Dynamic interactions between university-industry knowledge transfer channels: A case study of the most highly cited academic patent

Azagra‐Caro, Joaquín M.; Barbera‐Tomás, David; Edwards-Schachter, Mónica; Tur, EM Elena Mas

doi:10.1016/j.respol.2016.11.011

Cited by 96 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Here, the intention goes beyond formal contract and agreement that regulate the transfer process. It involves also the desire of scientists and engineers from both parties to interact and exchange expertise and technical capabilities with each other in the absence of a contract, which constitutes an informal channel for exchanging technology and its related knowledge (Azagra‐Caro et al, ). The second is that research shows that technology transfer is not typically a linear process (Bradley et al, ), rather it is a reciprocal exchange practice between the process actors (Tagliaventi and Matterelli, ).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Engineered’ University‐Industry Collaboration: A Social Capital Perspective

Al‐Tabbaa

Ankrah

2018

European Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While there is an extensive body of knowledge on university-industry collaboration (UIC) for technology transfer, two salient gaps remain. First, studies on UIC have predominately focused on situations when the relationship is established based on perceived complementary needs between collaborators. However, research on 'engineered' UIC, or when the collaboration has been triggered and coordinated by a third-party, is still scarce. Second, we lack proper understanding into the micro-foundations of technology transfer process using the lens of social capital (SC). This is a necessary inquiry given the prevailing conception of technology transfer as a socio-technical process. We address these two gaps by investigating the idiosyncrasy of SC in five case studies of the Faraday Partnership Initiative, a UK public-sponsored programme designed to enhance cross-sector technology transfer. As key contributions, we develop a conceptual framework that explains how social capital facilitates technology transfer in engineered UIC. We also advance the debate on academic engagement and commercialization by elaborating how knowledge produced by academics can be transformed into useable forms of technology by distinguishing between technology translation and transfer. The former emerged as a critical element of the latter. a We follow Bozeman's (2000) conceptualization that technology and knowledge are inseparable elements in the transfer process, therefore in this study we regard technology transfer and knowledge transfer as interchangeable.'Engineered' University-Industry Collaboration: A Social Capital Perspective

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Engineered’ University‐Industry Collaboration: A Social Capital Perspective

Al‐Tabbaa

Ankrah

2018

European Management Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The knowledge transfer channels among universities, industry and other users have been the topic of much investigation in recent decades (Perkmann et al, 2013;Azagra-Caro et al, 2017). Studies have examined closed disclosure practices related to the commercialisation of academic inventions (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing the transition to open access publishing: a psychological perspective

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To manage the transition to the open access (OA) model of scholarly publishing, we need to understand better what enables, encourages and inhibits the adoption of OA publishing among scientists, and to appreciate individual differences within disciplines. The study adopts a psychological perspective to elucidate motivations, capabilities and opportunities for OA publishing among bioscientists in the UK. To identify differences within the discipline, bioscientists with starkly different past practices for disclosing research data and technologies were interviewed. The sampled bioscientists face similar obstacles and enablers in their physical environment, but that their motivations and experience of their social environments differ. One group is strongly motivated by their moral convictions and beliefs in benefits of OA and feels peer pressure related to OA. The other group expresses fewer pro-OA beliefs, holds beliefs demotivating OA publishing, but feels pressure from research funders to adopt it. The former group makes more frequent use of OA publishing, which suggests that only those with strong motivations will work to overcome the social and physical obstacles. The individual differences within the discipline suggest that bioscientists are unlikely to respond to OA policies in the same way and, thus, the appropriateness of one-size-fits-all OA policies is questioned.

show abstract

“…Although university-industry collaboration can provide several opportunities for both universities and firms, it can confront decision makers, especially within universities, with major managerial challenges that are attributable to the diverse nature and the dynamics inherent to many university-industry interactions and prevalent organizational characteristics (e.g., Azagra-Caro et al 2017;Perkmann and Walsh 2007). Universityindustry collaboration entails the bridging of scholarly and commercial logics (Tartari and Breschi 2012;Villani et al 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining alliance management capabilities in university-industry collaboration

Leischnig

Geigenmüller

2018

J Technol Transf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effective university-industry technology transfer requires universities to maintain and strengthen research and technology capabilities on the one hand, but also to develop and strengthen management capabilities to build and manage relationships with external partners on the other hand. This research seeks to advance the knowledge on university-industry collaboration by examining how managerial routines that in sum reflect the concept of alliance management capability influence success of outward university technology transfer. The results of an empirical study with academics from different universities in Germany offer insights into net effects and configurational effects of routines to manage interorganizational collaboration on technology transfer success. The findings indicate that academic units' alliance management capability has a significant positive effect on technology transfer success. In addition, the findings indicate different configurations of alliance management routines, reflecting alternative, consistently sufficient pathways to technology transfer success. This knowledge contributes to current debates by disclosing important predictors of successful university-industry collaboration. In addition, it informs decision makers in universities about how to configure management systems to govern outward technology transfer activity.

show abstract

Dynamic interactions between university-industry knowledge transfer channels: A case study of the most highly cited academic patent

Cited by 96 publications

References 54 publications

‘Engineered’ University‐Industry Collaboration: A Social Capital Perspective

‘Engineered’ University‐Industry Collaboration: A Social Capital Perspective

Managing the transition to open access publishing: a psychological perspective

Examining alliance management capabilities in university-industry collaboration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About