Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Nascent green-technology ventures: a study assessing the role of partnership diversity in firm success

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Given the increasing deterioration of the environment, understanding the strategies of nascent green-technology ventures developing clean technology to address environmental concerns is important. This study is one of the first to empirically examine the role of partnership diversity in nascent green-technology ventures in a quantitative empirical study by systematically applying a resource-based view (RBV) theoretical perspective. Partnership diversity relates to the variety of partnerships with different sectors with which a green-technology venture engages in order to mobilize resources and be successful. RBV suggests that the accumulation and combination of such resources leads to success. However, data from 50 green-technology venture business plans suggest that resources mobilized do not mediate the relationship between partnership diversity and success as measured by venture development, value creation, and venture innovation. Nevertheless, partnership diversity and resources mobilized are related to venture development. These results, their implications, future research opportunities, and limitations are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldrich, H. (1999). Organizations evolving. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2001). How entrepreneurial firms can benefit from alliances with large partners. Academy of Management Executive, 15(1), 139–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, S. A., & Busenitz, L. W. (2001). The entrepreneurship of resource-based theory. Journal of Management, 27(6), 755–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, T. L., & Leal, D. (2001). Free market environmentalism. New York: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. E. (2000). The collaboration challenge: How nonprofits and businesses succeed through strategic alliances. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, J. R., Chandler, W., Le, C., & Papailiadis, T. (1994). Strategies for success: A profile of growing small and medium-sized enterprises in Canada. Catalogue No. 61-523-RPE. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.

  • Baldwin, J. R., & Johnson, J. (1999). Entry, innovation and firm growth. In Z. Acs (Ed.), Are small firms important? Their role and impact (pp. 51–71). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000). Why companies go green: A model of ecological responsiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 717–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, C. M., & Haunschild, P. R. (2002). Network learning: The effects of partners’ heterogeneity of experience on corporate acquisitions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 92–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhave, M. P. (1994). A process model of entrepreneurial venture creation. Journal of Business Venturing, 9(3), 223–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollingtoft, A., Ulhoi, J. P., Madsen, H., & Neergaard, H. (2003). The effect of financial factors on the performance of new venture companies in high tech and knowledge-intensive industries: An empirical study in Denmark. International Journal of Management, 20(4), 535–547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borch, K. (2007). Emerging technologies in favor of sustainable agriculture. Futures, 39(9), 1045–1066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bretherton, P., & Chaston, I. (2005). Resource dependency and SME strategy: An empirical study. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 12(2), 274–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brush, C. G., Greene, P., & Hart, M. M. (2001). From initial idea to unique advantage: The entrepreneurial challenge of constructing a resource base. Academy of Management Executive, 15(1), 64–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunderson, J. S., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2002). Comparing alternative conceptualizations of functional diversity in management teams: Process and performance effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 875–893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1983). Corporate profits and co-optation: Networks of market constraints and directorate ties in the American economy. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsrud, A. L., & Brännback, M. (2007). Entrepreneurship. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsrud, A. L., Gaglio, C. M., & Olm, K. (1987). Entrepreneurs—Mentors, networks, and successful new venture development: An exploratory study. American Journal of Small Business (now Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice), 12(2), 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsrud, A., Brännback, M., & Renko, M. (2008). Strategy and strategic thinking in biotechnology entrepreneurship. In H., Patzelt & T., Brenner (Eds.), Handbook of bioentrepreneurship (pp. 83–99). Springer Verlag.

  • Chapple, W., & Moon, J. (2005). Corporate social responsibility in Asia: A seven-country study of CSR web site reporting. Business & Society, 44(4), 415–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhri, V., & Wang, J. (2007). Communicating corporate social responsibility on the internet. Management Communication Quarterly, 21(2), 232–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chell, E. (2007). Social enterprise and entrepreneurship. International Small Business Journal, 25(1), 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christmann, P. (2000). Effects of “best practices” of environmental management on cost advantage: The role of complementary assets. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 663–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, N. C., & Lewis, V. L. (1983). The five stages of business growth. Harvard Business Review, 61(3), 30–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coddington, W. (1993). Environmental marketing: Positive strategies for reaching the green consumer. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    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 

  • Das, T. K., & Teng, B. (2000). A resource-based theory of strategic alliances. Journal of Management, 26(1), 31–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson, P., Delmar, F., & Wiklund, J. (2002). Entrepreneurship as growth; growth as entrepreneurship. In M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, S. M. Camp, & D. L. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset (pp. 328–342). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson, P., & Honig, B. (2003). The role of human and social capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 301–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson, P., Steffens, P., & Fitzsimmons, J. (2009). Growing profitable or growing from profits: Putting the horse in front of the cart? Journal of Business Venturing, 24(4), 388–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dean, T. J., & McMullen, J. S. (2007). Toward a theory of sustainable entrepreneurship: Reducing environmental degradation through entrepreneurial action. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1), 50–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmar, F., & Shane, S. (2004). Legitimating first: Organizing activities and the survival of new ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(3), 385–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Domenico, M., & Haugh, H. (2007). Strategic partnering: Results from a survey of social ventures in the UK. Paper presented at the International Social Entrepreneurship Research Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark.

  • Doz, Y., & Hamel, G. (1998). Alliance advantage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duriau, V. J., Reger, R. K., & Pfarrer, M. D. (2007). A content analysis of the content analysis literature in organization studies. Organizational Research Methods, 10(1), 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, J. H., & Nobeoka, K. (2000). Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: The Toyota case. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 345–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation. California Management Review, 36(2), 90–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (2004). Enter the triple bottom line. In A. Henriques & J. Richardson (Eds.), The triple bottom line: Does it all add up? (pp. 1–16). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, J. (1999). Social return on investment: Exploring aspects of value creation, REDF box set, Vol. 2, Chapter 8. San Francisco: Roberts Enterprise Development Foundation

  • Emerson, J. (2003). The blending value proposition: Integrating social and financial returns. California Management Review, 45(4), 35–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, J., & Bonini, S. (2003). The blended value map: Tracking the intersects and opportunities of economic, social and environmental value creation. From http://www.blendedvalue.org.

  • Fauchart, E., & Keilbach, M. (2009). Testing a model of exploration and exploitation as innovation strategies. Small Business Economics, 33(3), 257–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick, J. M., & Gedaka, K. A. (2003). Success through collaboration. Environmental Science and Technology, 37(23), 442–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foo, M. D., Wong, P. K., & Ong, A. (2005). Do others think you have a viable business idea? Team diversity and judges’ evaluation of ideas in a business plan competition. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3), 385–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friar, J. H., & Meyer, M. H. (2003). Entrepreneurship and start-ups in the Boston region: Factors differentiating high-growth ventures from micro-ventures. Small Business Economics, 21(2), 145–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galaskiewicz, J., Bielefeld, W., & Dowell, M. (2006). Networks and organizational growth: A study of community based nonprofit. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 337–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • García-Canal, E., Valdéz-Llaneza, A., & Ariñio, A. (2003). Effectiveness of dyadic and multi-party joint ventures. Organization Studies, 24(5), 743–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, B. A., McDougall, P. P., & Audretsch, D. D. (2006). New venture growth: A review and extension. Journal of Management, 32(6), 926–950.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gnyawali, D. R., & Park, B. R. (2009). Co-opetition and technology innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises: A multilevel conceptual model. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(5), 308–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M., & Baden-Fuller, C. (1995). A knowledge-based theory of inter-firm collaboration. In Best paper proceedings, Academy of Management Conference (pp. 17–21).

  • Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiner, L. E. (1972). Evolutions and revolutions as organizations grow. Harvard Business Review, 50(4), 37–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 293–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G. (1991). Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 12(S1), 83–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. (2007). What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1199–2228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L., & Sharma, S. (2004). Engaging fringe stakeholders for competitive imagination. Academy of Management Executive, 18(1), 7–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herfindahl, O. C. (1950). Concentration in the U.S. steel industry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, New York.

  • Hess, D., Rogovsky, N., & Dunfee, T. W. (2002). The next wave of corporate community involvement: Corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 44(2), 110–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, A. O. (1964). The paternity of an index. American Economic Review, 54(5), 761–762.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho Park, S., & Zhou, D. (2005). Firm heterogeneity and competitive dynamics in alliance formation. Academy of Management Review, 30(3), 531–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodge, G., & Greve, C. (Eds.). (2005). The challenge of public-private partnerships: Learning from international experience. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jack, S. L. (2010). Approaches to studying networks: Implications and outcomes. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(1), 120–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kale, P., Dyer, J., & Singh, H. (2001). Value creation and success in strategic alliances: Alliancing skills and the role of alliance structure and systems. European Management Journal, 19(5), 463–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2002). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review, 74(1), 75–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J., & Gartner, W. B. (1988). Properties of emerging organizations. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 429–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, P. H., & Aldrich, H. E. (2005). Social capital and entrepreneurship. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 1(2), 1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, A. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2000). Industry self-regulation without sanctions: The chemical industry’s Responsible Care Program. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 698–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingsley, G., & Malecki, E. J. (2004). Networking for competitiveness. Small Business Economics, 23(1), 71–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch, D., Goldfarb, B., & Gera, A. (2009). Form or substance: The role of business plans in venture capital decision making. Strategic Management Journal, 30(5), 487–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, R. D., & Whybark, D. C. (1999). The impact of environmental technologies on manufacturing performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(6), 599–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavie, D. (2006). The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 638–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Light, P. C. (2005). Searching for social entrepreneurs: Who they might be, where they might be found, what they do. In Association for Research on Nonprofit and Voluntary Associations conference proceedings, November 17–18, 2005.

  • Livesey, S. M. (1999). McDonald’s and the Environmental Defense Fund: A case study of a green alliance. Journal of Business Communication, 36(1), 5–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livesey, S. M., Hartman, C. L., Stafford, E. R., & Shearer, M. (2009). Performing sustainable development through eco-collaboration: The ricelands habitat partnership. Journal of Business Communication, 46(4), 423–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long, F., & Arnold, M. (1995). The power of environmental partnerships. Management Institute for Environment and Business. Orlando, FL: Harcourt, Brace & Company.

  • Maase, S. J. F. M., & Dorst, I. K. H. (2007). Exploring the development process of grassroots social entrepreneurship. Paper presented at the International Social Entrepreneurship Research Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark.

  • Marcus, A. A., & Fremeth, A. R. (2009). Green management matters regardless. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 17–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyskens, M. A., Carsrud, A. L., & Cardozo, R. (2010a). The impact of resources on the success of social entrepreneurship organizations: The symbiosis of entities in the social engagement network. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 22(5), 425–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyskens, M., Post, C., Stamp, J., Carsrud, A., & Reynolds, P. (2010b). Social venture strategy from a global perspective: An exploratory study assessing Ashoka fellows. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 34(4), 661–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, T. L., & Wesley, C. L. (2010). Assessing mission and resources for social change: An organizational identity perspective on social venture capitalists’ decision criteria. Entrepreneurship, Theory & Practice, 34(4), 705–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss, T. W., Short, J. C., Payne, G. T., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2010). Dual identities in social ventures: An exploratory study. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice.

  • Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, G. B., Trailer, W. L., & Hill, R. C. (1996). Measuring performance in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Research, 36(1), 15–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neck, H., Brush, C., & Allen, E. (2009). The landscape of social entrepreneurship. Business Horizons, 52(1), 13–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A. (2005). Social entrepreneurship. In S. Carter & D. Evans-Jones (Eds.), Enterprise, small business: Principles, practice, policy (2nd ed.). Harlow: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ottman, J. (1998). Green marketing: Opportunity for innovation (2nd ed.). Lincolnwood, IL: NTC/Contemporary Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, J., & Doh, J. P. (2005). The high impact of collaborative social initiatives. Sloan Management Review, 46(3), 329–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, E. T. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podolny, J. M., Stuart, T. E., & Hannan, M. T. (1996). Networks, knowledge, and niches: Competition in the worldwide semiconductor industry, 1984–1991. American Journal of Sociology, 102(3), 659–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1995). Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 295–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., Koput, K., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 116–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K. (2005). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preston, L. E., & Donaldson, T. (1999). Stakeholder management and organizational wealth. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 619–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rangan, V. K., Quelch, J. A., Herrero, G., & Barton, B. (2007). Business solutions for the global poor: Creating social and economic value. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renko, M., Carsrud, A., & Brännback, M. (2009). The effects of a market orientation, entrepreneurial orientation, and technological capability on innovativeness: A study of young biotechnology ventures in the United States and in Scandinavia. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(5), 331–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, P. D. (2000). National panel study of US business start-ups. Background and methodology. In J. A. Katz (Ed.), Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence and growth (Vol. 4, pp. 153–227). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, P. D., & Curtin, R. (2008). Business creation in the United States: Panel study of entrepreneurial dynamics II initial assessment. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 4(3), 155–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (1998). Corporate strategies and environmental regulations: An organizing framework. Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 363–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seelos, C., & Mair, J. (2005). Sustainable development, sustainable profit. European Business Forum, 20, 49–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sexton, K., Marcus, A., Easter, K. W., & Burkhardt, T. (1999). Better environmental decisions. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Short, J., Moss, T. W., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2009). Research in social entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(2), 161–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simms, S. V. K., & Robinson, J. (2006, April). Activist or entrepreneur? An identity-based model of social entrepreneurship. Paper presented at the 2nd International Social Entrepreneurship Research Conference, New York.

  • Sine, W. D., & Lee, B. H. (2009). Tilting at windmills?. The environmental movement and the emergence of the U.S. wind energy sector. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54, 123–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith-Doerr, L., & Powell, W. W. (2005). Networks in economic life. In N. Smelser & R. Swedberg (Eds.), The handbook of economic sociology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stafford, E. R., & Hartman, C. L. (1996). Green alliances: Strategic relations between businesses and environmental groups. Business Horizons, 39(2), 50–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stafford, E. R., Polonsky, M. J., & Hartman, C. L. (2000). Environmental NGO-business collaboration and strategic bridging: A case analysis of the Greenpeace-Foron alliance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 9(2), 122–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starik, M., & Marcus, A. A. (2000). Introduction to the special research forum on the management of organizations in the natural environment: A field emerging from multiple paths, with many challenges ahead. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 539–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinerowski, A., Jack, S. L., & Farmer, J. (2008, June 5–7). Who are the social ‘entrepreneurs’ and what do they actually do? Paper presented at the Babson College Entrepreneurship Research Conference (BCERC).

  • Stuart, T. E. (2000). Interorganizational alliances the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates in a high-technology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 21(8), 791–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, J., Fischer, E., Mitchell, R., & Phan, P. (2009). At the center of the action: Innovation and technology strategy research in the small business setting. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(5), 233–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teng, B. S. (2007). Corporate entrepreneurship activities through strategic alliances: A resource-based approach toward competitive advantage. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1), 119–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 674–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (1988). Building successful social partnerships. Sloan Management Review, 29(4), 17–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wen, C. T., & Chen, Y. W. (2007). The innovation process of entrepreneurial teams in dynamic business plan competition: From sense-making perspective. International Journal of Technology Management, 39(3/4), 346–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitman, J. (2009). Measuring social values in philanthropic foundations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 19(3), 305–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Management Department, School of Business, University of San Diego, Coronado 112, 5998 Alcala Park, San Diego, CA, 92110, USA

    Moriah Meyskens

  2. Ted Rogers School of Management, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 2K3, Canada

    Alan L. Carsrud

  3. Abo Akademi University, Turku, Finland

    Alan L. Carsrud

Authors
  1. Moriah Meyskens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alan L. Carsrud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moriah Meyskens.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Meyskens, M., Carsrud, A.L. Nascent green-technology ventures: a study assessing the role of partnership diversity in firm success. Small Bus Econ 40, 739–759 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9400-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9400-1

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Search

Navigation