citizens, universities, research centers and Government. Future vision that makes use of strenghts, competitive advantages and potential for excellence, all with an outward perspective.
including interviews and work groups with participation of representatives from government, businesses, business associations, universities, research centers, technology transfer instruments and society in general through the Castilla y León Regional Government
Heritage Administration Business researchers Technology Centres Knowledge Transfer Entities Universities and research centres Knowledge Transfer Offices Advanced Materials Biotechnology Advanced manufacturing
universities, research centers, and knowledge transfer centers have generated gradual convergence with the national average in terms of performance indicators. 2 CONTEXT ANALYSIS 5 Net taxes on products are considered an additional component in the regional GDP,
the weakness in the University-Company relationship persists and positions of the regional universities have fallen behind national university rankings.
The entrepreneurial fabric's technological level and capacity for absorption of knowledge is limited. Reduced scale of companies with management training requirements.
Insufficient preparation of university graduates in the skills and abilities that companies require. Decapitalization of human resources in research entities and talent and brain drain.
Wide offering of qualified professional profiles trained in ICT coming out of the region's university and vocational training systems.
Lack of adaptation of regulated training (University, Vocational training) for the ICT market. Difficulty in globalization of the regional ICT sector.
RUNNING INITIATIVES 2001 Commission for Coordination on Science and Technology. 2002 Law of Promotion and General Coordination of R&d&i. 2003 Universities Law modified in 2010). 2007-2013 Regional
R&d&i Strategy 2007-2013.2007 Commissioner for Science and Technology. 2008-2013 University-Business Strategy 2008-2013.2010-2013 II Framework Agreement for Industrial Competitiveness
Progressive integration of policies The University--Business Strategy, TCUE program, the support to business start-ups Consensus building with regional actors.
Universities and research centres Technology centres Companies, business associations and clusters Roles of the actors:
Focus Group Public administration Companies Researchers Technology centres Knowledge Transfer entities Universities Knowledge transfer entities Companies SWOT R&d&i SWOT Digital
still insufaicient university--business relationship. University graduates not adapted to companies'needs. Universities are low in national (and international) rankings.
Small size of companies, and low technology level and absorption capacity. Brain drain. Reduced internationalization. Building the evidence base for RIS3
(I) SWOT Analysis R&d&i 12 Opportunities Exploitation of trends of future in some areas, such as agro food, health and quality of life and energy and environment.
and supply of graduates from University and vocational training. ICT sector specialized in mobility and security.
All types of actors involved (companies, business associations, universities, research & technology centres, public administration, trade unions) More difaicult now (disappointment.
The discovery process means building external organisations of connections with universities, laboratories, suppliers, users, in order to integrate and structure this divided and dispersed knowledge.
which privileges the industry-public sector-university nexus in the innovation process. The RIS literature has had only a limited amount to say about the role of citizens and users in the innovation process,
There is some evidence that universities and research funders are now seeking to construct such spaces,
through national labs and universities, but also to mobilize resources that allow knowledge and innovations to diffuse broadly across sectors of the economy.
university nexus) will need to Smart Specialisation for Regional Innovation: WP2 Embracing Social Innovation Page 18 brought into collaboration with other actors including the social enterprises, civil society and end users.
‘firm-centred',university-centred, public-sector-centred and user-centred models (see Figure 4. 1). Ideally these separate models would be coordinated through local-regional public authorities.
WP2 Embracing Social Innovation Page 30 universities, public organizations and users. This is a huge cultural change be it in the public or private regime.
P. W. 2009)‘ Who matters to universities? A stakeholder perspective'High Education (2010) 59: 567 588.
Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. 2005) Universities and the Global Knowledge Economy: A triple-helix of university-industry-government relations.
Continuum Studies in Higher education EURADA (2011) Directory of"No-nonsense"Activities To Build S-minded Regions.
A Feminist Critique of Political economy, Minneaplois, University of Minnesota Press Gibson-Graham, J. K. 2008) Diverse Economies:
New york University Press Johnson, M (2013) Mondragon co-op reels after loss of oldest member, Financial times, 10 december Smart Specialisation for Regional Innovation:
Policy Commission on the Distribution of Wealth, Birmingham University www. birmingham. ac. uk/..Key-Facts-Background-Paper-BPCIV. pdf Rubalcaba L.,Windrum P
and Riccardo Pietrabissa, Politecnico di Milano, Italy (sub-section of Chapter 3 on university-industry knowledge transfers).
universities, research organisations and others. Their networks help them overcome some of the obstacles to innovation linked to their small size.
Universities are increasingly providing entrepreneurship training, and this book establishes core principles in this area. The efforts of vocational training institutions and schools are also central to meeting the challenge.
Professor Franco Malerba, Director of KITES (Centre on Knowledge, Internationalisation and Technology Studies), University of Bocconi, Italy Professor Jay Mitra, Director of the Centre for Entrepreneurship Research
, Essex Business school, University of Essex, United kingdom and Scientific Advisor on Entrepreneurship to the OECD Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMES and Local Development Professor Juan Roure, Professor of Entrepreneurship,
and Juan Luis Segurado, Senior Researcher on entrepreneurship and SME financing, at IESE Business school, University of Navarra, Barcelona, Spain Professor Luc Soete, Director of UNU-MERIT (the United nations
University Maastrict Economic and social Research and training centre on Innovation and Technology), Netherlands Karen Wilson, Senior Fellow at Kauffman Foundation and Director GV Partners, France Assistance in developing the Country Notes was provided by the following experts:
Petr Adamek, Bergman Group, Czech republic Rudy Aernoudt, Ghent University and Brussels University, Belgium Erma Aminullah, Indonesian Institute of Science, Indonesia Spyros Arvantis
Patries Boekholt, Technopolis, Netherlands Nadine Brown, Ministry of Economic Development, New zealand Maja Bucar, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia Giorgio Calcagnini, University of Urbino, Italy
Aruna Deo, University of Western Sydney, Australia Jo Doyle, Ministry of Economic Development New zealand Michael Eilan, Israel Business Information Services Consulting, Israel Sirin Elci, Technopolis, Turkey Ilario Favaretto, University of Urbino, Italy ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SMES
, E 8 NTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION OECD 2010 Yacov Fisher, Israel Business Information Services Consulting, Israel Claudia Gonzalez Brambila, Mexican Autonomous Institute of technology
, Mexico Ebbe Graversen, University of Aarhus, Denmark Heike Grimm, University of Erfurt, Germany Berglind Hallgrímsdóttir, Innovation Centre Iceland, Iceland Jain Alain Heraud
, University of Strasbourg, France Can Huang, UNU-MERIT, Maastricht University, Netherlands Ron Immink, Bookbuzz and Driveforgrowth, Ireland Jurgen Janger, Austria National bank, Austria Jari
Kuusisto, Lappeenranta University of Technology Finland Leonardo Latelier, University of Chile, Chile Asa Lindholm Dahlstrand, University of Chalmers, Sweden Katrin Mannik, Technopolis, Estonia Jaan Masso, Tartu University
, Estonia Jay Mitra, University of Essex, United kingdom Alexey Prazdnichnykh, Bauman Innovation, Russia Alisdair Reid, Technopolis, Belgium Stephen Roper, University of Warwick, United kingdom
Juan carlos Scapini, Central University of Chile, Chile Vitor Simões, Technical University of Lisbon Portugal Karen Siune, University of Aarhus, Denmark Olav Spilling, NIFUSTEP Research
Institute for Innovation, Research and Education, Norway David Storey, University of Warwick, United kingdom Joonghae Suh, Korean Development Institute, Korea Annamária Szukics, Ministry for National
Development and the Economy Hungary Lena Tsipouri, University of Athens, Greece Arnold Verbeek, Ideaconsult, Belgium Charles Wessner, National Academy of Science, Technology, Entrepreneurship and Innovation, USA David
Wolfe, University of Toronto, Canada Lee Woolgar, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, Japan Martin Wörter, Swiss Economic Institute Federal Institute of technology (KOF-ETHZ.
Useful comments and contributions were received from Emma Clarence, Chiara Criscuolo, Andrea Hofer, Kiira Karkkainen, and Stephan Vincent-Lancrin of the OECD Secretariat.
Enzo Rullani, Venice International University, Italy; Prof. Andrea Piccaluga, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy and Prof.
Allan Gibb, University of Durham, United kingdom; Geoff Mulgan and Julie Caulier-Grice, The Young Foundation, United kingdom;
Bjorn Asheim, University of Lund, Sweden, and Prof. Helen Lawton-Smith, Birkbeck, University of London, United kingdom. The analysis and recommendations presented in this publication have been reviewed
and accepted by the delegates to the OECD's Working Party on SMES and Entrepreneurship and the Directing Committee of the Local Economic and Employment Development Programme.
otherwise remain un-commercialised in large firms, universities and research organisations. Small firms on average do not appear to be more innovative after allowing for their size,
For example, the Austrian programme Aplusb (Academia plus Business) financially supports centres at universities to foster academic spin-offs.
angel investment) promoting more and better technologybased start-ups (technostarters) in and around universities. These programmes can provide inspiration for policy development in other countries.
and with universities and research organisations. Collaboration is an important element in the strategies of innovative SMES to overcome some of the barriers they face,
i e. those where R&d intensity, basic university research and highly-skilled workers are most important. This is associated with important local knowledge spillovers in these sectors.
and industry-specific networks that bring together public and private training providers (colleges, universities, etc.),employers, industry representatives, unions, labour market and training intermediaries (temporary work agencies and group training companies), local and regional government agencies,
Programmes should also be developed to promote corporate and university spinoffs with initiatives for proof-of-concept (i e. testing the technical and commercial viability of early-stage innovative ideas), pre-competitive research and seed funding.
Promote partnerships within innovation systems that involve large and small firms, universities and research institutes,
collaborative research opportunities, services for knowledge transfer (e g. innovation brokers, labour mobility schemes, programmes for the commercialisation of university research),
Encourage local universities and research institutes to be involved actively in a third mission of helping develop the locality in
Promote local labour mobility such as through university-industry staff exchange programmes. Use the concept of related variety to guide policy.
and universities in training and hosting researchers; and making diaspora populations aware of local job vacancies.
Build up entrepreneurship education in universities and higher education institutions by smartly scaling-up, shifting the emphasis from business management to growth-oriented entrepreneurship,
and include social entrepreneurship in school and university curricula. Introduce social clauses in public procurement procedures to encourage involvement of social enterprises in provision of social goods and services.
Rather, innovation today tends to be carried out in collaborations among universities, research organisations customer, supplier and competitor firms and consumers, with costs and roles shared,
Some of the ideas driving economic growth may be the result of scientific breakthroughs in large firms and universities,
and SMES that participate in knowledge transfer networks with universities, large firms and other players.
External ideas for innovation can come from many places from collaborations with universities and other firms or business angels, from labour mobility among firms and organisations and from informal social capital contacts.
universities and research organisations, requiring both innovation competencies and international connections. One of the ways of achieving this is through participating in globalised value chains and networks of innovation.
and inputs to ideas generation that are exploited by large firms, universities/research organisations and other small firms.
universities and research organisations. This type of knowledge spillover process is at the heart of the logic of endogenous growth theory, the lens through
Knowledge built up in universities, large firms and research organisations does not spill over automatically, however.
This largely occurs as individuals leave universities research organisations and large corporations to start enterprises based on knowledge they developed there in the form of spin-off companies,
alongside the more traditional patent and licensing routes and the publishing and teaching activities of universities.
In the USA, for example, the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 increased incentives to universities to invest in the commercial exploitation of their knowledge by giving them control of the intellectual property arising from the federal government funded research they undertake.
the University of British columbia has a venture fund, the University of Guelph has raised money for commercialisation by listing its intellectual property portfolio on the stock market,
and a range of entrepreneurship boot camps, mentoring programmes, entrepreneurship resource centres and entrepreneurship courses for researchers have been introduced (Mcnaughton, 2008).
which seems to have one of the highest rates of university spin-offs, only two spin-offs were created per research institution per year.
Neither are university spin 1. INTRODUCTION SMES, ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION OECD 2010 35 offs high-growth firms on average,
While forefront research establishments like Oxford university in the UK, the University of Wisconsin, Madison, in the USA,
and the University of Waterloo in Canada are key drivers of entrepreneurship in their areas through spin-offs (84 spin-offs in Madison;
and an additional one-sixth are spin-offs from universities. They also appear to be increasing in frequency over time
The relationship may involve not just the role of new start-ups in exploiting knowledge themselves but also the role of new enterprises and SMES as participants in knowledge exchange networks within innovation systems, stimulating knowledge transfers from universities and other
This framework examines the interactions among sets of organisations including firms, universities, venture capitalists and public agencies mediated by institutions that set the rules of the game,
such as intellectual property regulations and rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms.
which universities and research organisations are the central players, and the knowledge exploitation subsystem, in which new and small firms are key players along with larger firms.
For example, they may include lack of infrastructure for knowledge generation and transfer (e g. universities and science parks;
and lack of complementarity between the knowledge exploration and exploitation sub-systems (e g. lack of fit between university research
It is essentially a science-push approach in which R&d in universities and large firms is critical
and exploitation through knowledge-based spin-offs and high-technology collaborations between firms and universities and research institutes has an important role to play.
Whereas the managed economy implied an innovation policy that could be focused on encouraging basic research in universities
Large-scale research subsidies to national champions, other large firms and basic-research silos in national universities and research organisations are not the most effective way to generate innovation in an environment where knowledge
often exploiting new science developed in universities and research laboratories. They make up an important component of the high-employment-growth firm sector.
Examples of relevant policy approaches include creation of science parks and business incubators, encouraging mobility of staff between universities and industry,
and facilitating knowledge exploitation through licenses, patents and university and corporate spin-offs, and shared foresight and strategy development activities (OECD, 2004;
They may be imparted through school education, universities and vocational training colleges. Training in SMES is also very dependent on relationships with the public sector
Archibugi, D. and S. Iammarino (1997), The Policy Implications of the Globalisation of Innovation, University of Cambridge ESRC Centre for Business Research, Working Paper 75, ESRC Centre
University-Industry Linkages in Japan and the United states, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Callan, B. 2001), Generating Spin-offs:
Factor Productivity and the Role of Entrepreneurship, Jena Economic Research Papers 2008-19, Friedrich Schiller University and the Max Planck Institute of Economics, Jena.
from National Systems and Mode 2 to a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relation, Research Policy, Vol. 29, pp. 109 123.
Knight, F. 1921), Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, Chicago University Press, Chicago. Jensen, M.,B. Johnson, E. Lorenz and B. Lundvall (2007), Forms of Knowledge and Modes of Innovation, Research Policy, Vol. 36, No. 5, pp. 680-693.
Lindholm Dahlstrand, A. 2008), University Knowledge Transfer and the Role of Academic Spin-offs in J. Potter (ed.),Entrepreneurship and Higher education, Ch. 10, pp. 235-254, OECD, Paris. Lundvall, B. and S. Borràs (1997), The Globalising Learning Economy:
Mcnaughton, R. 2008), Technology Commercialisation and Universities in Canada, in J. Potter (ed.),Entrepreneurship and Higher education, Ch. 11, pp. 255-234-269, OECD, Paris
University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation, Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, UK. Stangler, D. and R. Litan (2009), Where Will the Jobs Come From?
Centres may also help organise placement of university researchers within SMES under the Researchers in Business initiative.
Aplusb The Aplusb programme (Academiaplusbusiness) financially supports institutionalised centres at universities to foster academic spin-offs.
Centres are limited liability companies that must be owned partly by the corresponding university; other companies and venture capital funds can be co-owners.
Evaluators confirm good performance, even in international comparisons with university incubators. The programme is administered by the agency FFG (Austrian Research Promotion Agency.
30 40 50%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
Share of turnover due to new-tomarket product innovation 0 10 20 30 40 50 60%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors
and is delivered by a network of over 250 industrial technology advisors located in universities, community colleges and other technology transfer organisations across the country.
60%50 Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
40 50%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
innovation Firms collaborating in innovation activities Firms with new-tomarket product innovations Share of turnover due to new to-market product innovations Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients
60 80%SMES Large Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
It is designed specifically to improve the entrepreneurial environment at universities and research institutes and to increase the number of technology and knowledge-based company formations.
The first, Culture of Entrepreneurship, aims at promoting entrepreneurship among university employees and students. Projects at universities and non-university research institutes can apply for financial support in the form of a non-repayable grant over a three-year period.
In all three application rounds, 120 applications were submitted, of which 48 projects at 64 higher education institutions were approved.
The second pillar, Business Start-up Grants, supports the preparation of innovative business start-up projects at universities and research establishments.
university graduates and students to develop their business ideas into business plans and to advance their ideas for products and services.
30%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
), TECHNOCELLS (research-based technology parks and business incubators), Poles of Innovation (industry-university cooperative research), PRAXE (research spin-offs) and the Zone of Innovation framework programme.
As a whole, these programmes have provided incentives to both university and the private sector to work together,
which also include universities. SMES have to identify a problem that requires know-how or expertise supplied by the innovation agent.
40 50 60%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
and R&d activities implemented in close co-operation by enterprises, universities and research institutes. It also promotes the establishment of up-to-date research infrastructure and patent right procedures in certain high-priority areas.
50 60%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Medium Large Small Consultants,
SMES Large Share of turnover due to new-tomarket product innovations 0 10 20 30 40 50%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers
40 50%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
The projects will favour partnerships and synergies among universities, research centres, private companies, private investment equity, and local governments.
The intended participants of the calls for tender are companies, universities, public and private research units,
Firms collaborating in innovation activities Share of turnover due to new-tomarket product innovations3 0 10 20 30%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors
Most network initiatives focus on interaction between universities and industry or between different firms with similar competences;
a programme that aims to encourage spin-offs from universities and research institutes. In 2007, this programme was able to create 269 incubation centres throughout Korea,
30 40%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
through the creation of a better climate for entrepreneurs inside and outside universities. It is a generic and flexible programme,
The projects that receive funding are based regionally public-private partnerships consisting of (applied science) universities, incubators, innovation intermediaries, banks, companies and other actors.
which starters operate, particularly in the universities. 2. THE NETHERLANDS SMES, ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION OECD 2010 85 The netherlands A. Structural indicators on enterprise population, 2007 Number of enterprises Total employment
40 50 60%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
The main target group of the programme is researchers working in universities, university colleges, research institutes and university hospitals.
However, rather than addressing the researchers directly, the main approach of the programme is to work through the local technology transfer offices.
%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
40 50 60%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
The demand side includes universities, incubators, development agencies and other regional partners, while the supply side comprises venture capital companies.
30 40%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
50 60%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small Medium Large Small Medium Large Consultants,
Firms with new-tomarket product innovations Firms collaborating in innovation activities Share of turnover due to new-tomarket product innovations3 0 10 20 30%Universities
Firms collaborating in innovation activities Share of turnover due to new-tomarket product innovations2, 3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60%Universities or HEI
It has been run together with universities since 1998. During a 66-hour course, students are assisted with developing their business ideas and business plans.
TEKMERS are established in co-operation with the technical universities and industrial chambers. As of 2009, there are 20 TEKMERS and 14 DTIS throughout the country.
The programme has been the major tool for start-up technology-based enterprises in Turkey and for improving university-industry co-operation.
For example, 70%of the tenants of METU-KOSGEB TEKMER the first TEKMER created by KOSGEB together with the Middle east Technical University (METU) in Ankara are new companies
and 69%of these companies are university spin-offs. This TEKMER hosted 161 enterprises between 1992 and 2009,
Between 2006 and 2009,206 eligible projects were funded among 519 project proposals from 65 universities. 2. TURKEY SMES
Share of turnover due to new-tomarket product innovations2 0 10 20 30%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Firms within the group Small
which for the first time brought responsibility for UK universities and economic development into the same department. At a more operational level both enterprise and innovation policy are now increasingly being regionalised
including innovation voucher schemes and a range of measures to support increased commercialisation of university research.
which places recent graduates with a business for two years as part of a university-industry collaborative R&d programme.
activities 0 10 20 30 40%Universities or HEI Firms within the group Suppliers Clients or customers Competitors Small Medium Large SME Large Consultants,
Under the Technology Innovation Programme, universities now can lead a joint venture when teamed up with at least one small or medium-sized for-profit company,
Universities may also participate as a contractor within any TIP award. Funding is available for single company projects of up to USD 3 million over a maximum of three years,
strategic partnership between universities or technological institutes and enterprises; technology-based entrepreneurship; incubators and technological parks;
This supports universities and research centres in developing pro-innovation research at an early stage.
university science parks, incubators and software parks across China. At the national level alone, by 2008 53 high-technology development zones, 62 university science parks, about 200 business incubators and 35 software parks had been developed through governmental support.
In the period 1992-2005, the revenue, industrial value added and profit of the enterprises operating in the 53 development zones grew at an average annual rate of 47.0%,30.5%and 38.2%,respectively.
The Torch Programme played an indispensable role in promoting entrepreneurship and start-up companies through its administrative arm and the university science parks and incubators.
-tomarket product innovations Share of turnover due to new-tomarket product innovations 0 10 20 30 40 50%Universities or HEI Suppliers Clients
i e. universities and research institutions, IPR centres, and businesses. These intermediary institutions provide integrated services in the areas of technology, human resource capacity building, business network development,
to conduct R&d necessary for using licences obtained from Russian universities and research institutions; or to carry out innovative projects realised with the support of Russian universities.
The Foundation has invited about 4 000 Russian scientists in various spheres to work as experts.
-tomarket product innovations Share of turnover due to new-tomarket product innovations 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80%Universities
Company and university spin-offs are prominent examples of the role of knowledge in the entrepreneurial process.
On the other hand, university spin-offs are synonymous with knowledge-based organisations, although they may lack the market knowledge to understand the commercialisation potential of an invention
but rather in collaboration with other organisations, including enterprises (e g. suppliers and customers), universities, research organisations, etc.
and other mechanisms, including interactive learning among different organisations involved in the innovation process (e g. customersupplier relations, industry-university collaborative research,
technology networks linking university faculty to exploitation partners, etc.).) 6. Creation and change of institutions that influence innovation actors and processes by providing incentives or obstacles to innovation (e g.
9. Provision of technology-oriented consultancy services (e g. technology transfer, university-based technology centres assessing commercialisation opportunities, etc..
or the share of university R&d funded by local private sources. That goes beyond the scope of this chapter
but other studies show that the efficiency of local innovation systems is related, inter alia, to indicators of knowledge flows such as the level of external funding for university research, the presence of intermediary technology organisations,
The success of these clusters in entrepreneurship and innovation has in large part stemmed from strong local knowledge generation, diffusion and absorption capacities in the form of leading universities and research organisations, strong concentrations
basic university research and highly-skilled workers are most important. For example, in the United states, knowledge-driven industries such as semiconductors, process
University-industry knowledge transfers In knowledge-and technology-intensive sectors, relationships with universities and other public research organisations take on growing importance for innovation in SMES.
This has led to the emergence and growth of university-based knowledge transfer offices (KTOS), which take responsibility for the whole process of identification, protection, valorisation and transfer to industry of university innovations.
Despite the increasing importance of university-industry knowledge transfers and of public schemes that try to bolster such transfers, it is difficult to produce reliable and comparable data on this phenomenon.
Patents and numbers of spin-off companies are relatively easy to count but the way research agreements, invention disclosures or licensing income are accounted differ widely across countries.
The survey is biased towards universities and public research organisations that are part of the network but also attempts to cover nonmembers.
In the United states, the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) has undertaken similar surveys since the early 1990s.
With regard to output indicators, innovation disclosures are much higher in US universities (102.7 per university) than in Europe (20.2)
Another, more questionable argument is that European universities are more reluctant to apply for patents for which they do not perceive a concrete licensing opportunity.
Finally, data on university spin-offs in the two different contexts diverge much more slightly, with nearly 2 spin-offs per KTO a year in Europe and nearly 3 in the United states. University-industry knowledge transfers are also of increasing importance in Asia;
Box 3. 2 provides a snapshot of recent trends in China, Japan, and Korea. Knowledge transfers concern not only industry and universities but also government organisations, financial bodies and intermediary institutions that play a supporting function.
Table 3. 6 gives an overview of the role and responsibilities of the different actors within an innovation system in the process of knowledge transfer.
The following graphs cast light on international knowledge flows by presenting information Box 3. 2. University-industry knowledge transfer in Asia In China,
university-industry knowledge transfer is a recent topic, but it has captured increasing attention. In 2002, a law along the lines of the US Bayh-Dole Act was enacted that enables universities to manage their own IPR,
have equity investments in new firms, and commercialise R&d results. The establishment of KTOS has also been encouraged,
with universities being given considerable freedom in the way they can run these centres. Data, however, show that knowledge transfer is still incipient in China.
Universities have a great number of patents (126 per KTO), but only 1. 6 of them are international.
a large proportion of university inventions are passed directly to companies through joint research agreements. This poses a challenge to the fairness of a system in which large companies disproportionally benefit from publicly funded research and in which start-up opportunities are diminished accordingly (Kneller, 2007.
which universities may choose to own IPRS and are asked to set up KTOS, while researchers have to be compensated up to 50%of the licensing revenues from their successful commercialised inventions.
Finance Fund industry and university research; support university entrepreneurship. Participate in transfer activities; identify criteria for risk sharing;
support investments in R&d. New financial services for R&d; investments in technology-based start-ups; appropriate evaluation of research intangibles.
and university spin-offs, rely on market and technological knowledge acquired in their source organisations for their success. The innovation system concept is helpful in understanding how policy can promote innovative entrepreneurship
and in particular with the lack of connection that often characterises the relationship between the knowledge exploration (universities, research organisations, etc.)
With this objective, policy may seek to increase the motivations of universities and research organisations to transfer knowledge to other national
and technology brokers and binding parts of the funding of universities and research organisations to the undertaking of local knowledge transfer functions.
and competences of the knowledge explorers and the knowledge exploiters in the system by better aligning the specialisms of universities and research organisations with the specialisms of firms.
Promote corporate and university spin-offs as high-potential knowledge-intensive businesses. Spin-offs, both corporate and university-based, are an important target for promotion efforts
because the internal technology and market competencies they carry from their sources in universities and other firms make them more likely to grow faster than the average start-up.
Programmes for corporate spin-offs should aim to diversify the customer base of these firms which often run the risk of being trapped in a oneway relationship with the parent company.
As to university spin-offs, the gap between technological invention and commercial innovation should be bridged through proof-of-concept support for testing the technical and commercial viability of early-stage innovative ideas,
which supports university centres with the mission of launching academic spin-offs. The programme raises awareness about business creation among students and faculty;
In 20 years of operation, this programme has supported 53 high-tech development zones, 62 university science parks,
Universities need to be involved actively in the innovation system. Local universities and research institutes need to be involved actively in knowledge flows
and so be given the opportunity to unfold their third mission to contribute to the development of their region (OECD, 2007c;
Universities and 3. KNOWLEDGE FLOWS SMES, E 154 NTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION OECD 2010 other research institutes can foster entrepreneurship by generating and diffusing innovations and supplying highly skilled
and put together university and company researchers are an option. Technology-bridging institutions can also be useful
and facilitate technology transfer by strengthening the industry-university link. In Australia, for instance, Enterprise Connect is a programme that runs six manufacturing network centres and five innovation centres.
since lack of motivation and capacities on the part of SMES often proves to be the most important barrier to industry-university collaboration.
University-industry staff exchange programmes should also be considered, although rigid university employment practices and the very university incentive structure (e g. the pressure to publish on peer review journals) can render this specific type of labour mobility difficult.
Promote cross-fertilising technologies with multiple industrial applications. Considering that every technology implies several possible entrepreneurial opportunities
though they require a strong knowledge base at the university level. Related variety should also be taken into consideration in attempting to diversify into new growth areas based on new combinations of existing sectoral and technological strengths.
Kneller, R. 2007), Japan's New Technology Transfer System and the Preemption of University Discoveries by Sponsored Research and Co-inventorship, Industry and Higher education, Vol. 21, No. 3. Florida
A Microeconomic Perspective, OECD, Paris. OECD (2009b), Entrepreneurship and the Innovative System of the Agder Region, Norway, OECD, Paris. OECD (2009c), Universities, Entrepreneurship and Innovation, internal
2009), Clusters, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, OECD, Paris. Piccaluga, A. and R. Pietrabissa (2009), International Dynamics of University-Industry Knowledge Transfer paper presented at the OECD Conference SMES, Entrepreneurship
In formal education, entrepreneurship training can be provided at different levels, from primary and secondary schools, to vocational colleges and tertiary and university education.
Universities and higher education institutions Entrepreneurship teaching OECD work shows that third-level (higher education) entrepreneurship teaching activities are increasing (Potter, 2008.
More universities, faculties and students are becoming involved and the variety of content and pedagogies is increasing.
with North american universities leading the way in introducing and refining approaches. Survey work reported in Solomon (2008) examined the types of entrepreneurship teaching offered in the United states. This showed that the most common courses in the broad field of entrepreneurship were in entrepreneurship
with approximately one-third of colleges and universities having an entrepreneurship centre, and one-third having an entrepreneurship professor or chair.
Research comparing entrepreneurship education across universities from the United states, Canada and Denmark suggests that entrepreneurship education provision in US universities is advanced relatively (Hoffman et al.
) Entrepreneurship education was compared among selected universities in the three countries, on five important dimensions of teaching activities:
outreach (scope of university networks co-operation with incubators, alumni networks, access to experienced practitioners, access to venture capital) and evaluation (degree of monitoring and assessment of entrepreneurship activities.
the US universities were strongest on these five dimensions, although Canada performed equally well in terms of educational scope and outreach.
The Danish universities were weaker on all dimensions. For example, at Stanford university and Cornell University in the United states, student participation in entrepreneurship programmes was 15%and 20%respectively.
In comparison, the participation rate at the Canadian universities was between 5%and 7, %while none of the Danish universities reported participation rates above 2. 5%.Despite the rapid growth in entrepreneurship teaching in higher education, there are a number of issues that need to be addressed in adapting universities to the needs of a more entrepreneurial economy (Potter,
2008). ) Two major issues are scaling up provision in order to offer courses to a larger number of students,
and shifting towards more interactive and experiential teaching methods in the entrepreneurship domain. In terms of provision, while many universities now offer entrepreneurship teaching, the numbers of students participating remains a small share.
This is associated with two barriers. Firstly, entrepreneurship teaching is confined often to certain departments and centres, in particular business and engineering schools and new university centres of entrepreneurship,
whereas potential entrepreneurs come from a wide variety of disciplines. Secondly, entrepreneurship teaching is often not well rewarded
The use of these methods can be promoted by greater networking among universities and faculties. Inappropriate constraints to the participation of entrepreneurs in entrepreneurship teaching programmes are another challenge.
The eastern German universities either use government schemes, private sector funding or a combination of both to sustain
the majority of the universities provide direct support to start-up: mentoring, grants, incubation facilities. A clear strength to build on is the presence of people teachers, researchers,
and university staff with a clear interest in entrepreneurship support. All of these developments demonstrate the importance given to the creation of new growth potential ventures out of universities.
The study identified the important role of public policy in initiating and enhancing entrepreneurship support in universities across the following six areas.
Strategy: There is clear role for public policy in opening up universities towards their third mission,
which ideally should be part of their key missions research and teaching. Clear incentives and rewards are needed for professors,
which universities are assessed. Resources: Public kickoff funding for entrepreneurship support infrastructure is common to many OECD countries.
Universities will need to find their place in existing start-up and entrepreneurship support systems. Networking and incentives for clear referral systems can be useful to increase the effectiveness
Universities need to have a genuine interest in such exchange, but public policy can facilitate the creation of platforms,
A key success factor for university entrepreneurship support lies in private sector collaboration. Universities can create a protected environment for nascent entrepreneurship.
This can be an important stimulus for students and researchers to make a first step towards the creation of a venture.
Public policy organisations and universities will need to work hand in hand in developing a monitoring and evaluation system
which demonstrates the socioeconomic impact of university entrepreneurship support and reveals needs for changes. The work has developed also a criteria list of good practice across the six dimensions from an assessment of existing literature and case studies of university entrepreneurship support.
Policy makers and university management can use these criteria to self-assess and reorient their current approaches (Box 4. 2). Box 4. 2. Entrepreneurship support in universities:
Criteria for good practice Strategy 1. A broad understanding of entrepreneurship is a strategic objective of the university,
and there is top-down support for it. 2. Objectives of entrepreneurship education and start-up support include generating entrepreneurial attitudes, behaviour and skills,
as well as enhancing growth entrepreneurship (both high-tech and low-tech). 3. There are clear incentives and rewards for entrepreneurship educators, professors and researchers,
Resources 1. A minimum long-term financing of staff costs and overheads for graduate entrepreneurship is agreed as part of the university's budget. 2. Self-sufficiency of university internal entrepreneurship support is a goal. 3
Support infrastructure 1. An entrepreneurship-dedicated structure within the university (chair, department, support centre) is in place,
and referral between university-internal and external business start-up and entrepreneurship support organisations; roles are defined clearly.
As a third example, Box 4. 2. Entrepreneurship support in universities: Criteria for good practice (cont.
Start-up support 1. Entrepreneurship education activities and start-up support are integrated closely. 2. Team building is facilitated actively by university staff. 3. Access to private financing is facilitated through networking
and dedicated events. 4. Mentoring by professors and entrepreneurs is offered. 5. Entrepreneurship support in universities is integrated closely into external business support partnerships and networks,
and industry-specific networks that bring together public and private training providers (including colleges and universities),
Policy recommendations Build up entrepreneurship education in universities and higher education institutions. Scale up, smartly. Increase the number of entrepreneurship courses
Hoffman, A n. Vibholt, M. Larsen and M. Moffet (2008), Benchmarking Entrepreneurship Education across US, Canadian and Danish Universities, in J. Potter (ed.),Entrepreneurship and Higher education, OECD
NTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION OECD 2010 Martinez-Fernandez, C. 2005), Knowledge Intensive Service Activities (KISA) in Innovation of Mining Technology Services in Australia, University of Western
Responses to Globalisation, University of Western Sydney and Liverpool City council, UWS, Sydney. Martinez-Fernandez, C. and S. Sharpe (2007), Ways to Grow in South West Sydney, University of Western Sydney and Liverpool City council, UWS, Sydney.
Martinez-Fernandez, C.,C. Soosay, V. V. Krishna, T. Turpin, M. Bjorkli and K. Doloswala (2005a), Knowledge Intensive Service Activities (KISA
) in Innovation of the Tourism Industry in Australia, University of Western Sydney, Sydney. Martinez-Fernandez, C.,C. Soosay, V. V. Krishna, T. Turpin, M. Bjorkli (2005b), Knowledge Intensive Service Activities (KISA) in Innovation of the Software
University of Western Sydney, Sydney. Martinez-Fernandez, C. and S. Sharpe (2007), Ways to Grow in South West Sydney, University of Western Sydney and Liverpool City council, UWS, Sydney.
Miles, I.,B. Jones, T. Dunnewijk, H. Meijers, A. van Zon and B. Kotteik (2008), Innovation in the European Service Economy Scenarios and Implications for Skills and Knowledge
nonprofit hospitals in the United states and abroad, biotechnology industries, companies, universities and organisations, drug research is brought from the lab into the clinic and on to regulatory approval and manufacturing for patients in the developing world.
and university curricula Social entrepreneurs might need special training to help them hone and develop their entrepreneurial and creative skills.
and to include social entrepreneurship in school and university curricula. Support market development for social enterprise
de l'économie sociale, 27-29 may, Carleton University, Ottawa. Caulier-Grice, J. and G. Mulgan (2009), Exploring the Links between Social Enterprises, Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation,
How Intentions to Create a Social Enterprise Get Formed, Working Paper No. 521, September, IESE Business school, University of Navarra (Spain.
A Framework for Future Research, Working Paper No. 546, IESE Business school, University of Navarra (Spain.
The Concept of Social Entrepreneurship, University of Aukland Business Review, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 45-51.
Domain, Contributions and Ethical Dilemmas, University of Minnesota Conference on Ethics and Entrepreneurship. Zhara, S.,E. Gedajlovic, D. Neubaum and J. Shulman (2008), Typology of Entrepreneurs:
and training to start-up entrepreneurs with strong technological knowledge and developing programmes for corporate and university spin-offs, including proof-of-concept,
promoting the local entrepreneurship engagement aspects of university third missions, developing technology bridging institutions, strengthening the innovation absorption capacity of SMES
and foreign direct investment ventures and attracting highly-skilled labour from abroad. 3. Strengthen entrepreneurial human capital Build up entrepreneurship education in universities
and include social entrepreneurship in school and university curricula. Introduce social clauses in public procurement procedures to encourage involvement of social enterprises in provision of social goods and services.
and learn from universities, research organisations and technologically-advanced companies. This is key to receiving external knowledge
universities, finance suppliers and public sector agencies bound together by common sets of norms and routines.
include industry, universities, colleges, employment agencies, unions and training organisations/associations, and are supported by integrated policy approaches to skills development.
Spin-off A new firm that is created by a former employee of a company (i e. corporate spin-off) or by researchers, teachers or students of a university (i e. university spin-off.
University spin-offs often exploit technologies generated within the university. Systemic failures Systemic failures are problems in innovation systems that prevent the generation, circulation and exploitation of knowledge.
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011