Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore the extent to which various theories of capital structure “fit” in the case of new technology‐based firms.

This study uses data from the Kauffman Firm Survey, a longitudinal data set of over 4,000 firms in the USA. Descriptive statistics and multivariate results are provided.

The authors' findings reveal that new technology‐based firms demonstrate different financing patterns than firms that are not technology‐based.

Although some support was found for both the Pecking Order and Life Cycle theories, the results also indicate that technology‐based entrepreneurs are both willing and able to raise substantial amounts of capital from external sources.

Technology‐based entrepreneurs need external sources of equity, in particular, in order to launch and grow their firms.

To the authors' knowledge, this is the first article to test specific theories of capital structure using a large sample of new technology‐based firms in the USA.

Risk management consists of a process that involves the assessment and evaluation of risks. Identifying risks that can be reduced and risks that can be transferred (through insurance) is part of that process. The environment for insurance affects the ability of the high technology‐based entrepreneur to engage in this process. For example, the availability of product liability cover can affect the ability to develop new products. In a combined study of Scottish and West Midlands high technology‐based small firms (HTSFs), follow‐up interviews, cases and research in the insurance industry, we found that this environment is less than perfect. There are issues in the insurance industry that can lead to problems for high technology‐based entrepreneurs. These issues are associated with the availability and search costs associated with specialized insurance. Failure rates of high technology‐based entrepreneurs, although below those of other small firms, are still high. The high cost and limited availability of specialized insurance, which is sought by the high technology entrepreneur, contributes to the difficulty of the environment and adds to the costs and/or risks faced by such entrepreneurs.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse technology‐based entrepreneurship and its importance for economic growth. Firstly, it discusses the concept of technology‐based entrepreneurship, and, secondly, it moves on to question if the phenomenon is important for regional growth. New technology‐based firms (NTBFs) can influence economic growth both directly, by their own growth, and indirectly, for example, by providing specialised input to other firms. Quite frequently those indirect effects are established within a regional context.

This paper contributes knowledge about the relatively successful Swedish case. Based on several of the author's earlier studies, some empirical data are used to illustrate some characteristics of the Swedish case. The background and origin of Swedish NTBFs, as well as the growth of these firms, are discussed. Since, technology‐based entrepreneurship is a strongly regional phenomena special attention will be paid to one of Sweden's major regions; the Gothenburg region.

The paper shows that the number of technology‐based new firms corresponds to a small share of general entrepreneurship. Technology‐based entrepreneurship is a highly regional phenomenon, where local large firms are important for the training and breeding of future entrepreneurs. Spin‐off processes are likely to enhance regional knowledge development and learning processes because it involves the diffusion and sharing of technological and managerial expertise within the region.

The results suggests that a country like Sweden, with high R&D spendings and innovative activities, should be encouraged to increase its entrepreneurial activities in order to benefit even further from its R&D and technology development.

Is of value by adding to the knowledge on technology‐intensive firms – how they tend to grow, how frequent they are and their role in economic growth.

For a new technology-based firm, the ability to learn is crucial to their growth process. However, firms constantly face the challenge of maintaining the ambidexterity of two different learning activities, namely learning by exploiting existing competencies and learning through exploring new ones. The purpose of this study is to examine how small technology-based firms at incubators perform both activities. Using the index of network openness, we argue that firms perform ambidexterity by maintaining a balance between a high and low level of network openness. Our first hypothesis was constructed as firms pursuing explorative learning will develop a high level of network openness while those pursuing exploitative learning will develop a low level of network openness. In the second hypothesis, we argue that firms need to balance network openness. Developing too low level of network openness will not add more benefits as the cost for maintaining relationship increases. Similarly, developing too high level of openness may potentially hinder firms’ progress as firms face distractions and difficulties in maintaining a wide variety of relationships. Using the empirical data from new technology-based firms located at the Daresbury SIC, we confirm the hypotheses. The result also found a trend of a curvilinear relationship between network openness and the firms’ performance which confirm the second hypothesis. The overall findings have illustrated how a network has a positive impact on helping small and new technology-based firms perform learning ambidexterity.

The focus of this chapter is assessment of effectiveness of support infrastructure for technology-based businesses. The chapter aims to examine the effects of physical infrastructure including incubators and science parks on the level of innovation activity and performance of new technology-based firms. It reviews evidence from Western countries comparing various assessments of the impact of science parks on the firms. The chapter is set to examine the development of the science park movement in Russia; it explores the empirical evidence from a case-study university in an attempt to analyse the shortcomings in present state of the support infrastructure in Russia from point of view of technology-based companies.

This paper aims to understand the factors associated with perceptions of venture capital as a barrier to innovation in an important subset of knowledge-intensive service firms – technology-based business services. A general and longstanding neglect of services in studies of innovation and a common focus of innovation studies on the availability of, and demand for, risk capital has been noted.

In exploring these issues, the authors draw on survey data collected from 264 technology-based service firms located in Scotland and Northern England. The data are subjected to bivariate and multivariate statistical analyses to help explore the extent of demand-side risk capital concerns.

It was found that smaller, faster growing and R&D-intensive firms perception greater equity barriers. Moreover, firms who are relatively happy about the managerial competencies available to them, but who identify deficiencies in marketing skills and the availability of external debt finance (which may say something broadly about their financial neediness), are shown to be “needy”.

Studies of venture capital demand are relatively rare. Studies involving innovative service firms are rarer still. Given the prominent role of service firms in advanced economies and the changing perspective of the role of services in innovation, studies of financial constraints to innovation in services are timely. Innovation policy in advanced economies continues to be premised on patterns identified in manufacturing industries. This paper contributes to a broader perspective that views [technology-based] business services as dynamic innovation actors.

This chapter presents research to assess the impact of the recent financial crisis on technology-based small firms (TBSFs) in the United Kingdom based on findings from an extended telephone survey with the owner-managers of 49 young and 51 more mature TBSFs, undertaken in 2010. Even before the onset of the global financial crisis in 2007, it was generally acknowledged that TBSFs faced greater obstacles in accessing finance than conventional SMEs. This is because banks have difficulty assessing the viability of new technology-based business ventures due to information asymmetries, whilst risk capital providers may have difficulty providing appropriate or sufficient funds on terms acceptable to entrepreneurs. Given the recent difficulties that SMEs, in general, have faced in obtaining external finance, we would expect TBSFs to have been particularly adversely affected by the financial crisis. Our evidence showed that TBSFs exhibited a strong demand for external finance between 2007 and 2010, related to their growth ambitions and achievements. They sought finance mainly from banks but also with younger TBSFs seeking business angel finance and more mature TBSFs seeking venture capital finance. However, our evidence indicates that both debt and equity finance became harder to access for TBSFs, particularly for early-stage and more R&D-intensive firms. Where funding was offered, it was often on unacceptable terms with regards to the levels of collateral or equity required. The chapter provides evidence of a growing funding gap and concludes that the ability of TBSFs to contribute to economic recovery is hampered by ongoing problems in obtaining external finance.

Discusses case study and interview evidence to examine the evolution and development of entrepreneurial strategies in the high technology small firm (HTSF). Evidence from case study material suggests that a period of non high technology development can be an advantage for the entrepreneur to gain essential contacts, networks and learn to develop strategy, as well as time to acquire income and funding to permit the development of the technology‐based firm. The paper discusses evidence from four rich case studies. Each of these involved a non‐high tech start‐up, yet this was still crucial to the entrepreneurship process and learning of the entrepreneur. Material from case evidence is also combined with interview evidence to discuss the critical factors in the learning process and the development of entrepreneurial strategies from a programme of interviews with HTSFs. It is argued that the evolution of a marketing strategy is part of the learning process involved in entrepreneurial development, we need to understand the diversity of this process if intervention is to be better informed by practitioners and by policy makers. In this paper we stress the diversity of entrepreneurial development, within HTSFs, discuss the importance of learning in entrepreneurial development for developing marketing strategies and develop policy implications for intervention.

In acquisitions of technology-based firms the focus is typically on the technology and the target firm's engineers and scientists. But a firm is a social entity with a range of important internal and external relationships that are essential to the exploitation of existing capabilities, and the development of new ones. These relationships need to be maintained, subsequent to acquisition, to preserve the target firm's ability to innovate and compete. I argue for the importance of the target firm's relationships with its customers, and show that the degree to which the acquisition creates or destroys value for the target firm's customers is a significant predictor of acquisition success.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the capabilities and roles of three types of actors, specifically technology-based start-ups, incumbent firms and intermediaries, in co-constructing a network for development and commercialization of an emerging technology. In particular, the research aims to understand how the roles played by network actors evolve during the development and commercialization process and what operational and dynamic capabilities are developed by actors through collaboration.

A single longitudinal case study methodology was applied to analyse roles and operational and dynamic capabilities developed in a network setting by multiple parties over time.

The findings indicate that actors need to take on new roles to be successful when dealing with an emerging technology in a network context and they need to develop certain dynamic capabilities to enact these roles. The study categorizes roles and capabilities of network actors through various stages of collaboration. Actors developed sensing capabilities in the pre-collaboration stage which drove joint new product development. During the collaboration, seizing capabilities were developed where resource commitment and alignment of resources among actors were essential. Capabilities gained through commercialization and large-scale production were predominantly transforming capabilities where actors realigned their structure and had positive impact on capability development in the wider network.

Using data of a single case data may limit the applicability of the findings, which calls for future research.

The findings inform managers’’ and policymakers’ strategies related to participation in networks for development and commercialization of emerging technologies. The research provides insights about the role of large and small firms as well as intermediary organizations in development of nanotechnology and highlights that all network actors need to develop and utilize dynamic capabilities in all areas of sensing, seizing and transforming over time to be able to innovate and successfully commercialize a new product.

The research investigates evolution of operational and dynamic capabilities and roles of multiple actors over time in collaborative networks for development and commercialization of an emerging technology. Building on the dynamic capabilities concept, the study broadens our understanding of the evolution of these capabilities in a network setting and elaborates how capability development is linked to changes in roles.