Technology transfer offices as boundary spanners in the pre-spin-off process: The case of a hybrid model

Small Business Economics

Volumn 43, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 289-307

  Huyghe, Annelore ^a   Knockaert, Mirjam ^a,b   Wright, Mike ^a,c   Piva, Evila ^d  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^c IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d POLITECNICO DI MILANO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Boundary spanning; Nascent spin offs; Proximity; Technology transfer office

Indexed keywords

EID: 84904183326     PISSN: 0921898X     EISSN: 15730913     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11187-013-9537-1     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Ambos, T. C., Makela, K., Birkinshaw, J., & D'Este, P. (2008). When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1424-1447.
2. Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009). Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20(4), 696-717.
3. Apple, K. S. (2008). Evaluating technology transfer offices. International Studies in Entrepreneurship, 17, 139-157.
4. Ashkanasy, N. M., Wilderom, C. P., & Peterson, M. F. (2000). The handbook of organizational culture and climate. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2008). Academic entrepreneurs: Organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science, 19(1), 69-89.
6. Bercovitz, J., Feldman, M., Feller, I., & Burton, R. (2001). Organizational structure as a determinant of academic patent and licensing behavior: An exploratory study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, and Pennsylvania State universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1), 21-35.
7. Booz, R. J., & Lewis, L. K. (1997). Facilitating technology transfer among organizations: An applied communication strategy concept for organizational boundary spanners. Journal of Technology Transfer, 22(1), 35-46.
8. Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61-74.
9. Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1997). The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 1-34.
10. Cash, D. W. (2001). "In order to aid in diffusion useful and practical information": Agricultural extension and boundary organizations. Science, Technology and Human Values, 26, 431-453.
11. Clark, B. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. New York: Pergamon.
12. Comacchio, A., Bonesso, S., & Pizzi, C. (2012). Boundary spanning between industry and university: The role of technology transfer centres. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(6), 943-966.
13. Coupe, T. (2003). Science is golden: Academic R&D and university patents. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1), 31-46.
14. Debackere, K., & Veugelers, R. (2005). The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links. Research Policy, 34(3), 321-342.
15. Djokovic, D., & Souitaris, V. (2008). Spinouts from academic institutions: A literature review with suggestions for further research. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 225-247.
16. Doz, Y. L. (1996). The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances: Initial conditions or learning processes? Strategic Management Journal, 17, 55-83.
17. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case-study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
18. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as 'quasi-firms': The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32(1), 109-121.
19. Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226.
20. Guston, D. H. (1999). Stabilizing the boundary between US politics and science: The role of the Office of Technology Transfer as a boundary organization. Social Studies of Science, 29, 87-111.
21. Hackett, E. (2001). Organizational perspectives on university-industry research relations. In J. Croissant & S. P. Restivo (Eds.), Degrees of compromise (pp. 1-21). Albany: State University of New York Press.
22. Hellström, T., & Jacob, M. (2003). Boundary organisations in science: From discourse to construction. Science and Public Policy, 30(4), 235-238.
23. Hofstede, G. (1998). Identifying organizational subcultures: An empirical approach. Journal of Management Studies, 35(1), 1-12.
24. Hoppe, H. C., & Ozdenoren, E. (2005). Intermediation in innovation. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 23(5-6), 483-503.
25. Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35, 715-728.
26. Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization and knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 577-598.
27. Kenney, M., & 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, 33, 691-707.
28. Knoben, J., & Oerlemans, L. A. G. (2006). Proximity and inter-organizational collaboration: A literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(2), 71-89.
29. Laursen, K., Reichstein, T., & Salter, A. (2011). Exploring the effect of geographical proximity and university quality on university-industry collaboration in the United Kingdom. Regional Studies, 45(4), 507-523.
30. Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2005). Opening the ivory tower's door: An analysis of the determinants of the formation of US university spin-off companies. Research Policy, 34(7), 1106-1112.
31. Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (2005). Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research Policy, 34(7), 1043-1057.
32. Lockett, A., Wright, M., & Franklin, S. (2003). Technology transfer and universities' spin-out strategies. Small Business Economics, 20(2), 185-200.
33. Louis, K., Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M., & Stoto, M. (1989). Entrepreneurs in academe: An exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(1), 110-131.
34. Lysonski, S. (1985). A boundary theory investigation of the product managers role. Journal of Marketing, 49(1), 26-40.
35. Macho-Stadler, I., Perez-Castrillo, D., & Veugelers, R. (2007). Licensing of university inventions: The role of a technology transfer office. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 25(3), 483-510.
36. Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., Phan, P. H., & Balkin, D. B. (2005). Innovation speed: Transferring university technology to market. Research Policy, 34(7), 1058-1075.
37. Markman, G. D., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2008). Research and technology commercialization. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1401-1423.
38. Messeni Petruzzelli, A. (2011). The impact of technological relatedness, prior ties, and geographical distance on university-industry collaborations: A joint-patent analysis. Technovation, 31(7), 309-319.
39. Nooteboom, B. (1999). Inter-firm alliances: Analysis and design. London: Routledge.
40. O'Shea, R., Allen, T., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994-1009.
41. Parker, J. N., & Crona, B. (2012). On being all things to all people: Boundary organizations and the contemporary research university. Social Studies of Science, 42(2), 262-289.
42. Pettigrew, A. M. (1973). The politics of organizational decision-making. London: Tavistock.
43. Pettigrew, A. M. (1990). Longitudinal field research on change: Theory and practice. Organization Science, 1(3), 267-292.
44. Phan, P. H., & Siegel, D. (2006). The effectiveness of university technology transfer. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 77-144.
45. Piercy, N. F. (2009). Strategic relationships between boundary-spanning functions: Aligning customer relationship management with supplier relationship management. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(8), 857-864.
46. Pirnay, F., Surlemont, B., & Nlemvo, F. (2003). Toward a typology of university spin-offs. Small Business Economics, 21(4), 355-369.
47. Polkinghorne, D. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences (SUNY series in philosophy of the social sciences). Albany: State University of New York Press.
48. Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34(3), 375-409.
49. Rasmussen, E., & Borch, O. J. (2010). University capabilities in facilitating entrepreneurship: A longitudinal study of spin-off ventures at mid-range universities. Research Policy, 39(5), 602-612.
50. Rasmussen, E., Moen, O., & Gulbrandsen, M. (2006). Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge. Technovation, 26(4), 518-533.
51. Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691-791.
52. Shane, S., & Stuart, T. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science, 48(1), 154-170.
53. Siegel, D. S., Veugelers, R., & Wright, M. (2007). Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: Performance and policy implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 640-660.
54. Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003a). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27-48.
55. Siegel, D. S., Westhead, P., & Wright, M. (2003b). Assessing the impact of university science parks on research productivity: Exploratory firm-level evidence from the United Kingdom. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21(9), 1357-1369.
56. Stuart, T., & Ding, W. (2006). When do scientists become entrepreneurs? The social structural antecedents of commercial activity in the academic life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 112(1), 97-144.
57. Suddaby, R. (2006). From the editors: What grounded theory is not. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 633-642.
58. Torre, A., & Rallet, A. (2005). Proximity and localization. Regional Studies, 39, 47-59.
59. Tsai, W. P. (2002). Social structure of "coopetition" within a multiunit organization: Coordination, competition, and intraorganizational knowledge sharing. Organization Science, 13(2), 179-190.
60. Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8-30.
61. Tushman, M. L., & Scanlan, T. J. (1981). Boundary spanning individuals-Their role in information-transfer and their antecedents. Academy of Management Journal, 24(2), 289-305.
62. van Looy, B., Landoni, P., Callaert, J., van Pottelsberghe, B., Sapsalis, E., & Debackere, K. (2011). Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs. Research Policy, 40(4), 553-564.
63. van Maanen, J., Sorensen, J. B., & Mitchell, T. R. (2007). The interplay between theory and method. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1145-1154.
64. Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy, 33(1), 147-175.
65. West, J. (2008). Commercializing open science: Deep space communications as the lead market for Shannon theory, 1960-73. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1506-1532.
66. Williams, P. (2002). The competent boundary spanner. Public administration, 80(1), 103-124.
67. Woerter, M. (2012). Technology proximity between firms and universities and technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(6), 828-866.
68. Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Lockett, A., & Knockaert, M. (2008). Mid-range universities' linkages with industry: Knowledge types and the role of intermediaries. Research Policy, 37(8), 1205-1223.
69. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed., Applied social research methods series, Vol. 5). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
70. Zhang, J. (2009). The performance of university spin-offs: An exploratory analysis using venture capital data. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(3), 255-285.
71. Zhang, C., Viswanathan, S., & Henke, J. W. (2011). The boundary spanning capabilities of purchasing agents in buyer-supplier trust development. Journal of Operations Management, 29(4), 318-328. doi: 10. 1016/j. jom. 2010. 07. 001.