Bridging the cultural divide: Trust formation in university–industry research collaborations in the US, Japan, and South Korea

Hemmert, Martin; Bstieler, Ludwig; Okamuro, Hiroyuki

doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2014.04.006

Cited by 152 publications

(118 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

114

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, research focuses not only on determining the relational success factors (e.g., communication, trust, understanding individuals) but also on the necessity to leverage the technical and networking competences (Comacchio et al 2012;Plewa et al 2013a). Correspondingly, research addresses the importance of developing an understanding of differences in these relational success factors across various cognitive, normative and regulative contexts (Hemmert et al 2014). Similarly, the motives of the collaboration (e.g., more technical or more scientific) need to be considered in the process of researching into relational aspects of U-I collaborations (Soh and Subramanian 2014).…”

Section: Cluster 2: Social Relations Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, we encourage researchers to extend current research by engaging in cross-stage studies. Additionally, we must acknowledge that the U-I relationships are shaped by institutional environments in which the academics and the industry partners are embedded, thus affecting the (expected) outcomes from joint R&D activities (Frasquet et al 2012;Hemmert et al 2014;Morandi 2013). Thus, it is necessary to consider the institutional context as a moderator in the relationship between governance mechanisms and outcomes of U-I collaborations.…”

Section: The Individual In University-industry Collaborationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The substantial acknowledgement of university-industry (U-I) collaborations as promotor of economic progress, innovativeness and competitiveness fostered a continuous research engagement. At the same time, the U-I literature experienced a notable increase in the past decade, transforming into a multi-faceted and ambiguous research field, characterised by highly complex interlinks. The recent transformation hinders a comprehensive understanding of the latest developments in research directions and their clear delineation. Therefore, the purpose of this bibliometric literature review is to examine the evolution of the field and identify the primary emerging patterns. This paper employs co-citation analysis and bibliographic coupling techniques to analyse the U-I publications dataset. The findings indicate that the U-I collaborations research can be systematically clustered, resulting in an interconnected ecosystem consisting of three levels: individual, organisational and institutional, respectively. Thus, this review presents the immense contribution that the analysis of U-I collaborations makes to various research streams. Building on these findings and employing qualitative content analysis on the clustered publications, the paper develops a research agenda that encourages future investigations of previously overlooked features of U-I collaborations in general, and their role across levels of analysis, contexts and stages of the collaboration process in particular.

show abstract

Section: Cluster 2: Social Relations Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Individual In University-industry Collaborationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, it is worth noting that the level of U-I collaborations in software engineering is still relatively low compared with the amount of activity in each of the two communities separately [18,21,41]. Indeed, the analysis of prior research included Chen and Lin [20], Banal-Estañol et al [31], Callaert et al [32], Fuentes, Dutrénit [33], Hemmert et al [34], Myneni et al [35] and Perkmann et al [36]. These papers suggest that the methods and systems currently available offer no possibilities to calculate a UIPS fair value, and provide recommendations for improving U-I partnerships.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation System for University–Industry Partnership Sustainability: Enhancing Options for Entrepreneurial Universities

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The concept of university-industry partnership sustainability (UIPS) stands for well-adjusted progress among key players from universities and industry by sustaining their welfare, both in the present and in the future. This paper sought to develop an evaluation system for UIPS. The need for such a system is justified at three levels: the micro level (i.e., research and innovation performance, transfer and absorptive capability, and technology development), the meso level (i.e., institutional arrangements, communication networks, and local and indigenous rules) and the macro level (i.e., supply and demand, regulations, financing, taxes, culture, traditions, market, climate, politics, demographics, and technology). The UIPS evaluation system developed in this study offers the possibility of calculating a fair value of UIPS and providing recommendations for improving university-industry (U-I) partnerships. This can be of great importance for entrepreneurial universities that would like to strengthen their corporate links and/or reduce/reverse the "hollowing effect" of globalisation in disadvantaged regions. Additionally, this paper also contains discussions on the advantages, limitations, and managerial implications of this proposal.

show abstract

“…Collaborative R&D projects among private firms, universities, and public research institutes (hereafter R&D consortia) have been attracting increasing attention in several countries as an effective means of promoting innovation (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000;Hemmert et al 2014). In Japan, public support for collaborative R&D projects has concentrated since the early 1960s on those among large private firms in the same industry (see for example Sakakibara 1997 and2001 for more details).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hemmert et al (2014) provided an international comparison, comprising the US, Japan, and South Korea, on the effects of project characteristics on trust formation in the university-industry research collaboration, but not on project performance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Governance and Performance of Publicly Funded R&D Consortia

Okamuro

Nishimura

2017

Innovation in the Asia Pacific

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:R&D consortia have been regarded as an effective means of promoting innovation, and several R&D consortia obtain public financial support, which may affect its governance structure and performance. This study investigates the governance mechanisms of publicly funded R&D consortia and their effects on innovation.Regarding R&D consortia, few studies have empirically addressed the effect of project monitoring by the government. Moreover, the role of project leadership in R&D consortia remains poorly explored. Focusing on a major support program for R&D consortia in Japan and using a sample of 315 firms that participated in publicly funded R&D consortia from 2004 to 2009, we empirically confirm that project leadership by a private firm, especially its coordination capability, significantly increases the probability of project success (early commercialization of innovation outcomes). We also find that project performance is positively affected by the strictness of project monitoring and evaluation by the government. Finally, we find no complementarity between project leadership and government monitoring with regard to the effects on project performance.

show abstract

Bridging the cultural divide: Trust formation in university–industry research collaborations in the US, Japan, and South Korea

Cited by 152 publications

References 67 publications

Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations

Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations

An Evaluation System for University–Industry Partnership Sustainability: Enhancing Options for Entrepreneurial Universities

Governance and Performance of Publicly Funded R&D Consortia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About