Special Issue on University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer: Selling University Technology: Patterns from MIT

By Scott A. Shane. Management Sciences, 2002

444 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/034f3f373544ce078543c20a587ca13f93a7cbf5

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Management of Technology and Innovation

Citations in the corpus

Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation? (2004, unknown): “a small number of science-based sectors, such as biotechnology ( Shane, 2002; Di Gregorio”
Complements or Substitutes? The Role of Universities and Local Context in Supporting the Creation of Academic Spin-offs (2011, unknown): “Furthermore, we select a Poisson model rather than event istory techniques (Shane, 2002) because the calendar year is an dequate period of time to explore patterns of spin-off founda-”
In good company: : The influence of peers on industry engagement by academic scientists (2012, background): “Much of the research on university-industry relations highlights the incidence and impact of academic scientists’ entrepreneurial activities in the form of patent applications and the founding of academic spin-offs (Agrawal and Henderson, 2002; Shane, 2002).”
Intellectual Property Protection and the Formation of Entrepreneurial Growth Aspirations (2010, background): “(Arora et al., 2001; Shane, 2002).”
Conceptualizing academic entrepreneurship ecosystems: a review, analysis and extension of the literature (2018, background): “…of academic entrepreneurship (Bray and Lee 2000; DiGregorio and Shane 2003; Lock-ett et al. 2003; Markman et al. 2005b; Rasmussen et al. 2006; Rasmussen 2008), though Shane (2002) finds—in the case of spinoffs—that licensing back to an inventor reduces the likelihood of commercialization.”
Overoptimism and the Performance of Entrepreneurial Firms (2006, methodology): “Because the distribution of royalties is truncated on the left at zero, following Shane (2002) we employ a 15 Limiting the sample to patented inventions introduces bias to our analysis by disproportionately removing licenses terminated by established firms rather than start-ups.”
Swimming with Sharks: Technology Ventures, Defense Mechanisms and Corporate Relationships (2008, methodology): “Finally, the Carnegie survey has been used extensively in research (e.g., Gulati and Singh, 1998; Shane, 2002; Arora and Ceccagnoli, 2006) and is considered the primary source of comparative data on appropriability.”
Corporate venturing and value creation: A review and proposed framework (2009, background): “…property, quality of aculty, culture, reward systems, and social network) are also posiively associated with the technology commercialization process Colyvas et al., 2002; Di Gregorio and Shane, 2003; Jacob et al., 003; Nicolaou and Birley, 2003a, 2003b; Shane, 2002; Zucker et l., 2002).”
Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? (2003, background): “However, the frequency of TLO start-up activity varies significantly across universities.”