Universities and the success of entrepreneurial ventures: Evidence from the small business innovation research program

Journal of Technology Transfer

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 404-415

  Siegel, Donald S ^a   Wessner, Charles ^b  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL   (United States)

Author keywords

Commercialization; Entrepreneurship; Small business innovation research program (SBIR); University technology transfer

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864305572     PISSN: 08929912     EISSN: 15737047     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10961-010-9186-3     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Audretsch, D. (2000). Is university entrepreneurship different? Mimeo, Indiana University.
2. Audretsch, D., Link, A., & Scott, J. T. (2002). Public/private technology partnerships: Evaluating SBIR-supported research. Research Policy, 31, 145-158.
3. Colombo, M., & Grilli, L. (2005). Founders human capital and the growth of new technology-based firms: A competence-based view. Research Policy, 34, 795-816.
4. Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, 32, 209-227.
5. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Schoonhoven, C. B. (1990). Organizational growth: Linking founding team, strategy, environment, and growth among U. S. semiconductor ventures, 1978-1988. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(3), 504-529.
6. Finkelstein, S., & Hambrick, D. C. (1990). Top-management team tenure and organizational outcomes: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(3), 484-503.
7. Foltz, J., Barham, B. L., Chavas, J.-P., & Kim, K. (2005). Efficiency and technological change at U. S. universities, paper presented at the technology transfer society meetings, Kauffman Foundation, Kansas City, MO, September 2005.
8. Gilbert, B., McDougall, P., & Audretsch, D. B. (2006). New venture growth: A review and extension. Journal of Management, 32(6), 926-950.
9. Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. American Economic Review, 91(1), 240-259.
10. Lacetera, N. (2007). Academic entrepreneurship. Mimeo, SSRN (http://ssrn. com/abstract=1090714).
11. Lerner, J. (1999). The government as venture capitalist: The long-run effects of the SBIR program. Journal of Business, 72(3), 285-297.
12. Link, A. N., & Ruhm, C. J. (2009). Bringing science to market: Commercializing from NIH SBIR awards. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 18, 381-402.
13. Link, A. N., & Ruhm, C. J. (forthcoming). Public knowledge, private knowledge: The intellectual capital of entrepreneurs. Small Business Economics.
14. Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2009). Private investor participation and commercialization rates for government-sponsored research and development: Would a prediction market improve the performance of the SBIR programme? Economica, 76, 264-281.
15. Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2010). Government as entrepreneur: Evaluating the commercialization success of SBIR projects. Research Policy, 39(2010), 589-601.
16. Louis, K. S., Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M. E., & Stoto, M. A. (1989). Entrepreneurs in academe: An exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 110-131.
17. O'Shea, R., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer, and spin-off performance of U. S. universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 981-993.
18. Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691-791.
19. Shane, S. (2002). Selling university technology: Patterns from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 122-137.
20. Shane, S., & Stuart, T. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science, 48(1), 154-170.
21. Shrader, R., & Siegel, D. S. (2007). Assessing the relationship between human capital and firm performance: Evidence from technology-based new ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(6), 893-907.
22. Siegel, D. S., & Phan, P. (2005). Analyzing the effectiveness of university technology transfer: Implications for entrepreneurship education. In G. Liebcap (Ed.), Advances in the study of entrepreneurship, innovation, and economic growth (Vol. 16, pp. 1-38). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science/JAI Press.
23. Vyakarnam, S., & Handelberg, J. (2005). Four themes of the impact of management teams on organizational performance: Implications for future research of entrepreneurial teams. International Small Business Journal, 23(3), 236-256.
24. Wessner, C. W. (2008). An assessment of the small business innovation research program. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
25. Wessner, C. W. (2009). An assessment of the SBIR program at the department of defense. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
26. Wiersema, M., & Bantel, K. (1992). Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management Journal, 35(1), 91-121.
27. Winkelmann, R., & Zimmerman, K. (1995). Recent developments in count data modeling: Theory and an application. Journal of Economic Surveys, 9(1), 1-24.
28. Zucker, L. G., & Darby, M. R. (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, 93, 709-716.
29. Zucker, L. G., Darby, M. R., & Armstrong, J. (1998a). Geographically localized knowledge: Spillovers or markets? Economic Inquiry, 36(1), 65-86.
30. Zucker, L. G., Darby, M. R., & Brewer, M. B. (1998b). Intellectual human capital and the birth of U. S. biotechnology enterprises. American Economic Review, 88(1), 290-306.
31. Zucker, L. G., & Darby, M. R. (2001). Capturing technological opportunity via Japan's star scientists: Evidence from Japanese firms' biotech patents and products. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 37-58.