International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, Volume 21, Issue 1, March 2015.Entrepreneurship education, Entrepreneurship, Joseph Schumpeter
The impact of R&D teams’ gender diversity on innovation outputs
Juan FernÃ¡ndez Sastre
International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Vol. 24, No. 1 (2015) pp. 142 – 162
Drawing from a sample of Spanish manufacturing firms, this paper examines the effect of R&D teams’ gender diversity on different innovation outputs: products, services, process and organisational innovations. The paper argues that some innovations are best positioned to capitalise the benefits of gender diversity, because of the greater relevance of market insight and personal interactions. Allowing for systematic correlations among the different innovation outcomes, results indicate that, although the relationship between gender diversity and innovation outputs has always the shape of an inverted-U, gender diversity produces a greater impact on service and organisational innovation than in process innovation, while its greatest effect is on product innovation. Results also indicate that having R&D teams with diverse functional expertise has more potential than having a gender diverse R&D labour force, except for service innovation for which gender diversity is as relevant as functional diversity.
Logic alone does not confer a competitive advantage and companies must increase collaboration to capture latent potential innovations that will improve the business, says entrepreneurial and innovation consultant Frans Johansson. Expertise is not a sufficient differentiator in the rapidly and continuously changing business landscape because logical, incremental innovations will not be able to respond to or capitalise on fast-moving trends. Innovative ideas are not recognised as logical prior to their acceptance and only appear obvious afterwards.
Go to Source
The ABIS Global site announced that an Open Innovation and Corporate Entrepreneurship Seminar will be held at the ESADE Business School, Barcelona, Spain on May 18, 2015. Henry Chesbrough, Ken Morse and Wim Vanhaverbeke, the three renowned experts who have been helping companies find the right paths to achieve success for more than 20 years, will provide insights into the key aspects of global entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship, vertical market focus, global sales and sales management, open innovation and corporate venturing. The topic of the course is “Using New Business Models to Create Major Sources of Revenue and Profits”.
Intrapreneurship, Business_Finance, Entrepreneurship, Henry Chesbrough
Journal of Intellectual Capital, Volume 15, Issue 4, Page 597-610, October 2014.
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose a conceptual framework to analyze the intellectual capital (IC) of new generation business incubators. Design/methodology/approach – The paper carries out a literature-based analysis of the different components of the IC of business incubators and develops a conceptual framework that links the business incubators’ IC to the IC of incubated firms. Findings – The paper provides an analytical model able to support practitioners and scholars to better understand and evaluate the IC criticalities and requirements of incubators. The notion of incubation path is developed. Originality/value – The paper contributes to the extant literature about the intangible assets of business incubators by analyzing in detail how these structures use their IC to perform their activities.
Go to Source
Journal of Intellectual Capital, Volume 15, Issue 4, Page 516-536, October 2014.
Purpose – The value of relational capital generated by entrepreneurs with their internal and external environment (Hormiga et al., 2011a, b), provides considerable resources when properly leveraged. It is particularly important in environments such as the high tech sector of incomplete information and weak economic markets such as new products, markets or technologies (Davidsson and Honig, 2003). The purpose of this paper is to examine how incubated technology entrepreneurs build relational capital for a new venture formation in the social context of a Higher Education Institution. Design/methodology/approach – The study took a qualitative approach based on content analysis of business plans and in-depth interviews with 25 technology entrepreneurs on an incubation programme – South East Enterprise Platform Programme – for technology graduates in the South East of Ireland. Findings – The study found that technology entrepreneurs during new venture formation engaged in four types of relational capital activities, namely, development of networks and contacts, relationship building, accessing and leveraging knowledge experts and members of associations. Practical implications – Incubator programmes need to actively support social building activities of technology entrepreneurs. Higher Education Institutes knowledge assets and networks are critical elements in supporting incubator technology entrepreneurs. Originality value – The study identified four types of relational capital building. The authors also found using Jones-Evans (1995) categorisation of technology entrepreneurs that users, producers, opportunists and non-technical entrepreneurs engaged in client focused relational capital building, whereas researcher types networked with service providers and displayed arms length relational capital building styles.
Go to Source
Journal of Intellectual Capital, Volume 15, Issue 4, Page 554-575, October 2014.
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the strategies business incubators (BI) adopt in respect to the creation of incubatee intellectual capital, and it focuses in particular on links between BI structural capital and the creation of incubatee relational capital (RC). By crossing IC literature with the open innovation paradigm the authors consider the incubator as an innovation intermediary and the authors investigate how different incubator strategies of knowledge exchange take place within and across incubator boundaries. The main issues the authors seek to explore regard the mechanisms by which incubators shape the exchange of knowledge within and across their boundaries and the rationale underlying such an approach. Design/methodology/approach – The analysis is based on a multiple case study research involving five Italian incubators. Primary and secondary data were gathered through interviews with each incubator managing director and with relevant actors. Findings – The analysis allows us to propose a theoretical framework and to highlight how different structural capital shape heterogeneous processes by which incubatees build their RC. The authors find that important differences in RC formation are present both at an exchange of knowledge level within the incubator, and across incubator boundaries. Research limitations/implications – The main limitations of this study regard the generalizability of results. This is mostly an exploratory work and further research based on quantitative rather than qualitative analysis, would provide stronger evidence in order to validate the results with respect to the population of incubators and consequently lead to more precise policy implications. Originality/value – The analysis points to the importance of recognizing different BI approaches regarding the mechanisms by which incubatees develop their RC, and allows us to gain a knowledge-based conceptualization of incubators. This definition moves beyond the more diffuse classification based on public vs private and sectoral specificities, and introduces some new insights for further research.
Go to Source