We examine how establishing a mixed–sex entrepreneurial founding team may benefit women entrepreneurs in male–dominated cultures and industries. We contend that as a result of sex–based stereotypes, women entrepreneurs face unique obstacles in securing access to resources for their ventures. We argue that one way for women entrepreneurs to overcome these obstacles is to partner with a man. Drawing upon institutional, resource–based, and network theories, we theorize how partnering with a man may help provide women entrepreneurs in male–dominated contexts with enhanced legitimacy, access to a larger number of resources, and a stronger, more diverse social network.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AchtenhagenL. & WelterF. (2003). Female entrepreneurship as reflected in German media in the years 1995–2001. In ButlerJ.E. (Ed.), New perspectives on women entrepreneurs, volume 3 in research on entrepreneurship and management (pp. 71–100). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
2.
AhlH. (2004). The scientific reproduction of gender inequality: A discourse analysis of research texts on women's entrepreneurship. Copenhagen, Denmark: Copenhagen Business School Press.
3.
AhlH. (2006). Why research on women entrepreneurs needs new directions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(5), 595–621.
4.
AldrichH.E. & FiolC.M. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation. Academy of Management Review, 19, 645–670.
5.
AldrichH.E., ElamA.B., & ReeseP.R. (1997). Strong ties, weak ties and strangers: Do women owners differ from men in their use of networking to obtain assistance? In BirleyS. & MacMillanI.C. (Eds.), Entrepreneurship in a global context (pp. 1–25). London: Routledge.
6.
AldrichH.E., KallebergA.L., MarsdenP.V., & CassellJ. (1989). In pursuit of evidence: Five sampling procedures for locating new businesses. Journal of Business Venturing, 4, 367–386.
7.
AnnaA.L., ChandlerG.N., JansenE., & MeroN.P. (2000). Women business owners in traditional and non–traditional industries. Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 279–303.
8.
BakerT., AldrichH.E., & LiouN. (1997). Invisible entrepreneurs: The neglect of women business owners by mass media and scholarly journals in the USA. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 9, 221–238.
9.
BarneyJ.B. (1986). Strategic factor markets: Expectation, luck and business strategy. Management Science, 32, 1512–1514.
10.
BarneyJ.B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17, 99–120.
11.
BelluR.R. (1993). Task role motivation and attributional style as predictors of entrepreneurial performance: Female sample findings. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 5, 331–344.
12.
BirdB. & BrushC. (2002). A gendered perspective on organizational creation: Masculine and feminine views on organizations. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26, 41–65.
13.
BourdieuP. (1986). The forms of capital. In RichardsonJ.G. (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood Press.
14.
BurtR.S. (1992). Structural holes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15.
BurtR.S. (1997). The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 339–365.
16.
ButtnerE.H. & RosenB. (1988). Bank loan officers’ perceptions of the characteristics of men, women and successful entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 3, 249–258.
17.
ButtnerE.H. & RosenB. (1992). Rejection in the loan application process: Male and female entrepreneur's perceptions and subsequent intentions. Journal of Small Business Venturing, 30, 58–66.
18.
CampbellK.E. (1988). Gender differences in job–related networks. Work and Occupations, 15, 179–200.
19.
CarrM., ChenM., & JhabvalaR. (1996). Speaking out: Women's economic empowerment in South Asia. London: IT Publications.
20.
CarterS., ShawE., WilsonF., & LamW. (in press). Gender, entrepreneurship and business finance: Investigating the relationship between banks and entrepreneurs in the UK. In BrushC.G., CarterN.M., GatewoodE.J., GreeneP.G., & HartM.H. (Eds.), Growth oriented women entrepreneurs and their businesses. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
21.
CarterS., TaggS., & BriertonJ. (2002). Restricted access: Women–owned businesses in profile. Available at http://www.prowess.org.uk/publications.htm, accessed 4 January 2006.
22.
Center for Women's Business Research. A compendium of national statistics on women–owned businesses in the U.S. Executive Summary and Data Report. Report #01COM, National Women's Business Council, September 2001.
ChandlerG.N. & LyonD.W. (2001, August). Entrepreneurial teams in new ventures: Composition, turnover, and performance. Paper presented at the 2001 National Academy of Management Meetings, Washington, DC.
25.
ChellE., HaworthJ., & BrearelyS. (1991). The entrepreneurial personality: Concepts, cases and categories. London: Routledge.
26.
Ching–Yin YimP. & Harris BondM. (2002). Gender stereotyping of managers and self–concept of business students across their undergraduate education. Women in Management Review, 17, 364–373.
27.
CliffJ.E. (1998). Does one size fit all? Exploring the relationship between attitudes towards growth, gender, and business size. Journal of Business Venturing, 13, 523–542.
28.
ColemanS. (2000). Access to capital and terms of credit: A comparison of men– and women–owned small businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 38, 37–52.
29.
CromieS. & BirleyS. (1992). Networking by female business owners in Northern Ireland. Journal of Business Venturing, 7, 237–251.
30.
DeephouseD.L. (1996). Does isomorphism legitimate?Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1024–1039.
31.
DelmarF. & ShaneS. (2004). Planning for the market: Business planning before marketing and continuation of organizing efforts. Journal of Business Venturing, 19, 767–785.
32.
DiekmanA.B. & EaglyA.H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men of the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1171–1181.
33.
DiMaggioP.J. & PowellW.W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.
34.
EaglyA.H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
35.
EaglyA.H. & KarauS.J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598.
36.
ElyR. (1995). The power of demography: Women's social constructions of gender identity at work. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 589–635.
37.
FabowaleL., OrserB., & RidingA. (1995). Gender, structural factors, and credit terms between Canadian small businesses and financial institutions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19, 41–65.
38.
FayM. & WilliamsL. (1993). Gender bias and the availability of business loans. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 363–376.
39.
FischerC.S. & OlikerS.J. (1983). A Research note on friendship, gender, and the life cycle. Social Forces, 62, 124–133.
40.
GartnerW.B., ShaverK.G., GatewoodE., & KatzJ.A. (1994). Finding the entrepreneur in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18, 5–10.
41.
GilliganC. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42.
GranovetterM.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380.
43.
GranovetterM.S. (1995). Getting a job: A study of contacts and careers (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44.
GreeneP.G., HartM.M., GatewoodE.J., BrushC.G., & CarterN.M. (2003). Women entrepreneurs: Moving front and center: An overview of research and theory. Available at http://www.usasbe.org/knowledge/whitepapers/greene2003.pdf, accessed 15 February 2005.
45.
HardingS. (1987). Is there a feminist method? In HardingS. (Ed.), Feminism and methodology: Social science issues (pp. 1–14). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
46.
HardingS. (1991). Who knows: Identities and feminist epistemology. In HartmanJ. & Masser–DavidsonE. (Eds.), Engendering knowledge: Feminists in academe (pp. 100–120). Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press.
47.
HeilmanM.E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. Research in Organizational Behavior, 5, 269–298.
48.
HeilmanM.E., BlockC.J., & MartellR.F. (1995). Sex stereotypes: Do they influence the perceptions of managers?Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 237–252.
49.
HisrichR.D. & O’BrienM. (1981). The woman entrepreneur from a business and sociological perspective. In VesperK.H. (Ed.), Frontiers of entrepreneurial research (pp. 21–39). Boston: Babson College.
50.
HolmquistC. (2003). Is the medium really the message? Moving perspective from the entrepreneurial actor to the entrepreneurial action. In SteyaertC. & HjorthD. (Eds.), New Movements in Entrepreneurship. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
51.
IbarraH. (1992). Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 422–447.
JalbertS.E. (2000). Women entrepreneurs in the global economy. Paper presented at the Center for International Private Enterprise Conference, Women: The Emerging Economic Force, Washington, DC.
54.
KabeerN. (2000). The power to choose. London: Verso.
55.
KammJ.B. & ShumanJ.C. (1990). Entrepreneurial teams in new venture creation: A research agenda. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 14, 7–17.
56.
KanterR.M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
57.
KantorP. (2003). Women's empowerment through home–based work: Evidence from India. Development and Change, 34, 425–445.
58.
KatzJ.A. & WilliamsP.M. (1997). Gender, self–employment and weak–tie networking through formal organizations: A secondary analysis approach. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 9, 183–197.
59.
KorY.Y. & MahoneyJ.T. (2000). Penrose's resource–based approach: The process and product of research creativity. Journal of Management Studies, 37, 109–139.
60.
LangowitzN.S. & MorganC. (2003). Women entrepreneurs: Breaking through the glass barrier. In ButlerJ.E. (Ed.), New perspectives on women entrepreneurs, volume 3 in research on entrepreneurship and management (pp. 101–120). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
61.
LinN., EnselW.M., & VaughnJ.C. (1981). Social resources and strength of ties: Structural factors in occupational status attainment. American Sociological Review, 46, 393–405.
62.
MastersR. & MeierR. (1988). Sex differences and risk–taking propensity of entrepreneurs. Journal of Small Business Management, 26, 31–35.
63.
McKechnieS.A., EnnewC.T., & ReadL.H. (1998). The nature of the banking relationship: A comparison of the experiences of male and female small business owners. International Small Business Journal, 16, 39–55.
64.
McPhersonJ.M. & Smith–LovinL. (1982). Women and weak ties: Differences by sex in the size of voluntary organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 87, 883–904.
65.
MenckenF.C. & WinfieldI. (2000). Job search and sex segregation: Does sex of social contact matter?Sex Roles, 42, 847–864.
66.
MontgomeryJ.D. (1992). Job search and network composition: Implications of the strength–of–weak ties hypothesis. American Sociological Review, 57, 586–596.
67.
MooreG. (1990). Structural determinants of men's and women's personal networks. American Sociological Review, 55, 726–735.
68.
MosherC.E. & Danoff–BurgS. (2005). Agentic and communal personality traits: Relations to attitudes toward sex and sexual experiences. Sex Roles, 52, 121–129.
69.
OliverC. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16, 145–179.
70.
OlmK., CarsrudA., & AlveyL. (1988). The role of networks in new venture funding of female entrepreneurs: A continuing analysis. In KichoffB.A., LongW.A., McMullanW.E., VesperK.H., & WetzelW.E. (Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship research. Wellesley, MA: Babson College.
71.
PfefferJ. & SalancikG.R. (1978). External control of organizations. New York: Harper and Row.
72.
ReadL.H. (1994). Raising finances from banks: A comparative study of the experiences of male and female business owners. In BygraveW.D., BirleyS., ChurchillN.C., GatewoodE., HoyF., KeeleyR.H., & WetzelW.E. (Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship research. Wellesley, MA: Babson College.
73.
RenzulliL.A., AldrichH.E., & MoodyJ. (2000). Family matters: Gender, networks and entrepreneurial outcomes. Social Forces, 79, 523–546.
74.
RidgewayC.L. & Smith–LovinL. (1999). Interaction in the gender system: Theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 191–216.
75.
RidingA.L. & SwiftC.S. (1990). Women business owners and terms of credit: Some empirical findings of the Canadian experience. Journal of Business Venturing, 5, 327–340.
76.
RodgersE. & KincaidD.L. (1981). Communication networks. New York: New York Press.
77.
RosaP., HamiltonD., CarterS., & BurnsH. (1994). The impact of gender on small business management: Preliminary findings of a British study. International Small Business Journal, 12, 25–33.
78.
RuefM., AldrichH.E., & CarterN.M. (2003). The structure of founding teams: Homophily, strong ties, and isolation among U.S. entrepreneurs. American Sociological Review, 68, 195–222.
79.
ScheinV.E. (1973). The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 95–100.
80.
ScheinV.E. (2001). A global look at psychological barriers to women's progress in management. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 675–688.
81.
SchwartzE. (1976). Entrepreneurship: A new female frontier. Journal of Contemporary Business, 5, 47–76.
82.
SextonD.L. & Bowman–UptonN. (1990). Female and male entrepreneurs: Psychological characteristics and their role in gender–related discrimination. Journal of Business Venturing, 5, 29–36.
83.
ShaheedF. (1989). Purdah and poverty in Pakistan. In AfsharH. & AgarwalB. (Eds.), Women, poverty and ideology in Asia (pp. 1–16). New York: Oxford University Press.
84.
Smith–LovinL. & McPhersonJ.M. (1993). You are who you know: A network approach to gender. In EnglandP. (Ed.), Theory on gender: Feminism on theory (pp. 223–251). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
85.
SonfieldM., LussierR., CormanJ., & McKinneyM. (2001). Gender comparisons in strategic decision–making: An empirical analysis of the entrepreneurial strategy matrix. Journal of Small Business Management, 39, 165–174.
86.
StarrJ.A. & YudkinM. (1996). Women entrepreneurs: A review of current research. Wellesley, MA: Wellesley College, Center for Research on Women.
87.
StoloffJ.A., GlanvilleJ.L., & BienenstockE.J. (1999). Women's participation in the labor force: The role of social networks. Social Networks, 21, 91–108.
88.
StuhlmacherA.F. & WaltersA.E. (1999). Gender differences in negotiation outcome: A meta–analysis. Personnel Psychology, 52, 653–677.
89.
TimmonsJ.A. (1994). New venture creation: Entrepreneurship for the 21st century (4th ed.). Boston: Irwin.
90.
TolbertP.S. & ZuckerL.G. (1996). The institutionalization of institutional theory. In CleggS., HardyC., & NordW.R. (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 175–190). London: Sage.
91.
TwengeJ.M. (2001). Changes in women's assertiveness in response to status and roles: A cross–temporal meta–analysis, 1931–1993. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 133–145.
92.
UcbasaranD., LockettA., WrightM., & WestheadP. (2003). Entrepreneurial founder teams: Factors associated with entry and exit. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(2), 107–127.
93.
WatsonJ. & NewbyR. (2005). Biological sex, stereotypical sex–roles, and SME owner characteristics. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 11, 129–143.
94.
WernerfeltB. (1984). A resource–based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5, 171–180.
95.
WillemsenT.M. (2002). Gender typing of the successful manager—a stereotype reconsidered. Sex Roles, 46, 385–391.
96.
ZimmermanM.A. & ZeitzG.J. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27, 414–431.
