Campus development as catalyst for innovation

Purpose This paper aims to model the relationship between innovation and real estate, providing campus managers with a tool that illustrates how campus development stimulates innovation and that guides them to add value to their organisations. Design/methodology/approach The authors review previous research and build theory from the study of two cases. They shape a hypothesis by linking various theoretical concepts and by verifying it with empirical data to finally model how campus development stimulates innovation. Findings Findings suggest that campus development facilitates five conditions required to stimulate innovation through decisions and interventions over long-term periods. These findings acknowledge that location is key to explain campus development as a catalyst for innovation. In addition, this paper identifies potential issues in decision-making processes that can inhibit the facilitating role of real estate in innovation. Practical implications A framework clarifying the path to stimulate innovation through real estate will allow campus managers to steer their real estate strategies in line with this specific organisational goal and to better communicate how their decisions add value to their organisations. Social implications Findings advocate a more effective and efficient resource allocation for campus development in and around cities. Originality/value Until now, studies on stimulating innovation through real estate have focussed on workplace level. A core theoretical contribution of this paper is enlarging the application scope of CREM theories to the urban level involving multiple organisations.

[1]  Harvey Goldstein,et al.  Assessing the Regional Economic Development Impacts of Universities: A Review of Current Approaches , 2007 .

[2]  Stephen E. Roulac,et al.  Linking Real Estate Decisions to Corporate Strategy , 2009 .

[3]  R. Boschma Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment , 2005 .

[4]  K. Eisenhardt Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[5]  Martha A. O'Mara,et al.  Strategy and Place: Managing Corporate Real Estate and Facilities for Competitive Advantage , 1999 .

[6]  Arie Romein,et al.  A knowledge-based urban paradox: the case of Delft , 2008 .

[7]  R. Boschma,et al.  Why is economic geography not an evolutionary science? : towards an evolutionary economic geography , 2004 .

[8]  R. Boschma,et al.  The Spatial Evolution of Innovation Networks: A Proximity Perspective , 2010 .

[9]  Appel Meulenbroek,et al.  How to measure added value of CRE and building design : knowledge sharing in research buildings , 2014 .

[10]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges , 2007 .

[11]  Anna-Liisa Lindholm,et al.  Modeling the Value-Adding Attributes of Real Estate to the Wealth Maximization of the Firm , 2006 .

[12]  Theo van der Voordt,et al.  A conceptual framework to identify spatial implications of new ways of learning in higher education , 2015 .

[13]  Richard Florida,et al.  The Great Reset: How New Ways of Living and Working Drive Post-Crash Prosperity , 2010 .

[14]  R. Boschma,et al.  Proximity and Innovation: From Statics to Dynamics , 2015 .

[15]  Flavia Teresa de Jesus Curvelo Magdaniel,et al.  Technology campuses and cities: A study on the relation between innovation and the built environment at the urban area level , 2016 .

[16]  Richard Florida,et al.  Who's Your City?: How the Creative Economy Is Making Where to Live the Most Important Decision of Your Life , 2008 .

[17]  Sylwia Męcfal Recenzja książki. Robert K. yin, Case Study Research. Design and Methods (fourth Edition), thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2009 , 2012 .

[18]  Arnoud Lagendijk,et al.  Proximity, Knowledge and Innovation in Peripheral Regions. On the Intersection between Geographical and Organizational Proximity , 2007 .

[19]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action , 2008 .

[20]  John T. Scott,et al.  U.S. science parks: the diffusion of an innovation and its effects on the academic missions of universities , 2003 .

[21]  Anna-Liisa Lindholm,et al.  A framework for identifying and measuring value added by corporate real estate , 2006 .

[22]  Martha A. O’Mara Strategic Drivers of Location Decisions for Information-Age Companies , 1999 .

[23]  Albert N. Link,et al.  University Research Parks , 2007 .

[24]  B. Flyvbjerg Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research , 2006, 1304.1186.

[25]  André Torre,et al.  Proximity and Localization , 2005 .

[26]  M. Castells,et al.  Technopoles of the World. The Making of 21st Century Industrial Complexes , 1995 .

[27]  Willem van Winden,et al.  Urban competitiveness in the knowledge economy: evolution paths of the Portuguese metropolises , 2008 .