Advertisement

The Journal of Technology Transfer

, Volume 44, Issue 5, pp 1603–1637 | Cite as

Technology spin-offs: teamwork, autonomy, and the exploitation of business opportunities

  • Marco Corsino
  • Paola Giuri
  • Salvatore TorrisiEmail author
Article
  • 278 Downloads

Abstract

This study analyzes the antecedents of technology spin-off resulting from the exploitation of patented technology developed in established firms and then transferred to a new organization. We hypothesize and empirically examine how teamwork and autonomy, two key dimensions of the established organization’s inventive activity, correlate with spin-off formation. The results, based on a large-scale survey of inventors, show that (1) inventive activities organized as teamwork are less likely to engender the creation of a new firm and (2) granting strategic autonomy increases the likelihood of a spin-off whereas structural autonomy decreases the chances of a spin-off.

Keywords

Technology spinoff Technology transfer Entrepreneurship Innovation process Patents 

JEL Classification

M13 032 O34 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Previous versions were presented at the Annual Conference of the European Policy for Intellectual Property Association in Leuven (2012), the Academy of Management Annual Meeting in Orlando (2013), the European Academy of Management Annual Conference in Istanbul (2013), the Entrepreneurship Exemplar Conference in Denver (2014) and the Strategic Management Society Special Conference in Tel Aviv (2014). We are particularly grateful for comments to earlier versions of the paper by Tim Folta, Keld Laursen, Gideon Markman and Richard Priem. Financial support from the PRIN National Research Programme of the Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research (Project B41J12000160008) and from the InnoS&T EC project (Contract No. 217299) is gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. Agarwal, R., Audretsch, D., & Sarkar, M. B. (2010). Knowledge spillovers and strategic entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4(4), 271–283.Google Scholar
  2. Agarwal, R., Echambadi, R., Franco, A. M., & Sarkar, M. B. (2004). Knowledge transfer through inheritance: Spin-out generation, development, and survival. The Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 501–522.Google Scholar
  3. Amabile, T. M. (1997). Motivating creativity in organizations: On doing what you love and loving what you do. California Management Review, 40(1), 39–58.Google Scholar
  4. Astebro, T., & Thompson, P. (2011). Entrepreneurs, jacks of all trades or hobos? Research Policy, 40(5), 637–649.Google Scholar
  5. Auerswald, P. E., & Branscomb, L. M. (2003). Start-ups and spin-offs: Collective entrepreneurship between invention and innovation. In D. H. Hart (Ed.), The emergence of entrepreneurship policy (pp. 61–91). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bailyn, L. (1985). Autonomy in the industrial R&D lab. Human Resource Management, 24(2), 129–146.Google Scholar
  7. Baron, R. A. (2010). Job design and entrepreneurship: Why closer connections = mutual gains. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(2–3), 370–378.Google Scholar
  8. Beckman, C., Eisenhardt, K., Kotha, S., Meyer, A., & Rajagopalan, N. (2012). Technology entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 6(2), 89–93.Google Scholar
  9. Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression diagnostics: Identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Bhidé, A. V. (2000). The origin and evolution of new businesses. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Braguinsky, S., Klepper, S., & Ohyama, A. (2012). High-tech entrepreneurship. Journal of Law and Economics, 55(4), 869–900.Google Scholar
  12. Breaugh, J. A. (1985). The measurement of work autonomy. Human Relations, 38(6), 551–570.Google Scholar
  13. Bruneel, J., Van de Velde, E., & Clarysse, B. (2013). Impact of the type of corporate spin-off on growth. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(4), 943–959.Google Scholar
  14. Burgelman, R. A. (1983). A process model of internal corporate venturing in the diversified major firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(2), 223–244.Google Scholar
  15. Burton, M. D., Sørensen, J. B., & Beckman, C. M. (2002). Coming from good stock: Career histories and new venture formation. In M. Lounsbury (Ed.), Research in the sociology of organizations (Vol. 19, pp. 229–262). Bingley: Emerald Publishing.Google Scholar
  16. Cassiman, B., & Ueda, M. (2006). Optimal project rejection and new firm start-ups. Management Science, 52(2), 262–275.Google Scholar
  17. Chatterji, A. K. (2009). Spawned with a silver spoon? Entrepreneurial performance and innovation in the medical device industry. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 185–206.Google Scholar
  18. Chesbrough, H. (2003). The governance and performance of Xerox’s technology spin-off companies. Research Policy, 32(3), 403–421.Google Scholar
  19. Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239–290.Google Scholar
  20. Delmar, F., Wennberg, K., & Hellerstedt, K. (2011). Endogenous growth through knowledge spillovers in entrepreneurship: An empirical test. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 5(3), 199–226.Google Scholar
  21. Dess, G. G., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2005). The role of entrepreneurial orientation in stimulating effective corporate entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Executive, 19(1), 147–156.Google Scholar
  22. Dobrev, S. D., & Barnett, W. P. (2005). Organizational roles and transition to entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 433–449.Google Scholar
  23. Eckhardt, J. T., & Shane, S. A. (2011). Industry changes in technology and complementary assets and the creation of high-growth firms. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(4), 412–430.Google Scholar
  24. Elfenbein, D. W., Hamilton, B. H., & Zenger, T. R. (2010). The small firm effect and the entrepreneurial spawning of scientists and engineers. Management Science, 56(4), 659–681.Google Scholar
  25. Erikkson, T., & Kuhn, J. M. (2006). Firm spin-offs in Denmark 1981–2000: Patterns of entry and exit. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 24(5), 1021–1040.Google Scholar
  26. Ferrary, M. (2008). Strategic spin-off: A new incentive contract for managing R&D researchers. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(6), 600–618.Google Scholar
  27. Festel, G. (2013). Academic spin-offs, corporate spin-outs and company internal start-ups as technology transfer approach. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(4), 454–470.Google Scholar
  28. Freeman, J. (1986). Entrepreneurs as organizational products: Semiconductor firms and venture capital firms. In G. Libecap (Ed.), Advances in the study of entrepreneurship, innovation, and economic growth (Vol. 1, pp. 33–58). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  29. Fryges, H., & Wright, M. (2014). The origin of spin-offs: A typology of corporate and academic spin-offs. Small Busimess Economics, 43(2), 245–259.Google Scholar
  30. Fuller, A. W., & Rothaelmer, F. T. (2012). When stars shine: The effects of faculty founders on new technology ventures. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 6(3), 220–235.Google Scholar
  31. Gambardella, A., Ganco, M., & Honoré, F. (2014). Using what you know: Patented knowledge in incumbent firms and employee entrepreneurship. Organization Science, 26(2), 456–474.Google Scholar
  32. Gompers, P., Lerner, J., & Scharfstein, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial spawning: Public corporations and the genesis of new ventures, 1986 to 1999. Journal of Finance, 60(2), 577–614.Google Scholar
  33. Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  34. Haas, M. R. (2010). The double-edge swords of autonomy and external knowledge: Analyzing team effectiveness in a multinational organization. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 989–1008.Google Scholar
  35. Hathaway, I. (2013). Tech starts: High-technology business formation and job creation in the United States. Ewing Marion Kauffman foundation research paper. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2310617
  36. Hayton, J. C. (2005). Promoting corporate entrepreneurship through human resource management practices: A review of empirical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15(1), 21–41.Google Scholar
  37. Helfat, C. E., & Lieberman, M. B. (2002). The birth of capabilities: Market entry and the importance of pre-history. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(4), 725–760.Google Scholar
  38. Hellmann, T. (2007). When do employees become entrepreneurs? Management Science, 53(6), 919–933.Google Scholar
  39. Hitt, M. A., Bierman, L., Shimizu, K., & Kochhar, R. (2001). Direct and moderating effects of human capital on strategy and performance in professional service firms: A resource-based perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 13–28.Google Scholar
  40. Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of the work design literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1332–1356.Google Scholar
  41. Ioannou, I. (2014). When do spinouts enhance parent firm performance? Evidence from the U.S. automobile industry, 1890–1986. Organization Science, 25(2), 529–551.Google Scholar
  42. King, G., & Zeng, L. (2001). Logistic regression in rare events data. Political Analysis, 9(2), 137–163.Google Scholar
  43. Kirchberger, M. A., & Pohl, L. (2016). Technology commercialization: A literature review of success factors and antecedents across different contexts. Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(5), 1077–1112.Google Scholar
  44. Klepper, S., & Sleeper, S. (2005). Entry by spinoffs. Management Science, 51(8), 1291–1306.Google Scholar
  45. Klepper, S., & Thompson, P. (2010). Disagreements and intra-industry spinoffs. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 28, 526–530.Google Scholar
  46. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3, 383–397.Google Scholar
  47. Larraneta, B., Galán González, J. L., & Aguilar, R. (2016). Early efforts to develop absorptive capacity and their performance implications: Differences among corporate and independent. Journal of Technology Transfer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9488-1.Google Scholar
  48. Lassen, A. H., Gertsen, F., & Riss, J. O. (2006). The nexus of corporate entrepreneurship and radical innovation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 15(4), 359–372.Google Scholar
  49. Lazear, E. P. (2004). Balanced skills and entrepreneurship. American Economic Review, 94(2), 208–211.Google Scholar
  50. Lazear, E. P. (2005). Entrepreneurship. Journal of Labour Economics, 23(4), 649–680.Google Scholar
  51. Liu, X., Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Dai, O., & Lu, J. (2010). Human mobility and international knowledge spillovers: Evidence from high-tech small and medium enterprises in an emerging market. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4(4), 340–355.Google Scholar
  52. Lumpkin, G. T., Cogliser, C. C., & Schneider, D. R. (2009). Understanding and measuring autonomy: An entrepreneurial orientation perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(1), 47–69.Google Scholar
  53. Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172.Google Scholar
  54. Markman, G. D., Balkin, D. B., & Baron, R. A. (2002). Inventors and new venture formation: The effect of general self-efficacy and regretful thinking. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(2), 149–165.Google Scholar
  55. Marvel, M. R., Griffin, A., Hebda, J., & Vojak, B. (2007). Examining the technical corporate entrepreneurs’ motivation: Voices from the field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(5), 753–768.Google Scholar
  56. McDonough, E. F., III. (2000). Investigation of factors contributing to the success of cross-functional teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17(3), 221–235.Google Scholar
  57. McGrath, R. G. (2001). Exploratory learning, innovative capacity and managerial oversight. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 118–131.Google Scholar
  58. Nanda, R., & Sørensen, J. B. (2010). Workplace peers and entrepreneurship. Management Science, 56(7), 1116–1126.Google Scholar
  59. Narayanan, V. K., Yang, Y., & Zahra, S. A. (2009). Corporate venturing and value creation: A review and proposed framework. Research Policy, 38(1), 58–76.Google Scholar
  60. Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Palomeras, N., & Melero, E. (2010). Markets for inventors: Learning-by-hiring as a driver of mobility. Management Science, 56(5), 881–895.Google Scholar
  62. Parhankangas, A., & Arenius, P. (2003). From a corporate venture to an independent company: A base for a taxonomy for corporate spin-off firms. Research Policy, 32(3), 463–481.Google Scholar
  63. Parker, S. C. (2011). Intrapreneurship or entrepreneurship? Journal of Business Venturing, 26(1), 19–34.Google Scholar
  64. Petre, M. (2004). How expert engineering teams use disciplines of innovation. Design Studies, 25(5), 477–493.Google Scholar
  65. Sampat, B. N. (2010). When do applicants search for prior art? The Journal of Law and Economics, 53(2), 399–416.Google Scholar
  66. Sauermann, H., & Cohen, W. M. (2010). What makes them tick? Employees motives and firm innovation. Management Science, 56(12), 2134–2153.Google Scholar
  67. Shane, S. (2001a). Technological opportunities and new firm creation. Management Science, 47(2), 205–220.Google Scholar
  68. Shane, S. (2001b). Technology regimes and new firm formation. Management Science, 47(9), 1173–1190.Google Scholar
  69. Sharma, P., & Chrisman, J. J. (1999). Toward a reconciliation of the definitional issues in the field of corporate entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(3), 11–27.Google Scholar
  70. Shepherd, D. A., Williams, T. A., & Patzelt, H. (2015). Thinking about entrepreneurial decision making: Review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 41(1), 11–46.Google Scholar
  71. Shimizu, K. (2012). Risks of corporate entrepreneurship: Autonomy and agency issues. Organization Science, 23(1), 194–206.Google Scholar
  72. Simons, K. L., & Astebro, T. (2010). Entrepreneurs seeking gains: Profit motives and risk aversion in inventors’ commercialization decision. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 19(4), 863–888.Google Scholar
  73. Somaya, D. (2003). Strategic determinants of decisions not to settle patent litigation. Strategic Management Journal, 24(1), 17–38.Google Scholar
  74. Sørensen, J. B. (2002). The strength of corporate culture and the reliability of firm performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(1), 70–91.Google Scholar
  75. Sørensen, J. B. (2007). Bureaucracy and entrepreneurship: Workplace effects on entrepreneurial entry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(3), 387–412.Google Scholar
  76. Sørensen, J. B., & Fassiotto, M. A. (2011). Organizations as fonts of entrepreneurship. Organization Science, 22(5), 1322–1331.Google Scholar
  77. Stevenson, H. H., & Jarillo, J. C. (1990). A paradigm of entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial management. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 17–27.Google Scholar
  78. Stuart, T. E., & Sorenson, O. (2003). The geography of opportunity: Spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms. Research Policy, 32(2), 229–253.Google Scholar
  79. Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285–305.Google Scholar
  80. Torrisi, S., Gambardella, G., Giuri, P., Harhoff, D., Hoisl, K., & Mariani, M. (2016). Used, blocking and sleeping patents: Empirical evidence from a large-scale inventor survey. Research Policy, 45(7), 1374–1385.Google Scholar
  81. Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Antitrust analysis and implications. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  82. Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293–321.Google Scholar
  83. Woolley, J. L. (2017). Origins and outcomes: The role of spin-off founders and intellectual property in high-technology venture outcomes. Academy of Management Discoveries, 3(1), 64–90.Google Scholar
  84. Zahra, S. A., Van de Velde, E., & Larraneta, B. (2007). Knowledge conversion capability and the performance of corporate and university spin-offs. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 569–608.Google Scholar
  85. Zhang, X., & Bartol, K. M. (2010). Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: The influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 107–128.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ManagementUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Economics, Management and StatisticsUniversity of Milano-BicoccaMilanItaly
  3. 3.ICRIOSBocconi UniversityMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations