Search results

The time is right for a theory on strategic entrepreneurial ecosystems and business model innovation. Both topics have increased substantially during the past couple of years due to their strategic nature. This means they are uniquely placed to provide practical advice but also theoretical development. This chapter discusses the theory in terms of how it bridges strategic planning, innovation management, and entrepreneurship literature. Thereby propelling the field of entrepreneurial ecosystems further by suggesting it has both a strategic and business model perspective. This chapter argues the reasons for a new theory to be developed in order to maintain the relevance and practicality of the entrepreneurial ecosystem literature.

Sport entrepreneurial ecosystems are part of the international business environment and help to determine the competitiveness of a place. While the origins of entrepreneurial ecosystems derive from the economic geography field, increasingly international business theories are being used as a way to engage with the cultural and societal context. This means it is important for scholars to take an interdisciplinary perspective on how to define and conceptualize an ecosystem from an entrepreneurial point of view. This chapter reviews the current body of literature on sport entrepreneurial ecosystems and extends it to a more international business perspective by focusing on knowledge spillovers. This will enable sport managers and practitioners to utilize entrepreneurial ecosystems as a way to foster their internationalization efforts.

Entrepreneurial ecosystems are fundamental to the functioning of an effective international business system that thrives on value creation. Despite the popularity of the term “entrepreneurial ecosystem,” its origins can be traced back to much of the research surrounding the effects of internationalization on the business environment. In the past 20 years, there has been many changes in the ability of businesses to market their services to consumers in other countries. This has largely been the result of technological innovation in the form of mobile commerce. At the same time, there has been a rise in the number of tourists traveling overseas. Both of these factors have led to the spread of ideas rapidly between countries thereby encouraging an entrepreneurial ecosystem to develop. Whilst much research has been conducted on the effects of internationalization on the economy, there is a shortage of research linking entrepreneurial ecosystems to internationalization effects. For this reason, this chapter is a timely one and an important milestone in the research on entrepreneurial ecosystems. This chapter will discuss the ways to create a conducive entrepreneurial ecosystem by taking into account culture and societal expectations, which leads to a discussion on managerial and policy implications together with future research suggestions.

This study evaluates the relationship between the entrepreneurial ecosystem and business competitiveness in four different contexts (i.e. France, Spain, Hungary and Costa Rica).

The study uses a sample of 348 manufacturing and knowledge-intensive business service firms operating in four countries with different entrepreneurial ecosystems (France, Spain, Costa Rica and Hungary) for 2019. Firm competitiveness is computed via the “benefit-of-the-doubt” (BOD) method, and a multilevel model is employed to assess the connection between the entrepreneurial ecosystem and firm competitiveness.

The results of the multilevel model indicate that the entrepreneurial ecosystem is related to firm competitiveness, while the BOD results suggest that firms operating in settings with a more consolidated entrepreneurial ecosystem are better able to realize the outcomes of strategic choices linked to the exploitation of key resources and capabilities. Country-specific results suggest that “human capital” is the most relevant competitive pillar prioritized by all sampled businesses.

The proposed analysis of the connection between the entrepreneurial ecosystem and business competitiveness in different contexts contributes to the development of the entrepreneurial ecosystem frame by offering insights into how the properties of the entrepreneurial ecosystem (i.e. interactions among individuals, organizations and institutions) can produce economically meaningful effects on business performance.

Entrepreneurial ecosystems provide the context for start-ups to access resources. The authors investigate the reliance of start-ups on their entrepreneurial ecosystem and the driving factors behind the proportion of local actors (belonging to their entrepreneurial ecosystem) within their overall set of relationships (their business ecosystem). Recognizing the limited relational capacity of firms, the authors focus on three differentiating firm characteristics: size, age and innovation of firms.

The authors developed a sample of 163 start-ups located in the entrepreneurial ecosystem of Toulouse, France. The authors investigated the characteristics of their relationship sets using regression analysis.

The results confirm that age is inversely related to the proportion of a start-up's relationships located in its entrepreneurial ecosystem. More surprisingly, for older start-ups, the authors also highlight the presence of a moderating effect of the start-up's size on the relationship between its degree of innovation and the proportion of its relationships in its entrepreneurial ecosystem: Larger and more innovative start-ups appear to rely more on their local entrepreneurial ecosystem.

This research increases the understanding of the characteristics driving the interactions of start-ups with their entrepreneurial ecosystems by adopting a relational capacity approach. The authors introduce digital methods as an innovative approach for uncovering firms' ecosystems. Finally, from a practical point of view, the research should provide public authorities seeking to promote the link between local resources and the development of innovative start-ups in their regions with interesting insights.

Following the triple helix (TH) model and the way knowledge is transferred into the industry domain, this chapter aims to define features interface that should be implemented in order to facilitate the University–Industry (UI) relationship and thus encourage the spin-off creation.

In order to support this relationship, a new business model configuration of an entrepreneurial ecosystem is proposed, aiming at creating a sustainable environment, where business entities can grow. The field of the Governance of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems is also investigated in order to define a framework for launching, developing, and sustaining a company over time.

This chapter presents a case study developed within the University of Salento (Italy). It capitalizes results from three different research analyses, based on questionnaires and interviews with actors of the spin-off network (professors and researchers, graduating students, admin-tech staff of the Technology Transfer Office, spin-offs’ CEOs/Associates, and R&D managers of external companies) and on results coming from scientific publications and regional/national reports in the innovation context.

A research methodology based on semantic network analysis and sentiment analysis has been applied in order to identify which features an interface should implement in order to facilitate the UI relationship and encourage the spin-off creation.

To support the start-up overcoming the “death valley,” the creation of a link between the strategy used to transfer value to the market and the phase of innovation is proposed inside the business model configuration. Some aspects of a governance model of an entrepreneurial ecosystem were also presented in order to support the business evolution of a single business entity and assuring sustainability over time.

There is an increasing interest in the literature for the characteristics of the entrepreneurial ecosystems and the impacts caused by their activities. Silicon Valley or Israel is widely known as the main entrepreneurial ecosystems, but there are a lot of different cities and countries which are performing a great effort to become a worldwide reference in entrepreneurship. The purpose of this work is to analyze the Spanish and the Portuguese entrepreneurial ecosystems and identify strengths and challenges. The basic characteristics of both countries will be introduced, as well as the relevant points regarding policies for fostering entrepreneurship, tax benefits to entrepreneurial activities, special considerations for social enterprises, investors support and the main challenges faced by each country.

The aim of this chapter is to contribute toward the phenomena of women entrepreneurship from an emerging economy perspective through a dynamic capability's perspective. The challenges faced by women entrepreneurs in a nonsupportive entrepreneurial ecosystem reshaped by digitization will contribute to the burgeoning women entrepreneurship literature. In order to survive in a challenging entrepreneurial ecosystem, women entrepreneurs need dynamic capabilities to face the challenges of a modern digital world. This chapter problematizes the challenges of the digital world and its role in modern day businesses.

This research aims to shed new lights on the most shared constructs developed on Innovation Ecosystems, Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Technology Transfer Ecosystem proposing an additional stand-alone ecosystem.

This research is built upon a qual-quantitative analysis of an empirical case. The latter analysis is performed through a single case study methodology on the San Giovanni Hub of the Federico II University of Naples.

Evidences show how a technological hub orchestrates three main ecosystems for the knowledge exploitation: the technology transfer ecosystem, devoted to gather knowledge form universities' labs towards industries; the innovation ecosystem, able to manage the exploration and exploitation of new knowledge and techniques; the entrepreneurial ecosystem, that supports startup/spinoff creation process.

Limitations mainly concern the fact that it is centred on just one case study.

Practical implications imply new opportunities of collaboration involving different stakeholders as university administrators, researchers, businesses and policymakers, creating a supportive environment for innovation.

The research offers a new vision about the role of Universities as creators and enablers of ecosystems pursuing diverse value propositions. The Academic Innovation Ecosystem is a new conceptualization of this role played by a university, and it can convey innovation and entrepreneurial attitude within its ecosystem leveraging on the transfer of university knowledge and technology.