The SMEChain Ventures’ Post

🤷♂️ "Its a pipeline problem - there just aren't enough women founders applying." ❌ Wrong. This is a tired excuse that is disproven by the data. The 2024 Techstars Tech Central Sydney Accelerator broke Australian records for an equity-backed accelerator: Highest representation of female founders (10 out of 12 teams or 83%), most diverse (all teams or 100%) and strongest cohort of founders in a single accelerator class (anecdotal at this stage - data to come in 5-10 years 😉 ). Looking at the data there are some big lessons that are applicable for all investors: 🏌♂️ Men prospect, women wait. The result? We had more applications from men-only teams, but stronger applications from teams with at least one woman. Once we controlled for quality, the remaining application numbers were pretty much gender-neutral. 🪜 The critical step is from application to interview. Many investors claim that their process has no bias because they don't see a drop in representation from teams with at least one woman between application and interview - but the fact that applications aren't actively penalised for having a woman founder doesn't go far enough. If the investor progresses teams to interview in the same proportion that applications are received without controlling for quality, they're favouring weaker applications from men-only teams over stronger applications from teams with at least one woman. 🎙️ How you interview matters. Structured rounds, clear interview goals, a founder-first mindset, and deploying a combination of promotional and preventative questions regardless of gender creates a level playing field - in our case, this allowed teams with at least one woman to actually increase representation from interview to screening committee. It is an unavoidable truth that the venture capital system was designed by men, is upheld predominantly by men, and benefits predominantly men.  But it doesn't have to be this way.