IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v40y2015i5p840-858.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governance mode choice in collaborative Ph.D. projects

Author

Listed:
  • Negin Salimi
  • Rudi Bekkers
  • Koen Frenken

Abstract

Joint Ph.D. projects are a prominent form of research collaboration, connecting universities to firms and public research organizations. When entering into such collaborations, partners need to make choices regarding a project’s governance. This paper investigates how a university and its partners govern such projects, including decision-making, daily management and disclosure policies. Earlier studies show that shared governance modes have had a higher success rate than centralized governance modes. Nevertheless, more than two thirds of the 191 joint Ph.D. projects we investigated opted for centralized rather than shared governance. Our findings show that: (1) geographical and/or cognitive distance render the adoption of a shared governance mode less likely; (2) the partner controlling critical resources tends to centralize governance, and (3) partnering firms are more likely to put restrictions on publication output than public research organizations. We therefore recommend that universities and their partners take these aspects into account when selecting such projects. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Negin Salimi & Rudi Bekkers & Koen Frenken, 2015. "Governance mode choice in collaborative Ph.D. projects," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 840-858, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:40:y:2015:i:5:p:840-858
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-014-9368-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10961-014-9368-5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-014-9368-5?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Corinne Autant‐Bernard & Pascal Billand & David Frachisse & Nadine Massard, 2007. "Social distance versus spatial distance in R&D cooperation: Empirical evidence from European collaboration choices in micro and nanotechnologies," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(3), pages 495-519, August.
    3. Julia Porter Liebeskind & Amalya Lumerman Oliver & Lynne Zucker & Marilynn Brewer, 1996. "Social networks, Learning, and Flexibility: Sourcing Scientific Knowledge in New Biotechnology Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 428-443, August.
    4. Mangematin, V., 2000. "PhD job market: professional trajectories and incentives during the PhD," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 741-756, June.
    5. Roderik Ponds & Frank Van Oort & Koen Frenken, 2007. "The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(3), pages 423-443, August.
    6. Alessandro Nuvolari, 2004. "Collective invention during the British Industrial Revolution: the case of the Cornish pumping engine," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 28(3), pages 347-363, May.
    7. Armstrong, J. Scott & Overton, Terry S., 1977. "Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys," MPRA Paper 81694, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Olivier Bouba-Olga & Marie Ferru & Dominique Pépin, 2012. "Exploring spatial features of science-industry partnerships: A study on French data," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 91(2), pages 355-375, June.
    9. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
    10. Nooteboom, Bart & Van Haverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & Gilsing, Victor & van den Oord, Ad, 2007. "Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1016-1034, September.
    11. Nathan ROSENBERG, 2009. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 11, pages 225-234, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. 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.
    13. Hagedoorn, John & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2000. "Research partnerships1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 567-586, April.
    14. Desrochers, Pierre, 2001. "Geographical Proximity and the Transmission of Tacit Knowledge," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 14(1), pages 25-46, March.
    15. Bronwyn H. Hall & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2003. "Universities as Research Partners," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 485-491, May.
    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. Kasia Zalewska-Kurek & Rainer Harms, 2020. "Managing autonomy in university–industry research: a case of collaborative Ph.D. projects in the Netherlands," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 393-416, April.
    2. Negin Salimi & Jafar Rezaei, 2016. "Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1911-1938, December.
    3. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Bart Verspagen, 2017. "The motivations, institutions and organization of university-industry collaborations in the Netherlands," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 379-412, July.
    4. Plantec, Quentin & Cabanes, Benjamin & le Masson, Pascal & Weil, Benoit, 2023. "Early-career academic engagement in university–industry collaborative PhDs: Research orientation and project performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    5. 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.
    6. Quentin Plantec & Benjamin Cabanes & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2023. "Caractérisation et performances des thèses Cifre," Working Papers hal-04099283, HAL.

    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. Christian Omobhude & Shih-Hsin Chen, 2019. "The Roles and Measurements of Proximity in Sustained Technology Development: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-30, January.
    2. Villani, Elisa & Rasmussen, Einar & Grimaldi, Rosa, 2017. "How intermediary organizations facilitate university–industry technology transfer: A proximity approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 86-102.
    3. Riccardo Crescenzi & Andrea Filippetti & Simona Iammarino, 2017. "Academic inventors: collaboration and proximity with industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 730-762, August.
    4. Ellen Siu, 2018. "Interorganisational collaboration in Academic Health Science Centre: A case study on King’s Health Partnership," Working Papers 40, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Feb 2021.
    5. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Ron Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2020. "Proximity, Innovation and Networks: A Concise Review and Some Next Steps," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2019, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Mar 2020.
    6. Davids, Mila & Frenken, Koen, 2015. "Proximity, knowledge base and the innovation process The case of Unilever’s Becel diet margarine," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/7, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    7. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Ron Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2015. "Proximity and Innovation: From Statics to Dynamics," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(6), pages 907-920, June.
    8. Rune Dahl Fitjar & Franz Huber & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2016. "Not too close, not too far: testing the Goldilocks principle of ‘optimal’ distance in innovation networks," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(6), pages 465-487, August.
    9. 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.
    10. Maria Tsouri, 2022. "Knowledge networks and strong tie creation: the role of relative network position," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 95-114, January.
    11. Ron Boschma & Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Mathijs de Vaan, 2014. "The formation of economic networks: a proximity approach," Chapters, in: André Torre & Frédéric Wallet (ed.), Regional Development and Proximity Relations, chapter 7, pages 243-266, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Lorenzo Cassi & Anne Plunket, 2015. "Research Collaboration in Co-inventor Networks: Combining Closure, Bridging and Proximities," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(6), pages 936-954, June.
    13. 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.
    14. Bastien Bernela & Rachel Levy, 2017. "Collaboration networks within a French cluster: Do partners really interact with each other?," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96(1), pages 115-138, March.
    15. Madhav Govind & Merle Küttim, 2016. "International Knowledge Transfer from University to Industry: A Systematic Literature Review," Research in Economics and Business: Central and Eastern Europe, Tallinn School of Economics and Business Administration, Tallinn University of Technology, vol. 8(2).
    16. Lorenzo Cassi & Anne Plunket, 2014. "Proximity, network formation and inventive performance: in search of the proximity paradox," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(2), pages 395-422, September.
    17. Laurent R. Bergé, 2017. "Network proximity in the geography of research collaboration," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96(4), pages 785-815, November.
    18. Sara Amoroso & Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2017. "European R&D networks: A snapshot from the 7th EU Framework Programme," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation JRC107546, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    19. Kaihuang Zhang & Qinglan Qian & Yijing Zhao, 2020. "Evolution of Guangzhou Biomedical Industry Innovation Network Structure and Its Proximity Mechanism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-20, March.
    20. Ferretti, Marco & Guerini, Massimiliano & Panetti, Eva & Parmentola, Adele, 2022. "The partner next door? The effect of micro-geographical proximity on intra-cluster inter-organizational relationships," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    University–industry collaboration; Collaborative Ph.D. project; Shared governance; Centralized governance; Proximity; Resource imbalances; Publication disclosure; D22; D23; D74; G34; L24; L33; O31; O32; O34;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions
    • G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance
    • L24 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Contracting Out; Joint Ventures

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jtecht:v:40:y:2015:i:5:p:840-858. 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.