This view overlooks the existence of more subtle but pervasive and socially acceptable sexist attitudes that often go unnoticed. Given the sheer number of people interested in or working in startups today, from investors to suppliers to applicants, the impact of these subtle forms of sexism can stack up across a large and diverse group of decision-makers.
For initiatives to address gender inequality in entrepreneurship to be effective, we need to gain a deeper understanding of the impact of these subtle biases that women entrepreneurs face.
Benevolent sexism in entrepreneurship
Benevolent sexism is a form of bias that, at first glance, appears to be positive towards women, but ultimately reinforces gender roles and perpetuates inequality.
In contrast to overtly hostile forms of discrimination, benevolent sexism manifests itself in seemingly harmless beliefs. This type of sexism often portrays women as vulnerable or in need of protection, while men are positioned as providers and protectors.
Because benevolent sexism is often expressed in seemingly positive ways, it is not questioned by either men or women. It can serve to maintain traditional gender dynamics by creating the illusion of support for women while limiting their autonomy.
Benevolent sexism often portrays women as vulnerable or in need of protection, while positioning men as providers and protectors.
(Shutterstock)
Specifically, research shows that benevolent sexism undermines women in the workplace and causes them to hold fewer positions of power in organizations. The startup ecosystem is particularly fertile ground for this type of sexism to manifest and worsen over time.
Because women are more underrepresented in entrepreneurship than in traditional organizations, startup evaluators are careful not to respond to overtly sexist attitudes. This, in turn, gives room for more subtle forms of bias to emerge.
Benevolent sexism benefits men
Our recent research examined how benevolent sexism affects how reviewers evaluate female- and male-led startups.
We originally theorized that startup evaluators with benevolent sexist views would be more likely to rate female-led startups as less viable (i.e., more likely to fail). We didn't expect their valuation of men's startups to be affected at all.
To test this hypothesis, we conducted three studies in which participants were tasked with evaluating a hypothetical early-stage startup founded by either a man or a woman. Both entrepreneurs in our scenarios had identical qualifications and startup ideas.
The results of all three studies found that the more the reviewers endorsed benevolent sexist beliefs, the more positively they viewed male-led startups. There was no impact on the valuation of women-led startups. This result was the same in two of the three studies, regardless of whether the reviewers themselves were men or women.
Dealing with unfair advantages
Our findings require a fundamental rethinking of what it means to achieve true justice. It's not enough to remove the unfair barriers that hold women back; We also need to confront the unfair privileges that drive men.
This suggests that common solutions to address gender inequalities are not enough. They focus primarily on the barriers women face, while ignoring the unfair advantages offered to men. These shared solutions include a focus on educating, mentoring and connecting women.
To effectively address the gender gap in entrepreneurship, we need to raise awareness of the hidden effects of benevolent sexism. This could be achieved through education and training of entrepreneurs, mentors and investors. Such interventions could convey to these stakeholders that benevolent sexism may appear positive but is actually harmful.
Additionally, we need to redesign the startup evaluation process. The currently unclear and unstructured conditions of startups give rise to subtle prejudices.
To address this problem, we need clearly defined and transparent criteria for evaluating startups. In fact, previous research shows that creating clear structure, transparency, and accountability in evaluation processes is critical to reducing biased decisions.
Fix the system, not the women
Our research challenges traditional interventions that exclusively address overt sexist attitudes toward women. Many interventions suggest that women need to change.
For example, women are advised to change their communication and negotiation style. You are also advised to move into more masculine and high-profile industries.
Such advice overlooks the benefits men derive from it. As our research shows, male-led startups are viewed as more promising, even when women have identical skills and ideas. Furthermore, well-intentioned initiatives to address gender gaps in entrepreneurship can backfire by signaling that women need help, which propagates a benevolently sexist tone.
This requires fixing the system, not fixing the women. We need to address gender inequality by examining and changing the attitudes and behaviors of assessors, rather than encouraging women to change.
Nhu Nguyen, PhD Candidate in Management, McGill University; Frederic Godart, Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior, INSEAD; Ivona Hideg, Associate Professor and Ann Brown Chair in Organization Studies, York University, Canada, and Yuval Engel, Associate Professor of Entrepreneurship, University of Amsterdam
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Comments are closed.