ACE research vignette 031: Startups lead the way in creating a nanobiotechnology industry

This series of research vignettes is aimed at sharing current and interesting research findings from our team of international Entrepreneurship researchers. In this vignette, Dr Martin Bliemel and his research team explore the emergence and evolution of a new knowledge intensive industry, i.e. the nanobiotechnology industry.

Stop whining and make the best of it: a cross-national comparison of response to regional disadvantage in the wine industry

Our cross-national field study of wine entrepreneurship in the “wrong” places provides some redress to the focus of the “regional advantage” literature on places that have already won and on the firms that benefit from “clusters” and other centers of industry advantage. Regional “disadvantage” is at best a shadowy afterthought to this literature. By poking around in these shadows, we help to synthesize and extend the incipient yet burgeoning literature on entrepreneurial “resourcefulness” and we contribute to the developing body of insights and theory pertinent to the numerous but often ignored firms and startups that mostly need to worry about how they will compete at all now if they are ever to have of chance of “winning” in the future. The core of our findings suggests that understandable – though contested – processes of ingenuity underlie entrepreneurial responses to regional disadvantage. Because we study entrepreneurship that from many angles simply does not make sense, we are also able to proffer a novel perspective on entrepreneurial sensemaking.

Stop whining and make the best of it : a cross-national comparison of responses to regional disadvantage in the wine industry

Our cross-national field study of wine entrepreneurship in the “wrong” places provides some redress to the focus of the “regional advantage” literature on places that have already won and on the firms that benefit from “clusters” and other centers of industry advantage. Regional “disadvantage” is at best a shadowy afterthought to this literature. By poking around in these shadows, we help to synthesize and extend the incipient yet burgeoning literature on entrepreneurial “resourcefulness” and we contribute to the developing body of insights and theory pertinent to the numerous but often ignored firms and startups that mostly need to worry about how they will compete at all now if they are ever to have of chance of “winning” in the future. The core of our findings suggests that understandable – though contested – processes of ingenuity underlie entrepreneurial responses to regional disadvantage. Because we study entrepreneurship that from many angles simply does not make sense, we are also able to proffer a novel perspective on entrepreneurial sensemaking.

Spot the differences in traditional and social entrepreneurial intention : highlighting the role of human and social capital

There is general agreement in the scientific community that entrepreneurship plays a central role in the growth and development of an economy in rapidly changing environments (Acs & Virgill 2010). In particular, when business activities are regarded as a vehicle for sustainable growth at large, that goes beyond mere economic returns of singular entities, encompassing also social problems and heavily relying on collaborative actions, then we more precisely fall into the domain of ‘social entrepreneurship’(Robinson et al. 2009). In the entrepreneurship literature, prior studies demonstrated the role of intentionality as the best predictor of planned behavior (Ajzen 1991), and assumed that the intention to start a business derives from the perception of desirability and feasibility and from a propensity to act upon an opportunity (Fishbein & Ajzen 1975). Recognizing that starting a business is an intentional act (Krueger et al. 2000) and entrepreneurship is a planned behaviour (Katz & Gartner 1988), models of entrepreneurial intentions have substantial implications for intentionality research in entrepreneurship. The purpose of this paper is to explore the emerging practice of social entrepreneurship by comparing the determinants of entrepreneurial intention in general versus those leading to startups with a social mission. Social entrepreneurial intentions clearly merit to be investigated given that the opportunity identification process is an intentional process not only typical of for profit start-ups, and yet there is a lack of research examining opportunity recognition in social entrepreneurship (Haugh 2005). The key argument is that intentionality in both traditional and social entrepreneurs during the decision-making process of new venture creation is influenced by an individual's perceptions toward opportunities (Fishbein & Ajzen 1975). Besides opportunity recognition, at least two other aspects can substantially influence intentionality: human and social capital (Davidsson, 2003). This paper is set to establish if and to what extent the social intentions of potential entrepreneurs, at the cognitive level, are influenced by opportunities recognition, human capital, and social capital. By applying established theoretical constructs, the paper draws comparisons between ‘for-profit’ and ‘social’ intentionality using two samples of students enrolled in Economy and Business Administration at the University G. d’Annunzio in Pescara, Italy. A questionnaire was submitted to 310 potential entrepreneurs to test the robustness of the model. The collected data were used to measure the theoretical constructs of the paper. Reliability of the multi-item scale for each dimension was measured using Cronbach alpha, and for all the dimensions measures of reliability are above 0.70. We empirically tested the model using structural equation modeling with AMOS. The results allow us to empirically contribute to the argument regarding the influence of human and social cognitive capital on social and non-social entrepreneurial intentions. Moreover, we highlight the importance for further researchers to look deeper into the determinants of traditional and social entrepreneurial intention so that governments can one day define better polices and regulations that promote sustainable businesses with a social imprint, rather than inhibit their formation and growth.

The apps industry

Australian apps developers typify global industry segmentation, varying in function, focus, employment situation and background. They range from freelancers contracted to build apps on demand and venture capital-backed or bootstrapped startups, to specialist app studios and full service digital agencies for whom apps are one among many services that may include web development, marketing, advertising, business strategy, branding and games development.

Why the energy technology revolution hasn't happened

The main thrusts of this TEDx talk are rooted in findings from original research by Rob Perrons concerning the role of industry clockspeed on technology-focused startups. The study involved extensive exposure to five member companies from the Shell Technology Ventures portfolio of companies over a three-year period, and shed new light on the specific mechanics that were contributing to these companies’ inability to get traction for their respective innovations within the marketplace. This evidence is also being coalesced into scholarly and scholarly publications—but this TEDx talk was a first release of a few of these high-level findings.

Creativity and design

Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Creating New Value covers all of the major aspects of innovation strategy and capabilities, including leadership of innovation, creativity, design led innovation, open innovation, management of the innovation portfolio and new product development processes. Ultimately, innovation is accomplished by people, and this book recognises the critical contribution of leadership and organisational culture to developing and promoting innovation behaviours. For startups and entrepreneurs, the book covers the practical, powerful tests that a new idea should be subjected to, as well as providing an overview of the entrepreneurship process. Another feature of the book is the detailed presentation of the practices common to highly innovative organisations that distinguishes them from low innovating organisations. Underpinned by research, this information is translated into an innovation audit tool that can be used by managers or students alike.