Linear and non-linear patterns of internationalisation and funding in academic spin-offs

Figures & data

Table 1. ANOVA and descriptive analysis of clusters.

	Entry time			Scale
Cluster	Item	N	%	Item	N	%
Cluster 1 Non-international (n=78)	Non-international ASOs	78	100%	Without changes (non-international ASOs)	78	100%
Cluster 2 True Born Global (n=50)	Less than 36 months	50	100%	From less than 25% to more than 25%	34	68%
				Without changes (more than 25%)	16	32%
Cluster 3 Sporadic Born Global (n=27)	Less than 36 months	27	100%	Without changes (less than 25%)	27	100%
Cluster 4 Uppsala Model (n=12)	More than 36 months	12	100%	From non-international ASO to less than 25%	6	50%
				From non-international ASO to more than 25%	6	50%
Cluster 5 Non-linear Model (n=6)	Less than 36 months	6	100%	From more than 25% to less than 25%	3	50%
				From more than 25% to more than 25% (reduction)	1	16.7%
				From more than 25% to non-international ASO	1	16.7%
				From less than 25% to non-international ASO	1	16.7%
F	34.706			0.000***
p Value	150.245			0.000***

Table 2. Profile of clusters

	Research group			Target market			Geographical scope			Global technological competence
Cluster	Item	N	%	Item	N	%	Item	N	%
Cluster 1 Non-international (n=78)	Technology	24	30.8%	Niche	59	78.7%				3.2
	Biology and environment	16	20.5%	Mass market	16	21.3%
	Economic sciences, law, and humanities	14	17.9%
	Physical, chemical and mathematics	12	15.4%
	Health sciences	12	15.4%
Cluster 2 True Born Global (n=50)	Technology	25	50%	Niche	33	66%	Europe	45	90%	4.1
	Biology and environment	11	22%	Mass market	17	34%	North America	28	56%
	Physical, chemical and mathematics	7	14%				South America	28	56%
	Health sciences	5	10%				Asia	26	52%
	Economic sciences, law, and humanities	2	4%				Oceania	7	14%
							North Africa	6	12%
							Africa	5	10%
Cluster 3 Sporadic Born Global (n=27)	Technology	12	44.4%	Niche	15	55,6%	Europe	20	74,1%	3.8
	Biology and environment	7	25.9%	Mass market	12	44,4%	North America	10	37%
	Health sciences	4	14.8%				South America	8	29,6%
	Physical, chemical and mathematics	3	11.1%				Asia	8	29.6%
	Economic sciences, law, and humanities	1	3.7%				North Africa	3	11.1%
							Oceania	3	11.1%
Cluster 4 Uppsala Model (n=12)	Technology	6	50%	Niche	4	33,3%	Europe	11	91.7%	3.9
	Biology and environment	4	25.9%	Mass market	8	66,7%	South America	8	66.7%
	Physical, chemical and mathematics	2	16.7%				Asia	6	50%
							North America	4	33.3%
							Africa	3	25%
							Oceania	3	25%
							North Africa	1	8.3%
Cluster 5 Non-linear Model (n=6)	Technology	2	33.3%	Niche	6	100%	Europe	5	83.3%	3.6
	Biology and environment	2	33.3%				South America	2	33.3%
	Economic sciences, law, and humanities	1	16.7%				North America	1	16.7%
	Health sciences	1	16,7%				Asia	1	16.7%
							Oceania	1	16.7%

Table 3. ANOVA analysis for non-international ASOs (cluster 1) and international ASOs (clusters 2, 3, 4, and 5).

Agent		Sum of squares	Df	Root mean square	F	Sig.
Academic actors	Inter-groups	2.741	1	2.741	2.073	0.152
	Intra-groups	216.880	164	1.322
	Total	219.620	165
Governmental institutions	Inter-groups	5.998	1	5.998	3.554	0.007**
	Intra-groups	276.773	164	1.688
	Total	282.771	165
VC firms	Inter-groups	0.489	1	0.489	0.277	0.002**
	Intra-groups	275.865	156	1.768
	Total	276.354	157
Other investors	Inter-groups	12.541	1	12.541	5.135	0.025*
	Intra-groups	378.529	155	2.442
	Total	391.070	156

*p <0.05 **; p < 0.001.

Table 4. Descriptive analysis for non-international ASOs (cluster 1) and international ASOs (clusters 2, 3, 4, and 5).

Agent	Cluster	N	Mean	sd	Lower limit for mean (95%)	Upper limit for mean (95%)	Min.	Max.
Academic actors	Non-international ASOs	74	1.93	1.296	1.63	2.23	1	5
	International ASOs	92	1.67	1.018	1.46	1.88	1	5
	Total	166	1.79	1.154	1.61	1.97	1	5
Governmental institutions	Non-international ASOs	73	2.22	1.294	1.92	2.52	1	5
	International ASOs	93	2.80	1.303	2.37	2.93	1	5
	Total	166	2.54	1.309	2.33	2.68	1	5
VC firms	Non-international ASOs	70	1.79	1.261	1.48	2.09	1	5
	International ASOs	88	2.55	1.382	1.60	2.19	1	5
	Total	158	2.21	1.327	1.94	2.39	1	5
Other investors	Non-international ASOs	68	2.06	1.535	1.69	2.43	1	5
	International ASOs	89	2.53	1.584	2.30	2.96	1	5
	Total	157	2.33	1.583	2.10	2.57	1	5

Table 5. ANOVA analysis for international ASOs (clusters 2, 3, 4, and 5).

Agent		Sum of squares	Df	Root mean square	F	Sig.
Academic actors	Inter-groups	6.791	3	2.264	2.278	0.045*
	Intra-groups	87.427	88	0.993
	Total	94.217	91
Governmental institutions	Inter-groups	7.870	3	2.263	1.573	0.201
	Intra-groups	148.410	89	1.668
	Total	156.280	92
VC firms	Inter-groups	11.916	3	3.972	2.164	0.038*
	Intra-groups	154.163	84	1.835
	Total	166.080	87
Other investors	Inter-groups	22.318	3	7.439	3.187	0.028*
	Intra-groups	198.446	85	2.335
	Total	220.764	88

*p < 0.05.

Table 6. Post-hoc analysis. Academic actors.

Agent	Cluster	N	Mean	Post-hoc test (Games-Howell)
				Cluster comparison	Mean difference	Sig.
Academic actors	2	49	1.59	2 vs. 3	−0.488†	0.090
				2 vs. 4	0.175	0.834
				2 vs. 5	0.425	0.262
	3	25	2.08	3 vs. 2	0.488†	0.090
				3 vs. 4	0.663*	0.042
				3 vs. 5	0.913*	0.021
	4	12	1.42	4 vs. 2	−0.175	0.834 0.042 0.685
				4 vs. 3	−0.663*
				4 vs. 5	0.250
	5	6	1.17	5 vs. 2	−0.425	0.262 0.021 0.685
				5 vs. 3	−0.913*
				5 vs. 4	−0.250

† p < 0.1; * p < 0.05.

Table 7. Post-hoc analysis. VC firms.

Agent	Cluster	N	Mean	Post-hoc test (Games-Howell)
				Cluster comparison	Mean difference	Sig.
VC firms	2	47	1.70	2 vs. 3	−0.465	0.561
				2 vs. 4	−0.798	0.462
				2 vs. 5	0.702**	0.002
	3	24	2.17	3 vs. 2	0.465	0.561
				3 vs. 4	−0.333	0.940
				3 vs. 5	1.167**	0.004
	4	12	2.50	4 vs. 2	0.798	0.462
				4 vs. 3	0.333	0.940
				4 vs. 5	1.500*	0.049
	5	5	1.00	5 vs. 2	−0.702**	0.002
				5 vs. 3	−1.167**	0.004
				5 vs. 4	−1.500*	0.049

* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.

Table 8. Post-hoc analysis. Other investors.

Agent	Cluster	N	Mean	Post-hoc test (Tukey)
				Cluster comparison	Mean difference	Sig.
Other investors	2	48	2.48	2 vs. 3	−0.021	1.000
				2 vs. 4	−1.354*	0.036
				2 vs. 5	0.679	0.780
	3	24	2.50	3 vs. 2	0.021	1.000
				3 vs. 4	−1.333*	0.042
				3 vs. 5	0.700	0.788
	4	12	3.83	4 vs. 2	1.354*	0.036
				4 vs. 3	1.333*	0.042
				4 vs. 5	2.033***	0.000
	5	5	1.80	5 vs. 2	−0.679	0.780
				5 vs. 3	−0.700	0.788
				5 vs. 4	−2.033***	0.000

† p < 0.1; * p < 0.05; *** p < 0.0001.