Research collaboration and behavioural additionality: A New Zealand case study

Abstract

Generating the greatest benefit from public research programmes is a major aim for industry managers and policy administrators alike. However, how to measure whether benefit has occurred createsf a considerable dilemma for managers and policy-makers. One approach centres upon the concept of ‘additionality’ or ‘what difference the policy has made’. Traditional ‘input additionality’ measures of subsequent research and development activity, for example, neither incorporate all impacts nor give adequate signals about adequate signals about aspects of ‘output additionality’, such as the impact on increased competitiveness at the level of the firm, or national competitiveness, the ultimate goal for the majority of research policies. An intermediate form of impact, ‘behavioural additionality’, centred upon changes in a firm's subsequent managerial behaviour, is considered to provide an alternative, yet compelling perspective on the impact of public support on the conduct of research. This study outlines empirical eveidence found for the various forms of additionality in a New Zealand collaborative research programme. It discusses how managers and policy administrators can exploit the occrrence of behavioural additionality to maximize the impact of a research policy, on the basis that modified behaviour is likely to strengthen a policy' latent abilityto influence the creation of output additionality. In such circumstances, the study suggests that managers and policy-makers should be identifying those interventions that lead to sustained improvements in mangerial practice, and in competitiveness, and should be managing their diffusion within firms and throughout industries.