Multilingual abstract
Introduction
Spin-offs as mediators
A mediator role in innovation systems
Need for diversity
Empirical study
Methodological aspects
Control variables | |
City region: variable in two categories, as a dummy (Trondheim = 1) | Trondheim 42 %; Delft 58 % |
Market competition: variable in two categories (many competitors = 1) | Many competitors 56 %; few competitors 44 % |
Firm age: continuous variable | Avg. 4.9; sd 3.1; min-max 0–10 |
Firm size: continuous variable as number of full time equivalent in 2006 | Avg. 7.2; sd 6.9; min-max 0.5–51 |
Capability factors | |
Size of founding team: continuous variable as team members at foundation | Avg. 2.3; sd 1.2; min-max 1–5 |
Pre-start experience areas: continuous variable as sum of types of founders’ experience in various domains | Avg. 1.1; sd 0.9; min-max 0–3 |
Education level of founding team (number of PhD): continuous variable measuring the members with PhD | Avg. 0.6; sd 0.9; min-max 0–3 |
Multidisciplinary education of founding team: variable in two categories (multiple studies = 1) | Single technology (65.7 %); multiple studies (34.3 %) |
Participation in training: variable in two categories, yes (1) and no (0), as a dummy | Yes (31.4 %); no (68.6 %) |
Entrepreneurial orientation | |
Initial growth strategy: a compound variable (size and international orientation), in three categories | Large and international (37 %); small and international (53 %); small and local (10 %) |
Type of innovation activity: variable in two categories, science-based (1) and non-science-based (0), as a dummy | Science-based: 27 %; non-science based: 73 % |
Level of innovativeness: continuous variable derived as a compound variable from R&D expenditure, newness in innovation, and patenting (based on factor analysis) | Avg. 0.1; sd 0.85; min-max −1.4 to 1.1 |
Dependent variable | |
Diversity: continuous variable indicating social-economic diversity of knowledge partners, incl. spatial orientation | Avg. 0.35; sd 0.2; min-max 0–0.9 |
Partner diversity and influences
Number of different partners (diversity) | No. stranger relationships | Total | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 1 | 2/3 | 4 | ||
1 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 7 (6.7) |
2 | 20 | 19 | 15 | 9 | 63 (60.0) |
3 | 5 | 2 | 6 | 11 | 24 (22.8) |
4/5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 11 (10.5) |
Totals | 32 (30.5) | 23 (21.9) | 23 (21.9) | 27 (25.7) | 105 (100.0) |
Combinations of partner types | Frequency | Percentage |
---|---|---|
University + large firm | 47 | 44.8 |
Large firm + government | 17 | 16.2 |
University + government | 17 | 16.2 |
University + large firm + government | 11 | 10.4 |
Single partner or merely similar partners | 13 | 12.4 |
Total number of spin-offs | 105 | 100 |
ß coefficient (standard error) | |
---|---|
Control variables | |
City region (Trondheim = 1) | 0.33 (0.17)* |
Market competition | 0.10 (0.17) |
Firm size (at time of survey) (fte) | 0.72 (0.11)*** |
Capability factors (founding team) | |
Size of founding team | −0.64 (0.24)*** |
Pre-start experience (domains) | 0.19 (0.10)** |
Education level | 0.01 (0.14) |
Multidisciplinary education | 0.43 (0.18)** |
Participation in training | 0.45 (0.36) |
Entrepreneurial orientation | |
Initial growth strategy | 0.04 (0.09) |
Innovation activity type (science-based = 1) | 0.30 (0.21) |
Level of innovativeness | 0.21 (0.11)* |
N
| 105 |
F
| 7.99*** |
R
2
| 0.49 |
Root MSE | 0.76 |