ANÁLISIS DE FALLAS EN EL SISTEMA

Therefore current research remains divided regarding both, the extent of the role of gender in men and women’s entrepreneurial experiences and possible explanations for the influence of gender. As Read (1998) emphasises ‘it is far from clear as to whether gender

plays a role in the problems faced by female business owners, how far difficulties are caused by discrimination, or whether they are merely a function of the characteristics of female business owners or of women-owned businesses’ (p60).

In reviewing existent literature, the theoretical concepts offered by Liberal and Social Feminism provide a useful lens for helping to order and understand the findings. Indeed, different strands of the literature give credence to both the Liberal and Social Feminist theoretical stances. However, whilst both theories help to shed some light on the situation there are limitations to the power of the explanations offered and key questions remain unresolved as neither theoretical explanation adequately describes the whole situation. Significantly these theoretical stances provide a useful starting point for considering the issues, yet highlight the need for further explanations. The requirement for continuing investigation reflects Wolcott’s (2001) statement that ‘theory should facilitate the inquiry

process. It is not intended to bring quick and satisfying closure to an account’ (p78).

Thus the ambiguity that remains necessitates the consideration of an alternative theoretical paradigm to help provide further insight into the situation.

Recently, the shortcomings in feminist theory in fully describing the role of gender in entrepreneurship have been recognised by scholars with calls emerging for the creation of a theoretical paradigm that combines the tenets of both entrepreneurship and feminist theories to help derive further understanding. Indeed, Orser et al. (2010) go as far as to advocate the emergence of a new theory, as they state:

‘Scholars are encouraged to concurrently examine how entrepreneurship theory might better inform feminist thought and how feminist thought might better inform entrepreneurship theory’ (Orser et al., 2010, p951).

97

Therefore the aim of this call is to generate what Orser et al. (2010) broadly describe as a

‘feminist entrepreneurship theory’ (p951). However, the specifics of this new theory have

yet to emerge and further research is required to help explore and define what is at present, quite a nebulous concept. As such, the field is open to additional input to help build upon current work to realise the fruition of the new theory. Thus research that aims to utilise the insight provided by both feminist and entrepreneurship theories is both timely and necessary and the possibility exists to make a contribution to the field. Moreover, combining the strengths of both feminist and entrepreneurship theory to provide a more comprehensive understanding may also contribute to Marlow et al.’s (2009) request to embed research in more informed conceptual frameworks.

One way to reconcile the Liberal and Social Feminist theories with the disparities present in the body of research is to explore the issues from a different theoretical perspective. In doing so, a plausible starting point is to consider the process of entrepreneurship rather than focusing upon the outcomes and deriving comparisons from these. One limitation of the Liberal and Social Feminist theories is that they do not provide an explanation for the diversity and differences amongst female entrepreneurs. Rather they focus instead upon making comparisons with male entrepreneurs. However, the heterogeneity of female entrepreneurs is an intriguing aspect of the issue and it is important to try to understand the possible reasons for these differences. To rectify this, a theory is required that can draw attention to intra-gender differences and help to provide plausible explanations for these differences. One theory that focuses on the process of entrepreneurship and may help to explain the situation further is the Theory of Effectuation (Sarasvathy, 2001).

Sarasvathy’s (2001) Theory of Effectuation, proposes a practical approach towards entrepreneurship and considers the process that entrepreneurs engage in. In essence, Sarasvathy (2001) argues that entrepreneurs start their venture with three types of ‘means’, that is they know who they are, what they know and whom they know. It is with this knowledge that the entrepreneurs go on to develop their business. To summarise, entrepreneurs exploit the contingencies that are open to them in their own particular circumstances (ibid).

In offering this explanation, Sarasvathy (2001) provides an alternative perspective that places the entrepreneurial process at the centre of the analysis. Indeed, rather than exploring the data to locate the successful personality or the characteristics of the successful firm, Sarasvathy (2001) suggests that the only way to understand how there are

98

so many different types of entrepreneurs and different types of firms are successful is to consider the process that they adopt. As she argues:

‘The essential agent of entrepreneurship… is an effectuator: an imaginative actor who

seizes contingent opportunities and exploits any and all means at hand to fulfil a plurality of current and future aspirations, many of which are shaped and created through the very process of economic decision making and are not given a priori’ (Sarasvathy, 2001, p262).

In moving the entrepreneur and the process they follow to the centre of the theoretical perspective, the Theory of Effectuation provides a further lens through which to consider the role of gender in entrepreneurship and allows further exploration of the data. Furthermore, the addition of this perspective and the focus on the entrepreneurial process may be the key to untangling the findings and helping to provide explanations.

The Theory of Effectuation also suggests that the entrepreneur attempts to mould and create the world that they are interested in rather than predicting it and reacting to the prediction (Sarasvathy, 2003). The entrepreneurs’ approaches can be distilled into four effectuation processes including; considering what they can afford to lose rather than what they expect to gain; building strategic alliances rather focusing on competitive analyses to assist with the process; exploiting the contingencies that arise in the marketplace rather than exploiting pre-existing knowledge; and finally not focusing on predicting an uncertain future but rather focusing on the controllable aspects of an unpredictable future (Sarasvathy, 2001). Moreover, once in business the configuration of the business is fluid as the entrepreneur exploits the changing means available to them as they increase their knowledge of their sector or as they expand their network or build their reputation (ibid). This bottom up, fluid approach to building the business, allows the entrepreneur to exploit their learning and helps to minimise the costs of failure (Sarasvathy, 2003).

This theory provides resonance as it offers a pragmatic approach, focusing upon the process rather than solely on the outcome or the inputs, however, they are conceived. In doing so, the Theory of Effectuation provides a useful tool to understand why the findings occur, helping to examine the nuances of the situation and adding to the understanding generated by the theoretical lenses of Liberal and Social Feminism. Additionally, by not focusing on gender it allows the conceptualisation of the findings from a different orientation, preventing the researcher from forcing the data into the feminist paradigm and allowing a more comprehensive analysis to be engaged in.

99

However, to date the Theory of Effectuation (Sarasvathy, 2001) has not been applied to the sphere of gender and entrepreneurship. Thus the combination of Liberal Feminism, Social Feminism and the Theory of Effectuation may contribute towards developing the ‘feminist

entrepreneurship theory’ that Orser et al. (2010, p951) call for. Indeed, the strengths of

each theoretical perspective may combine to provide a more in-depth and insightful theoretical perspective to help unravel the highly complex influence of gender and entrepreneurship. Taken together these theories may help to proffer explanations as to why the findings occur. The methodology utilised to explore the complex topic of gender and entrepreneurship will now be discussed, in detail, in the following chapter.

100 CHAPTER 5

THE METHODOLOGY

5.1 Introduction

The aim of this research is to explore the entrepreneurial process to understand if it differs upon the basis of the entrepreneur’s gender. Specifically, it considers the experiences of entrepreneurs operating in the business services and technology sectors. Thus this chapter will consider the methodological considerations for gathering the required data and engaging in its analysis.