Keywords

1 Introduction

Developments like digital transformation and shift toward more sustainability (Kerrigan & Kulasooriya, 2020) lead to constant discontinuous changes. These changes tend to transform business models, ways of working, and competence profiles: business driven by satisfying customer needs, work driven by the greater purpose, and competence driven by creativity (van den Berg, n.d.; Thang & Tuan, 2020). While these changes offer many opportunities for emerging startups, they pose several challenges to the established world of business and work (Lyytinen et al., 2016).

Hence, entrepreneurial thinking and behavior have become a key prerequisite for companies of all sizes and individual employees (Kusa et al., 2021; Blanka, 2019). Systematically implementing entrepreneurial activities requires entrepreneurial spirit and comprehensive innovation skills to be strengthened among founders and employees—both prospective and current. In the underlying training process, high education institutions (HEIs) and companies take important roles alike (Schmelter et al., 2010). So far, it is mainly HEIs that have used entrepreneurship education (EE) as a widespread practice with which they aim to address current and future challenges and stay attractive to their different stakeholders (e.g., students, political supporters, business partners) (Bauman & Lucy, 2021; Ratten & Usmanij, 2021).

Established companies, however, are more and more under pressure to remain competitive—not only for new business but also for new talents (Kuratko & Audretsch, 2013). New types of innovation and organizational transformations are found to pose challenges for established companies as their organizational structures and approaches are mainly designed to improve the core business by increasing efficiency rather than to support entrepreneurial development (O'Connor & DeMartino, 2006; O’Reilly & Tushman, 2013; Elfring, 2005). To address this, it can be observed that companies are using entrepreneurial activities more intensively as a strategic tool (Selig et al., 2016; Tseng & Tseng, 2019).Footnote 1

Scholars have identified a variety of motives why established companies invest in EE activities, e.g., creating new knowledge, increasing their innovativeness, and developing new ventures (Schmelter et al., 2010; Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018). While larger companies have implemented a wide variety of “professional” entrepreneurial activities (Kullik et al., 2018; Selig et al., 2018), like startup investments, company building, or incubating programs (Kullik et al., 2018; Kruft & Kock, 2019), and thus accompanying EE activities, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) seem to face difficulties in using entrepreneurial activities and upstream EE training. One reason might be their limited resources and strategic know-how (Schmelter et al., 2010).

Having their own requirements, we assume that SMEs cannot easily adapt to the approaches of larger companies. Collaborations yield potential for compensating for this gap for SMEs. One potential partner seems to be HEIs. Indeed it can be observed that HEIs and companies are working ever more closely together in this field (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018). So far, the EE literature mainly describes the motivations and benefits of EE and the trainable entrepreneurial competencies of leaders in the context of companies. To revitalize and renew the organization (Hjorth et al., 2003), companies use EE to stimulate employees to be more flexible, creative, and passionate about their work (Höglund & Mårtensson, 2019) and develop relevant entrepreneurial competencies like innovative behavior, risk propensity, long-term orientation, and independence (Schuler, 1986). Thereby, a description of the actual design and prerequisites are missing.

Even though EE in companies seems to be a relevant topic, it has received surprisingly little attention in the EE literature. Reasons might be found in the missing cases or research methodology. So far, EE activities have been practically tried and evaluated in individual places, but empirical evidence for effective action is lacking. Concluding, further empirical research is needed to increase the understanding of EE for SMEs, in which aspects it may be different from the approaches in HEIs and how this can be well studied scientifically in EE. In initial collaboration projects with different SMEs, the startup initiative of the Konstanz universities has applied specific EE formats and tools to the corporate practice. Thereby, it became apparent that various adjustments are required in the design, organization, and usage of EE programs to meet the company-specific requirements. However, to effectively meet these requirements, more profound insights from the corporate context are needed. We propose expanding previous qualitative research evaluations based on grounded theory to gain these insights. The basic understanding of EE in SME is mandatory for specifically designing activities for EE and innovation in SME. For this reason, our study aims to investigate the following: what characterizes EE for SMEs with HEIs and how is it different from the implementation in HEIs?

2 Theoretical Background: EE in Established Companies and HEI Transfer

EE refers to all activities and processes aimed at developing specific skills, expertise, and attitudes required to act entrepreneurially regardless of whether this is achieved by creating a new venture or by innovating in established companies (Henry et al., 2005a; Hisrich et al., 2010). EE is fostered for a variety of purposes: primarily, to enable individuals to build new ventures, pursue new paradigms, and assume responsibility for future challenges, and secondly, to rejuvenate economies through entrepreneurship (e.g., boosting competition and innovation, creating employment) (Matlay, 2008; Greene & Saridakis, 2007). The sought-after spreading of EE is mainly driven by HEIs’ EE initiatives—supported by politics—and their intensive work on further expansion (Fretschner & Weber, 2013). Thereby, EE is realized through various and different activities like single in-class courses, whole study programs, or boot camps (Ilonen, 2021; Gedeon, 2014).

With the growth in interest in EE in practice, EE moved into the spotlight of research. Inspired by EE initiatives’ evaluation processes, scholars strive to set up a theoretical concept using scientific methods, still searching for strategies to effectively analyze, systemize, and improve EE activities. A targeted review of the literature for the implementation of EE in the context of SME and HEI collaboration revealed three fields: (1) EE in HEI, (2) EE in larger and smaller companies, and (3) transfer of HEI knowledge into the innovation ecosystem.

EE in HEIs

Research on EE in HEIs shows insights along with the steps of the impact model:

  • Input level: optimal learning environments in HEI for EE (Ilonen, 2021), relevance and goals of EE programs and training, as well as respective content and challenges (Henry et al., 2005a).

  • Output level: entrepreneurial learning regarding what is teachable, the effectiveness of EE different EE activities, and how to increase entrepreneurial intention, mainly focusing on single entrepreneurial courses/offerings (Henry et al., 2005b).

Thereby, the analysis mostly take the student perspective. However, more stakeholders than only HEIs are involved in EE, like startup enabling organizations (e.g., accelerators, incubators, and similar) that focus on startups at various maturity levels, governments, and, increasingly, established companies (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018; Corral de Zubielqui et al., 2015). Regarding the latter, the corporate perspective is considered the least. This is somehow surprising since today, it seems that almost all large companies use entrepreneurship to overcome their delayed responsiveness and to explore new knowledge (Elfring, 2005; Glinyanova et al., 2021).

EE in larger and smaller companies

In their endeavor to implement different organizational forms for entrepreneurship like incubation, startup investment, or open innovation programs, those large companies have realized the relevance of EE as a means to strengthen their innovation capabilities (Kullik et al., 2018; Selig et al., 2018). They have started more or less experimental to include EE in their program either with learning by doing or external consultations in workshops or further HR training—not entirely unsuccessful as examples like the tech incubator hub:raum by Telekom show.

On the other hand, SMEs face more difficulties in systematically implementing entrepreneurial activities and upstream EE training due to a lack of resources and strategic know-how (Schmelter et al., 2010). As a result, the empirical findings on how to implement EE activities are mainly based on studies with large established companies (Glinyanova et al., 2021; Selig, 2021; Zahra et al., 2013) than on the context of smaller companies. Specifically for SME, only aspects regarding:

  • (High-level) motivators for pursuing EE and similar activities are considered. This includes, for instance, the creation of new knowledge and increasing innovativeness (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018).

  • Suitable HR practices are considered, on the one hand, with a focus on the entrepreneurial qualifications of managers/owners and on the other hand to evaluate entrepreneurial competencies of potential employees (Schmelter et al., 2010; Gordon et al., 2012).

In summary, aspects regarding how SMEs train their employees’ entrepreneurial skills are missing, even though it might be increasingly in their interest. Companies with an “entrepreneurial HR base” are better prepared not only to respond to the on holding market dynamics but also to take emerging new business opportunities (Schmelter et al., 2010). Even more, small companies must catch up, and indeed, it shows that increasingly small companies are also starting entrepreneurial activities. However, due to their specific characteristics, SMEs cannot simply adopt the approaches and experiences of large companies one-to-one.

One way to counter this challenge is to collaborate with partners. Partnerships have been found essential for SMEs to overcome size-related disadvantages and benefit from networking and collaboration (Corral de Zubielqui et al., 2015; Mackinnon et al., 2004)—especially with HEIs. Furthermore, as HEIs face similar resource challenges, collaborative projects offer the potential to effectively transfer university EE knowledge (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018; Corral de Zubielqui et al., 2015). In fact, in practice, it can be observed that HEIs and companies are working increasingly closely together in this field. Thereby, the “right” collaboration setting has been found to be crucial for the success of partnerships between SMEs and HEIs (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018).

EE transfer from HEIs to companies

As of today, HEIs deliver EE through their entrepreneurship centers with specific programs and formats for creating more new venture startups and educating future talents (Finkle et al., 2013; Maas & Jones, 2017; Crammond, 2020), mainly manifested through education happening on campus. At the same time, transfer is part of the core understanding of HEIs, so transfer activities are established in various forms and areas such as technology transfer offices, science parks, or business ventures (Jongbloed et al., 2008). So it stands to reason that HEIs are also playing a key role in the entrepreneurial activities of companies, especially of SMEs (Mian et al., 2016). Transfer in terms of collaboration of SMEs and HEIs for EE seems to be closest using the resources and experiences of the HEI EE initiatives for the corporate context. It appears that a trend toward an increasing number of EE formats by HEIs for the corporate context can be observed (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018; Gordon et al., 2012; Orazbayeva et al., 2019; Zhang & Hamilton, 2010). However, this transfer poses some challenges on both sides due to the different contexts, corporate versus academia, and that every company is individual.

Research on knowledge transfer from HEIs shows that EE knowledge is transferable (Blankesteijn et al., 2021) but not only considers the specific case between company and university but refers to the general transfer of knowledge into the innovation ecosystem. These covers:

  • Best practices for transferring EE knowledge between HEIs in different academic settings, like engineering and technology institutes (Qureshi & Mian, 2021).

  • Motivations of SMEs to collaborate with HEI, especially in the field of entrepreneurship education (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018).

  • Potential advantages for SMEs through knowledge exchange between HEIs and SMEs (Secundo et al., 2019).

  • Entrepreneurial ecosystems and the role of HEI and SME in them (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018) and general university-business cooperation on innovation topics like new technologies, smart services, digitalization, IoT, and also entrepreneurship (Orazbayeva et al., 2019).

While traditional forms of collaboration such as sponsoring research projects are well established, in recent years, companies and universities have explored and used various new formats to make collaborations within local innovation ecosystems more effective. Examples include hackathons and idea competitions for students and companies, scholarship programs, and jointly sponsored conferences and workshops (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018). In addition, SMEs have specific individual requirements for those EE initiatives and should adapt their programs when transferring (Orazbayeva et al., 2019). The many different perspectives from which EE is studied have resulted in various recommendations for action and programs developed (Ucbasaran et al., 2001). The format of collaboration should depend on the objectives sought through the collaboration of the SME and the university.

3 Methodology

This study follows an explorative, qualitative research approach to increase the understanding of how to describe and design the transfer between HEIs’ EE initiatives and SMEs. Thus, grounded theory was integrated into an evaluation process with two cases to create new scientific, empirical insights into EE activities in SME-HEI collaborations. Our study is part of the corporate entrepreneurship research at the Institute for Strategic Innovation and Transformation Management (IST). Therefore, specific EE formats and tools of the Konstanz universities’ EE initiative that have been adapted to the corporate practice in terms of collaboration projects with SMEs were examined.

3.1 Data Collection

Primary data sources include transcribed semi-structured interviews conducted with employees of the SMEs and an EE best practice company, as well as experts from the HEI EE initiative. Each SME case contained at least one interview with representatives of the following roles: CEO, collaboration coordinator, and participant. In those in-depth interviews with open-ended questions, the following key topics were addressed: (a) motivations for EE activities and the collaborations; (b) implementation of EE, the collaboration, and related challenges; (c) individual motivators and barriers; and (d) background information on innovation management within the SME. We supplemented these interviews with observations and informal conversations during the activities. Additionally, we gathered secondary data on the cases to achieve consistent findings and thereby strengthen the validity of our findings. Those data included publicly available data on the investigated SMEs like websites, presentations, and social media posts.

3.2 Data Set

The selection of the companies to be part of the study is based on their active cooperation project in the area of EE with the IST. The cooperation relationships with the IST are in various stages of the process, ranging from the evaluation phase to the tested and established implementation of the EE formats. The interviewed companies are related to the automotive or healthcare industry. Further, the company size reaches from approx. 2200 to 2450 employees. The sample contained eight interviews that were conducted between 2021 and 2022. All interviews were conducted in German, recorded, and transcribed on 163 pages representing 355 min of recorded material with an average interview duration of 44 min. The shortest interview was 27 min, and the longest was 62 min.

3.3 Data Analysis

Our analysis aimed to identify characteristics of SME-HEI collaborations on EE. Therefore, following grounded theory principles, all interviews were openly and selectively coded by one researcher and discussed with the other members of the research team to establish a reliable coding system. We then categorized and clustered the codes to identify higher-level attributes. By mapping two attributes, we were able to identify different collaboration types that the attributes can describe.

4 Results

Our findings reveal that EE in SMEs and, thereby, collaboration with HEIs is a diverse and multidimensional phenomenon. The analysis of the case studies has resulted in a set of attributes describing EE in SMEs and in collaboration with a university EE initiative. Using the two attributes of collaboration format and intensity of knowledge flow, distinct types of SME-HEI collaboration for EE have been identified.

4.1 Characterizing Attributes of EE in SME and HEI-SME Collaboration

Examining the cases resulted in a set of 13 characterizing attributes that can be used to describe EE collaboration activities with SMEs and HEIs from the perspective of SMEs. Examining these attributes resulted in insights and specifications for EE in SME and HEI-SME collaborations following five dimensions—strategic intention, condition, creation, collaboration format, and operative intention—and two levels, organizational level and individual level.

Figure 1 gives an overview of the assignment of the attributes to the clusters and levels.

Fig. 1
A dataset designates an organization's intentional, conditional, and creational aspects, as well as motivation types and participation barriers for E E in S M E. It also illustrates the collaboration's intention and format for E E in S M E H E I.

An overview of the dimensions and attributes describing EE in SME and SME-HEI collaboration

Full size image

Three of the five dimensions relate to EE in SME and the other two to EE in SME-HEI collaboration. For all dimensions, two attributes are assigned, except for condition with three. Additionally, the focus is mainly on the organizational level. We found that two attributes can also be discussed on an individual level, meaning that those attributes describe how employees perceive EE activities in SMEs. As participants are a part of EE activities, we further derived the (most dominant) motivation and challenges of individuals participating in the EE activities between SMEs and universities.

The attributes on a closer view show a wide variety of manifestations. To gain a better understanding of the design and usage of EE activities, a detailed categorization is provided in Table 1. Based on the findings in the study, the different attributes can be described in more detail by one or more variables, which can vary from case to case. For example, we identified the attribute “promoter role” in the dimension “intention for EE.” This describes who in the company is responsible for introducing EE activities. In our case studies, the variable “top management” was distinctive with exceptional support from the CEO.

Table 1 Specification of EE in SME and SME-HEI collaboration
Full size table

4.2 Mapping: HEI-SME-Collaboration Types for EE

One central dimension identified in this study is the collaboration format design, which is defined by the locus of collaboration (internal, joint, external) and intensity of know-how inflow (high, low). Thereby, the manifestation of the other attributes seems to be related to this dimension. To unlock the resulting relations, we suggest a mapping step. Combining the locus of opportunity with the intensity results in six clusters, which can be grouped into three distinct SME-HEI collaborations for EE. By distributing the attributes along with these three types, we see differences in EE in SMEs and among the EE collaboration types (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
A step diagram chart exhibits the low and high intensity of know-how inflow on the y-axis along with the locus of collaboration for H E I internal, joint, and S M E internal attributes on the x-axis.

An overview of the HEI-SME collaboration types for EE

Full size image

4.2.1 Type 1: EE Collider

Collaboration activities of this type take place solely in the HEI with inputs from the SME, which is provided through mentoring, coaching, validation of ideas, proof of concepts, or pilots. The company support can be either continuously through the idea development process (e.g., employees as mentors in a mentoring program) or for specific formats like summer schools with an entrepreneurial focus, entrepreneurship boot camps, or workshops at HEIs.

The main goal is to establish first contact points with EE for companies and to expand the companies’ external network for future partnerships. Additionally, it is used to get in contact with future talents and get to know new approaches for innovating and working. These activities are performed outside of the corporate environment and therefore are not interfering with corporate structures, processes, and decision-making.

This selective collaboration is thus characterized by a relatively low transfer of knowledge into the company, leading to a lower impact on the SME. At the same time, this offers companies the opportunity to gain insight into entrepreneurial formats and to use student competencies and thought patterns. Students get “real” knowledge from corporate practice in entrepreneurial formats.

4.2.2 Type 2: EE Matchmaker

Collaboration activities of this type happen jointly between HEI and SME and are characterized by the active participation of company employees and students. Both parties are contributing in terms of knowledge, competence, and resources. Thus, joint EE collaborations result in a medium to a high amount of transferred knowledge into the company, depending on the design of the activities.

In turn, these respective designs are determined by the main goals for EE matchmaker addressing changes in core business, insourcing novel approaches, gaining access to new talents, and strengthening collaborative relationships. These activities are found to occur either inside the company, inside the HEIs, or at third-party places.

One format is “broad hackathons,” where different companies propose their current problem statements, send corporate idea teams, and bring them together with students, resulting in co-creative new solutions, access to new talent, and entrepreneurial knowledge. Other formats like “single idea challenges” that last a weekend or even a whole semester, where a group of students addresses the issued problem statement of one company with the support of company representatives as sparring partners and mentors, also provide new ways of thinking and access to talent but insert less EE knowledge into the company. By working together on a specific problem, joint activities offer the opportunity for more impact on the SME than EE colliding.

4.2.3 Type 3: EE Facilitator

Collaboration activities of this type are only implemented within the company. Thereby, parts of the organization and individual employees are fully involved and influenced by the activity. The role of the HEI is found to reveal the current innovation capability, work out a common goal, and bring in experiences about possible procedures and tools to achieve the goal. This collaboration is thus characterized by a high flow of knowledge into the SME.

The EE facilitator aims to establish novel innovation approaches and company-wide training on EE. This seems to require strong motivators for EE and active promotors for EE and the HEI collaboration. This, in turn, means a total commitment from the top level and allocation of resources.

HEIs need a strong understanding of SME culture and unique requirements as the activity occurs in the corporate environment. An example of this kind of collaboration can be SME-internal idea competitions, which are adapted in structure and approach from HEIs to the needs of the SME. In these, employees generate novel ideas, for example, new products or use cases, which can be evaluated and possibly integrated into the portfolio of the SME. Therefore, the developed ideas must be strategically aligned and fit into the company’s product scope.

5 Discussion

Little research has been conducted to date on EE in the specific context of SMEs. Our study and results contributed to a first understanding, which may serve as a foundation for further research to build a deeper understanding of this domain. The examination of EE in SME and SME-HEI collaboration shows a distinct picture regarding the intention, conditions, and creation for EE activities. Our results enhance the research on EE by identifying attributes and variables suited for describing EE activities in SMEs. In the next section, we will discuss the characterizing aspects of EE activities, followed by a description of the differences in EE in HEIs. Finally, implications for the SME and HEI EE initiatives will be given.

5.1 Characterization of EE Activities in SME and SME-HEI Collaboration

Organization attributes in focus

Design attributes for EE in SMEs focus on companies’ organizational level. One reason may be that organization-related aspects like process and structure are hard factors that are easier to identify and thus easier to design. Contrary, softer factors, including the individuum and the environmental factors, are more challenging to grasp and, therefore, more difficult to address. The organizational dimensions of EE in SME manifest as an interplay of intention, condition, and creation for EE, which must not only be considered in themselves but how they are mutually dependent on each other. Depending on how they are designed, they provide a corresponding framework for individuals, which allows them to act entrepreneurially.

EE not yet a strategy tool

Literature recognizes entrepreneurial activities as a strategic tool for established companies (Selig et al., 2016; Tseng & Tseng, 2019). Further, our findings indicate that EE is not yet an innovation strategy and management tool in SMEs. The lack of actual embedding in SMEs’ strategic planning might be because their innovation focuses still on the core business with incremental product development. Thereby, completely new ideas required for future business development have no process yet.

Simultaneously, EE seems to be in the strategic scope as the CEO promotes its implementation. Thus, it appears to be important that the respective activities are culturally compliant and strategically aligned. However, SMEs are still in the phase of experimenting with this topic and have not yet implemented EE as a fixed part of their strategy.

Some barriers ahead

To take full advantage of EE, SMEs must overcome several obstacles. This requires that established thought patterns (efficiency and exploitation) and priorities (daily business over the future business) are reconsidered and changed. The barriers on the organizational level and the individual level partly correspond with each other. For example, lack of awareness for the activities and limited communication opportunities lead to employees having an unclear understanding of the reason the SME is pursuing EE in the first place and what objectives are associated with it. Furthermore, prioritizing the day-to-day business is a challenge already for beginning to implement EE activities. However, this also manifests itself during the implementation, when employees lack the free capacities (time) to participate in the EE activities.

Intention

As mentioned in the literature section, the motivations for EE in the literature are consistent with the motivators identified through the case studies. Furthermore, the drivers’ strategic renewal and insourcing of EE know-how were additionally mentioned as motivators in the case studies. While SMEs try to exploit internal potential through EE activities to tackle future challenges, the motivation for collaboration with HEIs is different. SMEs collaborate with HEIs to gain knowledge and acquire new talents and viewpoints. Therefore, a distinction must be made between the motivation for EE and collaboration. Since SMEs are currently still experimenting with EE, it is essential for them to minimize the risk and the use of resources. As mentioned in the literature section, this is achieved through collaboration with HEIs, as they can draw on existing experience and share the risk and resource input.

EE collaboration needs configuration

Depending on the intention for EE activities in SMEs, distinct types seem to be more suitable. If EE is part of the “new” innovation or even corporate strategy, EE facilitation is found to match these requirements better. On the one hand, EE facilitation implies that the EE activities are initiated within the SME, which results in adapting their organizational structure toward an innovation-friendly environment to build up and use EE knowledge and thus realize the “new” strategy. On the other hand, with EE facilitation, the deep strategic innovation knowledge from the HEI EE initiative to realize company-wide innovation with EE is provided. On the contrary, EE colliding or matchmaking with a more company-external orientation would be less suitable as insourcing knowledge for a “new” strategy, while simultaneously outsourcing the relevant processes and structures seems opposed.

EE collaboration as a marketing tool

EE involves different innovation competencies in terms of creating new ideas or using alternative working methods. Therefore, smaller companies seem to have understood that different ways of innovating and working are a new paradigm. So, EE is used (at least in part) by companies as a tool to attract and acquire new talents and thus establish their employer branding toward “being innovative.”

5.2 Differences in EE Between SME and HEI

Motivation individual

In the area of motivation on the individual level, it appears that both employees and students participate in EE formats only if there is a primary intrinsic motivation. However, participants in the academic environment are significantly more intrinsically motivated, while those from the corporate context additionally require stronger extrinsic motivators.

Challenges individual

We find one of the most significant differences between HEIs and SMEs when looking at the availability of time to participate in EE formats. While in the academic environment the time resources are relatively unlimited and the participants have a high degree of freedom in organizing their time, in SME, we find a substantial restriction of this resource and almost no freedom in terms of time allocation since all workflows are efficiency-driven and capacity-optimized.

Company culture conformity

While cultural conformity plays a minor role in the academic environment, this point is highly relevant to SMEs’ design of EE activities. The methods and procedures used, specific linguistic elements in SME, and the visual design (corporate design) must be adapted and considered in SME. In the academic environment, the use of external media and the exchange of knowledge are firmly anchored so that the methods and the visual design of the activities do not necessarily have to be adapted to be accepted by the target group. However, a strong brand like the university design supports the acceptance of new offers.

Resources

As stated out in the literature section, both HEIs and SMEs have limited resources (time, capital) as organizations. However, the perspective on EE programs and resulting projects differs as SMEs evaluate them much more by their prospects of success and the anticipated ROI than universities since the latter are more often financed by external funding and the programs are thus not directly linked to value creation. The different financing structures of the two programs thus lead to another way of evaluating their profitability.

Know-How

Another significant difference, which is the cornerstone of the attractiveness of transfer cooperation, can be found in the existing knowledge base. Explorative knowledge acquisition through research is an elementary core element of universities and leads to considerable methodological knowledge, which is almost wholly lacking in SMEs as they must allocate their resources in a very strategic targeted area.

5.3 Managerial Implications

This study has shown that EE is a multidimensional phenomenon with a wide variety of aspects to be considered when designing and implementing EE activities in SMEs. Therefore, we present different managerial implications.

5.3.1 Learnings for SME

Generally, the introduction of the EE activities in SMEs is performed step by step with local rollouts over a more extended period. If EE activities from the academic environment are transferred to the corporate, various adjustments must be applied. It should be noted that the design of the activities needs to address the company’s requirements and the individual subjects.

Collaborations to transfer EE knowledge and formats must occur early and address future challenges associated with high uncertainty. If the issues are already severe, conflicts in prioritizing resources (time and money) will make successful implementation difficult. Prior to the implementation of the EE programmes, none of the companies studied had a point of contact for innovative and novel ideas outside the company’s current business. Since the introduction of EE activities is a significant organizational change, it is essential to sensitize employees to the topic of entrepreneurship and to create an understanding of why the company is now introducing these activities. To do so, information flows and touchpoints need to be designed, for example, through physical illustrations of virtual tools or services. Even if various tools and knowledge sources are already available through the HEI, care must be taken to ensure that their design is aligned with the corporate design and fits in with the corporate identity to strengthen employees’ trust in the tools and activities. The primary employees who participate in the EE formats are already encouraged by the motivators mentioned above, but the additional potential could be exploited if financial or material incentives were also offered as a reward for successful implementation. During the activities, it is essential for the participants to have a continuous contact person and to be guided. This support can occur through mentoring, workshops, and other formats if it is both substantive and processual. Depending on the design of the EE activities, these can also include the development of new ideas and concepts. In this case, it can be difficult for the participants to transition from the idea phase to a project phase, especially if no financial resources or sponsors are available. Therefore, it is also essential to consider how participants can proceed after the EE activity.

Special attention must be devoted to the following aspects:

  • Communication and knowledge transfer must be on an equal footing and in a spirit of partnership with options for action and scope for design for the SME.

  • The time required for participation in the EE Activity must be as low, and knowledge transfer must be as time efficient as possible.

  • The EE activities should be as simple as possible and use easily understandable tools to make participation as convenient as possible for employees.

  • In addition to intrinsic motivation, participants must also be activated extrinsically, so it is essential to consider what motivates employees to participate.

  • The EE activities should be based on the progressive implementation of pilot projects and organic growth. Nevertheless, the activities must be structured from the very beginning in such a way that they are scalable (low resource input, high number of participants).

5.3.2 Learning for EE Academia

When cooperating with higher education institutions, SMEs are not interested in classic consulting for current problems but rather in support in evaluating and overcoming potential challenges that may arise in the future and jeopardize the core business and sharing the risk associated with the establishment of EE activities. HEIs have accumulated a lot of knowledge on methods but not only methodological support, for example, in the form of toolboxes is needed, but also additional expert knowledge, which can be brought in, for example, by mentors from inside and outside the company.

While in the academic environment various independent activities can be offered to address the different knowledge levels of the students, SMEs focus on fewer activities that need to be suitable for more diverse target groups. Therefore, the offers must be adapted so that they can be used appropriately with different previous knowledge of a technical and economic matter.

SMEs are looking for a new field of application for existing core competencies and primarily are not looking for new core competencies. The future core business should use existing core competencies, making search fields in EE activities in SMEs more limited from the beginning. In contrast, EE activities at HEIs and the ideas developed are requiring less strategic alignment, which is vital for SMEs. Therefore, the backing of management and staff is essential, whereas, in the academic environment, there is more freedom to operate.

Special attention must be devoted to the following aspects:

  • Knowledge of strategic innovation processes must be fundamentally provided. If necessary, partnerships with HEI institutions that have the methodological knowledge must be initiated.

  • The collaboration should be structured through regular jour fixes, mixed working groups, clear contact persons, and responsibilities (distribution of roles).

  • Paying attention to cultural conformity and being able to adapt individual solutions to the company (standard, unique part) are crucial. This can happen through adaption of visuals to CD/CI, used language, and special corporate terms.

  • The provision of knowledge must be adaptable to allow to individually select and tailor the methods and tools taught to the SME.

5.4 Limitations and Future Research

In the nature of research, the emergence of limitations is inevitable. The presented results face the following limitations and opportunities for future research. First, by focusing on only two case companies, the question of generalizability arises; second, as the data set only contains case studies on collaboration between SMEs and on EE HEI initiative, we may have an inaccuracy in comprehensively characterizing the implementation of EE activities in SME and the associated collaboration with HEI. Thus third, the number and maybe even the specifications of attributes and variables could be different if more cases are considered. Fourth, some aspects are described in a biased manner, leaving room for narratives and interpretations, exacerbated by the retrospective view that is partially taken. A counteract may be a more longitudinal study that “on going” follows EE collaboration projects. Finally, the limitations of our results and conclusions toward generalizability and applicability in practice must be further elaborated by investigating a broader range of collaborations between other HEIs and SMEs.

Concerning the abovementioned managerial implications of this study, several opportunities for future research arise. First, examining the impact of the adaptation of the elements described above on cultural conformity would be interesting, as we suspect that not all elements affect perceived cultural conformity. However, perceived cultural conformity is particularly important for the SME. Second, we assume that the existing initial situation concerning existing innovation processes and framework conditions influences the SME’s motivation to establish CE and thus EE programs. Whether and in which form the catalyst for EE is affected by the initial situation should be investigated.

6 Conclusion

Transferring knowledge about impactful programs from academic settings into the corporate environment is one approach for benefitting from experiences made in the last decades. It can be observed in practice that universities and companies are working ever more closely together in this field (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018). This chapter has examined how EE activities are designed in collaborations among SMEs and HEIs, thus strengthening the understanding of key requirements for the transfer and implementation of EE activities in SMEs. The investigated case studies resulted in characteristics in which we were able to identify various aspects where the underlying conditions in SMEs and universities are similar. However, characteristics were also found that differ and therefore make it necessary to adjust formats and activities if they are transferred to the corporate context.

SMEs can benefit from the transfer of EE knowledge in cooperation with universities of their enormous know-how in designing processes for strategic innovation, business development, and business model innovation through proven innovation methods. HEIs can use the insights from SMEs through collaboration to generate new knowledge. This includes what SMEs will need in the future and what entrepreneurial knowledge can be imparted to students to enable them to become intrapreneurs and, therefore, more valuable employees.