Moberg, K., Fosse, H. B., Hoffman, A., & Junge, M. (2015). Impact of entrepreneurship education in Denmark - 2014. Danish Foundation for Entrepreneurshiphttps://doi. org/10.5465/AMLE.2002.7373654. Morris, M. H., Webb, J. W., Fu, J., & Singhal, S. (2013). A competency-based perspective on entrepreneurship education: Conceptual and empirical insights. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), 352–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12023. Obino Mokaya, S., Namusonge, M., & Sikalieh, D. (2012). The concept of entrepreneurship: In pursuit of a universally acceptable definition. International Journal of Arts and Commerce, 1(6), 128–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-23456(14)00039-2. Padilla-Angulo, L. (2017). Student associations and entrepreneurial intentions. Studies in Higher Education, 0(0), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017. 1336215. Papadaki, Š., Novák, P., & Dvorský, J. (2017). Attitude of university students to entrepreneurship. Economic Annals XXI, 166(7–8), 100–104. https://doi.org/10. 21003/ea.V166-20. Passaro, R., Quinto, I., & Thomas, A. (2018). The impact of higher education on entrepreneurial intention and human capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 19(1), 135–156. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-04-2017-0056. Pennarola, F., Pistilli, L., & Dawson, G. (2016). From college to consulting through the main door: When IT skills make a difference for Junior Enterprise students. International conference on information systems, 11-14 december 2016 (Dublin, Ireland). Peteraf, M., & Reed, R. (2007). Managerial discretion and internal alignment under regulatory constraints and change. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 1089–1112. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj. Peterman, N. E., & Kennedy, J. (2003). Enterprise education: Influencing students' perceptions of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 129–144. Pina e Cunha, M., Vieira da Cunha, J. V., & Cabral-Cardoso, C. (2004). Looking for complication: Four approaches to management education. Journal of Management Education, 28(1), 88–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562903252518. Pittaway, L., Gazzard, J., Shore, A., & Williamson, T. (2015). Student clubs: Experiences in entrepreneurial learning. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: International Journal, 27(3–4), 127–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2015.1014865. Pittaway, L., Hannon, P. D., Gibb, A., & Thompson, J. L. (2009). Assessment practice in enterprise education. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research. (January) https://doi.org/10.1108/13552550910934468.

10

The International Journal of Management Education xxx (xxxx) xxxx

J. Almeida, et al.

Pittaway, L., Rodriguez-Falcon, E. M., & King, A. S. (2011). The role of entrepreneurship clubs and societies in entrepreneurial learning. International Small Business Journal. (February) https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242610369876. Plumly, L. W., Jr., Marshall, L. L., Eastman, J., Iyer, R., Stanley, K. L., & Boatwright, J. (2008). Developing entrepreneurial competencies: A student business. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 11, 17–28. Rauch, A., & Hulsink, W. (2015). Putting entrepreneurship education where the intention to act lies: An investigation into the impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial behavior. The Academy of Management Learning and Education, 14(2). Schelfhout, W., Bruggeman, K., & Maeyer, S. De (2016). Educational Evaluation Evaluation of entrepreneurial competence through scaled behavioural indicators: Validation of an instrument. Studies In Educational Evaluation, 51, 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.09.001. Schumacher, T., & Mayer, S. (2018). Preparing managers for turbulent contexts: Teaching the principles of design thinking. Journal of Management Education, 42(4), 496–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562917754235. Shapero, A., & Sokol, L. (1982). The social dimensions of entrepreneurship. Encyclopedia of entrepreneurship (pp. 72–90). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Sharma, R. R. (2017). A competency model for management education for sustainability. Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective, 21(2), x–xv. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0972262917700970. Shin, J., Taylor, M. S., & Seo, M.-G. (2012). Resources for change: The relationships of organizational inducements and psychological resilience to employees' attitudes and behavious toward organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 727–748. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0325. Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S., & Al-Laham, A. (2007). Do entrepreneurship programmes raise entrepreneurial intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(July), 566–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2006.05.002. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). USA: Pearson Education. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(1), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640. Thompson, J. L., Scott, J. M., & Gibson, D. A. (2010). Experiential learning, new venture creation, strategic entrepreneurship, knowledge and competency in the university context. In M.-L. Neuvonen-Rauhala (Ed.). Innovation and entrepreneurship in universities, the 3rd international FINPIN 2010 conference, Joensuu, Finland, April 25-27, 2010 (pp. 63–80). Lahti University of Applied Sciences: FINPIN Proceedings. Toutain, O., Fayolle, A., Pittaway, L., & Politis, D. (2017). Role and impact of the environment on entrepreneurial learning. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 29(9–10), 869–888. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2017.1376517. Vaicekauskaite, R., & Valackiene, A. (2018). The need for entrepreneurial education at university. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 20(1), 82–92. https:// doi.org/10.2478/jtes-2018-0005. Vazquez, J. L., Lanero, A., Gutierrez, P., & Garcia, M. P. (2011). Fostering entrepreneurship at the university: A Spanish empirical study. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, (32), 252–276. Volkmann, C., Wilson, K. E., Marlotti, S., Rabuzzi, D., Vyakarnam, S., & Sepulveda, A. (2009). Educating the next wave of entrepreneurs-unlocking entrepreneurial capabilities to meet the global challenges of the 21st century. A report of the global education initiative (Switzerland). Waddock, S. A. (1991). Educating tomorrow's managers. Journal of Management Education, 15(1), 69–95. Walsh, J. P. (1995). Managerial and organizational cognition: Notes from a trip down memory lane. Organization Science, 6(3), 280–321. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc. 6.3.280. Warwick, P., Wyness, L., & Conway, H. (2017). ‘Think of the future’: Managing educational change from students' perspectives of an undergraduate sustainable business programme. International Journal of Management in Education, 15(2), 192–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2017.03.010. Welsh, D. H. B., Tullar, W. L., & Nemati, H. (2016). Entrepreneurship education: Process, method, or both? Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 1(3), 125–132. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2016.01.005. Wilson, K. (2008). Entrepreneurship education in europe. Entrepreneurship and higher education (pp. 1–20). European Foundation for Entrepreneurship Research.

11