E xecutives use market labels to position their firms within market categories. Yet this activity has been given scarce attention in the extant literature that widely assumes that market labels are simple, prescribed classification brackets that accurately represent firms' characteristics. By examining how and why executives use the nanotechnology label, we uncover three strategies: claiming, disassociating, and hedging. Comparing these strategies to firms' technological capabilities, we find that capabilities alone do not explain executives' label use. Instead, the data show that these strategies are driven by executives' aspiration to symbolically influence their firms' market categorization. In particular, executives' perception of the label's ambiguity, their avoidance of perceived credibility gaps, and their assessment of the label's signaling value shape their labeling strategies. In contrast to extant research, which suggests that executives should aim for coherence, we find that many executives hedge their affiliation with a nascent market label. Thus, our study shows that in ambiguous contexts, noncommitment to a market category may be a particularly prevalent strategy.

No abstract

In this article, we explore the relationship between innovation policy and new venture creation in the United States. Specifically, we examine two components of innovation policy in nanotechnology-science and technology (S&T) initiatives and economic initiatives-and their relationship with the founding of nanotechnology firms. We find strong support relating new firm formation to S&T and economic initiatives. States with both S&T and economic initiatives had six times as many firms founded than those states without such initiatives. We also find evidence of a first-mover advantage as states with the earliest innovation policies had higher rates of related firm foundings over time. These findings suggest that states that are most attractive to entrepreneurs not only pursue technological innovation and provide resources, but also encourage and legitimize commercial development. Implications for public policy makers and scholars are provided.

Entrepreneurship is a perilous endeavor. Contextual changes, such as nascent technology emergence or new industry creation, can spawn entrepreneurial opportunities; however, these changes do not instantaneously create the resources and structures that new firms need to survive. This study examines the creation and configuration of the contextual infrastructure necessary for nascent technology entrepreneurship in new industries. Using the case of nanotechnology, I show how the elements of infrastructure emerge and configure through systemic coevolution. The data highlight how boundary crossing and obfuscation induces the configuration of separate elements into a cohesive infrastructure through heightened interaction and interdependence of organizations and institutions, both private and public.

No abstract