Search results

Global technological competition has made technology transfer from academia to firms an important public policy issue (Rahm, 1994). Academia and individual academic institutions are a primary source of new knowledge production and innovation (Brennan & McGowan, 2007). It is widely acknowledged that the commercialization of scientific and technological knowledge produced in public funded research institutions, including universities and research centres, into the marketplace have a fundamental role to play in wealth creation, supporting economic growth and technological innovation, and plays a significant role in new venture creation, growth of existing firms, and new job creation (Mansfield, 1991; Harmon et al., 1997; Ndonzuau, Pirnay, & Surlemont, 2002; Siegel, Waldman, Atwater, & Link, 2003b; Steffensen, Rogers, & Speakman, 1999; Walter, Auer, & Ritter, 2006; Perez & Sanchez, 2003). Research by Acs, Audretsch, and Feldman (1992), Jaffe (1989), Mansfield (1991, 1998), and others indicates that technological change in important segments of the economy has been significantly based on knowledge that spin-off from academic research.

Academic entrepreneurship is extremely relevant in knowledge and technology transfer (KTT). The purpose of this study is to provide insights into phase-specific constraints and needs impacting scientists’ engagement in entrepreneurial activities at public research institutions.

In an exploratory case study, 40 qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with German academic entrepreneurs in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM).

Based on the data analysis, an ideal-typical founding process with phase-specific barriers and needs was identified. Many constraints and associated needs occur in more than one phase, including the lack of knowledge, the demand for exchange formats, the lack of time and financial resources, institutionalized return options, the lack of human resources and the lack of incentives.

Given its exploratory approach, this study has limitations regarding its generalization; however, the presented findings may induce further research and in-depth analysis on this matter.

Several recommendations for action are provided for each phase of the founding process to strengthen the (entrepreneurial) transfer in research organizations. Generally, a pioneering indicator of excellence in the science system should be developed to promote transfer next to publications.

The study contributes to existing literature on determinants of academic entrepreneurship by indicating the phase-specific constraints and needs throughout the founding process and discussing those needs in the theoretical context of current societal and technological mega-trends.

Academic knowledge can be put to use in a commercial environment in several ways. One such mechanism to transfer knowledge to the market place is the start of a new, separate company, termed an academic spin-off company, with the aim to commercially develop and exploit the knowledge generated in the university (Fontes, 2003). In 1999, the Dutch Ministry of Economic affairs published a paper stating that the number of high-tech start-ups in the Netherlands lags behind compared to other EU countries and the United States. Subsequently, initiatives were started to stimulate commercial exploitation of knowledge generated within universities. A specific initiative by the Dutch government in the area of the Life Sciences was the so-called Biopartner programme. This was started in 2000 with the objective to enhance the business climate for start-ups in the Life Sciences and to realize 75 start-ups within 5 years (Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, 1999). Actions were directed toward increasing awareness, stimulating starters, establishing facilities like a seed fund and academic incubators, and promoting the commercialization of academic knowledge within universities. A few years later, the Technopartner program and the Valorization Grant were implemented with similar instruments aiming at scientists in universities (Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, 2003).

In this chapter we aim at examining the influence of early top management teams (TMTs) on the growth performance of university-based spin-off firms, presenting an empirical research on spin-off companies in Italy. The chapter proceeds along the following lines. First we describe the context of analysis, briefly reviewing the literature on TMT and performance. In the second section we outline the hypotheses of our research. The third section describes the sample and the method for the empirical analysis. The fourth section presents and discusses the results. In the last section we highlight the main implications and limitations of our results and suggest further lines of research.

The purpose of this paper is to identify how different modes of resource configuration, entry strategy and product/market characteristics affect new ventures' start‐up processes as well as outcomes in terms of firm growth and revenues.

Case studies of three academic spin‐offs and three non‐academic new ventures are employed as a base for analytical generalisation.

Non‐academic ventures and academic spin‐offs have different bases for their venture creation and follow different strategies to enter their specific markets. Academic spin‐offs are to a larger extent innovative, product‐oriented and enter their target markets employing a technology/science‐push strategy, which requires considerable resources and partner cooperation to manage. The non‐academic ventures, on the contrary, exploit emerging opportunities on the market through a market‐pull strategy relying mainly on offerings already known to the market and building on their own, in‐house resources.

Future research should benefit from investigating factors and conditions affecting different ventures' start‐up process by utilizing qualitative, in‐depth approaches as well as quantitative approaches and a more robust database.

Venture creation processes are not uniform but dependent on situational and contextual factors. Overall, academic spin‐offs come forward as examples of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship characterised by exploration and innovation, while the more “Kirznerian” and non‐academic start‐ups primarily recognise and exploit upcoming market opportunities based on resources they control. The results highlight challenges for nascent entrepreneurs as well as for policy makers supporting new venture creation.

A comparison highlighting critical events, resource configurations and environmental conditions of different start‐up processes depending on the new ventures' origin.

The promotion of research-based entrepreneurship is considered a crucial task for universities and policymakers in many Western countries. Research has shown that the university environment plays a decisive role in the spin-off activities of researchers. Although the number of science-based spin-offs has increased in recent years, women are still an exception when it comes to developing spin-off ventures. In turn, there is a lack of knowledge regarding the university environment that supports entrepreneurship from a gender perspective.

Based on the theoretical framework of the “Entrepreneurial University,” this contribution examines the formal and informal conditions for academic entrepreneurship using the example of Swiss universities of applied sciences (UAS). Based on a cross-sectional dataset of 1,551 researchers from various disciplines who were surveyed in 2019, linear regressions and logistic regression models were used to test gender-specific differences in the perception of organizational conditions concerning the entrepreneurial exploitation of research.

The results demonstrated significant differences in the perception of formal and informal conditions in higher education. First, they show gender differences in the perception of informal entrepreneurial support in universities; in particular, female researchers received less informal support for spin-off projects. For example, women hardly viewed commercial use of research and development knowledge as a career option and considered the existence of entrepreneurial role models at universities to be low. Second, further analyses highlighted that also formal support offerings were less known among female researchers.

The study highlights organizational barriers for female researchers regarding the development of spin-off creation at UAS, including the different formal and informal conditions for female academics in comparison to their male counterparts.

The objective of this research is to have an up-to-date and comprehensive assessment of the current knowledge regarding the variables that encourage the individuals, within the academic community, to get involved in knowledge exploitation activities. It is influenced by the observation that there is a need for more systematic scrutiny of micro-level processes to deepen our understanding of academic entrepreneurship (Balven et al., 2018; Wright and Phan, 2018). The study proposes to answer to ‘What are the drivers of academic entrepreneurial intentions?’ and ‘What are the emerging topics for future research?’

The paper follows a Systematic Literature Review process (Tranfield et al., 2003) and adopts a four-step process format from previous literature reviews within the entrepreneurship context (Miller et al., 2018). From the results within Scopus and Web of Science databases, this research selected, evaluated, summarised and synthesised 66 relevant papers.

This study provides a factor-listed representation of the individual, organisational and institutional variables that should be considered in the strategies defined by the university. Moreover, the study concludes that the push factors behind the intentions are multiple, context-dependent, hierarchy-dependent, heterogeneous and, at the same time, dependent on each other and against each other. Lastly, the study contributes to academic entrepreneurship literature, especially entrepreneurial intention literature, which has recently received more researchers' attention.

The study corroborates that the individual factors, directly and indirectly via Theory of Planned Behaviour, strongly impact the academics' intentions. While the focus of the papers under review was an in-depth analysis of a selected group of factors, this SLR sought to compile the factors that were identified and provide a broader picture of all those factors to be considered by the university management. It contributes to the identification and clustering of the drivers that encourage academics to engage in knowledge valorisation activities, differentiating them by activity. For the practitioners, this list can be used by university managers, TTOs and department managers, and policymakers to guide questionnaires or interviews to analyse their academics' intentions and adequately support its academic engagement strategy. Lastly, this study also suggests worthwhile avenues for future research.

The purpose of this paper is to identify different program models supporting the creation of spin‐offs at universities, analyzes the characteristics that differentiate them, and identifies the factors that determine their effectiveness.

The analysis was performed using data collected through a survey targeting the heads of spin‐off support programs at universities in the UK and Spain. The authors then applied factorial and cluster analysis techniques and a logistic regression analysis to the data to confirm the results.

The analysis identified three types of spin‐off support programs in these universities. Among these, the authors found one that appears to be the most effective model. The authors also found a certain “country effect” on the characteristics of the most effective model. Finally, the authors noted the importance the literature places on university R&D activity and the existence of a favorable environment for the performance of spin‐off programs.

This research is limited by the use of number of spin‐offs and survival rate as performance indicators for support programs. Future research should consider the effective contributions to economic growth and the extent to which such effects are related to university‐level policies.

The typology of the spin‐off support programs identified here provides insight for recommendations to improve less‐effective models.

This study contributes to the understanding of the role of university policy measures in spin‐off support program effectiveness, and of how the environment influences these policies.

Este estudio identifica diferentes modelos de programas de apoyo a la creación de spin‐offs en las universidades, analiza sus características diferenciadoras e identifica los factores que determinan su eficacia.

El análisis se ha realizado a partir de los datos recabados a través de una encuesta, dirigida a responsables de programas de apoyo a la creación de spin‐offs en universidades del Reino Unido y España. A continuación se ha aplicado un análisis cluster y un análisis de regresión logística para confirmar sus resultados.

El análisis ha identificado tres tipos de programas de apoyo a la creación de spin‐offs en estas universidades. Entre éstos se ha encontrado uno que parece ser el modelo más eficaz. También se ha encontrado un cierto “efecto país” en las características del modelo más eficaz. Finalmente se ha podido confirmar la importancia dada por la literatura a la actividad de I+D de la universidad y a la existencia de un entorno favorable para el éxito de estos programas.

Esta investigación está limitada por el uso del número de spin‐offs y la tasa de supervivencia como indicadores de rendimiento de estos programas de apoyo. La futura investigación debe considerar su contribución efectiva al crecimiento económico y el grado en el que estos efectos se relacionan con las políticas a nivel universitario.

La tipología de programas de apoyo a la creación de spin‐offs identificada permite realizar algunas recomendaciones para la mejora de los modelos menos eficaces.

Este studio contribuye a la comprensión del papel de las medidas de política universitaria en la eficacia de los programas de apoyo a la creación de spin‐offs y de la influencia del entorno sobre estas políticas.

The role of the university in the 21st century is rapidly changing, reflecting a growing interest in the commercialisation of university knowledge among scholars and policymakers. University spin-offs (USOs) represent one mechanism for commercialising knowledge that are attracting considerable attention because of their potential to (a) enhance local economic development, (b) assist universities in their major mission of teaching and research and (c) generate high-performance firms (Shane, 2004). Indeed, one study by Bray and Lee (2000), based on a small US sample, found that on average, technology transfer offices earned a higher return from equity stakes in their USOs, even allowing for a 50% failure rate, than from the average licensing agreement.

This research focuses on the relationship between Top Management Team heterogeneity (TMT) and University Spin-Offs (USOs) economic performance according to a micro-foundational perspective. The purpose consists in exploring whether a high academic representation in TMTs may improve USOs’ performance and how their competencies and backgrounds affect USOs’ economic success.

The authors employed data from the Italian platform Netval to identify the entire population of USOs in southern Italy. They selected both pure and hybrid spin-offs that had at least one academic member on the TMT. Applying these conditions to our sample selection, the authors came to a population of 136 firms. They applied a hierarchical regression analysis to test the hypotheses.

Our main findings reveal that the USOs’ economic performance improves with more academicians in the TMT and even in the same scientific field. Our data also shows that CEO duality has a negative impact on economic performance.

This work takes for the first time a micro-foundational perspective to analyze individual-level factors that affect USOs’ performance. The authors tried to bridge a research gap in the USO literature, shedding light on the relationship between TMT composition and new venture performance, considering some significant interactions between team members. Our expected findings also contribute to the general literature on entrepreneurial teams in new ventures and suggest a means to reconcile some inconsistent literature results on TMT heterogeneity and USO performance.