Resources and Capabilities for Academic Spin-Offs’ Development. An Empirical Analysis of the Italian Context

  • Stefania MiglioriEmail author
  • Francesco De Luca
Part of the Studies in Systems, Decision and Control book series (SSDC, volume 179)


The transfer of scientific knowledge from the academic context to the market can generate positive effects on the economic system. Universities have mainly carried out these activities by supporting the creation of spin-off firms. Drawing on a resource-based view theory, the aim of this study is to investigate which resources can affect more than others the creation and successful development of university spin-offs (USOs). In order to analyze the relevance of these drivers, we use a sample of 100 Italian USOs and focus our attention on the following factors: the availability of resources for the spin-off at the earlier stage such as know-how, financial assets, and managerial skills; the number of patents that have been successfully issued by the spin-off; the cultural background of the founders; the frequency of interactions with stakeholders outside the spin-off; and the propensitity and the ability to innovation. Our analysis shows that Italian spin-offs appears to be quite innovative, but they generally need time and probably more funding to protect their innovation through patents issuing. In this sense, established spin-offs suffer for the difficulties in raising funds, the high costs of developing ideas (together with the difficulties in monitoring them), and the lack of governmental support.


University spin-off Technology transfer Resource-based view theory Resources and capabilities 


  1. Brush, C.G., Green, P.G., Hart, M.M.: From initial idea to unique advantage: the entrepreneurial challenge of constructing a resource base. Acad. Manag. Exec. 15, 64–78 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. Calantone, R.J., Cavusgil, S.T., Zhao, Y.: Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Ind. Mark. Manage. 31, 515–524 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chandler, G., Hanks, S.H.: Market attractiveness, Resource- based capabilities, Venture strategies and Venture performance. J. Bus. 9, 331–349 (1998)Google Scholar
  4. Chrisman, J.J., Hynes, T., Fraser, S.: Faculty entrepreneurship and economic development: the case of the university of Calgary. Bus. Ventur. 10, 267–281 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Compagno, C., Lauto, G., Fornasier, E.: La genesi degli spin-off accademici di successo, Paper presented at IX Workshop dei Docenti e dei Ricercatori di Organizzazione Aziendale - L’organizzazione fa la differenza?. Università Ca’ Foscari –Venezia. (2008).Google Scholar
  6. Eisenhardt, K.M., Martin, J.A.: Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strateg. Manag. J. 21, 1105–1121 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ensley, M., Hmieleski, K.: A comparative study of new venture top management team composition, dynamics and performance between university-based and independent start-ups. Res. Policy 34, 1091–1105 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fini, R., Lacetera, N.: Different yokes for different folks: individual preferences, institutional logics, and the commercialization of academic research. In: Advance in the study of entrepreneurship, innovation and Economic Growth, emerald group publishing, vol. 21, 1–25 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. Fontes, M.: The process of transformation of scientific and technological knowledge into economic value conducted by biotechnology spin-offs. Technovation 25, 339–347 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Galbraith, J.R.: Designing Complex Organization. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA (1973)Google Scholar
  11. Grandi, A., Grimaldi, R.: Academics’ organizational characteristics and the generation of successful business ideas. J. Bus. Ventur. 20, 821–845 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hirman, A., Clarisse, B.: The initial resources and market strategy to create high growth firms. Working Paper Steunpunt OOI, October (2004)Google Scholar
  13. Hoang, H., Antonic, B.: Network-based research in entrepreneurship: a critical review. J. Bus. Ventur. 18, 165–187 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kale, P., Dyer, J.H., Singh, H.: Alliance capability, stock market response, and long-term alliance resources: the role of the alliance function. Strateg. Manag. J. 23, 747–767 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kirwan, P., Sijde van der, P., Groen, A.: Assessing the needs of new technology based firms (NTBFs): An investigation among spin-off companies from six European Universities. Int. Entrepreneurship Manag. J. 2, 173–187 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Landry, R., Amara, N., Rherrad, I.: Why are some university researchers more likely to create spin-offs than others? Evidence from Canadian universities. Res. Policy 35, 1599–1615 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lei-Yu, W.: Entrepreneurial resources, dynamic capabilities and start-up performance of Taiwan’s high-tech firms. J. Bus. Res. 60, 549–555 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lockett, A., Wright, M.: Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Res. Policy 34, 891–1122 (2005)Google Scholar
  19. Lockett, A., Siegel, D., Wright, M., Ensley, M.: The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: managerial and policy implications. Res. Policy 34, 981–993 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lockett, A., Wright, M., Franklin, S.: Technology transfer and universities’ spin-out strategies. Small Bus. Econ. 20, 185–200 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lockett, A., Wright, M., Vohora, A.: Resources, Capabilities, Risk Capital and the Creation of University Spin-Out Companies. University of Sussex, SPRU-Science and Technology Policy Research (2004)Google Scholar
  22. Nicolau, N., Birley, S.: Academic network in a tricothomous categorisation of university spinout phenomenon. J. Bus. Ventur. 18, 333–359 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. O’Shea, R.P., Chugh, H., Allen, J.T.: Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: A conceptual framework. Int. J. Technol. Transf. 33, 653–666 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. O’Shea, R.P., Allen, T.J., Chevalier A., Roche F.: Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities. Res. Policy 34, 994–1009 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pazos, D., López, S., González, L., Sandiás, A.: A resource-based view of university spin-off activity: New evidence from the Spanish caseUna aplicación de la teoría de los recursos a la creación de spin-offs universitarias: nuevas evidencias desde el caso español. Revista Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa 21, 255–265 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Penrose, E.T.: The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Wiley, New York (1959)Google Scholar
  27. Pirnay, F.: Spin-off et essaimage de quoi s’agit-il? Une revue de la literature, In: 4ème Colloque International Francophone sur la PME, Metz-Nancy, 22–24 October (1998)Google Scholar
  28. Powers, J.B., McDougall, P.P.: University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: A resource based view of academic entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Ventur. 20, 291–311 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Roberts, E.B.: The technological base of the new enterprise. Res. Policy 20, 283–298 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shan, S., Stuart, T.E.: Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Manag. Sci. 48, 154–170 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Siegel, D.,Waldman, D., Link, A.: Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the productivity of university technology transfer offices. An exploratory study. In: NBER Working Paper n. 7252, July (1999)Google Scholar
  32. Steffensen, M., Everet, M.R., Speakman, K.: Spin-offs from research centers at a research university. J. Bus. Ventur. 15, 93–111 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Teece, D.: Profiting from technological innovation: implication for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res. Policy 15, 285–305 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., Shane, A.: Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg. Manag. J. 18, 509–534 (1997) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Walter, A., Auer, M., Ritter, T.: The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. J. Bus. Ventur. 21, 541–567 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wennberg, K.J., Wiklund, J., Wrigth, M.: The effectiveness of university knowledge spillovers: performance differences between university spinoff and corporate spinoffs. Res. Policy 40, 1128–1143 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wernerfelt, B.: The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after. Strateg. Manag. J. 16, 171–174 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zahra, S., Van de Velde, E., Larraneta, B.: Knowledge conversion capabilities and the performance of corporate and university spin-offs. Ind. Corp. Change 16, 569–608 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zhang, J.: The performance of university spin-offs: An exploratory analysis using venture capital data. J. Technol. Transfer 34, 255–285 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Management and Business Administration“G. D’ Annunzio” University of Chieti-PescaraPescaraItaly

Personalised recommendations