What factors inhibit publicly funded principal investigators’ commercialization activities?

ABSTRACT This paper examines what factors publicly funded principal investigators (PIs) perceive as inhibiting their involvement in commercialization activities. PIs are important knowledge brokers in public science but while the emerging literature on PIs has primarily focused on identifying their multitude of roles and responsibilities, much less is known about their experiences in commercialization specifically. It remains unknown what challenges inhibit PIs from pursuing commercialization when shaping their competitive research proposals. To begin to address this topic, this study draws on semi-structured interviews with 24 funded health science PIs in New Zealand. The study found that a lack of confidence in the expectations and consistency of funding body review processes, as well as a lack of appropriate support and resources within the university, can deter PIs from incorporating commercialization activities in their research agendas. The implications of these findings for the literature and practice are also discussed.

[1]  James A. Cunningham,et al.  Gender differences and academic entrepreneurship: a study of scientists in the principal investigator role , 2017 .

[2]  John P. Walsh,et al.  Creativity in scientific teams: : Unpacking novelty and impact , 2015 .

[3]  Marie C. Thursby,et al.  Objectives, Characteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing: A Survey of Major U.S. Universities , 2001 .

[4]  M. Menter,et al.  Principal Investigators and the Commercialization of Knowledge , 2016 .

[5]  A. Link,et al.  Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. , 2004 .

[6]  Corine Genet,et al.  Principal investigators as scientific entrepreneurs , 2014 .

[7]  Mike Wright,et al.  Conceptualising the heterogeneity of research-based spin-offs: A multi-dimensional taxonomy , 2006 .

[8]  Gerard George,et al.  Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity , 2009 .

[9]  Catherine Beaudry,et al.  Impact of public and private research funding on scientific production: The case of nanotechnology , 2012 .

[10]  S. Rosser,et al.  Institutionalization, Sustainability, and Repeatability of ADVANCE for Institutional Transformation , 2006 .

[11]  Pascale G. Quester,et al.  Satisfaction with university-industry relationships : the impact of commitment, trust and championship , 2006 .

[12]  D. Parr,et al.  How to restore public trust in science , 1999, Nature.

[13]  Terttu Luukkonen,et al.  Conservatism and risk-taking in peer review: Emerging ERC practices , 2012 .

[14]  Conor O’Kane.  Technology transfer executives' backwards integration: An examination of interactions between university technology transfer executives and principal investigators , 2016, Technovation.

[15]  Melita Nicotra,et al.  Entrepreneurial performance of principal investigators and country culture: relations and influences , 2017 .

[16]  T. Allen,et al.  Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities , 2005 .

[17]  Holly J. Falk-Krzesinski,et al.  Mapping a research agenda for the science of team science. , 2011, Research Evaluation.

[18]  Gianni Lorenzoni,et al.  Closing the distance between academia and market: experimentation and user entrepreneurial processes , 2014 .

[19]  David B. Audretsch,et al.  The Bayh-Dole Act and scientist entrepreneurship , 2011 .

[20]  Benjamin F. Jones,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Figs. S1 to S3 References the Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge , 2022 .

[21]  Thomas Bolli,et al.  Do competitively acquired funds induce universities to increase productivity , 2011 .

[22]  Daniel L. Fay,et al.  Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art , 2012, The Journal of Technology Transfer.

[23]  Jeannette A. Colyvas,et al.  Breaking the Ivory Tower: Academic Entrepreneurship in the Life Sciences in UK and Germany , 2011 .

[24]  Ekaterina Albats,et al.  A micro level study of university industry collaborative lifecycle key performance indicators , 2018 .

[25]  E. Welch,et al.  Commercialization of university inventions: Individual and institutional factors affecting licensing of university patents , 2015 .

[26]  B. Latour,et al.  Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts , 1979 .

[27]  Branco Ponomariov,et al.  Management knowledge and the organization of team science in university research centers , 2014 .

[28]  Vincent Mangematin,et al.  PIs as boundary spanners, science and market shapers , 2014 .

[29]  K. Pavitt.  What makes basic research economically useful , 1991 .

[30]  James A. Cunningham,et al.  The inhibiting factors that principal investigators experience in leading publicly funded research , 2014 .

[31]  David Bennett,et al.  University to business technology transfer—UK and USA comparisons , 2007 .

[32]  S. Fiore.  Interdisciplinarity as Teamwork , 2008 .

[33]  Niclas Adler,et al.  The challenge of managing boundary-spanning research activities: Experiences from the Swedish context , 2009 .

[34]  J. S. Katz,et al.  What is research collaboration , 1997 .

[35]  Dagmara Weckowska,et al.  Learning in university technology transfer offices: transactions-focused and relations-focused approaches to commercialization of academic research , 2015 .

[36]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and , 2000 .

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

[38]  P. D'Este,et al.  The relationship between research funding and academic consulting: An empirical investigation in the Spanish context , 2013 .

[39]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  Emergence of a Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations , 1996 .

[40]  Diana Hicks,et al.  Equity and Excellence in Research Funding , 2011 .

[41]  M. Wright,et al.  Funding incentives, collaborative dynamics and scientific productivity : Evidence from the EU framework program , 2009 .

[42]  N. Rosenberg.  Why do firms do basic research (with their own money) , 1990 .

[43]  T. Elkins,et al.  Leadership in research and development organizations: A literature review and conceptual framework , 2003 .

[44]  Waverly W. Ding,et al.  When Do Scientists Become Entrepreneurs? The Social Structural Antecedents of Commercial Activity in the Academic Life Sciences1 , 2006, American Journal of Sociology.

[45]  Ben R. Martin,et al.  The use of multiple indicators in the assessment of basic research , 1996, Scientometrics.

[46]  Vincent Mangematin,et al.  Underpinning Strategic Behaviours and Posture of Principal Investigators In Transition/Uncertain Environments , 2015 .

[47]  D Blumenthal,et al.  Participation of life-science faculty in research relationships with industry. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[48]  Alice Lam,et al.  From ‘Ivory Tower Traditionalists’ to ‘Entrepreneurial Scientists’? Academic Scientists in Fuzzy University-Industry Boundaries , 2009 .

[49]  Stéphane Malo,et al.  The contribution of (not so) public research to commercial innovations in the field of combinatorial chemistry , 2009 .

[50]  Donna K. Kidwell,et al.  Principal investigators as knowledge brokers: A multiple case study of the creative actions of PIs in entrepreneurial science , 2013 .

[51]  James A. Cunningham,et al.  Publicly funded principal investigators allocation of time for public sector entrepreneurship activities , 2016 .

[52]  R. Keller,et al.  A Longitudinal Study of the Individual Characteristics of Effective R&D Project Team Leaders , 2017 .

[53]  Waverly W. Ding,et al.  The Determinants of Faculty Patenting Behavior: Demographics or Opportunities? , 2005 .

[54]  James A. Cunningham,et al.  Managerial challenges of publicly funded principal investigators , 2015, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[55]  Donna K. Kidwell,et al.  Navigating the role of the principal investigator: a comparison of four cases , 2014 .

[56]  S. Schwartzman,et al.  The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1994 .

[57]  A. Salter,et al.  The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review , 2001 .

[58]  A. Geuna,et al.  University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence , 2006 .

[59]  Diana Nadine Boehm,et al.  ‘A jack of all trades’: the role of PIs in the establishment and management of collaborative networks in scientific knowledge commercialisation , 2014 .

[60]  Grit Laudel,et al.  The ‘Quality Myth’: Promoting and Hindering Conditions for Acquiring Research Funds , 2006 .

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

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