CONTINUOUS RELEVANCE & RESPONSIBILITY: INTEGRATION OF SUSTAINABILITY & EXCELLENCE VIA INNOVATION

Purpose: Sustainable Enterprise Excellence or SEE weds core elements of corporate governance, sustainability, and enterprise excellence with the goal of advancing organizational progress toward the asymptotic objective of being continuously relevant and responsible. There are many possible enablers of and approaches to SEE realization. Innovation is among such critical enablers so that the role of innovation in SEE and a process for embedding innovation in the enterprise are explored. Use of innovation to integrate sustainability and enterprise excellence is particularly emphasized.Methodology & Approach: Two types of innovation are especially relevant to sustainable enterprise excellence: innovation for sustainability and sustainable innovation. The first of these focuses on targets of innovation with sustainability at their core, particularly with respect to environmental or social dimensions of sustainability. The second of these, sustainable innovation, is concerned with creating a culture wherein innovation is native. Sustainable innovation and innovation for sustainability are melded to produce Socio-Ecological Innovation or SEI. Formal SEI elements are considered, an approach for SEI deployment is suggested, and SEI maturity with respect to these elements is assessed.Findings: Ten basic and ten advanced SEI enablers are identified and integrated and a method for embedding and assessing the maturity of these is provided, after which a simple assessment presentation approach is proposed.Implications for Further Research: Better understanding of SEI enablers is needed as is more clear understanding of what overall SEI maturity entails. The cited SEI enablers and maturity assessment method should be refined as greater understanding of SEI evolves

Mechanisms Driving Digital New Venture Creation & Performance: An Insider Action Research Study of Pure Digital Entrepreneurship in EdTech

Digitisation has ushered in a new era of value creation where cross border data flows generate more economic value than traditional flows of goods. The powerful new combination of digital and traditional forms of innovation has seen several new industries branded with a ‘tech’ suffix. In the education technology sector (EdTech), which is the industry context of this research, digitisation is driving double-digit growth into a projected $240 billion industry by 2021. Yet, despite its contemporary significance, the field of entrepreneurship has paid little attention to the phenomenon of digital entrepreneurship. As several scholars observe, digitisation challenges core organising axioms of entrepreneurship, with significant implications for the new venture creation process in new sectors such as EdTech. New venture creation no longer appears to follow discrete and linear models of innovation, as spatial and temporal boundaries get compressed. Given the paradigmatic shift, this study investigates three interrelated themes. Firstly, it seeks to determine how a Pure Digital Entrepreneurship (PDE) process develops over time; and more importantly, how the journey challenges extant assumptions of the entrepreneurial process. Secondly, it strives to identify and theorise the deep structures which underlie the PDE process through mechanism-based explanations. Consequently, the study also seeks to determine the causal pathways and enablers which overtly or covertly interrelate to power new venture emergence and performance. Thirdly, it aims to offer practical guidelines for nurturing the growth of PDE ventures, and for the development of supportive ecosystems. To meet the stated objectives, this study utilises an Insider Action Research (IAR) approach to inquiry, which incorporates reflective practice, collaborative inquiry and design research for third-person knowledge production. This three-pronged approach to inquiry allows for the enactment of a PDE journey in real-time, while acquiring a holistic narrative in the ‘swampy lowlands’ of new venture creation. The findings indicate that the PDE process is differentiated by the centrality of digital artifacts in new venture ideas, which in turn result in less-bounded processes that deliver temporal efficiencies – hence, the shorter new venture creation processes than in traditional forms of entrepreneurship. Further, PDE action is defined by two interrelated events – digital product development and digital growth marketing. These events are characterised by the constant forking, merging and termination of diverse activities. Secondly, concurrent enactment and piecemeal co-creation were found to be consequential mechanisms driving temporal efficiencies in digital product development. Meanwhile, data-driven operation and flexibility combine in digital growth marketing, to form higher order mechanisms which considerably reduce the levels of task-specific and outcome uncertainties. Finally, the study finds that digital growth marketing is differentiated from traditional marketing by the critical role of algorithmic agencies in their capacity as gatekeepers. Thus, unlike traditional marketing, which emphasises customer sovereignty, digital growth marketing involves a dual focus on the needs of human and algorithmic stakeholders. Based on the findings, this research develops a pragmatic model of pure digital new venture creation and suggests critical policy guidelines for nurturing the growth of PDE ventures and ecosystems

Start up ecosystem: Features, processes, and actors.

Successful start-ups can positively contribute to the well-being of countries' economies by creating jobs and new investment opportunities. The success of start-ups strongly depends on the ecosystem in which they are inserted. In this regard, it is important to understand the concept of the start-up ecosystem, in particular from the point of view of researchers and professionals. The desire to deepen the dimensions and components of the ecosystem and to observe more closely the best start-up-friendly ecosystems, then propose a comparison with the Italian context, is derived from evidence indicating that the most successful start-ups are concentrated mainly in certain areas of the world, and this concentration is by no means accidental. In fact, the presence of cities and districts recognized worldwide as real technological hubs appears to be directly connected to the presence of a series of conditions that are extremely favorable to their development. From this reasoning, the concept of "ecosystem," which we defined in the course of the work as a "set of conditions, actors and infrastructures capable of supporting the birth and development of innovative business projects; an absolutely heterogeneous system of elements, which embraces culture, regulatory and fiscal measures, public administration, financiers, businesses, universities and research centers." To better describe the phenomenon of start-up ecosystems and analyze the main components that characterize the latter, especially in relation to the geographical contexts in which they develop, we have chosen to start from a model that presents five essential components of start-up ecosystems: entrepreneurship with a particular focus on the diffusion of start-up companies; business incubators and accelerators; institutions (and in particular universities); and the possibility of accessing technologies as a lever for achieving the main objectives of start-ups. The work presents a qualitative research methodology on different levels of analysis. The process research is aimed at multiple case studies in which we first present a comparison between the start-up ecosystems of Rome and Naples and then conciliate with a first benchmarking with a context considered to be of excellence (despite the limitations it presents in recent times), i.e., that of Silicon Valley. The case studies were enriched by the results of narrative interviews of the main actors of the start-up ecosystem: start-uppers, directors of incubators and start-up accelerators and university professors engaged in the issues of new entrepreneurship

The role of the university entrepreneurial ecosystem in entrepreneurial finance: case studies of UK innovation knowledge centres

How to commercialize university research and create positive socio-economic impact is a fundamental research question that is under explored. Considerable public funds are invested in universities globally to create knowledge and then to explore its viability to exploit commercial value through supporting entrepreneurship. We explore how publicly funded research and commercialization of projects promote university’s science and technology (S&T) initiatives. Qualitative case studies, involving 45 interviews, examine three UK government-funded Innovation Knowledge Centres’ (IKCs) roles in commercializing three different emerging disruptive technologies: cyber security, digital construction and synthetic biology. An improved entrepreneurial finance (“entfin”) ecosystem is the catalyst to promote innovation, through public funds to empower industry and deliver an effective finance escalator. A “WHO” policy analysis framework examines: the “Why” rationale for public investment; “How” process of translation; and “Outcomes”. This identified how Entrepreneurial Finance combined with Intermediaries, Infrastructure, Training and Leadership impacts scientific research commercialization. We reveal several inter connectors that link maturity of projects, their locality and outcome horizons. Universities play an important intermediary role, regionally and globally to connect the wider entfin ecosystems. The conclusions suggest that government needs to improve the policy mix across university ecosystem actors to improve long horizon investment

Taking ideas from mind to market: challenges and critical success factors for effective incubation of ICT start-up firms within the innovation hub.

Thesis (M.Com.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, 2010.The study examines the challenges and critical success factors for effective incubation of ICT start-up firms. Information and communication technology (ICT) start-up firms are internationally acknowledged for their contribution to economic growth, improving the quality of life and job creation. The selected case site is the Innovation Hub which hosts a hi-tech incubator called Maxum. The Innovation Hub is an internationally accredited science park located in Tshwane, Pretoria which was launched by the Gauteng Provincial Government in year 2002. The Innovation Hub’s challenge is that its incubation programme is similar to those employed in the developed world. The off-the-shelve programme has not been customised for use within the South African socio-economic context. However, the Innovation Hub is a relatively high performing incubator which has met the prescribed precursors for success. The critical success factors include the hands-on professional services provided to entrepreneurs, value networks and government support. In order to improve the success rate of the incubation of ICT start-up firms, there is a need to adopt a long-term approach towards innovation support and to establish an incentive funding mechanism that fosters job creation by entrepreneurs. The objectives of the study were achieved. The researcher has extended Kumar & Kumar framework and added three critical success factors. The findings of the study cannot be generalised but can be replicated. These findings are of value to the incubator managers and also to the policy-makers when developing and enacting policies that promote incubation of ICT start-up firms.Appendix B, signed declaration and the ethical clearance are missing from the digital copy of the theses

Design for Living Complexities

Lectures from a 12-session course that addresses the intersection of design with critical thinking. Design in this course means intentionality in construction, which involves a range of materials, a sequence of steps, and principles that inform the choice of materials and the steps. Design also always involves putting people, as well as materials, into place. This happens by working with the known properties of people, as well as the known properties of material, and trying out new arrangements to work around their constraints (at least temporarily). Critical thinking, as I define it, involves understanding ideas and practices better when we examine them in relationship to alternatives. Design cannot proceed without the idea that there are alternatives to the current way of doing things, even if you have not yet found those alternatives, or have not yet found the best ones, or have not yet been able to put them into practice. So critical thinking is in design from the start. Alternative designs are exposed and explored during the course through multiple lenses. First, design is explored through historical cases that illustrate how things have by no means always been the way they are now. Second, the class does archaeology of the present to shed light on what we might have taken for granted, relegated as someone else’s responsibility, or deferred to someone who is a specialist. Third, the class compares how things are arranged in different organizations and different cultures. And finally, through their own design sketches, students examine ill-defined problems in cases of real-world living complexity that invite a range of responses

Innovation Ecosystems: A Sustainability Perspective

To be competitive, companies must develop capabilities that allow them to react rapidly to market demands. The innovation methods of the past are not adapted to the turbulence of the modern world. In the last decade, increasing globalization of markets and Industry 4.0 have caused profound changes in the best way to manage the innovation process. This e-book includes a collection of thirteen papers that discuss theoretical approaches, case studies, and surveys focused on issues related to open innovation and its mechanisms

Navigating Complexity in an Internet of Things Era: A Case Study of Entrepreneurial Leadership in a Silicon Valley IoT Startup

Research into the inner-workings of high-tech startups in the field of leadership within the United States is needed. The accelerating impact of technology on society is clear. The Internet of Things (IoT) is a primary technology of an emergent era, the Fourth Industrial Revolution (Industry 4.0). Silicon Valley startups germinate many of these Industry 4.0 IoT technologies. The current understanding of leadership in IoT startups is often based on media reports. recounting villains and heroes. This is not that. This is a qualitative, normative case study based on the researcher’s insider status at an IoT startup. Insider case study research into leadership of this type is sparse. Based on a review of the literature, multiple one-on-one interviews were conducted with leaders in an IoT startup. An additional 12 interviews were conducted with leaders in the IoT startup field. This study asks: What does it take to lead an IoT startup in Silicon Valley? The data supported the use of Goffman’s (1959b) dramaturgy as an analytical tool for leadership. The leadership at IoT Inc. took on prescribed roles in formal and informal settings. Bourdieu’s (2020) social capital, habitus, and field concepts are also supported for analyzing IoT startups. The individuals at IoT Inc. used social capital, and exhibited habitus based on experiences and expertise while interacting with the IoT field. Chia’s (2013) process-orientation and application of knowledge types like techne, metis, and phronesis is supported. Leaders in the case study exhibited complexity-based leadership when pursuing opportunities in an environment of constrained resources. The data demonstrated that entrepreneurial leaders with accumulated social capital and habitus, who understand the dramaturgical context of an emergent technology field, can use forms of expert pragmatic knowledge to navigate the complexity in pursuit of a vision