Developing a Competency Framework for Intergenerational Startup
Innovation in a Digital Collaboration Setting
Irawan Nurhas
1,2 a
, Stefan Geisler
1 b
and Jan Pawlowski
1,2 c
1
Institute of Positive Computing, Hochschule Ruhr West-University of Applied Sciences, Bottrop, Germany
2
Faculty of Information Technology, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland
Keywords: Competency Framework, Intergenerational Innovation, Global Start-up, Digital Collaboration,
Computer-Supported Collaboration, Cross-generational Collaboration.
Abstract: This study proposes a framework for the collaborative development of global start-up innovators in a
multigenerational digital environment. Intergenerational collaboration has been identified as a strategy to
support entrepreneurs during their formative years. However, integrating and fostering intergenerational
collaboration remains elusive. Therefore, this study aims to identify competencies for successful global start-
ups through intergenerational knowledge transfer. We used a systematic literature review to identify a
competency set consisting of growth virtues, effectual creativity, technical domain, responsive teamwork,
values-based organization, sustainable networking, cultural awareness, and facilitating intergenerational
safety. The competency framework serves as a foundation for knowledge management research on the global
innovation readiness of people to collaborate across generations in the digital age.
1 INTRODUCTION
This research aims to highlight the competencies for
intergenerational collaboration in the digital age of
start-ups. Entrepreneurs today can expand globally
due to technological advancements. However, many
significant barriers to developing global start-ups
have been identified, including geographic isolation,
lack of trust, and aversion to imitation (Jensen, 2017;
Zakaria et al., 2004). One significant stumbling block
is a lack of competencies and successful
characteristics (Clercq et al., 2012; Giardino et al.,
2014; Nurhas et al., 2020), particularly in the early
stage when strategic organizational decisions are
often urgently needed (Clercq et al., 2012; Giardino
et al., 2014). One promising approach is an
intergenerational collaborative innovation (Matlay &
Gimmon, 2014; Underdahl et al., 2018), defined for
this study as collaboration in a virtual environment
for innovation activities between senior and younger
adults with an age difference of 20 years and more
(Brečko, 2021; Nurhas et al., 2020).
However, it remains unclear how to 1) integrate
generational competencies and 2) promote
a
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2211-8857
b
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1976-0013
c
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7711-1169
intergenerational collaboration for global start-up
innovation. Although society's generations change
every twenty years, managing age and
intergenerational disparities for innovation remains a
concern for companies of all sizes (Brečko, 2021).
Moreover, entrepreneurship research has identified
entrepreneurial competencies (Arafeh, 2016;
Bacigalupo et al., 2016; Dijkman et al., 2016; Kyndt
& Baert, 2015). However, little to no research
incorporates and integrates intergenerational start-up
entrepreneurship competency research into a
cohesive block of our knowledge.
Therefore, based on a systematic literature review
(Webster & Watson, 2002), we conceptualized and
discussed a required competencies for the study
context with two startup cofounders. This review
combines mature studies of required competencies
from multiple domains, such as entrepreneurship,
global innovation, intergenerational and digital
collaboration. The study proposed an eight-
competency-group framework, with each group
encompassing a different activity level related to
global innovation, intergenerational collaboration,
and digital activities.
110
Nurhas, I., Geisler, S. and Pawlowski, J.
Developing a Competency Framework for Intergenerational Startup Innovation in a Digital Collaboration Setting.
DOI: 10.5220/0010652100003064
In Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineer ing and Knowledge Management (IC3K 2021) - Volume 3: KMIS, pages 110-118
ISBN: 978-989-758-533-3; ISSN: 2184-3228
Copyright
c
 2021 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

2 BACKGROUND
Although the terms competency and competence are
often used interchangeably to describe a skill or
required knowledge for a particular state or function
(Holtkamp et al., 2015) , we used the term
competency. The term competency typically refers to
the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to solve
specific problems in specific contexts. In this study,
we consider integrating attitudes (Bosma &
Schutjens, 2011), which include individual
preferences, virtues, and character traits (Bosma &
Schutjens, 2011; Karlson & Fergin Wennberg, 2014).
At the organizational level, organizational
capabilities combine individual and group
competencies as human resources that complement
each other to form a specific set of expertise (Saa-
Perez & Garcia-Falcon, 2002). Therefore, it is critical
to examine the individual competencies required for
start-ups to develop as an organization.
The decision to engage in intergenerational
collaboration is not an easy path for organizations;
several barriers have been identified, including
individual, perceptual, and technical/operational
(Giardino et al., 2014; Nurhas et al., 2020).
Technology is being widely used to support
intergenerational collaboration and demographically
segregated teams, becoming increasingly important
in the era of digitalization (Lyashenko & Frolova,
2014; Nurhas et al., 2020; Shi et al., 2019; Underdahl
et al., 2018).
Being an entrepreneur in a multigenerational
environment, on the other hand, requires a unique set
of skills, especially if the goal is to (transition to) an
international business model. As a result, current
research on identified competencies needs to be
expanded and complemented by global innovation.
Previous research has identified different types of
competencies for entrepreneurs, such as self-
confidence and autonomy (Arafeh, 2016; Lans et al.,
2010; Mitchelmore & Rowley, 2010), taking
calculated risks and recognizing opportunities
(Arafeh, 2016; Kyndt & Baert, 2015), creativity, and
problem-solving (Jensen, 2017; Mitchelmore &
Rowley, 2010; Rasmussen et al., 2011; Wu, 2009),
The entrepreneurs also required to take action by
transforming information into actionable strategy
(Arafeh, 2016; Bacigalupo et al., 2016; Kyndt &
Baert, 2015). Concerning global innovation, critical
elements such as creativity, cultural empathy,
teamwork, networking, and organizational space and
vision can serve as a basis for categorization (Griffith
et al., 2016; Jensen, 2017; Lombardi, 2010). This may
pave the way for the identification of complementary
competencies for this study context as needed for
intergenerational collaboration in various settings,
including family businesses (Miller et al., 2003; Shi
et al., 2019), professional and knowledge-intensive
workplace organizations, and higher education. There
is still a need to understand what competencies are
required for successful intergenerational
collaboration, especially when using digital
technologies.
3 METHOD
Systematic Literature Review (SLR) was used in this
study. SLR helps develop conceptual models based
on fragmented research (Webster & Watson, 2002)
The following research question was proposed in
response to the issues presented in the introduction:
Which competencies are required for global start-up
entrepreneurs working in intergenerational settings?
Figure 1: Systematic literature review process.
For the SLR method, the guideline of conducting
SLR (Webster & Watson, 2002) was applied. The
research phase begins with the planning process,
based on the identified research question. The
selection of keywords was defined. On October 27,
2017, the following keywords were searched for:
[[competence OR competency OR capability OR skill
OR attitude OR behavior] AND ["global innovation"
OR "Intergenerational Innovation" OR "intercultural
Innovation" OR "cross-generational Innovation"]
AND [entrepreneurs OR start-ups]]. Scholarly
databases of related disciplines such as Springerlink,
AIS e-Library, ACM Digital Library, Sciencedirect,
and information systems senior scholar “basket of
eight” journals were used to find relevant articles. For
the inclusion criteria: an article should be written in
English, highlighting the importance of studying
competencies and articles that focus on providing
relevant competencies for intergenerational learning
context, entrepreneurship, digital collaboration, and
start-ups development. For the exclusion criteria:
"Research in Progress," or short articles, an opinion
article should be removed from the list, also an article
Developing a Competency Framework for Intergenerational Startup Innovation in a Digital Collaboration Setting
111

that does not focus on competencies or impacts of
competencies.
Based on the selection process, the final 63 papers
were selected for review. Manual and iterative coding
for content analysis and conceptualization was used
to develop a more abstract level of capabilities to
cover a wide range of individual-level competencies.
Each competency mentioned or discussed in the
selected literature was noted. The identified
competencies were assigned to an initial
classification of global innovation: creativity, cultural
empathy, teamwork, networking, and organizational
space and vision (Jensen, 2017; Knight & Cavusgil,
2004) or, if not relevant, were grouped into new
categories. The label concept for the group of
competencies was refined based on the collection of
competencies. The development of the conceptual
framework was fundamentally abductive. It resulted
in an attempt to determine the best way to describe
the competencies and competency groups found in
the selected literature.
4 RESULT
Table 1 depicts the conceptual matrix (Webster &
Watson, 2002) of intergenerational start-up
competency in the digital age following the
explanation of each competency category for the
study context, which includes growth virtues (Gv),
effectual creativity (Ec), technical domain (Td),
responsive teamwork (Rt), values-driven Organizing
(Vo), sustainable networking (Sn), cultural awareness
(Ca), and intergenerational safety facilitation (Is).
While there is only one category labeled
"intergenerational," other categories are also used in
this setting.
Growth virtues are a characteristic valued by the
individual or social group; in this context, we derived
the growth virtues competency from personal
competencies. We define growth virtues as values
that belong to intergenerational start-ups' innovators
to evolve and grow to meet various global innovation
challenges. Five virtues fall into this competency
group: grit, self-determination, conscientiousness,
intergenerational reflection, and resilience. These
five competency virtues are included in the virtues of
growth because they referred to individual values
acquired through learning and shared experience and
practiced in developing digital start-ups. Growth
virtue must be present to develop and innovate further
amid global innovation and intergenerational
collaboration challenges.
Effectual creativity is associated with institutional
creativity for global innovation. Foresight thinking
and global design thinking are two competencies
included in this category. By focusing on global
innovation, both competencies are related to creating
a global business model focused on available capital,
local values, and stakeholders. Effectual creativity
creates products or services by managing future
performance based on the availability of resources.
Technical domain expertise. In this category,
several competencies are remarkably similar, namely
the operationalization of specific skills and the use of
tools. Competency in this category includes financial
negotiations, digital information fluency, legal
analysis, financial negotiations, and digital
competency associated with operating digital devices
to optimize digital information for innovation
collaboration purposes.
Responsive teamwork is a group of competencies
highlighting the importance of constructive peer
feedback for teamwork progression. The
competencies included in this category are active
listening, conflict resolution, intergenerational
orientation, auxiliary skill. These competencies share
common features supporting interpersonal
relationships in working with teams within a
generation or different generations. Furthermore,
auxiliary skill is vital to help their peers overcome
their challenges and difficulties, supporting their
organization in long-term collaboration.
Value-driven organizing. For the fourth category,
the focus of the capability covered by this dimension
is on competencies for managing and empowering the
resources based on the shared belief. The
competencies in this category include visioning,
personal resource allocation, quality orientation,
decisiveness. Visioning shows the important role of
value in providing direction for defining organization
strategy. In addition to global innovation, the ability
to manage and optimize human resources, focusing
on the quality and decisiveness by simplification
steps to make the organizational strategy more natural
to implement and minimize all forms of risk.
Sustainable networking brings together all the
skills closely linked to professional bonds outside the
organization. Three competencies for this group are
influencing, transparency, effective communication.
In the context of global innovation, global start-up
innovators require the optimization of long-term
professional networks. This provides the ability to
influence professional networks' functions and ensure
transparency and communication effectiveness of
different channels and foreign languages.
Cultural awareness is about competencies that
underline the importance of valuing cultural
differences. Under this category, a global start-up
innovator travels to another country with a different
culture, searching for partners, developing products
and services based on the global and local value in
line with its objectives. Two skills we need to
KMIS 2021 - 13th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems
112

Table 1: Concept matrix.
literature
Concepts
Gv
Ec
Td
Rt
Vo
Sn
Ca
In
Abbott et al., 2013
x
x
x
x
x
x
Arafeh, 2016
x
x
x
x
Audzeyeva & Hudson, 2016
x
x
Bacigalupo et al., 2016
x
x
x
x
x
Bala et al., 2017
x
x
x
x
Barrett, 2014
x
x
Bharadwaj et al., 2010
x
x
Blackburn et al., 2003
x
x
x
x
x
x
Boughzala et al., 2012
x
x
x
Cheng & Huizingh, 2014
x
x
Czarnitzki & Lopes-Bento,
2014
x
Davis et al., 2009
x
x
x
Dijkman et al., 2016
x
x
x
x
x
Dimitratos et al., 2014
x
x
x
x
Dohmen et al., 2014
x
x
Dong & Wu, 2015
x
x
Duckworth et al., 2007
x
Duhan et al., 2001
x
x
x
x
x
x
European Communities, 2006
x
x
x
x
Fantini & Tirmizi, 2006
x
x
x
x
Foster-Fishman et al., 2001
x
x
x
Getha-Taylor, 2008
x
x
x
Goldsmith & Eggers, 2005
x
x
x
x
x
Griffith et al., 2016
x
x
Hamel, 2008
x
x
Hammer et al., 2003
x
x
Hertel et al., 2006
x
x
x
x
x
Igbaria & Baroudi, 1993
x
x
Kohli & Grover, 2008
x
x
Kollmann et al., 2009
x
x
Kungwansupaphan &
Siengthai, 2014
x
x
Kyndt & Baert, 2015
x
x
x
x
Lans et al., 2010
x
x
x
x
Li et al., 2016
x
x
x
x
x
x
Lim et al., 2013
x
x
x
Liu, 2016
x
Lombardi, 2010
x
x
Markham & Lee, 2013
x
x
x
x
Martins & Terblanche, 2003
x
x
x
x
x
Martinsons & Ma, 2009
x
x
x
Miranda & Kavan, 2005
x
Moro et al., 2014
x
x
Newman et al., 2017
x
x
Nielsen, 2015
x
x
x
x
x
Ojala, 2016
x
x
Quadros Carvalho et al., 2013
x
x
x
x
Rasmussen et al., 2011
x
x
Rasmussen et al., 2014
x
x
Reid & Brentani, 2015
x
x
Reid et al., 2014
x
x
x
Ritter & Gemünden, 2003
x
x
Sahay, 2004
x
x
x
x
Sánchez, 2013
x
x
Sarker & Sahay, 2003
x
x
x
x
x
Várhegyi & Nann, 2011
x
x
x
Vuorikari et al., 2016
x
x
Watts et al., 2013
x
x
x
x
x
x
Wei et al., 2011
x
x
Wu, 2009
x
x
x
x
x
x
Xu et al., 2007
x
x
Zakaria et al., 2004
x
x
Zimmermann & Ravishankar,
2014
x
x
x
Zimmermann et al., 2013
x
x
x
x
x
consider in this category are pluralistic thinking and
digital empathy. Digital empathy is closely linked to
cultural empathy, which is required to understand
cultural cues in virtual environments.
Intergenerational safety facilitation deals with
nurturing psychological safety in intergenerational
collaboration. Competencies include are:
intergenerational flexibility, intergenerational digital
adaptability, and intergenerational leadership.
Intergenerational flexibility can help provide a
feeling of safety to express opinions and accept
differences of opinion regarding new ideas or
approaches. In digital collaboration, each generation
can have a different background for the use of
technology. Therefore, facilitating safety for both
generations requires intergenerational digital
adaptability to facilitate workforce diversity, and no
generation feels excluded.
5 CASE STUDY
As an initial evaluation, the proposed comprehensive
list of competencies and competency groups of inter-
Generation startups-innOvators for globAL
innovation (iGOAL) can be used in the context of
human resource development to identify competency
gaps and initiate appropriate interventions (in the
form of training, matching, or recruitment processes).
For instance, a readiness indicator based on this study
result can be developed, which can be used for self-
assessment of the startup actor (s). Two case studies
were presented. We asked two different startup
founders in two different countries about required
competencies for startup development and discussed
the proposed list of competencies and the competency
group.
Developing a Competency Framework for Intergenerational Startup Innovation in a Digital Collaboration Setting
113

Case Study 1: an Indonesian IT company
founded in 2015 develops an integrated app for waste
management. The company connects community and
financial institutions for turning waste into digital
money, helping the government in decision making to
design a smart city and collaborate with consumer-
goods industries for trash management. In the context
of intergenerational collaboration, the founder (29
years old) stated, ”…very important, but right now it
is not a problem for us, because most of our team is
at the same generation age...” and currently at the
stage for expanding their business model in other
countries “…The internationalization process of the
business model right now is on the planned stage,
since now we are preparing our collaboration with
abroad partners...”
As for the assessment tool, the founder notes that
the tool could be helpful for their organization. The
founder suggests a mutual assessment with the internal
and external organization to reduce distortions in the
assessment (“…This readiness assessment tool will be
maybe helpful for our organization, but it needs an
independent assessment scoring because if we asses by
our self, there could be a bias with the score…”).
Furthermore, the founder also recommends an online
version of the tool for multiple uses, which allows the
historical assessment result of the organization to be
tracked (“I think this tool should be running on
mobile/web-based platform and can be used for
several times, so that it can track the development of
the existing score into the target score.”).
Case Study 2: a start-up was founded in 2019 by
three cross-generational co-founders (<30 years old,
mid 40, and >70 years old). The startup's focus is to
provide personal consultancy and recruit new
employees for specific vacancies, mainly in
engineering industries. For this study, the younger co-
founder described the current status of their
organization in terms of global innovation and
intergenerational collaboration. Despite the start-ups
currently focus on the local market (“…the company
is strongly oriented towards the North-Rhine-
Westphalia region (Germany). Due to the demand for
personal service, an expansion on a national or even
international level could only be implemented by a
significant increase in the number of employees..”),
the intergenerational collaboration plays an integral
part of their startup (“Due to the joint founding with
three members from different generations, it is an
integral part of the business concept. The older
generations bring experience and important business
contacts to the business, while the younger
generation is responsible for the implementation in a
digital working environment..”).
The founder took the prototype of the assessment
tool and gave some feedback, first referring to the
usefulness of the self-assessment as a starting point to
reflect the condition of current start-ups (“In
particular, the competencies and rubrics taken into
account enable a neutral assessment of one's own
status. Here, it is interesting to reflect on the relevant
contexts in order to be able to question one's own
approach critically…, the tool can certainly reveal
helpful starting points...”).
Furthermore, for improvement, the founder
proposed to add some examples for the competency
and to compare the result with peers to get a better
overview of the organization (“more detailed
explanations or examples could contribute to
understanding…”). And (“…The evaluation is
already very well presented at this point in time, but
as a participant, I can only estimate the result to a
limited extent without comparison. Here, individual
recommendations for action derived from the results
would be a huge added value for the participants…”).
The initial assessment of the proposed list of
competencies and competency groups through two
case studies demonstrates the potential of the study
result for startup founders, but also for further
investigation of the Startup Global Innovation
Readiness Assessment in the context of
intergenerational collaboration. The next section
discusses the research findings and proposes a
comprehensive overview of the study findings,
limitations, and future research directions.
6 DISCUSSION
This paper offers a comprehensive set of
intergenerational start-up innovation competencies
for the digital age. Previous research has found that
vision (Knight & Cavusgil, 2004) and personal
characteristics (soft skills) are important (Bauman &
Lucy, 2019; Karlson & Fergin Wennberg, 2014).
More importantly, we offer a comprehensive view of
innovation in an era of global digital collaboration
and workforce diversity. We supplement previous
research on global innovation success (Bauman &
Lucy, 2019; Jensen, 2017; Knight & Cavusgil, 2004)
and intergenerational competencies in start-up
development (Bauman & Lucy, 2019). (for example,
intergenerational flexibility, intergenerational
leadership, intergenerational reflection, and
orientation).
The concept of a competency group can be
defined as a group of people who complement each
other's skills. Group competency is more than just
intrapersonal or group human capital. Start-ups can
develop group competencies by matching individual
KMIS 2021 - 13th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems
114

Figure 2: Intergenerational competency framework of global startup innovators in the digital age.
skills in a global and intergenerational setting. This
research enlarges eight human-based start-up capital
competencies (Jensen, 2017; Knight & Cavusgil,
2004). Between generational differences, effectual
creativity that can support unique product
development or global idea generation (Knight &
Cavusgil, 2004), value-driven organizing and cultural
awareness of other generations, quality focus, and
cultural empathy are important (Jensen, 2017). The
proposed list of group competencies highlights
growth virtues, sustainable networking, responsive
teamwork, and a group competency of
intergenerational mobility safety facilitation that
focuses on intergenerational mobility safety
facilitation.
Developing a group competency based on
individual competencies may enable founders to
concentrate on their strengths. The framework can
assist start-up stakeholders in matching and
partnering (Bauman & Lucy, 2019). Furthermore,
educational institutions can prioritize courses or
curriculum development for start-up actors based on
individual competencies. As a result, start-up actors
can cultivate critical individual competencies and
form appropriate partnerships. The findings could
also be applied to developing supportive learning
systems for global start-ups (Pawlowski et al., 2018).
In conclusion, we provide an overview of the
conceptual competency framework for the study
context shown in Figure 2, which can enable an
intergenerational ecosystem. The framework can be
used to understand and support innovation activities
based on the identified concepts from the literature
and the competency group related to the three
activities: global innovation, intergenerational
collaboration, and the use of digital technology. This
study also provides an initial qualitative assessment
of the proposed approach through open-ended
questions in two case studies. The proposed
framework could be a basis for future empirical
studies on the competency of startup founders and
promote intergenerational collaboration for startup
internationalization.
Certain limitations should be noted. First, the
literature review may not include all relevant
disciplines and literature. Therefore, this study
developed a higher/abstract competency group that
encompasses a more general level of competency. A
new relevant study that comes after the review
process, if it contains a specific competency, can be
assigned to one of the predefined categories. In
addition, the proposed conceptual framework can be
used as groundwork for future research. It can be
validated empirically with experts and start-ups
entrepreneurs.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The first author received a financial grant from the
Ministry of Culture and Science of the State of North
Rhine-Westphalia to work at the Institute of Positive
Computing Hochschule Ruhr West.
REFERENCES
Abbott, P., Zheng, Y., Du, R., & Willcocks, L. (2013). From
boundary spanning to creolization: A study of chinese
software and services outsourcing vendors. The Journal
of Strategic Information Systems, 22(2), 121–136.
Developing a Competency Framework for Intergenerational Startup Innovation in a Digital Collaboration Setting
115

Arafeh, L. (2016). An entrepreneurial key competencies’
model. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship,
5(1), 26.
Audzeyeva, A., & Hudson, R. (2016). How to get the most
from a business intelligence application during the post
implementation phase? Deep structure transformation
at a UK retail bank. European Journal of Information
Systems, 25(1), 29–46.
Bacigalupo, M., Kampylis, P., Punie, Y., & van den Brande,
G. (2016). Entrecomp: The entrepreneurship
competence framework. Luxembourg: Publication
Office of the European Union, 10, 593884.
Bala, H., Massey, A. P., & Montoya, M. M. (2017). The
effects of process orientations on collaboration
technology use and outcomes in product development.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 34(2),
520–559.
Barrett, M. D. (2014). Developing intercultural competence
through education.
Bharadwaj, S. S., Saxena, K. B. C., & Halemane, M. D.
(2010). Building a successful relationship in business
process outsourcing: An exploratory study. European
Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 168–180.
Blackburn, R., Furst, S., & Rosen, B. (2003). Building a
winning virtual team. Virtual Teams That Work:
Creating Conditions for Virtual Team Effectiveness,
95–120.
Bosma, N., & Schutjens, V. (2011). Understanding regional
variation in entrepreneurial activity and entrepreneurial
attitude in europe. The Annals of Regional Science,
47(3), 711–742.
Boughzala, I., Vreede, G.-J. de, & Limayem, M. (2012).
Team collaboration in virtual worlds: Editorial to the
special issue. Journal of the Association for
Information Systems, 13(10), 6.
Brečko, D. (2021). Intergenerational cooperation and
stereotypes in relation to age in the working
environment. Changing Societies & Personalities. 2021.
Vol. 5. Iss. 1, 5(1), 103–125.
Cheng, C. C. J., & Huizingh, E. K. (2014). When is open
innovation beneficial? The role of strategic orientation.
Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(6),
1235–1253.
Clercq, D. de, Sapienza, H. J., Yavuz, R. I., & Zhou, L.
(2012). Learning and knowledge in early
internationalization research: Past accomplishments
and future directions. Journal of Business Venturing,
27(1), 143–165.
Czarnitzki, D., & Lopes-Bento, C. (2014). Innovation
subsidies: Does the funding source matter for
innovation intensity and performance? Empirical
evidence from Germany. Industry and Innovation,
21(5), 380–409.
Davis, A., Murphy, J. D., Owens, D., Khazanchi, D., &
Zigurs, I. (2009). Avatars, people, and virtual worlds:
Foundations for research in metaverses. Journal of the
Association for Information Systems, 10(2), 90.
Dijkman, B., Roodbol, P., Aho, J., Achtschin-Stieger, S.,
Andruszkiewicz, A., Coffey, A., Felsmann, M., Klein,
R., Mikkonen, I., & Oleksiw, K. (2016). European core
competences framework for health and social care
professionals working with older people.
Dimitratos, P., Liouka, I., & Young, S. (2014). A missing
operationalization: Entrepreneurial competencies in
multinational enterprise subsidiaries. Long Range
Planning, 47(1-2), 64–75.
Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., & Sunde, U. (2014).
The intergenerational transmission of risk and trust
attitudes. IZA Discussion Papers.
Dong, J. Q., & Wu, W. (2015). Business value of social
media technologies: Evidence from online user
innovation communities. The Journal of Strategic
Information Systems, 24(2), 113–127.
Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly,
D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-
term goals. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 92(6), 1087.
Duhan, S., Levy, M., & Powell, P. (2001). Information
systems strategies in knowledge-based smes: The role
of core competencies. European Journal of Information
Systems, 10(1), 25–40.
European Communities. (2006). Key competences for
lifelong learning: A European reference framework.
European Union. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32006H0962&fro
m=EN
Fantini, A., & Tirmizi, A. (2006). Exploring and assessing
intercultural competence.
Foster-Fishman, P. G., Berkowitz, S. L., Lounsbury, D. W.,
Jacobson, S., & Allen, N. A. (2001). Building
collaborative capacity in community coalitions: A
review and integrative framework. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 29(2), 241–261.
Getha-Taylor, H. (2008). Identifying collaborative
competencies. Review of Public Personnel
Administration, 28(2), 103–119.
Giardino, C., Wang, X., & Abrahamsson, P. (2014). Why
early-stage software startups fail: A behavioral
framework. In International conference of software
business (pp. 27–41). Springer.
Goldsmith, S., & Eggers, W. D. (2005). Governing by
network: The new shape of the public sector. Brookings
institution press.
Griffith, R. L., Wolfeld, L., Armon, B. K., Rios, J., & Liu,
O. L. (2016). Assessing intercultural competence in
higher education: Existing research and future
directions. ETS Research Report Series, 2016(2), 1–44.
Hamel, G. (2008). The future of management. Human
Resource Management International Digest.
Hammer, M. R., Bennett, M. J., & Wiseman, R. (2003).
Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The intercultural
development inventory. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 27(4), 421–443.
Hertel, G., Konradt, U., & Voss, K. (2006). Competencies
for virtual teamwork: Developmentand validation of a
web-based selection tool for members of distributed
teams. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 15(4), 477–504.
Holtkamp, P., Jokinen, J. P. P., & Pawlowski, J. M. (2015).
Soft competency requirements in requirements
KMIS 2021 - 13th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems
116

engineering, software design, implementation, and
testing. Journal of Systems and Software, 101, 136–146.
Igbaria, M., & Baroudi, J. J. (1993). A short-form measure of
career orientations: A psychometric evaluation. Journal
of Management Information Systems, 10(2), 131–154.
Jensen, K. R. (2017). Leading Global Innovation:
Facilitating Multicultural Collaboration and
International Market Success. Springer.
Karlson, N., & Fergin Wennberg, E. (2014). Virtue as
Competence in the Entrepreneurial Society. The Ratio
Institute.
Knight, G. A., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2004). Innovation,
organizational capabilities, and the born-global firm.
Journal of International Business Studies, 35(2), 124–
141.
Kohli, R., & Grover, V. (2008). Business value of it: An
essay on expanding research directions to keep up with
the times. Journal of the Association for Information
Systems, 9(1), 1.
Kollmann, T., HäSel, M., & Breugst, N. (2009).
Competence of it professionals in e-business venture
teams: The effect of experience and expertise on
preference structure. Journal of Management
Information Systems, 25(4), 51–80.
Kungwansupaphan, C., & Siengthai, S. (2014). Exploring
entrepreneurs’ human capital components and effects
on learning orientation in early internationalizing firms.
International Entrepreneurship and Management
Journal, 10(3), 561–587.
Kyndt, E., & Baert, H. (2015). Entrepreneurial competencies:
Assessment and predictive value for entrepreneurship.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 90, 13–25.
Lans, T., Biemans, H., Mulder, M., & Verstegen, J. (2010).
Self ‐ awareness of mastery and improvability of
entrepreneurial competence in small businesses in the
agrifood sector. Human Resource Development
Quarterly, 21(2), 147–168.
Li, W., Liu, K., Belitski, M., Ghobadian, A., & O'Regan, N.
(2016). E-leadership through strategic alignment: An
empirical study of small-and medium-sized enterprises
in the digital age. Journal of Information Technology,
31(2), 185–206.
Lim, J.-H., Stratopoulos, T. C., & Wirjanto, T. S. (2013).
Sustainability of a firm's reputation for information
technology capability: The role of senior it executives.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 30(1),
57–96.
Liu, F. H. (2016). Interactions, innovation, and services.
The Service Industries Journal, 36(13-14), 658–674.
Lombardi, M. R. (2010). Assessing intercultural competence:
A review. NCSSSMST Journal, 16(1), 15–17.
Lyashenko, M. S., & Frolova, N. H. (2014). Lms projects:
A platform for intergenerational e-learning
collaboration. Education and Information Technologies,
19(3), 495–513.
Markham, S. K., & Lee, H. (2013). P roduct d evelopment
and m anagement a ssociation's 2012 c omparative p
erformance a ssessment s tudy. Journal of Product
Innovation Management, 30(3), 408–429.
Martins, E.-C., & Terblanche, F. (2003). Building
organisational culture that stimulates creativity and
innovation. European Journal of Innovation
Management.
Martinsons, M. G., & Ma, D. (2009). Sub-cultural
differences in information ethics across china: Focus on
chinese management generation gaps. Journal of the
Association for Information Systems, 10(11), 2.
Matlay, H., & Gimmon, E. (2014). Mentoring as a practical
training in higher education of entrepreneurship.
Education+ Training.
Miller, D., Steier, L., & Le Breton-Miller, I. (2003). Lost in
time: Intergenerational succession, change, and failure
in family business. Journal of Business Venturing,
18(4), 513–531.
Miranda, S. M., & Kavan, C. B. (2005). Moments of
governance in is outsourcing: Conceptualizing effects
of contracts on value capture and creation. Journal of
Information Technology, 20(3), 152–169.
Mitchelmore, S., & Rowley, J. (2010). Entrepreneurial
competencies: A literature review and development
agenda. International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behavior & Research.
Moro, A., Fink, M., & Kautonen, T. (2014). How do banks
assess entrepreneurial competence? The role of
voluntary information disclosure. International Small
Business Journal, 32(5), 525–544.
Newman, L., Browne‐Yung, K., Raghavendra, P., Wood,
D., & Grace, E. (2017). Applying a critical approach to
investigate barriers to digital inclusion and online social
networking among young people with disabilities.
Information Systems Journal, 27(5), 559–588.
Nielsen, J. A. (2015). Assessment of innovation
competency: A thematic analysis of upper secondary
school teachers’ talk. The Journal of Educational
Research, 108(4), 318–330.
Nurhas, I., Geisler, S., Ojala, A., & Pawlowski, J. M. (2020).
Towards a wellbeing-driven system design for
intergenerational collaborative innovation: A literature
review. In Hawaii international conference on system
sciences. University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
Ojala, A. (2016). Business models and opportunity
creation: How it entrepreneurs create and develop
business models under uncertainty. Information
Systems Journal, 26(5), 451–476.
Quadros Carvalho, R. de, dos Santos, G. V., & de Barros
Neto, Manoel Clementino (2013). R&D+ I strategic
management in a public company in the brazilian
electric sector. Journal of Technology Management &
Innovation, 8(2).
Rasmussen, E., Mosey, S., & Wright, M. (2011). The
evolution of entrepreneurial competencies: A
longitudinal study of university spin ‐ off venture
emergence. Journal of Management Studies, 48(6),
1314–1345.
Rasmussen, E., Mosey, S., & Wright, M. (2014). The
influence of university departments on the evolution of
entrepreneurial competencies in spin-off ventures.
Research Policy, 43(1), 92–106.
Developing a Competency Framework for Intergenerational Startup Innovation in a Digital Collaboration Setting
117

Reid, S. E., & Brentani, U. de (2015). Building a
measurement model for market visioning competence
and its proposed antecedents: Organizational
encouragement of divergent thinking, divergent
thinking attitudes, and ideational behavior. Journal of
Product Innovation Management, 32(2), 243–262.
Reid, S. E., Brentani, U. de, & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2014).
Divergent thinking and market visioning competence:
An early front-end radical innovation success typology.
Industrial Marketing Management, 43(8), 1351–1361.
Ritter, T., & Gemünden, H. G. (2003). Network competence:
Its impact on innovation success and its antecedents.
Journal of Business Research, 56(9), 745–755.
Saa-Perez, P. D., & Garcia-Falcon, J. M. (2002). A
resource-based view of human resource management
and organizational capabilities development.
International Journal of Human Resource Management,
13(1), 123–140.
Sahay, S. (2004). Beyond utopian and nostalgic views of
information technology and education: Implications for
research and practice. Journal of the Association for
Information Systems, 5(7), 1.
Sánchez, J. C. (2013). The impact of an entrepreneurship
education program on entrepreneurial competencies
and intention. Journal of Small Business Management,
51(3), 447–465.
Sarker, S., & Sahay, S. (2003). Understanding virtual team
development: An interpretive study. Journal of the
Association for Information Systems, 4(1), 1.
Shi, H. X., Graves, C., & Barbera, F. (2019).
Intergenerational succession and internationalisation
strategy of family smes: Evidence from china. Long
Range Planning, 52(4), 101838.
Underdahl, L., Isele, E., Leach, R. G., Knight, M., & Heuss,
R. (2018). Catalyzing cross-generational
entrepreneurship to foster economic growth, employ
youth, and optimize retiree experience. In Icie 2018 6th
international conference on innovation and
entrepreneurship: Icie 2018 (p. 434). Academic
Conferences and publishing limited.
Várhegyi, V., & Nann, S. (2011). Framework model for
intercultural competences. On Behalf of Luminica Ltd.
For the Intercultool Project. European Commission.
Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y., Gomez, S. C., & van den Brande,
G. (2016). DigComp 2.0: The digital competence
framework for citizens. Update phase 1: The
conceptual reference model. Joint Research Centre
(Seville site).
Watts, F., Le Aznar-Mas, Penttilä, T., Kairisto-Mertanen,
L., Stange, C., & Helker, H. (Eds.) (2013). Innovation
competency development and assessment in higher
education.
Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to
prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS
Quarterly, xiii–xxiii.
Wei, K.-K., Teo, H.-H., Chan, H. C., & Tan, B. C. Y. (2011).
Conceptualizing and testing a social cognitive model of
the digital divide. Information Systems Research, 22(1),
170–187.
Wu, W. W. (2009). A competency-based model for the
success of an entrepreneurial start-up. WSEAS
Transactions on Business and Economics, 6(6), 279–291.
Xu, Q., Chen, J., Xie, Z., Liu, J., Zheng, G., & Wang, Y.
(2007). Total innovation management: A novel
paradigm of innovation management in the 21st century.
The Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(1-2), 9–25.
Zakaria, N., Amelinckx, A., & Wilemon, D. (2004).
Working together apart? Building a knowledge ‐
sharing culture for global virtual teams. Creativity and
Innovation Management, 13(1), 15–29.
Zimmermann, A., Raab, K., & Zanotelli, L. (2013). Vicious
and virtuous circles of offshoring attitudes and
relational behaviours. A configurational study of
german it developers. Information Systems Journal,
23(1), 65–88.
Zimmermann, A., & Ravishankar, M. N. (2014). Knowledge
transfer in it offshoring relationships: The roles of social
capital, efficacy and outcome expectations. Information
Systems Journal, 24(2), 167–202.
KMIS 2021 - 13th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems
118