The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: assessing the importance of experience and connectivity

By Jason Owen-Smith, Walter W. Powell. 2003

442 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3e87eec0244641020b74745157f3a9f7de72802f

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

Hybrid Vigor: Securing Venture Capital by Spanning Categories in Nanotechnology (2014, methodology): “We also included a dummy variable tracking whether a firm was a corporate or university transfer office spinout (Owen-Smith & Powell, 2003).”
Does Patent Strategy Shape the Long-Run Supply of Public Knowledge? Evidence from Human Genetics (2009, background): “The richness of these interactions has been the focus of recent institutional scholarship, highlighting the ways in which these two institutional spheres shape knowledge production in academia (Biagioli, 2000; Colyvas & Powell, 2006; Kleinman, 2003; Murray, in press; Owen-Smith & Powell, 2003 ).”
Academic entrepreneurship (re)defined: significance and implications for the scholarship of higher education (2010, background): “For instance, there exists an extensive body of literature that relies in part on entrepreneurial terminology to analyze university technology transfer activities and associated outcomes (e.g., Bercovitz and Feldman 2006; Bercovitz et al. 2001; Feldman et al. 2002; Owen-Smith 2005; Owen-Smith and P”
How organizational structures in science shape spin-off firms: the biochemistry departments of Berkeley, Stanford, and UCSF and the birth of the biotech industry (2006, background): “The existing literature, which does attempt to address variations across scientific institutions in the success with which university science is commercialized, on the one hand consists of studies that focus on the practices of technology-licensing offices (Mowery et al., 2004; Sampat et al., 2003; ”
A Dynamic Network Measure of Technological Change (2017, methodology): “To capture time-invariant heterogeneity among universities, account for overdispersion, and match the approach taken in earlier research (Owen-Smith and Powell 2003), we model Itotal 5 , CDtotal 5 , and CDtotal+ 5 using a conditional fixed-effects negative binomial specification (Hausman et al.”
Networks and Organizational Growth: A Study of Community Based Nonprofits (2006, background): “Uzzi (1997) warned about opportunity costs when ties are overly embedded (see also Owen-Smith and Powell, 2003).”
Information Technology and Intangible Output: The Impact of IT Investment on Innovation Productivity (2012, background): “However, university-level research has identified knowledge flows and access to information for external partners as key factors related to the creation of high-impact patents (Owen-Smith and Powell 2003).”
Of Mice and Academics: Examining the Effect of Openness on Innovation (2009, unknown): “3See Owen-Smith & Powell (2003).”
Value creation in the quadruple helix: a micro level conceptual model of principal investigators as value creators (2018, unknown): “…the quality of work itself, job satisfaction, publications, peer recognition, working on new ideas and increasing technological and human capital (see Miller, 1986; Mansfield, 1995; Jones, 1996; Keller, 1997; Agrawal and Henderson, 2002; Owen-Smith and Powell, 2003; Thursby and Thursby, 2004).”
Performance of technology transfer offices in Germany (2011, unknown): “Moreover, overwhelming evidence indicates that also in the academic world rewards matter (Link and Siegel 2005; Owen-Smith and Powell 2001, 2003; Geuna 1999), employees in TTO are paid as the administrators they really are.”
Exploring the Foundations of Cumulative Innovation: Implications for Organization Science (2007, background): “Second, with a shift toward “open innovation” (Chesbrough 2003), contributors to innovations are more likely to come from different types of organizations (e.g., Powell et al. 1996, Owen-Smith and Powell 2003) and across individual and firm units of analysis (Rosenkopf et al. 2001).”
Categories of university-level entrepreneurship: a literature survey (2010, background): “Owen-Smith and Powell (2001) Agrawal and Henderson (2002) Cohen et al. (2002) Feldman et al. (2002) Mowery et al. (2002) Mowery and Ziedonis (2002) Shane (2002) Thursby and Thursby (2002) Coupe (2003) Friedman and Silberman (2003) Hall et al. (2003) Nerkar and Shane (2003) Nicolaou and Birley (2003)”