THE NEED FOR A CHANGE IN THE PARADIGM OF
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AT UNIVERSITIES: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INNOVATIVE SPIN-OFFS AND
TECHNOLOGY-BASED SPIN-OFFS
Enara Zarrabeitia
University of the Basque Country, Spain
E-mail: enara.zarrabeitia@ehu.eus
Patxi Ruiz de Arbulo
University of the Basque Country, Spain
E-mail: patxi.ruizdearbulo@ehu.eus
Pablo Diaz de Basurto
University of the Basque Country, Spain
E-mail: pablo.diazdebasurto@ehu.eus
Submission: 07/12/2015
Revision: 13/01/2016
Accept: 15/01/2016
ABSTRACT
This study seeks to analyse the
main characteristics of and barriers to the growth and development of
innovative university spin-offs (which originate mainly from the fields of
social science and law) and technology-based university spin-offs (which tend to
originate from the experimental sciences, from technical studies and from
health science). The idea is to examine whether there is a need to redirect
university policies aimed in the field of entrepreneurship. The study is based
on a sample of 40 university spin-offs originating from the University of the
Basque Country (UPV/EHU). A questionnaire was sent to entrepreneurs identified
with the aid of the persons in charge of the university programmes for creating
businesses at the UPV/EHU. To determine the main differences between innovative
and technology-based spin-offs, once the replies were received a bivariate or
contingent analysis was applied to characterise the two types of businesses. The
main barriers to growth and development encountered by the two types were then
identified. The data analysed reveal significant differences between the two
types of businesses, and a need for a change in the paradigm of university
entrepreneurship.
Keywords:
University
spin-offs, innovative spin-offs, technology-based spin-offs, university
entrepreneurship, University of the Basque Country
1. INTRODUCTION
The creating and
developing of businesses in a region contributes to trade and thus constitutes
a major source of wealth creation. Support for entrepreneurship is therefore an
essential strategy that must be fostered by public administrations if they wish
to boost economic development in their areas.
However, merely setting
up businesses does not necessarily suffice to produce these positive effects.
If there is really a desire to foster a sustainable economic development in a
region it is necessary for the businesses created to be high in knowledge
content. This will enable them to act efficiently in the marketplace and thus
grow, create jobs, internationalise, etc. (SEGUÍ et al., 2013; FONG, 2009).
The current economic
crisis and the make-up of the fabric of business in Spain mean that it is now
more necessary than ever to encourage the creation of innovative and
technology-based businesses. It is essential to help set up businesses with a
high capability for growth that can also provide added value in transforming
the economic system as a whole to introduce new activities, new production
techniques and new forms of management and thus enrich the region's stock of technical
and entrepreneurial qualifications. In short, promoting such firms reinforces
all the elements that foster integration into the knowledge society (FONG,
2009; MARTÍNEZ; TADEO, 2006).
The term
"knowledge society" is used to describe a society fuelled by its
diversity and its capabilities (UNESCO, 2005), in which the basic economic
resource is and always will be knowledge itself. Organisations must be ready to
abandon knowledge that has become obsolete and learn to create new knowledge by
continuously improving their operations, developing new applications and
engaging in continuous innovation as an organised process (ÁLVAREZ, 2012;
DRUCKER, 1993).
Thus, in the knowledge
society there are actors of various kinds, including governments, research organisations
and universities, which interact with businesses to give rise to a constant
learning process. The roles played by these actors are vital for the
sustainable economic growth of regions (TRILLO; FERNÁNDEZ, 2013; FERNÁNDEZ et
al., 2011).
It was not until the
end of the 20th century that it became clear in Spain that the strength of the
economy depended, among other factors, on the proper transfer to production
settings of new knowledge generated at universities (FECYT, 2006). It is now
taken as given that universities must undertake the task of fostering economic
development in their home areas. Accordingly, they need to find commercial
applications for the knowledge that they generate (CONDOM; VALLS, 2006).
This being so,
universities are increasingly aware of the need to exploit research outcomes
commercially. Patents and research contracts are the most common ways of
transferring knowledge generated at universities to society as a whole (SIEGEL;
WALDMAN; LINK, 2003), but the creation of spin-offs has become increasingly
popular at domestic and foreign universities in the past 10 years (MINISTERIO
DE EDUCACIÓN Y CIENCIA, 2008; GÓMEZ et al., 2007). Many leading universities
have even set up separate units to handle their interests in this field (BERAZA;
RODRÍGUEZ, 2014).
Some Spanish
universities have been commercially exploiting the knowledge that they generate
through spin-offs for more than 15 years. Over that time a large number of
widely differing spin-offs have been set up.
Two of the types of
business set up are innovative spin-offs and technology-based spin-offs. The
former originate mainly from the fields of social science and law, and the
latter from the experimental sciences, technical studies and health science.
Given the lack of empirical evidence in this area, this research study sets out
to determine the main characteristics of and barriers to growth and development
for both these types of spin-off, with a view to examining whether there is a
need to redirect university policies in this field.
2. CHANGES OVER TIME IN THE FUNCTIONS OF UNIVERSITIES:
THE SHIFT TOWARDS ENTREPRENEURIAL UNIVERSITIES
Universities are among
the oldest institutions in the western world. They have changed over time in
line with the settings in which they have operated (BERAZA; RODRÍGUEZ, 2007).
The main mission of universities was
conventionally seen as the provision of education and research, but this view
gradually changed as new ideas concerning the role of universities within the
system of production and valorisation of knowledge arose. The role of
universities in economic development and their impact on society have become
increasingly prominent, due to their own internal development and to external
influences on academic structures (GÓMEZ et al., 2007). Nowadays they are seen
as tasked with developing pure and applied scientific knowledge, passing that
knowledge on through education, publication and dissemination and transferring
it to organisations in their area of influence (businesses, public bodies, social
organisations, etc.) to drive innovation and foster economic and social
development there (BERAZA; RODRÍGUEZ, 2007).
An analysis of the
different functions taken on by universities over the course of history reveals
that there have been two "academic revolutions" which have changed
the course that they have steered.
The first revolution
took place in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when the traditional role
of universities in preserving and disseminating knowledge was extended by
incorporating research (which had previously been undertaken separately at
scientific societies and colleges) as a legitimate function for them.
Universities thus took on the twin tasks of teaching and research and from then
on their basic mission was to develop pure but empirically-based scientific
knowledge and pass it on through education and publication. The introduction of
research as an academic mission was not without controversy, as universities
were generally seen as educational institutions whose sole purpose was to
preserve and disseminate knowledge (BERAZA; RODRÍGUEZ, 2007; ETZKOWITZ, 2004).
Universities
are currently undergoing a second academic revolution, the seeds of which can
be seen as contained in the first, given that the conducting of research generated
knowledge that could be marketed and capitalised. The first revolution, at the
end of the 19th century, saw the incorporation of research alongside teaching,
and the second, at the end of the 20th century, has entailed a further
extension of the university remit to include establishing relations with
business so as to foster economic and social development in their areas, thus
giving rise to the concept of the "entrepreneurial university"
(ETZKOWITZ, 2004; CONDOM; VALLS, 2003).
The shift from teaching
universities to research universities and then to entrepreneurial universities
can be attributed to a combination of various internal and external causes.
Each step along the way can, to some extent, be seen as preparing the way for
the next step. The desire to preserve and spread classical knowledge led to a
desire to recover lost texts, thus sparking a process of research. Similarly,
when scientific research was incorporated into universities its outcomes
sometimes had unlooked-for potential practical applications (ETZKOWITZ, 2003).
Finally, a number of organisational innovations in teaching and research
established the foundations for entrepreneurial universities as they are now
known (ETZKOWITZ, 2004).
3. UNIVERSITY SPIN-OFFS AS A VEHICLE FOR TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
Currently, there is not sufficient consensus for a single
model of analysis to be established that can determine precisely what
activities are included in the so-called "third mission" of
universities. However there is widespread agreement that actions for the
transfer of knowledge and technology to the production system predominate over
other activities that may potentially form part of the cooperation between
universities and society (BUENO; CASANI, 2007).
Accordingly, although there are many
different channels for the transfer of knowledge and technology between
universities and businesses (indeed, any medium that enables a business to
access specific knowledge or to make use of or market technology originating
from universities can be classed as such), three main strategies are involved:
projects carried out under contract, patent licensing and the creation of
university spin-offs (ALBERT,
2008; GONZÁLEZ; ÁLVAREZ, 2005; CONDOM; VALLS, 2003).
The creation of
spin-offs, in particular, has increased substantially in the past 10 years at
universities in Spain and elsewhere (MINISTERIO DE EDUCACIÓN Y CIENCIA, 2008;
GÓMEZ et al., 2007), because of their importance as a positive factor for
regional socio-economic development (RODEIRO, 2008; MCDONALD et al. 2004; MIAN, 1997). They are businesses that boost local
economic development and growth, generate financial revenues for universities,
enable technologies developed there to be marketed, increase interaction
between universities and their surrounding areas, redirect teaching and
research activities and spark changes in the culture of universities (RODEIRO; FERNÁNDEZ; VIVEL, 2011; SHANE, 2004).
The increasing numbers and repercussions of such
businesses in high value-added sectors of the economy can be attributed to two
main factors: on the one hand they enable socio-economic returns to be obtained
from university research through the dissemination and use of research outcomes
by society; and on the other hand they generate profits (COSTAS;
OURO, 2011).
4. THE CONCEPT OF UNIVERSITY SPIN-OFFS
Although they are
becoming increasingly important, both to universities themselves and in terms
of their contribution to the fabric of business (MORALES, 2008), there is no
consensus in the relevant literature as to what exactly a “university spin-off”
is. There is no consistency in the definitions and terms used in studies of
university spin-offs, which is clearly a hindrance in obtaining an in-depth
understanding of the associated phenomena and comparing the results of
different research studies (BERAZA, 2010b; IGLESIAS, 2010).
The preparation of
policies, strategies, programmes, etc. to foster, develop and consolidate new,
innovative businesses originating from universities and future research on the
matter are hampered by the widespread confusion in the specialist literature
concerning the terms "innovative businesses”, “technology-based
businesses”, “new technology-based businesses”, “innovative technology-based
businesses”, “start-ups”, “spin-outs” and “spin-offs”. An attempt is made below
to clarify and sort out these terms.
Beginning with the most
general term according to the Central Directory of Businesses (DIRCE) of
Spain's National Institute of Statistics (INE), innovative businesses can be
defined as follows (INE, 2012):
·
Innovative
business: a business which in the past three years has introduced
technologically new or improved products into the market, or technologically
new or improved processes in its methods of production of goods or provision of
services.
Technology-based
businesses, new technology-based businesses or innovative technology-based
businesses are considered as a subgroup of innovative businesses. In this case
there is no single definition of the concept in the relevant literature, but
the following definition by the Office of Technology Assessment (1992) is
widely accepted by the scientific community (MERINO; VILLAR, 2007):
·
Technology-based
business: a producer of goods and services committed to designing, developing
and producing new products and/or innovative manufacturing processes via the
systematic application of technical and scientific knowledge.
Thus, it can be seen
that all technology-based businesses are innovative, but not all innovative
businesses are necessarily technology-based (MERINO; VILLAR, 2007).
Some but not all
“start-ups”, “spin-outs” and “spin-offs” can be considered as a subgroup of
innovative and technology-based businesses, though there is a great deal of
confusion concerning these terms in the literature.
Beraza (2010b) &
Pirnay (2001) conclude that the concept of "spin-off" is difficult to
pin down, and that although various authors have tried to define it their
definitions do not entirely match. However, based on the definition given by
Pirnay (2001), which is broadly cited in the relevant literature, a
"spin-off" can be defined as follows:
·
Spin-off:
business generated from an existing organisation, which involves one or more
individuals from the original organisation.
Depending on the nature
of the original organisation, such businesses may be described as corporate
spin-offs, institutional spin-offs or, as in the case studied here, university
spin-offs (COTEC, 2003; LINDHOLM, 1997).
In a university
context, “start-ups”, “spin-outs” and “spin-offs” can be taken as equivalent,
as any nuances of meaning between them are not significant. That said,
entrepreneurs at some businesses of this type dislike the terms “spin-off” and
"spin-out", which they believe emphasise dependence on the parent
organisation and fail to acknowledge the sacrifices in the form of money, time
and effort normally required to set up a new company. The term
"start-up" can be used in a broader sense for new firms not based on
prior experience at other organisations (CONDOM; VALLS, 2003; STEFFENSEN; ROGERS; SPEAKMAN, 2000;
CARAYANNIS et al., 1998).
Moreover, the evidence
shows that European universities tend to use the term "spin-off"
while those in the United States favour the term "start-up" (BERAZA,
2010b; CONDOM; VALLS, 2003).
In this study we use
“spin-off”, which is the term most widely used in the literature
internationally and particularly in Spain. However even here there is no
unanimity as to the definition and delimitation of "university
spin-offs", and the term is often used differently by different authors.
In other words the term
"university spin-off" has no single agreed meaning, but can be used
to represent different things. However, most of the definitions given have two
elements in common: on the one hand at least one of the entrepreneurs who
create the spin-off must belong or have at some time belonged to the university
community; and on the other hand the activities of the business must be based
on knowledge that results from academic work. More specifically, the economic
activity of the business must initially take place under the auspices of a
university programme for the creation of businesses. The businesses created
must be based on the commercial exploitation of knowledge generated at a
university and must also be innovative or technology-based.
·
University
spin-off: an innovative or technology-based business set up under the auspices
of a university programme for the commercial exploitation of knowledge
generated at the university.
Figure
1 outlines the relationship between "innovative businesses",
"technology-based businesses", "spin-offs" and
"university spin-offs".
Figure 1: University spin-offs as a subgroup of innovative businesses and
technology-based businesses.
4.1.
Innovative and technology-based
spin-offs
As indicated above,
university spin-offs are heterogeneous businesses whose extent may vary
significantly depending on how they are perceived by those involved on the
ground and by the authors who write about them (BERAZA, 2010b).
The generally accepted
definition of university spin-offs sets out the essential requirements that
must be met for businesses to be considered as such. However the definition
also covers a large variety of subgroups of university spin-offs, including
innovative spin-offs and technology-based spin-offs.
They are all businesses
based on knowledge generated at universities, but the extent of R&D&i (Research,
Development and Innovation) at each differs. This means that the needs for
their creation, development and consolidation are also different.
Innovative spin-offs
originate generally from the fields of social science and law, while
technology-based spin-offs tend to come from the experimental sciences,
technical studies and health science. There is a need to encourage and help
them all if knowledge generated from all knowledge areas at universities is to
be properly commercially exploited.
5. UNIVERSITY SPIN-OFFS IN SPAIN
Legislation is an
important factor in facilitating or hindering the development of
entrepreneurial processes originating at universities. In Spain technological
innovation, the transfer of knowledge and, specifically, the setting up of
businesses by universities are governed by a range of different regulations
(BERAZA, 2010a; MINISTERIO DE EDUCACIÓN Y CIENCIA, 2008). This section seeks to
analyse the legal framework governing university spin-offs in Spain. An
overview of the main characteristics of the spin-offs set up by various Spanish
universities is then given to provide further understanding of the context in
which businesses of this type operate.
5.1.
Spanish legislation concerning
university spin-offs
The first piece of
legislation in Spain regulating technology-based businesses intended to
disseminate and exploit the outcomes of research generated at universities was
Public General Act [Ley Orgánica]
6/2001 (the Universities Act), which was subsequently amended by Public General
Act [Ley Orgánica] 4/2007. Under
these acts, such businesses are defined as businesses created or developed on
the basis of patents for results arising from research projects funded wholly
or partly from the public purse and carried out at universities.
More recently, Act
2/2011 of 4 March (the Sustainable Economy Act) established the possibility of
universities fostering the creation of "innovative technology-based
businesses", i.e. businesses in which one or more researchers can hold
capital stakes with a view to exploiting for financial gain the results of
their research and development work.
Act 11/2011 (the
Science, Technology and Innovation Act) regulates the framework for the
provision of services at trading companies, and establishes a category of
business known as "young, innovative businesses". Under this act,
such businesses are defined as those created less than six years previously
whose spending on technological R&D&i amounts to at least 15% of their
total spending in the past two years (or in the previous year in the case of
firms less than two years old) which are confirmed to be developing products,
services or processes which are technologically innovative or substantially
better than the current state of the art in the relevant sector, and which
entail technological or industrial risks.
But although Spanish
legislation establishes certain requirements that university spin-offs must meet,
it does not lay down a single, specific, overall definition of such businesses.
Moreover, the terms most frequently used in the legislation are
"technology-based business”, "innovative technology-based business”
and “young, innovative business”, i.e. the English term “spin-off” (or its
variants) widely used in the relevant literature does not appear. Moreover,
although the legislation speaks of “young, innovative businesses” technology is
clearly present in the definitions of all the terms used. This may actually be
a hindrance for setting up firms based on the fields of social science and law.
Finally, it is worth
noting that Spanish legislation on university spin-offs is supplemented by
regulations drawn up by universities themselves.
5.2.
Characteristics of Spanish
university spin-offs
According to studies by
Spain's Offices for the Transfer of Research Results (OTRI), by 2011
publicly-run universities in Spain had created approximately 1100 spin-offs
(REDOTRI, 2011; REDOTRI, 2006), and their numbers followed an upward trend over
the years (see Figure 2).
Figure 2: Changes over time in the creation of spin-offs at Spanish
universities (2000-2011)
Source: Redotri, 2012; Redotri 2006
The links between
university spin-offs and the universities that have created them reveal that
creating spin-offs is an established practice. Table 1 shows the increasing
trends in the number of spin-offs partly owned by universities, the returns or
increases in value obtained by those spin-offs and the number of spin-offs that
have increased their capital in recent years. However, these businesses need to
mature further and overcome the incongruities that can still be observed in
parameters such as the decrease in the number of researchers promoting
spin-offs and the small percentage of spin-offs that have received technology
from universities under licence in recent years (see Table 1).
Table 1: Links between
university spin-offs and the universities from which they came
Year |
Spin-offs partly owned by universities |
Return from spin-off in terms of profit/increased
value (in €) |
Research staff promoting spin-offs |
Spin-off under university technology licence |
Partly-owned spin-offs that have increased their
capital |
2006 |
44 |
416000 |
215 |
37 |
13 |
2007 |
14 |
0 |
197 |
46 |
21 |
2008 |
22 |
0 |
185 |
27 |
10 |
2009 |
37 |
31815 |
350 |
52 |
33 |
2010 |
29 |
35560 |
259 |
55 |
37 |
2011 |
37 |
76350 |
201 |
42 |
36 |
Source: Redotri, 2012;
Redotri, 2011
Finally, a study
conducted by Ortín et al (2007) indicates that the sector of activity where
most university spin-offs work is IT (hardware & software) with 54%,
followed by R&D (20%), the chemical industry (17%) and biotechnology (9%).
On the one hand this shows that the distribution of Spanish university
spin-offs by sectors is similar to that observed in the USA, where 70% of new
technology-based businesses founded between 1986 and 1999 belonged to the IT
sector (GOMPERS, 2005). On the other hand, the absence of firms working
directly in the fields of social science and law is noteworthy. So although
there are innovative university spin-offs that originate from various knowledge
areas in social science and law, they are all classed as operating in areas of
activity related to the experimental sciences, technical studies and health
science. This makes it difficult to study the different types of university
spin-offs.
6. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The study carried out
here is exploratory in that it seeks to provide knowledge on the actual
situation of innovative and technology-based university spin-offs and
consequently on the current paradigm of university entrepreneurship.
The primary information
used concerns spin-offs created at the University of the Basque Country
(UPV/EHU). The UPV/EHU exists as such since 1980, so it is a young university.
However it has been in existence for more than 30 years, and was founded on the
basis of a tradition and history that date back much further. Its first
programme for creating businesses, and indeed its first spin-offs, appeared in
1997. It now has business creation programmes on all three of its campuses
(Emprendedores Zitek in Bizkaia, Entreprenari in Gipuzkoa and Inizia Araba
Campus in Araba), and has so far created 120 spin-offs (UPV/EHU, 2015).
Our study covers the 91
university spin-offs created at the UPV/EHU up to October 2012. However, the
results can largely be extrapolated to other relatively young universities
which are active in all knowledge areas and have a consolidated track record of
creating innovative and technology-based spin-offs.
We sent a questionnaire
to entrepreneurs identified with the aid of those responsible for business
creation programmes at the UPV/EHU. In other words, we identified researchers
who had decided to create spin-offs originating from the UPV/EHU and who were
still linked to the businesses created (i.e. the spin-offs were still operating
and had not been sold). In the case of spin-offs with more than one
entrepreneur, we selected the one who discovered, evaluated and decided to
exploit the business opportunity, i.e. the researcher most closely involved in
the whole process from the initial idea stage through to the setting up and
development of the spin-off.
We received a total of
40 valid responses, which works out to a response rate of 44%.
To determine the main
differences between innovative and technology-based spin-offs, once the replies
were received a bivariate or contingent analysis was applied to characterise the two types of businesses. The main
barriers to growth and development encountered by the two types were then
identified.
7. RESULTS
The results of our
research are shown below. We begin by listing the main characteristics of the
innovative and technology-based university spin-offs considered, and then
examine the main barriers to growth and development encountered by both types
of business.
7.1.
Main characteristics of innovative
and technology-based university spin-offs
Table
2 shows the main characteristics of innovative and technology-based university
spin-offs.
It can be seen that 45%
of the UPV/EHU spin-offs analysed are innovative, and 55% are not only
innovative but also technology-based. In other words R&D&i is the core
business of more than half of the spin-offs created, and not just a budget
item. The data obtained also reveal a clear difference between innovative and
technology-based businesses.
All the spin-offs
examined focus on high and medium-level technology sectors and on
knowledge-intensive sectors (EUROSTAT, 2011). However, the innovative spin-offs
operate mainly in the service sector while the technology-based spin-offs focus
on ICTs and on the medical/pharmaceutical/chemical sector.
The technology-based
spin-offs achieve better results in practically all the characteristics
analysed: they have bigger workforces on average, more holders of doctorates,
more entrepreneurs per business, more female entrepreneurs per business,
entrepreneurs with more experience in creating and developing spin-offs, bigger
turnovers, higher rates of access to public and private funding sources and a
higher proportion of firms which have registered industrial property rights (see
Table 2).
Technology-based
spin-offs are observed to have less difficulty in accessing a broader variety
of funding sources, in spite of the risks inherent in the new technologies that
they develop. Moreover, the low level of formal and informal venture capital
investment observed in spin-offs reveals that their entrepreneurs are a highly
committed to the projects that they have undertaken, though this could also be
a sign of weakness in the financial system in regard to innovative and
technology-based business initiatives (see Table 2).
Finally, in spite of
the fact that the innovations and technologies developed by university
spin-offs form the basis of their competitive edge, a shortfall can be observed
in regard to ownership of industrial property rights, which prevent competitors
from exploiting those same innovations and technologies. In general, innovative
spin-offs are less able to absorb knowledge (see Table 2).
Specifically, Basque
university spin-offs are observed to have little ability to absorb the
knowledge that they generate through patents, which are the indicator most
frequently employed in analysing innovation systems (BUESA; HEIJS; NAVARRO,
2007), in spite of the fact that patent rights could provide them with
substantial income and could constitute a key asset for them (see Table 2).
Table 2. Main
characteristics of innovative & technology-based university spin-offs
|
|
INNOVATIVE
SPIN-OFFS |
TECHNOLOGY-BASED
SPIN-OFFS |
Type
of business |
Innovative or technology-based business |
45% of spin-offs |
55% of spin-offs |
Sector
of activity |
Area of activity of the business |
Services |
ICTs & medicine, pharmaceuticals & chemicals |
Workforce |
Nº of employees |
3.87 employees/ spin-off |
6.68 employees/ spin-off |
Nº of employees who hold doctorates |
10.3% of employees |
21.1% of employees |
|
Entrepreneurial
team |
Nº of entrepreneurs |
3.17 entrepreneurs/ spin-off |
4.18 entrepreneurs/ spin-off |
Nº of female entrepreneurs |
26.3% of entrepreneurs |
30.4% of entrepreneurs |
|
Experience
of entrepreneurs prior creating the spin-off |
Prior
experience working in business |
88.9% of spin-offs |
86.4% of spin-offs |
Prior experience working in the sector in which the
spin-off operates |
55.6% of spin-offs |
68.2% of spin-offs |
|
Experience in creating businesses |
44.4% of spin-offs |
45.5% of spin-offs |
|
Turnover
& profit |
Maximum turnover in the past year |
€250,000 – €500,000 |
> €1,000,000 |
Profit in the past year |
44.4% of businesses made a profit |
22.2% of businesses made a profit |
|
Sources
of funding used |
Subsidies & aid |
38.9% of spin-offs |
77.3% of spin-offs |
Bank loans |
22.2% of spin-offs |
40.9% of spin-offs |
|
Investment firms (venture capital) |
5.6% of spin-offs |
36.4% of spin-offs |
|
Business angels |
0% of spin-offs |
9.1% of spin-offs |
|
Loans from family, friends & fools |
16.7% of spin-offs |
4.5% of spin-offs |
|
Industrial
property |
Owner of patents |
16.7% of spin-offs |
31.8% of spin-offs |
Owner of utility models |
5.6% of spin-offs |
13.6% of spin-offs |
|
Owner of industrial designs |
5.6% of spin-offs |
4.5% of spin-offs |
|
Owner of registered trade marks |
38.9% of spin-offs |
45.5% of spin-offs |
Source: Own work
7.2.
Main barriers to growth and
development of innovative and technology-based university spin-offs
This section analyses
the main barriers faced by innovative and technology-based university spin-offs
as regards growth and development. Spin-offs were asked to rate the main
barriers that they encountered using a five-point Likert scale (from "of
no importance" to "highly important").
Their responses reveal
that they believe their main problems to be a lack of financial resources, the
innovative nature of their products/services, a lack of business experience and
a lack of external contacts. All these factors were rated higher than average
on the scale (see Figure 3).
Therefore, if the
spin-offs originating from the University of the Basque Country are to
consolidate themselves and attain high rates of growth the mechanisms designed
to support them should focus on narrowing the gap between the need for capital
at spin-offs and the willingness of the various actors who make up the Basque
financial system to invest in them. They should also seek to help to orient the
market towards the innovative products and services created by these businesses
are improving their management as companies; and to help set up a network of contacts
that can link Basque university spin-offs with potential investors, companies
specialising in business management, suppliers, customers and other businesses.
The barriers in which
there is most difference between the different types of spin-off are the
difficulty encountered in internationalising and the high level of risk that
their projects entail. In these two areas technology-based spin-offs experience
difficulties 1.43 and 1.30 points higher, respectively, than those encountered
by innovative spin-offs. On the other hand, innovative spin-offs rate the lack
of qualified personnel and the innovative nature of products/services 0.49 and
0.38 points higher, respectively, on the scale of difficulties than
technology-based spin-offs.
It is also noteworthy
that it is mainly technology-based businesses that encounter barriers to growth
and development (see Figure 3). Such R&D&i-intensive businesses can
grow into major firms capable of helping create wealth in their home
territories, but the risk inherent in the products that they develop means that
they face barriers that hinder their development in their areas of operation.
Figure 3: Main barriers to growth & development of innovative &
technology-based university spin-offs.
Source: Own work
8. CONCLUSIONS
University spin-offs
are playing an increasingly significant role in the sustainable development of
regions. They not only provide an efficient way of transferring technology and
research results from universities to society as a whole but also help to
renovate the fabric of production in their home areas and to hold on to
intellectual capital originating from universities.
In Spain the first
university business creation programmes and the first university spin-offs date
from before the turn of the 21st century. Over the years the number of
businesses created has gradually grown, and their results have followed a
largely positive trend. This is evidence that the practice has become
consolidated and is approaching maturity.
However, the trend in
this area and the changes that have taken place in the surrounding context on
the one hand, and the appearance of different types of spin-off – each with its
own particular features and specific needs – on the other mean that there is a
need to redirect the unified university policies in regard to spin-offs applied
to date at most Spanish universities.
This study confirms
that there are two clearly distinct types of university spin-off, in
practically equal proportions – innovative spin-offs and technology-based
spin-offs – which apply technical and scientific knowledge to different extents
in their business operations and which differ in terms of the results that they
obtain, their needs and the barriers to creation, development and consolidation
that they face.
Technology-based
university spin-offs achieve better results than their innovative counterparts
in terms of workforce numbers, employee qualifications and turnover, among
other items. However this does not mean that less effort should be devoted to
creating and developing innovative spin-offs. In spite of their apparent
initial fragility compared to technology-based businesses, innovative spin-offs
are worthy of consideration as businesses at all times because they represent
different areas of university knowledge -generally from social science and law-
that would otherwise not be directly commercialised.
The differences between
these two types of spin-off are not limited to their results. A lack of
financial resources is the main barrier to the successful development of
spin-offs, and with this in mind it is worth stressing that innovative
spin-offs find it more difficult to access different sources of public and
private funding. In spite of the risks inherent in the new technologies
developed by technology-based spin-offs, the fact that R&D&i is the
core of their business and not just a budget item makes it easier for them to
obtain funding.
However,
technology-based spin-offs encounter more difficulties in growing and
developing successfully. Although they may contribute high added value, they
are businesses that will continue to need help even after some years in the
marketplace.
Legislation is an
important aspect in facilitating or hindering the development of
entrepreneurial processes originating from universities. In Spain the creation
of businesses in a university setting is subject to a broad framework of
regulations that establish certain requirements that such businesses must meet,
but does not draw any distinction between innovative and technology-based
spin-offs. This is an essential point that the relevant authorities need to
take into account.
In view of the
foregoing, a change in the paradigm of university entrepreneurship is
considered necessary. Indeed, if the context into which such entrepreneurship
is set changes and the type and nature of the businesses created evolve then
the paradigm of university entrepreneurship itself should also change
accordingly. One fundamental action that could be taken to adapt to the new
situation is to distinguish between innovative and technology-based university
spin-offs. Only then can the proper fit be achieved between actions by the
actors that make up the ecosystem of Spanish entrepreneurship aimed at
university spin-offs and the actual needs of the spin-offs themselves.
Ultimately, the idea should be for this entrepreneurial activity to make as big
a contribution as possible to sustainable social and economic development at
regional level, through high-value-added activity sectors.
REFERENCES
ALBERT, A.
(2008) Procesos de transferencia de conocimientos en el ámbito de la
biotecnología. Arbor: Ciencia,
Pensamiento y Cultura, n. 732, p. 677-686.
ÁLVAREZ,
I. (2012) La gestión del conocimiento en
la pyme: Análisis de la situación actual de la gestión del conocimiento en las
pymes del País Vasco. Tesis Doctoral, Universidad del País Vasco.
BERAZA,
J. M. (2010a) La creación de spin-offs universitarias en la universidad
española: marco legal. Revista de
Dirección y Administración de Empresas, n. 17, p. 73-98.
BERAZA, J. M. (2010b) Los programas de apoyo a la creación de spin-offs
académicas en las universidades españolas: una comparación internacional. Tesis Doctoral, Universidad
del País Vasco.
BERAZA,
J. M.; RODRÍGUEZ, A. (2007) La evolución de la misión de la universidad. Revista de Dirección y Administración de
Empresas, n. 14, p. 25-56.
BERAZA,
J. M.; RODRÍGUEZ, A. (2014) Diseño de programas de apoyo a la creación de
spin-off académica. Revista de Dirección
y Administración de Empresas, n. 21, p. 119-140.
BUENO,
E.; CASANI, F. (2007) La tercera misión de la universidad. Enfoques e
indicadores básicos para su evaluación. Economía
Industrial, n. 366, p. 43-59.
BUESA,
M.; HEIJS, J.; NAVARRO, M. (2007) Medición
de la innovación. Indicadores regionales. En Buesa, M., Heijs, J. (coord.),
Sistemas regionales de innovación:
nuevas formas de análisis y medición, Funcas, Madrid, p. 91-142.
CARAYANNIS, E.; ROGERS, E. M.;
KURIHARA, K.; ALLBRITTON, M. M. (1998). High-Technology spin-offs from government R&D laboratories and research
universities. Technovation, v. 18, n. 1, p. 1-11.
CONDOM,
P.; VALLS, J. (2003) La creación de empresas desde la universidad: las
spin-offs. Iniciativa Emprendedora y
Empresa Familiar, n. 38, p. 46-64.
CONDOM,
P.; VALLS, J. (2006) La creación de empresas spin-off en las universidades
emprendedoras. Alta Dirección, n.
241-242, p. 192-202.
COSTAS,
I.; OURO, A. (2011) Participación de los investigadores en los resultados de la
investigación. El
entorno legal: proyectos de Ley de la Ciencia, la Tecnología y la Innovación y
de la Ley de Economía Sostenible. Diario
La Ley, p. 7615.
COTEC (2003) Nuevos mecanismos de transferencia de tecnología. Debilidades y
oportunidades del Sistema Español de Transferencia de Tecnología.
Encuentros Empresariales Cotec 9. Fundación Cotec para la Innovación
Tecnológica, Madrid.
DRUCKER, P. (1993) La sociedad poscapitalista. Apóstrofe, Barcelona.
ETZKOWITZ,
H. (2003) El auge de la universidad emprendedora. Iniciativa
Emprendedora y Empresa Familiar, n. 41, p. 13-33.
ETZKOWITZ, H. (2004) The evolution of the entrepreneurial
university. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, v.
1, n. 1, p. 64-77.
EUROSTAT (2011) High technology and
knowledge-intensive sectors. Eurostat.
FECYT
(2006) Carencias
y necesidades del sistema español de ciencia y tecnología. Recomendaciones para
mejorar los procesos de transferencia de conocimiento y tecnología a las
empresas. Informe 2005.
Available: http://icono.fecyt.es/informesypublicaciones/Documents/carencias.pdf.
Access: May 27, 2015.
FERNÁNDEZ,
M.; MERCHÁN, C.; RODRÍGUEZ, L.; BALMACEDA O. (2011) Indicadores de transferencia de conocimiento: una propuesta de medida
de la cooperación entre universidad y empresa. Documento de trabajo,
Instituto de Estudios Sociales Avanzados (IESA), CSIC, Córdoba.
FONG, C. (2009)
Patrones de creación de empresa competitiva en la coyuntura actual: El caso de
las empresas de tipo spin-off de origen universitario. Administrando En Entornos Inciertos, Managing in Uncertain Environment,
p. 142.
GÓMEZ, J.
M.; MIRA, I.; VERDÚ, A. J.; SANCHO, J. (2007) Las spin-offs académicas como vía
de transferencia tecnológica. Economía
Industrial, n. 366, p. 61-72.
GOMPERS, P.; LERNER, J.; SCHARFSTEIN, D. (2005)
Enterpreneurial Spawning: Public Corporations and the genesis of New Ventures,
1986 to 1999. The Journal of
Finance, p. 577-614.
GONZÁLEZ,
O.; ÁLVAREZ, J. A. (2005) Las spin off en la estrategia de transferencia de
conocimientos de las universidades españolas, XIV Jornadas de la Asociación de Economía de la Educación,
Oviedo, p. 1-12.
IGLESIAS,
P. P. (2010) Las Spin-Off Universitarias
como mecanismo de transferencia de tecnología y su impacto económico en base a
la actividad de I+D+i. Tesis Doctoral, Universidad de Málaga.
INE (2012) Encuesta
sobre Innovación Tecnológica en las Empresas. Instituto Nacional de
Estadística. Available: http://www.ine.es/dynt3/metadatos/es/RespuestaDatos.htm?oe=30061. Access: June 3, 2015.
LEY
2/2011, de 4 de marzo, de Economía
Sostenible; publicada en BOE nº 55 de 5 de marzo de 2011.
LEY
14/2011, de 1 de junio, de la Ciencia,
la Tecnología y la Innovación; publicada en BOE nº 131 de 2 de junio de
2011.
LEY
ORGÁNICA 4/2007, de 12 de abril, por la
que se modifica la Ley Orgánica 6/2001, de Universidades; publicada en BOE
nº 89 de 13 de abril de 2007.
LEY
ORGÁNICA 6/2001, de 21 de diciembre, de
Universidades; publicada en BOE nº 307 de 21 de diciembre de 2001.
LINDHOLM, A (1997) Entrepreneurial Spin-off
Enterprises in Göteborg, Sweden. European Planning Studies, v. 5, n. 5, p. 661-675.
MCDONALD, L.; CAPART, G.; BOHLANDER, B.; CORDONNIER,
M.; JONSSON, L.; KAISER, L.; LACK, J.; MACK, J.; MATACOTTA, C.; SCHWING, T.;
SUEUR, T.; VAN GREVENSTEIN, P.; VAN DEN BOS, L.; VONORTAS, N. (2004) Management of intellectual property in
publicly-funded research organisations: Towards European Guidelines. Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities, Luxembourg.
MERINO, C.; VILLAR, L. (2007) Factores de éxito en los procesos de
creación de empresas de base tecnológica. Economía
Industrial, n. 366, p. 147-167.
MIAN,
S. A. (1997) Assessing
and managing the university technology business incubator: an integrative
framework. Journal of Business Venturing, v. 12, n.
5, p. 251-285.
MINISTERIO
DE EDUCACIÓN Y CIENCIA (2008) La
creación de empresas de base tecnológica en el ámbito universitario a partir de
la reforma de la LOU. Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, Madrid.
MORALES,
S. T. (2008). El emprendedor académico y
la decisión de crear spin-off: un análisis del caso español. Tesis
Doctoral, Universidad de Valencia.
OFFICE Of TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (1992) Building
Future Security: Strategies for Restructuring the Defense Technology and
Industrial Base. Congress of the United States.
ORTÍN, P.; SALAS, V.; TRUJILLO, M. V.; VENDRELL, F.
(2007) El spin-off universitario
en España como modelo de creación de empresas intensivas en conocimiento.
Ministerio de Industria, Turismo y Comercio. Secretaría General de Industria.
DGPYME.
PIRNAY, F.
(2001). La valorisation économique des
résultats de recherche universitaire par création d'activités nouvelles
(spin-offs universitaires): Propositions d'un cadre procédural d'essaimage.
Thèse de doctorat ès Sciences de Gestion. Université du Droit et de la Santé -
Lille 2, Lille.
REDOTRI (2006) Memoria RedOTRI 2006. RedOTRI Universidades
y Crue, Madrid. Available: http://www.redotriuniversidades.net/index.php/memoria-redotri/5-memorias-de-redotri/informe-redotri-2006/detail. Access: June 9, 2015.
REDOTRI (2011) Informe de la encuesta de investigación y
transferencia de conocimiento 2010 en las universidades españolas. RedOTRI
Universidades y Crue, Madrid. Available:
http://www.redotriuniversidades.net/index.php/informa-encuesta/6-encuesta-redotri/informe-encuesta-i-tc-2010/detail. Access: June 9, 2015.
REDOTRI (2012) Informe de la encuesta de investigación y
transferencia de conocimiento 2011 en las universidades españolas. RedOTRI
Universidades y Crue, Madrid. Available:
http://www.redotriuniversidades.net/index.php/informa-encuesta/6-encuesta-redotri/informe-encuesta-i-tc-2011/detail. Access: June 9, 2015.
RODEIRO,
D. (2008) La creación de empresas en el
entorno universitario español y la determinación de su estructura financiera.
Tesis Doctoral, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela.
RODEIRO,
D.; FERNÁNDEZ, S.; VIVEL, M. M. (2011) Universidad
emprendedora. La creación de spin-offs, en FERNÁNDEZ, S., RODEIRO, D.
(coords), El emprendimiento femenino en
el sistema universitario español y gallego. Un análisis económico-financiero,
Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, p. 73-122.
SEGUÍ,
E.; SARRIÓN, F.; TORMO, G.; OLTRA, V. (2013) Estudio del emprendimiento
académico bajo fórmulas de economía social: análisis de las spin-off
universitarias cooperativas. Ciriec,
n. 78, p. 101-124.
SHANE, S. (2004) Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spin-Offs and Wealth Creation.
Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
SIEGEL, D. S.; WALDMAN, D. A; LINK, A. N. (2003)
Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity
of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy, v. 1, n. 32, p. 27-48.
STEFFENSEN, M.; ROGERS, E. M.; SPEAKMAN, K. (2000) Spin-offs from research centers at a research
university. Journal of Business Venturing, v. 15, n. 1, p. 93-111.
TRILLO,
M. A.; FERNÁNDEZ, M. (2013) Caracterización de la innovación en spin-off de
base tecnológica. Economía Industrial,
n. 388, p. 67-78.
UNESCO (2005) Towards
knowledge societies. Unesco Publishing, Paris.
UPV/EHU
(2015) Programas de creación de empresas
de la UPV/EHU. Universidad del País Vasco. Available:
http://www.ehu.eus/es/web/enpresa/enpresak-sortzeko-programak.
Access: June 10, 2015.