Has the dust settled yet? More than a decade after Margaret Thatcher’s death, the verdict is still fiercely contested. Yet her impact on women in business is worth revisiting, not least because the debates she provoked — about leadership, enterprise and equality — remain live.

Love her or loathe her — and most people still seem fixed on one of those points — no one can deny that Margaret Thatcher changed the landscape. The question for Prowess readers is what, if anything, that change meant for women trying to build businesses and careers.

Leadership

Thatcher came to power in 1979 during a period of profound economic and political turbulence. Researchers have since shown that women are often over-represented in leadership roles when the risk of failure is high — a phenomenon known as the glass cliff. By that measure, Thatcher was the ultimate glass-cliff leader.

She failed on many issues and was avowedly not a feminist. She did little to promote other women and her leadership style was often described as macho. Yet she also demonstrated that a woman could run the country — and win three general elections. In 1979 the UK gender pay gap stood at around 40 per cent; the idea that women were biologically or psychologically unsuited to senior roles was still commonplace. A woman in 10 Downing Street challenged that.

Today the picture has improved, though progress has been uneven. ONS data show that the median hourly gender pay gap for all employees was 14.3 per cent in 2023, while for full-time employees it was 7.7 per cent. Women now hold more than 40 per cent of board seats in FTSE 100 companies, up from almost none in 1979. Much of that advance is down to sustained campaigning by business-led initiatives such as the 30% Club, founded by Dame Helena Morrissey to push for better gender balance at the top.

Thatcher’s personal success did not, however, translate into a flood of women into Westminster or the boardroom. When she left office in 1990, women accounted for only 6 per cent of MPs. By 2024 that figure had risen to around 37 per cent — significant progress, but still short of parity. Her example was necessary but not sufficient: it took deliberate networks, targets and legislation to turn symbolism into numbers.

Thatcher’s leadership legacy is therefore symbolic rather than practical. She did not build a pipeline of women leaders, but she proved it could be done.

Enterprise for all

Thatcher’s economic record is contentious. Her critics blame her for hastening the decline of manufacturing and deepening regional inequality. Yet she was unusual among modern Prime Ministers in championing small business and self-employment.

Lord Sugar recalled that she “kick-started the entrepreneurial revolution in the 80s that allowed chirpy chappies to succeed and not just the elite.” Her government launched more than 100 initiatives to support small firms in its first four years, and the start-up programmes it introduced reached women in far higher proportions than many later schemes. They worked because they were locally rooted, enabling rather than bureaucratic, and offered meaningful financial and practical support.

The best known, the Enterprise Allowance Scheme, gave a generation of creative and entrepreneurial people the means to start out. Alumni include the founders of Creation Records and Superdry, and artists such as Tracey Emin and Rachel Whiteread. The enterprise culture it helped to create has endured: the UK private sector business population grew from under 2 million in 1979 to around 5.6 million in 2024, with small businesses making up the vast majority.

That legacy has been diluted by successive governments. Later schemes, including the New Enterprise Allowance and Start Up Loans, have not matched the original’s reach or accessibility for women. The Alison Rose Review of Female Entrepreneurship found that only one in three UK entrepreneurs is a woman, and that closing the gender entrepreneurship gap could add up to £250 billion to the economy. Women-led businesses still receive a tiny fraction of venture capital and private equity, and many report that support is harder to find than it was in the 1980s.

Today’s entrepreneurs operate in a very different environment. Growth hubs, mentoring programmes and start-up loans have helped many, yet women continue to report that advice is fragmented and finance is hard to access. Female-led start-ups receive less than 2 per cent of UK venture capital, and women are more likely to self-fund or borrow from family than seek institutional investment. The Rose Review argued that tackling these barriers could transform the economy, but implementation remains patchy.

The 1980s also saw the establishment of a network of women’s business organisations across the UK. Many have since closed or shrunk, casualties of austerity, short-term funding and the pandemic. At a time when the UK needs every scrap of entrepreneurial talent to drive recovery — and when women continue to face disproportionate barriers to work and finance — the current government urgently needs to revisit those “enterprise for all” principles.

Reactions from women in business

When Margaret Thatcher died in April 2013, women entrepreneurs and business leaders were quick to offer contrasting views. Their comments still capture the complexity of her legacy.

Dame Helena Morrissey, then CEO of Newton Investment Management and founder of the 30% Club, noted that Thatcher had shown women could lead, even if she had not actively advanced other women.

Michelle Mone, founder of the Ultimo lingerie brand, praised Thatcher as an inspirational leader who proved that women could reach the top on their own terms.

Claire Young, finalist on BBC One’s The Apprentice in 2008 and now an enterprise educator, highlighted Thatcher’s role in demonstrating that women could lead in the toughest of circumstances.

Deborah Leary, inventor and CEO of Forensic Pathways, credited Thatcher with creating an environment in which people from ordinary backgrounds could start a business.

Jo Verrent, an independent diversity consultant, singled out the Enterprise Allowance Scheme as a transformative programme that gave people the confidence and cash to become self-employed.

Thatcher’s broader legacy remains divisive. Many argue that her policies and personal style held women’s progress back; others see her as a seminal source of inspiration. What is clear is that the enterprise and small-business foundations she put in place gave people from all backgrounds a real chance to start a business. For women in business today, those foundations — however shaky — may still be her most important legacy.

What do you think? Add your thoughts to the comments below.