Target suffered a major data breach in 2013 that compromised over 70 million customer payment records. Hackers were able to infiltrate Target's network through an HVAC system and install malware on cashier systems to steal credit card data. Target was alerted multiple times by security firm FireEye that malware was present but failed to act, allowing the breach to continue. In response, Target implemented new security measures like credit cards with chips, security training for employees, and an incident response plan to prevent future breaches.

1. Information Assurance
Chaston Carter
04/17/17
Target Corporation
Target has had many ethical challenges over the
years but one of the biggest ones they have encountered was
the a credit and debit card data breach thought to have exceed
ed $700 million which was the biggest retail hacking in U.S.
history to date. While this is serious, what is even more serious
is that Target had clear warning signs that hacking was
occurring, but due to the lack of action the hacking continued
within the organization. It was estimated that close to 70
million people had their personal data stolen. That information
consisted of names, mailing addresses, phone numbers and
email addresses. Not only was it personal information shared ,
but a-lot of people encountered unauthorized, charges on their
credit card or debit card. The organization was shocked at the
amount of people that were affected by this recent attack.
I had only 10 days to implement changes to its
security policies, to prevent this from happening again. The
ultimate goal was to come up with quick solutions to solve this
problem. My first goal was to develop a written information
security program, which would ultimately document potential
security risk. Since the confidentiality of the customers
information is a important key factor. The goal of the whole
credit breach is to prevent customers information from getting
stolen . We can start by eliminating the problem, by offering
security training to current workers, this would not only
educate them but they would learn the importance of
safeguarding personal information , and it will allow them to

2. learn when to be alert to potential threats. To insure integrity in
the organization a system must be put in place to detect any
changes in data that might cause the server to crash when
making a purchase, or interfere when a customers makes a
purchase at a target store.
To Ensure Availability in Target Corporation ,
we would maintain all certain possible customers information,
to prevent any data from being lost, data could be store in a
isolated protected location. One of the main issues with the
credit cards hacked in the breach was that when the cards were
swiped the magnetic strip on the back contained unchanging
data. Whoever accessed the data got ahold of information
necessary to make purchases. Which eventually made traditional
cards prime targets for counterfeiters. The problem with Target
corporation is that they had no real structure on how to be
alerted when there was suspicious activity in a customers
account. The main objective for this information assurance plan
is to develop an alerting system that will alert a middle man
when there is suspicious, or unusual activity in a customers
account.
Even Though , target already had current policies in
place, six months prior to hackers
getting into their security system . They had began a
$1.6 million malware detection tool
they purchased from a computer security firm called
FireEye. Even with this billion dollar
infrastructure, which was much more extensive than other
retailers. It still couldn't do much
for the company because, target failed to act upon their
finding in the new security system.
Hackers were eventually able to infiltrate Target’s network by
using an HVAC. When
they gained access, they installed a pair of malware

3. programs. They then sent malware
designed to steal credit card numbers to cashier stations
in every domestic Target store.
November 30, 2013, FireEye was alerted to the presence
of the malware. Target’s security
teams in Bangalore were immediately notified of the
potential breach. FireEye had the ability
to automatically disable the malware, but Target had turned
this feature off. By target turning
the feature off, they no longer had any way of being alerted
so FireEye also alerted Target on
December 2 after hackers released a new version of
malware. (Adkins, 2014)
Based on the evaluation, the best approach to
targets security system . Is to come up with a security system
that alerts the user immediately giving the middle man the
opportunity to find a quick solution to the breach and putting a
stop to it right away. There are several key leaders since
confidentiality is a important factor , it is essential to have
designated a security officer who would be responsible for
coordinating and executing the program that would protect
customers information . This security officer would also report
to someone outside of the organization to make sure everything
is secure and in line. The officer would also offer classes to
current employees , by teaching them how to detect a potential
threats to the organization.
Thats why it is important develop a risk
assessment team who would manage the security program. This
team would be one the most important key factors to the
organization because they would identify the risk and would
ultimately decide on the appropriate, most cost effective ways

4. to manage them. The main objective would be to minimize
potential threats , but not eliminate them . To insure integrity in
the organization and to prevent data integrity failure an alerting
system would be put into place. This system will be designed to
detect potential threats, and give the risk assessment team
options on how to get rid of the threats.
Target already has had a bad reputation with
immediate response to the breaches. They also claimed that it
had suffered a data breach despite its best efforts, but it was
later revealed that it had been alerted more than once about
breaches. It was said Target also waited six days after it was
informed to tell consumers about the hacking attack, and about
a month before it revealed the extent of it. More than 90
lawsuits have been filed against Target by both customers and
banks, and Target's profit during the holiday shopping period
dropped 46 percent from the previous year.
Since a lot of customers were left out of the loop,
target came up with the solution of
sending customers emails with general security tips and
were offered with one year of free
credit monitoring and identity theft protection.
Additionally, The CEO assured customers
that they would not be held liable for any fraudulent
charges made to their credit cards as a
result of the hack. Customers were offered 10 percent off
in-store purchases following the
data breach.
The best solution thus far was Target announcing that it
would begin to release credit and debit cards with chips instead
of magnetic strips on the back of the cards by 2015. They had
invested over $100 million in registers and technology that will
be able to read the new chip cards.
As result of the breach Target lost a huge percentage of
customers and CEO Gregg Steinhafel also stepped down. As a

5. result a statement of policy had to be put in place to outline the
incident response protocols, disaster response protocols, access
control protocols, and maintenance plan, which will serve as
controls and guidelines to address instances of unauthorized
access to Targets information and also as response to disastrous
events or conditions that might adversely impact operations at
Target.
Incidence Response Protocols have become integral part of
information technology and they are used for detecting and
handling incidents, minimizing loss and destruction, mitigating
weaknesses and restoring IT services (Cichonski et.al, 2012).
The incident response process has several phases which includes
preparation, detection & analysis, containment, eradication and
recovery and post incident activities (Cichonski et.al, 2012).
The preparation phase attempts to limit or prevent the number
of security incidence that might occur by selecting controls such
as regular risk assessments, host security, network security,
malware prevention, and implementing user awareness training
etc. that will effectively reduce the number of incidence
occurring (Cichonski et.al, 2012).
Detection and analysis phase uses precursors and indicators to
monitor and analyze attack vectors such as external media,
attrition, web, email, impersonation, improper usage or
unauthorized accesses etc. that can be used to propagate attacks
against an organization. Some of the precursors that have been
put in place at Target includes:
Intrusion Detection and Prevention systems to identify and log
suspicious events, alert the necessary response team and take
automated mitigative actions;
Security information and event management (SIEM) products to
generate alerts based on the analysis of log data;
Antivirus and Anti-malware softwares to detect and prevent
attacks from infecting the systems;
File integrity checker to detect changes to important files during
attack incidents, and

6. Awareness programs for both internal and external users to keep
them abreast of the latest attack incidents and to create a
reporting route after anomalies have been identified (Cichonski
et.al., 2012).
The Containment, Eradication and Recovery phase is used to
manage incident attacks before they overwhelm the system and
result into more fatal damages, using predetermined procedures
such as disabling system functions or shutting down the systems
and disconnecting them from the network to mitigate the effects
of any attack (Cichonski et.al, 2012).
Finally the post incident activity phase is used by the
organization or response team to reflect on the new threats and
use lessons learned to improve on incident response plan
(Cichonski et.al, 2012).Within Target, the incident response
plan created will be used in responding to a variety of potential
threats such as:
Unauthorized access or unauthorized privilege escalation and
data breaches,
Denial or Distributed Denial of Service Attacks,
Firewall Breaches,
Viruses and malware outbursts,
Theft or physical loss of equipment, and
Insider Threats (Rouse, 2014).
To mitigate these issues, some of the recommended actions that
have been put in place at Target include the following:
Incident Type
Kill Chain Stage
Priority Level
Recommended Action
Unauthorized Access
Exploitation & Installation
High
Detect, monitor and investigate unauthorized access attempts
with priority on those that mission critical or contain sensitive
data.
Unauthorized Privilege Escalation

7. Exploitation & Installation
High
Critical systems are configured to record all privileged
escalation events and set alarms for unauthorized privilege
escalation attempts.
Data Breach
System Compromise
High
During a data breach, all evidence is captured carefully and
evidentiary data is collected. Alarms are set to alert system and
administrators and emergency system shut down and data
recovery steps is initiated.
All critical documents or data are backed up on a different
system.
Denial or Distributed Denial of Service Attacks
Exploitation & Installation
High
An IPS is implemented to monitor, detect and automatically
terminate all traffic patterns that steps out of the normal
behavior of the system.
Viruses or Malware
Delivery & Attack
Low
Remediate any malware infections as quickly as possible. The
rest of the network needs to scanned to ensure no further
compromise were associated with the outbreak.
Insider Breach
System Compromise
High
User accounts are routinely monitored using system log events
and security information and event management products that
can generate alerts based on the analysis of log files
Theft of Physical Loss
System Compromise
High
Whole disk encryption is used to protect all laptops and mobile

8. devices. Lockout screen or remote wiping is lost or stolen
equipment is used to remotely remove all critical data on stolen
or lost equipment.
Firewall Breaches
System Compromise
High
Technology additions and updates are used to evaluate firewall
settings and adjust them as needed in order to minimize the
impact on business.
Firewall rules are regularly reviewed and actively updated to
protect against the latest security threats and dedicated and
ongoing monitoring practices are employed to maximize system
uptime while actively defending network and connected network
devices.
Justification of Incident Response protocol
Since it is really difficult to assume the path that an attacker
will take to infiltrate the network, target decided to create their
incidence response plan through the cyber kill chain sequence
(Malik, 2016). The cyber kill chain sequence is the stages
required for an attacker to successfully infiltrate a network and
exfiltrate data from it. The cyber kill chain involves the
following stages:
Reconnaissance and Probing - This is the stage when the
attacker is probing the network to exploit any vulnerability or
opportunities that may present in the system (Malik, 2016).
Delivery and Attack – Once a vulnerability has been
established, then a delivery mechanism (attack mechanism) is
put in place to deliver the attacks or social engineering is
employed to induce the target (Malik, 2016).
Exploitation and Installation – This is the stage after the
attacker have found the vulnerability to the system. They
proceed to exploit those vulnerability in order to acquire access
to the system and once access has been granted, they proceed to
elevate their user privileges in order to elevate the access or

9. even install persistence payload (Malik, 2016).
System Compromise - At the stage, high value data is been
exflitrated as quickly as possible (Malik, 2016).
Designing an incidence response plan or protocol around these
different stages will allow Target to understand the threats
being faced in their network environment, the steps an attacker
can used to exploits such threats and take steps to adequately
prevent or mitigate the effects of any of such security threats.
In the Disaster response protocols are other critical
components of computer security operations that ensure the
continuation of vital business processes in the event that a
disaster occurs (Martin, 2002). At Target, the disaster response
and recovery protocols was not only focused on the physical
infrastructure, back up and restoration systems but was
expanded to include other critical components such as perimeter
defenses, IDS network, threat evaluation and assessment, virus
protections, patches and host configurations and vulnerability
surveillance (Velliquette, 2005). Paying proper attention all
these aspects is very critical to addressing computer security
within disaster recovery planning to ensure the most efficient
and successful recovery operations (Velliquette, 2005). Some of
the major components that was developed into the disaster
response protocols at Target includes:
Crisis Management Plan: This was a plan designed to ensure
continuation of vital business processes in case of an emergency
(Martin, 2002). This plan was developed to provide information,
procedures, responsibilities and checklists that will enhance an
organized and effective system of handling situations during a
crisis occurrence (Martin, 2002).
Alternate Recovery Site: To ensure that IT services and
recovery time matches the business recovery time objective,
Target implemented a back-up site at an alternate location,
where all data infrastructure is configured to run similar
hardware and software applications to ensure that regular
operations can be restored at the shortest time possible in the

10. case of a disaster occurrence (Velliquette, 2005).
Regular Data Backup: Target also implemented a scheduled
hardware and software backup and periodically validates that
critical systems, applications and data are accurately backed up
in a standard hardware in order to be able to easily replicate a
new hardware in the case of a disaster.
Perimeter Defenses: Perimeter defenses such as firewall and
VPN management are important aspects of Target disaster
recovery plan because they assist in monitoring traffic during a
recovery process and also ensuring a safe connection for users
and clients to the alternate network in order to get the operation
back online and reduce downtime (Velliquette, 2005).
Intrusion Prevention and Protection: This is another component
that been built into the recovery plan to ensure that during the
recovery process, proper configuration is established to keep
virus definition files current and to ensure new threat and
vulnerability are detected and prevented to improve the
fortification process in order to reduce system downtime and
return the system back to normal operations (Velliquette, 2005).
Justification of Disaster Response Protocol
The primary goal of Target is to get critical infrastructure,
networks and systems back up and running as quickly as
possible in order to minimize the potential long term impact on
the business. Having a crisis management plan is highly
important to coordinate the recovery effort in a systematic way
that enables the disaster response team to make quick and
effective decisions that will limit the impact of such disaster or
crisis. Not having this type of systematic plan might cause
ineffective decisions to be made and in turn cause an increase in
disruption time, which can be very detrimental not only to the
business but also to customers, stakeholders and investors alike
(Velliquette, 2005). The presence of an alternate recovery site,
an emergency response location and backup data are
instrumental to the strategic and tactical implementation of the
recovery procedures, without which the recovery process is
impossible. Also implementing perimeter defenses, intrusion

11. prevention system and virus protection during the recovery
process will ensure that new threats that could impede the
recovery process do not arise and increase the magnitude of the
already bad situation (Martin, 2005). The survivability of any
organization after a disaster is dependent on the premise of a
successful continence planning, which would determine how
effective an organization would responds to mitigate the
business impacts of such disaster (Martin, 2005).
Access Control Protocols
Security challenges faced at Target due to data breaches caused
the management to implement network access control protocols
that will provide endpoint assessment, authentication and
authorization of entities trying to gain access to their network,
while also limiting the privileges of user assigned roles. First,
Target decided to implement smart cards for employees, which
digital certificate and underlying password associated with
individual users. The smart cards provided authentication and
authorization used by employees and users to gain secure access
to the organization’s network (Boscolo, 2008). It also formed
the basis of accountability for users in ensuring that their smart
card are used in accordance to the organization’s acceptable use
policy and cannot be shared with any other users (Boscolo,
2008).
Target also implemented the Role Based Access Control List,
which grants permissions to users based on assigned roles rather
than granting permission to actual users. Users can only inherit
certain permissions or privileges based on the role they have
been assigned to (Conklin & White, 2015). The least privilege
security approach was also implemented to grant the least
necessary permission and privileges that will enable users to
perform their daily tasks according to their assigned roles
(Conklin & White, 2015).
Finally, the company also implemented separation of duties
with the different departments. This concept ensures that tasks
are broken down into several duties to be performed by
different individuals, in order to limit the probability of an

12. employee exploiting the organization system for their personal
gains (Conklin & White, 2015).
Justification of Access Control Protocols
Target decided to utilize smart cards, because it satisfies
two factor authentication, which was more secure than a one
factor authentication process such as passwords. Even though it
cost more in terms of infrastructure to support it, two factor
authentication provided two step verification process, which
makes data breaches twice as hard for an external intruder,
because not only do they need to have physical control of the
smart card but they will also need to have the pin number
associated to that card before they can be granted access to the
organization’s network (Conklin & White, 2015). The smart
card also created accountability measures, which makes the
owner of the card responsible for it usage on the network. It
also provided non repudiation, which means that a user cannot
deny to certain information as long as their digital signatures
was associated with the retrieval or access of such information.
In order words, it provided easy tracking of user and employee
activity across the network. Finally it improves integrity of
information because users can use embedded digital signatures /
private keys to encrypt files and emails before transmission and
also makes it easy for other members of organization to easily
decrypt such files or information using the corresponding public
keys (Conklin & White, 2015).
Target also decided to utilize role based access control list
because of the flexibility it create of granting and revoking user
access based on specified roles within the organization. Users
can be granted permissions to objects in terms of the specific
duties they must perform and not according to a security
classification associated to the individual objects (Rouse,
2012).
Finally implementing separation of duties helps Target
manage conflict of interest and fraud, by restricting power held
by any one individual. This provides checks and balances and
also limits the harm that can be caused by one single individual

13. and reduces the organization’s exposure to damage (Conklin &
White, 2015).
Maintaining Information Assurance Plan
Target understands that maintaining this information
assurance plan will involve every member of the organization
and also require a day to day monitoring, so it is stays effective
and relevant in improving their network security. Therefore
management created some critical steps and programs that will
enforce daily maintenance and continuous implementation of
the plan.
Security Awareness Programs: Target management decided to
implement monthly security meetings to talk about security
policies, risks and incidents assessments performed for the
organization. The awareness program serves as a monthly
refresher to the daily security risks facing the organization as
well as creating continous awareness for relevant security
incidents that has occurred within their organization or industry
(Kadam, 2002).
Monitor and Review Security Performance: Since the
implementation of an information assurance policy is not a one-
time event, target created controls to monitor and review
performance of the plan, to ensure that it is still serving the
purpose for which it was created (Kadam, 2002).
Quarterly Audits: Target IT department also set up quarterly
audits with an external auditor to review the various
performance controls in place, gather performance results,
document all non-conformities that will require corrective
actions and identify new threats (Kadam, 2002).
Management Review: This review meetings will be conducted to
revisit issues, analyze audit reports and take decisive actions,
whether to keep the information assurance plan as is or to
recommend improvements in order to accommodate the newly
identified threats (Kadam, 2002).
Justification of Maintenance Plan

14. The importance of these maintenance steps is that they help to
periodically access risks, identify new risks, and measure
effectiveness of the program. Periodic audits are important
because they serve as compliance controls that help the
organization to monitor compliance to the plan. They also help
access new risks, which gives the management the most updated
information concerning risk facing their organization, and helps
determine proper corrective actions to taken in order to ensure
the most adequate security controls are implemented.
Awareness training programs are also critical to keep users and
employees abreast of the latest security information that will
ensure conformance or unanimous compliance to the most
updated security controls (Garbars, 2002). When users are
unaware of the latest threats, then they cannot protect
themselves nor the organization from such threats and damages
that will ensue afterwards.
Monitoring the effectiveness of the information assurance
plan is also critical to the safety and security of the
organization. After plan has been created and implemented, it is
important to monitor and review the security performance of the
plan in order to analyze its effectiveness in improving the
security posture of the organization (Garbars, 2002).
Overall this assurance plan , will be put in place to protect
Targets data breach from happening again, and will be the
overall shield and plan target needs to protect the company from
ever being in such a bad situation again. With Awareness
training programs , bringing awareness to employees will be the
most important key factor.
References:
Kossman, S. (2016, xxsssdddFebruary 02). 8 FAQs about EMV
credit cards. Retrieved April 21, 2017, from
http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/emv-faq-chip-
cards-answers-1264.php
Initiative, Daniels Fund Ethics, University Of New Mexico, and

15. Http://danielsethics.mgt.unm.edu. Target: Putting Customers
First? (n.d.): n. pag. Web.
Boscolo, C. (2008). How to Implement Network Access Control.
Retrieved from
http://www.computerweekly.com/opinion/How-to-
implement-network-access-control
Cichonski, P., Millar, T., Grance, T., & Scarfone, K. (2012).
Computer Security Incident Handling Guide. NIST
Special Publication Vol 800, pp. 61
Conklin, W. & White, G. (2015). All-in-one CompTIA
Security+ Exam Guide. Fourth Ed.
(Exam SYO-401). San Francisco: McGraw Hill.
Garbars, K. (2002). Implementing an Effective IT Security
Program. Retrieved from
https://www.sans.org/reading-
room/whitepapers/bestprac/implementing-effective-security-
program-80
Kadam, A. (2002). Implementation Methodology for
Information Security Management System.
Retrieved from
https://www.giac.org/paper/gsec/2693/implementation-
methodology-information-security-management-system-to-
comply-bs-7799-requi/104600
Martin, B. C. (2002). Disaster Recovery Plan Strategies and
Processes. Retrieved from
https://www.sans.org/reading-
room/whitepapers/recovery/disaster-recovery-plan-strategies-
processes-564
Rouse, M. (2012). Role Based Access Control (RBAC).
Retrieved from
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/definition/role-based-
access-control-RBAC
Rouse, M. (2014). Incidence Response Plan (IRP). Retrieved
from
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/definition/incident-
response-plan-IRP

16. Velliquette, D. (2005). Computer Security Considerations in
Disaster Recovery Planning. Retrieved from
http://www.sans.org/reading-
room/whitepapers/recovery/computer- security-
considerations-disaster-recvery-planning-1512.
Institutional Theory and Contextual Embeddedness of
Women’s Entrepreneurial Leadership: Evidence from
92 Countries
by Shumaila Y. Yousafzai, Saadat Saeed, and Moreno Muffatto
Building on GEM research, we develop a multi-level framework
that draws on the notion of the
contextual embeddedness of entrepreneurship and institutional
theory. We examine the mediating
role of the vision for women’s entrepreneurship (VWE) on the
relationship between the regulatory,
normative and cognitive pillars of institutional theory and
women’s entrepreneurial leadership
(WEL) in 92 countries. Results suggest that the institutional
pillars influence VWE. Regulatory
institutions, entrepreneurial cognitions, and entrepreneurial
norms have a direct and an indirect
effect (through VWE) on WEL.
Introduction
Identified by the World Economic Forum
(2012) as the “way forward,” women’s entrepre-
neurship provides a formidable contribution to
the economic development, innovation and
wealth creation of many countries (Brush, de
Bruin, and Welter 2009). On the global scale,

17. women make up a substantial proportion of
the entrepreneurial population. According to
the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM)
report on women’s entrepreneurship, in 2012,
an estimated 126 million women were starting
or running new businesses in 67 economies
around the world. In addition, an estimated 98
million were running established businesses
(Kelley et al. 2012). Nevertheless, the gender-
gap in entrepreneurial activity varies widely
across countries, and in some countries women
represent a significant yet hitherto unrecognized
source of economic growth (Carter and Marlow
2003; Henry and Kennedy 2003). For example,
in Pakistan, women entrepreneurs represent
only 1% of this gender’s population, while 40%
of women in Zambia are engaged in this activity
(Kelley et al. 2012). In response to this, many
governments around the world have started to
pay attention to the value that woman entrepre-
neurs offer to society and the particular needs
that they may have. For example, in Mexico, a
government program called “Instituto Nacional
de las Mujeres” is oriented toward changing
cultural perceptions to promote equality
between men and women and increasing the
visibility of women entrepreneurs by helping
them develop their networks (Kelley et al.
2012).
Although the topic of women’s entrepre-
neurship has garnered much academic interest
in recent years, highlighting the value women
Shumaila Y. Yousafzai is senior lecturer of Strategy in the

18. Cardiff Business School at the Cardiff University,
Cardiff, UK.
Saadat Saeed is lecturer of Entrepreneurship in the Essex
Business School at the Essex University, Essex,
UK.
Moreno Muffatto is professor of Entrepreneurship in the School
of Entrepreneurship at the University of
Padova, Padova, Italy.
Address correspondence to: Shumaila Y. Yousafzai, Cardiff
Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff,
UK. E-mail: [email protected]
Journal of Small Business Management 2015 53(3), pp. 587–604
doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12179
YOUSAFZAI, SAEED, AND MUFFATTO 587
mailto:[email protected]
entrepreneurs offer and the particular needs
they may have, the area remains understudied,
and the paucity of research on the phenom-
enon of women’s entrepreneurship is well
documented (Brush, de Bruin, and Welter 2009;
Gatewood, Carter, Brush, Greene, and Hart
2003). Past research has explored women’s
motivation for starting businesses (Boden 1999;
Brush, Wong-MingJi, and Sullivan 1999;
Buttner and Moore 1997; Scott 1986; Stevenson
1986), the survival and profitability of women-
owned businesses (e.g., Watson 2003; Williams
2004), decisions about business growth (e.g.,

19. Morris et al. 2006; Orser and Hogarth-Scott
2002; Shelton 2006) and work-family balance
(Adkins et al. 2013; Caputo and Dolinsky 1998;
DeMartino, Barbato, and Jacques 2006;
Kirkwood and Tootell 2008). Nevertheless,
there has been little consideration on the role
of contextual embeddedness of female entre-
preneurship (Welter and Smallbone 2011).
Furthermore, the entrepreneurship literature
tends to focus on a direct relationship between
the general conditions and arrangements in the
overall entrepreneurial environment (for both
male and female entrepreneurs) and women’s
entrepreneurial activity. This approach over-
looks the critical mediating role of the specific
context of women’s entrepreneurship, and
ignores research that suggests women’s entre-
preneurial activity is contextually embedded in
the structural characteristic of a country (i.e.,
economic, sociocultural and legal environment)
and so needs to be interpreted according to the
context in which female entrepreneurs operate
(Welter 2011; Welter and Smallbone 2011).
Understanding the specific underlying
context of women’s entrepreneurial activity
is a topic of great significance. Recognizing
this, Ahl (2006) highlighted the need for
future research to focus on the contextual
embeddedness of women’s entrepreneurship
by broadening both the research questions as
well as the potential explanatory factors that
are investigated (Hughes et al. 2012). Drawing
on the notion of the contextual embeddedness
of entrepreneurship and the insights of institu-

20. tional theory, we propose and test a multi-level
model of women’s entrepreneurial leadership
(WEL) using GEM data collected in 92 coun-
tries. Following previous definitions of entre-
preneurial leadership (see for example, Gupta,
MacMillan, and Surie 2004; Swiercz and Lydon
2002), we define women’s entrepreneurial lead-
ership (WEL) as “the ability of women to
manage resources strategically in order to
emphasize both opportunity-seeking and
advantage-seeking behaviours in the form of
initiating, developing and managing entrepre-
neurial activity.” In this study WEL is measured
through the “female total early-stage entrepre-
neurial activity” using GEM data from 2000–
2012.
By addressing the phenomenon of women’s
entrepreneurship from a contextual and
institutional perspective, we respond to an
overarching critique of entrepreneurship
research as having an individualistic focus in
which “contextual and historical variables . . .
such as legislation, culture, or politics are
seldom discussed” (Ahl 2006, p. 605), and
restricting the scope of women’s entrepreneur-
ship research in particular (Hughes et al. 2012).
Hughes et al. (2012, p. 431), quoting Ahl
(2006), note that the entrepreneurship litera-
ture “by excluding explicit discussion of
gendered power structures, [highlights] the
apparent shortcomings of female entrepreneurs
. . . [and thus] . . . reinforce[ing] the idea that
explanations are to be found in the individual
rather than on a social or institutional level.” As

21. a consequence, the research puts the onus on
women and implies that in order to achieve
entrepreneurial success women must change
themselves by for example, enhancing their
education, management style and networking
skills.
Our multi-level measure and analysis tech-
niques provide an interactive answer to our
research question: how do different institutional
arrangements (regulatory, normative and cogni-
tive) interact to create a favorable or unfavorable
environment for women’s entrepreneurship,
i.e., vision for women’s entrepreneurship,
which eventually leads to the emergence of
WEL? We define vision for women’s entrepre-
neurship (VWE) as “a country mental image or
picture of women as viable entrepreneurs and its
views on the means to accomplish this mental
image.” In this study VWE is measured through
the GEM’s national expert’s vision on how the
state of the indicators in a country results in a
favorable environment for women’s entrepre-
neurship. Specifically, we present a more
nuanced understanding of the women’s entre-
preneurship phenomenon by examining the
mediating role of VWE on the relationship
between regulatory institutions, entrepreneurial
norms and entrepreneurial cognitions and
WEL. In so doing, we propose and test a new
JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT588
framework using a sample of 92 countries in

22. different phases of economic development and
cultural contexts as a point of reference for the
favourable institutional environment for WEL.
We also answer Stenholm, Acs, and Wuebker’s
(2011) call to extend research on institutional
theory and entrepreneurship to more countries.
Figure 1 presents our proposed conceptual
model.
Theoretical Background
All entrepreneurship is contextually embed-
ded in the social, cultural and political institu-
tions which influence the values, norms,
motives and behaviours of individuals (Bruton
and Ahlstrom 2003; Davidsson 2003; Martinelli
2004; Minniti 2009; North 1990; Steyaert
and Katz 2004). Institutional change can create
opportunities for potential entrepreneurs by
shaping and determining the prospects as well
as removing or lowering barriers to market entry
and/or exit, and thus can exert a positive impact
on entrepreneurial leadership (Gnyawali and
Fogel 1994; Hwang and Powell 2005; Smallbone
and Welter 2001).
Defying the general consideration of entre-
preneurship in either a gender-neutral or a
purely masculine context (Marlow 2002),
Brush, de Bruin, and Welter (2009) introduced
a gender-aware framework of entrepreneur-
ship which took into account specific contex-
tual factors as important determinants of
women’s entrepreneurial activity. This was an
important step toward broadening our under-

23. standing of women’s entrepreneurship as
women’s experience added intricate dimen-
sions to the decisions about occupations while
trying to balance family and financial respon-
sibilities (Gilbert 1997). Even today, in many
societies women are still defined primarily
through their domestic roles associated with
family obligations (for example, child rearing,
caring for the sick and the elderly, and repro-
ductive work) which fall almost exclusively on
women, even if they work equal or longer
hours than their male partners (Achtenhagen
and Welter 2003; Marlow 2002). Following this
line of inquiry, we propose a multi-level
framework of WEL that draws on the notion of
the contextual embeddedness of entrepreneur-
ship (Bates, Jackson, and Johnson 2007;
Brush, de Bruin, and Welter 2009; Welter and
Smallbone 2011) and the insights of institu-
tional theory.
Figure 1
Hypothesized Conceptual Model
YOUSAFZAI, SAEED, AND MUFFATTO 589
Campbell (2004, p. 1) describes institutions
as the foundation of social life consisting of
“formal and informal rules, monitoring and
enforcement mechanisms, and systems of
meaning that define the context within which
individuals, corporations, labor unions, nation-
states and other organizations operate and
interact with each other.” Institutional theory is

24. a particularly suitable frame of reference for
addressing the external context that shapes
women’s entrepreneurial activity. Research has
suggested that the institutional environment
not only influences the rate of entrepreneurial
activity, but also its resulting trajectories
(Bruton, Ahlstrom, and Li 2010). The institu-
tional framework of a society encompasses the
vital role of regulatory, normative and cognitive
“pillars” that promote successful entrepreneur-
ial activity (Scott 2001, p. 51). Entrepreneurship
research spanning the last two decades has
drawn on these institutional pillars and sup-
ported the contention that institutional differ-
ences lead to country-level variations in the
structuring and development of entrepreneurial
framework conditions (Aldrich 2011; Bruton,
Ahlstrom, and Li 2010; Meek, Pacheco, and
York 2010; Peng and Zhou 2005; Tolbert,
David, and Sine 2011). In the context of
women’s entrepreneurship, formal regulatory
institutions can create entrepreneurial opportu-
nities, influence the extent to which female
entrepreneurship can develop and affect the
types of enterprises in which women can
engage. Informal normative and cognitive insti-
tutions have the potential to exert significant
influence on the perceptions of entrepreneurial
opportunities (Welter and Smallbone 2011).
Building on this established research stream,
researchers have started to apply institutional
theory to explore the institutions that restrain
as well as promote women’s entrepreneurial
activity (Brush, de Bruin, and Welter 2009;
Bruton, Ahlstrom, and Li 2010; De Bruin,
Brush, and Welter 2007).

25. Regulatory Institutions
Regulatory institutions represent a rational
actor model of behaviour. This refers to formal
imposition, enforcement and acceptance of
policies, rules, laws and sanctions that affect
individual behavior in organizations and in
society (Manolova, Eunni, and Gyoshev 2008;
Stenholm, Acs, and Wuebker 2011). Research
has shown that regulatory institutions either
at organizational-level (e.g., workplace rules,
monitoring scripts and incentives) or at
country-level (e.g., centers on rules, monitoring
and sanctioning activities providing a frame-
work for law enforcing agencies and the
courts) can influence the legitimacy and accep-
tance of entrepreneurship (Webb et al. 2009).
For example, in the Republic of Korea, the
government-enacted “Law to Support Women
Entrepreneurs” in 1999 led to the formation of
the “Women Entrepreneurs Support Center”
which provides financial assistance (loans),
training, business incubation and other services
(Kelley et al. 2012). In contrast, potential entre-
preneurs can be discouraged by lengthy paper
work, procedures and rules and reporting to an
array of institutions (De Soto 2000). Capelleras
et al. (2008) showed that heavily regulated
countries will have fewer new firms and they
will grow more slowly. Similarly, in countries
with unstable regulatory institutions, the uncer-
tainty of the regulatory framework (Aidis 2005;
Boettke and Coyne 2003), lack of intellectual

26. property rights (Autio and Acs 2010), and
extensive corruption and untrustworthy
enforcement of regulations (Aidis, Estrin, and
Mickiewicz 2008) will increase the opportunity
cost for entrepreneurship. In the specific
context of women’s entrepreneurship, Jamali
(2009) showed that the lack of government
support in terms of policy, regulations and
legal barriers hindered women’s entrepreneur-
ial activity. Similarly, the World Bank’s report
on Women Business and the Law (World Bank
2012) showed that in over 75% of the world’s
economies, women’s economic opportunities
were limited by one or more legal differences
between women and men. On the other hand,
regulatory initiatives like labor market legisla-
tion, formal gender equality recognized by law,
tax legislation benefiting dual earners, family
and social policies, and an affordable childcare
infrastructure can facilitate WEL. Thus, we
hypothesize that there is a significant relation-
ship between regulatory institutions and WEL
in a country:
H1a: WEL in a country is positively related to
its regulatory institutions.
Entrepreneurial Norms
While regulatory institutions are related to
the formal compliance with rules and laws, the
underlying assumptions of entrepreneurial
norms are the informal and invisible “rules of
the game,” the uncodified values (what is
JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT590

27. preferred or considered proper) and norms
(how things are to be done, consistent with
those values), held by individuals and organi-
zations that influence the relative social desir-
ability of entrepreneurial activity and
entrepreneurship as a career option (Busenitz,
Gómez, and Spencer 2000).
The social acceptability of entrepreneurial
careers have been shown to vary across differ-
ent countries; some countries facilitate and
promote entrepreneurship, while others dis-
courage it by making it difficult to pursue
(Baumol, Litan, and Schramm 2009; De Soto
2000; Luthans, Stajkovic, and Ibrayeva 2000;
Mueller and Thomas 2001; Tiessen 1997).
Based on the theory of planned behavior
(Ajzen 1991), one can expect that the perceived
desirability of entrepreneurial activity in a
society will influence individuals’ entrepreneur-
ial intentions and result in the planned behav-
ior of starting entrepreneurial activity (Krueger,
Reilly, and Carsrud 2000). Indeed, research has
confirmed that the extent of female participa-
tion in new venture activities is predicted by
the degree of legitimacy, respect and admira-
tion afforded to women’s entrepreneurship
(Baughn, Chua, and Neupert 2006). Thus, we
propose that women’s entrepreneurial activity
will be higher if the entrepreneurial norms of a
country warrant that women will be admired
and rewarded for their efforts in creating entre-
preneurial value for society.

28. H1b: WEL in a country is positively related to
its entrepreneurial norms.
Entrepreneurial Cognitions
Entrepreneurial cognitions reflect the nature
of reality and the cognitive frameworks related
to individuals’ perceptions of their ability (level
of expected performance) and their self-efficacy
(that is, the level of confidence in their own
skills to start a business) to get involved success-
fully in an entrepreneurial activity (Bandura
1982; Krueger, Reilly, and Carsrud 2000).
According to Busenitz, Gómez, and Spencer
(2000), entrepreneurial opportunities may be
legitimized through individuals’ perceptions of
their knowledge and skills required for the
creation of a new business. Based on the theory
of planned behavior (Ajzen 1991), one can
expect that the perceived feasibility (perceived
behavioral control: Ajzen 1991) of entrepreneur-
ial activity in society will influence the entrepre-
neurial intentions of individuals and result in the
planned behavior of starting entrepreneurial
activity (Krueger, Reilly, and Carsrud 2000).
Building on these insights, entrepreneurship
research has shown that individuals’ percep-
tions of their ability to recognize opportunities
and their self-efficacy toward entrepreneurial
activity are positively related to enhancing the
extent of entrepreneurial activity (Arenius and
Minniti 2005; Saeed et al. 2013).
In addition, social capital and social networks

29. have been identified as imporant determinants
of the recognition and explotation of entrepre-
neurial opportunities (De Carolis and Saparito
2006; Mitchell et al. 2002; Stenholm, Acs, and
Wuebker 2011). Research has also shown that
the presence or lack of entrepreneurial net-
works and role models, and their capability to
encourage and maintain a platform for taking
part in entrepreneurial activity, is more impor-
tant than regulatory institutions (Mai and
Gan 2007; Owen-Smith and Powell 2008). Entre-
preneurial women, especially in developing
countries, suffer from weak entrepreneurial net-
works, lack of female entrepreneurial role
models, low levels of entrepreneurial and man-
agement education, skills training and career
guidance, and have limited access to support
services, including business development ser-
vices and information on business growth
(Davis 2012; Drine and Grach 2010; Kitching
and Woldie 2004). Furthermore, they face the
challenge of gaining access to and control over
finances and external sources of capital (Jamali
2009; Minniti 2009) causing them to perceive the
environment to be challenging and unsuitable
for entrepreneurial activity (Zhao, Seibert, and
Hills 2005). As a result, Langowitz and Minniti
(2007) found that “women tend to perceive
themselves and their business environment in a
less favorable light compared to men” (p. 356).
Thus, we hypothesize that there is a significant
relationship between entrepreneurial cognitions
and WEL in a country:
H1c: WEL in a country is positively related to its
entrepreneurial cognitions.

30. Institutional Theory and Vision for
Women’s Entrepreneurship (VWE)
In this study, we argue that the VWE will be
higher in countries where entrepreneurship in
general is highly regarded, entrepreneurial cog-
nitions are strong and where regulatory insti-
tutions support entrepreneurial activities. This
line of reasoning is based on previous research
YOUSAFZAI, SAEED, AND MUFFATTO 591
which has shown that the VWE is embedded in
a society’s support for entrepreneurial activity
itself (Baughn, Chua, and Neupert 2006).
Previous research has shown that the lack of
entrepreneurial norms and the cultural and
religious-based societal attitudes in some coun-
tries leads to a lack of support for working
women in general and for women’s entrepre-
neurship in particular (Baughn, Chua, and
Neupert 2006; Jamali 2009). For example,
Henry and Kennedy (2003) showed that the
lack of enterprise culture in Ireland coupled
with a very conservative view toward women
restricted the level of women’s entrepreneur-
ship (Baughn, Chua, and Neupert 2006). Fur-
thermore, the direct-effects argument for the
impact of the three institutional pillars on entre-
preneurial leadership is well established in
entrepreneurship literature (Bruton, Ahlstrom,
and Li 2010; Stenholm, Acs, and Wuebker
2011). However, in the case of women’s entre-

31. preneurship, a consideration of the specific
context demonstrates the mediating influence
of the VWE. Peng and Heath (1996) suggested
that the interaction of the institutional
framework with individuals influenced their
decision-making by determining the acceptabil-
ity of norms and behaviors in a given society.
Following this, we propose that the interaction
of individuals in a society with the general
institutional framework comprising favourable
regulatory institutions, positive entrepreneurial
norms and entrepreneurial cognitions will
enable the development of a positive VWE.
Examples of positive visions include non-
discriminatory business practices for entrepre-
neurial women, religious beliefs and family
values that support women’s entrepreneurial
activity, a view of entrepreneurship as not
solely masculine activity, and a general positive
attitude of society toward women and employ-
ment. This vision will, in turn, perform an
important mediating role in shaping the rela-
tionship between the three institutional pillars
and WEL. Specifically, VWE will ensure the
emergence of WEL because the extent to which
women’s entrepreneurial activity is recognized
to be as legitimate as male entrepreneurial
activity will lead to a higher level of women’s
entrepreneurship (Achtenhagen and Welter
2003). Legitimacy not only increases the
demand and supply of entrepreneurial activity
(Lounsbury and Glynn 2001), but also ensures
better access to the resources required to
support entrepreneurial start-ups and their con-
tinued growth (Etzioni 1987). Implicit in this

32. argument is the notion that VWE channels
general institutional support for entrepreneur-
ship to the emergence of WEL. Indeed, it is not
the general institutional support per se but
rather its integration of this support leading to
VWE that ensures WEL. Thus, we propose the
following additional hypotheses:
H2: The VWE in a country is positively related
to its (a) regulatory institutions, (b) entre-
preneurial norms, and (c) entrepreneurial
cognitions.
H3: WEL in a country is positively related to its
VWE.
H4: VWE mediates the effects of (a) regulatory
institutions, (b) entrepreneurial norms, and
(c) entrepreneurial cognitions on WEL.
Methodology
We developed a unique and distinctive data-
base of internationally comparative country-
level panel data on entrepreneurial activity
across 92 countries for the years 2000–2012. Our
main source of data was the GEM database,
which was developed by the Global Entrepre-
neurship Research Association (GERA).1 In addi-
tion, we also consulted the Index of Economic
Freedom (IEF) and the Doing Business Report
(EDBI) from the World Bank Group (World
Bank 2004, 2007). Each indicator’s value was
normalized to 1 (highest value) and 0 (lowest
value). Standardized values were used for the
SEM analyses. Study variables and data sources

33. are summarized in Table 1.
1GERA is the largest ongoing research consortium collecting
individual- and national-level data on the
incidence, determinants, and outcomes of entrepreneurial
activity since 1999 (Minniti, Bygrave, and Autio
2006). GEM collects data from two sources: (1) the adult
population survey (APS) and (2) the national expert
survey (NES). The NES-questionnaire includes standardized
measures of experts’ (entrepreneurs, consultants,
academics, politicians) perceptions of their country’s
entrepreneurial framework conditions and the
institutional environment for entrepreneurship. The country
experts in the NES-survey have a substantial
knowledge of entrepreneurship-related issues (Reynolds et al.
2001).
JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT592
WEL was measured using the GEM’s APS data
from 2000–2012. We calculated a combined
measure of female nascent entrepreneurs (trying
to start new ventures but have not paid any
wages to anyone for last 3 months) and new
female entrepreneurial activity (those who have
been in existence for more than 3 months but
not more than 42 months), known as female
Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA)
(Levie and Autio 2011). This normative data was
available for 92 countries. We compiled an
eleven-year panel of GEM countries (2002–
2012). For validation analyses and robustness
checks, the full 9-year time series was used.

34. VWE was measured through five questions
that approximately 446 experts from 92
Table 1
Exploratory Factor Analysis, Validity, and Reliability
Construct and Source Measures 1 2 3 4 Source
Regulatory institutional
arrangements
AVE (%) = 54.83
CR = 0.83; α = 0.96
Business freedom 0.85 IEF
*Ease of starting up a
business
0.71 EDBI
*Ease of closing a business. 0.71 EDBI
*Property rights. 0.68 IEF
Entrepreneurial
cognitions
AVE (%) = 42.74
CR = 0.80; α = 0.81
*Opportunity perception. 0.82 GEM—APS
*Knows an entrepreneur. 0.73 GEM—APS
*Skills. 0.71 GEM—APS
Entrepreneurial norms
AVE (%) = 49.64
CR = 0.61; α = 0.66

35. *High status. 0.67 GEM—APS
*Media attention. 0.74 GEM—APS
*Desirable Career Choice. 0.77 GEM—APS
Vision for women
entrepreneurship
AVE (%) = 42.90
CR = 0.67; α = 0.88
*There are sufficient social
services available so that
women can continue to
work even after they
start a family.
0.87 GEM—NES
*Starting a new business is
a socially acceptable
career option for
women.
0.88 GEM—NES
*Women are encouraged to
become self-employed or
start a new business.
0.81 GEM—NES
*Men and women are
equally exposed to good
opportunities to start a
new business.
0.80 GEM—NES

36. *Men and women are
equally able to start a
new business.
0.60 GEM—NES
% Explained variance 39.69 22.59 10.70 8.08
% Accumulated variance 39.69 62.28 72.99 81.07
*Normalized.
KMO = 0.786, Bartlett’s p > .001. The cut-off point was 0.60.
APS, Adult Population Survey; AVE, average variance
extracted; CR, composite reliability; EBDI,
World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Index (World Bank
2009); GEM, Global Entrepreneurship
Monitor; IEF, Index of Economic Freedom (Holmes et al.
2008); NES, National Expert Survey.
YOUSAFZAI, SAEED, AND MUFFATTO 593
countries were asked in the 2002 to 2012 admin-
istrations of the GEM’s NES-questionnaire. The
experts were asked to rate their agreement or
disagreement on a 5-point Likert scale with the
applicability of the following statements to their
country: (1) there are sufficient social services
available so that women can continue to work
even after they start a family; (2) starting a new
business is a socially acceptable career option
for women; (3) women are encouraged to
become self-employed or start a new business;
(4) men and women are equally exposed to
good opportunities to start a new business; and

37. (5) men and women are equally able to start a
new business.
Regulatory institutions were measured
through four items. Business freedom was
taken from IEF to indicate the overall burden of
government regulations set on entrepreneurial
and business activities (Holmes et al. 2008). It
assesses the procedures, time and cost involved
both in starting and closing a business. The
Ease of Doing Business Index (EDBI) was con-
sulted for measuring the ease of starting and
closing a business (World Bank 2009). The ease
of starting up a business indicates the effect of
the regulatory environment on start-ups in a
country by identifying the bureaucratic and
legal hurdles that an entrepreneur must over-
come to incorporate and register a new firm
(e.g., regulations on starting a business, dealing
with construction permits, employing workers,
registering property, obtaining credit, protect-
ing investors, paying taxes, trading across
borders and enforcing contracts) (Stenholm,
Acs, and Wuebker 2011). The ease of closing a
business indicates the effect of the regulatory
environment on closing a business through
weaknesses in existing bankruptcy law and the
main procedural and administrative bottlenecks
in the bankruptcy process (Stenholm, Acs, and
Wuebker 2011). The property rights measure
from IEF assessed the degree to which a coun-
try’s laws protect private property rights and
the degree to which its government enforces
those laws (Arora, Fosfuri, and Gambardella
2001).

38. Entrepreneurial norms were measured
through three variables from the GEM’s APS
questionnaire. Following the broad definition
of norms from Baughn, Chua, and Neupert
(2006), we first measured the status of entre-
preneurship in a country through the percent-
age of the adult population who agreed with
the statement that in their country people
attach a high status to successful entrepreneurs.
Second, we measured the level of perceived
media attention paid to entrepreneurship
through the percentage of the adult population
who agreed with the statement that they often
see stories in the public media about successful
entrepreneurs (Stenholm, Acs, and Wuebker
2011). Third, we measured the percentage of
people who agreed with the statement that in
their country, most people consider starting a
business as a desirable career choice.
Entrepreneurial cognitions were measured
through three variables from the GEM’s APS
questionnaire to capture the perception of per-
ceived business opportunities and the skills
necessary for starting a business in the non-
entrepreneurial adult population. Following
Stenholm, Acs, and Wuebker (2011), we first
measured opportunity perception which indi-
cates the percentage of the non-entrepreneurial
adult population who see opportunities for start-
ing a business in the area in which they live.
Second, the variable knows an entrepreneur
indicates the percentage of the non-
entrepreneurial adult population who person-
ally know an entrepreneur who started a

39. business in the previous two years. Finally, skills
measure the percentage of the non-
entrepreneurial adult population who believe
that they have the required skills and knowledge
to start a business.
Control Variables
In testing our hypotheses, we controlled for
the economic development status of a country
through its per capita income and domestic
growth. Following past studies, we used lagged
per capita income which is measured by a
country’s gross national income (GNI) per
capita expressed in US dollars at Purchasing
Power Party (PPP) exchange rates from the
World Bank’s World Development Indicators
(WDI) database (Bowen and De Clercq 2007;
Wennekers et al. 2005). Domestic growth
was measured through GDP and to obtain
endogenity we used lagged values from the
WDI database. Foreign direct investment (FDI)
represents the presence of foreign-owned
enterprises within a country as a demand-side
factor which is likely to influence a country’s
level of entrepreneurship (Verheul et al. 2002).
This variable was measured through the stock
of inward FDI relative to a country’s GDP,
the data for which were taken from the FDI
database maintained by the United Nations
JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT594
Conference on Trade and Development.

40. Finally, we expect a country’s uncertainty
avoidance and degree of collectivism to influ-
ence its entrepreneurial activity, the data for
which were obtained from the GLOBE study
(2004).
Results
Assessment of Measures
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with
Varimax-rotation and Kaiser Normalization was
conducted to understand the factor structure of
the variables. It resulted in four-factors with
eigenvalues greater than 1, accounting for
68.58% of the total variance (KMO = 0.786,
p < .001, cut off point 0.60). Table 1 reports the
EFA results. This factor structure was confirmed
through Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).
The parameter estimates from the CFA were
statistically significant and the chronbach’s
alpha reliability measures varied from excellent
0.96 (regulatory institutions) to acceptable
0.65 (entrepreneurial norms). The discriminant
validity was assessed by comparing the corre-
lations and the square root of the average vari-
ance of each construct. Table 2 suggests good
discriminant validity, which indicates that the
latent variables in the model are independent
constructs. Table 2 presents the correlation
matrix and summary statistics.
Convergent Validity
We followed the method by Stenholm, Acs,
and Wuebker (2011) to test the convergent
validity of the three institutional pillars and the

41. VWE through correlation analysis with other
measures employed in previous work. We com-
pared the regulatory institutions with GEM’s
NES data on government policies (ρ = 0.648,
p < .001), government support for entrepre-
neurship (ρ = 0.545, p < .001), and the financial
environment for entrepreneurial support
(ρ = 0.583, p < .001). The significant Spearman
correlation supports the regulatory institutions
measure.
For entrepreneurial norms, we used GEM’s
NES questionnaire. Following Stenholm, Acs,
and Wuebker (2011), we took country-level
data on the national experts’ perception of the
entrepreneurial culture measured through the
perceived degree of motivation and value
(ρ = 0.405, p < .001) and cultural norms and
societal support (ρ = 0.413, p < .001). Simi-
larly, the Spearman correlations between the
entrepreneurial cognitions and the NES’s
degree of skills and abilities for entrepreneur-
ship and opportunities perception were posi-
tive (ρ = 0.199, p < .001; ρ = 0.473, p < .001
respectively).
We tested the convergent validity of the
VWE on the Human Development Report’s
gender empowerment measure. It consists of
three indicators: (1) male and female shares of
parliamentary seats; (2) male and female shares
of administrative, professional, technical and
managerial positions; and (3) power over eco-
nomic resources as measured by women’s and
men’s estimated earned income (Purchasing

42. Power Parity, PPP US$) (Schüler 2006). The
VWE correlates positively with the gender
empowerment measure (ρ = 0.471, p < .001).
Analysis and Results
Direct Effects
Regression analysis was performed to test the
direct effects of the three institutional pillars on
the VWE and WEL. As Table 3 (Model 1) shows,
regulatory institutions (β = 0.21, p < .05), entre-
preneurial cognitions (β = 0.34, p < .001), and
normative institutions (β = 0.14, p < .05) have a
positive and significant effect on the VWE. These
results support H2a, H2b, and H2c. The results
in Model 2 show that regulatory institutions
(β = 0.32, p < .001), entrepreneurial cognitions
(β = 0.56, p < .001) and normative institutions
(β = 0.15, p < .05) have positive and significant
effects on WEL. These results support H1a, H1b,
and H1c. Among the control variables, domestic
growth (β = 0.25, p < .001) and per capita
income (β = 0.40, p < .001) are positively related
to the VWE, whereas domestic growth (β = 0.12,
p < .05) and per capita income (β = −0.18,
p < .05) are related to WEL.
Mediating Effect of VWE
A three-step regression was conducted to
examine the mediating role of VWE (Baron
and Kenny 1986). The regression results in
Table 3 show that regulatory institutions
(β = 0.32, p < .001), entrepreneurial norms
(β = 0.15, p < .05) and entrepreneurial cogni-
tions (β = 0.56, p < .001) have positive and

43. significant effects on the WEL (Model 2). Fur-
thermore, all dimensions of institutional pillars
are positively related to VWE (Model 1). When
VWE is entered into Model 3 (Table 3), it shows
a positive and significant effect on WEL
(β = 0.17, p < .001), supporting H3. The inclu-
sion of VWE leads to an increase in the effect
sizes of regulatory institutions (from 0.21 to
YOUSAFZAI, SAEED, AND MUFFATTO 595
T
a
b
le
2
C
o
rr
e
la
ti
o
n
M
a
tr
ix

44. a
n
d
D
e
sc
ri
p
ti
v
e
S
ta
ti
st
ic
s
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

45. 9
1
0
1
.
W
o
m
e
n
’s
E
n
tr
e
p
re
n
e
u
ri
al
L
e
ad
e
rs

46. h
ip
1
2
.
V
is
io
n
fo
r
W
o
m
e
n
’s
E
n
tr
e
p
re
n
e
u
rs

47. h
ip
0
.1
9
**
1
3
.
R
e
g
u
la
to
ry
In
st
it
u
ti
o
n
al
A
rr

48. an
g
e
m
e
n
ts
0
.4
2
**
0
.3
**
1
4
.
E
n
tr
e
p
re
n
e
u
ri

49. al
N
o
rm
s
0
.4
2
**
0
.3
8
**
0
.0
5
1
5
.
E
n
tr
e
p
re

50. n
e
u
ri
al
C
o
g
n
it
io
n
s
0
.6
9
**
0
.2
5
**
0
.2
4
**
0

51. .5
4
**
1
6
.
D
o
m
e
st
ic
G
ro
w
th
0
.4
4
**
0
.0
5
0
.4

52. 0
**
0
.4
3
**
0
.3
0
**
1
7
.
P
e
r
ca
p
it
a
In
co
m
e
−0
.5

53. 2
**
0
.2
2
**
−0
.7
6
**
−0
.2
5
**
−0
.4
2
**
−0
.5
4
**
1
8

54. .
F
o
re
ig
n
D
ir
e
ct
In
v
e
st
m
e
n
t
−0
.0
7
0
.0
6
−0
.3

55. 2
**
0
.0
2
−0
.1
1
*
0
.0
5
0
.1
8
**
1
9
.
C
o
ll
e
ct
iv
is

56. m
0
.2
9
**
−0
.3
0
**
0
.6
5
**
0
.0
4
−0
.0
3
0
.5
8
**
−0
.6

57. 8
**
−0
.0
4
1
1
0
.
U
n
ce
rt
ai
n
ty
A
v
o
id
an
ce
−0
0
.2

58. 6
**
0
.3
9
**
−0
.7
1
**
−0
.0
4
0
.0
2
−0
.2
4
**
0
.6
3
**
0

59. .2
3
**
−0
.7
3
**
1
M
e
an
0
.1
8
0
.7
2
0
.7
6
0
.7
6
0
.5

60. 3
0
.3
0
0
.3
3
0
.1
5
0
.8
1
0
.7
9
S
ta
n
d
ar
d
D
e
v
ia
ti

61. o
n
0
.1
7
0
.1
1
0
.1
2
0
.1
1
0
.1
5
0
.1
8
0
.2
2
0
.1
4
0

62. .1
1
0
.1
2
*p
<
.0
5
.
**
p
<
.0
1
.
JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT596
0.25), entrepreneurial cognitions (from 0.34 to
0.43) and decrease in entrepreneurial norms
(from 0.14 to 0.10), but remain significant, sug-
gesting partial mediation and partial support
for H4.
Structural Equation Modelling
We examined the robustness of the preceding

63. results with structural equation modelling
(SEM). The first model (SEM1) examined the
direct effect of the independent variables on
WEL, with the path from VWE constrained to
zero. The fit indexes (χ2 [df] = 545.50 [350],
CFI = 0.94, and RMSEA = 0.04) suggested a
good fit with the data. The second model
(SEM2), which involved a full mediation of the
effect of the independent variables by VWE, also
showed a good fit with the data (χ2 [df] = 530.67
[353], CFI = 0.94, and RMSEA = 0.04). Model
comparisons with the chi-square difference test
indicated that SEM2 performed better than SEM1
(Δχ2 [Δdf] = −14.83 [3], p < .001). In SEM2, our
results were consistent with the regression
analysis results. VWE (β = 0.29, t = 6.93,
p < .001), regulatory institutions (β = 0.36,
t = 9.50, p < .001), entrepreneurial cognitions
(β = 0.56, t = 16.05, p < .001) and entrepreneur-
ial norms (β = 0.20, t = 9.50, p < .001) were sig-
nificantly related to WEL.
Following Brown’s (1997) and Shrout and
Bolger’s (2002) recommendations, we tested
the significance of the specific mediation effects
as follows: regulatory institutions (total effect
β = 2.16, p < .001; direct effect β = 2.51, p < .05;
Table 3
Results of Regression Analysis: Standardized Path Coefficients
(t-Values)
Independent Variables Vision for Women’s

64. Entrepreneurship
Women’s Entrepreneurial
Leadership
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Control Variables
Domestic growth 0.25 (3.84)*** 0.12 (1.98)* 0.10 (1.99)*
Per capita income 0.40 (4.01)*** −.18 (−2.08)* −0.15 (−2.23)*
Foreign direct investment 0.037 (.86) 0.067 (0.79) 0.065 (0.80)
Collectivism 0.037 (0.60) −0.11 (−1.37) −0.11 (−1.38)
Uncertainty avoidance 0.14 (1.57) −0.04 (−0.60) −0.03 (−0.58)
Main Effects
Regulatory institutional
arrangements
0.21 (2.55)* 0.32 (3.58)*** 0.25 (3.80)***
Entrepreneurial cognitions 0.34 (5.60)*** 0.56 (11.10)*** 0.43
(8.73)***
Entrepreneurial norms 0.14 (2.58)* 0.15 (2.37)* 0.10 (2.29)*
Mediating Effect
Vision for women’s
entrepreneurship
0.17 (2.98)***
Observations 381 381 381
Number of years 10 10 10
R2 0.42 0.59 0.62
Adjusted R2 0.39 0.60 0.51
ΔR2 0.03***
F-value 22.30*** 46.56*** 42.20***

65. F change 5.15**
Max VIF 2.57 2.56 2.40
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, †p < .1 (one-tailed test for
hypotheses, and two-tailed test for control
variables).
YOUSAFZAI, SAEED, AND MUFFATTO 597
indirect effect through VWE β = 0.34, p < .001;
Sobel test = 4.84***), entrepreneurial norms
(total effect β = 0.10, p < .05.; direct effect
β = 0.07, p < .05.; indirect effect through VWE
β = 0.02, p < .001; Sobel test = 5.04***), and
entrepreneurial cognitions (total effect β = 0.32,
p < .001; direct effect β = 0.31, p < .001; indirect
effect β = 0.34, p < .001; Sobel test = 5.03***).
Discussion
Drawing on the notion of the social
embeddedness of entrepreneurship and the
insights of institutional theory, we proposed
and validated a multi-level model of WEL
using data collected in 92 countries through
the GEM project. Our multi-level measures
and analysis techniques provided an interac-
tive answer to our research question: how do
different institutional arrangements (regula-
tory, normative and cognitive) interact to
create a VWE that eventually drives WEL? Spe-
cifically, we examined the mediating role of
the VWE on the relationship between the
regulatory, normative and cognitive pillars of

66. institutional theory and WEL. Overall, the
results of this study suggest two main conclu-
sions. First, regulatory institutions, normative
institutions, and entrepreneurial cognitions
influence the VWE. Second, regulatory institu-
tions, entrepreneurial cognitions and entrepre-
neurial norms have a direct and an indirect
effect (through VWE) on WEL. Note that
although the direct effect of VWE on WEL is
small relative to the effect of regulatory and
cognitive dimensions, it plays an additional
role in linking institutional dimensions to
WEL.
Previous research has shown that the preva-
lence of entrepreneurial activity greatly differs
between countries (Freytag and Thurik 2007).
This study addressed the role of the VWE to
explain the country-level differences WEL. This
study was conducted because the role of insti-
tutional context on entrepreneurial activity
seems to be under researched (Ahl 2006). Fur-
thermore, recent conceptualizations of the VWE
as a cultural value allow the application of a
theoretically and empirically rigorous test of the
relationship between institutional dimensions
and WEL through a mediating effect of VWE. In
general, our study indicated that WEL is
explained by the match between a VWE and
institutional dimensions.
We found support for the direct effect of
entrepreneurial norms, regulatory institutions
and entrepreneurial cognitions on both WEL
and VWE. We also found that VWE partially

67. mediates the effect of institutional pillars on
WEL. This suggests that these pillars of institu-
tional theory may have different intrinsic prop-
erties, a nuanced insight that has not yet been
recognized in extant contingency theory. This
is consistent with the structural contingency
theory’s argument that favorable institutional
dimensions determine the degree to which the
VWE is supported. Although the women’s
entrepreneurship literature widely reports that
general normative support and a VWE are
important factors in the emergence of WEL
(Baughn, Chua, and Neupert 2006), we offer a
new insight by arguing that the latter factor can
be the route that makes the former a valuable
resource in the emergence of WEL. These
results also signal a ready supply of entrepre-
neurs that see opportunities and believe they
are capable of starting a business, and the regu-
latory components in the environment will
facilitate their efforts.2
We conducted a series of post hoc moderat-
ing tests with other variables in this study but
found no significant non-linear or moderated
effect of a VWE between institutional pillars
WEL. We evaluated the moderating view of the
VWE and found significant interaction effects
only between the VWE and entrepreneurial
cognitions (β = −1.27, t = −2.36, p < .05) and
regulatory institutions (β = −1.10, t = −4.93,
p < .01). These findings are novel. They suggest
that a VWE plays not only a mediation role but
also an unexpected negative moderating role.
Both policymakers and scholars have con-

68. siderable interest in measuring the levels of
women’s entrepreneurship within and between
nations. Our multidimensional country-level
results underscore the variance between
various institutional arrangements and WEL
through the mediation of VWE. Our findings
suggest that the rate of WEL in a country can be
enhanced through supportive regulatory insti-
tutions and, most importantly, improving
the entrepreneurial cognitions for women’s
entrepreneurship.
2We thank the anonymous reviewer for this insight.
JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT598
Implications and Contributions
This study contributes to women’s entrepre-
neurship literature in four main ways. First,
the direct effect of country-level institutional
dimensions sheds new light on the importance
ascribed to the concept of the entrepreneurial
environment in the emergence of WEL and the
importance that the women’s entrepreneurship
literature places on a broad understanding
of normative contexts (Baughn, Chua, and
Neupert 2006). However, the indirect, positive
effects of institutional pillars also emphasize
the need to embrace a more fine-grained notion
of the entrepreneurial environment. Without
this, it is unlikely that women’s entrepreneur-
ship theory will unearth new insights into the
role of the VWE in the emergence of WEL.

69. Second, all entrepreneurship is contextually
embedded in the social, cultural and political
institutions (Bruton and Ahlstrom 2003). We
found that where general entrepreneurial
norms (entrepreneurship is respected and
admired) and VWE (specific normative support
for women’s entrepreneurship) are higher, the
emergence of WEL is higher. Moreover, the
VWE appears to be a more significant predictor
of women’s entrepreneurial activity in a
country than more general entrepreneurial
norms (see Table 3, Model 3). This finding can
be interpreted in the light of push and pull
entry factors into entrepreneurship, because
the impact of general entrepreneurial norms
and the VWE are shaped by the context and
choice set available to the nascent entrepreneur
(Baughn, Chua, and Neupert 2006). Females
will be pulled into self-employment by the VWE
and normative support for entrepreneurship.
However, this will be less relevant in the case
of necessity-based entrepreneurship, that is,
even a country where the VWE and normative
institutions may inhibit women’s entry into
entrepreneurship, economic constraints on
employment will close off other options except
self-employment (Baughn, Chua, and Neupert
2006).
Third, we clarify how and why the VWE
matters in the emergence of WEL by showing
its simultaneously mediating and moderating
roles. We show that the VWE channels institu-
tional dimensions into WEL. This new insight
implies that by failing to consider the mediating
role of the VWE, previous research may have

70. assumed away the entrepreneurial environment
demands in WEL. Therefore, it may have
reached a premature and perhaps overly opti-
mistic view of the importance of the institu-
tional environment in the emergence of WEL.
More importantly, these findings suggest that
institutional dimensions are necessary but not
sufficient conditions for women’s entrepreneur-
ship, and that their interaction with the VWE is
the key driver of women’s entrepreneurship.
We show that the VWE plays an important role
in the emergence of WEL, by partially mediat-
ing the effects of institutional dimensions on
WEL. In other words, institutional dimensions
may not be intrinsically valuable; their value
may be realized through the VWE.
Fourth, given the complexity of the study
context, the negative moderating effects of the
VWE on entrepreneurial cognition and regula-
tory institutions suggest that at high levels, they
could supress the effect of institutional dimen-
sions on women’s entrepreneurship. It appears
that though some dimensions of the institu-
tional theory may make a VWE necessary, the
degree of the VWE might be tempered by the
contextual complexity of the country. One
could suspect positive moderating roles for the
VWE. The new insight we offer is that there
may be a threshold of the VWE beyond which
institutional dimensions may have a detrimen-
tal effect on women’s entrepreneurship. This is
a trade-off that has not been uncovered in
extant research.

71. Limitations and Future
Research Opportunities
Some limitations need to be discussed in
order to assess the generalizability of our
results. Our analysis has a decent sample size
for studies of this kind and we relied on data
from two independent datasets and, therefore,
there is no common method bias in our analy-
sis. However, we have not considered the pos-
sibility of a non-linear relationship between
institutional arrangements and WEL, which can
cause problems in the use of analytical tech-
niques that depend on causality and on average
values (Andriani and McKelvey 2009). Conse-
quently, we do not consider how the cognitive
and normative variance deviating from the
average might affect individuals’ responses to
institutional pressures. Future research should
study these outliers in detail to develop further
understanding of the topic. Second, our aim
was to study women’s entrepreneurial activity
at the national level. Accordingly, we consid-
ered all variables at the national level; thus, our
results should not be generalized to the indi-
YOUSAFZAI, SAEED, AND MUFFATTO 599
vidual level of entrepreneurship. Future
research can study the effects of individual-
level factors on women’s entrepreneurial
decisions, for example, personality traits, entre-
preneurial family background. Furthermore, we
did not address the issue of how our proposed

72. relationships will change over time across dif-
ferent countries. Since the variables used in this
study were collected systematically on a regular
basis from 2002–2012, to achieve a more com-
plete picture of women’s entrepreneurship in
different countries, future research can possibly
track the trajectories of different countries.
In this article, we have shown that WEL and
a VWE are influenced by institutional condi-
tions. A great deal remains to be done to under-
stand the institutional effects on women’s
entrepreneurial activity across countries, and
thereby to understand better why certain indi-
viduals switch from being employees to man-
aging their own ventures. For example, further
work could examine the effect of each of the
components of our model. Preliminary analysis,
not reported here, suggests interaction effects
between regulation and entrepreneurial capac-
ity and entrepreneurial opportunity. Repeating
the analysis for start-ups in different industries
or technology levels could also reveal different
effects. While we have chosen to study entry,
an analysis of the effect of institutional dimen-
sions on exit rates could also be fruitful.
Finally, further investigation of the extent to
which women’s entrepreneurship is substitut-
able under different institutional dimensions
and regimes could explain why some countries
with high regulation and relatively low rates of
women’s entrepreneurship remain powerful
economies.
References
Achtenhagen, L., and F. Welter (2003). “Female

73. Entrepreneurship in Germany: Context,
Development and Its Reflection in German
Media,” in New Perspectives on Women
Entrepreneurs. Ed. J. Butler. Greenwich, CT:
Information Age Publishing, 77–100.
Adkins, C. L., S. A. Samaras, S. W. Gilfillan, and
W. E. McWee (2013). “The Relationship
between Owner Characteristics, Company
Size, and the Work–Family Culture and Poli-
cies of Women-Owned Businesses,” Journal
of Small Business Management 51(2), 196–
214.
Ahl, H. (2006). “Why Research on Women
Entrepreneurs Needs New Directions,”
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice
30, 595–621. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006
.00138.
Aidis, R. (2005). “Institutional Barriers to Small-
and Medium-Sized Enterprise Operations in
Transition Countries,” Small Business Eco-
nomics 25(4), 305–317.
Aidis, R., S. Estrin, and T. Mickiewicz (2008).
“Institutions and Entrepreneurship Develop-
ment in Russia: A Comparative Perspective,”
Journal of Business Venturing 23(6), 656–
672.
Ajzen, I. (1991). “The Theory of Planned
Behavior,” Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes 50, 179–211.

74. Aldrich, H. E. (2011). “Heroes, Villains, and
Fools: Institutional Entrepreneurship, Not
Institutional Entrepreneurs,” Entrepreneur-
ship Research Journal 1(2), 1–6.
Andriani, P., and B. McKelvey (2009). “From
Gaussian to Paretian Thinking: Causes and
Implications of Power Laws in Organiza-
tions,” Organization Science 20, 1053–1071.
Arenius, P., and M. Minniti (2005). “Perceptual
Variables and Nascent Entrepreneurship,”
Small Business Economics 24(3), 233–247.
Arora, A., A. Fosfuri, and A. Gambardella
(2001). “Markets for Technology and their
Implications for Corporate Strategy,” Indus-
trial and Corporate Change 10(2), 419–451.
Autio, E., and Z. J. Acs (2010). “Intellectual
Property Protection and the Formation of
Entrepreneurial Growth Aspirations,” Strate-
gic Entrepreneurship Journal 4(4), 234–
251.
Bandura, A. (1982). “Self-Efficacy Mechanism in
Human Agency,” American Psychologist
37(2), 122–147.
Baron, R. M., and D. A. Kenny (1986). “The
Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in
Social Psychological Research: Conceptual,
Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,”
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
51(6), 1173–1182.

75. Bates, T., W. E. Jackson, III, and J. H. Johnson,
Jr. (2007). “Introduction to the Special Issue
on Advancing Research on Minority Entre-
preneurship,” Annals of the American
Academy of Political Science and Social
Science 613, 10–17.
Baughn, C., B. Chua, and K. Neupert (2006).
“The Normative Context for Women’s Partici-
pation in Entrepreneurship: A Multicountry
Study,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Prac-
tice 30(5), 687–708.
JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT600
Baumol, W. J., R. E. Litan, and C. J. Schramm
(2009). Good Capitalism, Bad Capitalism,
and the Economics of Growth and Prosper-
ity. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Boden, R. J., Jr. (1999). “Flexible Working
Hours, Family Responsibilities, and Female
Self-Employment,” American Journal of
Economics and Sociology 58(1), 71–83.
Boettke, P. J., and C. J. Coyne (2003). “Entre-
preneurship and Development: Cause or
Consequence?,” Advances in Austrian
Economics 6, 67–87.
Bowen, H. P., and D. De Clercq (2007).
“Institutional Context and the Allocation of
Entrepreneurial Effort,” Journal of Interna-

76. tional Business Studies 39(4), 747–767.
Brown, R. L. (1997). “Assessing Specific Media-
tional Effects in Complex Theoretical
Models,” Structural Equation Modeling 4(2),
142–156.
Brush, C., A. de Bruin, and F. Welter (2009).
“A Gender-Aware Framework for Women’s
Entrepreneurship,” International Journal of
Gender and Entrepreneurship 1(1), 8–24.
Brush, C. G., D. J. Wong-MingJi, and S. E.
Sullivan (1999). “Women Entrepreneurs:
Moving Beyond the Glass Ceiling,” Academy
of Management Review 24(3), 585–589.
Bruton, G., and D. Ahlstrom (2003). “An
Institutional View of China’s Venture Capital
Industry: Explaining the Differences
Between China and the West,” Journal of
Business Venturing 18(1), 233–259.
Bruton, G. D., D. Ahlstrom, and H.-L. Li (2010).
“Institutional Theory and Entrepreneurship:
Where Are We Now and Where Do We Need
to Move in the Future?,” Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice 34(3), 421–440.
Busenitz, L. W., C. Gómez, and J. W. Spencer
(2000). “Country Institutional Profiles:
Unlocking Entrepreneurial Phenomena,”
Academy of Management Journal 43(5),
994–1003.
Buttner, E. H., and D. P. Moore (1997).

77. “Women’s Organizational Exodus to Entre-
preneurship: Self-Reported Motivations and
Correlates with Success,” Journal of Small
Business Management 35(1), 34–46.
Campbell, J. L. (2004). Institutional Change
and Globalization. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Capelleras, J., K. F. Mole, F. J. Greene, and D. J.
Storey (2008). “Do More Heavily Regulated
Economies Have Poorer Performing New
Ventures? Evidence from Britain and Spain,”
Journal of International Business Studies
39(4), 688–704.
Caputo, R. K., and A. Dolinsky (1998).
“Women’s Choice to Pursue Self-
Employment: The Role of Financial and
Human Capital of Household Members,”
Journal of Small Business Management
36(3), 8–17.
Carter, S., and S. Marlow (2003). “Accounting
for Change: Professionalism as a Challenge
to Gender Disadvantages in Entrepreneur-
ship,” in New Perspectives on Women Entre-
preneurs. Ed. J. Butler. Greenwich, CT:
Information Age Publishing, 181–202.
Davidsson, P. (2003). “The Domain of Entre-
preneurship Research: Some Suggestions,”
in Cognitive Approaches to Entrepreneurship
Research, Vol. 6. Ed. J. Katz and D.
Shepherd. Oxford, UK: Elsevier/JAI Press,

78. 315–372.
Davis, P. J. (2012). “The Global Training
Deficit: The Scarcity of Formal and Informal
Professional Development Opportunities for
Women Entrepreneurs,” Industrial and
Commercial Training 44(1), 19–25.
De Bruin, A., C. G. Brush, and F. Welter (2007).
“Advancing a Framework for Coherent
Research on Women’s Entrepreneurship,”
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 31(3),
323–339.
De Carolis, D. M., and P. Saparito (2006).
“Social Capital, Cognition, and Entrepreneur-
ial Opportunities: A Theoretical Frame-
work,” Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice 30(1), 41–56.
De Soto, H. (2000). The Mystery of Capital: Why
Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails
Everywhere Else. New York: Basic Books.
DeMartino, R., R. Barbato, and P. H. Jacques
(2006). “Exploring the Career/Achievement
and Personal Life Orientation Differences
between Entrepreneurs and Non-
entrepreneurs: The Impact of Sex and
Dependents,” Journal of Small Business
Management 44(3), 350–368.
Drine, I., and M. Grach (2010). “Supporting
Women Entrepreneurs in Tunisia.” Septem-
ber 2010, UN-WIDER working paper.
Published online.

79. Etzioni, A. (1987). “Entrepreneurship, Adapta-
tion and Legitimation: A Macro-Behavioral
Perspective,” Journal of Economic Behavior
& Organization 8(2), 175–189.
Freytag, A., and R. Thurik (2007). “Entre-
preneurship and Its Determinants in a
YOUSAFZAI, SAEED, AND MUFFATTO 601
Cross-Country Setting,” Journal of Evolution-
ary Economics 17, 117–131.
Gatewood, E. G., N. M. Carter, C. G. Brush, P.
G. Greene, and M. M. Hart (2003). Women
Entrepreneurs, Their Ventures, and the
Venture Capital Industry: An Annotated Bib-
liography. Stockholm: ESBRI.
Gilbert, M. R. (1997). “Identity, Space, and Poli-
tics: A Critique of the Poverty Debates,” in
Thresholds in Feminist Geography: Differ-
ence, Methodology, Representation. Eds. J. P.
Jones, H. Nast, and S. Roberts. Lanham, MD:
Rowman and Littlefield, 29–45.
Gnyawali, D., and D. Fogel (1994). “Environ-
ments for Entrepreneurship Development:
Key Dimensions and Research Implications,”
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 18(4),
43–62.
Gupta, V., I. C. MacMillan, and G. Surie (2004).

80. “Entrepreneurial Leadership: Developing
and Measuring a Cross-cultural Construct,”
Journal of Business Venturing 19, 241–260.
Henry, C., and S. Kennedy (2003). “In Search of
a New Celtic Tiger,” in New Perspectives on
Women Entrepreneurs. Ed. J. Butler. Green-
wich, CT: Information Age Publishing, 203–
224.
Holmes, K. R., E. J. Feulner, M. A. O’Grady, A.
B. Kim, D. Markheim, and J. M. Roberts
(Eds.). (2008). 2008 Index of Economic
Freedom: The Link Between Economic
Opportunity and Prosperity. Washington,
DC and New York: The Heritage Foun-
dation/The Wall Street Journal.
Hughes, K. D., J. E. Jennings, C. Brush, S.
Carter, and F. Welter (2012). “Extending
Women’s Entrepreneurship Research in New
Directions,” Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice 36(3), 429–442.
Hwang, H., and W. W. Powell (2005). “Institu-
tions and Entrepreneurship,” in Handbook
of Entrepreneurship Research. Eds. S. A.
Alvarez, R. Agarwal, and O. Sorenson. New
York: Kluwer Publishers, 179–210.
Jamali, D. (2009). “Constraints and Opportuni-
ties Facing Women Entrepreneurs in Devel-
oping Countries: A Relational Perspective,”
Gender in Management: An International
Journal 24(4), 232–251.

81. Kelley, D. J., C. G. Brush, P. G. Greene, and Y.
Litovsky (2012). “Global Entrepreneurship
Monitor (2012).” Women’s Report. Published
online. http://www.gemconsortium.org/
docs/2825/gem-2012-womens-report. (Last
accessed April 9, 2015).
Kirkwood, J., and B. Tootell (2008). “Is Entre-
preneurship the Answer to Achieving Work-
Family Balance?,” Journal of Management
and Organization 14(3), 285–302.
Kitching, B., and A. Woldie (2004). “Female
Entrepreneurs in Transitional Economies: A
Comparative Study of Businesswomen in
Nigeria and China.” Paper presented at the
Hawaii International Conference on Busi-
ness, 21–24 June. Honolulu.
Krueger, N. F., M. D. Reilly, and A. L. Carsrud
(2000). “Competing Models of Entrepreneur-
ial Intentions,” Journal of Business Ventur-
ing 15(5–6), 411–432.
Langowitz, N., and M. Minniti (2007). “The
Entrepreneurial Propensity of Women,”
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 31(3),
341–364.
Levie, J., and E. Autio (2011). “Regulatory
Burden, Rule of Law, and Entry of Strategic
Entrepreneurs: An International Panel
Study,” Journal of Management Studies 48,
1392–1419.
Lounsbury, M., and M. A. Glynn (2001). “Cul-

82. tural Entrepreneurship: Stories, Legitimacy,
and the Acquisition of Resources,” Strategic
Management Journal 22(6/7), 545–564.
Luthans, F., A. D. Stajkovic, and E. Ibrayeva
(2000). “Environmental and Psychological
Challenges Facing Entrepreneurial Develop-
ment in Transitional Economies,” Journal of
World Business 35, 95–110.
Mai, Y., and Z. Gan (2007). “Entrepreneurial
Opportunities, Capacities and Entrepreneur-
ial Environments. Evidence from Chinese
GEM Data,” Chinese Management Studies
1(4), 216–224.
Manolova, T. S., R. V. Eunni, and B. S. Gyoshev
(2008). “Institutional Environments for
Entrepreneurship: Evidence From Emerging
Economies in Eastern Europe,” Entrepre-
neurship Theory and Practice 32(1), 203–
218.
Marlow, S. (2002). “Self-Employed Women: A
Part of or Apart from Feminist Theory?,”
Entrepreneurship and Innovation 2(2),
23–37.
Martinelli, A. (2004). “The Social and Institu-
tional Context of Entrepreneurship,” in
Crossroads of Entrepreneurship. Eds. G.
Corbetta, M. Huse, and D. Ravasi. New York:
Springer, 58–74.
Meek, W. R., D. F. Pacheco, and J. G. York
(2010). “The Impact of Social Norms on

83. Entrepreneurial Action: Evidence From the
JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT602
http://www.gemconsortium.org/docs/2825/gem-2012-womens-
report
http://www.gemconsortium.org/docs/2825/gem-2012-womens-
report
Environmental Entrepreneurship Context,”
Journal of Business Venturing 25(5), 493–
509.
Minniti, M. (2009). “Gender Issues in Entrepre-
neurship,” Foundations and Trends in
Entrepreneurship 5(7–8), 497–621.
Minniti, M., W. Bygrave, and E. Autio (2006).
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2005
Executive Report. London; Babson Park, MA:
London Business School; Babson College.
Mitchell, R. K., J. B. Smith, E. A. Morse, K. W.
Seawright, A. M. Peredo, and B. McKenzie
(2002). “Are Entrepreneurial Cognitions Uni-
versal? Assessing Entrepreneurial Cognitions
Across Cultures,” Entrepreneurship Theory
and Practice 26(4), 9–32.
Morris, M. H., N. N. Miyasaki, C. Watters, and S.
M. Coombes (2006). “The Dilemma of
Growth: Understanding Venture Size
Choices of Women Entrepreneurs,” Journal
of Small Business Management 44(2), 221–
244.

84. Mueller, S. L., and A. S. Thomas (2001).
“Culture and Entrepreneurial Potential: A
Nine Country Study of Locus of Control and
Innovativeness,” Journal of Business Ventur-
ing 16(1), 51–75.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional
Change and Economic Performance. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Orser, B., and S. Hogarth-Scott (2002). “Opting
for Growth: Gender Dimensions of Choosing
Enterprise Development,” Canadian
Journal of Administrative Sciences 19(3),
284–300.
Owen-Smith, J., and W. W. Powell (2008). “Net-
works and Institutions,” in The Handbook of
Organizational Institutionalism. Eds. R.
Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, and K.
Sahlin-Andersson. New York: Sage, 594–
621.
Peng, M., and P. S. Heath (1996). “The Growth
of the Firm in Planned Economies in Tran-
sition: Institutions, Organizations, and Stra-
tegic Choice,” Academy of Management
Review 21(2), 492–528.
Peng, M. W., and J. Q. Zhou (2005). “How
Network Strategies and Institutional Transi-
tions Evolve in Asia,” Asia Pacific Journal of
Management 22(4), 321–336.
Reynolds, P., A. Rauch, P. Lopez-Garcia, and E.

85. Autio (2001). Global Entrepreneurship
Monitor: 2000 Data Collection-Analysis
Strategies Operations Manual. London:
London Business School. Working Paper.
Saeed, S., S. Y. Yousafzai, M. Yani-de-Soriano,
and M. Muffatto (2013). “The Role of Per-
ceived University Support in the Formation
of Students’ Entrepreneurial Intention,”
Journal of Small Business Management
51(2), 196–214.
Schüler, D. (2006). “The Uses and Misuses of
the Gender-related Development Index and
Gender Empowerment Measure: A Review
of the Literature,” Journal of Human Devel-
opment 7(2), 161–181.
Scott, C. E. (1986). “Why More Women Are
Becoming Entrepreneurs,” Journal of Small
Business Management 24(4), 37–44.
Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and Organiza-
tions, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Shelton, L. M. (2006). “Female Entrepreneurs,
Work-Family Conflict, and Venture Perfor-
mance: New Insights into the Work-Family
Interface,” Journal of Small Business Man-
agement 44(2), 285–297.
Shrout, P. E., and N. Bolger (2002). “Mediation
in Experimental and Nonexperimental
Studies: New Procedures and Recommenda-
tions,” Psychological Methods 7(4), 422–445.

86. Smallbone, D., and F. Welter (2001). “The Dis-
tinctiveness of Entrepreneurship in Transi-
tion Economies,” Small Business Economics
16(4), 249–262.
Stenholm, P., Z. J. Acs, and R. Wuebker (2011).
“Exploring Country-Level Institutional
Arrangements on the Rate and Type of
Entrepreneurial Activity,” Journal of Busi-
ness Venturing 28(1), 176–193.
Stevenson, L. A. (1986). “Against All Odds: The
Entrepreneurship of Women,” Journal of
Small Business Management 24(4), 30–36.
Steyaert, C., and J. Katz (2004). “Reclaiming
the Space for Entrepreneurship in Society:
Geographical, Discursive, and Social Dimen-
sions,” Entrepreneurship & Regional Devel-
opment 16, 179–196.
Swiercz, P. M., and S. R. Lydon (2002). “Entre-
preneurial Leadership in High-Tech Firms: A
Field Study,” Leadership and Organiza-
tional Development Journal 23(7), 380–389.
Tiessen, J. H. (1997). “Individualism, Collectiv-
ism and Entrepreneurship: A Framework for
International Comparative Research,”
Journal of Business Venturing 12, 67–84.
Tolbert, P., R. David, and W. Sine (2011).
“Studying Choice and Change: The Intersec-
tion of Institutional Theory and Entrepre-
neurship Research,” Organization Science
22, 1332–1344.

87. YOUSAFZAI, SAEED, AND MUFFATTO 603
Verheul, I., S. Wennekers, D. B. Audretsch, and
R. Thurik (2002). “An Eclectic Theory of
Entrepreneurship: Policies, Institutions and
Culture,” in Entrepreneurship: Determinants
and Policy in a European–U.S. Comparison.
Eds. D. B. Audretsch, R. Thurik, I. Verheul,
and S. Wennekers. Norwell, MA: Kluwer
Academic Publishers, 11–82.
Watson, J. (2003). “Failure Rates for Female-
Controlled Businesses: Are They Any
Different?,” Journal of Small Business Man-
agement 41(3), 262–277.
Webb, J. W., G. M. Kistruck, R. D. Ireland, and D.
J. Ketchen (2009). “The Entrepreneurship
Process in Base of the Pyramid Markets:
The Case of Multinational Enterprise/
Nongovernment Alliances,” Entrepreneur-
ship Theory and Practice 34(3), 555–581.
Welter, F. (2011). “Contextualizing
Entrepreneurship—Conceptual Challenges
and Ways Forward,” Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice 35(1), 165–184.
Welter, F., and D. Smallbone (2011). “Institu-
tional Perspectives on Entrepreneurial
Behavior in Challenging Environments,”
Journal of Small Business Management
49(1), 107–125.

88. Wennekers, A. R. M., A. van Stel, A. R. Thurik,
and P. D. Reynolds (2005). “Nascent Entre-
preneurship and the Level of Economic
Development,” Small Business Economics
24(3), 293–309.
Williams, D. R. (2004). “Effects of Childcare
Activities on the Duration of Self-
Employment in Europe,” Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice 28(5), 467–485.
World Bank (2004). Doing Business in 2004:
Understanding Regulations. Washington,
DC: IBRD/World Bank.
——— (2007). Doing Business in 2007: How
to Reform. Washington, DC: IBRD/World
Bank.
——— (2009). “Doing Business.” Available at:
http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/
global-reports/doing-business-2009/.
——— (2012). “Women Business and the
Law: Removing Barriers to Economic Inclu-
sion.” http://wbl.worldbank.org.
World Economic Forum (2012). “Global Gender
Gap Report.” http://www.weforum.org/
reports/global-gender-gap-report-2012.
Zhao, H., S. E. Seibert, and G. E. Hills (2005).
“The Mediating Role of Self-Efficacy in the
Development of Entrepreneurial Intentions,”

89. Journal of Applied Psychology 90(6), 1265–
1272.
JOURNAL OF SMALL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT604
http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-
business-2009/
http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-
business-2009/
http://wbl.worldbank.org
http://www.weforum.org/reports/global-gender-gap-report-2012
http://www.weforum.org/reports/global-gender-gap-report-2012
Copyright of Journal of Small Business Management is the
property of Wiley-Blackwell and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or
posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.
OLCU 380 Article Comparison
Length: Paper: 3 - 5 double-spaced pages (excluding title and
references pages)
Due: Week 5 by Sunday Midnight
Value: 150 Points for 15% of the grade
Post: Week 5 Assignments
Select (2) articles listed below on one of the following themes:
decision making, diversity, women and