Localized norms and academics' industry involvement: The moderating role of age on professional imprinting

This study explores the interaction between professional imprinting and age in the context of industry-science collaboration. Specifically, we examine the impact of localized and personal peer effects on academics’ involvement with industry and how these effects are moderated by the career age of the scientist. We suggest that both localized and personal peer effects drive industry involvement but that the effects from such imprinting are more pronounced the more recent the vintage of the scientist’s PhD degree is, suggesting that professional imprinting takes place in the early stages of a scientist’s academic career. Based on a sample of 343 German academics in the field of biotechnology and publication data from the ISI Web of Science, we find that scientists with co-authors who have joint publications with industry personnel are more likely to be involved with industry (personal peer effect). Moreover, we find that the scientist’s involvement increases with the share of publications in the scientist’s department co-authored with industry personnel (localized peer effect). Only the latter effect turns out to be moderated by scientist’s age. While personal peer effects are independent of the scientist’s age, localized peer effects emerge for younger researchers.

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

[2]  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 .

[3]  Paula E. Stephan,et al.  Conveying Quality and Value in Emerging Industries: Star Scientists and the Role of Learning in Biotechnology , 2008 .

[4]  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.

[5]  I. Cockburn,et al.  Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery , 2003 .

[6]  Réjean Landry,et al.  “The Triple-Helix collaboration: Why do researchers collaborate with industry and the government? What are the factors that influence the perceived barriers?” , 2007, Scientometrics.

[7]  Albert N. Link,et al.  Universities as partners in U.S. research joint ventures. , 2005 .

[8]  Marie C. Thursby,et al.  Who is Selling the Ivory Tower , 2000 .

[9]  Richard A. Jensen,et al.  University-Industry Spillovers, Government Funding, and Industrial Consulting , 2010 .

[10]  Michael Reinhard,et al.  Wissens- und Technologietransfer in Deutschland - , 2001 .

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

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

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

[14]  M. Carree,et al.  Cooperative R&D and Firm Performance , 2004 .

[15]  A. Drejer.  Innovation and learning , 2003 .

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

[17]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D , 1989 .

[18]  Jeffrey M. Wooldridge,et al.  Solutions Manual and Supplementary Materials for Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2003 .

[19]  K. Boulding.  Towards a new economics , 1992 .

[20]  A. Link,et al.  An Empirical Analysis of the Propensity of Academics to Engage In Informal University Technology Transfer , 2007 .

[21]  Gary W. Matkin.  Technology Transfer and Public Policy , 1997 .

[22]  Maryann Feldman,et al.  Academic Entrepreneurs: Organizational Change at the Individual Level , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[23]  Elizabeth A. Corley,et al.  Scientists' collaboration strategies: implications for scientific and technical human capital , 2004 .

[24]  Stefan Kuhlmann,et al.  Across institutional boundaries?: Research collaboration in German public sector nanoscience , 2008 .

[25]  Branco Ponomariov,et al.  Effects of university characteristics on scientists’ interactions with the private sector: an exploratory assessment , 2008 .

[26]  Martin Woerter,et al.  Do specific forms of university-industry knowledge transfer have different impacts on the performance of private enterprises? An empirical analysis based on Swiss firm data , 2008 .

[27]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory , 2000 .

[28]  Henry Chesbrough,et al.  Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology , 2003 .

[29]  Paul Almeida,et al.  Learning - by - Hiring: When Is Mobility More Likely to Facilitate Interfirm Knowledge Transfer? , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[30]  Martin Kenney,et al.  The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: a comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford , 2004 .

[31]  P. Boardman,et al.  Influencing scientists’ collaboration and productivity patterns through new institutions: University research centers and scientific and technical human capital☆ , 2010 .

[32]  Hanna Hottenrott,et al.  Are Local Milieus the Key to Innovation Performance? , 2009 .

[33]  Jerry G. Thursby,et al.  Special Issue on University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer: Who Is Selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of Growth in University Licensing , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[34]  Christoph Grimpe,et al.  Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the United States and Germany , 2010 .

[35]  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 .

[36]  A. Bandura.  Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory , 1985 .

[37]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[38]  Maryann P. Feldman,et al.  Academic entrepreneurs and technology transfer: Who participates and why? , 2007 .

[39]  U. Schmoch,et al.  Science-based technologies: university-industry interactions in four fields , 1998 .

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

[41]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers’ interactions with industry , 2007 .