Nascent academic entrepreneurs and identity work at the boundaries of professional domains

Higher education institutions promote academic entrepreneurship through organizational arrangements such as innovation programs, incubators, and accelerators aimed at implementing the third mission of the university. While research has examined how these multi-professional arrangements support entrepreneurial efforts, less is known about their individual level implications which emerge as researchers are exposed to different professional values and practices. This article draws on a longitudinal qualitative study on an innovation program to investigate through what kinds of identity processes nascent academic entrepreneurs construct their professional identities and how as part of these processes they position themselves in relation to different professional domains. The analysis demonstrates three identity construction processes (hybridization, rejecting hybridization, and transitioning) and their associated identity work tactics (compartmentalizing, protecting, and reframing) at the boundaries of professional domains. Our contribution is in demonstrating how nascent academic entrepreneurs’ identity construction processes are influenced by internally and externally oriented identity work and their interactive dynamics. Moreover, the findings advance our understanding of how individuals can purposefully mould the fluidity of domain boundaries through identity work by making boundaries bridgeable, impermeable, or permeable. These findings have value for those developing organizational arrangements for the promotion of academic entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial identities.

From Lab to Market: Challenges Faced By Academic Entrepreneur in Technology Transfer Pursuit

The development of academic entrepreneurship is often benchmarked by the rate of patenting, licensing and spin-offs creation. However, these traditional indicators inherently require a long gestation period to materialize, thus creating a challenge to gauge the progress of novice universities. This paper preliminarily assesses the nature of academic entrepreneurship from a developing economy perspective and explore common challenges faced by academic entrepreneurs in bringing research discoveries from lab to market. Survey questionnaires were distributed to academic entrepreneurs of a public university in Malaysia and a series of answers to an open-ended question were analysed through content analysis. Although the results showed the rate of patents, licensing and start-up creations are modest, however, most of the scientists have made significant progress to the pre-commercialization stage by developing prototypes with commercial potential. The content analysis revealed that scientists’ entrepreneurial characteristics and institutional support were among the main factors that affect the commercialization of research discoveries. These findings suggest for the relevant authority to take improvement measures to enhance the efficiency of Technology Transfer Office and for the private funders and government disbursing agencies to provide more transparency in decision criteria and to reduce the period of application process and approval results. Avenues for future research are recommended based on the findings derived from this single case study.

Venture creation patterns in academic entrepreneurship: the role of founder motivations

The path to academic entrepreneurship is characterized by a sequence of venture creation activities, which can be classified into operational-, financing- and commercialization activities. Academic entrepreneurship research is concerned with the question how different motives of scientists affect the patterns of these venture creation activities. Using a longitudinal two-period dataset of 165 academic entrepreneurs from 73 universities in Germany, we propose and test a multi-activity-based model that links different types of entrepreneurial motives to venture creation activities. The findings show that founder motives related to self-realization, necessity and an increased financial income increase the likelihood of completing venture creation activities, whereas work-life balance motivations and the drive to make better use of one’s professional knowledge decrease that likelihood. The desire to translate research ideas into practice has no effect. Our results further show that the positive effects of seeking self-realization and an increased financial income are more pronounced for completing commercialization activities than for operational activities. Our study contributes to research on academic entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial motivations and helps university administrators and policymakers to design their entrepreneurship support programs more effectively.

How to develop ASOs of China? Answers from the academic entrepreneurs

PurposeWhy do academic spin-offs (ASOs) have different growth performance? What makes ASOs grow better? Based on the perspective of academic entrepreneurs, this study systematically studies the influence mechanism of the growth of Chinese ASOs and establishes an analytical framework for the influence of academic entrepreneurs on the growth of ASOs.Design/methodology/approachThis study takes ASOs of Chinese Academy of Sciences as a sample. On the basis of literature analysis, the questionnaire is designed to collect the measurement items of variables and amended after interviewing the well-known scholars and experienced enterprise managers. The entrepreneur capital theory and the triple helix (TH) model are used to formulate the research model. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysis was used to analyze the relationship between academic entrepreneurs' social capital, human capital and enterprise growth. Data processing, reliability and validity analysis, hypothesis testing and so on are all carried out by Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS), which is a common method of first-hand data processing.FindingsAccording to findings, capital of academic entrepreneurs exerted a positive impact on ASOs growth. First of all, ASOs growth is positively affected by external connections and human capital of academic entrepreneurs. Second, the institutional environment and location environment play a regulation role. However, regulation role of the industrial environment is not proved. Third, the research has shown academic entrepreneurs' capital and ASOs growth is regulated by both path guidance and resources support ways. Finally, according to further test, ASOs growth is positively affected by both business contacts and political contacts of academic entrepreneurs, and the role of political contacts is greater.Research limitations/implicationsInevitably, this research has limitations, to some extent, which need to be further improved and supplemented in future studies. First, samples are special. Due to the difficulty of data acquisition, this research only obtains data from ASOs of the Chinese Academy of Sciences system. Second, there should be diverse methods to measure the growth of ASOs.Originality/valueBased on composition-based view and triple helix model, this study constructs an analytical framework of the influence of academic entrepreneur capital on ASOs growth and verifies the influence and mechanism of academic entrepreneur social capital and human capital on enterprise growth. The conclusion of this study provides empirical support for the development of composition-based view and also proves the effectiveness of this theory in studying ASOs related issues in China. In addition, the research conclusion is also the practical application of triple helix model, which proves the effectiveness of triple helix model in analyzing the growth mechanism of ASOs.

Import of Scientific Policy Instruments in Contemporary Russia

Characteristic features of contemporary scientific policy of Russia in the context of its instruments import are highlighted in the article. Instruments are analyzed as institutions according to the D. North interpretation. It was revealed that the main imports are the instruments those ensure the accountability of the academic community (academia). Grant funding system, scientometrics and academic excellence programs are these instruments. In the conditions of contemporary Russia the accountability of scientists and scholars to society turns into accountability to the vertical of power. The motivation of its representatives includes both the idea of public benefits as well as the task of private efficiency maximizing when to select the goals and instruments of scientific policy. It is shown that the selection process includes three main levels: political, governmental and departmental. Imported instruments are gradually transformed in accordance with the interests of the actors participating in the vertical administrative bargaining at all these levels. The goals set at the political level to strengthen economic and political positions of the country in the world are gradually being replaced with the tasks of maximizing the private efficiency of high-ranking participants in this bargaining. As a result, a qualitative modification of the sphere of science occurs. It is not just about the limitation of academic community autonomy, but about its incorporation into the vertical of power in the conditions of contemporary Russia. This fact leads to the changing of motivation and structure of academia. Academic researchers and scholars are gradually being replaced by politicized academic administrators and specific academic entrepreneurs. They are differ if compare them with the western academic entrepreneurs. The latter are focused on the competitive economic markets, while the first concentrate their attention on the redistribution of resources within the framework of vertical administrative bargaining.

Bridging Academic Entrepreneurship and the World of Work? Perspectives from Contemporary Educator

This contribution of this study investigates how the use of the AE toolkit can take the lead to a greater appreciation of the university spin-off venture into the real world of work. Nevertheless, no conceptual framework can explain how the technology-market matching proceeds from one stage to another. A longitudinal survey design involving four focus groups was chosen to monitor the development process of group spin-off creation in context. Data collection is also derived from the literature review, in-depth interviews, and a series of workshops and focus group discussions on the Malaysian and Cambodian higher education sectors. Finding shows that the AE toolkit is organized around four mutually dependent themes: (1) the structure of an enterprising university and its culture, (2) university spin-offs (USOs) and applied research, (3) the attribute of academic entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial ecosystem, and (4) spin-off development and community engagements. These theories may offer a more comprehensive insight into the AE process in conjunction with each other. The beliefs of each notion hint at significant consequences for further research on AE and the world of work as a general rule.

The organizational architecture of entrepreneurial universities across the stages of entrepreneurship: a conceptual framework

Entrepreneurial universities contribute directly and indirectly to supporting all stages of entrepreneurship. The challenge for entrepreneurial universities is how they can best support academic entrepreneurs through these stages of entrepreneurship. This has led to the creation of different and often ad hoc organizational units within an entrepreneurial university. The organizational challenge for entrepreneurial universities is the selection of the appropriate formal organizational architecture to support the stages of entrepreneurship. The purpose of this paper is to examine the organizational architecture of entrepreneurial universities and how it supports the stages of entrepreneurship — latent, emergent, launch, and growth. Our conceptual organizational framework conflates the stages of entrepreneurship with the actual needs of university-based entrepreneurs and how these needs are supported through different formal organizational units within the organizational architecture of entrepreneurial universities. Therein, we categorize three types of formal organizational units — those that focus on exploration stages of entrepreneurship, those that straddle exploration and exploitation stages of entrepreneurship, and those that boundary span all stages of entrepreneurship. We conclude by discussing the resultant organizational tensions for entrepreneurial universities and highlight future avenues of research.