IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v31y2006i5p545-546.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determining Factors of the Effectiveness of IP-based Spin-offs: Comparing the Netherlands and the US

Author

Listed:
  • Rudi Bekkers
  • Victor Gilsing
  • Marianne Steen

Abstract

In this paper we describe and analyse IP-based spin-offs as a relatively new phenomenon for transferring knowledge from science to industry. We argue that the effectiveness of this mechanism is subject to a complex array of institutional factors. These factors entail national, sectoral, regional and managerial institutions. Based on an indicative comparison between the Netherlands and the United States we find that is especially the combination of national and sectoral institutions that condition whether an IP-based spin-off is established in the first place, whereas regional and managerial institutions condition its subsequent chances of success. We finish by formulating some notions for public policy. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Suggested Citation

  • Rudi Bekkers & Victor Gilsing & Marianne Steen, 2006. "Determining Factors of the Effectiveness of IP-based Spin-offs: Comparing the Netherlands and the US," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 545-546, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:31:y:2006:i:5:p:545-546
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-006-9058-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10961-006-9058-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-006-9058-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Michael S. Dahl & Christian Ø.R. Pedersen, 2003. "Knowledge Flows through Informal Contacts in Industrial Clusters Myths or Realities?," DRUID Working Papers 03-01, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    3. Oliver, Amalya L., 2004. "Biotechnology entrepreneurial scientists and their collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 583-597, May.
    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. Rudi Bekkers & Bodas Freitas, 2008. "Analysing preferences for knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01487467, HAL.
    2. Hugo Horta & Michele Meoli & Silvio Vismara, 2016. "Skilled unemployment and the creation of academic spin-offs: a recession-push hypothesis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 798-817, August.
    3. Christopher Hayter, 2015. "Public or private entrepreneurship? Revisiting motivations and definitions of success among academic entrepreneurs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1003-1015, December.
    4. van Burg, Elco & Du, Jingshu & Kers, Jannigje Gerdien, 2021. "When do academics patent outside their university? An in-depth case study," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    5. Prokop, Daniel, 2021. "University entrepreneurial ecosystems and spinoff companies: Configurations, developments and outcomes," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Marius Tuft Mathisen & Einar Rasmussen, 2019. "The development, growth, and performance of university spin-offs: a critical review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1891-1938, December.
    7. Stanislav Zaichenko, 2018. "The human resource dimension of science-based technology transfer: lessons from Russian RTOs and innovative enterprises," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 368-388, April.
    8. Berbegal-Mirabent, Jasmina & Ribeiro-Soriano, Domingo Enrique & Sánchez García, José Luis, 2015. "Can a magic recipe foster university spin-off creation?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2272-2278.
    9. Christopher Hayter, 2013. "Conceptualizing knowledge-based entrepreneurship networks: perspectives from the literature," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 899-911, December.
    10. Felicia Diana Nicoara & Dorin Maier & Andreea Maier, 2013. "General Aspects Related To The Technology Transfer, The Main Source Of Innovation And Development Among Economic Operators," Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 4, pages 139-147, August.
    11. van Burg, E. & Gilsing, V.A. & Reymen, I.M.M.J. & Romme, A.G.L., 2008. "Creating university spin-offs : A science-based design perspective," Other publications TiSEM ed13609d-fde4-43dc-ba8a-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Bekkers, Rudi & Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria, 2008. "Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1837-1853, December.
    13. Liudvika Leisyte, 2015. "Understanding knowledge disclosure of bioscientists," CHEPS Working Papers 201503, University of Twente, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS).
    14. Gilsing, V.A. & van Burg, E. & Romme, A.G.L., 2010. "Policy principles for the creation and success of corporate and academic spin-offs," Other publications TiSEM 4f828c53-0ac2-4ea7-9f90-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Samantha Bradley & Christopher Hayter & Albert Link, 2013. "Proof of Concept Centers in the United States: an exploratory look," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 349-381, August.
    16. Juan Pablo Diánez-González & Carmen Camelo-Ordaz & Mariluz Fernández-Alles, 2021. "Drivers and implications of entrepreneurial orientation for academic spin-offs," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 1007-1035, June.
    17. Christopher S. Hayter, 2013. "Harnessing University Entrepreneurship for Economic Growth," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 27(1), pages 18-28, February.
    18. Markus A. Kirchberger & Larissa Pohl, 2016. "Technology commercialization: a literature review of success factors and antecedents across different contexts," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 1077-1112, October.

    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. Rahmat Ullah & Rashid Aftab & Saeed Siyal & Kashif Zaheer, 2023. "Entrepreneurial Higher Education Education, Knowledge and Wealth Creation," Papers 2308.08808, arXiv.org.
    2. Bekkers, R. & Gilsing, V.A. & van der Steen, M., 2006. "Determining factors of the effectiveness of IP-based spin-offs : Comparing the Netherlands and the US," Other publications TiSEM 3e40ba18-c59c-46b5-a16a-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Avimanyu Datta, 2011. "Combining Networks, Ambidexterity and Absorptive Capacity to Explain Commercialization of Innovations: A Theoretical Model from Review and Extension," Journal of Management and Strategy, Journal of Management and Strategy, Sciedu Press, vol. 2(4), pages 2-25, December.
    4. S. Arunachalam & Sridhar N. Ramaswami & Pol Herrmann & Doug Walker, 2018. "Innovation pathway to profitability: the role of entrepreneurial orientation and marketing capabilities," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 744-766, July.
    5. Krickx, Guido A., 1995. "Vertical integration in the computer mainframe industry: A transaction cost interpretation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 75-91, January.
    6. Soufiane Mezzourh & Walid A Nakara, 2009. "Governance and innovation : A Knowledge-based approach [La gouvernance de l'innovation : une approche par la connaissance]," Post-Print halshs-01955966, HAL.
    7. Hua Tang, 2022. "The Effect of ESG Performance on Corporate Innovation in China: The Mediating Role of Financial Constraints and Agency Cost," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-21, March.
    8. Morricone, Serena & Munari, Federico & Oriani, Raffaele & de Rassenfosse, Gaetan, 2017. "Commercialization Strategy and IPO Underpricing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1133-1141.
    9. Kuosmanen, Natalia & Valmari, Nelli, 2023. "Renewal of Companies Through Product Switching," ETLA Working Papers 104, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    10. Tarifa Fernández, Jorge & de Burgos Jiménez, Jerónimo & Céspedes Lorente, José Joaquín, 2018. "Absorptive capacity as a confounder of the process of supply chain integration," MPRA Paper 120125, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2018.
    11. Laura Barbieri & Daniela Bragoli & Flavia Cortelezzi & Giovanni Marseguerra, 2015. "Public Support to Innovation Strategies," DISCE - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali dises1509, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    12. Massimo Colombo & Annalisa Croce & Samuele Murtinu, 2014. "Ownership structure, horizontal agency costs and the performance of high-tech entrepreneurial firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 265-282, February.
    13. Ariño, Africa & García-Canal, Esteban & Valdes, Ana, 1999. "Longevity of strategic alliances between competitors: A dynamic value creation approach," IESE Research Papers D/404, IESE Business School.
    14. Zemsky, Peter & Adner, Ron, 2003. "Disruptive Technologies and the Emergence of Competition," CEPR Discussion Papers 3994, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Frida Thomas Pacho, 2018. "Diversified Network Effects on Innovation Performance in Tanzania: Innovation Strategy in Service Firms," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Innovation, Macrothink Institute, Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Innovation, vol. 5(1), pages 1-1, December.
    16. Dwibedy, Punyashlok, 2022. "Informal competition and product innovation decisions of new ventures and incumbents across developing and transitioning countries," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 17(C).
    17. Richard Harris & John Moffat, 2011. "R&D, Innovation and Exporting," SERC Discussion Papers 0073, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    18. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2011. "Entry and Patenting in the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 915-933, May.
    19. Markus Solf, 2004. "Unternehmenskooperationen als Folge von Informations- und Kommunikations-technologieveränderungen: Eine theoretische Analyse," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 146-167, March.
    20. Annika Rickne, 2006. "Connectivity and Performance of Science-based Firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 393-407, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    industry-science relationships (ISR); spin-offs; technology transfer; university patenting; O3; O32; O34; L2; L3; I28;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • L3 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:kap:jtecht:v:31:y:2006:i:5:p:545-546. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.