A life cycle perspective of startup accelerators

de Klerk, S; Miles, MP; Bliemel, M

A life cycle perspective of startup accelerators

de Klerk, S Miles, MP Bliemel, M

Permalink

Publisher:: Springer Nature
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, pp. 1-17

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Accepted versionAdobe PDF (438.51 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	de Klerk, S
dc.contributor.author	Miles, MP
dc.contributor.author	Bliemel, M https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5160-0888
dc.date.accessioned	2024-01-12T06:13:25Z
dc.date.available	2024-01-12T06:13:25Z
dc.identifier.citation	International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, pp. 1-17
dc.identifier.issn	1554-7191
dc.identifier.issn	1555-1938
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/174394
dc.description.abstract	<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Accelerators are broadly seen as platforms that government, non-profit, and for-profit organizations use to fast-track the development of entrepreneurial and SME business capabilities. Typically, this occurs as competitive, time-constrained, cohort-centered, authentic learning experiences supported by mentoring and access to the local entrepreneurial ecosystem, management development programs, and financial resources. Interest in how the ventures in the development programs evolve and contribute to the entrepreneurial ecosystem is increasing (Cantner et al. in <jats:italic>Small Business Economics</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>57</jats:italic>, 407–423, 2021), but how the accelerators evolve has yet to be adequately researched. To better understand how accelerators evolve, we adapt Churchill and Lewis (<jats:italic>Harvard Business Review</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>61</jats:italic>(3), 30–50, 1983) conceptual framework of the stages of small business development. This study investigated the life cycle of Australian accelerators from 2013 to 2020. The accelerators ranged from short-term “pop-up” programs to permanent programs. We found through a series of four selected exemplar case studies that these accelerators exhibited a similar four-stage life cycle to their participants, including (1) gestation, (2) survival, (3) viability, and (4) decline or renewal. We also found that external support was a critical issue that determined viability. Our findings support the development of accelerator management to be more agile, resilient, and entrepreneurial, which can confront those adopting a more standardized franchise model. In addition, we adapt Kohler (<jats:italic>Business Horizons</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>59</jats:italic>(3), 347–357, 2016) work on corporate accelerators into an inclusive framework for all forms of accelerators, including considering their geographic context or Place, the actors involved with the accelerator or its People, the accelerator’s value Proposition to participants, the accelerator’s Processes and most fundamentally, its Purpose that will contribute to the entrepreneurial ecosystem practice and literature. This research provides practical considerations on positioning, suitable business models, and maximized operations.</jats:p>
dc.language	en
dc.publisher	Springer Nature
dc.relation.ispartof	International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1007/s11365-023-00933-7
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights	This version of the article has been accepted for publication, after peer review (when applicable) and is subject to Springer Nature’s AM terms of use, but is not the Version of Record and does not reflect post-acceptance improvements, or any corrections. The Version of Record is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-023-00933-7
dc.subject	1503 Business and Management
dc.subject.classification	Business & Management
dc.subject.classification	3505 Human resources and industrial relations
dc.subject.classification	3507 Strategy, management and organisational behaviour
dc.title	A life cycle perspective of startup accelerators
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.for	1503 Business and Management
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Provost
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Provost/TD School
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
dc.date.updated	2024-01-12T06:13:24Z
pubs.publication-status	Published online

Abstract:

AbstractAccelerators are broadly seen as platforms that government, non-profit, and for-profit organizations use to fast-track the development of entrepreneurial and SME business capabilities. Typically, this occurs as competitive, time-constrained, cohort-centered, authentic learning experiences supported by mentoring and access to the local entrepreneurial ecosystem, management development programs, and financial resources. Interest in how the ventures in the development programs evolve and contribute to the entrepreneurial ecosystem is increasing (Cantner et al. in Small Business Economics, 57, 407–423, 2021), but how the accelerators evolve has yet to be adequately researched. To better understand how accelerators evolve, we adapt Churchill and Lewis (Harvard Business Review, 61(3), 30–50, 1983) conceptual framework of the stages of small business development. This study investigated the life cycle of Australian accelerators from 2013 to 2020. The accelerators ranged from short-term “pop-up” programs to permanent programs. We found through a series of four selected exemplar case studies that these accelerators exhibited a similar four-stage life cycle to their participants, including (1) gestation, (2) survival, (3) viability, and (4) decline or renewal. We also found that external support was a critical issue that determined viability. Our findings support the development of accelerator management to be more agile, resilient, and entrepreneurial, which can confront those adopting a more standardized franchise model. In addition, we adapt Kohler (Business Horizons, 59(3), 347–357, 2016) work on corporate accelerators into an inclusive framework for all forms of accelerators, including considering their geographic context or Place, the actors involved with the accelerator or its People, the accelerator’s value Proposition to participants, the accelerator’s Processes and most fundamentally, its Purpose that will contribute to the entrepreneurial ecosystem practice and literature. This research provides practical considerations on positioning, suitable business models, and maximized operations.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/174394