Born global and well educated: start-up survival through fuzzy set analysis
- 142 Downloads
Although start-ups’ survival has been widely investigated, only few studies have focussed on the impact of the combined effect of firms’ internal resources. Drawing upon the resource-based view (RBV), we selected four internal resources influencing start-ups’ survival (R&D activity, advertising activity, export activity, and human capital) and we applied the fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to examine which interactions among the said internal resources affect start-ups’ survival. We used a unique dataset of 38 start-ups accelerated in Italy in 2013. Our findings suggest that, among the various combinations of internal resources considered, the interaction between export activity and human capital is the only one that affects start-ups’ survival. On one hand, the interaction between these two resources amplifies the effect of the learning by exporting on start-ups’ survival. On the other hand, export activity provides the knowledge necessary to exploit the potential of qualified human capital.
KeywordsfsQCA Resource-based view of the firm Start-ups Firm survival And Italy
JEL classificationsL21 L26 M13
- Baumgartner, M. & Thiem, A. (2017b). Often trusted but never (properly) tested: Evaluating qualitative comparative analysis. Sociological Methods & Research 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124117701487.
- Clarysse, B., & Yusubova, A. (2014). Success factors of business accelerators. In Technology Business Incubation Mechanisms and Sustainable Regional Development, Proceedings.Google Scholar
- Cohen, S., & Hochberg, Y. V. (2014). Accelerating start-ups: The seed accelerator phenomenon. Available at SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2418000.
- Cowling, M., Liu, W., Ledger, A., & Zhang, N. (2015). What really happens to small and medium-sized enterprises in a global economic recession? UK evidence on sales and job dynamics. International Small Business Journal, 33(5), 488–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242613512513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Eklund, J., Levratto, N., & Ramello, G. B. (2018). Entrepreneurship and failure: Two sides of the same coin? Small Business Economics, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0039-z.
- Galbreath, J. (2005). Which resources matter the most to firm success? An exploratory study of resource-based theory. Technovation, 25(9), 979–987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2004.02.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- GEM (2017), Global report 2016/2017 http://gemconsortium.org/report/49812/ Accessed 1 May 2017.
- Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1993). Innovation and growth in the global economy. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Hot Topics (2015). https://www.hottopics.ht/17202/100-leaders-of-top-tech-accelerators/ Accessed 1 May 2017.
- Kraus, S., Ribeiro-Soriano, D., & Schüssler, M. (2018). Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) in entrepreneurship and innovation research–the rise of a method. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14(1), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0461-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mian, S., Lamine, W., & Fayolle, A. (2016). Technology business incubation: An overview of the state of knowledge. Technovation, 50, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.02.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pauwels, C., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Van Hove, J. (2016). Understanding a new generation incubation model: The accelerator. Technovation, 50, 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.09.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ragin, C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative methods. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
- Ragin, C. (2000). Fuzzy-Set Social Science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Ragin, C. C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226702797.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ragin, C. C., & Sonnett, J. (2005). Between complexity and parsimony: Limited diversity, counterfactual cases, and comparative analysis. In Vergleichen in der Politikwissenschaft (pp. 180-197). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-80441-9_9.
- Ribeiro-Soriano, D., & Urbano, D. (2010). Employee-organization relationship in collective entrepreneurship: An overview. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 23(4), 349–359 https://doi.org/10.1108/09534811011055368.
- Sarasvathy, S. D., Menon, A. R., & Kuechle, G. (2013). Failing firms and successful entrepreneurs: Serial entrepreneurship as a temporal portfolio. Small Business Economics, 40(2), 417–434 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9412-x.
- Sperber, S., & Linder, C. (2018). Gender-specifics in start-up strategies and the role of the entrepreneurial ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-9999-2.
- Wagner, J. (2012). International trade and firm performance: a survey of empirical studies since 2006. Review of World Economics, 148(2), 235–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-011-0116-8.
- Woodside, A. G. (2013). Moving beyond multiple regression analysis to algorithms: Calling for adoption of a paradigm shift from symmetric to asymmetric thinking in data analysis and crafting theory. Journal of Business Research, 66(4), 463–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.12.021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar