Parallel Session Details

Track C: Innovation Intermediaries

C1: When neuroscience meets entrepreneurship: a bibliometric analysis (Extended Abstract)

Valentina Cucino1, Mariacarmela Passarelli2, Alfio Cariola2, Alberto Di Minin1

1Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna; 2Università della Calabria

What do we know about the role of neuroscience in management? In the last decade there was an important rise in the number of papers that analyze the ways that neuroscience affect different aspects of management. Our new knowledge is still not systematic. Although the past few years have observed the necessity of review studies on each of the three subsets of biological factors, no reviews have sought to bring those different subsets together into a broader biological perspective. Moreover, in this field of literature, “much of this research has been published in journals that management scholars do not routinely follow, and the different studies themselves have been isolated from one another making it difficult to see the cumulative set of findings.". Moreover, empirical work on the topic can be found across a large number of journals and in numerous subfields of management, which makes it difficult for management scholars to see how the same theoretical patterns are present in different subfields. Most importantly, the field of management also lacks a systematic discussion of how these individual findings relate to a broader theoretical perspective on how biology influences management. These studies form the basis for a new school of thought that incorporates neuroscience into descriptions of management and also entrepreneurial behavior. In this context, to examine the current state-of-the-art literature on this field, we focus on the business literature, by exploring the relation between neuroscience dimension, business and entrepreneurial intention, in order to compare the new emerging research foci, we try to find an evidence-based roadmap for stimulating focused entrepreneurial intention research so as to move the field forward. To address these challenge, we conducted a quantitative bibliometric analysis employing co-citation and bibliographic coupling. 

C2: Does TTO Capability Matter in Commercializing University Technology? Evidence from Longitudinal Data in South Korea (Extended Abstract)

Kyootai Lee1, Hyun Ju Jung2

1Sogang University, Korea, Republic of (South Korea); 2Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daejeon, Korea

Does technology transfer office (TTO) capability contribute to university technology commercialization? To answer this question, we identify three distinctive capabilities of technology commercialization—academic research capability, applied research capability, and TTO operation capability—using stochastic frontier analysis. Then, we examine the effects of the three capabilities on university technology commercialization performance measured by both the number and value of technology transfers. Using unique longitudinal data from 2009 to 2015 in South Korea, we find that TTO operation capability does not have a significant effect on university technology commercialization performance, while academic and applied research capabilities have significant and positive effects. TTO operation capability has a positive impact on technology commercialization performance only for universities possessing a high level of applied research capability. Our findings imply that in commercializing university technology, applied research capability enables universities to reconcile different institutional logics of academic and commercial research, and thus universities should have a certain level of applied research capability as a threshold to make TTO operation capability effective. This study extends our understanding of how universities have adapted to the proliferation of commercial research and of when TTOs can play a critical role in enhancing technology commercialization performance.

C3: Exploring the development of entrepreneurial alertness in universities - the entrepreneurship education ecosystem perspective (Extended Abstract)

Sirirat Sae Lim, Yi Han Then

National Chiao Tung Univeristy, Taiwan

Entrepreneurial alertness is a vital entrepreneurial capability, and its connection to new venture formation has long been acknowledged. With universities assuming a more active role in nurturing entrepreneurial talent in recent years, there is a need to study the early processes of entrepreneurial alertness development among students. This is essential not only to policy makers, but also to decision makers in universities.

Much literature has been written about capability development after venture formation, but far less is known about the role of universities in nurturing entrepreneurial alertness. This study addresses this gap, by exploring how a university’s entrepreneurship education ecosystem affects the development of entrepreneurial alertness among students. A case study was conducted of a leading research-based university in Taiwan that is known for its rich history in nurturing entrepreneurs.

We identify and discuss three factors within a university entrepreneurial education ecosystem that impact the development of entrepreneurial alertness among its students. Our study provides insights into the factors affecting the development of the entrepreneurial awareness of students within a university entrepreneurship education ecosystem. It enhances our understanding of pre-venture-formation entrepreneurial capability development in the university setting.

C4: How startups benefit from accelerator programs (Extended Abstract)

Vincent Kuo1, Caren Weinberg2, C.Y. Hwang3

1University of Nottingham Ningbo China, China, People's Republic of; 2Rupin Academic center; 3National Taiwan Chia Tong Univesity

Most study on incubators and accelerators examined their typology and offerings. Little has been discussed from the recipient perspective. How startups benefit from the accelerator program remains unanswered. The study adopted Importance and Performance analysis to examine how these offerings are utilized. We also conducted a qualitative research to explore the reason why some gaps existing in the expectation and performance while startups are still keen to entre an accelerator program. The study make contribution by offering perspectives from recipient and providing explanation of crown-effect.

C5: Conceptualisation and application of dynamic and open approaches in COMAU (Extended Abstract)

Alberto Di Minin, Giulio Ferrigno, Giuseppe Idone, Cristina Marullo

Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Italy

Nowadays, the global economy is continuously evolving at a pace that incumbents can barely sustain: increased technological uncertainty and market turbulence are forcing companies to be constantly ready for the change. Starting from this premise, the path through which incumbent firms pursue radical innovation is not extensively clear in the literature. Based on three relevant approaches proposed in the literature as solutions to the problem of pursuing radical innovation in large established firms, (i.e. ambidexterity, dynamic capabilities, and open innovation) we develop a conceptual framework allowing us to analyze firms’ dynamic and open approaches to radical innovation.  We present an empirical application of this framework to the case of a high-technology company operating in the industrial automation industry. Based on an exhaustive collection of primary and secondary data we provide empirical evidence of a “path” for incumbent companies which, by adopting open and agile approaches, can reach two purposes: first, to reduce and manage uncertainties generated by discontinuities and explorative activities, second, to successfully pursue radical innovation.

C6: Defusing inter-organizational barriers through Open Innovation environments (Extended Abstract)

Antonio Crupi1, Nicola Del Sarto1, Alberto Di Minin1, Andrea Piccaluga1, Rob Phaal2

1Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Italy; 2University of Cambridge, UK

This study aims at understanding how barriers impede knowledge sharing in inter-organizational arrangements and how Open Innovation environments can help in defusing such barriers.

C7: The role of open innovation intermediaries in initiating and coaching new types of firm-innovation lab collaborations: Findings from an exploratory study of a mediated knowledge creation process for managing open innovation projects in Austria and Italy (Extended Abstract)

Veronika Hornung-Prahauser

Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH, Austria

We aim to better understand the underresearched mode of open firm-innovation lab collaboration from a study (Austria and Italy), in which corporates,SMEs and innovation labs jointly worked on innovation projects. It specifically investigates the contribution of OI intermediaries in successfully implementing all phases of an interactive coupled OI process.

C8: Startup accelerators as an open environment: The impact on startups’ innovative performance (Extended Abstract)

Nicola Del Sarto1, Claudio Cruz Cazares2, Alberto Di Minin1

1Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Italy; 2Universitad de Barcelona

Accelerators program are emerging in recent years as e new model of startup assistance. However, despite the rapid proliferation of such programs, academic literature on the topic is surprisingly scarce. In particular, previous literature has neglected to investigate how the open environment provided by startup accelerators can enhance the innovation performance of accelerated startups despite Open Innovation practices are commonly adopted in acceleration programs. To address this research gap, we investigate how startups participating in accelerator programs can enhance innovation performance through information transfer from informal networks provided by startup accelerators. In doing so, we draw data from 113 startups accelerated by Italian accelerators since 2013. Our results reveal that different sources of external knowledge provided by accelerators are beneficial for different innovation outcomes contributing to the literature on accelerators. Moreover, our findings contribute to the literature on startups and open innovation and to the technology and innovation management literature.

C9: The bureaucratization of innovation: an exploration of Innovation Agency processes and their impacts (Extended Abstract)

Jeremy Klein

RADMA, Technologia Ltd (UK)

The track description poses the question of whether opportunity creation from breakthrough invention may be inadvertently suppressed by incubators and innovation intermediaries.  The question is addressed in this paper through a largely personal account of working in a contractor role for one such intermediary, a national innovation agency. 

Innovation agencies are funding bodies set up with the intended role of promoting and enabling innovation.  As distributors of public funds through grants and loans there are pressures to be both fair and efficient.  They have evolved into ‘machine bureaucracies’, typically with highly standardized practices, inflexible procedures and slow decision-making, all generally seen as antipathetic to innovation.  The potential tension between the innovation mission and supporting it through a bureaucratic mechanism is obvious.  My account covers the internal workings of the key processes in the support mechanism – project selection and project monitoring – which have been poorly researched so far but sometimes appear to supress innovation as suggested in the theme.

C10: Visualizing Emergent Innovation Ecosystems for Knowledge Synergies: The Case of the Zurich Fintech Sector (Extended Abstract)

Martin J. Eppler1, Vera Fearns2

1University of St. Gallen, Switzerland; 2Nova School of Business and Economics, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa

We approach emergent innovation ecosystems from a geographic perspective as regional industry clusters, highlighting the importance of visualizing these ecosystems through various maps to fully understand their potential. Our research case is the Fintech sector in the greater Zurich region, an emergent regional innovation ecosystem that has accelerated significantly in 2018.

C11: Enabling SMEs Digital Entrepreneurial Ecosystem: The Role of Digital Intermediaries (Extended Abstract)

Luca Marinelli1, Antonio Crupi2, Nicola Del Sarto2, Alberto Di Minin2, Gian Luca Gregori1, Dominique Lepore3, Francesca Spigarelli3

1Università Politecnica delle Marche, Italy; 2Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Italy; 3Università degli Studi di Macerata, Italy

The paper provides evidence on the mechanisms of a Digital Entrepreneurial Ecosystem (DEE). Information from different sources, which was gained through an action research methodology, allowed to analyze the digital actors (1), digital motivations (2), digital activities (3) and digital organization (4) of the DEE. The case presented sheds light on the role held by intermediary actors in an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem, which in the DEE examined is represented by the Digital Innovation Hub (DIH). In fact, the DIH was able to to gain trust in entrepreneurs who decided to invest in a digital solution that was still at an experimental stage.

C12: Many are Called, Few are Chosen: The Role of Science in Drug Development Decisions (Extended Abstract)

Linde Colen2, Stijn Kelchtermans1,2, Rene Belderbos1,3,4, Bart Leten1,2

1KU Leuven; 2Hasselt University; 3Maastricht University; 4UNU-MERIT

In recent decades, the number of new drug launches in the life sciences industry has not kept pace with soaring R&D expenditures. While firms are consistently patenting new drug candidates, most of these are not taken up in clinical development. We analyze whether the basic and applied science base of patented drug candidates – and who was responsible for that scientific research - affect their further development trajectory. We study the role of science for two critical decisions: first, whether a drug candidate enters clinical trials (i.e. the take-up decision), and second, whether the firm that is the patent owner takes the drug candidate into internal development or if it relies on the market for technology to transfer further development to another firm (i.e. the who decision). We analyze the references to scientific literature of 18,394 patented drug candidates of 140 biopharmaceutical firms, and find that both basic and applied scientific research increase the likelihood of bringing the drug candidate into clinical development, but that self-performed basic research induces only the patent owner to take the drug candidate into development. We reflect on the implications of our findings for the organization of scientific research and development in the life sciences industry and the potential downsides of organizational specialization in either scientific research or clinical development.