University startups as a commercialization alternative: lessons from three contrasting case studies
- Paul M. Swamidass
- … show all 1 hide
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
A recent National Research Council (NRC) report (2011) recommends that universities must craft policies and allocate resources to enable more university startups because some university technologies will never be commercialized unless licensed to a startup. However, the creation of university startups requires personnel skills and programs not typically associated with an university Office of Technology Transfer (OTT). Estimates show that 75 % of university inventions are not licensed at all. The conclusions of this study include university policies to turn some them to fuel university startups. Carefully selected case studies of three contrasting universities reveal patterns of successful startup policies and performance. MIT’s case is an example of long-term success, the University of Colorado’s case is an example of medium-term success, and Auburn University’s case is an example of a new-comer to the scene. Lessons from the case studies include: the need for very early evaluation of all inventions for their startup potential, the need for pre-license seed funds through proof-of-concept programs to advance early-stage inventions to the next stage, and the need for OTT personnel skilled in enabling startups. NSF’s recent I-Corps program invests heavily in the training of potential enablers and entrepreneurs for commercializing university inventions. Based on the findings of this study, I-Corps must also invest in pre-license proof-of-concept programs to advance early-stage university inventions closer to the market. Implementing the conclusions of this study would also accomplish the recommendations of the 2011 NRC report cited above.
- BankBoston. (1997). MIT: The impact of innovation, Boston, MA.
- Bostrom, D., & Tieckelmann, R. (2007). U.S. Licensing Activity Surveys FY 2006. Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM), North Brook, IL, USA (Annual surveys).
- Bray, M. J., & Lee, J. N. (2000). University revenues from technology transfer: licensing fees vs. equity position. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5–6), 385–392. http://www.sciencedirect.com/.
- Chukumba, C., & Jensen, R. (2005).University invention, entrepreneurship, and start-ups. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), Cambridge, MA, Working Paper 11475, June, http://www.nber.org/tmp/60448-w11475.pdf.
- DeSimone, J. M., & Mitchell, L. (2010). Facilitating the commercialization of university innovation: The Carolina express license agreement, Ewing Marion Kauffman foundation, April, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1585447.
- Di Gregoriao, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, 32, 209–227. CrossRef
- Feldman, M., Feller, I., Bercovitz, J., & Burton, R. (2002). Equity and the technology transfer: Strategies for American research universities. Management Science, 48, 105–122. http://www.web.ebscohost.com/.
- Gregario, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, 32, 209–227. www.elsevier.com/locate/econbase. Accessed October 28, 2008.
- Gubeli, M. H., & Doloreux, D. (2005). An empirical study of university spin-off development. European Journal of Innovation Management, 8(3), 269–282. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1500925.
- Gulbranson, C.A., & Audretsch, D. B. (2008). Proof of Concept Centers: Accelerating the Commercialization of University Innovation, a report of the Kauffman Foundation, Kansas City, MO.
- Hayter, C. S. (2010). In search of the profit-maximizing actor: Motivations and definitions of success from nascent academic entrepreneurs. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36, 340–352, on-line publication September 25. http://www.springerlink.com/content/w877x287w5855230/fulltext.pdf (2011).
- Hsu, D., & Bernstein, T. (1997). Managing the university technology licensing process: Findings from case studies. Journal of the Association of University Technology Managers, 11(1), 1–33.
- Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. (2001). Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. The American Economic Review, 91(1), 240–259. CrossRef
- Louis, K. S., Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M. E., & Stoto, M. A. (1989). Entrepreneurs in Academe: An exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 110. CrossRef
- Markman, G. D., Phan, P. H., Balkin, D. B., & Gianiodis, P. T. (2005). Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 241–263. http://www.sciencedirect.com/.
- Merrill, S. A., & Mazza, A. M. (Eds.). (2011). Managing university intellectual property in the public interest. National Research Council, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
- MIT TLO. (2010). Technology licensing office statistics for years 2000 to 2010 [ppt]. Cambridge, MA. http://web.mit.edu/tlo/www/about/office_statistics.html. Accessed 5/10/2011.
- Nelsen, L. (2010). Formation of an entrepreneurial eco-system: The interaction of a research university and its city. International Journal of Healthcare Technology Management, 11(4), 296–303. CrossRef
- Nelson, L. (2007). The activities and roles of MIT in forming clusters and strengthening entrepreneurship. In A. Krattiger, R. T. Mahoney & L. Nelsen, et al. (Eds.), Intellectual property management in health and agricultural innovation: A handbook of best practices. Oxford, U.K.: MIHR, and Davis, USA: PIPRA, www.ipHandbook.org.
- Nelson, A. J., & Byers, T. (2010). Challenges in university technology transfer and the promising role of entrepreneurship education. Kauffman: Emerging Scholars Initiatives. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1651224 (July 1).
- O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994–1009. CrossRef
- Powers, J. (2000). Academic entrepreneurship in higher education: Institutional effects on performance of university technology transfer. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Microform.
- Powers, J., & McDougall, P. (2005). University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: A resource based view of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3), 291–311. CrossRef
- Roberts, E. D., & Eesley, C. (2009). Entrepreneurial impact: The role of MIT. Kansas City, MO: Kauffman Foundation.
- Shane, S. (2000). Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. Organization Science, 11, 448–469. CrossRef
- Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2007). Intellectual property: The assessment. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 529–540. CrossRef
- Swamidass, P. M., & Vulasa, V. (2009). Why university inventions rarely produce income? Bottlenecks in university technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(4), 343–363. CrossRef
- University startups as a commercialization alternative: lessons from three contrasting case studies
The Journal of Technology Transfer
Volume 38, Issue 6 , pp 788-808
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- University spinoffs and startups
- Proof of concept (POC)
- Technology development stages
- Management of innovation
- Technology transfer
- NSF I-Corps program
- Auburn University
- The University of Colorado
- Stanford University
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. College of Business, Thomas Walter Center for Technology Management, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, 36849, USA