6. Conclusion

This work analyzed the academic discussion about the spin-off evolution pattern. The incipiency of the spin-off macro-theme was evidenced by divergence of discussion themes, and growing publication amount. This theme is discussed by the research policy and innovation system, entrepreneurship and management areas.

The conducted review, associated with the analysis, allowed the description of the literature chronological panorama. This panorama is mainly comprised by a list of research lines. The temporal distribution of these research lines indicated tendencies and opportunities to academic research on academic spin-off development. Research lines of this broad theme and specific kind of company were identified by cluster analysis. The obtained research lines were analyzed about similarities by multidimensional scaling. The boxplot made the temporal analysis of the research lines possible. The selected method combination for content analysis – with binary cluster, multidimensional scaling analysis, and the publication year dispersion analysis by boxplot – presented itself as efficient for the intended objectives.

Spin-off related academic discussions were evaluated to identify the commonly discussed themes. This evaluation showed that the most discussed themes were related to creation, the environment of academic spin-off and the Research Institution innovation system.

A significant part of the documents of these research lines also presented the evolutionary perspective as a background. So, the conducted analysis identifies another theoretical lens not identified by the Rothaermel et al. (2007) in his review of University Entrepreneurship. The evolutionary perspective, more specifically the capabilities lifecycle and development, is evidenced as the theory that will contribute to the study of spin-offs.

The main theme of this work, internal structure of academic spin-off, even if already with low discussion, was presented as a relevant characteristic of the most recent research line. The most recent and already incipient research line identified was characterized by 100% discussion of the theme spin-off organizational structure. This research line discusses management and decision making, and was the only one (excluding the spread research line) that discussed new product development process. For this reason, these themes can also be considered incipient.

Comparing with the broader technology development area, the spin-off focused discussion could be described as concordant with the broader theme, whereas with some delay. Differently the broader area, mostly focused in management discussions, the spin-off related discussions started originally in the economy and public policy-related areas. Some recent discussions come closer to the practical views, as related to management, product development, and organizational structure. So, it is possible to expect more practical consideration, with managerial and internal organization structure focused discussions. As this kind of company initially is more likely to present not so structured processes, the already observed capability focused discussion could be an alternative.

Therefore, the theoretical contribution of this work is the academic discussion evolution pattern mapping. More than showing the evolution from macro and meso level studies to micro level studies, this work enabled the new approaches identification for micro level studies. Further than networking, entrepreneurship (founders role), and factors for performance enabling, recent works started to discuss spin-off management, decision taking and organizational structure evolution. This is a discussion focus that could be enabled by evolutionary perspective, hence, constituting in a direction for future studies.

Acknowledgements

This work comprises a part of a research conducted in the Industrial Engineering Post-Graduation Program of the Federal University of the Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, supported by CNPq (Brazilian National Council of Scientific and Technological Development).

References

ATUAHENE-GIMA, K. (2005). Resolving the Capability-Rigidity Paradox in New Product Innovation. Journal of Marketing , 69, pp. 61-83.

BARNEY, J. B., 2001. Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year perspective on the resource-based view. Journal of Management , 27, pp. 643-650.

BESSANT, J., & TIDD, J. (2007). Innovation and entrepreneurship. John Wiley and Sons.

BOCCARDELLI, P., & MAGNUSSON, M. G., 2006. Dynamic Capabilities in Early-Phase Entrepreneurship. Knowledge and Process Management , 13, 3, pp. 162-174.

BURGELMAN, R. A., CHRISTENSEN, C. M., & WHEELWRIGHT, S. C. (2004). Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill Irwin.

CHESBROUGH, H., & ROSENBLOON, R. S. (2002). The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation's Technology spin-off companies. Industrial and Corporate Change , 11 (3), pp. 529-555.

CHIESA, V., Enrico, G., & MANZINI, R. (1999). R&D Corporate Planning: Selecting the Core Technological Competencies. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management , 11 (2), pp. 255-279.

CLARYSSE, B., & MORAY, N., 2004. A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: the case of a research-based spin-off. Journal of Business Venturing , 19, pp. 55-79.

COOMBS, R. (1996). Core competencies and the strategic management of R&D. R&D Management , 26 (4), pp. 345-355.

COOPER, R. G. (nov/dec de 2006). Managing Technology Development Projects. Research-Technology Management , pp. 23-31.

CRIPPS, D., YENCKEN, J., COGHLAN, J., & ANDERSON, D., 1999. University Research: Technology Transfer and Commercialisation Practices. Canberra: Australian Research Council.

DEGROOF, J.-J., & ROBERTS, E. B., 2004. Overcoming weak entrepreneurial infrastructures for academic spin-off ventures. Journal of Technology Transfer , 29, pp. 327-352.

DiGREGORIO, D., & SHANE, S., 2003. Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy , 2, 32, pp. 209-227.

DJOKOVIC, D., & SOUITARIS, V. (2008). Spinouts from academic institutions: A literature review with suggestions for further research. Journal of Technology Transfer , 33, pp. 225-247.

FAGENBERG, J., & VERSPAGEN, B., 2009. Innovation studies - The emerging structure of a new scientific field. Research Policy , 38, pp. 218-233.

GOLISH, B. L., BESTERFIELD-SACRE, M. E., & SHUMAN, L. J., 2008. Comparing Academic and Corporate Technology Development Processes. Journal of Product Innovation Management , 25, pp. 47-62.

GÜBELI, M. H., & DOLOREUX, D., 2005. An empirical study of university spin-off development. European Journal of Innovation Management , 8, 3, pp. 269-282.

GUIMARÃES, T. A., BORGES-ANDRADE, J. E., MACHADO, M. d., & VARGAS, M. R. (2001). Forecasting core competencies in an R&D environment. R&D Management , 31 (3), pp. 249-255.

HAIR, J. F., ANDERSON, R. E., TATHAM, R. L., & BLACK, W. C., 2005. Análise Multivariada de Dados. Porto Alegre: Bookman.

HANSEN, M. T., & BIRKINSHAW, J. (June de 2007). The Innovation Value Chain. Harvard Business Review , pp. 121-130.

HEIRMAN, A., & CLARYSSE, B., 2007. Which Tangible and Intangible Assets Matter for Innovation Speed in Start-Ups? Product Innovation Management , 24, pp. 303-315.

HELFAT, C. E., & RAUBITSCHEK, R. S. (2000). Product Sequencing: Co-Evolutionb of Knowledge, Capabilities and Products. Strategic Management Journal , 21, pp. 961-979.

HELLMANN, T., & PURI, M., 2000. The Interaction Between Product Market and Financing Strategy: The Role of Venture Capital. The Review of Financial Studies , 13, 4, pp. 959-984.

HELM, R., & MAURONER, O., 2007. Success of research-based spin-offs. State of the art and guidelines for further research. Review of Managerial Science , 1, 3, pp. 237-270.

HOWELLS, J., JAMES, A., & MALIK, K. (2003). The sourcing of technological knowledge: distributed innovation processes and dynamic change. R&D Management , pp. 395-409.

KLEIN, J., GEE, D., & JONES, H. (1998). Analysing clusters of skills in R&D - core competencies, metaphors, visualization, and the role of IT. R&D Management , 28 (1), pp. 37-42.

KRIPPENDORFF, K. (1980). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. Newbury Park: SAGE Publicationd.

LEE, Y. S., 1996. 'Technology transfer' and the research university: a search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration. Research Policy , 25, pp. 843 -863.

LOCH, C. H., & KAVADIAS, S. (2008). Managing new product development: An evolutionary framework. In: C. H. LOCH, & S. KAVADIAS, Handbook of New Product Development Management (pp. 1-26). Hungary: Elsevier.

LOCH, C., & KAVADIAS, S. (2008). Handbook of New Produt Development Management. Hungary: Elsevier.

LOCKETT, A., & WRIGHT, M., 2005b. Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research Policy , 34, pp. 1043 -1057.

LOCKETT, A., WRIGHT, M., & FRANKLIN, S., 2003. Technology Transfer and Universities' Spin-Out Strategies. Small Business Economics , 20, pp. 185-200.

MUSTAR, P., 2001. Spin-offs from public research: Trends and outlook. STI Review , 26, special issue, pp. 165-172.

MUSTAR, P., RENAULT, M., COLOMBO, M. G., PIVA, E., FONTES, M., LOCKETT, A., et al., 2006. Conceptualising the heterogeneity of research-based spin-offs: A multi-dimensional taxonomy. Research Policy, 35, pp. 289-308.

PENROSE, E., 1958. The Theory of the growth of the firm. New York: Oxford University Press.

RADOSEVICH, R., 1995. A model for entrepreneurial spin-offs from public technology sources. International Journal of Technology Management , 10, 7/8, pp. 879-893.

ROTHAERMEL, F. T., AGUNG, S. D., & JIANG, L., 2007. University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change , pp. 1 -101.

RUSH, H., BESSANT, J., & HOBDAY, M. (2007). Assessing the technological capabilities of firms: developing a policy tool. R&D Management , 37 (3), pp. 221-236.

SCHOLTEN, V. E., 2006. The Early Growth of Academic Spin-offs: Factors Invluencing the Early Growth of Dutch spin-offs in the Life Sciences, ICT and Consulting. PhD-thesis, Whageningen University and Researchcentrum, Rotterdam, Netherlands.

SHANE, S. A., 2004. Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation. Edward Elgar Publishing.

SPSS Inc., 1997. SPSS - SPSS Base 7.5 Applications Guide. Chicago: SPSS Inc.

UTTERBACK, J. M. (1994). Chapter 3 - Product Innovation as a Creative Force. In: J. M. UTTERBACK, Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation: How Companies Can Seize Opportunities in the Face of Technological Change (pp. 57-78). Harvard Business Press.

WALTER, A., AUER, M., & RITTER, T., 2006. The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing , 21, pp. 541-567.

WRIGHT, M., BIRLEY, S., & MOSEY, S., 2004a. Entrepreneurship and university technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, pp. 235-246.

WRIGHT, M., VOHORA, A., & LOCKETT, A., 2004b. The formation of high tech university spinout: the role of joint ventures and venture capital investors. Journal of technology transfer, 29, pp. 287-310.

YENKEN, J., & GILLIN, M., 2006. Parent research provider environments and the early stage development of spin-off companies. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialization , 5, 1/2, pp. 102-122.