创业支持政策对创客空间创业孵化绩效的影响
|
摘要
创业支持政策实施效果一直备受质疑。创业支持政策与创客空间创业孵化绩效的关系受到普遍关注,然而,现有研究结果不能对两者之间的关系提供一致性解释。探讨金融支持政策、公共服务政策和间接支持政策,以及间接支持政策对金融支持政策、公共服务政策对创客空间创业孵化绩效的调节作用,从西安、武汉、贵阳3个城市典型创客空间获取813份问卷数据,分析表明,金融支持政策、公共服务政策和创业孵化绩效之间呈倒U型关系,间接支持政策正向调节金融支持政策、公共服务政策和创业孵化绩效之间的关系。研究结论深化了对创业支持政策与创业孵化绩效间关系的认识,为政府制定创业支持政策、更好地促进小微创客创业孵化成功提供了重要理论依据。
The implementation effect of entrepreneurial support policies has always been questioned.The impact of entrepreneurial support policies on entrepreneurial incubation performance of maker space has been concerned.However,these studies cannot provide a consistent explanation of the relationship between entrepreneurial support policies and entrepreneurial incubation performance.This paper discusses the effects of financial support policies,public service policies and indirect support policies in the process of policies implementation,and the effects of interactions between them.Based on a survey of 813 makers,research hypotheses have been tested.The empirical results show that the relationship between financial support policies,public service policies and entrepreneurial incubation performance is inverted U,indirect support policies positively moderates these relationships.The conclusion makes up for the limited knowledge of the relationship between existing entrepreneurial support policies and entrepreneurial incubation performance,and gives the relevant theoretical basis for the government to develop entrepreneurial support policies to promote the hatching success of marker.
The implementation effect of entrepreneurial support policies has always been questioned.The impact of entrepreneurial support policies on entrepreneurial incubation performance of maker space has been concerned.However,these studies cannot provide a consistent explanation of the relationship between entrepreneurial support policies and entrepreneurial incubation performance.This paper discusses the effects of financial support policies,public service policies and indirect support policies in the process of policies implementation,and the effects of interactions between them.Based on a survey of 813 makers,research hypotheses have been tested.The empirical results show that the relationship between financial support policies,public service policies and entrepreneurial incubation performance is inverted U,indirect support policies positively moderates these relationships.The conclusion makes up for the limited knowledge of the relationship between existing entrepreneurial support policies and entrepreneurial incubation performance,and gives the relevant theoretical basis for the government to develop entrepreneurial support policies to promote the hatching success of marker.
引文
[1]HOWARD C,et al.The maker movement:a new avenue for competition in the EU[J].European View,2014,13(2):333-340.
[2]徐婧,房俊民,唐川.Fab Lab发展模式及其创新生态系统[J].科学学研究,2016,34(5):765-770.
[3]彭仁贤.创客空间发展的中美案例对比研究[J].技术经济与管理研究,2017(2):39-44.
[4]裴旭东,黄聿舟.创业支持政策对科技型小微企业孵化的影响---资源整合的中介作用[J].科技进步与对策,2016,33(12):109-114.
[5]VAN RIJNSOEVER F J,VAN WEELE,C P EVELEENS.Network brokers or hit makers?analyzing the influence of incubation on start-up investments[J].International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal,2016(7):1-25.
[6]谢莹,童昕,蔡一帆.制造业创新与转型:深圳创客空间调查[J].科技进步与对策,2015,32(2):59-65.
[7]KOSTAKIS V,V NIAROS,C GIOTITSAS.Production and governance in hackerspaces:a manifestation of commons-based peer production in the physical realm[J].International Journal of Cultural Studies,2015,18(5):555-573.
[8]顾光,马媛媛.科技型小微企业财政支持政策研究[J].科技进步与对策.2013,30(18):80-82.
[9]梅凯,陈效林.我国创客空间发展的体系构建与政策支持---基于中美创客空间形态与生态的对比[J].学习与实践,2015(12):5-14.
[10]苏瑞波.基于共词分析的广东与江苏、浙江、北京、上海支持众创空间政策的对比分析[J].科技管理研究,2017,37(13):94-100.
[11]臧维,李甜甜,徐磊.北京市众创空间扶持政策工具挖掘及量化评价研究[J].软科学,2018,32(9):56-61.
[12]伦晓波,刘颜,沈坤荣.政府角色与中小微企业发展---基于江苏省13个地级市4574家企业调研数据[J].经济理论与经济管理,2017(4):82-96.
[13]黄飞,柳礼泉.塑造具有中国特色的创客空间文化[J].学习与实践,2017(8):124-131.
[14]曾萍,邬绮虹,蓝海林.政府的创新支持政策有效吗---基于珠三角企业的实证研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2014,35(4):10-20.
[15]韩俊华,干胜道.科技型小微企业金融支持政策研究[J].科学管理研究,2013,31(4):105-108.
[16]李燕萍,李洋.中美英三国创客空间发展的比较及启示[J].贵州社会科学,2017(8):82-88.
[17]唐丽艳,周建林,王国红.社会资本、在孵企业吸收能力和创业孵化绩效的关系研究[J].科研管理,2014,35(7):51-59.
[18]AMEZCUA A S,GRIMES M G,BRADLEY S W,et al.Organizational sponsorship and founding environments:a contingency view on the survival of business-incubated firms,1994-2007[J].Academy of Management Journal,2013,56(6):1628-1654.
[2]徐婧,房俊民,唐川.Fab Lab发展模式及其创新生态系统[J].科学学研究,2016,34(5):765-770.
[3]彭仁贤.创客空间发展的中美案例对比研究[J].技术经济与管理研究,2017(2):39-44.
[4]裴旭东,黄聿舟.创业支持政策对科技型小微企业孵化的影响---资源整合的中介作用[J].科技进步与对策,2016,33(12):109-114.
[5]VAN RIJNSOEVER F J,VAN WEELE,C P EVELEENS.Network brokers or hit makers?analyzing the influence of incubation on start-up investments[J].International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal,2016(7):1-25.
[6]谢莹,童昕,蔡一帆.制造业创新与转型:深圳创客空间调查[J].科技进步与对策,2015,32(2):59-65.
[7]KOSTAKIS V,V NIAROS,C GIOTITSAS.Production and governance in hackerspaces:a manifestation of commons-based peer production in the physical realm[J].International Journal of Cultural Studies,2015,18(5):555-573.
[8]顾光,马媛媛.科技型小微企业财政支持政策研究[J].科技进步与对策.2013,30(18):80-82.
[9]梅凯,陈效林.我国创客空间发展的体系构建与政策支持---基于中美创客空间形态与生态的对比[J].学习与实践,2015(12):5-14.
[10]苏瑞波.基于共词分析的广东与江苏、浙江、北京、上海支持众创空间政策的对比分析[J].科技管理研究,2017,37(13):94-100.
[11]臧维,李甜甜,徐磊.北京市众创空间扶持政策工具挖掘及量化评价研究[J].软科学,2018,32(9):56-61.
[12]伦晓波,刘颜,沈坤荣.政府角色与中小微企业发展---基于江苏省13个地级市4574家企业调研数据[J].经济理论与经济管理,2017(4):82-96.
[13]黄飞,柳礼泉.塑造具有中国特色的创客空间文化[J].学习与实践,2017(8):124-131.
[14]曾萍,邬绮虹,蓝海林.政府的创新支持政策有效吗---基于珠三角企业的实证研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2014,35(4):10-20.
[15]韩俊华,干胜道.科技型小微企业金融支持政策研究[J].科学管理研究,2013,31(4):105-108.
[16]李燕萍,李洋.中美英三国创客空间发展的比较及启示[J].贵州社会科学,2017(8):82-88.
[17]唐丽艳,周建林,王国红.社会资本、在孵企业吸收能力和创业孵化绩效的关系研究[J].科研管理,2014,35(7):51-59.
[18]AMEZCUA A S,GRIMES M G,BRADLEY S W,et al.Organizational sponsorship and founding environments:a contingency view on the survival of business-incubated firms,1994-2007[J].Academy of Management Journal,2013,56(6):1628-1654.