Nurture or nature? The growth paradox of research-based spin-offs

Technology Analysis and Strategic Management

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 21-35

  Zerbinati, Stefania ^a   Souitaris, Vangelis ^a   Moray, Nathalie ^b  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE GHENT   (Belgium)

Author keywords

growth; research based spin offs

Indexed keywords

CAPITAL; COMPLEXITY; DATA SET; ECONOMIC GROWTH; EMPLOYMENT; INNOVATION; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT; TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

BELGIUM; FLANDERS;

EID: 84855963710     PISSN: 09537325     EISSN: 14653990     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09537325.2012.643558     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Amit, R. and Schoemaker, P. J.H. 1993. Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 33-46.
2. AUTM. 2002. AUTM Licensing Survey. Association of University Technology Managers, Norwalk, CT.
3. Barney, J. B. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17: 99-120.
4. Baron, J., Hannan, M. T. and Burton, M. D. 1999. Building the iron cage: Determinants of managerial intensity in the early years of organizations. American Sociological Review, 64: 527-47.
5. Baum, J. A.C. and Silverman, B. S. 2004. Picking winners or building them? Alliance, intellectual and human capital as selection criteria in venture financing and performance of biotechnology start-ups. Journal of Business Venturing, 19: 411-36.
6. Bray, M. J. and Lee, J. N. 2000. University revenues from technology transfer: Licensing fees vs. equity positions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15: 385-92.
7. Cantwell, J. and Iammarino, S. 2001. EU regions and multinational corporations: Change, stability and strengthening of technological comparative advantages. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10: 1007-37.
8. Certo, T. S. 2003. Influencing initial public offering investors with prestige: Signaling with board structures. Academy of Management Review, 28: 432-46.
9. Chiesa, V. and Piccaluga, A. 2000. Exploitation and diffusion of public research: The general framework and the case of academic spin-off companies. R&D Management, 30: 329-40.
10. Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A. and Mustar, P. 2007. Academic spin-offs, formal technology transfer and capital raising. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16: 609-40.
11. Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Van de Velde, E. and Vohora, A. 2005. Spinning out new ventures: A typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions. Journal of Business Venturing, 20: 183-216.
12. Cooper, A., Gimeno-Gascon, F. J. and Woo, C. Y. 1994. Initial human and financial capital as predictors of new venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 9: 371-95.
13. Dacin, M. T., Goodstain, J. and Scott, W. R. 2002. Institutional theory and institutional change: Introduction to the special research forum. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 45-56.
14. Davidsson, P., Hunter, E. and Klofsten, M. 2006. Institutional forces: The invisible hand that shapes venture ideas?. International Small Business Journal, 24: 115-31.
15. Davila, A., Foster, G. and Gupta, M. 2003. Venture capital financing and the growth of start-up firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 18: 689-708.
16. Delmar, F., Davidsson, P. and Gartner, W. B. 2003. Arriving at the high-growth firm. Journal of Business Venturing, 18: 189-216.
17. Degroof, J. J. and Roberts, E. B. 2004. Overcoming weak entrepreneurial infrastructures for academic spin-off ventures. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29: 327-52.
18. DiGregorio, D. and Shane, S. 2003. Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?. Research Policy, 32: 209-27.
19. DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organisational fields. American Sociological Review, 48: 147-60.
20. Djokovic, D. and Souitaris, V. 2008. Spinouts form academic institutions. A literature review with suggestions for further research. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33: 225-47.
21. Eisenhardt, K. and Schoonhoven, C. B. 1990. Organizational growth: Linking founding team, strategy, environment and growth among U.S. semiconductor ventures, 1978-1988. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 504-29.
22. Ensley, M. D. and Hmieleski, K. M. 2005. A comparative study of new venture top management team composition, dynamics and performance between university based start-ups and independent start-ups. Research Policy, 34: 1091-105.
23. Feldman, M., Feller, I., Bercovitz, J. and Burton, R. 2002. Equity and the technology transfer strategies of American research universities. Management Science, 48: 105-21.
24. Ginsberg, A. 1994. Minding the competition: From mapping to mastering. Strategic Management Journal, 15(Winter Special Issue): 153-74.
25. Grandi, A. and Grimaldi, R. 2003. Exploring the networking characteristics of new venture founding teams. Small Business Economics, 21: 329-41.
26. Gruber, M., Heinemann, F., Brettel, M. and Hungeling, S. 2010. Configurations of resources and capabilities and their performance implications: An exploratory study on technology ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 31: 1337-56.
27. Heiman, S., Sanchez, D. and Tuleja, T. 1995. "Buying influences. Chapter 5". In The new strategic selling: The unique sales system proven successful by the world's best companies, Reno, NV: Miller Heiman.
28. Henrekson, M. and Rosenberg, N. 2001. Designing efficient institutions for science-based entrepreneurship: Lessons from the US and Sweden. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26: 207-31.
29. Johansson, M. 2007. Corporate spin-offs and the significance of founders' informal relations. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 19: 789-806.
30. Lee, C., Kyungmook, L. and Pennings, J. M. 2001. Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: A study on technology-based ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 615-40.
31. Lockett, A. and Wright, M. 2005. Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research Policy, 34: 1043-57.
32. Mangematin, V., Lemarie, S., Boisson, J-P. and Catherine, D. 2003. Development of SMEs and heterogeneity of trajectories: The case of biotechnology in France. Research Policy, 32: 621-39.
33. Markman, G. D., Phan, P. H., Balkin, D. B. and Gianiodis, P. T. 2005. Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer. Journal of Business Venturing, 20: 241-63.
34. Moray, N. and Clarysse, B. 2005. Institutional change and resource endowments to science-based entrepreneurial firms. Research Policy, 34: 1010-27.
35. Mustar, P. 1997. Spin-off enterprises. How French academics create high-tech companies: The conditions for success or failure. Science and Public Policy, 24: 37-43.
36. Mustar, P., Renault, M., Colombo, M. G., Piva, E., Fontes, M., Lockett, A., Wright, M., Clarysse, B. and Moray, N. 2006. Conceptualising the heterogeneity of research-based spin-offs: A multi-dimensional taxonomy. Research Policy, 35: 289-308.
37. Nicolaou, N. and Birley, S. 2003. Academic networks in a trichotomous categorization of university spinouts. Journal of Business Venturing, 18: 333-59.
38. Nosella, A. and Grimaldi, R. 2009. University-level mechanisms supporting the creation of new companies: An analysis of Italian academic spin-offs. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 21: 679-98.
39. Oliver, C. 1997. Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and resource based views. Strategic Management Journal, 18: 697-713.
40. Powers, J. B. and McDougall, P. P. 2005. University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: A resource-based view of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 20: 291-311.
41. Roberts, E. B. 1991. Entrepreneurs in high technology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
42. Rothaermel, F. T. and Thursby, M. 2005. University-incubator firm knowledge flows: Assessing their impact on incubator firm performance. Research Policy, 34: 305-20.
43. Shane, S. 2002. Selling university technology: Patterns from MIT. Management Science, 48: 122-37.
44. Shane, S. 2004. Encouraging university entrepreneurship? The effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on university patenting in the United States. Journal of Business Venturing, 19: 127-51.
45. Shane, S. and Stuart, T. 2002. Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science, 48: 154-70.
46. Tornatzky, L., Waugaman, P. and Gray, D. 1999. Industry-university technology transfer: Models of alternative practise, policy, and program Atlanta, GA A Report of the Southern Technology Council
47. Van Looy, B., Debackere, K. and Andries, P. 2003. Policies to stimulate regional innovation capabilities via university-industry collaboration: An analysis and an assessment. R&D Management, 33: 209-29.