| 1. |
- Perkmann, M., et al.
(författare)
-
Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university-industry relations
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Research Policy. - : Elsevier BV. - 0048-7333 .- 1873-7625. ; 42:2, s. 423-442
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A considerable body of work highlights the relevance of collaborative research, contract research, consulting and informal relationships for university–industry knowledge transfer. We present a systematic review of research on academic scientists’ involvement in these activities to which we refer as ‘academic engagement’. Apart from extracting findings that are generalisable across studies, we ask how academic engagement differs from commercialisation, defined as intellectual property creation and academic entrepreneurship. We identify the individual, organisational and institutional antecedents and consequences of academic engagement, and then compare these findings with the antecedents and consequences of commercialisation. Apart from being more widely practiced, academic engagement is distinct from commercialisation in that it is closely aligned with traditional academic research activities, and pursued by academics to access resources supporting their research agendas. We conclude by identifying future research needs, opportunities for methodological improvement and policy interventions.
|
|
| 2. |
- D'Este, P, et al.
(författare)
-
Mobilising legitimacy through network ties: The relation between network content and innovation
- 2018
-
Ingår i: EURAM Conference, European Academy of Management, 2018 Conference, 19-22 June, 2018, Reykjavik, Iceland.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This study contributes to advance understanding on the micro-level foundations of the relationship between scientific research and innovation. We adopt a relational approach to scientific research networks through the analysis of the content of network ties, in contrast to more standard network approaches which are grounded on structural features of networks. We argue that the perceived legitimacy afforded through ties within research networks play a critical role in reconciling the conflicting logics of science and innovation. The proposed hypotheses are empirically tested in the context of the Spanish biomedical research system, drawing on a large scale survey of biomedical scientists. Our results indicate that scientists’ acquisition of legitimacy through their research network plays a critical role in the context of the translation from scientific research to technological achievements and innovations. These results confirm that the content of network ties provides a critical perspective into the analysis of network resource mobilization, well beyond the explanatory power of network properties based on structure and composition. Our findings also show that past scientific impact has a reinforcing effect on the relationship between legitimacy acquisition through network ties and innovation. On the contrary, we find that direct interaction with beneficiaries provides an alternative path to reconcile the conflicting logics of science and market, by compensating for the lack of acquired legitimacy from personal research networks.
|
|
| 3. |
- Llopis, O., et al.
(författare)
-
Navigating multiple logics: Legitimacy and the quest for societal impact in science
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Technovation. - : Elsevier BV. - 0166-4972. ; 110:February 2022
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Academic scientists are encouraged to pursue research that delivers both scientific and societal impact. This may involve a search for alternative mechanisms of social approval which lead to endorsement of scientists’ research goals. We explore how scientists mobilise and accumulate different forms of legitimacy, which might favour their participation in practices related to innovation and societal impact. We propose three specific sources of scientific legitimacy: i) scientists’ social networks (research-related legitimacy ties), ii) prominence in the relevant academic community (reputation-based legitimacy); and direct contact with the primary beneficiaries of the research (beneficiary-based legitimacy). To explain scientists’ participation in activities oriented towards innovation and societal impact, we test the significance of each of these sources of legitimacy and their potential interplay empirically, using a large sample of Spanish biomedical scientists. © 2021 The Authors
|
|
| 4. |
- Rake, B, et al.
(författare)
-
Exploring Investigator Networks in Clinical Tripals
- 2018
-
Ingår i: The ISS 2018 Conference, The International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society Conference, 2-4 July 2018, Seoul, Korea.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The objective of this paper is to explore the endogenous dynamics within a network of clinical trial investigators. Clinical trials provide an ideal context for our study since clinical trial investigators need to collaborate in the management of geographically dispersed clinical trials. Moreover, the interdependent nature of trial-related tasks requires bio-medical knowledge from different (sub-)disciplines (Hoekman et al., 2012; Malterud, 2001; Patel et al., 1999). Since most investigators are trained in one specific scientific discipline but lack knowledge in other disciplines (FitzGerald, 2005), cross-disciplinary collaboration with experienced investigators and professional networks provide opportunities to access the required skills and to transfer knowledge (O‘Connell and Roblin, 2006; Reagans and McEvily, 2003; Uzzi and Lancaster, 2003). In contrast to the large amount of anecdotal evidence within the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry suggesting that clinical trial investigators can influence the success of clinical research (Huckman and Zinner, 2008), empirical evidence based on sophisticated analyses of investigators’ importance for clinical trials outcomes is quite scarce. This is surprising since the investigators are, as lead scientists of clinical trials, responsible and accountable for how the entire clinical study is conducted (Hoekman et al., 2012). Moreover, the increased access to diverse knowledge enables investigators to balance their knowledge between basic and clinical research which increases the likelihood of clinical trial success in individual as well as collaborative clinical research (Assmus and Haeussler, 2017).
|
|
| 5. |
- Rake, B, et al.
(författare)
-
Exploring network dynamics in science: the formation of ties to knowledge translators in clinical research
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of evolutionary economics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0936-9937 .- 1432-1386. ; 31:5, s. 1433-1464
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- From an evolutionary perspective, knowledge networks are self-organizing systems. Therefore, studying changes of these systems requires an understanding of how such changes are influenced by both the behaviors and characteristics of key individual actors and the network structure. We apply this perspective to a network of investigators (i.e. lead scientists) and a sample of 9,543 Phase 2 cancer clinical trials during the period 2002-2012, in order to examine the structure and explore the dynamics of the clinical trial network. Using temporal exponential random graph models, we examine whether preferential attachment, multi-connectivity, or homophily drive the formation of new collaborative relations to knowledge translators - i.e. investigators with basic and clinical research knowledge. Our results suggest that despite some increased connectivity over time the network remains fragmented due to the considerably growing number of investigators in the network. We find that homophily in research fields and investigators’ country of affiliation and heterophily in terms of publication output promote the formation of ties to knowledge translators. We find also that multi-connectivity increases the probability of tie formation with knowledge translators while preferential attachment reduces this probability.
|
|
