Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations

Journal of Technology Transfer

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 316-339

  D'Este, Pablo ^a   Perkmann, Markus ^b  

^a INGENIO CSIC UPV Technical University of Valencia   (Spain)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Collaborative research; Commercialization; Entrepreneurial university; Joint research; Motivation; University industry relations

Indexed keywords

EID: 79953247168     PISSN: 08929912     EISSN: 15737047     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10961-010-9153-z     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Adams, J. D., Chiang, E. P., & Starkey, K. (2001). Industry-university cooperative research centers. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2), 73-86.
2. Agrawal, A., & Henderson, R. M. (2002). Putting patents in context: Exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 44-60.
3. Ambos, T. C., Mäkelä, K., Birkinshaw, J., & D'Este, P. (2008). When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1424-1447.
4. Baldini, N., Grimaldi, R., Sobrero, M. (2007). To patent or not to patent? A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives, and obstacles to university patenting. Scientometrics, 70(2), 333-354.
5. Behrens, T. R., & Gray, D. O. (2001). Unintended consequences of cooperative research: Impact of industry sponsorship on climate for academic freedom and other graduate student outcome. Research Policy, 30(2), 179-199.
6. Belkhodja, O., & Landry, R. (2007). The Triple-Helix collaboration: Why do researchers collaborate with industry and the government? What are the factors that influence the perceived barriers? Scientometrics, 70(2), 301-332.
7. Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2006). Entrepreneurial universities and technology transfer: A conceptual framework for understanding knowledge-based economic development. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1), 175-188.
8. Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2008). Academic entrepreneurs: Organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science, 19(1), 69-89.
9. Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M., Louis, K. S., Stoto, M. A., & Wise, D. (1986). University-industry research relationships in biotechnology-Implications for the university. Science, 232(4756), 1361-1366.
10. Bonaccorsi, A., & Piccaluga, A. (1994). A theoretical framework for the evaluation of university-industry relationships. R& D Management, 24(3), 229-247.
11. Cappellari, L., & Jenkins, S. P. (2003). Multivariate probit regression using simulated maximum likelihood. Stata Journal, 3(3), 278-294.
12. Carayol, N. (2003). Objectives, agreements and matching in science-industry collaborations: Reassembling the pieces of the puzzle. Research Policy, 32(6), 887-908.
13. Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Pergamon: New York.
14. Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2002). Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R& D. Management Science, 48(1), 1-23.
15. Czarnitzki, D., Glänzel, W., & Hussinger, K. (2009). Heterogeneity of patenting activity and its implications for scientific research. Research Policy, 38(1), 26-34.
16. D'Este, P., & Patel, P. (2007). University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors determining the variety of interactions with industry? Research Policy, 36(9), 1295-1313.
17. Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27(8), 823-833.
18. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as 'quasi-firms': The invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32(1), 109-121.
19. 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.
20. Feldman, M., Feller, I., Bercovitz, J., & Burton, R. (2002). Equity and the technology transfer strategies of American research universities. Management Science, 48(1), 105-121.
21. Feller, I. (1990). Universities as engines of R& D-based economic growth: They think they can. Research Policy, 19(4), 335-348.
22. Florida, R., & Cohen, W. M. (1999). Engine or infrastructure? The university role in economic development. In L. M. Branscomb, F. Kodama, & R. Florida (Eds.), Industrializing knowledge: University-industry linkages in Japan and the United States (pp. 589-610). Cambridge: MIT Press.
23. Glaser, B., & Bero, L. (2005). Attitudes of academic and clinical researchers toward financial ties in research: A systematic review. Science and Engineering Ethics, 11(4), 553-573.
24. Göktepe-Hulten, D., & Mahagaonkar, P. (2009). Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: In the expectation of money or reputation? Journal of Technology Transfer (in press).
25. Grimpe, C., & Fier, H. (2010). Informal university technology transfer: A comparison between the United States and Germany. Journal of Technology Transfer. doi: 10. 1007/s10961-009-9140-4.
26. Gulbrandsen, M., & Slipersæter, 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: Edward Elgar.
27. Hall, B. H., Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2000). Universities as research partners. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85, 485-491.
28. Hall, B. H., Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2001). Barriers inhibiting industry from partnering with universities: Evidence from the advanced technology program. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1), 87-98.
29. 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.
30. Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. (2001). Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. American Economic Review, 91(1), 240-259.
31. Kirby, D. (2006). Creating entrepreneurial universities in the UK: Applying entrepreneurship theory to practice. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(5), 599-603.
32. Klevorick, A. K., Levin, R. C., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1995). On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities. Research Policy, 24(2), 185-205.
33. Krimsky, S. (2003). Science in the private interest: Has the lure of profits corrupted the virtue of biomedical research? Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
34. Lach, S., & Schankerman, M. (2008). Incentives and invention in universities. RAND Journal of Economics, 39(2), 403-433.
35. Lee, Y. S. (1996). 'Technology transfer' and the research university: A search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration. Research Policy, 25(6), 843-863.
36. Lee, Y. S. (2000). The sustainability of university-industry research collaboration: An empirical assessment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 25(2), 111-133.
37. Link, A. N., & Siegel, D. S. (2005). Generating science-based growth: An econometric analysis of the impact of organizational incentives on university-industry technology transfer. European Journal of Finance, 11(3), 169-181.
38. Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Bozeman, B. (2007). An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 641-655.
39. Louis, K. S., Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M., & Stoto, M. A. (1989). Entrepreneurs in academe: An exploration of behaviors among life scientists. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(1), 110-131.
40. Lowe, R. A. (2006). Who develops a university invention? The impact of tacit knowledge and licensing policies. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 415-429.
41. Manning, W. G., Duan, N., & Rogers, W. H. (1987). Monte Carlo evidence on the choice between sample selection and two-part models. Journal of Econometrics, 35(1), 59-82.
42. Mansfield, E. (1991). Academic research and industrial innovation. Research Policy, 20(1), 1-12.
43. Mansfield, E. (1995). Academic research underlying industrial innovations: Sources, characteristics, and financing. Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(1), 55-65.
44. Martinelli, A., Meyer, M., & von Tunzelmann, N. (2008). Becoming an entrepreneurial university? A case study of knowledge exchange relationships and faculty attitudes in a medium-sized, research-oriented university. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 259-283.
45. McKelvey, M., & Holmén, M. (Eds.). (2009). Learning to compete in European universities: From social institution to knowledge business. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
46. Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science. Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.
47. Meyer-Krahmer, F., & Schmoch, U. (1998). Science-based technologies: University-industry interactions in four fields. Research Policy, 27(8), 835-851.
48. Mintzberg, H. (1983). Structure in fives: Designing effective organizations. International edition. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River.
49. Moutinho, P., Fontes, M., Godinho, M. (2007). Do individual factors matter? A survey of scientists' patenting in Portuguese public research organisations. Scientometrics, 70(2), 355-377.
50. Mowery, D. C., & Nelson, R. R. (Eds.). (2004). Ivory tower and industrial innovation: University-industry technology before and after the Bayh-Dole Act. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
51. Mowery, D. C., & Sampat, B. N. (2005). The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and university-industry technology transfer: A model for other OECD governments? Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(1/2), 115-127.
52. Murray, F. (2002). Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks: Exploring tissue engineering. Research Policy, 31(8, 9), 1389-1403.
53. Murray, F., & Stern, S. (2007). Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge? An empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 63(4), 648-687.
54. Nelson, R. R. (2001). Observations on the post-Bayh-Dole rise of patenting at American universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2), 13-19.
55. Nelson, R. R. (2004). The market economy, and the scientific commons. Research Policy, 33(3), 455-471.
56. Noble, D. F. (1977). America by design: Science, technology, and the rise of corporate capitalism. New York: Knopf.
57. Owen-Smith, J. (2003). From separate systems to a hybrid order: Accumulative advantage across public and private science at Research One universities. Research Policy, 32(6), 1081-1104.
58. Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001a). Careers and contradictions: Faculty responses to the transformation of knowledge and its uses in the life sciences. Research in the Sociology of Work, 10, 109-140.
59. Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001b). To patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1), 99-114.
60. Pavitt, K. (1991). What makes basic research economically useful? Research Policy, 20(2), 109-119.
61. Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2007). University-industry relationships and open innovation: Towards a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(4), 259-280.
62. Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2008). Engaging the scholar: Three forms of academic consulting and their impact on universities and industry. Research Policy, 37(10), 1884-1891.
63. Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2009). The two faces of collaboration: Impacts of university-industry relations on public research. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(6), 1033-1065.
64. Phan, P. H., & Siegel, D. S. (2006). The effectiveness of university technology transfer: Lessons learned from qualitative and quantitative research in the US and UK. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 66-144.
65. Polanyi, M. (2000 [1962]). The republic of science: Its political and economic theory. Minerva 38: 1-32.
66. 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.
67. Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116-145.
68. Roessner, J. D. (1993). What companies want from the Federal labs. Issues in Science and Technology, 10(1), 37-42.
69. Rosell, C., & Agrawal, A. (2009). Have university knowledge flows narrowed? Evidence from patent data. Research Policy, 38(1), 1-13.
70. Rosenberg, N. (1982). Inside the black box: Technology and economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
71. Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691-791.
72. Schartinger, D., Rammer, C., Fischer, M. M., & Fröhlich, J. (2002). Knowledge interactions between universities and industry in Austria: Sectoral patterns and determinants. Research Policy, 31(3), 303-328.
73. Shane, S. A. (2004). Academic entrepreneurship: University spinoffs and wealth creation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
74. Shane, S. A. (2005). Economic development through entrepreneurship: Government, university and business linkages. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
75. Siegel, D. S., & Zervos, V. (2002). Strategic research partnerships and economic performance: Empirical issues. Science and Public Policy, 29, 331-343.
76. Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003a). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27-48.
77. Siegel, D. S., Westhead, P., & Wright, M. (2003b). Science parks and the performance of new technology-based firms: A review of recent U. K. evidence and an agenda for future research. Small Business Economics, 23(1), 177-184.
78. Siegel, D. S., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2007). The rise of entrepreneurial activity at universities: Organizational and societal implications. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 489-504.
79. Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
80. Stephan, P. E., & Levin, S. G. (1992). Striking the mother lode in science: The importance of age. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
81. Stiglitz, J., & Wallsten, S. (1999). Public-private technology partnerships: Promises and pitfalls. American Behavioural Scientist, 43-73(1), 52-73.
82. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur's quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
83. 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.
84. Tornquist, K. M., & Kallsen, L. A. (1994). Out of the ivory tower: Characteristics of institutions meeting the research needs of industry. Journal of Higher Education, 65(5), 523-539.
85. Valentin, F., & Jensen, R. (2007). Effects on academia-industry collaboration of extending university property rights. Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(3), 251-276.
86. Vallas, S. P., & Kleinman, L. (2008). Contradiction, convergence and the knowledge economy: The confluence of academic and commercial biotechnology. Socio-Economic Review, 6(2), 283-311.
87. van Looy, B., Ranga, M., Callaert, J., Debackere, K., & Zimmermann, E. (2004). Combining entrepreneurial and scientific performance in academia: Towards a compounded and reciprocal Matthew-effect? Research Policy, 33(3), 425-441.
88. Woolgar, L. (2007). New institutional policies for university-industry links in Japan. Research Policy, 36(8), 1261-1274.
89. Zucker, L. G., & Darby, M. R. (1996). Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 93(23), 12709-12716.
90. Zuckerman, H., & Merton, R. K. (1972). Age, aging, and age structure in science. In M. W. Riley, M. Johnson, & A. Foner (Eds.), A sociology of age stratification (pp. 292-356). New York: Russell Sage.