Innovative activity and gender dynamics

  • Steven Bednar
  • Dora Gicheva
  • Albert N. LinkEmail author


We explore the innovative performance of firms resulting from their Phase II Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) research-funded projects in terms of the gender dynamics of the firms. Using commercialization as the relevant performance metric, we find that Phase II projects led by a female principal investigator (PI) have greater probability of being commercialized in female-owned firms than in male-owned firms. This result is consistent with the findings from other settings that females tend to perform better when working under a female supervisor.


Innovation SBIR program Gender gap Principle investigator 

JEL classifications

J16 L26 O31 O38 



  1. Ahern, K. R., & Dittmar, A. K. (2012). The changing of the boards: The impact on firm valuation of mandated female board representation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127, 137–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersen, M. S., Bray, J. W., & Link, A. N. (2017). On the failure of scientific research: An analysis of SBIR projects funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Scientometrics, 112, 431–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Athey, S., Avery, C., & Zemsky, P. (2000). Mentoring and diversity. American Economic Review, 90, 765–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Audretsch, D. B., & Link, A. N. (2018). Innovation capital. Journal of Technology Transfer, 43, 1760–1767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bednar, S., & Gicheva, D. (2014). Are female supervisors more female-friendly? American Economic Review, 104, 370–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bednar, S., & Gicheva, D. (2018). Career implications of having a female-friendly supervisor. ILR Review, 71, 426–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brush, C., Ali, A., Kelley, D., & Greene, P. (2017). The influence of human capital factors and context on women's entrepreneurship: Which matters more? Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 8, 105–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cornell, B., & Welch, I. (1996). Culture, information, and screening discrimination. Journal of Political Economy, 104, 542–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cardoso, A. R., & Winter-Ebmer, R. (2010). Female-led firms and gender wage policies. ILR Review, 64, 143–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carrell, S. E., Page, M. E., & West, J. E. (2010). Sex and science: How professor gender perpetuates the gender gap. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125, 1101–1144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dee, T. S. (2007). Teachers and the gender gaps in student achievement. Journal of Human Resources, 42, 528–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ding, W. W., Murray, F., & Stuart, T. E. (2006). Gender differences in patenting in the academic life sciences. Science, 313, 665–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dohse, D., Goel, R. K., & Nelson, M. A. (2019). Female owners versus female managers: Who is better at introducing innovations? Journal of Technology Transfer, 44, 520–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Flabbi, L., Macis, M., Moro, A., & Schivardi, F. (2019). Do female executives make a difference? The impact of female leadership on gender gaps and firm performance. The Economic Journal, 129, 2390–2423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fox, M. F., Realff, M. L., Rueda, D. R., & Morn, J. (2017). International research collaboration among women engineers: Frequency and perceived barriers, by regions. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42, 1292–1306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gicheva, D., & Link, A. N. (2013). Leveraging entrepreneurship through private investments: Does gender matter? Small Business Economics, 40, 199–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gicheva, D., & Link, A. N. (2015). The gender gap in federal and private support for entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 45, 729–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hensvik, L. E. (2014). Manager impartiality: Worker-firm matching and the gender wage gap. ILR Review, 67, 395–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Joshi Amol M, Todd M. Inouye, and Jeffrey A. Robinson (2018). “How does agency workforce diversity influence federal R&D funding of minority and women technology entrepreneurs? An analysis of the SBIR and STTR programs, 2001-2011,” Small Business Economics, 50: 499–519.Google Scholar
  20. Kurtulus, F. A., & Tomaskovic-Devey, D. (2012). Do female top managers help women to advance? A panel study using EEO-1 records. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 639, 173–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lazarsfeld, Paul F. and Robert K. Merton (1954). “Friendship as social process: A substantive and methodological analysis,” in Freedom and Control in Modern Society (edited by M. Berger, T. Abel, and C.H. Page, pp. 18–66), New York: D. Van Nostrand Company.Google Scholar
  22. Leyden, D. P., & Link, A. N. (2015). Public sector entrepreneurship: U.S. Technology and Innovation Policy, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Link, A. N., & Ruhm, C. J. (2009). Bringing science to market: Commercializing from NIH SBIR awards. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 18, 381–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2012). Employment growth from public support of innovation in small firms. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Link, A. N., & Strong, D. R. (2016). Gender and entrepreneurship: An annotated bibliography. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 12, 3–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Matsa, D. A., & Miller, A. R. (2011). Chipping away at the glass ceiling: Gender spillovers in corporate leadership. American Economic Review, 101, 635–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Matsa, D. A., & Miller, A. R. (2013). A female style in corporate leadership? Evidence from quotas. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5, 136–169.Google Scholar
  28. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2015). SBIR/STTR at the National Institutes of Health, Washington, DC: the National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  29. National Research Council. (2009). An assessment of the SBIR program at the National Institutes of Health. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  30. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 2019). Leveling the Playing Field: Dissecting the Gender Gap in the Funding of Start-Ups, OECD science and industry policy paper 73, Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  31. Shane, S., Dolmans, S., Jankowski, J., Reymen, I., & Romme, G. (2012). Which inventors do technology licensing officers favor for start-ups? Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 32, 1–15.Google Scholar
  32. Shane, S., Dolmans, S. A. M., Jankowski, J., Reymen, I. M. M. J., Georges, A., & Romme, L. (2015). Academic entrepreneurship: Which inventors do technology licensing officers prefer for spinoffs? Journal of Technology Transfer, 40, 273–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Siegel, D. S., & Wessner, C. (2012). Universities and the success of entrepreneurial ventures: Evidence from the Small Business Innovation Research program. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37, 404–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Szerb, L., Rappai, G., Makra, Z., & Terjesen, S. (2007). Informal investment in transition economies: Individual characteristics and clusters. Small Business Economics, 28, 257–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tate, G., & Yang, L. (2015). Female leadership and gender equity: Evidence from plant closure. Journal of Financial Economics, 117, 77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Weber, A., & Christine Zulehner, C. (2010). Female hires and the success of start-up firms. American Economic Review, 100, 358–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wolfers, J. (2006). Diagnosing discrimination: Stock returns and CEO gender. Journal of the European Economic Association, 4, 531–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Elon UniversityElonUSA
  2. 2.University of North Carolina at GreensboroGreensboroUSA

Personalised recommendations