A Guide to Planning and Managing

Open Innovative Ecosystems 1st

Edition João Leitão
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/a-guide-to-planning-and-managing-open-innovative-e
cosystems-1st-edition-joao-leitao/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Chess Explained The c3 Sicilian 1st Edition Sam Collins

https://ebookmeta.com/product/chess-explained-
the-c3-sicilian-1st-edition-sam-collins/

Starting Out The c3 Sicilian 1st Edition John Emms

https://ebookmeta.com/product/starting-out-the-c3-sicilian-1st-
edition-john-emms/

The Paper Issue 83 1st Edition Origamiusa

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-paper-issue-83-1st-edition-
origamiusa/

The American Revolution 1774 83 2nd Edition Daniel

Marston

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-american-
revolution-1774-83-2nd-edition-daniel-marston/
BNF 83 (British National Formulary) March 2022 Joint
Formulary Committee

https://ebookmeta.com/product/bnf-83-british-national-formulary-
march-2022-joint-formulary-committee/

English Grammar Exercises with answers Part 4 Your

quest towards C2 1st Edition Daniel B. Smith

https://ebookmeta.com/product/english-grammar-exercises-with-
answers-part-4-your-quest-towards-c2-1st-edition-daniel-b-smith/

Patriot vs Loyalist American Revolution 1775 83 Combat

1st Edition Si Sheppard

https://ebookmeta.com/product/patriot-vs-loyalist-american-
revolution-1775-83-combat-1st-edition-si-sheppard/

British Light Infantryman vs Patriot Rifleman American

Revolution 1775 83 1st Edition Robbie Macniven

https://ebookmeta.com/product/british-light-infantryman-vs-
patriot-rifleman-american-revolution-1775-83-1st-edition-robbie-
macniven/

Secrecy Public Relations and the British Nuclear Debate

How the UK Government Learned to Talk about the Bomb
1970 83 Cold War History 1st Edition Daniel Salisbury

https://ebookmeta.com/product/secrecy-public-relations-and-the-
british-nuclear-debate-how-the-uk-government-learned-to-talk-
about-the-bomb-1970-83-cold-war-history-1st-edition-daniel-
A Guide to Planning and Managing
Open Innovative Ecosystems
A Guide to Planning and
Managing Open
Innovative Ecosystems

EDITED BY
JOÃO LEITÃO, VANESSA RATTEN
AND
JEAN BARROCA
United Kingdom – North America – Japan – India – Malaysia – China
Emerald Publishing Limited
Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, UK

First edition 2020

Copyright © 2020 Emerald Publishing Limited

Reprints and permissions service

Contact: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any
form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without
either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying
issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright
Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the chapters are those of the authors. Whilst
Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its content, Emerald
makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the chapters’ suitability and application
and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-1-78973-410-2 (Print)

ISBN: 978-1-78973-409-6 (Online)
ISBN: 978-1-78973-411-9 (Epub)
Contents

List of Figures

List of Tables

List of Contributors

Chapter 1 Planning and Managing Open Innovative

Ecosystems, Data and Government
Vanessa Ratten and Abu Zafar Shahriar

Chapter 2 Understanding Bio Health Technologies

Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: An Intellectual Capital
Approach
Ângela Gonçalves, Dina Pereira, João Leitão and Maria del Mar
Fuentes

Chapter 3 Transformative University in Quadruple Helix

Sustainability Governance
Ufuk Gur

Chapter 4 Entrepreneurship and University Brands: The

Sense of Belonging in Higher Education
Bruno Sousa and Filipa Magalhães
Chapter 5 Business Concept in a Health-related Donation
Context
Amani Alsalem, Park Thaichon and Scott Weaven

Chapter 6 Empowerment and Performance in SMEs:

Examining the Effect of Employees’ Ethical Values and
Emotional Intelligence
Konstantinos Koronios, Panagiotis Dimitropoulos, Athanasios
Kriemadis, John Douvis, Marios Papaloukas and Vanessa Ratten

Chapter 7 Technology Ecosystems in Sport: A Bibliometric

Analysis
Paloma Escamilla-Fajardo, Juan Núñez-Pomar and Vanessa Ratten

Chapter 8 International Sports Organizations and

Internationalization of Sports Firms
Kadir Yildiz and Yeşer Eroğlu

Chapter 9 Traditional Cultural Industry in Jepara: An Open

Innovative Ecosystem Approach
Danu Patria, Petrus Usmanij and Vanessa Ratten

Chapter 10 An Education Ecosystem View to Managing

Ethics and Entrepreneurial Intention
Roos Kities Andadari, Ristiyanti Prasetyo, Rosaly Franksiska, Yustina
Pravitasmara Dewi, Petrus Usmanij and Vanessa Ratten

Chapter 11 State-owned Companies and Innovative

Ecosystem: A Case of 3-kg LPG
Roos Kities Andadari, Yulius Pratomo, Petrus Usmanij and Vanessa
Ratten

Index
List of Figures

Fig. 3.1. The Conceptual Model of Transformative University for

Sustainability
Fig. 6.1. Proposed Model
Fig. 7.1. Methodological Process
Fig. 7.2. Evolution of Articles Published Up To November 2019
Fig. 7.3. Co-authorship Network (≥2)
Fig. 7.4. Number of Articles by Language
Fig. 7.5. Co-occurrence of Terms Appeared in the Keyword Field (≥4
Co-occurrences)
Fig. 9.1. First Group
Fig. 9.2. Second Group
Fig. 9.3. Third Group
Fig. 9.4. Jepara Productions Structure
List of Tables

Table 2.1. Identification of the Units of Analysis of the Case Study

Table 2.2. Stakeholders’ Perspective on the Perception of Value
Regarding IC Components
Table 2.3. Detailed Description of Unit Cases
Table 3.1. Quadruple Helix Actors for Sustainability Governance
Table 5.1. Conceptual Models Informed Organ Donation Studies
Table 6.1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations
Table 6.2. 2SLS Regression Results
Table 7.1. Journals, Number of Articles, LCS, GCS (≥3 Published
Articles)
Table 7.2. Authors, Affiliation, LCS, GCS (≥2 Published Articles)
Table 7.3. Articles by Country, LCS, GCS
Table 7.4. Most Cited Articles (1977–November 2019)
Table 7.5. Articles Most Referenced in the Search (≥4)
Table 7.6. Keyword Frequency (≥10)
Table 7.7. Three Areas With Main Studies
Table 10.1. Summary of Number of Questionnaires
Table 10.2. Validity Test Results
Table 10.3. Reliability Test Results
Table 10.4. Index Values and Respondents’ Perceptions
Table 10.5. Main Model Regression Test Results
Table 10.6. Model Feasibility Test For The Main Model
Table 10.7. Coefficient of Determination in the Main Model Summary
Model
Table 10.8. Summary of Chow Test Results for Each Subgroup
Table 10.9. Business Ethics Interaction Test Results
Table 11.1. Respondents Groups
Table 11.2. Respondents’ Characteristics
Table 11.3. The type of LPG Packaging Size Used
Table 11.4. Number of 3-kg LPG Tubes Consumed Per Household
Per Month
Table 11.5. Regression Results for Several Factors That Influence
the Consumption of 3-kg LPG
List of Contributors

Amani Alsalem Griffith University, Australia

Roos Kities Andadari Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana,
Indonesia
John Douvis University of Peloponnese, Greece
Yeşer Eroğlu Istanbul Rumeli University, Turkey
Paloma Escamilla-Fajardo University of Valencia, Spain
Rosaly Franksiska Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana,
Indonesia
Maria del Mar Fuentes University of Granada, Spain
Ângela Gonçalves University of Beira Interior, Portugal
Ufuk Gur Duzce University, Turkey
Konstantinos Koronios University of Peloponnese, Greece
Athanasios Kriemadis University of Peloponnese, Greece
João Leitão University of Beira Interior, Portugal
Filipa Magalhães Polytechnic Institute of Cavado and
Ave, Portugal
Juan Núñez-Pomar University of Valencia, Spain
Panagiotis Dimitropoulos University of Peloponnese, Greece
Marios Papaloukas University of Peloponnese, Greece
Danu Patria University of Indonesia, Indonesia
Dina Pereira University of Beira Interior, Portugal
Ristiyanti Prasetyo Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana,
Indonesia
Yulius Pratomo Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana,
Indonesia
Yustina Pravitasmara Dewi Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana,
Indonesia
Vanessa Ratten La Trobe University, Australia
Abu Zafar Shahriar Monash University, Australia
Bruno Sousa Polytechnic Institute of Cavado and
Ave, Portugal
Park Thaichon Griffith University, Australia
Petrus Usmanij La Trobe University, Australia
Scott Weaven Griffith University, Australia
Kadir Yildiz Manisa Celal Bayar University, Turkey
Chapter 1

Planning and Managing Open

Innovative Ecosystems, Data and
Government
Vanessa Ratten and Abu Zafar Shahriar

Abstract
The rise of the digital economy has led to a focus on how to
manage big data and business intelligence for entrepreneurial
purposes. The aim of this chapter is to discuss how to plan for
open innovative ecosystems that harness the potential of new
data analytics techniques in order to progress society. This
means concentrating on the increasingly complex world of data
analytics in order to derive information about potential
entrepreneurial opportunities. The role of knowledge
management in influencing an open innovation ecosystem
predicated on big data and computing acumen is stated. This
helps to understand how the future of the global economy
relies on an open data policy that encourages the sharing and
dissemination of information. Implications for managers are
also suggested that emphasize the role of innovation
ecosystems, data and government.

Keywords: Data; ecosystem; entrepreneurship; entrepreneurial

ecosystem; government; innovation; open innovation; planning
1. Introduction
The concepts of ecosystems, data and government have evolved
over the years based on societal trends (Bliemel, Flores, De Klerk, &
Miles, 2019). This is influencing how people view the concepts and
how they are understood in society. Culture plays a role in this as
people will consider data differently depending on their experiences.
This has meant some countries where there are more open
discussions and a democratic society tend to view data differently
compared to more autocratic societies. This has also changed with
increased computing platforms being available that enable the open
and free sharing of information. This is evident in websites like
Wikipedia being edited on a daily basis based on new information
becoming available. This has increased internationalization as more
individuals can communicate and work together on projects. Most of
the research on big data has been conducted in the analytics field
due to its emphasis on statistics (Olszak, 2016). There is also a lot of
research being conducted in the information systems area due to the
need to introduce new data analysis methods. However, less
research has focused on innovation, data and government from an
innovation perspective, which is the reason for this chapter.
There has been a shift in entrepreneurship research from the
individual entrepreneur to an ecosystem perspective that
acknowledges the cultural and social embeddedness of
entrepreneurship (Ferreira, Ratten, & Dana, 2017). This means being
aware of how entrepreneurship occurs at multiple levels in society
from the individual, firm to societal. An intersectionality approach to
entrepreneurship is useful to understand the effects of different
identities and contexts. Entrepreneurs self-identify with being a risk
taker and innovator, but they can also have other roles in society (Dy
& Agwunbi, 2019). This comes from their socio-demographic
features such as gender, geographic location and income level.
Context also impacts entrepreneurial behavior with some contexts
more conducive to entrepreneurship (Shepherd, 2019). Although the
concept of entrepreneurship dates back a long time, it is only
recently with the internet and technology revolution has an
entrepreneurial ecosystem emphasis swept the industry. In order to
support entrepreneurship, different levels of analysis are needed that
focus on the role of data and government in society. The core
attribute of an ecosystem is in the complex interactions that are hard
to define due to their intangible nature (Puhakka, 2010). In addition,
there is a time effect evident in ecosystems due to the need for
connections based on time factors. The government is a crucial
ecosystem member that determines the fate of many involved in a
functioning entrepreneurial environment (Ferreira, Fernandes, &
Ratten, 2017). This is due to the role institutions play in managing
business activities and introducing new regulatory systems. One of
the key drivers of a good ecosystem is a government structure that
is sympathetic to entrepreneurship (Lichtenstein, 2011). This means
the role of government needs to be considered as one of the most
important factors influencing the entrepreneurial climate.
Entrepreneurship is not an isolated event but occurs based on
environmental conditions (Ferreira, Fayolle, Ratten, & Raposo, 2018).
This means it is important to understand the role ecosystems play in
fostering a good environment for entrepreneurship. Thereby
enabling a focus on how interconnected individuals, businesses and
government entities intersect to create business ventures. To do this
can be a hard task due to the continued and varied interactions
occurring in an ecosystem. This means the entrepreneurial processes
need to be understood as systemic interactions (Miller & Bound,
2011). In an entrepreneurial ecosystem, there is a wide range of
related activities taking place that often occur in a synchronous
manner. A sustainable ecosystem develops in a way that facilitates
mutual interactions based on common goals (Parente, El Tarabishy,
Botti, Vesci, & Feola, 2020). This means there are different activities
occurring at the same time that produce a collective outcome.
Ecosystems involve a large number of entities that depend on
each other for their survival. This results in both strong and weak
ties among the entities that facilitate mutual goals. Moore (1996, p.
26) defined a business ecosystem as “an economic community
supported by a foundation of increasing organisations and
individuals in the organisms of the business world.” This definition
highlights how the effectiveness of an ecosystem will depend on how
the entities interact in order to facilitate future gain. Thus, an
entrepreneurial ecosystem is a form of ecosystem that focuses on
entrepreneurial endeavors. This means stakeholders involved in
entrepreneurial projects such as entrepreneurs, research institutions
and start-ups work together in a collaborative manner. Certain cities
and regions like Silicon Valley in San Francisco have become famous
due to their entrepreneurial ecosystem. This has made other places
want to replicate their environment in order to obtain the same kind
of economic success. In an entrepreneurial ecosystem, there needs
to be a variety of entities in existence such as government
institutions and trade groups in order to foster entrepreneurship
(Pitelis, 2012). This is required as the interconnection of human and
social capital enables entrepreneurial ideas to emerge. Governments
have tried to create entrepreneurial environments due to the
benefits they bring to a region in terms of jobs and growth. This has
resulted in science and technology parks created to enable a number
of entities to work together in a region (Ratten, 2016). This also
enables support systems in terms of venture capital, financing and
other support services to be offered. Thereby ensuring that the
entities in the region have access to required services they need.
To build an understanding of how to plan and manage
ecosystems, this chapter examines the current research on
ecosystems. This ensures a full understanding of how ecosystems
work and operate based on the input of data and government.
Through the discussion provided in this chapter, it is possible to
identify the distinct elements and dynamics of entrepreneurial
ecosystems. In addition, this chapter provides an agenda for future
research based on open innovative ecosystems, thereby suggesting
a major contribution to the literature on ecosystems. This is by
discussing the importance of ecosystems in society and being able to
stress the role digitalization plays in the economy. This means
integrating the current literature with new research strands about
big data and data analytics. This is important as it focuses on how
the digital economy is influencing entrepreneurship. Moreover, the
literature on digital business with ecosystems is discussed in order to
derive theoretical and practical insights. This can help build
phenomenon-driven research on ecosystems, data and government.
In the remainder of this chapter, the role of ecosystems, data and
government in society is discussed. This includes focusing on the
importance of these topics for both scholars and practitioners. This
will help to highlight the relevant issues for analyzing and solving
societal problems related to big data and entrepreneurial
ecosystems. The last section of this chapter identifies opportunities
for future research on ecosystems, data and government that can
also provide advice for managers and educators.

2. Knowledge Economy
The knowledge economy has transformed organizations into being
repositories of intangible resources (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). In
the past, land and material capital was emphasized, but this has
changed with more interest in knowledge and intelligence. Thus, the
way firms compete is based on the information and wisdom they
have that can differentiate them in the marketplace. Gupta, Iyer, and
Aronson (2000, p. 17) state that knowledge management is “a
process that helps organizations find, select, organize, disseminate
and transfer important information and expertise.” This means it is
important to manage knowledge as a source of information. Most
knowledge is derived from gut feelings and intuition about events
(Polanyi, 1958). This makes it important to act on hunches in order
to progress in society. Some individuals do this by focusing on
insights they have that bring meaning to certain occurrences. Often
it is hard to put knowledge into words in order to explain it to
others, which makes knowledge a crucial asset individuals have that
can determine their success (Polanyi, 1966).
There can be some skepticism around the value of knowledge due
to uncertainty about whether it will alter market conditions.
Knowledge can be distinguished in terms of information or know-
how (Becerra-Fernandez & Subherwal, 2001). Information refers to
what something means and can be accrued from experience. Some
forms of information are embedded in events or procedures. This
means it is important to understand the context from which the
information was obtained. Know-how refers to how to do something
and is embodied inexperience (Suseno & Ratten, 2007). This means
in order for knowledge to be valued, it needs to be shared in a way
that gives meaning to those involved. To do this can be a hard task
as knowledge involves information that needs to be acted upon in
order to provide a benefit to society. Those who value knowledge
tend to understand its impact and recognize it as an asset. This
means intelligent people can harness the potential of knowledge by
acting on it for their own gain. This involves having the ability to
continually learn and innovate based on the accumulated knowledge.
Business intelligence is associated with knowledge management
and data analytics. This is due to it being an umbrella term to
describe a set of concepts that relate to the use of information. In
order to improve decision-making processes, businesses are
investing in ways to utilize information. This enables the use of fact-
based support systems that are characterized by the collection and
then analysis of information. In order to evaluate information, there
needs to be a set of business functions to transform data into
information. This enables advanced analytical tools to be used in
order to support the strategic decision-making initiatives in an
organization. The use of data analytics is needed in order to
systematically organize data so that intelligent decisions can be
made. Business intelligence provides a way for firms to leverage
information in order to make informed decisions. In order to realize
the potential of data, it needs to be analyzed using appropriate tools
and technologies. This helps firms to improve their decision-making
systems based on the data provided (Watson & Wixom, 2007). To do
this requires the gathering of data that can be stored for later
usages. Firms can use business intelligence in order to provide
analytical processing and predictive analysis. This enables the
reporting of data that can lead to performance benefits.
Information technology services have become a large share of
overall investments in the economy. There has been an exponential
increase in the amount of data being circulated in society due to the
adoption of mobile computing devices. Networked devices such as
smartphones have also contributed to this growth due to the way
they are connected to the internet. In addition, user-generated
content streaming from social media has further fueled this growth.
Big data analytics is becoming more important as a way to realize
the value in structured and unstructured data. In order to solve
societal problems, big data are being hailed as a new innovation that
has huge potential. Big data are a significant source of business
intelligence due to the way they can capture opinions. This means
big data can make a difference to human life and enable businesses
to deliver better value.
A decision support system is defined as “a computer-based
information system that supports business or organizational
decision-making activities that typically result in ranking, sorting or
choosing from among alternatives” (Mariani, Baggio, Fuchs, &
Hoepken, 2018, p. 4). Cloud-based services are being used to
provide business intelligence on demand. This enables data to be
accessed on demand and enables a faster way to analyze data.
Cloud-based architecture also enables more flexibility in accessing
data from any geographic location. Due to advances in computing
power and machine intelligence, the use of big data is becoming
more popular. Business intelligence can be defined as “a set of
conceptus and methods based on fact-based support systems for
improving decision making” (Trieu, 2017, p. 111). It is important to
utilize business intelligence in order to gather information about
government processes regarding entrepreneurship. This can enable
a more open innovation ecosystem to develop that utilizes the
government and other key stakeholders in the business
environment.
More firms are basing their decisions on big data due to the
voluminous amounts of data it contains. Despite the importance of
big data, there exist digital inequalities in society that might affect
their usage. This is due to there being a digital divide in terms of
who has the capacity and opportunity to work with big data. In order
to manage data, there should be some form of project management
in place. A project is defined as “a temporary endeavour undertaken
to create a unique product, service or result” (Sanchez, 2015, p.
319). Thus, projects can integrate complex data in a way that
benefits both business and government.
Those firms with the financial resources to buy data analytics
tools will have a distinct advantage. Computational intelligence can
be used to analyze big data as it enables a focus on understanding
ideas through computing processes. Fulcher (2008, p. 3) defined
computational intelligence as “adaptive mechanisms that enable or
facilitate intelligent behaviors in complex and changing
environments.” Increasingly social media platforms are becoming
part of computational intelligence as they generate a large amount
of unstructured data that are tied to an individual’s daily activities
and interests (Ghani, Hamid, Hashem, & Ahmed, 2019). This
overwhelming amount of data being generated has led to a surge of
interest in big data analytics. This is due to the ability of big data to
reveal previously unknown information.
Stakeholders are entities whose support is needed in order for the
survival of a business. This means that there are mutual
dependencies between stakeholders in order to ensure their success.
In order to facilitate successful business development, there needs
to be knowledge exchange and collaboration. Sanchez (2015, p.
320) defines stakeholders as “individuals, groups and organisations
that are affected by or can affect a decision or action.” There are
different types of stakeholders involved in project management
including dormant, discretionary, demanding, expectant and
dominant (Sunder, 2016). Dormant stakeholders are those who have
not been active for a long time period on a project. These
stakeholders can be active when the time or need arises.
Discretionary stakeholders are those who are not needed to run a
project and can come and go as they please. Sometimes, it is useful
to have backup stakeholders who can provide input if there is a need
for their services. Demanding stakeholders refer to those who
require something urgently from the project. These kinds of
stakeholders can be quite stressful as they are constantly requiring
resources. Expectant stakeholders are those who are waiting to
receive some kind of feedback from the project. These stakeholders
can be impatient as they might need something before they can do
something themselves. Dominant stakeholders are those who have
the most influence in a project. When these stakeholders’ view is
expressed, normally others listen to it in an attentive manner.
Stakeholder buy-in is needed in order to manage projects
involving start-ups. Attention needs to be paid to stakeholders who
have the greatest influence over the project. This requires ongoing
engagement to make sure the project aims are suitable to all the
stakeholders and that power relationships are managed. Power can
be defined as “the ability or capacity to produce an effect-to get
something done that otherwise may not be done” (Sunder, 2016, p.
139). To do this, communication is needed that identifies potential
problems before they occur. Active collaboration through the life
cycle of a project is needed in order to achieve the best outcomes.
To do this, there needs to be coordination among the stakeholders
that leads to continued interaction. This is important in ensuring that
knowledge about the project is spread to the stakeholders in order
to make sure they are involved with discussions. Stakeholders will
have different levels of impact on a project depending on their
importance. This means it is important that the input of stakeholders
is appropriate given their contribution to the project.

3. Data Revolution
There has been a data revolution led by the increased amounts of
data being available from the internet and social media. This has
meant more information is available on a range of issues that affect
the global economy. However, in order for data to be used properly,
it needs to be understood in terms of its meaning and potential
applications. Analyzing data through computing programs has
become a way to translate data into knowledge. This is important as
there are vast quantities of data available that can be used in order
to find patterns to predict future market trends. Thus, big data can
be a game changer and enable more entrepreneurship to take place.
Big data are changing the competitive dynamics of an economy
through transforming existing processes. Hazen, Skipper, Boone, and
Hill (2018, p. 202) state that big data are “large, complex and
longitudinal data sets generated from instruments, sensors, internet
transactions and/or other digital sources.” The emphasis in this
definition is on the complexity inherent in big data that makes them
hard to understand. Data can change over time so big data provide
a way to understand temporal effects. This can be useful to see how
events are impacting behavior and the relevance for business. Data
include information assets that need to be analyzed in the
appropriate manner. This enables enhanced insights into occurrences
and the ability to plan for the future. This is enabling companies to
alter their existing systems as a way to facilitate innovation. The
shift in the global economy to real-time data has meant increased
competitiveness. In addition, organizations are realizing that they
can increase their productivity by putting big data into analytics.
Mishra, Luo, Jiang, Papadopoulos, and Dubey (2017, p. 559) state
“big data refers to datasets whose size is beyond the ability of
typical database software tools to capture, store, manage and
analyse.” In order to comprehend the concept of big data, it can be
helpful to highlight its three main characteristics in terms of variety,
velocity and volume. The three Vs have become a common way to
describe big data due to the emphasis on how data are captured,
stored and analyzed. This helps to understand why big data need to
be analyzed through advanced technology services. The difference
between big data and normal data sets is in the need for big data to
be understood through the statistical analysis. This can be costly and
time-consuming due to the amount of data being available.
Therefore, new statistical tools are being used to understand data in
order so that people can learn more about the information it
contains. In the past, it was difficult to analyze data quickly, but with
cloud computing and other computing tools, it can be done in an
easier manner. This enables data to be analyzed in a way for future
gain. Variety refers to the wide range of data available that relate to
different topics. This means there are numerous ways to
comprehend data that depend on the way it is understood. For
business people, it might be important to focus on data related to
financial information, whereas other people might be interested in
other features such as the timing and content. Velocity refers to how
fast the data are being transferred and accumulated in society. Due
to increased usage of mobile communications, it can be important to
understand how and why data are being used in society. This might
refer to data being used to book events or plan for other types of
activity. Alternatively, the data might be being used to understand
consumer trends. Volume refers to the amount of data being stored.
As computing devices have more storage capabilities, it is becoming
easier to store data.
Lee (2017) suggests that an additional two Vs should be added to
the way big data are conceptualized: variability and value. Variability
refers to differences in the flow of data. The rate and exchange of
data can vary depending on numerous factors including time of day,
season and location. This means the flow of data will fluctuate
depending on these environmental effects. Thus, the context from
which the data are emerging needs to be considered. This will help
explain predictable and unpredictable events. Some data are
complex so they can take time to understand in terms of market
implications. For this reason, the circumstances surrounding the
extraction and use of data should be considered. Value refers to the
way data can be used once they have been assessed. Some data are
more valuable than other forms because of their usefulness. This is
due to the data initially not being seen as valuable, but once they
are analyzed, the value can be more easily understood.
Big data offer new insights into how to manage and store
information. There are increased privacy issues surrounding the use
of data due to the information it contains. In addition, often
individuals are unaware of data about them that cause them some
concern. This impacts the way individuals behave and act in society.
Cybersecurity is another vexing concern due to the confidential and
sensitive information being available. This means there is a debate
about how best to use data while protecting the privacy and security
rights of individuals. Big data are projected to influence the study of
medicine in a way that was not possible before. This is due to
innovations such as DNA being made as the result of large-scale
coordination of research centers. This means data if used in the right
way can have a beneficial effect in predicting events before they
occur. The big data era means more attention is being placed on
how data can be used in order to derive a benefit. Data should be
collected in an appropriate manner in light of recent technological
advances in real-time storage of information. This means
investments in data searching and analysis need to be made.
The use of data without authorization has become a concern in
society due to the large amounts of data being captured on a daily
basis. Compared to the past, it is now much easier to store data that
can be used at a later point in time. This means a balance between
privacy and societal benefits needs to be introduced as a way to
balance different concerns. A large amount of data are being
generated by Internet of Things devices such as smartphones and
home devices. This has changed the way data are used and
increased the need for data to be used on multiple devices. In
addition, new technological innovations such as wearable devices,
remote sensors and fitness apps have changed the way data are
stored and analyzed. This has given rise to new usages for data that
were previously not considered. The interactivity entered between
data provider and receiver has also changed. This has meant new
ways of assessing and then utilizing data. Blockchain technology is
becoming more popular due to the way data can be stored in an
encrypted format. This enables data privacy but still ensures
individuality of data in terms of retaining unique characteristics.
Blockchain is a way to enhance data security by making data tamper
resistant. This ensures data are unique while also protecting privacy
rights.
There are many inferences being made from big data in terms of
predicting behavior. While some of these inferences are merited,
others need further investigation in order to see if they hold true
under different circumstances. This means decisions inferred from
big data analytics need to be carefully considered given the potential
ramifications. Most decisions based on big data are based on quality
analysis, but some analysis techniques still have flaws. This means
data analysis results should be triangulated from multiple techniques
in order to see if the same results emerge. This would give greater
credibility to the results ascertained from the data.
 There have also been potential harmful effects derived from big
data analysis. This includes stereotyping others based on general
characteristics rather than focusing on individual attributes. Thus,
there needs to be care in terms of unjustified stereotypes that may
not consider outliers. There should also be transparency in terms of
how data are acquired and analyzed. This will lead to greater
assurance that the data results are consistent regardless of time and
geographic location. Transparency in data results is also important in
terms of replication studies. There has been some concern with data
analysis providing different results based on the analysis methods.
This means it is important to validate data analysis results in order to
refine the results. This will enable more people to trust data
analytics instead of being skeptical about its results.
While there is a substantial amount of data existing on big data,
there are some areas that are weak and need further research. This
is due to the emphasis on information quality rather than information
acquisition and dissemination. This is intriguing given the importance
being placed on data analytics in society and the increased pressure
on institutions on their data analytics strategies. Big data have many
impacts; some of which have been touched on in this chapter.
However, other implications are still emerging and this is rapidly
changing the way we view data analytics.
Big data have captured the attention of business leaders,
government advisers and scholars due to its impact on society.
There is a continuing discussion on big data driven by its potential to
bring transformational change. Initially, there was a lack of
understanding about what big data were and how they were
different from previous data analysis techniques. This has changed
with increased emphasis on global occurrences and the benefits
derived from studying data patterns. While big data are currently a
buzzword, it is expected to continue to have a big impact on society.
Big data can be analyzed in terms of descriptive, predictive or
prescriptive techniques (Hazen et al., 2018). Descriptive analysis
enables ways to visualize data in a way that helps to understand
their meaning. This includes providing conceptualizations about the
data in terms of what they mean. Descriptive techniques enable data
to be examined in terms of how and why events are occurring. This
enables some probabilities to be derived in terms of what might
happen in the future. Prescriptive analysis involves making policies
based on data inferences. This means analyzing the data in terms of
potential ways to solve problems easier. In times of resource
shortages, prescriptive policies can be used in order to make optimal
usage of resources. Different scenarios can be used in prescriptive
analysis to understand different suggestions. This enables a better
understanding about the potential results. Predictive analysis
involves trying to ascertain future occurrences. This involves
assessing the likelihood of something happening in the future. To do
this, it might be useful to analyze data in terms of projecting
occurrences.
Data analytics can be defined as “the extensive use of data,
statistical and quantitative analysis, explanatory and predictive
models, and fact-based management to drive decisions and actions”
(Davenport & Harris, 2007, p. 7). Data if they are in the form of
personal information can raise privacy concerns. This has impacted
the way individuals share and store personal information. The
inclusion of personal information within data is sometimes
unavoidable due to the need to keep certain forms of information.
The government has introduced laws to regulate the way data are
used in order to alleviate some of these problems. This is due to the
realization in society that data if used in the right ways can have a
positive effect.

4. Implications for Managers

Managers are being urged to make decisions based on data rather
than intuition. This is reflected in an emphasis on data-driven
decisions that seize the potential of big data. Managers regardless of
the size of their organization need to harness the potential of data
by analyzing it in the appropriate way. Big data can provide
important insights for managers that were previously not possible. In
order to take advantage of the data revolution, managers need to
consider how best to acquire and then integrate and analyze data
within their organizational settings. Due to the amount of data
available, it is important for mangers to constantly think about new
trends and ways to progress in the market by utilizing data analytics.
As the way data are being analyzed is becoming more sophisticated,
managers might need to implement new information
communications systems. This will help them to appreciate big data
and the information that can be derived from its analysis. Due to the
complex nature of data, it might be helpful for managers to
enlighten others in their organization about how they are using the
data. This might involve giving examples of what kind of data has
been collected and how it has been analyzed. This will give a sense
of meaning to those in the organization and better enable them to
understand the value of data. In order to provide guidance for
managers they might adopt a policy of providing information to
organizational members on a frequent basis about data trends. This
will enable more individuals to know about the relevancy of data and
appreciate the need for good data collection methods.
As data are collected, managers need to verify their authenticity.
This will help managers to understand whether the data are useful
and also to asset their quality. Not all data are useful, so some data
will need to be discarded. Thus, it is important that managers keep a
careful watch on what data are emerging and the kind of data that
they need in order to make decisions. Data can take time to acquire,
so managers need to be patient in terms of waiting to receive the
best possible sources of data. This might mean some kind of
experimentation with the data to see the trends that emerge is
needed. This will help to identify data needs and how data are
changing. An often underestimated step in data analytics is waiting
for the right kind of data. As there are a variety of data sources
available, all data analytics should obtain the best kinds of data. This
will enable more quality results to emerge. Preparing data before it
is analyzed is another task that managers should consider. As
managers are the ones making decisions about data input and
output, careful consideration of these steps is needed. By having
analytical rigor in the data processing stage, it can aid better
decision-making processes. This means managers need to also
commit to utilizing big data in the best possible way.

5. Conclusion
This chapter has reviewed and examined the existing literature on
innovative and entrepreneurial ecosystems by focusing on the role of
data and government intervention. This means understanding the
role digitalization plays in the global economy and how it has
influenced entrepreneurship. This has enabled the current state of
the literature on ecosystems to be better understood in order to
analyze how the literature can be relevant to future endeavors.

References
Becerra-Fernandez, I., & Sabherwal, R. (2001). Organizational knowledge management: A
contingency perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 23–55.
Bliemel, M., Flores, R., De Klerk, S., & Miles, M. (2019). Accelerators as start-up
infrastructure for entrepreneurial clusters. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development,
31(1–2), 133–149.
Davenport, T. H., & Harris, J. G. (2007). Competing on analytics. Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Dy, A., & Agwunbi, A. (2019). Intersectionality and mixed methods for social context in
entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research,
25(8), 1727–1747.
Ferreira, J. J., Fayolle, A., Ratten, V., & Raposo, M. (Eds.). (2018). Entrepreneurial
universities. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Ferreira, J. J., Fernandes, C. I., & Ratten, V. (2017). Entrepreneurship, innovation and
competitiveness: What is the connection? International Journal of Business and
Globalisation, 18(1), 73–95.
Ferreira, J. J., Ratten, V., & Dana, L. P. (2017). Knowledge spillover-based strategic
entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(1),
161–167.
Fulcher, J. (2008). Computational intelligence: A compendium. Heidelberg: Springer.
Ghani, N., Hamid, S. Hashem, I., & Ahmed, E. (2019). Social media big data analytics: A
survey. Computers in Human Behavior, 101, 417–428.
Gupta, B., Iyer, L., & Aronson, J. (2000). Knowledge management: Practices and challenges.
Industrial Management & Data Systems, 100(1), 17–21.
Hazen, B. T., Skipper, J. B., Boone, C. A., & Hill, R. R. (2018). Back in business: Operations
research in support of big data analytics for operations and supply chain
management. Annals of Operations Research, 270(1–2), 201–211.
Lee, I. (2017). Big data: Dimensions, evolution, impacts and challenges. Business Horizons,
60, 293–303.
Lichtenstein, B. (2011). Complexity science contributions to the field of entrepreneurship. In
P. Allen, S. Maguire, & B. McKelvey (Eds.), The Sage handbook of complexity and
management (pp. 471–493). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mariani, M., Baggio, R., Fuchs, M., & Hoepken, W. (2018). Business intelligence and big data
in hospitality and tourism: A systemic literature review. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(12), 3514–3554.
Miller, P., & Bound, K. (2011). The startup factories: The rise of accelerator programmes to
support new technology ventures. London: NESTA.
Mishra, D., Luo, Z., Jiang, S., Papadopoulos, T., & Dubey, R. (2017). A bibliographic study on
big data: Concepts, trends and challenges. Business Process Management Journal,
23(3), 555–573.
Moore, J. (1996). The death of competition: Leadership and strategy in the age of business
ecosystems. New York, NY: Harper Business.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese
companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Olszak, C. (2016). Toward better understanding and use of business intelligence in
organisations. Information Systems Management, 33(2), 105–123.
Parente, R., El Tarabishy, A., Botti, A., Vesci, M., & Feola, R. (2020). Humane
entrepreneurship: Some steps in the development of a measurement scale. Journal
of Small Business Management. 1–20.
Pitelis, C. (2012). Clusters, entrepreneurial ecosystem co-creation and appropriability: A
conceptual framework. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(6), 1359–1388.
Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. London: Routledge.
Puhakka, V. (2010). Versatile and flexible use of intellectual capital in entrepreneurial
opportunity discovery. Journal of Management Research, 2(1), E3.
Ratten, V. (2016). International collaboration and knowledge transfer among universities
and firms affecting regional competitiveness. Thunderbird International Business
Review, 58(1), 91–93.
Sanchez, M. (2015). Integrating, sustainability issues into project management. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 96, 319–330.
Shepherd, D. (2019). Researching the dark side, downside and destructive side of
entrepreneurship: It is the compassionate thing to do. Academy of Management
Discoveries, 5(3), 217–220.
Sunder, V. (2016). Lean six sigma project management: A stakeholder management
perspective. The TQM Journal, 28(1), 132–150.
Suseno, Y., & Ratten, V. (2007). A theoretical framework of alliance performance: The role
of trust, social capital and knowledge development. Journal of Management &
Organization, 13(1), 4–23.
Trieu, V. (2017). Creating value from business intelligence systems: A review and research
agenda. Decision Support Systems, 93, 111–124.
Watson, H., & Wixom, B. (2007). Enterprise agility and mature BI capabilities. Business
Intelligence Journal, 12(3), 4–6.

A Guide to Planning and Managing Open Innovative Ecosystems, 1–12

Copyright © 2020 by Emerald Publishing Limited
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved
doi:10.1108/978-1-78973-409-620201002
Chapter 2

Understanding Bio Health

Technologies Entrepreneurial
Ecosystems: An Intellectual Capital
Approach
Ângela Gonçalves, Dina Pereira, João Leitão and
Maria del Mar Fuentes

Abstract
This chapter uses an intellectual capital (IC) qualitative
approach for assessing the bio health technologies
entrepreneurial ecosystem of a university located in Southern
Europe, aiming to identify the role played by IC in fostering the
sustainable success of the entrepreneurial ecosystem. There
has been limited research dedicated to deepening the
knowledge of the entrepreneurial ecosystems’ dimensions,
using an IC lens, in the context of university cities with
different dimensions. Small cities may not have some
dimensions, so developed, comparing with the ones of the
ecosystems of large urban centers. This chapter uses a
qualitative approach funded in a case study exploring internal
and external stakeholders of a Portuguese entrepreneurial
ecosystem, UBImedical, targeted at the bio health sector. The
study is part of an exploratory study funded in the scope of a
European Project, aiming to explore in a pioneering way the
 application of the dominant triad of capitals forming IC and,
thus, identifying and understanding the dimensions of different
entrepreneurial ecosystems. The case study reveals that the
IC’s dimensions more critical for the success of the bio health
entrepreneurial ecosystems are the structural capital and the
relational capital, although human capital is perceived as a
basic prerequisite for fostering the entrepreneurial ecosystem’s
performance. The results are funded in primary and qualitative
data collected from the interviews developed to previously
identified external and internal stakeholders of this type of
entrepreneurial ecosystem under study.

Keywords: Entrepreneurial ecosystem; Europe; human capital;

intellectual capital; relational capital; structural capital

1. Introduction
Schumpeter (1934) defines entrepreneurship as the process by
which individuals exploit opportunities for innovation. Both
entrepreneurship and economic growth can be fast-tracked through
a proactive approach by the government (Abetti, 2004), and the
economic development of nations can be aided by incubators,
science parks and accelerators (Calza, Dezi, Schiavone, & Simoni,
2014).
The term “ecosystem,” inspired by biology and here applied to the
field of entrepreneurship, refers to a group of interacting firms that
depend on each other’s activities (Jacobides, Cennamo, & Gawer,
2018). An entrepreneurial ecosystem is quite hard to define, but the
concept has become increasingly popular (Oh, Phillips, Park, & Lee,
2016; Stam & Spigel, 2016), and it entails a series of interactions
between organizations (Jacobides et al., 2018; Leitão, Alves,
Krueger, & Park, 2018). These types of ecosystems are attractive
because they can bring co-evolution and co-creation of value
(Dodgson, Gann, & Phillips, 2014). As companies thrive on
information, networks and labor markets, it is beneficial to cluster in
advantageous regions (Coenen, Moodysson, & Martin, 2015). Most
of the times, this involves a variety of networks embracing people,
relationships and organizational procedures, as well as integrating
academic researchers, government, small businesses, investors and
industry (Coenen et al., 2015).
Following the Schiavone and Romano’s (2014) perspective, there
is a need for deepening the knowledge of these complex networks,
using an intellectual capital (IC) lens, focused on incubated start-
ups, in order to ascertain on both their own intangible assets and
the knowledge, experiences and processes.
In this exploratory study, an IC qualitative approach is used for
assessing the bio health technologies entrepreneurial ecosystem,
contrasting the perspectives of internal and external stakeholders,
with the aim of identifying and comparing the role played by the IC’s
components in fostering the sustainable success of the
entrepreneurial ecosystems.
This study will combine existing literature studies with qualitative
data on a real-life case of an ecosystem: UBImedical (Portugal).
UBImedical is part of the University of Beira Interior, and its mission
is to articulate the connection between the university, especially the
technology generated at the health faculty and the business world. It
allows companies to develop the research and laboratory tests
necessary to effectively commercialize new products, generating
value added for the economy. The incubator welcomes
entrepreneurs and innovative companies in the areas of health and
life sciences. For accomplishing the previously referred aim, a total
of 13 interviews were performed on both internal and external
stakeholders of the entrepreneurial ecosystem under study, in the
scope of a European Project.
This study provides guidelines for action to directors, coordinators
and managers of incubators and accelerators, especially in the bio
health sector, using an IC approach, which is oriented to the
sustainable success of a bio health entrepreneurial ecosystem. It is
also useful for policy makers who design supporting measures to the
ecosystems. As they can gain some insight into what constitutes a
bio health entrepreneurial ecosystem, and what IC dimensions can
contribute to a successful and sustainable pathway.
The remainder of this chapter is structured in the following way:
first, the theoretical background is reviewed; second, the research
methodology is presented; third, the results discussion is promoted;
and, finally, the conclusions and recommendations are provided.

2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Entrepreneurial Ecosystems
The focus of entrepreneurial ecosystems is the culture, institutions
and networks that are continuously emerging within a region over
time (Stam & Spigel, 2016). The arrival of these ecosystems brings a
number of economic and social consequences, such as the creation
of jobs, the revitalization of the economy, the attraction of capital,
the attraction of qualified talent, economic development and
community revitalization (Roundy, 2017; Yin & Du, 2018).
Science parks, business incubators and accelerators can host
entrepreneurial ecosystems. The shared location that a science park
or an incubator provides is an important factor, as these institutions
also provide opportunities for knowledge transfer and experience
shared between the incubatees (Bergek & Norrman, 2008).
Science parks first came to light in the 1950s, but academia
gained interest in them in the 1990s (Albahari, Pérez-Canto, &
Landoni, 2010). Science parks are usually oriented by a generic
mission, which is often focused on promoting the innovation’s
culture, in order to foster the potential development in the region in
which they are located. Data from 2013 reveals that there are about
366 science parks in the EU member states that employ more than
750,000 people (European Commission, 2013). This appears to have
a positive effect in the creation of informal networks involving
universities and research centers (Albahari et al., 2010), which is
contributing to society by way of the potential advantages and
positive effects that different stakeholders may experience from the
science parks (Lecluyse, Knockaert, & Spithoven, 2018).
 Business incubators arose in the 1970s and can be defined as a
“shared office-space facility that seeks to provide its incubatees with
a strategic, value-adding intervention system of monitoring and
business assistance” (Hackett, 2004). A business incubator can also
be considered as a supportive environment for start-ups (Peters,
Rice, & Sundararajan, 2004). There have been many definitions for
the term business incubator described in the literature (Chan & Lau,
2005; Clarysse, Wright, Lockett, van de Velde, & Vohora, 2005;
Hackett, 2004; Hackett & Dilts, 2004; Hsu, Shyu, Yu, Yuo, & Lo,
2003), but some ideas of what a business incubator should provide
to the incubatees have been a constant in most proposed definitions,
namely shared support services, coaching, access to networks and
office space (rented in supposedly favorable conditions to the
incubatees). Incubatees have multiple advantages given to them by
the incubator environment which they are a part of: access to
information and networks, support services, development of
business plans and marketing plans, management teams building,
new product development, customer validation, services
procurement, access to capital, mentorship and advisory sessions
(Abetti, 2004).
Accelerators are a more recent phenomenon, the first one,
YCombinator, appeared in 2005. Business accelerators can broadly
be defined as organizations that help nascent ventures get a
jumpstart by providing them with funds and resources in exchange
for partial equity of the company (Regmi, Ahmed, & Quinn, 2015)
and usually have a very competitive application process. Business
accelerator programs have a limited duration; provide seed capital
and working space; help ventures to define and build their own
products/services; arrange for customers; and secure capital,
investors and employees (Cohen, 2013).

2.2. Intellectual Capital

Structures like incubators, science parks and accelerators play a
critical role in fostering the economic development of the regions
(Calza et al., 2014) as the organization’s intangible assets are critical
for its success (Schiavone, Meles, Verdoliva, & Del Giudice, 2014). In
this context, exploring the role played by the IC for ensuring the
sustainability of an entrepreneurial ecosystem is quite relevant, in
the sense that little is known about the role played by the intangible
nature of distinct components of IC of this type of supportive
organizations for entrepreneurial initiatives.
For our purposes, the most suitable definition of IC to be
considered is the one that positions this type of strategic asset as
the knowledge that is of value to an organization (Campanella,
Peruta, & Del Giudice, 2014).
IC is also intended to be critical for the success of new
entrepreneurial initiatives (Hormiga, Batista-Canino & Sánchez-
Medina, 2011; Peña, 2002) and has three distinct branches:
structural capital, relational capital and human capital. These three
branches are part of the intangible assets of an organization and are
all well established in the literature of reference (Pedro, Leitão, &
Alves, 2018a, 2018b).
First, the structural capital refers to the organizational routines of
the business, the mechanisms of the organization that can support
employees in order to get a better intellectual performance (Bontis,
1999).
Prior literature has stressed the positive link between structural
capital and venture outcomes (Bates, 1990; Bontis, 1998; Bruderl,
Preisendorfer, & Ziegler, 1992; Rudez & Mihalic, 2007; Shane &
Stuart, 2002).
For Lev and Radhakrishnam (2004), structural capital, a unique
productive resource of the firm, is often the most important
determinant of corporate performance and growth. Thus, structural
capital is the persistent creator of value and growth for business. In
this sense, organizational capital is the major idiosyncratic resource
that impacts on performance and growth of firms.
Hsu (2007) studied the relationship between these outcomes and
two dimensions of structural capital which tend to vary across new
firms: prior founding experience/academic training and social capital.
This research concluded that measures associated with
organizational capital are positively related to venture valuation.
 Wu, Chang, and Chen (2008) suggested that firms with strong
structural capital will create favorable conditions in which to utilize
human capital and allow it to reach its full potential.
Second, the relational capital refers to the knowledge embedded
in the relationships established with the outside environment, as
market channels, customers and suppliers, government and industry
(Bontis, 1999).
Following Leitão and Franco (2011), the relational capital is based
on the intangible nature of the networks associated with the linkages
owned by the entrepreneurs, their families, past experiences,
training and the stock of successful and not so successful initiatives.
Third, the human capital refers to knowledge, experience and
talent of the employees, as such it is of extreme importance for the
reason that it is a source of innovation (Bontis & Fitz-Enz, 2002).
The human capital of a firm is held by its founders and employees
and can change if the employees change. Thus, human capital is of
particular relevance to the development and success of new
ventures, especially in the context of technology-based ones and
their founders’ knowledge and experience (Criaco, Minola, et al.,
2014), being this justified by the fact that the later one determine
companies’ competitive advantage (Feeser & Willard, 1990). In this
same line of reasoning, others have come to the conclusion
(Colombo, Delmastro, & Grilli, 2004; Colombo & Grilli, 2005) that the
founders’ capacity is the cornerstone for outperforming, as well as
the necessary “glue” between founders’ and teams’ capabilities and
experience, and strategy determining in an important way on the
sustained performance of the high-tech new ventures (Shrader &
Siegel, 2007). Indeed, the human capital of the new ventures, based
on their founders, plays a significant role in achieving venture capital
funding (Hsu, 2007).
For Calza et al. (2014), business incubators function as multipliers
of IC for the incubatees, and that managers when doing the
selection of potential incubatees should consider how much are
these new incubatees going to integrate and exploit the IC
components and incubation paths of the business incubator.
Moreover, the performance of science parks is positively influenced
by private financial resources, the number of experimental
laboratories available and the number of researchers (Campanella et
al., 2014).
Romano, Catalfo, and Nicotra (2014) believe that science parks,
as knowledge-based organizations, should have a strong
management of intangible resources. Schiavone et al. (2014) show
that the services provided by science parks play a fundamental role
in reinforcing the performance of a firm toward its IC, providing
more chances to capitalize knowledge and exploit resources. In
addition, Gately and Cunningham (2014) consider IC a very
important resource for the new venture in accessing the markets,
products and knowledge to grow.
Some studies used the number of patents, scientific publications,
amount of funds raised and contracts established with the industry
(Campanella et al., 2014; Villasalero, 2014) as indicators for the
assessment of the IC.

3. Research Methodology
3.1. Type of Study and Research Method
This case study has an exploratory and descriptive nature, as stated
by Berg and Lune (2004), following a qualitative research method
supported by the theoretical background. Case studies imply
gathering enough information about a particular person, event or
group to allow the researcher to effectively understand how it
functions (Berg, 2009). Thus, considering the same author’s vision, a
case study is not a data gathering technique but a methodological
approach that encompasses a number of data gathering measures.
Following Ryan et al. (2002) in order to achieve empirical
evidence, the data collection followed a methodological design,
which is considered adequate for the design of a case study, by
securing a set of crucial rules, namely, using as sources of evidence
the semi-structured interviews and also consulting websites. For the
writing of the case study, the sequencing format proposed by Dube
and Parê (2003) and Yin (2009) was used, accomplishing the
following steps: (i) the case description and processes, (ii) the
fieldwork notes, (iii) the clustering of information and confirmation of
its reliability, (iv) the data observation, (v) the interviews execution,
(vi) the analysis of the data collection by forming the explanation
and the data triangulation and (vii) the comparison with prior
literature.

3.2. Data Collection

To obtain empirical evidence, data collection followed a
methodological approach. Thus, semi-structured interviews were
performed, in the period from April until May 2019, both face to face
and via e-mail. Interviews involved incubatees and staff of the
incubator UBImedical and also of external incubation structures.
Alongside with interviews, the interviewees’ communities were
visited, in order to obtain more valuable information, which is in line
with procedures proposed by Yin (2009).

4. Content Analysis
This section uses data triangulation, presenting and discussing the
results obtained from the empirical evidence gathered from the
interviews performed. The content analysis is therefore presented in
three subsections according to the three branches of IC, covered in
the interviews. In total, we interviewed 13 people, 5 from the
UBImedical incubator (I1–I5) and 8 from different incubators across
Portugal (E1–E8). The interviewees covered diverse incubation
ecosystem stakeholders, namely incubation ecosystem staff and
incubatees (start-up and spin-off founders). Table 2.1 summarizes
the units of analysis covered. The choice on the persons to be
interviewed was based on their capacity to provide valuable
information on the topics covered. As so, we opted for interviewing
people in leading positions in the ecosystems’ stakeholders.
Table 2.2 summarizes the comparative analysis, illustrating the
stakeholders’ position in relation to the perception of value regarding
the three IC components analyzed.
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Structural Capital
Bearing in mind the main goal of using an IC qualitative approach
for exploring the bio health technologies entrepreneurial ecosystem,
through the lens of both its internal and external stakeholders, in
order to identify and compare the role played by the IC’s
components in the success of the entrepreneurial ecosystems, we
opted for a qualitative data analysis on a real-life case of UBImedical
ecosystem. To do so, we performed a total of 13 interviews (Table
2.3).

Table 2.1. Identification of the Units of Analysis of the Case Study.

Source: Own elaboration.

Regarding the structural capital, some questions were raised

about this subject in the scope of the interview, namely the
conditions of the ecosystem, the sort of tools provided for
incubation, spaces, services, shared spaces, determining conditions
for successful incubation, synergies and networking between
incubatees favored by the ecosystem, mentorship provided, support
system to business development, co-creation support for new
products and services, support to financial development of start-ups,
relations with investors and banks provided by the ecosystem and
support provided in terms of applications to grants.

Table 2.2. Stakeholders’ Perspective on the Perception of Value

Regarding IC Components.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
(a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project
Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed

editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
back