Study of the Administrative Barriers Influence on the Small Innovative Enterprises Activity of the RAS Institutes

The problem of inefficient activity of small innovative enterprises (SIE) is one of the reasons for the slow development of scientific institutions, including the RAS institutes. The state is gradually reducing their funding, forcing the management of institutions to seek the commercialization of the created intellectual property (IP). Many factors influence the activities of SIEs, such as legislative, personnel, financial, infrastructure, information and others, but administrative barriers are among the most significant. Within the framework of this study, the influence of each administrative factor on the activities of existing spin-off companies of RAS institutes is being studied. Among the main tasks of this work, a detailed analysis of Russian and foreign literature on the topic of research, the study of administrative barriers, as well as carrying an expert survey of the RAS institutes representatives in order to identify the most significant factors for the activities of SIEs can be mentioned. An expert poll was conducted by phone with a preliminarily prepared list of questions. Based on the results of the study, it can be concluded that it is exactly regulatory barriers, which require the most attention. This area demands to develop a measure set to improve their effectiveness. An important risk factor is the intellectual property weak protection, which not only deprives innovation of the opportunity to be realized, but also contributes to the leakage of technology. This problem is proposed to be solved by introducing a procedure for preliminary patent applications. In addition, it is important to continuously improve the level of knowledge in the field of patenting, intellectual property rights and entrepreneurship by research organizations. The abovementioned methods are only part of a large set of measures to reduce some of the administrative barriers in the process of commercializing innovation.

1. Melnikov K.V., Rybchak E. S. Problems of administrative barriers to the commercialization of intellectual property in the Russian Federation. EGO: Ekonomika. Gosudarstvo. Obshchestvo. 2012;2. URL: http://ego.uapa.ru/en/issue/2012/02/09/ (accessed 25.05.2018). (In Russ.)

2. Mazurkiewicz A., Poteralska B. Technology transfer barriers and challenges faced by R&D organisations. Procedia Engineering. 2017;182:457–465. DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.03.134

3. Mohannak K., Samtani L. A criteria-based approach for evaluating innovation commercialization. In: DRUID Society conf. 2014 on entrepreneurship-organization-innovation (Copenhagen, 16–18 June 2014). Copenhagen: CBS; 2014. URL: http://conference.druid.dk/acc_papers/i1xk9l9pli4jnefryvacrvpjdy22.pdf (accessed 10.06.2018).

4. Fici L., Malyzhenkov P. V., Piccarozzi M., Meleshina E. S. Spin-off design as an organizational practice: A methodological approach. Business Informatics. 2016;(3):7–14. DOI: 10.17323/1998-0663.2016.3.7.14

5. Conti G., Granieri M., Piccaluga A. La gestione del trasferimento tecnologico: Strategie, modelli e strumenti. Milano: Springer; 2011. 218 p. DOI: 10.1007/978–88–470–1902–7

6. Borges C., Filion L. J. Spin-off process and the development of academic entrepreneur’s social capital. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation. 2013;8(1):21–34. DOI: 10.4067/S0718-27242013000100003

7. Bozeman B., Rimes H., Youtie J. The evolving state-of-the-art in technology transfer research: Revisiting the effectiveness contingent model. Research Policy. 2015;44:34–49. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.06.008

8. Grasmik K. Spin-off as an indicator of regional innovation network development. Triple Helix. A Journal of University-Industry-Government Innovation and Entrepreneurship 2015;2:10. DOI: 10.1186/s40604-015-0022-5

9. Ivashchenko N. P., Pospelova T. V., Engovatova A. A. University innovation infrastructure model as a key part of a territoral cluster. MIR (Modernizatsiya. Innovatsii. Razvitie) = MIR (Modernization. Innovation. Development). 2015;6(2–2):32–40.

10. Porkhun E. Yu. The possibility of applying models of “spin-off” and “spin-out” in the organization of innovative companies. Kreativnaya ekonomika = Journal of Creative Economy. 2011;(5):103–108. (In Russ.).

11. Pattnaik P. N., Pandey S. C. University spinoffs: What, why, and how? Technology Innovation Management Review. 2014;4(12):44–50.

12. Auzan A., Kryuchkova P. Administrative barriers in the economy: The task of deblocking. Voprosy ekonomiki. 2001;(5):73–88. (In Russ.).

13. Malikov R. I., Grishin K. Е. The level of administrative barriers as an indicator of the quality of interaction between power and entrepreneurial structures. Vestnik UGUES. Nauka, obrazovanie, ekonomika. Seriya: Ekonomika. 2013;4:55–65. (In Russ.).

14. Pellikka J., Malinen P. Business models in the commercialization processes of innovation among small hightechnology firms. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management. 2014;11(02):1450007–1– 1450007–20. DOI: 10.1142/S0219877014500072

15. Ugnich E. A., Izotov M. A., Voloshchenko I. I. Commercialization of the results of intellectual activity in universities: The concept of an innovative ecosystem. Internet-zhurnal “Naukovedenie”. 2015;7(4):48. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.15862/30EVN415

16. Grasmik K. I., Khamazina A. M. University spin-off: What affects its creation and growth. Vestnik Tikhookeanskogo gosudarstvennogo ekonomicheskogo universiteta. 2016;(3):76–85. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.163555

17. Smith M.A., Cousté M., Hield T., Jarvis R., Kochupillai M., Leon B., Rasser J. C., Sakamoto M., Shaughnessy A., Branch J. Arbitration of patent infringement and validity issues worldwide. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology. 2006;19(2):259–357.

18. Zahra S. A., Van de Velde E., Larrañeta B. Knowledge conversion capability and the performance of corporate and university spin-offs. Industrial and Corporate Change. 2007;16(4):569–608. DOI: 10.1093/icc/dtm018

19. Klyucharev G. A., Chursina A.V. Small scientifi enterprises as a factor in the competition of universities. Vestnik instituta sotsiologii = Bulletin of the Institute of Sociology. 2017;8(3):69–97. DOI: 10.19181/vis.2017.22.3.471 (In Russ.).

20. Huang X., Chi R. Innovation in China’s high-tech industries: barriers and their impact on innovation performance. International Journal of Technology Management. 2013;62(1):35–55. DOI: 10.1504/IJTM.2013.053044

21. Narovlyanskaya T.N., Kartasheva V. K. Specifi y of administrative barriers as special institutions and their impact on the development of small and medium-sized businesses. Ekonomicheskie nauki = Economic Sciences. 2015;(128):15–21. (In Russ.).

22. Pozhidaeva S. V. Administrative barriers to small businesses and their costs of overcoming. Vestnik Rostovskogo gosudarstvennogo ekonomicheskogo universiteta (RINKh) = Vestnik of Rostov State University of Economics. 2008;(1):78–83. (In Russ.).

23. Manushin D. V. Administrative barriers in the Russian economy as the conditions promoting corruption, and measures for their elimination. Aktual’nye problemy ekonomiki i prava = Actual Problems of Economics and Law. 2014;(4):52–60. (In Russ.).

24. Stupina D. D. Administrative barriers in the institution of entrepreneurship of the Russian Federation and their organizational and legal nature. Novyi vzglyad. Mezhdunarodnyi nauchnyi vestnik. 2016;(15):51–61. (In Russ.).

25. Cervantes M. Higher education institutions in the knowledge triangle. Foresight and STI Governance. 2017;11(2):27–42.

26. Beginina I.A., Ivchenkov S. G., Malinsky I. G. Administrative barriers restricting competition in the Saratov region: The opinion of entrepreneurs. Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaya seriya. Seriya: Sotsiologiya. Politologiya = Izvestia of Saratov University. New Series. Series: Sociology. Politology. 2016;16(4):371–378. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.18500/1818-9601-2016-16-4-371-378