The negative interaction effect between technological experience and intra-team trust on opportunity

To solve the technology-to-market linking problem, the available technological and industry experience within an en-trepreneurial team plays a crucial role (Gruber et al., 2008). In the following, I outline three reasons why high techno-logical knowledge is normally an advantage for entrepreneurial teams when it comes to opportunity recognition. In the present work, I refer to these benefits of high technological knowledge as the "treasure trove of technological experi-ence."

First, to solve the technology-to-market linking problem, an entrepreneurial team needs to conduct a two-step technol-ogy leveraging process. First, they must understand and assess the technological basis, e.g., properties, components, and functionalities. This delinking step should happen independently of a business application. Second, for the relinking step, business applications for the available technological capital have to be recognized. For both steps, it is important

that an entrepreneurial team possesses deep technological knowledge. Thus, the technological level is crucial to under-stand the leveraging capacity of a technology. As a consequence, entrepreneurial teams with a high level of technolog-ical experience should have an advantage in the opportunity process compared to teams with a lower level of techno-logical experience (Cohen & Levinthal, 1990; Danneels, 2002; 2007; Gruber et al., 2013).

Second, a high level of technological experience enables a good performance in the corresponding specialized activi-ties. When looking for opportunities, for example, the technological feasibility of a potential product must be assessed (Danneels, 2002), but deep technological knowledge can prevent specialists from taking a broad perspective on a prob-lem-solving task, as they primarily focus on technological functions, instead of also including the market side (Gruber et al., 2012). However, when it comes to specialized activities, e.g., the quality of the selected opportunity and the selection performance, the influence of deep technological experience on the opportunity recognition performance should be positive.

Finally, there is a close link between the technological aspiration level of an organization and the recognition of oppor-tunities. Cohen and Levinthal (1990) argue that organizations can be distinguished by their technological aspiration level. Organizations with a low aspiration level are comparably unaware of external technological opportunities, as they conduct only little innovative action. However, organizations with a high technological aspiration level are aware of technological opportunities developed by others. As a consequence, they push their technological activities further and stay aware of external opportunities. I assume that this insight can be applied to entrepreneurial teams. Applying this insight to entrepreneurial teams would mean that teams with a high technological aspiration level based on high technological knowledge are better aware of technological opportunities. Thus, entrepreneurial teams with a higher technological aspiration level should achieve a better performance in recognizing and selecting opportunities.

However, I assume that intra-team trust also negatively influences how entrepreneurial teams solve the technology-to-market linking problem, the core problem entrepreneurial teams try to solve when recognizing (section 2.4.4.1) and selecting opportunities (section 2.4.4.2).

2.4.4.1 Quality of the selected opportunity

In order to solve the technology-to-market linking problem, entrepreneurial teams execute a technology leveraging process consisting of two steps. For the first step, delinking, they analyze the technological basis. In the second step, relinking, they search for business applications for the technology. Both steps are triggered by technological experience (Cohen & Levinthal, 1990; Danneels, 2002; 2007; Gruber et al., 2013). Thus, high technological experience should usually enable entrepreneurial teams to recognize opportunities with a higher quality as they can better understand and apply the technological basis to potential markets. However, in entrepreneurial teams with high technological experi-ence, high trust might lead teams to think alike and concentrate on already known sources and opportunities. Thus, they

are not able to recognize opportunities outside their familiar field (Zahra et al., 2006). Therefore, highly trusting entre-preneurial teams might not be able to fully apply their technology leveraging ability, as they are restricted by the focus on known environments. Less trust would probably enable the team to fully use the technology leveraging skills and, as a consequence, the team may recognize an opportunity with a higher quality that lies outside the familiar environ-ment. If the technological experience is higher in highly trusting entrepreneurial teams, it might be even more difficult to look outside the familiar field, as the technological specialization is higher and, thus, they focus even more on a narrow perspective when looking for opportunities.

In addition, innovative organizations based on high technological knowledge have a high technological aspiration level, which enables them to better recognize external technological opportunities (Cohen & Levinthal, 1990). Transferring this insight to entrepreneurial teams means that those with higher technological experience should be more likely to recognize high-quality opportunities, as they are more aware of innovative opportunities. However, as outlined above, entrepreneurial teams with high technological experience might tend to think alike and focus on familiar fields if they highly trust each other. Thus, they potentially have difficulty fully recognizing emerging technological opportunities outside their familiar scope (Zahra et al., 2006). In addition, not only their leveraging capacity, but also their techno-logical aspiration advantage is limited by their specialization and their need to think alike.

Furthermore, I assume that challenging other team members' opinions is even more difficult in highly trusting entre-preneurial teams if individuals are aware of the high technological knowledge of their teammates. They probably fear even more that questioning proposed opportunities could be understood as a lack of trust (Langfred, 2004). Thus, in entrepreneurial teams with high technological experience, high trust might lead to less scrutinizing of options, and consequently to a suboptimal quality of the selected opportunity.

In summary, these arguments suggest that intra-team trust negatively moderates the influence of technological experi-ence on the quality of the selected opportunity. Thus,

Hypothesis 4a: Intra-team trust will moderate the relationship between technological experience and the busi-ness value of the selected opportunity, such that entrepreneurial teams with higher intra-team trust will be more likely to select an opportunity with a lower business value than entrepreneurial teams with lower intra-team trust.

2.4.4.2 Selection performance

A high level of technological experience is generally beneficial for high performance in activities that focus on tech-nology (Gruber et al., 2012). When it comes to the opportunity evaluation, entrepreneurs need to assess the technolog-ical feasibility of a potential product, which is usually easier for them if they possess high technologtechnolog-ical knowledge (Danneels, 2002). Consequently, if the technological experience is high in an entrepreneurial team, they should be

better able to make a good selection about which opportunity to pursue. However, if intra-team trust is high in an entrepreneurial team with high technological experience, there are two factors that might prevent teams from fully using their technological knowledge for their selection performance. First, they might tend to conduct less formal eval-uations and thus insufficiently assess opportunities due to a lack of objectivity and overconfidence (Zahra et al., 2006).

Consequently, when making a decision, they are less likely to challenge the assumptions of their teammates (Zahra et al., 2006). Second, homogenous decisions are more agreeable for all team members as nobody's feelings are hurt (Lang-fred, 2004). Consequently, long controversial decision discussions about the technological advantages, feasibilities, and possibilities are unlikely, but would probably be necessary to fully leverage the technological experience of the team. Controversial discussions are potentially even less likely in highly trusting entrepreneurial teams if the techno-logical experience is higher, as each team member relies on the technotechno-logical ability of his or her teammates. As a consequence, the team is not able to fully use the available treasure trove of technological experience and has more difficulties when selecting an opportunity.

These arguments provide the theoretical basis for my next hypothesis. Thus,

Hypothesis 4b: Intra-team trust will moderate the relationship between technological experience and the dif-ference between the business value of the selected opportunity and the average business value of all their rec-ognized opportunities, such that the difference between the business value of the selected opportunity and the average business value of all the recognized opportunities is more likely to be smaller for entrepreneurial teams with higher intra-team trust than for entrepreneurial teams with lower intra-team trust.

2.4.5 The negative interaction effect between industry experience and intra-team trust on opportunity