Search

Scholars' balancing act between research and application leads to trade-offs between commercial and research output. Yet what some scholars may consider as poles apart might lead to super-additive outcomes for others. Based on a survey carried out at three leading European universities of technology we investigate the influence of scholars' research orientation and networks on their output productivity. Our results point to a very specific group of ambidextrous scholars that is comparatively small. The scholars in this group are able to successfully balance research and application. In contrast, all scholars focusing on either pure basic or pure applied research face a trade-off between publications and innovations. In general, our findings suggest that the output productivity of all scholars is the higher the better their research orientation fits with their network activities. In particular, ambidextrous scholars rely on effectively accessing and utilizing their network to increase commercial and research output. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior analyses of face-to-face contacts in collaborations have focused on one substitute only. Instead, we analyse various potential substitutes for face-to-face contacts in collaborations. Based on 45 interviews with academics from five leading European universities of technology our findings show that face-to-face contacts are closely intertwined with other mechanisms of coordination and communication for collaboration, particularly modern communication tools, proximity, and brokerage. Generally, to add personal and social proximity to their collaborations academics in our sample rely on face-to-face contacts. In their relationships with industrial partners, face-to-face contacts remain crucial to overcome cognitive and organizational distance. Yet when working with their peers, a number of partial substitutes for face-to-face contacts exist, knowingly combinations of temporary geographical proximity and modern communication tools. Moreover, PhD students can play a crucial role as junior brokers, overcoming a lack of face-to-face contacts between partners jointly supervising them while working in different locations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the applied sciences and in engineering there is often a significant overlap between work at universities and in industry. For the individual scholar, this may lead to serious conflicts when working on joint university–industry projects. Differences in goals, such as the university's aim to disseminate knowledge while industry aims to appropriate knowledge, might lead to complicated situations and conflicts of interest. The detailed cases of two electrical engineers and two architects working at two different universities of technology illustrate the kinds of problems individual scholars face in university–business collaborations. These cases are based on qualitative interviews and additional data and demonstrate that, while value conflicts emerge on the organizational level, it is primarily the individual researcher who must deal with such conflicts. This analysis adds to existing studies in two ways: first, it explicitly addresses normative issues framed in terms of ethical and social values, thereby going beyond the common social-science perspective of university–business collaboration. Secondly, it provides qualitative insights, thereby identifying details and issues not apparent in quantitative studies. In particular, it is evident that university–industry collaborations are prone to value conflicts not only in research but also in education and job training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We look into the question whether heterogeneity stemming from research orientation, gender, or disciplinary and cultural differences with their PhD supervisors helps or hampers academics' careers. Based on a sample of 248 academics at two leading European universities of technology, we combine multinomial logit models and sequential logit models to understand career advancement. Our results show that heterogeneity stemming from research orientation is helpful. Academics who bridge between the quest for fundamental understanding and socio-economic relevance attain career success. Yet heterogeneity stemming from gender hinders careers: female academics face problems securing tenured positions and full professorships. Mentor–mentee heterogeneity only helps in early career transitions, but hampers advancement later on. Our insights offer suggestions to policymakers, university managers, and academics, because they help to identify promising academics, the right support for sitting staff members, measures correcting for gender imbalances, and can inform strategic choices regarding research orientation and PhD supervisors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development and deployment of technologies depend upon collaborations concurrently relying on proximity between partners. By employing publication data of German nanotechnology, we augment former findings on the relationship between proximity and collaboration in three ways. First, we shed light on how the various forms of proximity affect different stages of collaboration. Particularly, we split geographical proximity into pure physical and systemic proximity. By doing so, we can show that pure physical proximity plays a role early on, as it positively influences the formation of collaborations. In contrast, systemic proximity affects collaborations later on by inducing higher output. Second, innovation systems shape collaboration networks. We learn that specific features of publicly funded German research organizations influence the formation and output of collaborations via organizational proximity or a lack thereof. Third, cognitive proximity has by far the strongest magnitude of effect on both the formation and the output of collaborations. Particularly, existing partnership being cognitively diverse have a lot of potential. Therefore, research policy and university management might consider to stimulating current partnerships, being cognitively different. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The proximity framework serves to analyse and understand how collaborations form and develop over time, and how these affect innovation and learning. The framework has inspired and informed empirical studies in several contexts, contributing to our understanding of the dynamics of dyadic collaborations, industrial clusters and districts, and regional innovation systems, to name but a few. Recent conceptual and empirical advances have called attention to the role of personal proximity and social proximity in such collaborations. In addition to other forms of proximity, these two dimensions could make up the glue that holds knowledge networks together. In the introduction to this special issue, we elaborate upon this proposition, setting out a point-of-departure for the three empirical studies collected in this issue. We summarize the findings of these papers, and develop a research agenda from those findings that may guide proximity researchers to novel research problems and useful research designs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Triple Helix is the property of Brill Academic Publishers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Previous studies investigating proximity and collaboration have not clarified personal elements, such as working or communication style. Here, we show that personal proximity-close similarity in terms of personal traits and behavioral patterns-substantially affects the whole life cycle of research collaborations. We conduct a multi-case study of Dutch nanotechnology researchers. We select our interviewees through a bibliometric analysis and focus on the most central Dutch nanotechnology researchers in the global network. Our results reveal that social proximity and temporary geographical proximity have indirect effects enabling potential partners to assess their personal proximity. Sufficient levels of personal proximity often make or break the deal, provided that partners' cognitive and organizational proximity-which are major drivers of research collaborations-suffice. Introducing personal proximity to analyze research collaborations puts previous findings on proximity dimensions' effect on collaboration in a new perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Universities’ functions in knowledge transfer have been thoroughly investigated by scholars from different disciplines in the last decades. However, a complete picture of universities’ contribution to regional, national and international knowledge transfer is still missing. In this paper, we pull together the strings of various scholarly works produced by economic geographers, economists, regional scientists and others, thereby taking stock of achievements and shortcomings and elaborating avenues for further scientific work. We analyse the various functions of universities by using four conceptual frameworks, namely the regional innovation systems approach, the new production of technology theory, the triple helix model and social network theory. These different frameworks help to integrate the functions of universities into local-regional, national and international relationships theoretically. Empirically, universities’ relationships have been investigated by case studies, surveys and increasingly by social network analysis. Our exercise results in a critical discussion of a predominantly regional focus of investigation. Looking at knowledge transfer from a regional, national and international perspective leads to a different way of developing theoretical concepts and matching them with empirical tools. In particular, we find that social network analysis and its theoretical basis, i.e., social network theory, will give more body to understanding knowledge transfer functions of universities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Collaborations are particularly important for the development and deployment of technology. We analyse the influence of organizational, technological and geographical proximity on European nanotechnology collaborations with the help of a publication dataset and additional geographical information. While organizational proximity influences the output of collaborations only indirectly, geographical and technological proximity do so directly. Geographical proximity is most significant in statistical terms and technological proximity has the highest magnitude of effect. Consequently, the latter lends itself most for management and policy interventions, for example, by providing information on technological specialization of potential partners. Resumen Las colaboraciones son especialmente importantes para el desarrollo y el despliegue tecnológico. Se analiza la influencia de la proximidad organizacional, tecnológica y geográfica en colaboraciones europeas en nanotecnología, con la ayuda de un conjunto de datos publicados e información geográfica adicional. Si bien la proximidad organizacional influye en el resultado de las colaboraciones solo de manera indirecta, las proximidades geográfica y tecnológica influyen directamente. La proximidad geográfica es la más significativa en términos estadísticos y la proximidad tecnológica tiene la magnitud del efecto más elevada. Consecuentemente, esta última se presta más a las intervenciones de gestión y de políticas, por ejemplo, facilitando información sobre la especialización tecnológica de socios potenciales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction to the journal is presented in which the editor discusses various reports published within the issue including one about networks and economic agglomerations, another one about network analysis application in innovation studies, and one on innovation and entrepreneurship.

Simulation models have become increasingly popular in economics in the last two decades, because they can deal with a wide range of research questions. The set-up and analysis of simulation models can range from very specific to very general and can be underpinned by different combinations of theoretical considerations and empirical data. We offer a taxonomy of existing simulation approaches and show how their results can be used to explain observed economic features, examine economic systems and predict future economic processes. Moreover, we offer a new type of method that helps to better exploit empirical findings in simulation models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies of knowledge and innovation as driving forces of regional development and growth offer a myriad of approaches. Here, questions asked, methods used and answers given are manifold. In our overview, we cover recent developments in this research area. Moreover, we explore the question as to the extent to which approaches in this research area compete with or complement one another. It turns out that the various studies are much more complementary than competitive. However, there is still much ground to be covered before we fully understand the processes underlying the creation and dissemination of knowledge and innovation leading to regional development and growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of the following analysis is to identify the most promising organisational strategies of innovative agents under different environmental constraints. To do so, the processes of the relationships between these agents are taken into account by putting three aspects together. First, it is shown that the transfer, storage, and use of knowledge are significantly influenced by this knowledge's characteristics. Second, the main principles of the generation and selection of innovation are introduced from the systemic point of view. As a third element, the variety of possible relationships between innovative agents are categorised to identify the different organisational principles that can be employed. By putting all these elements together, it is possible to show which strategies are the most promising under different constraints given by the innovation possibilities, the relevant institutions, the knowledge employed, and the kind of innovation expected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]