Re-imagining the Forest: Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Development for Finnish Cellulosic Materials
This case narrates the story of the creation of a Finnish Cellulose Entrepreneurial Ecosystem and its emergence through a series of community-based phase transitions during the years 2013–2017.
The case is explained by participants in the process who conducted and took part in a combination of more than 100 interviews and meetings. In the case, we explain the transition through phases of community: from a community of dreams through a community of inquiry towards a community of commerce, as the ecosystem emerges. The phases and transitions are characterised and driven by actors playing critical roles. These roles are identified in the phases along with the key processes that the actors lead and participate in.
The implications of the case are that entrepreneurial ecosystems can be created and driven through a bottom-up, community-based approach, driven by forms of public finance, as opposed to the creation of a hub-centred, more top-down model of development, and further that an understanding of roles and microprocesses can contribute to the building, organising and coordinating of ecosystem development.
KeywordsEntrepreneurial ecosystem Communities Actor roles Phase transitions
- Adner, R. (2006). Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harvard Business Review, 84(4), 98.Google Scholar
- Adomavicius, G., Bockstedt, J., Gupta, A., & Kauffman, R. J. (2006). Understanding patterns of technology evolution: An ecosystem perspective. In System Sciences, 2006. HICSS’06. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on (Vol. 8, pp. 189a–189a). IEEE.Google Scholar
- Allen, T. J. (1977). Managing the flow of technology: Technology transfer and the dissemination of technological information within the R and D organization. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Anggraeni, E., Den Hartigh, E., & Zegveld, M. (2007, October). Business ecosystem as a perspective for studying the relations between firms and their business networks. In ECCON 2007 Annual meeting.Google Scholar
- Anon. (2015). Finland, a land of solutions. Strategic Programme of Prime Minister Juha Sipilä’s Government. [Pdf] Prime Minister’s Office. Available at: http://valtioneuvosto.fi/documents/10184/1427398/Ratkaisujen+Suomi_EN_YHDISTETTY_netti.pdf/8d2e1a66-e24a-4073-8303-ee3127fbfcac. Accessed 10 Apr 2016.
- Autio, E., & Thomas, L. (2014). Innovation ecosystems. The Oxford handbook of innovation management, 204–288.Google Scholar
- Beinhocker, E. D. (2007). The origin of wealth: The radical remaking of economics and what it means for business and society. Cambridge: Harvard business school Press.Google Scholar
- Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., & West, J. (2006). Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm. New York: Oxford University Press on Demand.Google Scholar
- Den Hartigh, E., & van Asseldonk, T. (2004). Business ecosystems: A research framework for investigating the relation between network structure, firm strategy, and the pattern of innovation diffusion. In ECCON 2004 Annual Meeting: Co-Jumping on a Trampoline, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
- Gaglio, C. M., & Taub, R. P. (1992). Entrepreneurs and opportunity recognition. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 12, 136–147.Google Scholar
- Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). Strategy as ecology. Harvard Business Review, 82(3), 68–81.Google Scholar
- Isenberg, D. J. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, 88(6), 40–50.Google Scholar
- Koenig, G. (2012). Business ecosystems revisited. Management, 15(2), 208–224.Google Scholar
- Kristiansen, S. T. (2014). Facilitating innovation in networks composed of non-mandated relations. International Journal of Action Research, 10(1), 34–53.Google Scholar
- Lester, R., & Piore, M. (2004). The missing dimension. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Lichtenstein, B., & Kurjanowicz, B. (2010). Tangibility, momentum, and the emergence of The Republic of Tea. ENTER Journal, 1(1), 125–148.Google Scholar
- McMullen, J. S., & Dimov, D. (2013). Time and the entrepreneurial journey: The problems and promise of studying entrepreneurship as a process. Journal of Management Studies, 50(8), 1481–1512.Google Scholar
- Mitleton-Kelly, E. (2003). Ten principles of complexity and enabling infrastructures. Complex systems and evolutionary perspectives on organisations: The application of complexity theory to organisations (pp. 23–50). New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
- Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 75–83.Google Scholar
- Nahi, T., & Halme, M. (2015). Co-creation as Sensemaking: Collaboration in inclusive business creation in low-income contexts. Academy of management proceedings (Vol. 2015, No. 1, p. 18544). New York: Academy of Management.Google Scholar
- Peltoniemi, M. (2006). Preliminary theoretical framework for the study of business ecosystems. Emergence-Mahwah-Lawrence Erlbaum, 8(1), 10.Google Scholar
- Peltoniemi, M., & Vuori, E. (2004, September). Business ecosystem as the new approach to complex adaptive business environments. In Proceedings of eBusiness research forum (Vol. 18, pp. 267–281). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Elisa_Vuoripublication/228985086_Business_Ecosystem_as_the_New_Approach_to_Complex_Adaptive_Business_Environments/links/09e415110ff11e4a99000000.pdf
- Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.Google Scholar
- Sitra. (2016). Leading the cycle – Finnish road map to a circular economy 2016–2025, Sitra Studies 121, ISBN 978-951-563-978-3 (PDF) www.sitra.fi
- Swedberg, R. (2009). Schumpeter’s full model of entrepreneurship. In R. Ziegler (Ed.), An introduction to social entrepreneurship: Voices, preconditions, contexts (pp. 77–106). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
- Thomas, L., & Autio, E. (2012). Modeling the ecosystem: a meta-synthesis of ecosystem and related literatures. In DRUID 2012 Conference, Copenhagen (Denmark).Google Scholar
- Tushman, M. L. (1977). Special boundary roles in the innovation process. Administrative Science Quarterly, 587–605.Google Scholar
- Valdez, J. (1988). The entrepreneurial ecosystem: Toward a theory of new firm formation. Working Paper. Small Business Institute.Google Scholar
- Venkataraman, S., Sarasvathy, S. D., Dew, N., & Forster, W. R. (2012). Reflections on the 2010 AMR decade award: Whither the promise? Moving forward with entrepreneurship as a science of the artificial. Academy of Management Review, 37(1), 21–33.Google Scholar
- von Weymarn, N. (2015). Forest-based business ecosystems: Case Äänekoski bioproduct mill. [Pdf] Metsä Group Oyj. Available at: http://www.metsa.fi/documents/10739/4144441/Part2_N.vonWeymarn_150611+Mets%C3%A4+Fibre_Bioproduct+mill_ENG.pdf/4f8a4db3-5d45-47b0-ad78-8b5b9cce76ad. Accessed 26 Jan 2016.
- Waters, T. (2016). Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft societies. In Blackwell, G. R. (Ed.), Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology (2nd ed.). New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (Vol. 3). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar