How governments seek to bridge the financing gap for university spin-offs: proof-of-concept, pre-seed, and seed funding

University spin-offs often develop early-stage technologies characterised by long development paths and uncertain commercial potential. Private financiers, such as banks, informal investors, and venture capital firms, are reluctant to invest in these ventures at an early stage. To bridge this financing gap, governments have set up specialised programmes, but few studies have examined the rationale and organisation of different types of programmes. We analyse government schemes in six countries and identify three main categories of funding initiatives. Proof-of-concept (PoC) schemes aim to reduce the technological uncertainty. Pre-seed schemes aim to reduce the organisational uncertainty and make the nascent venture attractive to investors. Seed funding schemes provide early-stage equity financing. The seed funding initiatives seek to improve the supply of funding, while there seems to be an increasing number of pre-seed and PoC schemes seeking to bridge the financing gap from the demand-side by increasing the attractiveness of the spin-offs towards investors.

[1]  Phillip H. Phan,et al.  Analyzing the Effectiveness of University Technology Transfer: Implications for Entrepreneurship Education , 2005 .

[2]  Anna Nosella,et al.  University-level mechanisms supporting the creation of new companies: an analysis of Italian academic spin-offs , 2009, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[3]  Einar Rasmussen,et al.  Government instruments to support the commercialization of university research: Lessons from Canada , 2008 .

[4]  Marie C. Thursby,et al.  Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Licensing of University Inventions , 2001 .

[5]  Gordon Murray,et al.  Early-stage venture capital funds, scale economies and public support , 1999 .

[6]  Simon Mosey,et al.  Creating network bridges for university technology transfer: The medici fellowship programme , 2006, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[7]  Mike Wright,et al.  Agency and similarity effects and the VC’s attitude towards academic spin-out investing , 2010 .

[8]  Magnus Gulbrandsen,et al.  Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge , 2006 .

[9]  Philip E. Auerswald,et al.  Valleys of Death and Darwinian Seas: Financing the Invention to Innovation Transition in the United States , 2003 .

[10]  Gudrun Maass,et al.  Funding of Public Research and Development: Trends and Changes , 2004 .

[11]  F. Knight The economic nature of the firm: From Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit , 2009 .

[12]  M. Wright,et al.  University spin-off firms: Lessons from ten years of experience in Europe , 2008 .

[13]  Mike Wright,et al.  Academic Entrepreneurship in Europe , 2007 .

[14]  Jay B. Barney,et al.  How Do Entrepreneurs Organize Firms Under Conditions of Uncertainty? , 2005 .

[15]  Markku V. J. Maula,et al.  Profit distribution and compensation structures in publicly and privately funded hybrid venture capital funds , 2007 .

[16]  Sean McCarthy,et al.  Business Development Support and Knowledge-Based Businesses , 2006 .

[17]  Mike Wright,et al.  The Evolution of Entrepreneurial Competencies: A Longitudinal Study of University Spin‐Off Venture Emergence , 2011 .

[18]  Gordon Murray,et al.  Venture Capital and Government Policy , 2007 .

[19]  Josh Lerner,et al.  When Bureaucrats Meet Entrepreneurs: The Design of Effective 'Public Venture Capital' Programmes , 2002 .

[20]  Roger Sørheim,et al.  Action-based entrepreneurship education , 2006 .

[21]  Einar Rasmussen,et al.  Open innovation policy through intermediaries: the industry incubator programme in Norway , 2011, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[22]  Mike Wright,et al.  Do UK venture capitalists still have a bias against investment in new technology firms , 2002 .

[23]  Scott Shane,et al.  Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation , 2004 .

[24]  Magnus Gulbrandsen,et al.  The use and development of indicators for the commercialisation of university research in a national support programme , 2012, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[25]  Mike Wright,et al.  University Spin-Out Companies and Venture Capital , 2006 .

[26]  Bart Clarysse,et al.  The knowledge paradox explored: what is impeding the creation of ICT spin-offs? , 2010, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[27]  Lois Stevenson,et al.  Entrepreneurship Policy: Theory and Practice , 2005 .

[28]  David J. Storey,et al.  Public Policy Measures to Support New Technology-Based Firms in the European Union , 1998 .

[29]  Michael Queen,et al.  Government policy to stimulate equity finance and investor readiness , 2002 .

[30]  Rahel Falk,et al.  Measuring the effects of public support schemes on firms’ innovation activities: Survey evidence from Austria , 2007 .

[31]  J. Lerner,et al.  Boulevard of Broken Dreams: Why Public Efforts to Boost Entrepreneurship and Venture Capital Have Failed--And What to Do about It , 2009 .

[32]  Benoit Leleux,et al.  Public versus private venture capital: seeding or crowding out? A pan-European analysis , 2003 .

[33]  G. Lindstrom,et al.  Early stage financing of NTBFs: An analysis of contributions from support actors , 2001 .

[34]  Mike Wright,et al.  Convergence or path dependency in policies to foster the creation of university spin-off firms? A comparison of France and the United Kingdom , 2010 .

[35]  A. Stinchcombe Social Structure and Organizations , 2000, Political Organizations.