year 6, Issue 2 (Summer 2018)                   Ann. Appl. Sport Sci 2018, 6(2): 69-77 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Keshtidar M, Adib Roshan F, Sahebkaran M A. The Mediating Role of Innovative Supportive Environment in the Relationship between Organizational Climate and Entrepreneurship in Sports Sciences Male Students. Ann. Appl. Sport Sci. 2018; 6 (2) :69-77
URL: http://aassjournal.com/article-1-488-en.html
1- Sport Management Department, Sport Science Faculty, University of Birjand, Birjand, Iran , mkeshtidar@birjand.ac.ir
2- Sport Science Faculty, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran
3- Sport Management Department, Sport Science Faculty, Ferdowsi University, Mashhad, Iran
Abstract:   (749 Views)
Background. Today, education of entrepreneurs is considered as one of the basic and fundamental guidelines for the comprehensive development of a country.
Objectives. So the main purpose of this study is to investigate the mediating role of innovative supportive environment in the relationship between organizational climate and entrepreneurship in physical education male students in universities of Mashhad.
Methods. This is a descriptive-correlational and analytical study and has been done by field method. The statistical population of the present study consists of all male students of physical education and sport sciences faculties in the city of Mashhad (1083 people). Among these students, 308 people were selected as study samples. The sampling method was cluster and simple random. Organizational climate questionnaire by Sussman & Deep (1989) and Moghimi (2013) and entrepreneurship questionnaire of Kevin & Slavin (1986) were used for data collection. Also for evaluating the innovative supportive environment, the questionnaire of Cheng Hava Tassi through a
five-point Likert scale was used. The overall reliabilities of questionnaires were obtained respectively 89%, 84% and 92%. The software package of spss21 was used for descriptive statistics and the software of Liserl8.5 was used for confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling (SEM).
Results. The study results showed that there is a positive and significant relationship between all three factors of organizational climate, entrepreneurship and innovative supportive environment (55%). In this relationship, organizational climate (56%) and innovative supportive environment (74%) were effective on entrepreneurship.
Conclusion. Based on research findings, it could be stated that to have Entrepreneur University in the male student part, having merely organizational space is not adequate and the space that has innovative supportive environment should govern it so in interaction with each other causes increasing entrepreneurship in these students.
Full-Text [PDF 467 kb]   (188 Downloads)    
 
  
APPLICABLE REMARKS
• Entrepreneurship topics to be one of the compulsory courses in university both theoretically and practically.
• Holding entrepreneurship festivals and workshops with the cooperation of owners of the industries.
• Businesses of male sports science graduates of various universities of the country can explain the appropriate results for planners of the country.
• It is recommended for researchers to conduct studies on the comparative investigation of employment of domestic and foreign sports science university graduates.

Type of Study: Original Article | Subject: Sport Management and its related branches
Received: 2017/02/18 | Accepted: 2017/06/20 | Published: 2018/08/18

References
1. Roig-Tierno N, Alcázar J, Ribeiro-Navarrete S. Use of infrastructures to support innovative entrepreneurship and business growth. Journal of Business Research. 2015;68(11):2290-4. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.06.013]
2. Dadgar Y GA. Analysis of entrepreneurship in the past 70 years in Iran". Case study: The performance of a typical entrepreneur. Quarterly of Economic researches. 2010;2:61-90.
3. Premand P, Brodmann S, Almeida R, Grun R, Barouni M. Entrepreneurship education and entry into self-employment among university graduates. World Development. 2016;77:311-27. [DOI:10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.08.028]
4. Petrakis PE, Kostis PC, Kafka KI. Secular stagnation, faltering innovation, and high uncertainty: New-era entrepreneurship appraisal using knowledge-based thinking. Journal of Business Research. 2016;69(5):1909-13. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.078]
5. al Te. Providing a regression model for organizational climate and organizational entrepreneurship in physical education faculties in Iran. Quarterly of research in the humanities. 2009;22:97-116.
6. Başçı ES, Alkan RM. Entrepreneurship education at universities: suggestion for a model using financial support. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015;195:856-61. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.364]
7. Tsai C. Innovative behaviors between employment modes in knowledge intensive organizations. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science. 2011;1(6):153-62.
8. Johne FA, Snelson PA. Success factors in product innovation: A selective review of the literature. Journal of product innovation management. 1988;5(2):114-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.520114 [DOI:10.1016/0737-6782(88)90003-3]
9. Jansen S, van de Zande T, Brinkkemper S, Stam E, Varma V. How education, stimulation, and incubation encourage student entrepreneurship: Observations from MIT, IIIT, and Utrecht University. The International Journal of Management Education. 2015;13(2):170-81. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijme.2015.03.001]
10. Maresch D, Harms R, Kailer N, Wimmer-Wurm B. The impact of entrepreneurship education on the entrepreneurial intention of students in science and engineering versus business studies university programs. Technological forecasting and social change. 2016;104:172-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2015.11.006]
11. Sharma P, Chrisman SJJ. Toward a reconciliation of the definitional issues in the field of corporate entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship: Springer; 2007. p. 83-103. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48543-0_4 [DOI:10.1007/978-3-540-48543-8_4]
12. Robinson D. Economic development from the state and local perspective: Case studies and public policy debates: Springer; 2014. [DOI:10.1057/9781137317490]
13. Hu H, Huang T, Zeng Q, Zhang S. The role of institutional entrepreneurship in building digital ecosystem: A case study of Red Collar Group (RCG). International Journal of Information Management. 2016;36(3):496-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.12.004]
14. Letaifa SB, Goglio-Primard K. How does institutional context shape entrepreneurship conceptualizations? Journal of Business Research. 2016;69(11):5128-34. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.092]
15. Pérez CR, Cubero LN. Universities with Added Value: Employability and Innovative Entrepreneurship. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014;139:65-71. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.08.023]
16. İskender E, Batı GB. Comparing Turkish Universities Entrepreneurship and Innovativeness Index's Rankings with Sentiment Analysis Results on Social Media. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015;195:1543-52. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.457]
17. Oganisjana K, Laizans T. Opportunity–oriented problem–based learning for enhancing entrepreneurship of university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015;213:135-41. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.416]
18. Christina W, Purwoko H, Kusumowidagdo A. The role of entrepreneur in residence towards the students' entrepreneurial performance: a study of entrepreneurship learning process at Ciputra University, Indonesia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015;211:972-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.129]
19. Stuetzer M, Obschonka M, Audretsch DB, Wyrwich M, Rentfrow PJ, Coombes M, et al. Industry structure, entrepreneurship, and culture: An empirical analysis using historical coalfields. European Economic Review. 2016;86:52-72. [DOI:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2015.08.012]
20. Balan P, Lindsay NJ. Innovation capability and entrepreneurial orientation dimensions for Australian hotels: Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism; 2009.
21. Wu C-W. Global entrepreneurship and innovation in management: Comparing MRA/SEM versus fuzzy-set QCA theory creation, data analysis, and findings. Elsevier; 2016.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA code

Send email to the article author


© 2017 All Rights Reserved | Annals of Applied Sport Science

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb