Female Entrepreneurship

You cheer for women one day and ignore them tomorrow. Two weeks ago, my LinkedIn was flooded with brands paying anything to book women creators for Women’s Day. It happens every year. The grand celebrations, the inspiring quotes, the LinkedIn love. But what happens on March 9th? As a woman entrepreneur, I don’t just deal with challenges once a year, I fight them every damn day and every woman entrepreneur will relate to it. The funding battles, the societal expectations, the constant need to prove myself. And yet, once the hashtags stop trending, nobody talks about it. Here’s what people conveniently forget: → Investors hesitate when they see a woman at the helm. Less than 2% of VC funding goes to women-led businesses. The bias is real. We’re told to “think big,” but when we do? We’re “too ambitious.” → Women are expected to run businesses like they don’t have families and manage homes like they don’t have businesses. The pressure is relentless and the guilt is huge. → Speak up, and we’re “aggressive.” Play it safe, and we’re “not leadership material.” We’re stuck in a game where the rules were never made for us. Women don’t need a holiday. We need funding, hiring, investments, opportunities and recognition EVERY DAY. Not just when it’s trending. So if you really want to support women in business, put your money where your mouth is. Invest in them. Hire them. Fund them. Amplify their voices. And don’t just remember us when it’s convenient. #womenentrepreneurship #womencreators

Flo Health is the world's first femtech unicorn (yay) but it's also founded and funded by men (hmm) It's great that women's health is gaining more recognition, given the vast inequality in funding, research, and focus... BUT It also exposes a huge problem with the startup ecosystem. → Just 2% of global VC funding goes to women (WEF) → Women's presence on pitches is *neutral at best* and becomes negative when women don't embody typically female traits (Harvard) → Investors prefer pitches presented by men - when presented with two identical pitches, 68% funded the startup pitched by a man and 31% funded the exact same startup pitched by a woman (Harvard) → 83% of investment committees have no female members (British Business Bank) Women are discriminated against at all stages of the investment process. → Women are asked more negative questions around risk and worst-case scenarios, whereas men are asked about opportunity and opportunity (Harvard) → Women have to fight against preconceptions, we are judged more frequently, and held to higher standards (Yale) Ultimately, people with the most privilege raise the most money, and I count myself in that bucket as I am a white, privately educated female. → Just 0.5% of funding goes to black founders (WEF) → 79% of VC Seed funding for diverse founders (which is a tiny amount) goes to white women (BBG Ventures) There is SO much inequality in the startup world, and it's talked about but never taken seriously. Instead, female founders are assumed to be running businesses that aren't VC-backable, or that there just aren't enough of us. This is an uncomfortable topic, but the only way we can improve this system is to educate people about the huge inequality that exists in a sector awash with bonkers amounts of capital. Flexa #Startups #Fundraising #Inequality

The venture-capital world has a serial-entrepreneur problem, and it is gendered. New National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) research comparing male and female co-founders of the same startups reveals disparities that cannot be explained by founder quality or ambition: → Women make up only 4% of founders with 3+ startups (vs 13.3% of all VC-backed founders) → After a startup failure women are 22.5% less likely to secure venture-capital backing for their next venture → Female serial entrepreneurs raise 53.3% less capital after failures and 24.6% less after successes → Men receive larger deals for founding experience regardless of outcomes. Women are penalized for failures and barely rewarded for successes → When an unrelated women-founded startup fails, it hurts funding prospects for all female founders. However, successes do not create positive spillovers.

Let’s call it what it is: right now, the UK is a pretty terrible place to be a female entrepreneur. That’s not hyperbole - it’s backed by data. Just 1.8% of all venture capital went to all-women founding teams in H1 2024. As someone who’s built and sold three businesses, I can say this isn’t a pipeline issue. It’s a pattern-matching problem. Those making the investment decisions are still overwhelmingly male. Just 15% of investment committees are made up of women. When the decision-makers don’t look like you, don’t relate to your journey, or don’t see themselves in your pitch… It’s no surprise that female founders are being overlooked. The silver lining is that change is coming. A few months ago, the Invest in Women Taskforce launched a historic £250m fund. Through which investment decisions will be made by women, for women, and in women. With this, we hope to start ensuring capital finds its way to backing more innovative female-led businesses. It’s high time we stop debating whether the system is broken and focus on fixing it. 📷 - from a recent piece in The Times (linked in comments)

Last year, female founders in MENA raised just 1% of total VC funding, around $28 million out of $2.3 billion. It’s a clear signal of systemic bias, structural barriers, and untapped potential. Even more concerning, all-women founding teams received less than 0.5% of funding in 2023. Despite record startup funding in Q1 2025, women-led startups with no male co-founder saw almost no increase. As a leader, I see this not only as a call for fairness but as a strategic imperative. We cannot unlock the full potential of our region’s innovation ecosystem without true inclusion. Diversity of thought, experience, and perspective drives better decisions, stronger teams, and more sustainable growth. Changing this means rethinking how we build our ecosystem. It’s about more than just capital, it’s about creating real opportunities, removing barriers, and nurturing talent. Key steps forward include: • Increasing representation of women as investors and decision-makers • Providing practical mentorship, introductions, and tailored support • Implementing policies that commit real resources to female-led ventures Progress requires intentional leadership at every level, from investors, founders, corporates, and policymakers alike. It’s not enough to recognize the problem; we must all be part of the solution. What do you think? What needs to change for true progress? #FemaleFounders #MENA #VC #Startups #WomenInBusiness

Dear women founders, If you’ve ever dared to build something from scratch, you’ve probably heard these: “Why not stick to a safe job?” “Who’ll run the home if you start a company?” “Are you sure women can handle this kind of pressure?” India has the world’s third-largest startup ecosystem. Yet only 15% of Indian startups have a female founder. Shocking, isn’t it? Now before someone rolls their eyes and says – “There she goes, the feminist angle again...” If stating facts makes me a feminist, maybe check your funding portfolio – not my tone :) Because this isn’t an ambition problem. It’s an infrastructure problem. - Less than 10% of VC funding goes to women - 43% of women lacked support from family or spouse - Only 7% of unicorn leadership roles are held by women And investors still ask women about risks, while men get asked about scaling opportunities. And yet, she doesn’t just prove herself to the pitch room, She proves herself to the entire ecosystem. So, here’s what needs to change: VCs: Stop “diversity-washing” your portfolio and actually back outsiders Incubators: Build systems that serve people, not just outcomes Media: Stop spotlighting women only when it’s March 8th Families: Support your daughters even when the pitch flops Thankfully, some are flipping the script: WE Hub – India’s first women-focused incubator CXXO by Kalaari – Backed 100+ women CEOs Saha Fund – Investing only in women-led startups The Bottom line is – This isn’t a gender issue. It’s an innovation issue. It’s about unleashing the full potential of a nation. If we wish to position India as the #1 startup hub globally, we need to fund locally – without bias. Let’s raise the bar, together! What do you think?

A man was hired over a woman. Following 7 rounds of interviews. When the woman (my friend) asked why she missed out on the role, she got a vague response: → They were equally qualified → Both performed well → It was neck and neck So… what tipped the balance? Eventually, she got the answer: He asked for more money. That’s it. They said his negotiation showed “Commercial instinct.” “Confidence.” “Leadership potential.” They didn’t offer him more because he was better. They decided he was better because he asked for more. Her hesitation was seen as a lack of belief in herself. That’s why when clients ask me, “Should I negotiate?” I say: Always. Not just for the money but for what it signals. And here’s why it matters: 🔹 Only 34% of women negotiate their salary, compared to 61% of men (Source: LinkedIn Gender Insights Report) 🔹 The gender pay gap is 14.3% (and it widens dramatically for women over 40.) Ladies, it's time to close that gap: 1. Don’t pitch a number first. Pitch your value. → Frame the conversation around impact: → “Here’s what I’ve delivered…” → “Here’s the commercial value I’ve driven…” 2. Price your potential not your past. → You’re not being hired to repeat what you’ve done. → You’re being hired for what you’ll do next. 3. Do your research. Then ask for more. → Benchmark your role, level, and industry. → Use tools like Glassdoor. 4. Use the ‘Bracketing’ Technique. → Offer a range so you can negotiate. → "I’d expect something in the $150–$180K range.” 5. Own your worth. Out loud. → If you downplay your value, people will believe you. → Negotiation is not arrogance but it takes practice. It isn’t just about pay. It’s about perception. And perception shapes outcomes. Have you ever wished you asked for more money?

The minute you put "FEMALE" in front of "FOUNDER" the questions change. I’ve been in rooms where instead of asking about scale or market share, the questions were: “Do you have kids?” “What if you want them?” “How will you balance it all?” Questions no man in that room ever got. And here’s why that matters: those questions don’t just sting, they shape outcomes. Investors who ask defensive questions are 7x less likely to fund you. Founders who are framed as “risks” are given smaller checks, harsher terms, and less trust. And that ripples out into fewer women scaling to Series B and beyond. Sometimes the term female founder gets celebrated like a badge of honor. And yes, I’ll wear it with pride when it inspires someone else to step up. But let’s not pretend the label is neutral. It exists because women are still treated as outliers in entrepreneurship. And it carries baggage: That we’re more likely to build “lifestyle” projects. That we’re higher risk to back. That our ambitions are smaller or temporary. Women-founded startups still get less than 2% of VC funding. And that’s not because of performance. It’s because of perception. So where does that leave us? For me, the real badge of honor isn’t being called a female founder. It’s building, scaling, and proving you belong in the founder category, no adjective needed. Until the day the word “founder” automatically includes us.

Women-led teams make up nearly 14% of UK startups. But they receive just 2.4% of the £10M+ investment rounds. These stats don’t surprise me. But they still sting. The Startup Coalition’s latest report on funding for female founders is essential reading - not because it’s shocking, but because it confirms what so many of us already know, and have lived. As someone who became an entrepreneur in my 40s - while juggling motherhood, a mortgage, and a corporate career, I’ve seen the difference access to funding, networks, and belief can make. This report does something I think is vital: it goes beyond pointing out the problem, and lays out the structural barriers clearly - from investor bias and legal grey zones, to angel investment thresholds and childcare costs. What stood out to me most: The quiet toll that fundraising can take when you’re constantly questioned, underestimated, or simply overlooked. I’ve mentored many women who’ve faced this. Brilliant founders, building great businesses - but having to defend their ambition in rooms where their ideas are undervalued. Progress won’t happen by accident. It requires pressure, policy, and persistence. Let’s use this moment to push further and ensure the next generation of female founders doesn’t just survive the system, but reshapes it from the ground up.

𝟭 𝗶𝗻 𝟰 𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝘄𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻’𝘀 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗺𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱. 𝟭 𝗶𝗻 𝟭𝟬 𝘀𝗮𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝘄𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝘄𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻. Together with Laura Koch and Elisabeth Berger (JKU - Institute for Entrepreneurship), I surveyed 361 international VCs using a randomized response technique to bypass social desirability bias. The results aren't unconscious bias. The results are open discrimination. And it’s personal. Some of the strongest startups I’ve seen at the University of Hohenheim were women-led, such as Holiroots or Viva la Faba. What a waste of potential. We knew gender bias existed in venture capital. Now we know how much — and where. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗻𝗼𝘄? One recommendation from our findings that’s both practical and powerful: 👉 Increase the share of women in venture capital. Why it matters:  • Women VCs show significantly less bias.  • Diverse teams make better decisions.  • Mixed teams perform better. If we want fairer funding decisions, we must rethink who’s making them. 𝗟𝗲𝘁’𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮𝘀𝗸 𝗶𝗳 𝘄𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻 𝗮𝗿𝗲 “𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲.” 𝗟𝗲𝘁’𝘀 𝗮𝘀𝗸 𝘄𝗵𝘆 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻’𝘁. The paper is open access in Venture Capital—An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance. Feel free to share it or use it in teaching, workshops, or policy work. 📄 https://lnkd.in/eN4jfJQx