Content uploaded by Yolanda Salinero
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Yolanda Salinero on Nov 06, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
How entrepreneurship drives life
satisfaction among people with
intellectual disabilities (PwID):
a mixed-method approach
Virginia Barba-S
anchez, Yolanda Salinero, Pedro Jim
enez Est
evez and
Pablo Ruiz-Palomino
Department of Business Administration, University of Castilla-La Mancha,
Ciudad Real, Spain
Abstract
Purpose –The high and persistent unemployment rates of people with intellectual disabilities (PwID) reveal
the wide gap that still remains to be bridged. Entrepreneurship combinedly with a high enterprising tendency
could improve PwID’s life satisfaction.
Design/methodology/approach –A mixed-method approach was used, based on questionnaires and
structured face-to-face interviews on 37 PwID who had recently become entrepreneurs. Data were firstly
quantitatively analyzed using partial least squares-structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM), and qualitative
data were used to enable robust findings.
Findings –The entrepreneurial tendency of PwID who had recently become entrepreneurs was found to be a
positive to their life quality (LQ), job satisfaction and life satisfaction.
Research limitations/implications –This study revealed that entrepreneurship among PwID who had
high enterprising tendency enhances their LQ, job satisfaction and life satisfaction. However, further research
could evaluate whether becoming an entrepreneur is in itself enough to change PwID’s life to better, such that a
comparison could be done between PwID who become entrepreneurs and PwID who have a salaried job.
Practical implications –New aspects in the design of public social policies to improve PwID’s life
satisfaction are suggested. These include the facilitation of both entrepreneurship and enterprising tendency
for PwID to enhance their life satisfaction.
Originality/value –There are very few occasions in which PwID set up businesses. This is one of the first
studies to analyze the benefit of entrepreneurship and enterprising tendency on the LQ, the satisfaction at work
and the life satisfaction of PwID.
Keywords Entrepreneurship, Intellectual disabilities, Life satisfaction, Life quality, Job satisfaction,
Enterprising tendency
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Employment is one of the most important aspects that can condition our lives, our personal
relationships and even our health. It is a fundamental pillar of society and one of the main
activities in industrialized societies, such that it helps organize people’s lives and contributes
to their psycho-social and economic development (Wiklund et al., 2019). However, self-
employment may have more positive benefits among those who start their own business,
especially among those people who find it difficult to enter the labor market.
Entrepreneurship has an unquestionable social value per se, since it contributes to the
socioeconomic development of the context in which it takes place. Yet when it is developed
among particularly vulnerable groups, the effect of this value on society and the group of
people with disabilities (PwD), in particular, is unquantifiable.
PwD often find it difficult to enter the labor market, signifying that entrepreneurship is
often seen as an opportunity to work and earn a living (Norstedt and Germundsson, 2021).
In their research, P
erez-Mac
ıas and Fern
andez-Fern
andez (2022) state that the factors that
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/0025-1747.htm
Received 15 November 2022
Revised 13 February 2023
Accepted 10 March 2023
Management Decision
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0025-1747
DOI 10.1108/MD-11-2022-1568
most affect PwD’s decisions to become entrepreneurs are self-fulfillment, the search for
autonomy, freedom and independence. However, self-employment as a suitable alternative
for these people (and as an option that has positive outcomes among these people) has been
understudied when compared to other labor market policy strategies, despite the increasing
level of entrepreneurship occurring lately among groups considered to be marginalized
(Gidron and Monnickendam-Givon, 2017). In the US, for example, in 2019, PwD were running
their own businesses to a greater extent than the non-disabled population: 10% of PwD were
entrepreneurs, compared to 5.9% of the rest of the population (US Bureau of Labor Statistics,
2020). This same pattern can also be found in Australia (Maritz and Laferriere, 2016) and
Europe, but with large differences between countries: when compared to Northern and
Eastern Europe, PwD seem, for example, to be more often self-employed in Southern Europe
(OECD/European Union, 2014).
People with intellectual disabilities (PwID) are a particularly vulnerable group within the
PwD field that has traditionally experienced situations of exclusion that constitute a clear
violation of the rights enshrined in the 2007 Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (UN General Assembly, 2007).They are less likely to participate in mainstream
education than people without disabilities (Emerson et al., 2012) and have more limited social
networks and less frequent mutually satisfying interpersonal relationships (Hostyn and
Maes, 2009). They additionally comprise a group of people who are more likely to remain in
segregated environments (Mansell, 2006) and are more likely to confront greater difficulties in
exercising their right to self-determination (Murphy et al., 2011). Notwithstanding the above,
many studies focused on this group of people have highlighted the relationship between
employment and their well-being. Some authors have, for example, shown that PwID can
successfully hold jobs and contribute to the community (Kober and Eggleton, 2005) while
improving their self-esteem and social esteem (Jenaro et al., 2004). However, if it is already
difficult for PwD to find a job (e.g. in Spain, only 25.9% of the PwD group are officially
recognized as an active population, National Statistics Institute, 2020), for PwIDs, who
constitute a more vulnerable group than the former, the chances of doing so diminish
ostensibly. Nevertheless, according to the social theory of disability (i.e. Abberley, 1987),
PwIDs are citizens with rights who must not be excluded from participating in the diversity of
activities launched in society, while the positive psychology theory (i.e. Seligman, 2011) states
that civic virtues (i.e. responsibility, altruism, courtesy, moderation, tolerance, work ethics)
should be encouraged at a societal level, including groups of vulnerable people. Encouraging
self-employment among PwIDs could, therefore, help fulfill both demands, as it is an option
that completely eliminates the problem of the little labor integration usually experienced by
these people (P
erez-Mac
ıas and Fern
andez-Fern
andez, 2021). This option is also highly
recommendable for this group of people as it could provide them flexible working hours and
freedom/control over their work, which is highly appreciated as regards improving their life
quality (LQ) and life satisfaction (Ostrow et al., 2019). In fact, previous studies have shown
that self-employment is positive for people with mental disabilities, as it facilitates their
adaptation and flexibility to combine their work with medical treatment (Ashley and Graf,
2018) and favors increased levels of self-esteem and self-fulfillment (Klerk, 2008).
Notwithstanding the above, much previous research has focused exclusively on
identifying the environmental factors and differentiating personality traits that determine
entrepreneurial intention among PwD (P
erez-Mac
ıas and Fern
andez-Fern
andez, 2021) or on
the barriers they encounter in business creation (Renko et al., 2016). However, research on
entrepreneurs with disabilities is poorly understood, very fragmented and highly descriptive
(Mota et al.,2020). Further studies are, therefore, required to demonstrate how
entrepreneurship can improve the well-being-related outcomes of people with these
disabilities (PwID), and this study aims to bridge this gap, and to contribute as regards
previous calls for more “practical steps that can be taken to improve the employment
MD
outcomes [of this group of people] (Bainbridge and Fujimoto, 2018, p. 95). The purpose of this
study is, therefore, to analyze how entrepreneurship goes hand in hand with a general
enterprising tendency (GET) and helps PwID who have recently become entrepreneurs to see
their LQ, job satisfaction and life satisfaction enhanced. Our prediction is based on Seligman’s
positive psychology theory (Seligman, 2011) and Ryan and Deci’s (2000) self-determination
theory’s (SDT) argument that it is the fulfillment of values/needs that predicts well-being-
related outcomes. Our prediction also draws on the job or occupational person–fit theory
(see Cable and Edwards, 2004;McCarthy et al., 2022), which argues that such outcomes are
also more easily achieved when people’s preferences, wants or values (GET, in our case) fit the
role any individual has to execute at work (the role of entrepreneur, in our case).
This study helps elucidate whether efforts made by institutions to improve LQ, job
satisfaction and life satisfaction among PwID should rely only on supporting
entrepreneurship among these people or also, on implementing activities directed at
activating GETs among them. Furthermore, this study advances previous research that
focuses only on the mechanisms favoring entrepreneurship among PwID, but that ignores
whether and how it can benefit them in terms of LQ, job satisfaction and life satisfaction.
After this introduction, we review extant literature on the theoretical background in order
to develop hypotheses. The third section describes the method used, including sample and
procedure, measures and analytical techniques. Finally, the fourth section presents the
results, and the fifth describes the discussion and conclusions.
2. Theoretical framework and development of hypotheses
2.1 Theories and background on people with disabilities and entrepreneurship
The World Health Organization (WHO) defines disability as a complex phenomenon
resulting from the interaction between individual characteristics and the social environment,
and defines PwD as those people who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory
impairments which, in interaction with various barriers, may hinder their full and effective
participation in society on an equal basis with others (WHO, 2011). As seen, this concept
encompasses multiple areas of disability, among which, intellectual disability is likely the
most limiting. PwID differ from PwD in that the former are mainly characterized by
possessing significant limitations in both intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior,
thus being limited in their conceptual, social and adaptive skills (Schalock et al., 2010), with
the latter referring to important areas of life such as communication, leisure, health and
safety, self-care, home living, self-direction and work (Caldwell, 2014). Indeed, when
compared with other types of disability, PwID may experience major difficulties in engaging
in functional daily activities independently (Duttlinger et al., 2013), with an inability to
determine the right time for activities and a failure to take the initiative and start to perform
them (Cannella-Malone et al., 2013). These people, therefore, have less control over their
finances, less possibility of receiving loans, an increased need for support in the loan
acquisition process, and smaller and less diverse social networks (Caldwell et al., 2020b).
PwID are also more in need of strong support from family circles, and require stronger
support (e.g. personal assistants) in most of their day-to-day activities (Caldwell et al., 2020b),
especially in those that, like entrepreneurship, require social communicative skills to be
successfully realized (Odewale et al., 2019).
PwID, therefore, have greater difficulties in confronting day-to-day challenges than other
disabled people, and this situation is aggravated when they also confront the multiple
restrictions caused by society (e.g. systemic barriers, institutional forms of exclusion, cultural
attitudes embedded in social practices that are intentionally or unintentionally
discriminatory to these people, etc.). It is, therefore, no surprise that LQ, well-being and life
satisfaction may be at a reduced level among these people, unless initiatives are implemented
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
to defend and transform these people’s lives, which the social theory of disability (see
Abberley, 1987) strongly supports. This theory supports that strategies and initiatives be
implemented to smooth the multiple barriers that impede equitable support according to
disabled peoples’needs (Abberley, 1987)–all to promote the LQ and well-being of these
people –which is certainly feasible when these initiatives are oriented toward helping these
people to meet innate psychological nutriments such as the need for competence, relatedness
and autonomy (see SDT, Ryan and Deci, 2000), and/or feel positive emotions, be engaged in
activities that provide meaning and purpose, have positive relationships with others and
savor a sense of achievement in what they do (Positive psychology theory, Seligman, 2011). It
is consequently no surprise that in supporting PwD, the institutional implementation of
training strategies that favor these people’s personal and professional development is
becoming increasingly common, as these strategies, that range from the provision of support
(Hardonk and Halld
orsd
ottir, 2021) and mentoring (Wilson et al., 2018) to job adaptation
(Buhariwala et al., 2015), are helpful for them to cope better with the challenging environment
they usually confront (Caldwell et al., 2020a,b).
One means that has recently appeared as being effective to help PwD/PwID comprises
training and supportive initiatives to help them enroll in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship
as a career involves the development of certain behaviors, such as seeking opportunities,
achieving a sense of independence and fulfillment, taking initiative to do things, solving
problems creatively, building social networks, etc (cf., Gibb, 2008), all of which is closely
related to achieving emotional well-being, meaning in life, good social networks and a sense of
accomplishment, and therefore, to well-being and life satisfaction from both positive
psychology (cf., Seligman, 2011) or SDT (Ryan and Deci, 2000) perspectives. Training
initiatives oriented toward helping these people start their business could, therefore, help
them achieve high quotas of LQ, job satisfaction and life satisfaction. PwD not only
experience higher levels of unemployment but are also more likely to receive low wages and
experience work discrimination (Somavia, 2007). Participation in entrepreneurship is,
therefore, likely an optimal response strategy to this situation of discrimination, a
phenomenon that recent literature has noted and has increased lately (Caldwell et al., 2016)
and that, as Table 1 reflects, has recently received great attention, although studies
addressing entrepreneurship among PwID are still scant (Caldwell et al., 2020a,b;Ashley and
Graf, 2018).
Of all the recent studies, Table 1 shows on PwD/PwID and entrepreneurship, only a few
have addressed the benefits that self-employment brings to PwD (e.g. active integration into
society, Nefedyeva et al., 2021; self-realization, Bukari et al., 2021; freedom, Hidegh et al., 2022),
and that are, in some respects, positively related to having well-being related outcomes. Most
of these studies were, however, focused on the factors and motivators that promote
entrepreneurship among these people, and on the processes and enablers that facilitate their
entry into and success in entrepreneurship (P
erez-Mac
ıas and Fern
andez-Fern
andez, 2022;
Alvarado Blanquer et al., 2020;Caldwell et al., 2020a,b;Hsieh et al., 2019;Ashley and Graf,
2018;Saxena and Pandya, 2018;Renko et al., 2016), and practically ignored (with the
exception of Darcy et al., 2022) exploring “how”entrepreneurship helps PwID enhance
aspects such as LQ, job satisfaction and life satisfaction in any depth. However, this is a topic
of interest, to the extent that if it is demonstrated that there is such a relationship and “how”
this relationship exists, further research and institutional efforts on this topic could be
reactivated.
When combined, the social theory of disability (Abberley, 1987) and the positive
psychology theory (Seligman, 2011) seem to support the impact of entrepreneurship on
positive outcomes for PwID such as LQ, job satisfaction and life satisfaction. Recent studies,
for example, argue that entrepreneurship is a good option for PwD as it provides flexibility
(Wehman et al., 2015) and could potentially provide these people with engagement, meaning
MD
and accomplishment, to ultimately enhance their well-being and LQ (cf., Uyanik et al.,2017).
However, the job–person fit (Cable and Edwards, 2004) or occupational–personality fit theories
(McCarthy et al., 2022) argue that this would only be true if the personality or attitudes of the
people who start a business suitall those values and attitudes that the entrepreneurship career
represents. Indeed, when understood as the degree of alignment between the individual
attributes (e.g. desire for autonomy, creative tendency) and the job (cf., Cable and Edwards,
2004), job–person fit is expected to enhance the engagement of people in what they do (Bailey
et al., 2017), which, according to the positive psychology theory (Seligman, 2011), should help
people experience a satisfying job and life. This theory also states that the match of one’s
personality with the personality of a type of job is a key aspect as regards people finding their
work satisfying and being happier (McCarthy et al., 2022), and previous literature has showed
that this fit is critical if entrepreneurs are to be successful in their entrepreneurial projects
(Markman and Baron, 2003). Given that entrepreneurship as a career is likely to be chosen by
people with disabilities “out of obligation,”as a response to the discrimination and lack of
opportunities they perceive in the job market (Caldwell et al., 2020a), the entrepreneurial
Authors Objectives Methodology and sample size
Darcy et al. (2022) Entrepreneurs with disability: their
motivations, barriers, enablers, outcomes
and benefits
Qualitative. 60 PwD (i.e. only 6 were
PwID)
Hidegh et al. (2022) The lived experience of freedom among
entrepreneurs with disabilities
Qualitative. 29 PwD (None were PwID)
P
erez-Mac
ıas and
Fern
andez-
Fern
andez (2022)
Personal and contextual factors influencing
the entrepreneurial intentions of people with
disabilities
9 focus group discussions and one
interview
Bukari et al. (2021) Understanding the perspectives and lived
experiences of women entrepreneurs with
physical disabilities in a developing country
Qualitative. 6 PwD (None were PwID)
Nefedyeva et al.
(2021)
Entrepreneurship as an alternative form of
employment for disabled people
Qualitative. 50 PwD were interviewed
in 2017 and 72PwD and 12 experts
were interviewed in 2019
Alvarado et al. (2020) Entrepreneurial trajectories in people with
disabilities: Characteristics and
conditioning factors
Qualitative. 4 PwD (None were PwID)
Caldwell et al., 2020a Inclusive entrepreneurship and motivation
among people with intellectual disability
Qualitative. 7 PwID
Caldwell et al. (2020b) Inclusive management for social
entrepreneurs with intellectual disabilities
Qualitative. 7 PwID
Hsieh et al. (2019) Analysis on “how”different challenges
inspire impaired people to become self-
employed and how such challenges are
overcome through adaptive mechanisms
Qualitative. 13 PwD. (None were
PwID)
Ashley and Graf
(2018)
The process and experiences of self-
employment among people with disabilities
Qualitative. 18 PwD (among which 1
had cognitive disability)
Saxena and Pandya
(2018)
Exploring the role of challenges due to
disability that impaired people has had in
their life as enablers and facilitators of
certain aspects that lead them to take up
entrepreneurship successfully
Qualitative. 8 PwD
Renko et al. (2016) Entrepreneurial entry by people with
disabilities. Which is the effect of disability
on progress in the start-up process?
Quantitative. 150 PwD and1064
people without disabilities
Source(s): Table by authors
Table 1.
Current previous
studies on
entrepreneurship and
people with disability
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
personality of some of these people may not suit attributes entrepreneurs usually have
(e.g. GET, high need for achievement, high need for autonomy, calculated risk-taking, internal
locus of control, creative tendency, Caird, 2013). When combined with the social theory of
disability (Abberley, 1987) and the positive psychology theory (Seligman, 2011), the job or
occupational person–fit theory (Cable and Edwards, 2004;McCarthy et al., 2022)could,
therefore, help to explain how the combination of entrepreneurship and GET is the key to
promoting LQ, job satisfaction (and by impacting on these two aforementioned well-being
related outcomes), life satisfaction among PwID, as described below.
2.2 Enterprising tendency and life satisfaction among entrepreneurs who are PwIDs
According to theories such as positive psychology (Seligman, 2011) or SDT (Ryan and Deci,
2000), people have greater levels of well-being when their basic and core needs
(e.g. competence, relatedness, autonomy, positive emotions, engagement in activities that
provide meaning and purpose, etc.) are met. Entrepreneurship, as a career option that allows
individuals to express their personal interests in life (Morales and Holtschlag, 2013) and
allows each of these needs to be met, can be a goal in itself, that, when achieved, enhances
levels of life satisfaction (Brieger et al., 2020). Defined as a state of well-being and sense of
pleasure and satisfaction with aspirations and goals (Pavot and Diener, 1993), life satisfaction
occurs when individuals see that their attributes, aspirations and goals are being met, and
this is more likely to occur when they are self-employed –which entails self-determination
and autonomy –than working for others (Larsson and Thulin, 2019;Binder and Croad, 2013).
However, research has also found that this greater life satisfaction occurs among
entrepreneurs who have certain enterprising characteristics (e.g. internal locus of control,
need for independence, etc.) (cf., Larsson and Thulin, 2019;Binder and Croad, 2013) which
according to the job or occupational person–fit theory (McCarthy et al., 2022;Cable and
Edwards, 2004) makes sense. Entrepreneurship is, therefore, likely not sufficient to lead to life
satisfaction, but the greatest experience of life satisfaction may rather occur when
entrepreneurship is combined with having a high GET.
It is already known that people who decide to become entrepreneurs tend to be strongly
satisfied with their jobs (Naud
eet al., 2014), apparently because they experience greater
independence and autonomy at work. However, when people become entrepreneurs out of
necessity –which usually occurs when there is lack of alternative career opportunities
(Carsrud and Br€
annback, 2011)–they may not score high in GET, so they may not be happy
with this situation in their life and would likely report lower levels of life satisfaction (Larsson
and Thulin, 2019). Given that life satisfaction refers to a global evaluation one makes
regarding one’s own life and whether it exceeds (or otherwise) the standard by which it is
compared (Pavot et al., 1991), necessity entrepreneurs may not be satisfied with having to
decide “which”tasks to perform and “how”to carry them out, on a daily basis (Benz and Frey,
2008). Instead, high GET people who have recently become entrepreneurs will be satisfied
with their current life because entrepreneurship gives them the opportunity to enjoy more
task and skill variety, daily (Sev€
aet al., 2016), and also leads them to prove themselves
through their work and make a difference in their lives –doing something useful with their
work, and their lives (Lange, 2012). Thus,
H1. GET among PwID who have recently become entrepreneurs is directly and
positively related to their life satisfaction.
2.3 Enterprising tendency and life quality among entrepreneurs who are PwID
According to the WHO, LQ “is a very broad concept that is influenced in a complex way by the
subject’s physical health, psychological state, level of independence, social relationships, as well as
MD
his/her relationship with the essential elements of his/her environment”(WHOQOL Group,
1998, p. 552). Sen (1987) goes even further and states that LQ is much more than meeting basic
needs; it also encompasses more complex functioning and capabilities (e.g. self-dignity, social
inclusion) that proxy the concept of human development. In this regard, LQ for PwID is linked
to the possibilities of those people to decide and choose between different options in their
lives, along with the allowance for these people to express tastes, desires, goals and
aspirations, and participate in the decisions that affect their lives, such as being included in
the labor market (Sen, 1987;UN General Assembly, 2007).
Literature postulates that entrepreneurship gives choice and decision-making power to
self-employed individuals, thus likely helping them to improve well-being related outcomes
such as LQ, as may be seen from a positive psychology (Seligman, 2011) and SDT perspective
(Ryan and Deci, 2000). In fact, Morris and Lewis (1991) show that an environment that fosters
innovativeness, risk-taking and proactivity enhances one’s LQ experience. Previous research
has already showed that entrepreneurship among PwD/PwID is likely positive for these
people’s LQ (e.g. Darcy et al., 2022), thanks, among other things, to improving their lives,
along with their skills and sense of self-sufficiency (Wiklund et al., 2019). However, according
to the job or occupational person–fit theory (McCarthy et al., 2022;Cable and Edwards, 2004),
LQ is more likely to occur if the option of entrepreneurship fits the individual’s personal
tendencies and attributes, such that among entrepreneurs, LQ will be higher if these people’s
levels of GET are also high. Thus,
H2. GET among PwID who have recently become entrepreneurs is directly related to
their LQ.
2.4 Enterprising tendency and job satisfaction among entrepreneurs who are PwID
According to Locke et al. (1976), job satisfaction is the pleasurable emotional state resulting
from the subjective perception of one’s work experiences, or as Curry et al. (1986) state, a
positive affective orientation towards one’s job. Such a positive perception is more likely to
emerge when the job provides discretion, freedom or independence and feedback, and when it
is significant and also provides the opportunity to use a variety of skills (see Hackman and
Oldham, 1980), all of which are the typical needs whose fulfillment the positive psychology
theory (Seligman, 2011) and SDT (Ryan and Deci, 2000) establish as core aspects leading to
high states of well-being and satisfaction. This is, therefore, an experience that is more likely
to emerge among entrepreneurs than among employees, probably owing to the higher
autonomy and flexibility that the entrepreneurial option offers (Rojas et al., 2022). Indeed, the
greater independent lifestyle, autonomy, flexibility and skill utilization self-employed people
experience when compared to employees, make job satisfaction higher among the latter than
among the former (Binder and Croad, 2013). However, the job or occupational person–fit
theory (see Cable and Edwards, 2004;McCarthy et al., 2022) argues that the alignment of the
individual’s attributes with the personality of an occupation or job is also an important
element as regards experiencing job satisfaction, given that this person–job alignment allows
people to express what they are and want to realize in their lives. If individuals who have high
GET (i.e. willingness to build creative projects autonomously, with energy, self-determination
and a calculated risk-taking manner, see Caird, 2013) become entrepreneurs, they are,
therefore, likely to be satisfied with their current job (as entrepreneurs). In effect, and in line
with previous literature that shows high job satisfaction when a fit between the persons and
their working life exists (Edwards, 2008), we therefore predict that along with high GET,
PwIDs who are self-employed will be more satisfied with their jobs. Thus,
H3. GET among PwID who have recently become entrepreneurs is directly related to
their job satisfaction.
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
2.5 Life quality and life satisfaction among entrepreneurs who are PwID
Although LQ and life satisfaction are different concepts, they are closely and positively
related. Literature states that LQ comprises several dimensions such as “well-being”and “life
satisfaction”(Granzin, 1987). For example, Sirgy et al. (1985) describe LQ as a composite of
psychological (i.e. life satisfaction) and physical well-being (i.e. life expectancy), while Granzin
(1987) suggests that perceived LQ is a function of the degree of satisfaction one finds in a
given state of affairs compared to a desired state of affairs. Other research studies have
analyzed LQ in relation to theories of need satisfaction; for example, Sirgy’s (1986) and
Zinam’s (1989) hierarchy of needs has been used to analyze improvements in LQ as a
movement from lower-order needs (i.e. physiological, safety needs) to the satisfaction of
higher-order needs (i.e. self-fulfillment). Given that previous research has positively related
the satisfaction of higher order needs (i.e. friendship, sense of connection) to higher levels of
life satisfaction (Keng et al., 2000), a positive relationship between LQ and life satisfaction is
expected. Tokay Argan and Mersin (2021) have, for example, shown a positive relationship
between LQ and life satisfaction. Thus,
H4. LQ among PwID who have recently become entrepreneurs is directly and positively
related to their life satisfaction.
2.6 Job satisfaction and life satisfaction among entrepreneurs who are PwID
Previous research has indicated that job satisfaction and life satisfaction are likely to be
positively related (Vallejo et al., 2001). Literature supports this statement by arguing that both
involve emotional states, feelings and affective responses (Unanue et al., 2017), and that work
is an important sphere of one’s life, such that when one is satisfied with the job, one enjoys
being at and doing one’s job (Mafini and Dlodlo, 2014) and one is, therefore, more likely to also
be satisfied with one’s life overall. Indeed, according to the spillover model (see Chacko, 1983),
work is a central life activity on which a large amount of time is spent, so good feelings about
one’s work are highly likely to result in good feelings regarding one’s life (Chacko, 1983).
Some have even indicated that job satisfaction is a key indicator of overall life satisfaction (see
Mafini and Dlodlo, 2014), and various studies have even revealed the existence of a positive
relationship between both variables (Unanue et al., 2017;Mafini and Dlodlo, 2014). Thus,
H5. Job satisfaction among PwID who have recently become entrepreneurs is directly
and positively related to their life satisfaction.
2.7 Indirect effects of enterprising tendency on life satisfaction
The above arguments and hypotheses (H1–H5) suggest that both LQ and job satisfaction
mediate the relationship between GET and life satisfaction among self-employed PwID.
In effect, entrepreneurship offers people great autonomy and independence in what they do,
which, according to Seligman’s positive psychology theory (Seligman, 2011) and the SDT
(Ryan and Deci, 2000), fulfills core values or needs people usually have in their life and whose
fulfillment predicts their well-being. It is, therefore, no surprise that the entrepreneurship
option leads PwID to experience enhanced levels of job satisfaction (Benz and Frey, 2008) and
LQ (Tripathi and Moakumla, 2018), especially if, as the job or occupational person–fit theory
(Cable and Edwards, 2004;McCarthy et al., 2022) supports, these PwID score high in GET.
Unlike those with low GET scores, high GET individuals, who wish to be independent,
autonomous and are creative oriented, fit the entrepreneurship role better and are more likely
to experience an overlap between their personal interests and their day-to-day work activities
(Lange, 2012), all of which will be positive for their LQ and job satisfaction. Given, then, that
LQ and job satisfaction are both aspect(s) that one expects to attain in life (Mafini and Dlodlo,
2014), we predict that both LQ and job satisfaction may mediate the relationship between
MD
GET and life satisfaction among self-employed PwID. This is consistent with previous
research arguing that life satisfaction is the result of satisfaction with various life domains
(Rode, 2004), and that both the job and the LQ are some of these dimensions that help
individuals make overall life satisfaction evaluations (Mafini and Dlodlo, 2014).
Accordingly, then
H6a. The relationship between GET and life satisfaction of PwID who have recently
become entrepreneurs is mediated by their LQ
H6b. The relationship between GET and life satisfaction of PwID who have recently
become entrepreneurs is mediated by their job satisfaction
3. Materials and methods
3.1 Sample and data collection
The study population was composed of PwID from a Spanish region (Castilla–La Mancha)
who had set up a business in the last 3 years. This process was carried out contacting the 24
entities officially registered in Castilla–La Mancha as providing help to PwD and PwID to
obtain information regarding this specific issue, i.e. the number of PwID who had set up their
own business during the last 3 years. No known registers of this type were reported, which is
not atypical, according to previous research (cf., Darcy et al., 2022;Caldwell et al., 2020a,b).
As such, and given that we wished to know how GET could make a difference for PwID who
had set up their own business, we contacted the Spanish Group of Social entities called
CECAP –a central entity in the region of Castilla–La Mancha that provides training services
to PID and PwID to allow them to access different areas (e.g. employment, education,
independent living) –to build our own study sample. Having such a sample was important in
our research as we therefore ensured that the participants’GETs were highly variable
(cf., Cromie, 2000), which allowed us to analyze their role in helping entrepreneurship foster
their job satisfaction, LQ and life satisfaction. CECAP specifically proposed potential PwID
candidates to take a training course in entrepreneurship through which these participants
would receive help to create their own business. In this selection process, we considered that
participants had to have a recognized degree of intellectual disability with a percentage of at
least 33%, along with sufficient autonomy and literacy skills –an assessment of the
participants’individual characteristics was carried out to identify their strengths and
weaknesses in terms of personal and professional competencies, skills and abilities using the
MiRed technological tool, see https://www.mired.cecaptoledo.es/login. Finally, all the
participants’families were required to give their consent to this training proposal, as it
was critical for these participants (PwID) to have the support of their families in the
development of their own business, as recommended by previous research (Porcelli
et al.,2014).
Once we had obtained the families’consent, data collection was carried out, which
occurred between January and July 2020, with a forced break between March and June owing
to the COVID-19 pandemic. This data collection process eventually resulted in a final sample
of 37 cases, which constitutes the study population in the reference environment (PwID who
had set up a business in the focus region) and, as can be seen in Table 1, this is even higher
than those in the few studies published in this area. Please note that once after the training
plan was implemented, all the participants’support needs were identified and an intervention
itinerary on entrepreneurship was designed to provide them with the resources required to
achieve the entrepreneurship goal and provide tools that would facilitate the viability of their
nascent business (G
alvez-S
anchez et al., 2022). Each participant additionally had a supportive
network of relationships, as suggested by Caldwell et al. (2019), who stated that entrepreneurs
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
with intellectual disabilities need to rely on formal and informal networks to a greater extent
than entrepreneurs with physical disabilities. Each participant, therefore, had someone
(supporter or advisor) who technically helped adapt the participants’competencies to the
environment and worked side by side with them to help them adapt the business plan to the
needs of the market, in addition to having a good collaboration and commercial network with
which to guarantee a certain viability of the nascent business. This advice was technical, yet
autonomy in decision-making was always ensured for the participants in this study.
3.2 Measures
The questionnaire was developed using simplified and easy-to-read terminology, as it had to
be easy to understand owing to the great cognitive difficulties PwID may have (Gjertsen,
2019). The questionnaire was reviewed by four academics, an entrepreneurship support
person and two people with cognitive disabilities in order to check that all the questions were
understandable. This process provided several suggestions that allowed improving some
questions. In order to guarantee the quality of the information obtained, we carried out
structured face-to-face interviews in which the input was transcribed to the questionnaires
and, given the characteristics of the population studied (PwID, with cognitive difficulties), the
average duration of the interviews was long, around one hour.
All constructs of the research model were measured using five-item Likert scales, where 1
corresponds to “never or to a very low degree”and 5 to “always or to a very high degree”.
GET was measured using Caird’s (2013) scale (GET2, available online at http://www.get2test.
net), which summarizes five entrepreneurial attributes: high need for achievement, high need
for autonomy, calculated risk-taking, internal locus of control and creative tendency. This has
been recommended by academics as being both reliable and internally consistent (Cromie,
2000;Liu et al., 2020;Keling et al., 2022). This scale had 54 items, with the even-numbered and
the odd-numbered items being formulated in a positive and a negative direction, respectively.
We first inverted the negative items and finally added up the points assigned to each
statement to obtain a score of between 54 and 270 points. The mean value of each of the
subscales was relatively high, with ratings above 3.0 in a 5-point Likert scale (M
achievement 53.61, M autonomy 53.49, M risk taking 53.52, M internal locus of
control 53.33, M creative tendency 53.42) and with low standard deviations ranging
between 0.49 and 0.58, thus demonstrating homogeneity in the responses given, and
revealing that each of these dimensions went hand in hand with each other to reflect the
respondent’s GET.
LQ and life satisfaction were measured using the Spanish version of the WHOQOL-BREF
scale (WHOQOL Group, 1998). This scale has also been extensively recommended as being
both reliable and internally consistent in previous research (Skevington et al., 2014;Casamali
et al., 2019). For this paper, the three items of the scale that correspond to a general
appreciation of both LQ and life satisfaction were omitted, as occurred in the Spanish variant
used by Benitez-Borrego et al. (2014). The LQ measure therefore consists of 13 items and the
life satisfaction construct consists of 10.
Finally, job satisfaction was measured using the Pond and Geyer scale (1991). This scale
comprises six items that address how people feel about their current job.
3.3 Analytical procedures
The hypotheses were tested using a sequential explanatory strategy and particularly a
mixed-method approach. We firstly started to carry out a quantitative analysis on our sample
of study (n 537). These data were analyzed using partial least squares (PLS) structural
equation modeling (SEM) with SmartPLS 4.0, which is suitable to test mediation hypotheses
(Hair et al., 2022) and has proven to have a good performance and statistical power when the
MD
sample size is relatively small (see Ruiz-Palomino et al., 2019;Hair and Alamer, 2022).
Unlike covariance-based SEM approaches that compute all relationships in the structural
model simultaneously, PLS-SEM works by estimating the structural model partially,
equation by equation, and therefore works efficiently when researchers wish to test
complex models with a limited sample size (Hair et al., 2022). Furthermore, the study
fulfilled the criterion stated in classical PLS-SEM research that the minimum sample size
should be more than 10 times the number of independent variables in the most complex
regression (Hair et al., 2011). The most complex regression contained 3 independent
variables, signifying that the minimum sample size was, according to this criterion, 30, and
we had a sample of n 537. The sample size of our study, though relatively small, was
therefore sufficient to quantitatively analyze the target constructs of our research model
and produce stable estimates with PLS (Henseler et al., 2014). Furthermore, as shown in
Table 1 (see section 2.1 in this document), most of the studies focusing on entrepreneurship
and disability do not succeed in attaining large samples, since some studies analyzing
entrepreneurship with PwID use only samples of 7 respondents as the maximum (Caldwell
et al., 2020a,b), likely owing to the difficulty of finding and carrying out research on PwID
who become entrepreneurs (cf., Darcy et al., 2022).
We then carried out a qualitative study with semi-structured interviews to gain a better
understanding of the aspects studied during the quantitative study (Venkatesh et al., 2013).
This was also used to achieve more in-depth and reliable findings for the relationships we had
quantitatively analyzed (Salehi and Golafshani, 2010). Since when carrying out qualitative
analyses no minimum number of interviewees is required, we followed previous
recommendations and conducted “interviews until [data saturation was reached, that is
until] the point at which the last few interviews did not provide new insights”(Rahajeng,
2022, p. 13). After we had analyzed the quantitative data, a subset of participants was,
therefore, interviewed in depth. These were purposely selected to attain more in-depth
knowledge about their arguments on whether and how GET impacted on their LQ, job
satisfaction and life satisfaction. In particular, following previous examples from literature
(see McCrudden and McTigue, 2019), participants among the top 5 who had scored the
highest and the lowest in GET were selected, although data saturation was reached after
interviewing 4 from each group. The interviews lasted an average of 45 min, and the sampling
of these extreme cases allowed us to compare individuals with differing GET –the dimension
of interest in this study –to better analyze the relationships predicted in this study. Table 2
visually shows the procedure followed for the mixed-method approach used.
4. Results
4.1 Quantitative phase
When evaluating the measurement model, we noted that the original constructs did not, at
first glance, have a good convergent validity. These scales had not been adapted to PwID, and
five items on the LQ scale, two concerning life satisfaction and three concerning job
satisfaction had to be discarded owing to low loadings; this was also done because a
comparison of the results obtained with those items included and with those items excluded
revealed no significant changes across path coefficients or Rsquares. Once those items were
deleted, the measurement model therefore fulfilled well-established recommendations from
literature (Hair et al., 2022), and the constructs used all had good internal consistency
reliability (Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability [CR] and Dijkstra–Henseler index [Rho_A]
were all above 0.7), good convergent validity (average variance extracted [AVE] was above
0.5), and strong discriminant validity; for discriminant validity, both the Fornell–Larcker
criterion and the Heterotrait–Monotrait [HTMT] ratio showed the distinctiveness of each of
the study constructs (see Table 3).
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
We next tested the significance of path coefficients by using a bootstrapping procedure
(using 10,000 resamples) based on percentile confidence intervals (Aguirre-Urreta and
R€
onkk€
o, 2018), and (as shown in Table 3) the data revealed that GET does not have a
significant direct influence on PwID’s life satisfaction (H1:β50.017, not significant).
However, GET positively impacted on PwID’sLQ(H2:β50.229; p< 0.001) and job
satisfaction (H3:β50.346; p< 0.001), and both LQ (H4:β50.791; p< 0.001) and job
satisfaction (H5:β50.158; p< 0.1) influenced PwID’s life satisfaction in a positive, significant
manner, especially PwID’s LQ. It should be noted that, for example, LQ explains the greatest
proportion of the variance in life satisfaction (55.3%), with this effect (f
2
) being greater than
Phase
Procedure
Personal interviews to collect data to fill in
questionnaires
Data analysis using partial least squares (PLS)
structural equation modelling (SEM)
Convenience sample of four participants from each
group (high GET, n= 4; Low GET, n= 4) using
extreme-case sampling.
Development of interview questions and the
interview protocol criteria
Individual semi-structured interviews with 4 low
GET participants and 4 high GET participants and
subsequent interview transcripts
Coding and thematic analysis
Within-group and across-group theme
development.
Interpretation and explanation of the quantitative-
qualitative results obtained
Quantitative data collection
Quantitative data analysis
Convenience
Sampling;
Interview Protocol
Development
Qualitative data collection
Qualitative data analysis
Integration of the
Quantitative and
Qualitative Results
Source(s): Table by authors
Construct
Cronbach’s
alpha
Dijkstrqa–
Henseler’s
rho_A
Composite
reliability
(CR)
Average
variance
extracted
(AVE)
Discriminant validity
2
Life
quality
Job
satisf
Life
satisf
Life Quality 0.864 0.870 0.893 0.511 0.715 0.257 0.869
Job Satisfaction 0.729 0.781 0.847 0.653 0.126 0.808 0.330
Life Satisfaction 0.911 0.920 0.929 0.621 0.699 0.749 0.788
Note(s): All constructs are estimated in Mode A. GET is excluded as it is measured with a single item
Discriminant validity was successfully tested using Fornell–Larcker and HTMT
0.90
methods (see Hair et al.,
2022). For the first method, diagonal elements (in italic), which are the square root of the variance shared
between the constructs and their measures (AVE), were higher than the correlations between the constructs, as
recommended. For the second method, values in italics above the diagonal are HTMT
0.90
values and must be
lower than 0.90
Source(s): Table by authors
Table 2.
The explanatory
sequential study
design procedure
Table 3.
Reliability estimates ,
convergent and
discriminant
validity of the
measurement model
MD
0.35 and very large (Cohen, 1988), thus indicating that LQ is a key to explaining life
satisfaction among PwID who have started up their own business.
Finally, regarding the indirect effects that GET was predicted to have on PwID’s life
satisfaction through LQ and job satisfaction (see Table 4), in both cases the mediation effects
are not significant (H6a:β50.181, not significant; H6b:β50.055, not significant). However,
we did detect a positive and significant total influence of GET on PwID’s life satisfaction
(β50.253; p< 0.1), which gives an idea of the potential joint mediation of both LQ and job
satisfaction in this relationship. In short, all the hypotheses except the first can be accepted
(see Figure 1). Hypotheses H6a and H6b, which referred to particular mediation of each of the
mediators proposed, could not be accepted, yet the mediation analysis revealed that GET’s
total positive influence on life satisfaction among PwID was significant, thus potentially
indicating that the joint effect of LQ and job satisfaction could be mediating this relationship.
H6, in its general formulation, could therefore be partially accepted: GET of PwID who have
become entrepreneur influences life satisfaction through the joint presence of LQ and job
satisfaction.
4.2 Qualitative phase
When carrying out this phase, we focused on those 5 individuals in our sample who attained
the highest and the lowest GET scores, respectively. Data saturation was, however, reached
earlier (with 4 individuals) and we interviewed only 4 individuals from each group.
Descriptive sentences were then extracted from the explanations given by the interviewees
regarding the assessments of their responses, as detailed below.
High in GET group. Among these groups of individuals, there was one who stated that
“the company she had started had changed her life”, such that when asked to specify “this
change”in greater detail, she indicated that “it had allowed her to manage to have autonomy, a
salary, a reason to fight ...”. Another of the entrepreneurs told us that she had gone to live in a
supervised apartment instead of continuing to live with her parents, so that “she felt that her
life had more quality, and she felt she was more satisfied with her life, as she was able to have an
independent life like other young people”. There was also one person who stated that “thanks to
having set up his own business, he was his own boss in this company, and he could therefore
adapt his work schedule to his life needs, which made him feel much better at work and improved
his life quality”. He also said that “he was much more satisfied with his life because he could go to
his therapies and sports activities without it interfering with his work schedule”. The final
entrepreneur interviewed highlighted that “her life and job satisfaction had improved
Construct Direct effect
1
t-value
2
pvalue
2
PCI
2
Explained variance
Life Satisfaction (R
2
50.691)
H1: GET 0.017 0.133 0.447 [0.225, 0.198] 0.019
H4: Life Quality 0.791 8.898 0.000 [0.653, 0.938] 0.553
H5: Job Satisfaction 0.158 1.462 0.072 [0.019, 0.369] 0.119
Life Quality (R
2
50.052)
H2: GET 0.229 1.376 0.099 [0.001, 0.518] 0.052
Job Satisfaction (R
2
50.118)
H3: GET 0.343 1.963 0.025 [0.041, 0.617] 0.118
Note(s): PCI: Percentile Confidence Interval. GET 5General Enterprising Tendency
1 Paths from hypothesis assessed by applying a one-tailed test at 5% of significance level [5%, 95%]
2 Bootstrapping based on n 510,000 bootstrap resamples
Source(s): Table by authors
Table 4.
Direct effects on
endogenous constructs
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
Figure 1.
Results for the
research model
MD
considerably”after she had started her own company; she said this was possible because “she
felt important”within the group, and her opinions were very much listened to”.
Low in GET group. Of these individuals, there was one who thought that “the work he was
doing in the company was similar to what they had done before being an entrepreneur”,sohe
considered that “his life quality and job satisfaction had not increased so much”. Another of the
interviewees stated that “his life quality and job satisfaction had not improved, because he did
not like the tasks he had to do in his company”. Two of the entrepreneurs were also in
agreement in their answers as they both opined that the activity in the company meant stress
because they had to do different and very varied tasks from the ones they had done to date:
one said “he felt more comfortable doing repetitive jobs with little responsibility”and another
also said that “his life quality and job satisfaction were worse than before having set up
the firm”.
5. Discussion and conclusions
Social policies aim to increase the activity and employment rates of PwID and to improve
and dignify their working conditions and end discrimination against this group. However,
as a means of achieving these goals, these policies often emphasize regular forms of
employment (in companies or public administrations with places reserved for them) or
sheltered employment (in centers set up for this purpose). These policies do not usually
focus on encouraging self-employment, a field in which there is a lack of specificity
regarding the activities that should be designed to enable this group of people to become
entrepreneurs, and more importantly, to make them happier and more satisfied with
their lives.
The aim of this paper was, therefore, to provide empirical evidence on the beneficial effects
of entrepreneurship on PwID’s life satisfaction, especially if these individuals had a high
GET. Although the main results of this study confirm that the GET of PwID who had become
entrepreneurs has a significant positive effect on their LQ and job satisfaction, as stated in
previous literature (cf., Tokay Argan and Mersin, 2021), our findings revealed that GET may
have not a direct, significant, positive relationship with PwIDs’life satisfaction, which differs
from those results obtained for non-PwID by authors such as Lange (2012) or Morales and
Holtschlag (2013). This divergence of results could originate from the cognitive differences
that exist between the general population and PwID. Yet the relationship between GET and
life satisfaction may exist not directly, but rather indirectly, through LQ or job satisfaction
together (see Table 5).
Hypothesis
Total effect of GET
1
(p-value)
2
Direct effect of
GET
1
(p-value)
2
Indirect effect
Path
1
(p-value)
2
PCI
2
VAF (%)
H6a: GET→Life
Quality
→Life Satisfaction
0.253 (0.064) 0.017 (0.447) 0.181
(0.117)
[0.065,
0.434]
71.55
H6b: GET→Job
Satisfaction
→Life Satisfaction
0.055
(0.160)
[0.003,
0.167]
21.74
Note(s): PCI: Percentile confidence interval
1 Paths from hypothesis assessed by applying a one-tailed test at 5% of significance level [5%, 95%]
2 Bootstrapping based on n 510,000 bootstrap resamples
Source(s): Table by authors
Table 5.
Results of the
mediation test for the
GET–life satisfaction
relationship
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
Nonetheless, our findings are similar to those of previous research that affirms that
entrepreneurship is not, in itself, sufficient to favor human development among
individuals (Camacho-Ballesta et al.,2020); if the entrepreneurship option does not suit
the individuals’personal characteristics or attributes (e.g. GET), dissatisfaction may occur
(El Harbi and Grolleau, 2012) and happiness can be hampered (Block et al.,2015).
Entrepreneurship can, therefore, provide great benefits to PwIDs, but only if they score
high in GET. The results of the qualitative part of the study confirm this finding: those who
scored high in Get always showed improvements in LQ, and in job and life satisfaction,
whereas this enhancement was more difficult to see among those who scored low in GET.
Our findings are, therefore, in line with those of Seligman (2011) and Ryan and Deci’s (2000)
thesis, which state that PwID who are entrepreneurs and score high in GET can be
rationalized to fulfill their needs and values, because it is easier to achieve LQ, job
satisfaction and life satisfaction. Furthermore, our findings are in line with the job or
occupational person–fit theory (Cable and Edwards, 2004;McCarthy et al.,2022), as we
proved that those who achieve a high fit between their preferences, wants and values
(i.e. high GET), and the role they play daily at work (i.e. entrepreneurial role) showed more
LQ and job satisfaction.
With regard to the potential enhancement of both LQ and job satisfaction, the results
indicate that there is a direct positive influence of GET on LQ and job satisfaction among
PwID who have started their own business, thus corroborating the second and third of our
hypotheses. It is known that self-employment has additional benefits over employment for
PwID (Hagner and Davies, 2002), including improved self-esteem (Thoresen et al., 2018),
autonomy (Hagner and Davies, 2002), sense of purpose (Lange, 2012), control over decision-
making (Morris and Lewis, 1991), or reconciliation between work and medical treatments and
therapies (Verdugo et al., 2005). However, our findings add nuance to previous research by
highlighting the need for entrepreneurship to go hand in hand with GET to allow PwIDs to
have enhanced LQ and job satisfaction levels. Nevertheless, many other specific dimensions
of LQ (Rice et al., 1985) could have been evaluated in this study; entrepreneurship can have an
immediate, strong impact on the economic, technological and work–life domains, but a more
indirect impact on institutional or social LQ, so we agree with Hutchinson et al. (2020) that
more research is required to analyze the impact of GET on LQ among PwID who are
entrepreneurs.
Finally, our findings confirm that LQ and job satisfaction in turn influence life satisfaction
positively, as postulated in the fourth and fifth hypotheses. More importantly, although not
individually, their joint presence could be a key for GET to have a positive indirect effect on
the life satisfaction of PwID who have recently become entrepreneurs. This confirms that in a
group that needs considerable formal and informal support for daily life and has much
smaller social networks than those of people without intellectual disabilities (van Asselt-
Goverts et al., 2014), an improvement in their autonomy or an expansion in these social
networks is of considerable value (Barba-S
anchez et al., 2021), although, as argued
previously, providing these people also have high GETs.
Like any other investigation, ours has limitations. One main limitation is the small sample
size used to carry out our empirical analysis, which to some extent limits the generalizability
of our findings. However, literature states that this is one of the main challenges to overcome:
the scarcity of business owners with intellectual disabilities. Our sample of 37 cases is one of
the largest analyzed in this field to date (see Table 1), given that previous studies range from 4
entrepreneurs with intellectual disabilities in Australia (Thoresen et al., 2018) to 27 in the USA
(Conroy et al., 2010). In disability entrepreneurship, which is less specific than intellectual
disability, the number of interviewees also tends to be low: usually lower than 30 (Caldwell
et al., 2019). This reflects the great difficulty researchers have in accessing suitable
participants for research in this field (Klangboonkrong and Baines, 2022). In future research,
MD
we recommend that the geographical scope be expanded to a multi-country analysis, thus
making the sample size larger, and even extended to other PwID who have not started a
business and who may or may not be in paid or unpaid employment. Another important
limitation is that our research lacked the analysis of a similarly sized sample of PwIDs who
were rather working as employees in public or private organizations. The comparative
analysis of our model across two samples of PwIDs (e.g. entrepreneurs versus salaried
employees) could have provided more nuanced insights into whether entrepreneurship was
sufficient for these people to see their LQ, job satisfaction and life satisfaction enhanced.
Finally, but of no less importance, we selected only PwID. However, our qualitative study
should have included the input of all those called facilitators of the entrepreneurial process
that PwIDs carried out, either formal facilitators (e.g. coaches) or informal supportive
networks (e.g. family, friends).
It would have been interesting if this study had explored various aspects of the social
ecology disability model (see Darcy et al.,2022) in greater depth. Although it takes much
from the social theory of disability (i.e. Abberley, 1987) and is nurtured by the environment
that is socially and culturally created for these disabled people, and by the need to design
policies oriented toward smoothing the barriers society creates for them, the social ecology
model of disability also indicates the personal benefits and social outcomes that PwD/
PwID obtain or produce as a result of their involvement in entrepreneurship. For example,
in line with Darcy et al.’s (2022) qualitative findings, self-employed PwD/PwID’swork–life
balance, independence, autonomy and skill development are improved, and further
research could study whether these positive outcomes could explain the greater LQ, job
satisfaction and life satisfaction found in our research. It would also be interesting to
analyze whether the entrepreneurship of PwD/PwID additionally generates positive social
outcomes, such as improving the lives of other people (who have or do not have disabilities)
or creating role models for people around them, who also have (or do not have) disabilities,
which could confirm previous findings and extensions of the social ecology theory of
disability.
Finally, in terms of practical recommendations, the following points should be considered
when implementing social policies. If entrepreneurship generally improves all the variables
mentioned in this study, support for entrepreneurship and training programs oriented
toward encouraging the enterprising tendency of PwIDs in the field of social policies should
be encouraged. Moreover, it is not only economic aid that should be favored to support PwID
with certain subsidies or finance training actions for these people. More proactive actions,
such as a change of vision/philosophy in the treatment of PwID, should also be encouraged.
For example, we should not focus on welfare (passive) policies as much as we do now but
should rather favor (active) training actions and policies: “people supporting people”in order
to bring out the best in everyone. In doing this, citizenship with full rights, integration,
empowerment and well-being (LQ, life satisfaction) will likely be encouraged among PwID.
In this respect, we recommend that any entrepreneurial process for these group of people
requires effort, risk, perseverance, but especially the support of supportive networks (such as
family, friends, social entities, etc.), along with that of people with a professional profile who
accompany them throughout the process. Furthermore, we strongly recommend that social
policies do not ignore the need to encourage PwID’s enterprising tendency in order to enhance
their LQ, job satisfaction and life satisfaction. In short, investing money in social policies that
promote entrepreneurship among this population is necessary and worthwhile, but without
ignoring the need to devote resources to the design of training programs or other activities
oriented toward encouraging the enterprising tendency (GET) of these individuals. This
would undoubtedly generate LQ, job satisfaction, and via these aspects, life satisfaction
among PwID, thus activating both economic and, importantly, social value (Barba-S
anchez
et al., 2021).
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
References
Abberley, P. (1987), “The concept of oppression and the development of a social theory of disability”,
Disability and Society, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 5-19, doi: 10.1080/02674648766780021.
Aguirre-Urreta, M.I. and R€
onkk€
o, M. (2018), “Statistical inference with PLSc using bootstrap
confidence intervals”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 1001-1020, doi: 10.25300/MISQ/
2018/13587.
Alvarado Blanquer, A., Su
arez Ortega, M. and S
anchez Garc
ıa, M.F. (2020), “Trayectorias
emprendedoras en personas con discapacidad: caracter
ısticas y condicionantes a trav
es de
estudios de caso”,Psicoperspectivas, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 44-55, doi: 10.5027/psicoperspectivas-
vol20-issue2-fulltext-1926.
Ashley, D. and Graf, N. (2018), “The process and experiences of self-employment among people with
disabilities: a qualitative study”,Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, Vol. 61 No. 2, pp. 90-100,
doi: 10.1177/0034355216687712.
Bailey, C., Madden, A., Alfes, K. and Fletcher, L. (2017), “The meaning, antecedents and outcomes of
employee engagement: a narrative synthesis”,International Journal of Management Reviews,
Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 31-53, doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12077.
Bainbridge, H.T.J. and Fujimoto, Y. (2018), “Job seekers with musculoskeletal or sensory disabilities:
barriers and facilitators of job search”,British Journal of Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 82-98,
doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.12266.
Barba-S
anchez, V., Salinero, Y. and Jim
enez-Est
evez, P. (2021), “Monetising the social value of
inclusive entrepreneurship: the case of the Abono Caf
e social economy enterprise”,CIRIEC-
espa~
na, Vol. 101, pp. 115-141, doi: 10.7203/CIRIEC-E.101.18158.
Benitez-Borrego, S., Guardia-Olmos, J. and Urz
ua-Morales, A. (2014), “Factorial structural analysis of
the Spanish version of WHOQOLBREF: an exploratory structural equation model study”,
Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care
and Rehabilitation, Vol. 23 No. 8, pp. 2205-2212, doi: 10.1007/s11136-014-0663-2.
Benz, M. and Frey, B.S. (2008), “Being independent is a great thing: subjective evaluations of self-
employment and hierarchy”,Economica, Vol. 75 No. 298, pp. 362-383, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0335.
2007.00594.x.
Binder, M. and Coad, A. (2013), “Life satisfaction and self-employment: a matching approach”,Small
Business Economics, Vol. 40, pp. 1009-1033, doi: 10.1007/s11187-011-9413-9.
Block, J.H., Kohn, K., Miller, D. and Ullrich, K. (2015), “Necessity entrepreneurship and competitive
strategy”,Small Business Economics, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 37-54, doi: 10.1007/s11187-014-9589-x.
Brieger, S.A., De Clercq, D., Hessels, J. and Pfeifer, C. (2020), “Greater fit and a greater gap: how
environmental support for entrepreneurship increases the life satisfaction gap between
entrepreneurs and employees”,International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and
Research, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 561-594, doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-03-2019-0185.
Buhariwala, P., Wilton, R. and Evans, J. (2015), “Social enterprises as enabling workplaces for people
with psychiatric disabilities”,Disability and Society, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 865-879, doi: 10.1080/
09687599.2015.1057318.
Bukari, S., Quarshie, M.A. and Opoku, F.K. (2021), “Exploring the perspectives of physically challenged
women entrepreneurs in the Sekondi-Takoradi Metropolis, Ghana”,Journal of Enterprising
Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 358-381, doi: 10.1108/JEC-
03-2021-0042.
Cable, D.M. and Edwards, J.R. (2004), “Complementary and supplementary fit: a theoretical and
empirical integration”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89, pp. 822-834, doi: 10.1037/0021-
9010.89.5.822.
Caird, S. (2013), “General measure of enterprising tendency test”, available at: www.get2test.net
Caldwell, K. (2014), By the Bootstraps: Social Entrepreneurs with Intellectual Disabilities and the
Reification of Success, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago.
MD
Caldwell, K., Parker, S. and Renko, M. (2016), “Social entrepreneurs with disabilities: exploring
motivational and attitudinal factors”,Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, Vol. 5 No. 1,
pp. 211-244, doi: 10.15353/cjds.v5i1.255.
Caldwell, K., Parker Harris, S. and Renko, M. (2019), “Inclusive outcomes for social entrepreneurs with
intellectual disability: what happens when they act”,Inclusion,Vol.7No.4,pp.204-219,doi:10.1352/
2326-6988-7.4.204.
Caldwell, K., Harris, S.P. and Renko, M. (2020a), “Inclusive entrepreneurship and motivation among
people with intellectual disability: ‘why they act’”,Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities,
Vol. 58 No. 6, pp. 499-512, doi: 10.1352/1934-9556-58.6.499.
Caldwell, K., Parker Harris, S. and Renko, M. (2020b), “Inclusive management for social entrepreneurs
with intellectual disabilities: ‘how they act’”,Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual
Disabilities, Vol. 33No.2, pp. 204-218, doi: 10.1111/jar.12662.
Camacho-Ballesta, J.A., De la Hoz-Rosales, B.J. and Tamayo-Torres, I. (2020), “Entrepreneurship and
human development: an international analysis”,Revista Brasileira de Gest~
ao de Neg
ocios,
Vol. 22, pp. 781-798, doi: 10.7819/rbgn.v22i4.4081.
Cannella-Malone, H.I., Brooks, D.G. and Tullis, C.A. (2013), “Using self-directed video prompting to
teach students with intellectual disabilities”,Journal of Behavioral Education, Vol. 22,
pp. 169-189, doi: 10.1007/s10864-013-9175-3.
Carsrud, A. and Br€
annback, M. (2011), “Entrepreneurial motivations: what do we still need to know?”,
Journal of Small Business Management,Vol.49No.1,pp.9-26,doi:10.1111/j.1540-627X.2010.00312.x.
Casamali, F.F.C., Schuch, F.B., Scortegagna, S.A., Legnani, E. and De Marchi, A.C.B. (2019), “Accordance
and reproducibility of the electronic version of the WHOQOL-BREF and WHOQOL-OLD
questionnaires”,Experimental Gerontology, Vol. 125, 110683, doi: 10.1016/j.exger.2019.110683.
Chacko, T.I. (1983), “Job and life satisfaction. A causal analysis of their relationships”,Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 163-169, doi: 10.2307/256143.
Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., Lawrence Erlbaum,
Hillsdale, NJ.
Conroy, J.W., Ferris, C.S. and Irvine, R. (2010), “Microenterprise options for people with intellectual and
developmental disabilities: an outcome evaluation”,Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual
Disabilities, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 269-277, doi: 10.1111/j.1741-1130.2010.00276.x.
Cromie, S. (2000), “Assessing entrepreneurial implications: some approaches and empirical evidence”,
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 7-30, doi: 10.1080/
135943200398030.
Curry, J.P., Wakefield, D.S., Price, J.L. and Mueller, C.W. (1986), “On the casual ordering of jof
satisfaction and organizational commitment”,Academy of Management of Journal, Vol. 28
No. 4, pp. 847-858, doi: 10.5465/255951.
Darcy, S., Collins, J. and Stronach, M. (2022), “Entrepreneurs with disability: Australian insights
through a social ecology lens”,Small Enterprise Research, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 24-48, doi: 10.1080/
13215906.2022.2092888.
Duttlinger, C., Ayres, K.M., Bevill-Davis, A. and Douglas, K.H. (2013), “The effects of a picture activity
schedule for students with intellectual disability to complete a sequence of tasks following
verbal directions”,Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, Vol. 28, pp. 32-43,
doi: 10.1177/1088357612460572.
Edwards, J.R. (2008), “Person–environment fit in organizations: an assessment of theoretical progress”,
The Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 2, pp. 167-230, doi: 10.1080/19416520802211503.
El Harbi, S. and Grolleau, G. (2012), “Does self-employment contribute to national happiness?”,The
Journal of Socio-Economics, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 670-676, doi: 10.1016/j.socec.2012.06.001.
Emerson, E., Baines, S., Allerton, L. and Welch, V. (2012), Health Inequalities and People with Learning
Disabilities in the UK: 2012, Improving Health and Lives Learning Disability Observatory,
Durham, NC.
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
G
alvez-S
anchez, F.J., Prados-Pe~
na, M.B. and Molina-Moreno, V. (2022), “La Econom
ıa Circular como
paradigma para la inclusi
on socio-laboral de personas en situaci
on de vulnerabilidad: social
Business Factory”, in Meseguer-S
anchez, V. and L
opez-Mart
ınez, G. (Eds), Aspectos econ
omicos
sociales y culturales. Econom
ıa circular e inclusi
on social, Aranzadi, Cizur Menor, pp. 159-181.
Gibb, A. (2008), “Entrepreneurship and enterprise education in schools and colleges: insights from UK
practice”,International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, Vol. 6, pp. 101-144.
Gidron, B. and Monnickendam-Givon, Y. (2017), “A social welfare perspective of market-oriented social
enterprises”,International Journal of Social Welfare, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 127-140, doi: 10.1111/
ijsw.12232.
Gjertsen, H. (2019), “People with intellectual disabilities can speak for themselves! A methodological
discussion of using people with mild and moderate intellectual disabilities as participants in
living conditions studies”,Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, Vol. 21 No. 1,
pp. 141-149, doi: 10.16993/sjdr.615.
Granzin, K.L. (1987), “A general systems framework for quality-of-life”, in inSamli, A.C. (Ed.),
Marketing and the Quality of Life Interface, Quorum Books, Westport, CT, pp. 139-152.
Hackman, J.R. and Oldham, G.R. (1980), Work Redesign, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Hagner, D. and Davies, T. (2002), “Doing my own thing: supported self-employment for individuals
with cognitive disabilities”,Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 65-74.
Hair, J. and Alamer, A. (2022), “Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in
second language and education research: guidelines using an applied example”,Research
Methods in Applied Linguistics, Vol. 1 No. 3, 100027, doi: 10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027.
Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2011), “PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet”,Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 139-151, doi: 10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2022), A Primer on Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hardonk, S. and Halld
orsd
ottir, S. (2021), “Work inclusion through supported employment?
Perspectives of job counsellors in Iceland”,Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research,
Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 39-50, doi: 10.16993/sjdr.767.
Henseler, J., Dijkstra, T.K., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M., Diamantopoulos, A., Straub, D.W., Ketchen, D.J.,
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M. and Calantone, R.J. (2014), “Common beliefs and reality about partial
least squares: comments on R€
onkk€
o and Evermann (2013)”,Organizational Research Methods,
Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 182-209, doi: 10.1177/1094428114526928.
Hidegh, A.L., Svastics, C., Gy}
ori, Z. and Csillag, S. (2022), “The lived experience of freedom among
entrepreneurs with disabilities”,International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and
Research, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 357-375, doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-03-2022-0222.
Hostyn, I. and Maes, B. (2009), “Interaction between persons with profound intellectual and multiple,
disabilities and their partners: a literature review”,Journal of Intellectual and Developmental
Disability, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 296-312, doi: 10.3109/13668250903285648.
Hsieh, Y.C., Molina, V.M.J. and Weng, J. (2019), “The road to entrepreneurship with impairments: a
challenges-adaptive mechanisms-results model for disabled entrepreneurs”,International Small
Business Journal, Vol. 37 No. 8, pp. 761-779, doi: 10.1177/0266242619867654.
Hutchinson, C., Lay, K., Alexander, J. and Ratcliffe, J. (2020), “People with intellectual disabilities as
business owners: a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature”,Journal of Applied Research
in Intellectual Disabilities, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 459-470, doi: 10.1111/jar.12836.
Jenaro, C., Rodr
ıguez, P. and Caballo, C. (2004), “Assessment and training of work personality profiles of
adults with intellectual disabilities”,Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, Vol. 48, pp. 387-411.
Keling, W., Yap, C.S. and Ho, P.L. (2022), “Enterprising tendency and entrepreneurial performance of
indigenous Dayak women entrepreneurs in Sarawak, Malaysia”,Journal of Enterprising
Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol. ahead-of-print, No. ahead-of-print,
doi: 10.1108/JEC-02-2022-0032.
MD
Keng, K.A., Jung, K., Jiuan, T.S. and Wirtz, J. (2000), “The influence of materialistic inclination on
values, life satisfaction and aspirations: an empirical analysis”,Social Indicators Research,
Vol. 49, pp. 317-333, doi: 10.1023/A:1006956602509.
Klangboonkrong, T. and Baines, N. (2022), “Disability entrepreneurship research: critical reflection
through the lens of individual-opportunity nexus”,Strategic Change, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 427-445,
doi: 10.1002/jsc.2513.
Klerk, T.D. (2008), “Funding for self-employment of people with disabilities. Grants, loans, revolving
funds or linkage with microfinance programmes”,Leprosy Review, Vol. 79 No. 1, pp. 92-109,
doi: 10.47276/lr.79.1.92.
Kober, R. and Eggleton, I.R.C. (2005), “The effect of different types of employment on quality of life”,
Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, Vol. 49 No. 10, pp. 756-760, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.
2005.00746.x.
Lange, T. (2012), “Job satisfaction and self-employment: ¿autonomy or personality?”,Small Business
Economics, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 165-177, doi: 10.1007/s11187-009-9249-8.
Larsson, J.P. and Thulin, P. (2019), “Independent by necessity? The life satisfaction of necessity and
opportunity entrepreneurs in 70 countries”,Small Business Economics, Vol. 53, pp. 921-934,
doi: 10.1007/s11187-018-0110-9.
Liu, T., Walley, K., Pugh, G. and Adkins, P. (2020), “Entrepreneurship education in China: evidence
from a preliminary scoping study of enterprising tendency in Chinese university students”,
Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 305-326, doi: 10.1108/
JEEE-01-2019-0006.
Locke, E.A., Sirota, D. and Wolfson, A.D. (1976), “An experimental case study of the successes and
failures of job enrichment in a government agency”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 61 No. 6,
pp. 701-711, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.61.6.701.
Mafini, C. and Dlodlo, N. (2014), “The relationship between extrinsic motivation, job satisfaction and
life satisfaction amongst employees in a public organisation”,SA Journal of Industrial
Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 1, p. 1166, doi: 10.4102/sajip.v40i1.1166.
Mansell, J. (2006), “Deinstitutionalization and community living: progress, problems and priorities”,
Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 65-76, doi: 10.1080/
13668250600686726.
Maritz, A. and Laferriere, R. (2016), “Entrepreneurship and self-employment for people with
disabilities”,Australian Journal of Career Development, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 45-54, doi: 10.1177/
1038416216658044.
Markman, G.D. and Baron, R.A. (2003), “Person–entrepreneurship fit: why some people are more
successful as entrepreneurs than others”,Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 13 No. 2,
pp. 281-301, doi: 10.1016/S1053-4822(03)00018-4.
McCarthy, P.X., Kern, M.L., Gong, X., Parker, M. and Rizoiu, M.A. (2022), “Occupation-personality fit is
associated with higher employee engagement and happiness”, MPRA Paper No. 113345,
available at: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/113346/
McCrudden, M.T. and McTigue, E.M. (2019), “Implementing integration in an explanatory sequential
mixed methods study of belief bias about climate change with high school students”,Journal of
Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 381-400, doi: 10.1177/1558689818762576.
Morales, C.E. and Holtschlag, C. (2013), “Post materialist values and entrepreneurship: a multilevel
approach”,International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, Vol. 19 No. 3,
pp. 266-282, doi: 10.1108/13552551311330174.
Morris, M.H. and Lewis, P.S. (1991), “Entrepreneurship as a significant factor in societal quality of
life”,Journal of Business Research, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 21-36, doi: 10.1016/0148-2963(91)90056-4.
Mota, I., Marques, C. and Sacramento, O. (2020), “Handicaps and new opportunity businesses: what do
we (not) know about disabled entrepreneurs?”,Journal of Enterprising Communities, Vol. 14
No. 3, pp. 321-347, doi: 10.1108/JEC-12-2019-0120.
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
Murphy, E., Clegg, J. and Almack, K. (2011), “Constructing adulthood in discussions about the futures
of young people with moderate-profound intellectual disabilities”,Journal of Applied Research in
Intellectual Disabilities, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 61-73, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3148.2010.00565.x.
NationalStatistics Institute (2020), “El empleo de las personas con discapacidad”,Instituto Nacional de
Estad
ıstica, available at: https://www.ine.es/dyngs/INEbase/es/operacion.htm?c5estadistica_
Candcid51254736055502andmenu5ultiDatosandidp51254735976595 (accessed 17 May 2021).
Naud
e, W., Amor
os, J.E. and Cristi, O. (2014), “Surfeiting, the appetite may sicken: entrepreneurship
and happiness”,Small Business Economics, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 523-525, doi: 10.1007/s11187-013-
9492-x.
Nefedyeva, E.I., Sedykh, O.G. and Taraban, O.V. (2021), “Experts on entrepreneurship as an
alternative form of employment for disabled people”,Sotsiologicheskieissledovaniya, Vol. 11,
pp. 73-78, doi: 10.31857/S013216250012422-7.
Norstedt, M. and Germundsson, P. (2021), “Motives for entrepreneurship and establishing one’s own
business among people with disabilities: findings from a scoping review”,Disability and Society,
Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 247-266, doi: 10.1080/09687599.2021.1919504.
Odewale, G.T., Abd Rani, S.H., Migiro, S.O. and Adeyeye, O.P. (2019), “Does communication skills
matter to a nascent entrepreneur?”,Journal of Contemporary Management, Vol. 16 No. 1,
pp. 209-225, doi: 10.35683/jcm18038.0011.
OECD/European Union (2014), “Policy brief on entrepreneurship for people with disabilities:
entrepreneurial activities in Europe”, available at: https://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/Policy-brief-
entrepreneurship-people-disabilities.pdf
Ostrow, L., Smith, C., Penney, D. and Shumway, M. (2019), “It suits my needs’: self-employed
individuals with psychiatric disabilities and small businesses”,Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Journal, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 121-131, doi: 10.1037/prj0000341.
Pavot, W. and Diener, E. (1993), “The affective and cognitive context of self-reported measures
of subjective well-being”,Social Indicator Research,Vol.28No.1,pp.1-20,doi:10.1007/
BF01086714.
Pavot, W., Diener, E., Colvin, C.R. and Sandvik, E. (1991), “Further validation of the satisfaction with
life scale: evidence for the cross-method convergence of well-being measures”,Journal of
Personality Assessment, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 149-161, doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5701_17.
P
erez-Mac
ıas, N. and Fern
andez-Fern
andez, J.L. (2022), “Personal and contextual factors influencing
the entrepreneurial intentions of people with disabilities in Spain”,Disability and Society, Vol. 37
No. 7, pp. 1216-1238, doi: 10.1080/09687599.2021.1874302.
Pond, S.B. III. and Geyer, P.D. (1991), “Differences in the relation between job satisfaction and
perceived work alternatives among older and younger blue-collar workers”,Journal of
Vocational Behavior, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 251-262, doi: 10.1016/0001-8791(91)90012-B.
Porcelli, P., Ungar, M., Liebenberg, L. and Trepanier, N. (2014), “(Micro) mobility, disability and
resilience: exploring well-being among youth with physical disabilities”,Disability and Society,
Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 863-876, doi: 10.1080/09687599.2014.902360.
Rahajeng, D.K. (2022), “The ethical paradox in Islamic cooperatives: a lesson learned from scandalous
fraud cases in Indonesia’s Baitul Maal Wat Tamwil”,Cogent Business and Management, Vol. 9
No. 1, pp. 1-27, doi: 10.1080/23311975.2022.2090208.
Renko, M., Parker Harris, S. and Caldwell, K. (2016), “Entrepreneurial entry by people with
disabilities”,International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, Vol. 34 No. 5,
pp. 555-578, doi: 10.1177/0266242615579112.
Rice, R.W., McFarlin, D.B., Hunt, R.G. and Near, J.P. (1985), “Organizational work and the perceived
quality of life: toward a conceptual model”,Academy of Management Review, Vol. 10 No. 2,
pp. 296-310, doi: 10.5465/amr.1985.4278215.
Rode, J.C. (2004), “Job satisfaction and life satisfaction revisited: a longitudinal test of an integrated
model”,Human Relations, Vol. 57 No. 9, pp. 1205-1230, doi: 10.1177/0018726704047143.
MD
Rojas, M., Watkins-Fassler, K. and Rodr
ıguez-Ariza, L. (2022), “The life satisfaction of owner-manager
entrepreneurs when the business of business is not only business”,Applied Research Quality
Life, Vol. 17, pp. 2251-2275, doi: 10.1007/s11482-022-10035-1.
Ruiz-Palomino, P., Hern
andez-Perlines, F., Jim
enez-Est
evez, P. and Guti
errez-Broncano, S. (2019), “CEO
servant leadership and firm innovativeness in hotels: a multiple mediation model of
encouragement of participation and employees’voice”,International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 1647-1665, doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-01-2018-0023.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000), “Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation,
social development, and well-being”,American Psychologist, Vol. 55, pp. 68-78, doi: 10.1037/
0003-066X.55.1.68.
Salehi, K. and Golafshani, N. (2010), “Using mixed methods in research studies: an opportunity with
its challenges”,International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 186-191,
doi: 10.5172/mra.2010.4.3.186.
Saxena, S.S. and Pandya, R.S.K. (2018), “Gauging underdog entrepreneurship for disabled
entrepreneurs”,Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global
Economy, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 3-18, doi: 10.1108/JEC-06-2017-0033.
Schalock, R.L., Borthwick-Duffy, S.A., Bradley, V.J., Buntinx, W.H.E., Coulter, D.L., Craig, E.M.,
Gomez, S.C., Lachapelle, Y., Luckasson, R., Reeve, A., Shogren, K.A., Snell, M.E., Spreat, S.,
Tasse, M.J., Thompson, J.R., Verdugo-Alonso, M.A., Wehmeyer, M.L. and Yeager, M.H. (2010),
Intellectual Disability: Definition, Classification, and Systems of Supports, American Association
on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, Washington, DC.
Seligman, M.E.P. (2011), Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being,
Simon & Schuster, New York.
Sen, A. (1987), Gender And Cooperative Conflicts. Wider Working Papers, UNU-WIDER, Helsinki.
Sev€
a, I.J., Vinberg, S., Nordenmark, M. and Strandh, M. (2016), “Subjective well-being among the self-
employed in Europe: macroeconomy, gender and immigrant status”,Small Business Economics,
Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 239-253, doi: 10.1007/s11187-015-9682-9.
Sirgy, M.J. (1986), “A quality-of-life theory derived from maslow’s developmental perspective: ‘Quality’
is related to progressive satisfaction of a hierarchy of needs, lower order and higher”,American
Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 329-342, doi: 10.1111/j.1536-7150.1986.
tb02394.x.
Sirgy, M.J., Morris, M. and Samli, K.C. (1985), “The question of value in social marketing: use of a
quality-of-life theory to achieve long-term life satisfaction”,American Journal of Economics and
Sociology, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 215-228, doi: 10.1111/j.1536-7150.1985.tb02336.x.
Skevington, S.M., Dehner, S., Gillison, F.B., McGrath, E.J. and Lovell, C.R. (2014), “How appropriate is
the WHOQOL-BREF for assessing the quality of life of adolescents?”,Psychology and Health,
Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 297-317, doi: 10.1080/08870446.2013.845668.
Somavia, J. (2007), Facts on Disability in the World of Work, International Labor Organization, Geneva.
Thoresen, S.H., Thomson, A., Jackson, R. and Cocks, E. (2018), “Meaningful social and economic
inclusion through small business enterprise models of employment for adults with intellectual
disability”,Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 161-172, doi: 10.3233/JVR-
180962.
Tokay Argan, M. and Mersin, S. (2021), “Life satisfaction, life quality, and leisure satisfaction in health
professionals”,Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 660-666, doi: 10.1111/ppc.12592.
Tripathi, N. and Moakumla (2018), “A valuation of Abraham Maslow’s theory of self-actualization for
the enhancement of quality of life”,Indian Journal of Health and Well-Being, Vol. 9 No. 30,
pp. 499-504.
UN General Assembly (2007), “Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities: resolution/
adopted by the general assembly”, 24 January 2007, A/RES/61/106, available at: https://www.
refworld.org/docid/45f973632.html (accessed 15 November 2022).
Entrepreneur
with ID and life
satisfaction
Unanue, W., G
omez, M.E., Cortez, D., Oyanedel, J.C. and Mendiburo-Seguel, A. (2017), “Revisiting the
link between job satisfaction and life satisfaction: the role of basic psychological needs”,
Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 8, p. 680, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00680.
US. Bureau of Labour Statistics (2020), “Persons with a disability: labour force characteristics-2019”,
available at: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/disabl.pdf
Uyanik, H., Shogren, K.A. and Blanck, P. (2017), “Supported decision-making: implications from
positive psychology for assessment and intervention in rehabilitation and employment”,
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, Vol. 27, pp. 498-506, doi: 10.1007/s10926-017-9740-z.
Vallejo, R.D., Vallejo, J.A.D. and Parra, S.O. (2001), “Job satisfaction in banking workers”,Psicothema,
Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 629-635.
van Asselt-Goverts, A.E., Embregts, P.J.C.M., Hendriks, A.H.C. and Frielink, N. (2014), “Experiences of
support staff with expanding and strengthening social networks of people with mild
intellectual disabilities”,Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 2,
pp. 111-124, doi: 10.1002/casp.2156.
Venkatesh, V., Brown, S.A. and Bala, H. (2013), “Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide:
guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems”,MIS Quarterly,
pp. 21-54, doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2013/37.1.02.
Verdugo, M.A., Schalock, R.L., Keith, K.D. and Stancliffe, R. (2005), “Quality of life and its
measurement: important principles and guidelines”,Journal of Intellectual Disability Research,
Vol. 49 No. 10, pp. 707-717, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2005.00739.x.
Wehman, P., Brooke, V., Lau, S. and Targett, P. (2015), “Supported employment”, in Wehmeyer, M.L.
(Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology and Disability, Oxford University Press,
New York, pp. 338-364.
WHOQOL Group (1998), “Development of the World health organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of
life assessment”,Psychological Medicine, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 551-558, doi: 10.1017/
s0033291798006667.
Wiklund, J., Nikolaev, B., Shir, N., Foo, M.D. and Bradley, S. (2019), “Entrepreneurship and well-being:
past, present, and future”,Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 579-588, doi: 10.1016/
j.jbusvent.2019.01.002.
Wilson, N.J., Cordier, R., Ciccarelli, M., MacCallum, J., Milbourn, B., Vaz, S., Joosten, A., Buchanan, A.,
McAuliffe, T. and Stancliffe, R.J. (2018), “Intergenerational mentoring at Men’s Sheds: a
feasibility study”,Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, Vol. 31 No. 1,
pp. e105-e117, doi: 10.1111/jar.12338.
World Health Organization (2011), World Report on Disability 2011, World Health Organization.
Zinam, O. (1989), “Quality of life, quality of the individual, technology and economic development”,
American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 55-68, doi: 10.1111/j.1536-7150.
1989.tb02091.x.
Corresponding author
Yolanda Salinero can be contacted at: yolanda.salinero@uclm.es
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
MD
