University business incubators (UBIs) are uniquely positioned to foster transnational entrepreneurship and the evolution of business and technical communication practices on a worldwide basis. UBIs facilitate the launch of start-ups by professors, students, researchers, and local entrepreneurs. This study uses assemblage theory to profile four UBIs. Its findings concern their process of exporting incubation models and training transnational entrepreneurs, the roles of alumni and students, and the genres and conventions of entrepreneurship.
Al-MubarakiH. M.BuslerM. (2011). The development of entrepreneurial companies through business incubator programs. International Journal of Emerging Science, 1(2), 95–107.
2.
AngeliE. L. (2018). Rhetorical work in emergency medical services. Routledge.
CantúF. J.BustaniA.MolinaA.MoreiraH. (2009). A knowledge-based development model: The research chair strategy. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(1), 154–170. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270910931233
5.
Cantu-OrtizF. J.GaleanoN.Mora-CastroP.FangmeyerJ. (2017). Spreading academic entrepreneurship: Made in Mexico. Business Horizons, 60(4), 541–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2017.04.002
DeLandaM. (2016). Assemblage theory (speculative realism). Edinburgh University Press.
8.
DeleuzeG.GuattariF. (1989). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (MassumiB., Trans.). University of Minnesota Press.
9.
DeleuzeG.PartnerC. (1987). Dialogues. Columbia University Press.
10.
DroriI.HonigB.WrightM. (2009). Transnational entrepreneurship: An emergent field of study. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(5), 1001–1022. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00332.x
EtzkowitzH.SchulerE.GulbrandsenM. (2000). The evolution of the entrepreneurial university. In JacobM.HellströmT. (Eds.), The future of knowledge production in the academy (pp. 40–60). RHE and Open University Press.
14.
European Institute of Innovation and Technology. (n.d.). Making innovation happen. Retrieved December 17, 2019, fromhttps://eit.europa.eu/eit-home
15.
FoxN. J.AlldredP. (2015). New materialist social inquiry: Designs, methods and the research-x. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(4), 399–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2014.921458
16.
FraibergS. (2017). Start-up nation: Studying transnational entrepreneurial practices in Israel’s start-up ecosystem. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 31(3), 350–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651917695541
17.
GuillenJ. M.GarciaA. T.GiordanoK. (2010). Tecnológico de monterrey. In FettersM.GreeneP. G.RiceM. P. (Eds.), The development of university-based entrepreneurship ecosystems: Global practices (pp. 122–148). Edward Elgar.
18.
HoffmanD.NovakT.FischerE.KozinetsR. (2018). Consumer and object experience in the internet of things: An assemblage theory approach. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(6), 1178–1204.
19.
HondrosJ. J. (2016). Problematizing the internet as a video distribution technology: An assemblage theory analysis. Information, Communication & Society, 19(2), 221–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1050439
McCabeM. (2018). Cultural change in global consumer societies. In McCabeM.BriodyE. (Eds.), Cultural change from a business anthropology perspective (pp. 1–24). Lexington Books.
MianS. (1996). The university business incubator: A strategy for developing new research/technology-based firms. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 7(2), 191–208.
25.
MüllerM.SchurrC. (2016). Assemblage thinking and actor-network theory: Conjunctions, disjunctions, cross-fertilisations. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 41(3), 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12117
PottsL. (2009). Using actor network theory to trace and improve multimodal communication design. Technical Communication Quarterly, 18(3), 281–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572250902941812
28.
ReadS.SwartsJ. (2015). Visualizing and tracing: Research methodologies for the study of networked, sociotechnical activity, otherwise known as knowledge work. Technical Communication Quarterly, 24(1), 14–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2015.975961
29.
RiceM. P.FettersM. L.GreeneP. G. (2014). University-based entrepreneurship ecosystems: A global study of six educational institutions. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 18(5/6), 481. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEIM.2014.064722
30.
RiesE. (2011). The lean start-up: How today’s entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. Crown Books.
31.
SampatB. N. (2006). Patenting and US academic research in the 20th century: The world before and after Bayh-Dole. Research Policy, 35(6), 772–789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.04.009
32.
SiegelD. S.WrightM. (2015). Academic entrepreneurship: Time for a rethink?British Journal of Management, 26(4), 582–595. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12116
33.
StalE.AndreassiT.FujinoA. (2016). The role of university incubators in stimulating academic entrepreneurship. RAI Revista de Administração e Inovação, 13(2), 89–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rai.2016.01.004
34.
SunH. (2020). Global social media design: Bridging differences across cultures. Oxford University Press.
ThorpH.GoldsteinB. (2010). Engines of innovation: The entrepreneurial university in the twenty-first century. The University of North Carolina Press.
37.
VeugelersR. (2016). The embodiment of knowledge: Universities as engines of growth. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 32(4), 615–631. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grw026
38.
WiseJ.SlackJ. (2005). Culture and technology: A primer. Peter Lang.
