Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Academic spin-offs, corporate spin-outs and company internal start-ups as technology transfer approach

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As a rule, a technology transfer gap exists between research and development and the commercialisation of the results. This article investigates the role of new ventures for technology transfer from universities and research institutions as well as between or within companies to close this gap. Based on case studies in Germany and Switzerland, different examples of this technology transfer approach have been analysed. Academic spin-offs can help to transfer technology from universities and research institutions to industry especially if there is the need for additional funding to further develop the technology. Corporate spin-outs can be used for technology transfer between companies as an alternative to closing operations should these no longer fit into the parent organisation. Internal start-ups were identified as a new approach for company internal technology transfer from research departments to business units focused on commercial operations to overcome innovation barriers within companies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albers, S., Klapper, D., Konradt, U., Walter, A., & Wolf, J. (2007). Methodik der empirischen Forschung (2nd ed.). Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B. (2009). The entrepreneurial society. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 245–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitz, J., & Feldmann, M. (2006). Entrepreneurial universities and technology transfer: A conceptual framework for understanding knowledge-based economic development. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1), 175–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergh, D. D., & Lim, E. N. K. (2008). Learning how to restructure: Absorptive capacity and improvisional views of restructuring actions and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 93–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borchardt, A., & Göthlich, S. (2007). Erkenntnisgewinnung durch Fallstudien. In S. Albers, D. Klapper, U. Konradt, A. Walter, & J. Wolf (Eds.), Methodik der empirischen Forschung (2nd ed., pp. 37–54). Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bortz, J., & Döring, N. (2005). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation (3rd ed.). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bray, M. J., & Lee, J. N. (2000). University revenues from technology transfer: Licensing fees vs equity positions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5/6), 385–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemmanur, T. J., & Yan, A. (2004). A theory of corporate spin-outs. Journal of Financial Economics, 72, 259–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiaroni, D., Chiesa, V., Pozzi, E., & Rossi, L. (2005). The case of academic spin-off companies as technology transfer mechanisms: Evidence from two Italian regions. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning, 1(3), 340–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Mustar, P., & Knockaert, M. (2007). Academic spin-offs, formal technology transfer and capital raising. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 609–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. C. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czarniawska, B. (1998). A narrative approach to organization studies. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, P., & David, P. A. (1994). Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23, 487–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cleyn, S. H., & Braet, J. (2009). Research valorisation through spin-off ventures: Integration of existing concepts and typologies. World Review on Entrepreneurship, Management & Sustainable Development, 5(4), 325–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erikson, T., & Sørheim, R. (2005). Technology angels’ and other informal investors. Technovation, 25, 489–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faria, J. R. (2002). Scientific, business and political networks in academia. Research in Economics, 56, 187–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M., & Feller, I. (2002). Equity and the technology transfer strategies of American research universities. Special Issue, University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer, 48(1), 105–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrary, M. (2008). Strategic spin-off: A new incentive contract for managing R&D researchers. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(6), 600–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festel, G., De Cleyn, S., Boutellier, R., & Braet, J. (2011). Optimizing the R&D process using spin-outs: Case studies from the pharmaceutical industry. Research Technology Management, 54(1), 32–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flyvberg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, S., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2001). Academic and surrogate entrepreneurs in university spin-out companies. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1/2), 127–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, M. (1999). Science’s new social contract with society. Nature, 402, C81–C84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldfarb, B., & Henrekson, M. (2003). Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32(4), 639–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hearn, P. (1981). The business of industrial licensing. Farnham: Gower Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heirman, A., & Clarysse, B. (2004). How and why do research-based start-ups differ at founding? A resource-based configurational perspective. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 247–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jagersma, P. K., & van Grop, D. M. (2003). Spin-out management: Theory and practice. Business Horizons, 46(2), 15–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnaswami, S., & Subramaniam, V. (1999). Information asymmetry, valuation, and the corporate spin-out decision. Journal of Financial Economics, 53, 73–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamnek, S. (2008). Qualitative Sozialforschung (4th ed.). Weinheim: Beltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Litan, R. E., Mitchell, L., & Reedy, E. J. (2007). The university as innovator: Bumps in the road. Issues in Science and Technology, (Summer), 23(4), 57–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (2005). Resources capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research Policy, 34(7), 1043–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., Wright, M., & Franklin, S. (2003). Technology Transfer and Universities’ Spin-Out Strategie. Small Business Economics, 20, 185–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markman, G., Phan, P., Balkin, D., & Giannodis, P. (2005). Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 241–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M. (2006). Academic inventiveness and entrepreneurship: On the importance of start-up companies in commercializing academic patents. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 501–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mian, S. (1997). Assessing and managing the university technology business incubation: An integrative framework. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(3), 251–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moray, N., & Clarysse, B. (2005). Institutional change and resource endowments to science-based entrepreneurial firms. Research Policy, 34(7), 1010–1027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mustar, P., Renault, M., Colombo, M. G., Piva, E., Fontes, M., Lockett, A., et al. (2006). Conceptualising the heterogeneity of research-based spin-offs: A multidimensional taxonomy. Research Policy, 35(2), 289–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer ans spinoff performance of US universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994–1009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parhankangas, A., & Arenius, P. (2003). From a corporate venture to an independent company: A base for a taxonomy for corporate spin-out firms. Research Policy, 32, 463–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pentland, B. T. (1999). Building process theory with narrative: From description to explanation. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 711–724.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polkinghorne, D. E. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powers, J. B., & Mc Dougall, P. P. (2005). Universities start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: A resource-based view of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3), 291–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, E., Moen, O., & Gulbrandsen, M. (2006). Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge. Technovation, 26(4), 518–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rind, K. W. (1981). The role of venture capital in corporate development. Strategic Management Journal, 2(2), 169–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samson, K. J., & Gurdon, M. A. (1993). University scientists as entrepreneurs: A special case of technology transfer and high technology venturing. Technovation, 13(2), 63–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2002). Selling university technology: Patterns from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 122–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (1999). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. NBER working paper #7256, July 1999.

  • Smilor, R. (1987). Managing the incubator system: Critical success factors to accelerate new company development. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 34(3), 146–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stam, E., Suddle, K., Hessels, J., & Stel, A. (2009). High-growth entrepreneurs, public policies and economic growth. International Studies in Entrepreneurship, 22(1), 91–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vavakova, B. (1998). The new social contract between governments, universities and society: Has the old one failed? Minverva, 36, 209–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., Lockett, A., Clarysse, B., & Binks, M. (2006). University spin-out companies and venture capital. Research Policy, 35(4), 481–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., Vohora, A., & Lockett, A. (2004). The formation of high tech university spinout companies: The role of joint ventures and venture capital investors. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, 287–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1981). The case study crisis: Some answers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(1), 58–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2006). Mixed methods research: Are the methods genuinely integrated or merely parallel? Research in the Schools, 13(1), 41–47.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Start-up Research Group, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, Switzerland

    Gunter Festel

  2. Festel Capital, Mettlenstrasse 14, 6363, Fürigen, Switzerland

    Gunter Festel

Authors
  1. Gunter Festel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gunter Festel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Festel, G. Academic spin-offs, corporate spin-outs and company internal start-ups as technology transfer approach. J Technol Transf 38, 454–470 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9256-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9256-9

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation