Mr Oliver Garner, Founder Director at Mothecombe Digital [FEN0017]
My organisation: Mothecombe Digital
Operating a fractional advisory and consultancy in Travel, Streaming Media and Fintech. Also, a mentor to women founders in AI and beyond, supporting them in the early stages of development to increase the volume of businesses at the top of the funnel.
My reason for submitting is that I am actively giving up my time on a pro-bono basis to support female founders; however, without systemic changes, we are unlikely to see a significant shift in investment.
Despite years of progress, women in the UK still face substantial barriers when starting and growing businesses, particularly those from ethnic minority backgrounds. The most obvious and persistent challenge is access to finance. Just 1.8% of venture capital funding goes to all-female-led businesses, a figure that has barely shifted despite numerous reports and initiatives. Investors, often unconsciously, ask women questions that are different from men's, focusing on risk rather than opportunity, which leads to lower funding approvals and less confidence among female entrepreneurs when seeking investment.
Beyond finance, women face a lack of high-value ideas at the top of the funnel. Too few women enter or progress in high-growth sectors such as AI, fintech, and SaaS, where funding is concentrated. The structural barriers start early: fewer girls are encouraged into STEM, fewer women hold leadership positions in tech firms, and ultimately, fewer women launch businesses in these industries. The result? A vicious cycle where women struggle to attract investment not just because of bias but because they’re underrepresented in the sectors where capital is flowing.
Then there’s the networking problem. Business and investment circles remain largely male-dominated and intimidating. Even when overt bias isn’t present, women often feel like outsiders in a club they were never invited to join. Pitching in a room full of men, many of whom don’t share your lived experience or understand your product, is an uphill battle. This exclusion is even more pronounced if you’re a woman of colour.
And when female role models are highlighted, their stories often focus on how they succeeded despite systemic male bias, reinforcing the narrative of an uphill battle rather than showing what meaningful change looks like. Worse still, there’s a noticeable reluctance among some high-profile female founders to engage with others looking to break through or those looking to help. I’ve personally reached out to several successful women in business to explore what more I can do to help, but responses are rare, and genuine engagement is even rarer. The struggle for gender equality in entrepreneurship is still an individual fight rather than a collective movement.
The most significant barriers exist in AI, fintech, and SaaS, the industries where investment is thriving, and future wealth creation is most likely. Women are dramatically underrepresented in these fields, not because they lack ability or ambition, but because they don’t get the same exposure to opportunities early on.
It’s a pipeline issue. Young women are still steered away from technical fields. Those who do enter STEM often struggle to progress in male-dominated workplaces. Even when they do make it through, they’re less likely to start businesses in these high-growth sectors, often due to a lack of role models and networks.
Then there’s the intimidating investment culture. A woman launching an AI startup may be pitching to a room of investors who have never backed a female-led business before. The venture capital culture is steeped in male-dominated relationships, historically built-in universities, golf courses, and private clubs, places women have traditionally been excluded from. Even without explicit sexism, this imbalance creates an environment that’s harder for women to break into.
To fix this, we need a three-pronged approach:
3. How can women best be supported to overcome the challenges they face in securing funding to start and grow their businesses?
The obvious answer is more money in the right places, but it’s more nuanced than that. The problem isn’t just that women receive less funding, it’s that they’re less likely to ask for it, less likely to get the right kind of backing, and more likely to be scrutinised in ways men aren’t.
We need to rethink what “female-led” means in terms of investment. Right now, funding often focuses on all-female founder teams, excluding many businesses where women have significant but non-majority stakes. If we looked at companies where women hold at least 10% equity, we’d get a far more accurate picture of female entrepreneurial success.
Investor training is another crucial piece of the puzzle. Bias training for VCs and funding bodies isn’t just a nice to have; it’s essential. The data shows that investors treat male and female founders differently, even when presented with the same business fundamentals. Fixing this starts with making investment decisions more transparent and accountable.
And finally, mentorship needs a serious overhaul. Too much focus is placed on encouraging women to “be more confident” rather than tackling the systemic barriers they face. We don’t need more "lean in" rhetoric. We need structural change, more women in investment roles, better access to capital, and funding spaces that don’t feel like exclusive male domains.
There are some standout initiatives in the UK, NatWest’s Back Her Business, the British Business Bank’s Investing in Women Code, and the Female Founders Forum, but impact is still limited. These schemes help individual businesses but don’t shift the wider culture of investment.
Internationally, Canada’s SheEO model is a great example of an alternative approach, women collectively fund and support female-led businesses in a way that bypasses traditional venture capital structures. Goldman Sachs’ 10,000 Women programme has also shown how targeted investment in female entrepreneurs can drive economic growth.
But no scheme, however well-funded, can replace a real cultural shift. Until female founders are seen as just “founders” rather than a separate category requiring special treatment, progress will be slow.
5. What steps should the Government take to help support the development of female-led high-growth enterprises?
The Government needs to move beyond reports and recommendations and take direct action.
The Rose Review and Investing in Women Code provide useful snapshots, but they’re too focused on all-female teams. If we want to track real progress, we need:
March 2025