Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Between a Soft Landing and a Hard Place: How Silicon Valley Software and Life Sciences Business Incubators Facilitate Learning

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Technology-Based Nascent Entrepreneurship

Abstract

Incubators are increasingly used to support the development of technology-based nascent entrepreneurs and typically provide a range of services and resources. In providing such support, incubators use a variety of practices such as peer-to-peer learning, workshops, mentoring and access to wider expert support network. This chapter explores the practices through which incubators facilitate lower and higher order learning. This chapter applies theories of Organizational Learning and uses a multi case study of software and life sciences incubators in Silicon Valley. The findings suggest that software incubators focus on facilitating higher-order learning, by creating a high-pressure environment that challenges the start-up’s existing technologies, markets and business models, and stimulates start-ups to experiment with new ideas. In contrast, life science incubators emphasize lower-order learning and optimization of existing technologies by providing quick access to missing knowledge.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
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

References

  • Aaboen, L. (2009). Explaining incubators using firm analogy. Technovation, 29, 657–670. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2009.04.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adegbite, O. (2001). Business incubators and small enterprise development: The Nigerian experience. Small Business Economics, 17, 157–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aernoudt, R. (2004). Incubators: Tool for entrepreneurship? Small Business Economics, 23, 127–135. doi:10.1023/B:SBEJ.0000027665.54173.23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aerts, K., Matthyssens, P., & Vandenbempt, K. (2007). Critical role and screening practices of European business incubators. Technovation, 27, 254–267. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2006.12.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad, A. J., & Ingle, S. (2013). Business incubators and HTSF development: Setting an agenda for further research. In R. Oakey, A. Groen, C. Cook, & P. Van Der Sijde (Eds.), New technology-based firms in the New Millenium (Vol. 10, pp. 119–140). Bingley: Emerald Group.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Allied Market Research. (2014). World Bioinformatics Market—Opportunities and Forecasts, 2013–2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amezcua, A. S., Grimes, M. G., Bradley, S. W., & Wiklund, J. (2013). Organizational sponsorship and founding environments: A contingency view on the survival of business incubated firms, 1994–2007. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 1628–1654. doi:10.5465/amj.2011.0652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978). Organisational learning. A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P., & Corley, K. (2011). The Coming of Age for Qualitative Research. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 233–237. doi:10.5465/amj.2011.60262792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baraldi, E., & Havenvid, M. I. (2016). Identifying new dimensions of business incubation: A multi-level analysis of Karolinska Institute’s incubation system. Technovation, 50–51, 53–68. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2015.08.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbero, J. L., Casillas, J. C., Wright, M., & Ramos Garcia, A. (2014). Do different types of incubators produce different types of innovations? The Journal of Technology Transfer, 39, 151–168. doi:10.1007/s10961-013-9308-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartelsman, E. (2005). Comparative analysis of firm demographics and survival: Evidence from micro-level sources in OECD countries. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14, 365–391. doi:10.1093/icc/dth057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J. A. C., Calabrese, T., & Silverman, B. S. (2000). Don’t go it alone: Alliance network composition and startups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 267–294. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:3<267:AID-SMJ89>3.0.CO;2-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J., & Amburgery, T. (2002). Organizational ecology. In J. Baum (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to organizations. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, B., & Gassmann, O. (2006). Gaining leverage effects from knowledge modes within corporate incubators. R and D Management, 36, 1–16. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2005.00411.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergek, A., & Norrman, C. (2008). Incubator best practice: A framework. Technovation, 28, 20–28. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2007.07.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhave, M. P. (1994). A process model of entrepreneurial venture creation. Journal of Business Venturing, 9, 223–242. doi:10.1016/0883-9026(94)90031-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, M., Cavaliere, A., Chiaroni, D., Frattini, F., & Chiesa, V. (2011). Organisational modes for open innovation in the bio-pharmaceutical industry: An exploratory analysis. Technovation, 31, 22–33. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2010.03.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blank, S. (2013). Why the lean start-up changes everything. Harvard Business Review, 91, 63–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bøllingtoft, A., & Ulhøi, J. P. (2005). The networked business incubator—leveraging entrepreneurial agency? Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 265–290. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2003.12.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bravo-Biosca, A., & Westlake, S. (2009). The vital 6 per cent—how high-growth innovative businesses generate prosperity and jobs. Nesta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R., & Mason, C. (2014). Inside the high-tech black box: A critique of technology entrepreneurship policy. Technovation, 34, 773–784. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2014.07.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R., & Mawson, S. (2015). Targeted support for high growth firms: Theoretical constraints, unintended consequences and future policy challenges. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy forthcoming. doi:10.1177/0263774X15614680.

  • Brown, T. (1990). Match up with a mentor. Industry week, 239, 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruneel, J., Ratinho, T., Clarysse, B., & Groen, A. (2012). The evolution of business incubators: Comparing demand and supply of business incubation services across different incubator generations. Technovation, 32, 110–121. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2011.11.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (2008). Social research methods (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgers, J. H., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2008). Why new business development projects fail: Coping with the differences of technological versus market knowledge. Long Range Planning, 41, 55–73. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2007.10.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., & von Zedtwitz, M. (2005). Architecting gloCal (global–local), real-virtual incubator networks (G–RVINs) as catalysts and accelerators of entrepreneurship in transitioning and developing economies: Lessons learned and best practices from current development and business incubation. Technovation, 25, 95–110. doi:10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00072-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casper, S., Lehrer, M., & Soskice, D. (1999). Can high-technology industries prosper in Germany? institutional frameworks and the evolution of the German software and biotechnology industries. Industry & Innovation, 6, 5–24. doi:10.1080/13662719900000002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandra, A., & Fealey, T. (2009). Business incubation in the United States, China and Brazil. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 13, 67–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiva, R., Grandío, A., & Alegre, J. (2010). Adaptive and Generative Learning: Implications from Complexity Theories. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12, 114–129. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00255.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cincera, M., & Veugelers, R. (2013). Young leading innovators and the EU’s R&D intensity gap. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 22, 177–198. doi:10.1080/10438599.2012.731166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, S., & Hochberg, Y. V. (2014). Accelerating startups: The seed accelerator phenomenon. SSRN. Electronic Journal, 1–16. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2418000.

  • Cope, J. (2003). Entrepreneurial learning and critical reflection: Discontinuous events as triggers for “Higher-level” learning. Management Learning, 34, 429–450. doi:10.1177/1350507603039067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dingsøyr, T., Nerur, S., Balijepally, V., & Moe, N. B. (2012). A decade of agile methodologies: Towards explaining agile software development. Journal of Systems and Software, 85, 1213–1221. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2012.02.033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Economist. (2014). Tech start-ups: A cambrian moment. The Economist. Retrieved January 18, 2014, from http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21593580-cheap-and-ubiquitous-building-blocks-digital-products-and-services-have-caused.

  • Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550. doi:10.2307/258557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espedal, B. (2008). In the pursuit of understanding how to balance lower and higher order learning in organizations. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44, 365–390. doi:10.1177/0021886308319717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ethiraj, S. K., Kale, P., Krishnan, M. S., & Singh, J. V. (2005). Where do capabilities come from and how do they matter? A study in the software services industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 25–45. doi:10.1002/smj.433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiol, C., & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 10, 803–813.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franco, M., & Haase, H. (2009). Entrepreneurship: an organisational learning approach. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 16, 628–641. doi:10.1108/14626000911000965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago,IL: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garg, V. K., Walters, B. A., & Priem, R. L. (2003). Chief executive scanning emphases, environmental dynamism, and manufacturing firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 725–744. doi:10.1002/smj.335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grand View Research. (2015). Bioinformatics Market Analysis by Product, by segmentation and segment forecast to 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 693–706. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2006.22083026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackett, S. M., & Dilts, D. M. (2004). A systematic review of business incubation research. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, 55–82. doi:10.1023/B:JOTT.0000011181.11952.0f.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 929–964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49, 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T., Chesbrough, H. W., Nohria, N., & Sull, D. N. (2000). Networked incubators. Hothouses of the new economy. Harvard Business Review, 78, 74–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, R. T., Mason, C. M., & Girling, P. (2004). Financial bootstrapping and venture development in the software industry. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 16, 307–333. doi:10.1080/0898562042000263276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann, B. L., Marmer, M., Dogrultan, E., & Holtschke, D. (2012). Startup Ecosystem Report 2012: Part One.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hine, D., & Kapeleris, J. (2006). Innovation and entrepreneurship in biotechnology, an international perspective. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Howe, A. D., Costanzo, M., Fey, P., Gojobori, T., Hide, W., Hill, D. P., et al. (2008). Big data : The future of biocuration. Nature, 455, 47–50. doi:10.1038/455047a.Big.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, G. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2, 88–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, M., Ireland, R. D., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). Stimulating dynamic value: Social capital and business incubation as a pathway to competitive success. Long Range Planning, 40, 154–177. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2007.03.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • InBIA. (2016). International business incubation association—business incubation FAQs. Retrieved January 2, 2016, from www.inbia.org.

  • Kerr, W. R., Nanda, R., & Rhodes-Kropf, M. (2014). Entrepreneurship as experimentation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28, 25–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, L., & Pye, A. (2005). Network learning: An empirically derived model of learning by groups of organizations. Human Relations, 58, 369–392. doi:10.1177/0018726705053427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2004). Searching high and low: What types of firms use universities as a source of innovation? Research Policy, 33, 1201–1215. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2004.07.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, V., Radu Lefebvre, M., & Simon, E. (2015). Formal entrepreneurial networks as communities of practice: A longitudinal case study. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 27, 500–525. doi:10.1080/08985626.2015.1070539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mcadam, M., & Marlow, S. (2007). Building futures or stealing secrets? Entrepreneurial cooperation and conflict within business incubators. International Small Business Journal, 25, 361–382. doi:10.1177/0266242607078563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NESTA. (2011). The Startup Factories: The rise of accelerator programmes to support new technology ventures. London: NESTA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls-Nixon, C., Cooper, A., & Woo, C. (2000). Strategic experimentation: Understanding change and performance in new ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 9026, 493–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, M. J., & Grantham, C. E. (2000). The virtual incubator: Managing human capital in the software industry. Research Policy, 29, 125–134. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00054-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakey, R. (2003). Technical entreprenenurship in high technology small firms: Some observations on the implications for management. Technovation, 23, 679–688. doi:10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00045-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakey, R. (2012). High-technology entrepreneurship. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W. J. (2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13, 249–273. doi:10.1287/orsc.13.3.249.2776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, D. (2014). Realising potential: The impact of business incubation on the absorptive capacity of new technology-based firms. International Small Business Journal, 32, 897–917. doi:10.1177/0266242613482134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, D., & Marlow, S. (2011). University technology business incubators: Helping new entrepreneurial firms to learn to grow. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 29, 911–926. doi:10.1068/c10198b.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauwels, C., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Van Hove, J. (2016). Understanding a new generation incubation model: The accelerator. Technovation, 50–51, 13–24. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2015.09.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K. (1984). Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13, 343–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pisano, G. (2006). Can science be a business? Harvard Business Review, 84, 114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisano, G. P. (2006). Science business: The promise, the reality and the future of biotech. In Harvard business review. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pla-Barber, J., & Alegre, J. (2007). Analysing the link between export intensity, innovation and firm size in a science-based industry. International Business Review, 16, 275–293. doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2007.02.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Politis, D. (2005). The process of entrepreneurial learning: A conceptual framework. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 29, 399–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 116–145. doi:10.2307/2393988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2015). MoneyTree Report. Retrieved January 10, 2015, from www.pwcmoneytree.com.

  • Radu Lefebvre, M., & Redien-Collot, R. (2013). How to do things with words: The discursive dimension of experiential learning in entrepreneurial mentoring dyads. Journal of Small Business Management, 51, 370–393. doi:10.1111/jsbm.12022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, M. P. (2002). Co-production of business assistance in business incubators: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 17, 163–187. doi:10.1016/S0883-9026(00)00055-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, T. H., Aas, T. H., & Stead, A. (2015). Knowledge flow in technological business incubators: Evidence from Australia and Israel. Technovation, 41–42, 11–25. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2015.03.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santarelli, E., & Vivarelli, M. (2007). Entrepreneurship and the process of firms’ entry, survival and growth. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16, 455–488. doi:10.1093/icc/dtm010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schadt, E. E., Linderman, M. D., Sorenson, J., Lee, L., & Nolan, G. P. (2010). Computational solutions to large-scale data management and analysis nature reviews. Genetics, 11, 647–657. doi:10.1038/nrg2857.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scillitoe, J. L., & Chakrabarti, A. K. (2010). The role of incubator interactions in assisting new ventures. Technovation, 30, 155–167. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2009.12.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, D., Douglas, E., & Shanley, M. (2000). New venture survival: Ignorance, external shocks, and risk reduction strategies. Journal of Business Venturing, 9026, 393–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soetanto, D. P., & Jack, S. L. (2013). Business incubators and the networks of technology-based firms. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38, 432–453. doi:10.1007/s10961-011-9237-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spicer, D. P., & Sadler-Smith, E. (2006). Organizational learning in smaller manufacturing firms. International Small Business Journal, 24, 133–158. doi:10.1177/0266242606061836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stam, E., & Bosma, N. (2015). Local policies for high-employment growth enterprises. In D. B. Audretsch, A. Link, & M. Walshok (Eds.), Oxford handbook of local competitiveness (pp. 286–305). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, A. (1965). Social structure and organizations. In J. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 260–290). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • St-Jean, E., & Audet, J. (2012). The role of mentoring in the learning development of the novice entrepreneur. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 8, 119–140. doi:10.1007/s11365-009-0130-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, D. M., & Marvel, M. R. (2011). Knowledge acquisition, network reliance, and early-stage technology venture outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 1169–1193. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00998.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, R. (2000). Entrepreneurial learning and mentoring. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 6, 160–175. doi:10.1108/13552550010346587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tamásy, C. (2007). Rethinking technology-oriented business incubators: Developing a robust policy instrument for entrepreneurship, innovation, and regional development. Growth and change, 38, 460–473. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2257.2007.00379.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theodorakopoulos, N., & Figueira, C. (2007). What can situated learning theory tell us about leading to develop organizational learning capabilities for entrepreneurial performance? Lessons from a knowledge- intensive small firm. Thunderbird International Business Review, 54, 859–863. doi:10.1002/tie.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (2001). Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market and organizational change. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uotila, J., & Maula, M. (2009). Exploration, exploitation, and financial performance: Analysis of S&P 500 corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 221–231. doi:10.1002/smj.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A., & Polley, D. (1992). Learning while innovating. Organization Science, 3, 92–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Geenhuizen, M., & Soetanto, D. P. (2009). Academic spin-offs at different ages: A case study in search of key obstacles to growth. Technovation, 29, 671–681. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2009.05.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Rijnsoever, F. J., Meeus, M. T. H., & Donders, A. R. T. (2012). The effects of economic status and recent experience on innovative behavior under environmental variability: An experimental approach. Research Policy, 41, 833–847. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Weele, M. A., Van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Steinz, H. (2014). Start-ups down under: How start-up communities facilitate Australian entrepreneurship. In Druid Conference 2014, Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Weele, M., van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Nauta, F. (2016). You can’t always get what you want: How entrepreneur’s perceived resource needs affect the incubator’s assertiveness. Technovation. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2016.08.004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy, 33, 147–175. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00107-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, J., & Ungson, G. (1991). Organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 16, 57–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C. L., & Chugh, H. (2014). Entrepreneurial learning: Past research and future challenges. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16, 24–61. doi:10.1111/ijmr.12007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & Bogner, W. C. (2000). Technology strategy and software new ventures’ performance: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 135–173. doi:10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00009-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Innovation Studies Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Marijn A. van Weele & Frank J. van Rijnsoever

Authors
  1. Marijn A. van Weele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Frank J. van Rijnsoever
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marijn A. van Weele .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University Newcastle Business School, North Shields, United Kingdom

    James A. Cunningham

  2. University of Otago, Otago Business School University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

    Conor O'Kane

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

van Weele, M.A., van Rijnsoever, F.J. (2017). Between a Soft Landing and a Hard Place: How Silicon Valley Software and Life Sciences Business Incubators Facilitate Learning. In: Cunningham, J., O'Kane, C. (eds) Technology-Based Nascent Entrepreneurship. Palgrave Advances in the Economics of Innovation and Technology. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59594-2_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59594-2_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-59593-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-59594-2

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation