Comprehending the factors responsible for creating successful leadership among women leaders in the United Kingdom's fintech start-up sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present era, women have shown their proficiency in every sphere of the corporate environment and have developed competencies in achieving greater efficiency at the workplace. The FinTech start-up sector is also witnessing an increase in the number of women employees. However, despite a quarter of representation of women in the FinTech start-up sector, only one-seventh is placed among the board of directors. In this context, this study aims to evaluate the phenomenon of female leadership within FinTech start-up companies in the UK’s financial sector. The main aim of the study was to identify the factors responsible for successful female leadership in the UK’s FinTech start-up sector. The literature review revealed that there are four critical factors responsible for the outcome of female leadership-individual, organisational, social and technological. This was further examined using primary research. For this purpose, the researcher used a mixed-method comprising of both quantitative and qualitative approach. Under the quantitative approach, the researcher surveyed 100 employees working in the FinTech start-up sector through a close-ended questionnaire to examine the factors that impact the success of female leadership and the shortcomings under women leadership. On the other hand, under the qualitative analysis, the researcher interviewed the 5 managers through an open-ended questionnaire to understand the effectiveness of women leadership, leadership strategies and the challenges faced by women leaders. The findings indicated that women often face challenges in terms of the vertical limits created by society. All the factors significantly impact the leadership performance of females in the UK’s FinTech start-up sector. In addition to this, women often find it difficult to handle family and job responsibilities. Further, the findings indicate that women are more creative and need to be motivated. Lastly, organisations can play an important role in successful female leadership by adopting new management and leadership styles that provide women with equal opportunities.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".