Incentives for knowledge valorisation: a European benchmark

Abstract

Studies on incentives to stimulate researcher engagement in knowledge valorisation have primarily focused on incentives for economic output and it remains unclear how universities configure incentives for a broad societal impact of knowledge. Therefore, this article explores the presence and design of incentives for the full range of knowledge valorisation activities by employing a bottom-up, mixed-methods design. In 17 semistructured interviews with representatives from highly ranked European universities, 11 distinct incentives for valorisation activities with an academic, civil society, entrepreneurial or state-governmental orientation were identified. Subsequently, a quantifying survey was conducted (n = 48). Perceived effectiveness did not directly correspond to presence and desirability, indicating that additional motives play a role in implementing incentives, including managing conflict of interest situations. For non-scalable (hour-based) activities broader bandwidths of allocated percentages were employed that were more dependent on case by case attribution of income and for which more conditions to limit conflicts of interest were in place. Interestingly, this study found a negative correlation between the number of such restricting conditions being in place for consultancy and the university's overall success in industry income. A flowchart is presented that university management may use to align the selection and design of their incentives with their motives.

Science-based entrepreneurship education as a means for university-industry technology transfer

“…Universities have, in the last decades, started to reposition themselves in society. Keywords in their endeavors to do so are 'valorization' and 'entrepreneurship' (Blankesteijn et al 2019;van de Burgwal et al 2019). In order to 'valorize' their findings -turning scientific knowledge and technological inventions into commercial and societal value -academic researchers in a growing number of universities increasingly develop a new identity as academic entrepreneurs (Rothaermel et al 2007;Morales-Gualdrón et al 2009;Philpott et al 2011;Leloux et al 2013;Audretsch 2014;Sam and van der Sijde 2014;Wright 2014;Schmitz et al 2017).…”

Mixed Methods Utilisation in Innovation Management Research: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Summary

“…Partially mixed dominant sequential methods occur when one of the methods used in the sequential system is treated as more important in determining the results of the entire study. This type of method is very popular in our article database because it was used in 47 articles (Hankammer et al 2019;Teixeira et al 2019;Jensen 2011;Blindenbach-Driessen et al 2010;Lagos and Kutsikos 2011;Radovanović et al 2017;Wu 2016a, 2016b;Bouette and Magee 2015;Teirlinck and Spithoven 2013;Walwyn et al 2019;Almeida et al 2019;Ghezzi 2019;Duarte and Pinho 2019;Burleson et al 2019;van de Burgwal et al 2019;Olsson et al 2019;Harrison et al 2018;Chasanidou et al 2018;Reinhardt and Gurtner 2018;Ilonen et al 2018;Al-edenat 2018;Holis et al 2018;Geyskens et al 2009;Cowell et al 2018;Al-Husseini and Elbeltagi 2018;Tu 2018;Perenyi et al 2018;Grimpe et al 2017;Kılkış 2017;Bala and Venkatesh 2017;Lucas et al 2016;Kopcha et al 2016;Boerchers et al 2016;Klingebiel and Joseph 2016;McCarthy et al 2016;Swartz et al 2016;Bakhshi et al 2015;Udawatta et al 2015;Timma ...…”

Innovations in the veterinary intestinal health field: A patent landscape analysis

“…This research shows that industry stakeholders have been driving patent applications in this field and refocusing of industry partners due to innovation barriers may be another reason for declining innovation efforts. Mechanisms that hinder innovators to contribute to the open access knowledge base should be considered in light of existing innovation systems, with incentives and motivational drivers playing a key role in determining actions [ [37] , [38] , [39] ]. In view of these considerations, the increasing dependence on trade secrets within the field of antimicrobial innovations, and considerations of mechanisms to appropriate tangible and intangible resources are of increasing importance for stakeholders across pharma-nutrition industries [ 25 ].…”