This paper examines the multi-industry terrain of nanotechnology entrepreneurship. The core contribution is visual as well as theoretical – the analysis shows the multi-industry ‘footprint’ of nanotechnology entrepreneurial ventures that launch products into different industries. Dominant theory on industry emergence by Garud and Van de Ven (1987) takes a single-industry focus. By contrast, this research suggests that entrepreneurs focusing on radical technologies such as nanotechnology may straddle various industries in an attempt to peer into and develop inter-linkages among different entrepreneurial opportunities and industry contexts. A theoretical contribution, the research challenges Garud and Van de Ven's single-industry scope for understanding industry emergence, particularly in the context of multi-industry opportunities.
BurtR. S. (1992), Structural Holes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
5.
BurtR. S. (2004), ‘Structural holes and good ideas’, American Journal of Sociology, Vol 110, No 2, p 349.
6.
BorgattiS. P.FosterP. C. (2003), ‘The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology’, Journal of Management, Vol 29, pp 991–1013.
7.
ChristensenC. M. (1997), The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
8.
DeligiannidisL.NoyesE. (2010), ‘Visualizing creative destruction in entrepreneurship education’, in Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Human Systems Interaction. Rzeszow, Poland.
9.
DonathJ. (2001), The Visualization of Large-Scale Conversations, MIT Sociable Media Group, Cambridge, MA.
10.
EdmondsonA.McManusS. (2007), ‘Methodological fit in management field research’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 4, pp 1155–1179.
11.
FreemanL. C. (2004), The Development of Social Network Analysis, Empirical Press, Vancouver.
12.
ForbesD. P.KirschD. A. (2011), ‘The study of emerging industries: Recognizing and responding to some central problems’, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol 26, No 5, pp 589–602.
13.
GarudR.Van de VenA. H. (1987), ‘Innovation and the emergence of industries’, Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, pp 318–322.
14.
GranovetterM. (1985), ‘Economic action, social structure, and embeddedness’, American Journal of Sociology, Vol 91, No 3, pp 481–510.
15.
HayekF. (1945), ‘Use of knowledge in society’, American Economic Review, Vol 35, No 4, pp 519–530.
16.
HillsG.LumpkinG. T.SinghR. P. (1997), Opportunity Recognition: Perceptions and Behaviors of Entrepreneurs, Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, Babson College, Wellesley, MA.
17.
HittM.HoskissonR.IrelandR. D. (2009), Strategic Management, 8 ed, Cengage, Mason, OH.
18.
HugginsR.JohnstonA. (2010), ‘Knowledge flow and interfirm networks: The influence of network resources, spatial proximity and firm size’, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Vol 22, No 5, pp 457–484.
19.
KirznerI. (1973), Competition and Entrepreneurship, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
20.
KirznerI. (1997), ‘Entrepreneurial discovery and the competitive market process: An Austrian approach’, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol 35, No 1, pp 60–85.
21.
KlepperS.GraddyE. (1990), ‘The evolution of new industries and the determinants of market structure’, Rand Journal of Economics, Vol 21, pp 27–44.
22.
KrackhardtD. (1995), ‘Entrepreneurial opportunities in an entrepreneurial firm: A structural approach’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, spring, pp 53–69.
23.
LindgrenP.TaranY.BoerH. (2010), ‘From single firm to network-based business model innovation’, International Journal of Entrepreneurship & Innovation Management, Vol 12, No 2, pp 122–137.
24.
LowM.AbrahamsonE. (1997), ‘Movements, bandwagons and clones: Industry evolution and the entrepreneurial process’, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol 12, No 6, pp 435–457.
25.
MilgramS. (1967), ‘The small world problem’, Psychology Today, Vol 2, pp 60–67.
26.
MooreV. (2009), ‘Nano entrepreneurship’, Mechanical Engineering, April, p 27.
27.
National Nanotechnology Initiative (2010), ‘The goals of NNI are to advance world-class nanotechnology research and development; the NNI consists of nanotechnology-related activities of 25 U.S. federal agencies’, Website: www.nano.gov.
28.
NoyesE.DeligiannidisL. (2011), 2D and 3D Visualizations of Creative Destruction for Entrepreneurship Education, Human-Computer System Interaction: Backgrounds and Applications 2, Advances in Soft Computing Series, Springer-Verlag, New York.
29.
NoyesE.PariseS.AllenI. E. (2011), ‘Music to our ears: New market creation and creative influences in the popular music industry’, in HenryC.DeBruinA., eds, Entrepreneurship and the Creative Economy: Process, Practice and Policy, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
30.
ParuchuriS. (2010), ‘Intraorganizational networks, interorganizational networks, and the impact of central inventors: A longitudinal study of pharmaceutical firms’, Organization Science, Vol 21, No 1, pp 63–80.
31.
PfefferJ.SalanczikG. (1978), The External Control of Organizations, Harper and Row, New York.
32.
PhelpsC. C. (2010), ‘A longitudinal study of the influence of alliance network structure and composition on firm exploratory innovation’, Academy of Management Journal, Vol 53, No 4, pp 890–913.
33.
PorterM. (1980), Competitive Strategy, Free Press, New York.
34.
PorterM. (1985), Competitive Advantage, Free Press, New York.
35.
PowellW. W.KoputK. W.Smith-DoerrL. (1996), ‘Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology’, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol 41, pp 116–145.
36.
RiceM.KelleyD.PetersL.O'ConnorColarelli G. (2001), ‘Radical innovation: Triggering initiation of opportunity recognition and evaluation’, R&D Management, Vol 31, No 4, pp 409–420.
37.
RocoM. C. (2007), National Nanotechnology Initiative – Past, Present, Future, Handbook on Nanoscience, Engineering and Technology, 2 ed, Taylor and Francis, Abingdon.
38.
RocoM. C.BainbridgeW. S., eds (2005), Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology – Improving Benefits to Humanity, NSET and National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA, website: www.nano.gov.
39.
RogersE. M. (1962), Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press, New York.
40.
RosenkopfL.GiovannaP. (2008), ‘Investigating the microstructure of network evolution: Alliance formation in the mobile communications industry’, Organization Science, Vol 19, No 5, pp 669–687.
41.
SarasvathyS. D. (2001), ‘Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 26, No 2, pp 243–263.
42.
SarasvathyS. D.DewN. (2005), ‘New market creation through transformation’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Vol 15, No 5, pp 533–565.
43.
SchillingM. A.PhelpsC. C. (2007), ‘Interfirm collaboration networks: The impact of large-scale network structure on firm innovation’, Management Science, Vol 53, No 7, pp 1113–1126.
44.
SchumpeterJ. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
45.
ScottJ. (2000), Social Network Analysis: A Handbook, 2 ed, Sage Publications, London.
46.
ShaneS.VenkataramanS. (2000), ‘The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 25, No 1, pp 217–227.
47.
SinghR. P. (2001), ‘A comment on developing the field of entrepreneurship through the study of opportunity recognition and exploitation’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 26, No 1, pp 10–12.
48.
SinghR. P.HillsG. E.HybelsR. C.LumpkinG. T. (1999), ‘Opportunity recognition through social network characteristics of entrepreneurs’, in ReynoldsP. D.BygraveW. D.ManigartS.MasonC.MeyerG. D.SapienzaH. J.ShaverK. G., eds, Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 1999, Babson College, Wellesley, MA, pp 228–241.
49.
Smith-DoerrL.PowellW. (2005), Networks and Economic Life, The Handbook of Economic Sociology, Russel Sage Foundation and Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
50.
TushmanM. L.AndersonP. C. (1996), Managing Strategic Innovation: A Collection of Readings, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
51.
Van de VenA. H.GarudR. (1989), ‘A framework for understanding the emergence of new industries’, in RosenbloomR. S.BurgelmanR. A., eds, Research on Technology Innovation, Management and Policy, Vol 4, Elsevier, New York, pp 195–225.
52.
WassermanS.FaustK. (1994), Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
53.
WattsD. J.StrogatzS. H. (1998), ‘Collective dynamics of small-world networks’, Nature, Vol 363, pp 202–204.
54.
WhiteH. (1981), ‘Where do markets come from?’American Journal of Sociology, Vol 87, No 3, pp 517–547.
55.
WhittingtonK. B.Owen-SmithJ.PowellW. W. (2009), ‘Networks, propinquity, and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries’, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol 54, No 1, pp 90–122.
56.
WoolleyJ. L. (2007), ‘Understanding organizational community creation: The nanotechnology community’, unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Irvine, CA.
57.
WoolleyJ. L.RottnerR. M. (2008), ‘Innovation policy and nanotechnology entrepreneurship’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol 32, No 5, pp 791–811.
58.
ZaheerA.SodaG. (2009), ‘Network evolution: The origins of structural holes’, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol 54, No 1, pp 1–31.
