geacollege Faculty of Entrepreneurship THE MEDIATING ROLE OF NETWORKING ORIENTATION BETWEEN ENTREPRENEURIAL PERSONALITY CHARACTERISTICS AND ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTIONS Ayaz Ali Maitlo Salman Bashir Memon* Mahendar Kumar Shah Abdul Latif University, Shah Abdul Latif University, Greenwich University, Pakistan Pakistan Pakistan ayazalimaitlo@cmail.com salman.memon@salu.edu.pk mahendarbajajl 01 @cmail.com Abstract The literature suggest that there is an existence of networking orientation relationship with respect to personality characteristics and entrepreneurial intentions, and that has been tested in different settings but, this paper has examined the mediating relationship of networking orientation with respect to personality characteristics that lead towards entrepreneurial intentions in the context of Sindh Province, Pakistan. Hence, the six personality characteristics are taken as independent variables with respect to entrepreneurial intentions mediated by networking orientation. It is found that locus of control, propensity to take risk, need for achievement and innovativeness has shown positive and significant relationship but self-confidence and tolerance to ambiguity has shown significant but negative relationship. The data collected from 250 shopkeepers, those having maximum five employees belonging to three cities Khairpur Mir's, Sukkur and Shikarpur Sindh. The researcher then tested hypothesized theoretical model by employing Structural Equation Model (SEM). Ultimately, it implies through this study that entrepreneurs have to focus on networking orientation because this can contribute positively in enhancing entrepreneurial intentions as predicted by personality characteristics of entrepreneurs. Key Words Entrepreneurial personality characteristics; entrepreneurial intentions; networking orientation; small scale business; structural equation model. INTRODUCTION 'Corresponding Author Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 Entrepreneurship is as old as the idea of doing business for the profit but, the proper definition and understanding of the term and its application was started to be understood through the lens of political economy that emerged as a result of sematic work done by Adam Smith through his "Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations" in 1776. It was then entrepreneur, who was considered to be an agent accumulating resources and combining them in a way that generates profit and contribute into the economy through reinvestment and jobs creation. But, he didn't call that agent an entrepreneur precisely; but, French author Richard Cantillon in 1755 through his notable essay "Essai sur la nature du commerce en general" considered entrepreneur as the central actor of the economic process. However, later on in 20th century, the concept of entrepreneurship was further divided into two broader perspectives: Schumpeterian entrepreneur and Kirznerian entrepreneur. An entrepreneur is someone who pursue and recognizes an idea or opportunity and putting those useful ideas into practice (Barringer, Ireland 2008). In this research primarily focus is on the entrepreneurial personality characteristics, eventually leading towards entrepreneurial intentions through support of the network. Further, an individual's psychological, sociological and demographic characteristics have an impact on that individual's capacity in order to become an entrepreneur (Dollinger 1995). It is also mentioned that the "Big Three" characteristics of an entrepreneur are the need for achievement, locus of control and risk-taking propensity (Chell 2008). However, the personality characteristics as similar to this study, found that the risk-taking propensity, tolerance for ambiguity, openness and flexibility and self-confidence are positively related to entrepreneurial success (Fine et al., 2012). Similarly, there are several academic studies, those emphasized on the entrepreneurial characteristics such as need for achievement, locus of control, risk-taking propensity, need for autonomy, decisiveness, initiative, creativity, self-confidence and trust (Westhead, Solesvik, 2016). On the other hand, entrepreneurial intention is described as a cognitive representation of actions to be implemented by individuals, either establishing their new independent ventures or to create new value within existing companies (Kusmintarti et al. 2014). Entrepreneurial characteristics are related with entrepreneurial intention through the mediation of entrepreneurial attitude (Asdani et al., 2014). Similarly, in linking entrepreneurial personality with their intention and performance, that Big Five personality dimensions were associated with both dependent variables: Intention and Performance (Zhou et al., 2009). However, this study is different in the perspective that first of all, those above studies didn't include all six dimensions included in this study such as Locus of Control, Risk-taking propensity, Self Confidence, Need for achievement, Tolerance to ambiguity and Innovativeness. Second, this phenomenon is studied in rural areas of Pakistan and third, the link is not established through the network orientation, a mediating factor in previous studied conducted in similar domain. Hence, this study is going to fill the gap that is left wide and open by other scholars of same arena. 49 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 The conceptual model is the reflection of previous models developed in previous literature where psychological characteristics relationship is drawn with entrepreneurial intentions and networking orientation with entrepreneurs (Dinis et al., 2013; Ebbers, 2014). PROBLEM STATEMENT Although, the entrepreneurship domain has been widely discussed and researched upon but, the entrepreneur as an individual, and the attributes those lead an individual to create an intention to become an entrepreneur has not been studied comprehensively so far. Moreover, entrepreneurial action is taken as a planned behavior; commonly refer to an intention that is mostly influenced by attitudes (Krueger, Carsrud, 1993). Intention is associated with cognition including beliefs, perceptions and actions (Ajzen, 1991). While, the domain of personality characteristics of an entrepreneur has been examined over the last decades and psychological characteristics has been considered as possible sources for the entrepreneurial performance. Therefore, a wide variety of research surveyed characteristics those can determine and provide the answer "who is more likely to start a business" (Gupta, Muita 2013). Hence, this study has chosen the personal characteristics of an entrepreneur mediated with its network orientation in order to discover the link between the personal characteristics of an entrepreneur and its intention to open or continue an existing business in the context of rural areas of Pakistan. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE Based on research gap just mentioned above, the objective of this study is to investigate the networking orientation's mediating effect in relationship of entrepreneurial personality traits and entrepreneurial intentions of small scale entrepreneurs. Although related past literature supports the relationship between entrepreneurial personality characteristics and entrepreneurial intentions but limited evidences revealed the mediating effect of networking orientation in relationship of personality characteristics and intentions (Light, Dana, 2013). LITERATURE REVIEW Entrepreneurship is a way to face big challenges such as, unemployment and poverty and reduced economic growth (Robson et al., 2009). The positive link of entrepreneurship has been determined with economic growth and innovation (Oosterbeek et al. 2010). The entrepreneurship is defined as a process of discovery, evaluation, and exploitation of opportunities (Leyden et al., 2014). Not only this it is also considered as a set of activities involved in establishing and developing a new venture (Cooper, 2017; Khuong, An, 50 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 2016). The word entrepreneurship is taken from French language literally meaning "the one who undertakes" (Dollinger, 2008). The personality characteristics of entrepreneurship is a tendency of risk-taking, innovativeness, motivation for achievement, self-confidence, responsibility, hardworking, tolerance, locus of control, achievement orientation, dominance, and self-efficacy (Zhang, Zhang, 2013). In addition, risk attitude, locus of control, extraversion, and openness to experience, agreeableness and neuroticism are also discussed as personality characteristics of entrepreneurship (Caliendo et al., 2014). Locus of Control is a belief on fate, and this word is taken from Latin word meaning place or location, either internal or external (Prakash et al., 2015). Internal locus of control is a success or failure depending upon the efforts invested instead of luck or fate and external locus of control is fate depending upon luck not in human control (Hsiao et al., 2016). Specifically, locus of control is necessary for an individual to take risk (Khuong, An, 2016). Risk-taking propensity is an individual's inclination to take or avoid risk. It is the characteristics of an entrepreneurial success and ability to take deliberate risk (Chatterjee, Das, 2015; Prakash et al., 2015). So the proactive and risk taker entrepreneurs are better at identifying and developing entrepreneurial opportunities (Omorede et al., 2015; Block et al., 2015). It is necessary for entrepreneurs to have inherent risk-taking ability, because individuals make decisions by accessing complex situations with some target returns in their minds; further risk-taking propensity positively influence entrepreneurial intentions (Ozaralli, Rivenburgh, 2016). Even short term risk-taking has been observed as a positive contributor in entrepreneurial intention (Zhang et al., 2015). Thus, risk-taking helps in innovation when mediated by employees' risk-taking propensity (García-Granero et al., 2015). Self Confidence is an ability of handling events and executing those in life with confidence (Chatterjee, Das, 2015). Its direct impact exists on productivity asserting owner as a winner, even this self believe causes to work hard for success in entrepreneurship (McKenzie, 2017). The high belief in capabilities is developing from past experiences which generate self-confidence for success in entrepreneurship (Lee et al., 2016). Self-confidence enables an entrepreneur to accomplish business startup process and it influence entrepreneurial intentions positively with mediation of attitude toward entrepreneurship (Aparicio et al., 2016; Tsai et al., 2016). Need for achievement is an individual's motivational attribute to desire for achieving brilliant success (Chatterjee, Das, 2015). Achievement driven individuals are contributing rapidly in economic growth with the help of generating entrepreneurial opportunities (Jelilov, Onder, 2016). While in education of entrepreneurship for increasing entrepreneurial skills the moderate effect of need for achievement has been observed (Din et al., 2016). Moreover, individuals having high need for achievement are more capable and perform better along with higher ability to prevail under difficult situations as compared to those individuals having lower need for achievement (Karimi et al., 2017). 51 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 Tolerance to ambiguity is an ability to recognize ambiguous situations as open and desirable, also an ambiguous situation is composed of insufficient, complicated and outwardly conflicting information needed to be tolerated by an individual (Chatterjee, Das, 2015). It is the avoidance for uncertainty and ambiguity, referring degree of individual focus to avoid uncertain events (Tahir, 2014). In uncertain situations entrepreneurs must respond positively because of insufficient information available for decision making, but if he has trust on himself then he is tolerant of ambiguity (Mohanty, 2015). Innovativeness is an ability to generate ideas concluding in the creation of new products and services (Prakash et al., 2015). It is also instrumental in a way in which an entrepreneur can exploit ideas for the generation of new products and business opportunities (Chatterjee, Das, 2015; Omorede et al., 2015). The success of an entrepreneur is measured by ability of innovations by introducing new technology in products and services (Mohanty, 2015). Innovation and creativity are considered as crucial factors to enhance entrepreneurship, which certainly leads towards economic growth and development (Westhead, Solesvik, 2016). Entrepreneurial Intention is a key element in understanding process of business creation contributed by a number of researches in an entrepreneurial context and characteristics (Linan et al., 2011). The psychological characteristics i.e. self-confidence, need for achievement showed positive relationship, while propensity to risk showed negative relationship and other three variables i.e. tolerance for ambiguity, locus of control and innovativeness relationship found to be insignificant (Dinis et al., 2013). The entrepreneurial intentions relationship with personality characteristics has been confirmed in previous studies mainly in metaanalysis (Linan, Fayolle, 2015). Even though, the developed regions with support of social environment have contributed more in terms of entrepreneurial intentions as compared to less developed regions (Linan et al., 2011). Networking Orientation appeared to be equally valuable for personal gains as explained in a comparative study, showing the positive relationship with those business partners whom business assignments were given and no relationship found with those whom business assignments were received (Ebbers, 2014). Networking behavior of individuals in educational trainings has been determined having positive relationship with training and coaching but no relationship found just with only training (Spurk et al., 2015). The positive moderating effect of business networking found on entrepreneurial orientation and new venture performance (Su et al., 2015). Further networking effectiveness mediated partially in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance in small and medium enterprises (Hughes et al., 2015). CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Mediating effect of networking orientation in influence of entrepreneurship on entrepreneurial intentions (EI ^ NO ^ ENT) 52 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 Networking orientation and entrepreneurial intentions relationship is significant with entrepreneurship (Ebbers, 2014; Frederick et al., 2018). There is positive relationship between entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial intentions in educational institutions (Dinis et al., 2013). Mediating relationship of social networking between individuals and resources has been tested for confirmation of contribution in success (Foley, & O'Connor, 2013). Personality characteristics, i.e., locus of control and self-confidence effects significantly, while need for achievement effects were insignificant to entrepreneurial intentions (Sesen, 2013). Contrary to this business students in private universities of Pakistan have shown a positive influence of personality characteristics on entrepreneurial intentions (Farrukh et al., 2017). Further social networking provided support with positive relationship in case of organizational learning (Assis-Dorr et al., 2012). So the entrepreneurial orientation and entrepreneurship has been tested as a mediator and moderator in organization flexibility and strategic business performance (Yousaf, Majid, 2018). For mediation below hypotheses is drawn based on above information. H1: Networking orientation has significant effect in influence of entrepreneurship on entrepreneurial intentions Mediating effect of networking orientation in influence of Locus of Control on entrepreneurial intentions (EI ^ NO ^ LC) The study shows that when individuals face challenges and difficulties the locus of control can assist them to be more proactive in order to get help from individuals in their social network (Chen, Yen 2012). As it is revealed that locus of control can lead to positive entrepreneurial attitudes (Soomro, Shah, 2015). Also, the locus of control can be enhanced when mediated with social capital in association with entrepreneurship (Hsiao et al., 2016). In terms of big five traits, the locus of control contribute significantly with entrepreneurial activity (Obschonka, Stuetzer, 2017). Hence below hypotheses is drawn based on above information. H2: Networking orientation has significant effect in influence of locus of control on entrepreneurial intentions Mediating effect of networking orientation in influence of risk-taking propensity on entrepreneurial intentions (EI ^ NO ^ PR) The risk-taking propensity has negative influence on entrepreneurial intentions in students to start business (Dinis et al., 2013). Contrary, risk-taking propensity influence significantly and is positive to entrepreneurial intentions in male entrepreneurs as compared to female entrepreneurs (Sánchez, Licciardello, 2017). Further the opportunity entrepreneurs take more risk to achieve success in entrepreneurial activities (Block et al., 2015). Even duration of risk-taking matters (Zhang et al., 2015). Further risk-taking 53 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 when tested as a mediator enhanced influence of creativity theory on innovation (García-Granero et al., 2015). Hence based on above information below hypotheses is drawn. H3: Networking orientation has significant effect in influence of risk-taking propensity on entrepreneurial intentions Mediating effect of networking orientation in influence of Self Confidence on entrepreneurial intentions (EI ^ NO ^ SC) Self-confidence has positive influence on entrepreneurial intentions in students starting new business (Dinis et al., 2013). Similarly, self-confidence is significantly and positively correlated with opportunity entrepreneurship (Aparicio et al., 2016). In mediating effect self-confidence exerts significant and positive effect (Zhao et al., 2005). Further moderation of social environment is also available in relationship of entrepreneurial education and entrepreneurial intentions (Ekpe, Mat, 2015). Similarly, self-confidence showed significant and positive effects when mediated in emotional intelligence and entrepreneurial intentions (Mortan et al., 2014). So from above discussion the hypotheses can be drawn as below. H4: Networking orientation has significant effect in influence of self-confidence on entrepreneurial intentions Mediating effect of networking orientation in influence of need for achievement on entrepreneurial intentions (EI ^ NO ^ NA) Moderate relationship of need for achievement appears in reducing unemployment and enhancing performance of entrepreneurial activity (Din et al., 2016). Even when need for achievement mediated by contextual factors (perceived support and perceived barriers) the significant relationship has been determined with entrepreneurial intentions (Karimi et al., 2017). Need for achievement correlate positively with firm success (Khan et al., 2015). Hence below hypotheses is drawn based on above information. H5: Networking orientation has significant effect in influence of need for achievement on entrepreneurial intentions Mediating effect of networking orientation in influence of tolerance for ambiguity on entrepreneurial intentions (EI ^ NO ^ TA) There exists insignificant relationship of entrepreneurial intentions for tolerance to ambiguity in students (Dinis et al., 2013). But in Turkish student's tolerance for ambiguity found to have low influence on entrepreneurial intentions (Gürol, Atsan, 2006). While, tolerance for ambiguity influence on entrepreneurial intentions is more in American as compared to Irish with insignificant results (De Pillis, Reardon, 2007). But the network level entrepreneurial orientation is influenced by the mediating effect 54 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 of networking (Wincent et al., 2016). Hence below hypotheses is drawn based on above information. H6: Networking orientation has significant effect in influence of tolerance for ambiguity on entrepreneurial intentions Mediating effect of networking orientation in influence of Innovativeness on entrepreneurial intentions (EI ^ NO ^ IN) There exists insignificant relationship of innovativeness to entrepreneurial intentions in students (Dinis et al., 2013). Innovativeness in mediation enhanced the relationship of social networking and learning orientation on performance (Pesamaa et al., 2015). Female entrepreneurs' intentions have more significant and positive influence of innovative outcomes (Ratten, 2016). The mediation analysis of entrepreneurial intentions can be enhanced in emerging technology industries by personal innovativeness of the entrepreneurs (Dutta et al., 2015). Hence below hypotheses is drawn based on above information. H7: Networking orientation has significant effect in influence of innovativeness on entrepreneurial intentions RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This study has used the quantitative paradigm and it is cross-sectional in nature. The sampling design used is non-probability convenience sampling, as it is the best method that could be employed to conduct the study in limited time (Lavrakas, 2008). The study is based on small scale entrepreneurs, so all the data is collected through survey questionnaire from shopkeepers of mentioned three cities. For data collection, a paper based questionnaire survey was conducted from November 2018 to March 2019 from small scale business owners (i.e., shopkeepers) not having more than five employees, in three cities of North Sindh namely; Khairpur Mir's, Shikarpur, and Sukkur. The non-probability sampling based on convenience method was tailored to distribute 500 translated versions of survey questionnaires in order to avoid any kind of language barrier and get appropriate response from the respondents. As a result, the final usable responses received are 250 and the response rate remained 50%. The survey questionnaire consumed for this study was based on previously established scale of 36 items on entrepreneurial intention and psychological characteristics (Dinis et al., 2013; Linan, Chen, 2009) and five item scale of networking orientation (Ebbers, 2014; Hoogendoorn et al., 2013). Further researcher self-administered the scale and translated it in local languages, i.e., Sindhi and Urdu for understanding of local respondents who don't know English. The translation of questionnaires did with help of language specialist to keep the scale reliability and validity. 55 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 ANALYSIS AND RESULTS Respondents Profile Referring the data in Table 1, personal and categorical information has been achieved in five criteria i.e. gender, age, education, experience and location. According to descriptive results total 250 respondents out of which 232 nearly 92.8% are male and only 18 nearly 7.2% are female. The quantity of female respondents is very small because of cultural limitations and limited female entrepreneurs in Pakistani society; even these female respondents' data were collected with high efforts. These females are the owners of beauty parlors and female dress designers etc. Further details about remaining criteria's are given in table 1. Table 1: Personal and Categorical Information Category Profile Total Number (%) Gender Male 232 92.8 Female 18 7.2 Up to 25 16 6.4 Age 26 -35 72 28.8 36 - 45 80 32.0 46 - 55 57 22.8 Above 55 25 10.0 Educational Level No Education 08 3.2 Intermediate or less 71 28.4 Bachelors 93 37.2 Masters 68 27.2 MPhil/PhD 10 4.00 02 or less years 11 4.4 04 years 12 4.8 Experience 06 years 27 10.8 08 years 60 24.0 10 years 74 29.6 12 or above years 66 26.4 Khair Pur Mir's 85 34.0 Location Shikarpur 69 27.6 Sukkur 96 38.4 Source: Own survey. Reliability Validity Analysis Three techniques are adopted to access the internal consistency of the measures, i.e. Cronbach's Alpha 0.70 (Dinis et al., 2013), Composite reliability and Average Variance Extracted. The overall questionnaire Cronbach's Alpha results appeared 0.830 showing strong internal consistency of the measure as shown below in table 2. Further table 3, describes internal consistency results along with minimum threshold of each technique. Results show similarity with past literature (Davis et al., 2016; 56 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 Dinis et al., 2013) i.e. composite reliability and Cronbach's Alpha of propensity to risk, self-confidence, need for achievement, tolerance to ambiguity, innovativeness and entrepreneurial intentions are approaching to 0.70 except self-confidence CR 0.567. Further it has been observed that except entrepreneurial intentions, composite reliability and Cronbach's Alpha are improved and are approaching toward threshold limit 0.70. While average variance extracted explains the total elements of variance in the indicators which accounted for latent variables, its minimum level of satisfaction threshold is 0.30 (Hair et al., 2010), further average variance extracted is a measure of variance retained by amount with latent construct relative to variance remaining from measurement error and somewhere threshold is 0.50 i.e. in field of marketing research (Maitlo et al., 2017). Here in this study result of locus of control's is above 0.45 and networking orientation above 0.32 but other variables is less than satisfactory level indicating low total elements variance in the indicators. Further based on our sample of 250 participants, Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability of scale support to use it in data collection, these both will increase if this scale will be applied to more sample size. Table 2: Scale Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items .830 8 Source: Own survey. Table 3: Results of Cronbach Alpha, Composite Reliability, Average Variance Extracted (AVE) Dimensions Cronbach -a Composite (CR) Reliability Average Variance Extracted (AVE) Threshold Limit > 0.7 > 0.7 > 0.5 Locus of control 0.829 0.83 0.45 Propensity to take risk 0.651 0.647 0.273 Self confidence 0.647 0.567 0.179 Need for achievement 0.635 0.629 0.232 Tolerance to ambiguity 0.67 0.658 0.294 Innovativeness 0.672 0.63 0.249 Networking Orientation 0.737 0.739 0.324 Entrepreneurial Intentions 0.692 0.656 0.257 Source: Own survey. Correlation Analysis Correlation between variables shown in table 4 indicates the strength of relationship of variables at significant level below 0.05, ranging from -1 to +1 (Lind et al., 2012). The results show weak relationship with dependent variable except locus of control having value above 0.5 at significant level 0.05, but the relationship of all independent variables is significant. Table 4: Results of the Pearson Correlation Coefficients (r) 57 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 Dimension Frequency Correlation Coefficient (r) Sig Level LC and EI 250 0.562 0.000 PR and EI 250 0.427 0.000 SC and EI 250 0.351 0.000 NA and EI 250 0.415 0.000 TA and EI 250 0.317 0.000 IN and EI 250 0.358 0.000 NO and EI 250 0.229 0.000 Table 5: Hypotheses Testing Hypotheses Path rs * y "t-value "V value Result Hi El ENT (Direct Model) 0.66 .343 °Fixed 0.000 Supported Ei 4- NO ENT (Indirect Model) 1.00 .471 "Fixed 0.000 H2 El LC (Direct Model) .078 .692 4.334 0.001 Supported Ei NO «- LC (Indirect Model) .142 .884 6.231 0.000 H3 El PR (Direct Model) .051 .220 3.513 0.000 Supported EI NO PR (Indirect Model) .056 .200 3.577 0.000 H4 El SC (Direct Model) .067 -.119 -1.611 0.054 Rejected El NO SC (Indirect Model) .084 -.180 -2.145 0.032 H5 El NA (Direct Model) .072 .393 2.931 0.002 Supported EI 1.96 *** p < 0.05 "Based on ML estimate fixed parameter @ 1.0 Source: Own survey. The Structural Equation Model Structural equation model analysis through IBM-SPSS Amos, adopted because it facilitates to identify, evaluate and represent hypothesized relations between variables through graphical and non-graphical paths in model. Structural equation model is considered cross-sectional, linear statistical method of analysis and generally yield a model fit with normal data distribution. Especially, mediation in regression and path analysis used in this study are special features of structural equation model, because of which it is feasible that researcher can use it with least sample size for measurement scale and residual distribution (Hair et al., 2012). Measurement Model Results 58 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 In total, eight latent variables and 56 individualized items were consumed to construct the hypothesized model of this study. Figure 2 represents a measurement model results based on the main hypotheses. The result shows that the relationship of personality characteristics and entrepreneurial intentions is mediated positively and significantly (0.47) by networking orientation in comparison of past researches (Dinis et al., 2013). Even fit indices results can determine that few indices are good and few have weaker results. i.e. x2 is 1901.456 shows good fit. Also other model fit indices such as CFI (comparative fit index) = 0.887, TLI (tucker-Lewis index) = 0.863, IFI (incremental fit index) = 0.894, NFI (normed fit index) = 0.855, and RMSEA (root-mean-square error of approximation) = 0.073, values left behind the recommended threshold edges i.e. NFI> 0.90, CFI> 0.90 and RMSEA < 0.08. Figure 1: Measurement Model Results based on Hypotheses H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, H6, and H7 Fit Indices Result_ X2 = 1901.456, x2 / df = 2.33, CFI = 0.887, TLI = 0.863, IFI = 0.894, NFI = 0.855, RMSEA = 0.073_ Source: Own survey. Hypotheses Testing Results The path model was tested using multivariate analysis technique as the results of both direct and indirect model(s) are reported in Table 5. In case of both direct and indirect path model(s), the five hypotheses were supported 59 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 and the relationship found to be significant at p-value < 0.05. Further, the model fitness was checked through chi square value which implies that the hypotheses H1, H2, H3, H5 and H7 couldn't be rejected. For the mediated model, H1 (EI * NO * ENT: y= 0.47, p-value = 0.00), H2 (EI * NO * LC: Y= 0.884, t= 6.231, p-value = 0.00), H3 (EI * NO * PR: y= 0.200, t= 3.577, p-value = 0.00), H5 (EI * NO * NA: y= 0.201, t= 3.491, p-value = 0.00) and H7 (EI * NO * IN: y= 0.691, t= 5.779, p-value = 0.00) appeared significant. Whereas; hypotheses H4 (EI * NO * SC: y= -0.180, t= -2.145, p-value = 0.032) and H6 (EI * NO * TA: y= -0.158, t= -2.724, p-value = 0.006) are rejected because of negative gamma and t value. Finally, in this analysis it is concluded that the relationship of entrepreneurial intentions is mediated by networking orientation when tested with the six dimension(s) of entrepreneurial personality characteristics i.e. locus of control, propensity to take risk, self-confidence, need for achievement, tolerance to ambiguity and innovativeness. Out of these only four determined the positive and significant while two i.e. self-confidence and tolerance to ambiguity determined significant but negative relationship with entrepreneurial intentions when mediated by networking orientation. DISCUSSION Based on purpose of study the empirical relationship found to be significant and positive in four independent variables i.e. locus of control, propensity to take risk, need for achievement and innovativeness but significant and negative in two independent variables i.e. self-confidence and tolerance to ambiguity with dependent variable when mediated by networking orientation. While in previous literature it was found that without mediation the propensity to take risk were supported with negative relationship, but locus of control, tolerance to ambiguity and innovativeness were not supported, only two independent variables need for achievement and self-confidence were supported (Dinis et al., 2013). Similarly, when behavior and psychological approaches relationship applied simultaneously with entrepreneurial intentions, only hypotheses of need for achievement supported from psychological approach along with hypotheses of social norms and personal attitude from behavioral approach (Ferreira et al., 2012). But when personality and contextual factors mediated by theory of planned behavior with entrepreneurial intentions, risk-taking propensity, need for achievement and locus of control found strongly correlated with entrepreneurial intentions after mediation, and this is consistent with past researches that when personality traits are mediated with behavioral characteristics they have shown prediction of entrepreneurial intentions (Karimi et al., 2017). Here in results of this study, hypothesized relationship of self-confidence and tolerance to ambiguity with entrepreneurial intentions is negative but significant when mediated by networking orientation and hence rejected because it was set as positive and significant. All of the relationships are having above 95% confidence level i.e. of significant level less than 0.05 (p < 0.05). Among all variables independent and dependent after mediation 60 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 correlation results are significant and positive which also support the results mediation effects. Similarly, past studies identified the personality traits not only effect probability of becoming entrepreneur but also the entrepreneurial process (Caliendo et al., 2014). Most of the past studies have tested simple relationship of entrepreneurial traits with different variables i.e. entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurial process, entrepreneurial orientation etc. but the mediating relationship is lacking to test effect of personality traits (Karimi et al., 2017; Diniset al., 2013; Caliendo et al., 2014; Ferreira et al., 2012). Finally, enhanced relationship of entrepreneurial traits with entrepreneurial intentions examined when mediated by networking orientation. Referring the complexity of model, six independent variables are concurrently tested with entrepreneurial intentions in mediation of networking orientation, certainly disturbs the fitness indices but the level of fitness indices is not too much away from threshold, so covering normality of data distribution and testing relationship is determined. Also the context along with sample size matters and these indices can be enhanced by improving sample size. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Output from this research contributes a step forward in field of entrepreneurship because by enhancing networking orientation an entrepreneur can enhance his intentions of entrepreneurship, if he has entrepreneurial personality characteristics. Currently in Pakistan there is dire need of entrepreneurship for economic prosperity, Pakistan is facing challenge of lesser entrepreneurship activity than other developing countries in Asia i.e. Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and India, and is ranked on 138th out of 189 countries on the level of ease of doing business (Shabbir et al., 2018). So this research recommends proactive measures and can help the researches, decision makers in enhancing the potential of entrepreneurship in small scale business individuals as well as initiators. LIMITATIONS Along with general limitations of time, resources and data collection the survey is conducted only from three cities of north Sindh i.e. Khairpur Mir's, Sukkur and Shikarpur. Further the use of convenient (non-probability) sampling for easy access to sample is a potential limitation that can be circumvented in future studies. FUTURE DIRECTIONS The mediation of networking orientation can be tested in a relationship of entrepreneurial orientation along with all six as well as in two different sets of 61 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 three independent variables of personality traits. In this research paper the Structural Equation Model (SEM) implied but in future other testing techniques i.e. Partial Least Square (PLS) can be implied to get results for analysis. Table 4. Cross-sectional Regressions: The Impact of Innovations in Multidimensional Aspects of Liquidity on Security Prices Panel A Adjusted R2 Intercept p5it 0.14 0.0199 0.0167 (2.09) (3.98)*** Panel B Intercept p4it 0.12 0.01548 0.0261 (2.14) (2.31)** Panel C Intercept Pit p5it 0.03 0.09 0.0179 0.2565 08 (3.90) (0.69) (1.7 1)* Panel D Intercept Pit P1it 0.06 p2tt P^it 0.00 0.04 0.0148 0.01662 39 0.0031 06 (2.89) (0.42) (1.8 9)* (0.34) (0.8 7) Source: Own survey. Panel A of Table 4 shows that the net beta comprising of the systematic market risk component and the liquidity risk arising out of the innovations multidimensional measures is significantly priced in Indian stock market. It confirms that the common Indian investor demands an excess return for holding securities that are having liquidity risk which may be arising out of cost, quantity or time aspects of liquidity along with the systematic risk of the market. From Panel B, it can be reaffirmed that the investors explicitly demand a premium for holding securities whose liquidity movements (expected or unexpected) commoves with the liquidity of the market. Such commoving innovations can be raised out of cost, quantity or time aspect of liquidity, or from the combination of these aspects. Panel C discloses that, as in the case of innovations in individual aspects of liquidity, when the element of liquidity risk is incorporated, the investors are not concerned significantly for having a premium for bearing only the market risk alone. Nevertheless, they demand a significant premium for bearing the additional risk of liquidity 62 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 (illiquidity, more precisely) arising from unexpected fluctuations in different dimensions of liquidity of a stock responding to that in the market in addition to the market risk. Panel D confirms that the co-movements between innovations in individual stocks liquidity and that of market liquidity are significantly priced in the Indian stock market. However, it is found that the investors are least bothered about having significant premiums for holding securities whose returns are co-moving with the market-level innovations in liquidity or whose innovations in liquidity are co-moving with market returns when the liquidity risk (it can be any dimension of liquidity risk) of individual stock is found to be responding significantly to the market-wide liquidity risk. The results thus, validate that the common investors expect a premium for holding securities that are having greater liquidity risk in association with market-wide liquidity risk rather than for the mere market risk. REFERENCES Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211. Aparicio, S., Urbano, D., Audretsch, D. (2016). Institutional factors, opportunity entrepreneurship and economic growth: Panel data evidence. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 102, 45-61. Asdani, A., Kusmintarti, A. (2014). the impact of entrepreneurship education, internal locus of control, presentation need, creativity, gender and family towards entrepreneurship intention on students in polinema accountancy faculty. Journal of Management and Business, 13(1). Assis-Dorr, H., Palacios-Marques, D., Merigó, J. M. (2012). Social networking as an enabler of change in entrepreneurial Brazilian firms. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 25(5), 699-708. Barringer, B. R., Ireland, R. D. (2008). Entrepreneurship-Successfully launching new ventures 2nd ed. Block, J., Sandner, P., Spiegel, F. (2015). How do risk attitudes differ within the group of entrepreneurs? The role of motivation and procedural utility. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(1), 183-206. Caliendo, M., Fossen, F., Kritikos, A. S. (2014). Personality characteristics and the decisions to become and stay self-employed. Small Business Economics, 42(4), 787-814. Chatterjee, N., Das, N. (2015). Key psychological factors as predictors of entrepreneurial success: A conceptual framework. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 21(1). Chell, E. (2008). The nascent entrepreneur, business development and the role of human resources. International handbook of entrepreneurship and HRM, 21-46. Chen, H. H., Yen, J. Y. (2012). The relationship of personality, human capital, social capital and entrepreneurship. 2012 Health and Management Conference, Taipei. Cooper, A. C. (2017). Networks, alliances, and entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship: creating a new mindset, 201-222. Davis, M. H., Hall, J. A., Mayer, P. S. (2016). Developing a new measure of entrepreneurial mindset: Reliability, validity, and implications for practitioners. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 68(1). De Pillis, E., Reardon, K. K. (2007). The influence of personality traits and persuasive messages on entrepreneurial intention: A cross-cultural comparison. Career Development International, 12(4), 382-396. Din, B. H., Anuar, A. R., Usman, M. (2016). The effectiveness of the entrepreneurship education program in upgrading entrepreneurial skills among public university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 224, 117-123. 63 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 Dinis, A., do Paco, A., Ferreira, J., Raposo, M., Gouveia Rodrigues, R. (2013). Psychological characteristics and entrepreneurial intentions among secondary students. Education+ Training, 55(8/9), 763-780. Dollinger, M. J. (2008). Entrepreneurship: Strategies and resources. Marsh Publications. Dutta, D. K., Gwebu, K. L., Wang, J. (2015). Personal innovativeness in technology, related knowledge and experience, and entrepreneurial intentions in emerging technology industries: a process of causation or effectuation?. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(3), 529-555. Ebbers, J. J. (2014). Networking behavior and contracting relationships among entrepreneurs in business incubators. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(5), 1159-1181. Ekpe, I., Mat, N. (2015). The moderating effect of social environment on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and entrepreneurial intentions of female students at Nigerian universities. Farrukh, M., Khan, A. A., Shahid Khan, M., Ravan Ramzani, S., Soladoye, B. S. A. (2017). Entrepreneurial intentions: the role of family factors, personality traits and self-efficacy. World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 13(4), 303317. Ferreira, J. J., Raposo, M. L., Gouveia Rodrigues, R., Dinis, A., do Paço, A. (2012). A model of entrepreneurial intention: An application of the psychological and behavioral approaches. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 19(3), 424-440. Fine, S., Meng, H., Feldman, G., Nevo, B. (2012). Psychological predictors of successful entrepreneurship in China: An empirical study. International Journal of Management, 29(1), 279. Foley, D., O'Connor, A. J. (2013). Social capital and the networking practices of indigenous entrepreneurs. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(2), 276-296. Frederick, H., O'Connor, A., Kuratko, D. F. (2018). Entrepreneurship. Cengage AU. García-Granero, A., Llopis, Ó., Fernández-Mesa, A., Alegre, J. (2015). Unraveling the link between managerial risk-taking and innovation: The mediating role of a risk-taking climate. Journal of Business Research, 68(5), 1094-1104. Gupta, A., Muita, S. R. (2013). Relationship between entrepreneurial personality, performance, job satisfaction and operations strategy: An empirical examination. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(2). Gürol, Y., Atsan, N. (2006). Entrepreneurial characteristics amongst university students: Some insights for entrepreneurship education and training in Turkey. Education+ Training, 48(1), 25-38. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E. Tatham, R. L. (2010). Multivariate data analysis with readings. 7 ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson/Prentice Hall. Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 40(3), 414-433. Hoogendoorn, S., Oosterbeek, H., Van Praag, M. (2013). The impact of gender diversity on the performance of business teams: Evidence from a field experiment. Management Science, 59(7), 1514-1528. Hsiao, C., Lee, Y. H., Chen, H. H. (2016). The effects of internal locus of control on entrepreneurship: the mediating mechanisms of social capital and human capital. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(11), 1158-1172. Hughes, M., Eggers, F., Kraus, S., Hughes, P. (2015). The relevance of slack resource availability and networking effectiveness for entrepreneurial orientation. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 26(1), 116-138. Jelilov, G., Onder, E. (2016). Entrepreneurship in Nigeria Realities on Ground. Pyrex Journal of Business and Finance Management Research, 006-009. Karimi, S., Biemans, H. J., Naderi Mahdei, K., Lans, T., Chizari, M., Mulder, M. (2017). Testing the relationship between personality characteristics, contextual factors and entrepreneurial intentions in a developing country. International Journal of Psychology, 52(3), 227-240. Khan, M. S., Breitenecker, R. J., Schwarz, E. J. (2015). Adding fuel to the fire: Need for achievement diversity and relationship conflict in entrepreneurial teams. Management Decision, 53(1), 75-99. 64 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 Khuong, M. N., An, N. H. (2016). The factors affecting entrepreneurial intention of the students of Vietnam national university - a mediation analysis of perception toward entrepreneurship. Journal of Economics, Business and Management, 4(2), 104-111. Krueger, N. F., Carsrud, A. L. (1993). Entrepreneurial intentions: Applying the theory of planned behaviour. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 5(4), 315-330. Kusmintarti, A., Thoyib, A., Ashar, K., Maskie, G. (2014). The relationships among entrepreneurial characteristics, entrepreneurial attitude, and entrepreneurial intention. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 16(6), 25-32. Lavrakas, P. J. (2008). Encyclopedia of survey research methods. Sage Publications. Lee, C., Hallak, R., Sardeshmukh, S. R. (2016). Innovation, entrepreneurship, and restaurant performance: A higher-order structural model. Tourism Management, 53, 215-228. Leyden, D. P., Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S. (2014). A theoretical analysis of the role of social networks in entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 43(7), 1157-1163. Light, I., Dana, L. P. (2013). Boundaries of social capital in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(3), 603-624. Liñán, F., Chen, Y. W. (2009). Development and Cross- Cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 33(3), 593-617. Liñán, F., Fayolle, A. (2015). A systematic literature review on entrepreneurial intentions: citation, thematic analyses, and research agenda. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(4), 907-933. Liñán, F., Urbano, D., Guerrero, M. (2011). Regional variations in entrepreneurial cognitions: Start-up intentions of university students in Spain. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 23(3), 187-215. Lind, D. A., Marchal, W. G., Wathen, S. A. (2012). Statistical techniques in business & economics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin,. Maitlo, A. A., Memon, S. B., Syed, S. (2017). Influence of psychological capital on knowledge sharing behaviour in research fellows of public sector universities. Journal of Business Strategies, 11(2), 1-20. McKenzie, D. (2017). Identifying and spurring high-growth entrepreneurship: experimental evidence from a business plan competition. American Economic Review, 107(8), 22782307. Mohanty, S. R. (2015). Empirical Study on Entrepreneurs' Interpersonal Traits and its Effect on Business Performance of SMEs (Doctoral dissertation). Mortan, R. A., Ripoll, P., Carvalho, C. (2014). Effects of emotional intelligence on entrepreneurial intention and self-efficacy. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 30(3), 95. Obschonka, M., Stuetzer, M. (2017). Integrating psychological approaches to entrepreneurship: the Entrepreneurial Personality System (EPS). Small Business Economics, 49(1), 203-231. Omorede, A., Thorgren, S., Wincent, J. (2015). Entrepreneurship psychology: a review. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(4), 743-768. Oosterbeek, H., Van Praag, M., Ijsselstein, A. (2010). The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurship skills and motivation. European economic review, 54(3), 442-454. Ozaralli, N., Rivenburgh, N. K. (2016). Entrepreneurial intention: antecedents to entrepreneurial behavior in the USA and Turkey. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 6(1), 3. Pesamaa, O., Shoham, A., Khan, M. L., Muhammad, I. J. (2015). The impact of social networking and learning orientation on performance. Journal of Global Marketing, 28(2), 113-131. Prakash, D., Jain, S., Chauhan, K. (2015). Supportive government policies, locus of control and student's entrepreneurial intensity: a study of India. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 5(1). Ratten, V. (2016). Female entrepreneurship and the role of customer knowledge development, innovation outcome expectations and culture on intentions to start informal business ventures. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 27(2), 262-272. 65 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal, Volume 11, No. 1, 2020 Robson, P. J., Wijbenga, F., Parker, S. C. (2009). Entrepreneurship and policy: challenges and directions for future research. International Small Business Journal, 27(5), 531-535. Sánchez, J. C., Licciardello, O. (2017). Gender differences and attitudes in entrepreneurial intentions: the role of career choice. JWEE, (1), 7-27. Sesen, H. (2013). Personality or environment? A comprehensive study on the entrepreneurial intentions of university students. Education+ Training, 55(7), 624-640. Soomro, B. A., Shah, N. (2015). Developing attitudes and intentions among potential entrepreneurs. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(2), 304-322. Spurk, D., Kauffeld, S., Barthauer, L., Heinemann, N. S. (2015). Fostering networking behavior, career planning and optimism, and subjective career success: An intervention study. Journal of vocational behavior, 87, 134-144. Su, Z., Xie, E., Wang, D. (2015). Entrepreneurial orientation, managerial networking, and new venture performance in China. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(1), 228-248. Tahir, R. (2014). The impact of national and organizational cultural differences on international joint venture performance. IBA Business Review, 9(1). Tsai, K. H., Chang, H. C., Peng, C. Y. (2016). Extending the link between entrepreneurial self-efficacy and intention: a moderated mediation model. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12(2), 445-463. Westhead, P., Solesvik, M. Z. (2016). Entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial intention: do female students benefit?. International Small Business Journal, 34(8), 9791003. Wincent, J., Thorgren, S., Anokhin, S. (2016). Costly Ties: Social Capital as a Retardant of Network Level Entrepreneurial Orientation. Journal of Small Business Management, 54(1), 229-243. Yousaf, Z., Majid, A. (2018). Organizational network and strategic business performance: does organizational flexibility and entrepreneurial orientation really matter? Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31(2), 268-285. Zhang, H., Zhang, Y. (2013). Psychological characteristics of Entrepreneurship of college students in China. Psychology, 4(03), 159. Zhang, P., Wang, D. D., Owen, C. L. (2015). A study of entrepreneurial intention of university students. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 5(1), 61-82. Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., Hills, G. E. (2005). The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of applied psychology, 90(6). Zhou, J., Shin, S. J., Brass, D. J., Choi, J., Zhang, Z. X. (2009). Social networks, personal values, and creativity: Evidence for curvilinear and interaction effects. Journal of applied psychology, 94(6). 66