Exploresearch (ISSN: 3048-815X) ( Vol. 03 | No. 3 | July - September, 2026 )

Sustaining Entrepreneurial Intention Beyond the Founding Threshold: A Desirability–Feasibility–Legibility Framework from Operating Founders in India

Author: Ms. Monika Gupta, Prof. (Dr.) Vaishali Sharma & Prof. (Dr.) Namita Rajput

Purpose: Research on entrepreneurial intention has been built almost entirely on people who have not yet established their ventures. This study asks what sustains the intention of founders who already operate young ventures and develops a framework linking that intention to new venture development and sustainable performance (SP). Design/ Methodology/ Approach: Survey data from 457 founders running ventures of approximately two years’ standing in Delhi, Gurugram, and Noida (India) were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modelling. Seven antecedents were organized into three forces: desirability, feasibility, and institutional legibility. Founders also rated the severity of 15 challenges in new venture development. Findings: Six of the seven antecedents predicted sustained intention (R² = 0.727; Q² = 0.705), while one did not. Feasibility factors had the highest explanatory weights. Attitude was the strongest single predictor, whereas social influence had no effect (β = 0.003). The factors that the founders endorsed most strongly were not the ones that best predicted their future intention. Access to finance was the second strongest driver of intention and the most significant challenge faced by the entrepreneurs. Research Limitations and Implications: The data were cross-sectional, self-reported, and drawn from a single metropolitan area. The links between intention, venture development, and performance are proposed for future research. Practical Implications: Support for early stage founders should shift from promoting entrepreneurship to making ventures feasible, particularly through non-bank finance channels and founders’ investor communication capabilities. This study re-examines entrepreneurial intention after founding, adds institutional legibility as an individual-level antecedent, and distinguishes what founders possess from what distinguishes them from others.

Gupta, M., Sharma, V. & Rajput, N. (2026). Sustaining Entrepreneurial Intention Beyond the Founding Threshold: A Desirability–Feasibility–Legibility Framework from Operating Founders in India. Exploresearch, 03(03), 90–103. https://doi.org/10.62823/exre/03.03.259

  1. Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211, doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
  2. Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D. and Wright, M. (2014), “Entrepreneurial innovation: the importance of context”, Research Policy, Vol. 43 No. 7, pp. 1097-1108, doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.01.015.
  3. Bandura, A. (1997), Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control, W.H. Freeman, New York, NY.
  4. Bird, B. (1988), “Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: the case for intention”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 442-453, doi: 10.5465/amr.1988.4306970.
  5. Block, J.H., Colombo, M.G., Cumming, D.J. and Vismara, S. (2018), “New players in entrepreneurial finance and why they are there”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 239-250, doi: 10.1007/s11187-016-9826-6.
  6. Bruton, G.D., Ahlstrom, D. and Obloj, K. (2008), “Entrepreneurship in emerging economies: where are we today and where should the research go in the future”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
  7. Cardon, M.S. and Kirk, C.P. (2015), “Entrepreneurial passion as mediator of the self-efficacy to persistence relationship”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 1027-1050.
  8. Chen, C.C., Greene, P.G. and Crick, A. (1998), “Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers?”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 295-316, doi: 10.1016/S0883-9026(97)00029-3.
  9. Donaldson, C. (2019), “Intentions resurrected: a systematic review of entrepreneurial intention research from 2014 to 2018 and future research agenda”, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 953-975.
  10. Douglas, E.J. (2013), “Reconstructing entrepreneurial intentions to identify predisposition for growth”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 633-651.
  11. Dutta, D.K. and Thornhill, S. (2008), “The evolution of growth intentions: toward a cognition-based model”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 307-332.
  12. Estrin, S., Korosteleva, J. and Mickiewicz, T. (2013), “Which institutions encourage entrepreneurial growth aspirations?”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 564-580.
  13. Fisher, G., Kuratko, D.F., Bloodgood, J.M. and Hornsby, J.S. (2017), “Legitimate to whom? The challenge of audience diversity and new venture legitimacy”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 52-71, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.10.005.
  14. Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2022), A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 3rd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
  15. Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2019), “When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM”, European Business Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 2-24, doi: 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203.
  16. Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 115-135, doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
  17. Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2016), “Testing measurement invariance of composites using partial least squares”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 405-431, doi: 10.1108/IMR-09-2014-0304.
  18. Holland, D.V. and Shepherd, D.A. (2013), “Deciding to persist: adversity, values, and entrepreneurs’ decision policies”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 331-358.
  19. Karabulut, A.T. (2016), “Personality traits on entrepreneurial intention”, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 229, pp. 12-21, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.109.
  20. Kautonen, T., van Gelderen, M. and Fink, M. (2015), “Robustness of the theory of planned behavior in predicting entrepreneurial intentions and actions”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 655-674, doi: 10.1111/etap.12056.
  21. Khanna, T. and Palepu, K. (1997), “Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 75 No. 4, pp. 41-51.
  22. Kibler, E., Kautonen, T. and Fink, M. (2014), “Regional social legitimacy of entrepreneurship: implications for entrepreneurial intention and start-up behaviour”, Regional Studies, Vol. 48 No. 6, pp. 995-1015.
  23. Kock, N. (2015), “Common method bias in PLS-SEM: a full collinearity assessment approach”, International Journal of e-Collaboration, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 1-10.
  24. Kock, N. and Hadaya, P. (2018), “Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: the inverse square root and gamma-exponential methods”, Information Systems Journal, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 227-261, doi: 10.1111/isj.12131.
  25. Krueger, N.F., Reilly, M.D. and Carsrud, A.L. (2000), “Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 15 Nos 5-6, pp. 411-432, doi: 10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00033-0.
  26. Liñán, F. and Chen, Y.-W. (2009), “Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 593-617, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00318.x.
  27. Liñán, F. and Fayolle, A. (2015), “A systematic literature review on entrepreneurial intentions: citation, thematic analyses, and research agenda”, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 907-933.
  28. Meek, W.R., Pacheco, D.F. and York, J.G. (2010), “The impact of social norms on entrepreneurial action: evidence from the environmental entrepreneurship context”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 493-509.
  29. Murray, J. et al. (2018), “Innovative solutions through innovated problems”, International Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 34 No. 2(B), pp. 695-707.
  30. Nabi, G., Liñán, F., Fayolle, A., Krueger, N. and Walmsley, A. (2017), “The impact of entrepreneurship education in higher education: a systematic review and research agenda”, Academy of Management Learning and Education, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 277-299.
  31. Nambisan, S. (2017), “Digital entrepreneurship: toward a digital technology perspective of entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 1029-1055, doi: 10.1111/etap.12254.
  32. North, D.C. (1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  33. Nunez, M. et al. (2022), “EntreComp questionnaire: a self-assessment tool for entrepreneurship competencies,” Sustainability, Vol. 14 No. 5, 2983.
  34. Panizales et al. (2024), “Perceived access to finance and entrepreneurial self-efficacy as antecedents of entrepreneurial intention among millennial employees,” Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 598-608, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10935864.
  35. Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
  36. Rindfleisch, A., Malter, A.J., Ganesan, S. and Moorman, C. (2008), “Cross-sectional versus longitudinal survey research: concepts, findings, and guidelines”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 261-279, doi: 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.261.
  37. Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2016), “Gain more insight from your PLS-SEM results: the importance-performance map analysis”, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 116 No. 9, pp. 1865-1886, doi: 10.1108/IMDS-10-2015-0449.
  38. Sarstedt, M., Hair, J.F., Cheah, J.-H., Becker, J.-M. and Ringle, C.M. (2019), “How to specify, estimate, and validate higher-order constructs in PLS-SEM”, Australasian Marketing Journal, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 197-211.
  39. Schlaegel, C. and Koenig, M. (2014), “Determinants of entrepreneurial intent: a meta-analytic test and integration of competing models”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 291-332.
  40. Shah, I.A., Amjed, S. and Jaboob, S. (2020), “The moderating role of entrepreneurship education in shaping entrepreneurial intentions”, Journal of Economic Structures, Vol. 9, 19, doi: 10.1186/s40008-020-00195-4.
  41. Shane, S. (2000), “Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities”, Organization Science, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 448-469, doi: 10.1287/orsc.11.4.448.14602.
  42. Shapero, A. and Sokol, L. (1982), “The social dimensions of entrepreneurship”, in Kent, C.A., Sexton, D.L. and Vesper, K.H. (Eds), Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 72-90.
  43. Shepherd, D.A., Souitaris, V. and Gruber, M. (2021), “Creating new ventures: a review and research agenda”, Journal of Management, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 11-42, doi: 10.1177/0149206319900537.
  44. Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J.F., Cheah, J.-H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S. and Ringle, C.M. (2019), “Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using PLSpredict”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53 No. 11, pp. 2322-2347, doi: 10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189.
  45. Stenholm, P., Acs, Z.J. and Wuebker, R. (2013), “Exploring country-level institutional arrangements on the rate and type of entrepreneurial activity”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 176-193.
  46. Stinchcombe, A.L. (1965), “Social structure and organizations”, in March, J.G. (Ed.), Handbook of Organizations, Rand McNally, Chicago, IL, pp. 142-193.
  47. Svotwa, T.D., Jaiyeoba, O., Roberts-Lombard, M. and Makanyeza, C. (2022), “Perceived access to finance, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, attitude toward entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial ability, and entrepreneurial intention: a Botswana youth perspective”, SAGE Open, Vol. 12 No. 2, doi: 10.1177/21582440221096437.
  48. Überbacher, F. (2014), “Legitimation of new ventures: a review and research programme”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 667-698, doi: 10.1111/joms.12077.
  49. Unger, J.M., Rauch, A., Frese, M. and Rosenbusch, N. (2011), “Human capital and entrepreneurial success: a meta-analytical review”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 341-358, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.09.004.
  50. Whetten, D.A. (1989), “What constitutes a theoretical contribution?”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 490-495, doi: 10.5465/amr.1989.4308371.

DOI:

Article DOI: 10.62823/exre/03.03.259

DOI URL: https://doi.org/10.62823/exre/03.03.259

Download Full Paper:
Download PDF