Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
The creation of spin-off firms from universities is seen as an important mechanism for the commercialization of research, and hence the overall contribution from universities to technological development and economic growth. Governments and universities are seeking to develop framework conditions that are conductive to spin-off creation. The most prevalent of such initiatives are legislative changes at national level and the establishment of technology transfer offices at university level. The effectiveness of such initiatives is debated, but empirical evidence is limited. In this paper, we analyze the full population of universities in Italy, Norway, and the UK; three countries adopting differing approaches to framework conditions, to test whether national- and university-level initiatives have an influence on the number of spin-offs created and the quality of these spin-offs. Building on institutional theory and using multilevel analysis, we find that changes in the institutional framework conditions at both national and university levels are conductive to the creation of more spin-offs, but that the increase in quantity is at the expense of the quality of these firms. Hence, the effect of such top–down changes in framework conditions on the economic impact from universities seems to be more symbolic than substantive.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Aldrich, H. E., & Fiol, C. M. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation. The Academy of Management Review,19(4), 645–670.
Ambos, T. C., Mäkelä, K., Birkinshaw, J., & D’Este, P. (2008). When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions. Journal of Management Studies,45(8), 1424–1447. CrossRef
Baldini, N., Fini, R., & Grimaldi, R. (2014a). The transition towards entrepreneurial universities: An assessment of academic entrepreneurship in Italy. In A. Link, D. Siegel, & M. Wright (Eds.), Handbook of university technology transfer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Baldini, N., Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2014b). Organisational change and the institutionalisation of university patenting activity in Italy. Minerva,52(1), 27–53. CrossRef
Baldini, N., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2006). Institutional changes and the commercialization of academic knowledge: A study of Italian universities’ patenting activities between 1965 and 2002. Research Policy,35(4), 518–532. CrossRef
Bliese, P. D., Chan, D., & Ployhart, R. E. (2007). Multilevel methods: Future directions in measurement, longitudinal analyses, and nonnormal outcomes. Organizational Research Methods,10(4), 551–563. CrossRef
Bolzani, D., Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., Santoni, S., & Sobrero, M. (2014a). Fifteen years of academic entrepreneurship in Italy: Evidence from the TASTE Project. Technical Report, University of Bologna.
Bolzani, D., Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2014b). University Spin-Offs and Their Impact: Longitudinal Evidence from Italy. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics,41, 181–205.
Borlaug, S. B., Grünfeld, L., Gulbrandsen, M., Rasmussen, E., Rønning, L., Spilling, O. R., et al. (2009). Between entrepreneurship and technology transfer: Evaluation of the FORNY programme. In Report 19 (pp. 160). Oslo: NIFU STEP.
Carpenter, R. E., & Petersen, B. C. (2002). Capital market imperfections, high-tech investment, and new equity financing. The Economic Journal,112(477), F54–F72. CrossRef
Complete University Guide (2014). http://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/league-tables/rankings. Accessed 20/8 2014.
CWTS (2014). Leiden Ranking. http://www.leidenranking.com/. Accessed 8/7 2014.
Database for Statistics on Higher Education (2014). dbh.nsd.uib.no. Accessed 8/7 2014.
Dimaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review,48(2), 147–160. CrossRef
European Commission (2010). Feasibility study for creating a European university data collection. http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/docs/en/eumida-final-report.pdf. Accessed 15/5 2014.
Eurostat (2014). Eurostat Statistics Database. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/. Accessed 20/08/2014 and 24/01/2016.
FAME (2014). https://fame.bvdinfo.com/. Accessed 20/8 2014.
Fini, R., & Grimaldi, R. (2016). Process approach to academic entrepreneurship: evidence from the globe. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.
Goldfarb, B., & Henrekson, M. (2002). Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Research Policy,32(4), 639–658. CrossRef
Gulbrandsen, M., & Rasmussen, E. (2012). The use and development of indicators for the commercialisation of university research in a national support programme. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management,24(5), 481–495. CrossRef
Harrison, R. T., & Leitch, C. (2010). Voodoo institution or entrepreneurial university? Spin-off companies, the entrepreneurial system and regional development in the UK. Regional Studies,44(9), 1241–1262. CrossRef
Heritage Foundation. (2014). Index of Economic Freedom. http://www.heritage.org/index/download Accessed 20/8 2014.
Higher Education Information Database for Institutions (HEIDI). (2014). https://heidi.hesa.ac.uk/Home.aspx. Accessed 20/8 2014.
Huyghe, A., Knockaert, M., Wright, M., & Piva, E. (2014). Technology transfer offices as boundary spanners in the pre-spin-off process: the case of a hybrid model. Small Business Economics,43(2), 289–307. CrossRef
Italian Companies House Database. (2013). Infocamere Telemaco. https://telemaco.infocamere.it/. Accessed 17/11 2013.
Kenney, M., & Goe, W. R. (2004). The role of social embeddedness in professional entrepreneurship: A comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkley and Stanford. Research Policy,33(5), 679–844. CrossRef
Kochenkova, A., Grimaldi, R., & Munari, F. (2016). Public policy measures in support of knowledge transfer activities: a review of academic literature. The Journal of Technology Transfer,41(3), 407–429. CrossRef
Lawton Smith, H., & Ho, K. (2006). Measuring the performance of Oxford University, Oxford Brookes University and the government laboratories’ spin-off companies. Research Policy,35(10), 1554–1568. CrossRef
Louis, K. S., Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M. E., & Stoto, M. A. (1989). Entrepreneurs in academe: an exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Administrative Science Quarterly,34(1), 110–131. CrossRef
Mason, C. (2012). Handbook of research on venture capital. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
MIUR. (2013). Italian Ministry of instruction, university and research. http://nuclei.miur.it/sommario/ Accessed 17/11 2013.
Munari, F., Rasmussen, E., Toschi, L., & Villani, E. (2015). Determinants of the university technology transfer policy-mix: A cross-national analysis of gap-funding instruments. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1–29. doi: 10.1007/s10961-015-9448-1.
Muscio, A., Quaglione, D., & Ramaciotti, L. (2016). The effects of university rules on spinoff creation: The case of academia in Italy. Research Policy,45(7), 1386–1396. CrossRef
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance (the political economy of institutions and decisions). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review,16(1), 145–179. CrossRef
O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Morse, K. P., O’Gorman, C., & Roche, F. (2007). Delineating the anatomy of an entrepreneurial university: the Massachusetts Institute of Technology experience. R & D Management,37(1), 1–16.
Pauwels, C., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Van Hove, J. (2016). Understanding a new generation incubation model: The accelerator. Technovation, 50, 13–24. CrossRef
Perkmann, M., Fini, R., Ross, J. M., Salter, A., Silvestri, C., & Tartari, V. (2015). Accounting for universities’ impact: Using augmented data to measure academic engagement and commercialization by academic scientists. Research Evaluation,24(4), 380-391. CrossRef
Powers, J. B., & McDougall, P. P. (2005). University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: A resource-based view of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing,20(3), 291–311. CrossRef
Rasmussen, E. (2008). Government instruments to support the commercialization of university research: Lessons from Canada. Technovation,28(August), 506–517. CrossRef
Rasmussen, E., & Borch, O. J. (2010). University capabilities in facilitating entrepreneurship: A longitudinal study of spin-off ventures at mid-range universities. Research Policy,39(5), 602–612. CrossRef
Rasmussen, E., Mosey, S., & Wright, M. (2015). The transformation of network ties to develop entrepreneurial competencies for university spin-offs. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development,27(7–8), 430–457. CrossRef
Repubblica. (2013). Grande Guida dell’Università. http://temi.repubblica.it/guide-universita-2013-2014/. Accessed 17/11 2013.
Rosenbusch, N., Brinckmann, J., & Müller, V. (2013). Does acquiring venture capital pay off for the funded firms? A meta-analysis on the relationship between venture capital investment and funded firm financial performance. Journal of Business Venturing,28(3), 335–353. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.04.002. CrossRef
Salvador, E. (2009). Evolution of Italian universities' rules for spin-offs: The usefulness of formal regulations. Industry and Higher Education,23(6), 445-462. CrossRef
Scott, W. R. (2008). Institutions and organizations: Ideas and interests. London: Sage Publications.
Shane, S. (2003). A general theory of entrepreneurship: The individual-opportunity nexus. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. CrossRef
Shane, S. (Ed.). (2004). Academic entrepreneurship -University spinoffs and wealth creation (New horizons in entrepreneurship). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2004). Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management,21(1–2), 115–142. doi: 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2003.12.006. CrossRef
Spinouts UK Survey. (2014). http://www.spinoutsuk.co.uk/. Accessed 20/8 2014.
Stevens, A. J. (2004). The enactment of Bayh-Dole. The Journal of Technology Transfer,29(1), 93–99. CrossRef
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review,20(3), 571.
Tartari, V., Perkmann, M., & Salter, A. (2014). In good company: The influence of peers on industry engagement by academic scientists. Research Policy,43(7), 1189-1203. CrossRef
The Research Council of Norway. (2013). Det Norske Forsknings-og Innovasjonssystemet—Statistikk og Indikatorer. Oslo: Norges Forskningsråd.
Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of University Licensing: A survey of major U.S. Universities. Journal of Technology Transfer,26(1–2), 59–72. CrossRef
UNICO, & NUBS. (2002). Annual UNICO-NUBS-AURIL survey on university commercialization activities. Nottingham: Nottingham University Business School.
World Bank. (2014a). Doing business project of the world bank. http://www.doingbusiness.org/. Accessed 20/8 2014.
World Bank. (2014b). World Bank database. http://data.worldbank.org/. Accessed 20/8 2014.
Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Mustar, P., & Lockett, A. (Eds.). (2007). Academic entrepreneurship in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Zephyr. (2014). https://zephyr.bvdinfo.com/. Accessed 20/8 2014.
Zimmerman, M. A., & Zeitz, G. J. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review,27(3), 414–431.
- Institutional determinants of university spin-off quantity and quality: a longitudinal, multilevel, cross-country study
Marius Tuft Mathisen
- Springer US
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© BBL, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta, Neuer Inhalt/© hww, Best Practices zu agiler Qualität