In India, though women form a significant part of the population, gender stereotypes prevent women from engaging in entrepreneurship because they gain identities that are counterproductive. It is therefore important to study how Indian women entrepreneurs break the gender stereotype, reconstructing new gender identities. A longitudinal study with unstructured interviews capturing narratives of the entrepreneur and her team members was conducted adopting a qualitative, multi-method approach including focus groups and secondary data. Employing the Gioia method for analysis, our study makes three important contributions. First, it identifies enablers, obstacles, blockages and accelerators that help Indian women entrepreneurs reconstruct gender identity. Second, our study shows the intersectionality of concurrent identities and gender stereotyping at workplace, societal and personal levels. Third, our study brings out identity evolution drivers that helped in breaking the gender stereotype. The research advances knowledge on gender identity and gender stereotypes in entrepreneurship literature, particularly in the context of women entrepreneurs.
AgarwalS., & LenkaU. (2018). Why research is needed in women entrepreneurship in India: A viewpoint. International Journal of Social Economics, 45(7), 1042–1057.
AnthiasF. (2008). Thinking through the lens of translocational positionality: An intersectionality frame for understanding identity and belonging. Translocations: Migration and Social Change, 4(1), 5–20.
4.
AtewologunD. (2018). Intersectionality theory and practice. In Oxford research encyclopedia of business and management. Oxford University Press.
5.
BlakeM. K. (2006). Gendered lending: Gender, context and the rules of business lending. Venture Capital, 8(02), 183–201.
6.
BourneK. A., & CalásM. B. (2013). Becoming ‘real’ entrepreneurs: Women and the gendered normalization of ‘work’. Gender, Work & Organization, 20(4), 425–438.
7.
BramleyN., & EatoughV. (2005). The experience of living with Parkinson’s disease: An interpretative phenomenological analysis case study. Psychology & Health, 20(2), 223–235.
8.
BrunoA. V., & TyebjeeT. T. (1985). The entrepreneur’s search for capital. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(1), 61–74.
9.
BrushC. G., De BruinA., & WelterF. (2009). A gender-aware framework for womens entrepreneurship. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 8–24.
10.
CharlesworthT. E., & BanajiM. R. (2021). Patterns of implicit and explicit stereotypes III: Long-term change in gender stereotypes. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(1), 14–26.
11.
ChasserioS., PailotP., & PoroliC. (2014). When entrepreneurial identity meets multiple social identities: Interplays and identity work of women entrepreneurs. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 20(2), 128–154.
12.
CorlettS., & MavinS. (2014). Intersectionality, identity and identity work: Shared tenets and future research agendas for gender and identity studies. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 29(5), 258–276.
13.
CrenshawK. (1990). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241.
14.
CroftA., SchmaderT., & BlockK. (2015). An underexamined inequality: Cultural and psychological barriers to men’s engagement with communal roles. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19(4), 343–370.
15.
ErfanianF., RoudsariR. L., HaidariA., & BahmaniM. N. D. (2020). A narrative on the use of Vignette: Its advantages and drawbacks. Journal of Midwifery & Reproductive Health, 8(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.22038/jmrh.2020.41650.1472
16.
EssedP. (2001). Towards a methodology to identify converging forms of everyday discrimination. 45th Session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women. New York, p. 202.
17.
EssersC., & BenschopY. (2009). Muslim businesswomen doing boundary work: The negotiation of Islam, gender and ethnicity within entrepreneurial contexts. Human Relations, 62(3), 403–423.
GarcíaM. C. D., & WelterF. (2013). Gender identities and practices: Interpreting women entrepreneurs’ narratives. International Small Business Journal, 31(4), 384–404.
20.
GehmanJ., GlaserV. L., EisenhardtK. M., GioiaD., LangleyA., & CorleyK. G. (2018). Finding theory–method fit: A comparison of three qualitative approaches to theory building. Journal of Management Inquiry, 27(3), 284–300.
21.
GherardiS. (2015). Authoring the female entrepreneur while talking the discourse of work–family life balance. International Small Business Journal, 33(6), 649–666.
22.
HarlingK. (2012). An overview of case study. SSRN, 2141476. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2141476
23.
HolvinoE. (2010). Intersections: The simultaneity of race, gender and class in organization studies. Gender, Work & Organization, 17(3), 248–277.
24.
IbarraH., & BarbulescuR. (2010). Identity as narrative: Prevalence, effectiveness, and consequences of narrative identity work in macro work role transitions. Academy of Management Review, 35(1), 135–154.
25.
JenningsJ. E., & TonoyanV. (2022). Research on gender stereotyping and entrepreneurship: Suggestions for some paths worth pursuing. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 12(3), 187–212.
26.
JohnsonO. W., GerberV., & MuhozaC. (2019). Gender, culture and energy transitions in rural Africa. Energy Research & Social Science, 49, 169–179.
27.
KaurG., & SinghS. (2013). Women entrepreneurs in India: Problems and prospects. Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(1), 64–73.
28.
KoneruK. (2017). Women entrepreneurship in India-problems and prospects. SSRN 3110340. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3110340
29.
KraussS. (2008). A tripartite model of idiographic research: Progressing past the concept of idiographic research as a singular entity. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 36(8), 1123–1140.
30.
LawsonC., GeunaA., & FinardiU. (2021). The funding-productivity-gender nexus in science, a multistage analysis. Research Policy, 50(3), 104182.
31.
LevyJ. S. (2008). Case studies: Types, designs, and logics of inference. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 25(1), 1–18.
32.
LindseyT. B. (2011). Black no more: Skin bleaching and the emergence of new negro womanhood beauty culture. Journal of Pan African Studies, 4(4), 97–116.
33.
LoscoccoK., MonnatS. M., MooreG., & LauberK. B. (2009). Enterprising women: A comparison of women’s and men’s small business networks. Gender & Society, 23(3), 388–411.
34.
LuthansF., & DavisT. R. (1982). An idiographic approach to organizational behavior research: The use of single case experimental designs and direct measures. Academy of Management Review, 7(3), 380–391.
35.
MagnaniG., & GioiaD. (2023). Using the Gioia Methodology in international business and entrepreneurship research. International Business Review, 32(2), 102097.
36.
MahajanS. (2013). Women entrepreneurship in India. Global Journal of Management and Business Studies, 3(10), 1143–1148.
37.
MarlowS., & McAdamM. (2012). Analyzing the influence of gender upon high–technology venturing within the context of business incubation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(4), 655–676.
38.
MarlowS., & McAdamM. (2015). Incubation or induction? Gendered identity work in the context of technology business incubation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(4), 791–816.
39.
McCallL. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(3), 1771–1800.
40.
MirchandaniK. (1999). Legitimizing work: Telework and the gendered reification of the work-nonwork dichotomy. Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue Canadienne de Sociologie, 36(1), 87–107.
41.
MSC. (2022). Decoding government support to women entrepreneurs in India: The anatomy of entrepreneurship support schemes. https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2023-03/Decoding-Government-Support-to-Women-Entrepreneurs-in-India.pdf
42.
MushabenJ. M. (2009). Up the down staircase: Redefining gender identities through migration and ethnic employment in Germany. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35(8), 1249–1274.
43.
MustafaM., & TreanorL. (2022). Gender and entrepreneurship in the new era: New perspectives on the role of gender and entrepreneurial activity. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 12(3), 213–226.
44.
NashJ. C. (2008). Re-thinking intersectionality. Feminist Review, 89(1), 1–15.
45.
NowellL. S., NorrisJ. M., WhiteD. E., & MoulesN. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13.
46.
PeusC., BraunS., & KnipferK. (2015). On becoming a leader in Asia and America: Empirical evidence from women managers. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(1), 55–67.
47.
PonterottoJ. G. (2005). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: A primer on research paradigms and philosophy of science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 126.
48.
PreeceS., & BullinghamR. (2022). Gender stereotypes: The impact upon perceived roles and practice of in-service teachers in physical education. Sport, Education and Society, 27(3), 259–271.
49.
RunyanW. M. (1983). Idiographic goals and methods in the study of lives. Journal of Personality, 51(3), 413–437.
50.
ShaneS., & VenkataramanS. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.
51.
ShaneS. A. (2003). A general theory of entrepreneurship: The individual-opportunity nexus. Edward Elgar Publishing.
52.
ShieldsS. A. (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301–311.
53.
SimpsonJ. (2009). Everyone belongs: A toolkit for applying intersectionality. Institut canadien de recherches sur les femmes.
54.
SomersM. R. (1994). Rights, relationality, and membership: Rethinking the making and meaning of citizenship. Law & Social Inquiry, 19(1), 63–112.
55.
SteensmaT. D., McGuireJ. K., KreukelsB. P., BeekmanA. J., & Cohen-KettenisP. T. (2013). Factors associated with desistence and persistence of childhood gender dysphoria: A quantitative follow-up study. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 52(6), 582–590.
56.
StirzakerR., & SitkoR. (2018). The older entrepreneurial self: Intersecting identities of older women entrepreneurs. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 25(8), 1748–1765.
57.
TellisW. (1997). Introduction to case study. The Qualitative Report, 3(2), 1–14.
58.
The Mastercard Index of Women Entrepreneurs (MIWE) (2022). Mastercard. https://newsroom.mastercard.com/news/insights/2022/mastercard-index-of-women-entrepreneurs-2021/
59.
TsoukasH. (1989). The validity of idiographic research explanations. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 551–561.
60.
VerduijnK., & EssersC. (2013). Questioning dominant entrepreneurship assumptions: The case of female ethnic minority entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 25(7–8), 612–630.
61.
WangQ. (2019). Gender, race/ethnicity, and entrepreneurship: women entrepreneurs in a US south city. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 25(8), 1766–1785.
62.
WangY., & WarnJ. (2018). Chinese immigrant entrepreneurship: Embeddedness and the interaction of resources with the wider social and economic context. International Small Business Journal, 36(2), 131–148.
63.
WarnerL. R. (2016). Gender identity, theories of. In The Wiley Blackwell encyclopedia of gender and sexuality studies (pp. 1–6). Wiley-Blackwell.
64.
WhiteA., RobinsonS., & AndersonE. (2017). Inclusive masculinity theory: Sports’ role in the liberation of male gender. In Sport and discrimination (pp. 134–148). Routledge.
65.
YinR. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5). Sage Publications.
