Purpose The purpose of this article is to develop an integrative framework of accelerator design to answer the question of what activities accelerators perform and how they function within a structured framework. Research on the functioning of accelerators as a mechanism for startup engagement produced multiple empirical results. However, the comparability of relevant research is strongly limited, currently hindering theoretical developments. Existing accelerator design models often differ and only partially overlap, which leaves extant literature with a fragmented and discordant conceptual understanding. Design/methodology/approach Based on a meta-synthesis method using qualitative analysis of 36 accelerator design articles, an integrative framework is developed. After identification of relevant literature, a renowned method for extracting, coding and synthesizing data on individual and cross-study level is applied to identify accelerator design constructs. Eventually, identified accelerator design constructs are integrated into a framework resting on the activity system lens of business model design. Findings The article reconciles fragmented knowledge on accelerator design and shows how accelerator design can be holistically conceptualized by 32 key activities clustered in eight design dimensions. The framework is complemented by an initial guideline for measurement. The findings further highlight formerly disregarded aspects of governance and community formation from a processual and structural perspective. Originality/value This article is the first to present a comprehensive picture of accelerator design integrating multiple empirical findings of prior research into a single coherent framework. This framework offers a shared foundation for future research exploring the delineations, functioning and impact of accelerators. From a practical perspective, the article provides managers of accelerators a guide to design, review and improve programs according to their value creation goals.

Corporate accelerators have become integral actors in entrepreneurial ecosystems. They are heterogeneous and rapidly developing entities differing significantly in objectives and design. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive corporate accelerator taxonomy and present its evolution over time. We analyse the population of corporate accelerator programmes active in Germany in late 2019. Building on a unique dataset of 87 semi-structured interviews with managing directors of corporate accelerators, participating startups and corporate documents, we derive distinctive archetypes, differing in strategic objectives and defining characteristics. Based on this contemporary taxonomy, we discuss how corporate accelerators have evolved over recent years and delimit them to similar concepts such as incubators. Thereby, we contribute a holistic understanding of corporate accelerator commonalities and differences and provide the foundation for an evolutionary perspective to the field of corporate accelerator research. For entrepreneurial practice, we add novel insights on the experience-based learnings behind a considerable archetype evolution.

Trivago is a leading travel meta-portal with EUR 754 million in revenue and a double-digit profit margin in 2016. Since its inception in 2004 and especially since 2009, the company's founders have realized impressive growth rates with revenue doubling nearly every year. As of 2016, the company had more than 1,200 employees and offered access to more than 1.3 million hotels in 190 countries. At the end of 2016, trivago carried out an IPO on the NASDAQ stock exchange. For trivago's founders, the goal of not 'becoming corporate' had been a core premise for building the company. The task had been easy when trivago was still a small start-up, but its rapid growth made preserving the company's entrepreneurial capacity an increasingly challenging task: Would trivago be able to remain the entrepreneurial, driven company the founders had built and loved? The case targets MS, MA, and MBA students studying strategy, organizational behavior, entrepreneurship, and innovation management. It is also appropriate for discussions in executive-education programs (eg, lectures focused on corporate transformation and drivers of change).