Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hybrid organizations and the logics of entrepreneurial ecosystems

  • Published:
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Growing evidence suggests entrepreneurial ecosystems are a potent engine for economic and community development. Prior research has identified an ecosystem’s culture as serving a critical role in its creation and functioning. However, it is not clear how the cultural forces in entrepreneurial ecosystems develop and are shaped by individuals, organizational actors, and ecosystem-level institutions. Drawing from institutional theory and theories of multiple logic organizations (i.e., hybrids), this paper combines entrepreneurship and management research to argue that entrepreneurial ecosystems are influenced by two dominant institutional logics: entrepreneurial-market and community. By combining both logics, hybrid support organizations, such as incubators, accelerators, and small business development centers, play a unique role in entrepreneurial ecosystems by exposing participants to the two guiding logics. Furthermore, it is argued that intra-ecosystem variation among hybrid support organizations in the dominance of entrepreneurial-market and community logics, will result in a diversity of entrepreneurship within an ecosystem. This theorizing contributes to the understanding of entrepreneurial ecosystems by shedding light on the role institutional logics and hybrid support organizations play in ecosystem formation, structuring, and function and by explaining the genesis of the cultural values that guide ecosystem participants.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Even though all entrepreneurs will not directly interact with support organizations, the influence of support organizations’ logics are likely to diffuse among a population of entrepreneurs, influencing ventures not directly linked to support organizations (e.g., through isomorphism and homophily pressures among ventures; cf. Guler et al. 2002).

References

  • Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as structure an actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, 43, 39–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D.B., Belitski, M. (2017) Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: establishing the framework conditions. The Journal of Technology Transfer, forthcoming.

  • Audretsch, D. B., Keilbach, M. C., & Lehmann, E. E. (2006). Entrepreneurship and economic growth. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., Obschonka, M., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2017). A new perspective on entrepreneurial regions: linking cultural identity with latent and manifest entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 48, 681–697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2014). Entrepreneurial innovation: the importance of context. Research Policy, 43, 1097–1108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bahrami, H., & Evans, S. (1995). Flexible re-cycling and high-technology entrepreneurship. California Management Review, 37, 62–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: the case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 1419–1440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing–insights from the study of social enterprises. The Academy of Management Annals, 8, 397–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., Sengul, M., Pache, A.-C., & Model, J. (2015). Harnessing productive tensions in hybrid organizations: the case of work integration social enterprises. Academy of Management Journal, 58, 1658–1685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. (2014). Multiple institutional logics in organizations: explaining their varied nature and implications. Academy of Management Review, 39, 364–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, C. B., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2011). Rational heuristics: the ‘simple rules’ that strategists learn from process experience. Strategic Management Journal, 32, 1437–1464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breznitz, D., & Taylor, M. (2014). The communal roots of entrepreneurial–technological growth–social fragmentation and stagnation: reflection on atlanta's technology cluster. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 26, 375–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., Provance, M., & Grigoroudis, E. (2016). Entrepreneurship ecosystems: an agent-based simulation approach. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41, 631–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casasnovas, G., & Bruno, A. V. (2013). Scaling social ventures: an exploratory study of social incubators and accelerators. Journal of Management for Global Sustainability, 1, 173–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J. J., & Katrishen, F. (1995). The small business development center programme in the USA: a statistical analysis of its impact on economic development. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 7, 143–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, S. (2013). What do accelerators do? Insights from incubators and angels. Innovations, 8, 19–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, J. B., Gerrard, P., Schoch, H., & Lai Hong, C. (2002). An entrepreneurial logic for the new economy. Management Decision, 40, 734–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dempwolf, C. S., Auer, J., & D’Ippolito, M., (2014). Innovation accelerators: defining characteristics among startup assistance organizations. Small Business Administration. www.sba.gov/advocacy. Accessed 15 Feb 2017.

  • Feld, B. (2012). Startup communities: building an entrepreneurial ecosystem in your city. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. P. (2001). The entrepreneurial event revisited: firm formation in a regional context. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 861–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedland R, Alford RR (1991) Bringing society back in: symbols, practices and institutional contradictions. In: DiMaggio PJ (ed) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, pp 1–38.

  • Gorman, G., Hanlon, D., & King, W. (1997). Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship education, enterprise education and education for small business management: a ten-year literature review. International Small Business Journal, 15, 22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: the problem of~ mbeddednessl. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graves, W. (2011). The southern culture of risk capital: the path dependence of entrepreneurial finance. Southeastern Geographer, 51, 49–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5, 317–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greve, A., & Salaff, J. W. (2003). Social networks and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R., Puranam, P., & Tushman, M. (2012). Meta-organization design: rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 571–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guler, I., Guillén, M. F., & Macpherson, J. M. (2002). Global competition, institutions, and the diffusion of organizational practices: the international spread of ISO 9000 quality certificates. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 207–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzman, J., Stern, S. (2016). Nowcasting and placecasting entrepreneurial quality and performance. In: Measuring entrepreneurial businesses: current knowledge and challenges. University of Chicago Press.

  • Hackett, S. M., & Dilts, D. M. (2004). A systematic review of business incubation research. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, 55–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallen, B.L., Bingham, C.B., Cohen, S. (2014). Do accelerators accelerate? A study of venture accelerators as a path to success? In: Academy of Management Proceedings, vol. 1. Academy of Management, p. 12955.

  • Holcomb, T. R., Ireland, R. D., Holmes Jr., R. M., & Hitt, M. A. (2009). Architecture of entrepreneurial learning: exploring the link among heuristics, knowledge, and action. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33, 167–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isenberg, D. J. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, 88, 40–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isenberg, D. J. (2016). Applying the ecosystem metaphor to entrepreneurship: uses and abuses. The Antitrust Bulletin, 61, 564–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansen, S. T., Olsen, T. H., Solstad, E., & Torsteinsen, H. (2015). An insider view of the hybrid organisation: how managers respond to challenges of efficiency, legitimacy and meaning. Journal of Management & Organization, 21, 725–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirzner, I. M. (1979). Perception, opportunity, and profit: studies in the theory of entrepreneurship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konczal, J., Motoyama, Y. (2013). Energizing an ecosystem: brewing 1 million cups. Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation (research paper series), 1–20.

  • Krueger, N. F., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 411–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, N., Linan, F., & Nabi, G. (2013). Cultural values and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 25, 703–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leyden, D. P. (2016). Public-sector entrepreneurship and the creation of a sustainable innovative economy. Small Business Economics, 46, 553–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21, 135–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mack, E., & Mayer, H. (2016). The evolutionary dynamics of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Urban Studies, 53, 2118–2133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mack, E. A., & Rey, S. J. (2014). An econometric approach for evaluating the linkages between broadband and knowledge intensive firms. Telecommunications Policy, 38, 105–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J., Mayer, J., & Lutz, E. (2015). Navigating institutional plurality: organizational governance in hybrid organizations. Organization Studies, 36, 713–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marquis, C., Lounsbury, M., Greenwood, R. (2011). Introduction: community as an institutional order and a type of organizing. In: Communities and organizations. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp ix–xxvii.

  • McKague, K., Wong, J., & Siddiquee, N. (2017). Social franchising as rural entrepreneurial ecosystem development: the case of krishi utsho in bangladesh. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 18, 47–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., Breton-Miller, L., & Lester, R. H. (2011). Family and lone founder ownership and strategic behaviour: social context, identity, and institutional logics. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motoyama, Y., & Watkins, K. (2014). Examining the connections within startup ecosystems: a case study of st. Louis. Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation Research Series on City, Metro, and Regional Entrepreneurship (research paper series), 1–32.

  • Motoyama, Y., Fetsch, E., Jackson, C., & Wiens, J. (2016). Little town, layered ecosystem. Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation Research Series on City, Metro, and Regional Entrepreneurship (research paper series), 1–32.

  • Neck, H. M., Meyer, G. D., Cohen, B., & Corbett, A. C. (2004). An entrepreneurial system view of new venture creation. Journal of Small Business Management, 42, 190–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nylund, P.A., Cohen, B. (2016). Collision density: driving growth in urban entrepreneurial ecosystems. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal pp. 1–20.

  • Ocasio, W., & Thornton, P. H. (1999). Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958-1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 801–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oden, M. (1997). From assembly to innovation. In: Planning Forum, p 14.

  • Pache, A.-C., & Santos, F. (2013). Inside the hybrid organization: selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 972–1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pauwels, C., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Van Hove, J. (2016). Understanding a new generation incubation model: the accelerator. Technovation, 50, 13–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, N., & Tracey, P. (2007). Opportunity recognition, entrepreneurial capabilities and bricolage: connecting institutional theory and entrepreneurship in strategic organization. Strategic Organization, 5, 313–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reay, T., Jaskiewicz, P., & Hinings, C. (2015). How family, business, and community logics shape family firm behavior and “rules of the game” in an organizational field. Family Business Review, 28, 292–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roundy, P. T. (2016). Start-up community narratives: the discursive construction of entrepreneurial ecosystem. Journal of Entrepreneurship, 25, 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roundy, P. T. (2017). “Small town” entrepreneurial ecosystems: implications for developed and emerging economies. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, forthcoming.

  • Roundy, P.T., Bradshaw, M., Brockman, B. (2016). Venturing towards the edge of chaos: a complex adaptive systems approach to entrepreneurial ecosystems. In: United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Conference Proceedings, United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship, p F1.

  • Roundy, P. T., Harrison, D. A., Khavul, S., Perez-Nordtvedt, L., & McGee, J. E. (2017) Entrepreneurial alertness as a pathway to strategic decisions and organizational performance. Strategic Organization, forthcoming.

  • Santos, F. (2012). A positive theory of social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 111, 335–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional advantage: culture and competition in silicon valley and route 128. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle vol 55. New Brunswick: Transaction publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seaton, E. E. (2008). Common knowledge: reflections on narratives in community. Qualitative Research, 8, 293–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skelcher, C., & Smith, S. R. (2015). Theorizing hybridity: institutional logics, complex organizations, and actor identities: the case of nonprofits. Public Administration, 93, 433–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, W. K., Gonin, M., & Besharov, M. L. (2013). Managing social-business tensions: a review and research agenda for social enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23, 407–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spigel, B. (2013). Bourdieuian approaches to the geography of entrepreneurial cultures. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 25, 804–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spigel, B. (2016). Developing and governing entrepreneurial ecosystems: the structure of entrepreneurial support programs in Edinburgh, Scotland. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 7, 141–160.

  • Spigel, B. (2017a). The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41, 49–72.

  • Spigel, B. (2017b). Bourdieu, culture, and the economic geography of practice: entrepreneurial mentorship in Ottawa and Waterloo, Canada. Journal of Economic Geography, 17, 287-310.

  • Spilling, O. R. (1996). The entrepreneurial system: on entrepreneurship in the context of a mega-event. Journal of Business Research, 36, 91–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: a sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23, 1759–1769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stangler, D., Bell-Masterson, J. (2015). Measuring an entrepreneurial ecosystem. Kauffman Foundation Research Series on City, Metro, and Regional Entrepreneurship pp. 1–16.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, T. E., & Sorenson, O. (2005). Social networks and entrepreneurship (pp. 233–252). In: Handbook of entrepreneurship research. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (2008). Institutional logics. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, & R. Suddaby (Eds.), The sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 99–129). London: Sage Publications.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton PH, Ocasio W, Lounsbury M (2012) The institutional logics perspective: a new approach to culture, structure and process. OUP Oxford,

  • Tracey, P., Phillips, N., & Jarvis, O. (2011). Bridging institutional entrepreneurship and the creation of new organizational forms: a multilevel model. Organization Science, 22, 60–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. (1993). The development of an infrastructure for entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 211–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welter, F., Trettin, L., & Neumann, U. (2008). Fostering entrepreneurship in distressed urban neighbourhoods. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 4, 109–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zilber, T. B. (2012). The relevance of institutional theory for the study of organizational culture. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21, 88–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing and Entrepreneurship, College of Business, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, 615 McCallie Avenue, Chattanooga, TN, 37403-2598, USA

    Philip T. Roundy

Authors
  1. Philip T. Roundy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philip T. Roundy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Roundy, P.T. Hybrid organizations and the logics of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Int Entrep Manag J 13, 1221–1237 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0452-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0452-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation