Spin-Off VS. Spin-Out: A Dual-Category Approach and Minimal Descriptors for Comparable Research and Policy

Objective This article clarifies how the terms university “spin-off” and “spin-out” are used across scholarship, institutional reporting, and policy, and proposes operational definitions to distinguish the two notions that enhance measurement comparability while accommodating contextual diversity. Methodology We conduct a narrative review with emphasis on post-2020 work, synthesize institutional standards (OECD/Eurostat, European Commission, AUTM), and run an exploratory co-occurrence mapping of Scopus-indexed publications (2015–2025) using VOSviewer with a harmonizing thesaurus. Findings Two complementary lenses – IP-centric and knowledge-/founder-linked – structure the conceptual landscape, while institutional regimes create distinct “measurement windows.” Bibliometric analysis reveals five clusters (technology transfer, ecosystems, finance/policy, definitional core, HEI entrepreneurship). Overlay results show growing emphasis on ecosystems and finance. We propose operational definitions of academic spin-off and spin-out, supported by a minimal descriptor set for comparability. Practical implications Dual reporting using standardized descriptors enables universities, TTOs, and policymakers to better capture both IP-intensive and software/data-driven pathways, including those common in CEE systems with indirect commercialization routes. Originality/value The framework aligns scholarly lenses with the EU’s shift from “intellectual property” to “intellectual assets,” offering operationally useful definitions that support cross-study and cross-country comparability. Research limitations/implications: Results reflect Scopus coverage and keyword indexing. Further work should integrate transaction-level data and mixed-method evidence from founders and TTOs.