Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/327580 
Year of Publication: 
2025
Citation: 
[Journal:] Journal of Innovation & Knowledge (JIK) [ISSN:] 2444-569X [Volume:] 10 [Issue:] 2 [Article No.:] 100679 [Year:] 2025 [Pages:] 1-12
Publisher: 
Elsevier, Amsterdam
Abstract: 
The performance of firms involved in projects from 2 UK research councils was investigated; firms in Innovate UK projects receive co-funding while firms in Arts & Humanities Research Council (AHRC) projects do not. Firms in 266 projects 2009-2012 were tracked for Standard Industrial Code (SIC), location and year-on-year financial performance 2012-22. The results show that firms (un- and co-funded) were mainly not local to universities. The growth performance of non-funded firms was steady in the majority of SIC codes, but some SIC codes performed very well, while for co-funded firms, many SICs performed under control but losses were made up for on average by exceptionally high performance in other SIC codes. Overall, non-funded firms achieved average growth of ∼29 % above control while co-funded firms only achieved an average growth of ∼18 % above control. Firms (both co- and un-funded) associated with 21 universities perform consistently well, while other firms (co- and un-funded) associated with 24 other universities perform consistently poorly. This difference in performance was better correlated to degree of business ambidexterity in the tech transfer function, rather than with university reputation.
Subjects: 
Entrepreneurial universities
Geographical distribution
Knowledge spillovers
State funding
Technology transfer
JEL: 
C59
F43
L24
L53
O32
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.