Page 77 - T-I JOURNAL19 4

724 DEMIRALP ET AL. WOMEN’S ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN STEM 725

in favor of more egalitarian practices among acade- and on-the-job training and continuing through REFERENCES October 1, 2016]. https://www.bls.gov/soc/.
micians, in order to better accommodate junior and business formation and operation, that affect com- 12. U.S. Census Bureau. STEM, STEM-related,
mid-level women scientists in commercially-oriented mercialization among women. Individually, each 1. The White House. A strategy for American inno- and Non-STEM Occupation Code List 2010.
work distributions (9). stage represents a critical opportunity for leverag- vation. Washington (DC): National Research Washington (DC): United States Department of
ing the potential of women and girls in STEM. Taken Council and the Office of Science and Technol- Commerce; c2010 [accessed October 1, 2016).
Enabling Future Research on Women in STEM together, this pipeline demonstrates the considerable ogy Policy; 2015. https://www.census.gov/topics/employment/
The recent increase in scientific and policy breadth of the challenge of decreasing the commer- 2. Jarrett V, Tchen C. Keeping America’s women industry-occupation/guidance/code-lists.html.
resources directed at improving women’s engagement cialization gap. moving forward: the key to an economy built to 13. Ruggles S, Genadek K, Goeken R, Grover J,
in STEM further underscores the need for appropriate There is still a need for further research to better last. Washington (DC): The White House Coun- Sobek M. Integrated Public Use Microdata
data to understand the commercialization and entre- understand the determinants of commercialization cil on Women and Girls; 2012. Series: Version 6.0 [Machine-readable database].
preneurial outcomes of women in STEM. Specifically, and why they may have differential effects on women 3. Beede DN, Julian TA, Langdon D, McKittrick Minneapolis: University of Minnesota; 2015
improvements in data collected may better detail the and minority entrepreneurs in STEM. An immedi- G, Khan B, Doms ME. Women in STEM: a gen- 14. Siebens J, Ryan C. Field of Bachelor’s degree in
factors that contribute to the gender gap in commer- ate limitation in this research effort is the lack of data der gap to innovation. Economics and Statistics the United States: 2009. American Community
cialization and track progress towards equity (33). sources that allow researchers to simultaneously iden- Administration Issue Brief #04-11. Washington Survey Reports. Washington (DC): U.S. Census
To date, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office does tify entrepreneur and business characteristics and (DC): United States Department of Commerce; Bureau; 2012.
not publicly share demographic information on pat- measure the quality and quantity of their commercial- 2011.
ent applicants and granted patents, a practice that is ization outcomes. Therefore, enhancing data sources 4. Fairlie R, Robb A. Gender differences in business 15. Choi J, Jeong S, Kehoe C. Women in entrepre-
also common among university technology transfer to permit rigorous empirical analyses of commer- performance: evidence from the characteris- neurship education in US higher education. J
offices (27). Furthermore, microdata that has detailed cialization outcomes is an important step for future tics of business owners survey. Small Bus Econ. Bus Divers. 2012;12(2):11-26.
information on not only outputs related to intellec- research that is needed to inform policy-making. 2009;33(4):375-395. 16. Hunt J, Garant JP, Herman H, Munroe DJ. Why
tual property (e.g., patents, trademarks, etc.) but also Future research, empowered by improved data for 5. Robb A, Watson J. Gender differences in are women underrepresented amongst paten-
information on the extent to which underlying tech- analysis, should investigate the relative roles that var- firm performance: evidence from new ven- tees? Res Policy. 2013;42:831-843.
nology enters the market would lead to research that ious internal and external factors play in explaining tures in the United States. J Bus Venturing. 17. Ong M, Wright C, Espinosa L, Orfield G.
can provide more direct evidence on commercial commercialization outcomes among women entre- 2012;27(5):544-558. Inside the double bind: a synthesis of empir-
activity and better inform policy. preneurs. A better understanding of the determinants 6. Blume-Kohout ME. Understanding the gender ical research on undergraduate and graduate
influencing women’s entrepreneurial choices and gap in STEM fields entrepreneurship. Washing- women of color in STEM. Harvard Educ. Rev.
CONCLUSIONS commercialization outcomes is key for the devel- ton (DC): Small Business Administration Office 2011;81(2):172-208.
This report presents an examination of women’s opment of effective and targeted policies that will of Advocacy; 2014. 18. Espinosa L. Women of color in undergrad STEM
entrepreneurship and commercialization in STEM allow the U.S. economy to realize the full potential 7. BarNir A. Starting technologically innovative majors. Harvard Educ. Rev. 2011;81(2):209-240.
through descriptive data analysis and literature of STEM fields. ventures: reasons, human capital and gender. 19. Perna L, Lundy-Wagner V, Drezner ND, Gasman
review. Its findings highlight differences between Manage Decis, 2012;50(3):399-419. M, Yoon S, Bose E, Gary S. The contribution of
men and women entrepreneurs in STEM fields as ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 8. Turrentine A, Well V. Career advancement HBCUs to the preparation of African Ameri-
well as differences between women entrepreneurs We would like to thank Dolores Rowen (Research through academic commercialization: acknowl- can women for STEM careers: a case study. Res
in STEM and non-STEM fields in terms of owner Manager, National Women’s Business Council edging and reducing barriers for women High Educ. 2009;50:1-23.
and business characteristics. These differences sug- (NWBC)), Esther Morales (Executive Director, engineering faculty. Paper presented at: 122nd 20. Sugimoto CR, Ni C, West JD, Larivière V. The
gest that women entrepreneurs in STEM fields may NWBC), and Dr. Teresa Nelson (Councilmember, ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition; 2015 academic advantage: gender disparities in pat-
face unique challenges or may experience the effects NWBC) for their helpful comments on earlier drafts Jun 14-17; Seattle, WA. enting. PLOS ONE. 2015;10(5):e0128000
of certain challenges disproportionately relative to of this report. We would also like to thank Professors 9. Whittington KB, Smith-Doerr L. Women 21. Colyvas JA, Snellman K, Bercovitz J, Feldman M.
men. Further, minority women may face steeper and Al Link (University of North Carolina Greensboro) inventors in context: disparities in patent- Disentangling effort and performance: a renewed
somewhat different challenges to pursuing careers and Maryann Feldman (University of North Carolina ing across academia and industry. Gend Soc. look at gender differences in commercializ-
and commercial success in STEM fields than other Chapel Hill) for their valuable feedback and com- 2008;22(2):194-218. ing medical school research. J Technol Transf.
women. ments. We are grateful to Annie Rorem (Senior 10. Polkowska D. Women scientists in the leaking 2012;37:478-489.
Prior research has identified external factors in Research Manager, NWBC) for her valuable insight pipeline: barriers to commercialization of sci- 22. Ding WW, Murray F, Stuart TE. Gender pat-
each career stage, starting with STEM education and feedback throughout the project. entific knowledge by women. J Technol Manag enting differences in the academic life sciences.
Innov. 2013;8(2):156-165. Science. 2006;313(5787):665-667.
11. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Standard Occupa- 23. Goel GK, Göktepe-Hultén D, Ram R. Academics’
tional Classification. Washington (DC): United entrepreneurship propensities and gender dif-
States Department of Labor; c2017 [accessed ferences. J Technol Transf. 2015;40(1):161-177.