ARE START-UP ECOSYSTEMS THE SAME? TYPOLOGY OF START-UP
CITIES IN THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC
Marek Lavčák
Oto Hudec
The faculty of Economics at The Technical University of Košice
ABSTRACT
Following the year 2000, start-up movements expanded from the USA to Europe. The
form of innovative entrepreneurship based on the principles of problem-solving, taking
needs of common consumers into account by means of innovations, has become
generational and reached young people all over Europe. One of the specific features of
start-up entrepreneurship is represented by the networking of actors as well as the
tendency to cluster people into interest groups or even communities. The ever increasing
significance of this phenomenon leads to the need to investigate the process of local
entrepreneurship and start-up communities’ formation, also as a part of more extensive
ecosystems and support infrastructure.
The main aim of this paper is to identify the most important centres of start-up communities
in the Slovak cities and to identify the key factors that influence their formation, evolution
and specific features. The position of universities in the ecosystems is taken into
consideration following the experience of successful ecosystems formed at technological
universities in the USA. Investigation of the most significant personalities, institutes,
partner companies and activities brings the overview of natural relations and processes
that had influenced the development of the local support ecosystem of the key start-ups
in the selected cities. Based on the case studies considering the key start-up cities in the
Slovak Republic, we will identify the key environment factors affecting setting up new startup companies, to derive a typology of the cities and to consider the role of universities and
classify the ecosystems as interconnected/fragmented. Taking into account that in
Slovakia an entire concept of innovative entrepreneurship support was formed only a few
years ago, the analysis hereof may represent a significant contribution to identifying the
processes and strategies suitable for the formation of viable ecosystems that shall support
the starting start-ups and spin-offs.
JEL: L26, L31
KEYWORDS: start-up, ecosystem, community, entrepreneurship, Slovakia
INTRODUCTION
The concept of start-up has different interpretations, often even misused for designation of
any starting company. The leading personalities of the global start-up community share a similar
view on the start-up definition.
Paul Graham (investor and co-founder of Y-combinator) defines start-up (Graham, 2006)
as the company that has the potential to grow fast in a short period of time and requires various
forms of outside capital for the new company.
An entrepreneur, investor and educator Steve Blank (creator of Lean start-up methodology)
describes the term start-up (Blank, 2012) as a temporary organization used to search for a
repeatable and scalable business model. From his point of view, the established company is
then a permanent organization designed to apply and implement the tested repeatable business
model.
Eric Ries denotes start-up (Ries 2010) as a “human institution” developed in order to create
a new product or service regardless of the size or business activities of the organisation
emphasising the difference between the feasibility and the need of a certain product; making the
company able to ignore natural barriers existing in the large organisations and to aim at research
and development of new solutions or implementation of the existing solution in a new segment.
As a human institution hires creative employees and creates a corporate culture that brings
results. The value generated by the company is not set solely in the product itself but also in the
people who have created it.
Taking all the basic characteristic features of start-up companies identified by several
authors, we can identify the basic elements of start-up companies:

potential to grow fast (global ambitions),

initial stages of formation of companies and development of products are financed by
the outside capital,

flexible and repeatable business model (scalability),

newly developed or innovative product which observes mostly unmet needs,

team spirit, creativity and corporate culture represent the basic values of the company.
The difference is vivid in comparison to common business practises characterised by their
focus on the profit, reduction of production costs and a lack of scalability.
1
ORIGIN OF SILICON VALLEY PHENOMENON
In connection with start-up companies, the territory of Silicon Valley – the south region of
San Francisco Bay in the northern part of California in the USA should be mentioned. The name
was created around 1971 when the company Intel placed the first microprocessor on the market
and the USA got ahead of Japan in the technological development. One of the basic elements
used for the production of microprocessors, microchips and electronic components up to this
date is silicon. The name later becomes a metaphor for the whole electrical engineering industry.
Silicon Valley is currently a territory with the highest concentration of technological companies
and venture capital in the world, (according to Forbes, more than 50 billion USD was reinvested
in Silicon Valley, compared to 22.5 billion USD on the whole territory of Asian continent).
A.L. Saxenian points out the porousness of the boundaries between companies and
innovative inclusiveness of the region as the basic determinants of success (Saxenian, 1985).
Other present factors include technology-oriented universities with a long-standing tradition and
active connections to a large number of technology-oriented companies in the region.
Although other regions, cities and states strive for achieving the same success as Silicon
Valley, it is evident that even the phenomenon of Silicon Valley itself would not arise without
specific circumstances.
According to Isenberg, the key factors for success of Silicon Valley include:

strong local aerospace industry subsidized by the U.S. government,

the open California culture ensuring a high level of inclusiveness,

Stanford University’s supportive relationships with industry,

a mother lode of invention from Fairchild Semiconductor,

a liberal immigration policy toward doctoral students,

and pure “luck” in relation to the right combination of random events.
The specific factors are unlikely reproducible in other regions of the world. Regarding
the formation of ecosystems, it depends on the particular place, its characteristic and specific
features that make it unique (Isenberg, 2010, Baumol, 1990). However, some positive examples
of partial success include e.g. Tel Aviv since 1993 with no natural resources, military necessity,
and far from markets for its products; Berlin since 1997 thanks to transformation in business from
subsidized industry to developing advanced services; Madrid since 2005; Talin since 2006 owing
to the school reforms and massive support of IT. The main difference between these centres and
the Silicon Valley is the fact that the Silicon Valley was formed on a technological basis,
aerospace industry subsidized by the government as well as technological breakthrough related
to the discovery and launch of production of microchips by Intel. Other world centres have not
been
based
on
the
critical
discoveries
(Virgincom, 2014;
Startupblinkcom,
2015; Startupestoniaee, 2016).
2
ENTREPRENEURIAL ECOSYSTEMS
The importance of the environment for entrepreneurship and innovation business in the
form of start-up companies leads to underline the importance of an entrepreneurial ecosystem.
In biological terminology, the term ecosystem means a set of organisms and components
existing in a certain environment (applied when explaining the formation of the environment and
relationships among its components), the mutual relationships among the components of the
ecosystem as well as the relationships between components and the environment. This
approach may be used in the economic terminology and of the entrepreneurial environment. In
general, an entrepreneurial ecosystem (Feld, 2012) should comply with nine attributes listed in
the following table.
Table 1 Nine attributes of entrepreneurial ecosystem
Attribute
Description
Leadership
Strong group of entrepreneurs who are visible, accessible and
committed to the region being a great place to start and grow company.
Intermediaries
Many well-respected mentors and advisors giving back across all
stages, sectors, demographics and geographies as well as a solid
presence of effective, visible and well-integrated incubators and
accelerators.
Network density
Deep well-connected community of start-ups and entrepreneurs along
with engaged and visible investors, advisors, mentors and supporters.
Government
Strong government support for and understanding of start-ups to
economic growth.
Talent
Broad, deep talent pool for all levels of employees in all sectors and
areas of expertise. Universities are an excellent resource for star-up
talent and should be well connected to community.
Support services
Professional services (legal, accounting, real estate, insurance and
consulting) are integrated, accessible, effective and appropriately
priced.
Engagement
Large number of events entrepreneurs and community to connect, with
highly visible and authentic participants (e.g. meet-ups, pitch days, startup weekend, boot camps, hackathons and competitions)
Companies
Large companies that are the anchor of a city should create specific
departments and programmes to encourage cooperation with highgrowth start-ups.
Capital
Strong, dense and supportive community of venture capitalists and other
types of investors.
Source : (Feld 2012)
Although there is hardly any general guide to formation of the entrepreneurial ecosystem, it is
worth to mention principles recommended to public leaders when forming a vibrant ecosystem
(Isenberg, 2010):
To emphasize the role of local conditions and bottom-up processes (to shape the
ecosystem to local conditions instead of emulating Silicon Valley, to engage the private sector
from the start and to help to grow new ventures organically),
To emphasize ambitious entrepreneurship (to favour the high potentials and celebrate
successes),
To emphasize institution (to reform legal, bureaucratic and regulatory frameworks and change
a deeply ingrained culture).
The ecosystem attributes (Feld, 2012) as well as its building principles (Isenberg, 2010) explain
why any start-up ecosystem is significantly predefined by the local conditions it grows up. The
entrepreneurial ecosystem concepts emphasize a cultural change, leadership and close links
within the community of interdependent actors. Functioning ecosystem should ensure all the
relevant sources (talent, services, support, capital, etc.) to its associates and vice versa.
3
COMMUNITY
Professional communities represent specific groups of people sharing an interest in business,
technology trends and experience with global projects which improve their knowledge by meeting
and communicating with each other. (Learninglandscapes.ca 2016). Members do not
necessarily have to work together in one place on a daily basis. On the other hand, an endeavour
to share day-to-day experience and formation of synergy effects support the persisting trend of
shared working spaces (co-working centres) for starting technology-oriented companies, which
combine collaborative ideas and strong community nature. Such communities represent an ideal
space for sharing tacit knowledge, explaining why they are pinpointed in the theory of local startup community formation. (Wenger et al., 2002).
Feld (2012) considers community as a centre of the ecosystem and based on his
experience from Silicon Valley applied when working with the community of entrepreneurs in a
small town of Boulder in Colorado, he compiled a thesis with four pillars to form a viable start-up
community:
1. Entrepreneurs must lead start-up community,
2. The leaders have a long-term commitment,
3. Inclusiveness of anyone who wants to participate in it,
4. Continual activities that engage the entire entrepreneurial stack.
Transfer and distribution of knowledge are therefore one of the key tasks the community and
ecosystems shall provide with their members. Industries are relying on specific knowledge and
innovation input that affect the innovation processes (Asheim and Vang, 2005). The knowledge
base distinction takes into account knowledge-creating processes as it looks at the interplay
between actors and the knowledge that is created, transmitted and absorbed. A distinction has
been made between three types of industrial knowledge bases - analytical, synthetic and
symbolic (Asheim et.al. 2007). The knowledge base typology shall also serve to classify start-up
ecosystems. A brief specification of individual knowledge bases is introduced in the following
table:
Table 2 Specification of individual knowledge bases
ANALYTICAL
SYNTHETIC
SYMBOLIC
(science based)
(engineering based)
(artistic based)
Developing new knowledge
Applying or combining existing
Creating meaning, desire,
about natural systems by
knowledge in new ways; know
aesthetic qualities, affect,
applying scientific laws; know
how
intangibles, symbols, images;
why
know who
Scientific knowledge, models,
Problem-solving, custom
deductive
production, inductive
Creative process
Collaboration within and
Interactive learning with
Learning-by-doing, in studio,
between research units
customers and suppliers
project teams
Strong codified knowledge
Partially codified knowledge,
Importance of interpretation,
content, highly abstract,
strong tacit component, more
creativity, cultural knowledge,
universal
context-specific
sign values, implies strong
context specificity
Meaning relatively constant
Meaning varies substantially
Meaning highly variable
between places
between places
between place, class and
gender
Drug development
Mechanical engineering
Cultural production, design,
brands
Source: (Asheim, 2007)
4
RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND METHODOLOGY
Awareness of the Slovaks about the term start-up and innovative business has raised rather late
in comparison to other European countries (Germany – 1997, Spain – 2005, Czech Republic–
2008). The first activities regarding the support and education of innovative and technologically
minded entrepreneurs were recorded in Slovakia in 2010 when the young local community arose
in Bratislava. Meetings and discussions of the IT specialists who used to meet on a regular basis
at StartupCamp were the first impulse. This concept evolved over time into a civil association
which also moved to the Eastern part of Slovakia in 2011 thanks to students from Košice.
In the years 2011-2013, co-working centres with a comprehensive education concept that late
transformed into business incubators have been established in three cities of Bratislava, Košice
and Žilina as a basis of the local start-up ecosystems. However, the ranking of Slovakia in
comparison to other countries is still not high (KPMG Technology Innovation Survey 2014 and
Word Economic Forum’s Networked Readiness Index 2014). Nevertheless, all three local startup ecosystems became strong and active enough to study their similarities as well as differences.
Two following research questions are studied in the paper:
RQ1: Are there any differences between individual ecosystems of Slovak start-up centres in
respect to their previous history?
RQ2: What knowledge base is dominant in the Slovak start-up centres? Are the start-up
companies and local ecosystems in Slovakia formed in the business or academic environments?
The following qualitative research was conducted during 2015 and 2016 on a sample of 12
respondents who represent the leading representatives of communities in individual local startup ecosystems. Telephone and Skype interviews with the main representatives of local start-up
communities represent the primary method of collection of information. Four interviews have
been made for each local community to understand the evolution, knowledge bases, stimuli,
milestones, leaders, networks, personalities and institutions, relations to be able to sketch the
start-up ecosystem and community. Subsequently, identification of the nature of individual local
communities and ecosystems made possible to assign the examined cities into categories
according to dominant knowledge base and main driving force.
5
CASE STUDY BRATISLAVA
5.1
Overview
Bratislava as the capital of the Slovak Republic, is obviously the seat of local headquarters of the
most significant international companies. In the recent years, the start-up ecosystem of the
capital is more viable than ever and offers various forms of support to small and start-up. There
are several success stories in the start-up ecosystem of Bratislava, which currently represent an
important motivation factor for establishing start-up companies in Bratislava and second tier cities
(Košice, Žilina, etc.).
5.2
Ecosystem and community
Bratislava was the first city where a local community focusing on innovation entrepreneurship
and start-up companies has been formed. Committed IT and business specialists willing to share
their knowledge and experience represented the catalyst of the process. Establishment of the
first co-working centres and hubs was supported by private resources, which helped to create a
profile for the commercially oriented group. Relationships with high-profile companies such as
ESET, SYGIC or SOITRON were not limited solely to the financial support. The community was
formed under the supervision of experienced entrepreneurs, which delivered a sufficient flow of
business skills affecting positively the development and orientation of the whole community in
Bratislava.
According to the statements of the main representatives of the community in Bratislava, the
formation of ecosystem may be associated with the beginning of community formation. Selfproclaimed group of committed personalities had a strong relationship with the local companies,
universities and government which supported these activities. The private sector is engaged
financially and provides to community know-how on B2B, Big Data and cyber security – the most
powerful topics of projects formed in Bratislava.
Figure 1. The Evolution and the milestones of the start-up ecosystem in Bratislava
2010
meetings of
specialists within
StartupCamp O.Z.
2011
formation of first coworking centres and
conceptual education for
start-ups
2012/2013
making contacts
with multinational
companies and
local firms
2015
establishment of
the first
accelerator The
Spot Booster
Based on interviews with local community leaders, local entrepreneurs and partners
6
CASE STUDY ŽILINA
6.1
Overview
ŽIlina as the fifth largest city with the population of 85 000 inhabitants has a good tradition in the
industry and a strong base at the technologically-oriented University. The city has become an
important industrial centre owing to the arrival of KIA Motors as well as the cooperation in the
field of applied research of biotechnologies and transport. VTP Žilina represents a major player
in the field of innovations and their promoting and stimulation – the organisation which has been
active for 15 years and focusing on the support of young entrepreneurs at universities. This
association and the majority of activities to promoting the emergence of young entrepreneurs are
closely linked to the University of Žilina and the local companies such as AZET and KROS.
6.2
Ecosystem and community
Žilina is the youngest Slovak start-up city. A compact and distinctive community was formed only
in 2012 on a strong academic basis owing to the VTP Žilina – an organisation established by the
University in 2001. The contribution of VTP represented a systematic pressure for a change in
the system and flexibility of education at the University of Žilina. In 2011, the course
“Entrepreneur as a profession” was introduced under the auspices of VTP. The core topic of lean
canvas methodology for making business models made it popular with many students. With a
group of teachers connected to local companies such as AZET, KROS and others, the project
Banka Žilina started in 2015, which formed a space for the co-working centre, lectures and
seminars, starting businesses on the University grounds as well as smaller companies and also
AZET development centres. Despite the creation of new office premises outside of the university
campus, the local community remains firmly linked to Žilina University, which works as its
umbrella organisation and the main partner.
The leaders of the Banka Žilina project and VTP Žilina describe the existing ecosystem as still in
its developing phase. Despite a stable research and academic basis, there is a lack of support
from the local government and cooperation with local and national companies. An interesting fact
is that several young companies that have managed to get stabilised and already settled on the
market, turn back to community and provide lecturing and mentoring at the University.
Figure 2. The Evolution and the milestones of the start-up ecosystem in Žilina
2001
Establishment of VTP
Žilina o.z.
2011
The first Startup
Weekend Žilina
2012
Enforcement of
university subject:
"Entrepreneur as a
profession" at University
of Žilina
2015
Openning of the
reconstructed building of
Banka Žilina
Figure 1 Source : Based on interviews with local community leaders, local entrepreneurs and partners
7
CASE STUDY KOŠICE
7.1
Overview
Košice with the population of 240 000 is the second largest city in Slovakia and a metropolis of
the Eastern part of the country. The last decade has drawn to the city a large number of IT
companies, such as T-systems, Ness, Global Logic, AT&T, Siemens, IBM and Eset. The
presence of relevant universities and support activities aiming at the increase of interest in
entrepreneurship for young people and university graduates has brought several start-up
projects. The environment for innovative business has been formed through the cooperation of
various institutions, companies and individuals.
7.2
Ecosystem and community
Community in Košice has been affected by the activities and community in Bratislava from the
early beginning. The civic association StartupCamp putting together the start-up activities in
Bratislava transferred rapidly its model and activities also to East of Slovakia thanks to students
from Košice. First members of the community included a small number of professional business
fans, young students and starting entrepreneurs from the field of technologies. In 2013, these
activities intersected the Technical University of Košice and local companies at the first Startup
Weekend. This was the beginning of transformation of the environment for start-up companies
in Košice. Owing to the companies such as T-Systems, FPT Slovakia and IBM, sufficient
pressure was exerted on the Technical University of Košice and IT Valley cluster employing more
than 8 000 IT workers. Local community and its events were later supported by the local
government, which helped to form a three-pillar base for creation of a strong ecosystem to
support innovations and start-up companies. Non-profit organizations which operate in coworking hubs and provide training activities represent the most significant step. According to
Boulder’s, insufficient level of involvement of local entrepreneurs who may provide the
community with knowledge of business drive still constitutes the issue of the ecosystem. Such
activities are currently provided externally in cooperation with local communities from Slovakia,
especially from Bratislava.
Figure 3. The Evolution and the milestones of the start-up ecosystem in Košice
2011
meetings of specialists
within StartupCamo O.Z.
2012
Openning of the star-tup
centre Eastcubator and
the first Startup
Weekend Košice
2013
Comprehensive
educational program in
the field of
entrepreneurship
within the project AZU
2014
Reopening of the start-up
centre Eastcubator and
education programs in
cooperation with local
firms
Figure 2 Source : Based on interviews with local community leaders, local entrepreneurs and partners
8
CONCLUSIONS
The main aim of the paper is to compare the determinants for the formation of start-up
movements in three Slovak cities – Bratislava, Košice and Žilina. In Bratislava and Košice,
activities of groups of independent and professional individuals constituted the first impulse for
the formation of a complex entrepreneurial ecosystem, while the ecosystem in Žilina was formed
on a strong academic basis.
The solid inclination to entrepreneurship in Bratislava had an impact on the formation of
ecosystem from its very beginnings and the community found its path thanks to experienced
entrepreneurs involved in education and sharing of their experience with the community of
starting entrepreneurs. The range of involvement of academic environment within Bratislava is
rather low.
Košice city was significantly influenced by specialists whose business was based on their
experience in corporations actively involved in the business ecosystem in Košice mostly by
supporting the local community activities. The local universities later become involved in the
activities of the community supporting it in the form of space, personnel and promotion.
Activities of the ecosystem in Žilina are closely related to the university which is considered as
entrepreneurial; they are based in the academic environment interlinked with local firms. The
Žilina University works as the leader of the whole community.
A period needed for the formation of a start-up community oriented on support and education of
entrepreneurs is relatively short and ranges from 1 up to 3 years (based on the observations
made in Slovak conditions). Creation of a complex ecosystem for support of start-ups is much
more complex and in order to do so an active three-sector cooperation is necessary.
According to several authors led by Isenberg, an effective collaboration with the private sector,
the involvement of the government and a local entrepreneurial community to an appropriate
extent while taking strengths and weaknesses of the given territory into account are the keys to
success when forming a complex ecosystem. Regional and local governments often mistakenly
aim at imitating or copy the concept of success of Silicon Valley. This is, however, impossible.
According to Feld and Isenberg, not even Silicon Valley itself would not have to repeat its
success. Feld also puts a strong emphasis on the community base of an ecosystem focusing on
the interconnection with experienced entrepreneurs in the region and close relationship between
the community and universities in his theses. The formation of a successful ecosystem for startup companies should be ideally based on the cooperation among the private sector, public sector
and entrepreneurs that are altogether active in supporting the transfer of knowledge and
experience.
Regarding the conditions of Slovak start-up centres, no significant impact of the regional history
on the community’s and ecosystem’s primary focus has been observed. Although, history of the
region indirectly influences the community through local universities. Study programs shape an
individual’s formation.
In this respect, there are significant differences among the selected Slovak regions regarding the
prevailing knowledge base within the ecosystem. Unlike Bratislava and Košice, Žilina has shown
itself as an ecosystem based on the academic basis where analytical knowledge base prevails.
This may be caused by the fact that the activities at the University of Žilina had supported the
formation of local community and interconnection of local entrepreneurs and university
environment represented especially by VTP Žilina and Banka Žilina is still strong. Local
companies such as KROS and AZET have the opportunity to cooperate with the ecosystem and
they are actively involved in the community’s activities.
The community of avid business fans and young entrepreneurs began to form the ecosystem for
support of start-up companies in Bratislava and Košice. All these activities have been strongly
interconnected with the private sector and large companies in the given regions from the very
beginning. Bottom-up approach to ecosystem formation helped to create a relatively stable
environment. Large companies as well as small local firms take part in the education of the
community in Bratislava and Košice. Synthetic knowledge base prevails in both cities. Bratislava
and Košice differ from each other in the extent of university involvement. While universities in
Bratislava develop their own activities with no (or weak) interconnection with the local start-up
community, the community and its partners in Košice are actively involve at the university and
there are signs of cooperation and collaboration. Large companies such as T-systems and FPT
Slovakia who involve the community in activities of the university ensuring the supply of new
community members.
The following table shows the characteristic features comparison of individual start-up
ecosystems in Slovakia:
Table 3 The characteristic features comparison of individual start-up ecosystems in
Slovakia
Factor
Bratislava
Žilina
Košice
Beginning of
2010
2012
2011
significant
significant
insufficient
moderate
moderate
moderate
community formation
Involvement of local
entrepreneurs
Involvement of the
local government
Prevailing nature of
Finances, PR, expert Expert
Finances,
partner relationship
consultations
expert
consultations
with local companies
consultations
and organizations
Overall nature of
collaboration
collaboration
collaboration
Yes
No
Yes
High
High
High
relationships within the
ecosystem
Clear plan for
community progress
Inclusiveness of
community
Type of events required Discussion/business
Seminar/business Workshop/technical
in community -lectures,
seminars discussions,
technical, business,
law and accounting
Main topics that the
B2B
applications, B2C applications
community is
Cybersecurity
B2B,
Hardware
concerned with
Source : Based on interviews with local community leaders, local entrepreneurs and partners
A high level of involvement of university within a local community results in sophisticated
research projects. However, there is a lack of commercial applicability and often goes beyond
the needs of real customers, which has been proven by the case studies. The combined impact
of universities and companies excluding a significant interference is considered as an acceptable
option that does not affect the nature of starting companies. Local start-up communities can be
categorised according to the prevailing type of knowledge within the ecosystem and the key
factor affecting the nature of new projects as follows:
Table 4 The typology of knowledge bases in Slovak startup centres according to
Asheim’s thesis
Type of knowledge
Analytical
Synthetic
Symbolic
Key role
In the ecosystem
Prevailing influence of local
enterprises
Bratislava
Prevailing influence of
universities
Žilina
Significant influence of both –
local enterprises and
Košice
universities
Source : Based on own conclusions of interviews from Žilina, Bratislava and Košice
Dynamics of ecosystem development can be influenced by involved and experienced
entrepreneurs who are engaged in activities of the community, an appropriate extent of
involvement of local government (sufficient to support a strong community, however, not so
excessive so that it may influence or dictate the community’s orientation). According to the case
studies, the factors considered can serve to differentiate the main start-up centres in Slovakia.
System and legal support from relevant state organizations represent an important aspect which
enters into the process of ecosystem formation on local as well as regional level.
Acknowledgement:
This work was supported by the Slovak Research and Development Agency (APVV) under the
contract No. APVV-14-0512.
References:
[1] Asheim, B. T., & Coenen, L. (2005). Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: Comparing
Nordic clusters. Research policy, 34(8), 1173-1190.
[2] Aslesen, H. W., & Onsager, K. (2009, June). Knowledge bases, open innovation and city regions.
In The Summer Conference 2009 on CBS (pp. 17-19).
[3] Baumol, W.J. (1990) Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive, and Destructive. Journal of Political
Economy 98(5): 893-921.
[4] Beise, M., & Stahl, H. (1999). Public research and industrial innovations in Germany. Research policy,
28(4), 397-422.
[5] Birley, S. (1986). The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process. Journal of business venturing,
1(1),107-117.
[6] Blank, S., & Dorf, B. (2012). The startup owner's manual. K&S;
[7] Braczyk, H. J., Cooke, P. N., & Heidenreich, M. (1998). Regional innovation systems: the role of
governances in a globalized world. Psychology Press.
[8] Florida, R. (2005). Cities and the creative class. Routledge.
[9] Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of the Crative Class–and how it’s transforming work, leisure, community
and every day life. New York.
[10] Graham, P. (2006). How to be Silicon Valley. May.. http://www. paulgraham. com/siliconvalley. html.
[11] Gries, T., & Naudé, W. (2009). Entrepreneurship and regional economic growth: towards a general
theory of start-ups. Innovation–The European Journal of Social Science Research, 22(3), 309-328.
[12] Honig, B. (2003). The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of
business venturing, 18(3), 301-331. 18
[13]
Isenberg,
D.
(2011).
Introducing the Entrepreneurship
Ecosystem:
Four
Defining
Characteristics. Forbes, May, 25.
[14] Isenberg, D. J. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, 88(6),
40-50.
[15] KPMG Slovakia., (2015) Startup Survey 2014. Retrieved from
http://www.kpmg.com/SK/sk/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/Documents/Star tup-survey-2014SK.pdf (2015)
[16] Learninglandscapesca. (2016). Learninglandscapesca. Retrieved from http://www.learnin
glandscapes.ca/images/documents/ll-no12-vfinal-lr-links.pdf
[17] Ranch. Yining Wu Brian. (2013, May) Startup Communities Crash Course – The Boulder Thesis.
Retrieved
from
http://www.startupcommunities.ca/2013/05/01/startupcommunities-explained-the-
boulder-thesis/
[18] Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: How today's entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create
radically successful businesses. Crown Books.
[19] Ries, E. (2014). Minimum viable product: a guide. Startup Lessons Learned.
[20] Saxenian, A. (1985). Silicon Valley and Route 128: regional prototypes or historic exceptions. Urban
Affairs Annual Reviews, 28, 81-105.
[21]Startupblinkcom. (2015). StartupBlink Blog. Retrieved 4 March, 2016, from
http://www.startupblink.com/blog/berlin-startup-ecosystem/ In-text citation: (Startupblinkcom, 2015)
[22]
Startupestoniaee. (2016). Startup
Estonia. Retrieved 4
March,
2016, from
http://www
.startupestonia.ee/why-estonia/for-startup In-text citation: (Startupestoniaee, 2016
[23] Sokol, M. (2013). Silicon Valley in Eastern Slovakia? Neoliberalism, Post-Socialism and the
Knowledge Economy. Europe-Asia Studies, 65(7), 1324-1343.
[24] Tierney, John. (2014, December) How to Create a Tech Startup Scene If You're Not in Silicon Valley.
The Atlantic. Retrieved from the http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/12/how-to-create-atech-start-upscene-if-youre-not-in-silicon-valley/384024
[25] Virgincom. (2014). Virgin. Retrieved 4 March, 2016, from https://www.virgin .com/entrepreneur/infocus-the-worlds-best-start-up-hubs In-text citation.
[26] Wach, K. (2008). Impact of the regional business environment on the development of small and
medium-sized enterprises in Southern Poland. In ] R. Borowiecki, A. Jaki, eds: Cracow Enterprises in the
Face of 21st Century Challenges. Development - Management - Entrepreneurship.
University of Economics, Cracow 2008, p. 397-406 [27] Dutta, S. (Ed.). (2009). Global Information
Technology Report 2008-2009. World Economic Forum.
[28] Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A
guide to managing knowledge. Harvard Business Press.
CONTACT TO THE AUTHOR(S)
[Marek Lavčák, Ing., Oto Hudec, Profesor]
[Letná 9, 042 00 Košice]
[0917 408 136]
[[email protected]]