IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v50-51y2016ip69-78.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Situated regional university incubation: A multi-level stakeholder perspective

Author

Listed:
  • McAdam, Maura
  • Miller, Kristel
  • McAdam, Rodney

Abstract

From a macro perspective, it is widely acknowledged that University incubation models within a region are important stimulants of economic development through innovation and job creation. With the emergence of quadruple helix innovation ecosystems, universities have had re-evaluate their University incubation activity and models to engage more fully with industry and end users. However, within a given region, the type of University may influence their ability to engage with quadruple helix stakeholders and consequently impact their incubation activity. To date there is a scarcity of research which explores this 'meso' environment and its subsequent impact on University incubation models. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to use a stakeholder lens to explore University Incubation models within unique regional and organisational characteristics and constraints. The research methodology employed was based on a comparative case analysis of incubation of two different Universities within a UK peripheral region. It was found that variances existed in relation to the two universities incubation models which were found to result from both regional (macro environment) and organisational (meso environment) influences (i.e. university type). This research contributes to both regional and national agendas by empirically illustrating the need for appropriate design and tailoring of university incubation models (via acknowledgement of quadruple helix stakeholder influence) to incorporate contextual influences rather than adopting a best practise approach.

Suggested Citation

  • McAdam, Maura & Miller, Kristel & McAdam, Rodney, 2016. "Situated regional university incubation: A multi-level stakeholder perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 50, pages 69-78.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:50-51:y:2016:i::p:69-78
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2015.09.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497215000632
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.09.002?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. Roberto Camagni & Roberta Capello, 2013. "Regional Innovation Patterns and the EU Regional Policy Reform: Toward Smart Innovation Policies," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 355-389, June.
    2. Leonel Corona & Jérôme Doutriaux & Sarfraz A. Mian, 2006. "Building Knowledge Regions in North America," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3873.
    3. Inga Ivanova, 2014. "Quadruple Helix Systems and Symmetry: a Step Towards Helix Innovation System Classification," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(2), pages 357-369, June.
    4. Etzkowitz, Henry & de Mello, Jose Manoel Carvalho & Almeida, Mariza, 2005. "Towards "meta-innovation" in Brazil: The evolution of the incubator and the emergence of a triple helix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 411-424, May.
    5. Fabrizio Barca & Philip McCann & Andrés Rodríguez‐Pose, 2012. "The Case For Regional Development Intervention: Place‐Based Versus Place‐Neutral Approaches," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 134-152, February.
    6. Doloreux, David & Parto, Saeed, 2005. "Regional innovation systems: Current discourse and unresolved issues," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 133-153.
    7. José Amorós & Christian Felzensztein & Eli Gimmon, 2013. "Entrepreneurial opportunities in peripheral versus core regions in Chile," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 119-139, January.
    8. Keld Laursen & Toke Reichstein & Ammon Salter, 2011. "Exploring the Effect of Geographical Proximity and University Quality on University-Industry Collaboration in the United Kingdom," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(4), pages 507-523.
    9. Van Looy, Bart & Landoni, Paolo & Callaert, Julie & van Pottelsberghe, Bruno & Sapsalis, Eleftherios & Debackere, Koenraad, 2011. "Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 553-564, May.
    10. Asheim, Bjorn T. & Coenen, Lars, 2005. "Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: Comparing Nordic clusters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1173-1190, October.
    11. Sean Hackett & David Dilts, 2008. "Inside the black box of business incubation: Study B—scale assessment, model refinement, and incubation outcomes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 439-471, October.
    12. Phillip Phan & Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright, 2016. "Science Parks and Incubators: Observations, Synthesis and Future Research," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Phillip H Phan & Sarfraz A Mian & Wadid Lamine (ed.), TECHNOLOGY ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND BUSINESS INCUBATION Theory • Practice • Lessons Learned, chapter 9, pages 249-272, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Philip McCann & Raquel Ortega-Argilés, 2013. "Transforming European regional policy: a results-driven agenda and smart specialization," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 29(2), pages 405-431, SUMMER.
    14. Jeremy Howells & Ronnie Ramlogan & Shu-Li Cheng, 2012. "Innovation and university collaboration: paradox and complexity within the knowledge economy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 36(3), pages 703-721.
    15. Mario Minoja, 2012. "Stakeholder Management Theory, Firm Strategy, and Ambidexterity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 67-82, August.
    16. Jarunee Wonglimpiyarat, 2010. "Commercialization strategies of technology: lessons from Silicon Valley," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 225-236, April.
    17. Miika Varis & Timo Tohmo & Hannu Littunen, 2014. "Arriving at the Dawn of the New Economy: Is Knowledge-Based Industrial Renewal Possible in a Peripheral Region?," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 101-125, January.
    18. Hewitt-Dundas, Nola, 2012. "Research intensity and knowledge transfer activity in UK universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 262-275.
    19. Rasmussen, Einar & Mosey, Simon & Wright, Mike, 2014. "The influence of university departments on the evolution of entrepreneurial competencies in spin-off ventures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 92-106.
    20. Barbosa, Natália & Faria, Ana Paula, 2011. "Innovation across Europe: How important are institutional differences?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1157-1169.
    21. Andrea Bikfalvi & Christian Serarols & David Urbano & Yanci Vaillant, 2007. "Technological Trampolines for new venture creation in Catalonia: the case of University of Girona," Working Papers 0701, Departament Empresa, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, revised Jan 2007.
    22. Elias Carayannis & Ruslan Rakhmatullin, 2014. "The Quadruple/Quintuple Innovation Helixes and Smart Specialisation Strategies for Sustainable and Inclusive Growth in Europe and Beyond," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(2), pages 212-239, June.
    23. Kisfalvi, Veronika, 2002. "The entrepreneur's character, life issues, and strategy making: A field study," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 489-518, September.
    24. Richard T. Harrison & Claire M. Leitch, 2005. "Entrepreneurial Learning: Researching the Interface between Learning and the Entrepreneurial Context," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 351-371, July.
    25. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    26. Todtling, Franz & Trippl, Michaela, 2005. "One size fits all?: Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1203-1219, October.
    27. Sean M. Hackett & David M. Dilts, 2004. "A Real Options-Driven Theory of Business Incubation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 41-54, January.
    28. Graeme Larsen, 2011. "Understanding the early stages of the innovation diffusion process: awareness, influence and communication networks," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(10), pages 987-1002.
    29. Andrew L. Friedman & Samantha Miles, 2002. "Developing Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 1-21, January.
    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. Robert Huggins & Daniel Prokop & Piers Thompson, 2020. "Universities and open innovation: the determinants of network centrality," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 718-757, June.
    2. Kafouros, Mario & Wang, Chengqi & Piperopoulos, Panagiotis & Zhang, Mingshen, 2015. "Academic collaborations and firm innovation performance in China: The role of region-specific institutions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 803-817.
    3. Alberto Marzucchi & Davide Antonioli & Sandro Montresor, 2012. "Research cooperation within and across regional boundaries. Does innovation policy add anything?," JRC Research Reports JRC76320, Joint Research Centre.
    4. Zhigao Liu & Yimei Yin & Weidong Liu & Michael Dunford, 2015. "Visualizing the intellectual structure and evolution of innovation systems research: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 135-158, April.
    5. Hervás-Oliver, José-Luis & Parrilli, Mario Davide & Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés & Sempere-Ripoll, Francisca, 2021. "The drivers of SME innovation in the regions of the EU," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    6. Paola Rucker Schaeffer & Bruno Fischer & Sergio Queiroz, 2018. "Beyond Education: The Role of Research Universities in Innovation Ecosystems," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 50-61.
    7. Allen T. Alexander & Kristel Miller & Sean Fielding, 2015. "Open For Business: Universities, Entrepreneurial Academics And Open Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(06), pages 1-21, December.
    8. Trippl , Michaela & Grillitsch , Markus & Isaksen , Arne & Sinozic , Tanja, 2015. "Understanding Cluster Evolution," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/46, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    9. Jaanus Müür, 2022. "Intermediating Smart Specialisation and Entrepreneurial Discovery: The Cases of Estonia and Helsinki-Uusimaa," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(1), pages 541-573, March.
    10. Yongli Tang & Kazuyuki Motohashi & Xinyue Hu & Angeles Montoro-Sanchez, 2020. "University-industry interaction and product innovation performance of Guangdong manufacturing firms: the roles of regional proximity and research quality of universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 578-618, April.
    11. Dahesh, Mehran Badin & Tabarsa, Gholamali & Zandieh, Mostafa & Hamidizadeh, Mohammadreza, 2020. "Reviewing the intellectual structure and evolution of the innovation systems approach: A social network analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    12. João Lopes & Mário Franco, 2019. "Review About Regional Development Networks: an Ecosystem Model Proposal," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(1), pages 275-297, March.
    13. Ida Grundel & Margareta Dahlström, 2016. "A Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Approach to Regional Innovation Systems in the Transformation to a Forestry-Based Bioeconomy," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 7(4), pages 963-983, December.
    14. Claudia Fuentes & Gabriela Dutrénit, 2016. "Geographic proximity and university–industry interaction: the case of Mexico," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 329-348, April.
    15. Zouhaïer M’Chirgui & Wadid Lamine & Sarfraz Mian & Alain Fayolle, 2018. "University technology commercialization through new venture projects: an assessment of the French regional incubator program," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1142-1160, October.
    16. Matthias Firgo & Peter Mayerhofer, 2016. "Wissensintensive Unternehmensdienste, Wissens-Spillovers und regionales Wachstum. Teilprojekt 3: Zur Standortstruktur von wissensintensiven Unternehmensdiensten – Fakten, Bestimmungsgründe, regionalpo," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 59427.
    17. Daria Serogina & Hanna Bazetska, 2018. "Conceptual Model of Differentiated Social and Economic Policy of Smart Specialization of Regions," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 8(4), pages 185-198.
    18. Grillitsch, Markus, 2018. "Place-based entrepreneurship and innovation policy for industrial diversification," Papers in Innovation Studies 2018/3, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    19. Ben Vermeulen & Andreas Pyka, 2018. "The Role of Network Topology and the Spatial Distribution and Structure of Knowledge in Regional Innovation Policy: A Calibrated Agent-Based Model Study," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 52(3), pages 773-808, October.
    20. Christina Theodoraki & Karim Messeghem & Mark P. Rice, 2018. "A social capital approach to the development of sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: an explorative study," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 153-170, June.

    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:eee:techno:v:50-51:y:2016:i::p:69-78. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    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.