Danny Soetanto

Science Parks: what they are and how they need to be evaluated

Science Parks have become a popular policy tool to enhance knowledge-based regional development since the early 1980s. Science Parks are found in many places around the globe based on different models of stakeholder involvement and missions. The use of public investment has urged the need for evaluation of Science Parks to improve efficiency and this has led to a steady flow of evaluation studies. These studies have produced outcomes that are either not conclusive or only in part positive. Particularly, the causality question remains unsolved. Despite the rather poor proof of success, Science Parks, paradoxically, have remained extremely popular as a policy tool. This study elucidates both the diversity in Science Park models and the Science Park paradox, and proposes a list of requirements that contributes to a more refined approach to evaluate the impacts of Science Parks.

Benefitting from Learning Networks in “Open Innovation”: Spin-off Firms in Contrasting City Regions

R&D and innovation increasingly take place in networks that extend beyond the boundaries of a single firm, with customers in an important role in the learning processes involved. This phenomenon is captured by the term “open innovation”. Advantages of open innovation encompass cost reduction and an increased competitiveness. Spatial innovation theory however indicates that the potential of open innovation is not the same for all urban regions, there may be differences between large metropolitan areas and small cities. In this context, the authors compare university spin-off firms in two contrasting urban regions in Europe, Delft in the Netherlands and Trondheim in Norway (a metropolitan area versus an isolated city) with regard to the profile of their learning networks and the contribution of these networks to growth. Learning networks appear to differ in structure and strength, in spatial configuration and also in the influence on job growth. Thus, networks in Delft (in a large metropolitan area) tend to be stronger compared to those in Trondheim (isolated city), whereas the influence of network strength on growth tends to be negative in Delft but positive in Trondheim. Overall, firms in Trondheim tend to rely more on own resources and capabilities and less on learning networks in open innovation.

Open innovation among university spin-off firms: what is in it for them, and what can cities do?

R&D and innovation increasingly take place in networks beyond the boundaries of a single firm with customers in a more important role than in previous times. This new innovation model has been labelled as open innovation. In studies on innovation, learning mechanisms have largely remained a black box, causing difficulty in assessing what the benefits of open innovation might be. This paper examines a particular category of high-tech firms, university spin-offs, and illustrates resources that are missing and the level of openness in learning networks to gain these resources. Spin-off firms from Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands, are taken as a case study. Resource deficiency among these firms mainly concerns understanding and accessing the market, whereas the learning networks point to a negative impact of relatively closed networks (strong relationships, mainly local/regional orientation), thereby confirming the need for more open innovation. Next, the paper turns to an assessment of the potentials of certain types of open innovation to further enhance the growth of spin-off firms. The paper also identifies various new (or renewed) roles of city governments in promoting open innovation in a new scenario.

Networks and entrepreneurial learning: coping with difficulties

Purpose Many scholars analyse networks and learning to understand how individuals successfully create and manage new ventures. Based on the assumption that entrepreneurs learn from networks, the purpose of this paper is to examine which types of difficulties encourage entrepreneurs to use networks to facilitate learning, whether entrepreneurs change networks to deal with such difficulties, and which network characteristics facilitate learning. Design/methodology/approach Networks are considered a potential source of learning, namely, the cognitive process of acquiring and structuring knowledge, creating meaning from experience and generating new solutions from existing knowledge. Through networks, entrepreneur share information and discuss opportunities and problems. Using an innovative approach combining story telling and network mapping, this study analyses how entrepreneurs use networks in learning. The data collected from six entrepreneurs working in knowledge-intensive sectors enables examining the learning process ensuing from the interactions between entrepreneurs and their contacts. Findings The findings show that entrepreneurs construct different types of networks in response to their difficulties, not in relation to products or technologies, but to learn to overcome self-crises, external threats, management and organisational issues. The findings reveal that entrepreneurs develop networks dominated by strong ties for exploitative learning and networks dominated by weak ties for explorative learning. Originality/value This study contributes to literature on networks and entrepreneurial learning. More specifically, the study provides evidence of learning in the context of networks, which is a relatively overlooked area in entrepreneurship literature, identifying the role of difficulties in determining the type of learning through networks and the related mechanisms.

Networks and Networking Activities of Innovative Firms in Incubators An Exploratory Study

It has been widely argued that networks are critical for innovative firms. In the effort to support the growth of these firms, incubators seem to institutionalize support by having systems in place to encourage networking and help firms develop networks with other tenants and potential business allies. However, there is a lack of critical empirical investigation of the different types of networks developed by firms. This paper addresses this issue by systematically examining how firms in incubators develop their networks and what types of networks they might aim to build. The study is based on a survey with firms located at Daresbury Science and Innovation Centre in the UK. The results suggest that incubators often generalize their network support without considering that firms may develop different networks based on their needs. The results also demonstrate that the characteristics of firms do play a role in determining types of network. Science and engineering firms develop networks that differ from those of service and IT firms due to their need to access resources from other innovative firms in incubators, from the Science and Technology Facilities Council and from universities. Similarly, small firms are forced to establish internal and external networks in an attempt to compensate for their lack of resources. Overall, the findings suggest that academic theory on networks of firms in incubators needs to be more nuanced and that the networking support provided by incubators needs to be customized to the actual needs of the incubating firms.

Knowledge acquisition and innovation: potentials for upgrading of very small and small firms in furniture manufacturing in Indonesia

Among small firms in developing countries, innovation is often sorely needed. However, localised interactive learning tends to be poorly developed in these countries meaning that the inflow of new knowledge depends on interaction with global customers. Small firms may however be captured in unfavourable subcontracting relations and a low absorption capacity. This paper takes the furniture cluster of Jepara (Java, Indonesia) as an example, using a detailed fieldwork. The results picture a dominant learning-by-doing and interaction with buyers, and a low level of innovativeness, but also the presence of some highly innovative firms indicating a perspective for improvement.

Group work and the change of obstacles over time: The influence of learning style and group composition:

It is through working in groups that students develop cooperative learning skills and experience. However, group work activity often leads students into a difficult experience, especially for first-year students who are not familiar with group work activities at university. This study explores obstacles faced by first-year students during their group work activities. It investigates whether a group of students with a similar learning style (homogeneous group) experience different obstacles compared to a group of students with a diverse learning style (heterogeneous group). In addition, to identify the difference, if any, between a group formed by a tutor and one where the students form the group themselves, tutor and self-allocated group allocations are explored. This study focuses on obstacles experienced by these students during group work activities. Using a sample of more than 200 students over a period of 3 years, the types and the changes of obstacles in different stages of group life are explored. The findings show that students experience obstacles which can be classified into personal and social, leadership and management, and task-related obstacles. Those obstacles were not static but increased over time. The study also investigates the impact of different methods of forming groups and whether this impacted on obstacles experienced. Overall, different interventions prompted different patterns of obstacle development.

Obstacles, Networking Approaches and Entrepreneurial Network Changes

While recent work has considered network change, little is known about how certain factors determine such changes. This study focuses on two factors – the type of obstacles entrepreneurs face and their networking approach – and employs a two‐stage research design and network visualisation approach to capture entrepreneurs’ experiences in managing networks during their entrepreneurial journey. Using an inductive approach, the first stage of the study identifies the obstacles and networking approaches that influence different types of network changes. The second stage employs a deductive approach to test the hypotheses developed from the first stage using a larger sample. We find that in experiencing obstacles from internal sources, entrepreneurs are more likely to find support from weak ties while strong ties are beneficial for overcoming obstacles from external sources. In having difficulties in acquiring entrepreneurial knowledge and skills, entrepreneurs are more likely to develop a low‐density network consisting of many structural holes. Conversely, dealing with difficulties in accessing market and resources imposes over‐reliance on high‐density network. Furthermore, the entrepreneurs’ networking approaches also influence network changes and partially mediate the relationship between the networks and the obstacles they face.

Network Openness and Learning Ambidexterity of New Technology-Based Firms at Incubators

For a new technology-based firm, the ability to learn is crucial to their growth process. However, firms constantly face the challenge of maintaining the ambidexterity of two different learning activities, namely learning by exploiting existing competencies and learning through exploring new ones. The purpose of this study is to examine how small technology-based firms at incubators perform both activities. Using the index of network openness, we argue that firms perform ambidexterity by maintaining a balance between a high and low level of network openness. Our first hypothesis was constructed as firms pursuing explorative learning will develop a high level of network openness while those pursuing exploitative learning will develop a low level of network openness. In the second hypothesis, we argue that firms need to balance network openness. Developing too low level of network openness will not add more benefits as the cost for maintaining relationship increases. Similarly, developing too high level of openness may potentially hinder firms’ progress as firms face distractions and difficulties in maintaining a wide variety of relationships. Using the empirical data from new technology-based firms located at the Daresbury SIC, we confirm the hypotheses. The result also found a trend of a curvilinear relationship between network openness and the firms’ performance which confirm the second hypothesis. The overall findings have illustrated how a network has a positive impact on helping small and new technology-based firms perform learning ambidexterity.

The Application of BIM as Collaborative Design Technology for Collective Self-Organised Housing

Collective Self-Organised CSO housing projects are an emerging trend in Europe. In these projects communities engage in co-design throughout the process. Little knowledge exists that can support CSOs with the process of managing their projects by using state-of-the-art building information BI technologies. The authors introduce a BI supported CSO housing design process that can support CSOs through all stages in the design process, from early conceptual location planning through to selection of interior finishing. They illustrate the project using a demonstrative illustration of a CSO housing design process. The paper will concentrate on the development of innovative Collaborative Design Technology CDT solutions. The tools will be demonstrated on the basis of an illustrative demonstration case in which the CSO-process is combined with an IFD Industrial, Flexible and Durable building system. The particular advantages for architectural design practice will be highlighted throughout and gaps in the literature addressed.