The impact of Triple Helix agents on entrepreneurial innovations' performance: An inside look at enterprises located in an emerging economy

During the past few decades, the configurations of new knowledge-intensive environments have required fertile settings for innovative and entrepreneurial activities. In these environments, Triple Helix has been operationalized in different ways, spaces, and contexts where those agents are transforming their roles in the development and strengthening of national innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems. As a consequence, the phenomenon of entrepreneurial innovations emerged from enterprises with an entrepreneurial or high-growth orientation that collaborate with Triple Helix agents generating economic benefits and spillover effects. In emerging economies, the available literature about innovation and entrepreneurship is limited to explore the determinants of innovation performance as well as innovation constrains. Based on this argument and diverging from prior research, this research tries to provide a better understanding about the influence of Triple Helix agents on entrepreneurial innovations' performance of enterprises located in emerging economies. In particular, we analyze the effects produced by the links of enterprises with other enterprises, universities and government on their innovation performance (e.g., access to knowledge/technology, sources of funding, government subsidies), as well as, the moderation effects generated when those enterprises have a high-growth orientation (e.g., distinction of enterprises that develop entrepreneurial innovations or traditional innovations). To achieve this aim we look inside at the case of Mexico because is an emerging economy that during the last two decades has facing a transition to a knowledge-based economy. Using a cross-section dataset of 19,188 Mexican enterprises interviewed in the period of 2006 to 2012, we tested our proposed conceptual model with a Tobit regression. Our study provides interesting implications for the main actors involved in the Mexican Science, Technology and Innovation System, as well as, contributes about the debate of the impact of enterprises-university-government linkages on entrepreneurial innovations from diverse perspectives and research fields (e.g., open innovation, knowledge transfer, high-growth entrepreneurship, academic entrepreneurship, public entrepreneurship).

[1]  Dirk Czarnitzki,et al.  The Relationship between R&D Collaboration, Subsidies and R&D Performance: Empirical Evidence from Finland and Germany , 2007 .

[2]  John H. Friar,et al.  Entrepreneurship and Start-Ups in the Boston Region: Factors Differentiating High-Growth Ventures from Micro-Ventures , 2003 .

[3]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  “Open innovation” and “triple helix” models of innovation: can synergy in innovation systems be measured? , 2016, ArXiv.

[4]  R. Boschma Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment , 2005 .

[5]  Kristel Miller,et al.  The Changing University Business Model: A Stakeholder Perspective , 2014 .

[6]  Maribel Guerrero,et al.  Open business models in entrepreneurial stages: evidence from young Spanish firms during expansionary and recessionary periods , 2016 .

[7]  James A. Cunningham,et al.  Managerial challenges of publicly funded principal investigators , 2015, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[8]  John L. Thompson A strategic perspective of entrepreneurship , 1999 .

[9]  Ji Soo Kim,et al.  Changing patterns of technological cooperation activities of innovative small firms along technological development stages in the Korean telecommunication sector , 2003 .

[10]  Anu Wadhwa,et al.  The Paradox of Being Open: External Technology Sourcing and Knowledge Protection , 2011 .

[11]  David Urbano,et al.  Socio-cultural factors and entrepreneurial activity , 2011 .

[12]  M. Yamin,et al.  Patterns of knowledge flows and MNE innovative performance , 2004 .

[13]  Claudia De Fuentes,et al.  Geographic proximity and university–industry interaction: the case of Mexico , 2016 .

[14]  M. Perkmann,et al.  University Industry Relationships and Open Innovation: Towards a Research Agenda , 2007 .

[15]  Jiann-Chyuan Wang,et al.  External technology sourcing and innovation performance in LMT sectors: An analysis based on the Taiwanese Technological Innovation Survey , 2009 .

[16]  Claudia De Fuentes,et al.  Channels of interaction between public research organisations and industry and their benefits: evidence from Mexico , 2010 .

[17]  Alessandro Maffioli,et al.  Evaluating the impact of technology development funds in emerging economies: evidence from Latin America , 2008 .

[18]  G. Crespi,et al.  Heterogeneous effects of financial constraints on innovation: Evidence from Chile , 2015 .

[19]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and , 2000 .

[20]  D. Czarnitzki,et al.  The Effects of Public R&D Subsidies on Firms' Innovation Activities , 2003 .

[21]  J. Galende,et al.  Internal factors determining a firm’s innovative behaviour , 2003 .

[22]  Institutions, Finance and the Level of Development: the Impact on Entrepreneurship in Transition , 2010 .

[23]  M. Wright,et al.  30 Years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing Academic Entrepreneurship , 2011 .

[24]  Teresa García-Marco,et al.  Firms' motivations for cooperative R&D: an empirical analysis of Spanish firms , 2001 .

[25]  L. Klomp,et al.  Linking Innovation and Firm Performance: A New Approach , 2001 .

[26]  J. Solleiro,et al.  Competitiveness and innovation systems: the challenges for Mexico's insertion in the global context , 2005 .

[27]  Understanding entrepreneurial behaviour in organized criminals , 2009 .

[28]  José Ernesto Amorós,et al.  Entrepreneurship and competitiveness dynamics in Latin America , 2008 .

[29]  R. Sobel Testing Baumol: Institutional quality and the productivity of entrepreneurship , 2008 .

[30]  P. Davidsson,et al.  Arriving at the high growth firm , 2003 .

[31]  Maribel Guerrero,et al.  Economic Impact of Entrepreneurial Universities' Activities: An Exploratory Study of the United Kingdom , 2015 .

[32]  Paula E. Stephan How Economics Shapes Science , 2012 .

[33]  H. Chesbrough Why Companies Should Have Open Business Models , 2007 .

[34]  Saul Estrin,et al.  Institutions, resources and entry strategies in emerging economies , 2009 .

[35]  P. Kan What We’re Getting Wrong About Mexico , 2011, The US Army War College Quarterly: Parameters.

[36]  Gustavo Crespi,et al.  Innovation and Productivity: Evidence from Six Latin American Countries , 2010 .

[37]  Bronwyn H. Hall,et al.  Financing Innovation , 2020, Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

[38]  G. Dutrénit,et al.  Best channels of academia–industry interaction for long-term benefit , 2012 .

[39]  Catherine L. Wang,et al.  Social embeddedness, entrepreneurial orientation and firm growth in ethnic minority small businesses in the UK , 2012 .

[40]  D. Urbano,et al.  Entrepreneurial Universities , 2013 .

[41]  Yannis Caloghirou,et al.  University-Industry Cooperation in the Context of the European Framework Programmes , 2001 .

[42]  John P. Walsh,et al.  Special Issue on University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer: Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[43]  F. Damanpour Organizational Innovation: A Meta-Analysis Of Effects Of Determinants and Moderators , 1991 .

[44]  Michael E. Porter,et al.  Global Competitiveness Report 2007-2008 , 2007 .

[45]  Mike W. Peng,et al.  Strategy Research in Emerging Economies: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom , 2005 .

[46]  Martin Kenney,et al.  The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: a comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford , 2004 .

[47]  Ramón Padilla-Pérez,et al.  Science, technology and innovation policies in small and developing economies: The case of Central America , 2014 .

[48]  Kristel Miller,et al.  The development of University Technology Transfer stakeholder relationships at a regional level: Lessons for the future , 2012 .

[49]  Rogelio Oliva,et al.  Environmental Change and Organizational Transformation , 2005 .

[50]  A. James,et al.  The sourcing of technological knowledge: Distributed innovation processes and dynamic change , 2003 .

[51]  M. Carree,et al.  Cooperative R&D and Firm Performance , 2004 .

[52]  G. Dutrénit,et al.  What hinders innovation performance of services and manufacturing firms in Mexico? , 2017 .

[53]  Luuk Klomp,et al.  On the contribution of innovation to multi-factor productivity growth , 2006 .

[54]  Gobierno de la República Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2013-2018 , 2016 .

[55]  Raphael Amit,et al.  Business Model Design and the Performance of Entrepreneurial Firms , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[56]  Carl J. Dahlman,et al.  Mexico's transition to a knowledge-based economy : challenges and opportunities , 2008 .

[57]  G. Dutrénit,et al.  Determinants of Innovation and Productivity in the Service Sector in Mexico , 2015 .

[58]  E. Huizingh Open innovation: State of the art and future perspectives , 2011 .

[59]  Robert E. Hoskisson,et al.  Strategy in Emerging Economies , 2000 .

[60]  R. Aidis Institutional Barriers to Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprise Operations in Transition Countries , 2005 .

[61]  Clayton M. Christensen The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail , 2013 .

[62]  Albert N. Link,et al.  Essays in public sector entrepreneurship , 2016 .

[63]  R. Ireland,et al.  Conceptualizing Corporate Entrepreneurship Strategy , 2009 .

[64]  S. Klepper Employee Startups in High‐Tech Industries , 2001 .

[65]  Anders Drejer,et al.  Organisational learning and competence development , 2000 .

[66]  Mark Simon,et al.  Corporate versus independent new ventures: Resource, strategy, and performance differences , 1997 .

[67]  Howard E. Aldrich,et al.  Even Dwarfs Started Small: Liabilities of Age and Size and Their Strategic Implications , 1986 .

[68]  A. Salter,et al.  Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms , 2006 .

[69]  Fredrik Åström,et al.  Innovation and entrepreneurship studies: one or two fields of research? , 2015 .

[70]  R. Gooding,et al.  A Meta-Analytic Review of the Relationship between Size and Performance: The Productivity and Efficiency of Organizations and Their Subunits. , 1985 .

[71]  John T. Scott,et al.  Barriers Inhibiting Industry from Partnering with Universities: Evidence from the Advanced Technology Program , 2000 .

[72]  S. Thornhill Knowledge, innovation and firm performance in high- and low-technology regimes , 2006 .

[73]  David B. Audretsch,et al.  From the entrepreneurial university to the university for the entrepreneurial society , 2012, The Journal of Technology Transfer.

[74]  Brian K. Boyd,et al.  STRATEGIC PLANNING AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE: A META‐ANALYTIC REVIEW* , 1991 .

[75]  R. Veugelers,et al.  R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence , 1998 .

[76]  M. Wright,et al.  Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of context , 2014 .

[77]  Robert J. Bunker,et al.  Introduction: the Mexican cartels—organized crime vs. criminal insurgency , 2013 .

[78]  Ana M. Moreno,et al.  High-growth SMEs versus non-high-growth SMEs: a discriminant analysis , 2007 .

[79]  M. Wright,et al.  Entrepreneurship's Next Act , 2011 .

[80]  T. Elfring,et al.  Entrepreneurial Orientation and New Venture Performance: The Moderating Role of Intra- And Extraindustry Social Capital , 2008 .

[81]  A. Auerbach Taxes, Firm Financial Policy and the Cost of Capital: An Empirical Analysis , 1982 .

[82]  D. P. Leyden,et al.  Public-sector entrepreneurship and the creation of a sustainable innovative economy , 2016 .

[83]  B. Looy,et al.  Interorganizational collaboration and innovation: Toward a portfolio approach , 2005 .

[84]  M. Nieto,et al.  The importance of diverse collaborative networks for the novelty of product innovation , 2007 .

[85]  April Franco,et al.  KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER THROUGH INHERITANCE: SPIN- OUT GENERATION, DEVELOPMENT, AND SURVIVAL , 2004 .

[86]  D. Shepherd,et al.  Entrepreneurial Orientation and Small Business Performance: A Configurational Approach , 2005 .

[87]  Charles P. Himmelberg,et al.  R&D and internal finance: a panel study of small firms in high-tech industries , 1994 .

[88]  D. Czarnitzki,et al.  Value for Money? New Microeconometric Evidence on Public R&D Grants in Flanders , 2012 .

[89]  Kris Aerts,et al.  Two for the price of one? Additionality effects of R&D subsidies: A comparison between Flanders and Germany , 2008 .

[90]  James A. Cunningham,et al.  Fostering university-industry R&D collaborations in European Union countries , 2015 .

[91]  R. Hausmann The Mexico Competitiveness Report 2009 , 2009 .

[92]  Jong de Jpj,et al.  Open innovation in SMEs : trends, motives and management challenges , 2009 .

[93]  Dimo Dimov,et al.  Time and the Entrepreneurial Journey: The Problems and Promise of Studying Entrepreneurship as a Process , 2013 .

[94]  Josh Lerner,et al.  The Financing of R&D and Innovation , 2009 .

[95]  Michael Fritsch,et al.  Who cooperates on R&D? , 2001 .