Purpose – In this paper the aim is to present Debate Dashboard, an online collaborative platform ... more Purpose – In this paper the aim is to present Debate Dashboard, an online collaborative platform designed to support distributed knowledge management and decision making. The platform integrates an argument mapping tool with visual widgets with the objective of enhancing collective sense-making and mutual understanding as well as to compensate for the costs of mediated communication in virtual collaborative environments. Design/methodology/approach – The design of Debate Dashboard is based on the theory of common ground according to which participants involved in a conversation build mutual understanding thanks to the exchange of different types of feedback. Using the concept of grounding cost, the authors identified several features of the Dashboard supposed to favour mutual understanding and knowledge sharing. Such features have been implemented through six visual widgets selected through a benchmarking of currently available visualization tools. Findings – The paper discusses the limitations and advantages of online argumentation to support online discussions and presents a review of current visualization tools. The design of a new platform able to integrate online argumentation and visualization technologies is described and it is argued that Debate Dashboard will improve online collaboration in many respects especially in terms of supporting the construction of shared knowledge representations for geographically distributed collaborative teams. Originality/value – First, the work adds to the debate on the development of online argumentation platforms by offering an alternative theoretical perspective based on language and conversational studies. Second, it proposes for the first time to integrate argumentation and visualization technologies in the same tool to create an augmented collaborative platform able to overcome the limitations of both traditional online collaboration technologies, such as forums and wikis, as well as the criticalities associated with the use of argumentation technologies.
Collaborative Computer-Supported Argument Visualiza-tion (CCSAV) has often been proposed as an al... more Collaborative Computer-Supported Argument Visualiza-tion (CCSAV) has often been proposed as an alternative over more conventional, mainstream platforms for online discussion (e.g., online forums and wikis). CCSAV tools require users to contribute to the creation of a joint artifact (argument map) instead of contributing to a conversation. In this paper we assess empirically the effects of this fundamental design choice and show that the absence of conversational affordances and socially salient information in representation-centric tools is detrimental to the users' collaboration experience. We report empirical findings from a study in which subjects using different collaborative platforms (a forum, an argumentation platform, and a socially augmented argumentation tool) were asked to discuss and predict the price of a commodity. By comparing users' experience across several metrics we found evidence that the collaborative performance decreases gradually when we remove conversational interaction and other types of socially salient information. We interpret these findings through theories developed in conversational analysis (common ground theory) and communities of practice and discuss design implications. In particular, we propose balancing the trade-off between knowledge reification and participation in representation-centric tools with the provision of social feedback and function-alities supporting meaning negotiation.
Opening the innovation process represents a new opportunity for
small, medium and large firms to ... more Opening the innovation process represents a new opportunity for small, medium and large firms to increase the internal innovative capacity and to raise their overall innovation performance. Although large firms still realised the higher amount of innovation, few studies have paid attention to open innovation (OI) in small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and how the use of OI practices in SMEs differ from large enterprises. Starting from the findings in Spithoven (2013) that SMEs can foster the introduction of new offerings through collaboration with several innovation partners and that collaboration with partners increases the likelihood that SMEs launch new products and services, we investigate through a web-based survey realised in Italy how organisational factors, strategic factors and environmental factors impact on the ability of a firm to adopt an OI approach, if size matters, and whether innovation intermediaries play a critical role in the opening process.
A growing body of literature recognizes increasingly the vital importance of entrepreneurial acti... more A growing body of literature recognizes increasingly the vital importance of entrepreneurial activity as driving force of the social and economic development and societal wealth. Particularly, a crucial role has been assigned to newborn firms. Among newborn firms, start-ups, in particular, are considered to be one of the most important channels for industrial changing and renewal of the economic system. Start-ups, i.e., have the potentiality to accompany and to support the transition of whole national economies toward progress and border-line knowledge, as well as the industrial transformations of the local areas toward the future directions provided by innovations and high-tech industries. Consistent with this framework, since last decade, European Union (EU) stimulates the Member States to promote entrepreneurial activities by proposing several initiatives directed to support the entrepreneurial paths among an increasing number of individuals (EC, 2003; 2006). These initiatives are mainly intended to involve individuals with an entrepreneurial attitude still latent or with higher potentiality to found a successful start-up. Within the initiatives aimed at supporting the start-ups, one which seems to have an increasingly recognition among policy makers, with an increasing audience of followers and participants, is the proposition of start-up competitions (hereinafter SUCs). Also known as business plan competitions, SUCs could be meant as a selective instrument of entrepreneurship policy aimed at encouraging the starting-up by relying on subjective aspects of self-realization and self-efficacy of the participants, rather than on financial, monetary or fiscal rewards. Furthermore, it is organized not only by public institutions, but often also by private specialized organizations. In so doing, SUCs well suited the ongoing economic requirements of many EU countries. The ideas proposed with these SUCs are more likely to be consistent with the industrial structure and development level of EU countries. Although the increasing diffusion of SUCs, there is a gap in literature about the social and economic advantages provided by these SUCs, as well as about their functioning (Schwartz et al., 2013). Nor a comprehensive and systematic overview of SUCs is currently existent. Whit this in mind, the paper aims at presenting an explorative cross-section analysis of Italian SUCs in order to provide an overview of the chief characteristics of these initiatives and their potential impact on the territorial context. Coherently, the focal goal of this paper is to provide a first evaluation of SUCs for a better understanding of their contribution as entrepreneurship policy instrument aimed at facilitating the entrepreneurial process and, in so doing, to increase both the number of nascent entrepreneurs and the probability of success of such initiatives.
This paper aims at exploring the critical dynamic capabilities of SMEs in the innovation process ... more This paper aims at exploring the critical dynamic capabilities of SMEs in the innovation process and at identifying the dynamic capabilities which enable the implementation of open innovation practices. Building on qualitative data from the manufacturing industry deriving from an in-depth investigation of the capabilities of four case firms, the patterns between the firm's portfolio of dynamic capabilities and the different types of open innovation processes is mapped. This study makes three primary contributions to the body of knowledge. This is the first attempt to link dynamic capabilities to open innovation approach held by Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). Second, the study extends existing wok on innovation in SMEs by identifying key dynamic capabilities in that context. Finally, the case based research provides empirical evidence of dynamic capabilities in practices, where analysis reveals that companies with strong sensing, seizing reconfiguring capabilities are more inclined to develop open innovation approaches.
Opening the innovation process represents a new opportunity for SMEs to increase the internal inn... more Opening the innovation process represents a new opportunity for SMEs to increase the internal innovative capacity and to raise their overall innovation performances. Until today, open innovation in SMEs has been poorly studied, as certified by the high number of papers presenting case studies in large and multinational firms. This paper is aimed at adding a new step in the knowledge about the constraints and barriers that hinders SMEs in the adoption of open innovation practices. Based on preliminary results from a web-based survey realized in Italy, this study reveals how communication skills, internal resources availability, intellectual property management capabilities and trust among partners are the main elements that obstruct the SMEs in the acquisition and use of externally generated knowledge, and that the role played by intermediaries in innovation is still not good enough to help SMEs in the adoption of open innovation approaches.
In today economic environment, innovation is considered the primary source of competitive advanta... more In today economic environment, innovation is considered the primary source of competitive advantage for companies. The advent of Web 2.0 tools has provided organizations with new models and tools to improve collaboration and co-creation of new knowledge assets. In particular, the shift to Open Innovation models has been recognized as a major change in the way companies create and manage innovation. In this paper the authors focus on a particular kind of web-based platforms known as argument mapping tools. Argument mapping tools have proved to be valuable tools to the organization to support collaborative decision making in distributed environments, but the level of adoption of these technologies in common organizational practices remains quite low. To tackle this problem, the authors propose to augment common argumentation mapping features with a Debate Dashboard. The research hypothesis the authors make is that by providing visual conversational feedback the Debate Dashboard improves common ground and mutual understanding of online conversation thus supporting users adoption of argument mapping tools. Drawing on Grounding cost theory (Clark & Brennan, 1991; Clark, 1996), in this paper the authors describe the main rationale and requirements for a Debate Dashboard and argue that such interface can provide useful users feedback to compensate for the loss of information due to technology mediation, and therefore improve the communication and mediation abilities of argumentation systems. Moreover the authors describe the design and preliminary results of an evaluation study carried out to assess whether the Debate Dashboard can foster more efficient and easier interaction and communication among online users. Initial results appear to support their research hypothesis, at least in terms of users' involvement and level of participation. Indeed, from the preliminary analysis it emerges that by augmenting online argument mapping tools with visual feedback users' performances and users engagement improve, in particular by increasing the total number of user contributions and the number of most active users.
... In Resnick, Lauren B. Levine, John M. Teasley, Stephanie D. (Ed), Perspectives on socially sh... more ... In Resnick, Lauren B. Levine, John M. Teasley, Stephanie D. (Ed), Perspectives on socially shared cognition, Washington, DC, US: American Psycho ... Quinto I., Buckingham Shum S., De Liddo A., Iandoli L. (2010) A Debate Dashboard to Enhance On-Line Knowledge Sharing ...
Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge - LAK '11, 2011
Drawing on sociocultural discourse analysis and argumentation theory, we motivate a focus on lear... more Drawing on sociocultural discourse analysis and argumentation theory, we motivate a focus on learners' discourse as a promising site for identifying patterns of activity which correspond to meaningful learning and knowledge construction. However, software platforms must gain access to qualitative information about the rhetorical dimensions to discourse contributions to enable such analytics. This is difficult to extract from naturally occurring text, but the emergence of more-structured annotation and deliberation platforms for learning makes such information available. Using the Cohere web application as a research vehicle, we present examples of analytics at the level of individual learners and groups, showing conceptual and social network patterns, which we propose as indicators of meaningful learning.
International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 2014
Collaborative Computer-Supported Argument Visualization (CCSAV) is a technical methodology that o... more Collaborative Computer-Supported Argument Visualization (CCSAV) is a technical methodology that offers support for online collective deliberation over complex dilemmas. As compared with more traditional conversational technologies, like wikis and forums, CCSAV is designed to promote more critical thinking and evidence-based reasoning, by using representations that highlight conceptual relationships between contributions, and through computational analytics that assess the structural integrity of the network. However, to date, CCSAV tools have achieved adoption primarily in small-scale educational contexts, and only to a limited degree in real world applications. We hypothesise that by reifying conversations as logical maps to address the shortcomings of chronological streams, CCSAV tools underestimate the importance of participation and interaction in enhancing collaborative knowledgebuilding. We argue, therefore, that CCSAV platforms should be socially augmented in order to improve their mediation capability. Drawing on Clark and Brennan influential Common Ground theory, we designed a Debate Dashboard, which augmented a CCSAV tool with a set of widgets that deliver metainformation about participants and the interaction process. An empirical study simulating a moderately sized collective deliberation scenario provides evidence that this experimental version outperformed the control version on a range of indicators, including usability, mutual understanding, quality of perceived collaboration, and accuracy of individual decisions. No evidence was found that the addition of the Debate Dashboard impeded the quality of the argumentation or the richness of content.
The most successful democratic innovations have been able to promote good deliberation by employi... more The most successful democratic innovations have been able to promote good deliberation by employing small discussion groups (5 to 15 participants). In this paper we show that it is possible to design online democratic innovations that can induce good argumentation in large groups of more than 100 participants. The essay is based on a field experiment implemented in a real life democratic innovation designed to promote good e-deliberation and organized in collaboration with the largest online community of the Italian Democratic Party (Insieme per il PD). The field experiment aims to explore the possibility of improving the quality of e-deliberation by comparing the performance of a traditional forum with the performance of an argument mapping software structured to optimize argumentation (Deliberatorium). With respect to a traditional forum technology the argument mapping software 1) does not significantly reduce participation, 2) reduces the total number of ideas generated by the users, and 3) increases the exchange of arguments in favor of and against each proposed idea. Given the centrality of good argumentation in promoting the quality of deliberation, this experiment shows a promising first step in scaling-up deliberation.
Purpose – In this paper the aim is to present Debate Dashboard, an online collaborative platform ... more Purpose – In this paper the aim is to present Debate Dashboard, an online collaborative platform designed to support distributed knowledge management and decision making. The platform integrates an argument mapping tool with visual widgets with the objective of enhancing collective sense-making and mutual understanding as well as to compensate for the costs of mediated communication in virtual collaborative environments. Design/methodology/approach – The design of Debate Dashboard is based on the theory of common ground according to which participants involved in a conversation build mutual understanding thanks to the exchange of different types of feedback. Using the concept of grounding cost, the authors identified several features of the Dashboard supposed to favour mutual understanding and knowledge sharing. Such features have been implemented through six visual widgets selected through a benchmarking of currently available visualization tools. Findings – The paper discusses the limitations and advantages of online argumentation to support online discussions and presents a review of current visualization tools. The design of a new platform able to integrate online argumentation and visualization technologies is described and it is argued that Debate Dashboard will improve online collaboration in many respects especially in terms of supporting the construction of shared knowledge representations for geographically distributed collaborative teams. Originality/value – First, the work adds to the debate on the development of online argumentation platforms by offering an alternative theoretical perspective based on language and conversational studies. Second, it proposes for the first time to integrate argumentation and visualization technologies in the same tool to create an augmented collaborative platform able to overcome the limitations of both traditional online collaboration technologies, such as forums and wikis, as well as the criticalities associated with the use of argumentation technologies.
Collaborative Computer-Supported Argument Visualiza-tion (CCSAV) has often been proposed as an al... more Collaborative Computer-Supported Argument Visualiza-tion (CCSAV) has often been proposed as an alternative over more conventional, mainstream platforms for online discussion (e.g., online forums and wikis). CCSAV tools require users to contribute to the creation of a joint artifact (argument map) instead of contributing to a conversation. In this paper we assess empirically the effects of this fundamental design choice and show that the absence of conversational affordances and socially salient information in representation-centric tools is detrimental to the users' collaboration experience. We report empirical findings from a study in which subjects using different collaborative platforms (a forum, an argumentation platform, and a socially augmented argumentation tool) were asked to discuss and predict the price of a commodity. By comparing users' experience across several metrics we found evidence that the collaborative performance decreases gradually when we remove conversational interaction and other types of socially salient information. We interpret these findings through theories developed in conversational analysis (common ground theory) and communities of practice and discuss design implications. In particular, we propose balancing the trade-off between knowledge reification and participation in representation-centric tools with the provision of social feedback and function-alities supporting meaning negotiation.
Opening the innovation process represents a new opportunity for
small, medium and large firms to ... more Opening the innovation process represents a new opportunity for small, medium and large firms to increase the internal innovative capacity and to raise their overall innovation performance. Although large firms still realised the higher amount of innovation, few studies have paid attention to open innovation (OI) in small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and how the use of OI practices in SMEs differ from large enterprises. Starting from the findings in Spithoven (2013) that SMEs can foster the introduction of new offerings through collaboration with several innovation partners and that collaboration with partners increases the likelihood that SMEs launch new products and services, we investigate through a web-based survey realised in Italy how organisational factors, strategic factors and environmental factors impact on the ability of a firm to adopt an OI approach, if size matters, and whether innovation intermediaries play a critical role in the opening process.
A growing body of literature recognizes increasingly the vital importance of entrepreneurial acti... more A growing body of literature recognizes increasingly the vital importance of entrepreneurial activity as driving force of the social and economic development and societal wealth. Particularly, a crucial role has been assigned to newborn firms. Among newborn firms, start-ups, in particular, are considered to be one of the most important channels for industrial changing and renewal of the economic system. Start-ups, i.e., have the potentiality to accompany and to support the transition of whole national economies toward progress and border-line knowledge, as well as the industrial transformations of the local areas toward the future directions provided by innovations and high-tech industries. Consistent with this framework, since last decade, European Union (EU) stimulates the Member States to promote entrepreneurial activities by proposing several initiatives directed to support the entrepreneurial paths among an increasing number of individuals (EC, 2003; 2006). These initiatives are mainly intended to involve individuals with an entrepreneurial attitude still latent or with higher potentiality to found a successful start-up. Within the initiatives aimed at supporting the start-ups, one which seems to have an increasingly recognition among policy makers, with an increasing audience of followers and participants, is the proposition of start-up competitions (hereinafter SUCs). Also known as business plan competitions, SUCs could be meant as a selective instrument of entrepreneurship policy aimed at encouraging the starting-up by relying on subjective aspects of self-realization and self-efficacy of the participants, rather than on financial, monetary or fiscal rewards. Furthermore, it is organized not only by public institutions, but often also by private specialized organizations. In so doing, SUCs well suited the ongoing economic requirements of many EU countries. The ideas proposed with these SUCs are more likely to be consistent with the industrial structure and development level of EU countries. Although the increasing diffusion of SUCs, there is a gap in literature about the social and economic advantages provided by these SUCs, as well as about their functioning (Schwartz et al., 2013). Nor a comprehensive and systematic overview of SUCs is currently existent. Whit this in mind, the paper aims at presenting an explorative cross-section analysis of Italian SUCs in order to provide an overview of the chief characteristics of these initiatives and their potential impact on the territorial context. Coherently, the focal goal of this paper is to provide a first evaluation of SUCs for a better understanding of their contribution as entrepreneurship policy instrument aimed at facilitating the entrepreneurial process and, in so doing, to increase both the number of nascent entrepreneurs and the probability of success of such initiatives.
This paper aims at exploring the critical dynamic capabilities of SMEs in the innovation process ... more This paper aims at exploring the critical dynamic capabilities of SMEs in the innovation process and at identifying the dynamic capabilities which enable the implementation of open innovation practices. Building on qualitative data from the manufacturing industry deriving from an in-depth investigation of the capabilities of four case firms, the patterns between the firm's portfolio of dynamic capabilities and the different types of open innovation processes is mapped. This study makes three primary contributions to the body of knowledge. This is the first attempt to link dynamic capabilities to open innovation approach held by Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). Second, the study extends existing wok on innovation in SMEs by identifying key dynamic capabilities in that context. Finally, the case based research provides empirical evidence of dynamic capabilities in practices, where analysis reveals that companies with strong sensing, seizing reconfiguring capabilities are more inclined to develop open innovation approaches.
Opening the innovation process represents a new opportunity for SMEs to increase the internal inn... more Opening the innovation process represents a new opportunity for SMEs to increase the internal innovative capacity and to raise their overall innovation performances. Until today, open innovation in SMEs has been poorly studied, as certified by the high number of papers presenting case studies in large and multinational firms. This paper is aimed at adding a new step in the knowledge about the constraints and barriers that hinders SMEs in the adoption of open innovation practices. Based on preliminary results from a web-based survey realized in Italy, this study reveals how communication skills, internal resources availability, intellectual property management capabilities and trust among partners are the main elements that obstruct the SMEs in the acquisition and use of externally generated knowledge, and that the role played by intermediaries in innovation is still not good enough to help SMEs in the adoption of open innovation approaches.
In today economic environment, innovation is considered the primary source of competitive advanta... more In today economic environment, innovation is considered the primary source of competitive advantage for companies. The advent of Web 2.0 tools has provided organizations with new models and tools to improve collaboration and co-creation of new knowledge assets. In particular, the shift to Open Innovation models has been recognized as a major change in the way companies create and manage innovation. In this paper the authors focus on a particular kind of web-based platforms known as argument mapping tools. Argument mapping tools have proved to be valuable tools to the organization to support collaborative decision making in distributed environments, but the level of adoption of these technologies in common organizational practices remains quite low. To tackle this problem, the authors propose to augment common argumentation mapping features with a Debate Dashboard. The research hypothesis the authors make is that by providing visual conversational feedback the Debate Dashboard improves common ground and mutual understanding of online conversation thus supporting users adoption of argument mapping tools. Drawing on Grounding cost theory (Clark & Brennan, 1991; Clark, 1996), in this paper the authors describe the main rationale and requirements for a Debate Dashboard and argue that such interface can provide useful users feedback to compensate for the loss of information due to technology mediation, and therefore improve the communication and mediation abilities of argumentation systems. Moreover the authors describe the design and preliminary results of an evaluation study carried out to assess whether the Debate Dashboard can foster more efficient and easier interaction and communication among online users. Initial results appear to support their research hypothesis, at least in terms of users' involvement and level of participation. Indeed, from the preliminary analysis it emerges that by augmenting online argument mapping tools with visual feedback users' performances and users engagement improve, in particular by increasing the total number of user contributions and the number of most active users.
... In Resnick, Lauren B. Levine, John M. Teasley, Stephanie D. (Ed), Perspectives on socially sh... more ... In Resnick, Lauren B. Levine, John M. Teasley, Stephanie D. (Ed), Perspectives on socially shared cognition, Washington, DC, US: American Psycho ... Quinto I., Buckingham Shum S., De Liddo A., Iandoli L. (2010) A Debate Dashboard to Enhance On-Line Knowledge Sharing ...
Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge - LAK '11, 2011
Drawing on sociocultural discourse analysis and argumentation theory, we motivate a focus on lear... more Drawing on sociocultural discourse analysis and argumentation theory, we motivate a focus on learners' discourse as a promising site for identifying patterns of activity which correspond to meaningful learning and knowledge construction. However, software platforms must gain access to qualitative information about the rhetorical dimensions to discourse contributions to enable such analytics. This is difficult to extract from naturally occurring text, but the emergence of more-structured annotation and deliberation platforms for learning makes such information available. Using the Cohere web application as a research vehicle, we present examples of analytics at the level of individual learners and groups, showing conceptual and social network patterns, which we propose as indicators of meaningful learning.
International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 2014
Collaborative Computer-Supported Argument Visualization (CCSAV) is a technical methodology that o... more Collaborative Computer-Supported Argument Visualization (CCSAV) is a technical methodology that offers support for online collective deliberation over complex dilemmas. As compared with more traditional conversational technologies, like wikis and forums, CCSAV is designed to promote more critical thinking and evidence-based reasoning, by using representations that highlight conceptual relationships between contributions, and through computational analytics that assess the structural integrity of the network. However, to date, CCSAV tools have achieved adoption primarily in small-scale educational contexts, and only to a limited degree in real world applications. We hypothesise that by reifying conversations as logical maps to address the shortcomings of chronological streams, CCSAV tools underestimate the importance of participation and interaction in enhancing collaborative knowledgebuilding. We argue, therefore, that CCSAV platforms should be socially augmented in order to improve their mediation capability. Drawing on Clark and Brennan influential Common Ground theory, we designed a Debate Dashboard, which augmented a CCSAV tool with a set of widgets that deliver metainformation about participants and the interaction process. An empirical study simulating a moderately sized collective deliberation scenario provides evidence that this experimental version outperformed the control version on a range of indicators, including usability, mutual understanding, quality of perceived collaboration, and accuracy of individual decisions. No evidence was found that the addition of the Debate Dashboard impeded the quality of the argumentation or the richness of content.
The most successful democratic innovations have been able to promote good deliberation by employi... more The most successful democratic innovations have been able to promote good deliberation by employing small discussion groups (5 to 15 participants). In this paper we show that it is possible to design online democratic innovations that can induce good argumentation in large groups of more than 100 participants. The essay is based on a field experiment implemented in a real life democratic innovation designed to promote good e-deliberation and organized in collaboration with the largest online community of the Italian Democratic Party (Insieme per il PD). The field experiment aims to explore the possibility of improving the quality of e-deliberation by comparing the performance of a traditional forum with the performance of an argument mapping software structured to optimize argumentation (Deliberatorium). With respect to a traditional forum technology the argument mapping software 1) does not significantly reduce participation, 2) reduces the total number of ideas generated by the users, and 3) increases the exchange of arguments in favor of and against each proposed idea. Given the centrality of good argumentation in promoting the quality of deliberation, this experiment shows a promising first step in scaling-up deliberation.
Uploads
Papers by Ivana Quinto
small, medium and large firms to increase the internal innovative capacity and to raise their overall innovation performance. Although large firms still realised the higher amount of innovation, few studies have paid attention to open innovation (OI) in small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and how the use of OI practices in SMEs differ from large enterprises. Starting from the findings in Spithoven (2013) that SMEs can foster the introduction of new offerings through collaboration with several innovation partners and that collaboration with partners increases the likelihood that SMEs launch new products and services, we investigate through a web-based survey realised in Italy how organisational factors, strategic factors and environmental factors impact on the ability of a firm to adopt an OI approach, if size matters, and whether innovation intermediaries play a critical role in the opening process.
Consistent with this framework, since last decade, European Union (EU) stimulates the Member States to promote entrepreneurial activities by proposing several initiatives directed to support the entrepreneurial paths among an increasing number of individuals (EC, 2003; 2006). These initiatives are mainly intended to involve individuals with an entrepreneurial attitude still latent or with higher potentiality to found a successful start-up. Within the initiatives aimed at supporting the start-ups, one which seems to have an increasingly recognition among policy makers, with an increasing audience of followers and participants, is the proposition of start-up competitions (hereinafter SUCs).
Also known as business plan competitions, SUCs could be meant as a selective instrument of entrepreneurship policy aimed at encouraging the starting-up by relying on subjective aspects of self-realization and self-efficacy of the participants, rather than on financial, monetary or fiscal rewards. Furthermore, it is organized not only by public institutions, but often also by private specialized organizations.
In so doing, SUCs well suited the ongoing economic requirements of many EU countries. The ideas proposed with these SUCs are more likely to be consistent with the industrial structure and development level of EU countries.
Although the increasing diffusion of SUCs, there is a gap in literature about the social and economic advantages provided by these SUCs, as well as about their functioning (Schwartz et al., 2013). Nor a comprehensive and systematic overview of SUCs is currently existent.
Whit this in mind, the paper aims at presenting an explorative cross-section analysis of Italian SUCs in order to provide an overview of the chief characteristics of these initiatives and their potential impact on the territorial context. Coherently, the focal goal of this paper is to provide a first evaluation of SUCs for a better understanding of their contribution as entrepreneurship policy instrument aimed at facilitating the entrepreneurial process and, in so doing, to increase both the number of nascent entrepreneurs and the probability of success of such initiatives.
small, medium and large firms to increase the internal innovative capacity and to raise their overall innovation performance. Although large firms still realised the higher amount of innovation, few studies have paid attention to open innovation (OI) in small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and how the use of OI practices in SMEs differ from large enterprises. Starting from the findings in Spithoven (2013) that SMEs can foster the introduction of new offerings through collaboration with several innovation partners and that collaboration with partners increases the likelihood that SMEs launch new products and services, we investigate through a web-based survey realised in Italy how organisational factors, strategic factors and environmental factors impact on the ability of a firm to adopt an OI approach, if size matters, and whether innovation intermediaries play a critical role in the opening process.
Consistent with this framework, since last decade, European Union (EU) stimulates the Member States to promote entrepreneurial activities by proposing several initiatives directed to support the entrepreneurial paths among an increasing number of individuals (EC, 2003; 2006). These initiatives are mainly intended to involve individuals with an entrepreneurial attitude still latent or with higher potentiality to found a successful start-up. Within the initiatives aimed at supporting the start-ups, one which seems to have an increasingly recognition among policy makers, with an increasing audience of followers and participants, is the proposition of start-up competitions (hereinafter SUCs).
Also known as business plan competitions, SUCs could be meant as a selective instrument of entrepreneurship policy aimed at encouraging the starting-up by relying on subjective aspects of self-realization and self-efficacy of the participants, rather than on financial, monetary or fiscal rewards. Furthermore, it is organized not only by public institutions, but often also by private specialized organizations.
In so doing, SUCs well suited the ongoing economic requirements of many EU countries. The ideas proposed with these SUCs are more likely to be consistent with the industrial structure and development level of EU countries.
Although the increasing diffusion of SUCs, there is a gap in literature about the social and economic advantages provided by these SUCs, as well as about their functioning (Schwartz et al., 2013). Nor a comprehensive and systematic overview of SUCs is currently existent.
Whit this in mind, the paper aims at presenting an explorative cross-section analysis of Italian SUCs in order to provide an overview of the chief characteristics of these initiatives and their potential impact on the territorial context. Coherently, the focal goal of this paper is to provide a first evaluation of SUCs for a better understanding of their contribution as entrepreneurship policy instrument aimed at facilitating the entrepreneurial process and, in so doing, to increase both the number of nascent entrepreneurs and the probability of success of such initiatives.