Investigating the complexity facing academic entrepreneurs in science and engineering: The complementarities of research performance, networks and support structures in commercialisation

Cambridge Journal of Economics

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 751-780

  Bourelos, Evangelos ^a   Magnusson, Mats ^b   Mckelvey, Maureen ^a  

^a Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship   (Sweden)

^b ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Academic entrepreneurship; Commercialisation policies; Spin offs; Swedish academics; University patenting

Indexed keywords

COMMERCIALIZATION; ENTREPRENEUR; GEOGRAPHY EDUCATION; HIGHER EDUCATION; RESEARCH; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

SWEDEN;

EID: 84861117612     PISSN: 0309166X     EISSN: 14643545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/cje/bes014     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Aldrich, H., Rosen, B. and Woodward, W. 1987. The impact of social networks on business foundings and profit: a longitudinal study, Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, vol. 7, 154-68.
2. Allison, P. D., Long, J. S. and Krauze, T. K. 1982. Cumulative advantage and inequality in science, American Sociological Review, vol. 47, 615-25.
3. Balconi, M., Breschi, S. and Lissoni, F. 2004. Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data, Research Policy, vol. 33, 127-45.
4. Baldini, N., Grimaldi, R. and Sobrero, M. 2006. Institutional changes and the commercialization of academic knowledge: a study of Italian universities' patenting activities between 1965 and 2002, Research Policy, vol. 35, 518-32.
5. Birley, S. 1985. The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process, Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 1, 107-17.
6. Björk, J., Di Vincenzo, F., Magnusson, M. and Mascia, D. 2010. 'The Impact of Social Capital on Ideation: Untapping the Knowledge Creation Potential of Internal Networks, Center for Business Innovation Working Paper Series no. 16.
7. Bornmann, L., Leydesdorff, L. and Van den Besselaar, P. 2010. A meta-evaluation of scientific research proposals: different ways of comparing rejected to awarded applications, Journal of Informetrics, vol. 4, 211-20.
8. Breschi, S., Lissoni, F. and Montobbio,F. 2007. The scientific productivity of academic inventors: new evidence from Italian data, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, vol. 16, 101-18.
9. Broström, A. and McKelvey, M. 2009. How do organisational and cognitive distances shape firms interaction with universities and public research institutes?, DRUID Summer conference 2009.
10. Brush, C., Duhaime, I., Gartner, W., Stewart, A., Katz, J., Hitt, M., Alvarez, S., Meyer, G. and Venkataraman, S. 2003. Doctoral education in the field of entrepreneurship, Journal of Management, vol. 29, 309.
11. Campbell, A. 2005. The evolving concept of value add in university commercialisation, Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, vol. 11, 337-45.
12. Chok, J. 2009. Regulatory dependence and scientific advisory boards, Research Policy, vol. 38, 710-25.
13. Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R. and Walsh, J. P. 2002. Links and impact: the influence of public research on industrial R&D, Management Science, vol. 48, 1-23.
14. Di Gregorio, D. and Shane, S. 2003. Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, vol. 32, 209-27.
15. Dosi, G., Llerena, P. and Labini, M. S. 2006. The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: an illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called 'European Paradox', Research Policy, vol. 35, 1450-64.
16. Ds 1999:68. Departementsserien. Government Bills, p. 79.
17. Edquist, C. and McKelvey, M. 1991. 'The Diffusion of New Product Technologies and Productivity Growth in Swedish Industry, Consortium on Competitiveness and Cooperation Working Paper no. 91-15, 1992. Center for Research in Management, Berkeley, CA: University of California.
18. Ejermo, O. 2005. Country report: efforts and performance of R&D in Sweden, in Efforts and Performance of R&D in the Nordic Countries, ed. by S. Jespersen Efforts and Performance of R&D in the Nordic Countries, ed. by S. Jespersen Copenhagen, Denmark. Ministry of Finance.
19. Eklund, M. 2005. Reception of the Innovation System Concept in Sweden, Ekonomiskhistoriska mötet, Umeå, Sweden.
20. Etzkowitz, H. 2002. Incubation of incubators: innovation as a triple helix of university-industry-government networks, Science and Public Policy, vol. 29, 115-28.
21. Etzkowitz, H. 2004. The evolution of the entrepreneurial university, International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, vol. 1, 64-77.
22. Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. and Nelson, R. 2006. The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford University Press, USA.
23. Flodström, A. 1999. Utredning om Vissa Myndigheter, Sweden. Ministry of Industry.
24. Fridholm, T. 2010. Working Together: Exploring Relational Tensions in Swedish Academia, Sweden. Uppsala Universitet.
25. Gartner, W. and Birley, S. 2002. Introduction to the special issue on qualitative methods in entrepreneurship research, Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 17, 387-95.
26. Geuna, A. 1999. The economics of knowledge production: funding and the structure of university research, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.
27. Geuna, A. and Nesta, L. J. J. 2006. University patenting and its effects on academic research: the emerging European evidence, Research Policy, vol. 35, 790-807.
28. Goldfarb, B. and Henrekson, M. 2003. Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property, Research Policy, vol. 32, 639-58.
29. Hellstrom, T. and Jacob, M. 1999. Evaluating and managing the performance of university-industry partnerships: from central rule to dynamic research networks, Evaluation, vol. 5, 330.
30. Henderson, R., Jaffe, A. B. and Trajtenberg, M. 1998. Universities as a source of commercial technology: a detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965-1988, Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 80, 119-27.
31. Henrekson, M. and Rosenberg, N. 2001. Designing efficient institutions for science-based entrepreneurship: lesson from the US and Sweden, Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 26, 207-31.
32. Hornaday, J. 1982. Research about living entrepreneurs, pp. 39-71 in Kent, C.A., Sexton, D.L. and Vesper. K.H. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
33. Isaacson, R., Mitchell, R. and Starr, L. 1994. Getting the most from a scientific advisory board, Research Technology Management, vol. 37, 33-7.
34. Jacob, M., Lundqvist, M. and Hellsmark, H. 2003. Entrepreneurial transformations in the Swedish University system: the case of Chalmers University of Technology, Research Policy, vol. 32, 1555-68.
35. Jacobsson, S. and Granberg, A. 2006. Myth or reality-a scrutiny of dominant beliefs in the Swedish science policy debate, Science and Public Policy, vol. 33, 321-40.
36. Jacobsson, S. and Rickne, A. 2004. How large is the Swedish 'academic' sector really? A critical analysis of the use of science and technology indicators, Research Policy, vol. 33, 1355-72.
37. Jaffe, A.B. and Lerner, J. 2001. Reinventing public R&D: patent policy and the commercialization of national laboratory technologies, The RAND Journal of Economics, vol. 32, 167-98.
38. Jain, S., Gerald, G. and Maltarich, M. 2009. Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity, Research Policy, vol. 38, 922-35.
39. Johannisson, B. 1988. Business formation-a network approach, Scandinavian Journal of Management, vol. 4, 83-99.
40. Kenney, M. and Richard Goe, W. 2004. The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: a comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford, Research Policy, vol. 33, 691-707.
41. Klofsten, M. and Jones-Evans, D. 2000. Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe: the case of Sweden and Ireland, Small Business Economics, vol. 14, 299-309.
42. Laage-Hellman, J., McKelvey, M. and Johansson, M. 2009. 'Analysis of Chain-linked Effects of Public Policy-Effects on Research and Industry in Swedish Life Sciences within Innovative Food and Medical Technology', Sweden, Vinnova Analysis no. VA: 2009, 20.
43. Laage-Hellman, J. and Rickne, A. 2007. Hur blir man en vinnare? Fallet Biomedicinsk Utveckling i väst Sverige, Regional Växtkraft i en Global Ekonomi, book chapter, Sweden, Santéreus Academic Press.
44. Lach, S. and Schankerman, M. A. 2004. Incentives and Invention in Universities, SSRN eLibrary.
45. Laestadius, S., Nuur, C. and Ylinenpää, H. 2007. Regional växtkraft I en global ekonomi, book chapter, Sweden, Santéreus Academic Press.
46. Lissoni, F., Llerena, P., McKelvey, M. and Sanditov, B. 2008. Academic patenting in Europe: new evidence from the KEINS database, Research Evaluation, vol. 17, 87-102.
47. Ljungberg, D., McKelvey, M., Zaring, O., Laage-Hellman, J. and Szuc, S. 2012. Collaboration strategies and university-industry relationships: case studies of two Swedish university research centers, in McKelvey, M. and Lassen, A. H. (eds), Portfolio of Case Studies in Knowledge-Intensive Entrepreneurship, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.
48. Lockett, A., Wright, M. and Franklin, S. 2003. Technology transfer and universities' spin-out strategies, Small Business Economics, vol. 20, 185-200.
49. Magnusson, M., McKelvey, M. and Versiglioni, M. 2009. The forgotten individuals: attitudes and skills in academic commercialization in Sweden, Learning to Compete in European Universities: From Social Institution to Knowledge Business, book chapter, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.
50. Mansfield, E. 1991. Academic research and industrial innovation, Research Policy, vol. 20, 1-12.
51. Mansfield, E. 1998. Academic research and industrial innovation: an update of empirical findings, Research Policy, vol. 26, 773-6.
52. Merton, R. 1968. The Matthew Effect in Science, Science, 56-63.
53. Owen-Smith, J. and Powell, W. W. 2003. The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: assessing the importance of experience and connectivity, Research Policy, vol. 32, 1695-711.
54. Pavitt, K. 1998. The social shaping of the national science base, Research Policy, vol. 27, 793-805.
55. Pelz, D. C. and Andrews, F. M. 1976. Scientists in Organizations, rev. edn, Ann Arbor, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.
56. Philpott, K., Dooley, L., O'Reilly, C. and Lupton, G. 2011. The entrepreneurial university: examining the underlying academic tensions, Technovation, vol. 31, 161-70.
57. Powers, J. and McDougall, 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, vol. 20, 291-311.
58. Powers, J. B. 2004. R&D funding sources and university technology transfer: what is stimulating universities to be more entrepreneurial?, Research in Higher Education, vol. 45, 1-23.
59. Pries, F. and Guild, P. 2011. Commercializing inventions resulting from university research: analyzing the impact of technology characteristics on subsequent business models, Technovation, vol. 31, 151-60.
60. Prodan, I. and Drnovsek, M. 2010. Conceptualizing academic-entrepreneurial intentions: an empirical test, Technovation, vol. 30, 332-47.
61. Prop. 1999/2000:81. Proposition. Government Bills, p. 14 f.
62. Rasmussen, E., Moen, Ø and Gulbrandsen, M. 2006. Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge, Technovation, vol. 26, 518-33.
63. Rosenberg, N. 1992. Scientific instrumentation and university research, Research Policy, vol. 21, 381-90.
64. Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. and Link, A. 2003. Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study, Research Policy, vol. 32, 27-48.
65. Slaughter, S. and Leslie, L. 1997. Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies, and the Entrepreneurial University, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.
66. SOU. 1998. Statens offentliga utredningar. 128, pp. 153-4.
67. Stuart, T. and Ding, W. 2006. When do scientists become entrepreneurs? The social structural antecedents of commercial activity in the academic life sciences, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 112, 97-144.
68. Thornton, P. 1999. The sociology of entrepreneurship, Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 25, 19-46.
69. Thursby,M. C., Thursby, J.G. and Gupta-Mukherjee, S. 2005. Are There Real Effects of Licensing on Academic Research? A Life Cycle View, SSRN eLibrary.
70. Van Looy, B., Ranga, M., Callaert, J., Debackere, K. and Zimmermann, E. 2004. Combining Entrepreneurial and Scientific Performance in Academia: Towards a Compounded and Reciprocal Matthew-Effect?, Leuven, Katholieke Universiteit.
71. Vesper, K. H. and Gartner,W. 1997. Measuring progress in entrepreneurship education, Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 12, 403-21.
72. Vesper, K. H. 1980. New Venture Strategies, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall.
73. William Todorovic, Z., McNaughton, R. B. and Guild, P. 2010. ENTRE-U: an entrepreneurial orientation scale for universities, Technovation, vol. 31, 128-37.
74. Vinnova 2007. 'Public Procurement as a Driver for Innovation and Change', Sweden, Vinnova no. VP 2007:03.
75. Vinnova 2009. Research, Development and Innovation: Strategy Proposal for Sustainable Growth, Sweden, Vinnova.
76. Witt, P. 2004. Entrepreneurs, networks and the success of start-ups, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, vol. 16, 391-413.
77. Zucker, L. and Darby, M. 1996. Star scientists and institutional transformation: patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, vol. 93, 12709.
78. Zucker, L., Darby, M. and Brewer, M. 1998. Intellectual human capital and the birth of US biotechnology enterprises, The American Economic Review, vol. 88, 290-306.
79. Zucker, L. G., Darby,M. R. and Armstrong, J. S. 2002. Commercializing knowledge: university science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology, Management Science, vol. 48, 138-53.