The purpose of this paper is to identify how different modes of resource configuration, entry strategy and product/market characteristics affect new ventures' start‐up processes as well as outcomes in terms of firm growth and revenues.
Case studies of three academic spin‐offs and three non‐academic new ventures are employed as a base for analytical generalisation.
Non‐academic ventures and academic spin‐offs have different bases for their venture creation and follow different strategies to enter their specific markets. Academic spin‐offs are to a larger extent innovative, product‐oriented and enter their target markets employing a technology/science‐push strategy, which requires considerable resources and partner cooperation to manage. The non‐academic ventures, on the contrary, exploit emerging opportunities on the market through a market‐pull strategy relying mainly on offerings already known to the market and building on their own, in‐house resources.
Future research should benefit from investigating factors and conditions affecting different ventures' start‐up process by utilizing qualitative, in‐depth approaches as well as quantitative approaches and a more robust database.
Venture creation processes are not uniform but dependent on situational and contextual factors. Overall, academic spin‐offs come forward as examples of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship characterised by exploration and innovation, while the more “Kirznerian” and non‐academic start‐ups primarily recognise and exploit upcoming market opportunities based on resources they control. The results highlight challenges for nascent entrepreneurs as well as for policy makers supporting new venture creation.
A comparison highlighting critical events, resource configurations and environmental conditions of different start‐up processes depending on the new ventures' origin.
Roininen, S. and Ylinenpää, H. (2009), "Schumpeterian versus Kirznerian entrepreneurship: A comparison of academic and non‐academic new venturing", Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 504-520. https://doi.org/10.1108/14626000910977198Download as .RIS
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2009, Emerald Group Publishing Limited