Harriette Richards, Lani Sellers, Fabio Mattioli

Disruption, interrupted: Startups and social challenges in a government accelerator

Introduction

Disruption, interrupted: startups and social challenges in a government accelerator. Investigate how startups in a government accelerator balance financial demands and social impact, re-examining disruption through a relational lens. Case study from Melbourne.

Abstract

This article investigates how the dual demands of finance and social impact affect the relationships of founders to disruption, as a rhetorical function, material goal and relational context. Building on recent studies of innovation and entrepreneurship such as Bardinelli (2019), Irani (2019) and Lindtner (2020), the article offers a nuanced view of disruption that complicates unidimensional narratives of financialization as a singular force and accounts for the complexity of reconciling financial and social interests. Based on data gathered at a startup participating in a government-funded accelerator program in Melbourne, Australia, we analyse how the logics of finance impact entrepreneurial experience in an early-stage social enterprise startup. Our data suggests that, in their attempts to attract the attention and funding of financial investors, founders of early-stage startups focus more on proving the value of their disruption in a rhetorical sense than on refining the materially disruptive potential of their products to ensure real world social impact. By analysing disruption through a relational lens, we identify four layers of disruption (product innovation; social value; financial return; and labour relations) to which early-stage startups are aligned, and through which their products and personal lives are transformed.

Review

This article offers a timely and important investigation into the inherent tensions faced by startups operating within government accelerators, particularly those striving for both financial viability and social impact. By meticulously examining "disruption" through multiple lenses—rhetorical function, material goal, and relational context—the authors promise a significant contribution to the literature. Building on recent theoretical advancements in innovation and entrepreneurship, the paper is well-positioned to challenge simplistic narratives of financialization and provide a more sophisticated understanding of how financial and social interests intersect and often conflict in early-stage ventures. The chosen empirical context of a government-funded accelerator in Melbourne, Australia, provides a specific and relevant setting for this nuanced inquiry. The core finding, that early-stage founders tend to prioritize the rhetorical performance of disruption to attract financial investors over refining its material potential for actual social impact, is particularly compelling and insightful. This observation illuminates a critical challenge within the social enterprise ecosystem, highlighting how the pursuit of funding can inadvertently divert attention from the foundational mission of creating real-world change. The introduction of four distinct layers of disruption—product innovation, social value, financial return, and labour relations—analysed through a relational lens, provides a robust framework for understanding the complex transformations experienced by both the entrepreneurial products and the personal lives of founders. This analytical depth offers valuable insights into the lived realities of navigating these competing demands. While the single case study approach, focusing on one startup, allows for rich, in-depth contextual analysis, a potential area for further exploration could involve examining whether these dynamics hold true across a broader sample of accelerators, funding structures, or geographical regions to enhance generalizability. Nevertheless, the article makes a substantial contribution by theoretically enriching the concept of disruption and empirically demonstrating the practical challenges of aligning financial and social goals. It should stimulate crucial discussions among policymakers, accelerator managers, and impact investors on how to foster environments where rhetorical claims of disruption genuinely translate into sustained and meaningful social impact, rather than remaining merely "interrupted" by financial pressures.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.