From Early Curiosity to Space Wide Web: Emergence of the Small Satellite Innovation Ecosystem

Research Questions: How did the small satellite ecosystem emerge and evolve? Although the first modern small satellite UoSat-1 was successfully launched in 1981, and the CubeSat dominant design was introduced in 1999, the sales takeoff of small satellites did not occur until the early 2010s. What explains this long time period

Walking the Tightrope: Coopetition Capability Construct and Its Role in Value Creation

Prior research emphasizes the paradoxical nature of coopetition and the need for specialized capabilities—coopetition capability—to deal effectively with opportunities and challenges stemming from the simultaneous pursuit of cooperation and competition and to create superior value. However, we know little about the underlying conceptual properties of coopetition capability (construct clarity) and lack a reliable and valid scale to measure it (construct validity). We conduct a study in three phases to address this critical gap. First, building on paradox literature, we conceptualize coopetition capability as a multidimensional construct reflected by three underlying dimensions: coopetition mindset, analytical acumen, and executional skills. Second, we develop a 15-item psychometrically valid scale using a sample of 647 coopetitive alliances in high-technology sectors. Finally, using a matched sample of 536 coopetitive alliances, we extend the focal construct's nomological network by examining two relationships: coopetition experience's impact on coopetition capability and the effect of coopetition capability on the relationship between the coopetition paradox and value creation. Overall, our paper lays a foundation for deeper theory development and empirical research on coopetition by providing much-needed construct clarity and psychometrically valid measures for coopetition capability

Effect on Texas Grapefruit Sales…Point-of-Purchase Display Material.

2 p

Measuring personal networks and their relationship with scientific production

The analysis of social networks has remained a crucial and yet understudied aspect of the efforts to measure Triple Helix linkages. The Triple Helix model aims to explain, among other aspects of knowledge-based societies, ¿the current research system in its social context. This paper develops a novel approach to study the research system from the perspective of the individual, through the analysis of the relationships among researchers, and between them and other social actors. We develop a new set of techniques and show how they can be applied to the study of a specific case (a group of academics within a university department). We analyse their informal social networks and show how a relationship exists between the characteristics of an individual¿s network of social links and his or her research output

What Drives Innovation and Use of Big Data in the Small Satellite Industry? The Role of Technological Resources and Managerial Experience

The rapid growth of the small satellite industry has led to many new firm entries and an increased number of innovations. While some companies have focus their innovation efforts on improving the satellite systems, others have devoted their efforts on finding novel applications of small satellites. In this paper, we examine what factors drive companies’ innovation choices, and how technological resources and top management team experience influence companies’ pursuit of innovation. We categorize innovation choices in terms of products and application innovation. Using data from 196 companies seeking profit in the small satellite industry, we show that while having related technology is positively related to product innovation, having a CEO with more diverse experience is positively related to application innovation. We also find that firms may not be able to pursue product innovation if they don’t have the necessary technological ingredients. Innovation choices are important antecedents of companies’ innovation performance. By identifying the drivers of firm’s innovation choices, results of this paper provide implications for explaining innovation performance