Entry and Exit Policy and Ties with University as Critical Success Factors Influencing Agri-Business Incubation Performance

α
dr._ravi_kiran
dr._ravi_kiran
σ
Mr. S. C. Bose
Mr. S. C. Bose
ρ
Dr. Ravi Kiran
Dr. Ravi Kiran
Ѡ
Dr. Dinesh Goyal
Dr. Dinesh Goyal
α Thapar Institute of Engineering & Technology Thapar Institute of Engineering & Technology

Send Message

To: Author

Entry and Exit Policy and Ties with University as Critical Success Factors Influencing Agri-Business Incubation Performance

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

V7PD5

Entry and Exit Policy and Ties with University as Critical Success Factors Influencing Agri-Business Incubation Performance Banner

AI TAKEAWAY

Connecting with the Eternal Ground
  • English
  • Afrikaans
  • Albanian
  • Amharic
  • Arabic
  • Armenian
  • Azerbaijani
  • Basque
  • Belarusian
  • Bengali
  • Bosnian
  • Bulgarian
  • Catalan
  • Cebuano
  • Chichewa
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Chinese (Traditional)
  • Corsican
  • Croatian
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • Dutch
  • Esperanto
  • Estonian
  • Filipino
  • Finnish
  • French
  • Frisian
  • Galician
  • Georgian
  • German
  • Greek
  • Gujarati
  • Haitian Creole
  • Hausa
  • Hawaiian
  • Hebrew
  • Hindi
  • Hmong
  • Hungarian
  • Icelandic
  • Igbo
  • Indonesian
  • Irish
  • Italian
  • Japanese
  • Javanese
  • Kannada
  • Kazakh
  • Khmer
  • Korean
  • Kurdish (Kurmanji)
  • Kyrgyz
  • Lao
  • Latin
  • Latvian
  • Lithuanian
  • Luxembourgish
  • Macedonian
  • Malagasy
  • Malay
  • Malayalam
  • Maltese
  • Maori
  • Marathi
  • Mongolian
  • Myanmar (Burmese)
  • Nepali
  • Norwegian
  • Pashto
  • Persian
  • Polish
  • Portuguese
  • Punjabi
  • Romanian
  • Russian
  • Samoan
  • Scots Gaelic
  • Serbian
  • Sesotho
  • Shona
  • Sindhi
  • Sinhala
  • Slovak
  • Slovenian
  • Somali
  • Spanish
  • Sundanese
  • Swahili
  • Swedish
  • Tajik
  • Tamil
  • Telugu
  • Thai
  • Turkish
  • Ukrainian
  • Urdu
  • Uzbek
  • Vietnamese
  • Welsh
  • Xhosa
  • Yiddish
  • Yoruba
  • Zulu

Abstract

Business incubation performance is linked to many key factors. This study is focusing on two factors, namely Entry and Exit Policy and Ties with University. The effort is to understand that are these Critical success factors influencing Agri-Business Incubation performance. Through literature review the constructs for Entry and Exit Policy was 0.730; for Ties with University, it was designed. The reliability score for all three constructs was above the threshold value of 0.70. Entry and Exit Policy factor had Cronbach alpha of 0.730; for Ties with University it was 0.933 and for Business Incubation (BI) Performance it was 0.703. Factor analysis was conducted for Entry and Exit Policy factors and it helped to reduce the seven items to three, viz. i) EE11: Applicant’s proposal potentiality; ii) EE12: Admission & Graduation policy; and iii) EE13: Post incubation scenario. These three factors explained 81.378 percent of the variance. A model depicting relation of SEM-PLS was Entry and Exit Policy and Ties with University was designed to understand the criticality of these factors. Results suggest that both Entry and Exit Policy factors and Ties with University emerged as significant predictors of BI performance. They explained 49.2 percent of the variation. This study thus highlights that entry and exit policy and Ties with University emerge as important predictors of agri-BI performance.

References

37 Cites in Article
  1. Pier Abetti (2004). Government-Supported Incubators in the Helsinki Region, Finland: Infrastructure, Results, and Best Practices.
  2. Rudy Aernoudt (2004). Incubators: Tool for Entrepreneurship?.
  3. Kris Aerts,Paul Matthyssens,Koen Vandenbempt (2007). Critical role and screening practices of European business incubators.
  4. İ Akçomak (2009). Incubators as Tools for Entrepreneurship Promotion in Developing Countries.
  5. D Allen,S Rahmam (1985). Small Business Incubators: A Positive Environment for Entrepreneurship.
  6. H Al-Mubaraki,M Busler (2010). The incubators economic indicators: Mixed approaches.
  7. Tony Bailetti (2012). Technology Entrepreneurship: Overview, Definition, and Distinctive Aspects.
  8. Anna Bergek,Charlotte Norrman (2008). Incubator best practice: A framework.
  9. R Bhabra-Remedios,B Cornelius (2003). Cracks in the Egg: improving performance measure in business incubator research.
  10. Sue Birley (1986). The role of new firms: Births, deaths and job generation.
  11. O Brooks,Jr (1986). Impact of Business Incubators on Economic Growth and Entrepreneurship Development.
  12. Johan Bruneel,Tiago Ratinho,Bart Clarysse,Aard Groen (2012). The Evolution of Business Incubators: Comparing demand and supply of business incubation services across different incubator generations.
  13. A Buys,P Mbewana (2007). Key success factors for business incubation in South Africa: the Godisa study.
  14. Elias Carayannis,Maximilian Von Zedtwitz (2005). Architecting gloCal (global–local), real-virtual incubator networks (G-RVINs) as catalysts and accelerators of entrepreneurship in transitioning and developing economies: lessons learned and best practices from current development and business incubation practices.
  15. K Chan,T Lau (2005). Assessing technology incubators programs in the Science © 2018 Global Journals Park: the good, the bad and the ugly.
  16. N Churchill,Lewis (1983). The five stages of small business growth.
  17. Simon Collinson,Geoff Gregson (2003). Knowledge networks for new technology–based firms: an international comparison of local entrepreneurship promotion.
  18. Nobuya Fukugawa (2013). Which Factors do Affect Success of Business Incubators.
  19. Rosa Grimaldi,Alessandro Grandi (2005). Business incubators and new venture creation: an assessment of incubating models.
  20. Sean Hackett,David Dilts (2004). A Systematic Review of Business Incubation Research.
  21. Sean Hackett,David Dilts (2004). A Real Options-Driven Theory of Business Incubation.
  22. Sean Hackett,David Dilts (2008). Inside the black box of business incubation: Study B—scale assessment, model refinement, and incubation outcomes.
  23. Paul Hannon (2003). A conceptual development framework for management and leadership learning in the UK incubator sector.
  24. M Hansen (2000). Networked Incubators: Hothouses of the new economy.
  25. D Isabelle (2013). Key Factors Affecting a Technology Entrepreneur's Choice of Incubator or Accelerator.
  26. K Kumar,Suresh,D Ravindran (2012). A study on element of key success factors determining the performance of incubators.
  27. R Lalkaka (2002). Technology business incubators to help build an innovation-based economy.
  28. R Lalkaka,P Abetti (1999). Business incubation and Enterprise support system in restructuring countries.
  29. R Lalkaka,J Bishop (1996). Business Incubators in Economic Development: An Initial Assessment in Industrializing Countries.
  30. C Lendner,M Dowling (2003). University business incubators and the impact of their networks on the success of start-ups: An international study.
  31. Maura Mcadam,Rodney Mcadam (2008). High tech start-ups in University Science Park incubators: The relationship between the start-up's lifecycle progression and use of the incubator's resources.
  32. Sarfraz Mian,U (1994). US university-sponsored technology incubators: an overview of management, policies and performance.
  33. Sarfraz Mian (1996). Assessing value-added contributions of university technology business incubators to tenant firms.
  34. Sarfraz Mian (1997). Assessing and managing the university technology business incubator: An integrative framework.
  35. Nigel Nicholson (1992). Book Reviews : Joseph A. Raelin: The Clash of Cultures: Managers and Professionals.
  36. S Pals (2006). Factors determining success/failure in business incubators: A literature review of 17 countries.
  37. Phillip Phan,Donald Siegel,Mike Wright (2005). Science parks and incubators: observations, synthesis and future research.

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

dr._ravi_kiran. 2018. \u201cEntry and Exit Policy and Ties with University as Critical Success Factors Influencing Agri-Business Incubation Performance\u201d. Global Journal of Management and Business Research - A: Administration & Management GJMBR-A Volume 18 (GJMBR Volume 18 Issue A11): .

Download Citation

Issue Cover
GJMBR Volume 18 Issue A11
Pg. 17- 24
Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/GJMBR

Print ISSN 0975-5853

e-ISSN 2249-4588

Keywords
Classification
GJMBR-A Classification: JEL Code: Q10, Q13
Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

November 10, 2018

Language
en
Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

Article Matrices
Total Views: 2860
Total Downloads: 1380
2026 Trends
Related Research

Published Article

Business incubation performance is linked to many key factors. This study is focusing on two factors, namely Entry and Exit Policy and Ties with University. The effort is to understand that are these Critical success factors influencing Agri-Business Incubation performance. Through literature review the constructs for Entry and Exit Policy was 0.730; for Ties with University, it was designed. The reliability score for all three constructs was above the threshold value of 0.70. Entry and Exit Policy factor had Cronbach alpha of 0.730; for Ties with University it was 0.933 and for Business Incubation (BI) Performance it was 0.703. Factor analysis was conducted for Entry and Exit Policy factors and it helped to reduce the seven items to three, viz. i) EE11: Applicant’s proposal potentiality; ii) EE12: Admission & Graduation policy; and iii) EE13: Post incubation scenario. These three factors explained 81.378 percent of the variance. A model depicting relation of SEM-PLS was Entry and Exit Policy and Ties with University was designed to understand the criticality of these factors. Results suggest that both Entry and Exit Policy factors and Ties with University emerged as significant predictors of BI performance. They explained 49.2 percent of the variation. This study thus highlights that entry and exit policy and Ties with University emerge as important predictors of agri-BI performance.

Our website is actively being updated, and changes may occur frequently. Please clear your browser cache if needed. For feedback or error reporting, please email [email protected]

Request Access

Please fill out the form below to request access to this research paper. Your request will be reviewed by the editorial or author team.
X

Quote and Order Details

Contact Person

Invoice Address

Notes or Comments

This is the heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

High-quality academic research articles on global topics and journals.

Entry and Exit Policy and Ties with University as Critical Success Factors Influencing Agri-Business Incubation Performance

Mr. S. C. Bose
Mr. S. C. Bose
Dr. Ravi Kiran
Dr. Ravi Kiran
Dr. Dinesh Goyal
Dr. Dinesh Goyal

Research Journals