• Sami Mahroum


For much of the last three decades, the world of business and economic development has been dominated by the Silicon Valley Paradigm. This paradigm stipulates that high-growth technology companies most likely emerge under the particular framework conditions that govern the business environment of Silicon Valley. These include, for example, the abundance of risk capital, a culture of risk taking, the availability of a deep pool of highly skilled talent and the presence of large communities of foreign-born graduates and entrepreneurs, in addition to strong university–industry links and other factors. Considering the rapid emergence in Silicon Valley of numerous high-growth, high-tech start-ups that have gone on to become globally dominant, it is easy to see why this region has come to dominate attention and perceptions about what is most important for start-up success. With a population of less than three million, Silicon Valley generates a GDP of around US$210 billion (or US$70,000 per capita), with 45 % of households claiming an income over US$100,000. On a per capita basis, Silicon Valley counts among the richest areas of the world—in the same league as countries like Norway and Singapore.


Venture Capital Comparative Advantage Black Swan Competitiveness Index Online Travel 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bolton, R. 2002. Place surplus, exit, voice, and loyalty. In Regional policies and comparative advantage, ed. B. Johansson, C. Karlsson, and R. Stough. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  2. Brooks, David. 2010. Bobos in paradise: The new upper class and how they got there. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  3. Cyert, Richard, and James March. 1963. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  4. Dahl, Michael S., and Olav Sorenson. 2012. Home sweet home: Entrepreneurs’ location choices and the performance of their ventures. Management Science 58(6): 1059–1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Figueiredo, O., P. Guimaraes, and D. Woodward. 2002. Home-field advantage: Location decisions of Portuguese entrepreneurs. Journal of Urban Economics 52: 341–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Florida, Richard. 2002. Bohemia and economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography 2(1): 55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Florida, Richard. 2004. The rise of the creative class and how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life (Paperback Ed.). New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
  8. Galbraith, Craig S. 1985. High-technology location and development: The case of Orange County. California Management Review 28(1): 98 (pre-1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hirschman, A.O. 1970. Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Lafuente, Esteban, Yancy Vaillant, and Christian Serarols. 2010. Location decisions of knowledge-based entrepreneurs: Why some Catalan KISAs choose to be rural? Technovation 30(11): 590–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mueller, E., and J.N. Morgan. 1962. Location decisions of manufacturers. American Economic Review 52: 204–217.Google Scholar
  12. Porter, Michael E. 1996. What is strategy? Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  13. Prahalad, Coimbatore Krishnarao. 1993. The role of core competencies in the corporation. Research Technology Management 36: 40–47.Google Scholar
  14. Puhvel, J. 1984. The origin of Etruscan Tusna (‘Swan’). The American Journal of Philology 105: 209–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Reynolds, P., and S.B. White. 1997. The entrepreneurial process. New London: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
  16. Rogers, Everett M., and Judith K. Larsen. 1984. Silicon valley fever: Growth of high-technology culture. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  17. Saxenian, Annalee. 1985. Silicon valley and route 128: Regional prototypes or historic exceptions? In High technology, space and society, ed. M. Castells. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Saxenian, Annalee. 1983. The genesis of Silicon Valley. Built Environment 9: 7–17 (1978-).Google Scholar
  19. Senor, Dan, and Saul Singer. 2011. Start-up nation: The story of Israel’s economic miracle. New York: Random House LLC.Google Scholar
  20. Schroeder, Christopher. 2013. Startup rising. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  21. Stam, E. 2007. Why butterflies don’t leave: Locational behavior of entrepreneurial firms. Economic Geography 83(1): 27–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Storey, David J., et al. 1987. The performance of small firms: Profits, jobs and failures. Urbana-Champaign’s academy for entrepreneurial leadership historical research reference in entrepreneurship, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
  23. The Global Competitiveness Index 2013–14, World Economic Forum, Geneva.Google Scholar
  24. Van Fraassen, Bas C. 1980. The pragmatic theory of explanation.

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)> 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sami Mahroum
    • 1
  1. 1.INSEAD Abu Dhabi CampusAbu DhabiUnited Arab Emirates

Personalised recommendations