@article {1247,
	title = {The Strategies of Technology Startups Within and Between Business Ecosystems},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2019},
	month = {06/2019},
	pages = {25-41},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Technology startups build strategies in order to survive within the framework of business ecosystems. However, the knowledge required to make such strategies effective is scarce. This article poses the question: {\textquotedblleft}How do small technology startups strategize within and between business ecosystems?{\textquotedblright} Based on an explorative qualitative study, this article defines and presents a dynamic strategic framework of three strategies employed by technology startups. Some startups choose to act within one defined business ecosystem, most startups use a multi-ecosystem strategy to act between and draw benefits from many business ecosystems, and the rest act as ecosystem creators that challenge the logics of existing ecosystems.},
	keywords = {boundaries, business ecosystems, entrepreneurship, startups, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1247},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1247},
	author = {Taina Tukiainen and Thommie Burstr{\"o}m and Martin Lindell}
}
@article {1230,
	title = {Using Action Research to Organize Technology Transfer in Complex Innovation Contexts},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2019},
	month = {04/2019},
	pages = {17-26},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Technology transfer projects increasingly consist of multiple, diverse organizations, with each pursuing their own agenda as well as that of the overarching programme. In this article, we adopt a participatory action research methodology in order to explain and improve the coordination of the autonomous innovation activities within an organizationally complex project. The context of the research involved the transfer of rice production technology from China to Mozambique. The action research identified four categories of boundary within the project that were hindering performance: Intellectual/Land property rights; Public/Private sector logics; Inside/Outside programme; and Collaboration/Competition between programme actors. The process of co-inquiry with stakeholders enabled by the action research allowed programme actors to reach an understanding of others, and it created a new thinking space for mutual problem solving. By these means, the action research process makes a resource of the differences between stakeholders rather than it being seen as a barrier to be compromised through negotiation.},
	keywords = {action research, agricultural innovation, boundaries, international collaboration, technology transfer},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1230},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1230},
	author = {Armando Machevo Ussivane and Paul Ellwood}
}
