Professional Documents
Culture Documents
T He Russian Entrepreneur: A Study of Psychological Characteristics
T He Russian Entrepreneur: A Study of Psychological Characteristics
T He Russian Entrepreneur: A Study of Psychological Characteristics
a study of psychological
characteristics
R. Green, J. David and M. Dent
Staffordshire University, UK and
A. Tyshkovsky
Moscow StateAcademy of Management, Russia
could not easily be made in the absence of fuller interview data. We were also
aware of other important distinctions specifically relating to the Russian
context. Radaev (1993), for example, found that Russian experts believed in the
existence of three different types of entrepreneur:
(1) those coming from and involved in the privatization of stateowned property (nomenclatura recruits), who bring with them high
status and financial capital, and the ability to exploit old personal
networks;
(2) independent entrepreneurs, coming from nowhere and raising their
own start-up capital through savings or loans; and
(3) shadow dealers from already existing black markets.
A decision was made to locate the sample within group (2) of this typology, this
being the nearest equivalent to groups of entrepreneurs studied in other
cultures.
Our comparison sample was a group of business managers, in this case from
state enterprises. One problem this choice creates is that managers also tend to
score highly on the traits of interest, (e.g. type A, need for achievement (NA))
relative to members of the general public, a fact that is believed to contribute to
a certain degree of inconsistency in reported results. However, it was felt that
any other comparison would introduce too many other non-matched variables.
T he study subjects, materials and procedure
A total of 99 junior and middle managers of state enterprises (group M) and 108
first-generation small-business founders (entrepreneurs group E) were
interviewed, covering as wide a range as possible of types of business
enterprise. Restrictions in sampling the entrepreneur group were that the
business should have been running for at least six months and that it should be
legally registered (implying viability, since registration is not cheap).
Questionnaires to both groups covered biographical data on level of
education, working history, and family background. Group M were further
asked about their current managerial position, and any intentions they might
have for starting their own business. Group E were asked about the type of
business in which they were involved, the role taken in that business, and the
reasons for originating the business. Both groups then completed the four
scales described below. All questionnaire items were translated into Russian
following detailed discussions between authors to arrive at semantically and
colloquially acceptable equivalents. Back translation confirmed the accuracy of
the translation process.
Scale 1 need for achievement (NA)
The individuals internalized need for personal achievement and fulfilment was
measured using Smiths (1973) scale of ten true-false items. McClelland (1961)
initially found that successful entrepreneurs in the USA scored highly on NA;
similar results have since been obtained by a number of other authors, e.g.
Begley and Boyd (1986). The behaviours presumed to contribute to greater
entrepreneurial success in high need achievers include the setting of
challenging goals, demand for feedback to evaluate accomplishments, and
continuous striving for improved performance.
Scale 2 economic locus of control (ELC)
T his was measured using a 12-item version of Furnhams (1986)
multidimensional scale. Subscales of three items each reflect internal
economic locus of control (ELC-int), concerned with personal control over
positive outcomes relating to financial affairs; external-denial locus of control
(ELC-ed), concerned with negative economic outcomes that happen to other
people and the denial that poverty exists; powerful others locus of control
(ELC-po), referring to the power of others over ones economic position; and
chance locus of control (ELC-ch), concerned with beliefs
about how
position.
uncontrollable luck or chance factors affect ones own and/or
Items financial
selected from Furnhams larger set were those with the highest factor
others
were required.
Locus of
in generalResponses
refers to the
degree to which an individual
loadings
oncontrol
each subscale.
of agree,
perceives
success
and
failure
as
being
contingent
on personal initiative,
undecided, or disagree
Shapero (1975) found that entrepreneurs tended to score at the internal end of
Rotters IE scale, indicating greater belief in the efficacy of their own behaviour,
and rejecting the influence of external factors such as destiny, luck or chance.
led
entrepreneurs
D
of the study.
The main results which are the concern of this paper are comparisons of
groups M and E on the four scales described above. Initial hypotheses predicted
that the entrepreneur group would score higher on PWE and NA, and would be
more internal on ELC-int than state managers. In looking at the results below it
should be noted that high scores on PWE and NA represent high levels of that
attribute, while low scores on ELC represent high locus of control for that
subscale. Means and standard deviations are shown in Table II, together with
the results of t-tests comparing group M and group E scores. Two-tailed tests
were conducted except in the case of NA, ELC-int, and PWE scores, where
specific directional hypotheses had been proposed.
In summary, the entrepreneur group scored significantly higher on NA
(t = 3.31, p= 0.001), lower on the internal subscale of ELC (t = 2.29, p= 0.023)
Discussion
Initial results suggest that this group of Russian first-generation entrepreneurs
share characteristics of groups similarly labelled in research in capitalist
D
achievement, and (though not significant in this study) Protestant work ethic.
That PWE does not differentiate as clearly as the other two scales may be a
reflection of its multidimensional base, in that it covers values and attitudes
related to morality, leisure and politics as well as to work and the economy.
Thus only some components are likely to be intrinsic to entrepreneurship, while
others may actually be more likely to differentiate the same group negatively.
What may be of more interest here is the fact that the mean score on PWE for
the sample as a whole (78.3) is within a range found in many reports of average
PWE scores in Western cultures such as the UK, USA and Australia. This
evidence could be seen as adding weight to the argument that a broad European
consensus now exists with regard to a vocational work ethic (e.g. Giorgi and
Marsh, 1990), and that perhaps the label Protestant is now something of a
misnomer. It is less clear that our findings would support some of Furnhams
(1990) cross-cultural predictions about PWE scores (pp. 135-9), e.g. that scores
should be lower in more authoritarian and more bureaucratic
cultures, and in
However,
obviously
in are
this large
case inequalities
no direct cross-cultural
comparisons
were
countries where
there
between the
rich
produced,
and
the
question
of
whether
attitudes
endorsed
by
the
business
and the poor.
destiny
depend
remain
considered.
community are representative of the general population would
state
managers
also have
to be on ELC-po; in a society emerging from state domination it is
perhaps not surprising that those creating economic success in the private
domain
should
hold
less strong group
beliefsscored
about higher
the control
on their
In addition,
the
entrepreneur
than exerted
a
control group of
by powerful others.
Finally, state managers actually scored higher than entrepreneurs on
intrinsic work motivation, although for both groups scores on this dimension
are relatively high. It has already been noted that IWM is a more situationallydependent measure than others chosen for this study; the degree to which
intrinsic rewards are perceived and valued must, to some extent at least,
on the nature of the job itself. We suggest tentatively that managers who
in the state system may do so partly because their jobs are relatively fulfilling,
while for a significant number in the entrepreneur group more mundane jobs
may be compensated for by high extrinsic rewards (see also comments below).
Correlations beween scale scores present a rather less clear pattern. The
relationship between PWE and internal locus of control is consistent with
earlier research (e.g. Furnham, 1986). One might also predict a relationship
between NA and ELC-int, which was not found, though again some (e.g.
Brockhaus, 1980) argue that this may only hold for successful entrepreneurs.
That high need achievers believe less strongly in chance and in the control of
powerful others is plausible and consistent with the overall pattern of results.
However, further analysis revealed results that should lead to caution with
regard to the conclusion that first-generation small business owners in the
Soviet economy possess characteristics true to an entrepreneurial type or
gender and age respectively also need to be taken into account, either as main
effects or in interaction with entrepreneurial status. If we take the example of
age, it should be clear that the social/economic situation must also play its part,
since the opportunities offered by perestroika are recent, and were therefore
unavailable to an older generation. An interactionist or contingent model of the
type reviewed earlier seems more appropriate (see also Chell, 1986) and might
be tested by conducting longitudinal research.
Finally, looking at the interaction effect of gender and business group on
internal locus of control, one possible interpretation is that female state
managers are adopting stereotypical male characteristics in order to be more
successful in a traditional male environment, in this case assuming an image of
being in personal control of events. The results for entrepreneurs would reflect
more normal gender differences.