A trajectory of early-stage spinoff success: the role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem

Small Business Economics

Volumn 47, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 633-656

  Hayter, Christopher S ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Entrepreneurial universities; Entrepreneurship; Innovation ecosystems; Innovation policy; Social networks; University spinoffs

Indexed keywords

EID: 84975321440     PISSN: 0921898X     EISSN: 15730913     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11187-016-9756-3     Document Type: Article

References (98)

1. Acs, Z. J., Braunerhjelm, P., Audretsch, D. B., & Carlsson, B. (2009). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 32(1), 15–30.
2. Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), 306–333.
3. Agrawal, A., & Henderson, R. (2002). Putting patents in context: exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 44–60.
4. Audretsch, D. (2014). From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society. Journal of Technology Transfer, 39, 313–321.
5. Bahrami, H., & Evans, S. (2000). Flexible recycling and high-technology entrepreneurship. In M. Kenney (Ed.), Understanding silicon valley (pp. 165–189). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
6. Boh, W. F., De-Haan, U., & Strom, R. (2012). University technology transfer through entrepreneurship: Faculty and students in spinoffs. Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
7. Borgatti, S. P., & Foster, P. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management, 29(6), 991–1013.
8. Bozeman, B., & Corley, E. (2004). Scientists’ collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 33, 599–616.
9. Bozeman, B., Dietz, J. S., & Gaughan, M. (2001). Scientific and technical human capital: An alternative model for research evaluation. International Journal of Technology Management, 22(8), 616–630.
10. Bradley, S., Hayter, C. S., & Link, A. N. (2013a). Models and methods of university technology transfer. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 9(6), 571–650.
11. Bradley, S., Hayter, C. S., & Link, A. N. (2013b). Proof of concept centers in the U.S.: An exploratory look. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38, 349–381.
12. Braunerhjelm, P., Ács, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Carlsson, B. (2010). The missing link: Knowledge diffusion and entrepreneurship in endogenous growth. Small Business Economics, 34(2), 105–125.
13. Carter, N., Gartner, W., Shaver, K., & Gatewood, E. (2003). The career reasons of nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18, 13–39.
14. Casper, S. (2007). How do technology clusters emerge and become sustainable? Social network formation and inter-firm mobility within the San Diego biotechnology cluster. Research Policy, 36, 438–455.
15. Christensen, C. M., & Rosenbloom, R. (1995). Explaining the attacker’s advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics and the value network. Research Policy, 24(2), 233–257.
16. Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Bruneel, J., & Mahajan, A. (2014). Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems. Research Policy, 43, 1164–1176.
17. Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.
18. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. The American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95–120.
19. Colombo, M. G., Cumming, D. J., & Vismara, S. (2016). Governmental venture capital for innovative young firms. Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(1), 10–24.
20. Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges: Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21. Creswell, J. W. (2002). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22. Croce, A., Grilli, L., & Murtinu, S. (2014). Venture capital enters academia: An analysis of university-managed funds. Journal of Technology Transfer, 39, 688–715.
23. Davenport, S. (2005). Exploring the role of proximity in SME knowledge-acquisition. Research Policy, 34(5), 683–701.
24. Dietz, J., & Bozeman, B. (2005). Academic careers, patents, and productivity: Industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 34, 349–367.
25. Doutriaux, J. (1987). Growth pattern of academic entrepreneurial firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 2, 285–297.
26. Druilhe, C., & Garnsey, E. (2004). Do academic spin-outs differ and does it matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 269–285.
27. Feldman, M., & Desrochers, P. (2004). Truth for its own sake: academic culture and technology transfer at the Johns Hopkins University. Minerva, 42(2), 105–126.
28. Florida, R. L., & Kenney, M. (1988). Venture capital, high technology and regional development. Regional Studies, 22, 33–48.
29. Franklin, S., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2001). Academic and surrogate entrepreneurs in university spin-out companies. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 127–141.
30. Gertler, M. S., & Levitte, Y. M. (2005). Local nodes in global networks: The geography of knowledge flows in biotechnology innovation. Industry and Innovation, 12(4), 487–507.
31. Gray, D. O. & Boardman, C (2010). Special issue on cooperative research centers: policy, process, and outcome perspectives. Journal of Technology Transfer, 35.
32. Gulati, R., Nohria, N., & Zaheer, A. (2000). Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 203–215.
33. Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J. (2005). Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy, 34, 932–950.
34. Hayter, C. S. (2011). In search of the profit-maximizing actor: Motivations and definitions of success from nascent academic entrepreneurs. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 340–352.
35. Hayter, C. S. (2013a). Harnessing university entrepreneurship for economic growth: Factors of success among university spinoffs. Economic Development Quarterly, 27, 18–28.
36. Hayter, C. S. (2013b). Conceptualizing knowledge-based entrepreneurship networks: Perspectives from the literature. Small Business Economics, 41, 899–911.
37. Hayter, C. S. (2015). Social networks and the success of university spinoffs: Toward an agenda for regional growth. Economic Development Quarterly, 29(1), 3–13.
38. Hayter, C. S. (2016). Constraining entrepreneurial development: A knowledge-based view of social networks among academic entrepreneurs. Research Policy, 45, 475–490.
39. Hayter, C. S., & Link, A. N. (2015). On the economic impact of university proof-of-concept centers. Journal of Technology Transfer, 40, 178–183.
40. Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). The keystone advantage: What the new dynamics of business ecosystems mean for strategy, innovation and sustainability. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
41. Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. (2012). 2012 State new economy index. Washington, DC.
42. Jack, S. L. (2010). Approaches to studying networks: Implications and outcomes. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(1), 120–137.
43. Johannisson, B., & Monsted, M. (1997). Contextualizing entrepreneurial networking. International Journal of Management and Organization, 27, 109–137.
44. Jong, S. (2008). Academic organizations and new industrial fields: Berkeley and Stanford after the rise of biotechnology. Research Policy, 37, 1267–1282.
45. Kenney, M., & Patton, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial geographies: Support networks in three high-technology industries. Economic Geography, 81(2), 201–228.
46. Kenney, M., & von Burg, U. (1999). Technology and path dependence: The divergence between silicon valley and route 128. Industrial and Corporate Change, 8(1), 67–103.
47. Krackhardt, D. (1999). The ties that torture: Simmelian tie analysis in Organizations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 16, 183–210.
48. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research, 30, 411–433.
49. Kuckartz, U. (2014). Qualitative text analysis: A guide to methods, practice and using software. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50. Laur, I., Klofsten, M., & Bienkowska, D. (2012). Catching regional development dreams: A study of cluster initiatives as intermediaries. European Planning Studies, 20(11), 1909–1921.
51. Link, A. N., & Ruhm, C. J. (2009). Bringing science to market: Commercializing from NIH SBIR awards. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 4, 381–402.
52. Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2006). U.S. university research parks. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 25, 43–55.
53. Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2007). The economics of university research parks. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23, 661–674.
54. Lubynsky, R. (2013). Critical challenges to nascent academic entrepreneurs: From lab bench to innovation, University of Maryland, unpublished dissertation.
55. Mian, S. A. (1996). Assessing value-added contributions to university technology business incubators to tenant firms. Research Policy, 25, 325–335.
56. Mian, S. A. (1997). Assessing and managing the university technology business incubator: An integrative framework. Journal of Business Venturing, 12, 251–285.
57. Mian, S. A. (2011). University’s involvement in technology business incubation: What theory and practice tell us? International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 13(2), 113–121.
58. Mian, S., Fayolle, A., & Lamine, W. (2012). Building sustainable regional platforms for incubating science and technology businesses Evidence from US and French science and technology parks. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 13(4), 235–247.
59. Milken Institute. (2013). 2012 State technology and science index. CA: Santa Monica.
60. Moore, J. F. (1993). Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harvard Business Review, 71(3), 75–86.
61. Mosey, S., & Wright, M. (2007). From human capital to social capital: A longitudinal study of technology-based academic entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(6), 909–935.
62. Nicolaou, N., & Birley, S. (2003). Social networks in organizational emergence: The university spinout phenomenon. Management Science, 49(12), 1702–1725.
63. O’Gorman, C., Byrne, O., & Pandya, D. (2008). How scientists commercialise new knowledge via entrepreneurship. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33, 23–43.
64. Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. (2004). Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: The effects of spillovers in the Boston Biotechnology Community. Organization Science, 15, 617–632.
65. Phan, P., & Siegel, D. (2006). The effectiveness of university technology transfer: Lessons learned. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 77–144.
66. Piore, M., & Sabel, C. (1984). The second industrial divide: Possibilities for prosperity. New York: Basic Books.
67. Pittaway, L., & Cope, J. (2007). Entrepreneurship education: A systematic review of the evidence. International Small Business Journal, 25(5), 479–510.
68. Polkinghorne, D. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany: State University of New York Press.
69. Powell, W., Packalen, K., & Whittington, K. (2009). Organizational and institutional genesis: The emergence of high-tech clusters in the life sciences. In J. Padgett & W. Powell (Eds.), The organization of and markets. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
70. Rasmussen, E., Mosey, S., & Wright, M. (2011). The evolution of entrepreneurial competencies: A longitudinal study of university spin-off venture emergence. Journal of Management Studies, 48(6), 1314–1345.
71. Rasmussen, E., Mosey, S., & Wright, M. (2015) The transformation of network ties to develop entrepreneurial competencies for spin-offs. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 27(7–8), 430–457.
72. Renzulli, L. A., & Aldrich, H. (2005). Who can you turn to: Tie activation within core business discussion networks. Social Forces, 84, 323–342.
73. Ritter, T., & Gemünden, H. (2003). Network competence: It’s impact on innovation success and its antecedents. Journal of Business Research, 56, 745–755.
74. Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 71–102.
75. Ruef, M., Aldrich, H. E., & Carter, N. M. (2003). The structure of founding teams: Homophily, strong ties, and isolation among US entrepreneurs. American Sociological Review, 68(2), 195–222.
76. Saldana, J. (2012). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
77. Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional advantage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
78. Schoonhoven, C.B., & Eisenhardt, K. (1989). The impact of incubator region on the creation and survival of new semiconductor ventures in the U.S. 1978–1986, Report to the Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, August.
79. Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
80. Shane, S. A. (2004). Academic entrepreneurship: University spinoffs and wealth creation. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
81. Shane, S., & Cable, D. (2002). Network ties, reputation, and the financing of new ventures. Management Science, 48(3), 364–381.
82. Shane, S., & Stuart, T. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science, 48(1), 154–170.
83. Siegel, D. S., Westhead, P., & Wright, M. (2003). Assessing the impact of university science parks on research productivity: Exploratory firm-level evidence from the United Kingdom. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 23, 1357–1369.
84. Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state and higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
85. Slotte-Kock, S., & Coviello, N. (2010). Entrepreneurship research on network processes: A review and ways forward. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(1), 31–57.
86. Svensson, P., Klofsten, M., & Etzkowitz, H. (2012). An entrepreneurial university strategy for renewing a declining industrial city: The Norrköping way. European Planning Studies, 20(4), 505–525.
87. Tartari, V., Perkmann, M., & Salter, A. (2014). In good company: The influence of peers on industry engagement by academic scientists. Research Policy, 43, 1189–1203.
88. Urbano, D., & Guerrero, M. (2013). Entrepreneurial universities: Socio-economi impacts of academic entrepreneurship in a European region. Economic Development Quarterly, 27(1), 40–55.
89. Utterback, J. (1994). Mastering the dynamics of innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
90. van Praag, C., & Versloot, P. (2007). What is the value of entrepreneurship? A review of recent research. Small Business Economics, 29(4), 351–382.
91. Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spin-out companies. Research Policy, 33, 147–175.
92. Walcott, S. M. (2002). Analyzing an innovative environment: San Diego as a bioscience beachhead. Economic Development Quarterly, 16(2), 99–114.
93. Walter, A., Auer, M., & Ritter, T. (2006). The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 541–567.
94. Whittington, K., Owen-smith, J., & Powell, W. (2009). Networks, propinquity and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54, 90–122.
95. Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Mustar, P., & Lockett, A. (2007). Academic entrepreneurship in Europe. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
96. Youtie, J., & Shipiro, P. (2008). Building an innovation hub: A case study of the transformation of university roles in regional technological and economic development. Research Policy, 37, 1188–1204.
97. Yusef, S. (2008). Intermediating knowledge exchange between universities and businesses. Research Policy, 37, 1167–1174.
98. Zara, S. A., & Nambisan, S. (2012). Entrerpeneurship and strategic thinking in business ecosystems. Business Horizons, 55(3), 219–229.