Exploring the relationship between scientist human capital and firm performance: The case of biomedical academic entrepreneurs in the sbir program

Management Science

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 101-114

  Toole, Andrew A ^a   Czarnitzki, Dirk ^b,c  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^c CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN ECONOMIC RESEARCH ZEW   (Germany)

Author keywords

Academic entrepreneurship; Commercialization; Firm performance; Human capital; Sbir

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC ENTREPRENEURSHIP; COMMERCIALIZATION; FIRM PERFORMANCE; HUMAN CAPITAL; SBIR;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

EID: 67650045639     PISSN: 00251909     EISSN: 15265501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1080.0913     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Agrawal, A., R. Henderson. 2002. Putting patents in context: Exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Sci. 48 (1) 44-60.
2. Allen, T. J. 1977. Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information Within the R&D Organization. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
3. Astebro, T., I. Bernhardt. 2005. The winner's curse of human capital. Small Bus. Econom. 24 63-78.
4. Azoulay, P., W. Ding, T. Stuart. 2007. The determinants of faculty patenting behavior: Demographics or opportunities. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 63 (4) 599-623.
5. Cockburn, I. M., R. M. Henderson. 1998. Absorptive capacity, coauthoring behavior, and the organization of research in drug discovery. J. Indust. Econom. 46 (2) 157-182.
6. Corolleur, C. D. F., M. Carrere, V. Mangematin. 2004. Turning scientific and technological human capital into economic capital: The experience of biotech start-ups in France. Res. Policy 33 631-642.
7. Dasgupta, P., P. A. David. 1994. Toward a new economics of science. Res. Policy 23 487-521.
8. Etzkowitz, H. 2003. Research groups as "quasi-firms": The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Res. Policy 32 109-121.
9. Gittelman, M., B. Kogut. 2003. Does good science lead to valuable knowledge? Biotechnology firms and the evolutionary logic of citation patterns. Management Sci. 49 (4) 366-382.
10. Grant, R. M. 1996. Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: Organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organ. Sci. 7 (4) 375-387.
11. Hall, B. H., A. B. Jaffe, M. Trajtenberg. 2001. The NBER patent citations data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. NBER Working Paper 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
12. Henderson, R., I. Cockburn. 1994. Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management J. 15 63-84.
13. Institute of Medicine (IOM). 1998. Scientific Opportunities and Public Needs: Improving Priority Setting and Public Input at the National Institutes of Health. National Academies, Washington, D. C.
14. Jensen, R., M. Thursby. 2001. Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. Amer. Econom. Rev. 19 (1) 240-259.
15. Kogut, B., U. Zander. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replications of technology. Organ. Sci. 3 (3) 383-397.
16. Latour, B., S. Woolgar. 1979. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
17. Leibert, R. J. 1977. Research-grant getting and productivity among scholars. J. Higher Ed. 48 164-192.
18. Louis, K. S., D. Blumenthal, M. E. Gluck, M. A. Stoto. 1989. Entrepreneurs in academe: An exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Admin. Sci. Quart. 34 110-131.
19. Murray, F. 2002. Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: Exploring tissue engineering. Res. Policy 31 1389-1403.
20. Murray, F. 2004. The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: Sharing the laboratory life. Res. Policy 33 643-659.
21. National Institutes of Health (NIH), Office of Extramural Research. 2003. National survey to evaluate the NIH SBIR program. Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, MD.
22. Owen-Smith, J., W. W. Powell. 2001. To patent of not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. J. Tech. Transfer 26 99-114.
23. Packer, K., A. Webster. 1996. Patenting culture in science: Reinventing the scientific wheel of credibility. Sci. Tech. Human Values 21 (4) 427-453.
24. Powell, W. W., J. Owen-Smith. 1998. Universities and the market for intellectual property in the life sciences. J. Policy Anal. Management 27 (2) 253-277.
25. Stephan, P. E., S. Gurmu, A. J. Sumell, G. Black. 2007. Who's patenting in the university? Evidence from the survey of doctorate recipients. Econom. Innovation New Tech. 16 (2) 71-99.
26. Stern, S. 2004. Do scientists pay to be scientists? Management Sci. 50 (6) 835-853.
27. Thursby, J. G., M. C. Thursby. 2004. Are faculty critical? Their role in university-industry licensing. Contemporary Econom. Policy 22 (2) 162-178.
28. Toole, A. A., D. Czarnitzki. 2007. Biomedical academic entrepreneurship through the SBIR program. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 63 (4) 716-738.
29. Tushman, M. L. 1977. Boundary spanning roles in the innovation process. Admin. Sci. Quart. 22 (4) 587-605.
30. Zucker, L. G., M. Darby. 1996. Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93 12709-12716.
31. Zucker, L. G., M. R. Darby, J. S. Armstrong. 2002. Commercializing knowledge: University science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology. Management Sci. 48 (1) 138-153.
32. Zucker, L. G., M. R. Darby, M. B. Brewer. 1998. Geographically localized knowledge: Spillovers or markets? Econom. Inquiry 36 (1) 65-86.