BazEkon - The Main Library of the Cracow University of Economics

BazEkon home page

Main menu

Lis Andrzej (Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland), Komarnicka Anna (Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland, PhD student)
Academic Entrepreneurship Research Profiling : Towards Tematic Boundaries of the Field
Business and Non-profit Organizations Facing Increased Competition and Growing Customers' Demands, 2018, vol. 17, s. 235-260, rys., tab., bibliogr. 44 poz.
Przedsiębiorczość akademicka, Analiza bibliometryczna, Mapowanie wiedzy
Academic entrepreneurship, Bibliometric analysis, Knowledge mapping
The article was funded from the public budget by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education (the Diamond Grant research project as a part of the Education Programme resources) and the statutory research budget of the Faculty of Economic Sciences and Management, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń (research project "Contemporary management concepts" ["Współczesne koncepcje zarządzania organizacjami"])
The issues of academic entrepreneurship have been receiving growing attention among researchers in recent years. This increasing interest results in the number of publications. Nevertheless, so far, the research field has not been mapped thoroughly. The paper aims to identify thematic boundaries of the research field related to academic entrepreneurship and its key contributors through research profiling. The following objectives have been defined to design the research process oriented to achieving the aforementioned aim: (1) to identify nations, research institutions, journals and authors considered to be the key contributors in the field, (2) to identify the leading subject areas grouping research output in the field, and (3) to identify predominant topics of publications. Research profiling is a method applied to achieve the aim of the study and related objectives. Research profiling comprises three components: general research profiling, subject area profiling and topic profiling. General research profiling is conducted in order to identify key contributors in the field with the focus on such aspects as countries/territories producing the highest number of publications, the most productive affiliated institutions, source titles and authors. Exploring diversity of research perspectives within the research field, subject area profiling is applied to identify and analyze the distribution of the research output in the field among various subject areas, which highlights the multidimensionality of the issues related to academic entrepreneurship. Topic profiling, with the emphasis on differences among source titles, authors, subject areas and core references, is aimed at identifying key topics and research streams in the field. The study contributes to the existing body of knowledge through mapping the research field related to academic entrepreneurship and discovering its thematic boundaries, which has not been done before. This originality and novelty of the paper strengthen its value in the theory of academic entrepreneurship. Due to its theoretical character, the paper shows more research than practical implications as it provides recommendations for further theoretical studies aimed at exploring and describing the research field. (original abstract)
Full text
  1. Archambault, E., Campbell, D., Gingras, Y., & Larivière, V. (2009). Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(7), 1320-1326.
  2. Bozeman, B., Fay, D., & Slade, C.P. (2013). Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: The state of the art. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(1), 1-67.
  3. Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2008). Academic entrepreneurs: Organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science, 19(1), 69-89.
  4. Choi, D.G., Lee, H., & Sung, T. (2011). Research profiling for 'standardization and innovation.' Scientometrics, 88(1), 259-278.
  5. Colyvas, J.A. (2007). From divergent meanings to common practices: The early institutionalization of technology transfer on the life sciences at Stanford University. Research Policy, 36(4), 456-476.
  6. Colyvas, J.A., & Powell, W.W. (2007). From vulnerable to venerated: The institutionalization of academic entrepreneurship in life sciences. Research in Sociology of Organizations, 25, 219-259.
  7. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as 'quasi-firms': The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32(1), 109-121.
  8. Falagas, M.E., Pitsouni, E.I., Malietzis, G.A., & Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, 22, 338-342.
  9. Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., Santoni, S., & Sobrero, M. (2011). Complements or substitutes? The role of universities and local context in supporting the creation of academic spin-offs. Research Policy, 40(8), 1113-1127.
  10. Fini, R., Lacetera, N., & Shane, S. (2010). Inside or outside the IP system? Business creation in academia. Research Policy, 39(8), 1060-1069.
  11. Galloway, L., & Brown, W. (2002). Entrepreneurship education at university: A driver in the creation of high growth firms. Education + Training, 44(1), 398-405.
  12. Goldfarb, B., & Henrekson, M. (2003). Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property. Research Policy, 32(4), 639-658.
  13. Goethner, M., Obschonka, M., Silbersein, R.K., & Cantner, U. (2012). Scientists' transition to academic entrepreneurship: Economic and psychological determinants. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(3), 628-641.
  14. Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D.S., & Wright, M. (2011). 30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1045-1057.
  15. Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J.-C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors' research performance. Research Policy, 34(6), 932-950.
  16. Hayter, C.S. (2011). In search of the profit-maximizing actor: Motivations and definitions of success from nascent academic entrepreneurs. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 340-352.
  17. Henrekson, M., & Rosenberg, N. (2001). Designing efficient institutions for science-based entrepreneurship: Lessons from the US and Sweden. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(3), 207-231.
  18. Klofsten, M., & Jones-Evans, D. (2000). Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe: The case of Sweden and Ireland. Small Business Economics, 14(4), 299-309.
  19. Lis, A., (2017). General research profiling for the concept of a 'learning organization'. In A. Nalepka & A. Ujwary-Gil (Eds.), Business and Non-profit Organizations Facing Increased Competition and Growing Customers' Demands (Volume 16, pp. 75-92). Nowy Sącz: Wyższa Szkoła Biznbesu - National Louis University. Warsaw: Institute of Economics, Polish Academy of Sciences. Nowy Targ: Cognitione Foundation for the Dissemination of Knowledge and Science.
  20. Lis, A., Czerniachowicz, B., & Wieczorek-Szymańska, A. (2017). Leadership and corporate social responsibility: Research topic profiling. In A. Nalepka & A. Ujwary-Gil (Eds.), Business and Non-profit Organizations Facing Increased Competition and Growing Customers' Demands (Volume 16, pp. 59-74). Nowy Sącz: Wyższa Szkoła Biznbesu - National Louis University. Warsaw: Institute of Economics, Polish Academy of Sciences. Nowy Targ: Cognitione Foundation for the Dissemination of Knowledge and Science.
  21. Lockett, A., Siegel, D., Wright, M., & Ensley, M.D. (2005). The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: Managerial and policy implications. Research Policy, 34(7), 981-993.
  22. Lopez-Illescas, C., Moya-Anegon, F., & Moed, H.F. (2008). Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus. Journal of Informetrics, 2(4), 304-316.
  23. Martinez, H., Jaime, A., & Camacho, J. (2012). Relative absorptive capacity: A research profiling. Scientometrics, 92(3), 657-674.
  24. O'Shea, R.P., Allen, T.J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994-1009.
  25. Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Broström, A., D'Este, P., Fini, R., Geuna, A., Grimaldi, R., Hughes, A., Krabel, S., Kitson, M., Llerena, P., Lissoni, F., Salter, A., Sobrero, M. (2013). Academic engagement and commercialization: A review of the literature on university-industry relations. Research Policy, 42(2), 423-442.
  26. Piotrowska-Piątek, A. (2016). Analiza komercjalizacji wyników badań naukowych, wsparcia przedsiębiorczości akademickiej oraz prowadzenia działalności gospodarczej przez szkoły wyższe w Polsce - wybrane aspekty. Handel Wewnętrzny, 4(363), 217-229.
  27. Porter, A.L., Kongthon, A., & Lu, J.-C. (2002). Research profiling: Improving the literature review. Scientometrics, 53(1), 351-370.
  28. Powers, J.B. (2004). R&D funding sources and university technology transfer: What is stimulating universities to be more entrepreneurial? Research in Higher Education, 45(1), 1-23.
  29. Powers, J.B., & McDougall, P.P. (2005). University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: A resource-based view of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3), 291-311.
  30. Rasmussen, E., & Borch, O.J. (2010). University capabilities in facilitating entrepreneurship: A longitudinal study of spin-off ventures at mid-range universities. Research Policy, 39(5), 602-612.
  31. Rosa, P., & Dawson, A. (2006). Gender and the commercialization of university science: Academic founders spinout companies. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 18(4), 341-366.
  32. Rothaermel, F.T., Agung, S.D., & Jiang, L.E. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691-791.
  33. Shane, S. (2004a). Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation, Edward Elgar Publishing.
  34. Shane, S. (2004b). Encouraging university entrepreneurship? The effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on university patenting in the United States. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 127-151.
  35. Sikorski, C., & Bieńkowska, J. (2013). Przedsiębiorczość i innowacyjność w uniwersytecie. Przedsiębiorczość i Zarządzanie, 14(12), 263-272.
  36. Starnawska, M. (2017). Revising entrepreneurial orientation construct in a social enterprise. In A. Nalepka & A. Ujwary-Gil (Eds.), Business and Non-profit Organizations Facing Increased Competition and Growing Customers' Demands (Volume 16, pp. 117-130). Nowy Sącz: Wyższa Szkoła Biznbesu - National Louis University. Warsaw: Institute of Economics, Polish Academy of Sciences. Nowy Targ: Cognitione Foundation for the Dissemination of Knowledge and Science.
  37. Stawasz, E. (2007). Stymulowanie przedsiębiorczości środowiska naukowego w Polsce. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego, 453, 265-276.
  38. Sułkowski, Ł., & Seliga, R. (2016). Przedsiębiorczy Uniwersytet - zastosowanie zarządzania strategicznego. Research Papers of Wrocław University of Economics, 444, 478-489.
  39. Toole, A.A. & Czarnitzki, D. (2007). Biomedical academic entrepreneurship through the SBIR program. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 63(4), 716-738.
  40. Urbano, D., & Guerro, M. (2013). Entrepreneurial universities: Socioeconomic impacts of academic entrepreneurship in a European region. Economic Development Quarterly, 27(1), 40-55.
  41. Van Looy, B., Landoni, P., Callaert, J., Van Pottelsberghe, B., Sapsalis, E., & Debackere, K. (2011). Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs. Research Policy, 40(4), 553-564.
  42. 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(4), 541-567.
  43. Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Mustar, P., & Lockett, A. (2007). Academic Entrepreneurship in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  44. Wright, M., Hmielski, K.M., Siegel, D.S., & Ensley, M.D. (2007). The role of human capital in technological entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 31(6), 791-806.
Cited by
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on Pinterest Share on LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu