Time allocation decisions of academic scientists and their impact on technology commercialization

IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management

Volumn 59, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 705-716

  Libaers, Dirk P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI KANSAS CITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Academic scientists; technology commercialization; time allocation

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC ENTREPRENEURSHIP; ACADEMIC SCIENTISTS; FEDERAL GRANTS; GRADUATE STUDENTS; INDUSTRIAL CONTRACTS; INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS; REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE; RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES; TECHNOLOGY COMMERCIALIZATIONS; TIME ALLOCATION; TIME SPENT; UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS;

INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH; INDUSTRY; STUDENTS;

TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 84867886386     PISSN: 00189391     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/TEM.2012.2184119     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. A. Agrawal, "Engaging the inventor: Exploring licensing strategies for university inventions and the roleof latent knowledge," Strategic Manage. J., vol. 27, pp. 63-79, 2006. (Pubitemid 43011606)
2. T. Behrens and D. Gray, "Unintended consequences of cooperative research: Impact of industry sponsorship on climate of academic freedom and other graduate student outcomes," Res. Policy, vol. 30, pp. 179-199, 2001. (Pubitemid 33678407)
3. C. Bhat and F. Koppelman, "A retrospective and prospective review of time-use research," Transport, vol. 26, pp. 119-139, 1999. (Pubitemid 30024343)
4. D. Blumenthal, N. Campbell, and K. Louis, "Participation of life science faculty in research relationships with industry," New Eng. J. Med., vol. 335, pp. 1735-1739, 1996.
5. D. Blumenthal, N. Causino, and E. Campbell, "Academic-industry research relationships in genetics: A field apart," Nature Genetics, vol. 16, pp. 104-108, 1997. (Pubitemid 27198166)
6. C. Boardman, "Government centrality to university-industry interactions: University research centers and the industry involvement of university researchers," Res. Policy, vol. 38, no. 10, pp. 1505-1516, 2009.
7. H. Bowen and J. H. Schuster, American Professors: A National Resource Imperiled. New York: Oxford Univ. Press., 1986.
8. C Boyer and D. Lewis, "Faculty consulting: Responsibility or promiscuity?" J. Higher Edu., vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 637-659, 1984.
9. B. Bozeman and E. Corley, "Scientists' collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and human capital," Res. Policy, vol. 33, pp. 599-616, 2004.
10. B. Bozeman and M. Gaughan, "Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers' interactions with industry," Res. Policy, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 694-707, 2007. (Pubitemid 46810007)
11. J. M. Braxton and J. Berger, "Public trust, research activity, and the ideal of service to students as clients of teaching," in Faculty Teaching and Research: Is Therea Conflict? (New Directions for Institutional Research), J. B. Braxton, Ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1996.
12. M. Calderini, C. Franzoni, and A. Vezzulli, "The unequal benefits of academic patenting for science and engineering research," IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 16-30, Feb. 2009.
13. W. Cohen, R. Nelson, and J. Walsh, "Links and impacts: The influence of public research on industrial R&D," Manage. Sci., vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 1-23, 2002. (Pubitemid 34434352)
14. P. Cohen, J. Cohen, S. G. West, and L. S. Aiken, Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 3rd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 2003.
15. C. Colbeck, "Merging in a seamless blend: How faculty integrate teaching and research," J. Higher Edu., vol. 69, no. 6, pp. 647-671, 1998.
16. J. Colyvas, M. Crow, A. Gelijns, R. Mazzoleni, R. Nelson, and N. Rosenberg, "How do University inventions get into practice?" Manage. Sci., vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 61-72, 2002. (Pubitemid 34434355)
17. E. Corley, C. Boardman, and B. Bozeman, "Design and the management of multi-institutional research collaborations: Theoretical implications from two case studies," Res. Policy, vol. 35, pp. 975-993, 2006.
18. R. Cyert and J. G. March, A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1963.
19. D. De Carolis, B. Litzky, and K. Eddleston, "Why networks enhance the progress of new venture creation: The influence of social capital and cognition," Entrepreneurship Theory Practice, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 527-545, 2009.
20. A. Del Campo, A. Sparks, R. C. Hill, and R. T. Keller, "The transfer and commercialization of university-developed medical imaging technology: Opportunities and problems," IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 289-299, Aug. 1999.
21. D. Di Gregorio and S. Shane, "Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?" Res. Policy, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 209-227, 2003.
22. P. Di Maggio and W. W. Powell, "The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields," Amer. Sociol. Rev., vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 147-160, 1983.
23. H. Etzkowitz, "Entrepreneurial scientists and entrepreneurial universities in American academic science," Minerva, vol. 21, pp. 198-233, 1983.
24. H. Etzkowitz, A. Webster, and P. Healy, Capitalizing Knowledge: New Intersections of Industry and Academia. Albany, NY: State University of New York Univ. Press, 1998.
25. H. Etzkowitz and L. Leydesdorff, "The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and 'mode 2' to a triple helix of university-industry- government relations," Res. Policy, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 109-123, 2000.
26. H. Etzkowitz, A. Webster, C. Gebhardt, and B. R. C. Terr, "The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm," Res. Policy, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 313-330, 2000.
27. H. Etzkowitz, "The second academic revolution and the rise of entrepreneurial science," IEEE Technol. Soc. Mag., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 18-29, Summer 2001. (Pubitemid 32609090)
28. H. Etzkowitz, MIT and the Rise of Entrepreneurial Science. London, U.K.: Routledge, 2002.
29. J. Fairweather, "Faculty rewards reconsidered: The nature of tradeoffs," Change, vol. 25, pp. 44-47, 1993.
30. J. Fairweather, "The mythologies of faculty productivity: Implications for institutional policy and decision making," J. Higher Edu., vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 26-48, 1998.
31. K. Feldman, "Research productivity and scholarly accomplishment of college teachers as related to their instructional effectiveness: A review and exploration," Res. Higher Edu., vol. 26, pp. 227-298, 1987.
32. R. Geiger, Knowledge and Money: Research Universities and the Paradox of the Marketplace. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Univ. Press, 2004.
33. E.Geisler, "Industry-university technology cooperation: A theory of inter-organizational relationships," Technol. Anal. Strategic Manage., vol. 7, pp. 217-229, 1995. (Pubitemid 26433879)
34. E.Geisler,"Explaining the generation and performanceofintersector technology cooperation: A survey of the literature," Technol. Anal. Strategic Manage., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 195-206, 2001.
35. M. Gibbons, "Changing patterns of university-industry relations," Minerva, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 352-361, 2000.
36. M. Gibbons and R. Johnston, "The roles of science in technological innovation," Res. Policy, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 220-242, 1974.
37. M. Gluck, D. Blumenthal, and M. Stoto, "University-industry relationships in the life sciences: Implications for students and post-doctoral fellows," Res. Policy, vol. 16, pp. 327-336, 1987.
38. S. Gopalakrishnan and M. D. Santoro, "Distinguishing between knowledge transfer and technology transfer activities: The role of key organizational factors," IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 57-69, Feb. 2004.
39. M. Gulbrandsen and J. C. Smeby, "Industry funding and university professors' research performance," Res. Policy, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 932-950, 2005. (Pubitemid 41078309)
40. J. Hattie and H. W. Marsh, "The relationship between research and teaching: A meta-analysis," Rev. Educational Res., vol. 66, pp. 507-542, 1996.
41. J. Hattie and H. W. Marsh, "One journey to unravel the relationship between research and teaching," presented at the Int. Colloq. Research and Teaching: Closing the Divide?, Winchester, U.K., 2004
42. M. Haynie, D. Shepherd, and J. McMullen, "An opportunity for me? The role of resources in opportunity evaluation decisions," J. Manage. Stud., vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 337-361, 2009.
43. A. Hess and F. Rothaermel, "Intellectual human capital and the emergence of biotechnology: Trends and patterns, 1974-2006," IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 65-76, Feb. 2012.
44. T. Juster and F. Stafford, "The allocation of time: Empirical findings, behavioral models, and problems of measurement," J. Econ. Literature, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 471-522, 1991.
45. S. K. Kassicieh and R. Radosevich, From Lab to Market: Commercialization of Public Sector Technology. New York: Plenum, 1994.
46. S. K. Kassicieh, S. T. Walsh, J. C. Cummings, P. McWorther, A. Romig, and D. Williams, "Factors differentiating the commercialization of disruptive and sustaining technologies," IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 375-387, Nov. 2002.
47. M. Kenney and D. Patton, "Reconsidering the Bayh-Dole act and the current university invention ownership model," Res. Policy, vol. 38, pp. 1407-1422, 2009.
48. A.Link, C. Swann, and B. Bozeman,"Atime allocation study of university faculty," Econ. Edu. Rev., vol. 27, pp. 363-374, 2008.
49. E. Mansfield, "Academic research underlying industrial innovations: Sources, characteristics, and financing," Rev. Econ. Statist., vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 55-65, 1995. (Pubitemid 26429371)
50. W. Massey and R. Zemsky, "Faculty discretionary time: Departments and the academic ratchet," J. Higher Edu., vol. 65, pp. 1-22, 1994.
51. G. D. Markman, P. Phan, D. Balkin, and P. Gianiodis, " Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer," J. Bus. Venturing, vol. 20, pp. 241-263, 2005. (Pubitemid 39473695)
52. G. D. Markman, P. Gianiodis, and P. Phan, "Full-time faculty or part-time entrepreneurs," IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 29-36, Feb. 2008. (Pubitemid 351314637)
53. H. Marsh and J. Hattie, "The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness," J. Higher Edu., vol. 73, no. 5, pp. 603-641, 2002.
54. G. McMillan and R. Hamilton, "The impact of publicly funded basic research: An integrative extension of Salter and Martin," IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 184-191, 2003.
55. J. F. Milem, J. B. Berger, and E. Dey, "Faculty time allocation: A study of change over twenty years," J. Higher Edu., vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 454-475, 2000.
56. S. Mosey and M. Wright, "From human capital to social capital: A longitudinal study of technology-based academic entrepreneurs," Entrepreneurship Theory Practice, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 909-935, 2007.
57. D. Mowery, R. R. Nelson, B. Sampat, and A. A. Ziedonis, "The growth of patenting and licensing by the U.S. universities: An assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980," Res. Policy, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 99-119, 2001. (Pubitemid 33676869)
58. D. Mowery, B. N. Sampat, and A. A. Ziedonis, "Learning to patent: Institutional experience, learning, and the characteristics of U.S. university patents after the Bayh-Dole act, 1981-1992," Manage. Sci., vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 73-89, 2002. (Pubitemid 34434356)
59. D. Mowery, R. R. Nelson, B. N. Sampat, and A. A. Ziedonis, Ivory Tower and Industrial Innovation. University-Industry Technology Transfer Before and After the Bayh-Dole Act. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Univ. Press, 2004.
60. N. Nicolaou and S. Birley, "Academic networks in a trichotomous categorization of university spinouts," J. Bus. Venturing, vol. 18, pp. 333-359, 2003. (Pubitemid 36567503)
61. M. Perkmann and K. Walsh, "Engaging the scholar: Three types of academic consulting and their impact on universities and industry," Res. Policy, vol. 37, pp. 1884-1891, 2008.
62. D. Rebne, "Faculty consulting and scientific knowledge-a traditional university-industry linkage," Edu. Administ. Quart., vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 338-357, 1989.
63. E. Roberts, Entrepreneurs in High Technology: Lessons From MIT and Beyond. New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1991.
64. N. Rosenberg, Exploring the Black Box: Technology, Economics, and History. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1994.
65. F. Rothaermel, S. Agung, and L. Jiang, "University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature," Ind. Corporate Change, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 691-791, 2007. (Pubitemid 47323947)
66. A. Salter and B. Martin, "The economic benefits of basic research: A critical review," Res. Policy, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 509-532, 2001. (Pubitemid 33674598)
67. M. Santoro, "Success breeds success: The linkage between relationship intensity and tangible outcomes in industry-university collaborative ventures," J. High Technol. Manage. Res., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 255-273, 2000.
68. R. Schmidt, "Who maximizes what-A study in student time allocation," Amer. Econ. Rev., vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 23-28, 1983.
69. S. Seshadri and Z. Shapira, "Managerial allocation of time and effort: The effects of interruptions," Manage. Sci., vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 647-662, 2001. (Pubitemid 34192789)
70. S. Shane, "Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities," Org. Sci., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 448-469, 2000.
71. S. Shane, Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation. Norwich, MA: Edward Elgar, 2004.
72. S. Shane and T. Stuart, "Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups," Manage. Sci., vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 154-170, 2002. (Pubitemid 34434360)
73. D. Siegel, Technology Entrepreneurship: Institutions and Agents Involved in University Technology Transfer, vol. 1. London, U.K.: Edgar Elgar, 2006.
74. L. Singell, Jr., J. Lillydahl, and L. Singell, Sr., "Will changing times change the allocation of faculty time?" J. Human Resources, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 429-449, 1996. (Pubitemid 126594420)
75. G. Stevens, J. Burley, and R. Divine, "Creativity (plus) business discipline (equals) higher profits faster from new product development," J. Product Innovation Manage., vol. 16, pp. 455-468, 1999. (Pubitemid 129590838)
76. D. Stokes, D. E. Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1997.
77. J. Thursby and M. C. Thursby, "Who is selling the Ivory tower? Sources of growth in university licensing," Manage. Sci., vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 90-104, 2002. (Pubitemid 34434357)
78. S.Venkatarman, "The distinctive domainofentrepreneurship research: An editor's perspective," in Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence, and Growth, J. Katz and R. Brockhaus, Eds. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1997.
79. E. Von Hippel, The Sources of Innovation. New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1988.
80. J. West, "How open is enough? Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies," Res. Policy, vol. 32, pp. 1259-1285, 2003.
81. C. Winship and L. Radbill, "Sampling weights and regression analysis," Sociol. Methods Res., vol. 23, pp. 230-257, 1994.
82. Z. Xu, M. E. Parry, and M. Song, "The impact of technology transfer office characteristics on university invention disclosure," IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 212-227, May 2011.
83. A. Zaheer, B. McEvily, and V. Perrone, "Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance," Org. Sci., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 141-159, 1998.
84. S. Zahra, "Technology strategy and company performance: Examining the moderating effect of the competitive environment," J. Bus. Venturing, vol. 11, pp. 189-219, 1996. (Pubitemid 126166367)
85. S. Zahra and J. G. Covin, "Business strategy, technology policy and firm performance," Strategic Manage. J., vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 451-478, 1993.
86. S. Zahra and A. Nielsen, "Sources of capabilities, integration and technology commercialization," Strategic Manage. J., vol. 23, pp. 377-398, 2002. (Pubitemid 34452920)