Background

Two related contexts focus on the aspects of Academic entrepreneurs. Firstly, they (academic entrepreneurs) are viewed as important performers in forming channels for technology transfer through their interpersonal contact and movement of university employees. Secondly, they act as torch bearer in emphasizing the role of universities involved in research in development of regional economic. In this context, Stanford and MIT universities played a significant role in developing high-tech regional economies, partly through spinning off technology companies. However, the link between regional development and academic entrepreneurship has been discussed in literature. Academic entrepreneurship in addition to formation of new firm also involves academic patenting and consulting activities (Klofsten & Jones-Evans, 2000). On contrary to this, Stuart and Ding (2004) proposed that academic entrepreneur are important aspects of a start-ups scientific advisory board.

The academic entrepreneurship activity and its impacts should not be solely via economic returns to the university but should be considered by wider social and economic benefits such as the diffusion of knowledge or the contribution to employment. From the point of view of universities, a performance measurement system of academic entrepreneurship support in the development of task such as analysis of captured data for the development of university policies, strategies and initiatives related to academic entrepreneurship; short, medium and long-term planning includes target setting, monitoring of trends and analysis of results and dialogue, development of joint initiatives, and benchmarking with external stakeholders such as policy makers, funding institutions, universities, chambers of commerce, local development agencies, etc. Moreover, academic entrepreneurship opens the possibility for many higher education institutions to get a broader source of funding from non-governmental or public organizations. According to Fairweather (1990), the contribution of academic institutions to respond to social needs and economic development enhance their public image, which in turn can lead to regional and national economic development (Martin & Etzkowitz, 2001).Hence, universities have been considered as important key elements of the innovation system contributing to economic development both by interaction with existing industry and by other types of commercialization of knowledge, like the establishment of new firms (Rasmussen, in press). In this context, the entrepreneurial universities have the ability to generate a strategic direction in order to formulate academic goals and in translating knowledge produced within the university into economic and social utility (Clark, 1998).

A varied interest with regards to entrepreneurship and innovation within the Triple Helix has been a subject of focus among a wide realm of the researchers. Triple Helix Model applies the systems approach to describe the multifaceted nature of interactions at various levels - national, regional, technological, and sectors – and to describe the processes by which research capabilities build knowledge, and then transfer the knowledge to support business development in the context of the Triple Helix of business, government and academic interaction. The evolutionary interpretation of the Triple Helix model assumes that within specific local contexts universities, government and industry are learning to encourage economic growth through the development of what has been called “generative relationships.” The Triple Helix interactions try to renew this juxtaposition that greater innovation interactions between stakeholders of Triple Helix would lead to greater economic growth.

The study is in consistent with the fact that the role of government, HEI and industry stakeholders and their ensuing interactions assumes greater importance for the innovation ecosystem creation. Higher education institutions have been asked by the government to take a larger role in local economic development through innovation grant programme (Cooke et. al., 2000, Boucher et al., 2003) The role of Higher Education institutions have been commended by researchers for their expertise in knowledge generation, maintenance and transfer which has been proven with the creation of various industrial parks, knowledge parks, R&D parks very much in proximity to the higher education Institutions. The Silicon Valley at US, Silicon Alley at Bangalore, Shanghai, Hsinchu Science and Technology Industrial Park at Taiwan etc. are examples of the impetus provided by academia in industry creation. Researchers like Acs (2004) believe that the public knowledge stock and knowledge spillovers are important economic drivers for regional development and growth (Acs et al., 2004). Government support and R & D programs play an important role in economic development. Sikka (1997b) believes that R&D programmes enable industry to acquire a technology base in the country towards producing quality goods of international standard, to adapt and adopt foreign know-how while absorbing the imported technology, to strengthen its capacities and capabilities and to equip the scientific and technical (S&T) manpower to face the challenges in the future. Literature research on the subject reveals that technological collaboration between organizations or stakeholders for product innovation is a topic of considerable interest and study in recent years (Albertini & Butler, 1997; Millar et al., 1997; Chen, 1997). Literature survey suggests that the role of Universities in supporting these government support program is crucial. Powers and McDougall, (2005) believe that in the context of university technology transfer and commercialization, there has also been little research on possible contingency effects of particular institutional structures or processes. Lack of research was found to be higher in the case of government supported innovation funding programs and research in the Indian context related to innovation & commercialization. A major reason for the lack of research data regarding funding & commercialization support mechanisms in India is because most of them have been initiated within this past decade. Lack of research content, other than the official website of the concerned agencies was a major reason for non-availability of government innovation program related information. Another important reason could be the lack of willingness of individual innovators to part with information which may be subject to intellectual property laws and trade secrets, apprehension of copying and other miss utilization by information seekers.

The university based entrepreneurship as a central component for enhancement and exploitation of the national knowledge in order to develop knowledge based society (OECD, 1998). This help in rapid acceleration in the rhythm of creation and dissemination of knowledge, which means that the life spans of technologies and in progression of new products. In addition of this, the development of technologically sophisticated and knowledge led regions assist in wealth creation and improve quality of life (Kenney, 2000; Roberts, 1991). However, the knowledge creation and knowledge exploitation based on technology-based entrepreneurship help in converts new scientific discoveries into new opportunities (Chiesa & Piccaluga, 2000). On the other hand, Economic development is increasingly linked to a nation's ability to acquire and apply technical and socio-economic knowledge and the process of globalization is accelerating this trend. Thus, the government also recognize the need to support the process of technological change with the aim of spawning more high-growth, knowledge-intensive companies from university research.