Technology business incubators and industrial development: resource‐based view

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to determine enabling factors influencing the success of technology business incubators (TBIs) with respect to existing and acquired resources, and describe how these enabling factors have been implemented in practice. Design/methodology/approach -The potential enabling factors were identified based on the literature review through the lens of the resource-based view (RBV) perspective. The Q-sort method was then applied to classify those factors according to the experts' opinions, for evoking group consensus on the classifications. Finally, a Thailand science park incubator was taken as a case to illustrate the applicability of the findings. Findings -The strategic resources and their categories which can be considered as TBIs' enabling factors were found through the RBV theory. They are important to TBIs' success and improvement of technology-based SMEs' competitive advantage. Research limitations/implications -Because of the lack of international comparisons and the experts' panel selection bias, attempts to generalize the findings should be made with caution. Practical implications -The findings have been formulated into a set of comprehensive recommendations for all stakeholders (mainly public policy makers), which will help to enhance the development of business incubation in Thailand. Originality/value -The paper presents an approach to determine enabling factors influencing the successful TBIs, coming from the RBV perspective.

Beyond entrepreneurship education: business incubation and entrepreneurial capabilities

“…These include research in the area of capability approach, functionings, freedoms or capabilities, business incubation and entrepreneurship development (Al-Mubaraki and Busler, 2010;Alkire, 2002;Charles and Ikenna, 2009;Asongu and Tchamyou, 2016;European Commission, 2002;Gedeon, 2010;Isaacs et al, 2007;Lalkaka, 2003;Lee and Peterson, 2000;Lee et al, 2005;Lin et al, 2011;Morris et al, 2013;Nwekeaku, 2013;Aja-Okorie and Adali, 2013;Okpara et al, 2011;Oviawe, 2010;Ratten, 2014;Robeyns, 2000Robeyns, , 2005Sen, 1992;Somsuk et al, 2012;Varadjanin et al, 2014). The following sections provide a summary of literature on the capability approach and entrepreneurship education at a global level in general and Nigeria in particular.…”

“…According to Bøllingtoft (2012), most start-ups are unable to make it through their formative years because of numerous liabilities resulting from their being new in the ecosystem as well as being small; all of which reduce their chances of breaking through various obstacles along their path. They are not only faced with lack of requisite knowledge and skills but also have to waddle their way through lack of infrastructure, finance and other resources, which are critical to developing an idea into a product, and bringing a product to market (Lin et al, 2011;Somsuk et al, 2012). …”

4th party logistics service providers and industrial cluster competitiveness

“…Scholars analyzed how different logistics resources such as physical resources, human resources, information resources, knowledge resources and relational resources can be bundled together to assist in achieving sustainable competitive advantage (Wong and Karia, 2010;Somsuk et al, 2012;Phusavat et al, 2013). However, they argued that empirical evidence on how resources and their bundling for collaboration enable the competitiveness of clusters is needed.…”

A Pratical Benchmark for Quality Certification in Business Incubators

“…They have close ties to a research base, and the main task of the incubators is not to create new jobs, but to market new technologies by means of innovative projects [30]. These projects will thus be financially v iable and independent [8].…”

“…Technological business incubators are seen as a mechanis m that could create support environment fo r startups [30]. However, accord ing to [35], startups do not have sufficient resources to leverage their enterprises.…”