Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
It should be noted that it is unclear, whether participating in collaborative network causes the success of individual organization really. Probably, projects with higher probability of success are accepted by research partner for collaborative work.
- 2.
Again, it should be stated that correlation does not indicate causality.
References
Aldrich H, Zimmer C (1990) Entrepreneurship through social networks. California Management Review 33 (1): 3–23
Argyres N, Liebeskind J (1996) Privatizing the intellectual commons: Universities and the commercialization of biotechnology. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 35: 427–454
Arzeni S (1997) Entrepreneurship. The OECD Observer 209, December 1997/January 1998: 18–20
Autio E (1997) ‘Atomistic’ and ‘systemic’ approaches to research on new, technology-based firms: A literature study. Small Business Economics 9: 195–209
Baum JAC, Calabrese T, Silverman BS (2000) Don't do it alone: Alliance network composition and the startups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal 21 (Special issue): 267–294
Bourdieu P, Wacquant L (1992) An invitation to reflexive sociology, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
Burt R (1997) The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly 42: 339–365
Butler D (1998) France seeks scientific entrepreneurs. Nature 393 (6682): 203
Colombo MG, Grilli L (2005) Founder's human capital and the growth of new technology-based firms: A competence-based view. Research Policy 34: 795–816
Degroof JJ, Roberts EB (2004) Overcoming weak entrepreneurial infrastructure for academic spin-offs ventures. Journal of Technology Transfer 29: 327–352
Etzkowitz H (1998) The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages. Research Policy 27: 823–833
Etzkowitz H (2002) Incubation of incubators: Innovation as a triple helix of university–industry–government networks. Science and Public Policy 29: 115–128
Etzkowitz H (2003) Research groups as ‘quasi-firms’: The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy 32: 109–121
Etzkowitz H, Webster A, Gebhardt C, Terra BRC (2000) The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy 29: 313–330
Etzkowitz H, Benner L, Guaranys A, Maculan M, Kneller R (2005) Managed capitalism: Intellectual property and the rise of the entrepreneurial university in the US, Sweden, Brazil and Japan. Paper presented at Druid Summer conference, Denmark.
Feldman PM (2001) Where science comes to life: University bioscience, commercial spin-offs, and regional economic development. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 2: 345–361
Gnyawali DR, Madhavan R (2001) Corporative networks and competitive dynamics: A structural embeddedness perspective. Academy of Management Review 26: 431–445
Gulati R (1998) Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal 19: 293–317
Hall DT (ed) (1996) The career is dead – long live the career: A relational approach to careers. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
Kenney M (1986) Biotechnology: The university–industry complex. Yale University Press, New Haven
Kenney M, Goe WR (2004) The role of social embeddedness in professional entrepreneurship: A comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford. Research Policy 33: 691–707
Kets de Vries MFR (1996) The anatomy of the entrepreneur: Clinical observations. Human Relations 49: 853–884
Kirby D (2006) Creating entrepreneurial universities in the UK: Applying entrepreneurship theory to practice. Journal of Technology Transfer 31 (5): 599–603
Liebeskind JP, Oliver AL, Zucker L, Brewer M (1996) Social networks, learning and flexibility: Sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms. Organization Science 7: 428–443
Lindelö, Löen H (2004) Proximity as a resource base for competitive advantage: University–industry links for technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer 29 (3/4): 311–326
Link AN, Scott JT (2005) Opening the ivory tower's door: An analysis of the determinants of the formation of US university spin-offs companies. Research Policy 34: 1106–1112
Lowe CR (2005) Commercialization and spin-out activities of the Institute of Biotechnology. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology 11 (4): 305–317
Lumpkin GT, Dess GG (1996) Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review 21: 135–172
Merton R (1973) The sociology of science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Miner JB (1997) A psychological typology of successful entrepreneurs. Quorum Books, Westport, CT
Morris MH (1998) Entrepreneurial intensity: Sustainable advantages for individuals, organizations, and societies. Quorum, Westport, CT
Mowery DC, Sampat BN (2005) The Bayh–Dole Act of 1980 and university–industry technology transfer: A model for other OECD governments? Journal of Technology Transfer 30 (1/2): 115–127
Murray F (2004) The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: Sharing the laboratory life. Research Policy 33: 643–659
Nicolaou N, Birley S (2003) Academic networks in a trichotomous categorization of university spinouts. Journal of Business Venturing 18: 333–359
Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1995) The knowledge creating company. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Nowak MJ, Grantham CE (2000) The virtual incubator: Managing human capital in the software industry. Research Policy 29: 125–134
Oliver AL (2001) Strategic alliances and the learning life-cycle of biotechnology firms. Organization Studies 22: 467–489
Oliver AL (2004) Biotechnology entrepreneurial scientists and their collaborations. Research Policy 33: 583–597
Oliver AL (2005) University–industry collaborations: Contrasting metaphors of linear and chaotic networking processes. Working Paper, Department of Sociology, Hebrew University, Jerusalem
Oliver AL, Ebers M (1998) Networking network studies – An analysis of conceptual configurations in the study of inter-organizational relations. Organization Studies 19: 549–583
Oliver AL, Liebeskind JP (1998) Three levels for networking for intellectual capital in biotechnology: Implications for studying interorganizational networks. International Studies of Management and Organization 27 (4): 76–103
Oliver AL, Liebeskind JP (2006) Public research and intellectual property rights: A tale of two inventions. Working paper, Department of Sociology, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem
O'shea R, Allen TJ, O'Gorman C, Roche F (2004) Universities and technology transfer: A review of academic entrepreneurship literature. Irish Journal of Management 25: 11–29
O'shea R, Allen TJ, Chevalier A, Roche F (2005) Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer, and spinoff performance of U.S. universities. Research Policy 34: 994–1009
Owen-Smith J, Powell WW (2003) The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: Assessing the importance of experience and connectivity. Research Policy 32 (9): 1695–1711
Powell WW, Koput KW, Smith-Doerr L (1996) Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly 41: 116–145
Powell WW, White DR, Kupot KW, Owen-Smith J (2005) Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaborations in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology 110: 1132–1205
Shane S (2004) Academic entrepreneurship: University spin-offs and wealth creation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK
Shane S, Stuart T (2002) Organizational endowment and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science 48 (1): 154–171
Uzzi B (1996) The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review 61: 674–698
Van Looy B, Callaert J, Debackere K (2006) Publication and patent behavior of academic researchers: Conflicting, reinforcing or merely co-existing? Research Policy 35: 596–608
Vohora A, Wright M, Lockett A (2004) Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy 33: 147–175
Zaheer A, George VP (2004) Reach out or reach within? Performance implications of alliance and location in biotechnology. Managerial and Decision Economics 25: 437–452
Zucker LG, Darby MR (1996) Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 93: 12709–12916
Zucker LG, Darby MR, Brewer MB (1998) Intellectual human capital and the birth of U.S. biotechnology enterprises. The American Economic Review 88: 290–306
Zucker LG, Darby MR, Armstrong J (2002) Commercializing knowledge: University science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology. Management Science 48: 138–153
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Oliver, A.L. (2008). University-Based Biotechnology Spin-Offs. In: Patzelt, H., Brenner, T. (eds) Handbook of Bioentrepreneurship. International Handbook Series on Entrepreneurship, vol 4. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-48345-0_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-48345-0_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-48343-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-48345-0
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)