nach oben

International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal

Erschienen in:

06.03.2018

What drives the growth of academic spin-offs? Matching academics, universities, and non-research organizations

Erschienen in: International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal | Ausgabe 1/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This paper aims to contribute to the on-going debate on the factors that affect the growth of academic spin-off firms (ASOs) in the post-creation stage. Specifically, our study analyses whether the combination of academic and non-academic individuals and organizations on the board and in the shareholder base can foster ASOs’ early growth performance. We perform panel data estimates for a sample of 138 Italian ASOs observed between 1999 and 2009, which allows us to observe the non-linear effects of ownership and board composition on sales growth. Our findings suggest that, all else equal, the fastest growing academic spin-offs in our sample are characterized by the joint efforts of academic individuals and representatives of non-academic organizations on the board and in the shareholder base. Specifically, the estimates suggest that academic individuals’ engagement on the board of directors positively affects the early growth performance of ASOs’ early growth, but this effect is limited to a given share of board seats. However, academic individuals’ ownership shares do not exercise any significant impact on sales growth, and the effect of the parent university is negative, whereas non-academic organizations foster ASO sales growth in an inverse U-shaped fashion.

Vorheriger Artikel To belong or not to belong, that is the question?! Explorative insights on liminal gender states within women’s STEMpreneurship

Nächster Artikel Benefiting from economic crisis? Strategic orientation effects, trade-offs, and configurations with resource availability on SME performance

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

This choice does not limit the field of investigation in any significant manner, as researchers-entrepreneurs who belong to disciplines other than science and engineering account for only 1.6% of the ASOs included in our original dataset.

For spinoffs founded after 2009, we had fewer than 5 observations.

In the existing literature, the category of academics sometimes includes any individual entertaining a relationship with a university, e.g., undergraduates, PhD students, post-doctoral researchers, administrative staff, etc. These individuals, however, typically possess less-advanced academic competencies (if any) than tenured professors, have less experience with academic culture, and are subject to different time constraints. Including them would not allow us to properly measure academics’ participation in ASOs, as inspired by the literature reviewed in the second section.

We are unable to fully distinguish between academic individuals on the board who represent the spinning universities and those who are invited to the board solely because of their expertise.

Variance inflation factor tests performed on the estimated coefficients reported later in the paper confirm that multicollinearity is not a worrisome issue in this dataset. The test results are available upon request.

It has been argued that the use of a relative growth rate yields inflated growth figures for SMEs. Including lagged size mitigates this distortion (see Sapienza et al. 2004).

In order to avoid correlation with the variables entering linearly, squared variables were computed after subtracting the mean.

Clearly, this need not correspond to profit maximization. We have not computed the growth-maximizing ownership composition because of the relatively large confidence intervals around the ownership coefficients, which would make the calculation unreliable.

Confidence intervals should be built around these values.

The results are available upon request.

Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., Ferretti, M., & Parmentola, A. (2012). An individual- level assessment of the relationship between spin-off activities and research performance in universities. R&D Management, 42(3), 225–242.

Agrawal, A. (2006). Engaging the inventor: Exploring licensing strategies for university inventions and the role of latent knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 27(1), 63–79.

Agrawal, R., & Shahb, S. K. (2014). Knowledge sources of entrepreneurship: Firm formation by academic, user and employee innovators. Research Policy, 43(7), 1109–1133.

Amason, A. C., Shrader, R. C., & Tompson, G. H. (2006). Newness and novelty: Relating top management team composition to new venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(1), 125–148.

Audretsch, D. B. (2014). From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(3), 313–321.

Autio, E., Sapienza, H. J., & Almeida, J. G. (2000). Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity, and imitability on international growth. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 909–924.

Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric analysis of panel data (3rd ed.). Chichester: JW & Sons.

Beckman, C. M., & Burton, M. D. (2008). Founding the future: Path dependence in the evolution of top management teams from founding to IPO. Organization Science, 19(1), 3–24.

Berbegal-Mirabent, J., Ribeiro-Soriano, D. E., & Sanchez Garcia, J. L. (2015). Can a magic recipe foster university spin-off creation? Journal of Business Research, 68(11), 2272–2278.

Bessiere, V., Messeghem, K., Sammut, S., Gomez-Breysse, M., & Ramaroson, A. (2015). Competency acquisition in entrepreneurial teams and innovation performance in ASOs. Pisa: R&D Management Conference.

Bhargava, A., & Sargan, J. D. (1983). Estimating dynamic random effect models for panel data covering short time periods. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 52(6), 1635–1659.

Bigdeli, A. Z., Feng, L., & Shi, X. (2015). Sustainability and scalability of university spinouts: A business model perspective. R&D Management., 46, 504–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12167.CrossRef

Bjørnåli, E. S., & Gulbrandsen, M. (2010). Exploring board formation and evolution of board composition in academic spin-offs. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(1), 92–112.

Boardman, P. C., & Ponomariov, B. L. (2009). University researchers working with private companies. Technovation, 29(2), 142–153.

Bonardo, D., Paleari, S., & Vismara, S. (2010). Valuing university-based firms: The effects of academic affiliation on IPO performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(4), 755–776.

Bonardo, D., Paleari, S., & Vismara, S. (2011). Valuing university‐based firms: the effects of academic affiliation on IPO performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(4), 755–776.

Caves, R. E. (1998). Industrial organization and new findings on the turnover and mobility of firms. Journal of Economic Literature, 36(4), 1947–1982.

Chai, S., & Shihb, W. (2016). Bridging science and technology through academic industry partnerships. Research Policy, 45(1), 148–158.

Chang, Y. C., Yangand, P. Y., & Chen, M. H. (2009). The determinants of academic research commercial performance: Towards an organizational ambidexterity perspective. Research Policy, 38(6), 936–946.

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), 329–339.

Cho, J. H., & Sohn, S. Y. (2017). Competing risk model for predicting stabilization period of university spin-off ventures. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(3), 777–796.

Clarysse, B., & Moray, N. (2004). A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: The case of a research-based spin-off. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 55–79.

Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Mustar, P., & Knockaert, M. (2007). Academic spin-offs, formal technology transfer and capital raising. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 609–640.

Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Van de Velde, E. (2011). Entrepreneurial origin, technological knowledge, and the growth of spin-off companies. Journal of Management Studies, 48(6), 1420–1442.

Colombo, M. G., & Piva, E. (2008). Strengths and weaknesses of academic startups: A conceptual model. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55(1), 37–49.

Colombo, M. G., & Piva, E. (2012). Strengths firms genetic characteristics and competence-enlarging strategies: A comparison between academic and non- academic high-tech start-ups. Research Policy, 41(1), 79–92.

Colombo, M. G., D'Adda, D., & Piva, E. (2010). The contribution of university research to the growth of academic start-ups: An empirical analysis. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(1), 113–140.

Corsi, C., Prencipe, A., Rodríguez-Gulías, M. J., Fernández-López, S., & Rodeiro-Pazos, D. (2017). The effect of parent university on firm growth: an analysis of the Spanish and Italian USOs. Journal of Management Development, 36(2), 233–249.

Criaco, G., Minola, T., Migliorini, P., & Serarols-Tarrs, C. (2013). To have and have not: Founders human capital and university start-up survival. Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(4), 567–593.

Criaco, G., Minola, T., Migliorini, P., & Serarols-Tarrés, C. (2014). “To have and have not”: founders’ human capital and university start-up survival. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(4), 567–593.

Dasgupta, P., & David, P. A. (1994). Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23(5), 487–521.

De Cleyn, S. H., Braet, J., & Klofsten, M. (2015). How human capital interacts with the early development of academic spin-offs. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(3), 599–621.

Debackere, K., & Veugelers, R. (2005). The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links. Research Policy, 34(3), 321–342.

Degroof, J. J., & Roberts, E. B. (2004). Overcoming weak entrepreneurial infrastructures for academic spin-off ventures. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 327–352.

Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more startups than others? Research Policy, 32(2), 209–227.

Dosi, G. (2007). Statistical regularities in the evolution on industries. A guide through some evidence and challenges for the theory. Perspectives on Innovation, 153–186.

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

Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27(8), 823–833.

Fernández-Alles, M., Camelo-Ordaz, C., & Franco-Leal, N. (2015). Key resources and actors for the evolution of academic spin-offs. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(6), 976–1002.

Ferriani, S., Garnsey, E., & Lorenzoni, G. (2012). Continuity and change in a spin-off venture: The process of reimprinting. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(4), 1011–1048.

Festel, G. (2013). Academic spin-offs, corporate spin-outs and company internal start-ups as technology transfer approach. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(4), 454–470.

Filatotchev, I., Toms, S., & Wright, M. (2006). The firm’s strategic dynamics and corporate governance life-cycle. International Journal of Managerial Finance, 2(4), 256–279.

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.

Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1996). Strategic leadership: Top executives and their effects on organizations. Minneapolis: West Publishing.

Finkelstein, S., & Mooney, A. C. (2003). Not the usual suspects: How to use board process to make boards better. The Academy of Management Executive, 17(2), 101–113.

Gimeno, J., Folta, T. B., Cooper, A. C., & Woo, C. Y. (1997). Survival of the fittest? Entrepreneurial human capital and the persistence of underperforming firms. Administrative science quarterly, 42, 750–783.

Gras, J. M. G., Lapera, D. R. G., Solves, I. M., Jover, A. J. V., & Azuar, J. S. (2008). An empirical approach to the organisational determinants of spin-off creation in European universities. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 4(2), 187–198.

Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2011). 30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1045–1057.

Gurdon, M. A., & Samsom, K. J. (2010). A longitudinal study of success and failure among scientist-started ventures. Technovation, 30(3), 207–214.

Hesse, N., & Sternberg, R. (2017). Alternative growth patterns of university spin-offs: Why so many remain small? International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(3), 953–984.

Homberg, F., & Bui, H. T. (2013). Top management team diversity a systematic review. Group & Organization Management, 38(4), 455–479.

Jaw, Y. L., & Lin, W. T. (2009). Corporate elite characteristics and firm’s inter- nationalization: CEO-level and TMT-level roles. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(1), 220–233.

Knockaert, M., Bjornali, E. S., & Erikson, T. (2015). Joining forces: Top management team and board chair characteristics as antecedents of board service involvement. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(3), 420–435.

Kripfganz, S. (2016). Quasi–maximum likelihood estimation of linear dynamic short-T panel-data models. The Stata Journal, 16(4), 1013–1038.

Lehoux, P., Daudelinb, G., Williams-Jones, B., Denis, J. L., & Longo, C. (2014). How do business model and health technology design influence each other? Insights from a longitudinal case study of three academic spin-offs. Research Policy, 43(6), 1025–1038.

Leitch, C. M., & Harrison, R. T. (2005). Maximising the potential of university spin-outs: The development of second-order commercialisation activities. R&D Management, 35(3), 257–272.

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

Lowe, R. A., & Gonzales-Brambila, C. (2007). Faculty entrepreneurs and research productivity. Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(3), 173–194.

Lubik, S., Garnsey, E. W., & Minshall, T. (2013). Value creation from the innovation environment: Partnership strategies in university spin-outs. R&D Management, 43(2), 136–150.

McAdam, M., & McAdam, R. (2008). High tech start-ups in university Science Park incubators: The relationship between the start-up’s lifecycle progression and use of the incubator’s resources. Technovation, 28(5), 277–290.

Meyer, M. (2003). Academic entrepreneurs or entrepreneurial academics? Research-based ventures and public support mechanisms. R&D Management, 33(2), 107–115.

Mian, S. A. (1997). Assessing and managing the university technology business incubator: An integrative framework. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(4), 251–285.

Migliori, S., Pittino, D., Consorti, A., & Lucianetti, L. (2017). The relationship between entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation and performance in university spin-offs. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0488-x.

Moray, N., & Clarysse, B. (2005). Institutional change and resource endowments to science-based entrepreneurial firms. Research Policy, 34(7), 1010–1027.

Mosey, S., Lockett, A., & Westhead, P. (2006). The importance of bridging networks for university technology transfer: A case study of the Medici fellowship scheme. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 18(1), 71–91.

Murray, F. (2004). The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life. Research Policy, 33(4):643–659

Muscio, A., Quaglione, D., & Ramaciotti, L. (2006). The effects of university rules on spinoff creation: The case of academia in Italy. Research Policy, 45(7), 1386–1396.

Mustar, P., Renault, 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(2), 289–308.

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

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

Nosella, A., & Grimaldi, R. (2009). University-level mechanisms supporting the creation of new companies: An analysis of Italian academic spin-offs. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 21(6), 679–698.

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(7), 994–1009.

O’Shea, R. P., Chugh, H., & Allen, T. J. (2008). Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(6), 653–666.

Pelled, L. H. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science, 7(6), 615–631.

Rasmussen, E. (2011). Understanding academic entrepreneurship: Exploring the emergence of university spin-off ventures using process theories. International Small Business Journal, 29(5), 448–471.

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.

Rasmussen, E., & Wright, M. (2015). How can universities facilitate academic spin-offs? An entrepreneurial competency perspective. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(5), 782–799.

Rasmussen, E., Mosey, S., & Wright, M. (2011). The evolution of entrepreneurial competencies: A longitudinal study of university spin-off venture emergence. Journal of Management Studies, 48(6), 1314-1345.

Rasmussen, E., Mosey, S., & Wright, M. (2014). The influence of university departments on the evolution of entrepreneurial competencies in spin-off ventures. Research Policy, 43(1), 92–106.

Sapienza, H. J., Parhankangas, A., & Autio, E. (2004). Knowledge relatedness and post-spin-off growth. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(6), 809–829.

Scholten, V., Omta, O., Kemp, R., & Elfring, T. (2015). Bridging ties and the role of research and start-up experience on the early growth of Dutch academic spin-offs. Technovation, 45, 40–51.

Semadeni, M., & Cannella, A. A. (2011). Examining the performance effects of post spin-off links to parent firms: Should the apron strings be cut? Strategic Management Journal, 32(10), 1083–1098.

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

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.

Shrader, R., & Siegel, D. (2007). Assessing the relationship between human capital and firm performance: Evidence from technology based new ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(6), 893–908.

Siepel, J., Cowling, M., & Coad, A. (2017). Non-founder human capital and the long-run growth and survival of high-tech ventures. Technovation, 59, 34–43.

Slavtchev, V., & Goktepe-Hulten, D. (2015). Support for public research spin- offs by the parent organizations and the speed of commercialization. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(6), 1507–1525.

Soetanto, D., & Van Geenhuizen, M. (2015). Getting the right balance: University networks’ influence on spin-offs’ attraction of funding for innovation. Technovation, 36, 26–38.

Soetanto, D., & Jack, S. (2016). The impact of university-based incubation support on the innovation strategy of academic spin-offs. Technovation, 50, 25–40.

Stucki, T. (2016). How the founders general and specific human capital drives export activities of start-ups. Research Policy, 45(5), 1014–1030.

Sutton, J. (1997). Gibrat’s legacy. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(1), 40–59.

Treibich, T., Konrad, K., & Truffer, B. (2013). A dynamic view on interactions between academic spin-offs and their parent organizations. Technovation, 33(12), 450–462.

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.

Visintin, F., & Pittino, D. (2014). Founding team composition and early performance of university-based spin-off companies. Technovation, 34(1), 31–43.

Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy, 33(1), 147–175.

Walter, A., Auer, M., & Ritter, T. (2006). The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 541–567.

Wennberg, K., Wiklund, J., & Wright, M. (2011). The effectiveness of university knowledge spillovers: Performance differences between university spinoffs and corporate spinoffs. Research Policy, 40(8), 1128–1143.

Wright, M., Lockett, A., Clarysse, B., & Binks, M. (2006). University spin-out companies and venture capital. Research Policy, 35(4), 481–501.

Würmseher, M. (2017). To each his own: Matching different entrepreneurial models to the academic scientist's individual needs. Technovation, 59, 1–17.

Zahra, S. A., Van de Velde, E., & Larraneta, B. (2007). Knowledge conversion capability and the performance of corporate and university spin-offs. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 569–608.

Zucker, L. G., Darby, M. R., & Brewer, M. (1998). Intellectual human capital and the birth of US biotechnology enterprises. American Economic Review, 88(1), 290–305.

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.

Titel: What drives the growth of academic spin-offs? Matching academics, universities, and non-research organizations
Publikationsdatum: 06.03.2018
Erschienen in: International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal / Ausgabe 1/2020
Print ISSN: 1554-7191
Elektronische ISSN: 1555-1938
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0497-4

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2020

Guanxi and risk-taking propensity in Chinese immigrants’ businesses

Exploring the differences in early-stage start-up valuation across countries: an institutional perspective

Knowledge spillovers and strategic entrepreneurship: what researches and approaches?

Women entrepreneurship in STEM fields: literature review and future research avenues

An entrepreneurship education and peer mentoring program for women in STEM: mentors’ experiences and perceptions of entrepreneurial self-efficacy and intent

A lot of different flowers make a bouquet: The effect of gender composition on technology-based entrepreneurial student teams

Premium Partner