| Notes |
1
THE HISTORY AND IMPACT OF UNIT 8200 ON ISRAELI HI-TECH
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
___________________________________________
A Thesis
Presented to
The Honors Tutorial College
Ohio University
____________________________________________
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for Graduation
from the Honors Tutorial College
with the degree of
Bachelor of Business Administration
_____________________________________________
by
J. Peter Rousseau
April 2017
2
This thesis has been approved by
The Honors Tutorial College and the College of Business
____________________________________
Dr. Ikenna Uzuegbunam
Assistant Professor, Entrepreneurship
Thesis Advisor
____________________________________
Dr. Raymond Frost
Director of Studies, Business Administration
____________________________________
Dr. Jeremy Webster
Dean, Honors Tutorial College
3
Abstract
This thesis examines the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) military intelligence Unit 8200 and
its propensity for producing successful high-tech entrepreneurs. The paper begins with a
historical background of Unit 8200 and a description of its current state. It then introduces
Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) as a conceptual framework for analysis. To assess the EO
of Unit 8200 alumni, three methods are utilized: semi-structured interviews with members
of Israel’s startup community supplemented by relevant media reports, computer-aidedtextual-analysis (CATA) of Initial Public Offering (IPO) prospectuses from firms founded
by Unit alumni, and financial ratio analysis of those same firms. The results show that these
companies have a higher propensity for autonomy, risk-taking, and innovativeness than
industry peers. It also showed a negative propensity for proactiveness.
4
Acknowledgements
Foremost, I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Ikenna Uzuegbunam, for his continued
support and insights over the past year and a half. His guidance has been an invaluable
asset to my research and the main catalyst for my academic progress this year. Our weekly
meetings consistently furthered my understanding of business, entrepreneurship, and
academic writing. I could not have asked for a better advisor.
I also need to thank my friends Jacob Moore, Zaya Gillogly, and Nicholas Krainess
for their help in completing this project. Each of them provided valuable insights for
various sections of this thesis. I would also like to thank my many friends in Israel who
were so willing to assist in providing the much-needed cultural context into Israeli history
and culture.
I also must thank the Honors Tutorial College and Dr. Raymond Frost for the
continued support over the last four years at Ohio University. HTC has allowed me to
pursue my passions and pushed me to explore new ideas and academic areas. Without the
freedom provided by HTC, I would not have been able to study such a wide variety of
topics in four years.
Lastly, I would like to thank my mother, Ellen Kane, my father, Rudy Rousseau,
and my brother, Dirk Rousseau for the support and valuable contributions to this project. I
am so lucky to have such an intelligent and caring group of people to rely on.
5
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................6
Historical Background .................................................................................................................9
Pre-Independence Unit 8200 History....................................................................................... 11
Israeli Independence and the Founding of the Jewish State....................................................... 14
Post-Independence Unit 8200.................................................................................................. 16
Yom Kippur War................................................................................................................... 19
Post Yom Kippur War: Modern Unit 8200 Organizational Culture .......................................... 22
Screening ........................................................................................................................... 22
Motivation .......................................................................................................................... 26
Network.............................................................................................................................. 27
Theoretical Background............................................................................................................. 28
Entrepreneurial Orientation View .......................................................................................... 28
Innovativeness..................................................................................................................... 29
Proactiveness...................................................................................................................... 30
Risk-Taking......................................................................................................................... 30
Autonomy ........................................................................................................................... 30
Competitive Aggressiveness................................................................................................... 31
Measuring Entrepreneurial Orientation .................................................................................. 31
Methodology.............................................................................................................................. 33
Primary and Secondary Interview Data................................................................................... 33
Financial Analysis of Entrepreneurial Orientation................................................................... 35
Computer Aided Text Analysis (CATA) .................................................................................. 37
Results ...................................................................................................................................... 39
Autonomy ........................................................................................................................... 40
Competitive Aggressiveness................................................................................................... 41
Innovativeness..................................................................................................................... 42
Proactiveness...................................................................................................................... 43
Risk-Taking......................................................................................................................... 44
Discussion of Results.................................................................................................................. 45
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 50
Works Cited.............................................................................................................................. 52
Appendix................................................................................................................................... 57
Appendix 1: Descriptions of Peer Group for Financial Analysis................................................ 57
6
“Immigrants are not averse to starting over. They are, by definition, risk takers. A nation
of immigrants is a nation of entrepreneurs.”
-Gidi Grinstein
Introduction
Today, Israel is home to one of the world’s most thriving technology entrepreneurship
ecosystems. Seventy-six Israeli companies are currently traded on the NASDAQ, behind
only the United States and China. Israel exports $1,246 worth of hi-tech goods and services
per capita compared to $488 for the U.S. and $295 for the rest of the world (The World
Bank, 2016), see Figure 1. Israelis receive more than three times the venture capital funding
per capita than the United States and almost ten times that of the United Kingdom (The
World Bank, 2016).
Figure 1: A Comparison of High-Technology Exports Per Capita1
Dan Senor and Saul Singer outline several theories that explain Israel’s marked
technological success in their 2009 book, Start-Up Nation: The Story of Israel’s Economic
1Data from The World Bank (2017)
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014
High-Technology Exports per Capita
United States Israel World
7
Miracle. According to their analysis, the reasons for Israel’s technological success include
Israeli culture, the diversity of the country’s people, the mandatory military service and the
constant state of threat that consumes the lives of many Israelis (Senor & Singer, 2009).
While it is likely a confluence of these factors, combined with government curation of a
technology ecosystem, this paper will focus on one specific part of the Israeli technology
ecosystem, the military. Specifically, this study focuses on the Israeli Defense Force (IDF)
Unit 8200, and how it impacts the economic development of the nation.
Figure 2: A Comparison between Military Expenditure as % of GDP2
Unit 8200 is an elite military signals intelligence (SIGINT) unit in the Israeli
Defense Force (IDF). It is widely considered one of the best military intelligence agencies
in the world, on par with the United States’ National Security Agency (NSA) (Kahana,
2006). The Unit is responsible for collecting intelligence from electronic signals and other
communication systems used by foreign and domestic targets. This data is then used by
Military Intelligence (MI) to assess potential threats to Israeli national security.
2 Data from The World Bank (2017)
0
5
10
15
20
Total Military Expense / GDP
1990 1996 2002 2008 2014
Military expenditure (% of GDP)
United States Israel World
8
To effectively gather and decode this data, Unit 8200 must keep pace with and
advance signals collection and encryption technology. This elite Unit recruits Israel’s most
promising young talent and provides them with advanced technological training that proves
exceedingly beneficial in post-military careers. Many Unit alumni enter Israel’s thriving,
high-tech community with the experience, skills, network, and reputation to start or join
entrepreneurial ventures.
Companies such as CheckPoint Systems inventor of the internet firewall, Palo Alto
Networks, valued at over $14 billion, CyberArk, valued at almost $2 billion, and many
more multibillion dollar companies were founded by former members of Unit 8200. The
success of Unit alumni is undeniable, but why has this Unit been so successful in producing
successful technology entrepreneurs? Though I expect that there are several factors that
contribute to the entrepreneurial success of Unit 8200 alumni, my main thesis is that the
unique Unit 8200 organizational culture, uniquely rooted in the Unit's history has been the
most consequential, in this regard. Table 1 below describes some examples of notable
Israeli companies founded by former members of Unit 8200.
Table 1: Examples of Notable Israeli Companies (Source: Company Descriptions via
FactSet
Company
Name
April 2017
Market
Cap (in
millions) Founder’s Biography3
Palo Alto
Networks,
Inc. $10,370.62
Nir Zuk: Co-Founder, Chief Technology Officer and Director of Palo Alto Networks, Inc., since
March 2005. He is a successful serial entrepreneur and a network security expert. Mr. Zuk has been
affiliated with NetScreen Technologies, OneSecure, Check Point Software, Sumo Logic and
Silicom Venture. He also architected and led the development of many products, including Check
Point's flagship product, Firewall-1 versions 2.x and 3.x, as well as market leading VPN-1 product.
He was a member of elite military intelligence Unit 8200, while in the IDF. He studied
Mathematics at Tel Aviv University
CyberArk
Software Ltd. $1,751.10
Udi Mokady: Co-Founded Cyber-Ark Software, Inc. in 1999, has been its Chairman of the Board
since June 30, 2016 and serves as its Chief Executive Officer and President. He served in a military
intelligence unit in the Israel Defense Forces. Mr. Mokady holds a Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.) from
Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Israel and a Master of Science Management (MSM) from Boston
University in Massachusetts.
Imperva, Inc. $1,370.86
Amichai Shulman: Co-founder of Imperva Inc. and has been its Chief Technology Officer since
May 2000. He also served for eight years in various research and command positions in the Israel
3 Abbreviated biographies from Bloomberg Company Profiles
9
Defense forces. There he lead a number of data processing and command and control projects
related to information security and later lead a team of information security research responsible
for identifying new potential attack techniques and designing a mitigation pattern for them. Mr.
Shulman earned a B.Sc. and M.Sc degrees in Computer Science from the Technion, Israel Institute
of Technology.
Check Point
Software
Technologies
Ltd. $17,955.44
Gil Shwed: Co-founder of Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. Mr. Shwed has received
numerous prestigious accolades for his individual achievements and industry contributions,
including an honorary Doctor of Science from the Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, the
World Economic Forum's Global Leader for Tomorrow for his commitment to public affairs and
leadership in areas beyond immediate professional interests and the Academy of Achievement's
Golden Plate Award for his innovative contribution to business and technology.
Radware Ltd. $707.08
Roy Zisapel: Co-founder of Radware Ltd. and has been its Chief Executive Officer and President
and a Director since May 1996. He was a team leader of research and development projects for
RND Networks Ltd from February 1996 to March 1997. He was employed as a software engineer
for unaffiliated companies in Israel from July 1994 to February 1996. He serves as a Director of
Infogate On Line Ltd. Mr. Zisapel has a B.Sc. degree in mathematics and computer science from
Tel-Aviv University.
This paper examines the entrepreneurial culture that exists in Unit 8200 and places
it in the context of existing entrepreneurial frameworks. The research relies on interviews
with individuals that work in the Israeli entrepreneurial community, financial data from
companies that were founded and have been led by Unit 8200 alumni, and from initial
public offering (IPO) prospectuses that are analyzed using Computer Automated Textual
Analysis (CATA) method.
To understand how Unit 8200 has become known around the world for producing
top-tier entrepreneurial talent, it is important to examine its historical roots. This brief
historical section outlines the major events and transformations that led to Unit 8200’s
current state. It concludes with an in-depth description, using secondary source interview
data, of the current Unit 8200 culture.
Historical Background
Unit 8200’s history and the technology ecosystem is intertwined with the
establishment of Israel itself. The country was founded in 1948 by members of the Jewish
diaspora who sought a new life, a new opportunity, free from oppression in an independent
Jewish state. These early founders left their homes across Europe to attempt to build a
nation where Jewish people would be in the majority, rather than the consistently oppressed
10
and persecuted minority (Gratch, 2015). These early nation-builders were essentially
entrepreneurs, except instead of building a company, they were building a nation (Senor &
Singer, 2009).
To understand any Israeli culture attribute, one must know its origins. Israel was
founded based upon the idea of Zionism. Zionism is defined by the Jewish Virtual Library
as “the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the
resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel” (Jewish Virtual Library, 2017).
Zionism is inherently entrepreneurial. Israel is the “result of a conscious effort to build
from scratch a modern reincarnation of an ancient nation-state” (Senor & Singer, 2009).
Gidi Grinstein, the founder of the Reut Institute, a Jewish think-tank based in Tel
Aviv, notes “Immigrants are not averse to starting over. They are, by definition, risk takers.
A nation of immigrants is a nation of entrepreneurs” (Grinstein, 2013). Roberts et al (2007)
define entrepreneurship as “the pursuit of opportunity without regard to resources currently
controlled” (Roberts, Stevenson, Sahlman, Marshall, & Hamermesh, 2007).
Entrepreneurship is fundamental to Israeli existence and economic growth.
As with any entrepreneurial venture, there were risks. Unlike most start-ups,
building a nation requires risking much more than capital or reputation; it involved risking
lives to bring the Zionist vision into reality. Many Jews around the world were skeptical at
the prospects of creating an entirely new nation in a desert, from nothing. Alon Gratch
writes, “most Jews at the time didn't seem to oppose Zionism, they remained indifferent to
it, viewing it as fantastic and impractical. Whenever they felt they had a choice, the vast
majority of Jews preferred to stay in the Diaspora rather than move to the ancient
11
homeland” (Shindler, 2008). The rise of Hitler and ever increasing anti-Semitism around
the world took away the option to stay in Europe for many Jews.
Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism, famously said, “If you will it, it is
no dream.” The attitude of these early Zionists still exists in modern Israeli society, and the
nation’s entrepreneurial beginnings have had a lasting impact on the nation's culture. Unit
8200, and its precursors, embodied this entrepreneurial spirit in order to ensure the safety
of the country and stimulate modern economic development. This entrepreneurial spirit
continues to drive innovation and has turned Israel into one of the most technologically
advanced countries in the world.
Due to the secrecy of the Unit’s work, many details about its origin and its
involvement in Israeli affairs throughout its history remain unclear. Everything described
in this paper is aimed at examining the origin of the cultural attributes of the modern-day
Unit. Numbers and dates should be taken with some skepticism, but I hope the reader you
will identify some general themes that will provide insight into its current position within
the technological world.
Pre-Independence Unit 8200 History
Precursors to Unit 8200 predate the official founding of Israel in 1948. Arguably the first
modern Jewish intelligence unit was the Netzah Yisrael Lo Yeshaker (NILI). In November
of 1915, NILI, meaning “The Eternal One of Israel will not lie”, was formed in Turkish
controlled Palestine. The NILI served as a pro-British, clandestine spy agency and was
created by Aharon Aaronsohn, a world-renowned agronomist, and several of his siblings
(Florence, 2007).
12
At the outbreak of World War I, the Turks began to slaughter Armenians and deport
Jews. This Turkish oppression led to Jewish famine and suffering in Palestine. Aaronsohn
and his siblings hoped that the creation of NILI would aid the British invasion of Palestine
and ease the Jewish suffering (Florence, 2007).
The NILI “spy-ring” collected intelligence under the guise of Aaronsohn’s
agricultural business. The spies provided valuable information to British officers on
frigates, British warships, using signal lights off the Atlit coast. The information included
inland weather patterns, Turkish formations and troop movements, railroads, and potential
routes that the British could use in an invasion. This information proved valuable, but came
at a cost to the original spy-ring as most of its original members were arrested and
sentenced to death (Goldstone, 2007).
As anti-Semitism grew stronger in the run up to World War II, so did the Zionist
movement. In 1920, the Haganah, an underground militia that later became the IDF, was
formed to protect Jews under Ottoman rule. After the Ottomans were defeated, the British
took control in Palestine. In 1929, a group of Jews in the Haganah formed the Shin Mem
2, which bugged Arab phone lines to gather intelligence about forthcoming riots over the
disputed Western Wall in Jerusalem. This was the first instance of signals intelligence in
what would become the State of Israel (Perman, 2004).
The 1929 Arab riots in Palestine, or the Buraq Uprising, resulted in the deaths of
133 Jews and 110 Arabs (Shindler, 2008). Most of the causalities were inflicted by British
police trying to quell the riots. The Arab population was concerned with the influx of Jews
resulting from the Zionist movement and the mounting anti-Semitism sweeping across
Europe. The Jewish population realized they could no longer rely on British rule to protect
13
them. These violent riots fundamentally changed Haganah’s importance in Palestine
(Kahana, 2006).
The Haganah became a large organization that encompassed almost all the youth
and adults in the existing settlements, as well as thousands from the major Palestinian
cities. It began a comprehensive training program for its new members and ran officer
training courses. It established arm depots, which were filled with light arms that flowed
from Europe. It also gave rise to underground arm production facilities throughout
Palestine (Friedman, 1997).
The Arab Revolt, 1936-1939, led the Haganah to further mature from a militia to a
military force. The British administration did not officially recognize the Haganah, but the
British Security Forces cooperated with the “Jewish Settlement Police,” which was
comprised of Haganah forces. Special Night Squads (S.N.S.), part of the Jewish Settlement
Police, were established under the command of a British Intelligence officer named Orde
Wingate. The S.N.S. protected the Jewish population from frequent Arab rioters that were
regularly attacking Jewish and British forces. Wingate utilized intelligence gathered by the
Haganah to organize preemptive, night raids on Arab forces (Shindler, 2008).
While working with the British against Arab attacks in Palestine, the Haganah
formed the Mossad Le’ Aliyah Beth (Mossad) to undermine the official British, antiZionist policy that was established in the White Paper of 1939. The Mossad Le’ Aliyah
Beth organized illegal Jewish immigration from all over Europe into Palestine. As World
War II began, the Haganah formed voluntary units to fight alongside British forces. It also
worked closely with British intelligence units on various commando missions throughout
the Middle East (Shindler, 2008).
14
In June of 1940, Shaul Avigur, a leader in the Mossad Le’ Aliyah Beth, sent a
memorandum to the Haganah commanders proposing a joint countrywide information
service. This proposal went into effect in September of 1940, and the Sheruth Yedioth,
commonly known as Shai (The Information Service) was officially established. The British
government, provided weapons, funding, and training from MI4, a department of the
British Directorate of Military Intelligence responsible for aerial reconnaissance and
interpretation (Kahana, 2006).
At the end of World War II, the continued British anti-Zionist policy prompted an
open, organized struggle against the British Mandatory rule. The unified Jewish Resistance
Movement, established in October, 1945, consisted of the Haganah and two other
paramilitary organizations: Irgun Zevai Le’umi – Etzel, and Lohamei Herut Yisrael—Lehi.
These would become the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) (Perman, 2004).
Figure 3: History of Unit 8200 Precursors 1914-1948
Israeli Independence and the Founding of the Jewish State
In the spring of 1948, the British Mandate that had ruled Palestine for nearly 30 years came
to an end. Passionate Zionists and Arab nationalists continued to fight, and the British were
1914 1948
NILI was
formed in
Palestine
November
1915
July 28, 1914 World War I November 11, 1918
Haganah
was
formed
1920
Shin Mem 2
began to bug
Arab Phone
Lines
1929
April,
1936
August,
1939 The Arab Revolt
1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945
White Paper of
1939 established
British antiZionist policy
May 23, 1939
September 1,
1939
September 2,
1945 World War II
The Shai (The
Information
Service) was
established
September, 1940
Three
paramilitary
organizations
combined to
form the IDF
October, 1945
15
unable to come up with a solution to solve the conflict. On May 14th,
, 1948 the British rule
ended. At 4:00pm, David Ben-Gurion stood under a photograph of Theodore Herzl and
proclaimed,
By virtue of our national and intrinsic right and on the strength of the
resolution of the United Nations General Assembly, we hereby declare the
establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, which shall be known as the
State of Israel (Ben-Gurion, 1948).
Hours later, Arab armies from Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Iraq, and Lebanon joined
together and invaded the newly founded Israel (Shindler, 2008). From the early hours of
Israel’s modern birth, its very existence has been challenged. The country lacked
infrastructure, manpower, and resources. Early Israelis fought for eight months against the
Arab forces and not only defended its U.N. allotted 5,600 square miles, but also gained an
additional 2,500 square miles in the Negev desert and Galilee. Over these 8 months, more
than 6,000 Israelis were killed, which accounted for more than 1 percent of the global
Jewish population (Shindler, 2008).
Israel was able to defeat the Arab forces partially due to the vast intelligence
networks that the Haganah had developed throughout the previous decades (Perman, 2004).
The Mossad continued to smuggle Jewish immigrants from around Europe to increase the
size of its army. These networks were also helpful in smuggling weapons and ammunition
to aid in the war effort (Shindler, 2008).
Israel’s founding fathers knew that the country must be built upon knowledge,
innovation, national pride, cunning, and imagination. One of these founding fathers was
16
David Ben-Gurion, the man who declared Israel’s existence and became the nation’s first
Prime Minister (Perman, 2004).
David Ben-Gurion was twenty years old when he emigrated from Poland in 1906
to Petach Tikva, a Jewish community bordering modern day Tel Aviv. A lawyer by
training, he was the national architect of modern Israel. His strength was his ability to
organize, plan, and execute those plans. He was what Israeli’s call a bitzu’ist (Senor &
Singer, 2009).
A bitzu’ist is essentially someone who “gets things done.” Leon Wieseltier, a
Jewish writer and philosopher, writes
The bitzu’ist is the builder, the irrigator, the pilot, the gunrunner, the settler.
Israeli’s recognize the social type: crusty, resourceful, impatient, sardonic,
effective, not much in the need of thought but not much in the need of sleep
either (Wieseltier, 1985).
This characteristic is prized in Israeli culture and was necessary for the survival of early
Israel. After its independence, early Israelis began to build a country surrounded by
enemy’s who deny Israel’s right to exist and frequently attack the new nation.
Post-Independence Unit 8200
Unit 8200 began as a collection of pre-independence intelligence and signals gathering
groups that honed their technological skills on British and Arab adversaries. After
independence in 1948, the Israeli military, now called the IDF, set up an electronic warfare
unit in a green villa that was formerly inhabited by an Arab sheik in the old port town of
Jaffa, just south of Tel Aviv. The group was given the codename “Rabbit” and put in charge
of breaking codes and intercepting Arab communications. During this time, very few
17
countries possessed any ability to intercept and break codes. The U.S., U.K., and the Soviet
Union were among the few countries with this ability (Perman, 2004).
This technological ability was not purchased from any other country, but rather
developed by early Israeli computer engineers, some of whom had recently emigrated from
the Soviet Union (Shamir, 2005). The Unit had some unique restraints that did not exist in
the other technologically advanced countries, which included a lack technical experience,
technological institutions, funds, and manpower. To compensate for these deficiencies,
members of the Unit resorted to crude, albeit effective, techniques to monitor Arab
communications. These techniques included stringing up an antenna made of metal wire
between two poles, connected to an old Hallicrafter’s S-38, a popular civilian radio in the
1930’s and 40’s. In 1949, the Unit developed a more sophisticated monitoring systems
based on stolen BBC plans (Perman, 2004).
The Unit’s scrappiness derived from necessity. Constant Arab guerilla attacks
through the 1950’s and 1960’s provided ample incentive to gain a competitive edge over
their enemies (Gewirtz, 2016). To ensure the security of their new nation, the military
needed to know what their Arab neighbors were up to. This scrappiness and unwillingness
to let their circumstance get in the way of their mission can be best described in Hebrew as
davka (Gratch, 2015). Davka is hard to translate into English, but it can most accurately be
described as “‘despite’ with a ‘rub their nose in it’ twist” (Senor & Singer, 2009). The Unit
embodied this davka in its infancy and has kept that attitude through today (Perman, 2004).
In 1950, Unit 8200 was given a $15,000 budget and an additional $110,000 for
electronic purchases abroad (Perman, 2004). This amount in 2016 USD amounts to around
$1.25 million, which is a miniscule amount when trying to purchase the most advanced
18
computer systems in the 1950’s. Partially due to the low budget and partially to maintain
secrecy of its intelligence capabilities, the Unit developed most of its technology in-house
(Perman, 2004).
From its beginning, Unit 8200 has developed its own hardware and software with
few people and limited resources. Yair Cohen, former Unit 8200 commander during the
1980’s, commented in a 2016 Forbes interview that when given a complex task “you need
$300 million, but you only have $3 million. You cannot get ten people, you only have three
people” (Behar, 2016). It is in these situations that are all too common for Unit 8200
missions that the bitzua attitude is essential.
In the early 1950’s, the Unit had spread its listening bases out across Israel. The
listening posts still contained unsophisticated equipment manned by inexperienced, albeit
motivated and intelligent soldiers (Perman, 2004).
By 1959, the Unit gained access to more advanced computing technology. While
much of the early Israeli computing research was conducted at the Weitzman Institute of
Science, the military saw its potential and took over much of the early research. RAFAEL
(the Hebrew abbreviation for Armament Development Authority) was the IDF unit that
conducted much of the Israeli high-tech R&D in early computing. In 1956, RAFAEL
developed one of the first analog computers in Israel. By 1958, this unit had created a
computer called Itzik which allowed for large-scale simulations. By 1959, all the branches
of the IDF, including Unit 8200, wanted access to this new technology (Breznitz, 2002).
In 1960, the IDF purchased a Philco computer in the United States and created “The
Center for Computers and Mechanized Records” known as MAMRAM. Access to
computers nudged Unit 8200 closer to its more modern reputation of hackers and complex
19
code breakers. The IDF utilized this computing power during the Six-Day War in 1967
when it was able to intercept and decipher the Egyptian and Syrian air force
communications allowing for the smaller, less sophisticated Israeli air force to
outmaneuver and control the airspace (Perman, 2004).
The successful, simultaneous defeat of Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian forces in a
mere six-day campaign that substantially increased Israel’s territory gave Israelis a sense
of invincibility (Senor & Singer, 2009). This overconfidence extended to the Israeli
Intelligence Corp and Unit 8200.
Figure 4: Unit 8200 History 1948-1973
Yom Kippur War
On Yom Kippur4
in 1973, Egyptian and Syrian forces poured over the Israeli border and
killed 2,800 Israelis and injured more than 9,000 (Shindler, 2008). Israeli intelligence was
completely surprised by this massive attack. They were only able to provide several hours
of warning to the rest of the military, which was not enough time to mobilize an immediate
4 Yom Kippur, or Day of Atonement, is one of the most important Jewish holidays. On this day, observant
Jews will refrain from work, fast, and attend synagogue. The day is meant to atone from sins between man
and God (Jewish Virtual Library, 2017).
1948
David BenGurion declared
the independent
State of Israel
May 14, 1948
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970
1973
July,
1949
First Arab-Israeli
War
May 14,
1948
Unit 8200 is given
$15,000 budget and
an additional
$110,000 to purchase
equipment
1950
1950
June 5,
1967
Arab Guerilla Attacks
Itzik was created to
allow for large scale
computer simulations
1958
IDF purchased Philco
computer in the US and
created MAMRAM
1960
June 10,
1967
Six-Day War
Egyptian and Syrian
forces invade Israel
beginning the Yom
Kippur War
October 6, 1973
1960
20
defense. While Israel emerged from the eighteen-day war victorious, economic losses
reached an estimated $7 billion (Sachar, 1994).
The Agranat Commission was created to investigate what caused this intelligence
failure. The final diagnosis was two-fold. The first problem stemmed from the
overconfidence brought about by the successful Six-Day War seven years earlier. It was
called “the conception.” Per this idea, Egypt “a) would not launch war against Israel before
she had first ensured sufficient air power to attack Israel in depth, and in particular Israel’s
principal airfields, so as to paralyze the Israeli air force, b) that Syria would only launch an
all-out attack on Israel simultaneously with Egypt” (Agranat Commission of Inquiry,
1974). Essentially, the commission concluded that this intelligence failure was based upon
the false assumption that Egypt would not attack Israel at the time.
The second problem is tangentially related to the first. Some managing officers had
dismissed early warning signs from lower-level soldiers that could have been used to
initiate a much quicker response.
This intelligence failure goes against two core Israeli cultural values: Rosh Gadol
and Chutzpah. Rosh Gadol literally translates to “big head”, but to Israelis it has a more
positive connotation “signaling that the bearer of this head is capable of seeing the big
picture, of taking responsibility and initiative, or demonstrating leadership, and going
beyond the job description of the call of duty” (Kordova, 2012). It also connotes a certain
distaste for formal authority and places more responsibility on an individual rather than a
system (Perman, 2004). Members of the Israeli intelligence community failed to see that
one of their underlying assumptions was incorrect. All the analysis that occurred after this
base assumption was therefore rendered useless (Gewirtz, 2016).
21
Rank and file soldiers also failed to make their findings heard, which goes against
a second Israeli value of Chutzpah. Chutzpah most closely means audacity. Leo Rosten
describes chutzpah as “gall, brazen nerve, effrontery, incredible ‘guts,’ presumption plus
arrogance such as no other word and no other language can do justice to” (Rosten, 1968).
More chutzpah could very well have prevented this attack from being as devastating as it
was (Perman, 2004).
Upon the publication of the Agranat Commission report, the head of Israeli
intelligence and the Prime Minister of Israel were both forced to resign, and sweeping
changes were made to the intelligence system. A new unit was established under Military
Intelligence called Ipkha Mistabra, or “Devil’s Advocate.” This unit was created to provide
alternative explanations to intelligence reports from the main Military Intelligence
establishment. Organizationally, it countered the groupthink that contributed to the
intelligence failure (Kahana, 2006).
The fiasco of the Yom Kippur War left an indelible mark on the culture of Unit
8200 and the rest of the IDF. While questioning of authority was tolerated to a certain
extent prior to the war, it became expected after. The invincibility that the Israelis had after
the Six-Day War was also gone.
Table 1: List of Israeli Cultural Terms
Term Definition
Davka “‘despite’ with a ‘rub their nose in it’ twist”
- (Senor & Singer, 2009)
Bitzua “gets things done” - (Senor & Singer, 2009)
“crusty, resourceful, impatient, sardonic, effective” - (Wieseltier, 1985)
Chutzpah “audacity” - (Senor & Singer, 2009)
“gall, brazen nerve, effrontery, incredible guts” - (Rosten, 1968)
Rosh Gadol “signaling that the bearer of this head is capable of seeing the big picture,
of taking responsibility and initiative, or demonstrating leadership, and
going beyond the job description of the call of duty” - (Kordova, 2012)
22
Post Yom Kippur War: Modern Unit 8200 Organizational Culture
After the Yom Kippur War in 1973, and the dramatic changes that resulted from the
Agranat Commission Report, Unit 8200 began to take on its modern structure and
organizational culture (Perman, 2004). In addition to the organizational changes, the Unit
has also grown to be the largest, single unit in the IDF (Behar, 2016). The remainder of
this section will describe aspects of Unit 8200 as an organization as it relates to the
screening, training, motivation, and network.
Screening
Israel has a mandatory military service requirement for most (there are racial and
religious exceptions) of its citizens. When an Israeli citizen turns 18 and finishes high
school, the men are conscripted for 32 months and the women for 24 months (Central
Intelligence Agency, 2017). Elite units, including Unit 8200, require extended time to
compensate for additional training.
One of the most cited explanations for the Unit 8200 alumni success is the rigorous
screening process that each candidate must go through before being admitted to the Unit
(Senor & Singer, 2009). To establish where a candidate would fit in the IDF, each
individual is given a Kaba score. The Kaba score is comprised for three parts for men and
two parts for women (IDF, 2016). The three sections are the DAPAR, the TZADAK, and
the TZHAR. In conjunction, these tests are used to evaluate and place young israeli’s into
the various IDF units.
The DAPAR is the psychometric test that is administered in the initial interview
with IDF. It makes up 50 percent of a male’s score and 60 percent of a female’s score.
These tests are similar to the SAT or ACT require for admission to most American colleges
23
(The College Board, 2016). It is divided up into math, reading comprehension, instructions,
word analogies, and shape analogies.
The TZADAK is the initial interview that includes a physical and mental assessment.
This will consist of data verification, i.e. birthday, education level, etc., a personal
interview to assess your motivation to be in a combat unit, and a medical examination. The
TZADAK makes up 33 percent of the Kaba for males, but does not count toward the
female’s score.
The last part of the Kaba is the TZHAR, or the Initial Education Score. This score
represents how much formal education a candidate has. It makes up 17 percent of the Kaba
for men and 40 percent for women (IDF: Nefesh B'Nefesh, 2015).
The Kaba is scored on a scale from 41-56. Scores that range from 52-56 allow you
to be an officer. Unit 8200 places special emphasis on the DAPAR score and usually only
allows candidates who score in the 89th percentile or above to enter (IDF: Nefesh B'Nefesh,
2015). Since the DAPAR makes up such a large percentage of the Kaba, Unit 8200
candidates are highly sought after throughout the IDF. Candidates with language, coding,
or computer abilities and a desire to join an intelligence unit are therefore more likely to
be placed in Unit 8200.
To put in perspective, the percentile equivalent SAT composite score to the Unit
8200 DAPAR requirement would be a 1300 or higher, or a 28 on the ACT (The College
Board, 2016). While individuals Kaba score are confidential, the minimum score required
to enter Unit 8200 is, on a percentile basis, similar to the lower threshold for Ivy League
schools. As with collegiate admission, the ultimate decision for admission into Unit 8200
rests with the Unit’s recruitment team.
24
Similar to US-base collegiate recruitment, Unit 8200 invests substantial resources
recruiting the top-level talent. One former 8200 recruiter equates the selection process to
“NBA scouts tracking kids in high school and college” (Perman, 2004).
In summary, admission into Unit 8200 is highly selective, and because of the exit
opportunities it provides, is extremely competitive (Behar, 2016). Inbal Arieli, a Unit
alumnus, serial entrepreneur and venture capitalist, explains in a 2016 Forbes interview
that, “The Harvard Business School has a great screening process, but it depends on who
applies. Unit 8200 can take the top 1 percent of the 1 percent of the country” (Arieli, 2016).
Arieli also points out that the Unit 8200 screening process differs from equivalent
spy agencies, i.e. NSA, because it focuses on raw potential rather than previous experience.
She contends:
The screening process at the NSA largely focuses on experience, but what
does a 17- year-old know about intel challenges? Nothing. A high school
kid is busy with movies, boys, girls, fashion, sports—that’s your world—
and you’re not busy with terror in Syria or nuclear facilities in Iran, so
experience and know-how are not relevant because they don’t exist (Arieli,
2016).
A recruit’s lack of experience is not necessarily detrimental. Nadav Zafrir, former
commander of Unit 8200 and founder/CEO of Team8, a Tel Aviv-based cyber security
think tank, recalls that “every year, Unit 8200 gets this influx of young, smart, motivated
and passionate men and women looking at problems from an entirely new perspective. We
don’t tell them that other people have tried to solve the same problem many times and
failed” (Zafrir, 2016).
25
While a fresh perspective can be helpful, recruits still lack much of the technical
prowess that is necessary to do their job well. In order to teach those skills, the Unit has
put in place a demanding training program designed to prepare the candidate for real-world
situations that have life and death consequences.
Training
New Unit 8200 recruits are enrolled in an intensive, six-month training program at
a compound in Glilot, just north of Tel Aviv. While much of the specific training
methodology is secret, interviews conducted over the past several years give an idea of
how the Unit trains its recruits.
One Unit alumni recalls 16 to 18 hour days and because of the classified nature of
much of the work, Unit leaders allow for minimal dropouts (Perman, 2004). Behar
describes it as, “essentially a boot camp for the mind” (Behar, 2016). Arieli notes that,
“[The new recruit] is put into a small team where they study, brainstorm, train, analyze,
and solve problems, from early in the morning to very late at night” (Arieli, 2016).
The officers in charge of training are often are only a couple of years older than the
new recruits. These officers utilize a teaching approach developed by the IDF’s computer
training school known as MAMRAM during the 1980’s called Planning by Situations
(PBS), similar to the case-study approach used by The Harvard Business School (Breznitz,
2002). According to Breznitz, PBS is “a pragmatic holistic approach to the creation and
teaching of discrete bodies of processional knowledge.” This method focuses on what
qualities and skills are necessary for the student to acquire in order to do their job. These
qualities and skills are known as “the professional components.”
26
In order to ensure adequate mastery of these professional components, instructors
form the course around the “summarizing exercise”, which is essentially the final project
that is designed to mimic the required responsibility of the graduate (Breznitz, 2002). In
the case of Unit 8200, instructors often combine technical and intelligence problems. A
team of new recruits might, for example, have to build a piece of software that decrypts an
enemy transmission, then analyze the transmission and provide a potential course of action
(Perman, 2004). After this training, soldiers are placed in different sub-units in 8200. While
their individual responsibilities might vary, the fundamentals of their work remain the
same.
Motivation
Soldiers in Unit 8200 provide the SIGINT necessary for the national security of
Israel. The responsibility to protect your country, your friends, and your family provides
plenty of motivation to soldiers. In addition to national defense, many Unit 8200 soldiers
are motivated by the success of 8200 alumni (Senor & Singer, 2009). Avishai Abrahami,
the CEO and co-founder of Wix, Inc. and 8200 alumnus, explains:
Just from my generation, there are more than 100 guys from the unit that I
personally knew who built startups and sold them for a lot of money. There
was a team of ten people in our room in the unit. I call it the magic room
because all of them created companies where the average market cap is
half-billion dollars.
With this financial incentive, Unit 8200 soldiers are motivated to learn the technical skills
necessary to create the next big company. Since soldiers are aware that they are working
27
with some of Israel’s brightest minds, they are incentivized to build up a network during
their time in the Unit (Perman, 2004).
Network
In Israel, it is often said that ‘everybody knows everybody.’ The mandatory military
service allows for most Israelis to come together and share a common experience. This
common experience is frequently leveraged later for business and other interactions where
‘who you know’ is important. Because Unit 8200 is a collection of intelligent,
technologically advanced soldiers, that network proves to be extremely valuable.
Unlike most units in the IDF, Unit 8200 has a formal, organized alumni
organization. The organization is led by 8200 alumni who are prominent in the Israeli
entrepreneurial community. With over 14,000 alumni around the world, the network is
utilized by companies and individuals for talent acquisition and collaboration (Unit 8200
Alumni Association, 2017).
This network provides quick and easy access to some of the most technologically
advanced minds in Israel and around the world. For example, 8200 EISP is an accelerator
based in Tel Aviv that leverages the Unit 8200 alumni association connections. It provides
early-stage startups access to a workshop led by Unit 8200 alumni, access to the 8200
alumni network for talent recruitment, personal mentoring from current and former 8200
members, and access to the Unit 8200 Alumni Association events for networking purposes
(8200 EISP, 2017). These valuable perks have made 8200 EISP one of the most
competitive accelerators in Israel (Senor & Singer, 2009).
28
The next section provides a theoretical background on entrepreneurship with a
particular focus on Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO). EO will be used as the conceptual
framework for analysis.
Theoretical Background
To properly examine Unit 8200 as an entrepreneurial phenomenon, we must place it in the
broader context of current academic research on entrepreneurship. This section will
provide a theoretical background of key concepts and existing frameworks that will help
to place my findings in academia. This section will cover the meaning of entrepreneurship
from various perspectives and the factors that lead to successful entrepreneurship.
Defining entrepreneurship is a difficult task. The dictionary definition of an
entrepreneur is “one who organized, manages, and assumes the risks of a business or
enterprise” (Merriam-Webster, 2017). While this definition touches upon some of the
responsibilities of an entrepreneur, it fails to give a sufficient definition to further academic
study.
Entrepreneurial Orientation View
Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) is one of the most established constructs in
entrepreneurial research (Wales, 2016). Anderson et al. (2009) provide a broad definition
of EO describing it as “a firm’s decision-making practices, managerial philosophies, and
strategic behaviors that are entrepreneurial in nature” (Anderson, Anderson, Covin, &
Slevin, 2009). Historically, these behaviors have been categorized into three dimensions:
innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk taking (Colvin & Slevin, 1989). More recently, two
additional dimensions have been added to the framework: competitive aggressiveness and
autonomy (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). Various studies have found that organizations that
29
demonstrate high EO perform better. Wang (2008) describes EO as “a key ingredient for
firm success” (Wang, 2008). This section will provide a description of these five
dimensions and what qualities each represents.
Figure 5: Entrepreneurial Orientation Dimensions
Innovativeness
Successful entrepreneurs are often referred to as innovators because they disrupt
the status quo and generally make improvements on previous technologies or processes.
Innovativeness describes “the tendency to engage in and support new ideas, novelty,
experimentation, and creative processes that may result in new products, services, or
technological processes” (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). Often innovativeness manifests itself
is in a manager’s willingness to throw out previously held beliefs and explore new ways to
do things. ‘That’s how it has always been’ is not a phrase uttered at innovative firms or by
innovative people.
Entrepreneurial
Orientation
Innovativeness
Proactiveness
Competitive
Agressiveness Risk-Taking
Autonomy
30
Proactiveness
Proactiveness describes a firm’s ability to “[act] in anticipation of future problems,
needs or changes” (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). In other words, do firm decisions shape the
environment by introducing new products, technologies, or processes, or does the firm
simply react to the changing environment (Miller & Friesen, 1982). While some research
argues that an entrepreneurial firm is “first to come up with ‘proactive innovations” (Miller
P. , 1987), further research has shown that a firm can demonstrate proactive qualities
without necessarily being the first to act. Miller and Camp (1986) find that the second firm
to enter a new market is just as likely to be successful as the first firm (Miller & Camp,
1986).
Risk-Taking
Risk-taking has always been synonymous with entrepreneurship. Richard Cantillon
(1734) was the first to use the term ‘entrepreneurship’ argued that main factor that
differentiates entrepreneurs from employees was the uncertainty of self-employment
(Cantillion as referenced by Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). Today, the term has become slightly
more refined, and refers to a firm’s willingness to make large and risky resource
commitments to ventures that operate in uncertain environments (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996).
Autonomy
The modern, prototypical entrepreneur is a highly motivated, self-determined whiz
kid with a novel idea who is able to create a successful business from it i.e. Steve Jobs, Jeff
Bezos, Elon Musk, etc. These entrepreneurs demonstrated a significant amount of
autonomy when bringing their ideas to reality. Autonomy refers to “the independent action
31
of an individual or a team in bring forth an idea or a vision and carrying it through to
completion” (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996).
Competitive Aggressiveness
Startups and other new business ventures are often defined by their aggressive
nature toward competitors. Stinchcombe (1965) argues that young firms are particularly
susceptible to the “liability of newness” and must establish a presence in its industry
(Stinchcombe & March, 1965 as referenced by Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). Competitive
aggressiveness describes “a firm’s propensity to directly and intensely challenge its
competitors to achieve entry or improve position, that is, to outperform industry rivals in
the marketplace.”
Measuring Entrepreneurial Orientation
Entrepreneurial orientation is typically measured using a seven-point scale survey
developed by Colvin & Slevin (1989). These surveys are distributed to companies, and
employees are asked to provide responses based upon their perception of the firm’s
entrepreneurial orientation. When it is not possible to obtain a sample size large enough to
determine EO, other measures can be used. Below are secondary measures of EO. Table 2
uses financial ratios to determine scores, while Table 3 uses qualitative measures. Note that
there are only quantitative measures for three of the five EO dimension.
Table 2: Quantitative Measure of Entrepreneurial Orientation
Dimension Metric Calculation
Innovativeness R&D as percent of sales (Miller P. ,
1987)
# of specialists in firm (Hage, 1980)
R&D/Revenue
Count specialists
32
# of new product or service
introductions (Colvin & Slevin,
1989) (Miller & Friesen, 1982)
Count new products and
service introductions
Proactiveness Cash flow per dollar of net income
(Colvin & Slevin, 1989)
Cash flow from
investing / net income
Risk-taking Idiosyncratic risk of firms share
price (Fama & Babiak, 1968)
Beta vs. Benchmark
Table 3: Qualitative Measures of Entrepreneurial Orientation
Dimension Measure
Innovativeness “Willingness to discard old beliefs and explore new
alternatives” (Karagozoglu & Brown, 1988).
“Commitment to acquiring, developing, and deploying
technology” (Zahra & Covin, 1993).
Proactiveness "Does it shape the environment (high score) by
introducing new products, technologies, administrative
techniques, or does it merely react?” (Miller & Friesen,
1982)
“A firm’s tendency to lead rather than follow a new
development” (Colvin & Slevin, 1989).
Risk-taking “The degree to which a firm chooses a safe alternative
vs. a more attractive but risky one” (Brockhaus, 1980).
Autonomy “The degree of discretion or choice individuals have
about the methods and procedures they use in
completing their work” (Breaugh, 1999).
Competitive Aggressiveness “The way that companies engage with its competitors,
distinguishing between companies that shy away from
direct competition with other companies and those that
aggressively pursue their competitors’ target markets”
(Schillo, 2011).
In the preceding analysis, I highlighted Unit 8200’s history, especially as it relates
to how its historical and cultural attributes can help explain entrepreneurial success of Unit
8200 alumni. Following this, I presented a theory of how Entrepreneurial Orientation is
assessed and it contributions to success in entrepreneurship. Juxtaposing the theory of
33
Entrepreneurial Orientation in the context of Unit 8200 will suggest the following broad
proposition, which I examine further in this study:
Proposition: Firms founded by Unit 8200 alumni will exhibit a higher degree of
entrepreneurial orientation than their industry peers.
Methodology
By its nature, Unit 8200 is a secretive organization with limited publicly available
data. Entrepreneurs, by the nature of their work, are extremely busy. The combination of
these two factors makes it difficult to obtain relevant, accurate data necessary for academic
research. Because of these inherent difficulties, this study uses three different methods to
assess the EO of Unit 8200 alumni: semi-structured interviews with members of Israel’s
startup community supplemented by relevant media reports, computer-aided-textualanalysis (CATA) of Initial Public Offering (IPO) prospectuses from firms founded by Unit
alumni, and financial ratio analysis of those same firms. None of these methods can
independently answer the proposed question, but in conjunction they provide a more
cohesive argument.
The Unit 8200 founded companies will be compared to the non-Unit 8200 founded
industry peers on each EO dimension. Scores from different EO dimensions cannot be
compared to each other because components of financial ratios and CATA dictionary are
not the same.
Primary and Secondary Interview Data
The first method uses primary and secondary interview data. Primary data was
collected from two individuals with close ties in the Israeli entrepreneurial community.
34
One interviewee is a current CEO of a technology start up in Tel Aviv that works with
several Unit 8200 alumni and the other interviewee is a professor of entrepreneurship at an
Israeli University. These interviews were conducted using a semi-structured approach
outlined in Cohen & Crabtree, 2006. Interview audio was recorded and transcribed for
analysis.
Per university requirements, an Internal Review Board (IRB) expedited review was
completed. This required successful completion of the Collaborative Institutional Training
Initiative (CITI) program and an application detailing the interview recruiting process and
any questions that might be asked. These interview questions can be seen below. Due to
the semi-structured format, all of these questions may not have been asked and follow up
questions may not appear on the list. The list, however provides a general idea of the
interview content.
Figure 6: IRB Approved Semi-Structured Interview Questions
The secondary source data was collected from the popular press coverage of Unit 8200.
The most relevant stories about Unit 8200 and its alumni were collected and quotes from
8200 personnel were extracted and subsequently used for analysis. While there are inherent
biases that exist in using reporters’ selected quotes, when considered in combination with
1. What is your current relationship with the IDF?
2. What is your current relationship with Unit 8200?
3. What are your perceptions of Unit 8200?
4. How do Unit 8200 alumni differ from non-Unit 8200 alumni?
5. How has your involvement with the Unit changed over time?
6. What are the differences in the entrepreneurial ideation process between Unit8200 and non-Unit 8200 members?
7. What are the differences in available resources between Unit-8200 and nonUnit 8200 members?
8. How do you think your experience in the IDF affected your post-military
career?
9. What criteria do you look at in order to determine success of a venture?
35
primary interviews, other scholarly research, and financial data, I believe that it can paint
a clearer picture of this phenomena.
Financial Analysis of Entrepreneurial Orientation
The quantitative method used in this study aims to assess the Entrepreneurial
Orientation (EO) of publicly traded companies founded and managed by Unit 8200 alumni.
Ideally, private company data would be used to measure factors that contribute to EO, but
this data is not publicly available. Five companies were selected for study: CyberArk
Software Ltd., Imperva, Inc., Wix.com Ltd., Check Point Software Technologies Ltd., and
Palo Alto Networks, Inc. These companies were all founded by Unit 8200 alumni as
determined by personal biographies on company websites and corroborated by media
reports.
Table 4: Unit 8200 Founded Companies Used in Study
Company
Name
Year
Founded
Business Description5
CyberArk
Software Ltd.
1999 CyberArk Software Ltd. (CyberArk) provides information
technology (IT) security solutions that protect organizations
from cyber-attacks.
Imperva, Inc. 2002 Imperva, Inc. provides cyber-security solutions that protect
business-critical data and applications whether in the cloud
or on premises.
Wix.com, Ltd 2006 Wix.com Ltd. (Wix) is a Web development platform
enabling businesses and organizations to take businesses,
brands and workflow online.
Check Point
Software
Technologies
Ltd.
1993 Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. (Check point)
develops, markets and supports a range of products and
services for information technology (IT) security.
Palo Alto
Networks, Inc
2005 Palo Alto Networks, Inc. offers a next-generation security
platform. The Company's security platform consists of three
elements: Next-Generation Firewall, Advanced Endpoint
Protection and Threat Intelligence Cloud.
5 Descriptions from Thompson Reuters.
36
Comparable companies were selected based upon the following criteria: a) NAICS
code of 511201, 541511, or 541512, b) founded between 1990 and 2008, and c) traded on
U.S. exchanges i.e. NASDAQ or NYSE. The NAICS codes were selected from the Unit
8200 industry classifications. 116 comparable companies were found matching those three
criteria. For list of comparable companies and accompany business descriptions, see
Appendix 1.
Table 5: NAICS Code Descriptions
NAICS Code Description6
511201 Software Publishers: This industry comprises establishments primarily
engaged in computer software publishing or publishing and
reproduction.
541511 Custom Computer Programming Services: This U.S. industry
comprises establishments primarily engaged in writing, modifying,
testing, and supporting software to meet the needs of a particular
customer.
541512 Computer Systems Design Services: This U.S. industry comprises
establishments primarily engaged in planning and designing computer
systems that integrate computer hardware, software, and
communication technologies.
This study measured the three original EO measures as stated in Lumpkin and Dess
1996: Innovation, Risk Taking, and Proactiveness. Miller & Le-Breton Miller (2011)
provide objective ways to measure these traits. Innovativeness was calculated using
research & development / revenue from 2011-2016. Proactiveness was calculated using
cash flow from investing / net income from 2011-2016. Risk Taking was calculated using a
rolling 2-year quarterly beta from 2011-2016 (Fama & Babiak, 1968). Employee data was
collected as a proxy for company size to control for this variable. Company age was also
used as a control.
6 Descriptions from US Census Bureau (2007)
37
Computer Aided Text Analysis (CATA)
Computer Aided Text Analysis (CATA) measures the propensity of certain,
predetermined words in a text. Diction software was developed by Roderick P. Hart to be
used in rhetorical analysis (Hart, 2001). More recently, these methods have been adopted
by other academic fields including management and entrepreneurship. CATA is
particularly helpful in these fields because of the historically low survey response rate as
shown in Baruch, 1999. Short, et al., 2010 developed methodology for creating and
validating new dictionaires (See Table 6) using EO as their test case. See their work for
full methodology.
The dictionary developed by Short et al. tested EO in S&P 500 and Russell 2000®
letters to shareholders. Because letters to shareholders is not a required SEC filling
(although a common practice for larger companies), this study was not able to gather
enough data to perform analysis. In substitution, this study examines prospectus documents
from the firm’s Initial Public Offering. Specifically, the Security and Exchange
Commission (SEC) reqired ‘business’ section was examined. In this section, the company
describes the operation of the business and strategies for future growth to potential
investors.
Table 6: Expert Validated Words Relevant to Entrepreneurial Orientation
Entrepreneurial
Orientation
Dimension7
Content Analysis Words with Expert Validation from Short, J.
C., Broberg, J. C., Cogliser, C. C., & Brigham, K. H. (2010).
Construct Validation Using Computer-Aided Text Analysis
(CATA): An Illustration Using Entrepreneurial Orientation.
Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 320-347.
Autonomy At-liberty, authority, authorization, autonomic, autonomous,
autonomy, decontrol, deregulation, distinct, do-it-yourself,
7 This dictionary was developed by Short et al (2010) to identify entrepreneruial orientation in publically
traded companies’ Letters to Shareholders. DICTION software was used to assess compare these companies
to S&P 500 and Russel 200 benchmarks. For full methodogy, see Short et al, 2010.
38
emancipation, free, freedom, freethinking, independence,
independent, liberty, license, on-one’s-own, prerogative, selfdirected, self-directing, self-direction, self-rule, self-ruling,
separate, sovereign, sovereignty, unaffiliated, unattached,
unconfined, unconnected, unfettered, unforced, ungoverned,
unregulated
Competitive
aggressiveness
Achievement, aggressive, ambitious, antagonist, antagonistic,
aspirant, battle, battler, capitalize, challenge, challenger, combat,
combative, compete, competer, competing, competition,
competitive, competitor, competitory, conflicting, contend,
contender, contentious, contest, contestant, cutthroat, defend, dogeat-dog, enemy, engage, entrant, exploit, fierce, fight, fighter, foe,
intense, intensified, intensive, jockey-for-position, joust, jouster,
lock-horns, opponent, oppose, opposing, opposition, play-against,
ready-to-fight, rival, spar, strive, striving, struggle, tussle, vying,
wrestle
Innovativeness Ad-lib, adroit, adroitness, bright-idea, change, clever, cleverness,
conceive, concoct, concoction, concoctive, conjure-up, create,
creation, creative, creativity, creator, discover, discoverer,
discovery, dream, dream-up, envisage, envision, expert, form,
formulation, frame, framer, freethinker, genesis, genius, gifted, hitupon, imagination, imaginative, imagine, improvise, ingenious,
ingenuity, initiative, initiator, innovate, innovation, inspiration,
inspired, invent, invented, invention, inventive, inventiveness,
inventor, make-up, mastermind, master-stroke, metamorphose,
metamorphosis, neoteric, neoterism, neoterize, new, new-wrinkle,
innovation, novel, novelty, original, originality, originate,
origination, originative, originator, patent, radical, recast, recasting,
resourceful, resourcefulness, restyle, restyling, revolutionize,
seethings, think-up, trademark, vision, visionary, visualize
Proactiveness Anticipate, envision, expect, exploration, exploratory, explore,
forecast, foreglimpse, foreknow, foresee, foretell, forward-looking,
inquire, inquiry, investigate, investigation, look-into, opportunityseeking, proactive, probe, prospect, research, scrutinization,
scrutiny, search, study, survey
Risk-Taking Adventuresome, adventurous, audacious, bet, bold, bold-spirited,
brash, brave, chance, chancy, courageous, danger, dangerous, dare,
daredevil, daring, dauntless, dicey, enterprising, fearless, gamble,
gutsy, headlong, incautious, intrepid, plunge, precarious, rash,
reckless, risk, risky, stake, temerity, uncertain, venture,
venturesome, wager
Additional
inductively
derived words
Advanced, advantage, commercialization, customer-centric,
customized, develop, developed, developing, development,
developments, emerging, enterprise, enterprises, entrepreneurial,
exposure, exposures, feature, features, founding, high-value,
initiated, initiatives, innovations, innovative, introductions, launch,
39
launched, leading, opportunities, opportunity, originated, outdoing,
outthinking, patents, proprietary, prospects, prototyping, pursuing,
risks, unique, ventures
Results
Overall, the results of the financial and CATA analyses found that the EO dimensions most
associated with alumni of Unit 8200 are Risk-Taking and Autonomy. This is
complemented by primary and secondary interview data. While not demonstrated in either
statistical analysis, Innovation was also a common theme in the interview data.
Proactiveness was shown to be negatively correlated with Unit 8200 alumni by the
financial analysis. Competitive Aggressiveness was not shown to be significant by the
statistical analyses or the interview data. The following will delve deeper into the results
of the study. 8
Table 7: Summary Results of Financial Analysis
Financial Analysis Innovation Proactiveness Risk-Taking*
Unit 8200 21.27 -0.21 1.73
Peer Group 28.63 2.57 1.18
Difference -7.36 -2.78 0.55
% Difference -29.51% -235.84% 37.89%
Table 8: Summary Results of Computer-Automated-Textual-Analysis
CATA
Analysis Autonomy*
Comp.
Aggressiveness Innovation Proactiveness
RiskTaking
Unit 8200 1.11 1.61 2.72 1.05 0.3
Peer Group 0.52 1.77 3.54 1.01 0.2
Difference 0.59 -0.16 -0.82 0.04 0.1
% Difference 72.74% -9.52% -26.19% 3.86% 41.32%
8
* Denotes P-Value of <.1 meaning slightly significant.
40
Autonomy
In the CATA analysis, Unit 8200 founded companies had a 72.74 percent higher
Autonomy score than the peer group. This result is slightly significant with an R of 0.46,
an R^2 of 0.21, and a P value of 0.08.
This result is consistent with the interview results where interviewees often
mentioned independence from structure as a driving force within the Unit. Avishai
Abrahami, CEO and Co-Founder of Wix, Inc. and former Unit 8200 soldier, said in a 2016
Forbes interview,
There’s nobody around to tell you how to do it. The culture inside, and it’s
by design, is that your superiors just tell you to go figure it out. That gives
you the huge freedom to think differently. It’s you or nobody else. And when
you’re an entrepreneur, that’s the most important skill. When you do 5 or
10 or 20 of those projects, you’ve just built 3 things that could be a startup.
Dor Skuler, CEO and Co-Founder of Intuition Robotics and former officer in Unit 8200
adds:
Nobody tells you exactly what to do. They tell you, ‘This is the problem, go
figure it out.’ With a crazy deadline. So you’re inventing, being
entrepreneurial and only understanding what you were doing after the fact.
But you have to do it, because you don’t have any other choice to meet the
mission you were given.
Throughout the interviews, former Unit 8200 soldiers emphasized the freedom the Unit’s
commanding officers give to the young soldiers. This freedom is not exclusive to Unit
8200, but rather built into the IDF structure itself. Edward Luttwak, a military historian
notes,
41
The IDF is deliberately understaffed at senior levels. It means that there are
fewer senior officers to issue commands. Fewer senior officials means more
individual initiative at the lower ranks. (Luttwak quoted in Senor & Singer,
2009.)
Luttwak goes on to point out that the ratio of senior officers to combat troops in the US
Army is 1 to 5, but in the IDF it’s 1 to 9. Interviewees claimed that this flattened hierarchy
made individual autonomy necessary.
Competitive Aggressiveness
The CATA analysis showed that Unit 8200 founded companies had a 9.52 percent
lower Competitive Aggressiveness score than the peer group. This result is not significant
with an R of 0.14, an R^2 of 0.02, and a P value of 0.62. The interview data does not
support a high Competitive Aggressiveness score. Interviewees spoke more about the
cooperation that exists in Israel, especially amongst Unit 8200 alumni. One interviewee
stated,
I think that because many people in 8200 felt they were really lucky to gain
experience in the army and then became successful entrepreneurs that they
had the feeling that they need to give back to society. All the 8200 alumni,
this is what they are doing. EISP9
and 8200 is not only for the people from
the Unit, it’s for all people. They are very supportive. It’s a very important
rule that they need to give back to the community.
9 EISP is an accelerator based out of Tel Aviv that was founded by former Unit 8200 soldiers to
leverage the expertise of the alumni network.
42
Innovativeness
In this CATA analysis, Unit 8200 founded companies had a 26.19 percent lower
Innovation score than the peer group. This result is not significant with an R of 0.22, an
R^2 of 0.05, and a P value of 0.43. The financial analysis resulted in Unit 8200 founded
companies scoring 29.51 percent lower than their peer group with a P value of 0.35.
The interview results paint a slightly different story. Many interviewees talk about
the need to be creative because many tasks they are assigned to complete while in service
need a new solution. Not only are the tasks complicated, but the resources are limited. Yair
Cohen, former commander of Unit 8200 explains:
You need $300 million, but you only have $3 million. You cannot get ten
people, you have only three people. And you need to look at the future and
try to analyze what will be, before your enemy will start to purchase and to
use this thing.
When asked about some of the more complicated projects he had worked on while in the
Unit, Dor Skuler notes:
I think about that sometimes. Why was that possible? It’s totally nuts. But
we didn’t know any better. [The product] didn’t need to be perfect. It could
be buggy, it can crash—and you’d need to manually reset systems. But we
actually had a working solution in the field in days or in weeks sometimes.
Truly unique, magical moments.
The innovation that exists in the Unit is also cultivated through structure and personnel
turnover. Nadav Zafrir, CEO and Co-Founder of Team8, a cyber security think-tank, notes:
Every year, Unit 8200 gets this influx of young, smart, motivated and
passionate men and women looking at problems from an entirely new
43
perspective. We don’t tell them that other people have tried to solve the
same problem many times and failed.
Rami Efrati, a former Unit 8200 officer, explains that some of the need to innovate is
inherent when working in intelligence. “In intelligence, you can’t work only by the rules,
you need to be open-minded. We teach them how to work outside of the box.”
While the statistical tests do not show a propensity for innovation, the interview
data demonstrates that the Unit is focused on cultivating an innovative environment. The
amount of cutting edge technology that comes out from the Unit underscores this emphasis
on innovation.
Proactiveness
The CATA analysis showed that Unit 8200 founded companies had a 3.86 percent
lower Proactiveness score than the peer group. This result is not significant with an R of
0.02, an R^2 of 0.00, and a P value of 0.93. The financial analysis resulted in a 235.84
percent lower Proactiveness score with a P value of 0.46.
The interview results mildly support the, albeit not very significant, statistical
findings. Several of the interviewees noted that many companies founded by former Unit
8200 soldiers fail to scale. One interviewee remarked:
You find in a lot of Israeli companies, especially ones founded by Unit 8200
in the cyber security space, that the leaders don’t plan well for scaling. In
part, Israel’s geopolitical position causes many companies to be acquired
by mostly U.S. based companies. Often time’s Israeli founders would rather
sell and move to America, than scale up their business in Israel. In other
44
instances, those founders simply cannot manage a larger, less nimble
company. That lack of foresight really hurts the Israeli economy.
Interviewees also explained that Israel was “a startup nation, not a scale up nation” and that
some of the qualities that make Unit 8200 alumni successful do not work well for a more
mature businesses. The interviewees also noted that Israel has come a long way since the
technology boom in the 1980’s. Yigal Erlich, one of the most prominent venture capitalists
in Israel, spoke about that time saying, “While Israel was very good at developing
technologies, Israelis didn’t know how to manage companies or market products.”
Risk-Taking
In the CATA analysis, Unit 8200 founded companies had a 41.32 percent higher
Risk-Taking score than the peer group. This result is not significant with an R of 0.14, an
R^2 of 0.02, and a P value of 0.63. The financial analysis showed a 37.89 percent higher
Risk-taking score, with a P value of 0.08.
The interview results strongly support the statistical findings. Interviewees spoke
about how their experiences in the Unit allowed them to put their entrepreneurial work into
perspective. Many expressed the sentiment that it is much easier to take risks with business
ventures when they had just finished three years working with life and death consequences.
Kira Radinsky, a former Unit 8200 officer and co-founder of SalesPredict, a
predictive sales-retention tool, explains that she operates her business the same way she
operated while in the Unit. “Either you win or you are dead. It doesn’t look as scary to take
a risk because I took much bigger risks before” (Behar, 2016).
45
Discussion of Results
The goal of this study was to identify why Unit 8200 alumni have been so successful in
their entrepreneurial pursuits. The results of the financial and CATA analysis, the study
identified two EO dimensions that Unit 8200 alumni-founded companies exhibit in excess
of their peers: Autonomy and Risk-Taking. These analyses also showed a negative
relationship with Proactiveness. Based upon the interview data, it can be concluded that
Unit 8200 alumni demonstrate a large degree of Innovativeness even though it was not
demonstrated in the quantitative methods. This discussion will be organized by EO
dimension and will tie in key findings from the historical introduction.
Lumpkin & Dess (1996) define Autonomy as “the independent action of an
individual or a team in bring forth an idea or a vision and carrying it through to
completion.” This dimension of EO is important in startups when resources, both human
and financial, are in short supply. In the CATA, Unit 8200 members demonstrated a higher
propensity for Autonomy than their industry peers. Throughout the interviews this quality
was not only attributed to former members of Unit 8200, but also to Israeli culture more
broadly.
Recall the description of Israel’s first Prime Minister and forefather of the nation,
David Ben-Gurion. He has been called by many a bitzu’ist, or someone who “gets things
done” (Wieseltier, 1985). This quality is especially admired in a nation that was built so
quickly from very little, while under extreme external threats.
Members of Unit 8200 not only grew up in a society in which this quality was
admired, but also worked in a unit where this quality was necessary to be successful. Many
of the interviewees spoke about complex tasks they were assigned to and simply told to
‘get it done.’
46
The flat hierarchy that exists in the Unit and the IDF more broadly places large
responsibilities on a few, young people. As stated by Edward Luttwak, the IDF’s officer to
enlisted ratio is 1 to 9 compared to the US Military’s 1 to 5. This flattened hierarchy
provides young soldiers with opportunities to complete tasks with more limited oversight.
Figure 7: Officers to Enlisted per 100-Man Company:
The combination of societal traits and the unique working environment that
members of Unit 8200 encounter during their years of service, likely encourage a high
degree of Autonomy in 8200 alumni-founded companies.
The financial and CATA analyses did not find any difference between Competitive
Aggressiveness and Unit 8200-founded companies. Many of the interviewees, however,
noted that the Unit 8200 professional network was integral to their entrepreneurial success.
After completing their service in Unit 8200, many alumni receive their first job offers
47
through the extensive network. Some jobs posting are even directed specifically at Unit
8200 alumni.
Because the IDF has mandatory reserve requirements for its citizens, many working
professionals are often serve as teachers and mentors within the IDF (Breznitz, 2002). This
creates more of a collaborative atmosphere within Israel than you might see in other
countries.
While the financial and CATA analyses did not show excess Innovativeness for
unit 8200 founded firms, it is important to note that financial metric used to assess this
dimension, R&D / Sales, shows what percentage of sales is used for research and
development. It does not measure the output of this R&D. It is possible that Unit 8200
alumni could simply be more efficient with the R&D that they do spend. In order to
corroborate this, a future study would have to examine the firms output in the form of
patents, trademarks, new product offering, etc.
Based upon the interview and secondary data, members of Unit 8200 are not afraid
to ‘break things.’ The structure of the Unit, and the IDF more broadly, cultivate and
encourage innovation. Teams work in small groups on task-oriented projects much like
many Silicon Valley startups. The flat hierarchy and chutzpah demonstrated by Unit
members create an environment where all assumptions are questioned and no idea is
thrown out without the proper reasoning. Superior officers may be ahead in the chain of
command, but Unit 8200 soldiers value the quality of ideas more than a strict hierarchy.
One of the interviewees pointed out that while the IDF might have a less formal
hierarchy than the U.S. Military, in Israeli society, the military is the most formal
institutions in the country. Perhaps innovation is encouraged when societal informality is
48
combined with a professional, technologically advanced institution with an eminently
important mission.
Lumpkin & Dess (1996) describe Proactiveness as a company’s ability to“[act] in
anticipation of future problems, needs or changes" (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). Because Unit
8200 soldiers are generally on the cutting edge of technology, it is hard to argue that they
do not display proactive behavior. After all, military intelligence is, by its nature, proactive.
Soldiers must anticipate future threats and propose new defense strategies.
Where Unit 8200 members seem to lack is not in product proactiveness, but rather
in business proactiveness. Interviewees commented that Israeli companies, especially
some of the high-tech firms founded by 8200 alumni, were product focused not business
focused. This leads to the inability for some of these companies to scale successfully. More
often than not, Israeli tech companies are purchased by U.S.-based technology
conglomerates. Google, Apple, Microsoft, IBM, and Cisco are some of the largest
purchasers of Israeli tech. While these acquisitions make the founders exceedingly wealthy,
perhaps if the company growth was better managed, these smaller tech firms could grow
into larger, more mature Israeli-based companies.
The propensity for a company to take large-scale risks is a large determinant of
future success. In technologically based companies, it can be argued that it is even more
important. The nature of this highly competitive industry creates an environment where if
a company is risk-adverse in its early stages, it will not succeed. Even when controlling for
industry, the results showed an increased propensity for risk among firms founded by
former 8200 soldiers.
49
In a battlefield environment, taking risk is par-for-the-course. While the risk that
Unit 8200 soldiers face on a daily basis may not be the same as an infantryman, lives of
their countrymen and women are at stake. The risks that Unit soldiers take are much more
technical, but the scale of the consequences is likely much higher. One would expect an
individual who has spent a significant amount of time under high pressure, risky scenarios
to be more comfortable with risk in a business than someone who has not experienced that
environment.
There are several limitations that are inherent to studying a military intelligence
organization and its ties to entrepreneurship. A major limitation is the inability to identify
all of the alumni from the Unit. While some self-identify as Unit 8200 alumni, many do
not. This makes it hard to know whether the conclusions drawn from the study of a few is
representative of the whole Unit.
While financial ratios can be useful in analyzing a company’s input compared to
peers within its industry, it does not measure the output. The efficiency of the allocated
capital could vary drastically and would not be captured in the financial analysis.
Another limitation inherent to studying entrepreneurship is the limited access to
private company financial data. This study utilizes publicly traded companies to assess the
entrepreneurial orientation of its founder and CEO’s. A sample of only companies that
have reached an IPO is biased. Most startups fail and even Unit 8200 alumni are not
immune to this reality. In an ideal world, this study would be conducted on a wide range
of private companies from different industries. Even with these quantitative limitations, the
interview data fills the holes and adds much needed color to the data.
50
Conclusion
Unit 8200 is an elite military intelligence Unit that produces some of the best technological
talent in the world. The evidence from popular press accounts support this notion. The
results of this study show that alumni, in general, excel in three of the five entrepreneurial
orientation dimensions outlined by Lumpkin & Dess (1996): Risk-Taking, Autonomy and
Innovativeness. The EO framework is intended to assess a company’s tendency to act in
certain ways that have been determined to be entrepreneurial.
Company founders are integral in setting the managerial tone for a firm’s
entrepreneurial orientation. According to dominant entrepreneurial literature, a founder’s
prior experience informs or imprints the actions they take in a new venture. The prior
experience in Unit 8200 seems to condition these founders to be comfortable higher levels
of risk than their industry peers. The prevailing Unit cultural stance to embrace new ideas,
no matter who or where they come from, and the willingness to openly question any
assumptions, seems to inform their future orientation toward innovation.
Dan Senor and Saul Singer’s Start-Up Nation: The Story of Israel’s Economic
Miracle sought to identify the “secret sauce” that made Israel the technological hub that it
is today. They concluded that:
The secret of Israel’s success is the combination of classic elements of
technology clusters with some unique Israeli elements that enhance the
skills and experience of individuals, make them work together more
effectively as teams, and provide tight and readily available connections
within an established and growing community (Senor & Singer, 2009).
51
Unit 8200 is a concentrated microcosm and important driver of the larger Israeli success
story. The Unit embraces and embodies the chutzpah, rosh gadol, davka, and bitzua that
make Israeli culture so unique.
Unit 8200 is a unique gathering of highly-intelligent, technology-orientated,
motivated individuals who exist in an environment in which they are given advanced
technical training, hands-on military experience, and a powerful professional network, all
at the age of eighteen. Combine these elements with a society that elevates leaders who
demonstrate bold, resourceful, and inventive tendencies, and it produces some incredible
entrepreneurs.
52
Works Cited
8200 EISP. (2017, March 5). 8200 EISP. Retrieved from EISP.org:
http://www.eisp.org.il/en/home
Agranat Commission of Inquiry. (1974). Interim Report. Tel Aviv.
Anderson, Anderson, B. S., Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (2009). Understanding the
relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and strategic learning capability:
an empirical investigation. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 218-240.
Arieli, I. (2016, May). Excerpt. Inside Israel's Secret Start Up Machine.
Azulay, I., Lerner, M., & Tishler, A. (2001). Converting military technology through
corporate entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 419-435.
Baruch, Y. (1999). Response Rate in Academic Studies: A Comparative Analysis. Human
Relations, 421-438.
Behar, R. (2016, May). Inside Israel's Secret Startup Machine. Forbes.
Ben-Gurion, D. (1948, May 14). Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel.
Tel Aviv, Israel.
Breaugh, J. A. (1999). Further Investigation of the Work Autonomy Scales: Two Studies.
Journal of Business and Psychology.
Breznitz, D. (2002). The Military as a Public Space - The Role of the IDF in the Israeli
Software Innovation System. MIT Industrial Performance Center, 1-46.
Brockhaus, R. (1980). Risk taking propensity of entrepreneurs. Academy of management
Journal.
Central Intelligence Agency. (2017). CIA World Factbook. Central Intelligence Agency.
53
Cohen, D., & Crabtree, B. (2006). Qualitatiive research guidlines project. Robert Wood
Johnson Foundation.
Colvin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and
benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 75-87.
FactSet. (2017). FactSet Database. Boston, MA, USA.
Fama, E. F., & Babiak, H. (1968). Dividend policy: An emprical analysis. Journal of the
American Statistical Association.
Florence, R. (2007). Lawrence and Aaronsohn. New York: Penguin Group.
Friedman, D. M. (1997). The Haganah. Retrieved from Jewish Virtual Library:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-haganah
Gewirtz, J. (2016). Israel's Edge: The Story of the IDF's Most Elite Unit-Talpiot.
Jerusalem: Gefen Publishing House.
Goldstone, P. (2007). Aaronsohn's Maps: The Untold Story of the Man who Might have
Created Peace in the Middle East. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Gratch, A. (2015). The Israeli Mind: How the Israeli National Character Shapes Our
World. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Grinstein, G. (2013). Flexigidity. Tel Aviv: Self Published.
Hage, J. (1980). Theories of organizations: Form, process, and transformation. John Wiley
& Sons.
Hart, R. P. (2001). Redeveloping DICTION: theoretical considerations. Progress in
communication sciences, 43-63.
IDF. (2016, September). Military intelligence unit. Retrieved from www.idf.il
54
IDF: Nefesh B'Nefesh. (2015, October). Tzav Rishon (First Notice) and IDF Draft.
Retrieved from nbn.org.il: http://www.nbn.org.il/aliyahpedia/army-nationalservice/idf-sherut-leumi/joining-the-israeli-army-tzav-rishon-first-notice-anddrafting/
Jewish Virtual Library. (2017, February 7). A Definition of Zionism. Retrieved from
JewishVirtualLibrary.org: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/a-definition-ofzionism
Kahana, E. (2006). Historical Dictionary of Israeli Intelligence. Oxford: The Scarecrow
Press, Inc.
Karagozoglu, N., & Brown, W. B. (1988). Adapative responses by conservative and
entrepreneurial firms. Product Innovation Management.
Kordova, S. (2012, September 7). Word of the Day Rosh Gadol: What Sort of Head Do
You Have? Retrieved from Haaretz: http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/features/wordof-the-day-rosh-gadol-what-sort-of-head-do-you-have-1.463372
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct
and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review.
Merriam-Webster. (2017, February 12). Entrepreneur. Retrieved from merriamwebster.com: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/entrepreneurship
Miller, A., & Camp, B. (1986). Exploring determinants of success in corporate ventures.
Journal of Business Venturing, 87-105.
Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1982). Innovation in conservatice and entrepreneurial firms:
Two models of strategic momentum. Strategic Management Journal.
55
Miller, D., & Le Brenton-Miller, I. (2011). Governance, social identity, and entrepreneurial
orientation in closely held public companies. Entrepreneurship: Theory and
Practice, 1051-1076.
Miller, P. (1987). Strategic industiral relations and human resource managementdistinction, definition and recognition. Journal of Management Studies.
Perman, S. (2004). Spies, Inc. Business Innovation from Israel's Espionage. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Roberts, M. J., Stevenson, H. H., Sahlman, W. A., Marshall, P. W., & Hamermesh, R. G.
(2007). New Business Ventures and the Entrepreneur. New York: McGraw-Hill
Companies.
Rosten, L. (1968). The Joys if Yiddish. Tel Aviv: McGraww-Hill.
Sachar, H. (1994). History of Israel: Volume II from the Aftermath of the Yom Kippur War.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Schillo, R. S. (2011). Entrprenruial Orientation and Company Performance: Can the
Academic Literature Guide Managers? Technology Innovation Management
Review, 20-25.
Senor, D., & Singer, S. (2009). Start-Up Nation: The Story of Israel's Economic Miracle.
New York, NY: Hachette Book Group.
Shamir, E. (2005). Computer Science and Technology in Israel 1950-1980. Rutherford
Journal.
Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The Promise of Entrepreneurship as a Field of
Research. Academy of Management, 217-226.
56
Shindler, C. (2008). A History of Modern Israel: Second Edition. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Short, J. C., Broberg, J. C., Cogliser, C. C., & Brigham, K. H. (2010). Construct Validation
Using Computer-Aided Text Analysis (CATA): An Illustration Using
Entrepreneurial Oreintation. Organizational Research Methods, 320-347.
Solomon, S. (2016, October 5). Israeli army may crack down on ex-soldiers profiting from
tech expertise. Retrieved from The Times of Israel:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-army-may-crack-down-on-ex-soldiersprofiting-from-tech-expertise/
Stinchcombe, A. L., & March, J. G. (1965). Social struture an organizations. handbook of
organizations, 142-193.
Swed, O., & Butler, J. S. (2013). Military Capital in the Israeli Hi-tech Industry. Armed
Forces & Society, 123-141.
The College Board. (2016, September). College Board. Retrieved from collegeboard.org.
The World Bank. (2016, December 12). Data Bank. Retrieved from Data.WorldBank.org.
Unit 8200 Alumni Association. (2017, March 5). Unit 8200 Alumni Association. Retrieved
from Unit 8200 Alumni Association.
Venkataraman, S. (1997). The Distinvtive Domain of Entrepreneurship Research.
Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth, 119-138.
Wales, W. (2016). Entrepreneurial orientation: A review and synthesis of promising
research directions. International Small Business Journal, 3-15.
Wang, C. (2008). Entrepreneurial Orientation, Leaning Orientation, and Firm
Performance. Entrepreneuriship: Theory and Practice.
57
Wieseltier, L. (1985, February 11). Brothers and Keepers: Black Jews and the Meaning of
Zionism. New Republic.
Zafrir, N. (2016, May). Excerpt. Inside Israel's Secret Start Up Machine.
Zahra, S. A., & Covin, J. G. (1993). Business strategy, technology policy and firm
performance. Strategic management journal.
Zhao, J. (2014). An Argument on the Existing Framework of Entrepreneurship - Shanzhai:
An Emerging Entrepreneurial Model. Management and Administrative Sciences
Review, 762-808.
Appendix
Appendix 1: Descriptions of Peer Group for Financial Analysis
Company Name Business Description
Accelrys, Inc. Accelrys, Inc. develops and commercializes scientific informatics software products and services for industries and
organizations that rely on scientific innovation.
Alarm.com
Holdings, Inc.
Alarm.com Holdings, Inc. engages in the provision of wireless and web-enabled security system technology.
AutoNavi
Holdings Ltd.
AutoNavi Holdings Ltd. provides digital map content and navigation and location-based solutions in China.
Amber Road,
Inc.
Amber Road, Inc. provides cloud-based global trade management solutions.
Apigee
Corporation
Apigee Corp. provides application programming interface and predictive big data analytics technology.
AppFolio Inc
Class A
AppFolio, Inc. provides web-based property management software. It offers software solutions for small and
medium-sized businesses in the property management and legal industries or verticals.
Arotech
Corporation
Arotech Corp. provides defense and security products for the military, law enforcement and homeland security
markets, including advanced zinc-air and lithium batteries and chargers, and multimedia interactive simulators and
trainers.
A10 Networks,
Inc.
A10 Networks, Inc. engages in the provision of application networking solutions. It offers cloud storage, enterprise
solutions, security products, data center, application delivery, load balancing, and distributed denial of service
protection.
athenahealth, Inc. athenahealth, Inc. provides cloud-based business services and mobile applications for medical groups and health
systems. It also provides ongoing billing, clinical-related, and other related services to customers.
Brightcove Inc. Brightcove Inc. engages in providing cloud services for video which enable customers to publish and distribute
video to Internet-connected devices. It offers a family of products that revolutionize the way organizations deliver
video experiences.
BlackLine, Inc. BlackLine, Inc. provides financial close automation software solutions to the SAP market. It offers finance controls
and automation and unified cloud for finance and accounting.
Bridgeline
Digital, Inc.
Bridgeline Digital, Inc. is an information technology company, which engages in the development of iAPPS web
engagement management product platform and related digital solutions.
Box, Inc. Class A Box, Inc. provides an enterprise content platform that enables organizations to securely manage enterprise content
while allowing easy, secure access and sharing of this content from anywhere, on any device.
58
BroadSoft, Inc. BroadSoft, Inc. provides software and services that allow mobile, fixed-line, and cable providers to deliver voice
and multimedia services. Its products include BroadWorks, BroadCloud and BroadTouch.
Callidus
Software Inc.
Callidus Software, Inc. offers cloud software services. Its product includes CallidusCloud, a software that enables
organizations to drive performance and productivity across their business with its Hiring, Learning, Marketing, and
Selling clouds.
Calix, Inc. Calix, Inc. provides broadband communications access systems and software for fiber and copper-based network
architectures that enable communications service providers to transform their networks and connect to their
residential and business subscribers
Coupa Software,
Inc.
Coupa Software, Inc. develops and provides cloud-based financial applications. It produces software solutions for
sourcing, procurement and expense management that help companies control their spending.
COPsync, Inc. COPsync, Inc. engages in the operation of real-time, law enforcement mobile data information system
CounterPath
Corporation
CounterPath Corp. engages in the provision of desktop and mobile VoIP software products and solutions.
CSG Systems
International,
Inc.
CSG Systems International, Inc. engages in providing business support solutions serving the communications
industry.
Cornerstone
Ondemand, Inc.
Cornerstone OnDemand, Inc. engages in the provision of learning and talent management solutions delivered as
software-as-a-service.
CommVault
Systems, Inc.
CommVault Systems, Inc. is a data management software company which develops and distributes software
applications for data protection, information governance and discovery.
CYREN Ltd. CYREN Ltd. engages in the provision of cloud-based security solutions. Its products include web and electronic
mail security, cyber intelligence suite, malware attack detection, mobile security, uniform resource locator filtering,
phishing intelligence feed, and anti-spam.
Tableau
Software, Inc.
Class A
Tableau Software, Inc. engages in the provision of analytics and data visualization software.
Determine, Inc. Determine, Inc. operates as a global provider of SaaS enterprise contract lifecycle management, strategic sourcing,
supplier management, and procure-to-pay solutions.
eFuture Holding,
Inc.
eFuture Holding, Inc. engages in the development and provision of software applications and social shopping
network services. It offers supply chain solutions and operates omni-channel cloud service and myStore mobile
application.
eGain
Corporation
eGain Corp. provides cloud-based and on-site customer interaction software solutions. The company operates
business in one segment development, license, implementation and support of its customer service infrastructure
software solutions.
Envestnet, Inc. Envestnet, Inc. engages in the provision of integrated portfolio, wealth management technology, practice
management and reporting solutions to financial advisors and institutions.
Everbridge, Inc. Everbridge, Inc. provides mass notification solutions.
Five9, Inc. Five9, Inc. provides cloud software for contact centers.
Finjan Holdings,
Inc.
Finjan Holdings, Inc. engages in the investments in, and development of cybersecurity technologies and intellectual
property. The company was founded on January 2006, and is headquartered in East Palo Alto, CA.
Great Elm
Capital Group,
Inc.
Great Elm Capital Group, Inc. engages as an intellectual property company which focuses on the mobile industry.
Glu Mobile Inc. Glu Mobile, Inc. designs, markets and sells mobile games.
Sungy Mobile
Limited.
Sungy Mobile Ltd. provides mobile Internet products and services. The firm focuses on applications and mobile
platform development.
Gravity Co., Ltd.
Sponsored ADR
Gravity Co., Ltd. engages in the development and publishing of online games, software and other related services.
It operates through the following business fields: Online Games Development Business, Game Publishing
Business, Mobile Business, Multi Platform Business, One Source Multi Use Business and the Internet Protocol
Television Business.
Gridsum
Holding, Inc.
Gridsum Holding, Inc. provides data analysis software for multinational and domestic enterprises and government
agencies in China.
Guidance
Software, Inc.
Guidance Software, Inc. provides digital investigative solutions.
Greenway
Medical
Technologies,
Inc.
Greenway Medical Technologies, Inc. provides technical solutions and services for healthcare customers. It offers
electronic healthcare record, ambulatory healthcare, clinical research business solutions and services.
Guidewire
Software, Inc.
Guidewire Software, Inc. provides software products for property and casualty insurers.
Intellicheck
Mobilisa, Inc.
Intellicheck Mobilisa, Inc. is a technology company. It is engaged in developing and marketing wireless technology
and identity systems for various applications, including mobile and handheld access control and security systems
for the government, military and commercial markets.
Imprivata, Inc. Imprivata, Inc. engages in the provision of healthcare information technology security solutions that offers
authentication management, fast access to patient information, and secure communications technologies to the
healthcare industry.
59
King Digital
Entertainment
Plc
King Digital Entertainment Plc develops and publishes casual games on digital platforms.
KongZhong
Corp. Sponsored
ADR
KongZhong Corp. is an online game developer and operator in China. It operates through the following segments:
Internet Games, Mobile Games, and WVAS. The Internet Games segment deals with mobile internet and
entertainment sites. The Mobile Games segment develops and publishes downloadable and online mobile games.
LivePerson, Inc. LivePerson, Inc. engages in the provision of mobile and online messaging solutions. It operates through the
following segments: Business, Consumer, and Corporate.
Manhattan
Associates, Inc.
Manhattan Associates, Inc. designs, builds and delivers supply chain commerce solutions that drive top line growth
by converging front-end sales with back-end supply chain execution and efficiency.
Medidata
Solutions, Inc.
Medidata Solutions, Inc. provides cloud based solutions for life sciences that enhance the efficiency of customer's
clinical development processes from concept to conclusion, optimizing their research and development
investments.
Mimecast
Limited
Mimecast Ltd. provides cloud security and risk management services for corporate information and email. It
develops proprietary cloud architecture to offer email security, continuity and archiving capabilities
MiX Telematics
Limited
Sponsored ADR
MiX Telematics Ltd. engages in the provision of fleet an mobile asset management solutions. It operates through
the following geographical segments: Africa, Europe, Americas, Middle East and Australia, and Brazil.
Majesco Majesco provides software solutions for the insurance industry. It offers core insurance software solutions for
Property & Casualty/General Insurance, Life, Annuities & Pensions and Group/Employee Benefits providers,
allowing them to manage policy management, claims management and billing functions.
MIND C.T.I.
Ltd.
MIND C.T.I. Ltd. develops, manufactures, markets and implements real-time and off-line convergent billing and
customer care software solutions for various types of communication providers, including traditional wireline and
wireless, voice over IP, or VoIP, and broadband IP network operators, LTE operators, cable operators and mobile
virtual network operators, or MVNOs.
Model N, Inc. Model N, Inc. engages in the provision of revenue management cloud solutions for the life science and technology
industries. It solutions include two complementary suites of software applications: Revenue Management
Enterprise and Revenue Management Intelligence. The Revenue Management Enterprise suite serves as the system
of record for and automates the execution of, revenue management processes such as pricing, contracting and
incentive and rebate management.
Materialise NV
Sponsored ADR
EMaterialise NV provides additive manufacturing software and 3D printing services. It operates through the
following business segments: Materialise Software, Materialise Medical & Materialise Manufacturing.
NetSuite Inc. NetSuite, Inc. engages in the provision of cloud-based business management application and omnichannel
commerce software suites.
The9 Ltd.
Sponsored ADR
The9 Ltd. engages in developing and operating online games and related services. It also involves in mobile
advertising and mobile application education businesses.
ServiceNow, Inc. ServiceNow, Inc. engages in the provision of enterprise cloud computing solutions.
NQ Mobile, Inc. NQ Mobile, Inc. engages in the provision of mobile Internet services. It operates its business through the Consumer
and Enterprise segments.
NetEase, Inc.
Sponsored ADR
NetEase, Inc. engages in the provision of online internet technology services. It operates through the following
business segments: Online Games, Advertising, e-mail Services and E-commerce.
NetSol
Technologies,
Inc.
NetSol Technologies, Inc. provides information technology and enterprise application solutions. It operates through
the following geographical segments: North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific.
Nuance
Communications,
Inc.
Nuance Communications, Inc. provides voice and language solutions for businesses and consumers around the
world. Its solutions are used in healthcare, mobile, consumer, enterprise customer service and imaging markets.
Open Text
Corporation
Open Text Corp. is an independent software company that provides software products and services that assist
organizations in finding, utilizing, and sharing business information from any device.
Paycom
Software, Inc.
Paycom Software, Inc. provides cloud-based human capital management software solutions delivered as Softwareas-a-Service.
Points
International Ltd.
Points International Ltd. engages in the provision of ecommerce and technology services. It offers a range of white
label or private branded e-commerce services and Points Loyalty Wallet.
Park City Group,
Inc.
Park City Group, Inc. is a software-as-a-service provider.
Premiere Global
Services, Inc.
Premiere Global Services, Inc. provides conferencing and collaboration software and services. It offers solutions
for IT, sales, marketing, small business and enterprises.
Perfect World
Co., Ltd.
Perfect World Co., Ltd. is an online game developer and operator based in China. It develops online games based
on proprietary game engines and game development platforms.
Q2 Holdings,
Inc.
Q2 Holdings, Inc. engages in the provision of cloud-based virtual banking solutions. Its services offers security,
advisory, web services, custom services, and end user marketing solutions.
Red Hat, Inc. Red Hat, Inc. engages in the provision of open source software solutions..
RingCentral, Inc.
Class A
RingCentral, Inc. engages in the provision of a cloud unified communication, and collaboration solutions to support
the increasing mobile and distributed workforce. It also offers a open platform which integrates with current
business applications.
RealNetworks,
Inc.
RealNetworks, Inc. creates innovative applications and services that make it easy to connect with and enjoy digital
media. It provides the digital media services and applications to consumers, mobile carriers and other businesses. It
operates through the following segments: RealPlayer Group, Mobile Entertainment, and Games..
60
RealPage, Inc. RealPage, Inc. engages in the provision of software solutions for the rental housing industry.
Rapid7 Inc. Rapid7, Inc. engages in the business of security risk intelligence. It primarily provides security data and analytics
solutions.
Rosetta Stone
Inc.
Rosetta Stone, Inc. engages in the provision of technology based language learning solutions.
inContact, Inc. inContact, Inc. povides cloud contact center software solutions. The firm operates through two segments: Software
and Network Connectivity.
SINA Corp. SINA Corp. engages in the provision of online and mobile media services. It operates through the following
segments: Portal Advertising, Weibo, and Others
Sonic Foundry,
Inc.
Sonic Foundry, Inc. engages in the provision of video capture, management, and webcasting solutions in education,
business, and government.
Splunk Inc. Splunk, Inc. engages in the development and provision of software solutions
Support.com,
Inc.
Support.com, Inc. engages in the provision of cloud-based software and services, which enables technology support
for a connected world.
SolarWinds, Inc. SolarWinds, Inc. provides information technology solutions.
Atlassian Corp.
Plc Class A
Atlassian Corp. Plc operates as an enterprise software company, which engages in the designing, developing,
licensing, and maintaining of software.
TIBCO Software
Inc.
TIBCO Software, Inc. provides electronic business infrastructure software products.
Top Image
Systems Ltd.
Top Image Systems Ltd. engages in the provision of enterprise content management solutions. It offers technology
to automatically transform any information into electronic data
Talend SA
Sponsored ADR
Talend SA provides data integration and cloud software solutions. It offers open sources middleware solutions for
data migration, synchronization, governance and warehousing, as well as for cloud computing and process-based
applications.
Tangoe, Inc. Tangoe, Inc. engages in the provision of communications lifecycle management, and software and related services.
Take-Two
Interactive
Software, Inc.
Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. is a developer, marketer and publisher of interactive entertainment for
consumers around the globe.
Textura Corp. Textura Corp. provides on-demand business collaboration software to the commercial construction industry.
Monotype
Imaging
Holdings Inc.
Monotype Imaging Holdings, Inc engages in development, marketing, and licensing of technologies and fonts.
VMware, Inc.
Class A
VMware, Inc. provides the development and application of virtualization technologies with x86 server-based
computing, separating application software from the underlying hardware.
Varonis Systems,
Inc.
Varonis Systems, Inc. provides innovative software platform that allows enterprises to map, analyze, manage and
migrate their unstructured data. It operates through the following segments: United States, EMEA, and Rest of the
World.
VirtualScopics,
Inc.
VirtualScopics, Inc. provides quantitative imaging solutions currently serving the pharmaceutical, biotechnology
and medical device industries. It provides image analysis software tools and applications which are used in
detecting and measuring specific anatomical structures and metabolic activity using medical images.
Web.com Group,
Inc.
Web.com Group, Inc. engages in the provision of Internet services and online marketing solutions for small to
medium-sized businesses. Its solutions include domains, hosting, website design and management, search engine
optimization, online marketing campaigns, local sales leads, social media, mobile products, and eCommerce
solutions.
xG Technology,
Inc.
xG Technology, Inc. engages in the development of patented wireless communications and spectrum sharing
technologies. It operates through the following segments: Broadcast, Sports and Entertainment, and
Government/Surveillance.
Allot
Communications
Ltd.
Allot Communications Ltd. engages in the development and provision of mobile, fixed, and enterprise networks. It
operates through the following geographical segments: Europe; Asia and Oceania; Americas (excluding the United
States);
Arista Networks,
Inc.
Arista Networks, Inc. provides cloud networking solutions. Its extensible operating system supports cloud and
virtualization solutions, including VMware NSX, Microsoft System Center, OpenStack and other cloud
management frameworks.
Concur
Technologies,
Inc.
Concur Technologies, Inc. provides integrated travel and expense management solutions for companies of all
industries, sizes and geographies. Its solutions provide detailed information to help its customers effectively
negotiate with vendors, create budgets, and manage compliance.
Barracuda
Networks, Inc.
Barracuda Networks, Inc. engages in the development and provision of security systems and data protection
solutions. It offers cloud-connected applications and solutions for security threats, network performance, and data
storage.
Convergys
Corporation
Convergys Corp. engages in the provision of relationship management solutions. It focuses on customer
management through every customer interaction.
Cyan, Inc. Cyan, Inc. develops software-defined networks. Its solutions include high-capacity, multi-layer switching and
transport platforms as well as a carrier-grade software-defined networking platform and applications.
Jiayuan.com
International
Jiayuan.com International Ltd. is engaged in the operation of an online dating platform. It operates through the
following segments: Online Services, Events and VIP Services, and Other Services.
61
Digital River,
Inc.
Digital River, Inc. provides e-commerce solutions and markets shareware software products. It offers e-commerce
solutions to various companies in software, consumer electronics, computer games, publishing, travel, music, video
games, electronic toys, housewares, medical equipment, power tools and direct-selling and other markets.
EnerNOC, Inc. EnerNOC, Inc. engages the provision of energy intelligence software and demand response solutions It offers
software-as-a-service or SaaS which improve how enterprises manage and control energy costs for their
organizations.
EPAM Systems,
Inc.
EPAM Systems, Inc. provides software product engineering, technology consulting and digital expertise to clients.
Exa Corporation Exa Corp. develops, markets and supports simulation software for the fluids engineering marketplace. It engages in
software products development and provider of professional services.
Sourcefire, Inc. Sourcefire, Inc. provides intelligent cyber security solutions for information technology, environments of
commercial enterprises, including healthcare, financial services, manufacturing, energy, education, retail and
telecommunications companies, and federal, state and local government organizations.
HealthEquity Inc HealthEquity, Inc. offers solutions for managing health care accounts for health plans, insurance companies and
third-party administrators.
Immersion
Corporation
Immersion Corp. is an intellectual property and software licensing company, which engages on creation, design,
development and licensing of patented haptic innovations and software that allow people to use their sense of touch
more fully when operating a wide variety of digital devices.
Leaf Group Ltd. Leaf Group Ltd. is an Internet company, comprised of various marketplace and media properties.
Meru Networks,
Inc.
Meru Networks, Inc. designs and develops networking equipment for wireless LAN systems. The company was
founded by Nicholas Mitsakos and Vaduvur Bharghavan in January 2002 and is headquartered in Sunnyvale, CA.
Medical
Transcription
Billing Corp.
Medical Transcription Billing Corp. is a healthcare information technology company, which provides integrated
suite of proprietary web-based solutions, together with related business services, to healthcare providers practicing
in ambulatory care settings.
NCI, Inc. Class
A
NCI, Inc. engages in the provision of enterprise services and solutions.
ePlus inc. ePlus, Inc. operates as a holding company with interest in providing technology products and services, flexible
leasing solutions and enterprise supply management solutions.
Silver Spring
Networks, Inc.
Silver Spring Networks, Inc. operates as a networking platform and solutions provider for smart energy networks.
VASCO Data
Security
VASCO Data Security International, Inc. engages in the design, development, and markets security solutions that
secure and manage access to digital assets and protect transactions
Verint Systems
Inc.
Verint Systems, Inc. engages in the provision of actionable intelligence. It operates through the following
segments: Enterprise Intelligence Solutions, Cyber Intelligence Solutions, and Video and Situation Intelligence
Solutions.
WidePoint
Corporation
WidePoint Corp. provides information technology based products, services and solutions. It
Ixia Ixia engages in the development and provision of network testing, visibility, and security solutions. It offers
security products, training, test consulting and applications, and cloud services.
Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo!, Inc. operates as a digital media company that is focused on informing, connecting, and entertaining users
through research, communications, and digital content products. |