This article studies the extent to which corporate entrepreneurial intentions are enacted differently by academic and non-academic entrepreneurs. Using constructs from cognitive research and exploiting the theory of institutional logics, we observe that academic entrepreneurs, notwithstanding their engagement in entrepreneurship, still implement their corporate entrepreneurial intentions acting in accordance with the academic institutional environment to which they belong. Using a matched-pairs research design, our results show that academic entrepreneurs (compared to non-academic ones) leverage their awareness of technical competencies significantly more and their entrepreneurial self-efficacy and awareness of managerial skills considerably less. We discuss the theoretical and managerial implications related to how cognitive and institutional factors interact to foster entrepreneurial value in newly established firms.
AghionPDewatripontMSteinJ (2008) Academic freedom, private-sector focus, and the process of innovation. RAND Journal of Economics39(3): 617–635.
2.
AikenLSWestSG (1991) Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
3.
AjzenI (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes50(2): 179–211.
4.
AlfordRFriedlandR (1985) Powers of Theory Capitalism, the State, and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.
AlthauserRPRubinD (1970) The computerized construction of a matched sample. The American Journal of Sociology76(2): 325–346.
6.
AutioE (1997) New, technology-based firms in innovation networks symplectic and generative impacts. Research Policy26: 263–281.
7.
AutioEAcsZ (2010) Intellectual property protection and the formation of entrepreneurial growth aspirations. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal4(3): 234–251.
8.
BagozziRPYiY (1988) On the evaluation of structural equation models. Academy of Marketing Science Journal16(1): 74–95.
9.
BaldiniNFiniRGrimaldiR. (2014) Organisational change and the institutionalisation of university patenting activity in Italy. Minerva52: 27–53.
10.
BanduraA (1997) Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Self-Control. New York: Freeman.
11.
BaronR (2007) Behavioral and cognitive factors in entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurs as the active element in new venture creation. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal1: 167–182.
12.
BaronRMarkmanGD (2003) Beyond social capital: The role of entrepreneurs’ social competence in their financial success. Journal of Business Venturing18: 41–60.
13.
BattilanaJ (2011) The enabling role of social position in diverging from the institutional status quo: Evidence from the U.K. national health service. Organization Science22(4): 817–834.
14.
BaumJRLockeESmithKG (2001) A multidimensional model of venture growth. Academy of Management Journal44(2): 292–303.
15.
BeckmanCMBurtonMD (2008) Founding the future path dependence in the evolution of top management teams from founding to IPO. Organization Science19(1): 3–24.
16.
BergerPLLuckmannT (1966) Social Construction of Reality. New York: Doubleday.
17.
BidwellMBriscoeF (2010) The dynamics of inter-organizational careers. Organization Science21(5): 1034–1053.
BolzaniDFiniRGrimaldiR. (2014) University spin-offs and their impact: Longitudinal evidence from Italy. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics41(4): 237–263.
20.
BoydNGVozikisGS (1994) The influence of self-efficacy on the development of entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice18(4): 63–77.
21.
BrutonGDAhlstromDLiH-L (2010) Institutional theory and entrepreneurship: Where are we now and where do we need to move in the future?Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice34: 421–440.
22.
BurtonDMBeckmanCM (2007) Leaving a legacy role imprints and successor turnover in young firms. American Sociological Review72: 239–266.
23.
BusenitzLWGomezCSpencerJW (2000) Country institutional profiles: Unlocking entrepreneurial phenomena. Academy of Management Journal43(5): 994–1003.
24.
ChenCCGreenePGCrickA (1998) Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers?Journal of Business Venturing13: 295–316.
25.
ColyvasJAPowellWW (2006) Roads to institutionalization: The remaking of boundaries between public and private science. Research in Organizational Behavior27: 315–363.
26.
ColomboMDelmastroM (2002) How effective are technology incubators? Evidence from Italy. Research Policy31: 1103–1122.
27.
ColomboMPivaE (2012) Firms’ genetic characteristics and competence-enlarging strategies: A comparison between academic and non-academic high-tech start-ups. Research Policy41: 79–92.
CovinJGSlevinDP (1989) Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal10: 75–87.
30.
D’EstePPerkmannM (2011) Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. Journal of Technology Transfer36(3): 316–339.
31.
DewNReadSSarasvathyS. (2009) Effectual versus predictive logics in entrepreneurial decision-making: Differences between experts and novices. Journal of Business Venturing24: 287–309.
FanX (2003) Using commonly available software for bootstrapping in both substantive and measurement analyses. Educational and Psychological Measurement63(1): 24–50.
34.
FeldmanMP (2001) The entrepreneurial event revisited firm formation in a regional context. Industrial and Corporate Change10(4): 861–875.
35.
FerrianiSGarnseyELorenzoniG (2012) Continuity and change in a spin-off venture: The process of reimprinting. Industrial and Corporate Change21(4): 1011–1048.
36.
FiniRLaceteraN (2010) Different yokes for different folks: Individual preferences, institutional logics, and the commercialization of academic research. Advances in the Study of Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Economic Growth21: 1–25.
37.
FiniRGrimaldiRSobreroM (2009) Factors fostering academics to start up new ventures: An assessment of Italian founders’ incentives. Journal of Technology Transfer34: 380–402.
38.
FiniRGrimaldiRMarzocchiGL. (2012) The determinants of corporate entrepreneurial intention within small and newly established firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice36: 387–414.
39.
FiniRGrimaldiRSantoniS. (2011) Complements or substitutes? The role of universities and local context in supporting the creation of academic spin-offs. Research Policy40: 1113–1127.
40.
FiniRLaceteraNShaneS (2014) Academic entrepreneurship. In: TeeceDJAugierM (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Strategic Management. DOI: 10.1057/978113729467.
41.
FooMDSinHYiongL (2006) Effects of team inputs and intrateam processes on new venture team effectiveness. Strategic Management Journal27(4): 389–399.
42.
FooMDWongPKOngA (2005) Do others think you have a viable business idea? Team diversity and judges’ evaluation of ideas in a business plan competition. Journal of Business Venturing20(3): 385–402.
43.
ForbesDPBorchertPZellmer-BruhnM. (2006) Entrepreneurial team formation: An exploration of new member addition. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice2: 225–248.
44.
ForlaniDMullinsJW (2000) Perceived risks and choices in entrepreneurs’ new venture decisions. Journal of Business Venturing15(4): 305–322.
45.
Gomez-MejiaLRBalkinD (1989) Effectiveness of individual and aggregate compensation strategies. Industrial Relations28(3): 431–445.
46.
GrantPPerrenL (2002) Small business and entrepreneurial research. International Small Business Journal20(2): 185–211.
47.
GreenwoodROliverCSahlinK. (2008) Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. London: Sage.
48.
GrimaldiRKenneyMSiegelDS. (2011) 30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy40(8): 1045–1144.
HaberSReichelA (2007) The cumulative nature of the entrepreneurial process: The contribution of human capital, planning and environmental resources to small venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing22(1): 119–145.
51.
HmieleskiKBaronR (2008) A contextual study of entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal2: 57–72.
52.
JainSGeorgeGMaltarichM (2009) Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigation role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activities. Research Policy38(6): 922–935.
53.
JonesOMacphersonAWoollardD (2008) Entrepreneurial ventures in higher education. International Small Business Journal26(6): 683–708.
54.
KacperczykAJ (2013) Social influence and entrepreneurship: The effect of university peers on entrepreneurial entry. Organization Science24(3): 664–683.
55.
KehHTFooMDLimB (2002) Opportunity evaluation under risky conditions: The cognitive processes of entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice27(2): 125–148.
56.
KruegerNFReillyMCarsrudA (2000) Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing15(5/6): 411–432.
57.
LaceteraN (2009) Different missions and commitment power in R&D organization: Theory and evidence on industry-university alliances. Organization Science20(3): 565–582.
58.
LazearE (2004) Balanced skills and entrepreneurship. The American Economic Review94(2): 208–211.
59.
LinanFChenY (2009) Development and cross-cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice33(3): 593–617.
60.
LockettNKerrRRobinsonS (2008) Multiple perspectives on the challenges for knowledge transfer between higher education institutions and industry. International Small Business Journal26(6): 661–681.
61.
LubatkinMHSimsekZLingY. (2006) Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management32(5): 646–672.
62.
McAdamMMarlowS (2007) Building futures or stealing secrets? Entrepreneurial cooperation and conflict within business incubators. International Small Business Journal25(4): 361–382.
63.
McGeeJEPetersonMMuellerSL. (2009) Entrepreneurial self-efficacy: Refining the measure. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice33(4): 965–988.
64.
MarlowSMcAdamM (2012) Analyzing the influence of gender upon high technology venturing within the context of business incubation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice36(4): 655–676.
65.
MertonRK (1968) Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press.
66.
MisangyiVFWeaverGRElmsH (2008) Ending corruption: The interplay between institutional logics, resources, and institutional entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Review33: 750–770.
67.
MitchellRKBusenitzLWBirdB. (2007) The central question in entrepreneurial cognition research 2007. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice31(1): 1–27.
68.
MitchellRKSmithJBMorseEA. (2002) Are entrepreneurial cognitions universal? Assessing entrepreneurial cognitions across cultures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice26(4): 9–32.
69.
MoseySWrightM (2007) From human capital to social capital: A longitudinal study of technology-based academic entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice31(6): 909–935.
70.
MountMKBarrickMR (1995) The big five personality dimensions: Implications for research and practice in human resources management. Research in Personal and Human Resources Management13: 153–200.
71.
MoynihanDPandeySK (2007) The role of organizations in fostering public service motivation. Public Administration Review67(1): 40–53.
72.
MunariFToschiL (2011) Do venture capitalists have a bias against investment in academic spin-offs? Evidence from the micro- and nanotechnology sector in the UK. Industrial and Corporate Change20(2): 397–432.
73.
MunariFPasquiniMToschiL (2014) From the lab to the stock market? An analysis of University-Oriented Seed Funds in Europe. Journal of Technology Transfer. Epub ahead of print 17December2014. DOI: 10.1007/s10961-014-9385-4.
74.
MustarPWrightM (2010) Convergence or path dependency in policies to foster the creation of university spin-off firms? A comparison of France and the United Kingdom. The Journal of Technology Transfer35(1): 42–65.
75.
NormandSLTBelangerAJFrankRG (2003) Evaluating selection out of health plans for Medicaid beneficiaries with substance abuse. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services and Research30(1): 78–92.
76.
PalichLBagbyDR (1995) Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk-taking: Challenging conventional wisdom. Journal of Business Venturing10(6): 425–438.
77.
PerkmannMTartariVMcKelveyM. (2013) Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy42: 423–442.
78.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSLeeJY. (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology88: 879–903.
79.
PowellWWColyvasJA (2008) Microfoundations of institutional theory. In: GreenwoodROliverCSahlin-AnderssonK. (eds) Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. London: Sage, pp.276–298.
80.
RasmussenE (2011) Understanding academic entrepreneurship: Exploring the emergence of university spin-off ventures using process theories. International Small Business Journal29(5): 448–471.
81.
RasmussenEMoseySWrightM (2011) The evolution of entrepreneurial competencies: A longitudinal study of university spin-off venture emergence. Journal of Management Studies48(6): 1314–1345.
82.
RasmussenEMoseySWrightM (2014) The influence of university departments on the evolution of entrepreneurial competencies in spin-off ventures. Research Policy43(1): 92–106.
Sánchez-BarrioluengoM (2014) Articulating the ‘three-missions’ in Spanish universities. Research Policy43: 1760–1773.
85.
SauermannHStephanP (2013) Conflicting logics? A multidimensional view of industrial and academic science. Organization Science24(3): 889–909.
86.
ShaneS (2000) Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. Organization Science11(4): 448–469.
87.
ShortJCPayneGTKetchenDJ (2008) Research on organizational configurations: Past accomplishments and future challenges. Journal of Management22: 9–24.
88.
SitkinSBWeingartLR (1995) Determinants of risky decision-making behavior: A test of the mediating role of risk perceptions and propensity. Academy of Management Journal38(6): 1573–1592.
89.
SuchmanM (1995) Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review20: 517–610.
90.
TartariVPerkmannMSalterA (2014) In good company: The influence of peers on industry engagement by academic scientists. Research Policy43(7): 1189–1203.
91.
ThomsonE (2009) Individual entrepreneurial intent: Construct clarification and development of an internationally reliable metric. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice33(3): 669–694.
ThorntonPHRibeiro-SorianoDUrbanoD (2011) Socio-cultural factors and entrepreneurial activity: An overview. International Small Business Journal29(2): 1–14.
94.
UngerJRauchAFreseM. (2009) Human capital and entrepreneurial success: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Business Venturing26(3): 341–358.
95.
VanaelstIClarysseBWrightM. (2006) Entrepreneurial team development in academic spinouts: An examination of team heterogeneity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice30(2): 249–271.
WiklundJShepherdD (2003) Knowledge-based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and medium-sized businesses. Strategic Management Journal24: 1307–1314.
98.
WilliamsLJCoteJABuckleyMR (1989) The lack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: Reality or artifact?Journal of Applied Psychology74: 462–468.
99.
WrightMMarlowS (2012) Entrepreneurial activity in the venture creation and development process. International Small Business Journal30: 107–114.
100.
ZhaoHSeibertSEHillsGE (2005) The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurship intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology90(6): 1265–1272.
101.
ZhaoHSeibertSELumpkinGT (2010) The relationship of personality to entrepreneurial intentions and performance: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management36(2): 381–404.
