The University as an Entrepreneur: The Ingredients for Valorization and Valorization Strategies

Valorization of research results is becoming increasingly important today. Since academic research should not only contribute to our “quest for fundamental understanding,” but it also needs to “consider use” (Stokes, 1997); these dual goals give rise to tension in academic institutes that need to carefully balance research and its exploitation (Ambos, Makela, Birkenshaw, & D’ Este, 2008). Nevertheless, valorization, commercialization, technology transfer, knowledge exploitation or exploitation of research are different labels for a similar activity and have become part and parcel of academic life. Most universities own the intellectual property rights of their research, meaning they have the legal rights (in some countries the legal obligation) to exploit it in a way they see fit. Research (e.g., Van der Heide, S., Van der Sijde, P. & Terlouw, C. (2010). Exploring ‘transnational’ university cooperation in technology transfer: A European perspective. Industry & Higher Education, 24(1), 17–27) shows that universities have different objectives (e.g. regional development, spin-off creation) for engaging in this process and every university has developed its own approach to deal with this in the sense of funding and support. On an abstract level, there are two scenarios for commercialization (Derksen, J. T. P. (2000). De Ondernemende Onderzoeker: Paradox of Pleonasme [The entrepreneurial researcher: Paradox or pleonasm]. Nijmegen: UBC). In the first scenario the university takes the role of “entrepreneur” and in the second scenario it is the researcher (or the research group) who is involved in research that takes this role with the university being the context in which entrepreneurship takes place. In this contribution our focus is on the university as entrepreneur and we regard valorization as an entrepreneurial process. In order to visualize how the activities of different actors associated with the university contribute to the entrepreneurial process of a university, we will build on ideas postulated by Wakkee and Van der Sijde (2010) regarding the fluid and moldable nature of opportunities. We conceptually elaborate the consequences of their approach for bringing knowledge (and technology) from university to the market.

[1]  Neil Fligstein,et al.  Markets as Politics: A Political‐Cultural Approach to Market Institutions , 1996 .

[2]  Ingrid Wakkee,et al.  Understanding the Entrepreneurial Process , 2004 .

[3]  Michael J. Roberts,et al.  New business ventures and the entrepreneur , 1974 .

[4]  Benyamin B. Lichtenstein,et al.  The Role of Organizational Learning in the Opportunity–Recognition Process , 2005 .

[5]  Andrea Fosfuri,et al.  The Penguin Has Entered the Building: The Commercialization of Open Source Software Products , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[6]  Nicholas Dew,et al.  Innovations, Stakeholders & Entrepreneurship , 2007 .

[7]  Roland Adoutte High technology as a commercial asset , 2014 .

[8]  Matthew S. Wood Does One Size Fit All? The Multiple Organizational Forms Leading to Successful Academic Entrepreneurship , 2009 .

[9]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  Structure in Fives: Designing Effective Organizations , 1983 .

[10]  D. E. Stokes Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation , 1997 .

[11]  H. Etzkowitz Research groups as ???quasi-firms???: the invention of the entrepreneurial university , 2003 .

[12]  J. Barney Gaining and Sustaining Competitive Advantage , 1996 .

[13]  R. Veugelers,et al.  Licensing of University Inventions: The Role of a Technology Transfer Office , 2007 .

[14]  Scott Shane,et al.  Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? , 2003 .

[15]  Bronwyn H Hall Patents and patent policy , 2007 .

[16]  James G. Hunt,et al.  Entrepreneurial Processes as Virtuous and Vicious Spirals in a Changing Opportunity Structure: A Paradoxical Perspective , 1995 .

[17]  R. Baron Opportunity Recognition as Pattern Recognition: How Entrepreneurs “Connect the Dots” to Identify New Business Opportunities , 2006 .

[18]  Richard N. Cardozo,et al.  A theory of entrepreneurial opportunity identification and development , 2003 .

[19]  James J. Anton,et al.  The Sale of Ideas: Strategic Disclosure, Property Rights, and Contracting , 2002 .

[20]  Andy Neely,et al.  Academic entrepreneurship: What are the factors shaping the capacity of academic researchers to identify and exploit entrepreneurial opportunities? , 2009 .

[21]  A. D. Koning OPPORTUNITY DEVELOPMENT: A SOCIO-COGNITIVE PERSPECTIVE , 2003 .

[22]  Jay B. Barney,et al.  Discovery and creation: alternative theories of entrepreneurial action , 2007 .

[23]  Julian Birkinshaw,et al.  When Does University Research Get Commercialized? Creating Ambidexterity in Research Institutions , 2008 .

[24]  F. Rothaermel,et al.  University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature , 2007 .

[25]  Waverly W. Ding,et al.  The Determinants of Faculty Patenting Behavior: Demographics or Opportunities? , 2005 .

[26]  Amalya L. Oliver University-Based Biotechnology Spin-Offs , 2008 .

[27]  I. Gordon,et al.  What is (the Point of) an Entrepreneur in Residence? , 2010 .

[28]  William B. Gartner,et al.  A Conceptual Framework for Describing the Phenomenon of New Venture Creation , 1985 .

[29]  Ingrid Wakkee,et al.  ICT Opportunities Unlimited: The International Dimension in Opportunity Development , 2010 .

[30]  C. Pilbeam Designing an Entrepreneurial University in an Institutional Setting , 2008 .

[31]  Cameron Lawrence,et al.  Institutions and Organizations (2nd ed.) , 2003 .

[32]  B. Clark,et al.  The entrepreneurial university: Demand and response , 1998 .

[33]  H. Etzkowitz The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages , 1998 .

[34]  Devrim Göktepe Inside the Ivory Tower: Inventors and Patents at Lund University , 2008 .

[35]  Mark C. Suchman,et al.  Legitimacy in Organizational Institutionalism , 2009 .

[36]  Joshua B. Powers,et al.  University Start-Up Formation and Technology Licensing with Firms that Go Public: A Resource-Based View of Academic Entrepreneurship , 2005 .

[37]  Magnus Klofsten,et al.  The Business Platform: Developing an Instrument to Gauge and to Assist the Development of Young Firms , 2003 .