Entrepreneurial thinking: rational vs intuitive

Abstract

Purpose

Intentions are central to entrepreneurial thinking and thus entrepreneurial action yet we have not explored the different pathways of how intent evolves. How does an easily assessed measure of cognitive style influence how entrepreneurs develop their intentions?

Design/methodology/approach

We examine how cognitive style interacts with entrepreneurial intentions testing the model separately with subjects scoring as Intuitives or Analytics on cognitive style, plus nationality and gender as covariates with entrepreneurial intensity as a prospective moderator, using 528 university students from Norway, Russia and Finland.

Findings

Cognitive style does moderate the intentions model. For intuitives, country influenced social norms and entrepreneurial intensity proved a moderator. For analytics, neither perceived desirability, country, nor entrepreneurial intensity were significant.

Research limitations/implications

We will replicate these findings in different samples, especially non-WEIRD settings. It will also be useful to test alternate measures of cognitive style and other likely moderators.

Practical implications

We offer diagnostics for educators and ecosystem actors given that our findings suggest intriguing differences in the entrepreneurial mindset.

Social implications

Understanding multiple pathways exist to entrepreneurial intent and thus action helps policymakers and entrepreneurial champions better able to help nurture entrepreneurs and thus entrepreneurship in their communities.

Originality/value

Cognitive style has dramatic effects on the specification of the formal intentions model arguing for multiple pathways to entrepreneurial intent. For example, two entrepreneurs might arrive at the same intention but through very different processes because they differ in cognitive style.

Citation

Krueger, N., Mestwerdt, S. and Kickul, J. (2024), "Entrepreneurial thinking: rational vs intuitive", Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 25 No. 5/6, pp. 942-962. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-11-2023-0265