Download Journal of Technology Management & Innovation PDF

Journal of Technology Management & Innovation
Name: Journal of Technology Management & Innovation
Pages: 154
Year: 2015
Language: English
File Size: 6.72 MB
Downloads: 0
Page 2

J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2015. Volume 10, Issue 3 ISSN: 0718 2724. ( Journal of Technology Management & Innovation Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Facultad de Econom a y Negocios.Entrepreneurship and Academic Employment ore like than ou"d hink Anna Sinel l 1*, Marie Heidingsfelder 1, Martina Schraudner 1 Abstract: Recognising the increasing value of knowledge and technology transfer, the scienti?c and political communities in Germany have recently devoted much attention to academic entrepreneurship. Seeking to explore similarities and di?erences between academic employment and entrepren eurship, we interviewed 112 postdoctoral students from the four major German research organisations and 16 senior transfer managers whose resp onsibilities included spin o? facilitation. Our ?ndings indicate that those involved in such occupations o en believe that academic employment and entrepreneurship di?er substantially on many levels. Both interviewed senior managers and postdoctoral students considered engaging in commercialisation activities to be a risky and serious undertaking and a signi?cant career change. Simultaneously, the opinions and observations of postdoctoral students helped us identify a wide range of similarities between academic employment and entrepreneurship. Our ?ndings can help make entrepreneurship more accessible to researchers, re de?ne the boundaries between scienti?c and commercial activities, and, ultimately, foster knowledge and technology transfer. Keywo rds: Academic spin o?, entrepreneurship, knowledge transfer, paradigms of (German) academia. Schubert, Rammer, & Frietsch, 2014) and only approximately one percent of these businesses are initiated by researchers (Braun rmann, Knie, & Simon, 2010, p. 9). Seeking to increase the number of such businesses and to generally reduce the existing gap between academia and business, the government and many research organisations have recently initiated a range of programs. e impact of these programs, however, has remained low. In 2013, only 45 businesses were initiated by the employees of the four major national research organisations (Helmholtz Association, 2014; Leibniz Association, 2015; Fraunhofer Gesellscha , 2014; Max Planck Society, 2014). Such small proportions of academic spin o?s can be explained, for example, by potential entrepreneurs being unclear about their objectives and strategies and lacking necessary information and skills in business administration (Hemer, Schleinkofer, & G thner, 2007; Riesenhuber, Walter, & Auer, 2006; Franklin, Wright, & Lockett, 2001; Vohora, Wright, & Lockett, 2004). Especially during the start up stage, such lack of information and skills can lead to poor decisions (Spath, Winter, & Pape, 2010). One structural barrier, identi?ed by Braun rmann et al. (2010), is the lack of support by the employing organisation. Many of the publications on the subject share the assumption that the gap between academic employment and entrepreneurship would be extremely di cult to bridge and that for a scientist to engage in commercialisation activities would be a non trivial undertaking (e. g. Submitted August 26th 2015 / Approved September 30th 2015 1. Introduction continues to increase (von Kortzfleisch, Bertram, Zerwas, & Arndt, 2015; Bozeman, Rimes, & Youtie, 2015). In view of these developments, both the scientific and political communities have begun paying greater attention to academic entrepreneurship (e. g. Shane, 2004; W right, 2007; O'Shea, Chugh, & Allen, 2008). To this end, the European Commission initiated the European Institute of Innovation and T echnology, EIT, as a part of its Horizon 2020 program (European Commission, 2014, p. 28). In Germany, the High tech Strategy of the German federal government is intended to foster knowledge and technology transfer, to increase the national capacity for innovation, and, in particular, to increase the commercialisation activity of national research institutions (Federal Ministry of Education and Research, 2010, p. 10). Academic entrepreneurship can help more efficiently utilise research findings, create jobs, and provide economic benefits (Dickel, 2009). Germany's capacity for innovation is currently estimated as very high (Frietsch, Rammer, Schubert, B hrer, & Neuh usler, 2012; Poirson 2013). Simultaneously, a relatively small number of businesses are initiated every year (Brixy, Hundt, Sternberg, & St ber, 2009; 1 Fraunhofer Center for Responsible Research and Innovation Berlin Germany. *Corresponding author: [email protected]

Page 3

ISSN: 0718 2724. ( Journal of Technology Management & Innovation Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Facultad de Econom a y Negocios. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2015. Volume 10, Issue 3 Braun rmann et al., 2010; Jain, George, & Maltarich, 2009; van der Sijde, David, Frederik, & Redondo Carretero, 2014). In line with these ndings, we have formulated the following research questions: Where do transfer managers and postdoctoral students see the di?erences between academic employment and entrepreneurship and how do their perceptions match the existing common perceptions about such di?erences? What causes these perceptual di?erences? Considering job pro?les, required skill sets, and existing organisational practices, how di?erent are academic employment and entrepreneurship precisely? Our ndings suggest that this tale of two logics" (van der Sijde et al., 2014) might largely be a widely shared and self perpetuating illusion. 2. ?eoretical background 2.1. Existing paradigms By commercialising innovations, academic spin o s have the potential (e. g. Bollinger, Hope, & Utternack, 1983; Gottschalk, Fryges, Metzger, Heger, & Licht, 2007) to re shape the existing technological landscape (Breznitz, O"Shea, & Allen, 2008). Scholars have explored the challenges that potential academic entrepreneurs might face (e. g. Franklin et al., 2001; Vohora et al., 2004, Hemer et al., 2007; Riesenhuber et al., 2006). While their studies vary substantially in approach and method, these scholars share the view that academic employment and entrepreneurship belong to two di erent worlds, which are opposite of one another in a variety of ways and each of which has clear boundaries. Crossing these boundaries would require fundamental changes in social and symbolic order (Braun rmann et al., 2010). Braun rmann et al. (2010) distinguish between three types of such boundaries, which de ne (1) research types and contexts, (2) organisations, and (3) individual identities. From individuals, crossing these boundaries would require, respectively, (1) resetting their priorities, (2) developing new professional identities outside of their current organisations, and (3) conforming their behaviour to norms that are compatible with entrepreneurship. According to Jain et al. (2009), engaging in commercialisation activities typically require individual scientists to modify their role identity, which entails norms, processes, and outputs (Jain et al., 2009, p. 924). e transition between the two worlds can be achieved gradually and will result in the scientists adopting a hybrid role identity (Jain et al., 2009) and the development of a new community with its own norms and practices (Braun rmann et al., 2010, p. 24). Merton (1959) identi ed the four following components of the scienti c ethos: (1) universalism, implying that scienti c observations should be veri able and independent of the observer, (2) communism, implying that scientists share their work for the common good, (3) disinterestedness, implying that scientists have no emotional or nancial attachments to their work, and (4) organized scepticism, implying that scientists should wait until they have gathered all the facts before they make a judgment about a particular theory. ese norms are o en incompatible with those of entrepreneurship (Jain et al., 2009, p. 924). A scientist"s notion of universality is in con ict with an entrepreneur"s belief in the unique selling point (Barney, 1991). Communism is incompatible with the de nition of private property, while the academic ideal of scepticism contradicts the entrepreneurial ideal of passion (Baum & Locke, 2004; Camerer & Lovallo, 1999). While delayed dissemination of ndings in academia would con ict with the principles of universalism and communism (Merton, 1959), from an entrepreneurial perspective, a premature disclosure of certain ndings might violate patent protection and compromise potential intellectual property (Ndonzuau, Pirnay, & Surlemont, 2002). Given these incompatibilities, reconciling both worlds poses a non trivial challenge and requires a substantial amount of identity work" from an individual scientist engaging in entrepreneurial activity (Jain et al., 2009, p. 924; Bird, Hayward, & Allen, 1993). Other factors that such scientists might need to consider include planning, risks, management styles, and money (Samson, 1990). As compared to entrepreneurs, scientists usually have the opportunity to make longer term plans, face fewer risks, have the opportunity to appreciate more consensus oriented management styles, and place a lower value on money (Samson, 1990). Some recent studies, however, challenge this tale of two logics" by indicating that some of these incompatibilities might be relative. Sass (2011, pp. 55 57.) demonstrates that commercialisation activities and patent applications have long become part of academic occupation (see also Lee & Rhoads, 2004). In some cases, the principles of communism are not strictly adhered to and ndings are disseminated with restrictions or not at all, especially when di erent groups research in similar directions and are considered mutual competitors (Campbell et al. 2002; Blumenthal, Campbell, Anderson, Causino, & Louis, 1997). Some studies indicate that more scientists would potentially be interested in commercialising their ndings if they had the time (Braunerhjelm, 2007). In a group studied by van Looy, Callaert, & Debackere, (2006), those who were more open to entrepreneurship usually demonstrated higher academic productivity. All these ndings challenge the above described paradigms. 2.2 Beyond the paradigms Since the late 1930s, scholars in di erent research elds have explored how individuals related to their work (Ekehammer, 1974; Lewin, 1935; Murray, 1938; Pervin, 1968; Kristof Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005). While their studies vary in approach and method, most of them address individual values, preferences, aspirations, skills, and personality traits in relation to occupation and workplace. Drawing from their literature review, Kristof Brown et al. (2005) have developed probably the most comprehensive model of person environment t. is model has four dimensions. e rst dimension, Person job, refers to individual knowledge, skills, abilities, and job responsibilities. e second dimension, Person organisation , refers to fundamental organisational norms, values, and practices including organisational culture. e third dimension, Person group, refers to relationships with co workers, team composition, and work atmosphere. Finally, the fourth dimension, Person supervisor, refers to organisational hierarchies and relationships between employees and their superiors. 2

Page 4

ISSN: 0718 2724. ( Journal of Technology Management & Innovation Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Facultad de Econom a y Negocios. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2015. Volume 10, Issue 3 For the purposes of our research, we have slightly adapted this model. Kristof Brown et al. (2005) regarded supervising activities as part of group dynamics, and egalitarian work relationships and loose hierarchies are common practice in both academia and entrepreneurships. Our model therefore regards the third and fourth dimensions as one. We also expanded the second category and renamed it Person structure to shi the focus toward more structural aspects of organisations. Drawing from this model, we analyse the perceptions of transfer managers and postdoctoral students about di erences between academic employment and entrepreneurship and analyse possible causes of these perceptions. By considering job pro les, required skill sets, and existing organisational practices, we precisely discuss the di erences and similarities of academic employment and entrepreneurship. 3. Method In order to explore similarities and di erences between academic employment and entrepreneurship, we conducted a comprehensive literature review and 128 qualitative interviews. We used the review and the method of theoretical sampling (Glaser & Strauss, 2010) (1) to identify the criteria for interviewee selection, and (2) to deductively derive" (Flick, 2007; Mayring, 2010) categories, which helped develop semi structured questionnaires for the interviews and later helped analyse the gathered empirical data. For the interviews, we selected 112 postdoctoral students from the four major German research organisations 1 and 16 senior transfer managers from scienti c organisations and government agencies, including former researchers, whose responsibilities included spin o facilitation. e managers were selected (1) because of their long term and vast experience in KTT and academic entrepreneurship and (2) because, due to their positions, their views carried substantial weight in setting KTT agendas. e 112 individual problem centred interviews (Witzel, 2000) with postdoctoral students focused personal aspirations, career drivers, career development strategies, career paths both within and outside of academia, and existing practices in research organisations including shared norms, values, and basic assumptions (Schein, 1985). e questionnaire contained both yes/no and free response questions in order to approach the subject at hand from di erent angles. Each interview was recorded, and these records were transcribed and analysed. For this analysis, we utilised a range of qualitative methods from empirical social research, including that of Mayring (2010). By adhering to the principle of openness" (Flick, 2010; Lamnek, 2010), these methods enabled us to assess individual perspectives and points of reference. With the purpose of theory building (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007), this analysis focused on individual perceptions of self and others and behaviours typical within di erent types of KTT teams. Finally, we utilised the gathered data to inductively restructure and expand" the above mentioned categories (Mayring, 2010). e following section presents our ndings, including a selection of interview quotations. In accordance with the major principle of qualitative research, these quotations are intended to illustrate the ndings rather than provide a representative sample (Haas & Scheibelhofer, 1998). For reasons of con dentiality, only the sexes and positions of quoted interviewees are revealed. 4. Findings In this chapter, we show where interviewed senior transfer managers and postdoctoral students saw di erences between academic employment and entrepreneurship, present the students" perceptions about their jobs and workplaces, and describe the similarities between the two worlds that we established based on these perceptions. 4.1 Academic entrepreneurship as perceived by interviewed senior transfer managers and postdoctoral students Scientists are scientists to the core, they don't start businesses. (Senior manager, female) Most of the aspects of academic employment and entrepreneurship addressed by interviewed senior transfer managers can be referred to person job and person structure t and only few can be associated to person group t (Kristof Brown et al., 2005). ese managers most o en spoke about the individual traits of scientists and entrepreneurs and their intrinsic motivations. is section presents the managers" observations, and quotations supporting these observations. Many interviewed managers explained the low number of national academic spin o s by scientists being too averse to risk and lacking courage," as illustrated by the following quotation. is because too few are that open to risk and ready to do it. For a scientist to leave his or her organisation and to start a business, I think, the stretch would be too big. He or she would also need much endurance. (Senior manager, male) Many studies indicate that business owners o en exhibit high risk tolerance and more risk adverse individuals are less likely to start a business (e. g. Stewart, Watson, Carland, & Carland, 1999; Wagner, 2003; Ekelund, Johansson, J rvelin, & Lichtermann, 2005). Unlimited term employees have been shown to be particularly unlikely to start a business (Caliendo, Fossen, & Kritikos, 2007), and women have been shown to be more risk averse than men (e. g. Wagner, 2007; Caliendo et al., 2007). German research organisations mostly provide limited term employment contracts, which o en cover at most two years. Nonetheless, many researchers appear to regard academic employment as the more secure option" and would rather endure its hardships than expose themselves to the risks of entrepreneurship. (1) e interviews were part of Career and leadership women in research organisations and technical universities , funded by BMBF, grant ID 01FP1303, and jointly conducted by Fraunhofer and RWTH Aachen in four major research organisations and ve TU9 universities respectively between June 2013 and June 2015.3

Page 5

ISSN: 0718 2724. ( Journal of Technology Management & Innovation Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Facultad de Econom a y Negocios. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2015. Volume 10, Issue 3 Many research organisations provide business support programs, including the training of managerial skills. Simultaneously, interviewed managers observed that potential entrepreneurs in their organisations o en did not nd themselves ?t for surviving in the free market" (senior manager, female) and possessing necessary business management skills and understanding of the law. ese ndings match those of many empirical studies (e. g. Franklin et al., 2001; Vohora et al., 2004). Within their samples, Walter, Auer, & Ritter, (2006) and Dickel (2009) discovered that those new academic entrepreneurs who put a higher value on networking and cultivating entrepreneurial spirit were usually more successful in general and with their rst product in particular (Dickel, 2009). To summarise, interviewed senior transfer managers identi ed the following two major issues related to person job t: most scientists are too averse to risk and lack necessary skills. Similarly in relation to person structure t, many interviewees identi ed signi cant barriers that one might face while switching from relatively secure" academic employment to insecure" entrepreneurship. Some even referred to the latter as the risky area", as illustrated by the following quotation. To say, I am entering the risky area, where I have to face all these completely di?erent problems and possibly, a bankruptcy, that would be a really big deal. (Senior manager, male) In German academia, working extra hours on top of normal hours required in the o ce is standard practice. Simultaneously, many interviewees believed that entrepreneurship was more demanding and that it would be nearly impossible to combine entrepreneurship with family obligations and interests outside work. In view of the fact that women usually carry a larger load of family responsibilities it is perhaps not surprising that in 2009, for example, only eight and two percent of highly technological start ups in Germany were founded by all female and mixed gender teams respectively (Metzger, Niefert, & Licht, 2008). While the government and many research institutions provide di erent business support programs, including help with networking and the development of business plans, nance remains an issue, in particular when a potential new business requires complicated equipment. Many interviewed managers identi ed access to external nance to be another major challenge, as illustrated by the following quotation. I mean, there are opportunities . But you have to know about them. At the beginning, you need to be very... incredibly motivated and to want, want, want to ?nd all this information. (Senior manager, female) Many of the managers identi ed certain cultural beliefs to be a substantial barrier. As compared to other nations, Germans might be more prone to the fear of failure (Singer, Ernesto Amor s, & Moska, 2014) and more willing to believe in the gap between science and business, as illustrated by the following quotation. In Germany, there is this divide in people's heads. We believe that good science can not possibly be driven by considerations of commerce. (Senior manager, male) e language that interviewees used was a manifestation of this perceived divide. To engage in commercialisation activities, a scientist would have to take the plunge," to jump into the deep end," to go down a rough road," to be ready to su er," and to be a real bulldog". ese choices of words suggest that the managers believed that engaging in commercialisation activities would require much courage, endurance, and assertiveness. To summarise, most interviewed senior transfer managers believed that academic employment and entrepreneurship di ered substantially on many levels and that engaging in commercialisation activities entailed a range of challenges, as illustrated by the following quotation. Starting a business is just a huge life change. (Senior manager, female) Most interviewed postdoctoral students mentioned di erences between academic employment and entrepreneurship similar to those mentioned by interviewed senior transfer managers. Most spoke of the risks and downsides of academic entrepreneurship and few spoke of the upsides and opportunities that it provided. Both those who could imagine starting a business at some point and those who could not associated entrepreneurship with a range of challenges, primarily those related to nancing and planning, as illustrated by the following quotation. Well, that would be extremely risky and require a huge investment. ?at's why it probably wouldn't work. (Postdoc, male) Simultaneously, more than one fourth of the interviewed postdoctoral students found entrepreneurship appealing and considered it a valid career option. ese students included men and women in approximately equal proportions. Among those whose organisations provided spin o support, as compared to those whose organisations did not, a greater proportion either already had some entrepreneurial experience or intended to start a business in the immediate future, as illustrated by the following quotation. ?is program is actually quite generous. ?ey funded four full time positions for a start up. We also have quite a mix of backgrounds in our team, in a good way, everything a company needs, right at the start and later, a?er it takes o?. (Postdoc, male) Many interviewed postdoctoral students found that good, marketable ideas were essential for a successful start up. Many believed that the speci cs of one"s academic eld determined how much opportunity one had to develop such ideas and that applied research, as compared to basic research, provided better opportunities. Many believed, sometimes with regret, that it would be nearly impossible to commercialise most ndings in certain basic research elds, as illustrated by the following quotation. To start a business, one needs to have ideas that have that kind of potential. We o?en have interesting ideas here, but being outside of our 4

Page 6

ISSN: 0718 2724. ( Journal of Technology Management & Innovation Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Facultad de Econom a y Negocios. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2015. Volume 10, Issue 3 eld... they"re just ideas. And then we say, yeah, that would be useful, it would be great to do it. But you can"t, not with this group. (Postdoc, male) Many interviewed postdoctoral students believed that to attempt entrepreneurship, one needed to have certain personality traits such as high risk tolerance and to possess certain skills, such as business administration. Most believed that they lacked both and found that entrepreneurship would require too much time and e?ort, as illustrated by the following quotation. I don"t think I"m cut out for that. ere would be just too much uncertainty. (Postdoc, female) To conclude, most interviewed postdoctoral students believed that academic entrepreneurship was an option only for those scientists who were more risk tolerant, were interested in practical application, had the necessary knowhow and skills, and were willing to invest a great deal of time and e?ort. Although many found entrepreneurship potentially appealing, they believed that they lacked the necessary skills, had "the wrong personality," and were generally un?t for entrepreneurship. When looking at possible causes for the outlined perceptual di?erences of academic employment and entrepreneurship two main factors can be identi?ed: First, scientists and entrepreneurs lack the opportunity to identify themselves within the other group. It requires opportunities for re?ection and change of perspective to ?nd out about the working conditions and tasks in science and entrepreneurship respectively. e fact, that scientists have long been employed in their eld, makes entrepreneurship seem really strange and far away. So they are just not interested in it and don"t see potential overlaps. (Senior manager, female) University industry cooperation could be a promising way to overcome these perceptions, as pointed out by a senior KTT manager: Coorperation between research institutions and businesses are certainly a good way to simply have a change of perspective and also to see how companies work, what markets need, and what research can and cannot do. (Senior manager, male) Secondly, academic entrepreneurship as part of KTT activities is still a young topic and not yet well established in research institutions. ?e ?ndings indicate that apart from a small number of exceptions entrepreneurship and academic spin o? formation is neither part of university curricula nor is it well communicated in the research institutions. A huge barrier is that the issue of technology transfer and spin o s is just not on the agenda of and the directors of the institutions. (Senior manager, male) Additionally, there is a lack of incentives and appreciation for transfer activities and spin o? formation within research organizations as research and teaching are still perceived as being of greater value. ere are many ways to incentivize spin o activities. An award or nancial bene ts could be a good idea. but that just does not t to the strategy of . Here it"s mainly projects with industry that count. (Senior manager, male) ?e results are in line with the ?ndings of Grave, Hetze, & Kanig (2014) that more than half of the scienti?c sta? at German universities do not know that KTT support programs exist at their research institutions and less than 25% of German universities provide incentives or reward structures to foster spin o? formation (Grave et al., 2014). In order to increase the engagement of scientists in entrepreneurship activities, supporting structures for spin o? formation must be adequately and frequently communicated (Kolb & Wagner, 2015). Universities, that provide established policies and procedures for the management of technology transfer and articulate entrepreneurship as a fundamental element of their mission, perform signi?cantly better with regard to the number of spin o?s created (Caldera & Debande, 2010; Huyghe & Knockaert, 2015). ?e above described opinions and observations of both interviewed senior transfer managers and postdoctoral students match the widely shared assumptions that academic employment and entrepreneurship are fundamentally di?erent and that engaging in the latter would be an enormous career change and not worth the e?ort. In the following section, we explore to what degree this assumption is grounded in reality. 4.2 Similarities between academic employment and entrepreneurship ?e postdoctoral students were interviewed about their perceptions of German academia, its existing practices and infrastructures, their own place in it, and the speci?cs of their work. By analysing their responses, we concluded that academic employment and entrepreneurship share a range of similarities. Drawing from Kristof Brown et al. (2005), we associated each similarity with one of the three dimensions described in Section 2.2 person job, person structure, and person group. ?e responses of interviewed postdoctoral students suggest that their decisions to work in academia were primarily determined by considerations that can be referred to person job ?t. Most interviewed postdoctoral students stated that their major drivers were their assignments, research subjects, and the opportunity to research by itself. An occupation in science helped them explore their interests and provided variety of assignments, personal autonomy, and creative freedom. Many found their work to be rich and exciting. Many were motivated by the given autonomy to determine when, where, and how they will work. Many felt that their work was meaningful and its results useful to others. ?e following quotation illustrates. I was always driven by the substance, by its role. And when a project spoke to me, when I thought that it mattered, that was always a factor. at it was about some important issues, not just producing knowledge. And that it could be implemented and resolve these issues. (Postdoc, male) Many studies indicate that the most appealing aspects of entrepreneurship are very similar. Most entrepreneurs are driven by 5

Page 7

ISSN: 0718 2724. ( Journal of Technology Management & Innovation Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Facultad de Econom a y Negocios. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2015. Volume 10, Issue 3 the opportunities to realise their own ideas (H nnies Stemann, Rulle, Seel, & Terbel, 2010), to take responsibility, and work autonomously (Shane, 2004; Kulicke & Schleinkofer, 2008; Roberts, 1989; Egeln, Gottschalk, Rammer, & Spielkamp, 2002). When asked about their responsibilities, interviewed postdoctoral students mentioned research and project management, including team management, fundraising, and time management. Applying for grants, in particular, has long been a major part of researcher"s job, as illustrated by the following quotation. My responsibilities include project supervision and my own research. I mentor graduate and PhD students, network with both researches and business people, and manage my own projects. So, applying for and managing money grants. (Postdoc, female) Entrepreneurial activities are very similar to those described above entrepreneurs raise money, supervise other people, and manage time and nances. Lack of skills necessary for performing these activities can hinder a start up (H nnies Stemann et al., 2010). Some interviewed postdoctoral students commented on these similarities between entrepreneurship and a job in academia, as illustrated by the following quotation. Because I have to ?nd the money by myself... it's like in business. I ?nd the funds for everything here . ?at's what the overhead is for, so to say, for my co workers. And if this money stops, I'll be unemployed. It's not that di?erent from entrepreneurship. (Postdoc, male) With regard to the person structure relationship, most postdoctoral students spoke of the shortcomings of existing practices in academia and very few spoke of their bene ts. Many mentioned that the system provided limited opportunity for long term career development planning, and wished that their organisations would more actively communicate with them about their professional prospects and potential career steps, as illustrated by the following quotation. And then there's career planning, which is a really big issue in academia. I would like to have more certainty with that sometime soon. Not that I necessarily need an unlimited term contract, but it would be great if we could discuss what I can achieve here and how exactly I can achieve that. (Postdoc, male) Simultaneously, only few postdoctoral students associated entrepreneurship with similar uncertainties and commented on these similarities between the two worlds, as illustrated by the following quotations. Because academia doesn't do unlimited term contracts as much anymore, all you can be sure of is one year or two. And then there's the 12 years regulation. I simply see no point for myself , especially if I want to start a family. (Postdoc, female) In business as in academia there're no guaranties that a project will succeed. (Postdoc, female) In entrepreneurship, such uncertainties are balanced by a large degree of personal autonomy (Sass, 2011; Shane, 2004; H nnies Stemann et al., 2010). Similarly in academia, many organisations give their employees the autonomy to determine when, where, and how they will work. is exibility, however, continues to erase the boundaries between professional and private, and actual workloads exceeding contractual workloads has long been standard practice throughout academia. All postdoctoral students o en worked and were available to their co workers and superiors outside of regular working hours, as illustrated by the quotation below. While the students accepted this investment of time as natural and acceptable within the research context, they considered similar demands of an entrepreneurial lifestyle overwhelming. I read my mails. I am available on weekends for emergencies. I respond to mails a?er work. If you count all this, I start at 7 a.m. and ?nish around 10 or 11 p.m. (Postdoc, male) e students were to a large degree driven by intrinsic motivations they were passionate about their work, felt that it gave them the opportunity to satisfy their curiosity, and associated it with feelings of excitement, enjoyment, and freedom, as illustrated by the quotation below. Most described the given opportunity to ful l themselves through their work as one of their major drivers. In a similar manner, actual and potential business owners are o en driven by intrinsic motivations (Sass, 2011), including the opportunity to ful l themselves (H nnies Stemann et al., 2010; Autio & Kauranen, 1994). As a scientist, I feel free. I am more free to choose, what I want to research . What motivates me most, is my own curiosity... and then the discoveries, the wonders, and ?guring things out. (Postdoc, female) With regard to the person group relationships, most postdoctoral students found the atmosphere in their workplace to be very encouraging and described it as open, friendly, cooperative, and supportive. In particular, many found discussions with their co workers to be interesting and motivating. Some even chose to accept their current positions because of their co workers and atmosphere in the workplace. In a similar manner, actual and potential business owners are o en motivated by relationships with their employees and partners (Sass, 2011). Egalitarian relationships are characteristic of academia and its hierarchies are o en loosely de ned. Almost all postdoctoral students supervised projects and mentored PhD students. Simultaneously, their leadership was not institutionalised and they did not have any sanction power, which o en allowed for loose interpretations of their own position in the hierarchy. Some wished for a stricter de nition of hierarchies and clearer instruction from their superiors, and others did not question the existing order and appreciated the large degree of personal autonomy it provides. In this regard, some recognised the similarities between their current position and self employment, as illustrated by the following quotation. ?at you are, I'd say, your own boss. I mean, you have autonomy, you are not restricted and nobody tells you that you can't do this or that. Working here, at this institute, is really not that di?erent from being self employed. (Postdoc, male)6

Page 8

ISSN: 0718 2724. ( Journal of Technology Management & Innovation Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Facultad de Econom a y Negocios. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2015. Volume 10, Issue 3 Figure 1 shows the established similarities between entrepreneurship and academic employment. Figure 1: Similarities between entrepreneurship and academic employment the three dimensional construct (drawing from Kristof Brown et al., 2005) Entrepreneurship and academic employment appear to share precisely those traits that a majority of interviewed postdoctoral students found most appealing in their occupation, such as opportunities for stimulating and meaningful work and a large degree of personal autonomy. Similarly, while most postdoctoral students considered entrepreneurship to be a risky and serious undertaking because it provides only limited opportunities for long term planning, they already faced such challenges in their jobs as researchers. In view of these similarities, the perceptions expressed by both postdoctoral students and senior transfer managers regarding the greater challenges entailed by entrepreneurship and the un tness of most researchers for that task appear to be largely unjusti ed. 5. Conclusions e worlds of science and entrepreneurship have each developed their own di erent norms and practices. Simultaneously, our ndings challenge the widely shared perceptions of the gap between these two worlds and suggest that academic and entrepreneurial careers might be more alike than di erent. A majority of interviewed postdoctoral students were largely driven by the idea that the results of their work could be useful and have a variety of applications. At the same time, many were neither interested in nor considered themselves t for realising such applications. In other words, they desired to provide the foundation for potential innovations but not to participate in their commercialisation. In view of the many uncertainties that researchers in Germany currently face, on the one hand, and the large number of patents granted to German researchers every year, our ndings can be useful to both researchers and transfer managers. By challenging the perception of entrepreneurship as a completely di erent occupation," our ndings can help researchers both men and women recognise it as a valid career option and themselves as already possessing the necessary skills, especially if they are willing to re evaluate how averse they really are to risk. Transfer managers, on the other hand, might want to utilise our ndings to adjust both their ideas of researchers" capabilities and their business supporting strategies. In view of established similarities between academic and entrepreneurial careers, it would be interesting to explore what can motivate scientists to take the plunge" into entrepreneurship and what could be the real barriers to such a plunge, as opposed to it remaining merely illusory. To tackle the identi ed misperceptions and to outline that both roles in entrepreneurial and academic employment share similar characteristics, university business cooperation could be a promising solution. Joint research projects or internships at entrepreneurial businesses are possible cooperation formats to foster collaboration among scientists and entrepreneurs and may help to overcome the perceptual di erences of academic employment and entrepreneurship. Also, entrepreneurial education in university curricula could make entrepreneurship more tangible for scientists and encourage entrepreneurial ideas. By bringing researchers and transfer managers together, accommodating their perspectives, and helping them develop joint strategies, we can foster technology transfer and tap into a vast potential for innovation. References Autio, E., & Kauranen, I. (1994). Technologist entrepreneurs versus non entrepreneurial technologists: analysis of motivational triggering factors. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 6(4), 315 328. doi:10.1080/08985629400000019 Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99 120. doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 Baum, J. R., & Locke, E. A. (2004). e relationship of entrepreneurial traits, skill, and motivation to subsequent venture growth. e Journal of applied psychology, 89(4), 587 598. doi:10.1037/0021 9010.89.4.587 Bird, B. J., Hayward, D. J., & Allen, D. N. (1993). Con icts in the Commercialization of Knowledge: Perspectives from Science and Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship, theory and practice, 17(4), 57 77.7

Page 9

ISSN: 0718 2724. ( Journal of Technology Management & Innovation Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Facultad de Econom a y Negocios. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2015. Volume 10, Issue 3 Blumenthal, D., Campbell, E. G., Anderson, M. S., Causino, N., & Louis, K. S. (1997). Withholding research results in academic life science. Evidence from a national survey of faculty. Journal of the American Medical Association, 277(15), 1224 1228. Bollinger, L., Hope, K., & Utterback, J. M. (1983). A review of literature and hypotheses on new technology based rms. Research Policy, 12(1), 1 14. doi:10.1016/0048 7333(83)90023 9 Bozeman, B., Rimes, H., & Youtie, J. (2015). e evolving state of the art in technology transfer research: Revisiting the contingent e ectiveness model. Research Policy, 44(1), 34 49. doi:10.1016/j. respol.2014.06.008 Braunerhjelm, P. (2007). Academic entrepreneurship: social norms, university culture and policies. Science and Public Policy, 34(9), 619 631. doi:10.3152/030234207X276554 Braun rmann, H., Knie, A., & Simon, D. (2010). Unternehmen Wissenscha .: Ausgr ndungen als Grenz berschreitungen akademischer Forschung. Science Studies. Bielefeld: Transcript. Breznitz, S. M., O"Shea, R. P., & Allen, T. J. (2008). University Commercialization Strategies in the Development of Regional Bioclusters Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(2), 129 142. doi:10.1111/j.1540 5885.2008.00290.x Brixy, U., Hundt, C., Sternberg, R., & St ber, H. (2009). Unternehmensgr ndungen im internationalen Vergleich: Deutschland eine Gr ndungsw ste? (IAB Kurzbericht No. 15/2009). Retrieved from Institut f r Arbeitsmarkt und Berufsforschung (IAB) website: Caldera, A., & Debande, O. (2010). Performance of Spanish universities in technology transfer: An empirical analysis. Research Policy, 39(9), 1160 1173. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.05.016 Caliendo, M., Fossen, F., & Kritikos, A. (2009). Risk attitudes of nascent entrepreneurs new evidence from an experimentally validated survey. Small Business Economics, 32(2), 153 167. doi:10.1007/s11187 007 9078 6 Camerer, C., & Lovallo, D. (1999). Overcon dence and Excess Entry: An Experimental Approach. American Economic Review, 89(1), 306 318. doi:10.1257/aer.89.1.306 Campbell, E. G., Clarridge, B. R., Gokhale, M., Birenbaum, L., Hilgartner, S., Holtzman, N. A., & Blumenthal, D. (2002). Data withholding in academic genetics: evidence from a national survey. Journal of the American Medical Association, 287(4), 473 480. Dickel, P. (2009). Marktbezogenes Lernen in Akademischen Spin o s: Gewinnung und Integration von Marktinformationen in der fr hen Phase technologiebasierter Ausgr ndungen. Gabler Edition Wissenscha : Vol. 62. Wiesbaden: Gabler.Egeln, J., Gottschalk, S., Rammer, C., & Spielkamp, A. (2002). Spino Gr ndungen aus der entlichen Forschung in Deutschland: Gutachten f r das Bundesministerium f r Bildung und Forschung (Wirtscha sanalysen). Mannheim. Retrieved from p:// docs/docus/dokumentation0302.pdf Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). eory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25 32. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2007.24160888 Ekehammar, B. (1974). Interactionism in personality from a historical perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 81(12), 1026 1048. doi:10.1037/h0037457 Ekelund, J., Johansson, E., J rvelin, M. R., & Lichtermann, D. (2005). Self employment and risk aversion evidence from psychological test data. Labour Economics, 12(5), 649 659. doi:10.1016/j. labeco.2004.02.009 Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdor , L. (2000). e dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university industry government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109 123. doi:10.1016/S0048 7333(99)00055 4 Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., & Healey, P. (1998). Capitalizing knowledge: New intersections of industry and academia. SUNY series, frontiers in education. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. European Commission. (2014). Horizon 2020 in brief: e EU framework programme for research & innovation. Luxembourg: Publications O ce. Federal Ministry of Education and Research. (2010). Ideen. Innovation. Wachstum: Hightech Strategie 2020 f r Deutschland. Bonn, Berlin. Retrieved from BMBF_Hightech Strategie.pdf Flick, U. (2007). Qualitative Sozialforschung: Eine Einf hrung (6th ed.). rowohlts enzyklop die. Hamburg: Rowohlt. Flick, U. (2010). Design und Prozess qualitativer Forschung. In U. Flick, E. v. Kardor , & I. Steinke (Eds.), Qualitative Forschung. Ein Handbuch (8th ed., pp. 252 264). Reinbek: Rowohlt. Franklin, S. J., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2001). Academic and Surrogate Entrepreneurs in University Spin out Companies. e Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1 2), 127 141. doi:10.1023/A:1007896514609 Fraunhofer Gesellscha . (2014). Jahresbericht 2013: Leben in der digitalen Welt. M nchen. Retrieved from de/publikationen/fraunhofer jahresbericht.html Frietsch, R., Rammer, C., Schubert, T., B hrer, S., & Neuh usler, P. (2012). Innovationsindikator 2012. Berlin, Bonn. Retrieved from http://www.telekom cms/sites/default/files//dts library/materialien/pdf/innovationsindikator_2012.pdf 8

Page 10

ISSN: 0718 2724. ( Journal of Technology Management & Innovation Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Facultad de Econom a y Negocios. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2015. Volume 10, Issue 3Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2010). Grounded eory: Strategien qualitativer Forschung (3rd ed.). Bern: Huber. Gottschalk, S., Fryges, H., Metzger, G., Heger, D., & Licht, G. (2007). Start ups zwischen Forschung und Finanzierung: Hightech Gr ndun gen in Deutschland: Gutachten. Mannheim. Retrieved from Zentrum f r Europ ische Wirtscha sforschung (ZEW) website: Grave, B., Hetze, P., & Kanig, A. (2014). Gr ndungsradar 2013: Wie Hochschulen Unternehmensgr ndungen f rdern. Analysen. Essen: Sti erverband f r die deutsche Wissenscha . Haas, B., & Scheibelhofer, E. (1998). Typenbildung in der qualit ativen Sozialforschung:: Eine methodologische Analyse anhand ausgew hlter Beispiele. Reihe Soziologie: Vol. 34. Wien: Institut f r H here Studien. Helmholtz Association. (2014). Gesch sbericht 2014: Der Helmholtz Gemeinscha Deutscher Forschungszentren. Retrieved from leadmin/user_upload/04_ mediathek/Geschae sbericht_2014/epaper Geschae sbericht_2014/ epaper/au sgabe.pdf?rnd=545897a33d830 Hemer, J., Schleinkofer, M., & G thner, M. (2007). Akademische Spin o s: Erfolgsbedingungen f r Ausgr ndungen aus Forschungseinrichtungen. Studien des B ros f r Technikfolgen Absch tzung beim Deutschen Bundestag: Vol. 2. Berlin: Edition sigma. H nnies Stemann, J., Rulle, E., Seel, B., & Terberl, S. (2010). Frauen gr nden in Na no: Gr nderinnenpotenzialstudie im Rahmen des BMBF Projektes "Power f r Gr nderinnen Nano4women & Entrepreneurship. Retrieved from Bundesministerium f r Bildun g und Forschung (BMBF) website: http://www. nano 4 wo i leadmin/nano 4 women/dateien/ gruen derinn enpotenzialstudie_2010.pdf Huyghe, A., & Knockaert, M. (2015). e in uence of organizational cultur e and climate on entrepreneurial intentions among research scientis ts. e Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(1), 138 160. doi:10.1007/s10961 014 9333 3 Jain, S., George, G., & Maltarich, M. (2009). Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modi cation of university scientists involved in commercialization activity. Research Policy, 38(6), 922 935. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2009.02.007 Kolb, C., & Wagner, M. (2015). Crowding in or crowding out: e link betw een ac ademic entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial traits. e Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(3), 387 408. Consequences of individuals" fit at work. A meta analysis of person job, person organization, person group, and person supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 281 342. doi:10.1111/j.1744 6570.2005.00672.x Kulicke, M., & Schleinkofer, M. (2008). Wirkungen von EXIST SEED aus Sicht von Gef rderten: Ergebnisse einer Befragung im Rahmen der wissenschaftlichen Begleitung von EXIST Existenzgr ndungen aus der Wissenschaft im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums f r Wirtscha ft und T echnologie (BMWi). ISI Schriftenreihe Innovationspotenziale. Stuttgart: Fraunhofer IRB. Lamnek, S. (2010). Qualitative Sozialforschung: Lehrbuch (5th ed.). W einheim, Basel: Beltz. Lee, J. J., & Rhoads, R. A. (2004). Faculty Entrepreneurialism and the Challenge to Undergraduate Education at Research Universities. Research in Higher Education, 45(7), 739 760. doi:10.1023/ Leibniz Association. (2015). Leibniz Gemeinschaft: T ransfer / Gr ndungen. Retrieved from http://www.leibniz Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality: Selected papers. New York, NY: McGraw Hill. Max Planck Society. (2014). Jahresbericht 2013. M nchen. Retrieved from Mayring, P. (2010). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und T echniken. Beltz P dagogik. Weinheim: Beltz. Me rto n, R . K. (1959). Socia l theor y an d socia l structure . Glenco e: Fre e Press. Metzger, G., Niefert, M., & Licht, G. (2008). High Tech Gr ndungen in Deutschland.: Trends, Strukturen, Potenziale. Mannheim. Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in personality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ndonzuau, F. N., Pirnay, F ., & Surlemont, B. (2002). A stage model of academic spin off creation. TECHNOV ATION, 22(5), 281 289. doi:10.1016/S0166 4972(01)00019 0 O"Shea, R. P., Chugh, H., & Allen, T. J. (2008). Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework. The Journal of T echnology Transfer, 33(6), 653 666. doi:10.1007/s10961 007 9060 0 Pervin, L. A. (1968). Performance and satisfaction as a function of individual environment fit. Psychological Bulletin, 69(1), 56 68. doi:10.1037/h0025271 9

Tags: Download Journal of Technology Management & Innovation PDF, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation free pdf download, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation Pdf online download, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation 2015 download, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation.pdf, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation read online.
About | Contact | DMCA | Terms | Privacy | Mobile Specifications
Copyright 2021 FilePdf