ارزیابی طرح برای سرمایه گذاری های فن آوری های نوین در بریتانیا: ویژگی های شرکت های اسپین آف دانشگاهی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|17980||2005||9 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Technovation, Volume 25, Issue 5, May 2005, Pages 535–543
University “spin-off” companies are high technology ventures that originate from research work in a university, resulting in the generation of intellectual property and, usually, the subsequent involvement of key researchers. The analysis distinguishes between 14 new technology-based firms that are university “spin-off” companies and 14 community companies that had no connection with a university. The analysis described in this paper is based on a specially developed assessment methodology that comprises a structured decision-making model. This technology assessment methodology is based on the identification of key criteria for analysis. The study identified the most significant variable for university “spin-off” companies being that of protecting competitive advantage. This result can be attributed to the need for universities to protect their intellectual property, which is to be rewarded with an equity stake in the company. Two other significant variables were identified as the level of product innovation (compared to competitors) and market criteria (including the potential customer base).
New ventures have a high rate of births and failures. Estimates of failure rates for new ventures have improved with 91.4% of UK VAT-registered businesses in 2000 trading for a year, compared to 85.5% in 1993 (DTI, 2003). The same survey reported that the percentage of UK businesses surviving 3 years or more increased from 60 to 64%. The risks are greater for new technology ventures because they have more dimensions of novelty than other new ventures. The dimensions of novelty identified (Shepherd et al., 2000) are: • Novelty to the market; • Novelty in production; • Novelty in management. One of the challenges for bank managers and other investors is how to assess the various new technology ventures that approach them for funding. Expertise in financial matters does not provide the necessary background to understand the proposed technology in sufficient depth, preventing an assessment of viability or market attractiveness. Technology risk added to normal commercial risk could lead to the avoidance of new funding in this sector and potentially profitable future business. The use of consultants specialising in ‘due diligence’ work at the initial appraisal stage would be expensive and passing these costs on to the new technology ventures would be decidedly unwelcome. This paper develops a methodology for the assessment of new technology ventures based on the identification of key criteria for analysis. The methodology is then applied to a sample of new technology ventures. The samples chosen comprise a group of university “spin-off” companies and a group of companies arising from the community as a whole, later referred to simply as ‘community companies’ for convenience. The university “spin-off” companies selected were high technology ventures that originated from research work in a university, resulting in the generation of intellectual property and, usually, the subsequent involvement of key researchers. The categories used in the assessment method can readily be identified in the research literature and have frequently been used to assess business plans of high technology ventures. The analysis described in this paper is based on a specially developed assessment methodology that comprises a structured decision-making model.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The method of assessment of new technology ventures in the UK presented in this paper has been developed over a 4-year period and applied to over 250 business proposals. The methodology is based on a scoring system that focuses on criteria that have been identified in the research literature, although mainly in qualitative terms. The methodology was primarily designed for the use of a major UK bank and now widely employed to assist in deciding whether debt financing is appropriate. Compared with VC investments, such funding tends to be early stage and the amounts relatively small. Such funding cannot bear the cost of in-depth due diligence procedures. In contrast with VC funding, likely to invest in less than 1% (currently much less) of proposals received, banks provide support for about 60% of those proposals selected for the technical appraisal process. The comparison between university spin-outs and others was enabled by the availability of extensive data from carrying out the established appraisal process. There is strong evidence that universities have developed high levels of skill in preparing credible business plans, although it is likely that much university research is still unexploited commercially. It may also be that technology-based business emerging from the community (over 90% of the total) could benefit from more professional assistance or, possibly, some mechanism can be found to allow such companies to take advantage of university-based services. Further research will be carried out using the existing database of assessment results, which span several industry sectors and types of innovation. The opportunity also exists to continue monitoring the companies previously assessed as part of a long-term study to gain an insight into the problems facing organisations in the area of technology innovation.