Dr Martin Bliemel is the Acting Deputy Dean Research and the Director of the Diploma in Innovation at the Faculty of Transdisciplinary Innovation at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS).
There are three areas I am researching and seeking to supervise a Masters and/or PhD student. Each project has connections with collaborators within UTS:FTDI, across Australia and internationally.
Entrepreneurial ecosystems: What systems are there that support entrepreneurial activities and outcomes, and what feedback loops are there in that system? This research takes a qualitative behavioural approach to generate an aggregated view of how ecosystems work. It extends beyond research on clusters/precincts (geographic co-location), networks (social structures) and innovation systems (which emphasise the innovation; here the emphasis is on the person, their actions and outcomes). Prior related research examples: 2016 report for DIIS, 2018 Chapter (1), 2018 Chapter (2), 2018 article in E&RD, and 2019 UIIN magazine article.
Entrepreneurial capability development: This research builds on our counterfactual study in 2017 about whether accelerators build or erode entrepreneurial capabilities. Entrepreneurial capabilities can be made accessible to anyone (2018 LinkedIn), and include quite generalised capabilities such as creativity, identifying opportunities, mobilising resources, and mobilising others. Along with for-credit programs on campus (E+T 2019) we have developed free online resources (2019 ATN project). However, there remains a huge challenge in developing a scalable approach to accurately measuring the development of entrepreneurial capabilities and confidence therein. Our pilot studies showed how quickly confidence (self-efficacy) levels change and how inaccurate current capability measures are. There must be better methods!
What is transdisciplinary research?: What transdisciplinary research is remains poorly understood. In 2018, we published an open access Special Issue on Transdisciplinary Innovation that got us a step closer to a shared understanding. This project starts with a systematic bibliometric analysis of transdisciplinary research. Using this analysis, we aim to identify the leading definitions and researchers in this space, and to include their interpretation of preliminary results. This may lead to a typology of TD research, a research agenda setting paper and/or the development of new TD research methodologies.
Martin’s research interests include entrepreneurial networks, accelerators, education, research commercialization, and entrepreneurial ecosystems. He has been bringing these interests together under the umbrella concept of the entrepreneurial university. In particular, his work on accelerators played a key role in the design of the $23m Incubator Support Programme by the Department of Industry. Martin’s research has been published in several prestigious journals including Nature Nanotechnology, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Education+Training, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, and the Entrepreneurship Research Journal where one of his articles on entrepreneurship education is ERJ’s most downloaded article. Martin is a recipient of the nationally competitive Office of Learning and Teaching Citation for “For preparing students studying management to become entrepreneurs by creating authentic and respectful learning experiences that immerse students in collaborative interactions with external stakeholders." He is a member of the advisory committee for the Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange (ACERE), a member of the Talent Flows subcommitee of the NSW Innovation & Producitivty Council, and a member of the FTDI Faculty Board.
Research Awards & Grants
- 2019 Evaluation of Renewable Energy Venture Capital Fund Program
- 2018 Two internal grants for studying entrepreneurial ecosystems dynamics and metrics, in collaboration with UTS:CBSI
- 2017 Australian Technology Network: The EDGE project
- 2015 Department of Industry, Innovation & Science (DIIS, Canberra) review of accelerator and incubator activity in Australia. Published online May 2016
- 2014 Overall Best Paper at the 27th Annual Small Enterprise Association of Australia & New Zealand Conference, Sydney, NSW
- 2013 Best Empirical Paper Using Qualitative Methods at the Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange, Brisbane, QLD
- 2011 Strategic Management Stream Award at the 2011 Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management Conference, Wellington, NZ
- 2011 Internal Research Grant O&M / S&E for “Exploring the motivations and decision-making processes of Australian entrepreneurs”
- 2010 Internal Special Research Grant for “Configurations of Entrepreneurial Networks: An Empirical Examination using Q-analysis”
- 2009 Overall Best Paper Award (sponsored by Arthur D. Little) at the European Conference on Management of Technology, Glasgow, UK
Teaching Awards & Grants
- 2016 UNSW Scientia Education Fellow
- 2015 Office of Learning & Teaching (OLT; Federal government) Citation for outstanding Contribution to Student Learning “For preparing management students to become entrepreneurs by creating authentic and respectful learning experiences.”
- 2015 UNSW MOOC Development Grants (SEF #1) “How to validate your startup idea” (Lead member of a team of 6)
- 2014 UNSW Learning and Teaching Innovation Grant (SEF#4): “Innovation and entrepreneurship for media professions: developing flexible frameworks for learning and teaching”
- 2012 Recipient of the Outstanding Technology-Enabled Teaching Innovation Award at the Australian School of Business
- 2017 – Current: Academic lead between SSE.edu.au and UTS:Transdisciplinary Innovation
- 2016 – 2017: Academic lead between SSE.edu.au and UNSW
- 2015 – 2017: Faculty Liaison between UNSW Business and the Michael Crouch Innovation Centre
- 2015 – 2016: Charter Member and mentor for TiE Sydney
- 2015 – Current: Advisory Board member for the Amway Global Entrepreneurship Report
- 2011 – Current: Advisory Committee member for the Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange (ACERE)
Journal Reviews (alphabetical)
- Asia Pacific Journal of Management
- Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice
- Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice
- International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research
- International Journal of Technoentrepreneurship
- Journal of Business Research
- Journal of Business Venturing
- Journal of Product Innovation Management
- Organization Studies
- Small Business Economics
- Small Enterprise Research
Conference Reviews (alphabetical)
- Academy of Management conference: Business Policy and Strategy (BPS), Organization and Management Theory (OMT), and Entrepreneurship (ENT)
- Administrative Sciences Association of Canada conference: Technology and Innovation Management (TIM), Entrepreneurship and Family Business (ENT), and Strategy (STR)
- Australian and New Zealand International Business Academy (ANZIBA)
- Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange (ACERE)
Professional Memberships and Associations (alphabetical)
- Academy of Management (AOM)
- Administrative Sciences Association of Canada (ASAC)
- Australia and New Zealand Academy of Management (ANZAM)
- European Group of Organizational Studies (EGOS)
- International Network for Social Network Analysis (INSNA)
- Small Enterprise Association of Australia & New Zealand (SEAANZ)
Can supervise: YES
Courses and subjects I interact with include:
C20060 Diploma In Innovation
81539 Impossibilities to Possibilities
81540 Technology, Methods and Creative Practice
81538 Frame Innovation
94657 Futures Thinking: Making Futures
94665 Complexity and Sustainability
94663 Navigating Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Initiating Change
94662 Entrepreneurial Experimenting and Innovation Validation
94658 Evaluating Portfolios of Innovative Opportunities
Bachelor of Creative Intelligence and Innovation (BCII)
- 81516 Initiatives and Entrepreneurship - Subject coordinator
- 81523 Speculative Start-Up - Guest 'lecturing' / judging / mentoring
Bachelor of Technology and Innovation
- 94672 Creative Methods and Entrepreneurial Initiatives - Guest 'lecturing' / judging / mentoring
Sydney School of Entreprenuership (SSE.edu.au)
Griffith, S, Carruthers, K & Bliemel, M 2018, Visual Tools for Developing Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Capacity, Common Ground Research Networks, Champaign, IL.View/Download from: Publisher's site
Visual Tools for Developing Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Capacity identifies and documents pedagogical and practice-based visual approaches to scaffolding and developing these capacities in your classes, with your clients or in your teams. The editors have selected a diverse range of best practice case studies and theoretical frameworks from leading international educators and practitioners across a broad range of disciplines to illustrate how visual tools can be used to greatest effect. Divided into four logically sequenced sections, the book will progressively build upon the array of visual tools you can employ in your practice. Initially starting with tools for collaboration it expands to include ways to overcome the challenges of cross-disciplinary collaboration. Building on this foundation you will then explore visual tools for stimulating and supporting Innovation in classrooms, with clients and customers, or your team. The third section introduces strategies for selecting visual tools to aid in Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial activities. The final section provides you with case studies of fully integrated practice where teams have collaborated to innovate and bring the resultant outputs to market. Visual tools for Developing Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Capacity is the perfect companion for an educator, facilitator or practitioner to help students, clients or teams maximize their potential through the use of visual tools. Read cover to cover or dip in as you need to.
Thomas, VJ, Bliemel, M, Shippam, C & Maine, E 2020, 'Endowing university spin-offs pre-formation: Entrepreneurial capabilities for scientist-entrepreneurs', TECHNOVATION, vol. 96-97.View/Download from: Publisher's site
Bliemel, MJ, Flores, R, de Klerk, S & Miles, M 2019, 'Accelerators as start-up infrastructure for entrepreneurial clusters', Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, vol. 31, no. 1-2, pp. 133-149.View/Download from: Publisher's site
Infrastructure is commonly conceptualized as a set of facilities that play a critical role in facilitating activities by individuals and organizations. Conventionally, infrastructure is tightly linked to publicly funded projects that facilitate access to key resources and enable diverse activities. Within entrepreneurial clusters research, infrastructure includes universities, research institutions and telecommunication technologies that facilitate entrepreneurial activities. These capital-intensive investments seek to facilitate start-ups emergence by aiding access to markets and development of ideas. Accelerators facilitate the same activities and have only recently been conceptualized as start-up infrastructure. This study builds upon this research stream by elaborating on how accelerators can play this meaningful role at the cluster level. Specifically, and by relying on the analysis of empirical evidence from three distinct studies, we uncover how accelerators provide tangible and intangible dimensions of start-up infrastructure to form a positively reinforcing cycle of entrepreneurial activities. Additionally, our findings allow us to push further the idea that start-up infrastructure development can be an endogenous process involving multiple actors within the cluster. Our empirical findings and the theoretical insights derived from them have meaningful implications for the aforementioned literature, as well as start-up practitioners and policymakers linked to the funding of entrepreneurial clusters.
This special issue includes a rich and nuanced set of takeaways for practitioners, academics, and members of the public or third sectors. We highlight four of them here, regarding learning, spaces, levels of impact, and partner selection. We nonetheless strongly encourage you to read the entire set of articles to make sure you get a balanced overview of different ways in which transdisciplinary innovation occurs.
New product diffusion is critical to entrepreneurship. Without successful diffusion, the emergence of a new business is incomplete. Although we have several well-established models of the diffusion phenomenon, these models mainly describe the macro-level diffusion patterns after their ignition, thereby ignoring the ignition mechanism. This study conceptualizes an entrepreneur's introduction of a new product and its diffusion as a generative emergence from a complexity science perspective and employs agent-based modeling and simulation (ABMS) to explain the full ignition-diffusion process as well as ignition failures. In this study's model, the ignition process is made of individual consumers' heterogeneous thresholds and their relative levels of activities. These micro-level characteristics and behaviors influence the speed and scope of the diffusion at the macro-level. Our simulations reveal the minimum number of initial adopters required to ignite the diffusion process and show how an entrepreneur's advertising campaign may accelerate the ignition and diffusion speed. The simulations also reveal how consumers' negative word-of-mouth may reduce the diffusion scope.
Bliemel, MJ 2017, 'Angel group simulation – Turning the tables on students', Experiential Entrepreneurship Exercises Journal, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 44-47.
In most entrepreneurship exercises, students are the entrepreneurs. In this interactive exercise, the tables are turned: teams of students are angel investors, who compete against each other to allocate their seed funding. The exercise involves two rounds of a real-time simulation using google docs and portfolios of 1-page executive summaries. At face value, the objective of the simulation is to perform better than other teams, including guest angel investors. The pedagogical value includes helping increase awareness of the criteria by which their own ideas are judged. The debrief also helps students learn the motivations for angel investment deals.
Bliemel, MJ 2017, 'Serious silliness: Breaking the ice with ideation, pitching and networking', Experiential Entrepreneurship Exercises Journal, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 40-43.
In many entrepreneurship courses, students work in teams to initiate and iterate on a venture idea. This exercise provides a quick and fun sample of that ideation and iteration process. Another purpose of the activity is as an ice-breaker for students, while also introducing criteria by which ventures are evaluated. The first part of the exercise demonstrates how diverse ideas can originate from the same resources. The second part teaches students to network and articulate their ideas more succinctly while learning to adapt to new information.
Miles, MP, de Vries, H, Harrison, G, Bliemel, M, de Klerk, S & Kasouf, CJ 2017, 'Accelerators as authentic training experiences for nascent entrepreneurs', EDUCATION AND TRAINING, vol. 59, no. 7-8, pp. 811-824.View/Download from: Publisher's site
Shim, J, Bliemel, MJ & Choi, M 2017, 'Modeling complex entrepreneurial processes: A bibliometric method for designing agent-based simulation models', International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research.View/Download from: Publisher's site
The purpose of this paper is to suggest a bibliometric method for designing agent-based models (ABMs) in entrepreneurship research. The application of this method is illustrated with an exemplary agent-based modeling and simulation (ABMS) regarding the early venture growth process. This bibliometric approach invigorates the utilization of ABMS as a viable research methodology in process-oriented entrepreneurship research.
In the bibliometric method, a domain corpus composed of scholarly articles is established and systematically analyzed through co-word analysis to discern essential concepts (i.e. agents, objects, and contexts) and their interrelations. The usefulness of the bibliometric method is elucidated by constructing an illustrative ABMS.
The bibliometric method for designing ABMs identifies essential concepts in the entrepreneurship literature and provides contexts in which the concepts are interrelated. The illustrative ABMS based on these concepts and interrelations accurately and consistently reproduces the emergence of power-law distributions in venture outcomes consistent with empirical evidence, implying further merit to bibliometric procedures.
The proposed method can be used not only to build simple models with essential concepts, but also to build more complex models that take a large number of concepts and their interrelations into consideration.
This study proposes a bibliometric method for designing ABMs. The proposed method extends similar procedures that are limited to thematic or cluster analysis by examining the semantic contexts in which the concepts co-occur. This research suggests that ABMS from bibliographic sources can be built and validated with empirical evidence. Several considerations are provided for the combined utilization of the bibliometric method and ABMS in entrepreneurship.
Bliemel, MJ 2016, 'Authentic Learning Experiences in Entrepreneurship: Engaging External Stakeholders'.
Bliemel, MJ, Flores, RG, de Klerk, S, Miles, MPP, Costa, B & Monteiro, P 2016, 'The Role and Performance of Accelerators in the Australian Startup Ecosystem'.
Bliemel, MJ, McCarthy, IP & Maine, EMA 2016, 'Levels of Multiplexity in Entrepreneur's Networks: Implications for Dynamism and Value Creation', ENTREPRENEURSHIP RESEARCH JOURNAL, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 247-272.View/Download from: Publisher's site
Ozdemir, SZ, Moran, P, Zhong, X & Bliemel, MJ 2016, 'Reaching and Acquiring Valuable Resources: The Entrepreneur's Use of Brokerage, Cohesion, and Embeddedness', ENTREPRENEURSHIP THEORY AND PRACTICE, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 49-79.View/Download from: Publisher's site
Sepasgozar, SME, Bliemel, M & Bemanian, MR 2016, 'Discussion of "Barriers of Implementing Modern Methods of Construction" by M. Motiar Rahman', JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING, vol. 32, no. 2.View/Download from: Publisher's site
Bliemel, MJ & Flores, RG 2015, 'Defining and Differentiating Accelerators: Insights from the Australian Context', UNSW Business School Research Paper, no. 2016.
Bliemel, MJ 2014, 'Getting Entrepreneurship Education Out of the Classroom and into Students' Heads', Entrepreneurship Research Journal, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 237-260.View/Download from: Publisher's site
The debate on whether or not entrepreneurship can be taught has continued for many years (e.g., see Henry, Hill and Leitch 2005 for a review), and appears to have been concluded with a "yes .. but." In general, reviews of entrepreneurial education (hereafter EE) indicate that "yes" it can indeed be taught (see Hindle 2007; Franco, Haase and Lautenschläger 2010; Wadhwa 2010). The "but" part says that the design of EE programs is highly context dependent, and its impact is also highly contingent on several factors, including when EE is taught, by whom, and how (as also argued by Jones and Matlay 2011). Rather than lament the heterogeneity of EE programs and the difficulty in evaluating and comparing them, this study appeals to those who aim to celebrate the diversity of EE programs, and learn from improved detail regarding their origins, motivations, and methods, and of the people involved.
This paper is a case study of EE at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) that encompasses not just the contents and methods of the EE program, but also reveals the history and purpose of the program, the institutional context, and the qualifications of the educator. By providing such a detailed and comprehensive overview, this study responds to recent critical reviews of the EE literature that call for more detail. For example, Fayolle's reflective review identifies that "Studies into who entrepreneurship educators are and what they really do in their interventions are sorely missing. Whether educators and instructors in EE need to have prior entrepreneurial expertise is also an issue that has not been examined in the literature" (Fayolle 2013, 695). To this he adds that "few articles go beyond the description of contents and methods to consider the rationale leading to effective didactical designs" (ibid.). Likewise, a recent special issue in the Journal of Small Business Management on EE decries that "many of the linkages between entrepreneurship in the classroom and entr...
This paper summarizes the benefits and challenges of flipping an entrepreneurship course in two ways. The conventional flip changes how lecturers and students relate to the course content by primarily affecting when and where they learn, but not necessarily how. Flipping the classroom inside-out grounds the lessons learned in the 'real world' by bringing in guests to help run workshops in the classroom, and by getting students to validate their business ideas outside the classroom. This inside-out flip involves additional logistical challenges. However, it appears to be a better fit with the overarching set of attributes that graduates are expected to attain, and the assessment thereof.
Bliemel, MJ, McCarthy, IP & Maine, EMA 2014, 'An Integrated Approach to Studying Multiplexity in Entrepreneurial Networks', Entrepreneurship Research Journal, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 367-402.View/Download from: Publisher's site
Maine, E, Thomas, VJ, Bliemel, MJ, Murira, A & Utterback, J 2014, 'The Emergence of the Nanobiotechnology Industry', Nature Nanotechnology, Vol. 9, no. 1.
Ozdemir, SZ, Moran, P, Zhong, X & Bliemel, MJ 2014, 'Reaching and Acquiring Valuable Resources: The Entrepreneur's Use of Brokerage, Cohesion, and Embeddedness'.
Shim, J, Bliemel, MJ & Choi, M 2014, 'From Words to Models: A Bibliometric Approach to Designing Agent-Based Models in Entrepreneurship', International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research.View/Download from: Publisher's site
Bliemel, MJ, Flores, RG, Hamilius, J & Gomes, H 2013, 'Accelerate Australia Far: Exploring the Emergence of Seed Accelerators within the Innovation Ecosystem Down-Under'.
Shim, J & Bliemel, MJ 2013, 'How Can We Predict the Performance of Small Firms' Online Advertising? An Agent-Based Modelling & Simulation Approach'.
Maine, E, Bliemel, M, Murira, A & Utterback, J 2012, 'Knowledge diversity in the emerging global bio-nano sector', Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings, vol. 1466, pp. 14-25.View/Download from: Publisher's site
As scientists are able to understand and manipulate ever smaller scales of matter, research in the fields of biotechnology and nanotechnology has converged to enable such radical innovations as lab-on-a-chip devices, targeted drug delivery, and other forms of minimally invasive therapy and diagnostics. This paper provides a descriptive overview of the emerging bio-nano sector, identifying what types of firms are entering, from what knowledge base, where they are located, and their strategic choices in terms of technological diversity and R&D strategy. The firms engaged in bio-nano research and development span the range from start-up firm to multinational pharmaceutical, biotech, chemical, and electronics firms: two thirds of bio-nano firms are relatively young and relatively small. The United States dominates this sector, with more than half of all bio-nano firms located in the USA. Even within this sector which epitomizes the convergence of technology, there is a broad range of technological diversity, with the most diverse firms overall coming from a base in electronics, the most diverse start-up firms coming from a base in nanomaterials, and the most narrowly focused firms coming from a biotechnology/pharmaceutical base. We find that hybridization has been the dominant knowledge diversity strategy, with 93% of the bio-nano firms with nano-patents holding multi-class patents. © 2012 Materials Research Society.
Bliemel, MJ, McCarthy, IP & Maine, E 2009, 'In Search of Entrepreneurial Network Configurations: Using Q-Analysis to Study Network Structures and Flows'.
Bliemel, MJ & Maine, EMA 2008, 'Network embeddedness as a predictor of performance for New Technology-Based Firms', International Journal of Technoentrepreneurship, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 313-341.View/Download from: Publisher's site
The logic of network embeddedness has been widely used in the technology entrepreneurship literature in recent years, yet its operationalisation and use are neither well understood nor agreed upon. This paper reviews the logic of network embeddedness as it has been invoked and operationalised to predict the performance of New Technology-Based Firms (NTBFs). We find network embeddedness to be a useful predictor for NTBF performance when operationalised at both the dyad and network levels and when interaction effects or contingency factors that account for environmental conditions and firm constraints are included. © 2008 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.
Bliemel, MJ & McCarthy, IP 2008, 'Networks of dedicated biotechnology and service fi rms in Vancouver', Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 265-273.View/Download from: Publisher's site
Survival and growth of firms depends on their relationships to other organisations, including key suppliers, customers, supporters and competitors. This study compares geographic aspects of the networks of biotechnology firms (DBFs) and contract research organisations and service firms (CROs) in Vancouver, Canada. We find that for DBFs the key actors (organisations and individuals) that they network with are globally located (ie not local), despite the DBFs having originated from a local university. In contrast, CROs are more likely to network with localactors, and with actors on the same continent. Of the DBFs providing performance data, the distribution of their performance is consistent with recent developments in structural embeddedness theory (ie network coupling theory). This suggests that their performance may be inhibited if they are under- or over-embedded in their network, with the greatest opportunity for success in a medium range of coupling.
Salazar, M, Bliemel, MJ & Holbrook, AJ 2008, 'A comparison of R&D indicators for the Vancouver biotechnology cluster', Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 233-246.View/Download from: Publisher's site
The basis of this paper is to go beyond abstract definitions of what a cluster is, and look at a variety of measurable indicators, to see which can demonstrate the presence of a cluster. The example presented is based on the biotechnology industry in Vancouver, Canada. Biotechnology differs from conventional industries, in that there are few tangible goods or services traded, but rather the basis of value creation is primarily the sale or licensing of intangible intellectual property or the (usually pre-revenue) firms themselves. The two main questions we aim to test are (i) is there a biotechnology cluster in Vancouver, and (ii) what are its inputs, outcomes, and impact on the region? We use data provided from local and federal agencies such as Life Sciences British Columbia and Statistics Canada to compare biotechnology R&D activity across regions, and within the local economy. Our findings indicate that there is significant activity around biotechnology R&D and commercialisation in Vancouver, but no guarantee of the longevity of the innovation system.
Bliemel, MJ & McCarthy, IP 2007, 'Networks and High-Tech Innovation in Vancouver: An Application of Q-Analysis to ISRN Intervews'.
Bliemel, MJ 2018, 'Student's use of PLACE and time to develop capacity in cross-disciplinary collaboration in entrepreneurship' in Visual tools for developing student capacity for cross-disciplinary collaboration, innovation and entrepreneurship. A. Rourke and V. Rees (Series Curators), Transformative Pedagogies in the Visual Domain: Book No. 6., Common Ground Research Networks, Champaign, IL.
This chapter describes the use of a 'flipped classroom' environment by students of multiple disciplines in an entrepreneurship course, such that they can see each other's use of various tools throughout the course.
This is a reflective summary based on 3 years of teaching in "The PLACE". The PLACE (an acronym for Peer Learning and Creative Exchange) is a pedagogical tool known as the 'flipped classroom' which enables students to have the freedom for unencumbered movement within the physical learning and teaching space. This allows them to see oral presentations by their peers, including work-in-progress on their (personal or pod's) screens. This transparency in the classroom is mirrored with the transparency of each team's weekly progress in the online Learning Management System. This transparency leads to improved learning of how to use a variety of visual tools by individual students, within their cross-disciplinary teams, and across teams.
By understanding what students (and lecturers) do and see in the PLACE, we gain a better sense for what the right balance is between focussing on ICT technologies versus teaching methods to help students authentically develop a capacity for cross-disciplinary collaboration and entrepreneurship. This chapter is also relevant to students, desiring to understand how to leverage their learning spaces to improve their learning. This might even mean selecting courses for where they are taught over what is taught or by whom.
Beyond transmission of knowledge, universities are committed to improving the professional skills of students towards desirable graduate attributes or program learning outcomes. By focussing on these softer, social skills in the classroom, students are better prepared to confidently and effectively function in the professional environment upon graduation.
This chapter contributes to advocating for a holistic approach to using online technologies and physical space. This balances out the recent over-emphas...
Bliemel, MJ, de Klerk, S, Flores, R & Miles, MP 2018, 'Emergence of Accelerators and Accelerator Policy: The Case of Australia' in Wright, M & Drori, I (eds), Accelerators: Successful Venture Creation and Growth, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, pp. 162-187.View/Download from: Publisher's site
This study has explored the emergence of accelerators and related policy in the context of the Australian innovation system. Accelerators first appeared in 2010 with little formal coordination between them, followed by the development of accelerator policy in 2015 and its implementation in 2016. In comparison, the VC industry and VC policy in Australia started off with a neglected government report (i.e., the 1983 Espie Report), followed by the emergence of AVCAL in 1992 and the first formal VC fund in 1994, culminating in the introduction of VC policy 15 years after the report (1998). The evolution of the VC industry also suffered setbacks due to unfortunate timing with the burst of the dot-com bubble and GFC
Meanwhile, accelerators appeared in Australia largely independent of policy efforts, with only a few being capitalized via early stage VC policy programs. The federal and state governments were comparatively quick to learn about accelerators and design policy for accelerators while also reconsidering changes to complementary policies. Simultaneously, the total number of accelerators has been growing rapidly and accelerator business models are evolving at an incredible pace and hybridizing with incubation, co-working, VC, mentoring, higher education, professional services and other organizational types.
Griffith, S, Bliemel, MJ & Carruthers, K 2018, 'The Value of Using Visual Tools to Enable Students, Clients and End Users' in Griffith, S, Carruthers, K & Bliemel, M (eds), Visual tools for developing student capacity for cross-disciplinary collaboration, innovation and entrepreneurship. A. Rourke and V. Rees (Series Curators), Transformative Pedagogies in the Visual Domain: Book No. 6., Common Ground Research Networks, Champaign, IL.
This volume identifies and documents pedagogical and practice-based visual approaches to scaffolding and developing capacity for cross-disciplinary collaboration, innovation and entrepreneurship.
This first chapter introduces and contextualises the key themes of this book, outlining the value in supporting acquisition of cross-disciplinary collaboration, innovation and entrepreneurship skills in students and why visual tools are particularly useful in doing this. Chapter authors, and editors of this book, have chosen to divide the content of the book into four sections : i) visual tools and artefacts for Cross-disciplinary Collaboration; (ii) visual tools and artefacts for Innovation; (iii) visual tools and artefacts for Entrepreneurship; and (iv) Integrated approaches using visual tools and artefacts. The main chapters take a social, cultural and historical look at the evolution of visual tools, followed by a final chapter which takes a look into future possibilities.
Recke, M & Bliemel, MJ 2018, 'Policy Making Versus Policy Research: The Case of the City of Sydney's Tech Startups Action Plan' in Miles, MP, Battisti, M, Lau, A & Terziovski, M (eds), Economic Gardening: Entrepreneurship, innovation and small business ecosystems in regional, rural and international development – SEAANZ Annual Research Book Series, Tilde University Press, Prahran, VIC, pp. 58-79.
Public policy can shift the economic composition and outputs of a region or ecosystem. Many policy makers promote entrepreneurship under the assumption of a link between new ventures and economic growth and job creation. Such promotion makes to two important assumptions. First, that there is such a link despite it being hotly debated in literature. Second, that policy is informed by this debate. This project explores the (dis)connection between municipal entrepreneurship policy and the academic literature, using the City of Sydney's recent Tech Startups Action Plan as a case study.
Bliemel, MJ 2017, 'UNSW Startup Road Map' in Furber, B & Griffith, S (eds), Michael Crouch Innovation Centre : An emergent force, Michael Crouch Innovation Centre, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, pp. 24-25.
Bliemel, M, de Klerk, S & Flores, R 2019, 'Insights from analysing accelerators as entrepreneurial micro-ecosystems', Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange, Sydney, NSW.
Entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs) have been characterised by abstract or aggregated elements that interact to produce entrepreneurial outcomes. This aggregation is convenient because studying individual actors, interactions and outcomes for such complex systems is empirically difficult. However, the aggregation simultaneously limits our ability to study how EEs generate entrepreneurial outcomes as a consequence of the actions and interactions of actors who represent these aggregated elements. To work around the empirical challenge of surveying entire ecosystems or even a representative set of actors in an ecosystem, this study focusses on a temporally and spatially limited ecosystem. This study posits that accelerators are EEs, albeit entrepreneurial micro-ecosystems, which are analogous to the petri dish version of EEs. This study then adopts an EE lens and uses a mixed-methods approach to (1) explore the social and temporal boundaries of EEs, (2) illustrate the generative interactions between actors in EEs; thereby (3) revealing how EEs are maintained.
Bliemel, M, Schweitzer, J, Mery Keitel, A, Green, R, Nicolas, L, Miles, M, Moroko, L, Groeger, L & Griffith, S 2019, 'Herding cats to co-create cross-university courses in record time', University-Industry Engagement Conference, Sydney, NSW.
The Navigator, a core unit of the new AUD$25 million state-funded Sydney School of Entrepreneurship (SSE), provides an example of how a new course is co-developed and co-delivered by an interdisciplinary group of academics across multiple universities to multiple cohorts of students from all 12 higher-education institutions (HEIs) across the State of New South Wales (NSW). What is unique about this course is the extremely diverse inter-organisational environment hosted by SSE and the speed at which the unit was designed, often adjusted only hours ahead of delivery. While the operational details of SSE still require attention, the cross-institutional collaboration to develop The Navigator is recognised as best-practice in co-development of state- or even nation-wide curriculum.
Schweitzer, J & Bliemel, M 2019, 'Designing the Bachelor of Entrepreneurship (Honours) at the University of Technology Sydney: An integration of micro credentialing, blended and work integrated learning', 2019 Asia-Pacific UIIN Conference, University-Industry Engagement conference, Sydney, Australia.
Instigated in 2017 and commencing in 2019, the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) will be offering Australia's first one-year full-time university-wide Bachelor of Entrepreneurship (Honours). The new program complements undergraduate entrepreneurship subjects and extra-curricular activities and also serves as a bridge into more extensive postgraduate qualifications. The primary objective of the degree is to support students towards developing their entrepreneurial venture. In this degree, students learn the skills, knowledge and mindset required to build a successful enterprise. It is open to all students with an undergraduate degree from any discipline, including architecture, design, communications, engineering, science, IT, health, law or business. The program was developed in collaboration with multiple UTS faculties and the wider startup community. It will be delivered through UTS Business School and the Faculty of Transdisciplinary Innovation, and integrated with the UTS Startups extra-curricular program.
Schweitzer, J, Bliemel, M & Marchand, J 2019, 'Redefining the Honours degree to create a pan-university pathway to Entrepreneurship: Integrating modularized learning with blended and work integrated approaches', ACERE 2019 Conference Handbook, ACERE Entrepreneurship Educator's Forum, Sydney, Australia.
More than 40 per cent of students at the University of Technology Sydney want to create their own jobs or start their own companies. A greater percentage are interested in developing entrepreneurial capabilities for the future of work. EY's Global Centre for Entrepreneurship and Innovation found similar aspirations globally. With a growing interest in entrepreneurship and a thriving ecosystem in Australia, UTS explored the option of introducing a bespoke degree to help graduates from any discipline fulfil their entrepreneurial potential. Instigated in 2017 and commencing in 2019, UTS will be offering Australia's first one-year full-time university-wide Bachelor of Entrepreneurship (Honours). The new program complements undergraduate entrepreneurship subjects and extra-curricular activities and also serves as a bridge into more extensive postgraduate qualifications. The primary objective of the degree is to support students towards developing their entrepreneurial venture and learn the skills, knowledge and mindset required to build a successful enterprise. It is open to all students with an undergraduate degree from any discipline and was developed in collaboration with multiple UTS faculties and the wider startup community.
Subhadrammal, D & Bliemel, M 2019, 'University-Based accelerators as a source of entrepreneurial self-efficacy: Preliminary evidence from Australia', Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange, Sydney, NSW.
This paper aims to contribute a deeper understanding of how accelerators and authentic learning experiences influence the ESE of aspiring student entrepreneurs. To do so, this paper develops a conceptual foundation to understand how the design of accelerator programs can create and nurture potential entrepreneurs by influencing their self-efficacy. More specifically, this model disaggregates ESE into specific measures of learning that can act as a source of ESE beliefs in the learning context of a university based accelerator program. The conceptual model is supported by a literature review and by anecdotal findings from publicly available reports of Australian university-based accelerator programs and from participation in such programs.
This paper presents our review of the literature and industry reports in relation to attempts to quantify and measure entrepreneurial ecosystems. Public interest and research on entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs) has exploded in recent years, with many different conceptualisations of EEs. How they are opera-tionalised and quantified remains a challenge. However, having a reliable metric for the state or health of an EE remains of great interest to policy makers and researchers alike. In this study, we review the emerg-ing literature on EEs with a focus on attempts to quantify what they are and how they work. While there is an emerging concesus or synthesis of what EEs are, the literature and reports on their quantification remain scattered. Many quantitative studies are based on the practicality of using data with very limited availability. Others use macro-level or aggregated individual level data to make inferences about what occurs at the level of the firm, their immediate network, or how these interactions play out across the ecosystem across a very diverse set of actors. While startups are the primary outcome and primary stakeholder in EEs, the broader literature recognises that startups do not operate in isolation, and that their emergence depends on the actions and interaction with other stakeholders, such as larger corpora-tions, universities, government and other incumbents. A single-minded obsession about the number of startups and their fundings deprives policy makers and researchers the ability to study the whole system or context in which they exist and create jobs, wealth and innovations.
Bliemel, MJ, Monicolini, L, Cavallo, A & Ghezzi, A 2018, 'Applying entrepreneurial ecosystem frameworks to studying the entrepreneurial university', http://acereconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/FINAL-ACERE-Progr…, Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange, Brisbane, QLD.
This study extends a recent conceptual advancement of what the entrepreneurial university (EntUni) is to study this phenomenon using the frameworks of entrepreneurial ecosystems (EE). The EE frameworks are holistic frameworks that are useful in understanding the diverse factors that interact to attain entrepreneurial outputs and outcomes. Recent criticism of the EE literature concludes that is consists of "long laundry lists of relevant factors" (Stam, 2015, p. 1764), without attaining actionable causal or conceptual models. Meanwhile, the literature on EntUni has been driven by myriads of models that have historically remained relatively fragmented in terms of which aspect of the phenomenon is being studied. By adopting a holistic EE lens to studying the EntUni phenomenon, this study aims to enable further research on how universities generate entrepreneurial outcomes. By proposing the EntUni as an EE, this study contributes back to the EE literature by revealing more nuanced examples of EE. From these examples, we might recognize the relative importance of each factor in EE frameworks resulting in more actionable EE models.
Kaye, N, Schweitzer, J, Bliemel, MJ & Miles, M 2018, 'The Sydney School of Entrepreneurship: Building entrepreneurial capacity in NSW', http://acereconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/FINAL-ACERE-Progr…, Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange, Brisbane, QLD.
Monicolini, L & Bliemel, MJ 2018, 'What is the entrepreneurial university: A bibliometric analysis', http://acereconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/FINAL-ACERE-Progr…, Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange, Brisbane, QLD.
Slusarczyk, J, Sinclair, JR, Bliemel, M & Agrawal, S 2000, 'Evaluation of emergency ventilation in three subway stations', 10TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON AERODYNAMICS AND VENTILATION OF VEHICLE TUNNELS, 10th International Symposium on Aerodynamics and Ventilation of Vehicle Tunnels, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING PUBLISHING LTD, BOSTON, MA, pp. 491-510.
Bliemel, MJ 2016, The Role and Performance of Accelerators in the Australian Startup Ecosystem, no. 2016MGMT03.
The scope of this project was to assess the value-add of Australian incubators and accelerators to the high-growth innovative startups they support, as well as to the local, regional and national innovation ecosystems. This scope includes exploring their impact on the development of entrepreneurial networks, improving the performance of the supported startups, and providing generally positive economic and social outcomes. While the focus was nominally on incubators and accelerators, other support organisations for startups were considered, including co-working spaces, angel groups, mentoring programs and training services.
Bliemel, M 2019, 'StartRails and StartNets: Mapping experiential pathways toward entrepreneurship at two large universities'.
How to create visual directories of experiential entrepreneurship education opportunities at large universities and create a sense of belonging in an entrepreneurial community.
Bliemel, M 2019, 'University-based entrepreneurial ecosystems and their visualisations'.
Bliemel, M, de Klerk, S, Flores, R & Miles, M 2018, 'Should all students get a taste for entrepreneurship?'.
Many students really do want to become entrepreneurs and start start-ups while they are still at university. Nationally, and at UTS, about 40% are actively planning to develop entrepreneurial capabilities. But, why and how? Along with presenting a case for entrepreneurship education for all students, this article presents a summary of the state of business acceleration in Australia.
Bliemel, MJ & Maine, EMA 2016, 'Solar Power Venturing - Market Entry Decisions under Uncertainty', Ivey Case Publishing.
[Teaching case] Dr. Lachlan Rayburn founded Solectric, a small solar power venture, in March 2006 in Sydney, Australia, an area known for clean-technology entrepreneurship.1 Based on the recent development of solar hot water rebates from the government, Rayburn saw an opportunity to commercialize the next generation of domestic solar energy sources in anticipation of a similar legislative change that would encourage their
adoption. He had taken a fixed-term leave from his academic job to start the venture and had hired a business development manager (BDM) to run and grow the venture after his return to academia.
In October 2012, however, there were concerns about the financial sustainability of the venture because the markets that the BDM had explored were not providing enough traction to make a profit. A decision
had to be made soon about the overall direction of the venture, which could involve some difficult choices. Rayburn had finally reached a point where his founding vision was pitted against the practicality of generating revenues: as the chairman of his board, he was asked to present his and his BDM's analysis at an imminent board meeting. At this meeting, Rayburn was seeking the board's support for his choice among three potential markets: residential installations, refrigerated trailers, and digital signage.