This article explores dynamic capability formation in new ventures examining technology commercialization at the microlevel of entrepreneurs’ actions and decisions. The research reflects a longitudinal, qualitative, multi-case study design to build theory. Findings reveal two interdependent micro-level patterns that reflect dynamic entrepreneurial capabilities. First, prospecting problems or the capacity to identify problems in industrial settings that a commercially untried technology might solve. Second, openly sharing technological features with prospective customers in order to jointly design prototype products. Revealing technology helped ensure new venture survival in contrast with conventional wisdom that links firm survival to the insulation and protection of technology. Moreover, micro-level patterns shaped macro-level change in venture/customer dyads and in related customer’ industries.
BaarkE (2001) Technology and entrepreneurship in China: Commercialization reforms in the science and technology sector. Policy Studies Review18(1): 112–129.
3.
BakerTMinerAEesleyD (2003) Improvising firms: Bricolage, account giving and improvisational competencies in the founding process. Research Policy32(2): 255–276.
4.
BarneyJKetchenDWrightM (2011) The future of the resource-based theory: Revitalization or decline?Journal of Management37(5): 1299–1315.
5.
BhaveM (1994) A process model of entrepreneurial venture creation. Journal of Business Venturing9(3): 223–242.
6.
BoisotMMcKelveyB (2010) Integrating modernist and postmodernist perspectives on organizations: A complexity science bridge. Academy of Management Review35(3): 415–433.
7.
BruniDSVeronaG (2009) Dynamic marketing capabilities in science-based firms: An exploratory investigation of the pharmaceutical industry. British Journal of Management20(supp.1): S101–S117.
8.
CarterNGartnerWReynoldsP (1996) Exploring start up event sequences. Journal of Business Venturing11(3): 151–166.
9.
ChandlerGDeTienneDMcKelvieAMumfordT (2011) Causation and effectuation processes: A validation study. Journal of Business Venturing26(3): 375–390.
10.
CoffRKryscynskiD (2011) Drilling for micro-foundations of human capital-based competitive advantages. Journal of Management37(5): 1429–1443.
11.
CornerPHoM (2010) How opportunities develop in social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice34(4): 635–659.
12.
Di DomenicoMHaughHTraceyP (2010) Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice34(4): 681–703.
13.
DimovD (2007) Beyond the single-person: Single insight attribution in understanding entrepreneurial opportunities. Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice31(5): 713–731.
14.
DyerJSinghH (1998) The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review23(4): 660–679.
15.
EisenhardtKMartinJ (2000) Dynamic capabilities: What are they?Strategic Management Journal21(10–11): 1105–1121.
16.
EisenhardtKGraebnerM (2007) Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal50(1): 25–32.
17.
EversNO’GormanC (2011) Improvised internationalization in new ventures: The role of prior knowledge and networks. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development23(7–8): 549–574.
18.
FossN (2011) Why micro-foundations for resource-based theory are needed and what they may look like. Journal of Management37(5): 1413–1428.
19.
GalunicDCEisenhardtK (2001) Architectural innovation and modular corporate forms. Academy of Management Journal44(6): 1229–1249.
20.
GarudRKothaS (1994) Using the brain as a metaphor to model flexible production systems. Academy of Management Review19(4): 671–698.
21.
GarudRKumaraswamyAKaroeP (2010) Path dependence or path creation. Journal of Management Studies47(4): 760–774.
22.
HamelGPrahaladCK (1994) Competing for the Future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
23.
HarrisR (2011) Models of regional growth: Past, present and future. Journal of Economic Surveys25(5): 913–951.
24.
HartS (2005) Capitalism at the Crossroads. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing.
25.
HartSDowellG (2011) A natural resource-based view of the firm: Fifteen years after. Journal of Management37(5): 1464–1479.
KazanjianRDrazinR (1990) A stage contingent model of design and growth for technology based new ventures. Journal of Business Venturing5(3): 137–150.
28.
LiaoJWelschH (2008) Patterns of venture gestation process: Exploring the differences between tech and non-tech nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of High Technology Management Research19(2): 103–113.
29.
LiaoJWelschHTanW (2005) Venture gestation paths of nascent entrepreneurs: Exploring temporal patterns. Journal of High Technology Management Research16(1): 1–22.
30.
LichtensteinBBDooleyKLumpkinGT (2006) Measuring emergence in the dynamics of new venture creation. Journal of Business Venturing21(2): 153–175.
31.
MaritanCPeterafM (2011) Building a bridge between resource acquisition and resource accumulation. Journal of Management37(5): 1374–1389.
NewbertS (2005) New firm formation: A dynamic capability perspective. Journal of Small Business Management43(1): 55–77.
34.
NeweyRZahraS (2009) The evolving firm: How dynamic and operating capabilities interact to enable entrepreneurship. British Journal of Management20(supp.1): S81–S100.
35.
RasmussenE (2011) Understanding academic entrepreneurship: Exploring the emergence of university spin-off ventures using process theories. International Small Business Journal29(5): 448–471.
36.
RasmussenEMoseySWrightM (2011) The evolution of entrepreneurial competencies: A longitudinal study of university spin-off venture emergence. Journal of Management Studies48(6): 1314–1345.
37.
ReynoldsPDMillerB (1992) New firm gestation: Conception, birth and implications for research. Journal of Business Venturing7(5): 405–417.
38.
SantosFEisenhardtK (2009) Constructing markets and shaping boundaries: Entrepreneurial power in nascent fields. Academy of Management Journal52(4): 643–671.
39.
SapienzaHAutioEGeorgeGZahraS (2006) A capabilities perspective on the effects of early internationalization on firm survival and growth. Academy of Management Review31(4): 914–933.
40.
SarasvathyS (2008) Effectuation: Elements of Entrepreneurial Expertise. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
41.
SarasvathySDewN (2005) New market creation through transformation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics15(5): 533–565.
42.
SarasvathySDewNVelamuriSRVenkataramanS (2003) Three views of entrepreneurial opportunity. In: AcsZAudretschD (eds) Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 142–160.
43.
SchumpeterJ (1976) Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. London: George Allen & Unwin.
44.
TeeceD (2007) Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal28(13): 1319–1350.
VandeVenA (2007) Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
47.
VandeVenAJohnsonP (2006) Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review31(4): 802–821.
48.
VohoraAWrightMLockettA (2004) Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy33(1): 147–175.
49.
YinR (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Methods (3rd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50.
ZahraSGeorgeG (2002) Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review27(2): 185–203.
51.
ZahraSSapienzaHDavidssonP (2006) Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: A review, model, and research agenda. Journal of Management Studies43(4): 917–955.
