CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 149Entrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesCulture, Economy, and Development StudiesMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Varieties of entrepreneurship: exploring the institutional foundations of different entrepreneurship types through ‘Varieties-of-Capitalism’ arguments

Open access
Dilli, Selin, Elert, Niklas, Herrmann, Andrea M.·2018·Small Business Economics
DOI 10.1007/s11187-018-0002-z
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

While entrepreneurship researchers agree that institutions ‘matter’ for entrepreneurship, they also have a rather encompassing understanding of institutions as almost any external factor that influences entrepreneurship. Ultimately, this literature thus comes up with a long list of institutional factors that may explain entrepreneurial differences between countries. But which institutions are most influential? How do these institutions relate to different types of entrepreneurship? And to what extent are institutions complementary to each other in the way they sustain different entrepreneurship types? The literature on ‘Varieties-of-Capitalism’ (VoC) offers a parsimonious theoretical framework to address these questions. Based on the VoC literature, we theoretically derive a consistent set of institutional indicators that can explain differences in entrepreneurship types between countries. Based on principal component and cluster analyses, we illustrate how 21 Western developed economies cluster around four distinct institutional settings. Furthermore, we use simple OLS regressions to show how these institutional constellations are related to different types of entrepreneurship. We conclude that four different ‘Varieties of Entrepreneurship’ can be identified across the Western world. The main implication of our findings is that a ‘perfect’ institutional constellation, equally facilitating different types of entrepreneurship, does not exist. Policy-makers seeking to stimulate entrepreneurship are thus faced with the trade-off of targeting policy reforms to that entrepreneurship type they intend to promote—at the expense of other types of entrepreneurship and the broader societal consequences such reforms will have.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11187-018-0002-z

Cites

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 a -d Clusters of countries along the four dimensions
Fig. 1 a -d Clusters of countries along the four dimensionsCC-BY · From the PDF
Image 2
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 3
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 4
CC-BY · From the PDF
Fig. 2 The VoC framework: all indicators clustered together
Fig. 2 The VoC framework: all indicators clustered togetherCC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 66

  1. Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: the origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. New York: Crown Publishers.
  2. Acs, Z. J. (2008). Foundations of high impact entrepreneurship. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 4(6), 535–620. https://doi.org/10.1561/0300000025 . · DOI
  3. Acs, Z. J., Desai, S., & Hessels, J. (2008). Entrepreneurship, economic development, and institutions. Small Business Economics, 31(3), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-008-9135-9 . · DOI
  4. Altindag, E., Zehir, C., & Zafer, A. A. (2011). Strategic orientations and their effects on firm performance in turkish family owned firms. Eurasian Business Review, 1(1), 18–36. https://doi.org/10.14208/BF03353796 . · DOI
  5. Amable, B. (2003). The diversity of modern capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. · DOI
  6. Andersen, T. M., & Svarer, M. (2007). Flexicurity—labour market performance in Denmark. CESifo Economic Studies, 53(3), 389–429. https://doi.org/10.1093/cesifo/ifm015 . · DOI
  7. Autio, E., & Acs, Z. J. (2010). Intellectual property protection and the formation of entrepreneurial growth aspirations. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4(4), 234–251. · DOI
  8. Bartelsman, E., Scarpetta, S., & Schivardi, F. (2005). Comparative Analysis of Firm Demographics and Survival: Evidence from Micro-level Sources in OECD Countries. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(3), 365–391. · DOI
  9. Baumol, W. (1990). Entrepreneurship: productive, unproductive, and destructive. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 893–921. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(94)00014-X . · DOI · Paper page
  10. Bjørnskov, C., & Foss, N. J. (2013). How strategic entrepreneurship and the institutional context drive economic growth. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 7(1), 50–69. · DOI
  11. Bottazzi, L., & Da Rin, M. (2002). Venture capital in Europe and the financing of innovative companies. Economic Policy, 17(34), 229–269. · DOI
  12. Calcagno, P. T., & Sobel, R. S. (2014). Regulatory costs on entrepreneurship and establishment employment size. Small Business Economics, 42(3), 541–559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9493-9 . · DOI
  13. Coad, A. (2009). The growth of firms: A survey of theories and empirical evidence. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. · DOI
  14. Coad, A., & Rao, R. (2008). Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: a quantile regression approach. Research Policy, 37(4), 633–648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.003 . · DOI
  15. Colombo, M. G., & Grilli, L. (2005). Founders’ human capital and the growth of new technology based firms: a competence-based view. Research Policy, 34, 795–816. · DOI
  16. Corsino, M., & Gabriele, R. (2011). Product innovation and firm growth: evidence from the integrated circuit industry. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(1), 29–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtq050 . · DOI
  17. Da Rin, M., Nicodano, G., & Sembenelli, A. (2006). Public policy and the creation of active venture capital markets. Journal of Public Economics, 90(8–9), 1699–1723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2005.09.013 . · DOI
  18. Delmar, F., & Wennberg, K. (2010). Knowledge Intensive Entrepreneurship: The Birth, Growth and Demise of Entrepreneurial Firms. Edward Elgar Publishing. · DOI
  19. Fenn, G., Liang, N., & Prowse, S. (1995). The economics of the private equity market. Washington, D.C.: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
  20. Freel, M. S. (2000). Do small innovating firms outperform non-innovators? Small Business Economics, 14(3), 195–210. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008100206266 . · DOI
  21. Geroski, P. A. (1995). What Do We Know about Entry? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13(4), 421–40. · DOI
  22. Golpe, A., Millán, J., & Román, C. (2008). Labor market institutions and entrepreneurship. In E. Congregado (Ed.), Measuring entrepreneurship (pp. 279–296). Springer US: International Studies in Entrepreneurship. · DOI
  23. Gompers, P. A., & Lerner, J. (1999). An analysis of compensation in the U.S. venture capital partnership. Journal of Financial Economics, 51(1), 3–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-405X(98)00042-7 . · DOI
  24. Hall, R. E., & Jones, C. I. (1999). Why do some countries produce so much more output per worker than others? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(1), 83–116. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355399555954 . · DOI
  25. Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. W. (2001). An introduction to varieties of capitalism. In P. A. Hall & D. W. Soskice (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism - the institutional foundations of comparative advantage (pp. 1–68). Oxford: Oxford University Press. · DOI
  26. Hancké, B., Rhodes, M., & Thatcher, M. (2007). Beyond varieties of capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. · DOI
  27. Hechavarria, D. M., & Reynolds, P. D. (2009). Cultural norms & business start-ups: the impact of national values on opportunity and necessity entrepreneurs. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 5(4), 417–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-009-0115-6 . · DOI
  28. Henrekson, M., & Johansson, D. (2009). Competencies and institutions fostering high-growth firms. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 5(1), 1–80. https://doi.org/10.1561/0300000026 . · DOI
  29. Henrekson, M., & Rosenberg, N. (2001). Designing efficient institutions for science-based entrepreneurship: lessons from the U.S. and Sweden. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(2), 207–231. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011153922906 . · DOI
  30. Henrekson, M., & Sanadaji, T. (2014). Small business activity does not measure entrepreneurship. PNAS, 111(5), 1760–1765. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1307204111 . · DOI
  31. Henrekson, M., & Stenkula, M. (2016). Understanding entrepreneurship: definition, function and policy. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
  32. Herrmann, A. M. (2008). One political economy, one competitive strategy? Comparing pharmaceutical firms in Germany, Italy, and the UK. Oxford: Oxford University Press. · DOI
  33. Herrmann, A. M., & Peine, A. (2011). When ‘national innovation system’ meet ‘varieties of capitalism’ arguments on labour qualifications: On the skill types and scientific knowledge needed for radical and incremental product innovations. Research Policy, 40(5), 687–701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.02.004 . · DOI
  34. Hessels, J., Van Stel, A. J., Brouwer, P., & Wennekers, S. (2007). Social security arrangements and early−stage entrepreneurial activity. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 28(4) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1006256 .
  35. Jackson, G., & Deeg, R. (2012). The Long-Term Trajectories of Institutional Change in European Capitalism. Journal of European Public Policy, 19(8), 1109–1125. · DOI
  36. Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000116 . · DOI · Paper page
  37. Keuschnigg, C., & Nielsen, S. B. (2004). Taxation and venture capital backed entrepreneurship. International Tax and Public Finance, 11(4), 369–390. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ITAX.0000033984.29301.9e . · DOI
  38. Klein, B. (1996). Why hold-ups occur: the self-enforcing range of contractual relationships. Economic Inquiry, 34(3), 444–463. · DOI
  39. Lundvall, B. A. (1992). User-producer relationships, national systems of innovation and internationalisation. In B. A. Lundvall (Ed.), National systems of innovation—towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning (pp. 45–67). London: Pinter Publishers.
  40. Milgrom, P., & Roberts, J. (1992). Economics, organization and management. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
  41. Misher, N. (1984). Tax consequences of exercising an incentive stock option with stock of the granting corporation. Tax Executive, 36, 357–363.
  42. Molina, O., & Rhodes, M. (2007). The political economy of adjustment in mixed market economies: A study of Spain and Italy. In B. Hancké, M. Rhodes, & M. Tatcher (Eds.), Beyond varieties of capitalism: conflict, contradictions and complementarities in the European economy (pp. 223–252). Oxford: Oxford University Press. · DOI
  43. Murphy, K. M., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1990). The allocation of talent: implications for growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2), 503–530. https://doi.org/10.2307/2937945 . · DOI
  44. Nölke, A., & Vliegenthart, A. (2009). Enlarging the varieties of capitalism: the emergence of dependent market economies in east Central Europe. World Politics, 61(4), 670–702. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887109990098 . · DOI
  45. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. · DOI · Paper page
  46. OECD (2003). OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2003. OECD Publishing. · DOI
  47. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: a resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
  48. Rogerson, W. P. (1992). Contractual solutions to the hold-up problem. Review of Economic Studies, 59(4), 777–794. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297997 . · DOI · Paper page
  49. Román, C., Congregado, E., & Millán, J. M. (2011). “The role of labor market institutions on entrepreneurship dynamics in times of crisis: evidence from European countries.” In G.D. Libecap, & S. Hoskinson (Eds.), Entrepreneurship and Global Competitiveness in Regional Economies: Determinants and Policy Implications (pp. 161–183). Advances in the Study of Entrepreneurship, Innovation & Economic Growth. Bingley: Howard House, Emerald Group Publishing Limited. · DOI
  50. Schneider, M. R., & Paunescu, M. (2012). Changing varieties of capitalism and revealed comparative advantages from 1990 to 2005: a test of the hall and Soskice claims. Socio-Economic Review, 10(4), 731–753. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwr038 . · DOI
  51. Sobel, R. S. (2008). Testing Baumol: Institutional quality and the productivity of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(6), 641–655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.01.004 . · DOI · Paper page
  52. Stam, E. (2014). The Dutch entrepreneurial ecosystem. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2473475 . · DOI · Paper page
  53. Stenholm, P., Acs, Z. J., & Wuebker, R. (2013). Exploring country-level institutional arrangements on the rate and type of entrepreneurial activity. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(1), 176–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.11.002 . · DOI
  54. Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (2005). Introduction: Institutional change in advanced political economies. In W. Streeck & K. Thelen (Eds.), Beyond continuity: Institutional change in advanced political economies (pp. 1–39). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  55. Suhr, D. (2005). Principal component analysis vs. exploratory factor analysis. SUGI 30 Proceedings. Retrieved April 30 2017 from http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi30/Leadrs30.pdf .
  56. Tate, J. (2001). National varieties of standardization. In P. A. Hall & D. W. Soskice (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism - the institutional foundations of comparative advantage (pp. 442–473). Oxford: Oxford University Press. · DOI
  57. Taylor, M. Z., & Wilson, S. (2012). Does culture still matter? The effects of individualism on National Innovation Rates. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2), 234–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.10.001 . · DOI
  58. Teece, D. J., & Pisano, G. (1998). The dynamic capabilities of firms. In G. Dosi, D. J. Teece, & J. Chytry (Eds.), (pp. 193–212). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  59. Teubner, G. (2001). Legal irritants: How unifying law ends up in new divergences. In P. A. Hall & D. W. Soskice (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism—the institutional foundations of comparative advantage (pp. 417–441). Oxford: Oxford University Press. · DOI
  60. Urbano, D., & Alvarez, C. (2014). Institutional dimensions and entrepreneurial activity: an international study. Small Business Economics, 42(4), 703–716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9523-7 . · DOI
  61. Vitols, S. (2001). Varieties of corporate governance: comparing Germany and the UK. In P. A. Hall & D. W. Soskice (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism—the institutional foundations of comparative advantage (pp. 337–360). Oxford: Oxford University Press. · DOI
  62. Vivarelli, M. (2013). Is entrepreneurship necessarily good? Microeconomic evidence from developed and developing countries. Industrial and Corporate Change, 22(6), 1453–1495. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtt005 . · DOI
  63. Vivarelli, M., & Audretsch, D. (1998). The link between the entry decision and post-entry performance: evidence from Italy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 7(3), 485–500. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/7.3.485 . · DOI
  64. WEF. (2013). Entrepreneurial ecosystems around the globe and company growth dynamics. World Economic Forum: Davos.
  65. Wennekers, S., & Thurik, A. R. (1999). Linking entrepreneurship and economic growth. Small Business Economics, 13(1), 27–56. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008063200484 . · DOI
  66. Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: firms, markets, relational contracting. New York: Free Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Toward an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Research Program

    Wurth, B., Stam, E., & Spigel, B. (2022) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/1042258721998948 · Cited by 789

    “…emerging regarding how different ecosystem configurations lead to different entrepreneurship outputs, and even how different clusters within one ecosystem can produce different entrepreneurship outputs (Civera et al., 2019 ; Dilli et al., 2018 ; Neumeyer & Santos, 2018; Neumeyer et al., 2019).”

Metadata

Authors
Dilli, S., Elert, N., & Herrmann, A. M.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • Research Institute of Industrial Economics (SE)
Corresponding author
Dilli, Selin
ORCID
Venue
Small Business Economics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2018-03-29
Volume
51
Issue
2
Pages
293-320
ISSN
  • 0921-898X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-0913
DOI
10.1007/s11187-018-0002-z
OpenAlex
W2795035035
Cited by
149
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 10
FWCI
22.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Small Business Economics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Econstor (Econstor) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Utrecht University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Development › Culture, Economy, and Development Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Keywords
varieties of capitalism, institutional complementarity, entrepreneurship policy, cross-national comparison

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review