Academic Entrepreneurship

Academic Entrepreneurship Academic Entrepreneurship People with Academic degrees who found companies spin-offs Phenomenon rare but survival of those that do start is high; (68%) Creating spin-offs is more profitable than Licensing to Established firms It all got started in the 1970 s..about Silicon Valley and Route 128 West and East coast Stanford MIT Sloan Technology Meccas Semiconductors, IT and Biotech Setback in the late 70 s early 80 s; Silicon Valley recovered, but MIT only lately Role-models to the rest of the world 1

Innovation Systems A genuine belief that it was indeed possible to engineer a deficiency in entrepreneurship A clear favoring of opportunistic entrepreneurship over necessity entrepreneurship. Necessity entrepreneurship does not really exist Political and Social Issue Social Entrepreneurship Innovation Systems Case Finland Finland Population 5.2 million 69% urban 338.000 km 2 10% water, 68% forest GDP, USD 128 billion 2

Turku Region 290,000 inhabitants; 130,000 jobs; 14,000 firms of Finland 20 Universities 29 Polytechnic colleges 120,000 starting places Personnel 12,000 38% of the population has an academic degree Finnish Science Parks 22 technology and science parks 550 employees 100 M turnover 1 600 enterprises 32 000 experts 1 000 000 m 2 3

Mission of Science Parks ENHANCE INDUSTRIAL PROFILE BUILD THE IMAGE OF THE REGIONAL ECONOMY IMPORTANT ROLE IN INNOVATION AND INDUSTRIAL RENEVAL SUPPORT THE FORMATION OF BUSINESSES NURTURE ENTREPRENEURSHIP INTERMEDIATES BETWEEN ACADEMIA AND INDUSTRY CATALYST FOR THE COMMERCIALISATION OF RESEARCH RESULTS TRANSFORMER OF IDEAS INTO NEW PRODUCTS AND PROCESSES Technology Profiles Information and communications Healthcare and medical Environmental Electronics, optoelectronics Bio, pharmaceuticals Digital media, content production Food Materials Energy Logistics Measurement Metal, machine and tool Automation, lifting and moving Chemical and plastic Laser, optics Forestry and wood Paper manufacturing Nano The Finnish Innovation System 1982 First Finnish science 1979 Founding of National park technology committee 1985 Premises for 1982 Council of State enterprises resolution on near universities, technologypolicy incubators 1983 Founding of Tekes 1988> Finnish Science Park 1984 Commencement of Association TEKEL Technology programmes 1990 Commercialising 1991 Finland becomes a research-based member of CERN business ideas 1992 Founding of Finnish 1994 > Centre of Expertise Secretariat for EU R&D Programme 1995 > Developing regional clusters, specialized services 2000 > Internationalisation 4

Tekes mission statement Tekes primary objective is to promote the competitiveness of Finnish industry and the service sector by technological means. Activities aim to diversify production structures, increase production and exports, and create a foundation for employment and societal wellbeing. Turku Science Park three universities four polytechnics university hospital 13 500 employees 25 000 students 400 professors 300 companies and organizations over 210 000 m 2 of premises The Incubator Their story: nearly 150 startups 1989-2005 success rate 85-90 % nearly 800 new jobs at the moment about 30 ventures in the incubators My questions: 16 yrs 9 firms/yr 50 new jobs/yrs Only 0.5% want to start growth companies => minimum 200 firms to get 1 growth company Is this the economic engine? 5

Assuming Innovation = Entrepreneurship Is it a recipe for opting out? Most entrepreneurs are replicators Innovative entrepreneurship (high expectation entrepreneurship; Autio, 2005) has a high 1.6% prevalence and a low 0.5% prevalence What about the other 98.4% - 99.5%? This fraction stands for most new jobs created and economic wealth creation Technology entrepreneurship: Entrepreneruship = innovation (Schumpeter) National/Regional Innovation Systems (NIS/RIS) Policy makers attempts to increase Economic growth Entrepreneurship Employment, and Taxable income Innovative firms a.k.a high technology companies Assumed to create high salary employment Modern version of smoke-stack industry Most firm start small and never grow; 3% manage to grow beyond 100 persons Large body of previous research - growing The ideal: Triple Helix Industry Industry b. A laissez-faire model a. An etatistic model Industry c.triple Helix 6

The study The aim: Seek a common understanding of what an innovation system is and what it should be Identify potential weaknesses Identify potential overlap between the organizations, and Identify what measures need to be taken in order to increase venture development and emergence of growth companies 50 in-depth interviews; 1.5 hours; taped and transcribed Representatives of gov t agencies (science park, regional development centres, area development centres, national technology agency Universities and polytechnic colleges (researchers, rectors, deans, administrative support personnel) Entrepreneurs operating within the science park The study Survey among research and teaching personnel in three universities and one polytechnic college; response rate 23,5% N=326 Here we report on: 10 interviews from one out of the three universities researchers and administrative personnel 8 entrepreneurs Results What is an innovation system? Is there any other system than the US model; a capital and knowledge intensive environment that generates knowledge intensive growth companies I don t know! What do you do if you have an idea? Yougobehindthe corner and wait til it blows over, and then you back to research! We have tried to stay away as much as possible from their meetings and we want it to be that way 7

Innovation system as seen by entrepreneurs and researchers Entrepreneur Industry a. An etatistic model b. A laissez-faire model! The entrepreneur! Sources of Innovation Parallel universes: the entrepreneurs view Entrepreneur The World Conclusions The researcher is passionate about research Involvement in entrepreneurship is time away from important research Does not know who the relevant government bodies are Does not see itself as part of the science park The link (important) to business is through Industry collaboration; contract research; business innovation system : A real bureaucratic monster! The entrepreneur is part of an innovative business system not a government run national innovation system Does not think a science park can provide any relevant support A hotel with broadband Needs university collaboration to perform basic research Problematic Different worlds 8

Conclusions We are quite far from the ideal Triple Helix The entrepreneur is excluded The innovators is excluded A RIS or a NIS appears to assume that ideas and potential entrepreneurs will line up if the system is in place! What do we know about university/business collaboration Sometimes it leads to spun out business But; those conducting research in close proximity to business become better scientists and if they start businesses become more likley to succeed What do you know about the Bayh-Dole Act 1980? Made it significantly much easier to commercialize or license federally funded innovations 9