Monday 4 August 2014

The Top University Business Incubators

The UBI Index, based in Stockholm, Sweden, released its University Business Incubator Rankings for 2014.  The UBI Index apparently offers several different rankings based on the nature of the relationship (or lack of one) between the university and the incubator.  What is a “university business incubator?”  A “University Business Incubator” is defined as an incubator with the following characteristics:

·         Managed (by) or affiliated to university(ies)

·         Primary objective to facilitate entrepreneurship and support early stage (new) ventures through a systematic (mid-long term) and extensive incubation process that includes services and infrastructure

·         Quality controlled intake of clients (startups) and regular time bound exits in form of graduate startup clients

The definition also includes “Business Innovation Centers” as well as “Business Accelerators.”  The main ranking, which is based on information submitted by around 300 university business incubators from 67 countries, is the “University Business Incubator Rankings.”  Here are the top 15 university business incubators:
1
Rice Alliance for Technology and Entrepreneurship
Rice University
United States
2
SETsquared
University of Bath, Bristol, Exeter, Southampton, Surrey
United Kingdom
3
SCUT National University Science Park
South China University of Technology
China
4
ATP Innovations
University of Sydney; University of Technology, Sydney; Australian National University; University of New South Wales
Australia
5
Digital Media Zone
Ryerson University
Canada
6
IncubaUC
Pontifical Catholic University of Chile
Chile
7
Center of Industry Accelerator and Patent Strategy
National Chiao Tung University
Taiwan
8
Encubator
Chalmers University of Technology
Sweden
9
Instituto Genesis PUC-Rio
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro
Brazil
10
TEC Edmonton
University of Alberta
Canada
11
INiTS Universitäres Gründerservice Wien
Vienna University of Technology, Vienna University “Alma Mater Rudolphina”
Austria
12
DTU Symbion Innovation
Technical University of Denmark
Denmark
13
Melbourne Accelerator Program
University of Melbourne
Australia
14
Hust Science Park Development Corporation
Huazhong University of Science and Technology
China
15
Incubatore di Imprese Innovative del Politecnico di Torino (I3P)
Politecnico di Torino
Italy

 The rankings are based on an analysis of three performance categories that ultimately rest on over 60 “key performance indicators”.  The three performance categories include: “A, its contribution to the ecosystem; B, its value to the startup clients; and C, its attractiveness quotient.”  The “value to the ecosystem” examines factors such as “jobs created by the startup” and “sales revenue of client startups.”  The “value for the client” includes:

Important indicators measured such as number and activity of mentors and coaches, VC and angel funding availability, the investor network, network of sponsors & partners, the network relationships with large corporations; government; business providers and the size of the alumni network.

The “attractiveness quotient” includes: “investment in client startup” as well as “equity stake.” More information concerning the methodology used can be found here.  Besides the rankings, UBI Index also offers a best practices document for university business incubators as well as consulting services. 

Recently, I wrote on developing new metrics for measuring the success of technology transfer offices, here.  Would technology transfer offices benefit from a similar type of ranking offered by UBI Index (does one exist already)?  Could this be another helpful place to find additional metrics?  In addition, what is the relationship between a well-functioning incubator (or a poorly functioning one) and the success of a technology transfer office? 

1 comment:

  1. Goodness, everything is so expensive on the UBI website!

    I think what is needed is an analysis of the tech transfer offices that have failed to really learn the lessons of how to do it. I think the universities doing ground breaking research end up with patents with broad claims and that makes a big difference.

    ReplyDelete