The origin of spin-offs: a typology of corporate and academic spin-offs
- 1.8k Downloads
We provide a typology of corporate and academic spin-off types, distinguishing spin-offs involving new ventures from those that concern existing activities. We summarize the papers published in this special issue, relating them to the typology we develop. We conclude by developing an agenda for further research on spin-offs.
JEL ClassificationsL26 M13 L33
We thank the managing editors of Small Business Economics for affording us the opportunity to introduce the special issue with this editorial article. The first author is grateful for the opportunity to edit this special issue. The contribution of all anonymous reviewers who helped to improve the papers presented here is gratefully acknowledged.
- Bonaccorsi, A., Colombo, M. G., Guerini, M., & Rossi Lamastra, C. (2013). The impact of local and external university knowledge on the creation of knowledge-intensive firms: Evidence from the Italian case, Small Business Economics, this issue. doi: 10.1007/s11187-013-9536-2.
- Czarnitzki, D., Rammer, C., & Toole, A. A. (2013). University Spinoffs and the “Performance Premium”, Small Business Economics, this issue. doi: 10.1007/s11187-013-9538-0.
- Egeln, J., Gottschalk, S., Rammer, C., & Spielkamp, A. (2003). Public research spin-offs in Germany, summary report, ZEW Documentation 03-04. Mannheim: Centre for European Economic Research.Google Scholar
- Fiet, J. (2002). The systematic search for entrepreneurial discoveries. Westport, CT: Quorum.Google Scholar
- Fryges, H., Gottschalk, S., Gude, H., Kohn, K., Müller, K., Niefert, M. & Ullrich, K. (2010), Aufbruch nach dem Sturm. Junge Unternehmen zwischen Investitionsschwäche und Innovationsstrategie, Gründungspanelreport, Vol. 3, Creditreform, KfW, ZEW (eds.), Mannheim.Google Scholar
- Fryges, H., Müller, B., & Niefert, M. (2013). Job machine, think tank, or both—What makes corporate spinoffs different? Small Business Economics, this issue. doi: 10.1007/s11187-013-9540-6
- Gilligan, J., & Wright, M. (2012). Private equity demystified–2012 edition. London: ICAEW.Google Scholar
- Huyghe, A., Knockaert, M., Wright, M., & Piva, E. (2013). Technology transfer offices as boundary spanners in the pre-spin-off process: The case of a hybrid model, Small Business Economics, this issue. doi: 10.1007/s11187-013-9537-1
- Lejpras, A. (2013). How innovative are spin-offs at later stages of development? Comparing innovativeness of established research spin-offs and otherwise created firms, Small Business Economics, this issue. doi: 10.1007/s11187-013-9534-4
- Merton, R. K. (1942). The normative structure of science (1973), In N. Storer (Ed.), The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations (pp. 267–278). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Robbie, K., & Wright, M. (1996). Management Buyins. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
- Stephan, A. (2013). Are public research spin-offs more innovative? Small Business Economics, this issue. doi: 10.1007/s11187-013-9539-z
- Van de Velde, E., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., & Bruneel, J. (2007). Exploring the boundary between entrepreneurship and corporate venturing: From assisted spin-outs to entrepreneurial spin-offs, working paper 2007/472. Ghent: Ghent University.Google Scholar
- Weatherston, J. (1995). Academic entrepreneurs: Is a spin-off company too risky? Proceedings of the 40th International Council for Small Business (ICSB), Small Business Advancement National Center, University of Central Arkansas, http://www.sbaer.uca.edu/research/icsb/1995/pdf/20.pdf.
- Wright, M. (2011). Entrepreneurial mobility, In D. Bergh, & D. Ketchen, Research Methodology in Strategy and Management (Vol. 6, pp. 137–162). Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
- Wright, M. (2013) Academic entrepreneurship, technology transfer and society: Where next? Journal of Technology Transfer, forthcoming.Google Scholar
- Wright, M., Hoskisson, R., Busenitz, L., & Dial, J. (2000). Privatisation and entrepreneurship: The upside of management buy-outs. Academy of Management Review, 25(3), 591–601.Google Scholar