Voodoo institution or entrepreneurial university? spin-off companies, the entrepreneurial system and regional development in the UK

Regional Studies

Volumn 44, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 1241-1262

  Harrison, Richard T ^a   Leitch, Claire ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Entrepreneurial system; Entrepreneurial university; Regional development; Spin off companies; Technology transfer

Indexed keywords

COMMERCIALIZATION; ECONOMIC IMPACT; ENTREPRENEUR; NATIONAL ECONOMY; REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT; REGIONAL ECONOMY; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER; UNIVERSITY SECTOR;

NORTHERN IRELAND; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 77958600642     PISSN: 00343404     EISSN: 13600591     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00343400903167912     Document Type: Article

References (174)

1. ACKERLOF G. A. (1970) The market for lemons: quality uncertainty and the market mechanism, Quarterly Journal of Economics 84, 488-500.
2. ALDRICH H. E. (1999) Organizations Evolving. Sage, London.
3. ARMBRUSTER C. (2008) Research Universities: Autonomy and Self-Reliance After the Entrepreneurial University. Max Planck Institute, Jena.
4. ARONOWITZ S. (2000) The Knowledge Factory: Dismantling the Corporate University and Creating True Higher Learning. Beacon, Boston, MA.
5. BAHRAMI H. and EVANS S. (1995) Flexible re-cycling and high-technology entrepreneurship, California Management Review 37, 62-89.
6. BANK OF ENGLAND (2001) Financing of Technology-Based Small Firms. Bank of England Domestic Finance Division, London.
7. BARTKOWSKI J. P. (1998) Claims-making and typifications of voodoo as a deviant religion: hex, lies, and videotape, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 37, 559-579.
8. BARTUNEK J. M. and SEO M. (2002) Qualitative research can add new meanings to quantitative research, Journal of Organizational Behaviour 23, 237-242.
9. BEKKERS R., GILSING V. and VAN DER STEEN M. (2006) Determining factors of the effectiveness of IP-based spin-offs: comparing the Netherlands and the US, Journal of Technology Transfer 31, 545-566.
10. BENNEWORTH P. (2001) Academic entrepreneurship and long-term business relationships: understanding 'commercialization' activities, Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies 2, 225-237.
11. BENNEWORTH P. and CHARLES D. (2005) University spin-off policies and economic development in less successful regions: learning from two decades of policy practice, European Planning Studies 13, 537-557.
12. BENNEWORTH P. and HOSPERS G.-J. (2007) The new economic geography of old industrial regions: universities as global-local pipeline, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 25, 779-802.
13. BIRLEY S. (1985) The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process, Journal of Business Venturing 1, 107-117.
14. BIRLEY S. (2002) Universities, academics and spin-out companies: lessons from Imperial, International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education 1, 133-153.
15. BOK D. (2003) Universities in the Marketplace. The Commercialization of Higher Education. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
16. BOZEMAN B. (2000) Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory, Research Policy 29, 627-655.
17. BRANSCOMB L. M., KODAMA F. and FLORIDA R. L. (1999) Industrializing Knowledge. University-Industry Linkages in Japan and the United States. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
18. BREHENS T. R. and GRAY D. O. (2001) Unintended consequences of cooperative research: impact of industry sponsorship on climate for academic freedom and other graduate student outcome, Research Policy 30, 179-199.
19. BRIOSCHI M. S. and CASSIA L. (2006) Common trajectories of regional competitiveness in the knowledge economy: a European investigation, Industry and Higher Education 20, 387-401.
20. CLARK B. (1998) Sustaining Change in Universities. Society for Research into Higher Education, Open University Press, Buckingham.
21. CLARK B. (2004) Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organisational Pathways of Transformation. Elsevier, Oxford.
22. CLARK W. (2006) Academic Charisma and the Origins of the Research University. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
23. CLARYSSE B., WRIGHT M., LOCKETT A., VAN DE VELDE E. and VOHARA A. (2005) Spinning out new ventures: a typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions, Journal of Business Venturing 20, 183-216.
24. COHEN B. (2005) Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems, Business Strategy and the Environment 15, 1-14.
25. COLYVAS J. M., CROWA., GELIJNS R.,MAZZOLENI R., NELSON N., ROSNEBERG N. and SAMPAT B. (2002) How do university inventions get into practice?, Management Science 48, 61-72.
26. COOK T., DWEK R., BLUMBERG B. and HOCKADAY T. (2008) Commercialising university research: threats and opportunities - the Oxford model, Capitalism and Society 3, article 4 (available at: http://www.bepress.com/cas/vol3/iss1/art4).
27. COOKE P. (2002) Regional innovation systems: general findings and some new evidence from biotechnology clusters, Journal of Technology Transfer 27, 133-145.
28. COOKE P. and MORGAN K. (1998) The Associational Economy. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
29. DEGROOF J. and ROBERTS E. B. (2004) Overcoming weak entrepreneurial infrastructures for academic spin-off ventures, Journal of Technology Transfer 29, 327-352.
30. DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY (DTI) (2002) Investing in Innovation: A Strategy for Science Engineering and Technology. H. M. Treasury and DFES, London.
31. DI GREGORIO D. and SHANE S. (2003) Why do some universities generate more startups than others?, Research Policy 32, 209-227.
32. DOUTRIAUX J. (1987) Growth patterns of academic entrepreneurial firms, Journal of Business Venturing 2, 285-297.
33. DOWNES R. and EADIE G. (1998) The creation and support of academic spin-out companies, in OAKEY R. (Ed.) New Technology Based Firms in the 1990s: Volume 5, pp. 247-267. Paul Chapman, London.
34. ELIASSON G. (1996) Spillovers, integrated production and the theory of the firm, Journal of Evolutionary Economics 6, 125-140.
35. ELIASSON G. and ELIASSON A. (2006) The pharmacia story of entrepreneurship and as a creative technical university - an experiment in innovation, organizational break-up and industrial renaissance, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development 18, 393-420.
36. ETZKOWITZ H. (1998) The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages, Research Policy 27, 823-833.
37. ETZKOWITZ H. (2002) MIT and the Rise of Entrepreneurial Science. Routledge, London.
38. ETZKOWITZ H. (2003) Research groups as 'quasi-firms': the invention of the entrepreneurial university, Research Policy 32, 109-121.
39. ETZKOWITZ H. (2004) The evolution of the entrepreneurial university, International Journal of Technology and Globalisation 1, 64-77.
40. ETZKOWITZ H. and KLOFSTEN M. (2005) The innovating region: toward a theory of knowledge-based regional development, R&D Management 35, 243-255.
41. ETZKOWITZ H. and LEYDESDORFF L. (Eds) (1997) Universities in the Global Economy: ATriple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Cassell Academic, London.
42. ETZKOWITZ H., WEBSTER A., GEBHARDT C., and CANTINSO TERRA B. R. (2000) The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm, Research Policy 29, 313-330.
43. EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2002) An Assessment of the Implications for Basic Engineering Research of Failure to Publish, or Late Publication of, Papers on Subjects Which Could be Patentable. Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and Council COM (2002) 2 final. European Commission, Brussels.
44. FELDMAN M. P. (2005) The entrepreneurial event revisited: firm formation in a regional context, in BRESCHI S. and MALERBA F. (Eds) Clusters, Networks, and Innovation, pp. 136-168. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
45. FELDMAN M. P., FELLER I., BERCOVITZ J. and BURTON R. (2002) Equity and the technology transfer strategies of American research universities, Management Science 48, 105-121.
46. FIET J. O. (2002) The Systematic Search for Entrepreneurial Discoveries. Quorum, Westport, CT.
47. FLORIDA R. (1999) The role of the university: leveraging talent, not technology, Issues in Science and Technology Summer, 67-73.
48. FLORIDA R. L. and KENNEY M. (1988) Venture capital, high technology and regional development, Regional Studies 22, 33-48.
49. FRANKLIN S. J., WRIGHT M. and LOCKETT A. (2001) Academic and surrogate entrepreneurs in university spin-out companies, Journal of Technology Transfer 26, 127-141.
50. GARNSEY E. (2006) The entrepreneurial university: the idea and its critics, in SHAHID Y. and NABESHIMA K. (Eds) How Universities Promote Economic Growth, pp. 227-238. The World Bank, Washington, DC.
51. GIBBONS M., LIMOGES C., NOVOTNY H., SCHWARTZMAN S., SCOTT P. and TROW M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Sage, London.
52. GLASSON J., CHADWICK A. and LAWTON-SMITH H. (2006) Defining, explaining and managing high-tech growth: the case of Oxfordshire, European Planning Studies 14, 503-524.
53. GOLDSTEIN H. A. and RENAULT C. S. (2006) Contributions of universities to regional economic development: a quasi-experimental approach, Regional Studies 38, 733-746.
54. GOLOB E. (2006) Capturing the regional economic benefits of university technology transfer: a case study, Journal of Technology Transfer 31, 685-695.
55. GRAHAM G. (2002) Universities: The Recovery of an Idea. Imprint Academic, Exeter.
56. GRAHAM G. (2005) The Institution of Intellectual Values: Realism and Idealism in Higher Education. St. Andrews Studies in Philosophy and Public Affairs. Imprint Academic, Exeter.
57. GREGSON G. and HARRISON R. T. (2004) A real-time evaluation of intellectual capital and intellectual property rights in early-stage on-line enterprises, in SEPPA M., HANNULA M., JÄ RVELIN A.-M., KUJALA J., RUOHONEN M. and TIAINEN T. (Eds) Frontiers of E-Business Research, pp. 710-719. University of Tampere/Tampere University of Technology, Tampere.
58. GUTHRIE J. (2004) Why university spin-outs are spinning out of control?, Financial Times (London) 11 May, 13.
59. HAGUE D. and OAKLEY K. (2000) Spin-offs and Start-ups in UK Universities. CVCP, London.
60. HANNAN M. T., CARROLL G. R., DUNDON E. A. and TORRES J. C. (1992) Dynamics of Organizational Populations: Density, Legitimation and Competition. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
61. HARRISON R. T., MACINTYRE P. and MASON C. M. (1996) Informal investment in Northern Ireland. Paper presented at the Institute of Small Business Affairs Annual Conference, Belfast, UK, November 1996.
62. HARRISON R. T., MASON C. M. and GIRLING P. (2004) Financial bootstrapping and venture development in the software industry, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development 16, 307-333.
63. HARRISON S. and SULLIVAN P. H.Sr (2000) Profiting from intellectual capital: learning from leading companies, Journal of Intellectual Capital 1, 33-46.
64. HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL (HEFCE) (2003) Higher Education-Business Interaction Survey 2000-01. HEFCE, London.
65. HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL (HEFCE) (2004) Higher Education-Business Interaction Survey 2001-02. HEFCE, London.
66. HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL (HEFCE) (2005) Higher Education-Business and Community Interaction Survey 2002-03. HEFCE, London.
67. HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL (HEFCE) (2007) Higher Education-Business and Community Interaction Survey 2004-05 and 2005-06. HEFCE, London.
68. HILL F., LEITCH C. M. and HARRISON R. T. (2006) Desperately seeking finance? The demand for finance by women owned and led businesses, Venture Capital 8, 159-182.
69. H. M. TREASURY, DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY, and DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION AND SKILLS (2004) Science and Innovation: Working Towards a Ten-Year Investment Framework. HMSO, London.
70. HOLBROOK M. B. and HULBERT J. M. (2002) What do we produce in the 'Knowledge Factory' and for whom? A review essay of The Knowledge Factory by Stanley Aronowitz, Journal of Consumer Affairs 36, 99-114.
71. HUGHES A. (2007) Innovation Policy as Cargo Cult: Myth and Reality in Knowledge-Led Productivity and Growth. Working Paper Number 348. Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
72. JONES-EVANS D. (1998) Universities, Technology Transfer and Spin-Out Activities - Academic Entrepreneurship in Different European Regions. Final Report. Targeted Socio-Economic Research Project Number 1042. European Commission, Brussels.
73. JONGBLOED B., ENDERS J. and SALERNO C. (2008) Higher education and its communities: interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda, Higher Education 56, 303-324.
74. KEEBLE D. and WILKINSON F. (Eds) (2000) High-Technology Clusters, Networking and Collective Learning in Europe. Ashgate, Aldershot.
75. KENNY M. and GOE W. R. (2004) The role of social embeddedness in professional entrepreneurship: a comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford, Research Policy 33, 691-707.
76. KERR C. (2001) The Uses of the University, 5th Edn. The Godkin Lectures on the Essentials of Free Government and the Duties of the Citizen. Harvard University Press, Boston, MA.
77. KIRP D. L. (2003) Shakespeare, Einstein, and the Bottom Line: The Marketing of Higher Education. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
78. KLAGGE B. and MARTIN R. (2005) Decentralized versus centralized financial systems: is there a case for local capital markets?, Journal of Economic Geography 5, 387-421.
79. KLOFSTEN M. and JONES-EVANS D. (2000) Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe - the case of Sweden and Ireland, Small Business Economics 14, 299-309.
80. LAMBERT R. (2003) Lambert Review of Business-University Collaboration. H. M. Treasury, London.
81. LAWTON-SMITH H. (2003) Knowledge organisations and local economic development: the cases of Oxford and Grenoble, Regional Studies 37, 899-909.
82. LAWTON-SMITH H. (2007) Universities, innovation, and territorial development: a review of the evidence, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 25, 98-114.
83. LAWTON-SMITH H. and WATERS R. (2005) Employment mobility in high-technology agglomerations: the cases of Oxfordshire and Cambridgeshire, Area 37, 189-198.
84. LEE Y. S. (1996) Technology transfer and the research university: a search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration, Research Policy 25, 843-863.
85. LEITCH C. M. and HARRISON R. T. (2005) Maximising the potential of university spin-outs: the development of second-order commercialisation activities, R&D Management 35, 257-272.
86. LEITCH C. M., HILL F. M. and HARRISON R. T. (2006) The growth and financing of women-led ventures: the Northern Ireland experience, in BRUSH C., CARTER N., GATEWOOD E., GREENE P. and HART M. (Eds) Growth Oriented Women Entrepreneurs and Their Businesses: A Global Research Perspective, pp. 308-329. Edward Elgar, New York, NY.
87. LESTER R. (2008) Comment on 'commercialising university research: the Oxford model' (by Tim Cook, Raymond Dwek and Baruch Blumberg), Capitalism and Society 3, 1-5.
88. LESTER R. K. (2005) Universities, Innovation, and the Competitiveness of Local Economies. A Summary Report from the Local Innovation Systems Project - Phase I. Working Paper Number 05-010. MIT Industrial Performance Center, Cambridge, MA.
89. LEYDESDORFF L. and ETZKOWITZ H. (1996) Emergence of a triple helix of university-industry-government relations, Science and Public Policy 23, 279-286.
90. LEYDESDORFF L. and ETZKOWITZ H. (1998) The triple helix as a model for innovation studies, Science and Public Policy 25, 195-203.
91. LINDHOLM DAHLSTRAND A. (2008) University knowledge transfer and the role of academic spin-offs, in POTTER J. (Ed.) Entrepreneurship and Higher Education, pp. 235-254. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Paris.
92. LOCKETT A., SIEGEL D. A., WRIGHT M. and ENSLEY M. D. (2005) The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: managerial and policy implications, Research Policy 34, 981-993.
93. LOCKETT A., WRIGHT M. and FRANKLIN S. (2003) Technology transfer and universities' spin-out strategies, Small Business Economics 20, 185-200.
94. LUNDVALL B.-Å. (1992) National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. Frances Pinter, London.
95. LUNDVALL B.-Å., JOHNSON B., ANDERSEN E. S. and DALUM B. (2002) National systems of production, innovation and competence building, Research Policy 31, 213-231.
96. MALECKI E. J. (1997) Entrepreneurs, networks and economic development, Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence, and Growth 3, 57-118.
97. MALMBERG A. and MASKELL P. (2002) The elusive concept of localization economies: towards a knowledge-based theory of spatial clustering, Environment and Planning A 34, 429-449.
98. MARKHAM G. D., PHAN P. H., BALKIN D. B. and GIANIODIS P. T. (2005) Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer, Journal of Business Venturing 20, 241-263.
99. MARTIN R. and SUNLEY P. (2003) Deconstructing clusters: chaotic concept or policy panacea?, Journal of Economic Geography 3, 5-35.
100. MASKELL D. and ROBINSON I. (2002) The New Idea of a University. Imprint Academic, Exeter.
101. MASON C. and HARRISON R. T. (1994) The role of informal and formal sources of venture capital in the financing of technologybased SMEs in the United Kingdom, in OAKEY R. (Ed.) New Technology-Based Firms in the 1990s, pp. 104-124. Paul Chapman, London.
102. MASSEY D., QUINTAS P. and WIELD D. (1992) High Tech Fantasies: Science Parks in Society, Science and Space. Routledge, London.
103. MATTHEWS J. A. (1997) A Silicon Valley of the east: creating Taiwan's semiconductor industry, California Management Review 39, 36-54.
104. MAUSS M. (1902-1903/1972) A General Theory of Magic [1902-1903]. Norton, New York, NY.
105. MCCLOSKEY D. (1991) Voodoo economics, Poetics Today 12, 287-300.
106. MCNAUGHTON R. (2008) Technology commercialisation and universities in Canada, in POTTER J. (Ed.) Entrepreneurship and Higher Education, pp. 255-270. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Paris.
107. MEYER M. (2003) Academic entrepreneurs or entrepreneurial academics? Research-based ventures and public support mechanisms, R&D Management 33, 107-115.
108. MIAN S. (1997) Assessing and managing the university technology business incubation: an integrative framework, Journal of Business Venturing 12, 251-285.
109. MOWERY D. C., NELSON R. R., SAMPAT B. N. and ZIEDONIS A. A. (2001) The growth of patenting and licensing by US universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dohl Act of 1980, Research Policy 30, 99-119.
110. NECK H. M., MEYER G. D., COHEN B. and CORBETT A. C. (2004) An entrepreneurial system view of new venture creation, Journal of Small Business Management 42, 190-208.
111. NELSON R. R. (1993) National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
112. NICOLAOU N. and BIRLEY S. (2003) Academic networks in a trichotomous categorization of university spinouts, Journal of Business Venturing 18, 333-359.
113. NOVOTNY H., SCOTT P. and GIBBONS M. (2001) Rethinking Science. Knowledge and the Public in the Age of Uncertainty. Polity, Oxford.
114. OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (OST) (1998) Science Enterprise Challenge. OST, London (available at: http://www.ost.gov.uk/enterprise/knowledge/sec.htm).
115. ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (OECD) (2002) Benchmarking Industry-Science Relationships. OECD, Paris.
116. PEARSON I. (2000) Universities and Innovation: Meeting the Challenge. Social Market Foundation, London.
117. PÉREZ PÉREZ M. and MARTÍNEZ SÁNCHEZ A. (2002) The development of university spin-offs: early dynamics of technology transfer and networking, Technovation 23, 823-831.
118. PIRNANY F., SURLEMONT B. and NLMEVO F. (2003) Toward a typology of university spin-offs, Small Business Economics 21, 355-369.
119. POWERS J. B. and MCDOUGALL P. (2003) University entrepreneurship: testing a typology and its performance effects on technology licensing to firms that go public, in BYGRAVE W., BRUSH C., DAVIDSSON P., FIET J., GREENE P., HARRISON R., LERNER M., MEYER G., SOHL J. and ZACHARAKIS A. (Eds) Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, pp. 594-603. Babson College, Babson Park, MA.
120. POWERS J. B. and MCDOUGALL P. (2005) Policy orientation effects on performance with licensing to start-ups and small companies, Research Policy 34, 1028-1042.
121. POYAGO-THEOTOKY J., BEATH J. and SIEGEL D. S. (2002) Universities and fundamental research: reflections on the growth of university-industry partnerships, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 18, 10-21.
122. PREVEZER M. (2001) Ingredients in the early development of the US biotechnology industry, Small Business Economics 17, 17-29.
123. QUARNBY L. (2002) The financing of university spin-outs, Finance for Small Firms - A Ninth Report. April, pp. 65-86. Bank of England, London.
124. RADOSEVICH R. (1995) A model for entrepreneurial spin-offs from public technology sources, International Journal of Technology Management 10, 879-893.
125. RAPPERT B. and WEBSTER A. (1998) Links between universities and their spin-offs, Industry and Higher Education 12, 332-338.
126. REICHERT S. (2006) The Rise of Knowledge Regions: Emerging Opportunities and Challenges for Universities. European University Association (EUA) Publ. Brussels.
127. ROBERTS E. B. (1991) Entrepreneurs in High Technology - Lessons from MITand Beyond. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
128. ROBERTS E. B. and MALONE D. E. (1996) Policies and structures for spinning off new companies from research and development organizations, R&D Management 26, 17-48.
129. ROGERS E. M., YIN J. and HOFFMAN J. (2000) Assessing the effectiveness of technology transfer offices at US research universities, AUTM Journal 12, 47-80.
130. ROTHAERMEL F. T., AGUNG S. D. and JIANG L. (2007) University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature, Industrial and Corporate Change 16, 691-791.
131. RUTTEN R., BOEKEMA F. and KUIJPERS E. (2003) in RUTTEN R., BOUKEMA F. and KUIJPERS E. (Eds) Economic Geography of Higher Education. Knowledge Infrastructure and Learning Regions. Routledge, London.
132. SANDERSON M. (Ed.) (1975) The Universities in the Nineteenth Century. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
133. SCHINN T. (2002) The triple helix and new production of knowledge: prepackaged thinking on science and technology, Social Studies of Science 32, 599-614.
134. SENKER J. (1990) Conflict and cooperation: industrial funding of university research, Journal of General Management 15, 55-62.
135. SEQAL QUINCE & PARTNERS (1985) The Cambridge Phenomenon: The Growth of High Technology Industry in a University Town, Segal Quince & Partners, Cambridge.
136. SHANE S. (2004a) Academic Entrepreneurship. University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
137. SHANE S. (2004b) A General Theory of Entrepreneurship: The Individual-Opportunity Nexus. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
138. SHANE S. (2004c) Encouraging university entrepreneurship: the effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on university patenting in the United States, Journal of Business Venturing 19, 127-151.
139. SHAPERO A. and SOKOL L. (1982) The social dimensions of entrepreneurship, in KENT C. A., SEXTON D. L. and VESPER K. H. (Eds) Encyclopaedia of Entrepreneurship, pp. 72-90. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
140. SIEGEL D. S., WALDMAN D. A. and LINK A. N. (2003) Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study, Research Policy 32, 27-48.
141. SIEGEL D. S., WRIGHT M. and LOCKETT A. (2007) The rise of entrepreneurial activity at universities: organizational and societal implications, Industrial and Corporate Change 16, 489-584.
142. SLAUGHTER S. and LESLIE L. L. (1997) Academic Capitalism. Politics, Policies, and the Entrepreneurial University. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
143. SLAUGHTER S. and RHOADES G. (2004) Academic Capitalism and the New Economy: Markets, State and Higher Education. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
144. SMILOR R., O'DONNELL N., STEIN G. and WELBORN R. S.III (2007) The research university and the development of hightechnology centers in the United States, Economic Development Quarterly 21, 203-222.
145. SMILOR R. W. and FEESER H. R. (1991) Chaos and the entrepreneurial process: patterns and policy implications for technology entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Venturing 6, 165-172.
146. SMILOR R. W., GIBSON D. V. and DIETRICH G. B. (1990) University spin-out companies: technology start-ups from UT-Austin, Journal of Business Venturing 5, 63-76.
147. SMILOR R.W., GIBSON D. V. and KOZMETSKY G. (1989) Creating the technopolis: high-technology development in Austin, Texas, Journal of Business Venturing 4, 49-67.
148. SNOWDON K. (2003) Spin-off and Entrepreneurial Training Model. Working Paper. University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne.
149. SPILLING O. R. (1996) The entrepreneurial system: on entrepreneurship in the context of a mega-event, Journal of Business Research 36, 91-103.
150. STANDEVEN P. (1993) Financing the Early Stage Technology Firm in the 1990s: An International Perspective. Discussion Paper prepared for the Six Countries Programme Conference on 'Financing the Early Stage Technology Company in the 1990s: An International Perspective', Montreal, QC, Canada.
151. STEFFENSEN M., ROGERS E. M. and SPEAKMAN K. (2000) Spin-offs from research centers at a research university, Journal of Business Venturing 15, 93-111.
152. STEWART J. (2006) The Spin-Out Process from a Founder's Point of View. UnpublishedWorking Paper. Centre for Entrepreneurship Research, University of Edinburgh Management School, Edinburgh.
153. STINCHCOMBE A. L. (1995) Social structure and organisations, in MARCH J. G. (Ed.) Handbook of Organisations, pp. 142-193. Rand McNally, Chicago, IL.
154. STOCKHAMMER C. (2005) Why Some Research Insights Find Their Way to Market and Some Do Not - Social Capital as Resource Within the Triple Helix. Paper Number A204 (available at: http://www.triplehelix5.com/pdf/A204_THC5.pdf) (accessed on 6 February 2006).
155. SULLIVAN P. H. JR and SULLIVAN P. H.SR (2000) Valuing intangibles companies: an intellectual capital approach, Journal of Intellectual Capital 1, 328-340.
156. SWAMIDASS P. M. and VULASA V. (2008) Why university inventions rarely produce income? Bottlenecks in university technology transfer, Journal of Technology Transfer 34, 343-363.
157. TARGETING INNOVATION (2008) Scottish University Spin-out Study. Targeting Innovation, Glasgow.
158. TEECE D. (1986) Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy, Research Policy 15, 285-305.
159. TEECE D. (2002) Managing Intellectual Capital. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
160. TOMES A. (2003) UK government science policy: the 'Enterprise Deficit' fallacy, Technovation 23, 785-792.
161. TUUNAINEN J. (2005) Contesting a hybrid firm at a traditional university, Social Studies of Science 35, 173-210.
162. VAN DE VEN A. H. (1993) The development of an infrastructure for entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Venturing 8, 211-230.
163. VASS T. E. (2008) Unchallenged Assumptions about Innovation Meet Shibboleths of University Tech Transfer. The Technology Transfer and Innovation Series: The Private Capital MarketWorking Paper Number 2008-09-01, 4 June. Social Science Research Network (SSRN) (available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1271670).
164. VESTERGAARD J. (2007) The entrepreneurial university revisited: conflicts and the importance of role separation, Social Epistemology 21, 41-54.
165. VOHORA A., WRIGHT M. and LOCKETT A. (2004) Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies, Research Policy 33, 147-175.
166. VORLEY T. and NELLES J. (2008) (Re)conceptualising the academy: institutional development of and beyond the Third Mission, Higher Education Management and Policy 20, 109-126.
167. WALSHOK M. L. (1995) KnowledgeWithout Boundaries: What America's Research Universities Can Do for the Economy, theWorkplace and the Community. Jossey Bass, San Francisco, CA.
168. WINK R. (Ed.) (2004) Academia-Business Links. European Policy Strategies and Lessons Learnt. Palgrave Macmillan, London.
169. WRIGHT M., CLARYSSE B., MUSTAR P. and LOCKETT A. (2007) Academic Entrepreneurship in Europe. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
170. WRIGHT M., LOCKETT A., CLARYSSE B. and BINKS M. (2006) University spin-out companies and venture capital, Research Policy 35, 481-501.
171. WRIGHT M., VOHORA A. and LOCKETT A. (2004) The formation of high-tech university spinouts: the role of joint ventures and venture capital investors, Journal of Technology Transfer 29, 287-310.
172. ZACHARAKIS A. L., MEYER D., DE and CASTRO J. (1999) Differing perceptions of new venture failure: a matched exploratory study of venture capitalists and entrepreneurs, Journal of Small Business Management 37, 1-14.
173. ZACHARAKIS A. L., SHEPHERD D. A. and COOMBS J. E. (2003) Research Note: The development of venture-capital-backed internet companies: an ecosystem perspective, Journal of Business Venturing 18, 217-231.
174. ZUCKER L. G. and DARBY M. R. (2005) Socio Economic Impact of Nanoscale Science: Initial Results and Nanobank. Working Paper Number W11181. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). Cambridge, MA.