Sinsha and Srivastava2013

Journal of Entrepreneurship
http://joe.sagepub.com/
Association of Personality, Work Values and Socio-cultural Factors

with Intrapreneurial Orientation
Nupur Sinha and Kailash B.L. Srivastava
Journal of Entrepreneurship 2013 22: 97
DOI: 10.1177/0971355712469186
The online version of this article can be found at:

http://joe.sagepub.com/content/22/1/97
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for Journal of Entrepreneurship can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://joe.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://joe.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://joe.sagepub.com/content/22/1/97.refs.html
>> Version of Record - Feb 27, 2013
What is This?
Downloaded from joe.sagepub.com at NATIONAL CHUNG HSING UNIV on March 20, 2014
Article
Editor’s Introduction 97
Association of The Journal of Entrepreneurship

22(1) 97–113
Personality, Work © 2013 Entrepreneurship
Development Institute of India
Values and Socio- SAGE Publications
Los Angeles, London,
cultural Factors New Delhi, Singapore,
Washington DC
with Intrapreneurial DOI: 10.1177/0971355712469186
http://joe.sagepub.com
Orientation
Nupur Sinha
Kailash B.L. Srivastava
Abstract
This study reports on the impact of some personality factors, work
values and socio-cultural factors on intrapreneurial orientation. Data
were collected from 272 executives working in the manufacturing
sector. Correlation and multiple regression statistics were performed
to test the strength of association among measures of intrapreneurial
orientation, big-five locator personality, eight work-values and four
socio-cultural factors. Results showed that neuroticism significantly
but negatively, and extraversion, altruism, creativity management and
achievement positively predicted intrapreneurial orientation. Socio-
cultural factors had significantly interacted with personality factors, but
its impact on the association of work values with intrapreneurial ori-
entation remained almost unchanged. The HR professionals can utilise
this information in fostering facilitative climates for innovations in their
organisations.
Keywords
personality, work values, socio-cultural factors, intrapreneurial
orientation
Nupur Sinha is a Research Scholar and Kailash B. L. Srivastava is Professor

at Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology,
Kharagpur, India.
98 Nupur Sinha and Kailash B. L. Srivastava
Intrapreneurship is ‘entrepreneurship within existing organisations’

(Antoncic & Hisrich, 2001; Pinchot & Pellman, 1999). Companies can
tap the creative energy of their employees by allowing them to introduce
and implement innovations (Antoncic & Hisrich, 2001). Intrapreneurship
is a bottom–up process; employees, at any level can initiate the process
of innovation. This study attempts to explain the innovative behaviour of
individuals within organisations, that is, intrapreneurial orientation
(Antoncic & Hisrich, 2001; Shetty, 2004). The most common theoretical
and methodological approaches in studying the characteristics of entre-
preneurs/intrapreneurs are personality and demographic theories. The
tendency of a person to behave intrapreneurially has not been studied in
relation to his/her personality and work values. These factors play an
important role in determining vocational preferences, person–job fit,
person–organisation fit, performance at work place and job satisfaction
(Robbins & Judge, 2007).
Globalisation has led to an increased attention to cultural diversity
and specificity for personal, social and organisational practices (Amba-
Rao, Petrick, Gupta, & Von der Embse, 2000; Hofstede, 1983; Sinha &
Sinha, 1990). Researchers have claimed that entrepreneurship is omni-
present in humans, but its manifestation depends on the environment
(Begley & Tan, 2001). There is a need to explore the influence of socio-
cultural characteristics on intrapreneurial orientation. This would help
organisations to recognise the right persons to engage in innovative
activities in particular socio-cultural contexts. This study examines the
strength of association between the individual-level factors namely, per-
sonality and work values and intrapreneurial orientation of executives,
and the moderating role of socio-cultural factors among these factors.
Background
Intrapreneurs are not necessarily idea-generators, but have the capacity
to turn ideas into significant results to stimulate innovation and foster
growth in organisations. They can be found across hierarchy and in all
segments of business; and have the sense of ownership. The personality
of intrapreneurs includes attributes such as proactiveness, pursuit of
opportunity, self-determination, confidence, risk-taking, defying rules
The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113
Association of Personality, Work Values and Socio-cultural Factors 99
and a dislike of bureaucratic systems. They are more like entrepreneurs

than being traditional managers, but differ from them in terms of setting
new ventures within the boundary of their parent organisation and work-
ing within the hierarchy (Chisholm, 1987; Luchsinger & Bagby, 1987).
Based on the above discussion, it can be derived that intrapreneurial
orientation is the propensity to behave in an intrapreneurial manner at
work. Shetty (2004) found innovation in business, achievement, per-
sonal control, and perceived self-esteem as dimensions of intrapreneurial
orientation to be present in Indian managers.
The dynamic environment has forced the corporations to change their
outlooks regarding bureaucracy, which is based on the idea that people
are essentially interchangeable parts. But, intrapreneurs are not inter-
changeable and cannot be easily replaced. Therefore, corporations are
focusing their efforts on selecting people having intrapreneurial charac-
teristics (Pinchot & Pellman, 1999). At this stage, a relationship between
the dispositions of individuals and intrapreneurial orientation can help
organisations to recognise and employ the right kind of individuals for
the innovative purposes. We examine interrelationship personality, work
values and intrapreneurial orientation of employees working in the manu-
facturing sector.
Personality
Personality is a unifying concept that provides meaning, direction, and
mobilisation for the individual. The ‘Big Five’ factors (extraversion,
agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to experi-
ences) are considered to encompass most of the significant variations in
personality (Judge, Heller, & Mount, 2002; Robbins & Judge, 2007).
Studies have found that high extraversion and openness to experience,
and low neuroticism, agreeableness and conscientiousness are related to
high risk propensity (Nicholson, Soane, Fenton-O’Creevy, & Willman,
2005), which is an essential component of intrapreneurship.
A person being high on openness to experience suggests that one
is curious, creative and adaptable to new ideas, while the lower end
suggests conventionality and comfort with familiarity. People high
on agreeableness are described as humble, trusting, team players and
altruistic (Costa & McCrae, 1992, Robbins & Judge, 2007) which may
lead to conformity; whereas people low on agreeableness are character-
ised as sceptical, questioning and autonomous. People high on conscien-
tiousness are characterised to be dependable, organised, disciplined and
cautious. Most entrepreneurship studies regard risk-taking, creativity,
optimism, self-efficacy, need for achievement and locus of control inher-
ent characteristics of entrepreneurial personality (Brockhaus, 1980;
Garcίa-Cabrera & Garcίa-Soto, 2009). Researchers also assessed the
underlying personality traits of intrapreneurs which are expected to be
similar to that of the entrepreneurs in most respects. Wooten, Timmerman
and Folger (1999) found evidence of managers being less open to new
experiences and more group-dependent than entrepreneurs. Envick and
Langford (2000) supported this notion, where managers were found to
be more conscientious, sociable, and agreeable than entrepreneurs. With
the constraints imposed on intrapreneurs, it can be suggested that man-
ager and entrepreneur being at the two ends on a continuum, an intrapre-
neur might have the characteristics of both. Based on the setting of
operations and constraints, it can be argued that intrapreneurs would be
low on openness to experience and neuroticism, and high on agreeable-
ness, conscientiousness and extraversion. A similar relationship of per-
sonality characteristics is expected with intrapreneurial orientation. This
leads to the formulation of following hypothesis.
Hypothesis 1: Extraversion and conscientiousness would be posi-
tively associated to intrapreneurial orientation, whereas neuroti-
cism, agreeableness and openness would be negatively associated to
intrapreneurial orientation.
Work Values
Work values refer to the values important for an individual in particular
domain of work, and have been linked to occupational behaviour and
vocational interests (Krau, 1989; Roe & Ester, 1999; Zytowski, 1994),
and work performance (Robbins & Judge, 2007; Roe & Ester, 1999).
Roe and Ester (1999) found a general agreement in the literature
about the influence of values on attitudes and individual behaviour.
Values influence individual behaviour and performance indirectly
through attitudes and goals to be attained, and thus, these are considered
as a source of motivation for the actions of an individual. Values do not
correspond to a particular object or situation and are relatively stable as
opposed to attitudes, and are always positive and motivating (Elizur,
1984; Roe & Ester, 1999; White, 2006). Studies suggest the link of work
values with teenagers’ work attitudes (Loughlin & Barling, 1998, 2001).
It was found that young workers in employments with fewer opportuni-
ties of skill use and learning were not motivated to do good work. This
adaptation in values is carried to adulthood. This suggests that if intrinsic
work values (intellectual stimulation, altruism, aesthetic, creativity,
management and achievement) of people get satisfied at work, people
are motivated to put in more effort for better performance. Based on this
discussion, following assumption has been made to test the relationship
between work values and intrapreneurial orientation.
Hypothesis 2: Work values would be positively associated with
intrapreneurial orientation.
Socio-cultural Factors
Culture being an important contributing factor in organisational science
has been widely studied by researchers (Amba-Rao et al., 2000; Hofstede,
1983; Sinha, 2009). Hofstede (1983) described culture along four dimen-
sions: individualism versus collectivism, power distance, uncertainty
avoidance and masculinity versus femininity. Individualism, acceptance
of uncertainty and less power distance were found to be important for
innovations (Shane, 1993). Asian countries are high on collectivism,
power distance, and uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede, 1983). Begley and
Tan (2001) found that perceived high penalty for failures would lead to
greater scrutiny of entrepreneurial prospects, induced by shame from
failure. People in such societies have strong feelings of shame accompa-
nying losing face. Those societies become conservative for new business
ventures and individuals would start a new business independently only
if success is sure, else they would prefer to work in other organisations
to innovate.
On Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, India is characterised as: (a) fatal-
istic, lack of initiative, avoiding uncertainty, coincides with the ideology
of ‘karma’; (b) high power distance depicted by the undisputed respect

for seniors, and abiding by the hierarchical arrangements in family, with
age, caste, gender; (c) medium collectivist orientation; (d ) medium mas-
culinity (medium materialistic affiliation, and assertiveness, and affilia-
tion for social relationships); (e) strong long-term orientation (Amba-Rao
et al., 2000). Some of the general cultural values identified in Indian
organisations are a hierarchical approach, respect for seniors, paternal-
ism, fatalism, collectivism, feelings of in-group and out-group, loyalty,
belongingness, personalised relations and work to be considered as duty
(Sinha & Sinha, 1990). Though the effects of these dimensions remain in
check with the modernisation of the workplace, they are still influential
(Amba-Rao et al, 2000; Varma, Srinivas, & Stroh, 2005).
Indians adapt their cultural orientations according to the prevailing
situation; hence, try to have work-life balance. Sinha and Kanungo
(1997) proposed the concept of context sensitivity and balancing for the
Indians. Context-sensitivity is cognitive in nature; and balancing is a
behavioural disposition, which tends to discourage people from taking
extreme actions, and describes about the person (patra), time (kal), and
ecological (desh) components of the environment, as the socio-cultural
characteristics. Patra reflects group-embeddedness, and hierarchy; kal
reflects uncertainty about the future, and a short-term perspective; and
the ‘desh’ component reflects insufficient resources, infrastructural facil-
ities and the socio-economic condition.
Researchers studied the role of socio-cultural factors in the develop-
ment of work values (Mueller & Thomas, 2001). Primary socialisation
has its impact on the formation and crystallisation of work values. The
general values prevailing in the society and practiced by the elders might
influence the personality development and are internalised by the chil-
dren. The socio-cultural norms, and behaviours associated with hierar-
chy, paternalism, caste and class dominate social and organisational
functioning. In recent years, in Indian society, significant transitions
have been observed in values with changes in economy, urbanisation,
attitudes toward education and employment, government assertiveness,
women empowerment, competitive pressure on organisations. Keeping
in view the relationship of the socio-cultural context with personal devel-
opment of individuals, there is a need to explore the interaction of socio-
cultural factors with personality and work values of individuals in
influencing intrapreneurial orientation.
Hypothesis 3: Socio-cultural factors would moderate the influ-

ence of personality and work values on intrapreneurial orientation.
Methods
Sample
Data were collected from 272 executives working in the manufacturing
sector across India. The age of the employees ranged from 22 to 59 years
where 55.5 per cent of the sample belonged to the age range of 21–35
years, 31.3 per cent to the age range of 36–48 years and 13.2 per cent to
the 49–60-year range. The results showed that 68.4 per cent of the
employees had education of graduation level and 30.9 per cent com-
pleted post-graduation. The frequency distribution showed that 18.8 per
cent of the respondents lived their childhood in villages whereas 71 per
cent in towns/cities, and 10.3 per cent partly in a town and partly in a
village. In terms of family, 57.4 per cent belonged to nuclear families and
42.6 per cent to joint families. In terms of father’s occupation, the sample
distribution was found to be as follows: agriculture (10.3 per cent), busi-
ness (11.8 per cent), government service (29.4 per cent), private jobs
(39 per cent) and academics (9.6 per cent). Out of 272 employees, 44.5
per cent were employed in the large private sector and 55.1 per cent in
public sector organisations.
Measures
Intrapreneurial orientation scale
The items were taken from Sayeed and Gazdar (2003) and Shetty (2004).
The scale consisted of 25 items initially. The number of retained items
was 23. The Cronbach alpha was 0.82.
Personality
In order to measure personality, the Big Five Locator Questionnaire
(Howard, Medina, & Howard, 1996) with 25 items was used. The total
number of retained items was 19. The sub-scales included neuroticism,
extraversion, openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness. The scale

of neuroticism consisted of four items. The number of items for the
scales of extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness
were five, four, three and three respectively. Cronbach’s alpha for the
scales of domains were found to be as follows: neuroticism (0.84), extra-
version (0.73), openness (0.70), agreeableness (0.63) and conscientious-
ness (0.75).
Work values
Work values of employees were measured using the 45 item Super’s
WVI (Gable & Pruzek, 1971). After pilot testing, the number of items
was reduced to 22. The scale initially comprised of 15 indices. For the
purpose of this study, the indices consisting of a minimum of two items
were retained, which further reduced the number of items to 19. The
indices along with their respective reliability scores were: altruism
(0.90), aesthetics (0.86), creativity (0.91), management (0.81), achieve-
ment (0.84), economic returns (0.80), variety (0.78) and security (0.84).
Socio-cultural factors
The items have been taken from the scale given by Sinha, Singh, Gupta,
Srivastava, Sinha, Srivastava and associates (2010). The total number of
items was 27. The four factors with their reliability were duplicity (0.79),
goal-achieving behaviour (0.76), self-calculating behaviour (0.82), and
context sensitivity (0.78). The reliability index of the scale as indicated
by the Cronbach’s alpha was 0.81.
Results and Discussion

The data were analysed using correlation and multiple regressions to
draw inferences for the proposed hypotheses. The correlations among
the variables are presented in Table 1. Work values were significantly
and positively related to attitude towards intrapreneurial orientation
(r = 0.59, p ≤ 0.01). Intrapreneurial orientation significantly and posi-
tively correlated to all the factors: economic returns (r = 0.36, p ≤ 0.01),
variety (r = 0.25, p ≤ 0.01), security (r = 0.32, p ≤ 0.01), altruism (r =
0.47, p ≤ 0.01), aesthetics (r = 0.41, p ≤ 0.01), creativity (r = 0.51,
p ≤ 0.01), management (r = 0.49, p ≤ 0.01), and achievement work value
(r = 0.52, p ≤ 0.01). Neuroticism was significantly but negatively corre-

lated to intrapreneurial orientation (r = −0.16, p ≤ .01). Intrapreneurial
orientation significantly but negatively related to agreeableness
(r = −0.13, p ≤ 0.05) and conscientiousness (r = −0.15, p ≤ 0.05). The
results showed no significant relationship of extraversion and openness
to experience factors of personality with attitude towards intrapreneur-
ship. Three of the socio-cultural factors correlated significantly with
intrapreneurial orientation, which were self-calculating behaviour
(r = 0.23, p ≤ 0.01), goal-achieving behaviour (r = 0.31, p ≤ 0.01), and
context sensitivity (r = 0.30, p ≤ 0.01). Duplicity significantly correlated
with variety work value (r = .13, p ≤ .05). The results showed significant
and positive correlation of self-calculating behaviour, goal-achieving
behaviour, and context sensitivity with almost all the eight work values
(see Table 1). There was no significant correlation between socio-
cultural characteristics and personality.
Hypothesis 1 proposed that extraversion and conscientiousness would
be positively associated, while neuroticism, agreeableness and openness
would be negatively associated with intrapreneurial orientation. The
results are presented in Table 2.
The MRA (Multiple Regression Analysis) results showed that two
personality factors explained 3 per cent of the variance for attitude
towards intrapreneurship (F = 2.83, p ≤ 0.05). The standardised beta
coefficients indicate that neuroticism and extraversion significantly pre-
dicted intrapreneurial orientation among employees, while the remain-
ing three factors did not figure out in the equation. The results obtained
were on expected lines as it showed a positive association of extraver-
sion, and negative association of neuroticism with intrapreneurial
orientation.
The results suggest that intrapreneurship orientation might have
linkages with neuroticism/emotional stability. It would be expected that
individuals who are not temperamental; less stress-prone, anxious and
worrisome, are likely to have positive attitude towards intrapreneur-
ship. This makes it possible that such people would intend to act
intrapreneurially. Emotional stability is a desirable personality disposition
of entrepreneurs/intrapreneurs (Garcίa-Cabrera & Garcίa-Soto, 2009).
Employees need to be resilient to take risks and be innovative at
workplace. Extraversion was positively associated with intrapreneurial
orientation. Extraverts tend to be gregarious, assertive, and sociable.
Table 1. Correlation Matrix showing Pearson’s Correlation Values among the Variables along with their Means and Standard Deviations (SD)
Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
1. IE 4.02 0.45 1.00
2. N 2.35 0.81 −0.15** 1.00
3. Ex 2.80 0.65 −0.01 0.56** 1.00
4. Op 3.01 0.51 0.00 0.52** 0.49** 1.00
5. Ag 2.52 0.59 −0.13* 0.29** 0.33** 0.33** 1.00
6. Con 2.49 0.76 −0.14* 0.57** 0.44** 0.50** 0.39** 1.00
7. Al 4.22 0.67 0.47** −0.08 −0.05 −0.07 −0.09 −0.09 1.00
8. Es 3.91 0.78 0.41** −0.13 0.00 −0.04 −0.01 −0.05 0.42** 1.00
9. Cr 4.32 0.59 0.51** −0.16** −0.02 −0.01 −0.09 −0.11 0.48** 0.55** 1.00
10. Man 4.00 0.65 0.49** −0.09 −0.02 −0.03 −0.12* −0.13* 0.56** 0.43** 0.49** 1.00
11. Ach 4.41 0.57 0.52** −0.09 −0.06 0.00 −0.05 −0.11 0.47** 0.40** 0.60** 0.40** 1.00
12. Er 4.01 0.65 0.36** −0.09 −0.01 0.03 −0.05 −0.10 0.29** 0.36** 0.39** 0.36** 0.45** 1.00
13. Var 3.84 0.75 0.25** 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.09 0.34** 0.34** 0.37** 0.33** 0.31** 0.36** 1.00
14. Sec 3.88 0.73 0.32** −0.00 −0.05 0.13* 0.01 −0.04 0.24** 0.32** 0.25** 0.27** 0.36** 0.58** 0.20** 1.00
15. Dup 3.68 0.75 −0.02 0.06 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.09 0.04 0.04 −0.01 −0.06 0.02 0.02 0.13* 0.07 1.00
16. SSC 3.78 0.60 0.23** 0.02 0.02 −0.01 −0.01 −0.02 0.18* 0.14* 0.12* 0.14* 0.21** 0.17** 0.05 0.16** 0.51** 1.00
17. CS 3.77 0.52 0.30** 0.01 0.09 0.10 −0.02 −0.03 0.25** 0.26** 0.24** 0.31** 0.20** 0.22** 0.11 0.22** 0.15* 0.43* 1.00
18. GAB 3.80 0.52 0.31** −0.06 −0.03 −0.04 −0.14* −0.07 0.37** 0.22** 0.23** 0.31** 0.25** 0.18** 0.13* 0.20**−0.02 0.19** 0.43** 1.00
Source: Authors’ research.
Notes: *Significant at the 0.05 level **Significant at the 0.01 level
IE: Intrapreneurship orientation N: Neuroticism Ex: Extraversion Op: Openness Ag: Agreeableness
Con: Conscientiousness Al: Altruism Es: Aesthetics Cr: Creativity Man: Management
Ach: Achievement Er: Economic returns Var: Variety Sec: Security Dup: Duplicity
SSC: Self-calculating behaviour CS: Context sensitivity GAB: Goal-achieving behaviour
Table 2. Multiple Regression Analysis Results incorporating Personality

Factors as Predictors and Intrapreneurial Orientation as the Criterion Variable
Predictor Variables β F R² Adjusted R²

Neuroticism −0.18*
Extraversion 0.15* 2.83* 0.05 0.03
Note: *Significant at the 0.05 level
Extraversion was a positive predictor of performance in entrepreneurial

jobs (Barrick & Mount, 1991). Managers have been found to be more
group-dependent (Envick & Langford, 2000), hence the domain of
extraversion would help in socialising and creating a facilitating
environment for intrapreneurship. The results provided acceptance for
only parts of the proposition. This supports the long held view and
evidence of researchers regarding the failure or inconsistency of
personality to relate to attitudes and performance at workplace
(Brockhaus, 1980; Barrick, Mount, & Judge, 2001). Guion and Gottier
(1965) even noted in their review that there was no generalisable
evidence that personality measures could be recommended as good or
practical tools for employee selection. Hence, Hypothesis 1 was partially
accepted.
Hypothesis 2 proposed a positive association of work values with
intrapreneurial orientation. The results have been summarised in Table 3.
The MRA (Multiple Regression Analysis) results showed that
four work values explained 39 per cent of the variance for the criterion
Table 3. Regression Analysis Results incorporating Components of Work

Values as Predictors and Intrapreneurial Orientation as the Criterion Variable
Predictor Variables β F R² Adjusted R²

Altruism 0.13*
Creativity 0.15* 22.88** 0.41 0.39
Management 0.20**
Achievement 0.22**
Notes: * Significant at the 0.05 level
** Significant at the 0.01 level
variable (F = 22.88, p ≤ 0.01). The results showed that altruism, creativ-

ity, management and achievement values turned out to be significant
predictors of intrapreneurial orientation. Other work values such as aes-
thetics, variety, economic return and security did not predict employees’
attitudes towards intrapreneurship.
It can be said that the predominance of intrinsic work values motivate
employees to accept challenges at work place, and indicates an inclina-
tion towards doing something new. If a person considers his/her work to
be such, which provides ample scope of helping others, planning work
and managing others; opportunities to deliver creative results and self-
gratification of doing well, then, the person performs well. One seeks
satisfaction in one’s job if these values are satisfied. It can be argued that
intrinsically driven person treats entrepreneuring roles within the organi-
sation as important for his/her satisfaction, and thus, gets engaged in
such activities. The association of work values with employees’ attitudes
toward intrapreneurship strengthens the suggested relationship between
values and attitudes (Roe & Ester, 1999; Weiner & Vardi, 1980). Hence,
Hypothesis 2 was partially accepted.
Hypothesis 3 proposed about the interaction of socio-cultural envi-
ronment with personality factors and work values in influencing intrap-
reneurial orientation. The results are summarised in Tables 4 and 5.
The results showed that socio-cultural characteristics enhanced
the variance explained in intrapreneurial orientation significantly. The
Table 4. Multiple Regression Analysis Results with Domains of personality

and Components of Socio-cultural Characteristics as Predictor Variables and
Intrapreneurial Orientation as Criterion Variable
Model Predictor Variables β F R² R² change Adjusted R²

1 Neuroticism −0.18* 2.83* 0.051 0.051 0.003
Extraversion 0.15*
2 Neuroticism −0.17*
Goal achieving 0.20** 7.04** 0.176 0.126 0.151
behaviour 0.161*
Context sensitivity
Notes: *Significant at the 0.05 level
components of socio-cultural characteristics together with personality

explained 15 per cent of variance of intrapreneurial orientation (F = 7.04,
p ≤ 0.01). The variance increased significantly by incorporating compo-
nents of socio-cultural characteristics in the regression equation
(R² change = 0.129). In step one, neuroticism and extraversion were sig-
nificant predictors of intrapreneurial orientation, but only one domain of
personality turned out to be significant, that is neuroticism in the step
two (β = −0.17, p ≤ 0.05). Three domains of personality did not appear
in the regression equation in step one, but insignificant variables
increased to four domains of personality when components of socio-
cultural characteristics were incorporated in the second step, where
extraversion, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness, duplicity and
self-calculating behaviour did not turn out to be significant in regression
equation.
It can be said that the impact of neuroticism is independent of socio-
cultural characteristic. But, the impact of extraversion was mediated by
socio-cultural characteristic. Extraversion is the domain specifying the
sociability of a person. It can be said that people show their sociability
depending on the favourable environment. This domain explains one’s
inclination to act innovatively through one’s goal-achieving behaviour
and high context sensitivity. These socio-cultural orientations have
facilitating or inhibitory impact on the influence of extraversion on intra-
preneurship. It supports the notion that the expression of personality
Table 5. Multiple Regression Analysis Results with Components of Work

Values and Components of Socio-cultural Characteristics as Predictor
Variables and Intrapreneurial Orientation as Criterion Variable
Model Predictor Variables β F R² R² change Adjusted R²

1 Altruism 0.129* 22.88** 0.410 0.410 0.392
Creativity 0.155*
Management 0.201**
Achievement 0.224**
2 Creativity 0.156* 17.40** 0.424 0.014 0.40
Management 0.181**
Achievement 0.213**
Notes: * Significant at the 0.05 level
dimensions are also defined by their social and organisational niches

(Costa & McCrae, 1992).
The results show that work values explained 39 per cent of variance
in intrapreneurial orientation in first step (F = 22.88, p ≤ 0.01). There was
a 1 per cent increase in variance when socio-cultural characteristics were
incorporated in the equation along with work values (F = 17.40, p ≤
0.01). Creativity, management, and achievement values turned out to be
a significant predictor in both steps.
None of the components of socio-cultural characteristics appeared in
the regression equation, but some impact was seen. Altruism was a sig-
nificant predictor in step one, but became insignificant in the second
step. The standardised beta weights of management and achievement
values decreased slightly. This could be a result of the interaction
between work values and socio-cultural characteristics as a whole. These
work values can be seen as the inherent needs of a person. The impor-
tance of values can be determined on personal basis and choice for cer-
tain desirable work features. The impact of work values on work
performance might be independent of any particular socially determined
characteristic and behaviours of the people, as they behave according to
the demands of work.
Conclusion
The results indicated a strong association of person’s work values and
intrapreneurial orientation. Socio-cultural factors emerged as a signifi-
cant moderator in the association of extraversion and attitude towards
intrapreneurship. The results suggest the dominance of work values. The
controversy over the relationship and impact of personality on the vari-
ables encircling the work place has been supported by the results. The
importance of socio-cultural environment is well-established.
The study has certain implications for industry and academic frater-
nity. The information can be used by managers in the organisations while
engaging employees for intrapreneurial roles. For recruitment and selec-
tion, organisations can place more importance to work values and
the needs and preferences of individuals for work. The managers should
not ignore the socio-cultural environment of the organisational set-up
while implementing any practice or strategy. At the individual level,
localisation of management practices should be given due importance.

The organisations can become successful by emphasising these charac-
teristics in relation to each other.
The study has certain limitations. Firstly, the limitations of using
interview schedules in surveys cannot be avoided completely, though
checks in the items were included in the scales. The data were collected
only from the manufacturing sector and the service sector was not
included in the study. Studies can be conducted in the service sector to
enhance the generalisability of results. Another limitation is that that it
did not consider the differences in attitude towards intrapreneurship
across regions. Intra-cultural differences have been suggested in mind-
sets and behaviours of people in India (Panda & Gupta, 2004; Sinha
et al., 2010). Further research can take care of these factors in order to
better understand the dynamics of the relationship among the variables.
References
Amba-Rao, S.C., Petrick, J.A., Gupta, J.N.D., & Von der Embse, T.J. (2000).
Comparative performance appraisal practices and management values
among foreign and domestic firms in India. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 11(1), 60–89.
Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R.D. (2001). Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement
and cross-cultural validation. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(5), 495–527.
Barrick, M.R., and Mount, M.K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions
and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1–26.
Barrick, M.R., Mount, M.K., & Judge, T.A. (2001). Personality and performance
at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do
we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9(1), 9–30.
Begley, T.M., & Tan, W. (2001). The socio-cultural environment for entrepre-
neurship: A comparison between East Asian and Anglo-Saxon countries.
Journal of International Business Studies, 32(3), 537–553.
Brockhaus, R.H. (1980). Psychological and environmental factors which
distinguish the successful from unsuccessful entrepreneur: A longitudinal
study. Academy of Management Proceedings, 368–372.
Chisholm, T.A. (1987). Intrapreneurship and bureaucracy. SAM Advanced
Management Journal, 52(3), 36–41.
Costa, P.T., Jr., and McCrae, R.R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic.
Personality and Individual Differences, 13(6), 653–665.
Elizur, D. (1984). Facets of work values: A structural analysis of work outcomes.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(3), 379–389.
Envick, B.R., & Langford, M. (2000). The five-factor model of personality:

Assessing entrepreneurs and managers. Academy of Entrepreneurship
Journal, 6(1), 6–17.
Gable, R.K., and Pruzek, R.M. (1971). Super’s work values inventory: Two
multivariate studies of inter-item relationships. The Journal of Experimental
Education, 40(1), 41–50.
Guion, R.M., & Gottier, R.F. (1965). Validity of personality measures in
personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 8(2), 135–164.
Garcίa-Cabrera, A.M., & Garcίa-Soto, M.G. (2009). A dynamic model of
technology-based opportunity recognition. Journal of Entrepreneurship,
18(2), 167–190.
Hofstede, G. (1983). The cultural relativity of organizational practices and
theories. Journal of International Business Studies, 14(2), 75–89.
Howard, P.J., Medina, P.L., & Howard, J.M. (1996). The big five locator: A quick
assessment tool for consultants and trainers. In J.W. Pfeiffer (Ed.), The 1996
annual: Volume 1, Training (pp. 1–1310). San Diego: Pfeiffer & Company.
Judge, T.A., Heller, D., & Mount, M.K. (2002). Five factor model of personality
and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3),
530–541.
Krau, E. (1989). The transition in life domain salience and the modification
of work values between high school and adult employment. Journal of
Vocational Behaviour, 34(1), 100–116.
Loughlin, C., & Barling, J. (1998). Teenagers’ part-time employment and their
work related attitudes and aspirations. Journal of Organizational Behaviour,
19(2), 197–207.
———. (2001). Young workers’ work values, attitudes, and behaviours. Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74(4), 543–558.
Luchsinger, V., & Bagby, D.R. (1987). Entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship:
Behaviours, comparisons, and contrasts. SAM Advanced Management
Journal, 52(3), 10–13.
Mueller, S.L. & Thomas, A.S. (2001). Culture and entrepreneurial potential:
A nine country study of locus of control and innovativeness. Journal of
Business Venturing, 16(1), 51–75.
Nicholson, N., Soane, E., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., & Willman, P. (2005).
Personality and domain-specific risk taking. Journal of Risk Research, 8(2),
157–176.
Panda, A., & Gupta, R.K. (2004). Mapping cultural diversity within India:
A meta-analysis of some recent studies. Global Business Review, 5(1),
27–49.
Pinchot, G., & Pellman, R. (1999). Intrapreneuring in action: A handbook of
business innovation. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publication.
Robbins, S.P., & Judge, T.A. (2007). Organizational behaviour (12th Edition).
Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited, New Delhi.
Roe, R.A., and Ester, P. (1999). Values and work: Empirical findings and
theoretical perspective. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48(1),
1–21.
Sayeed, O.B., & Gazdar, M.K. (2003). Intrapreneurship: Assessing and defining
attributes of intrapreneurs. Journal of Entrepreneurship, 12(1), 75–89.
Shane, S. (1993). Cultural influences on national rates of innovation. Journal of
Business Venturing, 8(1), 59–73.
Shetty, P. (2004). Attitude towards entrepreneurship in organizations. Journal of
Entrepreneurship, 13(1), 53–68.
Sinha, J.B.P. (2009). Culture and organizational behaviour. New Delhi: Sage
Publications.
Sinha, J.B.P., & Kanungo, R.N. (1997). Context sensitivity and balancing in
Indian organizational behaviour. International Journal of Psychology, 32(2),
93–105.
Sinha, J.B.P., Singh, S., Gupta, P., Srivastava, K.B.L., Sinha, R.B.N., Srivastava,
S., Ghosh, A., Siddiqui, N., Tripathi, N., Gupta, M., Srivastava, S., Mulla,
Z., Vijayalakshmi, C., & Pandey, A. (2010). An exploration of the Indian
mindset. Psychological Studies, 55(1), 3–17.
Sinha, J.B.P., & Sinha, D. (1990). Role of social values in Indian organizations.
International Journal of Psychology, 25(3–6), 705–714.
Weiner, Y., & Vardi, Y. (1980). Relationships between jobs, organization,
and career commitments and work outcomes—An integrative approach.
Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 26(1), 81–96.
White, C. (2006). Towards an understanding of the relationship between work
values and cultural orientations. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 25(4), 699–715.
Wooten, K.C., Timmerman, T.A., & Folger, R. (1999). The use of personality and
the five-factor model to predict new business ventures: From outplacement
to start-up. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 54(1), 82–101.
Varma, A., Srinivas, E.S., & Stroh, L.K. (2005). A comparative study of the
impact of leader-member exchange in US and Indian samples. Cross Cultural
Management: An International Journal, 12(1), 84–95.
Zytowski, D.G. (1994). A super contribution to vocational theory: Work values.
The Career Development Quarterly, 43(1), 25–31.

Sinsha and Srivastava2013

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Sinsha and Srivastava2013

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Journal of Entrepreneurship

Association of Personality, Work Values and Socio-cultural Factors

The online version of this article can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://joe.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

>> Version of Record - Feb 27, 2013

Association of The Journal of Entrepreneurship

Nupur Sinha is a Research Scholar and Kailash B. L. Srivastava is Professor

Intrapreneurship is ‘entrepreneurship within existing organisations’

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

and a dislike of bureaucratic systems. They are more like entrepreneurs

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

of ‘karma’; (b) high power distance depicted by the undisputed respect

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

Hypothesis 3: Socio-cultural factors would moderate the influ-

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

extraversion, openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness. The scale

Results and Discussion

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

(r = 0.52, p ≤ 0.01). Neuroticism was significantly but negatively corre-

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

Table 2. Multiple Regression Analysis Results incorporating Personality

Predictor Variables β F R² Adjusted R²

Extraversion was a positive predictor of performance in entrepreneurial

Table 3. Regression Analysis Results incorporating Components of Work

Predictor Variables β F R² Adjusted R²

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

variable (F = 22.88, p ≤ 0.01). The results showed that altruism, creativ-

Table 4. Multiple Regression Analysis Results with Domains of personality

Model Predictor Variables β F R² R² change Adjusted R²

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

components of socio-cultural characteristics together with personality

Table 5. Multiple Regression Analysis Results with Components of Work

Model Predictor Variables β F R² R² change Adjusted R²

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

dimensions are also defined by their social and organisational niches

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

localisation of management practices should be given due importance.

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

Envick, B.R., & Langford, M. (2000). The five-factor model of personality:

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22, 1 (2013): 97–113

Potrebbero piacerti anche