Search results

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, the article explores an understudied side of invention commercialization–the rejection of business as something “dirty” among Russian scientists. As such, the paper contributes to the individual-level explanations of innovation promotion, hence balancing extant literature's excessive focus on institutional explanations. Second, the article suggests that Russian scientists' rejection of business is rooted in broader Russian work ethics rift between “material” and “ideational” aspects of life. As such, the paper shows how dominant collective values refract in the management practice of specific social class, i.e. of scientists.

To analyze the rift between material and ideational aspects of Russian scientists' work, the article employs directed content analysis (DCA) of in-depth interviews with 45 Russian scholars. To address credibility bias of the research findings stemming from DCA, I further draw on the survey of existing studies, researches and polls highlighting Russian population attitudes toward the dichotomy between “material” and “ideal” realms.

This study argues that Russian scientists' likelihood of invention commercialization is positively associated with their ability to integrate in a personal psyche business and science as equally valuable facets of life.

The article identifies the three groups of scientists – opportunity-seekers, idealists and integrators – with different attitudes to invention commercialization. The article shows how policymakers should apply institutional incentives differently to each group of scientists to achieve higher rates of invention commercialization.

The purpose of this paper is to expand the understanding of the “front end” of innovation by examining the influence of top executives, who allocate the resources and cultivate the culture in which inventions are born, on the innovation process.

This paper suggests that the effect of executives on innovation can be better understood by explicitly separating innovation into the component processes of invention and commercialization. This allows us to consider how executive characteristics might have a different effect on technology development outcomes than they do on the subsequent transformation of those technologies into new products. The theory is tested on a sample of firms from the biomedical device industry.

The findings indicate that top management team (TMT) age and tenure have no effect on the type of technologies a firm develops (radical vs incremental) but do significantly affect the efficiency with which new technologies are turned into new products in some contexts. TMT heterogeneity affects both the type of technologies developed in the firm and also their transformation to new products. Interestingly, the effect of executives on commercialization depends on the type of underlying technologies which the firm has developed.

This paper contributes to the literatures on TMTs and innovation by offering a more granular explanation of how executives differentially impact the disaggregated stages of the innovation process, and thus also contributes to knowledge of the long-term innovation performance implications of executive leadership.

The purpose of this paper is to examine which value capture strategies are efficient in the invention stage and commercialization stage for small and medium enterprises (SMEs).

According to the characteristic of four primary value capture strategies, the authors categorized the formal-oriented strategy (patent), informal-oriented strategies (secrecy, lead-time), mix strategies (both formal and informal strategies), and whether to invest in complementary assets. In order to assess R & D productivity based on value capture strategy, this paper applied the two-stage data envelopment analysis for data collected from Korea Innovation Survey 2010. The sample was made up of 640 SMEs in manufacturing industry.

The results suggest that informal strategy (secrecy, lead-time) is efficient in the invention stage. Furthermore, mixed use of formal (patent) and informal strategies results in higher productivity in the commercialization stage. Lastly, the results suggest that productivity may vary depending on the investment in complementary assets. Whereas the investment in complementary assets may reduce R & D productivity at the invention stage, it may increase the productivity at the subsequent commercialization stage.

This paper did not consider external conditions such as institutional environment, industry characteristics and complexity of technology, as possible factors affecting their firm performance that need future studies.

For practitioners, the results seem to stress that should be good at combining value capture strategies in order to capture financial performance from the invention.

This study is a novel attempt to analyze R & D productivity in terms of each value capture strategy throughout the two stages: invention stage; commercialization stage.

This chapter is designed for use by commercialization teams evaluating the commercial relevance of a new invention. To be relevant commercially, an invention must create value in one or more markets, which involves solving a problem or satisfying customer needs currently unmet. Unmet needs create market opportunities, and the goal is to identify and evaluate the profitability of these opportunities. The chapter provides an overview of concepts and techniques commonly used in the process. Important distinctions between market and industry concepts are introduced along with common rubrics for categorizing inventions in terms of their technological and market implications. These concepts are then used to discuss the roles of prior experience, lead users, and brainstorming in identifying market opportunities for various types of inventions. Techniques covered include market analysis, Porter’s five forces of industry profitability, analysis of political, economic, social, and technical environments (PEST), and the analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT). The use of these techniques is illustrated for two startup commercialization teams.

Consistent with the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship, the purpose of this paper is to recognise the complementary entrepreneurial role of knowledge transfer intermediary organisations in the context of two Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries: Poland and the Czech Republic.

The aim was achieved through empirical studies relying on multiple-case study methodology and cross-case analysis covering 21 cases of commercialisation intermediary institutions. It was assumed that institutional and geographical conditions can impact the knowledge-based opportunity exploitation between different national economies.

Research confirmed that scientists in Poland and the Czech Republic are the central figures of the commercialisation process in terms of entrepreneurial opportunity recognition; however, they need support from intermediary organisations in many other entrepreneurial activities. The history of knowledge commercialisation and its intermediating entities in these countries is relatively young and spin-off company creation is not a common practice. Expertise knowledge, creativity and self-confidence admitted, by the respondents in both countries, can be an optimistic sign for the future efforts in fostering innovativeness of CEE countries. Stronger support of formal institutional framework and policies in those countries is expected.

Science commercialisation has lately attracted much attention, but only a few studies have tried to develop conceptual frameworks considering knowledge-based entrepreneurship and knowledge commercialisation in their relations and subsequential roles. Also, over the past couple of years literature in this area has expanded mainly relying on observations in the USA and Western European countries. Hence, this study allowed to collect findings from CEE countries for which data are still insufficient but can significantly contribute to the theory development. Also, some recommendations for policymakers arise from this study. Further research could validate the results in an extensive quantitative study.

Since the 1980s, US universities have greatly increased attention given to innovation and entrepreneurship out of a genuine commitment to enhancing American competitiveness. Although regional innovation and entrepreneurship can be enhanced by universities in multiple ways, the primary metrics of “success” remain patenting, licensing rates, and university spin-outs. While these metrics can be a useful proxy for the entrepreneurial university they tend to understate the many important contributions universities, including non-research intensive universities, make to their regional economies. In this chapter, we introduce a framework of capabilities that are essential to nurturing ecosystems of innovation and entrepreneurship at the regional level. We then describe the varied ways in which universities can support the development of these capabilities. Finally, we provide a framework of metrics, which can more comprehensively capture the value that universities represent to innovation and entrepreneurship in their regions.

The Green Revolution was a singular event in world history; because of the Green Revolution, world prices for all crops declined. The agricultural mechanization issue was also driven by intellectual property rights (i.e., the right to patent products), as was the agricultural chemical revolution. The livestock industrialization revolution sharply lowered the prices for all livestock products. The Gene Revolution (i.e., the recombinant DNA revolution) further lowered the cost of producing farm products. The Gene Revolution was based on three events. The first was the discovery that DNA (Delbrook) was the carrier of genetic information. The second was the discovery by Watson and Crick of the double helix structure of DNA. The third was the method of stable insertion of DNA into a host genome (Cohen and Boyer). The future of agricultural research depends on the capacity of countries to invent and imitate.

A fundamental problem in articulating the societal benefits of technology transfer is the lack of hard empirical evidence on the economic gains associated with this activity. To fill this gap, we apply the framework and methods developed by Griliches and Mansfield et al. to assess the social returns to university-based inventions. This methodology can be used to derive explicit measures of key metrics, such as social rates of return and benefit-to-cost ratios characteristic of specific new technologies. A case study is used to illustrate the application of this method.

This study aims to identify how the personal social capital of opinion leaders contributes to the market adoption of start-up innovations.

A design-oriented case study is undertaken with a start-up company focusing on the development and commercialization of innovations in the veterinary market. Based on a literature review, the authors examine the social capital in value creation and the role of opinion leaders and use qualitative methodology and semi-structured in-depth interviews to collect data.

The adoption of innovations could start with opinion leaders that will later share their experience with other members of the professional community. In turn, social capital allows for creating a collaboration between start-ups and leaders based on a number of specific parameters.

This paper contributes to marketing literature by providing new insights regarding collaboration between start-ups and opinion leaders. The collaboration between opinion leaders and start-ups could be implemented not only in the veterinary industry but also in other industries with minor adaptations. Authors demonstrate how the social capital of external stakeholders may be used as a resource of the company for business development. The main contribution of this study is to demonstrate that social capital could be used as a parameter for the adoption of innovations. The key parameters that allow creating cooperation between start-up and opinion leader have been identified.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of the variables that play a relevant role in the management of university-industry linkage and technology transfer in the context of a public university in Mexico.

This study is quantitative, and the method is based on an exploratory factor analysis (EFA), to identify the group of variables that relates to university-industry technology transfer, by applying a questionnaire to full time professors and researchers.

The EFA allowed for the analysis of the relationships within a group of variables, and found that the structure of the principal components presents a close connection to the literature review. The first, second and third factors, named institutional support in the linkage and technology transfer activities, research results management, and university linkage activities planning, respectively, explain the original problem in a greater percentage. Additionally, it is suggested to include other variables, to increase the explained variance percentage of the components.

The study of university-industry linkage and technology transfer allows for improvement in the institutional management of these activities, their entrepreneurship, and consequently, their use by companies, government and society.

This study focuses on analyzing a group of variables in a questionnaire, in order to identify those that are related to the university-industry technology transfer management, in the context of a public university in Mexico.