IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v51y2024i1p144-148..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bringing technology to market: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute SBIR Phase IIB projects

Author

Listed:
  • Sara Nienow
  • Olena Leonchuk
  • Alan C O’Connor
  • Albert N Link

Abstract

The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) is the fourth largest institute in the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). Surprisingly, there is a conspicuous void of policy studies related to the research activities of NHLBI in comparison to NIH or the National Cancer Institute. This paper investigates the likelihood that a business funded through NHLBI’s Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program will commercialize from its Phase IIB translational support. Commercialization is one performance metric that quantifies a policy dimension of the success of the funded SBIR project. Based on an empirical analysis of sixty-one Phase IIB projects, we find that the most significant covariate with the likelihood of commercialization is the growth in human capital within the business since the Phase IIB award.

Suggested Citation

  • Sara Nienow & Olena Leonchuk & Alan C O’Connor & Albert N Link, 2024. "Bringing technology to market: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute SBIR Phase IIB projects," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 144-148.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:51:y:2024:i:1:p:144-148.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scad063
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexandre Dias & Beatriz Selan, 2023. "How does university-industry collaboration relate to research resources and technical-scientific activities? An analysis at the laboratory level," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 392-415, February.
    2. Albert N Link & Christopher A Swann & Martijn van Hasselt, 2022. "An assessment of the US Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program: A study of project failure [On the Failure of Scientific Research: An Analysis of SBIR Projects Funded by the U.S. Nationa," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(6), pages 972-978.
    3. Martin S. Andersen & Jeremy W. Bray & Albert N. Link, 2017. "On the failure of scientific research: an analysis of SBIR projects funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 431-442, July.
    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. Sergio Salles-Filho & Bruno Fischer & Yohanna Juk & Paulo Feitosa & Fernando A. B. Colugnati, 2023. "Acknowledging diversity in knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship: assessing the Brazilian small business innovation research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1446-1465, August.
    2. Mohammad Daradkeh, 2023. "Exploring the Curvilinear Relationship between Academic-Industry Collaboration Environment and Innovation Performance: A Multilevel Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Albert N. Link & Martijn van Hasselt, 2022. "The use of intellectual property protection mechanisms by publicly supported firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(1-2), pages 111-121, February.
    4. David B. Audretsch & Maksim Belitski & Rosa Caiazza & Farzana Chowdhury & Matthias Menter, 2023. "Entrepreneurial growth, value creation and new technologies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 1535-1551, October.
    5. Valérie François & Pascal Philippart, 2019. "A university spin-off launch failure: explanation by the legitimation process," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1188-1215, August.
    6. Kamilla Kohn Rådberg & Hans Löfsten, 2024. "The entrepreneurial university and development of large-scale research infrastructure: exploring the emerging university function of collaboration and leadership," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 334-366, February.
    7. Sara Amoroso & Albert N. Link, 2021. "Intellectual property protection mechanisms and the characteristics of founding teams," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7329-7350, September.
    8. Albert N Link & Christopher A Swann & Martijn van Hasselt, 2022. "An assessment of the US Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program: A study of project failure [On the Failure of Scientific Research: An Analysis of SBIR Projects Funded by the U.S. Nationa," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(6), pages 972-978.
    9. Rajeev K. Goel & Devrim Göktepe-Hultén, 2021. "Innovation by foreign researchers: relative influences of internal versus external human capital," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 258-276, February.
    10. Mengyang Pan & Aravind Chandrasekaran & James Hill & Manus Rungtusanatham, 2022. "Multidisciplinary R&D project success in small firms: The role of multiproject status and project management experience," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(7), pages 2806-2821, July.
    11. Steven Bednar & Dora Gicheva & Albert N. Link, 2021. "Innovative activity and gender dynamics," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1591-1599, April.
    12. Audretsch, David B. & Belitski, Maksim, 2024. "Knowledge collaboration, firm productivity and innovation: A critical assessment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    NHLBI; Phase IIB projects; SBIR program; technology commercialization;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • H51 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Health
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:oup:scippl:v:51:y:2024:i:1:p:144-148.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.