Perceived Digital Access Readiness, Digital Entrepreneurial Competence, and Digital Entrepreneurial Intention in Office Administration Education

Muhammad Choerul Umam; Anton Subarno; Sandrotua Bali; Ahmad Ziddan Wildan Al-Islami

doi:10.61255/jeemba.v4i6.1937

Authors

Muhammad Choerul Umam Universitas Sebelas Maret, Indonesia
Anton Subarno Universitas Sebelas Maret, Indonesia
Sandrotua Bali National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan
Ahmad Ziddan Wildan Al-Islami Istanbul University, Turkey

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61255/jeemba.v4i6.1937

Keywords:

Digital Entrepreneurial Intention, Digital Access Readiness, Digital Entrepreneurial Competence, Measurement Invariance, Office Administration Education

Abstract

Purpose – This study examines whether digital entrepreneurial competence accounts for the entire association between perceived digital access readiness and digital entrepreneurial intention, as a recent full-mediation finding implies, among students of one Indonesian office administration education programme.

Design/methodology/approach – A near-census survey of 344 of 400 students (86.0%) at a public university in Surakarta was analysed with confirmatory factor analysis (including robust and ordinal checks), multiple regression, LMG relative-importance analysis, bias-corrected bootstrap decomposition of associations, multiple imputation, measurement-invariance tests across venture-status groups, and equivalent alternative orderings.

Finding/Results – Access readiness and competence jointly accounted for 41.3% of intention variance, and competence made the larger relative predictive contribution (69.2% versus 30.8%). Access readiness had an indirect association through competence (ab = .203, 95% CI [.152, .261]) and a direct association (c′ = .214, 95% CI [.129, .307]). Both held across robustness checks and in students with and without an existing online business, for whom scalar invariance was supported. However, the four access items were empirically inseparable from basic digital-literacy items, and alternative variable orderings fitted the data equally well.

Originality/Value – The study provides a TPB-informed, non-causal decomposition for a population not previously examined, shows that self-reported access measures can capture broader digital readiness, and specifies the objective-access and time-lagged designs needed to test whether competence transmits access effects.

Abstract views: 0 ,

PDF downloads: 0

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665–683. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x

Ajzen, I. (2020). The theory of planned behavior: Frequently asked questions. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2(4), 314–324. doi:10.1002/hbe2.195

Alshebami, A. S., Fazal, S. A., Aljarodi, A. M., Zarin, N., Ali Seraj, A. H., & Alzain, E. (2025). The influence of access to technology and digital literacy on female empowerment and digital entrepreneurial intentions. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 23(3), 1–12. doi:10.21511/ppm.23(3).2025.01

Aydin, M. (2021). Does the digital divide matter? Factors and conditions that promote ICT literacy. Telematics and Informatics, 58, 101536. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2020.101536

Bachmann, N., Rose, R., Maul, V., & Hölzle, K. (2024). What makes for future entrepreneurs? The role of digital competencies for entrepreneurial intention. Journal of Business Research, 174, 114481. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114481

Balgiu, B. A., Cotoară, D. M., & Simionescu-Panait, A. (2024). Validation of the Internet entrepreneurial self-efficacy scale among Romanian technical students. PLOS ONE, 19(10), e0312929. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0312929

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.

Barra, C., Grimaldi, M., Muazzam, A., Troisi, O., & Visvizi, A. (2024). Digital divide, gender gap, and entrepreneurial orientation: How to foster technology adoption among Pakistani higher education students? Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 93, 101904. doi:10.1016/j.seps.2024.101904

Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(3), 464–504. doi:10.1080/10705510701301834

Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5

Elnadi, M., & Gheith, M. H. (2023). The role of individual characteristics in shaping digital entrepreneurial intention among university students: Evidence from Saudi Arabia. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 47, 101236. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101236

Enders, C. K. (2022). Applied missing data analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. doi:10.1177/002224378101800104

Gieure, C., Benavides-Espinosa, M. del M., & Roig-Dobón, S. (2020). The entrepreneurial process: The link between intentions and behavior. Journal of Business Research, 112, 541–548. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.088

Grömping, U. (2006). Relative importance for linear regression in R: The package relaimpo. Journal of Statistical Software, 17(1), 1–27. doi:10.18637/jss.v017.i01

Groves, R. M. (2006). Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70(5), 646–675. doi:10.1093/poq/nfl033

Hampton, K. N., Robertson, C. T., Fernandez, L., Shin, I., & Bauer, J. M. (2021). How variation in internet access, digital skills, and media use are related to rural student outcomes: GPA, SAT, and educational aspirations. Telematics and Informatics, 63, 101666. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2021.101666

Hayes, A. F. (2015). An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50(1), 1–22. doi:10.1080/00273171.2014.962683

Hayes, A. F. (2022). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. doi:10.1007/BF02289447

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118

Igolkina, A. A., & Meshcheryakov, G. (2020). semopy: A Python package for structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 27(6), 952–963. doi:10.1080/10705511.2019.1704289

Johnson, J. W., & LeBreton, J. M. (2004). History and use of relative importance indices in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 7(3), 238–257. doi:10.1177/1094428104266510

Kivuyo, R. B., Das, R., & Mbarak, K. S. (2025). Social media capital, facilitating conditions, and digital self-efficacy: An integrated model of internet entrepreneurship intention in India. Cogent Education, 12(1), 2587492. doi:10.1080/2331186X.2025.2587492

Kock, F., Berbekova, A., & Assaf, A. G. (2021). Understanding and managing the threat of common method bias: Detection, prevention and control. Tourism Management, 86, 104330. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2021.104330

Kraus, S., Palmer, C., Kailer, N., Kallinger, F. L., & Spitzer, J. (2019). Digital entrepreneurship: A research agenda on new business models for the twenty-first century. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 25(2), 353–375. doi:10.1108/IJEBR-06-2018-0425

Krueger, N. F., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5–6), 411–432. doi:10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00033-0

Lam, B. Q., Tran, H. Y., Nguyen, K. A., Nguyen, K. T., & Pham, M. (2025). Digital competence and digital entrepreneurial intention: A social cognitive approach. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 13(2), 139–153. doi:10.15678/EBER.2025.130208

Li, C.-H. (2016). Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behavior Research Methods, 48(3), 936–949. doi:10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7

Liñán, F., & Chen, Y.-W. (2009). Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593–617. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00318.x

Lindeman, R. H., Merenda, P. F., & Gold, R. Z. (1980). Introduction to bivariate and multivariate analysis. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

Little, R. J. A. (1988). A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83(404), 1198–1202. doi:10.1080/01621459.1988.10478722

MacCallum, R. C., Wegener, D. T., Uchino, B. N., & Fabrigar, L. R. (1993). The problem of equivalent models in applications of covariance structure analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114(1), 185–199. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.114.1.185

Maxwell, S. E., & Cole, D. A. (2007). Bias in cross-sectional analyses of longitudinal mediation. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 23–44. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.12.1.23

Mir, A. A., Hassan, S., & Khan, S. J. (2023). Understanding digital entrepreneurial intentions: A capital theory perspective. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 18(12), 6165–6191. doi:10.1108/IJOEM-05-2021-0687

Nambisan, S. (2017). Digital entrepreneurship: Toward a digital technology perspective of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(6), 1029–1055. doi:10.1111/etap.12254

Nguyen, T. T., Dao, T. T., Tran, T. B., Nguyen, H. T. T., Le, L. T. N., & Pham, N. T. T. (2024). Fintech literacy and digital entrepreneurial intention: Mediator and moderator effect. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 4(1), 100222. doi:10.1016/j.jjimei.2024.100222

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452

Preacher, K. J., & Kelley, K. (2011). Effect size measures for mediation models: Quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychological Methods, 16(2), 93–115. doi:10.1037/a0022658

Rhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P. É., & Savalei, V. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 354–373. doi:10.1037/a0029315

Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York, NY: Wiley.

Rucker, D. D., Preacher, K. J., Tormala, Z. L., & Petty, R. E. (2011). Mediation analysis in social psychology: Current practices and new recommendations. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(6), 359–371. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00355.x

Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399–419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Scheerder, A., van Deursen, A., & van Dijk, J. (2017). Determinants of Internet skills, uses and outcomes: A systematic review of the second- and third-level digital divide. Telematics and Informatics, 34(8), 1607–1624. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.07.007

Schlaegel, C., & Koenig, M. (2014). Determinants of entrepreneurial intent: A meta-analytic test and integration of competing models. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(2), 291–332. doi:10.1111/etap.12087

Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176. doi:10.1287/isre.6.2.144

Thoemmes, F. (2015). Reversing arrows in mediation models does not distinguish plausible models. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 37(4), 226–234. doi:10.1080/01973533.2015.1049351

Vamvaka, V., Stoforos, C., Palaskas, T., & Botsaris, C. (2020). Attitude toward entrepreneurship, perceived behavioral control, and entrepreneurial intention: Dimensionality, structural relationships, and gender differences. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 9, 5. doi:10.1186/s13731-020-0112-0

van Buuren, S., & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K. (2011). mice: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 45(3), 1–67. doi:10.18637/jss.v045.i03

van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2019). The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New Media & Society, 21(2), 354–375. doi:10.1177/1461444818797082

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. doi:10.2307/30036540

Ventrella, F. M., & Cotnam-Kappel, M. (2024). Examining digital capital and digital inequalities in Canadian elementary schools: Insights from teachers. Telematics and Informatics, 86, 102070. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2023.102070

von Arnim, L., & Mrozewski, M. (2020). Entrepreneurship in an increasingly digital and global world: Evaluating the role of digital capabilities on international entrepreneurial intention. Sustainability, 12(19), 7984. doi:10.3390/su12197984

Vu, T. H., Do, A. D., Ha, D. L., Hoang, D. T., Van Le, T. A., & Le, T. T. H. (2024). Antecedents of digital entrepreneurial intention among engineering students. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 4(1), 100233. doi:10.1016/j.jjimei.2024.100233

Wardoyo, C., Narmaditya, B. S., Qurrata, V. A., Satrio, Y. D., & Sahid, S. (2025). Are students ready for digital business? Antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions among Indonesian students using a serial mediation. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 11, 101213. doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101213

Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206. doi:10.1086/651257