Technology transfer offices and the formation of academic spin-off entrepreneurial teams

Figures & data

Figure 1. Evolution of TTOs in the region.

Table 1. Overview of TTOs that has been operating in the region

TTO name	Started operation	Parent organization	Important features	IPR	Status
TTO1	Late 1980s	Hospital1 (before 2007) University Hospital (from 2007 to 2011)	Aimed at coordinating collaboration with industry and raising research funding Mainly engaged in activities that enhance the utilization of the hospital’s capacity Served as a resource and contact point for professionals in the hospital if they need an assistance in developing their ideas (patenting, product development, etc.)	Inventors/researchers own the IP right on the inventions	Merged with TTO2 in 2007 A separate entity dedicated to searching for investment and facilitating the spin-off creation process was created before the merger. However, it ceased operation in 2013.
TTO2	Mid 1980s	Hospital2	Aimed at performing full technology transfer activities for Hospital 2 Researchers/inventors are not allowed to have any shares on their own in spin-offs created out of their inventions However, inventors are entitled to receive part of the revenue generated by the TTO out of the inventions Revenue is divided between the inventors, the TTO, and the research group (1/3 each) Inventors have a limited voice in deciding how to commercialize their inventions	The hospital owns the IPR from inventions	Merged with TTO1 in 2007. A foundation that serves as an institutional investor (INNINV) has been created by using the resources of TTO2 right before it merges with TTO1
TTO3	Early 2000s	University1	Aimed at performing full technology transfer activities Favours licencing, rather than creating a spin-off. If a decision is made to create a spin-off, the TTO is fully involved in activities such as developing a business plan, finding and assigning people to work in the ventures Revenue is divided 1/3 between the inventors, the TTO, and the research group	The university owns the IPR from inventions	Merged with TTO1 in 2011 to create TTO4
TTO4	2011	University1 and University Hospital1	Kept the rules from its predecessors for the first year (i.e. inventors do not own their shares) Changed its rule after one year and inventors can manage and decide on their own shares, and hence participate in the decision-making process as an owner	The University or the university Hospital owns the IPR Inventors receive 1/3 of revenue if licenced, or 1/3 of the share in a spin-off	Operating

Table 2. Overview of cases

Venture	ASO registrationyear	Creation period as identified in our study	Initiator	Actors involved in the creation process	Major activities performed	Affiliation of individuals that were part of the ETs	Type of affiliation	Ownership arrangement
Alpha	1998	I (pre-2003)	The researcher/ Inventor	An inventor from Hospital1 TTO1 Private Investors	Registration process Negotiating shareholders’ agreement Raising the capital Product development	CEO (from TTO1) Quality controller (hired later) Inventor, a researcher at Hospital1 (working without a formal position in the venture)	Part-time Full time	The researcher owns the IPR TTO1 or Hospital1 did not have a share in ownership Inventor had the right to decide or choose whom to involve in the team
Gamma	1997	I (pre-2003)	Two researchers	Two researchers from Hospital2 Private Investors	TTO2 accepted a ‘Declaration of Potential Financial Interest (DPFI)’ from the researchers TTO2 informed the researchers that they can develop the idea by themselves because it has committed all of its resources on a ‘promising venture’ (Beta) Registration process Raising capital	CEO (one of the researchers) Scientific advisory board (one of the researchers) CEO2 (hunted and assigned by the investors) CSO (following the arrival of CEO2, CEO1 took the CSO position)	Full time Part time Full time Full time	The researchers were not allowed to have any share of their own as the Hospital had the IPR over the invention. However, TTO2 decided not to take the idea further, and inventors own 100% at the beginning. Inventors had the right to decide or choose whom to involve in the team
Delta	2006	II (2003–2011)	Facilitator1	Facilitator1 TTO1 INNINV	Patenting Convincing one of the co-founders to start the company and work in the venture fulltime from the beginning Registration process Raising capital	CSO (one of the researchers) CEO (Facilitator1) Scientific Advisory Board (the other two researchers) Board Chairperson (from INNINV)	Full time Part-time Part-time Part-time	The hospital owns the IPR of all inventions
Epsilon	2009	II (2003–2011)	Three researchers (two from Hospital1 and oneindependent)	TTO1 Two researchers from Hospital1 Independent researcher INNINV	Registering the venture Raising capital Patenting application	CEO (assigned by TTO1) CSO (co-founder C) Board Chairperson (co-founder A) Board includes representatives from TTO1 and INNINV Scientific Advisory Board (Co-founder B)	Part-time Full time Part-time Part-time Part-time	Founding shares (even those owned by the researchers working in Hospital1 are managed by TTO1) TTO1 was responsible to make decisions on how to move forward INNINV played active role in finding and assigning new team members
Zeta	2009	II (2003–2011)	Three researchers at University1	Facilitator1 One of the researchers TTO3 INNINV	TTO3 initially rejected the idea One of the co-founders contacted Facilitator1, and found a way to take it forward TTO3 decided to join Registering the venture Raising capital Finding the right people to lead the venture	CEO (from Facilitator1 CSO (One of the researchers) CFO (from INNINV) Most of the board members (from Facilitator1) Board member (from INNINV)	Part-time Full time Part-time Part-time Part-time	The University/TTO owned the IPR The inventors/researchers own and manage their own shares Inventors/researchers involved in the decision- making process
Eta	2011	III (after 2011)	Three researchers at University Hospital1 INNINV	INNINV TTO4 The researchers	INNINV convinced TTO4 that a spin-off should be created out of the invention Raising capital (led by INNINV) Venture registration	CEO1 (temporarily from TTO4) CEO2 (hunted and assigned by the investors) COO (CEO1 took this post after CEO2 arrives) Board chairperson (from TTO4) Board member (one of the co-inventors) CTO (one of the co-inventors) CFO (employee of one of the investors)	Part-time Full-time Full-time Part-time Part-time Part-time Part-time	University Hospital1 owns the IPR Inventors own and manage their shares from day 1 Inventors/researchers involved in decision making process
Theta	2010	III (after 2011)	Researchers at University Hospital1	INNINV Inventors/researchers	Convincing INNINV to create a spin-off based on an old invention Raising capital (led by INNINV) Venture registration Finding the right team members (INNINV involved)	Board Chair person (from INNINV) CEO (picked by INNINV) COO (one of the inventors) CFO (Employee of INNINV) Clinical advisory board (one of the co-inventors)	Part-time Full time Full-time Part-time Part-time	The idea was from an old invention at Hospital1 Thus, the TTOs had no interest on this as the idea was created before 2003 The inventors own and manage their shares Inventors/researchers involved in decision making

Figure 2. How TTOs affect the formation of ASO-ETs.

Figure 3. Four roles TTOs play in shaping ASO-ET formation.