Evidence on how academics manage their portfolio of knowledge transfer activities

The purpose of this paper is to explore whether six broad categories of knowledge transfer activities undertaken by academics: the creation and diffusion of knowledge through publications, transmission of knowledge through teaching, informal knowledge transfer, patenting, spin-off formation and consulting activities, are complementary, substitute, or independent, as well as the conditions under which complementarities, substitution and independence among these activities are likely to emerge. This investigation relied on data regarding 1554 researchers funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. Contrary to prior studies which have examined complementarities and the determinants of knowledge transfer activities in separate models, this study relied on a multivariate path model to reflect the fact that in practice, academics consider simultaneously whether or not to undertake multiple knowledge transfer activities. Overall, the results point to the existence of three very different types of knowledge transfer portfolios of activities: a first portfolio made up of complementary activities which are interdependent and reinforce each other. This portfolio includes publications, patenting, spin-off creation, consulting and informal knowledge transfer. A second portfolio includes teaching activities and publication outputs which are substitute for each other. A third portfolio comprises teaching activities and other activities independent from teaching, namely, patenting, spin-off creation, consulting and informal knowledge transfer. Each of these three portfolios of knowledge transfer activities emerged under different conditions. Implications are derived for managerial practice and future research.

[1]  K. R. Conner,et al.  A Resource-Based Theory of the Firm: Knowledge Versus Opportunism , 1996 .

[2]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Heterogeneity of Patenting Activity and Its Implications for Scientific Research , 2007 .

[3]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  Academic careers, patents, and productivity: industry experience as scientific and technical human capital , 2005 .

[4]  Jason Owen-Smith,et al.  From separate systems to a hybrid order: accumulative advantage across public and private science at Research One universities , 2003 .

[5]  Daniel T. Layzell.  Faculty Workload and Productivity: Recurrent Issues with New Imperatives , 2017 .

[6]  Jw Kim.  Comment: University patenting and scientific productivity , 2008 .

[7]  Albert N. Link,et al.  Universities as Research Partners , 2003 .

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

[9]  Carol L. Colbeck,et al.  Merging in a Seamless Blend: How Faculty Integrate Teaching and Research. , 1998 .

[10]  Maryann Feldman,et al.  Special Issue on University Entrepreneurship and Technology Transfer: Equity and the Technology Transfer Strategies of American Research Universities , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[11]  P. M. Podsakoff,et al.  Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects , 1986 .

[12]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Measuring knowledge transfer between fields of science , 2002, Scientometrics.

[13]  Nicolaj Siggelkow,et al.  Misperceiving Interactions Among Complements and Substitutes: Organizational Consequences , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[14]  M. Gordon,et al.  PUBLICATION RECORDS AND TENURE DECISIONS IN THE FIELD OF STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT , 1996 .

[15]  Kira Fabrizio,et al.  Commercializing the laboratory: Faculty patenting and the open science environment , 2008 .

[16]  Yves Gingras,et al.  Impact of Collaborative Research on Academic Science , 2000 .

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

[18]  Monica Gaughan,et al.  Using curriculum vitae to compare some impacts of NSF research grants with research center funding , 2002 .

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

[20]  Nicolaj Siggelkow.  Persuasion with case studies , 2007 .

[21]  Réjean Landry,et al.  Managing the protection of innovations in knowledge-intensive business services , 2008 .

[22]  Patrick Llerena,et al.  Patent Production at a European Research University: Exploratory Evidence at the Laboratory Level , 2006 .

[23]  Robert G. Cooper,et al.  Portfolio Management - Fundamental to New Product Success , 2001 .

[24]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  The Impact of Research Collaboration on Scientific Productivity , 2005 .

[25]  Monica Gaughan,et al.  Scientific and technical human capital: an alternative model for research evaluation , 2001, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[26]  W. Powell,et al.  The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: assessing the importance of experience and connectivity , 2003 .

[27]  Amelia C. Regan,et al.  Trucking industry adoption of information technology: a multivariate discrete choice model , 2002 .

[28]  Maryann P. Feldman,et al.  Academic entrepreneurs: social learning and participation in university technology transfer , 2006 .

[29]  Nicolas Carayol,et al.  Individual and collective determinants of academic scientists' productivity , 2006, Inf. Econ. Policy.

[30]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Entrepreneurial universities and the dynamics of academic knowledge production: A case study of basic vs. applied research in Belgium , 2003, Scientometrics.

[31]  Stefano Breschi,et al.  University patenting and scientific productivity: a quantitative study of Italian academic inventors , 2008 .

[32]  Nabil Amara,et al.  Determinants of knowledge transfer: evidence from Canadian university researchers in natural sciences and engineering , 2007 .

[33]  Anastassios Pouris,et al.  Is patenting activity impeding the academic performance of South African University researchers , 2009 .

[34]  Michelle Gittelman,et al.  Does Good Science Lead to Valuable Knowledge? Biotechnology Firms and the Evolutionary Logic of Citation Patterns , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[35]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Publication and patent behavior of academic researchers: Conflicting, reinforcing or merely co-existing? , 2006 .

[36]  Rosa Grimaldi,et al.  To patent or not to patent? A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives, and obstacles to university patenting , 2007, Scientometrics.

[37]  R. Grant.  Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm,” Strategic Management Journal (17), pp. , 1996 .

[38]  D. Flora,et al.  An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. , 2004, Psychological methods.

[39]  Waverly W. Ding,et al.  The Impact of Academic Patenting on the Rate, Quality and Direction of (Public) Research Output , 2009 .

[40]  W. Hofmann,et al.  A Meta-Analysis on the Correlation Between the Implicit Association Test and Explicit Self-Report Measures , 2005, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[41]  Fiona E. Murray.  The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life , 2004 .

[42]  Réjean Landry,et al.  Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada , 2001 .

[43]  J. S. Long,et al.  DEPARTMENTAL EFFECTS ON SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTIVITY , 1990 .

[44]  Johnathan Roberts,et al.  The Modern Firm: Organizational Design for Performance and Growth , 2004 .

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

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

[47]  Nicolas Carayol,et al.  The exploitation of complementarities in scientific production process at the laboratory level , 2004 .

[48]  Stefan Krabel,et al.  What drives scientists to start their own company?: An empirical investigation of Max Planck Society scientists , 2009 .

[49]  Nabil Amara,et al.  Direct interactions medical school faculty members have with professionals and managers working in public and private sector organizations: A cross-sectional study , 2007, Scientometrics.

[50]  Douglas S. Rebne,et al.  Nonlinear effects of teaching and consulting on academic research productivity , 1995 .

[51]  Daniel Tzabbar,et al.  When is the whole bigger than the sum of its parts? Bundling knowledge stocks for innovative success , 2008 .

[52]  Jerry G. Thursby,et al.  Are There Real Effects of Licensing on Academic Research? A Life Cycle View , 2005 .

[53]  Garrett Upstill,et al.  Technology Transfer and the Creation of Companies: The CSIRO Experience , 2002 .

[54]  Nicolas Carayol,et al.  Objectives , Agreements and Matching in Science-Industry Collaborations : Reassembling the Pieces of the Puzzle , 2003 .

[55]  Paula E. Stephan,et al.  WHO'S PATENTING IN THE UNIVERSITY? EVIDENCE FROM THE SURVEY OF DOCTORATE RECIPIENTS , 2007 .

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

[57]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  A Triple Helix of University—Industry—Government Relations , 1998, Scientometrics.

[58]  Margarida Fontes,et al.  Do individual factors matter? A survey of scientists’ patenting in Portuguese public research organisations , 2007, Scientometrics.

[59]  Nicolas Carayol,et al.  Does research organization influence academic production?: Laboratory level evidence from a large European university , 2004 .

[60]  Paula E. Stephan.  The Economics of Science , 1996 .

[61]  Paul Milgrom,et al.  Complementarities and fit strategy, structure, and organizational change in manufacturing , 1995 .

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

[63]  B. Kogut,et al.  Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology , 1992 .

[64]  R. Burt.  A note on social capital and network content , 1997 .

[65]  Nabil Amara,et al.  Patenting and spin-off creation by Canadian researchers in engineering and life sciences , 2007 .

[66]  Nicolas Carayol,et al.  ACADEMIC INCENTIVES, RESEARCH ORGANIZATION AND PATENTING AT A LARGE FRENCH UNIVERSITY , 2007 .

[67]  Rosa Grimaldi,et al.  Exploring the Networking Characteristics of New Venture Founding Teams: A Stdy of Italian Academic Spin-off , 2003 .

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

[69]  Nils Stieglitz,et al.  Innovations and the Role of Complementarities in a Strategic Theory of the Firm , 2007 .

[70]  A. Richter,et al.  The Whole Is More Than the Sum of Its Parts— Or Is It? A Review of the Empirical Literature on Complementarities in Organizations , 2010 .

[71]  M. Fontes.  The process of transformation of scientific and technological knowledge into economic value conducted by biotechnology spin-offs , 2005 .

[72]  H. Etzkowitz.  Innovation in Innovation: The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations , 2002 .

[73]  J. Wallmark,et al.  Inventions and patents at universities: the case of Chalmers University of Technology , 1997 .

[74]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology , 2006 .

[75]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science , 1997 .

[76]  W. Glänzel,et al.  Patent and Publication Activities of German Professors: An Empirical Assessment of Their Co-Activity , 2007 .

[77]  Stephen Cole,et al.  Social Stratification in Science , 1974 .

[78]  M. Carree,et al.  Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies , 2004 .

[79]  E. Rogers.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[80]  B. Looy,et al.  Combining entrepreneurial and scientific performance in academia: towards a compounded and reciprocal Matthew-effect? , 2004 .

[81]  Cinzia Daraio,et al.  Age effects in scientific productivity , 2003, Scientometrics.