Our faculty are always on the move. Last summer, Dr. Laura Gasiorowski, Associate Professor of Entrepreneurship, captivated audiences at the Academy of Management Annual Conference in Chicago, IL, where she unveiled her research on how entrepreneurs’ responses during pitch Q&A sessions influence their chances of securing funding. We recently had the opportunity to sit down with Dr. Gasiorowski to dive deeper into her compelling findings.
What were the big takeaways from your research?
Laura: The more direct an entrepreneur answers questions, the greater likelihood of funding. The more succinct an entrepreneur answers questions, the less likely they will receive funding. There is a gender effect too. Women are punished more for being indirect and succinct.
What patterns did you observe in how entrepreneurs responded to Q&A questions, and were there specific types of questions that triggered more direct or indirect responses?
Laura: One of the first things I tested was whether there were gender differences in responses. Research from other disciplines would predict that females will communicate more indirectly and elaborately than males. What I found was that there was no significant difference between genders. Female entrepreneurs communicated as directly and succinctly as males, which may suggest that women alter their communication style to match what they believe will be successful in the context of an entrepreneurial pitch. There was only one category of questions that had a significant difference - the probing questions that are follow-ups to a previous answer. These are the questions that the entrepreneurs don't anticipate and rehearse. When given one of these questions, females tended to answer more elaborately.
Can you elaborate on why succinct responses might reduce funding likelihood, and did you find that investors respond differently to brevity depending on other factors, like industry or business type?
Laura: To tease this out, we talked to investors and we ran an experiment to isolate the impact of succinct responses. We found that it’s about the perception of trust in the entrepreneur’s ability. One major thing investors look for in the first interactions are “can I trust this person to deliver on what they’re pitching?”, so they want to hear how an entrepreneur answers questions. The same can be said of a professor trying to determine if they trust that a student has learned. If they give me one-word answers, it’s really hard to make a judgment one way or the other.
When we did an analysis by the type of question asked, we did find that succinctness was overall detrimental except for one type of question - the competition question. Investors seem to like a brief, decisive answer about how an entrepreneur will compete with or be better than competitor products.
Could you talk more about the gender dynamics you found? What underlying biases or expectations might explain why women are penalized more for being indirect or succinct?
Laura: Investors (and society) often associate entrepreneurship with stereotypically masculine traits such as assertiveness, decisiveness, and directness. When women exhibit these qualities, they may be viewed as violating expected gender roles, leading to harsher evaluations. Conversely, if they conform to traditional feminine traits—such as indirectness—they may be seen as less competent. This mismatch creates a bias that results in women entrepreneurs being scrutinized more harshly than their male counterparts.
Did your research reveal any strategies entrepreneurs might use to balance directness and elaboration in their answers to maximize their chances of securing funding?
Laura: The main takeaway is about how to prepare. Obviously, if an entrepreneur gets an audience with important resource holders, they are going to (and should) prepare. The key is to make sure the prepared answers always fully and honestly answer the entire question and that the answer provides a bit more context (elaborate!) than the bare minimum response.
How will you work the findings from your research into the courses you teach (like storytelling)?
Laura: In my storytelling class, ENTR 211, one entire module is dedicated to pitching, but I take it a step further by running a coaching session on how to handle Q&A like a pro. We practice answers, unpack why certain questions get asked, what biases exist in entrepreneurship, and how these dynamics shape opportunities. It’s been a real eye-opener for students, especially when they realize how these same communication tendencies may influence the way they prepare for job interviews.
Dr. Laura Gasiorowski is an Associate Professor of Entrepreneurship at the University of Delaware and faculty director of the Delaware Innovation Fellows (DIF) program. Laura joined UD in Fall of 2018 after receiving her PhD from Temple University. She is a former entrepreneur herself; she launched a startup in the music-tech industry while she was in college. Her research focuses on entrepreneurial learning, venture capital, and women’s entrepreneurship, and has been recognized by the Academy of Management, Korean Association of Business Education, and the Strategic Management Society. Within UD, Laura has been recognized multiple times as a Faculty MVP (Most Valuable Professor) by athletics and received the 2022 Outstanding Teacher Award.
About Horn Entrepreneurship
Horn Entrepreneurship serves as the creative engine for entrepreneurship education and advancement at the University of Delaware. Currently ranked among the best entrepreneurship programs in the U.S., horn Entrepreneurship was built and is actively supported by successful entrepreneurs, empowering aspiring innovators as they pursue new ideas for a better world.
