Do scientists get fundamental research ideas by solving practical problems?

Abstract

We discuss the problem-solving nature of scientific activity and maintain that contributions made in the form of improved methodologies, new technologies and instruments for research are, and will increasingly become, central in experimental sciences and in fields traditionally the realm of pure intellectual speculation. The contribution of scientists to the development of new technologies and techniques for research purposes largely exceeds their contribution to developing technologies for industrial purposes, although the former easily blurs into the latter. We verify the effect of both types of contributions on the productivity of a sample of American star physicists, and show that improving research technologies always boosts the productivity of scientists, whereas developing industrial technologies is beneficial only when the technology stems from research applications.

Organizational and individual determinants of patent production of academic scientists and engineers in the United States

“…When a scientist works with industry, the relationship provides new perspectives on application, opportunities for funding, and introductions to new research ideas (Franzioni, 2009;Stephan et al, 2007).…”

Underpinning Strategic Behaviours and Posture of Principal Investigators In Transition/Uncertain Environments

“…It can be characterised by a vague general direction of inquiry, and it is anticipated that phenomena will emerge that warrant further consideration (Klahr and Simon, 1999;Simon 1973). It should also be noted that continuous improvements or refinements in research instruments, technology, algorithms or methodologies can spur high impact or transformational advancements in scientific discovery and understanding that may not yet be appreciated (Franzoni 2009;Luukkonen, 2012). In this respect, explorative research involves a certain degree of flexibility during implementation.…”

“…We develop the construct of funding application conformance from the literature detailing the influence of peer review funding on research creativity and originality. Together our constructs reflect how choice of research in science must balance curiosity and opportunity boundaries (Bozeman and Mangematin, 2004;Fisher, 2005;Franzoni, 2009;Porac et al, 2004). The study context is Ireland's publicly funded science, engineering and technology (SET) sector.…”

Understanding industries-universities collaboration tendency, a Swedish-Tunisian comparative study

“…The fact is that the research ideas, both technical and managerial from the research scientists with the market intelligence and knowledge from business managers and companies are integrated through a set of performance dimensions that are meaningful and make output to both parties [6]. Collateral development of technology is then desirable [14] and although breakthroughs in technology require time and discoveries and innovations cannot be scheduled, industries and universities need to manage resources and programs.…”