IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03520325.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Incubation Process: A Key Innovation Lever for Successful Start-Up Businesses

Author

Listed:
  • Maryam Elbahjaoui

    (laboratoire Interdisciplinaire de Recherches et d’études en management des organisations et droit de l’entreprise-LIREMD)

  • Abdelaziz Elabjani

    (laboratoire Interdisciplinaire de Recherches et d’études en management des organisations et droit de l’entreprise-LIREMD)

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to describe the incubation relationship to establish win-win relations between incubator and entrepreneur, which allows us to get around all the obstacles that prevent us from maintaining a sustained level of innovation. Within an ecosystem of entrepreneurial support, the incubator has a leading role because, he constitutes the bridge between the entrepreneur and the external environment, to create this relationship; he develops cooperative strategies with other incubators so that his support offer has clarity and good legibility for projects leaders. The findings are useful for incubators and entrepreneurs-owners of start-ups in their efforts to enhance the innovation of their firm.

Suggested Citation

  • Maryam Elbahjaoui & Abdelaziz Elabjani, 2021. "Incubation Process: A Key Innovation Lever for Successful Start-Up Businesses," Post-Print hal-03520325, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03520325
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03520325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03520325/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ali J. Ahmad & Courtney Thornberry, 2018. "On the structure of business incubators: de-coupling issues and the mis-alignment of managerial incentives," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1190-1212, October.
    2. Paul M. Vaaler & Gerry McNamara, 2010. "Are Technology-Intensive Industries More Dynamically Competitive? No and Yes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 271-289, February.
    3. Karim Messeghem & Sylvie Sammut & Didier Chabaud & Camille Carrier & Roy Thurik, 2013. "L’accompagnement entrepreneurial, une industrie en quête de leviers de performance ?," Post-Print halshs-01948734, HAL.
    4. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    2. Kibaek Lee & Jaeheung Yoo & Munkee Choi & Hangjung Zo & Andrew P Ciganek, 2016. "Does External Knowledge Sourcing Enhance Market Performance? Evidence from the Korean Manufacturing Industry," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    4. Erik G. Hansen & Stefan Schaltegger, 2018. "Sustainability Balanced Scorecards and their Architectures: Irrelevant or Misunderstood?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(4), pages 937-952, July.
    5. Michele O’Dwyer & Raffaele Filieri & Lisa O’Malley, 2023. "Establishing successful university–industry collaborations: barriers and enablers deconstructed," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 900-931, June.
    6. Ali, Abdul & Mancha, Ruben & Pachamanova, Dessislava, 2018. "Correcting analytics maturity myopia," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 211-219.
    7. Kirsti Iivonen, 2018. "Defensive Responses to Strategic Sustainability Paradoxes: Have Your Coke and Drink It Too!," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 309-327, March.
    8. Chang, Kuo-Hsiung & Gotcher, Donald F., 2020. "How and when does co-production facilitate eco-innovation in international buyer-supplier relationships? The role of environmental innovation ambidexterity and institutional pressures," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(5).
    9. Amandine Maus & Sylvie Sammut, 2018. "Business model innovation in incubators: the role played by dynamic capabilities theory," Post-Print hal-02466175, HAL.
    10. Jesse Shore & Ethan Bernstein & David Lazer, 2014. "Facts and Figuring: An Experimental Investigation of Network Structure and Performance in Information and Solution Spaces," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-075, Harvard Business School, revised Jun 2014.
    11. Gayoung Kim & Woo Jin Lee, 2021. "The Venture Firm’s Ambidexterity: Do Transformational Leaders Boost Organizational Learning for Venture Growth?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-15, July.
    12. M. M. Sulphey, 2019. "Could the Adoption of Organizational Ambidexterity Have Changed the History of Nokia?," South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, , vol. 8(2), pages 167-181, August.
    13. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    14. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann & Volker H. Hoffmann, 2019. "Hybrid Ambidexterity: How the Environment Shapes Incumbents’ Use of Structural and Contextual Approaches," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1319-1348, November.
    15. Manuel Guisado-González & Jennifer González-Blanco & José Luis Coca-Pérez, 2019. "Exploration, exploitation, and firm age in alliance portfolios," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(4), pages 387-406, December.
    16. Danny Soetanto & Sarah L. Jack, 2018. "Slack resources, exploratory and exploitative innovation and the performance of small technology-based firms at incubators," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1213-1231, October.
    17. Choo Yeon Kim & Myung Sub Lim & Jae Wook Yoo, 2019. "Ambidexterity in External Knowledge Search Strategies and Innovation Performance: Mediating Role of Balanced Innovation and Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-23, September.
    18. Michael Yao-Ping Peng & Zhaohua Zhang & Hsin-Yi Yen & Shu-Mi Yang, 2019. "Dynamic Capabilities and Firm Performance in the High-Tech Industry: Quadratic and Moderating Effects under Differing Ambidexterity Levels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-15, September.
    19. Jimmi Normann Kristiansen & Frank Gertsen, 2015. "Is Radical Innovation Management Misunderstood? Problematising The Radical Innovation Discipline," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(06), pages 1-23, December.
    20. Schnellbaecher, Benedikt & Diefenbach, Ulf & Millemann, Jan, 2015. "Putting the Individual in Ambidexterity – Identifying Activities to Achieve Organisational Ambidexterity and Long-Term Survival," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2015), Kotor, Montengero, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Kotor, Montengero, 10-11 September 2015, pages 57-63, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    3 3 T Incubation; innovation; startup; morocco; Incubation;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03520325. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.