Research Summary: We evaluate a technology entrepreneurship training program by comparing career decisions among applicants accepted into the program with unaccepted applicants who are program finalists. We find that program participation is associated with an increased likelihood of subsequent entrepreneurship but that this is not uniform across participants; the estimated relationship between program participation and subsequent entrepreneurial activity is disproportionately lower for applicants with ex-ante resources and capabilities in entrepreneurship, measured by prior entrepreneurship experience. Moreover, we only observe this reduced impact of the program on subsequent entrepreneurial activity for participants that have prior experience in founding a technology company as opposed to other forms of entrepreneurial activity. This suggests the program is more effective for individuals that have otherwise limited access to technology entrepreneurship opportunities. Managerial Summary: Given the increasingly competitive landscape for entrepreneurship education programs, it is important to understand when and for whom they have the greatest impact. Using 5 years of data from a technology entrepreneurship training program, we show that individuals with a higher predisposition toward the type of entrepreneurship being taught by the program, measured by prior technology entrepreneurship experience, are less likely to benefit from training. Our findings imply that individuals who enter programs with the skill set being taught benefit less from the program at the margin, and that individuals without prior experience can be trained in entrepreneurship. These patterns have implications for entrepreneurial program strategy, individuals considering entry into entrepreneurial careers, and firms deciding whether to develop entrepreneurial capabilities in-house or acquiring them externally.

No abstract

We document the impact of an entrepreneurship training program on startup activity of minorities (females and non-Caucasians). We compare entrepreneurial activity between applicants who are accepted into the program with applicants who are program finalists but not accepted. We find that the effect of the program is small for minorities in the short run. However, the effect of the program is more pronounced for minorities' likelihood of longer run startup activity, whereas the effect on non-minorities is small and statistically insignificant. We suggest that such programs are most effective for individuals that may otherwise have limited access to entrepreneurial opportunities.

Social movements have the potential to effect change in strategic decision making. In this paper, we examine whether the #MeToo movement, spurred by the Harvey Weinstein scandal, leads to changes in the likelihood of Hollywood producers working with female writers on new movie projects. Because #MeToo affected the entire industry, we use variation in whether producers had past collaborations with Weinstein to investigate whether and how #MeToo may spur change. We find that producers previously associated with Weinstein are, on average, about 35% more likely to work with female writers after the scandal than they were before, relative to nonassociated producers, and the size of this effect increases with the intensity of the association. Female producers are the main drivers of our results, perhaps because they are more likely than male producers to resonate with the movement’s cause and face relatively low costs of enacting change. Changes made by other groups, such as production teams with the most intense association with Weinstein and less experienced all-male teams, may be better explained by motivations to mitigate risk. We also find that producers do not sacrifice writer experience by hiring more female writers and that both experienced and novice female writers have benefited from the increased demand. Our study shows that social movements that seek to address gender inequality can, indeed, lead to meaningful change. It also provides perspective for thinking about whether, and to what extent, changes may occur in broader settings.

Research Summary: We use a large‐sample inductive approach to explore the impact of two social liberalization policies (legalization of same‐sex civil unions and medical marijuana) and one anti‐liberalization policy (passage of abortion restrictions) on innovation. First, we show that liberalization policies increase state‐level patenting, while the anti‐liberalization policy reduces patenting. Next, we examine three possible mechanisms that could explain the findings. The results suggest that liberalization policies can increase the collaboration diversity of inventors, and hence, the rate, novelty, and impact of their innovation output, through promoting more liberal views and more openness to diversity. We also find speculative evidence that social liberalization policies increase entrepreneurial entry through promoting more diverse social interactions. We do not find evidence for liberal policies attracting top inventors from other regions. Managerial Summary: How does the social context impact the rate and direction of innovation? This article examines this question by exploring the impact of two social liberalization policies (legalization of same‐sex civil unions and medical marijuana) and one anti‐liberalization policy (passage of abortion restrictions) on innovation in the United States. We first show that liberalization policies increase patenting, while the anti‐liberalization policy reduces patenting. Further analyses highlight the impact of these policies on individuals’ openness to diversity as a driving mechanism. We show that inventors collaborate with more diverse partners after the implementation of liberalization policies, producing more innovations and more novel and impactful ones. We discuss the implications for firm location decisions, the impact of corporate social responsibility on innovation, and sources of regional competitive advantage.