My findings from the interviews both confirm results from previous research on the topic, as well as give interesting additions to the discussions on entrepreneurial intentions for potential fashion KIE entrepreneurship.
Looking first at the ways in which my study confirms previous literature, the answers given by the informants clearly point out aspects of lack of business knowledge and market knowledge as reasons for not becoming entrepreneurs, at least at an initial stage. This adheres well to the KIE literature and the discussion on the importance of not only scientific, technological and creative knowledge, but that this also needs to be complemented by market knowledge and business knowledge (cf. McKelvey & Lassen, 2013).
The answers given by the informants further adhere to previous research in that several express a desire to team up with someone in creating a venture, however the
type of partner does not necessarily follow the logic of that pointed out in the literature. Previous researchers have stressed the importance of having complementary skillsets, not least in relation to the three main types of knowledge highlighted in the KIE literature, 1) scientific, technological and creative knowledge, 2) market knowledge, and 3) business knowledge. From the interviews it becomes evident that among the informants the idea is rather that of teaming up, at least initially, with a friend, for example from fashion school to create a venture. This lack of understanding for the need of complementary knowledge bases is something that is recurring throughout the research, as explained more in detail below.
Looking more specifically at the entrepreneurial intentions, the perceived desirability of becoming an entrepreneur, and thereby create a venture, is in general high among the informants, though some exceptions exist. The levels of perceived feasibility is however to a great extent low for the informants, leading to a decision for a majority of them not to proceed with the entrepreneurial path. This both confirms and slightly opposes existing literature. It has previously been pointed at the importance of relatively high levels of both perceived desirability and perceived feasibility, however it has also been argued that a sufficiently high level of one of the two factors should lead to an entrepreneurial intention and consequent entrepreneurial behaviour (cf., e.g., Fitzsimmons & Douglas, 2011; Ajzen, 1991; Krueger et al., 2000)). The question then naturally becomes what a sufficiently high level of perceived desirability would mean, and likewise how low levels of perceived feasibility can be compensated for? As showcased in Chapter 6, even among informants choosing not to become entrepreneurs initially, the perceived desirability is very high, however the answers from the interviews give that the insecurity in pursuing that pathway is simply too high and consequently, venture creation is put on hold for the time being. The perceived desirability of becoming an entrepreneur was in general high among the informants, though the levels did vary. The reasons for this high perceived desirability were multiple, however a key aspect that crystallised from my analysis was specific for the setting of the research, clearly tying on to the educational structure at the Swedish School of Textiles. The informants give reports about an educational structure with a primary focus on the further development of creative knowledge. The result of this appears twofold; on the one hand it leads to graduates feeling that their knowledge base is not compatible with that commonly used in industry, oftentimes being overqualified for the positions offered. Furthermore, this continuous exploration and development of one’s creativity and creative knowledge throughout the education spurs a desire to continue along the same path also after graduation, nurturing and realising one’s conceptual ideas into future creations and potential business ideas. This shows that the perceived desirability is routed both in a resistance towards current norms, as well as in a belief that the own creativity and creative knowledge is possible to transform into innovative ideas to be offered to the market.
Based on the answers from the informants, it is undisputable that a general relatively high perceived desirability of becoming an entrepreneur is present within this specific group of individuals, that is, designers with a higher education degree in fashion design. At the same time, the results show that an actual entrepreneurial behaviour, in the sense of moving forward from idea to venture creation, is not on par with the reported desirability of doing so. This naturally leads the discussion from that of the perceived desirability to the perceived feasibility of becoming an entrepreneur.
Perceived feasibility deals with an individual’s perception of whether or not the desired behaviour can be realised, that is, if all necessary knowledge and resources are in place, in this case, for venture creation. It becomes evident that levels of perceived feasibility vary greatly among the informants of this study, however there is a higher representation of lower levels for the parameter. Through my analysis, a number of common reasons come forward, the most prominent one’s being that of low market knowledge and business knowledge, as well as insecurities/lack of funding for moving forward with one’s entrepreneurial ideas.
In terms of market knowledge and business knowledge, the informants state that interaction with industry has up to the point of graduation been limited, with most referring to their current knowledge base as being acquired through internships during the educational years. Few have previous industry experience and the curricula for the educational programmes witness of little industry interaction throughout the education. The results confirm previous research on KIE and the importance of multiple types of knowledge in succeeding with one’s entrepreneurial idea (McKelvey & Lassen, 2013), as well as the fact that KIE entrepreneurs often have several years of work experience within the industry in which they start a venture (Malerba & McKelvey, 2019).
A further interesting point in relation to the discussion above is how the informants reason around acquiring the knowledge necessary to succeed with venture creation. While previous literature has pointed at the difficulties for one person to acquire all the necessary knowledge, meaning that the preferred way to go about in getting access to the knowledge is to employ different people with different areas of expertise (cf. McKelvey & Lassen 2013), several informants talk about collaboration with skilled market and business people as a later stage in the development of their venture. Initially the idea is to be in sole control and potential collaborations mentioned are rather with other creatives, such as former fellow students. This indicates that the knowledge of how to go about with venture creation, and furthermore how to acquire missing knowledge, is something that is lacking within the observed group. The low levels of industry experience is a probable at least part explanation for this, the informants not being acquainted enough with what it means to act within the industry as opposed to the protected environment of higher
education, where more or less the sole focus has been that of creative development and creative knowledge.
In addition to the lack of business knowledge and market knowledge, my analysis of the interviews further highlighted a lack of resources as a common factor lowering the perceived feasibility. Most informants report a lack of initial financing to start a firm. Few have savings to use or other alternative sources of funding, such as help from family and friends. My findings are much in line with previous literature on the topic in that funding is a difficult matter and sources other than own capital or that of family and friends are difficult to find and access (Kohn & Wewel, 2018; Lassen et al., 2018)). In discussing accessing financial resources, my analysis shows that the knowledge of how to go about is in general low, with few having heard of aspects such as venture capital. One way to go about, which is reported by several informants, is that of participating in competitions. Here, cases are present with informants who this way have acquired initial funding to start a business. The odds of actually winning are however low, and several also debate on value of the time and money invested in participating in the first place.
Furthermore, other resources that during the years of education could be taken for granted, such as studio space, professional sewing machines and other equipment, were at the point of graduation something that needed to be invested in. Many report the lack of affordable studio places as a drawback for continue one’s creative process. This issue became even more prevalent among those relocating to Stockholm, a decision often based on the desire/need to be closer to the heart of the Swedish fashion industry (for a discussion on the structure of the Swedish fashion industry, see Chapter 2). My findings fall well in line with previous literature on the difficulties for actors in creative industries to access resources, not least financial (cf., e.g., Bergamini et al., 2017; Kohn & Wewel, 2018).
Taken together, the findings from my research in many ways confirm previous literature on entrepreneurial intentions. At the same time, the results partly reject previous research in that I can observe that even though informants showcase high levels of perceived desirability of becoming entrepreneurs, it is not enough to compensate for the low levels of perceived feasibility of doing so.