Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Determinant factors of university spin-off: the case of Korea

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

Abstract

Increasingly more research has examined the creation of university spin-off firms as are seen as an important source of regional and national economic growth. However little is known about the factors influencing the formation of university spin-off in Asian countries, especially in Korea. This paper contributes to the literature on academic entrepreneurship by deepening our understanding on determinant factors of university spin-off in the case of Korea. We investigate organizational and institutional factors highlighted in the literature as influencing the creation of university spin-off companies. The Korean government has implemented the INNOPOLIS Research Institute Spin-off (IRIS) program to enable universities to create new firms within special research and development (R&D) zones to commercialize public R&D output. The capability of universities to establish new firms through the program varies; consequently, this study utilized 122 universities from 2013 to 2015 to analyze determinant factors that affect university spin-offs. Panel logit and negative binomial analysis results indicate that university location has the highest positive influence on IRIS. Government-sponsored funding has a negative impact; however, the likelihood that universities create spin-offs and the number of IRIS firms are positively and significantly affected by publications, patents, research funding, and number of university spin-offs.

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

Notes

  1. Although 158 four-year universities were eligible to be analyzed, 36 universities are excluded because of data availability.

  2. We attempted a 2-year time lag as well as no lag between dependent variables and independent variables following the anonymous reviewer, but the result was not good to report.

References

  • Algieri, B., Aquino, A., & Succurro, M. (2013). Technology transfer offices and academic spin-off creation: The case of Italy. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(4), 382–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldini, N. (2010). University spin-offs and their environment. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(8), 859–876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitz, J., & Feldmann, M. (2005). Entrepreneurial universities and technology transfer: A conceptual framework for understanding knowledge-based economic development. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31, 175–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, B., & Fridh, A. C. (2002). Technology transfer in United States universities. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12, 19–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiesa, V., & Piccaluga, A. (2000). Exploitation and diffusion of public research: The case of academic spin-off companies in Italy. R&D Management, 30(4), 329–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. R. (1998). The entrepreneurial university: Demand and response 1. Tertiary Education and Management, 4(1), 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A., & Folta, T. (2000). Entrepreneurship and high-technology clusters. In D. L. Sexton & H. Landstrom (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of entrepreneurship (pp. 348–367). Malden, MA: Blackwell Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • David, P. A. (1993). Positive feedbacks and research productivity in science: Reopening another black box (p. 65). Buxton: MERIT.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djokovic, D., & Souitaris, V. (2008). Spinouts from academic institutions: A literature review with suggestions for further research. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33, 225–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doraszelski, U., & Jaumandreu, J. (2013). R&D and productivity: Estimating endogenous productivity. The Review of Economic Studies, 80(4), 1338–1383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the Future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., Santoni, S., & Sobrero, M. (2011). Complements or substitutes? The role of universities and local context in supporting the creation of academic spin-offs. Research Policy, 40(8), 1113–1127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, A. W., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2012). When stars shine: The effects of faculty founders on new technology ventures. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 6(3), 220–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffith, R., Huergo, E., Mairesse, J., & Peters, B. (2006). Innovation and productivity across four European countries. Oxford review of economic policy, 22(4), 483–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z. (1979). Issues in assessing the contribution of research and development to productivity growth. The Bell Journal of Economics, 10(1), 92–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z. (1994). Productivity, R&D, and the data constraint. The American Economic Review, 84(1), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B., Mairesse, J., & Mohnen, P. (2010). Measuring the Returns to R&D. In B. Hall & N. Rosenberg (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of innovation. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausman, J., Hall, B., & Griliches, Z. (1984). Economic models for count data with an application to the patents–R&D relationship. Econometrica, 52, 909–938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J. J. (1981). The incidental parameters problem and the problem of initial conditions in estimating a discrete time-discrete data stochastic process. In C. Manski & D. McFadden (Eds.), Structural analysis of discrete data with econometric applications (pp. 179–195). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, R., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (1998). Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965–1988. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(1), 119–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henrekson, M., & Rosenberg, N. (2001). Designing efficient institutions for science-based entrepreneurship: Lesson from the US and Sweden. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(3), 207–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, Cheng. (1986). Analysis of panel data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinsella, R., & McBrierty, V. (1997). Campus companies and the emerging techno-academic paradigm: The Irish experience. Technovation, 17(5), 245–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korea Institute of S&T Evaluation and Planning. (2016). Annual performance report of national R&D programs. Seoul: Korea Institute of S&T Evaluation and Planning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landry, R., Amara, N., & Rherrad, I. (2006). Why are some university researchers more likely to create spin-offs than others? Evidence from Canadian Universities. Research Policy, 35, 1599–1615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Meyer, M. (2010). The decline of university patenting and the end of the Bayh-Dole effect. Scientometrics, 83(2), 355–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenberg, F. R. (1992). R&D investment and international productivity differences (No. w4161). Cmbridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.

    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 

  • Luan, C., Zhou, C., & Liu, A. (2010). Patent strategy in Chinese universities: A comparative perspective. Scientometrics, 84, 53–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning. (2014). The performance of INNOPOLIS Research Spin-Offs. http://www.msip.go.kr/web/msipContents/contentsView.do?cateId=mssw311&artId=1233793.

  • Mowery, D. C., & Sampat, B. N. (2005). The Bayh-Dole act of 1980 and university-industry technology transfer: A model for other OECD governments?. Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(1–2), 115–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mustar, P., Wright, M., & Clarysse, B. (2008). University spin-off firms: Lessons from ten years of experience in Europe. Science and Public Policy, 35(2), 67–80.

    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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Shea, R. P., Chugh, H., & Allen, T. J. (2008). Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: A conceptual framework. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33, 653–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, D., & Kenney, M. (2010). The role of the university in the genesis and evolution of research-based clusters. In D. Fornahl, S. Henn, & M. P. Menzel (Eds.), Emerging clusters: Theoretical, empirical and political perspectives on the initial stage of cluster evolution (pp. 214–238). Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perez, M. P., & Sánchez, A. M. (2003). The development of university spin-offs: Early dynamics of technology transfer and networking. Technovation, 23(10), 823–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pirnay, F., Surlemont, B., & Nlemvo, F. (2003). Toward a typology of university spin-offs. Small Business Economics, 21(4), 355–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, E., Moen, Ø., & Gulbrandsen, M. (2006). Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge. Technovation, 26(4), 518–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2001). Technological opportunities and new firm creation. Management Science, 47(2), 205–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2002). Selling university technology: Patterns from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 122–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2004). 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 

  • Shankar, V., Albin, R., Milton, J., & Mannering, F. (1998). Evaluating median crossover likelihoods with clustered accident counts: An empirical inquiry using the random effects negative binomial model. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1635, 44–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Veugelers, R., & Wright, M. (2007). Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: Performance and policy implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 640–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sine, W. D., Shane, S., & Gregorio, D. D. (2003). The halo effect and technology licensing: The influence of institutional prestige on the licensing of university inventions. Management Science, 49(4), 478–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smilor, R. W., Gibson, D. V., & Dietrich, G. B. (1990). University spin-out companies: Technology start-ups from UT-Austin. Journal of Business Venturing, 5(1), 63–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sohn, D. W., & Kenney, M. (2007). Universities, clusters, and innovation systems: The case of Seoul, Korea. World Development, 35(6), 991–1004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. (2014). Success factors of university-spin-offs: Regional government support programs versus regional environment. Technovation, 34(3), 137–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2002). Who is selling the ivory tower? Sources of growth in university licensing. Management Science, 48(1), 90–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2003). Industry/university licensing: Characteristics, concerns and issues from the perspective of the buyer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(3–4), 207–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Looy, B., Landoni, P., Callaert, J., Van Pottelsberghe, B., Sapsalis, E., & Debackere, K. (2011). Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs. Research Policy, 40(4), 553–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J. (2009). The performance of university spin-offs: An exploratory analysis using venture capital data. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(3), 255–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, L. G., Darby, M. R., & Armstrong, J. S. (2002). Commercializing knowledge: University science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology. Management Science, 48(1), 138–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF- 2014S1A5B8061859). Funding was provided by Graduate School, Korea University of Technology and Education.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technology Innovation Management Center, Korea University of Technology and Education, Cheonan-si, Chungcheongam-do, Republic of Korea

    Hyejin Jung

  2. School of Industrial Management, Korea University of Technology and Education, Cheonan-si, Chungcheongam-do, Republic of Korea

    Byung-Keun Kim

Authors
  1. Hyejin Jung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Byung-Keun Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Byung-Keun Kim.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 4.

Table 4 Multicollinearity diagnostics
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jung, H., Kim, BK. Determinant factors of university spin-off: the case of Korea. J Technol Transf 43, 1631–1646 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9571-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9571-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation