Pathology of acceleration programs in corporate accelerators of Iran

Abstract

PurposeThis study was designed to detect the failures in Iranian accelerators. This paper attempts to identify these effects from the perspective of accelerator managers and founders of startups. The main goals of this article are as follows: (1) What are the failures of Iran's acceleration programs from the perspective of accelerator managers? (2) What are the failures of Iran's acceleration programs from the perspective of startup teams? (3) What are some of failures of the acceleration programs that both groups agree on?Design/methodology/approachIt has been attempted to conduct semi-structured interviews with managers of corporate accelerators on the one hand and startups accelerated in these accelerators on the other. The interviewees were selected using snowball method and consisted of 9 accelerator managers out of 7 accelerators and 15 startups based on 5 accelerators. The analysis of the information extracted from the interviews and coding of the failure identified in the accelerators was performed using the thematic analysis method. In order to assess the validity of this study, an entrepreneurial doctoral student was asked to codify the interviews individually to compare the extracted codes.FindingsFinally, 34 problems have been identified that are divided into four main themes related to mentorship, acceleration program, acceleration structure and infrastructure and internal startup team problems. Overall, the greatest agreement among the failures identified as wrong orientation by untrained mentors, the lack of complementary in ability and skills of team members, the lack of knowledge of mentors, the lack of acceleration managers in entrepreneurship and the lack of a proper leader in startup teams.Originality/valueThis study aimed to investigate the failures of corporate accelerators in Iran as a developing country, which is the first survey in Iran. We have many researches about the pathology and identify failures of accelerators, but in corporate accelerators, little research has been done. The authors have a classification of failures in corporate accelerators by using thematic analysis. In this study, accelerators' managers and founders of startups were interviewed and 34 failures were identified.

More than a handshake – knowledge transfer in structured corporate–startup collaboration programs

“…When establishing and implementing an SCSCP, corporations format goals to guide the program’s actions and appraise the program’s performance (Lang et al , 2021). Since those programs require a long time to materialize their benefit for the corporation and request also a high amount of resources, it is difficult for a corporation to assess their performance which can lead to the early closing of SCSCPs (Lang et al , 2021; Heshmati and Shafiee, 2021). Therefore, it is crucial to understand the corporate objectives set for the SCSCP and how those are connected with the design components of the program.…”

“…Second, this review adds to the research stream of SCSCPs by taking the corporate perspective on incubation and acceleration and focusing on the underlying concepts and processes that may impact the program's survival. The existing literature points out that the long-term survival of SCSCPs is problematic but remains on the descriptive level (Heshmati and Shafiee, 2021). By connecting the SCSCPs to the underlying processes of knowledge transfer and knowledge management, it is argued that an inefficient knowledge transfer hinders the accomplishment of SCSCPs' objective to integrate external knowledge and creates a dissonance between the expectations settled and the realized potential of SCSCPs.…”

“…Many SCSCPs have been closed in the last years, as they do not fulfill the objectives set by the corporation (Heshmati and Shafiee, 2021). The SCSCPs do not create sufficient value for the corporation, resulting in a loss of time and resources (Gu ¨r, 2021).…”

“…The corporate accelerator and the corporate incubator currently exhibit the best-known examples of structured corporate-startup collaboration programs (SCSCPs) and are widely used by corporations (Shankar and Shepherd, 2019). In both forms, the program establishes and coordinates the exchange process between the corporation and the young venture and acts as a bridge (Heshmati and Shafiee, 2021; Kanbach and Stubner, 2016). A corporate incubator can be depicted as a specialized corporate unit where new businesses are hatched and radical innovations are promoted (Gassmann and Becker, 2006).…”