A Pilot Study on the Perception of Innovation and Entrepreneurship

Year 2016, Volume: 16 Issue: 64, 0 - 0, 15.07.2016

Ayşe Esra Aslan , Burcu Duman Dunya Sen Cem Duran Sinem Atarbay

Abstract

Problem Statement: The concepts of innovation and entrepreneurship must be understood and adopted to ensure such transformation in the university after “Entrepreneurial and Innovative University Index” publication. The basic problem of this research is an analysis of how entrepreneurs define the concepts of innovation and entrepreneurship. Purpose of Study: This research is focused on how innovation and entrepreneurship concepts are defined by company and project owners making innovation, the types of innovation they work on, the challenges they encounter during the process, and the coping strategies they use Method: This study used a qualitative research pattern and phenomenological research. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews conducted with the owners of five companies who voluntarily participated in the study. The frequency and categorical analysis of content analysis techniques were used in the analysis of the data. Attempts were made to provide reliability by coding the coincidentally selected ones of the voice-recorded interviews via two independent coders. Jury assessment was made for general and specific sub-areas created for categorical analysis within validity. Findings and Results: Six general areas and 39 specific sub-areas were created within the scope of categorical analysis. Among the most remarkable findings, it was clear that innovative entrepreneurs expressed opinions mostly within the general scope of “innovation process”. Within the “definition of innovation”, it can be seen that they most often refer to providing “added value” with the product. Within the “product features”, they most often refer to the “inclusion of innovation.” It was mentioned that “learning experiences” have positive effects on the innovation process. Conclusions and Recommendations: It may be suggested that researchers can study the competitiveness and innovation ability of entrepreneurs. It was observed that the participant companies did not have their own innovation models and strategies. It is necessary to develop a countryspecific innovation model and strategies based on it in order to develop innovation. Keywords: innovation description, innovation process, challenges in innovation process.

References

• Abdurazzakov, O. (2015). Role of technology transfer mechanisms in stimulating
• innovation. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Oeconomia, 14 (4), 5-12.
• Alkibay, S., Orhaner, E., Korkmaz, S., & Ermec Sertoglu, A. (2012). Universite sanayi
• isbirligi cercevesinde teknoparklar, yonetimsel sorunlari ve cozum onerileri.
• [Technoparks within the framework of university-industry cooperation,
• managerial problems and suggested solutions]. Ataturk Universitesi Iktisadi ve
• Idari Bilimler Dergisi, 26 (2), 65-90.
• Altunoglu, A. E., & Bulgurcu-Gurel, E. B. (2015). Effects of leader-member exchange
• and perceived organizational support on organizational innovation: The case
• of Denizli Technopark. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 207, 175-181.
• Amara, N., Landry, R., Becheikh, N., & Ouimet, N. (2008). Learning and novelty of
• innovation in established manufacturing SMEs. Technovation, 28 (7), 450-463.
• Aslan, G. (2010). Ogretim uyelerinin girisimci universite ve universite sanayi isbirligi
• kavramlarina iliskin gorusleri [Faculty members’ views on the concepts of
• entrepreneurial university and university-industry cooperation]. Egitim Bilim
• Toplum Dergisi, 8 (30), 7-22.
• Balasescu, M. (2015). Evaluation of the impact of innovation processes and activities
• on Romanian retailers and consumers through marketing methods and
• techniques. Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Brasov - Series V: Economic
• Sciences, 8 (2), 19-26.
• Bennedsen, M., & Foss, N. (2015) Family assets and liabilities in
• the innovation process. California Management Review, 58 (1), 65-81.
• Bessant, J., & Tidd, J. (2015). Innovation and entrepreneurship. 2nd edition. West Sussex,
• UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
• Brettel, M., & Cleven. N. J. (2011). Innovation culture, collaboration with external
• partners and NPD performance. Creativity and Innovation Management, 20 (4),
• -272.
• Cai, Y., & Lui, C. (2014). The roles of universities in fostering knowledge-intensive
• cluster in Chinese regional innovation systems. Science and Public Policy
• Advance Access, 10, 1-15.
• Cansiz, E. (2007). Universite ogrencilerinin girisimcilik ozelliklerinin belirlenmesi
• [Determination of entrepreneurial characteristics of university students].
• Unpublished master dissertation, Suleyman Demirel Universitesi.
• Chesbrough, H. (2010). Business model innovation. Long Range Planning, 43, 354-363.
• Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
• approaches. 4th Edition. California: Sage Publication.
• Dahlqvist, J., & Wiklund, J. (2012). Measuring the market newness of new ventures.
• Journal of Business Venturing, 27 (2), 185-196.
• Elci, S., Karatayli, I., & Karaata, S. (2008, December 12). Bolgesel inovasyon merkezleri:
• Turkiye icin bir model onerisi [Regional innovation centers: A model suggestion
• for Turkey]. Istanbul: Tusiad Press, Retrieved July 20, 2015, from
• http://www.t-bim.org/files/T-B%C4%B0M%20rapor.pdf.
• Erdogan, I. (2012). Egitimde degisim yonetimi [Change management in education]. 3rd
• edition. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Ferrary, M., & Granovetter, M. (2009). The role of venture capital firms in Silicon
• Valley's complex innovation network. Economy and Society, 38 (2), 326-359.
• Gumus, S., & Gumus, H. G. (2015). Marketing of innovation in business. Procedia
• Social and Behavioral Sciences, 181, 261-268.
• Godin, B. (2015). The linear model of innovation the historical construction of an
• analytical framework. Routledge. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 31 (6),
• -667.
• Ha-Young, K., & Chang Mu, J. (2010). Does a technology incubator work in the
• regional economy? Evidence from South Korea. Journal of Urban Planning &
• Development, 136 (3), 273-284.
• Heath, T. B., Chatterjee, S., Basuroy, S., Hennig-Thurau, T., & Kocher, B. (2015).
• Innovation sequences over iterated offerings: A Relative innovation, comfort,
• and stimulation framework of consumer responses. Journal of Marketing. 79
• (6), 71-93.
• Hjalager, A. M. (2010). Process in tourism management a review of innovation
• research in tourism. Tourism Management, 31, 1-12.
• Hobday, M. (2005). Firm-level innovation models: Perspectives on research in
• developed and developing countries. Technology Analysis & Strategic
• Management, 17 (2), 121 –146.
• Kaynak, S., & Demir, A. (2015). Imalat Sektorunde inovasyon uygulamalari: TRA1
• Duzey 2 bolgesinde bir arastirma. Ataturk Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu
• Dergisi, 19 (3), 273-292.
• Koch, M., & Moslein, K. M. (2006). Community mirrors for supporting corporate
• innovation and motivation. Goteborg, Sweden: European Conference on
• Information Systems.
• Oslo Manual-OECD. (2005, November 10). The measurement of scientific and
• technological activities. Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting
• technological innovation data, Paris. Retrieved July 2, 2015, from
• http://www.oecd.org/science/inno/2367580.pdf
• Oneren, M. (2012). Ic Anadolu bolgesindeki genc nufusun girisimcilik egilimleri
• uzerine bir arastirma [A research on entrepreneurial tendencies of young
• population in Central Anatolia Region]. Girisimcilik ve Kalkinma Dergisi, 7 (2),
• -28.
• Ozer, Y. E. (2011). Girisimci universite modeli ve Turkiye [Entrepreneur university
• model and Turkey]. Uludag Universitesi Iktisadi ve Idari Bilimler Fakultesi
• Dergisi, 30 (2), 85-100.
• Ozer, M., & Wen, Z. (2015). The effects of geographic and network ties on
• exploitative and exploratory product innovation. Strategic Management Journal,
• (7), 1105-1114.
• Pahnke, C., McDonald, E., Rory, M., Wang, D., & Benjamin, H. (2015). Exposed:
• Venture capital, competitor ties, and entrepreneurial innovation. Academy of
• Management Journal, 58 (5), 1334-1360.
• Punch, K. (2014). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches.
• rd edition. Los Angeles: Sage.
• Rostami, N. A. (2015). Examining the relationship between marketing capability
• and innovation. International Journal of Management, Accounting & Economics, 2
• (1), 64-72
• Singh, R., Mathiassen, L., & Mishra, A. (2015). Organizational path constitution in
• technological innovation: Evidence from rural telehealth. MIS Quarterly, 39(3),
• -666.
• Shuai, W., Jin, F., Dingtao, Z., & Shanyong, W. (2016). Regional innovation
• environment and innovation efficiency: The Chinese case. Technology Analysis
• & Strategic Management, 28(4), 396-410.
• Tarkun-Tavsancil, E., & Aslan, A. E. (2001). Icerik analizi ve uygulama ornekleri
• [Content analysis and examples of practices]. Istanbul: Epsilon.
• Tatikonda, M. V., & Rosenthal, S. R. (2000). Technology novelty, project complexity,
• and product development project execution success: A deeper look at task
• uncertainty in product innovation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering
• Management, 47 (1), 74-87.
• Teece, D. J. (2010). Business Models, Business Strategy and Innovation. Long Range
• Planning, 43, 172 -194.
• Tonelli, A. O., Zambalde, A. L., de Brito, M. J., & de Souza Bermejo, P. H. (2016). The
• theory of practice and the development of ambidexterity in software
• innovation process. Brazilian Business Review (English Edition), 13 (3), 26-47.
• Uluyol, O. P. (2013). Ogrencilerin girisimcilik egilimlerinin belirlenmesi
• [Determination of entrepreneurial tendencies of students]. Adiyaman
• Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi, 6 (15), 349-372.
• Yilmaz, B. S., & Gunel, O. D. (2011). University education and entrepreneurship: A
• research on the factors driving the individuals to entrepreneurship. Akademik
• Bakis Dergisi, 26, 1-20