Do Academic and Private Entrepreneurs differ? An empirical analysis of the Micro-Foundation of Entrepreneurial Orientation

This Doctoral Thesis focuses on the study of individual behaviours as a result of organizational affiliation. The objective is to assess the Entrepreneurial Orientation of individuals proving the existence of a set of antecedents to that measure returning a structural model of its micro-foundation. Relying on the developed measurement model, I address the issue whether some Entrepreneurs experience different behaviours as a result of their academic affiliation, comparing a sample of ‘Academic Entrepreneurs’ to a control sample of ‘Private Entrepreneurs’ affiliated to a matched sample of Academic Spin-offs and Private Start-ups. Building on the Theory of the Planned Behaviour, proposed by Ajzen (1991), I present a model of causal antecedents of Entrepreneurial Orientation on constructs extensively used and validated, both from a theoretical and empirical perspective, in sociological and psychological studies. I focus my investigation on five major domains: (a) Situationally Specific Motivation, (b) Personal Traits and Characteristics, (c) Individual Skills, (d) Perception of the Business Environment and (e) Entrepreneurial Orientation Related Dimensions. I rely on a sample of 200 Entrepreneurs, affiliated to a matched sample of 72 Academic Spin-offs and Private Start-ups. Firms are matched by Industry, Year of Establishment and Localization and they are all located in the Emilia Romagna region, in northern Italy. I’ve gathered data by face to face interviews and used a Structural Equation Modeling technique (Lisrel 8.80, Joreskog, K., & Sorbom, D. 2006) to perform the empirical analysis. The results show that Entrepreneurial Orientation is a multi-dimensional micro-founded construct which can be better represented by a Second-Order Model. The t-tests on the latent means reveal that the Academic Entrepreneurs differ in terms of: Risk taking, Passion, Procedural and Organizational Skills, Perception of the Government, Context and University Supports. The Structural models also reveal that the main differences between the two groups lay in the predicting power of Technical Skills, Perceived Context Support and Perceived University Support in explaining the Entrepreneurial Orientation Related Dimensions.

Business Clusters in Eastern Europe: Policy Analysis and Cluster Performance

Clusters have increasingly become an essential part of policy discourses at all levels, EU, national, regional, dealing with regional development, competitiveness, innovation, entrepreneurship, SMEs. These impressive efforts in promoting the concept of clusters on the policy-making arena have been accompanied by much less academic and scientific research work investigating the actual economic performance of firms in clusters, the design and execution of cluster policies and going beyond singular case studies to a more methodologically integrated and comparative approach to the study of clusters and their real-world impact. The theoretical background is far from being consolidated and there is a variety of methodologies and approaches for studying and interpreting this phenomenon while at the same time little comparability among studies on actual cluster performances. The conceptual framework of clustering suggests that they affect performance but theory makes little prediction as to the ultimate distribution of the value being created by clusters. This thesis takes the case of Eastern European countries for two reasons. One is that clusters, as coopetitive environments, are a new phenomenon as the previous centrally-based system did not allow for such types of firm organizations. The other is that, as new EU member states, they have been subject to the increased popularization of the cluster policy approach by the European Commission, especially in the framework of the National Reform Programmes related to the Lisbon objectives. The originality of the work lays in the fact that starting from an overview of theoretical contributions on clustering, it offers a comparative empirical study of clusters in transition countries. There have been very few examples in the literature that attempt to examine cluster performance in a comparative cross-country perspective. It adds to this an analysis of cluster policies and their implementation or lack of such as a way to analyse the way the cluster concept has been introduced to transition economies. Our findings show that the implementation of cluster policies does vary across countries with some countries which have embraced it more than others. The specific modes of implementation, however, are very similar, based mostly on soft measures such as funding for cluster initiatives, usually directed towards the creation of cluster management structures or cluster facilitators. They are essentially founded on a common assumption that the added values of clusters is in the creation of linkages among firms, human capital, skills and knowledge at the local level, most often perceived as the regional level. Often times geographical proximity is not a necessary element in the application process and cluster application are very similar to network membership. Cluster mapping is rarely a factor in the selection of cluster initiatives for funding and the relative question about critical mass and expected outcomes is not considered. In fact, monitoring and evaluation are not elements of the cluster policy cycle which have received a lot of attention. Bulgaria and the Czech Republic are the countries which have implemented cluster policies most decisively, Hungary and Poland have made significant efforts, while Slovakia and Romania have only sporadically and not systematically used cluster initiatives. When examining whether, in fact, firms located within regional clusters perform better and are more efficient than similar firms outside clusters, we do find positive results across countries and across sectors. The only country with negative impact from being located in a cluster is the Czech Republic.

Nature and relevance of inherited blueprints on business models choices and innovation: an assessment

One important metaphor, referred to biological theories, used to investigate on organizational and business strategy issues is the metaphor about heredity; an area requiring further investigation is the extent to which the characteristics of blueprints inherited from the parent, helps in explaining subsequent development of the spawned ventures. In order to shed a light on the tension between inherited patterns and the new trajectory that may characterize spawned ventures’ development we propose a model aimed at investigating which blueprints elements might exert an effect on business model design choices and to which extent their persistence (or abandonment) determines subsequent business model innovation. Under the assumption that academic and corporate institutions transmit different genes to their spin-offs, we hence expect to have heterogeneity in elements that affect business model design choices and its subsequent evolution. This is the reason why we carry on a twofold analysis in the biotech (meta)industry: under a multiple-case research design, business model and especially its fundamental design elements and themes scholars individuated to decompose the construct, have been thoroughly analysed. Our purpose is to isolate the dimensions of business model that may have been the object of legacy and the ones along which an experimentation and learning process is more likely to happen, bearing in mind that differences between academic and corporate might not be that evident as expected, especially considering that business model innovation may occur.