Signature redacted Signature redacted Signature redacted Thesis Supervisor

73 Pages·2014·10 MB·English

Design of a Best-Practice Start-Up Accelerator for the
Granada Health Technology Park
by
Francisca Merchan Higuera
M. Sc. Computer Science and Electronic Engineering (2006),
University Carlos III de Madrid, Spain
Submitted to the MIT Sloan School of Management in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Degree of
Master of Business Administration MASSACHUSETTS INSTMUTfE
OF TECHNOLOGY
at the
JUN 18 201
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
June 2014 LiBRARIES
C 2014 Francisca Merchan Higuera. All rights reserved
The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and
electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known or
hereafter created.
Signature redacted
Signature of Author
Francisca Merchan Higuera
MIT Sloan School of Management
Signature redacted
May9,2014
Read by
Mercedes Delgado
/ -A
Signature redacted Assistant Professor
Fox School of Business
Read by
Lourdes Nufiez
Director of Knowledge Transfer
Signature redacted
Granada Health Technology Park
Certified by
Da Fiona Murray
Dean of Innovation
Signature redacted
Thesis Supervisor
AcceDted by
Maura Herson
Director MBA Program
MIT Sloan School of Management
2
Design of a Best-Practice Start-Up Accelerator for the
Granada Health Technology Park
by
Francisca Merchan Higuera
Submitted to the MIT Sloan School of Management on May 9, 2014 in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Business Administration
Abstract
Accelerators are ecosystem catalyzers introduced in 2005 by Y-Combinator. They are time-
bounded programs to facilitate core resources for entrepreneurs (mentors, capital,
training), with the goal of making the trial-and-error innovation process faster and more
efficient. Accelerators are schools of entrepreneurship and, often, a certificate of quality.
The province of Granada generates more than 3.46% of Spain's scientific production;
however, it contributes with only 1.4% to the domestic GDP (year 2011). A well-designed
startup accelerator can help close the gap between the innovation capacity and the
economic impact on the region by fostering a vibrant ecosystem of innovation-driven
entrepreneurs. Our research examines the idiosyncratic needs of the entrepreneurial
ecosystem in Granada, because this understanding is crucial to address the local
limitations. In parallel, we studied a diverse typology of accelerators (e.g., selected Health
based accelerators in the US and Spanish accelerators) and created an exhaustive
benchmark analysis across them. Finally, we proposed a "best-practice" accelerator for the
PTS Granada, including choices such as the value proposition, the intake process, the
program duration, the amount of seed capital, the role of mentors, and the nature of
sponsors. We determined that an accelerator may be non sufficient for emergent
entrepreneurial ecosystems. For those cases, we offer additional recommendations to
improve the pre- and post-acceleration phases.
Thesis Supervisor: Fiona Murray
Title: Dean of Innovation
MIT Sloan School of Management
3
4
Acknowledgements
This thesis is more than a grade fulfillment report. It is a project to make the Granada
Health Technology Park a reference hub in healthcare entrepreneurship; a project with the
ambition to be a reality and to have an impact on the society.
I would like to thank Lourdes Nufiez, Director of Technology Transfer at the Granada
Health Technology Park for her constant support during these months. We have been
working together to understand what kind of accelerator can bring the highest value to the
park. We interviewed a variety of stakeholders, ranging from investors to entrepreneurs,
university professors and healthcare professionals, to understand what is missing to boost
healthcare innovation in the region. We are both keen to make the accelerator a reality.
Mercedes Delgado has offered very helpful guidance to develop and implement the
research methodology used in the thesis. Her expertise in entrepreneurship, industry
clusters, and regional competitiveness has been valuable to shape the content of the thesis.
I would like to thank Fiona Murray for her inspiration and guidance for the thesis. She has a
tremendous experience advising regions to facilitate entrepreneurship and innovation. She
has a vast knowledge in the field. It has been an honor to have her supervision for this
ambitious project.
I would like to thank Christian Catalini for sharing with me his experience at Creative
Destruction Labs, and his research on crowdfunding. I also would like to thank Daniel
Fehder for sharing his article about Accelerator Design, and his knowledge about what is
working in different accelerators across America.
Without these people, and many others who contributed by answering emails, calls, or
having twenty minutes to sit with me, the conclusions and the results of the thesis would
not be as sounded and rounded as they are.
Thank you all for your time. Thank you all for your trust.
5
6
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................... 3
ACKNOW LEDGEM ENTS........................................................................................................... 5
ACRONYM S .......................................................................................................................... 11
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 13
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 13
1 .1 .Sc O PE ................................................................................................................................... 1 3
1.2. ENTREPRENEURSHIP ECOSYSTEM STAKEHOLDERS FRAMEWORK ......................................................... 14
1.3. RELEVANCE OF THE REPORT ....................................................................................................... 18
1.4. W hy the Granada Health Technology Park? ............................................................ 18
1.5. W hy .......................................................................................................... 21
1.6. W hy ................................................................................................ 24
2. RESEARCH APPROACH .......................................................................................................... 27
3. THESIS ORGANIZATION .......................................................................................................... 28
CHAPTER 2- RESEARCH FINDINGS..................................................................................... 29
1. CASE STUDIES ...................................................................................................................... 29
1.1. StartUp Health.............................................................................................................. 29
1.2. Creative Destruction Lab ......................................................................................... 32
1.3. Start-Up Chile ............................................................................................................... 35
1.4. Lanzadera ..................................................................................................................... 37
2. BENCHMARKS ................................................................................................. 39
2.1. Healthcare Accelerators in the US ............................................................................ 39
2.2. Com m unity Focused Am erican Accelerators ............................................................ 41
2.3. Spanish Accelerators ................................................................................................ 43
3. SURVEY FINDINGS.................................................................................................................44
3.1. Quantitative findings................................................................................................ 44
3.2. Qualitative findings .................................................................................................. 46
7
CHAPTER 3 - ACCELERATOR DESIGN ................................................................................... 50
1. ACCELERATOR GOAL .............................................................................................................. 50
2. LOCAL ATTRIBUTES AND CONSTRAINTS....................................................................................... 50
3. ACCELERATOR OUTLINE ......................................................................................................... 52
CHAPTER 4 - PRE AND POST ACCELERATION...................................................................... 58
4. PRE-ACCELERATION................................................................................................................58
5. POST-ACCELERATION............................................................................................................ 60
CHAPTER 5 - FUTURE W ORK............................................................................................... 62
1. M ETRICS ............................................................................................................................. 62
2. RECOMMENDATIONS TO POLICY M AKERS.................................................................................. 62
3. HEALTHCARE AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP: HOw TO MAKE IT M ODULAR ............................................. 63
BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................... 64
APPENDIX A - PTS GRANADA FOCUS AREAS ..................................................................... 65
APPENDIX B - SURVEY .......................................................................................................... 67
1. ONLINE SURVEY QUESTIONS .................................................................................................. 67
2. RESPONDENTS CHARACTERIZATION ............................................................................................. 69
APPENDIX C -M ENTORS ....................................................................................................... 71
APPENDIX D - ICAP AND ECAP FIGURES ............................................................................. 73
8
List of Figures
Figure 1. MIT Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Stakeholders Framework...............5.... i
Figure 2. eCap and iCap as drivers of economic impact ................................................................. 18
Figure 3. Aging Index in Andalusia (2000 - 2013)............................................................................... 22
Figure 4. Distribution of research production in Spain.................................................................... 23
Figure 5. A ccelerator T im e Line...................................................................................................................... 26
Figure 6. StartU p H ealth Program .................................................................................................................. 31
Figure 7. Creative Destruction Lab Timeline........................................................................................ 33
Figure 8. Resources wanted by survey respondents ......................................................................... 45
Figure 9. Recommended areas of specialization for the accelerator......................................... 46
Figure 10. Survey respondents professional field .............................................................................. 69
Figure 11. Survey respondents professional areas ............................................................................ 70
9
List of Tables
Table 1. Differences between SME and IBE .......................................................................................... 17
Table 2. How accelerators stimulate entrepreneurial capacity........................................................ 24
Table 3. How an accelerator can help entrepreneurs............................................................................ 25
Table 4. StartUp Health Best Practices...................................................................................................... 31
T able 5 .C D L B est P ractices............................................................................................................................... 34
Table 6. StartUp Chile Best Practices........................................................................................................ 36
Table 7. Lanzadera Best Practices.................................................................................................................. 38
Table 8. Benchmark Healthcare US Accelerators............................................................................... 40
Table 9. Benchmark Community Focused American Accelerators.............................................. 42
Table 10. Benchmark Spanish Accelerators .......................................................................................... 43
Table 11. Summary of the recommendations for the PTS Granada Accelerator................... 57
Table 12. Pre-acceleration actions................................................................................................................. 59
Table 13. Post-acceleration actions........................................................................................................... 61
10