To return to the NORSI 2020 Conference page click here.
NORSI 2020 Abstracts & Preliminary Schedule Overview
All events and meetings are held at Clarion Energy Hotel Stavanger unless otherwise noted.
Please see below all abstracts in order of presentation times. Presentation times are subjects to change.
PRELIMINARY PROGRAM (Updated January 25th)
|DAY 0: SUNDAY, 26 JANUARY 2020|
NORSI MANAGEMENT SESSION
Clarion Energy Hotel, Stavanger, room: Confidence
16:00 – 17:00| NORSI Management Meeting
17:00 – 18:30 | NORSI Board Of Directors Meeting
19:00| NORSI Dinner – Board of Directors and all conference participants that have arrived (at the hotel restaurant).
|DAY 1: MONDAY, 27 JANUARY 2020|
Clarion Energy Hotel, Stavanger
OPENING SESSION Day 1
09:30 – 10:00 | Registration, Coffee/Tea
10:00 – 10:10 | Welcome, Magnus Gulbrandsen, NORSI Chairman and UiO-TIK
10:10 – 10:25 | Greeting from Research Council, Philip Lorentzen, Research Council of Norway
10:25 – 11:15 | Key Note:”Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: Science & Policy,” Professor Erik Stam, Head of the Utrecht University School of Economics & Full Professor of Strategy, Organization and Entrepreneurship.
STUDENT PRESENTATIONS – 2 parallell sessions
STUDENT SESSION A – Session Chair: Bjørn T. Asheim, UiS
11:15 – 12:30 | Student presentations (15 min + 15 min feedback) x 2:
11:15 – 11:45 | Future Cargo Base for Transport between NW Europe and NE Asia via the Northern Sea Route, Alina Kovalenko, NORD and Björn Gunnarsson, NORD
Senior Opponent: Bram Timmermans, NHH; Junior Opponent: Eili Skrivervik, UiO-TIK
Regular year-round transit shipping via the Northern Sea Route (NSR) between NW Europe and NE Asia requires different physical infrastructure and support services than the current seasonal operations which take place in largely ice-free Arctic waters during the late summer and early autumn. Due to the potential large financial losses in case of wrong decisions in planning new Arctic transportation infrastructure (e.g., fleet of high ice-class vessels, transhipment hubs and other port infrastructure, railways, roadways, inland river transport, etc.) much attention needs to be paid to forecasting future cargo flow and possible future sustainable cargo base for transport via the NSR. Such an assessment of cargo potential is a prerequisite before drawing any conclusions about future transport and logistics infrastructure along the NSR as well as the preferred system of operation. Despite several publications dealing with the economic viability on NSR transit shipping, detailed assessment on the cargo potential is still lacking. To address this knowledge gap, the Centre for High North Logistics at Nord University Business School (Bodø, Norway) is currently developing a research project to identify the types of cargo and cargo volumes that could be transported on a sustainable basis via the NSR between markets in NE Asia and NW Europe by 2030. The research will evaluate current trade figures (import and export) between the two markets and assess trade and market conditions. We will present statistical analysis on Europe-Asia trade characteristics and preliminary results on possible future market potential and cargo base for NSR international transit shipping.
11:45 – 12:15 | Employees’ psychological capital and innovative behavior in higher education, Barbara Rebecca M. Lappalainen, INN
Senior Opponent: Bram Timmermans, NHH; Junior Opponent: Jonathan Muringani, UiS
|Purpose: The aim of this study is to examine the role of psychological capital (PsyCap) in higher education sector. Specifically, the aim of this paper is threefold. First, this study explores the effect of psychological empowerment (PsyEmp) and the two organizational culture factors; clan and market, on psychological capital. Second, the study also examines the relationship between psychological empowerment, psychological capital and individual innovative behavior (IIB). Third, this paper examines the mediating role of PsyCap on IIB and PsyEmp.|
Methodology: Employing a quantitative method in Norway universities, a conceptual model was developed and tested on 250 employees. Partial least square structural equation modeling was used to analysis the data.
Findings: The analysis shows that PsyCap and PsyEmp, both have a direct and positive relationship to IIB. The results also revealed that PsyEmp, clan culture and market culture, were all positively and significantly linked to PsyCap. Also, the relationship between IIB and PsyEmp is mediated by PsyCap.
Originality: This study extends our knowledge of PsyCap in the context of higher education sector. In general, the findings indicates that PsyCap as a state, can lead to an increased level of IIB, and a stronger obligation to change. For managers, the study highlights the importance of investing in and managing employees PsyCap. In addition, although perceived PsyEmp at work can strengthen the level of IIB among employees, employee PsyCap can perhaps be much more influential. Further, the study contributes new knowledge regarding the symbiotic nature of various organizational culture types and the benefits of having both a clan culture and a market culture in enhancing organizational capabilities.
STUDENT SESSION B – Session Chair: Marte C. W Solheim, UiS
11:15 – 12:30 | Student presentations (15 min + 15 min feedback) x 2:
11:15 – 11:45 | Navigating institutional barriers: the case of small exporting firms from a developing economy, Sudip Kranti Tiwari, NORD
Senior Opponent: Bisrat Misganaw, NEOMA; Junior Opponent: Artur Santoalha, UiO-TIK
By drawing on the literature of international entrepreneurship and institutional-based view, this study has twofold purposes: first to explore the major institutional barriers encountered by developing economy small exporting firms (DSEFs, henceforth), and second to shed lights on the strategies that could help to navigate such barriers. Relying on sixteen information-rich case firms, this study reveals five major institutional barriers faced by DSEFs.To navigate the institutional barriers and facilitate the growth of DSEFs, the findings suggest the importance of family ties, experiential learning, and institutional entrepreneurs. As such, three-fold theoretical contributions: to the institutional-based view, international entrepreneurship, and institutional entrepreneurship are discussed.
11:45 – 12:15 |Regional Economic Development and Smart Specialization: the role of technological diversification and relatedness on regional economic growth, Artur Santoalha, UiO-TIK
Senior Opponent: Marte C. W. Solheim, UiS; Junior Opponent: Beniamino Callegari, Kristiania University College
This paper argues that the core concept behind the idea of Smart Specialization shares many common aspects with the Schumpeterian Evolutionary Economics perspective. One of these dimensions is the idea that the structural evolution of economies should link their present and future strengths. For better understanding of the link between Smart Specialization and regional development, this article examines one little-explored explanatory factor of regional economic growth: technological diversification. Moreover, the article also tests the importance of technological relatedness as a moderator of the relationship between regional technological diversification and growth for different European regions. To do so, the article uses the OECD REGPAT data on applications for patents to construct indicators on technological diversification and technological relatedness for 216 European regions over the period 2000–2013. While diversification seems to hamper short-run economic growth, especially in less developed regions, relatedness mitigates this effect: as regions diversify into new technologies that are more closely related to the technologies that already exist in the region, diversification may boost short-run economic growth, particularly in more developed European regions.
12:15 – 13:15 | Lunch (in breakfast/lunch area)
ALUMNI PRESENTATIONS – move to 1 session
13:15 – 14:00| Key Note: Marte C. W. Solheim, UiS – Research Dissemination
14:00 – 14:20 |Status NORSI Research Collaborations, Beniamino Callegari, Kristiania University College
14:20 – 14:30 | Coffee Break
STUDENT PRESENTATIONS – 2 parallell sessions
STUDENT SESSION C – Session Chair: Taran Thune, UiO-TIK
14:30– 16:45 | Student Presentations (15 min + 15 min feedback) x 4:
14:30 – 15:00 | Experimentation and practices in transitions: Lessons from a car-sharing pilot project showing tensions between implementing a new practice and re-configuring an existing socio-technical system, Elisabeth Marie Cassidy Svennevik, UIO-TIK
Senior Opponent: Arne Isaksen, UiA (TBC); Junior Opponent: Fanny Hermundsdottir, NTNU
Socio-technical sustainability experiments are about a deliberate testing phase of new sustainable technologies or practices. Literature on experimentations concerns testing how an innovation is used in a current socio-technical system, highlighting how existing skills and social structures are involved in handling new technologies. Social practice theory also suggests that skills play a central role in practices. This theory states that practices are robust, consisting of a co-evolution of already existing elements. This article investigates the role of practices in the shift from experimentation to implementation, with an empirical study of a pilot project for a new car-sharing service in Oslo, Norway. The data collection consists of observations and interviews with participants. The findings highlight how already existing skills are re-organized in the testing phase of the new practice. Experimentation is discussed, arguing that there is a blind spot in the experimentation of not taking into account the decline other existing practices. Due to the determined period and proportion of the pilot projects, the implementation focuses mostly on continuing the new practices, and not on phasing out current practices. This has particular importance in a transition to sustainable mobility, where new transportation alternatives involve going away from existing modes of mobility. This reveals tensions as to if the objective of the experimentation is to re-configure an existing socio-technical system or to implement a new technology or practice. Future research on experimentation needs to take in aspects of phasing out in addition to the implementation of a new practice in the existing socio-technical system.
15:00 – 15:30 | Circular business models using digital innovations: the case of the Norwegian fashion industry, Pru Huynh, NORD
Senior Opponent: Bjørn Terje Asheim, UiS; Junior Opponent: Elisabeth Marie Cassidy Svennevik, TIK-UiO
The concept of the circular economy (CE) has recently received much interest from both practitioners and researchers. Digital innovations and circular business models are the two most significant factors in the transition of firms towards CE. Nevertheless, the CE literature offers scarce knowledge on the interplay between these two enablers and the occurrence of barriers during the transition to CE. This study uses qualitative case studies to investigate the fashion industry, which has long been known for its extreme problems with waste and pollution. The following research questions are explored: (1) What are the circular business models in the fashion industry? (2) How do digital innovations enable these circular business models? (3) What are barriers in the CE transition process? A framework of ReSOLVE actions is combined with the most important digital technologies (the Internet of Things, cyber-physical systems, big data, online platforms, 3D printing, blockchain). The findings indicate the crucial role of different digital technologies in five out of the six circular business model actions in the fashion CE, including “Share”, “Optimize”, “Loop”, “Virtualize”, “Exchange”, that aim to reduce new demand and waste. In this CE transition process, the complexity of barriers from both the supply and demand side might require not only a single policy instrument but a mix of policies. Changes in production patterns may lead to changes in consumption patterns. Therefore, consumer-oriented policies with both soft (consumer education programs) and tough (direct tax on consumption) instruments could be critical for increasing market acceptance.
15:30 – 16:00 | Practices in sustainability transitions: review, reflections, and research directions, Elisabeth Marie Cassidy Svennevik, UIO-TIK
Senior Opponent: Gry A. Alsos, Nord uni ; Junior Opponent: Pru Huynh, NORD
The role of users in transitions is receiving increased attention. Users are suggested to contribute beyond a consumer position to system change towards sustainability. Concepts concerning practices, in particular originating from practice theory, is proposed useful to handle these additional aspects of users. This article presents a review of research on practices in transitions. The findings show a wide-ranging use of the practice term, reaching from research on agent-based modeling and sustainable consumption, to experimentation and systems of practices. Reflecting on this, I show how these studies are not limited to zooming in on practices to study micro-processes, and not restricted to the dilemma of division between micro and macro level of analysis. Practices are in different ways used to study stability and change. Through a synthesis of this, I discuss how these studies include different assumptions and conceptualizations through processes of experimentation, implementation, upscaling and diffusion. This reveals controversies with original practice theory literature on how practices are robust constellations. I suggest that future research directions handle these tensions by elaborating on the assumptions, as well as taking in to account new concepts concerning users such as prosumer and intermediating roles. In particular, collaborative consumption and circular economy concepts call for a new understanding of the role of practices in transitions.
16:00 – 16:30 | Sustainability innovations and competitiveness – a review, Fanny Hermundsdottir, NTNU
Senior Opponent: Taran Thune, UiO-TIK; Junior Opponent: Elisabeth Marie Cassidy Svennevik, UiO-TIK
Resource use and emissions due to population and economic growth is putting increased pressure on the environment. Mounting scientific evidence of effects and likely unwanted social and environmental consequences increases the external pressure on firms to react to these challenges and deal with issues related to climate change, and social and environmental degradation. In addition to environmental pressure to become more sustainable, businesses are facing growing competition in all markets due to globalization and new technologies. This combined pressure have increased the focus on green and sustainable value creation among businesses and led to focus on the question of whether sustainability innovations can solve both these problems – simultaneously increase both sustainability and competitiveness. The relationship between corporate sustainability and business performance have gained interest among scholars, but so far the findings are fragmented. This article reviews the literature on the relationship between sustainability innovations and competitiveness in firms.
STUDENT SESSION D – Session Chair: Magnus Gulbrandsen, UIO-TIK
14:30 – 16:45 | Student Presentations (15 min + 15 min feedback) x 4:
14:30 – 15:00 | Legitimacy of technology based new ventures – characteristics of the phenomenon in the context of entrepreneurship, Karolina Lesniak, NTNU
Senior Opponent: Erik Stam, Utrecht Uni. ; Junior Opponent: Randi Taxt, HVL
Legitimacy, in other words the perception of surrounding audiences of appropriateness and desirability of a new venture, is conceptualized as a critical resource that contributes to overcoming liability of newness and in turn getting access to other resources. Although the exponential growth
in interest in legitimacy in the context of entrepreneurship in the last two decades, the understanding of what legitimacy is and how it unfolds in this context is still lacking. In order to shed light on those two issues, the study employs an in-depth, longitudinal case study approach, where two
technology based new ventures started by first time, inexperienced entrepreneurs are being followed. Preliminary results suggest “credibility” being the main legitimacy assessment factor next to appropriateness and desirability. Secondly, the study shows importance of personal legitimacy as
an integral part of new venture legitimacy. Finally, the study argues for looking at new venture legitimacy as a concept of continuous and cumulative character.
15:00 – 15:30 |Collaboration in social entrepreneurship: a systematic literature review and avenues for further research, Mikhail Kosmynin, NORD
Senior Opponent: Gry A. Alsos, NORD; Junior Opponent: Frauke Rohden, UiO-TIK
Collaboration is increasingly perceived by scholars as a crucial element of social entrepreneurship. However, this stream of knowledge is scattered in the literature. This article provides a systematic literature review that synthesizes and evaluates recent studies in order to examine the current and future research directions of collaboration in social entrepreneurship. The results indicate that collaboration is a vibrant and rapidly growing stream of the broader social entrepreneurship domain and that it is methodologically and topically diverse. Future research directions are also suggested based on the identified research gaps and analysis of the literature review.
15:30 – 16:00 |Barriers and drivers of digital transformation in public sector: How cross-sectional and cross functional collaboration in digital transformation challenge the norms of how public institutions operate, Linn Slettum Bjerke, NTNU
Senior Opponent: Magnus Gulbrandsen, UiO-TIK; Junior Opponent: Mikhail Kosmynin, NORD
Research findings suggest that the economic and cognitive path dependencies brought about by legacy systems, global operations, work silos and organizational politics in institutions, make managers more reluctant to change their physical models to digital models in institutions (Weill & Woerner, 2013). It is therefore important to understand why organizations are reluctant to change and how organizations can manage the transitions. This paper uses interpretative viability and actor-network theory to explain the main barriers and drivers for succeeding with digital transformation in public institutions. A case study of the Norwegian Court Administration was executed during the period of transformation. 8 members of the management group and 3 members of the project management group was interviewed. The findings in the case study suggest that barriers can be overcome by engaging cross-functional and cross-institutional actors systematically in active conversations, through the transformation process, at all levels. The findings imply that institutions engaging in digitalization must pay more attention to how these conversations can be facilitated. Further research should look into how interpretative viability is related to power structures in the institutions and how this affects the transformation process.
EVENING SESSION DAY 1: At Norwegian Petroleum Museum
17:15: Departure to Norwegian Petroleum Museum (Bus by lobby) Return bus at 22:15 outside museeum.
At Norwegian Petroleum Museum, in room Yggdrasil
LECTURES/RESEARCH PANEL – Organized by RUNIN – Regional Innovation (More information about panel TBA)
17:45 – 19:15 | Panel discussion: The oil industry and the region
The panel discussion will examine how the oil industry has shaped the region, how the region has shaped the oil industry, and discuss the future of the oil industry in Rogaland.
17:45 Panel discussion: The oil industry and the region
17:45 Bjørn Vidar Lerøen, former Equinor special advisor
18:00 Njål Gjedrem, former Equinor organisation director
18:15 Merete Vadla Madland, Pro-rector for Research, University of Stavanger
18:30 Oluf Langhelle, Professor, University of Stavanger
18:45 Panel discussion. Moderator: Hilde Øvrebekk, Stavanger Aftenblad
DINNER & SOCIAL
19:15 | Dinner at Bølgen & Moi Restaurant at Norwegian Petroleum Museum – Everyone welcome!
22:00 | Return bus – Departure from Norwegian Petroleum Museum to Clarion Energy Hotel
If you are registered for the conference you are automatically registered for the tapas dinner. Please let Birte know if you are not atternding dinner ASAP.
|DAY 2: TUESDAY, 28 JANUARY 2020|
At Clarion Energy Hotel, Stavanger
OPENING SESSION Day 2
09:00 – 9:30 | Registration and Coffee/Tea
09:30 – 10:00 | NORSI and the way forward, Roger Sørheim, NORSI Program Director and NTNU
10: 00 – 10:50 | Key Note: “Entrepreneurship Education and Firm Creation,” Associate Professor Shiri Breznitz, Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at University of Toronto
10:50 – 11:00 | Coffee Break
STUDENT PRESENTATIONS – 2 parallell sessions
SESSION D – Session Chair: Beniamino Callegari, Kristiania University College
11:00 – 13:00 | Student Presentations (15 min + 15 min feedback) x 4:
11:00 – 11:30 | Made for each other: contrast and performance of category hybrids, Sverre Ubisch, BI and Pengfei Wang
Senior Opponent: Magnus Gulbrandsen, UiO-TIK; and Junior Opponent: Beniamino Callegari, Kristiania University College
While research suggests that category schemas discourage hybridization, hybridization is a common production practice in many contexts (e.g., films and innovations). For many producers in those contexts, the question is not about whether to span their primary categories, but about what categories to combine together. In this study, we shift attention from the degree of category spanning to the patterns through which categories are hybridized. More specifically, we divide category hybrids into four distinct types according to the contrast of their primary and secondary categories: crisp-crisp, crisp-fuzzy, fuzzy-fuzzy, and fuzzy-crisp. Based on that, we theorize the performance consequences of different hybrids. Testing our theories in two distinct settings, we find both consistent and divergent results. In a post-hoc analysis, we also investigate the likelihood that each of the different types of hybrids is produced.
11:30 – 12:00 |New venture team learning: situated learning in venture creation, Iselin K. Mauseth Steira, NORD; Marianne T. Steinmo, NORD; Gry A. Alsos, NORD and Andrew C. Corbett, Babson College, USA
Senior Opponent: Bisrat Misganaw, NEOMA; Junior Opponent: Karolina Lesniak, NTNU
This paper takes a situated learning approach to examine the role of learning in the venture creation process by new venture teams. More concrete, we seek to examine how nascent new venture teams learn to develop their venture by taking part of an venturing community of practice and how learning can change over time. The aim of this paper is to help increase the understanding of the role of social interactions and communities of practice for learning by new venture teams seeking to start new ventures. Hence, our research question is as follows: How do new venture teams learn in the process of creating new ventures by taking part of a venturing community? Drawing on longitudinal case studies of five new venture teams, we points to different ways in with the new venture teams learn in the process of creating new ventures. We identify three dominant ways of learning, which all can occur simultaneously, but that one way is more prominent at some stages of the venture creation process than others.
12:00 – 12:30 | Demanding impact – How activist groups refer to science on the topic of climate change, Frauke Rohden, UiO-TIK
Senior Opponent: Nina Hjervikrem, NORCE; Junior Opponent: Emma Lind, NORCE
Two activist groups protesting climate change originated in Europe in 2018: “Fridays for Future” and “Extinction rebellion”. The groups work differently and have different membership structures, but both make extensive use of social media, and both refer to science as a basis for their political demands, arguing that “the science is clear” or that politicians should “listen to the scientists”. This study explores the online presence of the two organizations to examine how they refer to science in more detail, including sources referred to and types of communication shared on social media.
12:30 – 13:00 | Universities – a global pipeline actor or simply a part of the local buzz? Randi Elisabeth Taxt, Public Sector PhD candidate at the Department of Geography, UiB, The Mohncentre for Innovation, HVL and at Vestlandets Innovasjonsselskap (VIS)
Senior Opponent: Shiri Breznitz, Uni. of Totonto ; Junior Opponent: Haakon Thue Lie, NTNU/Leogriff
Creating and maintaining various forms of industry-science relations is acknowledged to positively affect innovation performance in a region, especially in terms of knowledge transfer. Informal networks and the transfer of tacit knowledge, also referred to as the “local buzz”, are considered highly important in this context. However, there is also a general agreement that not only the circulation of local knowledge fuels innovation; interactions with distant providers of knowledge are also acknowledged to play a central role. Successful clusters are therefore also depended on new knowledge, technologies and markets from external sources, in some contexts referred to as “global pipelines”. Universities are widely cited to play an important role as a source of new knowledge, and they constitute a prominent part of the overall national and regional innovation systems.
Recently, some critical aspects around the concept is raised. The question about how innovation in regions and clusters results from the combination of the “local buzz” and the “global pipelines” has been is asked from different authors. In addition, a lack of empirical insights into how the various actors get access to knowledge at different spatial scales is identified. Finally, the role of universities, both as a local actor and a source of new knowledge, needs to be further investigated with the help of empirical data.
The intention with this study is to discuss the mixed role of universities acting as a both a source of “global pipelines” and a “buzzing” local actor within a region. We will discuss this mixed role in the light of the conceptual framework of the Local Buzz and Global Pipeline as outlined from Bathelt, Malmberg and Maskell in 2004 in combination with the activity profiling methodology described as the Research Compass by Laredo and Mustard in 2000. In addition, the Regional Innovation System (RIS) form an interesting analytical framework as the innovation systems for regions are embedded within collaborative networks and regional economy. We will elucidate this discussion and draw some conclusions supported by empirical data from a vibrant cluster of marine biology.
The Bergen Region has a longstanding tradition in the harvesting of seafood, as well as a dominant position on the global seafood market for fishing, production, processing and sale. The region encompasses all actors in the value chain from production of fry and fish, through processing and export, as well as equipment suppliers and R&D institutions.. In this respect, the Bergen region constitutes a vital marine innovation system. Within the framework of the Horizon2020 project EMBRIC (European Marine Biotechnology Research Infrastructure Cluster), we have developed a typology of economic linkages to capture the types of relationships between research performing organisations and actors within the regional innovation systems. This allows us to profile both the public and private linkages of research institutions.
In my presentation I will share the findings from the profiling of the
University of Bergen and continue the discussion on the mixed role of
universities within regional innovation systems. Finally, some lines for
further studies will be indicated.
SESSION E – Session Chair: Roger Sørheim, NTNU
11:00 – 13:00 | Student Presentations (15 min + 15 min feedback) x 4:
11:00 – 11:30 |Monopoly spotting: The management of openness in research collaborations between universities and industry, Haakon Thue Lie *a, b, e , Knut Jørgen Egelie a, b, d, Christoph Grimpe c, Roger Sørheima
aNorwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), bCenter for Intellectual Property (CIP), cCopenhagen Business School (CBS), d NTNU TTO AS, e Leogriff AS
Senior Opponent: Åsa Lindholm Dahlstrand, CIRCLE, Lund uni. ; Junior Opponent: Mari Liavaag Holm, NTNU and Kjersti Kjos Longva, NTNU
Industry and universities engage in collaborative research often without a clear understanding of how open the research results should be. The contractual terms of the research project document agreed on openness. The terms also decide if access through licensing will be exclusive to a few, or available for the many in open innovation. However, collaborative research agreements are complicated with entangled terms. We applied a novel method for analysing such agreements on 484 publicly sponsored projects in different industries. Placing the projects in the method’s two-by-two matrix, we found that around 20 per cent of the projects, across all industries, have agreements that allow knowledge monopolies to form. We find a positive association between the openness of the research results and the projects that are climate and transport-related. For organisations, research managers and policymakers, the method can be used on a single project or a portfolio of collaborative projects to better align with research policy.
11:30 – 12:00 |Defending the Homeland: How Russia’s Yandex Competes with Google, Alina Kontareva, UiO-TIK
Senior Opponent: Roger Sørheim, NTNU; and Junior Opponent: Christopher Sabel, BI
Benefiting from enormous scale, network effects, and winner-take-all markets, the global platform giants have dominant positions in many countries. In this paper, I explore how Yandex, the Russian search engine has been able to compete with Google successfully enough to build significant market share in its open home market. What strategies for expansion do platform firms choose when limited to their national markets in the face of powerful international competitors? This paper focuses on the Internet search market, where very few national search engines are able to compete with Google. I analyze the evolution of the Yandex ecosystem to understand how the Russian Internet company became the local market leader, without significant government support, and despite facing significant competition from the world leader, Google. My multi-modal study draws upon a comprehensive database of Yandex press releases, interviews, business reports, and media publications.
12:00 – 12:30 |From genealogy to patchwork family: Multiple parent imprints and spinoff survival, Christopher Sabel, BI
Senior Opponent: Roger Sørheim, NTNU; and Junior Opponent: Alina Kontareva, UiO-TIK
Reasons for the survival of newly founded organizations have been a key interest among scholars of various disciplines. Spinoffs from established organizations have received considerable attention, as they obtain parent imprints of experience and routines, which shape their trajectories at birth and lead to increased survival and performance. Previous studies depict the parent-spinoff genealogy as dyadic relationship. However, the parent-progeny relation is often not only between a single parent and its spawn. Co-founders from different organizations imprint routines and experience from more than one parent organization into their newly founded organizations. Using Norwegian census data, the study tracks the population of spinoffs across industries in Norway from 2004-2016 and examines the effects of founders’ functional- and parent organization diversity. Relying on the behavioral theory of the firm, the study finds positive evidence that an interaction of functional overlap and parent firm divergence affects survival negatively. The study hypothesizes that procedural conflict between founders who rely on local search routines is the main mechanism behind this effect. The main theoretical contribution of this paper is the clarification of multiple parent imprints’ effects on spinoff survival and its contingency on the function- and organization-specific diversity of the founding team. Given the importance of co-founder choice, a basis to assess tradeoffs in founding with partners form multiple organizations is of theoretical and managerial relevance.
12:30 – 13:00 |Moving the castle in the air closer to the ground
A study of nascent entrepreneurs’ interaction with ecosystem actors and its influence on entrepreneurial learning, Mari Liavaag Holm, NTNU and Kjersti Kjos Longva, NTNU
Senior Opponent: Roger Sørheim, NTNU; and Junior Opponent, Iselin K. Mauseth Steira
The role of entrepreneurship as an engine for economic growth has increasingly been recognized in the recent decades. Accordingly, research on entrepreneurial learning has gained momentum as the research community strive to understand more about the entrepreneurial process. Meanwhile, research on entrepreneurial ecosystems have aspired to detect the mechanisms for facilitating and advancing entrepreneurial action. Frontiers of this field point out the knowledge dimension of entrepreneurial ecosystems as an important focus for future research. Thus, understanding the learning and flow of knowledge in the entrepreneurial context beyond single level inquiry seems crucial in advancing our understanding of entrepreneurship. Through interviews with participants in an entrepreneurship grant competition, this study seeks to explore how interaction with ecosystem actors influence entrepreneurial learning. We identify mechanisms of ecosystem influence on entrepreneurial learning, how they impact entrepreneurial projects, and explain the dynamics behind this impact. Hence, the paper makes theoretical contributions, but also has implications for policy makers who aim to support entrepreneurial learning among nascent entrepreneurs.
13:00 – 13:30 | Lunch (in breakfast/lunch area)
STUDENT PRESENTATIONS – 2 parallel sessions
SESSION F – Session Chair: Arne Isaksen, UiA
13:30 – 15:00 | Student Presentations (15 min + 15 min feedback) x 3:
13:30 – 14:00 |An empirical study into the impact of individual level variables on employee-driven innovation, Chukwuemeka Echebiri, INN
Senior Opponent: Silje Haus-Reve, NORCE; and Junior Opponent: Kristin Wulff, NTNU
The purpose of this paper is to develop and empirically test a set of hypotheses linking individual level factors (need for autonomy, self-leadership and perceived job autonomy) to employee-driven innovation. Based on a survey data of 315 employees in the banking sector, collected in two waves where the variables were separated in time. The hypothesized model was analysed using structural equation model on Stata. It was found that the need for autonomy had an indirect association with employee-driven innovation through self-leadership. Additionally, the findings show that self-leadership had a positive impact on employee-driven innovation at the various stages in the process. The findings in this paper are important because they identify key individual level antecedents of employee-driven innovation.
14:00 – 14:30 |Boundary judgement in a software development project: a longitudinal case study, Kristin Wulff, NTNU
Senior Opponent: Gry Alsos, NORD (not present but will provide comments); and Junior Opponent: Chukwuemeka Echebiri, INN
The purpose of this work is to study the possibilities and ways of evaluating Critical Systemic Thinking (CST) in a dynamic setting such as software development is. CST is a way of looking at systems as not only interpretive – but also study the power and actions of the different agents in the system.
The research design is Action Research (AR) and the methods used are second-person inquiry, observations and focus group interviews.
The findings are preliminary as they are based on tender documents. It is assumed that to enable CST in a dynamic setting the whole team must be involved in the systemic thinking.
This research implications are suggested ways of conducting boundary judgement in a high velocity setting. It looks into whether one can abide to the fundamental principles of boundary judgement and still run a dynamic software project.
Practical implications are that the four action arenas of boundary judgement assist the team in innovating new solutions to increase sustainable mobility.
The value of the research is a demonstration on how boundary judgement can be incorporated into the team workings instead of being something an external expert contributes to the team.
14:30 – 15:00 |FACT in Norway – An innovative and integrated service
model for people with severe mental illness and concurrent
substance abuse disorder? (INNOFACT), Tor Helge Tjelta, INN
Senior Opponent: Bjørn Erik Mørk, BI (not present, will provide comments); Olga Michailova, NMBU
FACT – Flexible Assertive Community Treatment is a Dutch service model for people with severe mental illness (SMI) and often concurrent substance abuse disorder (SUD). Cooperation between services is a big challenge, and the need for more knowledge on integrated, coordinated and holistic
services should be addressed. This project aims to meet this need. This knowledge gap has been underlined in various governmental and research documents, such as “HelseOmsorg21” (HOD, 2014) and “Research on coordinated services to persons with compound needs”1 (Forskningsrådet, 2019). The proposed research will encourage the implementation of models for collaboration between primary health care & welfare services and specialist health care services.
SESSION G – Session Chair: Åsa Lindholm Dahlstrand, CIRCLE, Lund uni.
13:30 – 15:00 | Student Presentations (15 min + 15 min feedback) x 3:
13:30 – 14:00 |Innovation on oil and gas platforms:
The case of Johan Sverdrup, Eili Skrivervik, UiO-Tik
Senior Opponents: Åsa Lindholm Dahlstrand, CIRCLE, Lund uni.; Junior Opponents: Alina Kovalenko, Nord
As megaproject go the oil and gas (OG) platform Johan Sverdrup is a giant. Megaprojects are categorized as large-scale projects spanning across years, costing US$1bn or more. The number of megaprojects is growing worldwide across businesses and sectors, including in OG. Johan Sverdrup is chosen as a case study to demonstrate what innovation looks like in an
ongoing OG project on the Norwegian continental shelf (NCS) today. It is chosen for its grand scale and for its impact on the Norwegian economy and the OG industry: Sverdrup is Norway’s largest industrial project, and one of the most significant discoveries ever made on the NCS. This research studies the existing and planned innovation on the Sverdrup: it explores where in the project development the innovations are produced and look into the collaborations and actors that generate the innovations. It will do this drawing on innovation literature. The paper will use megaproject literature and CoPS as a theoretical framework.
14:00 – 14:30 |Resilience after anchor firm’s closure: the role of Place Based Leadership, local resources and social capital in transformation of Entrepreneurial Ecosystem, Janna Alvedalen, CIRCLE, Lund uni.
Senior Opponent: Bjørn Terje Asheim, UiS; Junior Opponent: Tuukka Mäkitie, UiO-TIK
What factors can explain ability for resilience and transformation of an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem (EE) when a large multinational anchor firm closes down its operation in a region? Despite many examples of negative effects of large firm closures in the literature on regional development, I analyze and explain the determinants of resilience for the surprisingly positive effects that occurred in the EE for Life Sciences (LS) when local Research and Development activities of a large multinational pharmaceutical corporation closed down in Lund – a university city in Sweden with strong technological history, letting hundreds of skilled workers go. Based on qualitative data, I show how the resources left behind were transformed into a dynamic center for Life Sciences with new high-tech firms suggesting lasting positive effects on the cluster and region’s development. The aim of the study is to develop EE theory by providing a framework in order to understand crisis situations and subsequent transformation of EE, for which I find three main factors of influence. (i) the role of Entrepreneurial Place Based Leadership (EPL) is seen in vision-driven actions and long term commitment of the key public and private, regional and local actors, (ii) the local resources (released and existing) such as human, financial and physical resources have been crucial for effective PL and diffusion of the big pharma knowledge in the EE, (iii) access to the social capital of the networks through utilization of former employees’ old weak ties helped leverage the local resources to ensure the new firms’ survival and growth.
14:30 – 15:00 |Trust, quality of government and economic growth in European regions, Jonathan Muringani 1; Fitjar, Rune Dahl1; and Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés1,2; 1 University of Stavanger, Business School and 2London School of Economics
Senior Opponent: ‘Magnus Gulbrandsen, UiO-TIK; Junior Opponent: Janna Alvedalen, CIRCLE, Lund uni.
Empirical studies shows that there are economic differences between regions with high and low trust societies. Our point of departure is that this the majority of these studies have assumed trust uni-dimensional and focused on generalised trust, neglecting particularised and political trust. Only a few studies have examined some but not all three types of trust nor the institutional conditions under which they matter for economic growth. Accordingly, we attempt to address this using fixed effects panel data analysis of 208 regions in the European Union (EU). Our findings consistent with related studies on productivity show that political trust is a better predictor of economic growth than the other two types of trust and quality of government. Furthermore, we extent to show that the quality of government matters and its interaction with political trust is not a complementary but rather a substitute effect. The policy implications is that interventions aimed at improving economic growth could consider any one of the two However, soft institutions such as trust are unlikely to be a perfect substitute for formal institutions such as quality of government.
CLOSING SESSION – move to main room
15:00 – 15:30 | Summary/Ending remarks & Adjourn, Roger Sørheim, NTNU, NORSI Program Director
WORKSHOP SESSION – TUESDAY AFTERNOON
Session Chair: Beniamino Callegari, Kristiana University College
16:00 – 18:00 | NORSI Research Collaborations & Research Opportunity
|DAY 3: WEDNESDAY, 29 JANUARY 2020|
At University of Stavanger
WORKSHOP SESSION CONTINIOUS
Session Chair: Beniamino Callegari, Kristiana University College
09:30 – 12:00 | NORSI Research Collaborations & Research Opportunit
12:30 | GEOINNO2020 conference starts