IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jknowl/v11y2020i3d10.1007_s13132-019-0581-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do Firms Perceive Interactions with Researchers in Small Innovation Projects? Advantages and Barriers for Satisfactory Collaborations

Author

Listed:
  • Ann Camilla Schulze-Krogh

    (University of Agder)

  • Giuseppe Calignano

    (University of Vienna
    University of Stavanger)

Abstract

The level of interaction between academics and firms seems to be higher than ever, and policymakers adopt a variety of policies to foster an effective integration between research establishments (REs) and regional industries. This article explores the role of researchers and the interaction between private companies and REs in small innovation projects funded under the Norwegian Programme for Regional R&D and Innovation (VRI). VRI aims to stimulate research-based innovation in regional firms by funding collaboration projects between firms and external researchers. A drawback of innovation policies attempting to stimulate RE–industry collaborations is that they often neglect firms’ perspectives and motivations. Some academic studies argue that systemic approaches focusing on regional development and new path development tend to overlook in-depth analyses at the firm level. This paper aims to combine both approaches by exploring how firms perceive the role of the researchers in the projects, the quality of interactions and, in the end, the outcome of collaborations. Our analysis reveals that the role and motivations of researchers influence the outcome of projects and, from a systemic perspective, that the characteristics of regional innovation systems in which firms operate may represent an advantage or a barrier for satisfactory collaborations.

Suggested Citation

  • Ann Camilla Schulze-Krogh & Giuseppe Calignano, 2020. "How Do Firms Perceive Interactions with Researchers in Small Innovation Projects? Advantages and Barriers for Satisfactory Collaborations," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(3), pages 908-930, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jknowl:v:11:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s13132-019-0581-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s13132-019-0581-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13132-019-0581-1
    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/s13132-019-0581-1?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. 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. Azele Mathieu, 2011. "University-Industry interactions and knowledge transfer mechanisms: a critical survey," Working Papers CEB 11-015, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. 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.
    4. Richard R. Nelson, 2006. "The Market Economy and the Scientific Commons," Chapters, in: Birgitte Andersen (ed.), Intellectual Property Rights, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. 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.
    6. Anthony Arundel & Aldo Geuna, 2004. "Proximity and the use of public science by innovative European firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(6), pages 559-580.
    7. 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.
    8. Faulkner, Wendy & Senker, Jacqueline, 1994. "Making sense of diversity: public-private sector research linkage in three technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 673-695, November.
    9. Rune Dahl Fitjar & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2014. "When local interaction does not suffice: sources of firm innovation in urban Norway," Chapters, in: André Torre & Frédéric Wallet (ed.), Regional Development and Proximity Relations, chapter 5, pages 195-222, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Cooke, Philip & Gomez Uranga, Mikel & Etxebarria, Goio, 1997. "Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 475-491, December.
    11. Janet Bercovitz & Maryann Feldman, 2008. "Academic Entrepreneurs: Organizational Change at the Individual Level," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 69-89, February.
    12. Gabriela Dutrénit & Claudia De Fuentes & Arturo Torres, 2010. "Channels of interaction between public research organisations and industry and their benefits: evidence from Mexico," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(7), pages 513-526, August.
    13. Andrea Filippetti & Maria Savona, 2017. "University–industry linkages and academic engagements: individual behaviours and firms’ barriers. Introduction to the special section," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 719-729, August.
    14. Michaela Trippl & Tanja Sinozic & Helen Lawton Smith, 2015. "The Role of Universities in Regional Development: Conceptual Models and Policy Institutions in the UK, Sweden and Austria," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(9), pages 1722-1740, September.
    15. Giuliani, Elisa & Morrison, Andrea & Pietrobelli, Carlo & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2010. "Who are the researchers that are collaborating with industry? An analysis of the wine sectors in Chile, South Africa and Italy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 748-761, July.
    16. Claudia Fuentes & Gabriela Dutrénit, 2016. "Geographic proximity and university–industry interaction: the case of Mexico," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 329-348, April.
    17. Kodama, Toshihiro, 2008. "The role of intermediation and absorptive capacity in facilitating university-industry linkages--An empirical study of TAMA in Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1224-1240, September.
    18. Jerker Moodysson & Lars Coenen & Bjørn Asheim, 2008. "Explaining Spatial Patterns of Innovation: Analytical and Synthetic Modes of Knowledge Creation in the Medicon Valley Life-Science Cluster," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(5), pages 1040-1056, May.
    19. Gerry Boucher & Cheryl Conway & Els Van Der Meer, 2003. "Tiers of Engagement by Universities in their Region's Development," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(9), pages 887-897.
    20. Isaksen , Arne & Trippl , Michaela, 2014. "Regional industrial path development in different regional innovation systems: A conceptual analysis," Papers in Innovation Studies 2014/17, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    21. Ben R. Martin, 2016. "R&D policy instruments -- a critical review of what we do and don’t know," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 157-176, February.
    22. D’Este, Pablo & Iammarino, Simona & Savona, Maria & von Tunzelmann, Nick, 2012. "What hampers innovation? Revealed barriers versus deterring barriers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 482-488.
    23. Rune Dahl Fitjar & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2011. "Innovating in the Periphery: Firms, Values and Innovation in Southwest Norway," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 555-574, April.
    24. Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January.
    25. Magnus Gulbrandsen & Taran Thune, 2017. "The effects of non-academic work experience on external interaction and research performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 795-813, August.
    26. Narula, Rajneesh, 2002. "Innovation systems and 'inertia' in R&D location: Norwegian firms and the role of systemic lock-in," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 795-816, July.
    27. Lundvall, Bengt-Ake & Johnson, Bjorn & Andersen, Esben Sloth & Dalum, Bent, 2002. "National systems of production, innovation and competence building," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 213-231, February.
    28. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    29. Asheim, Bjorn T. & Coenen, Lars, 2005. "Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: Comparing Nordic clusters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1173-1190, October.
    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. Giuseppe Calignano, 2022. "Not all peripheries are the same: The importance of relative regional innovativeness in transnational innovation networks," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 276-312, March.

    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. Yongli Tang & Kazuyuki Motohashi & Xinyue Hu & Angeles Montoro-Sanchez, 2020. "University-industry interaction and product innovation performance of Guangdong manufacturing firms: the roles of regional proximity and research quality of universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 578-618, April.
    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. Nasirov, Shukhrat & Joshi, Amol M., 2023. "Minding the communications gap: How can universities signal the availability and value of their scientific knowledge to commercial organizations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    5. 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.
    6. Rakas, Marija & Hain, Daniel S., 2019. "The state of innovation system research: What happens beneath the surface?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    7. Claudia Fuentes & Gabriela Dutrénit, 2016. "Geographic proximity and university–industry interaction: the case of Mexico," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 329-348, April.
    8. Timo Kleiner-Schaefer & Kerstin J. Schaefer, 2022. "Barriers to university–industry collaboration in an emerging market: Firm-level evidence from Turkey," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 872-905, June.
    9. Paola Rucker Schaeffer & Bruno Fischer & Sergio Queiroz, 2018. "Beyond Education: The Role of Research Universities in Innovation Ecosystems," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 50-61.
    10. Barletta, Florencia & Yoguel, Gabriel & Pereira, Mariano & Rodríguez, Sergio, 2017. "Exploring scientific productivity and transfer activities: Evidence from Argentinean ICT research groups," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1361-1369.
    11. 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.
    12. Valeria Arza & Mariela Carattoli, 2017. "Personal ties in university-industry linkages: a case-study from Argentina," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 814-840, August.
    13. Borah, Dhruba & Massini, Silvia & Malik, Khaleel, 2023. "Teaching benefits of multi-helix university-industry research collaborations: Towards a holistic framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).
    14. André Spithoven & Jef Vlegels & Walter Ysebaert, 2021. "Commercializing academic research: a social network approach exploring the role of regions and distance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1196-1231, August.
    15. Andrea Greven & Steffen Strese & Malte Brettel, 2020. "Determining scientists’ academic engagement: perceptions of academic chairs’ entrepreneurial orientation and network capabilities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 1376-1404, October.
    16. Robert Huggins & Daniel Prokop & Piers Thompson, 2020. "Universities and open innovation: the determinants of network centrality," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 718-757, June.
    17. Tartari, Valentina & Perkmann, Markus & Salter, Ammon, 2014. "In good company: The influence of peers on industry engagement by academic scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1189-1203.
    18. Fernández-Esquinas, Manuel & Pinto, Hugo & Yruela, Manuel Pérez & Pereira, Tiago Santos, 2016. "Tracing the flows of knowledge transfer: Latent dimensions and determinants of university–industry interactions in peripheral innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 113(PB), pages 266-279.
    19. Tüzin Baycan & Roger Stough, 2013. "Bridging knowledge to commercialization: the good, the bad, and the challenging," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 50(2), pages 367-405, April.
    20. De Fuentes, Claudia & Dutrénit, Gabriela, 2012. "Best channels of academia–industry interaction for long-term benefit," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1666-1682.

    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:11:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s13132-019-0581-1. 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.