[Jump to content]

• Home
• Text View
• Contact Us
• Site Map
• Support
• Register
• Administrators
Login
Top of Form
6pa751su5er5ve

LoginUsername:

Password:
Login

login

- Athens/Institutional login
- Forgot password?
Bottom of Form
Welcome:
UNIVERSITY OF BOTSWANA

LogoutAccount info
Search for:
Top of Form
6pa751su5er5ve

Search
Go

in:
 Bottom of Form

• Advanced search
• Marked lists
Browse:
• Books & Journals
• Bibliographic Databases
Resources:
• Product Information
• Licensing Solutions
• For Authors
• For Librarians
• Research Zone
• Learning Zone
• Teaching Zone
• Support Resources
• About Emerald

Home > Women In Management Review > Volume 19 issue 1 > Applying theories of
entrepreneurship to a...
Top of Form
6pa751su5er5ve jnl all and 0964-9425 isn

Journal
search Search in this title:
Go

Bottom of Form
Women In Management Review
ISSN: 0964-9425
Currently published as: Gender in Management: An International Journal
Online from: 1985

Content: Latest Issue | Latest Issue RSS | Previous Issues

Options: To add Favourites and Table of Contents Alerts please take a Emerald profile

Top of Form

6pa751su5er5ve 1412287 %3Fissn%3D096 Go

Add to marked list:

Bottom of Form

DOI: 10.1108/09649420410518403 (Permanent URL)

Applying theories of entrepreneurship to a comparative

analysis of white and minority women business owners

The Authors
Andrea E. Smith-Hunter, Assistant Professor at Siena College, Loudonville, New York, USA.
Robert L. Boyd, Assistant Professor of Sociology at Mississippi State University, Mississippi
State, USA.
Acknowledgements
Received: June 2003 Revised: September 2003 Accepted: September 2003
Abstract
Scholarly interest in women’s business ownership has increased, but few studies offer
theoretically-based explanations for the racial differences observed among women entrepreneurs.
This paper seeks to remedy this oversight by applying several theories of entrepreneurship to a
comparative study of white and minority women. An analysis of survey data from upstate New
York shows that these theories can explain why racial differences in women’s business
ownership exist. In particular, the theories shed light on these differences by calling attention to a
gap between the high aspirations of minority women for business ownership and the paucity of
formal entrepreneurial resources that are available to these women (e.g. financial capital and
human capital).
Article Type:
Research paper
Keyword(s):
Women executives; Race discrimination; Entrepreneurialism; Personal social services; Gender;
Surveys.
Journal:
Women in Management Review
Volume:
19
Number:
1
Year:
2004
pp:
18-28
Copyright ©
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN:
0964-9425
Introduction
The literature on business ownership is multidisciplinary and thus is characterized by diverse
theoretical perspectives and empirical findings (e.g. Catalyst Guide, 1998; Christopher, 1998;
DeLollis, 1997; Goldenberg and Kline, 1999; Renzulli et al., 2000). This diversity is particularly
evident in the recent examinations of entrepreneurship among women (e.g. Radhakishan, 2001;
Lerner and Almor, 2002; Moore, 2000; Groot, 2001; Haynes and Helms, 2000; Inman, 1999;
Kessler, 2001) and racial minorities (e.g. Weiler and Bernasek, 2001; Cummings, 1999;
Dhaliwal, 1999; Fairlie, 1999; Goo, 2001; Hovey, 2001; Lee, 2002). These studies have
substantially added to knowledge about business enterprise among those segments of the
population that, historically, have been excluded from the entrepreneurial sector. However, the
pioneering efforts of these investigations have unintentionally created distinct lines of
scholarship that, all too often, remain separated, resulting in an unfortunate compartmentalization
of the literature on business ownership among disadvantaged members of society into specialized
disciplines (e.g. economics or sociology) and methodological approaches (e.g. case studies or
analyses of large data sets).
This paper takes a modest yet important step to remedy this problem by bringing together the
emerging lines of research on business ownership among women and minorities. Specifically,
the paper will apply several theories of entrepreneurship – namely, theories that emphasize the
respective influences of culture, disadvantage, and protected markets on entrepreneurial behavior
– to a comparative analysis of white and minority women who own small businesses. The paper
will contribute to the entrepreneurship literature by demonstrating that an understanding of racial
differences in women’s business ownership is enhanced by a theoretically-based approach to the
study of these differences.
Literature
The last three decades have seen a remarkable increase in the number of studies of women
entrepreneurs (Loscocco and Robinson, 1991; Moore and Buttner, 1997). Some of these studies
compare men and women business owners (Evans and Leighton, 1989; Wharton, 1989), focusing
on such topics as the different industrial and occupational concentrations of male and female
entrepreneurs. These studies show that many women entrepreneurs have entered the non-
traditional areas of manufacturing, construction, and finance. Yet, they also reveal that most
women business owners remain in traditional areas; notably, personal services (Biggart, 1989;
Sullivan and McCracken, 1988; Devine, 1994; Oliver, 1996; Young, 1996), which are often
extensions of women’s roles in the home (Reskin and Roos, 1990; Moore and Buttner, 1997;
Wharton, 1989). These studies, furthermore, suggest that women entrepreneurs have shied away
from non-traditional areas because of the higher risks of such pursuits (Scott, 1983) as well as
their greater demands for capital (Bates, 1989, 1991, 1995) and technical expertise (Tang, 1995;
Robinson and Mcllwee, 1991).
Other studies of women’s entrepreneurship focus exclusively on women, analyzing, among other
things, the reasons why women leave the mainstream labor market to pursue business ownership
(Moore and Buttner, 1997; Tang, 1995; Shabbir and Di Gregorio, 1996). Most of these are
studies of white women; relatively few directly compare white and minority women, and those
that do are frequently constrained by data limitations. Case in point: analyses of nationally
representative samples of census data do yield significant findings; for example, they
demonstrate that self-employed white women have higher earnings than do their minority
counterparts (Sullivan and McCracken, 1988). But these analyses cannot investigate racial
differences in several important areas of entrepreneurship research – for instance, reasons for
becoming an entrepreneur, sources of financing, and the unpaid labor assistance of friends –
because the relevant information is not included in census data. Consequently, there are
noticeable blind spots in the scholarly understanding of racial disparities in women’s business
ownership, especially with regard to the possibility that white and minority women have
different motivations for self-employment.
DeCarlo and Lyons (1979) were among the first researchers to comparatively analyze white and
minority women business owners. Examining such characteristics as age, education,
entrepreneurial experiences, and marital status, they found that minority women entrepreneurs
tended to be more disadvantaged than their white peers. The minority women, on the average,
were older, less educated, started their businesses at a later age, and were less likely to be
married. But these women also had a greater number of entrepreneurial experiences prior to
starting their businesses, a finding that implies that they had a high level of persistence in the
face of their relative disadvantages.
More recently, Inman (1999) compared white and minority women who owned service-oriented
businesses, such as hair salons, travel agencies, and law firms. In addition to studying personal
attributes (e.g. age, education, social class, and family background), she addressed two salient
questions:
 1. (1) What motivated women to start businesses?
2. (2) Once women decided to become entrepreneurs, how did they garner resources to
fulfill their business goals?
Inman discovered that minority women business owners were more likely to have been
motivated by their more limited options in the mainstream labor market. Furthermore, she found
that when minority women started their business, they had fewer financial options and greater
difficulty in obtaining the resources needed to pursue their entrepreneurial goals than did their
white counterparts.
In short, the literature on women’s business ownership suggests that, in terms of both
entrepreneurial options (e.g. occupational choices) and entrepreneurial resources (e.g. sources of
capital), women are more disadvantaged than men, and minority women are more disadvantaged
than white women. These findings are, of course, well known. However, they are rarely
scrutinized within an appropriate theoretical framework, in part because, as was discussed
earlier, theory and research tend to be compartmentalized into separate disciplines and
methodologies. Moreover, relatively few studies have examined racial differences in women’s
business ownership by investigating, for example, possible differences in the entrepreneurial
motivations of white and minority women.
The thesis of this paper is that empirical findings are best understood when viewed in a
theoretical context. Accordingly, our goal is to apply theories of entrepreneurship to a
comparative analysis of white and minority women business owners. Toward that end, the next
section will review several theories of entrepreneurship that are applicable to the study of racial
differences among women business owners. The following section will then describe the method
that will be used to test hypotheses derived from these theories.
Theories
Cultural theory
The cultural theory of entrepreneurship offers one of the oldest accounts of group difference in
business enterprise, having its origins in Max Weber’s classical writings (1930) on the Protestant
ethic and capitalism (Light, 1979; Weber, 1930). Its fundamental claim is straightforward: group
differences in business performance result from group differences in the cultural norms and
values that are required for successful entrepreneurship – for example, a predisposition toward
risk taking, hard work, and delayed gratification. The theory additionally holds that the pursuit of
economic independence – to be “one’s own boss” – and a drive for high achievement are primary
motivations for the pursuit of self-employment in a small business (Light, 1979).
A hypothesis implied by the cultural theory is that minority women, who, based on studies
reviewed above, have been less successful in the small-business world than their white
counterparts have, will exhibit a weaker desire or drive for entrepreneurial accomplishments than
will white women. The former, according to those scholars who emphasize the salience of
cultural traditions of enterprise (e.g. Light, 1972), have been handicapped by cultural orientations
that fail to encourage small-business ownership – for instance, the culture of poverty and low
expectations for achievement. This “cultural deficiency” explanation even suggests that many
minority women adhere to norms and values that are inimical not only to entrepreneurship but to
economic success in general.
Disadvantage theory
Similar to cultural theory, disadvantage theory is rooted in the work of Weber (1930),
specifically, in his proposal that those who are excluded from the mainstream economy because
of discrimination will often turn to business ownership as an alternative to the labor market – in
effect, choosing self-employment over unemployment (Light and Rosenstein, 1995; Berger,
1991). This theory has been used to explain why, in a wide variety of societies, immigrants and
minorities often embrace entrepreneurship as an economic survival strategy and have high rates
of small-business ownership (Cooper and Dunkelberg, 1987; Horton and DeJong, 1991; Light
and Rosenstein, 1995; Light, 1979).
In this connection, the concept of “survivalist entrepreneurship” has been proposed to refer to
those business ventures that are undertaken out of desperation by persons who have no options in
the mainstream economy (Light and Rosenstein, 1995). Applying this concept to business
enterprise among women, Boyd (2000) found that, during the Great Depression, the tendency for
women to become entrepreneurs was positively correlated with their level of disadvantage in the
labor market, which he measured as the rate of joblessness. Boyd (2000) also discovered that the
correlation between entrepreneurship and labor market disadvantage was stronger for minority
women than for white women, a finding that he attributed to a tradition of survivalist
entrepreneurship among minority women, particularly in the area of personal services. These
results challenge the cultural interpretation of racial differences in women’s business ownership
and imply that, despite of a paucity of resources, minority women intensely desire to become
self-employed, frequently out of necessity. Although Boyd’s study was set in the Great
Depression, his conclusions may still be relevant. Minority women continue to face many
barriers in the labor market, because of the “double disadvantage” of racism and sexism (Smith
and Tienda, 1988; Haddleston-Mattai, 1995; Reskin and Roos, 1990).
Of course, self-employment in a small business requires resources, such as financial capital and
human capital (e.g. formal education). Hence, the disadvantage theory must take account of the
fact that an entrepreneurial response to exclusion from the labor market of the mainstream
economy can be impeded by resource disadvantage. This type of disadvantage may result from
restricted access to formal sources of business financing, such as bank loans. The “resource
constraint” version of the theory, accordingly, suggests that those groups or individuals that face
both labor market disadvantage and resource disadvantage will become entrepreneurs in
marginal enterprises, such as those that operate in the informal economy (Light and Rosenstein,
1995; Boyd, 2000).
Yet, another possible response to resource disadvantage is the intense use of networks of
interpersonal relationships that can generate informal assistance (Low and Macmillan, 1988;
Light and Rosenstein, 1995; Aldrich et al., 1989). This informal assistance may take the form of
financial aid or unpaid labor from family members or friends. The use of such “social capital”
resources may even help to offset the dearth of financial capital or human capital for those
pursuing survivalist entrepreneurship.
Applying disadvantage theory to racial differences in women’s entrepreneurship, it is expected
that minority women business owners will more closely fit the profile of resource-disadvantaged,
survivalist entrepreneurs than will their white counterparts. It is specifically hypothesized that,
compared to white women, minority women will be more likely to:
• have started their enterprises for the purpose of avoiding disadvantage in the mainstream;
• have obtained their start-up capital from personal savings rather than from financial
institutions; and
• have used relatives or friends as sources of unpaid labor.
Protected market theory
The term “protected market” was proposed by Light (1972) to refer to the special, culturally-
based tastes of ethnic minority groups that can only be served by co-ethnic entrepreneurs. The
concept of a protected market was highly relevant to minority business enterprise in the pre-civil
rights era, when white entrepreneurs generally refused to cater to the personal service needs of
minority customers. During this time, many personal services – especially those requiring
intimate contact between provider and consumer, such as mortuary services, hairdressing, and
beauty culture – were left to minority business owners (Boyd, 1996a, b).
The protected market theory focuses, too, on the importance of the special skills or knowledge
that business owners must have in order to serve their clientele – for example, an intimate
knowledge of the cosmetics and hair preparations demanded by minority consumers (Boyd,
1996b). However, the theory is concerned mainly with the distance between provider and
consumer (Aldrich et al., 1985). This distance can be social in the sense that potential service
providers who are prejudiced will refuse to serve other racial groups. The distance can also be
geographic, as when business owners are constrained from serving particular racial groups
because of residential segregation by race.
Apropos of the last point, protected market theory argues that residential segregation can benefit
minority entrepreneurs in several ways. First, the withdrawal of majority-group merchants from
minority neighborhoods can open opportunities for minority businesses by reducing “outside
competition” (Aldrich et al., 1985). Second, the intense feelings of group solidarity that exist in
such neighborhoods may encourage members of the minority group to patronize minority-owned
businesses that are situated within the local community (Aldrich et al., 1985). Finally, the theory
suggests that the geographical clustering of a minority group might provide a foundation for an
ethnic enclave economy (Boyd, 1996b; Phizaclea, 1988; Raijman, 2001).
It follows from the protected market theory that minority entrepreneurs depend on the patronage
of co-ethnic customers and can offset their economic disadvantages by locating their enterprises
in neighborhoods that are populated by co-ethnics. Therefore, it is hypothesized that minority
women business owners will serve a largely minority clientele and be located in neighborhoods
whose ethnic composition is predominantly minority.
Methodology
The data for testing the above hypotheses were drawn from a sampling frame of women-owned
small businesses in the adjoining counties of Albany, Rensselaer, Saratoga, and Schenectady in
upstate New York. This sampling frame was constructed from multiple sources:
• the Dun and Bradstreet nationwide directory of businesses;
• the local Chamber of Commerce directories;
• the New York State Women and Minority Business Directory; and
• the Albany Urban League’s Minority Directory of Business Owners.
The latter two sources were used because of the limited number of minority (i.e. black or Latino)
women business owners identified from the first two sources. The use of these sources, therefore,
maximized the likelihood of sampling minority women. In order to capture entrepreneurs who
were actively operating a small business, the sampling was restricted to those enterprises that had
a sales volume of less than or equal to $500,000 and were in operation for at least a year.
Small businesses in personal services were examined because this industry merits special
attention. It is the industry in which women entrepreneurs, especially those who are minorities,
have traditionally concentrated (Boyd, 2000). It is also the industry that continues to offer
women their best opportunities for small business ownership (Light and Rosenstein, 1995;
Curran and Blackburn, 1991; Goffee and Scase, 1983). The sample distribution of the particular
businesses in this study is presented in Table I.
The procedure for collecting the data was as follows: of 118 potential participants originally
identified and contacted, 68 agreed to participate and 60 business owners were ultimately
interviewed: 30 white women and 30 minority women. Arrangements were made with these
participants to conduct face-to-face interviews, in order to complete the study’s questionnaire.
Interviews were preferable to mailed questionnaires because of the possible low response rate of
the latter data collection method (Bailey, 1994). The survey questions about the characteristics of
entrepreneurs and their firms were based on those asked in the Upstate New York Small Business
Owner Survey (Loscocco, 1998).
The characteristics of the samples of white and minority women business owners are
summarized in Table II. The attributes of the women in the two samples differed in several
respects. Compared to their white peers, minority women entrepreneurs were older, less likely to
have attended college, had more children, and were less inclined to be married. The
characteristics of the enterprises in the two samples differed as well. The firms owned by
minority women tended to be smaller than those owned by white women, having, on the average,
fewer employees, lower gross earnings, and lower net income. Last but not least, the enterprises
owned by minority women had been in operation for less time than those owned by white
women. These statistics tally with those of other studies of women business owners (Moore and
Buttner, 1997; DeCarlo and Lyons, 1979; Devine, 1994; Inman, 1999), a fact that bolsters our
confidence in the sample and in the results of the following analysis.
Analysis
Table III displays the mean responses of white and minority women to 12 items that addressed
the reasons for business ownership. The respondents were asked to rate, on a scale of zero to
three, the influence of these 12 factors on the decision to become an entrepreneur, with higher
values reflecting greater influence. The reasons for business ownership are ranked in Table III in
the order of the mean responses of minority women. Statistically significant differences in the
mean responses of white and minority women are identified with t-test statistics.
These findings provide no support for the hypothesis, based on the cultural theory of
entrepreneurship, that minority women would exhibit lower levels of desire or motivation for
independent enterprise. On the contrary, they show that minority women were significantly more
likely than white women to have become business owners for such reasons as “to be my own
boss” (t=–2.01, p<0.05), “to make more money” (t=–2.70, p<0.01), and “always wanted a
business” (t=–2.63, p<0.05). The results further suggest that minority women were more
opportunistic in their entrepreneurial decision making. Compared to their white peers, minority
women were more likely to have become business owners because an “opportunity presented
itself”, although the white-minority difference here fell just short of the 0.05 level of statistical
significance (t=–1.94, p=0.06). Taken together, these findings cast serious doubt on the “cultural
deficiency” explanation of racial differences in women business ownership.
The data in Table III also provide little support for the hypothesis, derived from the disadvantage
theory, that minority women would be more inclined than white women to start a business in
order to avoid disadvantage in the labor market. Consistent with the hypothesis, minority women
were more likely to have started their businesses because they “needed or wanted a job”. But this
white-minority difference was only marginally significant statistically (t=–1.69, p=0.09), and
minority women were no more likely than white women to report that they became business
owners because of such labor-market related reasons as “thought I could do better”, “dissatisfied
with work”, or “hit glass ceiling/dead end”.
Additional evidence about labor market disadvantage was provided by an item (not listed in
Table III) that asked the respondents if they saw business ownership as their “only alternative” to
earn an income at the time they started their enterprise. As expected, the percentage of minority
women who answered “yes” (60 per cent) was greater than that of white women (47 per cent).
The difference of these proportions was not statistically significant, however (χ2=1.07, p=0.30).
Therefore, the applicability of the concept of survivalist entrepreneurship to racial disparities in
women’s business ownership is questionable.
The issue of resource disadvantage is addressed by Table IV, which reports the sources of start-
up capital that were utilized by white and minority women. These data reveal that the vast
majority of women obtained their start-up capital from personal savings, a finding that agrees
with the well-known fact that personal savings are the main source of small-business financing.
Moreover, a test of group differences in proportions indicates that, compared to white women,
minority women were significantly more likely to have used this source and, correspondingly,
were significantly less likely to have procured start-up capital from a bank loan (χ2=7.68,
p<0.01). Thus, as hypothesized, minority women entrepreneurs were more financially
disadvantaged than their white counterparts in the sense that they depended more heavily on
personal resources for financial capital.
Parallel data on social capital resources are presented in Table V, which shows the use of
relatives and friends as unpaid workers in the businesses of white and minority women. The
results are mixed. As predicted, the percentage of minority women who received unpaid labor
assistance from relatives was greater than that of white women, but the difference was not
significant statistically (χ2=1.83, p=0.17). Also as predicted, the percentage of minority women
who received unpaid labor assistance from friends was greater than that of white women, and the
difference was statistically significant (χ2=4.27, p<0.05). There is only modest support, then, for
the hypothesis, based on disadvantage theory, that minority women entrepreneurs would be more
inclined than their white counterparts to use relatives or friends as unpaid workers.
Finally, Table VI displays data on the racial composition of the areas in which the businesses of
white and minority women were located. A test of group differences reveals a statistically
significant association between the race of the business owner and the racial makeup of the
business environment. As expected, white women tended to locate their enterprises in areas
populated by whites, and minority women tended to locate their enterprises in areas populated by
minorities, i.e. blacks and/or Latinos (χ2=35.62, p<0.001). These findings imply that
entrepreneurs from both groups depended heavily on co-ethnic clienteles and operated in racially
segregated consumer markets.
Additional evidence on this point was provided by an item (not reported in Table VI) that asked
respondents if their customers were predominantly members of their own race or ethnicity.
Almost 97 per cent of white women and 90 per cent of minority women responded “yes”. These
results, along with those of Table VI, strongly support the hypothesis, derived from the protected
market theory, that minority women business owners would serve a largely minority clientele
and locate in areas where the population is predominantly minority.
Discussion
Much of the literature on small-business enterprise among disadvantaged members of society is
segregated along the lines of discipline and methodology into separate areas of scholarship, one
on women and the other on racial minorities. The goal of this study was to bring these separate
research areas together by applying theories of racial disparities in entrepreneurship to a
comparative analysis of white and minority women business owners. The study focused on
personal services, a vibrant area of women’s business ownership. While the data were based on
relatively small samples, the characteristics of these samples were very similar to those of
national investigations of women entrepreneurs. Moreover, the samples provided data that are
generally unavailable from other sources (e.g. data on the motivation for becoming an
entrepreneur). Hence, the results, examined in a theoretical context, contribute potentially
valuable insights into racial differences in business ownership among women.
The most salient insight is that minority women entrepreneurs were highly motivated to become
business owners for achievement-oriented reasons. Indeed, these women were even more highly
motivated than their white counterparts to become self-employed for such classical reasons as
“to be my own boss”, “to make more money”, and “always wanted a business”. These findings
contradict the hypothesis that was based on the cultural theory of entrepreneurship and imply that
popular and scholarly accounts that stress “cultural deficiency” as an explanation of racial
disparities in women’s business ownership rest on an uncertain empirical foundation and should
be reassessed.
Another important insight is that racial differences in entrepreneurship among women were
influenced more by resource disadvantage than by labor-market disadvantage. Minority women
were only slightly more likely than white women to start businesses in order to avoid
disadvantage in the labor market. In point of fact, white and minority women responded
differently to only one of three survey items that tapped labor-market reasons for self-
employment; namely, “needed or wanted a job”, and the significance of this difference was
marginal. Furthermore, minority women business owners were no more inclined than their white
counterparts were to be “survivalist entrepreneurs”. These findings run counter to those of
studies that concluded that labor market disadvantage is a primary motivation for the self-
employment of minority women (Boyd, 2000; Inman, 1999). Yet, consistent with prior research
(Inman, 1999), the present study also found that minority women were significantly more likely
to use personal savings to start their businesses, a finding that suggests that the overall financial
resources of these women were substantially more limited than those of their white peers.
Apropos of this point, follow-up interviews revealed that, not surprisingly, women business
owners were routinely frustrated in their efforts to obtain financial capital. These women
believed, in particular, that the lending practices of banks and government funding agencies were
too restrictive. This belief was especially widespread among hairdressers, who frequently stated
that lenders perceived hairdressing as a hobby rather than as a vocation and thus did not take
their business proposals seriously (see also Clarke, 1999; Ayres-Williams and Brotherton, 1999;
Nelton, 1999; Brotherton, 1999).
An additional insight is that minority women entrepreneurs used social capital resources just as
often as their white peers did – and, in some cases, more often. There was no significant racial
difference in the use of family members as unpaid workers; yet, minority women made greater
use of friends as unpaid workers in their businesses than their white counterparts did. Perhaps
minority women used the social capital of their friendship networks more intensively in order to
offset their more disadvantaged position with respect to other entrepreneurial resources; notably,
financial capital and human capital.
A final insight is that women entrepreneurs operated in racially-segregated environments. In
accord with the theory of protected markets, minority women business owners depended on co-
ethnic consumers and located in neighborhoods that were populated heavily by minorities,
perhaps to more easily take advantage of the local co-ethnic trade in personal services. These
results are in line with those of past studies (e.g. Aldrich et al., 1985; Boyd, 1996b) that imply
that minority entrepreneurs, and minority women entrepreneurs, in particular, attempted to offset
some of their disadvantages by targeting minority consumer markets.
Taken together, these theoretically-grounded insights illuminate two areas of racial differences in
women’s business ownership: the motivation for entrepreneurship and the availability of
entrepreneurial resources. To summarize, the analysis suggested that minority women became
entrepreneurs for achievement-oriented reasons and attempted to overcome their educational and
financial handicaps by drawing social capital from friendships and by accessing co-ethnic
consumer markets. These insights call attention to a topic that demands further study for both
theoretical and public-policy reasons – the conspicuous gap between the high aspirations of
minority women for business ownership and the paucity of formal entrepreneurial resources that
are available to these women.

Table IBusiness categories in sample

Table IICharacteristics of white and minority women business owners

Table IIIReasons for becoming a business owner (means)

Table IVSources of start-up capital (percentage distributions)

Table VSources of unpaid labor assistance (percentage distributions)

Table VIRacial composition of the business location (percentage distributions)

References
Aldrich, H., Reese, P.R., Dubini, P. (1989), "Women on the verge of a breakthrough: networking
among entrepreneurs in the United States and Italy", Entrepreneurship and Regional
Development, Vol. 1 pp.339-56.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Aldrich, H., Cater, J., Jones, T., McEvoy, D., Velleman, P. (1985), "Ethnic residential
concentration and the protected market hypothesis", Social Forces, Vol. 63 No.4, pp.996-1009.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Ayres-Williams, R., Brotherton, P. (1999), "5 hot business fields for women", Black Enterprise,
No.September, pp.107-13.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Bailey, K.B. (1994), Methods of Social Research, 4th ed., Free Press, New York, NY., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Bates, T. (1989), "The changing nature of minority business: a comparative analysis of Asian,
non-minority and black-owned businesses", The Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 18 No.2,
pp.30-53.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Bates, T. (1991), "Commercial bank financing of white- and black-owned small business start-
ups", Quarterly Review of Economics and Business, Vol. 31 No.1, pp.64-80.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Bates, T. (1995), "Self-employment entry across industry groups", Journal of Business
Venturing, Vol. 10 pp.143-56.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Berger, B. (1991), The Culture of Entrepreneurship, ICS Press, San Francisco, CA., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Biggart, N. (1989), Charismatic Capitalism: Direct Selling Organizations in America, Chicago
University Press, Chicago, IL., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Boyd, R.L. (1996), "Demographic change and entrepreneurial occupations: African Americans
in northern cities", The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 55 No.2, pp.129-44.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Boyd, R.L. (1996), "The great migration to the north and the rise of ethnic niches for African
American women in beauty culture and hairdressing", Sociological Focus, Vol. 29 No.1, pp.33-
45.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Boyd, R.L. (2000), "Race, labor market disadvantage and survivalist entrepreneurship: black
women in the urban north during the Great Depression", Sociological Forum, Vol. 15 No.4,
pp.647-70.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Brotherton, P. (1999), "Get financing now", Black Enterprise, No.August, pp.77-84.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Catalyst Guide (1998), Advancing Women in Business, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Christopher, J. (1998), "Minority business formation and survival: evidence on business
performance and viability", The Review of Black Political Economy, Vol. 26 No.1, pp.37-72.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Clarke, R. (1999), "An office of her own", Black Enterprise, No.August, pp.59-63.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Cooper, A.C., Dunkelberg, W. (1987), "Entrepreneurial research: old questions, new answers
and methodological issues", American Journal of Small Business, pp.11-23.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Cummings, S. (1999), "African American entrepreneurship in the suburbs: protected markets and
enclave business development", Journal of American Planning Association, Vol. 65 No.1, pp.50-
61.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Curran, J., Blackburn, R. (1991), "Changes in the context of enterprise: some socioeconomic and
environmental factors facing small firms in the 1990s", in Curran, J., Blackburn, R. (Eds),Paths
of Enterprise: The Future of the Small Business, Routledge, Chapman and Hall Incorporated,
London, No.Ch. 9, .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
DeCarlo, J.F., Lyons, P.R. (1979), "A comparison of selected personal characteristics of minority
and non-minority female entrepreneurs", Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 17 pp.22-
9.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
DeLollis, B. (1997), "Today’s female passion for entrepreneurship", The American Enterprise,
Vol. 8 pp.42-5.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Devine, T. (1994), "Characteristics of self-employed women in the United States", Monthly
Labor Review, pp.20-34.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Dhaliwal, S. (1999), "Asian female entrepreneurs and women in business", Women’s Studies
International Forum, Vol. 21 No.5, pp.463-74.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Evans, D., Leighton, L. (1989), "Some empirical aspects of entrepreneurship", The American
Economic Review, pp.519-35.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Fairlie, R. (1999), "The absence of the African-American owned business: an analysis of the
dynamics of self-employment", Journal of Labor Economics, Vol. 17 No.1, pp.80-108.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Goffee, R., Scase, R. (1983), "Business ownership and women’s subordination: a preliminary
study of female proprietors", The Sociological Review, Vol. 31 pp.625-48.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Goldenberg, S., Kline, T. (1999), "An exploratory study of predicting perceived success and
survival of small businesses", Psychological Reports, Vol. 85 No.2, pp.365-77.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Goo, S. (2001), "Mixed story on minority businesses", The Washington Post, No.13 July, pp.E2.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Groot, T. (2001), "Challenges faced by women in industrial development", Women
Entrepreneurs in Africa: Experience from Selected Countries, United Nations Publications,
United Nations Conference Trade, Vienna, .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Haddleston-Mattai, B. (1995), "The black female academician and the ‘superwoman syndrome",
Race, Gender and Class, Vol. 3 pp.49-64.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Haynes, P., Helms, M. (2000), "A profile of the growing female entrepreneur segment", Bank
Marketing, Vol. 32 No.5, pp.28-35.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Horton, H., De Jong, G. (1991), "Black entrepreneurs: a sociodemographic analysis", Research
in Race and Ethnic Relations, Vol. 6 pp.105-20.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Hovey, J. (2001), "Financing and insurance: growing network of lenders help minority
entrepreneurs", The Los Angeles Times, No.12 March, pp.C4.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Inman, K. (1999), Women’s Resources in Business Start-up: A Study of Black and White Women
Entrepreneurs, Garland Publishing, New York, NY., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Kessler, A. (2001), "The market in women small entrepreneurs", Bank Marketing, Vol. 33 No.9,
pp.12-13.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Lee, J. (2002), "From civil relations to racial conflict: merchant customer interactions in urban
America", American Sociological Review, Vol. 67 No.1, pp.77-98.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Lerner, M., Almor, T. (2002), "Relationship among strategic capabilities and the performance of
women-owned small ventures", Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 40 No.2, pp.109-
25.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Light, I.H. (1972), Ethnic Enterprise in America: Business and Welfare Among Chinese,
Japanese and Blacks, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Light, I.H. (1979), "Disadvantaged minorities in self-employment", International Journal of
Comparative Sociology, Vol. 20 pp.31-45.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Light, I., Rosenstein, C. (1995), Race, Ethnicity and Entrepreneurship in Urban America, Walter
de Gruyter, New York, NY., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Loscocco, K. (1998), Upstate New York Small Business Owner Survey, State University of New
York at Albany, New York, NY., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Loscocco, K., Robinson, J. (1991), "Barriers to women’s small business success in the United
States", Gender and Society, Vol. 5 No.4, pp.511-32.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Low, M.B., Macmillan, I.C. (1988), "Entrepreneurship: past research and future challenges",
Journal of Management, Vol. 14 No.2, pp.139-61.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Moore, D. (2000), Careerpreneurs: Lessons From Leading Women Entrepreneurs on Building a
Career Without Boundaries, Davies-Black, Palo Alto, CA., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Moore, D., Buttner, H. (1997), Women Entrepreneurs: Moving Beyond the Glass Ceiling, Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Nelton, S. (1999), "Women-owned firms lag in winning federal contracts", Nation’s Business,
Vol. 87 No.3, pp.12.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Oliver, S. (1996), "How Katherine Hammer reinvented herself", Forbes, Vol. 158 No.4, pp.98-
103.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Phizacklea, A. (1988), "Entrepreneurship, ethnicity and gender", in Westwood, S., Bhachu, P.
(Eds),Enterprising Women: Ethnicity, Economy and Gender Relations, Routledge, New York,
NY., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Radhakishun, C. (2001), "Women entrepreneurs in least developed countries: profiles, problems
and policies", Women Entrepreneurs in Africa: Experience from Selected Countries, United
Nations Publications, United Nations Conference Trade, Vienna, .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Raijman, R. (2001), "Mexican immigrants and informal self-employment in Chicago", Human
Organization, Vol. 60 No.1, pp.47-55.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Renzulli, L., Aldrich, H., Moody, J. (2000), "Family matters: gender, networks and
entrepreneurial outcomes", Social Forces, Vol. 79 No.2, pp.523-46.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Reskin, B., Roos, P. (1990), Job Queues, Gender Queues: Explaining Women’s Inroads Into
Male Occupations, Temple University Press, Philadelphia, PA., .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Robinson, J.G., Mcllwee, J.S. (1991), "Men, women and the culture of engineering", The
Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 32 No.3, pp.403-21.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Scott, W. (1983), "Financial performance of minority versus non minority-owned businesses",
Journal of Small Business Management, pp.42-8.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Shabbir, A., Di Gregorio, S. (1996), "An examination of the relationship between women’s
personal goals and structural factors influencing their decisions to start a business: the case of
Pakistan", Journal of Business Venturing, pp.507-29.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Smith, S., Tienda, M. (1988), "The doubly disadvantaged: women of color in the US labor
force", in Stromberg, A.H., Harkness, S. (Eds),Women Working: Theories and Facts in
Perspective, Mayfield, Mountain View, CA, pp.61-80.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Sullivan, T., McCracken, S. (1988), "Black entrepreneurs: patterns and rates of return to self-
employment", National Journal of Sociology, pp.167-85.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Tang, J. (1995), "Differences in the process of self-employment among whites, blacks and
Asians: the case of scientists and engineers", Sociological Perspectives, Vol. 38 No.2, pp.273-
309.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Wharton, A. (1989), "Gender segregation in private-sector, public-sector, and self-employed
occupations (1950-1981)", Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 70 No.4, pp.923-43.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Weber, M. (1930), The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Routledge, London, .
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Weiler, S., Bernasek, A. (2001), "Dodging the glass ceiling? Networks and the new wave of
women entrepreneurs", The Social Science Journal, Vol. 38 No.1, pp.85-103.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Young, J. (1996), "Object lesson", Forbes, Vol. 158 No.5, pp.80-1.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Further reading
Aldrich, H., Waldinger, R. (1990), "Ethnicity and entrepreneurship", Annual Review of
Sociology, Vol. 16 pp.111-35.
[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited | Copyright info | Site Policies
..

| |