The impact of technological relatedness, prior ties, and geographical distance on university-industry collaborations: A joint-patent analysis

Abstract Empirical studies on R&D collaborations between universities and firms have mainly centered their attention on universities and firms' characteristics that favor the establishment of collaborative agreements. In this paper, I extend the current research framework investigating the role that specific technological and relational attributes may play on the relevance of such collaborations. Specifically, I focus on the effects exerted by three relevant factors, namely technological relatedness, prior collaboration ties, and geographical distance, on university–industry joint innovation value. I develop testable hypotheses about their impact on the innovative performance of R&D university–industry collaborations, and test them on a sample of 796 university–industry joint patents, developed by 33 universities located in 12 different European countries. Our results suggest that partners' technological relatedness has an inverted U-shaped relationship with innovation value. In addition, prior ties and geographical distance between universities and firms are both positively related to the achievement of higher innovative outcomes.

[1]  Ángeles Montoro-Sánchez,et al.  Determining factors in the success of R&D cooperative agreements between firms and research organizations , 2004 .

[2]  Walter W. Powell,et al.  A Comparison of U.S. and European University-Industry Relations in the Life Sciences , 2001 .

[3]  Marie C. Thursby,et al.  Gender Patterns of Research and Licensing Activity of Science and Engineering Faculty , 2005 .

[4]  Lori Rosenkopf,et al.  Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility , 2003, Manag. Sci..

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

[6]  Rod B. McNaughton,et al.  ENTRE-U: An entrepreneurial orientation scale for universities , 2011 .

[7]  Kira R. Fabrizio,et al.  University patenting and the pace of industrial innovation , 2007 .

[8]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  The Role of Academic Technology Transfer Organizations in Improving Industry Science Links , 2005 .

[9]  Salih Zeki Ozdemir,et al.  Vertical alliance networks: The case of university–biotechnology–pharmaceutical alliance chains , 2007 .

[10]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth , 1979 .

[11]  Igor Prodan,et al.  Conceptualizing academic-entrepreneurial intentions: An empirical test , 2008 .

[12]  H. Etzkowitz,et al.  The Future of the University and the University of the Future: Evolution of Ivory Tower to Entrepreneurial Paradigm , 2000 .

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

[14]  C. Antonelli.  Collective Knowledge Communication and Innovation: The Evidence of Technological Districts , 2000 .

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

[16]  Laura Abramovsky,et al.  University Research and the Location of Business R&D , 2007 .

[17]  Sanjay K. Jain,et al.  Technology Transfer Offices as Institutional Entrepreneurs: The Case of Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation and Human Embryonic Stem Cells , 2007 .

[18]  M. Feldman,et al.  Entpreprenerial Universities and Technology Transfer: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Knowledge-Based Economic Development , 2006 .

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

[20]  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..

[21]  Erik E. Lehmann,et al.  University spillovers and new firm location , 2005 .

[22]  J. Howells.  Tacit Knowledge, Innovation and Economic Geography , 2002 .

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

[24]  Bart Nooteboom,et al.  Empirical Tests of Optimal Cognitive Distance , 2004 .

[25]  B. Silverman,et al.  R&D, ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE, AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF CORPORATE TECHNOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE , 2004 .

[26]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness , 1997 .

[27]  Mariko Sakakibara,et al.  HETEROGENEITY OF FIRM CAPABILITIES AND COOPERATIVE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT: AN EMPIRICAL EXAMINATION OF MOTIVES , 1997 .

[28]  A. Agrawal.  University-to-industry knowledge transfer: literature review and unanswered questions , 2001 .

[29]  C. Gouriéroux,et al.  PSEUDO MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHODS: THEORY , 1984 .

[30]  F. Rothaermel,et al.  University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature , 2007 .

[31]  R. Nelson,et al.  American Universities and Technical Advance in Industry , 1994 .

[32]  Fred Pries,et al.  ‘Repeat commercializers,’ the ‘habitual entrepreneurs’ of university–industry technology transfer , 2009 .

[33]  Pablo D'Este,et al.  The spatial profile of university-business research partnerships , 2010 .

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

[35]  Scott Shane,et al.  Executive Forum: University technology transfer to entrepreneurial companies , 2002 .

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

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

[38]  G. Dosi,et al.  Technical Change and Economic Theory , 1989 .

[39]  Albert N. Link,et al.  Opening the ivory tower's door: An analysis of the determinants of the formation of U.S. university spin-off companies , 2005 .

[40]  Pablo D'Este,et al.  University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry? , 2007 .

[41]  Z. Griliches,et al.  Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship , 1984 .

[42]  M. Wright,et al.  Assessing the impact of university science parks on research productivity: exploratory firm-level evidence from the United Kingdom , 2003 .

[43]  Valeria Arza,et al.  What drives the formation of ‘valuable’ university–industry linkages?: Insights from the wine industry , 2009 .

[44]  E. Giuliani,et al.  Who are the researchers that are collaborating with industry? An analysis of the wine sectors in Chile, South Africa and Italy , 2010 .

[45]  D. Harhoff,et al.  Citation Frequency and the Value of Patented Inventions , 1999, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[46]  B. Nooteboom.  Learning and Innovation in Organizations and Economies , 2000 .

[47]  Kira R. Fabrizio,et al.  The Use of University Research in Firm Innovation , 2006 .

[48]  M. Fischer,et al.  Knowledge interactions between universities and industry in Austria: sectoral patterns and determinants , 2002 .

[49]  D. Mowery,et al.  Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: implications for the resource-based view of the firm , 1998 .

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

[51]  Pier Paolo Saviotti,et al.  Coherence of the Knowledge Base and the Firm's Innovative Performance: Evidence from the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry , 2005 .

[52]  Andrea Piccaluga,et al.  Exploitation and diffusion of public research: the case of academic spin-off companies in Italy , 2000 .

[53]  J. Schumpeter,et al.  The Theory of Economic Development , 2017 .

[54]  Scott Shane,et al.  Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? , 2003 .

[55]  A. Chandler,et al.  Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 , 1994 .

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

[57]  Mario Calderini,et al.  Academic research, technological specialization and the innovation performance in European regions: an empirical analysis in the wireless sector , 2005 .

[58]  M. Feldman,et al.  R&D spillovers and the ge-ography of innovation and production , 1996 .

[59]  Melissa S. Anderson,et al.  Withholding research results in academic life science. Evidence from a national survey of faculty. , 1997, JAMA.

[60]  Arvids A. Ziedonis,et al.  The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh–Dole act of 1980 , 2001 .

[61]  Klaus Brockhoff,et al.  Inter-firm R&D co-operations in Germany , 1991 .

[62]  J. West,et al.  Open innovation : researching a new paradigm , 2008 .

[63]  Jeffrey J. Reuer,et al.  Interorganizational Routines and Performance in Strategic Alliances , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[64]  Mike Wright,et al.  The rise of entrepreneurial activity at universities: organizational and societal implications , 2007 .

[65]  Bart Nooteboom,et al.  Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity , 2007 .

[66]  T. Daim,et al.  Measuring the efficiency of university technology transfer , 2007 .

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

[68]  Jeffrey H. Dyer,et al.  The Role of Trustworthiness in Reducing Transaction Costs and Improving Performance: Empirical Evidence from the United States, Japan, and Korea , 2003 .

[69]  L. Zucker.  Institutional Theories of Organization , 1987 .

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

[71]  M. Feldman,et al.  Fishing upstream: Firm innovation strategy and university research alliances , 2007 .

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

[73]  Stephen B. Adams,et al.  Stanford and Silicon Valley: Lessons on Becoming a High-Tech Region , 2005 .

[74]  Karin Fladmoe-Lindquist,et al.  Breakthrough innovations in the U.S. biotechnology industry: the effects of technological space and geographic origin , 2006 .

[75]  Hsin-Mei Lin.  Interorganizational Collaboration, Social Embeddedness, and Value Creation: A Theoretical Analysis , 2006 .

[76]  Marie C. Thursby,et al.  University–incubator firm knowledge flows: assessing their impact on incubator firm performance , 2005 .

[77]  Barbara Wejnert.  Integrating models of diffusion of innovations: a Conceptual Framework. , 2002 .

[78]  Mike Wright,et al.  Academic spin-offs, formal technology transfer and capital raising , 2007 .

[79]  Jaeyong Song,et al.  Creating new technology through alliances: An empirical investigation of joint patents , 2007 .

[80]  R. Veugelers,et al.  R&D Cooperation between Firms and Universities: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgian Manufacturing , 2003 .

[81]  Elizabeth A. Corley,et al.  Universities : The Impacts of University Research Center Affiliation and Gender on Industrial Activities , 2015 .

[82]  Andrew J. Nelson,et al.  Cacophony or Harmony?: Multivocal Logics and Technology Licensing by the Stanford University Department of Music , 2005 .

[83]  E. Mansfield,et al.  The modern university: contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R&D support , 1996 .

[84]  K. Pavitt.  Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change : Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory : Research Policy , 1984 .

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

[86]  Anthony Arundel,et al.  Proximity and the use of public science by innovative European firms , 2004 .

[87]  Toke Bjerregaard.  Industry and academia in convergence: Micro-institutional dimensions of R&D collaboration , 2010 .

[88]  J. Knoben,et al.  Proximity and Inter-Organizational Collaboration: A Literature Review , 2006 .

[89]  B. Salter,et al.  The changing idea of university autonomy , 1995 .

[90]  R. Gulati.  Does Familiarity Breed Trust? The Implications of Repeated Ties for Contractual Choice in Alliances , 1995 .

[91]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences , 1979 .

[92]  Janet Bercovitz,et al.  Organizational Structure as a Determinant of Academic Patent and Licensing Behavior: An Exploratory Study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, and Pennsylvania State Universities , 2001 .

[93]  P. Boardman,et al.  University researchers working with private companies , 2009 .

[94]  Peter J. Lane,et al.  Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning , 1998 .

[95]  A. Jaffe.  Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms&Apos; Patents, Profits and Market Value , 1986 .

[96]  Stephen Tallman,et al.  Knowledge Flows and Geography in Biotechnology , 2002 .

[97]  F. Narin,et al.  Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents , 1991 .