Advertisement

The Importance of the Business Idea for New Venture Creation in the Software Industry

  • Natalie Kaltenecker
  • Christian Hoerndlein
  • Thomas Hess
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 150)

Abstract

Entrepreneurial activity, especially the creation of new companies in the growing information and communication technology sector, is of high importance to foster an economy’s growth. However, despite calls for research to investigate why young people decide to start their own business, there is a lack of research to identify the role of the Business Idea in this context. In this paper, we conceptualize the construct “Business Idea” and test its influence on the intention to start a company in the software industry by drawing on the Theory of Planned Behavior. Empirical evidence from a survey among information technology students (N=402) shows that the Business Idea is a major driver for the intention to found a company. The study thus contributes to a better understanding of the factors driving the intention to start a new company in general and the Business Idea’s importance in particular.

Keywords

Business Idea Entrepreneurship Software Industry 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    van Stel, A., Carree, M., Thurik, A.R.: The effect of entrepreneurial activity on national economic growth. Max Planck Institute for Research into Economic Systems, Jena, pp. 1–22 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zoltan, J., Audretsch, D.: Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research: An Interdisciplinary Survey and Introduction. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    van Oort, F.G., Stam, E.: Agglomeration Economies and Entrepreneurship in the ICT Industry. Research in Management 16, 1–24 (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Underwood, J., Khosrowshahi, F.: ICT Expenditure and Trends in the UK Construction Industry and Facing the Challenges of the Global Economic Crisis. Journal of Information Technology in Construction 17, 25–42 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tessler, S., Barr, A., Hanna, N.: National Software Industry Development: Considerations for Gevernment Planners. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries 13(10), 1–17 (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Audretsch, D., Keilbach, M.: Entrepreneurship Capital and Economic Performance. Regional Studies 38, 949–959 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Erl, T.: Service-Oriented Design - Part IV: Business Process Design. In: Erl, T. (ed.) Service-Oriented Architecture: Concepts, Technology, and Design, pp. 565–611. Pearson Education, Inc., New York (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ayyagari, M., Demirgüc-Kunt, A., Maksimovic, V.: Firm Innovation in Emerging Markets: The Role of Finance, Governance, and Competition. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 46(6), 1545–1580 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Franke, N., Lüthje, C.: Studentische Unternehmensgründungen – dank oder trotz Förderung? Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung 54(3), 96–112 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Halberstadt, J., Ossietzky, C., Welpe, I.: Motive, Eigenschaften und Emotionen von Unternehmensgründern. In: Kraus, S., Fink, M. (eds.) Entrepreneurship - Theorie und Fallstudien zu Gründungs-, Wachstums- und KMU-Management, pp. 52–67. WUV Facultas, Wien (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Federal Ministry of Economics and Industry: Rückblick: Gründerwoche Deutschland 2011. Federal Ministry of Economics and Industry, Berlin (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weber, S., Starke, S.: Lernpotenzial und Effekte eines Business Planning-Kurses. Unterrichtswissenschaft 38, 292–317 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shane, S., Venkataraman, S.: The Promise of Entrepreneurship as a Field of Research. The Academy of Management Review 25(1), 217–226 (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tegtmeier, S.: Die Existenzgründungsabsicht - Eine theoretische und empirische Analyse auf Basis der Theory of Planned Behavior. Tectum Verlag Marburg, Lüneburg (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stephan, U.: Culture of Entrepreneurship (C-ENT)/Kultur der Selbständigkeit: Konzeptualisierung und erste Validierung eines Fragebogens zur Erfassung einer unternehmertumsförderlichen Kultur. Psychologie, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Llisterri, J.J., Kantis, H., Angelelli, P., Tejerina, L.: Is Youth Entrepreneurship a Necessity or an Opportunity? A First Exploration of Household and New Enterprise Surveys in Latin America (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ajzen, I.: The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50, 179–211 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Krueger, N.: Entrepreneurial Intentions are Dead: Long Live Entrepreneurial Intentions. In: Carsrud, A., Brännback, M. (eds.) Understanding the Entrepreneurial Mind, pp. 51–75. Springer, New York (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shane, S.: Reflections on the 2010 AMR Decade Award: Delivering on the Promise of Entrepreneurship as a Field of Research. Academy of Management Review 37(1), 10–20 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Venkataraman, S., Sarasvathy, S., Dew, N., Forster, W.: Reflections on the 2010 AMR Decade Award: Whither the Promise? Moving forward with Entrepreneurship as a science of the Artificial. Academy of Management Review 37(1), 21–33 (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jacob, K.: Unternehmer aus Hochschulen? Eine Studie zu Existenzgründungsabsichten von Studierenden. Verlag Dr. Kovac, Hamburg (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Klofsten, M.: New Venture Ideas: An Analysis of their Origin and Early Development. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 17(1), 105–119 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bamberg, S.: Helfen Implementationsintentionen, die Lücke zwischen Absicht und Verhalten zu überwinden? Ergebnisse zweier interventionsorientierter Feldexperimente. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie 33(3), 143–155 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Funke, J.: Psychologie der Kreativität. In: Holm-Hadulla, R.M. (ed.) Kreativität, pp. 283–300. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bird, B.: Implementing Entrepreneurial Ideas: The Case for Intention. Academy of Management Review 13(3), 442–453 (1988)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Eagly, A.H., Chaiken, S.: The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, Fort Worth (1993)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Churchill, G.: A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs. Journal of Marketing Research 16(1), 64–73 (1979)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    DeVellis, R.F.: Scale Development - Theory and Applications. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2003)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hinkin, T.R.: A Brief Tutorial on the Development of Measures for Use in Survey Questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods 1(1), 104–121 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F.D.: User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. Management Information Systems Quarterly 27(3), 425–478 (2003)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Friedrichs, J.: Methoden empirischer Sozialforschung. Opladen (1980)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Schnell, R., Hill, P.B., Esser, E.: Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung. Oldenburg, München (2005)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I.: Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. Psychology Press, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F.: Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research 18(1), 39–50 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L.: Multivariate Data Analysis. Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey (2006)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bliemel, F., Eggert, A., Fassott, G., Henseler, J.: Handbuch PLS Pfadmodellierung - Methode Anwendung Praxisbeispiele. Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart (2005)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gefen, D., Rigdon, E., Straub, D.: An Update and Extension to SEM Guidelines for Administrative and Social Science Research. Journal of Management Information Systems 35(2), iii–xiv (2011)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ringle, C.M., Wende, S., Sinkovics, R.R.: SmartPLS 2.0 (2005), http://smartpls.de
  39. 39.
    Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M.: PLS-SEM. Indeed a Silver Bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 19(2), 139–151 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Vinzi, V.E., Trinchera, L., Amato, S.: PLS Path Modeling: From Foundations to Recent Developments and Open Issues for Model Assessment and Improvement. In: Vinzi, V.E. (ed.) Handbook of Partial Least Squares, pp. 47–82. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tenenhaus, E., Vinzi, V.E., Chatelinc, Y.M., Laurob, C.: PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis 48, 159–205 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Urban, D., Mayerl, J.: Mediator-Effekte in der Regressionsanalyse direkte, indirekte und totale Effekte. University of Stuttgart (2007)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Orlikowski, W.J., Barley, S.R.: Technology and Institutions: What can Research on Information Technology and Research on Organizations Learn from each other? MIS Quarterly 25(2), 145–165 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sarasvathy, S.D., Dew, N., Velamuri, R., Venkataraman, S.: Three Views of Entrepreneurial Opportunity. In: Acs, Z.J., Audretsch, D.B. (eds.) Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research, 2nd edn. International Handbook Series on Entrepreneurship, vol. 5, pp. 77–96. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Natalie Kaltenecker
    • 1
  • Christian Hoerndlein
    • 1
  • Thomas Hess
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Information Systems and New MediaLudwig-Maximilians-Universität MünchenMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations