Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Stakeholder Relationship Building Processes of R&D Based Startups: The Case of Techno-entrepreneurs in Turkey

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Innovation and the Entrepreneurial University

Part of the book series: Science, Technology and Innovation Studies ((STAIS))

  • 776 Accesses

Abstract

Founding an R&D based startup is a risky challenge, one requiring balance between a technological search process and business capabilities. Stakeholders’ role is critical here as they help the entrepreneur in this endeavor. Our aim is to explore the stakeholder relationship building processes of R&D based startups. To this end, we conducted in-depth interviews with Turkish startups that were founded with the state’s ‘techno-entrepreneurship grant’ on the condition of conducting R&D. A common scheme emerging in all three cases was the presence of challenging and supporting stakeholders in the gestation stage. The predominant finding in the literature was the supportive role of the family; however we found a profoundly opposing role in one case. Secondly, the logic of the state’s techno-entrepreneurship fund monitoring staff seemed to be a vital factor in the sustainability of the startup. Finally, the ethical and passionate conduct of business by these startups could be a factor drawing third parties into becoming stakeholders. Based on these findings three propositions are stated to be studied in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://sagm.sanayi.gov.tr/userfiles/file/Teknogiri%C5%9Fim%20Sermayesi%20Deste%C4%9Fi/TGSD%2009-14%20D%C3%96NEM%20RAPORU%20REV%C4%B0ZYON%200409.pdf

  2. 2.

    100,000 TL was about 48,000 Euro and $65,000 in 2010 as per the Turkish Central Bank exchange rates. http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/kurlar/201012/31122010.xml

  3. 3.

    OSTİM is an organized industrial region in Ankara. Established in 1967, OSTİM accomodates 5200 SMEs employing 60,000 people in an area of 5 million m2(http://www.ostim.org.tr/p/5244).

References

  • Anderson AR, Jack SL, Dodd SD (2005) The role of family members in entrepreneurial networks: beyond the boundaries of the family firm. Fam Bus Rev 18(2):135–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman MH, Neale MA (1992) Negotiating rationally. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Brüderl J, Preisendörfer P (1998) Network support and the success of newly founded businesses. Small Bus Econ 10(3):213–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bygrave WD, Hay M, Ng E, Reynolds P (2003) A study of informal investing in 29 nations composing the global enterprise monitor. Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance 5:101–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conti A, Thursby M, Rothaerme F (2013) Show me the right stuff: signals for high-tech startups. J Econ Manag Strateg 22(2):341–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cope J (2005) Toward a dynamic learning perspective of entrepreneurship. Entrep Theory Pract 29(4):373–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coviello NE, Jones MV (2004) Methodological issues in international entrepreneurship research. J Bus Ventur 19(4):485–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalley H, Hamilton B (2000) Knowledge, context and learning in the small business. Int Small Bus J 18(3):51–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels C, Hofer C (1993) Characteristics of successful and unsuccessful entrepreneurial faculty and their innovative research teams. In: Frontiers of economic research. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp 598–609

    Google Scholar 

  • Deakins D, Freel M (1998) Entrepreneurial learning and the growth process in SMEs. Learn Organ 5(3):144–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutta DK, Thornhill S (2014) Venture cognitive logics, entrepreneurial cognitive style and growth intentions: a conceptual model and an exploratory field study. Entrep Res J 4(2):147–166. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2012-0004

    Google Scholar 

  • Elfring T, Hulsink W (2003) Networks in entrepreneurship: the case of high-technology firms. Small Bus Econ 21:409–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson P, Kovalainen A (2008) Qualitative methods in business research. Sage, London, UK

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Evers N, Andersson S, Hannibal M (2012) Stakeholders and marketing capabilities in international new ventures: evidence from Ireland, Sweden, and Denmark. J Int Mark 20(4):46–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Frooman J (1999) Stakeholder influence strategies. Acad Manag Rev 24:191–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Gans JS, Stern S (2003) The product market and the market for “ideas”: commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. Res Policy 32(2):333–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibb AA (1997) Small firms’ training and competitiveness: building on the small business as a learning organization. Int Small Bus J 15(3):13–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greve A, Salaff JW (2003) Social networks and entrepreneurship. Entrep Theory Pract 28(4):1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helfat CE, Finkelstein S, Mitchell W, Peteraf M, Singh H, Teece D, Winter SG (2007) Dynamic capabilities: understanding strategic change in organizations. Blackwell, MA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Honig B Samuelson M (2009) Business planning and venture level performance: challenging the institution of planning. Working papers series from Swedish Entrepreneurship Forum. http://entreprenorskapsforum.se/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/WP_05.pdf. Accessed 31 Jan 2016

  • Lawler EJ, Yoon J (1996) Commitment in exchange relations: test of a theory of relational cohesion. Am Sociol Rev 61(1):89–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell JA (1996) Qualitative research design: an interactive approach. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manag Rev 22(4):853–886

    Google Scholar 

  • Neves P, Story J (2015) Ethical leadership and reputation: combined indirect effects on organizational deviance. J Bus Ethics 127:165–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2003) The policy agenda for growth. OECD Publications, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage, California

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer J, Salancik G (1978) The external control of organizations: a resource dependence perspective. Harper & Row, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Postle D (1993) Putting the heart back into learning. In: Boud D, Cohen R, Walker D (eds) Using experience for learning. SRHE & Open University Press, Buckingham, pp 33–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenblatt PC, de Mik L, Anderson RM, Johnson PA (1985) The family in business. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy SD (2001) Causation and effectuation: toward a theoretical shift from economics inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Acad Manag Rev 26(2):243–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy SD (2008) Effectuation: elements of entrepreneurial expertise. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy S, Venkatamaran S (2011) Entrepreneurship as method: open questions for an entrepreneurial future. Entrep Theory Pract 35(1):113–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00425.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlange L (2009) Stakeholder identification in sustainability entrepreneurship the role of managerial and organisayional cognition. Greener Management International Winter 55:13–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Scottish Executive (2001) A smart successful Scotland: ambitions for the enterprise networks. HM Stationary Office, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirolli E (2003) Ripples from the Zambesi: passion entrepreneurship and the rebirth of local economies. New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island

    Google Scholar 

  • Steyaert C (1997) A qualitative methodology for process studies of entrepreneurship: creating local knowledge through stories. Int Stud Manag Organ 27(2):13–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss AL, Curbin JM (1990) Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage, California

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson L, Gentner D, Loewenstein J (2000) Avoiding missed opportunities in managerial life: analogical training more powerful than individual case training. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 82(1):60–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young JE, Sexton DL (1997) Entrepreneurial learning: a conceptual framework. J Enterp Cult 5(3):223–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra H, Sapienza J, Davidsson P (2006) Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: a review, model and research agenda. J Manag Stud 43(4):917–955

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Atılım University, Ankara, Turkey

    Elif Kalaycı

Authors
  1. Elif Kalaycı
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elif Kalaycı .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Higher School of Economics, National Research University, Moscow, Russia

    Dirk Meissner

  2. Department of Economics, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey

    Erkan Erdil

  3. SPRU, University of Sussex, Sussex, United Kingdom

    Joanna Chataway

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kalaycı, E. (2018). Stakeholder Relationship Building Processes of R&D Based Startups: The Case of Techno-entrepreneurs in Turkey. In: Meissner, D., Erdil, E., Chataway, J. (eds) Innovation and the Entrepreneurial University. Science, Technology and Innovation Studies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62649-9_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation