IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sgm/resrep/v2i19y2015p95-105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Priority Criteria and Alternatives for University Business Incubators in the Entrepreneurial Process in Mexico (Priorytetowe kryteria i alternatywy stosowane przez akademickie inkubatory przedsiebiorczosci w procesie przedsiebiorczym w Meksyku)

Author

Listed:
  • Lizbeth Martinez Ramirez

    (Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana)

  • Jaime Munoz

    (Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana)

Abstract

The Schumpeterian theory of economic development establishes the innovation process as a key factor for entrepreneurship. Nevertheless, not every entrepreneur exercises innovation and not every innovation leads to entrepreneurship. University Business Incubators (UBIs) have been considered as the main factor for entrepreneurial process in which if innovation takes place, the perspective of economic success becomes wide open. Currently, UBIs are typified and considered around the world as guides in the process of entrepreneurship; one of their objectives is the creation of startups that can eventually consolidate in the market. The aim of this work is to identify by means of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) the priority of UBIs performance criteria on the basis of the main levels of impacts the litera- ture remarks on: a) economic action, b) National Development Plan and/or c) scientific action. These criteria are related with four characteristic UBIs functions: i) provision of means of production, ii) strengthening entrepreneurship culture, iii) bonding with the mar- ket to generate a base of future firms, and, iv) creating pull effect. The hypothesis of this work is that UBIs classification not only allows for identifying their main characteristics but it also points toward a normative application of criteria and alternatives of performance, in order to reach the objective of creating and fostering solid and stable enterprises, no matter the sponsoring university characteristics. We tested it by analyzing the three most important Mexican UBIs. The results show that although the analyzed UBIs are a specific type of business incubators, their criteria and alternatives of performance differ among them.

Suggested Citation

  • Lizbeth Martinez Ramirez & Jaime Munoz, 2015. "Priority Criteria and Alternatives for University Business Incubators in the Entrepreneurial Process in Mexico (Priorytetowe kryteria i alternatywy stosowane przez akademickie inkubatory przedsiebiorc," Research Reports, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 2(19), pages 95-105.
  • Handle: RePEc:sgm:resrep:v:2:i:19:y:2015:p:95-105
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sim.wz.uw.edu.pl/sites/default/files/artykuly/_ramirez.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Etzkowitz, Henry & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 109-123, February.
    2. Bollingtoft, Anne & Ulhoi, John P., 2005. "The networked business incubator--leveraging entrepreneurial agency?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 265-290, March.
    3. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    5. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    6. Slavo Radosevic & Marat Myrzakhmet, 2006. "Between vision and reality: promoting innovation through technoparks in Kazakhstan," UCL SSEES Economics and Business working paper series 66, UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES).
    7. Autio, Erkko & Kenney, Martin & Mustar, Philippe & Siegel, Don & Wright, Mike, 2014. "Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of context," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1097-1108.
    8. Barba-Romero, Sergio, 1996. "Manual para la toma de decisiones multicriterio," Sede de la CEPAL en Santiago (Estudios e Investigaciones) 30558, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    9. Somsuk, Nisakorn & Laosirihongthong, Tritos, 2014. "A fuzzy AHP to prioritize enabling factors for strategic management of university business incubators: Resource-based view," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 198-210.
    10. Barbero, José L. & Casillas, José C. & Ramos, Alicia & Guitar, Susana, 2012. "Revisiting incubation performance," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(5), pages 888-902.
    11. Rudy Aernoudt, 2004. "Incubators: Tool for Entrepreneurship?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 127-135, September.
    12. Chang, Da-Yong, 1996. "Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 649-655, December.
    13. Grimaldi, Rosa & Kenney, Martin & Siegel, Donald S. & Wright, Mike, 2011. "30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1045-1057, October.
    14. Poh Wong & Yuen Ho & Erkko Autio, 2005. "Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Economic Growth: Evidence from GEM data," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 335-350, 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. Lizbeth Martínez Ramírez & Jaime Munoz Flores & Arturo Torres Vargas, 2016. "The Analytical Hierarchy Process: An Optimal Methodology for Research in Entrepreneurship (Metoda Analytical Hierarchy Process – optymalna metodologia badan przedsiebiorczosci)," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 14(62), pages 172-186.
    2. van Rijnsoever, Frank J., 2020. "Meeting, mating, and intermediating: How incubators can overcome weak network problems in entrepreneurial ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    3. Kameliya Deyanova & Nataliia Brehmer & Artur Lapidus & Victor Tiberius & Steve Walsh, 2022. "Hatching start-ups for sustainable growth: a bibliometric review on business incubators," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(7), pages 2083-2109, October.
    4. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    5. Brian J. Bergman & Jeffery S. McMullen, 2022. "Helping Entrepreneurs Help Themselves: A Review and Relational Research Agenda on Entrepreneurial Support Organizations," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 46(3), pages 688-728, May.
    6. Isabel Diez-Vial & Angeles Montoro-Sanchez, 2017. "Research evolution in science parks and incubators: foundations and new trends," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1243-1272, March.
    7. Chris P. Eveleens & Frank J. Rijnsoever & Eva M. M. I. Niesten, 2017. "How network-based incubation helps start-up performance: a systematic review against the background of management theories," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 676-713, June.
    8. 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.
    9. Liotard, Isabelle & Revest, Valérie, 2018. "Contests as innovation policy instruments: Lessons from the US federal agencies' experience," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 57-69.
    10. Joern H. Block & Christian O. Fisch & Mirjam van Praag, 2017. "The Schumpeterian entrepreneur: a review of the empirical evidence on the antecedents, behaviour and consequences of innovative entrepreneurship," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 61-95, January.
    11. Rippa, Pierluigi & Secundo, Giustina, 2019. "Digital academic entrepreneurship: The potential of digital technologies on academic entrepreneurship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 900-911.
    12. Leendertse, Jip & Schrijvers, Mirella & Stam, Erik, 2022. "Measure Twice, Cut Once: Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Metrics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(9).
    13. J. Piet Hausberg & Sabrina Korreck, 2020. "Business incubators and accelerators: a co-citation analysis-based, systematic literature review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 151-176, February.
    14. Good, Matthew & Knockaert, Mirjam & Soppe, Birthe & Wright, Mike, 2019. "The technology transfer ecosystem in academia. An organizational design perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 35-50.
    15. Lukman Raimi & Hassan Yusuf, 2020. "A Critical Discourse of EI and CA in Emerging Economies: The Place of Nigeria Within the Global Innovation Ecosystems," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 6(2), pages 295-314, July.
    16. Klofsten, Magnus & Lundmark, Erik & Wennberg, Karl & Bank, Megan, 2019. "Incubator specialization and size: divergent paths towards operational scale," Ratio Working Papers 326, The Ratio Institute.
    17. Erik Stam & Andrew Ven, 2021. "Entrepreneurial ecosystem elements," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 809-832, February.
    18. Soetanto, Danny & Jack, Sarah, 2016. "The impact of university-based incubation support on the innovation strategy of academic spin-offs," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 50, pages 25-40.
    19. Marina Knickel & Sabine Neuberger & Laurens Klerkx & Karlheinz Knickel & Gianluca Brunori & Helmut Saatkamp, 2021. "Strengthening the Role of Academic Institutions and Innovation Brokers in Agri-Food Innovation: Towards Hybridisation in Cross-Border Cooperation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-22, April.
    20. Mian, Sarfraz & Lamine, Wadid & Fayolle, Alain, 2016. "Technology Business Incubation: An overview of the state of knowledge," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 50, pages 1-12.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    AHP; business incubators; innovation; entrepreneurship.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M53 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Training

    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:sgm:resrep:v:2:i:19:y:2015:p:95-105. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/somuwpl.html .

    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.