Business incubators within entrepreneurial ecosystems: sustainability aspects of new venture support and development

2021 ◽  
pp. 124-139
Author(s):  
Magnus Klofsten ◽  
Dzamila Bienkowska
Keyword(s):  
New Venture ◽  
Business Incubators ◽  
Entrepreneurial Ecosystems

Screening Practices of New Business Incubators: The Evaluation of Critical Success Factors

1988 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 59-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R. Lumpkin ◽  
R. Duane Ireland
Keyword(s):  
Failure Rate ◽  
Critical Success Factors ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
New Venture ◽  
Business Incubators ◽  
Screening Practices ◽  
Critical Success ◽  
Probability Of Success ◽  
New Business ◽  
New Jobs

New firms are an important mechanism through which new jobs are created. However, the new venture failure rate is greater than the rate of creation. Business incubators have been organized to bring new businesses together to increase the probability of success. Incubators do not guarantee success; however, evaluating potential clients on Critical Success Factors can minimize failures once the firm joins an incubator. This research investigates the screening practices of incubators and identifies unique groups of incubators. The screening practices were found to relate to sponsorship but not to physical characteristics or objectives.

Entrepreneurial ecosystems as fields: Integrating meso-level institutional theory

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (2-4) ◽  
pp. 64-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolin Auschra ◽  
Thomas Schmidt ◽  
Joerg Sydow
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Theory ◽  
New Ventures ◽  
New Venture ◽  
New Venture Creation ◽  
Venture Creation ◽  
Meso Level ◽  
Entrepreneurial Ecosystems

Abstract Contemporary works on entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs) suffer from a lack of theorization. We address this problem by conceptualizing EEs as institutional fields, which is an analytical construct that is already well-elaborated on in neo-institutional theory. This theory provides a processual lens that is sensitive to the role of both institutions and agency in field structuration. Additionally, understanding EEs as fields can help to capture dynamics within EEs as well as their relationships with other fields. Following this approach, entrepreneurial issue fields mainly focus on debates around entrepreneurship and new venture creation, whereas entrepreneurial exchange fields focus on products and services produced by and offering support for a set of mainly industry-specific new ventures. In addition, we discuss mechanisms for transformations between both types of fields.

scholarly journals Expanding university entrepreneurial ecosystems to under-represented communities

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 384-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma O’Brien ◽  
Thomas M. Cooney ◽  
Per Blenker
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Model ◽  
Census Bureau ◽  
New Venture ◽  
Entrepreneurial Activity ◽  
Traditional Role ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Disadvantaged Communities ◽  
Entrepreneurial Ecosystems ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Us Census

Purpose Entrepreneurship education has moved from an elitist view focussing on a start-up and picking-the-winners philosophy towards a broader enterprising behaviour approach; recognising entrepreneurship as an activity of relevance for everybody. The purpose of this paper is to extend this development and identify how university entrepreneurial ecosystems can be expanded to support communities that are under-represented in entrepreneurship. Design/methodology/approach Based on an integrative literature review (Torraco, 2005), this paper draws together and synthesises literature from the field of entrepreneurship, higher education studies and under-represented communities in an integrated fashion, leading to the development of a new conceptual model. Findings This paper challenges the traditional role of universities in supporting entrepreneurship as focussing mainly on economic growth and new venture creation, and identifies how universities are also positioned to provide greater civic support to entrepreneurial learning amongst under-represented communities. Through a critical analysis of the literature, the conceptual model proposed identifies six key considerations in the expansion of university entrepreneurial ecosystems for under-represented communities. Practical implications There are currently 96.6m people at risk of poverty and social exclusion in the EU (OECD, 2017) and an estimated 43.1m Americans (US Census Bureau, 2017). This paper explores how university entrepreneurial ecosystems can be expanded to support minority and disadvantaged communities who are under-represented in terms of entrepreneurial activity. Originality/value Given that there is little research regarding how universities might activate inclusive entrepreneurship initiatives amongst under-represented communities, this paper expands existing knowledge as it identifies the key considerations encompassing university-led community collaborative enterprise support.

scholarly journals The buzz before business: a design science study of a sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystem

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory O’Shea ◽  
Steffen Farny ◽  
Henri Hakala
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Foundation ◽  
Design Science ◽  
New Venture ◽  
High Tech ◽  
Entrepreneurial Opportunities ◽  
Entrepreneurial Ecosystems ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Process View ◽  
Collaborative Sensemaking ◽  
Analyze Data

Abstract This paper examines how entrepreneurial opportunities co-evolve within a sustainable entrepreneurship ecosystem (SEE). Most of the literature on entrepreneurial ecosystems falls short on integrating the entrepreneurial process in empirical research. To analyze data collected from pre-start-up teams within a nascent SEE on high-tech cellulose-based materials over 3 years, we apply a design science approach that helps understand actors’ collaborative sensemaking in designing and structuring ecosystem features and relationships. Our findings show that the SEE can be seen as a design artifact which evolves by ecosystem actors collectively engaging in new venture ideation and developing opportunity confidence. Furthermore, the paper presents a novel SEE framework, which elaborates on phases and enablers of the opportunity co-evolution process within an emerging ecosystem. We contribute to the literature on sustainable as well as general entrepreneurial ecosystems and offer a new theoretical foundation for a process view on ecosystems.

The role of business incubators for start-ups development in Brazil and Portugal

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 256-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luisa Margarida Cagica Carvalho ◽  
Simone Vasconcelos Galina
Keyword(s):  
Latin American ◽  
Special Role ◽  
Business Incubators ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Entrepreneurial Ecosystems ◽  
Qualitative Research Methodology ◽  
International Profile ◽  
Start Ups ◽  
First Time

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present a comparative study about features, services and networks offered by business incubators (BI) to encourage start-ups development in Portugal and Brazil. Recently, these countries have revealed several cases of well-developed entrepreneurial ecosystems and Brazil receive a special position on Latin America; besides comparative studies between European and Latin American countries are scarce. Design/methodology/approach – This study uses a qualitative research methodology to study the role of BI in creation and growing of start-ups in Portugal and Brazil. Findings – The results do not reveal particular differences between Brazilian and Portuguese BI, except in international profile of tenants; in Portugal, probably due the market size, most of the firms born global or intend to internationalize. Research limitations/implications – The BI results depend on the wide services provided, networking platforms and support provided by BI staff individually to their tenants. These remarks provide some clues to develop public policies suitable to entrepreneurial ecosystems. Originality/value – BI have a special role on supporting start-ups creation and growth and to provide technology transfer. They are also considered as a key element to guarantee entrepreneurial ecosystems in a regional level, this research provide some contributes based on a case study with eight interviews in Portugal and Brazil, and compare for the first time these two countries with similar culture but with different levels of development.

Evolution of Incubation Models

2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-31
Author(s):  
Alessandro Grandi ◽  
Rosa Grimaldi
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
New Venture ◽  
New Venture Creation ◽  
Venture Creation ◽  
Business Incubators ◽  
Business Innovation ◽  
Different Types

This paper addresses the role of incubators in supporting new venture creation. A mapping of four different types of incubator is proposed: corporate private incubators (CPIs), independent private incubators (IPIs), business innovation centres (BICs) and university business incubators (UBIs). This mapping is exemplified through case studies of one incubator for each of the four categories. The authors argue that one interpretative key to explain the dynamics of the incubation industry is the evolution of company requirements and consequently of the services offered by incubators. In this context, two different incubating models are described which provide incubators with useful indications as to how they should position themselves strategically.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document