Demystifying entrepreneurial name choice: insights from the US biotech industry

Abstract

PurposeDrawing from legitimacy and institutional entrepreneurship theory, this study assesses the naming patterns of entrepreneurial firms in the US biotechnology industry.Design/methodology/approachThe authors use a mixed-methods design of content analysis and regression to analyze a sample of 441 entrepreneurial biotechnology firms, for which data were obtained from Net Advantage. The authors track changes to the proportion of firms with naming attributes, such as name length and type of name. The authors also examine variability in those characteristics during the industry's evolution, comparing freestanding to acquired start-ups.FindingsStart-ups select names that are longer, more descriptive, begin with rare sounds or hard plosives and have stronger discipline- or technology-specific links during nascent years of the industry. As the industry evolves, entrepreneurs are more likely to select names that are shorter, more abstract, begin with hard plosives and have stronger industry-specific links. The naming patterns of freestanding and acquired companies differ, and companies that conform to industry pressures tend to remain independent.Originality/valueUnlike extant studies that assess established industries, the current study identifies shifting trends in the naming patterns of entrepreneurial firms in an emerging industry. By focusing on start-ups, the authors expand research on organizational naming practices, which focuses traditionally on name choices and name change patterns of incumbents. By using marketing and linguistics methods when analyzing organizational name attributes, naming patterns in these attributes are identified, including name length, name type, starting letter of the name and link to the industry.

Deterministic Bibliometric Disambiguation Challenges in Company Names

“…If the equilibrium model is correct, then in aggregate, firm naming decisions should evolve with the maturity of the field, as suggested previously [13]. For instance, firms conducting semiconductor research may use these strategies more commonly than companies engaged in synthetic biology, a newer industrial sector.…”

“…For instance, do women use words like "Technologies" in their firm names to improve their legitimacy in peer-reviewed processes relevant to innovation, such as grant selection and patents [26], [41], [42]? Organizational names must be considered as another instrument in the strategic tool box [11]- [13], and thus they impact management scholarship and bibliometric studies.…”

“…Moreover, names impart information on the quality of the firm [17]. Therefore, name choice is an important decision [11]- [13]. Kohli and Suri describe the set of possible strategies for brand names in general [18]:…”

“…Unlike individual names, organizational entity names are not randomly assigned but instead are deterministic, as they result from important branding decisions [11]- [13]. Competitive equilibrium theory predicts that firms using existing words will be attracted to the same terms [14].…”

Its name suggests it belongs here: The power of a community namesake in decreasing founding rates during industry emergence

“…Organizational name has been primarily analyzed as a semantic symbol (Glynn and Abzug, 2002; Stoyneva and Vracheva, 2022). However, on top of linguistic meanings, names are represented through concrete materials.…”