Issue

Vol 40 No 2 (2025): May

Date Log

Submitted
Feb 1, 2024
Accepted
Sep 5, 2024
Published
May 28, 2025
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright

Upon acceptance of an article, authors transfer copyright to the JIEB as part of a journal publishing agreement, but authors still have the right to share their article for personal use, internal institutional use, and for any use permitted under the CC BY-SA license

Open Access

Articles are freely available to the public without any subscription with permitted reuse. For open access articles, permitted third party (re)use is defined by the following Creative Commons user licenses: Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-SA).

Innovative Governance in the Startup Era: The Interplay of Technology, Innovation, and Value Creation

https://doi.org/10.22146/jieb.v40i2.12038
Dian Kartika Rahajeng
dkrahajeng@ugm.ac.id
Universitas Gadjah Mada

Corresponding Author(s) : Dian Kartika Rahajeng

dkrahajeng@ugm.ac.id

Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, Vol 40 No 2 (2025): May

Abstract

Introduction: This groundbreaking paper examines the uncharted territory of corporate governance within non-traditional organizations, focusing on the dynamic landscape of start-up enterprises. Background Problem: In an era dominated by rapid technological advancements and unprecedented growth in start-ups, this research sheds light on the intricate relationship between innovation processes and value creation that fundamentally reshapes corporate governance mechanisms. Novelty: The novelty of this study paper lies in bridging the research gap in corporate governance studies, specifically in non-traditional settings like start-up enterprises. Research Methods: Embarking on a multi-exploratory study, the author examines the value of co-creation processes in eleven vibrant start-up organizations. The study unravels the interplay between stakeholders' value creation and innovation through primary and secondary data from interviews, focus group discussions, observations, and documentary analyses. This exploration vividly illustrates how these dynamics influence organizational culture and, consequently, redefine the very structure of these innovative entities. Findings: The findings spotlight unique innovation and co-creation processes intricately tied to customer needs and leadership styles. From product newness to bespoke offerings and active, dynamic leadership, these factors intricately mold the organizational structure of start-ups. Contributions: This paper offers insights into successful corporate governance in start-ups, focusing on the social impact of value generation. It outlines transformations like strong leadership, integrated communication systems, innovative remuneration schemes, and technology use, promoting a holistic approach to governance in the fast-paced startup world.

Keywords

Corporate governance value creation innovation leadership stakeholders
Kartika Rahajeng, D. (2025). Innovative Governance in the Startup Era: The Interplay of Technology, Innovation, and Value Creation. Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, 40(2), 179 -. https://doi.org/10.22146/jieb.v40i2.12038
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. Baum, Joel. A.C., Calabrese, T., & Silverman, B. S. (2000). Don't go it alone: Alliance network composition and start-ups' performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal, 21 (3), pp. 267-294.
  2. Castro-Martinez, M. P., & Jackson, P. R. (2015). Collaborative value co-creation in community sports trusts at football clubs. Corporate Governance, 15(2), 229–242. https://doi.org/10.1108/cg-05-2014-0066
  3. Cossío-Silva, F. J., Revilla-Camacho, M. N., Vega-Vázquez, M., & Palacios-Florencio, B. (2016). Value co-creation and customer loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1621–1625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.028
  4. DeKinder, J. S., & Kohli, A. K. (2008). Flow signals: How patterns over time affect the acceptance of start-up firms. Journal of Marketing, 72(5), 84-97.
  5. DOI: 10.1509/jmkg.72.5.084.
  6. Dess, Gregory G, Lumpkin G.T., and McGee, J.E. (1999), Linking corporate entrepre-neurship to strategy, structure, and process: Suggested research directions. Entrepre¬neurship Theory and Practice 23 (3):85-102.
  7. Di Vaio, A., Palladino, R., Pezzi, A., & Kalisz, D. E. (2021). The Role of digital innovation in knowledge management systems: A systematic literature review. Journal of Business Research, 123, 220–231. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.09.042
  8. Donaldson, Thomas, and Lee E Preston. (1995), The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review 20 (1):65-91.
  9. Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. (1989), Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review 14 (4):532-550.
  10. Etgar, Michael. (2008), A descriptive model of the consumer co-production process. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 36 (1):97-108.
  11. Fauzan, & Jahja, A. S. (2021). Intellectual Dynamics of Good Governance Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis. Journal of Indone¬sian Economy and Business, 36(2), 155-178. https://doi.org/10.22146/jieb.v36i2.1411
  12. Freeman, R. E. et al. (2013), "Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art". 3rd edition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  13. Freeman, R. E. (1994), The politics of stakeholder theory: Some future directions. Business Ethics Quarterly. 4 (04), 409–421.
  14. Frow, P., McColl-Kennedy, J., and Payne, A. (2016), Co-creation practices: Their role in shaping the health care ecosystem. Industrial Marketing Management 56:24-39.
  15. DOI: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.03.007.
  16. Gioia, D.A., Corley, K., and Hamilton, A. (2013), Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology.Organizational Research Methods 16 (1):15-31.
  17. Given, L. (2008), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. (L. Given, Ed.) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods (1 and 2). California: SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909
  18. Heidenreich, Sven, Kristina Wittkowski, Matthias Handrich, and Tomas Falk. (2015), The dark side of customer co-creation: exploring the consequences of failed co-created services. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 43 (3):279-296. DOI: 10.1007/s11747-014-0387-4.
  19. Hoyer, W.D, Chandy R., Dorotic M., Krafft M., and Singh, S.S. (2010), Consumer cocrea¬tion in new product development.Journal of Service Research 13 (3):283-296.
  20. Hunckler, M. (2017), 12 Challenges Startup Culture Must Overcome In Order To Thrive in 2017. Retrieved August 10, 2020, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthunckler/2017/03/22/12-challenges-startup-culture-must-overcome-in-order-to-thrive-in-2017/#563dbbfb7592
  21. Kelleher, C., Wilson, H., Macdonald, E., and Peppard, J. (2019), The score is not the music: Integrating experience and practice perspectives on value co-creation in collective consumption contexts. Journal of Service Research 22 (2):120-138.
  22. Krishnan, R. T., & Krishna, V. V. (2024). Introduction: Start-ups and Innovation Ecosystems. Science, Technology and Society, 29(1), 7-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/09717218241226499
  23. Mahr, D., Lievens, A., and Blazevic, V. (2014), The value of customer cocreated knowledge during the innovation process. Journal of Product Innovation Management 31 (3):599-615. DOI: 10.1111/jpim.12116.
  24. Markovic, S., and Bagherzadeh, M. (2018), How does the breadth of external stakeholder co-creation influence innovation performance? Analyzing the mediating roles of knowledge sharing and product innovation. Journal of Business Research 88:173-186.
  25. Merz, M. A., Zarantonello, L., & Grappi, S. (2018), How valuable are your customers in the brand value co-creation process? The development of a customer co-creation value (CCCV) Scale. Journal of Business Research, 82, 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.08.018
  26. Miles, Matthew B, and A Michael Huberman. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook: Sage.
  27. Moogk, Dobrila Rancic. (2012), Minimum viable product and the importance of experimentation in technology start-ups. Technology Innovation Management Review 2 (3).
  28. Nisar, A., Palacios, M., and Grijalvo, M. (2016), Open organizational structures: A new framework for the energy industry. Journal of Business Research 69 (11):5175-5179.
  29. Perks, H., Gruber, T., and Edvardsson, B. (2012), Co-creation in Radical service innovation: A Systematic analysis of microlevel processes. Journal of Product Innovation Management 29:935-951. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00971.x.
  30. Petroni, G., Venturini, K., and Verbano, C. (2012), Open innovation and new issues in R&D organization and personnel management. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 23 (1):147-173.
  31. Rahajeng, D. K. (2018), Stakeholders’ Perceptions Of Fraud In Indonesian BMT Islamic Cooperatives. University of Essex. [Unpublished Dissertation]
  32. Saadatmand, Mohammadsaleh. (2017), Assessment of Minimum Viable Product Techniques: A Literature Review.
  33. Saebi, Tina, and Nicolai J Foss. (2015), Business models for open innovation: Matching heterogeneous open innovation strategies with business model dimensions. European Management Journal 33 (3): 201-213.
  34. Stinchcombe, Arthur L., (1965), Organizations and social structure. Handbook of organizations 44 (2):142-193.
  35. Stock, R.M., Zacharias, N.A., and Schnellbaecher, A. (2017), How Do Strategy and Leadership Styles Jointly Affect Co-development and Its Innovation Outcomes? Journal of Product Innovation Management 34 (2): 201-222. DOI: 10.1111/jpim.12332.
  36. Van der Meer, Han. (2007), Open innovation–the Dutch treat: challenges in thinking in business models." Creativity and Innovation Management 16 (2):192-202.
  37. Vargo, S., and Lusch, R.. (2004), Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing. Journal of Marketing 68 (1):1-17.
Read More

Author Biography

Dian Kartika Rahajeng, Universitas Gadjah Mada

Dian Kartika Rahajeng is a lecturer and researcher at the Department of Accounting, Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), Indonesia where she has been a faculty member since 2012. She earned her bachelor’s degree in accounting at the Faculty of Economic and Business, UGM. During her undergraduate years, Ajeng was further sponsored by the Government of Indonesia Pension Fund (PT TASPEN) and the prestigious PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PwC) Scholarships. She graduated with honors and was recognized as the fastest graduate. She finished her M.Sc. in Islamic Finance at School of Government and International Affairs joint program with Durham Business School, Durham University, United Kingdom under a scholarship from Islamic Development Bank, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. She has finished her Ph.D. in Accounting and Finance at Essex Business School, University of Essex, United Kingdom under the scholarship from the LPDP Endowment Fund, the Ministry of Finance, the Republic of Indonesia.  Dian has co-authored several books and articles on corporate governance concepts and their implementation in traditional organizations in collaboration with her colleagues at Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia. Her recent book chapters underline the role of Pesantren (Islamic boarding school) in Indonesia's development. Currently, her research interests focus on non-traditional organizations, especially within Islamic institutions, as well as the issues of fraud, ethics and sustainability in newly innovative and technology-based organizations. Her commitment to academic and professional excellence has earned her numerous prestigious awards, including recognition as the Author of Reputable Scientific Articles by the Directorate General of Higher Education, Ministry of Education and Culture, Republic of Indonesia.

Download this PDF file
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 70 Download : 51