Are Indian Startups Technology Driven ? Investigating Potentiality of Indian Startups
The aspect which hinders technology driven entrepreneurship is weak intellectual property rights (IPR) protection. India was ranked second from bottom among 30 countries examined for IPR protection as per the 2015 GIPC Index of the US Chamber of Commerce. Weak IPR laws and enforcement continue to limit the ability of businesses to invest in R&D. Inadequate IPR protection could also discourage multinationals from setting up operations in India or in bringing their technology into the country. To foster innovation in terms of technology, both home-grown and imported, and to attract international partners who bring technology and global best practices, a country must have in place robust institutional and legal mechanisms to protect IPR. This needs to be prioritized by the Indian government as part of its national growth agenda to promote technology driven entrepreneurship.
To boost the startup enterprises in India along with market driven entrepreneurship, technology driven entrepreneurship has to be developed. Here in this paper an attempt was made to sincerely study startups from a technology point of view and not from the market point of view.
- Cohen, S. (2013). What do accelerators do? Insights fromincubators and angels. Innovations,8(3/4), 19 25. – https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/INOV_a_00184
- Friederici, N. (2019). Hope and hype in Africa’s digital economy: The rise of innovation hubs. In M. Graham (Ed.), Digital Economies at Global Margins (pp. 193 222). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, IDRC
- U.S. Chamber of Commerce. (2015). 2015 GIPC International IP Index Fact Sheet. https://www.uschamber.com/issue-brief/2015-gipc-international-ip-index-fact-sheet
- Kohler, T. (2016). Corporate accelerators: Building bridges between corporations and startups. Business Horizons, 59(3), 347 357. –
- Krahmer, H. (2014). India’s lawless war on intellectual property. Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304679404579456672440016300
- Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of “muddling through”. Public Administration Review,19(2), 79 88. Doi : 10.2307/973677
- Newbert, S., Walsh, S., Kirchhoff, B., & Chavez, V. (2006). “Technology-driven entrepreneurship: Muddling through and succeeding with the second product,” . In Habbershon, Timothy G., Minniti, Maria, Rice, Mark P., Spinelli, Stephen, Zacharakis, Andrew (Eds), Entrepreneurship: The engine of growth (pp. 291–312). New York: Praeger Perspectives.
- Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217 226. Doi : 10.2307/259271 –
- Thomke, S. H. (1998). Managing experimentationin the design of new products. Management Science, 44(6), 743 877. Doi : https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.44.6.743 –
- Weiblen, T., & Chesbrough, H. W. (2015). Engaging with startups to enhance corporate innovation. California Management Review, 57(2), 66 90. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2015.57.2.66
Abstract Views: 14
PDF Views: 2