IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v176y2022i1d10.1007_s10551-020-04686-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

No Strings Attached? Potential Effects of External Funding on Freedom of Research

Author

Listed:
  • René Chester Goduscheit

    (Aarhus University)

Abstract

Universities are increasingly pushed to apply for external funding for their research and incentivised for making an impact in the society surrounding them. The consequences of these third-mission activities for the degree of freedom of the research, the potential to make a substantial research contribution and the ethical challenges of this increased dependency on external funding are often neglected. The implications of external sponsorship of research depend on the level of influence of the sponsor in the various elements of the research. This paper provides a typology of sponsored innovation management research projects in order to create a common language between researchers and practitioners. Through in-depth analysis of nine innovation management research projects, carried out and funded in Northern Europe, and a rich set of qualitative data, the paper outlines the key dimensions of the projects where researchers and practitioners should agree on the degrees of freedom of the research project. It identifies three different methodological dimensions that can impact the likelihood of generating publishable results from the innovation management research. The three dimensions are purpose (e.g. formulating the topic of the research and the research question to pursue), throughput (the possibility of the researcher to decide on the way that the research question should be answered) and output (the expectations of the funding body on the results that should be generated from the innovation management research). The paper discusses the positive and negative impact of these types of projects and generates implications for the central stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • René Chester Goduscheit, 2022. "No Strings Attached? Potential Effects of External Funding on Freedom of Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 1-15, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:176:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-020-04686-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-020-04686-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-020-04686-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-020-04686-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gulbrandsen, Magnus & Smeby, Jens-Christian, 2005. "Industry funding and university professors' research performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 932-950, August.
    2. Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
    3. Soutrik Basu & Joost Jongerden & Guido Ruivenkamp, 2017. "Beyond the dichotomy of instrumentality and non-instrumentality of knowledge production: The case of generation challenge programme," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(4), pages 583-597.
    4. Bruneel, Johan & D'Este, Pablo & Salter, Ammon, 2010. "Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 858-868, September.
    5. Nicola Baldini, 2008. "Negative effects of university patenting: Myths and grounded evidence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(2), pages 289-311, May.
    6. Dirk Czarnitzki & Christoph Grimpe & Andrew A. Toole, 2015. "Delay and secrecy: does industry sponsorship jeopardize disclosure of academic research?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(1), pages 251-279.
    7. Callaert, Julie & Landoni, Paolo & Van Looy, Bart & Verganti, Roberto, 2015. "Scientific yield from collaboration with industry: The relevance of researchers’ strategic approaches," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 990-998.
    8. Thomas W. Guenther, 2019. "Third mission: a challenge for scholars? An editorial," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 247-249, October.
    9. Behrens, Teresa R. & Gray, Denis O., 2001. "Unintended consequences of cooperative research: impact of industry sponsorship on climate for academic freedom and other graduate student outcome," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 179-199, February.
    10. Arvanitis, Spyros & Kubli, Ursina & Woerter, Martin, 2008. "University-industry knowledge and technology transfer in Switzerland: What university scientists think about co-operation with private enterprises," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1865-1883, December.
    11. Freel, Mark & Persaud, Ajax & Chamberlin, Tyler, 2019. "Faculty ideals and universities' third mission," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 10-21.
    12. Fabrizio Cesaroni & Andrea Piccaluga, 2016. "The activities of university knowledge transfer offices: towards the third mission in Italy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 753-777, August.
    13. Kumar, Minu & Noble, Charles H., 2016. "Beyond form and function: Why do consumers value product design?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 613-620.
    14. Jain, Sanjay & George, Gerard & Maltarich, Mark, 2009. "Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 922-935, July.
    15. Hsing-fen Lee & Marcela Miozzo, 2015. "How does working on university–industry collaborative projects affect science and engineering doctorates’ careers? Evidence from a UK research-based university," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 293-317, April.
    16. Niels Mejlgaard & Thomas Kjeldager Ryan, 2017. "Patterns of third mission engagement among scientists and engineers," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(4), pages 326-336.
    17. Baglieri, Daniela & Baldi, Francesco & Tucci, Christopher L., 2018. "University technology transfer office business models: One size does not fit all," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 51-63.
    18. Degl’Innocenti, Marta & Matousek, Roman & Tzeremes, Nickolaos G., 2019. "The interconnections of academic research and universities’ “third mission”: Evidence from the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    19. Maximilian Unger & Giulia Ajmone Marsan & Dirk Meissner & Wolfgang Polt & Mario Cervantes, 2020. "New challenges for universities in the knowledge triangle," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 806-819, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gazi Islam & Michelle Greenwood, 2023. "Ethical Research in Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 1-5, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Barry Bozeman & Daniel Fay & Catherine Slade, 2013. "Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-67, February.
    2. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Brigida Blasi & Carmela Anna Nappi & Sandra Romagnosi, 2022. "Quality of research as source and signal: revisiting the valorization process beyond substitution vs complementarity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 407-434, April.
    3. Quentin Plantec & Benjamin Cabanes & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2021. "Market-Pull Or Research Push? Effects Of Research Orientations On University-Industry Collaborative Ph.D. Projects' Performances," Post-Print halshs-03190142, HAL.
    4. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Luca Secondi & Enza Setteducati & Alessio Ancaiani, 2014. "Participation and commitment in third-party research funding: evidence from Italian Universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 169-198, April.
    5. Victoria Galan-Muros & Todd Davey, 2019. "The UBC ecosystem: putting together a comprehensive framework for university-business cooperation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1311-1346, August.
    6. Lin, Jun-You, 2017. "Balancing industry collaboration and academic innovation: The contingent role of collaboration-specific attributes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 216-228.
    7. Lauretta Rubini & Chiara Pollio & Giuseppe Lucio Gaeta & Elisa Barbieri, 2021. "Heterogeneous effects of spinoff foundations on the means of technology transfer: the role of past academic-industry collaborations," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 38(1), pages 261-292, April.
    8. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Jofre-Bonet, Mireia & Lawson, Cornelia, 2015. "The double-edged sword of industry collaboration: Evidence from engineering academics in the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 1160-1175.
    9. Robert Huggins & Daniel Prokop & Piers Thompson, 2020. "Universities and open innovation: the determinants of network centrality," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 718-757, June.
    10. Ani Gerbin & Mateja Drnovsek, 2016. "Determinants and public policy implications of academic-industry knowledge transfer in life sciences: a review and a conceptual framework," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 979-1076, October.
    11. Borah, Dhruba & Ellwood, Paul, 2022. "The micro-foundations of conflicts in joint university-industry laboratories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    12. Adegbile, Abiodun Samuel & Sarpong, David & Kolade, Oluwaseun, 2021. "Environments for Joint University-Industry Laboratories (JUIL): Micro-level dimensions and research implications," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    13. Compagnucci, Lorenzo & Spigarelli, Francesca, 2020. "The Third Mission of the university: A systematic literature review on potentials and constraints," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    14. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic Inventions Outside the University: Investigating Patent Ownership in the UK," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 385-398, July.
    15. Victoria Galán-Muros & Peter Sijde & Peter Groenewegen & Thomas Baaken, 2017. "Nurture over nature: How do European universities support their collaboration with business?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 184-205, February.
    16. Tijssen, Robert J.W., 2018. "Anatomy of use-inspired researchers: From Pasteur’s Quadrant to Pasteur’s Cube model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1626-1638.
    17. Freel, Mark & Persaud, Ajax & Chamberlin, Tyler, 2019. "Faculty ideals and universities' third mission," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 10-21.
    18. Perkmann, Markus & King, Zella & Pavelin, Stephen, 2011. "Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 539-552, May.
    19. Ryan, Paul & Geoghegan, Will & Hilliard, Rachel, 2018. "The microfoundations of firms’ explorative innovation capabilities within the triple helix framework," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 15-27.
    20. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:176:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-020-04686-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.