How to commercialise university-generated knowledge internationally? A comparative analysis of contingent institutional conditions

Kalantaridis, Christos; Küttim, Merle; Govind, Madhav; Sousa, Cristina

doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.06.013

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, in their literature review of U-I international knowledge transfer, Govind and Küttim [20] only found 26 articles (mainly in the fields of innovation studies and higher education research) meeting their search criteria in the Scopus and Web of Science databases. Amongst the 26 articles, U-I interactions in the transnational context are mainly seen in the form of universities from one country interacting with enterprises from another country, which is echoed in other literature e.g., [21][22][23]. Other studies deal with joint R&D between universities and branches of international companies e.g., [24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building University-Industry Co-Innovation Networks in Transnational Innovation Ecosystems: Towards a Transdisciplinary Approach of Integrating Social Sciences and Artificial Intelligence

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a potential solution to fill a gap in both research and practice that there are few interactions between transnational industry cooperation (TIC) and transnational university cooperation (TUC) in transnational innovation ecosystems. To strengthen the synergies between TIC and TUC for innovation, the first step is to match suitable industrial firms from two countries for collaboration through their common connections to transnational university/academic partnerships. Our proposed matching solution is based on the integration of social science theories and specific artificial intelligence (AI) techniques. While the insights of social sciences, e.g., innovation studies and social network theory, have potential to answer the question of why TIC and TUC should be looked at as synergetic entities with elaborated conceptualization, the method of machine learning, as one specific technic off AI, can help answer the question of how to realize that synergy. On the way towards a transdisciplinary approach to TIC and TUC synergy building, or creating transnational university-industry co-innovation networks, the paper takes an initial step by examining what the supports and gaps of existing studies on the topic are, and using the context of EU–China science, technology and innovation cooperation as a testbed. This is followed by the introduction of our proposed approach and our suggestions for future research.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building University-Industry Co-Innovation Networks in Transnational Innovation Ecosystems: Towards a Transdisciplinary Approach of Integrating Social Sciences and Artificial Intelligence

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This, in turn, may explain why universities engage increasingly in collaboration with each other and with nonpracticing entities in commercialisation. Regarding the former, Cervantes and Meissner (2014) Kalantaridis et al 2017). These are organisations that own and often assert IPRs but do not directly exploit in practice the knowledge covered by the IPRs (Meurer and Bessen 2014).…”

Section: Actors and Information Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

University ownership and information about the entrepreneurial opportunity in commercialisation: a systematic review and realist synthesis of the literature

Kalantaridis

Küttim

2020

J Technol Transf

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is now increasingly acknowledged that universities, despite their research capabilities and ownership of the new technical information they generate, are able to transform only a small minority of the patents they hold into innovations. In the transition from research outcome to innovation, information about the entrepreneurial opportunity is important because the outcomes of academic research are distant from the marketplace: as they have not been conceived with consideration of practical use but solely in a quest for understanding a scientific phenomenon. This underpins the rationale for our study into the information conditions regarding the entrepreneurial opportunity in the context of the prevailing property rights regime. In addressing this issue we adopt a theory-led realist synthesis approach to the conduct of a systematic literature review. Whilst we find empirical evidence supporting the conclusions of theoretical models, i.e. the strengthening role of technology transfer offices, we also point to their shortcomings. We go on to argue that significant gaps in our knowledge, and thus our ability to act, remain. In response, we advance an agenda for future research that focuses on the exploration of alternative policy actions (interventions) that draw from different paradigmatic lenses and methodological approaches.

show abstract

“…Research commercialisation provides an avenue for universities to disseminate knowledge while contributing to economic and social benefits. Research commercialisation is a process through which academic research findings and outputs create economic and societal impact by translating research into marketable products that solve industry problems and generating income for the university (Bozeman et al, 2013;Etzkowitz, 2003;Gaweł, 2014;Kalantaridis, Küttim, Govind, & Sousa, 2017;Perkmann et al, 2013). Research commercialisation activities provide the means of generating commercial returns through income from capital gains, licences, and sales of new products and processes that result from research, including consultancies and contracts (see DIIS, 2016b).…”

Section: Research Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The characteristics of social sciences research outputs induce impediments. Research commercialisation is broadly defined as an activity by universities to disseminate research and receive revenue by marketing the findings (Kalantaridis et al, 2017;Markman et al, 2008;OECD, 2012). The university thus commercialised its research as defined.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Social Sciences Research Outputsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Universities disseminate these values through various means, such as scholarly publications, conferences, inter-institutional collaboration, and research commercialisation (OECD, 2012). The last involves a process through which academic research findings and outputs create an impact on the economy and society by translating research into marketable products that solve industry problems and generating income for the university (Bodas Freitas, Marques, & Silva, 2013;Bozeman et al, 2013;Etzkowitz, 2003;Gaweł, 2014;Gnuschke, 2001a;Kalantaridis, Küttim, Govind, & Sousa, 2017;Perkmann et al, 2013). The Australian Government has continually encouraged universities to commercialise because it believes that academics should commercialise or perish and that universities are open for business (Blackmore, 2003;DIIS, 2016c;Symes, 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social sciences research commercialisation: the case of one Australian university

Joesoef¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Commercialisation is mainly seen as the purview of science, technology, and engineering research. The focus of commercialising research is the inherent characteristics, valorisation, and translation mechanisms of science, technology, and engineering. In Australia, the commercialisation of social sciences research is often not considered or is even discouraged despite its benefits. This thesis argues that the often intangible, but no less economically valuable or impactful, social science research also generates insights that may drive business success and social progress. Collaboration is core to the success of research commercialisation, which can be used to supplement university income and disseminate research results. This research investigated how the stakeholders, who collaborated through university entrepreneurship in one Australian university to commercialise research in the social sciences, managed the competing logics that arose during collaboration. The research question asked: How is collaboration in research commercialisation in the social sciences negotiated in view of the institutional logics of universities, government, industry, and research commercialisation offices? Understanding the practices and strategies of research commercialisation embraced by university-based social scientists and their industry collaborators contributes to the fields of scholarship in university entrepreneurship, institutional logics, stakeholder theory, and triple helix studies. This thesis presents four nested studies that draw together insights from university researchers, industry partners, government officials, and the staff of the research commercialisation office involved in the commercialisation of social science research in the context of one Australian university. Study 1 reviewed the literature systematically to address the question: How does government create a favourable university entrepreneurship ecosystem in Australia through its policies? Using interview data from organisations such as a university, industries, and a research commercialisation office, Studies 2 and 3 addressed the questions: What are the characteristics, impediments and impacts of social sciences research for a university? and How does a university include the social sciences in collaboration where commercial interest is the main focus? Study 4 used within-and cross-case analyses of interview data with academics, industry partners, and research commercialisation office (RCO) staff to investigate the question: How do individual stakeholders collaborate amid competing logics in a social sciences context? Studies 2, 3, and 4 thematically analysed individual and organisational levels of collaboration as the micro-level unit of analysis (individuals) was embedded in the macro-level unit of analysis (the university).

show abstract

How to commercialise university-generated knowledge internationally? A comparative analysis of contingent institutional conditions

Cited by 13 publications

References 47 publications

Building University-Industry Co-Innovation Networks in Transnational Innovation Ecosystems: Towards a Transdisciplinary Approach of Integrating Social Sciences and Artificial Intelligence

Building University-Industry Co-Innovation Networks in Transnational Innovation Ecosystems: Towards a Transdisciplinary Approach of Integrating Social Sciences and Artificial Intelligence

University ownership and information about the entrepreneurial opportunity in commercialisation: a systematic review and realist synthesis of the literature

Social sciences research commercialisation: the case of one Australian university

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About