Science, Technology, and Entrepreneurship 2017 Fall (WBS)

Syllabus

As of October 3rd, 2017

 

Instructor: Kanetaka M. Maki, Ph.D. (Associate Professor)
E-mail: kanetaka@kanetaka-maki.org
Office Location: Building 11, Room 1136
Office Hours: By Appointment (e-mail to kanetaka-sec@kanetaka-maki.org; my secretary will respond to you)
Academic Year: 2017 (April 2017 – March 2018)
Term: Fall
Class Time: Thursdays, 3rd Period (1:00-2:30 PM)
Class Room: 11-1103  (New room from Class 02)
Teaching Assistant: Xuan Gao (gaoxuan@akane.waseda.jp)

Note: This syllabus may be updated and revised at a later date.

 

1. Course Description

The scientific and technological knowledge emerged from research institutes, including universities, is the source of new business creation. In this class, we will discuss (1) how the knowledge is generated, and (2) the knowledge is translated into commercialization. Throughout the course, we will explore the science and technology policy/business based on cutting-edge research in economics and management research streams.
The class sessions will be organized as seminar-style. In each session, I will choose about 3 academic articles (or chapters from books) for students to prepare. Each session is composed of lecture, presentation by students, and discussion regarding reading assignments.

2. Course Objectives

  • To provide the necessary knowledge in the field of science, technology, and entrepreneurship.
  • To provide policy/business implications in the field of science, technology, and entrepreneurship.
  • To provide the necessary skills to read empirical research papers.
  • To provide the skills to evaluate valid empirical research papers.
  • To provide the big picture of the “state of the art” in the research stream of science, technology, and entrepreneurship.
  • To provide the “real world” examples of science, technology, and entrepreneurship.

3. Topics     * Required Reading Assignments

  • Class 01 (9/28):  Introduction
    • Class syllabus *
    • G. Zucker, Darby, M.R. 2007. Virtuous circles in science and commerce. Papers in Regional Science86(3) 445-470. *
  • Class 02 (10/5): Why are Entrepreneurship and Innovation Important?
    • Bank. 2010. Innovation policy: A guide for developing countries. World Bank Group. [Chap 1] *
    • A. Timmons, Spinelli, S. 1999. New venture creation: Entrepreneurship for the 21st century. [Chap1] *
    • A. Timmons, Spinelli, S. 1999. New venture creation: Entrepreneurship for the 21st century. [Chap2] *
    • F. Drucker. 1998. The discipline of innovation. Harvard Business Review. 76(6) 149-157
  • Class 03 (10/12): Why is Innovation Policy Difficult? (October 12th, 2017)
    • Lerner. 2009. Boulevard of broken dreams: why public efforts to boost entrepreneurship and venture capital have failed–and what to do about it. Princeton University Press. [Chap2] *
    • Lerner. 2009. Boulevard of broken dreams: why public efforts to boost entrepreneurship and venture capital have failed–and what to do about it. Princeton University Press. [Chap3] *
    • Lerner. 2009. Boulevard of broken dreams: why public efforts to boost entrepreneurship and venture capital have failed–and what to do about it. Princeton University Press. [Chap4] *
  • Class 04 (10/19): Entrepreneurship in Japan
  • Class 05: (10/26): Basics of Empirical Research
    • T. Campbell, Stanley, J.C. 2015. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Ravenio Books. [Chap1] *
    • H. Inoue, Nakajima, H., Umeno, Y. 2017. The Impact of the Opening of High-Speed Rail on Innovation. RIETI Discussion Paper Series *
  • Class 06 (11/9): The Vehicle of Innovation: Large Firms vs Small Firms
    • J. Acs, Audretsch, D.B. 1988. Innovation in large and small firms: an empirical analysis. The American economic review 678-690. *
    • Haltiwanger, et al. 2013. Who creates jobs? Small versus large versus young. Review of Economics and Statistics. 95(2) 347-361. *
    • Guzman, Stern, S. 2015. Nowcasting and Placecasting: Entrepreneurial Quality and Performance. University of Chicago Press. *
    • Guzman, Stern, S. 2015. Where is Silicon Valley? Science. 347(6222) 606-609.
  • Class 07 (11/16): Where are Entrepreneurs Come from?
    • Lerner, Malmendier, U. 2013. With a little help from my (random) friends: Success and failure in post-business school entrepreneurship. Review of Financial Studies hht024. *
    • Giannetti, Simonov, A. 2009. Social interactions and entrepreneurial activity. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy18(3) 665-709. *
    • Yu. 2014. The impact of accelerators on high-technology ventures. Available at SSRN 2503510. *
    • Nanda, Sørensen, J.B. 2010. Workplace peers and entrepreneurship. Management Science. 56(7) 1116-1126.
  • Class 08 (11/23): How Important Are Star Scientists?
    • G. Zucker, Darby, M.R., Armstrong, J.S. 2002. Commercializing knowledge: University science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology. Management Science. 48(1) 138-153. *
    • Azoulay, Graff Zivin, J., Wang, J. 2010. Superstar extinction. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 25 549-589. *
    • Oettl. 2012. Reconceptualizing stars: Scientist helpfulness and peer performance. Management Science. 58(6) 1122-1140. *
  • Class 09 (11/30): Why is the Scientific Breakthrough Knowledge Localized?
    • G. Zucker, Darby, M.R., Brewer, M.B. 1998. Intellectual human capital and the birth of US biotechnology enterprises. Am Econ Rev. 88(1) 290-306. *
    • G. Zucker, Darby, M.R. 2001. Capturing Technological Opportunity Via Japan’s Star Scientists: Evidence from Japanese Firms’ Biotech Patents and Products. The Journal of Technology Transfer. 26(1/2) 37-58. *
    • G. Zucker, Darby, M.R. 2007. Star scientists, innovation and regional and national immigration. National Bureau of Economic Research. *
  • Class 10 (12/7): Why are the Entrepreneurial Activities Localized?
    • Agrawal, Cockburn, I., Galasso, A., Oettl, A. 2014. Why are some regions more innovative than others? The role of small firms in the presence of large labs. Journal of Urban Economics. 81 149-165. *
    • K. Agrawal, Catalini, C., Goldfarb, A. 2011. The geography of crowdfunding. National bureau of economic research. *
    • Fallick, Fleischman, C.A., Rebitzer, J.B. 2006. Job-hopping in Silicon Valley: some evidence concerning the microfoundations of a high-technology cluster. The Review of Economics and Statistics. 88(3) 472-481. *
  • Class 11(12/14): Why is Venture Capital Important?
    • Samila, Sorenson, O. 2011. Venture capital, entrepreneurship, and economic growth. The Review of Economics and Statistics. 93(1) 338-349. *
    • N. Kaplan, Sensoy, B.A., Strömberg, P. 2009. Should investors bet on the jockey or the horse? Evidence from the evolution of firms from early business plans to public companies. The Journal of Finance. 64(1) 75-115. *
    • Hellmann, Schure, P., Vo, D. 2013. Angels and Venture Capitalists: Complements or Substitutes? NBER Working Paper. *
    • Da Rin, Hellmann, T.F., Puri, M. 2011. A survey of venture capital research. National Bureau of Economic Research.
  • Class 12(12/21): How Important are Incentives to Invent and Commercialize?
    • Azoulay, Graff Zivin, J.S., Manso, G. 2011. Incentives and creativity: evidence from the academic life sciences. The RAND Journal of Economics. 42(3) 527-554.
    • Lach, Schankerman, M. 2008. Incentives and invention in universities. Rand Journal of Economics. 39(2) 403-433.
    • Roach, Sauermann, H. 2010. A taste for science? PhD scientists’ academic orientation and self-selection into research careers in industry. Research Policy.
  • Class 13 (1/11): Are SBIR (Small Business Innovation Research) Awards Effective?
    • Lerner. 1996. The government as venture capitalist: The long-run effects of the SBIR program. National Bureau of Economic Research. *
    • Howell. 2014. Financing constraints as barriers to innovation: Evidence from R&D grants to energy startups. Working paper. *
    • J. Wallsten. 2000. The effects of government-industry R&D programs on private R&D: the case of the Small Business Innovation Research program. The RAND Journal of Economics 82-100. *
    • A. Toole, Czarnitzki, D. 2009. Exploring the relationship between scientist human capital and firm performance: The case of biomedical academic entrepreneurs in the SBIR program. Management Science. 55(1) 101-114.
    • B. Audretsch. 2003. Standing on the shoulders of midgets: The US Small Business Innovation Research program (SBIR). Small Business Economics. 20(2) 129-135
  • Class 14 (1/18):  Do University-based Startups Accelerate the Innovation?
    • Di Gregorio, Shane, S. 2003. Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? Research Policy. 32(2) 209-227.
    • Shane, Stuart, T. 2002. Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science. 48(1) 154-170.
    • Thursby, Fuller, A.W., Thursby, M. 2009. US faculty patenting: Inside and outside the university. Research Policy. 38(1) 14-25.
    • A. Shane. 2004. Academic entrepreneurship: University spinoffs and wealth creation. Edward Elgar Publishing. [Chap 1] [Chap 2]
  • Class 15 (1/25): Final Presentation / Wrap-up
  • I may cancel some of the sessions. In that case, there will be a make-up class on February 3rd or 5th, 2018.

[Other Topics May Be Covered or  Homework for Spring Vacation]

  • What is the Secret Recipe of Success of Silicon Valley? (July 25th, 2017)
    • Saxenian. 1990. Regional networks and the resurgence of Silicon Valley. California Management Review. 33(1) 89-112. *
    • Kenney, Von Burg, U. 1999. Technology, entrepreneurship and path dependence: industrial clustering in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Industrial and corporate change. 8(1) 67-103. *
    • Saxenian, A., and J. Y. Hsu. 2001. The Silicon Valley–Hsinchu connection: technical communities and industrial upgrading. Industrial and corporate change 10:893-920. *
    • Porter, Michael. 1998. “Clusters and the New Economics of Competition.” Harvard Business Review (November-December): 77-90.
  • The Role of Cluster: The Case Study of San Diego (July 4th, 2017)
    • Walshok, Shragge, A. 2013. Invention and reinvention: The evolution of San Diego’s innovation economy. Stanford University Press. [Chap1] *
    • Kenney, Mowery, D.C. 2014. Public Universities and Regional Growth: Insights from the University of California. Stanford Business Books. [Chap 3] *
    • Casper. 2007. How do technology clusters emerge and become sustainable?: Social network formation and inter-firm mobility within the San Diego biotechnology cluster. Research Policy. 36(4) 438-455. *
    • Kenney, Mowery, D.C. 2014. Public Universities and Regional Growth: Insights from the University of California. Stanford Business Books. [Chap 5]
  • Why is University Important for Entrepreneurship?
    • Kenney, Mowery, D.C. 2014. Public Universities and Regional Growth: Insights from the University of California. Stanford Business Books. [Chap 1]
    • Kenney, Mowery, D.C. 2014. Public Universities and Regional Growth: Insights from the University of California. Stanford Business Books. [Chap 4]
    • B. Adams. 2003. Regionalism in Stanford’s contribution to the rise of Silicon Valley. Enterprise & Society. 4(3) 521-543.
  • Is University-based Technology Transfer Office effective?
    • Kenney, Mowery, D.C. 2014. Public Universities and Regional Growth: Insights from the University of California. Stanford Business Books. [Chap 1]
    • E. Litan, Mitchell, L., Reedy, E. 2008. Commercializing university innovations: Alternative approaches. University of Chicago Press.
    • Thursby, Fuller, A.W., Thursby, M. 2009. US faculty patenting: Inside and outside the university. Research Policy. 38(1) 14-25.
  • Infrastructure and Innovation
    • Donaldson, D. 2010. Railroads of the Raj: Estimating the impact of transportation infrastructure. National Bureau of Economic Research.
    • Inoue, H., K. Nakajima, and Y. U. Saito. 2017. The Impact of the Opening of High-Speed Rail on Innovation. RIETI Discussion Paper Series 17-E-304. 10. *
  • Topics Based on Students’ Need
    • Hunt, Gauthier-Loiselle, M. 2009. How much does immigration boost innovation? [Immigration]
    • Roach, Sauermann, H. 2010. A taste for science? PhD scientists’ academic orientation and self-selection into research careers in industry. Research Policy. 39(3) 422-434. [Career of Scientists]
    • Bruhn, Karlan, D., Schoar, A. 2010. What capital is missing in developing countries? The American Economic Review. 100(2) 629-633. [Entrepreneurship in Developing Countries]

4. Materials

A carefully selected list of readings is provided. Hand-outs and materials will be distributed in the class. I will provide the PDF files of reading documents using Google Drive.

5. Classroom Procedure

  • The course meets 15 times for 90 minutes each time. Class sessions will begin and end on time. Please be punctual so that you do not miss the initial thrust of the discussions or disturb others. If you need to miss a class please email me in advance. Keep in mind class participation is part of your grade.
  • Each student is expected to have completed readings, assignments for each class before the class starts. Each student should be prepared and expect to participate in classroom discussions.

6. Class Participation

  • You are expected to read assignments and prepare answers to the preparation questions prior to class. Come to class prepared to discuss your findings.
  • Every class session will involve interaction in the form of class discussion. I expect each student to be prepared at all times to comment in any class session. To reinforce this expectation, I will randomly cold call on students during the ensuing discussion, both those who raise their hand and those who do not.
  • Many of the sessions of this class will follow the discussion format. This allows you to apply theories, concepts and analytical devices discussed in class or in the reading materials, or from other relevant current events or news sources.
  • The direction and quality of the discussion are the collective responsibility of the class, not the sole responsibility of the instructor. Class participation will be graded on your readiness, willingness and the quality of your comments and their contribution to the discussion.
  • You are expected to attend every class. You are responsible for the material covered in class whether you attend or not. I realize that despite your best efforts you might miss a class. Please inform me in advance if you miss a class. In case of emergencies, please contact me after the class.

7. Grading

  • Grading Rubrics
    • Class Participation – 25%
    • Summary of Reading Assignments – 25%
    • In-class Presentation of Reading Assignments – 25%
    • Mid-term/Final Presentation of Research Proposal – 25%
  • Explanation
    • The class participation is the 5-scale evaluation. The instructor evaluates individual students in each session. I expect students to prepare all of the reading assignments in each session (Use of class contribution sheet).
      • Class participation will be graded by not only the frequency of comments but also insight or value-added, divided by air time: Grade = Value Added / Air Time, which will be decided on the basis of the following considerations:
        • The clarity and quality of your comments to the specific issues being discussed.
        • The relevance of your remarks and continuity with the foregoing discussion.
        • The extent to which your remarks reflect original thinking, going beyond common knowledge.
        • Helping to keep the class discussions lively, focused, and constructive.
    • Students are required to hand-in the one-page summary (there will be a template) of one of the articles assigned. The instructor will assign which article to prepare.
    • In-class presentation of the paper is required. I expect students to conduct a presentation at least three times throughout the course (depends on the number of students).
    • Students are expected to generate their own research proposal (ideally for the master thesis). All students are required to present their research proposal twice in this course (mid-term and final).

[Auditing a Class]

  • When you audit this class, you are required to read at least of the reading assignments to be ready to contribute to the class discussion.

8. Course Policies: Laptop Computers/ Tablets / Smart Phones

In order to increase focus, use of Laptop Computers, Tablets, and/or Smart Phones will not be permitted during class sessions, except as directed in specific exercises. All class materials will be provided during the class.

9. Academic Integrity

The integrity of scholarship is essential for an academic community. As members of the WBS, we pledge ourselves to uphold the highest ethical standards. The University expects that both faculty and students will honor this principle and in so doing protect the validity of University intellectual work. For students, this means that all academic work will be done by the individual to whom it is assigned, without unauthorized aid of any kind.

[Honor Code in This Course]

You can work with anyone on class assignments.  I suggest that you work in study groups on homework assignments.
Your class preparation and assignments must not benefit from class materials by students who took this course in prior years, or at other schools. Using course notes, powerpoint slides, or quizzes you received from previous students of this class is a violation of the Honor Code.

10. Note

  • English will be used in the classroom.
  • If you have difficulties using in English, I am happy to assist you in Japanese during my office hours etc.