Search results

The purpose of this paper is to reveal the characteristics and evolution path of entrepreneurial university in China, through a case study of Huazhong University of Science and Technology (HUST) which has the reputation of “Chinese miniature of higher education” and in which entrepreneurial practice displays “Chinese characteristics”.

The paper has originated from the ongoing thinking after completion of the author's Doctoral thesis. So, a large number of materials collected during the dissertation research will be used in this case, much of which are first‐hand, from investigations, site visits and interviews. As in the Doctoral thesis, a case study approach is also adopted in this paper.

Through the inspection of HUST, it has been found that its entrepreneurial practice is in full compliance with the criteria of the entrepreneurial university. To some extent, the theory of entrepreneurial university is being revised by the practice of HUST. However, there are some “Chinese characteristics” which should be given special attention, such as university‐run enterprises, government‐pulled triple helix, the tradition of government‐run universities and so on.

The paper will help the policy makers clarify the development situation of entrepreneurial university in China, which involves choosing the transformation paths and future directions, and to achieve a good way of building entrepreneurial university in accordance with China's national conditions. At the same time, it will promote international understanding of the entrepreneurial university in China.

Morton International Inc. have purchased Hoechst AG's printed circuit materials business including their Ozatec dry film and liquid primary imaging photoresists, Ozatec liquid photoimageable solder masks and related process equipment. Concurrently, Hoechst and its US subsidiary Hoechst Celanese Corporation purchased Morton's semiconductor photoresist business. Completion of these transactions was effective from 4 August 1993.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the collaboration strategies employed by collaborating small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) and university researchers for initiating and optimizing the process and outcome of R&D collaboration.

The paper is based upon a qualitative study of the total population of university departments and SMEs involved in collaborative research projects sponsored by a new governmental programme in Denmark, the aim of which was to build new R&D alliances between industry and universities.

The findings show how partners choose to pursue difference short‐ or long‐term strategies to optimize the process and outcome of university‐industry (UI) collaboration. Some collaborations were thus informed by a short‐term strategy aimed at achieving immediate R&D results. However, to a high extent, many SME partners relied upon a long‐term strategy aiming at developing UI relations beyond the immediate project and practical learning. A variety of shifting strategies shape researchers' decisions during UI collaborations, which thus convey different notions of success.

The findings of the present research point to the importance of taking the diverse reasons and micro strategies informing collaborative efforts into account when studying UI collaborations.

Different strategies may prove successful in optimizing the outcome of UI collaborations depending upon, e.g. partners' previous collaborative experiences. Policies should incorporate some openness towards the differential premises and reasons for UI collaboration.

Relatively little research has addressed the development of UI relationships from the micro‐level perspective of the discretionary decisions and strategies of collaborating researchers.

We conjecture that there are five stages to academic entrepreneurship: motivation, governance, selection, competition, and performance. The process of academic entrepreneurship originates with the motivation of faculty, universities, industry, and government to commercialize knowledge that originates within the university setting. The model conceptualizes that the governance and competitiveness of the commercialized knowledge moderate the mode selection and ultimately the performance of academic entrepreneurship. The conceptual and empirical support for the model are derived from a theory-driven synthesis of articles related to academic entrepreneurship.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the notion of a collaboratory as a virtual learning community and discuss its significance to support collaboration between library and information science (LIS) researchers and practitioners.

The LIS literature describes various forms of inter‐institutional collaboration involving librarians and information professionals, but there is an apparent lack of documented cases of collaboratories involving LIS practitioners and researchers. The paper draws from the literature about collaboratories in the fields of social informatics and information systems and describes the notion of collaboratory, its characteristics and main functions.

It is argued that a LIS collaboratory in the form of a virtual learning community has the potential to provide researchers and practitioners the opportunity to bring in and integrate their respective knowledge, expertise and connections, as well as expand participation of practitioners in research projects. Another claim is that this virtual learning community may fill a critical niche for small institutions as LIS schools and practitioners, and give them the opportunity to choose and work together on relevant research projects. While the prospect of LIS collaboratory looks promising, the challenges to building one need not be overlooked, in particular working at distance and crossing institutional boundaries. More research is needed on the socio‐organizational issues that can influence collaboration between LIS researchers and practitioners.

The discussion is based on the author's review of the literature and observations.

The notion of collaboratory is still new to the LIS field. This paper offers the opportunity to trigger a new discussion on collaboration between researchers and practitioners and the potential of collaboratories to support new forms of collaboration.

The professionalization of IT has long been complicated by disagreement over the appropriate model to employ. Physicians, lawyers, scientists, engineers, artisans, and artists have all one been invoked at one time or another by one group or another as guiding examples for the development of an IT profession. Yet none of these has proved fully convincing. Discusses the different kinds of professional practice which have been likened to IT, considers why it has proved so difficult to settle on a single one, and suggests an alternative way of conceptualizing IT practice.