21
Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered? Jodyanne Kirkwood Department of Management, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand Abstract Purpose – The family has the potential to be a breeding ground for entrepreneurs and may be key place where the entrepreneurial spirit is ignited. However, to date there has been little empirical research on how parents may influence their children’s subsequent decision to start a new venture. Design/methodology/approach – This study adopts a qualitative approach to investigate, via in-depth semi-structured interviews, the experiences of 50 entrepreneurs (25 men and 25 women). Findings – Parents influenced participants’ decision to create a new venture in a number of ways and two key gender differences were noted in this parental influence. The first related to how the participants were influenced differently by their mothers and fathers, with fathers playing the primary role in the new venture creation decision. The second was differences between how the women and men participants described the ways they were influenced by their parents. Many women entrepreneurs looked to their parents for advice, support and encouragement, while some men desired independence from their parents (primarily fathers) or were trying to compete with them. Research limitations/implications – Limitations exist due to the sample size and the complexity of motivations for starting a new venture. This study should be followed by more extensive research, addressing the further research questions and directions that are posed. Originality/value – This empirical study contributes to the literature by enhancing our limited understanding of how parents influence the decision to start a new venture. Keywords Family, Parents, Gender, Motivation (psychology) Paper type Research paper Introduction It was recently contended that the family is “the oxygen that feeds the fire of entrepreneurship” (Rogoff and Heck, 2003, p. 559). The influence of the family on the new venture creation process has received limited attention as “researchers have not yet focused their attention on how a new venture might spring from family relationships” (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003, p. 577). While studies have certainly not ignored the family, as the literature reviewed in this paper will highlight, others believe that the family is rarely mentioned in entrepreneurship research (Ahl, 2003). Where this criticism stems from is that the family is seldom discussed from sociological perspectives that consider how the social environment affects entrepreneurs (Hurley, 1999). This has been referred to as a family embeddedness perspective where people are part of networks of social relations and “do not decide to start a business in a vacuum” (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003, p. 577). This study aims to go some way towards filling this gap by focusing specifically on the role of parents on the new venture creation decision. The objective of this paper is to explore how parents influence the new venture creation process, with a particular focus on understanding any gender The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-2554.htm The entrepreneurial spirit 39 Received 26 September 2005 Revised 11 January 2006 Accepted 9 June 2006 International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research Vol. 13 No. 1, 2007 pp. 39-59 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1355-2554 DOI 10.1108/13552550710725174

Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

Igniting the entrepreneurialspirit: is the role parents play

gendered?Jodyanne Kirkwood

Department of Management, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

Abstract

Purpose – The family has the potential to be a breeding ground for entrepreneurs and may be keyplace where the entrepreneurial spirit is ignited. However, to date there has been little empiricalresearch on how parents may influence their children’s subsequent decision to start a new venture.

Design/methodology/approach – This study adopts a qualitative approach to investigate, viain-depth semi-structured interviews, the experiences of 50 entrepreneurs (25 men and 25 women).

Findings – Parents influenced participants’ decision to create a new venture in a number of ways andtwo key gender differences were noted in this parental influence. The first related to how theparticipants were influenced differently by their mothers and fathers, with fathers playing the primaryrole in the new venture creation decision. The second was differences between how the women andmen participants described the ways they were influenced by their parents. Many womenentrepreneurs looked to their parents for advice, support and encouragement, while some men desiredindependence from their parents (primarily fathers) or were trying to compete with them.

Research limitations/implications – Limitations exist due to the sample size and the complexityof motivations for starting a new venture. This study should be followed by more extensive research,addressing the further research questions and directions that are posed.

Originality/value – This empirical study contributes to the literature by enhancing our limitedunderstanding of how parents influence the decision to start a new venture.

Keywords Family, Parents, Gender, Motivation (psychology)

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionIt was recently contended that the family is “the oxygen that feeds the fire ofentrepreneurship” (Rogoff and Heck, 2003, p. 559). The influence of the family on thenew venture creation process has received limited attention as “researchers have notyet focused their attention on how a new venture might spring from familyrelationships” (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003, p. 577). While studies have certainly not ignoredthe family, as the literature reviewed in this paper will highlight, others believe that thefamily is rarely mentioned in entrepreneurship research (Ahl, 2003). Where thiscriticism stems from is that the family is seldom discussed from sociologicalperspectives that consider how the social environment affects entrepreneurs (Hurley,1999). This has been referred to as a family embeddedness perspective where peopleare part of networks of social relations and “do not decide to start a business in avacuum” (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003, p. 577). This study aims to go some way towardsfilling this gap by focusing specifically on the role of parents on the new venturecreation decision. The objective of this paper is to explore how parents influence thenew venture creation process, with a particular focus on understanding any gender

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-2554.htm

Theentrepreneurial

spirit

39

Received 26 September 2005Revised 11 January 2006

Accepted 9 June 2006

International Journal ofEntrepreneurial Behaviour &

ResearchVol. 13 No. 1, 2007

pp. 39-59q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

1355-2554DOI 10.1108/13552550710725174

Page 2: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

differences between the influence of mothers and fathers, and also between theexperiences of the women and men participants.

Defining what we understand by the family and entrepreneurs are important tasksto undertake at the outset. Although defining the family is not straightforward, for thepurposes of this study, the following definition is employed: the family is based onkinship, marriage and parenthood (Young, 1992). This is the most useful definitiongiven the focus of this study is on the role of parents in the new venture creationdecision. Others researching the family and entrepreneurship have used broaderdefinitions, such as the household (a residential unit) (Ram, 2001; Young, 1992) or theextended family that is often the focus of family business studies (Kuratko, 1993).

Definitions of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship have also been wide-ranging buthave primarily focused around three main areas; risk taking (Long, 1983, Stewart et al.,1996), founding a business (Brockhaus, 1987, Gartner, 1990), and innovation (Carlandet al., 1984, Drucker, 1985, Gartner, 1990, Schumpeter, 1934). While the termentrepreneur is used throughout this paper for the purposes of consistency it should benoted that other studies use various definitions of entrepreneurs. This is often aproblem in entrepreneurship studies and there is little that can be done to avoid thisweakness other than to note there may be a lack of direct comparability betweenstudies due to differences in definitions (Carland et al., 1988). In the current study adefinition of an entrepreneur is used which focuses on creating a new venture. Thus, itis a person (or a group of people) who creates a new business (for profit) and employs atleast one other paid employee. Further rationale for this definition is presented in themethodology section.

There have been a number of strands of research within the entrepreneurship fieldthat discuss the family. While these are not central to the purposes of this study a briefoverview of their focus is important as context to this paper. The first and mostprevalent discussion has been with respect to family businesses (for a recent review,see Zahra and Sharma, 2004). Within this field, there have been a wide range of studiesincluding those focusing on business aspirations and goals of family members (Basu,2004; Tagiuri and Davis, 1992), leadership (Wah, 2004), gender dynamics (Alcorso,1993) and ethnic family businesses (McGoldrick and Troast, 1993). A further approachhas been to study the demographics of entrepreneur’s families and attempt to suggestcausality between family background and entrepreneurship. This strand of researchhas been aimed at exploring demographics such as birth order or the social class of thefamily (Belcourt, 1987; Hisrich and Brush, 1985). Many of these studies have concludedthe percentage of entrepreneurs who have parents (mainly fathers) who are (or hadbeen) entrepreneurs is higher than that of the general population (Bird, 1993; Buttner,1993). Emerging from the observations in these studies there is evidence to suggestthat there is an increased likelihood of an individual becoming interested inentrepreneurship if there is a family background in business ownership (Mallette andMcGuinness, 1999; Matthews and Moser, 1996; Morrisson, 2000). Thus, the literaturecertainly suggests that the family can act as an incubator or is an antecedent toentrepreneurship (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003; Belcourt, 1988). While there is an absence ofresearch focusing specifically on the role of the family in terms of venture creationthere is research on the motivation for becoming an entrepreneur (one of which isfamily-related motivators) and this literature, focusing on gender comparisons, isdiscussed below.

IJEBR13,1

40

Page 3: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

Motivations for becoming an entrepreneurThe decision to become an entrepreneur is often a complex and multi-facetedphenomenon (Marlow and Strange, 1994; Shane et al., 1991; Stevenson, 1990) and hasbeen the focus of many studies over time (see, for example Hamilton, 1987; Mazzarolet al., 1999; McClelland and Swail, 2005; Segal et al., 2005; Stanworth and Curran, 1973).The four most common factors are a desire for independence and autonomy, monetarymotivations, factors related to work, and factors related to the family.

A desire for independence and autonomy is often cited as the number onemotivating factor for becoming an entrepreneur (Harrison and Hart, 1993; McDowell,1995; Shane et al., 1991; Vivarelli, 1991). Few gender differences have been found inrelation to independence as a motivator (Pinfold, 2001; Scott, 1986; Still and Soutar,2001; Sundin and Holmquist, 1991). Therefore, independence appears to be a universalmotivator for both women and men in deciding to become entrepreneurs. Of the studiesthat report gender differences, the degree and direction of gender differences areinconsistent. This was evidenced in the some cases where women were more motivatedby independence than men (Pinfold, 2001; Scott, 1986; Still and Soutar, 2001), whileother cases found the opposite trend, with male entrepreneurs being more motivated byindependence than women (Marlow, 1997; Sundin and Holmquist, 1991).

It is often assumed that entrepreneurs are highly motivated by money. However,research has found that entrepreneurs are not always primarily motivated by moneyand it is often less important than other factors (Fox, 1998; Kuratko et al., 1997;McDowell, 1995; Vivarelli, 1991; Watson et al., 2000). Statistically significant genderdifferences have been found in some cases (Borooah et al., 1997; DeMartino andBarbato, 2003; Fischer et al., 1993; Marlow, 1997; Scott, 1986). Similar to findings forindependence-related motivators, where gender differences were found the differencevaried. In some studies, men were more likely than women to report making money orfinancial reward as a motivation (Borooah et al., 1997; Cromie, 1987; DeMartino andBarbato, 2003; Marlow, 1997). Alternatively, Scott (1986) found that women were moremotivated to “make more money” than men.

Motivations that emerged from experiences at work were also an importantconsideration to many entrepreneurs. Two distinct categories of work-relatedmotivation were found in the literature; those regarding a particular job or employerand broader career or employment level factors. First, at an individual job level, factorssuch as job satisfaction (Honig-Haftel and Marin, 1986), job dissatisfaction (Cromie,1987), or job instability (Borooah et al., 1997) do motivate people to leave paidemployment and become entrepreneurs. On a higher level than an individual job arecareer and employment issues such as career flexibility, advancement and co-careerissues (DeMartino and Barbato, 2003), dissatisfaction with one’s career (Cromie, 1987;Marlow, 1997), difficulty finding employment (Fox, 1998; Hakim, 1989) andredundancy (Marlow, 1997). Gender differences with respect to work-relatedmotivating factors were relatively limited across the studies analysed. DeMartinoand Barbato (2003) found women were more motivated than men by co-career issuesand career flexibility. The opposite trend existed for advancement where significantlymore men were motivated by this factor than women (DeMartino and Barbato, 2003).Borooah et al. (1997) also found statistically significant gender differences in“redundancy and unemployment” where more men were motivated by this factor thanwomen. As per the previous categories of motivators (independence and monetary

Theentrepreneurial

spirit

41

Page 4: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

motivators), the direction of gender differences differed and there were sometimescontradictory results. As an example, Cromie (1987) also found “career dissatisfaction”to be more important to women than men. However, in the same study no genderdifferences were found in “job dissatisfaction”.

For independence and work-related factors the balance of these studies is largelyagainst gender differences. For monetary motivations, the balance is somewhat moreeven. Only in family-related factors do the majority of studies find significantdifferences between the motivations of men and women entrepreneurs. There are twodistinct family-related types of motivations for starting a new venture. The first genderdifferences relate to issues such as continuing a family tradition (Shane et al., 1991) andfollowing a role model (Pinfold, 2001). In both cases, men expressed a greater desirethan women to continue a family tradition or to follow a role model (Pinfold, 2001;Shane et al., 1991). However, following a role model is not necessarily specific to thefamily but it is included because the possibility arises that this role model may havebeen a family member. The second, and most prevalent family-related motivation,relates to the combining of waged and domestic labour (Marlow, 1997; Shane et al.,1991; Still and Soutar, 2001), family-related reasons (Sundin and Holmquist, 1991),family policies and family obligations (DeMartino and Barbato, 2003), fit with domesticcommitments (Greenfield and Nayak, 1992), and child-rearing (Cromie, 1987). Unlikeother motivations where some gender differences emerged but the direction of resultsdiffered, all of these studies found that women were more motivated by thesefamily-related factors than men. However, not all of these results are specificallyapplicable to the purposes of this study because they primarily refer to managingchildren and a partner in parallel with entrepreneurship, and do not describe theparental influence in the new venture creation decision.

The family and the new venture creation decisionWhile the literature review focuses on motivations of entrepreneurs using varyingdefinitions of entrepreneurs, more specific implications of the family on the newventure creation decision are now discussed. This definition parallels that which wasused for selecting the participants in this study and thus provides the closestcomparison with the current study. There is little doubt that there have been changesto the composition and roles of families in recent years (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003). One ofthe most substantial changes in the composition of the family has been that women arehaving children later in life and are having fewer children (Statistics New Zealand,2005). While these trends are occurring at a societal level, their effect specifically on thenew venture creation decision is potentially wide-ranging in both positive and negativeways. The decreasing size of families may in fact assist nascent entrepreneurs bylowering the perception of family risk. Alternatively, negative influences may alsoemerge such as fewer start-up resources available from the family and this might be abarrier to entering business (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003). Alongside these changes infamily composition and women’s participation in the labour market, shifts intraditional roles within the family have occurred. Another trend that has had an impacton the family is that there are now greater numbers of women in the workforce thanwas the case historically. Women’s labour participation rates have increasedsignificantly worldwide over time (Moore and Buttner, 1997) and these rising levels ofwomen’s participation in the workforce has meant changes to family life (Malveaux,

IJEBR13,1

42

Page 5: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

1990). The impact of this trend is that this may increase the numbers of women whodecide to create their own new venture (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003). Certainly, the recentgrowth in the numbers of women entrepreneurs worldwide supports this proposition(Minniti et al., 2005).

Assumptions that a woman’s role is to take primary responsibility for the care of thefamily are historical (Brush, 1990; Wetherell, 1977) and learned from infancy (Cromieand Hayes, 1988). While gendered role stereotypes may have lessened over time, withmore sharing of household duties and role reversals, others suggest the roles womenand men play in the family have not changed substantially (Ufuk and Ozgen, 2001).Traditionally, women are thought of as carers (Gilligan, 1982) and tended to be moreinvolved in child-rearing (Mallette and McGuinness, 1999) and socialisation of childrenthan men (Cromie and Hayes, 1988). However, parents are now having less of a role insocialising their children than in the past (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003). This may be ofconcern, as some suggest that socialisation as children and, later, at work may explainthe origins and motivations for entrepreneurship (Stanworth et al., 1989). Thus, lessinteraction between entrepreneurial parents and their children may reduce thepreparation and motivation and result in a decrease in the numbers of childrenfollowing their parents into entrepreneurship (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003). These potentialoutcomes of changes within the family are important to consider as context for thecurrent study.

MethodologyAs noted in the introduction, an entrepreneur is defined in this study as someone whostarts a new business venture. An entrepreneur is therefore a person (or a group ofpeople) who creates a new business (for profit) and employs at least one other paidperson. The rationale for this definition relates to varying levels of risk required in eachof the different ownership scenarios. People who have founded their own business andare responsible for employees have significantly more at stake than sole traders forexample. In support of this distinction between founding a new venture and otherforms of ownership Gartner (1990) found purchasing an existing business to be one ofthe lowest scoring factors in a Delphi study exploring definitions of an entrepreneur.Thus, the definition used in the current study excludes those who purchased anexisting business, franchisees, or sole traders. It must be noted that it excludes thosewho have inherited a business from their parents but includes entrepreneurs who mayhave started a new venture with a family member (in this study, none had startedbusinesses with parents but some had done so with siblings).

Because this study’s intention was to investigate how participants believed theirparents influenced their new venture creation decision a qualitative research methodwas deemed most appropriate. Some support the use of qualitative approaches whenresearching the family and its role in entrepreneurship (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003; Ram,2001) and note that they are especially useful within entrepreneurship research areasthat are not well advanced theoretically (Paulin et al., 1982). There are various methodsfor collecting qualitative data but interviews, in their various forms, are the mostwidely used method (Fontana and Frey, 1994; King, 1994). For the purposes of thisresearch interviews were the best option to understand the reality of entrepreneursthemselves. The choice of semi-structured interviews is also justified given the limitedamount of the prior research on the family and entrepreneurship. In addition, the

Theentrepreneurial

spirit

43

Page 6: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

complex decision to become an entrepreneur lends itself to interviews which allow for“full expression of the interrelationships between the many variables that can impacton one person’s ultimate decision to start a business” (Stevenson, 1990, p. 442).

The sampleThis paper reports on the qualitative phase of a multiple method study. Thequantitative phase of the study involved a mail survey of 932 business owners in NewZealand (66 were returned undeliverable). The 381 replies received represented a 44 percent response rate that is respectable given that response rates for small business mailsurveys average around 30 per cent (Dennis, 2003). Of these respondents, 289 met thedefinition of an entrepreneur used in this study. Individuals who started theirbusinesses after 1993 were chosen to maximise recall of their motivations for starting anew venture. The retrospective nature of this study parallels similar research onentrepreneurs (Carter and Cannon, 1992). In such cases, researchers often only haveretrospective accounts and there are potential issues with accuracy of recall (Mangione,1995; Reynolds, 1993). It is expected that the memory of events occurring earlier than1993 may be difficult to recall although similar research by Hamilton (1987) suggeststhat relying on the recall of founders from 10-15 years prior was a weakness of hisstudy but not a major defect.

A total of 159 of the 289 respondents indicated (from a question on the survey) theywould like to participate further in the study by way of a face-to-face interview or besent another survey in the future. Self-selection bias must be considered a potentialweakness of the sample selection method but given the lack of publicly availabledatabases of business owners in New Zealand this method was somewhat unavoidable.Because significantly more people self-selected than could be interviewed a selectionprocess ensued that was based on minimising travel expenses. A total of 50entrepreneurs in New Zealand were interviewed (25 women and 25 men) in phase twoof the study. All participants were interviewed face-to-face by the author. While thesample was not “matched” in a statistical sense care was taken to ensure that men’sand women’s businesses were broadly comparable in terms of three demographics:industry sector, annual sales volume and employee numbers. Table I shows anoverview of these and other sample demographics as well as the location of theinterviews.

The questions were designed to gauge individual opinions and therefore were broadand open-ended (see appendix for questions relating to the family). The interviewsranged from 45 minutes to over three hours, although the entire interview was notfocused on the role of parents in the new venture creation process. Most interviewslasted approximately 90 minutes and all were tape recorded and transcribed. Whiletape recorders can be considered intrusive to a research setting (Stainback andStainback, 1988) they are essential for providing a record of the interview and, moreimportantly, are necessary for coding the interview material (Curran and Blackburn,2001).

The QSR NUD *IST Vivo (Nvivo) software package was used for data management(Richards, 2000). Using Nvivo, transcripts were coded according to themes andanalysed using a constant comparison approach (Glaser, 1992). Data were coded byparagraph and sentence as proposed by Strauss and Corbin (1990), and the entiredocument viewed to see if (and how) it differed from the previous transcript. Code notes

IJEBR13,1

44

Page 7: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

were written from the open coding procedure and these were initial thoughts aboutthemes and possible relationships or issues that appeared important to theparticipants. Analysis began by coding the transcripts and from this categoriesemerged (nodes in Nvivo). A total of 2,184 passages were coded into the 38 nodecategories where a passage may be a few words or a number of paragraphs of text.

Trustworthiness of the researchReliable methods and valid conclusions are essential to any good piece of research,whether qualitative or quantitative (Silverman, 2000). In this study, the issue ofcredibility and transferability was addressed in three main ways – using convergentinterviews and native categories, selecting quotes and contrary cases, and in the use oftabulations. Native categories are those that the participants use themselves rather

Women n ¼ 25 Men n ¼ 25

Ethnic originPakeha/European 23 23Maori 1 1Other 1 1

AgeUnder 35 3 035-39 6 540-44 3 645-49 5 550 þ 8 9

IndustryService 15 13Manufacturing 3 4Retail 1 1Other 2 5More than one type (i.e. service and manufacturing) 4 2

Annual sales NZD (1NZD ¼ 0:38 GBP)Under $100,000 3 5100-500,000 8 5500,000-1 million 8 9Over 1 million 5 5Undisclosed 1 1

Employees: (mean)Part time 4 1.6Full time 5 6.1

LocationAuckland 17 10Wellington 4 4Christchurch 2 9Dunedin 1 2Invercargill 1 0

Table I.Sample demographics

Theentrepreneurial

spirit

45

Page 8: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

than the researcher interpreting their answers. The evolving interview schedule helpedto ensure that the questions were relevant to the participants. Data reduction inqualitative research is a necessary task. Given that there were 50 participants, therewas a need for selecting portions of transcripts to illustrate the views of theparticipants. Some qualitative researchers avoid numbers altogether but I tabulatedparticipants’ own categories as suggested by Silverman (2000).

The issue of dependability was also addressed in three ways. The primary methodfor establishing dependability in this study was the use of inter-coder agreement (King,1994). A postgraduate student who was unfamiliar with the research was asked to codefive interview transcripts using seven of the codes (including four that involved thefamily – parents, siblings, children, domestic partner). The additional coder was inagreement with my codes in 67 cases and in disagreement five times. For a personunfamiliar with the material this result was deemed adequate. Additionally, field noteswere also taken to supplement the recorded interviews (Silverman, 2000; Stainback andStainback, 1988). These field notes, typically amounting to two to three pages perparticipant, were written up as soon as possible after the interview.

FindingsTable II illustrates some information about the participants and their families. Itindicates that parents were described by 26 of the 50 participants as important in theirdecision to start a new venture (16 women and ten men). These participants wereprimarily those with parents who also had owned businesses (13 women and eightmen). Thus, it can be suggested that parents who owned businesses certainly mayhave played a role in their children’s decision to become an entrepreneur. In a furthersupport of this observation, it was found that of the participants who said they werenot influenced by their parents the majority had never owned a business (only five hadowned a business). This parallels the results of prior literature where a family historyof business ownership is linked to the incidence of entrepreneurship. However, whilethese demographics indicate a link between these two factors we know little about thenature of this influence.

The objective of this section is to move beyond these basic observations anddescribe, in as much detail as possible how parents were seen by the participants asinfluencing their decision to start a new venture. As noted, 16 women and ten menparticipants said they were in some way influenced by their parents in this decision.

Women n ¼ 25 Men n ¼ 25

Marital status (married or living with partner) 17 22Number of children (mean) 1.44 2.28Number of children living at home (mean) 0.80 1.64Siblings (mean) 3.16 2.20Brothers (mean) 1.88 1.08Sisters (mean) 1.28 1.08Parents previously owned business 16 14Motivated by parents 16 10Of these, parents had owned businesses 13 8

Table II.Family relateddemographics

IJEBR13,1

46

Page 9: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

While this “counting” approach is not the primary objective of this study, it may directattention to a possible gender difference between how women and men participantswere influenced by their parents. The following section is structured around theparticipants’ upbringing, and then specifically describes the influence of fathers andmothers with gender differences between men and women participants pointed out.Excerpts from the transcripts are presented here verbatim, and participants werenamed W1-W25 and M1-M25 (where W refers to women, and M refers to men).

UpbringingMany of the participants who said they were influenced by their parents spoke quitespecifically about how they thought their upbringing in general had on their decisionto start a new venture. The following three quotes from women participants illustratethat growing up with entrepreneurial parents meant they believed they saw thingsdifferently from other people:

I was thinking about the reasons you are doing this [study] and it’s definitely got to be family.We think its normal, my brother and I, to have a business (W6).

Daddy had about two or three businesses and he was an inventor. . . my grandfather on myfathers side had the biggest building firm in London so that was quite normal to have yourown business. Well, why wouldn’t you have your own business? (W3).

It’s very much in your upbringing really, you don’t do things as everyone else does. I wasn’tencouraged to get a job at a supermarket like all my friends did. I was always encouraged tothink outside the square, think differently, always our conversation at the dinner table wascompanies’ figures, what company was doing what (W9).

All three women talked of their upbringing as being different to their peers whoseparents did not have businesses. In relation to their subsequent motivations forstarting a new venture their family background gave them an early view of doingthings differently than children whose parents did not have their own businesses. Anumber of the men participants, in a similar way to these women, also described howthey were influenced by their parents’ experiences in business. The following quotesfrom two of the male participants outline their upbringing in entrepreneurial families:

The reason why I wanted to work for myself is, I guess, I had that innate sense of being selfemployed. Most of my family are self employed (M5).

Absolutely [parents influenced his decision to become an entrepreneur]. Yeah, it is an outlookon life, and my kids are going to be the same . . . they will be as independent as hell (M22).

In these examples, both men described the positive influence of growing up in anentrepreneurial family on their later decision to start a new venture. Early exposure totheir parents’ business ownership played a key role in many of the participants’decisions to become entrepreneurs. As the examples illustrated here suggest manyparticipants were able to trace a link between their decision to become an entrepreneurand their parents. There did not appear to be any gender differences between theexperiences of women and men when discussing their upbringing in general. However,there were other accounts that showed gender differences, and this was the heavyinfluence of fathers, as well as the ways in which participants viewed their parentsinfluence on the new venture creation decision.

Theentrepreneurial

spirit

47

Page 10: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

Influence of fatherOne gender difference that emerged strongly was the influence their mothers andfathers had on the participants’ decision to start a new venture. Most participantsrecalled that their fathers played the primary role in their decision to start a newventure. As an indication of this observation, mothers were discussed by 16 of the 50participants (totalling 25 passages of text), while 29 participants talked of their fathersin the interviews (totalling 66 passages of text). However, not all of these discussionswere in relation specifically to their decision to start a new venture. While this indicatesat the most basic level that fathers may have had more influence, the nature of thisinfluence is considered of most importance and is explored next. First, perhaps themost extreme case of parental influence can be seen in the case of one of the womenparticipants. Her father was a farmer and he took a business-like approach to parentinghis only child:

From an early age, he had what is best described as a business plan for my life. He would takeme to the accountant from when I was about eight years old. He used to let me carry hisbriefcase and we would have coffee and cookies and it was pretty cool. That was one of myfirst lessons in business. He gave me a cheque book when I was 15 and I had an annual salary,I had to manage my expenses. We used to have wage rounds every six months, I had tonegotiate (W17).

In this example, it was clear to her that her father’s role in teaching her about businesswas the major reason she started a venture of her own. Her father was basicallytraining her to be able to run the family farm and this was a key factor in her owndevelopment as an entrepreneur. She elaborates:

I guess from an early age I was unconsciously developing this early knowledge of business,so yes, It’s definitely the inspiration for where I am (W17).

Interestingly, once her father passed away she took over the family farm for a numberof years and then decided she wanted to sell it. She found this decision very difficult, asit was her final tie to her father and she felt like she should keep the farm because ofhim. Eventually, she did sell the farm and was pleased to have done so as she can nowfocus her business skills on what she has a passion for rather than keeping it becauseshe was concerned about her father’s wishes. This example stands out as one whereher father influenced her decisions regarding her work and her business, and she couldbe seen looking to her father (to please him) even after he died. Another womanparticipant also described the strong influence her entrepreneurial father had on herwhile growing up:

My dad, he was quite, a bit like my hero I suppose. He wouldn’t help, he didn’t help but he wasan inspiration in [the] way of his own business . . . he probably nurtured that in me. He didn’twith the others, there were two other girls, because they weren’t interested, I actually becamequite aligned with him and my other two sisters became quite aligned with my mother. Hewas quite a hard man, but I thought he was great (W21).

This participant said she felt inspired by her father and believed that an entrepreneurneeds a role model for inspiration. While her father helped her with her first businessventure in terms of ideas and advice, he refused to help her financially or withproblems that he felt she could solve on her own. For example, at age 15, she wanted tostart a business and it involved buying a large piece of land. Her father suggested she

IJEBR13,1

48

Page 11: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

get a job in order to pay for a deposit on a rental property. She did so, purchased aproperty and made a significant capital gain on it within a year. She then sold it andused this money to finance her first business. However, having a father in businesswhile growing up was not always influential in such a positive way. For oneparticipant, her father was self-employed and sometimes called to work on importantoccasions:

If anything it was probably a negative, because he is an [self-employed]. My memories are ofhim at Christmas going and having to [work] or missing a birthday dinner or whatever, didn’thappen every year, but only remember the bad ones. . .I have a great relationship with mydad, always have, he and I have a special bond so it’s not that I have ever resented the factthat he hasn’t been there, it’s more poor dad, he has got a real hard time (W1).

In this case, similar to the two previous quotes, she talks about her dad fondly andhighlights the relationship and bond she has with her father. She singles out her fatheras being the more influential of her parents and her quote shows she was concerned forher father especially in terms of the nature of his business (e.g. being on call, workingon holidays). Interestingly, she focuses not on her own perception of growing up withher father missing some special occasions but focuses on worrying about how her dadcoped with it.

In a similar vein to the women participants discussed here, many of the men whowere motivated by their parents said that their fathers were key figures in influencingtheir decision to start a new venture. Participant M1’s decision to start a new ventureappeared to be strongly motivated by his father, as his account illustrates:

I had set myself at the age of fifty that I wanted to be running my own business . . .explicitly decided after my father died, who had the same sort of aspiration butbasically ended up working for other people all his life. Never did it, left it too late andthen died within eighteen months of retiring, and I thought, well I am not going to letthat happen to me (M1).

While he already had aspirations to be an entrepreneur, his father dying was a keytrigger for him to make a decision to start a new venture and to set a time frame for it.This quote suggests that he believed his father had failed to follow through on hisvision of becoming an entrepreneur and he refused to meet the same fate. The influenceof fathers is also evident in stories from other men participants whose fathers hadbusinesses of their own, as the following passage illustrates:

He definitely influenced the feeling of independence. He never liked me being a public servant. . . I certainly admired my father’s ability and determination to make the business work(M12).

This passage indicates the influence his father had on his decision to subsequentlybecome an entrepreneur. For M12, choosing not to work with his father in the family’sbusiness was something he felt his father did not like. The desire for independence thathis father instilled in him appeared to have played some part in his decision tosubsequently start his own venture. While he looked to his father with admiration, hedid not want to work for him. Another of the men also viewed his father as beingsuccessful in business and saw him as a role model:

I saw [what] my father did and I wanted to do that, but I didn’t want him to do it for me . . .Maybe I was always trying to outdo him, which I think I did by about 20 times (M20).

Theentrepreneurial

spirit

49

Page 12: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

He looked to his father and wanted to do something similar (owning his own business)but at the same time did not want his father to give him all the answers nor help himdirectly. This participant spoke of wanting to be independent from his father and oftrying to outdo him. He also suggests he learnt by watching his father rather thantalking to him and he highlights the desire to be independent from his father and notask for help. While this participant learnt from his father in a positive way, three otherparticipants had fathers who owned businesses but did not like what they did:

My father died at the age of 53. He was self-employed . . . he was very good at what he did buthe never [was very successful]. He was quite careful and cautious (M14).

While this participants’ father had owned a business himself M14 saw his father asbeing too conservative and not successful. Other men saw the “mistakes” their fathershad made with their own businesses and decided they could learn from theseexperiences and do better themselves:

Some of the things he did I didn’t quite like, I didn’t think he had enough focus, all differentindustries, doing a whole lot of stuff (M15).

No. Dad was not a success, not a silly man . . . but he was a clever bugger,[he just] neverpicked the right things (M9).

Both men spoke of their fathers as being involved in a wide range of entrepreneurialventures. These two participants did not consider their fathers to be successful andlooked at their attempts at business ownership with disapproval. While the linkbetween their fathers and their subsequent decision to start new ventures in thesecases may be implicit, other examples illustrate more clearly how some maleparticipants looked to their fathers as role models but others wanted to learn from theirmistakes and to outdo them. These experiences appeared to differ from those of someof the women participants who looked to their fathers for support and encouragementseeing them as positive role models. The observation that the participants’ fathers heldmore influence than mothers in terms of their children’s later decision to start a ventureis perhaps not surprising. This may be due to the age of most of the participants, wherefor their parents’ generation, it was less common for a woman to own a business than itis today. Therefore, the majority of the business experience they were exposed towould have been their father’s experiences.

Influence of motherAs can be seen from the previous discussion, the primary influencer on theparticipants’ motivations for starting a new venture was fathers. As a contrast, thisdiscussion focuses on excerpts that talk of mothers. The following women illustrate thedifferences between their mothers and fathers. Only one woman directly said hermother influenced her:

My mother particularly [influenced me]. My father for the work ethic . . . Whilst I get a lot ofthe business side from my father, my personality, thank god, comes from my mother. He’s tooaggressive, too assertive (W18).

This excerpt from W18 shows the distinction that she made between her personalityand her “business side”, and she clearly splits the influences into two distinct areas.She did not want to inherit what she saw as aggressive aspects of her father’s

IJEBR13,1

50

Page 13: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

personality. While this quote shows that there was some influence from her mother,other women seemed not to view their mothers so positively:

I had a fantastic father, my mother was alright, but my father was particularly fantastic. Hehad a degree and he believes strongly in education for everyone, even though I am of an erawhere some people thought girls should go and be nurses and things (W13).

This participant considered her father to be fantastic, while her mother was alright.She recognised that her father was particularly forward thinking for the time (she isaged over 55). Another theme emerged from participant W5, who described her motheras having the ability to be entrepreneurial:

I guess my mother if she didn’t have six children, she might have, she would have hadthe ability [to be an entrepreneur] . . . She was probably a bit entrepreneurial. She run alittle business from home when we were children (W5).

This excerpt is particularly interesting as this woman’s mother did in fact have abusiness but was clearly not recognised by the participant as being important. In thiscase, it may imply that women with large families and being an entrepreneur aremutually exclusive. The experiences of the men participants who mentioned theirmothers were remarkably similar to the women’s accounts. Again, there were no casesof men participants saying they were specifically influenced by their mothers in thenew venture creation decision. One male entrepreneur, who singled out his father inearlier quotes as being the key parental role model in his entrepreneurial career, talkedof his mother:

My mother was a great mother. She was. She didn’t have a great role in . . . my thoughtprocesses, but my father did (M20).

Here, this participant appeared to focus on the traditional roles of parents, wheremothers were seen as having responsibilities for caring for the family. There was alsosome discussion of mothers potentially being seen as an anti-role model, and this seemsto be implied by M2:

My father was a Doctor, my mother didn’t bother working, she didn’t need to. She playedladies (M2).

As noted in these excerpts, no participants specifically talked of how they consideredtheir mothers as important influencers in their decision to start a new venture. The ageof the participants in this study will have influenced some of these findings, wheretraditional gendered roles may have been more strongly evident than they are today. Itappears that both women and men participants were equally uninfluenced by theirmothers in relation to the new venture creation decision. Interestingly, even inexamples where the mother and father owned and worked in a business together (suchas a farm), fathers were still described as playing the major influencing role in theirnew venture creation decision. The literature suggested that mothers may play a largerrole in their children’s early socialisation than fathers, but the experiences across therange of participant’s shows the influence of their mothers was recalled as relativelylimited in any capacity.

Theentrepreneurial

spirit

51

Page 14: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

DiscussionAs can be seen from these findings, an entrepreneur’s upbringing appears to be theseedbed from which the decision to start a new venture emerges. Clearly, the decisionto start a new venture is complicated and multi-faceted but the findings show thatparents appear to be a strong influencing factor. However, this is not to suggest thatthe role parents play in this process is the only factor involved. As noted in theliterature review, there are often many complex and intertwining motivations forcreating a new venture, and the family is only one possible consideration.

The findings show that parents are a source of inspiration for many participants intheir decisions to start new ventures. They lend weight to suggestions that norms,attitudes, and values within the family may impact the new venture creation decision(Aldrich and Cliff, 2003). Most of the participants who said they were influenced bytheir parents grew up within a family where entrepreneurship was present (as was thecase for 13 women and 8 men). A family background of owning businesses gave manyof the participants an early view of doing things differently than children whoseparents did not have their own businesses. Their upbringing in an environment wheredinner conversation revolved around parents’ businesses appears to have been acontributing factor in the new venture creation decision.

Fathers were discussed as being influential in the participant’s decision to start anew venture. Mothers, on the other hand seemed to not have been influential in thisdecision. Thus, gender differences were noted with respect to the greater influenceparticipants described their fathers as having in their new venture creation decision.This finding is possibly not surprising given that for this sample, it would have beenuncommon when they were growing up for mothers to have businesses of their own.Therefore, the majority of the business experience they were exposed to would havecome from their fathers. This balance is likely to change over time due to women’sincreased participation in the workforce and particularly, as a result of more womenhaving entrepreneurial experience. In the future, mothers may be more influential intheir children’s subsequent decision to start a new venture.

For some of the women participants, their parents were a source of inspiration andthey learnt valuable lessons from their childhood experiences of their parents owningbusinesses. Some women discussed their fathers in relation to learning from them(what to do, what not to do), being inspired by them and being concerned about them.While fewer men participants were motivated to start a new venture by their parents,some of their accounts differed from the women participants. It was observed that forsome men participants appeared to desire to be different from or better than theirfather and referred to an apparent desire to be independent from their fathers.

Conclusion and implications for further researchThe findings in this study add weight to Aldrich and Cliff’s (2003) claim that using afamily embeddedness perspective is a beneficial way of understanding the newventure creation process. The primary objectives of this study were to explore thenature of parents on the new venture creation decision, and to investigate any genderdifferences in the influence of mothers and fathers, and between men and women inhow they saw the role of their parents in their new venture creation decision. Someconclusions about these gender differences follow, coupled with a number ofsuggestions for further research questions that would add to our understanding of

IJEBR13,1

52

Page 15: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

this under-researched area. Because the family’s impact on the new venture creationdecision has not yet received a great deal of research attention, the current studyprovides much rich qualitative data from which to develop further researchquestions. While this paper contributes to our understanding of a previouslyneglected area, there is still much work to be done in order to understand theinfluence of the family on the decision to start a new venture. Thus, there are manyopportunities to undertake further research. In the first instance, more extensivequalitative work is called for, or a combination of both quantitative and qualitativemethods in order to advance our understanding of this area.

The findings presented in paper have shown that it is indeed possible for parents toignite the entrepreneurial spirit in their children. Demographic studies of entrepreneurshave long concluded that a family history of entrepreneurship is often linked to thedecision to start a new venture. The results of the current study shows that this wasindeed the case for the majority of participants who said they were influenced by theirparents in their decision to start a new venture. One suggested avenue for furtherresearch would be to compare the decision to start a new venture between individualswho had a family background in entrepreneurship and those who did not. This mayallow us to isolate the relative impact of the family in relation to other motivators inorder to better ascertain the role of parents in the new venture creation decision. Giventhat just over half of the participants in this study said they were influenced by theirparents, there were also a similar number who said they were not. While theseparticipants ultimately still became entrepreneurs, it raises questions as to where (andhow) their entrepreneurial spirit emerged. For example, did the participants desireindependence from an employer, or did they learn about entrepreneurship viaeducation, or was it an innate desire to start a new venture? These other potentialfactors could be explored in more depth to see whether (and how) they were importantigniting the entrepreneurial sprit.

A further suggestion relates to the relative importance of the family whencompared to other motivating factors. While an indication of the ranking ofmotivating factors can be gauged from prior quantitative studies it would beinteresting to view how these motivations differed in their impact on the new venturecreation decision. Motivating factors often work in combination and are complex, andit is difficult to suggest that the role parent’s play is more or less important than theother groupings of factors. Thus, it would appear to be productive for researchers tomake greater use of qualitative methods to understand how the motivators interlinkrather than continuing to contribute to the extensive literature that focuses onranking various motivators.

While this study found some pronounced gender differences in both the influenceof mothers and fathers and the experiences of women and men in the sample, moreextensive gender comparisons could be made. In particular, questions emerge as tothe apparently limited role of mothers in the new venture creation decision. Thus, itwould be interesting to explore in greater depth the nature of entrepreneurs’ maternalrelationship. In addition, more research exploring gender dynamics within theentrepreneurs’ parent’s relationship would give greater insights into other, lessobvious, reasons for this heavy dominance of fathers influence in the new venturecreation decision. Alongside the gender differences between mothers and fathers, afurther gender difference was noted in the ways which women and men recalled the

Theentrepreneurial

spirit

53

Page 16: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

nature of the influence their parents had on their decision to start a new venture.While some men appeared to desire independence from their fathers, or to competewith them, some women on the other hand learnt from, were encouraged by, and sawparents as role models. These observations apparently parallel traditional masculineand feminine stereotypes (e.g. independence versus interdependence), and furtherexploration of this would be useful in a later study. For example, studies thatincluded questions regarding roles and relationships within entrepreneurs’ familieswould assist in gaining a greater understanding the nature of these genderdifferences.

As noted, there are many changes occurring in the composition of the family (e.g.number of children decreasing), and previous research has suggested that they mayimpact entrepreneurship. These transitions clearly extend beyond entrepreneursfamilies and exist at a societal level but can have effects on the new venture creationprocess (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003). The results of this study showed that the potentialnegative flow-on effects (such as fewer start-up resources being available from parents)did not seem to have impacted these participants, as much of the influence that theytook from their parents was from their childhood. They did not appear to want tangibleresources from their parents at the time of start-up of their new venture, but the effectof changes to the composition of the family may yet impact the next generation ofentrepreneurs.

As with any research, there are potential limitations. The sample size may beconsidered by researchers in the positivist tradition to be a potential limitation andclaims may be made that a larger sample would have been more appropriate. In studieswith a larger sample size it would be worthwhile to explore differences between thosewho were influenced by their parents and those who were not in order to further teaseout the nature of any family-related differences. Secondly, every entrepreneur has hisor her own motivations for starting a new venture and all of these are important andrelevant to that individual. However, as is the case in most research, this studyattempts to gauge themes that seem important to the participants as a group. In doingso, close attention has been paid to maintaining individuals’ voices, but data reductionis a necessary yet difficult task in qualitative research. While every effort has beenmade to voice the participants’ views, it is the authors’ own interpretation of whatseemed important to the participants that ultimately appears here. However,interpretive researchers acknowledge that we bring our biases and assumptions to anyresearch (Strauss and Corbin, 1990). Thus, the relationship between researcher andparticipant is viewed as important and necessary (Benny and Hughes, 1970; King,1994).

The results of this study extends our understanding of the role of the family in thenew venture creation decision, and lends support to Rogoff and Heck’s (2003)contention that the family fuels the fire of entrepreneurship. It adds to the limitedresearch in the area that suggests that the family can act as an incubator toentrepreneurship (Aldrich and Cliff, 2003, Belcourt, 1988) and provides many insightsinto the ways in which parents can influence the new venture creation decision. If wereturn to the title of this paper, which questioned whether the role of parents in the newventure creation decision was gendered, it would seem there is a strong indication thatit is indeed gendered. As noted, more research would assist in better understanding thenature of these gender differences.

IJEBR13,1

54

Page 17: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

References

Ahl, H.J. (2003), Ways to Study the Text of Entrepreneurship, Scandinavian Academy ofManagement, Reykjavik.

Alcorso, C. (1993), “‘And I’d like to thank my wife.’ Gender dynamics and the ethnic ‘familybusiness’”, Australian Feminist Studies, Vol. 17, Autumn, pp. 93-108.

Aldrich, H.E. and Cliff, J.E. (2003), “The pervasive effects of family on entrepreneurship: toward afamily embeddedness perspective”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 18 No. 5,pp. 573-396.

Basu, A. (2004), “Entrepreneurial aspirations among family business owners”, InternationalJournal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol. 10 Nos 1/2, pp. 12-33.

Belcourt, M. (1987), “Sociological factors associated with female entrepreneurship”, Journal ofSmall Business and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 22-31.

Belcourt, M. (1988), “The family incubator model of female entrepreneurship”, Journal of SmallBusiness and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 34-44.

Benny, M. and Hughes, E.C. (1970), “Of sociology and the interview”, in Denzin, N.K. (Ed.),Sociological Methods: A Sourcebook, Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago, IL.

Bird, B. (1993), “Demographic approaches to entrepreneurship: the role of experience andbackground”, in Katz, J. and Brockhaus, R.H. (Eds), Advances in Entrepreneurship, FirmEmergence and Growth, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.

Borooah, V.K., Collins, G., Hart, M. and MacNabb, A. (1997), “Women in business”, in Deakins, D.,Jennings, P. and Mason, C. (Eds), Small Firms: Entrepreneurship in the Nineties,Paul Chapman Publishing, London.

Brockhaus, R.H. Snr (1987), “Entrepreneurial folklore”, Journal of Small Business Management,Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 1-6.

Brush, C.G. (1990), “Women and enterprise creation”, in OECD (Ed.), Enterprising Women: LocalInitiatives for Job Creation, OECD, Paris.

Buttner, E.H. (1993), “Female entrepreneurs: how far have they come?”, Business Horizons, Vol. 36No. 2, pp. 59-65.

Carland, J.W., Hoy, F. and Carland, J.A.C. (1988), “‘Who is an entrepreneur?’ is a question worthasking”, American Journal of Small Business, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 33-9.

Carland, J.W., Hoy, F., Boulton, W.R. and Carland, J.A.C. (1984), “Differentiating entrepreneursfrom small business owners: a conceptualization”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9No. 2, pp. 354-9.

Carter, S. and Cannon, T. (1992), Women as Entrepreneurs: A Study of Female Business Owners,Their Motivations, Experiences and Strategies for Success, Academic Press, London.

Cromie, S. (1987), “Motivations of aspiring male and female entrepreneurs”, Journal ofOccupational Behaviour, Vol. 8, pp. 251-61.

Cromie, S. and Hayes, J. (1988), “Towards a typology of female entrepreneurs”, SociologicalReview, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 87-113.

Curran, J. and Blackburn, R.A. (2001), Researching the Small Enterprise, Sage Publications,London.

DeMartino, R. and Barbato, R. (2003), “Differences between women and men MBA entrepreneurs:exploring family flexibility and wealth creation as career motivators”, Journal of BusinessVenturing, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 815-32.

Dennis, W.J. (2003), “Raising response rates in mail surveys of small business owners: results ofan experiment”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 278-95.

Theentrepreneurial

spirit

55

Page 18: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

Drucker, P.F. (1985), Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practice and Principles, Heinemann,London.

Fischer, E.M., Reuber, A.R. and Dyke, L.S. (1993), “A theoretical overview and extension ofresearch on sex, gender, and entrepreneurship”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 8 No. 2,pp. 151-68.

Fontana, A. and Frey, J.H. (1994), “Interviewing: the art of science”, in Denzin, N.K. andLincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks,CA.

Fox, M.A. (1998), “Motivations and aspirations of self-employed Maori in New Zealand”, workingpaper, Canterbury, Lincoln University.

Gartner, W.B. (1990), “What are we talking about when we talk about entrepreneurship?”,Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 15-28.

Gilligan, C. (1982), In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development,Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Glaser, B.G. (1992), Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis: Emergence vs Forcing, Sociology Press,Mill Valley, CA.

Greenfield, S. and Nayak, A. (1992), “The management information needs of very smallbusinesses: gender differences”, in Welford, R. (Ed.), Small Businesses and Small BusinessDevelopment: A Practical Approach, European Research Press, Bradford.

Hakim, C. (1989), “New recruits to self-employment in the 1980’s”, Employment Gazette, June,pp. 286-97.

Hamilton, R.T. (1987), “Motivations and aspirations of business founders”, International SmallBusiness Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 70-8.

Harrison, R.T. and Hart, M. (1993), “Entrepreneurship and public policy: encouraging enterprisein Northern Ireland”, in Aitkin, R., Chell, E. and Mason, C. (Eds), New Directions in SmallBusiness Research, Avebury, Aldershot.

Hisrich, R.D. and Brush, C.G. (1985), “Women and minority entrepreneurs: a comparativeanalysis”, in Hornaday, J.A., Shills, E.B., Timmons, J.A. and Vesper, K.H. (Eds), Frontiersof Entrepreneurship Research, Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Babson CollegeEntrepreneurship Research Conference, Babson College, Wellesley, MA.

Honig-Haftel, S. and Marin, L.R. (1986), “Is the female entrepreneur at a disadvantage?”, Thrust:The Journal for Employment and Training Professionals, Vol. 7 Nos 1/2, pp. 49-64.

Hurley, A. (1999), “Incorporating feminist theories into sociological theories of entrepreneurship”,Women in Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 54-62.

King, N. (1994), “The qualitative research interview”, in Cassell, C. and Symon, G. (Eds),Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research: A Practical Guide, Sage Publications,London.

Kuratko, D., Hornsby, J.S. and Naffziger, D.W. (1997), “An examination of owner’s goals insustaining entrepreneurship”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 35 No. 1,pp. 24-33.

Kuratko, D.F. (1993), “Family business succession in Korean and US firms”, Journal of SmallBusiness Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 132-7.

Long, W. (1983), “The meaning of entrepreneurship”, American Journal of Small Business, Vol. 8No. 2, pp. 47-56.

McClelland, E. and Swail, J. (2005), “Following the pathway of female entrepreneurs”,International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 87-107.

IJEBR13,1

56

Page 19: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

McDowell, C. (1995), “Small business objectives: an exploratory study of NSW retailers”, SmallEnterprise Research: The Journal of SEAANZ, Vol. 3 Nos 1/2, pp. 65-83.

McGoldrick, M. and Troast, J.G. Jr (1993), “Ethnicity, families, and family business: implicationsfor practicioners”, Family Business Review, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 283-300.

Mallette, H. and McGuinness, N. (1999), “Gender differences in the entrepreneurial start-upprocess”, paper presented at the 44th ICSB World Conference, Naples.

Malveaux, J. (1990), “Women in the labour market: the choices women have”, in OECD (Ed.),Enterprising Women: Local Initiatives for Job Creation, OECD, Paris.

Mangione, T.W. (1995), Mail Surveys: Improving the Quality, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks,CA.

Marlow, S. (1997), “Self-employed women: new opportunities, old challenges?”, Entrepreneurshipand Regional Development, Vol. 9, pp. 199-210.

Marlow, S. and Strange, A. (1994), “Female entrepreneurs: success by whose standards?”,in Tanton, M. (Ed.), Women in Management: A Developing Presence, Routledge, London.

Matthews, C.H. and Moser, S.B. (1996), “A Longitudinal Investigation of the impact of familybackground and gender on interest in small firm ownership”, Journal of Small BusinessManagement, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 29-43.

Mazzarol, T., Volery, T., Doss, N. and Thein, V. (1999), “Factors influencing small businessstart-ups: a comparison with previous research”, International Journal of EntrepreneurialBehaviour & Research, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 48-63.

Minniti, M., Bygrave, W.D. and Autio, E. (2005), Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2005Executive Report, Babson College, Babson Park, MA.

Moore, D.P. and Buttner, E.H. (1997), Women Entrepreneurs: Moving Beyond the Glass Ceiling,Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Morrisson, A. (2000), “Entrepreneurship: what triggers it?”, International Journal ofEntrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 59-71.

Paulin, W.L., Coffey, R.E. and Spaulding, M.E. (1982), “Entrepreneurship research: methods anddirections”, in Kent, C.A., Sexton, D.L. and Vesper, K.H. (Eds), Encycloepedia ofEntrepreneurship, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Pinfold, J.E. (2001), “The expectations of new business founders: the New Zealand case”, Journalof Small Business Management, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 279-85.

Ram, M. (2001), “Family dynamics in a small consultancy firm: a case study”, Human Relations,Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 395-418.

Reynolds, H.T. (1993), “Analysis of nominal data”, in Lewis-Bec, M.S. (Ed.), Basic Statistics, SagePublications, London.

Richards, L. (2000), Using NVivo in Qualitative Research, QSR International Pty, Doncaster.

Rogoff, E.G. and Heck, R.K.Z. (2003), “Editorial: evolving research in entrepreneurship andfamily business: recognizing family as the oxygen that feeds the fire of entrepreneurship”,Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 559-66.

Schumpeter, J.A. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard University Press,Cambridge, MA.

Scott, C.E. (1986), “Why more women are becoming entrepreneurs”, Journal of Small BusinessManagement, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 37-44.

Segal, G., Borgia, D. and Schoenfeld, J. (2005), “The motivation to become an entrepreneur”,International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 42-57.

Theentrepreneurial

spirit

57

Page 20: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

Shane, S., Kolvereid, L. and Westhead, P. (1991), “An exploratory examination of the reasonsleading to new firm formation across country and gender”, Journal of Business Venturing,Vol. 6, pp. 431-46.

Silverman, D. (2000), Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook, Sage Publications,London.

Stainback, S. and Stainback, W. (1988), Understanding and Conducting Qualitative Research,The Council for Exceptional Children, Dubuque, IA.

Stanworth, J., Stanworth, C., Granger, B. and Blyth, S. (1989), “Who becomes an entrepreneur?”,International Small Business Journal, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 11-22.

Stanworth, M.J. and Curran, J. (1973), Management Motivation in the Smaller Business,Aldershot, Gower Press.

Statistics New Zealand (2005), Demographic Trends, Statistics New Zealand, Wellington.

Stevenson, L.A. (1990), “Some methodological problems associated with researching womenentrepreneurs”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 9, pp. 439-46.

Stewart, W.H.J., Carland, J.A.C. and Carland, J.W. (1996), “Empirically defining the entrepreneur”,Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 1-18.

Still, L.V. and Soutar, G.N. (2001), Generational and Gender Differences in the Start-Up Goals andLater Satisfaction of Small Business Proprietors, Australia and New Zealand Academy ofManagement (ANZAM), Auckland.

Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Proceduresand Techniques, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.

Sundin, E. and Holmquist, C. (1991), “The growth of women entrepreneurship: push or pullfactors?”, in Davies, L.G. and Gibb, A.A. (Eds), Recent Research in Entrepreneurship,Avebury, Aldershot.

Tagiuri, R. and Davis, J.A. (1992), “On the goals of successful family companies”, FamilyBusiness Review, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 43-62.

Ufuk, H. and Ozgen, O. (2001), “Interaction between the business and family lives of womenentrepreneurs in Turkey”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 95-107.

Vivarelli, M. (1991), “The birth of new enterprises”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 3, pp. 215-23.

Wah, S.S. (2004), “Entrepreneurial leaders in family business organisations”, Journal ofEnterprising Culture, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 1-34.

Watson, J., Woodliff, D., Newby, R. and McDowell, C. (2000), “Developing an instrument toexamine SME owner-objectives”, paper presented at the ICSB World Conference, Brisbane.

Wetherell, M. (1977), “Social structure, ideology and family dynamics: the case of parenting”, inMuncie, J. (Ed.), Understanding the Family, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, London.

Young, K. (1992), “Household resource management”, in Ostergaard, L. (Ed.), Gender andDevelopment: A Practical Guide, Routledge, London.

Zahra, S.A. and Sharma, P. (2004), “Family business research: a strategic reflection”, FamilyBusiness Review, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 331-47.

Appendix. Family-related interview questions. Why did you start the business?. Did anyone encourage (or discourage) you to start your own business?. What were the main expectations you had for your business at start-up?. Personal motivation – what did you hope to achieve personally?

IJEBR13,1

58

Page 21: Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered?

. Were there family related motivations at start-up – parents, children, siblings, partner?

. Are there family related motivations now?

. Do any family members work in business? Who/in what capacity?

. Does/did anyone in family own a business? What type of business/when?

. How do/did family members react to starting the business?

. In the future, what are your goals for the business (including personal and family goals)?

Corresponding authorJodyanne Kirkwood can be contacted at: [email protected]

Theentrepreneurial

spirit

59

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints