is

International Small Business Journal 27(5)

International Small Business Journal
Copyright © 2009 SAGE Publications

bj
(Los Angeles, London, New Delhi,
Singapore and Washington DC)
http://isb.sagepub.com
[DOI:10.1177/0266242609338752]
Vol 27(5): 626–645

Government Bureaucracy, Transactional

Impediments, and Entrepreneurial
Intentions
M A R K D. G R I F F I T H S
Miami University, USA

JILL KICKUL
Berkley Center for Entrepreneurship Studies, NYU Stern School of Business, USA

ALAN L. C ARSRUD
Ryerson University, Canada

In environments where information asymmetries and changing market conditions

are ever-present, discerning between different macro-level and contextual factors
that stimulate or inhibit entrepreneurial activity still needs to be validated. Utilizing
our own primary data (N = 1473 across 10 countries) as well as secondary
data (World Bank Economic Forum, Global Financial Data, and Transparency
International), we investigate the role that several contextual indices
(e.g. perceptions of an entrepreneurial culture) and macro-level indices
(e.g. government corruption, GDP per capita, and ease of doing business indices)
have on entrepreneurial intentions. Results reveal the impact government
corruption and the concomitant transactional impediments have on the degree of
entrepreneurial interest across countries.

KEYWORDS: bureaucracy; corruption; entrepreneurial intentions

Government Bureaucracy, Transactional Impediments,

and Entrepreneurial Intentions
A frequently cited obstacle to new venture creation, especially for nascent entre-
preneurs, is gaining access to the appropriate players, networks, and resources in a
nation’s entrepreneurial ecosystem in order to move organizations forward (Dodd
and Patra, 2002; Drori and Lerner, 2002; Ozcan, 1995). Concurrently, venture
capitalists, service providers, and economic development agencies seek to build
robust pipelines of quality entrepreneurial opportunities for investment returns

626

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

 Griffiths et al.: Government Bureaucracy, Transactional Impediments
and job growth. However, this group is often frustrated at potential entrepreneurs’
perceived reluctance to undertake new ventures (Brännback et al., 2008a,b; Krueger
and Brazeal, 1994; Krueger et al., 2007; Mason and Harrison, 2002). What is not
clear in the research is how governmental bureaucracy and other cultural and
economic barriers (Donckels and Courtmans, 1990; Spilling, 1991) affect, positively
or negatively, the entrepreneurial intentions of individuals (Brännback et al., 2008a)
although Djankov et al. (2006) find that countries with better regulations tend to
grow faster.

Entrepreneurial Intentions: A Multi-Level Approach

Despite previous research identifying many of the contextual antecedents of
entrepreneurial intentions, little research has examined the role that the macro-
environment, including government corruption as well as governmental polices, have
on the intention to start a business. Most research has focused on barriers to growth
(Brännback et al., 2008b; Butler and Hansen, 1991; Donckels and Courtmans, 1990;
Drori and Lerner, 2002; Hindle and Gillin, 1991). Few studies have investigated how
macro-environmental variables augment the individual-level perceptions of culture
on influencing individual intentionality. Many studies have focused on cultural or
national differences (Reynolds, 1998; Reynolds et al., 1994, 2004; Spilling, 1991;
Westhead, 1997). These studies have not fully explained the causes of observed
differences in nations and none addresses the impact of macro-level variables on
individual intentions. While previous research suggests that intentions develop
through both rational analytic processes and through holistic, intuitive contextual
thinking, this study extends those investigations by analysing how both primary and
secondary sourced information available to individuals influence intentionality across
10 different national settings. This article proposes and tests a series of stage-based
models that analyze how macro-level and contextual variables influence individual
entrepreneurial intentions.

Demand-and Supply-Side Theories of New Firm Development

Recent work examining entrepreneurial firms and their evolution has begun to
employ theories incorporating a demand-side perspective that focuses on the degree
of entrepreneurial interest and activity, and its context. This demand perspective in-
vestigates the influences of businesses, markets, and institutions on where, how, and
why new and emerging firms are created. Thorton (1999) has extended this demand-
side perspective by integrating how the supply-side perspective (where the focus is
primarily on the individual) can complement and enhance our understanding of firm
creation. She argues for a sociological framework, an embeddedness perspective,
where institutional and ecological theories and multilevel models can be used to
integrate the two schools of thought.
Recently, Companys and McMullen (2007) reviewed many of the theories that
incorporate both the demand-and supply-side perspectives and argued that there
are three distinctive and emerging schools of thought regarding the development
of entrepreneurship. These are: the economic school; the cultural cognitive school;

627

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

International Small Business Journal 27(5)
and the socio-political school. They discuss how each tends to focus on either the
objective or subjective views of an individual’s perceptions of entrepreneurship and
strategies to exploit opportunities. Specifically, the economic school argues that the
attractiveness of entrepreneurship exists as a ‘result of the information about material
resources in society’ and the economic context where entrepreneurial opportunities
exist. The cultural cognitive school contends that this attractiveness is a ‘result
of environmental ambiguity and the cultural resources available to interpret and
define’ entrepreneurial opportunities. Lastly, the socio-political school emphasizes
the role of political structures in defining the attractiveness of participating in entre-
preneurial activities. Here, government mechanisms regulate the action of individuals
and define the social norms that dictate their intentions and actions. Regulatory
parties that impose rules and stipulations can also influence an individual’s desire
and intentions to perceive and exploit an entrepreneurial opportunity (Donckels
and Courtmans, 1990). Below, we begin our discussion on the cultural cognitive ele-
ments followed by the socio-political and economic elements that may influence an
individual’s entrepreneurial intentions and the decision to launch a venture.

Cultural Cognitive Elements of Intentionality

It is widely accepted that entrepreneurial cognitions are central to intentions and
thus, entrepreneurial action (Krueger and Carsrud, 1993; Krueger et al., 2000).
Yet, the multiple pathways to the formation of intentions have not been fully
explored (Brännback et al., 2008a). From the cultural cognitive perspective, the at-
tractiveness of entrepreneurship is subjective and based on the degree of ambiguity
in the environmental context as well as on the mental models that individuals use
to interpret and define entrepreneurship and opportunity (Brännback et al., 2005;
Brännback and Carsrud, 2008; Carsrud et al., 2009). This view is grounded in how
individuals perceive their society by combining cultural schemas and templates to
interpret their own entrepreneurial realities. Here, we discuss the role and inter-
pretation of perceptions of entrepreneurial culture and how those may affect one’s
intention to initiate a new venture.

Entrepreneurial Culture
Entrepreneurs across cultures share a great deal. As McGrath and MacMillan (1992)
pointed out, ‘they are more alike than different’. However, two entrepreneurs who
may arrive at the same beliefs and outcomes, can do so by very different paths
(Brännback et al., 2008b). Previous research has also shown that different cultural
norms can influence entrepreneurial intentions (Brännback et al., 2008a). Although
all of these explanations have received empirical support, none of them focuses
on broader cultural and societal differences that may affect the attractiveness of
entrepreneurship at the individual level. Culture may foster entrepreneurship
(Spilling, 1991), if the society ‘values’ entrepreneurs and ‘shows’ this by shaping
institutions and laws accordingly (Davidsson and Wiklund, 1997). Societies that
legitimize entrepreneurship provide a supportive environment, which, if perceived
by individuals as beneficial, reinforces their entrepreneurial inclinations (Etzioni,
1987; Spilling, 1991).

628

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

 Griffiths et al.: Government Bureaucracy, Transactional Impediments
This study addresses the gap between individual and macro-levels in the literature,
by linking the role of cultural and societal factors as they influence intentions.
Specifically, we analyze how perceptions of the culture and the social environment
in a country influence the intention to start a new venture (Hindle and Gillin, 1991;
Ramachandran, 1989). We assess perceptions of culture along six dimensions
(Stephan, 2007) plus country as a proxy for general society:
1. Opportunity seeking: the extent to which individuals in the same region/country
actively seek business opportunities;
2. Entrepreneurial traits: the extent to which individuals in the same region/country
value entrepreneurial traits such as autonomy, risk taking, personal initiative;
3. Capability beliefs: the extent to which individuals in the same region/country are
capable of solving complex problems and facing difficulties and uncertainty;
4. Responsibility taking: the extent to which individuals in the same region/country
take responsibility for the work they do;
5. Entrepreneurial fears: the extent to which individuals in the same region/country
have fears and doubts concerning an entrepreneurial career;
6. Entrepreneurial motivation: the extent to which individuals in the same region/
country are willing to start their own businesses.
These cultural factors might be considered commonly held cognitive elements that
individuals in a society might hold as a collective. Such ‘norms’ should be influenced
according to entrepreneurial intentions models (Krueger and Carsrud, 1993; Krueger
et al., 2000). Thus, one would expect the cultural elements described earlier (with
the exception of entrepreneurial fears) to have a positive impact on entrepreneurial
intentions. However, in societies where entrepreneurship is not seen as a valued
career option they should negatively affect the intentions of those in that society
intending to start a new venture (e.g. individuals in the same country have fears/
doubts about an entrepreneurial career). Thus, given the preceding discussion, we
offer our first hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1: The cultural cognitive elements will be significantly related to entrepre-
neurial intentions, such that: perceiving a cultural environment that favors entrepreneur-
ship is associated with higher entrepreneurial intentions.

Socio-Political and Economic Elements of Intentionality

An important player in the macro environment is the government and its role in
establishing and enforcing business-friendly policies. The 10 countries in our study:
Australia, Canada, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Mexico, Romania, Russia,
Spain and Ukraine have a range of government structures and administrative and
regulatory capabilities. Many of these countries have been subject to frequent study
as a part of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor project (GEM; Reynolds et al.,
2004) and the reader is referred to the GEM reports for a better understanding of
the various clusters of nations with respect to nascent entrepreneurship. Briefly,
three of the countries are attempting to make the transition from a centralized
economy to a market-based economy: Romania, Russia, and the Ukraine. Others

629

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

International Small Business Journal 27(5)
belong to the former British Empire (Canada and Australia) and others are clustered
as European Union (and related) countries (Germany, Netherlands, Norway, and
Spain). Mexico is representative of the emerging Latin America nations. As such,
there is a significant amount of economic diversity between and among the various
nations. This diversity is perhaps best demonstrated by the difference in 2006
per capita gross domestic product between the most productive nation (Norway
56,737.74) and the least productive nation (the Ukraine 1,712.85).
One also needs a measure of government effectiveness in promoting sound and
transparent economic policies. This measure is operationalized using the index
developed by Transparency International (discussed later in greater detail) to
rank the level of government corruption. For example, the Netherlands is ranked
as the 7th most administratively transparent country in which to do business while
Russia ranks 143rd out of 180 nations as one of the most corrupt states.
In a study of transition economies, Broadman and Recanatini (2002) find the
same broad economic and political causalities as do most global cross-country
studies (e.g. Djankov et al., 2006), i.e. that corruption tends to decline with economic
development, strengthening of democratic processes and to some extent greater
openness of trade.1 Importantly for our study, they also find that corruption is
encouraged by high barriers to new business entry, which should negatively affect
an individual’s intention to start a new venture. Accordingly, we include several
metrics developed by the World Bank Group that measure the ease of doing busi-
ness (i.e. transactional impediments).
Tanzi and Davoodi (2001, 2002) regressed per capita output on the Transparency
International Corruption Perception Index, the same index used here to measure
the level of government corruption and found that the correlation is high and signi-
ficant. Mo (2001) finds that a one-unit increase in the corruption index reduces the
economic growth rate by 0.545%. Corruption has been shown (Tanzi and Davoodi,
2001, 2002) to reduce the productivity of public investment and dampen growth.
Thus, corruption should also affect individual intentions.
A strong relationship of higher per capita incomes (Treisman, 2000) has been found
to be associated with reduced corruption: ‘Rich countries are perceived to be less
corrupt than poor ones’.2 Sullivan and Shkolnikov (2004) contend that, among other
things, corruption leads to misallocation of resources, a lack of competitiveness and
efficiency, lower public revenues for essential goods and services, lower productivity
and lower levels of innovation, lower growth and private sector employment rates.
Further, Sullivan (2000) asserts that:
Firms that refuse to participate in corrupt transactions may find themselves forced
out of certain markets … [D]omestic firms, especially small businesses are much more
vulnerable… they [too] can leave the market … they can emigrate into the informal or
underground economy. (Sullivan, 2000: 1)
This implicitly suggests that the existence of corruption does not necessarily
dampen entrepreneurial intentions totally, but may affect the success of the ventures
or the industries in which such intentions are actualized. Because corrupt transactions
are by definition illegal, or at the very least, part of the ‘informal economy’, they
are not recorded and thus, impossible to measure directly.3

630

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

 Griffiths et al.: Government Bureaucracy, Transactional Impediments
The question of whether per capita GDP affects entrepreneurship remains un-
answered. Ovaska and Sobel (2004) find no significant impact on the number of new
ventures per 1000 inhabitants while both Parker and Robson (2004) and, Fisman
and Sarria-Allende (2004) find that entrepreneurship increases with increasing
levels of GDP.
Based on the above discussion of the socio-political and economic elements of
intentionality, we offer the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 2: The socio-political and economic elements will be significantly related to
the intentions of individuals interested in entrepreneurial activity, such that: (a) stronger
perceptions of government corruption are associated with lower entrepreneurial intentions
and (b) higher levels of GDP per capita are associated with higher entrepreneurial
intentions.

Transactional Impediments and Entrepreneurial Intentions

Many researchers (Butler and Hansen, 1991; Donckels and Courtmans, 1990;
Drori and Lerner, 2002; Reynolds, 2007; Reynolds et al., 2004) have noted that
transactional impediments to doing business within a region or nation can affect the
growth rates and success of new ventures. The major and most recognized source
for determining the ‘ease’ comes from http://www.doingbusiness.org/economy-
rankings. This organization, part of the World Bank Economic Forum, ranks
countries (from 1 to 178) as to how easy it is to do business in that nation. The index
(discussed in detail later) is the ranking of the simple average of country percentile
rankings in each of the 10 topics (starting a firm, licenses, employing workers,
registering property, getting credit, protecting investors, paying taxes, trading
across borders, enforcing contracts, and closing a firm) each of which in turn is the
simple average of the percentile rankings of its component indicators. If a nation
has no laws or regulations covering a specific area, e.g. bankruptcy, it receives a ‘no
practice’ or ‘not possible’ mark. Similarly, an economy receives a similar mark if
regulations exist but are never used in practice or if competing regulations prohibit
such practice. Either way, such grades put the country at the bottom of the rankings
on the relevant indicator.
Hypothesis 3: Stronger perceptions of ease of doing business are associated with higher
entrepreneurial intentions.

Methodology
Participants
The individuals in our study were 1473 business students enrolled in either a graduate
business program or in their last year of a bachelor program, across 10 countries
(N size in parentheses): Australia (79), Canada (96), Germany (137), Netherlands
(121), Norway (112), Mexico (90), Romania (115), Russia (235), Spain (296), and
Ukraine (192). The questionnaire was administered between January and June 2007.
The average age of respondents is 23 years. Almost half of the respondents (48%)

631

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

International Small Business Journal 27(5)
are females. Over 43% of respondents reported their parents have been self-
employed. Thirty-nine percent of respondents are currently working at least part-
time and 15% are currently involved in start-up activities.4

Measures

Culture of Entrepreneurship Questionnaire (C-ENT) This questionnaire captures

cultural practices and attitudes relevant to entrepreneurship (Stephan, 2007). The
facets of the entrepreneurial climate/culture questionnaire are derived from per-
sonality traits and orientations shown to be related to becoming an entrepreneur,
to business success, and to differentiate entrepreneurs from managers (e.g. the
meta-analytic review by Rauch and Frese, 2007; Zhao and Seibert, 2006). The
questionnaire asks individuals to describe how people around them act and think.
Specifically, it is assumed that when one observes others, one is able to evaluate
their abilities with regards to:
• dealing with problems and trust in their abilities (capability beliefs);
• taking responsibility;
• valuing entrepreneurial traits like initiative, risk taking, and autonomy;
• being open to and actively seeking opportunities (seeking opportunities);
• seeing entrepreneurship as something desirable they are motivated to do
(entrepreneurial motivation);
• having few fears and doubts concerning an entrepreneurial career.

GDP per Capita GDP per capita was drawn from the Global Financial Data
website (http://www.globalfindata.com) which, in turn, obtains the data from the
relevant government archive or agencies. Consistent with Dreher and Grassebner
(2007), and Van Stel et al. (2003), squared GDP per capita is used to recognize its
quadratic relationship with nascent entrepreneurship.

Transactional Impediments (Ease of Doing Business) Economies are ranked on

their ease of doing business, from 1 to 178, with first place being the best. A high
ranking on the ease of doing business index means the regulatory environment is
conducive to new business operations. To operationalize this measure for the nascent
entrepreneur, we restrict the variables to three essential start-up concerns: dealing
with licenses, registering property, and enforcing contracts. Data were obtained
from Doing Business – The World Bank Group.5

Corruption In addition, we supplemented our data with information from

Transparency International.6 That is, we extracted from their 2005 Corruption
Perception Index the relevant evaluation for each country in the sample. This
index focuses on corruption in the public sector and defines corruption as the
abuse of public office for private gain. The surveys used in compiling the index ask
questions that relate to bribery of public officials, kickbacks in public procurement,
embezzlement of public funds or questions that probe the strength of anti-corruption
policies,7 thereby encompassing both administrative and political corruption.8

632

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

 Griffiths et al.: Government Bureaucracy, Transactional Impediments
Dependent Variable: Entrepreneurial Intentions Intentions to start a business were
assessed with nine items that included: ‘I am ready to do anything to be an entre-
preneur’, ‘My professional goal is to become an entrepreneur’, ‘I am determined
to create a business venture in the future’, ‘I have the intention to start a firm one
day’. These items are directly consistent with the entrepreneurship intentions
literature on measurement (Brännback et al., 2005; Carsrud et al., 2009; Krueger,
1993; Krueger et al., 2000).9

Data Analyses
Hierarchical multiple regression was used to test our hypothesized relationships.
Hierarchical regression attempts to improve standard regression estimates by
adding a second- or third-stage (etc.) ‘prior’ regression to an ordinary model. F-tests
compute the significance of each added variable (or set of variables) to the explan-
ation reflected in R-squared. This procedure is an alternative to comparing betas
assessing the importance of the independent variables.
A series of three stages for all of our variables were entered in the following way:
(1) cultural cognitive variables, i.e. seeking opportunities, valuing entrepreneurial
traits, capability beliefs, entrepreneurial responsibility, entrepreneurship fears,
entrepreneurial motivation, and country; (2) squared GDP per capita (in euros) and
perceived government corruption; (3) ease of doing business indices, i.e. dealing with
licenses, registering property, and enforcing contracts. As mentioned earlier in
our discussion of the cultural cognitive elements of intentionality, if cognitions do
indeed play an integral role in predicting intentions, then how do other variables
within a nascent entrepreneur’s decision-making framework and context influence
his/her perceptions of entrepreneurship? By incorporating a multiple-stage hier-
archical approach, we can fully explore and thus extend previous research on how
the context (economic and socio-political factors, including transactional policies/
impediments) affects intentionality.
Thus, the following equations describe each of the three multi-level stages to be
estimated in our hierarchical regression model:
Stage 1: Intentions = α 0 + α 1 Opps+ α 2 ETraits+ α 3 EBlief+ α 4 EResp+ α 5 EFear+
α6EMots+ε (1)
Stage 2: Intentions = β0+ β1Opps+ β2ETraits+ β3EBlief+ β4EResp+ β5EFear+ β6EMots+
β7Country+ β8GDP+ β9Corruption+ω (2)
Stage 3: Intentions = γ0+ β1Opps+ γ2ETraits+ γ3EBlief+ γ4EResp+ γ5EFear+ γ6EMots+
γ7Country+ γ8SqGDP+ γ9Corruption+ γ10License+ γ11RegProp+ γ12Contracts+ υ (3)

Results
Descriptive Statistics and Zero-Order Correlation Analyses
Before presenting our hierarchical regression results, we present the descriptive
statistics and zero-order correlations in Tables 1 and 2.10 At the bivariate level,
we find that with the exception of two of our cultural cognitive variables (valuing
entrepreneurial traits and taking responsibility), all of the other variables are
associated with entrepreneurial intentions at the 0.05 level. It is also interesting

633

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

International Small Business Journal 27(5)
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics
Variable Mean SD
Seeking opportunities 4.2822 1.03950
Valuing entrepreneurial traits 4.6300 1.18775
Capability beliefs 4.2098 1.04383
Taking responsibility 4.1222 1.33573
Entrepreneurial fears 4.7184 1.04659
Entrepreneurial motivation 5.0629 1.03568
Country 6.97 2.923
Sq GDP per capita 6E+008 832027733.5
Govt corruption 5.7225 2.61861
Dealing with licenses 85.5255 61.15166
Registering property 57.4555 41.07505
Enforcing contracts 36.4684 19.99859
Entrepreneurial intentions 4.53603 1.474752
N =1473

to note that entrepreneurial motivation had the highest negative correlation

with government corruption. That is, the more the corruption, the less likely the
motivation to be entrepreneurial. While GDP per capita had the highest positive
correlation with dealing with licenses and registering property, government
corruption was significantly correlated with capability beliefs, entrepreneurial
fears, and GDP per capita. While these initial analyses shed light on the primary
relationships in our study, additional investigative tests of the unique contribution
of each set of variables in explaining entrepreneurial intentions are still required.
The follow-up hierarchical regression analyses further tests our hypotheses and
gives us an improved understanding of how the three schools of thought are linked
to intentionality.

Analytic Approach: Hierarchical Regression Analyses

As discussed, we tested our hypotheses using a multiple-stage hierarchical approach.
Table 3 presents the results of our three stages. In the first model and test of
Hypothesis 1 that includes only the cultural cognitive variables and country, results
suggest that seeking opportunities, entrepreneurial fears, entrepreneurial motiv-
ation, and country were all positively related to intentions. Thus, this only provides
partial support for Hypothesis 1, since valuing entrepreneurial traits and capability
beliefs (in a positive manner) were not related to intentions.
In the second stage test of Hypothesis 2, the first stage variables remained sig-
nificant but GDP per capita and government corruption were also significant.
Specifically, both of these variables augmented the first stage in contributing an
additional 3% (p < 0.001) of variance in explaining entrepreneurial intentions. More
importantly, government corruption and GDP per capita were negatively associated
with intentions. As would be expected, the higher the level of corruption within a
country, the lower the entrepreneurial intentions. Similarly and inconsistent with

634

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

 Table 2. Correlation Matrix
Variables [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] Intent2
[1] Seeking opportunities Pearson Correlation 0.57 0.58 0.47 –0.10 0.36 0.11 –0.02 –0.03 0.09 0.15 –0.12 0.135
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.00
[2] Valuing entrepreneurial traits Pearson Correlation 0.50 0.43 –0.03 0.40 0.09 –0.07 –0.15 0.07 0.12 –0.07 0.42
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.56 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.11
[3]Capability beliefs Pearson Correlation 0.62 –0.12 0.32 0.02 0.00 –0.06 0.03 0.13 –0.16 0.06
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.96 0.01 0.29 0.00 0.54 0.03
[4] Taking responsibility Pearson Correlation –0.08 0.27 –0.08 0.11 –0.01 –0.05 0.05 –0.10 0.36
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.08 0.07 0.00 0.18
[5] Entrepreneurship fears Pearson Correlation 0.13 –0.05 –0.04 –0.09 0.07 0.09 –0.05 0.11
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.06 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.09 0.00
[6] Entrepreneurial motivation Pearson Correlation 0.19 –0.22 –0.16 0.24 0.27 0.07 0.25
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00
[7] Country Pearson Correlation –0.38 –0.02 0.39 0.38 0.51 0.17
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
[8] SqGDP per capita (in euros) Pearson Correlation 0.39 –0.43 –0.62 –0.42 –0.25
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
[9] Govt corruption Pearson Correlation 0.08 –0.18 –0.26 –0.20
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
[10] Dealing with licenses Pearson Correlation 0.48 –0.21 0.23
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.00 0.00

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

[11] Registering property Pearson Correlation 0.34 0.29
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.00
[12] Enforcing contracts Pearson Correlation 0.14
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00
|r| >0.08 is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed).

635
Griffiths et al.: Government Bureaucracy, Transactional Impediments
International Small Business Journal 27(5)
Table 3. Regression Results from Hierarchical Analysis
Model (1) Standardized Beta t-statistic p-value
Coefficient
(Constant) 1.792 6.28 0.00
Seeking opportunities 0.140 4.07 0.00
Valuing entrepreneurial traits –0.125 –3.84 0.00
Capability beliefs –0.026 –0.72 0.47
Taking responsibility 0.001 0.03 0.98
Entrepreneurship fears 0.105 4.04 0.00
Entrepreneurship motivation 0.223 7.68 0.00
Country 0.127 4.90 0.00
Adjusted R2 0.099 – –
F 23.204 – 0.00
Model (2)
(Constant) 2.379 8.07 0.00
Seeking opportunities 0.145 4.29 0.00
Valuing entrepreneurial traits –0.108 –3.38 0.00
Capability beliefs –0.046 –1.30 0.19
Taking responsibility 0.024 0.73 0.46
Entrepreneurship fears 0.093 3.64 0.00
Entrepreneurship motivation 0.177 6.05 0.00
Country 0.086 3.10 0.00
GDP2 per capita (euros) –0.126 –4.21 0.00
Govt corruption –0.111 –4.05 0.00
Adjusted R2 0.132 – –
R2 change 0.034 – 0.00
F 24.952 – 0.00
Model (3)
(Constant) 1.968 6.35 0.00
Seeking opportunities 0.131 3.94 0.00
Valuing entrepreneurial traits –0.090 –2.82 0.01
Capability beliefs –0.057 –1.62 0.11
Taking responsibility 0.024 0.75 0.46
Entrepreneurship fears 0.074 2.94 0.01
Entrepreneurship motivation 0.144 4.96 0.00
Country –0.026 –0.71 0.48
GDP2 per capita (euros) 0.051 1.32 0.19
Govt corruption –0.156 –5.50 0.00
Dealing with licenses 0.206 4.86 0.06
Registering property 0.116 3.32 0.00
Enforcing contracts 0.125 3.00 0.00
Adjusted R2 0.162 – –
R2 change 0.031 – 0.00
F 23.800 – 0.00

636

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

 Griffiths et al.: Government Bureaucracy, Transactional Impediments
our second hypothesis, we also found that the higher the levels of GDP per capita,
the lower the intentions. That is, the wealthier the individual, the less likely nascent
entrepreneurial intentions would exist. This might be the result of the fact that as
societies become wealthier there are more career options for individuals that com-
pete for attention. This interpretation is consistent with the findings of Brännback
and Carsrud (2008), with regard to entrepreneurship.
Finally, the third hypothesis examines transactional impediments and ease of
doing business indicators. All third-stage variables including dealing with licenses,
registering property, and enforcing contracts are positively linked to intentions,
with another 3% contribution in determining entrepreneurial intentionality
beyond our second-stage socio-political and economic variables. That is, the more
difficult it is to obtain licenses, to register property, and to enforce contracts, the
higher the intentions. Again, as indicated earlier with our second hypothesis, this
is incongruent with our earlier arguments and research investigating ease of doing
business factors and entrepreneurship. We discuss these apparent inconsistencies
in the next section.

Discussion
While previous research has identified many of the antecedents related to entre-
preneurial intentions, there has been little research that considers intentionality
as a variable embedded in multiple external environments and contexts (social,
cultural, industrial, and political, etc). By utilizing both primary and secondary-
sourced information across 10 national settings, we test a series of stage-based
models that analyze how socio-political, economic, and culturally cognitive variables
are related to entrepreneurial intentions. By adopting both a demand-side and
supply-side perspective that focuses on the degree of entrepreneurial interest,
we advance the work of Thorton (1999) and Companys and McMullen (2007) by
examining empirically how the three schools of thought, including transactional
impediment issues, are related and can explain and be integrated to understand
better how individuals perceive entrepreneurship and therefore process informa-
tion and formulate their own beliefs and attitudes regarding the launch of their
own ventures.
Some of our results are counter to our initial arguments and hypotheses that
emphasize the importance of cultural, economic, and government factors that lead
to the decision to start a business. While higher levels of corruption and lower
levels of GDP have been shown to lessen the interest and desirability to begin a
new venture, we also found those indicators that would increase the feasibility of
a successful launch to be related to intentions. Dealing with licenses, registering
property, and enforcing contracts may be seen as ‘positive’ stimulants that may
further motivate individuals to consider entrepreneurship. In fact, a rather robust
indicator of intentions found in our results was entrepreneurial motivation: the
extent to which individuals in the same region/country are willing to start their own
businesses. Recall that the dependent variable is intentions that the individual will
succeed in the venture. Hence, the subjective view of the transactional impediments
may underestimate their true nature once the venture is undertaken.

637

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

International Small Business Journal 27(5)
From an individual nascent entrepreneur perspective, the growing body of
motivation and cognition research offers us multiple mechanisms, both theory-driven
and empirically robust, to build a deeper, richer understanding of how we learn to
recognize opportunities and to assess their feasibility. Researchers have postulated
that motivation and cognition have the potential to make a significant contribu-
tion to the study of entrepreneurship (Allinson et al., 2000; Baron, 1998; Mitchell
et al., 2002; Mitchell et al., 2007). Cognitions assist in raising the level and degree
of awareness surrounding the opportunities within an entrepreneurial venture and
thus the motivation to act upon and pursue such opportunities.
Tangent to the level of awareness and perception of the attractiveness of a new
venture is the role that socio-political factors (transactional impediments) may play
in the creation and the sustainability of new firms. Public choice theory (Peltzman,
1976) views government regulation as socially ineffective and inefficient. Since
increased regulation may raise initial obstacles to entry in an attractive industry, it
could lead to opportunities associated with gaining early market advantages and
profitability – all increasing the level of desirability of launching one’s own firm. In
this theory, the government with increased regulation, policies, and payments may
create market conditions that raise the attractiveness of entrepreneurship with a
specific industry. The government, through its regulation policies and practices,
serves as an important actor in the perception of how new opportunities and market
spaces can be created and eventually exploited. In countries where the perception
of entrepreneurial motivation is high and combined with these conditions, the
level of interest to capture and sustain market share and power may be viewed as
lucrative and desirable.
These comments are speculative at best, especially since we have no direct and
objective measures of market attractiveness. Additional research should investi-
gate the mediating role that these perceptions have on entrepreneurial intentions
and behavior.

Study Limitations
Our study results have a number of limitations. The main limitation of the study is
that we use cross-sectional data. Thus, any conclusions about the causal structure of
our hypotheses are not warranted. Future research should capture data over time
(as discussed later) so that tests of the causal relationships can be examined.
While our study captured both objective and subjective data to examine the role
of economic, socio-political, and cultural cognitive perspectives on intentionality,
much remains to be done to analyze the impact of these cultural factors on the inten-
tionality of individuals in society. Although we tried to measure multiple elements
and facets of each type of perspective, future research should investigate how other
proxy and alternate measures, both at the subjective and objective levels, influence
intentionality. Along with intentionality, it would be interesting to incorporate
actual entrepreneurial activity and start-up behavior. However, this would most
likely require non-student samples. This would be an essential link that would
provide researchers, practitioners, and policy makers with the necessary evidence
and credence of all three perspectives and schools of thought in enabling and
stimulating entrepreneurship.

638

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

 Griffiths et al.: Government Bureaucracy, Transactional Impediments
In addition, while we were able to measure many variables using both primary and
secondary data, additional research should investigate how future changes and per-
ceptions will affect innovation in subsequent years and whether there is a lag in the
intention response to changes in the external cultural environment. New economic
and government policies and regulations that encourage shifts in the industrial,
economic, and regulatory environments may not reach full effectiveness and inten-
tions over a short period of time. Longitudinal studies need to be conducted to
understand the effects of such changes in economic markets, socio-political climate,
and overall cultural perceptions. For example, a long-term perspective along with
a commitment from a variety of institutional and government parties once a new
policy change is implemented will ensure which goals and activities are the most
successful in driving entrepreneurship within a specific country.
Notwithstanding these limitations and qualifications, we believe that we have
gathered and examined both primary and secondary data from a theoretically
interesting set of sources and respondents. This utilization of a theoretical framework
and the data analysis sheds new perspectives on the individual and combined
tripartite schools of thought. We believe that we have added to the intentions
literature by showing how government and cognitive cultural factors may enhance
entrepreneurial intentions.

Conclusion
By providing a robust empirical test across multiple countries, we extend research,
such as GEM, country-specific PSED-type studies (Reynolds, 2007); we also do this
by approaching our analyses at the macro-economic level as well as the individual
perceptions of the cultural, economic, and transactional impediments on inten-
tionality. Such an improved understanding of the role of these variables may further
inform and assist policy makers as well as educators in fostering and enabling
entrepreneurship in diverse contexts and cultures.

Notes
1. For a historical overview of the literature on cross-country corruption studies see
Lanyi (2004).
2. However, Kaufmann and Kraay (2002), find evidence of negative feedback from rising
per capita incomes towards better governance outcomes. They explain this somewhat
odd result by arguing that higher incomes do not necessarily lead to demands for better
institutions, but may be accompanied, initially, by ‘crony capitalism’, elite influence,
regulatory capture, or ‘state capture’; these phenomena have been observed in varying
degrees in East Asia, Latin America, and the transition economies of Central and
Eastern Europe, even during upswings in output. Kaufmann and Kraay (2002) uses
different explanatory variables, regressing per capita income on the main World Bank
good governance categories – voice and accountability, political stability, governmental
effectiveness, regulatory quality, and enforcement of anti-corruption policies.
3. The definition of an ‘illegal’ business need not be limited to, for example, drug dealing
or arms smuggling, but can also include unregistered, unlicensed or black market busi-
nesses. As Baumol (1990: 915) points out, ‘The spectacular fortunes amassed by the

639

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

International Small Business Journal 27(5)
“arbitrageurs” revealed by the scandals of the mid-1980s were sometimes, surely, the
reward of unproductive, occasionally illegal but entrepreneurial acts’. In this study, we do
not differentiate between the intentions to start a ‘legal’ or ‘illegal’ business. The students
in the study responded to general statements regarding entrepreneurial intentions of
starting their own business.
4. All students were involved in entrepreneurship courses focussing on new venture ini-
tiation and management at the various universities. The implied assumption is their desire
to learn about new venture creation/management. Accordingly, they form an appropriate
group to include in the analyses and testing of the hypotheses.
5. See http://www.doingbusiness.org/MethodologySurveys/methodologynote.aspx – ‘The
Doing Business methodology offers several advantages. It is transparent, using factual
information about what laws and regulations say and allowing multiple interactions with
local respondents to clarify potential misinterpretations of questions. Having representative
samples of respondents is not an issue, as the texts of the relevant laws and regulations are
collected and answers checked for accuracy. The methodology is inexpensive and easily
replicable, so data can be collected in a large sample of economies. Because standard
assumptions are used in the data collection, comparisons and benchmarks are valid
across countries’.
6. Transparency International (TI), founded in 1993 is an organization leading the fight
against corruption. TI brings together relevant players from government, civil society,
business and the media to promote transparency in elections, in public administration,
in procurement and in business. TI’s global network of chapters and contacts also use
advocacy campaigns to lobby governments to implement anti-corruption reforms. TI
does not undertake investigations of alleged corruption or expose individual cases, but
at times will work in coalition with organizations that do.
7. The broader definition of corruption includes nepotism, cronyism, insider trading and
issues involving government/administrative discretionary actions such as the granting
(or not) of licenses and permits.
8. The 2005 index draws on 16 different polls and surveys from 10 independent institutions.
To qualify for inclusion the data must be well documented and sufficient to permit a
judgment of its reliability. All sources must provide a ranking of nations and must meas-
ure the overall extent of corruption. The expertise reflected in the index draws upon the
understanding of corrupt practices held by those based in both the industrialized and
developing world. The surveys also use two types of samples both non-resident and resi-
dent. TI notes that residents’ viewpoints correlate well with those of non-resident experts.
9. The authors of the referenced articles were consulted in the development of the
questionnaire.
10. To examine further the issue of multicollinearity, we conducted a formal detection-
tolerance or the variance inflation factor (VIF). O’Brien (2007) suggests that a tolerance
of less than 0.20 and/or a VIF of 5 and above indicates a multicollinearity problem. With
all of our independent variables included in our hierarchical regression analyses, none
of our variables had a tolerance less than 0.20 nor was there a VIF higher than 3.

References
Allinson, C. W., Chell, E. and Hayes, J. (2000) ‘Intuition and Entrepreneurial Behaviour’,
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 9(1): 31–43.
Baron, R. A. (1998) ‘Cognitive Mechanisms in Entrepreneurship: Why and When
Entrepreneurs Think Differently than Other People’, Journal of Business Venturing
13(4): 275–94.

640

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

 Griffiths et al.: Government Bureaucracy, Transactional Impediments
Baumol, W. (1990) ‘Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive, and Destructive’, Journal
of Political Economy 98(5.1): 893–921.
Brännback, M. and Carsrud, A. (2008) ‘Do They See What We See?: A Critical Nordic Tale
About Perceptions Of Entrepreneurial Opportunities, Goals and Growth’, Journal of
Enterprising Culture 16(1): 55–89.
Brännback, M., Carsrud, A., Krueger, N. and Elfving, J. (2008a) ‘Challenging the Triple
Helix Model of Regional Innovations Systems: A Venture-centric Model’, International
Journal of Technoentrepreneurship 1(3): 257–77.
Brännback, M., Carsrud, A. Renko, M. (2008b) ‘Strategy and Strategic Thinking in
Biotechnology Entrepreneurship’, in H. Patzelt and T. Brenner (eds) Handbook
of Bioentrepreneurship, pp. 83–99. New York: Springer Verlag.
Brännback, M., Carsrud, A., Renko, M., Hudd, I. and Nordberg, L. (2005) ‘Perceived Success
Factors in Start Up and Growth Strategies: A Comparative Study of Entrepreneurs,
Managers, and Students’, paper presented at the 50th International Council on Small
Business, Washington, DC, June.
Broadman, H. G. and Recanatini, F. (2002) ‘Corruption and Policy: Back to the Roots’,
Journal of Policy Reform 5: 37–49.
Butler, J. and Hansen, G. (1991) ‘Network Evolution, Entrepreneurial Success, and Regional
Development’, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 3(1): 1–16.
Carsrud, A. Brännback, M., Nordberg, L., Renko, M. (2009) ‘Cognitive Maps and Perceptions
of Entrepreneurial Growth: A Quasi-experimental Study in Differences between Tech-
nology Entrepreneurs, Corporate Managers, and Students’, Journal of Enterprising
Culture. 17(1): 1–24.
Companys, Y. E. and McMullen, J. S. (2007) ‘Strategic Entrepreneurs at Work: The Nature,
Discovery, and Exploitation of Entrepreneurial Opportunities’, Small Business Economics
28: 301–22.
Davidsson, P. and J. Wiklund, (1997) ‘Conceptual and Empirical Challenges in the Study of
Firm Growth’, in D. Sexton and H. Landstrom (eds) Entrepreneurship and the Growth
of the Firm, pp. 26–44. Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Business.
Djankov, S., McLeish, C. and Ramalho, R. (2006) ‘Regulation and Growth’, unpublished,
World Bank.
Dodd, S. and Patra, E. (2002) ‘National Differences in Entrepreneurial Networking’, Entre-
preneurship & Regional Development 14(2): 117–34.
Donckels, R. and Courtmans, A. (1990) ‘Big Brother is Watching over You: The Counseling of
Growing SMEs in Belgium’, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 2(3): 211–24.
Dreher, A. and Grassebner, M. (2007) ‘Greasing the Wheels of Entrepreneurship?: The
Impact of Regulations and Corruption on Firm Entry’, Working Paper, KOF Swiss
Economic Institute.
Drori, I. and Lerner, M. (2002) ‘The Dynamics of Limited Breaking Out: The Case of the
Arab Manufacturing Businesses in Israel’, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development
14(2): 135–54.
Etzioni, A. (1987) ‘Entrepreneurship, Adaptation and Legitimation: A Macro-Behavioral
Perspective’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 8: 175–89.
Fisman, R. and Sarria-Allende, V. (2004) ‘Regulation of Entry and the Distortion of Industrial
Organization’, Working Paper No. 10929, National Bureau for Economic Research.
Hindle, K. and Gillin, M., (1991) ‘Governmental Involvement in Entrepreneurship and
New Business Creation in Australia: A Quantitative Analysis of Public Perceptions and
Opinions’, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 3(4): 379–94.
Kaufman, D. and Kraay, A. (2002) ‘Growth without Governance’, Working Paper No. 2928,
WorldBank Policy Research.

641

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

International Small Business Journal 27(5)
Krueger, N., Brännback, M. and Carsrud, A. (2007) ‘Watch Out Isaac!: Reciprocal
Causation in Entrepreneurial Intent’, paper presented at the Australian Graduate School
of Entrepreneurship (AGSE) Research Exchange Conference, February, Brisbane,
Queensland.
Krueger, N. and Brazeal, D. (1994) ‘Entrepreneurial Potential & Potential Entrepreneurs’,
Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice 18(1): 5–21.
Krueger, N. F. and Carsrud, A. L. (1993) ‘Entrepreneurial Intentions: Applying the Theory
of Planned Behavior’, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development 5(4): 315–30.
Krueger, N. F., Jr, Reilly, M. D. and Carsrud, A. L. (2000) ‘Competing Models of Entre-
preneurial Intentions’, Journal of Business Venturing 15: 411–32.
Lanyi, A. (2004) Measuring the Economic Impact of Corruption: A Survey, IRIS University
of Maryland.
McGrath, R. and MacMillan, I. (1992) ‘More like Each Other than Anyone Else?: A Cross
Cultural Study of Entrepreneurial Perceptions’, Journal of Business Venturing 7(5):
419–29.
Mason, C. and Harrison, R. (2002) ‘Barriers to Investment in the Informal Venture Capital
Sector’, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 14(3): 271–88.
Mitchell, R., Busenitz, L., Bird, B., Gaglio, C., McMullen, J., Morse, E. and Smith, B. (2007)
‘The Central Question in Entrepreneurial Cognition Research 2007’, Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice 31: 1–27.
Mitchell, R., Busenitz, L., Lant, T., McDougall, P., Morse, E. and Smith, B. (2002) ‘Toward
a Theory of Entrepreneurial Cognition: Rethinking the People Side of Entrepreneur-
ship Research’, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice 27(2): 93–104.
Mo, P. H. (2001) ‘Corruption and Economic Growth’, Journal of Comparative Economics
29: 66–79.
O’Brien, R. (2007) ‘A Caution Regarding Rules of Thumb for Variance Inflation Factors’,
Quality and Quantity 41(5): 673–90.
Ovaska, T. and Sobel, R. (2004) ‘Entrepreneurship in Post-Socialist Economies’, Working
Paper No. 04–06, West Virginia University, Department of Economics.
Ozcan, G. (1995) ‘Small Business Networks and Local Ties in Turkey’, Entrepreneurship &
Regional Development 7(3): 265–84.
Parker, S. and Robson, M. (2004) ‘Explaining International Variations in Self-Employment:
Evidence from a Panel of OECD Countries’, Southern Economic Journal 71: 287–301.
Peltzman, S. (1976) ‘Toward a More General Theory of Regulation’, Journal of Law and
Economics 19: 211–40.
Ramachandran, K. (1989) ‘Small Enterprises Promotion: Role of Incentives’, Entrepreneur-
ship & Regional Development 1(4): 381–94.
Rauch, A. and Frese, M. (2007) ‘Born to be an Entrepreneur?’, in R. J. Baum, M. Frese
and R. A. Baron (eds) The Psychology of Entrepreneurship. Mahawah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Reynolds, P. (1998) ‘Business Volatility: Source or Sympton of Economic Growth?’, in
Z. A. Acs et al. (eds) Entrepreneurship, Small and Medium Sized Enterprises and the
Macro-economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Reynolds, P. (2007) Entrepreneurship in the United States. New York: Springer.
Reynolds, P., Bygrave, W. and Autio, E. (2004) Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2003
Summary Report. Babson Park, MA: Babson College.
Reynolds, P., Story, D. and Westhead, P. (1994) ‘Cross-national Comparisons of the Variation
in New Firm Formation Rates’, Regional Studies 28(4): 443–56.
Spilling, O. (1991) ‘Entrepreneurship in a Cultural Perspective’, Entrepreneurship & Regional
Development 1(3): 33–48.

642

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

 Griffiths et al.: Government Bureaucracy, Transactional Impediments
Stephan, U. (2007) ‘Culture of Entrepreneurship (C-Ent)’, Doctoral Dissertation, Dresden
University of Technology.
Sullivan, J. (2000) ‘Development as a Two-way Street: Merging Social Progress with Financial
Profits’, paper presented at Sixth Annual Harvard International Development Conference,
Center for International Private Enterprise, US Chamber of Commerce.
Sullivan, J. and Shkolnikov, A. (2004) ‘Combating Corruption: Private Sector Perspectives and
Solutions’, Economic Reform (September), http://www.cipe.org/publications/papers
Tanzi, V. and Davoodi, H. (2001) ‘Corruption, Growth, and Public Finances’, in Arvind K.
Jain (ed.) The Political Economy of Corruption, pp. 89–109. London: Taylor & Francis.
Tanzi, V. and H. Davoodi, (2002) ‘Corruption, Public Investment and Growth’, in G. T. Abed
and S. Gupta (eds) Governance, Corruption and Economic Performance, pp. 280–99.
Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
Thorton, P. (1999) ‘The Sociology of Entrepreneurship’, Annual Review of Sociology 19:
25–46.
Treisman, D. (2000) ‘The Causes of Corruption: A Cross-national Study’, Journal of Political
Economy 76(3): 399–457.
Van Stel, I., Wennekers, S., Thurik, R. and De Wit, G. (2003) ‘Explaining Nascent
Entrepreneurship across Countries’, Working Paper No. 200301, SCALES.
Westhead, P. (1997) ‘Ambitions, “External” Environment and Strategic Factor Differences
between Family and Non-family Companies’, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development
9(2): 127–58.
Zhao, H. and Seibert, S. E. (2006) ‘The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Entrepreneurial
Status: A Meta-analytical Review’, Journal of Applied Psychology 91: 259–71.

MARK D. GRIFFITHS is the Jack Anderson Professor of Finance at Miami University’s

Farmer School of Business. His primary research areas of interest include money markets
and the economics of entrepreneurship. He has published several books and numerous
articles in leading research publications in economics, finance, and entrepreneurship.
Address: Mark D. Griffiths, Jack Anderson Professor of Finance, Farmer School of Business,
Miami University, Oxford, OH 45056, USA. [email: griffim2@muohio.edu]

JILL KICKUL. Please address all correspondence to: Jill Kickul, Director, Social
Entrepreneurship Program, Clinical Professor of Management and Entrepreneurship,
Berkley Center for Entrepreneurial Studies, NYU Stern School of Business, 44 West
Fourth Street, Suite 7–97, New York, NY 10012–1126, USA. [email: jkickul@stern.nyu.edu]

ALAN L. CARSRUD. Address: Alan L. Carsrud, Loretta Rogers Chair in Entrepreneurship,

Ted Rogers School of Management, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto,
Ontario, Canada M5B 2K3. [email: alan.carsrud@ryerson.ca]

643

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

International Small Business Journal 27(5)

Bureaucratie gouvernementale, obstacles transactionnels et intentions

entrepreneuriales
Mark D. Griffiths
Université de Miami, USA
Jill Kickul
Centre Berkley pour études entrepreneuriales, École de commerce Stern de l’Université de
New York, USA
Alan L. Carsrud
Université Ryerson, Canada
Dans des contextes où sont omniprésentes les asymétries de l’information et les conditions
fluctuantes des marchés, il n’a toujours pas été possible d’identifier le discernement entre
les différents facteurs contextuels et macroscopiques qui stimulent ou inhibent l’activité
entrepreneuriale. Nous appuyant sur nos propres données primaires (N = 1473 sur l’ensemble
de 10 pays) et sur des données secondaires (Forum économique de la Banque mondiale,
Données financières mondiales et Transparence internationale), nous étudions le rôle que
jouent plusieurs indices contextuels (par ex. la perception d’une culture entrepreneuriale)
et les indices macroscopiques (par ex. indices de corruption gouvernementale, du PIB per
capita, et de commerce facile) sur les intentions entrepreneuriales. Les résultats obtenus
révèlent les répercussions que peuvent avoir la corruption gouvernementale et les obstacles
transactionnels concomitants sur le degré d’intérêt entrepreneurial que l’on accorde dans
tous les pays.
Mots clés: Bureaucratie – Corruption – Intentions entrepreneuriales

Burocracia estatal, impedimentos transaccionales e intenciones

empresariales
Mark D. Griffiths
Universidad de Miami, EUA
Jill Kickul
Centro de Berkley para Estudios Empresariales. Escuela de Negocios Stern de NYU, EUA
Alan L. Carsrud
Universidad Ryerson, Canadá
En los entornos donde están siempre presentes las disimetrías de la información y
condiciones cambiantes del mercado, aún no se ha evaluado el discernimiento entre los
distintos factores contextuales a nivel macroscópico que estimulan o inhiben la actividad
empresarial. Basándonos en nuestros datos primarios (N = 1473 en 10 países) así como
en datos secundarios (Foro Económico del Banco Mundial, Datos Financieros Globales
y Transparencia Internacional), investigamos la función que desempeñan varios índices
contextuales (por ej., la percepción de una cultura empresarial) e índices a nivel macroscópico
(por ej., corrupción gubernamental, PIB per capita y facilidad de comerciar) respecto a
las intenciones empresariales. Los resultados revelan el impacto que causa la corrupción
gubernamental y los impedimentos transaccionales concomitantes sobre el grado de interés
empresarial en todos los países.
Palabras clave: Burocracia; corrupción; intenciones empresariales.

644

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015

 Griffiths et al.: Government Bureaucracy, Transactional Impediments

Staatliche Bürokratie, Geschäftshindernisse und unternehmerische

Absichten
Mark D. Griffiths
Universität von Miami, USA
Jill Kickul
Berkley Center für Unternehmerstudien, NYU Stern School of Business, USA
Alan L. Carsrud
Ryerson Universität, Kanada
In Bereichen mit allgegenwärtigen Informationsasymmetrien und wechselnden
Marktbedingungen muss die Unterscheidung zwischen verschiedenen Makroebenen und
Kontextfaktoren, die unternehmerische Aktivitäten stimulieren oder unterdrücken, noch
überprüft werden. Anhand unserer eigenen Primärstatistiken (N = 1473 in 10 Ländern)
sowie Sekundärdaten (Weltbank Wirtschaftsforum, Globale Finanzdaten und Transparency
International), untersuchen wir den Einfluss, den verschiedene kontextbezogene Kennziffern
(z.B. Vorstellungen über eine Unternehmerkultur) sowie Indizes auf Makroebene (z.B.
staatliche Korruption, pro-Kopf-Bruttoinlandsprodukt und die Leichtigkeit, mit der
betriebswirtschaftliche Indizes erstellt werden können) auf unternehmerische Absichten
haben können. Ergebnisse zeigen, welche Auswirkungen staatliche Korruption und die damit
verbundenen Geschäftshindernisse auf den Umfang von unternehmerischem Interesse in
den verschiedenen Ländern haben.
Schlüsselwörter: Bürokratie; Korruption; unternehmerische Absichten

政府的官僚主义、交易的障碍与企业的意向
美国迈阿密大学：Mark D. Griffiths
美国纽约大学斯特恩商学院伯克利企业研究中心：Jill Kickul
加拿大瑞尔森大学：Alan L. Carsrud

在始终存在信息不对称和市场条件不断变化的环境下，区分激励或遏制企业活动的不同的宏
观层面与背景因素之间仍需证实。利用我们自己收集的原始数据（来自10个国家的1473个
数据）以及第二手数据（来自世界银行经济论坛、全球金融数据和国际透视），我们调查
了几个影响企业意向的背景指标（比如对企业文化的认识）和宏观层面指标（例如政府的
腐败、人均国内生产总值和经营宽松度指标）的作用。调查结果表明对政府腐败和由此而
伴生的交易障碍影响程度依据不同国家企业利益的不同而不同。
关键词：corruption; entrepreneurial intentions

645

Downloaded from isb.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY on June 20, 2015