IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuhtim/102.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

All that glitters is not gold: How motives for open innovation collaboration with startups diverge from action in corporate accelerators

Author

Listed:
  • Moschner, Sandra-Luisa
  • Herstatt, Cornelius

Abstract

Prior research has shown that investing into startups through corporate venturing is a sufficient tool for inter-organizational learning, harvesting innovation and engaging in entrepreneurial activities. Recently, a new model of open innovation collaboration between incumbents and startups has gained popularity in practice. In corporate accelerator programs both partners collaborate to advance entrepreneurial products by leveraging their complementary resource bases. In our study we, firstly, analyze the underlying external and internal motives that impel established firms to initiate a corporate accelerator and, secondly, which personnel is responsible for this. Further, we examine the adoption of the corporate accelerator practice for collaborating with new firms. In order to shed light onto the phenomenon, we use interview data from ten corporate accelerators (30 interviews with program managers, corporate employees and startups) from various industries in Germany. By drawing on institutional theory our findings show that the diffusion of the open innovation collaboration practice is either imitatively or normatively driven, depending on the position of the initiator. Further, we demonstrate, that incumbents adopt a corporate accelerator program for sourcing external exploitative or explorative knowledge. However, the degree of adoption of the practice is low and, thereby, not internalized. Although the corporate accelerator has still a short history and many programs follow a trial-and-error approach regarding program structures, established firms seem not to be interested primarily in promoting the collaborative usage of complementary assets with startups. It resembles a rather symbolic action utilizing open innovation collaboration as a marketing tool to let the incumbent's innovation activity glitter more. Therefore, we conclude that established firms seem to practice entrepreneurial washing with corporate accelerators similarly to green-washing activities in the field of corporate social responsibility.

Suggested Citation

  • Moschner, Sandra-Luisa & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2017. "All that glitters is not gold: How motives for open innovation collaboration with startups diverge from action in corporate accelerators," Working Papers 102, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuhtim:102
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/172257/1/1007199385.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kent Walker & Fang Wan, 2012. "The Harm of Symbolic Actions and Green-Washing: Corporate Actions and Communications on Environmental Performance and Their Financial Implications," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(2), pages 227-242, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Dushnitsky, Gary & Lenox, Michael J., 2005. "When do incumbents learn from entrepreneurial ventures?: Corporate venture capital and investing firm innovation rates," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 615-639, June.
    4. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Xinlei Zhao, 2009. "Technological Innovation and Acquisitions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(7), pages 1170-1183, July.
    6. Felin, Teppo & Zenger, Todd R., 2014. "Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 914-925.
    7. Hagedoorn, John, 2002. "Inter-firm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 477-492, May.
    8. Paul Jackson & Nancy Richter, 2017. "Situational Logic: An Analysis Of Open Innovation Using Corporate Accelerators," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(07), pages 1-21, October.
    9. Kohler, Thomas, 2016. "Corporate accelerators: Building bridges between corporations and startups," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 347-357.
    10. Rajagopal, 2014. "Organizations and Innovation," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Architecting Enterprise, chapter 3, pages 58-86, Palgrave Macmillan.
    11. Gautam Ahuja & Riitta Katila, 2004. "Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncratic situations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 887-907, August.
    12. Constance E. Helfat & Marvin B. Lieberman, 2002. "The birth of capabilities: market entry and the importance of pre-history," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(4), pages 725-760, August.
    13. Christopher Marquis & Cuili Qian, 2014. "Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting in China: Symbol or Substance?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 127-148, February.
    14. Dubois, Anna & Gadde, Lars-Erik, 2002. "Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 553-560, July.
    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. Lysander Weiss & Dominik Kanbach, 2022. "Toward an integrated framework of corporate venturing for organizational ambidexterity as a dynamic capability," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 1129-1170, December.

    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. Jeffrey J. Reuer & Ramakrishna Devarakonda, 2017. "Partner Selection in R&D Collaborations: Effects of Affiliations with Venture Capitalists," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 574-595, June.
    2. Emil Lucian Crișan & Irina Iulia Salanță & Ioana Natalia Beleiu & Ovidiu Niculae Bordean & Raluca Bunduchi, 2021. "A systematic literature review on accelerators," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 62-89, February.
    3. Fernandez-Vidal, Jorge & Gonzalez, Reyes & Gasco, Jose & Llopis, Juan, 2022. "Digitalization and corporate transformation: The case of European oil & gas firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    4. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Yang, Jialei, 2022. "Distinguishing between appropriability and appropriation: A systematic review and a renewed conceptual framing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    5. He, Zi-Lin & Lim, Kwanghui & Wong, Poh-Kam, 2006. "Entry and competitive dynamics in the mobile telecommunications market," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1147-1165, October.
    6. Kenny Ching & Joshua Gans & Scott Stern, 2019. "Control versus execution: endogenous appropriability and entrepreneurial strategy," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(2), pages 389-408.
    7. Luis A. Rios, 2021. "On the origin of technological acquisition strategy: The interaction between organizational plasticity and environmental munificence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(7), pages 1299-1325, July.
    8. Chila, Vilma, 2021. "Knowledge dynamics in employee entrepreneurship : Implications for parents and offspring," Other publications TiSEM a1f5d18c-783b-4af6-8414-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Jegoo Lee & Sang-Joon Kim, 2017. "Curvilinear Relationship between Corporate Innovation and Environmental Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-15, July.
    10. Del Sarto, Nicola & Isabelle, Diane A. & Di Minin, Alberto, 2020. "The role of accelerators in firm survival: An fsQCA analysis of Italian startups," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 90.
    11. Swen Nadkarni & Reinhard Prügl, 2021. "Digital transformation: a review, synthesis and opportunities for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 233-341, April.
    12. Boeker, Warren & Howard, Michael D. & Basu, Sandip & Sahaym, Arvin, 2021. "Interpersonal relationships, digital technologies, and innovation in entrepreneurial ventures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 495-507.
    13. Hans K. Hvide & Benjamin F. Jones, 2018. "University Innovation and the Professor's Privilege," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(7), pages 1860-1898, July.
    14. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2011. "Entry and Patenting in the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 915-933, May.
    15. Matthias Firgo & Peter Mayerhofer, 2015. "Wissens-Spillovers und regionale Entwicklung - welche strukturpolitische Ausrichtung optimiert des Wachstum?," Working Paper Reihe der AK Wien - Materialien zu Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft 144, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik.
    16. Zhang, Hongjuan & Young, Michael N. & Tan, Justin & Sun, Weizheng, 2018. "How Chinese companies deal with a legitimacy imbalance when acquiring firms from developed economies," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(5), pages 752-767.
    17. Malen, Joel, 2015. "Motivating And Enabling Firm Innovation Effort: Integrating Penrosian And Behavioral Theory Perspectives On Slack Resources," Hitotsubashi Journal of commerce and management, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 49(1), pages 37-54, October.
    18. Jeroen Struben & Brandon H. Lee & Christopher B. Bingham, 2020. "Collective Action Problems and Resource Allocation During Market Formation," Post-Print hal-02927584, HAL.
    19. Zelong Wei & Hao Shen & Kevin Zheng Zhou & Julie Juan Li, 2017. "How Does Environmental Corporate Social Responsibility Matter in a Dysfunctional Institutional Environment? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 209-223, January.
    20. Jacob, Jojo & Belderbos, René & Lokshin, Boris, 2023. "Entangled modes: Boundaries to effective international knowledge sourcing through technology alliances and technology-based acquisitions," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    corporate accelerator; open innovation collaboration; incumbent; startups; complementary resources; degree of adoption; symbolic action;
    All these keywords.

    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:tuhtim:102. 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/ittuhde.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.