Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A note on the effects of start-up competitions: experience from the Czech Business Plan Contest “Idea of the Year”

A note on the effects of start-up competitions: experience from the Czech Business Plan Contest... ondrej.dvoulety@vse.cz The study contributes to the scholarly discussion on the effects of business plan Department of Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Business competitions by assessing the survival and performance of the entrepreneurial teams Administration, Prague University participating in the Czech Business Plan Contest “Idea of the Year” during the years of Economics and Business, W. 2010–2015. The implemented research design followed up with the finalists, receiv- Churchill Sq. 4, 13067 Prague 3, Czech Republic ing financial and non-financial rewards 5 years after participating in the contest. The implemented scientific methods include mainly survival analysis and applied statisti- cal techniques, such as cross-tabulations, tests of association, t-tests and correlation analysis. The obtained results allowed us to empirically support a hypothesis assuming that participation in the business plan contest positively relates to new venture crea- tion, start-up survival, and performance. The study provides a series of recommenda- tions for the contest’s organizers, especially in terms of evaluation and monitoring and encouraging the projects’ diversity. The added value for the international scholarship is that the article utilizes a complex theoretical framework combining various types of entrepreneurial capital that may be well used in future studies aiming to assess the impacts of start-up competitions. Keywords: Start-up contest, Business plan competition, Entrepreneurship and SME policy, Entrepreneurial ecosystem, Firm survival, Czech Republic Introduction Start-up, pitching, and business plan competitions are undoubtedly part of the so-called entrepreneurial ecosystem concept, shaping broader cultural, social, economic and institutional surroundings of entrepreneurs and persons engaged in self-employment (O’Connor et  al., 2018; Watson, 2019; Stolz, 2020; Smith & Muldoon, 2021; Adam & Alarifi, 2021; Carayannis et  al., 2021). Building on a seminal study on entrepreneurial ecosystem pillars by Stam (2015), Stolz (2020) notes that start-up competitions (SUC) combine several aspects of the ecosystem and mobilize numerous different actors. Therefore, those belong to both framework and systematic conditions, contributing in several ways thus to the overall quality of the ecosystem. Furthermore, Stolz (2020, p. 242) highlights the role of start-up competitions as the hub, which connects nascent entrepreneurs with other individuals willing to pursue a business with experts and © The Author(s) 2023. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the mate- rial. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/. Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 2 of 12 professionals and boosts the networking of experts and professionals as well. Besides, Passaro et al. (2017) add that start-up competitions increase awareness about entrepre- neurial learning processes and increase the prestige of business careers in the whole society. Past research concentrated on multiple dimensions of the phenomenon since the first start-up competitions originated at Babson College, Massachusetts, United States of America (Fetters et  al., 2010). Watson (2019) explains that since then, there have been various terms associated with start-up competitions, such as “business plan contests, business planning competitions, enterprise challenges, idea challenges, pitching com- petitions, competitions, enterprise challenges, idea challenges, pitching competitions, business design competitions, business idea competitions, business venture competi- tions” (Watson, 2019, p. 121). However, according to Watson (2019), the parameters of these events are somewhat similar. In brief, these regional, national and international activities aim to select teams with the best business proposals and support them with a maximum of financial and non-financial resources to boost their endeavour (der Foo et al., 2005; Schwartz et al., 2013; Boulocher-Passet et al., 2019; Joseph et al., 2021; Smith & Muldoon, 2021; Saripah et al., 2022). Tipu (2019) conducted a survey of the previously published literature and provided a structural overview of 22 studies. Tipu’s (2019) lit- erature review article demonstrates that the previous research on business competitions focused mainly on the structure, conditions, judging process, and benefits for partici - pants rather than assessing their impact on the participating teams. Another review out- come is that the current evidence is mainly driven by the British and American context, neglecting findings from emerging and developing countries (Tipu, 2019). The need to monitor the participating teams after the contests was articulated already by several scholars (Watson & McGowan, 2019; Tipu, 2019; Stolz, 2021), especially regarding the survival rates, finance acquiring, official business start-up, and perfor - mance. However yet, not many studies have addressed the issue empirically, primar- ily due to a lack of data. One recent exception is Kiesel and Harkiolakis’s (2021) study, which provided emerging observations from German teams participating in the business plan competition between the years 1999 and 2018. While the authors observed positive outcomes concerning networking for the most successful projects, they could not prove an association with the future success of the participating start-ups. These ambiguous findings are not favourable for the organizers of the contests. Thus, it is critical to extend the previous results and see if the German case was an exception or if the evidence from other countries is similar. We contribute to the body of knowledge on the effects of business plan competitions by evaluating the Czech Business Plan Contest “Idea of the Year” (2021), the country’s longest-lasting business plan competition. The Czech Republic is a small open Euro - pean economy with a long tradition of entrepreneurship and higher levels of entrepre- neurial activity (Lukeš, 2017; Čemerková et  al., 2017; Pavlák & Petrů, 2018; Dvouletý, 2019; Dvorský et  al., 2020; Hamplová et  al., 2021; Peterková et  al., 2022). We follow up with the best-graded finalists 5 years after the contest. We investigate the projects’ survival and the newly established firms’ financial performance, measured as sales and assets growth. More formally, the current research study seeks to answer the following D vouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 3 of 12 research question “What are the impacts of the business plan contest on project survival and newly established venture performance?” The study follows up with the finalists 5 years after the contest. The evaluation focuses on the project’s survival, the role of the selected team’s characteristics and the newly established firm’s financial performance. We proceed by pointing out the fundamental theories, shaping the process of business plan competitions and start-up performance. Then, the contest “Idea of the Year” and the data sources are introduced, followed by the start-up survival and performance analyses. The final section concludes with implica - tions for the business plan competitions organizers and research community. Theoretical considerations and hypothesis development Depending on the start-up competition organizers (university vs. non-academic entities) and expected outcomes (networking of actors, acquiring entrepreneurial skills, business start-up, and project visibility), the scholars utilize several theoretical approaches (Tipu, 2019, Stolz, 2021). As a common ground, we may use the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991; Neneh, 2019), assuming that individuals willing to pursue a business are closer to becoming entrepreneurs by taking any small step related somehow to entrepre- neurship. Business plan competition might be thus a crucial event, activating an individ- ual intending to start a business to actually decide to officially start a business (Passaro et al., 2017). Furthermore, researchers (Schwartz et  al., 2013; Watson et  al., 2018; Smith & Mul- doon, 2021) explain that participation in the contest, which may also be understood as an experiential learning technique, provides teams with a unique opportunity to present and defend their business idea in front of the judges, to make sense of their own project and increase their self-confidence. This agrees with the previous literature on nascent entrepreneurial learning (Karataş-Özkan, 2011). Even the best ideas, praised by the juries, cannot be transformed into real business companies without the proper resources, classified into physical, human, social (rela - tionship) and financial capital (Colombo & Grilli, 2010; Kellermanns et al., 2016; Drover et  al., 2017). By adapting the theoretical lenses of the resource-based view (RBV) on entrepreneurship (see, Kellermanns et  al., 2016, for details), we assume that the busi- ness plan competition may provide individuals with the missing resources. It enables them to set up the business officially, increase its chance to survive, and boost its per - formance. Depending on the contest’s conditions, the participants can attain financial capital through financial rewards or direct funding offers from the judges, often inves - tors themselves, and get the crucial initial investment to start up (Watson et al., 2018). Similarly, the social (relationship) capital could be enhanced, by the increased project’s visibility, providing the team with opportunities for networking with established ven- tures, suppliers, investors and (potential) customers (Passaro et  al., 2017). Some com- petitions even provide winners with physical rewards (equipment) or free office space at the entrepreneurial infrastructure (incubators, accelerators, coworking spaces), giving a team an actual place where they can do business and benefit from the start-up cul - ture (Schwartz et al., 2013; Dvouletý et al., 2018). Working closely with the mentors and benefitting from the variety of advisory services and training, the founders learn new Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 4 of 12 skills, acquire new knowledge and increase their experience with the start-up scene, thus improving their human capital (Russell et al., 2008; Watson, 2019). Therefore, it is relevant to ask how these considerable investments into resources shape the entrepreneurial endeavour. Thus, we ask our main research question: What impacts does the business plan contest have on project survival and newly established venture performance? By using the lenses of the resource-based view (RBV) on entre- preneurship, we set up the following hypothesis, linked with the business plan contest’s goal, to be tested in our study: H1: Participation in the business plan contest is positively related to the venture crea- tion, start-up survival and its performance. Contest “Idea of the Year” and the data sources The contest “Idea of the Year” (2021) is the longest-lasting business plan competition in the Czech Republic, which started back in 2007. The main partners have been chang - ing until 2011, when Vodafone, a telco company, joined the competition’s board and remained the leading (titular) partner until now. The contest focuses on business ideas and early-stage start-ups, who may compete in several categories (e.g., start-up of the year, best technological project, best student team) for tangible prizes, learning work- shops, mentoring and financial investment up to 3.75 mils. EUR. The applicants need to deliver several materials, particularly a power-point presentation, an executive summary of the project, a video of a maximum of 30 s and a structured business plan. Templates and learning materials are available on the website of the competition. From all applica- tions (usually a few dozen), the top 30 projects are selected, and teams are invited for an elevator pitch. Out of these, the top 10 projects (but sometimes even 14) are invited for the mentoring day, having assigned a mentor, helping them prepare the best pitch, work on their product and enhance the business plan. During the final elevator pitch, judges consisting of corporate sector managers, venture capital representatives, business angels, successful entrepreneurs, lawyers and journalists assign rankings and select the contest winner. It is crucial to note that each of the finalists is rewarded (seed money, advisory services, vouchers for web hosting, software, mentoring, marketing services, etc.), and the results are announced at the annual ceremony, which is also live-streamed and published on YouTube and other channels (Idea of the Year, 2021, YouTube, 2021). The selection process and the categories of rewards are very similar to other contests across the globe (Watson, 2019; Stolz, 2021; Smith et al., 2022), for example, compared to the annual B.E.T.A. (Babson Entrepreneurial Thought & Action , 2022) contest, awarding winners with 28,000 USD plus additional sponsored services or United King- dom university-based start-up competitions (Entrepreneur Handbook, 2022), such as Smarter Future Programme Shell LiveWIRE Awards offering start-up grants up to 5000 GBP or The Sirius Programme providing funding awards up to 35,000 GBP. Therefore, we work with the most promising projects–finalists, which may be extracted from the contest’s website (Idea of the Year, 2021), who are expected to ben- efit most from participation in the tournament. We combine this information with the available data from the internet, the Czech Business Register (2021) and the commercial database of financial records of the Czech businesses named Magnus Web, provided by Bisnode (2021) company. Given our interest in the long-term effects of the competition, D vouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 5 of 12 we worked with the finalist’s data starting from 2010, when Vodafone company joined the contest and monitored them for 5 years. The evaluation included the latest finalists from 2015. This selection was motivated mainly by the data availability, as secondary data for the competing teams needed to be available at least partially for 2021. Methods and results The study follows up with the finalists 5 years after the contest. The evaluation focuses on the project’s official registration as a business and its survival, the role of the selected team’s characteristics and the newly established firm’s financial performance. The usage of scientific methods includes mainly applied statistical techniques such as summary statistics, cross-tabulations with Chi-square tests of association, Cramer’s V, t-tests and calculation of correlation coefficients. We begin by exploring the official registration of the finalist’s projects. Out of the 68 projects we managed to find on the internet (including a search on the project’s websites and the Czech Business Register, 2021) that 66.2% of the finalist managed to start the business officially in the Czech Republic, Slovakia or another European country. After that, we were interested in whether any available characteristics impact the legal business start-up. We used the Chi-square association test to reveal if gender diversity (at least one female project member included) increases the chance of official incorpora - tion. Only 16.2% of projects had at least one woman in their team, and we failed to find any support for this relationship (Chi-square’s p-value = 0.85). Furthermore, we distin- guished between solo owner’s projects and projects having more than one project mem- ber. However, we found no statistical support for this association either (Chi-square’s p-value = 0.87). We also checked whether the incorporation rate is tightened with the contest’s year, and yes, we observed a statistically significant relationship (Chi-square’s p-value < 0.046; Cramer’s V = 0.4). It looks like, especially after the initial 2 years, the incorporation rate has increased notably, as shown in Table 1. The study proceeds by presenting the findings of the survival analysis. We con - ducted another round of searches on the internet and in the Czech Business Register (2021) to see whether the projects were still active. We searched for adverse events related to cash-flow problems, discontinuity in providing services and product deliv - ery and official firm bankruptcy records. We followed up with the newly established Table 1 Association between contest’s year and the incorporation (N = 68) Contest’s year/incorporation No (%) Yes (%) Total projects (%) 2010 50.0 50.0 14.7 2011 58.3 41.7 17.7 2012 35.7 64.3 20.6 2013 0.0 100.0 14.7 2014 40.0 60.0 14.7 2015 16.7 83.3 17.6 Total 33.8 66.2 100.0 Source:Own calculations based on the Czech Business Register (2021) and Idea of the Year (2021) data Test of association, Chi-square = 11.3, p-value < 0.046, Cramer’s V = 0.4 Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 6 of 12 T+1: 98.8% T+3: 88.9% T+5: 88.9% Active start-ups Active start-ups Active start-ups T+2: 95.6% T+4: 88.9% Contest´sYear Active start-ups Active start-ups Fig. 1 Start-up survival analysis (N = 45). Source: Own calculations based on the Czech Business Register (2021) and Idea of the Year (2021) data Table 2 The legal form of the start-ups Legal form N Frequency (%) Limited liabilities company 33 80.49 Joint stock company 4 9.76 Self-employed 3 7.32 Non-profit organization 1 2.44 Total 41 100.00 Source: Own elaboration based on Bisnode’s (2021) data organizations in five-time windows, year by year after the contest, with a maximum of 5 years. Figure 1 shows the obtained findings. It shows that the survival rate declined by up to 3 years. Then it became relatively stable for up to 5 years, delivering informa - tion that 88.9% of start-ups were active 5 years from the competition event. Given the lack of data on international businesses, we reduced the sample to the companies doing business in the Czech Republic (N = 41). At the time of business incorporation, almost half of the business owners started on their own (46.3%), fol- lowed by those having two co-owners (41.5%). However, there were also projects co- owned by four people. We also found that more than half of the teams (58.5%) had a person with a university education in their group. The vast majority of the firms were set up as limited liabilities companies (80.5%). For details, visit Table 2. The main activity of the start-ups was also not too diversified. Table  3 reports on the main economic activity of the established businesses. Almost one-third of the projects were active in computer programming, consultancy and related activities, followed by companies focused on wholesale, and a significant number of teams were engaged in the manufacturing of different types of products (31.7%). All these characteristics may determine whether the project survives the initial years. The most appropriate approach would be to implement the logistic regression analysis combined with the Cox proportional hazard function estimation (Tubadji et  al., 2021; Ugur & Vivarelli, 2021). Unfortunately, given the relatively low number of observations (N = 41), we cannot estimate a statistically robust multivariate regres- sion model (Wooldridge, 2002). Thus we need to rely on less rigorous but hopefully still valuable correlation analysis, providing information on the role of selected deter- minants on start-up survival. Mainly, we concentrate on the association with the start-up team size, founder’s university education, legal form, regional affiliation and classification of the economic activity. The estimated bivariate correlation coefficients with firm survival in the fifth year are presented in Table  4. Most of the obtained cor- relations are statistically insignificant. Still, we find empirical support at least for the D vouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 7 of 12 Table 3 The main activity of the start-ups, according to NACE-2 Rev. classification Main activity N Frequency (%) Computer programming, consultancy and related activities 13 31.71 Agents involved in the wholesale 6 14.63 Advertising agencies 2 4.88 Construction of residential and non-residential buildings 2 4.88 Repair of fabricated metal products, machinery and equipment 1 2.44 Manufacture of electronic components 1 2.44 Manufacture of other electrical equipment 1 2.44 Manufacture of games and toys 1 2.44 Manufacture of glass and glass products 1 2.44 Manufacture of wood and of products of wood and cork, except furniture; manufacture of 1 2.44 articles of straw and plaiting materials Manufacture of wearing apparel 1 2.44 Other manufacturing n.e.c. 1 2.44 Retail trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles 1 2.44 Non-specialized wholesale trade 1 2.44 Renting and operating of own or leased real estate 1 2.44 Accommodation and food service activities 1 2.44 Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing activities 1 2.44 Other education n.e.c. 2 4.88 Other professional, scientific and technical activities n.e.c. 2 4.88 Activities of organizations to improve the status of an ethnic, minority or other specific 1 2.44 groups Total 41 100.00 Source: Own calculations based on Bisnode’s (2021) and Idea of the Year (2021) data Table 4 Correlation analysis of factors impacting start-up survival after 5 years (N = 41) Variable Correlation coefficient Number of founders − 0.06 At least one founder has a university degree (BSc./MSc./MBA or equivalent) 0.06 Limited liabilities company 0.22 Joint stock company 0.11 Self-employed − 0.22 Non-profit organization 0.05 Hradec Kralove Region − 0.48* Advertising agencies − 0.33* Source: Own calculations based on Bisnode’s (2021) and Idea of the Year (2021) data *Denominates statistical significance at 10%. Regional and sectoral correlation coefficients are included only if statistically significant for parsimonious reasons role of the firm’s geographical location, and we further observe that advertising agen - cies indicate a lower survival rate. The last section deals with the financial performance of the start-ups. We work with limited data on the overall firm size, measured as total assets (N = 19) and total sales (N = 17). Both variables are denominated in thousands of Czech crowns—CZK. We aim to observe whether the start-ups increased their performance over time. Therefore, we compare financial data in the first year with the records in the 5 years as absolute and Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 8 of 12 Table 5 Summary statistics for financial growth variables after 5 years of start-up’s activity Indicator Median Minimum Maximum N Total assets (difference) 463.0 − 6367.0 54,472.0 19 Total assets (% growth) 137.8 − 98.7 18,315.4 19 Total sales (difference) 715.0 − 3835.0 46,847.0 17 Total sales (% growth) 156.1 − 100.0 707,100.0 15  Source: own calculations based on Bisnode’s (2021) data Table 6 Results of the paired t-tests comparing the financial performance of start-ups after 5 years Total assets Mean Standard error N t-Statistics Total assets (5th year) 7056.68 3678.76 19 1.67 Total assets (1st year) 2062.37 891.22 19p-value (H : difference > 0) Difference 4994.32* 2999.18 19 0.06 Total sales Mean Standard error N t-Statistics Total sales (5th year) 6387.65 3619.23 17 1.50 Total sales (1st year) 2143.24 1080.83 17p-value (H : difference > 0) Difference 4244.41* 2828.76 17 0.08 Source: Own calculations based on Bisnode’s (2021) and Idea of the Year (2021) data *Denominates statistical significance at 10% relative differences. We also formally test whether the changes are statistically significant with the help of paired t-tests. Given the relatively high variability in the data, we begin with the median values of indicators. The relative growth in median values (see Table  5) indicates that total assets increased by 1.4 times and total sales almost 1.6 times. The positive difference in the absolute changes in both variables is statistically supported by t-tests available in Table 6. At the 10% level of statistical significance, we conclude that the start-up’s prop - erty and sales have significantly increased over five years. However, we acknowledge that the number of available observations was relatively low, representing only 46.3% (41.5%, respectively) of the Czech start-ups, making this analysis a notable limitation. Discussion and concluding remarks Several researchers have recently mentioned a call for assessment of the effects of busi - ness plan competitions (Watson & McGowan, 2019; Tipu, 2019; Stolz, 2021). This research contributed to this call by evaluating the effects of the Czech contest “Idea of the Year” (2021), the country’s longest-lasting business plan competition. By combining theoretical approaches of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB), entrepreneurial learn- ing and resource-based view (RBV) on entrepreneurship, we formulated a hypothesis assuming that participation in the business plan contest is positively related to venture creation, start-up survival and its performance. D vouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 9 of 12 The conducted research followed up with the finalists, receiving financial and non- financial rewards five years after participating in the contest. We found that 66.2% of the finalists started the business in the Czech Republic, Slovakia or another European coun - try. Furthermore, we observe that 88.9% of the registered start-ups were still active on the market five years after the competition. For those businesses we managed to obtain financial data, we report that their financial performance, measured in terms of total sales and total assets, has increased significantly. These results together allow us to sup - port the stated hypothesis’s validity empirically. Different types of obtained resources raise physical, human, social and financial capital, which entrepreneurial teams utilize to boost their business activities (Kellermanns et al., 2016). Therefore, the theoretical approach combining various types of entrepreneurial capital may be well used in the forthcoming studies aiming to assess the effects of start-up com - petitions on the subsequent performance of the winning teams. As business plan com- petitions usually deliver different kinds of rewards and resources, it may also be relevant to investigate which rewards most significantly impact the subsequent survival and per - formance of the winning teams’ projects. However, it is necessary to acknowledge that these rewards are often determined by the partners and sponsors of the event, so the organizers have limited power to change them. Furthermore, we must mention the limitations and challenges of the conducted study. The lack of valid empirical data potentially useful for the analysis is striking. Based on the judges’ ranking, we worked only with the finalists of the competitions, i.e. with those who had the highest chance to succeed on the market. Even for this small group of start- ups, the number of observations of available observations was tiny. The competition organizers should promptly address this issue, as it can deliver excellent information on what is happening with the projects after the contest is over. The previous researchers have well-addressed the monitoring indicators and included information about the busi- ness incorporation, its survival and performance over time (Tipu, 2019; Stolz, 2021; Kie- sel & Harkiolakis, 2021), as demonstrated in this study. Nevertheless, there are also other relevant outcomes to be tracked, such as obtain- ing additional funding from investors, scaling up their business idea to the international markets (Schwartz et  al., 2013; Tipu, 2019) or increasing the team’s human capital and entrepreneurial skills (Russell et al., 2008; Watson, 2019). We strongly encourage organ- izers of the Czech Business Plan Contest “Idea of the Year” to observe what happens with the projects on an annual basis to obtain a more structured and reliable overview of what is happening with the teams and projects over time (Zoellner et  al., 2018; da Cunha & Arvate, 2021). Undoubtedly, focusing on the finalists’ success stories and shar - ing them could increase the contest’s prestige in the entrepreneurial ecosystem. More advanced research methods could be employed with more information about the project participants, such as counterfactual impact evaluation or analyses of start-up team sur- vival and performance determinants (Dvouletý et  al., 2018, 2022; Tubadji et  al., 2021). Furthermore, we suggest the organizers encourage wider teams’ diversity, particularly regarding gender (special call for women projects), age (encouragement of senior entre- preneurship), and primary sectoral orientation. The analysed data showed that computer programming, consultancy, and related activities significantly dominated the pool of participating teams (see also insights from Keiretsu Forum, 2021); perhaps engagement Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 10 of 12 in other business activities could enrich the contest and its culture (Der Foo et al., 2005; Tipu, 2019). Acknowledgements Not applicable. Author contributions The author read and approved final manuscript. Author’s information Ondřej Dvouletý is an Associate Professor at the Department of Entrepreneurship, Prague University of Economics and Business. His research focuses on the heterogeneity of self-employment, entrepreneurship and SME policy evaluation, and entrepreneurial economics. Ondřej’s research has been published in leading academic journals, such as Small Busi- ness Economics, Journal of Small Business Management, European Journal of Innovation Management and Interna- tional Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research. He also actively contributes to the development of the academic community. Ondřej is Associate Editor of the Journal of Small Business Management, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, and Central European Business Review. He is also active in other professional organizations. He is a member of the Committee for socio-economic development, which is a part of the Czech Government Council for Sustainable Development. He also closely cooperates with the Evaluation Unit of the Czech Ministry of Regional Devel- opment as an expert in statistics, econometrics, data analytics, and economics. Funding Not applicable. Availability of data and materials Data were purchased from the external supplier and, thus, cannot be published together with the article. Declarations Competing interests The author declares having no conflicts of interest. Received: 23 February 2022 Accepted: 4 March 2023 References Adam, N. A., & Alarifi, G. (2021). Innovation practices for survival of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the COVID-19 times: The role of external support. Journal of innovation and entrepreneurship, 10(1), 1–22. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179–211. ® ® Babson Entrepreneurial Thought & Action . (2022). B.E.T.A. (Babson Entrepreneurial Thought & Action ). https:// entre prene urship. babson. edu/ beta- chall enge- winne rs- 2022/. Accessed on 7th October 2022. Bisnode. (2021). MagnusWeb Database. Bisnode, Czech Republic. https:// magnu sweb. bisno de. cz/. Accessed on 10th August Boulocher-Passet, V., Daly, P., & Ruaud, S. (2019). Merci Handy: From start-up to born-global? The International Journal of Entre- preneurship and Innovation, 20(4), 301–309. Carayannis, E., Del Giudice, M., Tarba, S., & Soto-Acosta, P. (2021). Building entrepreneurial ecosystems: Exploring ambidexterity in technology and engineering management. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 68(2), 347–349. Colombo, M. G., & Grilli, L. (2010). On growth drivers of high-tech start-ups: Exploring the role of founders’ human capital and venture capital. Journal of business venturing, 25(6), 610–626. Czech Business Register (2021). Searching for a business subject. Available from https:// www. rzp. cz/ cgi- bin/ eng/ aps_ cache WEB. sh? VSS_ SERV= ZVWSB JFND Accessed on 7th August 2021. Čemerková, Š., Šebestová, J., Biznesu, W. S., & Górnicza, D. (Eds.). (2017). Innovation Activities and human factor in Modern Busi- ness: Measurement, results and impact. Scientific Publishing of the University in Dąbrowa Górnicza. da Cunha, G. G., & Arvate, P. (2021). Fostering entrepreneurship: The crucial role of monitoring schemes. Journal of Entrepre- neurship and Public Policy, 10(4), 527–554. Der Foo, M., Wong, P. K., & Ong, A. (2005). Do others think you have a viable business idea? Team diversity and judges’ evalua- tion of ideas in a business plan competition. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3), 385–402. Drover, W., Busenitz, L., Matusik, S., Townsend, D., Anglin, A., & Dushnitsky, G. (2017). A review and road map of entrepreneurial equity financing research: Venture capital, corporate venture capital, angel investment, crowdfunding, and accelerators. Journal of management, 43(6), 1820–1853. Dvorský, J., Ključnikov, A., & Polách, J. (2020). Business risks and their impact on business future concerning the entrepreneur’s experience with business bankruptcy: Case of Czech Republic. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 18(2), 418–430. Dvouletý, O. (2019). Entrepreneurial activity in the Czech Republic over the years 2005–2017. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology Market and Complexity, 5(3), 38. Dvouletý, O., Blažková, I., Ratinger, T., Agyemang, S. A., & Čadil, V. (2022). Experience with the application of quantitative (coun- terfactual) methods for evaluating the economic impacts of the business research and development (R&D) support in the Czech Republic. Economics Management Innovation, 14(2), 21–27. D vouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 11 of 12 Dvouletý, O., Longo, M. C., Blažková, I., Lukeš, M., & Andera, M. (2018). Are publicly funded Czech incubators effective? The comparison of performance of supported and non-supported firms. European Journal of Innovation Management, 21(4), 543–563. Entrepreneur Handbook (2022). Business Competitions and Awards in the UK. Available from https:// entre prene urhan dbook. co. uk/ compe titio ns- award/. Accessed on 7th October 2022. Fetters, M. L., Greene, P. G., & Rice, M. P. (2010). Babson college. In M. L. Fetters, P. G. Greene, & M. P. Rice (Eds.), The development of university-based entrepreneurship ecosystems (pp. 15–44). Edward Elgar. Hamplová, E., Bal-Domańska, B., & Provazníková, K. (2021). Business activity and its concentration in the Czech Republic and Poland in the years 2018–2020. In J. Maci, P. Maresova, K. Firlej, & I. Soukal (Eds.), Hradec Economic Days (pp. 217–224). University of Hradec Králové. Idea of the Year (2021). Idea of the Year - The oldest start-up competition in Czech Republic. Available from https:// napad roku. cz/ en/ Accessed on 4th August 2021. Joseph, C., Hossen, R., Rahmat, M., Noyem, J. A., & Ho, V. B. (2021). Exploring the readiness for business proposal pitching video activity using the competition-based Learning Model among Accounting Students. International Business Education Journal, 14(2), 13–24. Karataş-Özkan, M. (2011). Understanding relational qualities of entrepreneurial learning: Towards a multi-layered approach. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 23(9–10), 877–906. Keiretsu Forum (2021). START_UP Report 2019_2020. Available from https:// media. wix. com/ ugd/ c955a9_ 382f2 91fff e642c 68950 6b1d6 b6944 49. pdf. Accessed on 7th August 2021. Kellermanns, F., Walter, J., Crook, T. R., Kemmerer, B., & Narayanan, V. (2016). The resource-based view in entrepreneurship: A content‐analytical comparison of researchers’ and entrepreneurs’ views. Journal of Small Business Management, 54(1), 26–48. Kiesel, S., & Harkiolakis, N. (2021). Findings from 20 years of business plan competitions in North-Bavaria. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies, 12(1), 42–62. Lukeš, M. (2017). Entrepreneurship development in the Czech Republic. In A. Sauka, & A. Chepurenko (Eds.), Entrepreneurship in transition economies (pp. 209–224). Springer. Neneh, B. N. (2019). From entrepreneurial intentions to behavior: The role of anticipated regret and proactive personality. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 112, 311–324. O’Connor, A., Stam, E., Sussan, F., & Audretsch, D. B. (2018). Entrepreneurial ecosystems. Place-based transformations and transi- tions. Springer. Passaro, R., Quinto, I., & Thomas, A. (2017). Start-up competitions as learning environment to foster the entrepreneurial pro- cess. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 23(3), 426–445. Pavlák, M., & Petrů, N. (2018). Start-up ecosystem support in the Czech Republic. Economic Studies & Analyses/Acta VSFS, 12(2), 165–190. Peterková, J., Czerná, K., & Zimmermannová, J. (2022). Innovation Ecosystem in Selected Regions of the Czech Republic and Poland: Specifics of Infrastructure Supporting Innovative Entrepreneurship. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice, Series D: Faculty of Economics and Administration, 30(1), 1550. Russell, R., Atchison, M., & Brooks, R. (2008). Business plan competitions in tertiary institutions: Encouraging entrepreneurship education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30(2), 123–138. Saripah, I., Lestari, R. D., Putra, A., & Mutamam, M. H. A. (2022). Mentoring model of business plan competition program in improving social entrepreneurship. Journal of Nonformal Education, 8(1), 106–112. Schwartz, M., Goethner, M., Michelsen, C., & Waldmann, N. (2013). Start-up competitions as an instrument of entrepreneurship policy: The German experience. European Planning Studies, 21(10), 1578–1597. Smith, D., & Muldoon, J. (2021). Covid-19 and its impact on venture pitching competitions in higher education: a case study. Small Enterprise Research,1–12. Smith, D., Muldoon, J., & Lakshmikanth, G. S. (2022). The need for modification: The impact of COVID-19 on pitch competi- tions.entrepreneurship education and pedagogy, 25151274221079119. Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: A sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1759–1769. Stolz, L. (2020). Startup competitions and their role in entrepreneurial ecosystems: A conceptual attempt. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, 64(4), 233–246. Tipu, S. A. A. (2019). Business plan competitions in developed and emerging economies: What do we still need to know? Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 11(1), 81–97. Tubadji, A., Nijkamp, P., & Huggins, R. (2021). Firm survival as a function of individual and local uncertainties: An application of Shackle’s potential surprise function. Journal of Economic Issues, 55(1), 38–78. Ugur, M., & Vivarelli, M. (2021). Innovation, firm survival and productivity: The state of the art. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 30(5), 433–467. Watson, K. (2019). Stimulating entrepreneurial behaviour through start-up competitions: Current features of Provision in UK Higher Education Institutions. In M. McAdam, & J. Cunningham (Eds.), Entrepreneurial Behaviour. Palgrave Macmillan. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3- 030- 04402-2_6. Watson, K., & McGowan, P. (2019). Emergent perspectives toward the business plan among nascent entrepreneur start-up competition participants. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 26(3), 421–440. Watson, K., McGowan, P., & Cunningham, J. (2018). An exploration of the business plan competition as a methodology for effective nascent entrepreneurial learning. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 24(1), 121–146. Wooldridge, J. M. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. The MIT Press, United States. YouTube (2021). The idea of the Year 2021. Available from https:// youtu. be/ EOCWV j2XpG0. Accessed on 4th August 2021. Zoellner, M., Fritsch, M., & Wyrwich, M. (2018). An evaluation of german active labour market policies: A review of the empiri- cal evidence. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, 7(4), 377–410. Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 12 of 12 Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Springer Journals

A note on the effects of start-up competitions: experience from the Czech Business Plan Contest “Idea of the Year”

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/a-note-on-the-effects-of-start-up-competitions-experience-from-the-2aK1H132W0

References (49)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2023
eISSN
2192-5372
DOI
10.1186/s13731-023-00282-3
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

ondrej.dvoulety@vse.cz The study contributes to the scholarly discussion on the effects of business plan Department of Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Business competitions by assessing the survival and performance of the entrepreneurial teams Administration, Prague University participating in the Czech Business Plan Contest “Idea of the Year” during the years of Economics and Business, W. 2010–2015. The implemented research design followed up with the finalists, receiv- Churchill Sq. 4, 13067 Prague 3, Czech Republic ing financial and non-financial rewards 5 years after participating in the contest. The implemented scientific methods include mainly survival analysis and applied statisti- cal techniques, such as cross-tabulations, tests of association, t-tests and correlation analysis. The obtained results allowed us to empirically support a hypothesis assuming that participation in the business plan contest positively relates to new venture crea- tion, start-up survival, and performance. The study provides a series of recommenda- tions for the contest’s organizers, especially in terms of evaluation and monitoring and encouraging the projects’ diversity. The added value for the international scholarship is that the article utilizes a complex theoretical framework combining various types of entrepreneurial capital that may be well used in future studies aiming to assess the impacts of start-up competitions. Keywords: Start-up contest, Business plan competition, Entrepreneurship and SME policy, Entrepreneurial ecosystem, Firm survival, Czech Republic Introduction Start-up, pitching, and business plan competitions are undoubtedly part of the so-called entrepreneurial ecosystem concept, shaping broader cultural, social, economic and institutional surroundings of entrepreneurs and persons engaged in self-employment (O’Connor et  al., 2018; Watson, 2019; Stolz, 2020; Smith & Muldoon, 2021; Adam & Alarifi, 2021; Carayannis et  al., 2021). Building on a seminal study on entrepreneurial ecosystem pillars by Stam (2015), Stolz (2020) notes that start-up competitions (SUC) combine several aspects of the ecosystem and mobilize numerous different actors. Therefore, those belong to both framework and systematic conditions, contributing in several ways thus to the overall quality of the ecosystem. Furthermore, Stolz (2020, p. 242) highlights the role of start-up competitions as the hub, which connects nascent entrepreneurs with other individuals willing to pursue a business with experts and © The Author(s) 2023. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the mate- rial. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/. Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 2 of 12 professionals and boosts the networking of experts and professionals as well. Besides, Passaro et al. (2017) add that start-up competitions increase awareness about entrepre- neurial learning processes and increase the prestige of business careers in the whole society. Past research concentrated on multiple dimensions of the phenomenon since the first start-up competitions originated at Babson College, Massachusetts, United States of America (Fetters et  al., 2010). Watson (2019) explains that since then, there have been various terms associated with start-up competitions, such as “business plan contests, business planning competitions, enterprise challenges, idea challenges, pitching com- petitions, competitions, enterprise challenges, idea challenges, pitching competitions, business design competitions, business idea competitions, business venture competi- tions” (Watson, 2019, p. 121). However, according to Watson (2019), the parameters of these events are somewhat similar. In brief, these regional, national and international activities aim to select teams with the best business proposals and support them with a maximum of financial and non-financial resources to boost their endeavour (der Foo et al., 2005; Schwartz et al., 2013; Boulocher-Passet et al., 2019; Joseph et al., 2021; Smith & Muldoon, 2021; Saripah et al., 2022). Tipu (2019) conducted a survey of the previously published literature and provided a structural overview of 22 studies. Tipu’s (2019) lit- erature review article demonstrates that the previous research on business competitions focused mainly on the structure, conditions, judging process, and benefits for partici - pants rather than assessing their impact on the participating teams. Another review out- come is that the current evidence is mainly driven by the British and American context, neglecting findings from emerging and developing countries (Tipu, 2019). The need to monitor the participating teams after the contests was articulated already by several scholars (Watson & McGowan, 2019; Tipu, 2019; Stolz, 2021), especially regarding the survival rates, finance acquiring, official business start-up, and perfor - mance. However yet, not many studies have addressed the issue empirically, primar- ily due to a lack of data. One recent exception is Kiesel and Harkiolakis’s (2021) study, which provided emerging observations from German teams participating in the business plan competition between the years 1999 and 2018. While the authors observed positive outcomes concerning networking for the most successful projects, they could not prove an association with the future success of the participating start-ups. These ambiguous findings are not favourable for the organizers of the contests. Thus, it is critical to extend the previous results and see if the German case was an exception or if the evidence from other countries is similar. We contribute to the body of knowledge on the effects of business plan competitions by evaluating the Czech Business Plan Contest “Idea of the Year” (2021), the country’s longest-lasting business plan competition. The Czech Republic is a small open Euro - pean economy with a long tradition of entrepreneurship and higher levels of entrepre- neurial activity (Lukeš, 2017; Čemerková et  al., 2017; Pavlák & Petrů, 2018; Dvouletý, 2019; Dvorský et  al., 2020; Hamplová et  al., 2021; Peterková et  al., 2022). We follow up with the best-graded finalists 5 years after the contest. We investigate the projects’ survival and the newly established firms’ financial performance, measured as sales and assets growth. More formally, the current research study seeks to answer the following D vouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 3 of 12 research question “What are the impacts of the business plan contest on project survival and newly established venture performance?” The study follows up with the finalists 5 years after the contest. The evaluation focuses on the project’s survival, the role of the selected team’s characteristics and the newly established firm’s financial performance. We proceed by pointing out the fundamental theories, shaping the process of business plan competitions and start-up performance. Then, the contest “Idea of the Year” and the data sources are introduced, followed by the start-up survival and performance analyses. The final section concludes with implica - tions for the business plan competitions organizers and research community. Theoretical considerations and hypothesis development Depending on the start-up competition organizers (university vs. non-academic entities) and expected outcomes (networking of actors, acquiring entrepreneurial skills, business start-up, and project visibility), the scholars utilize several theoretical approaches (Tipu, 2019, Stolz, 2021). As a common ground, we may use the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991; Neneh, 2019), assuming that individuals willing to pursue a business are closer to becoming entrepreneurs by taking any small step related somehow to entrepre- neurship. Business plan competition might be thus a crucial event, activating an individ- ual intending to start a business to actually decide to officially start a business (Passaro et al., 2017). Furthermore, researchers (Schwartz et  al., 2013; Watson et  al., 2018; Smith & Mul- doon, 2021) explain that participation in the contest, which may also be understood as an experiential learning technique, provides teams with a unique opportunity to present and defend their business idea in front of the judges, to make sense of their own project and increase their self-confidence. This agrees with the previous literature on nascent entrepreneurial learning (Karataş-Özkan, 2011). Even the best ideas, praised by the juries, cannot be transformed into real business companies without the proper resources, classified into physical, human, social (rela - tionship) and financial capital (Colombo & Grilli, 2010; Kellermanns et al., 2016; Drover et  al., 2017). By adapting the theoretical lenses of the resource-based view (RBV) on entrepreneurship (see, Kellermanns et  al., 2016, for details), we assume that the busi- ness plan competition may provide individuals with the missing resources. It enables them to set up the business officially, increase its chance to survive, and boost its per - formance. Depending on the contest’s conditions, the participants can attain financial capital through financial rewards or direct funding offers from the judges, often inves - tors themselves, and get the crucial initial investment to start up (Watson et al., 2018). Similarly, the social (relationship) capital could be enhanced, by the increased project’s visibility, providing the team with opportunities for networking with established ven- tures, suppliers, investors and (potential) customers (Passaro et  al., 2017). Some com- petitions even provide winners with physical rewards (equipment) or free office space at the entrepreneurial infrastructure (incubators, accelerators, coworking spaces), giving a team an actual place where they can do business and benefit from the start-up cul - ture (Schwartz et al., 2013; Dvouletý et al., 2018). Working closely with the mentors and benefitting from the variety of advisory services and training, the founders learn new Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 4 of 12 skills, acquire new knowledge and increase their experience with the start-up scene, thus improving their human capital (Russell et al., 2008; Watson, 2019). Therefore, it is relevant to ask how these considerable investments into resources shape the entrepreneurial endeavour. Thus, we ask our main research question: What impacts does the business plan contest have on project survival and newly established venture performance? By using the lenses of the resource-based view (RBV) on entre- preneurship, we set up the following hypothesis, linked with the business plan contest’s goal, to be tested in our study: H1: Participation in the business plan contest is positively related to the venture crea- tion, start-up survival and its performance. Contest “Idea of the Year” and the data sources The contest “Idea of the Year” (2021) is the longest-lasting business plan competition in the Czech Republic, which started back in 2007. The main partners have been chang - ing until 2011, when Vodafone, a telco company, joined the competition’s board and remained the leading (titular) partner until now. The contest focuses on business ideas and early-stage start-ups, who may compete in several categories (e.g., start-up of the year, best technological project, best student team) for tangible prizes, learning work- shops, mentoring and financial investment up to 3.75 mils. EUR. The applicants need to deliver several materials, particularly a power-point presentation, an executive summary of the project, a video of a maximum of 30 s and a structured business plan. Templates and learning materials are available on the website of the competition. From all applica- tions (usually a few dozen), the top 30 projects are selected, and teams are invited for an elevator pitch. Out of these, the top 10 projects (but sometimes even 14) are invited for the mentoring day, having assigned a mentor, helping them prepare the best pitch, work on their product and enhance the business plan. During the final elevator pitch, judges consisting of corporate sector managers, venture capital representatives, business angels, successful entrepreneurs, lawyers and journalists assign rankings and select the contest winner. It is crucial to note that each of the finalists is rewarded (seed money, advisory services, vouchers for web hosting, software, mentoring, marketing services, etc.), and the results are announced at the annual ceremony, which is also live-streamed and published on YouTube and other channels (Idea of the Year, 2021, YouTube, 2021). The selection process and the categories of rewards are very similar to other contests across the globe (Watson, 2019; Stolz, 2021; Smith et al., 2022), for example, compared to the annual B.E.T.A. (Babson Entrepreneurial Thought & Action , 2022) contest, awarding winners with 28,000 USD plus additional sponsored services or United King- dom university-based start-up competitions (Entrepreneur Handbook, 2022), such as Smarter Future Programme Shell LiveWIRE Awards offering start-up grants up to 5000 GBP or The Sirius Programme providing funding awards up to 35,000 GBP. Therefore, we work with the most promising projects–finalists, which may be extracted from the contest’s website (Idea of the Year, 2021), who are expected to ben- efit most from participation in the tournament. We combine this information with the available data from the internet, the Czech Business Register (2021) and the commercial database of financial records of the Czech businesses named Magnus Web, provided by Bisnode (2021) company. Given our interest in the long-term effects of the competition, D vouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 5 of 12 we worked with the finalist’s data starting from 2010, when Vodafone company joined the contest and monitored them for 5 years. The evaluation included the latest finalists from 2015. This selection was motivated mainly by the data availability, as secondary data for the competing teams needed to be available at least partially for 2021. Methods and results The study follows up with the finalists 5 years after the contest. The evaluation focuses on the project’s official registration as a business and its survival, the role of the selected team’s characteristics and the newly established firm’s financial performance. The usage of scientific methods includes mainly applied statistical techniques such as summary statistics, cross-tabulations with Chi-square tests of association, Cramer’s V, t-tests and calculation of correlation coefficients. We begin by exploring the official registration of the finalist’s projects. Out of the 68 projects we managed to find on the internet (including a search on the project’s websites and the Czech Business Register, 2021) that 66.2% of the finalist managed to start the business officially in the Czech Republic, Slovakia or another European country. After that, we were interested in whether any available characteristics impact the legal business start-up. We used the Chi-square association test to reveal if gender diversity (at least one female project member included) increases the chance of official incorpora - tion. Only 16.2% of projects had at least one woman in their team, and we failed to find any support for this relationship (Chi-square’s p-value = 0.85). Furthermore, we distin- guished between solo owner’s projects and projects having more than one project mem- ber. However, we found no statistical support for this association either (Chi-square’s p-value = 0.87). We also checked whether the incorporation rate is tightened with the contest’s year, and yes, we observed a statistically significant relationship (Chi-square’s p-value < 0.046; Cramer’s V = 0.4). It looks like, especially after the initial 2 years, the incorporation rate has increased notably, as shown in Table 1. The study proceeds by presenting the findings of the survival analysis. We con - ducted another round of searches on the internet and in the Czech Business Register (2021) to see whether the projects were still active. We searched for adverse events related to cash-flow problems, discontinuity in providing services and product deliv - ery and official firm bankruptcy records. We followed up with the newly established Table 1 Association between contest’s year and the incorporation (N = 68) Contest’s year/incorporation No (%) Yes (%) Total projects (%) 2010 50.0 50.0 14.7 2011 58.3 41.7 17.7 2012 35.7 64.3 20.6 2013 0.0 100.0 14.7 2014 40.0 60.0 14.7 2015 16.7 83.3 17.6 Total 33.8 66.2 100.0 Source:Own calculations based on the Czech Business Register (2021) and Idea of the Year (2021) data Test of association, Chi-square = 11.3, p-value < 0.046, Cramer’s V = 0.4 Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 6 of 12 T+1: 98.8% T+3: 88.9% T+5: 88.9% Active start-ups Active start-ups Active start-ups T+2: 95.6% T+4: 88.9% Contest´sYear Active start-ups Active start-ups Fig. 1 Start-up survival analysis (N = 45). Source: Own calculations based on the Czech Business Register (2021) and Idea of the Year (2021) data Table 2 The legal form of the start-ups Legal form N Frequency (%) Limited liabilities company 33 80.49 Joint stock company 4 9.76 Self-employed 3 7.32 Non-profit organization 1 2.44 Total 41 100.00 Source: Own elaboration based on Bisnode’s (2021) data organizations in five-time windows, year by year after the contest, with a maximum of 5 years. Figure 1 shows the obtained findings. It shows that the survival rate declined by up to 3 years. Then it became relatively stable for up to 5 years, delivering informa - tion that 88.9% of start-ups were active 5 years from the competition event. Given the lack of data on international businesses, we reduced the sample to the companies doing business in the Czech Republic (N = 41). At the time of business incorporation, almost half of the business owners started on their own (46.3%), fol- lowed by those having two co-owners (41.5%). However, there were also projects co- owned by four people. We also found that more than half of the teams (58.5%) had a person with a university education in their group. The vast majority of the firms were set up as limited liabilities companies (80.5%). For details, visit Table 2. The main activity of the start-ups was also not too diversified. Table  3 reports on the main economic activity of the established businesses. Almost one-third of the projects were active in computer programming, consultancy and related activities, followed by companies focused on wholesale, and a significant number of teams were engaged in the manufacturing of different types of products (31.7%). All these characteristics may determine whether the project survives the initial years. The most appropriate approach would be to implement the logistic regression analysis combined with the Cox proportional hazard function estimation (Tubadji et  al., 2021; Ugur & Vivarelli, 2021). Unfortunately, given the relatively low number of observations (N = 41), we cannot estimate a statistically robust multivariate regres- sion model (Wooldridge, 2002). Thus we need to rely on less rigorous but hopefully still valuable correlation analysis, providing information on the role of selected deter- minants on start-up survival. Mainly, we concentrate on the association with the start-up team size, founder’s university education, legal form, regional affiliation and classification of the economic activity. The estimated bivariate correlation coefficients with firm survival in the fifth year are presented in Table  4. Most of the obtained cor- relations are statistically insignificant. Still, we find empirical support at least for the D vouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 7 of 12 Table 3 The main activity of the start-ups, according to NACE-2 Rev. classification Main activity N Frequency (%) Computer programming, consultancy and related activities 13 31.71 Agents involved in the wholesale 6 14.63 Advertising agencies 2 4.88 Construction of residential and non-residential buildings 2 4.88 Repair of fabricated metal products, machinery and equipment 1 2.44 Manufacture of electronic components 1 2.44 Manufacture of other electrical equipment 1 2.44 Manufacture of games and toys 1 2.44 Manufacture of glass and glass products 1 2.44 Manufacture of wood and of products of wood and cork, except furniture; manufacture of 1 2.44 articles of straw and plaiting materials Manufacture of wearing apparel 1 2.44 Other manufacturing n.e.c. 1 2.44 Retail trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles 1 2.44 Non-specialized wholesale trade 1 2.44 Renting and operating of own or leased real estate 1 2.44 Accommodation and food service activities 1 2.44 Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing activities 1 2.44 Other education n.e.c. 2 4.88 Other professional, scientific and technical activities n.e.c. 2 4.88 Activities of organizations to improve the status of an ethnic, minority or other specific 1 2.44 groups Total 41 100.00 Source: Own calculations based on Bisnode’s (2021) and Idea of the Year (2021) data Table 4 Correlation analysis of factors impacting start-up survival after 5 years (N = 41) Variable Correlation coefficient Number of founders − 0.06 At least one founder has a university degree (BSc./MSc./MBA or equivalent) 0.06 Limited liabilities company 0.22 Joint stock company 0.11 Self-employed − 0.22 Non-profit organization 0.05 Hradec Kralove Region − 0.48* Advertising agencies − 0.33* Source: Own calculations based on Bisnode’s (2021) and Idea of the Year (2021) data *Denominates statistical significance at 10%. Regional and sectoral correlation coefficients are included only if statistically significant for parsimonious reasons role of the firm’s geographical location, and we further observe that advertising agen - cies indicate a lower survival rate. The last section deals with the financial performance of the start-ups. We work with limited data on the overall firm size, measured as total assets (N = 19) and total sales (N = 17). Both variables are denominated in thousands of Czech crowns—CZK. We aim to observe whether the start-ups increased their performance over time. Therefore, we compare financial data in the first year with the records in the 5 years as absolute and Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 8 of 12 Table 5 Summary statistics for financial growth variables after 5 years of start-up’s activity Indicator Median Minimum Maximum N Total assets (difference) 463.0 − 6367.0 54,472.0 19 Total assets (% growth) 137.8 − 98.7 18,315.4 19 Total sales (difference) 715.0 − 3835.0 46,847.0 17 Total sales (% growth) 156.1 − 100.0 707,100.0 15  Source: own calculations based on Bisnode’s (2021) data Table 6 Results of the paired t-tests comparing the financial performance of start-ups after 5 years Total assets Mean Standard error N t-Statistics Total assets (5th year) 7056.68 3678.76 19 1.67 Total assets (1st year) 2062.37 891.22 19p-value (H : difference > 0) Difference 4994.32* 2999.18 19 0.06 Total sales Mean Standard error N t-Statistics Total sales (5th year) 6387.65 3619.23 17 1.50 Total sales (1st year) 2143.24 1080.83 17p-value (H : difference > 0) Difference 4244.41* 2828.76 17 0.08 Source: Own calculations based on Bisnode’s (2021) and Idea of the Year (2021) data *Denominates statistical significance at 10% relative differences. We also formally test whether the changes are statistically significant with the help of paired t-tests. Given the relatively high variability in the data, we begin with the median values of indicators. The relative growth in median values (see Table  5) indicates that total assets increased by 1.4 times and total sales almost 1.6 times. The positive difference in the absolute changes in both variables is statistically supported by t-tests available in Table 6. At the 10% level of statistical significance, we conclude that the start-up’s prop - erty and sales have significantly increased over five years. However, we acknowledge that the number of available observations was relatively low, representing only 46.3% (41.5%, respectively) of the Czech start-ups, making this analysis a notable limitation. Discussion and concluding remarks Several researchers have recently mentioned a call for assessment of the effects of busi - ness plan competitions (Watson & McGowan, 2019; Tipu, 2019; Stolz, 2021). This research contributed to this call by evaluating the effects of the Czech contest “Idea of the Year” (2021), the country’s longest-lasting business plan competition. By combining theoretical approaches of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB), entrepreneurial learn- ing and resource-based view (RBV) on entrepreneurship, we formulated a hypothesis assuming that participation in the business plan contest is positively related to venture creation, start-up survival and its performance. D vouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 9 of 12 The conducted research followed up with the finalists, receiving financial and non- financial rewards five years after participating in the contest. We found that 66.2% of the finalists started the business in the Czech Republic, Slovakia or another European coun - try. Furthermore, we observe that 88.9% of the registered start-ups were still active on the market five years after the competition. For those businesses we managed to obtain financial data, we report that their financial performance, measured in terms of total sales and total assets, has increased significantly. These results together allow us to sup - port the stated hypothesis’s validity empirically. Different types of obtained resources raise physical, human, social and financial capital, which entrepreneurial teams utilize to boost their business activities (Kellermanns et al., 2016). Therefore, the theoretical approach combining various types of entrepreneurial capital may be well used in the forthcoming studies aiming to assess the effects of start-up com - petitions on the subsequent performance of the winning teams. As business plan com- petitions usually deliver different kinds of rewards and resources, it may also be relevant to investigate which rewards most significantly impact the subsequent survival and per - formance of the winning teams’ projects. However, it is necessary to acknowledge that these rewards are often determined by the partners and sponsors of the event, so the organizers have limited power to change them. Furthermore, we must mention the limitations and challenges of the conducted study. The lack of valid empirical data potentially useful for the analysis is striking. Based on the judges’ ranking, we worked only with the finalists of the competitions, i.e. with those who had the highest chance to succeed on the market. Even for this small group of start- ups, the number of observations of available observations was tiny. The competition organizers should promptly address this issue, as it can deliver excellent information on what is happening with the projects after the contest is over. The previous researchers have well-addressed the monitoring indicators and included information about the busi- ness incorporation, its survival and performance over time (Tipu, 2019; Stolz, 2021; Kie- sel & Harkiolakis, 2021), as demonstrated in this study. Nevertheless, there are also other relevant outcomes to be tracked, such as obtain- ing additional funding from investors, scaling up their business idea to the international markets (Schwartz et  al., 2013; Tipu, 2019) or increasing the team’s human capital and entrepreneurial skills (Russell et al., 2008; Watson, 2019). We strongly encourage organ- izers of the Czech Business Plan Contest “Idea of the Year” to observe what happens with the projects on an annual basis to obtain a more structured and reliable overview of what is happening with the teams and projects over time (Zoellner et  al., 2018; da Cunha & Arvate, 2021). Undoubtedly, focusing on the finalists’ success stories and shar - ing them could increase the contest’s prestige in the entrepreneurial ecosystem. More advanced research methods could be employed with more information about the project participants, such as counterfactual impact evaluation or analyses of start-up team sur- vival and performance determinants (Dvouletý et  al., 2018, 2022; Tubadji et  al., 2021). Furthermore, we suggest the organizers encourage wider teams’ diversity, particularly regarding gender (special call for women projects), age (encouragement of senior entre- preneurship), and primary sectoral orientation. The analysed data showed that computer programming, consultancy, and related activities significantly dominated the pool of participating teams (see also insights from Keiretsu Forum, 2021); perhaps engagement Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 10 of 12 in other business activities could enrich the contest and its culture (Der Foo et al., 2005; Tipu, 2019). Acknowledgements Not applicable. Author contributions The author read and approved final manuscript. Author’s information Ondřej Dvouletý is an Associate Professor at the Department of Entrepreneurship, Prague University of Economics and Business. His research focuses on the heterogeneity of self-employment, entrepreneurship and SME policy evaluation, and entrepreneurial economics. Ondřej’s research has been published in leading academic journals, such as Small Busi- ness Economics, Journal of Small Business Management, European Journal of Innovation Management and Interna- tional Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research. He also actively contributes to the development of the academic community. Ondřej is Associate Editor of the Journal of Small Business Management, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, and Central European Business Review. He is also active in other professional organizations. He is a member of the Committee for socio-economic development, which is a part of the Czech Government Council for Sustainable Development. He also closely cooperates with the Evaluation Unit of the Czech Ministry of Regional Devel- opment as an expert in statistics, econometrics, data analytics, and economics. Funding Not applicable. Availability of data and materials Data were purchased from the external supplier and, thus, cannot be published together with the article. Declarations Competing interests The author declares having no conflicts of interest. Received: 23 February 2022 Accepted: 4 March 2023 References Adam, N. A., & Alarifi, G. (2021). Innovation practices for survival of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the COVID-19 times: The role of external support. Journal of innovation and entrepreneurship, 10(1), 1–22. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179–211. ® ® Babson Entrepreneurial Thought & Action . (2022). B.E.T.A. (Babson Entrepreneurial Thought & Action ). https:// entre prene urship. babson. edu/ beta- chall enge- winne rs- 2022/. Accessed on 7th October 2022. Bisnode. (2021). MagnusWeb Database. Bisnode, Czech Republic. https:// magnu sweb. bisno de. cz/. Accessed on 10th August Boulocher-Passet, V., Daly, P., & Ruaud, S. (2019). Merci Handy: From start-up to born-global? The International Journal of Entre- preneurship and Innovation, 20(4), 301–309. Carayannis, E., Del Giudice, M., Tarba, S., & Soto-Acosta, P. (2021). Building entrepreneurial ecosystems: Exploring ambidexterity in technology and engineering management. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 68(2), 347–349. Colombo, M. G., & Grilli, L. (2010). On growth drivers of high-tech start-ups: Exploring the role of founders’ human capital and venture capital. Journal of business venturing, 25(6), 610–626. Czech Business Register (2021). Searching for a business subject. Available from https:// www. rzp. cz/ cgi- bin/ eng/ aps_ cache WEB. sh? VSS_ SERV= ZVWSB JFND Accessed on 7th August 2021. Čemerková, Š., Šebestová, J., Biznesu, W. S., & Górnicza, D. (Eds.). (2017). Innovation Activities and human factor in Modern Busi- ness: Measurement, results and impact. Scientific Publishing of the University in Dąbrowa Górnicza. da Cunha, G. G., & Arvate, P. (2021). Fostering entrepreneurship: The crucial role of monitoring schemes. Journal of Entrepre- neurship and Public Policy, 10(4), 527–554. Der Foo, M., Wong, P. K., & Ong, A. (2005). Do others think you have a viable business idea? Team diversity and judges’ evalua- tion of ideas in a business plan competition. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3), 385–402. Drover, W., Busenitz, L., Matusik, S., Townsend, D., Anglin, A., & Dushnitsky, G. (2017). A review and road map of entrepreneurial equity financing research: Venture capital, corporate venture capital, angel investment, crowdfunding, and accelerators. Journal of management, 43(6), 1820–1853. Dvorský, J., Ključnikov, A., & Polách, J. (2020). Business risks and their impact on business future concerning the entrepreneur’s experience with business bankruptcy: Case of Czech Republic. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 18(2), 418–430. Dvouletý, O. (2019). Entrepreneurial activity in the Czech Republic over the years 2005–2017. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology Market and Complexity, 5(3), 38. Dvouletý, O., Blažková, I., Ratinger, T., Agyemang, S. A., & Čadil, V. (2022). Experience with the application of quantitative (coun- terfactual) methods for evaluating the economic impacts of the business research and development (R&D) support in the Czech Republic. Economics Management Innovation, 14(2), 21–27. D vouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 11 of 12 Dvouletý, O., Longo, M. C., Blažková, I., Lukeš, M., & Andera, M. (2018). Are publicly funded Czech incubators effective? The comparison of performance of supported and non-supported firms. European Journal of Innovation Management, 21(4), 543–563. Entrepreneur Handbook (2022). Business Competitions and Awards in the UK. Available from https:// entre prene urhan dbook. co. uk/ compe titio ns- award/. Accessed on 7th October 2022. Fetters, M. L., Greene, P. G., & Rice, M. P. (2010). Babson college. In M. L. Fetters, P. G. Greene, & M. P. Rice (Eds.), The development of university-based entrepreneurship ecosystems (pp. 15–44). Edward Elgar. Hamplová, E., Bal-Domańska, B., & Provazníková, K. (2021). Business activity and its concentration in the Czech Republic and Poland in the years 2018–2020. In J. Maci, P. Maresova, K. Firlej, & I. Soukal (Eds.), Hradec Economic Days (pp. 217–224). University of Hradec Králové. Idea of the Year (2021). Idea of the Year - The oldest start-up competition in Czech Republic. Available from https:// napad roku. cz/ en/ Accessed on 4th August 2021. Joseph, C., Hossen, R., Rahmat, M., Noyem, J. A., & Ho, V. B. (2021). Exploring the readiness for business proposal pitching video activity using the competition-based Learning Model among Accounting Students. International Business Education Journal, 14(2), 13–24. Karataş-Özkan, M. (2011). Understanding relational qualities of entrepreneurial learning: Towards a multi-layered approach. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 23(9–10), 877–906. Keiretsu Forum (2021). START_UP Report 2019_2020. Available from https:// media. wix. com/ ugd/ c955a9_ 382f2 91fff e642c 68950 6b1d6 b6944 49. pdf. Accessed on 7th August 2021. Kellermanns, F., Walter, J., Crook, T. R., Kemmerer, B., & Narayanan, V. (2016). The resource-based view in entrepreneurship: A content‐analytical comparison of researchers’ and entrepreneurs’ views. Journal of Small Business Management, 54(1), 26–48. Kiesel, S., & Harkiolakis, N. (2021). Findings from 20 years of business plan competitions in North-Bavaria. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies, 12(1), 42–62. Lukeš, M. (2017). Entrepreneurship development in the Czech Republic. In A. Sauka, & A. Chepurenko (Eds.), Entrepreneurship in transition economies (pp. 209–224). Springer. Neneh, B. N. (2019). From entrepreneurial intentions to behavior: The role of anticipated regret and proactive personality. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 112, 311–324. O’Connor, A., Stam, E., Sussan, F., & Audretsch, D. B. (2018). Entrepreneurial ecosystems. Place-based transformations and transi- tions. Springer. Passaro, R., Quinto, I., & Thomas, A. (2017). Start-up competitions as learning environment to foster the entrepreneurial pro- cess. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 23(3), 426–445. Pavlák, M., & Petrů, N. (2018). Start-up ecosystem support in the Czech Republic. Economic Studies & Analyses/Acta VSFS, 12(2), 165–190. Peterková, J., Czerná, K., & Zimmermannová, J. (2022). Innovation Ecosystem in Selected Regions of the Czech Republic and Poland: Specifics of Infrastructure Supporting Innovative Entrepreneurship. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice, Series D: Faculty of Economics and Administration, 30(1), 1550. Russell, R., Atchison, M., & Brooks, R. (2008). Business plan competitions in tertiary institutions: Encouraging entrepreneurship education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30(2), 123–138. Saripah, I., Lestari, R. D., Putra, A., & Mutamam, M. H. A. (2022). Mentoring model of business plan competition program in improving social entrepreneurship. Journal of Nonformal Education, 8(1), 106–112. Schwartz, M., Goethner, M., Michelsen, C., & Waldmann, N. (2013). Start-up competitions as an instrument of entrepreneurship policy: The German experience. European Planning Studies, 21(10), 1578–1597. Smith, D., & Muldoon, J. (2021). Covid-19 and its impact on venture pitching competitions in higher education: a case study. Small Enterprise Research,1–12. Smith, D., Muldoon, J., & Lakshmikanth, G. S. (2022). The need for modification: The impact of COVID-19 on pitch competi- tions.entrepreneurship education and pedagogy, 25151274221079119. Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: A sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1759–1769. Stolz, L. (2020). Startup competitions and their role in entrepreneurial ecosystems: A conceptual attempt. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, 64(4), 233–246. Tipu, S. A. A. (2019). Business plan competitions in developed and emerging economies: What do we still need to know? Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 11(1), 81–97. Tubadji, A., Nijkamp, P., & Huggins, R. (2021). Firm survival as a function of individual and local uncertainties: An application of Shackle’s potential surprise function. Journal of Economic Issues, 55(1), 38–78. Ugur, M., & Vivarelli, M. (2021). Innovation, firm survival and productivity: The state of the art. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 30(5), 433–467. Watson, K. (2019). Stimulating entrepreneurial behaviour through start-up competitions: Current features of Provision in UK Higher Education Institutions. In M. McAdam, & J. Cunningham (Eds.), Entrepreneurial Behaviour. Palgrave Macmillan. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3- 030- 04402-2_6. Watson, K., & McGowan, P. (2019). Emergent perspectives toward the business plan among nascent entrepreneur start-up competition participants. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 26(3), 421–440. Watson, K., McGowan, P., & Cunningham, J. (2018). An exploration of the business plan competition as a methodology for effective nascent entrepreneurial learning. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 24(1), 121–146. Wooldridge, J. M. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. The MIT Press, United States. YouTube (2021). The idea of the Year 2021. Available from https:// youtu. be/ EOCWV j2XpG0. Accessed on 4th August 2021. Zoellner, M., Fritsch, M., & Wyrwich, M. (2018). An evaluation of german active labour market policies: A review of the empiri- cal evidence. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, 7(4), 377–410. Dvouletý Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (2023) 12:14 Page 12 of 12 Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Journal

Journal of Innovation and EntrepreneurshipSpringer Journals

Published: Mar 9, 2023

Keywords: Start-up contest; Business plan competition; Entrepreneurship and SME policy; Entrepreneurial ecosystem; Firm survival; Czech Republic; H81; J68; L26; L53

There are no references for this article.