Inside the incubator – business relationship

creations among incubated firms

Christina Öberg
Weaterhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA; The Ratio Institute, Stockholm,
Sweden and School of Business, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
Markus Klinton
Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden, and
Helen Stockhult
University of Skövde, Skövde, Sweden

Abstract
Purpose – Incubators, as providers of advice and resources, suggest fostering the development of early-idea firms. Literature and practice seem to
suggest an ever-increasing amount of incubator support. The creation of business relationships is at the heart of any business development, and this
paper addresses whether a laissez-faire incubator fosters the creation of business relationships. The purpose of this paper is to explore the creation
of business relationships among incubated firms during and after their time in the incubator along with the roles that these relationships play for the
incubated firms.
Design/methodology/approach – Empirically, the paper is based on retrospective interviews with representatives of all incubated firms in a
university incubator. A total of fifteen interviews were conducted with representatives of the incubated firms, the incubator and its owners,
complemented by secondary data sources.
Findings – The paper points out three antecedents for business relationship creation: the lack of experience and connections; convenience; and trust
based on the interactions with others in the incubator. These antecedents are connected to the roles of transforming businesses and of adaptation in
the dyadic relationships. The laissez-faire incubator helped through the learning-by-doing among the incubated firms, which made them focus on
business relationship creation from early on.
Originality/value – Most incubator research portrays the unilateral transfer of knowledge from the incubator to the incubated firm, with the latter
being a service taker rather than a co-producer. The paper adds knowledge about business relationships among firms in incubators and the roles
that these business relationships could play for the firms. The focus on an incubator providing limited support is of high practical relevance, given
the trend of incubators facilitating more and more services.
Keywords University, Laissez-faire, Start-up, Business relationship, Incubator
Paper type Research paper

Introduction pointed out how business relationships may help early-idea

firms to develop their resources (Aaboen et al., 2017). But are
In the practice of incubators, that is, support organisations to incubators the best at facilitating business relationship
help early innovative ideas become fully fleshed firms (Hackett creations?
and Dilts, 2004; Clarysse et al., 2005), it has been increasingly Inspired by an incubator that existed 15 years ago and
assumed that the incubator is the party to facilitate the applied what could be described as a laissez-faire regime
development of ideas (von Zedwitz, 2003; Soetanto and Jack, (Hackett and Dilts, 2004; Bergek and Norrman, 2008), this
2013; Cantù, 2015; Pauwels et al., 2016; Hillemane et al., paper questions the increasingly heavy reliance on incubators as
2019). This includes an ever-increasing amount of services support organisations (Chan and Lau, 2005; Hausberg and
provided to incubated firms in a unilateral process of Korreck, 2018). A laissez-faire incubator denotes an
knowledge transfer. The creation of business relationships would organisation under which early innovative ideas are to become
be a core activity for firms to become self-sustaining. Business business firms without the incubator providing support beyond
relationships refer to repeated exchanges between firms, general office facility services (Bergek and Norrman, 2008).
including how they may adapt operations to one another Such laissez-faire types of incubators may be important for the
(Hallén et al., 1991; Ford and Håkansson, 2006). Research has incubated firms to rely on one another, and as suggested here to
establish business relationships with one another. This paper
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on
Emerald Insight at: [Link]
Received 14 December 2018
Revised 16 May 2019
30 September 2019
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 21 November 2019
© Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 0885-8624] 21 January 2020
[DOI 10.1108/JBIM-12-2018-0391] Accepted 11 February 2020
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

investigates how a laissez-faire incubator may enable the Empirically, this paper is based on retrospective interviews with
creation of business relationships among the incubated firms, representatives of firms incubated in an incubator 15 years
both during and since they were incubated. The purpose of the earlier, along with secondary data reviews. The analysis
paper is to explore the creation of business relationships among integrates the empirical data with descriptions of business
incubated firms during and after their time in the incubator. relationships. The paper ends with conclusions, including
Furthermore, the paper investigates the roles these early theoretical contributions, managerial and policy implications,
relationships played for the firms. The paper thereby puts focus and ideas for further research.
on antecedents for the creation of business relationships in
incubators and specifically focuses on the laissez-faire type of Theoretical background and framing
incubators. It also traces the consequences of the business
relationship creations for the firms in the incubator. Current research on incubators: a brief overview
Theoretically, the paper adopts an industrial marketing and Incubators are one of several organisations dealing with
purchasing (IMP) approach on business relationships, thus technology transfer between academia and the business society
referring to interdependencies among firms, heterogeneous (Mian, 1996; Markman et al., 2005; O’Gorman et al., 2008;
offerings and companies as mutually or unilaterally adapting to Berbegal-Mirabent et al., 2015). They could also deal with
each other (Hallén et al., 1991; Ford and Håkansson, 2006; other ideas than those arising from the academic world, and
Håkansson et al., 2009). The following research questions are their content may not be technologically driven (Etzkowitz
addressed: et al., 2005; Grimaldi and Grandi, 2005; Barbero et al., 2014).
 What explains the creation of business relationships Von Zedwitz (2003), for instance, divides incubators into
among incubated firms in a laissez-faire incubator? university, independent commercial, regional business,
 What roles do these business relationships play for the company-internal and virtual incubators to indicate their
incubated firms? diversity.
The characteristic of an incubator relates to how it is a
The paper is unique in how the incubator is not captured as an support organisation to facilitate the growth of innovative ideas
overarching actor orchestrating the incubated firms’ into self-sustaining companies. Research has pointed at
development, and in the description of the establishment of
different strategies to accomplish this, describing both the
business relationships among parties in the incubator. The
incubator’s selection of ideas and what support it provides
paper makes the following contributions to IMP research: IMP
(Soetanto, 2004; Clarysse et al., 2005; Bruneel et al., 2012).
research on incubators has foremost concentrated on the
Bergek and Norrman (2008) refer to selection based on the
incubator as a supporting unit for the firms to develop early
ideas and the entrepreneur (Aerts et al., 2007), picking winners
business relationships with parties outside of the incubator
and selecting broadly, respectively. Bergek and Norrman
(Maia et al., 2012; Cantù, 2014; Purchase et al., 2017).
(2008) also discuss strategies of the incubator from laissez-faire
Through focusing specifically on business relationships created
to strong intervention. Other researchers point not only at
in the incubator, the paper adds to those studies. The creation
resource and project facilitation to denote that incubators may
of business relationships within the incubator further changes
help with floor space and shared equipment but also advice and
the view on the incubator compared to those previous studies in
mentorship (cf. Soetanto and Jack, 2013 on tangible and
how it presents a more business network view on incubators. It
also adds to the understanding of how – and under which intangible resources). Pauwels et al. (2016) refer to mentorship,
circumstances – early business relationships are specifically networking opportunities and access to funding as more recent
critical for company development (Aaboen et al., 2017). services of incubators, and describe incubators as business
To studies on incubators, the laissez-faire incubator accelerators to also target later development steps of firms
produces insights of high practical relevance. This is so based (Hausberg and Korreck, 2018; Yusubova et al., 2019).
on how the trend thus points to incubators providing an ever- The incubators may thus, in terms of their services, range
increasing amount of services. Rather than depicting firms as from the facilitation of floor space to complete packages of
achieving unilateral knowledge from the support organisation, services, advice and help to facilitate contacts for business and
the paper brings attention to the incubated firms as such. financial support (Peters et al., 2004). The laissez-faire
Previous studies mostly focus on the incubator instead of the incubator would provide floor space, whereas its other services
incubated firms (Colombo and Delmastro, 2002; Chan and would not extend beyond the provision of office equipment
Lau, 2005; Bergek and Norrman, 2008; Bruneel et al., 2012). (printers, copy machines, etc.). The laissez-faire incubator is
Researchers such as Soetanto and Jack (2013) have called for sometimes described as a landlord, or an un(der)developed
studies understanding the networking of incubated firms over incubator. This again notices how research and practice do not
time, whereas Maia et al. (2012) address the issue of incubated see the laissez-faire incubator as purposefully designed for
firms rarely networking with one another. incubated firms to help one another, share knowledge or, as our
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. After this case illustrates, start creating business relationships among
introduction, a brief overview follows of research on incubators them. Rather, there seems to be a quite general opinion that it is
and networking in incubators to position the theoretical gap. the incubator organisations that should provide advice and
Thereafter, the IMP lens is introduced by focusing on previous other types of services or resources (Mian, 1996; Clarysse et al.,
research on start-ups and incubators in that context and by 2005; Grimaldi and Grandi, 2005, Löfsten and Lindelöf, 2005;
addressing the meaning and value of business relationships. Gerlach and Brem, 2015), and as practice develops, it seems to
Next, the research design is presented, followed by the findings. be assumed that the more, the better. Meanwhile, research
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

provides inconclusive findings in regard to incubators’ abilities (2013) refer to field-building services so that the incubated
to achieve value (Chan and Lau, 2005). firms can share knowledge and create legitimacy for their ideas.
Knowledge transfer is at the heart of the incubators’ support Soetanto and Jack (2013) add to this by describing knowledge
(Lockett et al., 2005; Rothaermel and Thursby, 2005), mostly sharing, including market knowledge and firms helping each
described as a unilateral process from the incubator to the early other to find business partners. In addition, Bollingtoft (2012)
idea (incubated) firms (Soetanto, 2004; Hillemane et al., describes a bottom-up incubator constructed by its incubated
2019). This again implies that the incubated firm is a service firms and how these cooperate and network to become each
taker rather than co-producer, and that it is the incubator’s task other’s entrepreneurial networks. And in a study on various
to create business development and value. The program of the types of networks (including the network of an incubated firm
incubators is generally described as a process of accelerating with advisors), Sá and Lee (2012) mention a few empirical
knowledge from how to create a business, over how to apply for examples of how incubated firm representatives’ connections
funding from venture firms, to eventually leave the incubator as indeed may help them in future business deals.
a fully fleshed company (Markman et al., 2005; McAdam and In all, studies on networking among incubated firms seem to
McAdam, 2008). Exceptions are, for instance, Rice (2002), suggest how incubated firms provide support in terms of
who describes the co-production between the incubator and sharing knowledge among them, and helping one another –
the incubated firm. through knowledge, but also joint creations of legitimacy for the
ideas – to reach customers, or how they simply socialise without
Networking in incubators any business relationship ambitions. The creation of business
Something called the networked incubator has emerged during relationships suggests to be external to such networking,
the past years (Hansen et al., 2000; Bollingtoft and Ulhoi, meaning that the firms may support one another with market
2005). This describes how the incubator focuses on the knowledge (Suchman, 1995), for instance, but would not
partnering and creation of business contacts for the incubated become customers and suppliers to one another (Schwartz and
firms (Nowak and Grantham, 2000; Rothschild and Darr, Hornych, 2010; Ebbers, 2013). The scholars describing
2005; Totterman and Sten, 2005; Hughes et al., 2007; Scillitoe networking within incubators have also not linked such
and Chakrabarti, 2010; Cantù, 2015). The networked networking to the type of incubator (Bollingtoft, 2012 is an
incubator thereby not only acknowledges the knowledge exception), and it is generally assumed that the incubator as a
transfer but also the connecting of incubated firms with support organisation helps to facilitate the networking.
incumbent ones. Still, the perspective remains of the incubator
supporting the incubated firms unilaterally, and how such
IMP approach to incubators
support is done per incubated firm, with very rare
Most of those few studies acknowledging the networking inside
acknowledgement of any networking among the incubated
incubators thus focus on social networking among individuals.
firms. Each incubated firm is thereby seen in isolation; it is the
Although they rely on the entrepreneurship literature that
firm or idea and its connection to the incubator that are in
proposes that social networking would be an antecedent to
focus.
business relationships, the incubator studies seem to have
There are a few studies that indeed describe the networking
proven the opposite. The networking in incubators becomes
among the incubated firms. Most such studies concern the
about supporting one another to potentially create business
social interaction among representatives of these firms, and
possibly their sharing of knowledge and tangible resources relationships with parties external to the incubator, which is
(McAdam and Marlow, 2007; Schwartz and Hornych, 2010; also the take in the literature focusing on the incubator as a
Sá and Lee, 2012; Ebbers, 2013; Soetanto and Jack, 2013). service and support provider to incubated firms (Mian, 1996;
McAdam and Marlow (2007) focus on how peers in different Clarysse et al., 2005; Grimaldi and Grandi, 2005, Löfsten and
incubators may discuss challenges, while later start competing Lindelöf, 2005; Gerlach and Brem, 2015).
with one another. Cooper et al. (2012) investigate In how the IMP approach describes the interactivities of
communication patterns among incubated firms, underlining firms, companies’ adaptation to one another and the mutual
co-location as an important factor for the communication. This interdependences of firms affecting their developments would
links to research on proximity (Öberg, 2018). Such studies, help to explore the creation of business relationships among
mostly concerning the geographical proximity, though tend to incubated firms and the roles that these relationships play for
focus on the university-incubated firm networking (Roig- the firms. The IMP approach emphasises how companies are
Tierno et al., 2015), with limited acknowledgement about the embedded in structures of other firms (Håkansson and
networking among incubated firms. Snehota, 1989). These structures include customers, suppliers
Schwartz and Hornych (2010) describe patterns of and other types of organisations interacting directly or
interaction among incubated firms and point at how these indirectly with the company (Anderson et al., 1994). Resources
rarely reach beyond informal (social) connections, how the become contained and developed in the relationships between
incubator is thought to facilitate any such connections and how companies, and dependencies develop as adjustments and
specialised incubators (incubators focusing on a specific sector) adaptations occur of firms’ resources and outputs (Hallén et al.,
do not help to accomplish cooperation among incubated firms. 1991). Structures of business relationships based on
Ebbers (2013), in a similar way, concludes that social interactions and interdependencies mean that much of a
interaction does not lead to business contracts. In their study, company’s development is dependent on business partners as
Rubin et al. (2015) focus on the technology and market part of repeated exchanges among firms (Håkansson and
knowledge transfer among incubated firms, and Amezcua et al. Waluszewski, 2007; Waluszewski et al., 2009).
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

Applying an IMP approach to incubators, and specifically, The empirical study inspiring us to write this paper points at
the networking among incubated firms, would highlight how a number of successful firms that were at one time incubated in
the firms share resources and, in processes of interaction, adjust what would be seen as a tenant/floor space laissez-faire
offerings to one another, thereby replacing the unilateral incubator. These firms are not only successful in terms of
process of knowledge transfer with a mutual adaptation survival rates and expansions but have also managed to create
process. This again would be under the obvious requirement business relationships, and partly did so inside the incubator,
that the incubated firms find any interest in each other’s which led us to ask: What explains the creation of business
offerings and would mean that the incubator’s role of co- relationships among incubated firms in a laissez-faire
locating innovative ideas come to the forefront, as reflected on incubator? And, what roles do these business relationships play
in studies on proximity (Roig-Tierno et al., 2015, Öberg, for the incubated firms?
2018).
With that said, IMP studies on incubators have mostly Research design
adopted similar perspectives as those incubator studies
described above: the process of business development as a pre- This paper thus followed from how it was noted how
stage to forming business relationships outside the incubator companies incubated in what could be referred to as a laissez-
(Aaboen et al., 2013; Baraldi et al., 2014; La Rocca and faire incubator had been successful in terms of surviving and
Snehota, 2014; Guercini and Milanesi, 2018; Lind and growing their businesses. Compared to data on success and
Landqvist, 2018). La Rocca et al. (2017), for instance, describe survival rates of incubated firms (Bager-Sjögren, 2018), the
how an incubated firm shifts networks from an academic to a firms have either grown considerably (with revenues up to more
business network along its development process, while than 100 MSEK 15 years later) or have been acquired
acknowledging how the company may return to the academic (whereby the growth of the firm would not be traceable, but
setting later (Aaboen et al., 2017; Laage-Hellman et al., 2017). which would mean that the founders have achieved a healthy
Furthermore, the focus in IMP studies on start-ups mostly exit). More important than the success of the firms as such
tends to be on what happens past the incubator stage, how the were, however, the observations that business relationships had
company manages to create its first and other early business been created among the incubated firms. Triggered by this, we
relationships (Aaboen et al., 2017) and embed in pre-existing wanted to dig deeper into understanding the creation of
business structures after it has left the incubator (Aaboen et al., business relationships in an incubator (cf. Schwarz and
2016). A study by Cantù (2015) describes the business Stensaker, 2016, on phenomenon-driven research). The
relationship facilitation by an incubator, but sees such incubator, having been present 15 years ago, helped us to
relationships as external to the incubator and thus highlights capture long-term effects of business relationships among its
how the incubator would take on an increasing number of firms, where we saw the setting as interesting to investigate,
tasks. Petrucci (2018) refers to the interaction between an despite some shortcomings in terms of retrospective
incubator and an incubated firm and does so through rationalisation and loss of memory effects (Huber and Power,
interlinking the interactions with an external business 1985).
relationship. Thereby, Petrucci (2018) does also not
acknowledge the establishment of business relationships among Data collection
incubated firms. Shih and Aaboen (2018) describe the The main empirical data source of this paper is interviews with
incubator’s mediating role in incubated firms’ development of individuals representing firms in the incubator, along with
business relationships external to the incubator, whereas Öberg interviews with representatives of the incubator and the
and Shih (2014) point at how interests of incubators and university located close to the incubator. A total of 15
business parties may collide and impede the ability of an interviews were performed (Table I), including all incubated
incubated firm to develop business relationships. firms (seven firms). The interviews were semi-structured, using
While IMP studies, as well as other studies on networking an open-ended question approach (Sarantakos, 1998). They
and incubators, thematically tend to see the incubator as a targeted the early experience from the incubator, the view on
support organisation potentially facilitating the creation of the support offered and the influence of the support on business
business relationships external to the incubator, IMP studies development. Questions further included how the firms
thus seem to more concern the firms after they have left the interacted with one another, contacts maintained and business
incubator. And, while networking in other studies focus on relationships created at the time of the incubator and since.
social interaction, the IMP studies indeed describe the Based on the smallness of the firms at their time in the
establishment of business relationships. The IMP literature, in incubator, the number of interviewees per company was limited
its broader approach to business relationships, adaptation, to one to three individuals. Through having descriptions
interdependences and so forth, would help to understand the confirmed among the interviewees representing the different
creation of business relationships within an incubator, and, as incubated firms, however, verifications of descriptions were
described in this paper, what role these relationships may play accomplished. This confirmation also helped to bring accuracy
for the firms. This would thereby create a theoretical to accounts on events happening far back, while the early
contribution to research on incubators. The laissez-faire business relationships were generally easier to remember for the
incubator, as described in this paper, would, in such regards, interviewees than the chronological adding of later business
mean that there is no overarching actor facilitating business relationships. Those other organisations interviewed were
relationship creations, but how any creation of business included to grasp the role of the incubator for the local society,
relationships follows from the incubated firms alone. compare more recent incubators with the one studied, and
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

understand the role of the incubator vis-à-vis the university. interacted with the other parties in the incubator. Early drafts of
These interviews should foremost be seen as providing context these descriptions were made available to the interviewees for
to those with the incubated firms, whereas the interviews with verification purposes (Sarantakos, 1998; Denzin and Lincoln,
the representatives of the incubated firms should be seen as the 2000). Based on how each business relationship targeted at
main data sources. Each interview lasted between one and one least two of the incubated firms, it was crosschecked between
and a half hours, and was taped and thereafter transcribed. the firms to grasp how both sides described it. The individual
As one of the authors (different from the one pursuing the business relationships constituted the unit of analysis in the
interviews and different from the one analysing the data) worked paper. The creation of business relationships should be seen as
for one of the incubated firms and later moved to another a state of existence of a business relationship (Havila, 1996).
incubated firm, the interviews were complemented with self- This puts focus on the existence/non-existence of business
experience reports from that author. This author has also relationships among the firms, and antecedents to such
maintained contact with several of those active in the incubator, existences/non-existences rather than processes of relationship
which helped with the long-term tracking of their developments developments. This had to do with how we wanted to focus on
after the incubator and the understanding of the incubated firms what enabled the creation of the business relationships among
and the support they received. To benefit from the experience of the firms in the incubator and their roles, rather than describe
the author while minimising biases, he was interviewed in a how the relationships increased or decreased in interactions,
similar way as the other interviewees. The analysis was also trust or other issues (Ford, 1980).
conducted without his involvement, and later he was asked to Following the capturing of the business relationships, the
read the findings and analysis to ensure their accuracy. individual instances of business relationships were categorised
In addition to interviews, the experience mentioned by one of to grasp their sources, contents and extent. This included the
the authors and the university and local business life being observation of delayed business relationships taking shape years
known by all authors, secondary data sources were also used. since the firms had left the incubator. Using backward tracing
These included newspaper items on the incubated firms, along (Jessop, 2005), antecedents for any establishment of a business
with annual reports from past to present for these firms. The relationship were sought in this process, while forward tracing
role of the secondary data was to capture the long-term helped to capture the effects (roles) of the relationships.
developments of the incubated companies, while dealing with Descriptions of business relationships were compared among
issues of retrospectivity and validating descriptions from the the incubated firms, and codes on sources and contents were
interviews (Huber and Power, 1985; Denzin and Lincoln, reduced in several steps (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007;
2000; Welch, 2000). More specifically, these sources helped to Pratt, 2009). This was done with the means to establish
check the accuracy of statements made by interviewees, to patterns of business relationship creation in the incubator and
correct the order of described developments, and based on to find potential clues for how the laissez-faire incubator had
financial reporting for all years back, to get a picture of the helped in the creations of the business relationships (see the
performances of the firms and their developments. first research question).
Thereafter, and to answer the second research question, the
Data analysis effect (roles) of these business relationships for the individual
As a first step of the analysis process, descriptions were firms was addressed, using both parties in each relationship’s
produced that departed from each of the firms and how they description of the business relationship, and what it had meant

Table I Interviews
Company Interviewee Duration of interview (in hours)
Incubated firms
Kylskåpspoesi Johan Andersson, founder 1
IT-Mästaren Martin Börjeskog, co-founder 1.5
Svea Tandvård Erkan de Basso, co-founder 1.5
Svea Tandvård Markus Klinton, (former) MD 1.5
Tele Coaching Isabel Gunnarsson, co-founder 1
Filter Björn Hagström, founder 1
Filter and Dagens skiva/Dagens bok Patrik Hamberg, employee 1
Impera Johan Plate, co-founder 1.5
Dagens skiva/Dagens bok Kal Ström, co-founder 1
Dagens skiva/Dagens bok Fredrik Welander, co-founder 1.5
Other organisations
Nora municipality Klas Brynte, business developer 1
STARTcentrum Örebro Janis Lancereau 1
Coffice Norrköping Nina Lindahl 1
Inkubera Mikale Melitshenko, CEO 1.5
Lund VentureLab Christian Tellin, business developer 1
Note: All interviews were performed by the same interviewer (the 3rd author in the list of authors for the paper)
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

for the firms. Again, the roles were reduced through We started to get dressed and get to work. In addition, not the least, we got
‘colleagues’. These functioned as workmates, also contributing to structure
comparisons among the individual firms (Eisenhardt and and the feeling that now it was for real. We had a few more people to greet in
Graebner, 2007; Pratt, 2009), and the roles were also the morning, and that could encourage us. We were also incited to do
compared for each of the two parties in the individual business. The other companies were sincere. This was important for the
development of the company as I recall it. The move to the incubator also
relationships. At this step of the analysis, the findings were eased the access to the Internet, telephone, meeting rooms, copy machines,
integrated with the IMP approach to create an understanding etc. (Johan Plate, co-founder Impera).
of the antecedents for the creation of business relationships and The students learnt from representatives of others firms in the
the roles of the relationships. As a last step of the analysis, incubator that indeed had worked or run businesses before. As
preliminary findings were compared with previous incubator this happened, the students started to see the need to fit their
research (cf. Dubois and Gadde, 2002), including previous offerings to customers. The lack of business contacts outside
IMP research on incubators. This was done to ensure the the incubator meant that discussions on potential sales soon
theoretical contribution of this paper and how it fitted with came to focus on possible deliveries to other firms in the
previous research. incubator. This included a refocus of the business. Impera
moved into providing customised web solutions as it started to
Findings provide such services to Svea Tandvård, another incubated
firm. This initial business contact not only shaped the
This section briefly describes the incubator and then describe
understanding of needs to adapt to the customer but also meant
the seven firms incubated in it: Impera, IT-Mästaren, Tele that the idea of the company moved to focus on such
Coaching, Kylskåpspoesi, Svea Tandvård, Filter and Dagens customised web design. Discussions were also held with other
skiva/Dagens bok. companies in the incubator on similar deliveries. These
discussions helped Impera to form its business and offering.
Incubator, “the corridor” The adaptation to the needs of others became an early lesson,
The incubator was located in Örebro, Sweden, close to the where the founders combined their urge to run a business with
university but not on its premises. The incubator was creating services asked for by customers. Kylskåpspoesi, also in
established on the initiative by the local science park, the the incubator, started to show interest in what Impera could do,
university and some business actors representing the local impacted by how the founders of Kylskåpspoesi followed the
business life. It was so in 1999 when the the university college interaction between Impera and Svea Tandvård. This led to
became a university. The incubator was founded based on Kylskåpspoesi starting to use services provided by Impera (see
expectations that a university should have an incubator and more later).
related to perceived governmental pressure to spin out ideas
from the university. The incubator facilitated office space and IT-Mästaren
equipment (copy machines and printers) and has in hindsight Two business students at the university college founded IT-
been referred to as “the corridor” to mark the co-location, but it Mästaren in 1998. The students had run a project to inform
provided limited service. No actual mentoring was pursued, about the college and soon founded their own business,
but seminars and similar were arranged based on the incubated Studentkompaniet, focusing on the staffing of students. They
firms’ requests. The limited amount of service to incubated thereafter started a second company, this time as franchisees
firms was a consequence of those establishing the incubator not dealing with IT. This company was soon transitioned into IT-
really knowing how to operate it. This was also seen in the Mästaren, making the founders sovereign owners rather than
selection of companies, where the incubator accepted anyone franchisees. That company moved into the incubator. Having
interested. The university was not very technologically had some previous business experience, the founders’
oriented, which is also seen in the type of ideas hosted in the interaction with other parties in the incubator focused on
incubator. Present or former students ran all of the incubated advice and recommendations to develop the business. This
firms, where some founders had returned from working in included how other firms in the incubator recommended
industry for a few years. The incubator ran for about five years, contacts to, for instance, law firms, auditors and accountants.
and during these years, it hosted the seven firms described Many of these contacts – external to the incubator from the
below, and these firms spent between one and five years in the start, but facilitated through the other firms in it – remained
incubator. over the years.
We established a number of contacts that have proven to be very valuable to
Impera us (Martin Börjeskog, co-founder, IT-Mästaren).

Impera was founded by two students at the university college in The interaction with representatives of the other firms in the
1998. The firm started off in one of the students’ dorm rooms. incubator also had another purpose. It created a competitive
The initial idea was to produce presentations working with atmosphere in terms of winning the most orders and
photo technology and focusing on 360-degree camera angles. succeeding the best. This competition was particularly
The technology for viewing such pictures online was however predominant against Tele Coaching.
not sufficiently developed, and the students also lacked We compared ourselves with one another, but this was also positive and
business contacts. Interested in pursuing business, the students contributed to our forwardness (Martin Börjeskog, co-founder, IT-
moved into the incubator. Becoming part of the incubator Mästaren).

provided work structures as opposed to seeing the firm as a Despite the competitive atmosphere, IT-Mästaren became a
hobby: producer of web solutions for Tele Coaching and provided
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

server space for the company, a business relationship that Kylskåpspoesi

remained some few years following both firms leaving the Kylskåpspoesi (translates to “refrigerator poetry”) was founded
incubator. For IT-Mästaren, this was one of its early business in 1998 by two students, one studying in Örebro and the other
relationships, which helped it to define its business further. in Karlstad. The original business idea was words on magnets
Customisation in offerings became a key aspect of the business to be placed on refrigerators for individuals to create sentences.
that thus stretched from web solutions to hardware support. The founders had seen a similar product in the USA and
IT-Mästaren subsequently left the incubator as its number of developed it to meet the Swedish market. They saw the idea as
customers outside the incubator increased. As IT-Mästaren a fun concept to explore in the wait for real jobs, but
developed, it moved away from initial ideas, while keeping the subsequently, the development of the firm took over other
focus on customised solutions. This was a lesson learnt through plans. The company moved into the incubator, where it spent
its early customer interactions in the incubator. The the following four years, and partly – at an early stage – also
interviewed co-founder underlines how the persistence and the hosted its manufacturing on the premises.
communication with customers helped to refocus the business Having a consumer product meant that the firm worked with
under times of difficulties, and how the early interaction with retailers external to the incubator while demonstrating the
possible and, in the case of Tele Coaching, actual customers in product in the incubator. Advice from other firms in the
the incubator, was essential to develop such a focus. The incubator was considered valuable for the company’s
company was, after it had left the incubator, hired as a supplier development. The type of product meant that the other parties
by those individuals involved with the incubated firm Filter and extensively tried it out but without becoming customers (more
Dagens skiva/Dagens bok. These founders had observed the than some possibly limited purchases for fun).
capabilities of IT-Mästaren as they saw its deliveries to Tele As a newly established firm, you have a lot of questions and the need to
Coaching. exchange thoughts with others takes away some of the concern that may
otherwise make you unfocused (Johan Andersson, founder, Kylskåpspoesi).

Tele Coaching The company soon achieved sales. The hype of refrigerator
One student and her colleague founded Tele Coaching in poetry spread and was picked up by the media. While having its
1997. Both founders had worked in the industry for some seven customer base external to the incubator, Kylskåpspoesi
years when they founded the company, then focused on call searched and found suppliers in the incubator. Having seen the
centre services. Having worked quite intensively with company- interaction between Impera and Svea Tandvård, it found
internal education, they founded Tele Coaching to focus on Impera to be a skilled IT supplier for various types of solutions.
such deliveries. The firm moved into the incubator in 1999 and The services were adjusted to Kylskåpspoesi’s needs while
soon hired its first employee. From early on, the firm worked affected by how Impera demonstrated what could be achieved.
with how it should interact with its customers, while the The business relationship with Impera was not very extensive
founders did not network severely with the other companies. from Kylskåpspoesi’s point of view, but remained since Impera
had left the incubator. Kylskåpspoesi came to be one of the
We did not have very extensive contacts with the other companies in the
incubator. The simple reason was that we did not have the time. We were
firms staying in the incubator the longest.
very focused on creating results through sales (Isabel Gunnarsson, co- In 2002, we and Tele Coaching were the only ones remaining in the
founder, Tele Coaching). incubator (Johan Andersson, founder, Kylskåpspoesi).
Since Tele Coaching brought both the experience and Over the years, the company internationalised its business,
customer contacts from previous experience, it was strongly focusing on the Nordic countries, and thereafter Germany, The
focusing on pursuing its business outside of the incubator. It Netherlands, Belgium, Italy and Spain. Following the
was also the party providing advice on lawyers and accountants geographical expansion, the company started to consider how it
to the other firms. As described above though, it became a would expand its concepts, increasingly focusing on gaming.
customer to IT-Mästaren, as it needed help with web solutions The refocusing was a lesson learnt from having seen other firms
and IT storage space. This relationship was more important to in the incubator changing their businesses.
IT-Mästaren than to Tele Coaching, as it was only a support
supplier in the eyes of Tele Coaching. IT-Mästaren adjusted Svea Tandvård
unilaterally to Tele Coaching. In the competitive atmosphere Two brothers, one a dentist and the other a business student,
created between IT-Mästaren and Tele Coaching, Tele founded Svea Tandvård (“Svea dentist care” in translation) in
Coaching felt that IT-Mästaren measured itself more with Tele 1999. The business concept concerned the starting and
Coaching than the opposite, and that IT-Mästaren was a step acquisition of private dentist practices, enabled by the
behind. deregulation in the sector. The first two clinics were acquired in
Some ten years following its foundation, Tele Coaching had Kumla and Arboga, two neighbouring cities of Örebro. The
developed in a way that meant that it needed to change its way company hired an MD at an early stage and chose a student
to be organised, leading to a more formalised organisation. It colleague from the university for this position. Svea Tandvård
was about that time, and thus since it had left the incubator, moved into the incubator in the year 2000. The firm’s business
that Tele Coaching hired an operations manager with the administration and strategic operations were run from the
background from Svea Tandvård, another incubated firm. The incubator, while the dentist founder worked at one of the
local presence and the getting to know the founders and staff at owned clinics.
the other incubated firms created a reassurance that helped in Being a dentist practice, the company did not have much in
this decision. common in its daily operations with the other firms in the
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

incubator. Focusing on creating business in a niche previously known by Filter’s founders and since IT-Mästaren had proven
operated by public actors though meant that the company dealt its capabilities in the interaction with Tele Coaching.
with several strategic issues. In these, and particularly the Compared to IT-Mästaren’s business relationship with Tele
struggle of the strategic direction, the company found support Coaching, IT-Mästaren had to take much more of a guiding
among the other incubated firms. role in its interaction with Filter. To Filter, the relationship
The differences in types of business and business approach created a became essential because of the lack of IT competences among
positive dynamic in the incubator, based on how we were different the individuals of Filter. The business relationship became
companies and different individuals. Some of the learning among the firms complementary, and Filter’s owners had difficulties learning
resulted from this dynamic (Markus Klinton, MD, Svea Tandvård).
from it since they lacked those fundamental skills needed to get
We often discussed different problems among us and could thereby attain the operations.
new perspectives on matters. We backed one another in the incubator Compared to the other firms in the incubator, Filter’s
(Erkan de Basso, co-founder, Svea Tandvård).
operations changed in a different way. An entirely new business
While Svea Tandvård’s customer interaction was external to was developed, Dagens skiva/Dagens bok (see next), when the
the incubator, the company searched for suppliers to support company itself did not manage to create enough progress.
services in the incubator. Impera became a supplier of web
solutions to the company. To Svea Tandvård, these deliveries Dagens skiva/Dagens bok
were a means to differentiate itself and be perceived as a Dagens skiva and Dagens bok (the record/book of the day) were
modern operating company, unlike the public competitors. two websites focusing on reviewing music records and books on
The choice of Impera followed from intense discussions on a daily basis. These were founded by the individuals previously
strategies between representatives of both firms. The deliveries founding and working for Filter. A book/record review was
as such were of less importance to Svea Tandvård than to produced every day on a website and aimed at creating interest
Impera. in cultural expressions. As before with Filter, the founders were
One and a half years past the move to the incubator, Svea largely artistically driven and less focused on conducting
Tandvård moved on to be situated at one of the clinics. Since business and achieving revenues. The company initially
then, a Norwegian company, Colosseum, operating in the focused on record reviews to later expand into book reviews.
dentist area, has acquired the company. While not being in The company was never placed in the incubator, but based
the incubator for an extensive period, Svea Tandvård’s time in on how the founders through Filter had been part of the
the incubator resulted in how the MD of the company was later incubator, Dagens skiva/Dagens bok benefitted from contacts
recruited to Tele Coaching. developed there. Collaborations were started with some
companies in the incubator, although to a limited extent. The
Filter experience of IT-Mästaren as a supplier to Filter meant that
Two former music and media students, who had worked Dagens skiva/Dagens bok saw IT-Mästaren as a trusted choice
together with student initiatives at the university, founded when developing the web solution for the reviews. This
Filter in 1998. The company focused on web communication relationship was established since IT-Mästaren had left the
for the public sector. Its founders were much driven by artistic incubator and was more fundamental for Dagens skiva/Dagens
creativity and the aim to do differently. Filter soon moved into bok than for IT-Mästaren, which at that point served several
the incubator. Lacking business experience, the founders soon other customers. IT-Mästaren adjusted its offering to Dagens
hired a third person and worked hard to create contacts with skiva/Dagens bok, which in this case, and similar to Filter,
the public sector. This process went slow, but the founders meant that IT-Mästaren took on most of the IT development in
developed skills in understanding customers’ needs. This led to the interaction with a party not well informed about technology
an early focus on printed material. These skills were largely the or possible solutions. Dagens skiva/Dagens bok though had a
result of attempts to establish business relationships external to lot of artistic ideas and opinions related to solutions discussed.
the incubator, while the founders found support in their efforts Dagens skiva was cancelled in 2012, and the last book review
from the other firms in the incubator. Being in the incubator was published in 2013. Its founders were thereafter active in
created meeting space with other firms. This helped not only in creating one of Sweden’s first music sites. As with its previous
a supportive manner but also in creating creative and attempts, the founders continued to focus on the cultural and
innovative solutions, and in the understanding of customer artistic dimensions while needing to rely on others (again
adaptation. including IT-Mästaren) for actually developing their ideas. To
The incubator contributed to the feeling of being chosen and acknowledged. summarise the above, Table II depicts the business
We were heading somewhere. It was also very financially beneficiary to be relationships among the individual firms in the incubator.
placed there, and we felt cool for being there. We were 25 years old, and we
were very different as individuals. Nevertheless, meeting those others was
very developing. The driving forces may be very different, and this is Analysis and discussion
something that I have carried with me. It enabled us to get started (Fredrik
Welander, first employee, Filter). The incubator addressed in the empirics of this paper provided
Being artistically driven and not having in-depth skills in the very limited support. It mainly focused on floor space and office
technology, the founders of Filter needed collaboration equipment facilitation, and as a key point of this paper; it did
partners to support them in the very development of solutions. not help in the creation of business relationships, neither
Filter soon started to do business with IT-Mästaren. IT- internal nor external to the incubator facilities. Relying on the
Mästaren had at this point already left the incubator but definition by Bergek and Norrman (2008), the incubator would
remained the first choice for Filter as it was the only IT supplier be an example of a laissez-faire incubator. This also follows
Table II Business relationships among the incubated firms

Dagens skiva/Dagens
Incubated firm Impera IT-Mästaren Tele Coaching Kylskåpspoesi Svea Tandvård Filter bok
Impera Impera got “colleagues” Impera sold some IT Impera and Svea Impera got Impera got
through the incubator, services to Kylskåpspoesi Tandvård discussed “colleagues” through “colleagues” through
with, for instance, IT- different business issues the incubator, with, the incubator, with, for
Mästaren and Impera customised for instance, Filter instance, Dagens skiva/
solutions to Svea Dagens bok, despite
Tandvård. This was Dagens skiva/Dagens
important for Impera to bok never being hosted
learn about customer in the incubator
Business relationship creations

adaptation and define its

business
IT-Mästaren IT-Mästaren got IT-Mästaren produced IT-Mästaren was helped IT-Mästaren has IT-Mästaren has worked
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

“colleagues” through web solution and to establish business worked with the with the founders of
Impera; both firms’ delivered server to Tele contacts by, for instance, founders of Filter Dagens skiva/Dagens
owners put efforts on Coaching. Tele Coaching Svea Tandvård. after the time in the bok after the time in the
social networking in the helped through Experience sharing incubator. incubator; supply of
incubator recommending lawyers, customised solutions
etc. The relationship
helped IT-Mästaren to
define its business
Tele Coaching Tele Coaching provided The MD of Svea Tandvård
business ambitions to IT- was later operative
Mästaren and became a manager at Tele Coaching
customer to IT-Mästaren (after the time in the
incubator)
Kylskåpspoesi Kylskåpspoesi bought Kylskåpspoesi learnt Kylskåpspoesi and Tele
some services from about business renewal Coaching came to be the
Impera. This was the from for instance IT- companies remaining the
result of Kylskåpspoesi Mästaren longest in the incubator
having studied the
interaction between
Impera and Svea
Tandvård. The business
relationship remained
since Impera had left the
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing

incubator
(continued)
Table II

Dagens skiva/Dagens
Incubated firm Impera IT-Mästaren Tele Coaching Kylskåpspoesi Svea Tandvård Filter bok
Svea Tandvård Svea Tandvård discussed Tele Coaching recruited Svea Tandvård got Svea Tandvård got
Business relationship creations

business issues with the MD of Svea Tandvård “colleagues” through “colleagues” through
Impera and became an as its operative manager the incubator, with, the incubator, with, for
early customer to Impera for instance, Filter instance, Dagens skiva/
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

Dagens bok
Filter Development of collegial Filter worked with IT- Filter’s CEO was the
atmosphere with Impera Mästaren after both firms CEO of Dagens skiva/
had left the incubator. Dagens bok and the
This was the result of firms had the same
Filter having seen how IT- founders
Mästaren worked with
Tele Coaching and was an
important relationship for
Filter since it lacked
necessary skills
Dagens skiva/ Worked with IT-Mästaren Dagens skiva/Dagens bok Same founders of
Dagens bok after it had left the got colleagues with Svea Filter as of Dagens
incubator, a result of Tandvård despite Dagens skiva/Dagens bok
having evaluated IT- skiva/Dagens bok never
Mästaren’s capacity in its being located in the
interaction with Tele incubator
Coaching and Filter
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

from the incubator as an un(der)developed incubator, where its created including parties with no previous experience, the ones
founders lacked the knowledge on how to operate an incubator. created based on convenience reasons included how suppliers
Related to the incubator being a laissez-faire type, and the adapted to customers, rather than the reverse. As seen in the
observation that the incubated firms created business business relationship between IT-Mästaren and Filter, this also
relationships among them, this paper addressed the following applied when the supplier was the more experienced party.
research questions: What explains the creation of business Convenience as an antecedent suggests a somewhat limited
relationships among incubated firms in a laissez-faire engagement by the party selecting a business partner in the
incubator? And, what roles do these business relationships play incubator. The antecedent resembles proximity (Öberg, 2018;
for the incubated firms? These questions guide the analysis Roig-Tierno et al., 2015) but denotes how the creation of a
below, while Table III provides a summary of the incubated business relationship is a choice of not looking into other
firms along with the antecedents and roles of the business alternatives. The antecedent also links to networking in
relationships for each firm. incubators (McAdam and Marlow, 2007; Schwartz and
Hornych, 2010; Sá and Lee, 2012; Ebbers, 2013; Soetanto and
Antecedents to business relationship creation Jack, 2013), but while such studies point at how social
Turning to how business relationships were created and based relationships may be established in an incubator, the
on how the incubator was a passive, laissez-faire incubator networking is in those studies not seen as an antecedent to
(Hackett and Dilts, 2004; Bergek and Norrman, 2008), it did business relationships.
not facilitate business relationship creation (Cantù, 2015), As business relationships were created in the incubator,
neither within the incubator nor with external parties. This including both those parties with previous business experience
again meant that the incubated firms needed to find their own and those gaining such through the interaction with the other
ways, which included intense discussions among the firms on firms in the incubator, a third antecedent came into play: that of
how to develop their businesses, but thus also led to the parties choosing business partners based on seeing them
creation of business relationships. Looking at what facilitated interacting with others in the incubator. This antecedent
these business relationship creations, three antecedents could entailed trust established based on parties being evaluated
be suggested: lack of experience and connections, convenience through their interaction with others. A shared characteristic
and trust established through others. These are further discussed among the “followers” was how the business relationships were
below. initiated by the customers, and how these were less experienced
For companies with no previous experience (as firms, but than those companies they followed. This applied to how
also in terms of founders not having conducted business Kylskåpspoesi evaluated and considered Impera a trustworthy
before), the incubator became “everything”. This followed and skilled supplier since Kylskåpspoesi had been able to follow
from a lack of experience and connections. These firms established the business relationship between Impera and Svea Tandvård
their first business relationships with other firms in the close at hand. It applied to how Filter and Dagens skiva/Dagens
incubator. Impera is one example of this. Its business bok decided to engage IT-Mästaren for IT solutions, as these
relationship with Svea Tandvård followed from how Impera firms had seen the business relationship between IT-Mästaren
lacked business contacts and also parties facilitating such and Tele Coaching. The carrying forth of the business contact
connections, where a more active incubator may have helped in between Filter and Dagens skiva/Dagens bok followed a similar
that regard. It actively came to search for customers in the pattern, while Tele Coaching’s hiring of an MD previously
incubator as a means to achieve revenues. Filter is another working for Svea Tandvård indicates such an effect on the
example: it searched for suppliers of IT solutions as its founders individual-to-individual level.
lacked such competences and turned to IT-Mästaren for these The trust established through seeing the interaction between
services. Analysing only these two examples indicates how the parties in the incubator can be described as a network effect
supplying firms are those adapting to customers, while (Anderson et al., 1994). This is so since previous business
customers, regardless of them having previous experience from relationships caused a new one to be created and thus includes
business relationships or not, did not do so. Thus, there is a parties in the incubator beyond the specific business
unilateral adaptation of businesses (Hallén et al., 1991), where relationship. Such relationships were also created after the
the supplier in the business relationship would be the party firms had left the incubator, indicating a memory effect
adapting. If comparing the antecedent of lack of experience to connected with trust. The trust established based on parties
previous research on incubators, previous studies, for the most being evaluated through their interaction with others is here
part, assume that it is the incubator that brings experience to described as a network-in effect, to mark how it is relationships in
incubated firms (Hackett and Dilts, 2004; Clarysse et al., 2005; the network that is the antecedent for the creation of a business
Hillemane et al., 2019) and hence not how experience is created relationship.
through the interaction among incubated firms. The three suggested antecedents may partly be overlapping,
For firms and founders with previous experience of but are distinguishable based on how they entail differences in
conducting business, the creation of business relationships with terms of experience/lack of experience of doing business, and
other parties in the incubator could be explained as a matter of whether or not other business relationships in the incubator
convenience based on the other firms being easily accessible. constructed reasons for business relationship creation.
Tele Coaching’s business relationship with IT-Mästaren is one
example thereof. For Tele Coaching, this business relationship Roles of business relationships
was not of key importance but came about as the firm needed As for the roles of the business relationships, the incubated
some IT-related support. Similar to the business relationships firms learnt to adjust and adapt their businesses, learnt how to
Table III Incubated firms

Antecedents to creating
Years in the Current size (Revenues/ business relationships in the Role of business relationships
Firm incubator number of employees) Business and development Previous experience incubator in incubator
Impera 3 years 23 MSEK/23 employees Founded by 2 students Lack of experience and business
No previous business experience Learn from others how to pursue
Initial focus: photo technology relationships led to customers
and no business relationships as it business including the need to fit
Refocus to web design following being sought in the incubator
entered the incubator. Other firms offerings to customers
business interaction with others Transformation of operations
in the incubator thereby became Customer relationships in the
important to provide work based on initial customer contact incubator led to a refocus of
(Svea Tandvård) in incubator
structure and learn how to pursue operations
business Additional customer Early relationships created ground
(Kylskåpspoesi) followed from that for later ones
Business relationship creations

company seeing the initial

customer relationship
IT-Mästaren 2.5 years 121 MSEK/78 employees Founded by 2 students The founders had created 2 As a supplier of IT-solutions to Increased customisation of
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

Franchise company transformed companies dealing with student provide such solutions to others offerings (dyadic level adaptation)
into IT-Mästaren consultancy and IT franchising, (convenience of these parties) Understanding of how to refocus
Development of web solutions respectively Incubated firms (Filter and Dagens the offerings to fit customers on
skiva/Dagens bok) observed the dyadic levels
interaction between IT-Mästaren
and Tele Coaching which led them
to establishing business
relationships with IT-Mästaren
Tele Coaching 4 years 17 MSEK/19 employees Founded by former student and Founders had worked in industry Customer finding suppliers (IT- Obtain supply of web solution and
one external person for seven years, which led to them Mästaren) of support services IT storage, where the supplier was
Telemarketing and education helping others more than the (convenience) the one adapting to the firm
reverse in the incubator and
particularly related to providing
contacts to external parties
(lawyers, etc.)
Kylskåpspoesi 4 years 40 MSEK/12 employees Founded by 2 students, one of No previous experience Obtain supply of IT solutions Customer finding supplier of
which local (Impera); choice based on seeing support services
Idea of word magnets seen in the others interact in the incubator Learn to transform businesses
USA adjusted to Swedish market (trust/evaluated through others) through observing others
Gaming
Svea Tandvård 1.5 years Merged 2016 Founded by 1 student and his Brother experience as dentist Customer finding suppliers of Obtain supply of IT solutions
brother, a dentist support services Supply of support services to
Choosing supplier based on seeing differentiate offering to customers
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing

(continued)
Table III

Antecedents to creating
Years in the Current size (Revenues/ business relationships in the Role of business relationships
Business relationship creations

Firm incubator number of employees) Business and development Previous experience incubator in incubator
Starting and acquiring dental the supplier’s (Impera’s) business
practices at time of deregulation relationship with Kylskåpspoesi
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

(trust/evaluated through others)

Filter 2 years Terminated in 2004, Founded by 2 media/music No previous experience Obtain supply of IT solutions (IT- Customer finding suppliers of
continued as Dagens students Mästaren); choice based on seeing support services
skiva/Dagens bok Web communication for the public interactions of others and lacking No previous experience led to
sector knowledge about other firms transformation of operations based
Refocus to Dagens skiva/Dagens (trust/evaluated through others) on interactions with others, that is,
bok understanding adaptation to
customers through others
Dagens skiva/ Never in the Terminated in 2013, Founders from Filter Experience from Filter Obtain supply of IT solutions (IT- Customer finding suppliers of
Dagens bok incubator, but continued as new project Review music and books Mästaren); choice based on seeing support services
the prolonging of Later turned into music site as new interactions of others and previous Limited previous experience led to
Filter (see above) venture experience with the supplier transformation of operations based
(inherited contacts from Filter) on interactions with others
Note: Revenues and number of employees refer to 2018. 1 MSEK is approximately 100tEUR
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

act in business relationships and learnt from early on how to a party led to another business relationship. This other business
achieve revenues. The roles played though differed somewhat relationship had the same supplier as the previous ones. We
among the firms. There is again the divide between firms and label this a network-in effect, as it is the business networking of
founders with no previous business experience, and those with the supplier that led to the creation of a new business
some established business relationships and experience from relationship.
running businesses. For the former, the incubator thus became As for the roles the business relationship played, these could
“everything”. These firms adjusted their businesses not only as be summarised as how they transformed the business or only
within-business relationship adaptation (Hallén et al., 1991) included adaptation in the dyad. In both these circumstances,
but in terms of the entire business content. They did so based adaptation suggests being connected to being the supplier.
on those initial business relationships formed in the incubator. Meanwhile, the business transformation was linked to parties
Impera is one example of this, where its business relationship lacking experience, while the possible adaptation in the dyad
with Svea Tandvård came to define the focus of the entire was connected to parties having some previous business
business to be about web design. Hence, the lack of experience experience. The transformation of business would affect the
led to what could be referred to as adaptation on the business business of the party in the future, and thereby its other
level – or transformation of business – also affecting future business relationships. It could thereby be seen as a network
business relationships. effect (Anderson et al., 1994). We describe these as a network-
The firms with some previous business experience likewise out effect, as it led to a future spread into new relationships. One
adapted to the business partners in the incubator but did so on business relationship led to a transformation of operations
the dyadic, relationship level, rather than in terms of affecting the future network interaction of the firm.
transforming their entire businesses. The owners of IT- So, how were these antecedents and roles linked to the
Mästaren had some experience from conducting business. laissez-faire type of incubator? Had the incubator been more
While the company increasingly became adaptive to customers active, its focus would presumably have been on streamlining
in its offerings, this did not redefine what products/services developments through a program and on business relationships
were offered. with external, incumbent parties, as described in previous
The roles of the business relationships could thus be research (Nowak and Grantham, 2000; Rothschild and Darr,
understood in terms of adaptation, where the adaptation 2005; Totterman and Sten, 2005; Hughes et al., 2007; Scillitoe
suggests being unilateral rather than mutual (Ford, 1980; and Chakrabarti, 2010; Cantù, 2015). This again would not
Hallén et al., 1991). The dyadic adaptation could be seen as a have created the same learning ground as did the real-world
relational effect, while the transformation of business would interaction among firms in the incubator. Being left without
have network implications. This is based on how future much support, the companies learnt the fundamental skills of
business relationships of the firm would be affected by the
developing business relationships from one another.
adjustments made from the initial business relationship in the
The antecedent of lack of experience and connections is the one
incubator. This paper describes this as network-out effects as they
that would foremost be linked to the laissez-faire incubator, as
start in a dyad but spread to new relationships. Figure 1
the inexperienced firms needed to figure out everything from
summarises the antecedents and roles.
scratch. Based on how the antecedent connects to the
transformation of businesses, it indicates how the business
Conclusions relationships were truly important for the development of the
The purpose of this paper is to explore the creation of business firms. Convenience and trust could also possibly appear in other
relationships among incubated firms during and after their time types of incubators, based on co-location. However, incubator
in the incubator. The paper specifically focuses on the laissez- programs and firms being treated as separate parties by the
faire type of incubators. It puts focus on the antecedents that incubator would assume to inhibit the creation of business
facilitate the creation of the business relationship in incubators, relationships to some extent, and the trust through others’
along with the consequences of these business relationships for interactions would not follow if other business relationships
the incubated firms. The antecedents were linked to the lack of had not been created in the incubator. Adaptation as a
experience and connections, convenience, and trust created through consequence of the business relationships is a skill which helped
others’ interactions. Among these, the last antecedent could thus the firms in their further progress, and which would expect to
be seen as a network effect in how the business relationships of have come later if the incubator had focused on a process of

Figure 1 Antecedents and roles

 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

accelerating knowledge from how to develop an idea, over how that takes against highly specialised incubators (Schwartz and
to apply for funding from venture firms, to eventually leave the Hornych, 2010).
incubator as a fully fleshed company (Markman et al., 2005; For managers of incubated firms, ideas on transformations of
McAdam and McAdam, 2008). businesses and adaptation, bring forth how real-life interaction
In terms of theoretical contributions, this paper contributes with other firms at an early stage helps the firm not only to
to IMP studies on incubators (Maia et al., 2012; Cantù, 2015; produce skills of adaptation, but also to find a rightful position
Purchase et al., 2017; Shih and Aaboen, 2018) through its of the operations. To enter into a laissez-faire incubator may
description of how business relationships may be created in an therefore be a strategic choice for obtaining fundamental skills
incubator. Previous IMP studies have mostly focused on the in how to operate in a real-world context. It may also be a
same process of unilateral knowledge transfer as the general conscious choice to go there to attract customers in the
incubator literature. Business relationships among firms in the incubator or to establish supplier relationships that may be
incubator portray a network-like process that fits well with the important for the continuous development of the firm.
general IMP idea, but introduces specific characteristics Managers should thereby carefully consider what incubator
compared to previous incubator studies. To the broader IMP support is really needed, how it is best obtained and what the
audience, the paper puts forth network effects in the form of the business potential would be if the company becomes part of an
network-in/network-out description of the selection of business incubator and depending on the support provided by the
partners based on their interaction with others, and in terms of incubator.
transformation extending beyond dyadic adaptation. The This paper is based on the study of incubated firms in a
distinction between firms with previous and no previous specific context and in an incubator characterised by a laissez-
business experience is important here and extends descriptions faire regime (Bergek and Norrman, 2008). Additional,
on the creation of the first and second customer relationship, as verifying studies would be prompted. The paper puts a focus on
elaborated on in studies on start-ups (Aaboen et al., 2013). the creation of relationships. Future studies may take a process
To research on incubators, the paper points out how a perspective on business relationships in the incubator, to
laissez-faire incubator may foster incubated companies to take thereby see how the relationships change over time and how
their own initiatives. The business relationships established their roles may shift during the development process. The
between the firms became a way of coaching. This coaching particularity of business relationships being evaluated based on
came forth in how the companies in a real-world context tested other parties’ interactions would be of interest to study further
their business efforts, let alone adapted them to counterparts or and in various contexts.
transformed their operations. Again, business relationships as Practically, it would be interesting to develop ideas focusing
valuable for developing businesses have been long on intra-incubator business relationship creation as a means of
acknowledged, but not seen as a primary aspect in incubator coaching and what that would bring in terms of incubator and
studies as something happening in the incubator. Previous company successes. Comparisons among different incubators
incubator studies rather focus on external business based on their organising (or lack of support) would be
relationships as a means to create revenues and achieve advice important as would studies concerning different compilations
(von Zedwitz, 2003). The unilateral knowledge transfer of firms in incubators. Such studies would enable the further
process of developing from an early idea to achieve revenues development of best practices and how ideal incubators should
would, in the context described here, rather be a matter of co- work. Such studies should also ideally compare laissez faire and
production of knowledge and business. This is the case since other types of incubators with start ups’ option not to become
business relationship creation in the incubator puts focus on part of an incubator.
circles of transformation, adaptation, new relationships being
established based on previous ones, and learning circles among
the incubated firms.
References
As for the practical implications and related to policy Aaboen, L., La Rocca, A., Lind, F., Perna, A. and Shih, T.
particularly, and based on how practice implies an ever- (Eds) (2017), Starting up in Business Networks: Why
increasing amount of support to incubated firms, this paper Relationships Matter in Entrepreneurship, London, Palgrave.
brings forth an important implication: That less may be more. Aaboen, L., Dubois, A. and Lind, F. (2013), “Strategizing as
Through providing fewer support services, incubators may networking for new ventures”, Industrial Marketing
foster the creation of business relationships, and mean that the Management, Vol. 42 No. 7, pp. 1033-1041.
incubated firms adjust their businesses more swiftly. Again, this Aaboen, L., Laage-Hellman, J., Lind, F., Öberg, C. and Shih,
introduces ideas for new incubator programs, focusing more on T. (2016), “Exploring the roles of university spin-offs in
the business interaction among firms and less on interventions business networks”, Industrial Marketing Management,
from the incubator organisation. The paper further points at Vol. 59, pp. 157-166.
how the mixture of more and less experienced firms would Aerts, K., Matthyssens, P. and Vandenbempt, K. (2007),
foster learning among them. There is the obvious risk that those “Critical role and screening practices of European business
with more experience would not find this as helpful as those incubators”, Technovation, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 254-267.
with less. The paper though shows that the more experienced Amezcua, A.S., Grimes, M.G., Bradley, S.W. and Wiklund, J.
firms also gained business relationships through the interaction (2013), “Organizational sponsorship and founding
in the incubator. The paper also points at how a mixture of environments: a contingency view on the survival of business
firms reflecting possible suppliers and customers to one another incubated firms”, Academy of Management Journal.” , Vol. 56
would foster the creation of business relationships, something No. 6, pp. 1628-1654.
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

Anderson, J.C., Håkansson, H. and Johanson, J. (1994), Ebbers, J.J. (2013), “Networking behavior and contracting
“Dyadic business relationships within a business network relationships among entrepreneurs in business incubators”,
context”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 1-15. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 38 No. 5,
Bager-Sjögren, L. (2018), Ekonomisk Utveckling Efter Inkubation pp. 1159-1181.
– Analys av Företag i Det Nationella Inkubatorprogrammet, Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. (2007), “Theory
Myndigheten för tillväxtpolitiska utvärderingar och analyser, building from cases: opportunities and challenges”, Academy
Östersund. of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25-32.
Baraldi, E., Ingemansson, M. and Launberg, A. (2014), Etzkowitz, H., de Mello, J.M.C. and Almeida, M. (2005),
“Controlling the commercialisation of science across inter- “Towards ‘meta-innovation’ in Brazil: the evolution of the
organisational borders: four cases from two major Swedish incubator and the emergence of a triple helix”, Research
universities”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 43 Policy, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 411-424.
No. 3, pp. 382-391. Ford, D. (1980), “The development of buyer-seller
Barbero, J.L., Casillas, J.C., Wright, M. and Garcia, A.R. relationships in industrial markets”, European Journal of
(2014), “Do different types of incubators produce different Marketing, Vol. 14 Nos 5/6, pp. 339-354.
types of innovations?”, The Journal of Technology Transfer, Ford, D. and Håkansson, H. (2006), “The idea of interaction”,
Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 151-168. The IMP Journal, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 4-27.
Berbegal-Mirabent, J., Ribeiro-Soriano, D.E. and Garcia, J.L. Gerlach, S. and Brem, A. (2015), “What determines a
S. (2015), “Can a magic recipe foster university spin-off successful business incubator? Introduction to an incubator
creation?”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68 No. 11, guide”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing,
pp. 2272-2278. Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 286-307.
Bergek, A. and Norrman, C. (2008), “Incubator best practice: Grimaldi, R. and Grandi, A. (2005), “Business incubators and
a framework”, Technovation, Vol. 28 Nos 1/2, pp. 20-28. new venture creation: an assessment of incubating models”,
Bollingtoft, A. (2012), “The bottom-up business incubator: Technovation, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 111-121.
leverage to networking and cooperation practices in a self- Guercini, S. and Milanesi, M. (2018), “Newness and heritage
generated, entrepreneurial-enabled environment”, in business networks: case analysis of university spin-offs”,
Technovation, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 304-315. Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 80, pp. 139-148.
Bollingtoft, A. and Ulhoi, J.P. (2005), “The networked Hackett, S.M. and Dilts, D.M. (2004), “A real options-driven
business incubator – leveraging entrepreneurial agency?”, theory of business incubation”, The Journal of Technology
Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 265-290. Transfer, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 41-54.
Bruneel, J., Ratinho, T., Clarysse, B. and Groen, A. (2012), Håkansson, H. and Snehota, I. (1989), “No business is an
“The evolution of business incubators: comparing demand island – the network concept of business strategy”,
and supply of business incubation services across different Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 5 No. 3,
incubator generations”, Technovation, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 187-200.
pp. 110-121. Håkansson, H. and Waluszewski, A. (Eds) (2007),
Cantù, C. (2014), “Entrepreneurial network: the new role of “Interaction: the only means to create use”, Knowledge and
incubators and accelerators”, 30th IMP-conference, Bordeaux. Innovation in Business and Industry. The Importance of Using
Cantù, C. (2015), “A service incubator business model: Others, Routledge, London, pp. 147-167.
external networking orientation”, IMP Journal, Vol. 9 No. 3, Håkansson, H., Ford, D., Gadde, L.-E., Snehota, I. and
pp. 267-285. Waluszewski, A. (2009), Business in Networks, John Wiley &
Chan, K.F. and Lau, T. (2005), “Assessing technology Sons, Chichester.
incubator programs in the science park: the good, the bad Hallén, L., Johanson, J. and Seyed-Mohamed, N. (1991),
and the ugly”, Technovation, Vol. 25 No. 10, pp. 1215-1228. “Interfirm adaptation in business relationships”, Journal of
Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., van de Velde, E. and Marketing, Vol. 55 No. 2, pp. 29-37.
Vohora, A. (2005), “Spinning out new ventures: a typology Hansen, M.T., Chesbrough, H.W., Nohria, N. and Sull, D.N.
of incubation strategies from European research (2000), “Networked incubators – Hothouses of the new
institutions”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 20 No. 2, economy”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78 No. 5,
pp. 183-216. pp. 74-84.
Colombo, M.G. and Delmastro, M. (2002), “How effective are Hausberg, J.P. and Korreck, S. (2018), “Business incubators
technology incubators? Evidence from Italy”, Research Policy, and accelerators: a co-citation analysis-based, systematic
Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 1103-1122. literature review”, Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 43
Cooper, C.E., Hamel, S.A. and Connaughton, S.L. (2012), No. 1, pp. 1-26.
“Motivations and obstacles to networking in a university Havila, V. (1996), “When does an international business
business incubator”, The Journal of Technology Transfer, relationship become non-existent?”, 25th EMAC Conference,
Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 433-453. Budapest University of Economic Sciences.
Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds) (2000), Handbook of Hillemane, B., Subrahmanya, M., Satyanarayana, K. and
Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, Chandrashekar, D. (2019), “Technology business
CA. incubation for start-up generation a literature review toward
Dubois, A. and Gadde, L.-E. (2002), “Systematic combining: a conceptual framework”, International Journal of
an abductive approach to case research”, Journal of Business Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, Vol. 25 No. 7,
Research, Vol. 55 No. 7, pp. 553-560. pp. 1471-1493.
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

Huber, G.P. and Power, D.J. (1985), “Retrospective reports of O’Gorman, C., Byrne, O. and Pandya, D. (2008), “How
strategic-level managers: guidelines for increasing their scientists commercialise new knowledge via entrepreneurship”,
accuracy”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 6 No. 2, The Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 23-43.
pp. 171-180. Öberg, C. (2018), “The dynamics of proximity in multiple-
Hughes, M., Ireland, R.D. and Morgan, R.E. (2007), party innovation processes”, IMP Journal, Vol. 12 No. 2,
“Stimulating dynamic value: social capital and business pp. 296-312.
incubation as a pathway to competitive success”, Long Range Öberg, C. and Shih, T. (2014), “Divergent and convergent
Planning, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 154-177. logic of firms – barriers and enablers for development and
Jessop, B. (2005), “Critical realism and strategic-relational commercialization of innovations”, Industrial Marketing
approach”, Critical Realism Today, Vol. 56, pp. 40-53. Management , Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 419-428.
La Rocca, A. and Snehota, I. (2014), “Relating in business Pauwels, C., Clarysse, B., Wright, M. and Van Hove, J. (2016),
networks: innovation in practice”, Industrial Marketing “Understanding a new generation incubation model: the
Management, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 441-447. accelerator”, Technovation, Vols 50/51, pp. 13-24.
La Rocca, A., Öberg, C. and Hoholm, T. (2017), “When start- Peters, L., Rice, M. and Sundararajan, M. (2004), “The role of
ups shift network–notes on start-ups journey”, in Aaboen, incubators in the entrepreneurial process”, The Journal of
L., La Rocca, A., Lind, F., Perna, A. and Shih, T. (Eds), Technology Transfer, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 83-91.
Starting up in Business Networks: Why Relationships Matter in Petrucci, F. (2018), “The incubation process of mid-stage
Entrepreneurship, Palgrave Macmillan, London. startup companies: a business network perspective”, IMP
Laage-Hellman, J., Lind, F., Öberg, C. and Shih, T. (2017), Journal, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 544-566.
“Never look back? Modes of interaction between university Pratt, M.G. (2009), “From the editors: for the lack of
spin-offs and the academia following commercialization”, boilerplate: tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative
23rd Nordic Workshop on Interorganizational Research, research”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 52 No. 5,
Stavanger. pp. 856-862.
Lind, F. and Landqvist, M. (2018), “A start-up embedding in Purchase, S., Schepis, D. and Butler, B. (2017), “The role of
three business network settings – a matter of resource corporate partners within innovation incubators”, 33rd IMP-
combining”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 80, conference, Kuala Lumpur.
pp. 160-171. Rice, M.P. (2002), “Co-production of business assistance in
Lockett, A., Siegel, D., Wright, M. and Ensley, M.D. (2005), business incubators – an exploratory study”, Journal of
“The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: Business Venturing, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 163-187.
managerial and policy implications”, Research Policy, Vol. 34 Roig-Tierno, N., Alcázar, J. and Ribeiro-Navarrete, S. (2015),
No. 7, pp. 981-993. “Use of infrastructures to support innovative entrepreneurship
Löfsten, H. and Lindelöf, P. (2005), “R&D networks and and business growth”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68
product innovation patterns – academic and non-academic No. 11, pp. 2290-2294.
new technology-based firms on science parks”, Technovation, Rothaermel, F.T. and Thursby, M. (2005), “University-incubator
Vol. 25 No. 9, pp. 1025-1037. firm knowledge flows: assessing their impact on incubator firm
McAdam, M. and Marlow, S. (2007), “Building futures or performance”, Research Policy, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 305-320.
stealing secrets? Entrepreneurial cooperation and conflict Rothschild, L. and Darr, A. (2005), “Technological incubators
within business incubators”, International Small Business and the social construction of innovation networks: an Israeli
Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, Vol. 25 No. 4, case study”, Technovation , Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 59-67.
pp. 361-382. Rubin, T.H., Aas, T.H. and Stread, A. (2015), “Knowledge
McAdam, M. and McAdam, R. (2008), “High tech start- flow in technological business incubators: evidence from
ups in university science park incubators: the relationship Australia and Israel”, Technovation, Vols 41/42, pp. 11-24.
between the start-up’s lifecycle progression and use of the Sá, C. and Lee, H. (2012), “Science, business, and innovation:
incubator’s resources”, Technovation, Vol. 28 No. 5, understanding networks in technology-based incubators”,
pp. 277-290. R&D Management, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 243-253.
Maia, F., Roseira, C., Ramos, C., Henneberg, S. and Naudé, Sarantakos, S. (1998), Social Research, Palgrave Macmillan,
P. (2012), “A business network approach to university New York, NY.
incubators: understanding the value of incubator facilities”, Schwartz, M. and Hornych, C. (2010), “Cooperation patterns
28th IMP Conference, Rome. of incubator firms and the impact of incubator specialization:
Markman, G.D., Phan, P.H., Balkin, D.B. and Gianiodis, P.T. empirical evidence from Germany”, Technovation, Vol. 30
(2005), “Entrepreneurship and university-based technology Nos 9/10, pp. 485-495.
transfer”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 20 No. 2, Schwarz, G.M. and Stensaker, I.G. (2016), “Showcasing
pp. 241-263. phenomenon-driven research on organizational change”,
Mian, S.A. (1996), “Assessing value-added contributions of Journal of Change Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 245-264.
university technology business incubators to tenant firms”, Scillitoe, J.L. and Chakrabarti, A.K. (2010), “The role of
Research Policy, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 325-335. incubator interactions in assisting new ventures”,
Nowak, M.J. and Grantham, C.E. (2000), “The virtual Technovation, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 155-167.
incubator: managing human capital in the software Shih, T. and Aaboen, L. (2018), “The network mediation of an
industry”, Research Policy, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 125-134. incubator: how does it enable or constrain the development
 Business relationship creations Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Christina Öberg, Markus Klinton and Helen Stockhult

of incubator firms’ business networks?”, Industrial Marketing Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Vol. 3 Nos 1/2,
Management, Vol. 80, pp. 126-138. pp. 176-196.
Soetanto, D.P. (2004), Research of the Role of the Incubation Waluszewski, A., Hadjikhani, A. and Baraldi, E. (2009), “An
Policy in Helping the Growth of New Technology Based Firm, interactive perspective on business in practice and business
Globelics Academy, Lisbon. in theory”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 38 No. 6,
Soetanto, D.P. and Jack, S.L. (2013), “Business incubators pp. 565-569.
and the networks of technology-based firms”, The Journal of
Welch, C. (2000), “The archaeology of business networks: the
Technology Transfer, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 432-453.
Suchman, M.C. (1995), “Managing legitimacy: strategic and use of archival records in case study research”, Journal of
institutional approaches”, The Academy of Management Strategic Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 197-208.
Review, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 571-610. Yusubova, A., Andries, P. and Clarysse, B. (2019), “The role
Totterman, H. and Sten, J. (2005), “Start-ups – business of incubators in overcoming technology ventures’ resource
incubation and social capital”, International Small Business gaps at different development stages”, R&D Management,
Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, Vol. 23 No. 5, Vol. 49 No. 5, pp. 803-818.
pp. 487-511.
von Zedwitz, M. (2003), “Classification and management of
incubators: aligning strategic objectives and competitive Corresponding author
scope for new business facilitation”, International Journal of Christina Öberg can be contacted at: [Link]@[Link]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
[Link]/licensing/[Link]
Or contact us for further details: permissions@[Link]