IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jknowl/v6y2015i3p522-550.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Targeting Academic Engagement in Open Innovation: Tools, Effects and Challenges for University Management

Author

Listed:
  • Lars Jonsson
  • Enrico Baraldi
  • Lars-Eric Larsson
  • Petter Forsberg
  • Kristofer Severinsson

Abstract

Besides commercialization, university knowledge is commonly transferred through different interactions constituting the so called academic engagement. Very little attention has been paid to professionalizing these various interactions compared to the linear commercialization funnel. In this paper, we conducted a qualitative case study of the innovation support organization at Uppsala University, Sweden, analysing the following: Which mechanisms and tools the university management does apply in order to create targeted open innovation interactions and which effects and challenges emerge when applying these tools? We found that staff with experience of both academia and industry is important for enabling open innovation interactions to evolve and that tools can be used to concretize specific and deeper interactions. However, six challenges was also identified: (1) the intermittent nature of university-industry interactions; (2) lack of codified ways to trace effects; (3) extensive and time consuming preparatory work; (4) the extra resources and low conversion rates in engaging academically unrelated small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); (5) high costs of recruiting staff with double competence and running the studied tools; and (6) the interdependencies which makes the system sensitive. Our results indicate that the tools used help the university to follow a mode 3 of knowledge creation. The study addressed the research gap regarding organizational support in academic engagement by indicating which tools can be used by the university management to target and focus industry-academia interactions, their effects and associated challenges. A lot of the effects still need to be codified, and more research is needed to understand their impact over time. Copyright The Author(s) 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Lars Jonsson & Enrico Baraldi & Lars-Eric Larsson & Petter Forsberg & Kristofer Severinsson, 2015. "Targeting Academic Engagement in Open Innovation: Tools, Effects and Challenges for University Management," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 6(3), pages 522-550, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jknowl:v:6:y:2015:i:3:p:522-550
    DOI: 10.1007/s13132-015-0254-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s13132-015-0254-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13132-015-0254-7?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. Etzkowitz, Henry & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 109-123, February.
    2. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    3. Etzkowitz, Henry & Webster, Andrew & Gebhardt, Christiane & Terra, Branca Regina Cantisano, 2000. "The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 313-330, February.
    4. Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
    5. Balconi, Margherita & Brusoni, Stefano & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2010. "In defence of the linear model: An essay," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 1-13, February.
    6. Elias G. Carayannis & David F.J. Campbell, 2010. "Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix and Quintuple Helix and How Do Knowledge, Innovation and the Environment Relate To Each Other? : A Proposed Framework for a Trans-disciplinary Analysis of Sustainable Dev," International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD), IGI Global, vol. 1(1), pages 41-69, January.
    7. Clarysse, Bart & Wright, Mike & Lockett, Andy & Van de Velde, Els & Vohora, Ajay, 2005. "Spinning out new ventures: a typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 183-216, March.
    8. Yusuf, Shahid, 2008. "Intermediating knowledge exchange between universities and businesses," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1167-1174, September.
    9. Debackere, Koenraad & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2005. "The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 321-342, April.
    10. Hertzfeld, Henry R. & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2006. "Intellectual property protection mechanisms in research partnerships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 825-838, July.
    11. Elias Carayannis & Ruslan Rakhmatullin, 2014. "The Quadruple/Quintuple Innovation Helixes and Smart Specialisation Strategies for Sustainable and Inclusive Growth in Europe and Beyond," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(2), pages 212-239, June.
    12. 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.
    13. Anna Nilsson & Annika Rickne & Lars Bengtsson, 2010. "Transfer of academic research: uncovering the grey zone," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(6), pages 617-636, December.
    14. Lai, Wen-Hsiang, 2011. "Willingness-to-engage in technology transfer in industry–university collaborations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(11), pages 1218-1223.
    15. Bryan Campbell, 2010. "Environment And Sustainable Development," CIRANO Papers 2010n-04speciala, CIRANO.
    16. Albert N. Link & Donald S. Siegel & Barry Bozeman, 2007. "An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 641-655, August.
    17. Janet Bercovitz & Maryann Feldman, 2006. "Entpreprenerial Universities and Technology Transfer: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Knowledge-Based Economic Development," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 175-188, January.
    18. Wright, Mike & Clarysse, Bart & Lockett, Andy & Knockaert, Mirjam, 2008. "Mid-range universities' linkages with industry: Knowledge types and the role of intermediaries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1205-1223, September.
    19. Håkansson, Håkan & Snehota, Ivan, 1989. "No business is an island: The network concept of business strategy," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 187-200.
    20. Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January.
    21. Tether, Bruce S. & Tajar, Abdelouahid, 2008. "Beyond industry-university links: Sourcing knowledge for innovation from consultants, private research organisations and the public science-base," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1079-1095, July.
    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. Meissner, Dirk & Shmatko, Natalia, 2017. "“Keep open”: the potential of gatekeepers for the aligning universities to the new Knowledge Triangle," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 191-198.
    2. Brantnell, Anders & Baraldi, Enrico, 2022. "Understanding the roles and involvement of technology transfer offices in the commercialization of university research," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    3. Marcin Baron, 2021. "Open Innovation Capacity of the Polish Universities," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(1), pages 73-95, March.
    4. François Facchini & Louis Jaeck & Chafik Bouhaddioui, 2021. "Culture and Entrepreneurship in the United Arab Emirates," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(3), pages 1245-1269, September.
    5. Livieratos, Antonios D. & Tsekouras, George & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Angelakis, Antonios, 2022. "Open Innovation moves in SMEs: How European SMEs place their bets?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    6. Angelo Bonfanti & Manlio Del Giudice & Armando Papa, 2018. "Italian Craft Firms Between Digital Manufacturing, Open Innovation, and Servitization," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(1), pages 136-149, March.
    7. 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.
    8. JinHyo Joseph Yun & Zheng Liu, 2019. "Micro- and Macro-Dynamics of Open Innovation with a Quadruple-Helix Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-17, June.
    9. Irina-Emily Hansen & Ola Jon Mork & Torgeir Welo & Geir Ringen, 2022. "Bridging the ‘Valley of Death’: Can Agile Principles Be Applied in Industry-Academia Research and Innovation Projects?," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(4), pages 3172-3194, December.
    10. Constance Horne & Vincent Dutot & Sylvaine Castellano & Marco Sosa & Lina Ahmad, 2021. "Integrating Entrepreneurship into the Design Classroom: Case Studies from the Developing World," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(1), pages 56-72, March.
    11. Constance Horne & Vincent Dutot, 2017. "Challenges in technology transfer: an actor perspective in a quadruple helix environment," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 285-301, April.

    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. 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.
    2. Good, Matthew & Knockaert, Mirjam & Soppe, Birthe & Wright, Mike, 2019. "The technology transfer ecosystem in academia. An organizational design perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 35-50.
    3. 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.
    4. Alejandro Bengoa & Amaia Maseda & Txomin Iturralde & Gloria Aparicio, 2021. "A bibliometric review of the technology transfer literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1514-1550, October.
    5. Igors Skute & Kasia Zalewska-Kurek & Isabella Hatak & Petra Weerd-Nederhof, 2019. "Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 916-947, June.
    6. Berna Beyhan & Derya Findik, 2018. "Student and graduate entrepreneurship: ambidextrous universities create more nascent entrepreneurs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1346-1374, October.
    7. 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.
    8. Aurora A. C. Teixeira & Luisa Mota, 2012. "A bibliometric portrait of the evolution, scientific roots and influence of the literature on university–industry links," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 719-743, December.
    9. Sándor Huszár & Szabolcs Prónay & Norbert Buzás, 2016. "Examining the differences between the motivations of traditional and entrepreneurial scientists," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-22, December.
    10. Christoph Kober, 2010. "Enhancing Knowledge-Based Regional Economic Development: Potentials and Barriers for Technology Transfer Offices," NEURUS papers neurusp139, NEURUS - Network of European and US Regional and Urban Studies.
    11. Alberto Gherardini & Alberto Nucciotti, 2017. "Yesterday’s giants and invisible colleges of today. A study on the ‘knowledge transfer’ scientific domain," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 255-271, July.
    12. Chai, Sen & Shih, Willy, 2016. "Bridging science and technology through academic–industry partnerships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 148-158.
    13. Enas Alhassan & R. Sandra Schillo & Margaret A. Lemay & Fred Pries, 2019. "Research Outputs as Vehicles of Knowledge Exchange in a Quintuple Helix Context: The Case of Biofuels Research Outputs," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(3), pages 958-973, September.
    14. Giannopoulou Eleni & Barlatier Pierre-Jean & Pénin Julien, 2017. "Same but Different? The impact of Research and Technology Organizations versus Universities on firms’ innovation," Working Papers of BETA 2017-09, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    15. Temel, Serdal & Dabić, Marina & Murat Ar, Ilker & Howells, Jeremy & Ali Mert, & Yesilay, Rustem Baris, 2021. "Exploring the relationship between university innovation intermediaries and patenting performance," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    16. Sánchez-Barrioluengo, Mabel, 2014. "Articulating the ‘three-missions’ in Spanish universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1760-1773.
    17. Bradley, Samantha R. & Hayter, Christopher S. & Link, Albert N., 2013. "Models and Methods of University Technology Transfer," UNCG Economics Working Papers 13-10, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    18. Christian Sandström & Karl Wennberg & Martin W. Wallin & Yulia Zherlygina, 2018. "Public policy for academic entrepreneurship initiatives: a review and critical discussion," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1232-1256, October.
    19. José Bestier Padilla Bejarano & Jhon Wilder Zartha Sossa & Carlos Ocampo-López & Margarita Ramírez-Carmona, 2023. "University Technology Transfer from a Knowledge-Flow Approach—Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-21, April.
    20. Martin Jaekel & Arto Wallin & Minna Isomursu, 2015. "Guiding Networked Innovation Projects Towards Commercial Success—a Case Study of an EU Innovation Programme with Implications for Targeted Open Innovation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 6(3), pages 625-639, September.

    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:spr:jknowl:v:6:y:2015:i:3:p:522-550. 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.