Cross-fertilizing effects found in dual roles for academic entrepreneurs

According to a new study published in Journal of Strategic Entrepreneurship.

The findings suggest that support for academic entrepreneurship goes beyond funding or intellectual property policies: universities, incubators, and policymakers can help by recognizing the practical identity work involved and creating flexible environments that give scientists the opportunity to integrate their academic and entrepreneurial roles in meaningful ways.

The study grew out of work that Marouane Bousfiha, of the University of Gothenburg, and Henrik Berglund, of Chalmers University of Technology, carried out with university scientists to identify and develop commercially viable products and services based on the scientists’ research.

“We noticed repeatedly that most scientists managed to combine being a deeply committed academic and a for-profit entrepreneur,” says Bousfiha, emphasizing that the scientific literature has always taken the position that academic and entrepreneurial identities are inherently in conflict. “[T]This inspired us to systematically study how academic entrepreneurs manage their dual identities.

Academic entrepreneurship is on the rise, Bousfiha says, as universities around the world support entrepreneurial strategies and encourage researchers to turn their findings into practical, concrete offerings, reflecting a broader drive by universities to drive innovation and economic development. However, the dominant assumption is that academic entrepreneurs face conflicting and disparate demands on their professional identities because their dual roles obey very different norms and practices.

Bousfiha and Berglund’s research explored how academic entrepreneurs construct and maintain their professional identities while frequently transitioning between academic and entrepreneurial activities. With little prior research on the topic, the authors conducted exploratory qualitative interviews with 27 Swedish academics active both in academia and in startups that commercialize their research. They focused specifically on how these professionals manage and make sense of their role.

“These people were ideal for our purpose because they were engaged in frequent and temporary changes – what we call micro-transitions – between two professional spheres, science and business, which differ sharply in terms of values, routines and expectations,” says Bousfiha.

The study authors found that the academic entrepreneurs they interviewed did not talk about their professional identity as something to be reconciled in an abstract way. Rather, they talked about what they were doing, including the situations, tools, and artifacts they were working with.

Taking a closer look at how their identity was tied to the practicality of their work, several interviewees described how their ability to create a successful lab was a valuable skill in building their startup. The academic entrepreneurs also explained how attracting research funding was similar to pitching venture capitalists, and how their experience starting a business provided practical authority in the classroom.

“We also found that concrete objects carried meanings in both domains,” says Bousfiha. “Commercial applications would thus generate new research ideas, and scientific publications would not only advance science, but also increase customer confidence. It is in such concrete tasks and artifacts that their professional identity is forged.”

Unlike previous research, the study showed that academic entrepreneurs did not prioritize their academic identity over their entrepreneurial identity. Instead, these professionals distinguished between tasks that were intellectually engaging and aligned with their expertise, and tasks that were more routine or administrative.

“Activities such as grading or managing payroll were readily delegated, while responsibilities such as establishing technology roadmaps, forming partnerships or securing funding were seen as natural parts of their professional identity,” says Bousfiha. “Their sense of coherence clearly came from engaging in work they found meaningful, in both roles, rather than maintaining strict boundaries between them.”

During the interviews, Bousfiha and Berglund found that a big source of anxiety for those interviewed concerned what is appropriate and encouraged. For universities, incubators and policymakers to better support academic entrepreneurs, the study authors recommend providing flexible environments that allow scientists to integrate their two roles in meaningful ways. This could include clearer guidelines for dual affiliations, use of university resources, and incentives recognizing and rewarding entrepreneurial engagement alongside academic work.

“The goal should not be to eliminate all tensions, but to make the relationship clear and productive so that academics can pursue both science and entrepreneurship productively,” Bousfiha says.