Impacts of research universities on technological innovation in industry: evidence from engineering research centers

Feller, Irwin; Ailes, Catherine P.; Roessner, J. David

doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(01)00119-6

Cited by 189 publications

(96 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is rather important when we consider that the variety of these channels of influence is very high (Molas-Gallart et al, 2002). For example, not only joint projects between universities and firms but also training of graduates (Nelson, 1986;Narin et al, 1997), basic research (Feldman, 1994;Feller et al, 2002) and other activities have been highlighted as major ways that universities influence the productive sector.…”

Section: Universities As Technology Partnersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complementarities Between Universities and Technology Institutes: New Empirical Lessons and Perspectives

Barge‐Gil

Santa-María

Modrego

2011

European Planning Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the different roles played by universities and technology institutes (TIs) as innovation partners of firms. Comparing the characteristics of Spanish firms collaborating with these agents allows us to better define complementarities among the target groups of these organizations. Our findings show that those firms collaborating with universities are bigger, have higher internal capabilities and are less dependent on their external relationships while firms collaborating with TIs are smaller, have weaker internal capabilities but are more open to their environment and thus more reliant on external sources. We point to the implications of these findings for regional development. Universities have a role as partners of more technologically advanced firms. TIs, on the other hand, partner those firms, which though also quite advanced, require more external help in their innovation processes. These results should help policy-makers in the definition of more complex regional strategies and the provision of tools aimed at different goals. Managers of universities, TIs and client firms should find these results of help in developing more positive collaborations with one another.

show abstract

Section: Universities As Technology Partnersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complementarities Between Universities and Technology Institutes: New Empirical Lessons and Perspectives

Barge‐Gil

Santa-María

Modrego

2011

European Planning Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies focus on the impact of collaboration (Durden and Perri 1995;Gonzalez-Brambila and Veloso 2007;Godin 2003;Lee and Bozeman 2005;Rigby and Edler 2005;Shelton 2008) with most research considering the impact of research collaboration in general rather than in the specific context of formal research networking. Many studies focus on the importance of industrial funding to researchers in terms of their research performance (Gulbrandsen and Smeby 2005;Feller et al 2002;Bozeman and Gaughan 2007). An examination of the impact of the research environment on research productivity of academic faculty is provided by Conn et al (2005).…”

Section: Research Networking For Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facilitating innovation in European research area through pre-competitive EU-funded COST Actions

Rakhmatullin

Brennan

2014

J Innov Entrep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Union (EU) Heads of States regularly confirm that knowledge and innovation are critical to Europe's growth and agreed to make the EU the most competitive knowledge-driven economy. The EU's ability to facilitate innovation by strengthening its research capacities is central to achieving this goal. Some EU initiatives under this innovation policy integrate research capacities already existing in individual states through pan-European participation in collaborative projects in science and technology. The EU is financing a number of formal pre-competitive networking programs aiming at a better deployment of existing national research capacities via their inclusion in joint research initiatives. Although there is a general consensus that increasing levels of collaboration amongst researchers produce better results, the issue of research networking and of related research outcomes continues to generate debate with a wide variety of views on what roles such programs play and their general implications for research and scientific performance. As the EU Framework Programme 7 is coming to its end, this paper explores whether such formal networking programs contribute to facilitating innovation in the European Research Area by enabling Science and Technology participants to achieve anticipated research outcomes from their involvement in such programs.

show abstract

“…Several studies have examined the value of participation in cross-sector R&D centres for business participants (Adams et al, 2001;Feller et al, 2002). Industry perspectives from our present study are reported elsewhere (Couchman and Fulop, 2004).…”

Section: Career Choices and Balancing Reward And Riskmentioning

confidence: 94%

Reward, risk and response in Australian cooperative research centres

Turpin

Garrett-Jones

2010

IJTTC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cooperative research centres are a well-established organizational embodiment of the 'triple helix' . As complex inter-organizational structures they are subject to diverse management strategies. The imperatives that drive their strategic plans and their impact on partner organizations and the careers of the scientists who work within them are not well understood. We examine 370 participants' experience in Australian Cooperative Research Centres and consider their effect on personnel and organizations in the public research system. We propose that a necessary part of management strategies is the negotiation and reconciliation of risk and reward for partner organizations and careers of participating scientists. Achieving a sustainable strategy carries implications for change within the partner organizations and for the endurance of CRCs as organizational arrangements. These emergent triple helix structures can be harbingers of change not just for the alternative institutional structures they present and the partner organizations, but also for the careers of scientists. Abstract: Cooperative research centres are a well-established organizational embodiment of the 'triple helix'. As complex inter-organizational structures they are subject to diverse management strategies. The imperatives that drive their strategic plans and their impact on partner organizations and the careers of the scientists who work within them are not well understood. We examine 370 participants' experience in Australian Cooperative Research Centres and consider their effect on personnel and organizations in the public research system. We propose that a necessary part of management strategies is the negotiation and reconciliation of risk and reward for partner organizations and careers of participating scientists. Achieving a sustainable strategy carries implications for change within the partner organizations and for the endurance of CRCs as organizational arrangements. These emergent triple helix structures can be harbingers of change not just for the alternative institutional structures they present and the partner organizations, but also for the careers of scientists.

show abstract

Impacts of research universities on technological innovation in industry: evidence from engineering research centers

Cited by 189 publications

References 11 publications

Complementarities Between Universities and Technology Institutes: New Empirical Lessons and Perspectives

Complementarities Between Universities and Technology Institutes: New Empirical Lessons and Perspectives

Facilitating innovation in European research area through pre-competitive EU-funded COST Actions

Reward, risk and response in Australian cooperative research centres

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About