The Journal of Technology Transfer

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 41–54

A Real Options-Driven Theory of Business Incubation

  • Sean M. Hackett
  • David M. Dilts
Article

Abstract

This article employs real options-theoretic reasoning to develop a theory of business incubation. This theory seeks to predict and explain how business incubators and the process of business incubation increase the likelihood that new ventures will survive the early stages of development. It conceptualizes the incubator as an entrepreneurial firm that sources and macro-manages the innovation process within emerging organizations, infusing these organizations with resources at various developmental stage-gates while containing the cost of their potential failure. The incubator is the unit of analysis while incubation outcomes—measured in terms of incubatee growth and financial performance at the time of incubator exit—provide indicators of success. Our model of the incubation process and specification of the range of possible incubation outcomes offer implications for managerial practice and policy-making vis-à-vis incubator management and good entrepreneurial failure.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aldrich, H., 1999, Organizations Evolving, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, D.N. and S. Rahman, 1985, 'Small Business Incubators: A Positive Environment for Entrepreneurship,' Journal of Small Business Management 23(3), 12-22.Google Scholar
  3. Alvarez, L.H.R. and R. Stenbacka, 2001, 'Adoption of Uncertain Multi-stage Technology Projects: A Real Options Approach,' Journal of Mathematical Economics 35(1), 71-97.Google Scholar
  4. Bacharach, S.B., 1989, 'Organizational Theories: Some Criteria for Evaluation,' Academy of Management Review 14(4), 496-515.Google Scholar
  5. Barney, J., 1991, 'Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage,' Journal of Management 17, 99-120.Google Scholar
  6. Bowman, E.H. and D. Hurry, 1987, 'Strategic Options,' Working Paper 87-20. Reginald Jones Center, the Wharton School: University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  7. Bowman, E.H. and D. Hurry, 1993, 'Strategy Through the Option Lens: An Integrated View of Resource Investments and the Incremental Choice Process,' Academy of Management Review 18(4), 760-782.Google Scholar
  8. Brooks, O.J., 1986, 'Economic Development Through Entrepreneurship: Incubators and the Incubation Process,' Economic Development Review 4(2), 24-29.Google Scholar
  9. Bruton, G.D. and D. Ahlstrom, 2003, 'An Institutional View of China's Venture Capital Industry: Explaining Differences Between China and the West,' Journal of Business Venturing 18(2), 233-259.Google Scholar
  10. Chrisman, J.J., 1989, 'Strategic, Administrative, and Operating Assistance: The Value of Outside Consulting to Pre-venture Entrepreneurs,' Journal of Business Venturing 4(6), 401-418.Google Scholar
  11. Coase, R.H., 1937, 'The Nature of the Firm,' Economica 4, 386-405.Google Scholar
  12. Coombs, R. and A. Richards, 1991, 'Technologies, Products and Firms' Strategies: Part 1—A Framework for Analysis,' Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 3(1), 77-86.Google Scholar
  13. Copeland, T., 2002, 'The Real-options Approach to Capital Allocation,' IEEE Engineering Management Review 30(1), 82-85.Google Scholar
  14. Daft, R., 1983, Organization Theory and Design, New York, NY: West.Google Scholar
  15. Deeds, D.L., D. DeCarolis, and J. Coombs, 1999, 'Dynamic Capabilities and New Product Development in High Technology Ventures: An Empirical Analysis of New Biotechnology Firms,' Journal of Business Venturing 15, 211-229.Google Scholar
  16. Dimaggio, P.J. and W.W. Powell, 1983, 'The Iron Cage Revisited: Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields,' American Sociological Review 48, 147-160.Google Scholar
  17. Dixit, A., 1992, 'Investment and Hysteresis,' Journal of Economic Perspectives 6(1), 107-132.Google Scholar
  18. Dixit, A. and R. Pindyck, 1994, Investment Under Uncertainty, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989, 'Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review,' Academy of Management Review 14(1), 57-74.Google Scholar
  20. Eisenhardt, K.M. and J.A. Martin, 2000, 'Dynamic Capabilities: What Are They?,' Strategic Management Journal 21, 1105-1121.Google Scholar
  21. Foss, N.J., 1998, 'The Resource-based Perspective: An Assessment and Diagnosis of Problems,' Scandinavian Journal of Management 14(3), 133-149.Google Scholar
  22. Galunic, D.C. and K.M. Eisenhardt, 2001, 'Architectural Innovation and Modular Corporate Forms,' Academy of Management Journal 44(6), 1229-1249.Google Scholar
  23. Giddens, A., 1984, The Constitution of Society: Introduction of the Theory of Structuration, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  24. Hackett, S.M. and D.M. Dilts, 2003, Variables of the Business Incubation Process: A Conceptual Framework, Nashville, Tennessee: Vanderbilt University — Management of Technology Program Working Paper Series 03-502.Google Scholar
  25. Hackett, S.M. and D.M. Dilts, 2004, 'A Systematic Review of Business Incubation Research,' Journal of Technology Transfer 29(1), 55-82.Google Scholar
  26. Hansen, M.T., H.W. Chesbrough, N. Nohria, and D.N. Sull, 2000, 'Networked Incubators: Hothouses of the New Economy,' Harvard Business Review 78(5), 74-84.Google Scholar
  27. Hurry, D., A.T. Miller, and E.H. Bowman, 1992, 'Calls on High-technology: Japanese Exploration of Venture Capital Investment in the United States,' Strategic Management Journal 13, 85-101.Google Scholar
  28. Jack, S.L. and A.R. Anderson, 2002, 'The Effects of Embeddedness on the Entrepreneurial Process,' Journal of Business Venturing 17, 467-487.Google Scholar
  29. Ketchen, D.J.J., J.B. Thomas, and C.C. Snow, 1993, 'Organizational Configurations and Performance: A Comparison of Theoretical Approaches,' Academy of Management Journal 36(6), 1278-1313.Google Scholar
  30. Kotha, S. and V. Rindova, 2001, 'Continuous “Morphing”: Competing Through Dynamic Capabilities, Form and Function,' Academy of Management Journal 44(6), 1263-1280.Google Scholar
  31. Kuhns, B.A., 1999, Technology Transfer Performance: The Impact of Entrepreneurial Responses to Institutional and Commercial Pressures in US Universities, Houston, Texas: University of Houston.Google Scholar
  32. Lichtenstein, G.A., 1992, The Significance of Relationships in Entrepreneurship: A Case Study of the Ecology of Enterprise in Two Business Incubators, Unpublished Dissertation, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  33. Luehrman, T.A., 1998, 'Investment Opportunities as Real Options: Getting Started on the Numbers,' Harvard Business Review 76(4), 51-67.Google Scholar
  34. McGrath, R.G., 1999, 'Falling Forward: Real Options Reasoning and Entrepreneurial Failure,' Academy of Management Review 24(1), 13-30.Google Scholar
  35. Mian, S.A., 1997, 'Assessing and Managing the University Technology Business Incubator: An Integrative Framework,' Journal of Business Venturing 12(4), 251-285.Google Scholar
  36. Mitchell, G.R. and W.F. Hamilton, 1988, 'Managing R&D as a Strategic Option,' Research-Technology Management 27(3), 15-22.Google Scholar
  37. Nohria, N. and R. G. Eccles (eds.), 1992, Networks and Organizations, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  38. Nonaka, I., 1994, 'A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation,' Organization Science 5(1), 14-37.Google Scholar
  39. Nonaka, I. and H. Takeuchi, 1995, The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Parks, R.B., P.C. Baker, L. Kiser, R. Oakerson, E. Ostrom, V. Ostrom, S.L. Percy, M.B. Vandivort, G.P. Whitaker, and R. Wilson, 1981, 'Consumers as Co-producers of Public Services: Some Economic and Institutional Considerations,' Policy Studies Journal 9(7), 1001-1011.Google Scholar
  41. Penrose, E., 1959, The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  42. Presseley, M., K. Hogan, R. Wharton-McDonald, and J. Mistretta, 1996, 'The Challenges of Instructional Scaffolding: The Challenges of Instruction that Supports Student Thinking,' Learning Disabilities Research and Practice 11(3), 138-146.Google Scholar
  43. Rice, M.P., 2002, 'Co-production of Business Assistance in Business Incubators: An Exploratory Study,' Journal of Business Venturing 17, 163-187.Google Scholar
  44. Rice, M.P. and J. Matthews, 1995, Growing New Ventures, Creating New Jobs: Principles and Practices of Successful Business Incubation, Westport, CT: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
  45. Riquelme, H. and J. Watson, 2002, 'Do Venture Capitalists' Implicit Theories on New Business Success/Failure have Empirical Validity?,' International Small Business Journal 20(4), 395-420.Google Scholar
  46. Rosenberger, J., 2003, What are Real Options?: A Review of Empirical Research. Paper presented at the Academy of Management, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  47. Rumelt, R.P., 1984, 'Towards a Strategic Theory of the Firm,' in R.B. Lamb (ed.), Competitive Strategic Management, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  48. Sarason, Y., J.F. Dillard, and T. Dean, 2002, Structuration Theory as a Framework for Exploring the Entrepreneurship Domain. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting, Denver, CO.Google Scholar
  49. Sherman, H. and D.S. Chappell, 1998, 'Methodological Challenges in Evaluating Business Incubator Outcomes,' Economic Development Quarterly 12(4), 313-321.Google Scholar
  50. Skinner, B.F., 1976, About Behaviorism, New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  51. Smilor, R.W., 1987, 'Managing the Incubator System: Critical Success Factors to Accelerate New Company Development,' IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management EM-34(4), 146-156.Google Scholar
  52. Storey, D.J., 2003, 'Entrepreneurship, Small and Medium Sized Enterprises and Public Policies,' in Z. J. Acs (ed.), Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research: An Interdisciplinary Survey and Introduction (Vol. 1), Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, p. 560.Google Scholar
  53. Sutton, R.I. and B.M. Staw, 1995, 'What Theory is Not,' Administrative Science Quarterly 40, 371-384.Google Scholar
  54. Teece, D. and G. Pisano, 1994, 'The Dynamic Capabilities of Firms: An Introduction,' Industrial and Corporate Change 3(3), 537-556.Google Scholar
  55. Temali, M. and C. Campbell, 1984, Business Incubator Profiles: A National Survey, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs.Google Scholar
  56. Trigeorgis, L., 1993, 'The Nature of Option Interactions and the Valuation of Investments with Multiple Real Options,' Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 28(1), 1-20.Google Scholar
  57. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 1994, Assessing the Effectiveness of Criminal Justice Programs, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  58. Udell, G.G., 1990, 'Are Business Incubators Really Creating New Jobs by Creating New Businesses and New Products?,' Journal of Product Innovation Management 7, 108-122.Google Scholar
  59. Urban Institute, T., 1997, Developing and Using a Logic Model, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  60. Watson, K., S. Hogarth-Scott, and N. Wilson, 1998, 'Small Business Start-ups: Success Factors and Support Implications,' International Journal of Entrepreneurial behavior & Research 4(3), 217-238.Google Scholar
  61. Wernerfelt, B., 1984, 'A Resource-based View of the Firm,' Strategic Management Journal 5, 171-180.Google Scholar
  62. Whelan, R., 1989, How to Prioritize R&D. Paper presented at the BAM Conference, Cardiff, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  63. Zacharakis, A.L., G.D. Meyer, and J. DeCastro, 1999, 'Differing Perceptions of New Venture Failure: A Matched Exploratory Study of Venture Capitalists and Entrepreneurs,' Journal of Small Business Management 37(3), 1-14.Google Scholar
  64. Zucker, L.G., 1987, 'Institutional Theories of Organizations,' Annual Review of Sociology 13, 443-464.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sean M. Hackett
    • 1
  • David M. Dilts
    • 1
  1. 1.Management of Technology ProgramVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations