Three elements to think critically about outreach policies: analyzing the case of university business incubators

Authors

  • Frida Negro-Hang Universidad Nacional de Córdoba

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61203/2347-0658.v11.n2.38431

Keywords:

academy-industry collaboration, university third mission, intermediary organizations, business incubators

Abstract

Collaboration between industry and university has been postulated as the panacea for regional development. Both academics and politicians have devoted countless resources to justify and demonstrate the need for this intersectoral work. However, the evidence in Argentine still shows an industry that does not identify when links with university are possible, and also, a university that does not find relevant and sustainable mechanisms to share its capital with other sectors of the economy. This paper argues that there are three analytical elements of linkages on which decision-makers should work in depth to increase the probability of successful collaborations. The elements considered are: a) the clear identification of objectives pursued by the initiative; b) the role attributed to the policy implementation mechanisms; c) the evaluation tools used to monitor the initiatives. To address this problem, the case of university business incubators is specifically analyzed. They are understood as a mechanism boost by universities to improve collaborations with industry. The analytical elements are applied considering argentine environment. The analyze of each element shows how a deficient implementation of the initiatives has a negative impact on the credibility and legitimacy of involved institutions

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Frida Negro-Hang, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba

Becaria Doctoral SECYT UNC, estudiante del doctorado en Ciencias Económicas y de la Especialización en Gestión de Tecnologías Innovadoras en la Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Licenciada en Administración. Profesora Adscripta de Psicosociología Organizacional y Principios de Administración, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Coordinadora del Programa científico emprendedor i-Teams Córdoba (2021), colaboradora externa del Centro Científico Tecnológico CONICET Córdoba (2022). 

 

References

Bourdieu, P. (2008). Homo academicus. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Siglo XXI Editores.

Chesbrough, H., y Crowther, A. K. (2006). Beyond high tech: early adopters of open innovation in

other industries. R and D Management, 36(3), 229–236. Recuperado de

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2006.00428.x

Clark, B. (2001). Places of Inquiry: Research and Advanced Education in Modern Universities.

Comparative Social Research, 19, 215–218. Recuperado de

https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1016/S0195-6310(00)80025-

/full/html

Davenport, T. H., De Long, D. W., y Beers, M. C. (1998). Successful Knowledge. Management

Projects. Sloan Management Review, 39(2), 43 – 57.

Etzkowitz, H., de Mello, J. M. C., y Almeida, M. (2005). Towards “meta-innovation” in Brazil: The

evolution of the incubator and the emergence of a triple helix. Research Policy, 34(4), 411–424.

Recuperado: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S004873330500034X

Gómez J. (2020). Beneficios hacia los investigadores y grupos de I+D. En C. González, E. Velazco,

J. Gómez y M. González. (1ra Ed.), Beneficios de la Ley de Promoción y Fomento de la Innovación

Tecnológica y su historia a 30 años de su sanción (pp. 65-92). Buenos Aires, Argentina: Foro CyTP.

Ho, J. y Yoon, S. (2021). Ambiguous roles of intermediaries in social entrepreneurship: The case of

social innovation system in South Korea. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 175.

Recuperado de https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040162521007551?via%3Dihub

Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research Policy, 35(5),

–728. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESPOL.2006.03.005

Mian, S., Lamine, W., y Fayolle, A. (2016). Technology Business Incubation: An overview of the

state of knowledge. Technovation, 50–51, 1–12. Recuperado de

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHNOVATION.2016.02.005

Molas–Gallart, J., Salter, A., Patel, P., Scott, A., y Duran, X. (2002). Measuring third stream activities.

SPRU. University of Sussex. England. Recuperado de:

https://www.academia.edu/532097/Measuring_third_stream_activities

Rathore, R., y Agrawal, R. (2021). Performance indicators for technology business incubators in

Indian higher educational institutes. Management Research Review, 44(11), 1499-1520.

Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-12-2019-0515

República Argentina. (1990). Ley de Promoción y Fomento de la Innovación Tecnológica N°

877. Recuperado de http://servicios.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/0-

/277/norma.htm

Sábato, Jorge (1979). Ensayos en campera. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Juárez.

Secundo, G., Toma, A., Schiuma, G., y Passiante, G. (2018). Knowledge transfer in open innovation.

Business Process Management Journal, 25 (1), 144-163. Recuperado de

https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/BPMJ-06-2017-0173/full/html

Shih, T., y Aaboen, L. (2019). The network mediation of an incubator: How does it enable or

constrain the development of incubator firms’ business networks?. Industrial Marketing

Management, 80, 126-138. Recuperado de

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INDMARMAN.2017.12.002

Siegel, D., Westhead, P. y Wright, M. (2003). Assessing the impact of university science parks on

research productivity: exploratory firm level evidence from the UK. International Journal of

Industrial Organization, 21(9), 1357-1369. Recuperado de

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167718703000869

Soetanto, D., y van Geenhuizen, M. (2015). Getting the right balance: university networks’

influence on spin–offs’ attraction of funding for innovation. Technovation, 36–37, 26–38.

Recuperado de

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166497214001576

Striukova, L., y Rayna, T. (2015). University-industry knowledge exchange: An exploratory study of

Open Innovation in UK universities. European Journal of Innovation Management, 18(4), 471–

Recuperado de https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/EJIM-10-

-0098/full/html

Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. Academy of

Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. Recuperado de

https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331

Torun, M., Peconick, L., Sobreiro, V., Kimura, H., y Pique, J. (2018). Assessing business incubation:

A review on benchmarking. International Journal of Innovation Studies, 2(3), 91-100. Recuperado

de https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijis.2018.08.002

Voisey, P., Gornall, L., Jones, P., y Thomas, B. (2006). The measurement of success in a business

incubation project. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 13(3), 454–468.

Recuperado de de

https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/14626000610680307/full/html

Wann, J. W., Lu, T. J., Lozada, I., y Cangahuala, G. (2017). University-based incubators’

performance evaluation: a benchmarking approach. Benchmarking, 24(1), 34–49.

Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-02-2015-0018

Published

2022-07-31

How to Cite

Negro-Hang, F. . (2022). Three elements to think critically about outreach policies: analyzing the case of university business incubators. Integración Y Conocimiento, 11(2), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.61203/2347-0658.v11.n2.38431