Abstract:Public business incubators are services placed at the disposal of original, generally newly-created projects, to which physical accompaniment, supervision, and location are offered at prices below market value. They have as their aim to help set in motion and consolidate these firms during the stages in which they are weaker. The ultimate goal consists in favouring the generation of innovative firms, inducers of high-quality jobs, which can diversify the local business fabric, thus becoming a key tool in local… Show more
“…Indeed, SBC was co‐funded by a big‐pharma company, a charity, and government, and thus needed to not only respond to the demands of these stakeholders, but also remain attuned to its positioning as an ‘incubator of choice’ for leading scientists. Incubators often combine the interests of private business with contributions to the public good (Nicolopoulou et al, ; Sentana et al, ). The SBC case demonstrates two instances in which prospective sensemaking resulted in a legitimacy maintaining repositioning.…”
This paper focuses on the adaption challenge that confronts the top management team (TMT) of science incubators in situations of substantial technological uncertainty. To do that, we draw on the three-year longitudinal analysis of a major bioscience catalyst in the United Kingdom. Through the lens of 'prospective sensemaking', we follow the TMT as they work with stakeholders in their ecosystem to make sense of a significant technological shift: the convergence of life sciences, IT and other sciences in the health care environment. Our analysis reveals how prospective sensemaking resulted in the launch of a new strategy to exploit these emerging opportunities. However, stakeholders' increasingly fragmented interpretation of the term convergence and the anticipation of legitimacy challenges in the wider ecosystem resulted in the repositioning of the incubator. Our findings contribute to extant research on science incubation. In particular, the paper sheds light on the complex interactions of incubator TMT's with stakeholders in situations of technological change and uncertainty. Moreover, responding to technological change does not only affect the structural conditions of an incubator. Rather, it may also require changes to the positioning of the incubator in order to maintain legitimacy in the wider ecosystem. The paper also suggests managerial as well as policy-level implications.
“…Indeed, SBC was co‐funded by a big‐pharma company, a charity, and government, and thus needed to not only respond to the demands of these stakeholders, but also remain attuned to its positioning as an ‘incubator of choice’ for leading scientists. Incubators often combine the interests of private business with contributions to the public good (Nicolopoulou et al, ; Sentana et al, ). The SBC case demonstrates two instances in which prospective sensemaking resulted in a legitimacy maintaining repositioning.…”
This paper focuses on the adaption challenge that confronts the top management team (TMT) of science incubators in situations of substantial technological uncertainty. To do that, we draw on the three-year longitudinal analysis of a major bioscience catalyst in the United Kingdom. Through the lens of 'prospective sensemaking', we follow the TMT as they work with stakeholders in their ecosystem to make sense of a significant technological shift: the convergence of life sciences, IT and other sciences in the health care environment. Our analysis reveals how prospective sensemaking resulted in the launch of a new strategy to exploit these emerging opportunities. However, stakeholders' increasingly fragmented interpretation of the term convergence and the anticipation of legitimacy challenges in the wider ecosystem resulted in the repositioning of the incubator. Our findings contribute to extant research on science incubation. In particular, the paper sheds light on the complex interactions of incubator TMT's with stakeholders in situations of technological change and uncertainty. Moreover, responding to technological change does not only affect the structural conditions of an incubator. Rather, it may also require changes to the positioning of the incubator in order to maintain legitimacy in the wider ecosystem. The paper also suggests managerial as well as policy-level implications.
“…Hence why the load of structural costs is far lower in business incubators, which only own office buildings or a few industrial premises. To which must be added that industrial estates or technological parks pursue other goals due to their justification as local development instruments (Sentana et al, 2017).…”
Section: General Methods To Measure Profitabilitymentioning
Business incubators can be defined as a service meant to promote entrepreneurship and firm creation, especially within sectors characterised by a high innovative content. The present paper takes as its starting point a review of previous studies dedicated to the profitability of investments in general, and particularly to that of business incubators, seeking to propose an own method which can make it possible to measure both the economic and the social profitability of business incubators. The subsequent application of this method to the incubators based in a specific Spanish region will lead to the conclusion that incubators are undoubtedly profitable, since society recovers 2.8 euros via taxes from each euro invested. Nevertheless, a number of lacks become visible amongst our findings which should definitely be corrected. Hence our decision to make a number of suggestions aimed at improving both the operation of business incubators and their economic and social profitability levels.
“…At this level, the tasks are again connected with research and development activities, urbanized areas, industrial specialization, knowledge production, access to venture capital and finance. this level is essential to serve as a 'filter' for tasks that an individual or group of people at an individual level cannot do without collaboration with other institutional-level bodies (Sentana, Gonzalez, Gasco, Llopis, 2017). these institutions have a key role to play in regional development and cooperation in the region.…”
Section: The Role Of Innovation In Economic Developmentmentioning
Innovation and entrepreneurship in regions is one of essential tools, in added value creation in economics and in development in national level. It is very important to encourage creativity, new ways of thinking and continuous process of learning of individuals. there are some different approaches how to measure competitiveness of state economy and competitiveness in regional level. Global competitiveness Index shows competitiveness of state among other world economies based on the 12 pillars of competitiveness, which is difficult to apply in regional or entrepreneurial level due to lack of data at regional level. Innovation is a key factor for development and competitiveness in individual (individual, enterprise) and institutional (local governmental institutions, regional, national and global level. Scientific problem of article is that impact of creativity, knowledge creation and dissemination and cooperation could not be measured trough quantitative data. Aim of the article is to define support model for cooperation of individual-institutional level in innovative entrepreneurship and its impact on regional development. Methods ar analysis of scientific literature, and political planning documents for define of support model in dynamic external environment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.