Channels of interaction and past collaborative experience as imperatives in academia–industry collaboration

ABSTRACT The present study deals with the engagement of academics with the industry using different channels for the transfer of knowledge and technology. The study provides empirical evidence substantiating the effect of the frequency of use of the different channels of interaction in explaining the relationship between past collaborative experience of the academic and the outcomes of academia–industry collaboration. The results indicate that past collaborative experience develops strong insights into industrial problems, opens up avenues for research projects, leads to industrial funding and builds research networks. The prospects of commercialisation of research of the academic are also rooted in past collaborative experience. The results also reveal that the frequency of use of the traditional and bi-directional channels partially mediate the relationship between the collaborative experience and the outcomes of collaboration, validating that higher collaborative experience leads to increased frequency of use of channels that results in improved outcomes of academia–industry collaboration.

[1]  A. Salter,et al.  Academic Engagement and Commercialisation: A Review of the Literature on University-Industry Relations , 2012 .

[2]  Jiancheng Guan,et al.  Collaboration between industry and research institutes/universities on industrial innovation in Beijing, China , 2005, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[3]  José Ramón Gil-García,et al.  Information sharing and business systems leveraging in supply chains: An empirical investigation of one web-based application , 2012, Inf. Manag..

[4]  Marko Sarstedt,et al.  Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research , 2014 .

[5]  G. Dutrénit,et al.  Best channels of academia–industry interaction for long-term benefit , 2012 .

[6]  Girma Zawdie,et al.  Science parks and university–industry collaboration in Malaysia , 2008, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[7]  Keun Lee,et al.  Are university–industry links meaningful for catch up ? A comparative analysis of five Asian countries , 2015 .

[8]  Marko Sarstedt,et al.  Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): A useful tool for family business researchers , 2014 .

[9]  Kyoung-Joo Lee,et al.  Formal boundary spanning by industry liaison offices and the changing pattern of university–industry cooperative research: the case of the University of Tokyo , 2010, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[10]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[11]  Joseph F. Hair,et al.  Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling , 2021, Handbook of Market Research.

[12]  E. B. Acworth,et al.  University–industry engagement: The formation of the Knowledge Integration Community (KIC) model at the Cambridge-MIT Institute , 2008 .

[13]  Ana M. Bernardos Barbolla,et al.  Critical factors for success in university–industry research projects , 2009 .

[14]  Maryann P. Feldman,et al.  The engaged university , 2012 .

[15]  Federica Rossi,et al.  Finding the Right Partners: Institutional and personal modes of governance of university-industry interactions , 2013 .

[16]  Kuang S. Yeh,et al.  Technology Transfer in Taiwan's Information Industry: The Lessons , 1996 .

[17]  Nabil Amara,et al.  Why are some university researchers more likely to create spin-offs than others? Evidence from Canadian universities , 2006 .

[18]  Ah-Lian Kor,et al.  Technology transfer model for Austrian higher education institutions , 2013 .

[19]  A. Rodríguez‐Pose,et al.  In Economics and Social Sciences Working Papers Series Firm Collaboration and Modes of Innovation in Norway Firm Collaboration and Modes of Innovation in Norway Firm Collaboration and Modes of Innovation in Norway , 2022 .

[20]  P. Klarner,et al.  Disentangling the Effects of Team Competences, Team Adaptability, and Client Communication on the Performance of Management Consulting Teams , 2013 .

[21]  Samuel N. Bar-Zakay,et al.  Technology transfer model , 1971 .

[22]  M. Kafouros,et al.  Academic collaborations and firm innovation performance in China: : The role of region-specific institutions , 2015 .

[23]  Rna Rudi Bekkers,et al.  Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter? , 2008 .

[24]  Robert V. Bloedon,et al.  Making University/Industry Collaborative Research Succeed , 1994 .

[25]  V. Arza.  Channels, benefits and risks of public–private interactions for knowledge transfer: conceptual framework inspired by Latin America , 2010 .

[26]  Elisabeth Starbuck.  Optimizing University Research Collaborations , 2001 .

[27]  T. Burgess,et al.  Asking both university and industry actors about their engagement in knowledge transfer: What single-group studies of motives omit , 2013 .

[28]  Ammon Salter,et al.  Searching Low and High : What Types of Firms use Universities as a Source of Innovation ? , 2003 .

[29]  Jina Kang,et al.  Does partner type matter in R&D collaboration for product innovation? , 2010, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

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

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

[32]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  University-industry relationships: How does the Belgian academic community feel about it?☆ , 1990 .

[33]  Keun Lee,et al.  Developing National Systems of Innovation , 2015 .

[34]  Marian Beise,et al.  Public research and industrial innovations in Germany , 1999 .