From starting to scaling

High growth startups are widely recognized as key sources of employment, productivity growth and innovation. However, while the long-term impact of the COVID-19 crisis on startups remains to be seen, many now face greater constraints than before. Continued policy support for startups therefore remains vital. In order to guide European policymakers, it is important to understand the key characteristics of high growth startups and gain insights into what sets them apart from other startups. In addition, this report examines the persistent gap between Europe and the United States (US) in terms of startup activity. The findings underscore the role of high growth startups for innovation ecosystems in Europe. The report also highlights some ways governments can continue to support startups by encouraging collaborations with startups as an active innovation partner. The report draws from unique sets of data, including the general module of the European Investment Bank Investment Survey (EIBIS) survey 2019 and the EIBIS Start-up and Scale-up Survey 2019

Small Differences in Experience Bring Large Differences in Performance

In many life situations, people choose sequentially between repeating a past action in expectation of a familiar outcome (exploitation), or choosing a novel action whose outcome is largely uncertain (exploration). For instance, in each quarter, a manager can budget advertising for an existing product, earning a predictable boost in sales. Or she can spend to develop a completely new product, whose prospects are more ambiguous. Such decisions are central to economics, psychology, business, and innovation; and they have been studied mostly by modelling in agent-based simulations or examining statistical relationships in archival or survey data. Using experiments across cultures, we add unique evidence about causality and variations. We find that exploration is boosted by three past experiences: When decision-makers fall below top performance; undergo performance stability; or suffer low overall performance. In contrast, individual-level variables, including risk and ambiguity preferences, are poor predictors of exploration. The results provide insights into how decisions are made, substantiating the micro-foundations of strategy and assisting in balancing exploration with exploitation

Hybrid orchestration in multi-stakeholder innovation networks : practices of mobilizing multiple, diverse stakeholders across organizational boundaries

The prominence of inter-organizational networks for innovation raises questions about how to support collaboration between multiple, diverse stakeholders. We focus on network orchestration and examine the practices that support orchestrators in dealing with the challenges brought by the number and diversity of stakeholders. Using qualitative, longitudinal data from an innovation network of 57 stakeholders, we identify three types of orchestration practices – connecting, facilitating and governing – and observe how they underlie innovation trajectories over time, each supporting the achievement of distinct network outcomes. Within and across trajectories, we observe how orchestrators rely on hybrid orchestration: they switch between dominating and consensus-based orchestration modes, in response to emergent network challenges. By switching between modes, orchestrators address the complexities of simultaneously and temporally dealing with a large number and diversity of stakeholders. With these findings, we present a toolbox of practices for network orchestrators to address distinct challenges in different types of networks and underscore that network research should consider the plurality of networks, rather than treat them as universalistic. Orchestrators play a key role in managing this plurality: they act as environmental scanners who address emergent network challenges through hybrid orchestration. This realization opens new avenues for network research, for example, relating to the skills and capabilities of orchestrators

Racial attention deficit

Despite efforts toward equity in organizations and institutions, minority members report that they are often ignored, their contributions undervalued. Against this backdrop, we conduct a large-sample, multiyear experimental study to investigate patterns of attention. The findings provide causal evidence of a racial attention deficit: Even when in their best interest, White Americans pay less attention to Black peers. In a baseline study, we assign an incentivized puzzle to participants and examine their willingness to follow the example of their White and Black peers. White participants presume that Black peers are less competent—and fail to learn from their choices. We then test two interventions: Providing information about past accomplishments reduces the disparity in evaluations of Black peers, but the racial attention deficit persists. When Whites can witness the accomplishments of Black peers, rather than being told about them, the racial attention deficit subsides. We suggest that such a deficit can explain racial gaps documented in science, education, health, and law

R&D innovation indicator and its effects on the market. An empirical assessment from a financial perspective

We propose an alternative firm-level measure for innovation activities—R&D elasticity—and we analyse its effects on the Tobin's Q of listed companies on the Euronext 100 Index. We find that R&D elasticity is positively related to market appreciation by stakeholder investors. Moreover, we analyse the role of default risk in the relationship between innovation activities and market value, and find that firms' default probabilities are negatively related to Tobin's Q. These findings are supported by OLS regressions, wherein Tobin's Q is regressed on R&D elasticity, five-year default probability, and controls such as ESG voluntary disclosure. These results further the research aimed at developing a conceptual framework for integrating at a policy level the R&D elasticity indicator as a type of innovation disclosure among the non-financial disclosures released by companies

To grasp cognition in action, combine behavioral experiments with protocol analysis

With behavioral experiments and protocol analysis, researchers can capture cognition in action. Using behavioral experiments, they can study realized behavior, not perception or self-reports. And they can do that in a controlled laboratory environment to establish causality, curbing spurious relationships. With protocol analysis, a method to elicit decision-makers’ thoughts, researchers can tap into cognitive processes. In combination, the two methods offer a novel approach to grasp mental processes alongside behavior, to reach causality and replicate findings. We describe the methods, demonstrate how researchers can apply them, and share practices from the design of experimental instruments to the replication of findings

La représentation médiatique des victimes depuis l'affaire Dutroux : quelle évolution pour les journalistes ?

Les victimes font partie intégrante de notre société, elles sont reconnues par leurs pairs mais aussi par les instances publiques et judicaires. Depuis l’affaire Dutroux qui ébranla le pays tout entier, 20 années se sont écoulées. Comment la médiatisation des victimes a-t-elle évolué au cours de ce laps de temps ? Le journalisme a-t-il changé depuis l’affaire en terme de respect des victimes et du traitement des l’informations relatif à ces personnes fragilisées? L’affaire a-t-elle réellement constitué un élément déclencheur pour la profession journalistique dans la manière de représenter les victimes ? De quelles évolutions parle-t-on ? Voici quelques questions auxquelles nous avons tenté de répondre dans ce travail.Master [120] en criminologie, Université catholique de Louvain, 201