The role of university spin-offs in the local socio-economic context. Analysis of performance and innovation indicators

Author/s Christian Corsi
Publishing Year 2018 Issue 2018/1 Language Italian
Pages 22 P. 73-94 File size 283 KB
DOI 10.3280/MACO2018-001004
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The paper has a twofold objective: 1) to verify whether the innovation resources offered by the socio-economic context can activate the performance of the university spin-offs operating in the same area; 2) to verify also the degree of success obtained by the university spin-offs able to produce effects on the level of innovation that emerges from the specific socio-economic environment. Starting from the Knowledge Spillover Theory of Entrepreneurship and the analysis of a sample of 405 Italian companies, it emerged that the resources promoting the innovation of the socio-economic context appreciably contribute to the achievement of better performance by the university spin-offs. Nonetheless, environmental influence is not always able to provide significant impetus or produce clearly positive consequences. Moreover, the impact on the socio-economic context of the actions promoting the university spin-offs innovation is only partially real and positive. Anyway, from the standpoint of the evidence gathered, the spin-off companies play a more significant role for an innovative environmental development than the role played by the territorial context in the growth of the spin-offs.

Keywords: Knowledge Spillover, Theory of Entrepreneurship, university spin-off, innovation, performance

  1. Acs Z.J., Audretsch D.B., Lehmann E.E. (2013). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship, Small Business Economics, 41(4), pp. 757-774.
  2. Acs Z.J., Braunerhjelm P., Audretsch D.B., Carlsson B. (2009), The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship, Small Business Economics, 32(1), pp. 15-30.
  3. Asheim B.T., Isaksen A. (2002), Regional innovation systems: the integration of local ‘sticky’and global ‘ubiquitous’ knowledge, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(1), pp. 77-86.
  4. Audretsch D.B., Keilbach M. (2004). Entrepreneurship and regional growth: an evolutionary interpretation, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14(5), pp. 605-616. DOI: 10.1080/0898562080233272
  5. Audretsch D.B., Lehmann E.E. (2005), Does the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship hold for regions?, Research Policy, 34(8), pp. 1191-1202.
  6. Audretsch D.B., Stephan P.E. (1996), Company-scientist locational links: The case of biotechnology, The American Economic Review, pp. 641-652.
  7. Audretsch D.B., Bönte W. , Keilbach, M. (2008), Entrepreneurship capital and its impact on knowledge diffusion and economic performance, Journal of business venturing, 23(6), pp. 687-698.
  8. Audretsch D.B., Hülsbeck, M., Lehmann E.E. (2012), Regional competitiveness, university spillovers, and entrepreneurial activity, Small Business Economics, 39(3), pp. 587-601.
  9. Audretsch D.B., Keilbach M.C., Lehmann E.E. (2006), Entrepreneurship and economic growth, Oxford University Press.
  10. Audretsch D., Keilbach M. (2004), Entrepreneurship capital and economic performance, Regional studies, 38(8), pp. 949-959.
  11. Autio E. (1997), New, technology-based firms in innovation networks symplectic and generative impacts, Research policy, 26(3), pp. 263-281. DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(96)00906-7
  12. Balderi C., Patrono A., Piccaluga A. (2011), La ricerca pubblica e le sue perle: le imprese spin-off in Italia, Quaderni dell’Istituto di Management, 1, 2011.
  13. Baldini N. (2010), University spin-offs and their environment, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(8), pp. 859-876.
  14. Berbegal-Mirabent J., Ribeiro-Soriano D.E., García, J.L.S. (2015), Can a magic recipe foster university spin-off creation?, Journal of Business Research (In corso di pubblicazione).
  15. Berggren E., Lindholm Dahlstrand A. (2009), Creating an entrepreneurial region: Two waves of academic spin-offs from Halmstad University, European Planning Studies, 17(8), pp. 1171-1189.
  16. Bessen J., Maskin E. (2009), Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation, The RAND Journal of Economics, 40(4), pp. 611-635.
  17. Bolzani D., Fini R., Grimaldi R., Sobrero M. (2014), University spin-offs and their impact: longitudinal evidence from Italy, Economia e Politica Industriale.
  18. Breschi S., Lissoni F. (2001), Knowledge spillovers and local innovation systems: a critical survey, Industrial and corporate change, 10(4), 975-1005.
  19. Carayannis E.G., Barth T.D., Campbell D.F. (2012), The Quintuple Helix innovation model: global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation, Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1(1), pp. 1-12.
  20. Cardamone P., Pupo V., Ricotta F. (2015), University Technology Transfer and Manufacturing Innovation: The Case of Italy, Review of Policy Research, 32(3), pp. 297-322.
  21. Carree M., Malva A.D., Santarelli E. (2014), The contribution of universities to growth: Empirical evidence for Italy, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(3), pp. 393-414.
  22. Cesaroni F., Moscara P., Piccaluga A. (2005), Le imprese spin-off della ricerca in Italia: modelli di sviluppo e percorsi di crescita, Piccola Impresa-Small Business, 1, pp. 81-126.
  23. Chesbrough H. (2017), The Future of Open Innovation: The future of open innovation is more extensive, more collaborative, and more engaged with a wider variety of participants, Research-Technology Management, 60(1), pp. 35-38.
  24. Chesbrough H.W. (2006), Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology, Harvard Business Press.
  25. Cinquini L., Di Minin A., Varaldo R. (Eds.) (2013), New business models and value creation: A service science perspective, Milan, Springer.
  26. Cinquini L., Giannetti R., Marelli A. (2001), Integration of financial and non financial indicators: some determinants from empirical evidence, Paper presentato al 5th EIASM International Seminar on Manufacturing Accounting Research, Pisa 6-8 giugno, 2001.
  27. Chiucchi M.S. (2014), Il gap tra teoria e prassi nel Management Accounting: il contributo della field-based research, Management Control, 3, pp. 5-9. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2014-003001
  28. Clarysse B., Wright M., Lockett A., Van de Velde E., Vohora, A. (2005), Spinning out new ventures: a typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions, Journal of Business venturing, 20(2), pp. 183-216.
  29. Cohen W.M., Florida R., Randazzese L., Walsh J. (1998), Industry and the academy: Uneasy partners in the cause of technological advance, In R. G. Noll (Ed.), Challenges to research universities (ch. 7). Washington, DC, Brookings Institute Press. Colombo
  30. Collini P., Frigotto M.L. (2013), Management Control Systems for exploration? A paradox and a challenge for research, Management Control, 1, pp. 27-44. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2015-001003
  31. Dahlander L., Gann D.M. (2010), How open is innovation?, Research policy, 39(6), pp. 699-709.
  32. Degroof J.J., Roberts E.B. (2004), Overcoming weak entrepreneurial infrastructures for academic spin-off ventures, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3-4), pp. 327-352.
  33. Del Barrio‐Castro T.D., García‐Quevedo J. (2005), Effects of university research on the geography of innovation, Regional Studies, 39(9), pp. 1217-1229.
  34. Di Gregorio D., Shane, S. (2003), Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?, Research policy, 32(2), pp. 209-227.
  35. Encaoua D., Guellec D., Martinez C. (2006), Patent systems for encouraging innovation: Lessons from economic analysis, Research Policy, 35(9), pp. 1423-1440.
  36. Etzkowitz H. (2004), The evolution of the entrepreneurial university. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 1(1), pp. 64-77.
  37. Fini R., Grimaldi R., Sobrero M. (2009), Factors fostering academics to start up new ventures: an assessment of Italian founders’ incentives, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(4), pp. 380-402.
  38. Fini R., Grimaldi R., Santoni S., Sobrero M. (2011), Complements or substitutes? The role of universities and local context in supporting the creation of academic spin-offs, Research Policy, 40(8), pp. 1113-1127.
  39. Friedman J., Silberman J. (2003), University technology transfer: do incentives, management, and location matter?, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1), pp. 17-30.
  40. Gallini N.T. (2002), The economics of patents: Lessons from recent US patent reform, Journal of Economic Perspectives, pp. 131-154.
  41. Garnsey E., Heffernan, P. (2005), High‐technology clustering through spin‐out and attraction: The Cambridge case, Regional Studies, 39(8), pp. 1127-1144.
  42. Griliches Z. (1990), Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey (No. w3301), National Bureau of Economic Research.
  43. Guerini M., Rossi-Lamastra C. (2014), How university and industry knowledge interact to determine local entrepreneurship, Applied Economics Letters, 21(8), pp. 513-516.
  44. Hellerstedt K., Wennberg K., Frederiksen L. (2014), University Knowledge Spillovers and regional start-up rates, Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth, 16, pp. 137-168.
  45. Hewitt-Dundas, N., Roper S. (2011), Creating advantage in peripheral regions: The role of publicly funded R&D centres, Research Policy, 40(6), pp. 832-841.
  46. Iacobucci D., Micozzi A. (2015), How to evaluate the impact of academic spin-offs on local development: an empirical analysis of the Italian case, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(3), pp. 434-452.
  47. Kenney M., Patton D. (2011), Does inventor ownership encourage university research-derived entrepreneurship? A six university comparison, Research Policy, 40(8), pp. 1100-1112.
  48. Kim Y., Kim W., Yang T. (2012), The effect of the triple helix system and habitat on regional entrepreneurship: Empirical evidence from the US, Research Policy, 41(1), pp. 154-166.
  49. Klepper S. (2007), Disagreements, spinoffs, and the evolution of Detroit as the capital of the US automobile industry, Management Science, 53(4), pp. 616-631.
  50. Landry R., Amara N., Rherrad I. (2006), Why are some university researchers more likely to create spin-offs than others? Evidence from Canadian universities, Research Policy, 35(10), pp. 1599-1615.
  51. Lawton Smith H., Ho K. (2006), Measuring the performance of Oxford University, Oxford Brookes University and the government laboratories’ spin-off companies, Research Policy, 35(10), pp.1554–1568.
  52. Lazzeri F., Piccaluga A. (2012), Le imprese spin-off della ricerca pubblica: convinzioni, realtà e prospettive future, Economia e società regionale, 2012(1), pp. 43-65.
  53. Lechner C., Leyronas C. (2007), Network-centrality versus network-position in regional networks: what matters most? – a study of a French high-tech cluster, International Journal of Technoentrepreneurship, 1(1), pp. 78-91.
  54. Lockett A., Wright M. (2005), Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies, Research policy, 34(7), pp. 1043-1057.
  55. Lockett A., Siegel D., Wright M., Ensley M.D. (2005), The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: Managerial and policy implications, Research Policy, 34(7), pp. 981-993.
  56. Lockett A., Wright M., Franklin S. (2003). Technology transfer and universities' spin-out strategies, Small Business Economics, 20(2), pp. 185-200.
  57. Marchi L. (a cura di) (2012). Introduzione all’economia aziendale. Il sistema delle operazioni e le condizioni di equilibrio aziendale, Giappichelli Editore, Torino.
  58. Marchi L. (2006), L’evoluzione del budget per la programmazione ed il controllo di gestione della piccola impresa. In: A.A. V.V. (a cura di), Scritti in onore di Isa Marchini, FrancoAngeli, Milano.
  59. Marchi L. (2015), Nuove prospettive di ricerca sulle tematiche di Management Control, Management Control, 3, pp. 5-8. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2015-003001
  60. Martinelli A., Meyer M., von Tunzelmann N. (2008), Becoming an entrepreneurial university? A case study of knowledge exchange relationships and faculty attitudes in a medium-sized, research-oriented university, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), pp. 259-283.
  61. Minguillo D., Tijssen R., Thelwall M. (2015), Do science parks promote research and technology? A scientometric analysis of the UK, Scientometrics, 102(1), 7.
  62. Motohashi K. (2005), University-industry collaborations in Japan: The role of new technology-based firms in transforming the National Innovation System. Research policy, 34(5), pp. 583-594.
  63. Mueller P. (2006), Exploring the knowledge filter: How entrepreneurship and university-industry relationships drive economic growth, Research policy, 35(10), pp. 1499-1508.
  64. Müller C., Fujiwara T., Herstatt C. (2004), Sources of bioentrepreneurship: the cases of Germany and Japan, Journal of Small Business Management, 42(1), pp. 93-101.
  65. Muscio A. (2008), Il trasferimento tecnologico in Italia: risultati di un’indagine sui dipartimenti universitari, L’industria, rivista di economia e politica industriale, 245.
  66. Mustar P., Wright M., Clarysse B. (2008), University spin-off firms: lessons from ten years of experience in Europe. Science and Public Policy, 35(2), pp. 67-80.
  67. O’Shea R.P., Allen T.J., Chevalier A., Roche, F. (2005), Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities, Research Policy, 34(7), 994-1009.
  68. O'shea R.P., Allen T.J., Chevalier A., Roche F. (2005), Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities, Research Policy, 34(7), pp. 994-1009.
  69. O'Shea R.P., Allen T.J., Morse K.P., O'Gorman C., Roche, F. (2007), Delineating the anatomy of an entrepreneurial university: the Massachusetts Institute of Technology experience, R&d Management, 37(1), pp. 1-16.
  70. Palumbo R. (2010), Dall’università al mercato: governance e performance degli spin-off universitari in Italia, Milano, FrancoAngeli.
  71. Paolini A., Soverchia M. (2017), I sistemi informativi per il controllo e la valutazione delle performance nelle università italiane, Management Control, 1, pp. 5-14. DOI: 10.3280/MACO2017-001001
  72. Paolone G., D’Amico L. (a cura di) (2011). L’Economia Aziendale nei suoi principi parametrici e modelli applicativi, Torino, Giappichelli Editore.
  73. Plummer L.A., Acs Z.J. (2014), Localized competition in the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), pp. 121-136.
  74. Powers J.B., 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(3), pp. 291-311.
  75. S.A. Shane, Academic entrepreneurship: University spinoffs and wealth creation, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2004.
  76. Sternberg R. (2009), Regional dimensions of entrepreneurship, Now Publishers Inc.
  77. Sternberg R. (2014), Success factors of university-spin-offs: Regional government support programs versus regional environment, Technovation, 34(3), pp. 137-148.
  78. Stuart T.E., Sorenson O. (2003), Liquidity events and the geographic distribution of entrepreneurial activity, Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), pp. 175-201.
  79. Su D.J., Sohn D.W. (2015), Roles of entrepreneurial orientation and guanxi network with parent university in start-ups’ performance: evidence from university spin-offs in China, Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 23(1), pp. 1-19. DOI: 10.1080/19761597.2015.1008196
  80. Tödtling F., Lengauer L., Höglinger C. (2011), Knowledge sourcing and innovation in “thick” and “thin” regional innovation systems – comparing ICT Firms in two Austrian regions, European Planning Studies, 19(7), pp. 1245-1276.
  81. Trajtenberg M., Henderson R., Jaffe A. (1997), University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention, Economics of Innovation and new technology, 5(1), pp. 19-50. DOI: 10.1080/1043859970000000
  82. Varga A. (2009), Universities, Knowledge Transfer and Regional Development: Geography, Entrepreneurship and Policy, UK, Northampton, MA, USA, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
  83. Venkataraman S. (2004), Regional transformation through technological entrepreneurship, Journal of Business venturing, 19(1), pp. 153-167.
  84. Villasalero M. (2014), University knowledge, open innovation and technological capital in Spanish science parks: Research revealing or technology selling?, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(4), pp. 479-496.
  85. Vincett P.S. (2010), The economic impacts of academic spin-off companies, and their implications for public policy, Research Policy, 39(6), pp. 736-747.
  86. Vinig T., van Rijsbergen P. (2010), 10 University technology transfer: comparative study of US, European and Australian universities, Handbook of Research on High-Technology Entrepreneurs, 179.
  87. Woo S., Jang P., Kim Y. (2015), Effects of intellectual property rights and patented knowledge in innovation and industry value added: A multinational empirical analysis of different industries, Technovation, pp. 43-44, 49-63.
  88. Wright M., Birley S., Mosey S. (2004), Entrepreneurship and university technology transfer, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3-4), pp. 235-246.
  89. Wright M., Clarysse B., Mustar P., Lockett A. (2007), Academic entrepreneurship in Europe, Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar,
  90. 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), pp. 1205-1223.

Christian Corsi, Il ruolo degli spin-off universitari nel contesto socio-economico locale: analisi degli indicatori di performance e innovazione in "MANAGEMENT CONTROL" 1/2018, pp 73-94, DOI: 10.3280/MACO2018-001004