Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art
TL;DR: The authors provide a critical overview of the literature on research collaboration, focusing particularly on individual-level collaborations among university researchers, but also give attention to university researchers' collaborations with researchers in other sectors, including industry.
Abstract: There is abundant evidence that research collaboration has become the norm in every field of scientific and technical research. We provide a critical overview of the literature on research collaboration, focusing particularly on individual-level collaborations among university researchers, but we also give attention to university researchers’ collaborations with researchers in other sectors, including industry. We consider collaborations aimed chiefly at expanding the base of knowledge (knowledge-focused collaborations) as well as ones focused on production of economic value and wealth (property-focused collaborations), the latter including most academic entrepreneurship research collaborations. To help organize our review we develop a framework for analysis, one that considers attributes of collaborators, collaborative process and organization characteristics as the affect collaboration choices and outcomes. In addition, we develop and use a “Propositional Table for Research Collaboration Literature,” presented as an “Appendix” to this study. We conclude with some suggestions for possible improvement in research on collaboration including: (1) more attention to multiple levels of analysis and the interactions among them; (2) more careful measurement of impacts as opposed to outputs; (3) more studies on ‘malpractice’ in collaboration, including exploitation; (4) increased attention to collaborators’ motives and the social psychology of collaborative teams.
Citations
More filters
17 Jun 2009
TL;DR: This article explored the influence of different mechanisms in lowering barriers related to the orientation of universities and to the transactions involved in working with university partners, and explored the effects of collaboration experience, breadth of interaction, and inter-organizational trust on lowering different types of barriers.
Abstract: Although the literature on university–industry links has begun to uncover the reasons for, and types of, collaboration between universities and businesses, it offers relatively little explanation of ways to reduce the barriers in these collaborations. This paper seeks to unpack the nature of the obstacles to collaborations between universities and industry, exploring influence of different mechanisms in lowering barriers related to the orientation of universities and to the transactions involved in working with university partners. Drawing on a large-scale survey and public records, this paper explores the effects of collaboration experience, breadth of interaction, and inter-organizational trust on lowering different types of barriers. The analysis shows that prior experience of collaborative research lowers orientation-related barriers and that greater levels of trust reduce both types of barriers studied. It also indicates that breadth of interaction diminishes the orientation-related, but increases transaction-related barriers. The paper explores the implications of these findings for policies aimed at facilitating university–industry collaboration.
858 citations
15 Jul 2015
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present the Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science (EES) report, which synthesizes and integrates the available research to provide guidance on assembling the science team; leadership, education and professional development for science teams and groups.
Abstract: The past half-century has witnessed a dramatic increase in the scale and complexity of scientific research. The growing scale of science has been accompanied by a shift toward collaborative research, referred to as “team science.“ Scientific research is increasingly conducted by small teams and larger groups rather than individual investigators, but the challenges of collaboration can slow these teams' progress in achieving their scientific goals. How does a team-based approach work, and how can universities and research institutions support teams? Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science synthesizes and integrates the available research to provide guidance on assembling the science team; leadership, education and professional development for science teams and groups. It also examines institutional and organizational structures and policies to support science teams and identifies areas where further research is needed to help science teams and groups achieve their scientific and translational goals. This report offers major public policy recommendations for science research agencies and policymakers, as well as recommendations for individual scientists, disciplinary associations, and research universities. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science will be of interest to university research administrators, team science leaders, science faculty, and graduate and postdoctoral students.
402 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore and extend the concept of hybridity to understand current changes in public services organizations, notably as seen from an organizational studies perspective, and suggest that bringing together work from the neighbouring disciplines of public administration and organization studies may improve our understanding of public services hybridity and outline a future research agenda.
Abstract: This article explores and extends the concept of hybridity to understand current changes in public services organizations, notably as seen from an organizational studies perspective. The notion of hybridity has become more important, given that the public sector increasingly blurs with other sectors and more social actors. Previous reliance on the use of ideal-types in characterizing public services reforms has masked expanding heterogeneity. We here move beyond the (i) conventional focus on structural hybridity to consider (ii) institutional dynamics, (iii) social interactions, and (iv) new identities and roles in public services. Based on these four dimensions of hybridity, we review alternative theoretical frameworks. We suggest that bringing together work from the neighbouring disciplines of public administration and organization studies may improve our understanding of public services hybridity and outline a future research agenda.
212 citations
Abstract: This paper identifies practices that can facilitate knowledge transfer in university–industry (U–I) research partnerships by systematically reviewing extant literature. We aim to contribute to the theoretical development in the field of academic engagement and propose that knowledge transfer provides a valuable perspective. We started our review with identifying barriers and facilitators of knowledge transfer. Extant literature identified knowledge differences and differences in goals resulting from different institutional cultures as important barriers to knowledge transfer. They result in ambiguity, problems with knowledge absorption and difficulties with the application of knowledge. Trust, communication, the use of intermediaries and experience are found as facilitators for knowledge transfer that help to resolve the identified barriers. Our analysis offers practical advice for the management of academic engagement. Finally, we identified questions for future research based on inconsistencies in extant research and open questions we encountered during our analysis.
186 citations
TL;DR: This article conducted a bibliometric analysis of scholarly research on the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship (KSTE) and identified the key academic journals, the main issues and subjects addressed and the backward and forward citations.
Abstract: In the past decade, a new and promising literature has been established linking endogenous growth theory to knowledge spillovers and entrepreneurship theory: the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship (KSTE). This study conducts a bibliometric analysis of scholarly research on this fruitful and promising strand of the literature. It highlights the increasing importance and acceptance of KSTE in the scientific community worldwide, its emergence across different fields in economics, management and policy and also the issues and questions raised. Based on all articles on KSTE published in refereed journals in the past 15 years (1999–2013), we identify the key academic journals, the main issues and subjects addressed and the backward and forward citations. We also identify the authors and their connections in terms of coauthorships to reconstruct the scientific community debating on KSTE. We are confident that our work will benefit scholars intending to leverage KSTE in their research in that it summarizes the main academic conversations within this theoretical perspective and set the boundaries of the network of scholars developing it.
180 citations
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1962
TL;DR: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions as discussed by the authors is a seminal work in the history of science and philosophy of science, and it has been widely cited as a major source of inspiration for the present generation of scientists.
Abstract: A good book may have the power to change the way we see the world, but a great book actually becomes part of our daily consciousness, pervading our thinking to the point that we take it for granted, and we forget how provocative and challenging its ideas once were-and still are. "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" is that kind of book. When it was first published in 1962, it was a landmark event in the history and philosophy of science. And fifty years later, it still has many lessons to teach. With "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions", Kuhn challenged long-standing linear notions of scientific progress, arguing that transformative ideas don't arise from the day-to-day, gradual process of experimentation and data accumulation, but that revolutions in science, those breakthrough moments that disrupt accepted thinking and offer unanticipated ideas, occur outside of "normal science," as he called it. Though Kuhn was writing when physics ruled the sciences, his ideas on how scientific revolutions bring order to the anomalies that amass over time in research experiments are still instructive in our biotech age. This new edition of Kuhn's essential work in the history of science includes an insightful introductory essay by Ian Hacking that clarifies terms popularized by Kuhn, including paradigm and incommensurability, and applies Kuhn's ideas to the science of today. Usefully keyed to the separate sections of the book, Hacking's essay provides important background information as well as a contemporary context. Newly designed, with an expanded index, this edition will be eagerly welcomed by the next generation of readers seeking to understand the history of our perspectives on science.
36,808 citations
34,393 citations
01 Jan 1996
6,168 citations
TL;DR: The psychosocial conditions and mechanisms underlying the Matthew effect are examined and a correlation between the redundancy function of multiple discoveries and the focalizing function of eminent men of science is found—a function which is reinforced by the great value these men place upon finding basic problems and by their self-assurance.
Abstract: This account of the Matthew effect is another small exercise in the psychosociological analysis of the workings of science as a social institution. The initial problem is transformed by a shift in theoretical perspective. As originally identified, the Matthew effect was construed in terms of enhancement of the position of already eminent scientists who are given disproportionate credit in cases of collaboration or of independent multiple discoveries. Its significance was thus confined to its implications for the reward system of science. By shifting the angle of vision, we note other possible kinds of consequences, this time for the communication system of science. The Matthew effect may serve to heighten the visibility of contributions to science by scientists of acknowledged standing and to reduce the visibility of contributions by authors who are less well known. We examine the psychosocial conditions and mechanisms underlying this effect and find a correlation between the redundancy function of multiple discoveries and the focalizing function of eminent men of science—a function which is reinforced by the great value these men place upon finding basic problems and by their self-assurance. This self-assurance, which is partly inherent, partly the result of experiences and associations in creative scientific environments, and partly a result of later social validation of their position, encourages them to search out risky but important problems and to highlight the results of their inquiry. A macrosocial version of the Matthew principle is apparently involved in those processes of social selection that currently lead to the concentration of scientific resources and talent ( 50 ).
5,689 citations
Book•
11 Jun 1997
TL;DR: Slaughter and Leslie as discussed by the authors examine the current state of academic careers and institutions, with a particular focus on public research universities in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia.
Abstract: The globalization of the political economy at the end of the twentieth century is destabilizing the patterns of university professional work developed over the past hundred years. One of the major changes that has taken place as a result of globalization is that faculty, who were previously situated between capital and labor, are now positioned squarely in the marketplace. To grasp the extent of changes taking place and to understand the forces of change, Academic Capitalism examines the current state of academic careers and institutions, with a particular focus on public research universities in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia. In this wide-ranging analysis, Slaughter and Leslie leave no aspect of academic work unexplored: undergraduate and graduate education, teaching and research, student aid policies, and federal research policies. All are part of the equation. The authors pay particular attention to how faculty spend their time, what forces drive their choices of activities, and what this means for higher education.
3,289 citations
"Research collaboration in universit..." refers background in this paper
...Likewise, there is a growing literature, mostly sharply critical, examining the effects of flows in the other direction, the impact of academic entrepreneurship (pejoratively referred to as ‘‘academic capitalism’’) on product-focused research (Slaughter and Leslie 1997; Rhoades and Slaughter 1997)....
[...]