Yasuyuki Motoyama

What Was New About the Cluster Theory

Michael Porters cluster theory became popular at both the academic and policy levels as well as received a series of critiques. This article provides a synthetic view of those critiques. In addition, it reveals two new fundamental limitations of the theory. First, the descriptive and static nature of the theory limits the ability to replicate a successful cluster in practice. In other words, the current theory is more focused on describing how a cluster is organized today rather than how a cluster emerged. Incorporating historical process can strengthen the practical application. Second, the interconnectedness of a cluster is hard to measure empirically, and moreover, the theory does not explain how exactly the public sector can strengthen this aspect. A dialogue with networking theories can potentially improve the application.

Examining the Connections within the Startup Ecosystem: A Case Study of St. Louis

We critically examine how an entrepreneurial ecosystem is structured using an exploratory and bottom-up approach. Past studies in this area have discussed the presence of elements in the system or captured the ecosystem as holistically as possible by extending to social, cultural, and institutional dimension. However, we find that such aggregated conceptualizations gave limited understanding to how different elements are connected and constitute the system. Here, we apply a social network approach by analyzing the connections of the ecosystem at multiple layers: (1) among entrepreneurs, (2) among support organizations, and (3) between and among entrepreneurs and key support organizations. Through a series of interviews with entrepreneurs and support organizations in St. Louis, we find that the ways in which support organizations in this region interacted with each other and with entrepreneurs, including explicit cross-organizational collaboration and strategic structuring of resources, significantly impacted the way that entrepreneurs interacted with one another and with organizations, thus deepening our understanding of these connections and identifying intervening points within the ecosystem.

From resource munificence to ecosystem integration: the case of government sponsorship in St. Louis

Abstract Government sponsorship of entrepreneurship has become a popular policy tool in the last 15 years. Despite this popularity, past academic studies have largely focused on firm-level survival rates and treated the effects of government sponsorship in isolation, which fails to capture the full effect of the sponsorship. That is, the objectives of the public sector include enhancing the macro-level entrepreneurial environment of the region as well as the success of individual firms. We expand research in this area through a case study in St. Louis, Missouri. We focus on the Arch Grants, a public–private coalition that provides

Globalization and De-Globalization in Nanotechnology Research: The Role of China

50,000 to 20 winners through their annual competition. Based on interviews of 46 recipient firms and 15 support organizations, we first demonstrate how government sponsorship can create a cohort of entrepreneurs who are able to learn from each other about business strategy, local mentors and other resources. Second, we uncover the process through which sponsorship can facilitate coordination among local entrepreneurship support organizations. Thus, we conclude that the evaluation of government sponsorship should go beyond the traditional firm-level performance measurement and consider the integration and enhancement of the local entrepreneurship ecosystem.

Empirical Disaggregation of Social Networks: A Study of Ethnic Professional Associations and Entrepreneurship in Silicon Valley

The share of nanotechnology publications involving authors from more than one country more than doubled in the 1990s, but then fell again until 2004, before recovering somewhat during the latter years of the decade. Meanwhile, the share of nanotechnology papers involving at least one Chinese author increased substantially over the last two decades. Papers involving Chinese authors are far less likely to be internationally co-authored than papers involving authors from other countries. Nonetheless, this appears to be changing as Chinese nanotechnology research becomes more advanced. An arithmetic decomposition confirms that China’s growing share of such research accounts, in large part, for the observed stagnation of international collaboration. Thus two aspects of the globalization of science can work in opposing directions: diffusion to initially less scientifically advanced countries can depress international collaboration rates, while at the same time scientific advances in such countries can reverse this trend. We find that the growth of China’s scientific community explains some, but not all of the dynamics of China’s international collaboration rate. We therefore provide an institutional account of these dynamics, drawing on Stichweh’s [Social Science information 35(2):327–340, 1996] original paper on international scientific collaboration, which, in examining the interrelated development of national and international scientific networks, predicts a transitional phase during which science becomes a more national enterprise, followed by a phase marked by accelerating international collaboration. Validating the application of this approach, we show that Stichweh’s predictions, based on European scientific communities in the 18th and 19th centuries, seem to apply to the Chinese scientific community in the 21st century.

The state-level geographic analysis of high-growth companies

Abstract While the literature of social networks and entrepreneurship has stated the importance of social networks for entrepreneurship, many past empirical studies tended to measure social networks only at the aggregated level. This led to a failure to capture heterogeneity or nonredundancy of networks, and sometimes resulted in empirically confusing verdicts regarding the contribution of social networks to entrepreneurship at a statistical level. We argue that disaggregation of networks is critical and will construct networks at a refined, specific level. With alarge-scale dataset of 2,273 individuals, we test the link between start-up activities and Chinese and Indian ethnic professional associations in Silicon Valley. Our multivariate models find that only a few networks with heterogeneous members correlate positively with entrepreneurship. The results indicate that social networks, a powerful and widely used theoretical construct, are still underdeveloped in both conceptualization and operationalization, and that we have to further develop effective measurement techniques.

The Economic Development–Vibrant Center Connection: Tracking High-Growth Firms in the DC Region

While the number of studies about high-growth firms has increased in recent years, scholarship has been primarily focused on the microeconomic factors for success, such as individual and firm characteristics. There has been an emerging body of research studying the macroeconomic or geographic factors, yet scholars have incorporated those external factors only in limited ways. This paper deepens our understanding about the macroeconomic factors related to high-growth firms by adapting the conceptual framework of the knowledge spillover theory and by using the list of Inc. 500 firms. Regression results demonstrate that the geographic factors for high-growth firms differ substantially from the knowledge spillover theory, as academic and government research activities, venture capital investment, and patents are unrelated to the concentration of high-growth firms. Nonetheless, the model in this paper agrees with the importance of the human capital-related factor, specifically science and engineering college graduates. These findings suggest that we need to have a more streamlined understanding of entrepreneurship, as high-growth may have some overlap, but still sharply differs from firm formation, self-employment, or innovations in the high-tech sectors.

Think Locally, Act Locally: Building a Robust Entrepreneurial Ecosystem

Guided by empirical observation of recent downtown redevelopment, we conduct spatial analysis between urban vibrancy and economic growth at the census tract level. To measure the level of urban vibrancy of live work and play environments, we rely on the Environmental Protection Agencys Smart Location Database with measures of density, land use diversity, urban design, distance to transit, and destination accessibility. We further measure economic growth by the concentration of high-growth firms and employ descriptive statistics and spatial regressions to analyze the correlations. We first find the presence of vibrant centers in both urban and suburban areas. More important, we observe that vibrant centers have captured more of these high-growth firms. These results suggest the need for more refined theoretical and empirical analysis of urban vibrancy, economic development, and place attractiveness at the intrametropolitan scale.

Guidelines for Local and State Governments to Promote Entrepreneurship

This report analyzes behavioral patterns of entrepreneurs who participate in 1 Million Cups® (1MC) Kansas City, a Kauffman Labs for Enterprise Creation program designed to engage, educate, and connect entrepreneurs. We published our first paper about 1MC in March 2013, which presented results of an initial survey among 1MC participants to identify their demographic characteristics, information about whether they were a founder or co-founder of a startup, and their attendance patterns at 1MC. This second paper is based primarily on another round of surveys we conducted in May 2013 and January 2014. This time, we deepen our analysis particularly on local networking activities, such as entrepreneurs’ connections to other local programs and information collection via Twitter activities.Key findings include:• Entrepreneurs follow local entrepreneurs. While the most popular Twitter accounts in the United States belong to celebrities, entrepreneurs are studious by primarily following entrepreneurship-focused accounts, such as those by other entrepreneurs, entrepreneurial programs, and individuals affiliated with local entrepreneurship support organizations.• Entrepreneurship is a local phenomenon. The most influential Twitter feeds among the entrepreneurs surveyed are primarily local.• Local network thickens over time. The network of 1MC participants gets considerably more connected over the eight months of our analysis.• Different programs reach different entrepreneurs. While the attendance of 1MC in Kansas City — more than 250 weekly — is by no means small, we observe heterogeneity within the local entrepreneurial ecosystem. We found a considerable overlap between 1MC and Startup Weekend attendees, as well as a strong connection between Kauffman FastTrac® and KCSourceLink® participants/users; however, there is little overlap between 1MC and FastTrac, and no evidence of a single “catch-all” program. One interpretation of these results is that different types of entrepreneurs use different types of programs to meet their needs.• Entrepreneurial demand is high for peer-based learning and networking. The fast growth experienced by the 1MC program, from Kansas City to the soon-to-be thirty-five other cities across the country, suggests that there is a demand from entrepreneurs for opportunities to learn from and connect with their local peers.Implications:• Think local. Policymakers, entrepreneurship supporters, and entrepreneurs themselves should keep in mind the locally structured nature of entrepreneurial networks. Thus, it will be most effective to communicate with entrepreneurs within a local sphere.• One size does not fit all. A single popular entrepreneurship program does not necessarily reach many types of entrepreneurs, and entrepreneurs seek out and build a diverse array of networks. When creating or promoting new entrepreneurship programs, policymakers and entrepreneurship-supporters should consider what types of entrepreneurs are already served by current existing programs and what types of entrepreneurs still are underserved.

Beyond Metropolitan Startup Rates: Regional Factors Associated with Startup Growth

Promoting entrepreneurship has been a part of many city and state economic development strategies for at least two decades. These strategies have been largely informed by academic writing and, more recently, by the experience of successful entrepreneurs. With so much attention paid to entrepreneurship, one might expect entrepreneurship to be booming. Unfortunately, the opposite is largely true. In the late 1970s, about 15 percent of all businesses in the United States were new; in 2011, that number hovered around 8 percent. Even the high-powered technology industry has succumbed to this trend. Not only are there fewer new firms today than in the past, but those startups that do exist are creating fewer jobs. This decline in startup activity has occurred across the country. Firm entry rates were lower between 2009 and 2011 than they were between 1978 and 1980 in every state and Metropolitan Statistical Area except one. This all begs a question: if so much attention has been paid to promoting entrepreneurship, why is it trending downward? The answer to that question is complex and certainly involves many factors, some of which are out of the control of state and local governments. But one area that deserves scrutiny is popular and widely tried economic development strategies to promote entrepreneurship. While much has been written about entrepreneurship in the context of economic development, academic research has not kept pace with emerging practices. And, while many studies discuss what was done in the past, few say anything about what has worked or why it has worked. This guideline is written to address those gaps and communicate lessons learned at the Kauffman Foundation through our experience running entrepreneurship support programs, doing interviews, and interacting with experts across many fields. The paper synthesizes more than eighty peer-reviewed academic articles, books, practitioners’ papers, and conference papers. Subsequent papers will address measurement and sources of entrepreneurship data, and the concept of entrepreneurial ecosystems.In this paper, we begin with a critical overview of two of the most commonly used strategies to promote entrepreneurship: creating public venture funds and business incubators. We then explain that these strategies often neglect an essential principle: connectivity and learning by entrepreneurs. Next, we describe ways in which public venture funds and incubators can be reorganized based on the connectivity principle before concluding with several other recommendations for how cities and states can promote entrepreneurship and begin to see real results that transform economies and provide new opportunities to residents.