Public policy for academic entrepreneurship initiatives: a review and critical discussion

Sandström, Christian; Wennberg, Karl; Wallin, Martin W.; Zherlygina, Yulia

doi:10.1007/s10961-016-9536-x

Cited by 76 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 215 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The importance of settling this question cannot be understated. In a recent review of 166 articles on government support for entrepreneurship, Sandström, Wennberg, Wallin, and Zherlygina (2018) concluded that “policymakers [sic] need to be cautious in the potential design of such initiatives” (p. 1232), largely because of the public resources deployed by such programs. Amezcua (2010) called for the need to understand the economic contributions of accelerators to provide guidance to industry and for policymakers to better understand if variations among accelerators explain differences in value‐added across ventures (Bruneel, Ratinho, Clarysse, & Groen, 2012; Rouach, Louzoun, & Deneux, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do differences among accelerators explain differences in the performance of member ventures? Evidence from 117 accelerators in 22 countries

Chan

Patel

Phan

2020

Strategic Entrepreneurship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Summary: Whether differences among accelerators explain differences in the performance of member ventures is an important and underexplored question.Conversely, are the effects of accelerators so isomorphic, because they copy each other, that ventures from different accelerators report little performance differences? We use variance decomposition analysis to test whether variations in characteristics of accelerators explain performance differences in the ventures that belong to them. Using a sample of 1,442 ventures from 117 accelerator programs across 22 countries, we find that 11.13-14.18% variance of venture performance can be attributed to accelerator membership. Accelerator membership also accounted for 3.00, 5.15, and 16.65% in the variance for employee growth, employee costs, and revenue change, respectively. Our findings suggest that between accelerator differences can make a significant economic difference to venture performance.Managerial summary: For accelerator managers and policymakers assessing if differences between accelerators explain the differences in outcomes of member ventures is All the authors contributed equally to this study.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do differences among accelerators explain differences in the performance of member ventures? Evidence from 117 accelerators in 22 countries

Chan

Patel

Phan

2020

Strategic Entrepreneurship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Grounded in scientific discoveries, they contribute to the innovative capacity and economic development of regions and countries (Bienkowska et al 2016;Galan-Muros et al 2017;Marzocchi et al 2017;Perkmann et al 2013). Thus, understanding the process and potential impacts of academic entrepreneurship, broadly understood as commercialization of scientific research results, becomes crucial for academics, practitioners, and policymakers (Balven et al 2018;Fini et al 2018;Sandström et al 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Opening the black box of academic entrepreneurship: a bibliometric analysis

Skute

2019

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing importance of academic entrepreneurship as a key mechanism for new innovative advancements and regional economic developments fostered a development of this research domain. The burgeoning literature examining key antecedents and consequences of academic entrepreneurship resulted in complex, multifaceted concept development, which hinder both the possibilities to grasp the crucial interlinkages and a comprehensive assessment of the latest theoretical contributions. Thus, to decrease the current risk of the field's further fragmentation and to support the comparison with the new emerging patterns, this paper seeks to develop new bibliometric insights and outline a nuanced research agenda for further advancements. To conduct a quantitative literature review, this paper employs bibliographic coupling on a sample of 615 Web of Science peer-reviewed articles on academic entrepreneurship. To conduct a comprehensive interpretation of the bibliometric findings, I perform additional hierarchical clustering of the frequent terms and content analysis of the publications. The results indicate that the academic entrepreneurship research field is based on four interconnected clusters: (1) the anatomy of an entrepreneurial university and its main components, (2) university spinoffs and technology commercialization, (3) the identities of academic entrepreneurs and their motivations and barriers in entrepreneurial activities, and (4) knowledge transfer and regional economic impacts. These findings are of high importance to academics who seek to enhance entrepreneurial processes and to policymakers interested in stimulating academic entrepreneurship. Fig. 5 Distribution of author affiliations to organizations based in selected publications (top 25 organizations)

show abstract

“…In the eyes of Autio and Klofsten (1998, p. 33), incubators were lacking in process specialization (soft resources) and placed too much emphasis on configuration (hard resources). Subsequently, however, incubators have steadily, and relatively successfully, developed more effective and more relevant start-up support to satisfy the real needs of entrepreneurs ( (Sandström et al 2016). To reach sufficient size, the inflow to the incubator needs to be large enough (Bank et al, 2017).…”

Section: Prior Literature On Incubator Specialization and Tenant Recrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incubator specialization and size: Divergent paths towards operational scale

Klofsten

Lundmark

Wennberg

et al. 2020

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnus KlofstenKlofsten is a professor and founding director of Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (CIE) at Linköping University, Sweden. His research is oriented towards the early growth and development of technology-based firms, financing young ventures and university-industry relations. Klofsten is as acting research leader at the Helix Competence Centre and member of Agora Link Centre for researcher mobility and commercialization of life science technologies. Erik LundmarkLundmark's research focuses entrepreneurship and the emergence of new organisation(s). Currently he studies the factors that underpin the so-called liability of newness (the increased mortality among new organisations compared to their more established counterparts) and the emergence of new market categories. Erik is also interested in how we can facilitate reflexivity through making the assumptions underpinning entrepreneurship research, which are often implicit, explicit and subject to scrutiny. Karl WennbergWennberg is a professor of organization and entrepreneurship at Linköping University and research fellow at the Ratio institute. His research broadly focuses on Entrepreneurship, Regional Development and Organization Theory. He is currently managing a large research project on entrepreneurial teams hosted in incubators, and a project on organizational diversity. Megan BankMrs. Bank is a PhD student at the Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University, Sweden. Her research is within the sustainable incubator area. Incubator specialization and size2 Abstract: Research on incubators show that size is important in achieving efficiency and networking benefits for clients. However, little research has focused on what factors influence incubator size. We theorize and show partial support for size benefits to incubator specialization. Analyses of the relationship between size and four distinct specialization strategies in a sample of 96 European incubators show that incubator size is positively related to a strategic focus on universities and research institutes as recruitment channels and to a focus on sustainability, but not to a regional or industry focus. Paradoxically, tenants with a focus other than sustainability often dominate sustainability-oriented incubators, suggesting that sustainability may be more of a legitimating strategy than an explicit selection criterion.

show abstract

Public policy for academic entrepreneurship initiatives: a review and critical discussion

Cited by 76 publications

References 215 publications

Do differences among accelerators explain differences in the performance of member ventures? Evidence from 117 accelerators in 22 countries

Do differences among accelerators explain differences in the performance of member ventures? Evidence from 117 accelerators in 22 countries

Opening the black box of academic entrepreneurship: a bibliometric analysis

Incubator specialization and size: Divergent paths towards operational scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About