Gender and the Use of Business Advice: Evidence from Firms in the Scottish Service Sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within the UK the levels of female entrepreneurship are considerably lower than in many of its peer countries. As part of a strategy to remedy this apparent shortfall, and to improve the environment for existing female-owned businesses, the UK Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) launched a ‘Strategic Framework for Women's Enterprise’ in 2003. A central rationale for the development of this strategy is a belief in the inadequacies of current business-advice provision and limited access to informal and formal business networks, mentors, and business support for women. However, there appears to be little evidence, either in this paper or in the body of previous research, to support the view that, within the UK, government agencies need to shape business support to reflect the gender of the business user. Drawing upon a sample of 650 small service sector firms in Scotland, we report the findings of a detailed postal questionnaire concerned with exploring usage and satisfaction of a range of formal and informal sources of business advice amongst male and female business owners. Bivariate analysis shows that amongst formal sources women are more likely to use friends and relatives, the Small Business Gateway, and chambers of commerce but are less likely to use suppliers and consultants. However, multivariate analysis suggests that, within the service sector, neither use of external advice nor impact of advice—either formal or informal—is greatly influenced by gender. Rather, it was the characteristics of service sector firms, most notably the number of employees and exporting activity, that explained the use of external advice. Therefore, a nongendered view of business support by the DTI appears more appropriate within the service sector. Nevertheless, the data do indicate more frequent use of informal family-network contacts amongst women business owners.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".