Education and Tech Entrepreneurship

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1127248

Educationand Tech Entrepreneurship

M a y 2 0 0 8

Vivek Wadhwa Richard Freeman

Ben Rissing


Education and Tech Entrepreneurship

May 2008

Vivek Wadhwa Executive in Residence/Adjunct Professor, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University

Wertheim Fellow, Labor and Worklife Program, Harvard Law SchoolFellow, Social Sciences Research Institute, Duke University

Richard FreemanHerbert Asherman Chair in Economics, Harvard UniversityDirector, Labor and Worklife Program, Harvard Law School

Director, Labor Studies Program, National Bureau of Economic Research

Ben RissingWertheim Fellow, Labor and Worklife Program, Harvard Law School

Research Scholar, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University

Student Research Team

Project Leaders: Baris Guzel

Molly House

Researchers:Poulomi Doshi

Mark MarexTim McLaughlin

Hope Lu

Varun VargheseDeepak Vedanthan

©2008 by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. All rights reserved.


E D U C AT I O N A N D T E C H E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P 1

Table of ContentsIntroduction and Summary ...................................................................................................................2

Our Findings ............................................................................................................................2Methodology...........................................................................................................................................3Definitions ...............................................................................................................................................4

Engineering and Technology Startups........................................................................................4U.S.-Born Tech Founders ..........................................................................................................4

Educational Attainment of U.S.-Born Tech Founders .........................................................................4Terminal (Highest) Degree Completed......................................................................................4

Figure 1: Terminal Degree Completed by U.S.-Born Tech Founders ....................................4Fields of Education ...................................................................................................................4

Figure 2: Fields of Terminal Degrees Completed by U.S.-Born Tech Founders .....................4Age and Tech Entrepreneurship ............................................................................................................5

Figure 3: U.S.-Born Tech Founders’ Age at Time of Company Founding ..............................5Figure 4: Time Lag Between Completion of Terminal Degree and Company Founding........5Figure 5: Time Lag Between Completion of Terminal Degree

and Company Founding by Field of Study.....................................................................6Figure 6: U.S. Tech Founder Age at the Time of Startup Establishment

and Terminal Degree.....................................................................................................6Universities and Tech Entrepreneurship...............................................................................................6

Top Ten Universities Graduating U.S.-Born Key Tech Founders.................................................6Table 1: Schools/Universities Awarding U.S.-Born Tech Founders’ Terminal Degrees ..........7

Ivy-League Universities and Entrepreneurship ..........................................................................7Table 2: Over-Representation by U.S.-Born Tech Founders with Terminal

Degrees Awarded from Ivy-League Universities ............................................................7U.S.-Born Founder Education and Startup Success ............................................................................8

Figure 7: Average 2005 Sales and Employee Count Comparison.........................................8University/Location of Startup ..............................................................................................................8

Figure 8: Percentage of U.S. Tech Founders Who Established a Startup in the Same State in Which They Received a Degree ....................................................8

Summary of Findings and Conclusions ................................................................................................9Author Biographies .................................................................................................................................9Appendix A: Engineering and Technology SIC Codes ......................................................................10Bibliography ..........................................................................................................................................12

E D U C AT I O N A N D T E C H E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P2

The popular image of American techentrepreneurs is that they come from eliteuniversities: Some graduate and startcompanies in their garages; others drop out of

college to start their business careers. The dot-comboom reinforced the image of technology CEOs beingyoung and brash. But, even though Bill Gates andSteve Jobs founded two of the world’s most successfulcompanies, they are not representative of technologyand engineering company founders. Indeed, a largerproportion of tech founders are middle-aged, well-educated in business or technical disciplines, withdegrees from a wide assortment of schools. Twice asmany U.S.-born tech entrepreneurs start ventures intheir fifties as do those in their early twenties, as thispaper will show.

Our earlier research on technology and engineeringentrepreneurship revealed that skilled immigrants werea driving force in recent U.S. economic growth. From1995 through 2005, skilled immigrant foundersestablished 25.6 percent of all the startups nationwide,and 52.3 percent of those in Silicon Valley. This grouptended to be highly educated in science-, technology-,and engineering-related disciplines. The majority cameto the United States to study and decided to stay.These immigrant tech founders typically established acompany thirteen years after coming to the UnitedStates and tended to gravitate to technology centersacross the country.1, 2

What about U.S.-born tech entrepreneurs? Werethey young college dropouts or well-educated? Werethey graduates of elite schools or a diverse set ofschools like the immigrant company founders? Wheredid they locate their companies?

To answer these questions, we surveyed 652 U.S.-born chief executive officers and heads of productdevelopment in 502 engineering and technologycompanies established from 1995 through 2005.These companies, identified from an existing datasetof corporate records in Dun & Bradstreet’s MillionDollar Database, have more than $1 million in sales,twenty or more employees, and company brancheswith fifty or more employees.

Our FindingsWe observed that, like immigrant tech founders,

U.S.-born engineering and technology company

founders tend to be well-educated. There are,however, significant differences in the types of degreesthese entrepreneurs obtain and the time they take tostart a company after they graduate. They also tend to be more mobile and are much older than is commonly believed.

• The average and median age of U.S.-born techfounders was thirty-nine when they started theircompanies. Twice as many were older than fifty aswere younger than twenty-five.

• The vast majority (92 percent) of U.S.-born techfounders held bachelor’s degrees. Additionally, 31 percent held master’s degrees, and 10 percenthad completed PhDs. Nearly half of all thesedegrees were in science-, technology-, engineering-,and mathematics- (STEM) related disciplines. One-third were in business, accounting, and finance.

• U.S.-born tech founders holding MBA degreesestablished companies more quickly (in thirteenyears) than others. Those with PhDs typically waitedtwenty-one years to become tech entrepreneurs,and other master’s degree holders took less time tostart companies than did those with bachelor’sdegrees (14.7 years and 16.7 years respectively).

• U.S.-born tech founders holding computer scienceand information technology degrees foundedcompanies sooner after graduating thanengineering degree holders (14.3 years vs. 17.6years). Applied science majors took the longest(twenty years) to create their startups.

• These tech founders graduate from a wideassortment of schools. The 628 U.S.-born techfounders providing information on their terminal(highest) degree, received their education from 287unique universities. But degrees from top-rankeduniversities are over-represented in the ranks ofU.S.-born tech founders. Ivy-League universitiesawarded 8 percent of the terminal degrees to U.S.-born tech founders in our sample.

Introduction and Summary

...a larger proportion of tech founders aremiddle-aged, well-educated in businessor technical disciplines, with degreesfrom a wide assortment of schools.

I n t r o d u c t i o n a n d S u m m a r y

M e t h o d o l o g y


• The top ten universities from which U.S.-born techfounders received their highest degrees in oursample are Harvard, MIT, Pennsylvania StateUniversity, Stanford, University of California-Berkeley, University of Missouri, University ofPennsylvania, University of Southern California,University of Texas, and University of Virginia.

• U.S.-born tech founders with Ivy-League degreestend to establish startups that produce higherrevenue and employ more workers than theaverage. Startups founded by those with only high school education significantly underperform all others.

• Nearly half (45 percent) of the startups wereestablished in the same state where U.S.-born techfounders received their education. Of the U.S.-borntech founders in our sample receiving degrees fromCalifornia, 69 percent later created a startup in thestate; Michigan, 58 percent; Texas, 53 percent; andOhio, 52 percent. In contrast, Maryland retainedonly 15 percent; Indiana, 18 percent; and New York,21 percent.

Methodology

In this study, we investigate the educationalattainment of U.S.-born startup founders. Theprimary data source for this work is a subset of anexisting dataset of corporate records included in

Dun & Bradstreet’s (D&B) Million Dollar Database.These listings contain U.S. companies with sales inexcess of $1 million, twenty or more employees, andcompany branches with fifty or more employees. Toconstruct our dataset, we extracted records of allengineering and technology companies founded from1995–2005 (representing the most current decade ofdata at the time of this initial search). This produced alisting of 28,766 companies. A portion (less than 10percent) of these, which represented shell companieswith zero U.S. employees or older companies withrecent changes in control/corporate restructurings,were omitted from our dataset. Approximately 1,800of the remaining companies were randomly contactedby our research team via phone or e-mail. During ourinterview requests, we sought to speak directly with acompany founder(s) or a direct representative todetermine if the founder or founders were U.S.-born.For this work, we defined “founders” as individuals

holding the position of chief executive officer or chieftechnology officer at the time of startup incorporation.

Through these interviews, D&B data, andsupplemental information from company Web sites,we gathered the following information for each U.S.-born tech founder in our dataset.

• U.S.-born tech founder(s) name

• Terminal (highest) academic degree: level, field,school, state, graduating year

• First academic degree: level, field, school, state,graduating year (if applicable)

• Second academic degree: level, field, school, state,graduating year (if applicable)

• Age of U.S.-born tech founder when companyincorporated

• Company address, city, state, zip code

• Company primary U.S. Government StandardIndustrial Classification (SIC) code

We surveyed 652 U.S.-born tech founders of 502engineering and technology companies. Our responserate was approximately 40 percent of those weattempted to contact.

• Highest academic degree: level, field, school, state,graduating year

• First academic degree: level, field, school, state,graduating year

• Second academic degree: level, field, school, state,graduating year

• Age of founder when company incorporated

• Company address, city, state, zip code

• Company primary U.S. Government StandardIndustrial Classification (SIC) code

To construct our dataset, we extractedrecords of all engineering and technologycompanies founded from 1995–2005(representing the most current decade ofdata at the time of this initial search).

Figure 1: Terminal Degree Completed by U.S.-Born Tech Founders

High School Diplomaor Lower

6%

Associates Degree,Certification,Some College

2%

MD4%

JD4%

Master’s30%

Bachelor’s44%

PhD 10%

Figure 2:Fields of Terminal Degrees Completed

by U.S.-Born Tech Founders

*STEM Fields 47%

Healthcare6%

Economics2%

Law 4%

Mathematics*2%

Business,Accounting, Finance

33%

Computer Science,Information Technology*

9%

Engineering*28%

Arts and Humanities,Social Sciences

3%

AppliedSciences*

8%

Other4%

E d u c a t i o n a l A t t a i n m e n t o f U . S . - B o r n T e c h F o u n d e r s


DefinitionsEngineering and Technology Startups

For the purposes of our study, the phrase“engineering and technology” indicates that the company’s main work focuses on design,manufacturing, or services. Our definition ofengineering and technology firms includes thefollowing industry groups, identified by three- andfour-digit SIC codes:

• Semiconductors • Computers • Communications• Biosciences • Defense/Aerospace • Environmental • Software• Innovation/Manufacturing-Related Services

Appendix A contains a full listing of the SIC codesassociated with each industry. This list was adoptedfrom an SIC code listing originally employed by a studyauthored by Dr. AnnaLee Saxenian, which explored theroles of immigrant startup founders in Silicon Valley.3

U.S.-Born Tech FoundersIn most engineering or technology companies, the

most critical startup roles are those of thepresident/chief executive officer and the head ofdevelopment/chief technology officer. An individualcan simultaneously perform both roles. This workfocuses on the entrepreneurial contributions of theseU.S.-born individuals. Other roles, such as finance andmarketing, also can be very important in startups, butare not the focus of this research.

Educational Attainment of U.S.-Born TechFoundersTerminal (Highest) Degree Completed

Technology and engineering company founders tend tobe highly educated. The vast majority (92 percent) ofU.S.-born tech founders hold at least a bachelor’s degree;47 percent hold more advanced degrees (master’s, PhD,MD, or JD). Figure 1 details the breakdown of theterminal (highest) degrees they completed.

Fields of EducationU.S.-born tech company founders tend to have

diverse educational backgrounds. The largest group (47 percent) of our sample held terminal degrees inscience-, technology-, engineering-, and mathematics-(STEM) related fields. Thirty-four percent held degrees in business, finance, and accounting. Figure 2 provides details.

If all degrees held by these U.S.-born tech founders areconsidered (first, second, terminal), the percentageholding at least one degree in a STEM field increases to55 percent. For instance, a U.S.-born tech founder maycomplete a terminal MBA degree after first obtaining abachelor’s degree in engineering.

A g e a n d E n t r e p r e n e u r s h i p


Age and Entrepreneurship

Acommon belief is that U.S.-borntech founders of technologycompanies tend to be young. We found that about 1 percent

were teenagers when they started their firms.More than twice as many were older thanage fifty than were younger than twenty-five.Many, in fact, were in their sixties when theyfounded their startups.

The vast majority of U.S.-born techfounders were older than twenty-five. The average and median age of key techfounders was thirty-nine. A breakdown ofU.S. tech startup founders’ ages at the timeof company founding is shown in Figure 3.

We found a positive correlation betweenU.S.-born tech founders’ terminal degreelevel (i.e., PhD, master’s, bachelor’s) and theperiod of time between graduation andstartup formation. By collecting data on thespecific year a tech founder graduated fromhis or her terminal degree program and the date he or she formed the startup, we wereable to calculate the length of time betweenthese events. On average, this was 16.4 years.

However, this length of time wasnoticeably shorter for individuals withspecific degree types. MBA holders tended to found companies fastest, with an averagelag time of 13.1 years. Together, all master’sdegree holders (14.7 years) foundedcompanies faster than bachelor’s degreeholders (16.7 years); both foundedcompanies faster than individuals who holdPhDs (20.9 years). These data are shown inFigure 4.

Additionally, we analyzed the field of theterminal degree completed by U.S.-born techfounders and the time to establishment of astartup. This intermediate period betweenstartup creation and degree completion was shortest for computer science andinformation technology graduates (14.3-yearaverage) and longest for applied sciencesgraduates (twenty-year average). A breakdown is found in Figure 5.

6%

45%

26%

5%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 50%

55+

45 - 54

35 - 44

25 - 34

0 - 24

Foun

der A

ge

Percentage of All Respondents

Figure 3:U.S.-Born Tech Founders’ Age at Time of Company Founding

18%

0

5

10

15

20

25

Master’s(MBA Only)

Master’s(All)

Bachelor’s PhD

Year

s Bet

wee

n Hi

ghes

t Deg

ree

and

Star

tup

Foun

ding

Highest Degree

Figure 4:Time Lag Between Completion of Terminal

Education and Company Founding

21years

17years15

years13years

The vast majority of U.S.-born techfounders were older than twenty-five.The average and median age of key techfounders was thirty-nine.

A g e a n d E n t r e p r e n e u r s h i p


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

0 - 19 20 - 24 25 - 29 30 - 34 35 - 39 40 - 44 45 - 49 50 - 54 55 - 59 60 - 64 65 - 69

Perc

enta

ge o

f All

Foun

ders

Founder Age at Time of Startup Creation

Figure 6:U.S. Tech Founder Age at the Time of Startup

Establishment and Terminal Degree

High School Bachelor’s Master’s PhD, MD, JD

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

CS, IT Business All STEM Fields Engineering Applied Sciences

Year

s Bet

wee

n Hi

ghes

t Deg

ree

and

Star

tup

Foun

ding

Highest Degree

Figure 5:Time Lag Between Completion of Terminal Degree

and Company Founding by Field of Study

20years

18years

18years

15years14

years

When subdivided by a tech founder’sage at the time of startup formation, oursample approaches a normal distribution.The majority of U.S.-born tech foundersholding bachelor’s, master’s, PhD, MD,and JD degrees fall within the thirty- tofifty-year-old age bracket. It is interestingthat the left tail of the distribution isdominated by high school degrees, whilePhD, MD, and JD degrees constitute themajority of degrees held on the right tail.This information is presented in Figure 6.

Universities and Entrepreneurship

The majority of U.S.-born techfounders holding bachelor’s,master’s, PhD, MD, and JDdegrees fall within the thirty- to fifty-year-old age bracket.

We found that U.S.-born tech founders ofengineering and technology companiestend to graduate from a wideassortment of universities. While elite,

highly ranked schools hold no monopoly on techentrepreneurship, some elite schools are over-represented in the ranks of these tech founders, andcompanies formed by these schools’ graduatesoutperform those established by others.

Top Ten Universities Graduating U.S.-Born Key Tech Founders

The 628 U.S.-born tech founders providinginformation on their terminal (highest) degree,received their education from 287 unique universities.Almost every major U.S. university was represented onthis list. The top ten institutions in this groupaccounted for only 19 percent of the entire sample, asshown in Table 1.

Ivy-League Universitiesand Entrepreneurship

U.S.-born tech founders whoseterminal degrees were awardedfrom Ivy-League schools (Brown,Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth,Harvard, Princeton, University ofPennsylvania, and Yale) accountedfor 8 percent of our sample. This group was led by HarvardUniversity, which awarded terminaldegrees to slightly more than 3 percent of our U.S.-born techfounder sample. Harvard wasfollowed by the University ofPennsylvania with slightly morethan a 2 percent contribution.

By contrast, in 2005, these Ivy-League schoolsgraduated approximately thirty-three thousandbachelor’s, master’s, and PhD degrees, or 1.6 percent of all U.S. degrees awarded at these levels(see Table 2). As such, our results show adisproportionately high concentration of U.S-born techfounders with terminal Ivy-League degrees engaging inentrepreneurial startup activities in the engineering

and technology industries. While the Ivy-Leagueschools graduated a larger proportion of U.S. studentstwenty to thirty years ago, they did not come close tothe proportions of terminal degrees representedamong U.S.-born tech founders in our sample. Wealso note that the tech founders from our sample whograduated from Harvard University and the Universityof Pennsylvania held a disproportionately high numberof MBAs—55 percent and 43 percent, respectively.

U n i v e r s i t i e s a n d E n t r e p r e n e u r s h i p


Schools PercentageTop 10 Schools: Harvard University, 19%Massachusetts Institute of Technology,Pennsylvania State University,Stanford University, University of California: Berkeley,University of Missouri, University of Pennsylvania, University of Southern California, University of Texas, University of Virginia

Other Colleges and Universities 76%

High School 5%

Total 100%

Table 1:Schools Awarding U.S.-Born Tech Founders’ Terminal Degrees

Table 2:Over-Representation by U.S.-Born Tech Founders with Terminal Degrees

Awarded from Ivy-League Universities1

Ivy SchoolPercentage of 1995–2005 U.S.-Born Tech Founders Receiving a BS, MS,or PhD Degree from This School

Percentage of All 2005 BS, MS, and

PhD Degree Recipients

Ivy-League Schools: 8% 2%Brown University,Columbia University, Cornell University,Dartmouth College, Harvard University,Princeton University, University of Pennsylvania, Yale University,

Non-Ivy Schools 92% 98%

Total 100% 100%

1National 2005 bachelor’s, master’s, and PhD degree production data was obtained from the Institute for Education Sciences–National Center forEducation Statistics. Individual schools’ 2005 graduation statistics were obtained from 2005 commencement announcements.

Figure 8:Percentage of U.S. Tech Founders Who Established a Startup

in the Same State in Which They Received a Degree

Perc

enta

ge o

f Tec

h Fo

unde

rs w

ith a

Deg

ree

and

Star

tup

in th

e Gi

ven

Stat

e

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Mary

land

India

na

New

York

Illino

is

Massa

chus

etts

Penn

sylva

nia

Virgin

ia

Geor

gia Ohio

Study

Ave

rage

Texa

s

Mich

igan

Calif

ornia

State

15% 18

% 21%

28% 29%

30%

30%

45%

45%

52%

53%

58%

69%

U . S . - B o r n T e c h F o u n d e r s E d u c a t i o n a n d S t a r t u p S u c c e s s


We also observed a correlationbetween the state in whichU.S.-born tech foundersreceived one or more of their

academic degrees (terminal, first, or second)and the state in which they eventuallyestablished a startup. Nearly 45 percent ofthe tech founders in our sample establishedstartups in the same state in which they wereawarded one or more of their degrees. OurU.S.-born tech founder dataset includedindividuals who received degrees fromacademic institutions located in forty-sevenof the fifty U.S. states. Figure 8 displays abreakout of retention rates in states where atleast twenty tech founders both receiveddegrees and established startups.

University/Location of Startup

U.S.-Born Tech Founder Education and Startup Success

$0.00

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

$7.00

$8.00

All Startups Startups with anIvy-League Founder

Startups with aHigh School Founder

Average 2005 Sales Average 2005 Employment

Aver

age

2005

Sal

es (M

illio

ns o

f USD

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Aver

age

2005

Tota

l Em

ploy

ees

Figure 7:Average 2005 Sales and Employee Count Comparison

Startup Grouping

We found a correlationbetween a U.S.-born techfounder’s terminal degreeand company performance.

Figure 7 displays the average 2005 salesand total employment of the startups inour sample. In 2005, the average salesrevenue of all startups in our sample wasaround $5.7 million, and these companiesemployed an average of forty-twoworkers. Startups established by techfounders with terminal Ivy-League degreeshad higher average sales andemployment—$6.7 million and fifty-fiveworkers, respectively. The success of thesetwo groups markedly contrasted withstartups established by tech founders withhigh school terminal degrees, which hadless than half the average revenues andnumber of employees—$2.2 million and eighteen workers.

S u m m a r y a n d A u t h o r B i o g r a p h i e s


Summary of Findings and Conclusions

Our survey shows that education provides anadvantage in tech entrepreneurship and thatmost U.S.-born tech founders of technologyand engineering companies are middle-aged

with sixteen years of work experience before theylaunch a startup. The twenty-year-old wunderkind isthe exception, not the rule.

The education a tech founder receives is importantin tech entrepreneurship. But, while elite, Ivy-Leagueschools are over-represented in the ranks of U.S.-borntech entrepreneurs and achieve greater businesssuccess than others, 92 percent of the U.S.-born techfounders come from other colleges and universities.The biggest difference in business success is betweentech founders with terminal bachelor’s degrees andthose with terminal high school diplomas.

Some states are more successful than others inretaining university graduates who go on to start

technology companies. California tops this list, butthere also are large differences between Michigan,Texas, and Ohio, which rank above average, andMaryland, Indiana, and New York, which are at the bottom.

This research raises policy questions on how regionsof the country and the country itself can foster greatertech entrepreneurship to boost economic growth.While we do not know how some of the techfounders would have fared had they not obtainedhigher degrees, the predominance of degree holderssuggests that an advanced education has becomecritical, at least in the sectors covered in our sample.The majority of higher education and graduatedegrees in our respondent body fell within techfounders of thirty-five to forty-four years of age. Thata large number of U.S.-born tech founders have manyyears of experience in business also is important inunderstanding the supply of tech entrepreneurs.

Author BiographiesRichard Freeman

Richard Freeman holds the Herbert Ascherman Chairin Economics at Harvard University, and serves asfaculty director of the Labor and Worklife Program atthe Harvard Law School. He also is director of thelabor studies program at the National Bureau ofEconomic Research, senior research fellow in LabourMarkets at the London School of Economics’ Centrefor Economic Performance, and visiting professor atthe London School of Economics. Freeman haspublished more than three hundred articles dealingwith a wide range of research interests, and haswritten or edited more than thirty-five books,including: America Works: The Exceptional LaborMarket (2007), What Workers Want? (2006, 1999),Seeking a Premiere League Economy (2004), andEmerging Labor Market Institutions for the 21stCentury (2004).

Ben RissingBen Rissing is a Wertheim Fellow in the Labor and

Worklife Program at the Harvard Law School and theproject manager of Duke’s engineering outsourcingand immigration research. As a research scholar with

Duke University’s Pratt School of Engineering, he investigated globalization, technologyentrepreneurship, and the roles of multinationalcorporations. Rissing has a degree in mechanicalengineering from the University of Virginia and amaster’s in engineering management from DukeUniversity. He has been involved in projects rangingfrom engineering design and technology transfer topublic policy in Washington, D.C. In his free time,Rissing enjoys competitive fencing and has competedin a number of national competitions.

Vivek WadhwaVivek Wadhwa is a Wertheim Fellow with the Labor

and Worklife Program at Harvard Law School andexecutive-in-residence/adjunct professor for the PrattSchool of Engineering at Duke University. He also is anentrepreneur who has founded two successfultechnology companies, an active mentor and advisorto various startups, and a columnist forBusinessWeek.com. Wadhwa was named a “Leader ofTomorrow” by Forbes.com, and his company, RelativityTechnologies, was named as one of the twenty-five“coolest” companies in the world by Fortunemagazine. Wadhwa holds a bachelor’s in computingstudies from Canberra University in Australia and amaster’s from New York University.

A p p e n d i x A


U.S. Government-Defined Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Codes

Industry SIC

SemiconductorsSpecial industry machinery 3,559Semiconductors and related devices 3,674Instruments for measuring and testing electricity and electrical signals 3,825

Computers/CommunicationsElectronic computers 3,571Computer storage devices 3,572Computer peripheral equipment, n.e.c. 3,577Printed circuit boards 3,672Electronic components, n.e.c. 3,679Magnetic and optical recording media 3,695Telephone and telegraph apparatus 3,661Radio and television broadcasting and communications equipment 3,663Communications equipment, n.e.c. 3,669

BioscienceDrugs 283Surgical medical and dental instruments, and supplies 384Medical laboratories 8,071Laboratory apparatus and analytical, optical, measuring, and controlling instruments 382 (except

3,822, 3,825, and 3,826)

Defense/AerospaceSmall arms ammunition 348Electron tubes 3,671Aircraft and parts 372Guided missiles and space vehicles 376Tanks and tank components 3,795Search, detection, navigation, guidance, aeronautical, and nautical systems

instruments and equipment 381

EnvironmentalIndustrial and commercial fans and blowers, and air purification equipment 3,564Service industry machinery, n.e.c. 3,589Sanitary services 495Scrap and waste materials 5,093

Appendix A: Engineering and Technology SIC Codes

A p p e n d i x A


SoftwareComputer programming services 7,371Prepackaged software 7,372Computer-integrated systems design 7,373Computer processing, and data preparation and processing services 7,374Information retrieval services 7,375

Innovation/Manufacturing-Related ServicesComputers, and computer peripheral equipment and software (wholesale trade) 5,045Electronics parts and equipment, n.e.c. (wholesale trade) 5,065Computer facilities management services 7,376Computer rental and leasing 7,377Computer maintenance and repair 7,378Computer-related services, n.e.c. 7,379Engineering services 8,711Research and testing services 873

B i b l i o g r a p h y


i Wadhwa, V., A. Saxenian, B. Rissing, and G. Gereffi. America’s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs: Part I. The Ewing Marion Kaufman Foundation. January 2007. Available online athttp://www.soc.duke.edu/globalengineering/papers_newimmigrant.html.

ii Wadhwa, V., B. Rissing, A. Saxenian, and G. Gereffi. Education, Entrepreneurship and Immigration: America’sNew Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II. The Ewing Marion Kaufman Foundation. June 2007. Available online at http://www.soc.duke.edu/globalengineering/papers_educationentrepreneurship.html.

iii Saxenian, A. Silicon Valley’s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs. Public Policy Institute of California. 1999. Available online at http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_699ASR.pdf.

iv Institute for Education Sciences–National Center for Education Statistics (2006). Table 257. Bachelor’s, master’s,and doctoral degrees conferred by degree-granting institutions by field of study and year: Selected years, 1970–71through 2004–05. 2006 Digest of Education Statistics. Available online athttp://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d06/tables/dt06_257.asp.

Bibliography

4801 ROCKHILL ROADKANSAS CITY, MISSOURI 64110

816-932-1000www.kauf fman.org

0408400JP