Vikas Joshi doctoral research synopsis: 'The Coevolution of Technology Firms and Founders'
•
4 gefällt mir•917 views
Vikas Joshi Presentation to Pune Entrepreneurs based on his Doctoral Research: 'The Coevolution of Technology Firms and Founders' at Ambrosia, Pune 2016
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (20)
Ähnlich wie Vikas Joshi doctoral research synopsis: 'The Coevolution of Technology Firms and Founders'
Ähnlich wie Vikas Joshi doctoral research synopsis: 'The Coevolution of Technology Firms and Founders' (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Vikas Joshi doctoral research synopsis: 'The Coevolution of Technology Firms and Founders'
- 1. The Coevolution of Technology Firms and Founders Vikas Joshi Based on Doctoral Dissertation, 2016 Alexandra Michel, Ph.D. (Chair) Sharon Ravitch, Ph. D. Candice Reimers, Ed. D. University of Pennsylvania Dissertation Committee
- 2. The Tech Industry’s Paradox Spectacular firm growth despite an inexperienced founder at the helm • Why this paradox matters to scholars and practitioners • My study aimed to explore how founders and their tech firms evolve together Shift in focal concern leadership founder development founder-firm coevolution
- 3. Groundwork • What is entrepreneurship? – Pursuit of opportunities without regard to resources currently controlled • What is leadership? – Influencing others toward a goal
- 4. Quote by a CEO I Interviewed “… my mantra was, and is, to always accept credit that people heap on you even when you don't deserve it because you're going to get plenty of blame that you don't deserve anyway.”
- 5. Theoretical Frames Cognitive • Construes a person to be analytically separate from context • Theorizes person-context relationship as interaction Sociocultural • Construes person and context in terms of each other • Theorizes person-context relationship as mutual constitution
- 6. Framework Ideas • Mutual constitution: The gun in the museum • Practice: Going to tradeshows • Habitus: The nurse and the doctor • Disposition: The woman carrying firewood
- 7. Research Questions • How do growing tech companies influence the development of their founders? • How do tech founders influence the growth trajectory of their firms over time? • How do tech founders and firms coevolve? Implications of this framing • Binds person and context analytically together • Implies temporality of the phenomena under study • Focuses the inquiry on growing firms • Sets up an explorative process study with a goal of theory building
- 8. Case 1: VikasCo Autoethnography Case Study Grounded theory model Tentative theory Key People Interviews Archival StudyMemory Key People Interviews Founder Interviews Archival Study Case 2: PeterCo Case 3: DavidCo Research Design • Case informants • Sampling period • Autoethnography • Instrument design • Unit of analysis
- 9. Finding 1A Firms influenced the development of founders by using founders as context-specific resources • Growth made founders mutable resources – Taking on new roles, re-learning in familiar roles • Founders were transformed ontologically – Lasting habitual transformations – Cognitive: From ‘I’m an engineer’ to ‘I’m flexible’ – Emotional: I am open to re-learn – Relational: My customer is a source of insight Practices changed people
- 10. Your Story • Let’s talk about a time when – the firm needed you to do something you weren’t sure you could do, or – be someone you weren’t sure you could be. • What changes in yourself did you experience in those times?
- 11. Finding 1B Firms influenced the development of founders by placing founders in changing relationships with others • Founders’ habitus evolved with growth events – e. g. recognition by industry, financing growth • They acquired new field-specific dispositions – Ways of thinking, feeling, relating, and behaving – Propensity to innovate, confidence in decisions – Need for control, openness to outside investment Practices changed people
- 12. Your Story • Let’s talk about a marker event / transformative period in the growth of your firm. • What habitual changes in thinking, feeling, relating, or behaving occurred in those times of firm growth?
- 13. • The dispositional toolkit evolved: $22m story • Situational cues activated dispositions – Decisions made ‘in the moment’: Benioff story – Leading to improvisation: Redbox story – Deal-seeking : Brand name story • Improvisation impacted firm growth trajectory – Altered the growth path: Harbinger story – Maintained the growth path: ACD story Finding 2 Founders’ improvisation—regulated by their evolving habitus—influenced firm growth Practices generated the organization
- 14. Your Story • Recall an important decision you were part of in your day-to-day practices of business • How did your disposition influence that decision? • When had you developed those disposition? • What triggered it?
- 15. • Found evidence for coevolution patterns instead of growth models: – Product-market fit – Resourcing – Others… • These patterns precluded lasting gaps between firm growth and founder development Finding 3 Founders and firms coevolved in a mutually constitutive relationship simultaneously as well as over time. Practices changed people and generated the organization
- 16. Your Story • Recall your hire #1 -10. How were you hiring people in the early days of business? • How did your hiring practices change over time? • How were those changes entwined with your own development?
- 17. Firm Growth Founder Development Environment • Customers • Competitors • Investors Contributes elements • Creates new tasks • Adds specialists • Changes relative position Practice Transforms founder • Makes a context-specific resource • Attunes to others’ expertise • Deposits dispositions Enacts growth • Maintains growth trajectory • Alters growth trajectory Contributes elements • Performs practice • Corrects or creates deviations • Improvises according to dispositions Contributes elements Changes practiceTransformative integration of Interconnected Elements Model
- 19. Toward Answers • How do some tech firms succeed spectacularly despite unexperienced founders? • How do some newbie tech founders somehow become the leaders their firms need? • How do the rest of us prepare new founders for long term success? • What is the nature of entrepreneurial leadership?
- 20. Follow up: Research • Prior micro and macro research leaves the paradox unresolved due to its limiting assumptions • My research makes several contributions • My theory needs to be understood as propositions for further research • Builds a theory of coevolution • Accounts for contextual factors in founder development • Explains founder influence on firm • Reframes entrepreneurial leadership • Builds theory using habitus change • Uses autoethnography
Hinweis der Redaktion
- The traits perspective: Entrepreneurs are born with certain traits Criticism: (1) They come in all shapes and sizes (2) Level of entrepreneurship varies within life The assumption: Leaders influence organizations, therefore entrepreneurs have leadership Criticism: What about inexperienced ones? How do some tech firms succeed spectacularly despite unexperienced founders? How do some newbie tech founders somehow become the leaders their firms need? Founder’s apparent MAKEOVER into the CEO their firms need Just how critical is prior experience of founding teams?
- Cognitive – focus on traits, competencies
- Mutual constitution: A gun at a museum, A gun in the hands of a person Practice – bundles of human activity How organization through its practices shapes habitus – a system of dispositions: nurses and doctors How habitus informs practices that shape the contours of organizational life: woman carries a load, man has hands free
- A street becomes a playground when no traffic. David’s self-interpretation as a flexible resource : Engineer manager deal closer CTO Vikas develops his understanding of sales by working with professional salespeople and channel partners: relational transformation Example of disposition: Peter’s optimism for and openness to outside investment changes, David need for autonomy and control + risk limiting Founders were transformed ontologically This went beyond ‘you do what it takes’ Produced lasting habitual transformations Founders became attuned to other people’s expertise Founders acquired a variety of dispositions Dispositional changes were unique to founders
- Startups keep placing founders in ever-changing social order, re-shaping dispositions Example of disposition: Peter’s optimism for and openness to outside investment changes, David need for autonomy and control + risk limiting Recognition by industry, Financing growth Founders were transformed ontologically This went beyond ‘you do what it takes’ Produced lasting habitual transformations Founders became attuned to other people’s expertise Founders acquired a variety of dispositions Dispositional changes were unique to founders
- Interactivity builder improvisation growth trajectory was altered ACD System growth maintained according to biz model Founders carry around this dispositional toolkit. (Example: AA finds analogies: cognitive. BB tells stories: relational. Peter loved control: emotional) Now this toolkit is not fixed – it is capable of evolving as we experience social life. (Example: With a 22m debt, Peter was open to VC control ) Our startups keep placing us in ever-changing social order, and that in turn re-shapes our dispositions. (Example: With a Inc 500 award, David put down $2m) These dispositions get activated by situational cues, leading to improvisation. (Example: Customer-centric relational disposition activated when a customer wanted a part of Elicitus, Raptivity was born) Improvisation alters or maintains firm growth trajectory (Diffidence in VC funding which led to SaaS model, led to significant growth) Founders’ improvisations influenced firm growth Altered or maintained growth trajectory Habitus shaped improvisation Founders improvised differently as dispositions evolved
- Product-centered to customer-centered attention Sensing environmental cues Allowing users to shape innovation Pride, motivation and identification Product-Market Fit Witness usage scenarios: Customer-centered attention Discover target customer: Sensitivity to environment Make changes in product: Allowing users to shape innovation Refine value proposition: Pride, motivation, identification Growth models were not helpful Coevolution temporality of mutual constitution Resourcing Attract talent Assign new work roles Develop people
- Education: Disposition Startup founder: Resourcing Board member: Understand mutual constitution Successful founders: Leadership reframed Dismiss the notion that founders have a one-way influence on the firm Pay attention to mutual constitution: The founder’s effectiveness changes with contextual factors Understand the role of dispositions: How they evolve and the role they play in regulating improvisation Example of mutual constitution Example of disposition – improvisation nexus