Description
Within this brief file with regards to global entrepreneurship monitor finnish 2013 report.
Turun kauppakorkeakoulu Turku School of Economics
Turun kauppakorkeakoulu Turku School of Economics
ISBN 978-952-249-358-3 (painettu)
978-952-249-359-0 (verkkojulkaisu)
GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP MONITOR
– Finnish 2013 Report
Stenholm, Pekka – Suomalainen, Sanna – Kovalainen, Anne –
Heinonen, Jarna – Pukkinen, Tommi
G
L
O
B
A
L
E
N
T
R
E
P
R
E
N
E
U
R
S
H
I
P
M
O
N
I
T
O
R
–
F
i
n
n
i
s
h
2
0
1
3
R
e
p
o
r
t
|
S
t
e
n
h
o
l
m
,
P
e
k
k
a
–
S
u
o
m
a
l
a
i
n
e
n
,
S
a
n
n
a
–
K
o
v
a
l
a
i
n
e
n
,
A
n
n
e
–
H
e
i
n
o
n
e
n
,
J
a
r
n
a
–
P
u
k
k
i
n
e
n
,
T
o
m
m
i
GEM_raportti Kansi 9 June 2014 2:18 PM
1
TURUN YLIOPISTON KAUPPAKORKEAKOULU
TSE ENTRE
TURKU SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS, UNIVERSITY OF TURKU
TSE ENTRE
SARJA A TUTKIMUSRAPORTTEJA
SERIES A RESEARCH REPORTS
A 1 / 2014
Stenholm, Pekka – Suomalainen, Sanna – Kovalainen, Anne –
Heinonen, Jarna – Pukkinen, Tommi
GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP
MONITOR
Finnish 2013 Report
2
Funding for the Finnish GEM 2013 study is provided by the Ministry of Employment and the
Economy and Turku School of Economics, University of Turku.
Although data used in this work is collected by the GEM consortium, the analysis and
interpretation of the data is on the sole responsibility of the authors.
Copyright © Global Entrepreneurship Research Association;
Financiers; Turku School of Economics, University of Turku; Pekka Stenholm,
Sanna Suomalainen, Anne Kovalainen, Jarna Heinonen and Tommi Pukkinen
ISBN 978-952-249-358-3 (nid.)
978-952-249-359-0 (pdf)
ISSN 1797-8386
Uniprint Oy
Turku
3
TIIVISTELMÄ YDINTULOKSISTA
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) 2013 -tutkimus tarkastelee erityisesti,
kuinka Suomi sijoittuu innovaatiovetoisten talouksien joukossa. Ainutlaatuinen GEM
tutkimus tutkii yrittäjyysaktiivisuutta ja uuden yritystoiminnan perustamista
väestötasolla sekä yrittäjyyden puitetekijöitä 26 maassa. Seuraavassa tiivistetään
Suomea koskevat keskeiset tulokset muihin innovaatiovetoisiin talouksiin verrattuna.
1. Yrittäjyyspotentiaali Suomessa
Väestötasolla liiketoimintamahdollisuuksien havaitseminen on Suomessa edelleenkin
korkeampaa kuin useimmissa muissa innovaatiovetoisissa talouksissa: Suomi on
kahdeksas innovaatiotalouksien joukossa. 44% aikuisväestöstä tunnistaa hyviä
liiketoimintamahdollisuuksia ympäristössään. Tässä vertailussa eniten
liiketoimintamahdollisuuksia tunnistetaan Ruotsissa (64%). Myös Norjassa (64%),
Kanadassa (57%), Yhdysvalloissa (47%), Israelissa (47%) ja Luxemburgissa (46%)
tunnistetaan liiketoimintamahdollisuuksia hyvin.
Joka kolmas suomalaisessa aikuisväestössä uskoo, että hänellä on yrityksen
perustamiseen ja johtamiseen liittyviä taitoja. Innovaatiovetoisista maista esimerkiksi
USA:ssa (55%), Sloveniassa (52%) ja Portugalissa (49%) nämä taidot ovat
yleisempiä. Suomi on 21. innovaatiovetoisten talouksien vertailussa jää hieman
esimerkiksi Ruotsin (39%) ja Norjan (34%) jälkeen.
GEM-tutkimuksessa selvitetään myös epäonnistumisen pelkoa, joka voi heikentää
yrittäjäksi ryhtymistä. Suomessa 37% työikäisistä aikuisista pelkää epäonnistumista,
kun vastaavaa osuus esimerkiksi Kreikassa on 49% ja Irlannissa 40%. Kaikista
innovaatiovetoisista maista Suomi sijoittuu Alankomaiden ja Ruotsin kanssa samalle
tasolle.
Seuraavan kolmen vuoden aikana yrittäjäksi aikovia on suomalaisessa aikuisväestössä
8%. Muihin innovaatiovetoisin talouksiin verrattuna osuus on verrattain alhainen.
Taiwanissa lähes 28% aikuisväestöstä aikoo yrittäjäksi, kun taas Norjassa osuus on
5%. Muista vertailumaista Israelissa (24%), Singaporessa (15%) ja esimerkiksi
Kanadassa (14%) yrittäjyysintentiot ovat korkeammat kuin innovaatiovetoisissa
maissa keskimäärin.
4
2. Yrittäjyysaktiivisuus
Myönteisistä asenteista ja aikomuksista huolimatta aikuisväestö perustaa Suomessa
varovaisesti uusia yrityksiä: runsaat 5% aikuisväestöstä on aloittamassa uutta
yritystoimintaa. Suomi jää vertailumaista hieman jälkeen sijoittuen 20:nneksi, Kreikan
ja Espanjan väliin. Yhdysvalloissa uutta yritystoimintaa aloittaa lähes 13% ja
Kanadassa 12%. Alkavien yrittäjien osuuteen verrattuna yli 3,5 vuotta yrittäjinä
toimineita Suomessa on hieman enemmän, vajaa 7%. Tässä vertailussa Suomi
sijoittuu Yhdysvaltojen (8%) ja Iso-Britannian (6,6%) väliin. Vertailumaista
kauemmin yrittäjinä toimineiden osuus on korkein Kreikassa (13%). Suomessa uusia
yrityksiä perustavat suhteellisen usein korkeasti koulutetut, mutta tässä vertailussa
Suomi jää selvästi esimerkiksi Sveitsin (10%) tai Alankomaiden (7%) jälkeen. Yli
ajan tarkasteltuna uusien yritysten perustaminen vaihtelee vuosittain erityisesti
miesten keskuudessa, kun naisten keskuudessa aktiivisuus on lähes samaa tasoa
vuodesta toiseen.
3. Yrittäjien tavoitteet
Suomalaisten yrittäjien kasvutavoitteet ovat maltillisia. Korkeaa kasvua (yli 20 uutta
työpaikkaa seuraavan viiden vuoden aikana) tavoittelee noin 8,5% uusista yrittäjistä.
Tämä on selvästi vähemmän kuin innovaatiovetoisissa talouksissa keskimäärin.
Innovaatiovetoisten talouksien vertailussa Suomi sijoittuu 15. Portugalin (10%) ja
Ruotsin (8%) väliin. Muista vertailumaista esimerkiksi Taiwanissa (30%), Japanissa
(26%), Singaporessa (24%) ja Israelissa (14%) huomattavasti useampi uusi yrittäjä
tavoittelee kasvua.
Kansainvälistymispyrkimyksiä GEM-tutkimuksessa tarkastellaan yrittäjän
kansainvälisten asiakkaiden osuudella. Yrittäjää pidetään kansainvälisenä, mikäli
vähintään 25% asiakkaista on muualta kuin yrittäjän kotimaasta. Näin tarkastellen
Suomessa alkuvaiheen yrittäjistä vain 10%:lla on kansainvälistymispyrkimyksiä –
tällä osuudella Suomi sijoittuu neljänneksi viimeiseksi innovaatiovetoisten talouksien
vertailussa. Esimerkiksi Singaporessa uusista yrittäjistä 37% toimii kansainvälisillä
markkinoilla.
GEM-tutkimuksessa innovaatiohakuisena pidetään yrittäjiä, jotka tähtäävät uusilla
tuotteilla uusille markkinoille. Suomalaisista uusista yrittäjistä vajaat 22% on
innovaatiohakuisia – Suomi sijoittuu innovaatiovetoisten talouksien vertailussa sijalle
20. Esimerkiksi Luxemburgissa 48% ja Yhdysvalloissa 34% uusista ovat
innovaatiohakuisia.
5
4. Yrittäjyyden puitetekijät ja merkitys
Vuosittain GEM-tutkimuksessa selvitetään kansallisten asiantuntijoiden näkemyksiä
yrittäjyyden olosuhteista. Innovaatiovetoisten talouksien vertailussa Suomi on
asiantuntijoiden mukaan kilpailukykyinen ja yritystoiminnalle suotuisa talous.
Kansalliset asiantuntijat arvioivat yrittäjyyspolitiikan ja säätelyn yrittäjyyttä tukevaksi,
ja tukea kohdennetaan erityisesti kasvuyrittäjyyteen. Asiantuntijoiden mielestä
suomalainen aikuisväestö havaitsee hyvin liiketoimintamahdollisuuksia, ja
markkinoille tuloa pidetään helppona useammin kuin muissa innovaatiovetoisissa
talouksissa. Jo pitkään ilmassa ollut ’start-up intoilu’ ei kuitenkaan näy riittävässä
määrin realisoituvan uudeksi ja innovatiiviseksi liiketoiminnaksi.
On hyvä muistaa, että yrittäjyyskeskustelu ei rajoitu uuden yritystoiminnan
synnyttämiseen ja olemassa olevan liiketoiminnan kasvattamiseen. Yrittäjyyttä on
myös yksilön yrittäjämäinen toiminta olemassa olevassa organisaatiossa. Suomessa
onkin enemmän työntekijän yrittäjämäistä toimintaa kuin aloittavaa yritystoimintaa.
Kenties tätä potentiaalia ei ole vielä riittävästi hyödynnetty?
Yrittäjyyden merkitys ei myöskään rajoitu vain talouden kasvuun. GEM-tutkimuksen
perusteella yrittäjät ovat muita työntekijöitä tyytyväisempiä työhönsä ja
hyvinvointiinsa siitä huolimatta, että he ovat vähemmän tyytyväisiä työn ja muun
elämän tasapainoon. Yrittäjyydellä on monipuolisia vaikutuksia yhteiskuntaan,
talouteen ja yksilöiden elämään. Tämän vuoksi yrittäjyyden edistäminen on
kokonaisvaltaista ja pitkäjänteistä työtä talouden suhdanteista riippumatta.
6
Table of Contents
Tiivistelmä ydintuloksista ........................................................................................................................ 3
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 7
2 Finland – A Prime Member of Innovation-Driven Economies ........................................................ 8
2.1 Economic performance ........................................................................................................... 8
2.2 Business environment ........................................................................................................... 12
3 State of Entrepeneurial Potential ................................................................................................. 16
4 State of Entrepeneurial Activity .................................................................................................... 19
5 Entrepreneurs in Finland – Middle League Aspirations and Performance ................................... 21
6 Special Topics: ‘Subjective Well-Being’ and ‘Job Satisfaction’ ...................................................... 25
7 Portrait of Entrepreneurial Activity .............................................................................................. 34
7.1 Age and entrepreneurial activity .......................................................................................... 34
7.2 Gender and entrepreneurial activity .................................................................................... 36
7.3 Education and entrepreneurial activity ................................................................................ 38
8 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 40
References ............................................................................................................................................ 42
Appendix A: Definitions ........................................................................................................................ 44
Appendix B: Tables and Figures ............................................................................................................ 49
7
1 INTRODUCTION
How does the entrepreneurial potential look like in Finland in 2013? How many people did
start-up a new venture or made progress towards starting one in 2013? These questions and
many more will be answered in this report. The national report is based on the annual Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), a unique global assessment of entrepreneurial activity, and
it will focus on the annual results of entrepreneurial activity in Finland in 2013.
1
The report introduces the state-of-the-art figures of the emerging, new and established
entrepreneurship in Finland as a one of the innovation-driven economies globally. Moreover,
we will show how the various aspirations among new entrepreneurial activities in Finland
score globally within the innovation-driven economies. Additionally, we will look at the
perceptions of well-being among self-employed and employed individuals in Finland.
GEM is a major research project aimed at describing and analyzing different phases of
entrepreneurship as well as the profile of entrepreneurs within a wide range of countries.
GEM’s contribution to the knowledge and understanding of the entrepreneurial process is
unique since, to date, no other data set exists that can provide consistent cross-country
information and measurements of entrepreneurial activity in a global context.
In Finland, the GEM project is led by academy professor Anne Kovalainen and it is
conducted by researchers from Turku School of Economics at the University of Turku: Pekka
Stenholm, Anne Kovalainen, Jarna Heinonen, Sanna Suomalainen, and Tommi Pukkinen.
The Finnish GEM study is sponsored by the Ministry of Employment and the Economy and
the Turku School of Economics.
1
Monitoring started in 1999 with 10 participating countries, including Finland. Nowadays the GEM project has expanded to include
annually almost 70 countries covering opinions of over 140.000 adults. The GEM project analyses countries across the different stages of
economic development.
8
2 FINLAND – A PRIME MEMBER OF
INNOVATION-DRIVEN ECONOMIES
Key highlights
? Finland is still a competitive and business friendly economy among
studied innovation-driven economies
? Finland has a well-developed and well-functioning support system for
entrepreneurship: Finnish governmental policies, finance and education
are supportive for entrepreneurship
? Further, in Finland there is lot of support provided for female
entrepreneurs and high growth firms
? According to experts’ opinions Finnish adults are good at spotting
opportunities.
2.1 Economic performance
How does the institutional environment in Finland support and inhibit businesses to prosper,
and how does Finland perform among its peers when the state of the national economic
performance is compared across the innovation-driven economies?
In the following we focus on the innovation-driven economies
2
, where the basic physical and
commercial infrastructure is more or less opportune for entrepreneurial activities. In GEM the
countries participating to global study are different in complex ways: the differences between
GEM countries are vast when measured by GDP, by legal and by governance structures, or
when compared through their citizenship, their rights and possibilities, to mention some key
national differences. The differences in the economic and societal structures govern also the
so called entrepreneurial frameworks which vary across countries. The entrepreneurial
framework conditions are likely to affect the extent to which entrepreneurial opportunities are
discovered and exploited within a country (Levie and Autio, 2008). In innovation-driven
economies the assumption is that all frameworks function efficiently and offer support to
entrepreneurial activities.
2
In 2013 GEM data set innovation-driven economies comprise 26 out of 67 economies participating
GEM: Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan,
Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Singapore, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, Taiwan, Trinidad & Tobago, United Kingdom, and the USA.
9
There are different ways to classify a nation-state as driven by innovation. The GEM-study
follows the definition that focuses on country’s economic and institutional structure (see
Schwab and Sala-i-Martin, 2013; Amoros and Bosma, 2014). The business sector of an
innovation-driven economy consists to large extent of knowledge intensive businesses and an
expanding service sector. We acknowledge that the 26 GEM countries classified as
innovation-driven economies do not otherwise necessarily cluster with each other: the
societal, legal and cultural frameworks do not fulfill the similarity as in the definition of
innovation-driven economy.
3
Entrepreneurship acts as an essential part of the engine boosting economic performance of an
economy. To illustrate this and how innovation-driven economies show up among all
participating GEM-countries, we assess the relationship between early-stage entrepreneurship
and economic development (Figure 1). The early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA) rate is
defined as the percentage of individuals aged 18–64-years in an economy who are in the
process of starting or are already running new businesses which are 42 months old at most
4
.
By following Wennekers and the others’ (2005) approach the Figure 1 illustrates a U-shaped
relationship. In modern economies early-stage entrepreneurial activity increases along with
the economic development (Wennekers et al., 2010). In general, innovation-driven economies
score low in early-stage entrepreneurship, but entrepreneurial activities consist of different
kind of activities compared to less developed economies; in innovation-driven economies
entrepreneurial activity is more often motivated by opportunities than necessity, exploits
knowledge more than physical resources.
3
It is important to acknowledge that even if the studied economies are categorized in one group (see
Schwab and Sala-i-Martin, 2013), they differ from each other in terms of their economic and societal structure,
development and dependency of other countries, among other things. Rates and types of entrepreneurial activity
also vary widely globally. The reasons for, and the ways to explain this variance are plenty, ranging from
regional and national variation (e.g. Eckhart and Chiuchta, 2008; Stenholm et al., 2013a) to global division of
economic activities (e.g. Acemoglu and Robinson, 2012).
4
See the exact definition of early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA) in Appendix A: Glossary of main GEM
variables.
1
0
F
i
g
u
r
e
1
:
E
a
r
l
y
-
s
t
a
g
e
e
n
t
r
e
p
r
e
n
e
u
r
i
a
l
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
i
n
t
e
r
m
s
o
f
G
D
P
p
e
r
c
a
p
i
t
a
(
P
P
P
)
5
5
I
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n
-
d
r
i
v
e
n
e
c
o
n
o
m
i
e
s
a
r
e
m
a
r
k
e
d
w
i
t
h
g
r
e
e
n
d
o
t
s
;
F
i
n
l
a
n
d
i
s
m
a
r
k
e
d
w
i
t
h
a
r
e
d
o
n
e
.
L
e
s
s
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
e
c
o
n
o
m
i
e
s
a
r
e
m
a
r
k
e
d
w
i
t
h
b
l
u
e
d
i
a
m
o
n
d
s
.
11
When assessing the selected global indexes and GDP per capital (in purchasing power
parity), which are widely used in measuring the economic development, the innovation-
driven economies are far from a homogenous group. In addition to GDP, World Bank’s Ease
of Doing Business and World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index as well as
the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom are often used in comparing
economies (see Appendix A for definitions).Table 1 summarizes the group of innovation-
driven economies that participated in GEM in 2013, and shows their position when measured
with the related indexes. Among its’ innovation-driven peers Finland seems to continuously
offer relatively stable environment of starting, running and expanding a business.
Furthermore, Finland’s global status as a competitive economy is enduring, despite some
structural rigidity.
Table 1: Innovation-driven economies in GEM 2013 dataset and their ranking in other
global indexes
Country GDP per
cap in PPP
(US$)
a)
Global
Competitiveness
Index
b)
Ease of
Doing
Business
b)
Index of
Economic
Freedom
c)
Early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA)
Belgium 39 751 17 36 69.9 4.9
Canada 42 533 14 19 80.2 12.2
Czech Republic 26 698 46 75 72.2 7.3
Finland 38 721 3 12 73.4 5.3
France 36 104 23 38 63.5 4.6
Germany 38 696 4 21 73.4 5.0
Greece 25 331 91 72 55.7 5.5
Ireland 43 683 28 15 76.2 9.3
Israel 31 869 27 35 68.4 10.0
Italy 33 134 49 65 60.9 3.4
Japan 35 178 9 27 72.4 3.7
Korea 30 801 25 7 71.2 6.9
Luxembourg 88 286 22 60 74.2 8.7
Netherlands 43 105 8 28 74.2 9.3
Norway 65 640 11 9 70.9 6.3
Portugal 25 389 51 31 63.5 8.3
Puerto Rico 27 677 30 40 - 8.3
Singapore 60 800 2 1 89.4 10.7
Slovenia 27 474 62 33 62.7 6.5
Spain 32 043 35 52 67.2 5.2
Sweden 43 021 6 14 73.1 8.3
Switzerland 53 281 1 29 81.6 8.2
Taiwan 38 400 12 16 73.9 8.2
Trinidad and
Tobago
26 550 92 66 62.7 19.5
United Kingdom 37 456 10 10 74.9 7.1
USA 51 749 5 4 75.5 12.7
a)
GDP (PPP) per capita is retrieved from the International Monetary Foundation.
b)
Ranking, 1=Most competitive economy/Doing business is easy. Global Competitiveness Index comprises 142
countries, and Ease of Doing Business Index covers 183 countries.
c)
Overall score, 100=Highest economic freedom, 1=Lowest economic freedom. Index comprises 179 countries.
12
2.2 Business environment
In addition to studying the individual and her relationship with entrepreneurial activity, the
GEM study also assesses the factors that either enhance or hinder individuals’ selection over
engaging in entrepreneurship through the entrepreneurial framework conditions (EFC) of
each country (see Appendix A for definitions). These conditions influence the entrepreneurial
opportunities and capacities which manifest as the actual entrepreneurial activity in any
country (Levie and Autio, 2008). Nationally, the EFCs are assessed by asking from the
national experts––including researchers, policy makers and entrepreneurs––their opinions.
Their replies are reflected in the following when analyzing Finland among its peers (see
Appendix A).
Finnish governmental policies, finance, and education continue to support
entrepreneurship
A closer look into EFCs shows that Finland scores much better than its peers when the
overall governmental support for entrepreneurship is under scrutiny (Figure 2). The level of
support for creativity and attention given to entrepreneurship in primary and secondary
education are better in Finland than the average in innovation-driven countries. It has been
argued that there might be a need for change in the culture and entrepreneurial attitudes in
Finland (Ministry of Finance, 2012), but it can be asked whether that change would increase
entrepreneurship per se? Entrepreneurship seems to flourish in economies with totally
opposite cultural backgrounds (Baumol et al., 2007), and thus, the causality between cultural
and entrepreneurial attitudes and higher levels of entrepreneurship is highly disputable
(Bottke and Coyne, 2009). Even if these aspects are supported in Finland, the outcome of
these policies in terms of the rate of new and nascent entrepreneurship may not match as later
in this report will be shown.
13
Figure 2: Institutional support for entrepreneurship in Finland, Nordic countries and
innovation-driven economies (1/3)
6
Despite the economic downturn relatively stable markets in Finland
When measured with other framework conditions, the differences between innovation-driven
economies in institutional support for entrepreneurship seem to even out in Figure 3. This is
in many ways understandable: frameworks, such as R&D transfer, and internal market
openness for new firm to enter existing markets, need to function efficiently in order to
amplify drive for innovations. Fortunately, these framework conditions are perceived to be in
good shape in Finland. When the internal market dynamics are measured and compared
within GEM innovation-driven economies, Finland seems to be slightly behind of the others.
7
6
Values of indicators are based on averaging the Z-scores (standardized values) for the countries in each
of group and the scale is standardized between -1.50 and 1.50. The further the data point is from the center, the
better is the perceived state of the topic.
7
Internal market dynamics is measured with the two following variables: “the markets for consumer goods
and services change dramatically from year to year”, and “the markets for business-to-business goods and
services change dramatically from year to year”.
14
Figure 3: Institutional support for entrepreneurship in Finland, Nordic countries and
innovation-driven economies (2/3)
8
Positive notions on opportunity perception and support for high growth firms in
Finland
In Finland the interviewed experts are slightly more positive in their opinions on the
opportunity existence perception among the adult population than in other innovation-driven
economies in general. The same positive attitude concerns also the public support available
for high growth firms (Figure 4). This may indicate that the extensive effort put in supporting
growth firms in Finland is more widely recognized. In Finland and in Nordic countries also
the support available for women’s entrepreneurship is perceived to be higher than in the other
innovation-driven economies. This can indicate at least two things: either Finland or its
Nordic peers are surpassing the other innovation-driven economies to some extent when
women’s entrepreneurship and its support are concerned, or there is a wider awareness of the
diminishing gap in the support mechanisms for women, in comparison to other innovation-
driven economies.
8
Values of indicators are based on averaging the Z-scores (standardized values) for the countries in each
of group and the scale is standardized between -1.50 and 1.50. The further the data point is from the center, the
better is the perceived state of the topic.
15
Figure 4: Institutional support for entrepreneurship in Finland, Nordic countries and
innovation-driven economies (3/3)
9
Based on the experts’ opinions in all innovation-driven economies the entrepreneurial
motivation and the valuation of entrepreneurship is relatively low in the adult population.
Finland is not an exception in this group.
9
Values of indicators are based on averaging the Z-scores (standardized values) for the countries in each
of group and the scale is standardized between -1.50 and 1.50. The further the data point is from the center, the
better is the perceived state of the topic.
16
3 STATE OF ENTREPENEURIAL POTENTIAL
Key highlights
? Adult population in Finland still perceives good business opportunities but
there is a decline in perceptions.
? The entrepreneurial intentions are slightly higher than in previous years:
9% of the non-entrepreneurial adult population expects to start a new
venture during the following three years.
? Highly educated Finnish adults are more alert to new business
opportunities than Finnish adults on average.
? Men more often than women consider themselves of having enough
knowledge, skills and experience to start a business.
In the following, we will highlight key results of the potential entrepreneurship in Finland in
2013, and relate the results to other innovation-driven countries.
Opportunity perception decreased from previous years
In Finland the share of those individuals who perceive good opportunities for
entrepreneurship was 44% of the whole adult population. The share has decreased from the
last year, when 55% had perceived good opportunities. The percentage is higher than among
all innovation-driven economies, but lower than in other Nordic countries (Figure 5). In
comparison the related share is 64% in Norway and in Sweden. In innovation-driven
economies the share is the lowest in Japan, where only 7% have perceived good opportunities
(Appendix Table 1 in Appendix B).
Who are those Finns that perceive new business opportunities? Based on GEM data the
opportunity perception relates strongly to the degree in education. Highly educated
individuals, who are holding at least a post-secondary degree, perceive new entrepreneurial
opportunities more often than less educated. Age and gender are not associated with
opportunity perception.
Perception of entrepreneurial capabilities is higher among men
How do people then perceive their own capabilities for business start-up? The perception of
entrepreneurial capabilities needed in starting a business in adult population in Finland (33%)
17
is rather similar to the average of Nordic countries (35%) (Figure 5). The share in Finland is
lower than in innovation-driven economies in average (41%). The perception, however,
varies considerably: For example, in the USA 56% of the adult population perceives having
necessary skills, while in Japan the share is only 13% (Appendix Table 1).
Based on GEM data the number of Finns who perceive good opportunities for
entrepreneurship is higher than the number of those who perceive having skills for creating
new businesses. This tendency is similar to other Nordic countries, but in a general level
different among innovation-driven economies. Further, Finnish results show that the
perception of entrepreneurial capabilities is higher among individuals aged over 35-years
than in younger age groups. Men consider themselves, more than women, of having enough
knowledge, skills and experience to start a business. Education is not associated with the
perception of entrepreneurial capabilities.
The untapped entrepreneurial potential
The results show that in Finland about one out of twelve adults has perceived both business
opportunities and the skills needed in themselves, but who are not entrepreneurially involved.
This group of so called untapped entrepreneurial potential has higher entrepreneurial
intentions than rest of the Finnish adult population, and its share is slightly higher among
individuals with higher education than their peers. Furthermore, the fear of failure is lower
among this group of individuals.
In Finland the fear of failure is higher than in previous years even if it can still be considered
to be relatively low among innovation-driven economies (Figure 5). When compared to other
Nordic countries, the share in Finland is the highest. For instance, in Norway 33% of the
adult population fears the failure. For comparison in Greece the fear of failure is higher
(69%) (Appendix Table 1). Finnish results show that the fear of failure is higher among
women than men. Older individuals (55–64-years old) seem to have lower fear of failure than
younger age groups. The educational attainment is not associated with the fear of failure.
Despite the entrepreneurial potential, entrepreneurial intentions remain low
In Finland, where the levels of opportunity recognition and untapped entrepreneurial potential
are promising, challenges arise the closer we get to actual engagement in entrepreneurship.
Even if the share of entrepreneurial intentions is higher than in previous years, still 9% of the
non-entrepreneurial adult population has entrepreneurial intentions (Figure 5). Among
innovation-driven economies the average is 14%, and for instance, in the USA 17% and in
Sweden 11% of adult population expects to start a new venture during the following three
years.
18
Further, Finnish results show that younger entrepreneurially active adults (18–24-years old)
have higher intentions than older individuals (55–64-years old). Entrepreneurial intentions
are also higher among men than among women. Individuals’ educational attainment is not
associated with entrepreneurial intentions.
Figure 5: Entrepreneurial potential in Finland, in Nordic countries and in innovation-
driven economies (as % of population aged 18–64)
10
10
The scale is the percentage of the adult population. The further the data point is from the center, the
higher is the prevalence of the topic in question.
19
4 STATE OF ENTREPENEURIAL ACTIVITY
Key highlights
? Among innovation-driven economies Finland struggles to maintain in the
middle league
? 5% of adult population in Finland is engaged in early-stage entrepreneurial
activities
? The rate of established business ownership (7%) in Finland is at the same
level than in innovation-driven economies and in Nordic countries
? In two out of three exits, business operations do not continue after the
business discontinuation
Established business ownership has a strong hold in Finland, early-stage
entrepreneurial activity is lower than before
The early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA) involves 5% of the adult population in Finland
(Figure 6). Among innovation-driven GEM economies the Finnish adults’ engagement in
early-stage entrepreneurial activities is slightly below the average (Appendix Table 2).
Majority of the innovation-driven economies has higher prevalence of new business
ownership
11
over nascent entrepreneurship
12
. In Finland so called non-established renewal of
entrepreneurship
13
is just below the average of the innovation-driven economies.
The rate of established business ownership
14
(7%) in Finland is approximately at the same
level than in other innovation-driven economies and Nordic countries on average (Figure 6).
A closer look shows that the share of established business ownership is higher among men
11
New business ownership is the percentage of 18-64 population who are currently an owner-manager of a
new business, i.e., owning and managing a running business that has paid salaries, wages, or any other payments
to the owners for more than three months, but not more than 42 months.
12
Nascent entrepreneurs is the percentage of 18-64 population who are currently actively involved in
setting up a business they will own or co-own; this business has not paid salaries, wages, or any other payments
to the owners for more than 3 months.
13
The share of nascent entrepreneurship over new business ownership indicates the prevalence of renewal
of entrepreneurial population which is not yet established. There are more individuals that are active in advance
of birth of the firm than there are individuals who already own and operate a new business. Thus, the situation
that nascent entrepreneurs’ progress into a new business venture is still more uncertain than for those already in
operation.
14
Established business ownership rate is defined as the percentage of individuals aged 18–64-years in an
economy who own and manage a business which is over 42 months old.
20
than women. The rate of established business ownership is higher among individuals aged
35–44-years and 45–54-years than in other age-groups.
Figure 6: Different stages of entrepreneurial activity in Finland, Nordic countries and in
innovation-driven economies (as % of population aged 18–64)
15
Business discontinuation
In terms of business discontinuation comprising selling, shutting down, or otherwise
discontinuing an ownership/management of the business Finnish adult population remains
relatively low compared to other innovation-driven economies (Appendix Table 2). In
Finland one out of four exits takes place because of retirement while one out of five exits
occur due to personal reasons. In two out of three exits, business operations do not continue
after the business discontinuation, while in 2012 in about half of the cases the business
operations were able to continue.
15
The scale is the percentage of the adult population. The further the data point is from the center, the higher is the prevalence of the
topic in question.
21
5 ENTREPRENEURS IN FINLAND – MIDDLE
LEAGUE ASPIRATIONS AND
PERFORMANCE
Key highlights
? Early-stage entrepreneurs’ growth expectations are slightly higher than in
previous years in Finland
? Innovation-orientation of Finnish entrepreneurs has slightly declined
? Only 11% of Finnish early-stage entrepreneurs has strong international
orientation
? Entrepreneurial aspirations are lower among established business owners
than new entrepreneurs
The GEM study explores entrepreneurial aspirations in terms of job growth expectations,
innovativeness and internationalization orientation among entrepreneurially oriented
individuals. In the following, we will highlight some key results in Finland in 2013, and
relate the results to other innovation-driven countries.
In this report the early-stage entrepreneurs’ growth expectations are categorized into three
following groups:
? No or low job expectation early-stage entrepreneurial activity: 0 or maximum 5 jobs;
? Medium job expectation early-stage entrepreneurial activity: expects between 6–19
jobs;
? High job expectation early-stage entrepreneurial activity: expects 20 jobs or more.
Among Finnish early-stage entrepreneurs 8.5% expect to provide 20 or more jobs during the
next five years (Figure 7). Even if Finnish share is lagging behind the average of innovation-
driven economies (10.6%), there seems to be slightly more entrepreneurs with high growth
expectations than the average in previous years. For instance, the same share in 2012 was
7.5%. For comparison, the share of early-stage entrepreneurs belonging to the high job
expectation group in Taiwan is 30% and in Japan 26 %.
A closer look shows that 68% of new entrepreneurs are thinking about hiring at least one
person to their new venture during the next 5 years. This share does not, however, vary
significantly across the entrepreneurial population in Finland.
22
Figure 7: Job growth expectations of early-stage entrepreneurs in innovation-driven
economies in 2013
Entrepreneurs’ prospects for creating new jobs are modest
Over half of Finnish established business owners have intentions to hire a new person to their
business during the next five years. However, half of them have low growth expectations and
only a few (3%) belong into high growth aspirations category. The results suggest that high
growth expectations are less common among the established businesses than among the
early-stage entrepreneurs. This indicates potentially two things: some entrepreneurs may have
different trajectories for their goals at the start-up phase, and/or high growth period may
remain short and appear on very early-stages of entrepreneurial life-cycle.
Early-stage entrepreneurs are more innovation-orientated than established business
owners
Innovative orientation among early-stage entrepreneurs is measured by means of new market-
product combination (see Appendix A for definitions). If an entrepreneur perceives that
his/her products are new to the customers and there are not many other competitors, then
she/he belongs to the innovative orientation group. When interpreting this ratio, one must
take into consideration that what seems as new market-product combination in some
countries may already be old, standard in the market in other countries. In Finland 22% of the
early-stage entrepreneurs are innovatively-oriented according to this measure (Figure 8). The
share has decreased from 2012, when 28.5% of the early-stage entrepreneurs were
23
innovatively-orientated. In comparison in Luxembourg 48% of the early-stage entrepreneurs
have high innovation orientation.
Figure 8: Innovative orientation of early-stage entrepreneurs in innovation-driven
economies in 2013
The share of innovative-oriented individuals among the established business owners is clearly
lower than among the early-stage entrepreneurs (17%).
International orientation still low among early-stage entrepreneurs
Early-stage entrepreneurs’ international orientation is measured by the extent to which
entrepreneurs sell their products/services to customers outside their domestic markets (see
Appendix A for definitions). Here, the international orientation is assessed in terms of the
proportion of early-stage entrepreneurs who have at least 25% international customers. The
results show that among the innovation-driven economies Finnish early-stage entrepreneurs
have relatively low international orientation (Figure 9). In all, 11% of Finnish early-stage
entrepreneurs have strong international orientation. The share has decreased from last year,
when 21% of entrepreneurs had international aspirations.
24
Figure 9: International orientation of early-stage entrepreneurs in innovation-driven
economies in 2013
Among the established business owners 8.3% show that they have international orientation
since at least 25% of their customers are international. Among innovation-driven economies
the average is 13.5%. The share is high in Singapore (34%), Luxembourg (27%), and
Switzerland (24%). Furthermore, in Sweden 16% of established business owner have
internationalization aspirations.
25
6 SPECIAL TOPICS: ‘SUBJECTIVE WELL-
BEING’ AND ‘JOB SATISFACTION’
Key highlights
? Finland has more entrepreneurial employee activity than early-stage
entrepreneurial activity
? In general Finnish adults rate their well-being high
? The perceived well-being is higher among entrepreneurs than among the
non-entrepreneurial individuals
? Non-entrepreneurs are more satisfied with the work-life balance than
entrepreneurs
? Self-employed individuals are more satisfied with their current work than
those in paid employment
Finland has more entrepreneurial employee activity than early-stage entrepreneurial
activity
In addition to different aspects of individual entrepreneurial engagement, GEM study
assesses entrepreneurial activities within existing organizations. The entrepreneurial
employee activity (EEA), is defined as employees developing new activities for their main
employer, such as developing or launching new goods or services, or setting up a new
business unit, a new establishment or subsidiary (see Appendix 2 for further definition).
In the EEA rates are presented in the whole adult population. In 2011 the share of EEA (8%)
in Finland was among the highest in the innovation-driven economies (Stenholm et al., 2012).
In 2013 the rate is slightly lower, 5.8%, which is close to the EEA rate found in Slovenia
(Figure 10). Moreover, the Finnish EEA rate is higher than the rate of early-stage
entrepreneurship. When assessed across all GEM countries participated in collected data on
EEA, only in innovation-driven economies the EEA rate is almost the same as the prevalence
of early-stage entrepreneurship (Amoros and Bosma, 2014). In less developed countries the
early-stage entrepreneurship is clearly more prevalent than entrepreneurial employee activity
reflecting the differences in labor markets.
26
Figure 10: Entrepreneurial employee activity in innovation-driven GEM economies (as %
of population aged 18–64) (adapted from Amoros and Bosma, 2014)
Further analyses show that in Finland entrepreneurial employee activity is more prevalent
among highly educated individuals and among individuals aged 35–44 years. Furthermore,
our results show that those who are entrepreneurially active employees have higher untapped
entrepreneurial potential (they have perceived entrepreneurial opportunities and skills) and
higher entrepreneurial intentions than the Finnish adult population in general. The results also
show that the highest prevalence of the entrepreneurial employee activity is in individuals
working for not-for-profit organizations. This result was also found in 2011 (Stenholm et al.,
2012).
Finnish adults rate their well-being high, and the well-being is higher among
entrepreneurs than those in paid employment
In 2013 GEM study has special focus on subjective well-being, work-life balance, and work
satisfaction. Through this assessment the GEM study offers an additional social component
for evaluating entrepreneurship’s role in the economy; generally the analyses emphasize
material and financial outcomes (Amoros and Bosma, 2014). For example, this approach
enables us to study if the entrepreneurs experience more well-being than rest of the adult
population. In this section we analyze these topics in Finland and among the other
innovation-driven economies.
27
Subjective well-being is the comprehension through which people experience the quality of
their lives, and it comprises both emotional reactions and cognitive judgments (Diener,
1984). In GEM study subjective well-being was measured with the Satisfaction with Life
Scale (Pavot and Diener, 2008), which is a five-item instrument designed to measure global
cognitive judgments of satisfaction with one’s life. The five items used in measuring
subjective well-being are shown in the Table 2.
The results show that in innovation-driven economies the adult population is more satisfied
with their current well-being than their peers in less developed economies (Figure 11)
16
. The
scale in the figure has the hypothetical range of ‘-1.7’ (less subjective well-being at country-
level) to ‘1.7’ (higher rate of subjective wellbeing). A deeper insight shows that across
different economies entrepreneurially active individuals show relatively higher rates of
subjective well-being contrasted with all populations and non-entrepreneurially active
individuals. Moreover, the subjective well-being rated higher among established business
owners than early-stage entrepreneurs. The latter group may have to deal with more
uncertainty and pressure to develop the firm to earn profit (Amoros and Bosma, 2014).
Figure 11: The subjective well-being by the stage of economic development and the
engagement in entrepreneurial activity in 2013 (Amoros and Bosma, 2014)
16
Values of indicators are based on averaging the Z-scores (standardized values) for the economies in each
of the three phases of economic development.
28
In a comparison across countries the results show that among EU28-countries the adults in
Finland rate their well-being highest. Moreover, the subjective well-being among Finnish
established business owners and non-entrepreneurially active population is rated than in the
other EU-countries on average. (Amoros and Bosma, 2014)
A closer look at the adult population in Finland shows that the subjective well-being varies
significantly between entrepreneurially active and non-active individuals (Table 2). The
difference might be partially explained by the higher average age of established business
owners, since among all respondents older ones saw more than their younger peers that they
have obtained the important things that they have wanted. However, the interaction between
the age and engagement in entrepreneurial activity at any level was significant only with
regards to one item “In most ways my life is close to my ideal”. The perception of this was
higher among younger than 35-years old respondents who were established business owners
compared to those who were not working. Accordingly, the higher rate of subjective well-
being among established business owners is not related to their age.
Table 2: Subjective well-being among entrepreneurially active and non-entrepreneur
Finnish adults (Scale is from ‘1’=strongly disagree to ‘5’=strongly agree)
Entrepreneurially active Non-entrepreneurs
Early-stage
entrepreneurs
(n=106)
Established
business owners
(n=128)
Working
(n=1 304–
1 308)
Not working
a)
(n=452–458)
Sig.
In most ways my life is close to
my ideal
3.7 4.0 3.9 3.5 p
Within this brief file with regards to global entrepreneurship monitor finnish 2013 report.
Turun kauppakorkeakoulu Turku School of Economics
Turun kauppakorkeakoulu Turku School of Economics
ISBN 978-952-249-358-3 (painettu)
978-952-249-359-0 (verkkojulkaisu)
GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP MONITOR
– Finnish 2013 Report
Stenholm, Pekka – Suomalainen, Sanna – Kovalainen, Anne –
Heinonen, Jarna – Pukkinen, Tommi
G
L
O
B
A
L
E
N
T
R
E
P
R
E
N
E
U
R
S
H
I
P
M
O
N
I
T
O
R
–
F
i
n
n
i
s
h
2
0
1
3
R
e
p
o
r
t
|
S
t
e
n
h
o
l
m
,
P
e
k
k
a
–
S
u
o
m
a
l
a
i
n
e
n
,
S
a
n
n
a
–
K
o
v
a
l
a
i
n
e
n
,
A
n
n
e
–
H
e
i
n
o
n
e
n
,
J
a
r
n
a
–
P
u
k
k
i
n
e
n
,
T
o
m
m
i
GEM_raportti Kansi 9 June 2014 2:18 PM
1
TURUN YLIOPISTON KAUPPAKORKEAKOULU
TSE ENTRE
TURKU SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS, UNIVERSITY OF TURKU
TSE ENTRE
SARJA A TUTKIMUSRAPORTTEJA
SERIES A RESEARCH REPORTS
A 1 / 2014
Stenholm, Pekka – Suomalainen, Sanna – Kovalainen, Anne –
Heinonen, Jarna – Pukkinen, Tommi
GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP
MONITOR
Finnish 2013 Report
2
Funding for the Finnish GEM 2013 study is provided by the Ministry of Employment and the
Economy and Turku School of Economics, University of Turku.
Although data used in this work is collected by the GEM consortium, the analysis and
interpretation of the data is on the sole responsibility of the authors.
Copyright © Global Entrepreneurship Research Association;
Financiers; Turku School of Economics, University of Turku; Pekka Stenholm,
Sanna Suomalainen, Anne Kovalainen, Jarna Heinonen and Tommi Pukkinen
ISBN 978-952-249-358-3 (nid.)
978-952-249-359-0 (pdf)
ISSN 1797-8386
Uniprint Oy
Turku
3
TIIVISTELMÄ YDINTULOKSISTA
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) 2013 -tutkimus tarkastelee erityisesti,
kuinka Suomi sijoittuu innovaatiovetoisten talouksien joukossa. Ainutlaatuinen GEM
tutkimus tutkii yrittäjyysaktiivisuutta ja uuden yritystoiminnan perustamista
väestötasolla sekä yrittäjyyden puitetekijöitä 26 maassa. Seuraavassa tiivistetään
Suomea koskevat keskeiset tulokset muihin innovaatiovetoisiin talouksiin verrattuna.
1. Yrittäjyyspotentiaali Suomessa
Väestötasolla liiketoimintamahdollisuuksien havaitseminen on Suomessa edelleenkin
korkeampaa kuin useimmissa muissa innovaatiovetoisissa talouksissa: Suomi on
kahdeksas innovaatiotalouksien joukossa. 44% aikuisväestöstä tunnistaa hyviä
liiketoimintamahdollisuuksia ympäristössään. Tässä vertailussa eniten
liiketoimintamahdollisuuksia tunnistetaan Ruotsissa (64%). Myös Norjassa (64%),
Kanadassa (57%), Yhdysvalloissa (47%), Israelissa (47%) ja Luxemburgissa (46%)
tunnistetaan liiketoimintamahdollisuuksia hyvin.
Joka kolmas suomalaisessa aikuisväestössä uskoo, että hänellä on yrityksen
perustamiseen ja johtamiseen liittyviä taitoja. Innovaatiovetoisista maista esimerkiksi
USA:ssa (55%), Sloveniassa (52%) ja Portugalissa (49%) nämä taidot ovat
yleisempiä. Suomi on 21. innovaatiovetoisten talouksien vertailussa jää hieman
esimerkiksi Ruotsin (39%) ja Norjan (34%) jälkeen.
GEM-tutkimuksessa selvitetään myös epäonnistumisen pelkoa, joka voi heikentää
yrittäjäksi ryhtymistä. Suomessa 37% työikäisistä aikuisista pelkää epäonnistumista,
kun vastaavaa osuus esimerkiksi Kreikassa on 49% ja Irlannissa 40%. Kaikista
innovaatiovetoisista maista Suomi sijoittuu Alankomaiden ja Ruotsin kanssa samalle
tasolle.
Seuraavan kolmen vuoden aikana yrittäjäksi aikovia on suomalaisessa aikuisväestössä
8%. Muihin innovaatiovetoisin talouksiin verrattuna osuus on verrattain alhainen.
Taiwanissa lähes 28% aikuisväestöstä aikoo yrittäjäksi, kun taas Norjassa osuus on
5%. Muista vertailumaista Israelissa (24%), Singaporessa (15%) ja esimerkiksi
Kanadassa (14%) yrittäjyysintentiot ovat korkeammat kuin innovaatiovetoisissa
maissa keskimäärin.
4
2. Yrittäjyysaktiivisuus
Myönteisistä asenteista ja aikomuksista huolimatta aikuisväestö perustaa Suomessa
varovaisesti uusia yrityksiä: runsaat 5% aikuisväestöstä on aloittamassa uutta
yritystoimintaa. Suomi jää vertailumaista hieman jälkeen sijoittuen 20:nneksi, Kreikan
ja Espanjan väliin. Yhdysvalloissa uutta yritystoimintaa aloittaa lähes 13% ja
Kanadassa 12%. Alkavien yrittäjien osuuteen verrattuna yli 3,5 vuotta yrittäjinä
toimineita Suomessa on hieman enemmän, vajaa 7%. Tässä vertailussa Suomi
sijoittuu Yhdysvaltojen (8%) ja Iso-Britannian (6,6%) väliin. Vertailumaista
kauemmin yrittäjinä toimineiden osuus on korkein Kreikassa (13%). Suomessa uusia
yrityksiä perustavat suhteellisen usein korkeasti koulutetut, mutta tässä vertailussa
Suomi jää selvästi esimerkiksi Sveitsin (10%) tai Alankomaiden (7%) jälkeen. Yli
ajan tarkasteltuna uusien yritysten perustaminen vaihtelee vuosittain erityisesti
miesten keskuudessa, kun naisten keskuudessa aktiivisuus on lähes samaa tasoa
vuodesta toiseen.
3. Yrittäjien tavoitteet
Suomalaisten yrittäjien kasvutavoitteet ovat maltillisia. Korkeaa kasvua (yli 20 uutta
työpaikkaa seuraavan viiden vuoden aikana) tavoittelee noin 8,5% uusista yrittäjistä.
Tämä on selvästi vähemmän kuin innovaatiovetoisissa talouksissa keskimäärin.
Innovaatiovetoisten talouksien vertailussa Suomi sijoittuu 15. Portugalin (10%) ja
Ruotsin (8%) väliin. Muista vertailumaista esimerkiksi Taiwanissa (30%), Japanissa
(26%), Singaporessa (24%) ja Israelissa (14%) huomattavasti useampi uusi yrittäjä
tavoittelee kasvua.
Kansainvälistymispyrkimyksiä GEM-tutkimuksessa tarkastellaan yrittäjän
kansainvälisten asiakkaiden osuudella. Yrittäjää pidetään kansainvälisenä, mikäli
vähintään 25% asiakkaista on muualta kuin yrittäjän kotimaasta. Näin tarkastellen
Suomessa alkuvaiheen yrittäjistä vain 10%:lla on kansainvälistymispyrkimyksiä –
tällä osuudella Suomi sijoittuu neljänneksi viimeiseksi innovaatiovetoisten talouksien
vertailussa. Esimerkiksi Singaporessa uusista yrittäjistä 37% toimii kansainvälisillä
markkinoilla.
GEM-tutkimuksessa innovaatiohakuisena pidetään yrittäjiä, jotka tähtäävät uusilla
tuotteilla uusille markkinoille. Suomalaisista uusista yrittäjistä vajaat 22% on
innovaatiohakuisia – Suomi sijoittuu innovaatiovetoisten talouksien vertailussa sijalle
20. Esimerkiksi Luxemburgissa 48% ja Yhdysvalloissa 34% uusista ovat
innovaatiohakuisia.
5
4. Yrittäjyyden puitetekijät ja merkitys
Vuosittain GEM-tutkimuksessa selvitetään kansallisten asiantuntijoiden näkemyksiä
yrittäjyyden olosuhteista. Innovaatiovetoisten talouksien vertailussa Suomi on
asiantuntijoiden mukaan kilpailukykyinen ja yritystoiminnalle suotuisa talous.
Kansalliset asiantuntijat arvioivat yrittäjyyspolitiikan ja säätelyn yrittäjyyttä tukevaksi,
ja tukea kohdennetaan erityisesti kasvuyrittäjyyteen. Asiantuntijoiden mielestä
suomalainen aikuisväestö havaitsee hyvin liiketoimintamahdollisuuksia, ja
markkinoille tuloa pidetään helppona useammin kuin muissa innovaatiovetoisissa
talouksissa. Jo pitkään ilmassa ollut ’start-up intoilu’ ei kuitenkaan näy riittävässä
määrin realisoituvan uudeksi ja innovatiiviseksi liiketoiminnaksi.
On hyvä muistaa, että yrittäjyyskeskustelu ei rajoitu uuden yritystoiminnan
synnyttämiseen ja olemassa olevan liiketoiminnan kasvattamiseen. Yrittäjyyttä on
myös yksilön yrittäjämäinen toiminta olemassa olevassa organisaatiossa. Suomessa
onkin enemmän työntekijän yrittäjämäistä toimintaa kuin aloittavaa yritystoimintaa.
Kenties tätä potentiaalia ei ole vielä riittävästi hyödynnetty?
Yrittäjyyden merkitys ei myöskään rajoitu vain talouden kasvuun. GEM-tutkimuksen
perusteella yrittäjät ovat muita työntekijöitä tyytyväisempiä työhönsä ja
hyvinvointiinsa siitä huolimatta, että he ovat vähemmän tyytyväisiä työn ja muun
elämän tasapainoon. Yrittäjyydellä on monipuolisia vaikutuksia yhteiskuntaan,
talouteen ja yksilöiden elämään. Tämän vuoksi yrittäjyyden edistäminen on
kokonaisvaltaista ja pitkäjänteistä työtä talouden suhdanteista riippumatta.
6
Table of Contents
Tiivistelmä ydintuloksista ........................................................................................................................ 3
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 7
2 Finland – A Prime Member of Innovation-Driven Economies ........................................................ 8
2.1 Economic performance ........................................................................................................... 8
2.2 Business environment ........................................................................................................... 12
3 State of Entrepeneurial Potential ................................................................................................. 16
4 State of Entrepeneurial Activity .................................................................................................... 19
5 Entrepreneurs in Finland – Middle League Aspirations and Performance ................................... 21
6 Special Topics: ‘Subjective Well-Being’ and ‘Job Satisfaction’ ...................................................... 25
7 Portrait of Entrepreneurial Activity .............................................................................................. 34
7.1 Age and entrepreneurial activity .......................................................................................... 34
7.2 Gender and entrepreneurial activity .................................................................................... 36
7.3 Education and entrepreneurial activity ................................................................................ 38
8 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 40
References ............................................................................................................................................ 42
Appendix A: Definitions ........................................................................................................................ 44
Appendix B: Tables and Figures ............................................................................................................ 49
7
1 INTRODUCTION
How does the entrepreneurial potential look like in Finland in 2013? How many people did
start-up a new venture or made progress towards starting one in 2013? These questions and
many more will be answered in this report. The national report is based on the annual Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), a unique global assessment of entrepreneurial activity, and
it will focus on the annual results of entrepreneurial activity in Finland in 2013.
1
The report introduces the state-of-the-art figures of the emerging, new and established
entrepreneurship in Finland as a one of the innovation-driven economies globally. Moreover,
we will show how the various aspirations among new entrepreneurial activities in Finland
score globally within the innovation-driven economies. Additionally, we will look at the
perceptions of well-being among self-employed and employed individuals in Finland.
GEM is a major research project aimed at describing and analyzing different phases of
entrepreneurship as well as the profile of entrepreneurs within a wide range of countries.
GEM’s contribution to the knowledge and understanding of the entrepreneurial process is
unique since, to date, no other data set exists that can provide consistent cross-country
information and measurements of entrepreneurial activity in a global context.
In Finland, the GEM project is led by academy professor Anne Kovalainen and it is
conducted by researchers from Turku School of Economics at the University of Turku: Pekka
Stenholm, Anne Kovalainen, Jarna Heinonen, Sanna Suomalainen, and Tommi Pukkinen.
The Finnish GEM study is sponsored by the Ministry of Employment and the Economy and
the Turku School of Economics.
1
Monitoring started in 1999 with 10 participating countries, including Finland. Nowadays the GEM project has expanded to include
annually almost 70 countries covering opinions of over 140.000 adults. The GEM project analyses countries across the different stages of
economic development.
8
2 FINLAND – A PRIME MEMBER OF
INNOVATION-DRIVEN ECONOMIES
Key highlights
? Finland is still a competitive and business friendly economy among
studied innovation-driven economies
? Finland has a well-developed and well-functioning support system for
entrepreneurship: Finnish governmental policies, finance and education
are supportive for entrepreneurship
? Further, in Finland there is lot of support provided for female
entrepreneurs and high growth firms
? According to experts’ opinions Finnish adults are good at spotting
opportunities.
2.1 Economic performance
How does the institutional environment in Finland support and inhibit businesses to prosper,
and how does Finland perform among its peers when the state of the national economic
performance is compared across the innovation-driven economies?
In the following we focus on the innovation-driven economies
2
, where the basic physical and
commercial infrastructure is more or less opportune for entrepreneurial activities. In GEM the
countries participating to global study are different in complex ways: the differences between
GEM countries are vast when measured by GDP, by legal and by governance structures, or
when compared through their citizenship, their rights and possibilities, to mention some key
national differences. The differences in the economic and societal structures govern also the
so called entrepreneurial frameworks which vary across countries. The entrepreneurial
framework conditions are likely to affect the extent to which entrepreneurial opportunities are
discovered and exploited within a country (Levie and Autio, 2008). In innovation-driven
economies the assumption is that all frameworks function efficiently and offer support to
entrepreneurial activities.
2
In 2013 GEM data set innovation-driven economies comprise 26 out of 67 economies participating
GEM: Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan,
Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Singapore, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, Taiwan, Trinidad & Tobago, United Kingdom, and the USA.
9
There are different ways to classify a nation-state as driven by innovation. The GEM-study
follows the definition that focuses on country’s economic and institutional structure (see
Schwab and Sala-i-Martin, 2013; Amoros and Bosma, 2014). The business sector of an
innovation-driven economy consists to large extent of knowledge intensive businesses and an
expanding service sector. We acknowledge that the 26 GEM countries classified as
innovation-driven economies do not otherwise necessarily cluster with each other: the
societal, legal and cultural frameworks do not fulfill the similarity as in the definition of
innovation-driven economy.
3
Entrepreneurship acts as an essential part of the engine boosting economic performance of an
economy. To illustrate this and how innovation-driven economies show up among all
participating GEM-countries, we assess the relationship between early-stage entrepreneurship
and economic development (Figure 1). The early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA) rate is
defined as the percentage of individuals aged 18–64-years in an economy who are in the
process of starting or are already running new businesses which are 42 months old at most
4
.
By following Wennekers and the others’ (2005) approach the Figure 1 illustrates a U-shaped
relationship. In modern economies early-stage entrepreneurial activity increases along with
the economic development (Wennekers et al., 2010). In general, innovation-driven economies
score low in early-stage entrepreneurship, but entrepreneurial activities consist of different
kind of activities compared to less developed economies; in innovation-driven economies
entrepreneurial activity is more often motivated by opportunities than necessity, exploits
knowledge more than physical resources.
3
It is important to acknowledge that even if the studied economies are categorized in one group (see
Schwab and Sala-i-Martin, 2013), they differ from each other in terms of their economic and societal structure,
development and dependency of other countries, among other things. Rates and types of entrepreneurial activity
also vary widely globally. The reasons for, and the ways to explain this variance are plenty, ranging from
regional and national variation (e.g. Eckhart and Chiuchta, 2008; Stenholm et al., 2013a) to global division of
economic activities (e.g. Acemoglu and Robinson, 2012).
4
See the exact definition of early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA) in Appendix A: Glossary of main GEM
variables.
1
0
F
i
g
u
r
e
1
:
E
a
r
l
y
-
s
t
a
g
e
e
n
t
r
e
p
r
e
n
e
u
r
i
a
l
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
i
n
t
e
r
m
s
o
f
G
D
P
p
e
r
c
a
p
i
t
a
(
P
P
P
)
5
5
I
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n
-
d
r
i
v
e
n
e
c
o
n
o
m
i
e
s
a
r
e
m
a
r
k
e
d
w
i
t
h
g
r
e
e
n
d
o
t
s
;
F
i
n
l
a
n
d
i
s
m
a
r
k
e
d
w
i
t
h
a
r
e
d
o
n
e
.
L
e
s
s
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
e
c
o
n
o
m
i
e
s
a
r
e
m
a
r
k
e
d
w
i
t
h
b
l
u
e
d
i
a
m
o
n
d
s
.
11
When assessing the selected global indexes and GDP per capital (in purchasing power
parity), which are widely used in measuring the economic development, the innovation-
driven economies are far from a homogenous group. In addition to GDP, World Bank’s Ease
of Doing Business and World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index as well as
the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom are often used in comparing
economies (see Appendix A for definitions).Table 1 summarizes the group of innovation-
driven economies that participated in GEM in 2013, and shows their position when measured
with the related indexes. Among its’ innovation-driven peers Finland seems to continuously
offer relatively stable environment of starting, running and expanding a business.
Furthermore, Finland’s global status as a competitive economy is enduring, despite some
structural rigidity.
Table 1: Innovation-driven economies in GEM 2013 dataset and their ranking in other
global indexes
Country GDP per
cap in PPP
(US$)
a)
Global
Competitiveness
Index
b)
Ease of
Doing
Business
b)
Index of
Economic
Freedom
c)
Early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA)
Belgium 39 751 17 36 69.9 4.9
Canada 42 533 14 19 80.2 12.2
Czech Republic 26 698 46 75 72.2 7.3
Finland 38 721 3 12 73.4 5.3
France 36 104 23 38 63.5 4.6
Germany 38 696 4 21 73.4 5.0
Greece 25 331 91 72 55.7 5.5
Ireland 43 683 28 15 76.2 9.3
Israel 31 869 27 35 68.4 10.0
Italy 33 134 49 65 60.9 3.4
Japan 35 178 9 27 72.4 3.7
Korea 30 801 25 7 71.2 6.9
Luxembourg 88 286 22 60 74.2 8.7
Netherlands 43 105 8 28 74.2 9.3
Norway 65 640 11 9 70.9 6.3
Portugal 25 389 51 31 63.5 8.3
Puerto Rico 27 677 30 40 - 8.3
Singapore 60 800 2 1 89.4 10.7
Slovenia 27 474 62 33 62.7 6.5
Spain 32 043 35 52 67.2 5.2
Sweden 43 021 6 14 73.1 8.3
Switzerland 53 281 1 29 81.6 8.2
Taiwan 38 400 12 16 73.9 8.2
Trinidad and
Tobago
26 550 92 66 62.7 19.5
United Kingdom 37 456 10 10 74.9 7.1
USA 51 749 5 4 75.5 12.7
a)
GDP (PPP) per capita is retrieved from the International Monetary Foundation.
b)
Ranking, 1=Most competitive economy/Doing business is easy. Global Competitiveness Index comprises 142
countries, and Ease of Doing Business Index covers 183 countries.
c)
Overall score, 100=Highest economic freedom, 1=Lowest economic freedom. Index comprises 179 countries.
12
2.2 Business environment
In addition to studying the individual and her relationship with entrepreneurial activity, the
GEM study also assesses the factors that either enhance or hinder individuals’ selection over
engaging in entrepreneurship through the entrepreneurial framework conditions (EFC) of
each country (see Appendix A for definitions). These conditions influence the entrepreneurial
opportunities and capacities which manifest as the actual entrepreneurial activity in any
country (Levie and Autio, 2008). Nationally, the EFCs are assessed by asking from the
national experts––including researchers, policy makers and entrepreneurs––their opinions.
Their replies are reflected in the following when analyzing Finland among its peers (see
Appendix A).
Finnish governmental policies, finance, and education continue to support
entrepreneurship
A closer look into EFCs shows that Finland scores much better than its peers when the
overall governmental support for entrepreneurship is under scrutiny (Figure 2). The level of
support for creativity and attention given to entrepreneurship in primary and secondary
education are better in Finland than the average in innovation-driven countries. It has been
argued that there might be a need for change in the culture and entrepreneurial attitudes in
Finland (Ministry of Finance, 2012), but it can be asked whether that change would increase
entrepreneurship per se? Entrepreneurship seems to flourish in economies with totally
opposite cultural backgrounds (Baumol et al., 2007), and thus, the causality between cultural
and entrepreneurial attitudes and higher levels of entrepreneurship is highly disputable
(Bottke and Coyne, 2009). Even if these aspects are supported in Finland, the outcome of
these policies in terms of the rate of new and nascent entrepreneurship may not match as later
in this report will be shown.
13
Figure 2: Institutional support for entrepreneurship in Finland, Nordic countries and
innovation-driven economies (1/3)
6
Despite the economic downturn relatively stable markets in Finland
When measured with other framework conditions, the differences between innovation-driven
economies in institutional support for entrepreneurship seem to even out in Figure 3. This is
in many ways understandable: frameworks, such as R&D transfer, and internal market
openness for new firm to enter existing markets, need to function efficiently in order to
amplify drive for innovations. Fortunately, these framework conditions are perceived to be in
good shape in Finland. When the internal market dynamics are measured and compared
within GEM innovation-driven economies, Finland seems to be slightly behind of the others.
7
6
Values of indicators are based on averaging the Z-scores (standardized values) for the countries in each
of group and the scale is standardized between -1.50 and 1.50. The further the data point is from the center, the
better is the perceived state of the topic.
7
Internal market dynamics is measured with the two following variables: “the markets for consumer goods
and services change dramatically from year to year”, and “the markets for business-to-business goods and
services change dramatically from year to year”.
14
Figure 3: Institutional support for entrepreneurship in Finland, Nordic countries and
innovation-driven economies (2/3)
8
Positive notions on opportunity perception and support for high growth firms in
Finland
In Finland the interviewed experts are slightly more positive in their opinions on the
opportunity existence perception among the adult population than in other innovation-driven
economies in general. The same positive attitude concerns also the public support available
for high growth firms (Figure 4). This may indicate that the extensive effort put in supporting
growth firms in Finland is more widely recognized. In Finland and in Nordic countries also
the support available for women’s entrepreneurship is perceived to be higher than in the other
innovation-driven economies. This can indicate at least two things: either Finland or its
Nordic peers are surpassing the other innovation-driven economies to some extent when
women’s entrepreneurship and its support are concerned, or there is a wider awareness of the
diminishing gap in the support mechanisms for women, in comparison to other innovation-
driven economies.
8
Values of indicators are based on averaging the Z-scores (standardized values) for the countries in each
of group and the scale is standardized between -1.50 and 1.50. The further the data point is from the center, the
better is the perceived state of the topic.
15
Figure 4: Institutional support for entrepreneurship in Finland, Nordic countries and
innovation-driven economies (3/3)
9
Based on the experts’ opinions in all innovation-driven economies the entrepreneurial
motivation and the valuation of entrepreneurship is relatively low in the adult population.
Finland is not an exception in this group.
9
Values of indicators are based on averaging the Z-scores (standardized values) for the countries in each
of group and the scale is standardized between -1.50 and 1.50. The further the data point is from the center, the
better is the perceived state of the topic.
16
3 STATE OF ENTREPENEURIAL POTENTIAL
Key highlights
? Adult population in Finland still perceives good business opportunities but
there is a decline in perceptions.
? The entrepreneurial intentions are slightly higher than in previous years:
9% of the non-entrepreneurial adult population expects to start a new
venture during the following three years.
? Highly educated Finnish adults are more alert to new business
opportunities than Finnish adults on average.
? Men more often than women consider themselves of having enough
knowledge, skills and experience to start a business.
In the following, we will highlight key results of the potential entrepreneurship in Finland in
2013, and relate the results to other innovation-driven countries.
Opportunity perception decreased from previous years
In Finland the share of those individuals who perceive good opportunities for
entrepreneurship was 44% of the whole adult population. The share has decreased from the
last year, when 55% had perceived good opportunities. The percentage is higher than among
all innovation-driven economies, but lower than in other Nordic countries (Figure 5). In
comparison the related share is 64% in Norway and in Sweden. In innovation-driven
economies the share is the lowest in Japan, where only 7% have perceived good opportunities
(Appendix Table 1 in Appendix B).
Who are those Finns that perceive new business opportunities? Based on GEM data the
opportunity perception relates strongly to the degree in education. Highly educated
individuals, who are holding at least a post-secondary degree, perceive new entrepreneurial
opportunities more often than less educated. Age and gender are not associated with
opportunity perception.
Perception of entrepreneurial capabilities is higher among men
How do people then perceive their own capabilities for business start-up? The perception of
entrepreneurial capabilities needed in starting a business in adult population in Finland (33%)
17
is rather similar to the average of Nordic countries (35%) (Figure 5). The share in Finland is
lower than in innovation-driven economies in average (41%). The perception, however,
varies considerably: For example, in the USA 56% of the adult population perceives having
necessary skills, while in Japan the share is only 13% (Appendix Table 1).
Based on GEM data the number of Finns who perceive good opportunities for
entrepreneurship is higher than the number of those who perceive having skills for creating
new businesses. This tendency is similar to other Nordic countries, but in a general level
different among innovation-driven economies. Further, Finnish results show that the
perception of entrepreneurial capabilities is higher among individuals aged over 35-years
than in younger age groups. Men consider themselves, more than women, of having enough
knowledge, skills and experience to start a business. Education is not associated with the
perception of entrepreneurial capabilities.
The untapped entrepreneurial potential
The results show that in Finland about one out of twelve adults has perceived both business
opportunities and the skills needed in themselves, but who are not entrepreneurially involved.
This group of so called untapped entrepreneurial potential has higher entrepreneurial
intentions than rest of the Finnish adult population, and its share is slightly higher among
individuals with higher education than their peers. Furthermore, the fear of failure is lower
among this group of individuals.
In Finland the fear of failure is higher than in previous years even if it can still be considered
to be relatively low among innovation-driven economies (Figure 5). When compared to other
Nordic countries, the share in Finland is the highest. For instance, in Norway 33% of the
adult population fears the failure. For comparison in Greece the fear of failure is higher
(69%) (Appendix Table 1). Finnish results show that the fear of failure is higher among
women than men. Older individuals (55–64-years old) seem to have lower fear of failure than
younger age groups. The educational attainment is not associated with the fear of failure.
Despite the entrepreneurial potential, entrepreneurial intentions remain low
In Finland, where the levels of opportunity recognition and untapped entrepreneurial potential
are promising, challenges arise the closer we get to actual engagement in entrepreneurship.
Even if the share of entrepreneurial intentions is higher than in previous years, still 9% of the
non-entrepreneurial adult population has entrepreneurial intentions (Figure 5). Among
innovation-driven economies the average is 14%, and for instance, in the USA 17% and in
Sweden 11% of adult population expects to start a new venture during the following three
years.
18
Further, Finnish results show that younger entrepreneurially active adults (18–24-years old)
have higher intentions than older individuals (55–64-years old). Entrepreneurial intentions
are also higher among men than among women. Individuals’ educational attainment is not
associated with entrepreneurial intentions.
Figure 5: Entrepreneurial potential in Finland, in Nordic countries and in innovation-
driven economies (as % of population aged 18–64)
10
10
The scale is the percentage of the adult population. The further the data point is from the center, the
higher is the prevalence of the topic in question.
19
4 STATE OF ENTREPENEURIAL ACTIVITY
Key highlights
? Among innovation-driven economies Finland struggles to maintain in the
middle league
? 5% of adult population in Finland is engaged in early-stage entrepreneurial
activities
? The rate of established business ownership (7%) in Finland is at the same
level than in innovation-driven economies and in Nordic countries
? In two out of three exits, business operations do not continue after the
business discontinuation
Established business ownership has a strong hold in Finland, early-stage
entrepreneurial activity is lower than before
The early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA) involves 5% of the adult population in Finland
(Figure 6). Among innovation-driven GEM economies the Finnish adults’ engagement in
early-stage entrepreneurial activities is slightly below the average (Appendix Table 2).
Majority of the innovation-driven economies has higher prevalence of new business
ownership
11
over nascent entrepreneurship
12
. In Finland so called non-established renewal of
entrepreneurship
13
is just below the average of the innovation-driven economies.
The rate of established business ownership
14
(7%) in Finland is approximately at the same
level than in other innovation-driven economies and Nordic countries on average (Figure 6).
A closer look shows that the share of established business ownership is higher among men
11
New business ownership is the percentage of 18-64 population who are currently an owner-manager of a
new business, i.e., owning and managing a running business that has paid salaries, wages, or any other payments
to the owners for more than three months, but not more than 42 months.
12
Nascent entrepreneurs is the percentage of 18-64 population who are currently actively involved in
setting up a business they will own or co-own; this business has not paid salaries, wages, or any other payments
to the owners for more than 3 months.
13
The share of nascent entrepreneurship over new business ownership indicates the prevalence of renewal
of entrepreneurial population which is not yet established. There are more individuals that are active in advance
of birth of the firm than there are individuals who already own and operate a new business. Thus, the situation
that nascent entrepreneurs’ progress into a new business venture is still more uncertain than for those already in
operation.
14
Established business ownership rate is defined as the percentage of individuals aged 18–64-years in an
economy who own and manage a business which is over 42 months old.
20
than women. The rate of established business ownership is higher among individuals aged
35–44-years and 45–54-years than in other age-groups.
Figure 6: Different stages of entrepreneurial activity in Finland, Nordic countries and in
innovation-driven economies (as % of population aged 18–64)
15
Business discontinuation
In terms of business discontinuation comprising selling, shutting down, or otherwise
discontinuing an ownership/management of the business Finnish adult population remains
relatively low compared to other innovation-driven economies (Appendix Table 2). In
Finland one out of four exits takes place because of retirement while one out of five exits
occur due to personal reasons. In two out of three exits, business operations do not continue
after the business discontinuation, while in 2012 in about half of the cases the business
operations were able to continue.
15
The scale is the percentage of the adult population. The further the data point is from the center, the higher is the prevalence of the
topic in question.
21
5 ENTREPRENEURS IN FINLAND – MIDDLE
LEAGUE ASPIRATIONS AND
PERFORMANCE
Key highlights
? Early-stage entrepreneurs’ growth expectations are slightly higher than in
previous years in Finland
? Innovation-orientation of Finnish entrepreneurs has slightly declined
? Only 11% of Finnish early-stage entrepreneurs has strong international
orientation
? Entrepreneurial aspirations are lower among established business owners
than new entrepreneurs
The GEM study explores entrepreneurial aspirations in terms of job growth expectations,
innovativeness and internationalization orientation among entrepreneurially oriented
individuals. In the following, we will highlight some key results in Finland in 2013, and
relate the results to other innovation-driven countries.
In this report the early-stage entrepreneurs’ growth expectations are categorized into three
following groups:
? No or low job expectation early-stage entrepreneurial activity: 0 or maximum 5 jobs;
? Medium job expectation early-stage entrepreneurial activity: expects between 6–19
jobs;
? High job expectation early-stage entrepreneurial activity: expects 20 jobs or more.
Among Finnish early-stage entrepreneurs 8.5% expect to provide 20 or more jobs during the
next five years (Figure 7). Even if Finnish share is lagging behind the average of innovation-
driven economies (10.6%), there seems to be slightly more entrepreneurs with high growth
expectations than the average in previous years. For instance, the same share in 2012 was
7.5%. For comparison, the share of early-stage entrepreneurs belonging to the high job
expectation group in Taiwan is 30% and in Japan 26 %.
A closer look shows that 68% of new entrepreneurs are thinking about hiring at least one
person to their new venture during the next 5 years. This share does not, however, vary
significantly across the entrepreneurial population in Finland.
22
Figure 7: Job growth expectations of early-stage entrepreneurs in innovation-driven
economies in 2013
Entrepreneurs’ prospects for creating new jobs are modest
Over half of Finnish established business owners have intentions to hire a new person to their
business during the next five years. However, half of them have low growth expectations and
only a few (3%) belong into high growth aspirations category. The results suggest that high
growth expectations are less common among the established businesses than among the
early-stage entrepreneurs. This indicates potentially two things: some entrepreneurs may have
different trajectories for their goals at the start-up phase, and/or high growth period may
remain short and appear on very early-stages of entrepreneurial life-cycle.
Early-stage entrepreneurs are more innovation-orientated than established business
owners
Innovative orientation among early-stage entrepreneurs is measured by means of new market-
product combination (see Appendix A for definitions). If an entrepreneur perceives that
his/her products are new to the customers and there are not many other competitors, then
she/he belongs to the innovative orientation group. When interpreting this ratio, one must
take into consideration that what seems as new market-product combination in some
countries may already be old, standard in the market in other countries. In Finland 22% of the
early-stage entrepreneurs are innovatively-oriented according to this measure (Figure 8). The
share has decreased from 2012, when 28.5% of the early-stage entrepreneurs were
23
innovatively-orientated. In comparison in Luxembourg 48% of the early-stage entrepreneurs
have high innovation orientation.
Figure 8: Innovative orientation of early-stage entrepreneurs in innovation-driven
economies in 2013
The share of innovative-oriented individuals among the established business owners is clearly
lower than among the early-stage entrepreneurs (17%).
International orientation still low among early-stage entrepreneurs
Early-stage entrepreneurs’ international orientation is measured by the extent to which
entrepreneurs sell their products/services to customers outside their domestic markets (see
Appendix A for definitions). Here, the international orientation is assessed in terms of the
proportion of early-stage entrepreneurs who have at least 25% international customers. The
results show that among the innovation-driven economies Finnish early-stage entrepreneurs
have relatively low international orientation (Figure 9). In all, 11% of Finnish early-stage
entrepreneurs have strong international orientation. The share has decreased from last year,
when 21% of entrepreneurs had international aspirations.
24
Figure 9: International orientation of early-stage entrepreneurs in innovation-driven
economies in 2013
Among the established business owners 8.3% show that they have international orientation
since at least 25% of their customers are international. Among innovation-driven economies
the average is 13.5%. The share is high in Singapore (34%), Luxembourg (27%), and
Switzerland (24%). Furthermore, in Sweden 16% of established business owner have
internationalization aspirations.
25
6 SPECIAL TOPICS: ‘SUBJECTIVE WELL-
BEING’ AND ‘JOB SATISFACTION’
Key highlights
? Finland has more entrepreneurial employee activity than early-stage
entrepreneurial activity
? In general Finnish adults rate their well-being high
? The perceived well-being is higher among entrepreneurs than among the
non-entrepreneurial individuals
? Non-entrepreneurs are more satisfied with the work-life balance than
entrepreneurs
? Self-employed individuals are more satisfied with their current work than
those in paid employment
Finland has more entrepreneurial employee activity than early-stage entrepreneurial
activity
In addition to different aspects of individual entrepreneurial engagement, GEM study
assesses entrepreneurial activities within existing organizations. The entrepreneurial
employee activity (EEA), is defined as employees developing new activities for their main
employer, such as developing or launching new goods or services, or setting up a new
business unit, a new establishment or subsidiary (see Appendix 2 for further definition).
In the EEA rates are presented in the whole adult population. In 2011 the share of EEA (8%)
in Finland was among the highest in the innovation-driven economies (Stenholm et al., 2012).
In 2013 the rate is slightly lower, 5.8%, which is close to the EEA rate found in Slovenia
(Figure 10). Moreover, the Finnish EEA rate is higher than the rate of early-stage
entrepreneurship. When assessed across all GEM countries participated in collected data on
EEA, only in innovation-driven economies the EEA rate is almost the same as the prevalence
of early-stage entrepreneurship (Amoros and Bosma, 2014). In less developed countries the
early-stage entrepreneurship is clearly more prevalent than entrepreneurial employee activity
reflecting the differences in labor markets.
26
Figure 10: Entrepreneurial employee activity in innovation-driven GEM economies (as %
of population aged 18–64) (adapted from Amoros and Bosma, 2014)
Further analyses show that in Finland entrepreneurial employee activity is more prevalent
among highly educated individuals and among individuals aged 35–44 years. Furthermore,
our results show that those who are entrepreneurially active employees have higher untapped
entrepreneurial potential (they have perceived entrepreneurial opportunities and skills) and
higher entrepreneurial intentions than the Finnish adult population in general. The results also
show that the highest prevalence of the entrepreneurial employee activity is in individuals
working for not-for-profit organizations. This result was also found in 2011 (Stenholm et al.,
2012).
Finnish adults rate their well-being high, and the well-being is higher among
entrepreneurs than those in paid employment
In 2013 GEM study has special focus on subjective well-being, work-life balance, and work
satisfaction. Through this assessment the GEM study offers an additional social component
for evaluating entrepreneurship’s role in the economy; generally the analyses emphasize
material and financial outcomes (Amoros and Bosma, 2014). For example, this approach
enables us to study if the entrepreneurs experience more well-being than rest of the adult
population. In this section we analyze these topics in Finland and among the other
innovation-driven economies.
27
Subjective well-being is the comprehension through which people experience the quality of
their lives, and it comprises both emotional reactions and cognitive judgments (Diener,
1984). In GEM study subjective well-being was measured with the Satisfaction with Life
Scale (Pavot and Diener, 2008), which is a five-item instrument designed to measure global
cognitive judgments of satisfaction with one’s life. The five items used in measuring
subjective well-being are shown in the Table 2.
The results show that in innovation-driven economies the adult population is more satisfied
with their current well-being than their peers in less developed economies (Figure 11)
16
. The
scale in the figure has the hypothetical range of ‘-1.7’ (less subjective well-being at country-
level) to ‘1.7’ (higher rate of subjective wellbeing). A deeper insight shows that across
different economies entrepreneurially active individuals show relatively higher rates of
subjective well-being contrasted with all populations and non-entrepreneurially active
individuals. Moreover, the subjective well-being rated higher among established business
owners than early-stage entrepreneurs. The latter group may have to deal with more
uncertainty and pressure to develop the firm to earn profit (Amoros and Bosma, 2014).
Figure 11: The subjective well-being by the stage of economic development and the
engagement in entrepreneurial activity in 2013 (Amoros and Bosma, 2014)
16
Values of indicators are based on averaging the Z-scores (standardized values) for the economies in each
of the three phases of economic development.
28
In a comparison across countries the results show that among EU28-countries the adults in
Finland rate their well-being highest. Moreover, the subjective well-being among Finnish
established business owners and non-entrepreneurially active population is rated than in the
other EU-countries on average. (Amoros and Bosma, 2014)
A closer look at the adult population in Finland shows that the subjective well-being varies
significantly between entrepreneurially active and non-active individuals (Table 2). The
difference might be partially explained by the higher average age of established business
owners, since among all respondents older ones saw more than their younger peers that they
have obtained the important things that they have wanted. However, the interaction between
the age and engagement in entrepreneurial activity at any level was significant only with
regards to one item “In most ways my life is close to my ideal”. The perception of this was
higher among younger than 35-years old respondents who were established business owners
compared to those who were not working. Accordingly, the higher rate of subjective well-
being among established business owners is not related to their age.
Table 2: Subjective well-being among entrepreneurially active and non-entrepreneur
Finnish adults (Scale is from ‘1’=strongly disagree to ‘5’=strongly agree)
Entrepreneurially active Non-entrepreneurs
Early-stage
entrepreneurs
(n=106)
Established
business owners
(n=128)
Working
(n=1 304–
1 308)
Not working
a)
(n=452–458)
Sig.
In most ways my life is close to
my ideal
3.7 4.0 3.9 3.5 p