IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/sbusec/v29y2007i1p81-99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adaptation and Performance in New Businesses: Understanding the Moderating Effects of Independence and Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Petra Andries
  • Koenraad Debackere

Abstract

New ventures as well as new business units experience significant difficulties in finding a viable business model. They often need to adapt their initial business model due to the presence of uncertainty and ambiguity. Technology-based companies are confronted with particularly high degrees of uncertainty and ambiguity. We hypothesize that adaptation is crucial for the performance (measured as survival) of these businesses, but that this effect is moderated by the (in)dependence of the new technology-based business and by the industry in which it is active. We test the adaptation-performance hypothesis through a survival analysis of a sample of 117 independent new ventures and business units. Our findings suggest that adaptation is beneficial in less mature, capital-intensive and high-velocity industries but not so in more mature, stable industries. Also, adaptation reduces failure rates in dependent business units as compared to independent ventures. Copyright Springer 2007

Suggested Citation

  • Petra Andries & Koenraad Debackere, 2007. "Adaptation and Performance in New Businesses: Understanding the Moderating Effects of Independence and Industry," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 81-99, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:sbusec:v:29:y:2007:i:1:p:81-99
    DOI: 10.1007/s11187-005-5640-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11187-005-5640-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11187-005-5640-2?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. Berry, Maureen M. J. & Taggart, James H., 1998. "Combining technology and corporate strategy in small high tech firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 883-895, April.
    2. Harry J. Sapienza & Ken G. Smith & Martin J. Gannon, 1988. "Using Subjective Evaluations of Organizational Performance in Small Business Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 12(3), pages 45-54, January.
    3. Cohen, Wesley M. & Levin, Richard C., 1989. "Empirical studies of innovation and market structure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 18, pages 1059-1107, Elsevier.
    4. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    5. Klepper, Steven, 2001. "Employee Startups in High-Tech Industries," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 10(3), pages 639-674, September.
    6. Brush, Candida G. & Vanderwerf, Pieter A., 1992. "A comparison of methods and sources for obtaining estimates of new venture performance," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 157-170, March.
    7. Henry Chesbrough & Richard S. Rosenbloom, 2002. "The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation's technology spin-off companies," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(3), pages 529-555, June.
    8. Almus, Matthias & Nerlinger, Eric A, 1999. "Growth of New Technology-Based Firms: Which Factors Matter?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 141-154, September.
    9. Scott Shane & Toby Stuart, 2002. "Organizational Endowments and the Performance of University Start-ups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 154-170, January.
    10. Rögnvaldur Saemundsson & Åsa Dahlstrand, 2005. "How Business Opportunities Constrain Young Technology-Based Firms from Growing into Medium-Sized Firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 113-129, March.
    11. Jane W. Lu & Paul W. Beamish, 2001. "The internationalization and performance of SMEs," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 565-586, June.
    12. Teubal, Morris & Yinnon, Tamar & Zuscovitch, Ehud, 1991. "Networks and market creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 381-392, October.
    13. Sidney G. Winter, 2003. "Understanding dynamic capabilities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(10), pages 991-995, October.
    14. Audretsch, David B, 1991. "New-Firm Survival and the Technological Regime," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 73(3), pages 441-450, August.
    15. Clarysse, Bart & Moray, Nathalie, 2004. "A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: the case of a research-based spin-off," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 55-79, January.
    16. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    17. Christensen, Clayton M., 1993. "The Rigid Disk Drive Industry: A History of Commercial and Technological Turbulence," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(4), pages 531-588, January.
    18. Robert, Edward Baer. & Meyer, Marc H., 1991. "Product strategy and corporate success," Working papers 3239-91., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    19. Shepherd, Dean A. & Douglas, Evan J. & Shanley, Mark, 2000. "New venture survival: Ignorance, external shocks, and risk reduction strategies," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(5-6), pages 393-410.
    20. Julie M. Hite & William S. Hesterly, 2001. "The evolution of firm networks: from emergence to early growth of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 275-286, March.
    21. Céline Druilhe & Elizabeth Garnsey, 2004. "Do Academic Spin-Outs Differ and Does it Matter?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 29(3_4), pages 269-285, August.
    22. Tuominen, Matti & Rajala, Arto & Moller, Kristian, 2004. "How does adaptability drive firm innovativeness?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(5), pages 495-506, May.
    23. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2.
    24. Mc Cartan-Quinn, Danielle & Carson, David, 2003. "Issues Which Impact Upon Marketing in the Small Firm," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 201-213, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Nicos Nicolaou & Sue Birley, 2003. "Social Networks in Organizational Emergence: The University Spinout Phenomenon," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(12), pages 1702-1725, December.
    2. Heinrichs, Simon & Walter, Sascha, 2013. "Don’t Step Into Your Parent’s Shoes – How Exploitation and Exploration Affect Spin-out Growth," EconStor Preprints 68591, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    3. Chiara Guardo & Giovanni Valentini, 2007. "Taking Actively Advantage of MNCs’ Presence," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 55-68, January.
    4. Kristina McElheran, 2015. "Do Market Leaders Lead in Business Process Innovation? The Case(s) of E-business Adoption," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1197-1216, June.
    5. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    6. Poh Kam Wong & Lena Lee & Maw Der Foo, 2008. "Occupational Choice: The Influence of Product vs. Process Innovation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 267-281, March.
    7. Mickey Folkeringa & Andre van Stel & Joris Meijaard, 2005. "Innovation, strategic renewal and its effect on small firm performance," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2005-36, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    8. F. Ted Tschang & Gokhan Ertug, 2016. "New Blood as an Elixir of Youth: Effects of Human Capital Tenure on the Explorative Capability of Aging Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 873-892, August.
    9. Scott Shane, 2001. "Technology Regimes and New Firm Formation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(9), pages 1173-1190, September.
    10. Hao Zhang & Xinbo Sun & Chan Lyu, 2017. "Exploratory Orientation, Business Model Innovation and New Venture Growth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, December.
    11. Scott Shane, 2001. "Technological Opportunities and New Firm Creation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 205-220, February.
    12. Ethan Gifford & Guido Buenstorf & Daniel Ljungberg & Maureen McKelvey & Olof Zaring, 2021. "Variety in founder experience and the performance of knowledge-intensive innovative firms," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 677-713, April.
    13. Ko, Eun-Jeong & McKelvie, Alexander, 2018. "Signaling for more money: The roles of founders' human capital and investor prominence in resource acquisition across different stages of firm development," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 438-454.
    14. Aamir Rafique Hashmi & Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2016. "The Relationship between Market Structure and Innovation in Industry Equilibrium: A Case Study of the Global Automobile Industry," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(1), pages 192-208, March.
    15. Emanuela Todeva & Ruslan Rakhmatullin, 2016. "Industry Global Value Chains, Connectivity and Regional Smart Specialisation in Europe. An Overview of Theoretical Approaches and Mapping Methodologies," JRC Research Reports JRC102801, Joint Research Centre.
    16. Ghosal, Vivek, 2002. "Impact of Uncertainty and Sunk Costs on Firm Survival and Industry Dynamics," Royal Economic Society Annual Conference 2002 86, Royal Economic Society.
    17. Manuel Acosta Sero & Daniel Coronado Guerrero, 1998. "The influence of regional location on the innovation activity of Spanish firms: A logit analysis," ERSA conference papers ersa98p63, European Regional Science Association.
    18. H. T. Tran & E. Santarelli, 2013. "Determinants and Effects of Innovative Activities in Vietnam. A Firm-level Analysis," Working Papers wp909, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    19. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2002. "When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(4), pages 571-586, Winter.
    20. Claude D'Aspremont & Rodolphe Dos Santos Ferreira & Louis‐André Gérard‐Varet, 2010. "Strategic R&D investment, competitive toughness and growth," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 6(3), pages 273-295, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    business model adaptation; performance; new technology-based businesses; D83; M13; O32;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • M13 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - New Firms; Startups
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:sbusec:v:29:y:2007:i:1:p:81-99. 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.