Improving the Entrepreneurial Intentions of Women in Malaysia: A Conceptual Framework

Improving the Entrepreneurial Intentions of Women in Malaysia: A Conceptual Framework

Hui Li You., Shyue Chuan Chong., *Fiona Jane Francis., Chia Yien Lim

Faculty of Accountancy, Finance & Business, Tunku Abdul Rahman University of Management and Technology, Jalan Genting Kelang, Setapak, 53300 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.90400420

Received: 14 April 2025; Accepted: 18 April 2025; Published: 19 May 2025

ABSTRACT

Women’s entrepreneurship has gained recognition as a crucial catalyst for economic development, social advancement, and job creation, particularly in emerging economies such as Malaysia. Despite concerted efforts by Malaysia to promote gender parity, significant disparities remain in female entrepreneurial participation. This shift also aligns with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 5, which advocates for women’s economic empowerment and involvement in leadership positions. This paper presents a conceptual framework that investigates the theoretical analysis of the elements that impact women’s intention to start their businesses, particularly in Malaysia. This conceptual framework integrates the Push-Pull-Mooring (PPM) Migration Model with the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to provide a comprehensive understanding of their intention and address the existing literature gap. Although the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) has been extensively utilised to predict entrepreneurial intentions through attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control, it has been limited in capturing contextual and structural barriers faced by women in the literature. Nevertheless, it does not adequately explore its impact on push and pull variables, particularly the mediating role of mooring factors on women’s entrepreneurial intentions. To bridge this gap, the PPM model introduces socio-cultural (push) and opportunity-driven (pull) factors influencing women’s decisions to pursue entrepreneurship. The proposed framework fills a critical gap in the existing literature by offering a multidimensional understanding of the drivers of female entrepreneurial intention, addressing internal motivations and external influences on women’s entrepreneurial behaviour. It also offers practical insights for policymakers to develop targeted strategies that remove barriers and enhance support entrepreneurial ecosystems benefiting aspiring women in Malaysia. Ultimately, the paper aims to contribute to Malaysia’s progress toward SDG 5 by promoting inclusive economic participation and creating a supportive environment for women’s entrepreneurial growth.

Keywords: Women’s Entrepreneurship; Entrepreneurial Intentions; Theory of Planned Behaviour; United Nations; SDG5

INTRODUCTION

Women’s participation in entrepreneurship is increasingly recognised as a pivotal driver of economic growth, innovation, and sustainability (Field et al., 2021; Selamat & Endut, 2020). Empowering women entrepreneurs can significantly elevate their socioeconomic status and contribute to more resilient and sustainable business practices. This empowerment is particularly vital in fostering gender equality, a critical dimension of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), particularly SDG 5, which emphasises the need for the full and effective participation of women in economic and leadership roles (Del-Aguila-Arcentales et al., 2022; Isa et al., 2021). Research underscores that promoting gender equality in entrepreneurship enhances national competitiveness and sustainability (Raman et al., 2022).

Despite this, Malaysia continues to face persistent gender disparities in economic participation. The World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index (2022) places the nation at 103rd out of 146 countries. Notably, female labour force participation has declined to 62.9%, the lowest recorded level since the index’s inception, in stark contrast to the 77.6% participation rate for males (World Economic Forum, 2022). This disparity is particularly pronounced compared to neighbouring nations such as Singapore, Thailand, and Indonesia, where female labour force participation is markedly higher.

Figure 1: A Conceptual Framework that Integrates the Push-Pull-Mooring (PPM) Migration Model with the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) towards Women’s Entrepreneurial Intention-Based Studies.

Figure 1 presents a conceptual framework that integrates the Push-Pull-Mooring (PPM) Migration Model with the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to investigate women’s entrepreneurial intentions in Malaysia. The TPB posits that intentions are influenced by attitudes towards behaviour, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control (Ajzen, 2020). Although TPB effectively predicts intentions, it does not fully account for external barriers that may prevent these intentions from translating into entrepreneurial actions, particularly for women (Brännback et al., 2007; Fragoso et al., 2019). To address this limitation, the PPM Migration Model provides an alternative perspective by categorising motivations into push, push and mooring factors (Fu, 2011; Giacomin et al., 2023; Schjoedt & Shaver, 2007). This framework thoroughly comprehends the complex factors shaping Malaysian women’s entrepreneurial aspirations. It addresses both socio-cultural (push) and opportunity-driven (pull) elements while also considering behavioural intentions shaped by the TPB (Ajzen, 2020; Welter, 2011) as mediating mooring factors.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Theoretical Underpinning – Push-Pull-Mooring (Ppm) Migration Model

As a precursor to entrepreneurial behaviour, entrepreneurial intention has garnered extensive attention in the literature due to its predictive power regarding entrepreneurial outcomes (Ajzen, 2011). The TPB, which posits that intention is shaped by attitudes towards behaviour, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control, has become a foundational model in this domain (Ajzen, 2020). However, while the TPB effectively forecasts entrepreneurial intentions, it has been critiqued for its limited consideration of external barriers that may disrupt the translation of intention into action (Brännback et al., 2007). This critique is particularly pertinent in women’s entrepreneurship, where structural and socio-cultural obstacles frequently impede progress, despite strong intentions (Gamidullaeva et al., 2020).

The relationship between intention and behaviour is well-documented, with intentions being reliable indicators of subsequent actions (Krueger et al., 2000). However, the extent to which these intentions translate into actual entrepreneurial activity, particularly for women facing unique socio-cultural challenges, remains under examination. Despite the predictive accuracy of the TPB, it does not account for all factors that may facilitate or inhibit entrepreneurial behaviour in women, such as access to resources, societal expectations, or systemic biases (Fragoso et al., 2019). These considerations suggest a need for a more comprehensive framework incorporating internal intentions and external constraints, offering a broader understanding of women’s entrepreneurship.

In response to these gaps, the PPM Migration Model offers a complementary perspective by categorising the motivations for entrepreneurial action into push and pull factors (Fu, 2011). Push factors, such as dissatisfaction with current employment or limited career advancement opportunities, are often seen as forces that drive individuals towards entrepreneurship out of necessity (Schjoedt & Shaver, 2007). In contrast, pull factors, such as the allure of autonomy, monetary motivation, or market opportunities, entice individuals into entrepreneurship through perceived opportunities (Giacomin et al., 2023). While these distinctions are valuable, the binary nature of push and pull factors may oversimplify the complex and dynamic decision-making processes that underlie entrepreneurial intentions, particularly for women (Uctu & Al-Silefanee, 2023).

The limitations of the push and pull framework become apparent when considering the role of mooring factors, which encompass personal and contextual elements that either facilitate or hinder the pursuit of entrepreneurship. These factors align with the TPB, particularly its emphasis on perceived behavioural control, attitudes, and subjective norms. However, mooring factors extend beyond psychological constructs, including broader socio-economic and structural conditions influencing entrepreneurial outcomes. For instance, while pull factors may draw women towards entrepreneurship, realising these intentions often depends on external supports, such as access to capital or strong networks. This complex interplay of motivations and barriers suggests that a purely push-pull approach may not sufficiently capture the diverse influences shaping women’s entrepreneurial decisions (Van der Zwan et al., 2016).

The push factors, illustrated in Figure 2, represent sociocultural influences that may compel women to pursue entrepreneurship, such as social recognition, job satisfaction, family support, and work-family balance (Ariffin et al., 2021). These factors underscore the societal and familial expectations that can either motivate or impede entrepreneurial activities. As indicated by P1, the impact of push factors is mediated through perceived behavioural control, subjective norms and attitudes towards entrepreneurship, aligning with the constructs of the TPB (Ajzen, 2011).

Simultaneously, the pull factors, illustrated in Figure 2, reflect opportunity-driven motivations, encompassing aspirations for independence, monetary motivations, market opportunities, and digital technology (Anggadwita et al., 2021; Zahra & Wright, 2011). These factors, depicted by P2, highlight the attraction of entrepreneurship as a means to achieve autonomy and capitalise on emerging market trends, further reinforcing women’s entrepreneurial intentions.

The mooring factors (Figure 2) are at the core of this framework, which draws on the TPB. These factors, such as attitudes towards behaviour, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control, act as mediators, converting push and pull factors into concrete entrepreneurial intentions (Ajzen, 2011). The interaction between these components, illustrated by P3 and P4, provides a deeper insight into how socio-cultural and opportunity-driven factors influence women’s decision-making processes regarding entrepreneurship (Welter, 2011).

Figure 2: A Conceptual Framework of the Push-Pull-Mooring (PPM) Migration Model towards Women’s Entrepreneurial Intention-Based Studies.

Finally, P5 demonstrates the direct impact of mooring (TPB) on women’s entrepreneurial intention, emphasising that internal beliefs and external pressures ultimately shape entrepreneurial outcomes (Ajzen, 2020). This suggests that even in the presence of favourable push and pull factors, the critical determinants of entrepreneurial intention are grounded in individual perceptions of feasibility and desirability (Zahra & Wright, 2011).

In summary, Figure 2 bridges the PPM model with the TPB, providing a more comprehensive framework for analysing women’s entrepreneurial aspirations in Malaysia. By combining socio-cultural, opportunity-driven, and psychological factors, this framework provides a robust theoretical foundation for future empirical research. Such studies will be crucial in addressing the persistent gender gap in Malaysia’s economic landscape, ultimately advancing women’s entrepreneurship (Anggadwita et al., 2021; Ariffin et al., 2021).

Hypothesis-Based Literature Development

This research overcomes theoretical limitations by incorporating the TPB with the PPM model, offering a robust framework to comprehend women’s entrepreneurial intentions in Malaysia. By combining the identification of motivational drivers with an analysis of facilitating and mitigating factors, this approach moves beyond the traditional focus on intentions alone. It emphasises the contextual elements that influence entrepreneurial behaviour in Malaysia. This model addresses a crucial gap and offers insights into the challenges and opportunities of women’s entrepreneurship in Malaysia. Additionally, it offers crucial insights for policymakers aiming to design targeted interventions that address internal and external obstacles to women’s entrepreneurial success and strategies to support women entrepreneurs more effectively.

Proposition 1: Socio-cultural determinants, commonly referred to as push factors, significantly affect women’s entrepreneurial intentions.

Social and cultural factors significantly impact women’s entrepreneurial intents in Asia, developing unique sociocultural systems distinct from those seen in Western countries (Franzke et al., 2022). These sociocultural systems are crucial factors that strongly impact women’s choices to engage in entrepreneurship (Khan et al., 2021). Existing research has identified several key factors that drive individuals to pursue entrepreneurial endeavours, including social recognition, job satisfaction, family support, and work-family balance. These factors are crucial in shaping an individual’s entrepreneurial intentions, as highlighted by various researchers (Aloulou & Algarni, 2022; Bublitz et al., 2020; Jaskyte et al., 2020; Lauto et al., 2019; Selamat & Endut, 2020; St-Jean & Duhamel, 2020; Tentama & Paputungan, 2019).

Social recognition, which refers to the acknowledgement and appreciation of acts that are highly valued by society, plays a vital role for aspiring entrepreneurs, mainly when financial incentives are limited (Ali et al., 2021; Bacq et al., 2014; Bublitz et al., 2020). The perception of social recognition can be a powerful motivator for individuals to start a business, regardless of their gender (Thomas & Mueller, 2000). Viewing entrepreneurship as a symbol of social status or a way to address social issues can further increase entrepreneurial intentions, particularly by boosting self-confidence in women seeking self-employment (Aloulou & Algarni, 2022; Anggadwita et al., 2021; Contreras-Barraza et al., 2021).

Job satisfaction, which encompasses individuals’ assessments of their work experiences and perceived accomplishments, can significantly influence entrepreneurial pursuits, particularly in workplaces where gender disparities are prevalent (Dubey & Sahu, 2022). Research has shown that job dissatisfaction can act as a driving force, or “push factor,” motivating individuals to start their businesses, often to escape unfavourable work environments (Jaskyte et al., 2020; Lauto et al., 2019). For women, self-employment can offer more fulfilling career opportunities and greater job satisfaction, often as a response to the glass ceiling and workplace discrimination (Jaskyte et al., 2020). Understanding job satisfaction is critical for comprehending why women often turn to entrepreneurship for greater fulfilment and independence.

Family and task-related social support significantly contribute to entrepreneurial persistence (Lauto et al.,2019). This underscores the crucial importance of family-to-business support, encompassing emotional, social, and financial assistance, in helping entrepreneurs launch and sustain their ventures (Klyver et al., 2020; Le Loarne Lemaire et al., 2022). Moreover, strong family cohesion provides essential emotional backing that fosters entrepreneurial intentions, particularly for women entrepreneurs who often rely on such support to overcome challenges (Bullough et al., 2021). Additionally, family support commonly includes startup capital, which is vital for establishing new businesses and enhancing the prospects of success (Tentama & Paputungan, 2019).

The concept of work-life balance has been a topic of extensive discussion and examination by scholars over the years. Sirgy and Lee (2018) describe work-life balance as engaging in work and non-work activities with minimal conflict between these roles. Tan (2007) defines it as the fair distribution of time, energy, and commitment across all life areas to achieve satisfaction. Recent research emphasises that household and family responsibilities are significant in women’s entrepreneurship (Lauto et al., 2019; St-Jean & Duhamel, 2020). Many women view entrepreneurship as a way to achieve better work-family balance due to its flexibility (Sirgy & Lee, 2018; St-Jean & Duhamel, 2020).

Proposition 2: The pull factors, which are driven by opportunities, substantially influence women’s intentions to engage in entrepreneurship.

Entrepreneurs are driven by various motivations, with pull factors pivotal. The ability to recognise and seize opportunities is a significant catalyst for entrepreneurial endeavours, referred to as pull factors (Van der Zwan et al., 2016). These factors incentivise opportunities-driven entrepreneurs (Rey-Martí et al., 2015). Existing research on entrepreneurial motivation has identified four primary pull factors that contribute to an individual’s decision to start their business venture: the desire for independence (Nsahlai et al., 2020; Shava & Chinyamurindi, 2019), monetary incentives (Giacomin et al., 2023), the perception of market opportunities (Ali et al., 2021; Bouarir et al., 2023; Dubey & Sahu, 2022), and the influence of digital technology (Kamberidou, 2020; Richter et al., 2017).

The motivation that drives women to pursue entrepreneurial careers is complex and multifaceted. One key factor that emerges consistently in the literature is the strong desire for independence, which encompasses a yearning for autonomy, authority, and flexibility (Eijdenberg & Masurel, 2013; Shava & Chinyamurindi, 2019). The desire for independence drives individuals to escape perceived constraints and gain control over their environment (Eijdenberg & Masurel, 2013; Van der Zwan et al., 2016). This psychological drive is particularly significant for women entrepreneurs, for whom independence is a primary motivation influencing their decision to pursue entrepreneurial careers (Nsahlai et al., 2020; Shava & Chinyamurindi, 2019). Their autonomy aspirations shape their intentions and actions to start a business.

Monetary incentives, associated with increased financial benefits, are the primary driving force behind innovation and identifying opportunities (Giacomin et al., 2023; Shepherd & DeTienne, 2005). Giacomin et al. (2023) found a strong positive relationship between financial rewards and the motivation to innovate, with higher rewards leading to increased innovation. Similarly, Shepherd and DeTienne (2005) demonstrated that higher potential income levels improve opportunity recognition, allowing individuals to identify and generate more business opportunities. This connection supports the argument by Gill and Ganesh (2007) that attractive, profitable opportunities draw individuals into entrepreneurship. Overall, studies indicate that those with a substantial profit orientation are likelier to start a business than to choose other career paths (Giacomin et al., 2023).

Entrepreneurial intentions are greatly influenced by the perception of market opportunities, which involves recognising and leveraging market gaps (Ali et al., 2021; Bouarir et al., 2023). Opportunity recognition is critical for an entrepreneur’s success, as it defines the scope of entrepreneurship and exchange conditions (Dubey & Sahu, 2022). The perception of market opportunities significantly influences entrepreneurial intentions, particularly among women (Ali et al., 2021; Dubey & Sahu, 2022; Shava & Chinyamurindi, 2019). Research indicates that individuals’ perceptions of market opportunities and the feasibility of starting a business substantially impact their decision to participate in entrepreneurial activities.

Digital technology has significantly transformed entrepreneurship, empowering individuals, particularly women, to overcome traditional barriers and unlock new avenues for entrepreneurial success (Hewavitharana et al., 2021). Digital technology has enhanced work flexibility and diminished the constraints imposed by physical limitations (Richter et al., 2017). As a result, the advancements in digital technology are increasingly motivating women to pursue entrepreneurship, as this technology-driven flexibility reduces physical constraints in a digitised, knowledge-based world, creating a “pull effect” towards entrepreneurship (Kamberidou, 2020; Richter et al., 2017).

Proposition 3: The mooring factors (TPB) mediate between push factors and women’s entrepreneurial intention.

The TPB is a crucial determinant of an individual’s intention, subsequently leading to their actual behaviour (Lin & Wu, 2021). Previous research (Brännback et al., 2007) has examined the mediating role of intention as a mediator between the antecedents of the mooring factor (TPB) and push factor behaviour. The push factors such as social recognition, job satisfaction, family support, and work-family balance have been positively associated with women’s intention to become entrepreneurs (Carsrud & Brännback, 2010; Lin & Wu, 2021). The mooring factor (TPB) is anticipated to mediate this relationship, where these push factors influence attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control, thereby affecting the intention to engage in entrepreneurial activities.

Proposition 4: The mooring factors (TPB) mediate between the pull factors and women’s intention to become entrepreneurs.

Research has consistently demonstrated that women’s beliefs and perceptions are crucial in shaping their entrepreneurial intentions and subsequent actions (Alam et al., 2019). Significant drivers of women’s entrepreneurial intentions are identified as pull factors, such as the desire for independence, monetary motivation, the perception of market opportunities, and the influence of digital technology (Alam et al., 2019). These factors significantly impact women’s motivation to initiate businesses and engage in entrepreneurial activities. According to the TPB, attitudes, subjective norms, and behaviour controls influence intention. Intention, in turn, mediates pull factors and women’s entrepreneurial intention behaviour (Brännback et al., 2007; Carsrud & Brännback, 2010).

Proposition 5: A strong correlation exists between mooring factors (TPB) and women’s intention to engage in entrepreneurship.

The TPB is a significant factor in shaping women’s intentions to engage in entrepreneurship (Lin & Wu, 2021; Ojiaku et al., 2018). According to TPB, intentions are influenced by attitudes towards the behaviour, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control, which are considered proximal antecedents (Krueger et al., 2000). This model is anticipated to affect women’s entrepreneurial intentions, as demonstrated by previous studies conducted by Farrukh et al. (2018) and Iakovleva et al. (2011).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Primary research data was collected using structured questionnaires from adult females aged 18 and older in Malaysia. The study concentrated on both formal and informal women-owned enterprises. A sample size of 400 respondents was determined using Cohen’s formula, with a 95% power level, 0.05 alpha significance, and 0.15 medium effect size (Cohen, 1992).

To comprehensively examine women’s entrepreneurial intentions, it is crucial to consider the economic activities and demographics across various regions: Central, Southern, Northern, Eastern, Sabah, and Sarawak. The economic landscape of each region significantly influences female entrepreneurship in Malaysia. Consequently, non-probability purposive sampling was employed to select samples based on women’s participation in formal or informal enterprises (Etikan et al., 2016; Taherdoost, 2016). The selection process considered the female population in each region and their contribution to Malaysia’s GDP, emphasising their economic importance.

Furthermore, a structured questionnaire will be administered to measure various statements on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The survey will be distributed via Google Forms to our target group. Subsequently, multivariate analysis will be used to test the hypotheses (Maxwell, 2000).

EXPECTED OUTCOME AND CONCLUSION

Although this study presents a conceptual framework for a novel perspective on the intentions and actions of women entrepreneurs in Malaysia, it is essential to provide a new perspective on Malaysian women entrepreneurs, offering insights to achieve SDG5 and promote gender equality. The presence of women entrepreneurs in Malaysia substantially affects the country’s economic progress by actively contributing to job creation, driving innovation, and boosting productivity. Furthermore, it fosters gender parity and enhances women’s agency by questioning conventional gender norms and attaining acknowledgement for their contributions.

The proposed conceptual framework provides a structure to understand the factors influencing women’s entrepreneurial behaviour. The extension of the TPB investigates the correlation between push-pull factors and women’s intentions to become entrepreneurs while also exploring the mediating influence of mooring factors. This approach offers a more profound comprehension of how socio-cultural and opportunity-driven factors influence these intentions.

To leverage these insights, the Malaysian government could enhance current policies by implementing targeted measures that more effectively support women entrepreneurs. This would enable the Malaysian government to make substantial progress towards achieving gender equality, empowering women, building a more inclusive society, and contributing significantly to achieving SDG5 within Malaysia and globally.

REFERENCES

1. Ajzen, I. (2011). The theory of planned behaviour: Reactions and reflections. Psychology & Health, 26(9), 1113–1127. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2011.613995
2. Ajzen, I. (2020). The theory of planned behavior: Frequently asked questions. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2(4), 314–324. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.195
3. Alam, M. Z., Kousar, S., & Rehman, C. A. (2019). Role of entrepreneurial motivation on entrepreneurial intentions and behaviour: Theory of planned behaviour extension on engineering students in Pakistan. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 9(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-019-0175-1
4. Ali, J., Shabir, S., & Shaikh, A. (2021). Exploring antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions among females in an emerging economy. International Journal of Social Economics, 48(7), 1044–1059. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijse-07-2020-0488
5. Aloulou, W. J., & Algarni, E. A. (2022). Determinants of social entrepreneurial intention: Empirical evidence from the Saudi context. Social Enterprise Journal, 18(4), 605–625. https://doi.org/10.1108/sej-11-2021-0086
6. Anggadwita, G., Ramadani, V., Permatasari, A., & Alamanda, D. T. (2021). Key determinants of women’s entrepreneurial intentions in encouraging social empowerment. Service Business, 15(2), 309–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-021-00444-x
7. Ariffin, A. S., Baqutayan, S. M. S., & Mahdzir, M. A. (2021). Enhancing women entrepreneurship development framework: Policy & institution gap and challenges in the case of Malaysia. Journal of Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy, 6(2), 22–33. https://doi.org/10.11113/jostipv6n2.58
8. Bacq, S., Hartog, C., & Hoogendoorn, B. (2014). Beyond the moral portrayal of social entrepreneurs: An empirical approach to who they are and what drives them. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(4), 703–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2446-7
9. Bouarir, H., Diani, A., Boubker, O., & Rharzouz, J. (2023). Key determinants of women’s entrepreneurial intention and behavior: The role of business opportunity recognition and need for achievement. Administrative Sciences, 13(2), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13020033
10. Brännback, M., Krueger, N. F., Carsrud, A. L., Kickul, J., & Elfving, J. (2007). ‘Trying’ to be an entrepreneur? A ‘goal-specific’ challenge to the intentions model. SSRN Electronic Journal, 27(6). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1135224
11. Bublitz, M. G., Chaplin, L. N., Peracchio, L. A., Cermin, A. D., Dida, M., Escalas, J. E., Eilert, M., Gloukhovtsev, A., & Miller, E. G. (2020). Rise: Understanding youth social entrepreneurs and their ecosystems. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 40(2), 206-225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620937702
12. Bullough, A., Guelich, U., Manolova, T. S., & Schjoedt, L. (2021). Women’s entrepreneurship and culture: Gender role expectations and identities, societal culture, and the entrepreneurial environment. Small Business Economics, 58(2), 985–996. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00429-6
13. Carsrud, A., & Brännback, M. (2010). Entrepreneurial motivations: What do we still need to know? Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1), 9–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627x.2010.00312.x
14. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
15. Contreras-Barraza, N., Espinosa-Cristia, J. F., Salazar-Sepulveda, G., & Vega-Muñoz, A. (2021). Entrepreneurial intention: A gender study in business and economics students from Chile. Sustainability, 13(4693), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094693
16. Del-Aguila-Arcentales, S., Alvarez-Risco, A., Jaramillo-Arévalo, M., De-la-Cruz-Diaz, M., & Anderson-Seminario, M. M. (2022). Influence of social, environmental and economic sustainable development goals (SDGs) over continuation of entrepreneurship and competitiveness. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(73), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8020073
17. Dubey, P., & Sahu, K. K. (2022). Examining the effects of demographic, social and environmental factors on entrepreneurial intention. Management Matters, 19(1), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/manm-12-2021-0006
18. Eijdenberg, E. L., & Masurel, E. (2013). Entrepreneurial motivation in a least developed country: Push factors and pull factors among MSEs in Uganda. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 21(01), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1142/s0218495813500027
19. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
20. Farrukh, M., Alzubi, Y., Shahzad, I. A., Waheed, A., & Kanwal, N. (2018). Entrepreneurial intentions: The role of personality traits in perspective of theory of planned behaviour. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 12(3), 399–414. https://doi.org/10.1108/apjie-01-2018-0004
21. Field, E., Pande, R., Rigol, N., Schaner, S., & Troyer Moore, C. (2021). On her account: How strengthening women’s financial control impacts labor supply and gender norms. American Economic Review, 111(7), 2342–2375. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20200705
22. Fragoso, R., Rocha-Junior, W., & Xavier, A. (2019). Determinant factors of entrepreneurial intention among university students in Brazil and Portugal. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 32(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2018.1551459
23. Franzke, S., Wu, J., Froese, F. J., & Chan, Z. X. (2022). Female entrepreneurship in Asia: A critical review and future directions. Asian Business & Management, 21(3), 343–372. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41291-022-00186-2
24. Fu, J.-R. (2011). Understanding career commitment of IT professionals: Perspectives of push–pull–mooring framework and investment model. International Journal of Information Management, 31(3), 279–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.08.008
25. Gamidullaeva, L. A., Vasin, S. M., & Wise, N. (2020). Increasing small- and medium-enterprise contribution to local and regional economic growth by assessing the institutional environment. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 27(2), 259-280. https://doi: 10.1108/JSBED-07-2019-0219
26. Giacomin, O., Janssen, F., Guyot, J.-L., & Lohest, O. (2023). Opportunity and/or necessity entrepreneurship? The impact of the socio-economic characteristics of entrepreneurs. Sustainability, 15(14), 10786. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410786
27. Gill, R., & Ganesh, S. (2007). Empowerment, constraint, and the entrepreneurial self: A study of white women entrepreneurs. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 35(3), 268–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909880701434265
28. Hewavitharana, T., Nanayakkara, S., Perera, A., & Perera, P. (2021). Modifying the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model for the digital transformation of the construction industry from the user perspective. Informatics, 8(4), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics8040081
29. Iakovleva, T., Kolvereid, L., & Stephan, U. (2011). Entrepreneurial intentions in developing and developed countries. In G. Nabi (Ed.), Education + Training, 53(5), 353–370. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911111147686
30. Isa, F. M., Nor, N. A. M., & Noor, S. (2021). Leadership and decision-making style among women entrepreneurs: A case of Malaysia. International Review of Management and Business Research, 10(1), 68–79. https://doi.org/10.30543/10-1(2021)-7
31. Jaskyte, K., Butkevičienė, R., Danusevičienė, L., & Jurkuvienė, R. (2020). Employees’ attitudes and values toward creativity, work environment, and job satisfaction in human service employees. Creativity Research Journal, 32(4), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2020.1821160
32. Kamberidou, I. (2020). ‘Distinguished’ women entrepreneurs in the digital economy and the multitasking whirlpool. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 9(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-020-0114-y
33. Khan, R. U., Salamzadeh, Y., Shah, S. Z. A., & Hussain, M. (2021). Factors affecting women entrepreneurs’ success: A study of small- and medium-sized enterprises in the emerging market of Pakistan. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 10(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-021-00145-9
34. Klyver, K., Mark, T., S. and Mette, S. N. (2020). Can’t always get what I want: Cultural expectations of emotional support in entrepreneurship. International Small Business Journal, 38(7), 677-690. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242620915675
35. Krueger, N. F., Michael, D. R., and Alan L. C. (2000). Competing Models of Entrepreneurial Intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5-6), 411–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00033-0
36. Lauto, G., Pittino, D., & Visintin, F. (2019). Satisfaction of entrepreneurs: A comparison between founders and family business successors. Journal of Small Business Management, 58(3), 474–510. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2019.1660937
37. Le Loarne Lemaire, S., Razgallah, M., Maalaoui, A., & Kraus, S. (2022). Becoming a green entrepreneur: An advanced entrepreneurial cognition model based on a practice-based approach. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 18(2), 801–828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-021-00791-1
38. Lin, X., & Wu, R.-Z. (2021). An empirical study on dairy product consumers’ intention to adopt the food traceability technology: Push-pull-mooring model integrated by D&M ISS model and TPB with ITM. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.612889
39. Maxwell, S. E. (2000). Sample size and multiple regression analysis. Psychological Methods, 5(4), 434-458. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.5.4.434
40. Nsahlai, V. K., Zogli, L.-K. J., Lawa, E., & Dlamini, B. I. (2020). Factors influencing entrepreneurial intention: A case of students in a South African university. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 26(1), 1-10. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340923058
41. Ojiaku, O. C., Nkamnebe, A. D., & Nwaizugbo, I. C. (2018). Determinants of entrepreneurial intentions among young graduates: Perspectives of push-pull-mooring model. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 8(24), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-018-0109-3
42. Raman, R., Subramaniam, N., Nair, V. K., Shivdas, A., Achuthan, K., & Nedungadi, P. (2022). Women entrepreneurship and sustainable development: Bibliometric analysis and emerging research trends. Sustainability, 14(15), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159160
43. Rey-Martí, A., Tur Porcar, A., & Mas-Tur, A. (2015). Linking female entrepreneurs’ motivation to business survival. Journal of Business Research, 68(4), 810-814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.033
44. Richter, C., Kraus, S., Brem, A., Durst, S., & Giselbrecht, C. (2017). Digital entrepreneurship: Innovative business models for the sharing economy. Creativity and Innovation Management, 26(3), 300-310. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12227
45. Schjoedt, L., & Shaver, K. G. (2007). Deciding on an entrepreneurial career: A test of the pull and push hypotheses using the panel study of entrepreneurial dynamics data. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(5), 733-752. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00197.x
46. Selamat, N. H., & Endut, N. (2020). “Bargaining with Patriarchy” and entrepreneurship: Narratives of Malay muslim women entrepreneurs in Malaysia. Kajian Malaysia, 38(1), 11-31. https://doi.org/10.21315/km2020.38.s1.2
47. Shava, H., & Chinyamurindi, W. T. (2019). The influence of economic motivation, desire for independence, and self-efficacy on willingness to become an entrepreneur. The Southern African Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management, 11(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajesbm.v11i1.234
48. Shepherd, D. A., & DeTienne, D. R. (2005). Prior knowledge, potential financial reward, and opportunity identification. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(1), 91-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00071.x
49. Sirgy, M. J., & Lee, D.-J. (2018). Work-life balance: An integrative review. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 13(1), 229-254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-017-9509-8
50. St-Jean, É., & Duhamel, M. (2020). Employee work–life balance and work satisfaction: An empirical study of entrepreneurial career transition and intention across 70 different economies. Academia-Revista Latinoamericana de Administracion, 33(3/4), 321-335. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/arla-02-2019-0054
51. Taherdoost, H. (2016). Sampling methods in research methodology: How to choose a sampling technique for research. International Journal of Academic Research in Management (IJARM), 5(2), 18-27. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205035
52. Tan, J. (2007). Breaking the ‘bamboo curtain’ and the ‘glass ceiling’: The experience of women entrepreneurs in high-tech industries in an emerging market. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(3), 547–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9454-9
53. Tentama, F., & Paputungan, T. H. (2019). Entrepreneurial intention of students reviewed from self-efficacy and family support in vocational high school. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 8(3), 557-562. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v8i3.20240
54. Thomas, A. S., & Mueller, S. L. (2000). A case for comparative entrepreneurship: Assessing the relevance of culture. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(2), 287-301. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490906
55. Uctu, R., & Al-Silefanee, R. (2023). Uncovering the factors influencing entrepreneurial intentions of university students: An application of Shapero’s model. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Knowledge, 11(1), 35-50. https://doi.org/10.37335/ijek.v11i1.182
56. Van der Zwan, P., Thurik, R., Verheul, I., & Hessels, J. (2016). Factors influencing the entrepreneurial engagement of opportunity and necessity entrepreneurs. Eurasian Business Review, 6(3), 273–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-016-0065-1
57. Welter, F. (2011). Contextualizing entrepreneurship: Conceptual challenges and ways forward. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(1), 165-184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00427.x
58. World Economic Forum. (2022). Global Gender Gap Report 2022. Retrieved March 3, 2023, from http://reports.weforum.org/globalgender-gap-report-2022
59. Zahra, S. A., & Wright, M. (2011). Entrepreneurship’s next act. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(4), 67-83. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2010.0149