New stakeholders and new roles for old stakeholders have emerged with the development of entrepreneurial universities. A new systemic framework is therefore required which includes these various stakeholders and their goals and thus gives a clear picture of the process of entrepreneurship encouragement and business development support (EE&BDS). The authors propose a model for knowledge transfer and company growth in the context of entrepreneurial universities and science parks. This integrative approach to the roles of the different stakeholders, activities, tools, goals and needs facilitates the arrangement and management of the EE&BDS process. The authors describe and assess their EE&BDS model, presenting the case of the Polytechnic University of Valencia (UPV) and the science park linked to it, the Polytechnic City of Innovation (CPI). The analysis identifies the roles of and relationships among the UPV-CPI stakeholders and shows how this integrative approach can enhance the EE&BDS process for the institution.
CastroE.de LucioFernández I.GutiérrezA.AñónM.J. (2001), ‘La dinamización en la cooperación investigación-empresa: Desarrollo conceptual y aplicaciones’, ALTEC′2001 Proceedings, Mexico DF.
2.
ClarkB. (1996), ‘Creando universidades emprendedoras en Europa’, Revista Valenciana d'Estudis Autonomics, Vol 21, pp 373–392.
ClarkB. (2004), ‘Delineating the character of the entrepreneurial university’, Higher Education Policy, Vol 17, pp 355–370.
5.
CuyversR.ZimmermannE. (2002), ‘KUL as a virtual incubator for new, knowledge-intensive businesses’, in DebackereK.De BondtR., eds, Leuven Research and Development: 30 Years of Breakthroughs and Innovations Towards an Entrepreneurial University, KUL Press, Leuven.
6.
DalmauJ.I.AlonsoJ.L.ColomerJ. (2003), Programa IDEAS. Un modelo de éxito para fomentar la creación de empresas desde las universidades, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Valencia.
7.
DaviesJ.I. (1987), ‘The entrepreneurial and adaptive university: Characteristics of its organization and operation’, International Journal of Institutional Management in Higher Education, Vol 2, No 1.
8.
EtzkowitzH. (1983), ‘Entrepreneurial scientists and entrepreneurial universities in American academic science’, Minerva, Vol 1, No 2–3 pp 198–233.
9.
EtzkowitzH. (1998), ‘The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages’, Research Policy, Vol 27, No 8, pp 823–833.
10.
EtzkowitzH. (2004), ‘The evolution of entrepreneurial university’, International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, Vol 1, No 1, pp 64–77.
11.
de LucioFernández I.GutiérrezA.AzagraJ.M.Jiménez-SáezF. (1999), ‘El Sistema Valenciano de Innovación en el inicio del siglo XXI’, Revista Valenciana d'Estudis Autonò mics, Vol 30, special issue, pp 7–64.
12.
de LucioFernández I.GutiérrezA.Jiménez-SáezF.AzagraJ.M. (2001), ‘Las debilidades y fortalezas del Sistema Valenciano de Innovación’, in OlazaránM.GómezUranga M., eds, Sistemas regionales de innovación, Universidad del País Vasco, Bilbao.
13.
GibbA. (1999), ‘Creating an entrepreneurial culture in support of SMEs’, Small Enterprise Development, Vol 10, No 4, pp 27–38.
14.
GoddardJ. (1998), ‘The role of universities in regional development’, working paper for CRE-Columbus, UNESCO, Paris.
15.
GrantC.A.van der SijdeP.C.HenryC.KoswenskaI.ScottT.ChassagneG. (1996), ‘Routes of technology transfer to SMEs: A cross-European perspective’, Industry and Higher Education, Vol 10, No 5, pp 293–299.
16.
GritK. (2000), Economisering als probleem - een studie naar de bedrijfsmatige stad en de ondernemende universiteit, Editorial Van Gorcum, Assen.
17.
GroenA. (2005), ‘Knowledge intensive entrepreneurship in networks: Towards a multi-level/multidimensional approach’, Journal of Enterprising Culture, Vol 13, No 1, pp 69–88.
18.
KirwanP.van der SijdeP.GroenA. (2006), ‘Assessing the needs of new technology based firms (NTBFs): An investigation among spin-off companies from six European universities’, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Vol 2, No 2, pp 173–187.
19.
Molas-GallartJ.SalterA.PatelP. (2002), Measuring Third Stream Activities, Internal Report, SPRU, Brighton.
O'SheaR.P.AllenT.J.MorseK.P.O'GormanC.RocheF. (2007), ‘Delineating the anatomy of an entrepreneurial university: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology experience’, R&D Management, Vol 37, No 1, pp 1–16.
22.
RasmussenE.BorchO.J. (2006), ‘The university and the spin-off process: A dynamic capability approach’, in UrbanoD., ed, Diversity in Entrepreneurship, 3rd Inter-RENT Online Publication, European Council for Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Turku.
23.
TodtO.Gutiérrez-GraciaA.de LucioFernández I.Castro-MartínezE. (2007), ‘The regional dimension of innovation and the globalization of science: The case of biotechnology in a peripheral region of the European Union’, R&D Management, Vol 37, No 1, pp 65–74.
24.
Van der SijdeP.C.van AlstéJ.A. (1998), ‘Support for entrepreneurship at the University of Twente’, Industry and Higher Education, Vol 12, No 6, pp 367–372.
25.
Van der SijdeP.C.van DriemG.A. (1999), ‘Incubation infrastructure for knowledge-intensive companies around the University of Twente’, Industry and Higher Education, Vol 13, No 4, pp 243–247.
26.
Van der SijdeP.C.van TilburgJ. (2000), ‘Support of university spin-off companies’, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol 1, No 1, pp 13–21.
27.
Van der SijdeP.C.RidderA.van BenthemJ.GroenA. (2002), ‘Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship stimulation at the University of Twente’, in van der SijdeP.C.RidderA.GòmezJ.M.PastorJ.T.GalianoD.MiraI., eds, Infrastructures for Academic Spin-Off Companies, CEE Limencop, SL.
28.
Van der VeenM.WakkeeI. (2006), ‘Understanding the entrepreneurial process’, in DavidssonP., ed, New Firm Startups, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 27–65.
