Mechanisms for facilitating academic entrepreneurship in higher education.

Purpose: The commercialization of research produced by universities constitutes a core facet of academic entrepreneurship (AE). Academic literature reveals the need to shed light on entrepreneurial processes in higher education institutions (HEIs). This study intends to fill this gap by researching the mechanisms for facilitating AE and the variables that can moderate the relationship between such mechanisms and AE in Portuguese HEIs. Design/methodology/approach: Our research model aims to assess the mechanisms of academic entrepreneurship (AE) within a sample of 125 Portuguese public higher education institutions (HEIs). To test our research hypotheses, we employed a structural equation model (SEM) using the partial least squares (PLS) method. Additionally, our evaluation examines the potential moderating effects of incubator programs, support initiatives, and proof-of-concept programs (PoCs). Our research model seeks to evaluate the mechanisms for facilitating AE and explore the effects of including incubator programs, support initiatives, and PoCs as moderators. The seven variables (Research mobilization, Unconventionality, Industry collaboration, University policies, Incubator programs and support initiatives, Proof-of-concept programs, and academic entrepreneurship) were measured using a 7-point Likert scale. Findings: The results revealed that different drivers of AE influence the creation and development of entrepreneurial activities. Our findings also show the moderating effects of incubator programs, support initiatives, and proof-of-concept programs on AE. We find that incubator programs, other support initiatives, and PoCs maintain a moderating effect on AE and benefit their respective HEIs. Research limitations/implications: The study examines only the Portuguese HEI context. Therefore, generalizing these results necessitates reservations. However, the responses came from various actors in HEIs, from different academic backgrounds and research interests. This makes the results more generalizable. Limitations are evident in external validity, given that we gathered the data over a relatively short period. Practical implications: Observed factors are explored to gain a deeper understanding of their influence on the mechanisms of AE. The implications arise from the new perspective presented and the methodology used to identify mechanisms capable of fostering AE. We hope this research will encourage other researchers to study this topic further. Social implications: the engagement of universities at the global level should be emphasised in future policy. While universities in innovation systems often have a local focus, their engagement in innovation ecosystems transcends the boundaries of geographic locations. Originality/value: PoCs had a significant positive moderating effect on the impact of research mobilization and university policies on AE. Thus, we find interactions between universities and industry boost AE. This study demonstrates how AE benefits HEIs by extending orientation towards mobilizing research, unconventional approaches, cooperation with industry, and university policy implementation. We thus advocate a new approach, demonstrating the influence that the mobility of research, unconventionality, industry collaboration, and university policies hold over AE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]