IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jadmsc/v13y2022i1p9-d1018508.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Academics’ Third Mission Engagement by Individual and Organisational Predictors

Author

Listed:
  • Verena Karlsdottir

    (School of Business, University of Iceland, 102 Reykjavík, Iceland)

  • Magnus Thor Torfason

    (School of Business, University of Iceland, 102 Reykjavík, Iceland)

  • Ingi Runar Edvardsson

    (School of Business, University of Iceland, 102 Reykjavík, Iceland)

  • Thamar Melanie Heijstra

    (Faculty of Sociology, Anthropology and Folkloristics, University of Iceland, 102 Reykjavík, Iceland)

Abstract

In recent years, the coming of the entrepreneurial university has brought about a third role in academia, which involves greater visible exchange of academics with society and industry. In this paper, the authors investigate to what extent individual and organisational factors influence the propensity of academics to engage in different types of Third Mission (TM) activities. This study is based on a large-scale survey of academics in Iceland regarding engagement in socio-economic activities. The results indicate that “soft” activities such as community activities and external teaching and training can be better predicted by individual factors, while hard activities such as applied contract research and commercialisation can be better predicted by organisational factors. Overall, academics are most likely to participate in community-related activities. Hereby, academics from the STEM and health disciplines, with work experience outside of academia and who are open to new experiences are more likely to be engaged in applied contract research and commercialisation. Academics belonging to disciplines other than STEM and health sciences and those that on an average publish more peer-reviewed articles are more likely to disseminate their knowledge to a wider audience outside of academia through public science communication. Gender, rank, and teaching do not affect TM participation, but openness, performance, or discipline do.

Suggested Citation

  • Verena Karlsdottir & Magnus Thor Torfason & Ingi Runar Edvardsson & Thamar Melanie Heijstra, 2022. "Assessing Academics’ Third Mission Engagement by Individual and Organisational Predictors," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:13:y:2022:i:1:p:9-:d:1018508
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/13/1/9/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/13/1/9/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    2. D. Schartinger & C. Rammer & J. Fröhlich, 2006. "Knowledge Interactions between Universities and Industry in Austria: Sectoral Patterns and Determinants," Springer Books, in: Innovation, Networks, and Knowledge Spillovers, chapter 7, pages 135-166, Springer.
    3. Tuzin Baycan & Gokcen Arkali Olcay, 2021. "Linking the Performance of Entrepreneurial Universities to Technoparks and University Characteristics in Turkey," REGION, European Regional Science Association, vol. 8, pages 97-117.
    4. 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.
    5. Secundo, Giustina & Elena Perez, Susana & Martinaitis, Žilvinas & Leitner, Karl Heinz, 2017. "An Intellectual Capital framework to measure universities' third mission activities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 229-239.
    6. Hanna Hottenrott & Cornelia Lawson, 2014. "Research grants, sources of ideas and the effects on academic research," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 109-133, March.
    7. Bozeman, Barry & Gaughan, Monica, 2011. "How do men and women differ in research collaborations? An analysis of the collaborative motives and strategies of academic researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1393-1402.
    8. 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.
    9. Angelika Jaeger & Johannes Kopper, 2014. "Third mission potential in higher education: measuring the regional focus of different types of HEIs," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 34(2), pages 95-118, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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).
    2. Massimo G. Colombo & Massimiliano Guerini & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra & Andrea Bonaccorsi, 2022. "The “first match” between high-tech entrepreneurial ventures and universities: the role of founders’ social ties," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 270-306, February.
    3. Stefano Bianchini & Francesco Lissoni & Michele Pezzoni & Lorenzo Zirulia, 2016. "The economics of research, consulting, and teaching quality: theory and evidence from a technical university," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(7), pages 668-691, October.
    4. Amara, Nabil & Olmos-Peñuela, Julia & Fernández-de-Lucio, Ignacio, 2019. "Overcoming the “lost before translation” problem: An exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 22-36.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Cassiman, Bruno & Mas, Jordi, 2009. "Catalan competitiveness: Science and business," IESE Research Papers D/806, IESE Business School.
    9. Azagra-Caro, Joaquin M. & Archontakis, Fragiskos & Gutierrez-Gracia, Antonio & Fernandez-de-Lucio, Ignacio, 2006. "Faculty support for the objectives of university-industry relations versus degree of R&D cooperation: The importance of regional absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 37-55, February.
    10. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lawson, Cornelia, 2013. "Fishing for Complementarities: Competitive Research Funding and Research Productivity," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201318, University of Turin.
    11. Carayol, Nicolas, 2003. "Objectives, agreements and matching in science-industry collaborations: reassembling the pieces of the puzzle," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 887-908, June.
    12. 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.
    13. Lee, Hsing-fen & Miozzo, Marcela, 2019. "Which types of knowledge-intensive business services firms collaborate with universities for innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1633-1646.
    14. Lili Wang & Zexia Li, 2021. "Knowledge flows from public science to industrial technologies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1232-1255, August.
    15. Ben Zhang & Xiaohong Wang, 2017. "Empirical study on influence of university-industry collaboration on research performance and moderating effect of social capital: evidence from engineering academics in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 257-277, October.
    16. Mirja Meyborg & Axel Schaffer, 2014. "Regional and global collaborations for knowledge in German academia," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 34(2), pages 157-176, October.
    17. 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.
    18. Christopher Palmberg, 2008. "The transfer and commercialisation of nanotechnology: a comparative analysis of university and company researchers," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(6), pages 631-652, December.
    19. Meng, Donghui & Li, Xianjun & Rong, Ke, 2019. "Industry-to-university knowledge transfer in ecosystem-based academic entrepreneurship: Case study of automotive dynamics & control group in Tsinghua University," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 249-262.
    20. Wolfgang Becker, 2003. "Evaluation of the Role of Universities in the Innovation Process," Discussion Paper Series 241, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.

    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:gam:jadmsc:v:13:y:2022:i:1:p:9-:d:1018508. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.