| 41. |
- McKelvey, Maureen, 1965, et al.
(författare)
-
Collaborative Strategies: How and Why Academic Spin-offs Interact with Engineering University Centers
- 2013
-
Ingår i: How Entrepreneurs Do What they Do: Case Study of Knowledge Intensive Entrepreneurship / McKelvey, M. and A.H. Lassen (eds.). - Cheltenham, U.K. : Edward Elgar Publishers. - 9781781005491 ; , s. 34-47
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter follows the management and development of two KIE ventures that are academic spin-offs, in relation to collaborative strategies. The perspective is on how and why academic spin-offs continue to engage in collaborative strategies with engineering centers located at the university. The KIE ventures use the centers to access scientific and technological knowledge, as expected, but they also are interested in accessing other resources and networks to help further develop their research, product and market development. The key message is that networks with research centers at the university help shape the venture. Even after the founding phase, these KIE ventures can use collaborative strategies for research to access resources and ideas – involving scientific and technological knowledge but also market and business knowledge. The results of the chapter help us understand in particular how the venture needs to continue to access resources and ideas, even during the management and development phase of the KIE conceptual model. The KIE ventures are academic spin-offs, heavily involved in the development of technologies, and yet they greatly benefit from these university networks to access market knowledge from other, established firms, and to access business knowledge through the recruitment of experienced managers.
|
|
| 42. |
- McKelvey, Maureen, 1965, et al.
(författare)
-
Governance of medical research and innovation - Lessons from a recent crisis in regenerative medicine
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Third Nordic STS (Science, Technology, Society) Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden, 31 May - 2 June 2017.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Within the field of regenerative medicine radical steps are taken, by combining knowledge advances in engineering and medicine, in an attempt to relieve human suffering and save lives. However, such an approach is not without risks and crisis that lead to questions about its legitimacy are common, especially in prestigious and fast-moving fields (The Lancet 2014, van Hoorden 2011). A recent Swedish television documentary tells the story of the thorax surgeon Paolo Macchiarini at the Karolinska Institute and his attempts to develop a new procedure for replacing parts of the trachea by growing stem cells on both biological and synthetic scaffolds. Originally presented as a groundbreaking achievement documented in prestigious medical journals and hailed by the press, it is now seen by many as a reckless and unethical experimentation supported by research fraud. Four members of the Nobel Prize committee in Physiology or Medicine have resigned. The Vice-Chancellor of the Karolinska Institute has resigned. Police investigation is in process A former minister and head of Swedish police is investigating whether unethical research practice can be verified. At the same time The Lancet (Horton 2016) has published a comment on why they have not retracted his article. While the Maccchiarini crisis is not unique it raises many interesting questions about the governance of medical research and innovation in general, and regenerative medicine in particular. The purpose of this paper is to identify and conceptualize the governance challenges related to major advances in medical research and innovation. Based on a previous conceptual model to explain technological collaboration (McKelvey et al 2015), this paper uses the case of regenerative medicine and of the crisis surrounding Macchiarini and the Karolinska Institute to identify three challenges facing policy makers and researchers. This paper is framed through theories of the specific site of medicine as an area for innovation. Recent research on medical innovation has focused on explaining how and why medical innovation emerges through heterogeneous and dispersed actors, such as hospitals, firms and universities, interacting through sequences of problem-finding, and problem-solving, processes (Metcalfe et al 2005). In this research special attention has been given to the role of clinical practice and its mutual interaction with biomedical science, but at the same time noting the role of the physician in mobilizing and guiding industrial innovation (Blume 1992, Hopkins 2006). In this particular setting, we then apply and develop theories of governance and co-evolution of knowledge in medicine to describe the system challenges (McKelvey et al 2015). Our conceptual model of the governance of technological collaboration recognizes that different types of organizations are involved in the production and use of knowledge, where each has a different set of incentives and networks. However, the governance requires the development of common norms and institutions for the collective action. In other words, the collective action is mediated by interacting, where common norms and institutions are developed that regulate behavior and help create a common good. The challenges that we identify and will describe in this case are: Firstly, role of research funding, especially the concentration of funding into strategic areas. The hiring of an internationally acclaimed researcher, Macchiarini, coincides with a strategic investment in regenerative medicine by the Karolinska Institute supported by large government grants for research excellence in selected fields. High concentration of research funds, strong pressures for success, and global competition for talent put strains on existing systems of governance of research and innovation for which it was not designed. Secondly, the specific nature of interface between medical research and practice. The close connection between research and practice is commonly believed to be one of the strength of medical innovation. In many cases university departments and university hospitals employ the same people, which means they are involved both in research and practice. However, there are different rules within medical research and clinical practice in terms of experimentation. How should procedures, and knowledge, by transferred from research to practice and how should the results transferred back to research? Furthermore, these issues play out in a larger context, which involves development of stem cell technology and intellectual property rights to commercialize the technology. Thirdly, the emergence of medical innovations also leads to systemic problems due to the rapid development of knowledge. Due to their evolutionary nature medical knowledge and innovations may give rise to irreducible systems based on how bottlenecks direct the focus of attention in order to solve critical problems. Furthermore, as the search for new medical knowledge has a strong ethical dimension, is sought for the common good, and to a large degree funded by public funds, oversight is required for what bottlenecks should be attended to and how. This oversight is proved by a governance regime, which includes both formal and informal elements. Given the nature of the current discussion about the Macchiarini crisis the most likely response is to strengthen the oversight and regulation, including monitoring, related to the interface between medical research and practice. The focus will be on universities and hospitals without consideration of other actors involved in the production and use of medical knowledge. We argue, based on our conceptual model, that this may have the adverse effects of introducing bottlenecks in the system. The main challenge for policy makers and researchers is to understand what actors are involved in the system, at regional, national and international levels, and how best to interact in order to create mechanisms of self-regulation that benefit each type of actor and the system as a whole.
|
|
| 43. |
- McKelvey, Maureen, 1965, et al.
(författare)
-
Knowledge Intensive Entrepreneurship
- 2014
-
Ingår i: European Network on the Economics of the Firm (ENEF). ; 2014:9, s. 1-24
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper addressed key conceptual and empirical issues around the concept of knowledge intensive entrepreneurship. It explores conceptual issues of how knowledge is linked to both innovation and entrepreneurship.
|
|
| 44. |
- McKelvey, Tomas, 1966, et al.
(författare)
-
Creating innovative opportunities through research collaboration: An evolutionary framework and empirical illustration in engineering
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Technovation. - : Elsevier BV. - 0166-4972. ; 39-40, s. 26-36
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper analyses the creation of innovative opportunities through research collaborations. It contributes by (i) providing an evolutionary conceptual framework for the formation and exploitation of innovative opportunities through research collaboration; and by (ii) providing an empirical illustration of this framework by applying it to a case study of firms׳ research collaboration taking place in university–industry research centers in engineering. The evolutionary framework developed specifically focuses on the generation of novelty and variety and on selection pressures as key for the creation of opportunities. It also emphasizes the differences between small and large firms when it comes to role of research collaboration for opportunity creation. Empirically, we illustrate that firms in general focus more on the generation of variety in the form of (fundamental) knowledge, than on research collaboration leading directly to the formation and exploitation of opportunities. For large firms, the focus is rather to transfer this created variety back to the firm, to use for inputs into the in-house creation of opportunities. In contrast, small firms focus instead on using research collaboration to generate and develop knowledge about customer needs in order to create market opportunities, especially through networking with large firms participating in the collaboration.
|
|
| 45. |
- McKelvey, Tomas, 1966, et al.
(författare)
-
Product Innovation Success Based on Cancer Research in the Pharmaceutical Industry: Co-publication networks and the effects of partners
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Industry and Innovation. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1366-2716 .- 1469-8390. ; 23:5, s. 383-406
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper builds upon the literature which provides conflicting theoretical insights and empirical results concerning the importance of companies’ collaborative relations, their position within a network of collaborative relations and the effects on their innovative performance. Taking the importance of collaborations and networks in the pharmaceutical industry into account, the paper untangles the influence of the firm’s co-publication relations with different types of partners and its network position on the company’s product innovation in a specific disease area—cancer. We find rather robust evidence that in particular, companies’ indirect connections within the co-publication network, including connections to academic institutions and biotechnology companies, support product innovation. In contrast to evidence in the strategic alliance literature, direct co-publication links to biotechnology companies do not support product innovation in terms of new cancer medications.
|
|
| 46. |
- Szücs, Stefan, 1964, et al.
(författare)
-
Local Political Capital for Innovation in the Global Knowledge Economy
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Book of Abstracts, XVII World Congress of Sociology, 11-17 July 2010, Gothenburg. ; XVII, s. 472-473
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Over the last decade, policy initiatives to promote innovativeness and growth, inspired by normative models of capacity building through industrial clusters, triple helix and innovation systems, have proliferated. Theories of economic development offer several explanations of the emergence of clusters in particular environments. Most theorists would argue that specific, natural, economic, or institutional factors determine capacity building in terms of cluster development. Other theorists emphasize the role of local social networks and phases of regional knowledge-based spaces in explaining the emergence of such capacity building. Neither of these theoretical streams offers systematic explanations of differences in the emergence and success of capacity building, beyond finding that crucial resources are unevenly distributed. The theoretical linkage between triple helix and capacity building through innovation governance is unclear. We still do not have a relevant theory explaining the influence of innovation governance involving local/regional government–industry–university relationships on capacity building leading to successful innovations. Therefore, we are making a proposal to further develop theory by focusing on capacity building through different sequences of innovation governance in relation to components of local political capital - values/norms of identity, networks and local-global relations - in the era of the global knowledge economy.
|
|
| 47. |
- Szücs, Stefan, 1964, et al.
(författare)
-
Regional innovation governance : a model for complex systems of innovation and economic emergence
- 2012
-
Ingår i: 14th International Schumpeter Society Conference.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Over the last decade, political science has moved far from the traditional economist’s view of the government and public policy as responses to ‘market failures’. One focus of understanding public policy has been on governance, which is a concept including complex public-private interactions through networks of relationships. There is often an assumption of complex socio-economic systems underlying this concept of governance. This type of thinking has been very prevalent in discussions of innovation and economic emergence. Many public policy initiatives to promote innovativeness and growth have been inspired by normative models of capacity building through industrial clusters, triple helix and regional innovation systems. While providing important insights about network and knowledge relationships, existing models poorly explain the influence of governance on innovation and economic emergence. In order to understand the issue of risk and uncertainty in innovative entrepreneurship, we propose a conceptual model that includes the impact of governing in complex systems through innovation policy. Due to the interdependency of several actors, the centers of decision-making in innovation are nested into complex systems of governing. This means that the obviously visible indicators of innovation and growth, which are often used, do not match the theoretical linkage between entrepreneurial economic emergence and capacity building. Instead of looking at firm start-ups and patents or the immediate effects of public policy through a cost-benefit analysis, our model of innovation governance requires that we delve deeper into social and knowledge relationships at the regional level. Innovation systems represent a typical example of many organizations and/or decision-centers that are formally autonomous, but are in fact linked together by an overarching set of rules, networks and relationships in systems, defined as polycentric, based on rules/norms in use to regulate access to information and common pool resources in such systems. We therefore start from this underlying theoretical insight that innovation governance depends upon capacity building among the heterogeneous organizations (university-government-industry), each based on different attributes of norms and incentives, networks and global relationships, but nevertheless tied together by overarching rules and aims of innovation and entrepreneurship. As will be further developed in the paper, we suggest that this process of capacity building during emergence and entrepreneurial uncertainty, relay on a sequence of events explaining the success and directionality of innovation through specific institutions and an associated , subsequent, organizational structure for University-Industry-Government co-operation at the local and regional level.
|
|
| 48. |
- Szücs, Stefan, 1964, et al.
(författare)
-
Triple Helix as a basis for capacity building through innovation governance
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Paper presented at the 7th Biennial International Conference on University, Industry & Government Linkages, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, 17-19 June, 2009.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Over the last decade, policy initiatives to promote innovativeness and growth, inspired by normative models of triple helix and capacity building, have proliferated. Theories of economic development offer several explanations of the emergence of clusters in particular environments. Most theorists would argue that specific, natural, economic, or institutional factors determine capacity building in terms of cluster development. Other theorists emphasize the role of local social networks and phases of regional knowledge-based triple helix spaces in explaining the emergence of such capacity building. Neither of these theoretical streams offers systematic explanations of differences in the emergence and success of capacity building, beyond finding that crucial resources are unevenly distributed. The theoretical linkage between triple helix and capacity building through innovation governance is unclear. We still do not have a relevant theory explaining the influence of innovation governance involving local government–industry–university relationships on capacity building leading to successful innovations. Therefore, we are making a proposal to further develop the triple helix theory by focusing on capacity building through different sequences of innovation governance in relation to values/norms of identity, networks and local-global relations.
|
|
| 49. |
- Veiderpass, Ann, 1953, et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluating the performance of higher education institutions in Europe: A non-parametric efficiency analysis of 944 institutions
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Efficiency in Education Workshop 19th – 20th September 2014 at The Work Foundation, London, U.K.., 2014 ( 9 ) s. 1-22. ; 2014:9, s. 1-22
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Although a long tradition exists of studying the economics of education, performance comparisons of different kinds have traditionally been difficult to undertake. An important impediment has been the lack of comparable data. Tertiary education is no exception and data availability has proven to be problematic in several respects. Thus, early studies focused on traditional universities although higher education institutions (HEIs) represent a diverse group of organizations providing education. Apart from the difficulty of including different types of education providers, the field has also faced the problem of country comparison. At best, researchers have been able to access data within one country or a handful of countries. To a large extent, this study remedies the shortcomings of earlier studies. The study suggests evaluating HEI performance in a production theory context, applying the well-known Data Envelopment Analysis method to a cross section of 944 HEIs in 17 European countries. The DEA approach is particularly suitable in this context where little is known about production technologies and economic behaviour of the HEIs. Our country comparison is based on a large database, developed by the EUMIDA consortium. The consortium developed a census about basic indicators of HEI inputs and outputs. Experts from each country gathered data from national statistics offices, ministries and specific universities and then harmonized the appropriate data according to the agreed upon definitions of indicators. The data collection includes all HEIs which grant postgraduate and graduate education. Hence, the EUMIDA database offers unique micro-data about decision-making units in the higher education sector across Europe. On average, provision of education is found to be most efficient in the Slovak Republic followed by Belgium and Latvia, while Denmark and Norway display the lowest efficiency. The study also indicates a positive relation between high efficiency and research intensity.
|
|
| 50. |
- Brunnström, Linus, 1984, et al.
(författare)
-
Designing university impact on society: Reflections based on the Sea & Society and Gothenburg U-GOT KIES centres
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Bruncevic, M., Fellman, S. Soderbom, M. and Styhre, A. (Eds) Sustainable World: 100 year Jubileum of School of Business, Economics and Law, University of Gothenburg.. - 9789189838277 ; , s. 217-239
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
