@article {598, title = {Relatedness in the implementation of Smart Specialisation Strategy: a first empirical assessment}, journal = {Papers in Regional Science}, volume = {99}, year = {2020}, pages = {405-425}, publisher = {Blackwell Publishing Ltd}, abstract = {Smart Specialisation Strategy required regional authorities to identify technological domains where to concentrate investment in R\&D and innovation. Their choices should originate from an analysis of regional strengths, aiming to identify those domains with the greatest potential for innovation and diversification. This paper aim to assess the degree of relatedness between chosen technological domains. We use patent data to categorize technological domains and the revealed associations methodology to measure their degree of relatedness. We find that the choices made by Italian regions show a significant higher relatedness as compared to a random choice, though with notable exceptions. {\textcopyright} 2019 The Author(s). Papers in Regional Science {\textcopyright} 2019 RSAI}, keywords = {assessment method, development strategy, Innovation, policy implementation, regional development, specialization, technology policy}, issn = {10568190}, doi = {10.1111/pirs.12492}, url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85076927157\&doi=10.1111\%2fpirs.12492\&partnerID=40\&md5=0915eca9a188b2df44da9945d6c2c4bd}, author = {D{\textquoteright}Adda, D. and Iacobucci, D. and Palloni, R.} } @article {580, title = {Is Smart Specialisation Strategy coherent with regional innovative capabilities?}, journal = {Regional Studies}, volume = {53}, year = {2019}, pages = {1004-1016}, publisher = {Routledge}, abstract = {

The implementation of the Smart Specialisation Strategy (S3) has required European regions to identify the technological domains in which they show superior innovative capabilities. This choice should promote specialization and facilitate diversification into new sectors. Given that regional specialization shows path dependence, successful diversification can be achieved in domains closely related to the existing knowledge base. The paper provides a first empirical assessment of the coherence between the technological domains chosen by Italian regions and those in which they show actual innovative capabilities, as measured by their patenting activity. {\textcopyright} 2018, {\textcopyright} 2018 Regional Studies Association.

}, keywords = {empirical analysis, Europe, Innovation, regional development, regional policy, specialization}, issn = {00343404}, doi = {10.1080/00343404.2018.1523542}, url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85056099350\&doi=10.1080\%2f00343404.2018.1523542\&partnerID=40\&md5=8bda85ac3cf98fb76919176089a75488}, author = {D{\textquoteright}Adda, D. and Guzzini, E. and Iacobucci, D. and Palloni, R.} } @article {588, title = {Academic spin-offs{\textquoteright} entrepreneurial teams and performance: a subgroups approach}, journal = {Journal of Technology Transfer}, volume = {43}, year = {2018}, pages = {714-733}, publisher = {Springer New York LLC}, abstract = {

Academic spin-offs{\textquoteright} entrepreneurial teams generally concentrate high levels of research and development experience while they are often found lacking in commercial skills. This prompts the integration of surrogate entrepreneurs (practitioners) but the literature questions the effectiveness of these artificially created teams. We argue that faultline theory applied to this context of different identity-based subgroups in a team can provide important insight, and complement the traditional approaches to top team diversity such as upper echelons theory. Our research compares the impact of the three main possible academic spin-off entrepreneurial team configurations on the two principal success-related tasks, innovation and sales, and considers the role important stakeholders, such as public research institutions and industrial partners, can have. In a sample of 164 academic spin-offs, we show that certain configurations are more suited to certain objectives and that faultline theory does indeed contribute to better our understanding of the entrepreneurial teams{\textquoteright} outcomes. Furthermore, the expectations one might have with regard to the extended entrepreneurial team as a possible remedy for weak core team configurations are not supported by our data. Implications for theory and practice are provided. {\textcopyright} 2017, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.

}, keywords = {Academic spin-offs, Commercial performance, Diversity, Entrepreneurial teams, Faultline theory, Industrial research, Innovation, Societies and institutions}, issn = {08929912}, doi = {10.1007/s10961-017-9623-7}, url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85029506376\&doi=10.1007\%2fs10961-017-9623-7\&partnerID=40\&md5=6c0b418a9a68daaec50147776448fdfa}, author = {Ben-Hafa{\"\i}edh, C. and Micozzi, A. and Pattitoni, P.} } @article {566, title = {Mapping innovation dynamics in the Internet of Things domain: Evidence from patent analysis}, journal = {Technological Forecasting and Social Change}, year = {2017}, abstract = {

The Internet of Things ({IoT}) is an emerging paradigm in the {ICT} sector and it is at the center of many current political and economic debates. Scholars, executives, and policymakers are becoming increasingly interested in understanding how to turn the {IoT} into reality, since various technological constraints (e.g., standardization and interoperability) limit the possibility of realizing an inclusive {IoT} information network. These constraints are exacerbated by the lack of a clear picture of the innovation dynamics and technology evolution of the {IoT}. This paper seeks to address this gap by mapping the development of {IoT} technologies. In particular, we have collected 61,972 {IoT} patents filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty in the period 2000{\^a}{\texteuro}{\textquotedblleft}2012. We analyze temporal trends, cross-country dynamics and identity of the applicants. Moreover, we provide insights about the development of the most relevant {IoT} technologies by looking at triadic patent families.

}, keywords = {Innovation, Internet of Things, Patent analysis, Technology evolution}, issn = {0040-1625}, doi = {10.1016/j.techfore.2017.04.022}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162517305498}, author = {Ardito, Lorenzo and D{\textquoteright}Adda, Diego and Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio} }