Entrepreneurial Orientation of Academic Spin-Offs: Statistical Correlations

• Authors: Jarosław Korpysa

Title variants

PL

Orientacja przedsiębiorcza uczelnianych firm spin-off – zależności statystyczne

Abstracts

PL

Podstawowym celem artykułu jest przedstawienie zależności statystycznych dotyczących oddziaływania poszczególnych determinant na orientację przedsiębiorczą akademickich przedsiębiorstw spin off. W pierwszej części przedstawiono istotę uczelnianych firm spin off oraz zaprezentowano najważniejsze elementy orientacji przedsiębiorczej przedsiębiorstw. W drugiej części empirycznej dokonano analizy wyników badań dotyczących zależności statystycznych orientacji przedsiębiorczej uczelnianych firm. Badania zostały przeprowadzone wśród 141 akademickich podmiotów funkcjonujących w Polsce. Do ustalenia związków korelacyjnych wykorzystano test niezależności oraz dla istotnie statystycznych korelacji wskaźnik V-Cramera.

EN

The main goal of this article is to present statistical correlations as regards the impact of certain determinants on entrepreneurial orientation of academic spin-off companies. The first part presents the definition of academic spin-offs and the most important elements of entrepreneurial orientation of such companies. The second, empirical, part reports the results regarding statistical correlations of entrepreneurial orientation of academic spin-offs. The research was conducted among 141 academic spin-offs. The test of independence and Cramér’s V coefficient were used to diagnose the correlation.

Keywords

EN

entrepreneurship; academic spin-off companies commercialisation; innovation

PL

przedsiębiorczość; akademickie przedsiębiorstwa spin off; komercjalizacja; innowacyjność

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
• Journal: Problemy Zarządzania
• Year: 2019
• Issue: 1/2019 (81)
• Pages: 93-106

Dates

published

2019

Contributors

author

Jarosław Korpysa

• University of Szczecin, Faculty of Economics and Management

References

• 1. Anderson, B.S., Kreiser, P.M., Kuratko, D.F., Hornsby, J.S., & Eshima, Y. (2015). Reconceptualizing entrepreneurial orientation. Strategic Management Journal, 36(10),1579–1596.
• 2. Bratnicki, M., & Dyduch, W. (2016). Przedsiębiorczość, twórcza strategia oraz zatrzymywanie i przechwytywanie wartości jako filary sukcesu organizacji. Zarządzanie i Finanse Journal of Management and Finance, 14(2/2), 50–53.
• 3. Covin, J.G., & Lumpkin, G.T. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation theory and research: Reflections on a needed construct. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 855–872.
• 4. Covin, J.G., & Miller, D. (2014). International entrepreneurial orientation: Conceptual considerations, research themes, measurement issues, and future research directions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(1), 11–44.
• 5. Diánez-González, J.P., del Carmen Camelo-Ordaz, M., & Ruiz-Navarro, J. (2016). Management teams’ composition and academic spin-offs’ entrepreneurial orientation: A theoretical approach. In Entrepreneurship – Practice-oriented perspectives. InTech.
• 6. Dyduch, W. (2008). Pomiar przedsiębiorczości organizacyjnej. Prace Naukowe/Akademia Ekonomiczna w Katowicach, 97–142.
• 7. Dyduch, W. (2018). Innowacyjność organizacyjna a tworzenie i przechwytywanie wartości. Prace Naukowe/Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach.
• 8. Hartsfield, S., Johansen, D., & Knight, G. (2017). Entrepreneurial orientation, strategy, and marketing capabilities in the performance of born global firms. International Business: Research, Teaching, and Practice, 2(1), 12–38.
• 9. Hayter, C.S. (2016). A trajectory of early-stage spinoff success: The role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 47(3), 633–656.
• 10. Hayter, C. S. (2016). A trajectory of early-stage spinoff success: The role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 47(3), 633–656.
• 11. Hess, A.M., & Rothaermel, F.T. (2011). When are assets complementary? Star scientists, strategic alliances, and innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 32(8), 895–909.
• 12. Jiang, X., Liu, H., Fey, C., & Jiang, F. (2018). Entrepreneurial orientation, network resource acquisition, and firm performance: A network approach. Journal of Business Research, 87, 46–57.
• 13. Korpysa, J. (2015). Przedsiębiorczość jako proces budowania i funkcjonowania akademickich przedsiębiorstw spin off w Polsce. Szczecin: Uniwersytet Szczeciński.
• 14. Kwiotkowska, A. (2017). Wymiary orientacji przedsiębiorczej – wyniki badań empirycznych. Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie, 257–269. Politechnika Śląska.
• 15. Miranda, F.J., Chamorro, A., & Rubio, S. (2018). Re-thinking university spin-off: A critical literature review and a research agenda. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(4), 1007–1038.
• 16. O’Shea, R.P., Allen, T.J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994–1009.
• 17. Rasmussen, E., & Wright, M. (2015). How can universities facilitate academic spin-offs? An entrepreneurial competency perspective. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(5), 782–799.
• 18. Tietz, R. (2013). Executive teams in research-based spin-off companies: An empirical analysis of executive team characteristics, strategy, and performance. St. Gallen, Switzerland: Springer.
• 19. van Doorn, S., Heyden, M.L., & Volberda, H.W. (2017). Enhancing entrepreneurial orientation in dynamic environments: The interplay between top management team advice-seeking and absorptive capacity. Long Range Planning, 50(2), 134–144.
• 20. Visintin, F., & Pittino, D. (2014). Founding team composition and early performance of university-based spin-off companies. Technovation, 34(1), 31–43.
• 21. Wales, W.J. (2016). Entrepreneurial orientation: A review and synthesis of promising research directions. International Small Business Journal, 34(1), 3–15.
• 22. Walter, A., Auer, M., & Ritter, T. (2006). The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 541–567.
• 23. Han, C.M., & Won, S.B. (2018). Cross-country differences in consumer cosmopolitanism and ethnocentrism: A multilevel analysis with 21 countries. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 17, e52–e66. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1675.
• 24. Hsieh, Y.C. (2012). Hotel companies’ environmental policies and practices: A content analysis of their web pages, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 24(1), 97–121. https://doi.org/10.1108/095961112.
• 25. Iacono, J., Brown, A., & Holtham, C. (2009). Research methods – A case example of participant observation. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 7(1), 39–46.
• 26. IBR. (2018). Statystyka firm rodzinnych (Report). Retrieved from www.ibrpolska.pl/raporty (16.02.2019).
• 27. Johnson, J. S. (2015). Qualitative sales research: an exposition of grounded theory. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 35(3), 262–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/08853134.2014.954581.
• 28. LeVine, R.A., & Campbell, D.T. (1972). Ethnocentrism: Theories of conflict, ethnic attitudes, and group behavior. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• 29. Lumpkin, G.T., & Dess, G.G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21, 135–172.
• 30. Mariampolski, H. (1997). Ethnography and cross-cultural research. In From International to Cross-Cultural Marketing. The Qualitative Connection (pp. 39–51). Amsterdam: ESOMAR.
• 31. Mariampolski, H. (2001). Qualitative market research: A comprehensive guide. Thousand Oaks – London – New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
• 32. Mazzola, P., Marchisio, G., & Astrachan, J. (2008). Strategic planning in family business: A powerful developmental tool for the next generation. Family Business Review, 21(3), 239–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(13)00147-0.
• 33. Melin, L., Nordqvist, M., & Pramodita, S. (2014). The SAGE handbook of family business. London: Sage.
• 34. Morgan, R.M., & Hunt, S.D. (1994), The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252308.
• 35. Myers, M.D. (2009). Qualitative research in business & management. London: Sage.
• 36. Neumann, W. (2003) Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• 37. Neyer F.J., Wrzus C., Wagner J., & Lang F.R. (2011). Principles of relationship differentiation. European Psychologist, 16(4), 267–277. http://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000055.
• 38. Nikodemska-Wołowik, A.M., & Zientara, P. (2012). Family enterprises in the European Union: A case for regional support. In E. Kotowska, E. Latoszek, A. Z. Nowak &A. Stępniak (Eds.), European integration process in the new regional and global settings. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
• 39. Orth, U.R., & Green, M.T. (2009). Consumer loyalty to family versus non-family business: The roles of store image, trust and satisfaction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16(4), 248–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2008.12.002.
• 40. Panafieu de, Ch.W., Weber, D., & Krason, A. (1997). Cross-cultural consumer targets in a context of rapid social change. The case of Central Europe. In From International to Cross-Cultural Marketing. The Qualitative Connection (pp. 69–78). Amsterdam: ESOMAR.
• 41. Parada, M., & Viladás, H. (2010). Narratives: A powerful device for values transmission in family businesses. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 23(2), 166–172. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534811011031346.
• 42. Pounder, P. (2015). Family business insights: An overview of the literature. Journal of Family Business Management, 5(1), 116–127. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFBM-10-2014-0023.
• 43. Rosina, M. (2018). The power of communicating the family firm status. The positive effect of family firms as a brand on consumer buying behavior and consumer happiness. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.
• 44. Sageder, M., Mitter, C., & Feldbauer-Durstmüller, B. (2018). Image and reputation of family firms: A systematic literature review of the state of research. Review ofManagerial Science, 12, 355–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-016-0216-x.
• 45. Saldana, J., & Omasta, M. (2018). Qualitative research: Analyzing life. Thousand Oaks – London – New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
• 46. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students. Harlow: Pearson Education.
• 47. Schlossberg, M. (2016, February, 28). No one is talking about a major reason that people aren’t shopping for clothes in stores. Business Insider. Retrieved from www.businessinsider.com/consumers-are-bored-with-shopping-2016-2?IR=T (18.01.2018).
• 48. Shimp, T.A., & Sharma, S. (1987). Consumer ethnocentrism: Construction and validation of the CETSCALE. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 280–289, https://doi.org/10.2307/3151638.
• 49. Sharma, S.T., Shimp T.A., & Shin, J. (1995). Consumer ethnocentrism: A test of antecedents and moderators. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(1), 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02894609.
• 50. Smith, D., Hair Jr., J.F., & Ferguson, K. (2014). An investigation of the effect of family influence on commitment-trust in retailer-vendor strategic partnerships. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5(3), 252–263. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2013.11.005.
• 51. Sorenson, R.L., Yu A., Brigham, K.H., & Lumpkin, G.T. (2013). The landscape of family business. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• 52. Stere, S., & Trajani, B. (2015). Review of the theoretical and empirical literature of consumer ethnocentrism. Social Sciences and Education Research Review, 2(1), 41–54.
• 53. Sumner, W.G. (1906). Folkways: A study of the sociological importance of usages, manners, customs, mores, and morals. New York: Ginn.
• 54. Tarnawa, A., & Skowrońska, A. (2016). Raport o stanie sektora małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw w Polsce. Warszawa: Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości.
• 55. Xi, J., Kraus, S., Filser, M., & Kellermanns, F.W. (2015). Mapping the field of family business research: past trends and future directions. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(1), 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-013-0286-z.
• 56. Zellweger, T. (2017). Managing the family business: Theory and practice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• 57. Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.
• 58. Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• 59. Pentland, B.T., & Rueter, H.H. (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 484–510.
• 60. Pitelis, C. (2012). Clusters, entrepreneurial ecosystem co-creation, and appropriability: A conceptual framework. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(6), 1359–1388.
• 61. Rampersad, G.C. (2016). Entrepreneurial ecosystems: A governance perspective. Journal of Research in Business, Economics and Management, 7(3), 1122–1134.
• 62. Roundy, P.T., Brockman, B.K., & Bradshaw, M. (2017). The resilience of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 8, 99–104.
• 63. Roundy, P.T., Bradshaw, M., & Brockman, B.K. (2018). The emergence of entrepreneurial ecosystems: A complex adaptive systems approach. Journal of Business Research, 86, 1–10.
• 64. Rumelt, R.P. (1984). Towards a strategic theory of the firm. In R. Lamb (Ed.), Competitive strategic management (pp. 556–570). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• 65. Saxenian, A. (2002). Silicon Valley’s new immigrant high-growth entrepreneurs. Economic Development Quarterly, 16(1), 20–31.
• 66. Segers, J.P. (2015, June). Building an entrepreneurial ecosystem. Paper presented at the University-Industry Interaction Conference (UIIC), June, Berlin, Germany.
• 67. Senor, D., & Singer, S. (2009). Startup nation: The story of Israel’s economic miracle. New York, NY: Hachette Book Group.
• 68. Shostack, L. (1984). Designing services that deliver. Harvard Business Review, 62(1), 133–139.
• 69. Spigel, B. (2016). Developing and governing entrepreneurial ecosystems: The structure of entrepreneurial support programs in Edinburgh, Scotland. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 7(2), 141–160.
• 70. Spigel, B. (2017). The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(1), 49–72.
• 71. Spigel, B., & Harrison, R. (2018). Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1), 151–168.
• 72. Spilling, O.R. (1996). The entrepreneurial system: On entrepreneurship in the context of a mega-event. Journal of Business Research, 36(1), 91–103.
• 73. Stam, E. (2014). The Dutch entrepreneurial ecosystem. Birch research. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2473475.
• 74. Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: A sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1759–1769.
• 75. Stam, E., & Spigel, B. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems. In R. Blackburn, D. De Clercq, J. Heinonen, & Z. Wang, (Eds.). Handbook for entrepreneurship and small business (pp. 407–422). London: SAGE.
• 76. Stangler, D., & Bell-Masterson, J. (2015). Measuring an entrepreneurial ecosystem. Kauffman Foundation Research Series on City, Metro, and Regional Entrepreneurship, March, 1–16.
• 77. Tansley, A.G. (1935). The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology, 16(3), 284–307.
• 78. Teece, D.J. (1982). Towards an economic theory of the multiproduct firm. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 3(1), 39–63.
• 79. Teece, D.J. (1984). Economic analysis and strategic management. California Management Review, 26(3), 87–110.
• 80. Teece, D.J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.
• 81. Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.
• 82. Thornton, P.H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M., (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure and process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• 83. World Economic Forum. (2013). Entrepreneurial ecosystems around the globe and company growth dynamics. Report Summary for the Annual Meeting of the New Champions 2013. World Economic Forum. Retrieved from http://reports.weforum.org/entrepreneurialecosystems-around-the-globe-and-early-stage-company-growth-dynamics/wp-content/blogs.dir/34/mp/files/ pages/files/nme-entrepreneurship-report-jan-8-2014.pdf.
• 84. Zacharakis, A.L., Shepherd, D.A., & Coombs, J.E. (2003). The development of venturecapital-backed internet companies: An ecosystem perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 217–231.
• 85. Zander, U., & Kogut, B. (1995). Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test. Organization Science, 6(1), 76–92.

Identifiers

DOI

10.7172/1644-9584.81.5

Biblioteka Nauki

525840