@article {654,
	title = {Editorial: Platforms, Communities, and Business Ecosystems (February 2013)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {02/2013},
	pages = {3-4},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {business ecosystems, communities, platforms, technology entrepreneurship},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/654},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/654},
	author = {Chris McPhee and Steven Muegge}
}
@article {703,
	title = {Keystone Business Models for Network Security Processors},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {07/2013},
	pages = {25-33},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Network security processors are critical components of high-performance systems built for cybersecurity. Development of a network security processor requires multi-domain experience in semiconductors and complex software security applications, and multiple iterations of both software and hardware implementations. Limited by the business models in use today, such an arduous task can be undertaken only by large incumbent companies and government organizations. Neither the {\textquotedblleft}fabless semiconductor{\textquotedblright} models nor the silicon intellectual-property licensing ({\textquotedblleft}IP-licensing{\textquotedblright}) models allow small technology companies to successfully compete. This article describes an alternative approach that produces an ongoing stream of novel network security processors for niche markets through continuous innovation by both large and small companies. This approach, referred to here as the "business ecosystem model for network security processors", includes a flexible and reconfigurable technology platform, a {\textquotedblleft}keystone{\textquotedblright} business model for the company that maintains the platform architecture, and an extended ecosystem of companies that both contribute and share in the value created by innovation. New opportunities for business model innovation by participating companies are made possible by the ecosystem model. This ecosystem model builds on: i) the lessons learned from the experience of the first author as a senior integrated circuit architect for providers of public-key cryptography solutions and as the owner of a semiconductor startup, and ii) the latest scholarly research on technology entrepreneurship, business models, platforms, and business ecosystems. This article will be of interest to all technology entrepreneurs, but it will be of particular interest to owners of small companies that provide security solutions and to specialized security professionals seeking to launch their own companies.},
	keywords = {business ecosystems, business model innovation, commercialization, cybersecurity, platforms, semiconductors, technology entrepreneurship},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/703},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/703},
	author = {Arthur Low and Steven Muegge}
}
@article {655,
	title = {Platforms, Communities, and Business Ecosystems: Lessons Learned about Technology Entrepreneurship in an Interconnected World},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {02/2013},
	pages = {5-15},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Technology entrepreneurs are increasingly building businesses that are deliberately anchored in platforms, communities, and business ecosystems. Nonetheless, actionable, evidence-based advice for technology entrepreneurs is scarce. Platforms, communities, and ecosystems are active areas of management research, but until recently, each has been studied in separate research programs, with results published in different venues, and often examined from the perspectives of incumbent managers or policy makers rather than entrepreneurs and new entrants.

This article re-examines these phenomena from the perspective of technology entrepreneurs facing strategic choices about interconnected systems of platforms, communities, and business ecosystems, and decisions about the nature and extent of participation. It brings together insights from a wide range of published sources. For entrepreneurs, it provides an accessible introduction to what can be a complex topic, identifies a set of practical considerations to be accounted for in decision-making, and offers a guide for further reading. For researchers and graduate students seeking practical and high-impact research problems, it provides an entry point to the research literature and identifies gaps in the current body of knowledge, especially regarding the system-level interactions between subsystems. },
	keywords = {architecture of participation, business ecosystem, community, platform, technology entrepreneurship},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/655},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/655},
	author = {Steven Muegge}
}
@article {545,
	title = {Business Model Discovery by Technology Entrepreneurs},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2012},
	month = {04/2012},
	pages = {5-16},
	abstract = {Value creation and value capture are central to technology entrepreneurship. The ways in which a particular firm creates and captures value are the foundation of that firm{\textquoteright}s business model, which is an explanation of how the business delivers value to a set of customers at attractive profits. Despite the deep conceptual link between business models and technology entrepreneurship, little is known about the processes by which technology entrepreneurs produce successful business models. This article makes three contributions to partially address this knowledge gap. First, it argues that business model discovery by technology entrepreneurs can be, and often should be, disciplined by both intention and structure. Second, it provides a tool for disciplined business model discovery that includes an actionable process and a worksheet for describing a business model in a form that is both concise and explicit. Third, it shares preliminary results and lessons learned from six technology entrepreneurs applying a disciplined process to strengthen or reinvent the business models of their own nascent technology businesses.},
	keywords = {business models, commercialization, innovation, technology entrepreneurship, value capture, value creation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/545},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/545},
	author = {Steven Muegge}
}
@article {557,
	title = {An Overview of Four Issues on Technology Entrepreneurship in the TIM Review},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2012},
	month = {05/2012},
	pages = {28-34},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {The field of technology entrepreneurship is in its infancy when compared to other fields such as economics and management. Articles on technology entrepreneurship have been published in at least 62 journals, of which only 18 contribute to technology innovation management or entrepreneurship. Less than a handful of these 62 journals are considered to be "good" journals and none can claim a leadership position in technology entrepreneurship. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the 20 journal articles published in the February, March, April, and May 2012 issues of the Technology Innovation Management Review (TIM Review).},
	keywords = {creative destruction, global entrepreneurship, journal articles, social entrepreneurship, technology entrepreneurship, theory},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/557},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/557},
	author = {Tony Bailetti and Sonia D. Bot and Tom Duxbury and David Hudson and Chris McPhee and Steven Muegge and Michael Weiss and Jonathan Wells and Mika Westerlund}
}
