catherine beaudry École polytechnique de montréal alliances et partenariats : un défi pour les...

Les facteurs qui affectent la collaboration des petites entreprises de biotech /

Factors that affect collaboration of small biotech firms

Catherine BeaudryÉcole Polytechnique de Montréal

Alliances et partenariats : un défi pour les biotechAlliances and partnerships: a challenge for biotechsCIRANO, 19 septembre 2008

Collaboration in CanadaIn 2004-2005, 52.6% of biotech firms participated to at

least one collaborative allianceLarge (> 150 employees): 59.6% (10% of the sample)Medium (50-150 employees): 56.6% (15% of the sample)Small (<50 employees):50.9 % (75% of the sample)

What are the most common types of collaborative arrangements?

With which partners do SMEs cooperate?Are SMEs different from larger firms in terms of the

number of collaboration arrangements to which they participate?

Do specific characteristics of a firm influence how much it collaborates? negative binomial regressions

19th September 2008 2 of 17Factors that affect collaboration of small biotech firms

Why collaborate?To survive! (Oliver 2004)Access to financial resources

R&D: long and expensiveDifficult for small firms that depend on angels, venture

capital, debt, grants, alliancesAccess to human capital

Lack of skilled labour is one of the principal reason to collaborate

Access to knowledge and competencesRather than developping within the firm

Learning networks are the source of innovation (Powell et al. 1996)


DataStatistics Canada Biotechnology use and development

surveys, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005Binary variable – collaboration yes/noCount variable – number of collaborative arrangement


Purpose\Partner Private enterprise Public institution Total

Knowledge eccprin eccpubn eccnProduction, market, capital ecpcprin ecpcpubn ecpcnTotal eceprin ecipubn ecnPurpose\Partner Private enterprise Public institution Total

Knowledge neccprin neccpubn neccnProduction, market, capital necpcprin necpcpubn necpcnTotal neceprin necipubn necn*

Evolution of collaborationPercentage of firms that collaborate

1999 2001 2003 2005

Small 56.0% 58.8 %

50.3 %

50.9 %

Medium 80.0 %

51.6 %

49.4 %

56.6 %

Large 81.6 %

80.9 %

59.0 %

59.6 %

All 62.5 %

60.3 %

51.2 %

52.6 %

Average number of collaborations 1999 2001 2003 2005

Small 2.8 4.0 3.2 4.7

Medium 2.7 4.9 7.5 7.0

Large 5.2 9.8 5.0 4.7

All 3.1 5.1 4.1 5.119th September 2008 5 of 17Factors that affect collaboration of small biotech firms

Credit crunch in 2001 reduction in collaboration in 2003

With whom and why?Among those that collaborate 1999 2001 2003 2005

With other firms 47.8 %

61.5 %

47.4 %

62.3 %

With public institutions 73.7 %

48.2 %

39.8 %

68.6 %

For knowledge purposes 96.0 %

91.6 %

65.7 %

95.0 %

For commercialisation purposes 57.6 %

33.0 %

42.2 %

35.7 %


1999 2001 2003 20050

50

100

150

200

250

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Firm Pub. Inst. % Firm % Pub. Inst.

1999 2001 2003 20050

50

100

150

200

250

300

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Know. Comm.% Know. % Comm.

With whom and why?Proportion among all firms 1999 2001 2003 2005

With another firm 29.8 %

37.0 %

24.2 %

36.4 %

Small 25.4 %

35.3 %

24.6 %

36.2 %

Medium 53.4 %

35.3 %

29.2 %

35.8 %

Large 24.4 %

48.2 %

15.9 %

38.9 %

With a public institution 46.2 %

29.0 %

20.4 %

36.1 %

Small 38.1 %

28.8 %

19.0 %

33.3 %

Medium 65.0 %

18.0 %

17.3 %

42.6 %

Large 71.2 %

44.8 %

31.5 %

47.3 %


55.2 %

33.7 %

50.0 %

For commercialization purposes 36.0 %

19.9 %

21.5 %

18.8 %


Decrease over 4 years of collaboration with public institutions (increase in 2005)

With whom and why?Proportion among all firms 1999 2001 2003 2005

With another firm 29.8 %

37.0 %

24.2 %

36.4 %

With a public institution 46.2 %

29.0 %

20.4 %

36.1 %


55.2 %

33.7 %

50.0 %

Small 52.4 %

52.7 %

33.4 %

47.8 %

Medium 80.4 %

49.5 %

32.6 %

57.2 %

Large 80.4 %

76.7 %

36.4 %

55.7 %

For commercialization purposes 36.0 %

19.9 %

21.5 %

18.8 %

Small 33.9 %

22.3 %

22.8 %

18.2 %

Medium 48.8 %

12.0 %

16.2 %

15.2 %

Large 30.4 %

16.1 %

20.9 %

28.7 %


Decrease over 4 years of knowledge–related collaboration (increase in 2005)

With whom and why?With firms for knowledge With pub. inst. for knowledge

2001 2003 2005 2001 2003 2005Small 35.35% 21.61% 31.30% Small 33.79% 19.21% 31.86%

Medium 40.24% 17.76% 35.75%

Medium 20.50% 21.14% 42.57%

Large 57.67% 12.61% 35.98% Large 47.95% 28.70% 47.31%All 38.95% 19.88% 32.47% All 33.35% 20.70% 35.04%

With firms for commercialisation

With pub. inst. for commercialisation

2001 2003 2005 2001 2003 2005Small 18.43% 16.77% 14.28% Small 6.16% 9.55% 6.55%

Medium 12.04% 13.68% 10.44%

Medium 0.00% 4.68% 4.68%

Large 16.13% 12.94% 14.63% Large 0.00% 13.34% 14.11%All 17.09% 15.81% 13.72% All 4.38% 9.27% 7.01%


Following the credit crunch of 2001, firms decreased dramatically their allianceswith other firms for knowledge purposes, but maintained their commercializationpartnershipsResurgence of knowledge-related alliances in 2004-5

Collaboration in general (negative binomial regressions)

Small SMEs

Number of collaborative arrangements

99 01 03 05 99 01 03 05

Number of employees (size) + +

% of biotech employees + +

Age - - -

Spinoff + + +

Products / Processes /+ /+ +/

Number of products and processes + + + + + +

Patents / Numbers /- /+ +/ +/

Contracts out/in +/ /+ +/ /+ +/

Number of contracts out /in +/ +/ +/

% biotech revenue / % biotech exports

+/- /- +/-

Success raising capital / government funds

/+ +/ /+ +/19th September 2008 10 of 17Factors that affect collaboration of small biotech firms

Collaboration by typeSMEs (small) For knowledge For commercialization

Nb. collaborative arrangements

01 03 05 01 03 05

Number of employees (size) +(+) +

% of biotech employees +

Age (-) (-) -(-)

Spinoff + (+) +(+) +(+)

Products / Processes /+ /+ /-(-) /+(+)

Number of products and processes

+(+) +(+) (+) +(+) +

Patents / Numbers /(+) /(-) +(+)/ /-(-)

Contracts out/in +/+ + +/ /+(+)

Number of contracts out /in (+)/ +(+) +/ -/-(-)

R&D$ / % biotech R&D +/ /+ (+)/ +/ -(-)/+(+)

% biotech revenue / % bio exports

/-(-) /-(-) /+(+)

+(+)/ -(-)/

Success K raising / gov’t funds

/+(+)

+/-(-)

+(+)/

+(+)/+

/+(+)


Collaboration by partnerSMEs (small) With firms Public Institutions


01 03 05 01 03 05

Number of employees (size) -(-) +

% of biotech employees +(+) +(+) +(+)

Age -(-) (-) + (-) (+)

Spinoff + + (+)

Products / Processes /(+) -(-)/ +(+)/ /+ /+(+)


+(+) +(+) +(+)

Patents / Numbers /(+) +(+)/ /(-) /(+) /(-)

Contracts out/in /+(+)

/+(+) (+)/ +(+)/

Number of contracts out /in /- +(+)/-(-)

(+)/ -/+(+)

R&D$ / % biotech R&D /-(-) (+)/


+(+)/ /-(-) /-(-) +/


+(+)/ +/ /+(+)

/+(+)


Collaboration for knowledgeSMEs (small) With firms Public

Institutions


01 03 05 01 03 05

Number of employees (size) (+) -(-) +

% of biotech employees +(+) + (-) +(+)

Age (-) (-) + (-) (+)

Spinoff + + (+)

Products / Processes +(+)/ (+)/+

/+


(+) +(+) +

Patents / Numbers /(+) (+)/ /(-) /(+) /(-)


+(+)/+(+)

/+(+) +/ +(+)/-

Number of contracts out /in -/- +(+)/-(-)

(+)/ -/+(+)

R&D$ / % biotech R&D + /(+) /-(-) (+)/


/-(-) /-(-)


+(+)/- /+(+)

+/-(-)

/(+)


Collaboration for commercializationSMEs (small) With firms Public Institutions


01 03 05 01 03 05

Number of employees (size) (-)

% of biotech employees +(+)

Age -(-) + (+) (+)

Spinoff +(+) +(+) (+)

Products / Processes /-(-) /+ +(+)/ +(+)/

/(+)


(+) +(+) +(+) +(+)

Patents / Numbers + +(+)/

/(-) /(-)


/+(+)

+(+)/-(-)

Number of contracts out /in (+)/ -/-(-) +/ (+)/-

R&D$ / % biotech R&D -(-)/+(+)

/- /(+) /+(+)


/(+) +/ -(-)/ + (+) -(-)/+


+(+)/

+(+)/ /+(+)

(+)/(+)

/+(+)


ConclusionsYounger firms collaborate in a greater number of

alliancesSpinoffs in general are more likely to have a greater

number of collaborative arrangementsThe number of products and processes has a strong and

positive influence on the extent of collaborationPatents needed for commercialization but not for other

types of alliances (not in terms of numbers)Contracting out is no substitute for alliances

Contracting in makes use of the lab space that would otherwise be used for collaboration

Firms with more export revenues are further along the market path and require less to collaborate


Further researchFollow the firms over the years

Linked database at Statistics Canada (4 linked surveys)

Find out which firms survive and which firms disappearDiscover what are the success factors for firm

survival and successLink the databases with the science-base

networkFind the influence of the geographical and

technological space on industrial innovation19th September 2008 16 of 17Factors that affect collaboration of small biotech firms

Thank youQuestions?Here is some of the work being done at École Polytechnique de Montréal

20th June 200817 of

17Factors that affect collaboration of small biotech firms

Hairy roots of the Madagascar periwinkle (Catharanthus roseus)

catherine beaudry École polytechnique de montréal alliances et partenariats : un défi pour les...

Documents

biotech factors

canadian nanotechnology

petites entreprises

network indicators

collaborative alliancelarge