Hidden mediator roles of university spin-offs in Triple Helix networks

Abstract

University spin-off firms contribute to bringing knowledge created at university to market. The networks these firms employ with other Triple Helix actors serve as not only getting access to resources but also shaping processes of collective learning in transforming the knowledge most adequately. In addition, spin-offs may affect the networks and behavior of network participants. While the first role has received large attention, collective learning and transforming networks and network partners have not. The paper addresses a key requirement in this setting, namely diversity in networks. We use a database of 105 young university spin-off firms and measure the socio-economic networks. A share of around 25 to 35 % of the firms tends to have an important potential mediator role, as they employ three to five different partners, connect with large firms as well as governments (outside the university), and have inserted a majority of strangers (outsiders) in their network. In the next step, to better understand partner diversity, we assess a simplified model. The level of innovativeness is found to be an important driver of diversity, with pre-start working experience (domains) and multidisciplinary education as important enabling factors. In exploring actual mediator roles using two case studies, we observe that Triple Helix actors are most diverse and tightly connected in testing activities in practice (pilots) enabling transformation of networks and network partners. The paper concludes with a summary, policy relevance, and future research paths. van Geenhuizen et al. Triple Helix (2016) 3:5 DOI 10.1186 Resumen Empresas spin-off universitarias contribuyen a llevar el conocimiento creado de la universidad al mercado. Las redes de estas empresas emplean con otros actores de la Triple Hélice no sólo sirven para obtener acceso a recursos, sino también para dar forma a procesos de aprendizaje colectivo. Además, empresas spin-off pueden afectar a las redes y el comportamiento de los participantes de la red. Sin embargo, el aprendizaje colectivo, la transformación de las redes, y la conformación de socios y su comportamiento, no han recibido mucha atención en la literatura. Este artículo aborda un requisito clave en este contexto; a saber, la diversidad en las redes. Utilizamos una base de datos de 105 empresas spin-off jóvenes y analizamos la composición socioeconómica de sus redes. Una proporción del 25 al 35 por ciento de las firmas tienen un importante papel potencial mediador, ya que emplean de tres a cinco socios, se conectan con empresas grandes, y con gobiernos (fuera de la universidad) y además permiten agentes foráneos en su red. Para entender mejor la diversidad de socios, evaluamos un modelo simplificado. El nivel de innovación resulta ser un motor importante de la diversidad, con el trabajo previo al inicio de la experiencia (dominios) y la educación multidisciplinar como factores de apoyo importantes. En la exploración de las funciones mediadoras reales, observamos que los actores de la Triple Héli...

Determinants of knowledge-based entrepreneurship: an exploratory approach

“…Additional research is thus suggested in this Patenting Activity area, not only related to the aforementioned factors but connected also to the knowledge and financing necessary to successfully patent new products -the external environment, namely economic crises such as the one in Portugal at the time of writing -are expected to negatively affect patenting activity as the necessary funds will be more difficult to come by. This has been confirmed by previous research into university spin-off activity, involving Portugal, Poland, Finland and the Netherlands -where gaining financial capital was an important barrier to overcome, on the path to university spin-off growth (Oliveira et al 2013;Van Geenhuizen and Ye 2012). Furthermore, Moutinho et al (2007) survey of scientists' patenting in Portuguese public research organizations revealed that the majority "believed that there are many difficulties associated with the patenting process and that they receive limited support from their organizations, which lack the proper competences and structures to assist with patenting and licensing" (Moutinho et al 2007, p. 355).…”

Intermediation in intermediation: triple helix innovation and intermediary legal organisation

“…Likewise, the Research Leader 'regarded the [Spin-Off Company] as an entirely private matter, with no ties to the university other than the temporary rental of laboratory space' (Tuunainen 2004: 56). Thus, notwithstanding (or, perhaps, because of) their relationship conflicts (Ranga and Etzkowitz 2013;van Geenhuizen et al 2016), all parties seemed to have agreed, while still acting only upon their respective divergent personal and institutionalised agendas and never in the overall interest of the common, that the Hybrid Firm either was or should be considered non-existent. As a result, and with no more than 2 years in operation (Tuunainen 2002: 50), the Hybrid Firm-the very 'locus of innovation' (Todeva 2013: 273; see also Boon et al 2011: 250)-was deliberately dissolved and 'de-hybridised.'…”

“…Similarly, Metcalfe (2010: 504) has found the fully-integrated trilateral networks of the triple helix to be 'understudied, ' prompting her to critically explore and model 'the role of external organizations in the formation of AIG ties.' Notwithstanding the relatively small sample of directly applicable scholarship, more developed literatures tackling intermediation and intermediary organisation exist within many disciplines (Landry et al 2013;Todeva 2013)-in particular, for current purposes, in the related research fields of innovation and technology transfer intermediation (Boon et al 2011;Dalziel 2010;Dalziel and Parjanen 2012;Gassmann et al 2011;Håkanson et al 2011;Hoppe and Ozdenoren 2005;Howells 2006;Kivimaa 2014;Klerkx and Leeuwis 2008;Kodama 2008;Lichtenthaler and Ernst 2008;Pollard 2006;Sieg et al 2010;Shohet and Prevezer 1996;Stewart and Hyysalo 2008;Suvinen et al 2010;van der Meulen et al 2005;van Lente et al 2003;Villani et al 2016) and knowledge intermediation (Cantù et al 2015;Parker and Hine 2014;Schlierf and Meyer 2013;Wright et al 2008;Yusuf 2008). Even here, however, authors have pointed out that '[d]espite their obvious presence, … innovation intermediaries have received little attention in the theoretical intermediation literature' (Hoppe and Ozdenoren 2005: 484) so that 'relatively few systematic analyses of their functions' (Suvinen et al 2010(Suvinen et al : 1366 are available today (see also van der Meulen et al (2005: 2)).…”

“…Given the 'previously buffered … space between firms and campuses' (Metcalfe 2010: 504) and the continued institutional isolation of each of the university-industry-government helices, it further appears that the design and provision of efficient legal intermediation practices and organisations should be of paramount importance for purposes of transcending the long-standing and pervasively practised institutional separateness and resistance to innovate and transform (see Tuunainen (2002)) among the helices, as well as for developing the institutional foundations of a sustainable intra-, inter-and, in particular, supra-helical intermediation infrastructure. It is this facilitating and reconciling intermediary infrastructure-including, its chosen legal premises and entity-level organisation--which has to continually and simultaneously effectuate a large and complex multitude of middle-position team-production equilibria among the helices in order to provide the cohesion, stability and synergy necessary for the long-term sustainability and innovation gains of real-world triple helix projects (see van Lente et al (2003)). …”

Evolution Characteristics of Government-Industry-University Cooperative Innovation Network of Electronic Information Industry in Liaoning Province, China

“…2) Interacting with each other, such as the cooperation between the university and the industry or the government's policy planning and guidance to industries. 3) The tripartite overlapping of functions formed by the hybrid organization; the three interact and jointly promote the spiral of innovation (Etzkowitz, 2002;van Geenhuizen et al, 2016).…”