Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The characteristics and behavior of university spinoff activity is an important subject in economic and management studies literature. Such studies merit research because it is suggested that university innovations stimulate economies by spurring product development, by creating new industries, and by contributing to employment and wealth creation. For this reason, universities have come to be highly valued in terms of the economic potential of their research efforts. The aim of this paper is to offer a framework for the study of academic entrepreneurship that explains different aspects of university spinoff behavior in a coherent way. We suggest that the existing literature on this topic can be categorized into six separate streams and synthesized in a framework that captures the determinants and consequences of spinoff activity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen, T. J., & Sosa, M. L. (2004). 50 years of engineering management through the lens of the IEEE Transactions; T-EM Nov. 391–395.

  • Allen, T. J., Tushman, M. L., & Lee, D. M. (1979). Technology transfer as a function of position in the spectrum from research through development to technical services. Academy of Management Journal, 22(4), 694–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Association of University Technology Managers FY (2001). The AUTM Licensing Surveys; University Start-up Data. AUTM Inc., Norwalk, Connecticut.

  • Association of University Technology Managers FY (2004). The AUTM U.S. Licensing Survey.

  • Audretsch, D. (2000). Is University Entrepreneurship Different? Mimeo, Indiana University.

  • Bank Boston (1997). MIT: The Impact of Innovation. Bank Boston Economics Department Special Report, Boston, MA.

  • Birley, S. (2002). Universities, academics and spinout companies: lessons from imperial. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 1(1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumenthal, D., Campbell, E. G., Causino, N., & Louis, K. (1996). Participation of life science faculty in research relationships with industry. New England Journal of Medicine, 335, 1734–1739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, B., & Fridh, A.-C. (2002). Technology transfer in United States universities: a survey and statistical analysis. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12, 199–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Van de Velde, E., & Vohora, A. (2005). Spinning out new ventures: A typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 183–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colyvas, J., Crow, M., Gelijns, A., Mazzoleni, R., Nelson, R. R., Rosenberg, N., & Sampat, B. N. (2002). How do university inventions get into practice? Management Science, 48(1), 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlstrand, A. (1997). Growth and inventiveness in technology-based spinoffs firms. Research Policy, 26(3), 331–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, S., Carr, A., & Bibby, D. (2002). Leveraging talent: Spin-off strategy at industrial research. R & D Management, 32(3), 241–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Debackere, K. (2000). Managing academic R&D as business at K.U. Leuven: Context, structure and process. R&D Management, 30(4), 323–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degroof, J.-J., & Roberts, E. B. (2004). Overcoming weak entrepreneurial infrastructures for academic spin-off ventures. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 327–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiGregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, 32(2), 209–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djokovic, D., & Souitaris, V. (2007). Spinouts from academic institutions. A literature review with suggestions for further research. Journal of Technology Transfer (forthcoming).

  • Druilhe, C., & Garnsey, E. (2004). Do academic spin-outs differ and does it matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 269–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ensley, M. D., & Hmieleski, K. M. (2005). A comparative study of new venture top management team composition, dynamics and performance between university-based and independent start-ups. Research Policy, 34, 1091–1105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. P., & Desrochers, P. (2004). Truth for Its own sake: Academic culture and technology transfer at the Johns Hopkins University. Minerva, 42(2), 105–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. P., & Francis, J. (2003). Fortune favors the prepared region: The case of entrepreneurship and the capitol region biotechnology cluster. European Planning Studies, 11, 765–788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florida, R., & Kenney M. (1988). Venture capital-financed innovation and technological change in the United States. Research Policy, 17, 119–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, G., Jain, S., & Maltarich, M. (2006). Academics or entrepreneurs? Entrepreneurial identity and invention disclosure behavior of university scientists. Paper presented at the University Technology Transfer and Commercialization of Research: Antecedents and Consequences Symposium, Academy of Management Conference, Atlanta, USA.

  • Goldfarb, B., & Henrekson, M. (2003). Bottom-up vs. top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32(4), 639–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hague, D., & Oakley, K. (2000). Spin-offs and Start-Ups in UK Universities. Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals (CVCP) Report.

  • Kenney, M. (2000). Understanding Silicon Valley: The anatomy of an entrepreneurial region. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenney, M., & Goe, W. R. (2004). The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: A comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford. Research Policy, 33, 691–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, D. A. (2006). Creating entrepreneurial universities in the UK: applying entrepreneurship theory to practice. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(5), 599–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacetera, N. (2006). Different missions and commitment power in R&D organization: Theory and evidence on industry-university relations. MIT Sloan School Working Paper 4528-05.

  • Lenoir, T., & Giannella, E. (2006). Mapping the impact of federally funded extra-university research and development on the emergence of self-sustaining knowledge domains: The case of microarray technologies. Paper presented at the University Technology Transfer and Commercialization of Research: Antecedents and Consequences Symposium, Academy of Management Conference, Atlanta, USA.

  • Link, A. N., & Siegel, D. S. (2005). Generating science-based growth: An econometric analysis of the impact of organizational incentives on university-industry technology transfer. European Journal of Finance, 11(3), 169–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (2005). Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research Policy, 34(7), 1043–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., Phan, P. H., & Balkin, D. B. (2004). Entrepreneurship from the ivory tower: Do incentive systems matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 353–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., Phan, P. H., & Balkin, D. B. (2005). Innovation speed: Transferring university technology to market. Research Policy, 34, 1058–1075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meseri, O., & Maital, S. (2001). A survey of university-technology transfer in Israel: Evaluation of projects and determinants of success. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 115–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D. C., & Shane, S. (2002). Introduction to the special issue on university entrepreneurship and technology transfer. Management Science, 48(1), v–ix.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, F. (2006). Exchange relationships & cumulative innovation: standing on the shoulders of oncomouse. Paper presented at the University Technology Transfer and Commercialization of Research: Antecedents and Consequences Symposium, Academy of Management Conference, Atlanta, USA.

  • Mustar, P. (1997). spin-off enterprises: how french academics create Hi-Tech companies: The conditions for success or failure. Science and Public Policy, 24(1), 37–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mustar, P., Renualt, M., Colombo, M.G., Piva, E., Fontes, M., Lockett, A., Wright, M., Clarysse, B., & Moray, N. (2006). Conceptualising the heterogeneity of research-based spin-offs: A multi-dimensional taxonomy. Research Policy, 35, 289–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ndonzuau, F. N., Pirnay, F., & Surlemont, B. (2002). A stage model of academic spin-off creation. Technovation, 22(5), 281–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nerkar, A., & Shane, S. (2003). When do startups that exploit academic knowledge survive? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(9), 1291–1410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolaou, N., & Birley, S. (2003a). Academic networks in a trichotomous categorisation of university spin-outs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 333–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolaou, N., & Birley, S. (2003b). Social networks in organizational emergence: The university spinout phenomenon. Management Science, 49(12), 1702–1725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. Universities. Research Policy, 34, 994–1009.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powers, J., & McDougall, 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radosevich, R. (1995). A model for entrepreneurial spin-offs from public technology sources. International Journal of Technology Management, 10(7/8), 879–893.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, E. (1991). Entrepreneurs in high technology, lessons from MIT and beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, E., & Malone, D. E. (1996). Policies and structures for spinning off new companies from research and development organizations. R&D Management, 26, 17–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M., Takegami, S., & Yin, J. (2001). Lessons learned about technology transfer. Technovation, 21(4), 253–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampat, B. N. (2006). Patenting and US academic research in the 20th century: The world before and after Bayh-Dole. Research Policy, 35, 772–789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional advantage: Culture and competition in silicon valley and route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2004a). Academic entrepreneurship: University spin-offs and wealth creation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2004b). Encouraging university entrepreneurship: The effect of the Bayh-Dole act on university patenting in the United States. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 127–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S., & Stuart, T. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science, 48(1), 154–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32, 27–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., Atwater, L., & Link, A. (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, 115–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smilor, R. W., Gibson, D. V., & Dietrich, G. B. (1990). University spinout companies: Technology start-ups from UT-austin. Journal of Business Venturing, 5, 63–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson, O., & Stuart, T. E. (2001). Syndication networks and the spatial distribution of venture capital financing. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 1546–1588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steffensen, M., Rogers, E. M., & Speakman, K. (1999). Spin-offs from research centers at a research university. Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 93–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, T. E., & Ding, W. W. (2006). When do scientists become entrepreneurs? The social structural antecedents of commercial activity in the academic life sciences. American Journal of Sociology 112(1), 97–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thursby, J., & Kemp, S. (2002) Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing. Research Policy, 31, 109–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanaelst, I., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Moray, N., & S’Jegers, R. (2006). Entrepreneurial team development in academic spinouts: An examination of team heterogeneity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(2), 249–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spin-out companies. Research Policy, 33, 147–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallmark, J. T. (1997). Inventions and patents at universities: The case of Chalmers University of Technology. Technovation, 17(3), 127–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., Birley, S., & Mosey, S. (2004a). Entrepreneurship and university technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 235–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., Lockett, A., Clarysse, B., & Binks, M. (2006). University spin-out companies and venture capital. Research Policy, 35, 481–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., Vohora, A., & Lockett, A. (2004b). The formation of high-tech university spinouts: The role of joint ventures and venture capital investors. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 287–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, L. G., Darby, M. R., & Armstrong, J. (1998a). Geographically localized knowledge: Spillovers or markets? Economic Inquiry, 36, 65–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, L. G., Darby, M. R., & Brewer, M. B. (1998b). Intellectual human capital and the birth of U.S. biotechnology enterprises. American Economic Review, 88(1), 190–305.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UCD School of Business, University College Dublin, National University of Ireland, Dublin, 4, Ireland

    Rory P. O’Shea

  2. Entrepreneurship Centre, Tanaka Business School, Imperial College London, South Kensington campus, London, SW7 2AZ, UK

    Harveen Chugh

  3. MIT Sloan School of Management, 50 Memorial Drive, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA

    Thomas J. Allen

Authors
  1. Rory P. O’Shea
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Harveen Chugh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas J. Allen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rory P. O’Shea.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

O’Shea, R.P., Chugh, H. & Allen, T.J. Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework. J Technol Transfer 33, 653–666 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-007-9060-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-007-9060-0

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Search

Navigation