Conceptualizing academic-entrepreneurial intentions: An empirical test

Technovation

Volumn 30, Issue 5-6, 2010, Pages 332-347

  Prodan, Igor ^a   Drnovsek, Mateja ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

Academics; Cross cultural study; Entrepreneurial intentions; Structural equation modeling

Indexed keywords

CATALYTIC ROLE; CONCEPTUAL MODEL; CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY; DATA SETS; EMPIRICAL TEST; INNOVATIVENESS; INTENTIONALITY; JOB CREATION; KNOWLEDGE GAPS; NATIONAL ECONOMY; POLICY MAKERS; SPIN-OFF COMPANIES; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING;

LEAD; RESEARCH; SOCIAL SCIENCES; SPIN DYNAMICS; STATISTICAL TESTS;

MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS;

EID: 77950021044     PISSN: 01664972     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2010.02.002     Document Type: Article

References (116)

1. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50 (1991) 179-211
2. Ajzen I. Residual effects of past on later behavior: habituation and reasoned action perspectives. Personality & Social Psychology Review 6 (2002) 107-122
3. Ajzen, I., 2006. Theory of planned behavior diagram. URL: 〈http://www.people.umass.edu/aizen/tpb.diag.html〉.
4. Arenius P., and Minniti M. Perceptual variables and nascent entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics 24 (2005) 233-247
5. Armstrong J.S., and Overton T.S. Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research 14 (1977) 396-402
6. Arvanitis S., Sydow N., and Woerter M. Do specific forms of university-industry knowledge transfer have different impacts on the performance of private enterprises? An empirical analysis based on Swiss firm data. The Journal of Technology Transfer 33 (2008) 504-533
7. Audretsch D.B., Weigand J., and Weigand C. Does the small business innovation research program foster entrepreneurial behavior? evidence from Indiana. In: Wessner C.W. (Ed). The Small Business Innovation Research Program: An Assessment of the Department of Defense Fast Track Initiative (2000), National Academy Press, Washington, DC 160-193
8. Autio, E., Keeley, R.H., Klofsten, M., Ulfstedt, T., 1997. Entrepreneurial intent among students: testing an intent model in Asia, Scandinavia, and USA. URL: 〈http://www.babson.edu/entrep/fer/papers97/autio/aut1.htm〉.
9. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review 84 (1977) 191-215
10. Bandura A. Social Learning Theory (1977), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
11. Bandura A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist 37 (1982) 122-147
12. BankBoston. MIT: The Impact of Innovation (1997), BankBoston, Boston
13. Baum J.R., and Locke E.A. The relationship of entrepreneurial traits, skill, and motivation to subsequent venture growth. Journal of Applied Psychology 89 (2004) 587-598
14. Bekkers R., and Bodas Freitas I.M. Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: to what degree do sectors also matter?. Research Policy 37 (2008) 1837-1853
15. Bentler, P.M., Wu, E.J.C., 2006. EQS 6.1 for Windows. Multivariate Software, Encino.
16. Berry M.M.J. Technical entrepreneurship, strategic awareness and corporate transformation in small high-tech firms. Technovation 16 (1996) 487-522
17. Bird B. Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: the case for intention. Academy of Management Review 13 (1988) 442-453
18. Bird B., and Jelinek M. The operation of entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 13 (1988) 21-29
19. Birley S. The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing 1 (1985) 107-117
20. Blumenthal D., Campbell E.G., Causino N., and Louis S.K. Participation of life-science faculty in research relationships with industry. New England Journal of Medicine 335 (1996) 1734-1739
21. Bosma N., and Harding R. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: GEM 2006 Results (2007), London Business School/Babson College, London 28pp
22. Boyd N.G., and Vozikis G.S. The influence of self-efficacy on the development of entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 18 (1994) 63-77
23. Brislin R.W. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 1 (1970) 185-216
24. Brislin R.W. Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In: Triandis H.C., and Berry J.W. (Eds). Handbook of Cross-cultural Psychology (1980), Allyn and Bacon, Boston 389-444
25. Carayannis E.G., Rogers E.M., Kurihara K., and Allbritton M.M. High-technology spin-offs from government R&D laboratories and research universities. Technovation 18 (1998) 1-11
26. Carmichael H.L. Incentives in academics: why is there tenure?. The Journal of Political Economy 96 (1988) 453-472
27. Carsrud A.L., Gaglio C.M., Olm K.W., and Churchill N.C. Entrepreneurs-mentors, networks, and successful new venture development: an exploratory study. American Journal of Small Business 12 (1987) 13-18
28. Chen C.C., Greene P.G., and Crick A. Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers?. Journal of Business Venturing 13 (1998) 295-316
29. Cohen W.M., Florida R., Randazzese L., and Walsh J. Industry and the academy: uneasy partners in the cause of technological advance. In: Noll R.G. (Ed). Challenge to the Research University (1998), Brookings Institution, Washington, DC 171-200
30. Coombs J.E., Mudambi R., and Deeds D.L. An examination of the investments in US biotechnology firms by foreign and domestic corporate partners. Journal of Business Venturing 21 (2006) 405-428
31. Corman J., Perles B., and Vancini P. Motivational factors influencing high-technology entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management 26 (1988) 36-42
32. Craig C.S., and Douglas S. International Marketing Research (2005), John Wiley, Chichester
33. Cronbach L.J. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16 (1951) 297-334
34. Debackere K., and Veugelers R. The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links. Research Policy 34 (2005) 321-342
35. Di Gregorio D., and Shane S.A. Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?. Research Policy 32 (2003) 209-227
36. Dillman D.A. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method (2000), John Wiley, New York, Chichester
37. Douglas E.J., and Shepherd D.A. Self-employment as a career choice: attitudes, entrepreneurial intentions, and utility maximization. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 26 (2002) 81-90
38. Drnovsek M., and Glas M. The entrepreneurial self-efficacy of nascent entrepreneurs: the case of two economies in transition. Journal of Enterprising Culture 10 (2002) 107-131
39. Druilhe C., and Garnsey E. Do academic spin-outs differ and does it matter?. Journal of Technology Transfer 29 (2004) 269-285
40. Etzkowitz H. The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy 27 (1998) 823-833
41. Feldman M.P., Feller I., Becovitz J.E., and Burton R.M. Understanding evolving university-industry relationships. In: Feldman M.P., and Link A.N. (Eds). Innovation Policy in the Knowledge-based Economy (2001), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA 171-188
42. Fini, R., Lacetera, N., Shane, S.A., 2008. Inside or Outside the IP-System? Business Creation in Academia. URL: 〈http://ssrn.com/abstract=1314361〉.
43. Fishbein M., and Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research (1975), Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
44. Florida R., and Cohen W.M. Engine or infrastructure? The university role in economic development. In: Branscomb L.M., Kodama F., and Florida R. (Eds). Industrializing Knowledge: University-Industry Linkages in Japan and the United States (1999), MIT Press, London 589-610
45. Floyd F.J., and Widaman K.F. Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment 7 (1995) 286-299
46. Gartner W.B. "Who is an entrepreneur?" Is the wrong question. American Journal of Small Business 12 (1988) 11-32
47. Gatewood E.J., Shaver K.G., and Gartner W.B. A longitudinal study of cognitive factors influencing start-up behaviors and success at venture creation. Journal of Business Venturing 10 (1995) 371-391
48. Gilsing V.A., van Burg E., and Romme A.G.L. Policy principles for the creation and success of corporate and academic spin-offs. Technovation 30 (2010) 12-23
49. Goldfarb B., and Henrekson M. Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Research Policy 32 (2003) 639-658
50. Grandi A., and Grimaldi R. Academics' organizational characteristics and the generation of successful business ideas. Journal of Business Venturing 20 (2005) 821-845
51. Greve A. Networks and entrepreneurship-an analysis of social relations, occupational background, and use of contacts during the establishment process. Scandinavian Journal of Management 11 (1995) 1-24
52. Greve A., and Salaff J.W. Social networks and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 28 (2003) 1-22
53. Gulbrandsen M., and Smeby J.-C. Industry funding and university professors' research performance. Research Policy 34 (2005) 932-950
54. Hair J.F., Black W.C., Babin B.J., and Anderson R.E. Multivariate data analysis (2010), Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ
55. Hair J.F., Anderson R.E., Tatham R.L., and Black W.C. Multivariate Data Analysis (1998), Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ
56. Hambleton R.K. Translating achievement tests for use in cross-national studies. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 9 (1993) 57-68
57. Harman H.H. Modern Factor Analysis (1967), University of Chicago Press, Chicago; London
58. Hills G.E., and LaForge R.W. Research at the marketing interface to advance entrepreneurship theory. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 16 (1992) 33-59
59. Hoang H., and Antoncic B. Network-based research in entrepreneurship: a critical review. Journal of Business Venturing 18 (2003) 165-187
60. Hoye K., and Pries F. 'Repeat commercializers,' the 'habitual entrepreneurs' of university-industry technology transfer. Technovation 29 (2009) 682-689
61. Jöreskog K.G., and Sörbom D. LISREL 8: User's Reference Guide (1996), Scientific Software International, Chicago
62. Kassicieh S.K., Radosevich R., and Umbarger J. A comparative study of entrepreneurship incidence among inventors in national laboratories. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 20 (1996) 33-49
63. Kassicieh S.K., Radosevich R.H., and Banbury C.M. Using attitudinal, situational, and personal characteristics variables to predict future entrepreneurs from national laboratory inventors. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 44 (1997) 248-257
64. Katz J., and Gartner W.B. Properties of Emerging Organizations. Academy of Management Review 13 (1988) 429-441
65. Kline R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (2005), Guilford Press, New York
66. Kolvereid L. Prediction of employment status choice intentions. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 21 (1996) 47-57
67. Kolvereid L., and Isaksen E. New business start-up and subsequent entry into self-employment. Journal of Business Venturing 21 (2006) 866-885
68. Krueger N. The impact of prior entrepreneurial exposure on perceptions of new venture feasibility and desirability. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 18 (1993) 5-21
69. Krueger N.F., Reilly M.D., and Carsrud A.L. Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing 15 (2000) 411-432
70. Landry R., Amara N., and Rherrad I. Why are some university researchers more likely to create spin-offs than others? Evidence from Canadian universities. Research Policy 35 (2006) 1599-1615
71. Lazear E.P. The Peter principle: a theory of decline. Journal of Political Economy 112 (2004) 141-163
72. Lee Y., and Gaertner R. Technology transfer from university to industry: a large-scale experiment with technology. Policy Studies Journal 22 (1994) 384-399
73. Levesque M., and Minniti M. The effect of aging on entrepreneurial behavior. Journal of Business Venturing 21 (2006) 177-194
74. Louis K.S., Blumenthal D., Gluck M.E., and Stoto M.A. Entrepreneurs in academe: an exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Administrative Science Quarterly 34 (1989) 110-131
75. Marsh H.W., and Hocevar D. Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept. Psychological Bulletin 97 (1985) 562-582
76. Marsh H.W., and Hocevar D. A new, more powerful approach to multitrait-multimethod analyses. Journal of Applied Psychology 73 (1988) 107-117
77. Mian S.A. Assessing and managing the university technology business incubator: an integrative framework. Journal of Business Venturing 12 (1997) 251-285
78. Morgan, R., 1993. Engineering research at US universities: how engineering faculty view it. In: IEEE-ASEE Frontiers in Education Conference.
79. Morgan, R., 1994. Engineering research at US universities: how university-based research directors view it. In: ASEE Annual Meeting.
80. Mustar P. Spin-off enterprises-how French academics create hi-tech companies: the conditions for success or failure. Science and Public Policy 24 (1997) 37-43
81. Nicolaou N., and Birley S. Academic networks in a trichotomous categorisation of university spinouts. Journal of Business Venturing 18 (2003) 333-359
82. Nicolaou N., and Birley S. Social networks in organizational emergence: the university spinout phenomenon. Management Science 49 (2003) 1702-1725
83. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2002. The measurement of scientific and technological activities : proposed standard practice for surveys on research and experimental development : Frascati manual 2002. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
84. Ozgen E., and Baron R.A. Social sources of information in opportunity recognition: effects of mentors, industry networks, and professional forums. Journal of Business Venturing 22 (2007) 174-192
85. Perez Perez M., and Sanchez A.M. The development of university spin-offs: early dynamics of technology transfer and networking. Technovation 23 (2003) 823-831
86. Podsakoff P.M., MacKenzie S.B., Lee J.Y., and Podsakoff N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (2003) 879-903
87. Pressman L. The Strategic Use of Patents: the M.I.T. Experience (1997), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
88. Pressman, L., AUTM Survey Statistics and Metrics Committee, 2002. The AUTM licensing survey: fiscal year 2000-survey summary. Association of University Technology Managers, Norwalk.
89. Rahm D. Academic perceptions of university-firm technology transfer. Policy Studies Journal 22 (1994) 267-278
90. Rahm D. University-Firm Linkages for Industrial Innovation (1994), Stanford University, Stanford, CA
91. Renzulli L.A., Aldrich H., and Moody J. Family matters: gender, networks, and entrepreneurial outcomes. Social Forces 79 (2000) 523-546
92. Reynolds P.D. Sociology and entrepreneurship: concepts and contributions. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 16 (1991) 47-70
93. Roberts E.B., and Malone D.E. Policies and structures for spinning off new companies from. R & D Management 26 (1996) 17-48
94. Rubin D.B. Inference and missing data. Biometrika 63 (1976) 581-592
95. Scherer R.F., Adams J.S., Carley S.S., and Wiebe F.A. Role model performance effects on development of entrepreneurial career preference. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice 13 (1989) 53-71
96. Scott M.G., and Twomey D.F. The long-term supply of entrepreneurs: students' career aspiration in relation to entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management 26 (1988) 5-13
97. Shane S., and Venkataraman S. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review 25 (2000) 217-226
98. Shane S.A. Technological opportunities and new firm creation. Management Science 47 (2001) 205-220
99. Shane S.A. Technology regimes and new firm formation. Management Science 47 (2001) 1173-1190
100. Shane S.A., and Stuart T. Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science 48 (2002) 154-170
101. Shapero A. The displaced, uncomfortable entrepreneur. Psychology Today 9 (1975) 83-88
102. Shapero A., and Sokol L. Social dimensions of entrepreneurship. In: Kent C.A., Sexton D.L., and Vesper K.H. (Eds). Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship (1982), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 72-90
103. Sharma S., Durvasula S., and Dillon W.R. Some results on the behavior of alternate covariance structure estimation procedures in the presence of non-normal data. Journal of Marketing Research 26 (1989) 214-221
104. Shook C.L., Ketchen D.J., Hult G.T.M., and Kacmar K.M. An assessment of the use of structural equation modeling in strategic management research. Strategic Management Journal 25 (2004) 397-404
105. Singh J. Measurement issues in cross-national research. Journal of International Business Studies 26 (1995) 597-619
106. Steffensen M., Rogers E.M., and Speakman K. Spin-offs from research centers at a research university. Journal of Business Venturing 15 (2000) 93-111
107. Thornton P.H. The sociology of entrepreneurship. Annual Review of Sociology 25 (1999) 19-46
108. Thursby J.G., and Thursby M.C. University licensing. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 23 (2007) 620-640
109. Thursby M., Thursby J., and Gupta-Mukherjee S. Are there real effects of licensing on academic research? A life cycle view. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 63 (2007) 577-598
110. Vandenberg R.J., and Lance C.E. A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational research methods 3 (2000) 4-70
111. Venkataraman S. The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research. In: Katz J.A. (Ed). Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth (1997), JAI Press, Greenwich 296
112. Venkatraman N. The concept of fit in strategy research: toward verbal and statistical correspondence. The Academy of Management Review 14 (1989) 423-444
113. Venkatraman N. Performance implications of strategic coalignment: a methodological perspective. Journal of Management Studies 27 (1990) 19-41
114. Walter A., Auer M., and Ritter T. The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing 21 (2006) 541-567
115. Wood R., and Bandura A. Social cognitive theory of organizational management. The Academy of Management Review 14 (1989) 361-384
116. Zhao H., Seibert S.E., and Hills G.E. The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology 90 (2005) 1265-1272