Search results

There are uncertainties concerning how innovators can successfully venture into disruptive innovations and how incumbents can react to the emergence of such innovations. Disruptive digital innovations, which use information technology to disrupt business contexts and can evolve rapidly to either successes or failures, have unique challenges. The literature has largely remained silent concerning these. Also, existing studies often focus on innovations originating in developed economies and just on successful cases. There is a lack of comparative focus on successful and failure cases emerging across economies. The purpose of this paper is to fill these gaps.

This paper assesses the evolution of disruptive digital innovations in various contexts through a financial management-motivated conceptual framework. Contrary to existing works, this paper focuses on both successful and failure cases and regards the influence of various stakeholders further to innovators and incumbents to explain the successes or failures of the innovation.

There are some common success factors for disruptive digital innovation. These include an inherent focus on social value, alignment to financiers' interests and rivals' actions and strategic collaborations to create a synergy effect.

Innovators can cause effective digital disruption by focusing on social and financial values. Success can also largely depend on strategic partnerships rather than actions by an individual entity. Thus, venturing and managing disruptive digital innovation is not an isolated but a social process.

This paper recommends propositions for innovators and incumbents to venture into and confront disruptive digital innovations effectively. Its originality lies in focusing on both successful and failure cases, unexplored in literature, to develop the propositions.

In the new development stage of comprehensively building a socialist modern state, it is imperative to adhere to the guidance of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, comprehensively summarize China's practical experiences in economic development, strengthen research on capital issues, construct theories of socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics regarding capital and provide scientific theoretical guidance for further promoting the positive role of various types of capital while preventing and overcoming their negative effects, which is a major theoretical issue and a glorious task for the theoretical and economic circles in China.

From the perspective of Marx's theory on capital and historical development, modern capital represents the organizational mode of socialized mass production and market economy. It serves as both the economic foundation of bourgeois society and a tool for socialist economic development.

The market economy represents an inevitable historical stage and form of socialist economic development, necessitating the adoption of capital as an organizational form within socialist economies.

The utilization of capital to advance a socialist economy is a remarkable achievement by the CPC and Chinese people, representing a significant innovation in both theory and practice. The role of capital is inherently dual under any social condition. In the context of a socialist system, capital can play a positive role effectively, and its behavior can be guided and regulated correctly to curb its negative or even destructive impact.

Data from HCL company and their corporate entrepreneurship activities were sourced using interviews and discussions. Secondary data was collected from the company website and other information available in the public domain.

This case narrates activities undertaken by the Enterprise Technology Office (ETO) of HCL Technologies Infrastructure Service Division to build the Corporate Entrepreneurship function. Around 2015–2016, the ETO started engaging with multiple people and organizations associated with the technology ecosystem outside the firm boundary for novel technologies and solutions. These entities included venture capitalists and start-ups. The ETO also began engaging with internal teams and existing customers to promote the identified novel technologies and innovative solutions. The ETO function grew organically by hiring resources from internal and external pools. ETO also undertook specific programs to increase the involvement of internal teams in their initiatives, like the Joint Exploration Program. ETO explored several options to further the ecosystem innovation strategy and institutionalize corporate entrepreneurship activities. The ETO team deliberated on ways to align the stakeholder goals and evaluate if technology could play a role.

This case can be used in any course on “Managing Corporate Entrepreneurship and Innovation,” “Strategic Management of Technology Enterprises” or any course focused on managing technology and innovation for graduate (MBA) or executive participants.

This chapter focuses on critical thinking as a new, powerful, and specialized tool and technique for understanding and analyzing the subtle operations of the free enterprise capitalist market system and its ethics and morality. Everything in the world of consumers and market enterprise systems are determined by our supply–demand system that in turn are determined by our presumed limitless production–distribution and consumption (LDPC) systems. From a critical thinking viewpoint, we study the free enterprise capitalist system (FECS) as a dynamic, interconnected organic system and not as a discrete or compartmentalized body of disaggregate parts. Systems thinking with critical thinking calls for a shift of our mindset from seeing just parts to seeing the whole reality in its structured dynamic unity; both mandate that we see ourselves as active participators or partners of FECS and not as mere cogs in its wheels or as mere factors of its production processes. Critical thinking seeks to identify the “structures” that underlie complex situations in FECS with those that bring about high- versus low-leveraged changes in various versions of capitalism. Specifically, this chapter applies critical thinking to FECS as defined by its founder, Adam Smith, in 1776 to its fundamental and structural assumptions, and as supported or critiqued by serious scholars such as Karl Marx, Maynard Keynes, C. K. Prahalad and Allen Hammond (inclusive capitalism), John Mackey and Rajendra Sisodia (conscious capitalism), and others.

Drawing upon a political economy approach, this article aims to analyze the transformations in the labor market within the context of contemporary capitalism, focusing on the phenomenon of financialization.

Financialization is defined as a distinct wealth pattern marked by a growing proportion of financial assets in capitalist wealth. Within financial markets, corporate performance is continuously assessed, in a process that disciplines management to achieve expected financial results, with consequences throughout corporate management.

We find that this phenomenon has implications for labor management, resulting in the intensification of labor processes and the adoption of insecure forms of employment, leading to the fractalization of work. These two mechanisms, added to the indebtedness of workers, constitute three elements for disciplining labor in contemporary capitalism.

We argue that these forms of discipline constitute a subsumption of labor to finance, resulting in an increase in labor exploitation. This formulation of the relationship between financialization and changes in the realm of labor also contributes to understanding the unrealizing potential of social free time in contemporary capitalism.

This paper aims to determine the status of the socialist market economy through a logical analysis of the evolution of economic systems in human society.

This paper presents an analysis of uncertainty and the functions performed by different economic systems in managing and resolving it, thereby explaining the evolutionary rationale behind economic system evolution.

Firstly, the socialist market economy empowers the market to play a decisive role in resource allocation, which serves as the foundation for activating individuals' motivation to engage in economic activities. Secondly, the socialist market economy adheres to the basic socialist economic system, which is the basis for the socialist market economy to stabilize the economy and society or to address the risk of economic uncertainty that may trigger macro-level inconsistencies in economic operations. Thirdly, the advantages of a socialist market economy in adapting to economic uncertainties do not arise spontaneously and must be exerted through continuous improvement of the socialist market economy.

The innovation of this paper lies in introducing uncertainty to clarify the logic behind the evolution of economic systems in human society and explaining the typical significance of the socialist market economy and its advantages in accommodating and resolving uncertainty.

This study aims to investigate a startup accelerator’s decisions toward exerting effort in an information acquisition process and selecting an information disclosure strategy. In particular, the authors are interested in examining which factors may cause the accelerator to report more or less accurate information, which will subsequently affect the investment decision and the outcome of the ventures. This study examines the impact of the equity share taken by the accelerator on the effort level being exerted in the information acquisition process, as well as the accelerator’s decision on the information disclosure regime.

The authors use mathematical models built upon well-established theoretical and practical concepts to analyze the research problems and derive the findings.

The authors show that when the accelerator takes a sufficiently large equity share from the entrepreneur in exchange for admitting the entrepreneur’s venture into the acceleration program, the accelerator is motivated to exert a significant level of effort to observe an accurate signal for the quality of the venture, and then disclose the information about the venture’s quality consistently with the observed signal (informative disclosure regime). On the other hand, if the accelerator takes a small equity share, it is optimal for her to exert no effort in the information acquisition process and simply adopt the basic disclosure regime, where the accelerator reports the quality of the venture based solely on the ex ante expected payoff of the venture, regardless of the observed signal.

The results indicate that an equity sharing scheme, which awards a sufficient amount of equity to the accelerator, can be an effective tool to help obtain accurate information about the quality of a startup venture and make a well-informed investment decision.

This research illustrates that the ownership stake of the accelerator can potentially indicate the accuracy of the information about the venture provided by the accelerator to outside investors. That is, when the stake held by the accelerator is large, the investors can conjecture that the information about the venture reported by the accelerator may be highly accurate and reliable. In contrast, if the accelerator holds a small stake, then it is likely that the information provided by the accelerator may not add any value to the publicly available information. These insights can guide investors (e.g. angle investors, venture capitalists, etc.) in making well-informed startup investment decisions.

The paper argues that the classical Marxist theory of capitalist accumulation is inadequate to understand new forms of capitalism and their accumulation processes determined by “platforms” and “big data”. Big data platforms are shaping the processes of production, labour, the price of products and market conditions. “Digital platforms” and “big data” have become an integral part of the processes of production, distribution and exchange relations. These twin pillars are central to the capitalist accumulation processes. The article argues that the classical Marxist theory of capitalist accumulation is inadequate to understand new forms of capitalism and their accumulation processes determined by “platforms” and “big data”.

As a conceptual paper, this paper follows critical methodological lineages and traditions based on non-linear historical narratives around the conceptualisation, construction and transition of the “Marxist theory of capital accumulation” in the age of platform economy. This paper follows a discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2003) to locate the way in which an artificial intelligence (AI)-led platform economy helps identify and conceptualise new forms of capitalist accumulation. It engages with Jørgensen and Phillips' (2002) contextual and empirical discursive traditions to undertake a qualitative comparative analysis by exploring a broad range of complex factors with case studies and examples from leading firms within the platform economy. Finally, it adopts two steps of “Theory Synthesis and Theory Adaptation” as outlined by Jaakkola (2020) to synthesise, adopt and expand the Marxist theory of capital accumulation under platform capitalism.

This article identifies new trends and forms of data driven capitalist accumulation processes within the platform capitalism. The findings suggest that an AI led platform economy creates new forms of capitalist accumulation. The article helps to develop theoretical understanding and conceptual frameworks to understand and explain these new forms of capital accumulation.

This study builds upon the limited theorisation on the AI and new capitalist accumulation processes. This article identifies new trends and forms of data driven capitalist accumulation processes within platform capitalism. The article helps to understand digital and platform capitalisms in the lens of digital labour and expands the theory of capitalist accumulation and its new forms in the age of datafication. While critiquing the Marxist theory of capitalist accumulation, the article offers alternative approaches for the future.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a systematic review of literature on corporate engagement with start-ups (CEWS) by identifying the modes, contexts, antecedents, barriers and outcomes. As an emerging field, CEWS presently has no such review available which will help in building consensus within the field and shape future research directions.

The study followed a two-phased systematic review of literature. Three research databases (i.e. Web of Science, ScienceDirect and SCOPUS) were accessed to gather and conduct the review. Of the total 379 papers retrieved, 63 total relevant papers were studied and analysed. The exhaustive review of literature helped to uncover the contexts, perspectives, antecedents, outcomes and barriers reported across the different modes of CEWS.

The study highlighted the five prominent modes of CEWS favoured by large corporations and start-ups. It found that the large corporations and start-ups associate with one another on the basis of complementarities of activities, resources and motives to pursue their strategic orientations. The engagements also face barriers on the ground, such as incompatibility of goals, power imbalances, cultural differences and weak engagement plans. Most important contexts seen were the high-technology industries in the developed economies like the USA and Europe. It also found that ecosystem creation, accessing innovation and corporate strategy have been preferred as the most productive modes of CEWS in the literature.

This review provides practitioners with a detailed list of the modes and drivers of CEWS. Subsequently, the barriers that need to be managed to successfully execute a specific mode of engagement. This shall enable the practitioners in developing and adopting the best practices while engaging with the start-ups to better facilitate the outcomes of CEWS.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there is no systematic literature review available in the domain of CEWS – thus, this study makes an important methodological contribution to the field. By consolidating the fragmented yet growing knowledge on CEWS, the study presents a detailed understanding of what drives and obstructs the engagement between large corporations and start-ups.

This paper aims to explore the effects of two drivers, namely, the received fundings and its interaction with the specialized competences owned by the managerial board, on the R&D activities performed by start-ups.

This paper tests hypotheses on a sample of 405 innovative start-ups established in Italy and registered into the Chamber of Commerce official database. This study uses the R&D expenses as a measure of the innovative performance of start-up, and the authors also collected the number and total amount of grants received by them and the presence of high qualified team in their management board.

The analysis reveals that both the number and total amount of grants received by start-ups positively impact the innovative performance. The same is for the integration of the total amount of grants with the presence of high qualified team in the management board.

This study did not distinguish between different types of grants adopted by start-ups, while it would be interesting to study whether any difference does exist among them in terms of their influence on innovative performance. Also, this paper considers the total number of specialized people in the team while it would certainly be interesting to analyze people’s background and competences in relation to the innovative performances.

This paper allows us to offer some provisional conclusions such as having funds in the preliminary phase of start-up life cycle, and investments mainly for R&D expenses. The start-up must also leverage its skills and therefore it is necessary to invest in human capital.

Findings suggest that policymakers should introduce integrated measures to support start-ups throughout the entire life cycle, from the creation of the idea to incubation up to industrial consolidation.

This paper focuses on the determinants of start-up innovative performance because both external (such as political, economic, social and technological) and internal (such as organizational) influencing factors have to be considered as crucial for start-ups innovation and growth. Finally, this study is one of the few attempts exploring the phenomenon by using an empirical methodology based on real and certificated data.