Search results

The purpose of the study was to examine the factors that are important for strengthening university–industry collaboration (UIC). This study also investigates the outcome of UIC in the light of creativity, skill, knowledge, and research work.

A survey method has been used to collect data for the study. This study applied a purposive judgmental sampling technique where particular types of respondents like university faculty members and the top officials of the organizations were selected who are knowledgeable and can provide the desired information. The current study used the structural equation modeling method to analyze the data. In the first stage, this research assessed the demographic factors of the respondent. Then this study conducts confirmatory factors analysis and convergent and discriminant validity and reliability test. Finally, the hypotheses are tested by using nonparametric.

This study finds that knowledge transfer mechanism, governmental factors, organizational design factors, technology transfer and the collaborative network has a significant impact on strengthening UIC, which ultimately facilitates creativity, knowledge creation, skills development and supply of graduate according to the requirement of the industry, good research work.

The current study identified some important determinant that has a substantial influence on strengthening UIC. According to the study organizational design, government, technology, collaborative network and mechanism for knowledge transfer play very crucial roles in strengthening collaboration that ultimately increases the creativity, skills, knowledge and research capability of graduates.

This article seeks to explore the micro‐dimensions of knowledge transfer partnerships (KTPs) with the aim of developing an appreciation of the personal interactions that facilitate the success of these university‐industry collaborations.

Empirical evidence concerning the operation of three KTPs, collected through interviews with the key partners and the review of relevant documentary material, is analysed through the lens of the communities of practice approach to situated learning.

The analysis of three case studies provides evidence to support the value of conceptualising the process of knowledge transfer between universities and industry as one of learning taking place within communities in which the development of mutual engagement, joint enterprise and shared repertoires play important roles facilitating successful collaborations. Moreover, the analysis highlights the significance of the boundary spanning roles of the KTP partners in facilitating the knowledge transfer process through engagement in both the university and industry communities.

By illuminating the dimensions of the inter‐personal interactions involved in the knowledge transfer process the CoPs analysis provides the foundations for recommendations to improve university‐industry KTPs, in particular, and, inter‐organisational knowledge transfer initiatives in general. A limitation of this research is its focus on the UK context. Moreover, given the exploratory nature of this study further research is required to verify the findings reported here.

The article makes an original empirical and conceptual contribution to understandings of university‐industry knowledge transfer collaborations.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the national and international political-economic environment in which Australian university research grew. It considers the implications of the growing significance of knowledge to the government and capital, looking past institutional developments to also historicise the systems that fed and were fed by the universities.

The paper is based on the extensive archival research in the National Archives of Australia and the Australian War Memorial on the formation and funding of a wide range of research programmes in the immediate post-war period after the Second World War. These include the Australian Atomic Energy Commission, the NHMRC, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, the Australian Pacific Territories Research Council, the Commonwealth Office of Education, the Universities Commission and the Murray review. This research was conducted under the Margaret George Award for emerging scholars for a project entitled “Knowledge, Nation and Democracy in Post-War Australia”.

After the Second World War, the Australian Government invested heavily in research: funding that continued to expand in subsequent decades. In the USA, similar government expenditure affected the trajectory of capitalist democracy for the remainder of the twentieth century, leading to a “military-industrial complex”. The outcome in Australia looked quite different, though still connected to the structure and character of Australian political economics.

The discussion of the spectacular growth of universities after the Second World War ordinarily rests on the growth in enrolments. This paper draws on a very large literature review as well as primary research to offer new insights into the connections between research and post-war political and economic development, which also explain university growth.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the reasons of the success of the Netherlands in knowledge valorisation: what are the actors that participate in knowledge valorisation process and what are their functions; what is the route of knowledge in valorisation; what “surplus value” does knowledge gain in the valorisation process.

Documentary and content analysis of the documents that regulate the knowledge valorisation on the level of the national policy and on the level of universities.

The success of the Netherlands in the knowledge valorisation can be explained by the creation of the process in which its main actors – state and universities collaborate and clearly understand and perform their functions and involve into the collaboration, the representatives of the industry. The state managed to create on the level of the country beneficial environment for knowledge valorisation that includes legal basis and establishment of organizations which provide funding for knowledge valorisation. Universities in their turn also have created beneficial and stimulating conditions for knowledge valorisation – science parks and valorisation centres provide support to the academics in the knowledge valorisation process. The process of valorisation at the university is built on cooperative relationship between researchers and management of the universities. Cooperation between researchers and management structures of the university which consult and support them in the process of valorisation is beneficial for both sides. Surplus value in the knowledge valorisation process can be financial and societal, but in some way they coincide because valorisation accelerates scientific progress, supports the economic development of the region and the Netherlands.

In research were explored documents that regulate knowledge valorisation on the level of state and on the level of university (strategic plans of the Dutch universities). This paper provides a basis for the substantial development of the general framework for the development of the policy at the area of knowledge valorisation and initiatives by higher education institutions.

The experience of the Netherlands in policymaking in area of knowledge valorisation and initiatives of the Dutch universities can be used as the basis for the development and implementation of the national policies of knowledge valorisation.

The experience of the development of the valorisation initiatives of the Dutch universities can be used as the basis for the development and implementation of the valorisation initiatives of the higher education institutions.

The study takes a documentary analysis to understand and explain the essence of the term “valorisation”, its types – societal and financial, the input of the main actors into knowledge valorisation process and to determine what surplus value and benefits are created during this process.

The aim of this study is to build upon Jain et al.'s (2007) work by investigating the knowledge-sharing barriers and strategies of academic staff in public and private universities in Malaysia which have received relatively little research attention to date.

A survey of 502 questionnaires was collected on both public and private universities in Malaysia. Data were analysed using SPSS.

The overall findings show that private universities are more effective and are more willing to share knowledge. Linking knowledge sharing with non-monetary rewards and fair performance appraisals are strongly recommended in private universities, while monetary rewards, recognitions, publication of knowledge on websites and newsletters and the use of appropriate technology tools and systems are strongly recommended in public universities.

Top management in Malaysian public and private universities must play their role and put in more effort to ensure academics have the proper platform and support to share their knowledge.

This study is perhaps one of the first to address the comparison between knowledge sharing among lecturers in private and public universities in Malaysia.

The purpose of this study is to explore the knowledge network-based intellectual capital of corporate universities and its co-evolution process with knowledge management activities.

An exploratory and multiple case study was conducted, investigating three Chinese corporate universities. Grounded theory was used for data analysis.

This paper finds that the intellectual capital of corporate universities comprises teacher network capital, knowledge process capital and knowledge ba. The steering wheel model is established through the synergistic interaction and promotion among these three types of intellectual capital. The interaction between intellectual capital and the knowledge network within corporate universities constructs the intellectual capital network, which plays the roles of coordinator, knowledge gatekeeper and innovation bridge. The intellectual capital of corporate universities is characterized by sequential inertia. Moreover, the intellectual capital and intellectual capital network are aligned with knowledge management activities at each stage of corporate university development, interacting and following the principles of ladder evolution.

A significant contribution of this paper lies in applying the concept of intellectual capital within the fourth-stage ecosystem to a broader range of knowledge networks. By exploring the dynamics and network of intellectual capital in corporate universities, especially the role of intellectual capital networks and the synergy between intellectual capital and knowledge management activities, this study enriches the existing research on knowledge management and intellectual capital of corporate universities. Furthermore, it advances the development of knowledge management promotion in corporate universities from a new perspective of intellectual capital.

This paper describes some basic concepts of knowledge management, and explains, using these definitions, why universities are not always seats of learning or knowledge sharing. A knowledge management programme, initiated by a leading British university, is described. The authors conclude by suggesting that knowledge management tools may be beneficial to supporting academics in their multi‐faceted work. However, time will tell as to the extent to which they can actually share tacit knowledge and enable real organisational learning across cultures in universities.

This research aims to shed new lights on the most shared constructs developed on Innovation Ecosystems, Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Technology Transfer Ecosystem proposing an additional stand-alone ecosystem.

This research is built upon a qual-quantitative analysis of an empirical case. The latter analysis is performed through a single case study methodology on the San Giovanni Hub of the Federico II University of Naples.

Evidences show how a technological hub orchestrates three main ecosystems for the knowledge exploitation: the technology transfer ecosystem, devoted to gather knowledge form universities' labs towards industries; the innovation ecosystem, able to manage the exploration and exploitation of new knowledge and techniques; the entrepreneurial ecosystem, that supports startup/spinoff creation process.

Limitations mainly concern the fact that it is centred on just one case study.

Practical implications imply new opportunities of collaboration involving different stakeholders as university administrators, researchers, businesses and policymakers, creating a supportive environment for innovation.

The research offers a new vision about the role of Universities as creators and enablers of ecosystems pursuing diverse value propositions. The Academic Innovation Ecosystem is a new conceptualization of this role played by a university, and it can convey innovation and entrepreneurial attitude within its ecosystem leveraging on the transfer of university knowledge and technology.

The purpose of this study is to introduce a conceptual framework for knowledge transfer between Chinese firms and universities around the world, based on a joint learning process. The transfer of knowledge is important to increase the innovative capabilities of Chinese firms by accessing more sources of new knowledge not available locally.

The framework is derived from the resource‐based perspective. Its main characteristics are defined, and the required stages are explained. The framework stresses the dynamic relationship among all stages, and the active interaction between interorganizational and intraorganizational learning processes.

Having a suitable process for selecting a partner is the pre‐condition for achieving effective knowledge transfer between university and firm, because it determines similar capabilities and how both partners can enhance the requirements of each other. In addition, the joint learning experience between university and firm will be rewarding to a large extent if high transparency, collaborative intent, informal communication and organizational commitment are adopted as the basis for joint learning.

The study proposes a conceptual framework for knowledge transfer between Chinese firms and universities around the world, based on previous research in this domain. An empirical study will be beneficial to support this framework and to suggest needed modifications.

The study provides a greater understanding of the importance of a joint learning process between university and firm to support the innovative capacity of a firm. It emphasizes that the successful collaboration with a university can make a firm function as an external R&D hub.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how universities' learning behavior (explorative or exploitative) and network structure (weak or strong inter‐organizational ties) can affect their capability to collect and diffuse knowledge, and thus to act as knowledge gatekeepers.

The research methodology is based on the longitudinal study (from 2000 to 2007) of three UK universities (University of Cambridge, London's Global University, and Imperial College London), located in the area of London and selected on the basis of their knowledge mobility. In particular, to evaluate the knowledge mobility for each university, the paper considers the collaborative R&D relationships established by each university, in terms of joint‐patents registered at the European Patent Office (EPO).

The analysis has revealed that the universities' knowledge mobility is positively affected by both the explorative learning behavior and the establishment of strong inter‐organizational ties. Moreover, results have shown that an increase of the explorative speed can entail a less positive effect of the exploration on the universities' knowledge mobility, since they can become less able to consolidate and implement the acquired new knowledge.

On the basis of these results, the present research provides interesting implications. In fact, recognizing the importance of explorative learning mechanisms, universities should enlarge and diversify their competencies and technological bases in order to be more effective knowledge sources and gatekeepers. Nevertheless, this shift towards new technologies and scientific fields should occur gradually, for instance towards more similar and contiguous technologies, so guaranteeing the necessary strengthening of skills and capabilities. Referring to the universities' network structure, the research suggests the importance of strong inter‐organizational ties as mechanisms that enable the transfer of knowledge. Hence, universities should promote the formation of stable and long‐lasting alliances and collaborations for favouring the creation of a trustworthy environment where knowledge can be exchanged and innovations rise.

The study contributes to the existing literature on knowledge gatekeepers, identifying its main performance, measuring it, and analyzing the impact exerted by two factors, as learning behavior and network structure.