27 Sorrentino epod_v2.inddMario Sorrentino
Evidences from Italy
27 Sorrentino COP epod.qxd:Layout 1 22/01/13 10.07 Page 1
University of Rome “Tor Vergata” Università degli Studi di Roma
“Tor Vergata”
Department of Business Government Philosophy
Dipartimento di Studi Impresa Governo Filosofia
Essays in Management, Economics and Ethics
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd I27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd I 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
Title ESSAYS IN MANAGEMENT, ECONOMICS & ETHICS
Acronym EMEE
AIMS AND SCOPE Essays in Management, Economics & Ethics (EMEE)
is a publication edited by the Department of Business, Government
and Philosophy of University of Rome “Tor Vergata”. EMEE’s goal is
to advance the theory and practice of management from a variety of
per- spectives, levels of analysis and methods. It publishes
original, peer-reviewed, theoretical and empirical papers, with a
particular attention to the interdisciplinarity among
socio-economic sciences.
Major topics, while not exclusive, cover the following disciplines:
Accounting and Finance General Management Entrepreneurship
Corporate Governance Business Ethics and Corporate Social
Responsibility Human Resource Management Strategic Management
Innovation International Management Knowledge Management Marketing
and Communication Operations Management and Procurement
Organizational Behaviour Public Management Research Methods and
Research Practice
Publisher McGraw-Hill Italia
Abstract/Indexing RePec
Guidelines for Authors Papers not yet published can be sent for
consideration for publication in EMEE. The length of each
manuscript should be maximum 40 typed pages (10.000 words)
including notes, references and appendices, where appropriate.
Manuscripts should be submitted in elec- tronic format (Word for
Windows) by the author to the email address:
[email protected] Once
received, the Editor in Chief and the Managing Editors will then
ask two anonymous reviewers to peer- review the paper. At the end
of the review process, the Editor in Chief will authorize the
publication of the scientific work. The Managing Editors will
insure the loading of all the accepted papers into the RepEc and
relevant database.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd II27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd II 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
Editor in Chief Prof. Roberto Cafferata, University of Rome Tor
Vergata, Italy
Scientific Committee Dermot Breslin, University of Sheffield,
United Kingdom Andrew Burke, Cranfield University, United Kingdom
Alessandro Carretta, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Italy
Corrado Cerruti, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Italy Sergio
Cherubini, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Italy Alessandro
Gaetano, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Italy Corrado Gatti,
University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Italy Claudia Maria Golinelli,
University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Italy Hans Hinterhuber,
University of Innsbruck,Austria Joanna Ho, University of
California, Irvine, U.S.A. Anne Huff, Technische Universität
München, Germany Morten Huse, Norwegian School of Management BI,
Norway Gennaro Iasevoli, LUMSA University, Italy Charlie Karlsson,
Jönköping University, Sweden Carlos Mena, Cranfield University,
United Kingdom Marco Meneguzzo, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”,
Italy Kathrin M. Möslein, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität
Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany Paola Paniccia, University of Rome “Tor
Vergata”, Italy Cosetta Pepe, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”,
Italy Ilfryn Price, Sheffield Hallam University, UK Francesco
Ranalli, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Italy Salvatore Sarcone,
University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Italy John Stanworth, University
of Westminster, United Kingdom Jonathan Williams, Bangor Business
School, United Kingdom Antonella Zucchella, University of Pavia,
Italy
Managing Editors Emiliano Di Carlo, University of Rome Tor Vergata,
Italy Sara Poggesi, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Italy Mario
Risso, Niccolò Cusano University, Telematic Rome, Italy Francesco
Scafarto, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Italy
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd III27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd III
01/02/13 12.2401/02/13 12.24
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd IV27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd IV 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
Diego Matricano, Luigi Guadalupi, Valerio Aniello Tutore, Francesco
Andreottola, Mario Sorrentino
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy
n. 27
McGraw-Hill
Milano • New York • San Francisco • Washington D.C. • Auckland
Bogotá • Lisboa • London • Madrid • Mexico City • Montreal New
Delhi • San Juan • Singapore • Sydney • Tokyo • Toronto
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd V27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd V 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
Copyright © 2012 McGraw-Hill Education (Italy) S.r.l. Via Ripamonti
89 20141 Milano
McGraw-Hill A Division of the McGraw-Hill Companies
All rights reserved. No part of this pubblication may be reproduced
or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database
or retrieval system, without the prior written consent of The
McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc, including, but not limited to, in any
network or other electronic storage or transmission, or broadcast
for distance learning.
Publisher: Alessandra Porcelli Production: Donatella Giuliani
Editorial production: Prontostampa, Verdellino Zingonia (Bg) Print:
Prontostampa, Verdellino Zingonia (Bg)
ISBN 978-88-386-7373-3 Printed in Italy
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd VI27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd VI 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy
Diego Matricano1, Luigi Guadalupi2, Valerio Aniello Tutore3,
Francesco Andreottola4, Mario Sorrentino5
Abstract Nowadays, Universities are trying to achieve their third
mission, i.e. to foster the eco- nomic development of a specific
context/Region, through Technology Transfer (TT) activities and
processes like licensing, patenting, joint venture or the creation
of aca- demic spin-offs. The present study focuses on the creation
of academic spin-offs in Italy and tries to investigate whether
cognitive/personal characteristics of academics, Univer- sities’
collaborations or environmental factors can affect this phenomenon.
Data about the ninety-two Italian Universities were collected (from
MIUR and CINECA websites) and multiple regression analyses were
developed. Results show that both personal char- acteristics
(academic status, age, gender) and cognitive factors (the amount of
professors and the fields of research) positively affect the
creation of academic spin-off. Results also show that the creation
of academic spin-offs is positively correlated to the participa-
tion in and coordination of scientific collaborations.
Environmental factors, do not pre- sent any significant
relationship with the creation of academic spin-offs. JEL
Classifications: L26 – Entrepreneurship; M10 – General Business
Administration;
M13 – New Firms, Startups. Keywords: Academic spin-off, Venture
creation, Knowledge Transfer, Entrepreneurial
University. Contents
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 127 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 1 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
1. Introduction 3 2. The creation of academic spin-offs 3 3.
Factors affecting the creation of academic spin-offs 6 4. Data
collection 14 5. Methodology and results 17 6. Conclusions and
discussion 21 References 23 Tables 29
Editorial notes The present contribution expands and updates these
previous works: • MATRICANO, D., GUADALUPI, L., TUTORE, V.A.,
ANDREOTTOLA, F. &
SORRENTINO, M. (2012), “The Creation of Academic Spin-offs:
Evidences from Italy”, working paper presented at the 4th E-LAB
International Sympo- sium of Entrepreneurship, University of Rome
Tor Vergata, May 15th-16th 2012.
• ANDREOTTOLA, F. (Ed.) (2011), Il Trasferimento Tecnologico e gli
Spin-Off Accademici in Italia, Napoli: Enzo Albano Editore.
Although the work is the result of the joint contribution of the
authors,
section 1 has been written by Mario Sorrentino, sections 2 and 6
have been written by Diego Matricano, section 3 has been written by
Francesco Andreot- tola, section 4 has been written by Luigi
Guadalupi, section 5 has been written by Valerio A. Tutore.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 227 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 2 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 3
1. Introduction Scholars seem to agree on the fact that
Universities need to try and achieve their third mission, i.e. to
foster the economic development of the context or Region they are
settled in (Etzkowitz et al., 2000; Bramwell and Wolfe, 2008;
Shane, 2004; Chiesa and Piccaluga, 2000).
However, despite the agreement on the final aim, scholars question
about the possible means that can be used, properly named
Technology Transfer (TT) processes (Ratinho and Henriques, 2010;
Abramo et al., 2009; Boardman and Ponomariov, 2009; Hoye and Pries,
2009; Lucas et al., 2009; Chiesa and Chi- aroni, 2005; Mowery et
al., 2004; Agrawal and Henderson, 2002; Cohen et al., 2002).
Generally speaking, the TT processes can be classified as soft or
hard ac- tivities (Philpott et al., 2011). The former group
comprehends educational pro- grammes, consultants’ training and
scientific publications while the latter in- cludes licensing,
joint venture and the creation of academic spin-offs.
In the present work, attention is going to be focused on the
creation of aca- demic spin-offs and, above all, on the factors
that can affect their creation by the Italian Universities.
The structure of the paper is the following. In section two, we
start from a review of the entrepreneurial literature about the
academic spin-offs in order to define the phenomenon. Subsequently,
in section three, the main factors af- fecting the creation of
academic spin-offs are identified and explained and hy- potheses
are generated. Data about the previously identified factors are
collect- ed in section four and then, in section five, the results
of multiple regression analyses are presented. Final conclusions
and discussion about these results are reported in the last
section.
2. The creation of academic spin-offs
Before proceeding, we are obliged to fix three very important
points: the first concerns the reasons why there is a growing
interest about the creation of aca- demic spin-offs in Italy; the
second deals with the definition, as punctual as
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 327 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 3 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
4 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
possible, of academic spin-off and the last one is about the level
of analysis to adopt for the present work.
In reference to the first point, we need to consider that the focus
on the third mission of Universities is very recent in Italy.
Latest data (available on NetVal website) show that most of the
Italian Universities have just imple- mented or they are still
implementing their Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs), the offices
aimed at promoting the economic exploitation of research results.
Even if this has inevitably generated a delay in the development of
the aca- demic spin-off phenomenon, as compared to other European
Countries, an increasing effort to develop the number of academic
spin-off is currently on the agenda of most of the Italian
Universities. In fact, many universities are currently involved in
defining and addressing new paths to improve the num- ber of new
ventures generated by professors. As a consequence, it is necessary
to start inquiring the factors on which Italian Universities can
leverage in order to foster the creation of academic spin-offs thus
reducing the existing gap with other Countries.
After explaining the reasons at the basis of the choice to focus on
the crea- tion of Italian academic spin-offs, it is time to move
towards the definition of the topic of research.
In reference to this, it is important to underline the missing of a
generally accepted definition of academic spin-offs. More
specifically, scholars seem to agree on some features but not on
others (Matricano, 2011). On the one hand, in fact, there is a
general consensus on the idea that an academic spin-off is a new
venture that:
• Starts thanks to a researcher, previously working in a
University, who can
totally or partially move towards the role of entrepreneur
(Compagno and Pittino, 2006; Nicolau and Birley, 2003);
• Leverages on the results achieved through previous academic
research pro- jects (Dell’Anno, 2010; Baglieri, 2008; Sorrentino,
2008; Rasmussen, 2006; Lockett et al., 2003; Friedman and
Silberman, 2003; Di Gregorio and Shane, 2003; Piccaluga, 2001),
i.e. on the exploitation of new knowledge created inside
Universities.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 427 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 4 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 5
On the other hand, instead, there is no agreement on the
relationship between the University and the new venture, especially
in reference to property rights and capital sharing. In Italy, for
example, each University has a specific regula- tion so it is not
possible to generalize any legal or property aspects.
So, for the present work, by academic spin-off is meant a new
venture pro- moted and launched by a researcher that aims to
exploit results of previous re- search projects (Mustilli and
Sorrentino, 2009) without any reference to legal or property
aspects.
In reference to the levels of analysis addressed by scholars to
study the aca- demic spin-offs, Djokovic and Souitaris (2008) point
out three possible levels: macro, meso or micro.
The first level of analysis, the macro one, pays attention over the
national innovation systems and, particularly, on the role that
policy makers can have in the creation of academic spin-offs
(O’Shea et al., 2005; Di Gregorio and Shane, 2003; Sorenson and
Stuart, 2001; Florida and Kenney, 1988). According to this, studies
about the creation of academic spin-offs focus on the presence of
venture capitalists, the legal protection of innovations, the
regional infrastruc- tures and the industrial context in which
universities are settled but, at the same time, they give less
importance to what happens inside the Universities themselves. For
this reason, the theoretical framework used to study academic
spin-offs at a macro level of analysis recalls the Industrial
Organization (IO) framework.
The second level of analysis, the meso one, focuses on the PRC
(Public Re- search Center), Universities or part of them, like
laboratories or researchers team (Carayol and Matt, 2004; Stephan
and Levin, 1997; Dasgupta and David, 1994) or academic departments
(Muscio, 2008), to test the conditions or the factors driving to
the creation of academic spin-offs (Colombo et al., 2010; Mustar
and Wright, 2010; Lockett and Wright, 2005; O’shea et al., 2005;
Pow- ers and McDougall, 2005). The theoretical framework that is
generally used to develop this kind of analysis is the
Resource-Based View (RBV) according to which internal factors, like
Penrose (1959) meant resources, determine or in- fluence the
output, i.e. the creation of academic spin-offs.
Eventually, the micro level of analysis converges on the
characteristics of the individual or of the group of individuals
promoting the creation of aca-
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 527 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 5 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
6 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
demic spin-offs. In this case, the theoretical framework has its
roots in the field of Entrepreneurial Theories (ET), investigating
the individual attributes, or in the Resource-Based View (RBV),
inquiring the personal resources affecting the crea- tion of
academic spin-offs (Compagno et al., 2009; Landry et al.,
2007).
The review of the above literature underlines a consistent
heterogeneity in studies about academic spin-offs (Mustar et al.,
2006). The option to assume three different levels of analysis
requires each author to specify which is the one, or even the ones,
to be used when approaching the study of academic spin-offs. For
the present work, we adopt both the meso and the macro levels of
analysis. Thus, in order to inquire the factors affecting the
creation of aca- demic spin-offs we assume that:
• An academic spin-off is a new venture launched by a researcher,
previously
involved in academic research projects, to exploit the achieved
results; • A meso level of analysis, in order to test the internal
factors, and a macro
level of analysis, to test the environmental factors affecting the
creation of academic spin-offs.
3. Factors affecting the creation of academic spin-offs As already
anticipated, the main objective of this study is to identify the
factors affecting the creation of academic spin-offs in Italy. In
order to achieve the above-cited goal, the main factors that can
probably affect academic spin-offs have been considered. They can
be referred to three different groups: • Cognitive/Personal
factors; • Relational factors; • Environmental factors. In order to
identify the first group of factors to test, it is necessary to
start from a review of the entrepreneurial literature focusing on
this topic. Even if the cognitive/personal factors deal with
professors/researchers involved in the creation of academic
spin-offs, we do not consider the individual as subject of
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 627 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 6 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 7
the analysis. As anticipated, in fact, we are interested in
identifying the main factors that can affect the creation of
academic spin-off according to a univer- sity-based perspective.
For this reason, we adopt a meso level of analysis.
Evidences (Zucker et al., 1998; Di Gregorio and Shane, 2003; Powers
and McDougall, 2005) underline that one of the most cited factors
is the amount of structured professors.
Generally speaking, when the amount of structured professors grows
up, there is an increasing of both formal and informal
relationships on which pro- fessors that aspire being entrepreneurs
can leverage (Schillaci, 1992). The rele- vance of these formal and
informal relationships is due to the exchange of al- ready existing
knowledge, skills, and expertise between professors (Bozeman, 2000;
Feldman et al., 2002; Zucker et al., 2002; Di Gregorio and Shane,
2003) and to the consequent creation of new knowledge that, as
anticipated in sec- tion two when we defined the topic of research,
lays at the basis of the creation of academic spin-offs. Thus it is
possible to hypothesize that:
H1: Universities with a higher presence of structured professors
show a higher possibility to create academic spin-offs. Another
factor that sounds very relevant in reference to creation of
academic spin-offs is the amount of unstructured researchers. As
noticed by Powers (2003) and Carayol and Matt (2004), unstructured
researchers contribute to carry out academic research.
The rationale assumed in reference to the amount of structured
professors can be assumed also in reference to unstructured
researchers: the more un- structured researchers contribute to
academic research, the more they contrib- ute to the creation of
new knowledge that is assumed to be exploited through the launch of
academic spin-offs. Also in this case, it sounds reasonable to as-
sume that:
H2: Universities with a higher presence of unstructured researchers
show a higher possibility to create academic spin-offs.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 727 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 7 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
8 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
Beyond the amount of structured professors and unstructured
researchers, a very important factor that seems to affect the
creation of academic spin-offs is the nature of scientific research
(O’shea, 2008), properly named Area Scientifico Disciplinare (ASD)
in Italy. As known, all the ventures need to leverage on R&D
activities (Lipparini, 2002) and to introduce innovation in order
to compete and to succeed in the market competition (Schumpeter,
1934). This is even truer in reference to academic spin-offs that,
by definition, are based on the exploitation of the innovative
results achieved through previous academic re- search
projects.
Generally speaking, Universities with professors focused in
technology- based ASD report a higher propensity to create academic
spin-offs than Uni- versities with professors in non-technology
based ASD (like philological- literary or historical-artistic
sciences). Previous empirical studies support this assumption.
Golub (2003) found out that spin-offs from Columbia University
exploit the results of previous research projects concerning with
biomedicine or electronics/software. Shane (2004) maintained that
most of academic spin- offs launched by Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (M.I.T.) are in the biomedical industry. O’Shea et al.
(2005) noticed that biotechnology, chemi- cals, and ICT are fields
of research that can positively affect the creation of academic
spin-offs. Hence, it is possible to assume that:
H3: Universities with a higher presence of professors in
technology-based ASD show a higher possibility to create academic
spin-offs. The academic status, i.e. the distinction between full,
associate and assistant professors, seems to be another factor that
can affect the creation of academic spin-offs, even if the kind of
correlation (direct or inverse) is not clear. On the one hand, in
fact, it is possible to assume that professors with higher academic
status, like full or associate ones, are more inclined to create
academic spin-offs than professors with lower one, like the
assistant professors are (Bonaccorsi and Daraio, 2002). This view
is based on the assumption that full or associate professors have a
more developed network to leverage on. The previous aca- demic
career, in fact, makes higher academic status professors more
experi- enced with research projects, better known by stakeholders
and, consequently,
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 827 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 8 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 9
less exposed to financial risk. In sum they seem to satisfy many of
the require- ments to start a new venture, thus it is possible to
hypothesize that:
H4a: Universities with professors at higher academic status show a
higher possibility to create academic spin-offs. On the other hand,
however, it is possible to assume that professors with higher
academic status are less inclined to create academic spin-offs than
pro- fessors with lower one. This view is based on the idea that
lower academic status professors feel a sort of disequilibrium
between their research capabili- ties and the uncertainty linked to
their academic status itself (Piccaluga, 2000). This means that
lower academic status professors could be more prone to ex- ploit
their own capabilities and to create academic spin-offs. Hence we
hy- pothesize that:
H4b: Universities with professors at lower academic status show a
higher possibility to create academic spin-offs. Age is another
factor that can affect the creation of academic spin-offs. Gener-
ally speaking, it is easy to figure out that there is no kind of
relationship be- tween professors’ academic status and age. In fact
it is possible to find profes- sors: old and with high status, old
and with low status, young and with high status, young and with low
status. According to this, age can be considered and investigated
as a standing alone variable.
By focusing only on age, several scholars (Kanazawa, 2003; Levin
and Stephan, 1991; Lehman, 1953) maintain that old professors show
fewer possi- bilities to get interesting results from research
projects. According to the above-cited scholars, in fact, old
professors are less involved in exploiting the results of research
projects in a very proactive way. Willingness to exploit the
results of their research projects seems to decrease as time passes
by. There- fore, it is possible to hypothesize that:
H5: Universities with young professors show a higher possibility to
create academic spin-offs.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 927 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 9 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
10 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
The last factor that according to the entrepreneurial literature
can be included in the cognitive/personal group is gender.
Several studies underline that female entrepreneurs are not so
common in technology-based fields of research since they often
undergo a sort of segrega- tion (Moore and Rickel, 1980; Anna et
al., 1999; Brush et al., 2001). In refer- ence to the creation of
academic spin-offs, a peculiar phenomenon takes place. According to
the report “She Figures” (2009), edited by the European Commis-
sion, in the very last years the amount of women getting a Ph.D.
and involved in research activities has grown up consistently (the
estimated rate is about 6,3% by year while the same rate about men
is about 3,7% by year). However, by the same report it emerges
that, after concluding their studies, female re- searchers are
mainly involved in universities (37%) and public research centers
(39%) rather then in creating their own ventures (17%) or other
activities (7%). These data are in line with an empirical study
(Profumo and Schiavone, 2009) demonstrating that male professors
are more inclined to create academic spin- offs than female ones.
Thus, the sixth research hypothesis is:
H6: Universities with a higher presence of male professors show a
higher possibility to create academic spin-offs. In sum, the first
group of factors, named cognitive/personal factors, includes:
1. The amount of structured professors; 2. The amount of
non-structured researchers; 3. The field of research (Area
Scientifico Disciplinare); 4. Academic status; 5. Age; 6. Gender.
In order to identify the second group of factors to test, the
relational ones, we proceed as done before: by reviewing the
entrepreneurial literature focusing on the academic spin-offs and
by adopting a meso level of analysis. Italian Universities, like
all the Universities, can establish partnerships with ex- ternal
partners (both public and private) to carry out different research
pro-
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 1027 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 10 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 11
jects. Heterogeneity in the kind of partnership prevents from
investigating all of them. For this reason, in the present paper,
attention is paid only over Progetti di Rilevante Interesse
Nazionale (named PRIN) that are relevant research projects
announced by Ministry of Education.
The choice to focus on the PRINs is due to the fact that these
research pro- jects are usually proposed by two or more
Universities and they are character- ized by two important phases:
the sharing experience and the conceptualization (Dell’Anno,
2010).
The sharing experience takes place when individuals, involved in TT
processes, exchange tacit knowledge (Polany, 1967; Dasgupta and
David, 1994) and, con- temporarily, start building trust based
relationships that, hopefully, can become knowledge based networks
in the future. In these networks there are the cross- fertilization
of already existing knowledge and the creation of new knowledge
that can be both fruitfully exploited to start a new venture. Thus,
it can be as- sumed that:
H7: Universities that participate in more scientific partnerships
show a higher possibility to create academic spin-offs. The act of
conceptualization is carried out in the last part of PRINs, before
results are going to be presented and discussed. As a matter of
fact, the PRINs can be divided into several parts. All the
Universities participating in a PRIN, com- monly named research
units, can focus on one or on more parts of a PRIN. It may happen
that, even if all the involved Universities share the same results,
only the University that coordinates the PRIN has the key-role of
providing final results of the research projects and of presenting
them. Implicitly, it hap- pens that University that coordinates the
PRIN can get to a wider and/or deeper knowledge of the achieved
results that, again, can be exploited to launch a new venture.
Therefore, it is possible to hypothesize that:
H8: Universities that coordinate more scientific partnerships show
a higher possibility to cre- ate academic spin-offs.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 1127 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 11 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
12 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
Participation in and coordination of PRINs is relevant also in
reference to the availability of funds that Universities can
get.
These funds can be spent in several ways:
• To acquire scientific equipment, like dedicated machines or
specific com- ponents;
• To provide research assistance, like partnerships with external
high-skilled researches or experts in specific fields;
• To support technology transfer processes and activities, like the
definition of the entrepreneurial idea and of the business
opportunity; the writing down of the business plan; the research
for potential investors and the launch the new venture (Matricano,
2011).
In reference to the destination of PRINs funds, each of the three
alternatives is standing-alone since they seem to get to specific
aims (equipment, partner- ships, technology transfer). In point of
fact, in reference to the creation of aca- demic spin-offs, all the
alternatives seem connected: investments in equipment can be
helpful for carrying out R&D activities and so to create new
knowledge to be potentially exploited by academic spin-offs;
investments in partnerships can be advantageous to share knowledge
with other researchers or experts in order to create new knowledge
aiming at the same goal of starting a new ven- ture; investments in
technology transfer processes and activities are directly in-
strumental to create academic spin-offs. Since all the alternatives
drive, implic- itly or explicitly, toward the creation of academic
spin-offs, we hypothesize that: H9: Universities that get more
funds due to scientific partnerships show a higher possibility to
create academic spin-offs. Briefly, the second group of factors,
the relational ones, includes:
1. Participation in scientific partnerships; 2. Coordination of
scientific partnerships; 3. Availability of funds due to scientific
partnerships.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 1227 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 12 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 13
In order to identify the third group of factors to test, the
environmental ones, we need to change the level of analysis and to
use the macro one. Particularly, for the present paper, we refer to
a Regional level of analysis.
As noticed by Piccaluga (2000) and, successively, by other scholars
(Bram- well and Wolfe, 2008; Moray and Clarysse, 2004), the
external context can in- fluence the creation of new ventures and,
of course, also the creation of aca- demic spin-offs.
One of the main environmental factors to be considered is the
presence of venture capitalists. The creation of new ventures in
technology-based fields of research, like the academic spin-offs
are, requires a big amount of financial re- sources and to find
them is not easy. Institutional investors, like banks, are not
involved in this kind of funding. The only chance that
professors/aspiring en- trepreneurs have is to count on venture
capitalists (Heirman and Clarisse, 2004; Moray and Clarysse, 2004;
Leland and Pile, 1997) that decide to settle and to operate in a
specific context (Italian Regions).
Other environmental factors that can affect the creation of
academic spin- offs are linked to the innovative processes taking
place in the Italian Regions. Apparently, these processes are not
directly combined with the ones taking place inside the Italian
Universities. Actually, this is not true if we consider the
spillover effect, i.e. the externalities of a specific activity
that have implications for subjects who are not directly involved
in that activity.
A very important factor from which the spillover effect can derive
is linked to the amount of researchers employed in public research
centres, not Universi- ties. As noticed in reference to PRINs (see
H7), both the cross-fertilization of already existing knowledge and
the creation of new knowledge can take place also starting from the
results of other research projects, like those promoted by public
research centres, thanks to researchers working there. This new
knowl- edge can be fruitfully exploited by academics to start a new
venture. So it seems reasonable to admit that the higher presence
of individuals working in public research centres can positively
affect the creation of academic spin-offs.
The innovation capacity in a Region, i.e. the average of R&D
expenditure by Public Administration, university, public and
private ventures (as percentage of regional G.D.P.), is another
relevant factor linked to the creation of aca- demic spin-offs.
This is due to the fact that the results achieved by Regional
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 1327 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 13 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
14 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
R&D expenditure can be considered as middle-term results on
which profes- sors can leverage (thanks to spillover effect) in
order to proceed with their re- search and, eventually, with the
creation of academic spin-offs.
In the same way, the act of patenting, resulting from the
innovation capacity cited before, is very relevant. It communicates
important information to the stakeholders: to other researchers
(like professors) it communicates whether it is appropriate or not
to proceed with a specific research project; to possible in-
vestors, it corresponds whether it is worth or not funding new
ventures, also including academic spin-offs, in a specific
Region.
According to the above analysis about the environmental factors,
the last research hypothesis is:
H10: The presence of venture capitalists, the amount of researchers
working in public re- search centres, the innovation capacity and
the ability to patenting in a Region positively affect the creation
of academic spin-offs. In conclusion, the third group of factors,
so called environmental factors, in- cludes:
• The presence of venture capitalists; • The amount of researchers
(employed in other research centres, not Uni-
versities); • The innovation capacity in the Region; • The ability
to patenting. 4. Data collection Data about all the ninety-two
Universities existing in Italy have been collected mainly from
NetVal, MIUR and CINECA websites.
The dependent variable is the number of academic spin-offs (exactly
773) created by Italian Universities over the years 2001-2009 and
data about it have been collected by NetVal website (Network per la
Valorizzazione della Ricerca Universitaria).
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 1427 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 14 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 15
There are two main aspects to be underlined: 1. It is not possible
to have detailed information about the creation of aca-
demic spin-off by each University for each year. Thus, the
dependent vari- able is the cumulated number of academic spin-offs
over the years 2001- 2009;
2. It is not possible to have detailed information about the
promoter of each academic spin-off. Because of this, the spin-offs
included in the NetVal list are considered as the result of the
University activity. It derives that the whole University is the
unit of analysis of the present work and, conse- quently, it
implies that all the independent variables are observed and con-
sidered from a University perspective and not from the promoter’s
one.
The way independent variables have been constructed varies for each
of them. For this reason it is suitable to consider each of them
separately.
In reference to H1, the considered variable includes the total
amount of structured professors for each University (Table
1).
Strictly connected to the above variable is the amount of
unstructured col- laborators (H2). They help structured professors
with all their activities (from teaching to researching).
Especially in reference to the research activity, the un-
structured collaborators represent a very important resource of
cognitive capi- tal. Collaborations can vary according to the kind
of contract linking the un- structured collaborators to the
University. In order to test the effect they can have on the
creation of academic spin-offs, different kinds of unstructured
col- laborators have been considered (Table 2).
Beyond the difference between structured professors and
unstructured col- laborators, a very important variable to be
considered for the creation of aca- demic spin-off is the ASD (H3).
The Italian Ministry of Education (MIUR) lists fourteen ASD that
have been considered for the present work (Table 3).
In the category of “professors”, very important differences can
come out because of the academic status (H4). The positions each
professor takes up in the University (full, associate or assistant)
can differently affect the creation of academic spin-offs so they
have been considered at a very deep level of analy- sis (Table
4).
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 1527 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 15 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
16 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
Another factor that can affect the creation of academic spin-off is
age of pro- fessors involved (H5). For this reason, all the
professors have been divided into five groups according to age
(Table 5).
Eventually, we assume that gender can affect the creation of
academic spin- offs (H6). For this reason, male and female
professors have been considered as two different groups (Table
6).
From a methodological perspective, it is important to underline
that, for all the cognitive/personal factors, we have considered
the average calculated on the values reported over the same time
span of the dependent variable.
Information collected about relational factors aims to catch the
ability of Universities to build scientific partnerships with other
Universities or research centres. As already anticipated,
inclination towards networking activity posi- tively affects the
creation of academic spin-offs. Data about relational factors refer
to PRIN over the same time span of the dependent variable.
In order to test the effect on the creation of academic spin-offs,
three inde- pendent variables have been considered.
In reference to H7, all the participations in PRIN have been
considered. In reference to H8, only the PRIN that have been
coordinated by a specific Uni- versity have been counted.
Eventually, in reference to H9, the amount of fi- nancial resources
attributed to a University to carry out a PRIN has been con-
sidered as a relational factor since it is representative of the
networking activity started by the University itself (Table
7).
The last group of factors includes the environmental ones. These
factors re- assume the specific conditions of each local context in
order to test whether and how they can affect the creation of
academic spin-offs.
From a methodological perspective, it is important to underline
that the en- vironmental factors are expression of the context in
each Italian Region. The considered variables, included in Table 8
and referred to the same time span of the dependent variable,
are:
• The average of the number of investments funded by venture
capitalists in
the Italian Regions (named VC). These data were collected from AIFI
(As- sociazione Italiana del Private Equity e Venture
Capital);
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 1627 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 16 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 17
• The average of the number of non-academic researchers per each
thousand inhabitants (called Researchers);
• The average of intra-muros R&D expenditure funded by Public
Administra- tion, Universities, public and private ventures as a
percentage of Regional G.D.P. (named CapInn);
• The average of patents registered at the European Patent Office
(EPO) per each million of inhabitants (named IntPat)
The values of the variables “CapInn”, “IntPat” and “Researchers”
were collec- ted from the Dipartimento per lo Sviluppo e la
Coesione Economica del Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico website.
5. Methodology and results The present section can be divided into
two main parts. The first includes de- scriptive statistics of the
investigated population. The second, instead, shows the results of
hypotheses testing.
We start by describing the characteristics of the investigated
population in reference to their property assets (public or private
universities), their size and geographical location.
Table 9 shows that around 80% of all the Italian universities are
public. Considering the size of the universities, we assumed that
“big university” are
those with more than 40.000 students, “medium university” those
with 15.000- 40.000 students and “small university” those with
fewer than 15.000 students. Table 10 shows that “small
universities” are the most frequent (60% of the population), while
the percentage of “big universities” in Italy is 12%.
Regarding the geographical location (Table 11), the universities
are distrib- uted not uniformly over the country. Most of them are
located in central Italy. Tables 12, 13, 14, and 15 report the
distribution of the Italian professors ac- cording to ASD, academic
status, age, and gender. For each of these distribu- tions, besides
average value and the standard deviation (σ ), tables report:
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 1727 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 17 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
18 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
• The minimum value which is the lowest average value reported by a
single University over the years 2001-2009. This value always moves
from zero since in the observed population there are some new, very
small Universi- ties or telematic ones which can miss some
independent variables.
• The maximum value which is the highest average value reported by
a single University over the years 2001-2009.
By examining data about the number of professors disaggregated by
scientific disciplines (Table 12), we find that Medical Sciences
(ASD06) is the scientific area with the highest average value of
professors.
Table 13 shows that, in the period considered, the average of no
fixed term full professors is 162 and the average of confirmed
associate professors is 147, while the average of no fixed term
assistant professors is 183.
The analysis of data disaggregated by age (Table 14) shows that
most of pro- fessors is 56-65, followed by the previous class
46-55. The under-35 age class has a lower value, showing that the
progress in academic career in Italian uni- versities is only after
researchers have gained experience over the years.
Finally, given the data on the gender of academics, we note that
the average number of male professors is almost double than that of
the female ones (Ta- ble 15).
In the passage from descriptive to inferential statistics, it is
necessary to un- derline that the present work represents an
exploratory study and so some criticalities about the methodology
aspects may rise up. The choice to use the Ordinary Least Square
(OLS) to get the estimation of the parameters can be as- cribed as
the first one. Even if the OLS is not the most fitting model with
the final aim, achieved results are presented since they seem to be
interesting and to constitute an important premise for further and
deeper studies. The second criticality is about endogeneity. This
criticality prevents from drawing any con- clusion about the causal
relationship between regressors and spin-offs but it helps to
understand the relationship itself at an exploratory phase. The
third and last criticality concerns the stepwise approach. In an
exploratory study like this, the stepwise approach helps to
understand the relationship between each regressor and the
spin-offs in a clear way. Once the relationship is clear,
fur-
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 1827 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 18 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 19
ther studies will be carried out without the stepwise approach
(including also not-significant variables).
According to the criticalities underlined before, the following
analysis does not include any definitive results about the creation
of academic spin-offs. The results are a sort of guidelines to
carry out future analyses.
Statistical elaborations support H1 according to which Universities
with a higher presence of structured professors show a higher
possibility to create academic spin-offs. Beta is different from
zero in a significant way; it is positive and its value is 0,017
(Table 16). According to this, the number of structured professors
positively affects the creation of academic spin-offs.
In H2 we predicted that Universities with a higher presence of
unstructured researchers show a higher possibility to create
academic spin-offs. Statistical elaborations show that Ph.D. and
Ph.D. students do not affect the creation of academic spin-offs. It
is possible to maintain that only the collaborators who receive a
research grant (named Coll_Tot) positively affect the creation of
aca- demic spin-offs (Table 17). One possible explanation can be
found in the longer time spent in researching by collaborators with
research grant as com- pared to Ph.D. The longer is the time spent
in research activities, the more is the new knowledge created and
so the higher is the possibility to create aca- demic
spin-offs.
In reference to H3, based on the assumption that Universities with
a higher presence of professors in technology-based ASD show a
higher possibility to create academic spin-offs, results show that
some fields of research, like the number 07 (agriculture and
veterinary science) and 09 (industrial and techno- logical
engineering), positively affect the creation of academic spin-offs.
At the same time, the fields of research number 08 (civil
engineering and archi- tecture) seem to affect in a negative way
the creation of academic spin-offs (Table 18).
Results about H4 (Table 19) refuses H4a and supports H4b since the
re- gression analysis reveals that the only academic status
affecting the creation of academic spin-offs in a positive way is a
low one: assistant professors not confirmed. These professors work
for the University with a fixed-term con- tract lasting three years
and, after that term, their works are evaluated in order to be
confirmed. This might mean that when professors get a higher
academic
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 1927 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 19 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
20 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
status, despite the major experience and better reputation, they
are less inclined to start academic spin-offs.
Statistical elaborations do not support H5 predicting that
Universities with young professors show a higher possibility to
create academic spin-offs. The professors that seem to affect in a
positive way the creation of academic spin- offs are the ones aged
35-45 and the ones aged 46-55 (Table 20).
The regression analysis confirms H6 assuming that Universities with
a higher presence of male professors show a higher possibility to
create aca- demic spin-offs (Table 21).
The regression analysis seems to support H7 expecting that
Universities that participate in more scientific partnerships show
a higher possibility to cre- ate academic spin-offs. It means that
the more Universities participate in PRIN, the higher is the
possibility to create academic spin-offs (Table 22).
The achieved results, shown in Table 23, support H8 and drive to
assume that Universities that coordinate more scientific
partnerships show a higher possibility to create academic
spin-offs. In fact, results show that the more Universities
coordinate PRIN, the higher is the possibility to create aca- demic
spin-offs.
By comparing the regression coefficients in Table 22 (Beta = 0,015)
and in Table 23 (Beta = 0,048) it results that when Universities
coordinate PRIN rather than participate in them, the possibility
that academic spin- offs are created grows up. According to this,
it derives that Universities that coordinate PRIN are more inclined
to create academic spin-offs.
Statistical results seem to support H9, according to which
Universities that get more funds due to scientific partnerships
show a higher possibility to create academic spin-offs, even if the
relationship does not result so strong (Table 24).
As already anticipated, in order to test H10 the unity of analysis
moves from Universities to Regions where Universities are settled
in. As a conse- quence, the dependent variable has changed too. In
fact, the dependent variable now is the total amount of academic
spin-offs created at regional level. Statistical elaborations drive
to refuse H10. In fact, the prediction that the presence of venture
capitalists, the amount of researchers, the innova-
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 2027 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 20 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 21
tion capacity in a Region and the ability to patenting positively
affect the crea- tion of academic spin-offs is not statistically
significant (Table 25).
6. Conclusions and discussion The present contribution has tried to
investigate the factors affecting the crea- tion of academic
spin-offs in Italy.
Methodological limitations (due to the use of OLS) and possible
effects due to endogeneity may affect the empirical results of this
exploratory study. In any case, results seem to suggest that
cognitive/personal and relational factors af- fect the creation of
academic spin-offs while environmental factors do not. In reference
to the cognitive/personal factors, statistical elaborations support
the following results:
• The number of structured professors positively affects the
creation of
academic spin-offs; • The collaborators who receive a research
grant (research fellows) positively
affect the creation of academic spin-offs; • Carrying out research
projects in some ASD, like the number 07 (agricul-
ture and veterinary science) and 09 (industrial and technological
engineer- ing), positively affects the creation of academic
spin-offs;
• The presence of not confirmed assistant professors seems to
affect the creation of academic spin-offs in a positive way;
• The professors that seem to affect in a positive way the creation
of aca- demic spin-offs are the ones aged between 35-45 and
46-55;
• The presence of male professors seems to positively affect the
creation of academic spin-offs.
In reference to the relational factors, statistical elaborations
show that the creation of academic spin-offs is positively
correlated to the number of scien- tific collaborations (PRIN)
participated by Universities and, even more, to the number of
collaborations coordinated by each University. The availability
of
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 2127 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 21 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
22 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
funds due to scientific partnerships seems to positively affect the
creation of academic spin-off but, statistically, the relationship
does not result so strong.
Eventually, statistical elaborations about the environmental
factors (includ- ing the number of investments funded by venture
capitalists in each Region, the number of researchers, the R&D
expenditure by Public Administration, University, public and
private ventures and the patents registered at EPO) do not present
any significant relationship with the creation of academic
spin-offs.
In order to comment the results of the present study, it is
suitable to refer to cognitive/personal and relational factors
contemporarily and to focus on the group of environmental factors
alone.
Despite methodological limitations, cognitive/personal and
relational fac- tors show results that are in line with existing
literature. They remark that Uni- versities need to have distinct
capabilities that facilitate the creation of aca- demic spin-offs
(Rasmussen and Borch, 2010).
Results about environmental factors, instead, show that none of the
four factors considered seem to affect the creation of academic
spin-offs in Italy.
The possible causes at the basis of the above results are linked to
methodo- logical aspects, especially to the used methodology (OLS)
and to the shift of the unit of analysis from University level to
Regional level. This shift makes the statistical relationships
between the independent variables and the dependent one less
punctual and, moreover, it implies a decrease of information
variability about the investigated phenomenon. However, beyond
methodological as- pects, the possible implications due to the
achieved results recall the idea of the “ivory tower” (Mowery et
al., 2004; Etzkowitz et al., 2000). Italian Universities still seem
to be apart from the context they are settled in. They seem to
ignore the presence of VC and of other researchers, the results of
other public R&D activities and the amount of patents that,
instead, could contribute to the crea- tion of new ventures
promoted by academics.
In order to increase the creation of academic spin-offs, policy
makers should thus drive the academics towards the external context
from which new possible synergies can come out and to which new
ideas can be transferred. Policy makers in Italy should act like a
bridge able to connect the academic world with the entrepreneurial
one in order to reduce or even to eliminate any possible gap.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 2227 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 22 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 23
References ABRAMO, G., D'ANGELO, C.A., DI COSTA, F. & SOLAZZI,
M. (2009),
“University-Industry Collaboration in Italy: A Bibliometric
Examination”, Technovation, vol. 29, pp. 498-507.
AGRAWAL, A. & HENDERSON, R. (2002), “Putting Patents in
Context: Explor- ing Knowledge Transfer from M.I.T.”, Management
Science, vol. 48, pp. 44-60.
ANNA, A.L., CHANDLER, G.N., JANSEN, E. & MERO, N.P. (1999),
“Women Business Owners in Traditional and Non-Traditional
Industries”, Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 15, pp.
279-303.
BAGLIERI, D. (2008), “Brevetti Universitari e Trasferimento
Tecnologico: Alcune Considerazioni Critiche”, Sinergie, vol. 75,
pp. 175-193.
BOARDMAN, P.C. & PONOMARIOV, B.L. (2009), “University
Researchers Working with Private Companies”, Technovation, vol. 29,
pp. 142-153
BONACCORSI, A. & DARAIO, C. (2002), The Organization of
Science. Size, Agglomeration and Age Effects in Scientific
Productivity, Proceedings of the Conference “Rethinking Science
Policy: Analytical Frameworks for Evidence-based Policy”, SPRU,
Brighton.
BOZEMAN, B. (2000), “Technology Transfer and Public Policy: A
Review of Research and Theory”, Research Policy, vol. 29, pp.
627–655.
BRAMWELL, A. & WOLFE, D.A. (2008), “Universities and Regional
Economic Development: The Entrepreneurial University of Waterloo”,
Research Policy, vol. 37, pp. 1175-1187.
BRUSH, C., CARTER, N., GATEWOOD, E., GREENE, P. & HART, M.
(2001), The Diana Project. Women Business Owners and Equity
Capital: The Myths Dispelled, Report by Kauffman Center for
Entrepreneurial Leadership, available on www.entreworld.org.
CARAYOL, N. & MATT, M. (2004), “Does Research Organization
Influence Academic Production? Laboratory Level Evidence from Large
European University”, Research Policy, vol. 33, pp.
1081-1102.
CHIESA, V. & CHIARONI, D. (2005), Industrial Clusters in
Biotechnology - Driving Forces, Development Processes and
Management Practices, London: Imperial College Press.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 2327 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 23 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
24 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
CHIESA, V. & PICCALUGA, A. (2000), “Exploitation and Diffusion
of Public Research: The Case of Academic Spin-Off in Italy”,
R&D Management, vol. 30, pp. 329-339.
COHEN, W., NELSON, R. & WALSH, J. (2002), “Links and Impacts:
The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D”, Management
Science, vol. 48, pp. 1-23.
COLOMBO, M., D’ADDA, D. & PIVA, E. (2010), “The Contribution of
Universi- ty Research to the Growth of Academic Start-Ups: An
Empirical Analysis”, Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 35, pp.
1-25.
COMPAGNO, C. & PITTINO, D. - EDS. - (2006), Ricerca Scientifica
e Nuove Imprese. Spin-Off Accademici e Valore della Conoscenza,
Torino: ISEDI.
COMPAGNO, C., LAUTO, G. & BAU’, M. (2009), Le Risorse e i
Fattori Motivazionali Abilitanti il Trasferimento Tecnologico,
Paper presented at WOA 2009, Cagliari 29-30th April.
DASGUPTA, P. & DAVID, P. (1994), “Towards A New Economics of
Science”, Research Policy, vol. 23, pp. 487-521.
DELL’ANNO, D. (2010), La Conoscenza dall’Università all’Impresa.
Processi di Trasferimento Tecnologico e Sviluppo Locale, Roma:
Carocci.
DI GREGORIO, D. & SHANE, S. (2003), “Why Some Universities
Generate More TLO Start-Ups than Others?”, Research Policy, vol.
32, pp. 209-227.
DJOKOVIC, D. & SOUITARIS, V. (2008), “Spinouts from Academic
Institutions. A Literature Review with Suggestions for Further
Research”, Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 33, pp.
225-247.
ETZKOWITZ, H., WEBSTER, A., GEBHARDT, C. & TERRA, B.R.C.
(2000), “The Future of the University and the University of the
Future: Evolution of Ivory Tower to Entrepreneurial Paradigm”,
Research Policy, vol. 29, pp. 313- 330.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2009, She Figures 2009 - Statistics and
Indicators on Gender Equality in Science, Bruxelles:
Directorate-General for Research.
FELDMAN, M.P., FELLER, I., BERCOVITZ, J.E.L. & BURTON, R.M.
(2002), “Equity and the Technology Transfer Strategies of American
Research Universities”, Management Science, vol. 48, pp.
105-121.
FLORIDA, R.L. & KENNEY, M. (1988), “Venture Capital, High
Technology and Regional Development”, Regional Studies, vol. 22,
pp. 33-48.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 2427 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 24 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 25
FRIEDMAN, J. & SILBERMAN, J. (2003), “University Technology
Transfer: Do Incentives Management and Location Matter?”, Journal
of Technology Transfer, vol. 28, pp. 17-30.
GOLUB, E. (2003), Generating Spin-Offs from University Based
Research. The Potential of Technology Transfer, Ph.D. dissertation
at Columbia University.
HEIRMAN, A. & CLARISSE, B. (2004), “How and Why Do
Research-Based Start- Ups Differ at Founding? A Resource-Based
Configurational Perspective”, Journal of Technology Transfer, vol.
29, pp. 247-268.
HOYE, K. & PRIES, F. (2009), ”Repeat Commercialiers: The
‘Habitual Entrepreneurs’ of University-Industry Technology
Transfer”, Technovation, vol. 29, pp. 682-689.
KANAZAWA, S. (2003), “Why Productivity Fades with Age: The
Crime–Genius Connection”, Journal of Research in Personality, vol.
37, pp. 257-272.
LANDRY, R., AMARA, N. & OUIMET, M. (2007). “Determinants of
Knowledge Transfer: Evidence from Canadian University Researchers
in Natural Sci- ences and Engineering”, The Journal of Technology
Transfer, vol. 32, pp. 561-592.
LEHMAN, H.C. (1953), Age and Achievement, Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
LELAND, H.E. & PILE, D.H. (1997), “Information asymmetries,
Financial Structure and Financial Intermediation”, Journal of
Finance, vol. 32, pp. 371- 387.
LEVIN, S. & STEPHAN, P. (1991), “Research Productivity over the
Life Cycle: Evidence for Academic Scientists”, American Economic
Review, vol. 81, pp. 114-132.
LIPPARINI, A. – ED. – (2002), La Gestione Strategica del Capitale
Intellettuale e del Capitale Sociale, Bologna: Il Mulino.
LOCKETT, A. & WRIGHT, M. (2005). “Resources, Capabilities, Risk
Capital and the Creation of University Spin-Out Companies”,
Research Policy, vol. 34, pp. 1043-1057.
LOCKETT, A., WRIGHT, M. & FRANKLIN, S. (2003), “Technology
Transfer and Universities’ Spinout Strategies”, Small Business
Economics, vol. 20, pp. 185- 200.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 2527 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 25 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
26 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
LUCAS W.A., COOPER S., WARD A.E., CAVE F. (2009), “Industrial
Placement, Authentic Experience and the Development of Venturing
and Technology Self-Efficacy”, Technovation, vol. 29, pp.
738-752.
MATRICANO, D. (2011), “I Meccanismi di Trasferimento tecnologico e
gli Spin- Off da Ricerca”, in ANDREOTTOLA, F. (Ed.), Il
Trasferimento Tecnologico e gli Spin-Off Accademici in Italia,
Napoli: Enzo Albano Editore.
MOORE, L.M. & RICKEL, A.U. (1980), “Characteristics of Women in
Traditional and Non-Traditional Managerial Roles, Personnel
Psychology, vol. 33, pp. 317-333.
MORAY, N. & CLARYSSE, B. (2004), “A Process Study of
Entrepreneurial Team Formation: The Case of a Research-Based
Spin-Off”, Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 19, pp. 55-79.
MOWERY, D.C., NELSON, R.R., SAMPAT, B.N. & ZIEDONIS, A.A.
(2004), Ivory tower and industrial innovation: university-industry
technology transfer before and after the Bayh-Dole Act, Stanford,
CA: Stanford University Press.
MUSCIO, A. (2008), “Il Trasferimento Tecnologico in Italia:
Risultati di un’Indagine sui Dipartimenti Universitari”,
L’Industria, Numero Speciale, pp. 245-268.
MUSTAR, P., RENAULT, M., COLOMBO, M.G., PIVA, E., FONTES, M.,
LOCKETT, A., WRIGHT, M., CLARYSSE, B. & MORAY, N. (2006),
“Conceptualizing the Heterogeneity of Research-Based Spin-Offs: A
Multi-Dimensional Taxon- omy”, Research Policy, vol. 35, pp.
289-308.
MUSTAR, P. & WRIGHT, M. (2010), “Convergence or Path Dependency
in Poli- cies to Foster the Creation of University Spin-Off
Spin-Offs? A Compari- son of France and the United Kingdom”,
Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 35, pp. 42-65.
MUSTILLI, M. & SORRENTINO, M. (2009), “The Emergence and
Development of University Spin-Offs”, in SCHILLACI, C.E., ROMANO,
M. & LONGO M.C. (Eds.), Hybrid Organizational Forms and
Academic Entrepreneurship. The Evolution of Italian University
Incubators, Torino: Giappichelli.
NICOLAU, N. & BIRLEY, S. (2003), “Academic Networks in a
Trichotomous Categorisation of University Spinouts”, Journal of
Business Venturing, vol. 18, pp. 333-359.
O’SHEA, R., ALLEN, T., CHEVALIER, A. & ROCHE, F. (2005),
“Entrepreneurial
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 2627 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 26 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 27
Orientation, Technology Transfer and Spin-Off Performances of U.S.
Uni- versities”, Research Policy, vol. 34, pp. 994-1009.
O’SHEA, R., CHUGH, H. & ALLEN, T.J. (2008), “Determinants and
Conse- quences of University Spinoff Activity: A Conceptual
Framework”, Journal of Technological Transfer, vol. 33,
pp.653-666
PENROSE, E.T. (1959), The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, New
York: Oxford University Press.
PHILPOTT, K., DOOLEY, L., O’REILLY, C. & LUPTON, G. (2011),
“The Entre- preneurial University: Examining the Underlying
Academic Tensions”, Technovation, vol. 31, pp. 161-170.
PICCALUGA, A. (2000), “I Processi di Filiazione: L’Impresa Crea
Impresa e la Ricerca Crea Impresa”, in LIPPARINI, A. &
LORENZONI, G. (Eds.), Imprendi- tori e Imprese. Idee, Piani,
Processi, Bologna: Il Mulino.
PICCALUGA, A. (2001), La Valorizzazione della Ricerca Scientifica.
Come Cambia la Ricerca Industriale e quella Pubblica, Milano:
Franco Angeli.
POLANYI, M. (1967), The Tacit Dimension, New York: Doubleday
Anchor. POWERS, J.B. (2003), “Commercializing academic Research.
Resource Effects
on Performance of University Technology Transfer”, Journal of
Higher Education, vol. 74, pp. 26-50.
POWERS, J.B. & MCDOUGALL, P. (2005). “University Start-Up
Formation and Technology Licensing with Firms that Go Public: A
Resource Based View of Academic Entrepreneurship”, Journal of
business venturing, vol. 20, pp. 291- 311.
PROFUMO, G. & SCHIAVONE, F. (2009), “Le Determinanti della
Nascita e del Successo degli Spin-off della Ricerca Pubblica”,
Rassegna Economica, vol. LXXII, pp. 39-61.
RASMUSSEN, E. (2006), Spin-off Venture Creation in a University
Context. An Entrepreneurial Process View, Bodo Graduate Business
School.
RASMUSSEN, E. & BORCH O.J. (2010), “University Capabilities in
Facilitating Entrepreneurship: A Longitudinal Study of Spin-off at
Mid-Range Universities”, Research Policy, vol. 39, pp.
602-612.
RATINHO, T. & HENRIQUES, E. (2010), “The Role of Science Parks
and Busi- ness Incubators in Converging Countries: Evidence from
Portugal”, Techno- vation, vol. 30, pp. 278-290.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 2727 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 27 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
28 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
SCHILLACI, C. (1992), “I Collegamenti Interpersonali e la loro
Rilevanza nella Nascita di una Nuova Impresa”, Sinergie, vol. 28,
pp. 97-107.
SCHUMPETER, J.A. (1911), The Theory of Economic Development: An
Inquiry into Prof- its, Capital, Credit, Interest and Business
Cycle (1934 edition), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
SHANE, S. (2004), “Encouraging University Entrepreneurship? The
Effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on University Patenting in the United
States”, Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 19, pp. 127-151.
SORENSON, O. & STUART, T.E. (2001), “Syndication Networks and
the Spatial Distribution of Venture Capital Investments”, American
Journal of Sociology, vol. 106, pp. 1546-1588.
SORRENTINO, M. (2008), Le imprese science-based, Roma: Carocci.
STEPHAN, P.E. & LEVIN, S.G. (1997), “The Critical Importance of
Careers in
Collaborative Scientific Research”, Revue d’Économie Industrielle,
Vol. 79, pp. 45-61.
ZUCKER, L.G., DARBY, M. & ARMSTRONG, J. (1998), “Geographically
Localized Knowledge: Spillovers or Markets?”, Economic Inquiry,
vol. 36, pp. 65-86.
ZUCKER, L.G., DARBY, M. & ARMSTRONG, J. (2002),
“Commercializing Knowledge: University Science, Knowledge Capture,
and Firm Perfor- mance in Biotechnology”, Management Science, vol.
48, pp. 138-153.
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 2827 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 28 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 29
Tables Table 1: Data used to test H1
Tot_Prof Number of professors (full, associate and assistant) for
each University Table 2: Data used to test H2
Coll_Tot Number of collaborators who receive a research grant
(post-doc, scholar- ship)
PhD_Tot Number of Ph.D. PhD_Stud_Tot Number of Ph.D. students
Table 3: Data used to test H3
Prof_ASD01 Number of professors of mathematics and information
technology Prof_ASD02 Number of professors of physics Prof_ASD03
Number of professors of chemistry Prof_ASD04 Number of professors
of geology Prof_ASD05 Number of professors of biology Prof_ASD06
Number of professors of medical sciences Prof_ASD07 Number of
professors of agriculture and veterinary science Prof_ASD08 Number
of professors of civil engineering and architecture Prof_ASD09
Number of professors of industrial and technological
engineering
Prof_ASD10 Number of professors of ancient times,
philological-literary and historical- artistic sciences
Prof_ASD11 Number of professors of historical, philosophical,
pedagogical and psycho- logical sciences
Prof_ASD12 Number of professors of law sciences Prof_ASD13 Number
of professors of economics and statistics Prof_ASD14 Number of
professors of politics and social sciences
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 2927 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 29 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
30 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
Table 4: Data used to test H4
Full Professors Number of full professors at no fixed term Number
of full professors at fixed term Number of temporary full
professors
Associate Professors Number of confirmed associates professors
Number of non-confirmed associate professors Number of associate
professors on contract
Assistant Professors Number of assistant professors at no fixed
term Number of assistant professors at fixed term Number of
assistant professors not confirmed
Table 5: Data used to test H5
Prof_under35 Number of professors younger than 35 years old
Prof_35_45 Number of professors aged between 35 and 45 years old
Prof_46_55 Number of professors aged between 46 and 55 years old
Prof_55_65 Number of professors aged between 56 and 65 years old
Prof_over65 Number of professors older than 65 years old
Table 6: Data used to test H6
Prof_M Number of male professors Prof_F Number of female
professors
Table 7: Data used to test H7, H8 and H9
Partic_PRIN Number of PRIN participated by the university (H7)
Coord_PRIN Number of PRIN coordinated by the university (H8)
Funded_PRIN Financial resources assigned to the university for
participation to PRIN (H9)
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 3027 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 30 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 31
Table 8: Data used to test H10
VC The average of the number of investments funded by venture
capitalists in each Region
Researchers The average of the number of researchers per each
thousand inhabitants
CapInn The average of R&D expenditure by Public Administration,
university, pub- lic and private ventures (as percentage of
regional G.D.P.)
IntPat The average of patents registered at EPO per each million
inhabitants Table 9: Distribution of the Italian Universities
according to property assets
Property assets Frequency Percentage Cumulative percentage Private
Universities Public Universities Total
19 20,7 20,7 73 79,3 100,0 92 100,0
Table 10: Distribution of the Italian Universities according to
size
Size Frequency Percentage Cumulative percentage Big Universities
Medium Universities Small Universities Total
11 12,0 12,0 25 27,2 39,1 56 60,9 100,0 92 100,0
Table 11: Distribution of the Italian Universities according to
geographic area
Geographic area Frequency Percentage Cumulative percentage North
Center South Total
28 30,4 30,4 40 43,5 73,9 24 26,1 100,0 92 100,0
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 3127 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 31 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
32 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
Table 12: Distribution of the Italian professors according to
ASD.
(ASD) Area Scientifico Disciplinare Minimum Maximum Average σ
Professors in ASD01 0 244,1 35,7 50,0 Professors in ASD02 0 178,2
27,6 39,2 Professors in ASD03 0 248,0 34,9 52,7 Professors in ASD04
0 87,1 13,7 20,6 Professors in ASD05 0 361,3 56,0 78,5 Professors
in ASD06 0 1.392,0 119,7 209,4 Professors in ASD07 0 288,0 34,4
65,7 Professors in ASD08 0 468,4 40,9 80,2 Professors in ASD09 0
543,9 53,4 95,0 Professors in ASD10 0 385,4 62,6 81,4 Professors in
ASD11 0 385,2 54,1 73,2 Professors in ASD12 0 297,8 51,4 61,9
Professors in ASD13 0 290,1 45,3 53,6 Professors in ASD14 0 138,5
17,6 26,0
Table 13: Distribution of the Italian professors according to
academic status.
Academic status Minimum Maximum Average σ Not confirmed assistant
professors 0 309,2 62,6 71,5 No fixed term Assistant professors 0
1.666,2 183,2 262,0 Fixed term assistant professors 0 36,0 2,9 6,2
Not confirmed associate professors 0 257,6 49,5 53,6 Confirmed
associate professors 0 1.027,3 147,4 191,0 Temporary full professor
0 192,9 34,5 38,6 No fixed term full professor 0 1.182,0 162,4
214,8 Fixed term full professor 0 7,8 0,2 0,9
Table 14: Distribution of the Italian professors according to
age.
Minimum Maximum Average σ
Prof_under35 0 36,9 8,6 9,5
Prof_35_45 0 678,3 142,1 156,6 Prof_46_55 0 1.237,7 189,4 220,2
Prof_56_65 0 1.691,0 204,7 284,0 Prof_over65 0 1.103,7 117,2
179,4
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 3227 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 32 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 33
Table 15: Descriptive statistics of professors by gender
Gender Minimum Maximum Average σ Female professors 0 1.636,0 218,7
286,8 Male professors 0 2.920,3 435,9 540,0
Table 16: Regression Coefficients about H1
Model Unstandardized
Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.
B Standard Error Beta (Constant) ,249 1,332 ,187 ,852 Tot_Prof ,017
,003 1,258 6,806 ,000
Table 17: Regression Coefficients about H2
Model Unstandardized
B Standard Error Beta
1 (Constant) 2,014 1,160 1,736 ,086 Coll_Tot ,017 ,002 ,657 8,277
,000
Table 18: Regression Coefficients about H3 – Stepwise method
Model Unstandardized
Coefficients Standard
1 (Constant) 3,673 ,996 3,689 ,000
Prof_ASD09 ,082 ,009 ,688 8,990 ,000
2 (Constant) 3,855 ,903 4,269 ,000
Prof_ASD09 ,146 ,016 1,221 8,954 ,000 Prof_ASD08 -,088 ,019 -,619
-4,540 ,000
3
(Constant) 2,587 ,869 2,977 ,004 Prof_ASD09 ,134 ,015 1,114 8,827
,000 Prof_ASD08 -,083 ,018 -,581 -4,675 ,000 Prof_ASD07 ,050 ,011
,290 4,445 ,000
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 3327 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 33 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
34 D. MATRICANO, L. GUADALUPI, V.A. TUTORE, F. ANDREOTTOLA, M.
SORRENTINO
Table 19: Regression Coefficients about H4 – Stepwise method
Model Unstandardized
B Standard Error Beta
1 (Constant) 1,937 1,253 1,546 ,126
AssP_noconf ,098 ,013 ,616 7,418 ,000 Table 20: Regression
Coefficients about H5 – Stepwise method
Model Unstandardized
B Standard Error Beta
1 (Constant) 1,469 1,243 1,182 ,240 Prof_35_45 ,046 ,006 ,639 7,887
,000
2 (Constant) 1,868 1,225 1,525 ,131 Prof_35_45 ,075 ,013 1,026
5,601 ,000
Prof_under35 -,513 ,219 -,429 -2,341 ,021
3
(Constant) 1,733 1,200 1,444 ,152 Prof_35_45 ,110 ,020 1,513 5,368
,000
Prof_under35 -,719 ,233 -,601 -3,082 ,003 Prof_56_65 -,015 ,007
-,381 -2,238 ,028
4
(Constant) 1,031 1,222 ,844 ,401 Prof_35_45 ,089 ,022 1,225 3,986
,000
Prof_under35 -,689 ,229 -,576 -3,006 ,003 Prof_56_65 -,037 ,012
-,934 -3,029 ,003 Prof_46_55 ,042 ,020 ,812 2,133 ,036
Table 21: Regressions Coefficients about H6 – Stepwise method
Model Unstandardized
B Standard Error Beta
1 (Constant) 2,674 1,245 2,149 ,034 Male prof ,012 ,002 ,587 6,887
,000
2 (Constant) 2,309 1,218 1,896 ,061 Male prof ,035 ,009 1,652 3,844
,000
Female prof -,043 ,017 -1,085 -2,525 ,013
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 3427 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 34 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
The Creation of Academic Spin-offs: Evidences from Italy 35
Table 22: Regressions Coefficients about H7
Model Unstandardized
B Standard Error Beta
1 (Constant) 2,284 1,176 1,942 ,055
Partic_PRIN ,015 ,002 ,639 7,882 ,000 Table 23: Regressions
Coefficient about H8
Model Unstandardized
B Standard Error Beta
1 (Constant) 3,451 1,189 2,902 ,005
Coord_PRIN ,048 ,007 ,580 6,759 ,000 Table 24: Regressions
Coefficients about H9
Model Unstandardized
B Standard Error Beta
Funded_PRIN 4,201E-7 ,000 ,634 7,768 ,000 Table 25: Regressions
Coefficients about H10
Model Unstandardized
B Standard Error Beta
1
(Constant) 25,642 15,996 1,603 ,130 CapInn -47,070 50,058 -,688
-,940 ,362
Researchers 26,485 18,951 1,166 1,398 ,183 IntPat -,282 ,278 -,444
-1,012 ,328
VC ,154 ,512 ,111 ,301 ,767
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 3527 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 35 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 3627 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 36 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 3727 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 37 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24
27 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 3827 Sorrentino epod_v2.indd 38 01/02/13
12.2401/02/13 12.24