The Female Entrepreneur: A Career Development Perspective

Author(s): Donald D. Bowen and Robert D. Hisrich

Source: The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Apr., 1986), pp. 393-407
Published by: Academy of Management
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/258468 .
Accessed: 26/01/2011 04:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aom. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Academy of Management is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Academy
of Management Review.

http://www.jstor.org
 ?Academy of Management Review, 1986, Vol. 11, No. 2, 393-407.

The Female Entrepreneur:

A Career Development Perspective
DONALD D. BOWEN
ROBERT D. HISRICH
University of Tulsa
Recent literature on female entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial careers
reveals that: (a) up to this time, piecemeal studies of entrepreneurs
(male and female) fail to provide a clear picture of the factors which
encourage an individual to enter upon an entrepreneurial career;
and (b) even less is known about female than male entrepreneurs. A
comprehensive career model (a more definitive picture of the determi-
nants of entrepreneurial behavior for women) is developed.
The influx of women into the workforce over 2,334,000 in 1981. More recent statistics put the
the past half century and their growing interest number of self-employed females at 3,500,000 in
in managerial and professional careers is one of 1984. While the percentage of businesses started
the major developments of contemporary Ameri- and operated by women in the United States is
can society. Female employment has increased small (estimates range from 4.6 percent to 5.7
from approximately one-quarter of the workforce percent), the absolute number of women-owned
in 1940, to over one-half of the workforce today, enterprises is still large. A report from the Inter-
and will be two-thirds of the expected increase nal Revenue Service indicates that there are 2.8
in the number of workers through 1995 (Bardwick, million businesses owned by women.
1979; Fullerton, 1980; Hisrich & Brush, 1985; Women-owned and -operated businesses vary
Shaw, 1979). from state to state. A study of the Small Business
Paralleling the movement of women into the Administration found women-owned businesses
workforce, is an increasing number of women more prevalent in California, Hawaii, Ohio,
deciding to start their own business. A report of Illinois, and states along the east coast. Women-
the Bureau of Census using 1972 data indicated owned firms were least prevalent in Arkansas,
that women-owned businesses accounted for South Dakota, Kentucky, and North Dakota (His-
only 4.6 percent of all firms in the United States rich & Brush, 1985).
and the receipts from women-owned businesses This growing number of women-owned busi-
equalled only . 03 percent of all business receipts nesses is concentrated in the retail and personal
in the United States. According to a recent service industries. Until relatively recently,
Bureau of Labor report, female self-employment women were discouraged from seeking career
experienced five times the growth rate of male and educational experiences that would provide
self-employment between 1972 and 1979. The managerial and technical training necessary for
level of self-employment for females increased success in other fields such as finance, manufac-
from 1,475,000 in 1972 to 2,102,000 in 1979 and turing, and research and development. Despite
recent small gains, female entrepreneurs are
Requests for reprints should be sent to Donald D. Bowen, relatively rare in these traditionally male-domi-
College of Business Administration, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, nated industries (Hisrich & Brush, 1985) where
OK 74104. a male orientation is likely to be particularly

393
entrenched. If equality of economic opportunity
is to become a reality in the United States, means
must be found to desegregate the entrepreneur-
ial ghettoes of women in the retail and service
trades. The research proposed here offers a new
approach-a careers perspective-which seems
likely to produce fruitful insights on how to better
develop and encourage female entrepreneurs,
especially in nontraditional industries.
Entrepreneurship and Career Theory
There are a multitude of definitions of "entre-
preneurs" and "entrepreneurship" in the litera-
ture, each seemingly reflecting the unique bias
or agenda of the scholar proposing it (Shapero
& Sokol, 1982). Because the authors are inter-
ested in developing ways to open up the widest
possible range of entrepreneurial opportunities
for women, entrepreneurship as defined by His-
rich and Brush (1985, p. 15) will be used:
Entrepreneurs are found in all professions-
teaching, medicine, research, law, architec-
ture, engineering, social work, and distribu-
tion. Therefore, to account for any type of
entrepreneurial behavior, our definition is:
Entrepreneurship is the process of creating
something different with value by devoting
the necessary time and effort, assuming the
accompanying financial, psychic, and social
risks, and receiving the resulting rewards of
monetary and personal satisfaction.
As is indicated in the following literature re-
view, in recent years there has been some re-
search addressing the question: What combina-
tion of personal characteristics and environmen-
tal factors tend to produce an entrepreneur?
However, Jelinek (1977) noted that what is known
about careers is knowledge about male, not
female careers. Hisrich and Brush (1983) ex-
tended the point, observing that most of the
knowledge about entrepreneurs is about male
entrepreneurs.
As students of entrepreneurship have begun
to explore the careers of female entrepreneurs,
career theory as a discipline has also been
advancing. Sonnenfeld and Kotter (1982) have
394
traced the historical development of career
theory, identifying four major phases:
Social Structure Approach. This approach,
which began around 1890, was an attempt to
identify determinants such as social class predic-
tors of occupational attainment.
Personality Trait Approach. Since the social
class researchers tended to overlook the effects
of changes in individuals and the occupational
environment, researchers in the 1920s turned to
personality traits to develop career theory. Al-
though valuable work in the area of vocational
interest testing resulted, the view, again, was
largely one of a static individual in a static world.
Career Stages. In the 1950s, a new approach,
much more dynamic in its view, emerged-
career stages. This approach recognized that
individual careers change throughout one's
working life and that different stages are marked
by different needs, concerns, commitments, as-
pirations, and interests.
Life Cycle Theory. This approach emerged in
the 1970s, and extended the more dynamic view
of career stages by recognizing that career stages
reflect and interact with stages and events in the
individual's life-past, present, and future. Levin-
son's (1978) study of man's lives is a prime exam-
ple of a research attempt to understand men's
lives from such a broad and encompassing
perspective.
As is evident from the review which follows,
research on entrepreneurs' careers almost exclu-
sively falls in the first two research categories-
social structure or static personality traits.
Sonnenfeld and Kotter provided a conceptual
model of the type of data that is required in a
life-cycle approach to career research (see Fig-
ure 1). Arrayed along the horizontal axis of his-
torical time are nine categories of variables nec-
essary to understanding the individual's present
situation. The review presented here uses the
nine categories as a framework for organizing
recent findings on entrepreneurial careers,
particularly as applied to female entrepreneurs.
In the next few pages, recent research on entre-
preneurial careers will be summarized with the
 C t CO
f 50k | 0

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0.
v8 " s ' - a)

H
D 0U : : E 9E |

4 ~~~~~~ -C a*i1
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4-
3 Ca

0~~~~~~~~~~~
z~~~~~~~~~~~
[ < |R Z z a., g 0 - Qffl ? 2 _

3o
0
<
0 cn~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C)00
0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
U) ~~~~~~~~)
o : 0 n E
0 U) U) 08 Cl2 ? UR{ J s
~~
~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~O 0~~~
~~~~~~ c

Cl

0 ~ ~ ~ 0

e3Dd3 e;q ~ ~

395
Sonnenfeld and Kotter model used to categorize
findings and to identify gaps in available know-
ledge. Findings on the careers of male entrepre-
neurs are contrasted with those for female entre-
preneurs to highlight similarities and differences
and to indicate the relative research effort de-
voted to the study of male versus female en-
trepreneurs.
A Life-cycle Approach to
Entrepreneurial Careers
Educational Environment
Table 1 indicates the findings about the educa-
tion level of entrepreneurs in general, and for
female entrepreneurs in particular. Itis frequently
hypothesized that entrepreneurs are less well-
educated than the general population (Gasse,
1982). It is clear that such a conclusion is not
supported for female entrepreneurs (who appear
to be substantially better educated than the gen-
eral populace). It is even questionable whether
it is true for male entrepreneurs.
In terms of type and quality and education
received, however, female entrepreneurs appear
to experience some disadvantage. Hisrich and
Brush (1983) observed that female entrepreneurs
tend to be graduates of liberal arts programs
and to lack necessary understanding and skills
in finance and management. Watkins and Wat-
kins (1983) observed the same problem with
female entrepreneurs in England. Carter (1980/
1981), describing the American Women's Eco-
nomic Development Council's (AWED) program
for education of female entrepreneurs, noted that
women frequently suffer from a math anxiety
which must be overcome before they can become
effective in financial planning and control.
The Individual's Personality
The research on personality traits of entrepre-
neurs indicates that a large number of traits have
been explored. The most frequently researched
traits are: need for achievement (nAch), locus of
control, risk taking, and gender identity (mascu-
396
linity-femininity). In reviewing several entrepre-
neurial traits hypothesized by various investiga-
tors, Hornaday (1982) noted the lack of agree-
ment on the importance of these traits.
Need For Achievement. McClelland's (1961)
demonstration that achievement motivation could
be developed and lead individuals to engage in
entrepreneurial behavior sparked several stud-
ies of nAch in entrepreneurs. Brockhaus (1982)
reviewed 12 of these studies and concluded: "The
causal line between ownership of a small busi-
ness and a high need for achievement is not
proven" (pp. 42-43). However, Gasse suggested
that conceptual problems may underline the
ambiguous results for nAch. Bowen's (1971) re-
view of the literature on measures of nAch indi-
cated that self-report measures such as the
Edwards' Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS)
employed by Hornaday and Aboud (1971) have
historically failed to predict achievement behav-
ior and to correlate with scores from the McCle-
lland's projective test.
In a study of female entrepreneurs, DeCarlo
and Lyons (1979) reported that female entrepre-
neurs scored significantly higher than females in
general on the EPPS achievement scale. Wad-
dell (1983) using Mehrabian and Bank's (1978)
achievement questionnaire found that female
entrepreneurs scored higher than secretaries
(but not as high as female managers).
Given the lack of similarity of results, no firm
conclusions on the nAch of female entrepreneurs
can be drawn at this time.
Locus of Control. Jennings and Zeithaml (1983)
reviewed nine studies of Rotter's (1966)internality-
externality (I-E) dimension of entrepreneurs.
Three of the studies depicted entrepreneurs as
internals (persons who have a sense of control
over their lives). One study showed entrepre-
neurial intentions were associated with internal-
ity, and another reported a positive correlation
between career success and internality. Sexton
and Bowman (1984) report that "budding entre-
preneurs" (undergraduates majoring in entre-
preneurship) are more internal than other busi-
ness or nonbusiness majors. Two studies of
Table 1
Amount of Education of Entrepreneurs

Studies Findings Comments

Entrepreneurs in general
Brockhaus (1982) Reviews 4 studies concluding that All samples small and limited to one
entrepreneurs tend to be better geographical area or industry.
educated than the general population,
but less so than managers.
Cooper & National survey of 1805 small
Dunkelberg (1984) business owners shows that a larger
proportion of business starters or
purchasers (approximately 64%) have
less than a college degree compared
to those who inherit or are brought
in to run the business (57%).
Gasse (1982) Reports 4 studies where entrepreneurs Education level varies with
are better educated than general public. industry (e.g., high tech).

Jacobowitz & Results of interviews with 430 Sample of Pennsylvania and New Jersey
Vidler (1982) entrepreneurs shows that they do not entrepreneurs; 11%female.
prosper in schools. 30% were high school
dropouts. Only 11%graduated from a
4-year college.

Male vs. Female Entrepreneurs

Humphreys & 54.8% of the female entrepreneurs Oklahoma sample of 86 female entrepreneurs
McClung (1981) were college graduates. Surpasses from all areas of the state.
rate for males and females in general, and
for male managers and administrators,
Charboneau (1981) Quotes 1977 Census Bureau study Also quotes SBA study with similar
showing that the average female finding.
entrepreneur is a college graduate.
DeCarlo & Female entrepreneurs have more 122 female entrepreneurs drawn at
Lyons (1979) education than the average adult random in mid-Atlantic states.
female. Non-minority female entrepreneurs
have more education than
minority female entrepreneurs.
Hisrich & 68% of nationwide survey of 468
Brush (1983) female entrepreneurs were at least
college graduates.
Mescon & Two-thirds had attended college; Sample of 108 female real estate
Stevens (1982) 15% had pursued graduate degrees. brokerage owners in Arizona.
Sexton & Kent Female entrepreneurs were slightly Interviewed 93 women (48 female
(1981) less educated than female executives entrepreneurs) from Texas.
(44% and 51% college graduates,
respectively). Younger female
entrepreneurs were better educated
than female executives of companies.

397
entrepreneurs under stress had mixed results-
some shifted toward greater internality, some
toward greater externality. Brockhaus (1980) and
Brockhaus and Nord's (1979) study of 31 entrepre-
neurs in St. Louis indicated that: (a) the more
successful were more internal and (b) that the
entrepreneurs were more internal than the gen-
eral populace, but not more so than a compari-
son group of male managers. Although provid-
ing no data, Jacobowitz and Vidler (1982) indi-
cated that their 430 entrepreneurs were internals.
Brockhaus (1982) observed that an internal
locus of control should be typical of high nAch
individuals, citing three studies where such a
correlation was found. Three earlier studies
where internality was demonstrated in entrepre-
neurs and prospective entrepreneurs (and one
study where there was no relationship between
internality and entrepreneurial activity) were also
cited. Overall, it appears that internal beliefs dif-
ferentiate entrepreneurs from the larger popula-
tion but not from other types of managers.
Only two studies of internality in female entre-
preneurs have been undertaken-Waddell's
(1983) comparison of 47 female entrepreneurs
with comparison groups of female managers and
secretaries and a study of 106 Arizona real estate
brokers by Mescon and Stevens (1982).The female
entrepreneurs were significantly more internal
than the secretaries or the general population
but, again, not more so than the managers. It
appears that the typical female entrepreneur
may be more internal than her male counterpart.
Risk-Taking. Risk-taking, whether financial,
social, or psychic, should be a distinguishing
characteristic of entrepreneurship. Early writers
such as McClelland posited that entrepreneurs
are high in nAch and therefore prefer moderate
levels of risk. Brockhaus (1982) reviewed early
research showing that entrepreneurs do, indeed,
prefer moderate risk-but so does the average
person.
Much of the research has employed Kogan
and Wallach's (1964) Choice Dilemmas Question-
naire (CDQ) as a measure of risk-taking propen-
398
sity. Brockhaus (1982) concluded that the CDQ
has failed to identify any uniquely entrepreneur-
ial trait; a conclusion subsequently verified in
studies comparing male entrepreneurs and man-
agers (Brockhaus & Nord, 1979) and students
taking courses in entrepreneurship and those not
taking the courses (Sexton & Bowman, 1983; 1984).
Other measures of risk-taking did differentiate
business alumni more likely to start a business
from those less likely (Hull, Bosely, & Udell, 1980)
and "budding entrepreneurs" from other under-
graduates (Sexton & Bowman, 1984). In a com-
parison of female entrepreneurs with female
executives, Sexton and Kent (1981) reported that
both groups described themselves as moderate
or calculated risk-takers. Clearly, little can be
concluded about the risk-taking propensities as
a personality trait of entrepreneurs of either sex.
Gender Identity. Using the Bem Sex Role In-
ventory (BSRI), Waddell (1983) reported that fe-
male entrepreneurs scored higher on 'mascu-
linity" than secretaries (but not higher than
female managers). Powell and Butterfield (1981)
also reported that for a sample of 1,400 male and
female students, the BSRI masculinity scale was
twice as important as sex in explaining aspira-
tions for a career in management. However, the
BSRI has been criticized on both methodological
and conceptual grounds (Taylor & Hall, 1982).
Despite problems of the BSRI, there are occa-
sional reports of female entrepreneurs scoring
high on instrumental traits normally associated
with the masculine sex-role stereotype such as
autonomy, aggression, independence, and lead-
ership (DeCarlo & Lyons, 1979). Similarly, female
entrepreneurs may place relatively low empha-
sis on such traditionally feminine concerns as
valuing family over occupation (Sexton & Kent,
1981), wanting support from others (DeCarlo &
Lyons, 1979; Humphreys & McClung, 1981), and
benevolence and conformity (DeCarlo & Lyons,
1979). Sketchy as the empirical evidence may
be, these traits seem consistent with the tendency
for female entrepreneurs to score high on inter-
nal beliefs.
Childhood Family Environment
Specific topics that need to be explored under
this general heading include: parents' occupa-
tions, parents' socio-economic status (SES), birth
order, and relationship with parents. Table 2 indi-
cates that there is strong evidence that entrepre-
neurs tend to have self-employed fathers. Female
entrepreneurs are almost as likely to report self-
employed or entrepreneurial fathers, and may
have more than their share of entrepreneurial
mothers, although the results here are much less
consistent.
Hennig and Jardim (1977) noted that female
executives tend to be first-born or only children,
a sibling position which is likely to result in the
child receiving special attention and opportuni-
ties for development of self-confidence. Hisrich
and Brush (1983) found that 50 percent of their
national sample of 468 female entrepreneurs
were first-born. Watkins and Watkins (1983)found
Table 2
Occupations of Entrepreneurs' Parents
Studies of entrepreneurs
in general or male
entrepreneurs, only
Brockhaus (1982) cited 4 studies suggesting
entrepreneurs tend to have entrepreneurial fathers.
Brockhaus and Nord (1979) found that 31 St. Louis
male entrepreneurs were no more likely than male
managers to have entrepreneurial fathers.
Cooper and Dunkelberg (1984) reported 47.5% of 1,394
entrepreneurs had parents who owned a business.
Jacobowitz and Vidler (1982) found that
72% of mid-Atlantic state entrepreneurs had parents
or close relatives who were self-employed.
Shapero and Sokol (1982) reported that 50
to 58% of company founders in U. S. had self-
employed fathers (at a time when self-employed
were only 12% of the workforce). Cited data on the
same pattern in 9 other cultures.
399
that 60 percent of their 45 British female entrepre-
neurs were first-borns (but the pattern did not
hold in two-child families). For Sexton and Kent's
(1981) female entrepreneurs in Texas, 45 percent
were first-born (52 percent were middle or last
children); figures very similar to those for the 45
female executives in their sample (that is, 44 per-
cent and 53 percent). The first-born effect has
been noted in samples of women opting for non-
traditional careers other than entrepreneurship
(see reviews by Auster & Auster, 1981; Chusmir,
1983), suggesting, perhaps, the need for further
data to assess the relationship so weakly demon-
strated in the studies reviewed here.
"The family, particularly the father or mother,
plays the most powerful role in establishing the
desirability and credibility of entrepreneurial
action for the individual" (Shapero & Sokol, 1982,
p. 83). Given the recognized salience of parents
in shaping entrepreneurial motivations, it is sur-
prising that no studies were found of the quality
Studies of female
entrepreneurs
Hisrich and Brush (1983) reported a nationwide sample of
468 female entrepreneurs. 36%had entrepreneurial fathers;
11%had entrepreneurial mothers.
Mescon and Stevens (1982) found 53% of 108 Arizona real
estate brokers had fathers who were entrepreneurs. No
mothers were entrepreneurs.
Sexton and Kent (1981) - 40% of 48 Texas female
entrepreneurs had entrepreneurial fathers, 13%entrepre-
neurial mothers (vs. 13%and 11%for 45 female executives).
Waddell (1983) found 63.8% of 47 female entrepreneurs
reported entrepreneurial fathers and 31.9% entrepreneurial
mothers (vs. 42.5% and 8.5% for female managers and
36.2% and 8.5% for secretaries).
Watkins and Watkins (1983) - 37% of 58 British female
entrepreneurs had self-employed fathers (self-employment
in male U.K. labor force is 9%). 16%of mothers were
whole or part owners of businesses (female self-
employment is 4%).
of the future entrepreneur's relationships with
his or her parents. Were the parents particularly
supportive? Did they encourage independence,
achievement, and responsibility? Research on
family backgrounds of women in nontraditional
occupations supports a hypothesis that both par-
ents are likely to be highly supportive of their
daughter's career interests (Auster & Auster,
1981). Hisrich and Brush (1983) found that 67 per-
cent of their 468 female entrepreneurs grew up
in middle- to upper-class environments (families
which are likely to be relatively child-centered).
Work History
Shapero and Sokol (1982) proposed a frame-
work for understanding how previous work his-
tory may interact with other experiences in a
person's life to encourage an eventual decision
to launch an entrepreneurial venture. They
emphasized "negative displacements" such as
dissatisfaction with various aspects of one's job
and being a "displaced person" (recently fired,
emigrated, etc.) as well as various aspects of
one's job and experience in working in an "in-
cubator organization" (small corporate divisions
or small firms). Factors reviewed here to be con-
sidered in the present review are: (a) extent of
prior work (especially in the same business field),
(b) satisfaction with prior job, (c) displacement,
and (d) the role of incubator organizations.
For entrepreneurs in general as well as for
female entrepreneurs, Table 3 indicates that sub-
stantial additional research is needed before con-
clusions can be reached regarding patterns of
prior work experience. Most of the findings to
date are based upon responses of first-time
entrepreneurs.
Brockhaus (1980) and Shapero and Sokol (1982)
reviewed several studies that indicated that
entrepreneurs were dissatisfied in their most
recent previous job. Brockhaus and Nord (1979)
found that dissatisfaction with promotion oppor-
tunity particularly differentiates male entrepre-
neurs from male managers. Hisrich and Brush
(1983) found that 42 percent of their 463 female
entrepreneurs reported frustration in their previ-
400
ous job as a major reason for becoming involved
in an entrepreneurial venture (an additional 3
percent each mentioned "boredom" and "time
to do something new").
Shapero and Sokol (1982) found evidence that
"negative displacement" (being fired, demoted,
transferred to an undesirable location; changes
in the organization or ownership with negative
career implications, etc.) is a major factor encour-
aging entrepreneurship in several cultures. Of
1,394 persons who started or purchased a busi-
ness, Cooper and Dunkelberg reported 21.6 per-
cent left prior employers due to negative dis-
placement. Hisrich and Brush (1983) reported the
following displacement reasons given by their
468 female entrepreneurs: terminated (7 per-
cent), widowed (4 percent), moved (4 percent),
children left home (3 percent)-data which draw
attention to th --need to consider changes in fam-
ily as well as in the work situation as spurs to
entrepreneurship for women.
"Incubator" organizations are small firms or
divisions, where, because the top manager and
the potential entrepreneur are likely to have fre-
quent close contact, the top manager becomes a
credible role model for the entrepreneur (Cooper,
1971; Cooper & Dunkelberg, 1984; Shapero &
Sokol, 1982). Their small size makes incubators
good opportunities to learn technologies and
markets. Studies of entrepreneurship in techni-
cal industries suggest that most entrepreneurs
have previously worked in the industry (Brock-
haus, 1982). Cooper and Dunkelberg reported
that a majority of their entrepreneurs had pre-
viously worked in firms of less than 100 em-
ployees where products, services, or customers
were the same or similar. While the English fe-
male entrepreneurs (Watkins & Watkins, 1983)
were much less likely to have worked previously
in the same fields, their American counterparts
(Hisrich & Brush, 1983) appear more fortunate.
From the available data, it appears that the more
technical the industry, the more critical incubator
experiences are likely to be in encouraging
women to make entrepreneurial decisions. Given
the almost total absence of women from techni-
Table 3
Entrepreneurs-Extent of Prior Work
Entrepreneurs in general
or male entrepreneurs, only
Brockhaus and Nord (1979)-28 St. Louis
entrepreneurs had an average of 3.11 previous
jobs (vs. 4.10 for managers who had changed jobs
and 2.58 for managers who had been promoted).
Dunk 64.5%
Coo94persand
1,394 telb (1984)found
who started
persons who
that oprior
or purchased a businesss
had had two or more previous jobs. Only 11% had
prior supervisory experience over other managers.
cal industries such as manufacturing or construc-
tion (Hisrich & Brush, 1985), this may be a funda-
mental issue for expanding economic oppor-
tunities for female entrepreneurs.
Adult Development History
There have not been any studies of adult devel-
opment history for female entrepreneurs or entre-
preneurs in general. Given the centrality of adult
development in contemporary career theory
(Sonnenfeld & Kotter, 1982), this presents a seri-
ous problem for development of a theory of
female entrepreneurs' careers. Faver (1982) stud-
ied women's employment patterns and their val-
ues for career, achievement, and family in a
sample of 1, 120 continuing education participants
at a midwestern university. She concludes: "Al-
though the data are cross-sectional, the analysis
suggests life-cycle stage variance in the effects
401
Female entrepreneurs
Hisrich and Brush (1983) found that 78% of 468 female
entrepreneurs were launching their first venture. 67% had
previous experience in their field.
Cuba, Decenzo, and Anish (1983) reported that median
work experience for 58 female entrepreneurs from
tresuhr iisws712yas
DeCarlo and Lyons (1979) noted that 83% of 77 non-minority
female entrepreneurs had no prior entrepreneurial
experience.
Humphreys and McClung (1981) reported that 57.4% of 86
Oklahoma female entrepreneurs had worked for other
employers for 5 years or more.
Watkins and Watkins tl983)-60% of 58 British female
entrepreneurs were opening their first business. 24% had
prior managerial experience and only 40% had prior
experience in the field (50% had neither vs. 5% for a
comparison sample of males).
of career and family values on women's employ-
ment activity" (p. 78).
Part of the blame for an absence of studies of
life stage effects can be attributed to the lack of
life stage theories for women comparable to those
available for men (Gilligan, 1982; Wortley &
Amatea, 1982). There is a substantial controversy
within the literature of women's psychology, par-
ticularly on the question of the relationship among
identity, intimacy, nurturance, and productivity
capabilities as women mature (see Dowling,
1981;Gilligan, 1982; Russell & Fitzgibbons, 1982).
The study of the careers of female entrepreneurs
should substantially contribute to resolving this
issue.
Adult Family/Nonwork History
Data on entrepreneurs' family history are
almost nonexistent except for information on the
female entrepreneurs' marital and family situa-
tion at the time of the survey (rather than, for
example, during the period leading up to the
establishment of the venture). Analogous data
for male entrepreneurs is apparently considered
irrelevant.
Although the Census Bureau has described
the typical female entrepreneur as unmarried,
the Small Business Association finds that 73 per-
cent are married (Charboneau, 1981). Percent-
ages of presently married female entrepreneurs
reported by various studies are: 52 percent (De-
Carlo & Lyons, 1979), 55 percent (Hisrich & Brush,
1983), 53.6 percent (Humphreys & McClung,
1981), 75 percent (Mescon & Stevens, 1982), 60
percent (Sexton & Kent, 1981), and 48 percent
(Watkins & Watkins, 1983) at the time of enter-
prise formation (with no subsequent data on
changes). No information on number of children,
children at home, etc., was found, except that
Mescon and Stevens reported that 70 percent of
their realtors who were or had been married,
had between two and five children.
It appears that 50- to 60 percent of any U.S.
sample of female entrepreneurs are married. Yet,
such data, until available by age cohort and
childcare responsibilities shed relatively little
light on their careers.
One further bit of information, occasionally
reported, is important for understanding female
entrepreneurs' career success: namely the sup-
portiveness of the spouse (or functional equiva-
lent). Watkins and Watkins (1983) reported that
English husbands, rather than being supportive,
are often threatened by and obstructive in the
careers of their wives. Thirty-eight percent of Sex-
ton and Kent's (1981) female entrepreneurs,
however, indicated that their husbands were the
persons who most influenced them to become
entrepreneurs. Hisrich and Brush (1983) noted
that spouses of their female entrepreneurs were
predominantly professional or technical people
who could provide emotional and financial sup-
port.
402
Current Work Situation
The impact of the current work situation needs
to be looked at in terms of the nature and size of
the ventures, the work hours, work values and
aspirations, managerial style, and obstacles
encountered.
It is well documented that businesses of female
entrepreneurs tend to be concentrated in certain
traditionally female industries such as retail
stores, personal services, and educational ser-
vices (U.S. Small Business Administration, 1984),
although some recent "modest" progress has
been made in women entering nontraditional
fields such as manufacturing, finance, and con-
struction. The SBA reports that the average net
income for female-operated nonfarm businesses
in 1980 was $2,200 (vs. $7,139 for male-operated
firms). Even in traditionally female industries,
male-operated sole proprietorships out-earned
those of their female counterparts; male income
was nine times that of women in retailing and
3.2 times greater in personal services. The SBA
believes that the lack of educational and work
experience in technical and business fields tradi-
tionally dominated by males limits the opportuni-
ties for female entrepreneurs in these fields.
Hisrich and Brush (1983) also observed that most
female entrepreneurs avoid innovation in prod-
ucts or services-preferring to compete in exist-
ing markets.
Hisrich and Brush found (as might be expected)
that the number of employees in the businesses
of female entrepreneurs was small; 30 percent
employed no full-time employees, and 55 per-
cent had one to nine full-time employees. De-
Carlo and Lyons' (1979) female entrepreneurs
employed an average of four persons. Hum-
phreys and McClung (1981) quote census data
showing that 70.4 percent of the firms of female
entrepreneurs employed four or less. Char-
boneau (1981) concludes: "Most women start
small and stay small" (p. 21).
Since female entrepreneurs tend to concen-
trate their businesses in labor-intensive indus-
tries (Humphreys & McClung, 1981), it seems
likely that they work long hours. What little data
is available confirms this suspicion. Forty per-
cent of Mescon and Stevens's (1982) real estate
brokers worked more than 50 hours per week
and 40 percent also reported taking less than
two weeks vacation per year. In their compari-
son of Texas female entrepreneurs and female
executives, Sexton and Kent (1981) indicated 71
percent of the female entrepreneurs (but only 49
percent of the executives) worked more than 50
hours per week. DeCarlo and Lyons (1979) found
an average of 47-49 hours per week.
Studies (DeCarlo & Lyons, 1979; Schwartz,
1976) of the work values of female entrepreneurs
found that female entrepreneurs tended to score
high on "masculine" or instrumental values
(achievement, recognition, independence,
leadership) and low on "feminine" expressive-
nurturant values (support, conformity, bene-
volence). While data from two small samples are
far from conclusive, it should be noted that these
values parallel those reported for entrepreneurs
in general (Jacobowitz & Vidler, 1982; Sexton &
Bowman, 1984) and for women in male-domi-
nated occupations (Chusmir, 1983; Lemkau,
1979).
If female entrepreneurs have strong values for
achievement and recognition, one would expect
that they would exhibit high aspirations for the
growth of their businesses. Humphreys and
McClung (1981) report that only 49 percent of the
female entrepreneurs rated "growth of business"
as an "extremely important" component of their
job satisfaction. "Large profits" was rated as
extremely important by only 23 percent. "Feeling
of personal achievement," "being my own boss,"
and "feeling of responsibility," were all rated as
being more important than growth, leading Hum-
phreys and McClung to conclude that female
entrepreneurs are similar to their male counter-
parts in placing relatively low emphasis on exter-
nal indicators of business success. Future re-
search should address the question of whether
lack of opportunity, low aspirations, or personal
403
choice are a factor in the relatively small size of
the average female entrepreneur's business.
A number of authors (for example, Bardwick,
1979; Marshall, 1984) have argued that women
managers employ a different (and perhaps more
effective) management and leadership style; one
that emphasizes behavior consistent with femi-
nine values of cooperation, support, and con-
cern. Jago and Vroom (1982) found experimental
support in that females selected more participa-
tive leadership strategies than males. Moreover,
autocratic females tended to be evaluated nega-
tively by subordinates. Cuba, Decenzo, and
Anish (1983) found that while successful female
entrepreneurs delegate more, most still had diffi-
culty relinquishing enough control to delegate
effectively. Two indicators of participation (47 per-
cent used little or no participation, 66 percent
said they gave "little-to-medium advance notice
of impending changes to employees") were not
related to financial success for the 58 female
entrepreneurs. Mescon and Stevens (1982) found
for their female real estate brokers: "Contrary to
popular pronouncements in the literature, the
majority of the entrepreneurs in this sample not
only plan, but plan well in advance, have for-
mal organizational structures, and solicit the
input of others in the planning process" (p. 13).
Substantial additional research is needed to clar-
ify this issue.
As previously noted, women tend not to enter
certain fields due, in part, to a lack of business
or technical skills. Asked to appraise their own
skills, Hisrich and Brush's (1983) female entrepre-
neurs felt least confident of their abilities in the
finance area (securing capital, budgeting, plan-
ning, etc.). Although their sample included only
20 female entrepreneurs (in retailing and per-
sonal services), Pelligrino and Reece (1982) also
found that female entrepreneurs encountered
special problems in the finance area (also in
managing, advertising, and in planning, in
general). While Mescon and Stevens's (1982) bro-
kers did plan effectively, Humphreys and Mc-
Clung (1981) noted that bankers feel that female
entrepreneurs are ineffective in obtaining credit
because of a lack of financial and accounting
expertise, and a lack of self-confidence. Female
entrepreneurs, in turn, accuse the male-domi-
nated banking industry of discrimination. They
rate getting credit as their second most impor-
tant obstacle (less important than lack of previ-
ous business experience) but ahead of discrimi-
nation and difficulty in obtaining expert advice.
The immensely successful AWED program for
female entrepreneurs focuses its efforts on plan-
ning and financial skills, as well as building
women's confidence and assertiveness (Carter,
1980/1981; Charboneau, 1981). A more definitive
assessment of the obstacles is needed in order to
fully understand the career development of fe-
male entrepreneurs.
The Individual's Current Perspective
and Family/Nonwork Situation
Sexton and Kent (1981)reported that their Texas
female entrepreneurs rated their business as a
higher priority in life than their family. Data on
other life priorities, self-esteem, and life goals,
are also needed in order to fully understand this
dimension.
The 1977 Census Bureau report on women-
owned businesses, supplemented by data from
a mail sample survey, indicated that the aver-
age female entrepreneur was 52 years old; 27
percent were married; 18.8 percent had never
been married; and 54.2 percent were widowed
or divorced (Charboneau, 1981; Humphreys &
McClung, 1981). Given the lack of information
on female entrepreneurs' adult development his-
tory and the meager statistics on age and mari-
tal status, this area needs further research before
any meaningful conclusions can be drawn.
Conclusions and Suggestions
For Future Research
What emerges from these findings about the
career of the female entrepreneur is a very
uneven picture, due in part to a lack of research
on female entrepreneurs in general. The few
studies that exist tended to employ very small
404
samples [Hisrich and Brush (1983, 1985) are
one notable exception] and seldom attempt to be
representative, geographically or by industry.
In a few areas, the findings seem to be suf-
ficiently confirmed in several studies to permit
tentative generalizations. For example, it seems
likely that female entrepreneurs are (a) relatively
well-educated in general, but perhaps not in
management skills; (b) high in internal locus of
control; (c) more masculine or instrumental than
other women in their values; (d) likely to have
had entrepreneurial fathers; (e) relatively likely
to have been first-born or only children; (f)unlikely
to start a business in traditionally male-domi-
nated industries; (g) more likely than not to be
married; (h) seldom owners of a large business;
and (i) experiencing a need for additional mana-
gerial training.
The patchwork of findings produced contrib-
utes little to the development of a theory of female
entrepreneurs' careers. Entire areas have been
overlooked in the design of the research, most
notably life and career stages and nonwork adult
history, data central to understanding how the
individual arrived at her current career situation
and how she is likely to develop in the future.
It is easy to criticize the overreliance on cross-
sectional studies in existing research; longitudi-
nal studies following the careers of entrepreneurs
over time obviously would be advantageous in
developing a life cycle conception of entrepre-
neurial careers. Longitudinal studies require
financial and career commitments in research
that should not be undertaken lightly, however.
A valuable preliminary step would appear to
parallel the intensive life history approach ap-
plied by Daniel Levinson and his co-workers
(Levinson, 1978). A combination of psychometric
tests and intensive interviewing might constitute
a first or exploratory stage in isolating a finite set
of patterns of development in female entrepre-
neurial careers. Spouses and others close to the
female entrepreneur could be interviewed as
well, for additional insights on the entrepreneur's
career. Comparisons are needed between fe-
male entrepreneurs in traditional female indus-
 tries and female entrepreneurs who have bro-
ken into more traditionally male enclaves such
as construction, manufacturing, or finance.
Table 4 catalogs a number of important issues
which need to be addressed in future research.
Each area is accompanied by a set of specific
research questions derived from the discussion
presented above. For example, in the area of
family/nonwork history, data on the status of a
woman's family situation at the time of becom-
ing an entrepreneur may well point to a form of
negative displacement heretofore unique to
women (displacement in the home due to the
empty-nest syndrome or to loss of husbands
through divorce or widowhood). Women dis-
placed into entrepreneurship may constitute a
special group even more likely to enter tradi-
tional female industries, and; because of their
lack of work experience, also be particularly
likely to need business and management train-
ing.
The products of the research approach sug-
gested here could include: (a) A richer, more
complete conceptual picture of the entrepreneur's

Table 4
Questions for Future Research on Female Entrepreneurs

Category Research questions

Personality variables
Childhood family environment
Prior work history
Family/nonwork situation
Nature and size of business
Work hours
Work values
Management
Obstacles and barriers
Current perspective and
family nonwork situation
Further exploration of traits such as need for achievement, locus of control, risk taking,
and gender identity, using instruments with better track records than the BSRI, CDQ, and
EPPS.
Clarification of birth-order issues. Assessment of influence of parents' (especially mothers')
occupations as role models. To what extent are female entrepreneurs encouraged by highly
supportive parents?
Are female entrepreneurs likely to persist in entrepreneurship beyond a first attempt? To
what extent is female entrepreneurship stimulated by job dissatisfaction, negative displace-
ment (occupational or family), incubator organizations? What is the extent and type of prior
work experience?
What is the female entrepreneur's family situation at the time she became an entrepreneur
and subsequently? Is spouse/family supportiveness crucial? Are female entrepreneurs more
likely to become divorced or separated due to competing demands of their business inter-
fering with family life?
Why do female entrepreneurs concentrate in female ghetto industries? Is small size a re-
flection of this concentration or by preference?
What is the typical work week of a female entreprenuer? At time business was started?
After the business is firmly established?
Do female entrepreneurs differ from male entrepreneurs? If so, does this largely explain the
relatively small size of female businesses?
What managerial styles and techniques are employed by and found effective for female
entrepreneurs? Does prior education and experience constitute a problem in being effective?
More conclusive evidence is needed on both internal barriers (self-esteem, lack of training)
and external obstacles (institutional barriers, prejudice).
In addition to firmer data on marital status and age, current attitudes, satisfaction, and out-
look need to be evaluated, particularly from the perspective of the impact of earlier life and
work history.

405
career, and the probable factors determining her
career choices; and, (b) a set of instruments and
measurement techniques pretested for reliability
References
Auster, C. J., & Auster, D. (1981) Factors influencing women's
choice of nontraditional careers: The role of family, peers,
and counselors. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 29, 253-
263.
Bardwick, J. M. (1979) In transition: How feminism, sexual
liberation, and the search for self-fulfillment have altered
our lives. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Bowen, D. D. (1971) An evaluation of motivational similarity
in work groups. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Yale
University, New Haven, CT.
Brockhaus, R. H. (1980)Psychological and environmental fac-
tors which distinguish the successful from the unsuccess-
ful entrepreneur. Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting
of the Academy of Management, 368-372.
Brockhaus, R. H. (1982) The psychology of the entrepreneur.
In C. A. Kent, D. L. Sexton, & K. H. Vesper (Eds.), Ency-
clopedia of entrepreneurship (pp. 39-71). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Brockhaus, R. H., & Nord, W. R. (1979) An exploration of fac-
tors affecting the entrepreneurial decisions: Personal char-
acteristics vs. environmental conditions. Proceedings of
the 39th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management,
364-368.
Carter, R. N. (1980/1981, Winter) New women entrepreneurs
mean business. Review of Business, 9-10.
Charboneau, F. J. (1981, June) The woman entrepreneur.
American Demographics, 21-23.
Chusmir, L. H. (1983, September) Characteristics and predic-
tive dimensions of women who make nontraditional voca-
tional choices. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 62(1),
43-47.
Cooper, A. C. (1971, February) Spin-offs and technical
entrepreneurship. IEEETransactions of Engineering Man-
agement, EM-18 (1), 2-7.
Cooper, A. C., & Dunkelberg, William C. (1984) Entrepre-
neurship and paths to business ownership (Paper No. 846),
West Lafayette, IN: Krannert Graduate School of Manage-
ment, Purdue University.
Cuba, R., Decenzo, D., & Anish, A. (1983) Management prac-
tices of successful female business owners. American Jour-
nal of Small Business, 8 (22), 40-46.
DeCarlo, J. F., & Lyons, P. R. (1979) A comparison of selected
personal characteristics of minority and non-minority
406
and validity for use in subsequent research of
either longitudinal or large-scale cross-sectional
design.
female entrepreneurs. Proceedings of 39th Annual Meet-
ing of the Academy of Management, 369-373.
Dowling, C. (1981) The Cinderella complex: Women's hid-
den fear of independence. New York: Pocket Books.
Faver, C. A. (1982) Achievement orientation, attainment
values, and women's employment. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 20, 67-80.
Fullerton, H. N. (1980, December) The 1995 workforce: A first
look. Monthly Labor Review, 11-21.
Gasse, Y. (1982) Elaborations on the psychology of the
entrepreneur. In C.A. Kent, D.L. Sexton & K.H. Vesper
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of entrepreneurship (pp. 57-71).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Gilligan, C. (1982) In a different voice: Psychological theory
and women's development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni-
versity Press.
Hennig, M., & Jardim, A. (1977) The managerial woman. Gar-
den City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday.
Hisrich, R. D., & Brush, C. (1983) The woman entrepreneur:
Implications of family, educational, and occupational ex-
perience. In J. A. Hornaday, J. A. Timmons, & K. H. Vesper
(Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship research (pp. 255-
270). Wellesley, MA: Babson College, Center for Entre-
preneurial Studies.
Hisrich, R. D., & Brush, C. G., (1985) The woman entrepre-
neur: Characteristics and prescriptions for success. Lex-
ington, MA: Lexington Books.
Hornaday, J. A. (1982) Research about living entrepreneurs.
In C. A. Kent, D. L. Sexton, & K. H. Vesper (Eds.), Ency-
clopedia of entrepreneurship, (pp. 20-38). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
Hornaday, J. A., & Aboud, J. (1971) Characteristics of success-
ful enterpreneurs. Personnel Psychology, 24, 141-153.
Hull, D. L., Bosley, J. T., & Udell, G. G. (1980, January) Renew-
ing the hunt for the heffalump: Identifying potential entre-
preneurs by personality characteristics. Journal of Small
Business, 18(1), 1-18.
Humphreys, M. A., & McClung, J. (1981) Women entrepre-
neurs in Oklahoma. Review of Regional Economics and
Business, 6(2), 13-21.
Jacobowitz, A., & Vidler, D.C. (1982) Characteristics of
entrepreneurs: Implications for vocational guidance.
Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 30, 252-257.
Jago, A. G., & Vroom, V. H. (1982) Sex differences in the inci-
dence and evaluation of participative leader behavior.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 776-783.
Jelinek, M. (1977, June) Career management and women.
Paper presented at the 27th Annual Conference of the
International Communication Association, Berlin.
Jennings, D. E., & Zeithaml, C. P. (1983) Locus of control: A
review and directions for entrepreneurial research. Pro-
ceedings of 43rd Annual Meeting of The Academy of Man-
agement, 417-421.
Kogan, N., & Wallach, M. A. (1964) Risk taking. New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Lemkau, J. P. (1979) Personality and background characteris-
tics of women in male-dominated occupations: A review.
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 4, 221-240.
Levinson, D. (1978) The seasons of a man's life. New York:
Alfred A. Knopf.
Marshall, J. (1984) Women managers: Travellers in a male
world. Chichester: John Wiley.
McClelland, D. (1961) The achieving society. Princeton: D.
Van Nostrand.
Mehrabian, A., & Bank, L. (1978) A questionnaire measure
of individual differences in achieving tendency. Educa-
tional and Psychological Measurement, 38, 445-451.
Mescon, T., & Stevens, G. E. (1982) Women as entrepreneurs:
A preliminary study of female realtors in Arizona. Arizona
Business, 29(7), 9-13.
Pellegrino, E. T., & Reece, B. L. (1982) Perceived formative
and operational problems encountered by female entre-
preneurs in retail and service firms. Journal of Small Busi-
ness Management, 20(2), 15-24.
Powell, G. N., & Butterfield, D. A. (1981) A note on sex-role
identity effects on managerial aspirations. Journal of Occu-
pational Psychology, 54, 299-301.
Rotter, J. B. (1966) Generalized expectancies for internal ver-
sus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Mono-
graphs: General and Applied, 80, Whole No. 609.
Russell, A., & Fitzgibbons, P. (1982) Career and conflict. A
woman's guide to making life choices. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Donald D. Bowen is Professor of Management in the College
of Business Administration, University of Tulsa.
Robert D. Hisrich is Bovaird Professor of Private Enterprise
and Entrepreneurial Studies and Professor of Marketing in
the College of Business Administration, University of Tulsa.
407
Schwartz, E. B. (1976, Winter) Entrepreneurship: A new
female frontier. Journal of Contemporary Business, 47-76.
Sexton, D. L., & Bowman, N. (1983) Determining entrepre-
neurial potential of students. Proceedings of the 43rd
Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, 408-412.
Sexton, D. L., & Bowman, N. (1984,August) The effects of
preexisting psychological characteristics on new venture
initiations. Paper presented at the meeting of the Academy
of Management, Boston, MA.
Sexton, D. L., & Kent, C. A. (1981) Female executives and
entrepreneurs: A preliminary comparison. In K. Vesper
(Ed.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship research (pp. 40-55).
Wellesley, MA: Babson University Press.
Shapero, A., & Sokol, L. (1982) The social dimensions of en-
trepreneurship. In C. A. Kent, D. L. Sexton, & K. H. Vesper
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of entrepreneurship, (pp. 72-90).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Shaw, L. B. (1979) Changes in the work attachment of mar-
ried women, 1966-1976. Columbus, OH: Center for
Human Resource Research, College of Administrative
Science, Ohio State University.
Sonnenfeld, J., & Kotter, J.P. (1982) The maturation of career
theory. Human Relations, 35, 19-46.
Taylor, M. C., & Hall, J. A. (1982) Psycholocical androgyny:
Theories, methods, and conclusions. Psychological Bulle-
tin, 92, 347-366.
U.S. Small Business Administration (1984) The state of small
business: A report of the president. Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 347-361.
Waddell, F. T. (1983) Factors affecting choice, satisfaction,
and success in the female self-employed. Journal of Voca-
tional Behavior, 23, 294-304.
Watkins, J. M., & Watkins, D. S. (1983) The female entrepre-
neur: Her background and determinants of business
choice some Britishdata. In J. A. Hornaday, J. A. Timmons,
& K. H. Vesper (Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship
research (pp. 271-288). Wellesley, MA: Babson College,
Center for Entrepreneurial Studies.
Wortley, D. B., & Amatea, E. S. (1982) Mapping adult life
changes: A conceptual framework for organizing adult
development theory. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 60,
476-482.