Abstract
Objective – Analyze the configurations of legitimacy, dynamic capabilities and business resources consistent with the survival of post-incubated companies.
Theoretical framework – A Liability of Newness highlights that nascent companies suffer from internal and external factors that make their survival difficult. However, business incubators help new businesses develop. However, post-incubated companies need strategic guidance for survival. Thus, we intend to demonstrate how different configurations between legitimacy, dynamic capabilities and resources can form this strategy.
Methodology – The multiple case study strategy was applied with 90 companies and comparative qualitative analysis techniques for fuzzy sets (fsQCA) were used.
Results – The results present two configurations of technology-based companies with high perceptions of legitimacy, resources and dynamic capabilities that differ by size and satisfaction. A third configuration of technology-based companies with high perceptions of legitimacy and resources. The fourth configuration involves technology-based companies with high perceptions of legitimacy, larger in size and satisfied with the incubator.
Practical and social implications of the research – For managers, the results make it possible to create an incubation environment that is capable of identifying and filling individual gaps in ventures. Furthermore, they indicate that business incubator managers and/or financiers should focus their efforts on incubating technology-based companies.
Contributions – The first contribution is to reinforce the central role of legitimacy for survival. The second is to demonstrate that, through different paths, the interrelationship between legitimacy, resources and dynamic capabilities form organizational configurations that are resilient to challenges.
Keywords – Initial vulnerability; Business configuration; Post-incubation; Organizational survival; FsQCA.
References
Abatecola, G., Cafferata, R., & Poggesi, S. (2012). Arthur Stinchcombe’s “liability of newness”: Contribution and impact of the construct. Journal of Management History, 18(4), 402-418. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17511341211258747.
Agarwal, R., & Audretsch, D. B. (2001). Does entry size matter? The impact of the life cycle and technology on firm survival. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 49(1), 21-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6451.00136.
Alexiou, K., & Wiggins, J. (2019). Measuring individual legitimacy perceptions: Scale development and validation. Strategic Organization, 17(4), 470-496. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1476127018772862.
Amit, R., & Schoemaker, P. J. (1993). Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14(1), 33-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250140105.
Organizational Survival of Technology-Based Enterprises after Incubation: A Qualitative-Comparative Explanation Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108.
Bayon, M., & Aguilera, P. (2020). Managerial perceptions of the strategic relevance of resources and capabilities and its configuration for firm competitiveness: An exploratory study. Competitiveness Review, 31(3), 462-476. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/CR-01-2020-0023.
Borges, M. R., & Bueno, J. M. (2020). O processo de incubação auxilia no desenvolvimento das capacidades adaptativa, absortiva e inovativa? Estudos de casos múltiplos na região do triângulo mineiro e Alto Paranaíba. Revista de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas, 9(2), 36-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.14211/regepe.v9i2.1309.
Breivik-Meyer, M., Arntzen-Nordqvist, M., & Alsos, G. A. (2020). The role of incubator support in new firms accumulation of resources and capabilities. Innovation, 22(3), 228-249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2019.1684204.
Carraro, W. B. W. H., Meneses, R., & Brito, C. (2019). Combining categories of management control tools for high performance of start-ups. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 21(4), 861-878. http://dx.doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v21i5.4022.
Del Sarto, N., Isabelle, D. A., & Di Minin, A. (2020). The role of accelerators in firm survival: An fsQCA analysis of Italian startups. Technovation, 90, 102102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2019.102102.
Drazin, R., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1985). Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(4), 514-539. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2392695.
Duşa, A. (2018). QCA with R: A comprehensive resource. Springer.
El Sawy, O. A., Malhotra, A., Park, Y., & Pavlou, P. A. (2010). Research commentary: seeking the configurations of digital ecodynamics: It takes three to tango. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 835-848. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/ isre.1100.0326.
Fiss, P. C. (2007). A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1180-1198. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.26586092.
Fiss, P. C. (2011). Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 393-420. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.60263120.
Frambach, R. T., Fiss, P. C., & Ingenbleek, P. T. (2016). How important is customer orientation for firm performance? A fuzzy set analysis of orientations, strategies, and environments. Journal of Business Research, 69(4), 1428-1436. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.120.
Fritsch, M., Brixy, U., & Falck, O. (2006). The effect of industry, region, and time on new business survival–a multidimensional analysis. Review of Industrial Organization, 28(3), 285-306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11151-006-0018-4.
Garrido, I. L., Kretschmer, C., Vasconcellos, S. L. d., & Gonçalo, C. R. (2020). Capacidades dinâmicas: Uma proposta de medição e sua relação com o desempenho. Brazilian Business Review, 17(1), 46-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.15728/bbr.2020.17.1.3.
Grilli, L., & Marzano, R. (2023). Bridges over troubled water: Incubators and start-ups’ alliances. Technovation, 121, 102689. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102689.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Education.
Hausberg, J. P., & Korreck, S. (2020). Business incubators and accelerators: A co-citation analysis-based, systematic
literature review. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 45(1), 151-176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9651-y.
Hoopes, D. G., Madsen, T. L., & Walker, G. (2003). Guest editors’ introduction to the special issue: Why is there a resource‐based view? Toward a theory of competitive heterogeneity. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 889-902. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.356.
Iacono, A., Almeida, C. A. S., & Nagano, M. S. (2011). Interação e cooperação de empresas incubadas de base
tecnológica: Uma análise diante do novo paradigma de inovação. Revista de Administração Pública-RAP, 45(5), 1485-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-76122011000500011.
Linton, G., & Kask, J. (2017). Configurations of entrepreneurial orientation and competitive strategy for high performance. Journal of Business Research, 70, 168- 176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.022.
Mas-Verdú, F., Ribeiro-Soriano, D., & Roig-Tierno, N. (2015). Firm survival: The role of incubators and business characteristics. Journal of Business Research, 68(4), 793- 796. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.030.
Miller, D. (1996). Configurations revisited. Strategic Management Journal, 17(7), 505-512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199607)17:7<505::AIDSMJ852>3.0.CO;2-I.
Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., & Lampel, J. (2009). Safári da estratégia. Bookman Editora.
Nagy, B. G., Rutherford, M. W., Truong, Y., & Pollack, J. M. (2017). Development of the legitimacy threshold scale. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 27(3), 50-58. https://libjournals.mtsu.edu/index.php/jsbs/article/view/763
Oliveira, M. C. S. F., Scherer, F. L., Carpes, A. M., Hahn, I. S., & Pivetta, N. P. (2016). A influência da capacidade de inovação sobre o desempenho internacional: Um estudo com empresas de base tecnológica. Economia & Gestão, 16(44), 192-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.5752/P.1984-6606.2016v16n44p192.
Oliveira, P. H., Terence, A. C. F., & Paschoalotto, M. A. C. (2019). as práticas de inovação e o processo de formação de estratégias das pequenas empresas de base tecnológica nos períodos de incubação e de pós-incubação. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Inovação, 7(1), 110-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.18226/23190639.v7n1.06.
Paradkar, A., Knight, J., & Hansen, P. (2015). Innovation in start-ups: Ideas filling the void or ideas devoid of resources and capabilities? Technovation, 41, 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.03.004.
Park, Y., El Sawy, O. A., & Fiss, P. (2017). The role of business intelligence and communication technologies in organizational agility: A configurational approach. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 18(9),1. http://dx.doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00467.
Park, Y., Fiss, P., & El Sawy, O. A. (2020a). Theorizing the multiplicity of digital phenomena: The ecology of configurations, causal recipes, and guidelines for applying QCA. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 44(4), 1493-1520. http://dx.doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2020/13879.
Park, Y., Pavlou, P. A., & Saraf, N. (2020b). Configurations for achieving organizational ambidexterity with digitization. Information Systems Research, 31(4), 1376-1397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.2020.0950.
Pasquali, L. (2011). Psicometria: teoria dos testes na psicologia e na educação (4. ed.). Vozes.
Patton, D. (2014). Realising potential: The impact of business incubation on the absorptive capacity of new technologybased firms. International Small Business Journal, 32(8), 897-917. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0266242613482134.
Pereira, D. R. (2022). Incubadora de empresas: o que causa a mortalidade de negócios que passaram pelo processo de incubação? Editora Dialética.
Ragin, C. C. (2000). Fuzzy-set social science. University of Chicago Press.
Ragin, C. C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond. University of Chicago Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226702797.001.0001.
Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02.
Ocampo, E. S., Iacono, A., & Leandro, F. R. (2019). Gestão da inovação em empresas de base tecnológica: Um estudo de caso em empresas incubadas. Innovar (Universidad Nacional de Colombia), 29(74), 71-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.15446/innovar.v29n74.82062.
Schwartz, M. (2009). Beyond incubation: An analysis of firm survival and exit dynamics in the post-graduation period. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(4), 403-421. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961-008-9095-x.
Schwartz, M. (2013). A control group study of incubators’ impact to promote firm survival. The Journal of Technology, 38(3), 302-331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9254-y.
Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Organizations and social structure. In P. P. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142-193). Rand McNally.
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.640.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AIDSMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z.
Tumelero, C., Santos, S. A., & Kuniyoshi, M. S. (2016). Sobrevivência de empresas de base tecnológica pós‐incubadas: Estudo sobre a ação empreendedora na mobilização e uso de recursos. REGE-Revista de Gestão, 23(1), 31-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rege.2014.11.001.
Tumelero, C., Sbragia, R., Borini, F. M., & Franco, E. C. (2018). The role of networks in technological capability: A technology-based companies perspective. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 8(1), 1-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40497-018-0095-5.
Van Weele, M., Van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Nauta, F. (2017). You can’t always get what you want: How entrepreneur’s perceived resource needs affect the incubator’s assertiveness. Technovation, 59, 18-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.08.004.
Wiklund, J., Baker, T., & Shepherd, D. (2010). The ageeffect of financial indicators as buffers against the liability of newness. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(4), 423-437. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.10.011.
Zhang, W., & White, S. (2016). Overcoming the liability of newness: Entrepreneurial action and the emergence of China’s private solar photovoltaic firms. Research Policy, 45(3), 604-617. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.11.005.
Zimmerman, M. A., & Zeitz, G. J. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27(3), 414- 431. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4134387.
If a paper is approved for publication, its copyright has to be transferred by the author(s) to the Review of Business Management – RBGN.
Accordingly, authors are REQUIRED to send RBGN a duly completed and signed Copyright Transfer Form. Please refer to the following template: [Copyright Transfer]
The conditions set out by the Copyright Transfer Form state that the Review of Business Management – RBGN owns, free of charge and permanently, the copyright of the papers it publishes. Although the authors are required to sign the Copyright Transfer Form, RBGN allows authors to hold and use their own copyright without restrictions.
The texts published by RBGN are the sole responsibility of their authors.
The review has adopted the CC-BY Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 allowing redistribution and reuse of papers on condition that the authorship is properly credited.