Spinning out new ventures: a typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions
This paper explores the different incubation strategies for spinning-out companies employed by European Research Institutions. More specifically we focus on two central questions: (i) What differences or similarities are there in the goals and objectives of the Research Institutions for creating new spinout ventures? (ii) What different incubation strategies are employed to achieve these goals in terms of the resources utilized and activities undertaken? The study uses a two-stage approach. In the first stage, 7 spin-out services in five European countries were selected for analysis. Based upon an in-depth analysis of these seven cases, we identified three distinct incubation models of managing the spin-out process: Low selective, Supportive, and Incubator. The different incubation models have very different resource implications in managing the process. In particular, we identify resource and competence differences relating to finance, organization, human resources, technology, network and infrastructure. In the second stage, 43 cases were used to validate these incubation models in terms of resources and activities. This process identified two categories that departed from the normative models, namely the resource deficient group and the competence deficient group.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby & Marilynn B. Brewer, 1994. "Intellectual Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," NBER Working Papers 4653, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Smilor, Raymond W. & Gibson, David V. & Dietrich, Glenn B., 1990. "University spin-out companies: Technology start-ups from UT-Austin," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 63-76, January.
- Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
- Scott Shane & Toby Stuart, 2002. "Organizational Endowments and the Performance of University Start-ups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 154-170, January.
- Richard Jensen & Marie Thursby, 1998. "Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Tale of University Licensing," NBER Working Papers 6698, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Thursby, Jerry G & Jensen, Richard & Thursby, Marie C, 2001. "Objectives, Characteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing: A Survey of Major U.S. Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 59-72, January.
- Ajay Agrawal & Iain M. Cockburn, 2002. "University Research, Industrial R&D, and the Anchor Tenant Hypothesis," NBER Working Papers 9212, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Scott Shane, 2001. "Technology Regimes and New Firm Formation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(9), pages 1173-1190, September.
- Jeannette Colyvas & Michael Crow & Annetine Gelijns & Roberto Mazzoleni & Richard R. Nelson & Nathan Rosenberg & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2002. "How Do University Inventions Get Into Practice?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 61-72, January.
- Jacob, Merle & Lundqvist, Mats & Hellsmark, Hans, 2003. "Entrepreneurial transformations in the Swedish University system: the case of Chalmers University of Technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1555-1568, October.
- Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B & Feldman, Maryann P, 1992. "Real Effects of Academic Research: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(1), pages 363-367, March.
- Clarysse, Bart & Moray, Nathalie, 2004. "A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: the case of a research-based spin-off," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 55-79, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbvent:v:20:y:2005:i:2:p:183-216. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.