- -

The pursuit of academic excellence and business engagement: is it irreconcilable?

RiuNet: Institutional repository of the Polithecnic University of Valencia

Share/Send to

Cited by

Statistics

The pursuit of academic excellence and business engagement: is it irreconcilable?

Show simple item record

Files in this item

dc.contributor.author Deste Cukierman, Pablo es_ES
dc.contributor.author Tang, Puay es_ES
dc.contributor.author Mahdi, Surya es_ES
dc.contributor.author Neely, Andy es_ES
dc.contributor.author Sánchez-Barrioluengo, M es_ES
dc.date.accessioned 2016-05-23T08:25:39Z
dc.date.available 2016-05-23T08:25:39Z
dc.date.issued 2013-05
dc.identifier.issn 0138-9130
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10251/64562
dc.description.abstract Universities currently need to satisfy the demands of different audiences. In light of the increasing policy emphasis on "third mission" activities, universities are attempting to incorporate these into their traditional missions of teaching and research. University strategies to accomplishing its traditional missions are well-honed and routinized, but the incorporation of the third mission is posing important strategic and managerial challenges for universities. This study explores the relationship between university-business collaborations and academic excellence in order to examine the extent to which academic institutions can balance these objectives. Based on data from the UK Research Assessment Exercise 2001 at the level of the university department, we find no systematic positive or negative relationship between scientific excellence and engagement with industry. Across the disciplinary fields reported in the 2001 Research Assessment Exercise (i.e. engineering, hard sciences, biomedicine, social sciences and the humanities) the relationship between academic excellence and engagement with business is largely contingent on the institutional context of the university department. This paper adds to the growing body of literature on university engagement with business by examining this activity for the social sciences and the humanities. Our findings have important implications for the strategic management of university departments and for higher education policy related to measuring the performance of higher education research institutions. es_ES
dc.description.sponsorship The authors would like to thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for very helpful comments. The authors acknowledge support from the Innovation and Productivity Grand Challenge (IPGC), an initiative of the Advanced Institute of Management Research (AIM) funded by the UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/C534239/1). We would like to thank the Chair of and the attendees at Session C3 of the 10th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Vienna 2008 for useful comments on an early version of this paper. en_EN
dc.language Inglés es_ES
dc.publisher Akadémiai Kiadó es_ES
dc.relation Innovation and Productivity Grand Challenge (IPGC), an initiative of the Advanced Institute of Management Research (AIM) es_ES
dc.relation UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/C534239/1 es_ES
dc.relation.ispartof Scientometrics es_ES
dc.rights Reserva de todos los derechos es_ES
dc.subject University–business collaborations es_ES
dc.subject Scientific excellence es_ES
dc.subject University departments es_ES
dc.subject University performance es_ES
dc.subject University management es_ES
dc.subject Incentives es_ES
dc.subject Impact assessment es_ES
dc.subject.classification ESTADISTICA E INVESTIGACION OPERATIVA es_ES
dc.title The pursuit of academic excellence and business engagement: is it irreconcilable? es_ES
dc.type Artículo es_ES
dc.identifier.doi 10.1007/s11192-013-0955-2
dc.rights.accessRights Cerrado es_ES
dc.contributor.affiliation Universitat Politècnica de València. Instituto de Gestión de la Innovación y del Conocimiento - Institut de Gestió de la Innovació i del Coneixement es_ES
dc.contributor.affiliation Universitat Politècnica de València. Departamento de Estadística e Investigación Operativa Aplicadas y Calidad - Departament d'Estadística i Investigació Operativa Aplicades i Qualitat es_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitation Deste Cukierman, P.; Tang, P.; Mahdi, S.; Neely, A.; Sánchez-Barrioluengo, M. (2013). The pursuit of academic excellence and business engagement: is it irreconcilable?. Scientometrics. 95(2):481-502. doi:10.1007/s11192-013-0955-2 es_ES
dc.description.accrualMethod Senia es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversion http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-0955-2 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio 481 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin 502 es_ES
dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion es_ES
dc.description.volume 95 es_ES
dc.description.issue 2 es_ES
dc.relation.senia 245645 es_ES
dc.relation.references Adamsone-Fiskovica, A., Kristapsons, J., Tjunina, E., & Ulnicane-Ozolina, I. (2009). Moving beyond teaching and research: economic and social tasks of universities in Latvia. Science and Public Policy, 36, 133–137. es_ES
dc.relation.references Agrawal, A., & Henderson, R. (2002). Putting patents in context: exploring knowledge transfer from MIT. Management Science, 48(1), 44–60. es_ES
dc.relation.references Ambos, T. A., Mäkelä, K., Birkinshaw, J., & D’Este, P. (2008). When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45(88), 1424–1447. es_ES
dc.relation.references Azoulay, P., Ding, W., & Stuart, T. (2007). The determinants of faculty patenting behaviours: Demographics or opportunities. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, 63(4), 599–623. es_ES
dc.relation.references Baldini, N., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2006). Institutional changes and the commercialization of academic knowledge: A study of Italian universities’ patenting activities between 1965 and 2002. Research Policy, 35, 518–532. es_ES
dc.relation.references Barker, K. (2007). The UK research assessment exercise: the evolution of a national research evaluation system. Research Evaluation, 16(1), 3–12. es_ES
dc.relation.references Belenzon, S., & Schankerman, M. (2007). The impact of private ownership, incentives and local development objectives on university technology transfer performance (CEP discussion paper no 779). London: Centre for Economic Performance. es_ES
dc.relation.references Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2004). Academic entrepreneurs: Social learning and participation in university technology transfer. Retrieved June 16, 2006 from http://www.hhh.umn.edu/centers/slp/clusters_entrepreneurship/pdf/bercovitz_academic_entrepreneurs.pdf . es_ES
dc.relation.references Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2006). Entrepreneurial universities and technology transfer: A conceptual framework for understanding knowledge-based economic development. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31, 175–188. es_ES
dc.relation.references Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2008). Academic entrepreneurs: Organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science, 19(1), 69–89. es_ES
dc.relation.references Bercovitz, J., Feldman, M., Feller, I., & Burton, R. (2001). Organizational structure as a determinant of academic patent and licensing behavior: An exploratory study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, and Pennsylvania State Universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 21–35. es_ES
dc.relation.references BIS (Department of Business, Innovation and Skills). (2011). Innovation and research strategy and growth. London: The Stationery Office Limited. es_ES
dc.relation.references Blumenthal, D., Campbell, E. G., Anderson, M. S., Causino, N., & Louis, K. S. (1997). Withholding research results in academic life science: Evidence from a national survey. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 277, 1224–1228. es_ES
dc.relation.references Blumenthal, D., Campbell, E. G., Causino, N., & Louis, K. S. (1996). Participation of life science faculty in research relationships with industry. New England Journal of Medicine, 335(23), 1734–1739. es_ES
dc.relation.references Bok, D. (2003). Universities in the marketplace: The commercialization of higher education. Princeton: Princeton University Press. es_ES
dc.relation.references Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., & Montobbio, F. (2007). The scientific productivity of academic inventors: New evidence from Italian data. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 16(2), 101–118. es_ES
dc.relation.references Butler, L. (2007). Assessing university research: A plea for a balanced approach. Science and Public Policy, 34(8), 565–574. es_ES
dc.relation.references Calderini, M., & Franzoni, C. (2004). Is academic patenting detrimental to high quality research? An empirical analysis of the relationship between scientific careers and patent applications. CESPRI working paper 162. Milan: Bocconi University. es_ES
dc.relation.references Carayol, N., & Matt, M. (2006). Individual and collective determinants of academic scientists’ productivity. Information. Economics and Policy, 18(1), 55–72. es_ES
dc.relation.references Clarke, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Kidlington: Pergamon. es_ES
dc.relation.references Cook, R. D., & Weisberg, S. (1982). Residuals and influence in regression. London: Chapman and Hall. es_ES
dc.relation.references Coryn, C. L. S., Hattie, J. A., Scriven, M., & Hartmann, D. J. (2007). Models and mechanisms for evaluating government-funded research: An international comparison. American Journal of Evaluation, 28(4), 437–457. es_ES
dc.relation.references D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316–339. es_ES
dc.relation.references Dasgupta, P., & David, P. (1994). Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23(5), 487–521. es_ES
dc.relation.references 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. es_ES
dc.relation.references DIUS. (2008). Innovation nation. London: HM Stationary Office. es_ES
dc.relation.references Donovan, C. (2007). Testing novel quantitative indicators of research quality, esteem and user engagement: An economics pilot study. Research Evaluation, 16(4), 231–242. es_ES
dc.relation.references Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive-effects of the new university–industry linkages. Research Policy, 27, 823–833. es_ES
dc.relation.references Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and ‘Mode 2’ to a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109–123. es_ES
dc.relation.references Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29, 313–330. es_ES
dc.relation.references Fini, R., Grimalid, R., & Sobrero, M. (2009). Factors fostering academics to start up new ventures: An assessment of Italian founders’ incentives. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 380–402. es_ES
dc.relation.references Florida, R. L., & Cohen, W. M. (1999). Engine or infrastructure? The university role in economic development. In: L.M. Branscomb, F. Kodama, R.L. Florida (Eds.), Industrializing knowledge. University–industry linkages in Japan and the United States. Cambridge: MIT Press. es_ES
dc.relation.references Friedman, J., & Silberman, J. (2003). University technology transfer: Do incentives, management, and location matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1), 17–30. es_ES
dc.relation.references Geuna, A., & Nesta, L. (2006). University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy, 35, 843–863. es_ES
dc.relation.references Godin, B., & Gingras, Y. (2000). Impact of collaborative research on academic science. Science and Public Policy, 27(1), 65–73. es_ES
dc.relation.references Gokhberg, L., Kuznetsova, T., & Zaichenko, S. (2009). Towards a new role of universities in Russia: Prospects and limitations. Science and Public Policy, 36, 121–126. es_ES
dc.relation.references Gray, D. O., Lindblad, M., & Rudolph, J. (2011). Industry–university research centers: A multivariate analysis of member retention. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 247–254. es_ES
dc.relation.references Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J.-C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy, 34, 932–950. es_ES
dc.relation.references HEFCE. (2006). Strategic plan 2006–11. Bristol: Higher Education Funding Council for England. es_ES
dc.relation.references HM Government. (2011). Government response to the hargreaves review of intellectual property and growth. Newport Wales: UK Intellectual Property Office. http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/innovation/docs/g/11-1199-government-response-to-hargreaves-review . es_ES
dc.relation.references Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2004). Patent licensing and the research university. Cambridge: NBER. es_ES
dc.relation.references Kostoff, R. N. (1998). The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation. Scientometrics, 43(1), 27–43. es_ES
dc.relation.references Lach, S., & Schankerman, M. (2007). Incentives and invention in universities (CEP discussion paper no 729). London: London School of Economics. es_ES
dc.relation.references Lam, A. (2011). What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: ‘Gold’, ‘ribbon’ or ‘puzzle’? Research Policy, 40, 1354–1368. es_ES
dc.relation.references Lambert, R. (2003). Lambert review on business university collaboration. London: HMSO. es_ES
dc.relation.references Larsen, M. T. (2008). Too close for comfort? The effect of university–industry collaboration on the scientific performance of university professors. Paper presented at the CAS workshop on the changing role of public sector research in innovation, 26–28 March 2008. Lysebu, Oslo, Norway: CAS. es_ES
dc.relation.references Larsen, W. A., & McCreary, S. J. (1972). The use of partial residual plots in regression analysis. Technometrics, 14(3), 781–790. es_ES
dc.relation.references Lee, S. Y. (1996). ‘Technology transfer’ and the research university: A search for the boundaries of university–industry collaboration. Research Policy, 25, 843–863. es_ES
dc.relation.references Louis, K. S., Jones, L. M., Anderson, M., Blumenthal, D., & Campbell, E. G. (2001). Entrepreneurship, secrecy, and productivity: A comparison of clinical and non-clinical life sciences faculty. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 233–245. es_ES
dc.relation.references MacRoberts, M. H., & MacRoberts, B. R. (1996). Problems of citation analysis. Scientometrics, 36, 435–444. es_ES
dc.relation.references Mahdi, S., D’Este, P., & Neely, A. (2008). Citation counts: Are they good predictors of RAE scores? A bibliometric analysis of RAE 2001. AIM report, February 2008. London: AIM. es_ES
dc.relation.references Mansfield, E., & Lee, J. Y. (1996). The modern university: Contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R&D support. Research Policy, 25(7), 1047–1058. es_ES
dc.relation.references Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., Phan, P., & Balkin, D. B. (2004). Entrepreneurship from the ivory tower: Do incentive systems matter. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29, 353–364. es_ES
dc.relation.references Martin, B. R., & Etzkowitz, H. (2000). The origin and evolution of the university species. VEST Journal for Science and Technology Studies, 13, 9–34. es_ES
dc.relation.references Martin, B. R., & Irvine, J. (1983). Assessing basic research: Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy. Research Policy, 12, 61–90. es_ES
dc.relation.references Martin, S., & Scott, J. T. (2000). The nature of innovation market failure and the design of public support for private innovation. Research Policy, 29, 437–447. es_ES
dc.relation.references Meyer, M., & Tang, P. (2007). Exploring the “value” of academic patents: IP management practices in UK universities and their implications for third stream indicators. Scientometrics, 70(2), 415–440. es_ES
dc.relation.references Meyer-Krahmer, F., & Schmoch, U. (1998). Science-based technologies: University–industry interactions in four fields. Research Policy, 27(8), 835–851. es_ES
dc.relation.references Mingers, J., Evangelia, A. E., & Lipitakis, C. G. (2010). Counting the citations: A comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management. Scientometrics, 85, 613–625. es_ES
dc.relation.references Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer. es_ES
dc.relation.references Moed, H. F. (2007). The future of research evaluation rests with an intelligent combination of advanced metrics and transparent peer review. Science and Public Policy, 34(8), 474–583. es_ES
dc.relation.references Moed, H. F., Glanzel, W., & Schmoch, U. (Eds.). (2004). Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. es_ES
dc.relation.references Nelson, R. R. (2001). Observations on the post Bayh-Dole rise of patenting universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 13–19. es_ES
dc.relation.references Nelson, R. R. (2004). The market economy and the scientific commons. Research Policy, 33(3), 455–471. es_ES
dc.relation.references Nightingale, P., & Scott, A. (2007). Peer review and the relevance gap: Ten suggestions for policy-makers. Science and Public Policy, 34(8), 453–553. es_ES
dc.relation.references Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2003). Citation counts and the research assessment exercise V: Archaeology and the 2001 RAE. Journal of Documentation, 59(6), 709–730. es_ES
dc.relation.references OECD. (2002). Benchmarking industry–science relationships. Paris: OECD. es_ES
dc.relation.references OECD. (2003). Turning science into business, patenting and licensing at public research organisations. Paris: OECD. es_ES
dc.relation.references Owen-Smith, J. (2003). From separate systems to a hybrid order: Accumulative advantage across public and private science at research one universities. Research Policy, 32, 1081–1104. es_ES
dc.relation.references Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001). To patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 99–114. es_ES
dc.relation.references Phelan, T. J. (1999). A compendium of issues for citation analysis. Scientometrics, 45(1), 117–136. es_ES
dc.relation.references Powers, J. B., & McDougall, P. (2005). Policy orientation effects on performance with licensing to start-ups and small companies. Research Policy, 34, 1028–1042. es_ES
dc.relation.references Renault, C. S. (2006). Academic capitalism and university incentives for faculty entrepreneurship. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 227–239. es_ES
dc.relation.references Schankerman, M. (2007). Harnessing success: Incentives for invention and technology transfer in universities. CentrePiece Autumn, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE. http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/cp231.pdf . es_ES
dc.relation.references Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32, 27–48. es_ES
dc.relation.references Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2007). Intellectual property: The assessment. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 529–540. es_ES
dc.relation.references Siegel, D. S., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2007). The rise of entrepreneurial activity at universities: Organizational and societal implications. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 489–504. es_ES
dc.relation.references Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (1996). The emergence of a competitiveness research and development policy coalition and the commercialization of academic science and technology. Science, Technology and Human Values, 21, 303–339. es_ES
dc.relation.references Stephan, P. E., Gurmu, S., Sumell, A. J., & Black, G. (2007). Who’s patenting in the university? Evidence from the survey of doctorate recipients. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 61(2), 71–99. es_ES
dc.relation.references Tang, P., Weckowska, D., Hobday, M., & Campos, A. (2009). Managing intellectual property in universities: Patents and the protection failure problem. A report prepared for the Gatsby Charitable Foundation. London: Gatsby Charitable Foundation. es_ES
dc.relation.references Thursby, G., & Thursby, M. (2002). Who is selling the ivory tower? Sources of growth in university licensing. Management Science, 48, 90–104. es_ES
dc.relation.references Thursby, G., & Thursby, M. (2004). Are faculty critical? Their role in university–industry licensing. Contemporary Economic Policy, 22(2), 162–178. es_ES
dc.relation.references Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2011). Faculty participation in licensing: Implications for research. Research Policy, 40, 20–29. es_ES
dc.relation.references Tijssen, R. J. W., Visser, M. S., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (2002). Benchmarking international scientific excellence: Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference? Scientometrics, 54(3), 381–397. es_ES
dc.relation.references Van Looy, B., Ranga, M., Callaert, J., Debackere, K., & Zimmermann, E. (2004). Combining entrepreneurial and scientific performance in academia: Towards a compounded and reciprocal Matthew-effect? Research Policy, 33, 425–441. es_ES
dc.relation.references Van Raan, A. F. J. (Ed.). (1988). Handbook of quantitative studies of science and technology. Amsterdam: Elsevier/North-Holland. es_ES
dc.relation.references Warry, P. (2007). Increasing the economic impact of research councils. A report of the research council economic impact group to the director general of science and innovation. London: UK Department of Trade and Industry, Department of Business, Skills and Universities. es_ES
dc.relation.references Whitley, R. (2007). The changing governance of the public sciences: The consequences of research evaluation systems. In R. Whitley, J. Glaser, & K. Barker (Eds.), The changing governance of the sciences: The advent of research evaluation systems. Dordrecht: Springer. es_ES


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record