The real reason female entrepreneurs get less funding | Dana Kanze

翻译人员: jacks peng 校对人员: Alex Liu

This is me at five years old,

这是我5岁的时候，

shortly before jumping into this beautifully still pool of water.

正准备跳进这美丽而平静的水潭。

I soon find out the hard way that this pool is completely empty

我很快就痛苦地发现， 这个水池完全是空的，

because the ice-cold water is near freezing

因为池里的水快结冰了，

and literally takes my breath away.

几乎让我无法呼吸。

Even though I already know how to swim,

即便我已经知道如何游泳，

I can't get up to the water's surface, no matter how hard I try.

但不管我怎么努力尝试， 都无法到达水面。

That's the last thing I remember trying to do before blacking out.

那是在我晕倒前 记得的最后一个事情。

Turns out, the lifeguard on duty had been chatting with two girls

原来，当我跳进去的 时候，当值救生员

when I jumped in,

在跟两位女孩聊天，

and I was soon underwater,

并且我很快就沉入水中，

so he couldn't actually see or hear me struggle.

所以他无法看到或听到我的挣扎。

I was eventually saved by a girl walking near the pool

我最终被在泳池旁 散步的一位女孩解救，

who happened to look down and see me.

她碰巧低头看到了我。

The next thing I know, I'm getting mouth-to-mouth

接下来我只记得， 有人给我做了人工呼吸，

and being rushed to the hospital to determine the extent of my brain loss.

并快速把我送去医院， 以确定我的大脑是否受到损伤。

If I had been flailing at the water's surface,

如果我一直在水面挣扎，

the lifeguard would have noticed and come to save me.

救生员可能会很快注意到并来救我。

I share this near-death experience because it illustrates

我分享这个濒死体验，是因为它反映了

how dangerous things are when they're just beneath the surface.

隐藏在表面之下的事物是多么的危险。

Today, I study implicit gender bias in start-ups,

今天，我致力于研究 初创企业中的隐性性别偏见，

which I consider to be far more insidious than mere overt bias

基于相似的理由，我认为这会比

for this very same reason.

公开的偏见更阴险。

When we see or hear an investor

当我们看到或听到一位投资人

behaving inappropriately towards an entrepreneur,

对一个创业者做出了不当言行，

we're aware of the problem

我们注意到了问题所在，

and at least have a chance to do something about it.

并且至少有机会去做点什么。

But what if there are subtle differences

但如果投资者和创业者之间的交流

in the interactions between investors and entrepreneurs

存在会影响最终结果，

that can affect their outcomes,

而且是我们没有意识到，

differences that we're not conscious of,

无法直接看到或者听到的细微差别，

that we can't directly see or hear?

会怎样呢？

Before studying start-ups at Columbia Business School,

在哥伦比亚商学院研究初创企业前，

I spent five years running and raising money for my own start-up.

我花了5年时间运作 自己的公司和募集资金。

I remember constantly racing around to meet with prospective investors

我记得总是跑来跑去 见各种潜在的投资人，

一边尝试着管理我的生意。

while trying to manage my actual business.

At one point I joked that I had reluctantly pitched

我曾一度开玩笑说我不情愿地向

each and every family member, friend, colleague, angel investor

每一个亲人，朋友，同事，天使投资人

and VC this side of the Mississippi.

和密西西比这边的风险投资人推销。

Well, in the process of speaking to all these investors,

在跟所有这些投资人的交谈中，

I noticed something interesting was happening.

我注意到一些有趣的事情。

I was getting asked a very different set of questions than my male cofounder.

我会比我的男性合伙人多问到 一些非常不同的问题。

I got asked just about everything that could go wrong with the venture

我被问到了几乎所有 可能会让项目出错

to induce investor losses,

导致投资人损失的问题，

while my male cofounder was asked about our venture's home run potential

而我的男性合伙人被问到的则是 我们企业的自主经营潜力，

to maximize investor gains,

如何使投资者收益最大化，

essentially everything that could go right with the venture.

基本都是那些符合 投资公司利益的问题。

He got asked how many new customers we were going to bring on,

他被问到我们打算发展多少新客户，

while I got asked how we were going to hang on to the ones we already had.

而我被问到我们打算如何 留住我们已有的客户。

Well, as the CEO of the company, I found this to be rather odd.

作为公司的CEO， 我发现这点相当奇怪。

In fact, I felt like I was taking crazy pills.

事实上，我感到有些抓狂。

But I eventually rationalized it by thinking,

但我最终想办法把它合理化了，

maybe this has to do with how I'm presenting myself,

也许这与我自我介绍的方式有关，

or it's something simply unique to my start-up.

或者这只是我的创业公司独有的问题。

Well, years later I made the difficult decision to leave my start-up

几年后，我做了个艰难的决定， 离开了我的初创公司，

so I could pursue a lifelong dream of getting my PhD.

这样我就能追求我的 终生梦想——拿到博士学位。

It was at Columbia that I learned about a social psychological theory

在哥伦比亚大学，我学到了一种

originated by Professor Tory Higgins called "regulatory focus,"

由托利•希金斯教授提出的 名为“调节焦点理论”的社会心理学理论，

它区分了促进和防御

which differentiates between two distinct motivational orientations

of promotion and prevention.

这两种截然不同的动机取向。

A promotion focus is concerned with gains

促进焦点专注于收益

and emphasizes hopes, accomplishments and advancement needs,

和强调理想，成就和进步需求，

while a prevention focus is concerned with losses

而防御焦点专注于损失

and emphasizes safety, responsibility and security needs.

并强调保险、责任和安全需求。

Since the best-case scenario for a prevention focus

因为防御焦点的最佳方案是

is to simply maintain the status quo,

保持现状，

this has us treading water just to stay afloat,

有点像我们踩水只是为了浮在水面上，

while a promotion focus instead has us swimming in the right direction.

而促进焦点却是为了 让我们朝正确的方向游去。

It's just a matter of how far we can advance.

这只是我们能走多远的问题。

Well, I had my very own eureka moment when it dawned on me

当看到这个理论时我灵光一闪，

that this concept of promotion

促进焦点的概念

sounded a lot like the questions posed to my male cofounder,

听起来很像向我的 男性合伙人提出的问题，

while prevention resembled those questions asked of me.

而防御焦点代表了问我的那些问题。

As an entrepreneurship scholar,

作为一位创业者学者，

I started digging into the research on start-up financing

我开始深入研究创业融资问题，

并发现在男性和女性创始人的

and discovered there's an enormous gap

between the amount of funds that male and female founders raise.

融资数额上存在巨大的鸿沟。

Although women found 38 percent of US companies,

虽然女性创建了38%的美国公司，

they only get two percent of the venture funding.

她们只拿到2%的投资基金。

I got to thinking:

我于是就想：

what if this funding gap is not due to any fundamental difference

如果这种资金落差不是 因为任何男人和女人

in the businesses started by men and women?

所成立公司的根本差异导致的呢？

What if women get less funding than men

如果女性比男性得到更少的融资

due to a simple difference in the questions that they get asked?

是因为被询问的问题 不一样所导致的呢？

After all, when it comes to venture funding,

毕竟涉及到企业融资时，

entrepreneurs need to convince investors of their start-up's home run potential.

企业需要说服投资人相信 他们公司的自主经营潜力。

It's not enough to merely demonstrate

仅仅证明你

不会让投资人亏钱是不够的。

you're not going to lose your investors' money.

So it makes sense that women would be getting less funding than men

所以如果女性进行的是一场防御焦点

if they're engaging

而非促进焦点的对话，

in prevention as opposed to promotion-oriented dialogues.

她们拿到的钱 比男性少就说得过去了，

Well, I got the chance to test this hypothesis

在纽约市举办的

on companies with similar quality and funding needs across all years

自2010年设立的

at the funding competition known as TechCrunch Disrupt

名为TechCrunch Disrupt Startup battle 的融资竞赛中，

Startup Battlefield has run in New York City

我找机会从有相似品质 和融资需求的公司身上

since its inception in 2010.

验证了这一假设。

TechCrunch is widely regarded as the ideal place for start-ups to launch,

TechCrunch被广泛认为是 启动创业公司的理想场合，

with participants including start-ups that have since become household names,

参加者包括后来家喻户晓的创业公司，

like Dropbox, Fitbit and Mint,

如Dropbox, Fitbit和Mint,

presenting to some of the world's most prominent VCs.

向世界顶尖风险投资机构展示自己。

Well, despite the comparability of companies in my sample,

尽管这些公司样本有可比性问题，

male-led start-ups went on to raise five times as much funding

但男性主导的创业公司 融资的金额仍然是

as the female-led ones.

女性主导的5倍之多。

This made me especially curious to see what's driving this gender disparity.

这让我尤其好奇想弄清是什么 导致了这个性别差异。

Well, it took a while,

这花了点时间，

but I got my hands on all the videos of both the pitches and the Q and A sessions

但我找到了来自TechCrunch的 所有的演示和问答环节的视频，

from TechCrunch, and I had them transcribed.

并把它们转录成文本。

I first analyzed the transcripts

我首先通过一个名为

by loading a dictionary of regulatory-focused terms

LIWC的语言查询和字数统计软件中

into the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count software called LIWC.

加载一个调节定向的 术语词典来分析这些文本。

This LIWC software generated the frequencies

LIWC软件统计了

of promotion and prevention words in the transcribed text.

转录文本中促进和防御的频次。

As a second method,

第二种方法是，

I had each of the questions and answers manually coded

我的每一个问题和答案 都是由哥伦比亚大学的

by the Tory Higgins Research Lab at Columbia.

托利·希金斯研究实验室手工编写的。

Regardless of the topic at hand,

不管手头的话题是什么，

an intention can be framed in promotion or prevention.

意图都可以在促进或防御中被框定。

Let's take that topic of customers I mentioned briefly earlier.

让我们以前面简要提到的 客户这个话题为例。

A promotion-coded question sounds like,

促进类的问题大多是这样，

"How many new customers do you plan to acquire this year?"

“你今年打算获取多少新用户？”

while a prevention-coded one sounds like,

而预防类的问题多是，

“你打算如何留住你现有的用户？”

"How do you plan to retain your existing customers?"

During the same time,

与此同时，

I also gathered background information

我也收集了

对创业公司和创业者来说可能 会影响他们融资的背景信息，

on the start-ups and entrepreneurs that can affect their funding outcomes,

like the start-up's age, quality and funding needs

如创业公司的年限，质量和资金需求

and the entrepreneur's past experience,

以及创业的历史经验，

so I could use these data points as controls in my analysis.

这样我就可以在分析中使用 这些数据点作为对照。

Well, the very first thing that I found

我首先发现的是

他们的创业宣讲的方式并无差异。

is that there's no difference in the way entrepreneurs present their companies.

In other words, both male and female entrepreneurs

换句话说，男性和女性创业者

use similar degrees of promotion and prevention language

在他们的实际宣讲环节中 所使用的促进和预防语言

in their actual pitches.

处于同类水平。

所以排除了创业者一方的差异后，

So having ruled out this difference on the entrepreneur's side,

我又转到到投资者这边，

I then moved on to the investor's side,

analyzing the six minutes of Q&A sessions

分析了创业者展示环节后的

that entrepreneurs engaged in with the VCs after pitching.

风险投资者参与的6分钟问答环节。

When examining the nearly 2,000 questions

当浏览了将近2千个问题

and corresponding answers in these exchanges,

和这些交流中给出的相应答案时，

both of my methods showed significant support

我的方法都显示出了显著支撑

for the fact that male entrepreneurs get asked promotion questions

男性创业者会被问促进焦点类问题，

and female entrepreneurs get asked prevention questions.

而女性创业者会被问 防御焦点类问题的事实。

In fact, a whopping 67 percent of the questions posed

事实上，高达67%抛给

to male entrepreneurs were promotion-focused,

男性创业者的问题是促进焦点的问题，

while 66 percent of those posed to female entrepreneurs were prevention-focused.

而有66%抛给女性创业者的 问题是防御焦点的问题。

What's especially interesting

尤其有趣的是，

is that I expected female VCs

我期待女性风投者的行为

to behave similarly to male VCs.

与男性风投者类似。

Given its prevalence in the popular media and the venture-funding literature,

鉴于它在大众媒体和 风险投资文献中的流行程度，

I expected the birds-of-a-feather theory of homophily to hold here,

我期待一丘之貉的同质性 偏好理论在这里成立，

meaning that male VCs would favor male entrepreneurs

这意味着男性风投者会在促进问题上

with promotion questions

偏向男性创业者，

and female VCs would do the same for female entrepreneurs.

而女性风投者会对 女性创业者做类似的事情。

But instead, all VCs displayed the same implicit gender bias

但相反，所有的风投者都 展示了同样的隐性性别偏见，

manifested in the regulatory focus of the questions they posed

这反映在他们针对男性和女性创业者

to male versus female candidates.

提出的问题的调节焦点上。

So female VCs asked male entrepreneurs promotion questions

也就是说，女性风投者 会问男性创业者促进问题，

and then turned around and asked female entrepreneurs prevention questions

然后转过来问女性创业者防御问题，

just like the male VCs did.

就跟男性风投者一样。

So given the fact that both male and female VCs

所以考虑到男性和女性风投

are displaying this implicit gender bias,

都展示出了这种隐性性别偏见，

what effect, if any, does this have on start-up funding outcomes?

这对创业融资的结果 有什么潜在影响吗？

My research shows it has a significant effect.

我的研究揭示了显著的影响。

The regulatory focus of investor questions

投资者的调节焦点问题

not only predicted how well the start-ups would perform

不仅可以预测出创业公司在

at the TechCrunch Disrupt competitions

TechCrunch Disrupt竞赛中的表现，

but also how much funding the start-ups went on to raise in the open market.

而且也能预测出创业公司在 公开市场能得到多少资金。

Those start-ups who were asked predominantly promotion questions

那些主要被问到促进问题的创业者，

went on to raise seven times as much funding

其融资金额是被问到防御问题的

as those asked prevention questions.

创业者的7倍之多。

But I didn't stop there.

但我并没有止步于此。

I then moved on to analyze entrepreneurs' responses to those questions,

我随后转而分析创业者 对这些问题的回应，

and I found that entrepreneurs are apt to respond in kind

我发现创业者会对他们得到的问题

to the questions they get,

做出对应的回应，

meaning a promotion question begets a promotion response

意思是促进的问题会得到促进的答复，

and a prevention question begets a prevention response.

而预防的问题会得到预防的回应。

Now, this might make intuitive sense to all of us here,

我们可能都对此有直观的理解，

but it has some unfortunate consequences in this context of venture funding.

但在风险投资的背景下， 它会带来一些不幸的后果。

So what ends up happening

所以最后，

is that a male entrepreneur gets asked a promotion question,

男性创业者被问到促进问题，

granting him the luxury to reinforce his association

给了他这种“奢侈”，从而得以增强其

with the favorable domain of gains by responding in kind,

处于可以获得实物回报的 有利位置的联想，

while a female entrepreneur gets asked a prevention question

而女性创业者被问到预防问题，

and inadvertently aggravates her association

无形中加重了她会

with the unfavorable domain of losses by doing so.

亏损的不利境地的联想。

These responses then trigger venture capitalists' subsequent biased questions,

这些回答会引发风险投资家 随后提出的带偏见的问题，

and the questions and answers collectively fuel a cycle of bias

这些问题和答案共同 助长了偏见的循环，

that merely perpetuates the gender disparity.

只会使性别偏见永远存在下去。

Pretty depressing stuff, right?

非常令人沮丧，对吧？

Well, fortunately, there's a silver lining to my findings.

幸运的是，我的发现还有一线希望。

Those plucky entrepreneurs who managed to switch focus

那些成功地用促进答案回应防御问题

by responding to prevention questions with promotion answers

从而扭转关注点的勇敢创业者

went on to raise 14 times more funding

融资的金额要比

用防御答案回应防御问题的

than those who responded to prevention questions

with prevention answers.

创业者高14倍。

So what this means is that if you're asked a question

所以这就意味着假如你被问到了

about defending your start-up's market share,

捍卫你初创公司市场份额的问题，

you'd be better served to frame your response

你最好根据整个市场蛋糕的大小

around the size and growth potential of the overall pie

和增长潜力来设计您的回应，

as opposed to how you merely plan to protect your sliver of that pie.

而非表现出只打算 保护自己那一小块蛋糕。

So if I get asked this question,

所以如果我被问到这个问题，

I would say,

我会说，

"We're playing in such a large and fast-growing market

“我们处在一个庞大 且快速增长的市场，

肯定会吸引新的进入者。

that's bound to attract new entrants.

We plan to take increasing share in this market

我们打算利用我们企业的独特资产

by leveraging our start-up's unique assets."

去增长这个市场的份额。”

I've thus subtly redirected this dialogue into the favorable domain of gains.

这样一来，我就巧妙地将这一对话 重新引入了对我有利的领域。

Now, these results are quite compelling among start-ups that launched at TechCrunch

这些结果在TechCrunch上启动的 初创企业中相当有说服力，

but field data can merely tell us that there's a correlational relationship

但实地数据只能告诉我们调节定向

between regulatory focus and funding.

和融资之间存在相关关系。

So I sought to see whether this difference in regulatory focus

因此，我试图通过对天使投资者

can actually cause funding outcomes

和普通人进行对照实验，

by running a controlled experiment

看看调节定向的这种差异

on both angel investors and ordinary people.

是否真的导致不同的融资结果。

Simulating the TechCrunch Disrupt environment,

通过模拟TechCrunch Disrupt的环境，

I had participants listen to four six-minute audio files

我参与倾听了4个包括10个问答的

of 10 question-and-answer exchanges

6分钟音频，

that were manipulated for promotion and prevention language,

这些问题包含促进和预防用语，

and then asked them to allocate a sum of funding

然后让他们按认为合适的方式

to each venture as they saw fit.

为每个企业分配资金。

Well, my experimental results reinforced my findings from the field.

我的实验结果印证了我实地的发现。

那些被问到促进问题场景的创业者

Those scenarios where entrepreneurs were asked promotion questions

募集到的资金是

received twice the funding allocations

of those where entrepreneurs were asked prevention questions.

被问预防问题者的两倍。

What's especially promising

尤其有前景的是

is the fact that those scenarios where entrepreneurs switched

那些接收到预防问题

as opposed to matched focus when they received prevention questions

但成功将问题进行转变的创业者

received significantly more funding from both sets of participants.

从两边的参与者中拿到了更多的资金。

So to my female entrepreneurs out there,

女企业家们，

here are a couple simple things you could do.

这是几点你能做的事情。

The first is to recognize the question you're being asked.

首先是认可你被问到的问题。

你是不是被问到了预防问题？

Are you getting a prevention question?

If this is the case, answer the question at hand by all means,

如果是这种情况，务必回答手头的问题，

but merely frame your response in promotion

但你要用促进的方式回答，

in an effort to garner higher amounts of funding for your start-ups.

从而给你的初创公司争取更多的资金。

The unfortunate reality, though,

虽然，很遗憾，

is that both men and women evaluating start-ups

男性和女性评估初创公司时

display the same implicit gender bias in their questioning,

在他们的问题中展示了 同样的隐性性别偏见，

inadvertently favoring male entrepreneurs over female ones.

无意中偏爱男性创业者 多于女性创业者。

So to my investors out there,

说给我的投资者们，

I would offer that you have an opportunity here

我会向你们建议，你们有机会

to approach Q&A sessions more even-handedly,

去更公平地对待问答环节，

not just so that you could do the right thing,

你不仅仅能做正确的事情，

but so that you can improve the quality of your decision making.

还可以提升你决策的质量。

By flashing the same light on every start-up's potential

用同样的眼光看待每一个初创企业

for gains and losses,

盈利和亏损的潜力，

you enable all deserving start-ups to shine

你让所有值得的创业者脱颖而出，

并在这个过程中获得最大的回报。

and you maximize returns in the process.

Today, I get to be that girl

今天，我要成为那个在泳池旁边

walking by the pool,

散步的女孩，

sounding the alarm

对表面之下

that something is going on beneath the surface.

发生的事情发出警报。

Together, we have the power to break this cycle

我们齐心协力，就能打破创业募资中

of implicit gender bias in start-up funding.

隐性性别偏见的循环。

Let's give the most promising start-ups,

让我们给最有前途的初创企业

regardless of whether they're led by men or women,

一个成长和成功的机会，

a fighting chance to grow and thrive.

无论它们是由男性还是女性领导的。

Thank you.

谢谢。

(Applause)

（鼓掌）