Entrepreneurial Innovation How To Unleash A Key Source Of Growth And Jobs In The G20

Description
In this particular detailed file in relation to entrepreneurial innovation how to unleash a key source of growth and jobs in the g20.

Entrepreneurial
Innovation:
how to unleash a key
source of growth and jobs
in the G20 countries
Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
2 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Contents
Introduction
Foreword
Executive summary
Chapter 1: Every entrepreneur is a digital entrepreneur
Chapter 2: Entrepreneurs are the catalyst for
job creation
Chapter 3: Emerging markets are increasingly
challenging developed economies as a major
source of entrepreneurial innovation
Chapter 4: Entrepreneurs are ready to shift attitude
toward more collaboration with large companies
Chapter 5: Technology clusters, inspired by
Silicon Valley, can provide a vital ecosystem
for entrepreneurial success
Chapter 6: Young entrepreneurs demand active
support from government to sustain their
leadership in technology innovation
The final word
About the research
Acknowledgements
Sources
Appendix: Survey results
3
4
7
10
16
20
24
28
34
40
42
43
44
39
Introduction 3
Introduction
Entrepreneurship is not only an important
driver of economic growth, productivity,
innovation and employment. It is also a key
player in the “cycle of life” of businesses, giving
rise to new firms to take the place of those
whose influence and relevance are waning.
But as anyone who has started a business knows well, being
an entrepreneur is not easy. Entrepreneurs often must fight
an uphill battle to get their new ventures off the ground,
and many never succeed.
For this reason, governments need to do all they can to
support fledgling entrepreneurs and remove the barriers
that unnecessarily constrain them and stifle innovation.
One way they can do this is by making decisions that foster
entrepreneurship and facilitate the dissemination of new
technologies and their adoption by an increasing number of
entrepreneurs. Indeed, we believe that the current wave of
new technologies provides a favorable environment for
entrepreneurs who aim to scale their business fast. Gaining
access to and deploying those technologies easily and cost-
effectively can mean the difference between a success story
and a compelling new idea that never sees the light of day.
To help governments in their policy making efforts,
Accenture teamed with the Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance on
a comprehensive research effort on entrepreneurial innovation
in the G20 countries, with an emphasis on new technologies.
The goal of the research was to gain insights from entrepreneurs
on the importance of innovation within their business, the
drivers and inhibitors for innovation, and what the G20
governments should do to better support entrepreneurs.
Five key findings emerged
from our research:
• Every entrepreneur is a
digital entrepreneur
• Entrepreneurs are the catalyst for
innovation and economic growth
• Emerging markets are challenging
developed economies as the leading
source of entrepreneurial innovation
• Entrepreneurs are ready to shift
attitude toward more collaboration
with large companies
• Technology clusters, inspired by Silicon
Valley, can provide a vital ecosystem
for entrepreneurial success
Young entrepreneurs demand active
support from government to sustain their
leadership in technology innovation.
4 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Foreword
This edition of the G20 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance (G20
YEA) Summit takes place in a context of economic instability
and structural changes. High unemployment, especially youth
unemployment, is one of the major concerns of governments,
while new technologies are reshaping value chains across
the globe and fundamentally transforming the context in
which entrepreneurs develop their activities. At the heart of
innovation, and technological innovation, lies free will and
creativity allied with the ability to exploit opportunities and
find effective solutions. Entrepreneurship, especially youth
entrepreneurship, demonstrates those qualities that play a
crucial role in the development of economies and job creation.
Victor Sedov
Chairman, G20 YEA
Summit, Moscow 2013,
and President, Center
for Entrepreneurship
Jean-Louis Grégoire
Committee Chair,
G20 YEA Thought Leaders
In the G20 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance,
we passionately believe that innovation,
regardless of its forms, has a role to
play in reinvigorating growth and job
creation. To take full advantage of the
benefits entrepreneurial innovation can
bring, the G20 governments need to
take some decisive action. In order to
prepare concrete proposals, the G20 YEA
commissioned this report to:
• Capture the role played by young
entrepreneurs in adopting and
developing technology innovation
within the G20 countries
• Analyze the source of tomorrow’s
technology innovation
• Pinpoint the barriers
entrepreneurs face
• Provide recommendations for
consideration when forming policy
and regulations at local levels to
foster technology innovation
driven by entrepreneurs
We are pleased to present you with
the results of this study conducted by
Accenture, and we hope that the ideas
presented here will serve as a guide for
policy makers and key opinion leaders to
unleash this key source of growth and
jobs and in the G20 countries.
5 Foreword
Young entrepreneurs from the G20 countries have become a
unique force. Powered by their relentless efforts to innovate,
develop new business models and sell new products and
services, they expect to achieve strong growth and job
creation in the next two years. This is a remarkable sign
of optimism given the uncertain and volatile business
environment in many G20 countries. At the same time,
young entrepreneurs seek more support from governments
and large businesses to help them sustain their contribution
to economic growth and job creation.
Pierre Nanterme
Chairman & CEO,
Accenture
These are among the conclusions of a
new report, “Entrepreneurial Innovation:
how to unleash a key source of growth
and jobs in the G20 countries,” published
by Accenture for the G20 Young
Entrepreneurs’ Alliance. The report
is based on a global survey of 1,000
entrepreneurs aged 40 or younger across
all G20 countries.
Of those entrepreneurs surveyed, 76
percent believe they are a major source of
technology innovation in their respective
countries. In addition, 81 percent expect
to create new jobs over the next two
years, and 41 percent expect to grow their
businesses by more than eight percent
annually during that time.
The optimism shared by these young
entrepreneurs can be explained largely by
their enthusiastic embrace of technology.
The report revealed that, today, every
entrepreneur is a digital entrepreneur.
Entrepreneurs are leveraging new
technologies such as social media, mobile
computing, analytics and the cloud to
create innovative new products at speed
and at scale—increasingly disrupting
existing value chains.
Yet the research also found that young
entrepreneurs are looking to collaborate
more with large companies. Although
only 35 percent of the entrepreneurs we
surveyed currently collaborate with large
businesses on innovation, another 46
percent intend to do so within the next
two years. These collaborations provide
entrepreneurs with better access to
new markets, specialist skills and more
expensive technologies which help fuel
their growth.
In turn, large companies are seeing the
benefits of cooperative efforts with
entrepreneurs to gain an early view of
disruptive innovations as well as access
to new sources of talent. Together, large
companies and entrepreneurs have an
opportunity to address the imbalances that
challenge sustainable economic growth
in communities around the world. Also,
governments have a decisive role to play
to strengthen entrepreneurial ecosystems
and encourage the development of
entrepreneurial innovation.
Time is of the essence for the G20 countries
to embrace their young entrepreneurs
and unleash a new wave of innovation,
productivity, job creation and sustainable
economic growth. We hope that all
stakeholders of the innovation ecosystem
will find this report relevant and actionable.
6 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
There is no doubt that the past few years have been challenging
for many economies. Europe has suffered greatly from the
consequences of successive financial, monetary and budgetary
crises, the US is only starting to show signs of slow recovery and
even the growth engine of China is starting to cool down. The
social impact has been particularly severe with high levels of
unemployment in many regions, with critically high levels among
the youth. The more successful economies in that context have
been driven by export-led growth built on a strong manufacturing
base. And, until now, much of the focus of governments has been
on providing the support needed for large companies to invest in
growth while tackling the social impact of the economic downturn.
Bruno Berthon
Global Managing Director,
Strategy & Sustainability,
Accenture
However, this alone is insufficient and
new paths to growth need to be invented.
Young entrepreneurs are therefore an
essential part of the business ecosystem
when their importance to the global
economy is often underappreciated.
Our report includes input from over
1,000 young entrepreneurs from across
all G20 countries. We also explored in
detail specific topics through eight ‘lab’
workshops including locations like Beijing,
London, Moscow and New York. And we
complemented this extensive approach
with in-depth interviews from 12 experts
in this field. And the results are telling.
Young entrepreneurs are a hotbed of
innovation, especially technological
innovation. Young entrepreneurs are a
source of economic growth across all
G20 countries. And young entrepreneurs
are an important source of job creation—
both direct and indirect. In short, we
can confirm that they are an essential
component of the business ecosystem
for growth.
It is therefore important for governments
and big business to understand the
untapped potential of partnering more
closely with young entrepreneurs by
helping them to overcome the barriers
they face and providing them with the
right conditions to grow and flourish
in order to benefit from greater
technological innovation, strong growth
potential and the subsequent impact on
new job creation.
Young entrepreneurs themselves
must also continue to play their
part. ‘Every entrepreneur is a digital
entrepreneur’: they must continue to
focus on innovation and exploiting new
technologies. Entrepreneurs must learn
to build their own virtual networks: they
must become active members of the
business ecosystem to access faster new
innovations, technologies and resources
on a global scale. In order to continue the
drive for job creation, entrepreneurs must
foster more and stronger collaborations
with big business to scale their ideas and
accelerate their growth.
This is why we are delighted to work with
the G20 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance and
share their ambition for the voice of young
entrepreneurs to be heard globally. We
hope this research provides a constructive
contribution to the dialogue and helps to
facilitate meaningful discussions with G20
governments at local, regional and state
levels for young entrepreneurs.
7 Executive summary
Executive summary
Entrepreneurship is not only an important driver of economic growth, productivity,
innovation and employment. It also is a key player in the life cycle of businesses, giving
rise to new firms to take the place of those whose influence and relevance are waning.
But as anyone who has started a business knows well, being an entrepreneur is not easy.
Entrepreneurs often must fight an uphill battle to get their new ventures off the ground,
and many never succeed.
The Entrepreneurial Innovation research
initiated by the G20 Young Entrepreneurs’
Alliance (G20 YEA) and carried out by
Accenture was designed to research
the current state of technology-driven
innovation by young entrepreneurs*,
gain entrepreneurs’ insights on
potential solutions to unleash a key
source of growth and job creation
in the G20 countries, and contribute
to the formulation of G20 policy
recommendations by the G20 YEA. It is
based on the hypothesis that technology
innovation by entrepreneurs is critical
to innovation’s ecosystems and to G20
countries’ competitiveness and job
creation. The results of the research are
presented in this report that was prepared
for the G20 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance
2013 Summit in Moscow.
Five key findings emerged
from our research:
Today every entrepreneur is a digital
entrepreneur. Innovation, and more
precisely technology-driven innovation,
is a strategic priority for 78 percent of
the entrepreneurs interviewed as part of
the survey that was conducted in the
G20 countries**. Entrepreneurs extensively
use new technologies—especially
information and communication
technologies such as social media,
mobile technologies, data analytics,
machine-to-machine connectivity, and
cloud technologies—to create new
innovative products and services and
reach customers at scale and at speed.
Scalability, flexibility, and reduced cost
of access to new technologies offer
entrepreneurs significant opportunities
to experiment and develop new business
models that can disrupt the value
chains of all industries and impact the
competitiveness of G20 economies.
* For a de?nition of young entrepreneurs, see the box “De?nitions” on page 9. The de?nition used in this report
is the de?nition developed by the Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance. The report is focused on this population, but,
for the sake of convenience, “young entrepreneurs” are sometimes called simply “entrepreneurs” in the report.
** See the appendix on page 44 for details on the survey methodology.
† IMF Global Economic Outlook, April 2013http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2013/01/pdf/text.pdf
Young entrepreneurs from the G20
countries see themselves as the most
dynamic source of technology innovation
and expect to achieve strong growth and
job creation through their businesses
in the next two years. More than three
quarters (76 percent) believe they are the
major source of technology innovation in
their country. Forty-one percent expect to
grow their businesses by more than eight
percent annually over the next two years
and 81 percent expect to create new
jobs in that period, which demonstrates
faith in the future at a time when global
economic growth will reach less than four
percent in 2013, according to the latest
forecasts
†
, and many countries struggle to
create jobs, especially for young people.
The specific impact of the high-tech
sector is particularly noteworthy, as,
according to recent economic analysis,
every new job in the high-tech industry
triggers the development of more than
four jobs in their local ecosystems.
8 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Although the United States is seen as
the most innovative country in the next
two years, China and India are considered
the second and third most innovative,
respectively, clearly on their way to
become the technology powerhouses of
the future. This assertion finds possible
support in separate Accenture analysis
revealing that of the world’s five million
science, technology engineering and
mathematics (STEM) graduates, 86
percent came from China, Brazil and
India in 2012 according to our estimates.
The proportion of emerging market
entrepreneurs applying mobile, social,
data analytics and machine-to-machine
technologies in their business is higher
than in mature economies, according to
the survey. This difference can be partly
explained by local growth opportunities,
availability of technology skilled workers
and fewer constraints on innovation
(i.e. fewer regulations).
Young entrepreneurs see their strong
contribution to economic growth
increasingly dependent on working with
larger businesses. Thrity-five percent of
respondents claim to collaborate with
large businesses today and a further
46 percent intend to do so in the
coming two years. They cite access to
new markets, specialist skills and more
expensive technologies as benefits of
working with bigger organizations. Larger
businesses appear less open, however,
with 52 percent of a sample researched
by Accenture stating they have either
no collaboration with entrepreneurs at
all or just one such initiative with at
least a single small company. Among
large companies which have developed
collaborations with entrepreneurs,
multiple different ways have been
tested: for example, corporate venturing
(nearly half of 100 leading international
companies we analyzed have developed
a formal corporate venture policy),
mentoring, joint innovation, support to
access markets, training and coaching,
and joint involvement in local community
development or technology clusters.
By collaborating in this way with
entrepreneurs, large companies benefit
from greater exposure to a wide range of
innovation that may potentially disrupt
their markets, gain access to a new talent
pool, and indirectly stimulate internal
entrepreneurship among their own
employees. This budding collaboration
in innovation between start-ups and
large companies is no guarantee for
systematic success; however, the mutual
benefits are potentially significant
enough to encourage both large
companies and entrepreneurs to pursue
it—especially in the pharmaceuticals
sector, but also increasingly in financial
services, communications, and energy.
As collaboration increases, new models
of cooperation will emerge, especially
to facilitate connections, clarify the
frameworks of engagement, and protect
intellectual property on both sides. The
implementation of formal innovation
systems by large companies will be key
to the success of these initiatives.
Entrepreneurs have a positive view
of technology clusters. Such clusters,
inspired by Silicon Valley, and adapted
to different business and cultural
environments, can provide a vital
ecosystem for entrepreneurship
development. Although Silicon Valley
is unique, governments may stimulate
the development of local clusters,
which leverage and expand the specific
strengths of local economies, and
their “smart specialization.” Clusters
also provide an answer to the growing
aspiration for people to benefit from
access to local supply chains and
energy supply, and access to locally
manufactured products through new
technology solutions such as 3D printing.
Specific measures that can aid the
development of clusters include providing
sustained and increased support for basic
research, reducing restrictions that inhibit
the ability of universities to collaborate
with industry to create value, “de-risking”
the future for entrepreneurs by promoting
stability and consistency in regulations,
increasing permeability across companies,
being a source of high-risk capital for
start-ups, and embracing diversity in all
aspects. In parallel, digital entrepreneurs’
connections with their stakeholders will
increasingly extend beyond geographic
boundaries and give rise to the creation
of “virtual entrepreneurial ecosystems”.
Our research also highlighted the
general support entrepreneurs would
like to receive from governments. Two
thirds are not satisfied with actual
government policies. Eighteen percent
say that governments take no action
to help entrepreneurs and a further
49 percent say that while they do, their
efforts are not relevant or effective.
Their primary demands are for changes
to tax, the development of technology
training and education to increase the
talent pool of technology skilled workers,
and public finance for entrepreneurs
and small businesses.
9 Executive summary
Key recommendations for
governments include:
• Stimulate demand through the
development of digital infrastructures,
export support schemes, the digitization
and opening up of public procurement to
small companies, and the digitalization
of public services (including open data
policies that encourage companies to
create innovative services for the
public sector).
• Support entrepreneurs through
efficient tax incentives, access to
broader sources of funding, greater
investment in STEM education and
training, and facilitating the creation
of clusters and incubators.
• Develop business friendly
environments for technology
innovation through personalized
and simplified online administrative
processes, a higher tolerance for
failure, standards for cloud technology
that reduce fixed business costs, and
an attractive environment
for entrepreneurs to set up
new businesses.
With a significant portion of the world
still struggling to respond to today’s
volatile and uncertain economy,
governments need to explore every
promising opportunity to positively
impact their business environment.
By better understanding the challenges
and needs of entrepreneurs, and putting
in place policies that enable them to
innovate and grow, governments can
capitalize on a proven economic and job
creation engine that can be a significant
contributor to G20 countries’ drive to
restore growth to their economies.
Definitions
Innovation is defined in the Oslo Manual
as including product innovation, process
innovation, marketing innovation and
organizational innovation. Innovation is
interpreted by Accenture as “a new way
of doing things that adds value” in the
fields listed above.
Entrepreneurs are defined by the
OECD-Eurostat Entrepreneurship
Indicators Program as those persons
(business owners) who seek to generate
value, through the creation or expansion
of economic activity, by identifying and
exploiting new products, processes or
markets. In this report, the focus is on
“employer enterprises”, which are more
closely related to the notion of
entrepreneurship as a driver of job
creation and innovation than micro
enterprises (those that provide some form
of subsistence to the owner, usually self-
employed and without employees).
“Young Entrepreneurs” are defined
by the Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance
as entrepreneurs aged 40 or younger,
who are founders, owners, or co-owners
of a private business.
New Technologies include technologies
such biotechnology, nanotechnology,
advanced materials, photonics, micro-
and nano-electronics, advanced
manufacturing systems and information
and communication technologies
(e.g. social media, mobility, analytics
or cloud). This report is primarily, but
not exclusively, focussed on information
and communication technologies.
10 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Every entrepreneur is a
digital entrepreneur
Technology-driven innovation is a strategic priority for entrepreneurs who were interviewed
in the survey that was conducted in the G20 countries: seventy eight percent indicated that
innovation is one of their top priorities, with about one-fourth reporting it is their number
one priority (Figure 1). In today’s business environment, innovation is an essential component
of entrepreneurship, in most cases associated with new technologies to create new products
and services. It also triggers disruptive changes to production processes, as illustrated by the
fact that 85 percent of entrepreneurs surveyed indicated that new technologies are critical
or important enablers of their business processes (Figure 2).
To a large extent, entrepreneurs are
digital entrepreneurs, given their appetite
for new technologies (Figure 3). A large
majority of respondents are either
currently leveraging these technologies
or planning to use them in the next two
years, with mobile and social technologies
being the most popular, followed by
data analytics, cloud technologies and
machine-to-machine connectivity.
Cognitive science and nanotechnology
are also either being used or under
consideration by a significant number
of entrepreneurs who see them as the
potential next big wave.
Beyond the preceding, simple economics
are also are making it easier for
entrepreneurs to embrace technology.
The continually decreasing costs of
access to new technologies provide
flexible ways to scale businesses more
easily and quickly, which creates a highly
favorable environment for new start-ups
(Figure 4). Entrepreneurs can now use
digital technologies to quickly create and
launch new products, services, customer
experiences and business models, as
well as to redefine end-to-end business
processes through enhanced
transparency, efficiency and
effectiveness. Indeed, about four in ten
entrepreneurs in our study said cost
efficiency, creation of
new products or services, and quality
were the most common benefits that
technology-driven innovation delivers
to their business (Figure 5).
The extent to which a company can
embrace digital technologies varies by
industry, but all industries are affected.
In the short term, companies in industries
such as high-tech services or products,
broadcast media, and financial services
have a much greater opportunity to use
digital technologies to transform their
business than those in agriculture or
construction. Companies in such
industries as consumer products,
automotive, media/entertainment,
and airline industries have significant
opportunities to use digital technologies
to transform their internal processes.
Figure 2: New technologies are
important enablers of entrepreneurs’
business processes (%)
What is the importance of new
technologies to support and enable
innovation in your business processes?
85%
22
63
14
1
Critical
Important
Not very
important
Not important
at all
Figure 1: Innovation is a strategic
priority for entrepreneurs (%)
Is innovation considered as a strategic
priority of your company?
78%
24
54
19
3
Number one
priority
One of the top
priorities
An important
priority but not a
top priority
Not a priority
Chapter 1:
11 Chapter 1: Every entrepreneur is a digital entrepreneur
Figure 3: Entrepreneurs are de facto digital entrepreneurs (%)
Do you currently leverage any of the following new technologies?
Do you expect to leverage any in the next two years?
Figure 4: Technology costs are declining logarithmically (USD)
Cost of 1 Mbps of data transfer
Cost of 1 MIPs of mainframe
computing power
Cost of 1 GB of data storage
100,000.00
10,000.00
1,000.00
100.00
10.00
1.00
0.10
0.01
1990 1993 1995 1998 2001 2004 2006 2009 2012
85% 78%
believe technology is critical or
important to support innovation
in business processes.
believe innovation is one of
the top strategic priorities for
entrepreneurs.
57
24
13
6
56
26
12
6
47
31
13
9
42
27
21
10
40
33
17
10
21
28
28
23
18
24
35
23
18
21
36
25
Currently being leveraged
Will be leveraged in the next
two years
Not currently leveraged and will not
be leveraged in the next two years
Do not know/not familiar with
this technology
Digital Technologies
Mobile
technology
Data
analytics
Internet
of things
Cloud
technologies
Cognitive
science
Nano
technology
Bio
technology
Social
technologies
12 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Figure 5: Technology innovation will benefit entrepreneurs both in revenue generation and productivity gains (%)
What are the main benefits that technology-driven innovation delivers for your business?
Cost efficiency 42
Creation of new products/services 40
Quality improvement & management 40
Access to global markets 29
Ability to target specific segments of clients 28
Process agility/flexibility 26
Quicker time to market 24
Collaboration (within enterprise, with partners, with vendors, etc.) 22
Supply chain optimization 17
Attraction and retention of best talent 17
Access to venture capital funding 14
Ranked within top 3
Cloud technologies are especially
important to entrepreneurs’ business, as
several entrepreneurs in our study singled
out the cloud as vital to their success.
“Today, we face an unprecedented
amount of innovation, and the nature
of it has changed as well, noted Cris
Conde, executive chairman at True
Risk. “In the 1980s, it took a long time
and a lot of money to get an idea off
the ground. With technologies such
as cloud computing, and SaaS models,
technologies barriers have eroded, and
entrepreneurs can launch their companies
very quickly without the help of venture
capital at the very beginning.”
Echoing Conde’s sentiments is Frank
Collins, CEO of DangerDynamite!
Multimedia in Canada. “The decrease of
technology costs is huge, especially in my
industry,” said Collins. “I was able to start
my business with next to no overhead
costs and immediately compete with
companies that have been around ten
or 15 years. Without cloud technologies,
I wouldn’t have been able to start my
company and move as quickly as I did
in the market.”
However, it is important to note that
while the cloud is helpful in quickly
and cost-effectively scaling a business,
companies in many industries will
still need access to substantial capital
to cover the purchase of physical
equipment and non-recurring costs,
such as engineering costs related
to the development and launch of
a new product.
The sidebar on page 14 discusses the
technology environment in more detail,
exploring seven key technology trends
that are impacting businesses and
entrepreneurs everywhere.
Entrepreneurs’ extensive use of
technology is driven by many factors
(Figure 6). The most prevalent of these
factors are clients’ demands (which drive
the need to innovate in a particular area
to attract and retain clients); availability
of technology-skilled workers (which
makes it possible to drive innovation);
and an entrepreneurial culture created
by other successful entrepreneurs (which
boosts entrepreneurs’ confidence and
appetite for risk, as well as provides
them with examples to emulate and
spurs friendly competition to succeed).
13 Chapter 1: Every entrepreneur is a digital entrepreneur
Figure 6: Clients’ demands, availability of skilled workers and entrepreneurial culture boost use of technology innovation (%)
Do you consider each of the following to be a technology innovation enabler in your country?
Clients’ demands 58
Availability of technology skilled workers 52
Entrepreneurial culture and successful entrepreneurs 52
Ease of collaboration with entrepreneurs and start-ups 49
Maturity of technology infrastructure 48
Co-production companies/clients 46
Access to funding 46
Ease of collaboration with universities/research laboratories 45
Ease of collaboration with large companies 45
Intellectual Property policy 43
Government policies such as tax incentives and regulation 43
Availability of local technology clusters 41
R&D public policies 41
Immigration policy to attract skilled workers 36
14 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Seven key technology
trends that are impacting
businesses
Entrepreneurs looking to capitalize on
technology innovation should consider
seven key technology trends
1
that
Accenture expects to have a significant
impact on technologies and businesses
in the coming years:
1. Relationships at scale:
Businesses today have new ways to
learn about consumers—all based on
richer digital interactions. Whether
through e-mail, social media, the Web,
online chat, or location-based services,
or on the many mobile devices consumers
use today, building relationships at scale
is about creating meaningful interactions
with consumers wherever they are and
whenever they need it. But it’s not just
about deeper insights. New technology
means enterprises must shift from a
focus on cost and channels, to a focus
on using the channels and the data
derived from them to build longer-term
and productive relationships.
2. Design for analytics:
Organizations are no longer suffering
from a lack of data; instead they’re
suffering from a lack of the right data.
Winning companies are those that
truly make data their strategic asset to
drive business outcomes. This means
starting with the outcome they desire,
understanding the data required, and
then using newer technology to get the
right data—from inside and outside the
enterprise. These companies will treat
data less as a warehouse and more as a
“data supply chain.” They will manipulate
it, add to it, update it, and analyze it in
various ways, transforming the data into
new products and business insights.
3. Data velocity:
This trend focuses on matching the
speed of data to the speed of decisions.
Today, thanks to unstructured data from
social media, mobile devices, sensors and
applications, the volume of data and data
sources available to business leaders is
greater than ever. But large amounts of
data are not helpful unless companies can
make sense of it. New technologies across
the ecosystem are enabling companies to
scan tens of billions of records a second
or query one to two terabytes in less than
a second. In the process, they are helping
accelerate the whole data cycle from
insight to meaningful action.
4. Seamless collaboration:
Advances in technology make it easier
than ever for people to work together.
But entrepreneurs don’t necessarily need
to become more social for collaboration
to work. It’s the work and the process
that need to be social. When that
happens, it will transform the nature
of work. The new face of collaboration
will involve embedding social-driven,
collaborative tools into business
processes. Organizations will be more
productive, more efficient, and more
innovative as a result.
5. Software-defined networking:
Software-defined networking, or
SDN, involves managing the network
through software instead of through
hardware, and it is a giant leap forward
in enterprise flexibility. SDN addresses
a significant need: it makes it easier for
businesses to manage change, integrate
cloud services and get more return from
their network investments. SDN allows
companies to remove the complexity
and reduce the cost of network
reconfiguration, and turn the network
into a truly dynamic and flexible asset.
6. Active defense:
Companies are recognizing that
protecting their digital assets from
threats must go further than prevention.
Protection policies must acknowledge
that attackers will get through, so
companies need to stay one step ahead
of them. Active defense technologies are
emerging to help companies know, and
hide from, their enemies. Sophisticated
data and analytics-driven information
security are shifting the security emphasis
from monitoring to understanding to
taking preemptive action. And approaches
such as turning computer systems into a
“moving target” are making it harder for
hackers to find and exploit vulnerabilities.
7. Beyond the cloud:
Companies should no longer be asking
why they must use the cloud or which
cloud technologies they should use.
Rather, the key question is how to use the
cloud to deliver value to the enterprise.
Whether it’s infrastructure, platforms or
applications in the cloud, there is much
more organizations can do to use the
cloud to enable their business. And as
organizations embed the cloud into the
fabric of their IT systems, they will need
to manage a mix of on-premise and off-
premise technology—legacy systems and
traditional software mixed with cloud-
based technology—as well as a mix of
public and private clouds.
15 Chapter 1: Every entrepreneur is a digital entrepreneur
Chapter 2:
16 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Entrepreneurs are the catalyst
for job creation
Entrepreneurs are valuable to the business community for many reasons. One of the biggest
is that they are often responsible for bringing new ideas to life that can create entirely new
markets or revitalize existing ones—and, in the process, spur economic growth.
Figure 7: Three quarters of entrepreneurs consider they are a major source of technology innovation in their country (%)
Do you think entrepreneurs are currently the major source of technology innovation in your country?
78 74 72 72 72 68 62 59 79 83 85 86 87 89 76
Canada Germany Australia UK US Brazil Mexico Russia France Japan India Turkey China Italy Overall
Across the G20 countries we studied,
three-quarters of entrepreneurs believe
they are a major source of innovation
(Figure 7). This belief is common in all
of those countries, and it is particularly
true in Australia, the United States,
Mexico, France, India, China and Italy.
Furthermore, respondents expect
innovation to continue in the near future:
84 percent said they are optimistic
entrepreneurial innovation will rise in the
next two years.
Even more compelling is the impact that
entrepreneurs believe innovation will
have on their business and the overall
economy (Figure 8). Forty-one percent
of entrepreneurs are confident their
business will grow more than eight
percent per year in the next two years,
which is an extraordinary statistic in
a business environment where global
economic growth will reach less than four
percent in 2013, according to the latest
forecasts
1
. Even more impressive,
81 percent of them are confident
they will create new jobs in the next
two years, which is striking given so
many countries struggle to create jobs,
especially for young people.
17 Chapter 2: Entrepreneurs are the catalyst for job creation
What is the impact of
entrepreneurs on job creation?
The role of start-ups is vital for job
creation, particularly in the United
States, where start-ups create most
new net jobs. According to a Kauffman
Foundation study
2
, firms in their first year
of existence create an average of three
million jobs annually, whereas net job
gain in existing firms was negative for
most years during 1976-2010. Without
start-ups, no net job growth would have
occurred in the United States in certain
years during that period. Moreover, during
the lower end of the business cycles, job
creation at start-ups remains high, while
net job losses at existing firms are highly
sensitive to the business cycle (Figure 9).
In the European Union the situation is
comparable to a large extent: according
to the European Commission, “new
companies, especially SMEs, represent
the most important source of new
employment”
3
, as they create more than
four million new jobs in Europe each year.
And according to data released by the
European Commission, 85 percent of net
employment growth during 2002-2010 is
attributable to SMEs.
Figure 8: 81 percent of Entrepreneurs will create new jobs in the next two years
Would you agree with this statement:
“I am optimistic about the rise of entrepreneurial innovation in G20 countries in the
next two years and its impact on job creation?”
16%
84%
In the next two years...
41%
of entrepreneurs
expect more
than eight
percent p.a.
growth
81%
of entrepreneurs
will create
new jobs
Figure 9: Entrepreneurs are the primary source of job creation in the US (Millions)
Start-up and job creation in US – 1977–2012
Note: Data calculation from 1976–2005 are taken from Kauffman Foundation estimates based on US Census
Bureau, data from 2005–2010 are taken from US Census Bureau Database.
Source: Kauffman Foundation based on Business Dynamics Statistics, Tim Kane, US Census Bureau
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
-8
1977 1988 1999 2010
Net job change – start-ups
Net job change – existing firms
No
Yes
18 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
The impact of job creation by
entrepreneurs goes beyond those figures,
as employment in the high-tech sector
has an especially high multiplier effect.
According to research by Enrico Morreti
4

and a Bay Area Economic Council study
5
,
every new high technology job in the
United States creates 4.3 to 4.9 additional
local jobs in the non-tradable sectors
(Figure 10).
The multiplier effect is particularly
large for high-tech jobs compared with
other sectors of the economy such as
Figure 10: Each new high-tech job generates more than four additional jobs
in the local economy
Local multiplier effect, US
1.4 4.3 1.6 4.9
High-Tech
Manufacturing
Moretti Bay Area Council
Economic Institute
Source: “Local Multipliers, American Economic Review, Enrico Moretti, May 2010,
and “High tech employment and wages in the United States,” Bay Area
Economic Institute Report , December 2012.
manufacturing. One additional job in
manufacturing creates an estimated 1.4
to 1.6 additional jobs, about one-third
as many as created by high-tech. High-
tech sector large multipliers in the United
States reflect the fact that high-tech
companies tend to cluster around one
another, which attracts additional high-
tech firms and the local service providers
that support their business activities. It
illustrates the impact of the high-tech
sector development, mainly through start-
ups, on job creation at the local level.
19 Chapter 2: Entrepreneurs are the catalyst for job creation
“ Time is of the essence for the G20 countries to
embrace their young entrepreneurs and unleash
a new wave of innovation, productivity, job
creation and sustainable economic growth.”
Pierre Nanterme, Chairman & CEO, Accenture
Chapter 3:
20 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Emerging markets are increasingly
challenging developed economies as a
major source of entrepreneurial innovation
Historically, developed markets were the drivers of innovation. However, in the past decade,
there has been a strong and sustained shift in the primary locus of innovation—from mature
markets to emerging markets. That is especially true in the technology arena.
Entrepreneurs in emerging markets are
embracing new digital technologies more
extensively than their counterparts in
mature markets (Figure 11). This disparity
may be explained by several factors,
including greater local growth
opportunities available, increasing
availability of technology-skilled workers,
and fewer constraints on innovation (i.e.
fewer regulations) in emerging markets.
For these reasons, emerging markets are
seen by many as an important source of
tomorrow’s innovation as well. One-third of
entrepreneurs overall, and 45 percent of
those with headquarters in an emerging
market, expect the next wave of innovation
to come primarily from emerging markets
(Figure 12).
Figure 11: Entrepreneurs in emerging markets are embracing new digital
technologies extensively (%)
Do you currently leverage any of the following new technologies?
Do you expect to leverage any in the next two years?
45 33 52 34 53 45 73 73 82 59 83 75 84 78 86 79
Mobile
technology
Social
technologies
Data analytics Internet
of things
Cloud
technologies
Cognitive
science
Nano
technology
Bio
technology
Mature markets Emerging markets
A large pool of engineering talent is a key
driver of technology innovation. China,
India, and Brazil already produce more
STEM (science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics) talent than the United States,
United Kingdom and Japan combined (86
percent versus 14 percent in 2012). The gap
is increasing: in China, 41 percent of all new
university degrees awarded are in science
and engineering (Figure 14).
6
Comparable
figures are 13 percent in the United States,
and 22 percent in the United Kingdom.
7
21 Chapter 3: Emerging markets are challenging developed economies as the leading source of entrepreneurial innovation 21
Figure 12: Nearly half of the entrepreneurs located in emerging markets are confident
that they will challenge mature markets’ entrepreneurs on innovation (%)
In your industry, where do you expect the next wave of technology innovation
to come from?
Total Headquarter
in a mature
market
Headquarter
in an emerging
market
66
34
74
26
55
45
Primarily from mature markets
Primarily from emerging markets
Figure 13: Technology innovation expectations shift to China, India
In your industry, what will be the three most innovative countries in two years’ time?
% mentioned in top three
United States 46
China 34
Germany 22
United Kingdom 17
India 14
Japan 14
China
• In 2011 China poster more IPs than the US
• Beijing Techno Park saw VC investments rise
by 70% since 2012 ($57bn)
• R&D expenditure to rise to 2.5% of GDP
by 2020
India
Frugal Innovation is inherent to the innovation
for India entrepreneurs in order to reach a
mass market with low income and facing
large social issues
Of course, debates persist about how
many STEM graduates from universities
in developing countries are actually
qualified for employment with domestic
firms, let alone global multinationals.
9

Even if just one in five STEM graduates
in China will be suitable for global
employment (that is, approximately
720,000 would be candidates to
work for multinationals), China is still
producing more qualified STEM talent
than the United States, which will
award 460,000 science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics degrees
in 2015.
10
For its part, India has led the way in
“frugal innovation,” driven by the need
to bring new offerings to a huge, but
relatively poor, consumer market still
beset with serious social issues. The
results of such frugal innovation are
now being exported from the home
base in India to customers in mature
markets around the world (see sidebar
on page 22).
However, that’s not to say that
mature markets are about to cede
their innovation crown. Two-thirds of
entrepreneurs overall think mature
markets will still drive most of the
world’s innovation in the next two
years, with the preponderance of that
innovation being centered in the United
States and, to a lesser extent, Germany,
the United Kingdom, and Japan.
Last but not least, old boundaries are
getting blurred, as a growing number
of entrepreneurs contribute to the
“brain circulation”
11
and intend to
innovate and operate in both mature
markets and emerging markets, as they
have increasing choices as to where
they locate and do business. Young
entrepreneurs are digital entrepreneurs
who know that technology goes beyond
geographic and sectorial boundaries.
For them, all markets are de facto
‘emerging’ markets.
Figure 14: China, India and Brazil produce more STEM graduates than the US, the UK
and Japan combined
In China, more than 40 percent of all degrees awarded are STEM degrees.
In the US, just one in eight is a STEM degree.
22 18 14 13 26 41
China India UK Japan Brazil US
Source: Accenture Institute for High Performance analysis
22 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Is frugal innovation really
different?
Frugal innovation is all about innovation
tailored to the needs of countries where
a majority of consumers have low income
per capita, many still require basic needs
to be fulfilled and, in some cases, the
population is widely dispersed across a
massive geographic area, including in
isolated rural areas.
India has been at the forefront of frugal
innovation. It is home to 18 percent of
the world’s population, much of which is
poor and rural: India’s per capita income
is just $103 per month and 70 percent
of its people live far outside the major
cities.
12
Furthermore, much of the country
still lacks the basic services many people
take for granted, including access to
safe and clean drinking water, effective
sanitation, healthcare, and electricity.
In such an environment, where low
cost and high value cannot be mutually
exclusive, India’s businesses and
entrepreneurs have been challenged to
think creatively about how a product is
designed, built and brought to market
so the item meets consumers’ needs but
does so at a price they can afford.
A combination of several structural
changes has triggered the rise of frugal
innovation in India and some other
emerging markets in the past two
decades: competition has been stimulated
by governments that have become more
market oriented; the rise of a large local
middle class has created a new demand
for goods and services; local large
companies have become major players
with capacity to innovate much more;
local universities have developed their
programs to produce STEM graduates;
and new local opportunities have slowed
the brain drain these countries faced
before. The economics of innovation have
changed, paving the way to increased
opportunities for entrepreneurs and
SMEs that can develop frugal innovation
adapted to their local markets.
13

Two companies illustrate how
entrepreneurs in India have embraced
frugal innovation as a core tenet of their
business model and, in the process, have
created successful new products that are
helping to meet consumers’ needs.
Forushealth, based in Bangalore, describes
its mission as “addressing the health care
delivery crisis in the developing world
through innovative and inclusive product
design and service deployment.”
14
The
company developed a diagnostic device
that detects glaucoma and diabetic
retinopathy—a critical capability given
the fact that India has the greatest
prevalence of blindness—much of which
is preventable—among its population.
Unlike existing devices, Forushealth’s
new device is highly portable, so it can
be brought to people in rural areas who
live far from the nearest medical facility,
and it costs much less than traditional
alternatives. Furthermore, the device
can be operated by a paramedic instead
of a doctor, the latter of which are in
short supply, especially in remote areas.
And because the data collected by the
device is transmitted and stored in a
central database via the cloud, a patient’s
condition can be evaluated by a doctor
anywhere in the country.
The second company, Reindeer
Technologies, has developed a “smart
plug” to help consumers manage their
energy consumption more effectively.
The smart plug addresses a pressing need
among consumers in India, where energy
conservation is vital due to ongoing
power shortages, and its innovative
design enables consumers to remotely
control their appliances and other devices
as one would do in “smart home.” Yet
the plug is extremely affordable, costing
much less than “smart appliances” while
delivering the same functionality.
Importantly, frugal innovation is not
confined to its “home” markets. A
growing number of companies that have
created products initially for emerging
markets via frugal innovation have
been able to export those products to
customers in developed markets. One
prominent example is the portable
ultrasound scanner that General Electric
created for rural clinics in India and
China. The product was a major success
in those countries, but also proved to be
a perfect fit for ambulances in Western
countries. Successes such as this are one
of the reasons why emerging markets are
increasingly being seen as challenging the
historic innovation supremacy of mature
markets.
23 Chapter 3: Emerging markets are increasingly challenging developed economies as a major source of entrepreneurial innovation
“ With technologies such as cloud computing,
technology barriers have eroded and
entrepreneurs can launch their companies
very quickly without the help of venture
capital at the very beginning.”
Cris Conde, Executive Chairman, True Risk
Chapter 4:
24 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Entrepreneurs are ready to shift
attitude toward more collaboration
with large companies
The relationship between entrepreneurs and large companies is often marked by
caution, if not outright suspicion. Entrepreneurs often complain that dealing with large
companies is too challenging because of the latter’s complex and arduous processes,
fear of losing competitive advantage, their focus primarily on large contracts and
large volumes of sales and purchasing, and resistance to change and innovation.
Figure 15: A large majority of entrepreneurs either collaborate or intend to
collaborate with large companies (%)
Do you currently collaborate or do you plan to collaborate in the next two years with
large companies on technology innovation topics?
35 46 19
Yes
No, but intend to within 2 years
No, and have no plans to do so
What are the key benefits of collaborating with large companies? (%)
Access to new markets 48
Access to specific skills 31
Access to expensive technologies 29
Funding 27
Economies of scale 25
Possibility to sell your business 23
Some entrepreneurs are also hesitant to
team with established companies because
they harbor ambitions to actually render
those companies irrelevant and effectively
drive them out of business.
15
For their
part, large companies are often tempted
to favor in-house innovation that is easier
to control despite internal organizational
challenges, and less costly to fund, or they
simply buy start-ups that have products
and services with proven marketplace
value (although the collaborative “open
innovation” approach has been gaining
ground in the last decade).
The results of our study illustrates
entrepreneurs’ current attitude and intent.
One-third of entrepreneurs we surveyed
currently collaborate with large companies
on technology innovation. Nearly half of
respondents who said that they don’t
currently collaborate with large companies
intend to do so within two years (Figure
15). This shift in mindset appears to be
driven by increasing recognition among
entrepreneurs of the benefits collaboration
can provide, with access to new markets
being the predominant benefit cited by
respondents. Access to specific skills,
access to expensive technologies, funding,
economies of scale, and the possibility to
eventually sell the entrepreneur’s business
to a collaboration partner also were seen
as potential benefits of collaboration.
Attitudes appear to be changing among
large companies as well. According to
Accenture analysis of 100 leading
companies,
16
large enterprises increasingly
are engaging in a wide variety of
collaboration initiatives with
entrepreneurs (Figure 16). The
environment is especially ripe for
collaboration in financial services (see the
Fintech case study on page 27) and
communication and high tech, two
industries that are largely impacted by the
digitalization of processes and services.
Numerous examples show that mutually
beneficial combinations can be developed
across a large “wheel of collaboration”
that includes corporate venturing,
mentoring, joint innovation, access to
markets, education and training, local
community development, and technology
clusters. There is numerous examples in
mature markets but also in emerging
markets of large corporations filling
“institutional voids” and playing a key role
in local ecosystems development.
However, few companies studied have
embraced more than a few such initiatives
(Figure 17) and few claim to have found
“the best” way to proceed.
Collaboration can materially benefit
both parties in many ways—as Isansys
Lifecare illustrates. Through its Technology
Lab India, Accenture has teamed with
Isansys to develop the iDOC physiological
wireless monitoring system for health
care purposes. The device monitors a
patient’s ECG readings and transmits
them wirelessly through a mobile
device to a doctor or hospital, where
the real-time data can be analyzed
to assess the risks to the patient.
The solution is at the same time frugal
(it costs 1/100th of the price of current
devices), global (it can be applied to
both emerging and mature markets), and
socially responsive (it helps address a
critical aspect of the health care crisis in
India). Through this collaboration, Isansys
developed new markets, increased its
products credibility, and gained access
to coaching to fine tune and align its
products with market needs.
Figure 16: Large companies are engaged in a wide variety of collaboration initiatives with entrepreneurs
Type of collaborative initiatives communicated by leading 100 companies*
Access to
markets
Universities and
education
Local community
NGOs
Technology
clusters
Joint
innovation
Mentoring of
entrepreneurs
Corporate
venturing
1% 17% 24% 30% 32% 33% 48%
* Accenture Research analysis based on public information for the Top 100 companies
26 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Figure 17: Only a few large companies have launched a broad set
of coherent collaborative initiatives with entrepreneurs (%)
Number of innovation initiatives with entrepreneurs by large companies*
52 37 11
Low collaboration
Having implemented none or one
type of collaborative initiative
Medium collaboration
Having implemented two to four
types of collaborative initiatives
High collaboration
Having implemented more than four
types of collaborative initiatives
1 2 3 4 5 6 0
Breadth of collaboration
(types of initiatives out of the 7 ways)
However as more large companies move
toward open innovation or collaborative
innovation
17
, it is crucial they manage
the relationships with partners to enable
successful and preferably long-lasting
collaborations. Large companies must
be able to identify the right partners as
well as learn how to collaborate with
different partners. Understanding and
respecting partners’ practices and
constraints may be difficult to achieve,
particularly when there are significant
size or cultural and organizational
discrepancies between partners.
Fast-moving consumer goods companies
differ significantly in their level of
openness, mainly reflecting their specific
culture and maturity level. Finished-
product manufacturers have often led the
way in open innovation for the whole
supply chain and specifically upstream
partners, i.e. raw materials and packaging
suppliers. For more on how Procter &
Gamble has used open innovation to
identify entrepreneurial and other
partners, see the sidebar on page 27.
Our conversations with entrepreneurs
around the world showed that setting a
clear framework of agreement for
collaboration with large companies is key
to successful collaboration. While some
flexibility is needed, especially in the long
term, some rules are expected to be set,
for example in terms of end client access,
intellectual property (IP) sharing, or
rewards. A leading US company in the
communications industry, for instance,
has implemented a specific IP agreement
framework to ensure clarity in its
relationships with entrepreneurs. The
three principles are simple:
• “What is yours is yours”: Participants
keep pre-existing IP but must be
willing to license what they contribute
to the project
• “What is mine is mine”: The large
company keeps pre-existing IP but is
willing to license what it contributes to
the project
• “What is ours is ours”: IP created in the
project is jointly owned by participants
and can be used independently
* Accenture Research analysis based on public information for the Top 100 companies in mature and
emerging markets – 50/50 split
“ Larger organizations
have a number of
benefits in place, like
marketing systems, back-
end support systems,
financial systems and
so on. This means that
the pace of innovation is
often greatly accelerated
through partnerships
between small, faster-
moving entrepreneurial
businesses and larger
organizations.”
Keith Errey, CEO and
co-founder of Isansys
Our conversations also revealed that
something as simple as identifying the
right contacts within large companies
was also key to further development of
collaboration. Large companies’
organizational structures are often highly
complex and difficult to grasp for
entrepreneurs. Some entrepreneurs noted
that mentoring provided by their large-
company partners helped them overcome
this barrier. Other approaches to
facilitating access and relationships
employed by large companies include
appointing a Chief Alliance Officer with a
specific focus on start-ups and SMEs and
having entrepreneurs in residence to
facilitate the communication between
large groups and start-ups.
As collaboration increases, new models of
cooperation will emerge to respond to the
current challenges faced by entrepreneurs,
especially to facilitate connections, clarify
the frameworks of engagement, and
protect IP. The implementation of formal
innovation systems by large companies will
be key to the success of these initiatives.
27 Chapter 4: Entrepreneurs are ready to shift attitude toward more collaboration with large companies
FinTech helps entrepreneurs
get off the ground
In New York, the FinTech Innovation
Lab is an annual program run by the
Partnership Fund for New York City for
early- and growth-stage companies
that have developed cutting-edge
technology products targeted at financial
services customers. Winners will have
the chance to refine and beta test their
financial technology products in New
York City in partnership with the lab’s
participating financial firms. Winners will
also participate in a Leadership Program,
where they will have the opportunity
to meet senior business leaders, leading
financial technology entrepreneurs,
and investors in the New York City
community. They will also participate in
panel discussions on relevant topics as
well as mentoring sessions with the lab’s
Entrepreneurs Network. At the end of
the 12-week program, winners have the
opportunity to present at a Demo Day in
front of investors, senior executives of
financial services firms, and the press.
Having already successfully run for
two years in New York, the FinTech
Innovation Lab was then launched in
London in 2012. The London Lab is run
in collaboration with a group of the
United Kingdom’s leading financial
service institutions, angel investors and
venture capital firms. It is supported by
the Mayor of London, the City of London
Corporation, and the Technology Strategy
Board. Based on a similar model as used
Procter & Gamble locates
favorably to identification
of partners
P&G’s open innovation center, Israel
House of Innovation (IHI), was established
in 2007 as part of the corporate
Connect+Develop
SM
Strategy. Its
mission is to leverage Israeli innovation
capabilities and culture partnering with
Israeli academia, private entrepreneurs,
venture capitalists and governmental
bodies to accelerate the company’s
innovation worldwide. In September
2011, IHI signed an agreement with the
Hebrew University of Jerusalem faculty—
through Yissum Research Development
Co., the university’s technology transfer
office. According to Sophie Blum, general
manager of P&G Israel and IHI, “The
agreement will enable P&G to enjoy the
breadth of research done at the Hebrew
University and collaborate on creating
innovative products that improve the lives
of people around the world.”
P&G didn’t choose Israel by accident: It
is one of the world’s leading innovation
ecosystems.
18
Blum explains that
Israeli innovation capabilities stem
from its culture (history, public policy,
military service encouraging leadership
and entrepreneurship, the mindset of
young people, etc.), that is favorable to
innovation. Israel attracts 30 times more
venture capital investment per person
than Europe. The success of ICQ (a pioneer
in instant messaging later acquired by
AOL) and ISCAR (an innovative metal
tool manufacturer created in the 1950s
in Israel and acquired by Berkshire
Hathaway) are a few examples of Israeli
innovation successes.
in New York, the London program invites
a handful of aspiring entrepreneurs with
promising ideas to refine and test their
financial technologies with program
partners at the London lab. At the end
of the 12-week program, winners have
the opportunity to present their concepts
to chief technology officers and senior
technology executives from participating
firms and potential investors.
The FinTech Innovation Lab was
developed in New York and London
to strengthen the local innovation
ecosystem. Participants noted that the
lab is not an incubator, but more of a
“facilitator” or an “accelerator.” As one
entrepreneur puts it, “You are breaking
bread here. It really changes the dynamic
of how companies are seen and how
the banks are seen.” Entrepreneurs
gain access to expertise and business
relationships with top executives at
potential clients, which helps them
to move at speed to proof of concept
and implementation. The peer-to-peer
relationship is also highly appreciated as
a way to test ideas in a safe environment,
develop collaboration, or simply
strengthen emotional confidence. For
leading companies, participation in the
program is a way to “filter through the
noise and identify what’s worth spending
time and energy on and what’s not.”
Participating large companies also find
that their interactions with entrepreneurs
during the program helps boost internal
entrepreneurship within their own
organizations.
28 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Technology clusters, inspired by Silicon
Valley, can provide a vital ecosystem
for entrepreneurial success
While many factors contribute to entrepreneurial success, one of the biggest—and hardest
to measure—is the ability to consort with other entrepreneurs. Having other like-minded
individuals nearby who can serve as both a sounding board for new ideas and a support group
when times get tough is something that has been proven valuable to entrepreneurs time and
again. Entrepreneurs in our study are no exceptions: one-third of them currently work in a local
technology “cluster”
19
and 57 percent would like to (and would, if there were one nearby or cost
and relocation hassles weren’t preventing them from moving to an area that has one) (Figure 18).
32 57 11
Figure 18: A large majority of entrepreneurs has a positive view of technology
clusters (%)
Do you currently work in a local technology cluster (eg. Silicon Valley, etc.)?
Yes
No, but would like to:
• One-third don’t have a technology clusters close to them
• Costs and hassles of relocation are seen as barriers by another 60%
No, and are not interested
Which major benefits do you get from working in a technology cluster
(eg. Silicon Valley, etc.)? (%)
Personal professional network 28
Business productivity 27
Collaboration with peers 26
Higher speed to market 24
Access to funding 22
Entrepreneurial culture 22
Collaboration with large companies 20
Entrepreneurs value local technology
clusters because their benefits are
compelling. Among other things, clusters
help entrepreneurs strengthen their
professional network, improve business
productivity, collaborate with peers,
reduce time to market, and gain access
to funding—all of which, in turn, helps
them increase sales and grow faster
than ventures that are not located in a
cluster. These benefits are seen by many
as easier to grasp through physical
proximity and local business environments
play an enduring critical role in the
competitiveness of start-ups. Nevertheless,
successful ecosystems are often open
to international cooperation, leveraging
technology to support virtual cooperation
and distributed operations.
Chapter 5:
29 Chapter 5: Technology clusters, inspired by Silicon Valley, can provide a vital ecosystem for entrepreneurial success
with local companies and industry, and an
affinity toward technological innovation,
all of which have led to tremendous
startup activity. A recent study
21
found
that the alumni and faculty of Stanford
University alone have created nearly
40,000 companies and 5.4 million jobs
since the 1930s, generating annual
revenues of $2.7 trillion. If all that business
activity were amassed into an independent
nation, that country would rank as the
world’s 10th largest economy.
On a related note, the region’s highly
educated, diverse workforce has also
played a major role. In Silicon Valley
and the adjacent Bay Area, 46 percent
of the general population has at least
an undergraduate university degree
(compared to 28 percent for the United
States as a whole), and the region boasts
twice the number of Ph.D.’s on a per-capita
basis than elsewhere. Moreover, the area
has been a powerful magnet for people
from around the world. Indeed, a large
percentage of its people speak English
as their second language at home. That
diversity has led to an influx of novel ideas
and fertile cross-pollination, all pointing to
higher innovation.
But looking beyond those talented, diverse
individuals, what role does the area’s
overall workplace culture play, and what
are the different components of that
culture? Moreover, what fosters those
different cultural characteristics?
One of the best examples of such a
cluster is Silicon Valley, the birthplace of
today’s modern tech industry. What is it
that has made Silicon Valley so effective
in fostering countless high-tech success
stories, to the point that it serves as the
paragon for entrepreneurial clusters?
Jeanne Harris and Chris DiGiorgio of the
Accenture Institute for High Performance
sought to provide some answers to
that question by studying the region’s
distinctive ecosystem and workforce to
understand their characteristics and what
they value
20
. Their research uncovered the
contradictions at work in Silicon Valley.
It’s just a geographical area of a few
hundred square miles, but Silicon Valley’s
achievements are outsize. For example,
it contains the highest concentration of
high-tech workers, the largest high-tech
manufacturing activity, and the most
millionaires and billionaires on a per-capita
basis of any major metropolitan area in the
United States. But all this raises a crucial
question: what makes Silicon Valley such
an exceptional hothouse for innovative
new businesses?
One key to the region’s success is the
tie between education and business.
But it’s not just the physical proximity
of a typical world-class university that
has made Silicon Valley what it is.
Untypically, Stanford University has long
espoused a meritocratic culture, a strong
entrepreneurial spirit, active engagement
“ Entrepreneurs must
learn to build their
own virtual networks
as part of the business
ecosystem to access
new innovations,
technologies and
resources faster and
on a global scale.”
Bruno Berthon,
Global Managing Director—
Strategy & Sustainability,
Accenture
30 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
The culture in Silicon Valley consists of five
seemingly contradictory characteristics,
and it’s the complex mix of those
characteristics that has enabled the region
to flourish. It’s also one of the main
reasons why Silicon Valley has been so
very difficult to replicate:
• Laid back yet driven for speed:
congenial and laid-back, people will
work intensely for long hours for their
companies; one of the key resulting
benefits is high productivity and
relentless innovation (including quickly
“pivoting” to fix things and move on
when necessary).
• Committed yet independent: people
are deeply committed to their work and
their colleagues, yet they are essentially
“free agents” with no allegiance to
one company; the outcome is a mobile
workforce that leads to a greater
exchange of ideas and information
across company borders.
• Cutthroat yet cooperative:
companies and individuals can be
ruthless competitors, yet they also
cooperate towards larger goals. This
way, information is rapidly shared
across organizational borders,
leading to greater cross-fertilization
and innovation.
• Be a global magnet for technology
and entrepreneurial talent.
• Produce ample, diverse, top
quality talent.
• Create a dense ecosystem of universities,
basic research, large companies, venture
funding, angels, incubators, business
experts, and tech talents. Critical mass
is required.
• Encourage the tech/entrepreneur
culture, mindset, values.
• Enable the non stop, open and free
exchange of ideas.
• Provide incentives to take responsible
professional risks.
• Pragmatic yet optimistic: people
realize that failures are inevitable
but they can also be celebrated as an
opportunity for learning and growth.
As a result, they are also resilient
and optimistic that any problem can
eventually be solved.
• Extrinsically motivated yet
intrinsically fulfilled: people are often
motivated by money, yet they say inner
fulfillment comes from being recognized
for their creativity and innovation.
The research further shows that the
characteristics of the talent in a city or
region can go a long way toward creating
an environment that is conducive to
entrepreneurial activity. And there are many
other important factors that governments
interested in spurring entrepreneurial
activity via a cluster should consider:
• Provide the table stakes, things that
make an area a great place to live,
work, innovate and succeed, such as
a desirable environment, low taxes,
modern infrastructure, economic
stability, and honest and efficient
government.
• Locate next to an attractive, young,
cosmopolitan city.
76%
of entrepreneurs believe
they are the major source
of technology innovation
in their countries.
41%
expect to grow their
businesses by more than
eight percent annually
over the next two years.
81%
expect to create new
jobs in that period.
31 Chapter 5: Technology clusters, inspired by Silicon Valley, can provide a vital ecosystem for entrepreneurial success
Top 10 Tips to Foster Entrepreneurship and Innovation Locally
by Dr Tom Kosnik, Stanford Technology Ventures Program
Mentor and encourage diversity
1. Encourage foreign entrepreneurs to
come, study at your universities, then
start companies.
2. Give women entrepreneurs founding
high growth ventures equal access to
funding—whether bank loans, venture
capital, or private equity.
3. Believe in the young. Look for
innovations in children, teens and
university students, and teach them
to implement by providing mentors.
4. Focus on cross-generational, cross-
gender, and cross-cultural collaboration
to create new innovations and then to
commercialize them.
Educate
5. Encourage children and teens to study
mathematics, science and subjects that
will allow them to go into science and
engineering at university level.
6. In universities, encourage cross-
disciplinary study, research and
commercialization by co-locating faculty
and grad students in engineering,
computer science, medicine, biology
and design in one location.
7. Promote university-age
entrepreneurship so students start
companies to create jobs instead of
graduating hoping for a job.
8. Equip your science and engineering
programs to also teach entrepreneurship
to students in those majors so they
understand how to commercialize
scientific inventions.
Promote commercialization
and innovation
9. Develop licensee-friendly technology
licensing programs at universities so
industry can license and commercialize
inventions from professors and
grad students.
10. Encourage global technology and
innovation leaders to promote innovation
and entrepreneurship through national and
international competitions to accomplish
objectives that are technically challenging
and have commercial promise.
“ New technologies are reshaping value chains across
the globe and fundamentally transforming the context
in which entrepreneurs develop their activities.”
Jean-Louis Grégoire, Thought Leaders Committee Chair, G20 YEA
32 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
While Silicon Valley has dominated the
startup scene for decades, promising
ecosystems exist or are emerging in
such areas as Tel Aviv, Boston, New York,
Bangalore, London, Berlin, and Toronto
and governments in such areas as Beijing,
Moscow and Paris are developing plans to
enhance local innovative entrepreneurship
ecosystems at scale and at speed
22
. These
initiatives are getting their inspiration
from the Silicon Valley model
23
, but are
adapting the model to fit their own local
characteristics, strengths, and needs.
Consider London’s experience. Scarred
by the fallout of the dot-com collapse
several years ago, many viewed
entrepreneurship in the United Kingdom
as a risky, unattractive alternative to
more “stable” career paths. However,
this attitude is changing rapidly. London
is the first European city ranked in the
Startup Ecosystem report and seventh
worldwide. Even if some regret a lack
of a large funding ecosystem, especially
in early stages, London benefits from
a renewed buzz on the entrepreneurial
scene—specifically due to a strong sense
of community and collaboration, a creative
technology spirit, arts and culture, cultural
diversity (40 percent of the residents
have international roots), a strong talent
pool thanks to its 40 universities and a
supportive government providing tax
breaks to support entrepreneurship.
Toronto and the state of Ontario is also a
cluster on the rise. The rise of RIM served
as an anchor to this ecosystem, backed
up by a voluntarist government policy,
which invested $3.6 billion in the past ten
years in programs to boost research and
development and innovation. Companies
who have settled in this area also benefit
from a generous research tax break, which
allows them to save up to 43 percent of
research spending. This contributed to an
unprecedented growth of venture capital,
which doubled between 2008 and 2012,
at a time when the global economy was
slowing down.
In Bangalore, the government has been
instrumental in ensuring the capital of
Karnataka plays a central role in India’s
IT landscape. Initiatives the Karnataka
government have taken include launching
formal policies designed to spur the
growth of the IT and ICT sectors; holding
a Global Investors Meet each year to
encourage investment in Karnataka;
creating a government-backed VC fund to
invest in IT, biotech and other knowledge-
based industries; and spearheading a task
force designed to foster development
of the education sector to address the
growing demand for technology skills.
These initiatives appear to have had the
desired effect as the number of software
companies in Karnataka has climbed from
782 in 2000 to 2,180 in 2011; Bangalore is
the fourth-largest technology hub globally
and the largest in Asia; and Karnataka’s
IT sector attracted 44.6 percent of all
investments in the country’s IT industry,
with investment in small and medium-
sized businesses growing by double digits.
The state is now home to 35 percent
of the country’s IT employees
24
. To help
sustain and build on this momentum,
the Karnataka government has created
a framework for what it is calling an
Information Technology Investment
Region, designed to promote investments
in technology-enabled services and
manufacturing units.
Russia’s experience in creating a formal
technology cluster near Moscow is another
interesting case to watch (see page 33).
The government is striving to create from
scratch a massive new complex outside the
city to stimulate entrepreneurial activity
across five industry areas and, in the
process, help to drive the Russian economy
well into the future.
These clusters, inspired by Silicon Valley,
and adapted to different business and
cultural environments, can provide a
vital ecosystem for entrepreneurial
development. Although Silicon Valley
is unique, governments may stimulate
the development of local clusters
that leverage and expand the specific
strengths of local economies and their
“smart specialization”. Specific measures
which are beneficial to the development
of clusters include providing sustained
and increased support for basic research,
reducing restrictions that inhibit the
ability of universities to collaborate with
industry to create value, “de-risking” the
future for entrepreneurs by promoting
stability and consistency in regulations,
increasing permeability across companies,
providing high-risk capital for start-ups,
and embracing diversity in all aspects.
Thanks to the increasing adoption of new
technologies, innovative entrepreneurs
can connect with their stakeholders
across geographic boundaries to
support the development of “virtual
entrepreneurial ecosystems”—which
provide all the benefits of local
ecosystems in a virtual environment.
33 Chapter 5: Technology clusters, inspired by Silicon Valley, can provide a vital ecosystem for entrepreneurial success
Skolkovo, a Russian ambition
To boost Russia’s ability to develop
compelling new technologies, the
country’s government has launched a
highly ambitious initiative: the Skolkovo
Innovation Center, a complex to be built
on the outskirts of Moscow that would
bring together start-ups, multinational
corporations, venture capitalists, and
university and other key players to
pursue innovation across five clusters
that reflect the modernization priorities
of the Russian government: energy, IT,
nuclear, biomedical, and space. Within
each of these clusters, the government
has identified a series of high-priority
investments on which participating
companies will focus.
Funded initially from the Russian federal
government, Skolkovo will include a
“technopark” that is designed to provide
the infrastructure and environment
to foster innovation. The technopark
provides access to offices and state-of-
the art research infrastructure in the
form of Common Use Centres, helps
start-ups recruit scientific, engineering
and other skilled human resources, and
provides assistance in the preparation
of business plans and other materials to
attract investors and enter markets.
57%
of entrepreneurs want
to work in a local
technology cluster but
distance and relocation
costs are major barriers.
Startups signing on for Skolkovo receive
a variety of benefits, including legal
status for 10 years, tax and customs
privileges, access to Skolkovo’s research
infrastructure and commercialization
services, grant applications, and access
to regular cluster activities.
Skolkovo also includes two educational
institutions, Skolkovo Tech and OpUS.
The former is as a private, not-for-profit
graduate research university, governed
by an independent and international
board of trustees and established in
cooperation with the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. Russian officials
expect that by 2020 Skolkovo Tech
will join the ranks of internationally
recognized research universities.
While Skolkovo is still in its early stages,
to date more than 200 companies have
each signed up for the energy, IT and
biomedical clusters, while 88 companies
have joined the space cluster and 67
have become part of the nuclear cluster.

Chapter 6:
34 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Young Entrepreneurs Demand Active
Support from Government to Sustain Their
Leadership in Technology Innovation
Most entrepreneurs interviewed in this research mentioned governments can play a
critical role in encouraging entrepreneurial innovation and in providing the environment
that encourages entrepreneurs to pursue their ambition.
33 49 18
67%
Figure 19: Two thirds of entrepreneurs consider that Governments’ support for
innovation driven by entrepreneurs is not sufficient (%)
What do you think of the actions taken by the government in your country to support
technology innovation created by entrepreneurs?
Relevant and efficient actions are taken
Actions are taken but they are not relevant or efficient
No real action taken
“ Governments should do more to ensure that
the innovation, power and ambition of young
entrepreneurs can help address the problem
of structural youth unemployment, and fuel
economic growth.”
Victor Sedov, President, Center for Entrepreneurship
According to 67 percent of entrepreneurs
in our study, governments are falling
short in that regard: Eighteen percent
said the government in their country
has taken no real actions to support
technology innovation by entrepreneurs,
and an additional 49 percent indicated
their government has taken actions, but
those actions have not been relevant
or efficient (Figure 19).
What do entrepreneurs expect?
Those in our study cited a wide range
of actions, with the most popular being
tax incentives, followed by the
development of technology education
and training to boost the availability
of skilled tech workers and increased
government purchasing of products and
services from small innovative businesses
(Figure 20). Better access to financing—
banks and venture capital for instance—
is also desired, as is a reduction in
bureaucracy and regulations that
constrain entrepreneurial businesses.
35 Chapter 6: Young entrepreneurs demand active support from government to sustain their leadership in technology innovation 35
Figure 20: Entrepreneurs expect a diverse series of actions from Governments
to support them (%)
With regard to supporting your business in its technology innovation agenda,
what priority actions do you expect from the government of the country in
which your company is based?
Tax incentives 40
Development of technology education and training 33
“Small Business Act” 32
Development of public bank to finance entrepreneurs and small and medium enterprises 28
Supportive environment for business angles and venture capital funds 27
Reducing red tape and regulation for entrepreneurs 26
Opening of public procurement to innovate small and medium enterprises 23
Public investment in R&D and technology infrastructures 22
Development of local technology clusters 21
Improvement of Intellectual Property Rights 19
Open immigration policies to attract skilled workers 15
Open data promotion 12
67%
of entrepreneurs are not
satisfied with current
support initiatives from
their government.
86%
of STEM graduates came
from China, Brazil and
India in 2011.
40%
Tax incentives is the
highest rated government
action needed to support
technology innovation.
36 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
develop international businesses, and
a critical element for entrepreneurs to
get access to the right data.
• Promote cloud development based on
harmonized standards to ensure that
entrepreneurs can use the inherent
flexibility and responsiveness the cloud
enables to create additional value.
• Develop common government open
data standards to enable entrepreneurs
to create, test and develop new
business models, powered by open
data, which will provide new services
to citizens.
• Make it easier to attract entrepreneurs
to set up and conduct businesses in
different countries—especially serial
entrepreneurs who frequently develop
their businesses across different
countries and different regions
and, thus, play an essential role in
stimulating different ecosystems.
Figure 21: A dozen policy levers can be used by Governments to support technology innovation driven by entrepreneurs
Categories of policies Policy levers Example
Public policies
strategy
Stimulate demand
Public spend Digital infrastructures
Public Procurement and R&D SBA/SBIR
Delivery of Public Services Open data policies
Access to International Markets Export schemes
Support entrepreneurs
Taxation policies Tax credits
Finance policies VC, Banking, Capital Markets, crowd funding
Education/training STEM graduates
Thriving eco-system Mentoring, Incubators, Clusters
Business environment
Simple and adapted admin processes Integrated online portal
Tolerance for failure Increased tolerance for failure (bankruptcy)
Data transfers and data privacy Harmonized Cloud standards/certi?cation
International business Process to set up business in several countries
More specifically on
technology innovation,
entrepreneurs identified
several actions G20
governments could
implement rapidly:
• Support the development of digital
infrastructures to help entrepreneurs
and their ecosystems (e.g., clients
and suppliers) drive the digital
transformation of industries—
especially through social, collaborative
technologies that play a critical role
in fostering the development of online
relationships with all stakeholders and
seamless collaboration of entrepreneurs
with their suppliers, peers and clients.
• Facilitate international mobility of data
while ensuring adequate protection of
personal data, as it is one of the key
success factors of entrepreneurs who
• Encourage development of
“crowdfunding” at the international
level; crowdfunding can play an
expanding role to finance startups,
especially those that are looking to
quickly test their prototypes.
At the country level, entrepreneurs
expressed a wide variety of requests,
which depend on the local institutional
context and business environment. Twelve
policy levers were mentioned, which will
vary according to the local context and
ambitions (Figure 21) and whose impact
will span different time horizons.
37 Chapter 6: Young entrepreneurs demand active support from government to sustain their leadership in technology innovation
The first series of actions
is related to the role that
governments can play in
stimulating demand for
digital goods and services:
• Development of digital infrastructures,
which provide the backbone of the
digital transformation of the economy
and are an essential ingredient to the
success of innovative entrepreneurs
• Adaptation of public procurement
processes to innovative startups
and “digitize” public procurement at
speed, which will benefit both public
authorities and their suppliers
• Involvement of startups in public R&D
programs and processes tailored to
SMEs such as SBIR
• Acceleration of the transition to
“Digital Government” through specific
measures to “digitalize” public services,
such as consistent “open data” policies
that will stimulate entrepreneurs’
development of new services to
citizens
• Support for entrepreneurs looking to
conquer international markets, through
adapted policies and encouragement
to large companies to embed startups
in their international development and
help them benefit from their networks
and access to markets.
The second series of actions
is related to the direct
support to innovative of
entrepreneurs through
several specific policies:
• Efficient tax incentives tailored to
entrepreneurs who invest in innovation
and develop new products and services
that create value.
• Financing adapted to the different
stages of development of startups,
and the different financing
environment of the G20 countries,
including bank financing, venture
capital, and crowdfunding.
• Placing priority on the development
of science, technology, engineering
and mathematics (STEM) education
and mechanisms to balance supply
and demand of talents.
• Providing adequate support to
encourage the development of a
thriving ecosystem, including local
clusters, incubators and virtual
international ecosystems. Specific
measures related to clusters include
providing sustained and increased
support for basic research, reducing
restrictions that inhibit the ability
of universities to collaborate with
industry to create value, “de-risking”
the future for entrepreneurs by
promoting stability and consistency
in regulations, increasing permeability
across companies, being a source of
high-risk capital for startups, and
embracing diversity in all aspects.
• Encouraging entrepreneurs in the
development of mentoring for other
entrepreneurs.
• Stimulation of the various ways that
large companies and entrepreneurs can
cooperate on innovation efficiently.
The third series of actions is
related to the development
of a business friendly
environment for technology
innovation by entrepreneurs
through a series of actions
such as:
• A personalized simple online portal to
deal with all administrative processes,
with a consistent effort to make it easy
to start and run a new business and
avoid “red tape.”
• A high tolerance for failure—for
example, adapting bankruptcy
rules to the new unstable business
environment.
• Adaptation of data privacy and data
transfers regulations to the new
business environment in which access
to the right data is a critical element
for entrepreneurs to develop relevant
data analytics processes.
• Promotion of cloud development
standards to ensure entrepreneurs can
“put the cloud to work” and create
additional value through the flexibility
and responsiveness the cloud enables.
• Ease of attracting entrepreneurs to
set up and conduct businesses across
different countries and different
regions.
38 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Large companies and
entrepreneurs interviewed for
this research also expressed
their views on the roles they
can play to ensure a
continuous development of
innovation.
Key expectations from large companies
included the following priorities:
• Openness to innovation developed by
startups, by putting formal systems in
place to manage innovation, identifying
high-potential collaboration, and
facilitating proactive contacts with
startups, with a focus on innovations
that are relevant to customers and
innovations that can be tested and
scaled quickly or put aside.
• Adaptation of their own structure and
processes to facilitate work with
startups, such as creating clear
agreement framework for commercial or
R&D partnerships and having a Chief
Alliance Officer in charge of facilitating
the relationship with entrepreneurs.
• Contribution to the local ecosystem,
especially by playing a central role in
technology clusters, hence contributing
to the development of a stream of local
industry partners.
• Being an active player in mentoring
programs to provide startups with the
opportunity to test concepts and build
networks and put “skin in the game” in
working with startups.
• Development of an entrepreneur
mindset within the company by
constantly providing opportunities for
employees to take risks and be
entrepreneurial in their work. Corporate
citizenship policies is one of the best
ways to promote such an
entrepreneurial mindset. As the
importance of contributing to the local
ecosystem and to the local society is
rising in most countries, firms can
encourage their employees to pursue
entrepreneurial activities in their local
ecosystem, as firms will also benefit
eventually of operating in thriving
ecosystem.
Key expectations from entrepreneurs
included the following priorities:
• Investigations of possibilities offered by
new technologies to create new
business models, especially by building
relationship at scale, getting the right
data through their analytics systems,
increasing data velocity, and putting the
cloud to work.
• Multi-local growth, with one foot in
mature market and one foot in
emerging market countries, to harness
the full range of innovation across
markets.
• Involvement in local technology clusters
to benefit from their competitive
advantage.
• Contribution to their ecosystems—
through regular engagement in the life
of the community and through active
cooperation with other entrepreneurs
such as with “payforward”
mechanisms—including virtual
ecosystems across geographies.
• Investment in mentoring opportunities
offered by large corporations to test
products, grow networks , identify
clients and accelerate growth.
“ In order to continue the
drive for job creation,
entrepreneurs must
foster more and stronger
collaborations with
big business to scale
their ideas quickly and
accelerate their growth.”
Bruno Berthon,
Global Managing Director—
Strategy & Sustainability,
Accenture
39 The ?nal word
The final word
As our Entrepreneurial Innovation survey revealed, a very large majority of entrepreneurs are
optimistic about their ability to drive growth and job creation in the coming years, whether
based in mature or emerging markets. Entrepreneurs we interviewed are ready to play a key
role in reinvigorating growth and job creation in the G20 countries. Through their relentless
investment in innovation, they create new products, new services, and new innovative business
models—and do so at a scale and speed that is unprecedented in recent decades.
To develop their businesses, innovative
entrepreneurs are also eager to
collaborate more with large companies.
As collaboration increases, new models
of cooperation will emerge to respond
to the current challenges faced by
entrepreneurs, especially to facilitate
connections, clarify the frameworks of
engagement and protect intellectual
property. There is no “one size fits all”
solution in this area, as approaches
depend on the industry and the size
and cultural environment of the players.
However, the budding collaboration
between startups and large companies
is a symbol of a new era of cooperation
between these two groups.
Contrary to conventional wisdom,
governments also have a role to play in
encouraging entrepreneurial innovation,
but this role is changing with the rise of
digital entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurs
believe specific actions can have a
significant and positive impact on their
ability to grow and create jobs—but only
if these actions are implemented with the
required scale, speed and consistency.
In summary, working together,
large companies, governments and
entrepreneurs can devise the right
combination of approaches and policies—
those that respect the diversity of G20
economies and are tailored to the unique
conditions and needs of individual
countries—to unleash the entrepreneurial
spirit. In the process, they can contribute
to innovation, sustained growth and
the job creation momentum that is
vital to G20 governments’ efforts to
create a dynamic economy that provides
significant opportunities for the people
they serve.
Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013 40
About the research
To identify entrepreneurs’ views on the importance of innovation within their business,
the drivers and inhibitors for innovation, and their expectations related to G20 governments’
policies to support entrepreneurs, Accenture conducted a comprehensive research effort in
close cooperation with the Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance’s global management and country
associations. The research comprised three streams:
An exclusive online survey of 1,000 young entrepreneurs*
Eight workshops with entrepreneurs in selected countries
Interviews with subject matter experts
Online survey of 1,000 young entrepreneurs
The fieldwork for the online survey of young entrepreneurs was conducted by Harris
Interactive between February 2013 and April 2013. All the G20 countries are represented
in the sample. The detailed breakdown is as follows:
Figure 20: Location of entrepreneurs Number of interviews - Total 1,002
US 114
France 93
Russia 92
Italy 79
Germany 68
Turkey 65
China 64
UK 61
Canada 57
India 56
Australia 53
Brazil 50
Mexico 37
Japan 34
South Africa 21
Argentina 18
Saudi Arabia 16
South Korea 11
Other 13
Classified as ‘mature markets’ in this report Classified as ‘emerging markets’ in this report
* As defined by the G20 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance
41 About the research
Eight local workshops with
entrepreneurs
To deepen the qualitative analysis, gather
relevant country examples and develop
actionable recommendations, we
conducted eight workshops in March 2013
and April 2013, in Bangalore, Beijing,
London, Moscow, New York, Paris, San José/
San Francisco, and Canada (teleconference).
Each workshop included between eight and
12 entrepreneurs, mainly coming from the
delegations to the YEA Summit in Russia.
Interviews with subject
matter experts
We conducted a series of interviews with
subject matter experts between February
2013 and May 2013 to get insights on
some specific topics.
In addition to the preceding, we leveraged
other relevant materials developed by
Accenture on entrepreneurship, including
outcomes of specific actions, such the
Accenture Global “Skills to Succeed”
program or the recent “Assises de
l’Entrepreneuriat” in France, where the
Country Managing Director for France led
one of the task forces that presented its
report to the French President at the end
of April 2013.
The project was supported by Accenture
Institute of High Performance Managing
Directors Paul Nunes and Jeanne Harris
who shared draft materials being
developed for new publications related to
entrepreneurship. Jeanne Harris was the
main writer of the enclosed chapter on
Silicon Valley.
42 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
This report and the research, on which
it is based would not have been possible
without the generous participation of
many people.
Core Accenture project team
Bruno Berthon: Global Managing Director,
Accenture Strategy and Sustainability
Services
Laurence Morvan: Managing Director,
Office of the CEO
Francis Hintermann: Managing Director,
Accenture Research
Sybille Berjoan, Charlotte Raut, Nicolas
Cancé, Harini Mohan, Georgina Lovati and
Edvina Kapllani from Accenture Research,
and Jeanne Harris from the Accenture
Institute of High Performance.
Also from Accenture we would like to
recognize the significant contribution
of Paul Daugherty, Chief Technology
Architect, and Accenture Technology
Labs: Mike Redding, Jamie Bailey, Dong
Liu, Namrata Rao, Paul Sanjoy, and Ester
Li Wang.
Other contributors include Chris
DiGiorgio, Dan Elron, Taylor Guo, David
Helin, Laurie Henneborn, Ulf Henning, Jill
Huntley, Christian Kelly, Wouter Koetzier,
Alexander Knote, Gamid Kostoev,
Ekaterina Kucheneva, Samad Masood,
Matthew McGuinness, Robin Murdoch,
George Murray, Paul Nunes, Patrick
Oliver, Fernando Parra, Pradeep Roy,
Gaurav Sharma, Tiesha Singleton, Mark
Spelman, Katsiaryna Surmach, Andrew
Vo, Laila Worrell, and Barbara Wynne,
and Tenguye Xu.
Queries relating to this report
should be directed to:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Young Entrepreneurs’
Alliance Executives
From the G20 YEA Thought Leaders
Committee, we would like to recognize
the significant contributions of:
• Gregoire Sentilhes, President, Journées
de l’Entrepreneur – France
• Jean-Louis Grégoire, Thought Leader
Committee Chair, and Sherpa, Journées
de l’Entrepreneur – France
• Helen Gale, Director of Strategy
and Performance at Youth Business
International – UK
• Gene Lim, Chairman – Global Strategic
Alliance Committee – Entrepreneurs’
Organization – USA
• Igor Egorov, Sherpa, Center for
Entrepreneurship – Russia
• Jeremy Liddle, CEO, Entreprise Network
for Young Australians – Australia
• Marsha Josephs, Director, Government
Relations at Canadian Youth Business
Foundation – Canada
From the G20 YEA local networks, we
would also like to thank especially Julia
Deans, Eric Hansen, Kevin Langley and
Srikant Suryanarayanan. More broadly
this research would not have been
possible without the support of the local
members of the YEA.
External Experts
Our research would not have been
possible without the contribution of more
than 80 entrepreneurs including FinTech
entrepreneurs in London and New York.
We also would like to thank the following
people who kindly spent time with us
during one-to-one interviews: Maxence
Bernard (IoSquare), Robert Castanelda
(CustomWare), Cris Conde (True Risk),
Keith Errey (Isansys), Fabienne Herlaut
(Ecomobilité Ventures), Martin George
(SmartSensors), Maria Gotsch (NY City
Investment Fund, Jonathan Ortmans
(Kauffman foundation) Irit Rapaport
(Gryphonet), Michelle Rogan (INSEAD),
Tom Kosnik (Stanford University) and
Chris Wearing (JP Morgan).
Additional thanks
We also wish to thank the 1,002
entrepreneurs who completed the survey
and the entrepreneurs who participated
in the workshops in Beijing, Bangalore,
Canada, London, Moscow, New York,
Paris, and in the Silicon Valley.
Acknowledgements
43 Sources
1 IMF Global Economic Outlook, April
2013http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/
ft/weo/2013/01/pdf/text.pdf
2 Kauffman Foundation Research Series,
The Importance of Startups in Job
Creation and destruction, July 2010 and
US Census Bureau Business Dynamics
Statistics.
3 “Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan”,
EU Commission, January 2013.
4 Enrico Moretti, Local Multipliers,
American Economic Review: Papers
and Proceedings 100, May 2010http://emlab.berkeley.edu/~moretti/
multipliers.pdf
5 Bay Area Economic Institute Report,
High tech employment and wages in
the United States, December 2012.
6 Calculated based on education statistics
published by the Ministry of Education
of the People’s Republic of China, 2009.
7 Calculated based on education statistics
in the two countries: National Center
for Education Statistics (NCES), 2008;
Higher Education Statistics Agency
(HESA) 2010.
8 Accenture Institute for High
Performance Report: “No Shortage of
Talent: How the Global Market is
Producing the STEM Skills Needed for
Growth” 2011http://www.accenture.
com/SiteCollectionDocuments/
Accenture-No-Shortage-of-Talent.pdf
9 For a review of this topic, see Gary
Gereffi, Vivek Wadhwa, Ben Rissing,
and Ryan Ong, “Getting the Numbers
Right: International Engineering
Education the United States, China, and
India,” Journal of Engineering
Education, 2008.
10 Estimated based on educations
statistics in the three countries:
People’s Republic of China Ministry of
Education (MOE), 2009; National
Center for Education Statistics (NCES),
2008; Higher Education Statistics
Agency (HESA) 2010.
11 “The new Argonauts: regional
advantage in a global economy”, Anna
Lee Saxenian, Harvard University Press,
2007.
12 Accenture Research analysis based on
public information :http://www.
business-standard.com/article/
economy-policy/india-s-per-capita-
income-rises-to-rs-5-729-per-
month-113020700995_1.html
13 “The economics of innovation, from
profligate to frugal?”, Accenture,
Outlook, 2012, no.3.
14 Company website.
15 Big Bang disruption, Larry Downes
and Paul F. Nunes, Harvard Business
review, March 2013.
16 Accenture Research analysis based on
information published by 100 leading
companies based in mature and
emerging markets.
17 For further reading on open
innovation, see “Open Innovation:
What is behind the buzz word?”
Accenture and ESCP research, 2012.http://www.accenture.com/fr-fr/Pages/
insight-open-innovation-behind-
buzzword.aspx
18 “Startup Nation, the story of Israel’s
economic miracle”, Dan Senor and
Saul Singer, Grand Central Publishing,
2011.
19 Cluster’s definition in “Clusters and
Competition: New Agendas for
Companies, Governments, and
Institutions”, in M.E. Porter (ed.)
“On Competition”, Harvard
Business School Press,1998.
20 “Decoding the contradictory culture
of Silicon Valley” by Jeanne G. Harris
and Iris Junglas, will be published in
2013. The paragraphs on Silicon
Valley have been adapted from
Jeanne G. Harris and Iris Junglas’
upcoming publication, with their
kind authorization.
21 “Stanford University’s Economic
Impact via Innovation and
Entrepreneurship,” by Charles Eesley,
and William F. Miller, October 2012
22 Startup ecosystem report, 2012 for a
data based classification of clusters
(“Startup Ecosystem Index”)
23 According to Deborah Perry Piscione,
in Secrets of Silicon Valley, Palgrave
McMillan, 2013, at least 11 cities
around the world use Silicon in the
name of their clusters.
24http://articles.economictimes.
indiatimes.com/2013-03-30/
news/38145701_1_matrix-partners-
india-lok-capital-motilal-oswal-
private-equity
Sources
44 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013
Survey Results

A
u
s
t
r
a
l
i
a
B
r
a
z
i
l
C
a
n
a
d
a
C
h
i
n
a
F
r
a
n
c
e
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
I
n
d
i
a
I
t
a
l
y
J
a
p
a
n
*
M
e
x
i
c
o
*
R
u
s
s
i
a
n

F
e
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
T
u
r
k
e
y
U
K
U
S
O
t
h
e
r

c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s
Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col %
Is innovation considered as a strategic priority of your company?
Number one priority 30% 20% 33% 25% 31% 13% 39% 27% 3% 38% 23% 5% 15% 25% 27%
One of the top priorities 57% 52% 46% 58% 55% 62% 48% 59% 47% 54% 51% 60% 56% 52% 51%
An important priority but not a top priority 11% 28% 16% 17% 10% 22% 11% 13% 32% 8% 25% 32% 26% 17% 18%
Not a priority 2% 0% 5% 0% 4% 3% 2% 1% 18% 0% 1% 3% 3% 6% 4%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
What is the importance of new technologies to support and enable innovation in your business processes ?
Critical - all process innovation is driven by new
technologies
36% 14% 30% 21% 28% 20% 31% 16% 7% 22% 16% 14% 22% 27% 22%
Important - most of process innovation is driven by
new technologies
56% 82% 47% 69% 59% 64% 61% 72% 48% 59% 60% 60% 70% 60% 68%
Not very important - some process innovation is
driven by new technologies
8% 2% 16% 10% 12% 16% 8% 11% 41% 14% 23% 26% 8% 10% 10%
Not important at all - process innovation is not
driven by new technologies
0% 2% 7% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 4% 5% 1% 0% 0% 3% 0%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Do you currently leverage any of the following new technologies? Do you expect to leverage any in the next two years? - Biotechnology
Currently being leveraged 11% 34% 19% 30% 10% 19% 29% 22% 9% 11% 15% 8% 15% 18% 18%
Not currently leveraged but will be leveraged in the
next two years
28% 30% 11% 38% 12% 15% 31% 22% 18% 19% 27% 6% 18% 17% 24%
Not currently leveraged and will not be leveraged in
the next two years
42% 22% 45% 23% 43% 45% 27% 32% 29% 35% 35% 32% 47% 44% 31%
Do not know/ not familiar with this technology 19% 14% 25% 9% 35% 21% 13% 24% 44% 35% 23% 54% 20% 21% 27%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Do you currently leverage any of the following new technologies? Do you expect to leverage any in the next two years? - Nanotechnology
Currently being leveraged 19% 30% 12% 27% 13% 19% 25% 18% 9% 11% 16% 23% 10% 18% 18%
Not currently leveraged but will be leveraged in the
next two years
23% 38% 16% 42% 10% 12% 25% 24% 15% 24% 22% 48% 20% 22% 22%
Not currently leveraged and will not be leveraged in
the next two years
37% 20% 42% 23% 46% 47% 36% 39% 21% 38% 45% 15% 49% 39% 24%
Do not know/ not familiar with this technology 21% 12% 30% 8% 31% 22% 14% 19% 55% 27% 17% 14% 21% 21% 36%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Do you currently leverage any of the following new technologies? Do you expect to leverage any in the next two years? - Social technologies
Currently being leveraged 70% 58% 68% 52% 55% 47% 77% 35% 6% 68% 43% 76% 63% 65% 54%
Not currently leveraged but will be leveraged in the
next two years
15% 28% 9% 31% 28% 25% 16% 37% 47% 22% 28% 15% 21% 18% 30%
Not currently leveraged and will not be leveraged in
the next two years
15% 10% 18% 14% 14% 16% 5% 22% 21% 5% 16% 3% 13% 12% 10%
Do not know/ not familiar with this technology 0% 4% 5% 3% 3% 12% 2% 6% 26% 5% 13% 6% 3% 5% 6%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Do you currently leverage any of the following new technologies? Do you expect to leverage any in the next two years? - Mobile technology
Currently being leveraged 65% 34% 48% 56% 44% 40% 50% 38% 38% 55% 35% 57% 58% 52% 37%
Not currently leveraged but will be leveraged in the
next two years
26% 38% 26% 33% 26% 37% 43% 32% 26% 35% 35% 29% 21% 25% 43%
Not currently leveraged and will not be leveraged in
the next two years
9% 18% 12% 8% 12% 13% 7% 22% 21% 5% 22% 3% 16% 13% 12%
Do not know/ not familiar with this technology 0% 10% 14% 3% 18% 10% 0% 8% 15% 5% 8% 11% 5% 10% 7%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Do you currently leverage any of the following new technologies? Do you expect to leverage any in the next two years? - Data analytics
Currently being leveraged 65% 34% 48% 56% 44% 40% 50% 38% 38% 55% 35% 57% 58% 52% 37%
Not currently leveraged but will be leveraged in the
next two years
26% 38% 26% 33% 26% 37% 43% 32% 26% 35% 35% 29% 21% 25% 43%
Not currently leveraged and will not be leveraged in
the next two years
9% 18% 12% 8% 12% 13% 7% 22% 21% 5% 22% 3% 16% 13% 12%
Do not know/ not familiar with this technology 0% 10% 14% 3% 18% 10% 0% 8% 15% 5% 8% 11% 5% 10% 7%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Appendix:
45 Appendix: Survey Results

A
u
s
t
r
a
l
i
a
B
r
a
z
i
l
C
a
n
a
d
a
C
h
i
n
a
F
r
a
n
c
e
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
I
n
d
i
a
I
t
a
l
y
J
a
p
a
n
*
M
e
x
i
c
o
*
R
u
s
s
i
a
n

F
e
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
T
u
r
k
e
y
U
K
U
S
O
t
h
e
r

c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s
Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col %
Do you currently leverage any of the following new technologies? Do you expect to leverage any in the next two years? - Cloud technologies
Currently being leveraged 57% 48% 39% 42% 49% 43% 38% 30% 21% 57% 38% 11% 41% 56% 33%
Not currently leveraged but will be leveraged in the
next two years
30% 34% 33% 36% 24% 29% 40% 37% 31% 30% 35% 35% 33% 24% 37%
Not currently leveraged and will not be leveraged in
the next two years
9% 12% 16% 17% 16% 18% 11% 22% 24% 5% 18% 40% 18% 12% 15%
Do not know/ not familiar with this technology 4% 6% 12% 5% 11% 10% 11% 11% 24% 8% 9% 14% 8% 8% 15%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Do you currently leverage any of the following new technologies? Do you expect to leverage any in the next two years? - Internet of Things
Currently being leveraged 38% 52% 37% 46% 40% 26% 59% 37% 21% 43% 48% 57% 31% 46% 52%
Not currently leveraged but will be leveraged in the
next two years
30% 36% 7% 42% 19% 33% 21% 30% 15% 41% 23% 29% 31% 18% 30%
Not currently leveraged and will not be leveraged in
the next two years
21% 8% 44% 9% 28% 29% 13% 25% 38% 8% 17% 9% 36% 22% 9%
Do not know/ not familiar with this technology 11% 4% 12% 3% 13% 12% 7% 8% 26% 8% 12% 5% 2% 14% 9%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Do you currently leverage any of the following new technologies? Do you expect to leverage any in the next two years? - Cognitive science
Currently being leveraged 25% 32% 12% 36% 24% 22% 23% 25% 6% 19% 17% 9% 18% 21% 19%
Not currently leveraged but will be leveraged in the
next two years
34% 40% 23% 40% 18% 28% 30% 19% 24% 22% 32% 22% 25% 27% 33%
Not currently leveraged and will not be leveraged in
the next two years
28% 12% 32% 13% 29% 31% 18% 33% 26% 27% 35% 51% 34% 29% 16%
Do not know/ not familiar with this technology 13% 16% 33% 11% 29% 19% 29% 23% 44% 32% 16% 18% 23% 23% 31%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Do you consider each of the following to be a technology innovation enabler in your country? % Yes
Clients' demands 56% 62% 65% 66% 61% 50% 57% 50% 36% 69% 48% 72% 67% 67% 45%
Availability of technology skilled workers 61% 58% 70% 64% 48% 41% 60% 39% 27% 65% 35% 44% 58% 59% 45%
Entrepreneurial culture and successful entrepreneurs 56% 64% 67% 70% 43% 44% 59% 48% 39% 73% 37% 33% 52% 64% 45%
Ease of collaboration with entrepreneurs and
starts-ups
58% 52% 65% 64% 39% 42% 54% 32% 36% 74% 41% 34% 61% 61% 43%
Maturity of technology infrastructure 51% 58% 67% 57% 49% 49% 60% 47% 39% 56% 30% 31% 44% 58% 37%
Co-production companies/clients 49% 50% 48% 66% 42% 42% 48% 41% 33% 60% 39% 27% 45% 57% 42%
Access to funding 43% 60% 48% 60% 36% 37% 56% 41% 24% 69% 29% 42% 55% 55% 37%
Ease of collaboration with universities/Research
Laboratories
42% 62% 61% 65% 30% 38% 54% 48% 21% 61% 34% 38% 45% 51% 39%
Ease of collaboration with large companies 46% 52% 52% 60% 30% 37% 50% 39% 24% 65% 40% 33% 58% 55% 36%
Intellectual Property Policy 40% 58% 59% 64% 38% 43% 47% 39% 21% 65% 26% 22% 56% 50% 40%
Goverment policies such as tax incentives and
regulation
36% 56% 48% 65% 34% 40% 41% 36% 24% 57% 25% 27% 61% 47% 43%
Availability of local technology clusters 48% 52% 51% 60% 27% 33% 54% 36% 27% 51% 29% 26% 50% 53% 34%
R&D public policies 47% 52% 46% 61% 36% 31% 52% 41% 18% 49% 27% 37% 43% 46% 42%
Immigration policy to attract skilled workers 47% 54% 44% 61% 22% 29% 47% 34% 24% 40% 26% 22% 44% 40% 30%
What are the main bene?ts that technology-driven innovation delivers for your business? - Ranked in top three
Cost ef?ciency 39% 36% 47% 33% 22% 39% 51% 42% 47% 47% 36% 74% 49% 53% 51%
Creation of new products/services 37% 36% 56% 29% 63% 43% 28% 42% 47% 43% 52% 31% 31% 35% 28%
Quality improvement & management 30% 45% 32% 51% 29% 43% 53% 34% 27% 37% 29% 57% 47% 44% 42%
Access to global markets 43% 36% 21% 25% 31% 17% 28% 36% 20% 37% 26% 24% 27% 22% 32%
Ability to target speci?c segments of clients 33% 23% 24% 25% 26% 24% 21% 19% 47% 30% 21% 24% 38% 34% 30%
Process agility/?exibility 26% 38% 29% 20% 38% 28% 17% 34% 33% 27% 26% 10% 33% 19% 16%
Quicker time to market 15% 13% 24% 27% 23% 35% 38% 15% 13% 20% 32% 26% 27% 18% 23%
Collaboration 20% 21% 32% 29% 25% 24% 17% 27% 27% 30% 17% 14% 11% 27% 21%
Supply chain optimization 22% 15% 9% 25% 15% 20% 17% 18% 27% 13% 20% 17% 11% 13% 18%
Attraction and retention of best talent 17% 21% 12% 16% 14% 15% 19% 18% 13% 13% 21% 10% 18% 23% 21%
Access to venture capital funding 17% 15% 15% 18% 14% 11% 11% 15% 0% 3% 21% 14% 9% 10% 19%
Do you think Entrepreneurs are currently the major source of technology innovation in your country?
Certainly 46% 38% 40% 44% 49% 34% 48% 38% 26% 27% 41% 8% 37% 36% 37%
Probably 43% 34% 33% 36% 37% 38% 36% 41% 35% 59% 26% 52% 36% 50% 27%
Probably not 9% 22% 23% 11% 8% 16% 9% 16% 21% 11% 22% 28% 20% 10% 24%
Certainly not 2% 6% 4% 9% 6% 12% 7% 5% 18% 3% 11% 12% 7% 4% 12%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
46 Young Entrepreneurs’ Alliance Summit 2013

A
u
s
t
r
a
l
i
a
B
r
a
z
i
l
C
a
n
a
d
a
C
h
i
n
a
F
r
a
n
c
e
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
I
n
d
i
a
I
t
a
l
y
J
a
p
a
n
*
M
e
x
i
c
o
*
R
u
s
s
i
a
n

F
e
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
T
u
r
k
e
y
U
K
U
S
O
t
h
e
r

c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s
Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col %
Would you agree with the statement : "I am optimistic about the rise of entrepreneurial innovation in G20 countries in the next two years and its impact on job creation"?
Agree 91% 82% 82% 91% 76% 90% 89% 75% 56% 97% 86% 94% 72% 83% 87%
Disagree 9% 18% 18% 9% 24% 10% 11% 25% 44% 3% 14% 6% 28% 17% 13%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
What is your expected revenue growth per year in the next two years?
Decrease or stable 6% 8% 12% 0% 18% 15% 4% 20% 18% 16% 5% 11% 20% 12% 4%
Increase < 4% 19% 12% 18% 8% 16% 19% 14% 30% 15% 19% 7% 25% 16% 14% 25%
Increase 4 - 8% 33% 52% 14% 47% 13% 31% 34% 23% 31% 11% 29% 38% 35% 35% 24%
Increase 8 - 12% 11% 20% 19% 25% 18% 16% 25% 18% 24% 19% 23% 15% 16% 16% 22%
Increase 12-20% 6% 6% 5% 17% 4% 13% 18% 3% 6% 8% 9% 6% 2% 8% 16%
Increase > 20% 25% 2% 32% 3% 31% 6% 5% 6% 6% 27% 27% 5% 11% 15% 7%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
What is your expected employee growth per year in the next two years?
Decrease or stable 8% 12% 31% 5% 29% 25% 14% 25% 15% 14% 8% 14% 34% 24% 15%
Increase < 4% 25% 18% 9% 11% 12% 25% 13% 34% 29% 24% 16% 28% 21% 26% 31%
Increase 4 - 8% 19% 40% 16% 37% 19% 24% 43% 24% 41% 24% 30% 36% 30% 20% 24%
Increase 8 - 12% 21% 22% 7% 33% 8% 13% 20% 10% 9% 22% 15% 18% 8% 15% 15%
Increase 12-20% 6% 6% 9% 8% 13% 6% 5% 3% 3% 8% 8% 2% 2% 4% 6%
Increase > 20% 21% 2% 28% 6% 19% 7% 5% 4% 3% 8% 23% 2% 5% 11% 9%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
In your industry, where do you expect the next wave of technology innovation to come from?
Primarily from mature markets 60% 58% 72% 72% 86% 81% 52% 81% 65% 41% 54% 58% 64% 74% 45%
Primarily from emerging markets 40% 42% 28% 28% 14% 19% 48% 19% 35% 59% 46% 42% 36% 26% 55%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
In your industry, what will be the 3 most innovative countries in two years' time? Ranked within top 3
Argentina 2% 24% 2% 5% 3% 1% 7% 4% 0% 0% 1% 2% 3% 3% 10%
Australia 45% 4% 7% 16% 8% 1% 20% 6% 3% 8% 4% 22% 8% 14% 9%
Austria 0% 6% 0% 5% 1% 7% 5% 10% 0% 0% 4% 0% 2% 0% 0%
Belgium 0% 0% 0% 0% 5% 1% 0% 3% 0% 0% 2% 3% 2% 1% 0%
Brazil 2% 70% 11% 2% 13% 1% 5% 9% 6% 19% 3% 2% 11% 9% 22%
Canada 2% 10% 47% 9% 9% 3% 4% 1% 0% 14% 3% 3% 2% 27% 4%
China 38% 24% 28% 50% 19% 25% 34% 18% 53% 22% 26% 37% 39% 38% 45%
France 0% 2% 11% 5% 52% 9% 5% 15% 6% 8% 5% 6% 8% 4% 10%
Germany 13% 6% 12% 20% 27% 74% 7% 32% 6% 11% 24% 43% 13% 12% 12%
Hong Kong 6% 0% 5% 9% 2% 0% 7% 1% 3% 0% 2% 0% 7% 1% 4%
India 17% 10% 12% 5% 10% 12% 59% 11% 12% 22% 5% 8% 18% 15% 10%
Indonesia 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 9% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 3%
Ireland 0% 0% 2% 0% 1% 0% 2% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0%
Italy 4% 6% 0% 0% 5% 7% 2% 44% 0% 0% 2% 6% 2% 3% 4%
Japan 8% 14% 5% 19% 13% 16% 14% 9% 59% 14% 7% 22% 13% 18% 9%
Mexico 2% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 2% 1% 0% 46% 0% 0% 2% 2% 1%
South Africa 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 9% 0% 0% 10%
Russian Federation 2% 0% 4% 5% 2% 3% 4% 11% 3% 5% 53% 3% 0% 4% 3%
Saudi Arabia 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 2% 4%
South Korea 4% 2% 2% 2% 4% 4% 4% 1% 9% 0% 5% 2% 5% 5% 10%
Spain 2% 2% 0% 3% 6% 3% 0% 4% 0% 3% 5% 3% 0% 3% 3%
Turkey 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 2% 17% 0% 2% 7%
United Kingdom 26% 2% 19% 5% 17% 15% 14% 9% 0% 14% 11% 26% 44% 25% 7%
United States 51% 40% 70% 39% 49% 46% 41% 22% 38% 68% 33% 46% 46% 64% 34%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Do you currently collaborate or do you plan to collaborate in the next two years with large companies on technology innovation topics?
Yes 62% 44% 35% 51% 33% 38% 34% 38% 21% 30% 30% 11% 40% 32% 25%
No, but intend to within 2 years 30% 54% 30% 44% 44% 40% 48% 49% 26% 46% 58% 71% 39% 43% 57%
No and have no plans to do so 8% 2% 35% 5% 23% 22% 18% 13% 53% 24% 12% 18% 21% 25% 18%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
47 Appendix: Survey Results

A
u
s
t
r
a
l
i
a
B
r
a
z
i
l
C
a
n
a
d
a
C
h
i
n
a
F
r
a
n
c
e
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
I
n
d
i
a
I
t
a
l
y
J
a
p
a
n
*
M
e
x
i
c
o
*
R
u
s
s
i
a
n

F
e
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
T
u
r
k
e
y
U
K
U
S
O
t
h
e
r

c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s
Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col % Col %
What are/would be the key bene?ts for your business as a result of collaborating with large companies on technology innovation topics?
Access to speci?c skills 38% 26% 18% 39% 29% 22% 34% 30% 35% 35% 33% 23% 31% 29% 39%
Economies of scale 45% 30% 26% 27% 17% 18% 25% 34% 21% 24% 25% 26% 36% 19% 15%
Funding 42% 6% 35% 22% 26% 19% 34% 24% 18% 19% 22% 58% 33% 26% 22%
Access to expensive technologies 25% 36% 16% 41% 31% 38% 25% 32% 15% 27% 29% 31% 11% 32% 33%
Access to new markets 32% 48% 39% 34% 52% 46% 46% 49% 47% 62% 57% 42% 57% 45% 58%
Possibility to sell your business 15% 34% 19% 31% 28% 38% 25% 28% 12% 16% 17% 17% 20% 19% 18%
Other (please specify) 4% 0% 5% 0% 2% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1% 0%
None - you do not see any bene?t for your business
to collaborate with large companies on technology
innovation topics
0% 10% 21% 3% 8% 9% 5% 1% 26% 8% 9% 2% 5% 14% 7%
Do you currently work in a local technology cluster (e.g., Silicon Valley, etc.)?
Yes 34% 60% 30% 70% 18% 24% 45% 35% 24% 27% 38% 11% 16% 26% 30%
No, but would like to 55% 36% 59% 28% 42% 65% 46% 57% 70% 69% 39% 59% 71% 44% 63%
No, and are not interested 11% 4% 11% 2% 40% 11% 9% 8% 6% 4% 23% 30% 13% 30% 7%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Which major bene?ts do you get from working in a technology cluster (e.g., Silicon Valley, etc.)?
Business productivity 28% 23% 35% 27% 18% 19% 32% 14% 25% 50% 34% 43% 10% 20% 35%
Access to speci?c skills 22% 7% 24% 18% 18% 38% 16% 7% 38% 10% 26% 29% 30% 17% 15%
Co-production with local clients on technology
innovation topics
11% 23% 6% 29% 12% 6% 24% 18% 50% 20% 14% 0% 20% 27% 5%
Collaboration with entrepreneurs and startups
settled in the cluster
50% 23% 24% 18% 35% 50% 12% 29% 25% 20% 23% 0% 30% 30% 25%
Collaboration with large companies settled in the
cluster
17% 20% 24% 13% 41% 13% 32% 25% 13% 30% 11% 14% 20% 30% 10%
Collaboration with universities, research laboratories 6% 17% 12% 22% 29% 19% 12% 18% 0% 20% 34% 14% 10% 20% 25%
Access to funding: proximity with Venture Capital-
ists, Business Angels, etc.
17% 17% 24% 31% 12% 6% 16% 29% 25% 30% 23% 57% 10% 17% 35%
Mature technology infrastructure 17% 30% 18% 24% 18% 13% 8% 21% 13% 10% 17% 29% 20% 7% 10%
Higher speed to market 28% 20% 29% 20% 0% 31% 48% 21% 13% 20% 29% 29% 30% 20% 20%
Personal professional network 17% 23% 18% 27% 41% 38% 32% 29% 50% 30% 29% 43% 30% 23% 35%
Entrepreneurial culture and successful entrepreneurs 33% 23% 41% 7% 18% 25% 20% 32% 0% 20% 11% 0% 10% 37% 40%
Highly diverse communities enhanced by open im-
migration policies
17% 23% 29% 18% 6% 25% 16% 18% 25% 0% 14% 14% 30% 23% 10%
Public infrastructures 28% 27% 6% 18% 24% 6% 24% 18% 13% 30% 17% 14% 20% 10% 15%
Government programs i.e. tax incentives etc. 11% 23% 12% 29% 29% 13% 8% 21% 13% 10% 17% 14% 30% 20% 20%
What do you think of the actions taken by the government in your country to support technology innovation created by entrepreneurs?
Relevant and ef?cient actions are taken 23% 38% 40% 64% 22% 45% 45% 18% 29% 24% 30% 28% 26% 41% 24%
Actions are taken but they are not relevant or ef-
?cient
49% 52% 48% 33% 45% 43% 48% 49% 39% 73% 57% 61% 54% 41% 60%
No real action taken 28% 10% 12% 3% 33% 12% 7% 33% 32% 3% 13% 11% 20% 18% 16%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
With regard to supporting your business in its technology innovation agenda, what priority actions do you expect from the government of the country in which your
company is based? - Ranked within top 3
Reducing Red Tape and regulation for entrepreneurs 30% 18% 26% 28% 31% 34% 27% 23% 6% 30% 23% 9% 43% 35% 19%
Improvement of Intellectual Property rights 26% 22% 14% 27% 13% 18% 16% 16% 29% 16% 24% 11% 18% 22% 18%
Tax incentives 42% 36% 28% 27% 35% 43% 30% 63% 50% 35% 35% 66% 41% 43% 24%
Development of technology education and training, 26% 44% 30% 28% 28% 31% 34% 27% 35% 32% 42% 28% 34% 28% 42%
Supportive environment for business angels and
venture capital funds
34% 26% 30% 23% 24% 21% 34% 24% 18% 30% 20% 38% 26% 22% 33%
Public investment in R&D and technology infra-
structures
30% 26% 28% 17% 22% 22% 27% 35% 21% 27% 22% 8% 20% 18% 24%
Development of public bank to ?nance entrepreneurs
and small and medium enterprises
25% 24% 35% 28% 28% 18% 25% 28% 32% 24% 17% 52% 33% 26% 34%
Development of local technology clusters 21% 28% 28% 23% 20% 18% 21% 20% 15% 38% 20% 18% 18% 16% 25%
Open Data promotion 11% 12% 12% 19% 9% 12% 13% 10% 21% 5% 18% 11% 7% 13% 9%
Opening of public procurement to innovative small
and medium enterprises
19% 22% 35% 31% 27% 26% 21% 14% 26% 14% 20% 37% 13% 21% 24%
"Small Business Act" 25% 26% 25% 22% 45% 37% 27% 28% 21% 35% 30% 18% 39% 43% 34%
Open immigration policies to attract skilled workers 8% 16% 7% 27% 14% 21% 25% 11% 26% 14% 27% 3% 8% 12% 13%
About Accenture
Accenture is a global management consulting, technology services and outsourcing
company, with approximately 261,000 people serving clients in more than 120 countries.
Combining unparalleled experience, comprehensive capabilities across all industries and
business functions, and extensive research on the world’s most successful companies,
Accenture collaborates with clients to help them become high-performance businesses
and governments. The company generated net revenues of US$27.9 billion for the ?scal
year ended Aug. 31, 2012. Its home page is www.accenture.com.
About Accenture Research
Accenture Research is Accenture’s global organisation devoted to economic and strategic
studies. The staff consists of over 160 professionals in economics, sociology and survey
research from Accenture’s principal of?ces in North America, Europe and Asia/Paci?c
Copyright © 2013 Accenture
All rights reserved.
Accenture, its logo, and
High Performance Delivered
are trademarks of Accenture.

doc_972988475.pdf