Incubator specialisation and size: divergent paths towards operational scale

PublikationArtikel (med peer review)

Business incubator, focus, industry, Karl Wennberg, region, Size, specialization, sustainability, university

Sammanfattning

Research on incubators show that size is important in achieving efficiency and networking benefits for clients. However, little research has focused on what factors influence incubator size. We theorize and show partial support for size benefits to incubator specialization. Analyses of the relationship between size and four distinct specialization strategies in a sample of 96 European incubators show that incubator size is positively related to a strategic focus on universities and research institutes as recruitment channels and to a focus on sustainability, but unrelated to industry focus. Incubator size was found to be negatively related to a regional focus. While sustainability focused incubators tended to not find recruitment challenging, paradoxically, among those who did, the most frequently reported challenges were related to finding tenants that focus on sustainability. Post-hoc analyses revealed that tenants with a focus other than sustainability often dominate sustainability-oriented incubators, suggesting that sustainability may be more of a legitimating strategy than an explicit selection criterion.

Klofsten, M., Lundmark, E., Wennberg, K. & Banks, N. (2020). Incubator specialisation and size: divergent paths towards operational scale. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 151. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119821

Liknande innehåll

Fooled by diversity? When diversity initiatives exacerbate rather than mitigate inequality

Artikel (med peer review)Publikation

Hellerstedt, K., Uman, T., & Wennberg, K.

Publiceringsår

2022

Publicerat i

Hellerstedt, K., Uman, T., & Wennberg, K. (2022). Fooled by diversity? When diversity initiatives exacerbate rather than mitigate inequality. Academy of Management Perspectives.

Sammanfattning

This article analyzes and critically discusses the business case logic of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. We highlight the value-in diversity logic for organizations and compare this with both the recent logic of power activism driven by internal and external lobbying and the classical moral justice logic originating in the civil rights movement,showing how the concepts of diversity, equity, and inclusion are seen differently in research and advocacy as organizational inputs, sought-for outputs, or as a context for social change…

Crises, Covid-19, and Entrepreneurship

Artikel (med peer review)Publikation

Batjargal, B., Jack, S., Mickiewicz, T., Stam, E., Stam, W., & Wennberg, K.

Publiceringsår

2023

Publicerat i

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice.

Sammanfattning

This virtual special issue includes research on the effects of crises, in particular the COVID-19 pandemic, on entrepreneurship, and entrepreneurial responses to deal with consequences of crises. This issue highlights how crises affect entrepreneurs’ well-being and reinforce the importance of agency of entrepreneurs and other citizens. The special issue also highlights the need for resilience; the ability of entrepreneurs, organizations, and economies to absorb and adapt to shocks; and how it can be strengthened. We discuss the importance of data in times of crisis and the greater need for engaged scholarship.

The article can be accessed here.

Evaluating Evaluations of Innovation Policy: Exploring Reliability, Methods, and Conflicts of Interest

BokkapitelPublikation

Collin, E., Sandström, C., & Wennberg, K.

Publiceringsår

2022

Publicerat i

Questioning the Entrepreneurial State, 157.

Sammanfattning

Expansions of innovation policies have been paralleled with an increase in the evaluations of such policies. Yet, there are few systematic evaluations of how such evaluations are conducted, by whom, and their overall conclusions. We analyze 110 evaluations of innovation policy in Sweden from 2005 to 2019. Our findings show that the majority of these evaluations are positive, about one-third are neutral in their conclusions, and very few are negative. The majority of evaluations were conducted by consulting firms, close to one-third by expert government agencies, and around 10% by university researchers or as self-evaluations by the governmental agencies responsible for the policy themselves. Few evaluations employed causal methods to assess the potential effects of policies. We discuss conflicts of interest and question the reliability of evaluations of innovation policy.

Visa fler