Spin-Off and University Patents: Evaluation Processes of the University of Turin


Valerio Brescia , Paolo Pietro Biancone , Maura Campra , Lucia Taruffo ,

Download Full PDF Pages: 51-68 | Views: 1035 | Downloads: 246 | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3613276

Volume 8 - December 2019 (12)


Great attention has been given in recent years to the means of evaluating university spin-offs and their impact on the social and economic context. Nevertheless, in literature, there is not an approach that takes into account the different elements linked both to the value of the organization and to the effects that technology and innovation have on the context. The study starting from the analysis of the different methods of evaluation of university spin-offs and the immaterial value of the spin-off proposes an approach that brings together the different elements.  The case study of the University of Turin (Italy) highlights the components and characteristics that must be analyzed and which confirm what has already been highlighted by the reference theory. The study offers an integrated approach that can be adopted in other Italian and foreign universities, and that accentuates the attention on the gaps that should be explored in future studies.


university spin-offs, intangible assets, university, evaluation methods


i.        Abbate, T., & Cesaroni, F. (2017). The (needed?) market orientation of academic spin-off firms. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 21(4–5), 395–421. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEIM.2017.085690

ii.      Al Kharusi, S., & Al Kindi, M. (2018). The university innovation model in a unique environment. International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, 17(3), 293–303. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijbir.2018.095538

iii.    Aria, M., Cuccurullo, C., & Aria, M. M. (2019). Package ‘bibliometrix’.

iv.     Backs, S., Günther, M., & Stummer, C. (2019). Stimulating academic patenting in a university ecosystem: An agent-based simulation approach. Journal of Technology Transfer, 44(2), 434–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9697-x

v.       Balluchi, F. (2013). La valutazione delle performance socio-ambientali: Indicatori e modelli interpretativi. G Giappichelli Editore.

vi.     Belitski, M., & Heron, K. (2017). Expanding entrepreneurship education ecosystems. Journal of Management Development, 36(2), 163–177. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-06-2016-0121

vii.   Benbasat, I., Dexter, A. S., Drury, D. H., & Goldstein, R. C. (1984). A critque of the stage hypothesis: Theory and empirical evidence. Communications of the ACM, 27(5), 476–485.

viii. Calvo, N., Rodeiro-Pazos, D., & Fernández-López, S. (2017). Science and technology parks as accelerators of knowledge-intensive business services. A case study. International Journal of Business and Globalisation, 18(1), 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBG.2017.081025

ix.     Cantu-Ortiz, F. J., Galeano, N., Mora-Castro, P., & Fangmeyer, Jr., J. (2017). Spreading academic entrepreneurship: Made in Mexico. Business Horizons, 60(4), 541–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2017.04.002

x.       Cattaneo, M., Meoli, M., & Vismara, S. (2015). Cross-border M&As of biotech firms affiliated with internationalized universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(3), 409–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-014-9349-8

xi.     Colletti G. (2018, gennaio 16). Più Spin-off universitari, ma il mercato resta lontano. il Sole 24 Ore.

xii.   Corsi, C., Prencipe, A., Rodríguez-Gulías, M. J., Fernández-López, S., & Rodeiro-Pazos, D. (2017). The effect of parent university on firm growth: An analysis of the Spanish and Italian USOs. Journal of Management Development, 36(2), 233–249. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-06-2016-0108

xiii. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2002). The qualitative inquiry reader. Sage.

xiv. Di Diego, S. (2016). Come fare un piano industriale e reperire le risorse finanziarie. Tutto quello che occorre sapere per crescere e superare la crisi.

xv.   Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of management review, 14(4), 532–550.

xvi. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of management journal, 50(1), 25–32.

xvii.           Fernandez-Alles, M., Diánez-González, J. P., Rodríguez-González, T., & Villanueva-Flores, M. (2019). TTO characteristics and university entrepreneurship: A cluster analysis. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 10(4), 861–889. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-03-2018-0026

xviii.         Fernández-Esquinas, M., Pinto, H., Yruela, M. P., & Pereira, T. S. (2016). Tracing the flows of knowledge transfer: Latent dimensions and determinants of university–industry interactions in peripheral innovation systems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 113, 266–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.07.013

xix. Fischer, B. B., Schaeffer, P. R., Vonortas, N. S., & Queiroz, S. (2018). Quality comes first: University-industry collaboration as a source of academic entrepreneurship in a developing country. Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(2), 263–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9568-x

xx.   Gélinas, P. (2013). Discounted Cash Flow Model 2.0. Modern Economy, 4(12), 818.

xxi. Glasser, W. (1999). Choice theory: A new psychology of personal freedom. HarperPerennial.

xxii.           González-Alcaide, G., Gorraiz, J., & Hervás-Oliver, J.-L. (2018). ON THE USE OF BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF EMERGING TOPICS AND THEIR EVOLUTION: SPIN-OFFS AS A CASE STUDY. El profesional de la información, 27(3).

xxiii.         Grimaldi, R., & Grandi, A. (2005). Business incubators and new venture creation: An assessment of incubating models. Technovation, 25(2), 111–121.

xxiv.          Gubitta, P., Tognazzo, A., & Destro, F. (2016). Signaling in academic ventures: The role of technology transfer offices and university funds. Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(2), 368–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9398-7

xxv.            Guerrero, M., Cunningham, J. A., & Urbano, D. (2015). Economic impact of entrepreneurial universities’ activities: An exploratory study of the United Kingdom. Research Policy, 44(3), 748–764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.008

xxvi.          Hayter, Christopher S. (2016). A trajectory of early-stage spinoff success: The role of knowledge intermediaries within an entrepreneurial university ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 47(3), 633–656.

xxvii.        Hayter, C.S. (2015). Public or private entrepreneurship? Revisiting motivations and definitions of success among academic entrepreneurs. Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(6), 1003–1015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9426-7

xxviii.      Hunady, J., Orviska, M., & Pisar, P. (2018). The effect of higher education on entrepreneurial activities and starting up successful businesses. Engineering Economics, 29(2), 226–235. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.29.2.19069

xxix.          Huyghe, A., & Knockaert, M. (2015). The influence of organizational culture and climate on entrepreneurial intentions among research scientists. Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(1), 138–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-014-9333-3

xxx.            Iacobucci, D., & Micozzi, A. (2015). How to evaluate the impact of academic spin-offs on local development: An empirical analysis of the Italian case. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(3), 434–452.

xxxi.          Ito, T., Kaneta, T., & Sundstrom, S. (2015). Does university entrepreneurship work in Japan?: A comparison of industry-university research funding and technology transfer activities between the UK and Japan. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-016-0037-9

xxxii.        Krishnaswami, S., & Subramaniam, V. (1999). Information asymmetry, valuation, and the corporate spin-off decision. Journal of Financial economics, 53(1), 73–112.

xxxiii.      Kroll, H., & Liefner, I. (2008). Spin-off enterprises as a means of technology commercialisation in a transforming economy—Evidence from three universities in China. Technovation, 28(5), 298–313.

xxxiv.      Leonard-Barton, D. (1990). A dual methodology for case studies: Synergistic use of a longitudinal single site with replicated multiple sites. Organization science, 1(3), 248–266.

xxxv.        Luehrman, T. A. (2005). Corporate valuation and market multiples.

xxxvi.      Mathisen, M. T., & Rasmussen, E. (2019). The development, growth, and performance of university spin-offs: A critical review. Journal of Technology Transfer, 44(6), 1891–1938. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-09714-9

xxxvii.    Meoli, M., & Vismara, S. (2016). University support and the creation of technology and non-technology academic spin-offs. Small Business Economics, 47(2), 345–362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9721-1

xxxviii.  Mosey, S., Kirkham, P., & Binks, M. (2015). The Co-creation of Locally Useful Knowledge by Business Schools. The Oxford Handbook of Local Competitiveness, 345.

xxxix.      Müller, K. (2010). Academic spin-off’s transfer speed—Analyzing the time from leaving university to venture. Research Policy, 39(2), 189–199.

xl.     Ndonzuau, F. N., Pirnay, F., & Surlemont, B. (2002). A stage model of academic spin-off creation. Technovation, 22(5), 281–289.

xli.   Novotny, A. (2017). Academic Entrepreneurship in Eastern Europe—Motivations and Success of University Spin-Offs in Hungary. In THE WORLD SCIENTIFIC REFERENCE ON ENTREPRENEURSHIP: Volume 4: Process Approach to Academic Entrepreneurship—Evidence from the Globe (pagg. 137–164). World Scientific.

xlii. O’Shea, R., Allen, T. J., O’Gorman, C., & Roche, F. (2004). Universities and technology transfer: A review of academic entrepreneurship literature. Irish Journal of management, 25(2).

xliii.           Parmentola, A., & Ferretti, M. (2018). Stages and trigger factors in the development of academic spin-offs: An explorative study in southern Italy. European Journal of Innovation Management, 21(3), 478–500. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-11-2017-0159

xliv.           Payne, B. (s.d.). Startup Valuations: The Dave Berkus Method. URL: http://billpayne. com/20, 11, 02–14.

xlv. Prieto, M. C. P., & Holgado, M. A. T. (2019). The influence of relational capital and networking on the internationalization of the university spin-off. Intangible Capital, 15(1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.1186

xlvi.           Ramaciotti, L., & Rizzo, U. (2015). The determinants of academic spin-off creation by Italian universities. R and D Management, 45(5), 501–514. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12105

xlvii.         Ruiz-Rosero, J., Ramirez-Gonzalez, G., & Viveros-Delgado, J. (2019). Software survey: ScientoPy, a scientometric tool for topics trend analysis in scientific publications. Scientometrics, 121(2), 1165–1188.

xlviii.       Scholten, V., Omta, O., Kemp, R., & Elfring, T. (2015). Bridging ties and the role of research and start-up experience on the early growth of Dutch academic spin-offs. Technovation, 45–46, 40–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.05.001

xlix.           Secundo, G., Ndou, V., Del Vecchio, P., & De Pascale, G. (2019). Knowledge management in entrepreneurial universities: A structured literature review and avenue for future research agenda. Management Decision, 57(12), 3226–3257. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-11-2018-1266

l.        Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. SAGE Publications Limited.

li.      Sveiby, K.-E. (2010). Methods for measuring intangible assets.

lii.    Trichkova, R., & Kanaryan, N. (2015). Startups valuation: Approaches and methods.

liii.  Veld, C., & Veld-Merkoulova, Y. V. (2009). Value creation through spin-offs: A review of the empirical evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(4), 407–420.

liv.   Visintin, F., & Pittino, D. (2014). Founding team composition and early performance of university—Based spin-off companies. Technovation, 34(1), 31–43.

lv.     Yin, R. K. (2017). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. SAGE Publications.

lvi.   Zhang, J. (2009). The performance of university spin-offs: An exploratory analysis using venture capital data. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(3), 255–285.

Cite this Article: