Search

The primary purpose of this monograph is to explore the search process for knowledge used by entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial firms in pursuit of new opportunities, new product innovation opportunities in particular. Understanding the search for and the use of informational sources is important at both the behavioral level and at the policy level. At the behavioral level, such an understanding expands the existing literature and research scope of scholars related to research on innovative activity, and innovative activity is important because it is a fundamental source of economic growth. At the policy level, such an understanding about sources of knowledge enhances the use of public-sector innovation initiatives in pursuit of economic growth. The second purpose of this monograph is to present empirical evidence about the sources of knowledge that entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial firms actually use (and actually do not use) in an effort to allow observed behavior to inform future economics and management theory about the search for and use of knowledge sources. The theoretical literature on this topic is limited and often uninformed by the actual behavior of entrepreneurs and the boundary constraints they face. The empirical evidence presented might begin to provide a foundation for additional theoretical advancements on the use of alternative sources and their economic and entrepreneurial implications for the firm. With such a foundation, working backwards to how a firm identified, searched for, and decided to use such sources might be possible. And, the third purpose of this monograph is to generate new and more complete empirical efforts to construct databases and to conduct analyses—empirical analyses and case studies—related not only to entrepreneur's and entrepreneurial firm's search for and use of sources of knowledge but also to measure the trends in the impacts of their use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction to the monograph is presented in which the authors discuss the nexus between gender and entrepreneurship through presenting an annotated bibliography.

The article presents the Chapter 5 of the book "Capturing Knowledge: Private Gains & Public Gains From University Research Partnerships," by Albert N. Link, which discusses performance variables characterizing Phase II Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) projects and university involvement.

The article discusses the covariates with the probability that a firm will received a Phase II Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) award to have a university research partner.

The article presents various questions on the U.S. National Research Council (NRC) project survey associated to the association of the university in the project.

The article focuses on the implementation of the U.S. Small Business Act of 1953 which leads to the creation of the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA).

The article presents a summary of the chapter 2 of the book "Capturing Knowledge: Private Gains and Public Gains from University Research Partnerships," by Albert N. Link, which explores the research partnerships of colleges and universities.

The article presents a summary of the chapter one of the publication "Capturing Knowledge: Private Gains and Public Gains from University Research Partnerships," by Albert N. Link, which discusses the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program.

The article presents a summary of the chapter one of the publication "Capturing Knowledge: Private Gains and Public Gains from University Research Partnerships," by Albert N. Link, which discusses the origin of knowledge concept.

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the database of the U.S. National Research Council (NRC), which undertake an evaluation of economic benefits associated with the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program.

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the Chapter 6 of the book "Capturing Knowledge Private Gains and Public Gains from University Research Partnerships," by Albert N. Link which states the involvement of universities in the government-funded research conducted by private firms.

The article presents a summary of the chapter one of the publication "Capturing Knowledge: Private Gains and Public Gains from University Research Partnerships," by Albert N. Link, which discusses the academic literature review written mostly by economists and the overview on monograph.

The article focuses on various topics including business innovations, the employment growth, and the research project funded by the Small Business Innovation (SBIR) program in the U.S.

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This monograph argues that a linear model of technology transfer is no longer sufficient, or perhaps even no longer relevant, to account for the nuances and complexities of the technology transfer process that characterizes the ongoing commercialization activities of universities. Shortcomings of the traditional linear model of technology transfer include inaccuracies -- such as its strict linearity and oversimplification of the process, composition, a one-size-fits-all approach, and an overemphasis on patents--and inadequacies--such as failing to account for informal mechanisms of technology transfer, failing to acknowledge the impact of organizational culture, and failing to represent university reward systems within the model. As such, alternative views of technology transfer that better capture the progression of the university toward an entrepreneurial and dynamic institution are presented here, and that advance the body of knowledge about this important academic endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]