Open Access

Technology entrepreneurship is on the rise around the world. In the quest for change, comparative advantage, innovation creation and socioeconomic progress, a turn to entrepreneurial solutions to persistent developmental challenges has provided a powerful and captivating alternative to past solution approaches. As a consequence, innovation clusters have mushroomed, and an enthusiasm for entrepreneurial activity has caught the attention of many in localities as diverse as Kenya’s Silicon Savannah, Nigeria’s Yabacoon Valley, South Africa’s Silicon Cape, Chile’s Chilecon Valley and Germany’s Silicon Allee, to mention just a few. Yet despite this new, vibrant entrepreneurial activity that continuous to nourish a global wave of excitement, we know little about how technology entrepreneurship is actually performed in these disparate places. This doctoral thesis sought to fill this gap by taking a look “behind the scenes” of one of the most prominent innovation clusters in Africa — Kenya’s information and communications technology (ICT) sector. In this empirical setting, industry participants were in the midst of actively negotiating and rationalizing how technology entrepreneurship needs to work to make it a success, to unlock the benefits of a knowledge economy for Kenya and to carve out a space in the global innovation landscape for innovations made in Africa. Three interconnected academic papers form the core of this thesis. The first paper provides a detailed illustration of the local and global prescriptions that influence entrepreneurial action in Kenya’s ICT sector and inspired the conceptualization of a dynamic process model of globalization. The second paper offers a fine-grained view into the work realities of Kenyans and the generation of the multidimensional work portfolios across which workers diversify their activities to achieve economic survival, create wealth and exert agency for change. The third paper is a theoretical piece that theorizes the process of nonnative organizational forms diffusing and becoming adopted in new organizational environments. All in all, the thesis can be seen as an attempt to study the complexities that reign in African economies through an organizational lens and thus to foster a global organizational scholarship research agenda and discourse that can be of benefit to the many rather than just the few.

Globalization is altering the international economic environment. To remain competitive and gain future competitive advantage, corporations need to operate successfully in an international context. Exploiting the potential offered by the increasingly global economy requires the effective capture of markets. Although the world economy is becoming globalized, some international markets continue to have high entry barriers and are thus closing themselves off to foreign companies. These barriers impede access to these markets and thus hamper corporations from adequately exploiting them. However, corporations should by no means allow these markets to lie fallow since this would deprive them of the possibility to participate in prospective growth markets. Corporations must consequently promote adequate internationalization and engage in market exploitation strategies to remain successful in an internationally competitive environment. It is the aim of this research to support corporations within the processes of internationalization and market exploitation. Therefore, the research explicitly focuses on developing an encompassing model that supports corporations in identifying markets, which, in order to be exploited effectively, require local production activities. Typically, this entails markets that show foreclosure tendencies. A decision-making process model for corporations’ internationalization and market exploitation strategies structured in different phases is developed, and relevant influencing factors are compiled and assigned to the appropriate phases. The process model, which aims to enable corporations to follow a structured internationalization and market exploitation approach by analyzing the most decisive influencing factors at respective process phases, is thereby targeted at empowering corporations to adequately exploit the potential the globalizing world economy offers. The aim of this research is thus to develop a comprehensive decision-making process model to effectively support corporations during the process of internationalization.

With the ripple effects of the global financial crisis of 2008 exhibiting enduring rifts in the global economy to date, an assessment of the crisis as being rooted in both market and regulatory failure sheds light on the significance and the severity of the challenges cross-border financial capitalism presents nation states with in the wake of globalization. As externalities increase, the threats the unprecedented interdependence and instability of the modern financial system pose are unlikely to recede; on the contrary, they are bound to become more pressing. This is of considerable significance for financial governance, implying that sovereign nation states – formally legitimized to conduct regulatory functions – must construct robust cross-border structures to cope with the challenges of governing an inherently crisis-prone system. In an attempt to address the underlying shortcomings exposed by the crisis – among them that the regulatory and supervisory architecture was not commensurate with the complexity and sophistication of financial markets – the European Union embarked on an ambitious reform path. The potential capacity of European integration in this regard, though central in the academic debate, has yet to be analyzed systematically with respect to systemic risk in terms of both its systemic qualities and political embeddedness. Drawing on a refined definition thereof set out by Willke et al. (2013), this research aims to shed light on how these themes resonate in the European context to inform the critical analysis of conducted reforms. Based on the assumption that cross-border finance requires integrated governance schemes to ensure its integrity and efficacy, the central goals are to (i) assess both systemic-risk related reform measures and the challenges they are confronted with, and (ii) illuminate the significance of reform, while underpinning the case for enhanced integration. Drawing on a broad theoretical framework combining insights from various EU integration theories to trace the rationale and assess the potential and significance of supranational integration, and constructing an analytical framework within which to assess the order-, legitimacy- and expertise-related challenges current structures are confronted with, i.e. factors inhibiting governance capacity, the research concludes that though substantive reforms have largely failed to address the core systemic issues exposed by the crisis, there has indeed been substantial progress in terms of the reform of the institutional governance architecture at the European level. While monumental challenges remain, it would be premature to discredit the response in its entirety. The analysis highlights the European Union’s remarkable capacity to adjust, with institutional responses essentially at the boundaries of legal and political feasibility. Given what is at stake, however, it contends that – with a view to future challenges – supranational governance regimes remain short of optimal scope and must be strengthened to forestall the gradual erosion of governance capacity vis-à-vis an increasingly interdependent and fragile financial system.

People face economic decisions on a daily basis. Quite often, these decisions involve high stakes and some degree of personal risk, as choices produce real consequences that set the course for future actions. Although decades of decision research in the intersection of psychology, behavioral economics, and neuroscience have much advanced our knowledge about the psychological underpinnings of economic decisions, several academic disputes remain unsettled. Indeed, surprisingly little is known about the role of motivation and volition in guiding economic decisions. Certainly, people’s motives, goals, and their expectations of attractive rewards are important drivers of decision making. Yet, motivation and volition cannot be reduced to goals and incentives. The cognitive mechanisms underlying economic decisions are rather complex, and motivation and volition may impact decisions at the level of these cognitive processes. This dissertation considers the role of motivation and volition in economic decisions by examining the impact of experimentally induced motivational and volitional states of mind on economic choices and decision processes. Using different methods and decision making paradigms, four experiments provide novel evidence that informs the ongoing debates in motivation research, decision science, and psychophysiology. In short, Experiments 1a and 1b explore the possibility of interactive effects between motivation, volition, and financial incentives in determining economic performance. Moving on to the level of decision processes, Experiment 2 examines the impact of motivation and volition on decision processes under risk. Decision times, eye movements, and pupil dilations provide process measures of cognitive effort, pre-decisional information search, and affective arousal, respectively. Finally, Experiment 3 investigates how particular decision attributes relate to affective and motivational processes in decisions under risk. The findings of the present dissertation can be summarized in terms of four main conclusions. First, incentives are effective for improving economic performance when the payment of attractive monetary rewards is contingent on performance. Yet, higher incentives do not further improve performance. Second, the experimental manipulation of motivational and volitional mindsets does not directly affect choices, but notably impacts decision processes. Third, the influence of motivation and volition on economic decisions appears to depend on the appropriate incentivization of the task at hand. Fourth, risky choice attributes that entail no gain at all, i.e., zero-outcomes, elicit high levels of affective arousal and motivational avoidance tendencies that guide selective attention and decision making in the lottery choice paradigm. The implications of these findings are discussed for theory development in motivation research and decision science, as well as in terms of their practical implications for decision making in managerial contexts and other high-stakes decision environments.

Organizations that aim at delivering essential goods and services to low-income populations a the base of the pyramid increasingly blend the social welfare and the commercial logics in an effort to create financially sustainable solutions to social problems. Scholars have portrayed these cross-sectoral hybrid organizations as particularly agentic and resilient in institutionally complex settings, highlighting their ability to turn institutional voids into opportunity spaces. At the same time, the reconciliation of two antagonistic goals, namely poverty alleviation and financial value creation, as well as the multiple institutional voids that hybrid organizations face at the base of the pyramid (BoP) expose them to severe tensions. By investigating eight hybrid organizations in four countries, namely Colombia, Mexico, Kenya and South Africa, the present study contributes to a better understanding of cross-sectoral hybrid organizations in BoP settings in two ways. First, it shows that hybrid organizations not only face tensions between sector logics, but also between formal and informal, as well as between “Western-style” and “local style” strategic action fields. In settings which do not effectively provide guidance on the prioritization of social vs. financial objectives, these institutional voids manifest as tensions over goals and tensions over means in hybrid organizations. Second, the study sheds light on how field-level dynamics influence the ability of hybrid organizations to strategically employ factors that spur legitimacy advantages in an effort to turn institutional voids into opportunity spaces. Two different scenarios have been identified. One scenario refers to Colombia, Mexico and Kenya, which have been classified as fields that don’t effectively enforce a dominant sector logic concerning the legitimate way that health services should be provided to low-income populations. The present study has shown that in such fields, an organization’s logic of origin as well as the personal background of founders are factors that may spur legitimacy advantages in hybrid organizations. In effect, organizations which strategically employ these factors can select more freely from competing logics and ultimately overcome the prevailing tensions. This resonates with previous research, which has suggested that in fields with a dominant logic, hybrid organizations may take advantage of legitimacy advantages if their logic of origin corresponds to the dominant logic at the field level (Pache and Santos, 2012). However, the present study suggests that the factors leading to legitimacy advantages are more complex in fields with no effective dominant logic regarding social service provision. Here, the dominant logics among funding organizations, possible legitimacy spill-over effects from other market players, as well as the specifications of the commercial and the social welfare logics become important sources of possible legitimacy advantages. However, the study suggests that an organization’s ability to employ them strategically is dependent on their time of founding and their size. In addition to these findings, the study also provides insights on cross-sectoral hybridization in fields with a weakly enforced dominant logic, which is the second scenario that has been identified in South Africa. In particular, the study suggests that in such settings, hybrid organizations are more restricted to freely draw from competing logics, given that they face effective, normative imperatives about the goals they should pursue. However, the empirical investigation also indicates that an organization’s resource dependence structure is more influential than the encountered normative claims of audiences in health fields at the BoP. Further research is needed to refine these insights and explore cross-sectoral hybridization in social service provision fields in contexts of a weakly enforced dominant logic. Based on these findings, the author derives a range of practical recommendations that may themselves be interpreted as paradoxical. As the empirical study suggests, blended value creating hybrid organizations in Colombia, Mexico and Kenya currently face legitimacy advantages when originating from a commercial origin. The researcher is thus, on the one hand, inclined to recommend them to position themselves as commercially oriented organizations as to take advantage of the legitimacy advantages that the commercial logic currently entails. On the other hand, she cautions actors in the field of blended value creation, particularly funding entities, not to neglect the actual role of nonprofit organizations. The establishment of (health) markets that provide low-income populations in developing and emerging economies with affordable, high-quality products and services is likely to require significant unprofitable efforts. Finally, hybrid organizations in South Africa need to be more careful when adopting structures or practices from the commercial logic given the low legitimacy that this logic has in the health market at the BoP. There, organizations need to thoroughly analyze the institutional claims in the specific context of post-Apartheid South Africa.