Process Of Academic Entrepreneurship Research Articles

Construction of theoretical model of academic entrepreneurship behavior map: based on grounded theory analysis

It is worth exploring how “novices in academic entrepreneurship” can more clearly judge their performance in academic entrepreneurship process, self-diagnose the interaction effect between internal and external factors, and improve the effectiveness of entrepreneurial activities. This research takes Chinese academic entrepreneurs as the object, through the qualitative research method of grounded theory analysis, constructs the behavior map of academic entrepreneurship. The main stages of academic entrepreneurship chain are divided, including four stages: starting point, finding technology application, stabilizing technology application, and enterprise mature development. The common decision logic of academic entrepreneurs in each stage is explained. At the same time, the map shows the main influencing factors of academic entrepreneurial behavior and the logic of these factors’ influence on academic entrepreneurial behavior. The above results not only enrich the research theory in the field of academic entrepreneurship process, but also have guiding significance for the practical activities of “novices in academic entrepreneurship”.

The Effect of Psychological Capital and Role Conflict on the Academic Entrepreneurial Intents of Chinese Teachers in Higher Education: A Study Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior.

Because academic entrepreneurship is an innovation driving force in China’s economy, teachers are key knowledge creators in the process of entrepreneurship. Therefore, it is particularly important to give attention to the individual psychological mechanism factors at play in the process of teachers in higher education academic entrepreneurship. The purpose of this study is to identify individual psychological capital and role conflict issues among university teachers in China. To accomplish this aim, we investigated the emergence of positive academic entrepreneurial intents, continued through the process of academic entrepreneurship, and clarified the impact of psychological capital and role conflict on entrepreneurial intent. Based on the theory of planned behavior, we constructed a research model from the perspective of entrepreneurial intent prior to entrepreneurial action. We established a cohort of teachers in 17 higher education institutions (N = 525) in southern China, with psychological capital and role conflict as the prior independent variables and the teachers’ academic entrepreneurial intent as the dependent variable. Using quantitative analysis, SPSS 22.0, and AMOS 23.0, we conducted reliability and validity tests, correlation analysis, and structural equation models on the collected data. We reached the following conclusions: (1) psychological capital has a positive effect on attitudes toward academic entrepreneurship; (2) psychological capital has a positive effect on perceived behavioral control; (3) role conflict has a negative effect on perceived behavioral control; (4) academic entrepreneurial attitudes have a positive effect on academic entrepreneurial intent; (5) perceived behavioral control has a positive effect on academic entrepreneurial intent; (6) subjective norms have a positive effect on academic entrepreneurial intent. We also provide some suggestions about academic entrepreneurship for university administrators.

Taking scientific inventions to market: Mapping the academic entrepreneurship ecosystem

The active contribution of academic institutions to the technological, social and economic development of societies is of increasing importance. To better understand this contribution, we present a systematic review, together with bibliometric and network analyses of the academic entrepreneurship literature. This provides a map of the main topics approached by scholars, thereby illustrating the scientific scenario of the field. Our findings identify three highly interconnected research activity domains that characterize the multidimensional features of entrepreneurship in the academic setting, as well as a significant gap in the literature regarding studies evaluating approaches to support the navigation of potential scientific discoveries to the market. We organize our findings into a four stages framework consisting of: idea inception; the recognition of how this idea unlocks value for customers and other stakeholders; development of an innovative business model; and a commercialization strategy that creates real impact. We discuss the relevance of each stage for the establishment of a more innovation-friendly environment and conclude by offering perspectives into future research opportunities and by encouraging studies that consider the academic entrepreneurship process from a systemic perspective, to support a greater contribution of academic institutions to the economic and social development of the nations and societies.

Digital transformation shaping structural pillars for academic entrepreneurship: A framework proposal and research agenda.

Digital technology always accelerates change, altering organisations culturally, socially and technically. These modifications are known as “digital transformation” (DT). On a much greater scale than DT, the world was changed in 2020 by the COVID-19 pandemic, which re-organised society in the way of thinking, acting, producing, consuming and creating new business. Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) were no different, since these institutions had to make changes to the student–lecturer interaction; teaching–learning, where DT had a relevant role, above all in academic entrepreneurship. Therefore, this study aims to propose a framework showing the structural pillars of the link between digital transformation (DT) and academic entrepreneurship (AC) (DT-AC Framework). This framework identifies the new patterns, methods, skills and other discoveries in aspects such as management, information systems and culture sciences. The intention is not to analyse how the COVID-19 pandemic imposed global structural changes, but because of it, lecturers and students found their DT accelerated and intensified, and so it is necessary to investigate the pillars supporting academic entrepreneurship. The results show that DT was already emerging as a basic element of academic entrepreneurship before the pandemic, but the process has speeded up. This bibliometric study indicates the structural pillars that support entrepreneurship following the Covid19 pandemic, as created from DT in universities, providing an extensive systematic review that indicates the cause and effect of the academic entrepreneurship process.

Rough set-based evaluation of academic entrepreneurial performance of university teachers

Academic entrepreneurship performance has become the core research content of academic entrepreneurial activities and the growth of entrepreneurial enterprises as a reflection of the academic entrepreneurship process and essence. Among them, universi

Selected Problems of an Entrepreneurial University - a Theoretical Perspective

Abstract The aim of the paper is to identify university’s activities and characteristics that enable it to reorient itself towards the idea of an entrepreneurial university. In the modern world, universities have an additional important role, that is, the need to adopt entrepreneurial strategies without disrupting the quality of teaching and research. First of all, the authors discuss the idea of entrepreneurship and focus mainly on academic entrepreneurship. The idea of entrepreneurship is becoming more and more desirable in a modern organization thus also in a university. The new role of the university is to create the entrepreneurial ideas and attitudes among students and all university employees, as well as to initiate entrepreneurial activities in academic institutions. It is also necessary to plan entrepreneurial university architecture. The article focuses on presenting the theoretical foundations of the academic entrepreneurship process to finally make a synthetic comparison of the features of a traditional university and an entrepreneurial university. The main research question of the article is: In which dimensions the idea of an entrepreneurial university can lead to the development of the university? The result of the research is a new combination of attributes and characteristics of an enterprising university and new directions of university’s development. By this paper the authors take part in the discussion about the implementation of the idea of entrepreneurship in contemporary university management.

Models, Processes, and Roles of Universities in Technology Transfer Management: A Systematic Review

Universities play pivotal roles when research findings are to be adopted commercially. Although these roles vary from one country to another, effective patenting and licensing procedures, as well as eventual commercialisation of scholarly inventions, reflect hard work on the part of the University mediating between the researcher and the industry through technology transfer offices (TTOs) in order to ensure that knowledge-developers take motivational and monetary credit for their findings. This paper details some existing models, processes, and roles taken up in some countries where sharing of intellectual property exists, and links it up with aspects of university–industry technology transfer, such as policies surrounding patenting, government investment and marketing, and the process of academic entrepreneurship, among others. 22 articles were found via a systematic review of literature and analysed with respect to four identified areas of focus: internal strategy, investment and market, academic entrepreneurship and policy. Based on models, processes, and roles in reviewed studies, our results indicate that new models for technology transfer mainly stem from the fact that there is no universally accepted model in the literature. Furthermore, management of technology transfer is mostly the responsibility of TTOs in most countries. While university TTOs act as intermediaries to protect the interest of the author/inventor, issues such as poor relationships between universities and industry, as well as funding, remain major challenges in many emerging economies. In contrast, researchers in western economies are mainly challenged by financial motivation and recognition within the academic domains.

Understanding Mission-based Social Academic Entrepreneurship: A Critical Realist Approach

Mission-based higher educational institutions have played various roles in addressing the challenges of socio-economic development. We investigated the process of academic entrepreneurship in a Cat...

An Empirical Study on Sustainable Innovation Academic Entrepreneurship Process Model

As academic entrepreneurs, university faculty members and researchers with rich knowledge resources play an important role in the technology commercialization process, and in the creation and development of university spinoff enterprises. In this paper, we used a case study method to construct a sustainable innovative academic entrepreneurship process model from the perspective of entrepreneurial behavior. Then, we used this model to provide a deeper understanding of the activities and roles of academic entrepreneurs. This paper also expounded the process of value creation that is a result of sustainable innovative academic entrepreneurship, and compared and analyzed three types of university technology commercialization models. Our results showed that in the sustainable innovative academic entrepreneurship process model, the motivation of academic entrepreneurs leads them to play multiple roles as academic researchers, enterprise founders, and enterprise managers. In creating enterprises as the founders, and establishing and developing their enterprises, academic entrepreneurs realize the commercial value of the technology, while also incrementing their personal value. The sustainable innovative academic entrepreneurship process model provides a new path for effective transfer of technological innovations from academic research to the commercial market, creates social as well as economic value, and promotes regional economic development.

A Cooperative Approach to Academic Entrepreneurial Initiatives

In this article we introduce a novel entrepreneurial model, the “Faculty Cooperative”, an eco-system for creating and managing academic entrepreneurial initiatives. The goal of this model is to promote academic entrepreneurism, by providing a guiding concept and tools that overcome the lack of alignment between individual academic attributes and faculty efforts in driving academic spin-out companies. Through an empirical inquiry based on an academic spin-out company in a UK university context, we have explored the key activities, actors, organisational processes and outcomes related to the formation and development stages of the academic entrepreneurship process. The empirical evidence reveals that the key principles embodied by the “Faculty Cooperative Model” namely, openness, freedom and collective shareholding, are likely to promote the entrepreneurial culture within a university context. The paper argues for the importance of developing entrepreneurial culture in conventional research focused universities, which not only improves the traditional values of teaching and research, but also enhances the dynamic capabilities of universities in a global marketplace. It is suggested that the entrepreneurial ideal is not contradictory to the conventional university missions, rather it is complementary.

Understanding academic entrepreneurship: Exploring the emergence of university spin-off ventures using process theories

This article explores how the use of process theories can lead to a better understanding of the university spin-off venture formation process. The most frequently used conceptualization of the new venture formation process is the stage model or life-cycle theory. However, no conceptual framework exists to describe how the venturing process proceeds from one stage to the next. Based on a longitudinal study of the initiation and early development of four university spin-offs, this article shows that life-cycle, teleological, dialectic and evolutionary theories explain different aspects of the spin-off venturing process. In combination, these theories may provide a more holistic understanding of the academic entrepreneurship process. The assumptions of each theory suggest important implications for further research on academic entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial processes in general.

A process model of academic entrepreneurship

Innovations stemming from research conducted on university campuses are a growing source for the ideas and core technologies that drive entrepreneurial endeavors. This trend has led to development of the term academic entrepreneurship, which refers to the efforts and activities that universities and their industry partners undertake in hopes of commercializing the outcomes of faculty research. Because it is a relatively new phenomenon, the process of academic entrepreneurship has not been as well articulated as one might hope. As such, the objective of this article is to draw on a range of academic entrepreneurship literature to develop a multi-stage process model of academic entrepreneurship. This model is intended to guide potential stakeholders through the application of academic entrepreneurship, with a focus on improving the odds of success. The advantage of this approach is identification of the activities, actors, and key success factors associated with each stage of the academic entrepreneurship process. We conclude our discussion by highlighting the benefits of engaging in academic entrepreneurship for a variety of potential stakeholders.

How Do University Inventions Get Into Practice?

Jeannette Colyvas • Michael Crow • Annetine Gelijns • Roberto Mazzoleni Richard R. Nelson • Nathan Rosenberg • Bhaven N. Sampat Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305 Office of the Executive Vice Provost, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027 INCHOIR, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027 Department of Economics and Geography, Hofstra University, Hempstead, New York 11594 School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027 Department of Economics, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305 School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332 colyvas@leland.stanford.edu • mc71@columbia.edu • acp10@columbia.edu • ecorzm@mail1.hofstra.edu rrn2@columbia.edu • nate@leland.stanford.edu • bhaven.sampat@pubpolicy.gatech.edu