This study explores how technologically sophisticated firms respond to different types of standard setting in an emerging economy. Considering the heterogeneous institutional logics that are embedded in a hybrid-mode standard-setting system, we distinguish between market- and government-led standard setting. Using data of 8,519 artificial intelligence–active firms engaging in Chinese artificial intelligence standard setting from 2010 to 2020, we demonstrate that firms with superior technological capability are more likely to engage in market-led versus government-led standard setting. This is due to divergent goals and norms in different types of standard setting. We also find that subfield technological diversity intensifies market competition, thereby improving the incentive of firms with superior technological capability to engage in market-led standard setting with the aim of shaping future technological trajectories. Additionally, government ownership relieves goal misalignment and mitigates firms’ concerns about technology expropriation, thus promoting firms’ engagement in government-led standard setting.

This paper extends the conventional wisdom of social networks and entrepreneurship by clarifying the relationship between network diversity and venture growth as well as by studying the mediation effect of entrepreneurial alertness on network diversity. It highlights the importance of diverse networks for providing heterogeneous information and resources, which is the antecedent of entrepreneurial alertness. In this paper, Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) data from 44 countries are used in our analysis, considering the country’s impact. Overall, we concluded that network diversity can significantly predict entrepreneurial alertness, and a venture’s growth. Furthermore, an entrepreneur’s educational level and entrepreneurial experience have positive moderating effects on the relationship between network diversity and entrepreneurial alertness.

This paper explores the academic entrepreneur’s identity transition and its impact on spin-off’s innovative input. Central to this study is the factors that influence scholars’ position-holding behavior and their impact on spin-offs. Based on the data of the 2005–2010 SME Innovation Fund and 14 interviews, we investigate the influence of scholars’ role embeddedness on their entrepreneurial role-taking behavior from the perspective of identity theory. Empirical results show that scholars with higher embeddedness in academia are less likely to hold a spin-offs’ CEO position. Besides, follow-up research found that scholars holding CEO positions can increase a spin-off’s R&D input, which reveals the influence of scholars’ career imprinting and its scientific logic on role-taking behaviors and spin-offs’ innovation input. We also empirically test the effect of scientific logic and business logic on a spin-off’s innovation input, concluding that conflicts between these two logics are detrimental to a firm’s innovation input. This paper contributes to existing literature by providing a new perspective for identity theory and has implications for scholars’ entrepreneurial practice. Additionally, it provides a theoretical basis for technology transfer and open innovation policy.