Men and women in entrepreneurial activity : (how) do role models affect the connection between gender and entrepreneurial activity?

(1)

Men and women

in

entrepreneurial

activity

(How) Do role models affect the

connection between gender and

entrepreneurial activity?

Name: Nataly Klaasse

Student numbers: 11418958/2528581 Program: MSc Entrepreneurship Academic year: 2016/2017 Thesis supervisor: Dr. J.K. Verduijn Date: July 1st, 2017

(2)

2

Preface

The copyright rests with the author. The author is solely responsible for the content of the thesis, including mistakes. The university cannot be held liable for the content of the author’s thesis.

I want to thank multiple people for their support during this research investigation. First of all, I would like to thank my thesis supervisor Dr. J.K. Verduijn for her concise feedback and support during this research. The other people I wish to thank are all the interviewees: Dorothé Schiks, Karin Barnhoorn, Marinel van de Velde, Irene Hin, Mirka Ridder, Birgitte Leertouwer, Margreta Barten, Hanneke Wessel, Paul Kokkeler, Eddy Bannet, Joop Heggelman, Gumi Rijsbergen, Arjan van Raadshoven, Frans Vossenaar, Rene Keereweer and Arjen Perez. Without their interviews, this research investigation would not have been possible.

(3)

3

Abstract

Over the past decades a lot of research has been undertaken regarding women and entrepreneurial activities. This research mainly focusses on women and their role in society. In the past women were supposed to take care of the family while the men were the breadwinners. This view is changing, so why are there still more men than women in entrepreneurial activity?

The gap that can be identified when analysing the literature connected to gender and entrepreneurial activity is that not much research has focused on the effect of role models on the intention to perform entrepreneurial activities.

The aim of this research is to gain more knowledge about why there are more men than women in entrepreneurial activity. To get a better understanding of this, men and women who perform entrepreneurial activities have been interviewed and these interviews have been analysed.

The findings of this research are that most of the entrepreneurs had one or multiple role models that they saw as inspiration. Women mostly had female role models and men mostly male role models. Men weigh having a role model more heavily than women when it comes to starting entrepreneurial activities.

(4)

4

1. Introduction

The relationship between gender and entrepreneurial activities has always been a hot topic for researchers, especially since views of gender and associated stereotypes have changed. In the earlier days women were mainly expected to take care of children while the men were supposed to be the breadwinners of the family (Lindsey, 2015). This view is changing rapidly and hence has an effect on entrepreneurial activities and the research on the connection between gender and entrepreneurial activities. One of the factors that has not been researched extensively to date is the effect of role models on the connection between gender and entrepreneurial activities. This research aims to provide a better understanding of the connection between gender and entrepreneurial activities and the effect of role models on this connection.

In this chapter, the topic of the research will be introduced. The chapter will start with the research focus. The concepts used in this research will be introduced, after which the research relevance will be explained. This chapter will finish with the structure of this thesis.

Research focus

Extensive research has already been done on the relationship between gender and entrepreneurial activity. However, these researchers have not all incorporated the ‘role model’. Research has yet to be conducted on the direct connection between role models and entrepreneurial activity. This research will focus on this connection. To be able to

(9)

9 perform this research, a research question has to be formulated. Therefore, the research question for this thesis will be:

(How) Do role models affect the connection between gender and entrepreneurial activity?

This question captures three sub-questions:

- What is the connection between gender and entrepreneurial activity? - What is the connection between gender and role models?

- What is the connection between role models and entrepreneurial activity?

Concepts

The concepts that are central to the research between gender and entrepreneurial activity are gender and entrepreneurial activity. They will be introduced below. Further connections between these two concepts and the effect of role models on these connections according to existing literature nowadays will be explained in Chapter Two ‘Theoretical Framework’.

Gender

Gender can be explained in two different ways. First, gender can be distinguished based on biological sex, meaning the human body with either the male or female reproductive organs. Second, gender can be distinguished based on socially constructed sex, that is,

(10)

10 by the different social practices and representations associated with femininity and masculinity (Acker, 1992). According to Ahl (2006) most authors usually refer to the first explanation, the biological difference between women and men.

Within the human being construct a distinction is made between male and female (Burr, 2015, p. 2). According to West and Zimmerman (1987) this construct is constructed through ‘doing gender’. ‘Doing gender’ means creating differences between male and female. These differences are not biological but they are constructed and used to reinforce the essential differences between male and female (West & Zimmerman, 1987). An example West and Zimmerman (1987) provide of the constructed female gender is the helpless women next to a flat tire. It is not biological that the female gender cannot fix a flat tire, it is socially constructed.

In the book on ‘undoing gender’ by Butler (2004, p.5) she explains that ‘becoming involves an ongoing process of recognition by the self and others within a ‘model of coherent gendered life that demeans the complex ways in which gendered lives are crafted and lived’’. She notes this as the process of becoming undone, and this is in contrast to the explanation of ‘doing gender’ as explained by West and Zimmerman (1987). Butler (2004) argues that the phenomenon of gender stays intact as long as individuals see it as a ‘tacit collective agreement to perform, produce and sustain discrete and polar genders as cultural fictions’. As soon as individuals let this belief go, gender can be undone.

(11)

11 The socially constructed view, as presented above, is supported by Calás, Smircich and Bourne (2009), who mention two different groups of feminist theorizing. This theorizing is about social change, it explains that gender is fundamentally structured in society, with women being historically disadvantaged. Feminist theorizing wants to change this view (Calás et al., 2009).

The first group is the liberal group, who assume that men and women are equal, but that man is the implicit norm. This group explains that the social disadvantage that women face stems from the male-dominating structuring of society. They desire changes in this view, and wish to eliminate the barriers that women face such as barriers to access in public life. Other changes they would like to see include the recognition of the value that the different experience of women has to society.

The other group is the socialist group, they focus on gender relations as productive processes in the ongoing structuring of society. So they focus more on the cultural differences between gender instead of on the sex. This focus changes the view from binary differences between men and women to the view of the cultural and material production of the social lives of the men and women (Calás et al., 2009).

Entrepreneurial activity

Many different explanations exist of what entrepreneurial activity is supposed to be according to scientific researchers. Entrepreneurship can be explained as a person who sets up a business or businesses, taking on financial risks in the hope of profit (Entrepreneurship, n.d.). It can also be explained as ‘new entry’ (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996), ‘the creation of a new enterprise’ (Low & MacMillan, 1988) and ‘the process of

(12)

12 creating something different with value by devoting the necessary time and effort; assuming the accompanying financial, psychological, and social risks; and receiving the resulting rewards of monetary and personal satisfaction’ (Hisrich & Peters, 1989). The description for entrepreneurial activity that will be used in this research is the description introduced by Van Gelderen. He introduces entrepreneurship as ‘entrepreneurial activity as the discovery, evaluation, creation, development, enactment, and exploitation of opportunities’ (Van Gelderen, 2017).

Research relevance

According to Reynolds, Bygrave, Autio, Cox, and Hay (2002) men are about twice as likely as women to be involved in entrepreneurial activities. Acs, Arenius, Hay, and Minniti (2004) show that in all countries that participated in the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) in 2004, men were more active in entrepreneurial activities than women. As is shown in the model below, no matter what the income level category of the country is, in 2004 in each category there were more men than women active in entrepreneurial activity.

(13)

13

Figure 1. Total entrepreneurial activity per country income group per gender in 2004 (Acs et al., 2004).

Based on the above mentioned researches by Reynolds et al. (2002) and Acs et al. (2004), the connection between gender and entrepreneurial activity, and specifically the effect of role models on this connection, is of relevance for future entrepreneurs. It is important because role models may be important for these future entrepreneurs to be able to see how a successful venture could be started.

Thesis structure

In Chapter Two ‘Theoretical Framework’ a literature review will be presented to gain more knowledge on the topic of research. In Chapter Three ‘Methodology’ the research methodology is explained. In Chapter Four ‘Results’ the results of the research will be

(14)

14 discussed. In Chapter Five ‘Discussion & Conclusion’ the discussion and conclusion, the limitations and recommendations for future research will be provided.

(15)

15

2. Theoretical framework

Based on the presented concepts in the introduction a literature review has been performed to gain more knowledge on these concepts in order to be able to research them more thoroughly. Based on the literature review, a gap can be identified between gender, role models and entrepreneurial activity. After presenting this gap, the expected results from this research will be presented. The expected results are based on the literature review and will be compared with the real results in Chapter Five ‘Discussion & Conclusion’.

Literature review

The connection between gender and entrepreneurial activity will first be presented, followed by the connection between role models and entrepreneurial activity. These connections have been chosen as they are also used in the sub-questions and the research questions of this thesis.

Gender and entrepreneurial activity

Gender structure is a theory that is used to explain the differences between women and men (Risman & Davis, 2013). Gender structure differentiates opportunities and constraints based on sex category and has three different dimensions: the individual level dimension, the interactional cultural expectations, and the institutional level domain. The social processes that are connected to the individual level dimension are, for example, the socialization, the identity of work and the construction of selves. The

(16)

16 social processes connected to the interactional cultural expectations are the status expectations, the cognitive bias and the trading power. For the institutional level domain, the connecting social processes are organizational practices, legal regulations and the distribution of resources. In all of these three dimensions, the gender inequality is produced, maintained and reproduced (Risman & Davis, 2013).

Throughout history the roles of men and women in society have always been different. Women were supposed to take care of the family and the home and men were supposed to be the breadwinners of the family (Lindsey, 2015). Cultural values can, next to the historical view, shape gender roles in society. According to Ahl (2006) entrepreneurship has always been a male-dominated field. Traditionally more men own a business than women. This fact may cause women to perceive the entrepreneurial environment to be unsuitable for them (Zhao, Seibert, & Hills, 2005). This is in consistence with Langowitz and Minniti’s research (2007) who found that women tend to perceive themselves and their businesses ‘in a less favorable light compared to men’.

This less favorable light could be caused through specific difficulties, according to Shinnar, Giacomin, and Janssen (2012). These difficulties they have indicated are lack of support, fear of failure, and lack of competency. The lack of support difficulty can be explained as the difficulties women can face in obtaining institutional support, family support, financial support and/or building relationships with suppliers and customers. The fail of failure difficulty can be explained as a fair for failing a practice that, for women, is socially discouraged. The lack of competency difficulty can be explained as

(17)

17 the difficulty that is created by the valid stereotype. These valid stereotypes can shape an individual’s perception of themselves and could therefore create this difficulty.

The barriers and the never-ending circle

El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987) identify seven barriers for women to enter into entrepreneurial activities. The first barrier is the behavioural barrier, where women have a low self-confidence and a negative-image about themselves. The second barrier is the education barrier. Women were, historically, supposed to take care of the children and hence were not able to follow education. The third barrier is the occupational barrier where women face skill constraints. The fourth barrier is the role barrier. Women are seen as a minority which influences their belief to be able to enter into entrepreneurial activities. The fifth barrier is the legal barrier, explaining discriminatory laws. The sixth barrier is the infrastructural barrier. This indicates the access to credit, support, and information. The seventh, and final, barrier is the societal and cultural barrier. This final barrier is related to the stereotypes that exist about women and women entrepreneurs.

Akehurst, Simarro, and Mas-Tur (2012) explain five barriers that women face in entrepreneurship. They mention difficulties with infrastructures, difficulties as a result of gender, bureaucratic and financial difficulties, competitive difficulties, and conciliation difficulties. These difficulties or barriers mainly suit with the barriers mentioned by El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987). The barrier that no longer holds under Akrehurst et al. is the educational barriers. The biggest difference between the two

(18)

18 researches is the conciliation barrier. Akehurst et al. researched this conciliation barrier by asking their respondents whether they devoted as much time as their partner to look after the family. Their research results that conciliation is still a barrier that women face when entering into entrepreneurial activities.

The stereotype of women staying home can be explained according to the never-ending circle proposed by El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987). The never-ending circle can be explained as: ‘the secondary position of women leads to little or no education which leads to not being able to work in the formal sector and being assigned to the informal sector. The income of working in the informal sector is rather low leading to no chance of improving life conditions and ending up in the fact that daughters need to help in the house which strengthens the secondary position of women’. This view is changing. For instance, Sullivan’s research on the trends within gender stereotyping shows that men are doing more family labor, meaning taking care of the family and the home, each decade (Sullivan, 2006). Fuwa (2004) mentions that, especially in the United States of Amerika, men have doubled their housework hours while women have almost cut it in half.

Motivations and traits

Birley (1989) presents the differences and similarities between men and women in entrepreneurial activity. She explains that men and women predominantly have the same motivations based on the four motivations identified by Goffee and Scase (1985).

(19)

19 Three out of the four motivations mentioned by them – avoiding low paid occupation, escaping supervision, and the constraint of domestic roles – are the same for men and women. Chaganti (1986) adds to this that no significant difference between men and women entrepreneurs can be found on the following traits: achievement motivation, autonomy, persistence, aggression, independence, non-conformity, goal orientation, leadership, and locus of control.

Brush, de Bruin and Welter (2009) introduce their ‘5M’ framework, the five ‘M’s’ are fundamental building blocks required for entrepreneurs in order to be able to launch and grow their venture. The framework used to consist of only three ‘M’s’ - Markets, Money and Management - before the other two ‘M’s’ - Motherhood and Meso/macro environment - were added. The ‘3M’ framework has been introduced in previous research. In this model it is explained that an entrepreneur needs access to the market, money and management in the form of human capital in order to launch a venture. The ‘5M’ framework can be used to analyze women’s entrepreneurial activity in its own rights. The first building block added is the ‘Motherhood’ building block. This block focuses on the family/household and the work-life balance. It explains that the ‘Motherhood’ may have a larger impact on women than on men. The other building block, ‘Meso/macro environment’, focuses on considerations beyond the market, such as expectations of the society regarding women in entrepreneurial activities (Brush et al., 2009). The last two added ‘M’s’ are considered as the most important ‘M’s’ for women.

(20)

20 The research by Birley (1989) is a contrast to the research by DeMartino and Barbato (2002). According to DeMartino and Barbato (2002) women mostly become entrepreneurs in order to create a good work life balance, while men mostly become entrepreneurs to seek wealth creation and/or economic advancement. The work-life balance can be explained as a theory of how individuals switch between two dimensions, namely the work dimension and the family dimension and how individuals maintain a balance between these two dimensions (Clark & Oswald, 2002). Clark and Oswald’s research (2002) resulted into a confirmation of the above mentioned quote, especially for women who start entrepreneurial activities for the work life balance, when they have children that are dependent on them. There was no difference in motivation to start entrepreneurial activities for male entrepreneurs, whether they were married with dependent children or not.

Langowitz and Minniti (2007) conducted research on the different factors that could have an influence on women and men entering into entrepreneurial activities. Their research resulted in a support for their hypotheses that one’s own entrepreneurial skills, and knowing other entrepreneurs are crucial characteristics for mainly women to start an entrepreneurial activity. They suggest that a strong relation exists between self-confidence, opportunity perception and the likelihood of entering into entrepreneurial activities.

Brush (1992) notes that a higher proportion of women are motivated by dissatisfaction with the current circumstances of employment and women see entrepreneurial activities as alternatives to the current circumstances of employment. Orhan (2000) adds to this

(21)

21 that women enter into entrepreneurial activities in order to avoid the constraints women face in regular employment, such as the glass ceiling. The glass ceiling can be explained as a widening gender gap at the top of the wage distribution (Arulampalam, Booth, & Bryan 2007).

Sexton and Bowman-Upton (1990) explain that women entrepreneurs have been subjected to gender-related discrimination, especially by financial institutions. There are different explanations for why gender-related discrimination exists. Madden (1975) and Bergman (1983) introduce the monopsonistic exploitation theory which explains that males collude in discrimination against women so they will have less competition for well-paying jobs.

Another theory, introduced by Thurow (1975), is the statistical discrimination theory. This theory says that discrimination occurs when the characteristics of a group, in this case woman versus man, are attributed to an individual regardless of his or her own characteristics. A similar theory, the theory of error discrimination, occurs when an individual is assigned certain characteristics based on a false stereotype of the whole group (Heilman, 1984). According to Unger (1979) and Martin (1987) it has been found that human beings tend to exaggerate the differences between men and women because human beings accept as real both actual and perceived differences.

According to Brophy (1989), women have difficulty obtaining financing for their firms because they tend to pursue lifestyle rather than growth-oriented business ventures. This connects to the traits and attributes that are connected to the female gender.

(22)

22 Emotionality, gentleness, sensitivity, passiveness and lack of logic are all stereotypes that have been seen as obstacles for women to, for instance, receive financing for their enterprise (Goleman, 1988). In a study by Buttner and Rosen (1988), they found that women entrepreneurs were evaluated significantly lower than male entrepreneurs on the attributes of leadership, autonomy, endurance, risk-taking propensity and readiness to change. Contrary to this, Chaganti (1986) notes that there are no significant differences between men and women on the aforementioned attributes.

Coleman (2000) explains that based on her research there is no discrimination on gender when it comes to financing. Women are less likely to use external financing, and rely more on informal and personal financial sources. This diminishes the argument of discrimination for financing based on gender.

Based on research by Sexton and Bowman-Upton (1990) women score significantly lower than men on the traits related to energy level and risk taking, but score significantly higher than men on the traits related to autonomy and change. These scores indicate that women entrepreneurs are less willing than men entrepreneurs to become involved in situations with uncertain outcomes and have less of the endurance of energy level needed to maintain a growth-oriented business and may therefore be more willing to start a lifestyle organisation that suits them better.

(23)

23 Role model and entrepreneurial activity

The idea of role models can be explained by the theory of role identification (Gibson, 2004). Role identification can be explained as a cognitive response to an individual’s belief that the characteristics of another person are close to his or her own motives and character and that this model occupies a position that the individual sees as attractive (Bell, 1970). This identification may result in an adaptation to the individual’s characteristics and this may provide someone with the intention to choose a particular career path such as an entrepreneurial activity (Krumboltz, Mitchell & Jones, 1976). The conclusion of the role identification theory is that entrepreneurs are likely to have a role model or multiple role models they can identify with, for example based on gender, characteristics and achieved career path (Bosma, Hessels, Schutjens, van Praag & Verheul, 2012).

Bosma et al. (2012) explain that role models are, according to the media, becoming more and more acknowledged as an influential factor for explaining why an individual might choose to start entrepreneurial activities. But Bosma et al. (2012) mention that empirical research towards this phenomenon has always been limited, meaning that the real relationship between role models and their effect on starting entrepreneurial activities has not been proven yet. Based on their research they found that, in line with the conclusion of the role identification theory, role models and entrepreneurs resemble each other in terms of certain characteristics such as gender and nationality (Bosma et al., 2012).

(24)

24 Social identity theory can also be used to explain the phenomenon of role models. Social identity theory focuses on the group in the individual (Trepte, 2006). It assumes that a part of the individual is defined by its belonging to a social group. The social identity is defined as membership alongside the value placed on this membership. The theory attempts to explain cognition and behaviour within a group and against other groups as a part of a process that aims to achieve positive esteem and self-enhancement (Trepte, 2006). The social identity theory starts from the social group perspective, which means that individuals see themselves as belonging to the specific group. This can be related to a role model to whom an individual can look up to and likes to measure up to.

Related to the social identity theory is the categorization theory. The self-categorization theory explains that social identity is a process that influences and changes interpersonal behaviour (Trepte, 2006). The influence of other individuals is critical for the individual in shaping perceptions of its self (Burke, Owens, Serpe & Thoits, 2003). According to the theory, people see themselves as unique individuals and as a member of a group, and these two ‘personalities’ are equally important to the individual (Scales, 2007). The self-categorization theory argues that the behaviours an individual chooses to express are chosen as a way to be typical of the ‘in-group’ (Abrams & Hogg, 2006). The ‘in-group’ is the group or the person that the individual sees as a role model. So, according to the self-categorization theory, a role model against which an individual measures himself or herself can have an effect on an individual’s behaviour.

(25)

25

Summary

Gender structure differentiates opportunities and constraints based on sex category and has three different dimensions, namely the individual level dimension, the interactional cultural expectations and, the institutional level domain (Risman & Davis, 2013).

The historical role distribution was that women were supposed to take care of the family and men were supposed to work and bring bread to the table (Lindsey, 2015). An aspect that is related to this historical view is the never ending circle. The never ending circle explains that women themselves enhance the vicious circle of their secondary position (El-Namaki & Gerritson, 1987). They enhance this circle by not getting education and staying home to take care of the family. This view is changing. Both Sullivan (2006) and Fuwa (2004) mention that more and more men are taking care of the family as well. El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987) and Akehurst et al. (2012) all mention barriers that women face in entrepreneurship. Both mention, mainly the same barriers. The only barrier that Akehurst et al. (2012) mention that El-Namaki and Gerriston (1987) do not is the conciliation barrier.

Based on the above referenced literature, it can be seen that researchers are not in line with one another. The research by Birley (1989) is a contrast to the research by DeMartino and Barbato (2002). Birley (1989) explains that women mainly start entrepreneurial activities to avoid low paid occupation, escape supervision, and the constraint of domestic roles, which she indicates are the same for men as well as for women. DeMartino and Barbato (2002) see this differently. DeMartino and Barbato explain that the motivation for women, which they mention as the ability to create a

(26)

26 work-life balance, to be the reason why women are attracted towards entrepreneurial activities.

DeMartino and Barbato (2002) do not believe that the motivations that are attributed to men are the same as the motivations attributed to women for starting entrepreneurial activities. Buttner and Rosen (1988) find that women score significantly lower on certain attributes compared to men, while Chaganti (1986) believes there are no significant differences on these attributes between men and women.

Women have been subjected to gender-related discrimination, especially in financial institutions (Sexton & Bowman-Upton, 1990). Different explanations have been given for this discrimination. First, the monopsonistic explanation, where men collude to discriminate against women to avoid competition for well-paying jobs. Second, the statistical discrimination theory and the error discrimination theory, where the characteristics of a group are attributed to an individual regardless of his or her own characteristics. Coleman (2006) sees that there is no discrimination whatsoever on gender when it comes to financing. She beliefs women entrepreneurs use less external financing, but that is not based on discrimination. This diminishes the above mentioned arguments about discrimination on gender.

Role identification can be explained as the belief that the characteristics of another person are close to the individuals own motives can characteristics, and that the person occupies a position that the individual sees as attractive.

(27)

27 Social identity theory and self-categorization theory can be used to explain the role identification. Social identity theory focuses on the group in the individual. It assumes that a part of the individual is defined by its belonging to a social group (Trepte, 2006). The self-categorization theory argues that social identity is a process that influences and changes interpersonal behaviour (Trepte, 2006). The influence of other individuals is critical for the individual in shaping perception of its self (Burke, Owens, Serpe & Thoits, 2003).

Theoretical application

This part gives a clear description on what theories, which were described in the above mentioned ‘Theoretical Framework’, will be applied in this thesis.

The gender structure and historical view on the differences between men and women, and specifically men and women in entrepreneurial activities, is of great importance for this research and will therefore be further investigated using the interviews. The never ending circle is related to the historical view and will therefore also be used in this thesis. Special emphasis will be put on the changing view on gender differences and the never ending circle.

The barriers towards entrepreneurship focus on the barriers for men and women entrepreneurship and are therefore used in this research. These barriers, as introduced by Akehurst et al. (2012) and El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987), are used in this research by asking entrepreneurs whether or not they see a difference between men and women

(28)

28 entrepreneurs. The answers to this question can indicate whether there are/were barriers or not.

The motivational factors and traits for men and women to start entrepreneurial activities are the basis of the research to be able to find out what motivational factors and traits there are. These factors are therefore of importance for this research. The research questions first of all if role model have an effect on the connection between gender and entrepreneurship. In order to answer this question, the motivations and traits are of high importance as well. There are multiples views, for instance by Langowitz and Minniti (2007), Birley (1989), and DeMartino and Barbato (2002) on different motivations and traits. All these views were taken into the interviews and were used in analysing the path of the interviewed entrepreneurs toward their entrepreneurial activities.

Related to the motivations, the opposite, namely the dissatisfactors, will not be investigated in this research since they will give the opposite explanation of the motivators. This would give a double explanation of the motivations but then in a positive and negative viewpoint.

The ‘5M’ framework will not be used in further research in this thesis since this also mainly focuses on women and does not directly cohere with the research on role models and men and women in entrepreneurial activities.

The gender-related discrimination, as explained by Sexton and Bowman-Upton (1990), focuses mainly on the financial aspect of starting entrepreneurial activities. This thesis

(29)

29 does not focus on the financial aspect but focuses on the motivations and role model aspect of starting entrepreneurial activities. Still, the gender-related discrimination is an important factor in the research on entrepreneurial activities. Consequently, the gender-related discrimination will be used in this research, but it will not focus on the financial aspect of entrepreneurship. In this research the gender-related discrimination will be used the same way as the barriers will be used, by asking the interviewees whether or not they belief gender-related discrimination is being used in entrepreneurship.

The social identity theory and self-categorization theory are theories that explain having a role model. Since this research is on role models and their connection to gender and entrepreneurial activities, these theories will be used in this thesis.

The gap

According to Fischer, Reuber and Dyke (1993) the lack of integrative frameworks for understanding the nature and implications of issues related to gender and entrepreneurial activity has been a major obstacle. In their article they indicate that theoretical research lacks an understanding of the effect that gender has on entrepreneurial activity, indicating a gap between gender and entrepreneurial activity. The biggest gap that has been found in the research is that there has not been much research done on whether role models have a (big) effect on whether men and women decide to proceed to entrepreneurial activities. Therefore this phenomenon will be researched in this thesis.

(30)

30

Expected results

Successful entrepreneurs can serve as role models for future entrepreneurs (Sarfaraz, 2017). Therefore one of the expected results of this research is that role models do have an important effect on whether women and men are interested in pursuing entrepreneurial activities.

As presented in the literature review on gender, women (still) have an inferior role compared to men. This is partly based on the socially constructed world. Because women have a feeling of being inferior it is likely that they will look up to each other in order to find support. Hence, one of the expected results will be that women entrepreneurs mainly look up to other women entrepreneurs or successful women. Following this result, the expected result will be that men entrepreneurs will be looking up to other men entrepreneurs or successful men.

El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987) and Akehurst et al. (2012) propose barriers towards starting entrepreneurial activities. It is expected that these barriers still hold up today. The final expected result will be that women weigh having a role model more heavily than men due to their belief that they are inferior.

(31)

31

3. Methodology

This methodology chapter will present how the research will be done and which interviewees were chosen for the research on the connection between gender, role models and entrepreneurial activity. The chapter will start with the research design, followed by the data collection and ends with how the data will be analysed. In the first section the design of the research will be described. The second section will explain how the data was collected in order to be able to answer the proposed research- and sub-questions. The final section will delineate how the acquired data will be analysed to gain a clear view of the difference between women and men in entrepreneurial activities and how gender and entrepreneurial activity and role models and entrepreneurial activity are connected to one another. A discourse analysis will be used to perform this research. To be more precise, the interpretative approach will be applied.

After the methodology section, a short description of each of the interviewees will be presented in a table. This short description focuses on who they are, what venture they started or have started and whether or not they have or have had a role model they saw as an inspiration for starting this venture.

Research design

A qualitative research approach has been chosen for this research, as the aim is to understand a phenomenon. A qualitative approach is useful in order to investigate how to, in this case interviewees, interpret the reality (Bryman & Allen, 2011). Next to this,

(32)

32 qualitative interviews are useful as the researcher is searching for yet unknown explanations (Blumberg, Cooper & Schindler, 2014, p. 247).

The research aims to introduce new knowledge about role models and their effect on women and men and their choice to become active in entrepreneurial activities.

The topics that will be discussed will focus on role models and their importance for the interviewees. Next to this, the connection between the appointed role model and the decision of the woman or man to develop themselves to become entrepreneurs will be researched. The units of analysis are women and men who pursue entrepreneurial activities of have pursued them in the past.

Based on the research question, a qualitative research methodology will be used. To gather the information needed to answer the research question interviews will be performed. Interviewees will be women and men who perform entrepreneurial activities and who own or have owned a venture. Semi-structured interviews will be used based on two considerations. First, semi-structured interviews are well suited for exploring perceptions and opinions of interviewees and enable probing for more information and clarification of answers. Second, semi-structured questions are useful since the interviewees will work in different industries, so detailed questions will not be suitable (Louise Barriball & While, 1994). Semi-structured interviews also allow interviewees to follow their own thoughts, and the researcher is able to learn about the interviewees’ viewpoints regarding the situations relevant to the research, which makes their answers

(33)

33 more useful in answering this thesis’ research question and sub-questions (Blumberg, Cooper & Schindler, 2014, p. 246).

Data collection

In addition to the basic assumption that the world is socially constructed, Gioia, Corley and Hamilton (2013) argue that people are ‘knowledgeable agents’, meaning that they know what they are doing and can explain it as well. Taking this into consideration makes it possible to perform interviews that extract the information needed to answer the proposed research question and sub-questions.

Semi-structured interviews will be used as they make it possible to obtain people’s experiences about a phenomenon (Gioia et al., 2013). Van Tulder (2012) explains that an interview must adhere to certain criteria. These criteria are that the list of questions should never be too long, there should be enough room to elaborate on specific points that prove interesting during the interview, and priorities have to be designated. A semi-structured interview would then be most useful to adhere to these criteria (Van Tulder, 2012).

A non-probability sampling will be used in this research. A non-probability sample, in contrast to a probability sample, means that it is non-random and subjective, which means that each member does not have a known non-zero chance of being included (Blumberg, Cooper & Schindler, 2011, p.174 – 176).

(34)

34

Data analysis

In order to be able to analyse all the information gathered in the interviews, the discourse analysis will be used. Discourse is seen as a form of social practice. It implies a dialectical relationship between a particular event and a situation, institution or social structure, which frame it. It means that a discourse is not only shaped by a situation, institution or structure, but the situation, institution or structure also shapes the discourse (Wodak & Meyer, 2009). A discourse is a circle where actors use language to give meaning to something as well as perceive meanings from language. When performing a discourse analysis it is important to keep the context of the research in place (Achtenhagen & Welter, 2007). Since a discourse is socially embedded, people understand language differently.

A discourse analysis is appropriate to use in this research because the concept of entrepreneurial activity is not fixed, but rather constructed by people together and to which certain meanings and interpretations are given (Jørgensen & Phillips, 2002). An approach of the discourse analysis is the interpretative approach. The interpretative approach will be used for this research. In society, and in the upcoming interviews, there are multiple, rival, definitions of reality. To present a conclusion and theory on these definitions it has to be taken into consideration what is diverse and changing as well as wat is shared and stable. This is what an interpretative research does (d’Iribarne, 2009). The focus is on a wider understanding of the connection between role models and entrepreneurial activity.

(35)

35

The interviewees

Below follows a list of the interviewed respondents for this thesis research. FR means female respondent, MR means male respondent. The choice has been made to interview an equal number of both genders to make possible a good comparison between them and the connection to entrepreneurial activity and role models. Therefore, eight women and eight men have been interviewed over the course of four weeks to gather all the data necessary for performing this research. The interviewees were selected based on the following criteria. First of all, an equal number of the same gender had to be selected so a list was made with interviewees based on gender. Second, the interviewees had to be entrepreneurs. So they either should have started a venture before or should own their own venture at the time of the interview. At last, they had to be available for an interview to be able to contribute to this research.

None of the interviewees wanted to stay anonymous so their names are used with their permission. The respondent numbers were used to make it easier to refer to certain interviewees in the analysis, the conclusion and the discussion of the research.

(36)

36

Respondent Name Current venture Gender

FR1 D. Schiks Public Support & More Female

FR2 K. Barnhoon Chapter Fifty Female

FR3 M. van de Velde Public Support Business Female

FR4 I. Hin Lady Africa Female

FR5 M. Ridder MR Support Female

FR6 B. Leertouwer How 2 B Organized Female

FR7 M. Barten Barten Coaching & Advies Female

FR8 H. Wessel Make room for magic Female

MR1 P. Kokkeler Public Support Advies Male

MR2 E. Bannet Quinator Investment Consultancy Male

MR3 J. Heggelman Public Support Groep Male

MR4 G. Rijsbergen Lady Africa Male

MR5 A. Van Raadshoven Vij5 Male

MR6 F. Vossenaar Public Support Groep Male

MR7 R. Keereweer Healthclub The right move Male

(37)

37

4. Results

In this chapter the results from the taken interviews with the entrepreneurs will be presented. This chapter is divided into the following subjects: gender structure: the role of men and women in entrepreneurial activity; barriers and never ending circle theory; motivations and traits; gender-related discrimination; and role models and role identification theory. The presented results will be used in the next chapter (Chapter five ‘Discussion & Conclusion’) to analyse them with regard to the presented literature in Chapter Two ‘Theoretical Framework’, and build upon them.

Gender structure: the role of men and women in entrepreneurial activity

In short, gender structure is a theory that is used to explain the differences between women and men (Risman & Davis, 2013). Many of the interviewed entrepreneurs mention that there is a certain difference between men and women in entrepreneurial activity. FR3 and MR1, for instance, mention that women focus more on the softer side of entrepreneurial activity, the social and emotional side, while men in entrepreneurial activity focus more on growing the business and generating money. FR2 and FR8 strongly agree with the above mentioned differences between men and women in entrepreneurial activity. They explained that women focus more on lifestyle and purpose entrepreneurial activity and men focus more on the finance, profit and ‘cashing in fast’.

(38)

38 MR5 sees that in the designer branch mostly men and women work together as duo-entrepreneurs. Meaning that a man and a woman start an enterprise together. The man is in this entrepreneurial duo more responsible for the strategic and technical side as they are more pragmatic. Women are more responsible for the look of the design since they take decisions based on emotions and feeling.

A few entrepreneurs do not notice a difference between men and women in entrepreneurial activity in their distinctive branch. FR7 is one of the interviewees that does not see a clear difference between men and women in entrepreneurial activity. She does see that many of her entrepreneurial colleagues struggle with the combination of motherhood with a job, but she does not see this as a pure characteristic for only people who pursue entrepreneurial activities. MR3 also does not see a very clear distinction between men and women in entrepreneurial activity. He does mention that women focus more on the soft side of entrepreneurial activity while men focus more on the harder side, but he also mentions that women are definitely not inferior to men.

The historical view is that women were supposed to take care of the children and men were supposed to be the breadwinners of the family (Lindsey, 2015). During the interviews none of the interviewees mentioned that constraints of these domestic roles had any role in their decision towards becoming entrepreneurs. The only interviewee that mentioned something about these domestic roles was MR2. He mentions that this was not a real motivation at first. But since he became an entrepreneur he had the freedom to divide his own time which made him able to be more at home and to take care of his children more often.

(39)

39

The barriers and the never ending circle

El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987) and Akehurst et al. (2012) propose barriers towards starting entrepreneurial activities.

El-Namaki & Gerritson (1987) identify seven barriers for women to enter into entrepreneurial activities: behavioural barrier, education barrier, occupational barrier, role barrier, legal barrier, infrastructural barrier, and societal and cultural barrier. Some of these barriers were identified in the interviews. The behavioural barrier and the occupational barrier, where women have a low self-esteem and lack the needed skills can clearly be seen in the interview with FR7. She indicates that after her father got fired she never thought of starting entrepreneurial activities herself and did not belief she had the skills. After she received the motivation she needed from a colleague she did take the step though. The role barrier and societal and cultural barrier can be seen in the interview with MR2. MR2 mentions that women have to fight in settings where there are more men than women. Women have to fight prejudices. This fighting makes them more driven and energetic and could, according to MR2, possible break the barriers.

The barrier introduced by El-Namaki and Gerritsen (1987) that no longer holds under Akehurst et al. (2012) is the educational barrier. The only barrier Akehurst et al. (2012) mention that is different from El-Namaki and Gerritsen (1987) is the conciliation barrier. Akehurst et al. (2012) researched this conciliation barrier by asking their respondents whether they devoted as much time as their partner to look after the family. An interviewee that mentions this barrier is MR4. He mentioned that a big difference

(40)

40 between men and women in entrepreneurial activities is that when women start having children they push their career to the second place and focus more on their family. MR4 explains that this does not happen with men when they get children; this indicates that the barrier still exists.

El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987) also propose the never-ending circle. This means that the secondary position of women is strengthened by itself. FR2 gives a clear quote about the never ending circle. She mentions that women strengthen their subordination to men in society themselves by not always being professional. As an example she says that many women in their email signature mention ‘on Wednesday I am out of office to take care of my children’. FR2 explains that this supports the never-ending circle as men do not write this in their email signature, and it does harm to the professionalism of women.

FR1 agrees with what FR2 says as she mentions that usually only women without children are the ones that get into high positions. As an example she gives Olcay Gulsen, who is the owner of the fashion brand SuperTrash. During the start of SuperTrash she was single and did not have children, this made it possible for her to work hard as she had no family to have to take care of. Eventually she carried on too far and had to take a time out. This quote of FR1 indicates that women push themselves to get out of the never ending circle but they eventually go too far, enhancing the never ending circle.

MR2 beholds the never ending circle in women entrepreneurial activity, like Sullivan (2006) and Fuwa (2004). He does not see a significant difference between men and

(41)

41 women in entrepreneurial activity. What he does see is that women entrepreneurs are very driven and have to fight hard. Women always have to fight hard in settings where there are more men than women. Women have to fight prejudices and this is expressed in fierceness and energy.

Motivations and traits

As motivational factors, the following factors were recognized by the interviewees: independence, avoiding low paid occupation, escaping supervision, achievement motivation, autonomy, persistence, and non-conformity. Most of the entrepreneurs said that escaping supervision and no longer having a boss watching over them was one of the most important factors for them to start pursuing entrepreneurial activities. The other factors that were nearly as important were independence and autonomy. Only one entrepreneur did not see autonomy as a motivation. This is MR4. He said that he did not see this as a starting motivation as he sort of rolled into entrepreneurial activity via his former boss. Many entrepreneurs said that their motivation to achieve something, though usually not from the start of starting their entrepreneurial activities, was important for them. This was especially true for FR4. She wanted to give something back to the community where she was born. But she did not only want to achieve something for the community in general but also for herself. She wanted to push her own boundaries and even break them down. Though also a few mentioned that achieving something was not their motivation at first, but it started to grow during their entrepreneurial life. This is for instance mentioned by FR7. She mentioned that starting her own enterprise was never her plan, but once she started it she realised that this was

(42)

42 exactly what she wanted and that she also wanted to achieve something meaningful for her clients with, through her trainings and advice.

Gender-related discrimination

One of the developments that MR4 notices is that there are more men entrepreneurs than women entrepreneurs. He assigns that to the fact that at a certain age women start having children and will than focus more on their family than on their career.

FR1 explains that she is of the opinion that the women who work at high positions are mostly women who do not have children. FR1 believes that only if a woman does not have children she will be able to work as hard as men can and she will be able to achieve the higher positions. She does think, though, that it is changing and that men are taking more care of the children which makes women more able to focus on their career.

FR2 grew up during the feminist movement. This means that, according to her, men and women are equal. This is what she was brought up with. As mentioned before, FR2 also believes that women enhance the perceived inequality themselves due to their sometimes unprofessional behaviour and attitude.

FR3 believes that women can still learn a lot from men. Especially when it comes to just doing it, just starting and seeing whatever comes at you when it comes. Women usually want to work out everything into detail, according to FR3, which makes them easily able to freeze and not know what to do anymore. FR6 sees this differently. She believes

(43)

43 that women, especially women at a slightly older age, are more driven than men. Also, women work harder and are more willing to step up for things they stand by and really want to do.

Role models and role identification theory

Role models can be explained by the theory of role identification (Gibson, 2004). Role identification is a cognitive response to an individual’s belief that the characteristics of another person are close to his/her own motives and character and that this model occupies a position that the individual sees as attractive (Bell, 1970).

The number of interviewees that has a real role model is (nearly) equal to the number of interviewees that could not identify a real role model.

FR1 mentions multiple role models. She mentions people that are close to her, such as her husband and her former boss, but also people who are famous, such as Richard Branson. FR2 does mention a woman who started a business that looks a lot like hers, FR2 sees her as a direct role model as she made decisions that FR2 had to make as well and FR2 could learn from her role model how to deal with these decisions. FR3 explains that she does not have a role model but that she does have people who can be seen as her source of inspiration. She believes that having a role model would have had a bad influence on her as she would have started to walk the same path and all her originality would have ceased. FR4 has multiple role models, such as her parents and grandmother, which have been great sources of inspiration and motivation for her to

(44)

44 push on through. FR5 does not have a role model, she has no one in mind that she looks up to or sees as a direct inspiration. FR6, however, does have a very strong role model that has inspired her - her former boss. FR7 sees the women that pushed her into entrepreneurial activity as her role model, FR7 believed that if her role model could do it, she would be able to as well. The last female respondent, FR8, mentions multiple role models. For her especially FR1 was a role model as her former boss. Other role models for her are Madonna, Beyoncé and Oprah Winfrey.

MR1 explains that his former boss was his one strong role model. MR1 explains that he just understood it and gave people a good and safe feeling. MR2, contrary to MR1, describes that he does not have a role model in the form of a person. During an earlier start-up MR2 started, he saw the technical start-ups in Silicon Valley as role models of a sort. MR3 does not have role models, but he does have people he looks up to who wanted to make the world a better place such as Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela. He also gives a quote about this, saying ‘I am [MR3] and I do it my own way’. With this quote he means that he wants to do it his way and not follow a role model. The former boss of MR4 is his role model. His former boss motivated him to just start and see wherever it goes. MR5 clarifies that he does not have a role model. With his company, he is in between the bigger brands and the individual designer, and he believes that both make mistakes indicating that he does not see either as a role model. Former President of the United States of America; Barack Obama, is MR6’s role model. He sees him as a role model because he appreciates his charismatic character and his cheerful outlook on everything. Obama can, according to MR6, connect seriousness with a sense of humor. MR7 explains that, as well as MR1 and MR4, he

(45)

45 sees his former boss as his role model. The final interviewee, MR8, does not have a role model. Certain directors can be seen as inspirations for him but then for their movies and not for their career path nor how they got where they eventually got to. So, for the entrepreneurial part he does not have a role model or inspirational factor.

The final question of the interviews was whether people would have come as far as they have had they had/not had a role model. Most of the women entrepreneurs that were interviewed indicated that even without a role model they would still have come as far as they have. FR3 gives a description that if she had had a role model, she would have become a copy of this person and all the uniqueness would cease. For the men entrepreneurs this was quite the opposite. Nearly all of them mention that having a role model was really important for them and has been a great inspiration. MR3 mentions that if he had had a role model, he would not have had the problem of trying to find everything out for himself. There would have been someone who could have supported him with information and expertise.

Striking results

This part of the ‘Results’ will summarize the results that were striking and will be used in the Chapter Five ‘Discussion & Conclusion’.

The first result that was striking was that not all the barriers have been identified in the interviews. From the seven barriers introduced by El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987) the education barrier, legal barrier, and infrastructural barrier were not identified in the interviews.

(46)

46 The barrier that Akehurst et al. (2012) propose that was different from El-Namaki and Gerritson’s barriers was the occupational barrier. This barrier was mentioned in only one of the interviews. The educational barrier, that no longer exists according to Akehurst et al. (2012), was not mentioned by any of the interviewees, indicating that this really has changed since El-Namaki and Gerritson introduced their research thirty years ago.

Almost all the interviewees indicated that they have a role model or person that inspired them to start entrepreneurial activities for themselves. The role models of the entrepreneurs that were interviewed are mostly the same gender as the entrepreneurs themselves. To the question if the entrepreneur came this far due to their role model, most women entrepreneurs answered this question with a ‘no’, most men entrepreneurs answered this question with a ‘yes’. The men that did not have a role model would have come further if they had had a role model, they explained during the interviews. This leads to a striking result that does not cohere with the expected results. This striking result is that men entrepreneurs weigh having a role model more heavily than women entrepreneurs.

(47)

47

5. Discussion & Conclusion

This chapter presents the discussion, conclusion, and limitations and recommendations for future research of this area. The discussion part will mainly built upon the presented results of the interviews from Chapter Four ‘Results’ in connection with the literature review from Chapter Two ‘Theoretical Framework’. The discussion will be divided into different parts: The role of men and women in history; the barriers and the never ending circle; motivating factors and traits; gender-related discrimination; and role models: social identity theory, self-categorization theory and role identification theory. After this the research questions will be answered as well as a comparison will be made between the expected results and the real results. This is followed by the conclusion. The chapter will finish with the limitations and recommendations for future research.

Discussion

The role of men and women in history

The historical role of the men was to be the breadwinners of the family and the historical role of the women was to take care of the family (Lindsey, 2015). None of the entrepreneurs that have been interviewed indicated the domestic roles as motivating factors in starting entrepreneurial activities. The only entrepreneur that still sees this old role pattern is MR4. Based on the fact that only one of the sixteen respondents mentioned these roles as existing, could indicate that these roles today do not have an effect on entrepreneurs or that they do not exist according to the interviewed entrepreneurs.

(48)

48 The barriers and the never ending circle

El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987) identify seven barriers for women to enter into entrepreneurial activities: behavioural barrier, education barrier, occupational barrier, role barrier, legal barrier, infrastructural barrier, and societal and cultural barrier.

The behavioural and occupational barriers were supported by multiple female respondents, for example FR7. The role and societal and cultural barriers were also supported by multiple interviewees, for instance MR2. The legal, infrastructural and educational barriers were not mentioned by any of the interviewees.

Akehurst et al. (2012) explain five barriers that women face in entrepreneurship: infrastructures barrier, gender barrier, bureaucratic and financial barrier, competitive barrier, and conciliation barrier.

The biggest difference between the two researches is the conciliation barrier. Akehurst et al.’ research (2012) results that conciliation is still a barrier that women face when entering into entrepreneurial activities. This barrier is indicated by only one entrepreneur, MR4. Due to the fact this barrier was only named once, there is no strong evidence that this barrier really affects women..

The barrier presented by El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987) that no longer holds under Akehurst et al. (2012) is the educational barriers. This barrier was never indicated in the

(49)

49 interviews, indicating that, in accordance with the literature, this barrier does not exist (anymore).

The never ending circle, as explained by El-Namaki and Gerritson (1987) as the secondary position of women that they enhance themselves, is not strongly support in this thesis. Two of the sixteen interviewed entrepreneurs indicate that they see or have seen this phenomenon. FR2 mentions it by the email signatures she sees from other women entrepreneurs. FR1 mentions this with the example of Olcay Gulsen, who only came as far as she came due to the fact that she did not have a family (yet) to have to take care of. One of the interviewees, MR 2, even beholds the never ending circle. He sees the opposite of the never ending circle, namely that women are very driven and fight hard for their rights and their spot in entrepreneurial activities.

Motivating factors and traits

Three motivations for becoming an entrepreneur are the same for men as for women (Birley, 1989). These factors are avoiding low paid occupation, escaping supervision, and the constraints of domestic roles (Goffee and Scase, 1985). As mentioned above, none of the entrepreneurs mentioned the constraints of domestic roles as a motivator, so this does not align with the reviewed literature.

Chaganti (1986) adds to this that no significant difference between men and women entrepreneurs can be found on the following traits: achievement motivation, autonomy, persistence, aggression, independence, non-conformity, goal orientation, leadership, and

(50)

50 locus of control. Based on motivating factors that, according to the literature, are different for men and women in entrepreneurial activity, a strong substantiation could not be found. FR1 and FR2 both mention autonomy and freedom as important factors, but MR2 and MR3 also see these factors as, or even the most important, important factors for becoming an entrepreneur. These findings indicate that there is not a big difference in motivating factors for men and women in becoming entrepreneurs.

According to DeMartino and Barbato (2002) women mostly become entrepreneurs in order to create a good work life balance, while men mostly become entrepreneurs to seek wealth creation and/or economic advancement. Most interviewees agreed with this research. Most entrepreneurs that were interviewed mention that women mainly use their emotions and a softer side of themselves to make entrepreneurial decisions. While men usually focus more on earning money (fast) and use therefore a harder and more egocentric side of themselves to arrange this.

Gender-related discrimination

Sexton and Bowman-Upton (1990) explain that women entrepreneurs have been subjected to gender-related discrimination, especially by financial institutions. This form of discrimination is not seen by any of the interviewed entrepreneurs. But gender-related discrimination itself is still a factor that is noticed by entrepreneurs today. Almost all the interviewed entrepreneurs indicated that there were clear differences between men and women entrepreneurs. For example, MR4 notices that there are more

(51)

51 men than women in entrepreneurship. He believes this comes due to the fact that women start having children and start taking care of them and put their career in second place. FR1 and FR2 both see gender-related discrimination. They notice it by the fact that women that are in high positions are usually women without children. Based on the above mentioned interviewee experiences, it can be seen that (some sort of) gender-related discrimination still exists today in entrepreneurship.

The theory of Heilman (1984) comes closes to explain the theory behind gender-related discrimination. Heilman (1984) explains the theory of error discrimination as discrimination that occurs when an individual is assigned certain characteristics based on a false stereotype of the while group. This theory is supported by MR2, who mentions that women have to fight in settings where there are more men than women. Women have to fight (false) prejudices and stereotypes, according to MR2.

Role models: social identity theory, self-categorization theory and role identification theory

Social identity theory focuses on the group in the individual (Trepte, 2006). It assumes that a part of the individual is defined by its belonging to a social group. This social identity can directly be related to what MR2 explains in his interview. When he started an earlier start-up, before starting his current organisation, he looked up to the Silicon Valley companies. He saw them as role models since they showed how creative and agile a company can be, which was really important for MR2 when starting this former start-up.

Men and women in entrepreneurial activity : (how) do role models affect the connection between gender and entrepreneurial activity?

Men and women

in

entrepreneurial

activity

(How) Do role models affect the

connection between gender and

entrepreneurial activity?

Preface

Abstract

Table of contents

1. Introduction

Research focus

Concepts

Research relevance

Thesis structure

2. Theoretical framework

Literature review

Summary

The gap

Expected results

3. Methodology

Research design

Data collection

Data analysis

The interviewees

4. Results

5. Discussion & Conclusion

Discussion