IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/mosaro/v28y2018i2p67-98n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ethos of science and the approach to promotion in science

Author

Listed:
  • Feldy Marzena

    (National Information Processing Institute Laboratory of Statistical Analysis and Evaluation,Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract

The quality of research is the most important feature in the world of science. A researcher who achieves an excellence in science has a chance to win recognition and gain authority in her scientific field. In order to succeed in science, a researcher ought to undertake effective personal marketing efforts. The aim of personal marketing is to create and maintain a desirable attitude and/or behavior of others towards a scientist and build a positive scientific image of herself. A scientist who engages in self-promotion may, however, take on herself the odium of the academic community. Hence, the researcher's perception of the importance of personal marketing engagement for success in science determines her activity in this domain. The approach to the issue may vary depending on the system of values and norms recognized as valid in science. The purpose of the study is to examine the differences in perceptions of the importance of personal marketing engagement between researchers who identify themselves with different scientific ethoses. In order to achieve the objective of the study, I created two research scales and classified surveyed scientists into four groups. Three of these groups professed the ethos of academic, industrial and post-academic science respectively, and the fourth group did not identify with any of the value systems above. Then, I examined how the members of distinguished groups perceive the importance of three potential success factors in science, i.e.: popularization of research results, recognition in the scientific community and recognition outside the scientific community. The analyses were performed on data obtained from 800 scientists who participated in a nationwide CAPI study conducted by National Information Processing Institute at the turn of 2015 and 2016. According to the surveyed scientists, the most attention should be paid to the popularization of research results, and the least attention should be given to the activities that ensure recognition outside the scientific community. Researchers who identify themselves with the ethos of post-academic science, that is based on values of both academic and industrial sciences, rate the importance of all three aspects of self-promotion relatively high. Scientists who acknowledge the Merton's ethos of academic science are at the opposite extreme. They rate extremely low the importance of striving for recognition in the non-scientific community.

Suggested Citation

  • Feldy Marzena, 2018. "Ethos of science and the approach to promotion in science," Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations, Sciendo, vol. 28(2), pages 67-98, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:mosaro:v:28:y:2018:i:2:p:67-98:n:4
    DOI: 10.14611/minib.28.06.2018.10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.14611/minib.28.06.2018.10
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.14611/minib.28.06.2018.10?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Dabic, Marina & González-Loureiro, Miguel & Daim, Tugrul U., 2015. "Unraveling the attitudes on entrepreneurial universities: The case of Croatian and Spanish universities," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 167-178.
    3. Etzkowitz, Henry, 1998. "The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 823-833, December.
    4. Jain, Sanjay & George, Gerard & Maltarich, Mark, 2009. "Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 922-935, July.
    5. Weingart, Peter, 1998. "Science and the media," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 869-879, December.
    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. Alexander Leischnig & Anja Geigenmüller, 2020. "Examining alliance management capabilities in university-industry collaboration," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 9-30, February.
    2. 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.
    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. David Johnson & Adam J. Bock, 2017. "Coping with uncertainty: entrepreneurial sensemaking in regenerative medicine venturing," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 33-58, February.
    5. Ener, Hakan, 2022. "How does CEO technical expertise influence licensing-out at technology ventures?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    6. 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.
    7. Francesco Campanella & Maria Rosaria Della Peruta & Stefano Bresciani & Luca Dezi, 2017. "Quadruple Helix and firms’ performance: an empirical verification in Europe," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 267-284, April.
    8. Nora Hesse, 2015. "Students' Career Attitudes - How Entrepreneurial Are Prospective Scientists?," Working Papers on Innovation and Space 2015-03, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    9. Humberto Merritt, 2015. "The Role of Human Capital in University-Business Cooperation: The Case of Mexico," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 6(3), pages 568-588, September.
    10. Bukhari, Esraa & Dabic, Marina & Shifrer, Dara & Daim, Tugrul & Meissner, Dirk, 2021. "Entrepreneurial university: The relationship between smart specialization innovation strategies and university-region collaboration," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    11. Tijssen, Robert J.W., 2018. "Anatomy of use-inspired researchers: From Pasteur’s Quadrant to Pasteur’s Cube model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1626-1638.
    12. Yuandi Wang & Ruifeng Hu & Weiping Li & Xiongfeng Pan, 2016. "Does teaching benefit from university–industry collaboration? Investigating the role of academic commercialization and engagement," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1037-1055, March.
    13. Belitski, Maksim & Aginskaja, Anna & Marozau, Radzivon, 2019. "Commercializing university research in transition economies: Technology transfer offices or direct industrial funding?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 601-615.
    14. Vega-Gonz¨¢lez & Lu¨ªs Roberto, 2015. "Public R&D Centers, Social Agents of the Socio Economic Innovation System of Mexico," Business and Economic Research, Macrothink Institute, vol. 5(1), pages 61-78, June.
    15. Hervé Goy, 2012. "Réflexions sur la nature entrepreneuriale des universités," Working Papers halshs-00747675, HAL.
    16. Eun, Jong-Hak & Lee, Keun & Wu, Guisheng, 2006. "Explaining the "University-run enterprises" in China: A theoretical framework for university-industry relationship in developing countries and its application to China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1329-1346, November.
    17. Katalin Erdős & Attila Varga, 2012. "The Academic Entrepreneur: Myth or Reality for Increased Regional growth in Europe?," Chapters, in: Marina van Geenhuizen & Peter Nijkamp (ed.), Creative Knowledge Cities, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Philippe Lefebvre & Frédérique Pallez & Daniel Fixari, 2011. "Linking competitiveness clusters with public higher education and research: the French puzzle," Working Papers hal-00699879, HAL.
    19. Zsolt BedÅ‘ & Katalin ErdÅ‘s & Luke Pittaway, 2019. "University-Centered Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: A Conceptual Framework," UPFBE Working Paper Series 2019_1, Faculty of Business and Economics, University Pécs.
    20. B. Urban & J. Chantson, 2019. "Academic entrepreneurship in South Africa: testing for entrepreneurial intentions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 948-980, June.

    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:vrs:mosaro:v:28:y:2018:i:2:p:67-98:n:4. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.