IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/esprep/37082.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Contingency Factors and the Technology-Performance-Relationship in Start-ups

Author

Listed:
  • Schmidt, Arne
  • Walter, Sascha G.
  • Walter, Achim

Abstract

This study identifies the pace of technological development and market heterogeneity as crucial environmental conditions shaping start-ups' performance when commercializing radical technologies. Using a unique dataset that combines survey and patent data for 85 technology-based start-ups, we found that technological radicalness has a positive effect on performance when the development pace in a start-up's technological field is high. Contrarily, under heterogeneous market conditions, technological radicalness diminishes a start-up's performance. The results emphasize that the impact of technological radicalness on start-ups' performance is context specific. Overall, these findings contribute to a better understanding of when technological radicalness represents an asset or a liability for technology-based startups.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmidt, Arne & Walter, Sascha G. & Walter, Achim, 2010. "Contingency Factors and the Technology-Performance-Relationship in Start-ups," EconStor Preprints 37082, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:esprep:37082
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/37082/4/Contingency-Factors%20and%20Technology-Performance-Relationship.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raghu Garud & Michael A. Rappa, 1994. "A Socio-Cognitive Model of Technology Evolution: The Case of Cochlear Implants," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 344-362, August.
    2. Jeff S. Armstrong & Michael R. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2003. "Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture and firm performance in biotechnology," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Sep, pages 149-170.
    3. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Freddi, Daniela, 2009. "The integration of old and new technological paradigms in low- and medium-tech sectors: The case of mechatronics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 548-558, April.
    5. Walsh, Vivien, 1984. "Invention and innovation in the chemical industry: Demand-pull or discovery-push?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 211-234, August.
    6. Doutriaux, Jerome, 1987. "Growth pattern of academic entrepreneurial firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 285-297.
    7. Danny Miller & Peter H. Friesen, 1982. "Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms: Two models of strategic momentum," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(1), pages 1-25, January.
    8. Rebecca Henderson & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1998. "Universities As A Source Of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis Of University Patenting, 1965-1988," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 119-127, February.
    9. Klevorick, Alvin K. & Levin, Richard C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1995. "On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 185-205, March.
    10. Jaffe, Adam B, 1989. "Real Effects of Academic Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 957-970, December.
    11. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    12. Zahra, Shaker A., 1996. "Technology strategy and financial performance: Examining the moderating role of the firm's competitive environment," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 189-219, May.
    13. Dolata, Ulrich, 2009. "Technological innovations and sectoral change: Transformative capacity, adaptability, patterns of change: An analytical framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 1066-1076, July.
    14. Atul Nerkar & Scott Shane, 2007. "Determinants of invention commercialization: an empirical examination of academically sourced inventions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(11), pages 1155-1166, November.
    15. Scott Shane, 2001. "Technology Regimes and New Firm Formation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(9), pages 1173-1190, September.
    16. 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.
    17. Walter, Achim & Auer, Michael & Ritter, Thomas, 2006. "The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 541-567, July.
    18. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 2008. "Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 1, pages 3-15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Gautam Ahuja & Curba Morris Lampert, 2001. "Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: a longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 521-543, June.
    20. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    21. Scott Shane & Toby Stuart, 2002. "Organizational Endowments and the Performance of University Start-ups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 154-170, January.
    22. Wright, Mike & Lockett, Andy & Clarysse, Bart & Binks, Martin, 2006. "University spin-out companies and venture capital," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 481-501, May.
    23. Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson & Adam Jaffe, 1997. "University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 19-50.
    24. Shaker A. Zahra & Donald O. Neubaum & Morten Huse, 1997. "The Effect of the Environment on Export Performance among Telecommunications New Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 22(1), pages 25-46, October.
    25. Fontana, Roberto & Geuna, Aldo & Matt, Mireille, 2006. "Factors affecting university-industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signalling," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 309-323, March.
    26. Ron Adner & Daniel Levinthal, 2001. "Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 611-628, May.
    27. Scott Shane, 2001. "Technological Opportunities and New Firm Creation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 205-220, February.
    28. Lockett, Andy & Wright, Mike, 2005. "Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1043-1057, September.
    29. Marie Thursby & Richard Jensen, 2001. "Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Licensing of University Inventions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 240-259, March.
    30. Michael B. Heeley & David R. King & Jeffrey G. Covin, 2006. "Effects of Firm R&D Investment and Environment on Acquisition Likelihood," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(7), pages 1513-1535, November.
    31. Rajshree Agarwal & Barry L. Bayus, 2002. "The Market Evolution and Sales Takeoff of Product Innovations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(8), pages 1024-1041, August.
    32. Gort, Michael & Klepper, Steven, 1982. "Time Paths in the Diffusion of Product Innovations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(367), pages 630-653, September.
    33. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    34. 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.
    35. Cimoli, Mario & Dosi, Giovanni, 1995. "Technological Paradigms, Patterns of Learning and Development: An Introductory Roadmap," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 243-268, September.
    36. Gans, Joshua S. & Stern, Scott, 2003. "The product market and the market for "ideas": commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 333-350, February.
    37. Maine, Elicia & Garnsey, Elizabeth, 2006. "Commercializing generic technology: The case of advanced materials ventures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 375-393, April.
    38. Steffensen, Morten & Rogers, Everett M. & Speakman, Kristen, 2000. "Spin-offs from research centers at a research university," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 93-111, January.
    39. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    40. Lettl, Christopher & Rost, Katja & von Wartburg, Iwan, 2009. "Why are some independent inventors 'heroes' and others 'hobbyists'? The moderating role of technological diversity and specialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 243-254, March.
    41. Hsu, David H., 2007. "Experienced entrepreneurial founders, organizational capital, and venture capital funding," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 722-741, June.
    42. Nerkar, Atul & Shane, Scott, 2003. "When do start-ups that exploit patented academic knowledge survive?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1391-1410, November.
    43. Birgitte Andersen, 1999. "The hunt for S-shaped growth paths in technological innovation: a patent study," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 487-526.
    44. Edwin Mansfield, 1986. "Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 173-181, February.
    45. Iansiti, Marco, 1997. "From technological potential to product performance: an empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 345-365, October.
    46. Zahra, Shaker A. & Bogner, William C., 2000. "Technology strategy and software new ventures' performance: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 135-173, March.
    47. Jeannette Colyvas & Michael Crow & Annetine Gelijns & Roberto Mazzoleni & Richard R. Nelson & Nathan Rosenberg & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2002. "How Do University Inventions Get Into Practice?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 61-72, January.
    48. Haupt, Reinhard & Kloyer, Martin & Lange, Marcus, 2007. "Patent indicators for the technology life cycle development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 387-398, April.
    49. Ron Adner & Peter Zemsky, 2005. "Disruptive Technologies and the Emergence of Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(2), pages 229-254, Summer.
    50. Lori Rosenkopf & Atul Nerkar, 2001. "Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 287-306, April.
    51. Dahlin, Kristina B. & Behrens, Dean M., 2005. "When is an invention really radical?: Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 717-737, June.
    52. Mansfield, Edwin, 1995. "Academic Research Underlying Industrial Innovations:," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(1), pages 55-65, February.
    53. Rosenberg, Nathan & Nelson, Richard R., 1994. "American universities and technical advance in industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 323-348, May.
    54. Sofy Carayannopoulos, 2009. "How Technology–Based New Firms Leverage Newness and Smallness to Commercialize Disruptive Technologies," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(2), pages 419-438, March.
    55. Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Underinvestment and Incompetence as Responses to Radical Innovation: Evidence from the Photolithographic Alignment Equipment Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(2), pages 248-270, Summer.
    56. Marc Gruber & Ian C. MacMillan & James D. Thompson, 2008. "Look Before You Leap: Market Opportunity Identification in Emerging Technology Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1652-1665, September.
    57. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 655-672, June.
    58. Chandler, Gaylen N. & McKelvie, Alexander & Davidsson, Per, 2009. "Asset specificity and behavioral uncertainty as moderators of the sales growth -- Employment growth relationship in emerging ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 373-387, July.
    59. Chesbrough, Henry, 2003. "The governance and performance of Xerox's technology spin-off companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 403-421, March.
    60. Kristina Dahlin & Deans M. Behrens, 2005. "When is an invention really radical? Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Post-Print hal-00480416, HAL.
    61. Johan Wiklund & Holger Patzelt & Dean Shepherd, 2009. "Building an integrative model of small business growth," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 351-374, April.
    62. Deeds, David L. & Decarolis, DONA & Coombs, Joseph, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities and new product development in high technology ventures: An empirical analysis of new biotechnology firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 211-229, May.
    63. Kenneth C. Robinson & Patricia Phillips McDougall, 2001. "Entry barriers and new venture performance: a comparison of universal and contingency approaches," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 659-685, June.
    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. Tischler, Joachim, 2014. "Characteristics of technological base, pace of technological development, and growth of young technology-based firms," EconStor Preprints 96156, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    2. Walter, Sascha G. & Schmidt, Arne & Walter, Achim, 2010. "The Patenting Behavior of Academic Founders," EconStor Preprints 37083, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    3. Agarwal, Rajshree & Shah, Sonali K., 2014. "Knowledge sources of entrepreneurship: Firm formation by academic, user and employee innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1109-1133.
    4. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.
    5. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," 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 129-213, Elsevier.
    6. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," 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 275-314, Elsevier.
    7. Leone, Maria Isabella & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2022. "Boundary spanning through external technology acquisition: The moderating role of star scientists and upstream alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    8. Markus A. Kirchberger & Larissa Pohl, 2016. "Technology commercialization: a literature review of success factors and antecedents across different contexts," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 1077-1112, October.
    9. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    10. Antonio Malva & Stijn Kelchtermans & Bart Leten & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2015. "Basic science as a prescription for breakthrough inventions in the pharmaceutical industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 670-695, August.
    11. Walter, Sascha G. & Schmidt, Arne & Walter, Achim, 2016. "Patenting rationales of academic entrepreneurs in weak and strong organizational regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 533-545.
    12. William Arant & Dirk Fornahl & Nils Grashof & Kolja Hesse & Cathrin Söllner, 2019. "University-industry collaborations—The key to radical innovations? [Universität-Industrie-Kooperationen – Der Schlüssel zu radikalen Innovationen?]," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 39(2), pages 119-141, October.
    13. Samantha Bradley & Christopher Hayter & Albert Link, 2013. "Proof of Concept Centers in the United States: an exploratory look," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 349-381, August.
    14. Christopher S. Hayter & Andrew J. Nelson & Stephanie Zayed & Alan C. O’Connor, 2018. "Conceptualizing academic entrepreneurship ecosystems: a review, analysis and extension of the literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 1039-1082, August.
    15. Christian Sandström & Karl Wennberg & Martin W. Wallin & Yulia Zherlygina, 2018. "Public policy for academic entrepreneurship initiatives: a review and critical discussion," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1232-1256, October.
    16. Barbieri, Nicolò & Marzucchi, Alberto & Rizzo, Ugo, 2020. "Knowledge sources and impacts on subsequent inventions: Do green technologies differ from non-green ones?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    17. Müller, Kathrin, 2010. "Academic spin-off's transfer speed--Analyzing the time from leaving university to venture," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 189-199, March.
    18. Marius Tuft Mathisen & Einar Rasmussen, 2019. "The development, growth, and performance of university spin-offs: a critical review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1891-1938, December.
    19. Sun, Bixuan & Kolesnikov, Sergey & Goldstein, Anna & Chan, Gabriel, 2021. "A dynamic approach for identifying technological breakthroughs with an application in solar photovoltaics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    20. Krabel, Stefan & Mueller, Pamela, 2009. "What drives scientists to start their own company?: An empirical investigation of Max Planck Society scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 947-956, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    technological radicalness;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:esprep:37082. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.