IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i16p10110-d888671.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Entrepreneurial University Concept Review from the Perspective of Academicians: A Mixed Method Research Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Hüseyin Emre Coşkun

    (Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Izmir Katip Celebi University, Izmir 35620, Turkey)

  • Catalin Popescu

    (Department of Business Administration, Petroleum-Gas University of Ploiesti, 100680 Ploiesti, Romania)

  • Deniz Şahin Samaraz

    (Department of Business Administration, Izmir Katip Celebi University, Izmir 35620, Turkey)

  • Akif Tabak

    (Department of Business Administration, Izmir Katip Celebi University, Izmir 35620, Turkey)

  • Bulent Akkaya

    (Department of Office Management, Manisa Celal Bayar University, Manisa 45140, Turkey)

Abstract

Understanding the role of the factors that contribute to the development and growth of entrepreneurial universities is important for both the university itself and the global economy as a whole. Therefore, this study aimed to gain a deep understanding of the entrepreneurial university. The study was designed with a mixed-method approach in which quantitative and qualitative methods were used together. In the quantitative part of the mixed-method research, a systematic literature review of the entrepreneurial university concept was done and based on the results of the literature search obtained by quantitative methods, general concepts and categories and their relations with the contexts were revealed. In the qualitative part of the mixed-method research, in order to explain the entrepreneurial university understanding, semi-structured interviews were conducted with academicians in universities. According to the findings, it was found that conceptualization was very important to understand the entrepreneurial university. The university was considered as an institution that serves students and companies via some channels, such as research reports, an academic publication, or a patent received at the end of a project. As the entrepreneurial university paradigm is being studied by various institutions in the world, this study contributes to the literature both as a theoretical study and as a study that reveal the concepts of the entrepreneurial university. By providing a conceptual framework, the research will contribute to the literature as a theoretical study by aiming to explain the service systems (universities, government, firms) based on the exchange of skills and the creation of common value in the knowledge-based society on the entrepreneurial university paradigm, which is extremely popular in the world. Fındings from the systematic literature review and interviews with academicians were analysed comparatively, and a conceptual framework that evaluates the concepts and variables of the entrepreneurial university with a holistic view is presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Hüseyin Emre Coşkun & Catalin Popescu & Deniz Şahin Samaraz & Akif Tabak & Bulent Akkaya, 2022. "Entrepreneurial University Concept Review from the Perspective of Academicians: A Mixed Method Research Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-15, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:16:p:10110-:d:888671
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/16/10110/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/16/10110/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    2. Philippe Lefebvre & Frédérique Pallez & Daniel Fixari, 2009. "Competitiveness clusters and new approaches to public research: uncertainties in the development of the Triple Helix in France," Post-Print hal-00643153, HAL.
    3. Frank T. Rothaermel & Shanti D. Agung & Lin Jiang, 2007. "University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 691-791, August.
    4. May Portuguez Castro & Marcela Georgina Gómez Zermeño, 2021. "Identifying Entrepreneurial Interest and Skills among University Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-19, June.
    5. Natalia Budyldina, 2018. "Entrepreneurial universities and regional contribution," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 265-277, June.
    6. Kenney, Martin & Patton, Donald, 2009. "Reconsidering the Bayh-Dole Act and the Current University Invention Ownership Model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1407-1422, November.
    7. Ademar Schmitz & David Urbano & Gertrudes Aparecida Dandolini & João Artur Souza & Maribel Guerrero, 2017. "Innovation and entrepreneurship in the academic setting: a systematic literature review," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 369-395, June.
    8. David Audretsch, 2014. "From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 313-321, June.
    9. Tõnis Mets & Mervi Raudsaar & Kaire Vahejõe & Merike Kaseorg & Piia Vettik-Leemet, 2022. "Putting Entrepreneurial Process Competence into the Focus in Entrepreneurship Education: Experience from Estonian Universities," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-23, June.
    10. Etzkowitz, Henry & Webster, Andrew & Gebhardt, Christiane & Terra, Branca Regina Cantisano, 2000. "The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 313-330, February.
    11. Etzkowitz, Henry, 1998. "The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 823-833, December.
    12. Adriana AnaMaria Davidescu & Simona-Andreea Apostu & Andreea Paul & Ionut Casuneanu, 2020. "Work Flexibility, Job Satisfaction, and Job Performance among Romanian Employees—Implications for Sustainable Human Resource Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-53, July.
    13. Vargo, Stephen L. & Maglio, Paul P. & Akaka, Melissa Archpru, 2008. "On value and value co-creation: A service systems and service logic perspective," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 145-152, June.
    14. Mª Inmaculada López-Núñez & Susana Rubio-Valdehita & Cristina Armuña & Elena Pérez-Urria, 2022. "EntreComp Questionnaire: A Self-Assessment Tool for Entrepreneurship Competencies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-14, March.
    15. Aldridge, T. Taylor & Audretsch, David, 2011. "The Bayh-Dole Act and scientist entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1058-1067, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yishu Zhou & Joseph D. Smith & Greg Gelles, 2022. "Teaching Energy Economics in the GCC: A Synergistic Approach between Engineering and Economics," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-11, September.
    2. Simona Andreea Apostu & Iza Gigauri & Mirela Panait & Pedro A. Martín-Cervantes, 2023. "Is Europe on the Way to Sustainable Development? Compatibility of Green Environment, Economic Growth, and Circular Economy Issues," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-17, January.
    3. Lukman Raimi & Mirela Panait & Adriana Grigorescu & Valentina Vasile, 2022. "Corporate Social Responsibility in the Telecommunication Industry—Driver of Entrepreneurship," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-23, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dabic, Marina & González-Loureiro, Miguel & Daim, Tugrul U., 2015. "Unraveling the attitudes on entrepreneurial universities: The case of Croatian and Spanish universities," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 167-178.
    2. Belitski, Maksim & Aginskaja, Anna & Marozau, Radzivon, 2019. "Commercializing university research in transition economies: Technology transfer offices or direct industrial funding?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 601-615.
    3. Junghee Han & Almas Heshmati, 2016. "Determinants Of Financial Rewards From Industry–University Collaboration In South Korea," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(07), pages 1-26, October.
    4. Clovia Hamilton & Simon P. Philbin, 2020. "Knowledge Based View of University Tech Transfer—A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-28, September.
    5. Charlotta Dahlborg & Danielle Lewensohn & Rickard Danell & Carl Johan Sundberg, 2017. "To invent and let others innovate: a framework of academic patent transfer modes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 538-563, June.
    6. Alejandro Bengoa & Amaia Maseda & Txomin Iturralde & Gloria Aparicio, 2021. "A bibliometric review of the technology transfer literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1514-1550, October.
    7. Ademar Schmitz & David Urbano & Gertrudes Aparecida Dandolini & João Artur Souza & Maribel Guerrero, 2017. "Innovation and entrepreneurship in the academic setting: a systematic literature review," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 369-395, June.
    8. Forliano, Canio & De Bernardi, Paola & Yahiaoui, Dorra, 2021. "Entrepreneurial universities: A bibliometric analysis within the business and management domains," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    9. Compagnucci, Lorenzo & Spigarelli, Francesca, 2020. "The Third Mission of the university: A systematic literature review on potentials and constraints," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    10. Paola Giuri & Federico Munari & Martina Pasquini, 2013. "What Determines University Patent Commercialization? Empirical Evidence on the Role of IPR Ownership," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 488-502, July.
    11. Walsh, John P. & Huang, Hsini, 2014. "Local context, academic entrepreneurship and open science: Publication secrecy and commercial activity among Japanese and US scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 245-260.
    12. Rippa, Pierluigi & Secundo, Giustina, 2019. "Digital academic entrepreneurship: The potential of digital technologies on academic entrepreneurship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 900-911.
    13. Tijssen, Robert J.W., 2018. "Anatomy of use-inspired researchers: From Pasteur’s Quadrant to Pasteur’s Cube model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1626-1638.
    14. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Luca Secondi & Enza Setteducati & Alessio Ancaiani, 2014. "Participation and commitment in third-party research funding: evidence from Italian Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 169-198, April.
    15. Hervé Goy, 2012. "Réflexions sur la nature entrepreneuriale des universités," Working Papers halshs-00747675, HAL.
    16. Eun, Jong-Hak & Lee, Keun & Wu, Guisheng, 2006. "Explaining the "University-run enterprises" in China: A theoretical framework for university-industry relationship in developing countries and its application to China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1329-1346, November.
    17. Todd Davey & Sue Rossano & Peter Sijde, 2016. "Does context matter in academic entrepreneurship? The role of barriers and drivers in the regional and national context," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(6), pages 1457-1482, December.
    18. Zsolt BedÅ‘ & Katalin ErdÅ‘s & Luke Pittaway, 2019. "University-Centered Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: A Conceptual Framework," UPFBE Working Paper Series 2019_1, Faculty of Business and Economics, University Pécs.
    19. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    20. B. Urban & J. Chantson, 2019. "Academic entrepreneurship in South Africa: testing for entrepreneurial intentions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 948-980, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:16:p:10110-:d:888671. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.