arbiter
JournalsAccount

Beyond the Match: What Intermediaries Should Do to Effectively Orchestrate Corporate–Startup Collaborations

Medhanie Gaim et al.

Academy of Management Perspectives2026https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2024.0327article
AJG 4ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Collaborations between startups and established firms are changing how organizations innovate and bring new technologies to market, yet they remain difficult to initiate and sustain without the involvement of intermediaries. Drawing on an in-depth study of a national matchmaking program in Sweden, we show how intermediaries orchestrate these collaborations from first contact to scalable partnership. We offer a framework that spells out the actions intermediary managers should take throughout the collaboration process. We conclude by presenting three strategic questions and evidence-based practices to guide intermediaries in navigating corporate–startup relations, along with policy recommendations for creating the enabling conditions necessary to make these collaborations work at scale.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2024.0327

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{medhanie2026,
  title        = {{Beyond the Match: What Intermediaries Should Do to Effectively Orchestrate Corporate–Startup Collaborations}},
  author       = {Medhanie Gaim et al.},
  journal      = {Academy of Management Perspectives},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2024.0327},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Beyond the Match: What Intermediaries Should Do to Effectively Orchestrate Corporate–Startup Collaborations

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.