Measuring the performance of Oxford University, Oxford Brookes University and the government laboratories' spin-off companies

Research Policy

Volumn 35, Issue 10, 2006, Pages 1554-1568

  Lawton Smith, H ^a   Ho, K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Academic spin offs; Oxfordshire; Performance

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; PERFORMANCE; PUBLIC POLICY; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT;

ACADEMIC SPIN-OFFS; EMPIRICAL INFORMATION; OXFORDSHIRE;

SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

EID: 33751228719     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.022     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. AUTM, 2003. AUTM Licensing Survey: FY 2003. Association of University Technology Managers, Northbrook, IL.
2. Babcock-Lumish, T., 2004. Beyond the TMT bubble: patterns of innovation investment in the US and the UK. Working Paper 4-06, School of Geography & the Environment, Oxford University.
3. Binks M., Wright M., Lockett A., and Vohora A. Venture Capital Finance and University Spin-outs (2004), Mimeo, University of Nottingham Institute for Enterprise and Innovation
4. Bozeman B. Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research Policy 29 (2000) 627-655
5. Branscomb L.M. National laboratories: the search for new missions and structures, Chapter 4. In: Branscomb L.M. (Ed). Empowering Technology: Implementing a U.S. Strategy (1993), The MIT Press, Cambridge MA 103-134
6. Chadwick A., Glasson J., Lawton Smith H., Clark G., and Simmie J. Enterprising Oxford: The Anatomy of the Oxfordshire High-tech Economy (2003), Oxford Economic Observatory, Oxford University
7. Clarysse, B., Heinman, A., Degroof, J.J., 2001. An Institutional and Resource-based Explanation of Growth Patterns of Research-based Spin-offs in Europe. In OECD 2001 Fostering High-tech Spin-offs: A Public Strategy for Innovation STI REVIEW No. 26, OECD, Paris, pp. 95-96.
8. De Coster R., and Butler C. Assessment of proposals for new technology ventures in the UK: characteristics of university spin-off companies. Technovation 25 (2005) 535-543
9. Di Gregorio D., and Shane S. Why so some universities generate more start-ups than others?. Research Policy 32 (2003) 209-227
10. DTI, 2004. Universities mean Business. Higher Education Business Interaction Survey, 2001/2 P/2004/64.
11. DTI, 2005. Comparative Statistics for the UK, European and US Biotechnology Sectors: Analysis Year 2003. Report prepared by Critical I Limited for the Department of Trade and Industry. DTI, London.
12. Druilhe C., and Garnsey E. Do academic spin-outs differ and does it matter?. Journal of Technology Transfer 29 3-4 (2004) 269-285
13. Etzkowitz H., Webster A., Gebhardt C., and Cantisano Terra B.R. The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution from ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy 29 2 (2000) 313-330
14. Feldman M., Feller I., Bercovitz J., and Burton R. Equity and the technology transfer strategies of American Research Universities. Management Science 48 1 (2002) 105-121
15. Garnsey E., and Heffernan P. High tech clustering through spin out and attraction: The Cambridge case. Regional Studies 39 8 (2005) 1127-1144
16. HM Treasury, 2003. Lambert Review of Business-University Collaboration (the Lambert Report).
17. Ince, M. (2005). 'World University Rankings' Times Higher October 25 2005.
18. Kenny M., and Goe W.R. The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: a comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford. Research Policy 33 (2004) 691-707
19. Lawton Smith, H., 1990. The location and development of advanced technology in Oxfordshire in the context of the research environment. Unpublished DPhil Thesis. University of Oxford.
20. Lawton Smith H. Knowledge organisations and local economic development: the cases of Oxford and Grenoble. Regional Studies 37 2 (2003) 899-990
21. Lawton Smith H., Glasson J., Simmie J., Chadwick A., and Clark G. Enterprising Oxford: The Growth of the Oxfordshire High-tech Economy (2003), Oxford Economic Observatory, Oxford
22. Lee, C.B., Walshok, M.L., 2003. Total Links Matter: The Direct and Indirect Effects of Research Universities in Regional Economies. Paper prepared for University of California's Industry-University Cooperative Research Programme, UCSD http://globalconnect.ucsd.edu/docs/TotalLinksMatter2003.pdf-.
23. Lerner, J., 2005. The University and the Start-up: lessons from the past two decades. Journal of Technology Transfer 30 (1/2) 49-56.
24. Lindholm Dahlstrand A. Growth and inventiveness in technology-based spin-off firms. Research Policy 26 3 (1997) 331-344
25. Lindholm Dahstrand, A., 2005. University knowledge transfer and the role of academic spin-offs Paper prepared for OECD Conference, May 2005.
26. Lockett A., and Wright M. Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research Policy 34 (2005) 1043-1057
27. Lockett A., Siegal D., Wright M., and Ensley M.D. The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: managerial and policy implications. Research Policy 34 (2005) 981-993
28. Meyer M., and Autio E. Science-based innovation and entrepreneurship: is there a relationship between scientific disciplines and the utilization of academic inventions in start-up companies?. R&D Management Conference. Sesimbra, Portugal, July 7-9 (2004)
29. Minshall, T., Wicksteed, B., 2005. University spin-out companies: Starting to fill the evidence gap A report on a pilot research project commissioned by the Gatsby Charitable Foundation.
30. Mustar P. Spin-off enterprises-how French academics create high-tech companies: conditions for success or failure. Science and Public Policy 24 1 (1997) 37-43
31. Nelsen L. The rise of intellectual property protection in the American university. Science 279 5356 (1998) 1460-1461
32. Nightingale P., and Martin P. The myth of the biotech revolution. Trends in Biotechnology 22 11 (2004) 564-569
33. OECD, 2001. Fostering High-tech Spin-offs:A Public Strategy for Innovation STI REVIEW No. 26. OECD, Paris.
34. O'Shea R.P., Allen T.J., Chevalier A., and Roche F. Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spin-off performance of U.S. Universities. Research Policy 34 (2005) 994-1009
35. Oxford Bioscience Network, 2002. GROWTH & Sustainability, The Cluster Report 2002. Oxford Bioscience Network, Oxford.
36. PACEC, 2003. The Cambridge Phenomenon: Fulfilling the Potential. PACEC, Cambridge.
37. Pirnay F., Surlemont B., and Nlemvo F. Towards a typology of university spin-offs. Small Business Economics 21 4 (2003) 355-369
38. Piva, E., Colombo, M.G., 2005. Academic start-ups and new technology-based firms: a matched pair comparison. Paper presented at the 5th Triple Helix conference, Turin May 2005.
39. In: Pressman L. (Ed). AUTM Licensing Survey: FY (2002), Association of University Technology Managers, Northbrook, IL
40. Rappert B., and Webster A. Regimes of ordering: the commercialisation of intellectual property in industrial-academic collaboration. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 9 2 (1997) 115-130
41. Rappert B., Webster A., and Charles D. Making sense of diversity and reluctance: academic-industrial relations and intellectual property. Research Policy 28 (1999) 873-890
42. Sahlman W., Stevenson H., Roberts M., and Bhidé A. The Entrepreneurial Venture (1999), Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA
43. Rowen, H.S., Sheehan, R., 2002. First Quarter Report: The GBS and Silicon Valley (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/TimLenoir/Startup/QuarterlyRpts/ProgressReportJan02.pdf).
44. Segal Quince and Partners, 1985. The Cambridge Phenomenon. Segal Quince and Partners, Cambridge.
45. Siegel D.S., Waldman D., and Link A. Assessing the impact of organisational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy 32 1 (2003) 27-48
46. Shane S. Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation (2004), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
47. Slaughter S., and Leslie L. Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies, and the Entrepreneurial University (1999), Johns Hokpins, Baltimore
48. Times Higher Education Supplement, 2004. World University Rankings.
49. UNICO, 2003. UK University Commercialisation Survey: Financial Year 2003. UNICO, London.
50. Vohora A., Wright M., and Lockett A. Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy 33 (2004) 147-175
51. Zucker L.G., and Darby M.R. Star scientists and institutional transformation: patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotech industry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 93 12 (1996) 709-716