Breaking Barriers: How Socio-Cultural Factors Moderate the Relationship Between Strategic Determinants and Women-Led SME Performance Across Diverse Cultures

Tom Ongesa Nyamboga

doi:10.12688/f1000research.167596.2

Home Browse Breaking Barriers: How Socio-Cultural Factors Moderate the Relationship...

ALL Metrics

-

Views

-

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Review

Revised

Breaking Barriers: How Socio-Cultural Factors Moderate the Relationship Between Strategic Determinants and Women-Led SME Performance Across Diverse Cultures

[version 2; peer review: 1 approved with reservations, 1 not approved]

Tom Ongesa Nyamboga

PUBLISHED 14 May 2026

Author details Author details

business administration, Kampala International University - Western Campus, Bushenyi, Western Region, Uganda

Tom Ongesa Nyamboga
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Women-led small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are vital drivers of economic growth, innovation, and employment, yet their performance is often constrained by socio-cultural barriers that limit the effectiveness of strategic factors such as innovation, market positioning, risk management, and access to resources. This narrative review examines how socio-cultural factors moderate the relationship between strategic determinants and the performance of women-led SMEs across diverse cultural contexts. A systematic search of peer-reviewed literature published between 2015 and 2025 identified 100 relevant studies, which were analysed using thematic synthesis to identify key patterns and moderating effects. The review finds that rigid gender norms, societal attitudes, educational attainment, religious beliefs, family responsibilities, and institutional structures significantly diminish the impact of business strategies by restricting women’s decision-making power and hindering engagement with critical business networks and institutional support systems. Strategic initiatives that are highly effective in theory, such as innovation adoption and market positioning, often produce suboptimal outcomes when socio-cultural constraints are unaddressed, and the strength of these moderating effects varies across regions and cultural settings. These findings highlight the importance of context-sensitive approaches that integrate socio-cultural awareness into enterprise development strategies. For policymakers and practitioners, this review underscores the necessity of designing culturally informed interventions that enhance women’s strategic capabilities, reduce structural limitations, and foster equitable access to resources and networks. Embedding socio-cultural considerations into strategy formulation represents a novel pathway to strengthen competitiveness and promote sustainable growth in women-led SMEs, offering actionable insights for global enterprise development initiatives.

Keywords

Strategic Determinants, Women-led SMEs, Social Cultural Barriers, SMEs Performance, Diverse Cultures

Corresponding author: Tom Ongesa Nyamboga

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Copyright: © 2026 Ongesa Nyamboga T. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Ongesa Nyamboga T. Breaking Barriers: How Socio-Cultural Factors Moderate the Relationship Between Strategic Determinants and Women-Led SME Performance Across Diverse Cultures [version 2; peer review: 1 approved with reservations, 1 not approved]. F1000Research 2026, 14:1140 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167596.2) First published: 20 Oct 2025, 14:1140 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167596.1) Latest published: 14 May 2026, 14:1140 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167596.2)

Revised Amendments from Version 1

The revised manuscript addresses the reviewer’s major concerns by restructuring the title, abstract, and keywords for clarity and impact, and explicitly stating the research gap, highlighting the lack of systematic understanding of how socio-cultural factors moderate strategic determinants and performance across diverse contexts. The narrative review approach is justified, emphasizing its suitability for synthesizing context-rich, qualitative findings and developing a conceptual framework. The methodology now provides a detailed search strategy, including the full Boolean search string, databases, and search dates, alongside a thorough explanation of thematic analysis using both deductive and inductive coding, with software and coding procedures specified. A formal quality assessment of the 100 included studies is incorporated using standard criteria, ensuring critical appraisal. Findings sections have been rewritten to move beyond description, offering synthesis, analysis, and identification of patterns and contradictions across regions. Discussions explicitly interpret results, link insights to Entrepreneurial Orientation and Gender Role Theory, and situate findings within existing literature. Limitations are elaborated to reflect interpretive constraints and potential publication bias. Finally, actionable future research directions are provided, including mixed-methods longitudinal designs, quantitative testing of moderating relationships, and exploration of socio-cultural enablers such as male allies and inclusive networks.

To read any peer review reports and author responses for this article, follow the "read" links in the Open Peer Review table.

Introduction

Women led SMEs operate within complex environments where strategic success factors such as access to resources, effective market positioning, risk management, and innovation are significantly influenced by prevailing socio-cultural conditions.^1,2 These factors are not experienced equally by all entrepreneurs; cultural norms, institutional structures, and societal expectations often constrain the strategic choices available to women, limiting their access to opportunities and reducing their autonomy in decision making processes.^3–5 Traditional gender roles, coupled with family responsibilities and community perceptions, further shape the entrepreneurial paths women follow, often creating barriers that men do not typically encounter in business settings.⁶

Socio cultural factors can both support and constrain the strategic choices available to women in business contexts.⁷ Education and institutional support often enhance innovation and improve access to vital resources, enabling women to pursue competitive strategies. In contrast, restrictive cultural norms and certain religious beliefs may limit women’s mobility in the market and reduce their willingness or ability to take entrepreneurial risks.¹ Family structures can provide emotional and practical support that fosters resilience, yet traditional caregiving responsibilities frequently limit the time and energy women can dedicate to business growth.^8,9 Understanding the strategic behavior and long-term sustainability of women led enterprises therefore requires a broader cultural perspective that considers the diverse social forces shaping entrepreneurial experiences.¹⁰

This review adopts an integrated framework that brings together strategic management and socio-cultural analysis to examine women led SMEs.¹ Unlike conventional studies that focus primarily on financial or operational challenges, this approach emphasizes the interplay between societal attitudes, religious beliefs, education, family responsibilities, gender norms, and institutional arrangements with core business strategies such as resource access, market positioning, risk management, and innovation.¹¹ By merging these perspectives, the review moves beyond standard business models to uncover how cultural and institutional dynamics influence entrepreneurial outcomes and shape the strategic direction of women led enterprises.^12,13

Earlier studies have acknowledged gender-based barriers to entrepreneurship,^14–16 but this research advances the discussion by directly linking socio cultural influences such as gender roles and religious beliefs to strategic decisions including market positioning and risk management. This integrated approach aims to provide a deeper understanding of the lived experiences of women entrepreneurs, highlighting how cultural contexts shape their strategic behavior and influence enterprise outcomes across diverse settings.

Women led SMEs face persistent structural and socio cultural barriers that drive performance gaps. Gender bias in financial systems and institutional weaknesses limit credit access to women,^17,18 while societal norms confine women to low growth sectors.¹⁹ Family expectations further hinder risk taking,²⁰ and unequal access to education, technology, and networks restricts women’s innovation.²¹ While prior research has identified these socio cultural barriers, a systematic understanding of how they moderate the relationship between specific strategic determinants such as innovation, market positioning, risk management, and resource access and performance across diverse cultural contexts is lacking.

This review therefore explores how socio cultural factors influence the performance of women led SMEs by shaping the strategic determinants previously discussed. A narrative review was chosen over a systematic review to synthesise diverse, context rich qualitative findings and to develop a conceptual framework that captures the complexity of socio cultural influences across different settings. Drawing on Entrepreneurial Orientation and Gender Role Theory, the study highlights the importance of aligning business strategy with cultural context to address barriers and harness emerging opportunities. This integrated framework offers practical insights for policy makers and development agencies, strengthening both strategic management and gender focused research by presenting a contextually grounded understanding of women entrepreneurs’ performance in an increasingly globalised economy.

The research objectives of this study are as follows:

a. To examine the influence of strategic determinants of resources, market positioning, risk management, and innovation on the performance of women-led SMEs in diverse cultural contexts.
b. To analyze the moderating role of socio-cultural factors, including societal attitudes, religious beliefs, education, family dynamics, gender roles, and legal and institutional frameworks, in shaping the strategic decisions of women entrepreneurs.
c. To investigate the interplay between strategic and socio-cultural forces, identifying how these interactions impact business growth, competitiveness, and sustainability in women-led SMEs.
d. To identify key barriers and enablers within different cultural settings that affect women entrepreneurs’ access to resources, market opportunities, and innovation potential.
e. To provide policy and practical recommendations aimed at fostering inclusive entrepreneurial ecosystems that support the growth and sustainability of women-led SMEs.

Materials and methods

This narrative review employed a qualitative approach guided by thematic analysis^22,23 to examine how socio cultural factors and strategic determinants influence the performance of women led SMEs. The review synthesised findings from 100 peer-reviewed articles published between 2015 and 2025, aiming to reveal patterns and mechanisms through which socio cultural barriers moderate strategic outcomes across diverse contexts.

Data collection methods and search strategy

Data were sourced from Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The search was conducted between 1 March and 30 April 2025. The exact Boolean search string was: (“women-led SME*” OR “female entrepreneur*”) AND (“socio-cultural” OR “gender norm*”) AND (“strategic determinant*” OR “enterprise performance” OR “business performance”). Studies included empirical or conceptual research explicitly linking socio cultural factors to strategic determinants and performance of women led SMEs. Key information extracted from each study included study context, theoretical framework, strategic factors, socio cultural moderators, and reported outcomes.

Screening and inclusion criteria

A three-stage screening process ensured relevance and quality. Stage one involved title and abstract screening, stage two involved full-text evaluation for alignment with research objectives, and stage three involved citation tracking. Inclusion criteria were: peer-reviewed studies published between 2015 and 2025, English-language publications, and studies addressing socio cultural moderators of strategic determinants in women led SMEs.

Exclusion criteria

Studies published before 2015 were excluded to maintain currency. Articles without theoretical grounding or based solely on anecdotal evidence were omitted. Single-case studies with limited generalisability and studies not linking socio cultural factors to strategic performance were excluded.

Data analysis and thematic coding

Thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo 12. Deductive coding applied theory-driven categories based on Entrepreneurial Orientation and Gender Role Theory, including societal attitudes, family dynamics, institutional frameworks, and strategic determinants. Inductive coding identified emerging themes such as digital infrastructure, microfinance, and public-private collaborations. The analysis followed Braun and Clarke’s six-step process: familiarisation with data, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes, and producing the final report. Frequency, contextual relevance, and evidence strength were considered in theme development.

Quality assessment and rigour enhancement

Study quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist for qualitative research and a custom checklist for mixed-methods studies, evaluating clarity of aims, appropriateness of methodology, data collection, analysis rigor, and relevance. The overall evidence base was considered moderate to high, with the majority of studies demonstrating methodological transparency and consistency. Peer debriefing and memo writing supported reflexivity, ensuring transparency and minimising bias.

Control of subjective interpretations

To enhance reliability and transparency in thematic analysis, the study incorporated specific procedures to manage subjectivity. Coding was conducted using NVivo software, with an initial set of deductive codes derived from literature on socio-cultural factors and strategic determinants, and inductive codes emerging from the data. To improve coding reliability, peer review steps were implemented: a second researcher independently coded a random sample of 20% of the articles, and discrepancies were resolved through discussion and consensus. Reflexivity was operationalized by maintaining detailed memos and coding journals, documenting analytic decisions such as theme inclusion, interpretation of ambiguous findings, and adjustments made when new patterns emerged. For example, the decision to classify digital financial inclusion as a socio-cultural enabler was explicitly recorded, reflecting reflexive consideration of context. These measures ensured that thematic findings were transparent, consistent, and grounded in the data, reducing subjective bias and enhancing the credibility of the review.

Theoretical framework implications

This review integrates Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) Theory and Gender Role Theory to examine the performance of women led SMEs. EO Theory emphasizes strategic traits such as risk taking, innovation, and proactiveness as key drivers of firm success.^24,25 However, EO often assumes a level playing field, overlooking how gender norms restrict women’s autonomy and decision making in entrepreneurial contexts.^26–28 Gender Role Theory complements EO by illustrating how societal expectations, religious norms, and institutional biases shape women’s roles and constrain their participation in strategic decision making.^1,29–31 Education levels and family dynamics further influence women’s behavior in areas such as innovation and risk taking.^32,33 While EO explains strategic intent, it fails to address the socio-cultural barriers that women navigate. Gender Role Theory highlights these constraints but lacks the strategic focus to explain how women adapt their business practices. Integrating EO and Gender Role Theory provides a more comprehensive view of how cultural norms shape entrepreneurial strategies in restrictive settings.^34,35

Findings of literature review

The explanations of these results are based on how Socio-cultural factors moderate the relationship between strategic determinants and the performance of women-operated SMEs, as illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Conceptual framework.

Institutional frameworks, gender bias, resource access and performance of women led SMEs

Institutional frameworks, encompassing both formal and informal rules, critically shape the performance of women led SMEs by influencing access to finance, business networks, and infrastructure.³⁶ Evidence from Kenya^37,38 indicates that gender-based lending practices and stringent collateral requirements significantly restrict credit access, particularly in contexts where land ownership is predominantly male. While similar constraints are observed in India,^39,40 domestic responsibilities further limit women’s participation in networks and training, suggesting that institutional barriers intersect with cultural expectations to compound strategic disadvantages. In Nigeria^41,42 poor road infrastructure disrupts supply chains for women in agricultural enterprises, illustrating how physical infrastructure can directly affect enterprise performance. By contrast, digital financial inclusion initiatives in Bangladesh⁴³ demonstrate that technology can mitigate these institutional constraints, enhancing access to financial services and expanding market opportunities. These findings suggest that institutional interventions are context dependent: measures effective in one sector or country may not transfer seamlessly to others, particularly technology or service-based enterprises.

Across the evidence base, patterns emerge highlighting the interplay between formal regulations, cultural norms, and strategic outcomes. For example, inclusive lending and property rights reforms consistently correlate with improved access to resources,^44–46 yet the magnitude of their impact is moderated by entrenched societal norms. Contradictions are apparent when comparing contexts: in Pakistan, religious norms often restrict women’s financial participation, whereas in Indonesia, Islamic microfinance provides culturally aligned avenues for resource access, illustrating that socio cultural factors can function as both barriers and enablers depending on local interpretations of institutional rules.^47,48 This comparison underscores the need for contextually tailored strategies rather than universal policy prescriptions. Overall, the evidence suggests that strengthening institutional frameworks alone is insufficient; interventions must simultaneously address cultural, gendered, and infrastructural constraints to enhance the strategic capabilities and performance of women led SMEs.

Societal attitudes, religious beliefs, education, market positioning and performance of women led SMEs

Societal attitudes and religious beliefs exert a powerful influence on the market positioning of women led SMEs, often limiting them to low growth sectors in traditionally patriarchal contexts.^49,50 Evidence from Saudi Arabia^51,52 demonstrates that policy reforms under Vision 2030 have begun to mitigate these barriers by actively promoting women’s participation in industries historically dominated by men, suggesting that government-led interventions can reshape entrenched norms. In contrast, in Pakistan,⁵³ religious and cultural norms continue to restrict women’s access to financial resources, constraining both business expansion and strategic decision making. Interestingly, Indonesia^47,48 illustrates how similar religious frameworks can function as enablers rather than barriers, with Islamic microfinance offering culturally aligned, interest-free loans and supportive services that empower women entrepreneurs. These contrasting outcomes underscore that socio-cultural factors interact with local institutional and financial mechanisms, making context-specific strategies essential.

Access to quality education and targeted entrepreneurial training further shapes women’s strategic capabilities.^54–56 Studies indicate that educational interventions strengthen digital literacy, business acumen, and innovation capacity, which in turn enable broader participation in competitive markets. Complementary public and private sector initiatives, such as mobile banking programs in Bangladesh,^57–59 have enhanced financial inclusion and improved market access, demonstrating the potential for coordinated institutional support to reinforce educational gains. While these interventions are promising, their transferability across sectors and regions remains uncertain, as contextual norms and infrastructure continue to mediate their effectiveness. Overall, the synthesis suggests that addressing societal attitudes and religious constraints in combination with educational and institutional initiatives is critical for enabling women led SMEs to expand into higher growth sectors. Targeted measures, including scholarships, tailored training programs, and culturally sensitive financial inclusion reforms, emerge as key strategies for fostering equitable market participation and sustainable enterprise performance.

Family dynamics, institutional frameworks, risk management and performance of women led SMEs

Risk management is critical for the sustainability and growth of women led SMEs, with both family dynamics and institutional frameworks shaping strategic decisions.¹⁷ Evidence from India^60,61 suggests that traditional gender norms confine women to low risk sectors, limiting access to higher growth opportunities. Conversely, supportive family structures⁶² appear to facilitate risk taking, fostering innovation and encouraging engagement in more ambitious business ventures. These findings highlight that family support functions as a contextual moderator, enhancing the effectiveness of strategic initiatives where cultural expectations may otherwise restrict women’s entrepreneurial autonomy.

Institutional deficiencies further constrain women’s capacity to manage risk effectively. Weak legal enforcement in Kenya,^63–65 for instance, limits business expansion and reduces incentives for investment, whereas targeted interventions such as Rwanda’s Women’s Guarantee Fund⁶⁶ demonstrate how tailored support can mitigate financial risks and stimulate enterprise growth. Evidence from Nigeria^67–70 indicates that financial literacy and risk management training improve profitability and resilience in the agribusiness sector; however, these sector-specific successes raise questions about the transferability of such interventions to technology or service-based SMEs. Similarly, inclusive financial systems in Bangladesh⁷¹ have enhanced access to credit and insurance, enabling women entrepreneurs to undertake strategic risks that would otherwise be constrained by both socio-cultural and institutional barriers.

The synthesis of these studies reveals a pattern: effective risk management for women led SMEs requires simultaneous attention to family support, institutional reforms, and targeted financial interventions. Advancing gender balanced legal frameworks, strengthening institutional enforcement, and integrating culturally sensitive financial tools emerge as essential strategies to promote equitable entrepreneurship, enhance strategic decision making, and support sustainable growth across diverse business contexts.

Education, societal attitudes, innovation and performance of women led SMEs

Innovation among women entrepreneurs is closely linked to access to both formal and informal education, which builds business, technical, and digital competencies.^72,73 Evidence from rural Pakistan^74,75 indicates that limited educational opportunities restrict innovation, compelling women to rely on outdated practices and constraining enterprise growth. In contrast, well-established educational systems in Finland⁷⁶ enable women to adopt digital technologies and expand business operations, illustrating the critical role of systemic educational support in fostering innovative capacity. These regional contrasts highlight that education functions not only as a skill-building mechanism but also as a moderator of the relationship between strategic determinants and performance.

Cultural norms and restrictive gender expectations further shape innovation outcomes. In India,^77–82 societal attitudes in the technology sector limit access to funding and deter risk taking, thereby suppressing innovative potential even when technical skills are present. By contrast, interventions in Canada and Rwanda^83–85 demonstrate that targeted programs in sectors such as fintech and healthcare can successfully overcome structural and socio-cultural barriers, enabling women entrepreneurs to translate skills into innovative business practices. This suggests that the effectiveness of education and training is contingent upon complementary institutional and societal support.

Synthesising these findings reveals that enhancing innovation among women led SMEs requires a multi-layered approach. Educational interventions must be paired with strategies to transform societal attitudes and reduce gender-based constraints, while also providing sector-specific support mechanisms. Programs that integrate skills development with culturally and institutionally aligned support not only expand opportunities for women entrepreneurs but also strengthen their capacity to adopt novel practices, manage risks, and achieve sustainable enterprise growth. Overall, the evidence underscores the importance of aligning education, societal transformation, and strategic innovation initiatives to foster inclusive and high-performing women led SMEs.

Discussion of findings

The review provided a detailed critical discussion of the findings of the literature review on how social cultural barriers moderate the relationship between strategic determinants and performance of women-led SMEs in diverse cultural contexts as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Schematic diagram.

Institutional frameworks, gender bias, resources access and performance of women led SMEs

The evidence indicates that institutional barriers such as collateral requirements, gender bias in banking systems, and uneven policy enforcement^36,37,85 significantly limit access to finance for women led SMEs, constraining their strategic decision making and growth potential. These barriers are often compounded by low land ownership and insufficient regulatory support, which intersect with socio cultural expectations and inadequate infrastructure^{38,40,41,86,87} to restrict participation in high growth industries and access to critical business networks. Microfinance and informal credit sources remain important enablers, yet their role is unevenly leveraged in shaping strategic outcomes. Initiatives such as mobile banking in Bangladesh⁴² show potential to transform these constraints into opportunities, suggesting that socio cultural and technological interventions can shift these factors from barriers to enablers under supportive policy and infrastructural conditions.

Linking these findings to theory, the results demonstrate that Entrepreneurial Orientation’s core components—risk taking, innovation, and proactiveness^24,25—are not universally accessible; they are filtered through a gendered socio cultural lens. Women entrepreneurs’ ability to exercise these traits is constrained by institutional and cultural norms, extending Gender Role Theory^1,29–31 by showing how societal expectations and structural barriers interact to shape strategic behaviour. While EO explains strategic intent, the findings reveal that institutional and socio cultural conditions mediate the effectiveness of these strategies, providing a critical theoretical contribution by highlighting the conditional nature of strategic capabilities in restrictive contexts.

Contextualizing with existing literature, these findings align with prior reviews emphasizing the influence of institutional support and socio cultural norms on women’s entrepreneurship, but extend the discussion by integrating financial, infrastructural, and technological dimensions across multiple regions. The synthesis underscores the need for culturally responsive financial policies, targeted infrastructural improvements, and technology enabled interventions to strengthen women’s strategic capabilities and long term enterprise sustainability. This integrated perspective advances the discourse by linking institutional and socio cultural moderators directly to strategic determinants, providing actionable insights for policymakers, development agencies, and researchers seeking to enhance women led SME performance globally.

Societal attitudes, religious beliefs, education, market positioning and performance of women led SMEs

Societal attitudes shape the market positioning of women led SMEs, frequently confining them to low growth sectors due to entrenched gender norms.^46,49 Reforms such as Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030⁵⁰ show promise in promoting inclusivity, yet their impact varies across regions, with rural areas demonstrating slower changes in entrepreneurial participation. Religious beliefs also influence women’s mobility, asset ownership, and access to finance.^52,88,89 Evidence from Islamic microfinance^47,53 illustrates that culturally aligned financial services can transform these norms into enablers, creating opportunities for women entrepreneurs in otherwise restrictive contexts. Education enhances digital and business skills,^48,54 but disparities in access and variations in societal or religious interpretation continue to limit competitiveness.

The findings demonstrate that the strategic capabilities emphasized in Entrepreneurial Orientation—risk taking, innovation, and proactiveness^24,25—are constrained by socio cultural and educational factors. While women may possess entrepreneurial intent, societal expectations and institutional barriers reduce the effectiveness of these strategies. Gender Role Theory^1,29–31 helps explain how cultural and religious norms shape permissible business behaviours, revealing that strategy and performance cannot be fully understood without considering these socio cultural moderators.

Overall, the evidence indicates that successful market positioning for women led SMEs requires interventions that combine education, culturally sensitive financial instruments, and supportive policies. The interaction between societal attitudes, religious norms, and educational access highlights both obstacles and opportunities for strategic development, emphasizing the need for integrated approaches to foster sustainable growth and competitiveness in diverse contexts.

Family dynamics, institutional frameworks, risk management and performance of women led SMEs

Family dynamics and institutional frameworks strongly influence how women manage entrepreneurial risk. Cultural gender norms frequently channel women towards low risk ventures, restricting participation in high growth sectors such as technology and finance.^17,59,60,90 Supportive family environments can enhance confidence and willingness to take calculated risks,⁶¹ yet variations in generational roles suggest that family influence on decision making is context dependent and requires further investigation. Institutional factors, including legal protections and access to finance, further shape risk taking. In Kenya,^63,64 weak enforcement mechanisms reduce investment incentives and constrain business expansion, whereas Rwanda’s Women Guarantee Fund⁶⁵ mitigates financial risk and promotes growth. Financial literacy initiatives in Nigeria^66,67 have improved profitability and operational decision making, though exposure to market and operational risks continues to limit enterprise resilience.

These findings indicate that the strategic components of Entrepreneurial Orientation^24,25—risk taking, innovation, and proactiveness—are filtered through both family and institutional contexts. While women may demonstrate strategic intent, cultural and structural factors determine whether these strategies can be effectively executed. Gender Role Theory^1,29–31 further explains how societal expectations shape permissible risk behaviours, highlighting that risk management is not only a strategic choice but also a function of socio cultural and institutional constraints. Effective interventions must therefore integrate family support mechanisms, legal reforms, and financial empowerment programs to enhance resilience and enable sustained growth in women led enterprises.

Education, societal attitudes, innovation and performance of women led SMEs

Education is a key driver of innovation among women entrepreneurs, providing essential technical, managerial, and strategic skills.⁷² Restricted access to education in regions such as rural Pakistan^73,74 limits women’s capacity for innovation and reduces their competitiveness in emerging markets. In contrast, countries with well developed educational systems, such as Finland,⁷⁵ support digital adoption and enhance entrepreneurial outcomes for women. Societal attitudes toward leadership and risk taking further shape innovation potential. In India,^77–79 cultural restrictions and limited access to funding continue to inhibit women’s advancement in male dominated sectors such as technology and engineering.

Evidence from Canada and Rwanda^82–84 demonstrates that inclusive environments, supported by incubators, mentorship programs, and policy backed funding, can foster innovation and empower women entrepreneurs. These findings indicate that the strategic traits of Entrepreneurial Orientation^24,25—innovation, risk taking, and proactiveness—are strongly mediated by education and societal context. While women may possess the intent to innovate, cultural norms and structural constraints determine whether innovation efforts translate into sustainable outcomes. Gender Role Theory^1,29–31 explains how societal expectations shape the types of innovation strategies women can pursue, highlighting that innovation is both a strategic capability and a product of socio cultural and institutional conditions.

The synthesis suggests that promoting inclusive innovation requires coordinated interventions across education systems, societal norms, and policy frameworks. Developing supportive ecosystems that integrate skill development, mentorship, and culturally aligned funding is essential for enabling women led enterprises to compete effectively, sustain innovation, and achieve long term performance in diverse contexts.

Practical implications

Addressing the challenges facing women led SMEs requires the development of tailored support systems that respond to both socio cultural and strategic barriers. Revising lending models to include flexible terms can help overcome discriminatory practices and reduce the burden of collateral requirements that disproportionately affect women. Mentorship provides essential business guidance and opens access to investor networks, while targeted training in financial literacy, digital skills, and leadership builds the capacity for informed decision making and enhanced competitiveness. Structural constraints can be mitigated through digital commerce training and improved access to business resources. Legal reforms that promote equal property rights, streamline business registration, and introduce tax incentives are also crucial in lowering entry barriers. When supported by robust institutional frameworks and technology, these interventions equip women entrepreneurs with the tools to innovate, expand their enterprises, and contribute meaningfully to inclusive and sustainable economic development.

Conclusion

Women’s entrepreneurship extends beyond mastering traditional business skills, requiring the ability to navigate complex socio-cultural barriers that influence access to resources and capacity for innovation. While strategic and financial competencies remain critical, their effectiveness is shaped by the broader cultural and institutional context in which women operate. In societies that support gender equity, systemic structures such as inclusive policies and legal protections enhance women’s entrepreneurial outcomes. In more restrictive environments, entrenched social norms and discriminatory practices pose significant barriers, making adaptability and resilience essential for success.

Tackling these challenges requires a multi layered approach, including legal reforms that guarantee property rights and business protections, expanded financial inclusion through accessible credit and mobile banking, and efforts to shift public attitudes. Mentorship programs and the visibility of successful female role models help to dismantle stereotypes and inspire broader participation. Encouraging women’s entry into high growth sectors and fostering a culture that accepts entrepreneurial risk are also vital for economic transformation.

Investments in education, digital literacy, and institutional support are key to enabling women to lead innovative and competitive enterprises. When such measures are in place, women entrepreneurs can significantly contribute to economic growth and play a central role in building inclusive and sustainable development across diverse societies.

Recommendations

Legal reforms that safeguard equal credit access and property rights play a pivotal role in dismantling structural inequalities that hinder women-led SMEs. In Rwanda and Kenya, such reforms have contributed to increased financial inclusion and improved business ownership for women, setting an example for broader policy adoption.^44,91 Enhancing women's entrepreneurial success also depends on targeted education in financial literacy, digital technologies, and leadership. Programs across the Asia Pacific region have shown how tailored capacity-building initiatives help women gain strategic competencies essential for growth.⁵⁶

Mentorship and partnerships between NGOs and industries further contribute to the sustainability and resilience of women-owned enterprises. Such models offer practical insights, access to networks, and guidance on scaling businesses in competitive markets.⁹² Institutional collaboration between government and private actors, like those implemented in Egypt, helps align national development goals with private-sector expertise to drive inclusive entrepreneurship.^93,94

Global initiatives like SheTrades play a transformative role in reshaping societal attitudes by promoting women’s integration into global markets. These platforms support gender-responsive trade, enable market access, and reinforce inclusive economic participation, thereby strengthening the overall positioning of women in business.⁹⁵ Replicating and localizing such approaches could be vital to cultivating an enabling ecosystem for women entrepreneurs globally.

Limitation of the study

The main limitation of this study lies in its reliance on secondary data and its narrative review approach, which is interpretive rather than a systematic, reproducible meta-analysis. The findings may be affected by publication bias, as valuable insights from grey literature, non-English sources, or contexts where women’s entrepreneurship is under-studied could be overlooked. The qualitative synthesis, while rich in context and conceptual understanding, does not allow for quantitative conclusions about the strength or magnitude of the moderating relationships between socio cultural factors, strategic determinants, and performance. Additionally, rapidly evolving socio-cultural and institutional environments may not be fully captured in published literature, limiting the immediacy of insights regarding contemporary challenges and opportunities for women led enterprises.

Direction for future research

Future research should employ mixed-methods longitudinal designs to trace the causal pathways through which specific socio-cultural factors influence strategic choices such as risk taking, innovation, and market positioning over time. Large-scale, cross-national quantitative studies are needed to test the moderating effects of institutional frameworks, societal attitudes, education, and resource access on women led enterprise performance. Investigating the role of male allies and evolving masculinities in reducing socio-cultural barriers could provide insights into how inclusive networks and social support enhance women’s strategic agency. Further studies should evaluate the effectiveness of culturally aligned financial interventions, digital infrastructure, and educational programs across diverse regions to identify best practices that foster sustainable enterprise growth. Finally, research should explore underrepresented contexts and grey literature to capture emerging trends and the lived experiences of women entrepreneurs, particularly in rapidly changing socio-cultural and institutional environments, ensuring a more complete understanding of the opportunities and constraints affecting women led enterprises.

Data availability statement

No data are associated with this article.

References

1. Sangu D: Cultural Factors and Women SMEs Performance. International Journal of Business, Law, and Education. 2025; 6(1): 22–36. Publisher Full Text
2. Barghouthi M, Abdalrahman M, Sharia M, et al.: Empowering women entrepreneurs: The interplay of internal drive, external support, and socio-cultural context. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development. 2024; 8(8): 6394. Publisher Full Text
3. Alsharari NM, Aljohani MS: The benchmarking implementation and management control process as influenced by interplay of environmental and cultural factors: institutional and contingency perspectives. BIJ. 2024; 31(9): 3327–3348. Publisher Full Text
4. Martins I, Nunez MA, Perez JP, et al.: Scrutinizing informal female entrepreneurship: a systematic review and research agenda. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2024. Publisher Full Text
5. Kakeesh DF: Female entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems. J. Res. Mark. Entrep. 2024; 26(3): 485–526. Publisher Full Text
6. Bullough A, Guelich U, Manolova TS, et al.: Women’s entrepreneurship and culture: gender role expectations and identities, societal culture, and the entrepreneurial environment. Small Bus. Econ. 2022; 58(2): 985–996. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
7. Banu J, Baral R, Vijayalakshmi V: The enablers and stumbling blocks in sustaining growth of women-owned micro-enterprises in India–a qualitative inquiry. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy. 2024; 18(5): 918–944. Publisher Full Text
8. Dewitt S, Jafari-Sadeghi V, Sukumar A, et al.: Family dynamics and relationships in female entrepreneurship: An exploratory study. Journal of Family Business Management. 2023; 13(3): 626–644. Publisher Full Text
9. Pont A, Simon A: Nurturing family business resilience through strategic supply chain management. Journal of Family Business Management. 2025; 15(1): 68–101. Publisher Full Text
10. Liew MX, Loo YM: The family-level of generational involvement: impact on the nexus between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance among small family businesses. Journal of Family Business Management. 2024; 14(3): 475–494. Publisher Full Text
11. Hundera M, Mudde HLM: A comprehensive analysis of gender dynamics in organizations: Integrating social, structural and individual dimensions. Eur. J. Educ. 2024; 59(4): e12722. Publisher Full Text
12. Tula ST, Ofodile OC, Okoye CC, et al.: Entrepreneurial ecosystems in the USA: A comparative review with European models. International Journal of Management & Entrepreneurship Research. 2024; 6(2): 451–466. Publisher Full Text
13. Vicentin DC, de Moraes GHSM , Fischer BB, et al.: The interdependence between the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem and Entrepreneurial Culture-an analysis with sustainable and traditional entrepreneurs. J. Clean. Prod. 2024; 466: 142821. Publisher Full Text
14. Filculescu A: The heterogeneous landscape of innovation in female led-businesses-cross-country comparisons. Management & Marketing. 2016; 11(4): 610–623. Publisher Full Text
15. Dissanayake K: Institutional forces and life cycle stages of women-led SMEs in developing economies. Journal of Business Studies. 2016; 3(2): 40–55. Publisher Full Text
16. Le LH, Stefańczyk JK: Gender discrimination in access to credit: are women-led SMEs rejected more than men-led? Gend. Technol. Dev. 2018; 22(2): 145–163. Publisher Full Text
17. Kevane M, Ratan AL, Dhar D: Women-Led Small-and Medium-Sized Enterprises During COVID-19: Examining Barriers and Opportunities. Fem. Econ. 2024; 30(1): 244–277. Publisher Full Text
18. Singh S, Dash BM: Gender discrimination in accessing finance by women-owned businesses: A review. J. Int. Women's Stud. 2021; 22(9): 381–399.
19. Samy Y, Adedeji A, Iraoya A, et al.: Trade and Women’s Economic Empowerment: Evidence from Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. Springer Nature; 2023; 162.
20. Haoucha M: Global Insights on Women Empowerment and Leadership. IGI Global; 2024.
21. Sharma LK, Paudel V: The Role of SMEs in Enhancing Women’s Employment Opportunities in Nepal: A Data-Driven Perspective. Cognition. 2025; 7(1): 35–44. Publisher Full Text
22. Snilstveit B, Oliver S, Vojtkova M: Narrative approaches to systematic review and synthesis of evidence for international development policy and practice. J. Dev. Eff. 2012; 4(3): 409–429. Publisher Full Text
23. Belotto MJ: Data analysis methods for qualitative research: Managing the challenges of coding, interrater reliability, and thematic analysis. Qual. Rep. 2018; 23(11): 2622–2633. Publisher Full Text
24. Seyed Kalali N: Entrepreneurial orientation in family firms: the effects of long-term orientation. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2022; 28(7): 1732–1750. Publisher Full Text
25. Mostafiz MI, Hughes M, Sambasivan M: Entrepreneurial orientation, competitive advantage and strategic knowledge management capability in Malaysian family firms. J. Knowl. Manag. 2022; 26(2): 423–458. Publisher Full Text
26. Venugopal S, Viswanathan M: Negotiated agency in the face of consumption constraints: A study of women entrepreneurs in subsistence contexts. J. Public Policy Mark. 2021; 40(3): 336–353. Publisher Full Text
27. Xiao Z, Chen X, Dong MC, et al.: Institutional support and firms’ entrepreneurial orientation in emerging economies. Long Range Plan. 2022; 55(1): 102106. Publisher Full Text
28. Liard-Muriente CF: Adaptations, Female Labour Participation, and Innovation among SMEs in Zambia during Covid-19 Pandemic. African Journal of Economic Review. 2023; 11(4): 1–14.
29. Rudman LA, Glick P: The social psychology of gender: How power and intimacy shape gender relations. Guilford Publications; 2021.
30. Jesús Carrasco-Santos M, Seyfi S, Hosseini S, et al.: Breaking boundaries: Exploring gendered challenges and advancing equality for Iranian women careers in tourism.2024.
31. Fang S, Goh C, Roberts M, et al.: Female entrepreneurs and productivity around the world: Rule of law, network, culture, and gender equality. World Dev. 2022; 154: 105846. Publisher Full Text
32. Ferdoos A, Zahra MS: 04 Patriarchy and decision-making power of women. Journal of Gender and Social Issues. 2016; 15(2): 55–68.
33. Mawa B: Challenging patriarchy: the changing definition of women’s empowerment. Social Science Review. 2020; 37(2): 239–264. Publisher Full Text
34. Heise L, Greene ME, Opper N, et al.: Gender inequality and restrictive gender norms: framing the challenges to health. Lancet. 2019; 393(10189): 2440–2454. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
35. Stoker S, Rossano-Rivero S, Davis S, et al.: Pursuing entrepreneurial opportunities is not a choice: the interplay between gender norms, contextual embeddedness, and (in) equality mechanisms in entrepreneurial contexts. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2024; 30(7): 1725–1749. Publisher Full Text
36. Tanzeela KD, Mehraj D: Determinants of Success for Women Entrepreneurs: An Examination of Small and Medium-Sized Women-Led Businesses in India's Emerging Market. Business Strategy & Development. 2024; 7(4): e70053. Publisher Full Text
37. De Andrés P, Gimeno R, de Cabo RM : The gender gap in bank credit access. J. Corp. Finan. 2021; 71: 101782. Publisher Full Text
38. Woehler ML, Cullen-Lester KL, Porter CM, et al.: Whether, how, and why networks influence men’s and women’s career success: Review and research agenda. J. Manag. 2021; 47(1): 207–236. Publisher Full Text
39. Reddy PR, Venugopal R, Narahari T: Women Entrepreneurship in India: Opportunities and Challenges. Madhya Bharti -Humanities and Social Sciences Vol-85, No. 12, UGC Care Group I Journal. 2024.
40. Ergün Z, Bayram AT, Bayram GE: Challenges and Opportunities in Rural Women's Entrepreneurship: Navigating Financial, Infrastructural, and Societal Barriers. Empowering Women Through Rural Sustainable Development and Entrepreneurship. 2025; 1–14.
41. James I, Onoshakpor C: Challenges and opportunities for informal female entrepreneurs in Nigeria using the 5M framework. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2025. Publisher Full Text
42. Azim MI, Rahman S: Digital Financial Inclusion: A Lifeline for Sustainable Development Goals—Lessons from Bangladesh Through Crisis and Beyond. Financing of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Challenges and Opportunities. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2025; pp. 193–216.
43. Imo IO, Ekechukwu NB: The Role of Women-Led Social Enterprises in Achieving SDG3. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Knowledge. 2024; 12(2): 93–115. Publisher Full Text
44. Uwantege A, Mbabazi B: Gender-sensitive financial policies and women’s access to credit in Rwanda. Journal of Financial Inclusion. 2023; 12(3): 45–62.
45. Ajala T: Gender discrimination in land ownership and the alleviation of women’s poverty in Nigeria: A call for new equities. International Journal of Discrimination and the Law. 2017; 17(1): 51–66. Publisher Full Text
46. Kumar S, Sahoo S, Lim WM, et al.: Religion as a social shaping force in entrepreneurship and business: Insights from a technology-empowered systematic literature review. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2022; 175: 121393. Publisher Full Text
47. Soemitra A, Kusmilawaty, Rahma TIF: The role of micro Waqf bank in women’s Micro-Business empowerment through Islamic social finance: Mixed-Method evidence from Mawaridussalam Indonesia. Economies. 2022; 10(7): 157. Publisher Full Text
48. Abdullah: Role of Education in women Development. BULLET: Jurnal Multidisiplin Ilmu. 2023; 2(2): 344–350.
49. Roka YB: Women-led Enterprises for Poverty Reduction in Pokhara. Janaprakash Journal of Multidisciplinary Research. 2024; 2: 65–78. Publisher Full Text
50. Vijaya GS, Almasri R: A study of women entrepreneurship in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Advanced Engineering, Management and Science. 2016; 2(12): 1159–1956.
51. Alreshoodi SA, Rehman AU, Alshammari SA, et al.: Women Entrepreneurs in Saudi Arabia: A Portrait of progress in the context of their drivers and inhibitors. Journal of Enterprising Culture. 2022; 30(03): 375–400. Publisher Full Text
52. Yunis MS, Hashim H, Anderson AR: Enablers and constraints of female entrepreneurship in Khyber Pukhtunkhawa, Pakistan: Institutional and feminist perspectives. Sustainability. 2018; 11(1): 27. Publisher Full Text
53. Rahayu NS: The Intersection of Islamic Microfinance and Women’s Empowerment: A Case Study of Baitul Maal Wat Tamwil in Indonesia. Int. J. Financial Stud. 2020; 8(2): 37. Publisher Full Text
54. Akpuokwe CU, Chikwe CF, Eneh NE: Leveraging technology and financial literacy for women’s empowerment in SMEs: A conceptual framework for sustainable development. Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances. 2024; 18(3): 020–032. Publisher Full Text
55. Pergelova A, Manolova T, Simeonova-Ganeva R, et al.: Democratizing entrepreneurship? Digital technologies and the internationalization of female-led SMEs. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2019; 57(1): 14–39. Publisher Full Text
56. Braun P, Birdthistle N, Flynn A: Beyond COVID-19: women entrepreneurs and e-commerce policy in the Asia-Pacific. Women's Entrepreneurship Policy. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2023; pp. 192–213.
57. Lee JN, Morduch J, Ravindran S, et al.: Poverty and Migration in the Digital Age: Experimental Evidence on Mobile Banking in Bangladesh. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 2021; 13(1): 38–71. Publisher Full Text
58. Ahmed MS, Rony RJ, Khan SS, et al.: Towards Exploration of the Factors Affecting Mobile Banking of Bangladeshi Women during COVID. SSRN Electron. J. 2021. Publisher Full Text
59. Neneh BN: Performance implications of the interrelationship between risk-taking and family support for women-owned businesses: evidence from South Africa. Int. J. Entrep. Small Bus. 2019; 38(1/2): 102–119. Publisher Full Text
60. Srinivasan S, Vallipriya R: Empowering Women Entrepreneurs and Developing Family Businesses. IGI Global; 2025.
61. Nanyanzi M, Katumba P, Tibaingana A: Spouse Support, Innovative Behaviour and Entrepreneurial Effectiveness of Women-Owned Agricultural Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Uganda. International Journal of Applied Research in Management and Economics. 2024; 7(1): 15–30. Publisher Full Text
62. Acquah OBED: The effects of security and performance risks on customers’ intention to utilize electronic banking based on unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Winneba: University of Education; 2021. (Doctoral dissertation).
63. Ghosh PK, Ghosh SK, Chowdhury S: Factors hindering women entrepreneurs’ access to institutional finance—an empirical study. J. Small Bus. Entrep. 2018; 30(4): 279–291. Publisher Full Text
64. Mwangi M, Ouma S: Legal Challenges Facing Women Entrepreneurs in Kenya: A Case Study of Nairobi County. Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2021; 12(3): 45–53.
65. Mukamuhoza P, Kengere OA, Nyabera OS: Micro-Credit Services and Growth of Women Enterprises in Rwanda: A Case of Urwego Opportunity Bank. J. Financ. Account. 2023; 7(11): 184–197.
66. Yasin RFF, Mahmud MW, Diniyya AA: Significance of financial literacy among women entrepreneurs on halal business. Journal of Halal Industry & Services. 2020; 3: 1–9.
67. Egbo OP, Ezeaku H, Igwemeka E, et al.: Financial literacy and access: revisiting the bridges and barriers to women entrepreneurship in Nigeria. Revista Amazonia Investiga. 2020; 9(29): 436–444. Publisher Full Text
68. Hasan R, Ashfaq M, Parveen T, et al.: Financial inclusion – does digital financial literacy matter for women entrepreneurs? Int. J. Soc. Econ. 2023; 50(8): 1085–1104. Publisher Full Text
69. Gumbo L, Marimuthu F, Vengesai E: Financial literacy competencies of women in agribusiness and their financial experiences during a pandemic. The Southern African Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management. 2023; 15(1): 1–11. Publisher Full Text
70. Mozumdar L, Hagelaar G, van der Velde G , et al.: Determinants of the business performance of women entrepreneurs in the developing world context. J. 2020; 3(2): 215–235. Publisher Full Text
71. Gasparin M, Green W, Lilley S, et al.: Business as unusual: A business model for social innovation. J. Bus. Res. 2021; 125: 698–709. Publisher Full Text
72. Maziriri ET, Nyagadza B, Chuchu T: Key innovation abilities on capability and the performance of women entrepreneurs: the role of entrepreneurial education and proactive personality. Business Analyst Journal. 2023; 44(2): 53–83. Publisher Full Text
73. Suseno Y, Abbott L: Women entrepreneurs' digital social innovation: Linking gender, entrepreneurship, social innovation and information systems. Inf. Syst. J. 2021; 31(5): 717–744. Publisher Full Text
74. Nasir M, Nasir S, Sajjad S: Women Entrepreneurship and Empowerment in Pakistan: Gender, Culture, Education and Policy in Broader Perspective. Journal of Managerial Sciences. 2021; 15(4): 1–22.
75. Heponiemi T, Gluschkoff K, Leemann L, et al.: Digital inequality in Finland: Access, skills and attitudes as social impact mediators. New Media Soc. 2021; 25(9): 2341–2360.
76. Sarkki S, Dalla Torre C, Fransala J, et al.: Reconstructive social innovation cycles in women-led initiatives in rural areas. Sustainability. 2021; 13(3): 1231. Publisher Full Text
77. Patterson N, Mavin S: When patriarchy and individualism collide: experiences of women entrepreneurial leaders. Int. J. Gend. Entrep. 2025; 17(1): 116–134. Publisher Full Text
78. Ahmed N: Empowering Women in India Through Innovative Incubators and Accelerators for Energy Entrepreneurship. University Incubators and Their Role in the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem. 2024; 293. Publisher Full Text
79. Gupta N: Empowering Women, Transforming India: The Ripple Effect of Women-Led Startups. Bhartiyam International Journal of Education & Research. 2024 March 2024; Volume 13(II). 2277-1255
80. Smulowitz SJ, Smulowitz M, Cossin D: More risk-averse or more innovative? The effect of women board membership and aspirations on patent activity. Res. Policy. 2025; 54(1): 105109. Publisher Full Text
81. Seigner BDC, Milanov H, McKenny AF: Who can claim innovation and benefit from it? Gender and expectancy violations in reward-based crowdfunding. Strateg. Entrep. J. 2022; 16(2): 381–422. Publisher Full Text
82. Seshasai SJ, Shriya K: Empowering women entrepreneurs: How tech-driven innovation can unlock business success. New Practices for Entrepreneurship Innovation. IGI Global; 2024; pp. 218–244.
83. Phillips MJ: Empowering undergraduate women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine: exploring experiences, fostering motivation, and advancing gender equity. Soc. Sci. 2024; 13(2): 74. Publisher Full Text
84. Rwigema PC: Initiatives Aimed at Increasing the Participation of Women in the Tech Industry in Rwanda and their Impact on Social and Economic Development. Reviewed Journal International. 2024; 5(1).
85. Wawire N, Tsuma F: Women Entrepreneurs’ Land Ownership and Performance of their Manufacturing Enterprises in Kenya. Kenyatta University Women’s Economic Empowerment (KU-WEE) Journal. 2025; 1(1): 141–163.
86. Xheneti M, Karki ST, Madden A: Negotiating business and family demands within a patriarchal society–the case of women entrepreneurs in the Nepalese context. Understanding Women's Entrepreneurship in a Gendered Context. Routledge; 2021; pp. 93–112.
87. Bhindi JS, Jangra R: Empowering Rural Women Entrepreneurs: The Intricate Tapestry of Family and Social Support Networks in India. Empowering Women Through Rural Sustainable Development and Entrepreneurship. IGI Global Scientific Publishing; 2025; pp. 139–178.
88. Monnickendam-Givon Y, Schwartz D, Gidron B: The surprising lack of connection between social networks and the enterprise success of ultra-religious female micro-entrepreneurs. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy. 2018; 12(3): 395–415. Publisher Full Text
89. Afrilsah M: Investigating the role of religion in shaping moral values and social norms. Mahogany Journal De Social. 2024; 1(1): 29–36.
90. Deng W, Liang Q, Wang W, et al.: How psychological perceptions and family dynamics shape necessity- and opportunity-based female entrepreneurship: the role of gender equality. Multinatl. Bus. Rev. 2025; 33(1): 170–197. Publisher Full Text
91. Nyamboga TO, Odhuno E, Okibo Bichanga W: Influence of Crediting Strategy on Growth of Small and Micro Enterprises in Kenya: A Case of Women Enterprise Fund. Asian Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting. 2019; 13(1): 1–17. Publisher Full Text
92. Haddock-Millar J, Clutterbuck D: Reciprocal mentoring in the entrepreneurial sector. Reciprocal Mentoring. Routledge; 2023; pp. 10–29.
93. Abdelwahid M, Kaoud H: Factors affecting the success of women entrepreneurs in Egypt. Int. J. Organ. Leadersh. 2022; 11(4): 444–461. Publisher Full Text
94. El-Fiky S: Shattering the second glass ceiling: an empirical study on women entrepreneurs in Egypt. Int. J. Gend. Entrep. 2023; 15(1): 1–21. Publisher Full Text
95. Beleyi F: Fostering Prosperity for African Female Entrepreneurs: Opportunities for AU–EU Cooperation in Digital Entrepreneurship Networks. Africa–Europe Cooperation and Digital Transformation. Routledge; 2022; pp. 228–242.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 20 Oct 2025

Author details Author details

business administration, Kampala International University - Western Campus, Bushenyi, Western Region, Uganda

Tom Ongesa Nyamboga
Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Article Versions (2)

version 2

Revised

Published: 14 May 2026, 14:1140

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167596.2

version 1

Published: 20 Oct 2025, 14:1140

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167596.1

Copyright

© 2026 Ongesa Nyamboga T. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

0

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Ongesa Nyamboga T. Breaking Barriers: How Socio-Cultural Factors Moderate the Relationship Between Strategic Determinants and Women-Led SME Performance Across Diverse Cultures [version 2; peer review: 1 approved with reservations, 1 not approved]. F1000Research 2026, 14:1140 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167596.2)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 20 Oct 2025

Views

10

Reviewer Report 29 Dec 2025

Rahabhi Mashapure, Chinhoyi University of Technology, Chinhoyi, Zimbabwe

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184722.r428481

The manuscript addresses a timely and significant topic: the interplay between socio-cultural factors and strategic determinants in women-led SMEs. The conceptual framework is strong and relevant, integrating Entrepreneurial Orientation and Gender Role Theory. The global scope, with examples from ... Continue reading

The manuscript addresses a timely and significant topic: the interplay between socio-cultural factors and strategic determinants in women-led SMEs. The conceptual framework is strong and relevant, integrating Entrepreneurial Orientation and Gender Role Theory. The global scope, with examples from Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, is a strength.
However, in its current form, the manuscript reads more like a well-structured report or a thesis literature review than a journal article ready for a high-impact publication. The primary weaknesses lie in the methodology, analytical depth, critical engagement, and academic writing style. Addressing these areas is crucial for publication success.
Major Areas for Correction and Improvement
1. Title, Abstract, and Keywords

Title: The title is clear but long. Consider making it more concise and impactful.
- Suggestion: "Socio-Cultural Moderators of Strategic Determinants and Performance in Women-Led SMEs: A Global Narrative Review"
Abstract: The abstract is descriptive but lacks the standard structure of a high-impact journal. It should clearly state: Background, Objectives, Methods, Results, Conclusion.
- Correction: Restructure to explicitly mention the number of studies reviewed, the main thematic findings, and the specific, novel contribution of the review.
- Improvement: The final sentence should be a powerful, take-home message for policymakers and researchers, not a general statement.

2. Introduction

Strengths: Establishes the research problem and the gap well. The research objectives are clearly listed.
Areas for Improvement:
- State the Gap More Forcefully: Instead of "this study fills this research gap," specify what exactly has been missing. E.g., "While prior research has identified socio-cultural barriers, a systematic understanding of how they moderate the relationship between specific strategic determinants and performance across diverse cultures is lacking."
- Justify the Review Type: Explain why a narrative review was chosen over a systematic review (e.g., to synthesize diverse, context-rich qualitative findings and develop a conceptual framework). This is a key methodological justification.

3. Materials and Methods
This is the weakest section and requires a complete overhaul to meet high journal standards. It is currently vague and lacks the rigor expected for reproducibility.

Critical Corrections:
1. Search Strategy: The description is insufficient. You must provide:
  - Full Search String: The exact Boolean/search string used (e.g., ("women-led SME*" OR "female entrepreneur*") AND ("socio-cultural" OR "gender norm*") AND ("strategic determinant*" OR "performance")).
  - Databases & Dates: Specify the exact dates the search was conducted.
2. Selection Process (PRISMA Flow Diagram): The "three-stage screening process" must be visualized. A PRISMA flow diagram is essential for a high-impact journal. It should show:
  - Records identified from each database (Scopus, n=; WoS, n=; etc.)
  - Records after duplicates removed
  - Records screened (title/abstract)
  - Full-text articles assessed for eligibility
  - Studies included in the review (n=100)
3. Data Analysis: The description of thematic analysis needs more detail.
  - Correction: Specify the software used for coding (e.g., NVivo, or even Excel). Describe the process of generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, and defining/naming themes. Distinguish more clearly between deductive (theory-driven) and inductive (data-driven) themes.
4. Quality Assessment: A critical flaw is the lack of a quality assessment of the included studies. For a review to be credible, you must explain how you assessed the rigor of the 100 articles.
  - Improvement: Adopt a standard quality assessment tool (e.g., CASP for qualitative studies, a custom checklist for mixed-methods) and briefly summarize the overall quality of the evidence base. This adds a layer of critical appraisal.

4. Findings / Results

Strengths: Well-organized around the conceptual framework. Good use of country-specific examples.
Areas for Improvement:
- From Description to Analysis: The current text often describes what the studies found rather than analyzing, synthesizing, and critiquing the body of evidence.
  - Example: Instead of "In Nigeria, financial literacy... led to improved profitability," try: "The evidence from Nigeria [72,73] suggests that financial literacy training can be a powerful tool for enhancing profitability; however, these studies focus on agribusiness, raising questions about the transferability of such interventions to the technology sector."
- Identify Contradictions and Patterns: Actively compare and contrast findings from different regions. For instance, contrast the role of religion as a barrier in Pakistan with its role as an enabler (via Islamic microfinance) in Indonesia. This is where true synthesis happens.
- Improve Conceptual Language: The text sometimes uses "stopped" (Page 5) and other informal language. Ensure all language is formal and academic.

5. Discussion

Critical Correction: The Discussion must not simply re-state the findings. It must:
1. Interpret the Findings: What do your synthesized results mean? For example, the finding that socio-cultural factors can be both barriers and enablers is crucial. Discuss the conditions under which this shift happens.
2. Link Back to Theory: Explicitly discuss how your findings affirm, challenge, or extend Entrepreneurial Orientation and Gender Role Theory. For instance, your review shows that EO's core components are not universally accessible; they are filtered through a gendered socio-cultural lens. This is a key theoretical contribution.
3. Contextualize with Existing Literature: Compare your overall model and findings with other major reviews or seminal papers in the field. How does your integrated framework advance the conversation?
4. Acknowledge Limitations More Deeply: The current limitation ("reliance on secondary data") is too generic. Be specific:
  - Improved Limitation: "As a narrative review, our findings are interpretive and not based on a systematic, reproducible meta-analysis. The reliance on published literature may introduce a publication bias, overlooking valuable insights from grey literature or contexts where women's entrepreneurship is under-studied. Furthermore, the qualitative synthesis, while rich, prevents quantitative conclusions about the strength of the moderating relationships."

6. Conclusion and Recommendations

Strengths: The recommendations are practical and relevant.
Improvement:
- Future Research Directions: This is a vital component for a high-impact journal. Dedicate a paragraph to specific, actionable research questions. For example:
  - "Future research should employ mixed-methods longitudinal designs to trace the causal pathways through which specific socio-cultural factors influence strategic choices over time."
  - "There is a need to quantitatively test the moderating model proposed in Figure 1 using large-N, cross-national data."
  - "Research should explore the role of male allies and changing masculinities in dismantling socio-cultural barriers for women entrepreneurs."

7. Referencing and Formatting

Critical Error: The reference list is incorrectly formatted and contains significant errors (e.g., "Gafur_and_Islam_2024" in Figure 2, inconsistent journal name abbreviations, missing authors, "Publisher Full Text" lines). This is a major red flag for any journal and suggests a lack of attention to detail.
Correction: Meticulously reformat the entire reference list according to the target journal's guide for authors (e.g., APA, Harvard). You might consider using a reference manager like EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley.

Summary of Key Actions for Improvement

Methodological Rigor: Completely rewrite the Methods section. Include a PRISMA flow diagram, a detailed search strategy, and a description of quality assessment.
Elevate the Analysis: Shift from describing individual study findings to synthesizing, comparing, and critiquing the entire body of evidence. Highlight contradictions and patterns.
Strengthen the Discussion: Make a compelling argument for your theoretical and practical contribution. Explicitly link findings to theory and prior literature.
Formalize Academic Writing: Eliminate informal language, improve flow, and ensure a critical, analytical tone throughout.
Correct References: Fix the reference list completely. This is non-negotiable.
Add Critical Sections: Include a dedicated "Future Research Directions" section and a robust "Limitations" section.

By addressing these points, the author can transform this promising manuscript from a good literature summary into a compelling, publishable review that makes a significant contribution to the field.

Is the topic of the review discussed comprehensively in the context of the current literature?

Yes
Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations?

Yes
Is the review written in accessible language?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn appropriate in the context of the current research literature?

Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Business management, women entrepreneurship, digital transformation, sustainable livelihoods, rural development

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Views

7

Reviewer Report 23 Dec 2025

Erum Shaikh, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University Shaheed Benazirabad, Shaheed Benazirbad, Pakistan

Not Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184722.r433336

Introduction

Lacks a clear problem statement specifying the exact gap the study addresses.
Overly descriptive and repetitive, with several ideas restated without synthesis.
Insufficient justification for why a narrative review (not systematic)

Introduction

Lacks a clear problem statement specifying the exact gap the study addresses.
Overly descriptive and repetitive, with several ideas restated without synthesis.
Insufficient justification for why a narrative review (not systematic) is the appropriate method.
Fails to define key constructs early (e.g., “strategic determinants,” “socio-cultural barriers”).
Does not clearly establish how the integrated framework advances prior work.

The literature review is missing
Materials and Methods

The narrative review approach lacks transparency and replicability compared to systematic reviews.
No clear criteria for inclusion beyond date range and language—weakens methodological rigor.
The sample of “100 articles” appears arbitrary; lacks explanation of how this number was determined.
No description of inter-coder reliability or triangulation beyond vague references to memos and peer debriefing.
Potential bias due to reliance on English-only studies, which excludes relevant literature from non-English speaking regions.

Data Collection and Analysis

Search strategy (keywords, databases) is insufficiently detailed to be reproducible.
Thematic analysis lacks evidence of coding depth no coding tree, examples, or theme development presented.
Citation tracking method not explained clearly (forward/backward).
No discussion of potential publication bias or database limitations.

Control of Subjective Interpretations

Provides broad statements but lacks concrete procedures (e.g., specific peer review steps).
No independent coders reduce reliability of thematic coding.
Reflexivity is claimed but not demonstrated through examples or reflexive decisions.

Theoretical Framework Implications

Integration of EO Theory and Gender Role Theory is conceptual but not operationalized.
The framework is not linked to empirical findings in a structured way.
The critique of EO Theory oversimplifies existing literature that already addresses gendered constraints.
Lacks a diagram or model to show how theories interact.

Findings of Literature Review

Findings are descriptive rather than analytical; mostly summarize prior studies.
Overreliance on country-specific examples without synthesizing cross-cultural differences.
Figure 1 is referenced but not explained or interpreted in depth.
No weighting of evidence or discussion of conflicting findings.

Discussion

Lacks critical evaluation; largely reiterates findings rather than analyzing them.
Does not address alternative explanations or contradictory literature.
Fails to link back to the theoretical framework in a meaningful way.
The discussion is fragmented and loosely connected to research objectives.

Is the topic of the review discussed comprehensively in the context of the current literature?

Yes
Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations?

Yes
Is the review written in accessible language?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn appropriate in the context of the current research literature?

No

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: I have expertise in Finance, CSs and entreprenurship

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 20 Oct 2025

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2
Version 2 (revision) 14 May 26
Version 1 20 Oct 25	read	read

Erum Shaikh, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University Shaheed Benazirabad, Shaheed Benazirbad, Pakistan
Rahabhi Mashapure, Chinhoyi University of Technology, Chinhoyi, Zimbabwe

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Sign up for content alerts

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

10 Views

29 Dec 2025 | for Version 1

Rahabhi Mashapure, Chinhoyi University of Technology, Chinhoyi, Zimbabwe

10 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved With Reservations

The manuscript addresses a timely and significant topic: the interplay between socio-cultural factors and strategic determinants in women-led SMEs. The conceptual framework is strong and relevant, integrating Entrepreneurial Orientation and Gender Role Theory. The global scope, with examples from Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, is a strength.
However, in its current form, the manuscript reads more like a well-structured report or a thesis literature review than a journal article ready for a high-impact publication. The primary weaknesses lie in the methodology, analytical depth, critical engagement, and academic writing style. Addressing these areas is crucial for publication success.
Major Areas for Correction and Improvement
1. Title, Abstract, and Keywords

Title: The title is clear but long. Consider making it more concise and impactful.
- Suggestion: "Socio-Cultural Moderators of Strategic Determinants and Performance in Women-Led SMEs: A Global Narrative Review"
Abstract: The abstract is descriptive but lacks the standard structure of a high-impact journal. It should clearly state: Background, Objectives, Methods, Results, Conclusion.
- Correction: Restructure to explicitly mention the number of studies reviewed, the main thematic findings, and the specific, novel contribution of the review.
- Improvement: The final sentence should be a powerful, take-home message for policymakers and researchers, not a general statement.

2. Introduction

Strengths: Establishes the research problem and the gap well. The research objectives are clearly listed.
Areas for Improvement:
- State the Gap More Forcefully: Instead of "this study fills this research gap," specify what exactly has been missing. E.g., "While prior research has identified socio-cultural barriers, a systematic understanding of how they moderate the relationship between specific strategic determinants and performance across diverse cultures is lacking."
- Justify the Review Type: Explain why a narrative review was chosen over a systematic review (e.g., to synthesize diverse, context-rich qualitative findings and develop a conceptual framework). This is a key methodological justification.

3. Materials and Methods
This is the weakest section and requires a complete overhaul to meet high journal standards. It is currently vague and lacks the rigor expected for reproducibility.

Critical Corrections:
1. Search Strategy: The description is insufficient. You must provide:
  - Full Search String: The exact Boolean/search string used (e.g., ("women-led SME*" OR "female entrepreneur*") AND ("socio-cultural" OR "gender norm*") AND ("strategic determinant*" OR "performance")).
  - Databases & Dates: Specify the exact dates the search was conducted.
2. Selection Process (PRISMA Flow Diagram): The "three-stage screening process" must be visualized. A PRISMA flow diagram is essential for a high-impact journal. It should show:
  - Records identified from each database (Scopus, n=; WoS, n=; etc.)
  - Records after duplicates removed
  - Records screened (title/abstract)
  - Full-text articles assessed for eligibility
  - Studies included in the review (n=100)
3. Data Analysis: The description of thematic analysis needs more detail.
  - Correction: Specify the software used for coding (e.g., NVivo, or even Excel). Describe the process of generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, and defining/naming themes. Distinguish more clearly between deductive (theory-driven) and inductive (data-driven) themes.
4. Quality Assessment: A critical flaw is the lack of a quality assessment of the included studies. For a review to be credible, you must explain how you assessed the rigor of the 100 articles.
  - Improvement: Adopt a standard quality assessment tool (e.g., CASP for qualitative studies, a custom checklist for mixed-methods) and briefly summarize the overall quality of the evidence base. This adds a layer of critical appraisal.

4. Findings / Results

Strengths: Well-organized around the conceptual framework. Good use of country-specific examples.
Areas for Improvement:
- From Description to Analysis: The current text often describes what the studies found rather than analyzing, synthesizing, and critiquing the body of evidence.
  - Example: Instead of "In Nigeria, financial literacy... led to improved profitability," try: "The evidence from Nigeria [72,73] suggests that financial literacy training can be a powerful tool for enhancing profitability; however, these studies focus on agribusiness, raising questions about the transferability of such interventions to the technology sector."
- Identify Contradictions and Patterns: Actively compare and contrast findings from different regions. For instance, contrast the role of religion as a barrier in Pakistan with its role as an enabler (via Islamic microfinance) in Indonesia. This is where true synthesis happens.
- Improve Conceptual Language: The text sometimes uses "stopped" (Page 5) and other informal language. Ensure all language is formal and academic.

5. Discussion

Critical Correction: The Discussion must not simply re-state the findings. It must:
1. Interpret the Findings: What do your synthesized results mean? For example, the finding that socio-cultural factors can be both barriers and enablers is crucial. Discuss the conditions under which this shift happens.
2. Link Back to Theory: Explicitly discuss how your findings affirm, challenge, or extend Entrepreneurial Orientation and Gender Role Theory. For instance, your review shows that EO's core components are not universally accessible; they are filtered through a gendered socio-cultural lens. This is a key theoretical contribution.
3. Contextualize with Existing Literature: Compare your overall model and findings with other major reviews or seminal papers in the field. How does your integrated framework advance the conversation?
4. Acknowledge Limitations More Deeply: The current limitation ("reliance on secondary data") is too generic. Be specific:
  - Improved Limitation: "As a narrative review, our findings are interpretive and not based on a systematic, reproducible meta-analysis. The reliance on published literature may introduce a publication bias, overlooking valuable insights from grey literature or contexts where women's entrepreneurship is under-studied. Furthermore, the qualitative synthesis, while rich, prevents quantitative conclusions about the strength of the moderating relationships."

6. Conclusion and Recommendations

Strengths: The recommendations are practical and relevant.
Improvement:
- Future Research Directions: This is a vital component for a high-impact journal. Dedicate a paragraph to specific, actionable research questions. For example:
  - "Future research should employ mixed-methods longitudinal designs to trace the causal pathways through which specific socio-cultural factors influence strategic choices over time."
  - "There is a need to quantitatively test the moderating model proposed in Figure 1 using large-N, cross-national data."
  - "Research should explore the role of male allies and changing masculinities in dismantling socio-cultural barriers for women entrepreneurs."

7. Referencing and Formatting

Critical Error: The reference list is incorrectly formatted and contains significant errors (e.g., "Gafur_and_Islam_2024" in Figure 2, inconsistent journal name abbreviations, missing authors, "Publisher Full Text" lines). This is a major red flag for any journal and suggests a lack of attention to detail.
Correction: Meticulously reformat the entire reference list according to the target journal's guide for authors (e.g., APA, Harvard). You might consider using a reference manager like EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley.

Summary of Key Actions for Improvement

Methodological Rigor: Completely rewrite the Methods section. Include a PRISMA flow diagram, a detailed search strategy, and a description of quality assessment.
Elevate the Analysis: Shift from describing individual study findings to synthesizing, comparing, and critiquing the entire body of evidence. Highlight contradictions and patterns.
Strengthen the Discussion: Make a compelling argument for your theoretical and practical contribution. Explicitly link findings to theory and prior literature.
Formalize Academic Writing: Eliminate informal language, improve flow, and ensure a critical, analytical tone throughout.
Correct References: Fix the reference list completely. This is non-negotiable.
Add Critical Sections: Include a dedicated "Future Research Directions" section and a robust "Limitations" section.

By addressing these points, the author can transform this promising manuscript from a good literature summary into a compelling, publishable review that makes a significant contribution to the field.

Is the topic of the review discussed comprehensively in the context of the current literature?

Yes
Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations?

Yes
Is the review written in accessible language?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn appropriate in the context of the current research literature?

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Business management, women entrepreneurship, digital transformation, sustainable livelihoods, rural development

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

7 Views

23 Dec 2025 | for Version 1

Erum Shaikh, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto University Shaheed Benazirabad, Shaheed Benazirbad, Pakistan

7 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Not Approved

Introduction

Lacks a clear problem statement specifying the exact gap the study addresses.
Overly descriptive and repetitive, with several ideas restated without synthesis.
Insufficient justification for why a narrative review (not systematic) is the appropriate method.
Fails to define key constructs early (e.g., “strategic determinants,” “socio-cultural barriers”).
Does not clearly establish how the integrated framework advances prior work.

The literature review is missing
Materials and Methods

The narrative review approach lacks transparency and replicability compared to systematic reviews.
No clear criteria for inclusion beyond date range and language—weakens methodological rigor.
The sample of “100 articles” appears arbitrary; lacks explanation of how this number was determined.
No description of inter-coder reliability or triangulation beyond vague references to memos and peer debriefing.
Potential bias due to reliance on English-only studies, which excludes relevant literature from non-English speaking regions.

Data Collection and Analysis

Search strategy (keywords, databases) is insufficiently detailed to be reproducible.
Thematic analysis lacks evidence of coding depth no coding tree, examples, or theme development presented.
Citation tracking method not explained clearly (forward/backward).
No discussion of potential publication bias or database limitations.

Control of Subjective Interpretations

Provides broad statements but lacks concrete procedures (e.g., specific peer review steps).
No independent coders reduce reliability of thematic coding.
Reflexivity is claimed but not demonstrated through examples or reflexive decisions.

Theoretical Framework Implications

Integration of EO Theory and Gender Role Theory is conceptual but not operationalized.
The framework is not linked to empirical findings in a structured way.
The critique of EO Theory oversimplifies existing literature that already addresses gendered constraints.
Lacks a diagram or model to show how theories interact.

Findings of Literature Review

Findings are descriptive rather than analytical; mostly summarize prior studies.
Overreliance on country-specific examples without synthesizing cross-cultural differences.
Figure 1 is referenced but not explained or interpreted in depth.
No weighting of evidence or discussion of conflicting findings.

Discussion

Lacks critical evaluation; largely reiterates findings rather than analyzing them.
Does not address alternative explanations or contradictory literature.
Fails to link back to the theoretical framework in a meaningful way.
The discussion is fragmented and loosely connected to research objectives.

Is the topic of the review discussed comprehensively in the context of the current literature?

Yes
Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations?

Yes
Is the review written in accessible language?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn appropriate in the context of the current research literature?

No

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

I have expertise in Finance, CSs and entreprenurship

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

[1] 1. Sangu D: Cultural Factors and Women SMEs Performance. International Journal of Business, Law, and Education. 2025; 6(1): 22–36. Publisher Full Text

[2] 2. Barghouthi M, Abdalrahman M, Sharia M, et al.: Empowering women entrepreneurs: The interplay of internal drive, external support, and socio-cultural context. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development. 2024; 8(8): 6394. Publisher Full Text

[3] 3. Alsharari NM, Aljohani MS: The benchmarking implementation and management control process as influenced by interplay of environmental and cultural factors: institutional and contingency perspectives. BIJ. 2024; 31(9): 3327–3348. Publisher Full Text

[4] 4. Martins I, Nunez MA, Perez JP, et al.: Scrutinizing informal female entrepreneurship: a systematic review and research agenda. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2024. Publisher Full Text

[5] 5. Kakeesh DF: Female entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems. J. Res. Mark. Entrep. 2024; 26(3): 485–526. Publisher Full Text

[6] 6. Bullough A, Guelich U, Manolova TS, et al.: Women’s entrepreneurship and culture: gender role expectations and identities, societal culture, and the entrepreneurial environment. Small Bus. Econ. 2022; 58(2): 985–996. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[7] 7. Banu J, Baral R, Vijayalakshmi V: The enablers and stumbling blocks in sustaining growth of women-owned micro-enterprises in India–a qualitative inquiry. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy. 2024; 18(5): 918–944. Publisher Full Text

[8] 8. Dewitt S, Jafari-Sadeghi V, Sukumar A, et al.: Family dynamics and relationships in female entrepreneurship: An exploratory study. Journal of Family Business Management. 2023; 13(3): 626–644. Publisher Full Text

[9] 9. Pont A, Simon A: Nurturing family business resilience through strategic supply chain management. Journal of Family Business Management. 2025; 15(1): 68–101. Publisher Full Text

[10] 10. Liew MX, Loo YM: The family-level of generational involvement: impact on the nexus between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance among small family businesses. Journal of Family Business Management. 2024; 14(3): 475–494. Publisher Full Text

[11] 11. Hundera M, Mudde HLM: A comprehensive analysis of gender dynamics in organizations: Integrating social, structural and individual dimensions. Eur. J. Educ. 2024; 59(4): e12722. Publisher Full Text

[12] 12. Tula ST, Ofodile OC, Okoye CC, et al.: Entrepreneurial ecosystems in the USA: A comparative review with European models. International Journal of Management & Entrepreneurship Research. 2024; 6(2): 451–466. Publisher Full Text

[13] 13. Vicentin DC, de Moraes GHSM , Fischer BB, et al.: The interdependence between the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem and Entrepreneurial Culture-an analysis with sustainable and traditional entrepreneurs. J. Clean. Prod. 2024; 466: 142821. Publisher Full Text

[14] 14. Filculescu A: The heterogeneous landscape of innovation in female led-businesses-cross-country comparisons. Management & Marketing. 2016; 11(4): 610–623. Publisher Full Text

[15] 15. Dissanayake K: Institutional forces and life cycle stages of women-led SMEs in developing economies. Journal of Business Studies. 2016; 3(2): 40–55. Publisher Full Text

[16] 16. Le LH, Stefańczyk JK: Gender discrimination in access to credit: are women-led SMEs rejected more than men-led? Gend. Technol. Dev. 2018; 22(2): 145–163. Publisher Full Text

[17] 17. Kevane M, Ratan AL, Dhar D: Women-Led Small-and Medium-Sized Enterprises During COVID-19: Examining Barriers and Opportunities. Fem. Econ. 2024; 30(1): 244–277. Publisher Full Text

[18] 18. Singh S, Dash BM: Gender discrimination in accessing finance by women-owned businesses: A review. J. Int. Women's Stud. 2021; 22(9): 381–399.

[19] 19. Samy Y, Adedeji A, Iraoya A, et al.: Trade and Women’s Economic Empowerment: Evidence from Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. Springer Nature; 2023; 162.

[20] 20. Haoucha M: Global Insights on Women Empowerment and Leadership. IGI Global; 2024.

[21] 21. Sharma LK, Paudel V: The Role of SMEs in Enhancing Women’s Employment Opportunities in Nepal: A Data-Driven Perspective. Cognition. 2025; 7(1): 35–44. Publisher Full Text

[22] 22. Snilstveit B, Oliver S, Vojtkova M: Narrative approaches to systematic review and synthesis of evidence for international development policy and practice. J. Dev. Eff. 2012; 4(3): 409–429. Publisher Full Text

[23] 23. Belotto MJ: Data analysis methods for qualitative research: Managing the challenges of coding, interrater reliability, and thematic analysis. Qual. Rep. 2018; 23(11): 2622–2633. Publisher Full Text

[24] 24. Seyed Kalali N: Entrepreneurial orientation in family firms: the effects of long-term orientation. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2022; 28(7): 1732–1750. Publisher Full Text

[25] 25. Mostafiz MI, Hughes M, Sambasivan M: Entrepreneurial orientation, competitive advantage and strategic knowledge management capability in Malaysian family firms. J. Knowl. Manag. 2022; 26(2): 423–458. Publisher Full Text

[26] 26. Venugopal S, Viswanathan M: Negotiated agency in the face of consumption constraints: A study of women entrepreneurs in subsistence contexts. J. Public Policy Mark. 2021; 40(3): 336–353. Publisher Full Text

[27] 27. Xiao Z, Chen X, Dong MC, et al.: Institutional support and firms’ entrepreneurial orientation in emerging economies. Long Range Plan. 2022; 55(1): 102106. Publisher Full Text

[28] 28. Liard-Muriente CF: Adaptations, Female Labour Participation, and Innovation among SMEs in Zambia during Covid-19 Pandemic. African Journal of Economic Review. 2023; 11(4): 1–14.

[29] 29. Rudman LA, Glick P: The social psychology of gender: How power and intimacy shape gender relations. Guilford Publications; 2021.

[30] 30. Jesús Carrasco-Santos M, Seyfi S, Hosseini S, et al.: Breaking boundaries: Exploring gendered challenges and advancing equality for Iranian women careers in tourism.2024.

[31] 31. Fang S, Goh C, Roberts M, et al.: Female entrepreneurs and productivity around the world: Rule of law, network, culture, and gender equality. World Dev. 2022; 154: 105846. Publisher Full Text

[32] 32. Ferdoos A, Zahra MS: 04 Patriarchy and decision-making power of women. Journal of Gender and Social Issues. 2016; 15(2): 55–68.

[33] 33. Mawa B: Challenging patriarchy: the changing definition of women’s empowerment. Social Science Review. 2020; 37(2): 239–264. Publisher Full Text

[34] 34. Heise L, Greene ME, Opper N, et al.: Gender inequality and restrictive gender norms: framing the challenges to health. Lancet. 2019; 393(10189): 2440–2454. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[35] 35. Stoker S, Rossano-Rivero S, Davis S, et al.: Pursuing entrepreneurial opportunities is not a choice: the interplay between gender norms, contextual embeddedness, and (in) equality mechanisms in entrepreneurial contexts. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2024; 30(7): 1725–1749. Publisher Full Text

[36] 36. Tanzeela KD, Mehraj D: Determinants of Success for Women Entrepreneurs: An Examination of Small and Medium-Sized Women-Led Businesses in India's Emerging Market. Business Strategy & Development. 2024; 7(4): e70053. Publisher Full Text

[37] 37. De Andrés P, Gimeno R, de Cabo RM : The gender gap in bank credit access. J. Corp. Finan. 2021; 71: 101782. Publisher Full Text

[38] 38. Woehler ML, Cullen-Lester KL, Porter CM, et al.: Whether, how, and why networks influence men’s and women’s career success: Review and research agenda. J. Manag. 2021; 47(1): 207–236. Publisher Full Text

[39] 39. Reddy PR, Venugopal R, Narahari T: Women Entrepreneurship in India: Opportunities and Challenges. Madhya Bharti -Humanities and Social Sciences Vol-85, No. 12, UGC Care Group I Journal. 2024.

[40] 40. Ergün Z, Bayram AT, Bayram GE: Challenges and Opportunities in Rural Women's Entrepreneurship: Navigating Financial, Infrastructural, and Societal Barriers. Empowering Women Through Rural Sustainable Development and Entrepreneurship. 2025; 1–14.

[41] 41. James I, Onoshakpor C: Challenges and opportunities for informal female entrepreneurs in Nigeria using the 5M framework. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2025. Publisher Full Text

[42] 42. Azim MI, Rahman S: Digital Financial Inclusion: A Lifeline for Sustainable Development Goals—Lessons from Bangladesh Through Crisis and Beyond. Financing of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Challenges and Opportunities. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2025; pp. 193–216.

[43] 43. Imo IO, Ekechukwu NB: The Role of Women-Led Social Enterprises in Achieving SDG3. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Knowledge. 2024; 12(2): 93–115. Publisher Full Text

[44] 44. Uwantege A, Mbabazi B: Gender-sensitive financial policies and women’s access to credit in Rwanda. Journal of Financial Inclusion. 2023; 12(3): 45–62.

[45] 45. Ajala T: Gender discrimination in land ownership and the alleviation of women’s poverty in Nigeria: A call for new equities. International Journal of Discrimination and the Law. 2017; 17(1): 51–66. Publisher Full Text

[46] 46. Kumar S, Sahoo S, Lim WM, et al.: Religion as a social shaping force in entrepreneurship and business: Insights from a technology-empowered systematic literature review. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2022; 175: 121393. Publisher Full Text

[47] 47. Soemitra A, Kusmilawaty, Rahma TIF: The role of micro Waqf bank in women’s Micro-Business empowerment through Islamic social finance: Mixed-Method evidence from Mawaridussalam Indonesia. Economies. 2022; 10(7): 157. Publisher Full Text

[48] 48. Abdullah: Role of Education in women Development. BULLET: Jurnal Multidisiplin Ilmu. 2023; 2(2): 344–350.

[49] 49. Roka YB: Women-led Enterprises for Poverty Reduction in Pokhara. Janaprakash Journal of Multidisciplinary Research. 2024; 2: 65–78. Publisher Full Text

[50] 50. Vijaya GS, Almasri R: A study of women entrepreneurship in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Advanced Engineering, Management and Science. 2016; 2(12): 1159–1956.

[51] 51. Alreshoodi SA, Rehman AU, Alshammari SA, et al.: Women Entrepreneurs in Saudi Arabia: A Portrait of progress in the context of their drivers and inhibitors. Journal of Enterprising Culture. 2022; 30(03): 375–400. Publisher Full Text

[52] 52. Yunis MS, Hashim H, Anderson AR: Enablers and constraints of female entrepreneurship in Khyber Pukhtunkhawa, Pakistan: Institutional and feminist perspectives. Sustainability. 2018; 11(1): 27. Publisher Full Text

[53] 53. Rahayu NS: The Intersection of Islamic Microfinance and Women’s Empowerment: A Case Study of Baitul Maal Wat Tamwil in Indonesia. Int. J. Financial Stud. 2020; 8(2): 37. Publisher Full Text

[54] 54. Akpuokwe CU, Chikwe CF, Eneh NE: Leveraging technology and financial literacy for women’s empowerment in SMEs: A conceptual framework for sustainable development. Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances. 2024; 18(3): 020–032. Publisher Full Text

[55] 55. Pergelova A, Manolova T, Simeonova-Ganeva R, et al.: Democratizing entrepreneurship? Digital technologies and the internationalization of female-led SMEs. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2019; 57(1): 14–39. Publisher Full Text

[56] 56. Braun P, Birdthistle N, Flynn A: Beyond COVID-19: women entrepreneurs and e-commerce policy in the Asia-Pacific. Women's Entrepreneurship Policy. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2023; pp. 192–213.

[57] 57. Lee JN, Morduch J, Ravindran S, et al.: Poverty and Migration in the Digital Age: Experimental Evidence on Mobile Banking in Bangladesh. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 2021; 13(1): 38–71. Publisher Full Text

[58] 58. Ahmed MS, Rony RJ, Khan SS, et al.: Towards Exploration of the Factors Affecting Mobile Banking of Bangladeshi Women during COVID. SSRN Electron. J. 2021. Publisher Full Text

[59] 59. Neneh BN: Performance implications of the interrelationship between risk-taking and family support for women-owned businesses: evidence from South Africa. Int. J. Entrep. Small Bus. 2019; 38(1/2): 102–119. Publisher Full Text

[60] 60. Srinivasan S, Vallipriya R: Empowering Women Entrepreneurs and Developing Family Businesses. IGI Global; 2025.

[61] 61. Nanyanzi M, Katumba P, Tibaingana A: Spouse Support, Innovative Behaviour and Entrepreneurial Effectiveness of Women-Owned Agricultural Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Uganda. International Journal of Applied Research in Management and Economics. 2024; 7(1): 15–30. Publisher Full Text

[62] 62. Acquah OBED: The effects of security and performance risks on customers’ intention to utilize electronic banking based on unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Winneba: University of Education; 2021. (Doctoral dissertation).

[63] 63. Ghosh PK, Ghosh SK, Chowdhury S: Factors hindering women entrepreneurs’ access to institutional finance—an empirical study. J. Small Bus. Entrep. 2018; 30(4): 279–291. Publisher Full Text

[64] 64. Mwangi M, Ouma S: Legal Challenges Facing Women Entrepreneurs in Kenya: A Case Study of Nairobi County. Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2021; 12(3): 45–53.

[65] 65. Mukamuhoza P, Kengere OA, Nyabera OS: Micro-Credit Services and Growth of Women Enterprises in Rwanda: A Case of Urwego Opportunity Bank. J. Financ. Account. 2023; 7(11): 184–197.

[66] 66. Yasin RFF, Mahmud MW, Diniyya AA: Significance of financial literacy among women entrepreneurs on halal business. Journal of Halal Industry & Services. 2020; 3: 1–9.

[67] 67. Egbo OP, Ezeaku H, Igwemeka E, et al.: Financial literacy and access: revisiting the bridges and barriers to women entrepreneurship in Nigeria. Revista Amazonia Investiga. 2020; 9(29): 436–444. Publisher Full Text

[68] 68. Hasan R, Ashfaq M, Parveen T, et al.: Financial inclusion – does digital financial literacy matter for women entrepreneurs? Int. J. Soc. Econ. 2023; 50(8): 1085–1104. Publisher Full Text

[69] 69. Gumbo L, Marimuthu F, Vengesai E: Financial literacy competencies of women in agribusiness and their financial experiences during a pandemic. The Southern African Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management. 2023; 15(1): 1–11. Publisher Full Text

[70] 70. Mozumdar L, Hagelaar G, van der Velde G , et al.: Determinants of the business performance of women entrepreneurs in the developing world context. J. 2020; 3(2): 215–235. Publisher Full Text

[71] 71. Gasparin M, Green W, Lilley S, et al.: Business as unusual: A business model for social innovation. J. Bus. Res. 2021; 125: 698–709. Publisher Full Text

[72] 72. Maziriri ET, Nyagadza B, Chuchu T: Key innovation abilities on capability and the performance of women entrepreneurs: the role of entrepreneurial education and proactive personality. Business Analyst Journal. 2023; 44(2): 53–83. Publisher Full Text

[73] 73. Suseno Y, Abbott L: Women entrepreneurs' digital social innovation: Linking gender, entrepreneurship, social innovation and information systems. Inf. Syst. J. 2021; 31(5): 717–744. Publisher Full Text

[74] 74. Nasir M, Nasir S, Sajjad S: Women Entrepreneurship and Empowerment in Pakistan: Gender, Culture, Education and Policy in Broader Perspective. Journal of Managerial Sciences. 2021; 15(4): 1–22.

[75] 75. Heponiemi T, Gluschkoff K, Leemann L, et al.: Digital inequality in Finland: Access, skills and attitudes as social impact mediators. New Media Soc. 2021; 25(9): 2341–2360.

[76] 76. Sarkki S, Dalla Torre C, Fransala J, et al.: Reconstructive social innovation cycles in women-led initiatives in rural areas. Sustainability. 2021; 13(3): 1231. Publisher Full Text

[77] 77. Patterson N, Mavin S: When patriarchy and individualism collide: experiences of women entrepreneurial leaders. Int. J. Gend. Entrep. 2025; 17(1): 116–134. Publisher Full Text

[78] 78. Ahmed N: Empowering Women in India Through Innovative Incubators and Accelerators for Energy Entrepreneurship. University Incubators and Their Role in the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem. 2024; 293. Publisher Full Text

[79] 79. Gupta N: Empowering Women, Transforming India: The Ripple Effect of Women-Led Startups. Bhartiyam International Journal of Education & Research. 2024 March 2024; Volume 13(II). 2277-1255

[80] 80. Smulowitz SJ, Smulowitz M, Cossin D: More risk-averse or more innovative? The effect of women board membership and aspirations on patent activity. Res. Policy. 2025; 54(1): 105109. Publisher Full Text

[81] 81. Seigner BDC, Milanov H, McKenny AF: Who can claim innovation and benefit from it? Gender and expectancy violations in reward-based crowdfunding. Strateg. Entrep. J. 2022; 16(2): 381–422. Publisher Full Text

[82] 82. Seshasai SJ, Shriya K: Empowering women entrepreneurs: How tech-driven innovation can unlock business success. New Practices for Entrepreneurship Innovation. IGI Global; 2024; pp. 218–244.

[83] 83. Phillips MJ: Empowering undergraduate women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine: exploring experiences, fostering motivation, and advancing gender equity. Soc. Sci. 2024; 13(2): 74. Publisher Full Text

[84] 84. Rwigema PC: Initiatives Aimed at Increasing the Participation of Women in the Tech Industry in Rwanda and their Impact on Social and Economic Development. Reviewed Journal International. 2024; 5(1).

[85] 85. Wawire N, Tsuma F: Women Entrepreneurs’ Land Ownership and Performance of their Manufacturing Enterprises in Kenya. Kenyatta University Women’s Economic Empowerment (KU-WEE) Journal. 2025; 1(1): 141–163.

[86] 86. Xheneti M, Karki ST, Madden A: Negotiating business and family demands within a patriarchal society–the case of women entrepreneurs in the Nepalese context. Understanding Women's Entrepreneurship in a Gendered Context. Routledge; 2021; pp. 93–112.

[87] 87. Bhindi JS, Jangra R: Empowering Rural Women Entrepreneurs: The Intricate Tapestry of Family and Social Support Networks in India. Empowering Women Through Rural Sustainable Development and Entrepreneurship. IGI Global Scientific Publishing; 2025; pp. 139–178.

[88] 88. Monnickendam-Givon Y, Schwartz D, Gidron B: The surprising lack of connection between social networks and the enterprise success of ultra-religious female micro-entrepreneurs. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy. 2018; 12(3): 395–415. Publisher Full Text

[89] 89. Afrilsah M: Investigating the role of religion in shaping moral values and social norms. Mahogany Journal De Social. 2024; 1(1): 29–36.

[90] 90. Deng W, Liang Q, Wang W, et al.: How psychological perceptions and family dynamics shape necessity- and opportunity-based female entrepreneurship: the role of gender equality. Multinatl. Bus. Rev. 2025; 33(1): 170–197. Publisher Full Text

[91] 91. Nyamboga TO, Odhuno E, Okibo Bichanga W: Influence of Crediting Strategy on Growth of Small and Micro Enterprises in Kenya: A Case of Women Enterprise Fund. Asian Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting. 2019; 13(1): 1–17. Publisher Full Text

[92] 92. Haddock-Millar J, Clutterbuck D: Reciprocal mentoring in the entrepreneurial sector. Reciprocal Mentoring. Routledge; 2023; pp. 10–29.

[93] 93. Abdelwahid M, Kaoud H: Factors affecting the success of women entrepreneurs in Egypt. Int. J. Organ. Leadersh. 2022; 11(4): 444–461. Publisher Full Text

[94] 94. El-Fiky S: Shattering the second glass ceiling: an empirical study on women entrepreneurs in Egypt. Int. J. Gend. Entrep. 2023; 15(1): 1–21. Publisher Full Text

[95] 95. Beleyi F: Fostering Prosperity for African Female Entrepreneurs: Opportunities for AU–EU Cooperation in Digital Entrepreneurship Networks. Africa–Europe Cooperation and Digital Transformation. Routledge; 2022; pp. 228–242.

Breaking Barriers: How Socio-Cultural Factors Moderate the Relationship Between Strategic Determinants and Women-Led SME Performance Across Diverse Cultures

Abstract

Keywords

Revised Amendments from Version 1

Introduction

Materials and methods

Data collection methods and search strategy

Screening and inclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria

Data analysis and thematic coding

Quality assessment and rigour enhancement

Control of subjective interpretations

Theoretical framework implications

Findings of literature review

Figure 1. Conceptual framework.

Institutional frameworks, gender bias, resource access and performance of women led SMEs

Societal attitudes, religious beliefs, education, market positioning and performance of women led SMEs

Family dynamics, institutional frameworks, risk management and performance of women led SMEs

Education, societal attitudes, innovation and performance of women led SMEs

Discussion of findings

Figure 2. Schematic diagram.

Institutional frameworks, gender bias, resources access and performance of women led SMEs

Societal attitudes, religious beliefs, education, market positioning and performance of women led SMEs

Family dynamics, institutional frameworks, risk management and performance of women led SMEs

Education, societal attitudes, innovation and performance of women led SMEs

Practical implications

Conclusion

Recommendations

Limitation of the study

Direction for future research

Data availability statement

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated