Determinants of Graduates' Start‐Ups Creation across a Multi‐Campus Entrepreneurial University: The Case of Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education*^∗

∗ David Urbano acknowledges the financial support from projects ECO2013‐44027‐P (Spanish Ministry of Economy & Competitiveness) and 2014‐SGR‐1626 (Economy & Knowledge Department–Catalan Government).

Abstract

Individual and organizational entrepreneurial activity varies across regions/countries. Universities have increasingly become knowledge‐intensive environments that support entrepreneurship. Extant studies demonstrate the need to explore graduate start‐ups using different levels of analysis an across economies. This paper explores individual and university determinants of graduates' start‐ups creation from a multi‐campus entrepreneurial university in a transition economy. A proposed model was tested with 11,569 graduates from 30 campuses across 21 Mexican cities. Results show that specific individual determinants are the most relevant determinant of graduate entrepreneurship as well as that some university mechanisms (incubators and research parks) have limited impact on graduates' entrepreneurship.

∗ David Urbano acknowledges the financial support from projects ECO2013‐44027‐P (Spanish Ministry of Economy & Competitiveness) and 2014‐SGR‐1626 (Economy & Knowledge Department–Catalan Government).

∗ David Urbano acknowledges the financial support from projects ECO2013‐44027‐P (Spanish Ministry of Economy & Competitiveness) and 2014‐SGR‐1626 (Economy & Knowledge Department–Catalan Government).

Notes

∗ David Urbano acknowledges the financial support from projects ECO2013‐44027‐P (Spanish Ministry of Economy & Competitiveness) and 2014‐SGR‐1626 (Economy & Knowledge Department–Catalan Government).

1 The university community comprises professors, staff, students, and alumni.

2 According to the World Bank Indicators, Mexico's economy, politics, and society have rapidly changed from an efficiency‐driven economy into an innovation‐driven economy. In this sense, Mexico is a transitional economy characterized by investment in productive/innovative/entrepreneurial capacity and the desire to achieve a stage of higher economic development and greater well‐being for its citizens (Meyer et al. 2009; Wright et al. 2005). Nevertheless, this transformation process has also been accompanied by growing levels of violence within the country.

3 The criteria used in extant studies (Audretsch and Lehmann 2005; Clark 1998; Di Gregorio and Shane 2003; Guerrero and Urbano 2012; Guerrero et al. 2015; O'Shea et al. 2008; Shane 2004; Wright et al. 2007) to identify entrepreneurial universities include: (1) the promotion of an entrepreneurial culture across the university community; (2) institutional efforts aimed at developing an entrepreneurial ecosystem and fostering innovative/entrepreneurial initiatives; (3) their socioeonomic impact on their regions/countries; (4) a continuous and sustained transformation process, and (5) involvement of various socioeconomic actors in their decisions, activities, and objectives.

4 Aguascalientes, Chiapas, Chihuahua, Ciudad Juárez, Ciudad Obregón, Cuernavaca, Guadalajara, Hidalgo, Irapuato, Laguna, León, Mazatlán, Mexico City, Monterrey, Morelia, North Sonora, Puebla, Querétaro, Saltillo, San Luis Potosí, Santa Fe, Sinaloa, State of Mexico, Tampico, Toluca, Veracruz Central, and Zacatecas.

5 Formed by a platform that comprises three subnetworks: (1) a technology‐based incubator network that drives the transformation of innovative ideas and projects in advanced sectors into high‐value‐added businesses; (2) an intermediate technology‐based incubator network that supports the creation, development, and consolidation of new businesses that incorporate some innovative elements; and (3) a social incubator network that promotes the creation and strengthening of micro‐enterprises.

6 The Professional Trajectory Survey is distributed to ITESM graduates who have completed their studies 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25 years ago. In this regard, we controlled by two generational cohorts using a binary variable that takes value: (0) for Gen X when the individual born during 1966–1976 and completed their university studies during 1987–1997; and (1) for Gen Y when the individual born during 1977–1994, and completed their university studies during 1997–2008 (Pekala 2001; Schroer 2008).

7 The main criteria were: educational impact, financial sustainability, academic credibility, human capital, structural embeddedness, context and infrastructures, alignment with institutional strategies and policies, community engagement, alignment with the policy context, and available funding.

8 If we estimated these models using OLS, the R² obtained is pretty similar 1.8, 13.3, 14.0, 14.4 and 14.5 percent, respectively.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Maribel Guerrero

Maribel Guerrero is Associate Professor in Newcastle Business School at the Northumbria University.

David Urbano

David Urbano is Professor in the Department of Business at the Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona.

James A. Cunningham

James A. Cunningham is Professor of Strategic Management in Newcastle Business School at the Northumbria University.

Eduardo Gajón

Eduardo Gajón is Academic Director in Instituto Tecnológico de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Campus Laguna.