Industry-university Cooperative Research Centers Research Articles

A policy mix experiment to promote start-up success: exploratory evaluation of the NSF Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Industry University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC) membership supplement

This paper investigates the outcomes of a policy experiment, the NSF SBIR/IUCRC Membership Supplement, designed to promote the success of small high-tech entrepreneurial ventures by providing subsidized memberships in university-based cooperative research centers (IUCRCs). Data collected via semi-structured interviews with representatives of 61 Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) firms indicated that SBIR firms who used the supplement to join an IUCRC reported multiple R&D benefits including research cost avoidance, research savings, and access to expensive equipment. A vast majority of SBIR firms also reported realizing or anticipated realizing commercial benefits (e.g., new investors, new products, and improvements to existing products). As suggested by social capital theory, SBIR firms reported that the policy mix experiment helped them make new connections with faculty and industry. Following our qualitative results, a structural equation model was applied to test the effect of social capital as an antecedent of SBIR firm R&D and commercialization outcomes. Results suggested that the SBIR firms who developed more social capital through interactions with faculty and industry members realized significantly more R&D and commercialization benefits. Further, commercialization benefits mediated the relationship between social capital and the SBIR firm’s perceived return on investment. Overall, this study demonstrates the feasibility of subjecting mixed policy interventions to evaluative scrutiny and provides evidence that such instruments can have substantive and positive effects on small high-tech entrepreneurial ventures. We discuss implications for social capital theory, policy mix initiatives and entrepreneurship policy.

CHOT LEADERSHIP

The first speaker is Dr. Thomas Ferris the Center Director of the NSF Center for Health Organization Transformation (CHOT). Dr. Ferris will provide a high-level overview of CHOT and provide the audience with a greater understanding of its history, funding, partners, and accomplishments. In this section, the mission, annual research model, and the I/UCRC planning integration framework will be reviewed and discussed. The NSF CHOT is the only Industry-University Cooperative Research Center (I/UCRC) focused on innovations in healthcare delivery in the nation. CHOT researchers work alongside the Industry Advisory Board (IAB) to conduct research that supports the implementation of evidence-based transformational strategies within the healthcare sector. During this symposium, Dr. Ferris will discuss some of the challenges and opportunities that can arise from these partnerships. More importantly, in this section will speak to how value is created through these collaborative efforts and how ultimately this can improve health outcomes.

Evaluating university industry collaborative research centers

This research provides performance metrics for cooperative research centers that enhance translational research through partnerships formed by government, industry and academia. Centers are part of complex ecosystems and vary greatly in the type of science conducted, organizational structures and expected outcomes. The ability to realize their objectives depends on transparent measurement systems to assist in decision making in research translation. We introduce a hierarchical decision model that uses both quantitative and qualitative metrics. A generalizable model is developed based upon program goals. The results are validated through consultation with experts. The method is illustrated using data from the National Science Foundation's industry/university cooperative research center (IUCRC) program. The methodology provides a basis for a generalizable model and measurement system to compares performance of university science and engineering focused research centers supported by industry and government.

Scientific and technological (human) social capital formation and Industry–University Cooperative Research Centers: a quasi-experimental evaluation of graduate student outcomes

In the current paper, we attempt to contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of science, technology and innovation (STI) outputs and outcomes through the application of a Scientific and Technical Human Capital (STHC) evaluation framework. We do this by describing a study that focuses on a type of STI initiative that appears ripe with potential to affect STHC impacts—Industry–University Cooperative Research Centers (IUCRCs). In doing so we summarize relevant theory related to the STHC framework and social capital formation more generally. We also define IUCRCs and highlight the program mechanisms that appear likely to impact the STHC outcomes. Finally, we narrow our focus to a relatively neglected research target of the STI evaluation—science and engineering (S&E) doctoral students. We compare social capital and other students’ outcomes by employing a rare quasi-experimental design with two training modalities: IUCRC and more traditional, non-center training. We show that our results demonstrate strong evidence for positive effects of IUCRC training on graduate S&E students’ outcomes. We also explain significant moderating effect of citizenship status on some of our results where international students, who account for 50% of this population, do not receive the same social capital outcomes as students with US citizenship or permanent resident status. In addition, we describe patterns in international students’ intentions to stay in the US and how they are affected by students’ training modality. Finally, we discuss the results and implications in the context of graduate training, STHC evaluation framework and STI and immigration policy.

NSF Industry University Cooperative Research Center for Electrochemical Processes and Technology a Model for Open Innovation

Introduction In the path from invention to product it becomes important to consider multiple options for generation of ideas that could lead to out of the box solutions to technological problems. In the search for new ideas and solutions the concept of Open Innovation has become a new paradigm for companies [1]. Within this paradigm cooperation among industry, universities, customers, and rivals is needed for success. One model that has been successful in such approach is the National Science Foundation's (NSF's) Industry/University Cooperative Research Centers (I/UCRC) program.Over the past three decades, the I/UCRCs have led the way to a new era of partnership between universities and industry, featuring high-quality, industrially relevant fundamental research, strong industrial support of and collaboration in research and education, and direct transfer of university developed ideas, research results, and technology to U.S. industry to improve its competitive posture in world markets [2].In this talk, the implementation of the NSF I/UCRC model will be described within the context of electrochemical processes and technology. A new NSF I/UCRC: Center for Electrochemical Processes and Technology (CEProTECH) had been established [3]. CEProTECH is dedicated to the improvement of chemical and biological processes utilizing novel, electrochemically-focused approaches. Ohio University (OHIO, lead Center site) and Washington University in St. Louis (WUSTL, Center site) are the founding universities. The Center facilitates fundamental, cross-cutting process analysis and research for a diverse range of industry applications. This includes both the classical electrochemical processes - chlor-alkali and aluminum processes, batteries, etc.- as well as processes that typically would not utilize electrochemical methods -remediation, advanced synthesis, and production of specialty gases, chemicals, and materials, etc.-. This talk will discuss the process of engaging companies to partner with the center and learning about their advanced manufacturing needs that electrochemical solutions can address.This presentation will focus on the path for the creation and operation of an industry focused research center, CEProTECH, the technology roadmap, the education opportunities for the participants, as well as discussing potential ways of collaboration.

Rare-Earth Economics: The Balance Problem

TMS has forged cooperative agreements with several carefully selected organizations that actively work to benefit the materials science community. In this occasional series, JOM will provide an update on the activities of these organizations. This installment, by the Center for Resource Recovery & Recycling (CR3), focuses on the importance of recycling of rare earths to mitigate the so-called Balance Problem. The CR3 is a research center established by Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Colorado School of Mines, and KU Leuven. Twenty-eight corporations and national laboratories along with support from the U.S. National Science Foundation’s Industry University Cooperative Research Center (I/UCRC) program are sponsors of the center.

University Technology Transfer: An Introduction to the Special Issue

In recent decades, there has been a substantial increase in university patenting, licensing, and research joint ventures with private companies. Technology incubators, science parks, and NSF-sponsored engineering research centers and industry–university cooperative research centers have also become ubiquitous at research universities. This special issue addresses the managerial and policy implications of these trends.

Quantifying the benefits of participating in an industry university research center: An examination of research cost avoidance

The challenges to conducting valid and complete outcome evaluations of cooperative research activities, like the National Science Foundation Industry/University Cooperative Research Centers (IUCRC) Program, are daunting. The current study tries to make a small but important contribution to this area by attempting to develop quantitative estimates of one center benefit - R&D cost avoidance. Cost avoidance is operationalized as R&D costs industrial members would have incurred but did not, because they participated in university-based industrial consortia, minus the costs of belonging to the consortia. Data were collected from a total of 18 industrial sponsors from three IUCRCs on 35 different research projects. Findings indicate that some firms do avoid R&D costs by participating in an IUCRC but the prevalence of this benefit varies across centers and across firms. The implications of these findings for policy, practice and future research are discussed.

Physician-System Alignment

The papers in this Special Supplement are based on research funded by the participating members of the joint Center for Health Management Research (CHMR) and Center for Organized Delivery Systems (CODS), and supported by the National Science Foundation under its Industry-University Cooperative Research Center Program. This 3-year research initiative from 1996 through 1999 involved 69 physician organizations (primarily organized medical groups as opposed to IPAs) associated with 14 organized delivery systems. The groups ranged in size from three to 958 with an average size of 76.4 and a median size of 25.0. Comparisons of the study groups with United States physician groups overall are shown in Table 1. The study groups are larger and more likely to be multispecialty than all groups in the United States. The organized delivery systems range in size from one hospital to 80 hospitals with an average of 21 hospitals per system and a median of 11 hospitals per system. They average 4.6 affiliated medical groups with a range from one to 23. The organized delivery systems range in total revenues in 1998 from $340 million to $6.2 billion with an average of $2.1 billion. All the study systems are not-for-profit. Most are located in single market areas, but several are located in multiple markets. For the most part, they represent some of the larger most experienced organized delivery systems in the country. Among the primary objectives of the study was to identify the factors most strongly associated with physician alignment with the health care system and the consequences for the implementation of evidence-based care management practices. The study was also designed to identify the barriers and facilitators to achieving such alignment and its consequences.

Industry-University Cooperative Research Centers

This paper takes a first look at the effect of Industry-University Cooperative Research Centers (IUCRCs) on industrial R&D laboratories. IUCRCs are small academic centers designed to foster technology transfer between universities and firms. Since IUCRCs depend on industry support we expect them to further the research of member companies. Our findings suggest that IUCRCs promote industry-university technology transfer. We find strong associations between laboratory membership in IUCRCs and the importance of faculty consultants, co-authorship with faculty and hiring of graduate students to the laboratories. IUCRC membership contributes small increments, not always statistically significant, of 2% in laboratory patenting and research expenditures. Both estimates are larger for National Science Foundation IUCRCs, consistent with their quality and their sorting to larger laboratories. These results survive a simultaneous equation analysis of the joint decision to patent and join IUCRCs. Nevertheless more work is needed to separate the effect of the IUCRCs from the matching mechanism that assigns IUCRCs to R&D laboratories.

Managing Professionals in Interorganizational Cooperative Research Alliances

ABSTRACTThe proliferation of cooperative R&D alliances is focusing attention on the problems and issues associated with managing professionals in these cooperations. This article reports some findings from a 10-year study of an industry-university cooperative research center (IUCRC) from its inception in 1985 to 1995. Interviews with the center's director and its faculty suggest that as the cooperative center evolves, the successful manager adapts his or her mode of operation to the given stage in the center's life in such areas as recruitment, motivation, control, compensation, retention, conflict resolution, and maintaining professional interest. Recommendations for managerial behavior are also offered as they apply to other forms of cooperative R&D alliances.

NSF Celebrates 20 Years of Industry-University Cooperative Research

In the two decades since it began, the National Science Foundation's industry- university cooperative research centers (IUCRC) program has emerged as one oi the most successful and highly leveraged government research programs to develop and transfer industrialK' relevant technologies from the university into practice. The program marked its 20th birthday early this month at a meeting in Washington, D.C. The Washington conference and exhibition, entitled Future Directions for Multimember Research Collaborations: The Best Path for Industrial Research? provided a showcase for the achievements ot the ILCRC program. More than 300 attendees from industry, government, and academe convened to consider alternative mechanisms—such as state-sponsored collaborations and industrial consortia in addition to the IUCRC model— to foster research collaborations that could enhance industrial competitiveness. IUCRC program director Alex Schwarzkopf notes that there are currently more than 30 active IUCRC centers across th...

Toward a conceptual model of cooperative research: patterns of development and success in university-industry alliances

A stage model of cooperative research between universities and industry using the National Science Foundation (NSF)-sponsored industry-university cooperative research centers (IUCRC) as a study sample is proposed. The model is a step above simple retrospective characterization of such cooperation in that causal factors are suggested. This study shows that certain critical events cluster around definable and discrete phases of organizational evolution of IUCRCs. Centers change, adapt, and search for an appropriate mode of operation in stages, redefining their objectives and refining their communications and organization processes. This continual sequential development and the identification of factors which impinge on each stage provides an explanatory mode of how centers evolve and how and why they succeed or fail. These findings are an encouraging note in the search for a predictive theory of cooperative scientific research. >

Factors in the Success or Failure of Industry-University Cooperative Research Centers

We studied 23 federally supported industry-university cooperative research centers and identified 22 organizational, managerial, and psychological factors that seem to contribute to the success or failure of the founders and managers of these centers, hence to the success or failure of the centers themselves. We grouped the factors into five categories: (1) relations with the focal university; (2) relations with industry; (3) internal management; (4) research and technology strategies; and (5) individual attributes of the founders and managers. Examples from actual chronologies of a successful and a nonsuccessful center seem to indicate that the attributes of the individual founders and managers and their relations with the focal university are the best predictors of success in the early stages of the life of a center, whereas relations with industry and internal management are the best predictors of success of a center in the later stages. Managers of centers and center constituents may be able to assess and predict the success or failure of a center, at any stage of its life, with a very small set of factors, thus allowing center managers to take corrective actions to improve their chances of success.

CPAC: An industry—university cooperative research center for process analytical chemistry

The Center for Process Analytical Chemistry (CPAC) is one of about 20 industry—university partnerships across the U.S.A. founded with support from the National Science Foundation to stimulate some aspect of industrial innovation and productivity. Because industry is looking toward increased automation and in order to improve productivity, new sensors and strategies need to be developed for real-time process monitoring and control. Research at CPAC is aimed at the discovery and development of analytical methods that can be integrated directly into the process and that are coupled with chemometrics techniques. CPAC is advancing a systems approach by combining (1) theoretical research on new and existing transduction principles, (2) rational sensor design and multivariate techniques for calibration, resolution and interpretation of data, (3) sensor fabrication and engineering research, and (4) process optimization and control using analytical data in real-time. Process applications are seen as one element of a broader trend, termed distributed analytical chemistry, which is bringing analytical methods out of the laboratory into the system being analyzed. The trend will provide a natural and fertile field for industry—university cooperative endeavors. In this article, the effects of the CPAC partnership on analytical research and education at the University of Washington are assessed.

Analytical Chemists Focus on Process Control

Process analytical chemistry. It's not a term most academic scientists are familiar with. However, a group of chemists and engineers at the University of Washington, Seattle, are working to change that. Those scientists believe that developing the ability to monitor industrial processes on-line is one of the major current challenges in analytical chemistry. That stance is not all that surprising because the scientists are affiliated with the university's Center for Process Chemistry (CPAC). One of the National Science Foundation's industry-university cooperative research centers, CPAC was set up in mid-1984 by two Washington chemistry professors, Bruce R. Kowalski and James B. Callis, who are codirectors of the center. Analytical chemistry missed the boat some years ago when chemists decided that, given the choice, analyses would be done in a laboratory, Kowalski says. If we had decided that analytical chemistry should be done at the site where the information is used, we would be in a ...

Manufacturing Systems Delphi Study

Abstract This paper presents the results of a Delphi inquiry carried out to determine the short and long range technology needs and plans of small and medium sized manufacturers in the Pacific Northwest. Policy directions which cooperative research centers might adopt to aid these enterprises are also examined. Delphi results demonstrated a strong consensus that many types of advanced manufacturing technologies will be used widely by the year 2000 and that their adoption is correlated with company size, net income, and gross sales volume. Functions and types of industrial robots forecasted for use are discussed as well as are timetables for the first use of various technologies. Industry-University cooperative research centers may best serve the needs of manufacturing firms by providing improved educational skills, improved information flow on assessment of technologies, and research in technologies likely to be implemented.