Tag Archives: entrepreneurship

Growing Your Ecosystem

Leave a reply

This post was contributed by Miranda Weston-Smith, who on 10 March was a guest speaker at an event hosted by the Transforming Institutions by Gendering contents and Gaining Equality in Research (TRIGGER) team – a research project in Birkbeck’s Department of Management.

biobeat-brandingAt a joint Birkbeck School of Science and TRIGGER event, Miranda Weston-Smith discussed her experiences in founding BioBeat together with opportunities for scientists and business graduates in bio-sciences. Miranda helps early stage biomedical businesses attract investment and develop their business strategies.

Miranda has worked with many entrepreneurs and is experienced in fundraising, business planning and technology transfer. She is a long standing Mentor for Cambridge Judge Business School’s Entrepreneurship Centre, contributes to the University of Cambridge Masters in Bioscience Enterprise course and is a member of the St John’s Innovation Centre Training Team.

Miranda studied Natural Sciences at the University of Cambridge and has a Diploma from the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants.

 

She brings experience as a Technology Manager at Cambridge Enterprise, where she assessed and marketed life science technologies, negotiated licences and spun-out companies. She was responsible for technology transfer at the University of Cambridge for the Cambridge-MIT Institute. In her five years at the seed capital firm, Cambridge Research and Innovation, she invested in early stage technologies. Miranda co-founded Cambridge Network with Hermann Hauser.

 

As a result of working with researchers, Miranda founded and runs BioBeat, a programme to inspire the next wave of bio-entrepreneurs and business leaders. It is a way to engage with successful women entrepreneurs and she explained that in her experience women adopt different strategies to issues such as working in teams, risks, and raising finance. Doctor Helen Lee, Director of Research, Department of Haematology, University of Cambridge and Founder, Diagnostics for the Real World, and Dr Jane Osbourn, Vice President Research and Development, MedImmune and Head of Site MedImmune Cambridge were hugely important catalysts for BioBeat getting underway and for the first Bio Beat conference in 2013, with an all-female panel.

Introducing the Cambridge bio cluster

Miranda introduced the Cambridge bio cluster that involved a range of organisations involved in medicines, R&D Support, clinical diagnostics and consumer health. Many of the companies involved in these areas have connections with Cambridge University. Those involved in medicines may have direct intellectual property (IP) relationships with University. For others, the relationships may be more indirect through networking between individuals and groups.

Miranda discussed the differences between the Cambridge biocluster of 2010 and of 2015. Lines are much tighter and investment has significantly increased through a range of funders. For example, Axol Bioscience after setting out to obtain £600,000 through a crowdfunding campaign, managed to bring in £1 million.

On advice for entrepreneurs, Miranda stressed that it is Important to find out where strengths of a company lie. The company needs to find where it sits in the market – where its customers are – and then funding can speed-up. For example, one company set out to exploit exhalation technology through non-invasive equipment that was developed as a veterinary product for horses and other animals. However, having discovered that managing severe breathing attacks such as asthma costs the NHS over £1 billion per year, the company is now developing the technology for human patients. The approval procedure, finances and returns are completely different in these two sectors.

Another aspect stressed by Miranda is linking-up the product and the market with the financial details. Investors are really interested in the two aspects of market and finance as well as the product, so providing projections of three-year cash-flows can be very important. Investors will be seeking creativity in potential problem-solving from an early stage.

Q&A

Miranda then took questions in a lively session during which most delegates to the seminar participated by asking specific questions or joining in the discussion that ensued.

The first question related to the institutional anchors that underpin the bio-science cluster. Miranda said that Cambridge University provided local industry links and was there as a strong, constant presence. The corporates that are present are a mainstay that can provide sponsorship as well as international connections and perspectives. BioBeat is also a way of opening up fresh energies and a way of encouraging people to do more.

In answer to later questions about the university’s role, Miranda confirmed that the institution does not usually seek absolute control of enterprises, but tries to support incubate, and accelerate ideas. Cambridge University’s IP policy is that of retention of the first right to file patent applications; but copyright rests with the researchers. This means that there are many ways to exploit the ideas and not just go through the University. In addition, Cambridge Enterprises puts in seed money, but this is generally done in a low key way. Generally the University sees itself as an enabler and incubator.

A series of questions and some discussion followed about how to get involved in networking from a student business perspective, rather than as a scientific researcher. Miranda suggested that the first thing to do is to just try it after scoping-out what events are going on. Miranda candidly admitted that when she first started, she didn’t really understand what networking was all about and that you have to learn on the job. Porosity and being interested in what others are doing are important. Also, if you go out with one or two colleagues, it is important not just to stand together; just go up to people and start talking to them.

In the discussion it was mentioned that potential entrepreneurs could attend interesting networking events. Such events are regularly attended by service providers, head-hunters, institutions and sometimes investors. In London, One Nucleus holds regular events. Miranda confirmed the value of attending them.

Asked about how the Cambridge bio-cluster compared with others in Europe, Miranda suggested that one of ways is to look at companies that are moving into the area, such as   Ilumina. Microsoft has its European R&D office in Cambridge. Astra Zeneca (AZ) already has various laboratories around Cambridge, but eventually some 1600 – 2000 people will move in to their new building. The impact on the cluster will be for example, there will be opportunities for sub-contracting work and for early stage collaborative projects.

Finally, on the subject of how Miranda saw the cluster evolving, she said she expected Cambridge University to continue to spin-out biotech companies, and with spin-outs from other companies, the cluster will grow further. Spin-outs will also come from Barbaham Institute and Addenbrookes Hospital and from companies such Illumina.

Find out more

Share

Social is Beautiful

Leave a reply

Birkbeck/SOAS contribution to Global Entrepreneurship Week reveals value of small-scale enterprise

For seven days each November, Global Entrepreneurship Week (GEW) celebrates the people and activities that turn ideas into enterprises. During the week, around the world, events large and small enable individuals to network, learn from experts, meet possible collaborators, and “explore their potential as self-starters and innovators” who can “launch start-ups that… drive economic growth and expand human welfare”, as the GEW website explains.

Asami Miyamoto (pictured right) of Asami Language Services takes part in a Speech Mentoring session

Asami Miyamoto (pictured right) of Asami Language Services takes part in a Speech Mentoring session

For GEW 2015, which ran from 16 to 22 November, Birkbeck teamed up with the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) to present a wide range of events. One achievement of this partnership was to draw attention to small-scale enterprise and the possible social value of entrepreneurship – the “human welfare” part of GEW’s description: an important focus, alongside images of high-tech Silicon Valley start-ups attaining vast commercial success, which the word “entrepreneurship” may first bring to mind.

This social role was the focus of a talk by Hugo Sintes Pons, Enterprise Development Programme (EDP) Manager, Oxfam GB, on Monday 16 November in SOAS’s Khalili Lecture Theatre, presented by Birkbeck/SOAS. The subject for the evening was “Solving Inequality: Supporting Entrepreneurs Where It Matters Most”.

Hugo’s Oxfam web entry, says the EDP “promotes and invests in early-stage agricultural enterprises that promote economic opportunities”. Its web page explains the EDP “helps many thousands of people – especially women – to work their way out of poverty”. The programme invests “where others don’t go and where the potential for social impact is highest” by providing “expertise from a board of successful businesspeople” as well as loans and grants to build “sustainable businesses”.

Looking at the EDP, the evening offered a view of top-down assistance (capital and expertise) encouraging bottom-up empowerment. By seeking potential entrepreneurs in communities that lack resources, the programme’s aim was to enable local, small-scale entrepreneurship as a vehicle for the poor and disenfranchised to generate initiatives and some wealth and influence for themselves.

In this approach, micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) specifically could benefit. In developing countries, enterprises are often “micro” and informal. SMEs have been labelled the “missing middle” as their financial needs ($5,000 to $2 million) are too large for microfinance lenders, but too small for banks or other investors. Both MEs and SMEs may therefore require forms of support that other institutions cannot offer but that the EDP can draw attention to or consider.

The EDP also sees women specifically as essential to development, and support for their enterprises can help women achieve more influence in otherwise male-dominated societies, and can create wider economic opportunities.

A question-and-answer discussion followed the talk, and the evening also considered ongoing issues facing the EDP and how it was adapting to circumstances and with experience to improve the tactics, strategy and targeting of support.

Issues raised included dealing with low or slow success rates; high costs and challenges for rural enterprises (distance, electricity supply, volatile markets, uncertain climate); difficulties in obtaining business advice; cooperatives versus private limited enterprises; women-friendly versus women-owned businesses; managing relationships with multiple stakeholders, including philanthropists providing time and money; and moving from a market approach towards an enterprise approach.

The event also introduced the audience to the Global Social Entrepreneurship Network (on Twitter @GlobalSEN). Supported by the Cabinet Office, this platform works with social entrepreneurs around the world, pooling their learning, models and expertise.

Overall, the talk was an excellent starting point for GEW 2015 at Birkbeck and SOAS.

GEW Bazaar

Small-scale and social enterprises led by women were also prominent at the Bazaar in the SOAS junior common room on 18 November, a Birkbeck/SOAS version for GEW of an event that SOAS holds roughly once a month.

At the event, SOAS Student Enterprise Officer Issy Schmidt explained that the Bazaar exemplifies the college’s enterprise provision, offering a platform to entrepreneurial students and alumni, and invited external entrepreneurs and small-scale enterprises.

The partnership also found a venue for an event involving a project that perhaps epitomises entrepreneurship’s welfare role: on Tuesday 17 November, Birkbeck’s Clore Management Centre hosted the launch of the book Yeshialem Learns About Fistula, by SOAS student and founder of the Women’s Health Organization International, Habiba Cooper Diallo.

This children’s book, about a medical condition that can result from childbirth, is of great social rather than commercial value, and publication required considerable entrepreneurial ability from the author. Together, Birkbeck and SOAS played a part in promoting this book, in providing a platform for a project that perhaps represented an aspect of these colleges’ partnership in promoting social enterprise for GEW 2015.

Businesses at the Bazaar included Women Worldwide, founded by director Susan Ma, in October 2014 as a platform to sell products made by women, “supporting these women to earn a living through craft, and not through charity”.

On display were an enticing range of creams, jewellery and other beautifully handcrafted items sourced globally, and Susan saw her company as addressing a need that extends beyond developing countries: “It’s for women all over [the world]… We’ve got women who are refugees here… It’s about trying to create opportunity through trade, and for women to be able to take their own direction in life and make their own choices – and money helps that.”

She also considers a wider economic argument for women’s empowerment: “One projection I have heard is that if we empowered all women in the world today, its economy would increase by $30 trillion.” That’s almost twice US GDP in 2014.

Susan was one of the day’s external participants. An invitation to speak at a careers event led to the Bazaar and involvement in Student Hub internship schemes.

Another enterprise at the Bazaar was the henna stall run by economics students Khadeeja Shahid and Sharmeen Shani. Besides raising money for the Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation, the two entrepreneurs were helping to extend henna’s cultural reach in London – and generate male as well as female interest in a form of body art reassuringly less permanent than tattooing.

Social anthropology student Tayler Ulmer has brought her family’s baking from back home in Chicago to SOAS, giving others the chance to try it at the Bazaar. Did she see herself as a global entrepreneur? “Sure,” the Bazaar had given her a taste for business….. and for London “I love it here… It’s very diverse – just a great experience… I think I want to live here – as long as I can make my own food!”

Starting a business

For those inspired to turn ideas into business, perhaps by events during GEW, Enterprise Club at Birkbeck on Wednesday 18 November offered some important insights on first steps.

The evening’s facilitator, Ben Leon, founded executive coaching and consulting company Bravo Lima, and has extensive experience in many areas of business, particularly travel.

Points addressed included planning – strategy on one page – and realistic schedules divided into timeframes of six months, three months and one month, with the customer at the centre of the strategy.

Highlighting examples from his own career as well as case studies of other businesses, Ben indirectly discussed what Michael Porter and Mark Kramer, in a Harvard Business Review article, call “creating ‘shared value’ – generating economic value in a way that also produces value for society by addressing its challenges”. Doing this could help start-ups build a virtuous cycle of recommendations and advocates.

Reflecting Birkbeck’s student diversity, international differences were discussed, ranging from policy, regulation, and tax complexities around starting new businesses in France, to attracting international trade to Brazil, and ecommerce in Georgia.

The discussion identified various resources. For business mentoring, Birkbeck has Enterprise Pathways, Mentoring Pathways, and the Work Readiness Programme. Outside Birkbeck there are the Institute of Directors’ 99 Programme and student membership, Meetup, London Small Business Centre and general interest events on Eventbrite.

For business services there are Upwork or Fiverr to find freelancers to work with, firms like Veale Wasbrough Vizards for start-up-specific legal services, Escape the City to seek like-minded people looking to change career, and Worthwhile for those seeking to start a career with social impact.

Concluding, Ben warned that start-ups could be rewarding but hard work. While those concerned with intellectual property rights and protecting ideas would have to take care with what and how to communicate, the speaker outlined the benefits of sharing the burden by taking advice, sharing ideas and meeting others with complementary strengths.

Speed Mentoring: Key Note Speaker

Dr Harveen Chugh (pictured right) leads a Speed Mentoring session

Dr Harveen Chugh (pictured right) leads a Speed Mentoring session

The Speed Mentoring event on 19th November in the Court Room of Senate House, was the perfect opportunity for entrepreneurial students to get some one-to-one expert advice on a whole range of subjects. The Key note speaker was Dr Harveen Chugh, who recently established her own entrepreneurship consultancy business working with universities, start-ups and the government.

During her speech, Harveen suggested that starting an enterprise was down to the passion and desire of the individual, and firmly believes that there is an entrepreneurial personality with specific traits. These traits include creativity, being innovative, a risk-taker and an idea-generator. Entrepreneurial individuals could be motivated by money, ambition, or not having any fear of failure.

She also pointed out that more enterprise support is available now than ever before, with last year seeing a record-breaking 581,713 start-ups in the UK, which meant it ranked 4th most entrepreneurial country in the world, and the most entrepreneurial in Europe.

Harveen drew attention to Accelerators, which can speed up the process of launching businesses and typically take equity for seed funding to help finance the start-up. She highlighted the importance of selecting an Accelerator which has the most relevant network of contacts. She also emphasised the proximity of London’s own Tech City: with so many experienced entrepreneurs so close, it is incredibly helpful to get involved at the silicon roundabout. As she pointed out, it is the third-largest technology start-up cluster in the world after San Francisco and New York City.

Harveen highlighted the importance of being prepared to be able to discuss a new start-up with anyone at any time, as funding can come from anywhere. Harveen also encouraged students to organise sale meetings in order to experience the process and take feedback on focus areas.

She concluded by drawing attention to an important attitude shift, where it is now ‘cool to fail’ in business. Many employers see the passion and courage necessary for establishing a start-up as positive attributes. There are also now more opportunities available for entrepreneurially-minded individuals within organisations to lead and develop projects.

Her final words encouraged her audience to go out, take the risk, and enjoy it!

Speed Mentoring Sessions

Harveen’s speech was then followed by 1-2-1 speed mentoring for students with 11 specialist entrepreneurial mentors, allowing students the opportunity to discuss their enterprise ideas and gain valuable advice and insight into starting their own business.

The mentors were:

  • Dr Harveen Chugh, Entrepreneurship Consultant
  • Natalie Campbell, Founder of ‘A Very Good Company’; Director of ‘Kensington Creates’
  • Vivi Friedgut, Founder of ‘Blackbullion’
  • Asami Miyamoto, Founder of ‘Asami Language Services’
  • Ben Leon, Managing Partner of ‘Bravo Lima’
  • Frederique Prevost, Founder of ‘Aware Square’
  • Nishal Desai, Co-Founder of ‘Imin’
  • Ilma Ibrisevic, Business Development Associate at ‘Balloon Ventures’
  • Naqiyah Sultan, Founder, ‘Kashka’
  • Yasmin Desai, Founder of ‘thestartupgirl.co.uk’
  • Anisah Osman Britton, Founder of ‘Allia.io’

“There was a wonderful buzz in the room for the Enterprise Speed Mentoring event. As a mentor, whilst the 1-to-1s with the students were short and intense, I was impressed with their level of preparedness for the sessions and their engagement.  The incredible richness of diversity of business ideas the students brought to the table was inspiring, and the feedback received was the most rewarding.”

Ben Leon, Managing Partner, Bravo Lima

Tea & Cake Drop In.

This was an opportunity for students to drop in and gain specific one to one advice related to their business ideas or enterprises provided by Claire Renwick, Student Enterprise Manager, SOAS.

Advice included:

  • Branding
  • Funding
  • Marketing
  • Target Market
  • Networking

The event was an opportunity for students at all stages of their enterprise journey to have an honest chat regarding their business idea in a relaxed and welcoming atmosphere.

The way ahead

Together, Birkbeck and SOAS presented a variety of exciting events during GEW 2015. The experience offers an enticing prospect for future collaborations. Please visit Enterprise Pathways for upcoming opportunities.

Find out more

Share

Can policy transform regions into entrepreneurship and innovation hubs?

Leave a reply

This post was contributed by Helen Lawton Smith, professor of Entrepreneurship at Birkbeck’s Department of Management. Prof Lawton Smith attended a workshop – ‘Can Policy Transform Regions into Entrepreneurship and Innovation Hubs? Theory, Evidence and Practice’ – hosted by the college’s Centre for Innovation Management Research (CIMR) on Friday 4 December

Angel of the North - Image courtesy of Tom Blackwell under CC via Flickr.com

Angel of the North – Image courtesy of Tom Blackwell under CC via Flickr.com

The latest CIMR workshop brought together both those who design policies and those who analyse the policy making process. It hosted representatives from the north of England, suggested to be comparatively disadvantaged economically, and the prosperous south. International comparisons were offered to provide insight into what works in policy making and what should be avoided.

 

 

The speakers were

  • Professor Roy Sandbach, ‘Innovation North East… building regional prosperity’
  • Dr Elvira Uyarra, ‘Key challenges of ‘smart’ policies for regional transformation’
  • Dr Adrian Healy, ‘From principles to practices in Smart Specialisation: Lessons from European Regions’
  • Professor Bjorn Asheim, ‘Smart Specialisation – an innovation driven strategy for economic diversification’
  • Rupert Waters, ‘Challenges for policy-makers in Buckinghamshire’
  • Professor Jeremy Howells, ‘Innovation intermediaries and innovation: Changing dynamics and future perspectives’
  • Dr Federica Rossi, ‘Evaluating the performance of regional innovation intermediaries: insights from the experience of Tuscany’s “innovation poles”’
  • Dave Waller, ‘’What makes a successful innovation ecosystem: great innovation and technology; great policies; plenty of investment funds; great culture or none of the above: just leave it to the market’
  • Dr Ana Colovic, ‘’Why are cluster policies created and how do they work? A comparison between Austria, France, Japan and Sweden’
  • Dr Rosa Fernandez, Chair of final discussion session

The following five themes were addressed throughout the day:

  1. Is it possible for regions to be transformed into Entrepreneurship and Innovation Hubs?

Policy makers everywhere are under pressure to transform lagging regions into leading centres of entrepreneurship, while continuing to support already successful areas of innovation. Roy Sandbach opened the workshop, drawing on the North East Strategic Economic Plan of 2013. The Plan encouraged the North East to ‘become an exemplar for open innovation and Smart Specialisation’, through innovation which would create economic value, social good or both. The Plan hoped to create the conditions and networked solutions to transform the region.

Other speakers argued that the role of policy is to develop new paths for policy, extend existing ones, and create an entrepreneurial state embedded in the economy. Jeremy Howells suggested that the role of policy makers is primarily to change the behaviour of firms, in order to convince them that it is in their interests to innovate.

Adrian Healy spoke on the political reality of delivering Smart Specialisation, using experience from a seven country FP7 Smart Specialisation Project. He argued that innovative and entrepreneurial regions develop independently of politics. Healy cited evidence from academic studies that 80% of economic growth is demand-led, so that only around 20% of structural change could be addressed by policies. He also suggested that policy can sometimes follow practice, such as when private sector developments are imitated by policies which provide supporting infrastructures. In addition, he argued that public procurement can have a crucial role in stimulating entrepreneurship. An example he gave of this was the North East subsea programme, which was not part of the regional development strategy.

Dave Waller also shared his own experience of local innovation policy and practice in England. He demonstrated the dissonance between local politics and economic theory, using an example from Oxfordshire. The result was wasted resources, duplication and fragmentation. Waller suggested more international benchmark evidence was required, building on work such as mapping research and innovation in Amsterdam.

The first theme was not without controversy therefore, and Sandbach concluded with a lesson for the Northern Powerhouse; ‘We must drive the Powerhouse as an economic vision fuelled by innovation rather than as a political item with insular, local devolution debates at the heart.’

  1. How important is analysis, international comparison and evaluation in developing appropriate policies?

In order to make effective policies, all the speakers agreed that policy makers need to be exceptionally focused on analysis. This might include analysing the national and regional context, the area’s potential for innovation, current programmes, global benchmarking, networks, entrepreneurial activity, university strengths or local corporate innovation strategies.

The workshop heard about geographical disparities, which result in varied difficulties for policy-makers in different regions. A major problem in the North East, for example, is that it has the lowest Business R&D expenditure in the UK and business formation rates have fallen by 10% in the past year. The North East is ranked lowest of 12 regions, and 89th in Europe on Attitude, Ability, Aspiration analysis, and thus presents a particular set of challenges. By contrast, London is ranked second on the 2014 Santander Enterprise Index. Analysis must also relate to the theoretical underpinnings of policy.

That there is a dialogue between academic practitioners and policy makers was very clear. Policy practitioners draw on academic theories (often developed by economic geographers) such as the theory of ‘anchor firms’. Anchor firms are different bases of analytic, symbolic and synthetic knowledge. Elvira Uyrrara argued that analysis should also relate to the formulation of programmes, including their scale of delivery and their tools for measuring and evaluating. She highlighted the diverse set of concepts that underpin Smart Specialisation and argued that the theoretical underpinnings are still in progress.

  1. What is the significance of Leadership, Engagement and Collaboration within and across regions?

There was a general consensus after Roy Sandbach’s presentation that the basis of an effective strategy relies on the set-up of a sound and inclusive governance structure. Entrepreneurial strategy requires a shared vision about the future of the region and the thorough integration of monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.

A contested issue, however, was whether Roy Sandbach was right to suggest that business leadership would always be the driving force in regional transformation, Bjorn Asheim argued that in some contexts, the public sector or universities can be directive. In some areas, it was claimed that local entrepreneurs were disinterested in the policy-making process, such as the SMEs in the North East.

In Europe, Smart Specialisation (SMART) is the single largest attempt at an orchestrated, supranational Innovation and Entrepreneurship strategy, which requires leadership, engagement and collaboration. Dave Waller, having faced the challenges of regional innovation strategies for Smart Specialisation, argued that SMART should be about addressing structural weaknesses and facilitating conversations between the right people.

SMART relies on networking, and the support of regional stakeholders. Elvira Uyrra pointed out that SMART has been criticised for not having a fully developed theoretical framework and for being too vague in terms of its target and mix of policies.

The points resonated with Jeremy Howells and Federica Rossi’s presentations on innovation intermediaries. Howells argued that intermediaries are a conceptual lens through which to view the dynamics and evolution of systems of innovation, and are of major policy significance as catalysts within a system.

Federica Rossi also identified intermediaries as important for changing the behaviour of firms and thus indirectly changing the capacity of regions to innovate. Using the case of Tuscany’s innovation poles, which aimed to provide a range of knowledge intensive business services and to strengthen the regional innovation system, she highlighted critical problems in evaluating interventions. These included a lack of sector differentiation, inadequate indicators and missing activities.

  1. What are the social and economic priorities of regional transformation?

Although innovation and job creation are obvious priorities of regional transformation, Bjorn Asheim highlighted other areas of focus, such as gender, migration and diversity. Adrian Healey also spoke about gender profiles of different sectors, as some are predominately male, and others dominated by women. It was concluded that equality of opportunity certainly needs to form part of any policy-making agenda.

Ana Colovic highlighted national differences in approaches to the design and implementation of cluster policies. She questioned whether cluster policies need to be designed if innovation is going well independently. In addition, she noted some of the challenges for policy makers in reality, such as considering whether all the policy tools available and variety of implementing agencies are made clear to actors. Colovic concluded by thinking about the contrasting budgets allocated in different countries for innovation strategies, and questioned what the appropriate level of budget would be to meet both local and national priorities.

  1. What would success look like?

Rosa Fernandez told the workshop that for Roy Sandbach, success would mean 60,000 new jobs created in the North East – but where would they come from? Dave Waller recognised success more in stronger leadership and governance, the development of useful tool kits, better spatial, temporal and more granular mapping of economic activity, and the application of Smart Specialisation principles to all aspects of EU programming.

Adrian Healey, on the other hand, measures success in terms of the gains made from shared governance, shared leadership, common objectives, overcoming fragmentation and getting beyond existing structures. He argued that success would rely on changing the mind-set of local authorities, as the only part of the system not fully connected is the public sector.

The biggest challenge for regions is to build capacity. However, as Henry Etzkowitz argued, the sheer scale of Silicon Valley’s financial and talent resources makes it difficult for Europe to compete. Maybe it need not all be bad news however, as the UK and Europe could yet be a Land of Opportunity.

Find out more

Share

Gender Equality in Entrepreneurship Policy: Looking to the Future

Leave a reply

This post was contributed by members of the Transforming Institutions by Gendering contents and Gaining Equality in Research (TRIGGER) team – a research project in Birkbeck’s Department of Management – following a workshop which they led at Dundalk Institute of Technology, Dundalk, Ireland on Thursday, October 22

Women at conference (pic credit: Ignite New Zealand under CC via Flickr.com)

Women at conference (pic credit: Ignite New Zealand under CC via Flickr.com)

The international panel at Dundalk Institute of Technology (DKIT), Ireland, was asked to reflect on the differences in the challenges that women entrepreneurs face compared to their male counterparts. Their responses would then shape their views as to whether the panel thought that different policies are needed to support them.

Professor Colette Henry, a member of the TRIGGER team and Head of Department of Business at DKIT introduced the panel. Professor Helen Lawton Smith – as the Birkbeck lead of the TRIGGER project – chaired the session, and began by asking the panellists to share their own perspectives and experiences of women’s enterprise policy. The panel brought together perspectives from both research and practice.

The panellists were:

  • Ms Sarita Johnston, Enterprise Ireland
  • Professor Barbara Orser, University of Ottawa, Canada
  • Professor Bill O’Gorman, Waterford Institute of Technology, Ireland
  • Professor Lene Foss, UiT – The Arctic University of Norway
  • Ms Roseann Kelly, Women in Business Northern Ireland

Structural and contextual challenges

In response to the question of the different challenges faced by men and women entrepreneurs, Lene Foss suggested that women face both structural and contextual challenges. Roseann Kelly identified these as a difference in the kinds of networks they have as well as the existence of fewer role models. Lene Foss further highlighted the dual role that women play as both mothers and entrepreneurs, as well as national differences in women’s propensity to become entrepreneurs. In Norway for example, immigrant women are more likely to be entrepreneurs than Norwegian women.

On the question of whether support for improved networking opportunities for women was an appropriate policy response, Bill O’Gorman cited his recent experiences of women’s attitudes towards women-only networks. He gave an example from his own work where his team at Waterford had set up three networks in Ireland and Wales: male only, mixed and female only. Surprisingly, while women initially were reluctant to join women only-networks because they realised that gender diversity is important and a women-only network would segregate them from men, the women-only network appeared to perform best. While the other two networks folded, the women-only one continued and still exists.

Sarita Johnson, Manager of Female Entrepreneurship for Enterprise Ireland, cited research that has led to Enterprise Ireland to support women-only programmes including networks. This demonstrated that the challenges facing women entrepreneurs are different, specifically with regard to attitude towards risk-taking and raising finance. For example, Enterprise Ireland invests in 100 high potential start-ups (HPSUs) per year. The specific targeting of women has meant that the number of women entrepreneurs in this category being awarded grants has risen from 7% to 18%. She also found that women-only networks tend to perform best – for example, in raising export sales.

Need for better understanding of gender differences

Dundalk Institute of Technology (pic credit banlon1964 under CC via Flickr.com)

Dundalk Institute of Technology (pic credit banlon1964 under CC via Flickr.com)

Barbara Orser highlighted that it is not just social capital that contributes to women only-networks performing better – it is also technology adoption and financial capital. There needs to be better understanding of gender differences, for example, with regard to levels of confidence, in order to develop better policy. Three aspects were identified as important: women’s social circles; social capital in the form of information gathering networks, and fear of failure.

Roseann Kelly suggested that women are sometimes reluctant to benefit from women-only initiatives and prefer not to be labelled as ‘women entrepreneurs.’ This is a marketing issue – exemplar women are there by right and should celebrate their success. They should play by their own rules and not those set by men. Moreover, women should not have the equivalent of ‘old boys’ networks, because women are better at inclusivity than men.

When the Panel were asked how a hypothetical one million euros might be best spent to support women’s entrepreneurship, Sarita Johnston from Enterprise Ireland said that a programme which would give financial support to women entrepreneurs would offer the quickest and most tangible benefits. Blended support in the form of networking, accelerator programmes and role models is the best approach for supporting start-ups. Access to capital pulls through the development of other skills. Bill O’Gorman thought the money being spent on Ireland’s action plan for jobs is effective, and an emphasis on female entrepreneurship would yield benefits.

Roseann Kelly pointed out that Women in Business Northern Ireland has no public funding for enterprise support and has to be self-sustaining. Public funding would give a boost to their programmes. Barbara Orser suggested that public monies in Canada could be spent on encouraging more women to become entrepreneurs. A specific population that might benefit from funding is women university students; these are under-represented in Ireland’s women entrepreneurs.

Impacting on the entrepreneurial culture

The challenge for the TRIGGER team at Birkbeck is to build on the insights gained from academics’ and practitioners’ experiences to make an impact on the entrepreneurial culture within the college. This means encouraging more female students, as well as professional and academic staff, to share the lessons of the differences in challenges they face with other communities. This panel event shows that there is much to be gained by sharing perspectives from within different institutional and national contexts.

Find out more

Share