Knowledge and Sustainability April 2015

Architecture Interior Design Landscape Architecture Planning Urban Design

Australia China Hong Kong SAR Singapore Thailand United Kingdom

SPOT THE DIFFERENCEUnderstanding different types of business incubators, accelerators and co-working spaces

01 Introduction 02 Incubators_a growth industry 03 A short history 04 A space, or a program? 05 The link between proximity, innovation and space06 Spot the difference_types of incubators07 Conclusion08 References

01 02 03 05 06 081011

Section

Contents

Front cover image: HUB Melbourne Photography by Dianna Snape

ContactBrett Pollard, Principalbpollard@hassellstudio.com AuthorMichaela Sheahan, Researchermsheahan@hassellstudio.com

HASSELL 61 Little Collins Street Melbourne, VIC Australia 3000 T + 61 3 81023000 hassellstudio.com @HASSELL_StudioHASSELL Limited ABN 24 007 711 435

1HASSELL © 2015

01 Introduction

Organisations of all sizes are increasingly creating new, tailor-made spaces and programs to nurture innovation, entrepreneurialism and talent in small enterprises.

The intense focus on innovation in science, business, technology and other aspects of our daily lives has led to the development of a particular type of facility – the incubator. Incubators (and their close relative, accelerators) have been operating for many years, across diverse sectors including the creative arts, technology, education, healthcare, finance and media, commonly in under-used, low rent or abandoned spaces.

However, organisations are increasingly creating new, tailor-made spaces and buildings to accommodate the growing requirements of businesses and institutions to nurture innovation, entrepreneurialism and talent in small enterprises. The rise of co-working spaces and distributed working models has parallels to this type of facility.

In his book “Where Good Ideas Come From, Steven Johnson notes that “environments that build walls around good ideas tend to be less innovative in the long run than more open-ended environments.” 1 It is this co-operative model of breaking down both physical and less tangible barriers on which incubators are based. It allows ideas to collide, but also to be nurtured by an open and supportive system of like-minded aspirants and well-connected experts.

Theories of innovation indicate that new ideas occur at the edges and intersections of communication networks. The role of space in this equation is to enable those connections to occur easily and to provide both the privacy required to work hard, and the social and work opportunities to gain valuable inspiration and support.

Flinders@Tonsley, Adelaide Photography by Sam Noonan

02 Incubators_a growth industry

DefinitionsAn incubator is described by the Oxford English dictionary as ‘a place, especially with support staff and equipment, made available at low rent to new small businesses.”2

More specifically, the US National Business Incubation Association describes business incubation as “a process that accelerates the successful development of start-up and fledgling companies by providing entrepreneurs with an array of targeted resources and services.” 3

The emergence in recent years of the new descriptor ‘accelerator’ is a variation of this concept, with differentiation largely in the business model, rather than the space or facility.

In some instances, an accelerator program is run in an incubator space. In others, an incubation program is targeted at the early start-up phase of a business, and an accelerator program is for businesses that are scaling up to the next stage, commercialisation. Often the terms are used interchangeably.

Separate from, although similar to incubators and accelerators, are co-working spaces, which sometimes do not have formalised investment mechanisms, but offer programs of learning and support, and provide business model benefits such as shared, subsidised or short term lease commitments.

Table 1 elaborates on the general differences between the three types of spaces, while recognising that there is considerable overlap between the services and spaces they provide.

Table 1 - General differences between co-working spaces, incubators and accelerators

Co-working space Incubator Accelerator

TIME No set timeframes _Intensive support for limited timeframe _1-12 weeks usually, but up to 1 year

_Intensive support of limited timeframe _3 months - 2 years

INTAKE _Ongoing according to available space _Individuals or small groups _Membership based, non-competitive application

_Fixed number of rolling admissions _Two business partners preferred _Competitive application or non-competitive university course

_Annual fixed (small) number, or as space is available _Two or more business partners, or small businesses _Competitive application

MONEY _No access to funding _Membership fee _Rental fee included _No IP clauses

_Assistance to attracting funding _Initial small grants and equity options _No rent, or subsidised rent _Some IP clauses

_Assistance in attracting funding _Invest for equity, or fees for services _Subsidised or full commercial rent _IP clauses

SERVICES _Space host or facilitator _Curated programs of talks and events _IT and administrative services

_Emphasis on training and mentorship for idea development _Corporate services (legal, financial, digital, etc)

_Emphasis on business development _Corporate services (legal, financial, digital, etc)

SPACE _Desk _Small spaces with communal meeting areas _Seminar or event space

_Desk or office _Small spaces with communal areas _Seminar or event space

_Desk or office _Small spaces with communal meeting areas _Longer term office or lab space _Specialised lab equipment _Seminar or event space

3HASSELL © 2015

03 A space, or a program?

Is an incubator a space, or a program? The answer is both. Many accelerator and incubator spaces are adopting incubation programs within which funding, mentoring, networking and other resources can be provided in a dedicated space, sometimes in a number of independent locations. These programs are often backed by large venture capital or corporate entities and angel investors.

The terms of the program can vary, from equity investment in successful applications to equity share in exchange for support, facilities, and expertise.Occasionally incubation programs operate from, or are offered through, co-working spaces provided by other organisations.

For example, the Blue Chilli program has a dedicated facility in Sydney, but also operates in Melbourne from the privately owned and run Cluster co-working space4 (see Table 2). Similarly, Pollenizer, an Australian incubator program works in partnership with HUB Sydney.5 And while there is no formal incubator program at HUB Melbourne, a number of members have won City of Melbourne entrepreneurialism awards. 6

HUB Westminster (which claims to be London’s largest innovation lab, accommodating up to 1000 start-ups) uses the Village Capital Incubator program,7 while HUB King’s Cross belongs to the BENISI network (Building a European Network of Incubators for Social Innovation), which aims to connect innovators with mentors and funding across seven countries.

Also in London, the Google Campus houses a number of different programs including Seedcamp, TechHub, Central Working and Startup Weekend. In the US, Techstars is one of the larger non-place based programs.8

HUB Melbourne Photography by Dianna Snape

03 A space, or a program?

Table 2 - International selection of high profile incubator programs and spaces

PROGRAM SPACE LOCATION TYPE FOCUS FUNDING DURATION INTAKE

Y Combinator Y Combinator Mountain View, California

Private Technology $US 200,000 grant 7% equity

3 months Bi-annual

Techstars No US, UK, Europe Private Technology $US 118,000 grant 7-10% equity

3 months Quarterly

Seedcamp No Google Campus London, Berlin

Private Technology €250,000 grant 7% equity

Varies, 1 weekend to 1 year

Periodic

Health Box No Chicago, Salt Lake City, Miami

Private Healthcare Information Technology

$US 50,000 grant 7% equity

2 months Periodic

Blue Chilli Accelerator

Blue Chilli Incubator

Sydney, Melbourne

Private Various, including real estate

20-30% equity plus $AUS 75,000 fee

2-3 years Ongoing

Muru-D Telstra Muru-D Academy

Sydney Private Digital $AUS 40,000 grant 6% equity

6 months Periodic

Melbourne Accelerator Program

No University of Melbourne

University Various $AUS 20,000 selective grant, $AUS 5,500 fee for total program

4 months Annual Staff, student or alumni only

Rice Alliance for Technology and Entrepreneurship

No Rice University Houston

University Technology $US 1.3 million cash prizes

3 day competition

Annual

Venture Incubation Program

Harvard I-Lab Boston University Various None 12 weeks Bi-annual

Tongji University Incubator and Accelerator

Tongji University Incubator

Shanghai University Design 500 RMB grant debt with zero interest or equity

3 years Periodic

No program University of Manchester Incubator

University of Manchester

University/ Basic

Bio-medical technology

No funding As available Ongoing leases

No program Citylabs Manchester Economic Development/Basic

Bio-medical technology

No funding As available Ongoing leases

Jolt (Global Accelerator Network)

MaRS Innovation Incubator

Toronto (+ 59 cities)

Economic Development/ Basic

Technology $CAD 50,000 grant 9% equity

6 months Bi-annual

5HASSELL © 2015

Early beginningsThe business incubator industry has experienced exponential growth recently,9

but can be traced back to the establishment of the Batavia Industrial Center in New York State in 1959. The Center, which is still operating, was used to fill a complex of disused industrial buildings when Massey Ferguson closed down and left the region with significant unemployment. Struggling to find a large, single tenant, the new owners decided instead to divide the space into smaller units and provide support to new businesses.10

Changing economiesIncubation has grown from this model of low cost space and shared services to providing training, mentoring, and access to business and funding networks via investor backed schemes (both private and corporate).11 A number of factors that were evident in the 1980s and 1990s led to these changes: economic restructuring, the importance of small business to the economy, and the emergence of technology clusters such as Silicon Valley.12

The continuing evolution of theories of innovation by Richard Florida, Thomas Allen, Steven Johnson and others contribute to an understanding that businesses and individuals are better served by connecting ideas (whether through agglomeration of industries, virtual connectivity or by physical co-location of collaborative entities) than they are by protecting them.1

The evolution of digital technology, too, has allowed more efficient and comprehensive communication between employees in different locations, and a readily accessible network of information. This has provided an unprecedented opportunity to share ideas.

Boom and bustIn 2012, there were over 1,250 incubators in the United States, up from only 12 in 1980.3 In the UK, the number has more than doubled since 2011,11 and in China in the last 15 years the number has grown from 164 to over 1200, employing over 1.4 million people and using over 40 million square metres of building space.13

Worldwide, it is estimated that there are over 7000 business incubators.3

Growth has not always been smooth however – an incubator boom in the late 20th century was largely undone by the dot.com bust in the early 2000s. Those programs took far fewer starters, provided significantly larger funds and took much greater equity stakes - up to 30 per cent - than the current model. Some business analysts believe another bust is on the way due to the sheer volume of programs now available.14

The percentage of start-up businesses that become successful global companies has been estimated at around five per cent.11,15 In the UK, the average survival rate of start-ups in incubators is nearly 20 per cent higher than those small businesses that choose to go it alone.11 So it is better to be in a program than not, but the low rate of success does raise issues of profitability for the incubator model. The burgeoning number of programs competing for attention and funding may exacerbate the problem that incubators were meant to solve – the difficulty of launching a new business.14

Although there are now more accelerators and incubators than ever, the total size of their portfolios of start-ups has begun to plateau in recent years, fuelling speculation within the industry that there are now not enough quality founders to justify continued expansion.15

To date, investor funds have grown with the number of incubators, but with this now levelling off, it may be that investment models will be adjusted to extract higher returns from the limited number of successful commercialisations. Or, it may be that a number of programs will fail as competition for angel investors and other funding sources intensifies. Another alternative is the emerging practice of crowd funding, which has the potential to disrupt standard business models for these enterprises.

Whatever the outcome over time, this pressure, for both incubator management and start-ups, underscores the need to provide the right kind of space that supports the style and specialisation of an incubation program. This is where good design can help.

04 A short history

As Fayad and Weeks explain from their studies into workplace communication, “The most effective spaces bring people together and remove barriers while also providing sufficient seclusion that people don’t fear being overheard or interrupted. In addition, they reinforce permission to convene and speak freely.” 17 Interaction depends on a balance between the social and physical dimensions of proximity, privacy and permissions - and “getting the balance wrong can turn a well-meant effort to foster creative collaboration into a frustrating lesson in unintended consequences.” 17

Proximity for interactionThere is great focus on the potential for networking and knowledge transfer in incubation spaces, which is predicated on both assumptions and evidence relating to the value of proximity for communication.

In much of the on-line marketing material for incubators, proximity to other start-up founders, mentors and administrators is highlighted as a major benefit of coming to a space. Y-Combinator, the leading incubator in the world according to Forbes Magazine18 requires its start-ups to work on site to maximise idea development and interaction with mentors - “What we do, we have to do in person.” 19

And while working close to others may be a necessary precondition for many of these facilities, other spatial clues should be designed to allow occupants to feel comfortable to speak to those they need or want to.

Social supportIn one study of a university incubator in the US, results indicated that communication with other start-ups at a similar stage provided valuable social support, particularly in the early stages of business development. “The stage of a resident company’s development as well as the level of its members’ experience affect the type, depth and frequency of interaction that is desired... Companies with longer tenure in the incubator or that have members with previous entrepreneurial experience expressed less desire for frequent interaction with resident companies”. 20

This differentiation of requirements highlights the need for, and potential of, specialised incubators, with spaces tailored to suit the type of start-ups going into them.

As well as providing spatial cues for user initiated interaction, some incubators and co-working spaces, employ hosts (or space curators) to help structure and facilitate a support network through social and learning events.

Technical supportOn the technical front, timely access to mentors and administration support on site enables fast responses that gives rise to the ‘accelerator’ nomenclature – for a start-up with little or no money, time is of the essence, and easy access to business leaders, legal and financial experts can expedite the process of establishing a business.

In addition to this is the availability of spaces, facilities and equipment that start-ups cannot afford when operating alone.

PrivacyTrust is also important, because there is an inherent tension between independence and connectedness in these environments: sharing and accessing information must be balanced with the need for time and space to work uninterrupted, and the protection of confidential information.20

Security of intellectual property can be facilitated by the provision of confidential work, discussion and brainstorming spaces. Design that gives acoustic, visual, and spatial clues for the appropriate levels of privacy and interaction is essential for a successful incubation space.

05 The link between proximity, innovation and space

George Patterson Y&R Photography by Dianna Snape

7HASSELL © 2015

Innovation on the edgeIt has long been understood (and demonstrated most commonly by the Allen Curve, named after Professor Thomas Allen of MIT) that the frequency of communication drops exponentially as the distance between co-workers increases, to the extent that communication is rare between workers over 50 metres apart.21

This research, coupled with the economic case for innovation from the agglomeration of industries22 and Granovetter’s theory of the ‘strength of weak ties’, where co-locating a number of different but related businesses increases the potential for communication of ideas,1 provides designers with vital clues in how to design effective spaces for creativity.

Essentially, all of these theories indicate that innovation occurs at the edges and intersections of communication networks. The role of space in this equation is to enable those connections to occur easily and to provide both the privacy required to work hard, and the social and work opportunities to gain valuable inspiration, influences and support.

Space for innovationWorkplace design can have major implications for innovative thinking – circulation paths, social spaces, formal and informal meeting areas, views, ceiling heights, outdoor space, and opportunities for expression of ideas have all been demonstrated to materially affect the behaviour of people within workspaces.

The primary tool in the designer’s kit is the common area – in the research relating to communication in a university incubator,20 interviews revealed that common areas were the place to meet others for business or social interaction. This is not a ground-breaking finding, but what was surprising was that the common area most valuable to the users of this particular incubator was outside the space – in the car park, where frazzled late night workers would meet for pizza deliveries, which were not possible inside due to security arrangements.

The study indicated that despite heavy involvement of the occupants in the technology industry, face to face interaction was the dominant form of communication. Physical proximity of companies within the facility influenced who the users talked to most, “suggesting that incubator site design is important in creating an entrepreneurial environment.” 20

The study also identified that users of the incubator sought social support from others for a sense of belonging, to manage stress, and to access information. Clever design can address the difficulties for start-ups - extreme time limitations for networking, lack of information about others within the program, and a lack of trust about innovations and funding sources - by providing a range of spaces within a facility that cater to the users’ particular needs.

Room to growBut the common area is not the only tool. The spaces within an incubator, particularly those with longer programs, must be versatile enough to allow for growth and variation in activity, as companies get larger or move to different phases of development. This is particularly pertinent for a company that may be scaling up from research to prototyping or commercialisation, or is part of an institutional model.

In the hospital and university precinct in Manchester, a number of co-located bio-science incubator facilities (large and small, wet labs and office space, private and university owned) provide a pathway for development to ensure that the investment in incubation is not lost to a different location when a start-up outgrows their initial lodgings.23

05 The link between proximity, innovation and space

HUB Adelaide Photography by Nathan Dyer

06 Spot the difference_Types of incubator

Basic research incubator

Space features _Large floor plates leased in part or whole _Generic wet and dry lab facilities _Specialised equipment _Commercial development _Adjacent to clinical research facilities

Examples _Co-Laborator Space, San Francisco _LabCentral, Boston _Longwood Center, Boston

Scientific research is the focus of basic research incubators, and these are often supported by pharmaceutical companies such as Bayer (Co-Laborator Space) and Johnson & Johnson (LabCentral).

Cross-sectoral arrangements are also common. MaRS Innovation in Toronto (see economic development incubators) and the Manchester Corridor precinct in the UK, combine government, business and industry interests to provide space, services and funding for start-ups.

Basic research spaces vary in size and services, but often include wet labs and equipment that may be prohibitively expensive for start-ups. Incubation programs are often not included due to the longer term and specialised nature of scientific research. However, early stage companies can access incubation funding programs separate to their commercial leasing arrangements.

The Longwood Center in Boston is an example of commercial lab space, which, while not offering incubation programs, provides space outside the standard university administration models prevalent in the basic research area.

University incubator

Space features _Under-utilised university buildings or purpose built _Spaces for teaching, formal and informal meeting, events, small workspaces

Examples _University of Manchester Incubator _Harvard I-Lab, Boston _Melbourne Accelerator Program _Flinders@Tonsley New Venture Institute, Adelaide (pictured)

In the UK, a quarter of all incubators are run out of universities.11 Generally located within university administration and on-site, some of these foster student entrepreneurship, skills and links to industry (improving employability) without involvement in commercialisation. Others are focussed on developing specific ideas, and may invest directly in start-ups. More intensive use of university infrastructure in holiday periods is an added benefit. 9

Exponential growth in this sector comes from increased commercialisation of university research. While university incubators usually don’t generate profit, there are opportunities to share risk with private partners. Despite financial and real estate risks, potential conflicts of interest in staff deployment and issues of intellectual property, expansion in this type of incubator is unlikely to abate. 2

The University Business Incubators Index cites the world’s best as Rice Alliance for Technology and Entrepreneurship in Houston. Highly ranked Australian organisations were ATP Innovation in Sydney, and the Melbourne Accelerator Program at the University of Melbourne.25

A body of literature relating to the benefits and challenges of incubators has grown with the number of facilities and programs. Although there are many categorisations, there is some consensus that there are four general types of incubator – basic research, university, economic development and private incubator.24 Within these categorisations, there are also profit and not-for-profit delineations.

Photographs from left to right: EcoSciences Precinct, Brisbane - Christopher Frederick Jones, Flinders@Tonsley, Adelaide - Sam Noonan

9HASSELL © 2015

Economic development incubator

Space features _Large and small premises, often disused _Small offices and workspaces _Centralised communal areas

Examples _MaRS Innovation, Toronto _Green Incubator, South Shields _Citylabs, Manchester (pictured) _Dublin Business Innovation Centre

In a similar vein to the original incubator concept from the Batavia Center (see page 5), cities around the world are using incubators to kick start economic development in locations or sectors that are underperforming. Most North American business incubators (over 90 per cent) are non-profit organisations focussed on economic development, with a large proportion of these (37 per cent) relating to technology businesses.3

While all business incubators can be seen to be contributing to economic development, those that are supported by government (from the local level right up to transnational) tend to fall into this category.

City councils can support economic growth and urban regeneration with investment and provision of premises and professional services in niche areas, while more major initiatives can provide a network of investment and expertise. The European Commission supports over 160 economic development incubators, in sectors as diverse as space, social innovation, mobility and creative industries, as well as more generalised organisations such as the Dublin Business Innovation Centre. 26

06 Spot the difference_Types of incubator

Google, Mountainview California, USA Photography by HASSELL.

Private incubator

Space features _Often disused buildings _Small offices and workspaces _Communal meeting and social areas

Examples _Muru-D incubator, Sydney _Y Combinator, Mountain View _Google Campus, London _Stone and Chalk, Sydney

Privately run spaces and programs are the most visible group of the four incubator types, largely because of the focus in business on web-based technology development and the high profile and profitability of some of the players involved.

There are thousands of small operators around the world, but these incubators are supported increasingly by large corporate organisations (e.g. Google, Telefonica, Barclays, Red Bull) and backed by global investment networks.

In the UK, corporate incubators are increasingly common, making up 12 per cent of the market.11 This trend can be seen in Australia also, with the emergence of programs such as Blue Chilli (Westpac) and Muru-D (Telstra).

The most recent addition to the private incubator landscape in Australia is the Stone and Chalk fintech incubator/co-working space in Sydney, supported by major Australian and international finance corporations.

Co-working space

Space features _Often disused buildings _Small workspaces or desks only _Informal and formal meeting spaces _Casual ambience

Examples _HUB Melbourne _HUB King’s Cross London(pictured) _General Assembly, New York _Thought Fort, Brisbane

While not technically part of the incubator family, co-working spaces have some similarities to them, particularly to the private incubators. They operate on the same principle of collaboration and support through proximity, but also use technology and membership structures to support collaborative relationships.

The primary differences lie in non-competitive, fee based membership. Some co-working spaces attract particular sectors, but generally they are open to any small business or individual who needs a workspace.

They provide more general services such as centralised administrative support, meeting spaces, and a variety of social networking events, all for a monthly fee. There are usually no formalised incubation programs on offer, although startups working in co-working spaces may access independant, non-place based incubation programs.

Photographs left to right: Citylabs, Manchester - Michaela Sheahan Flinders@Tonsley, Adelaide - Sam Noonan HUB Kings Cross - Steve Coster

07 Conclusion

Diversity in the activity, products and objectives of start-up businesses ensures a wide variety of incubator spaces and programs on offer. The business models vary in their financial incentives, equity stakes and investment opportunities but rely on administrative and investment networks and expertise to provide value to program participants and tenants.

From the sophisticated lab facilities of a biomedical incubator to the single chair and desk provided for an app developer in a co-working space, these types of workplaces represent a growing market.

Incubators and accelerators can be categorised in a number of ways - as profit and non-profit entities, as idea or product development vehicles, or, as noted in this paper, by sector type - basic research, university, economic development and private.

Whatever the category, the key design issues for these spaces are collaboration and confidentiality.

Successful collaborative environments typically provide a variety of shared and private spaces, formal and informal, but in particular are centred on communal (often kitchen or dining) spaces. Team rooms, hot desking and easily reconfigurable spaces provide ample opportunities for valuable interactions with other tenants and support networks.

The re-purposing of heritage buildings is a common, practical and resource efficient method of providing non-corporate environments. In the specialised area of scientific research, custom built lab spaces provide much needed low cost or flexible space and equipment that may otherwise be prohibitively expensive for a start-up company.

Each of these types of incubator, accelerator and co-working space necessitates a considered and particular approach. It is important for designers to understand the motivations of the businesses within incubation programs so that they can provide practical workspaces with opportunites for the desired amount of interaction, trust and privacy required by entrepreneurs.

WebsitesIncubators, accelerators and co-working spaces and programs included in this report

Citylabs, Manchester, UK http://citylabs.co.uk/Co-Laborator, San Francisco, US http://www.colaborator.bayer.com/Dublin Business Innovation Centre, Ireland http://dublinbic.ie/General Assembly, New York, US and international https://generalassemb.ly/Google Campus, London, UK https://www.campuslondon.com/Green Incuabtor, South Shields UK http://greenincubator.org.uk/Harvard University I-Lab, Boston, US https://i-lab.harvard.edu/Healthbox, US http://www.healthbox.com/Hub Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia http://www.hubaustralia.com/Impact Hub Kings Cross, London, UK http://kingscross.impacthub.net/Impact Hub Westminster, London, UK http://staging.hubwestminster.net/LabCentral, Boston, US http://labcentral.org/Longwood Center, Boston, US http://longwoodcenter.com/MaRS Innovation Incubator, Toronto, Canada http://marsinnovation.com/Melbourne Accelerator Program, Melbourne, Australia http://map.eng.unimelb.edu.au/Rice Alliance for Technology & Entrepreneurship, Houston, US http://alliance.rice.edu/Seedcamp, International http://seedcamp.com/Stone and Chalk, Sydney, Australia http://stoneandchalk.com.au/Techstars, US http://www.techstars.com/Telstra Muru-D, Sydney, Australia https://muru-d.com/Tongji University Incubator, Shanghai, China http://www.incubator.sh.cn/en/ University of Manchester Innovation Centre, Manchester, UK http://www.umic.co.uk/Y Combinator, Mountain View, US http://www.ycombinator.com/

Video Link Co-working and space designA successful co-working space is all about community. But how do you create a sense of community in a space that must also accommodate the individual working styles and business objectives of dozens of entrepreneurs, sole practitioners and small businesses? HASSELL Associate Kyrstyan Mcleod explains it’s about more than just shared tables, fast wi-fi and pot-plants. It’s about creating a space that inspires collaboration.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBOGPe-mG0A

11HASSELL © 2015

08 References

1. Johnson, S. 2010. Where Good Ideas Come From. Penguin Publishing 2 Oxford Dictionaries, 2015. Website, http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/incubator 3. National Business Incubator Association, 2015. Website http://www.nbia.org/4. Blue Chilli 2015. Website,http://www.bluechilli.com/5. HUB Australia, 2015. Website, http://www.hubaustralia.com/uncategorized/australias-first-incubator-joins-forces-with-australias-largest-community- of-entrepreneurs/6. Irving, K. 20012. Champions of Change, Jetstar Magazine. Website, http://renewaustralia.org/wp-content/uploads/120201_Jetstar-Magazine_Champions- of-Change.pdf7. Hub Westminster, 2015. Website, http://staging.hubwestminster.net/8. Techstars, 2015. Website, http://www.techstars.com/9. McDowell, K. 2011. Go Forth and Innovate! To be or not To Be: University Incubators. Website www.goforthandinnovate.blogspot.com.au10. Batavia, 2015. Website http://www.batavianewyork.com/for-businesses/pages/batavia-industrial-center11. Telefonica O2 2014. The Rise of the UK Accelerator and Incubator Ecosystem. Website http://cdn.news.o2.co.uk.s3.amazonaws.com/ wp-content/uploads/2014/12/O2_WAYRA_Report_121214.pdf12. Lewis, D. 2001. Does Technology Incubation Work? Reviews of Economic Development Literature and Practice: No. 11. US Economic Development Administration. Website, http://umdrive.memphis.edu/jkwalkr1/public/business_incubator/do%20business%20incubators%20work.pdf13. Swissnex 2013. Tongji University Incubator. Switzerland’s Outpost for Science, Technology and Culture in China, Website http://www.swissnexchinanews. org/innovation/2013/10/27/tongji-university-incubator14. Roush, W. 2011. There is an Incubator Bubble and it Will Pop. Xeconomy Website, http://www.xconomy.com/national/2011/08/12/theres-an-incubator- bubble-and-it-will-pop/15. Lennon, M. 2013. TechCrunch Daily, Website http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/19/the-startup-accelerator-trend-is-finally-slowing-down/16. Deloittes, 2012 Silicon Beach: A Study of the Australian Start_up Ecosystem. Website http://www2.deloitte.com/au/en/pages/technology-media-and- telecommunications/articles/silicon-beach-study-australian-startup-ecosystem.html17. Fayad and Weeks 2011. Who Moved My Cube? Harvard Business Review Website, . www.hbr.org/2011/07/sho-moved-my-cube18. Forbes Magazine, 2012. Website www.forbes.com/sites/tomiogeron/2012/04/30/top-tech-incubators-as-ranked-by-forbes-y-combinator-tops-with-7- billion-in-value/19. Y Combinator, 2015. Website https://www.ycombinator.com/faq/20. Cooper, Hamel and Connaughton. 2012. Motivation and Obstacles to Networking in a University Business Incubator. Journal of Technology Transfer 2012 37:433-453 Springer Publishing21. Allen, T. 200x MIT Sloan Website, http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/pdf/interaction.pdf22. McDougal and Witte, 2010. Knowledge Hubs, Innovation Precincts, Technology Parks, Employment Centres - Whatever Label You Want, They Are Much More Than Real Estate Projects, Economic Development Australia, Vol. 4, No. 3 pp 29-30. Website accessed 3 February 2014 at www.sgsep.com.au/ system/files/Knowledge_Hubs_%28McDougall_ Witte%29.pdf23. Chantler, K. 2014. Director Academic Affairs and Innovation, Royal Manchester Infirmary. Interview, October 4, 2014.24. Barbero, Casillas, Wright and Ramos Garcia, 2014. Do Different Types of Incubators Produce Different Types of Innovation? Journal of Technology Transfer (2014) 38:151-16825. University Business Indicator Index, 2015. Website http://ubiindex.com/rankings/26. EBN Innovation Network, 2015. Website, http://ebn.be/

Australia

Adelaide HASSELL Level 5 70 Hindmarsh Square Adelaide SA Australia 5000 T +61 8 8220 5000 E adelaide@hassellstudio.com

BrisbaneHASSELL 36 Warry Street Fortitude Valley QLD Australia 4006 T +61 7 3914 4000 E brisbane@hassellstudio.com

MelbourneHASSELL 61 Little Collins Street Melbourne VIC Australia 3000 T +61 3 8102 3000 E melbourne@hassellstudio.com

Perth HASSELL Podium Level, Central Park 152 – 158 St Georges Terrace Perth WA Australia 6000 T +61 8 6477 6000 E perth@hassellstudio.com

SydneyHASSELL Level 2 Pier 8/9, 23 Hickson Road Sydney NSW Australia 2000 T +61 2 9101 2000 E sydney@hassellstudio.com

China

Beijing HASSELL501, Tower BRaycom WangJing CentreChaoYang DistrictBeijing 100102 ChinaT +8610 5126 6908E beijing@hassellstudio.com

Hong Kong SARHASSELL 22F, 169 Electric Road North Point Hong Kong SAR T +852 2552 9098 E hongkong@hassellstudio.com

ShanghaiHASSELL Building 8 Xing Fu Ma Tou 1029 South Zhongshan Road Huangpu District Shanghai 200011 China T +8621 6887 8777 E shanghai@hassellstudio.com

ShenzhenHASSELL Room 202 Block B3 OCT loftEast Industry Zone Nanshan DistrictShenzhen 518053 ChinaT +86755 2381 1838 E shenzhen@hassellstudio.com

South East Asia

BangkokHASSELL Level 26 Sathorn City Tower175 South Sathorn Road ThungmahamekSathorn Bangkok 10120 ThailandT +66 818 758 300E bangkok@hassellstudio.com

SingaporeHASSELL 33 Tras Street #02-01 078973 SingaporeT +65 6224 4688E singapore@hassellstudio.com

United Kingdom

CardiffHASSELL 4th Floor, James William House 9 Museum Place Cardiff CF10 3BD United Kingdom T +44 29 2072 9071 E cardiff@hassellstudio.com

LondonHASSELL Level 2, Morelands 17 – 21 Old Street Clerkenwell London EC1V 9HL United Kingdom T +44 20 7490 7669 E london@hassellstudio.com