Me acogni i e Awa eness and Pe sonal Cha ac e is ics o S uden s: A Case
o Es onia
Hannes Ling, Inna Lii , Ma in Toding, U e Venesaa
Tallinn School o Economics and Business Adminis a ion,
Tallinn Uni e si y o Technology
Co esponding au ho : Hannes Ling, email: [email p o ec ed]
Abs ac
En ep eneu ship educa ion has acqui ed a g ea impo ance in highe educa ion o he
de elopmen o en ep eneu ial hinking, acqui ing knowledge and skills o he de elopmen
o en ep eneu ial ini ia i e among s uden s. Howe e , he e is a need o s udy mo e
p o oundly he inpu as well as ou come o en ep eneu ship aining cou ses, especially
conce ning he assessmen and imp o emen o aining cou ses o making hem mo e
e ec i e. The pu pose o his a icle is o in es iga e how he cou ses on en ep eneu ship a e
in luencing s uden s‟ me acogni i e awa eness and whe he di e en pe sonal cha ac e is ics
o s uden s a e connec ed wi h and in luencing he de elopmen o hei me acogni i e
abili ies. The a icle is based on he su ey ca ied ou by using s uden s‟ psychological
p o ile ques ionnai e and addi ional me acogni i e awa eness ques ionnai e. The esul s o
s udy ha e been analysed by he ools o linea s a is ical analysis and clus e ing
me hodologies.
The esul s indica e ha en ep eneu ial mindse and me acogni i e awa eness a e mos
de eloped among s uden s p esen ing highe le el o sel -con idence, aspi a ion owa ds
independence and and isk- aking p opensi y, i.e. en ep ising s uden s. On he basis o he
esul s o su ey i is possible o make a conclusion ha in o de o inc ease s uden s‟
me acogni i e awa eness he con en o cou ses and eaching me hods a e impo an aspec s o
conside o s uden s wi h di e en pe sonal cha ac e is ics.
In oduc ion
En ep eneu ship has been conside ed as a sou ce o g ow h and compe i i eness.
Fos e ing en ep eneu ship among s uden s has become an impo an opic o uni e si ies and
go e nmen s. As a esea ch subjec he en ep eneu ial mindse is a complex cons uc which
connec s o a a ie y o di e en ields like educa ion, business adminis a ion and cogni i e
psychology.
The ield o cogni i e psychology and me acogni i e awa eness is ge ing apidly inc easing
a en ion in he scien i ic discussions in he con ex o en ep eneu ship. Me acogni ion has
been de ined o be “ he abili y o e lec upon, unde s and, and con ol one‟s
lea ning”(Sch aw, 1998). In hei s udy Mi chell e al p opose ha me acogni i e hinking can
be delibe a ely p ac iced in an en ep eneu ial con ex . Fu he , hey sugges such
me acogni i e hinking will lead o c ea ion o en ep eneu ial expe ise by acili a ing he
sel - e lec ion, unde s anding and con ol o one‟s own en ep eneu ial cogni ions. (Mi chell,
e al. 2005). In addi ion i can be said ha me acogni ion plays a ole in how people adap o
hei de eloping and changing ci cums ances which a e p esen in any en ep eneu ial
p ocesses (Haynie, G ego ie & Shephe d 2004, 2; Haynie & Shephe d, 2007). Mo eo e ,
indings o he s udies by Haynie and Shephe d sugges ha cogni i e adap abili y is
impo an in an en ep eneu ial con ex , and ha me acogni ion does p omo e cogni i e
adap abili y and hus imp o e pe o mance on an en ep eneu ial ask. In he con ex o
en ep eneu ial aining o s uden s i would be app op ia e o ask also whe he he
de elopmen o me acogni ion could be p omo ed by lea ning and aqui ing o new knowledge
in he se ings o educa ional ins i u ion.
Pe sonal ai s play an impo an ole in he ame o de eloping he me acogni i e abili ies
which in luence signi ican ly he lea ning ou comes. Findings o Ve me en, Lodewijks &
Ve mun sugges ha deep (me acogni i e) lea ning is associa ed wi h a endency o sel -
egula e (Ve me en, Lodewijks & Ve mun 2001). Me acogni i e lea ning is conside ed o
in ol e he abili y o cons an ly ask you sel ques ions du ing he lea ning p ocess abou he
goals and op ional ways o achie ing he a ge and he p og ess made. This is in co ela ion
also wi h indings sugges ing ha pe sonal in e es is an impo an mo i a ional componen o
sel - egula ed lea ning and me acogni i e abili ies (McWhaw & Ab ami 2001). The lowe he
le el o pe sonal in e es o an indi idual is owa d he lea ning ou come, he mo e di icul i
is o make a deepe impac o a pe sons knowledgebase. The ela ions be ween pe sonali y
ai s and me acogni i e abili ies a e e en u he exposed by s udies o Klei man & S anko
(2007) who es ablished he s ong co ela ion be ween pe sons sel -con idence and
me acogni i e abili ies. Howe e , he e is a sho age o empi ical e idence o jus i y his
claim.
The pu pose o his esea ch is o explo e Es onian s uden s‟ me acogni i e awa eness in he
ame o en ep eneu ial p o ile (i.e. dempg aphic cha ac e is ics; pe sonal i s). The a icle is
based on he su ey ca ied ou in he Tallinn Uni e si y o Technology which included bo h
s uden s psychological p o ile ques ionnai e and addi ional me acogni i e awa eness
ques ionnai e. The la e ques ionnai e co e s 5 domains o me acogni i e awa eness as goal
o ien a ion, me acogni i e knowledge, me acogni i e expe ience, me acogni i e choice and
moni o ing. This p o ides a ich da ase s o analysis o he changes in s uden s me acogni i e
awa eness in he ame o hei en ep eneu ial p o ile. The cu en pape seeks o in es iga e
whe he sel -con idence, aspi a ion owa ds independence and eadiness o ake isks a e
connec ed wi h and in luencing he de elopmen o me acogni i e abili ies o s uden s. As a
esul o he analysis i will be use ul o ind ou abou how o each en ep eneu ship wi h he
pu poses o inc easing s uden s‟ me acogni i e awa eness. The esul s o s udy ha e been
analysed by he ools o linea s a is ical analysis and clus e ing me hodologies.
The main esea ch ques ions a e:
1) Wha is he in luence o en ep eneu ship educa ion aining cou ses o he
me acogni i e awa eness o s uden s?
2) Whe he and how he me acogni i e awa eness is connec ed wi h s uden s‟ pe sonali y
ai s?
In he s uc u e o he a icle nex he heo e ical amewo k is included on he issues o
me acogni i e awa eness and sel - egula ion as well as on en ep eneu ial pe sonali y ai s
and hei connec ion wi h me acogni ion ased on p e ious s udies in he ield. A e ha da a
and me hods o analysis a e co e ed. Following his, he esul s o he s udy a e p esen ed.
And inally, he a icle ends wi h sho conclusion.
1. Theo e ical F amewo k
1.1. Me acogni i e awa eness and sel - egula ion
Se e al s udies ha e ied o ill in he gaps in en ep eneu ship esea ch by ocusing on he
ole o me acogni ion in aining, sel - egula ed lea ning and sel - egula o y skills (Haynie,
G ego ie & Shephe d; 2004; Haynie & Shephe d, 2007; B yan , 2006; Ramocki 2007). I has
been s a ed ha almos anyone capable o pe o m a skill is also capable o me acogni ion, ie
hinking abou how hey pe o m ha skill (Sch aw, 1998) o „ hinking abou hinking‟(Jos ,
K uglanski, & Nelson, 1998). I has been also widely acknowledged ha me acogni ion plays
a signi ican ole in success o ailu e and in how people adap o hei changing
ci cums ances in an uns able en ep eneu ial en i onmen The unde lying assump ion o he
esea ch ela ed o me acogni i e abili ies is ha some indi iduals a e mo e likely o s a a
business, no ma e wha di icul ies hey migh encoun e . Success a ge ing in o business
would no ake place only due o he amoun o ime and e o de o ed o en ep eneu ial
ac i i ies – bo h success ul and unsuccess ul po en ial en ep eneu s a e likely o be able o
ex ac hese esou ces equally. Fu he mo e, he indings indica e ha indi iduals who a e
engaging in me acogni i e ac i i ies in a la ge ex en han o he s do no necessa ily wo k
mo e o longe , bu spend he gi en ime mo e e ec i ely (Schmid & Fo d, 2003). In pa allel
i has been ound ha me acogni i e aining has a posi i e impac on decision-making skills
which on i s behal a e one o he c i ical ones o e e y en ep eneu (Ba ha & Ca oll, 2007).
Mo eo e , indings sugges ha me acogni i e abili ies can be imp o ed by lea ning, hus
enhancing he adap abili y and imp o ing he en ep eneu ial pe o mance (Haynie, G ego ie
& Shephe d 2004; Haynie & Shephe d, 2007). This is suppo ed also by he esea ch o
Mi chell e al (2005) sugges ing ha me acogni i e hinking will lead o c ea ion o addi ional
en ep eneu ial expe ise. Ne e heless, me acogni ion is no a uni ied cons uc .
P e ious esea ch has shown ha mos heo ies o me acogni ion (Nelson & Na ens, 1994;
Sch aw & Dennison, 1994; Sch aw & Moshman, 1995) dis inguish be ween knowledge o
cogni ion (i.e., knowledge abou one's own cogni i e p ocesses o capabili ies, as well as
knowledge abou how, when, and why o use s a egies and alloca e cogni i e esou ces), and
egula ion o cogni ion (i.e., he con ol aspec o lea ning). In his con ex he e a e h ee
p ocesses o me acogni i e egula ion ypically posi ed (Sch aw & Moshman, 1995; Sch aw
e al., 1995): (1) Planning, which e e s o he selec ion o app op ia e s a egies and
alloca ion o cogni i e esou ces be o e he ask; (2) Moni o ing, which e e s o he
awa eness o unde s anding and pe o mance du ing he ask; and (3) E alua ion, which e e s
o he app aisal o pe o mance a e ask. This di ision o me acogni i e p ocesses
co esponds wi h indings o Haynie (in His ich, Pe e s & Shephe d, 2007) who makes a
dis inc ion be ween i e aspec s as goal o ien a ion, me acogni i e knowledge, me acogni i e
expe ience, me acogni i e choice and moni o ing.
Sch aw has a gued ha p omo ing me acogni ion begins wi h building an awa eness ha
me acogni ion exis s and inc eases he success (Sch aw, 1998). Fu he mo e, i has been
ound ha when bo h en ep eneu s and pe sons wi h high ask-mas e y skills p esen highe
le el o me acogni i e awa eness i is suppo ing he desi ed o op imal ou comes o hei
espec i e ac ions (V ug & Oo , 2008; Haynie e al., 2010). This is suppo ed by indings o
Bowman, Ma kham, & Robe s (2001) who indica e ha me acogni ion e e s o one's
awa eness o one's own cogni i e p ocesses. They a gue ha me acogni ion is an assessmen
o one's own abili y, knowledge, and unde s anding o ask- ele an ac o s and has wide
implica ions o bo h educa ional and indus ial/o ganiza ional se ings. Pin ich (2002) on i s
behal a gues ha me acogni i e knowledge in ol es knowledge abou cogni ion in gene al,
as well as awa eness o and knowledge abou one‟s own cogni ion. This allows a pe son o
moni o he de elopmen and o make app op ia e and imely co ec ions in he p ocesses in
own mind. Mo eo e , s uden s who a e unawa e ha hey lack ce ain abili ies o ac ual o
p ocedu al knowledge a e unlikely o make su ficien e o o acqui e o cons uc new
knowledge (Ibabe, 2010). This would allow o sugges ha o he s uden s who p esen lowe
me acogni i e abili ies (ie he ones no awa e o hei own easoning pa e ns) han o he s
a e he aining cou se i migh be a some le el ela ed wi h inabili y o educa ional p og am
o ully co espond wi h hei needs. Al hough he ou comes o ainings depend also on he
amoun o alue he pa icipan s pe sonally pu in o i , he e could exis a good possibili y o
make a las ing impac wi h cul i a ing he posi i e mindse owa ds en ep eneu ship.
Will o ac unde he p o ided ci cums ances, o assess hem, make decisions, plan he
ollowing s eps and o ealize hem o pu suing owa ds he goals a e all dependen on goal-
se ing skills. I could be e en said ha i is one o he co e skills o an en ep eneu .
Fo una o&Goldbla (2006) a gue ha he e exis s a dimension as lea ning goal o ien a ion.
Based on his he indi iduals who a e ac i ely in ol ed in me acogni i e exe cises sco e high
on achie emen o ien a ion, gene alized sel -e icacy, mo i a ion o lea n, posi i e
emo ionali y, and posi i e sel -pe cep ions. Bu esea ch indica es also he connec ion
be ween goal-o ien a ion and me acogni ion in he ame o mas e y goals and sel - epo ed
use o me acogni i e s a egies o e ime. Fo example indings o Pin ich (2000) es ablish
ha highe mas e y in goal o ien a ion co ela es wi h highe sel - egula ion o cogni ion.
Fu he mo e, Vandewalle (2001) a gues ha he indi iduals wi h a s ong lea ning goal
o ien a ion a e mo e in e es ed in de eloping hei skills and abili ies, belie e ha such
de elopmen is possible, and app oach si ua ions wi h a sense o high sel -e ficacy. Based on
his i could be p oposed ha inc eased le els o skills, abili ies, belie in o onesel and
si ua ional awa eness a e a some le el he p edic o s o p esense o highe le els o
me acogni i e awa eness. By ag eeing wi h his one could also ag ee ha cogni i e
adap abili y (a ec ed by he lea ning p ocess) suppo s he willingness o s e ch onesel o
mee he challenging goals and o seek oppo uni ies ha os e pe sonal g ow h. Resea ch o
Godshalk&Sosik (2003) adds o his discussion by a guing ha pe sons ha ing high le els o
lea ning goal o ien a ion a e associa ed wi h he highes le els o psychosocial suppo and
epo highe le els o ca ee de elopmen , manage ial aspi a ions and ca ee sa is ac ion
when compa ed o he ones wi h low le els o lea ning goal o ien a ion.
1.2. En ep eneu ial pe sonali y ai s and hei connec ion wi h me acogni i e
awa eness
The li e a u e on en ep eneu ial cha ac e is ics has included a numbe o a iables ha
add ess psychological a ibu es, pe sonali y, a i udes, and beha io . Many au ho s explain
he en ep eneu ial p o ile o he pe son h ough c ea i i y, locus o con ol, sel -e icacy,
sel -con idence, sel -independence and isk- aking. His ich and Pe e s (1989) ocus on h ee
pe sonal cha ac e is ics, namely sel -con idence, aspi a ion owa ds independence and
eadiness o ake isks. This a icle ocuses on hese h ee pe sonal ai s and hei ela ionship
wi h en e p ising and me acogni i e awa eness.
Knigh and Bandu a (1994) discussed he concep o sel -con idence. A p esen , he e is
conside able in o ma ion abou he ela ionship be ween sel -con idence and cogni i e
abili ies (S anko , 1998; 1999; S anko & C aw o d, 1996, 1997; S ano ich, 1999).
Some hing is also known abou i s ela ionship o pe sonali y (Pallie e al., 2002). Sel -
con idence is some imes ea ed as a pe sonali y ai , ei he on i s own o as an unde lying
ace o b oade ai s (see Blais, Thompson, & Ba anski, 2005, o a e iew). Mo eo e , Blais
e al. (2005) ha e demons a ed ha a b oad ange o cogni i e s yles, including need o
cogni ion and desi e o s uc u e, had no e ec on con idence (Klei man, S anko 2007).
Impo an ly, he e idence o he meaning ul ela ionship be ween sel -con idence and some
concep ually ela ed cons uc s is sca ce. In heo y, con idence judgemen s e lec an
impo an aspec o me acogni i e p ocesses (S anko , 1999, ci ed in Klei man, S anko
2007).
By K onenbe g's esea ch en ep eneu ‟s sel -independence is ela ed wi h he alues o
en ep eneu ship such as: eedom, eedom o decision, indi iduaal esponsibili y,
esponsibili y and wo king independen ly. Wo k Independen ly is linked o F eedom o
Decisions and desc ibes he ad an age o a sel -employmen in e ms o no being dependen

om o he s. (K onenbe g 2011). Howe e , Segal, Bo gia & Schoen eld (2005) a e belie ing
ha people may be mo i a ed o become en ep eneu s i hey belie e sel -employmen is
mo e likely han wo king o o he s o lead o alued ou comes. People wi h a sense o
en ep eneu ial sel -e icacy may be d awn o sel -employmen ‟s desi able oppo uni ies and
bene i s, compa ed o he a ailabili y o hese bene i s ob ained h ough wo king o o he s
(Segal, e al 2005). By op ion o Me aal people wi h a s ong need o au onomy insis on no
being domina ed by o he pe sons, a oid in luence om o he s, and show impulsi e,
obnoxious, and i esponsible beha io (Me aal, 1992, ci ed in Gelde en, Jansen and Jonges
2003).
Bo h economic heo y and e e y-day obse a ion sugges ha isk- aking o isk-p opensi y
a e impo an aspec s o unning a business. Mill (1848/1984) desc ibed he en ep eneu as a
isk ake and cap ain o en e p ise, and emphasized isk- aking as a ea u e di e en ia ing an
en ep eneu om a manage . Simila ly, isk is a business ac o ha is widely assumed in
economic heo y o be a sou ce o en ep eneu ial p o i (Tyszka a al 2011). Macko and
Tyszka (2009), in hei esea ch on en ep eneu ial isk- aking, ound ha in well-de ined
(labo a o y) isky si ua ions en ep eneu s we e no mo e isk-p one han non-en ep eneu s.
Howe e , in na u alis ic-business isky si ua ions hey ound mo e isky choices among
en ep eneu s han among non-en ep eneu s. They concluded his s udy wi h he asse ion
ha pe haps, like mos humans, en ep eneu s y o a oid isks. Fu he mo e, en ep eneu s
ha e o deal wi h isky si ua ions ( hey simply ace hem), so hey canno a oid unde aking
isky ac i i ies in business (e.g., in es ing, aking ou c edi , e c.). In addi ion, acco ding o
he p e ious esea ch he Es onia people a e a he isk-e asi e when planning he business
and in es men (Es onian Ins i u e o Economic Resea ch, 2004). The same esul was ound
in he su ey among s uden s (Venesaa e al, 2006).
2. Da a and me hod
The empi ical s udy was ca ied ou among he bachelo and mas e s udy s uden s o
echnical speciali ies o Tallinn Uni e si y o Technology, who we e asked o gi e sel -
alua ion o pe sonal ai s connec ed wi h en ep eneu ship and o me acogni i e awa eness.
In h ee academic yea s (2008-2010) he s uden s who had aken he subjec o
en ep eneu ship and business planning, we e asked o e alua e hei pe sonal ai s and on he
i s o second lec u e acco ding o he ques ions o he es s gi en, and o assess hei
me acogni i e awa eness. The pu pose o he cou se was o in oduce pa icipan s wi h he
concep o an en ep eneu ial mindse and widen he ho izon o he espec i e knowledge
among s uden s. The con en o he cou se in en ep eneu ship and business planning included
lec u es and exe cises, sol ing eaching cases and w i ing business plans. I las ed h oughou
he whole semes e (i.e. o al 16 weeks and 48 hou s). 280 s uden s o di e en speciali ies
we e pa icipa ed in he s udy, mainly on he speciali ies o logis ics, na u al sciences and
echnical sciences. Assemblage o he sample o he h ee yea s allows making gene aliza ions
o he esul s o he analysis wi h a highe p obabili y.
In o de o collec he necessa y da a samples, pa icipan s we e asked o ill ou a
ques ionnai e abou cogni i e adap abili y. I was o iginally de eloped by Haynie (in His ich,
Pe e s & Shephe d, 2007) as a "gene alized measu e o adap i e cogni ion". The
ques ionnai e included 35 di e en s a emen s and i was asked o be illed ou bo h a he
beginning and immedia ely a he end o he aining cou ses. The s a emen s co e ed i e
dis inc i e a eas; such as goal o ien a ion, me acogni i e knowledge, me acogni i e
expe ience, me acogni i e choice and moni o ing. This o iginal ques ionnai e was ansla ed
in o Es onian in o de o a oid he possibili y o ge alse eadings due o possible
misunde s anding o he ex . Fo measu ing he espec i e a ings a 10-s ep Like Scale was
in oduced. Responden s we e asked o answe he s a emen s by a ing each o hem on he
p o ided scale o 1 o 10, based on hei own judgmen whe e: 1 being equal o "No e y
much like me" and 10 being equal o "Ve y much like me"
To e alua e s uden s‟ pe sonal ai s, he so-called en ep eneu ‟s psychological po ai es
was used (au ho s His ich and Pe e s, 1993), in which he ques ions we e di ec ed o making
ce ain beha iou al choices and whe e i was possible o gi e „yes” and „no” answe s. The
esul s o he analysis b ough ou in he a icle a e mainly based on he me hodology o he
es ‟s au ho s. The ques ions ha e been di ided in o wo pa s – „yes”-answe o one g oup o
he ques ions con i ming hose pe sonal ai s (sel -con idence, aspi a ion owa ds
independence, eadiness o ake isks), can gi e he e alua ion ha he pe son has good
p e equisi es o becoming an en ep eneu ; a ce ain numbe o „yes”-answe s o he ques ions
o he second g oup cha ac e izing he opposi e pe sonal ai s (dependence on ex e nal
in luences, non-aspi a ion owa ds independence and isk-e asi eness) indica es he case ha
he esponden should e y ca e ully obse e himsel and plan an ac ion p og amme o
de elop en ep eneu al pe sonal ai s. The au ho s o he cu en a icle p esumed ha in he
i s case an e alua ion o he pe son ha ing good p e equisi es o becoming an en ep eneu
can be gi en and in he second case, hey p esume ha he pe son has poo p e equisi es o
becoming an en ep eneu .
Then, he ques ions o he psychological es ha e been g ouped o exp ess he pe sonal ai s
o an en ep eneu (sel -con idence, aspi a ion owa ds independence, eadiness o ake isks).
The au ho s o he a icle di ided all he en ep eneu ‟s psychological po ai es ‟s ques ions
in o six g oups acco ding o ision o he au ho s o he es . The da abase ea lie consis ing o
22 ques ions ( ai s) became a da abase o 6 g oups ( ai s) wi h iles o he es as ho izon al
lines and he abo emen ioned 6 g oups ( ai s) as columns. In case o each g oup he au ho s
o he a icle coun ed he „yes”-answe s. The ques ions-answe s o he i s g oup (R1) show
i he esponden is dependen on ex e nal in luences which can in e e e wi h becoming an
independen en ep eneu . The o ien a ion o he ques ions o he second g oup (R2) is o
de e mine i he esponden ‟s inne will o achie e success and ic o y is mo e powe ul han
he aspi a ion o subo dina e o a s ange will. The „yes”-answe s o he ques ions o he hi d
g oup (R3) gi e e idence o he esponden no pa icula ly aspi ing owa ds independence;
he „yes”-answe s o he ques ions o ou h g oup (R4) gi e e idence o he con a y. The
pu pose o he ques ions o he i h g oup (R5) is o examine he esponden ‟s eadiness o
ake isks, he „yes”-answe s o he ques ions o he six h g oup (R6) gi e e idence o he
opposi e.
Resea ch design has been cen e ed on a ques ionnai e de eloped o measu e me acogni i e
awa eness. In o de o ind e idence a equency analysis has been u ilized o e alua e he
answe s gi en o he espec i e s a emen s. This p o ides he s a is ical p ope ies
(speci ically mean and s anda d de ia ion, S De ) o each s a emen asked, as a as he
dis ibu ion o he da apoin s on he Like scale is conce ned. Addi ionally, analyzing hese
esul s gi es an oppo uni y o assess whe he hey could be domina ed by ce ain alues o
no . As a second s ep in he analysis o s a is ical p ope ies i was designed o look a he
di e ence o means be o e and a e he cou se. This would allow ex ac ing an indica ion
abou he impac o a aining cou se. The basis o analysis is me acogni i e awa eness o
s uden s be o e he cou se. On he basis o clus e s o med he changes in me acogni i e
awa eness we e assessed also a e he cou se. And also, he p o ile o s uden s we e analysed
acco ding o he cluse e s o med.
In o de o analyse he esul s o he ques ionnai e o cogni i e adap abili y clus e analysis
has been used, he idea o which is ha objec s a e columned in o clus e s (g oups) in a way
ha one clus e consis s o objec s as simila as possible and hey would clea ly dis inguish
om he objec s in o he clus e s. In o de o ge he i s insigh s om he da a, he
agglome i i e comple e-linkage hie a chical clus e ing p ocedu e (Hall e al., 2009) was used
o isualize all he esponden s using a dend og am. The clus e analysis was ca ied ou also
using K-means me hod (MacQueen, 1967), in case o which he numbe o clus e s k has o be
de ined i s – acco ding o he in o ma ion gained om he heo e ical backg ound, he
esul s o hie achical clus e ing and conside ing he wi hin clus e sum o squa ed e o s, he
objec s we e di ided in o i e g oups. K-means is a combina o ial da a analysis pa i ional
clus e ing me hod, whe e he objec i e unc ion is o maximize he in a-clus e simila i y and
minimize he in e -clus e simila i y. Simila i y unc ion o his esea ch was chosen o be
Eucledian dis ance, which was compa ible wi h Like scale. As a esul o clus e analysis,
each esponden was assigned o a g oup o simila s uden s. The in o ma ion abou ha
clus e was added as a new a ibu e o e e y pe son in a da abase, allowing o pe o m a
ollow-up analysis o e e y such an objec o clus e .
3. Resul s
3.1. Me acogni i e awa eness o s uden s
In he cu en s udy he le el o me acogni i e awa eness o s uden s has been iden i ied
based on he Haynie's cogni i e adap abili y ques ionnai e (Annex1). In o de o p esen he
e idences he linea s a is ical analysis has been u ilised in he ame o mean alues and
s anda d de ia ions o each 5 me acogni i e ca ego ies (Table1). The o al mean alues
(column2) e ie ed be o e he aining cou se indica es ha he pa icipan s a ed he le el o
all hei me ocogni i e abili ies qui e high (mo e han 6 poin s on 10-s ep scale). This allows
o d aw an assump ion ha on a e age he s uden s we e (based on hei own judgemen s)
al eady be o e he aining cou se signi ican ly awa e o hei hinking and easoning pa e ns.
Howe e , when looking a his mo e closely i is e iden ha skills ela ed o goal o ien a ion
and me acogni i e knowledge ecei ed highe a ings han o he s. A he same ime he skills
ela ed o he abili ies o choosing be ween mul iply op ions ( he ca ego y "me acogni i e
choice") ecei ed he lowes anking on a e age. Fu he mo e, when looking a he esul s
a e he aining (column2) i is e iden ha he a ings ha e inc eased in all me acogni i e
ca ego ies (ie all he a ings a e abo e 7 poin s). The ac ha me acogni i e abili ies ha e
inc eased a e he aining, suppo s he indings o Haynie e al (2004; 2007) which posi ed
ha lea ning has signi ican impac o me acogni i e abili ies and i enhances he
pe o mance.
Table 1. A e age sco es o s uden s a ings be o e and a e he aining cou se on
en ep eneu ship educa ion
To al
Logis ics
Na u al
Sciences
Technical
Sciences
Mean
S De
Mean
S De
Mean
S De
Mean
S De
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Be o e he aining
Goal O ien a ion
7.6
1.342
7.7
1.293
7.5
1.511
7.6
1.221
Me acogni i e knowledge
7.5
.960
7.6
.808
7.5
.960
7.4
1.113
Me acogni i e expe ience
7.3
1.121
7.5
.927
7.1
1.180
7.2
1.255
Me acogni i e choice
6.8
1.400
6.9
1.198
6.6
1.491
6.9
1.510
Moni o ing
7.1
1.212
6.9
1.118
7.0
1.182
7.2
1.335
A e he aining
Goal O ien a ion
7.9
1.100
8.0
1.008
7.7
1.267
8.0
1.026
Me acogni i e knowledge
7.8
.907
7.9
.888
7.7
.943
7.7
.890
Me acogni i e expe ience
7.6
1.036
7.8
.878
7.5
1.150
7.5
1.081
Me acogni i e choice
7.1
1.454
7.1
1.393
7.1
1.528
7.1
1.443
Moni o ing
7.5
1.219
7.6
1.127
7.3
1.191
7.4
1.340
No e: The scale o 1-10 is used, whe e 1 being equal o "No e y much like me" and 10 being equal o "Ve y
much like me". Sou ce: au ho s’ compila ion
By compa ing he a e age a ings in he ame o he s udy-disciplines i can be seen ha
s uden s s uding logis ics domina e wi h high sco es in almos e e y me acogni i e ca ego y
bo h be o e and a e he aining (column4). Technical sciences s uden s indica e he
compa able sco es be o e he aining only in ca ego y "me acogni i e choice" (column8, 6.9
poin s) and a e he aining in "goal o ien a ion" (8.0 poin s). I is ema kable also ha
a iance o a ings o logis ics-s uden s (column5) emain on a e age lowe compa ed o
s uden s s uding na u al (column7) o echnical sciences (column9). This indica es ha
logis ics-s uden s a e bo h mo e awa e o hei easoning pa e ns and hey do no ha e on
a e age so much di e en opinions han s uden s o o he disciplines.
The esul s o clus e ing using K-means me hod p o ided us he g oups wi h a leas 40
s uden s in each o hem (Table2). Looking a he g oups close e eals ha based on he
mean alues calcula ed o each o he i e me acogni i e cons uc s bo h be o e and a e he
aining he highes alues we e indica ed by s uden s belonging o clus e 2 (columns 4&5).
Membe s o his g oup exp essed he highes sco es in all he ca ego ies (ie goal o ien a ion,
me acogni i e knowledge, me acogni i e expe ience, me acogni i e choice and moni o ing).
A he same ime he lowes alues be o e he aining we e gi en mos ly by s uden s in he
clus e 3 (excep in he domain o me acogni i e knowledge whe e lowes esul s a e indica ed
by clus e 4). Howe e , in o de o desc ibe he me acogni i e abili ies and awa eness o
s uden s i is necessa y o ake a look mo e a he indi idual s a emen s as i allows o p esen
se e al in e es ing aspec s cha ac e ising s uden s.
Table 2. Analysis o me acogni i e awa eness o s uden s be o e and a e he cou se on
en ep eneu ship educa ion using K-means clus e ing me hod
clus e 1
clus e 2
clus e 3
clus e 4
clus e 5
be o e
a e
be o e
a e
be o e
a e
be o e
a e
be o e
a e
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Coun
68
52
40
49
71
Goal O ien a ion
1
8.0
8.1
9.3
8.9
6.8
7.4
8.4
8.5
7.5
8.2
2
8.2
8.1
9.3
8.8
6.7
7.1
8.0
8.3
7.8
8.0
3
7.4
7.5
8.9
8.9
5.5
6.6
7.9
7.9
7.0
7.7
4
7.2
7.6
8.9
8.6
4.7
6.3
7.7
7.7
7.3
7.8
5
7.3
7.7
9.0
8.6
5.1
6.4
7.4
7.9
7.3
7.7
Mean
7.6
7.8
9.1
8.8
5.8
6.8
7.9
8.1
7.4
7.9
Me acogni i e knowledge
6
8.2
7.5
9.1
8.9
7.0
7.2
8.0
8.1
8.0
8.6
Fo una o, V.J., Goldbla , A.M. (2006). "An Examina ion o Goal O ien a ion P o iles Using
Clus e Analysis and Thei Rela ionships Wi h Disposi ional Cha ac e is ics and
Mo i a ional Response Pa e ns." Jou nal o Applied Social Psychology, 36(9): 2150-
2183
Ga ne , W.B. (1989). "Some Sugges ions o Resea ch on En ep eneu ial T ai s and
Cha ac e is ics". En ep eneu ship: Theo y & P ac ice, 14(1): 27-37
Gelde en, M., Jansen, P., Jonges, S. (2003). "The mul iple sou ces o au onomy as a s a up
mo i e". SCALES-pape N200315;
Godshalk, V.M., Sosik. J.J. (2003). "Aiming o ca ee success: The ole o lea ning goal
o ien a ion in men o ing ela ionships." Jou nal o Voca ional Beha io , 63(3): 417-
437
Hall, M., F ank, E., Holmes,G., P ah inge , B., Reu emann, P., Wi en, I.H., (2009). "The
WEKA Da a Mining So wa e: An Upda e"; SIGKDD Explo a ions. 11(1): 10-18
Haynie, J. M., G ego ie, D., & Shephe d, D.A. (2004). "In o ming en ep eneu ial cogni ion:
he ole o me acogni ion and analogical aining in s a egic decision-making."
Ob ained h ough Social Science Resea ch Ne wo k,
(h p://pape s.ss n.com/sol3/pape s.c m?abs ac _id=1768018);
Haynie, J.M., & Shephe d, D.A. (2007). "Explo ing he En ep eneu ial Mindse : Feedback
and Adap i e Decision-Making." Pape p esen ed a Babson College En ep eneu ship
Resea ch Con e ence (BCERC) and ob ained h ough Social Science Resea ch
Ne wo k (h p://pape s.ss n.com/sol3/pape s.c m?abs ac _id=1030014);
Haynie, J.M., Shephe d, D.A., Pa zel , H. (2010). "Cogni i e Adap abili y and an
En ep eneu ial Task: The Role o Me acogni i e Abili y and Feedback."
En ep eneu shipTheo y and P ac ice. (Fo hcoming)
His ich, R.D, & Pe e s, M.P. (1989). En ep eneu ship. S a ing, De eloping and Managing a
New En e p ise. USA: Richa d D. I win Inc.;
His ich, R.D., Pe e s, M.P., & Shephe d, D.A. (2007) "The En ep eneu ial Mind-se " In
En ep eneu ship (7 h ed). McG aw-Hill, 640p.;
Ibabe, I., Jau egiza , J. (2010). "Online sel -assessmen wi h eedback and me acogni i e
knowledge" Highe Educa ion, 59(2): 243-258
Jos , J.T., K uglanski, A.W., & Nelson, T.O. (1998). "Social Me acogni ion: An Expansionis
Re iew" Pe sonali y and Social Psychology Re iew. 2(2): 137-154
Klei man, S., S anko , L. (2007). "Sel -con idence and me acogni i e p ocesses." Lea ning
and Indi idual Di e encies. 17(2): 161-173
K onenbe g, C. (2005). "En ep eneu ial Values in Small and Medium Sized En e p ises –
E idence om Aus ia." Jou nal o Small Business Managemen 43(4):. 453–479
MacQueen, J. (1967). "Some me hods o classi ica ion and analysis o mul i a ia e
obse a ions". In LeCam. L. and Neyman. J.. edi o s. P oceedings o he Fi h
Be keley Symposium on Ma hema ical s a is ics and p obabili y, olume 1, 281-297.
Be keley. Uni e si y o Cali o nia P ess;
McWhaw, K., Ab ami, P.C. (2001) "S uden Goal O ien a ion and In e es : E ec s on
S uden s‟ Use o Sel -Regula ed Lea ning S a egies." Con empo a y Educa ional
Psychology, 26(3): 311-329
Mi chell, J.R., Gus a sson, V., Smi h, J.B., Da idsson, P., & Mi chell, R.K. (2005). "Thinking
abou hinking abou hinking: Explo ing how en ep eneu ial me acogni ion a ec s
en ep eneu ial expe ise". Babson Con e ence. Wellesley. MA.
h p://www. onaldmi chell.o g/publica ions/ .pd ;
Nga, J.K.H., Shamugana han, G. (2010). "The In luence o Pe sonali y T ai s and
Demog aphic Fac o s on Social En ep eneu ship S a Up In en ions." Jou nal o
Business E hics, 95(2): 259-282;

Nelson, T.O.; Na ens, L.(1994). "U iliza ion o me acogni i e judgmen s in he alloaa ion o
s udy du ing mul i ial lea ning". Psychological Science, 5(4): 207-213
Pillis, E., Rea don. K. (2007). "The in luence o pe sonali y ai s and pe suasi e messages on
en ep eneu ial in en ion." Ca ee De elopmen In e na ional, 12(4): 382-396
Pin ich, P.R. (2002). "The Role o Me acogni i e Knowledge in Lea ning. Teaching. and
Assessing". Theo y in o P ac ice. 41(4): 219-225
Pin ich, P.R. (2000). "Mul iple Goals. Mul iple Pa hways: The Role o Goal O ien a ion in
Lea ning and Achie emen ". Jou nal o Educa ional Psychology, 92(3): 544-555
Ramocki, S.P. (2007). "Me acogni ion and T ans e : Keys o Imp o ing Ma ke ing
Educa ion". Jou nal o Ma ke ing Educa ion. 29(1): 18-24
Rasheed, S.H. (2000). "De eloping En ep eneu ial Cha ac e is ics in You h: The E ec s o
Educa ion and En e p ise Expe ience", In e na ional Jou nal o En ep eneu ship
Educa ion. 14(1): 89-101
Sch aw, G. (1998). "P omo ing Gene al Me acogni i e Awa eness". Ins uc ional Science, 26
(1-2): 113-125
Sch aw, G.; Moshman, D.(1995). "Me acogni i e Theo ies" Educa ional Psychology Re iew,
7(4): 351-372
Schmid , A.M., Fo d, J.K., (2003) "Lea ning Wi hin a Lea ne Con ol T aining En i onmen :
The In e ac i e E ec s o Goal O ien a ion and Me acogni i e Ins uc ion on Lea ning
Ou comes", Pe sonnel Psychology, 56(2): 405-429
Segal, G., Bo gia, D., Schoen eld, J. (2005). "The mo i a ion o become an en ep eneu ."
In e na ional Jou nal o En ep eneu ial Beha iou & Resea ch, 11(1): 42-57
Tyszka, T., Cieślik, J., Domu a , A., Macko, A. (2011). "Mo i a ion, sel -e icacy, and isk
a i udes among en ep eneu s du ing ansi ion o a ma ke economy". Jou nal o
Socio-Economics. 40(2): 124-131;
Vandewalle, D. (2001). "Goal O ien a ion: Why Wan ing o Look Success ul Doesn‟ Always
Lead o Success." O ganiza ional Dynamics. 30(2): 162-171
Venesaa , U., Kolb e, E., Pilis e, T. (2006) "A i udes and in en ions o S uden s owa d
En ep eneu ship: A Case o Es onia". The pape is p esen ed a he EISB2006
Con e ence in Sou hamp on, UK;
Ve me en, Y.J., Lodewijks, H.G., Ve mun , J.D. (2001). "The Role o Pe sonali y T ai s and
Goal O ien a ions in S a egy Use". Con empo a y Educa ional Psychology. 26(2):
149-170
V ug , A., Oo , F.J. (2008). "Me acogni ion, Achie emen Goals, S udy S a egies and
Academic Achie emen : Pa hways o Achie emen ". Me acogni ion Lea ning. 3(2):
123-146
Annex1 Cogni i e adap abili y ques ions
1.I o en de ine goals o mysel
2. I unde s and how accomplishmen o a ask ela es o my goals
3. I se speci ic goals be o e I begin a ask
4. I ask mysel how well I ha e accomplished my goals once I ha e inished
5. When pe o ming a ask, I equen ly assess my p og ess agains may objec i es
6. I hink o se e al ways o sol e a p oblem and choose he bes one
7. I challenge my own assump ions abou a ask be o e I begin
8. I hink abou how o he s may eac o my ac ions
9. I ind mysel au oma ically employing s a egies ha ha e wo ked in he pas
10. I pe o m bes when I al eady ha e knowledge o he ask
11. I c ea e my own examples o make in o ma ion mo e meaning ul
12. I y o use s a egies ha ha e wo ked in he pas
13. I ask mysel ques ions abou he ask be o e I begin
14. I y o ansla e new in o ma ion in o my own wo ds
15. I y o b eak p oblems down in o smalle componen s
16. I ocus on he meaning and signi icance o new in o ma ion
17. I hink abou wha I eally need o accomplish be o e I begin a ask
18. I use di e en di e en s a egies depending on he si ua ion
19. I o ganise my ime o bes accomplish my goals
20. I am good a o ganising in o ma ion
21. I know wha kind o in o ma ion is mos impo an o
conside when aced wi h a p oblem
22. I consciously ocus my a en ion on impo an in o ma ion
23. My "gu " ells me when a gi en s a egy I use will be mos e ec i e
24. I depend on my in ui ion o help me o mula e s a egies
25. I ask mysel i I ha e conside ed all he op ions when sol ing a p oblem
26. I ask mysel i he e was an easie way o do hings a e I inish a ask
27. I ask mysel i I ha e conside ed all he op ions a e I sol e a p oblem
28. I e-e alua e my assump ions when I ge con used
29. I ask mysel i I ha e lea ned as much as I could ha e a e I inish he ask
30. I pe iodically e iew o help me unde s and impo an ela ionships
31. I s op and go back o e in o ma ion ha is no clea
32. I am awa e o wha s a egies I use when engaged in agi en ask
33. I ind mysel analysing he use ulness o a gi en s a egy while engaged in a gi en ask
34. I ind mysel pausing egula ly o check my comp ehension o he p oblem I si ua ed a hand
35. I ask mysel ques ions abou how well I am doing while I am pe o ming a no el ask. I s op and e- ead
when I ge con used
Sou ce: adop ed om His ich, R.D., Pe e s, M.P., & Shephe d, D.A. (2007)