Brinckmann Competence of Top Management Teams and Success of New Technology-Based Firms
2008
ISBN: 978-3-8350-5503-2
Verlag: Deutscher Universitätsverlag
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: 1 - PDF Watermark
A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis Concerning Competencies of Entrepreneurial Teams and the Development of Their Ventures
E-Book, Englisch, 304 Seiten, eBook
Reihe: Strategisches Kompetenz-Management
ISBN: 978-3-8350-5503-2
Verlag: Deutscher Universitätsverlag
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: 1 - PDF Watermark
Jan Brinckmann analyzes how competencies of founders of new technology-based firms affect the development of their ventures. The research is grounded in competence-related literature and combines insights from entrepreneurship and management research.
Dr. Jan Brinckmann promovierte bei Prof. Dr. Hans-Georg Gemünden am Lehrstuhl für Technologie und Innovationsmanagement der Technischen Universität Berlin. Er ist Assistant Professor an der School of Business Admistration der Loyola University Chicago, USA.
Zielgruppe
Research
Weitere Infos & Material
1;Foreword;6
2;Preface;10
3;Table of contents;12
4;Index of abbreviations;18
5;Index of figures;20
6;Index of tables;22
7;1. Introduction;26
7.1;1.1 Importance of new ventures;26
7.2;1.2 Purpose and delimitation of this study;29
7.3;1.3 Research method and structure of this research;32
8;2. Fundamental research terms;35
8.1;2.1 New technology-based firms;35
8.2;2.2 Management and entrepreneurship;38
8.3;2.4 Competence;44
8.4;2.5 Executive teams;48
9;3. Theories regarding entrepreneurial and management competencies and the development of new technology- based firms;51
9.1;3.1 Development of the competence concept for new technology based firms;51
9.1.1;3.1.1 Competence concepts in entrepreneurship science;51
9.1.2;3.1.2 Competence concepts in management literature;57
9.1.3;3.1.3 Additional competence requirements demanded by entrepreneurship science;62
9.1.4;3.1.4 Synthesis: entrepreneurial-management-competence;66
9.2;3.2 Specification of the entrepreneurial management construct;67
9.2.1;3.2.1 General entrepreneurial competencies;67
9.2.1.1;3.2.1.1 Conceptual competencies;68
9.2.1.2;3.2.1.2 Innovation competencies;69
9.2.1.3;3.2.1.3 Enforcement competencies;69
9.2.2;3.2.2. Social competencies;70
9.2.2.1;3.2.2.1 Teamwork competencies;71
9.2.2.2;3.2.2.2 Leadership competencies;72
9.2.2.3;3.2.2.3 Network competencies;74
9.2.3;3.2.3 Functional competencies;75
9.2.3.1;3.2.3.1 Technology management competencies;80
9.2.3.2;3.2.3.2 Marketing management competencies;84
9.2.3.3;3.2.3.3 Financial management competencies;86
9.3;3.3 Theoretical approaches to the development of new firms;89
9.3.1;3.3.1 Galbraith stages of growth model;92
9.3.2;3.3.2 Kazanjian stages of growth model;93
9.3.3;3.3.3 Klocke model;94
9.3.4;3.3.4 Development concept for production based NTBFs;97
9.4;3.4 Theories linking competence and the development of firms;101
9.4.1;3.4.1 Theory of the growth of the firm;102
9.4.2;3.4.2 Resource based view of the firm;104
9.4.3;3.4.3 Dynamic capability approach;106
9.4.4;3.4.4 Human capital approach;107
9.4.5;3.4.5 Summary of theoretical approaches;110
10;4. Empirical evidence about competence and the development of new firms;111
10.1;4.1 Empirical studies relating to general entrepreneurial competencies;113
10.1.1;4.1.1 Empirical studies relating to conceptual competencies;115
10.1.2;4.1.2 Empirical studies relating to innovative competencies;118
10.1.3;4.1.3 Empirical studies relating to enforcement competencies;120
10.2;4.2 Empirical studies relating to social competencies;122
10.2.1;4.2.1 Empirical studies relating to teamwork competencies;123
10.2.2;4.2.2 Empirical studies relating to leadership competencies;125
10.2.3;4.2.3 Empirical studies relating to network competencies;126
10.3;4.3 Empirical studies relating to functional competencies;128
10.3.1;4.3.1 Empirical studies relating to technology management competencies;129
10.3.2;4.3.2 Empirical studies relating to marketing management competencies;131
10.3.3;4.3.3 Empirical studies relating to financial management competencies;134
10.4;4.4 Empirical summary;136
11;5. Conceptual framework: Entrepreneurial-management-competence and its effects on task complexity and the success of new firms;140
11.1;5.1 Design of the comparative static conceptual framework;141
11.2;5.2 Venture success;147
11.3;5.3 Direct effects of EMC on venture success;151
11.3.1;5.3.1 Direct effects of general entrepreneurial competence on success;151
11.3.1.1;5.3.1.1 Direct effects of conceptual competence on growth;151
11.3.1.2;5.3.1.2 Direct effects of innovation competencies on growth;152
11.3.1.3;5.3.1.3 Direct effects of enforcement competence on growth;153
11.3.2;5.3.2 Direct effects of social competencies on growth;155
11.3.2.1;5.3.2.1 Teamwork-competence and growth;155
11.3.2.2;5.3.2.2 Leadership-competence and growth;156
11.3.2.3;5.3.2.3 Network-competence and growth;157
11.3.3;5.3.3 Direct effects of functional management competence on functional success and growth;159
11.3.3.1;5.3.3.1 Direct effects of technology management competence on technology success and growth;159
11.3.3.2;5.3.3.2 Direct effects of marketing management competence on market success and growth;161
11.3.3.3;5.3.3.3 Direct effects of financial management competence on financial success;162
11.4;5.4 Indirect effects of competence on growth;164
11.4.1;5.4.1 Complexity of the first development task;165
11.4.2;5.4.2 Functional competencies and task complexity;166
11.4.3;5.4.3 Task complexity and growth;167
11.4.4;5.4.4 Functional success and growth;169
11.5;5.5 Venture development and the development of competencies;170
11.6;5.6 Summary of hypotheses;173
12;6. Research process, sample and method;175
12.1;6.1 Process of empirical research;175
12.2;6.2 Sample description;177
12.3;6.3 Method of empirical study;181
12.3.1;6.3.1 Method selection for analysis of structural equation models;181
12.3.2;6.3.2 Description of the partial least square approach;185
12.3.3;6.3.3 Evaluation of measurement and structural models;186
12.3.3.1;6.3.3.1 Evaluation of the measurement model;187
12.3.3.1.1;6.3.3.1.1 Evaluation-criteria for reflective constructs;187
12.3.3.1.2;6.3.3.1.2 Evaluation-criteria for formative constructs;194
12.3.3.2;6.3.3.2 Evaluation of the structural model;196
13;7. Presentation of the measurement model;198
13.1;7.1 Entrepreneurial-management-competence;199
13.1.1;7.1.1 General entrepreneurial competencies ;200
13.1.1.1;7.1.1.1 Conceptual competence;200
13.1.1.2;7.1.1.2 Innovation competence;202
13.1.1.3;7.1.1.3 Enforcement competence;204
13.1.2;7.1.2 Social competencies;206
13.1.2.1;7.1.2.1 Teamwork competence;206
13.1.2.2;7.1.2.2 Leadership competence;207
13.1.2.3;7.1.2.3 Network competence;211
13.1.3;7.1.3 Functional competencies;212
13.1.3.1;7.1.3.1 Technology management competencies;212
13.1.3.1.1;7.1.3.1.1 Strategic technology management;213
13.1.3.1.2;7.1.3.1.2 Technology analysis;214
13.1.3.1.3;7.1.3.1.3 Internal technology development;215
13.1.3.1.4;7.1.3.1.4 External technology acquisition;217
13.1.3.1.5;7.1.3.1.5 Technology protection;219
13.1.3.1.6;7.1.3.1.6 Utilization of technology;220
13.1.3.1.7;7.1.3.1.7 Technology controlling;221
13.1.3.1.8;7.1.3.1.8 Composition of the technological management construct;222
13.1.3.2;7.1.3.2 Marketing management competencies;225
13.1.3.2.1;7.1.3.2.1 Strategic marketing competence;226
13.1.3.2.2;7.1.3.2.2 Market analysis competence;227
13.1.3.2.3;7.1.3.2.3 Transactional marketing competence;228
13.1.3.2.4;7.1.3.2.4 Relational marketing competence;230
13.1.3.2.5;7.1.3.2.5 Composition of the marketing management construct;231
13.1.3.3;7.1.3.3 Financial management competence;233
13.1.3.3.1;7.1.3.3.1 Strategic financial competence;234
13.1.3.3.2;7.1.3.3.2 Financing competence;235
13.1.3.3.3;7.1.3.3.3 Liquidity management competence;236
13.1.3.3.4;7.1.3.3.4 Accounting competence;238
13.1.3.3.5;7.1.3.3.5 Composition of the financial management construct;240
13.2;7.2 Complexity of the first development task;242
13.3;7.3 Success-measures;242
13.3.1;7.3.1 Technology success;242
13.3.2;7.3.2 Market success;243
13.3.3;7.3.3 Financial success;245
13.3.4;7.3.4 Growth;246
14;8. Empirical findings;247
14.1;8.1 Descriptive analysis of the competencies and firm development;247
14.1.1;8.1.2 Development of new technology-based firms;247
14.1.1.1;8.1.2.1 Activities at start-up;247
14.1.1.2;8.1.2.1 Current activities;253
14.1.2;8.1.3 Development of entrepreneurial-management-competence;262
14.1.2.1;8.1.3.1 Competence development based on functional background experiences of the different team members;263
14.1.2.2;8.1.3.2 Development of entrepreneurial-management-competence based on team- characteristics;266
14.2;8.2 Analysis of the effects of entrepreneurial-management-competence on the development of new technology- based firms;269
14.2.1;8.2.1 Effects of entrepreneurial-management-competence on the development of new technology- based firms at start- up;269
14.2.2;8.2.2 Effects of entrepreneurial-management-competence on the development of new technology- based firms at the exploitation stage;274
14.2.3;8.2.3 Combined effects of entrepreneurial-management-competence on the development of new technology- based firms at the exploration and exploitation stage;278
15;9. Discussion of central findings and implications;281
15.1;9.1 Central research findings;281
15.2;9.2 Implications;284
15.2.1;9.2.1 Implication for researchers;284
15.2.2;9.2.2 Implications for entrepreneurs;286
15.2.3;9.2.3 Implication for policy makers and educators;287
15.3;9.3 Limitations and further research;288
15.3.1;9.3.1 Limitations;288
15.3.2;9.3.2 Further research;289
16;Appendix;292
16.1;I. Distribution and correlation of constructs at the exploration stage;292
16.2;II. Distribution and correlation of constructs at the exploitation stage;295
16.3;III. Confirmatory factor analysis at the exploration stage;298
16.4;IV. Confirmatory factor analysis at the exploitation stage;299
17;Literature;300
Fundamental research terms.- Theories regarding entrepreneurial and management competencies and the development of new technology-based firms.- Empirical evidence about competence and the development of new firms.- Conceptual framework: Entrepreneurial-management-competence and its effects on task complexity and the success of new firms.- Research process, sample and method.- Presentation of the measurement model.- Empirical findings.- Discussion of central findings and implications.
2. Fundamental research terms (p. 10)
In this chapter, the fundamental terms and concepts of the research are explained and defined. The key requisites for this investigation are the notion of "young companies", "management", "teams", "competence", and "company development". This chapter is important to assure a common understanding. Especially terms like management can be misleading in the context of young companies and entrepreneurship. Popular terms like "competence", "management", and "young companies" often have diverse or even conflicting meaning. In this light, the following sections establish the fundament of the subsequent research.
2.1 New technology-based firms
With the rise of the new economy new technology-based firms (NTBF) have gained large public recognition. Media presence was dominated by a few rapidly growing firms. They offered their electronic services to a broad private customer base, became global players within a few years, and achieved spectacular valuations by venture capitalists or at initial public offerings (IPOs). These characteristics have shaped the public perception of NTBFs. Yet, they are misguiding images. The vast majority of NTBFs start small and remain small. The average firm in this study employs about 20 persons after six years.
Only 10-15% of the NTBFs are offering goods or services to consumers, while the rest is almost exclusively dealing with commercial customers. Most of the technology ventures are production-based, developing and marketing products which are enhanced by a service offering. Primarily their technology belongs to the field of information- and communication technology, electronics, mechanical engineering, biotechnology, microtechnology, material science, or optical-technology. Their business fields are characterized by high degree of change and unpredictability.
The average founder of a technology start-up has a high educational level. 80-90% of the founders in the technology field have received special technological education as part of their bachelor, master, or PhD-studies. This high level of education especially in the executive position of the ventures, is in contrast to the otherwise limited resource dispositions. Due to the nature of an extensive research and development process, which precedes the first significant sales by two to three years, the young technology ventures incorporate financial requirements that generally exceed the possibilities of self-financing or financing via personal savings of the founders.
In general banks offer limited credits to the new ventures due to a lack of viable information and missing collateral. Additionally, most technology ventures do not meet the requirements of venture capitalists or do not want to subject themselves to the demanding conditions of this form of financing. Accordingly, founders depend on personal savings, the limited company’s cash-flow, governmental support, and restricted bank credits. This implies significant resource restrictions. Besides the resource restrictions, NTBFs face several characteristic internal and external challenges.
Internally, the founders have to create and refine their products or services, establish a functioning organization, deal with human resource issues, and administrative duties. Externally, they have to deal with the "liability of newness", the "liability of smallness", and general market entry barriers.
