Elsevier

Journal of Business Research

Volume 139, February 2022, Pages 1177-1191
Journal of Business Research

The effect of human capital, innovation capacity, and Covid-19 crisis on Knowledge-Intensive Enterprises’ growth within a VC-driven innovation ecosystem

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.10.055Get rights and content

Abstract

Knowledge Intensive Enterprises (KIEs) constitute one of the most promising forms of entrepreneurial activity that can boost economic growth. Especially within the context of Innovation Ecosystems (IEs), KIEs play a central role in modern innovation research. The Covid-19 pandemic highlighted strongpoints and deficiencies in the broader ecosystems, the companies themselves, and most importantly, their founders and employees. Despite the external hindrances, many enterprises found growth driven by their ecosystems’ dynamic and their staffs’ capabilities. Combining insights from a quantitative survey, with actual growth data in the context of a Venture Capital (VC)-driven IE, we argue that enterprise profile - as defined by its innovation capability and its members’ personal, organizational, and demographic characteristics – affect KIE growth potential, and actual growth. In addition, we argue that both enterprise profile, as well as KIE growth, affect its members’ emotional reaction to the Covid-19 crisis, in terms of worry, hope, and optimism.

Introduction

Recent advances in digitization and globalization have profoundly reshaped traditional businesses, providing exceptional opportunities for spawning new forms of entrepreneurship (Hafezieh et al., 2011, Markus and Loebbecke, 2013, Nambisan et al., 2019). Arguably, one of the most promising forms of entrepreneurship that can significantly boost economic growth is Knowledge-Intensive Entrepreneurship (KIE) (Acs, Stam, Audretsch, & O’Connor, 2017). In line with the definition provided by (Malerba & McKelvey, 2019); KIE are “new innovative firms that display a significant knowledge intensity in their business activities and exploit innovative opportunities in diverse sectors”. Being at their initial stages of development, KIE have limited probability of growth compared to established firms (Malerba & McKelvey, 2019). Stinchcombe labelled this phenomenon the ‘liability of newness’ (Stinchcombe, 1965). It is becoming increasingly challenging to identify the characteristics that can lead these enterprises to growth. To date, shedding substantive light on KIE growth is still unaddressed from many aspects and is undoubtedly crucial for both the research and practice of their management.

Achieving growth is difficult for KIE, as they are confronted not only with their infancy, but also resource poverty, lack of legitimacy and weak ties with external businesses. In addition, these enterprises require radical or incremental innovation, significant knowledge about advanced science and technology but also intensive market knowledge to exploit emerging opportunities. To deal successfully with such challenges, all members of the new enterprise should contribute complementary skills, competencies, and experiences. Overriding the idea of the “lonely hero entrepreneur” (Chowdhury, 2005) and shifting attention to the “collective nature of entrepreneurship” (Johannisson, 2003), this research is directed towards the study of various characteristics of enterprise profile that can drive KIEs to realise growth. This profile is mainly outlined by the personal traits, capabilities, skills and demographics of the human capital (founders and employees). In addition, considering that innovation has been characterized as “the engine that drives revenue growth” in organizations (Patterson, 1998), KIE profile is also complemented by its innovation capability that is strongly related to long-term corporate growth (Yang, 2012).

Taking a step forward, this paper differs in that it directs attention to context. Context refers to the situations – not the physical environment, but rather the opportunities – that establish the conditions for growth (Griffin, 2007). The context perspective on new venture growth is really important, as KIE growth cannot be analyzed in dissociation from the environment (Welter, 2011). Thus, this paper tries to link KIE growth with the context of Innovation Ecosystems (IE) (Granstrand an Holgersson, 2020, Moore, 1993). The main argument behind this rationale is that participating in an IE can ensure growth, as the enterprise will receive significant support by gaining access to acceleration services, infrastructure, an established network of external actors, and intensive market knowledge or funding. More specifically, this study focuses on an IE that is built around a Venture Capital (VC) accelerator, that has a main focus on spin-offs (i.e., knowledge-intensive firms), that is located in Greece.

Against this background – and motivated by the fact that contemporary literature has not yet explored these factors as part of a unified interacting ecosystem – this work was designed to further explore how intrinsic characteristics that are known to affect innovation can shape KIE growth, especially in the context of an IE. Furthermore, the researchers’ access to financial data provided directly by the KIEs and the VC created an opportunity to further illuminate the inner workings of said ecosystems.

Given the importance of the broader environment for new venture growth and IEs in general, it is safe to assume that the global crisis brought forth by the Covid-19 pandemic had an important effect on most SMEs and their employees (Montani and Staglianò, 2021, Obrenovic et al., 2020, Thukral, 2021). During this study, Covid-19 became a global phenomenon disrupting traditional business processes. Thus, this research also examines the impact of such a period of high uncertainty, on KIE growth. Overall, the chronological circumstance of this research also provided a motivation to place this investigation in the unique context of a global crisis, given the limited amount of similar research especially within the context of KIEs.

Based on all of the above, the research objectives of this study can be articulated as follows:

• Examine the effect of enterprise profile (as defined by its innovation capability, as well as its members’ personal, organizational, and demographic characteristics) on KIEs growth (in terms of both growth potential and actual growth) within an IE that is built around a VC.

• Explore how enterprise profile affects the extent to which the Covid-19 crisis affects the KIE in terms of their members’ emotional reaction within an IE that is built around a VC.

To address these objectives, the research design is based on a combination of insight from a questionnaire-based quantitative survey and actual growth data. The quantitative analysis was conducted in eighteen (18) KIEs within the VC-driven IE, aiming to test the significance of key characteristics identified from the literature and assess their impact on their growth (both during the Covid-19 crisis, as well as under normal circumstances).

This paper is structured as follows. Section 2 presents the interdisciplinary rationale behind human capital characteristics and new enterprises’ growth and provides background information on the KIE and IEs. Section 3 presents the research materials and methods employed. Section 4 outlines the obtained results. Section 5 provides a discussion of the findings, their theoretical and practical implications, and Section 6 provides the conclusions, limitations, and further research propositions.

Section snippets

Knowledge-Intensive entrepreneurship (KIE) within an innovation ecosystem

Entrepreneurship research has a history of focusing on a number of questions, such as “Why do some new ventures succeed while others fail? What market, regulatory, and organizational environments foster the most successful entrepreneurial activities?” (Amit, Glosten, & Muller, 1993). An important form of entrepreneurship is that of KIE that is believed to drive economic competitiveness, and innovative capabilities (Acs et al., 2017). KIE places emphasis on: (a) knowledge - related to science,

Materials and methods

In the present research, we focus on an IE built around a Venture Capital (VC) accelerator that acts as the orchestrator for the system. The VC in question focuses on early-stage startups and spin-offs from various sectors. In order to support its investments, it has set-up an acceleration process to aid and speed up the companies’ scaling process. This process involves funding, networking, and mentoring in order to create ecosystem collaborations and help identify market fit.

Based on the

Sample characteristics

Our sample consisted of 36 participants, holding various roles within 21 KIEs. Per company, 1.71 participants participated on average in the study. Their average age was 40.2 years old, while most (91.7%) were male. Overall, they were educated to a high level (47.2% Masters’, 27.8% Doctoral diploma, 22.2% University degree). The vast majority (88.9%) also declared that their education was related to the product/service offered by their company. Almost half (47.2%) of the participants had been

Discussion

In the present research, we investigate the effect of enterprise profile (as expressed through the KIE’s innovation capability and a set of its members’ personal, organizational, and demographic characteristics) on growth within an IE that is built around a VC in Greece. Additionally, since this study took place during the Covid-19 health crisis, we also examine its effect on the growth of the participating KIEs, as well as the connection between enterprise profile and the members’ emotional

Conclusion

One of the most promising forms of entrepreneurship that can boost economic growth is KIE. KIE requires innovation, knowledge about advanced science and technology, and extensive market knowledge to exploit emerging opportunities. This research focuses on characteristics of enterprise profile that can drive KIE growth, in the context of a VC-driven IE. It also focuses on the effect of the Covid-19 crisis on KIEs. Combining insights from a quantitative survey, with actual growth data, we found

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Dimosthenis Kotsopoulos: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Supervision, Project administration. Angeliki Karagianaki: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization. Stratos Baloutsos: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgment

We would like to thank Associate Professor Katerina Pramatari for her continued support and advice throughout our research efforts.

Dr. Dimosthenis Kotsopoulos is a post-doctoral researcher at the Department of Management Science and Technology at Athens University of Economics and Business (AUEB). He holds a PhD in Management Science and Technology and an MBA from AUEB, as well as an MSc in Geographic Information Science from University College London (UCL). His research focuses on organizational behaviour, pro-environmental behaviour, IoT, information systems, and innovative entrepreneurship, while he has published

References (143)

  • O. Granstrand et al.

    Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition

    Technovation

    (2020)
  • H. He et al.

    The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on corporate social responsibility and marketing philosophy

    Journal of Business Research

    (2020)
  • K.M. Hmieleski et al.

    The contrasting interaction effects of improvisational behavior with entrepreneurial self-efficacy on new venture performance and entrepreneur work satisfaction

    Journal of Business Venturing

    (2008)
  • A. Hyytinen et al.

    Does innovativeness reduce startup survival rates?

    Journal of Business Venturing. Elsevier B.V.

    (2015)
  • A. Kuckertz et al.

    Startups in times of crisis – A rapid response to the COVID-19 pandemic

    Journal of Business Venturing Insights

    (2020)
  • M. McAdam et al.

    Situated regional university incubation: A multi-level stakeholder perspective

    Technovation

    (2016)
  • S. Nambisan et al.

    The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key themes

    Research Policy

    (2019)
  • M.L. Patterson

    From Experience: Linking Product Innovation to Business Growth From Experience: Linking Product Innovation to Business Growth * The Innovation Engine in the Revenue Loop

    Journal of Product Innovation Management (JPIM)

    (1998)
  • Z.J. Acs et al.

    The lineages of the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach

    Small Business Economics

    (2017)
  • R. Adner

    Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem

    Harvard Business Review

    (2006)
  • R. Adner

    Ecosystem as Structure: An Actionable Construct for Strategy

    Journal of Management

    (2017)
  • R. Amit et al.

    Challenges To Theory Development in Entrepreneurship Research

    Journal of Management Studies

    (1993)
  • E. Autio et al.

    Innovation ecosystems

    The Oxford Handbook of Innovation

    (2014)
  • C. Banc et al.

    Discovering the entrepreneurial micro-ecosystem: The case of a corporate accelerator

    Thunderbird International Business Review

    (2020)
  • Bar Am, J., Furstenthal, L., Jorge, F., & Roth, E. (2021) Innovation in a crisis: Why it is more critical than ever....
  • R.A. Baron et al.

    Self-efficacy and entrepreneurs’ adoption of unattainable goals: The restraining effects of self-control

    Journal of Business Venturing

    (2016)
  • T.S. Bateman et al.

    The Proactive Component of Organizational-Behavior - a Measure and Correlates

    Journal of Organizational Behavior

    (1993)
  • J.R. Baum et al.

    The relationship of entrepreneurial traits, skill, and motivation to subsequent venture growth

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (2004)
  • R.J. Baum et al.

    A Multidemensional model for venture growth

    Academy of Management Journal

    (2001)
  • R.S. Billings et al.

    A Model of Crisis Perception : A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis and Mary Lou Schaalman

    Administrative Science Quarterly

    (1980)
  • J.H. Block et al.

    New players in entrepreneurial finance and why they are there

    Small Business Economics

    (2018)
  • W.J. Burns et al.

    Risk Perception and the Economic Crisis: A Longitudinal Study of the Trajectory of Perceived Risk

    Risk Analysis

    (2012)
  • T.H. Byers et al.

    Technology Ventures: From Idea to Enterprise

    (2008)
  • E.G. Carayannis et al.

    “Mode 3” and “Quadruple Helix”: Toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem

    International Journal of Technology Management

    (2009)
  • B. Carlsson et al.

    On the nature, function and composition of technological systems

    Journal of Evolutionary Economics

    (1991)
  • G. Chen et al.

    Validation of a New General Self-Efficacy Scale

    Organizational Research Methods

    (2001)
  • S. Chowdhury

    Demographic diversity for building an effective entrepreneurial team: Is it important?

    Journal of Business Venturing

    (2005)
  • S. Collins

    Social workers, resilience, positive emotions and optimism

    Practice

    (2007)
  • N.S. Contractor et al.

    Testing multitheoretical, multilevel hypotheses about organizational networks: An analytic framework and empirical example

    Academy of Management Review

    (2006)
  • F. Crecente-Romero et al.

    ‘Competitiveness and entrepreneurship rate in Europe during the economic recovery phase, 2012–2016’, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal

    International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal

    (2019)
  • B. Dattee et al.

    Maneuvering in poor visibility: How firms play the ecosystem game when uncertainty is high

    Academy of Management Journal

    (2018)
  • de Vasconcelos Gomes et al.

    Unpacking the innovation ecosystem construct: Evolution, gaps and trends

    Technological Forecasting and Social Change

    (2018)
  • W.N. Dember et al.

    The measurement of optimism and pessimism

    Current Psychology

    (1989)
  • Devece, C., Peris-Ortiz, M. and Rueda-Armengot, C. (2016) ‘Entrepreneurship during economic crisis: Success factors and...
  • E. Diener

    Subjective well-being

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1984)
  • Durst, S. and Poutanen, P. (2013). Success factors of innovation ecosystems - Initial insights from a literature...
  • The Economist (2021) ‘Money, machines and mayhem What history tells you about post-pandemic booms’, www.economist.com,...
  • C.M. Eklund

    Why do some SME’s become high-growth firms? The role of employee competences

    Journal of Intellectual Capital

    (2020)
  • G. Elia et al.

    Digital entrepreneurship ecosystem: How digital technologies and collective intelligence are reshaping the entrepreneurial process

    Technological Forecasting and Social Change

    (2020)
  • B. Feld

    Startup Communities: Building an entrepreneurial ecosystem in your city

    (2012)
  • Cited by (22)

    • The measurements and decomposition of innovation inequality: Based on Industry − University − Research perspective

      2023, Journal of Business Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      In such a case, a technological innovation system based on the deep integration of enterprises, universities, and scientific research institutions is crucial; this kind of collaboration combines heterogeneous knowledge that can contribute to the economic development of countries or regions (Rajalo & Vadi, 2017). Technological innovation activities with enterprises as the main body and their innovation resources play an essential role in improving technological progress, production efficiency, and economic growth (Guellec & Van Pottelsberghe De La Potterie, 2003; Kotsopoulos, Karagianaki, & Baloutsos, 2022). In addition to enterprises, two other major innovation subjects—universities and scientific research institutions—have increasingly become sources of technological innovation, undertaking several basic and applied research work (Arvanitis, 2012; Temel et al., 2021).

    • Regional convergence analysis of sustainable innovation efficiency in European Union countries

      2023, Journal of Environmental Management
      Citation Excerpt :

      Technological innovation is an important driving force for national and regional development (Wang et al., 2015). With fierce competition and severe COVID-19 pandemic all over the world, more and more innovative countries and regions put emphasize on technological innovation and innovation cooperation, such as China and the European Union (EU) (Agarwal and Gaule, 2022; Caballero-Morales, 2021; Jin et al., 2022; Kotsopoulos et al., 2022; Markovic et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2022). Innovation ability is not only reflected in the level of innovation inputs and outputs, but also in the innovation efficiency.

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Dr. Dimosthenis Kotsopoulos is a post-doctoral researcher at the Department of Management Science and Technology at Athens University of Economics and Business (AUEB). He holds a PhD in Management Science and Technology and an MBA from AUEB, as well as an MSc in Geographic Information Science from University College London (UCL). His research focuses on organizational behaviour, pro-environmental behaviour, IoT, information systems, and innovative entrepreneurship, while he has published research papers in academic journals and conferences. He has participated in various EU-funded projects focused on technologically innovative solutions and has significant work experience in a management role within an industrial setting.

    Dr. Angeliki Karagiannaki is a part-time Lecturer at the Departments of Management Science and Technology, and Informatics of the Athens University of Economics and Business (AUEB). She is also a founding member and the managing director of ACEin. She holds a PhD from AUEB and a Masters’ in Management Science and Operational Research from Warwick Business School. Her research interests lie in innovation and entrepreneurship, research commercialization, and supply chain management innovation. Angeliki has had active participation in several national and European research projects and has published articles in many academic Journals and conferences

    Mr. Stratos Baloutsos is a doctoral candidate at the Athens University of Economics & Business (AUEB) and Business Development Manager at ACEin. His research interests concern open innovation, innovation management, and more specifically drivers that accelerate start-up development within innovation ecosystems. He holds a B.Sc. and M.Sc. in Mechanical Engineering and Aeronautics (University of Patras) and an M.B.A. (AUEB). He has experience working on business development, R&D, and project exploitation both as an individual contractor and as a consultant for various firms. He has also worked on several EU research projects.

    View full text