Search results

This paper investigates the intersectionality of entrepreneurial masculinity within the context of venture accelerators. As such, it aims to shed light on how intersecting factors influence the construction and expression of masculinity among male entrepreneurs in venture accelerators.

This research is based on an in-depth analysis of four distinct accelerator cohort groups, employing a semi-structured interview approach. Interviewees were conducted with four accelerator managers and 52 male accelerator participants across four distinct accelerator cohort groups. Such a methodological choice is deemed instrumental in unravelling the nuanced dynamics within accelerator environments and their implications on hegemonic masculinity.

This study elucidates the nuanced ways in which men navigate the venture accelerator landscape. The findings revealed that the accelerator environment facilitated the reinforcement of traditional masculine behaviours. Whilst diversity was ostensibly valued, its acceptance decreased if it posed a challenge to male dominance or stereotypical masculine traits. Indeed, there was marginalisation of nontraditional expressions of masculinity, leading to a sense of “othering”.

By integrating intersectionality theory into the examination of masculine dynamics within venture accelerator contexts, this study expands current understanding of venture accelerator environments and their effects on both traditional and nontraditional forms of hegemonic masculinity. In particular, we highlight the impact of non-intersectional institutional norms on male entrepreneurs who deviate from traditional stereotypes. As such, we advance the understanding of venture accelerators by examining how they perpetuate and reinforce traditional masculine norms, even in environments that strive for diversity.

This study focuses on the lived experiences of early-stage women founders in a venture accelerator context. In particular, this work explores how gender shapes entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE) development in early-stage female founders in the venture accelerator context.

A qualitative, feminist-sensitive research methodology was utilized, with empirical evidence drawn from interviews with fifty one female founders and four accelerator managers located in four, competitive accelerator programs located in the Northeastern United States.

Study findings highlight how accelerators contribute to ESE development. Data also shows how the micro-processes related to masculinized discourse, culture, as well as mentorship and training, contribute to the “othering” and minimization of women during early-stage venture development.

This study contributes to the accelerator literature through a provision of insights into the ways a dominant, masculinized discourse and culture alienates female participants, making them feel “othered’, and resulting in a lack of fit with critical networking and funding opportunities. Second, this study builds on self-efficacy theory by applying a gender lens to the areas of mastery learning, vicarious learning, social persuasion and mental state, thus illuminating ways that the masculinization of these processes negatively disrupts the ESE development of female founders. Third, this study builds more broadly on the women's entrepreneurship literature by showing how masculine norms and culture ultimately impact upon the well-being of women in an early-stage entrepreneurship context.

Despite the title of this bibliography, there was not a truly underground press in the United States during the 1960s and 1970s. The phrase is amisnomer, reputedly coined on the spur of the moment in 1966 by Thomas Forcade when asked to describe the newly established news service, Underground Press Syndicate, of which he was an active member. The papers mentioned in this bibliography, except for the publications of the Weather Underground, were not published by secretive, covert organizations. Freedom of the press and of expression is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution, although often only symbolically as the experience of the undergrounds will show, and most of the publications that fall into the “underground” described herein maintained public offices, contracted with commercial printers, and often used the U.S. Postal Service to distribute their publications.

The term diverse books is increasingly popular yet persistently nebulous. The purpose of this paper – Part I of II – is to illuminate both that the concept is in need of a unified account and that conceptual analysis, though at first seemingly quite promising, fails as a method for identifying one.

This paper utilizes traditional (or intuitive) conceptual analysis to specify the respective clusters of necessary and sufficient conditions that constitute four broad candidate accounts of diverse books.

Though diverse books is a concept in need of a definition, conceptual analysis is not an appropriate method for adjudicating between the definitions we have on offer. This is because the concept is fundamentally political, serving as a resource for re-shaping collective social arrangements and ways of life. The conceptual problem outlined here requires for its resolution a method that will move us from a descriptive project to an explicitly normative one, wherein we consider what we properly work to achieve with and through the concept in question.

This paper initiates a systematic analytical project aimed at defining diverse books. In illustrating a moment of methodological failure, it paves the way for a critical alternative – namely, Part II's proposal of an analytical intervention in which political concepts are defined partially in terms of their benefits vis-á-vis informational justice.

The following classified, annotated list of titles is intended to provide reference librarians with a current checklist of new reference books, and is designed to supplement the RSR review column, “Recent Reference Books,” by Frances Neel Cheney. “Reference Books in Print” includes all additional books received prior to the inclusion deadline established for this issue. Appearance in this column does not preclude a later review in RSR. Publishers are urged to send a copy of all new reference books directly to RSR as soon as published, for immediate listing in “Reference Books in Print.” Reference books with imprints older than two years will not be included (with the exception of current reprints or older books newly acquired for distribution by another publisher). The column shall also occasionally include library science or other library related publications of other than a reference character.