How Do New Ventures Evolve? An Inductive Study of Archetype Changes in Science-Based Ventures

References

• Aldrich H. E., Wiedenmayer G., Katz J., Brockhaus R. From traits to rates: An ecological perspective on organizational foundings. Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence, and Growth (1993) 1(JAI Press, Greenwich, CT) 145–195Google Scholar
• Ambos T. C., Makela K., Birkinshaw J., D'Este P. When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions. J. Management Stud. (2008) 45(8):1424–1447Crossref, Google Scholar
• Autio E. New, technology-based firms in innovation networks symplectic and generative impacts. Res. Policy (1997) 26(3):263–281Crossref, Google Scholar
• Balogun J., Johnson G. Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking. Acad. Management J. (2004) 47(4):523–549Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barr P. S., Stimpert J. L., Huff A. S. Cognitive change, strategic action, and organizational renewal. Strategic Management J. (1992) 13(S1):15–36Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baum J., Locke E. A., Smith K. G. A multidimensional model of venture growth. Acad. Management J. (2001) 44(2):292–304Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beckman C. M., Burton M. D. Founding the future: Path dependence in the evolution of top management teams from founding to IPO. Organ. Sci. (2008) 19(1):3–24Link, Google Scholar
• Birkinshaw J., Nobel R., Ridderstrahle J. Knowledge as a contingency variable: Do the characteristics of knowledge predict organization structure? Organ. Sci. (2001) 13(3):274–289Link, Google Scholar
• Boeker W., Wiltbank R. New venture evolution and managerial capabilities. Organ. Sci. (2005) 16(2):123–133Link, Google Scholar
• Brownstein A. Biased predecision processing. Psych. Bull. (2003) 129(4):545–568Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burgelman R. A. Intraorganizational ecology of strategy making and organizational adaptation: Theory and field research. Organ. Sci. (1991) 2(3):239–262Link, Google Scholar
• Burton M. D., Beckman C. M. Leaving a legacy: Position imprints and successor turnover in young firms. Amer. Sociol. Rev. (2007) 72(2):239–266Crossref, Google Scholar
• Churchill N., Lewis V. L. The five stages of small-business growth. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1983) 61(3):30–40Google Scholar
• Clarysse B., Moray N. A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: The case of a research-based spin-off. J. Bus. Venturing (2004) 19(1):55–79Crossref, Google Scholar
• Covin J. G., Slevin D. P., Sexton D., Kasarda J. High growth transitions: Theoretical perspectives and suggested directions. The State of the Art of Entrepreneurship (1997) (PWS-Kent, Boston) 99–126Google Scholar
• Dencker J. C., Gruber M., Shah S. K. Pre-entry knowledge, learning, and the survival of new firms. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(3):516–537Link, Google Scholar
• Donaldson T., Preston L. E. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Acad. Management Rev. (1995) 20(1):65–91Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doty H., Glick W., Huber G. Fit, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: A test of two configurational theories. Acad. Management J. (1993) 36(6):1196–1250Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dougherty D. J. Understanding new markets for new products. Strategic Managment J. (1990) 11:59–78Crossref, Google Scholar
• Drazin R., Van de Ven A. H. Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1985) 30(4):514–550Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt K. M. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Management Rev. (1989) 14(4):532–550Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt K. M., Schoonhoven C. B. Organizational growth: Linking founding team, strategy, environment and growth among U.S. semiconductor ventures, 1978–1988. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1990) 35(3):504–529Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elliot A. J., Devine P. G. On the motivational nature of cognitive dissonance: Dissonance as psychological discomfort. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1994) 67(3):382–394Crossref, Google Scholar
• Festinger L.A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (1957) (Stanford University, Stanford, CA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiss P., Zajac E. The symbolic management of strategic change: Sensegiving via framing and decoupling. Acad. Management J. (2006) 49(6):1173–1193Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galunic C. D., Eisenhardt K. M. Architectural innovation and modular corporate forms. Acad. Management J. (2001) 44(6):1229–1249Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gersick C. J. G. Revolutionary change theories: A multilevel exploration of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm. Acad. Management Rev. (1991) 16(1):10–36Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glaser B., Strauss A.The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Strategies of Qualitative Research (1967) (Wiedenfield and Nicholson, London) Google Scholar
• Golden B. R. The past is the past—Or is it? The use of retrospective accounts as indicators of past strategy. Acad. Management J. (1992) 35(4):848–860Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graebner M. E. Momentum and serendipity: How acquired leaders create value in the integration of technology firms. Strategic Management J. (2004) 25(8/9):751–777Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graebner M. E., Eisenhardt K. M. The seller's side of the story: Acquisition as courtship and governance as syndicate in entrepreneurial firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. (2004) 49(3):366–380Google Scholar
• Greenwood R., Hinings C. R. Organizational design types, tracks and the dynamics of strategic change. Organ. Stud. (1988) 9(3):293–316Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greenwood R., Hinings C. R. Understanding strategic change: The contribution of archetypes. Acad. Management J. (1993) 36(5):1052–1082Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greiner L. E. Evolution and revolution as organizations grow. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1972) 50(4):37–46Google Scholar
• Hakanson L. Creating knowledge: The power and logic of articulation. Indust. Corporate Change (2006) 16(1):51–88Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hamel G., Prahalad C. K. Strategy as stretch and leverage. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1993) 71(2):75–84Google Scholar
• Huff A. S.Mapping Strategic Thought (1990) (Wiley, Chichester, UK) Google Scholar
• Kaulio M. A. Initial conditions or process of development? Critical incidents in the early stages of new ventures. R&D Management (2003) 33(2):165–175Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kazanjian R., Drazin R. A stage-contingent model of design and growth for technology-based new ventures. J. Bus. Venturing (1990) 5(3):137–150Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kogut B., Zander U. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ. Sci. (1992) 3(3):383–397Link, Google Scholar
• Lawrence P., Lorsch J.Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration (1967) (Harvard University, Boston) Google Scholar
• Leonard-Barton D. A dual methodology for case studies: Synergistic use of a longitudinal single site with replicated multiple sites. Organ. Sci. (1990) 1(3):248–266Link, Google Scholar
• Leonard-Barton D. Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in new product development. Strategic Management J. (1992) 13(S1):111–125Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lounsbury M., Glynn M. A. Cultural entrepreneurship: Stories, legitimacy and the acquisition of resources. Strategic Management J. (2001) 22(6/7):545–562Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meyer A. D., Tsui A. S., Hinings C. R. Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Acad. Management J. (1993) 36(3):1175–1195Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miles M., Huberman A. M.Qualitative Data Analysis (1984) (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA) Google Scholar
• Miles R. E., Snow C. C.Organizational Strategy, Structure and Process (1978) (McGraw-Hill, New York) Google Scholar
• Miller D. Configurations of strategy and structure: Towards a synthesis. Strategic Management J. (1986) 7(3):233–250Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller D., Friesen P. H. A longitudinal study of the corporate life cycle. Management Sci. (1984) 30(10):1161–1183Link, Google Scholar
• Miller C. C., Cardinal L. B., Glick W. H. Retrospective reports in organizational research: A re-examination of recent evidence. Acad. Management J. (1997) 40(1):189–201Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H.The Structuring of Organizations (1979) (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H., Waters J. A. Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management J. (1985) 6(3):257–272Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moch M. K., Bartunek J. M.Creating Alternative Realities at Work (1990) (Harper & Row, New York) Google Scholar
• Monteiro L. F. Connecting the dots: Uncovering the technology scouting process. (2008) . Unpublished doctoral thesis, London Business School, LondonGoogle Scholar
• Mudambi R., Zahra S. A. The survival of international new ventures. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. (2007) 38(2):333–352Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson R. R., Winter S. G.An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (1982) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Nonaka I., Takeuchi H.The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation (1995) (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Penrose E. T.The Theory of the Growth of the Firm (1959) (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK) Google Scholar
• Pfeffer J., Salancik G. R.The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective (1978) (Harper & Row, New York) Google Scholar
• Ranson S., Hinings B., Greenwood R. The structuring of organizational structures. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1980) 25(1):1–17Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rindova V., Kotha S. Continuous “morphing”: Competing through dynamic capabilities, form and function. Acad. Management J. (2001) 44(6):1263–1280Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rubenson G. C., Gupta A. K. The initial succession: A contingency model of founder tenure. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice (1996) 21(2):21–35Crossref, Google Scholar
• Santos F. M., Eisenhardt K. M. Organizational boundaries and theories of organization. Organ. Sci. (2005) 16(5):491–508Link, Google Scholar
• Santos F. M., Eisenhardt K. M. Constructing markets and organizational boundaries: Entrepreneurial action in nascent fields. (2006) . Working paper, INSEAD, Fontainebleau, FranceGoogle Scholar
• Sapienza H., Autio E., George G., Zahra S. A. A capabilities perspective on the effects of early internationalization on firm survival and growth. Acad. Management Rev. (2006) 31(4):914–933Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schulz-Hardt S., Frey D., Luthgens C., Moscovici S. Biased information search in group decision making. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (2000) 78(4):655–669Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwenk C. R. The use of participant recollection in the modeling of organizational decision processes. Acad. Management Rev. (1985) 10(3):496–503Google Scholar
• Shane S., Venkataraman S. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Acad. Management Rev. (2000) 25(1):217–226Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sommer S. C., Loch C. H., Dong J. Managing complexity and unforseeable uncertainty in startup companies: An empirical study. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(1):118–133Link, Google Scholar
• Stern S. Do scientists pay to be scientists? Management Sci. (2004) 50(6):835–853Link, Google Scholar
• Stevenson H. H., Jarillo J. C. A paradigm of entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial management. Strategic Management J. (1990) 11(5):17–27Google Scholar
• Thompson J.Organizations in Action (1967) (Knopf, New York) Google Scholar
• Tushman M. L., Anderson P. Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1986) 31(3):439–465Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman M. L., Romanelli E., Cummings L. L., Straw B. M. Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. Research in Organizational Behavior (1985) 7(JAI Press, Greenwich, CT) 171–222Google Scholar
• Van de Ven A. H., Poole M. S. Explaining development and change in organizations. Acad. Management Rev. (1995) 20(3):510–540Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weick K. E., Teece D. J. Substitutes for strategy. The Competitive Challenge (1987) (Ballinger, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Weick K. E.Sensemaking in Organizations (1995) (Sage Publications, London) Google Scholar
• Woodward J.Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice (1965) (Oxford University Press, London) Google Scholar
• Yin R. K.Case Study Research: Design and Methods (1984) (Sage, New York) Google Scholar
• Yli-Renko H., Autio E., Sapienza H. Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management J. (2001) 22(6/7):587–613Crossref, Google Scholar