Joint university-industry laboratories through the lens of proximity dimensions: moving beyond geographical proximity

Abstract

Purpose There is little known about investigating the importance of all proximity dimensions simultaneously as a result of geographical proximity on university-industry collaborative innovation. This paper aims to answer the question of how geographically proximate university and industry influence cognitive, social, organizational, institutional and cultural proximity within university-industry joint laboratories and finally, what is the outcome of these interplays on collaborative innovation. Design/methodology/approach The study uses an exploratory multiple-case study approach. The results are derived from 53 in-depth, semistructured interviews with laboratory directors and representatives from both the company and the university within 8 joint laboratories of Telecom Italia (TIM). The data collection was carried out in 2014 and 2015. The analysis follows a multi-grounded theory approach and relies on a mix of deductive and inductive reasoning with the final goal of theoretical elaboration. Findings This study finds the role of social and cultural proximity at the individual level as a result of geographical proximity as an enabler of collaborative innovation by triggering mutual learning, trust formation and frequent interactions. Cognitive proximity at the interface level could systematically influence collaborative innovation, while organizational and institutional proximity has marginal roles in facilitating collaborative innovation. The qualitative analysis offers a conceptual framework for proximity dimensions and collaborative innovation within university-industry joint laboratories. Practical implications The framework not only advances state-of-the-art university-industry collaboration and proximity dimension but also offers guidance for managers in designing collaborative innovation settings between university and industry. Originality/value With this study, the paper advances the understanding beyond solely the relationship between proximity and collaboration and shed light on the interplay between geographical proximity and other proximity dimensions in this context, which has received limited scholarly attention.

Network-driven positive externalities in clean energy technology production: the case of energy efficiency in the EU residential sector

“…Our results, while confirming the key role played by proximity in enabling collaborative innovation by triggering mutual learning, trust formation and frequent interactions, suggest that the multiple dimensions (i.e. cognitive, institutional, organizational, social) of proximity (Boschma and Frenken, 2011;Mahdad et al, 2020) might differently interact with the knowledge diffusion process. In particular, this study allows emphasising four main outcomes related to the relation between proximity and innovation performance.…”

Improving knowledge transfer and collaboration between science and business in Spain

“…Unweighted, provisional results from the 2021 OECD International Survey of Science (ISSA) -based as of July 2021 on over 500 responses while still in the field -provide several insights on the degree of knowledge transfer and collaboration between scientists and business as well as the factors that contribute to it. 35 As shown in Figure 31, the self-reported activities and outputs of the majority of Spanish scientists are closely connected to academic pursuits. S&T education and training coexists with both basic and applied research, as well as scientific information processing.…”

“…However, shared responsibilities over science and innovation policy between different levels of government can also lead to fragmentation, duplication and overlap, policy inconsistencies and incoherence, bureaucratic and political conflict, and lack of consensus when setting priorities (OECD, 2011 [34]; Magro, Navarro and Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, 2014 [35]). The proliferation of public support programs at different levels can lead to higher transaction costs, more bureaucracy, and confusion among target beneficiaries.…”

“…S&T education and training coexists with both basic and applied research, as well as scientific information processing. Other 35 ISSA2021 was designed to help inform questions on KTC arising from this particular project and was first piloted in Spain starting March 2021 before being launched globally. The median respondent for Spain is male (57% of resp.…”

“…Briefly introduced in section 2, technology centres 50 as defined in the Spanish legislation are non-for-profit organisations regardless of their legal form (typically private associations or 49 https://innotransfer.org/ 50 The majority of CTs (close to 70) and CAITs (13) with state-wide scope of activity and their status is recognised by an official register maintained by the Ministry of Science and Innovation, which is not necessarily all encompassing of all entities functionally under this category, AAbout half of them (35) are part of the Spanish Federation of Technology Centres (FEDIT). https://sede.micinn.gob.es/inforct/imprimirTodos.mec.…”