IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i22p15427-d978444.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Best Practices in Knowledge Transfer: Insights from Top Universities

Author

Listed:
  • Annamaria Demarinis Loiotile

    (Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, 70126 Bari, Italy
    Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica e dell’Informazione, Politecnico di Bari, 70125 Bari, Italy)

  • Francesco De Nicolò

    (Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, 70126 Bari, Italy
    Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica e dell’Informazione, Politecnico di Bari, 70125 Bari, Italy)

  • Adriana Agrimi

    (Direzione Ricerca, Terza Missione e Internazionalizzazione, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, 70121 Bari, Italy)

  • Loredana Bellantuono

    (Dipartimento di Biomedicina Traslazionale e Neuroscienze (DiBraiN), Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, 70124 Bari, Italy
    Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Bari, 70125 Bari, Italy)

  • Marianna La Rocca

    (Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, 70126 Bari, Italy
    Laboratory of Neuro Imaging, USC Stevens Neuroimaging and Informatics Institute, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, 2025 Zonal Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA)

  • Alfonso Monaco

    (Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, 70126 Bari, Italy
    Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Bari, 70125 Bari, Italy)

  • Ester Pantaleo

    (Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, 70126 Bari, Italy)

  • Sabina Tangaro

    (Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Bari, 70125 Bari, Italy
    Dipartimento di Scienze del Suolo, della Pianta e degli Alimenti, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, 70126 Bari, Italy)

  • Nicola Amoroso

    (Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Bari, 70125 Bari, Italy
    Dipartimento di Farmacia-Scienze del Farmaco, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, 70125 Bari, Italy)

  • Roberto Bellotti

    (Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, 70126 Bari, Italy
    Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Bari, 70125 Bari, Italy)

Abstract

The impact of knowledge transfer induced by universities on economy, society, and culture is widely acknowledged; nevertheless, this aspect is often neglected by university rankings. Here, we considered three of the most popular global university rankings and specific knowledge transfer indicators by U-multirank, a European ranking system launched by the European Commission, in order to answer to the following research question: how do the world top universities, evaluated according to global university rankings, perform from a knowledge transfer point of view? To this aim, the top universities have been compared with the others through the calculation of a Global Performance Indicator in Knowledge Transfer (GPI KT), a hierarchical clustering, and an outlier analysis. The results show that the universities best rated by global rankings do not always perform as well from knowledge transfer point of view. By combining the obtained results, it is possible to state that only 5 universities (Berkeley, Stanford, MIT, Harvard, CALTEC), among the top in the world, exhibit a high-level performance in knowledge transfer activities. For a better understanding of the success factors and best practices in knowledge transfer, a brief description of the 5 cited universities, in terms of organization of technology transfer service, relationship with business, entrepreneurship programs, and, more generally, third mission activities, is provided. A joint reading of the results suggests that the most popular global university rankings probably fail to effectively photograph third mission activities because they can manifest in a variety of forms, due to the intrinsic and intangible nature of third mission variables, which are difficult to quantify with simple and few indicators.

Suggested Citation

  • Annamaria Demarinis Loiotile & Francesco De Nicolò & Adriana Agrimi & Loredana Bellantuono & Marianna La Rocca & Alfonso Monaco & Ester Pantaleo & Sabina Tangaro & Nicola Amoroso & Roberto Bellotti, 2022. "Best Practices in Knowledge Transfer: Insights from Top Universities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:15427-:d:978444
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15427/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15427/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Olcay, Gokcen Arkali & Bulu, Melih, 2017. "Is measuring the knowledge creation of universities possible?: A review of university rankings," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 153-160.
    2. 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.
    3. Scarrà, Deepa & Piccaluga, Andrea, 2022. "The impact of technology transfer and knowledge spillover from Big Science: a literature review," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    4. Jill Johnes, 2018. "University rankings: What do they really show?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 585-606, April.
    5. Maria Abreu & Pelin Demirel & Vadim Grinevich & Mine Karataş-Özkan, 2016. "Entrepreneurial practices in research-intensive and teaching-led universities," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 695-717, October.
    6. Tijssen, Robert J.W., 2006. "Universities and industrially relevant science: Towards measurement models and indicators of entrepreneurial orientation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1569-1585, December.
    7. Poh Kam Wong & Annette Singh, 2013. "Do co-publications with industry lead to higher levels of university technology commercialization activity?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(2), pages 245-265, November.
    8. Azagra-Caro, Joaquín M. & Barberá-Tomás, David & Edwards-Schachter, Mónica & Tur, Elena M., 2017. "Dynamic interactions between university-industry knowledge transfer channels: A case study of the most highly cited academic patent," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 463-474.
    9. Jaehyun Choi & Dongsik Jang & Sunghae Jun & Sangsung Park, 2015. "A Predictive Model of Technology Transfer Using Patent Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-21, December.
    10. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    11. Hanne Peeters & Julie Callaert & Bart Looy, 2020. "Do firms profit from involving academics when developing technology?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 494-521, April.
    12. Kapetaniou, Chrystalla & Lee, Soo Hee, 2017. "A framework for assessing the performance of universities: The case of Cyprus," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 169-180.
    13. Giuri, Paola & Munari, Federico & Scandura, Alessandra & Toschi, Laura, 2019. "The strategic orientation of universities in knowledge transfer activities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 261-278.
    14. Robert J W Tijssen & Thed N van Leeuwen & Erik van Wijk, 2009. "Benchmarking university-industry research cooperation worldwide: performance measurements and indicators based on co-authorship data for the world's largest universities," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 13-24, March.
    15. Rocco Frondizi & Chiara Fantauzzi & Nathalie Colasanti & Gloria Fiorani, 2019. "The Evaluation of Universities’ Third Mission and Intellectual Capital: Theoretical Analysis and Application to Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-23, June.
    16. Juan Antonio Dip, 2021. "What does U-multirank tell us about knowledge transfer and research?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3011-3039, April.
    17. Giovanni Cerulli & Giovanni Marin & Eleonora Pierucci & Bianca Potì, 2022. "Do company-owned academic patents influence firm performance? Evidence from the Italian industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 242-269, February.
    18. Michaela Trippl & Tanja Sinozic & Helen Lawton Smith, 2015. "The Role of Universities in Regional Development: Conceptual Models and Policy Institutions in the UK, Sweden and Austria," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(9), pages 1722-1740, September.
    19. Rachel Levy & Pascale Roux & Sandrine Wolff, 2009. "An analysis of science–industry collaborative patterns in a large European University," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 1-23, February.
    20. Henk F. Moed, 2017. "A critical comparative analysis of five world university rankings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 967-990, February.
    21. Brian Pusser & Simon Marginson, 2013. "University Rankings in Critical Perspective," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 84(4), pages 544-568, July.
    22. 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).
    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. 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.

    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. Riviezzo, Angelo & Santos, Susana C. & Liñán, Francisco & Napolitano, Maria Rosaria & Fusco, Floriana, 2019. "European universities seeking entrepreneurial paths: the moderating effect of contextual variables on the entrepreneurial orientation-performance relationship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 232-248.
    2. Robert J. W. Tijssen & Alfredo Yegros-Yegros & Jos J. Winnink, 2016. "University–industry R&D linkage metrics: validity and applicability in world university rankings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 677-696, November.
    3. 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).
    4. Csató, László & Tóth, Csaba, 2020. "University rankings from the revealed preferences of the applicants," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 309-320.
    5. Xia Fan & Xiaowan Yang & Liming Chen, 2015. "Diversified resources and academic influence: patterns of university–industry collaboration in Chinese research-oriented universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 489-509, August.
    6. Marco Taliento, 2022. "The Triple Mission of the Modern University: Component Interplay and Performance Analysis from Italy," World, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-24, July.
    7. 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.
    8. Yating Wen & Xiaodong Zhao & Xingguo Li & Yuqi Zang, 2023. "Explaining the Paradox of World University Rankings in China: Higher Education Sustainability Analysis with Sentiment Analysis and LDA Topic Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Poh Kam Wong & Annette Singh, 2013. "Do co-publications with industry lead to higher levels of university technology commercialization activity?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(2), pages 245-265, November.
    10. Meissner, Dirk & Zhou, Yuan & Fischer, Bruno & Vonortas, Nicholas, 2022. "A multilayered perspective on entrepreneurial universities: looking into the dynamics of joint university-industry labs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    11. Juan Antonio Dip, 2021. "What does U-multirank tell us about knowledge transfer and research?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3011-3039, April.
    12. Soo Jeung Lee, 2019. "Academic entrepreneurship: exploring the effects of academic patenting activity on publication and collaboration among heterogeneous researchers in South Korea," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1993-2013, December.
    13. Hans Pohl, 2021. "Internationalisation, innovation, and academic–corporate co-publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1329-1358, February.
    14. Jinyuan Ma & Fan Jiang & Liujian Gu & Xiang Zheng & Xiao Lin & Chuanyi Wang, 2020. "Patterns of the Network of Cross-Border University Research Collaboration in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-17, August.
    15. Cinzia Daraio & Simone Di Leo & Loet Leydesdorff, 2022. "Using the Leiden Rankings as a Heuristics: Evidence from Italian universities in the European landscape," LEM Papers Series 2022/08, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    16. Ferran Giones & Kari Kleine & Silke Tegtmeier, 2022. "Students as scientists’ co-pilots at the onset of technology transfer: a two-way learning process," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1373-1394, October.
    17. Giuseppe Calignano & Rune Dahl Fitjar, 2017. "Strengthening relationships in clusters: How effective is an indirect policy measure carried out in a peripheral technology district?," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 59(1), pages 139-169, July.
    18. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2022. "Drivers of academic engagement in public–private research collaboration: an empirical study," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 1861-1884, December.
    19. Chan-Yuan Wong & Hon-Ngen Fung, 2017. "Science-technology-industry correlative indicators for policy targeting on emerging technologies: exploring the core competencies and promising industries of aspirant economies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 841-867, May.
    20. Ana Fernández & Esther Ferrándiz & M. Dolores León, 2021. "Are organizational and economic proximity driving factors of scientific collaboration? Evidence from Spanish universities, 2001–2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 579-602, January.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:15427-:d:978444. 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.