Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between organizational characteristics and presence in a board-of-directors (BoD)-network, in the context of the biotechnology industry. Accessing and integrating external knowledge is key to an organization’s success within innovative industries. This can occur through inter-organizational networks such as the BoD-network.

The authors apply a network analysis method (Robins and Alexander, 2004) and a logistic regression to a proprietary database of Belgian biotechnology organizations.

The authors conclude that some organizational characteristics influence the presence of a biotechnology organization in the regional BoD-network. Academic spin-offs, start-ups and small companies are more likely to be part of the regional biotechnology BoD-network. The authors also observe that organizations involved in innovative activities are prominently present in the BoD-network. Interestingly, key actors like universities or academic hospitals are less present in the network.

The authors show that studying full networks and heterogeneous groups of organization leads to a better understanding of the causal mechanisms and dynamics of inter-organizational networks. To better understand the network dynamics in a context as complex as the biotechnology industry, multiple networks need to be studied simultaneously.

The findings in this study allow for the development of policies addressing knowledge transfer, diffusion of management and governance practices, and the initiation and management of collaborative projects through the BoD-network. The authors observe a self-reinforcing dependency between innovative activities and BoD-network membership. This implies that policies aimed at stimulating innovation should also aim at increasing the target organizations’ presence in the BoD-network. Analyzing an organization’s innovative activities and position in the BoD-network allows for identifying those organizations that contribute most to the region’s knowledge transfer network and innovative capacity.

The authors combine two different research streams and are the first to study the complete BoD-network of a biotechnology industry agglomeration.

No matter the size or scope of a biotech laboratory project, neither landlords nor tenants should rely on traditional ‘form’ documents to address the many complex leasing issues unique to this industry. When negotiating and documenting a biotech lab lease, five clauses warrant particular attention. ‐ Construction of tenant improvements: Build‐outs of lab space can be highly specialised and elaborate. Tenants will require detailed involvement in design and construction of improvements while landlords may limit, to the extent possible, tenant improvements to those that are financeable, resuable and ‘generic’. ‐ Security deposits: Greater security in the form of a deposit and letter of credit may be required to balance the potentially higher risks and longer terms of many biotech laboratory leases. ‐ Hazardous materials: Most biotech laboratories will work with hazardous materials. Specially tailored lease provisions can help limit liability and mitigate the potential costs of removal, remediation and litigation. ‐ Building services and utilities: Biotech users may require high levels of heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), plumbing, electrical and janitorial services. Lease provisions for services and utilities should be tailored to the unique intended use of biotech premises. ‐ Assignment of sublease: Given the rapidly changing nature of the science, tenants may require added flexibility to sublease space or to assign the entire interest in the lease. Although these five clauses address only some of the many issues that landlords and tenants should consider in biotech lab leases, they have implications that echo throughout the lease.

To analyze several complex issues which are being addressed by biotechnological research and identify possible solutions to some concrete problems.

The objectives are achieved by the use of detailed data and literature search, decision analysis, case studies and personal involvement in research conferences on this and closely related problem areas. The approach to the topic is critical and constructive based on own work and that of colleagues and other analysts.

Significant issues are waiting to be properly addressed in decision making within the field of modern biotechnology; this applies to the USA as well as Europe. However, controversies about insufficient risk assessments, inadequate risk management or ethical acceptability in different applications of biotechnology co‐exist with controversies about their needs. Technology, politics and values must be integrated. Inadequacies in decision making may be at least partly resolved by proper planning mechanisms, the use of think tanks and applied foresight analysis.

Better understanding of a more general problem, i.e. gaps in the framework in the introduction of biotechnology into the food sector must be pursued, as public reactions to this new technology and its usage will likely increase, as will fears associated with it. New ideas are needed. Future work must identify ways and means for assessment and evaluation of “think tanks” and their proper use if these are to be applied.

This paper will provide a very useful source of information on a complex and increasingly important subject for a target audience consisting of: decision makers in government, biotech companies, international and national experts, researchers and graduate students. It will broaden the practical understanding in the use of biotechnology.

The paper fulfils an identified information/resources need and offers insight and practical help to organizations and individuals involved with biotechnological research, applications and decision making.

Biotech companies are generally faced with the paradoxes of simultaneously managing growth and innovation, as well as addressing explorative and exploitative aspects of innovation. Scholars have urged them to re‐evaluate their business model. The purpose of this paper is to explore how biotech companies in emerging economies address these paradoxes, focusing upon the nascent biotech industry in India, in order to investigate their growth and innovation patterns, as well as identify the challenges that they may face.

A qualitative data collection, using in‐depth interviews with representatives of organizations that deal directly with improving the quality of the business environment for biotech industry in India, as well as biotech entrepreneurs and leaders were undertaken. A total of 13 interviews provided insights related to innovation and growth that is discussed in the paper.

Data indicate that Indian biotech companies are ambidextrous and have managed to transcend the aforementioned paradoxes by developing and maintaining distinct organizational capabilities. They were found to pursue an integrated model of efficiency and innovation and utilize both exploitative and explorative aspects of innovation to fuel growth and innovation. The authors also found evidence of some of the characteristics of the “India Way”, proposed by Cappelli et al.

The authors conclude that Indian companies offer an opportunity for learning for American biotech companies with respect to building new competencies and balancing growth and innovation in today's competitive environment.

Despite being labeled as the “industry of the decade”, biotechnology has been neglected in technology and innovation literature. It is hoped that the paper's findings will generate interest in the study of biotech industries in emerging economies, to help scholars develop interesting new theoretical models of innovation and aid managers in coping with the innovation and change paradoxes that they are faced with in developing new products and services.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the business model components and related attributes of biotech spin-offs activity that are key to the implementation of the internationalization strategy.

The paper is based on a multiple case study analysis including business models of seven biotechnology spin-offs traded on the Warsaw Stock Exchange. Based on the literature review the authors identify the key attributes of the business model for the commercialization of R&D outcomes. The authors conduct an analysis taking into consideration the determinants of biotech spin-off activity. The authors also measure the internationalization strategy implementation with the use of indicators identified in the empirical research literature review.

According to the results, the authors identified that international cooperation in research projects and partnering, as well as international experience in the management board and tacit knowledge, play a facilitating role in the business model for the commercialization of biotech spin-off research findings. The cost advantage on the global market, tax advantages and support of venture capital are the key to the exploitation of profit potential on the global market. An important component of the business model specific to companies conducting R&D activities is to ensure firm survival activities by funding research grants to makes R&D possible prior to commercialization.

The main limitation of this study is the small magnitude of the sample, particularly as only two of the seven analyzed spin-offs realized their profit potential on the global market.

The findings are important for the development of business models of new biotech ventures. Research results can be used as recommendations for universities on how to effectively build a business model for the commercialization of biotech spin-offs on the basis of R&D outcomes for the internationalization strategy.

The paper’s uniqueness results from the synergy of combining three research areas: components of business models for commercialization; attributes of biotech R&D activity; and indicators measuring the internationalization strategy implementation. The results can contribute to the existing body of knowledge on business models for the commercialization of R&D outcomes in the context of internationalization. The value of this paper is an extended knowledge of the internationalization of biotech ventures based on R&D outcomes.

In light of the controversy between the theoretical importance of financing biotechnology firms’ research and development (R&D), and the firms’ contradictory and ambivalent empirical results, this paper aims to contribute to the debate by providing empirical evidence from Mexico’s case.

The authors use the probit model to determine if firms’ achievements in innovations are related to both private and public financing, and if so, to calculate their marginal effect on the firms’ innovation (n = 40 from 53 firms: 75.5% response). The survey was applied in 2015.

Although a large proportion of the firms innovate and dedicate resources to R&D activities, neither private financing (different from the R&D portion of sales) nor public financing has an impact on innovation activity.

It is necessary to increase the number of studies that corroborate the type of link established between innovations in biotechnology firms and financing. Analyzing the financing/innovation links at various stages of the innovation process would also be relevant.

The research results support the perspective that the theoretical relationship between the financing and achievements of innovation is not conclusive and point to relevant considerations for the public policy agenda of the case study.

This article aims to analyze the interaction between university and enterprise based on the experience of two biotechnology centers in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, namely the Biotechnology Center of the State of Rio Grande do Sul and the Biotechnology Center of the Federal University of Pelotas. The multiple‐case method was chosen to analyze and identify university‐enterprise interaction models. A theoretical review established a typology of university‐enterprise interaction constituted by three models: classic model, market model and partnership model. Ten university‐enterprise interaction projects were classified. At the Biotechnology Center of the State of Rio Grande do Sul the five projects were mainly on the lines of the market model, whereas at the Biotechnology Center of the Federal University of Pelotas the five projects were mainly the classic model of interaction. A culture of interaction between university and enterprise must be stimulated at both centers, and actions were proposed for this purpose.

The objective of this paper is to evaluate the role of consumers’ perceived risks and benefits of agro‐biotechnology in shaping the purchase pattern for organic food among UK consumers.

An on‐line household survey of UK consumers was conducted using household panels maintained by the National Panel Diary (NPD) group. The data included organic food purchase pattern, perceived risks and benefits of agro‐biotechnology, and socio‐demographic information about the respondents. A regression model was used to examine the impact of consumers’ general purchase behavior, perceived risks and benefits of GM technology, and socio‐demographic on organic food purchase.

Only 4 percent of the respondents purchased organic foods all the time, while 26 percent never purchased. Perceived risks of agro‐biotechnology played a dominant role in influencing organic food purchase decisions. As the risk perception increased consumers were likely to buy organic food more often. Although premium prices of organic foods were of concern to many consumers, food safety was the most important consideration when making organic food purchase decisions. Household income positively influenced consumers’ likelihood of buying organic food. Female respondents were likely to purchase organic foods more often than their male counter parts. Older respondents were less likely to buy organic foods compared to younger respondents.

The results of this study provide valuable information in formulating short and long‐term marketing programs for organic producers. Following the study results, food safety concern and perceived risks of GM food products need to be the overall theme of marketing programs for organic products.

The study uses a large sample size in examining the relationship between perceived risks of agro‐biotechnology and organic food purchase. The results are more robust and representative.

Economic interest groups such as seed, pesticide, feed, and food companies play an important role in supporting or preventing the production of genetically modified (GM) crops. The purpose of this paper is to examine firm managers’ attitudes toward GM technology, biotechnology R&D investment, and political lobbying activities.

Using data from surveys of 160 managers in the food, feed, chemical, and seed industries in 2013-2014, this paper employed three probit models to examine the determinants of managers’ attitudes, biotechnology R&D investment, and lobbying activities.

The results show that most Chinese agribusiness managers are concerned about GM foods and oppose its adoption. Nevertheless, one-third of the firms invest in biotechnology R&D and less than 15 percent of managers lobbied the government to change biotechnology policies. The econometric estimation results suggest that profit change expectation is the main factor affecting managers’ attitudes and biotechnology R&D investment decisions, whereas lobbying activities are significantly influenced by their attitudes and biotechnology R&D investment. In addition, managers’ attitudes toward GM foods also significantly influence firms’ decisions to invest in biotechnology R&D.

This paper has improved on previous research in two ways. First, it analyses the determinants of agribusiness firm managers’ attitudes toward GM technology, biotechnology R&D investment, and lobbying activities. Second, the methodology involves an analysis of agribusiness firm survey data in the food, feed, chemical, and seed industries, which is the first time to use such data to research on economic interest group in agricultural biotechnology field.

Describes and assesses the results of a recent survey of research and development managers on the prospects for commercialization in agro‐food biotechnology. Arrives at two conclusions. First, in the foreseeable future, most of the major developments in agro‐food biotechnology will focus on new or improved food processing aids and ingredients rather than food products. Second, clear differences of opinion between key agents involved in developing and applying biotechnology reflect deficiencies in the diffusion of knowledge in this area; in turn, this might affect when, how and what elements of biotechnology are developed and produced. Argues that if the full benefits of biotechnology are to be achieved, policy needs not only to stimulate biotechnology per se, but also encourage greater dialogue, co‐operation and collaboration between agents and interests involved in the biotechnology and food provision industries.