基于集群生命周期的产业集群技术创新扩散探析

技术创新扩散在产业集群整个演变进程中具有极其重要的地位与作用,技术创新扩散程度如何,关系到产业集群的可持续发展。在产业集群生命周期理论的基础上,了解集群各阶段技术创新扩散过程和特征等进行探讨,以时间为维度揭示产业集群技术创新扩散的内涵与规律。     

Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle

The term “entrepreneurial orientation” has been used to refer to the strategy-making processes and styles of firms that engage in entrepreneurial activities. A popular model of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) suggests that there are five dimensions of EO—autonomy, innovativeness, risk taking, proactiveness, and competitive aggressiveness (Lumpkin and Dess 1996). This paper reports on two of those dimensions—proactiveness and competitive aggressiveness. Proactiveness refers to how firms relate to market opportunities by seizing initiative in the marketplace; competitive aggressiveness refers to how firms react to competitive trends and demands that already exist in the marketplace. Despite these distinctions, prior research has tended to equate these two concepts and argued that they have a similar effect on firm performance. This paper investigates how these two approaches are related to each other, how they are related to performance, and how their function differs in the environments in which firms exhibit these approaches to strategy making. These distinctions are important because proactiveness and competitive aggressiveness represent distinctly different avenues to entrepreneurial success.A field study was conducted in which 124 executives from 94 firms were surveyed. These were executives from non-affiliated, non-diversified firms who were actively involved in strategic decision making at the top level of the firm. All firms reporting had at least one respondent who was an owner. Analysis of the data was conducted in two phases. In phase 1, factor analysis was used to examine the distinctions between different dimensions of EO. Proactiveness and competitive aggressiveness emerged as two separate factors indicating that these two strategy-making modes were perceived differently by the executives in the study. In the second phase, the relationship of these two dimensions to performance was analyzed in various contexts. Initial tests found that proactiveness was positively related to performance but competitive aggressiveness tended to be poorly associated with performance.Subsequent tests of the EO-performance relationship indicated that the stage of industry life cycle tended to favor one entrepreneurial orientation over another. The performance of firms in the early stages of industry development was stronger when their strategy making was proactively oriented. In contrast, a competitively aggressive frame of mind was helpful to firms in more mature stages of industry development. These findings were supported by other tests of the business environment. In dynamic environments, characterized by rapid change and uncertainty, proactive firms had higher performance relative to competitively aggressive firms. In hostile environments, where competition is intense and resources are constrained, competitively aggressive firms had stronger performance.The findings suggest that these two different approaches to entrepreneurial decision making may have different effects on firm performance. The differences were particularly apparent in the way firms relate to their external environment. Proactiveness—a response to opportunities—is an appropriate mode for firms in dynamic environments or in growth stage industries where conditions are rapidly changing and opportunities for advancement are numerous. But such environments may not favor the kind of combative posturing typical of competitive aggressiveness. Firms in hostile environments, or in mature industries where competition for customers and resources is intense, are more likely to benefit from competitive aggressiveness—a response to threats. A further implication of this research is that the dimensions of an entrepreneurial orientation, often considered to be positively related to performance under all conditions, may not always be associated with successful outcomes. This study indicates that the dimensions of EO often vary independently rather than covary, suggesting that the extent to which an entrepreneurial approach to strategy making is useful will frequently depend on the organizational or environmental conditions under which such decisions are made.     

Civic entrepreneurial ecosystems: Smart city emergence in Kansas City

Embedded between the broader fields of social and digital entrepreneurship, the concept of ‘smart cities’ can be conceptualized as a domain that is currently pre-paradigmatic—that is, one in which multiple yet unaligned models exist, marked by the absence of a single dominant one. Despite such shortcomings, there is a reflective similarity across ecosystems as the various players attempt to converge on a common understanding of the term smart city. The common objective of smart city implementation is to spark economic growth and social development, facilitated by collaborative dialogue and innovations in technology. We integrate theoretical lenses to explore the roles played by ecosystem actors, stakeholders, and socioeconomic and political agents in creating economic value and solving societal problems—particularly highlighting opportunities and challenges to bottom-up innovation from local entrepreneurs.     

Searching for the existence of entrepreneurial ecosystems: a regional cross-section growth regression approach

In this paper, we propose a method by which the entrepreneurial ecosystem, if present, reveals itself in the data. We first follow the literature and define the entrepreneurial ecosystem as a multidimensional set of interacting factors that moderate the effect of entrepreneurial activity on economic growth. The quality of such an ecosystem, by its multidimensionality, is impossible to measure directly. But so defined, we argue that variation in entrepreneurial ecosystem quality should result in variation in the estimated marginal effect of entrepreneurial activity on economic growth. Testing for such variation is possible using a combination of a multilevel growth regression and latent class analysis. We motivate and validate our approach in simulated data before illustrating its applicability in a data set covering 107 European NUTS1-2 regions across 16 EU member states. For this dataset, we cannot reject the hypothesis of a homogeneous contribution of entrepreneurship to regional growth. That is, in this dataset, we find no evidence of statistically significant heterogeneity in the estimated slope coefficients for entrepreneurial activity across regions. There are several possible explanations for this negative result. The two we deem most likely are first that the NUTS1-2 level may not be disaggregated enough to coincide with the relevant boundaries of the entrepreneurial ecosystem. We suspect our method would reveal significant differences across smaller geographical units, but the data unfortunately do not yet allow us to empirically test this hypothesis in a multi-country regional analysis. The second possible explanation is that the growth rates from 2006 to 2014 coincided with the global financial and the European crisis, and during this time, the effect of entrepreneurship on (long-run average) growth overall has been obscured. Our simulations also suggested a third reason. If measurement error is large (in the order of 33 or 0.015% point annual GDP-growth), the effects may also have been obscured.     

Looking inside the spiky bits: a critical review and conceptualisation of entrepreneurial ecosystems

The concept of entrepreneurial ecosystems has quickly established itself as one of the latest ‘fads’ in entrepreneurship research. At face value, this kind of systemic approach to entrepreneurship offers a new and distinctive path for scholars and policy makers to help understand and foster growth-oriented entrepreneurship. However, its lack of specification and conceptual limitations has undoubtedly hindered our understanding of these complex organisms. Indeed, the rapid adoption of the concept has tended to overlook the heterogeneous nature of ecosystems. This paper provides a critical review and conceptualisation of the ecosystems concept: it unpacks the dynamics of the concept; outlines its theoretical limitations; measurement approaches and use in policy-making. It sets out a preliminary taxonomy of different archetypal ecosystems. The paper concludes that entrepreneurial ecosystems are a highly variegated, multi-actor and multi-scalar phenomenon, requiring bespoke policy interventions.     

Strategic alliances and the rate of new product development: An empirical study of entrepreneurial biotechnology firms

A key to success in industries populated by entrepreneurial high-technology firms is the rate at which the firm develops new products. Rapid product development creates significant advantages for entrepreneurial firms, including access to early cash flows, external visibility, legitimacy, and early market share. The higher a firm's rate of new product development, the more likely the firm is to achieve and maintain these first-mover advantages. This is particularly true in industries such as pharmaceuticals, where the effectiveness of patent protections leads to patent races in which a “winner take all” scenario exists. But even in industries where patent protection is weak, the advantages of being first, in terms of market preemption, reputation effects, experience curve effects, etc., can still be of major importance. We argue that one way an entrepreneurial firm can increase its rate of new product development is by entering into strategic alliances with firms that possess complementary assets.The basic proposition advanced is that a firm's rate of new product development is a positive function of the number of strategic alliances that it has entered. However, the relationship between strategic alliances and the rate of new product development may be nonlinear. Specifically, although strategic alliances may initially have positive effects on the rate of new product development, this relationship may exhibit diminishing returns. Moreover, past some point it is possible that negative returns may set in. Thus, the relationship between the number of alliances and the rate of new product development may be an inverted U-shape.Two reasons can be given to support such a relationship. First, not all alliances will make an equal contribution to increasing the rate of new product development. The economic “law” of diminishing returns suggests that the more alliances a firm engages in, the more likely it is to enter some alliances whose marginal contribution is relatively minor. Such a phenomenon on its own is enough to suggest diminishing returns.Second, gaining access to complementary assets through strategic alliances is not without risks. Malperformance may occur when the firm discovers that the complementary assets provided by the partner are a poor match, fail to live up to the promises made by the partner, or a partner may opportunistically exploit an alliance, expropriating the firm's know-how while providing little in return. These problems arise because the effectiveness with which the firm can select and manage alliance partners is likely to be negatively related to the number of alliances the firm is managing. Due to information processing requirements, the quality of partner search and the ability to monitor the partners' actions will decline as the firm increases the number of alliances in which it is involved. This reasoning leads to a prediction that past some point, alliances will be increasingly vulnerable to malperformance. This raises not only the possibility of diminishing returns to the number of alliances, but also negative returns as the number of alliances increases past some critical point.This proposed relationship between alliances and new product development was tested on a sample of 132 biotechnology firms. The results provide strong evidence to support the inverted U-shaped relationship between the number of strategic alliances and the rate of new product development. Therefore, at low levels strategic alliances are positively related to new product development, but as the number of alliances increases, the benefits begin to decrease, and at high levels the costs of an additional alliance actually outweigh the benefits.     

From knowledge to business ecosystems: emergence of an entrepreneurial activity during knowledge replication

Small Business Economics - Our article emphasizes the relationship between knowledge and business ecosystems. Transformation of a knowledge ecosystem can lead to the emergence of a technological...     

The product life cycle trap

Many of America's most successful companies have gone through a life cycle similar to the product life cycle. They began as innovators, and then grew to be giants in their markets. But, as their products mature, they need new products to continue company growth. However, the organizational structure of an established company is no longer suited for innovation. The authors provide some insight into this cycle, and offer some solutions for big companies which need new products.     

Organizations as biomes of entrepreneurial life: Towards a clarification of the corporate entrepreneurship process

In 1983, Robert A. Burgelman published an influential paper in the field of strategic entrepreneurship, holding that the autonomous entrepreneurial initiative of employees and top management's desire for it might be simultaneously present, simultaneously absent, or go in opposite directions, yielding paradoxical results. To the best of our knowledge, this proposition, that translates into four types of organizations with regards to the process of corporate entrepreneurship, has however never been empirically tested before. Our results partially confirm Burgelman's ideas, while uncovering an unexpected transitional organizational archetype. Borrowing from Biology we metaphorically identify these archetypes as biomes of entrepreneurial life. This study takes an important step towards understanding the corporate entrepreneurial process, contributing not only to scholarship in the domain, but also rendering our conclusions particularly relevant for practitioners. The uncovering of a transitional archetype also holds significant implications for the main entrepreneurship literature in what refers to startup teams.     

How entrepreneurial intentions influence entrepreneurial career choices: The moderating influence of social context

In this paper, we build on social cognitive career theory to examine the relation between entrepreneurial intention and new venture creation (i.e., the entrepreneurial career choice). We model how contextual influences at different levels may favor or inhibit the translation of entrepreneurial intention into new venture creation. Using unique longitudinal data from almost the entire population of Italian university graduates, we are able to assess how the immediate (i.e., the influence of relevant others) and larger context (i.e., organizational and environmental influences) affect new venture creation. Our research contributes to the emerging literature of the intention–behavior link in entrepreneurship.     

Planning: The entrepreneurial ego at work

The ego gives direction to personal behavior. The entrepreneurial ego gives purpose, direction, and control to the organization. The author outlines three action steps to engage the entrepreneurial ego through planning.     

The rural entrepreneurial venture: Creating the virtual megafirm

Non-metropolitan areas have been attracting the attention of entrepreneurs due to the low cost of doing business and advances in telecommunications. In metropolitan settings, the entrepreneur typically employs a network of professionals and has access to expertise that can easily be consulted to help remedy problems facing the organization. In a rural location, entrepreneurs must develop a means to augment the expertise assembled in the firm and in the local area. Information becomes the critical variable in strengthening the competitiveness of rural entrepreneurs.The evidence strongly supports the view that critical success factors exist for entrepreneurial ventures, that information systems impact many of these critical success factors, and that rural ventures can benefit greatly from an effective expert information system. This paper examines the issues associated with improving the gathering and processing of information to enhance the structure, resources, and decision-making capabilities of rural entrepreneurs. Several concepts are presented that should provide assistance for examining the issues. These concepts are then integrated into the model, the entrepreneurial virtual megafirm (EVM), designed to provide infrastructure to enhance the effectiveness of rural entrepreneurs.     

The campus as entrepreneurial ecosystem: the University of Chicago

This paper employs Frederick Jackson Turner’s Frontier Thesis of American democracy to construct a framework for understanding the U.S. university campus as an entrepreneurial ecosystem. One question that immediately comes to mind when studying ecosystem performance is what the proper unit of analysis is: the country, the state, the city, the region, or something smaller, like an incubator or accelerator? This paper suggests that the open, innovative American frontier that closed at the end of the twentieth century has reemerged in the entrepreneurial economy on the U.S. campus. The contemporary campus entrepreneurial ecosystem offers the characteristics of Turner’s frontier: available assets, liberty, and diversity while creating opportunity, and fostering entrepreneurship and innovation. A case study of the University of Chicago explores governance of the campus as an entrepreneurial ecosystem and the output produced by that campus ecosystem.     

The family life cycle concept revisited: a need for new considerations

While the family life cycle concept is widely used in the consumer behaviour literature, its value for explaining variation in buyer behaviour is less than it could be. The major problems with the concept as presently used are that: (1) it was borrowed from sociology without any basic revisions for consumer behaviour use; (2) it is presently generally operationalized as a static classificatory scheme and therefore cannot account for changing family structure; and (3) researchers have failed to link family life cycle to the concept lifestyle - another concept so crucial to explaining variations in buyer behaviour. The present paper focuses on these shortcomings and presents a model designed to make the concept more useful. Furthermore, a way of testing the model is offered. Data are presented which emphasize the need for any model to be able to incorporate the rapid change the American family is presently undergoing.     

The lineages of the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach

In its most abstract sense, an ecosystem is a biotic community, encompassing its physical environment, and all the interactions possible in the complex of living and nonliving components. Economics has always been about systems that explain differential output and outcomes. However, economics has generally ignored the role of entrepreneurship in economic systems, just as entrepreneurship studies have largely overlooked the role of systems in explaining the prevalence and performance of entrepreneurship. The entrepreneurial ecosystem approach has the promise to correct these shortcomings. Its two dominant lineages are the regional development literature and the strategy literature. Both lineages share common roots in ecological systems thinking, providing fresh insights into the interdependence of actors in a particular community to create new value. But studies of both regional development and strategic management have largely ignored the role of entrepreneurs in new value creation. In this paper, we will outline contributions to the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach and conclude with a promising new line of research to our understanding of the emergence, growth, and context of start-ups that have achieved great impact by developing new platforms.     

Choose wisely: Crowdfunding through the stages of the startup life cycle

Crowdfunding is attractive to startups as an alternative funding source and offers nonmonetary resources through organizational learning. It encompasses the outsourcing of an organizational function, through IT, to a strategically defined network of actors (i.e., the crowd) in the form of an open call—specifically, requesting monetary contributions toward a commercial or social business goal. Nonetheless, many startups are hesitant to consider crowdfunding because little guidance exists on how the various types of crowdfunding add value in different life cycle stages and which type is best suited for which stage. In response to this gap, this article introduces a typology of crowdfunding, the benefits it offers, and how specific benefits relate to the identified crowdfunding types. On this basis, we present a framework for choosing the right crowdfunding type for each stage in the startup life cycle, in addition to providing practical advice on crowdfunding best practices. The best practices outlined have shown demonstrable contributions toward achieving funding goals and are likely to prove valuable for startups.