http://www.smallbusinessinstitute.biz A B S T R A C T Keywords: Journal of Small Business Strategy 2019, Vol. 29, No. 01, 55-70 ISSN: 1081-8510 (Print) 2380-1751 (Online) ©Copyright 2019 Small Business Institute® w w w. j s b s . o rg Global competition between innovation-based companies is mounting. To succeed in world markets, companies in both developed and emerging markets must continually strengthen their capacity for innovation– broadly conceived as the creation and adoption of new technologies, processes, and business models. While the United States relies primarily on the private sector to drive innovation, many European countries have launched public sector programs (funded by national governments and the European Union) to bolster the innovation-related capabilities of globally active companies. This article analyzes the results of one such program dedicated to strengthening the global competitiveness of startup companies headquartered in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Launched in 2013, the Polish Silicon Bridge is a partnership between the Government of Poland and the Silicon Valley Acceleration Center aimed at hastening the entry of high-potential Polish startups in the United States and global markets. The Polish Silicon Bridge is distinctive among programs designed to strengthen the global competitiveness of early stage emerging market companies. A number of emerging markets have created locally based incubators and accelerators to support domestic startups: e.g., Egypt (Mrkajic, 2017), Kosovo (Mulolli, Islami, & Skenderi, 2017), Nigeria (Iyortsuun, 2017), Russia (Rogova, 2014). Other emerging markets have launched programs that enlist foreign-based startups to take up residencies in local incubators/accelerators (e.g., Santiago-based Start-Up Chile). By contrast, this article focuses on the experiences of emerging market startups embedded in a developed market economy with an established innovation ecosystem. In the case of Silicon Valley, the Polish startups featured in our study were placed in a region renowned for its concentration of talent, technology, capital, global connections, and entrepreneurial energy. Introduction David Bartlett1, Tomasz Mroczkowski2 1American University, USA, dbartlett@american.edu 2American University, USA, mrocz@american.edu Emerging market startups engage Silicon Valley: Cases from Central and Eastern Europe Innovation, Global startups, Emerging markets, Ecosystems, Silicon Valley, Central and Eastern Europe This article examines the challenges and opportunities of innovation-driven growth in Central and Eastern Europe. Drawing on firm-lev- el survey research, we analyze the experiences of early stage Polish companies in Silicon Valley. We focus on the Polish Silicon Bridge, an international bridge organization that differs from conventional business incubators and accelerators by embedding emerging market startup companies in foreign innovation hubs. We situate the analysis in the context of the “Polish Paradox”. While Poland ranks as one of the European Union’s fastest growing economies over the past two decades, it is one of the EU’s weakest performers measured by innovation. The Silicon Bridge program aims to expand Poland’s innovation capacity by placing promising local startups in the world-class ecosystem of the San Francisco Bay Area. Our empirical study demonstrates that international bridge organizations gen- erate significant benefits–knowledge acquisition, mentoring, networking with prospective investors and strategic partners–for young emerging market companies seeking to enter the global market. The article thus augments the scholarly literature on global innovation ecosystems, entrepreneurial internationalization, and emerging market startups. APA Citation Information: Bartlett, D., Mroczkowski, T. (2019). Emerging market startups engage Silicon Valley: Cases from Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 29(1), 55-70. http://www.smallbusinessinstitute.biz http://www.jsbs.org 56 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 We examine the Silicon Valley experiences of 11 Polish technology startups. Through surveys and telephonic interviews, we evaluate the impact of the Polish Silicon Bridge on the business development of participating firms. Our investigation focuses on the following questions: • What benefits did Polish startups derive from their partic- ipation in the Silicon Valley program? • How did the program influence the business strategies of participating companies? • To what degree and in what ways did the Silicon Val- ley program strengthen the innovation capacity of Polish startups? • To what extent did the program prepare Polish startups for entry into the United States and global markets? • What does the Polish Silicon Bridge case suggest about the utility of international bridge organizations for accel- erating global startups? Drawing on the results of our empirical analysis, we propose a model to speed the integration of emerging market startups into global innovation ecosystems. In this way, our research provides guidance on how the best startup companies in the CEE region and other emerging markets can become citizens of world-class hubs such as Silicon Valley. The article is organized as follows. We begin by explaining the rationale of our selection of Poland, whose national economic trajectory (strong GDP growth performance but low innovation capacity) renders the country a suitable case for a study of international bridge organizations. We review recent scholarly work on the challenges and opportunities facing emerging market companies seeking to enter global markets. We then address the specific problem of innovation-led growth in Central and Eastern Europe. We examine the role of international bridge organizations, noting the rising visibility of that organizational form in Silicon Valley. We proceed with our empirical analysis, reporting the results of our investigation of the experiences of Polish startups in Silicon Valley. We discuss the lessons of the Polish Silicon Bridge for enterprise development policies, international partnerships, and innovation building programs in the CEE region. We conclude by identifying directions for future research on emerging market startups and global innovation ecosystems. The Polish Paradox Poland presents an interesting paradox: Measured by GDP growth and per capita income growth, Poland has proven one of Europe’s best performing economies over the past two decades. The country’s standing as Europe’s growth champion of the 1990s-2000s reflects: (1) a sizable domestic market, which now ranks as the EU’s 6th biggest economy, (2) a highly diversified industrial sector populat- ed by leading foreign multinationals, (3) a coastal outlet that confers a geographical advantage over the landlocked economies of the CEE region, (4) an ample human resource base, including a large population of university-degreed, English-speaking young professionals, and (5) major inter- national technology hubs in Kraków, Warsaw, Wrocław and other cities. Despite these assets, Poland ranks as one of Europe’s weakest economies measured by innovation. Studies by the 2018 European Commission place Poland near the lesser-developed CEE countries (Bulgaria, Romania) in firm-level innovation, R&D funding, and other innova- tion-related metrics. The Polish paradox (strong macroeconomic perfor- mance combined with weak innovation capabilities) has spurred government officials to expand enterprise devel- opment programs such PARP (Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości). A significant portion of Poland’s cur- rent tranche (€86 billion) of EU Structural and Investment Funds is earmarked for technology research, SME devel- opment, educational/vocational training, and other innova- tion-promoting activities. The international organization examined in this article (the Polish Silicon Bridge) com- plements these national- and EU-level programs, seeking to boost the global competitiveness of Polish startup com- panies via placement in the world’s leading innovation eco- system. The Polish case underscores the competitive pressures on the emerging markets of Central and Eastern Europe to accelerate the integration of local companies into global ecosystems. During the years leading up to its accession to the European Union in 2004, Poland undertook a broadly successful economic development strategy based on low labor costs and geographic proximity to the developed EU- 15 economies. That strategy enabled the country to attract significant volumes of efficiency-seeking foreign direct investment and to expand exports of automotive products and other manufactured goods. Polish manufacturing companies became major subcontractors of leading multinationals from Germany and other Western countries. But amid rising factor costs and mounting competition from emerging markets outside Europe, Poland and other CEE countries face growing pressure to migrate towards high value-added activities to spur innovation and global competitiveness. The Polish Silicon Bridge program addressed in this article illustrates this new strategy. 57 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 Emerging Markets in the Global Economy The rapid ascent of emerging markets has spawned an extensive literature on emerging market-based firms in the world economy. This literature includes analyses of the rise of emerging market multinational corporations (Fey, Nay- ak, Wu, & Zhou, 2016; Guillén & García-Canal, 2012; Van Agtmael, 2007). These studies indicate that many emerging market Multinational Corporation (MNCs) have already reached international standards of excellence in operations, particularly advanced manufacturing. But emerging market companies lag behind their developed market competitors in innovation, reflecting persistent institutional and cultural barriers to the creation and adoption of new technologies and business models. As operational performance metrics have converged, innovation capacity has become a key driver of the global competitiveness of emerging market companies (Ramamurti, 2016). Recent studies investigate how emerging market companies are striving to narrow the innovation gap. Siv- alogathasan and Wu (2014) explore how the spillover of inbound foreign direct investment heightens the indigenous innovation capacity of emerging markets in South Asia. Misra, Memili, Welsh, and Fang (2014) address the role of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in promoting innovation at women-owned entrepreneurial firms in developing/emerg- ing economies in Latin America, Middle East, and Sub-Sa- haran Africa. Wang, Sutherland, and Ning (2014) analyze the impact of international innovation networks in patent generation in emerging markets. Pitchayadol, Hoonsopon, Chandrachai, and Triukose (2018) examine the links be- tween “familiness” (defined by family-specific culture and experience) and innovativeness in family-owned SMEs in Thailand. Ernst, Kahle, Dubiel, Prabu, and Subramanian (2015) and Winterhalter, Zeschky, Neumann, and Gass- mann (2017) investigate the use of frugal innovation by lo- cal and foreign companies to tailor products and services for resource-constrained customers in fast-growing emerging markets. Subramaniam, Ernst, & Dubiel (2014) address the growing incidence of reverse innovation, whereby emerg- ing market companies (exploiting cost advantages and tech- nology leapfrogging opportunities) become first movers in innovative products that are then exported to advanced de- veloped markets. Paulose and Nair (2015) and Naqshbandi and Kamel (2017) analyze the expanding role of open in- novation in emerging markets, whereby emerging market firms (following the precedent of many leading Western companies) look outside their organizational boundaries for innovative ideas, processes, and technologies. Innovation in Central and Eastern Europe The challenge of innovation confronting emerging mar- ket firms worldwide strongly resonates in Central and East- ern Europe, now populated by post-transition economies whose factor cost advantages are dissipating. As CEE-based companies exhaust their potential for efficiency-led growth, they face a mounting imperative to strengthen their capabil- ities in innovation to compete in demanding global markets. The case of the Czech Republic well illustrates the problems of innovation-led growth in Central and East- ern Europe. With its historical roots as the most developed economy in the region (dating from early industrialization in Bohemia and Moravia), its robust manufacturing industries (automotive, chemicals, armaments, glass, optics, etc.), and its recent reclassification as a high-income economy, the Czech Republic would appear to be a strong candidate as the regional innovation leader. Indeed, these attributes have prompted some commentators to characterize the country as a low-cost version of Germany. However, in many respects the Czech Republic shares a closer affinity with the other post-transition economies in the CEE region than with advanced developed countries like Germany. Ministr and Pitner (2015) identify the factors impeding the development of the Information and Commu- nications Technology (ICT) sector in the Czech Republic: insufficient private sector funding of research and develop- ment; fragmentation of higher education and research insti- tutions that disperse innovation efforts; educational and re- search structures that stifle entrepreneurial initiatives; brain drain of talented scholars and researchers amid a globalized academic job market; low levels of academic-industrial col- laboration. Other studies indicate that Czech companies have achieved limited success expanding their global positions. Musteen, Datta, and Francis (2014) identify the liabilities confronting Czech companies seeking to globalize: origin, smallness, foreignness, newness. Zapletalová (2015) finds that Czech firms scaling out of their small domestic market tend to stay within geographical sub-regions and cultural clusters in the CEE area, illustrating limited financial re- sources and thin knowledge of foreign markets. Innovation-led global growth has proven even more elusive for Poland. As shown in Table 1 below, a recent Eu- ropean Commission 2018 report ranks Poland 25th among the EU-28 countries in overall innovation capacity. Table 2 summarizes the results of the Commission’s ex- amination of the drivers of innovation in the EU. Poland performs strongly in certain innovation metrics: opportu- nity-driven entrepreneurship; employment in fast-growing innovative sectors; enterprise births. But the country places near the bottom of the EU-28 in key measures of innova- tion: SMEs with product/process innovations; collaboration between innovative SMEs; private-public funding of R&D; international scientific co-publications; foreign doctoral 58 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 students. A detailed report by the World Bank (Piatkowski, 2016) cites the following factors hindering Poland’s progress in innovation: deficient private financing; low public sector support; limited access to new markets; short supply of skilled R&D personnel; weak managerial skills; insufficient networking; high levels of risk aversion; psychological bar- riers of company managers focused on short-term results. The report notes that Poland is particularly weak in product and process innovation, with just 8 percent of manufacturing companies introducing product/process in- novations compared with 14% in the Czech Republic and 22% in Germany. In their analysis of the Polish paradox, World Bank economists consider the possibility that Poland belongs to a small group of European economies (Ireland, Spain, Slovak Republic) that can grow without extensive investments in R&D and other innovation-promoting activ- ities. However, they conclude that Poland enjoys substan- tial scope for productivity gains and that improvements in the country’s innovation capacity would yield a significant GDP growth premium. To that end, the World Bank proposes an innovation framework for Poland organized around the concept of “Smart Specialization”, which emphasizes the prioritization of public funding to support high-value technologies, fields, and company populations. The Smart Specialization mod- el includes: (1) “Smart Labs” comprising selected young enterprises and experienced business/technology experts who form working groups focused on specific economic ar- eas, and (2) “Innovation Maps” to cull critical information on company applications for R&D funding to help public agencies target projects with high innovation potential. Our empirical study addresses the potential contribu- tions of an alternative approach to innovation in Central and Eastern Europe: The embedding of CEE startup enterprises in established foreign-based innovation ecosystems to speed the entry of participating companies in highly competitive global markets. We focus on the experiences of Polish com- panies in international bridge organizations, which we treat as global business development vehicles that are related but Table 1 Innovation in the European Union County rankings: Summary index* (Overall performance relative to EU average, 2017). 59 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 ket infrastructures, weak legal/regulatory systems, and thin financial markets (Dutt, Hawn, Vidal, Chatterji, McGahan, & Mitchell, 2016). The research presented in this article focuses on anoth- er type of business development organization that offers substantial promise for emerging market-based companies seeking to build global capabilities. International bridge organizations promote transnational partnerships between governmental institutions, non-governmental agencies, uni- versities/research institutions, and private sector agents to spur global commerce and technology innovation. These partnerships serve both to advance the international growth strategies of locally based companies and to facilitate the distinct from conventional incubators and accelerators. International Bridge Organizations There is extensive literature on the role of business ac- celerators and business incubators in speeding the develop- ment of startup companies (e.g., Albort-Morant & Oghazi, 2016; Barrehag, Fornell, Larsson, Mårdström, Westergård, & Wrackefeldt, 2012; Bøllingtoft, 2012; Bruneel, Ratinho, Clarysee, & Groen, 2012; Cohen, 2013; Pauwels, Clarysse, Wright, & Van Hove, 2016). For globally minded startups in emerging markets, accelerators/incubators help fill the “institutional voids” of home economies with inchoate mar- Table 2 Innovation in the European Union Country rankings: Selected Sub-Indices (Rank in EU-28, 2017). Sub-Indices EU Leader Poland Rank Sub-Indices EU Leader Poland Rank Human Resources Denmark 22 Linkages Belgium 26 Life Long Learning Sweden 24 Collaboration between Innovative SMEs Belgium 25 New Doctoral Graduates Slovenia 28 Private/Public Co-Fund- ing of R & D Germany 27 Attractive Research Systems Denmark 26 Intellectual Assets Malta 17 International Scientific Co-Publica- tions Denmark 26 Trademark Applications Cyprus 21 Foreign Doctoral Students Luxembourg 27 PCT Patent Applications Sweden 23 Innovation-Friendly Environment Denmark 26 Employment Impacts Ireland 15 Opportunity-Driven Entrepreneurship Denmark 8 Employment in Fast-Growing Enterprises in Innovative Sectors Hungary 8 Broadband Penetration Denmark 19 Employment in Knowl- edge-Intensive Sectors Luxembourg 25 Finance & Support France 24 Sales Impacts Ireland 22 Venture Capital Luxembourg 22 Knowledge-Intensive Service Exports Ireland 22 Public R & D Expenditures Sweden 23 Sales of New Innovative Products UK 22 Firm Investments Finland 24 Governance & Policy Framework Netherlands 21 Business R & D Expenditures Sweden 23 Government Procurement of Advanced Technology Luxembourg 18 Enterprises Providing ICT Training Austria 24 Rule of Law Finland 21 Innovators Ireland 27 Performance & Structure of Economy SMEs with Product/Process Innova- tions Belgium 26 Enterprise Births UK 10 SMEs Innovating In-House Ireland 27 Share of Knowledge-In- tensive Industry Luxembourg 22 60 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 local market entry of foreign-based companies (Pietrasiens- ki & Bitka, 2015). For globally oriented, early stage emerging market companies, international bridge organizations represent an attractive alternative to conventional accelerators and incu- bators: • Hastening the internationalization of emerging market startups via embedding in the established ecosystems of advanced industrialized countries • Circumventing the institutional void problem of emerging markets by integrating high-potential local startups into developed market-based technology hubs • Enlarging the financing domain of emerging market start- ups through links with angel investors, venture capitalists, and strategic investors in developed economies • Boosting exports of products and services through ties with foreign customers, distributors, and channel partners • Strengthening the global competitiveness of technolo- gy-centric emerging market companies through engage- ment in open innovation programs with developed mar- ket-based partners International Bridge Organizations in Silicon Valley The fulcrum of the international bridge phenomenon is Silicon Valley, whose standing as the leading global inno- vation hub renders the San Francisco Bay Area a highly at- tractive destination for early stage foreign technology com- panies pursuing international growth. The 2017 report of Startup Genome/Global Entrepreneurship Network (Start- up Genome, 2017) ranks Silicon Valley first among global ecosystems, followed by New York, London, Beijing, and Boston. Silicon Valley ranks first in four components of that survey (performance, funding, market reach, and startup ex- perience) and second to Singapore in the fifth component (talent). The economic value of ecosystems is concentrat- ed in these “superstar” cities along with other innovation/ technology hubs such as Tel Aviv, Berlin, Paris, Stockholm, Vancouver, and Sydney. As the world’s foremost enterprise ecosystem, Silicon Valley hosts nearly 18,000 active startups, whose busi- ness development efforts benefit from proximity to major multinational technology companies (Apple, Cisco, Ebay, Google, Hewlett-Packard Intel, Oracle, etc.), leading ven- ture capital firms (Accel Partners, Kleiner Perkins Caufield, et al), and world-class research universities (Stanford, UC Berkeley). Silicon Valley captures 28% of global invest- ments in early stage companies, generates nearly one-third of the exit value of startups globally, and hosts one-fourth of the world’s unicorns (startups valued at more than $1 billion). The area boasts the world’s highest share of com- panies founded by immigrants (46%), illustrating Silicon Valley’s allure for talented foreign-born entrepreneurs and the region’s high rate of success of immigrants applying for visas, long-term residencies, and United States citizenship. Silicon Valley startups employ the world’s highest percent- age of engineers with prior startup experience, bolstering the region’s capacity to develop and commercialize ad- vanced technologies (Gauthier, 2017). Silicon Valley thus demonstrates the potency of global ecosystems for the following: technology driven, global- ly oriented startup companies: concentration of talent, both home-grown and foreign-born; access to seed funding; availability of exit vehicles; clustering of customers, suppli- ers, and investors; robust economic and physical infrastruc- ture; strong governmental support; large installed multina- tional base; premier universities and research institutions; high global connectedness; and presence of experienced business mentors with a “pay it forward” mentality. For European-based startups, Silicon Valley offers the locational advantages of deep economic, commercial, and political connections with Europe. While Europe ranks be- hind Asia-Pacific and NAFTA for Silicon Valley exports, it is the world’s largest foreign investor in the San Francis- co Bay Area. Led by the UK, Germany, Switzerland, and France, European firms operate more than 1,000 subsidiar- ies in the region. Technology represents the largest share of European FDI reaching Silicon Valley, demonstrating the area’s gravitational pull for foreign companies active in ICT, life sciences, and advanced R&D. The region hosts some 170,000 European-born residents, including a siz- able number of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) professionals employed at local companies. There is also extensive outbound trade and investment from the Bay Area to Europe, including substantial foreign direct investment, venture capital, and private equity investments by Silicon Valley-based firms (Berger & Brem, 2016). Augmenting Europe’s business presence in the Bay Area, the region hosts the third largest European diplomat- ic community in the US (following Washington and New York) supported by an array of binational business organi- zations, public-private partnerships, and sister city arrange- ments. (Randolph & Grose, 2014). Empirical Study: Polish Startups in Silicon Valley An earlier article reports the results of our investigation of the Czech Accelerator, an initiative of CzechInvest (part of the Ministry of Industry and Trade in Prague) that places selected Czech startups in foreign accelerators in the United States, United Kingdom, Singapore, and Israel (Mroczkow- 61 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 ski, Assudani, Muñoz-Fernández, & Khilji, 2017). Build- ing on the Czech survey, here we report the findings of our analysis of the experiences of Polish startup companies in Silicon Valley. Polish Silicon Bridge The Polish Silicon Bridge is an initiative of the Polish Ministry of Economy, financed by the European Regional Development Fund under the aegis of the Innovative Econ- omy part of the EU’s National Cohesion Strategy. The pro- gram is administered by PARP in Warsaw in collaboration with the Trade and Investment Section of the Polish Embas- sy in Washington and the Silicon Valley Acceleration Cen- ter (SVAC) in San Francisco. Similar to the Czech Acceler- ator, this bridge organization provides high-potential Polish startups with training and advisory services, mentoring by experienced business leaders, networking with technology developers, and introductions to prospective investors and strategic partners. Via immersion in the global innovation hub of the San Francisco Bay Area, the program aims to speed the entry of Polish companies into the United States and international markets and to facilitate the transfer of knowledge from Silicon Valley to Poland (Pietrasienski, 2013). Our Polish study focused on the Silicon Valley experi- ences of 11 out of 34 companies that were hosted by Sili- con Valley Acceleration Center in 2015. Our Polish sample included Polish-based developers of mobile technologies, digital marketing, social media, Web applications, and wastewater treatment systems. Method Our investigation comprised computer-assisted surveys consisting of questions with Likert scales to gauge company participants’ assessment of the impact of these programs, and follow-up telephonic interviews that allowed Polish managers to elaborate on their experiences in Silicon Val- ley. Through these surveys and interviews, we evaluated the contribution of the Polish Silicon Bridge in the following areas: • Knowledge acquisition (markets, competition, financing, intellectual property, distribution, etc.) • Formation of business and technology partnerships be- tween Polish startups and host country participants • Development of international networks to support the global expansion of Polish participants • Securing of seed funding, venture capital, and other in- vestments • Realization of increased global sales Survey Results To preserve the confidentiality of our survey respon- dents, we use pseudonyms to identify participants in the Polish Silicon Bridge, indicated in Table 3: Knowledge Acquisition The results of our survey of Polish startups on knowl- edge acquisition are reported in Table 4: On the Likert scale (1-5, 1 = High and 5 = Low), our Polish respondents indicated a medium level of overall knowledge acquisition (2.66). Among the eight compo- nents of this survey question, the Polish startups reported the highest levels of knowledge acquisition in the following areas: • Markets: average score of 1.82 • Financing: average score of 2.27 • Competition: average score of 2.27 Our Polish respondents indicated the lowest levels of knowledge acquisition in these areas: • Intellectual property: average score of 3.00 • Team: average score of 3.00 • Suppliers: average score of 3.27 Distribution (2.73) and Technology (2.91) occupy inter- mediate positions in the knowledge acquisition survey. The Table 3 Participants in Polish Silicon Bridge pseudonyms & activities of Polish firms embedded in Silicon Valley Firm Pseudonym Firm Activity MS Web Development YE Digital Marketing ES Mobile Technologies Web Development AQ Wastewater Treatment CS Mobile Applications for Skin Care QL Digital Solutions GOG Social Media VAZ Digital Technologies Man- agement Systems HO Social Media NG Unknown EVO Unknown 62 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 high rankings of knowledge acquisition related to markets, financing, and competition demonstrate the value of embed- ding Polish startups in the global business milieu of Silicon Valley, where managers of participating companies interact with leading multinational companies, locally based SMEs and entrepreneurs, angel investors, and venture capitalists. The comparatively weak results of intellectual proper- ty and technology in the knowledge acquisition survey are surprising insofar as one of the presumed virtues of inter- national bridge programs like the Polish Silicon Bridge is exposure of foreign startups to world-class technology com- panies and leading research universities. Our Polish sample included four startups situated in ICT (web development, digital marketing/social media, mobile technologies, digital solutions) while a fifth enterprise is a developer of a next generation wastewater treatment system. Our telephonic follow-up interviews indicated that these Polish startups gained less value from immersion in advanced technologies (where the companies were already operating on the leading edge) than from learning about the American market and United States business practices. Impact of Experience The next question in the survey asked respondents to gauge the business impact of their international bridge ex- periences. The results are shown in Table 5. Similar to the knowledge acquisition question, our re- spondents registered a medium score (2.53) on the overall impact of their experience in the Polish Silicon Bridge. The Polish group reported the stronger values on the sales/pro- ductivity growth (2.00) and revenue growth (2.09) parts of the business impact survey. This result reflects the profile of the companies in the Polish sample, which was weighted towards young, growth-oriented technology companies. Starting of new initiatives (2.64) and generation of new ideas (2.73) registered intermediate scores on the business impact survey. Securing of angel/VC funding yielded the weakest result (3.18), with a notable divergence between a Polish cohort reporting the highest score (“very descrip- tive”) and one reporting the lowest score (“not descriptive at all”). Our telephonic follow-ups suggested that the latter companies had unrealistic expectations regarding funding opportunities for Polish startups in Silicon Valley, where seasoned local entrepreneurs compete fiercely for venture capital and angel investment. Value of Programs Augmenting the Likert scale numerical survey, we in- vited the Polish startups to respond to an open-ended ques- tion about the value of their international experience in Sil- icon Valley (Table 6): Echoing these survey responses, participants in our Table 4 Survey of participants in Polish Silicon Bridge knowledge acquisition Question: On a Likert Scale of 1-5 (where 1 = tremendously and 5 = not at all), how deeply has the experience with the international bridge program changed your understanding and knowledge of successful company startup management (including such aspects as technology, markets, financing, competition)? Area 1 = High 2 3 4 5 = Not at All Technology MS VE, ES, AQ, QL EVO, GOG NG, VAZ, HO CS Markets MS, YE, AQ, VAZ, HO ES, QL, GOG, NG EVO CS Financing MS, YE QL, GOG, NG, VAZ, HO, AQ ES, EVO CS Competition MS, AQ, VAZ YE, ES, QL, HO EVO, GOG CS, NG Intellectual Property MS AQ, QL, HO EVO,VAZ ES, GOG, NG CS Team MS,AQ QL, HO YE, EVO, NG ES, GOG CS, VAZ Suppliers MS AQ, QL YE, EVO, NG ES, GOG, HO CS, VAZ Distribution MS YE, AQ, QL, NG ES, EVO, HO CS, GOG, VAZ 63 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 telephonic interviews emphasized the following contribu- tions of the Polish Silicon Bridge: immersion in the global business ecosystem; generation of business contacts and referrals; cultivation of personal connections; expansion of professional networks; exchanges with United States entre- preneurs; gaining knowledge through mentors; exposure to American business culture; generation of feedback on prod- ucts; cross-fertilization of ideas and approaches; and accel- erating United States market entry. Foremost Challenges We asked our Polish respondents to describe the busi- ness challenges facing them after their return from Silicon Table 5 Survey of participants in Polish Silicon Bridge impact of experience Question: As a result of your experience from the Polish Silicon Bridge program, how would you rate the following state- ments on a Likert scale of 1-5 (where 1 = very descriptive and 5 = not at all descriptive)? • Owing to the experience with the Polish Silicon Bridge, my firm will start New Initiatives • Owing to the experience with the Polish Silicon Bridge, my firm will generate New Ideas • Owing to the experience with the Polish Silicon Bridge, my firm will Secure Angel or Venture Capital Funding • Owing to the experience with the Polish Silicon Bridge, my firm will start to see Revenue Growth • Owing to the experience with the Polish Silicon Bridge, my firm will start Sales or Productivity Growth Area 1 = Very Descriptive 2 3 4 5 = Not Descriptive at All New Initiatives GOG, VAZ, AQ ES, NG YE, EVO, QL, HO MS, CS New Ideas AQ YE, QL, HO ES, EVO, CS, GOG, NG, VAZ MS Secured Venture Funding CS, QL, HO, AQ YE, VAZ ES, EVO, GOG, NG, MS Revenue Growth MS, QL, HO YE, EVO, AQ, CS, VAZ ES, NG GOG Sales/Productivity Growth MS, QL, HO, AQ YE, EVO, CS, GOG ES, NG VAZ Table 6 Survey of participants in Polish Silicon Bridge value of program Question: What was the most valuable experience for you during this program? Pseudonym Most Valuable Experience YE “To meet the American way of thinking.” ES “Meetings with local entrepreneurs.” AQ “To meet many companies/Startups and people and sharing ideas. Huge feedback about our products.” CS “Networking.” QL “Contacts.” GOG “Gaining knowledge on how startups communicate with the whole ecosystem.” NG “Most you can learn from other entrepreneurs.” VAZ “Gaining knowledge from mentors as well as through self-organized meetings.” HO Understanding the USA market and obtaining knowledge about what I have to do to succeed here.” EVO “Learning the system.” MS “Jesper Wind” [Founder of EDGE Business Advisory, accelerator in San Francisco] 64 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 Valley (Table 7): The most commonly cited challenge was generating funding and attracting investors. Elaborating on that theme, one of the Polish firms (a digital technology provider with a strong commercial portfolio and a sophisticated manage- ment team) stressed the risks of undue concentration on revenue generation to support its strategy of self-funding, which threatened to divert attention from product innova- tion and invited preemption of new ideas by competitors. Planned Changes We asked our Polish respondents to identi- fy the particular actions they intended to take fol- lowing their return from Silicon Valley (Table 8) Our telephonic follow-ups provided additional infor- mation on how the Polish Silicon Bridge influenced the for- ward business plans of program participants. Respondents stressed adaptations to the United States market, drawing Table 8 Survey of participants in Polish Silicon Bridge planned changes Question: Describe the most important changes you are planning to implement inside your company resulting from your experience with the Polish Silicon Bridge program Pseudonym Planned Changes Pseudonym Planned Changes AQ • Future planning MS • Triple sales • Strengthen leadership • Marketing strategy CS • Go to market strategy • Prototyping • Traction results NG • More experiment with our product sales• Closer focus on our customer segments ES • Narrowing strategic focus • Hiring sales person • Content marketing QL • Sales strategy GOG • Converting existing products into startups • Changing company’s offer VAZ • Change in communication with clients-reworking marketing strategy • Changing of approach-reach big companies first to get feedback • Focus on getting big brands through shadow IT or direct contact • Speed development cycle and focus more on rapid deployments • Considering VC funding instead of self-funding HO • Stronger concentration on sales • Start real sales in USA • Change the information we send to the market about our product • Change the way I express myself when speaking about what we do • Change the order of implemen- tation of new features in our platform VE • Defining core value proposition • Market segmentation • Refining business model • Improving communication with customers • Marketing strategy Table 7 Survey of participants in Polish Silicon Bridge foremost challenges Question: What in your opinion would be the most important challenges you could encounter upon returning to Poland in terms of implementing new knowledge gained (ideas and solutions) during the Polish Silicon Bridge program? Pseudonym Most Valuable Experience CS Concentration on team ES Financing GOG Funding of new ventures HO Generating sales in the USA and finding investors to scale the business NG Financing QL Ego of Polish investors VAZ Focusing on revenue activities instead of product, increasing the risk that someone will imple- ment our idea faster YE Making our business model transparent and compelling to investors 65 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 on their observations in Silicon Valley on how companies communicate with American customers. They also cited refinements of their approaches to global product develop- ment, noting the relative shortage of such business skills in Poland. Recommendations to Colleagues We asked the survey participants whether they would recommend the Polish Silicon Bridge to colleagues. The responses were highly laudatory of the program (Table 9): Our respondents signaled strong interest in other pro- grams administered by PARP, whose portfolio includes Table 9 Survey of participants in Polish Silicon Bridge recommendations to colleagues Question: Based on your experience, how would you describe the Polish Silicon Bridge program to your colleagues? Pseudonym Description of Program AQ “Big possibilities.” CS “Great thing to start up your startup experience.” ES “Great experience.” EVO “Good.” GOG “The program helps Polish companies gain knowledge about the US market.” HO ”Polish Silicon Bridge is the perfect program which will drive you from living and making business in Poland to getting into USA, making your first sales here and findings investors in USA and making your business global.” MS “Rocket launch to the US reality.” NG “Nice boost to think about your business.” QL “Easy way to get into the US.” VAZ “A great program to gain knowledge on launching a product in US, giving most advantages if your prod- uct already has traction in Poland.” YE “World quality program.” innovation, internationalization, and SME development. The favorable reaction to the Polish Silicon Bridge also strengthened the case for the integration of international bridge programs in Poland’s broader “Strategy for Respon- sible Development”, launched in 2016 by Minister of Fi- nance (and now Prime Minister) Mateusz Morawiecki to promote sustainable, inclusive, and knowledge-centric eco- nomic growth. Favored United States Innovation Centers The final question in the Polish survey prompted respondents to rate the attractiveness of particular United States cities/regions as global innovation hubs (Table 10): The ranking of New York City and San Francisco as “most important” echoed the findings of the global surveys cited earlier in the article identifying those locales as the world’s foremost business ecosystems. The high placements of Chicago (a major international business hub and host of a large Polish American community) and Boston (a leader in ICT and biomedical technology) aligned with the broader pattern of Polish companies entering the United States. The lower placements of San Diego, Atlanta, Miami, and Seattle indicate that those cities lack high concentra- tions of business development resources prioritized by this particular collection of Polish startups. The intermediate United States cities on this list possess specific assets of interest to these Polish companies: Austin (a rising player in ICT), Reno/Tahoe (a region with close ties to the Polish Government and geographic proximity to the San Francisco Bay Area), and Washington, D.C. (an area that combines federal/regulatory/diplomatic organizations and significant ICT and biomedical clusters). Discussion This article augments the extant literature on emerging market startups by examining the contributions of interna- tional bridge organizations (a distinctive type of business development agency) to the growth strategies of early stage companies in Central and Eastern Europe. The Polish cases analyzed in the article (along with our previous work on the Czech Accelerator) strengthen the the- 66 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 oretical framework for scholarly research on emerging mar- ket startups and global innovation ecosystems. Our study of the Silicon Valley experiences of CEE-based startups pro- vides the foundation for a distinctive model of the interna- tional bridging process, indicating particular concepts and sequences to explain the relative effectiveness of alternative strategies of new enterprise development. Efficacy of Incubators and Accelerators Business incubators, business accelerators, and hybrid incubators/accelerators have proliferated over the past de- cade. By 2018, over 3,000 such organizations were active worldwide covering both developed markets and emerging markets. However, empirical research indicates that these orga- nizations have generated little measurable impact on the business outcomes of startup companies. Only a handful of elite global accelerators (e.g., Silicon Valley-based Y Combinators and Boulder, Colorado-based TechStars) have produced statistically significant effects on the acceleration trajectories of portfolio companies (Hallen, Bingham, & Cohen, 2014; Van Weele, van Rijnsoever, & Nauta, 2017; Yin & Luo, 2018). Drawing on a large study of startup firms in Italy, Lukeš, Longo, and Zouhar (2018) find that incuba- tors may actually have a negative effect on the sales revenue of incubatees. In these cases, the “safe harbors” of business incubators pamper resident startups, shielding them from market competition and leaving them unprepared upon graduation. Conventional incubators/accelerators deliver a number of intangible benefits that are not fully captured by financial performance metrics (e.g., expansion of international net- works; cross-fertilization of ideas and experiences; expo- sure to leading innovative technologies and business mod- els). But the middling results of the global proliferation of accelerators/incubators underscore the need for alternative business development models better suited to the needs of startup companies with global growth aspirations. Promise of the International Bridge Model The international bridge organizations addressed in this article complement conventional incubators/acceler- ators. The particular design of the Polish Silicon Bridge (immersion of CEE technology startups in a world-class Table 10 Survey of participants in Polish Silicon Bridge favored US innovation centers Question: On a Likert scale of 1-5 (where 1 = most important and 5 = not important) please indicate which US innovation centers you would consider most important for future international bridge programs. Pseudonym 1 = Most Important 2 3 4 5 = Not Important AQ Austin, Chicago, San Francisco, Washing- ton Atlanta, Boston, Reno/Tahoe, San Diego, Seattle Miami ES New York, San Francisco Boston Austin, Chicago, Seattle, Washington San Diego Atlanta, Miami, Reno/Tahoe EVO Atlanta, San Fran- cisco Reno/Tahoe, San Diego Austin, Boston, Chicago, Miami, Seattle, Washington GOG New York, San Francisco Chicago, Miami Atlanta, Austin, Boston, Reno/ Tahoe, San Diego, Seattle, Washington HO Chicago, New York, San Francisco Reno/Tahoe Boston, Miami, Washington Seattle Atlanta, Austin, San Diego MS Austin, Boston, New York, Reno/Tahoe NG Chicago, New York, San Francisco Boston, San Diego, Washington Atlanta, Miami Austin, Seattle QL Boston, New York, San Francisco Austin, Chicago, Washington Miami, San Diego, Seattle Reno/Tahoe Atlanta VAZ New York, San Francisco Austin, Chicago Atlanta, Boston, Miami, Reno/ Tahoe, San Diego, Washington, Seattle 67 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 foreign ecosystem) affords participating companies greater opportunities for rapid globalization than locally based in- cubators/accelerators. By forging transnational partnerships between private and public actors, international bridges pro- vide financial support to promising startup firms that may be unable to raise seed funding through traditional investor channels. International bridge organizations also serve as a transitional vehicle for high-potential startups that are not ready for entry into premier accelerators. The application of exacting selection criteria, rigorous residential programs, and systematic follow-up with graduating firms (discussed below) would elude the safe harbor problem that afflicts many incubators/accelerators and heighten the effectiveness of international bridges. Conclusions For emerging market companies, international bridge organizations offer a different value proposition than con- ventional business incubators and business accelerators. Through immersion in developed market-based ecosystems like Silicon Valley, bridge organizations afford emerging market-based startups direct exposure to world-class tech- nology companies, seasoned entrepreneurs, angel investors, and venture capitalists that hasten integration of those firms into global markets. The international bridge organizations also circumvent the institutional void problem of emerging markets, whose structural liabilities (thin capital markets, shortage of expe- rienced mentors, weak industry-university links, low public sector capacity) hinder the growth strategies of high-poten- tial startup firms. Embedding in dynamic, globally connect- ed, risk-tolerant milieus like Silicon Valley and New York also helps such companies surmount local cultural barriers to international business development. The international bridge organization assessed in this article (the Polish Silicon Bridge) is especially promising to startup companies in Central and Eastern Europe, which by virtue of region-specific assets are uniquely well posi- tioned for integration into global ecosystems. Eastward enlargement aligned the former socialist countries with the financial/legal/regulatory norms of the European Union, rendering the new accession states of the CEE region com- paratively safe locations for technology-intensive, IP-sensi- tive foreign direct investment. EU enlargement also stimu- lated high volumes of manufacturing-related FDI, creating a large installed base of leading Western multinationals and integrating CEE companies into regional/global value chains. Furthermore, EU accession gave the CEE countries access to the European Union’s Structural and Investment Funds, whose early tranches hastened modernization of re- gional infrastructure and whose current tranche prioritizes technology, innovation, and human resource development. These regional assets clearly benefit CEE-based, technolo- gy-driven startup companies that aspire to quick expansion in global markets. The CEE region further benefits from an impressive endowment of university-degreed, English-speaking young professionals, a number of whom gained valuable experi- ence with American and West European multinationals be- fore launching their own enterprises. This factor heightens the probability of success of CEE-based entrepreneurs in developed market ecosystems like Silicon Valley, facilitat- ing participants’ adoption of innovative technologies and business models and easing their cultural integration into foreign business communities. Our investigation of the international bridge experienc- es of Polish startups illuminates the particular challenges and opportunities facing early stage CEE companies. The startups that participated in the Polish Silicon Bridge are representative of a new generation of CEE companies, and include technology based, globally oriented young enter- prises poised to leverage their international experiences for innovation-driven growth. Our research indicates that Pol- ish companies reaped substantial benefits from their experi- ences in Silicon Valley and other foreign ecosystems, nota- bly expansion of transnational networks critical for United States and global market entry. But our study also demonstrates the limitations of the international bridge model. While immersion in intensive, fixed-term programs like the Polish Silicon Bridge can de- liver short-term benefits to participating companies, their long-term success depends on sustained implementation of lessons learned during the foreign ecosystem experiences. To that end, Polish authorities should consider refinements of their international bridge models, including: • More aggressive promotion of international bridge pro- grams with local companies to enlarge the size and im- prove the quality of the applicant pool • More rigorous selection criteria to enlist local startups ex- hibiting the most talented management, most promising technologies, and greatest prospects for success in the in- ternational bridge • Systematic tracking of the business progress of graduating companies (e.g., angel/venture capital received; foreign strategic partnerships formed; revenue growth achieved; new technologies/business models/practices adopted; new products and services commercialized) • Reconnecting participating companies and their foreign hosts to strengthen the personal/professional connections forged in the international bridge, through funded return 68 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 trips by local participants to the foreign host and/or visits by foreign partners to the home country • Sponsorship of international exhibitions to showcase the achievements of local participants in the bridge programs As an advanced post-transition country that has largely exhausted its scope for efficiency-led growth, Poland fac- es increasing pressure to pursue innovation-led economic development strategies. The rapid integration of promising local startups in global innovation ecosystems is a key com- ponent of that strategy. However, realization of such a goal hinges on the creation of a critical mass of startup compa- nies, small and medium enterprises, and emerging multina- tionals capable of integration into global innovation eco- systems. The pilot international bridge program examined in this article constitutes a first step towards that objective. Future Research The findings reported in this article draw on a small sample of recent participants in the Polish Silicon Bridge, indicating directions for future research on the integration of emerging market startups in global innovation ecosys- tems. A future research agenda may include the following: • Longitudinal analyses to track the progression of individ- ual emerging market companies from launch to commer- cialization to global entry • Firm-specific case studies to observe emerging market startups engaged in business incubators, business acceler- ators, and international bridge organizations • Comparative studies of startups, incubators, accelerators, and bridge organizations in different emerging and devel- oped market countries • Mapping of global innovation ecosystems to trace the transnational commercial activities of emerging mar- ket-based and developed market companies in those hubs Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the following individuals for their contributions to this article. Professor Pawel Pietrasienski of the Warsaw School of Economics facilitated access to the Polish startup firms that partici- pated in our survey research. Professors Erran Carmel and Gwanhoo Lee of the Kogod School of Business, American University provided helpful feedback on an earlier draft of the article. Patryk Czerwony served as research assistant for the project, effectively interfacing with our Polish survey participants. We also acknowledge the valuable comments and suggestions of anonymous reviewers of the draft paper we presented at the 8th conference of the Global Innova- tion and Knowledge Academy (GIKA) in Valencia, Spain in June 2018. References Albort-Morant, G., & Oghazi, P. (2016). How useful are incubators for new entrepreneurs? Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 2125-2129. Barrehag, L., Fornell, A., Larsson, G., Mårdström, V., West- ergård, V., Wrackefeldt, S. (2012). Accelerating suc- cess: A study of seed accelerators and their defining characteristics. Retrieved from Thesis in Industrial Engineering and Management, Department of Tech- nology Management, Chalmers University of Technol- ogy, Gothenberg, Sweden. (TEKX04-12-10). Berger, A., & Brem, A. (2016). Why do European com- panies have innovation hubs in Silicon Valley–Best practice examples and key takeaways. Thunderbird International Business Review, 59(6), November/De- cember, 757-763. Bøllingtoft, A. (2012). The bottom-up business incubator: Leverage to networking and cooperation practices in a self-generated, entrepreneurial-enabled environment. Technovation, 32(5), 304-315. Bruneel, J., Ratinho, T., Clarysee, B., & Groen, A. (2012). The evolution of business incubators: Comparing demand and supply of business incubation services across different incubator generations. Technovation, 32(2), 110-121. Cohen, S. (2013). What do accelerators do? Insights from incubators and angels. Innovations, 8(3/4), 19-25. Dutt, N., Hawn, O., Vidal, E., Chatterji, A., McGahan, A., & Mitchell, W. (2016). How open system intermediar- ies address institutional failures: The case of business incubators in emerging market countries. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 818-840. Ernst, H., Kahle, H., Dubiel, A., Prabhu, J., & Subrama- niam, M. (2015). The antecedents and consequences of affordable value innovations for emerging markets. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(1), 65-79. European Commission (2018). European Innovation Score- card 2018. Brussels: European Commission. Fey, C., Nayak, A., Wu, C., & Zhou, A. (2016). Internation- alization strategies of emerging market multinationals: A five M framework. Journal of Leadership & Orga- nizational Studies, 23(2), 128-143. Gauthier, J. F. (2017). Global startup ecosystem report 2017. Retrieved from https://startupgenome.com/re- port2017/. 69 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 Guillén, M., & García-Canal, E. (2012). Emerging markets rule: Growth strategies of the new global giants. New York: McGraw-Hill. Hallen, B., Bingham, C., & Cohen, S. (2014). Do accel- erators accelerate? A study of venture accelerators as a path to success. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2014(1), 747-752. Iyortsuun, A. (2017). An empirical analysis of the effect of business incubation process on firm performance in Nigeria. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneur- ship, 29(6), 433-459. Lukeš, M., Longo, M., & Zouhar, J. (2018). Do business incubators really enhance entrepreneurial growth? Ev- idence from a large sample of innovative Italian start- ups. Technovation, In Press. Ministr, J., & Pitner, T. (2015). Academic-industrial co- operation in ICT in a transition economy–Two cases from the Czech Republic. Information Technology for Development, 21(3), 480-491. Misra, K., Memili, E., Welsh, D., & Fang, H. (2014). The impact of foreign direct investment (FDI) on women’s entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 24(1), 45-59 Mrkajic, B. (2017). Business incubation models and insti- tutional void environments. Technovation, 68, 44-55. Mroczkowski, T., Assudani, R., Muñoz-Fernández, A., & Khilji, S. (2017). Entrepreneurial support systems: Role of the Czech Accelerator. International Jour- nal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 21(6), 530-552. Mulolli, E., Islami, X., & Skenderi, N. (2017). Business encubators as a factor for the development of SMEs in Kosovo. International Journal of Management, Ac- counting and Economics, 4(6), 659-666. Musteen. M., Datta, D., & Francis, J. (2014). Early internationalization by firms in transition economies into developed markets: The role of international networks. Global Strategy Journal, 4(3), 221-237. Naqshbandi, M. & Kamel, Y. (2017). Intervening role of realized absorptive capacity in organizational cul- ture–open innovation relationship: Evidence from an emerging market. Journal of General Management, 42(3), 5-20. Paulose, H., & Nair, S. (2015). Open innovation in emerg- ing markets: A business model perspective. Journal of Promotion Management, 21(1), 1-2. Pauwels, C., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Van Hove, J. (2016). Understanding a new generation incubator model: The accelerator. Technovation, 50-51, 13-24. Piatkowski, M. (2016). Toward an innovative Poland: The entrepreneurial discovery process and business needs analysis. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. Pietrasienski, P. (2013). Silicon Valley acceleration cen- ter–A case study of the first Polish government “bridge organization”. Przegląd Organizacji, 8, 54-60. Pietrasienski, P., & Bitka, K. (2015). European bridge orga- nizations in Silicon Valley: Organizational structures, activity profiles, best practices. Trade and Investment Section of the Polish Embassy, Washington, D.C. Pitchayadol, P., Hoonsopon, D., Chandrachai, A., & Triu- kose, S. (2018). Innovativeness in Thai family SMEs: An exploratory case study. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 42(1), 38-48. Ramamurti, R. (2016). Internationalization and innovation in emerging markets. Strategic Management Journal, 37(13), E74-E83. Randolph, S., & Grose, T. (2014). Europe and the Bay Area: Investing in each other. San Francisco: Bay Area Council Economic Institute. Retrieved from http://www.bayareaeconomy.org/report/europe-and- the-bay-area/. Rogova, E. (2014). The effectiveness of business incubators as the element of the universities’ spin-off strategy in Russia. International Journal of Technology Manage- ment & Sustainable Development, 13(3), 265-281. Sivalogathasan, V. & Wu, X. (2014). The effect of foreign direct investment on innovation in South Asian emerg- ing markets. Global Business and Organizational Ex- cellence, 33(3), 63-76. Startup Genome (2017). Global Startup Ecosystem Re- port. Oakland, CA: Startup Genome. Retreived from https://startupgenome.com/reports/2018/GSER-2018- v1.1.pdf. Subramaniam, M., Ernst, H., & Dubiel, A. (2014). From the special issue editors: Innovations for and from emerg- ing markets. Journal of Product Innovation Manage- ment, 32(1), 5-11. Van Agtmael, A. (2007). The emerging markets century: how a new breed of world-class companies is overtaking the world. New York: Free Press. Van Weele, M., van Rijnsoever, F., & Nauta, F. (2017). You can’t always get what you want: How entrepreneur’s perceived resource needs affect the incubator’s asser- tiveness. Technovation, 59, 18-33. Wang, Y., Sutherland, D., & Ning, L. (2014). A dynamic comparative analysis of international innovation net- works in emerging market MNCs. Industry and Inno- vation, 21(6), 457-475. Winterhalter, S., Zeschky, M., Neumann, L., & Gassmann, O. (2017). Business models for frugal innovation in emerging markets: The case of the medical device and laboratory equipment industry. Technovation, 66, 3-13. 70 D. Bartlett, & T. Mroczkowski Journal of Small Business Strategy / Vol. 29, No. 1 (2019) / 55-70 Yin, B., & Luo, J. (2018). How do accelerators select startups? Shifting decision criteria across stages. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 65(4), 574-589. Zapletalová, S. (2015). Models of Czech companies’ in- ternationalization. Journal of International Entrepre- neurship, 13(2), 153-168.