Abstract
The paper explores the process of early growth of entrepreneurial science-based firms. Drawing on case studies of British and Dutch biopharmaceutical R&D firms, we conceptualize the speed of early growth of science-based firms as the time it takes for the assembly (or combined development) of three types of critical resources—a functionally-diverse management team, early fundraising and development of technology. The development of these resources is an unfolding and interrelated process, the causal direction of which is highly ambiguous. We show the variety of paths used by science-based firms to access and develop these critical resources. The picture that emerges is that the various combinations of what we call “assisted” and “unassisted” paths combine to influence the speed of firm growth. We show how a wide range of manifestations of technology development act as signaling devices to attract funding and management, affecting the speed of firm development. We also show how the variety of paths and the speed of development are influenced by the national institutional setting.
Highlights
The growth of science-based firms is a key factor in discussions on how economies commercialize and benefit from the economic impact of science and innovation (Casper, 2007) and on the technology transfer process (DiGregorio and Shane, 2003)
Drawing on Penrose (1959) and Garnsey (1998), which point to the search activities in early growth, in particular regarding perception of opportunities and resourcing prospects, we developed two constructs: fundraising development and managerial development
To conceptualize the process of early growth of science-based firms, we focused on the interaction between the access and development of fundraising, managerial and technology resources
Summary
The growth of science-based firms is a key factor in discussions on how economies commercialize and benefit from the economic impact of science and innovation (Casper, 2007) and on the technology transfer process (DiGregorio and Shane, 2003). Studies have explored the sequence of archetypes in venture evolution from an organizational theory perspective (Ambos and Birkinshaw, 2010), the links between the competitive environment and resource management in different modes of growth from a resource-based view (Clarysse et al, 2011), and the simultaneous experimentation and variety in business models from an organizational learning perspective (Andries et al, 2013) While these contributions have provided important insights into how these firms grow, why different growth patterns exist, the importance of resource configurations, and the effect of the (competitive) environment on growth, they do not address directly the speed of growth
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
