IER-09-02-04-pp049--2136-Trojak,Hojda,Roszkowska 2023, Vol. 9, No. 2 10.15678/IER.2023.0902.04 Study-related determinants of university graduates’ entrepreneurship Mariusz Trojak, Paulina Hojda, Sylwia Roszkowska A B S T R A C T Objective: The study undertook an assessment – unique in Polish conditions – of the factors related to higher education differentiating the group of graduates of the Jagiellonian University (JU) in terms of their profes- sional activity in the context of taking up employment or starting self-employment. Research Design & Methods: Lazear’s theory was applied to find study-related entrepreneurship determi- nants. The study attempted to determine the factors influencing the employment of Jagiellonian University graduates or their self-employment. The following explanatory variables were used during the study: scientific discipline and students’ faculty, professional activity or possibly running a business by the student, mode of study (full-time versus part-time), and scientific and non-scientific activities such as volunteering, undertaking studies abroad, and internships. The analyzes were based on data collected during the alumni career paths research of more than 6000 graduates who completed their studies between 2015 and 2019. Findings: The Mann-Whitney test and parametric t-Student tests showed that graduates of the JU who started a business, as opposed to those who work as employed persons, already set up a business during their studies and then continued it or started other types of business activity. Regarding the two analysed groups of stu- dents, there were significant differences in the completed faculty, study mode (full-time versus part-time), student internships, studies, internships abroad, and volunteering. Implications & Recommendations: The results of the analyses can be used by several groups of beneficiaries. Firstly, they can be useful for high school graduates intending to start higher education, as they indicate such disciplines and fields of study, after which the chances of professional success are the highest. The second group interested in the results of this work might be university students, who, based on its results, may un- dertake additional academic and non-academic activities that could increase their chances of professional success. Thirdly, the management of universities can use the results of research when preparing an educa- tional offer that would be best suited to the needs of the labour market. Contribution & Value Added: The subject of factors differentiating the professional attitudes of university graduates, especially in countries undergoing systemic transformation, is insufficiently explored. Deficiencies in quantitative research based on large sets of data are particularly visible. This article fills this gap by pointing to the factors that significantly affect self-employment or hired work by graduates of the oldest and one of the most renowned universities in Poland. Article type: research article Keywords: graduates’ entrepreneurship; graduates’ employment; Lazear’s theory; Jagiellonian University; Poland JEL codes: I23, L26, J24 Received: 23 November 2022 Revised: 14 February 2023 Accepted: 16 February 2023 Suggested citation: Trojak, M., Hojda, P., & Roszkowska, S. (2023). Study-related determinants of university graduates’ entrepre- neurship. International Entrepreneurship Review, 9(2), 49-60. https://doi.org/10.15678/IER.2023.0902.04 INTRODUCTION One of the most important life decisions that young people make is to start their professional career as an employed person or as an entrepreneur. Often, these decisions are related to the decision to start university studies. It is worth paying attention to the global trend which is the systematic increase International Entrepreneurship Review RI E 50 | Mariusz Trojak, Paulina Hojda, Sylwia Roszkowska in the percentage of people undertaking higher education. Today, tertiary education is, on average, the most common attainment level among 25-34-year-olds in OECD countries and constitutes 45%; in Poland, it is 43% (OECD, 2022). According to the EU policy, universities should support entrepreneurial activities and hence positively influence economic and social progress (European Commission, 2006). As we know, almost half of the population between 25 and 34 years old take up tertiary education, hence, entrepreneurial support at universities becomes important. The study attempted to analyse the factors related to studies that differentiate graduates of Jagiellonian University (the oldest and one of the most respected universities in Poland) in terms of the type of professional activity after gradua- tion. The study was based on data from the Careers Service of the Centre for Academic Support JU. The research contributes to the entrepreneurship literature by empirically testing Lazear‘s hypothesis using a sample of JU graduates in the period 2014-2019 and narrowing the determinants to those related to students’ academic activities. According to Sułkowski (2016), one of the basic conditions for the development of entrepreneurship is an appropriate educational process, carried out at all levels of education, including higher education. For this reason, this study attempted to identify significant studies-related determinants that affect the decision made by graduates of Jagiellonian University to take up employment or start their own businesses. Many researchers focus on the issues of motivation and factors determining the decision of uni- versity graduates to start a business. A popular psychological approach is a theory of planned behav- iour (TPB) developed by Ajzen (1991). It assumes that intentions are a significant determinant of hu- man social behaviour. In his model, Ajzen indicates that the intended results from the expectations of a given person regarding the benefits of a given behaviour – attitude, the perception of the correctness of this behaviour from the point of view of social norms – subjective norms, and additionally from the assessment of the difficulty of a given behaviour: perceived behavioural control (Wasilczuk, 2021; Wach & Bilan, 2021). Concerning this theory, a person can have the feeling of having control over life and taking up self-employment can be a manifestation of this ability to control. Such an approach, however, seems to be insufficient to fully explain entrepreneurial attitudes based on social psychology. The alternative entrepreneurial intention model is called Shapero’s en- trepreneurial event (SEE). Initially, it was developed by Shapero (1975), then developed by Sokol (1982), and finally, Kruger contributed to it with important findings (1993). According to the SEE model, individuals’ intentions are guided by inertia until something disturbs or displaces them (Krue- ger & Brazeal, 1994). Such displacement is an initial factor that causes a change in human behaviour (Shapero & Sokol, 1982). Such a change can push an individual into risky behaviour connected with starting up a business. According to Ayob, Yap, Sapuan, and Rashid (2013), displacement can be negative like the lack of job satisfaction, or positive such as rewards. Noteworthy, the SEE model stresses that desirability, feasibility, and a propensity to act are the major factors that control an individual’s intention to create a new venture (Ahuja, Akhtar, & Wali, 2019). Perceived desirability refers to a situation in which an individual starts a company, and perceived feasibility is the recogni- tion by an individual that he or she can establish such a company, while the perception of attractive- ness is influenced by personal attitudes, values, and feelings that result from the individual’s social environment, such as family, friends, and colleagues. Factors such as knowledge and human and financial resources influence the perceived feasibility (Shapero & Sokol, 1982). It is worth mentioning that entrepreneurial activities are risky, and risk is the central part of entrepreneurial intention (Zhang, Wang, & Owen, 2015). Many researchers proved that a positive attitude towards risk or a willingness to bear uncertain results is associated with entrepreneurial intention (Douglas & Shephard, 2002). Wach indicates that the environment and experience of the family business has a positive effect on entrepreneurial intentions, making students with family entrepreneurship back- ground more entrepreneurial than those that do not have such experience (Wach, 2015). The intention to become an entrepreneur is not a sufficient condition to start a business. According to Piróg (2014), there are external and internal determinants that create four groups of factors interact- ing with each other. These are individual/personal characteristics of an individual, social capital/social conditions, potential/competence, qualification capital (education and experience), and external condi- Study-related determinants of university graduates’ entrepreneurship | 51 tions (macroeconomic context). This approach is coherent with Lazear’s ‘jack-of-all-trades’ theory, ac- cording to which the choice between self-employment and paid employment shows that having a back- ground in many different roles increases the probability of becoming an entrepreneur (Lazear, 2002). University education and university-related additional activities deliver a lot of various competencies to the students. In turn, it may influence the choice of an individual graduate to become self-employed or paid employed. In this research, Lazear’s model was applied to identify study-related determinates which have an impact on JU graduates to search for paid employment or start their own businesses. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 briefly reviews the evolution of university grad- uates’ entrepreneurship and develops our hypotheses. In Section 3, we describe our sample and research design. Next section provides the results of the distributions’ comparison of hired and self-employed grad- uates. Finally, the last section concludes and gives some insights on policy implications of the study. LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT Lazear’s ‘jack-of-all-trades’ theory was verified by many researchers. A big sample data set of 29 tran- sitional post-communist countries was meant to verify the hypothesis of the negative impact of uni- versity education on the probability of being self-employed. To create a set of entrepreneurship de- terminates Lazear’s model was applied and empirical analysis was conducted. It was proved that a university education does not support entrepreneurship. However, the research proved that individ- uals with some experience and a more balanced portfolio of human and social capital can lead to taking up a decision to set up a business, which supports the ‘jack-of-all-trades’ theory (Habibov et al., 2016). Lazear’s hypothesis was also supported by Schutzer, who proved that a balanced skill set is important for making progress in venture creation. This set of skills comes from the innate entre- preneurial talent of an individual and prior managerial and entrepreneurial experience, early interest in an entrepreneurial career, and further investments in entrepreneurial education (Stuetzer et al., 2013a). However, Silva tested Lazear’s hypothesis using two different methods for the Italian working population. When cross-sectional techniques were used the theory seemed to be valid. However, when the panel technique was used, the results showed that a spread of knowledge across different fields does not increase the probability of becoming an entrepreneur (Silva, 2007). In the German case, a large representative sample of the German population was used to evaluate the validity of the balanced skills concept and its influence on choosing own business rather than paid employment. In this study, nascent entrepreneurs were compared to people who decided to continue their paid work. The article leads to the conclusion that Lazear’s theory is backed by German data (Wagner, 2006). Another German study conducted on innovative (technology-oriented or knowledge-based) new firms showed that the traditional human capital indicators individually have little or no influence on entrepreneurial skills. However, consistent with Lazaer’s theory those entrepreneurs who have got a varied set of work experience have higher entrepreneurial skills relevant to starting and growing a firm (Stuetzer et al., 2013b). Using a data set of Canadian entrepreneurs and individuals who were paid/employed, Åstebro and Thompson (2011) tried to find the set of characteristic skills and triggers that pushes people towards risky occupations which are connoted with setting up a business. The article tested the jacks-of-all-trade and the so-called ‘test for variety’ hypothesis. These two theorems are not mutually exclusive, but they imply distinctive interpretations of the cause and effects of oc- cupational variety. In this research, it was proven that the ‘test for variety’ dominates the effects of Lazear’s theory. However, both theorems seem to be true (Åstebro & Thompson, 2011). Similar con- clusions come from the work of Chung and Parker, who proved that the ‘test for variety’ is a key driver of entrepreneurship decisions of college graduates (Chung & Parker, 2020). In the Polish case, Lazear’s hypothesis was tested too. The research of Kurczewska and Mackiewicz positively verified Lazear’s concept proving that in Polish conditions, individuals with a broader educational and professional background are more likely to start a business. Additionally, the level of education has a negative influence on the chances of survival as an entrepreneur, but at the same time, the number of fields studied has a strong impact on success (Kurczewska & Mackiewicz, 2020). The same authors did another piece of research focusing on the determinates 52 | Mariusz Trojak, Paulina Hojda, Sylwia Roszkowska which increase the probability of business survival. They found out that the breadth of education impacts the propensity to start a business, but it also increases the chances of business survival. The breadth of professional experience turned out to have a significant impact on business survival, but this result did not hold for extensive managerial experience (Kurczewska & Mackiewicz, 2020). Ac- cording to the work of Gano and Łuczka (2020), Polish students have insufficient knowledge in the field of running their own business, therefore providing them with appropriate qualifications in this regard should increase entrepreneurial intentions. Hence, not directly, Lazear’s concept is sup- ported, because a proper skill set is a stimulant of nascent entrepreneurship. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Higher Education Institution (HEI) Data In Poland, two methods are used to monitor the professional careers of graduates of universities and other higher education institutions. One of the tools is the nationwide system for monitoring the eco- nomic fate of university graduates (the so-called ELA), which has been run in a centralized manner since 2014. In this study, particular importance was given to employment and wages as economic outcomes of higher education. The data contained in the ELA come from two sources: the POL-on system, devel- oped and implemented by the Ministry of Education and Science and the Social Insurance Institution. The second method of examining the professional career of graduates is research conducted individ- ually and separately by universities. An example of such a study are the activities undertaken by JU since 2008. The JU intends to systematically collect data on the entire population of graduates. Accordingly, graduates are invited to participate in this study at different time intervals (0.5 years, 3 years, and 5 years after graduation). The effectiveness of this study is astonishingly high and averages between 55% and 65% of returns. In the current study, the results of the JU’s studies were used, because they are much more accurate and include non-economic parameters that are missing in the ELA study. Sample Characteristics This study used data from surveys conducted among graduates of master‘s studies from 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. Due to the high convergence of survey questions conducted in individual years, it was possible to build a uniform database based on which it was possible to conduct re- search of a quantitative nature. We used a graduates’ survey to compare hired and self-employed workers. The comparative analysis was built based on data obtained in the last four editions of the survey, i.e. for 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 vintages. In the end, 7675 observations were included in the database. The following Table shows the number of records (survey responses) by year. Table 1. Sample size in the JU graduates survey Academic year No. of responses Share of the whole sample 2014/2015 1935 25.21% 2015/2016 1651 21.51% 2016/2017 1391 18.21% 2017/2018 1070 13.94% 2018/2019 1628 21.21% Source: own study. The table below presents the distribution of graduates by present-day (up to six months after grad- uation). It turns out that more than half of JU graduates were not continuing their studies but working. A quarter of JU graduates combined work and study and 15% did not work. The proportion of graduates taking up paid jobs and those studying has been relatively stable over time. On average, every year between 2015 and 2019 around 6% of all working graduates were self-employed. Study-related determinants of university graduates’ entrepreneurship | 53 Table 2. Distribution of JU graduates by post-graduation status, 2015-2019 vintages Post-graduation status Number Share I am working and not continuing my education 4256 55.45 I am working and pursuing my studies 1927 25.11 I am not working, but continuing my education 688 8.96 I am not working and I am not continuing my education 542 7.06 No answer 262 3.41 Total 7675 100.00 Source: own study. Table 3. Distribution of working graduates by employment and activity, 2015-2019 vintages Year Category Numbers Percentage 2015 hired 1423 93.25 own business 103 6.75 2016 hired 1229 95.05 own business 64 4.95 2017 hired 1058 95.23 own business 53 4.77 2018 hired 791 93.5 own business 55 6.5 2019 hired 1314 93.39 own business 93 6.61 Total 2015-2019 hired 5815 94.5 own business 368 5.95 Source: own study. Study-related Variables In the following analysis, we wanted to determine whether the fact that graduates start their own businesses or take up employment depended on certain characteristics related to the period of study. Furthermore, we tested the set of hypotheses if the distributions of those two groups differ due to these characteristics. Among the variables were mainly those related to the faculty completed, the scientific discipline, and the type of study divided into the full-time and part-time programs. Self-employment and running own business were the most popular among graduates from the Faculty of Management and Social Communication (31% of them started running a business), the Faculty of Law and Administration (17.7%), and the Faculty of Philosophy (approximately 10%). On the other hand, the least popular faculties (from each faculty less than 10 graduates started a busi- ness in the analyzed period) were the Faculty of Biochemistry, Biophysics and Biotechnology (three people), Faculty of Chemistry (five people), and the Faculty of Polish Studies (nine people). The structure of those self-employed and hired by faculty translates into the structure of these groups by discipline. The social sciences discipline was dominant (61-62% of graduates in both groups can be assigned to this discipline), while the interdisciplinary sciences discipline was the least popular. The sciences and natural sciences, on the other hand, were marginally more popular among the business group than among the salaried employees. A feature that differentiates the two groups is the mode of study. In the case of salaried employees, the vast majority have completed full-time studies (around 82%), while among those who were self- employed, only 7% declared having completed full-time studies. 54 | Mariusz Trojak, Paulina Hojda, Sylwia Roszkowska Table 4. Distribution of working graduates by faculty, discipline, and programme completed, 2015-2019 vintages Category Hired Self-employed # % # % By faculties Faculty of Biochemistry, Biophysics and Biotechnology 133 2.29 3 0.82 Faculty of Biology, Faculty of Biology and Earth Sciences, Faculty of Geography and Geology 339 5.83 17 4.62 Faculty of Chemistry 198 3.4 5 1.36 Faculty of History 261 4.49 16 4.35 Faculty of International and Political Studies 442 7.6 21 5.71 Faculty of Law and Administration 1043 17.94 65 17.66 Faculty of Management and Social Communication 1582 27.21 114 30.98 Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science 240 4.13 21 5.71 Faculty of Philology 543 9.34 29 7.88 Faculty of Philosophy 586 10.08 38 10.33 Faculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science 127 2.18 29 7.88 Faculty of Polish Studies 308 5.3 9 2.45 Inter-faculty interdisciplinary studies 13 0.22 1 0.27 By disciplines Humanities 1220 20.98 65 17.66 Interdisciplinary studies 13 0.22 1 0.27 Science and natural sciences 1018 17.51 75 20.38 Social sciences 3564 61.29 227 61.68 By programme type Full-time programme 4818 82.85 26 7.07 Part-time programme 951 16.35 238 64.67 Source: own study. Variables Related to Non-study Activity The structure of hired and self-employed graduates is different when considering activities during their studies. Looking at the activities related to the field of study, one can note that graduate entrepreneurs already started their own businesses during their studies (almost 22% of them), while in the group of graduates who are employees, this amounts only to 1%. Differences of several percentage points between the two groups can also be noticed in the case of work placements at home and abroad. In the case of non-degree-related activities, a difference in structure is also ap- parent, in particular the significant prevalence of self-employment among graduate entrepreneurs and the dominance of casual work among employed graduates. Table 5. Distribution of working graduates by activity undertaken during their studies, 2015-2019 Activity Activities matched to the studies Activities unmatched to the studies Hired Self-employed Hired Self-employed # % # % # % # % Full-time employment 1412 24.28 104 28.26 1398 24.04 71 19.29 Own business 57 0.98 81 22.01 124 2.13 101 27.45 Occasional work 908 15.61 67 18.21 2353 40.46 105 28.53 Volunteering 1511 25.98 77 20.92 874 15.03 52 14.13 Internship in the country 3279 56.39 157 42.66 296 5.09 17 4.62 Internship abroad 2594 44.61 122 33.15 250 4.30 17 4.62 Studying abroad 760 13.07 29 7.88 – – – – Note: % refers to the entire group of hired and self-employed. Source: own study. It is also worth considering the number of activities broken down by those related and unrelated to the study process and by graduate entrepreneurs and those in paid employment. Study-related determinants of university graduates’ entrepreneurship | 55 Among activities unrelated to the field of study, it can be seen that generally, the majority under- took no more than one activity. Two activities were undertaken by several per cent of respondents in both groups. Three or more activities involved only a few per cent of graduates. The distribution of the number of activities consistent with the completed field of study was similar in both groups of gradu- ates with a slight difference for two activities, which also predominated among graduates taking up paid employment. Among graduate entrepreneurs, on the other hand, the lack of activities related to the field of study was predominant (about 27 declared cases). Looking at total activities, the distribution was very similar among the employed and self-employed. Between two and four activities were undertaken by around 85-87% of respondents in both groups. Table 6. Distribution of working graduates by the number of activities undertaken during their studies, 2015-2019 No. of activities Hired graduates Percentage No. of activities Self-employed graduates Percentage Activities unmatched to the completed field of study 0 2299 39.54 0 154 41.85 1 2241 38.54 1 128 34.78 2 917 15.77 2 48 13.04 3 237 4.08 3 23 6.25 4 97 1.67 4 8 2.17 5 23 0.4 5 4 1.09 6 1 0.02 6 3 0.82 Activities matched to the completed field of study 0 1431 24.61 0 100 27.17 1 1216 20.91 1 84 22.83 2 1543 26.53 2 80 21.74 3 1133 19.48 3 65 17.66 4 404 6.95 4 27 7.34 5 84 1.44 5 11 2.99 6 4 0.07 6 1 0.27 Total activities 0 263 4.52 0 9 2.45 1 1249 21.48 1 92 25 2 1237 21.27 2 79 21.47 3 1442 24.8 3 82 22.28 4 1136 19.54 4 63 17.12 5 465 8 5 35 9.51 6 23 0.4 6 8 2.17 Source: own study. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Comparison of the Distributions of Hired and Self-employed Graduates To compare the distribution of employed and self-employed graduates, many statistical tests were carried out. The null hypothesis states that two independent samples are drawn from a population with the same distribution using the Wilcoxon rank sum test, also known as the Mann-Whitney two- sample statistic (Wilcoxon, 1945; Mann & Whitney, 1947). To compare the structure of the two groups, many parametric tests were also carried out (the table below shows the results of the Student’s t-test, but the tests were carried out with modifications such as rejecting the assumption of the equality of variance in the two groups or the Welch test). Using 5% as a cut-off significance level, it should be concluded that the distributions of graduates who were hired and self-employed differ due to several characteristics. Firstly, differences were evident in the faculty completed and the full-time or part-time programme (Dolton & Silles, 2001; Jasiński et al., 2017). Looking at activities during the studies in line with the field of study, we found that the distributions of entrepreneurial graduates and employed graduates differ in terms of work internships, studies 56 | Mariusz Trojak, Paulina Hojda, Sylwia Roszkowska abroad, and volunteering. Moreover, own a business, irrespective of its matching with the field of study, is an element of differentiation between the two groups; self-employed graduates already start their own business during their studies and then continue it or enter into new types of these activities. Further differentiating factors were occasional work or full employment during studies unmatched in the field of study. In this case, graduates in paid employment were more likely to be interested in these activities (Pinto & Pereira, 2019; Odlin et al., 2022). Interestingly, the distribution of graduates by the number of activities undertaken during the studies was statically the same. Table 7. Results of the non-parametric Mann-Whitney test and the parametric Student’s t-test (assuming dif- ferent variances) for equality of the distributions of hired and self-employed Variables Mann-Whitney test Student’s t-test Test statistics p-value Test statistics p-value Faculty -2.695 0.007 -2.7729 0.0058 Discipline -0.591 0.5544 -1.1521 0.2499 Programme (full or part-time) -3.159 0.0016 -1.9146 0.0563 Study abroad 2.893 0.0038 3.5199 0.0005 Number of activities unmatched to the studies 0.016 0.9876 -1.2147 0.2252 Number of activities matched to the studies 0.804 0.4212 0.3505 0.7261 Total number of activities -0.202 0.8402 -0.6429 0.5207 Employment during studies matched to the field of study -1.72 0.0853 -1.6464 0.1005 Activities during studies matched to the field of study -26.484 0 -9.7068 0 Occasional work matched to the field of study -1.323 0.1859 -1.2521 0.2112 Volunteering matched to the field of study 2.155 0.0312 2.3005 0.0219 Internships matched to the field of study 5.139 0 5.1554 0 Foreign inter matched to the field of study 4.294 0 4.5063 0 Employment during studies unmatched to the field of study 2.075 0.038 2.2241 0.0267 Activities during studies unmatched to the field of study -25.146 0 -10.8313 0 Occasional work unmatched to the field of study 4.535 0 4.8831 0 Volunteering unmatched to the field of study 0.469 0.6391 0.4791 0.6321 Internships unmatched to the field of study 0.399 0.6896 0.4155 0.678 Foreign intern abroad matched to the field of study -0.293 0.7694 -0.2841 0.7765 Source: own study. CONCLUSIONS This article provided empirical evidence that two analysed groups of working university graduates, i.e. those hired and entrepreneurs differed in terms of some characteristics. These were degree-related variables (faculty and full-time vs. part-time studies) and variables defining activities during studies (such as internships, volunteering, internships abroad and studying abroad, employment, occasional work, and own business taken during studies). The results of the Mann-Whitney statistics met partially the assumptions of Lazear’s theory, which refers to entrepreneurs’ pre-experience in a variety of areas. Undertaking many different activities during studies is an example of such preparation. In this way, individuals acquire sufficient skills and knowledge to run their businesses. The null hypothesis can be rejected as stated that there is no dif- ference between medians of the above-mentioned variables. The distributions in the two groups of working graduates differed significantly. The main limitation of the analysis presented in this article is that connected with the variables’ availability, the collected data relates only to some aspects of the Jagiellonian University graduates’ entrepreneurship or activities. As regards other research limitations, one should bear in mind that an- alysed data were collected from one specific Polish University. Firstly, it implies that the results should be interpreted only in the context of Poland and secondly, in the context of a region with a specific labour market such as Malopolskie voivodship. At the same Study-related determinants of university graduates’ entrepreneurship | 57 time, this limitation suggests an important future research question: Are there any specific character- istics of the labour market in this region which encourage or discourage young people to undertake own businesses? This question can also be confronted with a discrepancy between students’ plans and the real proportion of graduates running their businesses. Surveys carried out among students demon- strate that this career path is often declared. Over two-thirds of Polish students (73.2%) perceived themselves as entrepreneurial persons. Almost half of the students (42.3%) had an innovative idea for the business and 26.9% declared to choose this career path after studies (Kunasz, 2008). However, there is a lack of data that verifies the level of putting these declarations into practice. Generally, in Poland, the percentage of fresh alumni starting their own business after graduation is calculated at around 2-10% and is varied depending on the type of HEIs. Furthermore, the article was based on data collected before the Covid-19 pandemic, when the labour market was completely different, particularly for individuals running their businesses. Finally, we cannot forget that data in the vast majority related to young entrepreneurs, who are the most vulnerable to various crises. For this reason, the presented analysis should be revised after the pandemic. The direction of future research may consist in including the differences between various HEIs. It might be applied by using and comparing data from Polish Graduates Tracking System. Another area for developing future research is including some macro-level variables (such as the unemployment rate or this directly connected with entrepreneurship ‘climate,‘ i.e. Doing Business Indicators). The third new research field is a trial to confront country data with some international students’ or graduates’ surveys (e.g. Eurostudent) in terms of entrepreneurship. The most practical implication is that the analysis results can be used when preparing the Uni- versity’s educational offer to provide students with some entrepreneurial skills. The differences between faculties should be considered. Additionally, University careers advisors are provided with knowledge of entrepreneurship’s determinants. However, in interpreting the data and results presented in this article, it is important to remember that there are many determinants of choosing an entrepreneur’s career. The role of the HEI diploma has not been proven to be the most important in this process (Greene & Saridakis, 2008). REFERENCES Ahuja, V., Akhtar, A., & Wali, O.P. (2019). Development of a comprehensive model of social entrepreneurial in- tention formation using a quality tool. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 9, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-019-0164-4 Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T Åstebro, T., & Thompson, P. (2011). Entrepreneurs, Jacks of all trades or Hobos?. Research Policy, 40(5), 637-649. ISSN 0048-7333, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.01.010 Ayob, N., Yap, C.S., Sapuan, D.A., & Rashidd, Z.A. (2013). Social entrepreneurial intention among business under- graduates: An emerging economy perspective. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 15, 249-267. https://doi.org/10.22146/gamaijb.5470 Chung, D., & Parker, S. (2020). Why Do Generalists Become Entrepreneurs? Revisiting the Jack of All Trades The- ory. Academy of Management, https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2020.12751abstract Dolton, P., & Silles, M. (2001). Over education in the graduate labor market: some evidence from alumni data (No. 9). Centre for the Economics of Education, London School of Economics and Political Science. Douglas, E.J., & Shepherd, D.A. (2002). Self-Employment as a Career Choice: Attitudes, Entrepreneurial Intentions, and Utility Maximization. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(3), 81-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225870202600305 European Commission. (2006). Recommendation 2006/962/EC on key competencies for lifelong learning. Re- trieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:394:0010:0018:en:PDF on October 20, 2022. Gano, E., & Łuczka, T. (2020). Determinanty intencji przedsiębiorczych studentów. Przedsiębiorczość-Edukacja, 16(1), 31-44. https://doi.org/10.24917/20833296.161.3 58 | Mariusz Trojak, Paulina Hojda, Sylwia Roszkowska Green, F., & Saridakis, G. (2008). The role of higher education skills and support in graduate self-employment. Studies in Higher Education, 33, 653-672. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070802457082 Habibov, N., Afandi, E., & Cheung, A. (2016). What is the effect of university education on chances to be self-em- ployed in transitional countries?: Instrumental variable analysis of a cross-sectional sample of 29 nations. Inter- national Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-016-0409-4 Jasiński, M., Bożykowski, M., Chłoń-Domińczak, A., Zając, T., & Żółtak, M. (2017). Who gets a job after graduation? Factors affecting the early career employment chances of higher education graduates in Poland. EDUKACJA Quarterly, 143(4), https://doi.org/10.24131/3724.170402 Krueger N.F. (1993). The impact of prior entrepreneurial exposure on perceptions of new venture feasibility and desirability. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(1), 5-21, https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879301800101 Krueger, N.F., & Brazeal, D.V. (1994). Entrepreneurial Potential and Potential Entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(3), 91-104. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879401800307 Kurczewska, A., & Mackiewicz, M. (2020). Are jacks-of-all-trades successful entrepreneurs? Revisiting Lazear’s theory of entrepreneurship. Baltic Journal of Management, 15, 411-430. https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-07- 2019-0274 Kunasz, M. (2008). Zachowania przedsiębiorcze studentów w świetle badań ankietowych. Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, 222(3), 65-86. https://doi.org/10.33119/GN/101316 Lazear, P. (2002). Entrepreneurship. NBER Working Paper No. w9109. Retrieved from https://www.nber.org/pa- pers/w9109 on October 20, 2022. Mann, H.B., & Whitney, D.R. (1947). On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 50-60. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177730491 Odlin, D., Benson-Rea, M., & Sullivan-Taylor, B. (2022). Student internships and work placements: approaches to risk management in higher education. Higher Education, 83(6), 1409-1429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734- 021-00749-w OECD. (2022). Education at a glance 2022. Retrieved from https://gpseducation.oecd.org/Content/EAGCountry- Notes/EAG2022_Poland.pdf on October 20, 2022. Pinto, L.H., & Pereira, P.C. (2019). ‘I wish to do an internship (abroad)’: investigating the perceived employabil- ity of domestic and international business internships. Higher Education, 78(3), 443-461. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0351-1 Piróg, D. (2014). Determinants of entrepreneurship of higher education graduates: theoretical assumptions vs. Reality. Przedsiębiorczość–Edukacja, 10. Retrieved from https://p-e.up.krakow.pl/article/view/1762/1518 on October 7, 2022. Shapero, A. (1975). The displaced, uncomfortable entrepreneur. Psychology Today, 9, 83-88. Shapero, A., & Sokol, L. (1982). The social dimensions of entrepreneurship. Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship (pp. 72-90). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Silva, O. (2007). The Jack-of-all-trades entrepreneur: innate talent or acquired skill?. Economics Letters, 97(2), 118-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2007.02.027 Stuetzer, M., Obschonka, M., Davidsson, P., & Schmitt-Rodermund, E. (2013a). Where do entrepreneurial skills come from. Applied Economics Letters, 20(12), 1183-1186, https:// doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2013.797554 Stuetzer, M., Obschonka, M., & Schmitt-Rodermund, E. (2013b). Balanced skills among nascent entrepreneurs. Small Bus Econ, 41, 93-114, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-012-9423-2 Sułkowski, Ł. (2016). Accountability of university: Transition of public higher education. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 4(1), 9-21. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2016.040102 Tyrowicz, J., Smyk, M., & Liberda, B. (2017). Talent workers as entrepreneurs: a new approach to aspirational self-employment. Bank i Kredyt, 48(6), 571-592. Retrieved from https://bankikredyt.nbp.pl/con- tent/2017/06/BIK_06_2017_03.pdf on October 17, 2022. Wach, K. (2015). Środowisko biznesu rodzinnego jako stymulanta intencji przedsiębiorczych młodzieży akade- mickiej. Przedsiębiorczości i Zarządzanie, XVI(7/III), 25-40. Wach, K., & Bilan, S. (2021). Public support and administration barriers towards entrepreneurial intentions of stu- dents in Poland. Administratie si Management Public, 36, 67-80. https:// doi.org/10.24818/amp/2021.36-04 Study-related determinants of university graduates’ entrepreneurship | 59 Wasilczuk, J. (2021). Przedsiębiorczość cyfrowa oparta na blogu – wiwisekcja. E-management. Tom I. Digitalizacja procesów biznesowych, 75-90. Retrieved from https://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/bitstream/han- dle/item/278590/kopera_e-management_t-1_2021.pdf on October 20, 2022. Wagner, J. (2006). Are nascent entrepreneurs ‘jacks-of-all-trades’? A test of Lazear’s theory of entrepreneurship with German data. Applied Economics, 38(20), 2415-2419. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840500427783 Wilcoxon, F. (1945). Some uses of statistics in plant pathology. Biometrics Bulletin, 1(4), 41-45. https://doi.org/10.2307/3002011 Zhang, P., Wang, D.D., & Owen, C.L. (2015). A study of entrepreneurial intention of university students. Entre- preneurship Research Journal, 5(1), 61-82. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2014-0004 The journal is co-financed in the years 2022-2024 by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Poland in the framework of the ministerial programme “Development of Scientific Journals” (RCN) on the basis of contract no. RCN/SP/0251/2021/1 concluded on 13 October 2022 and being in force until 13 October 2024. 60 | Mariusz Trojak, Paulina Hojda, Sylwia Roszkowska Authors The contribution share of authors is equal and amounts to 33% for each of them. MT – conceptualisation, literature writing, conclusions, PH – conceptualisation, literature writing, conclu- sions, SR– methodology, calculations, conclusions. Mariusz Trojak PhD, Assistant Professor at the Institute of Economics, Finance and Management Jagiellonian University. Mar- iusz Trojak is a lecturer and researcher in Economics and Finance. His main research focus is on the micro and macroeconomics efficiency and determinants of regional and local economic development. Correspondence to: Dr Mariusz Trojak, Institute of Economics, Finance and Management Jagiellonian Univer- sity Ul. Prof. S. Łojasiewicza 4, 30-348 Krakow, Poland, e-mail: mariusz.trojak@uj.edu.pl ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8367-6249 Paulina Hojda Graduated from the Institute of Sociology at the Jagiellonian University (MA) and Master’s Programme in Po- litical Sociology at Hőgskolan Dalarna in Sweden. She is a student at the Doctoral School of Social Sciences at the University of Łódź. She works at the Careers Service Centre for Academic Support at Jagiellonian University and has fifteen years of experience in conducting quantitive research in the area of quality of teaching (Uni- versity graduates’ transition to the labour market). Correspondence to: Ms. Paulina Hojda, Centre for Academic Support, Jagiellonian University, Ingardena 6, 30- 060 Kraków, Poland, e-mail: paulina.hojda@uj.edu.pl ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8158-4690 Sylwia Roszkowska Associate Professor at the University of Łódź. Her research fields include labour market economics, educational economics, regional economic development and macroprudential policy. She is an expert in econometric model- ling using not only macro-level data but also large individual datasets. She gained experience in conducting anal- yses on modelling economic trends in Narodowy Bank Polski and several research projects. Correspondence to: Dr hab. Sylwia Roszkowska, Department of Economic Mechanisms, Ul. Rewolucji 1905 No. 41, 90-214 Lodz, Poland, e-mail: sylwia.roszkowska@uni.lodz.pl ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6043-8210 Acknowledgements and Financial Disclosure The publication was financed from the funds granted to Jagiellonian University and the University of Lodz. Conflict of Interest The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relation- ships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. Copyright and License This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Published by Krakow University of Economics – Krakow, Poland