Doktorská práce se zaměřuje na podnikatelské klima v zemích procházejících transformací s konkrétním zaměřením na Českou republiku a její srovnání vůči Švýcarsku. Metodou grounded theory porovnává možnosti zakládání nových akademických spin-off v obou zemích a hodnotí klíčové faktory v dané oblasti. Práce se opírá o rozsáhlý soubor literatury stejně jako o vlastní výzkum.

Doktorská práce se zaměřuje na podnikatelské klima v zemích procházejících transformací s konkrétním zaměřením na Českou republiku a její srovnání vůči Švýcarsku. Metodou grounded theory porovnává možnosti zakládání nových akademických spin-off v obou zemích a hodnotí klíčové faktory v dané oblasti. Práce se opírá o rozsáhlý soubor literatury stejně jako o vlastní výzkum.

<p>Sweden is one of five nations in the world manufacturing fighter aircrafts. Highly advanced technology is needed in order to develop a fighter aircraft. When developing advanced technology, new applications, other than those initially intended occur, spin-off. Some of Sweden’s largest companies are spin-offs from the fighter aircraft industry. Saab Automobile is an example of this. Spin-off as a concept appears in different contexts, from television series to audit terms but foremost in connection with splitting of companies. In the initial phase of our study we came across numerous definitions and concepts as explanation of spin-off and we therefore choose to adopt our own definition. </p><p>Our study defines civil spin-offs from military aircraft projects. The Swedish aircraft industry consists of three large companies, Saab, Volvo Aero and Ericsson Microwave and we have for our case studies chosen spin-off processes within those companies. We interviewed persons well familiar with the above mentioned process in the respective companies, individually. The answers from the interviews, which we have analysed based on theory and literature, have enabled us to identify, describe and analyse factors promoting as well as counteracting spin-offs arising from military aircraft projects.</p><p>From our study we have drawn the conclusion that all companies want to achieve spin-offs. One important way of creating opportunities for spin-offs is organising in cross functional groups, one of many internally acting factors that we have tried in our study. A factor that strongly counteracts the development of a spin-off is a strict focus on the core business of the company. This comes as a result of demand for saving measures, which has also led to much less time or no time at all for reflecting on new ideas.</p><p>The historic role of the Swedish Government as a long term and demanding customer of military aircraft systems has over the last years shown less significance. The Government now has to play the role of co-operative link between the industry and the university in what is called a Triple Helix. The role of the Government is thus to support new enterprising as spin-off through technique parks, incubators and VINNOVA.</p><p>Another significant factor supporting the development of spin-offs is co-operation in networks and clusters. In the spring of 2005 SwedCat was founded, a cluster between Saab, Volvo Aero and Ericsson microwave with the aim to take advantage of spin-offs from the respective companies and to support each other in developing them. We are of the opinion that this collaboration sets an excellent example for the industry, irrespective of line of business.</p>

National innovative performance is a key driver for sustainable growth (Pavitt, 1980). National innovative capacity may be improved by fostering industrial Research and Development (R&D), by funding academic research and by effectively supporting university-industry interactions in order to strengthen the linkage between R&D and product development. In a context of growing relevance of external sources of innovation, where the industry, rather than relying on internal R&D, increasingly engages in ‘open innovation’ (Chesbrough, 2006), the role played by universities is crucial. The essays presented in this thesis focus mainly on academic R&D and knowledge transfer mechanisms from the university viewpoint, as opposed to government or industry perspectives. These essays contribute to our understanding of how universities organise themselves to adapt to this changing context. In other words, the thesis looks at the ‘reflexivity’ norm of the system associated with the entrepreneurial university, as established by Etzkowitz (2004); or “a continuing renovation of the internal structure of the university as its relation to industry and government changes, and of industry and government as their relationship to the university is revised”. Universities play a major role in the national innovative capacity of a country as producers and transmitters of new knowledge (see for instance, Adams, 1990; Mansfield, 1991; Klevorick et al., 1995; Zucker et al., 1998; Cohen et al., 2002; Arundel and Geuna, 2004; Guellec and van Pottelsberghe, 2004). While European countries play a leading global role in terms of scientific output, they lag behind in the ability to convert this strength into wealth-generating innovations (this is known as the ‘European paradox’, see for instance Tijssen and van Wijk, 1999; and Dosi et al., 2005). This level of innovation may be improved by different factors; for instance, by fostering an entrepreneurial culture, or by increasing industry’s willingness to develop new products, new processes. One of these factors relies on the notion of an ‘entrepreneurial university’. Universities, in addition to the two traditional missions of research and teaching, foster their third mission of contribution to society, by improving the transfer of knowledge to the industry. New tools and regulations have been established to support universities in this process. Since the early 80’s, academic technology transfer offices (TTOs) have been created, dedicated employees have been trained and hired, incubators for the launch of new academic ventures have been set up, academic or independent pre-seed investment funds have been founded and laws related to the ownerships by university of their invented-patents have been promulgated. But what exactly stands behind the notion of ‘entrepreneurial university’? There exist more different descriptions of a similar concept or of a similar evolution than a general agreed definition. Indeed, "(…) There is high heterogeneity, there is no such thing as a typical university, and there is no typical way to be or become an entrepreneurial university" (Martinelli et al., 2008, p.260). However some similar patterns of what is or should be an entrepreneurial university may be identified. First, there is this notion of a revolution experienced by universities that now have to integrate a third mission of contributing to economic development aside of their traditional academic missions. “(…) But in the most advanced segments of the worldwide university system, a ‘second revolution’ takes off. The entrepreneurial university integrates economic development into the university as an academic function along with teaching and research. It is this ‘capitalisation of knowledge’ that is the heart of a new mission for the university, linking universities to users of knowledge more tightly and establishing the university as an economic actor in its own right” (Etzkowitz, 1998, p.833). This revolution finds its origin in a necessary adaptation of universities to an external changing environment where modern societies put a strong emphasis on knowledge. “The concept of the entrepreneurial university envisions an academic structure and function that is revised through the alignment of economic development with research and teaching as academic missions. The transformation of academia from a ‘secondary’ to a ‘primary’ institution is a heretofore unexpected outcome of the institutional development of modern society (Mills, 1958). In consequence, the knowledge industry in modern societies is no longer a minor affair run by an intellectual elite, an activity that might be considered by pragmatic leaders as expendable; it is a mammoth enterprise on a par with heavy industry, and just as necessary to the country in which it is situated (Graham, 1998, p.129)”, quoted by Etzkowitz et al. (2000, p.329). The notion of an ‘entrepreneurial university’ also exceeds the simple idea of the protection of academic intellectual property by patents owned by universities and their out-licensing as well as the launch of new ventures. It encompasses an overall change of how the university is organised. “In the gruesome and heady world of changing external environments, organizations – including universities – will need to seek opportunities beyond their existing competences (Hamel and Prahalad, 1989, 1994), which suggests the need for an entrepreneurial orientation (Lumpkin and Dess, 1996)”, quoted by Glassman et al. (2003, p.356). This entrepreneurial orientation will only be possible if the overall organisation of the university changes. “An entrepreneurial university, on its own, actively seeks to innovate how it goes about its business. It seeks to work out a substantial shift in organizational character so as to arrive at a more promising posture for the future. Entrepreneurial universities seek to become 'stand-up' universities that are significant actors on their own terms” (Clark, 1998, p.4). The notion of entrepreneurial university also encompasses the concept of academic entrepreneurship in its broad sense. For a university to become entrepreneurial, individual academics also have to adapt and to behave in an entrepreneurial way. This concept is not solely conceived here as the launching of new ventures by academics (a view embraced by Shane, 2004, for instance). It relates more to the view of Stevenson, Roberts and Grousbeck (1989), referenced by Glassman et al. (2003, p.354) or “the process of creating and seizing an opportunity and pursuing it to create something of value regardless of current available resources.” The difficulty facing universities is then to adapt to their external environment while preserving the integrity of their two traditional academic missions. However, some conceive this challenge as precisely an ability that characterise the very intrinsic university’s nature. "The uniqueness of the university,(…) lies in its protean capacity to change its shape and function to suit its temporal and sociopolitical environment while retaining enough continuity to deserve its unchanging name” (Perkin, 1984, p.18). Furthermore, others perceive this challenge as a tension that has always been at the root of the university’s character. “The cherished view of some academics that higher education started out on the Acropolis of scholarship and was desecrated by descent into the Agora of materialistic pursuit led by ungodly commercial interests and scheming public officials and venal academic leaders is just not true for the university systems that have developed at least since 1200 A.D. If anything, higher education started in the Agora, the market place, at the bottom of the hill and ascended to the Acropolis on the top of the hill… Mostly it has lived in tension, at one and the same time at the bottom of the hill, at the top of the hill, and on many paths in between” (Kerr, 1988, p.4; quoted by Glassman, 2003, p.353). Nevertheless, it appears that some institutions, the ones integrating the best their different missions and being the most ‘complete’ in terms of the activities they perform, will be better positioned to overcome this second revolution than other institutions. “Since science-based innovations increasingly have a multidisciplinary character and build on "difficult-to-codify" people-centred interactions, university-based systems of industry science links, which combine basic and applied research with a broader education mission, are seen as enjoying a comparative advantage relative to research institutes” (OECD, 2001 quoted by Debackere and Veugeleers, 2005, p.324). Or as stated by Geuna (1998, p.266), in his analysis of the way the different historical trajectories of European universities are influencing their ability to adapt to the current changing environment, “ (…) the renowned institutions of Cluster IV (pre-war institutions, large in size, with high research output and productivity) are in a strong position both scientifically and politically, and can exercise bargaining power in their relations with government and industry. (…) On the other side, universities in the other two clusters (new postwar universities, characterised by small size, low research output and low research orientation and productivity, whether involved in technological research or in teaching), with very low research grants from government, are pushed to rely more heavily on industrial funding. Being in a weak financial position, they may find themselves in an asymmetric bargaining relationship with industry that they may be unable to manage effectively.” To summarize, one could attempt to define the broad notion of an ‘entrepreneurial university’ as follows. An entrepreneurial university is a university that adapts to the current changing environment that puts a stronger emphasis on knowledge, by properly integrating the third mission or the capitalisation of knowledge aside of its two traditional missions. This adaptation requires a radical change in the way the university is organised. It will require important strategic reorientation from the top but also, and mainly, it will require from the individual academics to better seize new opportunities to generate value (not only financial but also scientific or academic) given scarcer resources. Renowned and complete universities (with teaching, basic and applied research) have an edge over other institutions to overcome this second revolution. This notion of ‘entrepreneurial university’ has drawn criticisms. For example, academics’ interactions with industry could impact negatively on research activities by reorienting fundamental research towards more applied research projects (Cohen and Randazzese, 1996; David, 2000), by restricting academic freedom (Cohen et al., 1994; Blumenthal et al., 1996; Blumenthal et al., 1997), or by potentially reducing scientific productivity (see for instance van Zeebroeck et al., 2008 for a review on this issue). The present work does not address the issue of the impact of increased interactions with the business sector on traditional academic missions nor the question of whether universities should become entrepreneurial or not. Instead, the essays start from the idea that the ‘entrepreneurial university’ notion is part of the intrinsic nature of modern universities, or at least, is a part of its evolution. Industry-university relationships are not a new phenomenon; it can be traced at least to the mid- to late-1800s in Europe and to at least the industrial revolution in the USA (Hall et al., 2001). What is evolving is the nature of such relationships that become more formal. The present analysis starts then from the general observation that some universities (and researchers) are more entrepreneurially-oriented and better accept this mission than others. From that stems the primary research question addressed in this thesis: are there characteristics or conditions leading to a smooth coexistence of traditional and new academic missions inside an entrepreneurial university? And if so, what are they? Existing work on the entrepreneurial university is a nascent but already well developed field of research. The aimed contribution of this thesis is to analyse the topic under three specific but complementary angles. These three perspectives are explored into the four main chapters of this work, structured as follows. Chapter 1 is titled “Turning science into business: A case study of a traditional European research university”. It introduces the topic by investigating the dynamics at play that may explain the propensity of a traditional, research-oriented university to start generate entrepreneurial outputs, while being not full-fledge entrepreneurially organised. Exploring the importance of “new” entrepreneurial outputs, as defined as patents and spin-off companies, compared to other ways of transferring new knowledge to the industry, Chapter 2 reviews the literature on the variety of knowledge transfer mechanisms (KTMs) used in university-industry interactions. It is titled “University-Industry interactions and knowledge transfer mechanisms: a critical survey”. Given scarcer structural funds for academic research and increasing pressure on academics to diversify their activities in terms of being involved in patenting or spin-off launching, Chapter 3 and Chapter 4 investigate the role played by individual characteristics of researchers in attracting competitive, external funding. Chapter 3 presents stylised facts related to external fundraising at ULB and characteristics of researchers who attracted these funds over the period 1998-2008. The empirical analysis on associations between individual characteristics of researchers (intrinsic, scientific and entrepreneurial) and the extent of funds attracted from different sources (national, regional and business) is presented in Chapter 4, titled “The determinants of academic fundraising.” Chapter 5 concludes and suggests ideas for future investigation on this topic. Chapter 6, in appendix of the present work, titled “A note on the drivers of R&D intensity”, is not directly linked to the issue of the entrepreneurial university. It has been included to complement the studied topic and to put in perspective the present work. Academic research and university-industry interactions constitute important drivers of a national R&D and innovation system. Other factors are at play as well. Looking at this issue at the macroeconomic level, Chapter 6 investigates to what extent the industrial structure of a country influences the observed R&D intensity, and hence would bias the well-known country rankings based on aggregate R&D intensity.

Sweden is one of five nations in the world manufacturing fighter aircrafts. Highly advanced technology is needed in order to develop a fighter aircraft. When developing advanced technology, new applications, other than those initially intended occur, spin-off. Some of Sweden’s largest companies are spin-offs from the fighter aircraft industry. Saab Automobile is an example of this. Spin-off as a concept appears in different contexts, from television series to audit terms but foremost in connection with splitting of companies. In the initial phase of our study we came across numerous definitions and concepts as explanation of spin-off and we therefore choose to adopt our own definition. Our study defines civil spin-offs from military aircraft projects. The Swedish aircraft industry consists of three large companies, Saab, Volvo Aero and Ericsson Microwave and we have for our case studies chosen spin-off processes within those companies. We interviewed persons well familiar with the above mentioned process in the respective companies, individually. The answers from the interviews, which we have analysed based on theory and literature, have enabled us to identify, describe and analyse factors promoting as well as counteracting spin-offs arising from military aircraft projects. From our study we have drawn the conclusion that all companies want to achieve spin-offs. One important way of creating opportunities for spin-offs is organising in cross functional groups, one of many internally acting factors that we have tried in our study. A factor that strongly counteracts the development of a spin-off is a strict focus on the core business of the company. This comes as a result of demand for saving measures, which has also led to much less time or no time at all for reflecting on new ideas. The historic role of the Swedish Government as a long term and demanding customer of military aircraft systems has over the last years shown less significance. The Government now has to play the role of co-operative link between the industry and the university in what is called a Triple Helix. The role of the Government is thus to support new enterprising as spin-off through technique parks, incubators and VINNOVA. Another significant factor supporting the development of spin-offs is co-operation in networks and clusters. In the spring of 2005 SwedCat was founded, a cluster between Saab, Volvo Aero and Ericsson microwave with the aim to take advantage of spin-offs from the respective companies and to support each other in developing them. We are of the opinion that this collaboration sets an excellent example for the industry, irrespective of line of business.

The research takes depth interview of the case study method. It focuses on the engineering department of the telecommunications industry which is transformed into an independent engineering company by spin-off. It also discusses the motive of diversification and the model of operation. The research expects to understand the interactive relation between successful entrepreneur, management abilities and resource using. The research chooses a successful spin-off company as it's case study. It discusses the strategy phase and implementation phase to find out the key success factors. By analyzing the documents about entrepreneur, the research investigates the managements and strategies of spin-off and integrates the theories and practices into a conclusion: 1. Strategy is the motive power of entrepreneur: The right strategy is "Do the right thing". Whether a start-up can start or not depends on the right combination of core strategies, strategic resources and value net. 2. Implementation is the driving power of entrepreneur: The good implementation is "Do the thing right". Whether a strategy can operate or not depends on the efficient combination of organization structure, human resource, technical R&D, manufacturing, marketing, customer relationship and financial planning. 3. Key success factor (KSF) is the accelerating power of entrepreneur: Only if the strategy phase and implemetation phase operate in coordination, the start-up possesses the condition of success. However, just a fast success is a real success in the speedily changing time. A start-up company cannot shorten the time to success unless it owns some special KSF. 4. The success in the entrepreneurial phase can't ensure that the start-up will also succeed in the future operation. It must transform the success factors in the entrepreneurial phase into the ones in the future operation.

Ausgründungen aus der Wissenschaft (spin-offs) gehören zu den anspruchsvollsten Instrumenten des Wissens- und Technologietransfers. Die Initiatoren erfolgreicher Gründungsvorhaben sind oftmals engagierte Hochschullehrer, die nicht nur Anerkennung in der Scientific Community suchen, sondern ihre Forschungsergebnisse ebenso in anwendungsorientierte Produkte und Dienstleistungen überführen. Was treibt diese Wissenschaftler an? In welchem Zusammenhang steht die Gründungsmotivation mit der ursprünglichen wissenschaftlichen Motivation? Ist das Initiieren einer Ausgründung mehr als das Lösen eines herausfordernden Rätsels? Der vorliegende Artikel gibt eine Antwort auf diese Fragen und gewährt einen Einblick in die Gründungsmotivation von Hochschulprofessoren aus den Naturwissenschaften. Mit Hilfe einer qualitativen Untersuchung werden verschiedene Gründertypen gebildet.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universiẗat, Hannover, 2005.

This study proposes to contribute to the knowledge of the entrepreneurship from the spin-off from university. It aims to better understand the problems encountered by students and researchers in this process. A qualitative and longitudinal approach allowed for the examination of the performance and the evolutions of the support structures of firm creation in the territory of Nancy. During the five years of study, the behaviours and practices observed between the local territorial development actors changed considerably. This observation has allowed the carrier of innovative projects to integrate the characteristics of the milieu within which they are anchored. The longitudinal approach enabled for the consideration of the management structure within the organisations followed. One of the central elements rests on the analysis of the relationship between the members of the team of creators. This second section treats the different phases of the entrepreneurial situation along with the vision of the entrepreneur. The ensemble of the results sought to shed light on the theory of entrepreneurship and to make practical propositions to creators, public powers, and local actors of territorial development. / Cette recherche se propose de contribuer à la connaissance du processus entrepreneurial au départ de l'Université. Elle vise à mieux connaître les problèmes rencontrés par les créateurs étudiants et chercheurs de "spin-off". L'approche qualitative et longitudinale permet d'approcher tout d'abord les logiques de fonctionnement et les évolutions de l'accompagnement à la création d'entreprises sur le territoire nancéien. Sur près de cinq ans de suivi, les comportements et les pratiques observés entre ces acteurs locaux du développement territorial ont considérablement été modifiés. Ce constat invite les porteurs de projet innovant à intégrer les caractéristiques du milieu auquel ils sont ancrés. L'approche dans la durée permet ensuite d'envisager l'organisation de la conduite interne des entreprises retenues. Un des éléments centraux porte notamment sur l'analyse de la relation entre les membres de l'équipe de créateurs. Cette seconde partie traite des différentes phases de ces situations entrepreneuriales ainsi que de la vision de l'entrepreneur. L'ensemble des résultats observés a pour objet à la fois d'éclairer une lecture théorique et de faire des propositions pratiques aux créateurs, pouvoirs publics et acteurs locaux du développement territorial.

The aim of this thesis is on the base of accounting and tax treatment of corporate transformations modeled timelines for each phase of transformation, respectively. merger and spin-off, and test their functionality on the practical example. For the purpose of accomplish this goal was done, especially in the first two parts, the analysis of individual Czech and European professional publications and articles, as well as Czech and European legislation and judicature. For the next parts it was also used comparison of accounting and tax treatment of transformation, respectively. merger and spin-off, modeling timelines for each phase of transformation and their testing on practical example for the purpose of verification of functionality. The conclusion evaluates the usability of modeled timelines for practice.