Technovation—Intrapreneurial universities in digital times

Magnus Klofsten (corresponding author)

Linköping University, Helix Competence Centre & PIE, Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping, Sweden, magnus.klofsten@liu.se

Alexander Brem

Institute of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Science, University of Stuttgart, Germany, alexander.brem@ets.uni-stuttgart.de

Maribel Guerrero

Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University (U.K.), and School of Business and Economics, Universidad del Desarrollo (Chile), maribel.guerrero@northumbria.ac.uk

David Urbano

Department of Business and Centre for Entrepreneurship & Social Innovation Research (CREIS), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain, david.urbano@uab.cat

This SI explores various aspects of intrapreneurship in the context of universities. The academic culture conceives intrapreneurship as simply entrepreneurial activities that occur within established organizations (Abreu and Grinevich, 2013; Corbett et al., 2013; Audretsch et al., 2021; Klofsten et al., 2021). Intrapreneurs in university organizations exploit new ideas and opportunities that can eventually create meaning and value in their academic work and, in the long run, in their future careers and capabilities (Youssef et al. 2021). Academics, whether they are researchers or teachers, or have an intermediary role at the university, are as capable as their industrial counterparts in acting entrepreneurially and producing new activities and organizations within their internal context. Academics may prefer to stay at the university and in their professional role nurture novel ideas and create new organizations, which result in added value in the organizations within which they operate (c.f. Vanhaverbeke and Peeters, 2005; Stuart and Ding, 2006).

When studying intrapreneurship and the academy it is important to be aware of the heterogeneities that may exist within a university organization. For instance, studies have shown that academics in natural sciences and technology generally view the creation of a spin-off company as the main result of an entrepreneurial activity while their arts and social sciences counterparts are more concerned with the social dimensions of entrepreneurship where organizing activities addressing societal challenges is the more important aspect of entrepreneurship (Bienkowska et al. 2016). Also, in the context of universities, it is useful to consider the role of digitalization to explore the potential intrapreneurial opportunities with acknowledging the differentiation of related terms (Brem and Giones, 2017). Secundo et al. (2020) identify the major streams of digital academic entrepreneurship literature. Some of the aspects they highlight are digital technologies for entrepreneurship education, digital technologies for discovering entrepreneurial opportunities, and creating entrepreneurial competences in the digital “university-based” entrepreneurial ecosystems. Particularly, Youssef et al. (2021) analyze the specific influence of digital technologies on education, and how education affects entrepreneurial intent among students and the importance of the digital entrepreneurship ecosystem for entrepreneurial processes.

Moreover, variations in university environments can influence researcher mobility, networking, external collaboration, and related issues and thereby encourage or discourage entrepreneurship (Bienkowska and Klofsten, 2012; Munoz et al., 2018). Therefore, it is crucial in this SI to take in to account that universities are large and complex organizations comprising many sub-organizations and cultures and there is a reason to assume that this fundamentally affects the intrapreneurial process.

In recent decades, extensive research has been carried out on various aspects of academic entrepreneurship (Klofsten and Jones-Evans, 2000), the entrepreneurial university (Etzkowitz et al., 2019) and the engaged university (Breznitz and Feldman, 2012). Moreover, many different sub-areas have been studied, such as technology and knowledge transfer (Markman et al., 2005); internal factors (Teece, 2018); institutional factors (Guerrero and Urbano, 2012), entrepreneurial teaching and learning (Fayolle and Gailly, 2015); why academics engage with industry (Perkmann et al., 2021), entrepreneurial universities in emerging economies (Dalmarco et al., 2018), innovation systems and ecosystems (Brem and Radziwon, 2017) and measuring impact of the entrepreneurial university (Guerrero et al., 2015). Furthermore, several SI have been published, and amongst these, the well-cited works include Perkmann et al. (2013), Guerrero et al. (2016), and Klofsten et al. (2019). However, these special issues have focused on the entrepreneurial university per se and not the intrapreneurial processes.

A few recent studies have focused on intrapreneurial capabilities in terms of remote education (Guerrero et al., 2020), intrapreneurial behaviors, and commitment of employees in the university milieu (c.f. Valka et al., 2020). However, despite the extensive research on entrepreneurial behaviors and activities linked to universities (e.g., students’ start-ups, academic spin-offs, commercialization), there has overall been very little research executed on intrapreneurship in an academic context. Specifically, we still need analysis and provocative discussions that provide a better understanding of how intrapreneurial behaviors could be impregnated within university managers teams (e.g., intrapreneurial mind-sets, strategic intrapreneurial orientation), as well as how an intrapreneurial identity could be encouraged across students/researchers communities through the core entrepreneurial universities activities (e.g., intrapreneurial education, value creation across intrapreneurial researcher projects, commercialization of intrapreneurial tech-initiatives).

This special issue is seeking novel research exploring various forms of intrapreneurial initiatives in research, education, knowledge transfer, and societal collaboration in general. This special issue strives to include contributions with varying research designs and welcomes research based on case studies as well as research from a quantitative viewpoint.

For this special issue, we envision articles possibly related to (but not necessarily limited to) any of the following questions:
● What characterizes the discovery and exploitation of opportunities in a university intrapreneurial process?

●How might digitization facilitate the exploration of intrapreneurial opportunities within universities?

● What possible role can digitalization have in intrapreneurial universities?

● What (de)motivates academics to behave intrapreneurially?

● Why are the intrapreneurial activities occurring on both the individual and the organizationallevels in the academic context?

● What internal and external facilitators are needed to foster intrapreneurial processes in the academic context?

● What constitutes the transition from academic research to the transfer of knowledge in an intrapreneurial process?

● What are the elements, actors, and networks in the university intrapreneurial ecosystem?

● Is there an influence of different disciplines in intrapreneurial behavior?

● What intermediary roles in the academic context affect intrapreneurial processes?

●How have intrapreneurial processes within universities been altered or enabled by digitalization?

●What are success factors of incubators and accelerators in university entrepreneurial ecosystems?

●How can universities harness intrapreneurial activity for their strategic benefit using digital technologies?

We invite submissions of case studies, theoretical papers, and empirical papers. We do not have specific theoretical or methodological preferences. We welcome high-quality, qualitative, and quantitative papers, as well as papers using mixed methods.

Only original manuscripts can be submitted, according to the ‘Guide for Authors’ published on the Technovation journal website.

Please mention the name of the Special Issue in your cover letter, and make sure that your paper is designated for this special issue in the Editorial Manager. All manuscripts will be peer-reviewed following the established policies and procedures of the journal. The final papers will be selected for publication depending on the results of the peer-review process and the reviews of the Guest Editors.

• Call for papers 15th of October 2021
• Submission start 15th of January 2022
• Submission deadline 15th of October 2022
• Expected date of publication online by the end of 2023

Abreu, M, Grinevich, V (2013) The nature of academic entrepreneurship in the U.K.: widening the focus on entrepreneurial activities. Research Policy 42(2): 408–422.

Audretsch, D. B., Lehmann, E. E., Menter, M., & Wirsching, K. (2021). Intrapreneurship and absorptive capacities: The dynamic effect of labor mobility. Technovation, 99, 102129.

Bienkowska, D., Klofsten, M. (2012). Creating entrepreneurial networks: academic entrepreneurship, mobility, and collaboration during PhD education. Higher Education, 64 (2), 207-222.

Bienkowska, D., Klofsten, M., Rasmussen, E. (2016). PhD students in the entrepreneurial university‐perceived support for academic entrepreneurship. European Journal of Education. 51 (1), 56-72.

Brem, A., & Radziwon, A. (2017). Efficient Triple Helix collaboration fostering local niche innovation projects–A case from Denmark. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 123, 130-141.

Breznitz, S. M., & Feldman, M. P. (2012). The engaged university. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(2), 139-157.

Corbett, A., Covin, J. G., O'Connor, G. C., & Tucci, C. L. (2013). Corporate entrepreneurship: State-of-the-art research and a future research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(5):812–820.

Dalmarco, G., Hulsink, W., & Blois, G. V. (2018). Creating entrepreneurial universities in an emerging economy: Evidence from Brazil. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 135, 99-111.

Etzkowitz, H., Germain-Alamartine, E., Keel, J., Kumar, C., Smith, K. N., & Albats, E. (2019). Entrepreneurial university dynamics: Structured ambivalence, relative deprivation and institution-formation in the Stanford innovation system. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141(C), 159-171.

Fayolle, A., & Gailly, B. (2015). The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial attitudes and intention: Hysteresis and persistence. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(1), 75-93.

Giones, F., & Brem, A. (2017). Digital technology entrepreneurship: A definition and research agenda. Technology Innovation Management Review, 7(5).

Guerrero, M. & Urbano, D. (2012): The development of an entrepreneurial university. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(1), 43-74.

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.

Guerrero, M., Heaton, S., & Urbano, D. (2020). Building universities’ intrapreneurial capabilities in the digital era: The role and impacts of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Technovation, 102139.

Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., Fayolle, A., Klofsten, M., & Mian, S. (2016). Entrepreneurial universities: emerging models in the new social and economic landscape. Small Business Economics, 47(3), 551-563.

Klofsten, M., & Jones-Evans, D. (2000). Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe–the case of Sweden and Ireland. Small Business Economics, 14(4), 299-309.

Klofsten, M., Fayolle, A., Guerrero, M., Mian, S., Urbano, D., & Wright, M. (2019). The entrepreneurial university as driver for economic growth and social change-Key strategic challenges. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 149–158.

Klofsten, M., Urbano, D., & Heaton, S. (2021). Managing intrapreneurial capabilities: An overview. Technovation, 99, 102177.

Markman, G. D., Phan, P. H., Balkin, D. B., & Gianiodis, P. T. (2005). Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 241-263.

Munoz, C., Guerra, M., & Mosey, S. (2018). The Potential Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on Doctoral Students in Chile. In Academy of Management Proceedings (2018(1), 17423.

Perkmann, M., Salandra, R., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., & Hughes, A. (2021). Academic engagement: A review of the literature 2011-2019. Research Policy, 50(1), 104114.

Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Broström, A., D’Este, P., ... & Krabel, S. (2013). Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy, 42(2), 423–442.

Secundo, G., Rippa, P., & Cerchione, R. (2020). Digital Academic Entrepreneurship: A structured literature review and avenue for a research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 157, 120118.

Stuart, T.E., Ding, W.W., (2006). When do scientists become entrepreneurs? The social structural antecedents of commercial activity in the academic life sciences. American Journal of Sociology. 112, 97–144.

Teece, D.J., 2018. Managing the university: why “organized anarchy” is unacceptable in the age of massive open online courses. Strategic Organisation, 16 (1), 92–102.

Valka, K., Roseira, C., & Campos, P. (2020). Determinants of university employee intrapreneurial behavior: The case of Latvian universities. Industry and Higher Education, 34(3), 190–202.

Vanhaverbeke, W., & Peeters, N. (2005). Embracing innovation as strategy: Corporate venturing, competence building and corporate strategy making. Creativity and Innovation Management, 14(3), 246-257.

Youssef, A.B., Boubaker, S., Dedaj, B., & Carabregu-Vokshi, M. (2021). Digitalization of the economy and entrepreneurship intention. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 164, 120043.

Magnus Klofsten is professor at Linköping University (Sweden). His research is oriented towards the creation and growth of new ventures, business incubation aspects of academic entrepreneurship and ecosystems. Magnus has an extensive publication record. He has founded or co-founded several academic intrapreneurial initiatives such as the Centre for Innovation & Entrepreneurship (1994-), Helix Centre of Excellence (2005–2015), AgoraLink (2008–2012), and the Helix Competence Centre (2017-). Magnus has been guest editor for several SI such as Small Business Economics, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, and Technovation. In two of them (TFSC and Technovation), he was working with professors David Urbano and Maribel Guerrero (see below).

Alexander Brem is an endowed chaired professor and institute head at the University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart (Germany). In addition, he is an honorary professor with the University of Southern Denmark. His research interests include technological innovation and entrepreneurship. He is editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, as well as associate editor for IEEE Transactions and Engineering Management as well as Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Alexander has guest edited SI for several outlets, such as Technological Forecasting and Social Change, International Journal of Innovation Management, International Journal of Technology Management.

Maribel Guerrero is professor of entrepreneurship at Universidad del Desarrollo (Chile), Northumbria University (UK), and affiliated with the CIRCLE at Lund University (Sweden). Her research interests include entrepreneurship, technological innovation, policy frameworks, and socio-economic development. She has an extensive list of publications. Maribel has served as guest editor for Journal of Business Research, Journal of Technology Transfer, Small Business Economics, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Journal of Family Business Strategy, and International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal.

David Urbano is a professor of entrepreneurship Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain). He is a member of the Board of Directors in the European Council of Small Business and Entrepreneurship. David's research focuses on the analysis of factors affecting entrepreneurship in different contexts, using institutional economics as a theoretical framework, and combining quantitative and qualitative methodologies. David has editorial and review process experience as an editor of Small Business Economics and as a Consulting editor of the International Small Business Journal. He has also co-edited several SI for Technovation, Small Business Economics and Technological Forecasting and Social Change.