GENDER EQUALITY
IN EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP
BY
ELIZABETH I. OLINMAH
ABSTRACT:-This Article of gender equality in education, employment and
entrepreneurship has been inspired by gender equality issues. Today research and policy have been more and
more fuelled by the idea that gender equality in education, employment and
entrepreneurship are important for economic progress. Gender equality in
education, employment and entrepreneurship were assumed to experience
gender-related discrimination and to experience more difficulties when starting
up and running a business than their male counterparts. Even when issues such
as barriers and obstacles to gender equality in education, employment and
entrepreneurship are raised in the gender and entrepreneurship debate, this is
usually done from the perspective that gender entrepreneurs are an untapped
resource and have potential to contribute to a country’s economic performance.
Indeed, although one of the arguments underlying the support for gender equality
in education, employment and entrepreneurship within the Africa and European
Union, is that gender entrepreneurs have the potential to contribute to
economic performance and role to play in the society at large. The global
growth of gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship in the
last decades has been accompanied by an increase in the number of studies on
female entrepreneurship. Despite the
growing interest in women’s entrepreneurship and the radical increase in
numbers over recent years, the potential of women’s entrepreneurship has only
recently started to materialize.
This is clearly evident in the
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2010 women’s report, which examined the rates
of entrepreneurship in 59 countries and showed that in all these countries, the
rates of women’s entrepreneurship were lower than men’s entrepreneurship.
A multi‑year analysis of (2002‑2010)
presented in the report shows that this gender pay gap has persisted across
most economies through the years. Indeed, despite women’s increasing
participation in the labour market, women remain substantially under‑represented
among self‑employed workers. On average, during the 2008‑2012 period, the share
of self‑employed women compared to the total number in employment is much
smaller than the corresponding share
for men, across the Member States: 10 % compared with 18 %.
Keywords: Managing diversity, female entrepreneurship,
economic performance, gender differences, entrepreneurial diversity
INTRODUCTION: - Gender
differences are more important. However, several arguments have been brought
forward why the study of gender differences in entrepreneurship would not be
very useful. A related argument is that the differences among women and among men
are larger and more importantly than those between women and men, and
accordingly, that research should focus upon these intra-group (or in-group)
differences instead of intergroup (or between-group) differences (e.g., Kimmel,
2000; Ahl, 2002). In this respect, Moore (1999, p. 388) advocates that: “It is
time to stop clumping entrepreneurs together in one group.
Much
is to be learned by studying women entrepreneurs as members of various groups”.
Also, there are likely to be differences between female entrepreneurs of
different generations. Moore (1999) distinguishes between ‘traditional’ (i.e.,
female entrepreneurs with traditional values, adhering to stereotypical female
work roles) and ‘moderns’ (i.e., later generation female entrepreneurs who are
more similar to that different from their male counterparts other words, there
may be a generation effect which outweighs the gender effect, where female
entrepreneurs from earlier generations are different from those of later
generations. Indeed, over time gender differences have become less pronounced.
We
see a gender convergence rather than divergence, and women and men nowadays are
far more alike than they were some decades ago (Kimmel, 2000). Obviously, there
will be a range of other factors including age, educational background, firm
size and sector, that may be more important in explaining differences between
entrepreneurs than gender.
The
article incorporates studies on gender differences in entrepreneurship,
spanning different aspects of entrepreneurship at different levels of analysis,
including the individual, the organization and the environment Entrepreneurship plays an important role in creating jobs, innovation
and growth. Fostering entrepreneurship is a key policy goal for governments
that expect that high rates
of entrepreneurial activity will
create sustainable jobs like:-
(1) Self-employment.
(2) Also
contributes to job creation in Nigeria and beyond with at least 30 % of the
self-employed have employees of their own.
The level at which self-employed
sector has shown a degree of resilience during the recent economic crisis, as
the relative decline in self-employment has been more moderate in comparison
with salaried employment.
(3). Against
this backdrop, interest in women’s entrepreneurship has grown among scholars
and policymakers. While the rationale for women’s entrepreneurship has
traditionally focused on enhancing women’s equality, empowerment and social inclusion
in the society of today.
(4). its development is now seen to make good economic sense. Only
in recent years has it become clear that women entrepreneurs can be a powerful
economic resource tools.
(5). World Bank studies show that women entrepreneurs make
significant contributions to economic growth and poverty reduction, not only in
developing countries but also in high-income countries
(6). Women entrepreneurs create new jobs for themselves and others.
Besides boosting employment, women’s entrepreneurship also supports the
diversification of business, stimulating innovation and diversification in
management, in production and in marketing practices as well as in products and
services. Women provide different solutions to management, organizational and
business problems.
(7) The
number of woman entrepreneurs has changed little in Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. The proportion of women-owned
businesses currently lies at around 30 % of the total number of businesses in
OECD countries. When women do start business, they do it on a smaller scale
than men and in a limited range of sectors. In addition, self-employed women
experience severe gender gaps and may earn 30 % to 40 % less than their male
counterparts
(8). The
gender pay gap for self-employment stands at 45 % at EU level, which vividly
illustrates the extent of the disparities between women and men in this type of
employment
(9). The entry of women into the labour market in the last decade
has made a decisive contribution to the pursuit of the objectives for
employment. However, this favourable trend in the growth rates of female
employment should not obscure the many aspects of inequality between women and
men in the labour market. These
inequalities have proven to be persistent and deeply rooted in stereotypes
which influence the professional and personal choices of both men and women,
placing women at a disadvantage with regard to the conditions for participation
in the labour market, specifically in terms of the gender pay gap and their
presence in positions of leadership or economic decision-making, and men with
regard to the conditions for participating in family life. The increase in female participation in the
labour market has not been counterbalanced by a corresponding rise in male participation
in the responsibilities of caring for the home and family members, specifically
children. Women continue to face the greatest difficulties in reconciling their
professional, family and personal lives, with adverse effects on the conditions
for their employability and the creation of self-employment for women.
The demands of flexible labour have
had a disproportionate impact on women and men. Gender gaps persist in the use
of part-time employment which, because of the divide that separates the two
sexes, shows differences in the way time is spent. This has repercussions on
precarious employment for women, progress in their careers, the difference in
the division of family tasks and, consequently, the reconciliation of
professional, personal and family life.
Feminine and Masculine stereotypes
influence societal expectations about choosing a profession and thus guide
women toward the social, educational and cultural realms and men toward the
fields of technology and those related to the pure sciences. The growth in
female employment rates is concentrated around activities and roles
predominated by women. Social practices persist which assume that unpaid work
resulting from taking care of a family is a primary responsibility of women and
paid work resulting from economic activity is a primary responsibility of men.
The same stereotypes make it difficult for women to start companies, as they
face more obstacles than men in terms of credibility, confidence or access to
credit.
The promotion of female
entrepreneurship is a privileged instrument which ensures that men and women
participate on an equal footing in the creation of businesses, one which
increases employment rates for women and simultaneously improves their position
in the labour market, their economic independence, social status and personal fulfillment,
whilst increasing the competitiveness of Africa economies, particularly when
this entrepreneurship is linked to innovation. To strengthen the gender dimension there is a
way to meet the targets for female participation in the labour market (60% in
2010), encouraging access for women to decent, high-quality jobs (more and
better jobs).
Encourage female entrepreneurship as
a factor for innovation and competitiveness through vocational training and
re-skilling, financial incentives, micro-credit, creation of organizational
networks, meetings and sharing good practices, thus fostering a positive
climate for female entrepreneurs. To
promote the knowledge of female entrepreneurship by developing specific
indicators as a means of exchanging good practices and monitoring the several
modalities of entrepreneurship, namely innovation and sustainability
entrepreneurship, as well entrepreneurship based in needs. To promote measures which ensure that women
entrepreneurs are not a target of gender discrimination. When applying for a bank loan. To foster increased public aid to access
credit and micro-credit, not only for women who are undertaking an economic
activity for the first time, but also for those activities already created,
increasing the information available for possible innovative business forms. To promote the integration of entrepreneurship
education into national study programmes, establishing clear targets to
eliminate gender stereotypes that influence the professional and personal
choices of men and women as a way to increase the number of female
entrepreneurs. To eliminate segregation
in the labour market, thus facilitating, on the one hand, the entry of women
into non-traditional sectors and promoting, on the other, the presence of men
in traditionally female occupations. To place greater emphasis on the lifelong
education, skills and vocational training of men in the areas of care and
social action and of women in the areas of knowledge, leadership, innovation
and new technologies whilst also taking into account the skills acquired in
informal contexts. To overcome the
disadvantage faced by men as regards the conditions for participating in family
life, defining measures to foster male participation in private life, namely by
creating new options at national level for paid paternity leave or increasing the possibility of non-transferable, paid parental leave.
To promote measures which ensure maternity and paternity rights for
women and men who carry out self-employment activities. To develop specific indicators for paid and
unpaid work carried out by men and women in order to generate data about the
difference in the way time is spent and promote measures that support spouses
of those that undertake independent work. To develop effective measures to encourage the
reintegration of women and men into employment, without a loss of skills or pay
following a period of maternity or paternity leave or leave to care for
dependant family members.
National plans to reform the system
for calculating pensions should also prevent women from losing the right to a
pension or seeing the value of their pension considerably reduced because of
part-time work and interruptions in their professional career due to family
obligations, considering the necessity to overcome pay gap, time gap and care
gap. To promote corporate social
responsibility with regard to real equality between women and men in accessing
jobs, training and career progress and in reconciling professional, personal
and family life. To motivate public and
private sector companies to adopt equality plans and encouraging social
partners and all participants in this social dialogue to incorporate the many dimensions
of gender equality into the various levels of intervention. To promote the adoption of political measures that
ensures the elimination of gender pay gap. To ensure that national “flexicurity”
strategies adopt a gender perspective.
LITERATURE
REVIEW
GENDER EQUALITY
IN EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP:-Research is
concerning gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship dates
back to the 1970s. Before that, only men were the object of research by studies
of entrepreneurship (AHL, 2006). One of the earliest articles on “female entrepreneurship “is that this
research found was that of Schwartz (1976).
In
it, the author addresses issues referring to motivation, personality traits and
difficulties faced by women entrepreneurs.
Schwartz
(1976) concluded, at the time, that the reasons that led women to set up their
own businesses were similar to those of men. Moreover, both had similar
“entrepreneurial qualities”.
Their
differences are minimal. The researcher found, however, that women faced more
barriers
hindering
the success of their organizations, mainly due to difficulties in obtaining
credit.
At
the end of that decade, Decarlo and Lyons (1979) published the results of an investigation
carried
Out
with 122 women. The researchers described the profile of the group of
entrepreneurs and compared it with that of other groups of women. Quantitative
in nature, the data provided information on the “profile” of women
entrepreneurs and contributed to research that was carried out later. Despite
finding that women entrepreneurs differed from women in general there is need
for additional research to reach more useful results.
Our
research found a small number of articles published in the 1970s. However, the
1980s, when
compared
to the previous decade, emerged as a period in which, at least quantitatively,
research on “female’s entrepreneurship” has
increased. This can be explained, at
least in theory, by an increase in female participation in the labour market,
not only as employees but as employers and owners of their own businesses.
The
present study revealed that international academic literature on the subject
was limited to the
northern
hemisphere. Robert Hisrich and Candida
Brush are, for example, scholars who continue to
investigate the phenomenon,
sometimes carrying out research alone, sometimes among themselves or with other
partners, even from other institutions and countries. In the early 1980s, Hisrich and O’Brien
(1981) predicted that, although the presence of women in entrepreneurial
activities was insignificant, their participation would increase in almost all
fields.
When carrying out research on 40 female
entrepreneurs, Hisrich and O’Brien (1981) found that they had difficulties
referring to access to credit, obtaining guarantees and overcoming a female
negative image. The survey results showed that the problems faced referred to
the type of business and not to the level of education or experience of the
respondents.
In 1984, Hisrich and Brush,
considering there was little knowledge about women entrepreneurs, carried out a
survey of 468 entrepreneurs and described their profile, their motivation,
their skills, and the problems and characteristics of their businesses. In the
same decade, Hisrich and Brush (1987) analyzed the results of a longitudinal
study of female entrepreneurs and, again, investigated their personal
characteristics, family practices, management skills, propensity to take risks,
problems and business growth rate. Like Hisrich and Brush (1984,1987), Joe
(1987) believed that female engagement in entrepreneurial activity was
increasing, although little is known about these women. Thus, he explained the
rise of women in the condition of businesswomen numerically, in the Africa and
outside the country from the mid-1970s to mid-1980s, crediting part of the
growth to stimulus by the administration of President Jimmy Carter, who created
programs to support women entrepreneurs: there was an understanding that their
businesses impacted the American economy in a positive way. However, surveys
were not limited to the USA alone but also in Africa too. In the UK, Watkins
and Watkins (1983) presented the results of a survey of women entrepreneurs and
compared the experience of men and women. The authors concluded that women
entrepreneurs, due to involuntary factors and conscious decision, were
restricted to stereotypically feminine areas. In the authors’ opinion, women would
work in any business segment facing true acceptance by society of their
presence in the labour market as businesswomen, when offered equal conditions.
Watkins and Watkins (1983) pointed out that the differences between men and
women were not necessarily biological, but social.
Buttner and Rosen (1988) discussed
the power and influence of gender stereotypes in the business environment. The researchers investigated whether women entrepreneurs
were seen in terms of gender stereotypes when securing financing institutions,
and concluded that bank loan officers had a generalized and prejudiced
understanding those women would have less chance of achieving success when
compared to men, since they did not possess the “attributes” required to be true
entrepreneurs. Also in the UK, Carter
(1989) published the results of research carried out on women entrepreneurs,
considering that their businesses’ dynamics and performance were specific to
their condition. In a way, she
explained that the differences between men and women occurred due to personal
and differentiated behavior, motivation and ambition, also because women had a
particular criterion, that was not merely economic, to evaluate success.
Similarly, in the USA, Wilkens (1989:15) also defended the idea that women
needed to accept their “typically feminine strengths and recognize” that these
strengths would provide a solid basis for the development and success of their
careers as entrepreneurs. Carter’s (1989) and Wilkens’ (1989) understanding of
the differences referred more to aspects of a personal nature, instead of what
was suggested by Buttner and Rosen (1988).
Other studies have sought to get to know women entrepreneurs by
comparing them to their male versions. Indeed, comparative study has always
been present in academic literature on the subject (CARTER, 1989; Reese and
Dubini (1989) investigated networks of female and male entrepreneurs in the USA
and Italy. They did not observe any significant differences between the two
countries. However, they did identify significant differences between networks
made up of men and those made up of women. Taking into account the small number
of women in personal networks, the researchers found substantial disparities
between male and female “worlds”. Inspired by the work of Aldrich, Reese and
Dubini (1989), Cromie and Birley (1992) carried out similar research in
Northern Ireland. The researchers concluded that women, when compared to men,
are less active in networks, develop networks that are less dense, are more
inclined to argue with other women, and consider their family members the most
important people in their network. Our
research found that, up till now, in the search for differences between male
and women entrepreneurs, demographics and family, occupational and educational
data prevail. In other words, research
has also used a more quantitative approach. However, we identified work such as
that of Neider (1987), which attempted to combine open-ended interviews with
psychological testing and observation, in order to investigate the personality,
demographic and organizational characteristics of the businesses of 52 women in
Florida. Despite the fact that she used several research techniques, she also
ended up drawing a “psychological profile” of entrepreneurial women. The
researcher found that, in these entrepreneurial women, certain
“characteristics” such as high energy levels, persistence and ability to
influence others prevailed. The literature review carried out so far reveals
that methodologies with a quantitative approach prevailed. In other words, the articles analyzed allow
us to say that the 1980s were marked by studies that were, in most cases,
quantitative and empirical, that tried to characterize, or rather draw a
“profile” of entrepreneurial women. So much so that Sexton and Kent (1981), in
order to identify the psychological characteristics that distinguish female
executives and women entrepreneurs, compared the behavior of 45 executives and
48 entrepreneurs, concluding that they had more similarities than differences.
The following year, Smith, McCain and Warren (1982) published the results of a
survey carried out with 76 entrepreneurs in San Francisco, in the United
States. This classified the entrepreneurs as crafts-oriented and opportunistic.
Compared to men, women showed a trend towards opportunistic behavior and
attitudes. As precursors, these studies
introduced women in the debate on entrepreneurship, and presented preliminary
data regarding the condition of women as businesswomen and entrepreneurs in
several countries. The contributions of these surveys tended primarily towards
formulating normative empirical studies designed to identify demographic and
personality characteristics concerning women, and even to trace their “behavioral
profile”. In essence, these studies were restricted to identifying and
describing the characteristics of entrepreneurial women, looking for certain
attributes in their “essence”. Thus, we
can conclude that, in the 1970s and 1980s, international scientific production
was still caught up in the vision of biological determinism – that places
gender as the triggering element of differences – and few studies discussed the
role of sociocultural context on the construction of the meanings of manhood
and womanhood. Although we are not incurring in any kind of
generalization, research carried out
over the next decade did not behave
very differently.
THE ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION OF GENDER EQUALITY IN EDUCATION,
EMPLOYMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP:-There
are different ways in which gender equality in education, employment and
entrepreneurship (whether in established businesses or in new venture creation)
can be measured.
First, one can investigate the
number of female entrepreneurs per (female) labour force (i.e., female
entrepreneurial activity).
Second, one can have a look at the
female share in total entrepreneurial activity (i.e., female entrepreneurial
participation).
Whereas the first measures female
entrepreneurship vis-Ã -vis the number of women in the labor force, while the second
measures female entrepreneurship vis-Ã -vis the total number of entrepreneurs. These discuss gender equality in education,
employment and entrepreneurship from both perspectives, also distinguishing between
self-employment and new venture activity.
Because female entrepreneurship
rates are not similar across countries, the present section also touches upon
some country differences, but this is not the main focus of the present
section. Although it is interesting to see where cross-country differences in
female entrepreneurship come from, at the end of the day a more important
question (in particular for policy makers) is whether these differences lead to
variation in economic performance across countries. Hence, special attention is
paid to the relationship between female entrepreneurship and economic
performance.
GENDER DIVERSITY AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE:-This is assumed that female and male entrepreneurs have a
different profile, e.g., they have a different way of doing business and start to run different types of firms. Thus, female
entrepreneurs can contribute to the diversity in entrepreneurial activity and economic
performance by way of their distinctive characteristics.
In terms of products and services it
may be argued that female entrepreneurs tend to operate in niche markets.
Female entrepreneurs often pursue a specialization strategy offering tailor-made
goods and services (Chaganti and Parasuraman, 1996). Assuming that tailor-made
products and services are different from other products offered within the
industry, it can be said that female entrepreneurs offer new non-competing or
complementary products, insulating them from competition. Because over time
consumer demand has become more versatile (Brock and Evans, 1989), niche
markets have become more important, i.e., diversity in demand has to be met by
diversity in supply of goods and services. From this perspective it may be
important to stimulate female entrepreneurship, in particular as at present the
share of women in entrepreneurial activity is still below 40 percent compare to
men entrepreneur of today.
Hence, stimulating female
entrepreneurship may be a way to increase entrepreneurial diversity.
Overview of gender differences in
entrepreneurship within entrepreneurship research, female entrepreneurship can
be considered a ‘separate’ field of study. Researchers focusing upon the issue of female
entrepreneurship have traditionally been female, and still continue to be. In
general entrepreneurship appears to have become more aware of the possibility
of gender differences and gender is increasingly used as a control variable. To give an overview of the many studies
undertaken in the area of gender issues in entrepreneurship, this builds upon
review articles by Brush (1992), Ahl (2002) and a review of studies identified
in Gatewood et al (2003).
The aim is not to provide a full
picture of research in the area of female entrepreneurship, but rather to give
the reader an idea of the state of research on gender issues in
entrepreneurship. The subject of the present is situated at the intersection of
two broad fields of study: entrepreneurship and gender. Research on female
entrepreneurship can be structured around different themes. Brush (1992) uses
Gartner’s (1985) framework distinguishing between four key components of new
venture creation:
Individual,
Process,
Organization, and
Environment.
Here the same classification is used
for gender differences with respect to the different subjects within the field
of entrepreneurship.
Most studies on female
entrepreneurship focus upon the individual, covering topics such as
motivations, demographics and background characteristics (such as education and
experience). Up to the early 1990s research on female entrepreneurship
identified gender differences with respect to individual characteristics. Brush
(1992; p.13) concludes that: “women business owners are more different from that
of men in terms of individual level characteristics such as education,
occupational experience, motivations, and circumstances of business
start-up/acquisition”. However,
contemporary research indicates that for a range of individual characteristics
(including psychological, attitudinal and personal background factors) there
are more similarities than differences between female and male entrepreneurs (e.g.,
Ahl, 2002). With respect to research intensity, the ‘individual’ studies are
followed by studies on the environment, organization and process of
entrepreneurship, respectively (Ahl, 2002) . In particular the number of studies dealing
with environmental aspects has increased since the early 1990s.
The process of starting up and
running a business as well as environmental influences on entrepreneurial
activity seem relatively similar for female and male entrepreneurs (e.g., Ahl,
2002). However, in terms of organizational characteristics businesses of women
have been found to be more different from than similar to businesses of men. In
particular, this is found for sales volumes, management styles, goals, and the
acquisition of start-up capital (Brush, 1992). Ahl (2002) finds that the scarce
research (usually studies with few observations) focusing upon organization
refers to a distinctive (relational) management style of female entrepreneurs
as compared to that of male entrepreneurs. The most consistent gender
differences are found for firm size and sector, where businesses of women are
on average smaller than those of men (whether measured in terms of financial
indicators or employees) and with female entrepreneurs being more likely to
operate retail or service firms. In addition to studies that fall into one of
the categories– individual, organization, environment, and process – there are
studies that are more comprehensive, taking into account and covering several
aspects at the same time. For example, studies classified as mixed studies
include overview articles and investigating individual and firm performance. In the review of performance argues that the
topic of firm performance has become more popular in female entrepreneurship
studies in the past decade. Until the early 1990s this topic did not receive
much attention.
And if preferences are taken into
account there appears to be no support for the proposed gender differences in
entrepreneurial performance.
With respect to the particular
subjects dealt within each of the categories, it can be said that environment
studies mostly focus upon resource availability and (to a lesser extent)
support structures for female entrepreneurs. The organization studies emphasize
business profile characteristics, such as sector, firm size and age. Process
studies tend to focus upon the process of new venture creation, including
topics such as networking and resource acquisition. In addition, most studies
within the area of performance differentials focus upon firm performance.
Although individual studies in the area of female entrepreneurship have a broad
focus, they tend to focus upon Perspectives on Gender Differences Nature versus
nurture There are two basic schools of thought proposing different reasons for
the existence of gender differences (in general): biological determinism
(referred to as nature) and differential socialization (referred to as
nurture), the latter of which has served as input for the social feminist
perspective.
Biological arguments for gender
differences generally draw upon three streams of research, including
evolutionary theory, brain research and endocrinological research on sex
hormones. The implication of the biological determinism perspective is that
because differences between women and men are attributed to their different
biological nature, one automatically assumes that the existing societal
arrangements between women and men are inevitable, dismantling the need for
policy intervention and support structures. Social scientists refute the
perspective that innate biological differences lead to behavioral differences
which – in turn – construct the social, political and economic environment.
They argue that gender inequality in
society leads to observable differences in behaviors, attitudes and traits. The
differential socialization school of thought assumes that women and men are
different because they are taught to be different. In essence both the
biological determinism perspective and the socialization view assume that women
and men behave differently, and that
they are different from each other.
Moreover, both streams of thought assume that the differences between men and
women are greater and more decisive (and therefore more worthy of study) than
the differences within groups of women and men.
SOCIAL VERSUS LIBERAL FEMINISM:-The identified gender differences in entrepreneurship
research have been explained in different ways, either assuming that women and
men are different from each other or that they are in essence the same and the
environment causes them to behave in different ways. These perspectives are
consistent with the social and liberal feminist perspective, respectively
(Fischer et al., 1993). According to the social feminist perspective gender
differences in entrepreneurship are due to differences in early and ongoing
socialization.
Hence, female and male entrepreneurs
are inherently different, giving rise to different ways of
viewing the world and, accordingly,
different ways in which entrepreneurship is practiced.
The liberal feminist perspective
argues that in essence women and men are the same and that female
entrepreneur experiences are more
problematic or structures their firms in a distinct way (as compared to male
entrepreneurs) because they are confronted with unequal access to resources and
gender-based discrimination. To summarize this, both perspectives which are female
and male entrepreneurs expect a different way, either determined by situational
differences and/ or barriers (liberal feminism) or by dispositional differences
and/or barriers (social feminism).
A different way of explaining gender.
A difference in entrepreneurship is
by investigating situational factors that are correlated with gender. Female
and male entrepreneurs may behave in the same fashion, provided they have the
same personal and business profile.
For instance, because female
entrepreneurs tend to have smaller firms, their firms are characterized
by different performance rates and
organizational structure. This perspective on studying and explaining gender
differences may be more similar to that different from the two perspectives
proposed above. Indeed, differences in the personal and
business profile of female and male entrepreneurs may be explained by
situational or dispositional differences.
Despite a major difficulty in
examining and measuring entrepreneurship due to the blurred boundaries
separating it from self-employment the literature shows that women still face a
great
number of difficulties and obstacles
in establishing and running businesses.
These include:
Access to finance
Unfavourable Business Regulations
Cultural Barriers
Choice of Business Types and Sectors
Information and Training Gaps
Lack of Contacts and
Access to Social
Support and Networking
Educational and Occupational Segregation
Competing Demands on Time
Double Burden of Home and Work Responsibilities.
Although most of these difficulties
are common to both women and men, evidence suggests that the
barriers faced by women
entrepreneurs are often significantly greater than those experienced by
their male peers.
GENDER AND ACCESS TO CREDIT, FINANCE AND CAPITAL:-Access to credit finance is a common barrier to women starting
and growing a business. There are considerable differences between women and
men entrepreneurs in terms of their financial arrangements and the sectors they
operate in. Bank loans are
traditionally the route to finance for many businesses but during the
realignment of the banking sector, this path has been and continues to be
reduced, according to a survey by the European Central Bank. Although no breakdown by gender is included
and both women and men
face similar reductions in loans,
recent studies suggest that barriers in accessing credit and finance
are higher for women. The reasons
for this include lack of traditional collateral (such as land or
property, which is often registered
in men’s names), women’s lower income levels relative to men’s
and financial institutions’
inability (or lack of interest) to design appropriate products and out-
reach strategies for women. A gateway to the use of financial services is
the ownership of a bank
account. The Global Findex, a
comprehensive database measuring how people save, borrows and man-age risk in
148 countries reveals that women are less likely than men to have formal bank
accounts. With regard to EU Member
States specifically, studies carried out in France found
that 10 % of women entrepreneurs
wish to receive support from banks, which is a third lower than
their male counterparts. Similarly,
a UK study found that women entrepreneurs are less amenable to
institutional finance, such as
overdrafts, bank loans and supplier credit. Even if they can gain access
to a loan, women often lack access
to other financial services such as savings, digital payment
methods and insurance. Lack of
financial education can also limit women's ability to gain access to
and benefit from financial services.
Equal access to capital is not yet a
reality. In 2008, only 20.3 % of EU businesses started with
venture capitals were run by women.
Three factors may explain these differences: women own fewer financial assets
and have shorter credit histories (given their lack of entrepreneurial
experience), both of which are valued by credit providers; given the sectors
women are active in and the size of their companies, their projects are
generally less capital intensive; there might also be some bias reflecting a
lack of confidence in women entrepreneurs, an idea reinforced by the fact that
women are less represented in financing activities and networks. Also, because of the unequal access to capital,
when they become self-employed, women tend to operate smaller businesses in
sectors that are different from those of men and largely mirror segregation
patterns in the labour market. These factors can then translate into lower
levels of labour productivity and earnings and a greater risk of poverty for
women who are self-employed compared with women employees.
Networking opportunities for women
entrepreneurs. Having access to a
strong network of business
partners can be a highly important
factor in achieving entrepreneurial success. The tendency to
network does not appear to differ
significantly between women and men entrepreneurs and the size
of
the networks to which they both have access to is similar. Prejudices and
stereotypes about women in business prevailing entrepreneurial role models
reflect a masculine bias and this is reinforced in popular media, education and
government policy. Studies indicate that one effect of this ‘masculine’
entrepreneurial discourse is that women can feel out of place in this domain. This bias affects women’s perceptions about
their entrepreneurial ability and those of other relevant stakeholders
supporting business creation and growth (including the banking and venture
capital system, other entrepreneurs and their networks, potential customers,
etc.).
Stereotypes and the lower exposure
of women to other women role models might explain why they
report less interest in
entrepreneurial careers and feel less able to become successful entrepreneurs
Generally speaking, the concept of
entrepreneurship carries more positive connotations than self
-employment and refers to a higher
quality form of participation in the labour market, one
characterized by deliberate choice
and the pursuit of self-realization. By contrast, self-employment
is often seen as a path that
individuals, especially women, choose out of necessity. These assumptions may
reflect stereotypical gendered expectations surrounding entrepreneurship and
self-
employment, which, in turn,
reproduce masculine norms of entrepreneurial behaviour.
Entrepreneurship has traditionally
been constructed as a masculine field — men own a larger share
of businesses and they
overwhelmingly outnumber women in industries such as technology, which
receive the most attention from the
media, the general public and policymakers. Women entrepreneurs are
concentrated in low-growth and low-skilled business sectors such as retailing
and
services, which are dismissively labeled
as ‘mice’, ‘failure’ and ‘plodder’, compared with high-
growth ‘gazelle’ businesses that is
commonly associated with men.
Furthermore, entrepreneurship case
studies are mostly about men (e.g. Bill Gates, Donald Trump,
Sam Walton) and most role models in
entrepreneurship tend to be men.
Women’s entrepreneurship is a key
issue for the European institutions. Since 2005, to ensure that
small and medium-sized enterprises
(SMEs) would benefit from the measures identified in the
Lisbon Strategy, the European
Commission undertook to work with national authorities to address
those areas, such as access to
credit and entrepreneurial networks, where the needs of women
entrepreneurs were not sufficiently
met. The European policies for women
entrepreneurs have therefore pursued first of all the main objective of
spreading entrepreneurial mindsets among women, encouraging and financially supporting
the start-up of business activity by women.
FEMALE ENTREPRENEURSHIP:-Interestingly,
the female coefficient increases slightly in absolute value after the inclusion
of the main controls and does not change after inclusion of assets. The change
in the marginal effects estimate from Specification 3 to Specification 4 is
primarily due to the higher percentage of women who are not employed and the
higher rate of entry from non-employment than from wage/salary employment into
self-employment. This finding suggests that the female/male difference in
self-employment entry rates would be slightly larger if not for the initial
difference in non-employment rates. As expected, controlling for other
variables has little effect on the female coefficient estimate because men and
women have very similar characteristics.
Women are much less likely than men
to enter self-employment, all else equal. Similar results are found using micro-data
from the European Union. Blanch flower (2000, 2004) finds large female/male
differences in the probability of being self-employed after including education
and other measurable. Recent studies
focusing on gender differences in self-employment provide some
interesting findings, but provide
only limited direct evidence on the question of what explains the
large gender difference in
self-employment rates. For example, these studies find that women who are
married to self-employed men are more likely to be self-employed or enter
self-employment and that the choice of self-employment is partly driven by the
desire for flexible schedules and other family-related reasons for women
relative to men (Bruce 1999, Boden 1996, 1999, Carr 1996, Devine 1994b, Lombard
2001, and Lohmann 2001). Gender earnings
differentials in the wage/salary sector may contribute, but there is also
considerable evidence indicating large female/male earnings differences in the
self-employment sector (Aronson 1991, Devine 1994b, Hundley 2000 and U.S.
Bureau of the Census 2004). In the end, unobservable factors, such as different
preferences, discrimination, and risk aversion, may be responsible for low
levels of female entrepreneurship. As
noted above, an interesting finding is that a lower percentage of young women
than men report a desire for being self-employed in the United States
(Kourilsky and Walstad 1998). Using a combined sample from many countries,
Blanch flower, Oswald and Stutzer (2001) also find a lower probability of preferring
self-employment among women after controlling for other factors. In both cases,
however, the differences are not large and represent roughly 15 percentage
points. Individual characteristics as well as country
dummies.
A few core objectives motivate the emphasis
on women’s entrepreneurship. In the developed countries, support for female
entrepreneurship is part of a general push to stimulate growth. The focus on
growth applies also to men’s entrepreneurship, of course, but the notion that
women lag behind
men in both starting businesses and
achieving growth calls more attention to the females. For
the developing countries, however, the
core emphasis in international discourse shifts strongly toward women’s
entrepreneurship as a poverty alleviation strategy. The poverty agenda comes
into play largely because women invest earnings in children and community, thus
producing a positive ripple effect that does not manifest in the same way for
men’s incomes. Facilitating women’s entrepreneurship thus has become a
preferred tactic for economic development.
For all countries, the call to
support women’s entrepreneurship also falls under an overall charge to “close
the gender gap” across economic domains, including formal
employment, financial access, and so
on.
Such calls have come from the World
Bank and OECD, for instance, and tend to focus on the generalized benefits that
are believed to accrue from gender equality, including better use of national
resources, reduction in disease and hostility, improved human capital, as well
as increased growth.
Women constitute roughly half of
Nigerian’s population and by extension half of the work force. As
a group, women do as much work as
men if not more. However, the types of work as well as the
condition under which women work and
their access to opportunities for advancement differs from
men.
Women are, often, disadvantaged
compared to men in access to employment opportunities and
conditions of work; furthermore,
many women forgo or curtail employment because of family
responsibilities. The removal of
obstacles and inequalities that women face with respect to
employment is a step towards
realizing women’s potential in the economy and enhancing their
contribution to economic and social
development.
The Beijing Declaration affirms
national commitment to the inalienable rights of women and girls
and their empowerment and equal
participation in all spheres of life including the economic domain. The Beijing
Platform for Action (BPA), identifies women’s role in the economy as a critical
area of
concern and calls attention to the
need to promote and facilitate women’s equal access to
employment and resources as well as
the harmonization of work and family responsibilities for
women and men.
Furthermore, the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) targets the achievement of full and
productive employment and decent
work for all including women and young people as part of MDG 1 to eradicate
extreme poverty and hunger. Some progress has been made towards these ends, but
the gains are uneven.
This chapter examines trends over
the last 8 years and describes the current situation of women and men in the
labour force, employment and unemployment.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:- Researchers
use various methods to validate their hypothesis which is usually specified as
a negation of the objective. Usually, data availability and an investigator’s expertise
define his approach. To effectively explore the major dimensions of the
arguments of this paper which has the objective of showing that women’s
empowerment – unlimited by their gender, either through employment or education
– will lead to an increase in output per capita and poverty reduction in the
study chose Nigeria with less than moderate women’s
involvement in economic and corporate
activities for the period 1970-2012 using World Bank data. The linkage model is
Meier & Rauch’s, (2005) which portrays an economic development worth
sustaining as one where an increase
in real per capita GDP is not counteracted by increases in either poverty or
inequality. This study used the Bound Testing technique popularized by a number
of scholars (Pesaran et al., 2001; Pesaran and Shin, 1999; Pesaran and Smith,
1998).
An empirical analysis of labour
market outcomes for a cross-national sample of college students commissioned by
the OECD and the World Bank sheds more light on the linkages between genders
differences in performance in
education, career choices in tertiary education and subsequent labour market
outcomes. Its initial findings
include:
·
Women are slightly more likely
than men to obtain a tertiary degree but these are more often in the first
level of tertiary education (e.g. Bachelor) than in the post-graduate level
(e.g. Masters or Ph.D.).
· Most of the individuals in the survey
work as professionals or skilled technicians, with a few
holding less skilled positions (clerks) and a negligible
minority holding more senior positions – which is consistent with the fact that
the survey covers college graduates with about five years of work experience.
Within these occupation categories, more men than women work in senior and
professional positions.
· Gender is a significant determinant of
the choice of field of study, even when ability, the
perceived quality of the programme and family background are
controlled for. The "quality" of the programme has a positive effect
on choosing sciences but negative on choosing humanities and
"ability" has a slightly larger effect on the choices made by men
compared with those made by women.
· Focusing only on professional and
skilled technicians, there are strong asymmetries by gender in the correlation
between field of study and occupation. Almost 70% of the female graduates from
the field of humanities work as teachers compared with about 50% of the male
graduates. Most of the differences concern teaching occupations and professions
related to physics, mathematics and engineering. The majority (about 55%) of
the male graduates in sciences work as professionals in physics, mathematics
and engineering as opposed to 33% of the female graduates. Overall, only 7.5%
of women work in these fields while physics, mathematics and engineering is the
second favorite field for men.
Women
are more concentrated in teaching.
DATA ANALYSIS
OCCUPATION:
|
PHYSICS,
MATHEMATICS
AND ENGINEERING
|
LIFE SCIENCE
AND HEALTH
|
TEACHING
|
OTHER
|
TOTAL
|
Field of study, Males
|
|||||
HUMANITIES
|
7.94
|
0.89
|
52.36
|
38.80
|
100.00
|
SOCIAL SCIENCES
|
13.40
|
1.14
|
7.71
|
77.75
|
100.00
|
SCIENCE
|
55.32
|
18.40
|
13.80
|
12.49
|
100.00
|
HEALTH
|
8.35
|
76.56
|
3.12
|
11.97
|
100.00
|
TOTAL
|
23.03
|
15.44
|
16.79
|
44.74
|
100.00
|
(Table 1.1)
Occupation
choice by field of study completed for professionals and technicians -
Male
OCCUPATION:
|
PHYSICS,
MATHEMATICS
AND
ENGINEERING
|
LIFE
SCIENCE
AND
HEALTH
|
TEACHING
|
OTHER
|
TOTAL
|
Field
of study, Females
|
|||||
HUMANITIES
|
1.98
|
1.70
|
68.43
|
27.89
|
100.00
|
SOCIAL SCIENCES
|
5.45
|
2.43
|
11.42
|
80.70
|
100.00
|
SCIENCE
|
33.65
|
28.91
|
22.12
|
15.32
|
100.00
|
HEALTH
|
5.61
|
69.89
|
5.15
|
19.35
|
100.00
|
TOTAL
|
7.54
|
21.06
|
29.92
|
41.48
|
100.00
|
(Table 1.1) Occupation choice by field of study
completed for professionals and technicians –
Female
In Gender Equality in Education,
Employment and entrepreneurship occupations are the sub-major groups from the
International Standard Classification of Occupations. Examples of occupations
at the minor group level that correspond to the sub-major group level
occupation other are: Business and legal professionals, creative professionals,
finance and sales associate professionals.
FINDINGS:-Gender
differences in employment and education are likely to play a role in gender
differences in entrepreneurship. Women’s under-representation among employed
managers not only provides them with less direct experience of managing
businesses compared with men, but it also hinders the likelihood of successful
bids for start-up loans. Moreover, women’s lower average earnings endow them
with fewer saving for starting a business. Importantly, under-capitalization at
start-up impacts negatively on the survival rates and growth prospects of
firms. Occupational segregation reinforces the concentration of women-owned
enterprises in service sectors and jeopardizes women’s prospects as
entrepreneurs in high-growth sectors.
The knowledge base on female entrepreneurship
has increased markedly in recent years (Minniti,
2009). Research has focused on women
business owners ’ characteristics and development, women’s motivations for
starting and leading a business, women’s leadership styles and management strategies;
and barriers encountered by women business owners. Arguably, financing issues
are those that triggered the keenest gender-based discussions.
Policy development has to address
the needs of women entrepreneurs and particular policy
lessons include ensuring equal
property and inheritance rights; strengthening financial education and
encouraging dissemination of financial information to women; facilitating
access to public support services; fostering a positive image of
entrepreneurship amongst women; promoting development of women entrepreneurship
networks; and, supporting mentoring and coaching programmes (OECD, 2000 and
OECD, 2004).
There is still lack of knowledge on
the role of women’s entrepreneurship in the society and the
economy, as well as on the specific
obstacles met by women entrepreneurs. This is mainly because the analytical
activity has been relying mainly on qualitative data and case-based cross
country analysis, largely drawing on the experiences of advanced economies.
Cross-national analysis remains scant. A more global and diversified analysis
of female entrepreneurial activities is needed for solid policy development and
policy transferability across countries, as for example through the OECD-MENA
Women's Business Forum.
CONCLUSIONS:-The
present thesis shows that female and male entrepreneurs differ significantly
with respect to arrange of aspects of entrepreneurship. The studies show that
there is evidence of gender differences in entrepreneurship both at the macro
and the micro level. At the macro level the present thesis shows that there is
some evidence of a positive relationship between female entrepreneurship
(vis-Ã -vis male entrepreneurship) and economic performance at both the regional
and country level.
With respect to the determinants of
entrepreneurship at the macro level it is found that the factors influencing
female and male entrepreneurship are similar rather than different. Most of the
factors
that influence entrepreneurship in
general, also influence female entrepreneurship.
However, differential effects have
been found for unemployment and life satisfaction, suggesting
that the female share in
self-employment is influenced by those factors. At the micro level most of the
gender differences are attributable to indirect effects, although some evidence
has also been found for direct gender effects.
Even though most of the micro-level studies find some evidence for the
existence of direct gender effects, these may be residual effects that exist
because it is virtually impossible to take into account all factors that
influence entrepreneurship. The present thesis has studied the characteristics of
the average female entrepreneur, the profile of which has been described in one
of the previous paragraphs. However, it may be that new generations operate
their businesses in a different way than older generations of female
entrepreneurs. It is therefore interesting to investigate the (differences in)
profile of younger and older female entrepreneurs. In general, the information on
female entrepreneurship can be enriched by investigating different types of
female entrepreneurs in addition to the average female entrepreneur. For
example, part-time versus full-time female entrepreneurs; married versus single
female entrepreneurs; female entrepreneurs with and without children; and women
running service versus production firms. Distinguishing between different types
of female entrepreneurs also enables the comparison with male entrepreneurs in
similar circumstances. Furthermore, this thesis has studied gender diversity in
entrepreneurship in terms of individual and business characteristics. Most of
the studies deal with business structuring and the input side of the business,
focusing upon time investments, financial structure, (human resource)
management, and organizational structure. The output side has not been
investigated and, although there have been several studies investigating
performance differentials between businesses of women and men; there is still
need for further research. First, research should explore the type of output
female entrepreneurs produce and the extent to which these are unique and
contribute to entrepreneurial diversity. For example, because female
entrepreneurs tend to pursue combinations of goals, they may also be more
likely to engage in social entrepreneurship. Second, we have seen that
businesses of women tend to be small, and are less likely to experience growth.
Arguing that female entrepreneurship is important for economic performance thus
seems a paradox. Future research may be able to unravel this paradox by
focusing both upon the quantitative and qualitative contribution of (female)
entrepreneurs. To summarize, the relations between female entrepreneurship,
entrepreneurial diversity and economic performance should be further explored
in empirical studies . Measurement issues are crucial here as female
entrepreneurship can be measured in different ways .If the aim is to
investigate the link between entrepreneurial diversity and economic performance,
researchers should take the female share in entrepreneurial activity (as a
measure of entrepreneurial diversity) as a starting point.
Using female entrepreneurial
activity rates (measured vis-Ã -vis the labor force) is likely to only establish
a link between entrepreneurial activity and economic performance, as countries
with relatively high total entrepreneurial activity rates also tend to be
characterized by relatively high female entrepreneurial activity rates.
Finally, future research on gender issues in entrepreneurship should explore
different ways of approaching and measuring gender. In the present thesis
gender is measured by way of biological sex. In this way sex and gender
coincide.
RECOMMENDATIONS:-Despite
the contribution of each study, since, overall, they provided relevant data and
information about enterprising women, many researches were limited to
describing, in a fragmented way, small segments of the population of women
entrepreneurs, and did not advance in applying and developing theory.
Incidentally, this was also the perception of Moore (1990), when analyzing the
literature that had been produced in previous years about women entrepreneurs.
Moreover, in most cases, the studies
were quantitative and empirical in nature and limited themselves to attempting
to draw a “profile” of enterprising women.
This attempt led to many studies
that sought to highlight the differences between men and women through
demographic, family, occupational and educational data.
On the one hand, this data
contributed significantly to knowledge about enterprising women.
On the other, it reinforced the
stereotype that women had an “essence” which defined their skills and
attributes. In other words, it appears that an artificial naturalization
process led researchers to believe that male or women entrepreneurs are people
endowed with certain characteristics that are “naturally” determined.
Incidentally, it seems that much of
the research did not realize that essentialist conceptions have guided academic
production on “female entrepreneurship”.
The extremely persuasive structuring
of this speech can be so deeply imbued in societies that it is not surprising
that literature on “women entrepreneurs” did not escape from it unscathed.
Few studies specifically developed a
theoretical analysis on the topic “gender”.
Apparently, the recurring concern of
many works was the sexual structure of the organizations and its implications
on business activities.
Thus, it seems appropriate to bring
to the debate a discussion concerning the need to use new lenses to study the
“female entrepreneurship” phenomenon, at least to establish new directions for
research.
The need for additional research to
be undertaken to come to any kind of conclusion regarding the alleged
establishment of an “enterprising profile” of women was felt by several
researchers.
Ahl (2006), for example, when he
found that, despite intentions to the contrary, academic literature dealing
with “female entrepreneurship” harbored certain discursive practices that
reproduce women’s subordination, that is, that recreated the idea that companies
managed by women played a secondary and less significant role compared to those
led by men, suggested that future research on the topic broaden their object of
research and change their epistemological position.
The research of Ahl (2006)
reinforced the initial perception that there seems to be a lack of
epistemological diversity in the scientific production dealing with “female
entrepreneurship”, of enterprising women, of women who own companies etc.,
since a substantial part of the studies seem to understand sex/gender as a
variable and not as a frame of reference.
Despite the predominance of research
of a normative nature, we observed an increase in the number of studies that
see gender as a social construct that ensures women’s subordination to men and,
especially, that understands that sex and gender are discursive practices that
constitute specific subjectivities by means of power and resistance in the
materiality of human bodies.
They, above all, not only propose
the denaturalization and deconstruction of discursive practices considered
universal but also give voice to ethnic minorities, which are not addressed in
the mainstream, and problematize the concept of gender as constituted in the
West.
The compilation carried out here
sought to mirror the national and international academic production on “female
entrepreneurship”, mainly in journals and conference annals from the field of
administration. It shows the birth of a field of research, its transformation
and its coming-of-age pari passu with changes in society, in the labor market
and in academy. Despite these advances, there is still a long way to go.
REFERENCES
AHL, H. Why research on women
entrepreneurs needs new directions, Entrepreneurship Theory
and Practice , [S. l.], v. 30, n.5,
p. 595-621, Sept. 2006.
ALDRICH, H.; REESE, P. R.; DUBINI,
P. Women on the verge of a breakthrough?: networking among entrepreneurs in the
United States and Italy. In: VESPER, K. H. (Ed.)
Frontiers of entrepreneurship research.
Wellesley, Massachusetts: Babson College, p. 560-574, 1989.
ALLEN, K. R.; CARTER, N. M. Women
entrepreneurs: profile differences across high and low performing adolescent
firms.
Frontiers of Entrepreneurship
Research, 1996. ALSOS, G. A.; ISAKSEN, E. J.; LJUNGGREN,
E. New venture financing and
subsequent business growth in men-and women-led businesses.
Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice,[S. l.], v. 30, n. 5, p. 667-686, Sept. 2006.
ARRIBAS, I.; VILA, J. E. Human
capital determinants of the survival of entrepreneurial service firms in Spain.
The International Entrepreneurship
and Management Journal, [S.l.], v. 3, n. 3, p. Sept. 2007.
BECKER-BLEASE, J. R.; SOHL, J. E. Do
women-owned businesses have equal access to angel capital?
Journal of Business Venturing, Amsterdam,
v. 22, n. 4, p. 503-521, July 2007.
BIERNACKI, P., WALDORF, D. Snowball
sampling: problems and techniques of chain referral sampling.
Sociological Methods & Research,
[S. l.], v. 2, n. 2, p.141-163, Nov. 1981.
BOOHENE, R.; SHERIDAN, A.; KOTEY, B.
Gender, personal values, strategies and small
business performance.
Equal Opportunities International,
[S. l.], v. 27, n. 3, p. 237-257, 2008.BJÖRNSSON, B.; ABRAHA, D. Counselling
encounters between banks and entrepreneurs: a gender perspective. International
Journal of Bank Marketing, Bradford, v. 23, n. 6, p. 444-463, 2005.
BOOHENE, R.; SHERIDAN, A.; KOTEY, B.
Gender, personal values, strategies and small
business performance.
Equal Opportunities International,
[S. l.], v. 27, n. 3, p. 237-257, 2008. BOTHA, M.; NIEMAN, G.; VUUREN, J.
Enhancing female entrepreneurship by
enabling access to skills. Entrepreneurship Management,
[S. l.], v. 2, n. 4, p. 479-493,
Dec. 2006.
BRUIN, A.; FLINT-HARTLE, S.
Entrepreneurial women and private capital: the New Zealand
perspective.
International Journal of
Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, [S. l.], v. 11, n. 2, p. 108-128,
2005.
BUTTNER, E. H.; ROSEN, B. Bank loan
officers’ perceptions of the characteristics of men,
women, and successful entrepreneurs.
Journal of Business Venturing,
Amsterdam, v. 3, n. 3, p. 249-258, Summer 1988.CANTZLER, I.; LEIJON, S.
Team-oriented women entrepreneurs: a way to modern management.
Journal of Small Business and
Enterprise Development, Bradford, v. 14, n. se CARTER, N. M. The role of risk
orientation on financing expectations in new venture creation: does sex matter?
Frontiers of Entrepreneurship
Research, 2002. DisponÃvel em: <www.babson.edu>. Accessed on: 05 Feb.
2012.
BIERNACKI, P., WALDORF, D. Snowball
sampling: problems and techniques of chain referral sampling.
Sociological Methods & Research,
[S. l.], v. 2, n. 2, p.141-163, Nov. 1981.BOOHENE, R.; SHERIDAN, A.; KOTEY,B.
Gender, personal values, strategies and small business performance.
Equal Opportunities International,
[S. l.], v. 27, n. 3, p. 237-257, 2008.BJÖRNSSON, B.; ABRAHA, D. Counselling
encounters between banks and entrepreneurs: a gender perspective.
International Journal of Bank
Marketing, Bradford, v. 23, n. 6, p. 444-463, 2005.
BOOHENE, R.; SHERIDAN, A.; KOTEY, B.
Gender, personal values, strategies and small business performance.
Equal Opportunities International,
[S. l.], v. 27, n. 3, p. 237-257, 2008.BOTHA, M.; NIEMAN, G.; VUUREN, J.
Enhancing female entrepreneurship by enabling access to skills.
Entrepreneurship Management, [S.
l.], v. 2, n. 4, p. 479-493, Dec. 2006.BRUIN, A.; FLINT-HARTLE, S.
Entrepreneurial women and private capital: the New Zealand perspective.
International Journal of
Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, [S. l.], v. 11, n. 2, p. 108-128,
2005.
BUTTNER, E. H.; ROSEN, B. Bank loan
officers’ perceptions of the characteristics of men,
women, and successful entrepreneurs.
Journal of Business Venturing,
Amsterdam, v. 3, n. 3, p. 249-258, Summer 1988. CANTZLER, I.; LEIJON, S.
Team-oriented women entrepreneurs: a way to modern management.
Journal of Small Business and
Enterprise Development, Bradford, v. 14, n. seCARTER, N. M. The role of risk
orientation on financing expectations in new venture creation: does sex matter?
Frontiers of Entrepreneurship
Research, 2002. DisponÃvel em: <www.babson.edu>. Accessed on: 05 Feb.
2012.
CARTER, S. The dynamics and
performance of female-owned entrepreneurial firms.
Journal of Organizational Change
Management. Bradford, v. 2, n. 3, p. 54-64, 1989 et al. Gender,
entrepreneurship, and bank lending: the criteria and processes used by bank
loan officers in assessing applications.
Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, [S. l.], v. 31, n. 3, p. 427-444, May 2007. CASSOL, N. K.; SILVEIRA,
A.;
HOELTGEBAUM, M. Empreendedorismo
feminino: análise da produção cientÃfica da base de
dados do Institute for Scientific
Information (ISI), 1997-2006. In: ENCONTRO NACIONAL DA
ASSOCIAÇÃO DOS PROGRAMAS DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO
EM ADMINISTRAÇÃO, 31., 2007. Salvador.
Anais Salvador: ANPAD, 2007. 1
CD-ROM.CHEW, I. K. H.; YAN, T. C. The changing pattern of women entrepreneurs:
the Singapore experience.
Women in Management Review,
Bradford, v. 6, n. 6, 1991. COLEMAN, S. Access to capital: a comparison of men
and women.
Frontiers of Entrepreneurship
Research, 1998. Available at: < http://www.babson.edu/entrep
/fer/papers98/V/V_B/V_B.html>. Accessed on: Oct. 24 2007.COOK, R. G.;
BELLIVEAU, P.; LENTZ, C.
The role of gender in US
microenterprise business plan development, Journal of Small Business and
Enterprise Development,Bradford, v. 14, n. 2, p. 241-251, 2007.
CRAMER, L. et al. Representações
femininas da ação empreendedora: uma análise da trajetória
das mulheres no mundo dos negócios.
Revista de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas
Empresas, São Paulo, v.1, n.1,
53-71, Jan./April, 2012.
CROMIE, S.; BIRLEY, S. Networking by
female business owners in Northern Ireland.
Journal of Business Venturing,
Amsterdam, v. 7, n. 3, p. 237-251, May 1992 DECARLO, J. F; LYONS, P. R. A
comparison of selected personal characteristics of minority and non-minority
female entrepreneurs.
Journal of Small Business
Management, Morgantown, v. 17, n. 4, p. 222-229, Oct. 1979.DECHANT, K.; LAMKY,
A. Toward an understanding of arab women entrepreneurs in Bahrain and Oman.
Journal of Developmental
Entrepreneurship, Norfolk, v. 10, n. 2, p. 123–140, Aug. 2005. DE TIENNE, D.
R.; CHANDLER, G. N. The role of gender in opportunity identification.
Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, [S. l.], v. 31, n. 3, p. 365-386, May 2007. DHALIWAL, S.; KANGIS, P.
Asians in the
UK: gender, generations and enterprise.
Equal Opportunities International,
Bradford, v. 25, n. 2, p. 92-108, 2006. DIAS, V. T. et al. A idealização da
profissional adequada aos “novos tempos”. Anais Salvador: ANPAD, 2006. 1
CD-ROM.DIEGUES-CASTRILLON, M. I. et al. Turismo rural, empreendedorismo e
gênero: um estudo do caso na comunidade autônoma da Galiza.
Revista de Sociologia e Economia
Rural, BrasÃlia, v. 50, n. 2, p. 371-382, Apr./Jun, 2012.
DOLINSKY, A. L.; CAPUTO, R. K.;
PASUMARTY, K. Long-term entrepreneurship patterns: a national study of black
and white female entry and stayer status differences.
Journal of Small Business
Management. Morgantown, v. 32, n. 1, p. 18-26, Jan. 1994.
EDDLESTON, K. A.; POWELL, G. N.
The role of gender identity in
explaining sex differences in business owners’ career satisfier references Journal
of Business Venturing, Amsterdam, v. 23, n. 2, p. 244-256, Mar. 2008. FAGENSON,
E. A. Personal value systems of men and women entrepreneurs versus managers.
Journal of Business Venturing, v. 8,
n. 5, p. 409-430, Sept. 1993.FAIRLIE, R. W. Entrepreneurship and earnings among
young adults from disadvantaged families.
Small Business Economics, Dordrecht,
v. 25, n. 3, p. 223-236, Oct. 2005. FASCI, M. A.; VALDEZ, J. A performance
contrast of male- and female-owned small accounting practices. Journal of Small
Business Management, Morgantown, v. 36, n. 3, p. 1-7, July 1998.
FERREIRA, J. M.; GIMENEZ, F. A. P.;
RAMOS, S. C. Potencial empreendedor e gênero: estudo com varejistas de
materiais de Curitiba/PR.
In: ENCONTRO DE ESTUDOS SOBRE
EMPREENDEDORISMO E GESTÃO DE PEQUENAS EMPRESAS, 4., 2005. Curitiba. Anais.
Curitiba: UEL/UEM/PUC-PR/PPA, 2005. 1 CD-ROM. NOGUEIRA, E. E. S. Mulheres esuas
histórias: razão, sensibilidade e subjetividade no empreendedorismo feminino.
Revista de Administração
Contemporânea, Curitiba, v. 17, n. 4, p. 398-417, Jul./Aug. 2013.
FISCHER, E. M.; REUBER, A. R.; DYKE,
L. S.
A theoretical overview and extension
of research on sex, gender, and entrepreneurship.
Journal of Business Venturing, New
York, v. 8, n. 2, p. 151-168, Mar. 1993.
FULLER-LOVE, N.; LIM, L.; AKEHURST,
G. Guest editorial: female and ethnic minority entrepreneurship.
The International Entrepreneurship
Management Journal, [S. l.], v. 2, n. 4, p. 429-439, Dec. 2006.
GATEWOOD, E. J. et al. Toward a
theory of women entrepreneurship and venture capital.
Frontiers of Entrepreneurship
Research, 2003. Available at: <http://www.babson.edu/entrep/fer/
BABSON2003>. Accessed on: Oct. 24
2007.GIMENEZ, F. A. P. et al.
Gênero Empreendedorismo: um estudo
comparativo no Paraná. In: ENCONTRO DE ESTUDOS
SOBRE EMPREENDEDORISMO E GESTÃO DE
PEQUENAS EMPRESAS, 1., 2000.
Anais Maringá: UEL/UEM/PPA, 2000. 1
CD-ROM.
GLOBAL ENTERPRENEURSHIP MONITOR
(GEM) 2013a. Empreendedorismo no Brasil:
relatório executivo 2013. Available
at: < http://ibqp.org.br/upload/tiny_mce/
Download/GEM_2013_-_Relatorio_executivo_Empreendedorismo_no_Brasil.pdf>.
Accessed on:
06 Jun. 2014.
GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP MONITOR (GEM)
2013b. Empreendedorismo no Brasil
2013. Curitiba: IBQP, 2013.
Available at: < http://www.ibqp.org.br/upload/tiny_mce/ GEM_2013_-_Livro_Empreendedorismo_no_ Brasil.pdf>.
Accessed on: 06 Jun. 2014.
GODWIN, L. N.; STEVENS, C. E.;
BRENNER, N. L. Forced to play by the rules? Theorizing
how mixed-sex founding teams benefit
women entrepreneurs in male-dominated contexts.
Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice,[S. l.],v. 30, n. 5, p. 623-642, Sept. 2006.
GRAY, K. R.; FINLEY-HERVEY, J. Women
and entrepreneurship in Morocco.
The International Entrepreneurship
and Management Journal, [S. l.], v. 1, n. 2, p. 203-217, 2005.
HARRISON, R. T.; MASON, C. M. Does
gender matter? Women business angles and the supply
of entrepreneurial finance.
Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, [S. l.], v. 31, n. 5, p. 445-472, May 2007. HISRICH, R. D. et al.
Performance in entrepreneurial ventures: does gender matter?.
Frontiers of Entrepreneurship
Research, 1997. Available at: < http://www.babson.edu/ entrep/
fer/papers97/sum97/hisb.htm>.
Accessed on: 23 Oct. 2007 BRUSH, C.
The woman entrepreneur: management
skills and business problems BRUSH, C. G. Women entrepreneurs: a longitudinal
study. In: VESPER, K. H. (Ed.).
Frontiers of entrepreneurship
Research. Wellesley, Massachusetts: Babson College, p. 187-199, 1987. FAN, Z.
Women entrepreneurs in the people’s Republic of China: an exploratory study
Journal of Managerial Psychology,
Bradford, v. 6, n. 3, p. 3-12, 1991.
O`BRIEN, M.
The woman entrepreneur from a business
and sociological perspective. In: VESPER, K. H. (Ed.)
Frontiers of Entrepreneurship
Research. Wellesley, Massachusetts: Babson College, p. 21-39, 1981.
HOLMQUIST, C.; SUNDIN, E.
Women as entrepreneurs in Sweden:
conclusions from a survey. In: VESPER, K. H. (Ed.)
Frontiers of Entrepreneurship
Research. Wellesley, Massachusetts: Babson College, p. 626-642, 1989.
JONATHAN, E. G. Empreendedorismo
feminino no setor tecnológico brasileiro: dificuldades e
tendências. In: ENCONTRO DE ESTUDOS
SOBRE EMPREENDEDORISMO E GESTÃO
DE PEQUENAS EMPRESAS, 3., 2003.
BrasÃlia. Anais. BrasÃlia: UEL/UEM/PPA/UnB, 2003. 1
CD-ROM.
Psicologia & Sociedade, Belo
Horizonte, v. 19, n. 1, p. 77-84, Jan./Apr. 2007. JOOS, M. Women: the
entrepreneurs of the 1980s. Reference Services Review, Bradford,v. 15, n. 3, p.
59-65, 1987.
KEPHART, P.; SCHUMACHER, L. Has the
‘glass ceiling’ cracked?: an exploration of women
entrepreneurship.
Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, [S. l.], v. 12, n. 1, p. 2-15, Fall 2005.
KIRKWOOD, J. Igniting the
entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered
International Journal of
Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, [S. l.], v. 13, n. 1,p. 39-59, 2007.
KLYVER, K.; TERJESEN, S.
Entrepreneurial network composition.
Women in Management Review,
Bradford, v. 22, n. 8, p. 682-688, 2007.KYRO, P.
Women entrepreneurs question men’s
criteria for success.
Frontiers of Entrepreneurship
Research, 2001. Available at: <http://fusionmx.
babson.edu/entrep/fer/babson2001/IV/IVC/IVC.htm
>. Acesso em: 23 out. 2007.
LEAHY, K. T.; EGGERS, J. H. Is
gender still a factor in entrepreneurial leader behavior?
Frontiers of Entrepreneurship
Research, 1998. Available at: <http://www.babson.edu/entrep/fer/
papers98/V/V_F/V_F_text.htm>.
Accessed on: 23 Oct. 2007.
LEE-GOSSELIN, H.; GRISÉ J. Are women
owner-managers challenging our definitions of
entrepreneurship? An in-depth
survey.
Journal of Business Ethics,
Dordrecht, v. 9, n. 4-5, p. 423-433, Apr./May 1990.
LERNER, M.; MENAHEM, G.; HISRICH, R.
D. Does government matter? The impact of
occupational retraining, gender and
ethnicity on immigrants’ incorporation.
Journal of Small Business and
Enterprise Development, Bradford, v. 12, n. 2, p. 192-210, 2005.
LIMA, R. C. R.; FREITAS, A. A. F.
Personalidade empreendedora, recursos pessoais, ambiente,
atividades organizacionais, gênero e
desempenho financeiro de empreendedores informais.
Revista
Comments
Post a Comment