Search

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.

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.

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]

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 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]

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.

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]

When advising policy we face the fundamental problem that economic processes are uncertain. Consequently, policy can err. In this paper we show how the use of simulation models can reduce policy errors by inferring empirically reliable and meaningful statements about economic processes. We suggest that policy is best based on so-called abductive simulation models, which help to better understand how policy measures can influence economic processes. We show that abductive simulation models use a combination of theoretical and empirical analysis based on different data sets. By way of example we show what policy can learn with the help of abductive simulation models, namely how policy measures can influence the emergence of a regional cluster. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the opportunities and risks facing the use of various models of simulation methods in economics. Opportunities mentioned include modeling the economic problems. However, it states that the success of the simulation models in economics brings in risks such as remaining implicit of the methodological issues and the problem of deciding how simple and how descriptive the model should be.