Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Academic entrepreneurship (AE) has gained widespread acclaim globally for bridging the gap between academia and industry, as well as addressing the issue of socio-economic inclusion and the impact of research. In this paper, we both relate to, and extend scholarly work in the domains of AE and social inclusion by investigating the process of AE from an interplay of institutional logics perspective, with an emphasis on the diversity strands to which academic entrepreneurs belong. Drawing on extensive fieldwork of 55 academic researchers affiliated with 6 UK universities, our findings highlight the co-existence of profession, science logic and market logic, combined with the new logics that we introduce—diversity and impact logics—in capturing value through AE for addressing social inclusion. We make an empirical and theoretical contribution by demonstrating the instrumentality of these logics as enablers and constraints on the process of AE. We also advance the theory on logics and AE by demonstrating how the intersection of logics creates different kinds of salient points and pressures for academics and university policy makers. Closely linked to this, we make policy contributions by putting forward policy insights that are bottom-up and tailored based on a thorough understanding of the experiences and views of academic entrepreneurs.
Academic entrepreneurship (AE) has gained widespread acclaim globally for bridging the gap between academia and industry, as well as addressing the issue of socio-economic inclusion and the impact of research. In this paper, we both relate to, and extend scholarly work in the domains of AE and social inclusion by investigating the process of AE from an interplay of institutional logics perspective, with an emphasis on the diversity strands to which academic entrepreneurs belong. Drawing on extensive fieldwork of 55 academic researchers affiliated with 6 UK universities, our findings highlight the co-existence of profession, science logic and market logic, combined with the new logics that we introduce—diversity and impact logics—in capturing value through AE for addressing social inclusion. We make an empirical and theoretical contribution by demonstrating the instrumentality of these logics as enablers and constraints on the process of AE. We also advance the theory on logics and AE by demonstrating how the intersection of logics creates different kinds of salient points and pressures for academics and university policy makers. Closely linked to this, we make policy contributions by putting forward policy insights that are bottom-up and tailored based on a thorough understanding of the experiences and views of academic entrepreneurs.
Discussion in the scholarly literature about partnerships between entrepreneurs and universities for the creation of technological spinouts, and for helping universities to extract more value from their technology-related intellectual property (IP), is lively. However, the literature exhibits a gap in understanding how business schools may participate in the process of technology commercialization by facilitating the creation of intellectual property rights. In this conceptual paper, we seek to fill this gap in three ways. First, we offer some novel conceptual insights by studying the partnership between technical universities and entrepreneurs using a multi-level approach, incorporating a phenomenological research method, through the lenses of several established theoretical perspectives from the domains of economics, social science, and management: the division of labor, motivation, the nature of the firm, organization, and IP. Second, we develop a working hypothesis focused on learning reinforcement through multiple organizational levels that predicts how business schools may play a prominent role in technology commercialization, together with the theoretical conditions under which they may do so. Third, we offer an IP management model under which business schools, as such, may create and appropriate financial value by generating innovation-related IP that may be transferred to enterprises. Our research reveals a misalignment between promising approaches to university-based technological innovation suggested by normative theory and typical approaches associated with extant practice; and it also highlights a strategic issue, which is that the performance of most universities in the domain of technology transfer is disappointing. We suggest a way to address this misalignment, and this strategic issue, which is through the establishment of what we label as “Technology Innovation Laboratories” in business schools—analogous to technical laboratories usually associated with technical universities—that could generate various types of product- or service-related IP. This type of intellectual property—typically different from invention IP, and which we label here as “business IP”—could be exchanged for equity in spinouts or royalties from licensing, similar to the manner in which the invention IP of technical universities is usually commercialized.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.