02151nas a2200217   4500008004100000022001400041245009300055210006900148260004200217300001000259490000600269520145900275653001801734653003301752653002901785653001401814653001901828100002601847700002301873856003701896       2017                        eng d  a1927-032100aCollaborative Capability in Coworking Spaces: Convenience Sharing or Community Building?0 aCollaborative Capability in Coworking Spaces Convenience Sharing  aOttawabTalent First Networkc12/2017  a32-420 v73 aThis study explores the development of collaborative capability in coworking spaces. It is based on the perception of collaboration among 31 coworking founders, community managers, and coworkers of those spaces. In-depth interviews around the meaning of collaboration and its challenges were conducted in 14 coworking spaces located in six Asian countries. A set of factors was identified and a model was proposed based on a set of four dimensions: enabling knowledge sharing, enhancing a creative field, enhancing an individual action for the collective, and supporting a collective action to an effective execution. The “Convenience Sharing” and “Community Building” coworking types based on Capdevila (2014) suggest different conditions under which collaborative capability develops. Convenience Sharing coworking spaces tend to foster collaborative capability through knowledge sharing and effective execution, whereas Community Building coworking spaces tend to foster collaborative capability by enhancing a creative field and individual action for the collective. Overall, this study contributes to a theoretical model for coworking spaces to help coworking founders and community managers make strategic decisions. The findings suggest that collaborative capability in coworking spaces depends on the interlacing of a set of factors along four dimensions that relate in varying degrees of intensity to a two-fold coworking space typology.10acollaboration10acollaborative knowledge work10acollaborative workspaces10acoworking10ainnovativeness1 aCastilho, Marcelo, F.1 aQuandt, Carlos, O.  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/112602721nas a2200301   4500008004100000022001400041245006500055210006500120260004200185300001000227490000600237520183900243653001302082653003102095653002402126653002502150653001702175653003002192653003202222653001902254653002102273653001802294653001602312653001902328100001802347700001802365856003602383       2014                        eng d  a1927-032100aEnabling Employee Entrepreneurship in Large Technology Firms0 aEnabling Employee Entrepreneurship in Large Technology Firms  aOttawabTalent First Networkc02/2014  a23-320 v43 aManagers of development projects in large technology firms face a dilemma. They operate under pressure to achieve predictable quality, cost, and schedule objectives but are also expected to encourage their employees to act entrepreneurially. Given the uncertain nature of the entrepreneurial process, these managers often cling to existing practices and values and consequently inhibit their employees’ ability to act entrepreneurially.

In this article, we examine the product development and entrepreneurship literature streams to identify the barriers that managers of development projects of large technology firms face in allowing employees to act entrepreneurially. We organize these barriers using the five components of entrepreneurial orientation: risk taking, proactiveness, innovativeness, competitive aggressiveness, and autonomy. Then, building on the literature and our combined 40 years of experience managing development projects in large technology firms, we provide recommendations to managers on how to overcome these barriers. 

A better understanding of how to enable employees to act entrepreneurially will increase the entrepreneurial orientation of development projects in large technology firms. The relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and development project performance is expected to be curvilinear. Therefore, an increase in entrepreneurial orientation is expected to improve the performance of development projects up to a point after which it is expected to decrease it. 

This article will be particularly relevant to researchers interested in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and project performance as well as managers in technology firms who want to achieve their operational milestones while maximizing the entrepreneurial value creation of their employees.10aautonomy10acompetitive aggressiveness10acorporate venturing10adevelopment projects10aemancipation10aemployee entrepreneurship10aentrepreneurial orientation10ainnovativeness10aintrapraneurship10aproactiveness10arisk taking10avalue creation1 aMiron, Walter1 aHudson, David  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/766