Conclusiones generales

Inferential statistics is the use of statistics to project characteristics from a sample onto an entire population (Zikmund et al., 2010:653). In this study, inferential statistical analysis was used to address the stated hypotheses.

6.5.1 Regression analysis

Multiple regression analysis was used to assess the relationships between dependent and independent variables, as implied in the hypotheses (see Section 5.3.3). The first multiple regression assessed the relationship between causation as dependent variable and the seven independent variables as shown in Table 6.14.

Table 6.14: Regression analysis results: Causation

Independent variables Beta coefficient t-value Level of significance Relationship cultivation 0.292 3.394 0.001 ** Partner knowledge -0.118 -1.480 0.140 Experience 0.049 0.763 0.446 Education -0.003 -0.053 0.958 Self-efficacy 0.230 3.210 0.001 **

The fear of having an uncertain future

-0.015 -0.226 0.821

The fear of devaluing one's self- estimate

-0.043 -0.657 0.551

** p < 0.01

It is apparent from Table 6.14 that relationship cultivation (β = 0.292; p < 0.05) and self-efficacy (β = 0.230; p < 0.05) have a significant positive relationship with causation. Null hypotheses H06A and H01A are thus rejected. In other words,

businesswomen's ability to cultivate relationships and their self-efficacy will have a positive relationship with their causal reasoning.

The relationship between partner knowledge (β = -0.118; p > 0.05), experience (β = 0.049; p > 0.05), education (β = -0.003; p > 0.05), the fear of having an uncertain future (β = -0.015; p > 0.05), the fear of devaluing one's self-estimate (β = -0.043; p > 0.05), and causation is not statistically significant. In other words, null hypotheses H05A, H07A, H04A, H02A and H03A cannot be rejected. Businesswomen's experience,

partner knowledge, education, fear of having an uncertain future and fear of devaluing themselves have no significant relationship with their causal reasoning. The coefficient of determination (R²) indicates that the independent variables in this multiple regression analysis explain 19.40% of the variance in the dependent variable, causation.

The second multiple regression assessed the relationship between affordable loss as dependent variable and the seven independent variables, as depicted in Table 6.15.

Table 6.15: Regression analysis results: Affordable loss

Independent variables Beta coefficient t-value Level of significance Relationship cultivation 0.258 2.773 0.006 ** Partner knowledge -0.032 -0.374 0.709 Experience 0.029 0.417 0.677 Education -0.020 -0.330 0.742 Self-efficacy -0.009 -0.116 0.908

The fear of having an uncertain future

0.019 0.272 0.786

The fear of devaluing one's self- estimate

0.017 0.247 0.805

** p< 0.01

Table 6.15 shows that relationship cultivation (β = 0.258; p < 0.05) has a significant positive relationship with affordable loss. Therefore null hypothesis H06Bis rejected. In

other words, businesswomen's ability to cultivate relationships has a positive relationship with effectual reasoning (as measured by affordable loss).

The relationship between partner knowledge (β = -0.032; p > 0.05), experience (β = 0.029; p > 0.05), education (β = -0.020; p > 0.05), self-efficacy (β = -0.009; p < 0.05), the fear of having an uncertain future (β = 0.019; p > 0.05), the fear of devaluing one's self-estimate (β = 0.017; p > 0.05) and affordable loss is not statistically significant. In other words, null hypotheses H07B,H05B,H04B,H01B,H02B and

H03Bcannot be rejected. It can thus be concluded that affordable loss, a dimension of

effectual reasoning, was not influenced by businesswomen's partner knowledge, experience, education, self-efficacy, fear of having an uncertain future or fear of devaluing their selves.

The independent variable in this multiple regression analysis explains 5.70% of the variance in the dependent variable, affordable loss.

The third multiple regression assessed flexibility as dependent variable and the seven independent variables, as shown in Table 6.16.

Table 6.16: Regression analysis results: Flexibility

Independent variables Beta coefficient t-value Level of significance Relationship cultivation 0.247 2.953 0.003 ** Partner knowledge 0.013 0.174 0.862 Experience -0.057 -0.918 0.359 Education -0.020 -0.369 0.712 Self-efficacy 0.288 4.136 0.000 **

The fear of having an uncertain future

0.015 0.242 0.809

The fear of devaluing one's self- estimate

-0.077 -1.216 0.225

** p < 0.01

It is evident from Table 6.16 that relationship cultivation (β = 0.247; p < 0.05) and self-efficacy (β = 0.288; p < 0.05) have a significant positive relationship with flexibility. Null hypotheses H01C and H06C are thus rejected. Consequently,

businesswomen's self-efficacy and their ability to cultivate relationships have a positive relationship with flexibility, a dimension of effectual reasoning.

The relationship between partner knowledge (β = 0.113; p > 0.05), experience (β = -0.057; p > 0.05), education (β = -0.020; p > 0.05), the fear of having an uncertain future (β = 0.015; p > 0.05), the fear of devaluing one's self-estimate

(β = -0.077; p > 0.05) and flexibility is not statistically significant. In other words, null hypotheses H02C,H03C,H04C,H05Cand H07Care not rejected. Flexibility, a dimension of

effectual reasoning, was not influenced by businesswomen's fear of having an uncertain future, their fear of devaluing themselves, their education, experience or partner knowledge.

The coefficient of determination (R²) indicates that the independent variables in this multiple regression analysis explain 23.90% of the variance in the dependent variable, causation.

The last multiple regression assessed pre-commitments as dependent variable and the seven independent variables, as shown in Table 6.17.

Table 6.17: Regression analysis results: Pre-commitments

Independent variables Beta coefficient t-value Level of significance Relationship cultivation 0.400 4.509 0.000 ** Partner knowledge -0.067 -0.820 0.413 Experience -0.113 -1.714 0.088 Education 0.041 0.696 0.487 Self-efficacy 0.109 1.467 0.144

The fear of having an uncertain future

0.083 1.230 0.220

The fear of devaluing one's self- estimate

0.059 0.871 0.384

** p < 0.01

Table 6.17 shows that relationship cultivation (β = 0.400; p < 0.05) has a significant positive relationship with pre-commitments. Therefore, null hypothesis H06D is

rejected and businesswomen's ability to cultivate relationships has a positive relationship with pre-commitments, as a dimension of effectual reasoning.

The relationship between partner knowledge (β = -0.067; p > 0.05), experience (β = -0.113; p > 0.05), education (β = 0.041; p > 0.05), self-efficacy (β = 0.109; p < 0.05), the fear of having an uncertain future (β = 0.083; p > 0.05), the fear of devaluing one's self-estimate (β = 0.059; p > 0.05) and pre-commitments is not statistically significant. In other words, null hypotheses H07D,H05D,H04D,H01D,H02D and

H03D are not rejected. Pre-commitments, as a dimension of effectual reasoning, was

not influenced by businesswomen's partner knowledge, experience, education, self- efficacy, fear of having an uncertain future or fear of devaluing their selves.

The independent variable in this multiple regression analysis explain 14,40% of the variance in the dependent variable, pre-commitments.

6.5.2 Independent sample t-tests

An independent sample t-test was conducted to determine whether there is a significant difference, in terms of entrepreneurial involvement, between the two groups of businesswomen, namely self-employed and corporate entrepreneurs. The results of the independent sample t-test are shown Table 6.18.

Table 6.18: Independent sample t-tests Groups of businesswomen N Mean Standard deviation Significance Self-employed entrepreneurs 160 4.04 0.74 0.33 Corporate entrepreneurs 109 4.11 0.68

The mean scores revealed that there is no statistically significant difference between the two groups of businesswomen and their entrepreneurial involvement. The p-value of the difference between the mean of the two groups of businesswomen is 0.33. In other words, when examining the entrepreneurial involvement of businesswomen, both in a new venture and in the corporate sector context, there are no distinct difference between self-employed and corporate entrepreneurs, and hypothesis H8is

not rejected.