UNIVERSITY ENTREPRENEURSHIP SUPPORT:

POLICY ISSUES, GOOD PRACTICES AND

RECOMMENDATIONS
A NOTE PREPARED IN NOVEMBER 2010 FOR THE DIRECTING COMMITTEE OF THE LOCAL ECONOMIC
AND EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME OF THE OECD

DISSEMINATED THROUGH THE OECD EDUCATION DIRECTORATE’S PROGRAMME ON INSTITUTIONAL

MANAGEMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION
 AUTHORS’ NOTE

This document presents findings and recommendations on university graduate entrepreneurship

support as part of the Local Economic and Employment Development Programme‟s current programme of
work on entrepreneurship and as an input into LEED reviews on Skills for Entrepreneurship to be
undertaken in 2011-12. It summarises the results of a questionnaire-based survey of universities, case study
reviews in selected localities, including LEED contributions to reviews by the OECD Education
Directorate on Higher Education and Regional Development, capacity-building seminars and a literature
review. The work covers entrepreneurship education and associated start-up support to graduates
including enterprise financing and incubation.

The note was prepared by Andrea-Rosalinde Hofer of the LEED Secretariat under the direction of
Jonathan Potter with contributions from external consultants (Janice Byrne, Alain Fayolle and Phillip H.
Phan) Joseph Tixier and Barbara Barone of the OECD Secretariat.

Contacts:

Andrea-Rosalinde Hofer, [email protected]

Jonathan Potter, [email protected]

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4
1. Key debates on university entrepreneurship support ............................................................. 5
2. Good practice criteria and survey findings .......................................................................... 10
3. Key issues for policy recommendations and further investigation ...................................... 24
References ................................................................................................................................ 27
ANNEXES .................................................................................................................................. 29
Annex A. Basic information on the surveyed universities ....................................................... 29
Annex B. Analysed questions .................................................................................................. 32

Tables

Table 1. Skills and competencies for successful entrepreneurship ...................................... 7

Figures

Figure 1. Key objectives in university entrepreneurship support ....................................... 12

Figure 2. Number of „clicks‟ ............................................................................................... 13
Figure 3. Sources of financing for university entrepreneurship support ............................. 15
Figure 4. Access to campus incubation facilities ................................................................ 17
Figure 5. Partnering and strategic networking of universities ............................................ 18
Figure 6. Student take-in channels in entrepreneurship education...................................... 21
Figure 7. Teaching methods in entrepreneurship education ............................................... 22
Figure 8. Share of teaching by „externals‟ .......................................................................... 23
Figure 9. Business plan competitions ................................................................................. 24

Boxes

Box 1. Strategy in university entrepreneurship support: criteria of good practice ................. 11

Box 2. Criteria of good practice in financing and human resources development .................. 14
Box 3. Criteria of good practice in start-up support infrastructure .......................................... 16
Box 4. Criteria of good practice in entrepreneurship education ............................................. 20
Box 5. Criteria of good practice in business start-up support provided by universities .......... 23
Box 6. Criteria of good practice in evaluation university entrepreneurship support ............... 24

3
 UNIVERSITIES AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP SUPPORT

Indeed, the events that explain why entrepreneurship becomes effective are probably not
in themselves economic events. The causes are likely to lie in changes in values,
perception, and attitude, changes perhaps in demographics, in institutions … perhaps in
education as well. (Drucker 1993, 13)

Introduction

1. Entrepreneurs shift economic resources into areas that yield higher productivity and returns. This
definition was offered by Jean-Baptiste Say at the beginning of the nineteenth century and, despite the
debates that have evolved ever since, it is, in its quintessence, still valid today. Shifting economic resources
requires information as well as the will and power to employ this information in decision making. Very
often becoming an entrepreneur is the result of a personal decision making process in which one assesses
opportunities and their costs (being employed, being unemployed, being one‟s own boss) and risk-reward
relationships (what is at stake). Values, beliefs and behaviours, embedded in the culture of a country and a
place, influence this decision as do the individual‟s knowledge, skills, competences and experience. This
paper examines how entrepreneurship values, beliefs and behaviours as well as knowledge, skills,
competences and experiences are developed by universities amongst their graduates.

2. The debate on whether or not entrepreneurship can be taught and learned is well-known, and does
not need to be unfolded in this note, which aims to provide practical advice to policy makers on how to
stimulate entrepreneurship in a time of post-crisis recovery. We start from the assumption that „everyone
who can face up to decision making can learn to be an entrepreneur and to behave entrepreneurially‟ and
that entrepreneurship is „behaviour rather than personality trait‟ (Peter F. Drucker 1993, 26; 34).
Entrepreneurship can therefore be promoted by appropriate teaching. To complement entrepreneurship
education, certain targeted start-up and early growth support needs to be provided, such as finance and
training. Universities are key actors in both areas, and there is a clear role for public policy and local
governance in supporting them in these tasks.

3. The note focuses our attention on a number of key questions: „what‟ skills are most important in
successfully starting and growing a business, „where and how‟ they are developed and „who‟ it is all for. It
confirms that target groups for policy intervention are diverse and have a number of specificities in terms
of attitudes and motivations for entrepreneurship as well as experience. Hence, to be successful, policy
intervention requires tailoring of both design and delivery.

4. It draws on the findings of LEED research and policy advice on universities and
entrepreneurship, including:

 The development of a good practice criteria list in consultation with a selection of universities
and experts, which universities can use as a tool to self-assess and re-orient (i) their strategy in
supporting entrepreneurship, (ii) their pool of financial and human resources, (iii) the support

4
 structures they have established, (iv) their current approaches in entrepreneurship education and
start-up support, and (v) their evaluation practices.

 Questionnaire-based interviews with 35 experts from 23 OECD member countries and a

questionnaire-based survey, developed from the criteria list, of 16 universities in ten OECD
member and three non-member countries.

 In-depth assessments of graduate entrepreneurship support in selected case study regions

undertaken in collaboration between LEED and the OECD Education Directorate‟s Institute for
the Management of Higher Education as part of a cross-country review series on the contribution
of higher education institutions to city and regional development, covering reviews of
Veracruz/Mexico, El Paso/US, Penang/Malaysia and Lombardy/Italy.

 A review of the literature in university entrepreneurship support.

5. The work will be continued in 2011-12, in particular through the new reviews on Boosting Local
Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Creation (CFE/LEED2009/20), which will examine training and support
for self-employment among people outside of the formal education system and entrepreneurship training
provided in vocational education as well as graduate entrepreneurship support by universities.

6. The remainder of this note is structured as follows. First a summary will be provided on key
debates concerning university entrepreneurship support, including strategic issues in university governance
and partnering, incentives and rewards, and entrepreneurship education and the emerging importance of
educating educators. This section includes key findings of a series of interviews with entrepreneurship
education experts. In a second part, findings from the questionnaire-based survey of 16 universities are
presented for the six dimensions of the criteria list. The list of surveyed universities and the questions
analysed are presented in Annex A and B. The note concludes with policy recommendations.

1. Key debates on university entrepreneurship support

Strategic issues in university entrepreneurship support

7. Worldwide, the number of universities providing entrepreneurship support for their students,
graduates, researchers and professors is growing. That encompasses both entrepreneurship education, with
its two main objectives of generating motivation and attitudes for entrepreneurship and the skills and
competencies needed to successfully start-up and grow a business, and the provision of start-up support.
Different strategies have been advanced and various forms of support established including actors both
within and outside universities. Tailored practices have emerged in educating future entrepreneurs and in
helping them to take their first steps in forming and growing a business. Universities have established
dedicated start-up support services, often also as single units that centralise and steer a multitude of
activities, to offer would-be entrepreneurs and those already in the start-up process consultation and access
to networks and premises. Rewarding those who are designing and implementing innovative and high
quality pedagogical material and teaching, and those who are sharing and promoting the dissemination of
ideas and good practices is of crucial importance for promoting continuation of activities and encouraging
professors, researchers and university administration to join.

8. The emergence and implementation of these entrepreneurship strategies has had an impact on
what universities perceive as their „first‟, „second‟ and „third‟ missions, and what the best linkages are
between education, research, and promoting social and economic development. Internal governance,
positioning in local, national and global levels and strategic partnerships are issues for debate in defining
the role of universities in promoting economic development and growth. Universities either use

5
government schemes, private sector funding or a combination of both to sustain and expand their 'third
mission'. In the long-run the goal should be a high degree of self-sufficiency of the university internal
entrepreneurship support system (OECD 2010a; 2010b). This involves a broader funding base, including
more private financing and less dependency upon time-limited public funding. Activities to this end are
different for each university and may range from revenues from licences and the sale of shares in spin-off
companies to entrepreneurship training courses and business consultancy. This is often backed up by basic
funding of overhead costs for support infrastructure and staff from university budget.

9. Assisting the establishment of new firms is a key objective of university entrepreneurship

support, but not its only one. Creating entrepreneurial mindsets that drive innovation in existing firms is of
equal importance, yet success is much more difficult to measure. The economic recession has triggered
cuts in government funding and resource allocation for universities and put entrepreneurship education
under increased performance pressure. Demonstrating the achievements of entrepreneurship education
towards external funders remains a key challenge, as evaluation efforts are still considered to be relatively
weak or underdeveloped (Wilson, 2008). The co-existence of tangible outputs, such as, for example, the
number of spin-offs and start-ups assisted, and intangible outcomes – creating entrepreneurial mindsets –
remains a key challenge.

Entrepreneurship education

10. Of the many inputs and circumstances contributing to the success of an entrepreneurial venture,
having the right skills and competences is of particular importance. Motivated people need the right set of
skills to identify entrepreneurial opportunities and to turn their entrepreneurial projects into successful
ventures. Starting early in getting familiar with the idea that running one‟s own firm is a potential career
option is important and education can play a core role in this.

11. Entrepreneurship education in universities has come a long way since the first entrepreneurship
course was held by Professor Myles Mace at Harvard. The purpose of university entrepreneurship
education is two-fold. Contributing to the creation and development of entrepreneurial attitudes and
motivations to start-up a firm is as important as developing the skills needed to successfully run and grow a
business venture. Increasing demand for higher education, the above mentioned globalisation of „tasks‟,
changing knowledge structures and transmission channels, evolving dynamics between industry,
government and the education sector, as well as societal demands gave rise to entrepreneurship education
in universities. An international study1, comparing tertiary education students‟ attitudes to entrepreneurship
in 19 different countries across the globe, showed that 43% of students intend to pursue some form of
independent employment five years after graduating (GUESSS, 2009).

12. Which are the skills and competencies that are most useful? Man et. al. (2002) developed a
conceptual framework. Drawing from the concept of competitiveness and the competency approach 2, they
developed a model of four constructs of competitive scope, organisational capabilities, entrepreneurial
competencies and performance (Table 1).

1
The Global University Entrepreneurial Student Spirit Survey (GUESSS), 2008 questioned over 60 000
students in 20 different countries across the world as to their career intentions vis-à-vis entrepreneurship
and their attitudes to entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education
2
The competency approach has been widely applied since the work Boyatzis (1982) for the study of
individual characteristics contributing to task accomplishment and organisational success.
6
 Table 1. Skills and competencies for successful entrepreneurship

Competency area Behavioural focus

Opportunity Skills and competencies related to recognizing and developing market opportunities
through various means.
Relationship Skills and competencies related to person-to-person or individual-to-group-based
interactions, e.g., building a context of cooperation and trust, using contacts and
connections, persuasive ability, communication and interpersonal skill.
Conceptual Skills and competencies related to different conceptual abilities, which are reflected in
the behaviors of the entrepreneur, e.g., decision skills, absorbing and understanding
complex information, and risk-taking, and innovativeness.
Organising Skills and competencies related to the organization of different internal and external
human, physical, financial and technological resources, including team-building, leading
employees, training, and controlling
Strategic Skills and competencies related to setting, evaluating and implementing the strategies of
the firm
Commitment Skills and competencies that drive the entrepreneur to move ahead with the business
Source: Man et. al. (2002), adapted.

13. Across OECD countries university entrepreneurship education covers a wide variety of
audiences, objectives, contents and pedagogical methods (Fayolle and Gailly, 2008). The demand for
entrepreneurship courses, in particular from government side, is growing for science, engineering, and arts
faculties (Cooney and Murray, 2008). The underlying assumption is that innovative and viable business
ideas are more likely to arise from students pursuing technical, scientific and creative studies. Reality
looks, however, slightly different: in Europe and the rest of the OECD, except for the US, the majority of
entrepreneurship courses are offered in business and economic studies (Byrne and Fayolle 2010,
submitted).

Key findings from an expert survey on entrepreneurship education in OECD countries

14. In the following, a summary of key findings from a literature review and an expert survey is
presented. The survey, conducted in collaboration with LEED by Byrne and Fayolle (2010, submitted),
focused on (i) the current main objectives driving entrepreneurship education, (ii) the content of university
entrepreneurship education, and, (iii) the teaching methods and pedagogies. The expert survey included 35
experts from 23 OECD member countries, who have on average 13 years of teaching and research
experience in entrepreneurship education.

OECD countries differ in their driving objective…:

15. In some OECD countries, particularly in Australia, Poland, Czech Republic and Italy,
entrepreneurship education is still primarily centred on the twin objectives of „economic development and
job creation‟ (McMullan and Long, 1987). Yet, there are signs of a shift towards the prevalent objective in
the US, that is, on the stimulation of growth-oriented ventures (Wilson, 2008). More focusing on
individuals, Denmark and the UK, emphasise the guiding objective of creating „entrepreneurial mindsets‟
and the need to equip students with skills and competencies that are useful for running one‟s own business
or being employed.

…and in the extent of research-education links in entrepreneurship education:

16. Research on entrepreneurship education is widely spread in Europe and the US, whereas research
results for Chile, South Korea and Japan are non-existent in internationally published journals. Research-
7
oriented models of entrepreneurship education in eastern Europe are still low in numbers, and conducted
only in a handful of institutions (Varblane and Mets, 2010). There is thus a strong need for comparative
studies, in order to understand pitfalls, follow common successful trends, and anticipate new approaches in
entrepreneurship education.

Traditional methods in courses and teaching methods „about‟ and „for‟ entrepreneurship:

17. What entrepreneurship education can achieve may range from a gradual change of mindset, the
„how-to‟ in multidisciplinary problem solving, to the development of skills and competences needed to
successfully start-up and run a business. Although entrepreneurship courses differ across OECD countries,
they all share subjects that are either about or for entrepreneurship (Kirby, 2004). In Europe, the focus is
on theory on entrepreneurship and contextual background on the entrepreneur and society, and small
business management, whilst venture development and growth is prevalent in the US.

18. The majority of entrepreneurship courses are related to teaching for entrepreneurship. Courses
include „idea creation and opportunity recognition‟; „opportunity assessment‟; „managing the growing
business‟; or „new product development‟. „Business planning‟ and „new venture creation‟ courses were by
far the most common within this category.

19. Generalist courses i.e. those that essentially teach about entrepreneurship remain popular.
Examples include „The role and importance of entrepreneurship in society‟ and „The macro-economic and
socio-cultural dimensions of Entrepreneurship‟. In Europe entrepreneurship courses that deal with
particular national contexts (i.e., „The Italian Entrepreneur: between individualism and creativity‟ are
frequent. In France, the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden courses on entrepreneurship theory are popular.

20. Case study teaching methods are often used, although it seems lecture-style classes and
traditional (frontal) teaching still form a core part of the curriculum. Sadly, good quality participative,
experiential problem-solving-based education is more expensive than traditional „talk and chalk‟ style
lectures (Cooney and Murray, 2008). Resource requirements are not adequately recognised in funding
allocation mechanisms.

Not enough is being done on values, emotions and the ethical component of being an entrepreneur:

21. The dominance of business planning and venture creation modules leaves little room for
addressing values, emotions and the ethical component of being an entrepreneur. In business planning
courses, students are often exposed to a very sequential and functional based approach to understanding
and learning about venture development, which leaves little room for creativity, values, emotions and the
ethical component of being an entrepreneur.

On the differences between Europe and the USA:

22. Many of the interviewed experts felt that entrepreneurship education in their country was lagging
behind the US. Looking at this from the debate in the literature, it seems that whilst the US may benefit
from a more mature state and increased legitimacy of entrepreneurship education (Katz, 2003; Kuratko,
2005), the impacts at classroom level have not yet been fully explored. It is questionable whether (i) the
course contents and delivery is significantly different to that in Europe, given the differences in the latter,
and (ii) whether the US curriculum development is applicable to other socio-economic contexts.

23. From what is known at present, it appears that US universities are stronger in multi-disciplinary
entrepreneurship education. In Europe, building inter-disciplinary approaches, making entrepreneurship
education accessible to all students, mixing students from economic and business studies with students
from other faculties and with different backgrounds, and creating start-up teams remain key challenges
8
(EC, 2008). Crossing boundaries between disciplines, and multidisciplinary collaboration, are, however,
essential elements in building enterprising abilities (EC 2008, OECD 2010b).

Educating educators

24. Entrepreneurship as a discipline pioneered the pedagogically organised use of practitioners in the
classroom (Katz, 1995). Entrepreneurship education today is characterised by a more eclectic collection of
teaching staff than other disciplines.

25. According to Byrne and Fayolle (2010, submitted), the following actors in university
entrepreneurship education can be distinguished:

 Academic staff (professors, lecturers, assistant lecturers)

 Doctoral students and research assistants

 Practicising entrepreneurs

 Pracademics (entrepreneurs employed as university staff)

 Industry experts

 Business professionals i.e. lawyers, consultants, accountants, financers etc

 Incubator or business support staff

 Alumni

26. Since, most academic teachers have little or no practical experience of being entrepreneurs
themselves, calls have been made for more training opportunities for those involved in entrepreneurship
training (EC, 2008; OECD, 2008; OECD 2010b; World Economic Forum, 2009). Although entrepreneurs
and business practitioners are in general involved in teaching, there are few examples of entrepreneurial
practitioners engaged in the full curricula experience. Most frequently, they are ad hoc involved in
teaching, providing personal testimonials or guest lectures, or acting as member of competition
committees.

27. Byrne and Fayolle (2010, submitted) reviewed the current situation in several OECD countries
concerning the training of educators and found different stages of development. They point to the lack of
training opportunities to entrepreneurship educators in a number of OECD countries, particularly in
Belgium, Chile, Japan and Australia. Interesting initiatives are on the way in the UK, France, Denmark and
the US.

28. In the UK, the introduction of successive rounds of government funding for universities in the
last decade significantly impacted on institutional behaviour, and supported new developments in
supporting enterprise and entrepreneurship, including curricula innovation (EC 2008). As a result, the UK
has been proactive in training for educators. An example is the International Entrepreneurship Educators
Programme (IEEP), launched in 2008 by the National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship. The recent
change of government and the financial crisis brought resource tightening, which could result in a less
proactive approach. Enterprise Educators UK recently published an „Enterprise Education Manifesto‟ for
the UK government. Enterprise Educators UK emphasise the pressing need to continuing „educate

9
educators to build capacity, embed enterprise throughout the student experience, and to enable enterprise
by providing opportunity‟ (Enterprise Educators UK, 2010).

29. In France, initiatives have been taken forward at national level to develop exchange, training and
research activities (Académie de l’Entrepreneuriat). Pedagogical experiences and tools in entrepreneurship
are collected and disseminated through a national database, the Observatoire des Pratiques Pédagogiques
en Entrepreneuriat (OPPE).3

30. In 2004, the Danish government created the International Danish Entrepreneurship Academy
(IDEA), entirely focused on entrepreneurship teaching in higher education with 38 universities and
colleges as IDEA partners and the participation of a wide range of faculties. IDEA runs an International
Master in Entrepreneurship Education and Training (IMEET) and a Diploma Course for Entrepreneurship
Teachers.4

31. In the US, the Price-Babson Symposia for Entrepreneurship Educators‟ (SEE) programs is held
every spring on the Babson campus. Cross-disciplinary educators from around the world are invited to
attend and the program is designed to build an international cadre of educators who understand the
importance of combining entrepreneurship theory and practice in teaching.

2. Good practice criteria and survey findings

32. The OECD LEED Committee recently surveyed 16 universities in ten OECD member and three
non-member countries on their objectives, resources and practices in entrepreneurship support. The
questionnaire used for this purpose was developed from the criteria list of good practice in university
entrepreneurship support (CFE/LEED 2009/22). The sample included universities that applied for the
international capacity building seminar „Universities, Skills and Entrepreneurship‟, organised by the
OECD LEED Trento Centre in October 2010. All universities registered online for the seminar by filling
out an online questionnaire. All sampled universities provide entrepreneurship support. The respondents
are either part of senior university management, technology transfer units, or entrepreneurship centres or
professors and lecturers or entrepreneurship. Annex A provides the list of surveyed universities, and Annex
B the questions that were analysed for this note.

33. In the following key survey findings are presented for each of the six dimensions of the criteria
list, that is, strategy, financial and human resources, support infrastructure, entrepreneurship education,
start-up support and evaluation.

Strategy

34. Universities follow different strategies in entrepreneurship support. Which one they choose is
likely to have an impact on what universities perceive as their „first‟, „second‟ and „third‟ missions, and
what the best linkages are between education, research and promoting social and economic development.

35. Box 1 presents criteria of good practice in strategically promoting entrepreneurship in

universities.

3
See OECD (2010a) for a brief description of OPPE.
4
See OECD (2010a) for a brief description of IMEET.

10
 Box 1. Strategy in university entrepreneurship support: criteria of good practice

1. A broad understanding of entrepreneurship is a strategic objective of the university, and there is top-
down support for it.

2. Objectives of entrepreneurship education and start-up support include generating entrepreneurial

attitudes, behaviour and skills, as well as enhancing growth entrepreneurship (both high-tech and low-
tech).

3. There are clear incentives and rewards for entrepreneurship educators, professors and researchers,
who actively support graduate entrepreneurship (mentoring, sharing of research results, etc.).

4. Recruitment and career development of academic staff take into account entrepreneurial attitudes,
behaviour and experience as well as entrepreneurship support activities.

Source: OECD (2010b)

36. The universities were asked eight questions concerning objectives of entrepreneurship support,
acknowledgement in strategy documents and Internet presence, and incentives and rewards for professors,
particularly in terms of recruitment and career development. Their answers are summarised below.

Objectives of entrepreneurship support and acknowledgement in strategy documents

37. Universities can have different sub-objectives within the broad overall objective of promoting
entrepreneurship. The surveyed universities were asked to rank the following six objectives according to
their current relevance.

Objective 1: To generate Objective 2: To promote business Objective 3: To promote business

entrepreneurial attitudes, behaviour start-ups that will create jobs start-ups by students
and skills amongst students

Objective 4: To commercialise Objective 5: To promote Objective 6: To generate revenues

research outputs technology intensive business start- for the University
ups

38. Optional answers for each of the six objectives were „primary objective‟, „secondary objective,
i.e., important but not top objective‟, and „not a key objective‟ and their respective scores of „1‟, „2‟, and
„3‟.

39. „To generate entrepreneurial attitudes, behaviour and skills amongst students‟ is for all
universities the primary objective. Next are promoting business start-ups that will create jobs and
commercialisation of research outputs, which 40% of respondents considered a primary objective.
Promoting business start-ups by students in general is considered by one-third a primary objective, whereas
only four respondents chose promoting technology intensive business start-ups and only three generating
revenues for the university as their primary objective. For more than half of the respondents the latter is not
a key objective of university entrepreneurship support.

40. The first three objectives in the above list are more student-centred and focused on job creation,
whereas the objectives four to six are more university-centred, i.e., on research, technology transfer and
revenues. Although all of the reviewed universities show different patterns, three groups can be formed
(Figure 1).

11
Figure 1. Key objectives in university entrepreneurship support

MK_CYRME

1
Generate
Promote student
revenues for the 2 start-ups
University
3
Promote Promote start-ups
technology that will create
intensive start- … jobs

Commercialise
research outputs

IT_BGM

1
Generate
Promote student
revenues for the 2 start-ups
University
3
Promote Promote start-ups
technology that will create
intensive start- … jobs

Commercialise
research outputs

UK_WAL

1
Generate
Promote student
revenues for the 2 start-ups
University
3
Promote Promote start-ups
technology that will create
intensive start- … jobs

Commercialise
research outputs

12
41. More than half fall into the student-centred and job-creation focused group. The Ss. Cyril and
Methodius University in Macedonia (MK_CYRME) is group leader with all primary objectives being
equally distributed between promoting attitudes and skills, student start-ups and start-ups that create jobs.
The University of Wales (UK-WAL) leads the university-centred group with commercialisation of
research outputs and the promotion of technology intensive start-ups being primary objectives along with
the generation of entrepreneurial attitudes, behaviour and skills. The University of Bergamo, Italy
(IT_BGM) represents the „in-between‟ group with commercialisation as one of the four primary objectives
and the promotion of technology start-ups as important objective.

42. Adjunct to the objectives of contributing to economic development and job creation is the
objective of generating revenues for the organisation that provides the support. Besides licenses on patents
and fees for services, holding a share in spin-off firms is more and more common today. In eight
universities there are no legal obstacles to holding a share, and four more plan to introduce the necessary
legal framework in the two years.

43. In all reviewed universities the promotion of entrepreneurship is an acknowledged strategic

objective. We have looked into their external communication and the extent of publicity the
entrepreneurship support activities receive. All universities, except for one, have strategy documents. Only
for one university there is no mentioning of entrepreneurship support in the latter. Also, in nearly all recent
Annual Reports, the activities and results of entrepreneurship report are featured.

44. Information about entrepreneurship support activities needs to reach potential beneficiaries.
Hence, Internet presence matters. We have asked university representatives to indicate the number of
clicks needed from the university‟s main website to arrive at information about the entrepreneurship
support provided by the university. On average 3.1 clicks are needed. The Lahti University of Applied
Sciences in Finland is an outlier with 10 clicks.

Figure 2. Number of ‘clicks’

10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
DE_EMA DE_WIS DE_KIE UK_WAL DE_MAG FI_LAHT MK_CYRME US_UIC IL_SHC IT_BGM

Note: Ten universities answered the question ‘From your main University website how many ‘clicks’ are needed to get to your
entrepreneurship support activities?’

Incentives and rewards for professors

45. Professors can be crucial for motivation and skills development, that is, instilling ideas for
entrepreneurship. Professors also are very often the ones who hold knowledge and research results that
contain entrepreneurial opportunities. These two features can be interlinked, but they do not have to be.
Ideally, there are incentives and rewards in place for both the „motivator‟ and the „creator‟ professors.
13
46. From the 15 universities, who answered the question „Are the professors, who act as mentors for
would-be-entrepreneurs and/or are sharing research results to this end, rewarded by your University?‟, only
three have incentives and rewards currently in place, whereas in more than half of the universities efforts
are underway to introduce these in the next two years. In two-third of the universities, private sector
experience matters for recruitment.

47. There are advantages and disadvantages to privileging professors and researchers in the
commercialisation of research; this discussion is beyond the scope of this note. The premise here is that
ownership over research results can be a very powerful incentive for professors to commercialise research
result either on their own or in collaboration and partnership with peers and students. In the reviewed
sample ownership is mainly with universities. From the commercialisation of research results professors
and researchers get on average 47%.5

Financing and development of human resources

48. Entrepreneurship support requires additional financing and human resources from universities.
Financing can come either from grants, donations or own revenues. Human resources for entrepreneurship
support can either be internally or recruited and developed.

49. Box 2 presents criteria of good practice.

Box 2. Criteria of good practice in financing and human resources development

A minimum long-term financing of staff costs and overheads for graduate entrepreneurship is agreed as part
of the university’s budget.

1. Self-sufficiency of university internal entrepreneurship support is a goal.

2. Human resource development for entrepreneurship educators and staff involved in entrepreneurship
start-up support is in place.

Source : OECD 2010b

50. The universities were asked to answer three questions concerning their financing and human
resource development.

Financing

51. The reviewed universities use government schemes, private sector funding or a combination of
both to sustain and expand their entrepreneurship support (Figure 3).

5
Nine universities responded to the question “If research results are commercialised what share does the
professor/researcher get?”. Shares range from 15% (Shamoon College of Engineering, Israel) to 75%
(Universidade Catolica Portuguesa, Portugal).

14
 Figure 3. Sources of financing for university entrepreneurship support

52. Eleven out of the 16 universities cover more than half of their entrepreneurship support through
grants from government, international organisations and the EU. More than half of the universities expect
grant funding to increase for the next five years. 13 universities have less one-quarter of their
entrepreneurship support activities financed by the university budget, but more than half of the universities
are optimistic that university funding would increase over the next half decade. Seven universities have
been able to attract donations from private firms, associations and individuals and ten expected an increase.
In three universities (University of Illinois at Chicago, EM Lyon Business School, Ilira College), revenues
from fees for services and licences on patents cover between 50-75 percent of the entrepreneurship support
provision costs. Eleven universities expect no change to this source of financing.

Human resources development

53. Promoting entrepreneurship through education and providing hands-on support for business start-
ups requires skills and competencies which are not necessarily readily available within today‟s universities.

15
Given that business formation requires skills that academic scientists typically do not possess and they
involve activities that are somewhat alien to their culture (e.g., assessing market demand for their
invention), universities could partner with and reward business school faculty to train and mentor potential
academic entrepreneurs. Hence, there is a clear need to develop and promote the right set of skills and
amongst staff as well as a broad appreciation of entrepreneurship. In all reviewed universities, except for
two (Universidade Catolica Portuguesa, IMC University in Austria), entrepreneurship support staff has
been offered training over the past two years.

Start-up support infrastructure

54. More and more universities in OECD countries provide direct support for start-ups through
mentoring, grants, and incubation facilities. Start-up support is providing a helping hand in business start-
up without taking away the „do it on your own‟. It is all about making, entrepreneurship support systems
accessible and attractive for future entrepreneurs, and about rectifying market and system failures in
financing and premises. For universities to be effective, partnerships with entrepreneurship support actors
in the territory and beyond are relevant.

55. Box 3 presents criteria of good practice in start-up support infrastructure.

Box 3. Criteria of good practice in start-up support infrastructure

An entrepreneurship dedicated structure within the university (chair, department, support centre) is in place,
which closely collaborates, co-ordinates and integrates faculty-internal entrepreneurship support and
ensures viable cross-faculty collaboration.

1. Facilities for business incubation either exist on the campus or assistance is offered to gain access to
external facilities.

2. There is close co-operation and referral between university-internal and external business start-up and
entrepreneurship support organisations; roles are clearly defined.

Source : OECD 2010b

56. The universities were asked to answer three questions concerning their entrepreneurship support
infrastructure and their partnering with business support actors in the territory.

57. Except for two, all reviewed universities have currently dedicated permanent structures on
campus, such as for example entrepreneurship centres, that provide start-up support. Twelve universities
have their own business incubation facilities and two were in the process of establishing them. Incubation
facilities are available mainly for students, professors, researchers and alumni, and less often for students
and alumni from other universities (Figure 4).

16
 Figure 4. Access to campus incubation facilities

Note: 13 universities answered the question: ‘Who can use the incubation facilities?’. Multiple answers were possible.

58. University entrepreneurship support has its limits. It prepares students for future intrapreneurial
and entrepreneurial careers and promotes the commercialisation of research results. Close co-operation and
integration of university internal and external support infrastructure and services is an important success
factor. Getting in private actors contributing to university entrepreneurship support as early as possible is
crucial in exposing would-be-entrepreneurs and support providers to the „world of business‟.

59. A close co-operation and referral between university internal and external start-up support
organisations can be stated for all of the reviewed universities. Some relied more on personal contacts then
on institutionalised relationships. Figure 5 shows Shamoon College of Engineering (IL_SHC) and Øresund
Entrepreneurship (DK_ORE) as examples of organisations that rely more on personal contacts, whereas
the University of Illinois at Chicago (US_UIC) and EM Lyon Business School (FR_EML) predominantly
work on the basis of institutionalised ties.

17
Figure 5. Partnering and strategic networking of universities

18
 Figure 5 (continued). Partnering and strategic networking of universities

Note: The question asked to universities was ‘Does your university maintain regular contacts with the following organisations? If so
please specify their nature. Respondents could freely choose amongst the 13 organisations. The possible options where ‘no
relationship’, ‘personal contacts only’, and ‘institutionalised partnership (e.g., participation in boards, steering groups etc.)’. Short arcs
between the university and the connected vertex indicate ‘personal contacts only’, long arcs stand for ‘institutionalised partnership’,
and disconnected vertices represent ‘no relationship’. Network graphs developed with Pajek.

19
Entrepreneurship education

60. Ideally, all students have access to a wide range of entrepreneurial learning opportunities inside
and outside their courses of study. Increasing take-up rates will require both expanding and tailoring the
offer in entrepreneurship education. The goal is to develop entrepreneurial graduates who are self-
confident, capable, experienced and motivated to think and act entrepreneurially. With suites of courses,
the offer in entrepreneurship education can be expanded and tailored to different student interests and
needs.

61. Evidence suggests that widely communication and advertising of the entrepreneurship education,
using posters, guerrilla marketing techniques, and the university‟s website yields success in terms of higher
numbers of take-up and a broader, multi-disciplinary range of students.

62. Box 4 presents criteria of good practice in entrepreneurship education.

Box 4. Criteria of good practice in entrepreneurship education

Entrepreneurship education is progressively integrated into curricula and the use of entrepreneurial
pedagogies is advocated across faculties.

1. The entrepreneurship education offer is widely communicated, and measures are undertaken to
increase the rate and capacity of take-up.

2. A suite of courses exists, which uses creative teaching methods and is tailored to the needs of
undergraduate, graduate and post-graduate students.

3. The suite of courses has a differentiated offer that covers the pre-start-up phase, the start-up phase
and the growth phase. For certain courses active recruitment is practiced.

4. Out-reach to Alumni, business support organisations and firms is a key component of entrepreneurship
education.

5. Results of entrepreneurship research are integrated into entrepreneurship education messages.

Source : OECD 2010b.

63. The universities were asked eight questions concerning their current practice in entrepreneurship
education, including take-up rates, take-in channels, teaching methods and teachers.

64. All of the reviewed universities have seen an increase in the take-up rate of entrepreneurship
education in the period 2008-2010 and the majority believes that this is a stable trend.

65. For the majority of reviewed universities student demand for entrepreneurship courses has been
higher than advertisement through posters and flyers, websites and mailing lists (Figure 6). Only half of the
universities use social media, such as Facebook, Twitter, Linked-in, etc., to advertise their entrepreneurship
courses that are not faculty or study programme specific (e.g., open courses, open activities, incubation
space, etc.).

20
 Figure 6. Student take-in channels in entrepreneurship education

14
12
11

8 8

Students come to us Posters and flyers Website Mailing list New social media Other

Note: 15 universities answered the question: ‘How do you advertise on Campus the entrepreneurship support activities that are not
faculty or study programme specific (e.g., open courses, open activities, incubation space, etc.)?’. Multiple answers were possible.

66. Only three universities do not actively recruite students for certain courses, whereas at present ten
universities recruit students for idea contests and business-plan-competitions and scouting, three plan to
start in the near future. Selection criteria are motivation, curiosity, appearance, background, study progress,
willingness to think and act in an interdisciplinary way.

67. Business plan preparation and competitions are one of the most used teaching methods in
entrepreneurship education (Figure 7). In all reviewed universities, except for one (University of
Bergamo), business plan preparation was used, and in most of them it was one of the primarily used
teaching methods.

68. It is interesting to note that „Business survival‟, „Business start-up‟, and „Growing your business‟
assignments were less frequently used.

21
 Figure 7. Teaching methods in entrepreneurship education

Note: All 16 universities responded to the question ‘To what extent are the following teaching methods used in your entrepreneurship
courses?’. Respondents were asked to rank ten different teaching methods by using 1 for ‘primarily used’, 2 for ‘used, but not a major
component’, and 3 for ‘not used’.

69. In the majority of reviewed universities research into entrepreneurship education is underway,
and often carried out by single professors, researchers and students. In three universities research is carried
out at department level. In most of the cases, research on entrepreneurship education is linked with
education practice and people involved in research are also involved in entrepreneurship education.

70. All universities collaborate with alumni, people from business support organisations, banks
venture capitalists, business angels, and entrepreneurs in the design of entrepreneurship courses. Their
share in teaching, however, differs. More than half involved „externals‟ in less than 50 percent of the
course and only in five universities this share has reached 75 percent (Figure 8).

22
 Figure 8. Share of teaching by ‘externals’

100% 0

>75% 0

50%-75% 5

25%-50% 2

<25% 7

0% 2

Note: All 16 universities responded to the question ‘What is the share of teaching conducted by external teachers (e.g. entrepreneurs,
VCs, bankers, etc.) in the course?’. Respondents could choose between the above listed percentage points and classes.

Start-up support

71. More and more universities in OECD countries provide direct support for start-ups through
mentoring, grants, and incubation facilities. Start-up support is providing a helping hand in business start-
up without taking away the „do it on your own‟. It is all about making, entrepreneurship support systems
accessible and attractive for future entrepreneurs, and about rectifying market and system failures in
financing and premises. Support systems for academic entrepreneurship and spin-offs in general include
both university internal and external components.

72. Box 5 presents criteria of good practice in business start-up support provided by universities.

Box 5. Criteria of good practice in business start-up support provided by universities

Entrepreneurship education activities and start-up support are closely integrated.

1. Team building is actively facilitated by university staff.

2. Access to private financing is facilitated through networking and dedicated events. Mentoring by
professors and entrepreneurs is offered.

3. Entrepreneurship support in universities is closely integrated into external business support

partnerships and networks, and maintains close relationships with firms and Alumni.

Source : OECD 2010b.

73. The universities were asked to answer six questions concerning their start-up support provision.

74. In all universities entrepreneurship education and start-up support are closely integrated. In the
majority teambuilding for business start-up is facilitated, in half of the cases by individual professors and
in the other half by the entrepreneurship centre of the university. Twelve universities maintain regular
contacts with venture capitalists and business angels, and two plan to establish these in the near future.

75. At present 13 universities organise mentoring by entrepreneurs and the remaining three plan to
start with this.
23
76. Business plan competitions can be an effective platform to increase the linkages between
entrepreneurship support provided by universities and business support partnerships and networks in a
territory and the wider economic context. The majority of reviewed universities participate in business plan
competitions and one (the Ss. Cyril and Methodius University) organises its own.

Figure 9. Business plan competitions

1 1 1

Yes Part of a region-wide Organise own business plan No No, but planned for the next
business plan competition competition two years

Note: All 16 universities responded to the question ‘Does your University participate in business plan competitions’.

Evaluation

77. Demonstrating the achievements of entrepreneurship support is difficult, with the co-existence of
tangible (e.g., number of spin-offs) and intangible outcomes, especially of entrepreneurship education
being a key challenge.

78. Box 6 presents criteria of good practice in university entrepreneurship support evaluation.

Box 6. Criteria of good practice in evaluation university entrepreneurship support

1. Regular stock-taking and performance checking of technology transfer and entrepreneurship support
practice is undertaken.

2. Evaluation of entrepreneurship education and start-up support activities is formalised and includes
immediate (e.g., post-course), mid-term (e.g., graduation), and long-term (e.g., alumni and post-start-
up) monitoring of the impact.

Source : OECD 2010b.

79. Fourteen universities regularly evaluate their entrepreneurship education offer. Out of these,
twelve evaluate immediately after the course, two shortly before graduation and only one university
(University of Bergamo) traces alumni on the outcomes of entrepreneurship education.

80. The questionnaire contained no questions to measure the presence of regular stock-taking and
performance checking of technology transfer and start-up support.

3. Key issues for policy recommendations and further investigation

81. The review of findings from LEED work on university entrepreneurship to date, the interviews
with entrepreneurship education experts and the university survey, points to the following key policy

24
recommendations. Further investigation is required into how best to promote the adoption of these
principles in university entrepreneurship programmes.

Top-management support for the entrepreneurial mission

82. Universities may not fully realise their entrepreneurial potentials, if promoting entrepreneurship
only falls into their „third mission‟ with no or weak links to the core missions of teaching and research and
a lack of incentives and rewards for professors and researchers, who act as mentors for would-be-
entrepreneurs and are sharing research results to this end. Moreover internal administrative barriers and a
lack of incentives may actually impede students, researchers, professors and administrators to think and act
entrepreneurial, and efforts to develop entrepreneurship skills support may not be fully effective because of
a missing interface with the local economy‟s wider entrepreneurship support system. Hence, there is a need
for top-management support to create synergies between education, research and entrepreneurship and to
establish a functional incentives and rewards system that reaches professors and researchers, administrative
personnel or universities as well as students.

Making strategic choices in positioning and partnership working in university entrepreneurship support

83. Support systems for academic entrepreneurship and spin-offs in general include both university
internal and external actors. The aim should be to develop a shared and well-communicated vision and to
implement a joint strategy to promote academic entrepreneurship. A concerted approach is needed to take
stock of the range of activities, the people behind it and the resources devoted, to identify areas of overlap
as well as potentials for synergies and untapped resources. Decisions about resource allocation should be
driven by strategic choices that the university makes regarding the areas of technology and the various
modes of transfer – licensing, sponsored research, start-ups, and other mechanisms of technology transfer
that are focused more directly on stimulating economic and regional development, such as incubators and
science parks. Licensing and sponsored research can generate a stream of revenue, whereas investment in
spin-offs and start-ups could yield returns in the long run.

Establishing a functional entrepreneurship-related incentive and reward system

84. In promoting entrepreneurship, universities themselves need to be entrepreneurial and innovative.

Introducing an entrepreneurship-related incentive and reward system requires a pro-entrepreneurship
positioning of the university leadership and its administration can facilitate this. Monitoring and evaluating
the impact of entrepreneurship support on entrepreneurial behaviour of graduates and business activities of
members of the university community will help to advocate for the introduction of a reward and incentives
system. At present, the calculation of universities‟ budgets largely depends upon the number of students,
the degree of scientific excellence and other aspects, all not directly related to entrepreneurship. Incentives
and rewards for those involved in entrepreneurship support are, however, of crucial importance for a
university to succeed in its entrepreneurial mission. Empirical evidence from the US (Phan 2010,
submitted) shows that shifting the royalty distribution formula in favour of faculty members (e.g., allowing
faculty members to retain 75% of the revenue, instead of 33% of the revenue) would elicit more invention
disclosures and so lead to greater efficiency in technology transfer and entrepreneurship. Time can be an
important factor for professors, which should be taken into account when designing incentives and
rewards. A more controversial recommendation is to modify promotion and tenure guidelines by giving a
more positive weight on entrepreneurship in such decisions. It touches the very core of what it means to be
an academic researcher and therefore impinges on issues of norms and shared values.

25
Improving university internal information flows

85. Improving information flows between academics and the university administration matters
particularly in terms of motivation for entrepreneurship and time needed to comply with regulations.
Technology transfer officers and university administrators share an interest in promoting technology
commercialisation and therefore should devote more effort to eliciting invention disclosures. While part of
the problem with poor disclosure outcomes has to do with faculty incentives (publications are usually
regarded as mutually exclusive to patents) a greater part has to do with the lack of formal and detailed (or
varied) communication channels between the university laboratories and the entrepreneurship and
technology transfer units. Maintaining a viable communication bandwidth is resource intensive (in time)
for the researcher. The filing of reports and giving seminars to potential technology licensees and
entrepreneurs is usually a strong deterrent to faculty, even if they are interested in profiting from their
discoveries.

Entrepreneurship education - taking account of research results and real-business needs

86. Entrepreneurship education should be organised in a dynamic way, taking into account research
and real-business needs. To ensure this, regular performance assessment exercises are useful, including
regular feedback sessions with people from the business community, alumni entrepreneurs and students
and to track and survey alumni with entrepreneurial careers.

87. It is important that entrepreneurship education is taken serious by both students and teachers
(which does not mean it cannot be fun), but it should also help to fulfil the academic requirements for both
sides. It is important to build and expand linkages between research and teaching, for example by getting
doctoral students to work on an entrepreneurship education related research topic. Inviting international
visiting entrepreneurship professors on a regular basis strengthen the research base, the teaching students,
and training „trainers‟ efforts.

88. Across OECD countries, more and more universities follow the approach of assigning a member
of the top-level university management to take over responsibility for the development of entrepreneurship
education and start-up support, including goal and policy definition, degree of curricular integration,
resources, dedicated research and evaluation, enhances the role entrepreneurship in relation to teaching and
research. To create a broad basis for this the establishment of a „strategic‟ committee, including all the key
people acting within the university has proven to be useful.

89. Although entrepreneurship education might be particularly linked to the entrepreneurial

ecosystem and its opportunities of a given local economy, there is a clear case for economies of scale. A
joint resource centre, providing an on-line information system of pedagogical practices freely accessible
for teachers, researchers, students and other organisations involved in entrepreneurship education, could
greatly contribute to the development of a more entrepreneurial learning environment. Its task could be to
produce innovative and pertinent teaching material (case studies, videos, games, course contents, syllabi,
etc.), and to organise regular events, also using on-line services, targeted at different and mixed audiences
to enhance communication on, and exchange of, new and innovative approaches in entrepreneurship
education.

Investing in students…

90. Students can add immense value if given the opportunity and support to act. However, often they
are considered beneficiaries and not partners in, and creators of entrepreneurship support. That the latter
actually brings success, demonstrate examples of a student run entrepreneurship clubs, such as CUTEC,
Cambridge University Technology and Enterprise Club, running a „Start-Up Cafe‟ on campus, and the

26
introduction of paid student entrepreneurship interns, which work across campus to promote and support
entrepreneurship actions and to carry out applied entrepreneurship research. Social media, such as
Facebook and Twitter attract students and allow for a wide dissemination of the message. Collaboration
amongst different local universities and other higher education institutions should be promoted to allow
student participation.

91. Entrepreneurship is closely connected with development and equal opportunities. It is also about
finding „sustainable solutions to overcoming the injustices of poverty‟ (World Economic Forum, 2009).
Shailendra Vyakarnam from the Centre for Entrepreneurial Learning at the University of Cambridge
Entrepreneurship, who is the author of this quote said in an interview with a Malaysian radio station in
2009 that entrepreneurship education is not learning about entrepreneurship, it is getting the skills to try out
entrepreneurship. The multifaceted phenomenon of entrepreneurship requires something else than simple
textbooks and an ordinary classroom setting. An „entrepreneurial‟ pedagogy seeks to enhance
entrepreneurial capacities and capabilities amongst students by giving them more autonomy and
responsibilities in the learning process through experiments and reflexive learning and a greater application
of collective and co-operative learning.

…and in teachers

92. Teachers are important. Their knowledge, experience and attitude with regard to entrepreneurship
and the entrepreneur as a person matter. Not always are professors and lecturers the best teachers when it
comes to business matters. Entrepreneurship support in universities, in particular entrepreneurship
education, is demanding reinforcement and development of existing human resources and employing new
staff. Working with entrepreneurs, chief executives, bankers, venture capitalists and business angels can
help overcoming bottlenecks. On a regular basis organised entrepreneurship educator development
programmes and workshops, careers adviser awareness programmes, and faculty deans‟ and directors‟
development programmes and workshops promote a university‟s entrepreneurial spirit. Well-publicised
yearly awards on the „Best Entrepreneurship Innovative Pedagogy‟ and the „Best Entrepreneurship
Professor‟ for students to vote is a soft incentive that can stimulate more involvement by professors and
teaching staff in entrepreneurship education and also raise the awareness of entrepreneurship amongst
students. Reducing the teaching load for those involved in „strategic‟ entrepreneurship activities, such as
entrepreneurship ambassadors and mentors should be considered.

References

Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), „The Competent Manager‟, NY: Wiley

Byrne and Fayolle (2010 submitted), „Entrepreneurship Education in Higher Education Institutions‟,
OECD, Paris.

Cooney T. and Murray T. (2008), „Entrepreneurship Education in the Third Level Sector in Ireland‟,
Report Presented To The National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship (U.K.), August 2008.

Drucker P.F. (1993), „Innovation and Entrepreneurship‟, Harper Business, New York.

Entreprise Educators, UK (2010) „Manifesto to the new Brittish Government‟ available at

http://www.enterprise.ac.uk/.

European Commission (2008), „Entrepreneurship in higher education, especially within non-business

studies‟, European Commission, Brussels.

27
Fayolle, A., and B. Gailly (2008) „From craft to science: Teaching models and learning processes in
entrepreneurship education.‟ Journal of European Industrial Training 32, no. 7 : 569–593.

Fayolle, A. (2009, submitted), „Entrepreneurship Education in Berlin HEIs‟, OECD, Paris.

Katz, J. A. (2003) „The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education:
1876-1999.‟ Journal of Business Venturing 18, no. 2 (March 2003): 283-300.

Kirby, D. A (2004) „Entrepreneurship education: can business schools meet the challenge?.‟ Education +
Training 46, no. 8 (2004): 510-519.

Kuratko, D. F. (2005), „The Emergence of Entrepreneurship Education: Development, Trends, and

Challenges‟, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, volume 29, issue 5.

Man Th. W.Y., Theresa Lau, K.F. Chan (2002), „The competitiveness of small and medium enterprises. A
conceptualization with focus on entrepreneurial competencies‟, Journal of Business Venturing 17,
pp. 123–142.

McMullan, W. Ed, and Wayne A. Long (1987) „Entrepreneurship education in the nineties.‟ Journal of
Business Venturing 2, no. 3 : 261-275.

OECD (2010a), „From Strategy to Practice in University Entrepreneurship Support: Strengthening

Entrepreneurship and Local Economic Development in Eastern Germany: Youth, Entrepreneurship
and Innovation‟, OECD Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED) Working Papers,
2010/9, OECD Publishing.

OECD (2010b), „Universities, Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Criteria and Examples of Good Practice‟,
OECD Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED) Working Papers, 2010/10, OECD
Publishing.

Wilson, K. (2008) „Entrepreneurship Education in Europe‟ in J. Potter, Entrepreneurship and Higher

Education, (ed.) (2008), Entrepreneurship and Higher Education, OECD, Paris.

28
 ANNEXES

Annex A. Basic information on the surveyed universities

IMC University, Austria AT_IMC

Number of students (2010/11) 1 169
Number of Faculties 3
Number of academic staff (2009) 300
Number of administrative staff (2009) 136
Website http://www.fh-krems.ac.at/

Lahti University of Applied Sciences, Finland FI_LAHT

Number of students (2009/10) 4 700
Number of Faculties 7
Number of academic staff (2010) 250
Annual budget (2009) EUR 12 million
Website http://www.lamk.fi

EM Lyon Business School, France FR_EML

Number of students (2009/10) 3 200
Number of academic staff (2009) 110
Number of administrative staff (2009) 240
Annual budget (2009) EUR 50 million
Website http://www.em-lyon.com/

Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-University Greifswald, Germany DE_EMA

Number of students (2009/10) 12 304
Number of Faculties 6
Number of academic staff (2008) 2 550
Number of administrative staff (2009) 2 857
Website www.uni-greifswald.de

Wismar University of Applied Sciences; Technology, Business and Design, Germany DE_WIS
Number of students (2009/10) 5 896
Number of graduates (2008/09) 858
Number of Faculties 3
Number of academic staff (2009) 212
Number of administrative staff (2009) 233
Annual budget (2009) EUR 23.5 million
Website http://www.hs-wismar.de

Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel (University of Kiel), Germany DE_KIE

Number of students (2009/10) 22 825
Number of graduates (2008/09) 2 335
Number of Faculties 9
Number of academic staff (2009) 1 491
Number of administrative staff (2009) 1 032
Annual budget (2009) EUR 220 million
Website http://www.uni-kiel.de

29
University of Magdeburg, Germany DE_MAG
Number of students (2009/10) 13 770
Number of graduates (2008/09) 975
Number of Faculties 9
Number of academic staff (2009) 1 238
Number of administrative staff (2009) 857
Annual budget (2009) EUR 162.6 million
Website http://www.uni-magdeburg.de/

Shamoon College of Engineering, Israel IL_SHC

Number of students (2009/10) more than 4 000
Number of Faculties 6
Website http://www.sce.ac.il

University of Bergamo, Italy

Number of students (2009/10) 15 415
Number of Faculties 6
Number of academic staff (2009) 339
Number of administrative staff (2009) 231
Website http://www.unibg.it

Ilira College Universiteti Mbretëror ILIRIA, Kosovo KS_ICDP

Number of students (2009/10) 1 500
Number of programmes 6 Bachelors, 1 Master
Website http://www.uiliria.org/cms/

Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Macedonia MK_CYRME

Number of students (2009/10) 50 000
Number of doctoral students (since 1949) 2700
Number of foreign students (2010) 700
Number of Faculties 21 + 5 research institutes
Number of academic staff (2010) 2700
Website http://www.ukim.edu.mk

Academy of Economic Studies, Moldova MD_AES

Number of students (2006) 15 000
Number of graduates (as of 1992) 18 000
Number of doctoral students (2006) 290
Number of foreign students (2006) 150
Number of Faculties 6
Number of academic staff (2010) 500
Website http://www.ase.md

PT_UCP Universidade Catolica Portuguesa, Portugal PT_UCP

Number of students (2008/09) 11 854
Number of Faculties 18
Number of academic staff (2009) 1 169
Number of administrative staff (2009) 466
Website http://www.ucp.pt

University of Wales, UK UK_WAL

Number of students (2009/10) 80 000
Number of graduates (2009) 22 508
Number of Faculties 4 + 2 Research Centres (Centre for Advanced Welsh & Celtic
Studies and Global Academy)
Number of academic staff (2009) 47

30
Number of administrative staff (2009) 68
Annual budget (2009) GBP 12 million
Website http://www.wales.ac.uk

University of Illinois at Chicago, US US_UIC

Number of students (2009/10) 27 309
Number of graduates (2010) 6 343
Number of doctoral students (2010) 316
Number of foreign students (2010) 730
Number of Faculties 15
Number of academic staff (2010) 2 574
Number of administrative staff (2010) 3 669
Annual budget (2009) USD 1.7 billion
Website http://www.uic.edu/uic/

Øresund Entrepreneurship, Denmark and Sweden DK_ORE

Øresund Entrepreneurship serves nine universities. Five in Denmark – University of Copenhagen,
Copenhagen Business School, Technical University of Denmark, The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts,
School of Architecture, and Roskilde University – and four universities in Sweden – Lund University, Malmö
University, Kristianstad University College and the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp.
Number of students (2009/10) approximately 150 000
Annual budget (2009) EUR 500 000
Website http://www.oresund.org/entrepreneurship

31
Annex B. Analysed questions

STRATEGY

Q1 What are for your University key objectives of supporting entrepreneurship?

[Please assign: 1, for primary objective; 2, for secondary objective, i.e. important, but not top objective; 3, not a
key objective
 To generate entrepreneurial attitudes, behaviour and skills amongst students
 To promote business start-ups by students
 To commercialise research outputs
 To promote technology intensive business start-ups
 To promote business start-ups that will create jobs
 To generate revenues for the University
 Other, please specify
Q2 Can your University be a shareholder in a spin-off company?
 Yes
 No
 No, but planned
 Comment
Q3 Does your University have a written strategic document?
 Yes
 No
 Comment
Is entrepreneurship support mentioned?
 Yes
 No
Q4 In your annual report 2009 is there a section on the activities and results of entrepreneurship support?
 Yes
 No
 Don’t have an annual report 2009
Q5 From your main University website how many ‘clicks’ are needed to get to your entrepreneurship
support activities?
 __________
Q6 Are the professors, who act as mentors for would-be-entrepreneurs, and/or are sharing research
results to this end rewarded by your University?
 Yes
 No
 No, but planned for the next 2 years.
Q7 When recruiting professors and researchers is experience in the private sector, either as business
owner or business manager taken into consideration?
 Yes
 No
 No, but planned for the next 2 years.
Q8 If research results are commercialised what share does the professor/researcher get?
 _______%
 Comment

32
RESOURCES

Q1 What are the main sources for financing your entrepreneurship support activities?

Grants by government, EU, international organisations  0%  <25% 25-50%

50-75%>75%  100%
Donations by private firms, associations, individuals  0%  <25% 25-50%
50-75%>75%  100%
Revenues from student fees, fees for services, licenses and patents  0%  <25% 25-50%
50-75%>75%  100%
Annual budget of your organisation (may mainly apply for universities and  0%  <25% 25-50%
larger organisations where entrepreneurship support is one of many portfolios) 50-75%>75%  100%
Other  0%  <25% 25-50%
50-75%>75%  100%
Q2 For the next five years what changes do you expect or plan for in financing the entrepreneurship
support activities?
Grants by government, EU, international organisations  no change,  increase,  decrease
Donations by private firms, associations, individuals  no change,  increase,  decrease
Revenues from student fees, fees for services, licenses and  no change,  increase,  decrease
patents
Annual budget of your organisation (may mainly apply for  no change,  increase,  decrease
universities and larger organisations where entrepreneurship
support is one of many portfolios)
Other  no change,  increase,  decrease
Q3 Has staff involved in entrepreneurship education and start-up support activities been offered formal
training during the last two years?
 Yes
 No

START-UP SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTURE

Q1 Is there a permanent structure at your University that supports entrepreneurship (i.e., unit,
‘entrepreneurship centre’, etc)?
 Yes
 No
 No, but planned for the next two years
Q2 Does your University have business incubation facilities (i.e., free or subsidised rental of office space
and access to laboratory space) on Campus?
 Yes
 No
 No, but planned for the next two years
Who can use these facilities? [multiple answers]
 Students
 Students from other universities
 Your Alumni
 Alumni from other universities
 Professors
 Researchers
 Other
Q3 Does your University refer future entrepreneurs to other organisations in the region that are
specialised in providing start-up support for certain technologies or economic sectors?
 Yes, to other universities
 Yes, to business development organisations
 No

33
ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION

Q1 Has the take-up rate of entrepreneurship education activities increased or decreased between 2008-
2010?
 Increased
 Decreased
Would you say this is a permanent trend?
 Yes
 No
Q2 How do you advertise on Campus the entrepreneurship support activities that are not faculty or study
programme specific (e.g., open courses, open activities, incubation space, etc.)?
 Students come to us
 Posters and flyers
 Website
 Mailing list
 New social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.)
 Other

Q3 Do you actively recruit students for entrepreneurship activities (e.g. entrepreneurship courses,
scouting, etc.)
 Yes
 No
 No, but planned for next academic year
Q4 In which format are your entrepreneurship education activities offered?
 Courses are open for all faculties
 Mandatory courses with credits
 Electives with credits
 Open activities (e.g., brown bag sessions, enterprise fridays etc.)
 Separate courses for Bachelor students
 Separate courses for Master students
 Separate courses for Phd and postdoc researchers
 Other
Q5 To what extent are the following teaching methods currently used in your entrepreneurship courses:
Please assign:
1, primarily used
2, used, but not a major component
3, not used
 Business plan preparation
 Role play
 Case studies
 Guest speakers in class
 Company visits
 Internships in companies and banks
 ‘Start-up your business’ assignments
 ‘Business survival’ assignments
 ‘Growing your business’ assignments
 Social media (Bloggs, Facebook, Twitter, etc.)
 Other
Q6 Is there research on teaching entrepreneurship, skills for entrepreneurship, etc. carried out at your
University?
 Yes, by individual professors, researchers and students
 Yes, by a department
 No
 No, but planned for next two years
Is the unit that is carrying our research on entrepreneurship involved in the entrepreneurship courses?
 Yes
 No

34
Q7 Do you collaborate with Alumni, business organisations, firms, banks, venture capitalists, etc. in the
design of your entrepreneurship courses
 Yes
 No
Q8 Do Alumni, people from business organisations, firms, banks, venture capitalists, etc. teach in your
entrepreneurship courses?
 Yes
 No
What is their share of teaching in the course?
 0%  <25%  25-50% 50-75% >75%  100%

START-UP SUPPORT

Q1 Does your University refer future entrepreneurs to other organisations in the region that are specialised in
providing start-up support for certain technologies or economic sectors?
 Yes, to other universities
 Yes, to business development organisations
 No
Q2 Are staff who are involved in business start-up support activities (e.g., entrepreneurship centre, incubation
facilities, etc.) also involved in the entrepreneurship education activities?
 Yes
 No
Q3 Is teambuilding for business start-up facilitated by university staff?
 Yes, mainly through professors
 Yes, mainly through the unit in charge of entrepreneurship support
 No
Q4 Does your University maintain regular contacts with banks, venture capitalists and business angels?
 Yes
 No
 No, but planned for next two years
Q5 Is mentoring by entrepreneurs organised?
 Yes
 No
 No, but planned for next two years
Q6 Does your University participate in business plan competitions?
 Yes
 Yes, we are part of a region wide business plan competition
 Yes, we organise our own business plan competition
 No
 No, but planned for next two years

EVALUATION

Q1 Is there formal evaluation of the entrepreneurship courses?

 Yes
 No
 No, but planned for next academic year

Q5 : How is evaluation organised?

 Immediately after the course
 Shortly before graduation
 Post graduation (Alumni tracer)
 Other

35