Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities

Victor Mignenan

doi:doi:10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17

| Peer-Reviewed

Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities

Victor Mignenan

Published in Science Journal of Business and Management (Volume 9, Issue 2)

Received: 25 May 2021 Accepted: 9 June 2021 Published: 21 June 2021

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The research on intellectual capital carried out so far for the academic entrepreneurial development is few but has clearly shown its importance. However, the overall contribution of intellectual capital to the performance of academic entrepreneurial projects of both technologies, social and environmental or university spin-offs remains little studied. Even studies carried out on this subject, often, focus only on a single component and favor, for the most part, the quantitative approach. This posture does not allow us to understand which of the three components of intellectual capital is the best predictor of academic entrepreneurial performance. Thus, the results of these previous studies provide little information on how to increase entrepreneurship by mobilizing intellectual capital. To fill these gray areas and facilitate an understanding of the causal link between intellectual capital and academic entrepreneurial performance, a semi-structured interview of eleven entrepreneurs and a survey of 278 researchers and students from four Chadian universities were conducted. The research process was mixed. We used an approach that focused on both economic/financial entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship (which is part of the obligations of Chadian universities) and societal/environmental entrepreneurship. During data production, we have put forward the criterion of participation of the actor (researcher-student-practitioner) in the various phases of activities in the process of implementation of entrepreneurship. Our results have shown that human capital (R²= 0.21) and relational capital (R²= 0.29) are the best predictors of academic entrepreneurial performance. It is mainly relational capital that contributes mainly (b = 31%) academic entrepreneurial performance. These results are explained by the fact that human capital and relational capital are deployed for the purposes of creativity, contact, creation of business networks, etc., while structural capital plays an essential role in the credibility and influence of universities. Finally, it is the combination of the three components of intellectual capital that plays a decisive role (R²= 0.85) in achieving academic entrepreneurial performance. Thus, universities are invited to revitalize their network of actors, to promote collaborative research, to advocate the agile approach and to enrich their human capital so that it fulfills its mission as an open innovation subject, without neglecting their capital structure for its undeniable support role.

Published in	Science Journal of Business and Management (Volume 9, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17
Page(s)	103-118
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Management, Intellectual Capital, Entrepreneurship, Performance, University

References

[1]	Nakagawa, K., et al., A University–Industry Collaborative Entrepreneurship Education Program as a Trading Zone: The Case of Osaka University. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2017. 7 (6): p. 1-13.
[2]	Scandura, A., University–industry collaboration and firms’ R & D effort. Research Policy, 2016. 45 (2016): p. 1907–1922.
[3]	Bessieux-Ollier, C. and É. Walliser, Le capital immatériel État des lieux et perspectives. Revue française de gestion 2010. 2010 (207): p. pages 85 à 92.
[4]	Damsgaard, E. F. r. and M. Thursby, University entrepreneurship and professor privilege. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2013. 22 (1): p. 183–218.
[5]	Garel, G. and E. Mock, The Innovation Factory. 2016.
[6]	Abbadi, N., Transfert des technologies. Quel model pour l’Afrique ? Triennale de l’éducation et formation en Afrique, Association pour le développement de l’éducation en Afrique (ADEA), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, 2012. 2012: p. p. 1-30.
[7]	Bug, A. and D. Randet, Valorisation économique de la recherche publique. ANRT-Valoris-FutuRIS, 2009. 29/09/2009 (2009): p. p. 1-19.
[8]	Yaseen, S., D. Dajani, and Y. Hasan, The impact of intellectual capital on the competitive advantage: Applied study in Jordanian telecommunication companies. Computers in Human Behavior 2016. 62 (2016): p. 168-175.
[9]	Abdullaha, D. F. and S. Sofiana, The Relationship between Intellectual Capital and Corporate Performance. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2012. 40 (2012): p. 537-541.
[10]	Nakagawa, K., et al., A University–Industry Collaborative Entrepreneurship Education Program as a Trading Zone: The Case of Osaka University. Technology Innovation Management Review 2017. 7 (6): p. 38-49.
[11]	Bardinet-Evraert, F., Capital intellectuel, gouvernance et facteurs institutionnels Dans Variations autour des PME et entreprises de taille intermédiaire EMS 2019 (2019): p. 127 à 135.
[12]	Berzkalnea, I. and E. Zelgalve, Intellectual capital and company value. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2014. 110 (2014): p. 887-896.
[13]	Aramburu, N. and J. Saenz, Structural capital, innovation capability, and size effect: An empirical study. Journal of Management & Organization, 2011. 17 (2011): p. 307–325.
[14]	Cadet, I., La mesure du capital humain: comment évaluer un oxymore? du risque épistémologique à l'idéologie de la certification. Question(s) de management 2014. 1 (5): p. 11-32.
[15]	Marvel, M., Human Capital and Search-Based Discovery: A Study of High-Tech Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 2013. 10 (2013): p. 403-419.
[16]	Unger, J., et al., Human capital and entrepreneurial success: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Business Venturing, 2011. 26 (2011): p. 341–358.
[17]	Ahmad, S. b. and A. M. Mushraf, The Relationship between Intellectual capital and Business Performance: An empirical study in Iraqi industry. International Conference on Management and Artificial Intelligence 2011 (2011): p. 1-6.
[18]	AL-Duajaili, M. A. A., Influence of Intellectual Capital in the Organizational Innovation. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology., 2012. 3 (2): p. 128-135.
[19]	Brulhart, F., G. Guieu, and L. Maltese, Théories des ressources: Débats théoriques et applicabilités. Revue française de gestion, 2010. 5 (204): p. 83 à 86.
[20]	Maltseva, A., Intellectual capital of universities and regions: a qualitative analysis of mutual influence’s directions. Revista ESPACIOS, 2018. 39 (20): p. 18-31.
[21]	Zerenler, M., S. B. Hasiloglu, and M. Sezgin, Intellectual Capital and Innovation Performance: Empirical Evidence in the Turkish Automotive Supplier. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 2008. 3 (4): p. 31-40.
[22]	Nhon, H. T., B. Q. Thong, and N. V. Phuong, The impact of intellectuel capital dimensions on vietnamese information communication technology performance: a mediation analysis of human and social capital. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 2018. 17 (1): p. 1-15.
[23]	Nyeko, K. E. and N. K. Sing, Academic Entrepreneurs and Entrepreneurial Academics: Are They the Same. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 2015. 5 (12): p. 1-6.
[24]	Libecap, G., University entrepreneurship and technology transfer: process, design, and intellectual property. Elsevier -The University of Arizona, USA, 2005. 1 (2005): p. 335.
[25]	Wright, M., S. Mosey, and H. Noke, Academic entrepreneurship and economic competitiveness: rethinking the role of the entrepreneur. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 2012. 21 (5-6): p. 429-444.
[26]	Wiguna, A. B. and A. Manzilati, Social Entrepreneurship and Socio-entrepreneurship: A Study with Economic and Social Perspective. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2014. 115 (2014): p. 12-18
[27]	Jones, A. L., B. Warner, and P. Kiser, Social Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 2010. 23 (2010): p. 1-9.
[28]	Schieb-Bienfait, N. and C. Urbain, L’entrepreneuriat social, une autre façon d’entreprendre ? Une étude exploratoire sur l’émergence organisationnelle dans l’univers des services à domicile aux personnes âgées. Revue internationale de l'économie sociale, 2004 (293): p. 68–92.
[29]	Valéau, P. and J. Boncler, Social entrepreneurship. Revue Interdisciplinaire Management, Homme & Entreprise », 2013. 2013 (9): p. 46 à 64.
[30]	Juma, N. A., C. James, and E. Kwesiga, Sustainable entrepreneurship in Sub-Saharan Africa: the collaborative multi-system model. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 2017. 29 (3): p. 211-235.
[31]	Klein, D. A. and L. Prusak, Characterizing Intellectual Capital. Centre for business innovation, 1994.
[32]	Nonaka, I. and H. Takeuchi, The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995.
[33]	Bontis, N., Intellectual Capital Disclosure in Canadian Corporations Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting., 2002. 2 (2003): p. 1-16.
[34]	Boujelbene, M. A. and H. Affes, Perception du capital intellectuel par les managers: étude empirique dans le contexte tunisien. Comptabilité sans Frontières., 2014. 34 (2014): p. 1-32.
[35]	Chen, J., Z. Zhu, and H. Y. Xie, Measuring intellectual capital: a new model and empirical study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2004. 5 (1): p. 195-208.
[36]	Meles, A., et al., The impact of the intellectual capital efficiency on commercial banks performance: Evidence from the US. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 2016. 36 (2016): p. 64–74.
[37]	Bouteiller, D., et al., Capital humain et performance(s). Cadres théoriques et protocoles de mesure. HEC Montréal, 2013. 2013: p. 241.
[38]	OCDE, L’investissement dans le capital humain: Une comparaison internationale. OCDE, 1998. 1998: p. 121.
[39]	Keeley, B., Le capital humain: comment le savoir déterminer ? LES ESSENTIELS DE L’OCDE, 2004 (2004): p. 163.
[40]	Yaroson, E. V., N. G. Esew, and A. B. Abdul-Qadir, Human capital development in Nigeria: an empirical assessment on the impact of corruption. African J. Economic and Sustainable Development, 2017. 6 (1): p. 86-103.
[41]	Ugalde-BindaI, N., et al., The role of intellectual capital and entrepreneurial characteristics as innovation drivers. Innovar, 2013. 24 (53): p. 41-60.
[42]	Rodriguez, J. P. and S. R. Loomis, A new view of institutions, human capital, and market standardisation. Education, Knowledge and Economy, 2007. 1 (1): p. 93-105.
[43]	Borges, C. and L. J. Filion, Essaimage universitaire et capital social entrepreneurial. Revue de l’Entrepreneuriat 2016. 15 (2): p. 43 à 73.
[44]	Ordóñez de Pablos, P., Intellectual capital reporting in Spain: a comparative view. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2003. 4 (1): p. 61-81.
[45]	Welbourne, T. and M. Pardo-del-Val, Relational Capital: Strategic Advantage for Small and Medium-Size Enterprises (SMEs) Through Negotiation and Collaboration. Group Decis Negot 2009. 18 (2009): p. 483–497.
[46]	Ramírez, Y., M. Manzaneque, and A. M. Priego, La formulation et le développement d’un modèle de mesure du capital intellectuel dans les universités publiques espagnoles. Revue Internationale des Sciences Administratives, 2017. 83 (1): p. 155 à 179.
[47]	Dagenais, C. and M. Janosz, Études des besoins de chercheurs de l'université de Montréal en matière de transfert de connaissances issues de la recherche. Université de Montréal, 2008 (2008): p. 1-96.
[48]	Mignon, S. and É. Walliser, Éditorial. Connaissances, capital intellectuel et management de l’innovation. Innovations, 2015. 2 (47): p. pages 5 à 13.
[49]	Pépin, M., M. Tremblay, and L. Auderbrand, L’entrepreneuriat responsable: cadre conceptuel et implications pour la formation. Université de Laval, conférence annuelle du Conseil canadien sur les PME et l’entrepreneuriat, mai 2017, 2017. 2017: p. 1-19.
[50]	Kalkan, A., Ö. Ç. Bozkurtb, and M. Arman, The impacts of intellectual capital, innovation and organizational strategy on firm performance. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2014. 150 (2014): p. 700-707.
[51]	Praag, M. v., Entrepreneurship and Human Capital. Amsterdam Center for Entrepreneurship, 2006 (2006): p. 1-84.
[52]	Hashima, M. J., I. Osmanb, and S. M. Alhabshic, Effect of Intellectual Capital on Organizational Performance. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2015. 211 (2015): p. 207-214.
[53]	Lev, B. and D. Han, The Relationship between Intellectual Capital and Corporate Performance in Chinese Bio-pharmaceutical Industry. SHS Web of Conferences., 2015. 0102 (2015): p. 1-7.
[54]	Maboudi, M., et al., The Effect of Intellectual Capital on Innovation: A Case Study of an Institute for Advanced Studies in Basic Sciences Located in the Science and Technology Park of Zanjan.. Journal of Entrepreneurship & Organization Management, 2015. 4 (148): p. 111-123.
[55]	Chandra, Y., Social entrepreneurship as emancipatory work. Journal of Business Venturing, 2017. 32 (2017): p. 657–673.
[56]	CNUCED, L’entreprenariat au service de la transformation structurelle: Changer de cap. CNUCED (Nations Unies): RAPPORT 2018 SUR LES PAYSLES MOINS AVANCÉS, 2018 (2018): p. 1-17.
[57]	Naneix, C., La promotion de l’entreprenariat vert et de l’éco-innovation sociale au Maroc: État des lieux et recommandations des parties prenantes. switchmed, 2017 (2017): p. 38.
[58]	Youssef, A. B. H. and M. Dziri, L'entrepreneuriat vert: mécanismes de mise en oeuvre et motivations en tunisie (cas d'un pays émergent). Vie & sciences de l'entreprise, 2012. 1992 (191): p. 59 à 77.
[59]	Floyd, S. W. and B. Wooldridge, Knowledge creation and social networks in corporate entrepreneurship: The renewal of organizational capability. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 1999. 23 (3): p. 123-143.
[60]	Zahra, S., A. Nielsen, and W. Bogner, Corporate Entrepreneurship, Knowledge, and Competence Development. Sage Journal, 1999. 23 (3): p. 169-189.
[61]	Barney, J., Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 1991. 17 (1): p. 99-120.
[62]	Barney, J., Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A tenyear retrospective on the resource-based view. Journal of Management 2001. 27 (2001): p. 643–650.
[63]	Wernerfelt, B., A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 1984. 5 (2): p. 171-180.
[64]	Bornard, F. and C.-N. Briest-Breda, Développer l'esprit d'entreprendre, une question d'agilité. Revue de l’Entrepreneuriat, 2014. 13 (2): p. pages 29 à 53.
[65]	Legras, S., L'agilité, nouvelle transformation pour l'entreprise. Documentaliste-Sciences de l'Information, 2014. 51 (4): p. 4 à 6.
[66]	Al-Duaili, M. A. A., Influence of Intellectual Capital in the Organizational Innovation. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 2012. 3 (2): p. 128-135.
[67]	Bozeman, B., D. Fay, and C. Slade, Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art. J Technol Transf, 2013. 38 (2013): p. 1–67.
[68]	Lazega, E. and É. P. Icher, Réseaux sociaux et coopération entre concurrents C. N. R. S. Editions \| « Hermès, La Revue », 2011. 1 (59): p. 43 à 49.
[69]	Obstfeld, D., Social Networks, the Tertius lungens Orientation, and Involvement in Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2005. 50 (2005): p. 100-130.
[70]	Singh, P. V., Y. Tan, and V. Mookerjee, Network effects: the influence of structural capital on open source project success. MIS Quarterly, 2011. 35 (4): p. pp. 813-829.
[71]	Corner, P. D. and S. Wu, Dynamic capability emergence in the venture creation process. International Small Business Journal, 2012. 2012: p. 1-24.
[72]	Lichtenthaler, U. and M. Muethel, The Impact of Family Involvement on Dynamic Innovation Capabilities: Evidence From German Manufacturing Firms. ENTREPRENEURSHIP THEORY and PRACTICE, 2012. 2012: p. 1235-1253.
[73]	Ramírez, Y., M. Manzaneque, and A. M. Priego, La formulation et le développement d'un modèle de mesure du capital intellectuel dans les universités publiques espagnoles. Revue Internationale des Sciences Administratives 2017. 83 (2017): p. pages 155 à 179.
[74]	Châteauneuf-Malclès, A., LE CAPITAL HUMAIN, une source de compétitivité délaissée ? Idées économiques et sociales 2016. 2 (184): p. pages 25 à 34.
[75]	Mengistae, T., Competition and entrepreneurs' human capital in small business longevity and growth Taye Mengistae. The Journal of Development Studies, 2006. 42 (5): p. 812–836.
[76]	Vinokur, A., Pourquoi le "capital" humain ? L’Harmattan., 2014 (2014): p. 1-11.
[77]	OCDE, Nouvelle source de croissance: le capital intellectuel, analyses de base et conclusion pour l'action gouvernementale. OCDE, 2013. 2013: p. 73.
[78]	Bourgault, P., et al., Le devis mixte en sciences infirmières ou quand une question de recherche appelle des stratégies qualitatives et quantitatives. Association de recherche en soins infirmiers, 2010. 4 (103): p. pages 20 à 28.
[79]	Molina-Azorin, J. F., Mixed Methods Research in Strategic Management: Impact and Applications. Organizational Research Methods, 2012. 15 (1): p. pp. 33-56.
[80]	Evrard, Y., et al., Market - Fondements et méthodes de recherches en marketing. 2009.
[81]	Gogan, L.-M. and A. Draghici, A model to evaluate the intellectual capital. Procedia Technology 2013. 9 (2013): p. 867-875.
[82]	Cappelletti, L., Vers un modèle socio-économique de mesure du capital humain? Revue française de gestion, 2010. 8 (207): p. 139 à 152.
[83]	Moon, Y. J. and H. G. Kym, A model for value of intellectuel capital. Revue canadienne de science de l'administration, 2006. 23 (3): p. 253-269.
[84]	Guerrero, M., et al., Entrepreneurial universities: emerging models in the new social and economic landscape. Small Bus Econ, 2016. 47 (2016): p. 551–563.
[85]	PAUL, B., Université et entrepreneuriat en Haïti MPRA, 2012. 2012 (39015): p. 1-11.
[86]	Igalens, J. and P. Roussel, Méthodes de recherche en gestion des ressources humaines. Économica, 1998. 1998: p. 207p.
[87]	Armstrong, S. and T. Overton, Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 1977. 14: p. 396-402.
[88]	Becker, G. S., Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education University of Chicago Press., 2009.
[89]	Crook, T. R., et al., Does human capital matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between human capital and firm performance. Journal Application Psychologic, 2011. 96 (3): p. 443-56.
[90]	Essayie, F. and B. Buclet, Programme sur l'Innovation, l'Enseignement Supérieur et Recherche pour le Développement (IHERD): 8-9 octobre 2013, Dakar, Sénégal. OCDE, 2013. 2013: p. 1-51.
[91]	Alain, M., Les us et abus dans l'application de la régression multiple en sciences humaines. Les éditions SMG, 2004. 2004: p. 110 p.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Victor Mignenan. (2021). Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities. Science Journal of Business and Management, 9(2), 103-118. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Victor Mignenan. Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities. Sci. J. Bus. Manag. 2021, 9(2), 103-118. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Victor Mignenan. Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities. Sci J Bus Manag. 2021;9(2):103-118. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17,
  author = {Victor Mignenan},
  title = {Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities},
  journal = {Science Journal of Business and Management},
  volume = {9},
  number = {2},
  pages = {103-118},
  doi = {10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sjbm.20210902.17},
  abstract = {The research on intellectual capital carried out so far for the academic entrepreneurial development is few but has clearly shown its importance. However, the overall contribution of intellectual capital to the performance of academic entrepreneurial projects of both technologies, social and environmental or university spin-offs remains little studied. Even studies carried out on this subject, often, focus only on a single component and favor, for the most part, the quantitative approach. This posture does not allow us to understand which of the three components of intellectual capital is the best predictor of academic entrepreneurial performance. Thus, the results of these previous studies provide little information on how to increase entrepreneurship by mobilizing intellectual capital. To fill these gray areas and facilitate an understanding of the causal link between intellectual capital and academic entrepreneurial performance, a semi-structured interview of eleven entrepreneurs and a survey of 278 researchers and students from four Chadian universities were conducted. The research process was mixed. We used an approach that focused on both economic/financial entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship (which is part of the obligations of Chadian universities) and societal/environmental entrepreneurship. During data production, we have put forward the criterion of participation of the actor (researcher-student-practitioner) in the various phases of activities in the process of implementation of entrepreneurship. Our results have shown that human capital (R2 = 0.21) and relational capital (R2= 0.29) are the best predictors of academic entrepreneurial performance. It is mainly relational capital that contributes mainly (b = 31%) academic entrepreneurial performance. These results are explained by the fact that human capital and relational capital are deployed for the purposes of creativity, contact, creation of business networks, etc., while structural capital plays an essential role in the credibility and influence of universities. Finally, it is the combination of the three components of intellectual capital that plays a decisive role (R2 = 0.85) in achieving academic entrepreneurial performance. Thus, universities are invited to revitalize their network of actors, to promote collaborative research, to advocate the agile approach and to enrich their human capital so that it fulfills its mission as an open innovation subject, without neglecting their capital structure for its undeniable support role.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities
AU  - Victor Mignenan
Y1  - 2021/06/21
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17
DO  - 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17
T2  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JF  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JO  - Science Journal of Business and Management
SP  - 103
EP  - 118
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0634
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17
AB  - The research on intellectual capital carried out so far for the academic entrepreneurial development is few but has clearly shown its importance. However, the overall contribution of intellectual capital to the performance of academic entrepreneurial projects of both technologies, social and environmental or university spin-offs remains little studied. Even studies carried out on this subject, often, focus only on a single component and favor, for the most part, the quantitative approach. This posture does not allow us to understand which of the three components of intellectual capital is the best predictor of academic entrepreneurial performance. Thus, the results of these previous studies provide little information on how to increase entrepreneurship by mobilizing intellectual capital. To fill these gray areas and facilitate an understanding of the causal link between intellectual capital and academic entrepreneurial performance, a semi-structured interview of eleven entrepreneurs and a survey of 278 researchers and students from four Chadian universities were conducted. The research process was mixed. We used an approach that focused on both economic/financial entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship (which is part of the obligations of Chadian universities) and societal/environmental entrepreneurship. During data production, we have put forward the criterion of participation of the actor (researcher-student-practitioner) in the various phases of activities in the process of implementation of entrepreneurship. Our results have shown that human capital (R2 = 0.21) and relational capital (R2= 0.29) are the best predictors of academic entrepreneurial performance. It is mainly relational capital that contributes mainly (b = 31%) academic entrepreneurial performance. These results are explained by the fact that human capital and relational capital are deployed for the purposes of creativity, contact, creation of business networks, etc., while structural capital plays an essential role in the credibility and influence of universities. Finally, it is the combination of the three components of intellectual capital that plays a decisive role (R2 = 0.85) in achieving academic entrepreneurial performance. Thus, universities are invited to revitalize their network of actors, to promote collaborative research, to advocate the agile approach and to enrich their human capital so that it fulfills its mission as an open innovation subject, without neglecting their capital structure for its undeniable support role.
VL  - 9
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Victor Mignenan

Department of Management, Faculty of Business Sciences and Techniques, University of Moundou, Moundou, Chad

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Victor Mignenan. (2021). Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities. Science Journal of Business and Management, 9(2), 103-118. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Victor Mignenan. Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities. Sci. J. Bus. Manag. 2021, 9(2), 103-118. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Victor Mignenan. Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities. Sci J Bus Manag. 2021;9(2):103-118. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17,
  author = {Victor Mignenan},
  title = {Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities},
  journal = {Science Journal of Business and Management},
  volume = {9},
  number = {2},
  pages = {103-118},
  doi = {10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sjbm.20210902.17},
  abstract = {The research on intellectual capital carried out so far for the academic entrepreneurial development is few but has clearly shown its importance. However, the overall contribution of intellectual capital to the performance of academic entrepreneurial projects of both technologies, social and environmental or university spin-offs remains little studied. Even studies carried out on this subject, often, focus only on a single component and favor, for the most part, the quantitative approach. This posture does not allow us to understand which of the three components of intellectual capital is the best predictor of academic entrepreneurial performance. Thus, the results of these previous studies provide little information on how to increase entrepreneurship by mobilizing intellectual capital. To fill these gray areas and facilitate an understanding of the causal link between intellectual capital and academic entrepreneurial performance, a semi-structured interview of eleven entrepreneurs and a survey of 278 researchers and students from four Chadian universities were conducted. The research process was mixed. We used an approach that focused on both economic/financial entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship (which is part of the obligations of Chadian universities) and societal/environmental entrepreneurship. During data production, we have put forward the criterion of participation of the actor (researcher-student-practitioner) in the various phases of activities in the process of implementation of entrepreneurship. Our results have shown that human capital (R2 = 0.21) and relational capital (R2= 0.29) are the best predictors of academic entrepreneurial performance. It is mainly relational capital that contributes mainly (b = 31%) academic entrepreneurial performance. These results are explained by the fact that human capital and relational capital are deployed for the purposes of creativity, contact, creation of business networks, etc., while structural capital plays an essential role in the credibility and influence of universities. Finally, it is the combination of the three components of intellectual capital that plays a decisive role (R2 = 0.85) in achieving academic entrepreneurial performance. Thus, universities are invited to revitalize their network of actors, to promote collaborative research, to advocate the agile approach and to enrich their human capital so that it fulfills its mission as an open innovation subject, without neglecting their capital structure for its undeniable support role.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Collective Intelligence and University Entrepreneurial Performance: An Exploratory Study Among Teacher Researchers and Students from Chadian Universities
AU  - Victor Mignenan
Y1  - 2021/06/21
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17
DO  - 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17
T2  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JF  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JO  - Science Journal of Business and Management
SP  - 103
EP  - 118
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0634
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210902.17
AB  - The research on intellectual capital carried out so far for the academic entrepreneurial development is few but has clearly shown its importance. However, the overall contribution of intellectual capital to the performance of academic entrepreneurial projects of both technologies, social and environmental or university spin-offs remains little studied. Even studies carried out on this subject, often, focus only on a single component and favor, for the most part, the quantitative approach. This posture does not allow us to understand which of the three components of intellectual capital is the best predictor of academic entrepreneurial performance. Thus, the results of these previous studies provide little information on how to increase entrepreneurship by mobilizing intellectual capital. To fill these gray areas and facilitate an understanding of the causal link between intellectual capital and academic entrepreneurial performance, a semi-structured interview of eleven entrepreneurs and a survey of 278 researchers and students from four Chadian universities were conducted. The research process was mixed. We used an approach that focused on both economic/financial entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship (which is part of the obligations of Chadian universities) and societal/environmental entrepreneurship. During data production, we have put forward the criterion of participation of the actor (researcher-student-practitioner) in the various phases of activities in the process of implementation of entrepreneurship. Our results have shown that human capital (R2 = 0.21) and relational capital (R2= 0.29) are the best predictors of academic entrepreneurial performance. It is mainly relational capital that contributes mainly (b = 31%) academic entrepreneurial performance. These results are explained by the fact that human capital and relational capital are deployed for the purposes of creativity, contact, creation of business networks, etc., while structural capital plays an essential role in the credibility and influence of universities. Finally, it is the combination of the three components of intellectual capital that plays a decisive role (R2 = 0.85) in achieving academic entrepreneurial performance. Thus, universities are invited to revitalize their network of actors, to promote collaborative research, to advocate the agile approach and to enrich their human capital so that it fulfills its mission as an open innovation subject, without neglecting their capital structure for its undeniable support role.
VL  - 9
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download