CHAPTER TEN: WOMEN CHARACTERS IN SME DECISION IN MALAYSIA

Nurhaya Omar & Noor Azlin Ismail

10.0  Introduction

The tractable truth about Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), according to The World Bank Finance (2022), is that SMEs play a leading role in the economies of most countries of the world, especially in developing countries. SMEs are traceably responsible for the majority of businesses across the world and therefore, are important contributors in job creation, an economic development strategy for the world. SMEs “represent about 90% of businesses and more than 50% of employment worldwide” (The World Bank, 2022). By definition, individuals who enter into new ventures are known as entrepreneurs (Ahmad and Seymour, 2008) and McClelland (1961) defines entrepreneurs as someone who exercises some form of control over the means of production. An entrepreneur produces more than can be consumed to sell (or exchange) it for household income (McClellan 1961: p. 65). It comprises four interrelated components: individual, organisation, environment, and new venture process (Gartner, 1985). In Malaysia, a Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) is defined as a non-public listed company in the main board or country. It is non-subsidiary to public-listed companies in Malaysia as in other countries. It is, therefore, non-subsidiary to large firms like Multi-National Companies (MNCs), Government-Linked Company (GLCs), Syarikat Menteri Kewangan di Perbadankan (MKDs) or State-owned Enterprises. It must be locally incorporated under Companies Act 1965; or registered under Registration of Company Act (1956) or Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) Act 2012; or registered under respective authorities in Sabah or Sarawak; or registered under statutory bodies for professional service providers.

In the Malaysian experience, SMEs in the manufacturing sector must not exceed a sales turnover of RM50 million or have full-time employees not exceeding 200 workers. For services and other sectors, sales turnover must not exceed RM20 million or full-time employees not exceeding 75 (Bank Negara Malaysia, 2013). In 2011, there were 645, 136 SMEs established, which was 97.3% from overall business establishments in Malaysia. From this number, 77% of 645, 136 represent micro-enterprises, 20% were small-enterprises and 3% were medium-enterprises (SME Corporation, 2014). Malaysian Government actively promotes the involvement of individuals in SMEs because it catalyses the development of the national economy. SME is the backbone of national economies with, in Malaysia, a share of 97% of the business sector (PEMANDU, 2013).

According to SME Corporation (2015), SMEs contributed 35.0% to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2014, which was expected to increase to 41% by the year 2020 (PEMANDU, 2013). It also contributed 57.5% to employment opportunities and 19% to exports. Specifically, the Malaysian Government is gender sensitive as it intensifies women’s involvement in SMEs to improve their economic status and household income. It also reduces the unemployment and poverty rates through job creation (SME Corporation, 2015; Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development, 2015; OECD, 2012). The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is Europe-based. Estimations indicated there were 10 million self-employed women. In the United States, there is a notable presence of self-employed women who play a vital role in the economy. Approximately 6.4 million self-employed women contribute to job creation by providing employment opportunities for around 9.2 million individuals. These women also generate substantial sales through their entrepreneurial ventures. Their active participation in self-employment demonstrates their valuable contributions to the economic landscape of the country.

10.1  Background of Women SMEs in Malaysia

Women's involvement in SMEs is 19.7% of the overall 645, 136 SMEs registered in Malaysia in 2010 (SME Corporation, 2014). From 127, 091 SMEs run by women either 51% possession of equity shows that women are the owners, or they have 10% possession equity as the CEO. Further, 91.7% of women-owned SMEs involved are in the service sector, 6.9% in manufacturing, and little involvement is recorded in the construction, agriculture, mining, and quarrying sectors (SME Corporation, 2015). Women's involvement as entrepreneurs is seen as the mechanism for them to be autonomous, take full control, and break and rise above the ‘glass ceiling’ (OECD, 2012).

Women entrepreneurs are driven by different sets of motivation as they get involved in SME activities. They tend to incorporate psychological motivations ahead of financial motivations (material needs) in comparison to men who are more financially driven (Kepuladze, 2010). According to Ismail et al. (2012), their study reveals that women entrepreneurs in Sintok are motivated to engage in entrepreneurship due to various "pull factors." These factors include the desire for independence, the aspiration to gain recognition from society, the urge to pursue their ventures, and a relatively lower emphasis on material needs as a driving force. These findings suggest that women in Sintok are driven by intrinsic motivations and personal aspirations, rather than purely materialistic goals when venturing into entrepreneurship.

Records show that 76% of men venture into SMEs ultimately with the motivation to build wealth, while 77% of women are into SMEs due to their appealing culture; a new venture (Cohoon, Wadhwa and Mitchell, 2009). But Manolova et al., (2012) state that men focus on their SME because of a strong drive for financial success. This makes them risk-takers in their drive for business expansion, while women are driven by a complex series of motivations, such as the desire for self-realisation and recognition. This makes them not to be risk-takers like men. They fear the possibility of failure (De Jong, 2013).

According to Chan et al. (2009), their analysis of 531 youth entrepreneurs in Klang Valley highlights certain personality traits, socio-economic backgrounds, and business characteristics. In male youth entrepreneurs, important traits include perseverance, determination, the ability to take calculated risks, initiative, and responsibility. These entrepreneurs are goal-oriented, focused on identifying and capitalising on opportunities, and possess an internal locus of control. They actively engage in the discovery, evaluation, and exploitation of new goods, services, markets, and organisational processes through their entrepreneurial endeavors, demonstrating value creation through the establishment of their enterprises.

On the other hand, Hoe et al. (2012) explore the characteristics of successful women entrepreneurs and find that they possess traits such as strong interest and passion, a desire for self-development, distinctiveness from others, self-analysis to address weaknesses, the ability to build positive relationships with employees, customers, and suppliers, self-confidence, faith, perseverance, hard work, risk-taking, effective communication, good leadership skills (trustworthiness, fairness, honesty, responsibility, motivation), team spirit, and flexibility/open-mindedness.

Similarly, Hassan et al. (2014) identifies success-related characteristics among women entrepreneurs in rural areas of the Northern region of Malaysia (Kedah, Penang, and Perlis). This region exhibits high levels of confidence, determination, and vision, as well as attributes such as risk-taking, exploration, initiative, creativity, innovation, social networking, and strategic thinking.

These studies collectively emphasise the importance of specific traits and characteristics in both male and female entrepreneurs, highlighting factors such as perseverance, determination, risk-taking, initiative, creativity, and effective communication as influential elements in entrepreneurial success across different contexts.

10.2  Gender Gap in SME Ownership

The European Union (EU) recognises that women entrepreneurship plays a crucial role in promoting both gender equality and economic growth. However, despite women's progress in labour markets, a significant gender gap persists in entrepreneurship. In 2012, women accounted for only 31% of self-employed individuals in Europe, and out of all working women, only 10% were self-employed. This indicates a disparity between the proportion of women in the overall population and their representation in business ownership.

In the case of Malaysia, women constitute 50% of the total population, but their participation in owning business enterprises is significantly lower. According to Alam et al. (2012), only 15% of women in Malaysia are business owners. This highlights the underrepresentation of women in entrepreneurial activities compared to their overall population share.

These statistics demonstrate the existing gender gaps in entrepreneurship, both in Europe and Malaysia. Efforts are needed to address the barriers and challenges that hinder women's participation in business ownership, as promoting women's entrepreneurship can contribute to fostering gender equality and driving economic growth. Women's involvement in SMEs dictates slow progress over 7 years. In 2003, it was reported that 82,911 SMEs were owned by women from overall 518, 996 registered SMEs in Malaysia (Bank Negara Malaysia, 2005). This represents only 15.98 % of women's participation in comparison to 84% of men's participation in SMEs. Meanwhile, in 2010, 127, 091 or 19.7 % of SMEs were owned by women from the total of 645, 136 registered, in comparison to men that represent 80.3% of SME ownership (SME Corporation, 2015). This clearly shows men-owned SMEs outnumber women–owned SMEs with high percentage discrepancy. Yet interestingly, data from TEKUN indicates that women entrepreneurs were loaned more than men. 51% out of 285, 227 loans were given to women entrepreneurs in 2013 (MWCFD, 2014). This invites further questions on why women's participation in SMEs still lags behind men in Malaysia.

10.3  Government Programme for Women SMEs

The importance of SMEs to Malaysian economic growth is noticeable in 35.0% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2014, i.e. there was 57.5 % to employment and 19 % to Malaysian exports (MOF, 2015; SME Corporation, 2015). Due to this contribution, the Malaysian Government and its agencies introduced several programmes to boost SME participation, particularly by women on how to improve their economics status as well as their household income. Objectively, the programmes were expected to reduce unemployment and poverty rate in Malaysia following to Vision 2020 and Economic Planning Policy (MOF, 2015; SME Corporation, 2012). In response to this, the Government provided a total of RM5.10 billion to the Ministries and their respective agencies to carry out courses and initiatives for women in order to increase their involvement in SMEs. SME Integrated Plan of Action or SMEIPA reported that 23 programmes were implemented in collaboration with private sectors to assist over 65,000 SMEs in building finance management and human capital development. In total, 2014 witnessed 139 development programmes under SMEIPA. These programmes focus on human capital development (35 programmes), market access (33 programmes), access to finance (30 programmes), innovation and technology adoption (28 programmes) and infrastructure (13 programmes). It benefited 503, 704 SME recipients (SME Report, 2015). There were also programmes specifically designed to attract more women involvement in SMEs and assist new women entrepreneurs, such as the Women Entrepreneurs Incubator Program (I-KeuNITA) under the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development (MWFCD). It aimed to provide intensive skill training and entrepreneurial assistance to low-income women to increase their monthly income through entrepreneurial activity. It was targeted to develop 4,000 women entrepreneurs and from 2009 to 2013, 5,300 women entrepreneurs were successfully developed from an income of more than RM3,500 a month. Consequently, from the period of January 2013 to June 2014, another 1, 645 women entrepreneurs were successfully developed.

Another programme to assist women in SME was Tabung Ekonomi Kumpulan Usaha Niaga (TEKUN). It provided loans to assist new entrepreneurs and until March 2014, TEKUN distributed a total of RM2.98 billion to 347, 225 borrowers across Malaysia. From this number, 183, 218 loans worth RM 1.44 billion were tailored to women entrepreneurs. As at 2013, TEKUN gave loans to 285, 227 entrepreneurs; 146, 200 (51%) to women and 139, 027 (49%) to men. Small and Medium Enterprises Corporation (SME Corp) also introduced several loans such Soft Loan Scheme for Small and Medium Enterprises (SLSME), with 79 women-owned enterprises. It was an approved loan amounting to RM40.25 million. In addition, 82 women-owned enterprises loans were approved, amounting to RM4 million under the Enrichment and Enhancement program or E², and another 84 women-owned SMEs were given financial assistance amounting to RM19.98 million under the Business Accelerator program. To stimulate more women-owned SMEs into various ventures, the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development provided support for women entrepreneurs with the introduction of the Women Exporters Development Programme (WEDP) under the Malaysia External Trade Development Corporation (MARTRADE) and the Women Global Entrepreneurs Development Programme with the partnership with MARTRADE (MWFCD, 2014)

There are other initiatives given by other agencies and ministries such as PUNB (Perbadanan Nasional Berhad), Ministry of Agriculture and Agro-based Industry, MARA (Majlis Amanah Rakyat) under the Ministry of Rural and Regional Development and Tabung Ekonomi Belia (SME Corporation, 2014). Specifically for entrepreneurs in ICT (Information and communication technology) and multimedia new ventures, MDeC and their partners; MaGIC (Malaysian Global Innovation and Creativity Centre), StartupMalaysia.org, MyNEF (New Entrepreneurship Foundation, Cradle and TeAM (Technopreneur Association of Malaysia) launched MSC Malaysia for Start-ups programme to renew venturing into SMEs to utilise multimedia and digital technologies to produce and enhance global products and services (MDeC, 2015).

But in spite the numerous support programmes and incentives provided with the aim of strengthening women participation in SMEs, women still lag behind men, and the other unanswered question re-emerges; why? Why does the challenge still exist? Could it be that the programmes provided were not compatible with the women’s needs? The next section presents the theory and concept which might be useful in explaining the difference between women characters as they venture into SMEs.

10.4  Entrepreneur’s Trait Differences between Men and Women: The Emergent Theories

10.4.1    Social Role Theory

The Social Role Theory acknowledges the historical division of labour between women and men, where women have traditionally been associated with household responsibilities, while men have been associated with responsibilities outside the home (Eagly, 1987). Eagly's explanation is rooted in gender and sexuality development, which is influenced by the process of socialisation. According to her Social Role Theory, there exists a sexual division of labour and societal expectations based on stereotypes of gender and sex roles. Eagly distinguishes between two dimensions of gender-stereotyped characteristics: communal and agentic dimensions. The communal role is characterised by attributes such as nurturance and emotional expressiveness, which are commonly associated with domestic activities and, therefore, associated with women.

On the other hand, the agentic role describes attributes like assertiveness and independence in public activities, which are associated with men. Behaviour is heavily influenced by gender and sex roles when cultural norms endorse specific stereotypes for each gender (Eagly, 1987; Eagly et al., 2000). Thus, Eagly explains that gender and sex roles are based on the assumption that certain individuals are socially identified as males or females based on their expected roles. Consequently, the theory predicts that males and females will develop different skills and attitudes that shape their behaviour and character. Gender stereotypes are described across four dimensions: traits, role behaviours, physical characteristics, and occupations. For example, men are often perceived as aggressive and competitive, while women are often generalised as passive and cooperative. Traditional gender roles dictate that men are the primary financial providers for families, while women are seen as caretakers. Physical characteristics and occupations have also been categorised as (in)consistent with masculine or feminine roles. As a result, each gender is expected to possess characteristics that align with their respective sex role. This helps explain the behavioural differences between men and women in various organisational and familial roles.

 In a business, for example, men behave differently than women in relation to assertiveness tendencies and helpfulness. Men, often, have roles of executive and managerial powers, whereas women are more found in clerical positions (Eagly, p. 11). Thus, entrepreneurship is often associated with a traditional male-type career (Thebaud, 2010; Gupta et al., 2008). This can be seen by men who are normally linked to masculine needs for economic success, autonomy, and achievement. Meanwhile, women are expected to be fulfilled on catering for family needs and family life quality. They are perceived on a level of interpersonal relationships, security, and environment (Kepuladze, 2010). Consequently, according to this stereotype, it is not surprising to see those men out-number women in participation into SMEs.

Being a woman carries feminine stereotypical roles, family responsibilities and cultural traditions. This is always gender-based for women in SMEs. This is due to the demanding situation of women starting and growing their enterprises and simultaneously needing to juggle work and family responsibilities. However, even if such cultural constraints are not present, the lack of child-care services can obstruct a woman’s ability to grow her business. Thus, even after legal barriers to business ownership are addressed, many women business owners still encounter the challenge of not only in time management but also of cultural acceptance (Women Able, 2010). This is not peculiar to Malaysia alone. In a study of business students in the United States, India, and Turkey, Gupta et al. (2008) report how respondents in all three contexts strongly associate entrepreneurship with stereotypically masculine characteristics. Their result supports the hypothesis that entrepreneurship is associated with stereotypically masculine characteristics and not associated with traditionally feminine characteristics. Men score higher in entrepreneurial intention compared to women when no stereotypical information about entrepreneurship is presented, suggesting that underlying societal stereotypes associating entrepreneurship with masculine characteristics may influence people’s intentions. Furdas & Kohn (2010) on the propensity to start a business between men and women specify that women’s personality characteristics are less favourable to a business start-up than men’s and women and men score differently in ‘soft’ personality traits; such as risk aversion, openness to change, persuasiveness, and need for achievement (Furdas & Kohn, 2010).

Sweida & Reichrad (2013) on the association of high‐growth entrepreneurship (HGE) with women's entrepreneurial self-efficacy associate HGE negatively impacting on women's intention and self‐efficacy, thereby limiting their behaviour in the entrepreneurial arena. The study identifies decreasing masculine stereotype‐related barriers with HGE. They consequently suggest that by increasing women's HGE self‐efficacy, it should be possible to increase women's intention to engage in high‐growth venture creation.

The next section discusses the difference in individual entrepreneurial orientation and its relation to the lower involvement of SMEs among women.

10.4.2    Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO)

The ability of an individual to take risks, be innovative, and be proactive is a vital component of entrepreneurs (Aloulou and Fayolle, 2005). According to Muchiri & McMurray (2015), these three dimensions are the basis of opportunity seeking and effective use of resources that serve as a strategy for an individual to embark on entrepreneurship (Muchiri & McMurray, 2015). Individual entrepreneurial orientation is key to helping entrepreneurs overcome resource or knowledge constraints in entrepreneurial decisions (Fang et al., 2009). Lumpkin & Dess (1996) see entrepreneurial orientation (EO) as a concept that explains process, practices, and decision-making activities that lead to new venture. Aloulou & Fayolle (2005) describe EO as the strategic orientation of small businesses to perform their strategic analysis with opportunity-based and resource-based views. They propose that EO comes with three main components: innovation (action to gain competitive advantage), proactivity (competing aggressively as being first mover) and risk propensity (ability to take risks to be proactive to offer innovative products and services that change market boundaries and behaviour) (Iakovleva, 2013). The focus on these activities serves as a benchmark in opportunity-seeking and effective use of resources. It is also referred to as the strategy-making process as individuals embark on entrepreneurship in order to create a competitive advantage (Muchiri and McMurray, 2015). Indeed, studies suggest that entrepreneurs who have strong EO have better likelihood for success (Taylor, 2013).

However, Ayub et al., (2013) investigated gender effects on entrepreneurial orientation and value innovation in 120 young entrepreneurs in Pakistan. They find dissimilar scores of EO between men and women. Women are likely to have lower EO propensity than men with their lower score in innovativeness and autonomy. Moreover, women take fewer risks and are less aggressive in business than men. In another study, Recio et al. (2014) analysed gender differences in EO. They intended to capture the profile of the individual entrepreneur in the pre-stage company from a sample of students from the Universidad Rey Juan Carlos who attended extracurricular seminars on “Entrepreneurship and Leadership”. The result finds significant differences in EO based on gender and sexuality. Specifically, the feminine gender is more risk-averse and is considered less innovative. However, concerning proactivism, the feminine gender has more attributes relating to responsibility, discipline, and independence, while masculinity is prone to initiative and leadership positions.

In other aspects, women who start their entrepreneurial activity have smaller amounts of capital, smaller equity, and higher proportions of bank loans. Besides, having less risk propensity in comparison to men that makes them to target the existing market and use known technology (Kariv, 2012: p. 52).

10.4.3    Risk Propensity

Committing a large portion of the firm’s resources to undertake uncertain outcomes, taking bold steps such as entering unknown markets, etc. are risk propensities. These risks vary from individuals and contexts (Taylor, 2013). Venturing into SMEs, entrepreneurs invest in products and services that may (not) produce profits; therefore, individual with high-risk propensity will have the ability to generate value in the environment that full of uncertainty (York and Venkataraman, 2010). El-Annan (2013) claims that entrepreneurs who associate the generation of new concepts and turn it into reality through the process of innovation, succeed in risk management. They become good\successful risk-takers. El-Annan further states that risk-takers perceive entrepreneurial actions and opportunities as more attractive and possible than those who avoid risks. Moreover, to venture into entrepreneurship is a decision that assumes risks (Yan, 2010).

Differences in attitudes of men and women about intentions to start a business are often used to explain this gendered landscape of women's participation in SMEs. Women are often believed to be more averse towards taking risks than men. It is found that women, to some extent, are more likely to avoid risks than men i.e. (53% to 46%) agree that one should not start a business if there is a risk of failure. Koellinger et al. (2013) on a survey of 17 countries, submit that the lower rate of women's participation in entrepreneurial activities is primarily because women lack condense in their entrepreneurial skills and exhibit higher fear of failure than men. Another empirical investigation on the contribution of personality traits to the gender gap in entrepreneurship from individuals in 36 countries suggest that a group of personality traits or Individual Entrepreneurial Aptitude (IEA) has a positive effect on entrepreneurship venture among women and men. However, in comparison to men, women are considerably low on IEA, which leads to significant gender gap in entrepreneurship. The lower level of IEA is mainly due to women’s lower levels of competitiveness and risk tolerance (Bonte & Jarosch, 2011). Fossen (2012) investigates the role played by gender differences in the degree of risk aversion and submits the decomposition of the gender differential in the entry rate into self-employment. Only about 2 % of the gaps owes to women’s higher level of risk aversion. Meanwhile, the largest part of the higher exit rate of women out of self-employment is explained by their higher level of risk aversion.

10.4.4    Innovativeness

Innovation is individual’s tendency to creatively initiate and support new ideas, experimentation, and creative processes that may result in new products, services, or technological processes, or exploitation of new markets (Taylor, 2013). De Jong and den Hartog (2010) categorise innovative behaviour into 4 dimensions: the ability of an individual to explore, generate, champion, and implement ideas. Entrepreneur is assumed as an innovator based on the paradigm which put the entrepreneur as a person who involves in the identification of opportunities and employs the innovation tool for developing successful new business (El-Annan, 2013). Innovative behaviour is important to entrepreneurs because it stimulates creation of new concepts, ideas, and as well as products for competitive advantage as they make the entrance into market. To allow entry, development, and success of new enterprises, entrepreneurs should embrace and lead innovative behaviour following market demand. Lai et al. (2010) investigate the effect of innovation on the success of women's ventures. Among 120 women, entrepreneurs indicate that most women entrepreneurs believe innovation is a vital aspect of a successful venture. Lai et al. (2010) states that women entrepreneurs need innovative behaviour and thinking in order to be more competitive and offer unique products for market acceptance. It suggests that innovation needs to be an integral part of a business practice in order to develop the right attitude, confidence, and belief in innovation. In yet another study by Huysentruyt (2014), innovative behaviour and innovation are important to women in two specific areas. First, innovation allows stimulation into new ventures, community development, and penetration to the global market through opportunities for invention. Second, innovation allows the entrance of new ventures with the offerings of products or services that no one else provides at that particular time. Additionally, social entrepreneurs make women entrepreneurs more sensitive towards social demands resulting in the creation of job opportunities that help the community upgrade its economic status (GEM, 2012: p. 32)

According to the Global Entrepreneurship Monitoring (GEM) report, women entrepreneurs in Asian countries like China, Malaysia, and Thailand exhibit the lowest levels of innovation compared to men, with only 17% of women entrepreneurs engaging in innovative activities, while men stand at 22%. In contrast, women entrepreneurs in the United States demonstrate the highest levels of innovation, at 36%. These women introduce new products or services to customers, often with limited or no competition. Furthermore, innovation levels among U.S. women are slightly higher than those among men, reaching 33%. Developed countries in Europe also display high levels of innovation among women entrepreneurs, standing at 32%, equal to their male counterparts (GEM, 2012).

This difference in innovation levels could be attributed to the fact that women entrepreneurs in general tend to start their small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in industries such as retail, education, and other service sectors. These industries are often perceived as making a lesser economic contribution compared to industries dominated by men, such as high technology and manufacturing, which are considered more crucial for economic development and growth (OECD, 2004). This probably leads to gender influence in getting access to innovation resources such as finance, extension, and support services. Ighomereho et al. (2013) indicate that women in Lagos (Nigeria) face no difficulties in getting support for innovation in terms of extension and support but instead have difficulties in financial support. Other experimental studies in the UK and US confirm the above findings that gender status is generally a disadvantage to women entrepreneurs in their search for support. As a result, it builds negative perceptions of the viability and investment-worthiness for support of innovative ideas.

10.4.5    Proactiveness

The consensus among scholars is that entrepreneurial activities stem from the intentions of individuals and the actions they take over time. These intentions play a significant role in shaping entrepreneurial behaviour, including the establishment of new ventures and engagement in self-employment. Given that entrepreneurship involves addressing and resolving challenges and problems, individuals who possess a preference for actively making changes to their environment are more likely to become entrepreneurs compared to those who do not exhibit such characteristics. These proactive individuals are characterised by their inclination toward opportunity-seeking behaviour and a forward-looking perspective. They are described as being proactive in their approach to entrepreneurship. Proactiveness entails actively seeking out opportunities and taking a proactive stance in anticipating future demands by introducing new products and services that go beyond existing competition (Cools and Van den Broeck, 2008). It can be in the mode of taking initiatives and pursuing new business opportunities in emerging markets or to improve existing competitive positions (Campos et al., 2013). Being proactive is important in new venture because by being the first mover, entrepreneurs are not only able to innovate but can earn huge profits and get advance track in establishing brands by exploiting market (Taylor, 2013).

However, Ilhaamie et al., (2014) highlights that inability to be the first mover in order to explore for opportunities for obtaining financial loans, enhancing knowledge in industry, building networking and inability to catch up with stiff competition in the market are among barriers to Malaysian women entrepreneurs to success and sustain in entrepreneurial activity. This may cause fewer women involvement into SMEs in Malaysia.

Based on this discussion, there is the need to recommend ways out in order to attract more women involvement into SMEs, particularly in Malaysia.

10.5  Conclusion and Recommendations

As summary, there are differences between men and women in approach to entrepreneurship, especially in Malaysia, where men are still being stereotyped and considered as the dominant gender (Hin et al., 2012). According to the OECD (2004), mainstream research, policies, and programs focused on small and medium enterprises (SMEs) have often been biased towards men and fail to adequately address the unique needs and requirements of women entrepreneurs and potential women entrepreneurs. This suggests that existing initiatives have predominantly catered to male entrepreneurs, overlooking the specific challenges and opportunities faced by women in the entrepreneurial sphere. The OECD recognises the importance of recognising and addressing these gender-specific considerations to promote gender equality and create a supportive environment for women in entrepreneurship. Women and men have different needs according to their characters and what is expected out of them according to their roles in the society. Therefore, it is highly recommended to comprehend their characters prior to a design the framework and incentives programmes for them in order to ensure the compatibility of programmes offered with their needs.

Women entrepreneurs need frameworks, policies, and programmes that cater for unique characters and orientation according to women’s roles. For example, as the greatest challenge among women involvement into SMEs is work-family balance, an initiative on childcare might be helpful to propose in a designed framework for women in SMEs. The initiative by UK Department for Business Innovation and Skill can be set as an example. They have programmes that include childcare and caring responsibility in their key recommendations for Women’s enterprise support. This support includes childcare and caring allowances and more access to holistic childcare facilities in order to assist women involvement into SMEs. A framework for training programmes specifically on character building needs to be designed by the government and its respective agencies prior to any incentives programme given to women intended to involve in SMEs. The training programmes should incorporate the development of the right characters and attitude for women in various ventures and their sustainability in SMEs. They need to be trained in order to develop crucial characters of entrepreneurs such as being innovative, risk-taking, and proactive. This is important as according to Hoe et al., (2012) women who are innovative portray right attitude towards entrepreneurial activity. This consequently will lead these women to be proactive in exploring opportunities to pursue marketing for globalisation thereby boosting their income and national economy.

Secondly, their innovation and risk-taking propensity helps them to develop ability to embark on blue ocean strategies as they set their own pace by creating unique products and making it available at the uncontested market space with irrelevant competitors and create new value for customer.

References

Ahmad, N. & Seymour, R. G. (2008). “Defining Entrepreneurial Activity: Definitions Supporting Frameworks for Data Collection”, OECD Working Paper.

Alam, S. S., Senik, Z. C. & Jani, F. M. (2012). “An Exploratory Study of Women Entrepreneurs in Malaysia: Motivation and Problems”, Journal of Management and Research. 4(4)  282-97.

Aloulou, W. & Fayolle, A (2005). “A Conceptual Approach of Entrepreneurial Orientation within Small Business Concept”, Journal of Enterprising Culture. 13(1) Retrieved on 16 November 2015. http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0218495805000045.

Ayub, A., Aslam, M. S., Razzaq, A., & Iftekhar, H. (2013). “Gender Effects on Entrepreneurial Orientation and Value Innovation: Evidence from Pakistan”, European Journal of Business and Social Sciences. 2(1):  82-90.

Bank Negara Malaysia (2013). Circular on New Definition of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). Kuala Lumpur: Bank Negara.  2-5.

---. (2005). SME Annual Report 2005. Available: http://www.treasury.gov.my/index.php?option=com_
content&view=article&id=4297:economic-report-2014-http://www.bnm.gov.my/?ch=en_press&pg=en_press_all&ac=1279&lang=en. Last Accessed Date:9 November 2015.

Bönte, W., & Jarosch, M. (2011). Gender Differences in Competitiveness, Risk Tolerance, and Other Personality Traits: Do They Contribute to the Gender Gap in Entrepreneurship? (No. 2011-012). Schumpeter Discussion Papers.

Brandstatter, H. (2011). “Personality Aspects of Entrepreneurship: A look At Five Meta-Analysis”, Personality and Individual Differences. 51(2011):  222-30.

Caliendo, M., Fossen, F., & Kritikos, A., (2011). “Personality Characteristics and the Decision to Become and Stay Self-Employed”, IZA Discussion Paper. No. 5566.

Campos, H., M., et al. (2013). “Entrepreneurial Orientation in Mexican Microenterprises”, Journal of Entrepreneurship Management and Innovation. 9(3):  5-20.

Chan, K. L., Selvadurai, S. & Hamid, B. A (2009). “Malay Youth Entrepreneurship in Malaysia: An Empirical Update”, Malaysian Journal of Society and Space 5(2):  55-67.

Cohoon,J. M., Wadhwa, V. & Mitchell, L (2009). The Anatomy of Entrepreneur. Are Successful Women Entrepreuers Different from Men? Available: http://www.kauffman.org/~/media/kauffman_org/
research%20reports%20and%20covers/2009/07/successful_women_entrepreneurs_510.pdf. (Last Accessed: 1 December, 2015.

Cools, E. & Van den Broeck, H. (2008). “The Hunt for the Heffalump Continues: Can Trait and Cognitive Characteristics Predict Entrepreneurial Orientation?” Journal of Small Business Strategy, 18(2):  23-41.

Crant, J. M. (1996). “The Proactive Personality Scale as A Predictor of Entrepreneurial Intentions”, Journal of Small Business Management. 34(3):  42-53

De Jong, W. (2013). Women Entrepreneurship in EU. Available:http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/
bibliotheque/briefing/2013/130517/LDM_BRI%282013%29130517_REV1_EN.pdf. (Last Accessed Date: 20 December, 2015.

De Jong, J., and den Hartog, D (2010). “Measuring Innovative Work Behavior”, Creativity and Innovation Management. 19(1):  23-36.

Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social-Role Interpretation. 1st New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.. p.11.

Eagly, A., Wood, W. & Diekman, A. B. (2000). “Social Role Theory of Sex Differences and Similarities: A Current Appraisal”, In T. Eckes & H. M Trautner (Eds.) The Developmental Social Psychology of Gender,  123-74 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Economics Census 2011. Available: http://www.smecorp.gov.my/vn2/sites/default/files/07%20
SMEAR_11-12%20BM%20Banci%20Ekonomi%202011.pdf. Last Accessed Date:9 November 2015.

El-Annan, S. H. (2013). “Innovation, Proactive, and Vision Are Three Integrated Dimensions between Leadership and Entrepreneurship”, European Journal of Business and Social Sciences. 1(12):  148-63.

Fang, N., Yuli, Z. & Hignzhi, X (2009). “Acquisition of Resources, Formal Organization and Entrepreneurial Orientation of New Ventures”, Journal of Chinese Entrepreneurship. 1(1):  40-52.

Fossen, F.M (2012). “Gender Differences in Entrepreneurial Choice and Risk Aversion- A Decomposition Based on Micro Econometric Model”, Applied Economics Taylor & Francis Journals, 44(14),  1795-1812,

Furdas, M. D., & Kohn, K. (2010). “What's the Difference? Gender, Personality, and the Propensity to Start a Business”, IZA Discussion Paper No. 4778 Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/
sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1560905

Gartner, W.B (1985). “A Conceptual Framework for Describing the Phenomenon of New Venture Creation”, The Academy of Management Review. 10(4):  696-706.

GEM (2012). “Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2012 Women Report”. 2012. Babson College p. 32

Gupta, V. K., Turban, D. B & Bhawe, N. M. (2008). “The Effect of Gender Stereotype Activation on Entrepreneurial Intentions”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5):  1053-1061.

Hassan, F., Ramli, A & Desa, N. M. (2014). “Rural Women Entrepreneurs in Malaysia: What Drives Their Success?” International Journal of Business and Management, 9(4):  10-21.

Hin, C. W., Isa, F. D & Hashim, N. (2012). A Qualitative Study of Innovativeness, Strategies and Leadership Styles of Successful Women Entrepreneurs in Malaysia. Paper Presented at Knowledge Management International Conference (KMICe) 2012, Johor Bahru, Malaysia: 4-6 July, 2012.

Hoe, C. H., et al. (2012). “Development of Women Entrepreneurs: The Case of Malaysia”, World Journal of Social Sciences. 2(6):  123-145.

Huysentruyt, M. (2014). “Women Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation”, OECD Local Economic and Employment Development. Series 01(2014)

Iakovleva, T (2013). “Open Innovation at the Root of Entrepreneurial Strategy: A Case from the Norwegian Oil Industry”, Technology Innovation Management Review. April, 2013:  17-22.

Ighomereho, O.S., Agbalajobi, T.D., and Edegwa, K.S (2013). “Gender Influence on Access to Innovation Resources in Nigeria”, International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 3(1): 216-27.

Ilhaamie, A. G. A, et al. M. (2014). “Challenges of Muslim Women Entrepreneurs in Malaysian SMEs”, International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology. 5(6):  428-33.

Ismail, H. C., Shamsudin, F. M., Chowdhury, M. S. (2012). “An Exploratory Study of Motivational Factors on Women Entrepreneurship Venturing in Malaysia”, Business and Economic Research. 2(1):  1-13.

Kariv, D. (2013). Female Entrepreneurship and The New Venture Creation. An International Overview Routledge, New York: NY.

Kepuladze, T. A. (2010). “Gender Stereotypes and Gender Feature of Jobs Motivation: Differences or Similarity?” Problems and Perspectives in Management. 8(2):  84-93.

Kickul, J. & Gundry, L. K. (2009). “Intuition Versus Analysis? Testing Differential Models of Cognitive Style and Entrepreneurial Self Efficacy and the New Venture Creation Process”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(2):  439-53.

Koellinger, P. Minniti, M & Schade, C. (2013). “Gender Differences in Entrepreneurial Propensity”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics. 75(2):  213-34.

Lai, K. P., Nathan, J., Tan, K. S. & Chan, B. B. (2010). “Effect of Innovation to the Success of Female Entrepreneurs”, Journal of Innovation Management in Small and Medium Enterprises. 2010(1):  1-14.

Lumpkin, G. T. and Dess, G. G. (1996). “CLarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking it to Performance”, Academy of Management Review. 21(1):  135-172.

Manolova, T. S., et al. (2012). “One Size does not fit all: Entrepreneurial Expectancies and Growth Intentions of US Women and Men Nascent Entrepreneurs”, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 24(1):  7-27.

McClelland, D. C. (1961). The Achieving Society. Priceton, New Jersey: Van Nostrand Co. p. 65.

MDeC (2015). MDec and MaGIC Take Aspiring Startups to Strategic Next Level. Available: http://www.mdec.my/media-centre/news-releases/mdec-and-magic-take-aspiring-startups-strategic-next-level. (Last Accessed Date:11 November 2015).

Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development, MWFCD (2015) Quick Facts KPWKM 2014. Available: http://www.kpwkm.gov.my/documents/10156/9169c437-cce2-4d33-95dc-d3eb8aa14dd6. (Last Accessed Date: 1 December 2015).

Ministry of Finance (2015). Economic Report 2014/15. Available: http://www.treasury.gov.my/index.php?
option=com_content&view=article&id=4297:economic-report-2014-2015&catid=262&Itemid
=2478&lang=en. (Last Accessed Date:9 November 2015).

Muchiri, M. & McMurray, A. (2015). “Entrepreneurial Orientation within Small Firms; Critical Review of Why Leadership and Contextual Factors Matter”, Small Enterprise Research. 22(1):  17-31.

OECD, 2012. “Gender Equality in Education, Employment and Entrepreneurship: Final Report to MCM 2012”, Meeting of the OECD Council at Ministerial Level, 23-24 May 2012, Paris, France.

OECD (2004). Promoting Entrepreneurship and Innovative SMEs in a Global Economy: towards a More Responsible and Inclusive Globalization Presented at the 2nd OECD Conference of Ministers Responsible for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs), Istanbul: 3-5 June 2004.

PEMANDU (2013). Economic Transformation Programme Annual Report Available: http://etp.pemandu.
gov.my/annualreport2013/upload/ENG/ETP2013_ENG_full_version.pdf. (Last Accessed Date:22 December, 2015).

Recio, L. E. R., Costa, M. J. P. and Pinar, I. S. (2014). “Gender Differences in Entrepreneurial Orientation”, ESIC Market Economies and Business Journal. 45(3):  421-39.

SME Corporation (2014). SME Annual Report 2013/2014. Available: http://www.treasury.gov.my/index.
php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4297:economic-report-2014-http://www.smecorp.gov.my/vn2/node/1479. (Last Accessed Date: 9 November, 2015).

SME Corporation. (2015). SME Development Framework: The Malaysian Framework. Paper presented at CAIRO AMC-CBE-WBG-SME Conference, Cairo: 14-15 January 2015.

SME Annual Report 2014/2015. Available: http://www.smecorp.gov.my/vn2/sites/default/files/
SMEAR2015Eng%20sec1%262_1.pdf (Accessed Date: 11 December 2015).

Sweida, G. L., Reichrad, R. J. (2013). "Gender Stereotyping Effects on Entrepreneurial Self‐Efficacy and High‐Growth Entrepreneurial Intention", Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 20(2:,  296 – 313.

Taylor, P. (2013). “The Effect of Entrepreneurial Orientation on The Internationalization of SMEs in Developing Countries”, African Journal of Business Management, 7(19):  1927-1937.

Thébaud, S. (2015). “Status Beliefs and the Spirit of Capitalism: Accounting for Gender Biases in Entrepreneurship and Innovation”, Social Forces, sov042.

---. (2010). “Gender and Entrepreneurship as Career Choice. Do Self-assessments of Ability Matter?” Social Psychology Quarterly 73(3):  288-304.

The World Bank Finance. (2022). https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/smefinance

United Nations. (2013). A Survey on Women Entrepreneurship and Innovations.

Womenable (2010). Innovation and Women's Entrepreneurship: Exploration of Current Knowledge. Available: http://www.gwiin.com/files/editor_files/image/4.pdf. Last Accessed Date: 20 December, 2015.

Yan, J. (2010). The Impact of Entrepreneurial Personality Traits on Perception of New Venture Opportunity. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship. 13(2):  21-35.

York, J. G. & Ventakaraman, S. (2010). The Entrepreneur –Environment Nexus: Uncertainty, Innovation and Allocation”, Journal of Business Venturing. 25(5):  449- 63.