SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 26

A Sociological Analysis of Established Firms as a Source of Innovative Cluster Entrepreneurialism: The Turkish Case

YENİLİK KÜMELERİNDE GİRİŞİMCİLİĞİN KAYNAKLARI OLARAK YERLEŞİK FİRMALARIN ROLÜNÜN SOSYOLOJİK ANALİZİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ

Meliha Demet ULUSOY
Mehmet CANSIZ
Pages
69–92
Publication Date
2022-10-17
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Moreover, the analysis has demonstrated that affective political environment has a negative effect on entrepreneurship.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Innovation clusters play an important role in the development of technology-based entrepreneurship.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The regression analysis has demonstrated that education level, effective work environment, joining in clusters, age of the firms, number of publicly funded R & D projects made by the firm, and export capacity of the firm have a positive effect in the emergence of entrepreneurship.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Moreover, the analysis has demonstrated that affective political environment has a negative effect on entrepreneurship.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Innovation clusters play an important role in the development of technology-based entrepreneurship. Information workers who are gathered in innovation clusters can become entrepreneurial at any time in relation to their knowledge and abilities. In literature, this process is generally explored from the point of the entrepreneurship ecosystem and the characteristics of firms. The sociological dimension of this process has not been adequately analysed in terms of social and cultural bases. Based on this, our work focuses on the entrepreneurial supply; the structural characteristics of firms and the social and cultural capital of the entrepreneurs that influence the workers in the process of becoming an entrepreneur. The regression analysis has demonstrated that education level, effective work environment, joining in clusters, age of the firms, number of publicly funded R & D projects made by the firm, and export capacity of the firm have a positive effect in the emergence of entrepreneurship. Moreover, the analysis has demonstrated that affective political environment has a negative effect on entrepreneurship.

Özet

Yenilik kümeleri teknoloji tabanlı girişimciliğin gelişmesinde önemli rol oynarlar. Yenilik kümelerinde yoğunlaşan bilgi işçileri, sahip oldukları bilgi ve yeteneklerle her an girişimci olabilmektedirler. Literatürde bu süreç daha çok girişimcilik ekosistemi ve firmaların özellikleri açısından incelenmiştir. Bu sürecin sosyolojik boyutu yeterince analiz edilmemiştir. Buradan hareketle bu çalışmada; teknoparklardaki girişimci arzına odaklanılmış ve çalışanların girişimci olmasında; çalıştıkları firmaların yapısal özellikleri ve bunların sahiplerinin sosyal ve kültürel sermayelerinin etkisine bakılmıştır. Regresyon analiz sonucunda; özellik yanında çalıştıkları girişimcinin eğitim düzeyinin, etkili iş çevresinin, kümelenme girişimlerine katılma durumunun, firmanın yaşının, ihracat yapma durumunun ve firmanın yaptığı kamu destekli Ar-Ge proje sayısının istatistiki olarak pozitif yönde bir etki, girişimci türü ve sahip olunan etkili bir siyasi çevrenin ise negatif bir etki yarattığı tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ULUSOY, M. D., CANSIZ, M. (2022). A Sociological Analysis of Established Firms as a Source of Innovative Cluster Entrepreneurialism: The Turkish Case. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 26, 69–92. https://ajindex.com/articles/533562

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Amador, M. and Landier, A. (2003). Entrepreneurial Pressure and Innovation. Stern School of Business. Mimeo. Anton, J. and Yao, D. (1995).
  2. Start-Ups, Spin-Offs, and Internal Projects. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 11(2), 362-378.
  3. Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. ThousandOaks, CA: Sage. Dacin, M.T., Ventresca, M. and Beal, B.B. (1999). The Embeddedness Of Organizations: Debates, Dialogue, Dialogue and Directions. Journal of Management, 25(3), 317-356.
  4. Davidsson, P. (1989). Continued Entrepreneurship and Small Firm Growth. Economic Research Institute, Stockholm. Drucker, F. P. (1994). Yeni Gerçekler (B. Karanakçı, Çev.). Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
  5. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self Identity. Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  6. Polanyi, K. (1944).
  7. The Great Transformation. Holt, Reihhart. New York. Vallas, S. (2016). Reconfiguring Worker Subjectivity: Enterprise Discourse in an Age of Neoliberalism. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Eastern Sociological Society. Boston, MA. Thornton, P. H. (1999). The Sociology of Entrepreneurship. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 19-46.
  8. Agarwal, R., Echambadi, R., Franco, A. and Sarkar, M.B. (2004). Knowledge Transfer Through Inheritance: Spin-Out Generation, Growth and Survival. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 501-522.
  9. Allen, J. (1998). Capital Markets and Corporate Structure: The Equity Carve-Outs of Thermo Electron. Journal of Financial Economics, 48, 99-124.
  10. Aldrich, H. (1991). Need For More Research on Entrepreneurship. The American Sociological Association Organizations and Occupations. Newsletter Spring. Amit, R., Glosten, L. and Muller, E. (1993). Challenges to Theory Development in Entrepreneurship Research. Journal of Management Studies, 30, 815-834.
  11. Bell, D. (1973). The Coming of Postindustrial Society: A Venture in A social Forecasting. New York: Basic Books. Araujo, L. and Easton, G. (1996). Networks in Socioeconomic Systems: A Critical Review (D. Iacobucci, Ed.) in (pp. 63 – 107). Networks in Marketing. Bell, D. (1974). Labour in Post-Industrial Society: The Worker in “Post-Industrial” Capitalizm Liberal and Radical Responses. New York: The Free Press.
  12. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. (J. G. Richardson, Ed.). Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education in (pp. 241-258). New York: Greenwood Press.
  13. Bhide, A. (1994). How Entrepreneurs Craft Strategies That Work. Harvard Business Review