Skip to main content

A social capital approach to the development of sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: an explorative study

Abstract

The entrepreneurial ecosystem, an emerging and developing theoretical stream, has the potential to expand our understanding of entrepreneurship. In previous research, this concept has been studied from the university perspective, but it has not yet been introduced in the field of entrepreneurial support. Additionally, the growing number of university business incubators has led to increasing research interest in the entrepreneurial support field. This research project seeks to develop a more robust understanding of sustainable university-based entrepreneurial ecosystems through an in-depth analysis of an essential entrepreneurial support element: the university business incubator. Our exploratory research study draws on 48 face-to-face interviews with key members of university-based entrepreneurial ecosystems to explore the operation of three cases through the lens of social capital theory. Our analysis suggests that all three social capital dimensions are relevant to the effective functioning of the university-based entrepreneurial ecosystem and contribute to its sustainability: applying the structural dimension of social capital enhances access to resources; addressing the cognitive dimension strengthens relationships among ecosystem members; and investing in the relational dimension enhances complementarity and trust while the ecosystem evolves. Thus, the interaction of these dimensions may further contribute to the sustainability of the university-based entrepreneurial ecosystem. Enhancing the development and application of the three social capital dimensions as an aspect of proactive management of the entrepreneurship ecosystem has the potential to improve outcomes for ecosystem members.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  • Ács, Z. J., Autio, E., & Szerb, L. (2014). National systems of entrepreneurship: measurement issues and policy implications. Research Policy, 43(3), 476–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), 306–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2016). Innovation ecosystems and the pace of substitution: re-examining technology S-curves. Strategic Management Journal, 37(4), 625–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adner, R., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (2013). Collaboration and competition in business ecosystems. Bingley: Emerald.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Aernoudt, R. (2004). Incubators: tool for entrepreneurship? Small Business Economics, 23(2), 127–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad, A. J., & Ingle, S. (2011). Relationships matter: case study of a university campus incubator. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, 17(6), 626–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Belitski, M. (2016). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: establishing the framework conditions. Journal of Technology Transfer, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9473-8.

  • Barbero, J. L., Casillas, J. C., Wright, M., & Ramos Garcia, A. R. (2014). Do different types of incubators produce different types of innovations? Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(2), 151–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazeley, P., & Jackson, K. (2013). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. Los Angeles: Sage Publications Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben Letaifa, S. (2013). A methodology for ecosystem creation: how organizations can shift from supply chain to ecosystems. In S. Ben Letaifa, A. Gratacap, & T. Isckia (Eds.), Understanding business ecosystems. How firms succeed in the new world of conveergence (pp. 86–95). Brussels: De Boeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben Letaifa, S., & Rabeau, Y. (2013). Too close to collaborate? How geographic proximity could impede entrepreneurship and innovation. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 2071–2078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergek, A., & Norrman, C. (2008). Incubator best practice: a framework. Technovation, 28(1–2), 20–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bøllingtoft, A., & Ulhøi, J. P. (2005). The networked business incubator—leveraging entrepreneurial agency? Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 265–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1992). The social structure of competition. In N. Nohria & R. G. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organizations: structure, form, and action (pp. 57–91). Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in ecosystems: crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research Policy, 43(7), 1164–1176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, B. (2006). Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, B., & Winn, M. I. (2007). Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1), 29–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colombo, M. G., & Delmastro, M. (2002). How effective are technology incubators? Research Policy, 31(7), 1103–1122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dess, G. G., Lumpkin, G. T., & Covin, J. G. (1997). Entrepreneurial strategy making and firm performance: tests of contingency and configurational models. Strategic Management Journal, 18(9), 677–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2002). Incubation of incubators: innovation as a triple helix of university-industry-government networks. Science and Public Policy, 29(2), 115–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, S.-C., Tsai, F.-S., & Lin, J. L. (2010). Leveraging tenant-incubator social capital for organizational learning and performance in incubation programme. International Small Business Journal, 28(1), 90–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, L. S., Jackson, K., & di Gregorio, S. (2014). Tools for analyzing qualitative data: the history and relevance of qualitative data analysis software. In J. M. Sector, M. D. Merril, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 221–236). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimaldi, R., & Grandi, A. (2005). Business incubators and new venture creation: an assessment of incubating models. Technovation, 25(2), 111–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2011). 30 years after Bayh–Dole: reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1045–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackett, S. M., & Dilts, D. M. (2004a). A systematic review of business incubation research. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(1), 55–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackett, S. M., & Dilts, D. M. (2004b). A real options-driven theory of business incubation. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(1), 41–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackett, S. M., & Dilts, D. M. (2008). Inside the black box of business incubation: study B—scale assessment, model refinement, and incubation outcomes. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(5), 439–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T., Chesbrough, H. W., Nohria, N., & Sull, D. N. (2000). Networked incubators. Hothouses of the new economy. Harvard Business Review, 78(5), 74–84 199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayter, C. S. (2016). A trajectory of early-stage spinoff success: the role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 47(3), 633–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoang, H., & Antoncic, B. (2003). Network-based research in entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 165–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs, K. G., Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2017). Science and technology parks: an annotated and analytical literature review. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(4), 957–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). Strategy as ecology. Harvard Business Review, 82(3), 68–78 126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inkpen, A. C., & Tsang, E. W. K. (2005). Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 146–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isenberg, D. (2011). The entrepreneurship ecosystem strategy as a new paradigm for economic policy: principles for cultivating entrepreneurship. Dublin: Institute of International European Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kale, P., Singh, H., & Perlmutter, H. (2000). Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: building relational capital. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 217–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klofsten, M., Bank, N., & Bienkowska, D. (2016). The role of incubators in supporting sustainable entrepreneurship. In Work Package (Vol. 3). Linköping: SHIFT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knopp, L. (2012). State of the business incubation industry. Athens: National Business Incubation Association (NBIA) Publicatons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lado, A. A., Dant, R. R., & Tekleab, A. G. (2008). Trust-opportunism paradox, relationalism, and performance in interfirm relationships: evidence from the retail industry. Strategic Management Journal, 29(4), 401–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasrado, V., Sivo, S., Ford, C., O’Neal, T., & Garibay, I. (2016). Do graduated university incubator firms benefit from their relationship with university incubators? Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(2), 205–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. S., & Osteryoung, J. S. (2004). A comparison of critical success factors for effective operations of university business incubators in the United States and Korea. Journal of Small Business Management, 42(4), 418–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate? Educational Researcher, 17(2), 13–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAdam, M., & Marlow, S. (2008). A preliminary investigation into networking activities within the university incubator. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, 14(4), 219–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messeghem, K., Bakkali, C., Sammut, S., & Swalhi, A. (2017). Measuring Nonprofit Incubator Performance: Toward an Adapted Balanced Scorecard Approach. Journal of Small Business Management, 1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12317.

  • Mian, S. A. (1994). US university-sponsored technology incubators: an overview of management, policies and performance. Technovation, 14(8), 515–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mian, S. A. (1996). The university business incubator: a strategy for developing new research/technology-based firms. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 7(2), 191–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2003). Analyse des données qualitatives. Brussels: de Boeck Supérieur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 75–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neck, H. M., Meyer, G. D., Cohen, B., & Corbett, A. C. (2004). An entrepreneurial system view of new venture creation. Journal of Small Business Management, 42(2), 190–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, D. (2014). Realising potential: the impact of business incubation on the absorptive capacity of new technology-based firms. International Small Business Journal, 32(8), 897–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, L., Rice, M., & Sundararajan, M. (2004). The role of incubators in the entrepreneurial process. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(1), 83–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phan, P. H., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2005). Science parks and incubators: observations, synthesis and future research. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 165–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. G. (2002). Technology business incubators: how effective as technology transfer mechanisms? Technology in Society, 24(3), 299–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, L. (2009). Big losses in ecosystem niches: how core firm decisions drive complementary product shakeouts. Strategic Management Journal, 30(3), 323–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regele, M. D., & Neck, H. M. (2012). The entrepreneurship education subecosystem in the United States: opportunities to increase entrepreneurial activity. Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 23(2), 25–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, M. P. (2002). Co-production of business assistance in business incubators: an exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(2), 163–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, M. P., & Matthews, J. B. (1995). Growing new ventures, creating new jobs. Westport, CT: Quorum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, M. P., Fetters, M. L., & Greene, P. G. (2014). University-based entrepreneurship ecosystems: a global study of six educational institutions. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 18(5/6), 481–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothaermel, F. T., & Thursby, M. (2005). Incubator firm failure or graduation? Research Policy, 34(7), 1076–1090.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M., & Hornych, C. (2008). Specialization as strategy for business incubators: an assessment of the Central German Multimedia Center. Technovation, 28(7), 436–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M., & Hornych, C. (2010). Cooperation patterns of incubator firms and the impact of incubator specialization: empirical evidence from Germany. Technovation, 30(9–10), 485–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M., & Hornych, C. (2012). Specialisation versus diversification: perceived benefits of different business incubation models. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 15(3), 177–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simsek, Z., Lubatkin, M. H., & Floyd, S. W. (2003). Inter-firm networks and entrepreneurial behavior: a structural embeddedness perspective. Journal of Management, 29(3), 427–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soetanto, D. (2004). Research of the role of the incubation policy in helping the growth of new technology based-firm. Lisbon: Globelics Academy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soetanto, D., & van Geenhuizen, M. (2015). Getting the right balance: university networks’ influence on spin-offs’ attraction of funding for innovation. Technovation, 36–37, 26–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Somsuk, N., & Laosirihongthong, T. (2014). A fuzzy AHP to prioritize enabling factors for strategic management of university business incubators: resource-based view. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 85, 198–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Somsuk, N., Laosirihongthong, T., & McLean, M. W. (2012). Strategic management of university business incubators (UBIs): resource-based view (RBV) theory. In IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation & Technology (ICMIT) (pp. 611–618). Piscataway: IEEE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spigel, B. (2017). The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(1), 49–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: a sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1759–1769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stangler, D., & Bell-Masterson, J. (2015). Measuring an entrepreneurial ecosystem. Kansas City: Kauffman Foundation Research Series on City, Metro, and Regional Entrepreneurship.

  • Sternberg, R. (2014). Success factors of university-spin-offs: regional government support programs versus regional environment. Technovation, 34(3), 137–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, L. D., & Autio, E. (2013). The fifth facet: the ecosystem as an organizational field. In Proceeding of the Conference on DRUID Society: Innovation and Entrepreneurship Group Working Papers. Copenhagen: CBS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tötterman, H., & Sten, J. (2005). Start-ups. International Small Business Journal, 23(5), 487–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Zedtwitz, M., & Grimaldi, R. (2006). Are service profiles incubator-specific? Results from an empirical investigation in Italy. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 459–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C.-H., Motohashi, K., & Chen, J.-R. (2009). Are new technology-based firms located on science parks really more innovative? Research Policy, 38(1), 77–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to participants and reviewers of the EURAM Conference in Warsaw on June 17–20, 2015, the special SMS Conference on the Entrepreneurial Ecosystems in Rome-IT on June 5–7, 2016, and the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Symposium in Adelaide-AU on June 14–15, 2016, for their inspiring feedback. We appreciated suggestions from Professors Zoltan Acs, David Audretsch, Bart Clarysse, Allan O’Connor and Erik Stam. Special thanks to David Audretsch, Adam Lederer and the anonymous reviewers for their help and efforts in improving our work.

Funding

We are also grateful to LabEx Entreprendre for funding this study. LabEx Entreprendre received government funding through the Agence Nationale de la Recherche under the “Investissements d’Avenir” program; reference: ANR-10-LABX-11-01.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christina Theodoraki.

Appendix

Appendix

Fig. 2
figure 2

Data structure

Table 6 Representative quotes of social capital dimensions

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Theodoraki, C., Messeghem, K. & Rice, M.P. A social capital approach to the development of sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: an explorative study. Small Bus Econ 51, 153–170 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9924-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9924-0

Keywords

  • Ecosystem
  • Entrepreneurial support
  • University business incubators
  • Social capital approach
  • Sustainability

JEL classifications

  • L26
  • L22
  • L29