Abstract
Entrepreneurship is crucially important for the introduction of disruptive and radical innovation. However, in Germany entrepreneurship and disruptive innovation are consistently low whereas the USA, for example, performs very well in these areas. This chapter offers insights into the relevance of entrepreneurship for a national innovation system. It illustrates the effects of policy interventions on potential entrepreneurs and shows pathways to encourage entrepreneurial behaviour and startups.
Keywords
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
‘National Innovation System means a core concept for analyzing an economy’s capacity to produce, commercialize, import, and utilize knowledge and technology. Innovation, learning and technological development, indispensable for long-term economic development of a nation, are now seen as systemic activities involving many and diverse economic actors’ (INSME, 2017, para. 1).
- 2.
Leading buyers are early adopters of new methods , technology, services or products .
- 3.
Venture capital is a subset of private equity and refers to equity investments made to support the pre-launch, launch and early stage development phases of a business (OECD, 2015c).
References
Ahuja, G., & Lampert, C. M. (2001). Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7), 521–543.
Audretsch, D. B., Dohse, D., & Niebuhr, A. (2009). Cultural diversity and entrepreneurship: A regional analysis for Germany. Paper presented at 24th Annual Congress of the European Economic Association, Barcelona, Spain.
Breznitz, D. (2014). Why Germany dominates the US in innovation. Harvard Business Review Blog. https://hbr.org/2014/05/why-germany-dominates-the-us-in-innovation/
Christensen, C., & Rayner, M. (2013). The innovator’s solution: Creating and sustaining successful growth. Boston: Harvard Business Review.
Christensen, C. M. (2011). The innovator’s dilemma. Warum etablierte Unternehmen den Wettbewerb um bahnbrechende Innovationen verlieren. München, Bavaria: Vahlen.
Cornell University, INSEAD, & WIPO. (2015). The global innovation index 2015: Effective innovation policies for development. Ithaca, NY/Geneva, Switzerland: World Intellectual Property Organization.
Die Bundesregierung. (2017). The new High-Tech Strategy. The new High-Tech Strategy – Understanding what belongs together. Retrieved from https://www.hightech-strategie.de/de/The-new-High-Tech-Strategy-390.php
Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. (2015). Adult population survey measures, 2015. London: Global Entrepreneurship Monitor.
HRK. (2017). Higher education finance. Retrieved from https://www.hrk.de/activities/higher-education-finance/
IBB. (2017/2018). Förderfibel 2017/2018. Der Ratgeber für Unternehmen und Existenzgründungen. Retrieved from https://www.ibb.de/media/dokumente/publikationen/wirtschaft-in-berlin/foerderfibel/foerderfibel_2017-2018.pdf
INSME. (2017). Glossary. National Innovation System (NIS). Retrieved from http://www.insme.org/glossary/national-innovation-system-nis
Jackson, P., Dobson, P., & Richter, N. (2017). The situational logic of entrepreneurship: A realist approach to national policy. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2017.1348932.
Jackson, P., Runde, J., Dobson, P., & Richter, N. (2015). Identifying mechanisms influencing the emergence and success of innovation within national economies: A realist approach. Policy Sciences, 1–26.
Kelley, D. J., Singer, S., & Herrington, M. (2015). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2015/16 global report, Babson College, Baruch College, MA.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). Wellsprings of knowledge: Building and maintaining the sources of innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
O’Connor, G. C. (1998). Market learning and radical innovation: A cross case comparison of eight radical innovation projects. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15(2), 151–166.
OECD. (2013). Entrepreneurship at a Glance. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2015a). OECD science, technology and industry scoreboard. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2015b). Culture: Entrepreneurial perceptions and attitudes. In Entrepreneurship at a Glance 2015. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2015c). Entrepreneurship at a Glance. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1994). Capitalism, socialism and democracy (pp. 82–83). London: Routledge.
Spiegel. (2016). Umfrage. Jeder dritte Student will Beamter werden. Retrieved from http://www.spiegel.de/karriere/jeder-dritte-student-will-beamter-werden-a-1109900.html
Statista. (2017). Arbeitslosenquote in Deutschland von September 2016 bis September 2017. Retrieved from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1239/umfrage/aktuelle-arbeitslosenquote-in-deutschland-monatsdurchschnittswerte/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Richter, N., Jackson, P., Schildhauer, T. (2018). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Startups: The Case of Germany and the USA. In: Richter, N., Jackson, P., Schildhauer, T. (eds) Entrepreneurial Innovation and Leadership. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71737-1_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71737-1_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-71736-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-71737-1
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)