IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i5p1397-d144161.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Economic Growth and the Adaptability of a National System of Innovation: A Socio-Cognitive Explanation for South Korea’s Mired Technology Transfer and Commercialization Process

Author

Listed:
  • Tahir Hameed

    (SolBridge International School of Business, 128 Uam-Ro Dong-Gu, Daejeon 34613, Korea)

  • Peter Von Staden

    (Kedge Business School, Domaine de Luminy, Rue Antoine Bourdelle, 13009 Marseille, France)

  • Ki-Seok Kwon

    (Department of Public Policy, Hanbat National University, 125 Dongseo-daero, Deogmyeong-dong, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 34104, Korea)

Abstract

Sustainable economic growth is closely linked to a national system of innovation’s (NSI) adaptability. The NSI of a country in catch-up mode is different than one at the technology frontier. In this exploratory paper we use a socio-cognitive approach to demonstrate that shared mental models (SMMs) need to change with the evolution of a NSI to sustain growth. For South Korea in particular, this insight offers a way for it realize better technology transfer and commercialization (TTC) performance and a new cognitive model for its TTC teams to transition to and operate at the technology frontier. We use cognitive mapping techniques to interpret the interviews of teams in South Korea’s public research institutes active in TTC. Their SMMs reveal that a top-down policy for catching-up NSIs reinforces SMMs around a linear commercialization process. Alternatively, the participatory policy approach of frontier innovation systems supports interaction and the active learning of their actors’ SMMs. This affords a wider variety of innovation and commercialization processes. Consequently, a policy of transitioning NSIs that remains top-down freezes TTC teams in their existing SMMs fettering growth. By extension, as a transitioning NSI, South Korea should adopt policy that reconfigures its existing SMMs to encourage a more open approach to TTC.

Suggested Citation

  • Tahir Hameed & Peter Von Staden & Ki-Seok Kwon, 2018. "Sustainable Economic Growth and the Adaptability of a National System of Innovation: A Socio-Cognitive Explanation for South Korea’s Mired Technology Transfer and Commercialization Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-26, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:5:p:1397-:d:144161
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/5/1397/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/5/1397/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mary Tripsas & Giovanni Gavetti, 2000. "Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1147-1161, October.
    2. Wuyts, Stefan & Colombo, Massimo G. & Dutta, Shantanu & Nooteboom, Bart, 2005. "Empirical tests of optimal cognitive distance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 277-302, October.
    3. Lee, Keun & Lim, Chaisung, 2001. "Technological regimes, catching-up and leapfrogging: findings from the Korean industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 459-483, March.
    4. Gideon D. Markman & Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright, 2008. "Research and Technology Commercialization," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 1401-1423, December.
    5. Duk Hee Lee & Il Won Seo & Ho Chull Choe & Hee Dae Kim, 2012. "Collaboration network patterns and research performance: the case of Korean public research institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 925-942, June.
    6. Raghu Garud & Michael A. Rappa, 1994. "A Socio-Cognitive Model of Technology Evolution: The Case of Cochlear Implants," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 344-362, August.
    7. Kim, Linsu, 1980. "Stages of development of industrial technology in a developing country: A model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 254-277, July.
    8. Teubal, Morris, 1996. "R&D and technology policy in NICs as learning processes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 449-460, March.
    9. Lee, Dal Hwan & Bae, Zong-Tae & Lee, Jinjoo, 1991. "Performance and adaptive roles of the government-supported research institute in South Korea," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 19(10), pages 1421-1440, October.
    10. Martin, Ben R., 2012. "The evolution of science policy and innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1219-1239.
    11. Mansfield, Edwin, 1991. "Academic research and industrial innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    12. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    13. Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
    14. Lall, Sanjaya & Teubal, Morris, 1998. ""Market-stimulating" technology policies in developing countries: A framework with examples from East Asia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(8), pages 1369-1385, August.
    15. Kaplan, Sarah & Tripsas, Mary, 2008. "Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 790-805, June.
    16. Wong, Poh-Kam & Ho, Yuen-Ping & Singh, Annette, 2007. "Towards an "Entrepreneurial University" Model to Support Knowledge-Based Economic Development: The Case of the National University of Singapore," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 941-958, June.
    17. Arthur T. Denzau & Douglass C. North, 1994. "Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 3-31, February.
    18. Cowan, Robin & David, Paul A & Foray, Dominique, 2000. "The Explicit Economics of Knowledge Codification and Tacitness," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 9(2), pages 211-253, June.
    19. Mazzoleni, Roberto & Nelson, Richard R., 2007. "Public research institutions and economic catch-up," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1512-1528, December.
    20. Eom, Boo-Young & Lee, Keun, 2010. "Determinants of industry-academy linkages and, their impact on firm performance: The case of Korea as a latecomer in knowledge industrialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 625-639, June.
    21. Link, Albert N. & Siegel, Donald S. & Wright, Mike (ed.), 2015. "The Chicago Handbook of University Technology Transfer and Academic Entrepreneurship," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226178349, October.
    22. Choung, Jae-Yong & Hameed, Tahir & Ji, Illyong, 2012. "Catch-up in ICT standards: Policy, implementation and standards-setting in South Korea," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(4), pages 771-788.
    23. Karen A. Jehn & Lindred Greer & Sheen Levine & Gabriel Szulanski, 2008. "The Effects of Conflict Types, Dimensions, and Emergent States on Group Outcomes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 465-495, November.
    24. E. Westphal, Larry & W. Rhee, Yung & Kim, Linsu & H. Amsden, Alice, 1984. "Republic of Korea," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 12(5-6), pages 505-533.
    25. Wright, Mike & Clarysse, Bart & Lockett, Andy & Knockaert, Mirjam, 2008. "Mid-range universities' linkages with industry: Knowledge types and the role of intermediaries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1205-1223, September.
    26. Grimaldi, Rosa & Kenney, Martin & Siegel, Donald S. & Wright, Mike, 2011. "30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1045-1057, October.
    27. Goldfarb, Brent & Henrekson, Magnus, 2003. "Bottom-up versus top-down policies towards the commercialization of university intellectual property," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 639-658, April.
    28. Yusuf, Shahid, 2008. "Intermediating knowledge exchange between universities and businesses," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1167-1174, September.
    29. Roger I. Hall, 1984. "The Natural Logic of Management Policy Making: Its Implications for the Survival of an Organization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(8), pages 905-927, August.
    30. Bozeman, Barry, 2000. "Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 627-655, April.
    31. Choung, Jae-Yong & Hameed, Tahir & Ji, Illyong, 2011. "Role of formal standards in transition to the technology frontier: Korean ICT systems," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 269-287, April.
    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. Wei Li & Desheng Xue & Xu Huang, 2018. "The Role of Manufacturing in Sustainable Economic Development: A Case of Guangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Jan Cadil & Karel Mirosnik & Ludmila Petkovova & Michal Mirvald, 2018. "Public Support of Private R&D–Effects on Economic Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Dejan Ravšelj & Aleksander Aristovnik, 2020. "The Impact of R&D Expenditures on Corporate Performance: Evidence from Slovenian and World R&D Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, March.
    4. Man Zhang & Fan Wang & Anupam Kumar Das, 2020. "Work–Family Conflict on Sustainable Creative Performance: Job Crafting as a Mediator," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-15, September.
    5. Insu Cho & Young Hoon Kwak & Jaehyeon Jun, 2019. "Sustainable Idea Development Mechanism in University Technology Commercialization (UTC): Perspectives from Dynamic Capabilities Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-16, November.
    6. Tahir Hameed & Peter von Staden & Ki-Seok Kwon, 2019. "Impediments to Sustaining South Korea’s Economic Development: Pathologies of Cooperation in Intra-Team Dynamics of Technology Commercialization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-18, May.

    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. Good, Matthew & Knockaert, Mirjam & Soppe, Birthe & Wright, Mike, 2019. "The technology transfer ecosystem in academia. An organizational design perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 35-50.
    2. 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.
    3. Igors Skute & Kasia Zalewska-Kurek & Isabella Hatak & Petra Weerd-Nederhof, 2019. "Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 916-947, June.
    4. Diekhoff, Josefine & Krieger, Bastian & Licht, Georg & Rammer, Christian, 2019. "Stand der Messung von Interaktionen zwischen Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft im internationalen Vergleich," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 248650, June.
    5. Choi, Haneul & Yoon, Hyunjung & Siegel, Donald & Waldman, David A. & Mitchell, Marie S., 2022. "Assessing differences between university and federal laboratory postdoctoral scientists in technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    6. Jisun Kim & Tugrul Daim, 2014. "A new approach to measuring time-lags in technology licensing: study of U.S. academic research institutions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(5), pages 748-773, October.
    7. O’Kane, Conor & Mangematin, Vincent & Geoghegan, Will & Fitzgerald, Ciara, 2015. "University technology transfer offices: The search for identity to build legitimacy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 421-437.
    8. Rasmussen, Einar & Borch, Odd Jarl, 2010. "University capabilities in facilitating entrepreneurship: A longitudinal study of spin-off ventures at mid-range universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 602-612, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Bai, Xue-Jie & Li, Zhen-Yang & Zeng, Jin, 2020. "Performance evaluation of China's innovation during the industry-university-research collaboration process—an analysis basis on the dynamic network slacks-based measurement model," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    11. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    12. Brantnell, Anders & Baraldi, Enrico, 2022. "Understanding the roles and involvement of technology transfer offices in the commercialization of university research," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    13. Conor O'Kane & Vincent Mangematin & Will Geoghegan & Ciara Fitzgerald, 2015. "University Technology Transfer offices : the search for identity to build legimacy," Post-Print hal-01072998, HAL.
    14. Etzkowitz, Henry & Zhou, Chunyan, 2021. "Licensing life: The evolution of Stanford university's technology transfer practice," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    15. Charlotta Dahlborg & Danielle Lewensohn & Rickard Danell & Carl Johan Sundberg, 2017. "To invent and let others innovate: a framework of academic patent transfer modes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 538-563, June.
    16. Tina C. Ambos & Kristiina Mäkelä & Julian Birkinshaw & Pablo D'Este, 2008. "When Does University Research Get Commercialized? Creating Ambidexterity in Research Institutions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 1424-1447, December.
    17. Albats, Ekaterina & Alexander, Allen T. & Cunningham, James A., 2022. "Traditional, virtual, and digital intermediaries in university-industry collaboration: exploring institutional logics and bounded rationality," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    18. Alejandro Bengoa & Amaia Maseda & Txomin Iturralde & Gloria Aparicio, 2021. "A bibliometric review of the technology transfer literature," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1514-1550, October.
    19. Hernandez-Mondragon, Alma Cristal & Herrera-Estrella, Luis & Kuri-Harcuch, Walid, 2016. "Legislative environment and others factors that inhibit transfer of Mexican publicly funded research into commercial ventures," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 100-108.
    20. Marcus Conlé & Henning Kroll & Cornelia Storz & Tobias ten Brink, 2023. "University satellite institutes as exogenous facilitators of technology transfer ecosystem development," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 147-180, February.

    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:10:y:2018:i:5:p:1397-:d:144161. 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.