Research centers in transition: Patterns of convergence and diversity

Journal of Technology Transfer

Volumn 37, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 18-42

  Cruz Castro, Laura ^a   Sanz Menéndez, Luis ^a   Martínez, Catalina ^a  

^a The Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas   (Spain)

Author keywords

Funding strategies; Organizational change; Research centers; Research management; Spain

Indexed keywords

EID: 84856266663     PISSN: 08929912     EISSN: 15737047     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10961-010-9168-5     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Ashworth, R., Boyne, G., & Delbridge, R. (2009). Escape from the iron cage? Organizational change and isomorphic pressures in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(1), 165-187.
2. Barbacid, M. (2008). Interview in focus on Europe: Research by the numbers? by Jill U. Adams AAAS/Science, 11 July 2008, pp. 269-273.
3. Boden, R., Cox, D., & Nedeva, M. (2006). The appliance of science?-New public management and strategic change. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 18(2), 125-241.
4. Boden, R., Cox, D., Nedeva, M., & Barker, K. (2004). Scrutinising science: The changing UK government of science. Houndmills, New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.
5. Boxenbaum, E., & Jonsson, S. (2008). Isomorphism, diffusion and decoupling. In R. Greenwood, Ch. Oliver, R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 78-98). London: Sage.
6. Bozeman, B. (1987). All organizations are public: Comparing public and private organizations. Washington, DC: Beard Books (reprint 2004).
7. Bozeman, B., & Boardman, P. C. (2003). Managing the new multipurpose multidiscipline university research centers: Institutional innovation in the academic community. Arlington, VA: IBM Center for the Business of Governments.
8. Bozeman, B., & Boardman, C. (2004). The NSF engineering research centers and the university-industry research revolution: A brief history featuring an interview with Erich Bloch. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3-4), 365-375.
9. Bozeman, B., & Crow, M. (1990). The environments of US R& D laboratories: political and market influences. Policy Sciences, 23(1), 25-56.
10. Cohen, L., Duberley, J., & McAuley, J. (1999). The purposes and process of science: contrasting understandings in UK research institutions. R& D Management, 29(3), 233-245.
11. Cox, D., Gummett, P., & Barker, K. (Eds.). (2001). Government laboratories. Transition and transformation. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
12. Crow, M., & Bozeman, B. (1987). R& D laboratory classification and public policy. The effects of the environmental context in laboratory behavior. Research Policy, 16(5), 229-258.
13. Crow, M., & Bozeman, B. (1998). Limited by design. R& D laboratories in the U. S. national innovation system. New York: Columbia University Press.
14. Crow, M., Emmert, M. A., & Jacobson, C. I. (1990). Government-supported industrial research institutes in the United States. Policy Studies Journal, 19(1), 59-74.
15. Cruz-Castro, L., & Sanz-Menéndez, L. (2007). New legitimation models and the transformation of the research field. International Studies of Management and Organization, 37(1), 27-52.
16. Deephouse, D. (1996). Does Isomorphism legitimate? Academy of Management Journal, 30(4), 1024-1039.
17. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.
18. EUROLABS. (2002). A comparative analysis of public, semi-public and recently privatised research centres, PREST on behalf of a project consortium (PREST, CSI_EM, SISTER, CSIC_UPC), July 2002. Brussels: CEC. ftp://ftp. cordis. lu/pub/rtd2002/docs/ind_report_prest1. pdf. Accessed August 1, 2008.
19. Feller, I., Ailes, C. P., & Roessner, J. D. (2002). Impacts of research universities on technological innovation in industry: Evidence from engineering research centres. Research Policy, 31(3), 457-474.
20. Fligstein, N. (1991). The structural transformation of American industry: An institutional account of the causes of diversification of the large firms, 1919-1979. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 311-336). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
21. Frumkin, P., & Galaskiewicz, J. (2004). Institutional isomorphism and public sector organizations. Journal of Public Administrations Research and Theory, 14(3), 283-307.
22. Sanz G., & Fuster, V. (2008). Spanish National Center for Cardiovascular Research (CNIC): Pioneering a new model for funding biomedical research. Nature Clinical Practice. Cadiovascular Medicine, CNIC Edition, 5(11), 19-23.
23. George, E., Chattopadhyay, P., Sitkin, S. B., & Barden, J. (2006). Cognitive underpinnings of institutional perspectives and change: A framing perspective. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 347-365.
24. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, S., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge. The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
25. Greenwood, R., Oliver, Ch., Suddaby, R., & Sahlin, K. (Eds.) (2008). Isomorphism, diffusion and decoupling. In The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism. London: Sage.
26. Haveman, H. A. (1993). Follow the leader: Mimeric isomorphism and entry into new markets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4), 593-627.
27. Heimer, C. A. (1999). Comparing institutions: Law, medicine, and family in neonatal intensive care. Law & Society Review, 33(1), 17-66.
28. Jansen, D. (Ed.). (2007). New forms of governance in research organizations: Disciplinary approaches, interfaces and integration. Dordrecht: Springer.
29. Jordan, G. B. (2001). Measuring the performance of American science and technology laboratories. In D. Cox, P. Gummett, & K. Barker (Eds.), Government laboratories. Transition and transformation (pp. 174-186). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
30. Kraatz, M. S., & Zajac, E. J. (1996). Exploring the limits of new institutionalism: The causes and consequences of illegitimate organizational change. American Sociological Review, 61(5), 812-836.
31. Larédo, P. (2001). Government laboratories or public institutions of professional research: The case of France. In D. Cox, P. Gummett, & K. Barker (Eds.), Government laboratories. Transition and transformation (pp. 114-127). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
32. Larédo, P., & Mustar, P. (2004). Public sector research: A growing role in innovation systems. Minerva, 42(1), 11-27.
33. Lin, M. W., & Bozeman, B. (2006). Researchers' industry experience and productivity in university-industry research centers: A "scientific and technical human capital" explanation. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 269-290.
34. Liyanage, S., & Mitchell, H. (1993). Organizational management in Australian cooperative research centres. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 5(1), 3-14.
35. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
36. Meyer, J. W., Scott, R. W., & Strange, D. (1987). Centralization, fragmentation, and school district complexity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(2), 186-202.
37. Mizruchi, M. S., & Fein, L. C. (1999). The social construction of organizational knowledge: A study of the uses of coercitive, mimetic, and normative isomorphism. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 653-683.
38. Moso, M., & Olazaran, M. (2002). Regional technology policy and the emergence of an R& D system in the Basque country. Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(1), 61-75.
39. Nedeva, M., & Boden, R. (2006). Changing science: The advent of neo-liberalism. Prometheus, 24(3), 269-281.
40. Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science. Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity.
41. OECD. (1989). The changing role of government research laboratories. Paris: OECD.
42. OECD. (2003). Governance of public research. Toward better practices. Paris: OECD.
43. OECD. (2004). OECD science, technology and industry outlook 2004. Paris: OECD.
44. OECD. (2009). Main science and technology indicators 2009/1. Paris: OECD.
45. Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional process. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145-179.
46. Perry, J. L., & Rainey, H. G. (1988). The public-private distinctions in organization theory. Academy of Management Review, 13(2), 182-201.
47. Pestre, D. (2003). Regimes of knowledge production in society: Towards a more political and social reading. Minerva, 41(3), 245-261.
48. Rainey, H. G., & Bozeman, B. (2000). Comparing public and private organizations. Empirical research and the power of a priori. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 447-469.
49. Rip, A. (2002). Regional innovation systems and the advent of strategic science. Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(1), 123-231.
50. Ruef, M., & Scott, W. R. (1998). A multidimensional model of organizational legitimacy: Hospital survival in changing institutional environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(4), 877-904.
51. Sanz-Menéndez, L., & Cruz-Castro, L. (2003). Coping with environmental pressures: Public research organizations responses to funding crisis. Research Policy, 32(8), 1293-1308.
52. Sanz-Menéndez, L., & Cruz-Castro, L. (2005). Explaining the science and technology policies of regional governments. Regional Studies, 39(7), 939-954.
53. Schimank, U., & Stucke, A. (1994). Coping with trouble as a complex constellation of political and research actors: Introducing a theoretical perspective. In U. Schimank & A. Stucke (Eds.), Coping with trouble. How science reacts to political disturbances of research conditions (pp. 7-34). Frankfurt-New York: Campus Verlag-St. Martin's Press.
54. Scott, W. R. (1987). The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(4), 493-511.
55. Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
56. Scott, W. R. (2008). Approaching adulthood: the maturing of institutional theory. Theory and Society, 37(5), 427-442.
57. Senker, J. (2000). Introduction to a special issue on changing organization and structure of European public-sector research systems. Science and Public Policy, 27(6), 394-396.
58. Smith, J. (2000). From R& D to strategic knowledge management: transitions and challenges for national laboratories. R& D Management, 30(4), 305-311.
59. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteurs quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: The Brooking Institution.
60. van der Meulen, B. J. R., & Rip, A. (1994). Research institutes in transition. Enschede: University of Twente -WMW.
61. Weingart, P. (1997). From "finalization" to "mode 2": Old wine in new bottles? Social Science Information, 36(4), 591-613.
62. Zajac, E. J., & Kraatz, M. S. (1993). A diametric forces model of strategic change: Assessing the antecedents and consequences of restructuring in the higher education industry. Strategic Management Journal, 14 (special issue: Corporate Restructuring), 83-102.