Entrepreneurial bricolage : towards systematic empirical testing

The behavioral theory of “entrepreneurial bricolage” attempts to understand what entrepreneurs do when faced with resource constraints. Most research about bricolage, defined as “making do by applying combinations of the resources at hand to new problems and opportunities” (Baker & Nelson 2005: 333), has been qualitative and inductive (Garud & Karnoe, 2003). Although this has created a small body of rich descriptions and interesting insights, little deductive theory has been developed and the relationship between bricolage and firm performance has not been systematically tested. In particular, prior research has suggested bricolage can have both beneficial and harmful effects. Ciborra’s (1996) study of Olivetti suggested that bricolage helped Olivetti to adapt, but simultaneously constrained firm effectiveness. Baker & Nelson (2005) suggested that bricolage may be harmful at very high levels, but more helpful if used judiciously. Other research suggests that firm innovativeness may play an important role in shaping the outcomes of bricolage (Anderson 2008). In this paper, we theorize and provide preliminary test of the bricolage-performance relationship and how it is affected by firm innovativeness.

Effectuation & newness : an intertwined relationship?

Principal topic: Effectuation theory suggests that entrepreneurs develop their new ventures in an iterative way by selecting possibilities through flexibility and interactions with the market; a focus on affordability of loss rather than maximal return on the capital invested, and the development of pre-commitments and alliances from stakeholders (Sarasvathy, 2001, 2008; Sarasvathy et al., 2005, 2006). In contrast, causation may be described as a rationalistic reasoning method to create a company. After a comprehensive market analysis to discover opportunities, the entrepreneur will select the alternative with the higher expected return and implement it through the use of a business plan. However, little is known about the consequences of following either of these two processes. One aspect that remains unclear is the relationship between newness and effectuation. On one hand it can be argued that the combination of a means-centered, interactive (through pre-commitments and alliances with stakeholders from the early phases of the venture creation) and open-minded process (through flexibility of exploiting contingencies) should encourage and facilitate the development of innovative solutions. On the other hand, having a close relationship with their “future first customers” and focussing too much on the resources and knowledge already within the firm may be a constraint that is not conducive to innovation, or at least not to a radical innovation. While it has been suggested that effectuation strategy is more likely to be used by innovative entrepreneurs (Sarasvathy, 2001), this hypothesis has not been demonstrated yet (Sarasvathy, 2001). Method: In our attempt to capture newness in its different aspects we have considered the following four domains where newness may happen: new product/service; new method for promotion and sales; new production methods/sourcing; market creation. We identified how effectuation may be differently associated with these four domains of newness. To test our four sets of hypotheses a dataset of 1329 firms (702 nascent and 627 young firms) randomly selected in Australia was examined through ANOVA Tukey HSD Test. Results and Implications: Results indicate the existence of a curvilinear relationship between effectuation and newness where low and high levels of newness are associated with low level of effectuation while medium level of newness is associated with high level of effectuation. Implications for academia, practitioners and policy makers are also discussed.

The importance of gestation process dynamics

Principal Topic In this paper we seek to highlight the important intermediate role that the gestation process plays in entrepreneurship by examining its key antecedents and its consequences for new venture emergence. In doing so we take a behavioural perspective and argue that it is not only what a nascent venture is, but what it does (Katz & Gartner, 1988; Shane & Delmar, 2004; Reynolds, 2007) and when it does it during start-up (Reynolds & Miller, 1992; Lichtenstein, Carter, Dooley & Gartner, 2007) that is important. To extend an analogy from biological development, what we suggest is that the way a new venture is nurtured is just as fundamental as its nature. Much prior research has focused on the nature of new ventures and attempted to attribute variations in outcomes directly to the impact resource endowments and investments have. While there is little doubt that venture resource attributes such as human capital, and specifically prior entrepreneurial experience (Alsos & Kolvereid, 1998), access to social (Davidsson & Honig, 2003) and financial capital have an influence. Resource attributes themselves are distal from successful start-up endeavours and remain inanimate if not for the actions of the nascent venture. The key contribution we make is to shift focus from whether or not actions are taken, but when these actions happen and how that is situated in the overall gestation process. Thus, we suggest that it is gestation process dynamics, or when gestation actions occur, that is more proximal to venture outcomes and we focus on this. Recently scholars have highlighted the complexity that exists in the start-up or gestation process, be it temporal or contextual (Liao, Welsch & Tan, 2005; Lichtenstein et al. 2007). There is great variation in how long a start-up process might take (Reynolds & Miller, 1992), some processes require less action than others (Carter, Gartner & Reynolds, 1996), and the overall intensity of the start-up effort is also deemed important (Reynolds, 2007). And, despite some evidence that particular activities are more influential than others (Delmar & Shane, 2003), the order in which events may happen is, until now, largely indeterminate as regard its influence on success (Liao & Welsch, 2008). We suggest that it is this complexity of the intervening gestation process that attenuates the effect of resource endowment and has resulted in mixed findings in previous research. Thus, in order to reduce complexity we shall take a holistic view of the gestation process and argue that it is its’ dynamic properties that determine nascent venture attempt outcomes. Importantly, we acknowledge that particular gestation processes of themselves would not guarantee successful start-up, but it is more correctly the fit between the process dynamics and the ventures attributes (Davidsson, 2005) that is influential. So we aim to examine process dynamics by comparing sub-groups of venture types by resource attributes. Thus, as an initial step toward unpacking the complexity of the gestation process, this paper aims to establish the importance of its role as an intermediary between attributes of the nascent venture and the emergence of that venture. Here, we make a contribution by empirically examining gestation process dynamics and their fit with venture attributes. We do this by firstly, examining that nature of the influence that venture attributes such as human and social capital have on the dynamics of the gestation process, and secondly by investigating the effect that gestation process dynamics have on venture creation outcomes. Methodology and Propositions In order to explore the importance that gestation processes dynamics have in nascent entrepreneurship we conduct an empirical study of ventures start-ups. Data is drawn from a screened random sample of 625 Australian nascent business ventures prior to them achieving consistent outcomes in the market. This data was collected during 2007/8 and 2008/9 as part of the Comprehensive Australian Study of Entrepreneurial Emergence (CAUSEE) project (Davidsson et al., 2008). CAUSEE is a longitudinal panel study conducted over four years, sourcing information from annually administered telephone surveys. Importantly for our study, this methodology allows for the capture and tracking of active nascent venture creation as it happens, thus reducing hindsight and selection biases. In addition, improved tests of causality may be made given that outcome measures are temporally removed from preceding events. The data analysed in this paper represents the first two of these four years, and for the first time has access to follow-up outcome measures for these venture attempts: where 260 were successful, 126 were abandoned, and 191 are still in progress. With regards to venture attributes as gestation process antecedents, we examine specific human capital measured as successful prior experience in entrepreneurship, and direct social capital of the venture as ‘team start-ups’. In assessing gestation process dynamics we follow Lichtenstein et al. (2007) to suggest that the rate, concentration and timing of gestation activities may be used to summarise the complexity dynamics of that process. In addition, we extend this set of measures to include the interaction of discovery and exploitation by way of changes made to the venture idea. Those ventures with successful prior experience or those who conduct symbiotic parallel start-up attempts may be able to, or be forced to, leave their gestation action until later and still derive a successful outcome. In addition access to direct social capital may provide the support upon which the venture may draw in order to persevere in the face of adversity, turning a seemingly futile start-up attempt into a success. On the other hand prior experience may engender the foresight to terminate a venture attempt early should it be seen to be going nowhere. The temporal nature of these conjectures highlight the importance that process dynamics play and will be examined in this research Statistical models are developed to examine gestation process dynamics. We use multivariate general linear modelling to analyse how human and social capital factors influence gestation process dynamics. In turn, we use event history models and stratified Cox regression to assess the influence that gestation process dynamics have on venture outcomes. Results and Implications What entrepreneurs do is of interest to both scholars and practitioners’ alike. Thus the results of this research are important since they focus on nascent behaviour and its outcomes. While venture attributes themselves may be influential this is of little actionable assistance to practitioners. For example it is unhelpful to say to the prospective first time entrepreneur “you’ll be more successful if you have lots of prior experience in firm start-ups”. This research attempts to close this relevance gap by addressing what gestation behaviours might be appropriate, when actions best be focused, and most importantly in what circumstances. Further, we make a contribution to the entrepreneurship literature, examining the role that gestation process dynamics play in outcomes, by specifically attributing these to the nature of the venture itself. This extension is to the best of our knowledge new to the research field.

Asset specificity and behavioural uncertainty as moderators of the sales growth : employment growth relationship in emerging ventures

Sales growth and employment growth are the two most widely used growth indicators for new ventures; yet, sales growth and employment growth are not interchangeable measures of new venture growth. Rather, they are related, but somewhat independent constructs that respond differently to a variety of criteria. Most of the literature treats this as a methodological technicality. However, sales growth with or without accompanying employment growth has very different implications for managers and policy makers. A better understanding of what drives these different growth metrics has the potential to lead to better decision making. To improve that understanding we apply transaction cost economics reasoning to predict when sales growth will be or will not be accompanied by employment growth. Our results indicate that our predictions are borne out consistently in resource-constrained contexts but not in resource-munificent contexts.

Scott A. Shane : winner of the Global Award for Entrepreneurship Research

Scott A. Shane is the 2009 winner of the Global Award for Entrepreneurship Research. In this article we discuss and analyze Shane’s most important contributions to the field of entrepreneurship. His contribution is extraordinarily broad in scope, which makes it difficult to pinpoint one or a few specifics that we associate with Shane’s scholarship. Instead, they can be summarized in the following three points. First, he has influenced what we view as central aspects of entrepreneurship. Shane has been a leading figure in redirecting the focus on entrepreneurship research itself. Second, he has influenced how we view entrepreneurship. Shane’s research is arguably theory driven and it applies and develops theoretical lenses that greatly improve our understanding of entrepreneurship. Third, he has contributed to how we conduct entrepreneurship research. Shane has been a forerunner in examining relevant units of analysis that are difficult to sample; research designs and databases specifically designed for studying entrepreneurial processes; and sophisticated analytical methods. This has contributed to advancing the methodological rigor of the field. Summing them up, the contributions are very impressive indeed.

From resource base to dynamic capabilities : an investigation of new firms

Despite the numerous observations that dynamic capabilities lie at the source of competitive advantage, we still have limited knowledge as to how access to firm-based resources and changes to these affect the development of dynamic capabilities. In this paper, we examine founder human capital, access to employee human capital, access to technological expertise, access to other specific expertise, and access to two types of tangible resources in a sample of new firms in Sweden. We empirically measure four dynamic capabilities and find that the nature and effect of resources employed in the development of these capabilities vary greatly. For the most part, there are positive effects stemming from access to particular resources. However, for some resources, such as access to employee human capital and access to financial capital, unexpected negative effects also appear. This study therefore provides statistical evidence as to the varying role of resources in capability development. Importantly, we also find that changes in resource bases have more influential roles in the development of dynamic capabilities than the resource stock variables that were measured at an earlier stage of firm development. This provides empirical support for the notion of treating the firm as a dynamic flow of resources as opposed to a static stock. This finding also highlights the importance of longitudinal designs in studies of dynamic capability development. Further recommendations for future empirical studies of dynamic capabilities are presented.

Does venture opportunity variation matter? investigating systematic process differences between innovative and imitative new ventures

The central thesis in the article is that the venture creation process is different for innovative versus imitative ventures. This holds up; the pace of the process differs by type of venture as do, in line with theory-based hypotheses, the effects of certain human capital (HC) and social capital (SC) predictors. Importantly, and somewhat unexpectedly, the theoretically derived models using HC, SC, and certain controls are relatively successful explaining progress in the creation process for the minority of innovative ventures, but achieve very limited success for the imitative majority. This may be due to a rationalistic bias in conventional theorizing and suggests that there is need for considerable theoretical development regarding the important phenomenon of new venture creation processes. Another important result is that the building up of instrumental social capital, which we assess comprehensively and as a time variant construct, is important for making progress with both types of ventures, and increasingly, so as the process progresses. This result corroborates with stronger operationalization and more appropriate analysis method what previously published research has only been able to hint at.

PSED II and the comprehensive Australian study of entrepreneurial emergence (CAUSEE)

Two current longitudinal studies in advanced countries, PSED II in the US and CAUSEE in Australia, have attempted to harmonize the major features of the research design. A comparison of the initial screening and first detailed interviews indicates a higher participation in new firm creation in the U.S. Similar types of persons are involved in both countries, albeit more immigrants, older individuals with more work experience and more established individuals in Australia. The nascent enterprises in the two countries are similar on many characteristics, although those in Australia report greater emphasis on new technology and international customers. Assessment of the prevalence of nascent enterprises and new firms from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor surveys indicates a higher prevalence of new firms in Australia. These two longitudinal projects may help determine if this reflects a high proportion of new firm births or greater survival in the early years among Australian new firms.

Venture idea newness, relatedness and performance in nascent ventures

Principal Topic The study of the origin and characteristics of venture ideas - or ''opportunities'' as they are often called - and their contextual fit are key research goals in entrepreneurship (Davidsson, 2004). We define venture idea as ''the core ideas of an entrepreneur about what to sell, how to sell, whom to sell and how an entrepreneur acquire or produce the product or service which he/she sells'' for the purpose of this study. When realized the venture idea becomes a ''business model''. Even though venture ideas are central to entrepreneurship yet its characteristics and their effect to the entrepreneurial process is mysterious. According to Schumpeter (1934) entrepreneurs could creatively destruct the existing market condition by introducing new product/service, new production methods, new markets, and new sources of supply and reorganization of industries. The introduction, development and use of new ideas are generally called as ''innovation'' (Damanpour & Wischnevsky, 2006) and ''newness'' is a property of innovation and is a relative term which means that the degree of unfamiliarity of venture idea either to a firm or to a market. However Schumpeter's (1934) discusses five different types of newness, indicating that type of newness is an important issue. More recently, Shane and Venkataraman (2000) called for research taking into consideration not only the variation of characteristics of individuals but also heterogeneity of venture ideas, Empirically, Samuelson (2001, 2004) investigated process differences between innovative venture ideas and imitative venture ideas. However, he used only a crude dichotomy regarding the venture idea newness. According to Davidsson, (2004) as entrepreneurs could introduce new economic activities ranging from pure imitation to being new to the entire world market, highlighting that newness is a matter of degree. Dahlqvist (2007) examined the venture idea newness and made and attempt at more refined assessment of the degree and type of newness of venture idea. Building on these predecessors our study refines the assessment of venture idea newness by measuring the degree of venture idea newness (new to the world, new to the market, substantially improved while not entirely new, and imitation) for four different types of newness (product/service, method of production, method of promotion, and customer/target market). We then related type and degree of newness to the pace of progress in nascent venturing process. We hypothesize that newness will slow down the business creation process. Shane & Venkataraman (2000) introduced entrepreneurship as the nexus of opportunities and individuals. In line with this some scholars has investigated the relationship between individuals and opportunities. For example Shane (2000) investigates the relatedness between individuals' prior knowledge and identification of opportunities. Shepherd & DeTinne (2005) identified that there is a positive relationship between potential financial reward and the identification of innovative venture ideas. Sarasvathy's 'Effectuation Theory'' assumes high degree of relatedness with founders' skills, knowledge and resources in the selection of venture ideas. However entrepreneurship literature is scant with analyses of how this relatedness affects to the progress of venturing process. Therefore, we assess the venture ideas' degree of relatedness to prior knowledge and resources, and relate these, too, to the pace of progress in nascent venturing process. We hypothesize that relatedness will increase the speed of business creation. Methodology For this study we will compare early findings from data collected through the Comprehensive Australian Study of Entrepreneurial Emergence (CAUSEE). CAUSEE is a longitudinal study whose primary objective is to uncover the factors that initiate, hinder and facilitate the process of emergence and development of new firms. Data were collected from a representative sample of some 30,000 households in Australia using random digit dialing (RDD) telephone survey interviews. Through the first round of data collection identified 600 entrepreneurs who are currently involved in the business start-up process. The unit of the analysis is the emerging venture, with the respondent acting as its spokesperson. The study methodology allows researchers to identify ventures in early stages of creation and to longitudinally follow their progression through data collection periods over time. Our measures of newness build on previous work by Dahlqvist (2007). Our adapted version was developed over two pre-tests with about 80 participants in each. The measures of relatedness were developed through the two rounds of pre-testing. The pace of progress in the venture creation process is assessed with the help of time-stamped gestation activities; a technique developed in the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED). Results and Implications We hypothesized that venture idea newness slows down the venturing process whereas relatedness facilitates the venturing process. Results of 600 nascent entrepreneurs in Australia indicated that there is marginal support for the hypothesis that relatedness assists the gestation progress. Newness is significant but is the opposite sign to the hypothesized. The results give number of implications for researchers, business founders, consultants and policy makers in terms of better knowledge of the venture creation process.

The comprehensive Australian Study of entrepreneurial emergence (CAUSEE) high potential nascent entrepreneurs : some preliminary findings

Principal Topic The Comprehensive Australian Study of Entrepreneurial Emergence (CAUSEE) represents the first Australian study to employ and extend the longitudinal and large scale systematic research developed for the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED) in the US (Gartner, Shaver, Carter and Reynolds, 2004; Reynolds, 2007). This research approach addresses several shortcomings of other data sets including under coverage; selection bias; memory decay and hindsight bias, and lack of time separation between the assessment of causes and their assumed effects (Johnson et al 2006; Davidsson 2006). However, a remaining problem is that any a random sample of start-ups will be dominated by low potential, imitative ventures. In recognition of this issue CAUSEE supplemented PSED-type random samples with theoretically representative samples of the 'high potential' emerging ventures employing a unique methodology using novel multiple screening criteria. We define new ''high-potential'' ventures as new entrepreneurial innovative ventures with high aspirations and potential for growth. This distinguishes them from those ''lifestyle'' imitative businesses that start small and remain intentionally small (Timmons, 1986). CAUSEE is providing the opportunity to explore, for the first time, if process and outcomes of high potentials differ from those of traditional lifestyle firms. This will allows us to compare process and outcome attributes of the random sample with the high potential over sample of new firms and young firms. The attributes in which we will examine potential differences will include source of funding, and internationalisation. This is interesting both in terms of helping to explain why different outcomes occur but also in terms of assistance to future policymaking, given that high growth potential firms are increasingly becoming the focus of government intervention in economic development policies around the world. The first wave of data of a four year longitudinal study has been collected using these samples, allowing us to also provide some initial analysis on which to continue further research. The aim of this paper therefore is to present some selected preliminary results from the first wave of the data collection, with comparisons of high potential with lifestyle firms. We expect to see owing to greater resource requirements and higher risk profiles, more use of venture capital and angel investment, and more internationalisation activity to assist in recouping investment and to overcome Australia's smaller economic markets Methodology/Key Propositions In order to develop the samples of 'high potential' in the NF and YF categories a set of qualification criteria were developed. Specifically, to qualify, firms as nascent or young high potentials, we used multiple, partly compensating screening criteria related to the human capital and aspirations of the founders as well as the novelty of the venture idea, and venture high technology. A variety of techniques were also employed to develop a multi level dataset of sources to develop leads and firm details. A dataset was generated from a variety of websites including major stakeholders including the Federal and State Governments, Australian Chamber of Commerce, University Commercialisation Offices, Patent and Trademark Attorneys, Government Awards and Industry Awards in Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Industry lead associations, Venture Capital Association, Innovation directories including Australian Technology Showcase, Business and Entrepreneurs Magazines including BRW and Anthill. In total, over 480 industry, association, government and award sources were generated in this process. Of these, 74 discrete sources generated high potentials that fufilled the criteria. 1116 firms were contacted as high potential cases. 331 cases agreed to participate in the screener, with 279 firms (134 nascents, and 140 young firms) successfully passing the high potential criteria. 222 Firms (108 Nascents and 113 Young firms) completed the full interview. For the general sample CAUSEE conducts screening phone interviews with a very large number of adult members of households randomly selected through random digit dialing using screening questions which determine whether respondents qualify as 'nascent entrepreneurs'. CAUSEE additionally targets 'young firms' those that commenced trading from 2004 or later. This process yielded 977 Nascent Firms (3.4%) and 1,011 Young Firms (3.6%). These were directed to the full length interview (40-60 minutes) either directly following the screener or later by appointment. The full length interviews were completed by 594 NF and 514 YF cases. These are the cases we will use in the comparative analysis in this report. Results and Implications The results for this paper are based on Wave one of the survey which has been completed and the data obtained. It is expected that the findings will assist in beginning to develop an understanding of high potential nascent and young firms in Australia, how they differ from the larger lifestyle entrepreneur group that makes up the vast majority of the new firms created each year, and the elements that may contribute to turning high potential growth status into high growth realities. The results have implications for Government in the design of better conditions for the creation of new business, firms who assist high potentials in developing better advice programs in line with a better understanding of their needs and requirements, individuals who may be considering becoming entrepreneurs in high potential arenas and existing entrepreneurs make better decisions.

Celebrity capital as a strategic asset : implications for new venture strategies

Despite an increase in businesses started by celebrities, we have limited understanding as to how celebrity entrepreneurs benefit new ventures. Drawing on a reputational capital perspective, we develop the notion of celebrity capital and show how it can be used to uniquely differentiate the venture and to overcome liabilities of newness. We discuss how celebrity capital can negatively influence the venture when negative information about the celebrity surfaces and in terms of limiting the scope of the venture. We discuss the different strategic implications of celebrity capital for ventures using celebrity entrepreneurs versus endorsers.