Interactions between public research organizations and industry can be conceptualized as having three main stages: drivers of interaction, channels of interaction, and the perceived benefits from collaboration. Both of the agents differ in terms of the incentives they have to collaborate and the behaviors they adopt during the collaboration process. Following a three-stage model based on Crépon, Duguet, and Mairesse (1998), this paper discusses the impact of drivers of collaboration on channels of interaction, and the impact of these channels on the perceived benefits by researchers and firms. The methodology also allows firm-level benefits from interaction to be connected with researchers' characteristics via the analysis of four common channels of interaction for firms and researchers. The study is based on original data collected through two surveys, carried out in Mexico during 2008, of R&D and product-development managers of firms and of academic researchers. Our results show that all channels of interaction play an important role in determining benefits; however, they differ in terms of their impact on short-or long-term benefits for firms. The channels related to joint and contract R&D, property rights, and human resources are the best, as they have a higher impact on long-term benefits for firms. Policy implications derived from this study focus on specific actions that enhance those researchers' characteristics related to the best channels for fostering long-term benefits for firms.

The process of knowledge transfer between public research organisations and industry occurs through multiple channels of interaction, however, there are differences in terms of the benefits that the agents perceive. Based on micro-data, this paper explores which channels are the most effective for triggering different benefits perceived by researchers and firms involved in such interactions in Mexico. The results suggest that researchers obtain intellectual benefits from the bi-directional and the traditional channels. Firms obtain benefits related to production activities and innovation strategies from the bidirectional and the services channels, while the traditional channel only provides production-related benefits. These results raise different policy issues. First, fostering the bi-directional channel could contribute to building virtuous circles. Secondly, it is necessary to align the incentives to foster other channels of interaction. Thirdly, a change in the researchers' incentives is required to induce new benefits from interactions.

This paper analyses whether geographic proximity favours specific channels of university-industry interaction when firms collaborate with universities and with government research centres. Our study also provides insights regarding the relationship between the associated channel and the role of firms' absorptive capacities. Our results show that firms with higher levels of absorptive capacities tend to interact more independently of their location. Additionally, interaction with non-local universities generally includes the transfer of codified forms of knowledge, while links with local universities includes more tacit forms of knowledge. Policy implications derived from this analysis focus on fostering interaction at local and non-local levels.Keywords Geographic proximity Á University-industry interaction Á Research centres Á Systems of innovation Á Mexico JEL Classification C10 Á L25 Á L60 Á O18 Á O31 Á O32 Á O38 Á O54

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the field of social innovation by examining institutional logics at the level of inter- and intra-organizational partnerships for scaling impact. Design/methodology/approach The authors use a set of case studies from the Stanford Social Innovation Review to analyze success in scaling social innovations applying the logic compatibility-centrality matrix proposed by Besharov and Smith (2014), which aims to reveal the potential for conflict in organizations based on the diversity of logics present and the degree to which they are compatible with each other. Findings The findings shed insight on how individuals and organizations are able to manage logic multiplicity in the context of partnerships for scaling social innovation. Originality/value The authors build on recent work that recognizes logic multiplicity in social enterprises resulting from their hybrid nature, and the authors add to the existing debate by introducing to the discussion contributions from cognitive theory that help explain why organizational cultures evolve and scale out the way they do.