This paper explores the academic entrepreneur’s identity transition and its impact on spin-off’s innovative input. Central to this study is the factors that influence scholars’ position-holding behavior and their impact on spin-offs. Based on the data of the 2005–2010 SME Innovation Fund and 14 interviews, we investigate the influence of scholars’ role embeddedness on their entrepreneurial role-taking behavior from the perspective of identity theory. Empirical results show that scholars with higher embeddedness in academia are less likely to hold a spin-offs’ CEO position. Besides, follow-up research found that scholars holding CEO positions can increase a spin-off’s R&D input, which reveals the influence of scholars’ career imprinting and its scientific logic on role-taking behaviors and spin-offs’ innovation input. We also empirically test the effect of scientific logic and business logic on a spin-off’s innovation input, concluding that conflicts between these two logics are detrimental to a firm’s innovation input. This paper contributes to existing literature by providing a new perspective for identity theory and has implications for scholars’ entrepreneurial practice. Additionally, it provides a theoretical basis for technology transfer and open innovation policy.

Project expert evaluation is the backbone of public funding allocation. A slight change in score can push a proposal below or above a funding line. Academic researchers have discovered many factors that may affect evaluation decision quality, yet the subject of cognitive proximity towards decision quality has not been considered thoroughly. Using 923 observations of the 2017 Beijing Innofund data, the study finds that cognitive proximity has an inverted “U-shape” relation to decision-making quality. Moreover, two contextual factors, evaluation experience and evaluation efforts, exert moderation effects on the inverted U shape. These findings fill the gaps in the current research on cognition-based perspective by specifying the mechanism of cognitive proximity in the evaluation field and contributing to improving decision-making quality by selecting appropriate evaluators. Theoretical contributions and policy implications have been discussed.