Advertisement

How Do Academic Spin-off Companies Generate and Disseminate Useful Market Information Within Their Organizational Boundaries?

  • Tindara Abbate
  • Fabrizio Cesaroni
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation book series (LNISO, volume 13)

Abstract

From a market orientation perspective, this study intends to examine how small high-tech firms generate, disseminate and integrate information on customers’ needs, competitors’ activities and market forces within their organizational boundaries in order to define and to implement effective strategies. We perform an explorative qualitative analysis based on Italian and Spanish academic spin-off firms. We find that the activities of generation, dissemination and integration of market information are crucial to develop technological innovations and to obtain positive performance, even if these activities require the definition and development of a sophisticated marketing information system, as well as the availability of economic resources and specialized competences, often more limited in these small firms.

Keywords

Academic spin-off companies Market orientation Information generation Information dissemination Information integration 

References

  1. 1.
    Zhang, J.: The performance of university spin-offs: an exploratory analysis using venture capital data. J. Technol. Transfer 34, 255–285 (2009)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ortìn-Angel, P., Vendrell-Herreo, F.: University spin-offs vs. other NTBFs: total factor productivity differences at outset and evolution. Technovation 34(2), 101–112 (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mohr, J., Sengupta, S., Slater, S.: Marketing of high-technology products and innovations. 3rd ed. Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dutta, S., Narasimhan, O., Rajiv, S.: Success in high-technology markets: is marketing capability critical? Marketing Science 18(4), 547–568 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baker, W.E., Sinkula, J.M.: The complementary effects of market orientation and entrepreneurial orientation on profitability in small businesses. J. Small Bus. Manage. 47(4), 443–464 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kohli, A.K., Jaworski, B.J.: Market orientation: the construct, research proposition, and managerial implications. J. Mark. 54(2), 1–18 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lockett, A., Wright, M., Franklin, S.: Technology transfer and universities’ spinout strategies. Small Bus. Econ. 20, 185–200 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wright, M., Birley, S., Mosey, S.: Entrepreneurship and university technology transfer. J. Technol. Transfer 29(3–4), 235–246 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clarysse, B. Wright M., van de Velde, E.: Entrepreneurial origin, technological knowledge, and the growth of spin-off companies. J. Manage. Stud. 48(6), 1420–1442 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Steffensen, M., Rogers, E.M., Speakman, K.: Spin-offs from Research Centers at a Research University. J. Bus. Ventur. 15(1), 93–111 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Roberts, E.B., Malone, D.E.: Policies and structures for spinning off new companies from Research and Development Organizations. R&D Manage. 26(1), 17–48 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Franklin, S.J., Wright, M., Lockett, A.: Academic and surrogate entrepreneurs in university spin-out companies. J. Technol. Transfer 26(1–2), 127–141 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Clarysse, B., Moray, N.: A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: the case of a research based spin-off. J. Bus. Ventur. 19(1), 55–79 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    O’Shea, R., Allen, T.J., Chevalier, A., Roche, F.: Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. Universities. Res. Policy 34(7), 994–1009 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Siegel, D.S., Waldman, D.A., Atwater, L.E., Link, A.N.: Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. J. Eng. Tech. Manage. 21(1/2), 115–142 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Lockett, A., Binks, M.: Venture capital and university spin-outs. Res. Policy 35, 481–501 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mustar, P., Renault, M., Colombo, M.G., Piva, E., Fontes, M., Lockett, A., Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Moray, N.: Conceptualising the heterogeneity of research-based spin-offs: a multi-dimensional taxonomy. Res. Policy 35(2), 289–308 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ensley, M.D., Hmieleski, K.M.: A comparative study of new venture top management team composition, dynamics and performance between university-based and independent start-ups. Res. Policy 34, 1091–1105 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shapiro, B.P.: What the hell is market oriented? Harvard Bus. Rev. 66, 119–125 (1988)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Narver, J.C., Slater, S.F.: The effect of a market orientation on business profitability. J. Mark. 54(4), 20–35 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Day, G.S.: The Capabilities of market-driven organization. J. Mark. 58(4), 37–52 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kumar, V., E. Jones, Venkatesan, R., Leone, R. P.: Is market orientation a source of sustainable competitive advantage or simply the cost of competing? J. Mark. 75(1), 16–30 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jaworski, B.J., Kohli, A.K: Market orientation: antecedents and consequences. J. Mark. 57(3), 53–70 (1993)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kirca, A.H., Jayachandran, S., Bearden, W.O.: Market orientation: a meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedent and impact on performance. J. Mark. 69, 24–41 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ellis, P.: Market orientation and performance: a meta-analysis and cross-national comparisons. J. Manage. Stud. 43, 1089–1107 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yin, R.K.: Case study research: design and methods. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M.: Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA (1994)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Denzin, N.K.: The research act: a theoretical introduction to sociological methods. McGraw-Hill, New York (1978)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Deshpande, R., Farley, J.U.: Organizational culture, market orientation, innovativeness, and firm performance: an international research odyssey. Int. J. Res. Mark. 21(1), 3–22 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lee, T.: Using qualitative methods in organizational research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA (1999)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics and Business (SEAM)University of MessinaMessinaItaly
  2. 2.Istituto di ManagementScuola Superiore Sant’AnnaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations