Discovering support needed for startups in their early stages using on Penta Helix framework
Startup companies are expected to become the new engines of economic growth through the rise of new innovation-based entrepreneurs. The Penta Helix framework is widely used as a framework to analyse factors related to the development of innovation-based companies. The use of the Penta Helix framework as the unit of analysis is considered to be relevant because this framework offers a comprehensive perspective and is in line with the economic development innovation and knowledge-based startups. However, there is a lack of research that has been conducted that analyse the nature of support that can be given to startups at their early-stage of creation using the Penta Helix framework that consists of five stakeholders namely Academicians, Businessmen, Government, Communities. This study aims to propose a conceptual model about the nature of support needed by startups in order to survive in their initial stages by using the Penta Helix Framework. This study is a qualitative one using the Focus Group Discussion method, in which participants are made of six early stages technology-based startup founders and CEOs, who were gathered to conduct several discussions regarding the topics. Our results show that obstacles faced by startups include among other: difficulties in obtaining qualified yet affordable workforce in facing existing competitors, difficulties in increasing sales, difficulties in managing product development costs, no adequate support from the government, and ineffective incubation programs. A model that consists of lists of support that startups need, was depict as main contribution from the discussion, named Penta Helix support for startups. This model offers comprehensive practical guide for policy makers to support startups from five perspectives.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Awaluddin, M., Sule, E. T., & Kaltum, U. (2016). The Influence of competitive forces and value creation on company reputation and competitive strategy: a case of digital creative industry in Indonesia with the Implication on sustainable business performance. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, IV(2), 201–234.
Azar, S., & Mackey, T. K. (2015). Crowdfunding: a new untapped opportunity for biotechnology start-ups? Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 21(4). https://doi.org/10.5912/jcb717
Bednar, R., Tariskova, N., Zagorsek, B., & others. (2018). Startup revenue model failures. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 14(4), 141–157. https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2018.14-4.10
Bloch, F. (2016). The role of government support in French tech startup activity. Rep.
Cakrasiwi, P., Sutopo, W., & Widiyanto, A. (2013). Evaluasi Keberhasilanstrategi Bisnis Komersialisasi Teknologi Tenant (Studi Kasus: Tenant Bit-Bppt). Conference: Seminar Nasional Industrial Engineering Conference (IDEC), 1. At Surakarta, Indonesia.
Campbell, D. F. J., Carayannis, E. G., & Rehman, S. S. (2015). Quadruple Helix structures of quality of democracy in innovation systems: the USA, OECD countries, and EU member countries in global comparison. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6(3), 467–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-015-0246-7
Cantamessa, M., Gatteschi, V., Perboli, G., & Rosano, M. (2018). Startups’ roads to failure. Sustainability, 10(7), 2346. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072346
Chiappini, L. (2016). The contribution of the Italian startup act to the country’s economic growth and job cration: the anatomy of a successful implementation. Luiss Biblioteca.
Devece, C., Peris-Ortiz, M., & Rueda-Armengot, C. (2016). Entrepreneurship during economic crisis: Success factors and paths to failure. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 5366–5370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.139
Dolfsma, W., & Soete, L. (2006). Understanding the dynamics of a knowledge economy. Studies in Evolutionary Political Economy, ix. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eoh&AN=0873801&site=ehost-live
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Triple Helix – University-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge based economic development. EASST Review, 14(1), 14–19.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000a). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university. Research Policy, 29(2), 109. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=2815434&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000b). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
Etzkowitz, H., & Zhou, C. (2017). Innovation incommensurability and the science park. R and D Management, 48(1), 73-87. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12266
Fahad, F. A., & Sohaib, O. (2016). Enhancing innovative capability and sustainability of Saudi firms. Sustainability (Switzerland), 8(12), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8121229
Fairlie, R. W., Russell, J., & Marion, E. (2016). A snapshot of national trends in main street entrepreneurship. Kauffman Foundation.
Fatoki, O. (2014). The causes of the failure of new small and medium enterprises in South Africa, 5(20), 922–927. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n20p922
Francis, N. (2016). What do state economic development agencies do? Economic Development Strategies Information Brief, 6.
Fyodorov, M. V., Peshina, E. V., Gredina, O. V., & Avdeev, P. A. (2012). Pentahelix as a concept of knowledge production in innovative economy. Upravlenec.
Gonzalez, G. (2017). What factors are causal to survival of a startup? Muma Business Review, 1(9), 97–114. https://doi.org/10.28945/3845
Halibas, A. S., Sibayan, R. O., Lyn, R., & Maata, R. (2017). The Penta Helix model of innovation in Oman: An HEI Perspective, (May). Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, 12(12), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.28945/3735
Henriques, I. C., Sobreiro, V. A., & Kimura, H. (2018). Science and technology park: Future challenges. Technology in Society, 53, 144–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.01.009
Hyytinen, A., Pajarinen, M., & Rouvinen, P. (2015). Journal of business venturing does innovativeness reduce startup survival rates? Journal of Business Venturing, 30(4), 564–581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.10.001
Kiskis, M., & Gulevičiūtė, G. (2015). Differentiating public policy for technology startups-Essential for biotech? Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 21(1), 39–52. https://doi.org/10.5912/jcb672
Kulicke, M., & Kripp, K. (2013). Ergebnisse und Wirkungen des Förderprogramms EXIST- Gründerstipendium. Exist. https://www.exist.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Studien/Ergeb-nisse-Wirkungen-Foerderprogramm-Gruenderstipendium.pdf?__blob=publicationFile
Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Triple Helix of university-industry-governement relations. Scientometrics, (14), 14–19.
Lindmark, A., Sturesson, E., & Nilsson-Roos, M. (2009). Difficulties of collaboration for innovation-A study in the Öresund region (Masters Thesis). Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Makris, G. C. (2015). Crowdfunding: from startup businesses to startup science. BMJ, 350, h18. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h18
Motoyama, Y., & Knowlton, K. (2017). Examining the connections within the startup ecosystem: a case study of St. Louis. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 7(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2016-0011
Muhyi, H. A., Chan, A., Sukoco, I., & Herawaty, T. (2017). The Penta Helix collaboration model in developing centers of flagship industry in Bandung city. Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research, 6(1), 412–417.
Mulyana, S. (2014). Peningkatan kapabiltas inovasi, keunggulan bersaing dan kinerja melalui pendekatan quadruple helix: studi pada industri kreatif sektor fashion. Jurnal Manajemen Teknologi, 13(3), 304–321. https://doi.org/10.12695/jmt.2014.13.3.5
Nyumba, O. T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C. J., & Mukherjee, N. (2018). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12860
Oh, D., & Yeom, I. (2012). Daedeok Innopolis in Korea: from science park to innovation cluster. World Technopolis Review, 141–154. https://doi.org/10.7165/wtr2012.1.2.141
Parveen, S., Senin, A. A., & Umar, A. (2015). Organization culture and open innovation: A Quadruple Helix Open Innovation Model Approach. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 5(2), 335–342.
Rodrigues, F., Centro, S., Souza -São, P., Brazil, P.-, Fabrício, R., Paula, C., … & Brazil, P. (2015). Why technology-based startups fail? An IT management approach, (2014), 1–9. https://www.pomsmeetings.org/confpapers/060/060-0879.pdf
Salamzadeh, A., & Kawamorita, K. H. (2015). Startup companies: Life cycle and challenges. In 4th International conference on employment, education and entrepreneurship (EEE). Belgrade, Serbia. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2628861
Spender, J.-C., Corvello, V., Grimaldi, M., & Rippa, P. (2017). Startups and open innovation: a review of the literature. European Journal of Innovation Management, 20(1), 4–30. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-12-2015-0131
Tjakraatmadja, J. H., Martini, L., & Anggoro, Y. (2011). Knowledge sharing in small and medium enterprises: a case study of creative clothing industry in Bandung, West Java, Indonesia. Enhancing Innovation, 29–35.
Tonkovic, A. M., Veckie, E., & Veckie, V. W. (2015). Aplications Of Penta Helix Model In economic development. Economy of Eastern Croatia Yesterday, Today, Tommorow.
Triebel, C., Schikora, C., Graske, R., & Sopper, S. (2018a). Failure in startup companies: why failure is a part of founding. Strategies in Failure Management (pp. 121–140). Research Gate. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72757-8_9
Triebel, C., Schikora, C., Graske, R., & Sopper, S. (2018b). Failure in startup companies: why failure is a part of founding. In Strategies in Failure Management (pp. 121–140). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72757-8_9
Wendra, W., Sule, E. T., Joeliaty, J., & Azis, Y. (2019). Exploring dynamic capabilities, intellectual capital and innovation performance relationship: evidence from the garment manufacturing. Business: Theory and Practice, 20, 123–136. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2019.12