Research Approach

Design, sample, data collection, analysis, and the limitations of this study.

3.1 Research Design

This study adopts a qualitative research design to examine how #SheFUND shapes the entrepreneurial trajectories, perceived capabilities, confidence, identity, and legitimacy of migrant women entrepreneurs. The research is exploratory in nature and is concerned not only with identifying program outcomes, but also with understanding the mechanisms through which those outcomes are produced. For this reason, a qualitative approach is particularly appropriate. It allows the analysis to capture participants’ subjective experiences, interpretations, relational dynamics, and meaning making processes, which are central to understanding empowerment-oriented interventions but are often difficult to observe through quantitative indicators alone.

The study is designed around the question of how #SheFUND works, for whom, and under what conditions. Rather than treating the program solely as a financial instrument, the research examines #SheFUND as a broader support process embedded in coaching, community, public recognition, feedback, and institutional validation. This required a research strategy capable of reconstructing the participant journey across different stages, from first contact with #SheDIDIT to coaching, application, pitching, funding decisions, and post decision trajectories.

In-depth semi-structured interviews were used as the primary method of data collection. This method was selected because it provides sufficient structure to ensure comparability across participants while also allowing respondents to elaborate on their personal histories, entrepreneurial aspirations, challenges, and experiences of the program in their own terms. The interview data were supplemented by document review and process reconstruction through interviews with staff, coaches, and external stakeholders. This combination of sources allowed the analysis to connect individual experiences with the wider organizational design and implementation logic of #SheFUND.

3.2 Participants and Sampling Strategy

The study draws on interviews with individuals across three broad participant categories: (i) funded entrepreneurs, (ii) non-funded entrepreneurs and (iii) organizational stakeholders, including staff, coaches, and the external funding partner. This multi perspective design was adopted to capture both the lived experience of women entrepreneurs and the institutional perspective of actors involved in designing, delivering, and supporting the program.

Participants were recruited through purposive sampling facilitated by #SheDIDIT. The aim was not to produce a statistically representative sample, but to ensure analytical variation across relevant dimensions, including program edition, funding outcome, national background, entrepreneurial sector, and stage of engagement with #SheDIDIT. This was important because the study seeks to understand the value generated by #SheFUND beyond the final funding decision, including how the process affects women who participate in coaching, apply, pitch, or receive feedback but do not ultimately receive financial support.

The inclusion of staff, coaches, and the external funding partner served two purposes. First, these interviews helped reconstruct the program process, including its intended objectives, selection mechanisms, coaching components, and feedback practices. Second, they provided a basis for triangulating participants’ accounts and interpreting how individual experiences relate to organizational design choices. All participants gave informed consent prior to interview. Names and identifying details have been anonymized to protect confidentiality, and findings are presented in a way that avoids attributing sensitive or identifiable information to individual respondents.

Below is presented a summary of the sample of participants of this study.

3.3 Data Collection

Data collection relied primarily on semi structured interviews. Separate interview protocols were developed for different respondent groups.

For funded entrepreneurs, the interview guide focused on the entrepreneurial background of the participant, the pathway into #SheDIDIT and #SheFUND, the experience of coaching and application preparation, the pitch and selection process, the use and perceived meaning of the loan, and the broader effects of participation on skills, confidence, legitimacy, and business development.

For non-funded entrepreneurs and coaching participants, the interview guide covered similar themes but placed greater emphasis on the experience of not being selected, the quality and usefulness of feedback, the emotional and practical consequences of the decision, and the extent to which participants remained connected to #SheDIDIT after the process. This distinction was important because the study does not assume that impact is limited to funded beneficiaries. Instead, it examines whether and how the application and coaching journey itself generates value, even when it does not result in financial support.

A separate shorter protocol was developed for staff, coaches, and stakeholders. These interviews focused on program objectives, implementation choices, selection criteria, perceived strengths and weaknesses, participant needs, and opportunities for future improvement. In combination, the three interview protocols allowed the study to examine #SheFUND from multiple angles: as a participant experience, as an organizational intervention, and as a funding and support mechanism.

Interviews were conducted in English and lasted between 40 and 70 minutes. With participants’ consent, interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were subsequently reviewed manually to correct transcription errors, improve accuracy, and ensure that meaning was preserved. In addition to interview data, relevant program documents were reviewed to contextualize the findings and support the reconstruction of the #SheFUND process.

3.4 Data Analysis

The analysis followed an abductive thematic approach. This approach combines sensitivity to existing analytical concepts with openness to themes emerging from the data. It was appropriate for this study because the research was guided by a set of core dimensions, including skills and capabilities, entrepreneurial identity, confidence, perceived legitimacy, and community, while also allowing new themes to emerge inductively from participants’ accounts.

The coding process developed iteratively. An initial codebook was constructed on the basis of the research objectives and the first set of interviews. This codebook included deductive categories related to the expected areas of program impact, such as business skills, financial literacy, pitch readiness, entrepreneurial confidence, legitimacy, network access, and post decision trajectories. During early coding, additional themes were added to capture issues that emerged from the data, including emotional safety, peer recognition, the meaning of being taken seriously, the role of community, the experience of rejection, and the importance of feedback quality.

The first interviews were coded closely to refine the codebook and clarify coding boundaries. The full dataset was then coded consistently using the revised structure. The analysis proceeded through several stages. First, within case analysis was used to reconstruct each participant’s journey and identify how she experienced different phases of the program. Second, cross case analysis was used to compare patterns across funded and non funded participants. This comparison was particularly important for identifying which forms of value were specific to funded entrepreneurs and which were generated through the broader #SheFUND process. Third, stakeholder and staff interviews were used to triangulate findings and connect participant experiences to the program’s design and implementation features.

The final themes were developed by moving iteratively between the coded material, the research questions, and the emerging interpretation of #SheFUND as more than a loan mechanism. This analytical process led to the identification of several core mechanisms, including capability building, confidence formation, entrepreneurial identity work, perceived legitimacy, community embeddedness, and feedback as a critical turning point in the participant journey.

3.5 Limitations

It is important to acknowledge that this study has limitations mostly linked to the small sample size. As a result, findings should not be interpreted as generalizable. The study relies primarily on self-reported experiences. For these reasons, the findings should be understood as analytical and explanatory rather than causal in a strict evaluation sense.

Despite these limitations, the qualitative design provides rich insight into the mechanisms through which #SheFUND creates value. It is particularly well suited to capturing forms of impact that are central to the program but difficult to measure through standard financial indicators alone, including confidence, legitimacy, community, identity, and readiness to continue the entrepreneurial journey.