thesis on entrepreneurship and innovation

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 06 March 2024

Innovation dynamics within the entrepreneurial ecosystem: a content analysis-based literature review

• Rishi Kant Kumar   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5681-0203 1 ,
• Srinivas Subbarao Pasumarti 2 ,
• Ronnie Joshe Figueiredo 3 ,
• Rana Singh 1 ,
• Sachi Rana 4 ,
• Kumod Kumar 1 &
• Prashant Kumar   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9160-5811 5  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  366 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

1447 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Business and management

Entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs) delineate concepts from varied streams of literature originating from multiple stakeholders and are diagnosed by different levels of analysis. Taking up a sample of 392 articles, this study examines how innovation fosters the emergence of self-operative and self-corrective entrepreneurial ecosystems in the wake of automatic market disruptions. It also finds that measures lending vitality and sustainability to economic systems across the world through a mediating role played by governments, along with synergies exhibited by academia and “visionpreneurs” at large, give rise to aspiring entrepreneurs. The study also aligns past practices with trending technologies to enrich job markets and strengthen entrepreneurial networks through spillover and speciation. The research offers valuable insights into entrepreneurial ecosystems’ practical policy implications and self-regulating mechanisms, and it suggests that governments overseeing these entrepreneurial ecosystems should identify and nurture the existing strengths within them. Additionally, entrepreneurial ecosystems can benefit from government support through subsidies and incentives to encourage growth. In collaboration with university research, specialized incubation centers can play a pivotal role in creating new infrastructures that foster current and future entrepreneurial development.

Similar content being viewed by others

Changing entrepreneurial attitudes for mitigating the global pandemic’s social drama

Elena G. Popkova, Aleksei V. Bogoviz, … Bruno S. Sergi

The impact of digital capabilities and dynamic capabilities on business model innovation: the moderating effect of organizational inertia

Liping Liu, Lichuan Cui, … Chunyu Zhang

Digital transformation, entrepreneurship, and disruptive innovation: evidence of corporate digitalization in China from 2010 to 2021

Yuan Wu & Ziwei Li

Introduction

Innovation provides a gateway to products/services in varied market dynamism by transcending time horizons. Innovations work on the back and call of automatic disruptions that happen in markets through the mediating role of governments, institutions, and academicians, leading to “self-operative” and “self-corrective ecosystems.” Most of the time, innovative processes are self-corrective and operate without much effort. As innovations in products keep evolving, they rekindle customers’ interest and increase the prospects of products for better sales and a long-life cycle (for example, entrepreneurs may offer new features or new looks to older products). To undertake this sort of initiative, commercial freedoms must be guaranteed, which can be used to create, deploy, and protect intangible assets (Teece, 2007 ; Sprinkle, 2003 ). Thus, innovations together with entrepreneurial networks or ecosystems provide dynamic capabilities to the economy by imparting continuity. In that process, entrepreneurs, through their better learning skills and novel methods, create opportunities in changing markets (Garnsey and Leong, 2008 ; Garnsey et al., 2008 ; Kantarelis, 2009 ; Levinson, 2010 ; Biggs et al., 2010 ), as markets are always fueled by disruptions in entrepreneurial ventures, and old products must be replaced by newer ones.

Further, synergy between entrepreneurial ecosystems and research plays a pivotal role in fostering disruptive innovations within contemporary markets. This collaboration, exemplified by the establishment of “spin-off companies” from academic research, is instrumental in guiding aspiring talent and cultivating growth in local economies. However, despite this symbiosis, a notable gap exists in knowledge spillovers between universities and their surrounding entrepreneurial and innovation ecosystems. To address this, collaborative and interactive research is recommended, as proposed by Mehta et al. ( 2016 ). Such initiatives not only facilitate self-operative and self-corrective entrepreneurial ecosystems but also contribute to knowledge spillovers that fuel product development and speciation. The interconnected processes of institutionalizing methods, policy entrepreneurship, and knowledge spillovers underscore the intricate relationship between academia, institutional research, and market dynamics, emphasizing the need for cohesive strategies to bridge existing gaps and maximizing the impact of disruptive tendencies in entrepreneurship. This mechanism can receive a boost with the assistance of sustainable innovation of society through “social entrepreneurship education (SEE) programs” (Kim et al., 2020 ), which can be designed and operated to cultivate social entrepreneurial abilities and contribute to the development of innovation hubs for entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs). For example, a study by Igwe et al. ( 2020 ) focused on frugal innovations and informal entrepreneurship, which could lead to the creation of fresh, innovative tendencies in informal sectors of different nations.

So, looking forward, the relevance for the development of entrepreneurial networks (Teece, 2007 ), where innovation can accentuate the need for the intersection of researchers, entrepreneurship, and regional economic development while holding entrepreneurship as a key mechanism. Although there has been much innovative research done in recent years using a systematic literature review approach, it was observed that existing literature typically lacked the required comprehensive theoretical foundations; more work can contribute to the development of suitable theoretical methodologies for practical results in economic development. For example, past literature is focused on intervention of innovation with digital entrepreneurship (Satalkina and Steiner, 2020 ), social entrepreneurship (Fauzi et al., 2022 ). In a similar way, Montes-Martínez and Ramírez-Montoya ( 2022 ) oriented their research towards finding the relationship between educational and social entrepreneurship innovations using a systematic mapping technique and suggested a potential research gap in this area by collating the number of articles published and geographical contributions. Further, the literature also talked about sustainable entrepreneurship (Thananusak, 2019 ), technological innovation and entrepreneurship in management science (Shane and Ulrich, 2004 ), or the role of open innovation in entrepreneurship (Portuguez-Castro, 2023 ).

Conversely, most of these studies deliberated on the genesis, development, and operation of innovative entrepreneurial ecosystems and subsidiary literature contributing to their existence and growth, then those for laying down foundations for newer tendencies the world is witnessing and vying to enable and sustain them during the times of “Contaminant Economic Trends” (abrupt economic disruptions due to the advent of some natural, environmental, or manmade phenomenon such as COVID-19). It is essential to combine and progress research in several important areas to fill the current gaps in the literature on innovation and entrepreneurship. First, a thorough investigation of information effects is necessary for the present connection between innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems, especially through subsidiaries businesses. Mehta et al. ( 2016 ) support collaborative research, but more research is required to understand the mechanisms and obstacles preventing knowledge transfer from institutions to entrepreneurial ecosystems. This research aims to examine the following research questions:

What are the key thematic progressions in innovation research within the field of entrepreneurial ecosystems?

What conceptual models can be recommended based on the existing literature to guide and inform future research endeavors at the intersection of innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems?

To examine the research questions, we applied the text mining approach of the content analysis method on the articles collected on the keywords related to innovation and entrepreneurship for a selected period. This study also aims to fill this gap by designing a model of EE offering multidimensional insights into recent developments in the field of entrepreneurial ecosystems. This study contributes theoretically by synthesizing insights from a systematic literature review to construct a comprehensive model elucidating the intricate dynamics influencing entrepreneurial ecosystems. Identified decisive components—namely, “Evolutionary Theories,” “Governmental Assistance,” “Global Outreach of Academic Innovations,” “Open and Distributed Models of Innovation,” “Entrepreneurial Learning Experience,” and “Social Entrepreneurship”—provide a nuanced understanding of factors shaping enhanced entrepreneurial landscapes. The structured model unveils the synergies underpinning ecosystem development across diverse nations and economies amid economic uncertainties. Moreover, the study posits that government policies, such as subsidized infrastructural support, play a pivotal role in fostering entrepreneurial growth, thereby contributing novel perspectives to the scholarly discourse on entrepreneurial ecosystem evolution.

From this point forward, the paper progresses as follows: Section “Theoretical background and analysis” explains the meaning of innovation and its place in entrepreneurship development and entrepreneurial ecosystem networks; Section “Methodology” reviews prior literature on innovation in the entrepreneurship context; Section “Results” discusses the methodology adopted for the present study and delves into the methods of data collection and analysis for present research; Section “Discussion” discusses the results and analysis done in the present study; Section “Implications, Limitations, and Future Trends” delineates the theoretical implications of the present research and proposes a conceptual model for better innovation in entrepreneurship; and Section “Conclusion” takes up the conclusion part of the study.

Theoretical background and analysis

Past research has mainly focused on developing entrepreneurial ecosystems and their genesis. They hardly focused on what is mainly lacking in the growth process of these ecosystems and why academic knowledge fully fails to translate into entrepreneurial achievements. Moreover, past studies have explored and delineated the extant ecosystems with their peculiarities without looking deep down into the self-operative and self-corrective mechanisms of entrepreneurial ecosystems, which have their own strengths that make them resilient to economic turbulences. The present study highlights this mechanism and forwards a model that explains the process of enhanced ecosystems.

What is innovation?

As per the Schumpeterian view, the practical implementation of ideas for developing new goods and services is innovation (Mehmood et al., 2019 ). ISO TC 279, in the standard of ISO 56000:2020, states that innovation is “a new or changed entity realizing or redistributing value” (ISO, 2020). Definitions of innovations focus on newness, improvement, and the spread of ideas or technologies, products, processes, services, technologies, and artworks (Lijster, 2018 ). Business models that are brought forward by innovators to the market, governments (Bhasin, 2012 ), and society are certain modes through which innovation takes place.

Innovation and entrepreneurship

The advancement of entrepreneurial innovation has necessitated an increased demand for policy interventions that encourage and complement entrepreneurial ecosystems. These interventions are crucial for managing and containing emerging disruptions by introducing effective strategies. The goal is to harness these disruptions for the development of newer and improved entrepreneurial ecosystems, ultimately bringing greater benefits to entrepreneurial ventures. By employing business strategies in indigenous markets, entrepreneurs can carve out niches to meet existing demands and expand into international markets (Sprinkle, 2003 ).

This approach not only enhances enterprise performance in an open economy but also stimulates rapid innovation and disperses dynamic capacities across enterprises, entities, and institutions. According to Teece ( 2007 ), it establishes micro-foundations for entrepreneurial ecosystems, contributing to the formation of innovative networks that support emerging industries (Garnsey and Leong, 2008 ). Additionally, it generates conceptual dimensions by developing complementarities that assist in the adoption of compatible applications (Garnsey et al., 2008 ).

For instance, recent literature on entrepreneurial practices during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and post-pandemic business activities catalyzed by the digital revolution highlights the acceleratory role of digitization in expanding the business world. This digital transformation has led to the development of novel social innovations, transforming entrepreneurial practices and liberating the workforce from being “cabin cooped in individuals” to “flexible timers.” These social disruptors have also prompted the exploration of groundbreaking approaches for assessing nuances that emphasize sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems. Lastly, we present the core concepts related to these domains in Table 1 .

Methodology

Many researchers have applied different methodologies for literature review, such as theory-based review (Debellis et al., 2021 ); framework-based systematic review (Rosado-Serrano et al., 2018 ); theme-based structured review (Pansari and Kumar, 2017 ); techno-commercial literature review (Chatterjee et al., 2018 ; Kumar et al., 2020 ); and literature review based on text mining (Kumar et al., 2019 ). As for article selection, researchers indicate selecting a database such as Scopus or Web of Science (Kumar et al., 2023 ; Donthu et al., 2021 ), with which researchers get a better grasp of a specific domain of research (Alvesson & Sandberg, 2020 ) and set the stage for future research (Elsbach & Knippenberg, 2020 ). By looking at our research questions, we have employed content analysis with a text mining approach in this study, which presents thematic analysis and helps present contextual analysis.

Database preparation

The present study seeks to explore the themes underlying the domain of innovation in entrepreneurial ecosystems. Considering the methodology followed by Akter and Wamba ( 2016 ), we searched keywords such as “business entrepreneurship,” “entrepreneurial ecosystem,” and “entrepreneurial networks” on Scopus in the abstract, title, and keywords fields to search relevant documents. There were 2136 articles matching the keywords in January 2023; following this, a search for “innovation” yielded 772 documents. The final filter was performed to select articles and reviews only, which left us with a batch of 392 documents belonging to different subject areas like business management (34.6%), followed by Social Sciences (17.0%), Economics (14.4%), Engineering (7.7%), Environmental Sciences (6.4%), Computer Sciences (3.1%), Decision Sciences (3.1%), Energy (2.7%), Psychology (1.9%), Biochemistry (1.7%), and others (7.4%). All 392 articles’ abstracts were subjected to content analysis (text mining) after selecting the timeframes outlining the extracted themes to showcase the changes in the research.

Different approaches exist for selecting time duration: while Leone et al. ( 2012 ) proposed three years, Kumar et al. ( 2019 ) suggested five years for getting ideal time durations. In this study, the initial timeframe covered research for 13 years (2003–15) as in these years there were very few publications. Afterward, two sets of two-year durations of 2016–17 and 2018–19 were included, followed by three sets of single-year durations (2020, 2021, and 2022). We initially categorized articles by year but found that there were relatively few articles published in the earlier years, with a significant increase after 2010. Consequently, selecting either a 3-year or 5-year timeframe would have resulted in sample size variation by including the number of articles in each timeframe. To address this, we segmented the articles into eight periods, each containing over 40 articles in each timeframe. The year selection was done to reduce the redundancy found during the content analysis of the abstracts.

Analysis method

Looking toward our first research question of key thematic progressions in the selected domain, we applied the content analysis method to the abstract of 392 articles. In the content analysis approach, text mining (Kumar et al., 2019 , Tiwary et al., 2021 ) is a natural language processing (NLP) technique used to explore valuable insights and uncover relationships from unstructured text data. Text mining provides various benefits due to its feature of processing and analyzing large volumes of data quickly, which allows researchers to find trends and patterns effectively, which could be difficult using human approaches. Furthermore, text mining makes it possible to generate useful numerical indices that support the quantification and methodical examination of word clusters, thereby improving the accuracy and effectiveness of content analysis techniques. Text mining is being used in academic research to speed up the analytical process and improve the quality and scope of insights obtained from unstructured textual material (Karami et al., 2020 ; Gurcan and Cagiltay, 2023 ). We applied text mining to capture the themes that emerged from the articles and to create meaningful numeric indices to analyze word clusters (Feldman & Sanger, 2007 ). As for text mining, we used the widely accepted bibliometric tool “VOSViewer” (Van Eck and Waltman, 2010 ) to analyze the abstract by creating a term co-occurrence map.

Following our RQ1 of exploring maturity and themes of innovations in entrepreneurial ecosystems, we first analyzed all the articles published annually as per maturity and research exploration. We present the results from each year group below separately:

Theme that emerged during the year 2003–2015

Conceptual visualization.

During this period, the focus was on exploring themes that were categorized under specific clusters (see Fig. 1 ), “business ecosystem, capability, customer, development, ecosystem service, entrepreneur, Europe, firm, goal, innovation ecosystem, new venture, opportunity, resource, student, success.” These word clusters indicate entrepreneurial symphony , especially capturing nurturing success in the business ecosystem . Further, a cluster containing words like “adoption, case study, culture, ecosystem, emergence, knowledge, phenomenon, small firm, society, strategy, transformation, value” indicates its connection with Cultural Catalysts , unveiling small firm transformation through ecosystem adoption . The third theme under these years contains words like “entrepreneurial innovation, entrepreneurship framework, government, innovation, issue, policy, region, Silicon Valley, university,” indicating its connection with Elevate by Innovation by crafting a robust entrepreneurship framework for regional growth and navigating government policies . The last theme under these years contains words such as “business, case, company, consumer, convergence, enterprises, factor, growth, medium, product, technology” grouping theme under TechConverge Enterprises , which navigates business growth through consumer-centric mediums and product innovation .

Theme of study during the years 2003–2015.

Together, these four themes delve into the complex worlds of innovation, company culture, and entrepreneurship. The focus on cultural catalysts and technological convergence offers a comprehensive knowledge of entrepreneurial alterations, geographic expansion strategies, and the complex aspects influencing global business performance, even while the European and regional views offer specialized insights. For example, Sprinkle ( 2003 ) drew attention to concurrent policy restrictions on commercial and entrepreneurial freedoms that inhibit bioscience advancement. Teece ( 2007 ) explored the globally dispersed sources of invention, innovation, and dynamic manufacturing capabilities to create a self-operative and self-corrective entrepreneurial network based on creative destruction, commercialization, and transformation of product technologies. Le and Tarafdar ( 2009 ) underscored the importance of interactive collaboration and value co-creation in the era of commerce and the Web 2.0 version, as took place on Facebook, Google, and Myspace.

Theoretical aspects

During this period, entrepreneurial success became synonymous with innovation research, primarily stemming from university research efforts. This led to creative destruction, fostering the commercialization, speciation, and transformation of existing products and strategies. Companies sought value co-creation, supported by government policies and academic advancements. Teece ( 2007 ) emphasized the importance of dynamic capabilities, in which firms deploy tangible assets for business through innovative networks. Governmental R&D played a pivotal role in shaping these networks, aligning research with policies. The collaborative nature of business models, as highlighted by Garnsey and Leong ( 2008 ), facilitated speciation, branching, and technological advancement, contributing to “techno-organizational speciation spin-offs” and niche creation for transformative innovations (Kantarelis, 2009 ). However, this perspective is challenged by evolving policies and practices leading to urbanization, expanding markets, and technological speciation across different geographic areas, negatively impacting rural vitality (Nybakk et al., 2009 ).

Proposition: University-driven efforts, collaborative business models, and government policies combined to drive the intersection of innovation research and entrepreneurial success, which resulted in commercialization and transformation. In addition, changing policies and practices have affected rural vitality through urbanization, market expansion, and technological evolution .

Theme emerged during the year 2016–2017

The emergence of clusters (see Fig. 2 ) during the timeframe of 2016–2017 majorly saw research surrounding themes of innovative interactions through entrepreneurial university dynamics community-driven economies (e.g., community, demand, design, economy, entrepreneurial university, government, growth), entrepreneurial evolution by nurturing sustainable innovation and open innovation economy (e.g., entrepreneurship, evolution, innovation, open, innovation), TechHub Nexus by maximizing R&D efficiency, fostering creative development and focusing commercialization capability (e.g., capability, commercialization, creative, economy) and urban prowess through innovative business models by crafting a dynamic entrepreneurial ecosystem (e.g., dynamic, ecosystem, business model, regional). Many articles address important aspects of contemporary enterprise, innovation, and regional development. These topics highlight the delicate interplay between academics, technology, and policy, offering nuanced viewpoints critical for supporting innovation, sustainable development, and entrepreneurial growth in a variety of situations.

Theme of study during the year 2016–2017.

Most prominent themes, which were accentuated through the creation of academic entrepreneurship for the creation of maker spaces and creative economy which could forward and contribute towards regional innovations through the “University’s Economic Development Mission” that was instrumental in building up the prospects for “transforming economy” leading to “regional development,” which gave rise to “new ventures development” and created platforms for novel entrepreneurship. Herein, the university ecosystem examines individual intermediaries and facilitates “Student Spin-off Industries” (Hayter, 2016 ). For example, the Bayh-Dole Act in the United States takes up ownership of students’ inventions funded by the government. Consequential, novel themes and new ventures in the entrepreneurial ecosystem emerged (Soundarajan et al., 2016 ) because of emerging models of entrepreneurial universities for transforming the economy in pursuit of regional development through “University Business Cooperations (UBCs)” (Guerrero et al., 2016 ) to tackle the disruptor dilemma by showing the entrepreneurs the profitable path providing platforms for the overall development of regional innovation systems.

Proposition: Academic entrepreneurship facilitated by initiatives like maker spaces and the creative economy may foster regional innovation and new ventures driven by the university’s economic development mission and exemplified by entities such as student spin-off industries .

Theme emerged during the years 2018–2019

The course of this timeframe saw themes associated with (see Fig. 3 ) “startups,” “network,” “innovation policy,” “service innovation,” “social entrepreneurship,” and “academic,” among others. These cluster themes drew on the concepts “Innovation Driven Gazelle Enterprises (IDEs),” “prototype equipment facilities,” “translational research by local universities,” “platformization,” “Knowledge-Intensive Entrepreneurship (KIE),” “KIE Concentration,” “innovative milieus,” “voluntary horizontal knowledge spillovers,” and “Silicon Valley.”

Theme of study during the years 2018–2019.

The most prominent of all themes were “startups” and “networks,” fueling regional entrepreneurship and leading to radically innovative products and services (de Vasconcelos Gomes et al., 2018 ). The cross-connection of entrepreneurial factors and networks in academic and industrial circles is key to transmitting knowledge bases (Qian, 2018 ), leading to the growth of startups. Furthermore, the government’s innovation policies lead to the development of “services innovation” and “social entrepreneurship” through the supportive programs of entrepreneurial development that are further boosted by strong networks created by startups advancement in any regional or national entrepreneurial ecosystem. However, it is still unknown how knowledge networks (Miller et al., 2018 ) influence entrepreneurship processes through supportive environments fostering innovative startups (Spigel and Harrison, 2018 ).

Proposition: The symbiotic relationship between startups, knowledge networks, and government innovation policies may be pivotal in driving regional entrepreneurship, particularly in the development of services innovation and social entrepreneurship, yet the specific influence of knowledge networks on entrepreneurial processes within supportive environments remains unclear and requires further exploration .

Theme that emerged during the year 2020

The themes that originated during this timeframe (see Fig. 4 ) were associated with “academic entrepreneurship,” “social entrepreneurship,” “urban-rural divide,” “disruptive innovation,” and “tourism,” the origination of which was based on tagged-in factors such as “innovation hubs for Entrepreneurial Ecosystems (EEs),” “informal entrepreneurship,” “frugal innovation,” “utility-maximization,” “business incubators,” “innovation transition,” etc.

Theme of study during the year 2020.

“Academic” and “social” were the most prominent themes that emerged during this timeframe, encompassing “academic entrepreneurship,” “social entrepreneurship,” “urban–rural divide,” and “disruptive innovation.” The theme emphasized that academic and social are the two most basic and crucial benchmarks for any economy to have the presence of entrepreneurial ecosystems. They are the only factors that give rise to social entrepreneurship that use social issues as the basis for developing new entrepreneurial ideas to establish social enterprises. This is not only blurring the urban–rural divide but is also using this divide to determine, locate, and pick new opportunities and turn them into successful social entrepreneurship model firms, giving rise to informal and frugal innovations that are leading to utility maximization in resource-scarce ecosystems. This even helps in attaining sustainable innovation, which is the only way for nations to balance industrial growth and the sustainability of resources. For example, Kim et al. ( 2020 ) discussed the role of social entrepreneurship programs in developing sustainable innovation through balanced industrial growth and opined for internal and external connectivity through innovations and sustainable informal entrepreneurship (Igwe et al. 2020 ).

Proposition:The intertwining of academic and social themes within entrepreneurial ecosystems may serve as a foundational driver for social entrepreneurship, blurring the urban–rural divide and fostering sustainable innovations that balance industrial growth with resource sustainability .

Theme that emerged during the year 2021

During this timeframe (see Fig. 5 ), the research focused on “policy implication,” “frugal innovation,” “research,” “innovative behavior,” “intermediary,” “open innovation,” “empirical evidence,” “agent,” “community,” and “social entrepreneurship,” driving on concepts such as “digitization,” “digital platform,” “digital entrepreneurial ecosystems,” “COVID-19”, “pandemic” and “women entrepreneurship,” “circular entrepreneurship,” “sociology,” “emergent entrepreneurship,” “phenomenological inquiry,” “nascent,” “knowledge-intensive,” “returnee entrepreneurial firms,” “Entrepreneurial Discovery Theory,” and “artistic place-making,” among others, which were recurrently referred to by authors in their research works. Furthermore, these themes were spawned from the factors and concepts related to “moderate innovation ecosystems,” “digital platform ecosystems,” “innovation leaders,” “culture entrepreneurship,” “interacting predictors,” etc.

Theme of study during the year 2021.

Out of all themes, the most important themes that emerged were policy implication, frugal innovation (Frugal innovations encompass affordable new products, methods, and designs developed for or emerging from the underserved lower segment of the mass market, often referred to as the ‘bottom of the pyramid), and “innovative behavior,” which were heavily drawn from “digital” associated with terms such as “digitization,” “COVID-19”, “pandemic” etc., and “women entrepreneurship,” “women entrepreneurs,” “women economic empowerment,” “job losses,” and “COVID-19 impact”. These themes essentially and visibly emanated from the term COVID-19, which has been the most effective disruption witnessed in several centuries, sending shock waves and necessitating ‘totally out of the box,’ yet basic and indigenous thought processes and helping the creation of innovations outposts (Decreton et al., 2021 ). The COVID-19 crisis prompted impactful frugal innovations, particularly among jobless women, fostering widespread women’s entrepreneurship amid the digital revolution (Cullen & De Angelis, 2021 ). Digitalization facilitated startups as effective innovation brokers, connecting ecosystems, and promoting synergies. The “Waste Not” strategy contributed to resource-efficient production, circular entrepreneurship, and social purpose organizations. This global shift towards novel economic empowerment models, including priority action roadmaps for women, emerged in response to the pandemic’s impact, creating innovative approaches and strategies (Cullen & De Angelis, 2021 ).

Proposition: The unprecedented disruption caused by COVID-19 has catalyzed transformative innovations, particularly in frugal entrepreneurship driven by jobless individuals, notably women, harnessing digital revolution and waste reduction strategies, thereby fostering women’s entrepreneurship, circular economies, and social purpose organizations on a global scale .

Theme that emerged during the year 2022

The clusters that were accentuated in this timeframe (see Fig. 6 ) were: “biomedical entrepreneurship,” “sustainability,” “translational research,” “demand,” “databases,” “social innovator,” etc. among others, which had their origination from themes such as “digital entrepreneurship,” “digital entrepreneurial ecosystems,” “smart cities,” “circular business models,” “incremental innovation,” “Schumpeterian Entrepreneurship,” “social innovations’ systems,” “Isenberg’s Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Model” (international reference guide for collecting and using data on innovation), “Financial Technology (FinTech) Innovation,” “investment advisory sector,” “trans-disciplinary research,” and “cross cutting themes,” which got frequently referred to by authors in their articles.

Theme of study during the year 2022.

This time period saw the emergence of many “incremental innovations” adding to and revitalizing the existing ones in the wake of COVID-19 (Henrekson et al., 2022 ). To this end, every nation was endeavoring to get hold of resources and diverting them towards translational research, comprising academic entrepreneurial innovations and social innovations (Audretsch et al., 2022 ), culminating in biomedical research and entrepreneurship. Biomedical entrepreneurship was in its heyday as it was the most important aspect related to the major disruptor COVID-19 at the time. As a result, there was a mushrooming of startups catering to biomedical resources to fulfill the demand that was extant in almost all the markets of the world. In addition, the most prominent entrepreneurial success was witnessed in “digital entrepreneurial enterprises,” which rose quickly due to the widespread digitization of almost all of the world’s economies in the wake of COVID-19. This trend of enterprises surpassed all records of success and they skipped decades in their growth journey.

Proposition: The aftermath of COVID-19 witnessed a global pursuit of resources for translational research encompassing social innovations, fueling a surge in biomedical entrepreneurship and the rapid success of digital enterprises due to widespread digitization surpassing conventional growth timelines .

Starting with the first research question, which aimed to organize the thematic progress of innovation research in entrepreneurship, we applied a text-mining approach of content analysis on the six identified year groups. The results highlight that in recent years digitization and frugal innovations have acted as catalysts for novel business models, termed “Abrupt Circumstantial Business Handling Practices (ACBHP)”. These practices spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic include customized products, increased home deliveries, pop-up shops, and ventures, breaking traditional business norms. This led to the emergence of a “Minimalistic Business Model of Manufacturing” (MBMM), where businesses adapted with minimal resources based on market needs during the pandemic. Such disruptions created uncertainties but also introduced new entrepreneurial ecosystem dynamics. In light of this, we present the findings as follows:

Insight 1: Speciation of innovations and technologies

Innovations, technologies, and strategies are the major drivers of economic growth and development. “Speciation” is one such force and mechanism underlying the business thought process, policy formulation, and practices. It enables the factors and actors facilitating entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems to perform business initiation and expansion (Ganzaroli et al., 2014 ), thereby giving rise to newer research factors concerning policy formulations, dynamic capabilities lying latent, and innovative networks. Speciation largely leads to the branching and advancing of technologies (Kantarelis, 2009 ), as was found in the case of the USA, wherein speciation drew attention to the concurrent policy restrictions on commercial and entrepreneurial freedoms. Thereafter, it was witnessed in the most recent case of disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic, wherein “digitization” was the main source used by almost every new technology as mainstream, and several speciation methods, products, and strategies emanated from that. This magnetized the innovative network and the think pools to leverage assets and strategies at hand and bring out the necessary synergies, leading to required entrepreneurial and policy frameworks to assist in entrepreneurial advancements.

Insight 2: Global outreach of academic knowledge and innovations

The global outreach of entrepreneurship facilitates rapid innovation, leading to knowledge dispersion, inventions, and enhancement of manufacturing capabilities. Moreover, it helps in “nascent opportunity generation” and innovation networks for inventions, leading to augmentation and advancement of technologies. For example, Guerrero et al. ( 2016 ) delineated the soaring need for research in business and economy and further discussed the issue of individual growth and restriction on scientific and commercial freedoms. Collaborative and interactive research has further been facilitated by innovative value co-creation (Mehta et al. 2016 ), along with the extension of new management processes for the extension of processes beyond existing ecosystems. However, at the same time, it poses a concern for damage and serious harm like mishandling, and misuse of dangerous innovative products, which is why it is necessary to foresee and assist scientific and commercial freedoms (Hayter, 2016 ) with precautions that should be taken to prevent scientific inventions and innovations from harming society in general (Roundy, 2016 ).

Insight 3: Government assistance generating synergies for growth

Government assistance by funding innovations leads to better academic research and innovation-centric activities that generate synergies, impacting and enhancing innovative business ecosystems (Harper-Anderson, 2018 ). Even in developing countries, governments have come forward with schemes for payment for ecosystem services (PES), as done in Costa Rica, for biodiversity protection and conservation endeavors (Fischer et al., 2018 ). The heterogeneity among ventures is largely facilitated by knowledge spillovers and dispersion at the global level (Autio et al., 2018 ), corporate research development (Eckhardt et al., 2018 ), and the regional economic development policy agenda of the nations (Crammond et al., 2018 ), which takes up corporate research to bring about regional-level multidimensional economic systems. To further this process, the traditional “Triple Helix Innovation Model,” focusing on the university-industry-government relationship, and the “Quadruple Helix Innovation Systems” can be used to bring about the required synergies (Mirvis and Googins, 2018 ) and ensure success in business ecosystems based on collaboration and competition (Hu, Yu & Chia, 2018 ; Carayannis et al., 2018 ).

Insight 4: Regional transformation and platformization

Regional transformation through open and distributed models of innovation facilitates the pursuit of entrepreneurship. Regional transformation can be hailed as the “basic innovation driver,” disgorging newer approaches toward entrepreneurship (Igwe et al., 2020 ) and helping policymakers and practitioners (Guerrero et al., 2020 ). Moreover, regional transformation together with platformization creates a typology of different ecosystem structures, thereby shaping high-growth entrepreneurship. Furthermore, they help in exploring the dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems for rural and urban areas (Huggins and Thompson, 2020 ). To this end, many regions are following the “educate, deregulate, and finance” approach to entrepreneurship, as happened in the case of “Financial and Institutional Reforms for Entrepreneurial Society” in Europe (Lyons et al., 2020 ). Another example is the “Innovation Hub Organizations” in African cities, which have become “Fixtures” (Švarc et al., 2020 ). However, regional transformation is not possible without a proper policy (Jia & Desa, 2022 ) that works on key components and factors influencing entrepreneurial processes (Halbinger, 2020 ).

Insight 5: Management of collective risk for radically innovative products

The management of collective risk by social entrepreneurial ecosystems helps in strengthening institutional environmental and bridges uncertainties to radically innovative products (Khurana and Dutta, 2021 ). Investigating innovation drivers in the informal sector may scrutinize the impact of “complementors” within business owners’ strategies, navigating formal and informal rules (Gifford et al., 2021 ). Further, regional economic ecosystems, influenced by human behavior, culture, and environment, require the measurement and development of skills. Tools like “Entrepreneurship Skill-Building Framework (ESBF)” and “Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE),” based on “communimetrics: theory of measurement,” are crucial (Nthubu, 2021 ). The European Smart Specialization Strategy (S3) reflects the latest entrepreneurial ecosystem developments (Khatami et al., 2022 ).

In addition, addressing systematic inequities involves social innovations and financial models like “blended financing” and “public-private partnerships” (PPP) (Volkmann et al., 2021 ). Other factors include affordable business models for resource settings (Guerrero et al., 2021 ), knowledge economy expansion (Plata et al. 2021 ), and new evaluative approaches to local entrepreneurial ecosystems (Liu et al., 2021 ). Innovation strategies by companies like Apple and Uber, financial technology ecosystem development (Canh et al., 2021 ), growth-oriented entrepreneurship in the African business environment (McDaniel et al., 2021 ), and risk mitigation through public-private ownership (Moraes et al. 2023 contribute to assessing and enhancing the global entrepreneurial climate, including the US (Schaeffer, Guerrero & Fischer, 2021 ).

Insight 6: Discovering latent entrepreneurship for emergent entrepreneurship

Empirical studies underscore the crucial role of entrepreneurial learning and experience in unlocking latent resources and hidden capabilities within social and economic ecosystems. A prime example is the transformative impact observed in the US drone industry (Henrekson et al., 2022 ). Innovative ecosystems, particularly those with a knowledge-intensive focus, foster emergent entrepreneurship, notably when returnee entrepreneurs contribute to local firms, enhancing innovation performance in their home countries (Bakry et al., 2022 ). The “discovery theory” further illuminates how digital applications stimulate entrepreneurial alertness, especially in diverse innovation ecosystems, such as the influence of creative industries on social entrepreneurship (Ho and Yoon, 2022 ). The success of new ventures hinges on navigating multifaceted components within entrepreneurship ecosystems (EE) and the broader business environment (Johnson et al., 2022 ).

To overcome these challenges, entrepreneurs strategically establish complex ecosystems, temporarily gaining monopolistic advantages by eliminating competition during the development phase (Raposo et al., 2022 ). Various factors shape entrepreneurial sustainable innovations (ESIs),” with distinct emphasis on policy, finance, human capital, support, and culture within entrepreneurial ecosystems (Berman et al., 2021 ). While creating new businesses is essential, the establishment of institutions supporting entrepreneurial growth is equally vital. Although “Schumpeterian entrepreneurs play a role, the limitations of “top-down policies” in fostering thriving ecosystems for Schumpeterian entrepreneurship are evident (Henrekson et al., 2022 ). Social entrepreneurship, guided by local actors and social innovators with insights into emerging needs, can lead to profit-oriented innovations (Audretsch et al., 2022 ; Bakry et al., 2022 ). Implementing these strategies demands entrepreneurial ecosystems equipped with tools that address the complex and dynamic aspects of development (Johnson et al., 2022 ; Schmutzler et al., 2022 ).

Model for enhanced entrepreneurial ecosystems

The systematic literature review conducted for the present study has yielded insights that can be utilized to enhance entrepreneurial ecosystems. These insights have been integrated into a model explaining the relationship between various decisive components crucial for achieving improved entrepreneurial ecosystems. The key insights of the model are outlined below.

First, the attainment of enhanced entrepreneurial ecosystems is influenced by several factors that interact and synergize, ultimately resulting in the creation of new ecosystems or the enhancement of existing ones. “Evolutionary Theories,” “Governmental Assistance,” “Global Outreach of Academic Innovations,” “Open and Distributed Models of Innovation,” “Entrepreneurial Learning Experience,” and “Social Entrepreneurship” are identified as decisive components in this research. Alongside underlying factors, these components promote and contribute to the enhancement of entrepreneurial ecosystems.

Figure 7 illustrates that entrepreneurial ecosystems develop unique synergies in all nations and economies in response to different types of economic disturbances arising from individual and collective uncertainties. Although there is a pattern and path with the highest probability of yielding better network creation and rapid development of entrepreneurial ecosystems, it is generally guided by the path of economic turmoil or uncertainty they face. Additionally, government policies play a significant role in influencing the creation, operation, and pace of the progress of entrepreneurial ecosystems. For instance, in countries such as South Korea, where entrepreneurs are provided with free or subsidized space for their ventures, there is a notable boost in entrepreneurial growth, leading to the creation of a higher-quality entrepreneurial ecosystem with better services and growth prospects.

Model for Enhanced Entrepreneurial Ecosystems (bidirectional arrow represents interaction between those factors; unidirectional arrow represents research related to innovation across different domains).

Government assistance and support are crucial components that contribute to the development of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Evolutionary theories from different fields serve as a repository of past initiatives that have proven successful, guiding and enlightening the thought processes of entrepreneurs. These theories often emerge as corrective responses to individual and collective uncertainties or as attempts to rectify anomalies in different ecosystems. Furthermore, government assistance, when integrated into academic research programs, fosters the creation of heterogeneous, innovative models that can be emulated by others. Support for research projects aids in the development of entrepreneurial ecosystem models aligned with market trends and economic turbulence, providing a foundation for theories and fostering entrepreneurial growth.

In addition, the global outreach of academic innovations plays a crucial role in disseminating these innovative models. Through concerted paths, it leads to the development of newer technologies and products. The open and distributed models involved in this process facilitate knowledge spillovers, permeating and transforming the urban and rural economies of nations. Subsequently, this transformative process initiates knowledge spillovers and the diffusion of technology across nations, ushering in uncharted methodologies for addressing challenges and seizing opportunities. This dynamic gives rise to creative industries, fostering a culture of continuous learning and adaptation essential for achieving business sustainability. The enrichment of entrepreneurial learning and experience is evident across diverse nations. Ultimately, this interconnected synergy propels actors and agents of change toward assuming collective responsibilities and championing the cause of social entrepreneurship for greater good and universal growth. The diverse trajectories of entrepreneurial growth invariably encompass these interconnected elements and sequential steps, underscoring the complexity and interdependence inherent in entrepreneurial growth.

Implications, limitations, and future trends

The following section provides implications and limitations.

Theoretical implications

The study underscores crucial theoretical implications, emphasizing that innovation not only introduces novel attributes to business culture but also gives rise to ecosystems capable of developing self-operative and self-corrective mechanisms in response to market disruptions. It asserts that innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems play pivotal roles in implementing sustainable measures to invigorate global economic systems. An examination of the specified period reveals noteworthy themes that significantly contribute to existing knowledge in business and entrepreneurship. The onset of the pandemic triggered a transformative shift in entrepreneurial ecosystems, leading to “venture mushrooming” driven by dynamic factors (Castellani et al., 2022 ). The disruption prompted a strategic response from entrepreneurial think tanks, showcasing their adept management of unprecedented challenges and highlighting the resilience and adaptability of entrepreneurial ecosystems (Ramezani and Camarinha-Matos, 2020 ). Moreover, the disruptions unveiled opportunities and novel resources, particularly in the digital realm, fostering niche entrepreneurial ecosystems driven by individuals, especially women, responding to COVID-19-related challenges (Cullen & De Angelis, 2021 ). The evolution of these ventures highlighted the self-operative and self-corrective nature of entrepreneurial ecosystems, offering insights into the evolving dynamics of the business environment.

Given the unified global markets and increasing trade transactions, entrepreneurial innovations emerge as essential tools to counter challenges to the global economy. To establish effective progressive and corrective mechanisms for market disruptions, there is a pressing need for innovative speciation that addresses specific market needs and customer bases. Global outreach of innovations is crucial for swift knowledge dissemination, and governments should develop collaborative assistance mechanisms to foster growth. Regional transformation and platformization are equally vital for cultivating novel entrepreneurial tendencies among youth. Creating a catalytic environment requires managers to take initiative in dealing with collective uncertainties, fostering the creation of radically innovative products. Finally, to facilitate the process of creating entrepreneurial ecosystems, emphasis should be placed on recognizing emerging entrepreneurial tendencies at regional, national, and international levels through timely support—technical, economic, and moral—to budding entrepreneurs and “visionpreneurs”.

Practical implications

The study underscores critical policy implications by highlighting the role of entrepreneurial ecosystems in fostering and empowering aspiring entrepreneurs. However, it acknowledges the challenges posed by unprecedented changes, which may prove difficult to address. These situations, whether rooted in knowledge banks or not, often present formidable obstacles that cannot be easily overcome with existing skill sets. The study emphasizes the need for emergent entrepreneurs to draw on their previous exposures, urging them to boldly anticipate and explore future trends, particularly as technologies and skill sets evolve with increasingly shorter product life cycles.

Furthermore, the study advocates for close collaboration between governments and entrepreneurial faculties to mitigate negative economic downturns. Given the interconnected and inseparable nature of international trade indices, this research stresses the importance of collective action to prevent potential cascading effects that could lead to significant economic damage in a short period. The research contributes practical policy implications by proposing a model for entrepreneurial ecosystems with self-operative and self-corrective mechanisms. It suggests that governments support the strengths inherent in their ecosystems, providing subsidies, incentives for growth, and specialized incubation center facilities. These facilities, collaboratively developed with university research outcomes, aim to build new infrastructures for entrepreneurial development, ensuring both present and future entrepreneurial growth.

Limitations

This study presents a comprehensive review of collected papers utilizing text mining and content analysis to delve into the dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems. However, it acknowledges certain limitations that could impact the breadth and clarity of perspectives. The review focused exclusively on papers matching specific keywords like “Innovation,” “Business Entrepreneurship,” “Entrepreneurial Ecosystem,” and “Entrepreneurial Networks.” Notably, the exclusion of other keywords such as “academic entrepreneurship,” “spillover effects,” and “speciation” might have yielded different insights not covered in this analysis.

Additionally, the choice of the Scopus database as the sole source for article extraction poses another limitation, as utilizing different databases could have resulted in a diverse set of research articles, potentially altering the domain and theme structures. The study’s methodology is also recognized as a limiting factor, as alternative approaches could have produced varied results. Furthermore, the consideration of a nearly two-decade timeframe raises concerns about the relevance of earlier reviews in the rapidly evolving landscape of entrepreneurial needs and trends.

Despite these limitations, the paper makes a noteworthy contribution by providing a general outline and direction for the development of enhanced entrepreneurial ecosystems. It acknowledges the lack of first-hand exposure to entrepreneurial ecosystems, which could have enriched the output. Nevertheless, the study’s significant contribution lies in its comprehensive analysis of entrepreneurial ecosystems and their interplay, aiming for greater output generation, improved growth for the collective good, and the overall welfare of economies, beyond mere economic gains.

In conclusion, while innovations and entrepreneurial ecosystems have been extensively explored in research, a collaborative effort between governments and the intelligentsia is essential to reshape policies. Addressing the identified gap in the literature, the research emphasizes that entrepreneurial ecosystems are not confined to traditional business circles but have evolved through the ingenuity of individuals facing job losses or career shifts. Therefore, this paper aims to provide the thematic improvement that happens in literature and based on that, present the enhanced entrepreneurial ecosystems. This study’s result indicates the necessity of global outreach for swift knowledge dissemination and emphasizes collaborative efforts between governments and entrepreneurial entities to foster growth. Regional transformation and platformization are identified as pivotal in nurturing novel entrepreneurial tendencies, particularly among youth.

This study elucidates critical theoretical implications, highlighting the transformative power of innovation in shaping not only novel attributes within business culture but also the creation of adaptive entrepreneurial ecosystems. The study underscores the need for proactive policymaking and infrastructure support to empower these ecosystems to navigate the evolving landscape. The collaboration between governments and the intelligentsia is highlighted as crucial for ensuring that entrepreneurial ventures thrive and contribute significantly to the broader economic context. This integrated approach aligns policy measures with the dynamic needs of entrepreneurial ecosystems, fostering resilience, adaptability, and sustained success in the face of emerging global challenges. In essence, this research not only contributes to the existing knowledge but also fills a crucial gap by shedding light on the dynamic nature of entrepreneurial ecosystems in the face of unprecedented challenges, providing valuable insights for future research and practical applications.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.

Akter S, Wamba SF (2016) Big data analytics in E-commerce: a systematic review and agenda for future research. Electron Mark 26:173–194

Article   Google Scholar  

Alvesson M, Sandberg J (2020) The problematizing review: A counterpoint to Elsbach and Van Knippenberg’s argument for integrative reviews. J Manag Stud 57(6):1290–1304

Audretsch DB, Eichler GM, Schwarz EJ (2022) Emerging needs of social innovators and social innovation ecosystems. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J 18:217–254

Autio E, Nambisan S, Thomas LD, Wright M (2018) Digital affordances, spatial affordances, and the genesis of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strateg Entrep J 12(1):72–95

Bakry DS, Daim T, Dabic M, Yesilada B (2022) An evaluation of the effectiveness of innovation ecosystems in facilitating the adoption of sustainable entrepreneurship. J Small Bus Manag https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2022.2088775

Berman A, Cano-Kollmann M, Mudambi R (2021) Innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems: fintech in the financial services industry. Rev Manag Sci 16(1):45–64

Bhasin K (2012) This Is The Difference Between ‘Invention’ And ‘Innovation’. Business insider, 2–4. https://www.businessinsider.com/this-is-the-difference-between-invention-and-innovation-2012-4?IR=T

Biggs R, Westley FR, Carpenter SR (2010) Navigating the back loop: fostering social innovation and transformation in ecosystem management. Ecol Soc 15:2

Brown R (2016) Mission impossible? Entrepreneurial universities and peripheral regional innovation systems. Ind innov 23(2):189–205

Canh NP, Nguyen B, Thanh SD, Kim S (2021) Entrepreneurship and natural resource rents: evidence from excessive entrepreneurial activity. Sustain Prod Consum 25:15–26

Carayannis EG, Campbell DF (2011) Open innovation diplomacy and a 21st century fractal research, education and innovation (FREIE) ecosystem: building on the quadruple and quintuple helix innovation concepts and the “mode 3” knowledge production system. J Knowl Econ 2:327–372

Carayannis EG, Grigoroudis E, Campbell DF, Meissner D, Stamati D (2018) The ecosystem as helix: an exploratory theory‐building study of regional co‐opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as Quadruple/Quintuple Helix Innovation Models. Rd Manag 48(1):148–162

Google Scholar  

Castellani D, Perri A, Scalera VG, Zanfei A (Eds) (2022) Cross-border innovation in a changing world: players, places, and policies. Oxford University Press

Chatterjee S, Kumar P, Chatterjee S (2018) A techno-commercial review on grid connected photovoltaic system. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 81:2371–2397

Crammond R, Omeihe KO, Murray A, Ledger K (2018) Managing knowledge through social media: Modelling an entrepreneurial approach for Scottish SMEs and beyond. Baltic J Manag 13(3):303–328. https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-05-2017-0133

Cullen UA, De Angelis R (2021) Circular entrepreneurship: A business model perspective. Resour conserv recycl 168:105300

de Vasconcelos Gomes LA, Salerno MS, Phaal R, Probert DR (2018) How entrepreneurs manage collective uncertainties in innovation ecosystems. Technol Forecast Soc Change 128:164–185

Debellis F, Rondi E, Plakoyiannaki E, De Massis A (2021) Riding the waves of family firm internationalization: a systematic literature review, integrative framework, and research agenda. J World Bus 56(1):101144

Decreton B, Monteiro F, Frangos JM, Friedman L (2021) Innovation outposts in entrepreneurial ecosystems: how to make them more successful. Calif Manag Rev 63(3):94–117

Donthu N, Kumar S, Pandey N, Lim WM (2021) A bibliometric retrospection of marketing from the lens of psychology: insights from psychology & marketing. Psychol Mark 38(5):834–865

Eckhardt JT, Ciuchta MP, Carpenter M (2018) Open innovation, information, and entrepreneurship within platform ecosystems. Strateg Entrepreneurship J 12(3):369–391

Elsbach KD, van Knippenberg D (2020) Creating high‐impact literature reviews: An argument for ‘integrative reviews’. J Manag Stud 57(6):1277–1289

Fauzi MA, Muhamad Tamyez PF, Kumar S (2022) Social entrepreneurship and social innovation in ASEAN: past, present, and future trends. J Soc Entrepreneurship https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2022.2143870

Feldman R, Sanger J (2007) The text mining handbook: advanced approaches in analyzing unstructured data. Cambridge university press

Fischer BB, Schaeffer PR, Vonortas NS, Queiroz S (2018) Quality comes first: university-industry collaboration as a source of academic entrepreneurship in a developing country. J Technol Transf 43:263–284

Ganzaroli A, De Noni I, Pilotti L (2014) The role of social entrepreneurship in leveraging exaptation in locked-in industrial districts: the case of Idrogenet in the industrial district of Lumezzane. Innov Eur J Soc Sci Res 27(3):254–274

Garnsey E, Leong YY (2008) Combining resource‐based and evolutionary theory to explain the genesis of bio‐networks. Ind Innov 15(6):669–686

Garnsey E, Lorenzoni G, Ferriani S (2008) Speciation through entrepreneurial spin-off: the Acorn-ARM story. Res Policy 37(2):210–224

Gifford E, McKelvey M, Saemundsson R (2021) The evolution of knowledge-intensive innovation ecosystems: co-evolving entrepreneurial activity and innovation policy in the West Swedish maritime system. Ind Innov 28(5):651–676

Groth OJ, Esposito M, Tse T (2015) What Europe needs is an innovation‐driven entrepreneurship ecosystem: Introducing EDIE. Thunderbird Int Bus Rev 57(4):263–269

Guerrero M, Santamaría-Velasco CA, Mahto R (2021) Intermediaries and social entrepreneurship identity: implications for business model innovation. Int J Entrepreneurial Behav Res 27(2):520–546

Guerrero M, Urbano D, Gajón E (2020) Entrepreneurial university ecosystems and graduates’ career patterns: do entrepreneurship education programmes and university business incubators matter? J Manag Dev 39(5):753–775

Guerrero M, Urbano D, Fayolle A, Klofsten M, Mian S (2016) Entrepreneurial universities: emerging models in the new social and economic landscape. Small Bus Econ 47:551–563

Gurcan F, Cagiltay NE (2023) Research trends on distance learning: a text mining-based literature review from 2008 to 2018. Interact Learn Environ 31(2):1007–1028

Halbinger MA (2020) The relevance of makerspaces for university-based venture development organizations. Entrepreneurship Res J 10(2)

Harper-Anderson E (2018) Intersections of partnership and leadership in entrepreneurial ecosystems: Comparing three US regions. Econ Dev Q 32(2):119–134

Hayter CS (2016) A trajectory of early-stage spin-off success: the role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem. Small Bus Econ 47:633–656

Henrekson M, Kärnä A, Sanandaji T (2022) Schumpeterian entrepreneurship: coveted by policymakers but impervious to top-down policymaking. J Evolut Econ 32(3):867–890

Ho JY, Yoon S (2022) Ambiguous roles of intermediaries in social entrepreneurship: the case of social innovation system in South Korea. Technol Forecast Soc Change 175:121324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.009

Huggins R, Thompson P (2020) Human agency, entrepreneurship, and regional development: A behavioural perspective on economic evolution and innovative transformation. Entrepreneurship Reg Dev 32(7-8):573–589

Hu TS, Yu CW, Chia PC (2018) Knowledge exchange types and strategies on the innovation interactions between KIBS firms and their clients in Taiwan. Cogent Bus Manag 5(1):1534527

Igwe PA, Odunukan K, Rahman M, Rugara DG, Ochinanwata C (2020) How entrepreneurship ecosystem influences the development of frugal innovation and informal entrepreneurship. Thunderbird Int Bus Rev 62(5):475–488

Jia X, Desa G (2022) Social entrepreneurship and impact investment in rural–urban transformation: An orientation to systemic social innovation and symposium findings. In Social Innovation and Sustainability Transition (pp. 283–305). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland

Johnson E, Hemmatian I, Lanahan L, Joshi AM (2022) A framework and databases for measuring entrepreneurial ecosystems. Res Policy 51(2):104398

Kantarelis D (2009) Entrepreneurship in the USA: architecture, market structure and incentives. Int J Entrepreneurship Innov Manag 9(3):191–203

Karami A, Lundy M, Webb F, Dwivedi YK (2020) Twitter and research: a systematic literature review through text mining. IEEE Access 8:67698–67717

Khatami F, Scuotto V, Krueger N, Cantino V (2022) The influence of the entrepreneurial ecosystem model on sustainable innovation from a macro-level lens. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J 18:1419–1451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-021-00788-w

Khurana I, Dutta DK (2021) From latent to emergent entrepreneurship in innovation ecosystems: the role of entrepreneurial learning. Technol Forecast Soc Change 167:120694

Kim MG, Lee JH, Roh T, Son H (2020) Social entrepreneurship education as an innovation hub for building an entrepreneurial ecosystem: The case of the KAIST social entrepreneurship MBA program. Sustainability 12(22):9736

Kumar P, Hollebeek LD, Kar AK, Kukk J (2023) Charting the intellectual structure of customer experience research. Mark Intell Plan 41(1):31–47

Kumar P, Sharma A, Salo J (2019) A bibliometric analysis of extended key account management literature. Ind Mark Manag 82:276–292

Kumar R, Anand A, Kumar P, Kumar RK (2020) Internet of Things and social media: a review of literature and validation from Twitter Analytics. In 2020 International Conference on Emerging Smart Computing and Informatics (ESCI) (pp. 158–163). IEEE

Le TT, Tarafdar M (2009) Business ecosystem perspective on value co-creation in the Web 2.0 era: implications for entrepreneurial opportunities. Int J Entrepreneurial Venturing 1(2):112–130

Leone RP, Robinson LM, Bragge J, Somervuori O (2012) A citation and profiling analysis of pricing research from 1980 to 2010. J Business Res 65(7):1010–1024

Levinson NS (2010) Innovation in cross-national alliance ecosystems. Int J Entrepreneurship Innov Manag 11(3):258–263

Lijster T (2018) The future of the new: Artistic innovation in times of social acceleration. Valiz

Liu H, Kulturel-Konak S, Konak A (2021) A measurement model of entrepreneurship education effectiveness based on methodological triangulation. Stud Educ Eval 70:100987

Lyons TS, Lyons JS, Jolley GJ (2020) Entrepreneurial skill-building in rural ecosystems: a framework for applying the Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE). J Entrepreneurship Public Policy 9(1):112–136

McDaniel M, Sutter C, Webb JW, Elgar FJ, Parker KF, Nwachu J (2021) Breaking the cycle of crime: promoting the positive social spillover potential of entrepreneurship. J Bus Venturing Insights 16:e00249

Mehmood T, Alzoubi HM, Alshurideh M, Al-Gasaymeh A, Ahmed G (2019) Schumpeterian entrepreneurship theory: evolution and relevance. Acad Entrepreneurship J 25(4):1–10

Mehta K, Zappe S, Brannon ML, Zhao Y (2016) An educational and entrepreneurial ecosystem to actualize technology-based social ventures. Adv Eng Educ 5(1):n1

Miller K, Alexander A, Cunningham JA, Albats E (2018) Entrepreneurial academics and academic entrepreneurs: a systematic literature review. Int J Technol Manag 77(1-3):9–37

Mirvis P, Googins B (2018) Engaging employees as social innovators. Calif Manag Rev 60(4):25–50

Montes-Martínez R, Ramírez-Montoya MS (2022) Systematic mapping: educational and social entrepreneurship innovations (2015–2020). Educ+ Train 64(7):923–941

Moraes GHSMD, Spers EE, Mendes L, Silva HMRD (2023) Corporate entrepreneurship at the university: the influence of managerial support, autonomy and reward on the innovative behavior of university professors. J Entrepreneurship Emerg Econ 15(2):404–424

Nthubu B (2021) The value of a co-design visualization approach: Enhancing the understanding of local entrepreneurial ecosystems. Des J 24(5):749–760

Nybakk E, Crespell P, Hansen E, Lunnan A (2009) Antecedents to forest owner innovativeness: An investigation of the non-timber forest products and services sector. For Ecol and Manag 257(2):608–618

Pansari A, Kumar V (2017) Customer engagement: the construct, antecedents, and consequences. J Acad Mark Sci 45:294–311

Peña Gallo ML (2021) The European Social Innovation Diplomacy, a post-2020 Strategy to put the EU at the Global Scene: The role of Sweden as an innovative leader

Plata G, Aparicio S, Scott S (2021) The sum of its parts: examining the institutional effects on entrepreneurial nodes in extensive innovation ecosystems. Ind Mark Manag 99:136–152

Portuguez-Castro M (2023) Exploring the potential of open innovation for co-creation in entrepreneurship: a systematic literature review. Adm Sci 13(9):198

Qian H (2018) Knowledge-based regional economic development: a synthetic review of knowledge spillovers, entrepreneurship, and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Econ Dev Q 32(2):163–176

Ramezani J, Camarinha-Matos LM (2020) Approaches for resilience and antifragility in collaborative business ecosystems. Technol Forecast Soc Change 151:119846

Ranga M, Perälampi J, Kansikas J (2016) The new face of university–business cooperation in Finland. Sci Public Policy 43(5):601–612

Raposo M, Fernandes CI, Veiga PM (2022) We dreamed a dream that entrepreneurial ecosystems can promote sustainability. Manag Environ Qual: Int J 33(1):86–102

Rosado-Serrano A, Paul J, Dikova D (2018) International franchising: a literature review and research agenda. J Bus Res 85:238–257

Roundy PT (2016) Start-up community narratives: The discursive construction of entrepreneurial ecosystems. J Entrepreneurship 25(2):232–248

Satalkina L, Steiner G (2020) Digital entrepreneurship and its role in innovation systems: a systematic literature review as a basis for future research avenues for sustainable transitions. Sustainability 12(7):2764

Schaeffer PR, Guerrero M, Fischer BB (2021) Mutualism in ecosystems of innovation and entrepreneurship: A bidirectional perspective on universities’ linkages. J Bus Res 134:184–197

Schmutzler J, Pugh R, Tsvetkova A (2022) Contextual and evolutionary perspectives on entrepreneurial ecosystems. insights from Chris. Freeman’s Think Innov Dev 12(1):13–21

Shane SA, Ulrich KT (2004) 50th anniversary article: technological innovation, product development, and entrepreneurship in management science. Manag Sci 50(2):133–144

Soundarajan N, Camp SM, Lee D, Ramnath R, Weide BW (2016) NEWPATH: an innovative program to nurture IT entrepreneurs. Adv Eng Educ 5(1):n1

Spigel B, Harrison R (2018) Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strateg Entrepreneurship J 12(1):151–168

Sprinkle RH (2003) The biosecurity trusts. BioScience 53(3):270–277

Švarc J, Dabić M, Daim TU (2020) A new innovation paradigm: European cohesion policy and the retreat of public science in countries in Europe’s scientific periphery. Thunderbird Int Bus Rev 62(5):531–547

Teece DJ (2007) Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and micro foundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strateg Manag J 28(13):1319–1350

Tiwary NK, Kumar RK, Sarraf S, Kumar P, Rana NP (2021) Impact assessment of social media usage in B2B marketing: A review of the literature and a way forward. J Bus Res 131:121–139

Thananusak T (2019) Science mapping of the knowledge base on sustainable entrepreneurship, 1996–2019. Sustainability 11(13):3565

Van Eck N, Waltman L (2010) Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84(2):523–538

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Volkmann C, Fichter K, Klofsten M, Audretsch DB (2021) Sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: an emerging field of research. Small Bus Econ 56(3):1047–1055

Yoda N, Kuwashima K (2020) Triple helix of university–industry–government relations in Japan: transitions of collaborations and interactions. J Knowl Econ 11:1120–1144

Zahra SA, Nambisan S (2011) Entrepreneurship in global innovation ecosystems. AMS Rev 1:4–17

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Chandragupt Institute of Management Patna, Patna, India

Rishi Kant Kumar, Rana Singh & Kumod Kumar

Department of Management studies, NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad, India

Srinivas Subbarao Pasumarti

Centre of Applied Research in Management and Economics, Polytechnic Leiria, Leiria, Portugal

Ronnie Joshe Figueiredo

Dewan Institute of Management Studies CCS University, Meerut, India

O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana, India

Prashant Kumar

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Rishi and Srinivas designed the study, performed data analysis, and wrote the manuscript. Ronnie contributed to data collection, interpretation of results. Rana and Sachi contributed to the interpretation of the data and critical revision of the manuscript. Kumod assisted in data acquisition and manuscript preparation. Prashant provided critical feedback, improvised network diagram and model, and revised the manuscript for intellectual content. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript. All contributed authors have been listed in this article.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rishi Kant Kumar .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was not required as the study did not involve human participants.

Informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Kumar, R.K., Pasumarti, S.S., Figueiredo, R.J. et al. Innovation dynamics within the entrepreneurial ecosystem: a content analysis-based literature review. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 366 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02817-9

Download citation

Received : 25 September 2023

Accepted : 09 February 2024

Published : 06 March 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02817-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Faculty of Arts and Sciences
• FAS Theses and Dissertations
• Communities & Collections
• By Issue Date
• FAS Department
• Quick submit
• Waiver Generator
• DASH Stories
• Accessibility
• COVID-related Research

Terms of Use

• Privacy Policy
• By Collections
• By Departments

Essays on Entrepreneurship and Innovation

Citable link to this page

Collections.

• FAS Theses and Dissertations [6136]

Contact administrator regarding this item (to report mistakes or request changes)

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

Entrepreneurial Leadership and Innovation Performance in New Ventures: Examining the Roles of Strategic Flexibility and Environmental Turbulence

This study seeks to disclose the influencing mechanism of entrepreneurial leadership on innovation performance in new ventures. Drawing on the upper echelons theory, we construct a mediation model to examine the mechanism through which entrepreneurial leadership affects innovation performance of new ventures via strategic flexibility. To obtain an in-depth understanding of the mediating mechanism, this study argues that environmental turbulence could be considered as the moderating variable. Our hypotheses are tested on a sample of 175 Chinese high-tech new ventures. The results show that strategic flexibility mediates the association between entrepreneurial leadership and innovation performance. However, the results only support the moderation of technological turbulence on the association between entrepreneurial leadership and strategic flexibility. Our findings extend the entrepreneurship and leadership research by investigating how entrepreneurial leadership affects innovation performance of new ventures via strategic flexibility, and the effectiveness of entrepreneurial leadership under technological turbulence.

Funding source: National Social Science Foundation of China

Award Identifier / Grant number: 19CRK021

Funding source: Philosophy and Social Science Program of Shanghai City

Award Identifier / Grant number: 2019EGL020

Award Identifier / Grant number: 2018BSH006

Funding source: Humanities and Social Sciences Program of Chinese Ministry of Education

Award Identifier / Grant number: 18YJA79011

Research funding: This work was supported by the National Social Science Foundation of China (No. 19CRK021), Philosophy and Social Science Program of Shanghai City (No. 2019EGL020), Philosophy and Social Science Program of Shanghai City (No. 2018BSH006) and Humanities and Social Sciences Program of Chinese Ministry of Education (No. 18YJA79011).

Agnihotri, A. 2014. “The Role of the Upper Echelon in the Value Chain Management.” Competitiveness Review 24 (3): 240–55, https://doi.org/10.1108/cr-05-2013-0049 . Search in Google Scholar

Aiken, L. S., and S. G. West. 1991. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions . Newbury Park: Sage Publications. Search in Google Scholar

Bagheri, A. 2017. “The Impact of Entrepreneurial Leadership on Innovation Work Behavior and Opportunity Recognition in High-Technology SMEs.” The Journal of High Technology Management Research 28: 159–66, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2017.10.003 . Search in Google Scholar

Baldegger, U., and J. Gast. 2016. “On the Emergence of Leadership in New Ventures.” International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 22 (6): 933–57, https://doi.org/10.1108/ijebr-11-2015-0242 . Search in Google Scholar

Bliemel, M. J., I. P. Mccarthy, and E. Maine. 2014. “An Integrated Approach to Studying Multiplexity in Entrepreneurial Networks.” Entrepreneurship Research Journal 4 (4): 367–402, https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2014-0007 . Search in Google Scholar

Brinckmann, J., J. Villanueva, D. Grichnik, and L. Singh. 2019. “Sources of Strategic Flexibility in New Ventures: An Analysis of the Role of Resource Leveraging Practices.” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 13 (2): 154–78, https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1313 . Search in Google Scholar

Brozovic, D. 2018. “Strategic Flexibility: A Review of the Literature.” International Journal of Management Reviews 20: 3–31, https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12111 . Search in Google Scholar

Buganza, T., C. Dell’Era, and R. Verganti. 2009. “Exploring the Relationships between Product Development and Environmental Turbulence: The Case of Mobile Tlc Services.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 26 (3): 308–21, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2009.00660.x . Search in Google Scholar

Cai, W. J., E. I. Lysova, S. N. Khapova, and B. A. G. Bossink. 2019. “Does Entrepreneurial Leadership Foster Creativity Among Employees and Teams? The Mediating Role of Creative Efficacy Beliefs.” Journal of Business and Psychology 34: 203–17, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-9536-y . Search in Google Scholar

Chen, M. H. 2007. “Entrepreneurial Leadership and New Ventures: Creativity in Entrepreneurial Teams.” Creativity and Innovation Management 16 (3): 239–49, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2007.00439.x . Search in Google Scholar

Chen, T. T., F. L. Li, X. P. Chen, and Z. Y. Ou. 2018. “Innovate or Die: How Should Knowledge-Worker Teams Respond to Technological Turbulence?” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 149: 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.08.008 . Search in Google Scholar

Dai, Y., J. C. Goodale, G. Byun, and F. S. Ding. 2018. “Strategic Flexibility in New High-Technology Ventures.” Journal of Management Studies 55 (2): 265–94, https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12288 . Search in Google Scholar

Dai, Y., G. Byun, and F. S. Ding. 2019a. “The Direct and Indirect Impact of Gender Diversity in New Venture Teams on Innovation Performance.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 43 (3): 505–28, https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258718807696 . Search in Google Scholar

Dai, Y., G. Byun, J. I. Chok, and F. S. Ding. 2019b. “Learning From Referents Across Geographic Distance and Institutional Contexts: The Perceived Speed of ISO 9000 Certification in Chinese High-Technology New Ventures.” Journal of Small Business Management 57 (2): 400–20, https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12374 . Search in Google Scholar

Das, T. K., and B. S. Teng. 1999. “Cognitive Biases and Strategic Decision Processes: An Integrative Perspective.” Journal of Management Studies 36 (6): 757–78, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00157 . Search in Google Scholar

De Clercq, D., N. Thongpapanl, and M. Voronov. 2018. “Sustainability in the Face of Institutional Adversity: Market Turbulence, Network Embeddedness, and Innovative Orientation.” Journal of Business Ethics 148 (2): 437–55, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-3004-7 . Search in Google Scholar

Edwards, J. R., and L. S. Lambert. 2007. “Methods for Integrating Moderation and Mediation: A General Analytical Framework Using Moderated Path Analysis.” Psychological Methods 12 (1): 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989x.12.1.1 . Search in Google Scholar

Eva, N., A. Newman, Q. Miao, B. Cooper, and K. Herbert. 2019. “Chief Executive Officer Participative Leadership and the Performance of New Venture Teams.” International Small Business Journal-Researching Entrepreneurship 37 (1): 69–88, https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242618808558 . Search in Google Scholar

Fan, Z. G., D. Wu, and X. B. Wu. 2013. “Proactive and Reactive Strategic Flexibility in Coping with Environmental Change in Innovation.” Asian Journal of Technology Innovation 21 (2): 187–201, https://doi.org/10.1080/19761597.2013.866316 . Search in Google Scholar

Feng, C., X. Huang, and L. Zhang. 2016. “A Multilevel Study of Transformational Leadership, Dual Organizational Change and Innovative Behavior in Groups.” Journal of Organizational Change Management 29 (6): 855–77, https://doi.org/10.1108/jocm-01-2016-0005 . Search in Google Scholar

Franco, M., and H. Haase. 2017. “Collective Entrepreneurship: Employees’ Perceptions of the Influence of Leadership Styles.” Journal of Management & Organization 23 (2): 241–57, https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2016.3 . Search in Google Scholar

Friske, W. M., and M. A. Zachary. 2019. “Regulation, New Venture Creation, and Resource-Advantage Theory: An Analysis of the US Brewing Industry.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 43 (5): 999–1017, https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258718760840 . Search in Google Scholar

Grewal, R., and P. Tansuhaj. 2001. “Building Organizational Capabilities for Managing Economic Crisis: The Role of Market Orientation and Strategic Flexibility.” Journal of Marketing 65 (2): 67–80, https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.65.2.67.18259 . Search in Google Scholar

Guo, R. P. 2019. “Effectuation, Opportunity Shaping and Innovation Strategy in High-Tech New Ventures.” Management Decision 57 (1): 115–30, https://doi.org/10.1108/md-08-2017-0799 . Search in Google Scholar

Guo, B., and Y. Q. Wang. 2014. “Environmental Turbulence, Absorptive Capacity and External Knowledge Search Among Chinese SMEs.” Chinese Management Studies 8 (2): 258–72, https://doi.org/10.1108/cms-03-2014-0051 . Search in Google Scholar

Guo, R. P., L. Cai, and Y. P. Fei. 2019. “Knowledge Integration Methods, Product Innovation and High-Tech New Venture Performance in China.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 31 (3): 306–18, https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2018.1500688 . Search in Google Scholar

Gupta, V., I. C. Macmillan, and G. Surie. 2004. “Entrepreneurial Leadership: Developing and Measuring a Cross-Sectional Construct.” Journal of Business Venturing 19 (2): 241–60, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-9026(03)00040-5 . Search in Google Scholar

Gupta, V. K., D. K. Dutta, and X. Chen. 2014. “Entrepreneurial Orientation Capability and Firm Performance under Conditions of Organizational Learning.” Journal of Managerial Issues 26 (2): 157–73. Search in Google Scholar

Hambrick, D. C. 2007. “The Field of Management’s Devotion to Theory: Too Much of a Good Thing?” Academy of Management Journal 50 (6): 1346–52, https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.28166119 . Search in Google Scholar

Hayes, A. F. 2013. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach . New York: Guilford Press. Search in Google Scholar

Hitt, M. A., R. D. Ireland, D. G. Sirmon, and C. A. Trahms. 2011. “Strategic Entrepreneurship: Creating Value for Individuals, Organizations, and Society.” Academy of Management Perspectives 25 (2): 57–75, https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.25.2.57 . Search in Google Scholar

Huang, S., D. Ding, and Z. Chen. 2014. “Entrepreneurial Leadership and Performance in Chinese New Ventures: A Moderated Mediation Model of Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation and Environmental Dynamism.” Creativity and Innovation Management 23 (4): 453–71, https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12085 . Search in Google Scholar

Hughes, M., S. L. Martin, R. E. Morgan, and M. J. Robson. 2013. “Realizing Product-Market Advantage in High-Technology International New Ventures: The Mediating Role of Ambidextrous Innovation.” Journal of International Marketing 18 (4): 1–21, https://doi.org/10.1509/jimk.18.4.1 . Search in Google Scholar

Hutchison-Krupat, J., and S. Kavadias. 2015. “Strategic Resource Allocation: Top-Down, Bottom-Up, and the Value of Strategic Buckets.” Management Science 61 (2): 391–412, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1861 . Search in Google Scholar

Ireland, R. D., M. A. Hitt, and D. G. Sirmon. 2003. “A Model of Strategic Entrepreneurship: The Construct and its Dimensions.” Journal of Management 29 (6): 963–89, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0149-2063_03_00086-2 . Search in Google Scholar

Jansen, J. J. P., D. Vera, and M. Crossan. 2009. “Strategic Leadership for Exploration and Exploitation: The Moderating Role of Environmental Dynamism.” The Leadership Quarterly 14 (1): 5–18, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.11.008 . Search in Google Scholar

Jaworski, B. J., and A. K. Kohli. 1993. “Market Orientation: Antecedents and Consequences.” Journal of Marketing 57 (3): 53–71, https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299305700304 . Search in Google Scholar

Jeng, J. F., and A. Pak. 2016. “The Variable Effects of Dynamic Capability by Firm Size: The Interaction of Innovation and Marketing Capabilities in Competitive Industries.” International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal 12 (1): 115–30, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-014-0330-7 . Search in Google Scholar

Jones, O., and H. Crompton. 2009. “Enterprise Logic and Small Firms: A Model of Authentic Entrepreneurial Leadership.” Journal of Strategy & Management 2 (4): 329–51, https://doi.org/10.1108/17554250911003836 . Search in Google Scholar

Kakabadse, N. K., A. Tatli, K. Nicolopoulou, and A. Tankibayeva. 2018. “A Gender Perspective on Entrepreneurial Leadership: Female Leaders in Kazakhstan.” European Management Review 15 (2): 155–70, https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12125 . Search in Google Scholar

Kamasak, R., U. Yozgat, and M. Yavuz. 2017. “Knowledge Process Capabilities and Innovation: Testing the Moderating Effects of Environmental Dynamism and Strategic Flexibility.” Knowledge Management Research & Practice 15 (3): 356–68, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41275-017-0068-4 . Search in Google Scholar

Kang, J. H., G. T. Solomon, and D. Y. Choi. 2015. “CEOs’ Leadership Styles and Managers’ Innovative Behaviour: Investigation of Intervening Effects in an Entrepreneurial Context.” Journal of Management Studies 52 (4): 531–54, https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12125 . Search in Google Scholar

Kline, R. B. 2005. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling . New York: The Guilford Press. Search in Google Scholar

Koryak, O., K. F. Mole, A. Lockett, J. C. Hayton, D. Ucbasaran, and G. P. Hodgkinson. 2015. “Entrepreneurial Leadership, Capabilities and Firm Growth.” International Small Business Journal 33 (1): 89–105, https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242614558315 . Search in Google Scholar

Kumar, V., E. Jones, R. Venkatesan, and R. P. Leone. 2011. “Is Market Orientation a Source of Sustanable Competitive Advantage or Simply the Cost of Competing?” Journal of Marketing 75: 16–30, https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.75.1.16 . Search in Google Scholar

Lee, T., and H. M. Liu. 2018. “How Do Firms with Management Ability Promote Competitive Advantages? An Integrated Model from Entrepreneurial Strategy Making and Internal Resources.” Entrepreneurship Research Journal 8: 71, https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2017-0071 . Search in Google Scholar

Li, L. 2018. “China’s Manufacturing Locus in 2025: With a Comparison of “Made-In-China 2025” and “Industry 4.0”.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 135: 66–74, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.028 . Search in Google Scholar

Li, Y., Y. Liu, Y. Duan, and M. Li. 2008. “Entrepreneurial Orientation, Strategic Flexibilities and Indigenous Firm Innovation in Transitional China.” International Journal of Technology Management 41: 223–46, https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtm.2008.015993 . Search in Google Scholar

Liao, S. Q., Z. Y. Liu, L. H. Fu, and P. C. Ye. 2019. “Investigate the Role of Distributed Leadership and Strategic Flexibility in Fostering Business Model Innovation.” Chinese Management Studies 13 (1): 93–112, https://doi.org/10.1108/cms-02-2018-0420 . Search in Google Scholar

Marvel, M. R., and P. C. Patel. 2018. “Self-Leadership and Overcoming the Time Resource Constraint: Accelerating Innovation for New Products.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 65 (4): 545–56, https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.2017.2690818 . Search in Google Scholar

Miao, Q., N. Eva, A. Newman, and B. Cooper. 2019. “CEO Entrepreneurial Leadership and Performance Outcomes of Top Management Teams in Entrepreneurial Ventures: The Mediating Effects of Psychological Safety.” Journal of Small Business Management 57 (3): 1119–35, https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12465 . Search in Google Scholar

Miller, K. D. 2007. “Risk and Rationality in Entrepreneurial Processes.” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 1: 57–74, https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.2 . Search in Google Scholar

Morse, E. A., S. W. Fowler, and T. B. Lawrence. 2007. “The Impact of Virtual Embeddedness on New Venture Survival: Overcoming the Liabilities of Newness.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 31 (2): 139–59, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00167.x . Search in Google Scholar

Najmaei, A. 2016. “How Do Entrepreneurs Develop Business Models in Small High-Tech Ventures? An Exploratory Model From Australian IT Firms.” Entrepreneurship Research Journal 6 (3): 297–343, https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2014-0037 . Search in Google Scholar

Nambisan, S. 2017. “Digital Entrepreneurship: Toward a Digital Technology Perspective of Entrepreneurship.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 41 (6): 1029–55, https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12254 . Search in Google Scholar

Newman, A., C. Neesham, G. Manville, and H. H. M. Tse. 2018a. “Examining the Influence of Servant and Entrepreneurial Leadership on the Work Outcomes of Employees in Social Enterprises.” International Journal of Human Resource 29 (20): 2905–26, https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1359792 . Search in Google Scholar

Newman, A., H. H. M. Tse, G. Schwarz, and I. Nielsen. 2018b. “The Effects of Employees’ Creative Self-Efficacy on Innovative Behavior: The Role of Entrepreneurial Leadership.” Journal of Business Research 89: 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.04.001 . Search in Google Scholar

Pitelis, C. N., and J. D. Wagner. 2019. “Strategic Shared Leadership and Organizational Dynamic Capabilities.” The Leadership Quarterly 30 (2): 233–42, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.08.002 . Search in Google Scholar

Preacher, K. J., and A. F. Hayes. 2008. “Asymptotic and Resampling Strategies for Assessing and Comparing Indirect Effects in Multiple Mediator Models.” Behavior Research Methods 40 (3): 879–91, https://doi.org/10.3758/brm.40.3.879 . Search in Google Scholar

Raynor, M. E., and X. Leroux. 2004. “Strategic Flexibility in R&D.” Research-Technology Management 47 (3): 1–27, https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2004.11671627 . Search in Google Scholar

Renko, M., A. E. Tarabishy, A. L. Carsrud, and M. Brännback. 2015. “Understanding and Measuring Entrepreneurial Leadership Style.” Journal of Small Business Management 53 (1): 54–74, https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12086 . Search in Google Scholar

Sarros, J. C., B. K. Cooper, and J. C. Santora. 2008. “Building a Climate for Innovation Through Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture.” Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 15 (2): 145–58, https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051808324100 . Search in Google Scholar

Schoemaker, P. J. H., S. Heaton, and D. Teece. 2018. “Innovation, Dynamic Capabilities, and Leadership.” California Management Review 61 (1): 15–42, https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125618790246 . Search in Google Scholar

Sedita, S. R., R. Apa, T. Bassetti, and R. Grandinetti. 2019. “Incubation Matters: Measuring the Effect of Business Incubators on the Innovation Performance of Start-Ups.” R&D Management 49 (4): 439–54, https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12321 . Search in Google Scholar

Shimizu, K., and M. A. Hitt. 2004. “Strategic Flexibility: Organizational Preparedness to Reverse Ineffective Strategic Decisions.” Academy of Management Executive 18 (4): 44–59, https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2004.15268683 . Search in Google Scholar

Sklaveniti, C. 2017. “Processes of Entrepreneurial Leadership: Co-acting Creativity and Direction in the Emergence of New SME Ventures.” International Small Business Journal 35 (2): 197–213, https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242616673420 . Search in Google Scholar

Su, Z., and D. Wang. 2018. “Entrepreneurial Orientation, Control Systems, and New Venture Performance: A Dominant Logic Perspective.” Entrepreneurship Research Journal 8: 91, https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2017-0091 . Search in Google Scholar

Tang, W., D. Libaers, and J. Hao. 2014. “Opening the Black Box of Upper Echelons in China: TMT Attributes and Strategic Flexibility.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 32 (5): 685–703, https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12152 . Search in Google Scholar

Tang, Y., J. Li, and Y. Liu. 2016. “Does Founder CEO Status Affect Firm Risk Taking?” Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 23 (3): 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051815623736 . Search in Google Scholar

Tlaiss, H. A., and S. Kauser. 2019. “Entrepreneurial Leadership, Patriarchy, Gender, and Identity in the Arab World: Lebanon in Focus.” Journal of Small Business Management 57 (2): 517–37, https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12397 . Search in Google Scholar

Tomlinson, P. R., and F. M. Fai. 2016. “The Impact of Deep Vertical Supply Chain Relationships Upon Focal-Firm Innovation Performance.” R&D Management 46: 277–90, https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12181 . Search in Google Scholar

Xia, T. J., and X. H. Liu. 2017. “Foreign Competition, Domestic Competition and Innovation in Chinese Private High-Tech New Ventures.” Journal of International Business Studies 48 (6): 716–39, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-017-0083-y . Search in Google Scholar

Xiu, L., X. Liang, Z. Chen, and W. Xu. 2017. “Strategic Flexibility, Innovative HR Practices, and Firm Performance A Moderated Mediation Model.” Personnel Review 46 (7): 1335–57, https://doi.org/10.1108/pr-09-2016-0252 . Search in Google Scholar

Yang, J., B. Pu, and Z. Z. Guan. 2019. “Entrepreneurial Leadership and Turnover Intention of Employees: The Role of Affective Commitment and Person-Job Fit.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16: 2380, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16132380 . Search in Google Scholar

Ye, J. F., B. Hao, and P. C. Patel. 2016. “Orchestrating Heterogeneous Knowledge: The Effects of Internal and External Knowledge Heterogeneity on Innovation Performance.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 63 (2): 165–76, https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.2016.2541863 . Search in Google Scholar

Zahra, S. A., H. J. Sapienza, and P. Davidsson. 2006. “Entrepreneurship and Dynamic Capabilities: A Review, Model and Research Agenda.” Journal of Management Studies 43 (4): 917–55, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00616.x . Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, Y., and H. Y. Li. 2010. “Innovation Search of New Ventures in a Technology Cluster: The Role of Ties with Service Intermediaries.” Strategic Management Journal 31 (1): 88–109, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.806 . Search in Google Scholar

Zhou, Y. Y., C. L. Shu, W. Jiang, and S. X. Gao. 2019. “Green Management, Firm Innovations, and Environmental Turbulence.” Business Strategy and the Environment 28 (4): 567–81, https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2265 . Search in Google Scholar

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

• advanced search
• submit works
•   MOspace Home
• University of Missouri-Kansas City
• School of Management, Henry W. Bloch (UMKC)
• Department of Global Entrepreneurship and Innovation (UMKC)

Global Entrepreneurship and Innovation Theses and Dissertations (UMKC)

Date Issued Author/Contributor Title Identifier Thesis Department Thesis Advisor Thesis Semester

Search within this collection:

The items in this collection are the theses and dissertations written by students of the Department of Global Entrepreneurship and Innovation. Some items may be viewed only by members of the University of Missouri System and/or University of Missouri-Kansas City. Click on one of the browse buttons above for a complete listing of the works.

Items in MOspace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Recent Submissions

The systemic risk of consolidation in the cloud computing industry , an analysis of the decision to formally register a new venture in sub-saharan africa , an attention-based view on environmental exigencies and opportunity valuation , ceo narcissism and strategic entrepreneurial behaviors: the moderating role of industry environment , emerging methods for use of real-world clinical data for cardiovascular outcomes research , capturing the strategic pivot: identifying the performance outcomes of new venture pivots , the case for humble and narcissistic leadership: creative self-efficacy and idea generation in entrepreneurial settings , of floods and gales: environmental value creation due to creative destruction , opportunity recognition: a contingency framework of individual attributes, time pressure, and uncertainty , understanding and adapting to crowd behavior: a study of wireless networks and entrepreneurial crowdfunding , hybrid fuzzy-bayesian dynamic decision support tool for resource-based scheduling of construction projects , essays on complexity and design thinking in entrepreneurship , the influence of director human social capital and firms' entrepreneurial orientation on corporate entrepreneurship , entrepreneurial search, innovation, and initiative: the stage, network, and level analysis , institutions, entrepreneurship, and microfinance institutions , the financialization of the business enterprise , toward a search perspective on entrepreneurship , the governance-performance relationship: examining the impact of nonprofit governance on financial performance in medium-sized nonprofit organizations , intention, economic opportunity and their impact on venture creation , the paradox of prosperity in china: the interplay among entrepreneurs, government, and venture capitalists at initial public offering .

Secure your free spot at Excelerate Connect career event in Copenhagen

• Student profile
• Employer profile

Excelerate ApS Strandlodsvej 44, 3. sal 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark

[email protected]

Entrepreneurship & Innovation THESIS AND RESEARCH TOPICS

Entrepreneurship and innovation research topics ignite business evolution, from novel concepts to market disruptions, shaping entrepreneurial mindsets and propelling industries into the future. View all of our entrepreneurship and innovation thesis topics below.

Click on a research area to find inspiration.

Select semesters to find inspiration from.

• Fall 2023 1
• Spring 2022 3
• Spring 2023 2
• Spring 2024 1

Select universities to find inspiration from.

• IT University of Copenhagen 2
• Copenhagen Business School 5

Select academic degrees to find inspiration from.

• Bachelor of Arts 0
• Bachelor of Science 0
• Candidate 1
• Erhvervsakademiuddannelse 0
• Master of Arts 0
• Master of Science 2
• Clear filters

Overview of Entrepreneurship & Innovation topics for a thesis project

Find entrepreneurship and innovation research topics and themes in go-to-market strategies, business ventures, creative problem-solving, innovation culture, market disruption, and much more! Start your entrepreneurial thesis journey here.

• IT University of Copenhagen
• Master of Science
• Spring 2024

Entrepreneurship & Innovation

Service Design

Prototyping

Collaborate with Four Designers for Your Next Challenge

Get fresh perspectives and practical solutions in service design and UX/UI

Let us explore your challenge through design. Hello there! We are a team of four ambitious students from ITU's Digital Design program, gearing up to go on our thesis journey this spring. Throughout our studies, we have developed our expertise in UX/UI and service design.  This means we possess the tools to take a holistic view of processes and services and also to craft practical solutions. And now we are looking for interesting cases. The outcome of our collaboration could range from proto...

1 x MSc in Digital Design and Interactive Technologies

• Copenhagen Business School
• Spring 2023

Co-creation

Desing Thinking

Co-creation of innovation between companies and start-ups

Innovation and Entrepreneurship

We are interested in researching the connection between startups and companies and how this collaboration process can bring value to both companies and startups. We would like to explore what the process looks like and how it can be optimized. We are also curious to research how long-term partnerships can be established. The companies we are interested in collaborating with have collaborated on a solution with a startup or companies that mediate this connection.  ...

1 x Organizational Innovation and Entrepreneurship

Startup Ecosystem

Entrepreneurship

Business Processes

Collaboration

Role of your company in terms of innovation and the start-up ecosystem

Innovation and entrepreneurship

We are interested in researching how is your company involved in the startup ecosystem. In case you are a startup, we are curious to hear about your journey and look into your past or current challenges and how can we use theory in innovation and entrepreneurship to develop a framework for solving the challenges. In case you are an established company, we would like to hear about how you engage with innovation, internally or externally. In case you are an incubator, accelerator or innovation man...

• Spring 2022

Open Innovation

International

Co-Creation

Cultural influence

Performance

Co-Creation Practices in Open Innovation

Is there a cultural influence on co-creation practices between international companies?

The purpose of this study is to assess if within the open innovation field, cultural differences might influence co-creation practices. The last couple of decades, Open Innovation (OI) has become an important topic for firms who wish to effectively access flows of knowledge. However, even though OI is of high importance, we found out that it has not received enough attention in the academic literature, especially within Scandinavia. For that reason, this thesis will be primarily focused on Open ...

1 x International Business

Sustainability

Business Model Design

Stakeholders

Sustainable Business Model Innovation in the textile industry

Drivers & Barriers for Sustainable Business Model Innovation

Broadly my thesis will explore the process of how companies in the textile industry are transforming into more sustainable practices, business models, and strategies. I am particularly interested in the drivers and barriers to creating Sustainable Business Model Innovation.  This includes, but is not limited to, the strategic focus and governance, how the internal organization can be designed to create patient investments, enabling innovation and collaborative innovation, internal capabilit...

1 x Cand.merc. i Erhvervsøkonomi (Finance and Strategic Management)

Process Automation

Knowledge value

Digital Innovation

Organizational change

The Value of Digital Automation

The Value of Business Process Automation

I am still in the process of scoping the thesis, and I am currently working on some of the administrative tasks of getting an academic supervisor. However, I have the following ideas for the project:Preliminary problem statement:How do you gain the most value possible in digital automation projects such as (either RPA or BPA) and how do you measure it?The notion of value is in this regard questioned in how to measure value. I would like to research both the technical aspects of automation and th...

1 x IT Management

digital health

digitalization

pharmaceutical

Digital health in the pharmaceutical industry

Create a digital strategy through implementation of a digital platform to support a company's portofolio

The main goal of the project is to build a strategy for a chosen pharmaceutical company on how to implement a digital platform/app to enhance its existing product portfolio. The pharmaceutical industry has a revenue model, which is highly dependent on the reimbursement agreements with the governments, which only now are, starting to implement reimbursements on digital health solutions. Some countries are exploring this such as Germany (made possible by the German Digital Healthcare Act, DVG) or ...

1 x Management of Innovation and Business Development

Find more thesis topics in related research areas

Looking for more thesis topic inspiration? Find topic ideas and examples in related research areas below.

21 Business & Economics

Interested in the world of business and economics, understanding what fosters and drive organizational triumphs? Explore business and economic research topics examining sustainable strategies to fuel growth and success.

Business & Economics research topics

16 management & leadership.

Interested in human interactions, what drives change, and how to lead with impact? Explore management and leadership research topics examining how to elevate organizations through effective and impactful strategies and techniques.

Management & Leadership research topics

8 finance & accounting.

Curious about finance and accounting, analyzing the fusion of money and informed decision-making? Explore financial research topics examining strategies to fuel economic stability and growth.

Finance & Accounting research topics

6 marketing, communication & media.

Interested in the world of marketing, captivating consumers through messages that resonate and engage people? Explore marketing, communications, and media research topics delving into the art of persuasion and consumer behavior.

Marketing, Communication & Media research topics

2 tourism & hospitality.

Interested in the world of travel and leisure, culture, and top-tier hospitality? Explore tourism and hospitality research topics examining the art of crafting immersive experiences and adventures for people.

Tourism & Hospitality research topics

Want to dive into the world of legal frameworks, unraveling the principles that shape societies and uphold justice? Explore research topics in law, understanding its pivotal role in society.

Law research topics

Curious about the world of taxation, shaping financial strategies, compliance, and legal frameworks? Explore tax research topics that craft strategies, ensure compliance, and dive into the rules and nuances of taxation.

Tax research topics

FREE for students

Use Excelerate to search for thesis inspiration and find companies for a thesis collaboration.

Related articles

Find the perfect thesis topic – 8 useful tips, how to write a thesis alone, thesis writing in a group, thesis writing tips – a guide to writing a good thesis project, what is writer’s block and how do you overcome it, how to write the perfect thesis statement for your master’s – 6 easy steps.

Do a more advanced search »

Search for dissertations about: "Entrepreneurship and Innovation"

Showing result 1 - 5 of 92 swedish dissertations containing the words Entrepreneurship and Innovation .

1. Entrepreneurship Policy : Public Support for Technology-Based Ventures

Author : Charlotte Norrman ; Magnus Klofsten ; Anna Bergek ; Linköpings universitet ; [] Keywords : SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP ; SOCIAL SCIENCES ; Public support programmes ; Entrepreneurship policy ; Early stages technology-based ventures ; Entrepreneurship ; Innovation ; Innovation systems ; Programme theory ; Evaluation ; Business studies ; Företagsekonomi ;

Abstract : The subject of this thesis is entrepreneurship policy and the focus is on public support programmes directed to early stages technology-based ventures. It advocates that a broad view should be taken with regard to the type of policies for entrepreneurship that aim at supporting the facilitation of the supported ventures’ ability to link to their surrounding innovation system, in which they can secure their access to crucial external resources. READ MORE

2. Managing the Collaborative Front End of Innovation in Manufacturing Firms : Requirements, Capabilities, and Conditions

Author : Fabio Gama ; Johan Frishammar ; David Sjödin ; Vinit Parida ; Anders Fundin ; Luleå tekniska universitet ; [] Keywords : SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP ; SOCIAL SCIENCES ; TEKNIK OCH TEKNOLOGIER ; ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ; Entreprenörskap och innovation ; Entrepreneurship and Innovation ; front end of innovation ;

Abstract : The front end of innovation is critical to innovative efforts in firms yet it remains to be poorly understood. This especially important since innovation efforts in the front end are becoming increasingly open in line with the era of open innovation. READ MORE

3. Change in the Pharmaceutical Industry : Aspects on Innovation, Entrepreneurship, Openness, and Decision Making

Author : Thomas Hedner ; Magnus Klofsten ; Johan Braet ; Mirjam Knockaert ; Linköpings universitet ; [] Keywords : Pharmaceutical industry ; Big Pharma ; life sciences ; drug discovery ; drug development ; R D ; business model ; innovation ; closed innovation ; open innovation ; entrepreneurship ; intellectual property ; multiple stakeholders ; decision making ; judgment ; uncertainty ; go no-go ; go no-go recycle ; company ; SME. ; Läkemedelsindustri ; Big Pharma ; biovetenskap ; läkemedelsutveckling ; utveckling av läkemedel ; FoU ; affärsmodell ; innovation ; stängd innovation ; öppen innovation ; entreprenörskap ; immaterialrätt ; beslutsfattande ; osäkerhet ; go no-go ; go no-go recycle ; företag ; små och medelstora företag ;

Abstract : Over the past century, the pharmaceutical industry has been a major contributor of individual and population health and societal wealth. Its products and services have contributed to longevity of large groups of patients and symptom relief from major diseases. READ MORE

4. Walking the Plank of the Entrepreneurial University : The little spin-out that could?

Author : Nina Fowler ; David Sköld ; Marcus Lindahl ; Malin Brännback ; Uppsala universitet ; [] Keywords : University spinouts ; research ; academic capitalism ; entrepreneurship ; commercialisation ; social forces ; Engineering Science with specialization in industrial engineering and management ; Teknisk fysik med inriktning mot industriell teknik ;

Abstract : Creating spinout companies (USOs) from university research is one focus of innovation policy. The phenomenon features in two main fields of enquiry: academic entrepreneurship studies, and literature on academic capitalism and the entrepreneurial university. READ MORE

5. Small Firm Growth and Performance : Entrepreneurship and Beyond

Author : Johan Wiklund ; Jönköping University ; [] Keywords : SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP ; SOCIAL SCIENCES ;

Abstract : Why is it that some small firms perform well and grow while others do not? Does entrepreneurship play a role in this process? These are the two principal questions addressed in this text.On the basis of an extensive literature review, variables enhancing and restricting small firm growth and performance were identified. READ MORE

Searchphrases right now

• Gothenburg University
• product management
• qualitative design
• thesis on road accident
• two-component system
• Complex questions

Popular searches

• evaluations
• state complexity
• interdisciplinary
• Weight ratios
• SPATIAL MODELS
• environmental aspects

Popular dissertations yesterday (2024-04-10)

• An Information-Theoretic Approach to Generalization Theory
• Chains of Trust : Networks of Persistent Resistance in Digital Activism
• The Europeanization of Swedish Alcohol Policy
• Some Factors Influencing Thermal Comfort and Air Quality in Residential Buildings. Field Measurements and Laboratory Tests
• Transport and location analysis
• SECURITY OF SUPPLY DURING THE ENERGY TRANSITION:THE ROLE OF CAPACITY MECHANISMS
• Concepts and biomedical applications of excitation-modulated transient state monitoring of fluorescence emitters
• Knowledge Dissemination in Multinational Corporations
• Modelling and Detecting Kilonovae in the Rubin Observatory Era
• Four multivariate studies in personality and socialization
• Popular complementary terms: essays, phd thesis, master thesis, papers, importance, trend, impact, advantages, disadvantages, role of, example, case study.

See yesterday's most popular searches here . Dissertations.se is the english language version of Avhandlingar.se .

• To the content
• To the main navigation
• To the target group navigation
• To the sub-navigation

Indicative Master Thesis Topics 

In the coming semesters we will supervise master theses with the following indicative titles and descriptions. The list is not exhaustive and serves only as an orientation as to what kind of topics you can work on.

1. “Towards a green supply chain – Supplier engagement strategies to decarbonize supply chains” A considerable amount of CO2 emissions of businesses result from their supply chain. For instance, in the automotive industry about 95% of the CO2 emissions of a car manufacturer are located in its supply chain. While authorities and stakeholders request all businesses to reduce their carbon footprints, industries with large and complex supply chains are especially challenged. Supplier engagement strategies represent an important approach in decarbonizing supply chains. This master thesis investigates how supply chains can be effectively decarbonized by relying on supplier engagement strategies. What we want to know is: What are the antecedences and the impact of supplier engagement strategies for decarbonization of supply chains?

Keywords: Supply Chain, Decarbonization

2. “Do investors care? - Investors' preferences and companies’ pledge for carbon neutrality” A rising number of companies announce publicly to be carbon neutral by a specific year. This pledge for a net zero carbon footprint aims to eliminate, remove, and/or offset firm’s carbon emissions in the mid or long term future. Net zero emission pledges are in line with what is necessary to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to well below 2 C. To achieve net zero CO2 emissions requires significant investments affecting companies’ bottom line. Although a growing number of investors support companies’ low carbon transition, a net zero carbon footprint may reduce firms’ shareholder value. This master thesis investigates how investors react on firms’ announcement to become carbon neutral. What we want to know is: Do investors value companies’ green ambition?

Keywords: Investors, Decarbonization, Carbon Neutrality

3. “Investigating the impact of CEO variable compensation on external corporate venturing activity” CEOs oftentimes receive a compensation package that also comprises variable components such as stock options. According to the behavioral agency model, such remuneration may incentivize more or less risk-taking behavior. Does it also trigger external corporate venturing acticity (i.e. M&A, CVC, alliances)?

Keywords: Stock options, Corporate venturing, M&A, CVC, Alliances, Behavioral agency model

4. “Identifying top management team characteristics that affect green external venturing activity” According to the upper echelon perspective, the experience of top management team (TMT) members shapes their views and ultimately their decision-making. Are their certain TMT characteristics that foster green external corporate venturing acticity (i.e. green M&A, green CVC, green alliances)?

Keywords: TMT, Upper echelon theory, Corporate venturing, Green M&A, Green CVC, Green alliances

5. “Assessing market expectation with respect to company announcements on green external venturing activity” With means of event studies, researchers measure the influence of certain corporate activities on stock prices. Do company announcements of green external corporate venturing activity (i.e. green M&A, green CVC, green alliances) drive stock price performance? Does the capital market value green external corporate venturing activity?

Keywords: Event study, Stock price reactions, Green M&A, Green CVC, Green alliances

6. “Marketers in the upper echelon: Understanding their role for firms' innovation performance” "Any business enterprise has two - and only two - basic functions: marketing and innovation." Peter Drucker's famous quote from 1954 is more relevant than ever: In times of accelerating digitalization and radical technological change, firms are under increasing pressure to innovate in order to remain relevant in the marketplace. Marketing departments claim a key role in this task, and recent research confirms marketing's importance for overall firm performance. What remains unclear, however, is the influence of marketing on firms' innovation efforts. Do firms with superior marketing expertise possess an advantage in delivering market breakthrough innovation? Do senior-level marketing managers help or hinder the transition towards digital offerings? Leveraging powerful proprietary databases, this thesis aims to explore these and related questions, advancing marketing strategy and innovation research as well as managerial practice.

Keywords: Upper Echelons, Marketing, CMO, Innovation

7. “Innovation and megatrends – Investigating changes in firms’ innovation pipeline” Innovation is a key prerequisite of firms’ long-term success. However, current megatrends, e.g., sustainability, require firms to rethink their innovation pipelines. This thesis proposal aims to review the theoretical foundations to develop hypotheses on firms’ innovation activity against the background of key megatrends. What are the key megatrends impacting firms? Has there actually been a change in firms’ innovations and how are key megatrends reflected in those changes? These hypotheses are empirically evaluated leveraging powerful databases. Findings are of high relevance not only for the scientific community but also to practitioners: how can firms’ leadership teams address megatrends in their innovation focus to retain and strengthen their market position?

Keywords: Innovation, Megatrends, Upper Echelons

8. “Innovation as Big Tech’s winning formula – Are the FAANG companies better than the old economy in innovating?” The 2010s have seen the tremendous rise of technology companies in economic importance and stock prices. Five companies – namely Facebook (Meta), Apple, Amazon, Netflix, and Google (Alphabet) are particularly prominent and said to dominate their markets. How come? A recent stream of literature investigates the role of innovation for those companies’ success. This thesis aims to advance recent literature by comparing Big Tech’s innovation activity to that of the old economy. How do their innovations differ? Do Big Tech companies bring more radical innovations and breakthroughs to the market? This thesis aims at addressing those questions empirically building upon existing data and approaches.

Keywords: Innovation, Technology, Digitalization, Firm Performance

9. "Digital Health and Innovation in healthcare"

The digitalisation of healthcare has been one of the main drivers of innovation in the healthcare sector, and not just since the Corona pandemic. An increasing number of digital solutions are in development or are being introduced into the German health market under the term Digital Health Application (DiGa). In the context of these developments, we examine the role of start-ups and established companies in this development. Further research questions are the origin of innovations and their penetration in the market. Which go-to-market strategies exist and which of them are suitable for start-up-related innovations. The starting point for these studies is a broad quantitative database, which we are constantly expanding.  See Research Group – Digital Ecosystems for further information.

Keywords: eHealth, mHealth, Digital Health, Telemedicine, MedTech, Artificial Intelligence, Entrepreneurship, Medical Entrepreneurship, Health Care Entrepreneurship, Physician Entrepreneurs

10. "Personalities of Founders in the Clean Energy Industry"

Your master thesis is about the backgrounds and expertise of founders in green energy start-ups. While previous studies have looked at tech start-ups, your research uniquely focuses on the clean energy sector, emphasizing the significance of founders' experiences in determining the success of these ventures. Start-ups in this field play a pivotal role in sustainable rural electrification, driving major innovations to conserve resources, address climate change, and minimize environmental pollution.

Keywords: Green energy start-ups, Founders' backgrounds, Clean energy sector, Venture success.

11. "Hit or hype? Digital technologies shaking up today's economic landscape"

Digital transformation is shaking up the value chains of companies in all industries. An unprecedented number of new technologies are entering the market, e.g. artificial intelligence or blockchain. The impact of these technologies on our economy today, but also on social life in general, needs to be explored intensively. Theses in this area investigate these interrelationships with different methodological approaches, e.g. literature reviews, surveys, secondary data analysis.

Keywords: Digital Technology, Digital Transformation, Firm Performance

12. "Evaluating the Environmental Footprint of Solid-State Batteries: A Life Cycle Assessment Approach for Sustainable Energy Storage Solutions"

Due to the high relevance of sustainability in society, it is essential to evaluate the environmental impact of new technologies. In line with this goal, this master thesis will address the implementation of a life cycle assessment analysis of solid state batteries. This research project aims to comprehensively assess the environmental impact of solid state batteries throughout their life cycle, considering aspects such as raw material extraction, production, use and disposal. Subsequently, the results will be processed for a qualitative analysis. The master thesis will contribute to the research of environmental impacts and facilitate the development of sustainable energy storage solutions.

Keywords: sustainability, environmental impact, new technologies, life cycle analysis, solid state batteries, life cycle, raw material extraction, qualitative analysis, sustainable energy storage solutions.

12. "A Comparative Study on Climate Change Mitigation vs. Adaptation Technologies: A Path to Sustainability"

Climate change presents two distinct challenges: mitigation and adaptation. This master thesis focuses on understanding the differences between technologies aimed at mitigating climate change and those designed for adaptation. Utilizing OLS analysis on comprehensive datasets, the research will dissect the economic dimension of both approaches. The goal is to provide a nuanced understanding of how different strategies contribute to combating climate change, offering insights for policymakers, investors, and environmental stakeholders.

Keywords: Sustainability, innovation performance, OLS regression

Practitioner Theses

We also welcome and encourage collaborations with practitioners to write your thesis (e.g., startups, corporates, non-profit organizations). In general, it is your responsibility to find a collaboration partner. From time to time, we will publish cooperation opportunities on our Jobs website .

Currently there is the possibility to write theses at Durante Adesivi in Italy or the St. Franziskus Foundation . If you are interested, please contact Maximilian Charlet .

Please apply to our chair before you commit to the partner to discuss whether your proposed topic is a good fit for our chair (see below for details on the application process). In your application, you will be asked to include the contact details of your contact within the partner organization. The final topic will be determined by the chair in consultation with the contact person.

You need to ensure that the partner agrees to make the data used in your thesis available to the academic supervisor and the head of the chair for the purpose of the examination.

Pursuant to the regulations governing examinations, the practice partner has no right to participate in the evaluation of the thesis. Other contractual agreements between the student and the company do not affect the regulations governing examinations set by the examination office and are solely in the candidate’s scope of responsibility.

Formal Requirements

We recommend writing your Master thesis in English but it can also be written in German after consultation with your advisor. Detailed guidelines, especially with regard to the layout, will be provided in time once you are accepted.

To start your thesis, you need to fill in the candidate section of the guide card (“Leitkarte”) which you can find here . The writing period starts once the topic is assigned. You can calculate the exact start and submission dates for your specific circumstances in the online calculator here .

Final Submission

You must submit your Master's thesis no later than the date specified in the routing card.

From Q1 2023, please only use the digital option of the Thesis Uploader for submission. Physical printing is no longer necessary.

The declaration of consent for plagiarism checking ("Declaration of consent to check my thesis with plagiarism detection software") can be downloaded here and must be attached to the bound copies at the end of the Master's thesis and signed. 

The declaration of authorship must also be included and signed in the bound copies at the end of the Master's thesis.

Application to the Institute for Entrepreneurship

Before you register at the Examination Office, please apply by completing the following survey. Note that you will be asked to upload a CV and current transcript of records. We will not consider applications if these two documents are missing.

Registration with the Examination Office

Registration for Master theses is done via the examination office of the Faculty of Business and Economics at the University of Münster. The registration dates can be found on the Examination Office’s website .

Previous Master Thesis Topics

Entrepreneurship

Internationalization of Startups: Market Selection, Entry Mode and Entry Timing – The Case of a B2B Online Used Car Marketplace (2020)

E-Commerce Success Factors: Dynamic and Promotional Pricing in Online Retail (2020)

Traditional Public Offering vs. Token Offering – A Cost Comparison of a New Form of Financing (2020)

Digital Internationalization: the Role of E-Commerce in Expansion Processes (2020)

An Analysis of Strategic Success Factors for Start-ups: Possible Application of the PIMS Project Findings for Start-Ups in the Seed, Start-up and Growth Stage (2020)

Establishment of a Sales Cycle Management Process to Optimize the Lead-To-Customer Conversion Rate for a B2B Online Used Car Marketplace (2020)

Quantitative Analysis of the Influence of Vehicle Characteristics on Used Car Market Prices – Improving the Car Valuation of a B2B Online Used Car Marketplace (2020)

Hypothesenbasiertes Entrepreneurship: Customer Discovery und Kundenvalidierung am Beispiel eines IT-Startups (2020)

The Impact of Corporate Venture Capital Leadership in Investments and Exits (2019)

Text Mining of User Generated Content to Derive Informational Needs of Consumers: An Application for Content Marketing in Leadership Development (2019)

The Power of Being a Digital High Performer – What Drives Digital Innovation in US Large Caps? (2020)

XaaS in Industry 4.0: Developing and Evaluating New Business Models to Operate Automated Guided Vehicles for an Industrial Services Company (2020)

How to Drive Digital Transformation: the Role of Chief Information Officers’ Power and Background (2020)

Digital Innovation: An Analysis of Characteristic Drivers in S&P 500 Companies (2020)

Do Innovations Really Pay Off? The Impact of Innovation on Stock Performance (2020)

How to be Green? Corporate Strategies to Reduce CO2 Emissions (2020)

Ho to sell green – Strategic pricing of CO2 emission reduction and eco-innovation (2020)

How to Make a Green Virtue of a Necessity – Green Innovations and Business Opportunities Triggered by CO2 Emissions (2020)

Does It Pay to Be Green – Carbon Emission Reduction and Its Impact on Companies’ Performance (2020)

Digital Radical Innovation in American Large Caps: Characteristics & Trends (2019)

Leading in the Age of Disruption: Why Digital Innovation matters (2019)

Digitization: Does the Level of Industry IT Investment Impact Firm Performance? (2019)

Ways Into a Sustainable Future: How Large Caps Deal with the Triple Bottom Line (2019)

Relationship between Sustainable Innovations and Corporate Performance – Do Sustainable Innovators Outperform Their Competitors? (2019)

The Impact of Sustainable Innovation on the success of US large caps (2019)

Strategic Management

Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes – The Importance of Personality Traits for Entrepreneurship Efforts (2020)

Organizational Impact on Employee Motivation – An Empirical Analysis (2020)

Personality Traits in the Top Management Team – The role of Narcissism, Overconfidence and Extraversion (2020)

Strategic Alliances and Firm Performance: Does Coopetitive Behavior Pay Off? – An Empirical Analysis (2020)

Identifying Robust Causal Inferences is Possible – Mitigating Endogeneity in Empirical Management Research in the Context of Product Recalls (2020)

The Increasing Openness for Employee’s Sexual Orientation and Its Contribution to Business Success – An Analysis of LGBT Executives and Their Organizations (2020)

The Personality of Top Managers – The Interaction between the CMO and Branding Strategies (2020)

The Personality of Top Managers – The Interaction of the CMO and Strategic Decisions (2020)

Employee’s Personalities and Reward Preferences: Designing the optimal incentive programs based on individual differences (2020)

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall … I Am the Most Successful of Us All – How CEO Narcissism Influences Firm Performance (2019)

Do you have any questions? Our contact person for master theses at the Institute for Entrepreneurship  Maximilian Charlet will help you.   

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Construction of Innovation Behavior of College-Student Entrepreneurs Using Entrepreneurship and Innovation Theory Under Educational Psychology

Baoge zhang.

1 Faculty of Teacher Education, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China

2 Faculty of Education, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, China

3 Department and Institute of Psychology, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China

Associated Data

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

The purpose is to analyze the entrepreneurship and innovation education of colleges from the perspective of educational psychology and optimize the teaching mode reform of entrepreneurship and innovation courses. In this study, the theoretical research and case studies are combined to explore the performance of college-student entrepreneurs during college and work and have provided data for targeted entrepreneurship and innovation education in the schools. Meanwhile, the specific manifestation of the entrepreneurial spirit during work is analyzed, and the impact of entrepreneurial spirit is discussed on the new venture performance. The case study shows that most of the surveyed college-student entrepreneurs have a higher educational background and short venture-creation time, and their ventures are mostly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with rapid development. Most entrepreneurs show a strong entrepreneurial spirit during college. Among them, the average score of honesty is 3.85. At work, the surveyed entrepreneurs have high innovation attitude and innovation intention. Most entrepreneurs use innovative methods to solve practical problems in their work, and innovation spirit plays an important role in improving venture performance. Innovation attitude and innovation performance have a significant positive impact on innovation behavior. The research is comprehensive, and the results have very important application value. The results can provide scientific and effective references for colleges to reform entrepreneurship and innovation education.

Introduction

At this stage, China vigorously promotes mass entrepreneurship and innovation (hereinafter referred to as entrepreneurship and innovation) policy and especially focuses on the entrepreneurship and innovation education of college students (Gideon et al., 2017 ). The content related to entrepreneurship and innovation policy is written into the government work report to further improve the attention to the innovation and entrepreneurship and innovation education of college students, such as giving full play to the advantages of rich human resources, adhering to the reform and innovation, vigorously cultivating the professional spirit, and cultivating and expanding the new momentum. With the continuous advancement of policies, the number of self-employment in China has increased significantly (Lee and Nathan, 2017 ). College students, rich in knowledge, vitality, and enthusiasm, have become an important part of entrepreneurial groups under the influence of the entrepreneurial boom. The number of college entrepreneurs has increased year by year and has gradually occupied the majority of entrepreneurs (Antal et al., 2017 ). In this context, colleges have also vigorously expanded entrepreneurship and innovation education and strive to further improve the awareness among college students for entrepreneurship and innovation and entrepreneurial competency through related courses and competitions, such as the entrepreneurship design competition, entrepreneurship theoretical foundation training, and entrepreneurship lectures. However, some colleges lack the necessary attention in the ideological education of entrepreneurship and innovation. The ideological education of entrepreneurship can help students to thoroughly understand the nature of entrepreneurial activities and cultivate entrepreneurship of college students, so its importance in entrepreneurship and innovation education cannot be overemphasized (Edwards-Schachter et al., 2015 ). More importantly, contemporary college students have a strong self-awareness. The psychological status of the college students should be fully considered in the development of entrepreneurship and innovation education, and entrepreneurial education courses should be formulated based on scientific research theories. Therefore, educational psychology should be incorporated into entrepreneurship and innovation education, together with other professional disciplines, for targeted entrepreneurship and innovation curriculum reform. This research direction is also a hot spot in related fields (Wu and Song, 2019 ).

Entrepreneurship and innovation education is also essential for entrepreneurs at work. Currently, with a faster pace of life and work, the business environment is also changing rapidly. To win the upper hand in the fierce market competition, enterprises must master the core competitiveness (Sieja and Wach, 2019 ). Innovation is an important component of the core competitiveness of enterprises and can determine the development of enterprises. The main work of the entrepreneurs include setting business objectives, arranging management regulations, formulating strategic decisions, shaping and disseminating corporate culture, and exploring the direction of enterprise innovation and development (Lee and Lee, 2016 ). Entrepreneurs are the pioneers of an enterprise, and they affect the enterprise from all aspects: they can either innovate by themselves or provide key support for the innovation activities to enhance enterprise innovation. Research shows that the innovation ability and awareness of entrepreneurs are key to enterprise innovation (Ng et al., 2016 ). Therefore, the exploration of innovation ability and awareness of entrepreneurs can promote the healthy development of new ventures, the growth of the industrial economy, and the optimization of social resources as a whole.

Hence, college-student entrepreneurs are studied, and their entrepreneurial spirit and creativity during school and work are explored through questionnaire surveys (QS) and case analyses. Then, corresponding scales are designed with scores and related characteristics for analysis (Deng et al., 2021 ). In this study, the purpose is to provide an effective reference for targeted entrepreneurship and innovation education in colleges and to explore the impact of entrepreneurial spirit on the innovation and development of new ventures. In the study, the school days capability and working days ability of entrepreneurs are innovatively compared and analyzed. Specifically, the mechanism of entrepreneurial spirit is analyzed throughout the process, which has significant practical application value.

Materials and Methods

The basic meaning of entrepreneurship and innovation theory.

The entrepreneurship and innovation theory is widely used in the research of pedagogy (Colombo et al., 2016 ). Entrepreneurship and innovation education is the practice to create new things. It can either refer to the education to create new occupations and job opportunities or can refer to specific works in course system, work-integrated learning, school-enterprise cooperation teaching evaluation system, and school status management system (Huggins and Thompson, 2015 ). Entrepreneurship and innovation education focuses on actively adapting to economic development, unlike the traditional education model. In entrepreneurship and innovation education, students are not merely taught with the theories of entrepreneurship and innovation but are provided with scientific guidance for the innovative ideas and entrepreneurial ability that include many aspects as shown below (Lortie and Castogiovanni, 2015 ). Entrepreneurship and innovation education can deliver systematic knowledge that helps learners avoid specific risks and help them make scientific planning (Wei et al., 2019 ). Finally, entrepreneurship and innovation should be fully practiced, which is a major way for effective entrepreneurship and innovation education. Various entrepreneurial activities should be promoted to combine theory with practice and apply knowledge in practical skills (Chen, 2019 ).

Analysis of the Entrepreneurship and Innovation Courses in Colleges Based on Educational Psychology

Educational psychology plays a very important role in college education courses. Educational psychology can promote course objectives and the all-around development of the students through a timely understanding of psychological status and clear phase-training goals of the students. From the perspective of educational psychology in colleges, administrators, teachers, and students at all levels should work together to promote the development of entrepreneurship and innovation education (Robinson and Marino, 2015 ). The school administrators need to unify their understanding and firmly believe that the development of entrepreneurship and innovation education can improve the quality of personnel training. Only through reform on education and learning concepts, entrepreneurship and innovation education can get fruitful results. From the perspective of college teachers, the understanding and recognition of entrepreneurship and innovation education of teachers can determine their teaching behavior. College teachers should be trained more professionally, and they should guide students to participate in the related competitions (Zhao et al., 2018 ) so that entrepreneurship and innovation education can be improved. From the perspective of students, they are the subject of education, so the ultimate goal of entrepreneurship and innovation education is to help college students master the comprehensive quality of entrepreneurial spirit (Tan, 2020 ). College students should cultivate their interests and hobbies, strive for opportunities for learning and practice, and cultivate their ability to innovate so that they master the entrepreneurial spirit. Only in this way, can the creative enthusiasm of college students be further aroused (González-Pernía and Peña, 2015 ).

The establishment of practical courses in colleges has always been the focus of colleges, and the hierarchical and progressive practical teaching course system can build up a set of entrepreneurship and innovation courses in colleges (Bunten et al., 2015 ). This learning method focuses on research learning and autonomous learning, which fully mobilizes the learning enthusiasm of the students. The proposed teaching system has effective applicability on entrepreneurship and innovation courses that require active learning of the students. The structure of the system is shown in Figure 1 .

College entrepreneurship and innovation course based on hierarchical progression.

Colleges should reasonably allocate resources and supervise the teaching process seriously during entrepreneurship and innovation education. The teaching process should be student-centered and practice-oriented (Pisoni, 2019 ). Entrepreneurship and innovation education aims to cultivate awareness of entrepreneurship and innovation in the students and comprehensively improve the quality and related abilities in them. Besides, entrepreneurship and innovation education should be market-oriented to combine specialties and positions. Under a constantly mutating market economy, students should be cultivated with ideas and skills to keep pace with the times to adapt to the development of modern society (Jodoin, 2017 ).

The Features and Content of College-Student Entrepreneurial Spirit

Especially, in the context of poor employment rates, entrepreneurship and innovation education can alleviate the employment pressure of college students, promote social stability, unity of people, and economic development (Urbano et al., 2019 ). Some entrepreneurs even have improved their entrepreneurial ability through the entrepreneurship and innovation course. Colleges should pay more attention to entrepreneurship and innovation education for talent cultivation (Doern et al., 2019 ). The entrepreneurship and innovation courses in colleges should be up to date. With an ever-faster information surge and knowledge expansion, the multidisciplinary exchange has also become part of entrepreneurship and innovation education (Fu et al., 2019 ). Thus, supplementary courses are added to entrepreneurship and innovation education as well. Meanwhile, the teachers with practical experiences have been entrusted in entrepreneurship and innovation education to provide good guidance for students (Feng et al., 2020 ).

The entrepreneurial spirit is the core content of entrepreneurship and innovation education (Sutter et al., 2019 ). The definition of entrepreneurial spirit varies, and some regard it as the innovative spirit that lays the spiritual foundation of entrepreneurs (He et al., 2019 ). College students should be cultivated with an entrepreneurial spirit. In addition to the innovation spirit, the entrepreneurial spirit also contains dimensions, such as leadership, collaboration, responsibility, dedication, honesty, and foresight. Meanwhile, the entrepreneurial spirit can actively promote social development. For any industry, the innovation spirit is key in promoting enterprise development (Dabić et al., 2020 ). Superior leadership and collaboration can manage personnel effectively, strengthen cooperation, and improve enterprise development. Entrepreneurs have many obligations. For example, they should never damage public interests, and at the same time, they should maintain a unique enterprise culture and moral values. Besides, they can dedicate themselves to society through charities (Landström and Harirchi, 2018 ). Honesty is the foundation for enterprise development, and it should be spread through the enterprise culture, promoting the sustainable development of enterprises. With the rapid advancement of society, entrepreneurs should plan strategically with foresight, and foresight is also the full embodiment of the personal ability of entrepreneurs (Chen et al., 2016 ). In this article, some QS scales will be developed based on the content of entrepreneurial spirit.

Venture Performance of New Ventures

Venture performance is the key index to measure the success or failure of a new venture. New venture performance refers to the results of new ventures after their entrepreneurial activities (Wei et al., 2020 ). New venture performance analysis can indicate the survival and development of the enterprises and enterprise goal accomplishment rate. This can provide a clear direction for enterprise development. Venture performance is affected by internal factors and external factors (Li et al., 2021 ). The external factors are complex and variable, and they refer to the environmental factors, such as market factors, policy factors, and institutional factors (Hou et al., 2017 ). The innovation spirit of entrepreneurs is one of the internal factors that affect venture performance. Those entrepreneurs with strong creativity are more likely to produce new ideas and can significantly improve the new venture performance. The internal factors of venture performance are mainly studied here (He and Tian, 2018 ; Feng and Chen, 2020 ).

Venture performance can be obtained through financial indices, such as sales growth rate, return on investment, and return on assets. However, since most financial indices are confidential, venture performance can also be obtained through customer satisfaction and the judgment of entrepreneurs (Goktan and Gupta, 2015 ). In this article, the judgment of entrepreneur can evaluate the venture performance.

QS Scale and Data Collection of College-Student Entrepreneurs

• (1) The QS scale of the college-student entrepreneur in college years

In this scale, entrepreneurial spirit is investigated for college-student entrepreneurs from five different dimensions, such as innovation spirit, leadership and cooperation, responsibility, honesty, and foresight during school. For each of these five dimensions, four questions are set, totaling 20 questions. Questions 1–4 are designed based on the actual situation of participation of students in extracurricular practice, club activities, competitions, and theoretical education, respectively, covering multiple levels of school year performance for college-student entrepreneurs. The Likert scale 5-point scoring method is chosen here: 1-point-score represents unqualified; 2-points-score represents not-so-qualified; 3-points-score represents just-qualified; 4-points-represents qualified; and 5-points-score represents well-qualified.

• (2) QS scale of the college-student entrepreneur in the start-up period

The impact of innovative thinking on new ventures is analyzed based on the current situations of college-student entrepreneurs. The scale includes innovation attitude, innovation intention, and innovation behavior. Five questions are designed for each aspect. The innovation attitude can explore the attitude of entrepreneurs toward innovation during work from two aspects, namely, the spiritual attitude and material attitude. Innovation intention refers to the willingness to practice innovation during work. Innovative behavior can explore the actual innovative situation in enterprises. Likert scale 5-point scoring method is chosen here: 1-point-score represents unqualified; 2-points-score represents not-so-qualified; 3-points-score represents just-qualified; 4-points-represents qualified; and 5-points-score represents well-qualified.

Selection of Survey Subjects and Data Analysis Methods

In this article, only college-student entrepreneurs within venture-creation time of 10 years are selected and analyzed, and data are collected both online and offline. Social software can send QS to the social media accounts of entrepreneurs online. Then, entrepreneurs can fill in the QS and feedback the results, and thus data are collected and collated. The database of the alumni association of the N College is consulted and QSs are issued to pertaining entrepreneurs for data collection. In this article, the Excel and the data analysis software SPSS22.0 are chosen for the statistical analysis of the surveyed data.

Reliability and Validity Test Method

In this article, Q1 denotes the QS scale of college-student entrepreneurs during school years. Then, their five abilities, such as innovation spirit, leadership and cooperation ability, responsibility, honesty, and foresight are denoted from 1 to 5, respectively. Meanwhile, four questions are designed for each ability, and they are represented by 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. For example, the first question of innovation spirit in this scale will be expressed as Q1-1-1. Similarly, Q2 denotes the QS scale of college-student entrepreneurs during work. Then, three dimensions, such as innovation attitude, innovation intention, and innovation behavior are denoted as 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The five problems designed for each dimension are denoted as 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. For example, the first problem of innovation attitude in the scale is expressed as Q2-1. Afterward, the reliability and validity of the Q1 and the Q2 scales will be analyzed.

The Cronbach's α coefficient can represent the reliability of the QS scale. In general, the Cronbach's α coefficient is >0.7, and the closer the coefficient gets to 1, the better the reliability of the QS scale is. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett hemispheric tests can validate the QS scales. The value of KMO should be >0.7 for the validity test.

Research Hypothesis Analysis

Meanwhile, the innovation attitude, innovation intention, and innovation behavior are analyzed through the hypothesis test for college-student entrepreneurs. Here are the two hypotheses.

H1: Innovation attitude has a significant positive impact on innovation behavior. H2: Innovation intention has a significant positive effect on innovation behavior.

Results and Discussion

Reliability and validity of the qs scale.

The reliability analysis results of Q1 and Q2 are shown in Figure 2 .

Reliability analysis of the questionnaire survey (QS) scales.

Figure 2 indicates that the Cronbach's α coefficient of each item in the Q1 and Q2 has exceeded 0.7, indicating that the reliability of the QS scale is good and desirable.

The results of the validity test are shown in Figure 3 .

Validity analysis of the questionnaire surveys (QS) scales.

Figure 3 shows that the KMO values of Q1 and Q2 are 0.738 and 0.712, respectively, which are >0.07. Thus, the validity of the two QS scales is desirable.

To sum up, the designed QS scales have good reliability and validity and can be applied to practical research.

Visualized Statistical Analysis of Surveyed College-Student Entrepreneurs

A total of 120 QSs are distributed, and 92 of them are effectively recovered, with a recovery rate of 76.7%. Six aspects are included in the QS, such as gender, age, education, venture-creation time, company size, and annual income. The specific statistical analysis results are shown in Figures 4A–F .

Summary and analysis of surveyed college-student entrepreneurs.

Figures 4A–F show analysis results of the surveyed college-student entrepreneurs from six aspects: gender, age, education, start-up time, number of company employees, and annual income of the company. The results suggest that the number of men entrepreneurs is larger than that of women entrepreneurs that include 82 males, accounting for 89.13% of the total number. While only there are 10 women, accounting for 10.87% of the total number. From the perspective of age, there are 34 entrepreneurs aged between 26 and 30, accounting for 36.96%, 27 entrepreneurs aged between 31 and 35, accounting for 29.34%, 12 entrepreneurs aged between 22 and 25, accounting for 12.03%, and 19 entrepreneurs aged between 36 and 40, accounting for 20.65%. In terms of education, most entrepreneurs have higher academic qualifications, only two of them have high school degrees, accounting for 2.17%; there are 49 entrepreneurs with a bachelor's degree, accounting for 53.26%; entrepreneurs with a master's degree reaches 38 people, accounting for 41.3%; and 3 entrepreneurs have a doctoral degree, accounting for 3.26%. From the perspective of venture-creation time, most of them are <8 years: 50 ventures have survived 1–3 years, accounting for 54.34% of the total, 38 ventures have lasted 4–7 years, accounting for 41.30%, and only four ventures have held on 8–10 years, accounting for just 4.34%. In terms of venture size, 14 ventures have <10 workers, accounting for 15.21% of the total, 32 ventures have employed 11–50 personnel, accounting for 34.78%, 25 ventures hired 50–100 employees, accounting for 27.17%, 15 companies possess 101–150 staff, accounting for 16.30%, while only six ventures have a team with 150 talents, just accounting for 16.30%. From the perspective of annual income, 17 ventures have an annual income <5,00,000, accounting for 18.48% of the total, 27 ventures have annual income between 5,00,000 and 10,00,000, accounting for 29.34%, 23 ventures have an annual income of 10,00,000–15,00,000, accounting for 25%, 16 ventures have annual income between 15,10,000 and 20,00,000, accounting for 17.39%, and only nine ventures earn more than 20,00,000 annually, just accounting for 9.78%.

Apparently, men entrepreneurs are more than women counterparts, and most entrepreneurs have received higher education and have either a bachelor's degree or higher degrees. Meanwhile, 90% of them have venture-creation time within 8 years. Most ventures are small in size, with <100 employees. Besides, over 90% of ventures have an annual income of <2 million, and most of them belong to SMEs.

Results of the QS of College-Student Entrepreneurs During School

In this article, the QS for college-student entrepreneurs is statistically analyzed, as shown in Figure 5 . Figure 5 illustrate the QS results of innovation spirit, leadership and collaboration ability, responsibility, honesty, and foresight.

An analysis of the basic situation of college-student entrepreneurs during school.

Accordingly, Q1-4-1 has the highest score of 4.27. Q1-1-4 had the lowest score of 3.21. In each dimension, the scores on extracurricular practice are the highest; while scores on theoretical education are the lowest. However, the innovation spirit, leadership and cooperation ability, responsibility, honesty spirit, and foresight are at a relatively high level.

Further analysis shows that during school, college-student entrepreneurs have an average score of 3.63 on innovation spirit with a variance of 0.077. Their average score of leadership collaboration ability is 3.79, and the variance is 0.090. Their average score of responsibility is 3.76, and the variance is 0.016. Their average score of honesty is 3.85, and the variance is 0.063. Their average score of foresight is 3.67, and the variance is 0.148.

Further analysis of the results in Figures 5 , ​ ,6 6 reveals that most entrepreneurs have shown high entrepreneurial spirit during their student years, which contributes greatly to the entrepreneurial activities of the entrepreneurs. Thus, the entrepreneurial spirit is very important for college students, and colleges should focus on the cultivation of entrepreneurial spirit of the students. At the same time, research shows that most entrepreneurs score higher in honesty and responsibility, proving that these two dimensions are more important in entrepreneurship and innovation education. Therefore, great importance should be attached to honesty and responsibility education.

Analysis of college-student entrepreneurs during school based on five dimensions.

Results of QS on the Innovation Spirit of College-Student Entrepreneurs During Work

The results of QS on innovative attitude, innovative intention, and innovative behavior at work are shown in Figures 7A–C .

Analysis on innovation behavior of college-student entrepreneurs during work.

The above results show that the highest score during work is the innovation intention, which is 3.87 points; while the lowest score is the first item in the innovative behavior QS scale, with a score of 3.12.

Figure 8 implies that the average score of innovation attitude is 3.48, and the variance is 0.019; the average score of innovation intention is 3.62, and the variance is 0.028; the average score of innovation behavior is 3.32, and the variance is 0.126.

Analysis of college-student entrepreneurs during work based on three dimensions.

The analysis of Figures 7A–C and Figure 8 reveal that the overall score for innovation situation of the surveyed college-student entrepreneurs is relatively high. Especially, the score of innovation intention is more than 3.5 points, and the score of innovation attitude is almost 3.5 points, indicating that they have high innovation awareness and encourage innovation in the venture development.

Innovation Behavior of Entrepreneurs

To further study the innovation behaviors of the college-student entrepreneurs, 20 college-student entrepreneurs are randomly selected and are conducted in-depth interviews through the five dimensions QS. The in-depth interview aims to discover the innovative points, suggest innovative solutions, make reasonable arrangements, and propose innovative ways to improve the overall venture performance. After in-depth interviews, college-student entrepreneurs have chosen three cases that have been practiced most, and these results can analyze their innovation behaviors.

Figure 9 shows that 15 college-student entrepreneurs think that they can put forward innovative solutions in their usual work. Fourteen of them think they can make reasonable arrangements for the implementation of ideas. At the same time, 13 of them believe that they have put forward innovative methods in their work that can improve job performance.

Innovation behavior analysis of the college-student entrepreneur.

Further analysis implies that the results of in-depth interviews reflect the importance of innovation spirit in venture development. Innovation spirit can effectively improve work efficiency and venture performance, promote venture development, and bring vitality to ventures.

In this article, the SPSS22.0 is chosen to analyze the results of the data t -test. A significant t -test is conducted for these two hypotheses, as shown in Table 1 .

Hypothesis test results.

Accordingly, the hypotheses of H1 and H2 are valid. The higher the innovation attitude and intention of college-student entrepreneur are, the stronger the innovation behavior is.

In this article, the QS method is utilized to investigate and analyze the basic situation of young entrepreneurs during their school and start-up periods, and the following conclusions are obtained: according to the QS results, there are more men than women in college-student entrepreneurs who have received higher education, and most ventures are very young and developing rapidly. In the QS scales, the highest score appeared in honesty, the score of extracurricular practice is the highest. Most entrepreneurs show remarkable entrepreneurial spirit when they are students. Therefore, schools should focus on the cultivation of innovation spirit and honesty in extracurricular practice activities and community activities. At work, most enterprises have obvious innovation attitudes and innovation intentions. The in-depth interviews of 20 entrepreneurs show that most entrepreneurs put forward innovative solutions in their daily work and think that putting forward innovative behavior can effectively improve the work performance and venture performance, while innovation attitude and innovation intention have a positive impact on the innovation behavior. The survey data are rich, and the entrepreneurial spirit of college-student entrepreneurs is analyzed from different angles. The results can provide an effective reference for college entrepreneurship and innovation education and contribute to the research on entrepreneurship and innovative behavior. However, due to time constraints, most of the respondents have been chosen from the same college. The survey sample lacks universality, which affects the application value of the research results. In the follow-up study, the scope of the study should be expanded, and the entrepreneurs of different colleges should be contained for more reliable research results.

Data Availability Statement

Ethics statement.

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Ningbo University Ethics Committee. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study. Written informed consent was obtained from the individual(s) for the publication of any potentially identifiable images or data included in this article.

Author Contributions

All authors listed have made a substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Funding. This work was supported by the National Social Science Fund of China, General topics in education (BHA180142, BHA190124).

• Antal N., Kingma B., Moore D., Streeter D. (2017). University-wide entrepreneurship education . Adv. Study Entrepreneurship Innov. Econ. Growth 24 , 227–254. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bunten D., Weiler S., Thompson E., Zahran S. (2015). Entrepreneurship, information, and growth . J. Reg. Sci. 55 , 560–584. 10.1111/jors.12157 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen C., Chen Y., Hsu P. H., Podolski E. J. (2016). Be nice to your innovators: Employee treatment and corporate innovation performance . J. Corp. Finan. 39 , 78–98. 10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2016.06.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen M. (2019). The impact of expatriates' cross-cultural adjustment on work stress and job involvement in the high-tech industry . Front. Psychol . 10 :2228. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02228 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Colombo M. G., Cumming D. J., Vismara S. (2016). Governmental venture capital for innovative young firms . J. Technol. Transf. 41 , 10–24. 10.1007/s10961-014-9380-9 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dabić M., Vlačić B., Paul J., Dana L. P., Sahasranamam S., Glinka B. (2020). Immigrant entrepreneurship: a review and research agenda . J. Bus. Res. 113 , 25–38. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.013 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deng X., Guo X., Wu Y. J., Chen M. (2021). Perceived environmental dynamism promotes entrepreneurial team member's innovation: explanations based on the uncertainty reduction theory . Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18 :2033. 10.3390/ijerph18042033 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Doern R., Williams N., Vorley T. (2019). Special issue on entrepreneurship and crises: business as usual? An introduction and review of the literature . Entrepreneurship Reg. Dev. 31 , 400–412. 10.1080/08985626.2018.1541590 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Edwards-Schachter M. A, García-Granero M., Sánchez-Barrioluengo M., Quesada-Pineda H., Amara N. (2015). Disentangling competences: interrelationships on creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship . Think. Skills Creat . 16 , 27–39. 10.1016/j.tsc.2014.11.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Feng B., Chen M. (2020). The impact of entrepreneurial passion on psychology and behavior of entrepreneurs . Front. Psychol . 11 :1733. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01733 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Feng B., Sun K., Chen M., Gao T. (2020). The impact of core technological capabilities of high-tech industry on sustainable competitive advantage . Sustainability 12 :2980. 10.3390/su12072980 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fu H., Okumus F., Wu K., Köseoglu M. A. (2019). The entrepreneurship research in hospitality and tourism . Int. J. Hosp. Manage. 78 , 1–12. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.10.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gideon D., Markman D, Balkin R, Baron A. (2017). Inventors and new venture formation: the effects of general self–efficacy and regretful thinking . Entrepreneurship Theor. Pract. 27 , 149–165. 10.1111/1540-8520.00009 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goktan A. B., Gupta V. K. (2015). Sex, gender, and individual entrepreneurial orientation: evidence from four countries . Int. Entrepreneurship Manage. J. 11 , 95–112. 10.1007/s11365-013-0278-z [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• González-Pernía J. L., Peña I. (2015). Export-oriented entrepreneurship and regional economic growth . Small Bus. Econ. 45 , 505–522. 10.1007/s11187-015-9657-x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• He C., Lu J., Qian H. (2019). Entrepreneurship in China . Small Bus. Econ . 52 , 563–572. 10.4324/9781315625126-4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• He J., Tian X. (2018). Finance and corporate innovation: a survey . Asia Pac. J. Financ. Stud. 47 , 165–212. 10.1111/ajfs.12208 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hou Q., Hu M., Yuan Y. (2017). Corporate innovation and political connections in Chinese listed firms . Pac. Basin Financ. J. 46 , 158–176. 10.1016/j.pacfin.2017.09.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Huggins R., Thompson P. (2015). Entrepreneurship, innovation and regional growth: a network theory . Small Bus. Econ. 45 , 103–128. 10.1007/s11187-015-9643-3 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jodoin S. (2017). Entrepreneurship in developing countries . Environ. Plan. 35 , 1418–1436. 10.1177/2399654417719287 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Landström H., Harirchi G. (2018). The social structure of entrepreneurship as a scientific field . Res. Policy 47 , 650–662. 10.1016/j.respol.2018.01.013 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee H. K., Lee I. H. (2016). The study of the effects of college student's creativity and self-efficacy on entrepreneurial intention . Asia Pac. J. Bus. Venturing Entrepreneurship 11 , 111–120. 10.16972/apjbve.11.3.201606.111 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee N., Nathan M. (2017). Knowledge workers, cultural diversity and innovation: evidence from London . Int. J. Knowledge Based Dev. 1 , 53–78. 10.1504/IJKBD.2010.032586 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li R., Cui Y., Zheng Y. (2021). The impact of corporate strategy on enterprise innovation based on the mediating effect of corporate risk-taking . Sustainability 13 :1023. 10.3390/su13031023 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lortie J., Castogiovanni G. (2015). The theory of planned behavior in entrepreneurship research: what we know and future directions . Int. Entrepreneurship Manage. J. 11 , 935–957. 10.1007/s11365-015-0358-3 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ng J. C. Y., Huang M. M. D., Liu Y. (2016). The feminine entrepreneurial personality trait: the competitive advantage of female college-student entrepreneurs in Chinese Wei-Shang businesses? Asian Bus. Manage. 15 , 1–27. 10.1057/s41291-016-0012-0 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pisoni G. (2019). Strategies for pan-European implementation of blended learning for innovation and entrepreneurship (i&e) education . Educ. Sci. 9 :124. 10.3390/educsci9020124 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Robinson A. T., Marino L. D. (2015). Overconfidence and risk perceptions: do they really matter for venture creation decisions? . Int. Entrepreneurship Manage. J. 11 , 149–168. 10.1007/s11365-013-0277-0 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sieja M., Wach K. (2019). The use of evolutionary algorithms for optimization in the modern entrepreneurial economy: interdisciplinary perspective . Entrepreneurial Bus. Econ. Rev. 7 , 117–130. 10.15678/EBER.2019.070407 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sutter C., Bruton G. D., Chen J. (2019). Entrepreneurship as a solution to extreme poverty: a review and future research directions . J. Bus. Venturing 34 , 197–214. 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.06.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tan S. (2020). A brief analysis of AI curricula construction and development orientation from the perspective of innovation and entrepreneurship education . Creat. Educ. 11 :1866. 10.4236/ce.2020.1110136 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Urbano D., Aparicio S., Audretsch D. (2019). Twenty-five years of research on institutions, entrepreneurship, and economic growth: what has been learned? . Small Bus. Econ. 53 , 21–49. 10.1007/s11187-018-0038-0 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wei X., Liu X., Sha J. (2019). How does entrepreneurship education influence the students' innovation? Testing on the multiple mediation model . Front. Psychol. 10 :1557. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01557 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wei Y., Nan H., Wei G. (2020). The impact of employee welfare on innovation performance: evidence from China's manufacturing corporations . Int. J. Prod. Econ. 228 :107753. 10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107753 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wu Y., Song D. (2019). Gratifications for social media use in entrepreneurship courses: learners' perspective . Front. Psychol. 10 :1270. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01270 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhao S., Zhang H., Wang J. (2018). Cognition and system construction of civil engineering innovation and entrepreneurship system in emerging engineering education . Cogn. Syst. Res. 52 , 1020–1028. 10.1016/j.cogsys.2018.10.020 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• OU Homepage
• The University of Oklahoma
• Master of Science in Entrepreneurship and Innovation

The University of Oklahoma Price College of Business M.S. in Entrepreneurship and Innovation focuses on developing the essential skills entrepreneurs and innovators need to be successful. Whether you have an idea for a startup, have launched a new business, or aim to innovate in an existing company, this program is designed to fit your career goals and aspirations by allowing you to choose between two different tracks: New Venture Development and Corporate Innovation.

The hybrid program consists of 30 credit hours of instruction, which can be completed by working professionals in as little as 12 months and offers the flexibility of either a spring or fall start. The program kicks off with a one-week residency featuring project-based learning and networking in the dynamic entrepreneurial ecosystems of Oklahoma City and Tulsa, allowing you to interact with world-renowned faculty, successful entrepreneurs, Price College alumni and a highly motivated cohort of peers. You’ll continue with weekly live online discussions and asynchronous interactions for the remainder of the program.

Certificates

• Business Entrepreneurship, Graduate Certificate

  View Course Catalog

Entrepreneurship research faculty in the world

Texas Christian University Global University Entrepreneurship Research Productivity Rankings, 2023

Graduate Entrepreneurship Program in the U.S.

The Princeton Review and Entrepreneur Magazine, 2024

Application Deadlines

Fall admissions, u.s. citizens.

November 15

International

Fall Semester Begins In August

Spring Admission

Spring Semester Begins In January

Summer Admission

Summer Semester Begins In June

Where Price College Entrepreneuship Grads Work

Goldman Sachs

Considering Entrepreneurship

Why choose ou's price college of business,   two unique tracks.

Choose between New Venture or Corporate tracks. You’ll learn how to develop your business to the next level or learn how to apply a new entrepreneurial mindset in a corporate setting.

  Residency

Students will take advantage of an in-person, one-week residency touring Oklahoma City and Tulsa’s established and growing ecosystems built to facilitate innovation. 

  Complete in as Little as 1 Year.

As of spring 2024, we’re the only program under $30K that you can finish in just one year.

Request Information

Your browser does not support iframes.

Director Tom Love Division of Entrepreneurship and Economic Development

Email:  [email protected] Office: Price Hall Room 3050L Phone: (405) 325-0716

Keith Brigman's Bio

Associate Professor of Entrepreneurship Tom Love Division of Entrepreneurship and Economic Development

Email:  [email protected] Office: Price Hall Room 3050 Phone: (405) 325-1638

Todd Moss' Bio

See Entrepreneurship and Economic Development Directory

• Accessibility
• Sustainability
• OU Job Search
• Legal Notices
• Resources and Offices
• OU Report It!

Main Navigation

• Accept offer and enrol
• Current Students

Personalise your experience

Did you mean..., diploma of arts and social sciences, art/science collaboration wins waterhouse natural science art prize, unit of study isys6008 it entrepreneurship and innovation (2025).

Future students: T: 1800 626 481 E: Email your enquiry here

Current students: Contact: Faculty of Science and Engineering

Students studying at an education collaboration: Please contact your relevant institution

updated - DO NOT REMOVE THIS LINE 6:07 AM on Tue, 9 April

Show me unit information for year

Unit snapshot.

PG Coursework Unit

Credit points

Faculty & college.

Faculty of Science and Engineering

Unit description

Introduces students to digital innovation, the entrepreneurial environment and way of thinking, and the process of innovation. Students gain insight into diverse social, economic, institutional and political factors affecting future software development and User Experience (UX) design. Students learn to critically evaluate the risks involved with the entrepreneurship and innovation process.

Unit content

Availabilities.

2025 unit offering information will be available in November 2024

Learning outcomes

Unit Learning Outcomes express learning achievement in terms of what a student should know, understand and be able to do on completion of a unit. These outcomes are aligned with the graduate attributes . The unit learning outcomes and graduate attributes are also the basis of evaluating prior learning.

On completion of this unit, students should be able to:

outline the concepts of entrepreneurship and the principles of innovation.

work in team to assess the impacts of new business enterprises and conditions in their success or failure.

work in team to develop a plan for an innovative business venture.

examine the ethical and socio-economic aspects of the enterprise and innovation.

Fee information

Commonwealth Supported courses For information regarding Student Contribution Amounts please visit the Student Contribution Amounts .

Fee paying courses For postgraduate or undergraduate full-fee paying courses please check Domestic Postgraduate Fees OR Domestic Undergraduate Fees .

International

Please check the international course and fee list to determine the relevant fees.

Courses that offer this unit

Master of information technology (2024), any questions we'd love to help.

• Bearcat Bookstore
• Baruch Forward
• Blogs@Baruch
• Degree Works
• Digital Measures
• Email (starting May 3, 2022)
• Email (thru May 2, 2022)
• Student Email
• President's Office
• News Center

• Provost Home
• Online/Hybrid Learning
• Mental Health Awareness Week 2024
• Artificial Intelligence Think Tank
• Experiential Learning
• Organization Charts
• Academic Honesty
• Support for Students
• Support for Faculty
• Reappointment, Tenure, CCE, and Promotion
• List of Department Chairs
• Representatives to Faculty Personnel Committees
• Faculty Workload Reporting and Compliance
• Faculty Leaves
• New Faculty
• Chair Resources
• Faculty Forms
• Data-driven Decision Making
• Program Review
• Interview with MSCHE Liaison, Dr. Tiffany Lee
• Specialized Accreditation
• NYSED – Academic Program Registration
• National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)
• College Agreements
• Institutional Effectiveness
• Faculty Convocation
• Faculty Handbook
• From the Provost
• From the Associate Provost for Teaching and Learning
• From the Associate Provost for Academic Admin. and Research

Entrepreneurship and Innovation

The Entrepreneurship and Innovation Cluster relates to the Field Center of Entrepreneurship and to the recently created department of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in the Zicklin School of Business (established in July 2023). The convener of this cluster is Prof. Maria Halbinger. This cluster held its kickoff meeting on Mar. 28, 2023. In AY23-24, four new tenure-track cluster hires joined this cluster.  

Celebrating Graduate Excellence in Research, Mentorship, and Scholarship at UCF

Recognizing students and faculty for their outstanding contributions to the UCF community.

By Mila Chial | April 10, 2024

Each year, students and faculty at UCF demonstrate incredible dedication to their work. Many go above and beyond to produce high-quality research while helping others reach their potential. The College of Graduate Studies recognizes students and faculty members annually for their exceptional teaching, research, and service through the Graduate Awards for Excellence.

At the awards ceremony during Student Research Week, several graduate students were recognized for their exceptional achievements in teaching and research. Additionally, other students and faculty members were acknowledged for their academic excellence during Founders’ Day.

This year, the awards expanded to include greater recognition of the arts – an area that may not always receive the attention it deserves. The new Award for Outstanding Graduate Creative Work, spearheaded by Graduate Student Advisory Council (GSAC) member and MFA Feature Film Production student Tolulope Ogunrinde, recognizes the merit of creative scholarship and the incredible value art brings to our community.

This award aims to acknowledge and celebrate the significant creative contributions made by graduate students in various fields, including but not limited to film, visual arts, performing arts, literature, and digital media. The award also provides a platform for graduate students to showcase their talents, gain recognition for their achievements, and receive support and encouragement as they pursue their creative endeavors.

“The inspiration behind creating the Award for Outstanding Graduate Creative Work stemmed from one of my goals as a member of the Graduate Student Advisory Council, which is to promote creative works among graduate students at the university,” says Ogunrinde. “By highlighting the outstanding creative work of graduate students, I hope to inspire future generations of scholars and artists to push the boundaries of creativity and make meaningful contributions to their respective fields. I believe that by recognizing and honoring excellence in creative work, we can foster a culture of innovation, collaboration, and artistic expression within our graduate community and beyond.”

The Graduate Student Advisory Council also presents the Award for Excellence by a Graduate Student Researcher. This self-nominated award recognizes outstanding graduate student-level research and creative scholarship at UCF, allows students to share their research with the UCF community, and provides an opportunity for the GSAC to acknowledge and reward exceptional students.

Award for Outstanding Graduate Creative Work – Njeri Kinuthia, College of Arts and Humanities.

Njeri Kinuthia is a graduate student in the Studio Art and Design MFA program . She is an immensely talented artist who creates multidimensional pieces representing her Kenyan heritage and feminist values. Her artistic style is multifaceted and uses various mediums, including fabric, canvas, and everyday objects. Kinuthia uses her art to raise awareness of gender and racial inequality while advocating for change. She loves incorporating bright and colorful fabrics from her hometown, and her background in fashion design enhances the visual appeal of her pieces, all while seamlessly integrating important social messages into her artwork.

Award for Excellence in Graduate Student Teaching – Hannah Bevan, College of Sciences.

Hannah Bevan is a graduate student in the Conservation Biology doctoral program . She is a graduate teaching associate in the Mammalogy Lab, where she is dedicated to creating a welcoming environment for students to learn and enjoys sharing her passion for biology. Her course focuses on the theoretical and methodological aspects of modeling species distributions through habitat suitability and connectivity analyses to inform effective conservation management decisions.

Award for Excellence by a Graduate Teaching Assistant – Mousam Hossain, College of Engineering and Computer Science.

Mousam Hossain is a doctoral student in the Computer Engineering Ph.D. program and teaches Computer Organization. As a graduate teaching assistant, she guides students on assembly language programming using the MARS simulator and Verilog coding using design and simulation tools. Besides her teaching responsibilities, she conducts research in the Computer Architecture Lab focusing on reconfigurable and evolvable hardware. Her love for computer engineering is channeled into her teaching as she helps students better understand computer organization and build a solid foundation in the subject.

Award for Excellence by a Graduate Student Researcher (Doctoral – Arts, Social Sciences, and Humanities) – James Rujimora, College of Community Innovation and Education

James Rujimora is in the Counselor Education doctoral program , conducting research on the potentially traumatic experience of caring for a child with a chronic medical illness, specifically among parents and guardians. He found that raising a child with a serious diagnosis can take a major psychological toll on caregivers, leading to concerning levels of secondary traumatic stress and vicarious trauma. Now, he plans to utilize his research findings to enact meaningful change. By partnering with local organizations to develop targeted on-site interventions that provide parents and guardians with the support they desperately need during this challenging time, sharing his findings through peer-reviewed journals across multiple disciplines, and connecting with family advocacy organizations to inform caregiver-centric policies on the federal and state levels, he aims to support parents going through such struggles.

Runner Up (STEM) – Joseph Goode, Biomedical Sciences PhD, College of Medicine

Honorable Mention (STEM) – Edwin Davidson, Chemistry PhD, College of Sciences

Award for Excellence by a Graduate Student Researcher (Master’s – Arts, Social Sciences, and Humanities) – Melanie Cedeño-López, College of Sciences

Melanie Cedeño-López is in the Feature Film Production MFA program. For her thesis, she produced a feature-length documentary film called “La Buena Cosecha” which explores the remarkable contributions of Latino business owners in the United States. The film’s exploration of the economic impact of Latinos in the U.S. revealed their high entrepreneurship rates, job creation, and substantial contributions to consumption and capital formation, reflecting their growing wealth. She aims to continue sharing positive stories about Latinos making a meaningful impact on society.

Joint Runner Up – (ASSH) Njeri Kinuthia, Studio Art and Design MFA, College of Arts and Humanities

Joint Runner Up (STEM) – Manisha Thenuwara, Counselor Education MA, College of Community Innovation and Education

Award for Outstanding Master’s Thesis (Engineering, Physical Science, Mathematical Sciences, and Life Sciences) – Tajnuba Hasan, College of Engineering and Computer Science

Tajnuba Hasan is from the Mechanical Engineering master’s program and mentored by Dr. Tuhin Das.

Hasan’s thesis is titled: “Control of the Spar-Buoy Based Wind Turbine Floating Platform Through Mooring Line Actuation.”

Hasan’s thesis focused on a critical challenge within the burgeoning field of offshore wind energy, specifically addressing the stability of floating offshore wind turbine (FOWT) platforms in challenging ocean environments. Her research proposes a novel approach to stabilize FOWTs by concurrently designing the mooring system and control strategy. Unlike conventional methods that exclusively focus on control design, this work recognizes the interdependence between platform dynamics and mooring configuration, thereby advancing the field of renewable energy.

Award for Outstanding Master’s Thesis (Social Sciences, Humanities, Education, Business, Fine Arts, and Health Sciences) – Jason Pagan, College of Health Professions and Sciences

Jason Pagan is from the Kinesiology master’s program and mentored by Dr. Matt Stock.

Pagan’s thesis is titled: “Resistance Training Adaptations in Older Adults Exhibit Task Specificity.”

Pagan’s thesis focuses on examining how exercise and movement specificity determine the extent of improvements in strength and mobility in older adults. Adults lose muscle strength as they age, which can lead to gradual loss of mobility, chronic pain, and poor quality of life. Pagan found that strength training can help mitigate and even reverse these effects. His findings have important implications for designing senior community exercise programs when equipment access may be limited. His primary thesis manuscript is currently undergoing peer review in a top gerontology journal.

Honorable Mention – Cole Taylor, College of Arts and Humanities

Award for Outstanding Dissertation (Engineering, Physical Science, Mathematical Sciences, and Life Sciences) – Ce Zheng, College of Engineering and Computer Science

Ce Zheng is a graduate of the Computer Science doctoral program and mentored by Dr. Chen Chen.

Zheng’s thesis is titled: “Reconstructing 3D Humans from Visual Data.”

Zheng’s dissertation focuses on artificial intelligence-based solutions for human pose estimation (HPE) and human mesh recovery (HMR). At the time when Ce started his doctoral studies, the challenges posed by HPE and HMR were significant. Ce recognized the need for a more efficient and cost-effective solution, leading to the development of groundbreaking techniques for accurate 3D HE and HMR directly from images and videos. These advancements have not only eliminated the dependence on costly motion capture systems but have also significantly impacted the broader research community.

Honorable Mention – Swarnadeep Seth, College of Sciences

Award for Outstanding Dissertation (Social Sciences, Humanities, Education, Business, Fine Arts, and Health Sciences) – Corey Seavey, College of Medicine

Corey Seavey is a graduate of the Biomedical Sciences doctoral program and mentored by Dr. Bradley Willenberg.

Seavey’s dissertation is titled: “New Tools and Platforms for Mosquito Behavior, Control, and Bite-Site Biology Investigations.”

Seavey’s research focused on using technology to create new methods of studying mosquito-borne diseases and ultimately mitigate their impact. Through his work, he developed two innovative tools to help deepen our understanding of mosquito behavior and enhance control strategies. The first tool is a unique flight chamber designed to study spatial repellents – specific airborne chemicals that form an invisible barrier, deterring mosquitoes and mosquito-borne diseases away from humans. The second tool is a model system called BITES that mimics a mosquito biting a human, which can be used to study the mosquito-bite site more closely and potentially better understand disease transmission. These new tools can lead to improved mosquito control strategies, thereby reducing mosquito-borne diseases worldwide.

Honorable Mention – Ratna Okhai, College of Community Innovation and Education

Award for Excellence in Graduate Teaching – Debbie Hahs-Vaughn, College of Community Innovation and Education

Debbie Hahs-Vaughn is a professor and academic program coordinator in the Department of Learning Sciences and Educational Research. She teaches a subject known to be challenging for many people – quantitative statistics. “Statistics is an integral component of graduate education but at the same time is also difficult for many students to understand,” Hahs-Vaughn says. “On top of this, not everyone learns the same so it’s important to present material in multiple ways to reach students.”

Despite the demanding nature of her subject matter, she is regarded as an excellent instructor who makes herself available to students and offers highly constructive feedback. Her recognition with this award is a testament to her exceptional teaching abilities. Her passion for statistics, eagerness to teach her students, and supportive nature have allowed her students to succeed under her direction. “Being recognized through the Excellence Award for Graduate Teaching is an incredible honor and is incredibly motivating to continue to work on improving my instruction.”

The college recipients of the Award for Excellence in Graduate Teaching are:

• College of Arts and Humanities – Julia Listengarten, Professor – School of Performing Arts
• College of Business Administration – Lealand Morin, Assistant Professor – Department of Economics
• College of Engineering and Computer Science – George Atia, Associate Professor – Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
• College of Health Professions and Sciences – Morris Beato, Associate Professor – School of Kinesiology and Rehabilitation Sciences
• College of Nursing – Desiree Diaz, Professor – Department of Nursing Practice
• College of Optics and Photonics – Romain Gaume, Associate Professor – College of Optics and Photonics
• College of Sciences – Thomas Dolan, Associate Professor – School of Politics, Security, and International Affairs
• Rosen College of Hospitality Management – Juhee Kang, Associate Professor – Department of Hospitality Management Services

Award for Faculty Excellence in Mentoring Postdoctoral Scholars – Mubarak Shah, College of Engineering and Computer Science

Mubarak Shah is a trustee chair professor of computer science and the founding director of the Center for Research in Computer Vision. The Pegasus professor has mentored more than twenty postdoctoral scholars during his tenure at UCF, many of whom have gone on to work for prominent universities, companies, and organizations such as Meta and Nvidia. Two co-founded startups and three are now successful faculty members at UCF.

“My philosophy always has been to mentor postdocs to achieve their goals of getting faculty jobs in highly ranked universities or jobs in top tech companies with strong R&D. I mentored them how to publish in a top-quality venue, and how to write successful proposals and how to guide research projects of graduate and undergraduate students,” Shah says. Watching his pupils find success is one of the most fulfilling aspects of his career.

Two exceptional faculty members are selected each year who show great dedication and guidance in the mentorship of doctoral students for the Award for Faculty Excellence in Mentoring Doctoral Students in the following disciplines: Health Sciences, Engineering, Physical Sciences, Life Sciences, Social Sciences, Humanities, Education, Business and Fine Arts.

This year, the two faculty members recognized for their excellence in mentoring doctoral students are Ahmad Elshennawy and Robert Dvorak.

Award for Faculty Excellence in Mentoring Doctoral Students (Health Sciences, Engineering, Physical Sciences, and Life Sciences ) – Ahmad Elshennawy, College of Engineering and Computer Science

Ahmad Elshennawy is a professor in the Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems and Director of the UCF Quality Institute. Elshennawy has over thirty years of experience as a researcher, academic, and consultant in the United States and abroad. His areas of teaching expertise include quality and reliability engineering, quality systems and management, six sigma quality, and statistical process control.

Award for Faculty Excellence in Mentoring Doctoral Students (Social Sciences, Humanities, Education, Business, and Fine Arts) – Robert Dvorak, College of Sciences

Robert Dvorak is a professor in the Clinical Psychology program and director of the REALE-TIME Lab. His work focuses on cognitive, affective, and behavioral self-regulation in health-compromising behaviors, such as substance use and eating pathology. In his lab, he works alongside his students to develop mobile and web-based interventions to reduce involvement in health-compromising behaviors.

Mentoring his students and seeing them grow into wonderful scholars and people is what drives him to continue his work. “I’ve found that the key to being a good mentor isn’t teaching, or guiding, or providing opportunities, or support,” says Dvorak. “Those are all important, but the most important thing, at least from my perspective, is helping these amazing people see in themselves what I see in them.”

The 2024 Excellence Awardees represent a level of distinction in research, mentorship, and academic scholarship that goes above and beyond expectations. To learn more about the Graduate Awards of Excellence, visit the College of Graduate Studies website .

More Topics

Pegasus magazine.

Founded to help fuel talent for the nearby space industry , UCF continues to build its reputation as SpaceU. Here's a look at the early days of UCF's space ties and journey to new frontiers.

Innovation or Exploitation? The AI Copyright Conundrum Passage to Profit Show - Road to Entrepreneurship

• Entrepreneurship

Join Richard Gearhart and Elizabeth Gearhart are the co-hosts of The Passage to Profit Show, as they delve into recent court rulings and the contentious relationship between artificial intelligence and creative ownership, we explore the complexities of innovation versus exploitation. From Napster's echoes to the New York Times' legal battle with OpenAI, we dissect the challenges facing creators in the digital age and ponder the future of copyrights and intellectual property in an increasingly automated world. Tune in for a thought-provoking discussion on the blurred lines between inspiration and infringement.   Whether you're a seasoned entrepreneur, a startup, an inventor, an innovator, a small business or just starting your entrepreneurial journey, tune into Passage to Proft Show for compelling discussions, real-life examples, and expert advice on entrepreneurship, intellectual property, trademarks and more. Visit https://passagetoprofitshow.com/ for the latest updates and episodes. 

• Episode Website
• More Episodes
• All rights reserved