Associer analyse industrielle et imaginaire peut sembler audacieux. C’est la puissance de ce travail de recherche qui propose d’aborder les nouvelles institutions que sont devenus les géants du CaC40 non pas par leur pouvoir financier mais par leur puissance de penser. Une des hypothèses fortes observées après plusieurs années d’expériences professionnelles en France et à l’international dans le domaine de la recherche (Silicon Valley, Stanford University, University of Berkeley, University of California (UCLA)) et de l’industrie, est de défendre que l’industrie pense. Avant même de répondre à la mission qu’on lui attribue, soit de produire, l’industrie compose et diffuse une idéologie. Les industries « classiques » de l’imaginaire s’amplifient et se métamorphosent avec les industries high-tech du logiciel, des jeux vidéo et du web dont Apple est le parangon. Notre sujet prend alors une double dimension théorique et critique, mais aussi industrialo -technique. Ce n’est pas seulement un enjeu heuristique qui l’anime, mais le souci d’analyser un « terrain » de grande actualité et de forte visibilité. Une autre originalité de ce travail stratégique est de proposer une méthode de recherche applicable afin de questionner le monde industriel. Ce travail a permis de constituer un corpus complexe et riche ainsi que de rencontrer de multiples acteurs stratégiques de la Silicon Valley dont le co-fondateur d’Apple Steven Wozniac, Daniel Kottke premier salarié d’Apple, des professeurs californiens comme Fred Turner et des Designers-artistes afin de questionner l’entreprise la plus chère du monde, qui détient autant de richesses que des dizaines d’États. / Combining industrial and imaginary analysis may seem daring. It is the power of this research that proposes to address the new institutions that have become the giants of the CaC40 not by their financial power but by their power of thinking. One of the strong hypotheses observed after several years of professional experience in France and abroad in the field of research (Silicon Valley, Stanford University, University of California, University of California (UCLA)) and industry, is to defend that the industry thinks. Even before responding to the mission attributed to it, to produce, the industry composes and disseminates an ideology. The "classic" industries of the imaginary are amplified and metamorphosed with the high-tech industries of software, video games and the web, of which Apple is the paragon. Our subject then takes on a double dimension, theoretical and critical, but also industrialtechnical. It is not only a heuristic issue that drives it, but the desire to analyze a "terrain" of great relevance and high visibility. Another originality of this strategic work is to propose an applicable research method to question the industrial world. This work has made it possible to build a complex and rich corpus as well as to meet many strategic people in Silicon Valley including Apple co-founder Steven Wozniac, Daniel Kottke, Apple's first employee, Californian professors like Fred Turner and Designers-artists to question the most expensive company in the world, which holds as much wealth as dozens of states.

This analysis examines the impact that personal characteristics like gender, race, years participating in the labor force, education, and previous entrepreneurship have on the amount of funding a startup receives from venture capital investors. Data for the analysis is taken from online venture capital database, Crunchbase, and includes investments made by venture capitalists between the years of 2002 and 2014. Findings from the regression analysis conclude that gender, the number of years a founder has been in the labor force, and a founder’s education background are significant determinants of the amount of funding a company receives in funding rounds. In addition, the sector the company falls under and the venture capital firms that the company seeks investment from are both significant determinants of the amount of funding received by the company and the founder.

The purpose of this study is to test if there is bias in the Venture Capital investment decision-making process towards ecosystems. To guide the research and ensure the fulfillment of the study’s main purpose, we will analyze two specific ecosystems (Stockholm and Silicon Valley). This choice is motivated by their respective importance (Worldwide and Nordics reference) in the global entrepreneurial landscape. The aim is to make an empirical contribution regarding how a herding behavior from Venture Capital investments can drive irrational investment flows towards specific ecosystem such a Silicon Valley, regardless available information towards other ecosystems, in this case, Stockholm. Most researches until today have been focusing on the assessment of startup-focused factors which we believe only picture partly the attractiveness of a startup ecosystem. In our perception, environmental factors in which the ecosystem take place also play an essential role in the attractiveness of an ecosystem to invest in. Is there a behavioral bias in the investment decision processes of Venture Capital regarding startup ecosystems? To assess the presence or absence of a behavioral bias in the investment decision of Venture Capital investors, we are first going to establish an objective attractiveness score using environment-based factors. These factors are going to be combined into six main variables that picture the environmental attractiveness of both ecosystems. In a second time, we are going to submit these six variables to two populations of investors operating in each ecosystem. To do so, we will operate a quantitative study of Stockholm and Silicon Valley-localized private Venture Capital investors towards our different environmental variable. This will enable us to obtain their specific drivers toward these variables and therefore adapt our objective attractiveness scores to obtain weighted attractiveness scores. In a third time, we are going to compare our obtained weighted attractiveness scores per ecosystem with the investment flows effectuated respectively in both ecosystems in 2016. To be able to compare both settings on the same range, we are going to calculate both investment flow data: investment volumes and number of deal closed per capita. The results of this comparison will then bring us either a correlation relation between weighted attractiveness and investment flows per capita for both ecosystems, infirming our theory or a non-correlative relation, which would confirm our theory. Indeed, a non- correlative relation will show that investors do no follow a rational investment behavior based only on the attractiveness of their ecosystem.

Startups surgem com o intuito de explorar comercialmente uma ideia de potencial inovador. Para isso, necessitam de um conjunto de capacidades técnicas e de negócios, alocando recursos de modo eficiente para obter um produto com valor de mercado. Elas necessitam, portanto, tornar-se firmas e executar um modelo de negócios. Nesse processo, muitas startups fracassam, enquanto outras atingem um bom desempenho e conseguem realizar a oferta pública de ações (IPO), ou mesmo vender o negócio. Torna-se crucial, então, identificar quais são os conjuntos de capacidades necessários para o sucesso e a sobrevivência das startups. Enquanto firmas possuem diferentes arranjos de quatro capacidades de inovação, nomeadamente as capacidades de desenvolvimento, de operação, de gestão e de transação, o assunto ainda é pouco investigado em startups. Isso posto, este estudo tem por objetivo identificar como se configuram as capacidades de inovação em startups. Para alcançar esse objetivo foi realizado um estudo exploratório de abordagem qualitativa no Vale do Silício, no qual foram entrevistadas 11 startups de base tecnológica e 7 profissionais com conhecimentos na área. O estudo evidenciou que startups não possuem as quatro capacidades de inovação, mas necessitam desenvolvê-las a fim de comercializar um bem/serviço no mercado, tornandose firmas. Enquanto as capacidades de desenvolvimento e a de transação são as primeiras a serem desenvolvidas (sendo as mais desenvolvidas), as capacidades de operação e de gestão necessitam ser desenvolvidas à medida que o negócio se expande. O aprendizado por startups também foi identificado como relevante para a construção das capacidades de inovação, processo no qual o rico ecossistema do Vale do Silício desempenha um papel fundamental. Embora esse ecossistema seja importante, a seleção e aplicação dos conhecimentos externos na construção de tais capacidades é uma tarefa que cabe apenas à startup. Evidenciaram-se também os diferentes arranjos de capacidades que podem levar à venda, transformação em firma e fracasso das startups. A principal contribuição teórica do presente estudo foi avaliar, em um único estudo, não apenas capacidades de cunho tecnológico, mas também operacionais, gerenciais e transacionais em startups, destacando sua importância para o sucesso do negócio. Uma segunda contribuição está em evidenciar, por meio da perspectiva da firma, que conhecimentos amplamente disponíveis no ecossistema podem ser irrelevantes para a startup se não forem aplicados adequadamente no desenvolvimento das capacidades. Como contribuição gerencial evidencia-se a necessidade de avaliar o desempenho da startup por meio de métricas, não negligenciando a importância da gestão. Às instituições governamentais sugere-se uma maior ênfase na cobrança de resultados das startups. / Startups are created to commercially explore an ideia with innovative potential. To do so, they need a set of technical and business capabilities, efficiently allocating resources to obtain a product with market value. They need, in such an understanding, to become firms and execute a business model. While searching for such a business model, a high percentage of startups fail, while others perform well and reach the initial public offering (IPO), or even sell the business. It seems crucial, then, to identify which capability arrangements are required for the success and the survival of startups. While firms have different arrangements of four innovation capabilities, namely development capability, operation capabillity, management capability and transaction capability, the issue is still under-researched for startups. That being said, this study aims to identify how innovation capabilities are arranged in startups. To accomplish that, an exploratory study with a qualitative approach was performed in Silicon Valley, in which 11 startups and 7 knowledgeable professionals related to the field were interviewed. It was found that startups do not have the four innovation capabilities, but need to develop them in order to transact goods/services in the market, allowing them to become firms. While the development capability and the transaction capability are the first developed by the startup (and also the most developed ones), the operation and management capabilities need to be developed once the business starts to grow. Learning by startups was also identified as relevant to the construction of their innovation capabilities, in which the rich ecosystem in Silicon Valley plays a key role. Although the importance of such an ecosystem, the selection and application of such external information into the construction of such capabilities is a task that can only be performed by the startup. Different arrangements of innovation capabilities were also identified, that might lead a startup to be sold, to turn into a firm or to follow a failure path. The main theoretical contribution was to evaluate, in a single study, not only technological capabilities, but also operational, management and transactional capabilities in startups, highlighting their importance to the startups’ sucess. A second contribution relies in identifying, through the lenses of the theory of the firm, that knowledge widely available in the ecosystem might be irrelevant to the startup if not properly applied in the development of capabilities. As a managerial contribution, the study highlights the need to evaluate the startup performance through metrics, without neglecting the importance of management. It is also suggested that governmental institutions should put a higher emphasis in demanding results from startups.

Based in the modern day San Francisco Bay Area, these two stories intend to utilize “outsider”-labeled protagonists to portray de-familiarized accounts of two specific Bay Area realities. “Drought Measures” depicts a new student at a diverse and de-facto segregated public high school, following her as she learns to navigate the unspoken status quo of a long-entrenched racial divide. This story is neither a commentary on nor a critique of contemporary racial issues, but rather a portrayal of some of the many ways in which socioeconomic status and race inform day-to-day interactions. Half-Spanish, the protagonist is confronted with the paradox of being too white-passing in certain contexts, and not white-passing enough in others. “The Coffee Girl” strives to explore the way in which various trivialities of status – appearance, dress, the perceived value of one’s job – become toxic and inflated once deemed important. Though the issue of status is certainly not unique to the Bay Area, the influence of Silicon Valley, Sand Hill Road, (etc.) can lead to a narrow definition of what it means to be successful. Occupying a perceived “menial” job, the protagonist serves to provide an outsider perspective on a white-collar event, and to illustrate how this disparity of status can breed insecurity within a relationship, limiting its ability to function. As a café employee, she finds it particularly difficult to navigate the vague norms and boundaries of modern-day dating from a position of lower occupational status.

<p>Arbetsmarknaden i Silicon Valley karakteriseras av faktorer som hög personalomsättning, nätverkande och risktagande. Denna arbetsmarknad har vuxit fram på en begränsad geografisk yta och består idag ca 7 500 företag. Mjärdevi Science Park är en av de snabbast växande teknikparkerna i världen, varför vi anser att en jämförelse av de båda arbetsmarknaderna är intressant. Syftet är att med utgångspunkt från de faktorer som karakteriserar arbetsmarknaden i Silicon Valley, genomföra en jämförelse med arbetsmarknaden i Mjärdevi Science Park. Denna uppsats kommer inte att behandla vad det är som gör en teknikpark ekonomiskt framgångsrik. Uppsatsen är konstruerad efter ett så kallat systemsynsätt och bygger på en studie av sekundärmaterial om Silicon Valley samt på tio intervjuer med anställda och med representanter för Mjärdevi Science Park. Vi definierar olika faktorer som karakteriserar arbetsmarknaden i Silicon Valley utifrån ett systemsynsätt innehållande systemmiljö, infrastruktur och tre olika subsystem. Subsystemen genererar tillsammans en unik arbetsmarknad som i Silicon Valley kan sägas ha en intern karaktär och som präglas av rörlighet. I Mjärdevi kan dessa tre subsystem uttydas i mindre utsträckning. Vidare kan endast en del av arbetsmarknaden sägas ha en intern karaktär då området ännu är för litet.</p>

Arbetsmarknaden i Silicon Valley karakteriseras av faktorer som hög personalomsättning, nätverkande och risktagande. Denna arbetsmarknad har vuxit fram på en begränsad geografisk yta och består idag ca 7 500 företag. Mjärdevi Science Park är en av de snabbast växande teknikparkerna i världen, varför vi anser att en jämförelse av de båda arbetsmarknaderna är intressant. Syftet är att med utgångspunkt från de faktorer som karakteriserar arbetsmarknaden i Silicon Valley, genomföra en jämförelse med arbetsmarknaden i Mjärdevi Science Park. Denna uppsats kommer inte att behandla vad det är som gör en teknikpark ekonomiskt framgångsrik. Uppsatsen är konstruerad efter ett så kallat systemsynsätt och bygger på en studie av sekundärmaterial om Silicon Valley samt på tio intervjuer med anställda och med representanter för Mjärdevi Science Park. Vi definierar olika faktorer som karakteriserar arbetsmarknaden i Silicon Valley utifrån ett systemsynsätt innehållande systemmiljö, infrastruktur och tre olika subsystem. Subsystemen genererar tillsammans en unik arbetsmarknad som i Silicon Valley kan sägas ha en intern karaktär och som präglas av rörlighet. I Mjärdevi kan dessa tre subsystem uttydas i mindre utsträckning. Vidare kan endast en del av arbetsmarknaden sägas ha en intern karaktär då området ännu är för litet.

Calif., Univ., Dep. of Civil and Environment Engineering, Diss.--Stanford, 2003. / Kopie, ersch. im Verl. UMI, Ann Arbor, Mich.

What specific factors contribute to Silicon Valley’s world-renowned success as a high technology district? How significant is California’s rejection of specific regulation restricting the mobility of technical professionals via the nullification of all non-compete agreements? Using in-depth interviews with entrepreneurs seeking to start their own companies, I argue that the ability to effectively ignore non-compete agreements in Silicon Valley is a critical yet understudied premise underlying Silicon Valley’s success. Scholars seeking to understand Silicon Valley’s global success and continuing allure must turn their attention to the effects of this regulation. My findings suggest that an analysis not only of these regulations but of the lack of enforcement around such regulations needs to be a central focus in understanding how Silicon Valley emerged as a high technological powerhouse.

Startups surgem com o intuito de explorar comercialmente uma ideia de potencial inovador. Para isso, necessitam de um conjunto de capacidades técnicas e de negócios, alocando recursos de modo eficiente para obter um produto com valor de mercado. Elas necessitam, portanto, tornar-se firmas e executar um modelo de negócios. Nesse processo, muitas startups fracassam, enquanto outras atingem um bom desempenho e conseguem realizar a oferta pública de ações (IPO), ou mesmo vender o negócio. Torna-se crucial, então, identificar quais são os conjuntos de capacidades necessários para o sucesso e a sobrevivência das startups. Enquanto firmas possuem diferentes arranjos de quatro capacidades de inovação, nomeadamente as capacidades de desenvolvimento, de operação, de gestão e de transação, o assunto ainda é pouco investigado em startups. Isso posto, este estudo tem por objetivo identificar como se configuram as capacidades de inovação em startups. Para alcançar esse objetivo foi realizado um estudo exploratório de abordagem qualitativa no Vale do Silício, no qual foram entrevistadas 11 startups de base tecnológica e 7 profissionais com conhecimentos na área. O estudo evidenciou que startups não possuem as quatro capacidades de inovação, mas necessitam desenvolvê-las a fim de comercializar um bem/serviço no mercado, tornandose firmas. Enquanto as capacidades de desenvolvimento e a de transação são as primeiras a serem desenvolvidas (sendo as mais desenvolvidas), as capacidades de operação e de gestão necessitam ser desenvolvidas à medida que o negócio se expande. O aprendizado por startups também foi identificado como relevante para a construção das capacidades de inovação, processo no qual o rico ecossistema do Vale do Silício desempenha um papel fundamental. Embora esse ecossistema seja importante, a seleção e aplicação dos conhecimentos externos na construção de tais capacidades é uma tarefa que cabe apenas à startup. Evidenciaram-se também os diferentes arranjos de capacidades que podem levar à venda, transformação em firma e fracasso das startups. A principal contribuição teórica do presente estudo foi avaliar, em um único estudo, não apenas capacidades de cunho tecnológico, mas também operacionais, gerenciais e transacionais em startups, destacando sua importância para o sucesso do negócio. Uma segunda contribuição está em evidenciar, por meio da perspectiva da firma, que conhecimentos amplamente disponíveis no ecossistema podem ser irrelevantes para a startup se não forem aplicados adequadamente no desenvolvimento das capacidades. Como contribuição gerencial evidencia-se a necessidade de avaliar o desempenho da startup por meio de métricas, não negligenciando a importância da gestão. Às instituições governamentais sugere-se uma maior ênfase na cobrança de resultados das startups. / Startups are created to commercially explore an ideia with innovative potential. To do so, they need a set of technical and business capabilities, efficiently allocating resources to obtain a product with market value. They need, in such an understanding, to become firms and execute a business model. While searching for such a business model, a high percentage of startups fail, while others perform well and reach the initial public offering (IPO), or even sell the business. It seems crucial, then, to identify which capability arrangements are required for the success and the survival of startups. While firms have different arrangements of four innovation capabilities, namely development capability, operation capabillity, management capability and transaction capability, the issue is still under-researched for startups. That being said, this study aims to identify how innovation capabilities are arranged in startups. To accomplish that, an exploratory study with a qualitative approach was performed in Silicon Valley, in which 11 startups and 7 knowledgeable professionals related to the field were interviewed. It was found that startups do not have the four innovation capabilities, but need to develop them in order to transact goods/services in the market, allowing them to become firms. While the development capability and the transaction capability are the first developed by the startup (and also the most developed ones), the operation and management capabilities need to be developed once the business starts to grow. Learning by startups was also identified as relevant to the construction of their innovation capabilities, in which the rich ecosystem in Silicon Valley plays a key role. Although the importance of such an ecosystem, the selection and application of such external information into the construction of such capabilities is a task that can only be performed by the startup. Different arrangements of innovation capabilities were also identified, that might lead a startup to be sold, to turn into a firm or to follow a failure path. The main theoretical contribution was to evaluate, in a single study, not only technological capabilities, but also operational, management and transactional capabilities in startups, highlighting their importance to the startups’ sucess. A second contribution relies in identifying, through the lenses of the theory of the firm, that knowledge widely available in the ecosystem might be irrelevant to the startup if not properly applied in the development of capabilities. As a managerial contribution, the study highlights the need to evaluate the startup performance through metrics, without neglecting the importance of management. It is also suggested that governmental institutions should put a higher emphasis in demanding results from startups.