IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v45y2018i4p553-564..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

University–industry collaboration within the triple helix of innovation: The importance of mutuality

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Jackson
  • Reza Kiani Mavi
  • Yuliani Suseno
  • Craig Standing

Abstract

This article was triggered by the observation that not only are there very low rates of collaboration between Australian firms and universities, but that there are similarly low rates of collaboration between Australian firms, their clients and suppliers. This suggests that the lack of collaboration with universities may be caused by something within the firm context, rather than specific difficulties in the relationship between firms and universities. Using OECD data, we found a general correlation between firm–firm collaboration and firm–university collaboration. After cluster analysis of national collaboration rates, we compared Australia with the UK. We found the most significant variation in collaboration occurs within the dimension of mutuality: what is to be gained by both parties. Mutuality is most common within a diverse economy with complex manufacturing and supply chains, and consequently higher levels of knowledge intensity. Our results suggest these are the key differences in driving collaboration for innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Jackson & Reza Kiani Mavi & Yuliani Suseno & Craig Standing, 2018. "University–industry collaboration within the triple helix of innovation: The importance of mutuality," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 553-564.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:45:y:2018:i:4:p:553-564.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scx083
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. 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.
    2. Nanny Bressers, 2012. "The triple helix organization in practice: Assessment of the triple helix in a Dutch sustainable mobility program," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(5), pages 669-679, June.
    3. Robert Strand, 2009. "Corporate Responsibility in Scandinavian Supply Chains," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 85(1), pages 179-185, February.
    4. Bruneel, Johan & D'Este, Pablo & Salter, Ammon, 2010. "Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 858-868, September.
    5. Jonas Lundberg & Göran Tomson & Inger Lundkvist & John Sk?r & Mats Brommels, 2006. "Collaboration uncovered: Exploring the adequacy of measuring university-industry collaboration through co-authorship and funding," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(3), pages 575-589, December.
    6. Loet Leydesdorff & Henry Etzkowitz, 1996. "Emergence of a Triple Helix of university—industry—government relations," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(5), pages 279-286, October.
    7. Dodgson, Mark & Hughes, Alan & Foster, John & Metcalfe, Stan, 2011. "Systems thinking, market failure, and the development of innovation policy: The case of Australia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1145-1156.
    8. Branco Ponomariov & P. Craig Boardman, 2008. "The effect of informal industry contacts on the time university scientists allocate to collaborative research with industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 301-313, June.
    9. Debackere, Koenraad & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2005. "The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 321-342, April.
    10. Leydesdorff, Loet & Dolfsma, Wilfred & Van der Panne, Gerben, 2006. "Measuring the knowledge base of an economy in terms of triple-helix relations among 'technology, organization, and territory'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 181-199, March.
    11. Michel R M Rod & Stanley J Paliwoda, 2003. "Multi-sector collaboration: A stakeholder perspective on a government, industry and university collaborative venture," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 273-284, August.
    12. D'Este, P. & Patel, P., 2007. "University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1295-1313, November.
    13. Joacim Rosenlund & Erik Rosell & William Hogland, 2017. "Overcoming the triple helix boundaries in an environmental research collaboration," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(2), pages 153-162.
    14. John Hagedoorn, 1993. "Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 371-385, July.
    15. Ruud E. Smits & Stefan Kuhlmann & Phillip Shapira (ed.), 2010. "The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4181.
    16. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    17. Henry Etzkowitz, 2002. "Incubation of incubators: innovation as a triple helix of university-industry-government networks," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 115-128, April.
    18. Welsh, Rick & Glenna, Leland & Lacy, William & Biscotti, Dina, 2008. "Close enough but not too far: Assessing the effects of university-industry research relationships and the rise of academic capitalism," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1854-1864, December.
    19. Thomas Klier & James Rubenstein, 2008. "Who Really Made Your Car? Restructuring and Geographic change in the Auto Industry," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number wrmyc.
    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. Rakhshan Ummar & Sharjeel Saleem, 2020. "Thematic Ideation: A Superior Supplementary Concept in Creativity and Innovation," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, August.
    2. Bar-El, Raphael, 2023. "Reframing innovation: A case of split personality," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 111-122.
    3. Anton Klarin & Rifat Sharmelly & Yuliani Suseno, 2021. "A Systems Perspective in Examining Industry Clusters: Case Studies of Clusters in Russia and India," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-23, August.

    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. Victoria Galan-Muros & Todd Davey, 2019. "The UBC ecosystem: putting together a comprehensive framework for university-business cooperation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1311-1346, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Ryan, Paul & Geoghegan, Will & Hilliard, Rachel, 2018. "The microfoundations of firms’ explorative innovation capabilities within the triple helix framework," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 76, pages 15-27.
    4. Junghee Han & Almas Heshmati, 2016. "Determinants Of Financial Rewards From Industry–University Collaboration In South Korea," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(07), pages 1-26, October.
    5. Martina Fromhold-Eisebith & Claudia Werker, 2013. "Universities’ functions in knowledge transfer: a geographical perspective," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 51(3), pages 621-643, December.
    6. Liming Liang & Lixin Chen & Yishan Wu & Junpeng Yuan, 2012. "The role of Chinese universities in enterprise–university research collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(1), pages 253-269, January.
    7. Ankrah, Samuel & AL-Tabbaa, Omar, 2015. "Universities–industry collaboration: A systematic review," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 387-408.
    8. Iorio, Roberto & Labory, Sandrine & Rentocchini, Francesco, 2017. "The importance of pro-social behaviour for the breadth and depth of knowledge transfer activities: An analysis of Italian academic scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 497-509.
    9. Barry Bozeman & Daniel Fay & Catherine Slade, 2013. "Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-67, February.
    10. Ekaterina Albats & Irina Fiegenbaum & James A. Cunningham, 2018. "A micro level study of university industry collaborative lifecycle key performance indicators," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 389-431, April.
    11. Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Francesco Rentocchini, 2014. "Academics’ Motivations and Depth and Breadth of Knowledge Transfer Activities," Working Papers 1401, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
    12. Federico Caviggioli & Alessandra Colombelli & Antonio De Marco & Giuseppe Scellato & Elisa Ughetto, 2023. "Co-evolution patterns of university patenting and technological specialization in European regions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 216-239, February.
    13. 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.
    14. Kim, Younghwan & Kim, Wonjoon & Yang, Taeyong, 2012. "The effect of the triple helix system and habitat on regional entrepreneurship: Empirical evidence from the U.S," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 154-166.
    15. 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.
    16. Noriko Yoda & Kenichi Kuwashima, 2020. "Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations in Japan: Transitions of Collaborations and Interactions," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(3), pages 1120-1144, September.
    17. Yung-Chi Shen, 2017. "Identifying the key barriers and their interrelationships impeding the university technology transfer in Taiwan: a multi-stakeholder perspective," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2865-2884, November.
    18. 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.
    19. Todd Davey & Sue Rossano & Peter Sijde, 2016. "Does context matter in academic entrepreneurship? The role of barriers and drivers in the regional and national context," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(6), pages 1457-1482, December.
    20. Hsu, David W.L. & Shen, Yung-Chi & Yuan, Benjamin J.C. & Chou, Chiyan James, 2015. "Toward successful commercialization of university technology: Performance drivers of university technology transfer in Taiwan," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 25-39.

    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:oup:scippl:v:45:y:2018:i:4:p:553-564.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.