Previous research provides unequivocal evidence that women-owned businesses start with both lower levels of overall capitalization and lower ratios of debt finance. Structural dissimilarities between male-owned and female-owned businesses explain most, but by no means all, of these contrasting funding profiles. Explanations of residual differences, viewed in terms of supply-side discrimination or demand-side debt and risk aversion, remain controversial. Using experimental and qualitative methodologies, this study explores the role of gender in bank lending decisions, focusing on the criteria and processes used by male and female loan officers. Results reveal similarities in the criteria used to assess male and female applicants but show modest differences in the emphasis given to certain criteria by male and female lending officers. The processes used by male and female lending officers to negotiate loan applications revealed the greatest differences.Sara Carter is now employed at the University of Strathclyd

This paper presents a research agenda for understanding how entrepreneurs accrue social capital in the digital age. We develop a conceptual framework with 12 research propositions that specify how the unique technical capabilities of social network sites impact entrepreneurs' bridging and bonding social capital online. These propositions are informed by anecdotal evidence from founders that finds entrepreneurs' social capital accrual differs online. We include theoretical and methodological insights for overcoming research challenges concerning context dynamism, intertwined networks, and unclear behavioral norms. This agenda addresses a growing gap between contemporary entrepreneurial practices and existing social capital theory and research in entrepreneurship.

Purpose-Despite growing scholarly v interest in social entrepreneurs and the social enterprises which they create, few studies have examined the hybridity of social enterprises including, surprisingly, whether they adoption an entrepreneurial orientation (EO) One explanation for this may be the continuing lack of an appropriate scale measuring a social entrepreneurship orientation. This paper seeks to address this research gap by proposing an initial social entrepreneurship orientation (SEO) scale based on input from scholars in the fields of entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship. Design/methodology/approach-This study presented employed mixed-methods and a two stage design. In stage one a Delphi study with 18 researchers with expertise of investigating entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship was used to generate constructs combining aspects of both social and entrepreneurial orientations. In stage two, we assessed the face validity of the derived items from the Delphi study by conducting a survey with 82 such experts. Findings-The paper provides empirical insights into how SEO can be measured by proposing, for the first time, a 12-item scale with 4 dimensions that allows the measurement of a social entrepreneurship orientation for the first time. Research limitations/implications-We recommend that future studies employ quantitative methods, particularly with firms exhibiting differing levels of the 'socialness' dimension which we propose and that such studies involve a variety of research informants. Statistical analysis of data collected across large sample sizes will help evaluate the reliability and validity of the scale which we propose. Practical implications-The paper includes implications for future research based on the proposed social entrepreneurship orientation measurement scale. Originality/value-This paper develops the first SEO scale based on empirical data collected from experts in the fields of entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship.

This version is available at https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/4514/ Strathprints is designed to allow users to access the research output of the University of Strathclyde. Unless otherwise explicitly stated on the manuscript, Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Please check the manuscript for details of any other licences that may have been applied. You may not engage in further distribution of the material for any profitmaking activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute both the url (https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/) and the content of this paper for research or private study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge.Any correspondence concerning this service should be sent to the Strathprints administrator: strathprints@strath.ac.ukThe Strathprints institutional repository (https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk) is a digital archive of University of Strathclyde research outputs. It has been developed to disseminate open access research outputs, expose data about those outputs, and enable the management and persistent access to Strathclyde's intellectual output.

This special edition explores and analyses the complexities and possibilities of social enterprise and social innovation. While these related concepts have been subject to considerable research, policy and practitioner attention, detailed empirical studies of the processes involved, the impact of social enterprises, the effects of social innovations and the motivations of social entrepreneurs, and those with whom they partner, are rare. The articles which follow present fresh evidence to provide contemporary insights into: the role of risk in shaping the effectiveness of social enterprises; the mediating function of not-for-profit organisations in the process of social innovation; the relevance of local embeddedness and sociocultural context; and the practice of social entrepreneurship within fluctuating and difficult environmental circumstances. These articles provide convincing examinations of and insights into social enterprise and social innovation which, at times, challenge dominant state within the ‘mainstream’ entrepreneurship discourse. Individually, they offer recommendations for future research and collectively, identify a research agenda for developing knowledge about social entrepreneurship and social innovation.