Research has focused on identifying ways in which entrepreneurs exhibit similar attitudes despite clear cultural differences. Countries as distinct as Spain, the United Kingdom, and Taiwan share a common trend toward innovation in entrepreneurship (Liñán et al., 2020; Liñán & Chen, 2009). These cross-cultural similarities in entrepreneurial attitudes aim to foster a deeper theoretical understanding of entrepreneurial behavior. Such efforts have included adaptations of theories such as Ajzen’s (1991) theory of planned behavior, informed by empirical findings in the business domain related to entrepreneurial intention.

Other studies grounded in the model developed by Liñán and Chen (2009) have also identified differences in entrepreneurial attitudes between Mexican and Spanish students, with Mexican students exhibiting a more positive attitude toward entrepreneurship. They reported stronger perceived support from subjective norms, viewed entrepreneurship as a more enriching professional option, and perceived it as a more satisfying and advantageous activity. Mexican students also expressed less fear of failure (29.8% vs. 46.9%, respectively) and had a more favorable perception of their education (54.4% vs. 25%) and entrepreneurial experience (49.7% vs. 41.9%) compared to their Spanish counterparts (Guerrero et al., 2016).

Conversely, several attitudinal factors can hinder entrepreneurial activity. Among entrepreneurs, these include risk intolerance, a tendency to postpone unpleasant tasks or bad news, and fear of failure (Hoogendoorn et al., 2019; Laachach et al., 2024). These individual factors interact with external factors, such as perceptions of national corruption (Costa & Mainardes, 2016), shaping negative attitudes toward expected outcomes and external conditions. Such dynamics have significant repercussions for entrepreneurial outcomes, as they influence what entrepreneurs are willing to do under given circumstances. For example, an overly optimistic attitude regarding potential outcomes and personal capabilities can lead to overconfidence and an underestimation of financial risks (Invernizzi et al., 2017). Thus, there is a dynamic interaction between entrepreneurs’ perceptions of the external business environment and their sense of self-efficacy, which together shape entrepreneurial decision-making (Calanchez Urribarri et al., 2023; Taneja et al., 2024; Vilanova & Vitanova, 2020). These interactions are critical to understanding the factors that contribute to entrepreneurial success and underscore the importance of personal attitudes.

In this regard, Shriha et al. (2025) state that entrepreneurial intention captures the mental and motivational processes that inspire individuals to launch new businesses. Entrepreneurial intention thus represents a deliberate state of mind that focuses attention and energy on starting new ventures and pursuing self-employment. Numerous factors—including social, cultural, and environmental—affect an individual’s attitude, perceived behavioral control, and subjective norms regarding entrepreneurship, all of which can influence the desire to become an entrepreneur.

Shriha et al. (2025) further note that the extent to which a person develops the intention to behave in a particular way may be influenced by social pressure. In this context, subjective norms refer to the perceived social pressure from significant others (such as family members, friends, and peers) to engage or not engage in entrepreneurial behavior (Ajzen, 1991). In other words, subjective norms reflect the degree to which an individual believes that important people in their environment approve or disapprove of entrepreneurial behavior. Shriha et al. (2025) found a moderate correlation between subjective norms and entrepreneurial intention. In contrast, Duong (2022) found no correlation between subjective norms and entrepreneurial intention, arguing that this relationship may be mediated by other factors—an observation that opens new avenues for research.

Regarding perceived behavioral control, Shriha et al. (2025) conceptualize it as individuals’ control-oriented attitudes toward becoming an entrepreneur. Perceived control plays a crucial role in determining whether someone becomes an entrepreneur, as it reflects the degree to which an individu al believes they have control over a given behavior and is shaped by beliefs about factors that may facilitate or hinder successful performance of that behavior. Both Duong (2022) and Shriha et al. (2025), in their empirical work, found a strong correlation between perceived behavioral control and entrepreneurial intention.

In addition, Liao et al. (2022) identified entrepreneurial knowledge as a key antecedent of entrepreneurial intention, as it influences the cognitive foundations of individuals engaged in new ventures. Personal attitude and self-efficacy are also vital predictors of entrepreneurial intention. In this regard, entrepreneurship education plays an important role in developing the attitudes, knowledge, and skills associated with entrepreneurial practice. Consistent with this finding, Karyaningsih et al. (2020) demonstrated that students who completed entrepreneurship courses—or related coursework such as business planning, marketing strategies, and other entrepreneurial skills—exhibited stronger entrepreneurial intention than those who did not. Similarly, Shriha et al. (2025), in their empirical study, found a strong correlation between entrepreneurial knowledge and entrepreneurial intention.

Abaddi (2024) and Shriha et al. (2025) define subjective norms as the perceived social pressure from close individuals (such as family members, friends, and peers) to engage or not engage in entrepreneurial behavior. Subjective norms reflect the degree to which an individual believes that others approve or disapprove of their entrepreneurial behavior. It is expected that subjective norms will influence entrepreneurial intentions, as a supportive social environment can encourage and inspire potential entrepreneurs.

Among university students, particular attention has been given to aspects of personal development in shaping attitudes toward entrepreneurship, including the interaction between upbringing and traits conducive to entrepreneurial activity. In this regard, Calanchez Urribarri et al. (2023) found that, among students, only perceived social support was directly associated with a stronger entrepreneurial orientation.

Among the variables most closely linked to entrepreneurial intention, family influence and individualist values stand out, along with educational experiences that promote self-employment (Moriano León et al., 2006).

To the original model—which includes personal attitude toward becoming an entrepreneur, subjective norms (i.e., the approval of significant others regarding entrepreneurial activity), and perceived behavioral control (i.e., perceptions of the difficulty or ease of becoming an entrepreneur)—additional factors have been incorporated. These include social evaluation, which encompasses cultural attitudes that encourage or discourage certain entrepreneurial traits and behaviors, and close social evaluation, which refers to the influence of family members, friends, and colleagues with whom the entrepreneur interacts daily. The model also considers entrepreneurial skills (as a measure of the degree to which such skills are possessed) and knowledge of the business environment (i.e., the level of awareness and understanding the individual has of themselves and their support systems) (Calanchez Urribarri et al., 2023; Liñán et al., 2020).

Training for entrepreneurial activity, aimed at developing business skills, may be limited by individuals’ existing attitudes. For example, those with greater risk tolerance—i.e., a more positive attitude toward risk—derive greater benefit from entrepreneurship training (Calanchez Urribarri et al., 2023; Fairlie & Holleran, 2012; Laachach et al., 2024; Shriha et al., 2025). As Shriha et al. (2025) observe, a positive attitude toward risk can enhance the creativity and innovation of potential entrepreneurs in seizing business opportunities. However, they did not find a direct association between risk propensity and entrepreneurial intention, explaining that this inconsistency may result from the influence of cultural, social, and economic factors that vary across countries.

Gender differences have also been observed. Shinnar et al. (2014) found that in entrepreneurship training courses, women exhibited lower initial and final scores for both entrepreneurial intention and self-efficacy. Unsurprisingly, the best outcomes were observed among those with favorable personal conditions, a strong capacity to achieve their goals, and a higher perception of their own abilities. Thus, attitudes play a central role in both goal setting and goal attainment.

In a sample of Mexican university students, Barrera González et al. (2024) found that young people express an intention to pursue entrepreneurship and display a positive attitude toward acquiring the knowledge, skills, abilities, and competencies needed to enter the business world in the future.

Positive effects are also observed in attitudes such as perceived control over one’s own activities and the perceived importance that one’s social group places on entrepreneurship (Karimi et al., 2016). This is particularly relevant when the entrepreneur’s reference group does not support such activities, as education can moderate the negative influence of social disapproval—an effect that was especially notable among women (Entrialgo & Iglesias, 2016). It is worth noting that as entrepreneurial training increases, the relationship between perceived personal capacity and entrepreneurial intention strengthens, while the influence of social approval weakens (Akinleke, 2024; Arruda et al., 2023; Entrialgo & Iglesias, 2016; Potishuk & Kratzer, 2017). In other words, training helps individuals resist the disapproval of those close to them by providing information and tools that strengthen their confidence in their own capacity.

Among the types of content that have demonstrated the strongest effects on entrepreneurial intention and attitudes are those that foster positive attitudes toward the usefulness of acquired knowledge and promote self-perceptions of being capable of launching successful ventures—ultimately improving risk tolerance. Such training also helps moderate the attitudes of individuals who may initially exhibit excessive confidence due to a lack of experience with project rejection, particularly in technological fields (Bandera et al., 2018).

In programs targeting adolescents (average age 15), training in four components—(1) accounting, finance, marketing, and management; (2) self-efficacy, proactivity, and risk-taking; (3) business plan development; and (4) experiential learning—delivered through lectures, reading discussions, exercises, games, and computer simulations resulted in significant improvements in self-efficacy, proactivity, and risk-taking. These, in turn, had a positive impact on participants’ intention to pursue self-employment in the future. Among all the variables studied, self-efficacy showed the strongest correlation with the others, even before participation in the educational program (Sánchez, 2013).

Thus, the impact of entrepreneurship training—particularly prior to engaging in ventures through trial and error, as allowed by simulations—can lead to better planning, control, and sustainability of entrepreneurial efforts, in addition to fostering attitudes that support personal growth. In this regard, Arruda et al. (2023) found a positive relationship between entrepreneurship education among university students and their entrepreneurial attitudes, knowledge, skills, self-efficacy, and initial entrepreneurial behavior. Similarly, Nogaibayeva et al. (2024) confirmed a significant relationship between entrepreneurship education and students’ enthusiasm and determination to pursue entrepreneurship. Taneja et al. (2024) found a positive relationship between entrepreneurial success and self-efficacy, while Al-Tekreeti et al. (2024), Jiatong et al. (2021) and Murad et al. (2021) reported a strong, positive, and significant relationship between creativity and entrepreneurial intention.

Regarding the perceived attractiveness of entrepreneurship as a career option, Al-Mamary et al. (2020), Duong (2022), Liñán et al. (2020), and Liñán and Chen (2009) found that students generally view entrepreneurial activity positively as a professional path. In contrast, Pérez Paredes et al. (2022) did not find evidence of strong interest among university students in pursuing entrepreneurship after completing their university education.

Entrepreneurial intention can be defined as a process of acquiring the knowledge needed to launch a business—a process that guides individuals in planning and taking action to create a new enterprise. In this sense, entrepreneurship education has been identified as a driver of entrepreneurial intention, although findings on this relationship have been somewhat mixed (Al-Tekreeti et al., 2024).

In addition, education can foster entrepreneurial intention, particularly by enhancing perceptions of preparedness, improving access to relevant information, and strengthening perceptions of personal characteristics such as a stronger internal locus of control and self-efficacy. With regard to self-efficacy, Kalitanyi (2019) and Taneja et al. (2024) suggest that universities should place greater emphasis on including training components aimed at improving students’ entrepreneurial self-efficacy.

Moreover, exposure to entrepreneurial activity through work experience can also contribute to more positive entrepreneurial attitudes. Individuals who have worked in small businesses or who have attempted an entrepreneurial venture themselves may develop a more favorable view of entrepreneurship. For example, in Mexico, among the 21% of students who reported having created a business, 42% had entrepreneurial parents (Guerrero et al., 2016).

Entrepreneurial competencies are typically associated with knowledge and skills; however, they are also closely linked to initiative and creativity, as well as to the importance of personal independence and creative capacity. In other words, training for entrepreneurial competence must help individuals generate new projects and develop additional competencies that go beyond the technical performance of entrepreneurial tasks (Ahumada Méndez, 2014; Arruda et al., 2023).

Varela (2014) defines business competencies as "the set of attributes—namely motivations, attitudes, values, self-concepts, knowledge, and skills—of a person, which are expressed through definable, observable, and measurable behaviors, and which are causally linked to superior performance in entrepreneurial activity" (p. 3).

Bird (1995) similarly describes entrepreneurial competencies as "the underlying characteristics of individuals, including specific knowledge, motivation, traits, self-perception, social roles, and skills that can lead to the creation, growth, or survival of a business" (p. 51).

The list of business and entrepreneurial competencies is extensive, making it unsurprising that various authors have proposed overlapping frameworks. Table 1 summarizes the principal competencies identified by the authors reviewed in this study.

Identifying business and entrepreneurial competencies makes it possible to view them as the set of characteristics, skills, attitudes, knowledge, and values that, collectively, enable an individual to achieve business objectives—that is, to create, sustain, and/or develop an organization.

In this regard, Villa and Poblete (2008) highlight three key components of entrepreneurial competence:

Considering these elements as part of an effort to improve the discouraging employment prospects faced by many young people in Latin America underscores the urgent need for investments in competency development and the creation of new opportunities for entrepreneurship. Such measures could help young people transition more smoothly from education to the labor market by empowering them to become active participants who can take advantage of opportunities arising from political, social, and economic changes.

An important point to note is the observation by San-Martín et al. (2020), who argue that entrepreneurship education can enhance students’ attitudes, skills, and business competencies—effects that, in turn, motivate them to pursue entrepreneurship. It is therefore essential to foster entrepreneurial skills and abilities, attitudes, and knowledge through education and training.

Bird (1988) notes that entrepreneurial intention combines contextual factors—such as political, economic, and social elements—with personal factors, including competencies, experience, and characteristics that define the entrepreneur. Together, these factors can create conditions that motivate and foster entrepreneurial activity. Similarly, Neira et al. (2013) classify the factors that shape entrepreneurship into three broad categories: individual, social, and macroeconomic.

Individual factors refer to psychological characteristics (such as attitudes) and demographic attributes (such as gender, age, occupation, education level, and work experience). These factors are important because they strongly influence an individual's decision to pursue entrepreneurship. In particular, gender, education level, and income level have been shown to affect entrepreneurship rates across different contexts.

Social factors relate to the availability of social capital and to the norms that support the emergence of entrepreneurial initiatives (Neira et al., 2013). According to Bourdieu (2000), capital can take three fundamental forms: economic, social, and cultural. In the context of entrepreneurship, social capital allows entrepreneurs to leverage support networks that facilitate business development. Moreover, it is important that social capital be complemented by economic, cultural, and symbolic capital.

In this regard, Sánchez García et al. (2005) argue that the combination of individual and social factors influences the development of entrepreneurial intention. Both personal history and vicarious experience (experience acquired through observing others), along with personal characteristics and skills, affect individuals’ entrepreneurial intention. In addition, the social context—including culture, cooperative networks, and subjective norms—also contributes to shaping this intention (Maslakcı et al., 2021; Neira et al., 2013; Oliveira et al., 2015).

Finally, macroeconomic factors—such as access to financing, unemployment, and inflation—force individuals to make decisions they might not otherwise consider if they had more favorable alternatives or a more supportive environment.

The capital that entrepreneurs invest themselves is typically the primary source of funding for developing their business ideas. However, this personal capital is often insufficient, prompting entrepreneurs to seek external financing (Irwin & Scott, 2010). Among these external sources, bank loans remain one of the most common, though they frequently involve significant barriers—especially for small and medium-sized enterprises—as banks may perceive these businesses as high-risk ventures (Arango Vásquez & Durango Gutiérrez, 2014).

Arango Benjumea (2017) emphasizes that the family is the most influential factor in entrepreneurship, surpassing other actors such as the state and universities. In line with this view, Guerrero et al. (2016) found that among students who expressed an intention to pursue entrepreneurship, 48% had at least one parent who was an entrepreneur; 65% reported that another family member was an entrepreneur; 35% cited a friend; 12% mentioned a teacher; and 65% identified another person close to them. These findings are consistent with the observations of scholars such as Caballero García et al. (2019) and Davidsson and Honig (2003), who argue that individuals are more likely to undertake entrepreneurial ventures if their parents, friends, or neighbors are entrepreneurs or have attempted entrepreneurship themselves.

The relationship between entrepreneurs and the legal framework required to create or develop a business is critical. The factors involved—such as legal requirements and accessibility—directly affect the difficulty of starting and growing a business and thus influence entrepreneurial performance. Within this component of the entrepreneurial ecosystem, elements such as regulation, bureaucratic procedures, taxation, and corruption can either foster or hinder the creation of new ventures (Aguirre-González, 2020; IMCO, 2014).

Organizations and programs that support entrepreneurs—by providing guidance, planning, access to financing, and other resources—play an important role. Such support is often provided by incubators and accelerators and is especially valuable, as many entrepreneurs lack information about marketing, industry structure, and business networks (Calanchez Urribarri et al., 2023; IMCO, 2014). Examples of entrepreneurial support services include accelerators, incubators, and mentorship programs.

Among the factors that inhibit entrepreneurship, Çera et al. (2021) highlight the macroeconomic environment: contextual conditions—including institutional and economic factors—affect individuals’ cognition, preferences, and intentions regarding entrepreneurship. Similarly, Aguirre-González (2020) found that limited government support constitutes a significant barrier to entrepreneurship among university students.

According to the OECD (2019), "Higher education contributes to inclusive growth by strengthening human capital formation, research and development (R&D), and innovation. One of the primary goals of higher education is to produce graduates with the competencies needed to succeed in the labor market. This is particularly important in today’s innovation-driven and skills-based global economies and aligns well with students’ expectations of finding suitable employment upon graduation" (p. 12).

In line with this perspective, the 2018 edition of the GUESSS Global Report emphasizes that the university context is fundamental for fostering entrepreneurship. Engaging in entrepreneurial activities during the university years encourages students to generate business ideas and envision a future in entrepreneurship. For this reason, investing in entrepreneurship education is a worthwhile strategy to increase the number of students who are prepared to start their own ventures (Calanchez Urribarri et al., 2023; Sieger et al., 2019).

Some universities also offer an extensive support network for entrepreneurs, including incubators, accelerators, innovation labs, and business development centers. These resources aim to help students generate new ideas and perspectives. In some cases, this activity extends to faculty members, who serve as advisors and mentors for student-led business projects. Certain universities even extend these services to the broader community, positioning themselves as catalysts for business creation and playing an increasingly important role within the entrepreneurial ecosystem. This support is critical in encouraging university students to engage in entrepreneurial activity (Calanchez Urribarri et al., 2023).

Moreover, it is widely recognized that "Research and knowledge are essential for innovation and entrepreneurship. The creation of innovative businesses based on university-generated knowledge is a valuable way to contribute to the desirable goals of economic growth and social cohesion" (Red Emprendía, 2015, p. 3).

In the realm of innovation, ideas developed within universities can give rise to startups or spin-offs. Startups are innovative ventures that, with the support of university services, evolve into high-growth companies. Spin-offs originate from scientific and/or technological developments that—when supported by university knowledge, infrastructure, and services—can be linked to productive sectors to create technology-based enterprises.

According to Eisenberg et al. (2019), several critical factors support collaboration between universities and industry, including organizational structure and personnel. The former fosters the creation of a framework for industry partnerships. Such relationships offer several advantages, including access to and collaboration with students and university staff who contribute talent to support emerging businesses. One example is the Triple and Quintuple Helix Models, in which universities, businesses, government, and other actors form a virtuous circle of support for industry and regional development. In these models, universities often participate through technology parks, contributing knowledge, research, and other resources.

Amponsah et al. (2025) argue that students’ entrepreneurial behavior depends on the quality and effectiveness of the entrepreneurship education provided by universities. Their empirical study confirmed a significant positive relationship between university support for entrepreneurship, entrepreneurship training, and entrepreneurial intention—findings consistent with those of Leiva et al. (2021). However, Duong (2022) did not find a direct relationship between entrepreneurship training and entrepreneurial intention. Rather, when attitude toward entrepreneurship and perceived behavioral control were included as mediating variables, a correlation between entrepreneurship training and entrepreneurial intention did emerge. Similarly, Hoang et al. (2020) confirmed that entrepreneurship training positively affects entrepreneurial intention, with this relationship mediated by both learning orientation and self-efficacy. Moreover, they found that entrepreneurship training is significantly and positively related to entrepreneurial efficacy (Hoang et al., 2020).

Çera et al. (2021) also emphasize that human capital acquired through education is a key factor in fostering entrepreneurial spirit. Furthermore, the university environment can either encourage or discourage students from pursuing entrepreneurship. In this respect, higher education institutions play an essential role in motivating students to choose an entrepreneurial career—a finding that was empirically validated by these authors.

Based on the literature review, the variables for this study were defined, as the primary objective of this research is to propose and validate a measurement instrument to assess entrepreneurial intention among university students (see Figure 1).

The target population for this study consists of undergraduate students enrolled in the Faculty of Accounting and Business Administration (FCA) at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM). According to data from UNAM’s General Directorate of Academic Affairs and Enrollment, the faculty had a total enrollment of 10,682 students in 2018. The distribution of these students is presented in Table 2.

The sample used in this study consisted of volunteer students who elected to participate in the research.

Based on the literature review, a structured direct questionnaire was developed, consisting of seven variables and 140 items and questions, as summarized in Table 3. Response options included a 6-point Likert scale and yes/no choices for dichotomous questions. The full version of the questionnaire as administered to students is provided in Table A1.

A pilot test was conducted with a sample of 30 students who completed the questionnaire in a self-administered format. This process allowed for adjustments to several questions to clarify their content and for modifications to some response options to improve their accuracy.

Given the conditions under which this study was conducted (the COVID-19 pandemic), the questionnaire was created using Google Forms, a free survey administration platform provided by Google. The questionnaire was distributed to students via a link, with the support of program coordinators and faculty members from the Faculty of Accounting and Business Administration who agreed to assist with the research. As such, the questionnaire was self-administered and conducted in June 2021.

To mitigate potential bias associated with collecting data via Google Forms, faculty members were first asked to explain to students the purpose of the questionnaire and the potential benefits they could derive from the study’s results. Additionally, a 5% margin of error was established, recognizing that the inability to administer the questionnaire in person—due to pandemic restrictions—constituted a limitation of the study. However, this was the only feasible method available under the circumstances.

As a result of the data collection process, 1,141 completed questionnaires were obtained. The distribution of responses by academic program and semester is presented in Table 4. As shown, the distribution of the collected data is proportionally consistent with the population described in Table 2.