University-industry Alliances Research Articles

Promote or inhibit? The influence of partner repeatedness in university-industry alliance portfolios on firm innovation performance

ABSTRACT Constructing a portfolio of university-industry (UI) alliances with multiple academic institutions simultaneously has been pervasive for emerging market firms. However, whether repeated partnerships in focal firms’ UI alliance portfolios influence firm innovation performance remains unknown. Using the unbalanced panel data from Chinese manufacturing firms, we theorise and find that UI alliance portfolio partner repeatedness has a negative effect on focal firms’ innovation performance. Besides, we examine the boundary conditions under which UI alliance portfolio partner repeatedness influences firm innovation performance. We find that both institutional development and market competition weaken the negative effect of UI alliance portfolio partner repeatedness on firm innovation performance. This study contributes to previous studies and provides practical implications for both firm managers and policymakers.

How do university–industry alliances respond to the trust crisis in green technology innovation activities?

PurposeWith the evolution of the turbulent environment constantly triggering the emergence of a trust crisis between organizations, how can university–industry (U–I) alliances respond to the trust crisis when conducting green technology innovation (GTI) activities? This paper aims to address this issue.Design/methodology/approachThe authors examined the process of trust crisis damage, including trust first suffering instantaneous impair as well as subsequently indirectly affecting GTI level, and ultimately hurting the profitability of green innovations. In this paper, a piecewise deterministic dynamic model is deployed to portray the trust and the GTI levels in GTI activities of U–I alliances.FindingsThe authors analyze the equilibrium results under decentralized and centralized decision-making modes to obtain the following conclusions: Trust levels are affected by a combination of hazard and damage (short and long term) rates, shifting from steady growth to decline in the presence of low hazard and damage rates. However, the GTI level has been growing steadily. It is essential to consider factors such as the hazard rate, the damage rate in the short and long terms, and the change in marginal profit in determining whether to pursue an efficiency- or recovery-friendly strategy in the face of a trust crisis. The authors found that two approaches can mitigate trust crisis losses: implementing a centralized decision-making mode (i.e. shared governance) and reducing pre-crisis trust-building investments. This study offers several insights for businesses and academics to respond to a trust crisis.Research limitations/implicationsThe present research can be extended in several directions. Instead of distinguishing attribution of trust crisis, the authors use hazard rate, short- and long-term damage rates and change in marginal profitability to distinguish the scale of trust crises. Future scholars can further add an attribution approach to enrich the classification of trust crises. Moreover, the authors only consider trust crises because of unexpected events in a turbulent environment; in fact, a trust crisis may also be a plateauing process, yet the authors do not study this situation.Practical implicationsFirst, the authors explore what factors affect the level of trust and the level of GTI when a trust crisis occurs. Second, the authors provide guidelines on how businesses and academics can coordinate their trust-building and GTI efforts when faced with a trust crisis in a turbulent environment.Originality/valueFirst, the interaction between psychology and innovation management is explored in this paper. Although empirical studies have shown that trust in U–I alliances is related to innovation performance, and scholars have developed differential game models to portray the GTI process, building a differential game model to explore such an interaction is still scarce. Second, the authors incorporate inter-organizational trust level into the GTI level in university–industry collaboration, applying differential equations to portray the trust building and GTI processes, respectively, to reveal the importance of trust in CTI activities. Third, the authors establish a piecewise deterministic dynamic game model wherein the impact of crisis shocks is not equal to zero, which is inconsistent with most previous studies of Brownian motion.

Knowledge Transfer Effectiveness of Industry-University Alliances: Tax Awareness vs Accounting Students

There is growing interest in knowledge transfer between higher education institutions (HEIs) and industry by policymakers at all levels of government, from regional to international, which has resulted in a range of initiatives. Failure to embrace the culture of proper knowledge transfer is a major obstacle student development, particularly due to inadequate levels of tax awareness in the handling of tax matters. The outcome has been that of social and economic instability in the country. Given this environment, in-depth knowledge of tax management is a must today's economic growth. Enhancing community through competitive and sustainable economy is listed as first thrust area of rural development in Malaysia. The government is seriously concern on this issue in the education planning towards achieving sustainable communities.. It is therefore important to understand how the awareness on taxation among accounting students facilitate the industry player (IRBM) to empower a sustainable, competitive and prosperous communities. Knowledge-transfer between industry and university in exposing the roles of IRBM to university accounting students is highly referred in understanding tax responsibility, yet the inclusion of awareness, knowledge, skill, attitude and behaviour relatively none. Exploratory sequential quantitative method research design will be employed, which include questionnaire that is expected to serve as a tool to significantly expose the accounting students to the roles of IRBM. The effectiveness of knowledge-transfer between industry and university towards tax awareness to accounting students underpins sustainable decision making, which has a significant impact towards supporting Malaysia to become a developed country by 2025 and high income nation

Mapping the entrepreneurial university literature: a text mining approach

ABSTRACT Since the introduction of the concept of entrepreneurial university in 1980s, the number of studies has dramatically increased, in particular since 2015. This had made the literature on the entrepreneurial university complex, fragmented and difficult to navigate. This paper provides a comprehensive review of all topics covered in the body of literature on the entrepreneurial university and identifies the most salient topics and papers within this literature, making use of text-mining techniques. Our paper employs topic modelling that reveals the underlying semantic structure of texts to identify the different underlying. Our study systematically analyses 1,110 papers over the period 1983–2020 using the Latent Dirichlet Allocation algorithm. Our analysis shows that the entrepreneurial university is fragmented around different topics that are very diverse. We find a total of 20 differentiated topics. Our study suggests that topics related to the overarching theme of academic entrepreneurship, in particular to commercialisation of research and the triple helix model are very popular within the entrepreneurial university literature. Finally, our analysis reveals that case-study type of research is losing momentum, giving path to nascent topics of research in the areas of entrepreneurial capability and university-industry alliances, which are becoming very popular within the entrepreneurial university literature.

Knowledge-Sharing Strategies of University-Industry Alliances Promoting Green Technology Innovation in Ecosystems: Based on the Utility of Multichannel Funding

Knowledge-Sharing Strategies of University-Industry Alliances Promoting Green Technology Innovation in Ecosystems: Based on the Utility of Multichannel Funding

University-Industry R&D Alliances – An Exploration of Alliance Capabilities Measures

Background: Alliance capabilities studies have long emerged since the 1990s, focusing mainly on firm-to-firm collaboration. However, research on university-industry alliances only emerged from the 2000s. Alliance capabilities are portrayed as a crucial condition to achieve the targeted collaboration outcomes and sustainable relationships. As most alliance capabilities studies focus on firm-to-firm collaboration, research on university-industry research and development (R&D) alliance is still scarce. Thus, the measurement items for alliance capabilities in the university-industry R&D context are still under-developed. Thus, to investigate how alliance capabilities affect university-industry R&D performance in Malaysia, the relevant measures must first be defined. This paper intends to properly define the measurement items for alliance capabilities in the context of university-industry R&D alliances. Methodology: The alliance capabilities measures are adapted from various literature to accommodate both university and industry perspectives. In finalizing the measurement, in-depth pre-testing was conducted by five strategic management subject matter experts in ensuring face and content validity. Results: There are three alliance capability dimensions. The first dimension is alliance management capability which includes goal setting, process configuration, alliance structure, coordination, management support, and alliance evaluation. The second dimension is alliance integration capability which incorporates relational capabilities, inter-organizational communication, relational capital, and project team effectiveness. The third is alliance learning capability which measures alliance experience, knowledge articulation, knowledge sharing, knowledge codification, internalization, and relationship learning. Although this study successfully develops a set of measurement items for alliance capabilities in university-industry R&D, further statistical analysis is required to test this scale. Conclusion: To date, quantitative measurement items for alliance capabilities in the context of university-industry R&D alliances are still at the infancy stage. Although the measurements are yet to be statistically analyzed, they can be used as a benchmark for future university-industry R&D alliances studies.

Transactional leadership and dynamic capabilities: the mediating effect of regulatory focus

PurposeThe mechanism of leadership’s impact on dynamic capabilities has aroused widespread interest, but few studies focus on transactional leadership, especially empirical research by micro foundations in the R&D departments from collaborative innovation alliances. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how the mechanism of transactional leadership affects dynamic capabilities based on the mediating effect of regulatory focus.Design/methodology/approachIn order to better illustrate the role of transactional leadership on dynamic capabilities, the authors introduced regulatory focus as a mediator based on previous research. A sample of 245 dyads comprised of full-time employees and their immediate supervisors was collected from the innovation teams of industry-university alliances through questionnaires in China and analyzed via hierarchical regression method. Non-response bias and endogeneity testing were also conducted to confirm the validity of the findings.FindingsContingency-reward behavior promotes the development of employee sensing and seizing capability. Management-by-exception promotes the development of employee reconfiguration capability. Promotion focus positively mediates the relationship between contingency-reward and sensing-seizing capability. Prevention focus positively mediates the relationship between management-by-exception and sensing-seizing capability. In addition, management-by-exception is also positively related to sensing capability and promotion focus is positively related to reconfiguration capability.Originality/valueThis paper confirmed different dimensions of transactional leadership favor different dimensions of dynamic capabilities based on different dimensions of regulatory focus, which enriches the theory of strategic leadership and dynamic capabilities, and is conducive to the management of collaborative innovation in technological innovation alliances.

The role of interpartner dissimilarities in Industry-University alliances: Insights from a comparative case study

Based on a comparative study of two alliances, this paper provides an in-depth examination of the role of interpartner dissimilarities in Industry-University (IU) alliances. We make a conceptual distinction between routine-based dissimilarities (differences in partners’ behavior) and orientation-based dissimilarities (differences in partners’ goals and expectations), illuminating their joint implications for collaborative processes and outcomes over time. Our findings reveal that interpartner dissimilarities might not be problematic at the start-up or honeymoon stage in IU alliances. In the post-formation alliance stages, however, they are likely to complicate the collaboration. Orientation-based dissimilarities might frustrate partners’ attempts to solve routine-based dissimilarities by impeding successful joint sensemaking. We conclude that different combinations of the two types of dissimilarities are likely to trigger particular coordination and cooperation patterns in IU alliances, eliciting different outcomes on both technological and relational levels.

Universities as Hybrid Organizations

:Today’s public universities are increasingly becoming like enterprising nonprofits. Partly because of financial reasons, they are turning to the private sector to boost or replace their traditional—predominantly public—sources of funding. University-industry alliances in research and development (R&D) are the result of deliberate strategies implemented by national and international (e.g., EU) governing bodies, as well as the university leadership itself, to promote a more direct involvement of universities in research-based innovation and economic development. This multiplication of stakeholders is leading to new organizational—more hybrid—models of governance that help the university cope with the increased complexity of networks and linkages with which it is involved. This article addresses some of the drivers and manifestations of universities as hybrid organizations, as well as examples of (public-private partnership) models of knowledge linkages between university and industry, such as the ones currently promoted across Europe. The article concludes by highlighting some of the challenges of the increased hybridization of universities, including challenges for research on university governance.

Systems of indicators to evaluate the performance of university-industry alliances: a review of the literature and directions for future research

Purpose – Despite evaluating the performance of university-industry alliances being extremely important, scholars have not developed any structured and commonly accepted systems of indicators aimed at measuring the results of these collaborations. In this article, the aim is to review the literature on the evaluation of the performance of university-industry alliances and to identify a series of issues that future studies on this topic should take into account. Design/methodology/approach – The paper opts for a literature review on university-industry collaborations. The review is based on papers in management, economics, and organization science. Systems of indicators to evaluate the performance of these collaborations are discussed. Directions for further research are proposed. Findings – The literature review on firm-industry collaborations highlights a large number of contributions on the topic. However, it shows that there is still room for further inquiry on systems of indicators to evaluate the performance of these collaborations. Research limitations/implications – The literature review offers a good guideline to researchers intending to study the performance of industry-university collaborations. The discussion on the system of indicators paves the way to further empirical research on the topic. Practical implications – The authors are confident that the paper has interesting practical implications. Indeed, it is a valuable guideline for policymakers, university managers, and entrepreneurs interested in evaluating the performance of industry-university collaborations. Social implications – Industry collaborations are the third mission of university systems. When this mission is accomplished in a proper manner, it benefits firms, universities, and society at large. Originality/value – The paper adds to the debate on university-industry collaborations by offering literature on the topic with a particular emphasis on an under-researched theme: systems of indicators to evaluate the performance of these collaborations.

How should firms evaluate success in university–industry alliances? A performance measurement system

While firms increasingly engage in formal alliances with universities, there is a lack of tools to assess the outcomes of such collaborations. We propose a performance measurement system for university–industry alliances. We derive a success map from existing research on university–industry relations, indicating the causal relationships underpinning successful alliances. The success map distinguishes between different process stages, including inputs, in‐process activities, outputs and impacts. We discuss specific measures for each of these stages, and how they should be deployed. The resulting framework includes both prospective and retrospective measures and subjective and objective measures. It provides research and development managers with a tool for assessing university–industry alliances that is prospective, reliable and multi‐dimensional.

Different Missions and Commitment Power in R&D Organizations: Theory and Evidence on Industry-University Alliances

This paper proposes a theory for why firms conduct some research activities in-house but outsource other projects to independent partners and for why firms retain different degrees of control over collaborative research projects. The focus is on the determinants of a company's choice to outsource research projects to academic organizations. Because of the different institutional missions of academic organizations, outsourcing a project to a university allows a firm to commit not to terminate or alter a scientifically valuable project before it is complete. This commitment is potentially valuable for the firm in an environment where scientific value and economic value may not coincide, and scientific workers are responsive to the incentives defined by their community of peers. An economic model that formalizes these arguments is developed. Empirical hypotheses are then formulated about the kind of research activities firms will outsource to universities and activities on which they will exert stronger control. Evidence from a sample of industry-university research agreements, as well as from other large-sample and case studies, shows patterns consistent with the predictions of the model.

Knowledge Acquisition in University–Industry Alliances: An Empirical Investigation from a Learning Theory Perspective*

A firm's technological knowledge base is the foundation on which internal product and process innovations are generated. However, technological knowledge is not accumulated solely through internal learning processes. Increasingly, firms are turning to external sources in the technology supply chain to acquire the technological knowledge they need to introduce product and process innovations. Thus, the successful structuring and executing of partnerships with external “technology source” organizations is often critical to competitive success in technologically dynamic environments. This study uses situated learning theory as a basis for explaining how factors inherent to the knowledge acquisition context may affect the successful transference of technological knowledge from universities to their industry partners. Data collected via a survey instrument from 104 industry managers were used to explore the effects of various organizational knowledge interface factors on knowledge acquisition success in university–industry alliances. The organizational knowledge interface factors hypothesized to affect knowledge acquisition success in the current research include partner trust, partner familiarity, technology familiarity, alliance experience, formal collaboration teams, and technology experts' communications. Results indicate that partner trust predicts the successful acquisition of tacit knowledge but not explicit knowledge. Both forms of knowledge are predicted by partner familiarity and communications between the partners' technology experts. These findings suggest three principal managerial implications. First, although the development of a trusting relationship between the knowledge source and knowledge‐seeking parties is generally advisable, firms that seek to acquire explicit technological knowledge from their alliance partners may successfully do so without having made significant time and energy investments designed to assure themselves that they can trust those partners. The relative observability and verifiability of explicit knowledge relative to tacit knowledge may enable knowledge‐seeking parties to have greater confidence that knowledge has been acquired when partner trust is in question or has not been deliberately developed. A second implication is that, other things being equal, a knowledge‐seeking party's interests may be best served through repeated exposures to particular alliance partners, particularly if those exposures facilitate mutual understandings on relevant process‐related matters. A third managerial implication is that ongoing, broad‐based communications between the partners' technology experts should be used to effect technology transfer. A key quality of the organizational knowledge interface that promotes the successful acquisition of technological knowledge, both tacit and explicit, is multipoint, real‐time contact between the technology experts of the partner organizations. Such communications potentially enable the knowledge‐seeking party to directly access desired information through the most knowledgeable individuals on an as‐needed basis.

Different Missions and Commitment Power in R&D Organization: Theory and Evidence on Industry-University Alliances

This paper proposes a theory for why firms conduct some research activities in-house while outsourcing other projects to independent partners, and for why firms retain different degrees of control over collaborative research projects. The focus in on the determinants of a company`s choice to outsource research projects to academic organizations. Due to the different institutional mission of academic organizations, outsourcing a project to a university allows a firm to commit not to terminate or alter a scientifically valuable project before completion. This commitment is potentially valuable for the firm in an environment where scientific value and economic value may not coincide, and scientific workers are responsive to the incentives defined by their community of peers. An economic model that formalizes these arguments is developed. Empirical hypotheses are then formulated about the kind of research activities firms will outsource to universities, and activities on which they will exert stronger control. Evidence from a sample of industry-university research agreements, as well as from other large-sample and case studies, shows patterns consistent with the predictions of the model.

Universities and Fundamental Research: Reflections on the Growth of University-Industry Partnerships

The recent rise in university-industry partnerships has stimulated an important public policy debate regarding how these relationships affect fundamental research. In this paper, we examine the antecedents and consequences of policies to promote university-industry alliances. Although the preliminary evidence appears to suggest that these partnerships have not had a deleterious effect on the quantity and quality of basic research, some legitimate concerns have been raised about these activities that require additional analysis. We conclude that additional research is needed to provide a more accurate assessment of the optimal level of commercialisation.

Success breeds success: The linkage between relationship intensity and tangible outcomes in industry–university collaborative ventures

While advancing new technologies has not traditionally been a major focus of industry–university collaboration, this article stresses that industry–university alliances can be instrumental in facilitating the industrial firm's advancement of both knowledge and new technologies. To investigate this phenomenon, this study focuses on industry–university relationships within the context of university research centers. The results from this multi-method, cross-sectional study indicate that a positive, two-way linkage exists between the intensity of industry–university relationships and the level of tangible outcomes generated. Results also show that while organization size and length of relationship do not significantly affect these dynamics, the industrial firm's geographic proximity to the university research center does. The implications of these findings for both industrial firms and universities are discussed.

Creating effective University-industry alliances: An organizational learning perspective

Creating effective University-industry alliances: An organizational learning perspective

Industry-university alliances in biomedical research.

The Journal of Clinical PharmacologyVolume 32, Issue 2 p. 100-106 Free Access Industry-University Alliances in Biomedical Research Pedro Cuatrecasas MD, Corresponding Author Pedro Cuatrecasas MD Parke-Davis Pharmaceutical Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan.Parke-Davis Pharmaceutical Research, 2800 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105.Search for more papers by this author Pedro Cuatrecasas MD, Corresponding Author Pedro Cuatrecasas MD Parke-Davis Pharmaceutical Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan.Parke-Davis Pharmaceutical Research, 2800 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105.Search for more papers by this author First published: February 1992 https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1552-4604.1992.tb03813.xCitations: 2AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Citing Literature Volume32, Issue2February 1992Pages 100-106 RelatedInformation

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. >

Common ground Lessons for building industry-university alliances

On the occasion of the formation of the European University-Industry Forum, the director of the US Business-Higher Education Forum reflects on lessons learned about business-academic alliances during the first ten years of the American Forum's experiment in collaboration.