Resumo
Entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs) are receiving greater attention both in the academic world and in the field of government action. Recently, many studies have used a configuration perspective in the analysis of EEs. However, many of these studies have not specifically addressed whether different EE configurations can produce similar outputs; that is, they do not properly explore the concept of equifinality. Our main purpose was to fill this theoretical and empirical gap by exploring and demonstrating the patterns of performance of EEs (e.g., configurations) along a bundle of entrepreneurial outcome indicators. Using the Entrepreneurship Framework Conditions (EFCs) indicators provided by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) from 60 countries and applying exploratory factor analysis and cluster analysis, we identified and developed five distinctive EE configurations. Later, by applying analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare these EE configurations across the entrepreneurial outcome indicators, we were able to show distinctive (dis)similarities with respect to the outcome indicators investigated. The results contribute to the understanding that there is not only one type of successful EE. In other words, the equifinality of EEs was empirically evidenced by our analysis. This is a significant theoretical contribution to the field, emphasizing the need for a broader view of how EEs may be configured and denying the relevance of searching for an ideal EE.
Referências
ACS, Z. J.; AUTIO, E.; SZERB, L. National systems of entrepreneurship: measurement issues and policy implications. Research Policy, Amsterdam, v. 43, n. 3, p. 476-494, 2014. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.08.016 » http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.08.016
AHMAD, N.; HOFFMAN, A. A framework for addressing and measuring entrepreneurship. Paris: 2008. (OECD Statistics Working Papers, 2008/02). http://doi.org/10.1787/18152031 » http://doi.org/10.1787/18152031
AHMAD, N.; SEYMOUR, R. G. Defining entrepreneurial activity: definitions supporting frameworks for data collection. Paris: 2008. (OECD Statistics Working Papers, 2008/01). http://doi.org/10.1787/18152031 » http://doi.org/10.1787/18152031
ALVEDALEN, J.; BOSCHMA, R. A critical review of entrepreneurial ecosystems research: toward a future research agenda. European Planning Studies, London, v. 25, n. 6, p. 887-903, 2017. http://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1299694 » http://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1299694
ALVES, A. C. et al Configurations of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurial ecosystems. Revista de Administração de Empresas, São Paulo, v. 59, n. 4, p. 242-257, 2019. http://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020190403.
BOSMA, N.; SCHUTJENS, V. Understanding regional variation in entrepreneurial activity and entrepreneurial attitude in Europe. The Annals of Regional Science, Heidelberg, v. 47, n. 3, p. 711-742, 2011. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-010-0375-7 » http://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-010-0375-7
BROWN, R.; MASON, C. Looking inside the spiky bits: a critical review and conceptualization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Small Business Economics, Heidelberg, v. 49, n. 1, p. 11-30, 2017. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9865-7 » http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9865-7
BRUNS, K. et al Searching for the existence of entrepreneurial ecosystems: a regional crosssection growth regression approach. Small Business Economics, Heidelberg, v. 49, n. 1, p. 31-54, 2017. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9866-6 » http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9866-6
COHEN, B. Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems. Business Strategy and the Environment, Hoboken, v. 15, n. 1, p. 1-14, 2006. http://doi.org/10.1002/bse.428 » http://doi.org/10.1002/bse.428
COLOMBELLI, A.; PAOLUCCI, E.; UGHETTO, E. Hierarchical and relational governance and the life cycle of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Small Business Economics, Heidelberg, v. 52, n. 2, p. 505-521, 2019. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9957-4 » http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9957-4
COLOMBO, M. G. et al The governance of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Small Business Economics, Heidelberg, v. 52, n. 2, p. 419-428, 2019. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9952-9 » http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9952-9
CORRENTE, S. et al Evaluating and comparing entrepreneurial ecosystems using SMAA and SMAA-S. The Journal of Technology Transfer, Heidelberg, v. 44, n. 2, p. 485-519, 2019. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9684-2 » http://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9684-2
DE BRITO, S.; LEITÃO, J. Mapping and defining entrepreneurial ecosystems: a systematic literature review. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, London, v. 19, n. 1, p. 21-42, 2021. http://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2020.1751571 » http://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2020.1751571
DE JONG, J. P.; MARSILI, O. The fruit flies of innovations: a taxonomy of innovative small firms. Research Policy, Amsterdam, v. 35, n. 2, p. 213-229, 2006. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.09.007 » http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.09.007
DESS, G. G.; NEWPORT, S.; RASHEED, A. M. Configuration research in strategic management: key issues and suggestions. Journal of Management, Thousand Oaks, v. 19, n. 4, p. 775-795, 1993. http://doi.org/10.1177/014920639301900403 » http://doi.org/10.1177/014920639301900403
DOSI, G. Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, Amsterdam, v. 11, n. 3, p. 147-162, 1982. http://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(82)90016-6 » http://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(82)90016-6
FARINHA, L. et al Entrepreneurial dynamics and government policies to boost entrepreneurship performance. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Amsterdam, v. 72, p. 100950, 2020. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100950 » http://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100950
FISS, P. C. A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Academy of Management Review, New York, v. 32, n. 4, p. 1180-1198, 2007. http://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.26586092 » http://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.26586092
FREEMAN, C.; SOETE, L. Developing science, technology and innovation indicators: what we can learn from the past. Research Policy, Amsterdam, v. 38, n. 4, p. 583-589, 2009. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.01.018 » http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.01.018
GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP RESEARCH ASSOCIATION – GEM. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2019/2020: global report. London, 2020. Available from: < https://www.gemconsortium.org/wiki/1154>. Access in: 6 May 2023. » https://www.gemconsortium.org/wiki/1154
GRILICHES, Z. Issues in assessing the contribution of research and development to productivity growth. The Bell Journal of Economics, Heidelberg, v. 10, n. 1, p. 92-116, 1979. http://doi.org/10.2307/3003321 » http://doi.org/10.2307/3003321
HAIR, J. F. et al Multivariate data analysis 7th ed. Georgia: Pearson, 2010.
HARMS, R.; KRAUS, S.; SCHWARZ, E. The suitability of the configuration approach in entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, London, v. 21, n. 1, p. 25-49, 2009. http://doi.org/10.1080/08985620701876416 » http://doi.org/10.1080/08985620701876416
HECHAVARRIA, D. M.; INGRAM, A. A review of the entrepreneurial ecosystem and the entrepreneurial society in the United States: an exploration with the global entrepreneurship monitor dataset. Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, Houston, v. 26, n. 1, p. 1-35, 2014.
HECHAVARRÍA, D. M.; INGRAM, A. Entrepreneurial ecosystem conditions and gendered national-level entrepreneurial activity: a 14-year panel study of GEM. Small Business Economics, Heidelberg, v. 53, n. 2, p. 431-458, 2019. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-9994-7
» http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-9994-7
HERRINGTON, M.; CODURAS, A. The national entrepreneurship framework conditions in sub-Saharan Africa: a comparative study of GEM data/National Expert Surveys for South Africa, Angola, Mozambique and Madagascar. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Heidelberg, v. 9, n. 1, p. 60, 2019. http://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-019-0183-1 » http://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-019-0183-1
HOLLENSTEIN, H. Innovation modes in the Swiss service sector: a cluster analysis based on firm-level data. Research Policy, Amsterdam, v. 32, n. 5, p. 845-863, 2003. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00091-4 » http://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00091-4
ISENBERG, D. J. How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, Boston, v. 88, n. 6, p. 40-50, 2010.
KANTIS, H. D.; FEDERICO, J. S.; GARCÍA, S. I. Entrepreneurship policy and systemic conditions: EVIDENCE-based implications and recommendations for emerging countries. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Amsterdam, v. 72, p. 100872, 2020. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100872 » http://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100872
KLINE, P. An easy guide to factor analysis London: Routledge, 1994.
LEENDERTSE, J.; SCHRIJVERS, M.; STAM, E. Measure twice, cut once: entrepreneurial ecosystem metrics. Research Policy, Amsterdam, v. 51, n. 9, p. 104336, 2022. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104336 » http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104336
MALECKI, E. J. Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Geography Compass, Hoboken, v. 12, n. 3, e12359, 2018. http://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12359 » http://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12359
MÉNDEZ-MORALES, E. A.; MUÑOZ, D. Input, output, and behavioral additionality of innovation subsidies. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, Santiago, v. 14, n. 4, p. 158-172, 2019. http://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242019000400158 » http://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242019000400158
MEYER, A. D.; TSUI, A. S.; HININGS, C. R. Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Academy of Management Journal, Briarcliff Manor, v. 36, n. 6, p. 1175-1195, 1993. http://doi.org/10.2307/256809 » http://doi.org/10.2307/256809
MILLER, D. Notes on the study of configurations. Management International Review, Hoboken, v. 39, n. 2, p. 27-39, 1999.
MILLER, D. Challenging trends in configuration research: where are the configurations? Strategic Organization, Thousand Oaks, v. 16, n. 4, p. 453-469, 2017. http://doi.org/10.1177/1476127017729315 » http://doi.org/10.1177/1476127017729315
MUÑOZ, P. et al Local entrepreneurial ecosystems as configural narratives: a new way of seeing and evaluating antecedents and outcomes. Research Policy, Amsterdam, v. 51, n. 9, p. 104065, 2022. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104065 » http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104065
NELSON, R. R.; WINTER, S. G. In search of useful theory of innovation. Research Policy, Amsterdam, v. 6, n. 1, p. 36-76, 1977. http://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(77)90029-4 » http://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(77)90029-4
NICOTRA, M. et al The causal relation between entrepreneurial ecosystem and productive entrepreneurship: a measurement framework. The Journal of Technology Transfer, Heidelberg, v. 43, n. 3, p. 640-673, 2018. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9628-2
» http://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9628-2
OROBIA, L. A. et al Entrepreneurial framework conditions and business sustainability among the youth and women entrepreneurs. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Bingley, v. 14, n. 1, p. 60-75, 2020. http://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-07-2019-0059
» http://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-07-2019-0059
PEREIRA, J. C. R. Análise de dados qualitativos: estratégias metodológicas para as ciências da saúde, humanas e sociais São Paulo: Ed. UNESP, 1999. 156 p
RIETVELD, C. A.; PATEL, P. C. A critical assessment of the national expert survey data of the global entrepreneurship monitor. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Thousand Oaks, v. 47, n. 6, p. 2494-2507, 2023. http://doi.org/10.1177/10422587221134928 » http://doi.org/10.1177/10422587221134928
ROUNDY, P. T.; BRADSHAW, M.; BROCKMAN, B. K. The emergence of entrepreneurial ecosystems: a complex adaptive systems approach. Journal of Business Research, Amsterdam, v. 86, p. 1-10, 2018. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.01.032 » http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.01.032
SAVONA, M.; STEINMUELLER, W. E. Service output, innovation and productivity: a time-based conceptual framework. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Amsterdam, v. 27, p. 118-132, 2013. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2013.06.006
» http://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2013.06.006
SCHRIJVERS, M.; STAM, E.; BOSMA, N. Figuring it out: configurations of high-performing entrepreneurial ecosystems in Europe. Utrecht: U.S.E. Research Institute, 2021. (Working Paper Series, 21‐05).
SPIGEL, B. The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Thousand Oaks, v. 41, n. 1, p. 49-72, 2017. http://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12167 » http://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12167
SPIGEL, B. Entrepreneurial ecosystems: theory, practice and futures. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020. http://doi.org/10.4337/9781788975933 » http://doi.org/10.4337/9781788975933
SPIGEL, B.; HARRISON, R. Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, Hoboken, v. 12, n. 1, p. 151-168, 2018. http://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1268 » http://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1268
SPIGEL, B.; KITAGAWA, F.; MASON, C. A manifesto for researching entrepreneurial ecosystems. Local Economy, London, v. 35, n. 5, p. 482-495, 2020. http://doi.org/10.1177/0269094220959052 » http://doi.org/10.1177/0269094220959052
STAM, E. Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: a sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, London, v. 23, n. 9, p. 1759-1769, 2015. http://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1061484 » http://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1061484
STAM, E.; SPIGEL, B. Entrepreneurial ecosystems. In: BACKBURN, R.; DE CLERCQ, D.; HEINONEN, J. (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of small business and entrepreneurship 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 2017.
STAM, E.; VAN DE VEN, A. Entrepreneurial ecosystem elements. Small Business Economics, Heidelberg, v. 56, n. 2, p. 809-832, 2021. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00270-6 » http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00270-6
TORRES, P.; GODINHO, P. Levels of necessity of entrepreneurial ecosystems elements. Small Business Economics, Heidelberg, v. 59, n. 1, p. 29-45, 2022. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-021-00515-3 » http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-021-00515-3
VEDULA, S.; FITZA, M. Regional recipes: a configurational analysis of the regional entrepreneurial ecosystem for US venture capital-backed startups. Strategy Science, Catonsville, v. 4, n. 1, p. 4-24, 2019. http://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2019.0076 » http://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2019.0076
VELT, H.; TORKKELI, L.; LAINE, I. Entrepreneurial ecosystem research: bibliometric mapping of the domain. Journal of Business Ecosystems, Hershey, v. 1, n. 2, p. 43, 2020. http://doi.org/10.4018/JBE.20200701.oa1 » http://doi.org/10.4018/JBE.20200701.oa1
WURTH, B.; STAM, E.; SPIGEL, B. Toward an entrepreneurial ecosystem research program. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Thousand Oaks, v. 46, n. 3, p. 729-778, 2022. http://doi.org/10.1177/1042258721998948 » http://doi.org/10.1177/1042258721998948
XIE, Z. et al Entrepreneurial ecosystem and the quality and quantity of regional entrepreneurship: a configurational approach. Journal of Business Research, Amsterdam, v. 128, p. 499-509, 2021. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.02.015 » http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.02.015
YAN, Y.; GUAN, J. Entrepreneurial ecosystem, entrepreneurial rate and innovation: the moderating role of internet attention. The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Heidelberg, v. 15, n. 2, p. 625-650, 2019. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0493-8 » http://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0493-8

Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2024 Revista Brasileira de Inovação