박사

정부출연연구기관의 기술창업에 영향을 미치는 요인

박대식 2018년
논문상세정보
' 정부출연연구기관의 기술창업에 영향을 미치는 요인' 의 주제별 논문영향력
논문영향력 선정 방법
논문영향력 요약
주제
  • 기술이전?사업화 전담조직
  • 기술창업
  • 기업가정신
  • 자원기반관점
  • 정부출연연구기관
동일주제 총논문수 논문피인용 총횟수 주제별 논문영향력의 평균
1,083 0

0.0%

' 정부출연연구기관의 기술창업에 영향을 미치는 요인' 의 참고문헌

  • 한국과학기술기획평가원, 2015년도 국가연구개발사업 조사
    분석보고서 [2016]
  • 패널데이터 분석
    민인식 최필선 한국STATA학회 [2009]
  • 출연연구기관 역사적 변화과정과 미래 발전방향
    이민형 과학기술정책, 26(4), 18-25 [2016]
  • 출연(연) 발전전략TF, 출연(연)발전전략보고서
    (구) 기초기술연구회 및 (구) 산업기술연구회 [2013]
  • 출연(연) 기술이전 및 사업화 촉진 방안
    최치호 KISTEP [2011]
  • 창조경제와 기업가정신
    이윤준 과학기술정책, 24(3/4), 48-55 [2014]
  • 창업보육센터
    www.bi.go.kr
  • 창업론
    이상석 도서출판 청람 [2011]
  • 창업과 비즈니스
    김흥수 한국학술정보 [2013]
  • 창업과 벤처
    이덕훈 교우사 [2008]
  • 창업경영의 이해
    김경자 김기운 무역경영사 [2015]
  • 중소벤처기업부
    2017년도 업무계획 [2017]
  • 중소기업청,한국창업보육협회
    기술창업가이드 [2015]
  • 중소기업연구원, 중소기업 포커스 - 창업기업의 성장과 폐업
    그리고 고용, 14-18 [2014]
  • 중소기업 성공모델에 관한 실증연구
    김세종 중소기업연구원 [2010]
  • 정부출연연구기관의 위상 재정립 및 발전전략
    이장재 황지호 KISTEP [2008]
  • 정부출연(연) 및 주요대학의 기술 분야, 연구단계별 투입 대비 성과분 석
    이철원 과학기술부 [2006]
  • 정부 R&D 성과 관리・활용 체계 현황진단과 시사 점-연구자 인식도 조사를 중심으로
    김홍범 이길우 장인호 한국과학기술기획평가원 [2012]
  • 잘되는 기업은 무엇이 다를까?
    신형덕 스마트북스 [2016]
  • 연구개발특구진흥재단
    연구소기업 설립 가이드 북 [2015]
  • 산업기술진흥원~2015)
    각 연도별 공공연구기관(대학 연구소) 기술이전 사업화 실태조사보고서 [2010]
  • 벤처기업협회
    2016년 벤처기업정밀실태조사 [2016]
  • 미래창조과학부
    학회자료 출연연구기관의 개방형 협력생태계 조성 방안 [2013]
  • 미래창조과학부
    2015년도 연구개발활동조사보고서(통계표) [2017]
  • 미래창조과학부
    2015 과학기술연감 [2016]
  • 대학의 기술기반창업 영향요인분석 및 활성화 방안
    김용정 KISTEP [2014]
  • 기업가정신 2.0
    이민화 창조경제연구회 [2016]
  • 기술창업 활성화를 위한 정책제언
    김근영 이갑수 삼성경제연구소, Issue Paper. [2004]
  • 기술사업화 특성분석 및 전략적 추진방안
    김주희 한국과학기술기획평가원 [2014]
  • 기술보증기금
    2011 기술창업 가이드북 [2011]
  • 기술기반 창업의 성과에 영향을 미치는 요인에 관한 연구: 정부정책 효과성 분석을 중심으로
    안승구 한국과학기술기획평가원 [2017]
  • 국회예산정책처
    한국경제의 진단과 해법 [2016]
  • 국가과학기술정보서비스(NTIS)
    http://www.ntis.go.kr
  • 국가과학기술연구회, www.nst.re.kr
    통계자료
  • 국가과학기술연구회
    출연(연) 창업실태 진단 및 활성화 방안 기획보고서 [2015]
  • 국가과학기술심의회, 제3차 연구성과 관리
    활용 기본계획 [2016]
  • 국가과학기술심의회
    제3차 과학기술기본계획 [2013]
  • 관계부처 합동
    제5차 기술이전 및 사업화 촉진계획 [2014]
  • 관계부처 합동
    창업활성화 방안 [2017]
  • 과학기술정보통신부
    2017년도 업무계획 [2017]
  • 과학기술분야 정부출연연구기관 투자 및 성과분석과 시사점
  • 고급연구인력 기술창업 활성화 방안
    김선우 중소기업연구원 [2011]
  • 『국가연구개발사업의 유형별 성과분석을 통한 전략적 연구관리체계 구축에 관한 연구』
    최태진 건국대학교 박사학위논문 [2007]
  • Winebrake, J. J. (1992), A study of technology-transfer mechanisms for federally funded R&D, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 17(4), 54-61.
  • White House, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/startup-america-fact-sheet
  • Wernerfelt, B. 1984. A Resource-based View of the Firm. Strategic Management Journal 5: 171-180.
  • Timmons, J. A., & Spinelli, S. (2008), New Venture Creation: Entrepreneurship for the 21st Century. Eighth edition, McGraw-Hill, Boston.
  • The Science Coalition (2010), Sparking Economic Growth: How federally funded university research creates innovation, new companies and jobs, www.sciencecoalition.org.
  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.
  • Storey, D. J., & Tether, B. S. (1998), New technology-based firms in the European Union: An introduction, Research Policy, 26(9), 933-946.
  • Stevenson, H. (1999), A Perspective on Entrepreneurship, in The Entrepreneurial Venture, Sahlman, W., H. Stevenson, M. Roberts, and A. Bhide (eds.), Second edition, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
  • Steffensen, M., Rogers, E. M., & Speakman, K. (2000), Spin-offs from research centers at a research university, Journal of Business Venturing, 15(1), 93-111.
  • Smilor, R. W., Gibson, D. V., & Dietrich, G. B. (1990), University spin-out companies: Technology start-ups from UT-Austin, Journal of Business Venturing, 5(1), 63-76.
  • Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003), Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study, Research Policy, 32(1), 27-48.
  • Shearman, C., & Burrell, G. (1988), New technology based firms and the emergence of new industries: Some employment implications, New Technology, Work and Employment, 3(2), 87-99.
  • Shane, S. (2004b), Encouraging university entrepreneurship? The effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on university patenting in the United States, Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 127-151.
  • Shane, S. (2004a), Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham.
  • Schumpeter, J. A.(1934), “The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard University Press”, Cambridge, MA.
  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1942), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2003.
  • Rogers, E. M., Yin, J., & Hoffmann, J. (2000), Assessing the effectiveness of technology transfer offices at US research universities, The Journal of the Association of University Technology Managers, 12(1), 47-80.
  • Roessner, J. D. (2000), Technology Transfer, In: C. Hill, Ed., Science and Technology Policy in the US. A Time of Change, Longman, London.
  • Roberts, E. B., & Malonet, D. E. (1996), Policies and structures for spinning off new companies from research and development organizations. R&D Management, 26(1), 17-48.
  • Reis, E. (2011), The Lean Startup, Crown Business, New York.
  • Ramaciotti, L., & Rizzo, U. (2015), The determinants of academic spin‐off creation by Italian universities, R&D Management, 45(5), 501-514.
  • Prodan, I. (2007), A model of technological entrepreneurship. Handbook of Research on Techno-entrepreneurship, 26-38, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
  • President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (2012), Transformation and opportunity: The future of the U.S. research enterprise.
  • Powers, J. B., & McDougall, P. P. (2005), University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: A resource-based view of academic entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3), 291-311.
  • Porter, M. E (1990), The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Free Press, New York.
  • Penrose, E. (1959), The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, Blackwell, London.
  • Pazos, D. R., L pez, S. F., Gonz lez, L. O., & Sandi s, A. R. (2012), A resource-based view of university spin-off activity: New evidence from the Spanish case, Revista Europea de Direcci n y Econom a de la Empresa, 21(3), 255-265.
  • O’Shea, R. P., Chugh, H., & Allen, T. J. (2008). Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework. The Journal of Technology Transfer , 33(6), 653-666.
  • O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005), Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities, Research Policy, 34(7), 994-1009.
  • OECD (2017b), Small, Medium, Strong. Trends in SME Performance and Business Conditions, OECD Publishing, Paris.
  • OECD (2017a), Main Science and Technology Indicators, 2016/2.
  • OECD (2016), OECD Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook 2016.
  • OECD (2014b), Entrepreneurship at a Glance 2014.
  • OECD (2014a), Reviews of Innovation Policy, Industry and Technology Policies in Korea.
  • OECD (2001), Generating Spin-offs: Evidence from Across the OECD, STI Review 26.
  • Ndonzuau, F. N., Pirnay, F., & Surlemont, B. (2002), A stage model of academic spin-off creation, Technovation, 22(5), 281-289.
  • Muscio, A., Quaglione, D., & Ramaciotti, L. (2016), The effects of university rules on spinoff creation: The case of academia in Italy, Research Policy, 45(7), 1386-1396.
  • Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B. N., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2001), The growth of patenting and licensing by US universities: An assessment of the effects of the Bayh–Dole act of 1980, Research Policy, 30(1), 99-119.
  • Morris, M. H. (1998), Entrepreneurial intensity: Sustainable Advantages for Individuals, Organizations, and Societies, Greenwood Publishing Group, London.
  • McQueen, D. H., & Wallmark, J. T. (1982), Spin-off companies from Chalmers University of Technology, Technovation, 1(4), 305-315.
  • Mansfield, E., & Lee, J. Y. (1996), The modern university: Contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R&D support, Research Policy, 25(7), 1047-1058.
  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135-172.
  • Lowe, R., & Marriott, S. (2006), Enterprise: entrepreneurship and innovation: concepts, contexts and commercialization. Elsevier, Oxford.
  • Low, M. B., & MacMillan, I. C. (1988), Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenges, Journal of Management, 14(2), 139-161.
  • Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (2005), Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies, Research Policy, 34(7), 1043-1057.
  • Leitch, C. M., & Harrison, R. T. (2005), Maximising the potential of university spin‐outs: The development of second‐order commercialisation activities, R&D Management, 35(3), 257-272.
  • Landry, R., Amara, N., & Rherrad, I. (2006), Why are some university researchers more likely to create spin-offs than others? Evidence from Canadian universities, Research Policy, 35(10), 1599-1615.
  • Krabel, S., & Mueller, P. (2009), What drives scientists to start their own company?: An empirical investigation of Max Planck Society scientists, Research Policy, 38(6), 947-956.
  • Klofsten, M., & Jones-Evans, D. (2000), Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe–the case of Sweden and Ireland, Small Business Economics, 14(4), 299-309.
  • KOTRA
    주요국의 스타트업 육성정책과 한국의 과제 [2015]
  • Heirman, A., & Clarysse, B. (2004), How and why do research-based start-ups differ at founding? A resource-based configurational perspective, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3), 247-268.
  • Hausman, J., Hall, B., & Griliches, Z. (1984), Economic models for count data with an application to the patents–R&D relationship, Econometrica 52(4), 909–938.
  • Gartner, W. B.(1985), A Conceptual Framework for Describing the Phenomenon of New Venture Creation, Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 696-706.
  • Drucker, P. F. (1985), Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practice and Principle, Harper & Row, New York.
  • Dollinger, M. J. (2008), Entrepreneurship: Strategies and Resources, Marsh Publications. Lombard, Illinois.
  • Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003), Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?, Research Policy, 32(2), 209-227.
  • De Cleyn, S. H., & Braet, J. (2009), Research valorisation through spin-off ventures: Integration of existing concepts and typologies, World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 5(4), 325-352.
  • Dahlstrand, . L. (1997), Growth and inventiveness in technology-based spin-off firms, Research Policy, 26(3), 331-344.
  • Cunningham, J. B., & Lischeron, J. (1991), Defining entrepreneurship, Journal of Small Business Management, 29(1), 45-61.
  • Cooper, A. C., & Bruno, A. V. (1977), Success among high-technology firms, Business Horizons, 20(2), 16-22.
  • Cooper A. C. (1971), The Founding of Technologically-Based Firms, The Center for Venture Management, Milwaukee.
  • Clarysse, B., & Moray, N. (2004), A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: The case of a research-based spin-off, Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 55-79.
  • Carland, J. W., Hoy, F., Boulton, W. R., & Carland, J. A. C. (1984), Differentiating entrepreneurs from small business owners: A conceptualization, Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 354-359.
  • Carayannis, E. G., Rogers, E. M., Kurihara, K., & Allbritton, M. M. (1998), High-technology spin-offs from government R&D laboratories and research universities, Technovation, 18(1), 1-11.
  • Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (1986), Econometric models based on count data. Comparisons and applications of some estimators and tests, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 1(1), 29-53.
  • Butchart, R. (1987), A new UK definition of high technology industries, Economic Trends, 400(Feb.), 82-88.
  • Bray, M. J., & Lee, J. N. (2000), University revenues from technology transfer: Licensing fees vs. Equity positions, Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5), 385-392.
  • Bozeman, B. (2000), Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory, Research Policy, 29(4), 627-655.
  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
  • Barney, J. & Hesterly, W. (2008), Strategic Management and Competitive Advantage; Concepts and Cases, Pearson, Pearson Prentice-Hall.
  • Baldini, N. (2010), University spin-offs and their environment, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(8), 859-876.
  • Bailetti, T. (2012), Technology entrepreneurship: Overview, definition, and distinctive aspects, Technology Innovation Management Review, 2(2), 5-12.
  • AUTM, https://www.autm.net
  • AUTM (2004), AUTM Licensing Survey, AUTM Inc., Norwalk, Connecticut.
  • AUTM (2001), AUTM Licensing Surveys; University Start-up Data, AUTM Inc., Norwalk, Connecticut.
  • AUTM (1998), AUTM Licensing Survey: Survey Summary, AUTM Inc., Norwalk, Connecticut.
  • AUTM (1996), AUTM Licensing Survey: Survey Summary, AUTM Inc., Norwalk, Connecticut.
  • 2017년도 정부연구개발예산 현황분석
    김주일 안승구 한국과학기술기획평가원 [2017]