Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Acknowledging diversity in knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship: assessing the Brazilian small business innovation research

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article analyzes a policy instrument that nurtures knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship in the State of São Paulo, Brazil. The PIPE Program is a small-business innovation research run by The Sao Paulo Research Foundation since 1997. While prior literature has pointed out that firm-level heterogeneity is an important feature to consider when evaluating these kinds of policies, heterogeneity has not been appropriately addressed as a factor of consideration for improving funding effectiveness. This study contributes to the literature by empirically appraising the Brazilian PIPE Program, while explicitly considering heterogeneity across firms. We conduct an empirical evaluation of a set of companies funded and non-funded by PIPE employing a multiple correspondence analysis followed by a clustering analysis. The results identify firm performance patterns on different dimensions, determining that the effects associated with the PIPE vary according to firm characteristics. Findings underscore the need to incorporate heterogeneity across firm types as a relevant source of evidence in funding instruments to support policy design and decision-making toward a more effective allocation of resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. “The primary goal of the Department of Defense (DoD)’s SBIR program is the provision of technologies that are used as part of the nation’s defense system, which is the mission of the DoD. In contrast, the National Institute of Health (NIH)’s primary mission for its SBIR program is the development of fundamental knowledge and its application for improving health. Pioneering the future of space exploration, scientific discovery, and aeronautical research is the mission of National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and its SBIR program. The SBIR program within the Department of Energy (DoE) supports technical knowledge related to the agency’s program areas. Finally, the National Science Foundation’s SBIR program promotes science and the commercialization of science.” (Link and Scott, 2012, p. 36).

  2. For instance, agencies with missions to develop technologies for internal use, via procurement, as the cases of the DoD and NASA SBIR programs, have a considerably different orientation from other agencies that focused on developing technologies to be used outside the agency, such as the NIH (Wessner, 2008).

  3. The FAPESP is a public foundation, funded by the taxpayers of the State of São Paulo, with the mission to support research projects in higher education and research institutions in all fields of knowledge.

  4. Although considerably variable, the exchange rate at the time of this article is 5.3 reais (the Brazilian currency) per US dollar.

  5. There are two other complementary phases. The most relevant in terms of pushing companies to launch goods or services is called PIPE-invest, which allows FAPESP to continue to invest in companies that are able to obtain funds from other financial sources (public or private). In these cases, the FAPESP may provide matching (non-reimbursable) funds for companies to continue their research and improve the technology under development. This modality is recent (2020), and it was not available for the sample we analyzed in this article. The other modality is Phase III. Companies do not receive any financial support from the FAPESP in this phase, as the FAPESP helps them to apply for other public funding agencies’ programs. Details are available on the FAPESP website (https://fapesp.br/pipe/).

  6. It is important to note that this evaluation is part of a larger project to evaluate several FAPESP initiatives.

References

  • Ács, Z., & Armington, C. (2004). Employment growth and entrepreneurial activity in cities. Regional Studies, 38(8), 911–927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ács, Z., Desai, S., & Hessels, J. (2008). Entrepreneurship, economic development and institutions. Small Business Economics, 31(3), 219–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aernoudt, R. (2004). Incubators: Tool for entrepreneurship? Small Business Economics, 23(2), 127–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alves, A., Fischer, B., & Vonortas, N. (2021). Ecosystems of entrepreneurship: Configurations and critical dimensions. Annals of Regional Science, 67, 73–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amoroso, S., & Link, A. N. (2018). Under the AEGIS of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship: Employment growth and gender of founders among European firms. Small Business Economics, 50(4), 899–915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, M. S., Bray, J. W., & Link, A. N. (2017). On the failure of scientific research: An analysis of SBIR projects funded by the U.S National Institutes of Health. Scientometrics, 112, 431–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audrestch, D., & Link, A. (2018). Innovation capital. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 43, 1760–1767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D., Colombelli, A., Grilli, L., Minola, T., & Rasmussen, E. (2020). Innovative start-ups and policy initiatives. Research Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Link, A. N. (2012). Entrepreneurship and innovation: Public policy frameworks. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D., & Link, A. (2019). The fountain of knowledge: an epistemological perspective on the growth of U.S. SBIR-funded firms. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 15, 1103–1113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2002). Public/private technology partnerships: Evaluating SBIR-supported research. Research Policy, 31, 145–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckman, C., Eisenhardt, K., Kotha, S., Meyer, A., & Rajagopalan, N. (2012). Technology Entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 6(2), 89–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belz, A. (2017). Real options valuation of a federally funded small business portfolio: Analysis of the Nasa Sbir program. In IEEE Technology & Engineering Management Conference.

  • Boccardelli, P., & Magnusson, M. G. (2006). Dynamic capabilities in early-phase entrepreneurship. Knowledge and Process Management, 13(3), 162–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock, C., Huber, A., & Jarchow, S. (2018). Growth factors of research-based spin-offs and the role of venture capital investing. Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(5), 1375–1409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breschi, S., Lenzi, C., Malerba, F., & Mancusi, M. L. (2014). Knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship: Sectoral patterns in a sample of European high-tech firms. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 26(7), 751–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R., & Mason, C. (2014). Inside the high-tech black box: A critique of technology entrepreneurship policy. Technovation, 34(12), 773–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cahen, F. R. (2019). Internationalization of Brazilian high-tech startups. In M. Oliveira, F. Cahen, & F. Borini (Eds.), Startups and innovation ecosystems in emerging markets (pp. 37–53). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Caloghirou, Y., Protogerou, A., & Tsakanikas, A. (2015). The AEGIS survey: A quantitative analysis of new entrepreneurial ventures in Europe. In Dynamics of knowledge intensive entrepreneurship: Business strategy and public policy (pp. 48–94).

  • Camerani, R., & Malerba, F. (2010).Patterns of technological entry in different fields: an analysis of patent data. In: M. Franco (Ed.), Knowledge intensive entrepreneurship and innovation systems : evidence from Europe. Routledge.

  • Chatterji, A., Glaeser, E., & Kerr, W. (2014). Clusters of entrepreneurship and innovation. Innovation Policy and the Economy, 14, 129–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, Y. R., & Shepherd, D. A. (2004). Entrepreneurs’ decisions to exploit opportunities. Journal of Management, 30(3), 377–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colombelli, A., Grilli, L., Minola, T., & Mrkajic, B. (2020). To what extent do young innovative companies take advantage of policy support to enact innovation appropriation mechanisms? Research Policy, 49(10), 103797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connell, D. (2017). Leveraging public procurement to growth the innovation economy - An Independent Review of the Small Business Research Initiative by David Connell; Final Report and Recommendations

  • Deeds, D. L., Decarolis, D., & Coombs, J. (2000). Dynamic capabilities and new product development in high technology ventures: An empirical analysis of new biotechnology firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(3), 211–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, B., Salles-Filho, S., Zeitoum, C., & Colugnati, F. (2021). Performance drivers in knowledge-intensive entrepreneurial firms: A multidimensional perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management. Pre-print.

  • Fischer, B., Moraes, G., & Schaeffer, P. (2019). Universities’ institutional settings and academic entrepreneurship: Notes from a developing country. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 147, 243–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fritsch, M. (2008). How does new business formation affect regional development? Introduction to the special issue. Small Business Economics, 30(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galope, R. (2016). A different certification effect of the small business innovation research (SBIR) program. Economic Development Quarterly, 30(4), 371–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giga, A., Graddy-Reed, A., Belz, A., et al. (2021). Helping the little guy: the impact of government awards on small technology firms. Journal of Technology Transfer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-021-09859-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gimenez-Fernandez, E. M., Sandulli, F. D., & Bogers, M. (2020). Unpacking liabilities of newness and smallness in innovative start-ups: Investigating the differences in innovation performance between new and older small firms. Research Policy, 49(10), 104049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goel, R. K., & Saunoris, J. (2017). Dynamics of knowledge spillovers from patents to entrepreneurship: Evidence across entrepreneurship types. Contemporary Economic Policy, 35(4), 700–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gök, A., & Edler, J. (2012). The use of behavioural additionality evaluation in innovation policy making. Research Evaluation, 21, 306–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, D., Minola, T., & Eddleston, K. A. (2019). How do scientists contribute to the performance of innovative start-ups? an imprinting perspective on open innovation. Journal of Management Studies, 56(5), 895–928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernández-Perlines, F., Moreno-García, J., & Yañez-Araque, B. (2016). The mediating role of competitive strategy in international entrepreneurial orientation. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 5383–5389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howell, S. (2017). Financing innovation: Evidence from R&D grants. American Economic Review, 107(4), 1136–1164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inoue, H., & Yamaguchi, E. (2017). Evaluation of the small business innovation research program in Japan. SAGE Open, 7(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kantis, H. D., Federico, J. S., & García, S. I. (2020). Entrepreneurship policy and systemic conditions: Evidence-based implications and recommendations for emerging countries. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 72, 100872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katila, R., Chen, E. L., & Piezunka, H. (2012). All the right moves: How entrepreneurial firms compete effectively. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 6(2), 116–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanahan, L. (2016). Multilevel public funding for small business innovation: a review of US state SBIR match programs. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41, 220–249. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10961-015-9407-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanahan, L., Joshi, A. M., & Johnson, E. (2021). Do public R&D subsidies produce jobs? Evidence from the SBIR/STTR program. Research Policy, 50(7), 104286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lassen, A., McKelvey, M., & Ljungberg, D. (2018). Knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship in manufacturing and creative industries: Same, same, but different. Creativity and Innovation Management, 27(3), 284–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenzi, C., Bishop, K., Breschi, S., Buenstorf, G., Llerena, P., Mancusi, M., Malerba, F., & Mckelvey, M. (2010). New Innovators and Knowledge-based entrepreneurship: A field analysis. In F. Malerba (Ed.), Knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship and innovation systems. Routledge, London: New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, J. (2002). When bureaucrats meet entrepreneurs: The design of effective public venture capital programmes. The Economic Journal, 112(477), F73–F84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N. (2017). Gender and entrepreneurial activity. Edward Elgar

  • Link, A. N., & Sarala, R. M. (2019). Advancing conceptualisation of university entrepreneurial ecosystems: The role of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurial firms. International Small Business Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242618821720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2010). Government as entrepreneur: Evaluating the commercialization success of SBIR projects. Research Policy, 39, 589–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2012). Employment growth from public support of innovation in small firms. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2013). Public R&D subsidies, outside private support, and employment growth. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 22(6), 537–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2018). Toward an assessment of the US small business innovation research program at the national institutes of health. Science and Public Policy, 45(1), 83–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., Swann, C. A., & van Hasselt, M. (2022). An assessment of the US small business innovation research (SBIR) program: A study of project failure. Science and Public Policy. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scac049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, H., Neergaard, H., & Ulhøi, J. P. (2003). Knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship and human capital. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 10(4), 426–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, H., Neergaard, H., & Ulhøi, J. P. (2008). Factors influencing the establishment of knowledge-intensive ventures. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 14(2), 70–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F., & Vonortas, N. (2010). Knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship in Europe: Some policy conclusions.In Knowledge intensive entrepreneurship and innovation systems: Evidence from Europe (pp. 299–311).

  • Malerba, F., & McKelvey, M. (2019). Knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 14(6), 555–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F., & McKelvey, M. (2020). Knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship integrating Schumpeter, evolutionary economics, and innovation systems. Small Business Economics, 54(2), 503–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marques, N., Sbragia, R., Oliveira, M., Jr., & Borini, F. (2019). The background of the entrepreneur in high-tech incubated startups. In M. Oliveira, F. Cahen, & F. Borini (Eds.), Startups and innovation ecosystems in emerging markets (pp. 55–68). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, M., & Lassen, A. (2013). Managing Knowledge Intensive Entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Minniti, M. (2008). The role of government policy on entrepreneurial activity: Productive, unproductive, or destructive? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practic, 32(5), 779–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montoro-Sánchez, A., Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado, M., & Mora-Valentín, E. M. (2011). Effects of knowledge spillovers on innovation and collaboration in science and technology parks. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(6), 948–970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira, M., Jr., Fernandes, C., Sbragia, R., & Borini, F. (2019). Startups and Technology transfer from universities and research centers—an analysis of the impact on launching new products. In M. Oliveira Jr., F. Cahen, & F. Borini (Eds.), Startups and Innovation ecosystems in emerging markets (pp. 17–35). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pan, F., & Yang, B. (2019). Financial development and the geographies of startup cities: Evidence from China. Small Business Economics., 52, 743–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paoloni, M., Coluccia, D., Fontana, S., & Solimene, S. (2020). Knowledge management, intellectual capital and entrepreneurship: A structured literature review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(8), 1797–1818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Protogerou, A., Caloghirou, Y., & Vonortas, N. S. (2017). Determinants of young firms’ innovative performance: Empirical evidence from Europe. Research Policy, 46(7), 1312–1326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qian, H., & Haynes, K. E. (2014). Beyond innovation: The small business innovation research program as entrepreneurship policy. Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(4), 524–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salles-Filho, S., Bonacelli, M., Carneiro, A., Castro, P., & Santos, F. (2011). Evaluation of ST&I programs: A methodological approach to the Brazilian Small Business Program and some comparisons with the SBIR program. Research Evaluation, 20(2), 159–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sallos, M. P., Yoruk, E., & García-Pérez, A. (2017). A business process improvement framework for knowledge-intensive entrepreneurial ventures. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 354–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiavone, F., Meles, A., Verdoliva, V., & Del Giudice, M. (2014). Does location in a science park really matter for firms’ intellectual capital performance? Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(4), 497–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Secundo, G., Schiuma, G., & Passiante, G. (2017). Entrepreneurial learning dynamics in knowledge-intensive enterprises. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 23(3), 366–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2009). Why encouraging more people to become entrepreneurs is bad public policy. Small Business Economics, 33(2), 141–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soetanto, D., & Jack, S. (2016). The impact of university-based incubation support on the innovation strategy of academic spin-offs. Technovation, 50–51, 25–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stokan, E., Thompson, L., & Mahu, R. J. (2015). Testing the differential effect of business incubators on firm growth. Economic Development Quarterly, 29(4), 317–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Studdard, N. L. (2006). The effectiveness of entrepreneurial firm’s knowledge acquisition from a business incubator. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 2, 211–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Symeonidou, N., & Nicolaou, N. (2018). Resource orchestration in start-ups: Synchronizing human capital investment, leveraging strategy, and founder start-up experience. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(2), 194–218. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, J., & Murphy, P. J. (2012). Prior Knowledge and New Product and Service Introductions by Entrepreneurial Firms: The Mediating Role of Technological Innovation. Journal of Small Business Management, 50(1), 41–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Temouri, Y., Pereira, V., Muschert, G. W., Ramiah, V., & Babula, M. (2021). How does cluster location and intellectual capital impact entrepreneurial success within high-growth firms? Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(1), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2020-0066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy, 33(1), 147–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallsten, S. T. (2000). The effects of government-industry R&D programs on private R&D: the case of the small business innovation research program. The RAND Journal of Economics, 31(1), 82–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wessner, C. (2008). An assessment of the sbir program at the national science foundation. National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wessner, C. (2009). An assessment of the sbir program at the department of defense. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Professor Nicholas Vonortas from the George Washington University for his rich and helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. Of course, any deficiencies must be attributed solely to the authors.

Funding

The authors acknowledge funding from the São Paulo Research Foundation—FAPESP (Grant # 2019/04300–5 and Grant # 2021/06285–3). The funding has not influenced the research process or results.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Science and Technology Policy, Institute of Geosciences, University of Campinas, Carlos Gomes Str 250, Campinas, 13083-855, Brazil

    Sergio Salles-Filho & Yohanna Juk

  2. School of Applied Sciences, University of Campinas, Pedro Zaccaria Str 1300, Limeira, 13484-350, Brazil

    Bruno Fischer

  3. School of Communications and Arts, University of Sao Paulo, Av. Prof. Lúcio Martins Rodrigues, 443, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

    Paulo Feitosa

  4. Department of Internship, Medicine School, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, José Lourenço Kelmer Str, 1300, Juiz de Fora, 36036-330, Brazil

    Fernando A. B. Colugnati

Authors
  1. Sergio Salles-Filho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bruno Fischer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yohanna Juk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paulo Feitosa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Fernando A. B. Colugnati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yohanna Juk.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Salles-Filho, S., Fischer, B., Juk, Y. et al. Acknowledging diversity in knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship: assessing the Brazilian small business innovation research. J Technol Transf 48, 1446–1465 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-022-09976-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-022-09976-4

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation