Composition of inventor teams and technological progress – The role of collaboration between academia and industry

It is generally claimed that universities provide the scientific basis for future technological progress. Still, empirical evidence of the impact of direct links between universities and firms remains weak and is often inconsistent. This paper aims at contributing to the literature by analyzing how direct academic involvement affects the output of inventive activities of research teams with different organizational backgrounds. By applying a unique dataset of German academic and corporate patents, we find that boundary-spanning knowledge production with academic inventors raises the innovative performance of SMEs and MNEs. Finally, in line with previous research, the results generally indicate a limiting effect of geographical proximity, while teams with academic involvement appear to be less affected.

[1]  John P. Walsh,et al.  Special Issue on University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer: Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[2]  Bronwyn H Hall,et al.  Market value and patent citations , 2005 .

[3]  Reinhilde Veugelers,et al.  In Search of Performance Effects of (In)Direct Industry Science Links , 2008 .

[4]  A. Salter,et al.  Exploring the Effect of Geographical Proximity and University Quality on University–Industry Collaboration in the United Kingdom , 2011 .

[5]  H. White.  A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity , 1980 .

[6]  A. Neely,et al.  Gaining from interactions with universities: multiple methods for nurturing absorptive capacity , 2008 .

[7]  Francis Narin,et al.  Citation rates to technologically important patents , 1981 .

[8]  M. Trajtenberg,et al.  University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention , 1997 .

[9]  Richard Williams,et al.  Using the Margins Command to Estimate and Interpret Adjusted Predictions and Marginal Effects , 2012 .

[10]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Team diversity and information use , 2005 .

[11]  Curba Morris Lampert,et al.  Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: a longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions , 2001 .

[12]  A. Salter,et al.  Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation? , 2004 .

[13]  M. Perkmann,et al.  University Industry Relationships and Open Innovation: Towards a Research Agenda , 2007 .

[14]  Alessandro Muscio.  University‐industry linkages: What are the determinants of distance in collaborations?* , 2013 .

[15]  Ulrich Schmoch,et al.  Identification of university-based patents: A new large-scale approach , 2013 .

[16]  Francesco Rullani,et al.  Skills, Division of Labor and Performance in Collective Inventions. Evidence from the Open Source Software , 2004 .

[17]  Rainer Frietsch,et al.  SME patenting: An empirical analysis in nine countries , 2013 .

[18]  Alessandro Maffioli,et al.  A Primer for Applying Propensity-Score Matching , 2010 .

[19]  Andreas Pyka,et al.  A new model for university-industry links in knowledge-based economies , 2011 .

[20]  Keld Laursen.  Keep searching and you’ll find: what do we know about variety creation through firms’ search activities for innovation? , 2012 .

[21]  Jesper Manniche,et al.  Combinatorial Knowledge Dynamics: On the Usefulness of the Differentiated Knowledge Bases Model , 2012 .

[22]  Jeffrey M. Wooldridge,et al.  Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach , 1999 .

[23]  M. Gittelman,et al.  Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows: The Influence of Examiner Citations , 2006, The Review of Economics and Statistics.

[24]  M. Trajtenberg.  A Penny for Your Quotes : Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations , 1990 .

[25]  A. Salter,et al.  Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university–industry collaboration , 2009 .

[26]  Arvids A. Ziedonis,et al.  Changes in university patent quality after the Bayh-Dole act: a re-examination , 2003 .

[27]  M. Perkmann,et al.  The Two Faces of Collaboration: Impacts of University-Industry Relations on Public Research , 2009 .

[28]  A. Jaffe.  Real Effects of Academic Research , 1989 .

[29]  F. Narin,et al.  Science and Technology as Predictors of Stock Performance , 1999 .

[30]  Katrin Hussinger,et al.  The nexus between science and industry: evidence from faculty inventions , 2012 .

[31]  O. Sorenson,et al.  Science as a Map in Technological Search , 2000 .

[32]  Anne W. Fuller,et al.  Us Faculty Patenting: Inside and Outside the University , 2007 .

[33]  R. Katila,et al.  Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncratic situations , 2004 .

[34]  M. Arthur.  Economics of Science , 2008 .

[35]  Kira Fabrizio.  Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation , 2009 .

[36]  Maria Savona,et al.  Taking services seriously: how policy can stimulate the 'hidden innovation' in the UK’s services economy , 2008 .

[37]  Gary J. Sullivan,et al.  Overview of the High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) Standard , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology.

[38]  Z. Griliches,et al.  Citations, Family Size, Opposition and the Value of Patent Rights Have Profited from Comments and Suggestions , 2002 .

[39]  Markus Perkmann,et al.  Engaging the Scholar: Three Types of Academic Consulting and Their Impact on Universities and Industry , 2008 .

[40]  Walter G. Vincenti,et al.  What Engineers Know and How They Know It: Analytical Studies from Aeronautical History. , 1992 .

[41]  M. Feldman,et al.  The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: Composition, social networks, and geography , 2011 .

[42]  Alexander Kaufmann,et al.  Do different types of innovation rely on specific kinds of knowledge interactions , 2008 .

[43]  Alok K. Chakrabarti,et al.  FIRM SIZE AND TECHNOLOGY CENTRALITY IN INDUSTRY-UNIVERSITY INTERACTIONS , 2002 .

[44]  D. Rubin,et al.  Constructing a Control Group Using Multivariate Matched Sampling Methods That Incorporate the Propensity Score , 1985 .

[45]  A. Agrawal,et al.  Gone but not Forgotten: Knowledge Flows, Labor Mobility, and Enduring Social Relationships , 2006 .

[46]  Walter W. Powell,et al.  Networks of Innovators , 2006 .

[47]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[48]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  THE NBER/SLOAN PROJECT ON INDUSTRIAL TECHAIOLOGY AND PRODUCTIVITY: INCORPORATING LEARNING FROM PLANT VISITS AND INTERVIEWS INTO ECONOMIC RESEARCHt Knowledge Spillovers and Patent Citations: Evidence from a Survey of Inventors , 2000 .

[49]  Arvids A. Ziedonis,et al.  Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh-Dole act in the United States , 2002 .

[50]  B. Lundvall,et al.  Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation , 2007 .

[51]  A. Torre.  On the Role Played by Temporary Geographical Proximity in Knowledge Transmission , 2008 .

[52]  Koen Frenken,et al.  The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration , 2007 .

[53]  Sidonia von Proff,et al.  Inventor collaboration over distance: a comparison of academic and corporate patents , 2013, Scientometrics.

[54]  James D. Adams,et al.  Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth , 1990, Journal of Political Economy.

[55]  A. Nerkar,et al.  Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry , 2001 .

[56]  D. Mowery,et al.  The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and University--Industry Technology Transfer: A Model for Other OECD Governments? , 2004 .

[57]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science , 1997 .

[58]  Takashi Shibata,et al.  Sony's successful strategy for compact discs , 1993 .

[59]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Heterogeneity of Patenting Activity and Its Implications for Scientific Research , 2007 .

[60]  Katrin Hussinger,et al.  Commercializing academic research: the quality of faculty patenting , 2011 .

[61]  Edward W. Constant,et al.  The Origins of the Turbojet Revolution , 1982 .

[62]  Jasjit Singh.  Distributed R&D, Cross-Regional Knowledge Integration and Quality of Innovative Output , 2006 .

[63]  Tom Broekel,et al.  The Regional Dimension of Knowledge Transfers—A Behavioral Approach , 2007 .

[64]  Shaker A. Zahra,et al.  Where Do Breakthroughs Come From? Characteristics of High‐Potential Inventions , 2013 .