L’intensité concurrentielle et les évolutions technologiques n’ont jamais été aussi intenses. Aussi, les entreprises en quête de pérennité sont-elles de plus en plus confrontées à une nécessité d’exploiter leurs activités actuelles et d’explorer des activités futures. Or la gestion de ce double impératif est loin d’être évidente, générant potentiellement d’importantes tensions au sein des entreprises. Bien que la recherche en management ait permis de mieux appréhender cette tension d’Exploration/Exploitation, il reste des zones de contradiction et des espaces non explorés. En particulier, il n’y a pas de consensus sur les définitions des concepts d’exploration et d’exploitation, ne permettant pas ainsi de garantir une certaine cohérence dans la recherche (Birkinshaw & Gupta, 2013). D’autre part, la tension Exploration/Exploitation n’a que très peu été étudiée dans le contexte des jeunes entreprises de croissance - également appelées « scale-up » - qui ont la particularité d’être exposées à de forts enjeux de survie. Ainsi, afin de contribuer à une meilleure compréhension des problématiques que soulève cette tension au sein de celles-ci, un format de thèse sur travaux, comprenant trois études complémentaires, est adopté.Au préalable, afin de cadrer conceptuellement la thèse, je réponds, dans une première étude, à l’appel des chercheurs pour la clarification des concepts d’exploration et d’exploitation en proposant une typologie d’exploration. Puis, par l’intermédiaire d’une approche multi-cas longitudinale menée auprès de huit jeunes entreprises de croissance, j’explore tout d’abord, dans une deuxième étude, les facteurs influençant les orientations stratégiques des entreprises quant à leurs activités d’exploration et d’exploitation. Enfin, dans la troisième étude, je cherche à comprendre comment le fonctionnement des équipes de direction définit les rôles de chacun dans les activités d’exploration et d’exploitation. / Competition and technological change have never been as intense as they are today. To survive, companies must increasingly carry out current activities at the same time that they explore future ones. It is no easy task to operate on both of these fronts, and doing so is a potential source of tension and contradiction. Although management research has provided insight into the exploration and exploitation tension, there are still contradictions and unexplored areas. In particular, there is no consensus on the definition of the concepts of exploration and exploitation, which means the research lacks a certain level of consistency. In addition, there has been very little attention paid to the Exploration/Exploitation tension in the context of young, growing “scale-up” companies, which are particularly exposed to threats to their survival. To obtain a better understanding of the situations this tension causes in these companies, we have adopted a multi-paper dissertation consisting of three complementary studies.In the first study, to create a conceptual framework for the thesis, we answer researchers’ call for a clarification of the concepts of exploration and exploitation by proposing a typology of exploration. Then, based on a longitudinal, multi-case approach focused on eight scale-up companies, we first explore, in a second study, the factors influencing firms’ strategic orientations vis-à-vis exploration and exploitation activities. Finally, in the third study, we seek to understand how management teams define their individual roles with respect to exploration and exploitation activities.

Abstract Background Even though the topic of shared leadership has been thoroughly investigated throughout recent years in research, limited literature has focused on this process in the context of new ventures. Moreover, to the knowledge of the authors of this paper, no previous literature has explored how shared leadership evolves as new ventures go through the different phases of the entrepreneurial process, and new members join the team. Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate the functioning and practice of shared leadership within new venture teams, and to explore if, how and why shared leadership evolves throughout the life cycle of new ventures as the size of the entrepreneurial team changes. Method This study adopted a qualitative approach. A total of nine semi-structured interviews (six co-founders from different new ventures and three new employees) were conducted and transcribed. The collected data was analyzed using template analysis, presented in the empirical findings, discussed in relation to the frame of reference in the discussion, and finally summarized in the conclusion. Conclusion Shared leadership continues to be essential throughout all of the phases of the entrepreneurial process. In the ideation phase, shared leadership is necessary as the different co-founders have different skills and experiences, and different individuals took charge at different times based on their expertise. Shared leadership continued to be essential in the start-up phase as new employees were hired to fill the knowledge-gaps in the new ventures. As the size of the new ventures was still rather small, it was still possible to involve most of the employees in the decision-making. As the size of the new ventures increased and they reached the growth phase, organizational restructuring was necessary and shared leadership was exercised in a different manner. A management team utilized shared leadership to take over-all decisions, the members of the management teams oversaw functional teams, and in those functional teams, shared leadership was utilized.

Background: There has been a great effort in the venture capital research community in trying to identify what criteria are used by venture capital firms (VCFs) when evaluating new ventures as an investment opportunity. Efforts have also been put on trying to rank these criteria’s importance in relation to each other, with the main literature arguing that the new venture team (NVT) has the greatest influence over the VCF’s investment decision. Although there is scientific consensus regarding the superior importance of the NVT relative to other criteria, the practical methods used by VCFs to evaluate the NVT is highly underexplored. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore the decision process and evaluation of NVTs by VCFs in the Nordic venture capital industry. Method: A qualitative method with an inductive approach conducted through semi-structured interviews with seven relevant industry professionals within the Nordic venture capital space. Conclusion: The findings suggest that the evaluation of NVTs follows a linear process of five sequential phases. Ten practical evaluation methods are identified as being used in the five phases of the process. The evaluation of specific NVT sub-criteria is found to be influenced by the availability of methods of evaluation in a respective phase of the process. Furthermore, it is found that the first phase of the process can only evaluate hard NVT sub-criteria, and that to evaluate soft sub-criteria, methods underlined by personal interaction between the two involved parties are necessary. The findings are synchronized into a framework depicting the dynamics of the NVT evaluation process and temporality of the NVT sub-criteria.