Entrepreneurial competencies

According to ^{McClelland (1973)}, competencies are related to people’s intrinsic motivations and needs, which lead them to develop certain skills to achieve their goals in different areas of their lives. In this study, the focus is on competencies related to entrepreneurship since it has been shown that entrepreneurial competencies have a meaningful impact on entrepreneurial success. These competencies are practical skills, values, and measures that influence companies’ creation, development, and consolidation (^{Kyndt & Baert, 2015}; ^{Martínez & Carmona, 2009}).

For ^{Man et al. (2008)}, the classification of competencies to understand entrepreneurial behavior includes six areas: opportunistic, organizational, strategic, social, commitment, and conceptual competencies, offering a complete view of the skills necessary for success in entrepreneurship. Meanwhile, ^{Toril and Valenciano (2011)} conducted studies that identified a series of characteristics that entrepreneurs acquire or develop, including ambition, positive mental aptitude, creativity, effort, initiative, tenacity, vision of the future, negotiating and commercial attitude, decisiveness, leadership, planning, and social skills. These qualities are fundamental for developing and growing a successful venture, as they allow one to face challenges and take advantage of opportunities effectively.

^{Plumly et al. (2008)} found that entrepreneurship potential in university students is related to competencies such as analytical skills and business intelligence for problem-solving and decision-making. On the other hand, ^{Nwachukwu and Minh (2021)} emphasize that entrepreneurial competencies include the entrepreneurs’ skills, determined by their personality, social role, knowledge, self-perception, and motivations for entrepreneurship. ^{Palacios (1999)} identified several fundamental competencies for business development, such as the need for existence, previous technical experience, entrepreneurial spirit, hard work, ability to recover and learn, risk tolerance, credibility, family culture, entrepreneurial professionalism, and a tolerant society. These characteristics have been taken up in subsequent research, such as that of ^{Barroso et al. (2014)} for the Mexican Southeast and ^{Mandujano (2017)} for the context of the state of Tabasco.

H1. The “ability to work with others” is positively and significantly related to the latent variable “entrepreneurial competencies” in Tabascan women.

Motivation for entrepreneurship

To understand what leads a person to start a business, the motives that drive them to form a company must be recognized (^{Mahto & McDowell, 2018}). Therefore, the theory on the motivation for entrepreneurship has been conceived based on factors contributing to entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship responds to motives of personal interest or need, being a dynamizing device of the economy, allowing the creation of jobs as the generation of wealth through the development of companies (^{Sastre, 2013}; ^{Murnieks et al., 2020}). Understanding the motives behind entrepreneurship is of great interest, separating its conception from motivation focused on organizational behavior (^{López et al., 2016)}.

Women start a business for various reasons, including seeking freedom and control in their decisions, obtaining economic benefits, achieving personal goals, improving social status, and the possibility of having a job (^{Ramadani, 2015}). They are also driven by the pursuit of individual achievement, competition, independence, affiliation, the desire to obtain power as an innovative element, willingness to face risks, and a proactive spirit (^{Barba-Sánchez & Atienza-Sahuquillo, 2012}; ^{Rahmatullah & Zaman, 2014}). In addition, some women start a business in response to an adverse environment, such as financial difficulties, continuity of family businesses, lack of flexibility and control over their time, personal dissatisfaction, unemployment, or as a recreational option due to limitations in socialization (^{Rahmatullah & Zaman, 2014}).

Thus, the motivations for business entrepreneurship in women can be classified into pull factors, related to the search for freedom, high income, and growth opportunities; push factors, linked to complex aspects such as migration or job loss; balance factors, associated with flexible schedules and work-family balance; and emotional factors, such as commitment and discrimination, considering that women start businesses to seek financial security due to precarious conditions, and are also motivated by psychosocial factors such as a sense of achievement and prestige (^{Ozsungur, 2019}; ^{Selamat et al., 2020}; ^{Avcı & Gümüş, 2022}). Nevertheless, from comparative studies between men and women in Mexico, four major dimensions could also be identified as the principal reasons for starting a business: intrinsic factors, search for autonomy, economic security, and income generation (^{López et al., 2016)}. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H2. The “Search for autonomy” is positively and significantly related to the latent variable “Motivation for entrepreneurship” in Tabascan female entrepreneurs.

Thus, in this research, entrepreneurial competencies are considered the characteristics that define the entrepreneur’s behavior and contribute to the development of their entrepreneurship (^{Alda-Varas et al., 2012}). They are closely related to the individual’s motivation and self-perception, which influences their entrepreneurial personality and identity in their social environment (^{Mahto & McDowell, 2018)}. People’s internal capabilities improve their entrepreneurial development and chances of success when coupled with the motivation to have their own business (^{Paredes, 2019}). Motivation and entrepreneurial competencies lead individuals to carry out and sustain their entrepreneurship based on their personal goals, such as family culture or the desire to have a business (^{Rahmatullah & Zaman, 2014}; ^{Lopez et al., 2016}). Ultimately, the reason for entrepreneurship and making business their way of life and livelihood will determine the implementation of these competencies and motivations.

The theoretical model proposed for this research integrates the four motivational factors behind entrepreneurship, as proposed by ^{López et al. (2016)} in the Mexican context. Additionally, to identify the entrepreneurial competencies, the methodology proposed by ^{Palacios (1999)} was selected, which was replicated and validated by ^{Santos (2011)} in a study in Yucatan and by Mandujano (2016) in another study on entrepreneurial competencies in Tabasco (see Figure 1), given the relevance of the geographical context where this study was carried out, allowing an approach to the identification of both characteristics in female entrepreneurs in a relevant manner and according to the local reality, based on which the following hypothesis was proposed:

H3. Motivation is positively and significantly related to entrepreneurial competencies in Tabascan female entrepreneurs.

Source: created by the authors based on the entrepreneurial competencies of ^{Palacios (1999)} and the motivation for entrepreneurship of ^{López et al. (2016)}

Figure 1 Proposed theoretical model of the relation between entrepreneurial competencies and motivation 

Instruments

The study used two instruments for data collection. The first, designed by ^{Santos (2011)}, was based on the entrepreneurial competencies proposed by ^{Palacios (1999)}. It comprised 57 items distributed in eleven dimensions (see Table 3). The second instrument, created by ^{López et al. (2016)}, focused on measuring entrepreneurial motivation and consisted of 18 items distributed in four dimensions (see Table 4). Both instruments were authorized by their respective authors for use in this research. They were selected because of their relevance in previous national, regional, and local studies similar to the present study. In this way, it was possible to verify their suitability and applicability in the field of gender in entrepreneurship.

The final instrument was divided into three sections. The first collected demographic data and business characteristics. The second contained items to identify motivations for entrepreneurship (Table 3), while the third included items related to entrepreneurial competencies (Table 4). The items in sections two and three were evaluated using a Likert scale, where participants expressed their perception, from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (5) of the proposed statements. The final instrument consisted of 75 items.

Instrument validation

In order to ensure the criterion and content validity of the instrument, an expert judgment was made with the participation of three specialists in the area of study, specifically in entrepreneurship, with a gender-based approach. These experts evaluated the coherence, relevance, sufficiency, and clarity of each item of the instrument using a scale of 1 to 4, where 1 meant that the item did not meet the criterion and 4 indicated a high level of compliance (^{Escobar-Pérez & Cuervo-Martínez, 2008}). The Fleiss Kappa concordance index was used to calculate the concordance among experts, obtaining a moderate concordance (0.426) according to the ^{Landis and Koch (1977)} scale. Based on the experts’ ratings and recommendations, changes were made to the wording of some items to make them more appropriate for the study population and the context in which the instrument would be applied.

For construct validation, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed using the maximum likelihood extraction method with varimax rotation and Kaiser normalization. Nevertheless, before its use, the sample adequacy measures were calculated through the Kaiser Meyer Olkin index (KMO) and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity, obtaining the values presented in Table 5 for each construct. In addition, it was verified that the correlation matrix was adequate to perform the factorization of the constructs since the values were not typical of an identity matrix (^{Moral, 2011}).

For the Motivation construct, four factors were identified that explained 51.482% of the variance, in line with the findings of ^{López et al. (2016)}. As for the Entrepreneurial Competencies construct, 11 factors were found that explained 58.424% of the variance, in line with what was proposed by ^{Palacios (1999)}.

Instrument reliability

In order to establish the instrument’s reliability, a pilot test was conducted with the participation of 37 women who possessed the same characteristics as the study population. The instrument was self-administered through the Google Forms platform as a form, shared through instant messaging platforms and e-mail. In order to verify its internal consistency, Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s Omega coefficients were calculated for each variable and its dimensions (see Table 6). According to the criteria of ^{Oviedo and Campo-Arias (2005)}, those that ≥ 0.70 are acceptable.

The results showed that both variables presented internal consistency above the acceptable value. Specifically, entrepreneurial competencies had reliability values >0.90, while motivation had values >0.80/0.70. When analyzing the dimensions of each variable, it was observed that some obtained lower alpha and omega values, such as the dimension “Need for existence” in entrepreneurial competencies (0.630/0.611) and the dimension “Intrinsic factors” in motivation (0.489/0.685). Nonetheless, modifications were made to the wording of the items based on expert observations, maintaining the original meaning given by the authors for each item.

Data collection and analysis procedure

SPSS v25 statistical software was used to calculate central tendency and dispersion measures, determine normality, and obtain descriptive data. The constructs’ reliability, criterion, content validity analyses, item correlation analyses, and factor loadings were also carried out through Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). Using the AMOS v23 program, bivariate analyses were carried out using structural equations to establish the relation between the motivation and entrepreneurial competencies constructs. The theoretical model was generated using goodness of fit indicators, and the proposed hypotheses were answered.

Results

Construct validity analysis by CFA

Data were processed using structural equation modeling. Eighteen factors correlated by maximum likelihood were used to measure the two constructs under study: motivation (with four factors) and entrepreneurial competencies (with eleven factors). Each construct’s goodness of fit indices were analyzed to prove their convergent and discriminant validity. It was identified that the goodness of fit indices were not valid for the study population since they showed Qi-square significance values of .000, which was not acceptable according to the authors’ original proposal.

Several goodness-of-fit criteria were used for models under structural equations. Discrepancy indices (CMIN/DF), root mean square errors of approximation (RMSEA), corrected goodness of fit indices (GFI), comparative fit indices (CFI), and root mean square residual (RMR) for each construct were analyzed. Table 7 presents the estimated baseline values for determining the parsimony of the SEM model.

Motivational construct

In the construct “Motivation,” which initially consisted of 18 items, to achieve a satisfactory goodness of fit, 5 items identified as MEOI57 (Revenue), MEFI61 (Intrinsic Factors), MEBA67 and MEBA68 (Search for Autonomy), and MESE72 (Economic Security) were eliminated. Thus, only 13 items were used to explain the construct (see Figure 2). These values indicate that the model fits adequately when analyzing constructs that measure skills and attitudes in the social sciences (^{Padilla, 2019}). Despite eliminating the items mentioned, the theory proposed by ^{López et al. (2016)} is still consistent with this population’s data obtained in this study.

Note 1: Discrepancy ratio of 1.190; RMR=0.043, CFI=0.938, GFI=0.925, and RMSEA=0.069. *p<.05, **<.01, ***<.001

Note 2: OI=Obtaining Income, FI=Intrinsic Factors, BA=Search for Autonomy, SE=Economic Security

Source: created by the authors in the AMOS program based on the data obtained

Figure 2 Standardized coefficients to measure the motivational construct 

Entrepreneurial competencies construct

For the Entrepreneurial Competencies construct, 57 items were integrated. Nevertheless, 24 of these items had to be eliminated to achieve the model’s goodness of fit. These items were called CEE2 and CEE5 for Entrepreneurial Spirit, CENE8 for Need for Existence, CEETP11, CEETP12, and CEETP14 for Prior Technical Experience, CETR17 and CETR19 for Risk Tolerance, CETA20, CETA21, and CETA23 for Hard Work, CECRA27 for Ability to Recover and Learn, CECTO30 and CECTO34 for Ability to Work with Others, CEC35 and CEC39 for Credibility, CEP42 and CEP43 for Priority, CEFYN45, CEFYN46, and CEFYN49 for Family and Business, and CEPE52, CEPE53, and CEPE54 for Entrepreneurial Professionalism. This resulted in 33 items to explain the construct.

Strong correlations were identified between the CENE6 and CENE7 “Need to Exist” items and between the CETR15 and CETR16 “Risk Tolerance” items. In order to address these correlations, contractions of the relevant items were performed. Since the 11 dimensions of ^{Palacios (1999)} were maintained, it was possible to determine that the theory agrees with this study’s data, as shown in Figure 3. Nevertheless, not all items were necessary for this study population to explain each variable dimension.

Note 1: Discrepancy ratio of 1.955 and RMR=108, CFI=0.888, GFI=0.803 and RMSEA=0.067. *p<.05, **<.01, ***<.001

Note 2: F1=Entrepreneurial spirit, F2=Need for existence, F3=Previous technical experience, F4=Risk tolerance, F5=Hard work, F6=Ability to recover and learn, F7=Ability to work with others, F8=Credibility, F9=Prioritize, F10=Family and business, F11= Professionalization of the entrepreneur

Source: created by the authors in the AMOS program based on the data obtained

Figure 3 Standardized coefficients to measure the Entrepreneurial Competencies construct 

Hypothesis testing

Based on the models generated through the structural equations for each construct, the interaction between the values was performed (see Table 8) to respond to the hypotheses according to the theoretical model proposed through the SEM model (see Figure 4). According to ^{Escobedo et al. (2016)}, to determine whether a group of factors has a meaningful effect on another, the value must be >0.5.

The first hypothesis sought to determine if the “ability to work with others” was positively and significantly related to the latent variable “entrepreneurial competencies” in Tabascan women, where, employing SEM, a significant relation was identified (p < 0.001), although weaker than expected. While the hypothesis that there is a meaningful relation between both latent variables is supported, it is important to remember that the relation is weaker than expected (CF = 0.22) compared with other items for this construct.

The second hypothesis aimed to determine whether the “search for autonomy” is positively and meaningfully related to the latent variable “Motivation for entrepreneurship” in Tabascan women. It can be observed that the results obtained through the structural equation analysis provide solid evidence to affirm that the hypothesis has been fulfilled. The relation between the latent variable “Search for autonomy” (CF = 1.00) and the latent variable “Motivation for entrepreneurship” showed a perfect and significant positive relation (p < 0.001), providing a solid basis to affirm that “Search for autonomy” is a well-measured construct and has a high influence on the entrepreneurial Tabascan women studied.

Note 1: Relation of motivation and entrepreneurial competencies= 0.48. Discrepancy ratio= 2.315, RMSEA= 0.079, CFI=0.77. *p<.05, **<.01, ***<.001

Note 2: F1=Income earning, F2=Intrinsic factors, F3=Search for autonomy, F4=Economic security. F12=Entrepreneurial spirit, F13=Need for existence, F14=Previous technical experience, F15=Risk tolerance, F16=Hard work, F17=Ability to recover and learn, F18=Ability to work with others, F19=Credibility, F20=Prioritization, F21=Family and business, F22=Professionalization of the entrepreneur.

Source: created by the authors in the AMOS program based on the data obtained

Figure 4. SEM model of the relation between motivation and entrepreneurial competencies in women 

For the third hypothesis, it was found that there is a positive relation between the variable “Motivation for entrepreneurship” and the variable “Entrepreneurial competencies.” Although the association is moderate (CF=0.48), it indicates that as the level of motivation of Tabascan women to become entrepreneurs increases, their entrepreneurial competencies are expected to increase. Thus, the p-value < 0.001 reinforces confidence in the results, demonstrating that this relation is not simply the result of chance but is a statistically significant and valid finding. Consequently, the results support the hypothesis initially proposed, which implies that in entrepreneurial women from Tabasco, a greater motivation for entrepreneurship is positively and significantly associated with a higher level of entrepreneurial competencies.

Regarding the results obtained when analyzing the composition of each of the constructs of both variables, it was found that for Motivation, the Economic Security factor for this population reported a negative behavior (CF=-0.03, p= >0.005), indicating the existence of an extremely weak or non-existent relation with its observable indicators, and this relation is not statistically significant. Therefore, it is important to explore this lack of relation and its possible influence on the motives for entrepreneurship among women in this population.

Thus, it can be seen that there are motives that drive the entrepreneurial behavior of entrepreneurial women, as well as motivational factors that favor the development of entrepreneurship in women, such as the search for autonomy, internal factors, having support networks, interaction with the outside world, and feeling part of something, which is consistent with ^{Weeks and Seiler (2001)}, ^{Jawarma et al., (2011)}, ^{Berdugo and Gámez (2015)}, and ^{Pérez-Pérez and Ávila-Hernández (2016)}. Regarding the analysis of the factors that can best explain the variable Entrepreneurial Competencies of Tabascan entrepreneurs, these were Prioritizing (1.00) and Need for Existence (0.93). On the other hand, the factors that least explained the variable were Credibility (0.22), Family and Business (0.23), and Hard Work (0.28). This result satisfies the minimum acceptable criteria indicated above.