Re-examining And Extending Penrose's Growth Theory: Updating Penrose For The 21St Century

Edith Penrose argued that firms face a constraint on organic growth because of growth activities in previous periods. Central to her ideas about growth is the distinction between managerial and entrepreneurial capabilities. Growth in previous periods creates adjustment costs which are associated with managerial capabilities and impacts on the growth opportunities which are associated with entrepreneurial capabilities. In this paper we revisit Penrose’s work to examine how the nature of growth in previous periods may effect growth in the current period. Employing a panel of all commercially active enterprises in the private (non-government) sector in Sweden over a 10 year period our results indicate that previous organic growth acts as a constraint on organic growth, however, acquisitive growth may act as a catalyst for organic growth. Based on these findings, we suggest extensions Penrose’s to growth theory

Spinning off new ventures: a typology of facilitating services

This study analyses the spin-out activity in seven technology transfer units, which are considered to be successes in Europe: Crealys in France, the Top Initiative of the university of Twente in the Netherlands, Leuven R&D at the KUL in Belgium, Business Develop-ment at IMEC in Belgium, BioM in Germany (Munich area), Technology Transfer Partners (TTP) and Scientific Generics, both in Cam-bridge, UK. In each of these institutes, an in depth analysis is made of how they organise the following activities: (1) sensibilisation and Detection of opportunities, (2) management of IPR, (3) selection of spin-out projects, (4) incubation and business plan preparation, (5) financing of these spin-outs and finally (6) the follow-up of spin-outs after start-up. Based upon the analysis of these activities, three different models have been defined: a self selective model, a supportive model and a protective model. In the first model, the specific aim is to generate as many start-ups as possible. Stimulating general entrepreneurship rather than financially or economically attractive companies are thus the goal. This means that sensibilisation and opportunity seeking is the main activity. In the second model, the emphasis lies on creating economically attractive companies with a transitional starter profile. These companies might not yet have a financially attractive business plan but have the ambition to make one in the future. Usually they are based upon the IP generated in the mother institute. Management of IPR and business plan preparation are crucial activities in this model. Finally, the protective model focuses on the creation of financially attractive companies, which receive VC-money at start. In addition to the previous activities, also financing activities are of crucial importance here. In addition to analysing the activities developed in each of these models, also theresources necessary to organise these activities are examined. In the first model, the crucial resources seem to be an experienced entrepreneur as manager who can sensibilise students, researchers and professors to start up a company and public money to facilitate this start up. In the second model, a financially autonomous organisation is needed which is strongly supported by the top management of the university in its activities. This organisation needs to have a minimum critical mass of people specialised in legal issues, IPR and business plan development. In addition, a public-private early stage. Capital fund is needed to support the start-ups. Finally, the protective organisation needs a worldwide recognised leading research team in a particular technology. The tech transfer or business development unit needs to be able to incubate the organisation and facilitate the recruitment of external management, attraction of international early stage venture capital and the formation of the company's intellectual property base

Pluralized leadership in complex organizations : exploring the cross network effects between leadership influence and informal network relations

Understanding the connection between leadership and informal social network structures is important in advancing understanding of the enactment of pluralized leadership. in this article we explore how the enactment of pluralized leadership is shaped by leadership influence and informal (advice and support) networks and the interactions between the two. building on recent developments in exponential random graph modeling, we empirically model the cross network effects across three leadership networks and explore different forms of cross network effects and under what conditions they occur. our findings suggest that patterns of pluralized leadership have important endogenous qualities, as shaped through actors’ leadership and informal networks, and are important for understanding the required capability for facing increasingly complex organizational situations

The enactment of plural leadership in a health and social care network : the influence of institutional context

In this article we employ developments in social network analysis (SNA), specifically the p* model, to examine the enactment of plural leadership within, and across, hierarchical levels and organizational boundaries (Denis et al., 2012). Drawing on an empirical study of an inter-professional, inter-organizational network (number of nodes = 23) that delivers health and social care, we address two research gaps: (i) the effect of power relations, derived from professional hierarchy, upon spread of plural leadership; and (ii) the effect of formal leadership, derived from managerial accountability, in channeling the spread of plural leadership for coherent strategic effect. We show that, in a routine situation, the network is characterized by generalized leadership exchanges. In this situation, professional hierarchy and managerial accountability are not visible, nor is channeling of plural leadership by the formal leader. In a non-routine situation, when a disruptive event occurs, the network is characterized by restricted exchange. In this situation, professional hierarchy and managerial accountability are evident, and a formal leader channels plural leadership

The effects of leader succession and prior leader experience on postsuccession organizational performance

In this article we strive to reconcile equivocal findings about the effects of top leader succession and prior leadership experience on postsuccession organizational performance. In doing so, we draw on insights from theories of human capital, learning, and asymmetric information to better understand the conditions under which leaders increase or decrease postsuccession performance. Employing a sample of 119 newly appointed leaders in the English Premier League (1996–2010), we find the following results. First, relating to the succession event, outside leaders that directly move between leadership positions are associated with higher postsuccession performance while the departure of a prior leader to a leadership position in another organization has a negative effect on postsuccession performance. Second, relating to prior leadership experience, leaders with domestic top leader experience are associated with lower postsuccession performance, while leaders with foreign top leader experience are associated with higher postsuccession performance

Exploring the potential and limits of a neuroscientific approach to entrepreneurship

We critically examine the potential that neuroscience holds for the future of entrepreneurship research and provide a framework for entrepreneurship researchers interested in pursuing this line of inquiry. Specifically, we propose four complementary mechanisms through which neuroscience can inform entrepreneurship theory and research. We conclude with a discussion of the limitations and ethical implications of a neuroscientific approach to entrepreneurship