DOCSLIB.ORG

Software Startup Ecosystems Maturity Model, 1–12

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Software Startup Ecosystems Maturity Model, 1–12 Cukier and Kon Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2018) 7:14 Journal of Innovation and https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-018-0091-6 Entrepreneurship RESEARCH Open Access A maturity model for software startup ecosystems Daniel Cukier* and Fabio Kon *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract Department of Computer Science, University of São Paulo, Rua do Resulting from the digital revolution of the last decades, multiple startup hubs Matão, 1010, São Paulo, SP, Brazil flourished across the globe in the past 10 years. Healthy environments for the development of innovative, nascent digital enterprises require a well-balanced variety of agents and supporting processes, which we collectively call a software startup ecosystem. These ecosystems are fundamental for the insertion of countries in the digital economy of the twenty-first century. However, having all the elements that compose such environments in the most advanced and prolific state is difficult and relatively rare. In this paper, we show that startup ecosystems can evolve over time passing through a sequence of maturity level stages. For that, we introduce a maturity model for software startup ecosystems based on systematic qualitative research around a multiple case study we conducted across three ecosystems. The study was carried out over 4 years and included an extensive array of data collection mechanisms such as literature reviews, expert interviews, and observations in three relevant ecosystems (Tel-Aviv, São Paulo, and New York); all collected data were analyzed with techniques based on Grounded Theory, resulting in a conceptual framework of software startup ecosystems. Finally, we developed a maturity model for startup ecosystems, which helps us understand their evolution and dynamics. Moreover, it can serve as a basis for stakeholders in less mature ecosystems to analyze their environment, identify weak spots, and propose policies and practical actions for improving their ecosystems over time. Keywords: Qualitative methods, Software startups, Startup ecosystems, Maturity model, Entrepreneurship, Innovation Background In the last two decades, we observed the rise and maturation of many software startup ecosystems around the world. The technological revolution has driven society evolution, prompted by broader access to the Internet and the popularization of mobile devices; likewise, society’s progress drives technological evolution in a co-embedded evolution phenomenon. The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, a long-term study conducted by a consortium of universities, shows that human capital and social capital co-evolve (Reynolds et al. 2000;Singeretal.2015). Given the hundreds of technological clusters present in different countries, it is difficult to identify each ecosystem’s level of devel- opment. This paper proposes a methodology to measure such maturity with respect to multiple factors, enabling the ability not only to compare different ecosystems, but, more © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Cukier and Kon Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2018) 7:14 Page 2 of 32 importantly, to propose practical actions that can lead to meaningful improvements in existing ecosystems. As Daniel Isenberg argues, “There’s no exact formula for creating an entrepreneurial economy; there are only practical, if imperfect, road maps.” Instead of aiming to imi- tate successful ecosystems, each region should identify and develop its own qualities (Isenberg 2010). Isenberg also proposes a conceptual model for entrepreneurship ecosys- tems, which maps different agents in the ecosystem and proposes that they must work together. The entrepreneurship ecosystem can be viewed as a new paradigm for eco- nomic policies (Isenberg 2011). Isenberg’s model is based on the OECD entrepreneurial determinants, which proposes indicators for measuring an ecosystem’s performance in six areas: regulatory framework, market conditions, access to finance, creation and diffusion of knowledge, entrepreneurial capabilities, and entrepreneurship culture. A limitation of this model is that it misses ecosystems’ dynamics and the connectivity aspects. Economic theory shows that entrepreneurs are the prime forces in modern eco- nomic development. Significant changes of economic systems are impossible without them (Schumpeter 1934). Besides creating new jobs and generating wealth in society, entrepreneurs and their startups foster the technological innovation in industries. New venture creation is statistically linked to both job creation (Acs and Armington 2004; Endeavor Brasil 2015) and regional development (Kasturi and Subrahmanya 2014). High rates of entrepreneurial activity are strongly related to the growth of local economies. Entrepreneurial market activity is mostly a decentralized and unplanned process (Lewin 2011; Koppl 2008), in which innovative companies must effectively interact with each other to achieve success (Olsson and Bosch 2015); thus, technological entrepreneurs act in the context of complex entrepreneurship ecosystems, which can be viewed as a new paradigm for economic policies (Isenberg 2011). In our research, we focused on technology entrepreneurs and their software startups: companies with a potential for high-growth and scalable business models (Blank and Dorf 2012). Startups usually have to pivot their strategy, especially in the first 2 years, until they find their product-market fit (Terho et al. 2015). A supportive startup ecosystem can help entrepreneurs during this unstable period. We define a startup ecosystem as a limited region, roughly within a 50-km (or 1-h travel) range, formed by people, their startups, and various types of supporting organizations, interacting as a complex system to create new startup companies and evolve existing ones. Porter introduced the concept of clusters in 1990 (Porter 2011), as a geographically close group of interconnected companies and associated institutions in a particular field. Differently from the cluster concept, which can be viewed as a static asset, ecosystems are dynamic complex structures in which stakeholders co-evolve (Moore 1993)basedonboth competition and cooperation (Peltoniemi 2004). Thus, clusters are components within ecosystems. Besides, we define a startup ecosystem as a limited geographic region, the boundaries of these regions are not perfectly clear, and the ecosystem is not dependent on these borders to exist. Boundaries are useful specially for the purpose of defining limits between different ecosystems that are geographically close. Therefore, for example, San Francisco and San Jose are far enough to be considered two different ecosystems, but at the same time, they are close enough to form a single larger ecosystem known as the Silicon Valley. Similarly, Tel Aviv, Haifa, and Jerusalem are three distinct ecosystems, all of them within the broad Israeli ecosystem. Cukier and Kon Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2018) 7:14 Page 3 of 32 Any healthy entrepreneurial ecosystem directly impacts on entrepreneurs’ lives (Jayshree and Ramraj 2012). Several studies try to identify gaps in innovation ecosystems and propose practical actions to improve their performance, with examples in Germany (Voss and Müller 2009;Sternberg2013), India (Kasturi and Subrahmanya 2014), Portugal (Vaz et al. 2014), and Israel (Kon et al. 2015). Some industry initiatives such as the Startup Genome1 try to map the characteristics of all startup ecosystems around the globe. This paper is based on a multiple case study (Stake 2013) applying rigorous qualita- tive methods (Corbin and Strauss 2007;Stoletal.2016; Maxwell 2012) and carried out in three different software startup ecosystems: Tel Aviv (Israel), São Paulo (Brazil), and New York (USA). Rather than only mapping the innovation ecosystems’ characteristics and proposing actions and policies for those locations (Frenkel and Maital 2014), the pri- mary objective of this research was to understand their dynamics and explore how they evolved over time. Understanding each ecosystem’s characteristics as a snapshot in time is very important, but evaluating their dynamics allowed us to understand the path that ecosystems followed to grow in a sustainable way. By mapping the road, we can show to ecosystem stakeholders the next steps they need to take to advance in the evolutionary process. The general objective of this research was to advance the understanding of how soft- ware startups work, what are the elements that influence their behavior, and how startups relate with other players in their ecosystem. From this general objective, we derived our specific objectives: (1) achieving a better comprehension of existing startup ecosystems, with the development of a generic conceptual framework of software startup ecosys- tems; (2) instantiating the conceptual framework at, at least, three different ecosystems, in three different regions of the world, analyzing their characteristics, strengths, and weak- nesses; (3) developing a methodology to compare multiple ecosystems, highlighting their similarities and differences; and (4) creating a model to map ecosystem evolution and dynamics. The literature
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Exploring Start-Up Ecosystem and Its Structural Impact : a Review
    ISSN (Online) : 0975-1432 ISSN (Print) : 0975-153X DOI: 10.18311/gjeis www.gjeis.com Volume 11 | Issue 1 | Jan-Mar 2019 ENTERPRISE INFORMATION SYSTEM Dr. SubodhEditor-in-Chief Kesharwani www.gjeis.com Published by ENTERPRISE INFORMATION SYSTEM Sin ce 20 09 in Aca de mi c & Res earch Exploring Start-up Ecosystem and its Structural Impact : A Review – Surabhi Kapoor* Research Scholar, Department of Humanities, Delhi Technological University, Delhi [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3831-709X – Seema Singh Professor in Economics, Department of Humanities, Delhi Technological University, Delhi [email protected] ARTICLE HISTORY EDITORIAL BOARD EXCERPT Initially at the Time of Submission (ToS) submitted Paper Nomenclature: paper had a 4% plagiarism which is an accepted percentage for publication. The editorial Review of literature (RoL) board is of an observation that paper had a successive close watch by the blind reviewers Paper Code: V11N2AJ2019ROL3 which at a later stages had been rectified and amended by authors (Surabhi & Seema) in various phases as and when required to do so. The comments related to this manuscript Originality Test Ratio: 4% are noticeable related to Start-up Ecosystem and its Structural impact both subject-wise Submission Online: 6-April-2019 and research-wise. As we all know Start-ups are effective in promoting innovation and Setting up start-ups is a driving force for the development of worldwide economy. The study Manuscript Acknowledged: 10-May-2019 has made a deliberate attempt in identify the emerging nature of start-ups and to discover Originality Check: 14-May-2019 factors helping in the development of start-up ecosystems.
    [Show full text]
  • Tech Startup Ecosystem in West Bank and Gaza
    Tech Startup Ecosystem in Public Disclosure Authorized West Bank and Gaza FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized This map was designed over a map produced by the Map Design Unit of the World Bank. The boundaries, colors, denominations and any other information shown on this map do not imply, on the part of The World Bank Group, any judgment on the legal status of any territory, or any endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Content Authors and Acknowledgements 1 Executive Summary 2 Measuring and Analyzing the Tech Startup Ecosystem in the West Bank and Gaza 5 Measuring the Tech Startup Ecosystem 5 Analyzing the Tech Startup Ecosystem 6 The Tech Startup Ecosystem in the West Bank and Gaza 9 Skills 12 Supporting Infrastructure for Entrepreneurship 14 Investment 17 Community 20 Startup Success Factors 23 Gap Analysis and Policy Recommendations 24 Summary of Gap Analysis and Stage of Ecosystem 24 Policy Recommendations 25 Appendix: Survey Methodology and Analysis 28 Methodology 28 Short-Term Success 32 Long-Term Success 32 Notes 33 References 34 LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 Networking Assets 7 Table 1.2 Categories of Ecosystems 8 Table 3.1 Development Stage of Ecosystem 24 Table 3.2 Policy Recommendations 25 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Startup Growth in the West Bank and Gaza 9 Figure 2.2: Time to Complete Procedural Tasks in Life Cycle of a Startup Across Regions 10 Figure 2.3: Percentage of Female Founders Across Analyzed Ecosystems 10 Figure 2.4: Gender Distribution
    [Show full text]
  • Success Factors of Startups in the EU—A Comparative Study
    sustainability Article Success Factors of Startups in the EU—A Comparative Study Eulalia Skawi ´nska* and Romuald I. Zalewski Department of Economy and Management, University of Zielona Góra, 65-417 Zielona Góra, Poland; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +48-600-033-122 Received: 13 August 2020; Accepted: 1 October 2020; Published: 5 October 2020 Abstract: The paper focuses on key success factors of startups in the European Union. Startup companies have a massive potential to boost the level of innovation and competitiveness of national economies. They are also uniquely equipped to provide extremely effective and flexible ways of meeting both existing and emerging market needs. However, the development of these microventures differs from country to country. Hence, we put forth a hypothesis that strategic success factors in the development of startups vary in highly developed and catching-up countries. Our main goal was to determine the key success factors of startups in the EU, and to classify the gap between developed and lagging Member States. For this purpose, we applied the method of component analysis on startup data available for selected the EU states. We managed to isolate 5 components explaining 72% of data variability, all of which can be linked to human capital as well as to formal and informal economic institutions. The results confirmed the validity of our hypothesis. We established that more developed countries offer an institutional competitive advantage to startups, while the gap in success factors between highly developed and catching-up countries can be attributed to human capital and to institutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Workplace Innovation Today the Coworking Center
    Workplace Innovation Today The Coworking Center Andrea P. Foertsch Founder, Disruptive Space Principal, Melrose Real Estate Strategies Visiting Lecturer, Baker Program in Real Estate, Cornell University About NAIOP Research Foundation The NAIOP Research Foundation was established in 2000 as a 501(c)(3) organization to support the work of individuals and organizations engaged in real estate development, investment and operations. The Foundation’s core purpose is to provide these individuals and organizations with the highest level of research information on how real properties, especially office, industrial and mixed-use properties, impact and benefit communities throughout North America. The initial funding for the Research Foundation was underwritten by NAIOP and its Founding Governors with an endowment fund established to fund future research. For more information, visit www.naioprf.org. There are many ways to give to the Foundation and support projects and initiatives that advance the commercial real estate industry. If you would like to do your part in helping this unique and valuable resource, please contact Bennett Gray, senior director, at 703-904-7100, ext. 168, or [email protected]. Requests for funding should be submitted to [email protected]. For additional information, please contact Margarita Foster, vice president for knowledge and research, NAIOP Research Foundation, 2201 Cooperative Way, Herndon, VA 20171, at 703-904- 7100, ext. 117, or [email protected]. About NAIOP NAIOP, the Commercial Real Estate Development Association, is the leading organization for developers, owners and related professionals in office, industrial, retail and mixed-use real estate. NAIOP comprises some 15,500 members in North America. NAIOP advances responsible commercial real estate development and advocates for effective public policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Rise of the Tech
    Rise of the MIAMI Tech Hub www.emergeamericas.com We’re Transforming... At eMerge Americas, we’re transforming Miami into the tech hub of the Americas by partnering with the entire tech and entrepreneurial ecosystem, from government to higher-ed, startups to investors, corporate enterprises to media. We’re connecting the dots – between talent, capital and entrepreneurs. And we’re telling – and amplifying – the stories of how Miami is transforming. We’re attracting the best and the brightest from around the world to come to Miami to launch, build, and successfully scale their ideas. We believe Miami can serve as a gateway to the Americas and help bridge divides while fueling innovation and building out a sustainable, diverse and inclusive ecosystem. It’s remarkable how far this ecosystem has come in a few short years. In 2017, Miami ranked #1 in startup activity1 in the U.S., according to the Kauffman Index. Miami is a model for immigrant integration, with 52% of the population foreign-born and serving as the top metro area for immigrant-owned businesses – many of us are a testament to this fact. Miami is also a leader in diversity and inclusion - its ranked as the #2 U.S. metro area for female entrepreneurs in 2015. Miami thinks “global first” – with more than 1,100 multinational businesses based here and market access to Latin America being one of our most competitive advantages. And in terms of investment, last year was also an amazing year for venture capital in South Florida*, with Miami startups attracting nearly $1.4 billion in VC funding – ranking our metro area 11th in the nation in terms of investments by volume.
    [Show full text]
  • Part One Introduction from the Startup Genome
    Part One Introduction from the Startup Genome While nearly all high growth technology startups have historically emerged from no more than 3-4 startup ecosystems, namely Silicon Valley and Boston, this trend appears to have reached its end. Simultaneous with a global explosion of entrepreneurship has been an explosion in the rise of new startup ecosystems around the world, and a new found maturity in others. As high growth technology startups look to be the primary growth engine of the new information economy, the recent development of startup ecosystems flowering all over the world has big consequences for the future of the global economy. With that in mind, Startup Genome and Telefonica Digital teamed up to take a global look at the state of startups to understand where, outside of the proven testing ground of Silicon Valley, does entrepreneurship take hold? There are several factors that helped inspire this report, all with the goal of helping entrepreneurs, investors, and policy makers understand where they sit in the global startup ecosystem, how they can improve their odds of success, and where investors might start exploring for new opportunities. Obviously there are significant implications from this research, which will be unveiled in entirety in Q4 2012. In the meantime, this highly localized look at global entrepreneurship can be represented at a glance in the Global Startup Ecosystem Index, below. Summary Overall, the Startup Ecosystem Index paints a glowingly positive picture of the state of entrepreneurship around the world. While Silicon Valley is far and away the strongest ecosystem, just 5 or 10 years ago most of the other ecosystems on this list either barely existed or didn’t exist at all.
    [Show full text]
  • Examining the Connections Within the Startup Ecosystem: a Case Study of St. Louis
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by IssueLab Kauffman Foundation Research Series on City, Metro, and Regional Entrepreneurship Examining the Connections within the Startup Ecosystem: A CASE STUDY OF ST. LOUIS Yasuyuki Motoyama, Ph.D. Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation Karren K. Watkins Washington University in St. Louis September 2014 ©2014 by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. All rights reserved. EXAMINING THE CONNECTIONS WITHIN THE STARTUP ECOSYSTEM: A CASE STUDY OF ST. LOUIS FOREWORD Foreword he recent growth of the startup scene and entrepreneurial community in St. Louis is incredibly exciting. It means economic progress for the TSt. Louis region and more jobs available for St. Louis citizens. Many newly formed local assets, such as ITEN, T-Rex, and Arch Grants, are laying a foundation that will have impact for decades to come. In this paper, Yas Motoyama from the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, and Karren Watkins from Washington University, document the resurgence of entrepreneurial activity in St. Louis by reporting on the collaboration and local learning within the startup community. This activity is happening both between entrepreneurs and between organizations that provide support, such as mentoring and funding, to entrepreneurs. As these connections deepen, the strength of the entrepreneurial ecosystem grows. Another finding from the research is that activity-based events, where entrepreneurs have the chance to use and practice the skills needed to grow their businesses, are most useful. St. Louis provides a multitude of these activities, such as Startup Weekend, 1 Million Cups, Code Until Dawn, StartLouis, and GlobalHack.
    [Show full text]
  • Accelerators: Their Fit in the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem and Their Cohort Selection Challenges
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 5-2019 Accelerators: Their Fit in the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem and Their Cohort Selection Challenges Shu Yang The Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/3247 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] ACCELERATORS: THEIR FIT IN THE ENTREPRENEURSHIP ECOSYSTEM AND THEIR COHORT SELECTION CHALLENGES by SHU YANG A dissertation submitted to the Graduate FaCulty in Business in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The City University of New York 2019 i © 2019 SHU YANG All Rights Reserved ii ACCelerators: Their Fit in the Entrepreneurship ECosystem and Their Cohort SeleCtion Challenges by Shu Yang This manusCript has been read and aCCepted for the Graduate FaCulty in Business in satisfaCtion of the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Date Ramona K. ZaChary Chair of Examining Committee Date Karl Lang ExeCutive OffiCer Supervisory Committee: Ramona K. ZaChary Romi Kher Thomas S. Lyons THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iii ABSTRACT ACCelerators: Their Fit in the Entrepreneurship ECosystem and Their Cohort SeleCtion Challenges by Shu Yang Advisor: Ramona ZaChary The entrepreneurial financing landsCape has drastiCally evolved over the past two deCades with many of the new entrants (e.g., crowdfunders, aCCelerators, incubators, etC) rapidly rising to prominence (Block et al., 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Pakistan Startup Ecosystem Report 2019
    INVEST2INNOVATE PAKISTAN STARTUP ECOSYSTEM REPORT 2019 INVEST2INNOVATE PAKISTAN STARTUP ECOSYSTEM REPORT 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments 5 Executive Summary 6 Introduction 10 1 1.1 Methodology and Scope of Study 14 1.1.1 Instruments 15 1.1.2 Sampling 15 Ecosystem Overview 16 2 2.1 Entrepreneurship Support Organizations 21 2.1.1 The Role of Government in Ecosystem Support 21 2.1.2 The Role of Corporations in Ecosystem Support 22 2.1.3 The Role of Private Sector Support Players 23 2.2 Finance 25 2.2.1 Deal Flow Analysis (2015 - 2019) 25 2.2.2 The Role of Grant Capital 29 2.2.3 The Role of Angel Investors 29 2.2.4 The Emergence of the Venture Capital Landscape 31 2.2.5 Growth of Local Funds 31 2.2.6 Rising Interest from International Funds 32 2.2.7 Role of the Pakistani Diaspora in Financing 33 Gaps & Challenges 34 3 3.1 Support Organizations 36 3.2 Finance 39 3.3 Policy & Regulatory Environment 41 3.4 The Gender Lens 46 Recommendations & Way Forward 50 4 Conclusion 55 Glossary 56 Appendix A 62 Appendix B 75 Appendix C 97 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was authored by Ambareen Baig, Kalsoom Lakhani and Areej Mehdi (Invest2Innovate - i2i) The analysis in the report draws on both secondary and primary data collected by the i2i team including Kalsoom Lakhani, Ambareen Baig, Areej Mehdi, Ahsan Mukhtar, Rohma Labeeb, Muhammad Mubashir, Warda Malik, Aarti Lila Raam and Emaan Malik. The report benefitted from ongoing technical guidance and inputs provided by the World Bank team including, Komal Mohindra, Aun Ali Rahman, Sarmad Shaikh, and Meenah Tariq.
    [Show full text]
  • Coworking Centers Take It to the Next Level
    Coworking Centers Take It to the Next Level A confluence of technological, demographic and cultural influences has fueled rapid transformation in the workplace. The Internet, social media and Wi-Fi have profoundly affected workplace communications as well as workplace flexibility. Reliance on this technology has produced a generation of young workers (the millennials, also known as Generation Y and echo boomers) who expect continuous, personal access to information in real time rather than on a prescribed schedule. They increasingly insist on sharing information in an open-sourced, nonhierarchical way. As a result, they expect a workplace with no doors or even walls, no set hours and few professional boundaries. While some corporations have viewed this as untenable, others have seen it as an opportunity to create more economical, collaborative and user-intensive workplaces. And freelancers and entrepreneurs who work outside of traditional companies have viewed it as an opportunity to create coworking centers — entirely new workplaces to serve this generation’s independent workers and small businesses. As a result of these technological and social forces, within the past five years the coworking concept has emerged to meet the needs of independent innovators and small businesses — and has become the largest of the innovation workplace movements. This highly versatile concept has taken innovative workplaces to the next level by offering a membership-based workplace solution that provides independent workers with both a community and a place where they can focus on productivity. The coworking concept fuses the desk hoteling concept relied upon by management consulting firms for decades with the fitness club membership operational model to bring affordable, amenitized workspace to the public.
    [Show full text]
  • The David Vs. Goliath of Startup Ecosystems
    WATERLOO STARTUP ECOSYSTEM REPORT The David vs. Goliath of Startup Ecosystems The Startup Ecosystem Report Series Compass.co (formerly Startup Genome) with the support of Crunchbase Nov 8, 2015 Version 1.3 2 Contents 4 1. Executive Summary 53 6. Key Findings & Recommendations 54 6.1 Key Findings 7 2. Startup Ecosystem Lifecycle Model 55 6.2 Recommendations 8 2.1 Lifecycle Phases 9 2.2 Detailed Model 63 7. Sources 64 Literature 14 3. Ecosystem Description and Stakeholder Perspectives 65 Primary Data Sources 15 3.1 Description 65 Secondary Data Sources 17 3.2 Entrepreneurs’ Persona 18 3.3 Perspectives on the Ecosystem in Waterloo 66 8. Acknowledgement and Partners 67 Authors 22 4. Ecosystem Assessment 67 Project Team 24 4.1 Performance and Lifecycle 67 Survey Participants and Interviewees 29 4.2 Funding 67 Partners and Collaborators 35 4.3 Market Reach 70 Startup Package Partners 41 4.4 Talent 70 Survey Promotion Collaborators 44 4.5 Startup Experience 47 4.6 Policy 49 5. Relevant Case Studies 50 5.1 Tel Aviv, Israel 52 5.2 Cambridge, UK Note: For short we use “Waterloo” to indicate “Waterloo Region”. All data in U.S. dollars. Copyright © 2015 Startup Compass Inc. (compass.co), all rights reserved. You agree not to reproduce nor distribute the report, either by email, website download, or any other electronic or physical means without the prior written authorization of Compass. This material has been prepared for general informational purposes only and is not intended to be relied upon as professional advice. Please refer to your advisors for specifc advice.
    [Show full text]
  • Ruecklinger Patrick
    Die approbierte Originalversion dieser Diplom-/ Masterarbeit ist in der Hauptbibliothek der Tech- nischen Universität Wien aufgestellt und zugänglich. http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at The approved original version of this diploma or master thesis is available at the main library of the Vienna University of Technology. http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at/eng I M M O B I L I E N F U E R S T A R T U P S AM BEISPIEL DES EHEMALIGEN SIEMENSAREALS IN WIEN MASTERTHESIS PATRICK RÜCKLINGER Die approbierte Originalversion dieser Diplom-/ Masterarbeit ist in der Hauptbibliothek der Tech- nischen Universität Wien aufgestellt und zugänglich. http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at The approved original version of this diploma or master thesis is available at the main library of the Vienna University of Technology. http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at/eng Die approbierte Originalversion dieser Diplom-/ Masterarbeit ist in der Hauptbibliothek der Tech- nischen Universität Wien aufgestellt und zugänglich. http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at The approved original version of this diploma or master thesis is available at the main library of the Vienna University of Technology. http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at/eng 4Die approbierte Originalversion dieser Diplom-/ Masterarbeit ist in der Hauptbibliothek der Tech- nischen Universität Wien aufgestellt und zugänglich. http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at The approved original version of this diploma or master thesis is available at the main library of the Vienna University of Technology. http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at/eng D I P L O M A R B E I T Immobilien für Startups - am Beispiel des ehemaligen Siemens-Areals in Wien Ausgeführt am Institut für Städtebau, Landschaftsarchitektur und Entwerfen Fachbereich Projektentwicklung und Management Eingereicht an der Technischen Universität Wien Fakultät für Architektur und Raumplanung unter der Anleitung von: Univ.
    [Show full text]