Do winners pick government? How scale-up experience shapes entrepreneurs’ assessments of innovation policy mixes

Abstract

How do entrepreneurs of high-growth firms in small, open economies evaluate innovation policy mixes? In response to market consolidation by large firms, governments in such countries are using a mix of innovation policy tools to support firms with high-growth potential in digitally intensive sectors. Government objectives, however, are not being realized. Bringing actor-centric perspectives to the policy mix literature, we analyze interviews with entrepreneurs from Canadian technology firms to determine whether there is a disconnect between the objectives and instruments employed by the government. With distinct policy preferences rooted in their growth experiences specific to the country’s political economy, we find that scale-up entrepreneurs prefer a more active role of the government in the form of demand-side, direct, and targeted innovation instruments. The findings presented in this article provide a more nuanced understanding of the innovation policy landscape and the preferences of technology scale-up firms

Comparison between sponsored and non-sponsored regarding personal administrative factors for SMEs from Kuwait during the COVID-19 pandemic

“…Considering policymakers substantial and urgent focus on economic diversification in oil-dominant economies over the past several decades and a six billion USD budget allocated by the government of Kuwait to establish the National Fund for Small and Medium Enterprise Development, a more solid understanding of the quality of entrepreneurs selected in funding decisions and firm survival rates undoubtedly warrants interest. The rising popularity of such programs in developing regions emulating innovation-based economies to advance their economies and overcome market failure warrants attention to these contexts (De Bruijn & Lagendijk, 2005;Denney, Southin, & Wolfe, 2023;Lerner, 2009;Wang, Li, & Furman, 2017). The purpose of this paper is to investigate the link between funding decisions and entrepreneurs personal, managerial, and social skills.…”

An Integrative Institutional Framework of the Canada–US Business Performance Gap

“…Some researchers and public commentators suggest that Canadian and American business leaders vary in certain business practices or personal attributes (e.g., risk tolerance, orientation toward short-termism, and growth aspirations), which could play a role in Canada-U.S. gaps in innovation, exports, and other performance outcomes (Bloom 2011;Council of Canadian Academies 2009;Deloitte 2011). Meanwhile, other studies seem to link Canada's business performance challenges to institutional factors in the distant past (i.e., the political economy around staple trade or resource concentration in primary industries) (Conesa and Pujolas 2019;Naylor 2006;Watkins 1963), or more recent years (i.e., innovation-or competition-inhibiting business and environmental regulations and laws versus enabling incentives) (Deacon 2023;Denney, Southin, and Wolfe 2023;Deslauriers and Gagné 2023;Hearn 2022;Schwanen 2017;Yamazaki 2022). This article adds to prior studies by synthesizing the distinct perspectives on the underperformance problem.…”