Founding logics, technology validation, and the path to commercialization

Abstract

Considerable research has demonstrated that small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) who obtain institutionalized third-party endorsements experience higher performance. In this study, we develop an important boundary condition around this process. Drawing on institutional logics, we introduce the novel concept of founding logics. We then develop and test a theory in which founding logics play a role in both an SME’s decision to seek a third-party endorsement for the firm’s technology and then the likelihood that the SME will generate revenues based on the technology receiving the endorsement. Notably, our theory and results suggest that a founding logic that may compel an SME to seek technology validation can also impede the SME’s ultimate commercialization ability.

Legitimation work in sustainable entrepreneurship: Sustainability ventures’ journey towards the establishment of major partnerships

“…Specifically, our findings support the view of legitimation work being subject to logic tensions also when these logics are well-aligned in terms of strategic options. In addition, our study responds to the call by Ciuchta et al (2018) for research that examines the origins of founding logics and its implications for new venture endorsement. Our findings highlight how variations in entrepreneur backgrounds translate into differences in founding logics, but also how the mobilisation of logics in the legitimation work of sustainability ventures leads to differences in partnership outcome.…”

“…Building upon the first stage of analysis, we proceeded to a more theoretically driven stage. Through an in-depth exploration of literature on sustainable entrepreneurship (O'Neil and Ucbasaran, 2016; York et al, 2016), new venture legitimation (Navis and Glynn, 2011; Uberbacher, 2014; Truong and Nagy, 2020), and hybrid organising and social enterprises (Pache and Santos, 2013; Ciuchta et al, 2018; Wagenschwanz and Grimes, 2021), we analysed whether the emerging themes suggested concepts that might help us to describe and explain the phenomena we observed. Building on insights from the relevant literature, the first-order codes were grouped into second-order themes through axial coding (Corbin and Strauss, 1990; Gioia et al, 2013).…”

Scholars’ Identity Transition and Its Impact on Spin-Offs’ R&D Input

“…For scholars, the development of an academic career involves long-term academic training and socialization [20]. In the meantime, they have long been immersed in the normative system of advocating scientific spirit, adhering to the scientific logic of pursuing technological novelty [8,10], while entrepreneurship itself is a more commercialized activity and pursues business logic, involving a strong focus on financial outcomes, as well as attention on technology robustness and utility [21]. Therefore, there is a huge gap between the scholar role and entrepreneur role in terms of their values, beliefs, and norms.…”

“…Therefore, there is a huge gap between the scholar role and entrepreneur role in terms of their values, beliefs, and norms. Substantial empirical evidence shows that these two types of logics persist over time [10,22]. For example, Mary and Giovanni [23] assert that scholars often use scientific logic to deal with commercialization problems when they are faced with identity transition.…”

“…Moreover, role identity management strategies would influence venture growth because of individuals' varied expectations for the entrepreneurial role [7]. This constructs the frame of reference to make strategic choices [9]and spin-offs' commercialization path [10]. Additionally, academic entrepreneurs would influence spin-offs' innovative performance through the institutional logic they carry from academia [11,12].…”