The inhibiting factors that principal investigators experience in leading publicly funded research

Journal of Technology Transfer

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 93-110

  Cunningham, James ^a   O'Reilly, Paul ^b   O'Kane, Conor ^c   Mangematin, Vincent ^d  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND   (Ireland)

^b DUBLIN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Ireland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

^d GRENOBLE ECOLE DE MANAGEMENT   (France)

Author keywords

Inhibiting factors; Principal investigators; Publicly funded research; Research autonomy; Research leadership; Research management

Indexed keywords

EID: 84895059429     PISSN: 08929912     EISSN: 15737047     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10961-012-9269-4     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Adler, N., Elmquist, M., & Norrgren, F. (2009). The challenge of managing boundary-spanning research activities: Experiences from the Swedish context. Research Policy, 38(7), 1136-1149.
2. Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29(4-5), 627-655.
3. Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2007). Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers' interactions with industry. Research Policy, 36(5), 694-707.
4. Callon, M. (1995). Is science a public good? Science, Technology and Human Values, 19(4), 395-425.
5. Cañibano, C., Otamendi, J., & Andújar, I. (2008). Measuring and assessing researcher mobility from CV analysis: The case of the Ramón y Cajal programme in Spain. Research Evaluation, 17(1), 17-31.
6. Chubin, D. E., & Hackett, E. J. (1990). Peerless science: peer review and US Science Policy. SUNY Press: New York.
7. Clark, B. R. (1987). The academic profession: National, disciplinary, and institutional settings. London: Univ of California Press.
8. Clark, B. Y. (2011). Influences and conflicts of federal policies in academic-industrial scientific collaboration. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(5), 514-545.
9. Cunningham, J., O'Reilly, P., O'Kane, C. & Mangematin, V. (2012) Managerial Challenges of Publicly Funded Principal Investigators, Technology Transfer Society Annual Conference, New York, 2/3 November.
10. Dany, F., Louvel, S., & Valette, A. (2011). Academic careers: The limits of the 'boundaryless approach' and the power of promotion scripts. Human Relations, 64(7), 971-996.
11. D'este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2010). Why do academic engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36, 316-339.
12. Dietz, J. S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). Academic careers, patents, and productivity: Industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 34(3), 349-367.
13. Drejer, I., & Jorgensen, B. H. (2004). Public-Private collaboration on knowledge generation and application to new product development projects. Research on Technological Innovation, Management and Policy, 8, 285-308.
14. Duberley, J., Cohen, L., & Mallon, M. (2006). Constructing scientific careers: Change continuity and context. Organization Studies, 27(8), 1131-1151.
15. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532-550.
16. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunity and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25-32.
17. Geuna, A., & Martin, B. R. (2003). University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison. Minerva, 41, 277-304.
18. Geuna, A., & Nesta, L. (2006). University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy, 35(6), 790-807.
19. Glassman, A. M., Moore, R. W., Rossy, G. L., Neupert, K., Napier, N. K., Jones, D. E., et al. (2003). Academic entrepreneurship-views on balancing the acropolis and the agora. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12(4), 353-374.
20. Göktepe-Hultenet, D., & Mahagaonkar, P. (2010). Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: In the expectation of money or reputation? The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(4), 401-423.
21. Guston, D. H., & Keniston, K. (1994). The fragile contract: University science and the federal government. Boston: MIT Press.
22. Hessels, L. K., & van Lente, H. (2008). Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda. Research Policy, 37(4), 740-760.
23. 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.
24. Joly, P. B., & Mangematin, V. (1996). Profile of public laboratories, industrial partnerships and organisations of R&D: The dynamics of industrial relationships in a large research organisation. Research Policy, 25(6), 901-922.
25. Klofstenet, M., & Jones-Evans, D. (2000). Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe-The case of Sweden and Ireland. Small Business Economics, 14(4), 75-96.
26. Kreeger, K. Y. (1997). Researchers setting up labs must learn skills on the fly. The Scientist, 11(5), 14-15.
27. Libaers, D., Meyer, M., & Geuna, A. (2006). The role of university spinout companies in an emerging technology: The case of nanotechnology. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 443-450.
28. Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2012). The exploitation of publicly funded technology. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(3), 375-383.
29. Lyall, C., Bruce, A., Firn, J., Firn, M., & Tait, J. (2004). Assessing end-use relevance of public sector research organisations. Research Policy, 33(1), 73-87.
30. Mangematin, V. (2004). From sectoral to horizontal public policies: The evolution of support for biotechnology in Europe, 1994-2001. Science and Public Policy, 31(5), 397-406.
31. Mangematin, V., & Robin, S. (2003). The double face of PhD students: The example of life sciences en France. Science and Public Policy, 30(6), 405-414.
32. Melkers, J., & Xiao, F. (2012). Boundary-spanning in emerging technology research: Determinants of funding success for academic scientists. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(3), 251-270.
33. Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. The Free Press: New York.
34. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Sage: Newbury Park, CA.
35. Nedeva, M., Georghiou, L., & Halfpenny, P. (1999). Benefactors or beneficiary-The role of industry in the support of university research equipment. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 24(2-3), 139-147.
36. Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001). Carrers and Contradictions: Faculty responses to the transformation of knowledge end its uses in th Life Science. The Transformation of work 10 (research in sociology of work): 46.
37. Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2003). The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: Assessing the importance of experience and connectivity. Research Policy, 32(9), 1695-1711.
38. Palmberg, C. (2008). The transfer and commercialisation of nanotechnology: A comparative analysis of university and company researchers. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(6), 631-652.
39. Preston, D. S. (2002). The university in crisis. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
40. Puay Tang, & Martin B. (2007). The benefits from publicly funded research. SPRU Working paper Paper 161.
41. Roach, M., & Sauermann, H. (2010). A taste for science? PhD Scientist's academic orientation and selfselection into research careers in industry. Research Policy, 39(3), 422-434.
42. Rosser, S. V., & Chameau, J. L. (2006). Institutionalization, sustainability, and repeatability of ADVANCE for institutional transformation. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31, 335-344.
43. Rubenstein, R., Schwartz, A. E., & Stiefel, L. (2003). Better than raw: A guide to measuring organizational performance with adjusted performance measures. Public Administration Review, 63(5), 607-615.
44. Shelly, l. (2010). Research managers uncovered: Changing roles and 'shifting arenas' in the academy. Higher Education Quarterly, 64(1), 41-64.
45. Shinn, T. (1988). Hiérarchies des chercheurs et formes de recherche. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 74, 2-22.
46. Siegel, D. S., Waldam, D., & Link, A. N. (2003). Assessing the Impact of organisational practices on the relative productivity of university transfer offices: An exploratory case. Research Policy, 32(1), 27-48.
47. Siggelkow, N. (2007). Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 20-24.
48. Stephan, P. E. (2004). Robert K. Merton's perspective on priority and the provision of the public good knowledge. Scientometrics, 60(1), 81-87.
49. Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major U. S. universities. The journal of Technology transfer, 26(1/2), 59-72.
50. Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2011). Has the bayh-dole act compromised basic research? Research Policy, 40(8), 1077-1083.
51. Vincett, P. S. (2010). The economic impacts of academic spin-off companies, and their implications for public policy. Research Policy, 39(6), 736-747.
52. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills: SAGE.