Résumés
Résumé
Les essaimages académiques se sont fortement développés en France depuis le début des années 2000. Cependant, malgré ce développement, la compréhension de leur processus de croissance et la durabilité de cette croissance restent peu explorées. À partir d’un échantillon de 118 essaimages académiques français de la même génération, cet article analyse les facteurs qui déterminent leur croissance au-delà de leur 5e année d’existence. Ces facteurs sont dérivés de l’approche par les ressources et des capacités dynamiques. Les résultats de notre étude quantitative montrent que 5 facteurs expliquent la croissance des essaimages académiques étudiés : l’orientation entrepreneuriale (et plus largement les ressources cognitives), l’acquisition de compétences tout au long du processus entrepreneurial, le montant des fonds levés (publics et privés), la capacité technologique et l’accompagnement.
Mots-clés:
- Croissance,
- Essaimage académique,
- Ressources et capacités dynamiques
Abstract
Academic spin-offs (ASOs) have developed considerably in France since the 2000s. However, despite a strong increase in the number of new ventures, little is known about their ability to experience growth and to sustain it beyond the five first years. Based on a sample of 118 French ASOs from the same generation, this article analyses the factors that determine their growth just after their 5th year. These factors are derived from the resource-based view (RBV) and the dynamic capabilities approach (DCA). The results of our quantitative study show that 5 factors determine growth of ASOs after the 5th year : entrepreneurial orientation (and broader cognitive resources), the acquisition of skills along the entrepreneurial process, the amount of public and private financing, the technological capability and the support program.
Keywords:
- Growth,
- Academic spin-off,
- Resources and dynamic capabilities approach
Resumen
Desde los años 2000, el número de las spin-off universitarias creadas en Francia ha aumentado considerablemente. Sin embargo, a pesar de este desarrolló, la comprensión de los procesos de crecimiento y la perduración de este crecimiento quedan poco exploradas. A partir de los datos extraídos de una encuesta de 118 spin-off universitarias francesas de la misma generación, tratamos de los factores que influyen el crecimiento de ellas más allá del quinto año de existencia. Estos factores están derivados del enfoque para los recursos y las capacidades dinámicas. Este estudio contribuye a explicar el crecimiento de las spin-off universitarias a partir de los 5 factores siguientes : la orientación emprendedora, el adquisitivo de competencias durante el proceso emprendedor, el importe de los recursos financieros, la capacidad tecnología y las infraestructuras de apoyo.
Palabras clave:
- Crecimiento,
- Spin-off universitarias,
- Recursos y capacidades dinámicas
Parties annexes
Références
- Acs, Z.J., Anselin, L. et Varga, A. (2002). Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge. Research Policy, 31(7), 1069-1085.
- Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
- Barney, J.B. (1997). Gaining and sustaining competitive advantage. Massachusetts, Addison-Wesley Reading.
- Basso, O., Fayolle, A. et Bouchard, V. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation : the making of a concept. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 10(4), 313-321.
- Baum, J.A.C. et Silverman, B. (2004). Picking winners or building them ? Alliance, intellectual, and human capital as selection criteria in venture financing and performance of biotechnology startups. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(3), 411-436.
- Berkhout, G., Hartmann, D. et Trott, P. (2010). Connecting technological capabilities with market needs using a cyclic innovation model. R&D Management, 40(5), 474-490.
- Boissin, J.-P., Chalus-Sauvannet, M.-C., Deschamps, B. et Geindre, S. (2009). Profils de chercheurs primo-entrepreneurs et stratégies de croissance de la jeune entreprise innovante. Revue internationale PME, 22(2), 41-65.
- Bruderl, J. et Schussler, R. (1990). Organizational mortality : the liabilities of newness and adolescence. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(3), 530-547.
- Bruneel, J., Ratinho, T., Clarysse, B. et Groen, A. (2012). The evolution of business incubators : comparing demand and supply of business incubation services across different incubator generations. Technovation, 32(2), 110-121.
- Brush, C.G., Greene, P.G., Hart, M.M. et Haller, H.S. (2001). From initial idea to unique advantage : the entrepreneurial challenge of constructing a resource base. Academy of Management Executive, 15(1), 64-80.
- Brush, C.G. et Lichtenstein, B.M. (2001). How do « resource bundles » develop and change in new ventures ? A dynamic model and longitudinal exploration. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(3), 37-58.
- Chemmanur, T.J. et Fulghieri, P. (1999). A theory of the going-public decision. Review of Financial Studies, 12(2), 249-279.
- Clarysse, B. et Moray, N. (2004). A process study of entrepreneurial team formation : the case of a research-based spin-off. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 55-79.
- Clarysse, B., Bruneel, J. et Wright, M. (2011). Explaining growth paths of young technology-based firms : structuring resource portfolios in different competitive environments. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 5(2), 137-157.
- Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Van De Velde, E. et Vohora, A. (2005). Spinning out new ventures : a typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 183-216.
- Coad, A. et Hölzl, W. (2010). Firm growth : empirical analysis. WIFO Working Papers, (361), 1-24.
- Cooper, A.C., Gimeno-Gascón, F.J. et Woo, C.Y. (1994). Initial human and financial capital as predictors of new venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 9(5), 371-395.
- Covin, J.G. et Lumpkin, G.T. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation theory and research : reflections on a needed construct. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 855-872.
- Covin, J.G. et Slevin, D.P. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(1), 7-25.
- Datta, A., Mukherjee, D. et Jessup, L. (2014). Understanding commercialization of technological innovation : taking stock and moving forward. R&D Management, 45(3), 215-249.
- Davenport, S., Carr, A. et Bibby, D. (2002). Leveraging talent : spin-off strategy at industrial research. R&D Management, 32(3), 241-254.
- Delmar, F., Davidsson, P. et Gartner, W.B. (2003). Arriving at the high-growth firm. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 189-216.
- Di Gregorio, D. et Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more startups than others ? Research Policy, 32(2), 209-227.
- Druilhe, C. et Garnsey, E. (2004). Do academic spin-outs differ and does it matter ? The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3-4), 269-285.
- Ensley, M.D. et Hmieleski, K.M. (2005). A comparative study of new venture top management team composition, dynamics and performance between university-based and independent startups. Research Policy, 34(7), 1091-1105.
- Fornell, C. et Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
- Foss, N.J. (2011). Entrepreneurship in the context of the resource-based view of the firm. Dans K. Mole et M. Ram (dir.), Perspectives in entrepreneurship : a critical approach (p. 120-133). New York, Palgrave Macmillan.
- Franzoni, C. et Lissoni, F. (2009). Academic entrepreneurship, patents, and spin-offs : critical issues and lessons for Europe. Dans A. Varga (dir.), Universities and regional economic development (p. 163-190). Cheltenham, Royaume-Uni, Edward Elgar.
- Fryges, H. et Wright, M. (2014). The origin of spin-offs : a typology of corporate and academic spin-offs. Small Business Economics, 43(2), 245-259.
- Gilsing, V.A., Van Burg, E. et Romme, A.G.L. (2010). Policy principles for the creation and success of corporate and academic spin-offs. Technovation, 30(1), 12-23.
- Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent statistics as economic indicators : a survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28(4), 1661-1707.
- Guan, J. et Yam, R.C.M. (2015). Effects of government financial incentives on firms’ innovation performance in China : evidences from Beijing in the 1990s. Research Policy, 44(1), 273-282.
- Hackett, S.M. et Dilts, D.M. (2004). A systematic review of business incubation research. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(1), 55-82.
- Heirman, A. et Clarysse, B. (2004). How and why do research-based startups differ at founding ? A resource-based configurational perspective. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3-4), 247-268.
- Hsu, H.C. (2014). Industry technological innovations and initial public offering : an empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting and Finance, 14(1), 103-120.
- Hu, L. et Bentler P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling : A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
- Kerr, W.R., Lerner, J. et Schoar, A. (2014). The consequences of entrepreneurial finance. Review of Financial Studies, 27(1), 20-55.
- Lee, C., Lee, K. et Pennings, J.M. (2001). Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance : a study on technology-based ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 615-640.
- Lee, K., Jee, M. et Eun, J.H. (2011). Assessing China’s economic catch-up at the firm level and beyond : Washington consensus, East Asian consensus and the Beijing model. Industry & Innovation, 18(5), 487-507.
- Lev, B. et Zarowin, P. (1999). The Boundaries of financial reporting and how to extend them. Journal of Accounting Research, 37(2), 353-385.
- Lin, B.W., Li, P.C. et Chen, J.S. (2006). Social capital, capabilities, and entrepreneurial strategies : a study of taiwanese high-tech new ventures. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(2), 168-181.
- Lockett, A., Siegel, D., Wright, M. et Ensley, M.D. (2005). The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions : managerial and policy implications. Research Policy, 34(7), 981-993.
- Lockett, A. et Wright, M. (2005). Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research Policy, 34(7), 1043-1057.
- Lumpkin, G.T. et Dess, G.G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance : the moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(5), 429-451.
- Lundqvist, M.A. (2014). The importance of surrogate entrepreneurship for incubated swedish technology ventures. Technovation, 34(2), 93-100.
- Macpherson, A. et Holt, R. (2007). Knowledge, learning and small firm growth : a systematic review of the evidence. Research Policy, 36(2), 172-192.
- Markham, S.K. (2002). Moving technologies from lab to market. Research-Technology Management, 45(6), 31-42.
- Markham, S.K., Ward, S.J., Aiman-Smith, L. et Kingon, A.I. (2010). The valley of death as context for role theory in product innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(3), 402-417.
- Matkin, G. (1990). Technology transfer and the university. New York, MacMillan Publishing Company.
- Mcqueen, D.H. et Wallmark, J.T. (1982). Spin-off companies from chalmers university of technology. Technovation, 1(4), 305-315.
- Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770-791.
- Moreno, A.M. et Casillas, J.C. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation and growth of SMEs : a causal model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(3), 507-528.
- Mosey, S. et Wright, M. (2007). From human capital to social capital : a longitudinal study of technology-based academic entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(6), 909-935.
- Mustar, P., Renault, M., Colombo, M.G., Piva, E., Fontes, M., Lockett, A. et Moray, N. (2006). Conceptualising the heterogeneity of research-based spin-offs : a multi-dimensional taxonomy. Research Policy, 35(2), 289-308.
- Mustar, P., Wright, M. et Clarysse, B. (2008). University spin-off firms : lessons from ten years of experience in Europe. Science and Public Policy, 35(2), 67-80.
- Nicolaou, N. et Birley, S. (2003). Academic networks in a trichotomous categorisation of university spinouts. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 333-359.
- Ortín-Ángel, P. et Vendrell-Herrero, F. (2014). University spin-offs vs. other NTBFs : total factor productivity differences at outset and evolution. Technovation, 34(2), 101-112.
- OSEO (2011). 10 ans de création d’entreprises innovantes en France. Récupéré le 10 janvier 2014 du site : http://www.bpifrance-lelab.fr/Ressources/Ressources-Bpifrance-Le-Lab/Dix-ans-de-creation-d-entreprises-innovantes-en-France-une-photographie-inedite.
- Pena, I. (2004). Business incubation centers and new firm growth in the Basque country. Small Business Economics, 22(3-4), 223-236.
- Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. New York, Oxford University Press.
- Phan, P.H., Siegel, D.S. et Wright, M. (2005). Science parks and incubators : observations, synthesis and future research. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 165-182.
- Rasmussen, E. (2008). Government instruments to support the commercialization of university research : lessons from Canada. Technovation, 28(8), 506-517.
- Rasmussen, E., Mosey, S. et Wright, M. (2011). The evolution of entrepreneurial competencies : a longitudinal study of university spin-off venture emergence. Journal of Management Studies, 48(6), 1314-1345.
- Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G.T. et Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance : an assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761-787.
- Sapienza, H.J., Parhankangas, A. et Autio, E. (2004). Knowledge relatedness and post-spin-off growth. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(6), 809-829.
- Shane, S. (2004). Academic entrepreneurship : university spinoffs and wealth creation. Cheltenham, Royaume-Uni/Northampton, Massachusetts, Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Shane, S. et Stuart, T. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of university startups. Management Science, 48(1), 154-170.
- Smilor, R.W. (1987). Commercializing technology through new business incubators. Research Management, 30(5), 36-41.
- Somsuk, N. et Laosirihongthong, T. (2014). A fuzzy AHP to prioritize enabling factors for strategic management of university business incubators : resource-based view. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 85, 198-210.
- Steffensen, M., Rogers, E.M. et Speakman, K. (2000). Spin-offs from research centers at a research university. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(1), 93-111.
- Stéphany, E. (2015). Le financement par les business angels. Dans V. Bessière et E. Stéphany (dir.), Le financement de l’innovation : nouvelles perspectives théoriques et pratiques (p. 63-75). Paris, De Boeck.
- Stevenson, H.H. et Jarillo, J.C. (1990). A paradigm of entrepreneurship : entrepreneurial management. Strategic Management Journal, 11(5), 17-27.
- Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. et Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.
- Unger, J.M., Rauch, A., Frese, M. et Rosenbusch, N. (2011). Human capital and entrepreneurial success : a meta-analytical review. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(3), 341-358.
- Van Geenhuizen, M. et Soetanto, D. (2009). Academic spin-offs at different ages : a case study in search of key obstacles to growth. Technovation, 29(10), 671-681.
- Vanaelst, I., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Moray, N. et S’jegers, R. (2006). Entrepreneurial team development in academic spinouts : an examination of team heterogeneity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(2), 249-271.
- Vincett, P.S. (2010). The economic impacts of academic spin-off companies, and their implications for public policy. Research Policy, 39(6), 736-747.
- Visintin, F. et Pittino, D. (2014). Founding team composition and early performance of university-Based spin-off companies. Technovation, 34(1), 31-43.
- Vohora, A., Wright, M. et Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy, 33(1), 147-175.
- Walter, A., Auer, M. et Ritter, T. (2006). The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 541-567.
- Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180.
- Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Mustar, P. et Lockett, A. (2007). Academic Entrepreneurship in Europe. Cheltenham, Royaume-Uni/Northampton, Massachusetts, Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Wright, M. et Stigliani, I. (2013). Entrepreneurship and growth. International Small Business Journal, 31(1), 3-22.
- Zahra, S.A. et Nielsen, A.P. (2002). Sources of capabilities, integration and technology commercialization. Strategic Management Journal, 23(5), 377-398.
- Zerbinati, S., Souitaris, V. et Moray, N. (2012). Nurture or nature ? The growth paradox of research-based spin-offs. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 24(1), 21-35.
- Zhao, Y.L., Song, M. et Storm, G.L. (2013). Founding team capabilities and new venture performance : the mediating role of strategic positional advantages. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(4), 789-814.
- Zollo, M. et Winter, S.G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3), 339-351.
- Zott, C. (2003). Dynamic capabilities and the emergence of intra-industry differential firm performance : insights from a simulation study. Strategic Management Journal, 24(2), 97-125.
- Zott, C. et Huy, Q.N. (2007). How entrepreneurs use symbolic management to acquire resources. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 70-105.