The role of industrial Advisory Boards in technology transfer between universities and industry

Geisler, Eliezer

doi:10.1007/bf02173398

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Perception of academic status and capabilities Alunurm et al ( 2020 ); Amaral et al ( 2011 ); Chryssou ( 2020 ); Razak and White ( 2015 ); Tootell et al ( 2021 ) Cultural Contextual Transaction Perception that intellectual property is not important in the particular research field Muscio and Pozzali ( 2013 ) Cultural Misalignment Orientation The research is not linked to industrial interests/needs. Leave of absence of the researcher in relation to the activities of the industry Carvalho et al ( 2015 ); Muscio and Pozzali ( 2013 ) Cultural Misalignment Transaction Universities need publications Schulze-Krogh and Calignano ( 2020 ) Potential conflicts with industry regarding patents Bruneel et al ( 2010 ); Geisler ( 1986 ); Muscio and Pozzali ( 2013 ); Razak and White ( 2015 ) Cultural Governance Orientation Collaboration with people from different organizations Razak and White ( 2015 ); Ribeiro and Nagano ( 2021 ); Tootell et al ( 2021 ); Wallin et al ( 2014 ) Cultural Motivation Orientation University researchers are not motivated to cooperate. Absence of incentives and working conditions.…”

Section: Content Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers and facilitators of university-industry collaboration for research, development and innovation: a systematic review

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cooperation in research, development and innovation (RD&I) between universities or research institutes and industries plays a fundamental role in the economic development of a country. Industry benefits from state-of-the-art laboratories and technologies from academia, while institutes learn about business reality and market needs. Numerous barriers to the establishment and maintenance of these partnerships have been investigated and reported in the literature, but the information generated by these empirical studies is very fragmented and there is a need to consider the barriers systematically in order to clarify the topic. The aims of this systematic review were to analyze university-industry collaborations set up for the purpose of RD&I in an effort to recognize the barriers and facilitators of the process and to identify the approaches by which such barriers may be overcome. Following searches of the Scopus database and application of the exclusion criteria, 86 relevant articles were identified and submitted to bibliometric analysis. Subsequently, 75 articles were selected for in-depth content analysis, and the ideas embodied therein were presented in a structured and comprehensive manner. Barriers were evaluated according to three different theoretical perspectives, namely the triple helix and the entrepreneurial university, the relational social capital and value creation, and technology transfer and cultural differences. The facilitators were categorized as internal and external. The results obtained highlight the importance of fostering relational social capital and providing tax incentives to facilitate industry's pursuit of innovation through academia partnerships, and also show that collaborative barriers in RD&I may be overcome to some extent by starting with smaller projects and gradually increasing their complexity. Based on the findings outlined in this review, we propose various lines for future research.

show abstract

Section: Content Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers and facilitators of university-industry collaboration for research, development and innovation: a systematic review

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Processes to co-produce knowledge [ 21 ] involving a range of non-academic partners [ 22 ] institutionalise modes of formal and informal engagement and interaction that can underpin durable collective research agendas, organisational forms, and innovation pathways [ 23 – 25 ]. A variety of intermediaries, including legal and market professionals, support the transfer of university knowledge and technology to external users and innovators, professionalising these innovation pathways [ 26 – 28 ]. At the heart of such networked processes lie interpersonal and inter-organisational relationships, the ‘productive interactions’ among researchers and stakeholders through which transformative learning occurs and new valorisation possibilities can emerge [ 11 , 29 ].…”

Section: Value Creation Between Science and Societymentioning

confidence: 99%

A value creation model from science-society interconnections: Archetypal analysis combining publications, survey and altmetric data

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interplay between science and society takes place through a wide range of intertwined relationships and mutual influences that shape each other and facilitate continuous knowledge flows. Stylised consequentialist perspectives on valuable knowledge moving from public science to society in linear and recursive pathways, whilst informative, cannot fully capture the broad spectrum of value creation possibilities. As an alternative we experiment with an approach that gathers together diverse science-society interconnections and reciprocal research-related knowledge processes that can generate valorisation. Our approach to value creation attempts to incorporate multiple facets, directions and dynamics in which constellations of scientific and societal actors generate value from research. The paper develops a conceptual model based on a set of nine value components derived from four key research-related knowledge processes: production, translation, communication, and utilization. The paper conducts an exploratory empirical study to investigate whether a set of archetypes can be discerned among these components that structure science-society interconnections. We explore how such archetypes vary between major scientific fields. Each archetype is overlaid on a research topic map, with our results showing the distinctive topic areas that correspond to different archetypes. The paper finishes by discussing the significance and limitations of our results and the potential of both our model and our empirical approach for further research.

show abstract

“…Geisler, 1995;Perkmann et al, 2011). A variety of intermediaries, including legal and market professionals, support the transfer of university knowledge and technology to external users and innovators, professionalising these innovation pathways (Agrawal & Henderson, 2002;Bozeman, 2000;Eliezer Geisler, 1986). At the heart of such networked processes lie interpersonal and inter-organisational relationships, the 'productive interactions' among researchers and stakeholders through which transformative learning occurs and new valorisation possibilities can emerge (Molas-Gallart & Tang, 2011;Spaapen & Drooge, 2011).…”

Section: Research Collaboration Translation and Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

A value creation model from science-society interconnections: Archetypal analysis combining publications, survey and altmetric data

Ramos-Vielba¹,

Robinson-García²,

Woolley³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interplay between science and society takes place through a wide range of intertwined relationships and mutual influences that shape each other and facilitate continuous knowledge flows. Stylised consequentialist perspectives on valuable knowledge moving from public science to society in linear and recursive pathways, whilst informative, cannot fully capture the broad spectrum of value creation possibilities. As an alternative we experiment with an approach that gathers together diverse science-society interconnections and reciprocal research-related knowledge processes that can generate valorisation. Our approach to value creation attempts to incorporate multiple facets, directions and dynamics in which constellations of scientific and societal actors generate value from research. The paper develops a conceptual model based on a set of nine value components derived from four key research-related knowledge processes: production, translation, communication, and utilization. The paper conducts an exploratory empirical study to investigate whether a set of archetypes can be discerned among these components that structure science-society interconnections. We explore how such archetypes vary between major scientific fields. Each archetype is overlaid on a research topic map, with our results showing that different archetypes correspond to distinctive topic areas. The paper finishes by discussing the significance and limitations of our results and the potential of both our model and our empirical approach for further research.

show abstract

The role of industrial Advisory Boards in technology transfer between universities and industry

Cited by 8 publications

References 20 publications

Barriers and facilitators of university-industry collaboration for research, development and innovation: a systematic review

Barriers and facilitators of university-industry collaboration for research, development and innovation: a systematic review

A value creation model from science-society interconnections: Archetypal analysis combining publications, survey and altmetric data

A value creation model from science-society interconnections: Archetypal analysis combining publications, survey and altmetric data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About