Mandy Wheadon & Nathalie Duval-Couetil

Purdue University

mwheadon@purdue.edu

natduval@purdue.edu

PURPOSE

Gender Theory

WHY ARE WE DISCUSSING THIS?

Communication Theory Entrepreneurship Theory

+ +

PURPOSEWHAT ARE WE TRYING TO DO?

• Show how research & discussion of things like “entrepreneurial

personality characteristics” can negatively affect female students’

intent and motivation to act as entrepreneurs

• Give examples of entrepreneurial language that is exclusive or

otherwise problematic

BACKGROUND

WHAT IS MEANT BY THE “ENTREPRENEURIAL

PERSONALITY”?

• Research often frames differences in

entrepreneurial success, career choice, and

income earned as being related to the presence or

absence of certain traits & characteristics.

BACKGROUND

THE BIG FIVE

High levels of:

• Conscientiousness

• Openness

• Extraversion

Low levels of:

• Neuroticism

• Agreeableness

For example, the Big Five personality traits

that make up the “entrepreneurial personality”

are commonly reported as being:

(see Brandstatter, 2011; Goldberg, 1992; Shane et al., 2010; Zhao et al., 2010; & Leutner et al., 2014)

AWARENESSSO WHAT’S WRONG WITH THAT?

Language shapes

understanding

THE BIG FIVEHigh :

Conscientiousness

Openness

Extraversion

Low:

Neuroticism

Agreeableness

• Marked language (i.e.,

“nurse” vs. “male nurse” or

“entrepreneur” vs.

“female/woman

entrepreneur”)

• Gender associations with

certain words

Entrepreneurship Theory Communication Theory

EXISTING EXAMPLES

Masculinity words (from Bem’s masculinity index)

Entrepreneur words (from foundational texts)

MASCULINITY WORDS COMPARED TO ENTREPRENEUR WORDS

Self-reliant Self-centered, internal locus of control, self-efficacious, mentally free, able

Defends own beliefs Strong-willed

Assertive Able to withstand opposition

Strong personality Resolute, firm in temper

Forceful, athletic Unusually energetic, capacity for sustained effort, active

Has leadership abilities Skilled at organizing, visionary

Willing to take risks Seeks challenges, optimistic, daring, courageous

Makes decisions easily Decisive in spite of uncertainty

Self-sufficient Independent, detached

Dominant, aggressive Influential, seeks power, relentless

Willing to take a stand Sticks to a course, speaks up

Acts as a leader Leads progress, pilot of industrialism, manager

Individualistic Detached, prefers not to have a boss

Competitive Wants to fight and conquer, wants to prove competence/superiority

Ambitious Achievement oriented

Independent Independent, mentally free

Analytical Exercises sound judgment, superior business skill, perceptive, intelligent

(adapted from Ahl, 2006)

AWARENESSSO WHAT’S WRONG WITH THAT?

It’s never as

simple as just

biology.

TRAIT

PERSPECTIVE

• Personality traits

conceptualized as

intrinsic characteristics,

relatively stable,

measurable

• Genetic/biological

implications

• Socialization

• Opportunities to

learn/express traits

(especially when

capital is involved)

Entrepreneurship Theory Gender Theory

WHY DO THE WORDS MATTER?ASSUMPTIONS SHAPE BELIEFS & ACTIONS

Ahl (2006):

• “Research on entrepreneurship holds certain assumptions about

business, gender, family, society, the economy, and the individual,

all of which influence the research questions asked, the methods

chosen, and the answers received. The assumptions also [shape]

WHAT IS EXCLUDED—i.e., factors or circumstances that are not

perceived as relevant for entrepreneurship research—and issues

of legitimacy: who is allowed to speak on the subject and what

channels count?” (p.579)

• Assumptions about directionality influence research

(most likely that behaviors are shaping the context as

the context is simultaneously shaping the behaviors)

WHY DO THE WORDS MATTER?

Foucault (1972):

• Discourse is never neutral—power structures aid in determining who shapes the dominant discourse on a topic, what information is included within (or excludedfrom) the discourse, as well as who has access to it.

• The words used to describe something influence what is represented as knowledge or truth on that subject, as well as how it may be known, and who may come to know it.

• In other words, the words used in teaching & research generate information, but they also generate meanings.

LANGUAGE, POWER, & KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION ARE

INTERRELATED

EXAMPLES

Obschonka et al. (2014):

• “It is well-documented that men and women differ in their

personality characteristics” (p.2).

• Emphasize importanceof “factors that lie ‘under the skin,’

something as fundamental as a person’s basic personality

structure” (p.10) as determinants of entrepreneurial career

choice & behavior.

• “Gender difference in entrepreneurial personality, which ‘favors’

men, indeed show a certain degree of…universality” (p.9).

• (*However, also throw in: “this gender difference in personality

differs substantially across cultures; and that in some cultures

this gender difference may not even exist, or may rather exist in

the reverse direction” (p.9).)

BIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM

EXAMPLES

Miller (2014):

• Entrepreneurship demands “a special type of individual; it

is not surprising, then, that…..particular personality traits

inhere in these individuals” (p.2).

• Also looked for, and found, that the hormone testosterone is

higher among entrepreneurs than among the general

population.

What assumptions underlie these examples? How might they

prevent some individuals from engaging in entrepreneurship?

EXCLUSIVITY OF ENTREPRENEURIAL ABILITY

IMPACTEXPECTANCY EFFECT

Dweck (2008):

• Personality shaped by the way one perceives self, others, situations,

& opportunities

• Central part of perception & personality development shaped through

socialization by exposure to beliefs & expectations of others

• Personality is shaped by beliefs about whether traits &

characteristics CAN be developed or not, and by beliefs about

whether others will ACCEPT their expressions of certain

characteristics or not

LANGUAGE BELIEFS

DEVELOPMENT

(OR LACK) OF

INTENTIONS,

ACTIONS, &

BEHAVIORS

IMPACT

SOCIAL IDENTITY, ACCEPTANCE, & INFLUENCE

Hogg (2001):

• As a group develop over time, a group prototype

also develops.

• Self identification & group acceptance/credibility

influenced by degree to which a person fits with

identity of the group.

• Individuals become influential in the group when

they become most like the group prototype.

IMPACT

POWER IMBALANCE IN KNOWLEDGE CREATION

• Disciplines such as entrepreneurship, where the

research has historically been dominated by

scholars who share certain privileges and

characteristics, often illustrate the fundamental

relationship between the construction of

knowledge and the transferal of power to similar

others.

• Reproduces and perpetuates status quo

IMPACT

(Based on search of Academic Search Premier database using query terms “entrepreneur*” AND “personality” OR “traits” with results filtered to include only results published in peer reviewed journals between 2005 and 2015)

RISING TREND OF STUDIES LOOKING AT

“ENTREPRENEURIAL PERSONALITY TRAITS”

2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

GENDERED DIFFERENCE IN RESEARCH PURSUED

Reviewing the available literature on the

development of entrepreneurial intention shows:

• The majority of researchers who focus on the role

of intrinsic personality traits are male.

• By contrast, female researchers tend to

emphasize the role of self-efficacy—which may be

developed.

IMPACT

IMPACT

Entrepreneurial

PersonalityUsing a framework of traits and

characteristics implies the

necessity of fixed biological or

psychological attributes to be

present in order to exhibit an

entrepreneurial personality -

allowing one to “be” an

entrepreneur (identity).

Entrepreneurial

SkillsConversely, entrepreneurial skills

may be cultivated through training

and practice, making it possible for

anyone to develop the capacity to

“act entrepreneurially”

(role/process/behavior/tool).

DO THE TOPICS WE RESEARCH & THE WORDS WE USE

WHILE TEACHING IMPLY:

or

IMPACT

DEVELOPMENT OF INTENT

Given these connections, how might research

on, and references to, “entrepreneurial

personality” impact career intention and

behavior of females?

IMPACTWHAT ARE WE IMPLYING?

If entrepreneurial traits are innate… …and the words used to describe the traits of an entrepreneur

are the same words used to describe masculinity….

…then our biology is saying that men are probably better at

entrepreneurship... right?

IMPACT ON WOMEN’S ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITY

• Women in the U.S. receive an increasingly greater proportion

of university degrees than men do, yet continue to be less

likely to believe that they are capable of being successful

entrepreneurs (Bygrave et al., 2013; Kelley, Brush, Greene, & Litovsky, 2012;

VanderBrug, 2013).

• One in five men anticipate starting a business in the next five

years, while only one in thirteen women report intentions to do

likewise (Kelley et al., 2012; Pofeldt, 2013b).

• Two-thirds of men in the U.S. have positive perceptions about

their entrepreneurial abilities & opportunities, are confident

they could start a business, and have a relatively low fear of

failure—but less than half of women with similar levels of

education and experience share these beliefs (Pofeldt, 2013b).

IMPACT

IMPACT ON WOMEN’S ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITY

(CONT.)

• Existing female entrepreneurs are overwhelmingly found in

less-profitable consumer, retail, and service sectors, while

males continue to dominate the more profitable

manufacturing and technology sectors (Kelley et al., 2012).

• It is more difficult for women to secure funding for new

business ventures, and they generally have limited access to

valuable mentorship and support networks during the

enterprise creation process (Pofeldt, 2013b).

IMPACT

IMPACT

SO, WHAT?

• Taken together, these factors result in many women failing to

consider entrepreneurship as a career option at all.

• Since entrepreneurship skills are projected to be vital to job

creation and future economic security, the gender gap in the

amount and types of entrepreneurial work performed by

women brings with it substantial societal & individual losses.

INTERRUPTION OF PATTERNS

“At any historical moment, both the gender order and

linguistic conventions exercise a profound constraint on our

thoughts and actions, predisposing us to follow patterns set

down over generations and throughout our own development.

Change comes with the interruption of such patterns, and

while sometimes that interruption may be sudden, it comes

more commonly through infinitesimally small events that may

or may not be intentional.”

(Eckert & McConnell-Ginet (2013), Language and Gender, p.44)

CONCLUSION

MOVING FORWARD: INTERRUPTING THE PATTERNS

• Entrepreneurship requires flexibility. Relying on narrow descriptions of

entrepreneurship implies that there is a “right way” to be an

entrepreneur, erasing the possibility for multiple interpretations and

diverse enactments of entrepreneurship.

• Multiple outcomes and objectives. A more flexible and pluralistic view of

entrepreneurship would generate multiple definitions, each specific to a

different desired outcome or best suited to the combination of skills

that falls under a particular entrepreneurial archetype.

• “Skills mindset” vs. “Identity mindset.” Personality language constructs

entrepreneurs as an identity that someone either ‘is’ or ‘is not’ based on

their level of conformity to the ‘right way’ to be entrepreneurial—instead

of portraying it as a complex and integrative process that involves a

combination of diverse mindsets, skills, perspectives, and tools that

anyone can potentially learn to access and employ.

CONCLUSION

CONCLUSION

FOR EXAMPLE, A SKILLS MINDSET IDENTIFIES SOME

ENTREPRENEURIAL SKILLS & COMPETENCIES AS:

• Opportunity recognition

• Opportunity assessment

• Risk management/mitigation

• Convey a compelling vision to others

• Tenacity/perseverance

• Creative problem-solving/imaginativeness

• Identify/leverage resources

• Do more with less/resourcefulness

• Value creation

• Focused yet adaptable

• Resilient

• Believe they have ability to accomplish tasks/achieve goals

• Building/using/maintaining useful networks

(see Morris et al., 2013)

QUESTIONS?

REFERENCESAhl, H. (2006). Why research on women entrepreneurs needs new directions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(5), 595–621.

Brandstätter, H. (2011). Personality aspects of entrepreneurship: A look at five meta-analyses Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 222–230.

Bygrave, W. D., Healey, K., Lee, M., Barefoot, B., Fetters, M., & Greene, P. (2013). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: National Entrepreneurial Assessment for the United States of America, 1–64.

Dweck, C. (2008). Can Personality Be Changed? The Role of Beliefs in Personality and Change. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17( 6), 391-394. Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (2013), Language and Gender. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language (A.M. Sheridan Smith, Trans.). Truth: Engagements Across Philosophical Traditions. New York: Pantheon.

Goldberg, L.R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26–42.

Hogg, M.A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 184-200.

Kelley, D. J., Brush, C. G., Greene, P. G., & Litovsky, Y. (2012). 2012 Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Women’s Report (pp. 1–58).

Lazear, E. P. (2004). Balanced Skills and Entrepreneurship. In American Economic Review (Vol. 94, 208–211).

Leutner, F., Ahmetoglub, G., Akhtara, R., & Chamorro-Premuzica, T. (2014). The relationship between the entrepreneurial personality and the Big Five personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 63(June), 58–63.

Miller, D. (2014). A downside to the entrepreneurial personality? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(5), 1–8.

Morris, M. H., Webb, J. W., Fu, J., & Singhal, S. (2013). A competency-based perspective on entrepreneurship education: Conceptual and empirical insights. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), 352–369.

Obschonka, M., Schmitt-Rodermund, E., & Terracciano, A. (2014). Personality and the gender gap in self-employment: A multi-nation study. PloS One, 9(8).

Pofeldt, E. (2013). The Confidence Gap and Women Entrepreneurs. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/elainepofeldt/2013/05/28/the-confidence-gap-and-women-entrepreneurs/

Shane, S., Nicolaou, N., Cherkas, L., & Spector, T. D. (2010). Do openness to experience and recognizing opportunities have the same genetic source? Human Resource Management Review, 49(2), 291–303.

VanderBrug, J. (2013). The Global Rise of Female Entrepreneurs. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2013/09/global-rise-of-female-entrepreneurs

Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2010). The relationship of personality to entrepreneurial intentions and

performance: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36(2), 381–404.