The Changing Rewards to Science

Little is known about the form and or magni- tude of compensation provided university-based scientists working on firm R&D. This is unfortunate, given the impor- tant role that university-based scientists play in R&D, and the growing literature concerning compensation and innovation. This paper sheds some light on these issues by examining the compensation of university-based scientists involved with 52 biotech firms that made an initial public offering between March of 1990 and November of 1992. Although the stock holdings of the university scientists are of particular interest, additional forms of compensation received by the scientists are also examined. We find that approximately 10 percent of the university- based scientists affiliated with these companies hold sufficient options or stock to require disclosure at the time of the public offering. A far larger proportion has an equity position in the firm. In many instances the scientists also receive consulting fees or salary from the firm and enter into licensing agree- ments with the firm. In addition to providing information concerning the compensation of university-based scientists, the empirical work suggests that the rewards to science can be significantly greater than previous work would suggest.

[1]  R. Merton Priorities in scientific discovery: A chapter in the sociology of science. , 1957 .

[2]  H. Tuckman Publication, teaching, and the academic reward structure , 1976 .

[3]  D. Audretsch Innovation and Industry Evolution , 1995 .

[4]  Partha Dasgupta,et al.  Information Disclosure and the Economics of Science and Technology , 1987 .

[5]  Alfred Kleinknecht,et al.  Firm size and innovation , 1991 .

[6]  H. Rosovsky,et al.  The University: An Owner's Manual , 1990 .

[7]  L. Zucker,et al.  Intellectual Capital and the Firm: The Technology of Geographically Localized Knowledge Spillovers , 1994 .

[8]  Martin Kenney,et al.  Biotechnology: The University-Industrial Complex , 1986 .

[9]  D Blumenthal,et al.  Relationships between academic institutions and industry in the life sciences--an industry survey. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[10]  F. Black,et al.  The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities , 1973, Journal of Political Economy.

[11]  Paula E. Stephan,et al.  Company-Scientist Locational Links: The Case of Biotechnology , 1996 .

[12]  Jason Wolfe,et al.  A passion for science , 1988 .

[13]  D. Levy,et al.  The Market for Fame and Fortune , 1988 .

[14]  A. Diamond What is a Citation Worth , 1986 .

[15]  Paula E. Stephan,et al.  Striking the Mother Lode in Science: The Importance of Age, Place, and Time. , 1993 .

[16]  R. Rothwell Small firms, innovation and industrial change , 1989 .

[17]  Paula E. Stephan,et al.  Property rights and entrepreneurship in science , 1996 .

[18]  Bengt Holmstrom,et al.  AGENCY COSTS AND INNOVATION , 1989 .

[19]  J. Hicks,et al.  The economics of science , 1996 .

[20]  David B. Audretsch,et al.  Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis , 1988 .

[21]  Paula E. Stephan,et al.  Research Productivity over the Life Cycle: Evidence for Academic Scientists , 1991 .

[22]  M. C. Jensen,et al.  The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems , 1993, A Theory of the Firm.

[23]  E. Mansfield Academic Research Underlying Industrial Innovations , 1995 .

[24]  H. Tuckman,et al.  What Is an Article Worth? , 1975, Journal of Political Economy.

[25]  W. Hagstrom The scientific community , 1966 .

[26]  J. Tirole,et al.  The Management of Innovation , 1994 .