The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/2040-0705.htm
Entrepreneurship Genderperception of
and internationalisation: export success
factors
to what extent do the perceptions
of male and female entrepreneurs
differ on success factors Received 5 September 2022
Revised 7 March 2023
4 April 2023
Obi Berko Obeng Damoah Accepted 16 April 2023
Department of Organisation and Human Resource Management,
University of Ghana Business School, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of the paper is to explore gender variations in entrepreneurship and
internationalisation from the perspective of the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm; in particular, the
paper explores how differences in the personal idiosyncrasies of both males and females in part account for the
variations in export internationalisation.
Design/methodology/approach – The study draws on extant literature on the critical success factors in
entrepreneurship and internationalisation research (e.g. foreign market knowledge, firm-level technology and
firm age) as the conceptual framework to explore the issue. The study is based on 21male and 17 female export
entrepreneurs from Ghana and uses a descriptive research design (i.e. frequencies and chi-square test) to
analyse the results.
Findings – The results show that the perceptions of male and female exporters differ on key
internationalisation success factors based on extant literature. Implicitly, whilst both groups shared a
similar degree of basic knowledge on a few export success factors, across most of the other key export success
factors, the male counterparts demonstrated a more expanded view compared to the females. The results
support the assumption of the RBV theory applied in this study to argue that to account properly for the
internationalisation outcomes of small andmedium-sized enterprises (SMEs), the personality characteristics of
the owner entrepreneurs are critical resources which cannot be ignored.
Research limitations/implications – In terms of limitation, the study is exploratory study based on non-
probability sampling methods using descriptive frequencies tables and analysis of chi-square test and so
readers must bear this limitation in mind in interpreting the results to improve on future studies.
Originality/value – The paper contributes to the empirical literature by offering a unique perspective
regarding how women and men perceive and interpret export success factors and how that impacts on the
internationalisation outcomes of women and men. The paper responds to calls by researchers (e.g. Terjesen
et al., 2011; Ratten and Tajeddini, 2018; Kuschel and Labra, 2018; Javadian and Richards, 2020) to populate
studies on the topic to deepen the present understanding. By using data from Ghana, West Africa, the study
sheds a fresh insight on the topic from an under-studied and under-researched geographical context.
Keywords Internationalisation, Ghana, Export, Gender difference
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Gender difference in entrepreneurship and internationalisation is a dominant research field
because of its relevance to practitioners and policymakers. As a result of the creation of
entrepreneurship awareness globally, entrepreneurial activity is being intensified between
males and females (Dilli andWesterhuis, 2018; Jena, 2020). Previously, entrepreneurial activities
used to be associated with males, but these days, the contribution of female entrepreneurial
African Journal of Economic and
Management Studies
The author expresses his appreciation to the Research and Conferences Committee of the University of © Emerald Publishing Limited
2040-0705
Ghana Business School, for providing the funding for this research. DOI 10.1108/AJEMS-09-2022-0355
AJEMS activity towards employment, innovation and economic growth in all stages of economic
development is recognised, confirming the relevance of entrepreneurship to both groups (Costa
and Pita, 2020). According to Kuada (2009), the gender factor in the entrepreneurship literature
emerged in the late 1970s following a seminal paper by Schwartz (1976). Kelley et al. (2017)
argued that to this day, more females are seen entering personal entrepreneurship.Moreira et al.
(2019) maintain that the decision of the United Nations to include gender equality in the
Sustainable Development Goals has revived female entrepreneurship across the world. Women
entrepreneurship impacts national employment levels (De Bruin et al., 2007). Studies (e.g.
Duberley andCarrigan, 2013;Hodges et al., 2015) found thatwomengain control over theirwork-
life balance because of the flexibility from entrepreneurship. Financial independence and
recognition in society are amongst other benefits arising out of women entrepreneurship
(Petridou and Glaveli, 2008; Tajeddini et al., 2017). Consequently, research in gender and
entrepreneurship continues to gain research interest (see Cabrera and Mauricio, 2017; Henry
et al., 2017; Gimenez and Calabro, 2018; Ennis, 2018; Costa and Pita, 2020).
However, because of competitive advantages (e.g. innovation opportunities, increased resource
capacity, international exposure and market intelligence (see Farahat et al., 2020; Zahoor et al.,
2020) associatedwith firms that operate in the internationalmarket over those that operatewholly
in the local market, a stream of research have extended the debates regarding gender difference in
entrepreneurship to internationalisation. Unfortunately, there is a paucity of knowledge and
inconclusive findings on the topic thereby limiting our understating (Rattern and Tajeddinim,
2018). Kuschel and Labra (2018) argue that though gender and internationalisation occupy a
significant position in promoting gender equality in the international market, research output
regarding the issue is at its infant stage. Researchers (e.g. Al-Dajani and Marlow, 2010; Terjesen
et al., 2011; Rattern and Tajeddunim, 2018), concur that whilst research on gender and
entrepreneurship have advanced, studies on gender and internationalisation are under-researched
causing a lacuna of knowledge on the topic. Likewise, regarding the gender difference in
entrepreneurship, a question that is yet to be resolved is why gender difference in
internationalisation is still unresolved. A sample of studies and theoretical assumptions has
shed light on the issue, yet there are still inconsistencies and a lack of clarity on the empirical front.
For example, according to Javadian andRichards (2020), gender differences in internationalisation
are accounted for largely by industry variations and country of origin. Moreira et al. (2019) found
that varied motivations inform why females enter the international market compared to males.
Besides, Gender theories (e.g. the gender-aware framework of women entrepreneurship (Bates
et al., 2007; Brush et al., 2009) and the social feminist theory (Fischer et al., 1993) argue that external
influences are the determinants of gender variation in internationalisation. Amongst the factors
from the perspectives of these theories include, but are not limited to industry differences, country
of origin and domestic responsibilities. The present study builds on this line of research (i.e. the
gender difference in the internationalisation) and offers four (4) new contributions to the field. First,
the study diverts from the existing line of argument (i.e. “external determinants” of the issue) and
uses the resource-based view (RBV) theory of the firm to examine whether or not the personal
idiosyncrasies of male and female entrepreneurs account for the variation, a perspective that to
date researchers have overlooked. Second, the paper contributes to the dearth of empirical
literature in this line of research and in sodoing responds to calls by researchers (e.g.Terjesen et al.,
2011; Ratten and Tajeddini, 2018; Kuschel and Labra, 2018; Javadian and Richards, 2020) to
populate studies on the topic to deepen our understanding. Third, the study uses evidence froman
under-studied andanewgeographical context,Ghana to shednew insights into the topic. Ghana, a
sub-Saharan African country has much to offer the developing world because although the
country is yet to become one of the BRICS countries (e.g. Brazil, Russia, India, China and South
Africa), its democratic credentials havewon it the title of “the beaconofAfricandemocracy and the
gateway to Africa”. Consequently, empirical evidence from Ghana presents much inspiration to
similar developing countries on the topic.
Fourth, the study seeks to extend the external validity of the RBV of the firm (Barney, Gender
1991) to argue that the difference in the phenomenon is partly accounted for by the differences perception of
in the personality characteristics of both counterparts. Furthermore, besides the call to scale export success
up research in the area to deepen our understanding, the topic is highly relevant because
presently the promotion of female involvement in economic activities is one of the global factors
initiatives from the perspectives of the United Nations and national governments (Moreira
et al., 2019). From the foregone, the following research questions guide the study.
RQ1. To what extent do male and female exporters perceive the following export success
factors - firm size, firm age, prior international experience, management commitment to
export business, firm-level technology and international market knowledge differently?
RQ2. To what extent do the relevance/importance that male and female exporters attach
to extant export success factors in bullet one (1) above differ?
RQ3. To what extent does the relative strength of the six selected factors on export
success differ between male and female exporters?
Literature review
Women internationalisation in Africa
Whilst there is a general agreement on the dearth of literature regardingwomen entrepreneurship
and internationalisation research, the topic is lacking more in the African context. For instance,
Madsen andAndrade (2018) concluded that most of the researchers working on entrepreneurship
and internationalisation studies turn to come fromNorthAmerica andEurope,whilst regions such
as Latin America and Africa are considered underrepresented. In a systematic review of women
entrepreneurship and internationalisation research, it was found that out of 277 articles reviewed
between 1990 and 2016, Africa was not represented in the top 10 countries of origin of the authors
who published papers on the topic “women entrepreneurship and internationalisation” (Moreira
et al., 2019). Moreira et al. (2019) maintain that the top 10 countries that featured in the review and
the associated papers included the United States, 92 papers; the United Kingdom, 39 papers;
Canada, 26 papers; Spain, 24 papers; Germany, 14 papers; Scotland, 12 papers; India, 11 papers;
Netherlands, 11 papers; Italy, 10 papers and Switzerland, 9 papers. Moreira et al. (2019) called for
more studies on the topic from under-researched regions, especially in Africa. In another
systematic review that examines the pattern and trends in women entrepreneurship and
internationalisation research, Ratten and Tajeddini (2018) found that out of 232 articles reviewed
on the topic, the researchers were from the United States (31%), the UK (12%) and Canada (10%),
whilst Spain, Switzerland, Ireland and India being the country of origin of the rest of authors; the
author stated that there was no authorship from Africa in that review.
Internationalisation of SMEs
Research has shown that the international market is not exclusively preserved for
multinational companies (MNCs), but the activities of SMEs in the international market are
recognised in the literature (e.g. Etemad, 2004; Coviello and Martin, 1999; Coviello and Jones,
2004; McAuley, 1999, 2010). The literature contains several definitions of SMEs, but the
conclusion is that each is varied in its context. According to the European Commission (2014),
SMEs are firms that possess less than 250 workforces, turnover not higher than 50 million
Euros and a balance sheet total of not more than 43 million Euros. Conversely in the USA, the
Small BusinessAdministration (2014)maintains that firms possessing between 100 and 1,500
workforces and a turnover between 2.2–21.5mUS$ are considered SMEs. In Ghana, SMEs are
also defined in several ways; however, this study is based on the definition offered by the
World Bank in its project of Regional Project for Enterprise Development based on selected
AJEMS countries in West Africa. In the project, the World Bank defined SMEs into three (3)
categories based on firm size. The categorisations are: micro firms as those employing 1–5
workers; small firms as those employing between 6–29 workers and medium-sized firms as
those employing 30–99 workers (Abor and Quartey, 2010).
As regards the motivation to enter the international market, SMEs are driven by various
motivations consisting of proactive and reactive motivations (Albaum et al., 1994; Hollensen,
2004). However, the proactive and reactive motivations have been argued using several
theories ranging from the stage theory (Johanson and Vahlne, 1977) to the network theory
(Johanson andMattsson, 1988). Several methods are presented in the literature with regard to
internationalisation entry modes (e.g. Foreign Direct Investment [FDI], contract
manufacturing, licensing and exporting). Amongst the various methods, SMEs are known
to be associated with export businesses because of its flexibility and low investment cost
compared to the other entry modes such as the FDI (Dalli, 1995).
Defining gender
Gender is defined in the literature variously. There is a view that gender is a multilevel
phenomenon because it involves labels and stereotypes regarding values, biological and
behavioural patterns (Ayman and Korabik, 2010). For instance, Nightingale (2006) views
gender as a process where people perceive and analyse the differences regarding the
biological sex. Apergis and Pekka Economon (2010) contend that gender is culturally defined
and that cultural embeddedness impact women’s engagement in entrepreneurship. In line
with Chen et al. (2018), gender is operationalised in this paper as a discrete variable (i.e. males
and females).
Defining entrepreneurship
The concept of entrepreneurship is a multi-dimensional phenomenon. The concept can be
seen as a mindset and therefore, sometimes classified as personal and organisational
entrepreneurship (Bahrami et al., 2023). In line with Smith et al. (2020), this study defines
entrepreneurship as an individual enterprise activity for the purpose of economic gain and
continuous growth.
Theoretical framework
Gender-aware framework
Several theories have been advanced to explain gender differences in business. Amongst
these theories include the gender-aware framework of women entrepreneurship (Bates et al.,
2007; Brush et al., 2009). The framework argues that gender differences in entrepreneurship
are accounted for by both social and institutional factors and these factors pose a great
impact on female entrepreneurs. Brush et al. (2009) presented these factors as consisting of
motherhood and meso and/or macro external factors (e.g. the motherhood role of a woman,
national-level policies, culture, economic factors, laws and regulations and business-level
factors such as organisational-level structures and structures in industries). The conclusion
in this theory is that differences in gender and entrepreneurship outcomes must not be
explained in isolation, because family-level as well as meso/macro-level factors are key in
women entrepreneurship and internationalisation outcomes. Based on the gender-aware
framework, it is confirmed that the macro-level factors account for the gender variations in
the internationalisation of SMEs (Javadian and Richards, 2020). Another theory is the social
feminist framework (Fischer et al., 1993). This theory maintains that gender differences in
entrepreneurship outcomes (e.g. business sizes, performance, activities, etc.) are also
accounted for by the socialisation process in society which over the years has shaped the
gendered forms of attitudes which impact female entrepreneurship as opposed to their Gender
biological sex criteria. This paper is based on these theories because they have been employed perception of
in extant studies (see Javadian and Richards, 2020). export success
factors
Resource-based view of the firm
In the internationalisation research field, several theories are put forward to explain SMEs’
internationalisation (e.g. stage, theory (Johanson and Vahlne, 1977), the network theory
(Johanson and Mattsson, 1998), international entrepreneurship (McDougall et al., 1994) and
the RBV of the firm Barney (1991)). However, the study is based on the RBV; the RBV argues
that a firm consists of a bundle of tangible and intangible resources which determine the
behaviour of a firm and its eventual outcomes. Consequently, in line with SME
internationalisation, the RBV assumes that it is the unique bundles of the resources of
firms (SMEs) (whether owned by a female or male) that enable the firm to make key business
decisions, including embarking on export business. Of the various frameworks of SMEs’
internationalisation, Ruzzier et al. (2006) argue that one unique aspect of the RBV in
accounting for the internationalisation of SMEs is that it is the only framework that takes into
consideration, the personality characteristics of the SMEs’ owner-manager/manageress
(i.e. personal perceptions, motivations, aspirations) in internationalisation decisions.
Therefore, because this study is based on the idiosyncratic perceptions of male and female
entrepreneurs regarding success factors in internationalisation, the RBV is employed to
account for the total resources owned by an entrepreneurial firm, including the personality
characteristics/capacity of entrepreneurs.
Export success factors in extant research
In the internationalisation research field, variables that account for success factors have been
confirmed over time by different researchers in different contexts. This sub-Section presents
six (6) selected export success factors that inform the study. The success factors consist of
firm size, firm age, international experience, firm technology, management commitment and
foreign market knowledge. These factors were selected because of their wide support in
extant literature over time and in different contexts (e.g. India, Indonesia, Nigeria and Ghana,
the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Africa, Malawi, Swaziland, Mozambique, Zambia,
USA, UK, Brazil, Columbia, Slovenia, Poland, China, Kosovo, Argentina, Spain, Malaysia,
Portugal, France, Greece, Turkey, Belgium). Limited empirical literature supporting each of
the six selected variables is presented below because of the limitedword count requirement of
this journal.
International experience
Studies have confirmed that one of the success factors that account for success in the
international market is the entrepreneur’s international experience. What this means is that
the deeper the international experience and exposure, the higher the positive impact on
internationalisation activities. Sample empirical evidence of the entrepreneur’s prior
international experience included, but is not limited to Bianchi and Wickramasekera
(2016), Khokhar (2018), Leonidou et al. (2015), Love et al. (2016), Galati et al. (2017), Ursic and
Czinkota (2015), Oura et al. (2016), Escandon-Barbosa et al. (2019), Celec and Globocnik (2017),
Kotorri and Krasniqi (2018) and Alkhateeb (2019).
Firm age/experience
In the internationalisation research field, firm age is associated with a firm’s experience. The
argument is that because internationalisation appears complex compared to a domestic
AJEMS market operation, a firm’s experience is recommended as one of the success factors. The
following empirical results confirm firm age and/or firm experience as one of the success
factors in internationalisation. These studies include, but are not limited to Serrano et al.
(2016), Acar (2015), Reis and Forte (2016), Pickernell et al. (2016), Aziz and Samad (2016),
Meschi et al. (2017), Babatunde (2016) and Faruk and Subudhi (2019).
Firm size
Firm size which is operationalised as the total number of full-time employees has been
confirmed as one of the critical success factors in the export business. This is explained both
in the aggregate skills and knowledge that the workforce brings to bear on the firm’s
activities. Empirical confirmation of a firm’s size as a key success factor in
internationalisation also includes, but is not limited to Onkelinx et al. (2016), Chen et al.
(2016), Reis and Forte (2016), Coo (2017), Tuhin and Swanepoel (2017), Fernando et al. (2017),
Khokhar (2018), Faruk and Subudhi (2019) and Bekteshi (2020).
Management commitment
Most exporting SMEs operate in the domestic market and export goods abroad. Over the
years, management commitment as operationalised as the amount of time and resources
management allocates to internationalisation activity is found as one of the critical export
success factors. Management commitment is an indicator of management’s ability to
prioritise resource allocation across various activities in a firm by making exporting activity
a priority. Amongst the empirical findings are: Yu and Lindsay (2015), Fuchs and K€ostner
(2016), Lin et al. (2016), Erdil and O€zdemir (2016), Sraha et al. (2020), Purwanto et al. (2018),
Kotorri and Krasniqi (2018), Munawar et al. (2019) and Faruk and Subudhi (2019).
Firm-level of technology
As a result of the competition in the global market, compared to the domestic market, firm-
level technology such as technological innovation and innovation know-how, amongst others
are seen as key success factors in international market. The following empirical findings
confirm the importance of firm-level technology and export success. Amongst the papers are:
Damijan et al. (2017), Uyar and Oralhan (2017), Azar and Ciabuschi (2017), Coo (2017),
Khokhar (2018), Krammer et al. (2018), Faruk and Subudhi (2019), Rauf et al. (2019), Radicic
and Djalilov (2019) and Alkhateeb (2019).
Foreign market knowledge
Research has found that knowledge of the export market is a key success factor. Samples of
empirical findings that confirm this are as follows; they include but are not limited to Pascucci
et al. (2016), Boso et al. (2017), Kim-Soon et al. (2015), Fernando et al. (2017), Dhliwayo (2017),
Bahar et al. (2018),Mohammed (2018), Alkhateeb (2019), Lejpras (2019) andHaddoud et al. (2021).
Methodology
The objective of the paper is to examine the extent to which the perception of female and male
exporters differs on export success factors in extant papers (see literature review sub-ection
titledExport Success Factors in Extant Research). The context of the study is Ghana; Ghana is a
sub-Saharan African country and the country is credited as the beacon of Africa’s democracy
because of its stable democratic governance credentials in the African region. Economically,
Ghana is considered one of the fastest-growing countries on the continent ofAfrica (Amankwah-
Amoah, 2017). Within Ghana, the study is based on the capital city, Accra because it is the
commercial city of Ghana with more than 95% of corporate and commercial activities in the Gender
country (GRA, 2018). Male and female SMEs exporting firms were the target population of the perception of
country. The sampling method used is based on the convenience and snowball non-probability export success
sampling that is supported by a sampling frame obtained from the Ghana Export Promotion
Authority (GEPA). Questionnaire was used to collect the data for the study. Because the factors
respondentswere asked to share their thoughts on export success factors used as the conceptual
framework for the study, some parts of the questionnaire weremade open-ended. The questions
were composed of the demographic details of the respondents and questions regarding their
perceptions of export success factors. The studywas conducted from June 2020 to July 15, 2020.
Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the data collection was supplemented with
online Google Forms to the target population using e-mails and theirWhatsApp pages, coupled
with some face-to-face and telephone interviews (i.e. depending on a respondent preference and
availability). An average of one hour was expended on 16 of the respondents that agreed to be
interviewed face-to-face. The data collection lasted for one and a half months (June 5, 2020–July
15, 2020). Overall, 38 respondents participated in the study consisting of 21 male and 17 female
exporters. Being a quantitative exploratory study, descriptive statistics based on frequencies
and chi-square analysis were employed to analyse the responses (Aziz and Samad (2016).
Table 1 presents the profile of the sample.
Variable Female Male Total Percentage
Owner Gender 17 21 38 100
Owner age
>30 3 1 4 11
30–40 3 1 4 11
41–50 7 12 19 50
51–60 4 7 11 28
Total 17 21 38 100
No. of employees
0–5 5 6 11 29
6–10 6 3 9 24
11–15 1 3 4 10
16–20 3 1 4 10
21–25 2 4 6 17
26–30 0 2 2 5
30 and above 0 2 2 5
Total 17 21 38 100
Number of years in export business
1–5 4 2 6 16
5–10 5 7 12 32
11–15 6 5 11 29
16–20 1 4 5 13 5
21–25 0 2 2 5
26–30 1 1 2 100
Total 17 21 38
Owner’s education
Below Degree 10 8 18 47
Degree 6 12 18 47
Above Degree 1 1 2 6
Total 17 21 38 100 Table 1.
Source(s): Author 2020 Respondents’ profile
AJEMS Table 1 shows that whilst 55% (21 respondents) of the exporters weremales, the female exporters
accounted for 45% (17 respondents). Exporters between the ages of 41–50 (50%) dominate the
sample with the majority being males. This is followed by those aged between 51–60, accounting
for 28% (11 respondents), alsowith themajority beingmales. The least represented group is those
below 40 years. Following the SMEs definition that informs this study, small firms dominate the
sample (i.e. those employing 6 and 29workers) accounting for 66% (i.e. 25 firms, 13male firms and
12 female firms) whilst themicro firms (those employing 1–5workers) followed representing 29%
of the sample. Amongst the three classes of firms - micro, small and medium-sized, the size of the
male firmsoutweighs the female firmsacross all the size dimensions.Regarding export experience,
those with 5–10 (32%) years of experience dominate the sample with the majority of the firms in
this category beingmales. This is followed by thosewith 11–15 years (29%)with the female firms
dominating the sample. The least experience is those between 21–25 years and 26–30 years
representing 5% each. Most of the exporters are non-degree holders and degree holders,
accounting for 47%, but more educated ones being males.
Results of research questions
RQ1 To what extent do male and female exporters perceive the meaning of firm size, firm
age, prior international experience, management commitment to export business, firm-
level technology and international market knowledge differently?
The first question sought to explore the perceptions of the male and female exporters regarding
the export success factors from the literature. Table 1, Appendix, presents the categories and
subcategories which show their perceptions leading to the main themes from the responses. As
regards firm size, both groups have a fair understanding of the concept, yet the categories
revealed that the males have an expanded view of the concept. The perceptions concerning
foreign market knowledge show that both groups possess a fair understanding of the concept.
Regarding international experience, although the categories which emerged from both groups
are valid, the responses show that themales possess an extensive viewof the theme compared to
the femalesbased on themainmeaning ascribed in extant literature. Bothgroups showedagood
understanding of firm age, but there was also an expanded view exhibited by their male
counterpart. The results further show that both groups have an equally fair understanding of
firm-level technology. Regarding management commitment, again there is also an expanded
understanding of the male counterpart in terms of its relations to the export business.
RQ2 To what extent do the relevance that male and female exporters attach to extant
export success factors in research question one differs?
As can be seen in Table 2, the results of research question two are ranked. This is because
respondents were asked to rank which of the factors were more important to
Male Female
Factors Freq Percentage Freq Percentage
International experience 21 100 13 76
Age of firm 20 67 9 53
Number of employees 20 95 16 94
Table 2.
Perceptions of the Management commitment to export 20 95 15 88
relevance factors to Firm’s level of technology 20 67 16 94
export success by Foreign market knowledge 21 100 17 100
gender Source(s): Author 2020
internationalisation and/or export business from their view. Table 2 presents the results as Gender
follows. perception of
The second research question seeks to explore the perceptions of male and female export success
exporters regarding which of the factors are important to export success. The results show
that both the female and themale exporters perceive that the selected factors are important to factors
export business. The results further show that whilst their perceptions vary on five (5) out of
the six factors, their opinion converged on the importance of foreign market knowledge,
accounting for 100%confirmation of both groups. Although, themale exporters outweigh the
females, that is 21 versus 17; the results further show that most of the males jointly and
unanimously agree on the importance of the variables on the success of the export business,
whilst that of the females differs.
RQ3 To what extent do the relative strengths of the six selected factors to export success
differ between the male and female exporters?
Table 3 presents the perceptions of male exporters concerning the relative strengths of the
selected export success factors. The results from Table 3 show that the relative power of
the export success factors differs between males and females. As a result of the fact that the
factors are six (6), the following phrases: most important, moderately important and least
important are used to categorise the relative difference of the factors based on the frequencies.
Amongst the male exporters, they all did not agree equally on the importance of the factors.
First, all the male exporters perceived possessing foreign market knowledge and having
international experience as the most powerful export success factors, representing 100%
each. The results show that about 95% of males unanimously confirmed that firm size, firm
age, management commitment and firm-level technology as being the next bunch of factors
which equally impinge successfully on export business. Consequently, the male exporters
perceived export market knowledge and international experience as being the most
important export success factors whilst firm size, firm age, firm technology andmanagement
commitment as being the moderately important factors. Given the pattern of the results, the
perceptions of the male are categorised into two dimensions (i.e. most important and
moderately important factors) as shown in Table 3.
Table 4 presents the perception of female exporters regarding the relative importance of
the selected factors to export success. Like their male counterpart, all female exporters
perceived that the most important export success factors amongst the six variables are
foreign market knowledge, firm level of technology and the size of a firm and/or capacity,
representing 100%, 94% and 94% respectively. Besides, the moderately important factors
according to them are management commitment to export and international experience
Male
Factors Rank Freq Percentage
Most important
Foreign market knowledge 1 21 100
International experience 1 21 100
Moderately important
Number of employees 2 20 95
Management commitment 2 20 95 Table 3.
Age of firm 2 20 95 Relative importance of
Firm-level technology 2 20 95 export success factors
Source(s): Author 2020 by male exporters
AJEMS
Female
Factors Rank Freq Percentage
Most important factors
Foreign market knowledge 1 17 100
Firm-level technology 2 16 94
Number of employees 2 16 94
Moderate important factors
Management commitment export 3 15 88
International experience 4 13 76
Table 4.
Relative importance of Least important
export success factors Age of firm 5 9 53
by female exporters Source(s): Author, 2020
accounting for 88 and 76% respectively. The least important factor from the perception of the
female is firm age. Because the perception of the females was spread through the three
dimensions, they are analysed according to most important, moderately important and least
important as follows.
Overall, the differences regarding the responses of the male and female exporters on each
of the factors were examined using a non-parametric test approach of chi-square test of
independence. Using this test, the aim is to find out whether the proportion of males who
confirmed the importance of a particular export success factor significantly differs from the
confirmation of the females or vice-versa. In this analysis, the null hypothesis of each variable
is that there is a significant difference between the proportion of males who perceived the
importance of a particular variable compared to the proportion of females on the same
variables and/or they are not related. The result is presented in Table 5.
From Table 5, the chi-square test statistic is shown in column three (3) with its associated
p-values. Since the p-values are less than 0.05, the output shows that there is no evidence to
reject the null hypothesis that there are significant differences in the proportion of male
exporters and females regarding their perceptions of each variable. Implicitly there is a
significant difference between the male and female exporters regarding their perception of
each variable.
Number Gender and the variables Stata output Status
1 Gender and managers with international Pearson χ2(1) 5 34.0000 significant
experience Pr 5 0.000
2 Gender and the firm-level Technology Pearson χ2(1) 5 36.0000 significant
Pr 5 0.000
3 Gender and age of the firm Pearson χ2(1) 5 29.0000 significant
Pr 5 0.000
4 Gender and number of employees Pearson χ2(1) 5 36.0000 significant
Pr 5 0.000
5 Gender and knowledge of the foreign market Pearson χ2(1) 5 38.0000 significant
Pr 5 0.000
6 Gender and Top management’s commitment to Pearson χ2(1) 5 35.0000 significant
Table 5. Exporting Pr 5 0.000
Output of chi-square Note(s): Gender of the export chief executive officer (CEO) is coded as 1 5 Female and 0 5 Male
test of independence Source(s): Author, 2020
Discussion Gender
The paper sought to use the RBV of the firm (Barney, 1991) to explore whether the personal perception of
idiosyncratic perceptions of male and female exporters differ on extant export success factors. export success
Extant literature on the internationalisation of SMEs has confirmed that the success of every
small andmedium-sized enterprise in international business is dependent on themanagement of factors
certain key success factors. Six (6) key factors confirmed in extant literature over time in
different contexts (e.g. Nigeria, Ghana, theDemocratic Republic of Congo, SouthAfrica, Malawi,
Swaziland, Mozambique, Zambia, USA, UK, Brazil, Columbia, Slovenia, Poland, China, Kosovo,
Argentina, Spain,Malaysia, Portugal, France, Greece, Turkey,Belgium)which thepresent study
is based on include the size of the firm, firm age, prior international experience, firm technology,
management commitment and foreign market knowledge. Sample studies which confirm the
authenticity of these variables include, but are not limited to Khokhar (2018) and Alkhateeb
(2019), international experience; Babatunde (2016) and Faruk and Subudhi (2019), firm age; Coo
(2017), Tuhin and Swanepoel (2017) and Bekteshi (2020), firm size; Kotorri and Krasniqi (2018)
and Munawar et al. (2019), management commitment; Damijan et al. (2017), Uyar and Oralhan
(2017) andAlkhateeb (2019), firm-level of technology; Alkhateeb (2019), Lejpras (2019), Haddoud
et al. (2021), foreign market knowledge.
Previous studies (e.g. Moreira et al., 2019; Javadian and Richards, 2020), coupled with sample
theoretical frameworks (e.g. the gender-aware framework of women entrepreneurship (Bates
et al., 2007; Brush et al., 2009) and the social feminist theory (Fischer et al., 1993)) on the debates
have argued that gender variation internationalisation of SMEs is principally accounted for by
external factors which affect the actors (i.e. males and females). The paper diverts from the
existing line of research and argues that even where the playing field between male and female
exporters is levelled, the variation in entrepreneurship will still exist. Consequently, our
understanding of the issuewill not be full until the personality characteristics of both groups are
analysed from the perspective of the RBVof the firm (Barney, 1991). TheRBVwas usedbecause
it is the only theoretical framework from the internationalisation of SMEs’ field that takes into
account the personality characteristics of entrepreneurs as a critical part of a firm’s resource
stocks which must be understood (see Ruzzier et al., 2006). In total, the results show that both
groups have a fair understanding of the categories (see Table 1, Appendix), yet the analysis of
the responses indicates that the perceptions of themale exporters showamore expandedviewof
the success factors compared to the females. These results confirm the RBV theory (Barney,
1991) implying that besides themacro-level factors (Bates et al., 2007; Brush et al., 2009; Moreira
et al., 2019; Javadian and Richards, 2020), the personality make-up of both groups plays a very
critical role, which unfortunately have been overlooked by earlier researchers to shed a full light
on the topic.
These findings also imply that whilst other internationalisation models (e.g. the process
theory (Johnson and Valne, 1977); the network theory, Johanson and Mattsson, 1998) have
enriched our understanding regarding the internationalisation behaviour of SMEs, the RBV
of the firm (see Barney, 1991; Ruzzier et al., 2006), remains one of the best frameworks in
accounting for the internationalisation behaviour of the SMEs. The uniqueness of the RBV is
that, it explains the behaviour of SMEs’ internationalisation, including the personality
characteristics of the entrepreneurs. Using the RBV to understand how males and females
think, view and perceive the determinants of internationalisation success factors is critical
especially given that previous findings have settled on external factors to explain the
problem. The implicit assumption is that the internationalisation outcomes for males and
females are not only accounted for by external factors (e.g. culture, family responsibilities),
but the personality characteristics of both groups. Confirmation of the variables by both
groups in the study confirms the plausibility of extant findings as used as the conceptual
framework for this study (e.g. see Alkhateeb (2019), Bekteshi (2020), Haddoud et al. (2021)).
Regarding the importance and relative strengths of the factors, research questions two and
AJEMS three, the results show that the perception of the male exporters in some cases were more
uniform and convergent compared to the females. From Table 3, the responses of the males
were summarised into two divisions whilst that of the females were a bit fragmented
(Table 4). This also supports the argument that there is the likelihood of a problem of
perceptions accounting for gender differences in internationalisation, which is ignored by
previous research though a critical variable in internationalisation success of SMEs. The
results of the non-parametric test attest to the overall relative difference between the males
and females regarding their perceptions of the factors. Implicitly, our understanding of
gender differences in internationalisation will not be perfected without augmenting it with
the perspective of the RBV to extant models (e.g. gender-aware framework (Bates et al., 2007;
Brush et al., 2009) as well as the social feminist theory Fischer et al. (1993).
Furthermore, it canbe argued that thevariations in theperception ofmale and female exporters
regarding the export success factors in this study may be attributed to the concept of personality
and gender variations in entrepreneurship (see Bernardino et al., 2018). In the literature, five
personality traits namely: openness to experience (e.g. creativity), conscientiousness
(e.g. thoughtfulness), extraversion (e.g. sociability), agreeableness (e.g. kindness) and
neuroticism (e.g. emotional instability) (See Chell, 2008; Brandstatter, 2011). Following Chell
(2008), the complementary-contribution view in the field of management recognises the value of
the differences in the personality traits between males and females. For instance, Eagly and
Johannesen-Schmidt (2001) have argued that it is plausible to assume gender differences in
personality characteristics such as assertiveness, aggressiveness, ambitiousness, forcefulness,
daring and being competitive and their corresponding impacts on gender and entrepreneurship
outcomes. Researchers (e.g. Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001) associate personality traits such
as concern for welfare, affection and interpersonal sensitivity to females compared tomaleswhich
also have implications on entrepreneurship outcomes.
Conclusions
As a result of the advantages which accrue to firms that have international experience over
those that operate wholly in the domestic market, gender and entrepreneurship research has
been extended to internationalisation. Despite the importance of the topic, our knowledge is
limited. Amongst the limited studies on the topic, an emerging line of research is that gender
variation in internationalisation do exist and is principally influenced by external factors
(e.g. motherhood [family and household responsibilities], meso and/or macro external factors
[e.g. national-level policies, culture, economic factors, laws and regulations], business-level
factors [e.g. organisational level structures and structures in industries]) (Bates et al., 2007;
Brush et al., 2009; Javadian and Richards, 2020;Moreira et al., 2019).Whilst these studies have
moved the field forward to a greater degree, the present study uses the RBV theory of the firm
(Barney, 1991) to draw attention to a critical variable which has been ignored by earlier
researchers (i.e. components of the idiosyncratic characteristics of the owner entrepreneur).
Using quantitative descriptive research design based on frequencies and chi-square test of
independence, the results show that whilst the two groups agree on the relevance of the
variables in export business, thereby attesting to the plausibility of extant findings of the
variables, the perceptions of both groups differ. Specifically, the results implying that more
work is needed from policymakers, educators and researchers to address the mindset of the
entrepreneurs, a critical variable earlier research has ignored.
Implications of the study
The study makes four contributions to the gender and internationalisation research field.
First, it contributes to the empirical literature by offering a unique perspective regarding how
women andmen think, perceive and interpret export success factors and how that impacts on Gender
their internationalisation outcomes. Second whilst extant frameworks [(e.g. the gender-aware perception of
framework of women entrepreneurship (Bates et al., 2007; Brush et al., 2009) and social export success
feminist theory (Fischer et al., 1993)] have made an impressive contribution to our
understanding of what accounts for the gender difference in internationalisation, current factors
researches have overlooked the mindset of males and females in predicting
internationalisation success. Consequently, the present study brings a new dimension to
the discourse from the RBV theory of the firm to show that more work is needed from
educators, researchers and policymakers to address the mindset, including the personal
idiosyncratic characteristics of male and female actors in export business. In so doing, the
external validity of the RBV theory is confirmed.
Third, the paper responds to calls by researchers (e.g. Terjesen et al., 2011; Ratten and
Tajeddini, 2018; Kuschel and Labra, 2018; Javadian and Richards, 2020) to populate studies
on the topic to deepen our present understanding. Fourth, by using data from Ghana, West
Africa, the study sheds a fresh insight on the topic from an under-studied and under-
researched geographical context. By so doing, the paper again responds to calls to extend the
research topic to under-researched regions such as Africa (i.e. the gender and
internationalisation research given the scarcity of Africa region (Ratten and Tajeddini,
2018; Moreira et al., 2019). Fourth, the study sheds a fresh light on the topic from an under-
studied and a newgeographical context, Ghana to shed new insights into the topic, paying the
way for non-BRICS countries.
The results have practical implications. First, exporters must participate in targeted
education and training based on systematic research findings which impact export success.
Since socioeconomic development in developing countries such asGhana is low compared to the
advanced countries, one of the things that will address the knowledge gap in export success is
that both male and female exporters must work together as partners in the export business as
confirmed in the findings. Such partnership has the potential advantage of knowledge spillovers
to individual exporters (e.g. from male to female exporters). In addition, female exporters must
make a conscious effort to enrol in capacity building in export success factors.
From the policy standpoint, government ministries, departments and agencies whose
activities impact entrepreneurship (e.g. in the case of Ghana, the Ghana Enterprise Agency,
the Empretec Ghana and the National Entrepreneurship Program, Ghana [NEIP]) must
enhance their capacity-building efforts especially, targeted training programmes that aim to
expose entrepreneurs to export success factors through outputs from a systematic peer-
reviewed research. In this regard, working on the entrepreneurs’ mindset will be critically
important becausewith SMEs, the owner-managers are the centre of everything. In particular
special attention to female exporters regarding capacity building in export success will be
critical to bridging the knowledge gap in export success between males and females.
Limitations and implications for future research
Analysis of the personality as a key determinant in SMEs’ internationalisation success is
ignored in the field and future research must advance that, especially in different contexts. In
terms of limitation, the study is exploratory based on non-probability sampling methods
using descriptive frequency tables and chi-square test and so readers must bear these
limitations in mind in interpreting the results to improve future studies.
References
Abor, J. and Quartey, P. (2010), “Issues in SME development in Ghana and South Africa”, International
Research Journal of Finance and Economics, Vol. 39, pp. 218-228.
AJEMS Acar, F.P. (2015), “The effects of top management team composition on SME export performance: an
upper echelons perspective”, Central European Journal of Operations Research, Vol. 24 No. 4,
pp. 833-852, doi: 10.1007/s10100-015-0408-5.
Al-Dajani, H. and Marlow, S. (2010), “Impact of women’s home-based enterprise on family dynamics:
evidence from Jordan”, International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship,
Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 470-486, doi: 10.1177/0266242610370392.
Albaum, G., Strandskov, J., Duerr, E. and Dowd, L. (1994), International Marketing and Export
Management, 2nd ed., Addison-Wesley, MA.
Alkhateeb, M. (2019), “Impact of controllable factors on export performance of SMEs in Jordan”,
Chinese Business Review, Vol. 18 No. 4, doi: 10.17265/1537-1506/2019.04.003.
Amankwah-Amoah, J. (2017), “Cultivating greater self-confidence in African management research”,
Thunderbird International Business Review, Vol. 60 No. 4, pp. 511-522, doi: 10.1002/tie.21921.
Apergis, N. and Pekka-Economou, V. (2010), “Incentives and female entrepreneurial activity: evidence
from panel firm level data”, International Advances in Economic Research, Vol. 16 No. 4,
pp. 371-387, doi: 10.1007/s11294-010-9277-9.
Ayman, R. and Korabik, K. (2010), “Leadership: why gender and culture matter”, American
Psychologist, Vol. 65 No. 3, pp. 157-170, doi: 10.1037/a0018806.
Azar, G. and Ciabuschi, F. (2017), “Organisational innovation, technological innovation, and export
performance: the effects of innovation radicalness and extensiveness”, International Business
Review, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 324-336, doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.09.002.
Aziz, N.N.A. and Samad, S. (2016), “Innovation and competitive advantage: moderating effects of firm
age in foods manufacturing SMEs in Malaysia”, Procedia Economics and Finance, Vol. 35,
pp. 256-266, doi: 10.1016/s2212-5671(16)00032-0.
Babatunde, M.A. (2016), “Export propensity and intensity of Nigerian SMEs”, Journal of Small
Business and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 25-55, doi: 10.1080/08276331.2016.1248056.
Bahar, D., Hauptmann, A., O€zgu€zel, C. and Rapoport, H. (2018), “Let their knowledge flow: the effect of
returning refugees on export performance in the former Yugoslavia”, SSRN Electronic Journal,
CESifo Working Paper No. 7371, [Preprint], doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3338700.
Bahrami, Z., Ebrahimi, M.S., Khedri, G. and Azadi, H. (2023), “The role of entrepreneurial universities
in developing students’ awareness and improving post-graduation entrepreneurship
circumstances”, Higher Education for the Future, Vol. 10 No. 1, 234763112211411, doi: 10.
1177/23476311221141153.
Barney, J. (1991), “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 99-120, doi: 10.1177/014920639101700108.
Bates, T.C., Jackson, W.F. and Johnson, J.R. (2007), “Advancing research on minority
entrepreneurship”, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 613
No. 1, pp. 10-17, doi: 10.1177/0002716207303405.
Bekteshi, S.A. (2020), “Firm size related to export performance”, Journal of Economics and Business
Administration, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 51-61, available at: https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/ijebaa/
vviiiy2020i1p51-61.html
Bernardino, S., Freitas Santos, J. and Cadima Ribeiro, J. (2018), “Social entrepreneur and gender: what’s
personality got to do with it?”, International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 10
No. 1, pp. 61-82.
Bianchi, C. and Wickramasekera, R. (2016), “Antecedents of SME export intensity in a Latin American
Market”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 10, pp. 4368-4376, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.
02.041.
Boso, N., Adeola, O., Danso, A. and Assadinia, S. (2017), “The effect of export marketing capabilities
on export performance: moderating role of dysfunctional competition”, Industrial Marketing
Management, Vol. 78, pp. 137-145, doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.09.006.
Brandstatter, H. (2011), “Personality aspects of entrepreneurship: a look at five Meta-analyses”, Gender
Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 222-230. perception of
Brush, C.G., De Bruin, A. and Welter, F. (2009), “A gender-aware framework for women’s export success
entrepreneurship”, International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 8-24,
doi: 10.1108/17566260910942318. factors
Cabrera, E.M. and Mauricio, D. (2017), “Factors affecting the success of women’s entrepreneurship: a
review of literature”, International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 9 No. 1,
pp. 31-65, doi: 10.1108/ijge-01-2016-0001.
Celec, R. and Globocnik, D. (2017), “Benchmarking firm-level resources, capabilities, and postures
driving export performance of SMEs”, Nase Gospodarstvo, Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 47-58, doi: 10.1515/
ngoe-2017-0005.
Chell, E. (2008), The Entrepreneurial Personality: A Social Construction, Routledge, New York.
Chen, J., Sousa, C.M. and He, X. (2016), “The determinants of export performance: a review of the
literature 2006-2014”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 626-670.
Chen, J., Saarenketo, S. and Puumalainen, K. (2018), “Home country institutions, social value
orientation, and the internationalization of ventures”, International Business Review, Vol. 27
No. 2, pp. 443-454.
Coo, B. (2017), “Developing SMEs’ export success factors for distribution reinforcement”, Journal of
Distribution Science, Vol. 15 No. 10, pp. 65-80, doi: 10.15722/jds.15.10.201710.65.
Costa, J. and Pita, M. (2020), “Appraising entrepreneurship in Qatar under a gender perspective”,
International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 233-251, doi: 10.1108/
ijge-10-2019-0146.
Coviello, N. and Jones, M.V. (2004), “Methodological issues in international entrepreneurship research”,
Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 485-508, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2003.06.001.
Coviello, N. and Martin, K. (1999), “Internationalisation of Service SMEs: an integrated perspective from
the engineering consulting sector”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 42-66.
Dalli, D. (1995), “The organisation of exporting activities: relationships between internal and external
arrangements”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 34, pp. 107-115, doi: 10.1016/0148-2963(94)00059-n.
Damijan, J.P., Kostevc, C. and Rojec, M. (2017), “Exporting status and success in innovation: evidence
from CIS micro data for EU countries”, Journal of International Trade and Economic
Development, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 585-611, doi: 10.1080/09638199.2016.1271819.
De Bruin, A., Brush, C.G. and Welter, F. (2007), “Advancing a framework for coherent research on
women’s entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 323-339.
Dhliwayo, S. (2017), “Export experience and key success factors in cross-border trade: evidence from
Southern Africa”, Acta Commercii, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 1-9, doi: 10.4102/ac.v17i1.383.
Dilli, S. and Westerhuis, G. (2018), “How institutions and gender differences in education shape
entrepreneurial activity: a cross-national perspective”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 51 No. 2,
pp. 371-392, doi: 10.1007/s11187-018-0004-x.
Duberley, J. and Carrigan, M. (2013), “The career identities of ‘mumpreneurs’: women’s experiences of
combining enterprise and motherhood”, International Small Business Journal, Vol. 31 No. 6,
pp. 629-651, doi: 10.1177/0266242611435182.
Eagly, A. and Johannesen-Schmidt, M. (2001), “The leadership styles of women and men”, Journal of
Social Issues, Vol. 57 No. 4, pp. 781-797, doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00241.
Ennis, C.A. (2018), “The gendered complexities of promoting female entrepreneurship in the Gulf”,
New Political Economy, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 365-384, doi: 10.1080/13563467.2018.1457019.
Erdil, T.S. and O€zdemir, O. (2016), “The Determinants of relationship between marketing mix strategy
and drivers of export performance in foreign markets: an application on Turkish clothing
industry”, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 235, pp. 546-556, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.
2016.11.067.
AJEMS Escandon-Barbosa, D., Rialp-Criado, J., Fuerst, S., Rodriguez-Orejuela, A. and Castro-Aristizabal, G.
(2019), “Born global: the influence of international orientation on export performance”, Heliyon,
Vol. 5 No. 11, e02688, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02688.
Etemad, H. (2004), “Internationalisation of small and medium-sized enterprises: a grounded theoretical
framework and an overview”, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 21
No. 1, pp. 1-2.
European Commission (2014), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/Enterprise/Policies/SMEs/ (accessed 24
March 2014).
Falahat, M., Ramayah, T., Soto-Acosta, P. and Lee, Y.Y. (2020), “SMEs internationalisation: the role of
product innovation, market intelligence, pricing and marketing communication capabilities as
drivers of SMEs’ international performance”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change,
Vol. 152, 119908, doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119908.
Faruk, O. and Subudhi, R.N. (2019), “Export performance of SMEs:A review of firm-level controllable
determinants”, Parikalpana: KIIT Journal of Management, Vol. 15 Nos 1 and 2, p. 112, doi: 10.
23862/kiit-parikalpana/2019/v15/i1-2/190177.
Fernando, Y., Fitrianingrum, A. and Richardson, C. (2017), “Organisational determinants of export
performance: evidence from exporting firms in Batam, Indonesia”, International Journal of
Business Excellence, Vol. 11 No. 1, p. 95, doi: 10.1504/ijbex.2017.080607.
Fischer, E., Reuber, A.R. and Dyke, L.S. (1993), “A theoretical overview and extension of research on sex,
gender, and entrepreneurship”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 151-168, doi: 10.
1016/0883-9026(93)90017-y.
Fuchs, M. and K€ostner, M. (2016), “Antecedents and consequences of firm’s export marketing
strategy”, Management Research Review, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 329-355, doi: 10.1108/mrr-07-
2014-0158.
Galati, A., Crescimanno, M., Tinervia, S., Iliopoulos, C. and Theodorakopoulou, I. (2017), “Internal
resources as tools to increase the global competition: the Italian wine industry case”, British
Food Journal, Vol. 119 No. 11, pp. 2406-2420, doi: 10.1108/bfj-02-2017-0092.
Gimenez, D. and Calabro, A. (2018), “The salient role of institutions in Women’s entrepreneurship:
a critical review and agenda for future research”, International Entrepreneurship and
Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 857-882, doi: 10.1007/s11365-017-0480-5.
GRA (Ghana Revenue Authority) (2018), “List of companies”, available at: www.gra.gov.gh/docs/info/
Itos_22nd.pdf
Haddoud, M.Y., Jones, P.W. and Newbery, R. (2021), “Export intention in developing countries:
a configuration approach to managerial success factors”, Journal of Small Business
Management, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 107-135, doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12470.
Henry, C., Orser, B., Coleman, S. and Foss, L. (2017), “Women’s entrepreneurship policy: a 13 nation
cross-country comparison”, International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 9 No. 3,
pp. 206-228, doi: 10.1108/ijge-07-2017-0036.
Hodges, N., Watchravesringkan, K., Yurchisin, J., Karpova, E., Marcketti, S., Hegland, J. and Childs, M.
(2015), “Women and apparel entrepreneurship”, International Journal of Gender and
Entrepreneurship, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 191-213, doi: 10.1108/ijge-07-2014-0021.
Hollensen, S. (2004), Global Marketing: A Decision-oriented Approach, Pearson Education, Harlow.
Javadian, G. and Richards, D. (2020), “Examining gendered variations in the internationalisation of
businesses”, International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, Vol. 19 No. 2,
p. 126, doi: 10.1504/ijmed.2020.107399.
Jena, R.K. (2020), “Measuring the impact of business management Student’s attitude towards
entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial intention: a case study”, Computers in Human
Behavior, Vol. 107, 106275, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106275.
Johanson, J. and Mattsson, L.G. (1988), “Internationalization in industrial systems—a network
approach”, in Hood, N. (Ed.), Strategies for Global Competition, Croom Helm, London.
Johanson, J. and Vahlne, J.-E. (1977), “The internationalisation process of the firm—a model of Gender
knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments”, Journal of International
Business Studies, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 23-32, doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490676. perception of
export success
Kelley, D.J., Baumer, B.S., Brush, C., Greene, P.G., Mahdavi, M., Majbouri, M., Cole, M., Dean, M. and
Heavlow, R. (2017), “Women’s entrepreneurship 2016/2017 report”, Global Entrepreneurship factors
Research Association.
Khokhar, S. (2018), “Determinants of export performance of SMEs: an empirical analysis of literature
pertained to India”, International Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol. 9 No. 8, pp. 91-101.
Kim-Soon, N., Mostafa, M., Mohammed, A. and Ahmad, A. (2015), “Export market orientation and
organisational knowledge enhance export market performance”, International Business
Research, Vol. 8 No. 12, p. 80, doi: 10.5539/ibr.v8n12p80.
Kotorri, M. and Krasniqi, B.A. (2018), “Managerial characteristics and export performance – empirical
evidence from Kosovo”, South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. 13 No. 2,
pp. 32-48, doi: 10.2478/jeb-2018-0008.
Krammer, S., Strange, R. and Lashitew, A.A. (2018), “The export performance of emerging economy
firms: the influence of firm capabilities and institutional environments”, International Business
Review, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 218-230, doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2017.07.003.
Kuada, J. (2009), “Gender, social networks, and entrepreneurship in Ghana”, Journal of African
Business, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 85-103, doi: 10.1080/15228910802701445.
Kuschel, K. and Labra, J.-P. (2018), “Developing entrepreneurial identity among start-ups’ female
founders in high-tech: policy implications from the Chilean case”, A Research Agenda for
Women and Entrepreneurship, pp. 27-44, doi: 10.4337/9781785365379.00007.
Lejpras, A. (2019), “Determinants of export performance: differences between service and manufacturing
SMEs”, Service Business, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 171-198, doi: 10.1007/s11628-018-0376-7.
Leonidou, L.C., Fotiadis, T.A., Christodoulides, P., Spyropoulou, S. and Katsikeas, C.S. (2015),
“Environmentally friendly export business strategy: its determinants and effects on
competitive advantage and performance”, International Business Review, Vol. 24 No. 5,
pp. 798-811, doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2015.02.001.
Lin, S., Mercier-Suissa, C. and Salloum, C. (2016), “The Chinese-born globals of the Zhejiang Province:
a Study on the key factors for their rapid internationalisation”, Journal of International
Entrepreneurship, Vol. 14, pp. 75-95.
Love, J.H., Roper, S. and Zhou, Y. (2016), “Experience, age and exporting performance in UK SMEs”,
International Business Review, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 806-819, doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2015.10.001.
Madsen, S.R. and Andrade, M.S. (2018), “Unconscious gender bias: implications for women’s
leadership development”, Journal of Leadership Studies, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 62-67, doi: 10.1002/
jls.21566.
McAuley, A. (1999), “Research into the internationalisation process: advice to an alien”, Journal of
Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 11-17, doi: 10.1108/
14715209980001552.
McAuley, A. (2010), “Looking back, going forward: reflecting on research into the SME
internationalisation process”, Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 12
No. 1, pp. 21-41, doi: 10.1108/14715201011060858.
McDougall, P.P., Covin, J.G., Robinson, R.B. Jr and Herron, L. (1994), “The effects of industry growth
and strategic breadth on new venture performance and strategy content”, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 15 No. 7, pp. 537-554, doi: 10.1002/smj.4250150704.
Meschi, P.-X., Ricard, A. and Tapia Moore, E. (2017), “Fast and furious or slow and cautious? The joint
impact of age at internationalisation, speed, and risk diversity on the survival of exporting
firms”, Journal of International Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 279-291, doi: 10.1016/j.intman.
2017.01.001.
AJEMS Mohammed, A.R.A. (2018), “Determinants of export survival: the case of Ghanaian manufacturers”,
Journal of Quantitative Methods, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 37-61, doi: 10.29145/2018/jqm/020102.
Moreira, J., Marques, C.S., Braga, A. and Ratten, V. (2019), “A systematic review of women’s
entrepreneurship and internationalisation literature”, Thunderbird International Business
Review, Vol. 61 No. 4, pp. 635-648, doi: 10.1002/tie.22045.
Munawar, F., Rahayu, A., Disman, D. and Wibowo, L.A. (2019), “Management commitment and
partner relationship program toward export performance of handicraft industry”, Proceedings
of the 1st International Conference on Economics, Business, Entrepreneurship, and Finance
(ICEBEF 2018), [Preprint], doi: 10.2991/icebef-18.2019.34.
Nightingale, A. (2006), “The nature of gender: work, gender, and environment”, Environment and
Planning D: Society and Space, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 165-185, doi: 10.1068/d01k.
Onkelinx, J., Manolova, T.S. and Edelman, L.F. (2016), “The human factor: investments in employee
human capital, productivity, and SME internationalisation”, Journal of International
Management, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 351-364, doi: 10.1016/j.intman.2016.05.002.
Oura, M.M., Zilber, S.N. and Lopes, E.L. (2016), “Innovation capacity, international experience and
export performance of SMEs in Brazil”, International Business Review, Vol. 25 No. 4,
pp. 921-932, doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2015.12.002.
Pascucci, F., Bartoloni, S. and Gregori, G.L. (2016), “Export market orientation and international
performance in the context of SMEs”, Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 28
No. 5, pp. 361-375, doi: 10.1080/08276331.2016.1167528.
Petridou, E. and Glaveli, N. (2008), “Rural women entrepreneurship within co-operatives: training
support”, Gender in Management: An International Journal, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 262-277, doi: 10.
1108/17542410810878077.
Pickernell, D., Jones, P., Thompson, P. and Packham, G. (2016), “Determinants of SME exporting”, The
International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 31-42, doi: 10.5367/
ijei.2016.0208.
Purwanto, S., Setiawan, M., Rohman, F. and Indrawati, N.K. (2018), “Financial assistance, marketing
assistance and export commitment to improve export performance”, European Research Studies
Journal, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 69-91, doi: 10.35808/ersj/1104.
Radicic, D. and Djalilov, K. (2019), “The impact of technological and non-technological innovations on
export intensity in SMEs”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 26 No. 4,
pp. 612-638, doi: 10.1108/jsbed-08-2018-0259.
Ratten, V. and Tajeddini, K. (2018), “Women’s entrepreneurship and internationalisation: patterns and
trends”, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. 38 No. 10, pp. 780-793, doi: 10.
1108/ijssp-01-2018-0001.
Rauf, A., Ma, Y. and Jalil, A. (2019), “Revisiting the innovation-export nexus using industry-level data:
evidence from China’s large- and medium-sized industrial enterprises”, International Journal of
Economics and Financial Issues, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 73-80, doi: 10.32479/ijefi.7942.
Reis, J.F. and Forte, R. (2016), “The impact of industry characteristics on firms’ export intensity”,
International Area Studies Review, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 266-281, doi: 10.1177/2233865916646560.
Ruzzier, M., Antoncic, B. and Konecnik, M. (2006), “The Resource-based approach to the
internationalisation of SMEs: differences in resource bundles between internationalised and
non-internationalised companies”, Zagreb International Review of Economics and Business,
Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 95-116, available at: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:zag:zirebs:v:9:y:2006:i:
2:p:95-116
Schwartz, E.B. (1976), “Entrepreneurship-New female Frontier”, Journal of Contemporary Business,
Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 47-76.
Serrano, R., Acero, I. and Fernandez-Olmos, M. (2016), “Networks and export performance of agri-food
firms: new evidence linking micro and macro determinants”, Agricultural Economics
(Zemedelska Ekonomika), Vol. 62 No. 10, pp. 459-470, doi: 10.17221/71/2015-agricecon.
Smith, S.E., Hamilton, M. and Fabian, K. (2020), “Entrepreneurial drivers, barriers and enablers of Gender
computing students: gendered perspectives from an Australian and UK university”, Studies in
Higher Education, Vol. 45 No. 9, pp. 1892-1905, doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1637840. perception of
export success
Sraha, G., Sharma, R.R., Crick, D. and Crick, J.M. (2020), “International experience, commitment,
distribution adaptation and performance: a study of Ghanaian firms in B2B export markets”, factors
Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 11, pp. 1715-1738.
Tajeddini, K., Ratten, V. and Denisa, M. (2017), “Female tourism entrepreneurs in Bali, Indonesia”,
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 31, pp. 52-58, doi: 10.1016/j.jhtm.2016.
10.004.
Terjesen, S., Couto, E.B. and Francisco, P.M. (2011), “Does the presence of independent and female
directors impact firm performance? A multi-country study of board diversity”, Journal of
Management and Governance, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 447-483, doi: 10.1007/s10997-014-9307-8.
Tuhin, R. and Swanepoel, J.A. (2017), “Export behaviour and business performance: evidence from
Australian microdata”, Department of Industry, Innovation and Science Research Paper,
Vol. 7, pp. 1-23.
Ursic, M. and Czinkota, M. (2015), “The relationship between managerial characteristics and exporting
behavior”, Proceedings of the 1989 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference,
pp. 208-211, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-17055-8_42.
US Small Business Administration (SBA) (2014), available at: https://www.sba.gov (accessed 25
November 2014).
Uyar, K. and Oralhan, B. (2017), “Innovation capability and export performance of Turkish export
firms”, Chinese Business Review, Vol. 16 No. 10, pp. 481-495.
Yu, Y. and Lindsay, V. (2015), “Export commitment and the global financial crisis: perspectives from
the New Zealand wine industry”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 54 No. 2,
pp. 771-797, doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12171.
Zahoor, N., Al-Tabbaa, O., Khan, Z. and Wood, G. (2020), “Collaboration and internationalisation of
SMEs: insights and recommendations from a systematic review”, International Journal of
Management Reviews, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 427-456, doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12238.
Corresponding author
Obi Berko Obeng Damoah can be contacted at: obodamoah@ug.edu.gh
AJEMS Appendix
Gender of
Main themes respondents Categories Sub-categories
Firm size Females Firm capacity Total capital
Total assets
Lands and equipment
Machines
Males Firm capacity All workers and total resources
Total assets
Total investment capital
Money value of all assets
Foreign market Females Foreign market Nature of foreign demand
knowledge awareness Foreign pricing
Foreign government import
regulations
Specifications
Males Foreign market Foreign tastes and preferences
awareness Countries with the most immigrants
Specifications
Foreign government import
regulations
Foreign pricing
International Females Familiarity in foreign Frequent foreign travel
experience countries Foreign connections
Previous stay abroad
Having foreign partners
Males Familiarity in foreign Previous stay abroad
countries Previous foreign work experience
Extensive foreign experience
Collaboration with foreign partners
Working with foreign partners
Firm age Females Firm years in business Calendar years of a firm
The age of a business
Years in business
Males Firm years in business Age of a firm since formation
Firm experience in business
Calendar years in business
Age to date
Firm technology Females Firm known-how Machines
Foreign machines
Foreign equipment
Process change
Males Firm known-how Innovation and inventions
New production methods
New processes
Known how in business
Management Females Management The seriousness of managers
commitment motivation Managers total interests
Managers’ concern for the firm
Males Management General motivation for export
Table A1. motivation Proportion of resources allocated to
Themes and sub- export
themes developed from General aggressiveness of managers
the responses using the Management time for exporting
deductive approach activities