Abstract
Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have been placed at the core of regional innovation ecosystems and encouraged to contribute to the social and economic development of the communities where they operate. In response to this change in the environment, HEIs have faced the need to adapt their organisational culture, practices and structures. In spite of the acknowledged relevance of university-business cooperation (UBC) as a source of HEI competitive advantage, and the recognition that appropriate interventions or supporting mechanisms can effectively foster UBC, there is still little systematic understanding of organizational mechanisms in the HEI management of UBC. In order to fill this gap, this paper identifies and evaluates the mechanisms that European HEIs are using to nurture industry collaboration at strategic and operational level and assess their relationship with seven UBC activities. With a sample of 2.157 HEI managers in 33 countries, the main results highlight the importance of the combination of support at both strategic and operational levels and the core role of the management commitment for all UBC activities. The paper concludes with the contribution to theory and the relevant implications for UBC managers and policy makers.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Understood in this paper as synonym of university.
References
Aldridge, T. T., & Audretsch, D. (2011). The Bayh–Dole act and scientist entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1058–1067.
Ambos, T. C., Mäkelä, K., Birkinshaw, J., & D’Este, P. (2008). When does university research get commercialised? Creating Ambidexterity in Research Institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1424–1447.
Arvanitis, S., Kubli, U., & Woerter, M. (2008). University–industry knowledge and technology transfer in Switzerland: What university scientists think about co-operation with private enterprises. Research Policy, 37(10), 1865–1883.
Bekkers, R., & Freitas, I. M. B. (2008). Analysing knowledge transfer channels between Universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter? Research Policy, 37(10), 1837–1853.
Bozeman, B., Fay, D., & Slade, C. P. (2013). Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: The state-of-the-art. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(1), 1–67.
Busch, L., & Lacy, W. B. (1983). Science, agriculture, and the politics of research. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Caniëls, M., & van den Bosch, H. (2011). The role of higher education institutions in building regional innovation systems. Papers in Regional Science, 90(2), 271–286.
Carayol, N. (2003). Objectives, agreements and matching in science–industry collaborations: Reassembling the pieces of the puzzle. Research Policy, 32(6), 887–908.
Clark, B. (1995). Places of inquiry: Research and advanced education in modern universities. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Clark, B. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
Clarysse, B., Tartari, V., & Salter, A. (2011). The impact of entrepreneurial capacity, experience and organizational support on academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1084–1093.
D’Este, P., & Patel, P. (2007). University–industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry? Research Policy, 36(9), 1295–1313.
D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316–339.
Davey, T., Baaken, T., Galán-Muros, V., & Meerman, A. (2011). Study on the cooperation between Higher Education Institutions and Public and Private Organisations in Europe. Brussels: European Commission, DG Education and Culture.
Debackere, K., & Veugelers, R. (2005). The role of academic technology transfer organizational in improving industry science links. Research Policy, 34(3), 321–342.
Dottore, A., Baaken, T., & Corkingdale, D. (2010). A partnering business model for technology transfer: The case of the Muenster University of Applied Sciences. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 12(2), 190–216.
Enders, J. (2004). Higher education, internationalisation, and the nation-state: Recent developments and challenges to governance theory. Higher Education, 47(3), 361–382.
Etzkowitz, H. (2001). The second academic revolution and the rise of entrepreneurial science. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 20(2), 18–29.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1997). Introduction: Universities in the global knowledge economy. In H. Etzkowitz & L. Leydesdorff (Eds.), Universities and the global knowledge economy: A triple helix of university–industry–government relations (pp. 1–8). London and Washington: Pinter.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.
Feller, I., & Feldman, M. (2010). The commercialization of academic patents: Black boxes, pipelines, and Rubik’s cubes. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 597–616.
Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., Santoni, S., & Sobrero, M. (2011). Complements or substitutes? The role of Universities and local context in supporting the creation of academic spin-offs. Research Policy, 40(8), 1113–1127.
Frey, B., & Neckermann, S. (2008). Academics appreciate awards—A new aspect of incentives in research. CESIFO Working Paper Series, 2531.
Friedman, J., & Silberman, J. (2003). University technology transfer: Do incentives, management, and location matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1), 17–30.
Geissler, M., Jahn, S., & Haefner, P. (2006). The entrepreneurial climate at universities: The impact of organisational factors. In D. Smallbone, J. Leitao, M. Raposo, & F. Welter (Eds.), The theory and practice of entrepreneurship—Frontiers in European entrepreneurship research. Cheltenham, MA: Edward Elgar.
Geuna, A., & Nesta, L. J. (2006). University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy, 35(6), 790–807.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, S., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research contemporary societies. London: Sage.
Goddard, J. B., & Chatterton, P. (1999). Regional development agencies and the knowledge economy: Harnessing the potential of universities. EPC Government and Policy, 17, 685–699.
Göktepe-Hulten, D., & Mahagaonkar, P. (2009). Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: In the expectation of money or reputation? Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(4), 401–423.
Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2011). 30 Years after Bayh–Dole: Assessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1045–1057.
Grimpe, C., & Fier, H. (2010). Informal university technology transfer: A comparison between the United States and Germany. Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 637–650.
Guerrero, M., Cunningham, J. A., & Urbano, D. (2015). Economic impact of entrepreneurial universities’ activities: An exploratory study of the United Kingdom. Research Policy, 44(3), 748–764.
Gulbrandsen, M., & Slipersaeter, S. (2007). The third mission and the entrepreneurial university model. In A. Bonaccorsi & C. Daraio (Eds.), Universities and strategic knowledge creation—Specialization and performance in Europe (pp. 112–143). Cheltenham, MA: Edward Elgar.
Harryson, S. J. (2008). Entrepreneurship through relationships—Navigating from creativity to commercialization. R&D Management, 38(3), 290–310.
Henrekson, M., & Rosenberg, N. (2001). Designing efficient institutions for science- based entrepreneurship: Lesson from the US and Sweden. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(3), 207–231.
Hughes, A. (2006). University–industry linkages and UK science and innovation policy. ESRC Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. CBR Research Programme on Enterprise and Innovation, Working Paper 326.
Jacob, M., Lundqvist, M., & Hellsmark, H. (2003). Entrepreneurial transformations in the Swedish university system: the case of Chalmers university of Technology. Research Policy, 32(9), 1555–1568.
Jain, S., George, G., & Maltarich, M. (2009). Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity. Research Policy, 38(6), 922–935.
Johnson, W. H. (2009). Intermediates in triple helix collaboration: The roles of 4th pillar organisations in public to private technology transfer. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 8(2–3), 142–158.
Katz, J. S. (2000). Scale-independent indicators and research evaluation. Science and Public Policy, 27(1), 23–36.
Kaufmann, A., & Tödtling, F. (2001). Science–industry interaction in the process of innovation: the importance of boundary-crossing between systems. Research Policy, 30(5), 791–804.
Kitagawa, F., & Lightowler, C. (2013). Knowledge exchange: A comparison of policies, strategies, and funding incentives in English and Scottish higher education. Research Evaluation, 22(1), 1–14.
Klofsten, M., & Jones-Evans, D. (2000). Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe—The case of Sweden and Ireland. Small Business Economics, 14(4), 299–309.
Korff, N., Van der Sijde, P., Groenewegen, P., & Davey, T. (2014). Supporting university–industry linkages—A case study of the relationship between the organisational and individual levels. Industry and Higher Education, 28(4), 281–300.
Kruss, G., Aphane, M., Muller, L., & Manamela, A. (2011). Promoting higher education–industry partnerships and collaborations. South Africa: Research and Innovation Strategy Group, Higher Education.
Lach, S., & Schankerman, M. (2003). Incentives and invention in Universities. 9727. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
Lam, A. (2011). What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: “Gold”, “ribbon” or “puzzle”? Research Policy, 40(10), 1354–1368.
Lamichhane, S., & Sharma, T. N. (2013). University–industry relations: A thrust for transformation of knowledge and economic acceleration. Journal of Education and Research, 2, 59–66.
Link, A., & Siegel, D. (2005). Generating science-based growth: An econometric analysis of the impact of organizational incentives on university–industry technology transfer. The European Journal of Finance, 11(3), 169–181.
Lockett, A., Siegel, D., Wright, M., & Ensley, M. D. (2005). The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: Managerial and policy implications. Research Policy, 34(7), 981–993.
Loi, M., & Di Guardo, M. C. (2015). The third mission of universities: An investigation of the espoused values. Science and Public Policy,. doi:10.1093/scipol/scv012.
Lubango, L. M., & Pouris, A. (2007). Industry work experience and inventive capacity of South African academic researchers. Technovation, 27(12), 788–796.
Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., Phan, P. H., & Balkin, D. B. (2004). Entrepreneurship from the ivory tower: Do incentive systems matter?—Universities role in regional innovation system. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 353–364.
Mathieu, M. (2003). An integrated approach to academic reinforcement systems. Higher Education Management and Policy, 15(3), 25–40.
Meyer-Krahmer, F., & Schmoch, U. (1998). Science-based technologies: university–industry interactions in four fields. Research Policy, 27(8), 835–851.
Mitton, C., Adair, C. E., McKenzie, E., Patten, S. B., & Waye Perry, B. (2007). Knowledge transfer and exchange: Review and synthesis of the literature. The Milbank Quarterly, 85(4), 729–768.
Mowery, D. C., & Sampat, B. N. (2006). Universities in national innovation systems. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Muscio, A., & Pozzali, A. (2012). The effects of cognitive distance in university–industry collaborations: Some evidence from Italian universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(3), 1–23.
Nilsson, A. S., Rickne, A., & Bengtsson, L. (2010). Transfer of academic research: Uncovering the grey zone. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 617–636.
OECD (2002). Benchmarking science–industry relationships, Paris. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/. Accessed 3 February, 2015.
Pajunen, K. (2008). The nature of organizational mechanisms. Organization Studies, 29(11), 1449–1468.
Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Broström, A., D’Este, P., et al. (2013). Academic engagement and R&D commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy, 42(2), 423–442.
Phan, P. H., & Siegel, D. S. (2006). The effectiveness of university technology transfer: Lessons learned from quantitative and qualitative research in the US and the UK. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 1–53.
Plewa, C., Korff, N., Johnson, C., MacPherson, G., Baaken, T., & Rampersad, G. (2013). The evolution of university–industry linkages—A framework. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 30(1), 21–44.
Plewa, C., Quester, P., & Baaken, T. (2006). Organisational culture differences and market orientation: an exploratory study of barriers to university–industry relationships. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 5(6), 373–389.
Polt, W., Rammer, C., Gassler, H., Schibany, A., & Schartinger, D. (2001). Benchmarking industry–science relations: The role of framework conditions. Science and Public Policy, 28(4), 247–258.
Ponomariov, B. L. (2008). Effects of university characteristics on scientists’ interactions with the private sector: An exploratory assessment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(5), 485–503.
Rasmussen, E., Moen, Ø., & Gulbrandsen, M. (2006). Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge. Technovation, 26(4), 518–533.
Renault, C. S. (2006). Academic capitalism and university incentives for faculty entrepreneurship. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 227–239.
Roges, E. M. (2002). The nature of technology transfer. Science Communication, 23(3), 323–341.
Rossi, F., & Rosli, A. (2013). Indicators of university–industry knowledge transfer performance and university implications for Universities: evidence from the UK’s HE-BCI survey. Working Paper. Birkbeck College, London: university of London.
Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691–791.
Rothaermel, F. T., & Thursby, M. (2005). University–incubator firm knowledge flows: Assessing tuniversityr impact on incubator firm performance. Research Policy, 34(3), 305–320.
Santoro, M. D., & Chakrabarti, A. K. (2002). Firm size and technology centrality in industry–university interactions. Research Policy, 31(7), 1163–1180.
Santoro, M. D., & Gopalakrishnan, S. (2000). The institutionalization of knowledge transfer activities within industry–university collaborative ventures. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 17(3), 299–319.
Servos, J. W. (1980). The industrial relations of science chemical engineering at MIT, 1900–1939. Isis, 71(4), 531–549.
Shane, S. A. (2004). Academic entrepreneurship: University spinoffs and wealth creation. Cheltenham, MA: Edward Elgar.
Siegel, D. S., & Phan, P. H. (2005). Analyzing the effectiveness of university technology transfer: Implications for entrepreneurship education. Advances in the Study of Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Economic Growth, 16, 1–38.
Siegel, D. S., Veugelers, R., & Wright, M. (2007a). Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: Performance and policy implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 640–660.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2003a). Commercial knowledge transfers from Universities to firms: Improving the effectiveness of university industry collaboration. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14(1), 111–133.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2004). Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: Qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 21(1), 115–142.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003b). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27–48.
Siegel, D. S., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2007b). The rise of entrepreneurial activity at Universities: Organizational and societal implications. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 489–504.
Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (1996). The emergence of a competitiveness research and development policy coalition and the commercialization of academic science and technology. Science, Technology and Human Values, 21(3), 303–339.
Sporn, B. (2001). Building adaptive universities: Emerging organisational forms based on experiences of European and US Universities. Tertiary Education and Management, 7(2), 121–134.
Ssebuwufu, J., Ludwick, T., & Béland, M. (2012). Strengthening university–industry linkages in Africa—A study on institutional capacities and gaps. Accra: Association of African Universities-Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada.
Stephan, P. E. (2008). Science and the university: Challenges for future research. CESifo Economic Studies, 54(2), 313–324.
Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Social structure and organisation. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142–193). London: Routledge.
Stinchcombe, A. L. (1968). Constructing social theories. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace and World.
Tartari, V., & Breschi, S. (2011). Set them free: Scientists’ evaluations of the benefits and costs of university–industry research collaboration. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(5), 1117–1147.
Teichler, U. (2008). Diversification? Trends and explanations of the shape and size of higher education. Higher Education, 56(3), 349–379.
Teixeira, A., & Mota, L. (2012). A bibliometric portrait of the evolution, scientific roots and influence of the literature on university–industry links. Scientometrics, 93(3), 719–743.
Thompson, G. N., Estabrooks, C. A., & Degner, L. F. (2006). Clarifying the concepts in knowledge transfer: A literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(6), 691–701.
Thursby, J. G. A., Jensen, R. A., & Thursby, M. C. A. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major US Universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1), 59–72.
Tornatsky, L. G., Waugaman, P. G., & O’Gray, D. (2002). Innovation U: New university roles in a knowledge economy. Research Triangle Park, NC: Southern Technology Council.
Van der Sijde, P. (2012). Profiting from knowledge circulation: The gains from university–industry interaction. Industry and Higher Education, 26(1), 15–19.
Van Geenhuizen, M. (2010). Valorisation of knowledge: Preliminary results on valorisation paths and obstacles in bringing university knowledge to market. In: Proceedings of the eighteenth annual high technology small firms conference, university of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Hessels, L. K. (2011). Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research Policy, 40(3), 463–472.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and Motivation. New York: Wiley.
Wilson, T. (2012). A review of business-university collaboration. London: Department for Business Innovation and Skills. UK Government https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32383/12-610-wilson-review-business-university-collaboration.pdf. Accessed 25 November, 2014.
Wissema, J. G. (2009). Towards the third generation university, managing the university in transition. Cheltenham, MA: Edward Elgar.
Yencken, J., & Ralston, L. (2005). Evaluation of incentives for R&D commercialisation of research in Australian Universities: A survey of selected Australian Universities. Australia: Department of Education, Science and Training.
Acknowledgments
The survey design and data collection for this study was funded by the European Commission DG Education and Culture, Public Tender (EAC/37/2009), but has not been involved in the data analysis or the paper writing.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Appendix: Results of the factor analysis of the UBC supporting mechanisms
Appendix: Results of the factor analysis of the UBC supporting mechanisms
1.1 Top management support (Cronbach α = .91)
-
A top-level management committed to UBC.
-
The presence of academics on company boards.
-
The presence of business people on the HEI board.
-
Board member or vice rector positions for UBC.
1.2 Communication (Cronbach α = .87)
-
A documented mission/vision embracing UBC.
-
The internal promotion of UBC.
-
The external promotion of UBC.
1.3 Incentives (Cronbach α = .85)
-
The dedication of resources (inc. funding). to support UBC.
-
The provision of incentives for academics to encourage UBC.
-
The inclusion of UBC as part of the assessment of work performance for academics.
1.4 Structures/offices (Cronbach α = .79)
-
Career offices within the HEI.
-
Internal agencies within the HEI dedicated to UBC.
-
Incubators for the development of new business.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Galán-Muros, V., van der Sijde, P., Groenewegen, P. et al. Nurture over nature: How do European universities support their collaboration with business?. J Technol Transf 42, 184–205 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9451-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9451-6
Keywords
- University-business cooperation
- Strategies
- Structures
- Incentives
- Organisational culture
- Knowledge transfer