IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jknowl/v13y2022i4d10.1007_s13132-021-00816-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Investigation of the Translational Asset: A Proposed Classification

Author

Listed:
  • Gennaro Strazzullo

    (University of Strathclyde)

  • William J. Ion

    (University of Strathclyde)

  • Jillian MacBryde

    (University of Strathclyde)

Abstract

Translational assets (TAs) are considered one of the actors that play a critical role within the national innovation system (NIS) of every country that embraces university, government, and industry collaboration. Moreover, these organisations have been established to support industries, companies, and particularly SMEs, filling the university-industry gap. Although the establishment of translational assets creates many benefits, this organisational ecosystem has been a controversial topic. It is hampered by a lack of consensus on how to define and classify translational assets. The problem arises because of their heterogeneity. This study identifies the critical factors for presenting a general classification from the analysis of academic papers and technical reports. The proposed classification is built, showing the factors of organisational structure, resources, and motivation for collaboration on a bidirectional continuum. Therefore, this paper’s findings provide a proposed classification of three main types of TAs, which are as follows: exploratory, plug, and developer/solver. This is a heuristic classification that provides enrichment to the literature and a better understanding for practitioners of these organisations' behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • Gennaro Strazzullo & William J. Ion & Jillian MacBryde, 2022. "An Investigation of the Translational Asset: A Proposed Classification," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(4), pages 3123-3149, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jknowl:v:13:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s13132-021-00816-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s13132-021-00816-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13132-021-00816-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13132-021-00816-8?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. Stanislav Zaichenko, 2018. "The human resource dimension of science-based technology transfer: lessons from Russian RTOs and innovative enterprises," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 368-388, April.
    2. 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.
    3. Hoppmann, Joern, 2021. "Hand in hand to Nowhereland? How the resource dependence of research institutes influences their co-evolution with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    4. 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.
    5. Hagedoorn, John & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2000. "Research partnerships1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 567-586, April.
    6. Haeussler, Carolin & Assmus, Anne, 2021. "Bridging the gap between invention and innovation: Increasing success rates in publicly and industry-funded clinical trials," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    7. Auerswald, Philip E & Branscomb, Lewis M, 2003. "Valleys of Death and Darwinian Seas: Financing the Invention to Innovation Transition in the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(3-4), pages 227-239, August.
    8. O'Kane, Conor & Mangematin, Vincent & Zhang, Jing A. & Cunningham, James A., 2020. "How university-based principal investigators shape a hybrid role identity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    9. Chompalov, Ivan & Genuth, Joel & Shrum, Wesley, 2002. "The organization of scientific collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 749-767, July.
    10. Laura Cruz-Castro & Koen Jonkers & Luis Sanz-Menéndez, 2015. "The internationalisation of research institutes," Working Papers 1513, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    11. McNie, Elizabeth C. & Parris, Adam & Sarewitz, Daniel, 2016. "Improving the public value of science: A typology to inform discussion, design and implementation of research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 884-895.
    12. 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. Jing Lu & Guohua Cao & Chuan Lin & Stavros Sindakis & Saloome Showkat, 2024. "Corporate Site Visits and Stock Price Crash Risk: The Role of Institutional Investors’ Knowledge Acquisitions," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(2), pages 9082-9114, June.

    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. Ana Fernández-Zubieta & Inés Andújar-Nagore & Sandro Giachi & Manuel Fernández-Esquinas, 2016. "New Organizational Arrangements for Public-Private Research Collaboration," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 7(1), pages 80-103, March.
    2. Craig Boardman & Denis Gray, 2010. "The new science and engineering management: cooperative research centers as government policies, industry strategies, and organizations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(5), pages 445-459, October.
    3. Altaf, Aqsa & Hassan, Ibn e & Batool, Sana, 2019. "The role of ORIC in the evolution of the triple helix culture of innovation: The case of Pakistan," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 157-166.
    4. Craig Boardman & Barry Bozeman, 2015. "Academic faculty as intellectual property in university-industry research alliances," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(5), pages 403-420, July.
    5. Gibson, Elizabeth & Daim, Tugrul U. & Dabic, Marina, 2019. "Evaluating university industry collaborative research centers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 181-202.
    6. 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.
    7. Hird, Mackenzie D. & Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., 2017. "How complex international partnerships shape domestic research clusters: Difference-in-difference network formation and research re-orientation in the MIT Portugal Program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 557-572.
    8. Daniel Nepelski & Vincent Roy & Annarosa Pesole, 2019. "The organisational and geographic diversity and innovation potential of EU-funded research networks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 359-380, April.
    9. 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.
    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. Lee, Young Hoon & Kim, YoungJun, 2016. "Analyzing interaction in R&D networks using the Triple Helix method: Evidence from industrial R&D programs in Korean government," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 93-105.
    12. 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.
    13. Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2010. "Economics of Technology Policy," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1181-1218, Elsevier.
    14. 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.
    15. He, Vivianna Fang & von Krogh, Georg & Sirén, Charlotta & Gersdorf, Thomas, 2021. "Asymmetries between partners and the success of university-industry research collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    16. De Silva, Muthu & Gokhberg, Leonid & Meissner, Dirk & Russo, Margherita, 2021. "Addressing societal challenges through the simultaneous generation of social and business values: A conceptual framework for science-based co-creation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    17. Daniel Nepelski & Giuseppe Piroli, 2018. "Organizational diversity and innovation potential of EU-funded research projects," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 615-639, June.
    18. 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.
    19. Hawkins, Richard & Langford, Cooper H. & Saunders, Chad, 2015. "Assessing the practical application of social knowledge: A survey of six leading Canadian Universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 83-95.
    20. Esther Wit-de Vries & Wilfred A. Dolfsma & Henny J. Windt & M. P. Gerkema, 2019. "Knowledge transfer in university–industry research partnerships: a review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1236-1255, August.

    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:13:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s13132-021-00816-8. 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.