Ecosystem alignment is critical for realizing complementarities in nascent industries, yet prior research views it as predominantly supply-led, driven by influential firms. We examine how demand-side actors construct coordination mechanisms for ecosystem alignment, and how their participation shapes ecosystem innovation. Using historical methods and data from the DICOM medical imaging standard, we develop a phased process model of demand-led alignment. We find that alignment emerges when consumption complementarities are salient but supply-side incentives are weak. Users institutionalize influence through governance arrangements that privilege application-area needs while managing inter-vendor and user-vendor conflicts. Successful diffusion of demand-led ecosystem innovation further requires addressing challenges of scale and scope. Our findings establish demand-led alignment as a distinct ecosystem coordination form, with extensions to industry evolution and user innovation scholarship.

We examine industry and technology (non)emergence by integrating actorcentric and systems perspective literature streams. We use historical methods to analyze rich data tracking investments by actors spanning private, public, and academic sectors in the solar photovoltaics context. The industry took several decades after commercialization to emerge; moreover, silicon and thin film technologies experienced divergent fates despite firm takeoff. By uncovering critical interdependencies across activities by different actors, we show that, whereas attention by all actors to developing various elements of technological systems is necessary for emergence, it may not be sufficient. The industry emerged after activities by technology producers, industry associations, and government agencies ensured stable institutional support that stimulated latent demand (by utilities and end consumers) and created reinforcing loops among activities by technology producers and research institutes for solar technologies to become a viable alternative to fossil fuels. Moreover, silicon experienced additional reinforcing loops in demand-side and supply-side ecosystems, wherein technology producers and equipment manufacturers leveraged adjacent mature supply chains to meet demand-side scale and reliability requirements in fast growing markets. In contrast, thin film experienced balancing loops wherein nascent firmspecific supply side alliances could not address these demand side needs. These findings showcase how dominant designs may emerge even when there is no ex ante competitive dynamics among technology producers: Although silicon may have benefited from first mover advantage at the technology level, our study highlights that ecosystem first mover advantages of silicon relative to thin film were particularly salient in their divergent fates.

Research Summary We examine variation in high-technology startups' performance based on founders' pre-entry experiences by developing a formal model and using confidential employee-employer linked microdata from the United States to examine the empirical consistency of the model propositions. The model posits that relative to insiders, a lack of industry-specific experience creates greater epistemic uncertainty regarding optimal business models at time of entry for outsiders and thus, higher post-entry adjustment costs associated with necessary pivots. Consequently, outsiders have a higher selection threshold for the value-creation potential of the underlying technical ideas. Together, these mechanisms yield propositions that relative to insiders, outsiders have lower odds of survival on average, but higher growth and probability of being acquired. The empirical results indicate strong and robust support for these propositions.Managerial Summary Our paper showcases that individuals contemplating entrepreneurial opportunities outside their industry of employment face higher uncertainty in configuring their business model at time of entry relative to those with industry-specific experience. This results in higher adjustment costs for implementing pivots resulting from post-entry learning and a higher likelihood that they will terminate operations. To offset these higher risks, individuals venture outside their industry only if their technical ideas have higher value-creation potential. This implies that outsider startups are more likely to exit (including through acquisitions), but if they survive, they will experience higher growth relative to insider startups. We provide empirical evidence in support of these propositions.

How nascent industries evolve and contribute to economic growth and societal advancement has long been a central topic for research and practice. In this review, we focus on the generative role of the heterogeneous actors who contribute to industry creation. Integrating robust literature streams spanning management, economics, marketing, and sociology, we highlight how industries emerge from the purposeful action and interplay of firm and nonfirm actors. Our synthesis provides an overarching framework wherein we situate individual research articles based on their examination of actor attributes (endowments; identities; inducements) and actions (when to engage; capability development and reconfiguration; modes of interactions). The engagement and attributes of heterogeneous actors and feedback loops across various actions are critical for outcomes at both industry and actor levels. Our article also reveals opportunities for future research: these include a deeper focus on actor attributes to address the imbalance in studies of firm and non-firm actors, expand attention to a broader set of markets, and examine emerging contexts.

Entrepreneurs making decisions under uncertainty are encouraged to evaluate their initial ideas through hypothesis testing, but entrepreneurial approaches vary in their emphasis on ex-ante theory development prior to collecting evidence. In this paper, we examine whether and how entrepreneurs benefit from adopting an evidence-based approach or a theory-and-evidence-based approach to decision-making. We conducted a field experiment with Tanzanian agribusiness entrepreneurs by randomly assigning entrepreneurs to two different training conditions. We find that entrepreneurs in the theory-and-evidence-based condition have higher economic performance during the observation period following the intervention. We conjecture this result stems from differences in the types of changes enacted: entrepreneurs in the theory-and-evidence-based training make more coordinated changes that encompass both core and operational elements of their business models.

We examine how formalization in cognitive processes (theorization) and evidence evaluation (experimentation) influence the type (frequency and radicalness) and nature (impetus, clarity, and coherence) of entrepreneurial pivots. We use a mixed-method research design to analyze rich data from over 1,600 interviews with 261 entrepreneurs within a randomized control trial in London. A quantitative analysis that complements human-coded and machine learning-coded measures reveals that conditional on pivoting, theorization and experimentation are complementary in their association with making single radical pivots. The extensive qualitative-case comparison further elucidates interactions between theorization and experimentation that generate differences in the nature of pivots that range from purposeful (clear and coherent rationale deriving from articulated theory and experimentation), postulatory (informed by articulated theory but not incorporating nuances or surprises generated from experimentation), and remedial (stemming from adjustments to preformed theories that drew on prior experiences) to reactive (driven by environmental stimuli absent a clear theory of value). These insights contribute to the theory-driven strategic decision-making literature and offer practical insights for entrepreneurs, incubators, and policymakers on the benefits of a scientific approach to entrepreneurship.

Research Summary: As the study of entrepreneurship advances, our appreciation for the role of theory in the development of the field has grown. In this paper, we build on our collective experiences to offer a peek into the inner workings of entrepreneurship theorizing, using specific examples to highlight ways of developing theoretical insights for advancing entrepreneurship research. Our journeys suggest an iterative process centered on asking an important and interesting question, challenging prevailing assumptions, understanding context and phenomenon, and developing conceptual models and analyses. We focus on the uniqueness of entrepreneurial phenomena, contexts, and actors as well as the interdisciplinary nature of the field. Managerial Summary: Entrepreneurship as a scholarly field has reached a stage of maturity where we need to think more carefully about our contribution to theory. Theory enriches managerial parctice. We offer helpful and actionable suggestions to develop and share rich theoerical insights that inform schaolrship and practice.

Research SummaryWe inductively examine how the careers of employee entrepreneurs unfold, uncovering the role of motives and attribution for failure. Founders expressing organizational misalignment motives for leaving established organizations engaged in "venture crafting" whereby they actively sought to build well-functioning organizations. They built successful initial ventures and careers. Founders lacking organizational misalignment motives generally founded initial ventures that failed: however, those making internal attributions altered their behaviors and built successful careers; in contrast, founders making external attributions continued founding unsuccessful ventures. These findings suggest that building organizational capabilities-and not merely inheriting capabilities from existing organizations-is a cornerstone of building successful entrepreneurial careers. Our findings are based on detailed career history and archival data on employee entrepreneurs in the disk-drive industry.Managerial SummaryOur study follows careers of individuals leaving employment to create ventures, providing insights for entrepreneurs and managers. Though entrepreneurs often choose to focus solely on building a stellar product, our study underscores the importance of crafting well-functioning organizations for career and venture success. Moreover, in case where initial ventures fail, founders who make internal attribution generate a "second chance" at success, whether as serial entrepreneurs or by returning to paid employment. Those who attribute failure to external factors, however, repeat their mistakes. For managers, our study reveals that the genesis of successful entrepreneurial careers is rooted in organizational deficiencies that prevent talented employees from thriving as intrapreneurs. The venture crafters typically left their jobs only after attempts to amend these issues were unsuccessful.

This symposium proposes that experiments have the potential to be used more effectively in strategy and entrepreneurship research if they leverage methodological innovations from other disciplines that have a longer tradition of using experiments. The symposium combines the perspectives of leading experts on experiments in psychology captured on video with a live debate and commentary with management scholars with deep expertise in experiments. The management scholars participating in the live debate will ‘translate’ best practices from psychology, and discuss to what extent and how they can be applied to research in strategy and entrepreneurship by putting them in the context of their own work. Presenters will outline specific opportunities to advance the theory, techniques, and variety of topics that methodologically advanced experiments can address and provides actionable insights for researchers at all stages of their career. This symposium builds on the success of the symposium held during the Academy of Management 2022 that focused on insights from economics and saw participation from over 100 scholars (both in person and via Zoom).

Research Summary: We inductively analyze rich qualitative and quantitative data on the global census of pioneering mobile money firms to examine how firm characteristics shape digital platform ecosystem configuration choices regarding (a) internal versus external integration and (b) the creation of network externalities through open versus closed end-user access. In contrast to received wisdom, we find pioneering firms were equally likely to engage in external and internal integration; moreover, diversifying entrants were less likely to internally integrate than startups. We uncover the important role of motives, in addition to capabilities, for creating alignment between pioneering firms and their partners. Such alignment was key for addressing path-dependent implementation challenges through experimentation and navigating nascent industry uncertainty for success. Managerial Summary: Our study showcases how enterprising firms pioneered and diffused mobile money, a digital platform that improves access to financial services. The successful take-off and growth of this industry, as revealed by our inductive analysis, was contingent on aligned capabilities and motives among platform co-providers and critical partners. We illuminate why and how pioneer capabilities and motives influenced key platform choices regarding internal versus external integration, and open versus closed end-user access. These choices then created different implementation challenges. The successful pioneers navigated these challenges to create a robust ecosystem for network effects by engaging in two actions: they developed lasting partner relationships, and they experimented to determine distinct demand segments, identify unmet needs, and develop value propositions.

Research Summary: We examine how and why pre-existing vertical scope may cause differences in product market exit rates after sudden and exogenous decreases in demand. Our empirical context is the U.S. medical diagnostic imaging industry (2004-2009), wherein a major Medicare reform created a derived demand shock to equipment manufacturers. Using a difference-in-difference-in-difference design, we find integrated firms were more likely to exit than nonintegrated firms. Building on the literature conceptualizing firms' pre-shock vertical scope as a representation of existing resources and governance choices, we explain that integrated and nonintegrated firms responded differently by leveraging their own distinctive capabilities. Our qualitative insights suggest that higher market exit of integrated firms was driven by their higher adjustment costs due to frictions across strategies for demand management versus cost reduction. Managerial Summary: This study investigates whether having a dedicated sales force or utilizing third-party distributors can help mitigate the adverse effect of an abrupt demand decrease on manufacturers. In the context of the US medical imaging equipment industry affected by the 2005 Deficit Reduction Act, we show that all firms implemented strategies for demand management, cost reduction, and product portfolio reconfiguration in response. Manufacturers using external distributors experienced fewer frictions across these strategies than those with an internal sales force and were less likely to exit. Thus, a firms' vertical scope can impact how they cope with environmental changes.