Elements and Infrastructures for Technology Startups Proposal

Background

The technological developments we witness today are the aftermath of the different stages of industrial revolution which started with the use of water and steam power as energy sources in production. The Third Industrial Revolution was characterized by the use of electronics and information technology (IT) to automate production (Hussain, 2019; Jee, 2017). The Fourth Industrial Revolution (also known as industry 4.0) which is considered as a continuation of the Third, is a digital revolution which has been occurring since the middle of the 20^th century (Morrar & Mousa, 2017; Oztemel & Gursev, 2020; Schwab, 2016). According to Schwab (2016), the process “is characterized by a fusion of technologies that is blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres” (para. 2).

Opportunities for billions of people connected by mobile devices with larger processing power and storage capacity are innumerable. As identified by Schwab (2016), the opportunities are as a result of the several breakthroughs in fields such as “artificial intelligence, robotics, the Internet of Things, autonomous vehicles, 3-D printing, nanotechnology, biotechnology, materials science, energy storage, and quantum computing” (para. 4). For instance, investments in research have resulted in the development of self-driving cars, drones and virtual assistant software among other technologies.

With the emergence of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, numerous companies have been developed to continue providing the vast population with up to date products and services. According to Skawińska and Zalewski (2020), the concept of startups started in the 1970s when they were referred to as “emerging high-tech micro companies, active mainly in the field of electronics and computer technologies” (p. 1). These companies formed the basis of the subsequent emergence of companies such as the IT-based company in the Silicon Valley and the biotech-based company in San Francisco, among others (Skawińska & Zalewski, 2020). As business models and structures are transforming function to technological advancement, technological startups are increasingly creating employment opportunities and innovation (Choi et al., 2020; Kemell et al., 2020; Pandey, 2019; Peter et al., 2020; Spender et al., 2017). Consistent with Skawińska and Zalewski (2020), Etla (2019), and Baldridge (2021), Choi et al. (2020) states that one significant motivation for these companies is that drastic innovation which can result in increase in employment levels. However there are concerns to balance macroeconomic benefits and individual contentment with advanced technology.

Many startup projects are launched on a daily basis across the world. Rufig and Wang (2020) estimate that about 100 million startups are each year all over the world. However, for each successful one, several of them fail due to a variety of reasons (Gonzalez, 2017; Nair & Blomquist, 2019). Research previously done by Wang et al. (2016) reveal that 60 percent of startups do not go beyond the five years of operation while 75 percent of venture capital funded startups fail. Mimaroglu (2020) states that “in the information technology startup, high birth rates go hand in hand with a high risk of failure” (p. 1). India which has a considerably large ecosystem for startups, 90 percent of them were failures due lack of strategic thinking, inadequate technological innovations, and the absence of unique business models (Muramalla & Al-Hazza, 2019). Some startups also start well but fail to sustain the business and as a result, they quit the market (Bednar & Tariskova, 2017; Kalyanasundaram, 2018). Table 1 shows some infamous startup failure which have occurred in the past years due to poor project management skills.

Table 1: Most Infamous Startup Failures

Numerous researchers have identified the problems facing startups and their importance to the economy. However, there is little evidence about the elements and infrastructures needed to create a successful ecosystem for technological startups and this research gap will form the basis of this study (Tripathi et al., 2019). In so far as Tripathi et al. are concerned, the closest study is the one by Torres and Souza (2016) which used the snowball sampling technique to determine the elements of a technological startup. Therefore, the objective of this research is to define a startup ecosystem and identify the elements which constitutes the ecosystem of technological startups. To guide the study, this paper proposes the research question that “what factors determine the success of technological startup in the economy?” To answer the question, this paper will perform a comprehensive review of literature relevant to the topic and augment the findings with an analysis of real-world companies in Singapore, Malta, and the Silicon Valley.

Literature Review

To understand the various factors which can promote a successful ecosystem for technological startups, it is imperative to understand what a technology startup is. A widely acceptable definition by Ries (as cited in Wang et al., 2016) states that a startup is “human institution designed to deliver a new product or service under the conditions of extreme uncertainty” (p. 170). It follows that any young company developing new products and services in extreme uncertainty is regarded as a startup (Bednar et al., 2018; Kim et al., 2018; Lim et al., 2018; Perry et al., 2018). Jain (2016) defines a startup as a young company which searches for an unknown business models to disrupt the market. According to Gupta et al. (2020), startups “are temporary organizations that are continuously experimenting to identify a business model, which is scalable and repeatable, thereafter they attain higher growth levels and returns” (p. 2). Kim et al. (2018) defines a startup as a “new business that entrepreneurs initiate by combining business ideas and resources” (p. 2). Therefore, technological startups are those which focus on leveraging innovative technology to create unique products and services.

Small firms that begin their operations in new markets or products have variations based on how their operations. From the definitions, startups generally have no or limited history (Salamzadeh & Kesim, 2017; Lim et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2016). Ries’s definition further highlights the chaotic environment characterized by uncertainties in which startups expect to operate in as they venture the market (Da Camara et al., 2020; Pandey, 2019; Wang et al., 2016). Research by Tripathi et al. (2019) already identified that little evidence of systematic and elaborate study which provides an overview of the startup ecosystem and related literature is limited or unknown. Scattered evidence exist on the factors which would influence the continuity of startups upon their implementation. Before reviewing other researchers’ understanding of the ecosystem elements which determine the success of startups, it is imperative to understand the meaning of an ecosystem in the context of startups.

Various scholars have different understanding of small businesses, which begin to operate in new markets. Singh et al. (2019a) defines a startup ecosystem as a socio-economic structure whereby various actors collaborate to promote a startup. According to Tripathi et al. (2019), a startup ecosystem refers to a “phenomenon in which startups and their supporting elements interact in an environment that is built to foster these startups’ development and growth” (p. 56). Cukier and Lyons (2016) defines a startup ecosystem as:

A limited region within 30 miles (or one-hour travel) range, formed by people, their startups, and various types of supporting organizations, interacting as a complex system to create new startup companies and evolve the existing ones (p. 2).

In the word of Pandey (2019), a startup ecosystem is defined as a “society of founders with ideas and skills, young companies at early stages with talent, incubators with mentors and capital, early adopters and the media” (p. 237). Pandey adds that the objective of any startup ecosystem is to create a self-sustaining network of talent and resources which can fulfill the needs of the larger community.

Although the whole concept about startup ecosystem revolves around the social-economic factors which stand to bolster the development and growth of a startup, researchers hold different opinions. According to some researchers, the key factors making up a startup ecosystem include firms, physical infrastructure, network, incubation programs, culture, support services, and higher education institutions such as universities and colleges (Roundy et al., 2017; Junttila, 2020; Sing et al., 2019a; Singh et al., 2019b; Spigel, 2017; Zhavoronkova et al., 2021). According to Pandey (2019), an ecosystem is made up of entrepreneurial stakeholders and they are members, startups, and service providers (see Figure 1). The members include entrepreneurs, private investors and advisors (Haines, 2016; Hernandez & Gonzalez, 2017; Karim et al., 2018). Service providers include Business to Business (B2B) product and service providers, funders, entrepreneurial associations, knowledge and government institutions (Pandey, 2019).

Pandey underscores that entrepreneurs, private investors, and advisors are the main members of an ecosystem which are key for its success. However, at the initial stages of startup funding, the experience, skills, time, and funds are essential ecosystem components worth considering (Crisan et al., 2019; Kupp et al., 2017). Literature review by Tripathi et al.(2019) indicates that in a software ecosystem, which is one kind of a technology startup system, different stakeholders such as companies, competitors, and customers collaborate to avail product and services to customers. Some researcher find a connection between entrepreneurship and startups since they are both based on identifying new business opportunities and pursuing them (Cantamessa et al., 2018; Tripathi et al., 2019). However, software startups are rapidly growing but still at an immature stage and are most of them are bound to fail in the first few years (Bui, 2016; Manikas, 2016; Santisteban & Mauricio, 2017).

Research Method

This research will apply the case study and literature review methodologies to answer the research question. The study will be conducted between April 2021 and August 2021. The case study method will be suitable as an empirical method because it aims at investigating contemporary phenomena in their context and it is appropriate for this type of business research (Rashid et al., 2019; Ridder, 2017). The fact that it is hard to study the target objects in isolation and that case studies are appropriate for real-world settings makes this research method the most suitable. Literature review will be used since it provide a rich and ready source of evidence which will help in achieving the research objectives (Paul & Criado, 2020; Snyder, 2019).

The study intends to analyze the case studies of three companies in Singapore, Malta and the Silicon Valley. In Singapore, Attune Technologies’ case study will be analyzed whereas in the Silicon Valley, the Cardiva Medical Inc. will be studied. Since most of Maltese startups leverage modern technology such as artificial intelligence to provide financial services, this research cannot easily locate a medical device startup in Malta. However, the closest startup which can be identified is the Cannapharm Technologies as highlighted by Seedtable (2021). The case of each of the three companies is narrated below.

Attune Technologies

Attune Technologies was founded in 2008 by Anand Gnanaraj, Arvind Kumar, Mohanaraj Paramagurusamy, and Ramakrishnan Venkataraman (Attune Technologies, n.d.). Its funding amounts to a total of 26 million dollars. The company has about 202 employees, as of 2021. Throughout its existence, it has launched cloud-based products designed to help the healthcare sector. The company’s products integrate labs, hospitals, pharmacies, blood banks, radiology, insurance companies, and medical devices (Internet of Things) hence boosting revenue and efficiency of operations. Attune’s solutions are deployable across various kinds of organizations making it the largest cloud-based healthcare IT service provider in Singapore (Attune Technologies, n.d.). The company is funded by Norwest Venture Partners and Qualcomm Ventures. With headquarters located in Singapore, Attune supports customers across 15 countries in other parts of Asia and Africa. The company is determined to create a global healthcare network through the concept of Internet of Things.

Cardiva Medical Company

Cardiva Medical Inc. was founded in 2002 in the Silicon Valley by Gordon Epstein and Zia Yassinzadeh as a medical device company focusing cardiovascular procedures. The company’s VASCADE vascular closure system which was PMA-approved by FDA since 2013 is indicated for vessel closure following 5-7F arterial and venous procedures (Cardiva Medical, n.d.). The company’s latest portfolio is the VASCADE MVP Venous Vascular Closure System which is the only marketed vessel closure technology designed exclusively for electrophysiology procedures (Cardiva Medical, n.d.). The company’s total funding is 182.2 million dollars with about 154 employees and it has its headquarters at Silicon Valley in San Francisco. The company is funded by 12 investor, however Evidity Health Capital and Luther King Capital Management are the most recent.

Cannapharm Technologies Malta

Founded in 2018 by Denis Orlov, Cannapharm Technologies Malta (CTM) is an agriculture-based, manufacturing, and genetics Maltese company specializing in producing a variety of pharmaceutical, cosmetics and cannabis based products (CTM, n.d.). It partners with hospital management companies and pharmaceutical distributors. The company’s ecosystem enables it to implement systems such as the genetic bank and research, cultivation and processing, application programs interface (API) manufacturing, research and development (R&D) clinical trials, and welfare programs (CTM, n.d.). Although CTM originates from Malta, it is based at the European Union headquarters.

Data Analysis

A hybrid data analysis approach which entails published data and comparison of each of the case studies presented for each company in Singapore, Malta, and the Silicon Valley, will be used. It is imperative to complement the case study analysis with literature review since each of them do not provide concrete information when used independently. According to Yin (as cited in Carolan et al., 2016), data analysis is the least developed aspect of case study hence the need to incorporate qualitative mixed methods. By using the two methods together, bias is minimized using the triangulation technique (Dzuigol, 2020; Fusch et al., 2017a; Kern, 2018). Fusch et al. (2018b) explains that “triangulation involves the employment of multiple external data collection methods concerning the same events” (p. 20). Fusch et al. asserts that triangulation ensures the reliability of data. This analysis involves assessing the factors which could have led to the success of the case companies since previous evidence show that dysfunctional startups usually fail by the second year. Since all of them have been in existence for more than two years the paper assumes that the companies have succeeded. The identified factors should be supported by existing evidence in the literature review.

Research Limitations

Evidence about the elements and infrastructure which determines the success of startups in their ecosystem is little or unknown. Although the literature review serves to augment the case study analysis, it presents limited evidence resulting from the inadequacy of the latter. The scarcity of the sources could be caused by the priority given to materials published later than 2015 thus excluding the outdated sources. Another limitation of this study is that only three case studies are selected for analysis. The limited number of companies makes the application of the findings on other companies a matter of unrealistic generalization. The selection also lacks geographic diversity in that the three startups were selected from Asia, Europe, and the US leaving out South America, Africa, and Australia which also have large number of startup companies.

References

Attune Technologies (n.d.). About Attune. Web.

Baldridge, R. (2021). What is a startup? Forbes. Web.

Bednár, R., & Tarišková, N. (2017). Indicators of startup failure. Industry 4.0, 2(5), 238-240.

Bednar, R., Tariskova, N., & Zagorsek, B. (2018). Startup revenue model failures.Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 14(4), 141-157. Web.

Bui, A. (2016). Startup ecosystem in Finland [Bachelor’s Thesis, Helsinki Metropolia University of Applied Sciences]. Theseus.

Cannapharm Technologies (n.d.). Cannapharm Technologies. Web.

Cantamessa, M., Gatteschi, V., Perboli, G., & Rosano, M. (2018). Startups’ roads to failure. Sustainability, 10(7), 2346.

Cardiva Medical (n.d.). About Cardiva Medical Inc. Web.

Carolan, C. M., Forbat, L., & Smith, A. (2016). Developing the DESCARTE model: The design of case study research in health care.Qualitative Health Research, 26(5), 626-639. Web.

Choi, D. S., Sung, C. S., & Park, J. Y. (2020). How does technology startups increase innovative performance? The study of technology startups on innovation focusing on employment change in Korea.Sustainability, 12(2), 551. Web.

Crișan, E. L., Salanță, I. I., Beleiu, I. N., Bordean, O. N., & Bunduchi, R. (2019). A systematic literature review on accelerators. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42, 62-89. Web.

Cukier, D., Kon, F., & Lyons, T. S. (2016, June). Software startup ecosystems evolution: The New York City case study. In 2016 International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation/IEEE lnternational Technology Management Conference (ICE/ITMC) (pp. 1-8). IEEE.

Da Camara, R., Marinho, M., Sampaio, S., & Cadete, S. (2020). How do agile software startups deal with uncertainties by Covid-19 pandemic?, International Journal of Software Engineering & Applications, 11(4).

Dzwigol, H. (2020). Methodological and empirical platform of triangulation in strategic management.Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 1-8. Web.

Etla (2019). Business angel investment, public innovation funding and firm growth. Web.

Fusch, P. I., Fusch, G. E., & Ness, L. R. (2017a). How to conduct a mini-ethnographic case study: A guide for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 22(3), 923. Web.

Fusch, P., Fusch, G. E., & Ness, L. R. (2018b). Denzin’s paradigm shift: Revisiting triangulation in qualitative research. Journal of Social Change, 10(1), 19-32.

Gonzalez, G. (2017). Startup business plans: Academic researchers and expert practitioners still disagree?. Muma Business Review, 1(15), 189-196.

Gupta, V., Fernandez-Crehuet, J. M., Hanne, T., & Telesko, R. (2020). Requirements Engineering in Software Startups: A Systematic Mapping Study. Applied Sciences, 10(17), 6125. Web.

Haines, T. (2016). Developing a startup and innovation ecosystem in regional Australia. Technology Innovation Management Review, 6(6), 24-32. Web.

Hernández, C., & González, D. (2017). Study of the start-up ecosystem in Lima, Peru: Analysis of inter-organizational networks.Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 12(1), 71-83. Web.

Hussain, A. (2019). Industrial revolution 4.0: Implication to libraries and librarians.Library Hi Tech News, 37(1), 1-5. Web.

Jain, S. (2016). Growth of startup ecosystems in India.International Journal of Applied Research, 2(12), 152-154. Web.

Jee, Y. S. (2017). Exercise rehabilitation in the fourth industrial revolution.Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation, 13(3), 255. Web.

Junttila, J. (2020). Collaboration within a startup ecosystem: Enhancing entrepreneurial activities through collaboration in the startup ecosystem of Sydney, Australia [Master’s Thesis, University of Gothenburg].GUPEA.

Kalyanasundaram, G. (2018). Why do startups fail? A case study based empirical analysis in Bangalore. Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy, 7(1), 79-102. Web.

Karim, I. U., Khurshid, I. N., & Huq, S. N. (2018). Critical success factors of tech-based disruptive startup ecosystem in Bangladesh. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Management, 7(2), 7-27.

Kemell, K. K., Risku, J., Strandjord, K. E., Nguyen-Duc, A., Wang, X., & Abrahamsson, P. (2020, August). Internal software startups–a multiple case study on practices, methods, and success factors. In 2020 46th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA) (pp. 326-333). IEEE.

Kern, F. G. (2018). The trials and tribulations of applied triangulation: Weighing different data sources.Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 12(2), 166-181. Web.

Kupp, M., Marval, M., & Borchers, P. (2017). Corporate accelerators: fostering innovation while bringing together startups and large firms.Journal of business strategy, 38(6), 47-53. Web.

Lim, S. L., Bentley, P. J., & Ishikawa, F. (2020, May). Reaching the Unreachable: A Method for Early Stage Software Startups to Reach Inaccessible Stakeholders within Large Corporation. In 2020 IEEE 28th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE) (pp. 376-381). IEEE.

Lim, S., Kwon, O., & Lee, D. H. (2018). Technology convergence in the Internet of Things (IoT) startup ecosystem: A network analysis. Telematics and Informatics, 35(7), 1887-1899.

Manikas, K. (2016). Revisiting software ecosystems research: A longitudinal literature study. Journal of Systems and Software, 117, 84-103.

Mimaroglu, E. S. (2020). A quantitative study investigating the critical success factors in relation to software project success among technology based startup companies in the United States [Doctoral dissertation, Capella University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

Morrar, R., Arman, H., & Mousa, S. (2017). The fourth industrial revolution (Industry 4.0): A social innovation perspective. Technology Innovation Management Review, 7(11), 12-20. Web.

Muramalla, V. S. S. R., & Al-Hazza, A. M. (2019). Entrepreneurial strategies and factors stimulate the business of tech startups.International Journal of Financial Research, 10(3). Web.

Nair, S., & Blomquist, T. (2019). Failure prevention and management in business incubation: practices towards a scalable business model.Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 31(3), 266-278. Web.

Oztemel, E., & Gursev, S. (2020). Literature review of Industry 4.0 and related technologies. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 31(1), 127-182.

Pandey, N. K. (2018). An analysis of startup ecosystem in metropolitan city in India. International Journal of Engineering and Management Research, 8(2), 237-244.

Paul, J., & Criado, A. R. (2020). The art of writing literature review: What do we know and what do we need to know?International Business Review, 29(4). Web.

Perry, A., Rahim, E., & Davis, B. (2018). Startup success trends in small business beyond five-years: A qualitative research study. International Journal of Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Corporate Social Responsibility (IJSECSR), 3(1), 1-16. Web.

Peter, L. M., Back, A., & Werro, T. (2020). Conceptual framework for collaborative open innovation with a startup ecosystem. International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy (IJIDE), 11(1), 21-43.

Rafiq, U., & Wang, X. (2020). Continuous Information Monitoring in Software Startups. In International Conference on Agile Software Development (pp. 280-287). Springer, Cham.

Rashid, Y., Rashid, A., Warraich, M. A., Sabir, S. S., & Waseem, A. (2019). Case study method: A step-by-step guide for business researchers. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18,1-13.

Ridder, H. G. (2017). The theory contribution of case study research designs.Business Research, 10(2), 281-305. Web.

Roundy, P. T., Brockman, B. K., & Bradshaw, M. (2017). The resilience of entrepreneurial ecosystems.Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 8, 99-104. Web.

Salamzadeh, A., & Kesim, H. K. (2017). The enterprising communities and startup ecosystem in Iran.Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 11(4), 456-479. Web.

Santisteban, J., & Mauricio, D. (2017). Systematic literature review of critical success factors of information technology startups. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 23(2), 1-23. Web.

Schwab, K. (2016). The fourth industrial revolution: What it means, how to respond. World Economic Forum. Web.

Seedtable. 52 Malta Startups to Watch in 2021. Web.

Singh, S., Chauhan, A., & Dhir, S. (2019). Analyzing the startup ecosystem of India: a Twitter analytics perspective. Journal of Advances in Management Research, 17(2), 262-281. Web.

Singh, S., Dhir, S., Das, V. M., & Sharma, A. (2019). Interrelationships among the institutional enablers of national innovation system, in Z.U. Ahmed (Ed.), Advancements in Global Business Research across Emerging Countries (421-441), McGraw Hills.

Skawińska, E., & Zalewski, R. I. (2020). Success factors of startups in the EU—A comparative study.Sustainability, 12(19), 8200. Web.

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines.Journal of Business Research, 104, 333-339. Web.

Spender, J. C., Corvello, V., Grimaldi, M., & Rippa, P. (2017). Startups and open innovation: a review of the literature.European Journal of Innovation Management, 20(1), 4-30. Web.

Spigel, B. (2017). The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(1), 49-72.

Torres, N. N., & Souza, C. R. (2016, May). A literature review about technology startups ecosystems. In Proceedings of the XII Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems on Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems: Information Systems in the Cloud Computing Era-Volume 1 (pp. 385-392).

Tripathi, N., Seppänen, P., Boominathan, G., Oivo, M., & Liukkunen, K. (2019). Insights into startup ecosystems through exploration of multi-vocal literature. Information and Software Technology, 105, 56-77.

Wang, X., Edison, H., Bajwa, S. S., Giardino, C., & Abrahamsson, P. (2016, May). Key challenges in software startups across life cycle stages. In International Conference on Agile Software Development (pp. 169-182). Springer.

Zhavoronkova, G., Zhavoronkov, V., & Nagieva, V. (2021). Innovative business development and the startup ecosystem in the era of the fourth industrial revolution.Industry 4.0, 6(1), 32-36. Web.