Germany's Innovation Ecosystem Analysis with a Focus on Supporting Mittelstand Companies

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Technology Studies Research Group, Department of Technology Development Studies (DTDS), Iranian Research Organization for Science and Technology (IROST), Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of Political Science and Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran.

3 Department of Agricultural Extension and Education, Faculty of Agricultural Management, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran.

Abstract

This study aimed to analyze the governance model, policy-making, and innovation evaluation in Germany, particularly the role of small and medium-sized enterprises (Mittelstand companies). The research method was a systematic review, employing the seven-step meta-synthesis approach by Sandelowski et al for searching, storing, refining, and utilizing information sources. The primary research question was identifying the governance mechanisms of Germany's innovation system and the position of Mittelstand companies within it. From the initial search, 341 articles were identified, and after multi-stage evaluation, 54 works were selected for in-depth analysis. The findings were organized into eight conceptual categories: 1) Research and development infrastructure centered on research-innovation synergy (universities, research institutions, intellectual property systems); 2) Government policies (national innovation strategy, funding programs, regulatory frameworks); 3) Industry-university collaboration (technology transfer offices, joint projects); 4) Innovation ecosystems (regional clusters, innovation hubs, local integration); 5) Support for startups and Mittelstand companies (incubators, accelerators, venture capital); 6) Institutional division of labor at federal, state, and local levels (Fraunhofer institutes, technology transfer, direct investment); 7) International collaboration (EU programs, global partnerships); 8) Focus on sustainability (green technologies, fourth-generation industries). Germany's innovation system, as a dynamic ecosystem, facilitates business evolution and enhances global competitiveness by strengthening collaboration among government, industry, and academia. Mittelstand companies play a key role through targeted support, such as incubators and investment, and integration into innovation clusters. This system, emphasizing research-industry synergy, offers a successful model for innovation policy-making. The findings highlight the need to strengthen innovation infrastructure, support SMEs, and promote sustainable technologies. This model can guide developing countries, especially in designing supportive policies for innovative businesses.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

References
Ahmadi, M., Ahmadi, P., & Javadi, R. (2023). The moderating role of innovation in the effect of strategic thinking on the survival of the organization (A case study of knowledge-based companies of Markazi Province). Education and Management of Entrepreneurship, 2(1), 1-20. doi: 10.22126/eme.2023.2497 (in Persian).
Alfred, A. M., & Adam, R. F. (2009). Green management matters regardless. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 17–26. doi: 10.5465/AMP.2009.43479261.
Allen, M. M. (2015). National Innovation System in G ermany. Wiley encyclopedia of management, doi: 10.1002/9781118785317.weom130047.
Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2006). Discovery and creation: Alternative theories of entrepreneurial action. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(1-2), 11–26. doi: 10.2139/ssrn. 900200.
Amis, J., T. Slack, & Hinings, C. R. (2004). The pace, sequence, and linearity of radical change. Academy of Management Journal, 47(1), 15–39. doi: 10.2307/20159558.
Arnone, M., & Capriati, M. (2023). Innovation Policies in Germany: An Analysis of Tools and Impacts. In: Bevilacqua, C., Balland, PA., Kakderi, C., & Provenzano, V. (Eds.) New Metropolitan Perspectives. NMP 2022. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 639. Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-34211-0_5.
Aslani, F., Salehi, S., & Salemei, Y. (2024). An analysis of the entrepreneurial leadership effect on innovative behaviors: The role of innovation climate and cognitive agility as mediators. Education and Management of Entrepreneurship, 3(3), 1-24. doi: 10.22126/eme.2024.10985.1111 (in Persian).
Audretsch, D. B., Lehmann, E. E., & Schenkenhofer, J. (2018). Internationalization strategies of hidden champions: lessons from Germany. Multinational Business Review. 1(26), 2–24. doi: 10.1108/MBR-01-2018-0006.
Auerswald, P. E. (2015). Enabling entrepreneurial ecosystems In: Audretsch, D, Link, A, Walsok, ML (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Local Competitiveness. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 54–83.
Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2014). Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of context. Research Policy, 43(7), 1097–1108. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2014.01.015.
Baker, T., & Nelson, R. E. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3), 329–366. doi: 10.2189/ asqu.2005.50.3.329.
Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. doi:10.1177/014920639101700108.
Barney, J. B. (2001). Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 41–56. doi: 10.2307/259392.
Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2006). Entpreprenerial universities and technology transfer: A conceptual framework for understanding knowledge-based economic development. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1), 175–188. doi:10.1007/s10961-005-5029-z.
Caleb, H. T., Yu, L., & Zhu, J. (2017). A multimediation model of learning by exporting: Analysis of export-induced productivity gains. Journal of Management, 43(7), 2118 –2146. doi:10.1177/0149206315573998.
Cassiman, B., & Golovko, E. (2011). Innovation and internationalization through exports. Journal of International Business Studies, 42(1), 56–75. doi:10.1057/jibs.2010.36.
Chen, Z., & Aryee, S. (2007). Delegation and employee work outcomes: An examination of the cultural context of mediating processes in China. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 226–238. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2007.24162389.
Cherif, R., Grimpe, C., Hasanov, F. & Sofka, W. (2023). Promoting Innovation: The Differential Impact of R&D Subsidies. J Ind Compet Trade, 23, 187–241. Available at:  https://doi-org.wdg.biblio.udg.mx:8443/10.1007/s10842-023-00400-7.
Chesbrough, H. (2006). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. doi: 10.1108/14601060410565074.
Chirico, F., & Nordqvist, M. (2010). Dynamic capabilities and trans-generational value creation in family firms: The role of organizational culture. International Small Business Journal, 28(5), 487–504. doi:10.1177/0266242610370402.
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., De Massis, A., Frattini, F., & Wright, M. (2015). The ability and willingness paradox in family firm innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(3), 310–318. doi:10.1111/jpim.12207.
Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research Policy, 43(7), 1164–1176. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2014.04.014.
Corbett, A., Covin, J., O'Connor, G., & Tucci, C. (2013). Corporate entrepreneurship: State-of-the-art research and a future research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(5), 812–820. doi:10.1111/jpim.12031.
Dacin, P. A., Dacin, M. T., & Matear, M. (2010). Social entrepreneurship: Why we don't need a new theory and how we move forward from here. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3), 37–57. doi:10.5465/AMP.2010.52842950.
De Massis, A., Kotlar, J., Chua, J. H., & Chrisman, J. J. (2014). Ability and willingness as sufficiency conditions for family-oriented particularistic behavior: Implications for theory and empirical studies. Journal of Small Business Management, 52(2), 344–364. doi:10.1111/jsbm.12102.
De Massis, A., Kotlar, J., Frattini, F., Chrisman, J. J., & Nordqvist, M. (2016). Family governance at work: Organizing for new product development in family SMEs. Family Business Review, 29(2), 189–213. doi:10.1177/0894486515622722.
Di Stefano, G., Peteraf, M., & Verona, G. (2014). The organizational drivetrain: A road to integration of dynamic capabilities research. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 307–327. doi:10.5465/amp.2013.0100.
Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories. Research Policy, 11(3), 147–162. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(82)90016-6.
Duran, P., Kammerlander, N., van Essen, M., & Zellweger, T. (2016). Doing more with less: Innovation input and output in family firms. Academy of Management Journal, 59(4), 1224–1264. doi:10.5465/amj.2014.0424.
Dushnitsky, G., & Shapira, Z. (2010). Entrepreneurial finance meets organizational reality: Comparing investment practices and performance of corporate and independent venture capitalists. Strategic Management Journal, 31(9), 990–1017. doi:10.1002/smj.851.
Eggers, J. P., & Kaplan, S. (2013). Cognition and capabilities: A multi-level perspective. The Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 295–340. doi:10.1080/19416520.2013.769318.
Foss, N. J., Klein, P. G., Kor, Y., & Mahoney, J. (2008). Entrepreneurship, subjectivism, and the resource-based view: Toward a new synthesis. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 2(1), 73–94. doi:10.1002/sej.41.
Fraser, S., Bhaumik, S. K., & Wright, M. (2015). What do we know about entrepreneurial finance and its relationship with growth? International Small Business Journal, 33(1), 70–88. doi:10.1177/0266242614547827.
Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2014). Industry platforms and ecosystem innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(3), 417–433. doi:10.1111/jpim.12105.
Gianiodis, P., Ettlie, J., & Urbina, J. (2014). Open service innovation in the global banking industry: Inside-out versus outside-in strategies. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(1), 76–91. doi:10.5465/amp.2012.0126.
Gladysz, S., Beyerer, J., & Eichhorn, M. (2021). Fraunhofer Institute of Optronics, System Technologies and Image Exploitation: introduction to the focus issue. Appl Opt. 2021 Aug 1, 60(22), FRA1. doi:10.1364/AO.437732.
Grimpe, C., & Fier, H. (2010). Informal university technology transfer: A comparison between the United States and Germany. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 637–650. doi: 10.1007/s10961-009-9140-4.
Haeussler, C. (2011). The Determinants of Commercialization Strategy: Idiosyncrasies in British and German Biotechnology. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(4), 653-681. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00385.x.
Haji Aghaee, H. (2024). Designing an entrepreneurial school model with an emphasis on the establishment of an entrepreneurial ecosystem. Education and Management of Entrepreneurship, 2(4), 1-24. doi: 10.22126/eme.2023.9806.1054 (in Persian).
Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Available at: https://books.google.com/books/about/Culture_s_Consequences.html?id=Cayp_Um4O9gC
Honttenrott, H., & Richstein, R. (2020). Start-up subsidies: Does the policy instrument matter? Research Policy, 49, 1–21. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2019.103888.
I-COM, (2013). Presenza Ed impatto economico delle “start up” innovative di successo: un confronto internazionale. Available at: https://www.i-com.it/2013/01/22/presenza-ed-impatto-economico-delle-start-up-innovative-di-successo-un-confronto-internazionale/.
Jones, C. I., & Williams, J. C. (2000). Too much of a good thing? The economics of investment in R&D. Journal of Economic Growth, 5(1), 65–85. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/i40007506.
Kafouros, M. I., Buckley, P. J., Sharp, J. A., & Wang, C. (2008). The role of internationalization in explaining innovation performance. Technovation, 28(1-2), 63–74. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2007.07.009.
Kammerlander, N., & Ganter, M. (2014). An attention-based view of family firm adaptation to discontinuous technological change: Exploring the role of family CEOs' noneconomic goals. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(3), 361–383. doi:10.1111/jpim.12205.
König, A., Kammerlander, N., & Enders, A. (2013). The family innovator's dilemma: How family influence affects the adoption of discontinuous technologies by incumbent firms. Academy of Management Review, 38(3), 418–441. doi:10.5465/amr.2011.0162.
Kotlar, J., Fang, H., De Massis, A., & Frattini, F. (2014). Profitability goals, control goals, and the R&D investment decisions of family and nonfamily firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(6), 1128–1145. doi:10.1111/jpim.12165.
Kraiczy, N. D., Hack, A., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2015). What makes a family firm innovative? CEO risk-taking propensity and the organizational context of family firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(3), 334–348. doi:10.1111/jpim.12203.
Kuhlmann, S. (2003). Evaluation of research and innovation policies: a discussion of trends with examples from Germany. International Journal of Technology Management, 26(2-4), 131-149. doi:10.1504/IJTM.2003.003366.
Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 461–477. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199805)19:5<461::AID-SMJ953>3.3.CO;2-C.
Liguori, M. (2012). The supremacy of the sequence: Key elements and dimensions in the process of change. Organization Studies, 33(4), 507–539. doi:10.1177/0170840612443457.
Lorenzen, H. P. (2003). The significance of communication networks for the success of system evaluations. International Journal of Technology Management, 26(2-4), 150-165. Available at: https://jglobal.jst.go.jp/en/detail?JGLOBAL_ID=200902267119307765.
Massis, A. D., Audretsch, D., Uhlaner, L., & Kammerlander, N. (2018). Innovation with Limited Resources: Management Lessons from the German Mittelstand. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 35(open in a new window) (1(open in a new window)), 125–146. doi: 10.1111/jpim.12373.
Matzler, K., Veider, V., Hautz, J., & Stadler. C. (2015). The impact of family ownership, management, and governance on innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(3), 319–333. doi:10.1111/jpim.12202.
McFarlin, D. B. (2008). Does “family” matter to corporate performance? The Academy of Management Perspectives, 22(2), 100–101. doi:10.5465/amp.2008.32739762.
Menrad, K., & Gabriel, A. (2009). National innovation systems in horticulture in Germany and the Netherlands. International Journal of Public Policy, 4(6), 479-494.‏ doi:10.1504/IJPP.2009.025258.
Meoli, M., Paleari, S., & Vismara, S. (2019). The governance of universities and the establishment of academic spin-offs. Small Business Economics, 52(2), 485–504. doi:10.1007/s11187-017-9956-5.
Meyer-Krahmer, F. (1987). Evaluating innovation policies: The German experience. Technovation, 5(4), 317-330. doi:10.1016/0166-4972(87)90070-8.
Meyer-Krahmer, F. (2001). The German innovation system. Research and Innovation Policies in the New Global Economy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 205-252.‏ Available at:https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/gbp/research-and-innovation-policies-in-the-new-global-economy-9781840647846.html.
Miranda, F.-J., Chamorro, A., & Rubio, S. (2018). Re-thinking university spin-off: A critical literature review and a research agenda. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(4), 1007–1038. doi: 10.1007/s10961-017-9647-z.
Namdarian, L. & Alidousti, S. (2018). Designing and developing a website for information recourses related to indicators for monitoring and evaluation of science, technology and innovation) STI) Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management, 33(4), 1611-1636. doi: 10.35050/JIPM010.2018.045 (in Persian).
Nepelski, D., & Van Roy, V. (2021). Innovation and innovator assessment in R&I ecosystems: the case of the EU Framework Programme. J Technol Transf, 46, 792–827. doi: 10.1007/s10961-020-09814-5.
Nurzal, E. R., & Rosadi, A. H. Y. (2022). Research Cooperation Between Industry and Research and Development Institutions-Universities in Indonesia with Policy Implications. The Asian Journal of Technology Management, 15(3), 210-223.‏ doi:10.12695/ajtm.2022.15.3.2.
OECD (2022), OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: Germany 2022: Building Agility for Successful Transitions, OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy, OECD Publishing, Paris, doi:10.1787/50b32331-en.
Onetti, A., Zucchella, A., Jones, M. V., & McDougall-Covin, P. P. (2012). Internationalization, innovation and entrepreneurship: Business models for new technology-based firms. Journal of Management and Governance, 16(3), 337–368. doi:10.1007/s10997-010-9154-1.
Papageorgiadis N, & Sofka, W. (2020) Patent enforcement across 51 countries – patent enforcement index 1998–2017. J World Bus, 55(4), 1–14. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2020.101092.
Park, W. G. (2008). International patent protection: 1960–2005. Research Policy, 37(4), 761–766. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.006.
Parry, M. E., & Kawakami, T. (2017). The encroachment speed of potentially disruptive innovations with indirect network externalities: The case of e-readers. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 34(2), 141–158. doi:10.1111/jpim.12333.
Pearson, A., Carr, J. C., & Shaw, J. (2008). Toward a theory of familiness: A social capital perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(6), 949–969. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2008.00265.x.
Peng, M. W., Sun, S. L., Pinkham, B., & Chen, H. (2009). The institution-based view as a third leg for a strategy tripod. The. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 63–81. doi:10.5465/AMP.2009.43479264.
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Blackwell Publishing. doi:10.1002/9780470754887.
Planes-Satorra, S., & Paunov, C. (2019). The digital innovation policy landscape in 2019. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers.‏ Paris, 55 pp. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/the-digital-innovation-policy-landscape-in-2019_6171f649-en.html.
Pouder, R., & John, C. H. S. (1996). Hot spots and blind spots: Geographical clusters of firms and innovation. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1192–1225. JSTOR, JSTOR. Publisher version of record available at: www.jstor.org/stable/259168. doi: 10.2307/259168.
Ramírez-López, C., Till, K., Boyd, A., Bennet, M., Piscione, J., Bradley, S., & Jones, B. (2020). Coopetition: cooperation among competitors to enhance applied research and drive innovation in elite sport. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 55(10), 522-523.‏ doi:10.1136/bjsports-2020-102901.
Randhawa, K., Wilden, R., & Hohberger, J. (2016). A bibliometric review of open innovation: Setting a research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33, 750–772. doi:10.1111/jpim.12312.
Rassenfosse, G., & Fischer, T. (2016). Venture debt financing: Determinants of the lending decision. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 10(3), 235–256. doi:10.1002/sej.1220.
Rivera-Santos, M., Holt, D., Littlewood, D., & Kolk, A. (2015). Social entrepreneurship in sub-Saharan Africa. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 29(1), 72–91. doi:10.5465/amp.2013.0128.
Romanelli, E., & Tushman, M. L. (1994). Organizational transformation as punctuated equilibrium: An empirical test. Academy of Management Journal, 37(5), 1141–1166. doi: 10.2307/256669.
Rossi, F. (2010). The governance of university‐industry knowledge transfer. European Journal of Innovation Management, 13(2), 155-171. doi:10.1108/14601061011040230.
Roundy, P. T., & Bayer, M. A. (2018). Entrepreneurial ecosystem narratives and the micro-foundations of regional entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation., 20(1), 194-208. doi:10.1177/1465750318808426.
Salomon, R. M., & Jin, B. (2010). Do leading or lagging firms learn more from exporting?. Strategic Management Journal, 31(10), 1088–1113. doi: 10.1002/smj.850.
Salomon, R. M., & Shaver, J. M. (2005). Learning by exporting: New insights from examining firm innovation. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 14(2), 431–460. doi:10.1111/j.1530-9134.2005.00047.x.
Sandelowski, M., Docherty, S., & Emden, C. (1997). Quality met synthesis: Issues and techniques. Research in Nursing and Health, 20, 365–371. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X(199708)20:4<365::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-E.
Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243–263. doi:10.5465/AMR.2001.4378020.
Schilke, O. (2014). Second-order dynamic capabilities: How do they matter? The Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 368–380. doi:10.5465/amp.2013.0093.
Sciascia, S., Nordqvist, M., Mazzola, P., & De Massis, A. (2015). Family ownership and R&D intensity in small- and medium-sized firms. Journal of Product and Innovation Management, 32(3), 349–360. doi:10.1111/jpim.12204.
Sharifzadeh, M. S. & Abdollahzadeh, G. H. (2018). A Comparative Analysis of Sustainability of the Entrepreneurial Agro-Enterprises and Conventional Farming Systems in the Golestan Province. Iranian Agricultural Extension and Education Journal, 13(2), 1-20. dor:20.1001.1.20081758.1396.13.2.1.1 (in Persian).
Sieger, P., Zellweger, T., Nason, R. S., & Clinton, E. (2011). Portfolio entrepreneurship in family firms: a resource-based perspective. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 5(4), 327–351. doi:10.1002/sej.120.
Sirmon, D., Gove, S., & Hitt, M. (2009). Resource management in dyadic competitive rivalry: The effects of resource bundling and deployment. Academy of Management Journal, 51(5), 919–935. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2008.34789656.
Sirmon, D., Hitt, M., & Ireland, R. (2007). Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: Looking inside the black box. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 273–292. doi:10.5465/AMR.2007.23466005.
Sirmon, D., Hitt, M., Arregle, J., & Campbell, J. (2010). The dynamic interplay of capability strengths and weaknesses: Investigating the bases of temporary competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 31(13), 1386–1409. doi:10.2307/40961189.
Sirmon, D., Hitt, M., Ireland, R., & Gilbert, B. (2011). Resource orchestration to create competitive advantage breadth, depth, and life cycle effects. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1390–1412. doi:10.1177/0149206310385695.
Sofka, W., & Sprutacz, M. (2017). Rio Country Report 2016: Germany. Available at: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC105845,10.2760/883398.
Sofka, W., Shehu, E., & Hristov, H. (2018). Research and Innovation (Rio) Country Report 2017: Germany. European Commission, Brussels. doi:10.2760/507952.
Soltani, B., Hajihoseini, H. A., Arasti, M., Ghazinoory, S., Rzavi, M., Shafiaa, M., Manteghi, M., Tabatabaeian, H. A. & Shaverdi, M. (2017). A Review on Iran’s NIS Challenges & Proposing Policies and Initiatives for Improvement. Strategic Studies of public policy, 7(23), 185-198. Available at: https://sspp.iranjournals.ir/article_26808_6751246899dee8b58e1ef31250134e8b.pdf (in Persian).
Stock, R., Zacharias, N. A. & Schnellbaecher, A. (2016). How do strategy and leadership styles jointly affect co-development and its innovation outcomes? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 34(2), 201–222. doi:10.1111/jpim.12332.
Teece, D. J. (2012). Dynamic capabilities: Routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1395–1401. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01080.x.
Thompson, D. V., Hamilton, R. W., & Rust, R. T. (2005). Feature fatigue: When product capabilities become too much of a good thing. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(4), 431–442. doi:10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.4.431.
Van Burg, E., Podoynitsyna, K., Beck, L., & Lommelen, T. (2012). Directive deficiencies: How resource constraints direct opportunity identification in SMEs. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(6), 1000–1011. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00976.x.
Van de Ven, A. H. (1992). Suggestions for studying strategy process: A research note. Strategic Management Journal, 13 (special issue),169–188.  doi:10.1002/smj.4250131013.
Venohr, B., Fear, J., & Witt, A. (2015). Best of German Mittelstand - The world market leaders. In Langenscheidt, F.; Venohr, B. (Eds.). The Best of German Mittelstand. Cologne: Deutsche Standards Editionen. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2724609.
Wessner, C. W. (2013). How Does Germany Do It? Mechanical Engineering, 135(11), 42-47. doi: 10.1115/1.2013-NOV-3.
West, J., & Bogers, M. (2014). Leveraging external sources of innovation: A review of research on open innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31, 814–831. doi:10.1111/jpim.12125.
Wicaksono, H. (2021). From Idea to Commercialization. IEEE 62th International Scientific Conference on Power and Electrical Engineering of Riga Technical University (RTUCON) (pp. 1-6). IEEE. Available at: https://www.proceedings.com/62688.html.
Williams, D. W., & Wood, M. S. (2015). Rule-based reasoning for understanding opportunity evaluation. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 29(2), 218–236. doi:10.5465/amp.2013.0017.
Wright, M., Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., & Steier, L. P. (2014). Family enterprise and context. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(6), 1247–1260.  doi:10.1111/etap.12122.
Wu, J., Si, S., & Wu, X. (2016). Entrepreneurial finance and innovation: Informal debt as an empirical case. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 10(3), 257–273. doi:10.1002/sej.1214.
Zahra, S. A., & Wright, M. (2011). Entrepreneurship's next act. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(4), 67–83. doi:10.5465/amp.2010.0149.
Zemlickienė, V., & Turskis, Z. (2022). Determination of Importance of Key Decision Points in the Technology Commercialization Process: Attitude of the US and German Experts. Sustainability, 14(23), 15847. doi:10.3390/su142315847.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 04 March 2025
  • Revise Date: 08 April 2025
  • Accept Date: 08 April 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics