Recently, entrepreneurship has been seen to be one of the key driving forces for economic development and growth since it is able to provide literally millions of opportunities for jobs. It also helps to offer a large variety of goods and services to consumers and in general helps to increase the prosperity and competitiveness in a nation (Stanworth, Blythe, Granger, & Stanworth, 1989). However, there is also a lot of debate on the technical knowledge transfer that takes place from universities to industries and on how these universities can continue to support the economic and technological development of countries.
It is very important to look at how significant this spinoff issue actually is to those in the United States and in Europe (Roberts, 1991). This is necessary because spinoffs seem to be growing at a rapid rate and entrepreneurship is getting extremely lucrative in many areas of the country (Roberts, 1991). It is necessary to shed light on the reasons behind this so that it can be more clearly understood. One of the reasons that it appears to be growing so quickly is that both innovation and entrepreneurship are very critical incentives in dealing with the development and growth of the economy and they also help to create various employment opportunities and increased productivity in many countries (Roberts, 1991).
Within the United States there are very strong governmental policies on technology and legal ideas that are very well protected (Seifert & Rubin, 1989). These help foster a much more friendly environment for entrepreneurial expression within academics. When looking at entrepreneurship since 1980, over five million work opportunities have been lost (Seifert & Rubin, 1989). However, some businesses have excelled quite well and created over 34 million new jobs for individuals (Seifert & Rubin, 1989). Other places across the globe are also seeing entrepreneurship as being the key that they need to unlock their economic development (Seifert & Rubin, 1989).
Within higher education institutions across the country and across the Western world the science and technology areas provide such a great deal of knowledge for individuals that they are no longer simply designed for research and education (Salzer, 1994; Hornaday, 1990; Nohria, 1992; Moncada, Tubke, Howells, & Carbone, 1999). Because the Western world in the form of the U.S., the UK, and Europe has become so strongly knowledge based in their economies those who work in academia are being asked to help with the development of regional economic issues and the creation of more employment (National Science Foundation, 1999). This is especially true of those individuals who work in research universities and they are asked to play a much larger role than they did in the past.
There have been various studies that have looked into this issue and how entrepreneurial efforts have been undertaken by those who work in academic institutions to help to create stronger economies and more jobs for individuals in the local area (Schulman, Ranan, & Streeter, 1999). Because of this, the traditional functions of research and education have been expanded into economic creation and it appears that not only will the trend continue but the amount of attention that is placed on this issue will continue to grow as it becomes more important in the future. There have been large research grants given out in the past from governments and other entities to support the ideas of many academic researchers in various countries.
Because government funding is gradually declining money comes to research and various other institutional activities in...
Those who deal with academic research have been expanding these searches that they make toward finding other individuals that will help fund what they want to do. Transitioning over to a lighter dependence upon the government support that is offered for academic research is most significant within the UK and much of this came about beginning in the 1980s.
However, the United States also has seen this issue even though it has been hidden somewhat because government funding for research in specific areas such as health has continued to increase. It has become crucial recently to change not only the function but the structure of various universities to help facilitate the flow of knowledge into innovative technologies and industry through SMEs and entrepreneurial ventures. This being the case, though, things will change with the times and will keep these small companies moving forward and succeeding.
Bird Schoonhoven, C., Eisenhardt, K.M., & Lyman, K. (1990). Speeding product to market: waiting time to first product introductions in new firms. ASQ, 35, 177-207.
Chrisman, J.J., Hynes, T., & Fraser, S. (1995). Faculty entrepreneurship and economic development: the case of the University of Calgary. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(4): 267-281.
Clarysse, B., Degroof, J.J., & Heirman, a. (2001). Analysis of the typical growth path of technology-based companies in life sciences and information technology, and the role of different sources of innovation financing. Brussels: European Commission, Entreprise Directorate-General.
Collinson, S. & Gregson, G. (2003). Knowledge networks for new technology-based firms: an international comparison of local entrepreneurship promotion. R & D. Management, 33(2): 189-208.
Cooper, a.C. (1995). Challenges in predicting new venture performance. in: I. Bull, H. Thomas and G. Willard (Eds.) Entrepreneurship: Perspectives on Theory Building. London, Elsevier Science Ltd.
Cooper, a.C. (1971) Spin-offs and technical entrepreneurship. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management Vol. EM-18 (1) 2-6.
Dahlqvist, J. & Davidsson, P. (2000). Business Start-up Reasons and Firm Performance. in:P. Reynolds, E. Autio, C. Brush, W. Bygrave, S. Manigart, H. Sapienza and K.G. Shaver (Eds.) Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 2000. Wellesley, MA, Babson College.
Dahlqvist, J., Davidsson P. & Wiklund, J. (2000). Initial conditions as predictors of new venture performance: a replication and extension of the Cooper et al. study. Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies 1(1): 1-17.
Davidsson, P. (2002). What entrepreneurship research can do for business & policy practice. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 1(1): 1-20.
Hornaday, R.V. (1990). Dropping the E-words from small business research: an alternative typology. Journal of Small Business Management 28(4): 22-33.
Moncada, P., Tubke, a., Howells, J. & Carbone, M. (1999) the Impact of Corporate Spin-offs on Competitiveness and Employment in the European Union. European Commision and the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Draft Working Paper Series, Seville, Spain.
National Science Foundation (NSF)(1999). Science and Technology Indicators, www.nsf.gov.
Nohria, N. (1992). Informational and search in the creation of new business ventures: the case of the 128 venture group. In N. Nohria & R. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organizations: structure, forms, and action (pp. 240-261). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Roberts, E. (1991). Entrepreneurs in high technology. Lessons from MIT and beyond. New York: Oxford University Press.
Salzer, M. (1994). Identity across Borders. Department of Management & Economics. Linkping, Sweden, Linkping University (diss.).
Schulman, J.M., Ranan, U.S., & Streeter, F.S. (1999). Corporate Entrepreneurship through Strategic Entrepreneurial Units (SEUs), paper presented at the Babson-Kauffman Entrepreneurship Research Conference, May 11-15, 1999.
Seifert, B., & Rubin, B. (1989) Spin-offs and the listing phenomena. Journal of Economics and Business, 41: 1-19.
Stanworth, J., Blythe, S., Granger, B. & Stanworth, C. (1989). Who becomes an entrepreneur? International Small Business Journal, 8: 11-22.
Swann, John (1998) Academic Scientists and the Pharmaceutical Industry. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Timmons, J., Smollen, L., & Dingee, a. (1990). New Venture creation. Entrepreneurship in the 1990s. Boston: Irwin.
Varga, a. (1999) University Research and Regional Innovation. A Spatial Econometric Analysis of Academic Technology Transfers. London, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Venkataraman, S. (1997). The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research: an editor's perspective. in: J. Katz and R.…
Burns (2007) indicates that the text is about that which motivates the actions and decisions of the entrepreneur, including the influence of personal social networks, family and personal background. Moreover, the text reports itself to be about the tasks of management which are associated with the entrepreneurial approach as well as how decisions are make, how risk is balanced and most essentially how there is a clear distinction between
SMEs Internationalization Process INTERNATIONALIZATION MODELS TRADITIONAL MARKETING APPROACH Uppsala model (the classical model) NETWORK THEORY ENTRY MODES EXPORT ENTRY MODES Direct Exports Indirect exports INTERMEDIATE ENTRY MODES LICENSING Franchising Joint venture Hierarchical entry modes INTERNATIONALIZATION MODELS: Traditional Marketing Approach: An American born British economist, Edith Elura Penrose has described the traditional marketing approach in his exceptional work "The Theory of the Growth of the Firm." The writer has described how the firm grows and how effectively and efficiently it can grow at a faster pace. Penrose
Predictable business processes are often difficult to establish in the SME environment. For one six sigma integration often requires logistics integration which historically has been one of the more prevalent challenges SMEs face in managing processes (Bigras & Gelinas, 2004: p. 263). SMEs must often change operational and organizational styles to conform to six sigma strategies and replace traditional ways of doing business with more integrated systems to help synchronize
S. That said, the country's long history of immigrant entrepreneurialism, however tenuous the notion might be today, has left a cultural legacy as evidenced by the relatively high entrepreneurship index score given to the U.S. There are other structural factors as well. In Europe in general, there are a myriad of impediments to entrepreneurialism, including legal barriers, a consumer sector that is unventuresome about new products, stronger unions and higher levels
Even poor De Beers seems flummoxed. (Twitchell, 2002, p. xv) Some consider this trend, of luxury for the every day buyer a negative trend as non-luxury brands claim luxury status and luxury brands like Prada are pressured to provide their products for a lower scale market, yet the trend is essential to international and national creative industries development. In fact one trend in international creative industries is a system nicknamed "grey
Thailand Small and Medium Enterprises The Industrial Sector and Its Regulators. The industrial sector has contributed the most to the economic growth of Thailand, with manufacturing as its most important sub-sector, followed by construction, mining and quarrying. Manufacturing, accounting for approximately 25% of each addition to the incremental Gross Domestic Product, has relied heavily on agricultural products, such as rubber, textile, food processing, beverages and tobacco. Employment in the manufacturing sector