Youth Entrepreneurship

Employment of adolescents is commonplace. Adolescents work for a variety of reasons: helping with family expenses, earning spending money, saving for college or vocational education, and paying personal bills. Additionally, businesses rely on adolescent employees to produce, package, and sell their goods and services. Thus, a symbiotic relationship has been formed between adolescents and employers.

Much research has been conducted on the effects of adolescent employment. Some negative effects of adolescent employment include reduction in the likelihood of getting enough sleep, eating breakfast, and exercising; increased problem behaviors; decreased leisure time (Bachman, & Schulenberg, 1993); increased conflict with parents and family discord (Steinberg, Fegley, & Dornbusch, 1993; Manning, 1990); and poorer school performance (Steinber, et al. 1993; High, & Collins, 1991). Some positive effects of adolescent employment include increased personal responsibility and earning power; development of social skills; improved grades and participation in school-related activities (Kablaoui, & Pautler, 1991); higher self-esteem (Hardesty, & Hirsch, 1992); and increased self-direction and independence (Shanahan, Finch, Mortimer, & Ryu, 1991).

Further, research suggests that detrimental effects of working long hours can be offset by the quality of work being performed (Barling, Rogers, & Kelloway, 1995). Worley (1995) found that adolescents who work in non-structured work environments have higher grades than those who did not work or worked in a structured work environment.

Youth entrepreneurship has been touted by educators and employers as an alternative means for acquiring skills and attitudes necessary for entering the workforce (Tweeten, 1992; Bishop, 1991). Sexton and Bowman-Upton (1991) define entrepreneurship as the process of identifying opportunities, gathering resources, and exploiting these opportunities through action. For the purpose of this paper youth entrepreneurship is defined as adolescents using this process by working in non- structured (for example, babysitting, yard work) and semi- structured (such as, paper courier, contract worker) work environments.

The purpose of this study was to determine differences between youth entrepreneurs and non-entrepreneurs. Specifically, the study sought to determine differences between youth entrepreneurs and non-entrepreneurs by type of work structure, income derived from employment, age, gender, grade level, grade point average, health and fitness habits, and social skills.

The research design for this study employed a descriptive survey method. A questionnaire was developed following a literature review. The target population included participants at Ohio State University Extension's 4-H Leadership Camp. Data were collected through a written questionnaire administered during camp registration. The survey was divided into three sections. The first section was designed to gather data demographic data on the target population. The second and third sections were designed to gather data, using a five-point Likert-type scale, related to specific objectives of this study. Content and face validity were established by a panel of experts consisting of faculty and research associates at The Ohio State University. Instrument reliability was estimated by calculating a Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Overall reliability for the instrument was .88. The sample size included the entire target population or 144 youth. One hundred forty camp participants returned their surveys for a response rate of 97%.

The analysis of variance procedure was used to test seven null hypotheses of no difference between type of work structure and income derived from employment (Ho1), age (Ho2), grade level (Ho3), gender (Ho4), grade point average (Ho5), health and fitness habits (Ho6), and social skills (Ho7). The analysis of variance procedure can be used to test for the equality of population means. The alpha level for statistical significance was set a priori at .05. The analysis were done with the Minitab Statistical Program.

The first hypothesis in this study was to test for the significant differences in type of work structure by income derived from employment. At an alpha level of .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected, F (2, 76) = 1.12, and it was concluded that type of work structure was not significantly related to income derived from employment.

The second hypothesis in this study was to test for the significant differences in type of work structure by age. At an alpha level of .05, the null hypothesis was rejected, F (4, 135) = 5.59. Hence, age was significant and it was concluded that age was significantly related to type of work structure. The younger the adolescent, the more likely they were to be youth entrepreneurs.

The third hypothesis in this study was to test for the significant differences in type of work structure by grade level. At an alpha of .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected, F (4, 132) = 2.36, and it was concluded that grade level was not significantly related to type of work structure.

The fourth hypothesis in this study was to test for the significant differences in type of work structure by gender. At an alpha of .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected, F (1, 137) = 2.24, and it was concluded that gender was not significantly related to type of work structure.

The fifth hypothesis in this study was to test for the significant differences in type of work structure by grade point average. At an alpha of .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected, F (3, 128) = 0.77, and it was concluded that type of work structure was not significantly related to grade point average.

The sixth hypothesis in this study was to test for the significant differences in type of work structure by health and fitness habits. At an alpha of .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected, F(3, 136) = 0.46, and it was concluded that type of work structure was not significantly related to health and fitness habits. Subsequently, nine alternative null hypothesis were tested. At an alpha of .05, the alternative hypotheses of no difference between type of work structure, and personal organization and time management was rejected, F (3, 136) = 2.85. It was concluded that type of work structure was significantly related to personal organization and time management. Youth entrepreneurs tended to rate their organization and time- management skills lower than non entrepreneurs. No other alternative null hypothesis showed a significant effect.

The seventh hypothesis in this study was to test for the significant differences in type of work structure by social skills. At an alpha of .05, the null hypothesis was not rejected, F (3, 136) = 1.07, and it was concluded that type of work structure was not significantly related to social skills. Subsequently, 18 alternative null hypothesis were tested. At an alpha of .05, the alternative hypothesis of no difference between type of work structure and helping with community service projects was rejected, F (3, 136) = 2.77. It was concluded that type of work structure was significantly related to helping with community service projects.

Youth entrepreneurs tended to say they helped more with community service projects than non entrepreneurs. At an alpha of .05, the alternative hypothesis of no difference between type of work structure and personal leadership assessment was rejected, F (3, 136) = 2.83. It was concluded that type of work structure was significantly related to personal leadership assessment. Youth entrepreneurs tended to rate their leadership skills lower than non entrepreneurs. At an alpha of .05, the alternative hypothesis of no difference between type of work structure and getting along with siblings was rejected, F (3, 136) = 1.28. It was concluded that type of work structure was significantly related to getting along with siblings. Youth entrepreneurs tended to say they did not get along as well with their siblings as did non entrepreneurs. No other alternative null hypothesis showed a significant effect.

The world is changing rapidly and education is facing new challenges it we moves into the 21st century. For educators, this means new approaches to teaching and learning are needed. Futurist John Naisbitt (1994) predicts that as structured employment opportunities decline, entrepreneurial skills will become necessary for workers to compete in the workforce. Additionally, acquiring skills and attitudes necessary for the workforce can be achieved through youth entrepreneurship programs (Cox, 1998).

Economics and entrepreneurial education involve a unique blend of competencies and methods of problem solving for creating change and dealing with its consequences. The results from this study provide important insight and implications which should be incorporated into future youth entrepreneurship development efforts. Further, the results presented in this paper provide information and direction into content areas to be included in youth entrepreneurship curriculum. For example, topics such as personal organizational and time management, leadership development, interpersonal relationships with siblings should be incorporated into curriculum, since these are workforce skills in which youth entrepreneurs tend to rate themselves lower than do other youth. Specifically, the results presented in this paper provided the framework for Ohio State University Extension's "Getting Down to Business: A Curriculum for Introducing Youth to Entrepreneurship" program (Cox, 1998).

The results of this study do not confirm those of Worley (1995) and Barling, et al. (1995) who found detrimental effects of work were offset by quality and type of work structure. Our results show little to no differences between youth entrepreneurs and non entrepreneurs. Further focused research in the area of youth entrepreneurship is needed to determine the effects of youth entrepreneurship.

Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. (1993) How part-time work intensity relates to drug use, problem behavior, time use, and satisfaction among high school seniors: Are these consequences or merely correlates? Developmental Psychology, 29(2), 220-235.

Barling, J., Rogers, K. A., & Kelloway, E. K. (1995). Some effects of teenagers' part-time employment: The quantity and quality of work make the difference. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(2), 143-154.

Bishop, J. H. (Ed.). (1991). Taking charge: Learning economics through entrepreneurship. Reading, PA: Pennsylvania Council on Economic Education.

Cox, K. J. (Ed.). (1998). Getting down to business: A curriculum for introducing youth to entrepreneurship. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Extension.

Hardesty, P. H., & Hirsch, B. J. (1992). Summer and school- term youth employment: Ecological and longitudinal analysis. Psychological Reports, 71(2), 595-606.

High, R., & Collins, J.W. (1991-92, December-January). High school employment: At what cost? High School Journal. 75(2), 90- 93.

Kablaoui, B. N., and Pautler, A. J. (1991). The effects of part-time work experience on high school students. Journal of Career Development, 17(3), 195-211.

Manning, W.D. (1990). Parenting employed teenagers. Youth & Society. 22(2), 184-200.

Naisbitt, J. (1994). Global paradox. New York: Morrow.

Sexton, D. L., & Bowman-Upton, N. B. (1991). Entrepreneurship: Creativity and growth. New York: Macmillan.

Shanahan, M. J., Finch, M. D., Mortimer, J. T., & Ryu, S. (1991). Adolescent work experience and depressive affect. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54(4), 299-317.

Steinberg, L., Fegley, S., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1993). Negative impact of part-time work on adolescent adjustment: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 29(2), 171-180.

Tweeten, K. (Ed.). (1992). Youth entrepreneurship: Be your own boss. North Dakota State University. (Eao1-FCX01).

Worley, L. P. (1995). Working adolescents: Implications for counselors. School Counselor, 42(3), 218-223.