IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v47y2022i1d10.1007_s10961-020-09794-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A policy mix experiment to promote start-up success: exploratory evaluation of the NSF Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Industry University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC) membership supplement

Author

Listed:
  • Denis Gray

    (North Carolina State University)

  • Lindsey McGowen

    (North Carolina State University)

  • Timothy L. Michaelis

    (Northern Illinois University)

  • Olena Leonchuk

    (RTI International)

  • Drew Rivers

    (Chronicle Research, LLC)

Abstract

This paper investigates the outcomes of a policy experiment, the NSF SBIR/IUCRC Membership Supplement, designed to promote the success of small high-tech entrepreneurial ventures by providing subsidized memberships in university-based cooperative research centers (IUCRCs). Data collected via semi-structured interviews with representatives of 61 Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) firms indicated that SBIR firms who used the supplement to join an IUCRC reported multiple R&D benefits including research cost avoidance, research savings, and access to expensive equipment. A vast majority of SBIR firms also reported realizing or anticipated realizing commercial benefits (e.g., new investors, new products, and improvements to existing products). As suggested by social capital theory, SBIR firms reported that the policy mix experiment helped them make new connections with faculty and industry. Following our qualitative results, a structural equation model was applied to test the effect of social capital as an antecedent of SBIR firm R&D and commercialization outcomes. Results suggested that the SBIR firms who developed more social capital through interactions with faculty and industry members realized significantly more R&D and commercialization benefits. Further, commercialization benefits mediated the relationship between social capital and the SBIR firm’s perceived return on investment. Overall, this study demonstrates the feasibility of subjecting mixed policy interventions to evaluative scrutiny and provides evidence that such instruments can have substantive and positive effects on small high-tech entrepreneurial ventures. We discuss implications for social capital theory, policy mix initiatives and entrepreneurship policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Denis Gray & Lindsey McGowen & Timothy L. Michaelis & Olena Leonchuk & Drew Rivers, 2022. "A policy mix experiment to promote start-up success: exploratory evaluation of the NSF Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Industry University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC) membership supp," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 176-212, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:47:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10961-020-09794-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-020-09794-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10961-020-09794-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-020-09794-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hagedoorn, John & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2000. "Research partnerships1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 567-586, April.
    2. Stefan Kuhlmann & Philip Shapira & Ruud Smits, 2010. "Introduction. A Systemic Perspective: The Innovation Policy Dance," Chapters, in: Ruud E. Smits & Stefan Kuhlmann & Phillip Shapira (ed.), The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Denis O. Gray & Harm-Jan Steenhuis, 2003. "Quantifying the benefits of participating in an industry university research center: An examination of research cost avoidance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 281-300, October.
    4. Albert N. Link & Nicholas S. Vonortas (ed.), 2013. "Handbook on the Theory and Practice of Program Evaluation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14384.
    5. Lanahan, Lauren & Feldman, Maryann P., 2015. "Multilevel innovation policy mix: A closer look at state policies that augment the federal SBIR program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1387-1402.
    6. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Seo, Hangyeol & Chung, Yanghon & Yoon, Hyungseok (David), 2017. "R&D cooperation and unintended innovation performance: Role of appropriability regimes and sectoral characteristics," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 66, pages 28-42.
    2. Borrás, Susana & Laatsit, Mart, 2019. "Towards system oriented innovation policy evaluation? Evidence from EU28 member states," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 312-321.
    3. Olena Leonchuk & Denis O. Gray, 2019. "Scientific and technological (human) social capital formation and Industry–University Cooperative Research Centers: a quasi-experimental evaluation of graduate student outcomes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(5), pages 1638-1664, October.
    4. Li, Dan, 2013. "Multilateral R&D alliances by new ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 241-260.
    5. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    6. Gilsing, Victor & Nooteboom, Bart & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & van den Oord, Ad, 2008. "Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: Technological distance, betweenness centrality and density," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1717-1731, December.
    7. Haider, Sajjad & Mariotti, Francesca, 2016. "The orchestration of alliance portfolios: The role of alliance portfolio capability," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 127-141.
    8. Yannis Caloghirou & Stavros Ioannides & Nicholas S. Vonortas, 2003. "Research Joint Ventures," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(4), pages 541-570, September.
    9. Lee, Cheng-Yu & Wang, Ming-Chao & Huang, Yen-Chih, 2015. "The double-edged sword of technological diversity in R&D alliances: Network position and learning speed as moderators," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 450-461.
    10. He, Vivianna Fang & von Krogh, Georg & Sirén, Charlotta & Gersdorf, Thomas, 2021. "Asymmetries between partners and the success of university-industry research collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    11. Ricard Esparza-Masana, 2022. "Towards Smart Specialisation 2.0. Main Challenges When Updating Strategies," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(1), pages 635-655, March.
    12. Chen Tao & Yiying Qu & Hao Ren & Zhuopin Guo, 2020. "The Influence of Inter-Enterprise Knowledge Heterogeneity on Exploratory and Exploitative Innovation Performance: The Moderating Role of Trust and Contract," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-19, July.
    13. Bayona, Cristina & Garcia-Marco, Teresa & Huerta, Emilio, 2001. "Firms' motivations for cooperative R&D: an empirical analysis of Spanish firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(8), pages 1289-1307, October.
    14. Cevikarslan S., 2015. "Research joint ventures in an R&D driven market with evolving consumer preferences: An evolutionary multi-agent based modelling approach," MERIT Working Papers 2015-007, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    15. Ardalan Haghighi Talab & Victor Scholten & Cees van Beers, 2020. "The Role of Universities in Inter-organizational Knowledge Collaborations," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(2), pages 458-478, June.
    16. Magro, Edurne & Wilson, James R., 2019. "Policy-mix evaluation: Governance challenges from new place-based innovation policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    17. Bleda, Mercedes & del Río, Pablo, 2013. "The market failure and the systemic failure rationales in technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1039-1052.
    18. Hird, Mackenzie D. & Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., 2017. "How complex international partnerships shape domestic research clusters: Difference-in-difference network formation and research re-orientation in the MIT Portugal Program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 557-572.
    19. Lukasz Puslecki & Michael Czekajlo & Mateusz Puslecki, 2021. "How Innovation Cooperation Supports the Improvement of Health Care in the CEE Region: The Case of ECMO for Greater Poland," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 1), pages 1074-1095.
    20. Okamuro, Hiroyuki, 2007. "Determinants of successful R&D cooperation in Japanese small businesses: The impact of organizational and contractual characteristics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1529-1544, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Entrepreneur; SBIR; Cooperative research center; Policy mix; Social capital theory;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D85 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Network Formation
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Language; Social and Economic Stratification

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:47:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10961-020-09794-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.