IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v45y2020i4d10.1007_s10961-019-09724-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gimme shelter? Heterogeneous preferences for tangible and intangible resources when choosing an incubator

Author

Listed:
  • Marijn A. Weele

    (Utrecht University)

  • Frank J. Rijnsoever

    (Utrecht University
    Universitat Politècnica de València)

  • Menno Groen

    (Utrecht University)

  • Ellen H. M. Moors

    (Utrecht University)

Abstract

The rapidly growing and diversifying incubator population has led to increasing efforts to understand why entrepreneurs prefer one incubator over another. Scientific studies suggest that entrepreneurs should prefer incubators that provide startups with intangible resources, such as business knowledge or networks to enhance performance. Yet, studies show many entrepreneurs prefer incubators that provide tangible resources, such as funding and office space. The heterogeneity in preferences for resources from incubators is poorly understood. We do not know whether there are patterns in this heterogeneity nor what factors explain this heterogeneity. Thereby, we do not know the extent to which a one-size-fits-all model of incubation is sufficient to attract and support startups or whether incubators need to tailor themselves to the perceived resource needs of different groups of startups. Hence, this paper aims to identify and explain the heterogeneity in preferences for resources offered by an incubator to startups. We conducted a discrete choice experiment to determine how the attributes of an incubator influence incubator choice by different latent classes of entrepreneurs. The data comes from 935 entrepreneurs in North America and Western Europe. Our results reveal three latent classes of entrepreneurs: “ambitious, balanced spinoffs,” who consider all the incubator’s attributes when making a decision; “innovation-driven funding seekers,” who base their choice on funding availability; and “self-made individualists,” who disfavor networking, training, and coaching. The ambitious, balanced spinoffs class based their choice on the attributes highlighted in the literature, while the innovation-driven funding seekers and self-made individualists fit more with empirically observed preferences for tangible resources. The classes show that systematic heterogeneity exists in the preferences for resources provided by an incubator. We advise incubator managers how to better tailor their support to the preferences and needs of classes of startups.

Suggested Citation

  • Marijn A. Weele & Frank J. Rijnsoever & Menno Groen & Ellen H. M. Moors, 2020. "Gimme shelter? Heterogeneous preferences for tangible and intangible resources when choosing an incubator," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 984-1015, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:45:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s10961-019-09724-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-019-09724-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10961-019-09724-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-019-09724-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frank Rijnsoever & Leon Welle & Sjoerd Bakker, 2014. "Credibility and legitimacy in policy-driven innovation networks: resource dependencies and expectations in Dutch electric vehicle subsidies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 635-661, August.
    2. Sean M. Hackett & David M. Dilts, 2004. "A Systematic Review of Business Incubation Research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 55-82, January.
    3. Alicia Leung & Amy L. Y. Wong & Michael N. Young, 2008. "Global Information Technology Company, Ltd," Asian Case Research Journal (ACRJ), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 12(01), pages 129-140.
    4. Zoltán J. Ács & Erkko Autio & László Szerb, 2015. "National Systems of Entrepreneurship: Measurement issues and policy implications," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 28, pages 523-541, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Oecd, 2008. "Developments in Fibre Technologies and Investment," OECD Digital Economy Papers 142, OECD Publishing.
    6. van Rijnsoever & Marius Meeus & Roger Donders, 2012. "The effects of economic status and recent experience on innovative behavior under environmental variability: an experimental approach," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 12-01, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Jan 2012.
    7. Garry D. Bruton & David Ahlstrom & Han–Lin Li, 2010. "Institutional Theory and Entrepreneurship: Where Are We Now and Where Do We Need to Move in the Future?," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 34(3), pages 421-440, May.
    8. Leyden, Dennis P. & Link, Albert N. & Siegel, Donald S., 2014. "A theoretical analysis of the role of social networks in entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1157-1163.
    9. Robert E. Carpenter & Bruce C. Petersen, 2002. "Capital Market Imperfections, High-Tech Investment, and New Equity Financing," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(477), pages 54-72, February.
    10. Chris P. Eveleens & Frank J. Rijnsoever & Eva M. M. I. Niesten, 2017. "How network-based incubation helps start-up performance: a systematic review against the background of management theories," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 676-713, June.
    11. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    12. M. Tina Dacin & Christine Oliver & Jean‐Paul Roy, 2007. "The legitimacy of strategic alliances: an institutional perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 169-187, February.
    13. Stam, Wouter & Arzlanian, Souren & Elfring, Tom, 2014. "Social capital of entrepreneurs and small firm performance: A meta-analysis of contextual and methodological moderators," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 152-173.
    14. Paul Westhead & David Storey, 1997. "Financial constraints on the growth of high technology small firms in the United Kingdom," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 197-201.
    15. Rice, Mark P., 2002. "Co-production of business assistance in business incubators: an exploratory study," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 163-187, March.
    16. Danny Soetanto & Sarah Jack, 2013. "Business incubators and the networks of technology-based firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 432-453, August.
    17. Haughton, Dominique & Legrand, Pascal & Woolford, Sam, 2009. "Review of Three Latent Class Cluster Analysis Packages: Latent Gold, poLCA, and MCLUST," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 63(1), pages 81-91.
    18. Golombek, Rolf & Hoel, Michael, 2008. "Endogenous technology and tradable emission quotas," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 197-208, May.
    19. D. Patton & L. Warren & D. Bream, 2009. "Elements that underpin high-tech business incubation processes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(6), pages 621-636, December.
    20. Vohora, Ajay & Wright, Mike & Lockett, Andy, 2004. "Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 147-175, January.
    21. Storey, D. J. & Tether, B. S., 1998. "New technology-based firms in the European union: an introduction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(9), pages 933-946, April.
    22. Morgan, Steve & Grootendorst, Paul & Lexchin, Joel & Cunningham, Colleen & Greyson, Devon, 2011. "The cost of drug development: A systematic review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 4-17, April.
    23. Marijn van Weele & Frank J. Rijnsoever & Chris P. Eveleens & Henk Steinz & Niels Stijn & Menno Groen, 2018. "Start-EU-up! Lessons from international incubation practices to address the challenges faced by Western European start-ups," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1161-1189, October.
    24. Dean A. Shepherd & Andrew Zacharakis, 1999. "Conjoint analysis: A new methodological approach for researching the decision policies of venture capitalists," Venture Capital, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(3), pages 197-217, July.
    25. van Weele, Marijn & van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Nauta, Frans, 2017. "You can't always get what you want: How entrepreneur's perceived resource needs affect the incubator's assertiveness," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 18-33.
    26. Rothaermel, Frank T. & Thursby, Marie, 2005. "Incubator firm failure or graduation?: The role of university linkages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1076-1090, September.
    27. Rudy Aernoudt, 2004. "Incubators: Tool for Entrepreneurship?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 127-135, September.
    28. Chandra R. Bhat, 2000. "Incorporating Observed and Unobserved Heterogeneity in Urban Work Travel Mode Choice Modeling," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 228-238, May.
    29. Jennings, P. Devereaux & Greenwood, Royston & Lounsbury, Michael D. & Suddaby, Roy, 2013. "Institutions, entrepreneurs, and communities: A special issue on entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-9.
    30. Greg Fisher, 2012. "Effectuation, Causation, and Bricolage: A Behavioral Comparison of Emerging Theories in Entrepreneurship Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 36(5), pages 1019-1051, September.
    31. Paul Gompers & Josh Lerner, 2001. "The Venture Capital Revolution," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 145-168, Spring.
    32. Storey, D. J. & Tether, B. S., 1998. "Public policy measures to support new technology-based firms in the European Union," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(9), pages 1037-1057, April.
    33. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Meeus, Marius T.H. & Donders, A. Rogier T., 2012. "The effects of economic status and recent experience on innovative behavior under environmental variability: An experimental approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 833-847.
    34. Frank J. Van Rijnsoever & Marijn A. Van Weele & Chris P. Eveleens, 0. "Network brokers or hit makers? Analyzing the influence of incubation on start-up investments," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-25.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Photchanaphisut Pattanasak & Tanyanuparb Anantana & Boontarika Paphawasit & Ratapol Wudhikarn, 2022. "Critical Factors and Performance Measurement of Business Incubators: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-39, April.
    2. Vidit Mohan & Rohan Chinchwadkar, 2022. "Technology Business Incubation: A Literature Review and Gaps," International Journal of Global Business and Competitiveness, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 53-63, June.
    3. van Rijnsoever, Frank J., 2022. "Intermediaries for the greater good: How entrepreneurial support organizations can embed constrained sustainable development startups in entrepreneurial ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    4. Brian J. Bergman & Jeffery S. McMullen, 2022. "Helping Entrepreneurs Help Themselves: A Review and Relational Research Agenda on Entrepreneurial Support Organizations," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 46(3), pages 688-728, May.
    5. Michele Manconi & Salvatore Bellomo & Anna Nosella & Lara Agostini, 2022. "Attributes of Business Incubators: A Conjoint Analysis of Venture Capitalist’s Decision Making," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-16, May.
    6. Zhou, Junbi & Wang, Mingyue, 2023. "The role of government-industry-academia partnership in business incubation: Evidence from new R&D institutions in China," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    7. Gonzalez-Uribe, Juanita & Hmaddi, Ouafaa, 2022. "The multi-dimensional impacts of business accelerators: what does the research tell us?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115461, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Eveleens, Chris P., 2021. "Money Don't matter? How incubation experience affects start-up entrepreneurs' resource valuation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    2. van Rijnsoever, Frank J., 2020. "Meeting, mating, and intermediating: How incubators can overcome weak network problems in entrepreneurial ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    3. van Weele, Marijn & van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Nauta, Frans, 2017. "You can't always get what you want: How entrepreneur's perceived resource needs affect the incubator's assertiveness," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 18-33.
    4. van Rijnsoever, Frank J., 2022. "Intermediaries for the greater good: How entrepreneurial support organizations can embed constrained sustainable development startups in entrepreneurial ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    5. Chris P. Eveleens & Frank J. Rijnsoever & Eva M. M. I. Niesten, 2017. "How network-based incubation helps start-up performance: a systematic review against the background of management theories," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 676-713, June.
    6. Frank J. Van Rijnsoever & Marijn A. Van Weele & Chris P. Eveleens, 0. "Network brokers or hit makers? Analyzing the influence of incubation on start-up investments," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-25.
    7. Frank J. Van Rijnsoever & Marijn A. Van Weele & Chris P. Eveleens, 2017. "Network brokers or hit makers? Analyzing the influence of incubation on start-up investments," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 605-629, June.
    8. J. Piet Hausberg & Sabrina Korreck, 2020. "Business incubators and accelerators: a co-citation analysis-based, systematic literature review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 151-176, February.
    9. Niels Stijn & Frank J. Rijnsoever & Martine Veelen, 2018. "Exploring the motives and practices of university–start-up interaction: evidence from Route 128," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 674-713, June.
    10. Isabel Diez-Vial & Angeles Montoro-Sanchez, 2017. "Research evolution in science parks and incubators: foundations and new trends," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1243-1272, March.
    11. Joshi, Kshitija & S, Krishna H & Loganathan, Muralidharan, 2021. "Resources or Capabilities: A Study of Startup Emergence within Applied Research Universities in India," SocArXiv uevnj, Center for Open Science.
    12. Christina Theodoraki & Karim Messeghem & Mark P. Rice, 2018. "A social capital approach to the development of sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: an explorative study," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 153-170, June.
    13. Marijn van Weele & Frank J. Rijnsoever & Chris P. Eveleens & Henk Steinz & Niels Stijn & Menno Groen, 2018. "Start-EU-up! Lessons from international incubation practices to address the challenges faced by Western European start-ups," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1161-1189, October.
    14. Lukeš, Martin & Longo, Maria Cristina & Zouhar, Jan, 2019. "Do business incubators really enhance entrepreneurial growth? Evidence from a large sample of innovative Italian start-ups," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 25-34.
    15. Good, Matthew & Knockaert, Mirjam & Soppe, Birthe & Wright, Mike, 2019. "The technology transfer ecosystem in academia. An organizational design perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 35-50.
    16. Kameliya Deyanova & Nataliia Brehmer & Artur Lapidus & Victor Tiberius & Steve Walsh, 2022. "Hatching start-ups for sustainable growth: a bibliometric review on business incubators," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(7), pages 2083-2109, October.
    17. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Kempkes, Sander N. & Chappin, Maryse M.H., 2017. "Seduced into collaboration: A resource-based choice experiment to explain make, buy or ally strategies of SMEs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 284-297.
    18. Mian, Sarfraz & Lamine, Wadid & Fayolle, Alain, 2016. "Technology Business Incubation: An overview of the state of knowledge," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 50, pages 1-12.
    19. Li Zhang & Ping Gao & Yongtao Zhou & Yuchuan Zhang & Junhua Wang, 2019. "Surviving through Incubation Based on Entrepreneurship-Specific Human Capital Development: The Moderating Role of Tenants’ Network Involvement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-19, May.
    20. Brian J. Bergman & Jeffery S. McMullen, 2022. "Helping Entrepreneurs Help Themselves: A Review and Relational Research Agenda on Entrepreneurial Support Organizations," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 46(3), pages 688-728, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Startup; Incubator; Resources; Entrepreneurship; Discrete choice experiment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L26 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Entrepreneurship
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:45:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s10961-019-09724-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.