Evaluation of factors affecting entrepreneurship: a case of Indian women in the handicraft industry

The study investigates which factors shape the intentions and behaviours of Indian women toward entrepreneurship in the handicraft industry. Grounded in the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and the Entrepreneurial Event Model (EEM), the work proposes and tests an integrated model that also incorporates contextual factors such as innovativeness/digitalisation and anticipated social support. The purpose is to evaluate how key antecedents—attitude, subjective norms, anticipated behavioural control, anticipated feasibility, and anticipated inclination—affect entrepreneurial intention (EI) and, in turn, entrepreneurial behaviour (EB) among female students and young professionals linked to the handicraft sector. This topic is important for socio-economic development in emerging economies where female entrepreneurship can enhance innovation, preserve cultural heritage, generate employment, reduce poverty, and contribute to GDP growth, yet remains underexplored for handicrafts in India.

A systematic review using Scopus identified 1,169 records on female entrepreneurship; refining with the keyword “intention” yielded 47 papers, with 30 empirical studies reviewed for determinants of women’s entrepreneurial intention. Prior research shows mixed gender differences in EI and risk-taking; barriers include fear of failure and socio-cultural constraints; self-efficacy effects vary by context. TPB and EEM have been widely applied, with meta-analyses suggesting integrated TPB–EEM models outperform individual models in explaining EI. Studies highlight the roles of attitudes, subjective norms, perceived/anticipated control and feasibility, innovativeness, networks/support, and education/training. However, gaps remain regarding innovativeness and digitalisation in India’s handicraft sector, the financial impact on new craft entrepreneurs, and focussed studies on Indian female students’ and professionals’ entrepreneurial behaviour in handicrafts. The present study addresses these gaps with an extended TPB–EEM framework including innovativeness/digitalisation and anticipated social support.

Design: Cross-sectional survey using convenience sampling. Population and sample: Female students and young professionals associated with business and entrepreneurship programmes (diploma, undergraduate, postgraduate) at Indian state and private universities, including IITs and NITs. Instruments: A structured questionnaire with 36 items on 7-point Likert scales (1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree), plus 9 demographic questions. Constructs operationalised from prior validated scales: TPB (attitude, subjective norms, anticipated behavioural control), EEM (anticipated feasibility, anticipated inclination), and outcomes (entrepreneurial intention, entrepreneurial behaviour), plus contextual variables (innovativeness/digitalisation, anticipated social support). Items adapted from Linan (2008), Krueger (1993), Hair et al. (2010), and others; item lists provided (e.g., EI: 6 items; SN: 4; Attitude: 7; ASS: 3; AI: 6; ABC: 7; ID: 5; EB: 3). Data collection: 631 questionnaires distributed via Google Forms; 482 responses received; 430 valid female responses retained after screening (53 straight-lining cases removed). Demographics: Age—18–20 (20.98%), 20–25 (56.64%), 25–30 (11.42%), 30+ (10.96%). Education—UG (83.68%), PG (13.52%), Diploma (2.80%). Courses—Business/Management (66.2%), Entrepreneurship specialisation (33.8%). Craft segments among respondents include terracotta (6%), wood/stone carving (22%), toys (20.01%), carpet industry (52%). Analysis: Conducted in AMOS 25 and Excel. Assessed common method bias (Harman’s single-factor: 29.34% variance < 50%) and normality (skewness/kurtosis within ±2). Measurement model: CFA to test convergent and discriminant validity. Factor loadings generally >0.50; Cronbach’s alpha ≥0.70 across constructs; AVE ≥0.50; CR acceptable. Discriminant validity supported via Fornell-Larcker and HTMT (<0.85/0.90). Measurement model fit acceptable (e.g., GFI≈0.938, CFI≈0.954–0.956, AGFI≈0.849, RMSEA≈0.036). Structural model: SEM fit indices acceptable (χ2/df≈1.91; CFI≈0.939; GFI≈0.911; AGFI≈0.814; RMSEA≈0.036). Tested eight direct and four mediation hypotheses within the integrated TPB–EEM framework with contextual variables.

• Model performance: R^2 for entrepreneurial intention (EI)=0.742; R^2 for entrepreneurial behaviour (EB)=0.459, indicating substantial explained variance. - Direct effects on EI: • Anticipated feasibility (AF) → EI: β≈0.161, p≈0.010 (H1 supported). • Anticipated inclination (AI) → EI: β≈0.271, p≈0.001 (H2 supported). • Entrepreneurial attitude (EAT) → EI: β≈0.272, p<0.001 (H3 supported). • Subjective norms (SN) → EI: β≈0.154 (reported as significant), p≈0.011 (H4 supported). - Direct effects on EB: • Innovativeness and digitalisation (ID) → EB: β≈0.158–0.161, p≈0.003–0.005 (H5 supported). • Anticipated social support (ASS) → EB: β≈0.245, p<0.001 (H6 supported). • Anticipated behavioural control (ABC) → EB: β≈0.224, p<0.001 (H7 supported). • Entrepreneurial intention (EI) → EB: β≈0.436, p<0.001 (H8 supported). - Mediation (indirect) effects via EI on EB: • AF → EI → EB: indirect β≈0.040–0.042, p≈0.004–0.005 (supported). • AI (reported as AD/AI) → EI → EB: indirect β≈0.069–0.070, p≈0.001–0.003 (supported). • EAT → EI → EB: indirect β≈0.071–0.073, p≈0.003–0.004 (supported). • SN → EI → EB: indirect β≈0.039–0.040, p≈0.022–0.023 (supported). - Reliability and validity: Cronbach’s alpha ≥0.70 across constructs; AVE ≥0.50; discriminant validity established (Fornell-Larcker and HTMT). - Model fit indices met recommended thresholds for both measurement and structural models (e.g., χ2/df≈1.5–1.9, CFI≈0.939–0.956, GFI≈0.911–0.938, AGFI≈0.814–0.849, RMSEA≈0.035–0.036). Overall, all eight direct hypotheses and four mediation hypotheses were supported, indicating that TPB and EEM antecedents, along with innovativeness/digitalisation and anticipated social support, significantly shape EI and EB among Indian female participants in the handicraft context.

Findings validate an extended TPB–EEM model for Indian female handicraft entrepreneurship. Attitude, anticipated feasibility, and anticipated inclination meaningfully increase entrepreneurial intention, while subjective norms also contribute, reflecting the influence of family and peer support in collectivist settings. Innovativeness and digitalisation directly foster entrepreneurial behaviour, indicating that digital skills and innovative orientation translate into concrete start-up actions. Anticipated social support enhances EB, underscoring the role of perceived community backing for socially valuable ventures. Anticipated behavioural control is positively associated with EB, highlighting the importance of self-efficacy and perceived control over resources and opportunities. Critically, EI strongly predicts EB, and multiple antecedents exert additional indirect effects on EB through EI, emphasizing intention as a key transmission mechanism. The model explains high variance in EI (74%) and notable variance in EB (46%), outperforming standalone TPB or EEM reported in prior literature and supporting the integration of contextual factors. The results suggest policy and educational interventions should target attitudes, perceived feasibility/control, social support, and innovation/digital competencies to catalyse female entrepreneurial action in handicrafts.

The study advances understanding of how TPB and EEM antecedents, augmented by innovativeness/digitalisation and anticipated social support, shape entrepreneurial intention and behaviour among Indian women in the handicraft sector. Using a validated SEM model, all hypothesised direct and mediated relationships were supported, with strong effects from attitude, anticipated inclination and feasibility on EI, and from EI, ABC, ASS, and ID on EB. The integrated model explained 74% of EI and 46% of EB, yielding theoretical contributions by combining TPB and EEM with contextual determinants and practical implications for education, policy, and ecosystem supports to promote women’s craft entrepreneurship. Future research should broaden samples beyond students and India, incorporate longitudinal designs to track intention–action dynamics over time, and test moderating variables (e.g., entrepreneurial education, competence, prior experience).

• Sample limits: Convenience sample of female students/young professionals from select Indian universities; results may not generalise to other populations (e.g., non-student women, mixed-gender samples, other regions/countries). - Cross-sectional design: Limits causal inference and understanding of changes in EI and EB over time. - Context specificity: Focus on the Indian handicraft sector; sectoral and cultural factors may constrain generalisability. - Model scope: No moderators were tested; potential influences such as entrepreneurial education intensity, competencies, and prior experience were not modelled. - Measurement/reporting inconsistencies: Minor inconsistencies in reported coefficients/signs and tabular labels may warrant replication.