Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Entrepreneurial ecosystems and the lifecycle of university business incubators: An integrative case study

  • Published:
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

University business incubators (UBIs) are an important part of the ecosystem that supports entrepreneurial activities and economic development. Extant research has focused on examining UBI activities at a single point in time, but there is a paucity of theoretical and empirical work aimed at understanding the forces that explain why and how UBIs change over time. This is an important gap because establishing a university business incubator does not assure its development and growth. We address this issue by drawing upon the Fisher et al. Academy of Management Review, 41(3), 383-409 (2016) Identity-Legitimacy-Life Cycle model to explain how the pursuit of resources and organizational legitimacy shapes the development of UBIs along key strategic and operational dimensions, which has implications for performance evaluation over time. We illustrate with a case study about the creation and evolution of the DMZ, a leading UBI at Ryerson University in Canada. This case provides new insights about the dynamics of UBIs and their relationships with the entrepreneurial ecosystems in which they are embedded. Implications for future research, management practice, and public policy 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

  • Albort-Morant, G., & Ribeiro-Soriano, D. (2016). A bibliometric analysis of international impact of business incubators. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1775–1779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, H., & Fiol, C. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation. Academy of Management Review, 19, 645–670.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, D., & McCluskey, R. (1991). Structure, policy, services, and performance in the business incubator industry. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 15(2), 61–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvedalen, J., & Boschma, R. (2017). A critical review of entrepreneurial ecosystems research: Towards a future research agenda. European Planning Studies, 25(6), 887–903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. (2014). From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society. Journal of Technology Transfer, 39, 313–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D., & Keilbach, M. (2008). Resolving the knowledge paradox: Knowledge-spillover entrepreneurship and economic growth. Research Policy, 37, 1697–1705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D., Cunningham, J., Kuratko, D., Lehmann, E., & Menter, M. (2019). Entrepreneurial ecosystems: Economic, technological, and societal impacts. Journal of Technology Transfer, 44, 313–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2014). Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of context. Research Policy, 43(7), 1097–1108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.01.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baraldi, E., & Ingemansson Havenvid, M. (2016). Identifying new dimensions of business incubation: A multi-level analysis of Karolinska Institute's incubation system. Technovation, 50-51, 53–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.08.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbero, J. L., Casillas, J. C., Ramos, A., & Guitar, S. (2012). Revisiting incubation performance: How incubator typology affects results. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(5), 888–902.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbero, J. L., Casillas, J. C., Wright, M., & Garcia, A. R. (2014). Do different types of incubators produce different types of innovations? Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(2), 151–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing: Insights from the study of social enterprises. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benwell, B., & Stokoe, E. (2006). Discourse and identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergek, A., & Norrman, C. (2008). Incubator best practice: A framework. Technovation, 28(1), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2007.07.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betakit (2019). How turning down $1 million changed the DMZ. Retrieved May 7, 2019, from http://betakit.com

  • Bhatli, D. (2016). Top University Business Incubators 2015–2016. Retrieved from Stockholm.

  • Bramwell, A., & Wolfe, D. (2008). Universities and regional economic development: The entrepreneurial University of Waterloo. Research Policy, 37, 1175–1187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R., & Mason, C. (2017). Looking inside the spiky bits: A critical review and conceptualisation of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Small Business Economics, 49, 11–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9865-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A., & Starkey, K. (2000). Organizational identity and learning: A psychodynamic perspective. Academy of Management Review, 25, 102–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruneel, J., Ratinho, T. F., Clarysse, B., & Groen, A. J. (2012). The evolution of business incubators: Comparing demand and supply of business incubation services across different incubator generations. Technovation, 32(2), 110–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2011.11.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budyldina, N. (2018). Entrepreneurial universities and regional contribution. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14, 265–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavallo, A., Ghezzi, A., & Balocco, R. (2019). Entrepreneurial ecosystem research: Present debates and future directions. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 15, 1291–1321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation.

  • Clark, B. (2004). Delineating the character of the entrepreneurial university. Higher Education Policy, 17, 335–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, S. (2013). What do accelerators do? Insights from incubators and angels. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 8(3–4), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1162/INOV_a_00184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, S., Bingham, C., & Hallen, B. (2018). The role of accelerator designs in mitigating bounded ratonality in new ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839218782131

  • Cohen, S., Fehder, D., Hochberg, Y., & Murray, F. (2019). The design of startup accelerators. Research Policy, 48, 1781–1797.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, C. E., Hamel, S. A., & Connaughton, S. L. (2012). Motivations and obstacles to networking in a university business incubator. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(4), 433–453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9189-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahms, S., & Kingkaew, S. (2016). University business incubators: An institutional demand side perspective on value adding features. Entrepreneurial Business and Economic Review, 4(3), 41–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Fina, A., & Georgakopoulou, A. (2011). Analyzing narrative: Discourse and sociolinguistic perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Drori, I., & Honig, B. (2013). A process model of internal and external legitimacy. Organization Studies, 34(3), 345–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, J., & Dukerich, J. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 517–554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Essig, L. (2014). Ownership, failure, and experience: Goals and evaluation metrics of university-based arts venture incubators. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 2(1), 117–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2002). Incubation of incubators: Innovation as a triple helix of university-industry-government networks. Science and Public Policy, 29(2), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154302781781056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00069-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, G. (2012). Effectuation, causation, and bricolage: A behavioral comparison of emerging theories in entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(5), 1019–1051. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00537.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, G., Kotha, S., & Lahiri, A. (2016). Changing with the times: An integrated view of identity, legitimacy, and new venture life cycles. Academy of Management Review, 41(3), 383–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukugawa, N. (2018). Is the impact of incubator’s ability on incubation performance contingent on technologies and life cycle stages of startups?: Evidence from Japan. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14, 457–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, B., McAdam, R., & Cross, S. (2019). The evolution of the incubator: Past, present and future. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2019.2905297.

  • Garud, R., Schildt, H., & Lant, T. (2014). Entrepreneurial storytelling, future expectations, and the paradox of legitimacy. Organization Science, 25, 1479–1492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gedeon, S. (2019). Theory-based design of an entrepreneurship microcredentialing and modularisation system within a large university ecosystem. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515127419856612.

  • Glynn, M. A. (2000). When cymbals become symbols: Conflict over organizational identity within a symphony orchestra. Organization Science, 11(3), 285–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, M., Knockaert, M., Soppe, B., & Wright, M. (2019). The technology transfer ecosystem in academia: An organizational design perspective. Technovation, 82–83, 35–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, B., & Ariss, S. (1985). Politics and strategic change across organizational life cycles. Academy of Management Review, 10, 707–723.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimaldi, R., & Grandi, A. (2005). Business incubators and new venture creation: An assessment of incubating models. Technovation, 25(2), 111–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00076-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero, M., & Urban, D. (2012). The development of an entrepreneurial university. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37, 43–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., Fayolle, A., Klofsten, M., & Mian, S. (2016). Entrepreneurial universities: Emerging models in the new social and economic landscape. Small Business Economics, 47, 551–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackett, S., & Dilts, D. (2004). A systematic review of business incubation research. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(1), 55–82. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOTT.0000011181.11952.0f.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausberg, J. P., & Korreck, S. (2018). Business incubators and accelerators: A co-citation analysis-based, systematic literature review. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9651-y.

  • Huang-Saad, A., Fay, J., & Sheridan, L. (2017). Closing the divide: Accelerating technology commercialization by catalyzing the university entrepreneurial ecosystem with I-corps. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42, 1466–1486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isenberg, D. (2010). The big idea: How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, 88(6), 40–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, M., Lundqvist, M., & Hellsmark, H. (2003). Entrepreneurial transformations in the Swedish University: The case of Chalmers University of Technology. Research Policy, 32, 1555–1568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamil, F., Ismail, K., & Mahmood, N. (2015). A review of commercialization tools: University incubators and technology parks. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 5, 223–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansen, S., Olsen, T., Solstad, E., & Torsteinsen, H. (2015). An insider view of the hybrid organization: How managers respond to challenges of efficiency, legitimacy and meaning. Journal of Management & Organization, 21(6), 725–740.

    Google Scholar 

  • Just, R., & Huffman, W. (2009). The economics of universities in a new age of funding options. Research Policy, 38, 1102–1116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazanjian, R. (1988). Relation of dominant problems to stages of growth in technology based ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 31(2), 257–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kher, R., & Lyons, T. (2018). Where do accelerators fit in the venture creation pipeline? Entrepreneurship Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2017-0140

  • Klofsten, M., Fayolle, A., Guerrero, M., Mian, S., Urbano, D., & Wright, M. (2019). The entrepreneurial university as driver for economic growth and social change – key challenges. Technolgical Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 149–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahikainen, K., Kolhinen, J., Ruskovaara, E., & Pihkala, T. (2019). Challenges to the development of an entrepreneurial university ecosystem: The case of a Finnish university campus. Industry and Higher Education, 33(2), 96–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, V., & Churchill, N. (1983). The five stages of small business growth. Harvard Business Review, 61(3), 30–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAdam, R., & Cross, S. (2019). The evolution of the incubator: Past, present, and future. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2019.2905297

  • McAdam, M., McAdam, R., & Miller, K. (2016). Situated regional university incubation: A multi-level stakeholder perspective. Technovation, 50-51, 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.09.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mian, S., Lamine, W., & Fayolle, A. (2016). Technology business incubation: An overview of the state of knowledge. Technovation, 50–51, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.02.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Acs, Z. (2017). The campus as entrepreneurial ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 49, 75–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. (1980). Momentum and revolution in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Review, 23, 591–614.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K., McAdam, M., & McAdam, R. (2014). The changing university business model: A stakeholder perspective. R&D Management, 44(3), 265–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12064.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mrkajic, B. (2017). Business incubation models and institutionally void environments. Technovation, 68, 44–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, W., Appel-Meulenbroek, R., Cloodt, M., & Arentze, T. (2019). Towards a segmentation of science parks: A typology study on science parks in Europe. Research Policy, 48, 719–732.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls-Nixon, C., & Valliere, D. (2019). A framework for exploring heterogeneity in university business incubators. Entrepreneurship Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2018-0190.

  • Nicholls-Nixon, C., Valliere, D., & Hassannezhad, Z. (Eds.). (2018). A typology of university business incubators: Implications for research and practice. University of Aveiro: Academic Conferences and Publishing International. XXII, 535–543.

  • Ozcan, P., Han, S., & Graebner, M. (2017). Single cases: The what, why, and how. In R. Mir & S. Jain (Eds.), The Routledge companion to qualitative research in organization studies. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauwels, C., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Van Hove, J. (2016). Understanding a new generation incubation model: The accelerator. Technovation, 50-51, 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.09.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinto, J. (2019). Key to effective organizational performance management lies at the intersection of paradox theory and stakeholder theory. International Journal of Management Reviews, 21, 185–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, R., & Cameron, K. (1983). Organizational life cycles and shifting criteria of effectiveness: Some preliminary evidence. Management Science, 29, 33–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redondo, M., & Camarero, C. (2017). Dominant logics and the manager’s role in university business incubators. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 32(2), 282–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redondo, M., & Camarero, C. (2018). Social capital in university business incubators: Dimensions, antecedents and outcomes. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0494-7.

  • Redondo, M., & Camarero, C. (2019). Social capital in university business incubators: Dimensions, antecedents and outcomes. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 15, 599–624.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redondo-Carretero, M., & Camarero-Izquierdo, C. (2017). Relationships between entrepreneurs in business incubators. An exploratory case study. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 24(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/1051712X.2016.1275826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roundy, P., Brockman, B., & Bradshaw, M. (2017). The resilience of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 8, 99–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roundy, P., Bradshaw, M., & Brockman, B. (2018). The emergence of entrepreneurial ecosystems: A complex adaptive systems approach. Journal of Business Research, 86, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubens, A., Spigarelli, F., Cavacchi, A., & Rinaldi, C. (2017). Universities’ third missions and the entrepreneurial university and the challenges they bring to higher educational institutions. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Community, 11(3), 354–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2007). The rise of entrepreneurial activity at universities: Organizational and societal implications. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 489–504. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtm015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirmon, D., Hitt, M., Ireland, R., & Gilbert, B. (2011). Resource orchestration to create competitive advantage: Breadth, depth, and life cycle effects. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1390–1412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spigel, B. (2017). The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12167.

  • Spigel, B., & Harrison, R. (2018). Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12, 151–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theodorakopoulos, N., Kakabadse, N. K., & McGowan, C. (2014). What matters in business incubation? A literature review and a suggestion for situated theorising. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 21(4), 602–622. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-09-2014-0152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todorovic, Z. W., & Suntornpithug, N. (2008). The multi-dimensional nature of university incubators: Capability/resource emphasis phases. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 16(4), 385–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Looy, B., Landoni, P., Callaert, J., van Pottelsberghe, B., Sapsalis, E., & Debackere, K. (2011). Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs. Research Policy, 40(4), 553–564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.02.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Weele, M., van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Nauta, F. (2017). You can’t always get what you want: How entrepreneur’s perceived resource needs affect the incubator’s assertiveness. Technovation, 59, 18–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.08.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanderstraeten, J., & Matthyssens, P. (2012). Service-based differentiation strategies for business incubators: Exploring external and internal alignment. Technovation, 32(12), 656–670.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, N. (2003). Founder-CEO succession and the paradox of entrepreneurial success. Organization Science, 14(2), 149–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welter, F. (2011). Contextualizing entrepreneurship: Conceptual challenges and ways forward. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 465–475.

  • Whetten, D. (2006). Albert and Whetten revisited: Strengthening the concept of organizational identity. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15, 219–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., Siegel, D., & Mustar, P. (2017). An emerging ecosystem for student start-ups. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42, 909–944.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wry, T., Lounsbury, M., & Glynn, M. (2011). Legitimating nascent collective identities: Coordinating cultural entrepreneurship. Organization Science, 22, 414–463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Youtie, J., & Shapira, P. (2008). Building an innovation hub: A case study of the transformation of univeristy roles in regional technological and economic development. Research Policy, 37, 1188–1204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. (2007). Contextualizing theory building in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(3), 443–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, M., & Zeitz, G. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27, 414–431.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

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

    Charlene L. Nicholls-Nixon, Dave Valliere, Steven A. Gedeon & Sean Wise

Authors
  1. Charlene L. Nicholls-Nixon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dave Valliere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Steven A. Gedeon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sean Wise
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charlene L. Nicholls-Nixon.

Ethics declarations

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Originally submitted to International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal on September 5, 2019

Highlights

• Proposes a model of UBI development within the context of a socially constructed entrepreneurial ecosystem

• Draws on the Fisher ILLC model linking identity, resource providers and legitimacy to explain UBI progression through distinct lifecycle stages

• Illustrates the effects of lifecycle progression on seven dimensions of UBI typology, using a ten-year case study of a leading global UBI

• Suggests research directions and managerial implications

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nicholls-Nixon, C.L., Valliere, D., Gedeon, S.A. et al. Entrepreneurial ecosystems and the lifecycle of university business incubators: An integrative case study. Int Entrep Manag J 17, 809–837 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-019-00622-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-019-00622-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation