The importance of pro-social behaviour for the breadth and depth of knowledge transfer activities: An analysis of Italian academic scientists

Iorio, Roberto; Labory, Sandrine; Rentocchini, Francesco

doi:10.1016/j.respol.2016.12.003

Cited by 93 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although since then the number of studies addressing individual interaction has increased significantly, as shown in Perkmann et al (2013), most contributions have focused on personal characteristics such as sex, age, seniority, and academic standing of the scholar as drivers of academic entrepreneurship. However, less emphasis has been given to proximities, particularly those that differ from spatial ones, and to sociological aspects, such as social ties and the prosocial attitude of researchers, up until very recently (Iorio et al 2017).…”

Section: Individual Characteristics Proximities and Academic Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

University–industry linkages and academic engagements: individual behaviours and firms’ barriers. Introduction to the special section

Filippetti

Savona

2017

J Technol Transf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article introduces the special section on ''University-industry linkages and academic engagements: Individual behaviours and firms' barriers''. We first revisit the latest developments of the literature and policy interest on university-industry research. We then build upon the extant literature and unpack the concept of academic engagement by further exploring the heterogeneity of UI linkages along a set of dimensions and actors involved. These are: (1) Incentives and behaviours of individual academic entrepreneurs; (2) Firms' barriers to cooperation with public research institutions; (3) Individual behaviours, incentives and organizational bottlenecks in late developing countries. We summarize the individual contributions along these dimensions. There are overlooked individual characteristics that affect the degree of engagement of academics and scholars in cooperating with other organizations, of which gender and the nonacademic background of individuals are most crucial. The notion of academic engagement should be enlarged to aspects that go beyond the commercialization or patenting of innovation, but embrace social and economic impact more at large. From the perspective of the firm, barriers to innovation might exert an effect on the likelihood to cooperate with universities and public research institutes, most especially to cope with lack of finance or access to frontier knowledge. We finally propose a research agenda that addresses the challenges ahead.

show abstract

Section: Individual Characteristics Proximities and Academic Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

University–industry linkages and academic engagements: individual behaviours and firms’ barriers. Introduction to the special section

Filippetti

Savona

2017

J Technol Transf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Además, se necesitan diseñar estructuras de estímulos para motivar a los investigadores en la creación de nuevo conocimiento y vincularse en la implementación del proceso. Los estímulos pueden ser de tipo financiero, pero también social, puesto que muchos investigadores desean contribuir con la solución de problemáticas sociales mediante su trabajo (Lorio, Labory y Rentocchini, 2017). Asimismo, existe el desafío de eliminar las barreras de egoísmo entre los investigadores y propiciar un ambiente donde el conocimiento y experiencia se transfiera de forma natural (Cheng, et al, 2009).…”

Section: Desafíos De La Gestión Del Conocimiento En Instituciones De unclassified

Gestión del conocimiento en Instituciones de Educación Superior: Caracterización desde una reflexión teórica

Guzmán¹,

Arrieta²

2020

RCS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge management has become a topic of interest for academics and professionals, who recognize its positive impact on the performance of all kinds of organizations, including Higher Education Institutions, however, these present conditions individuals to be considered. For this reason, this article aims to characterize knowledge management in these institutions based on theoretical reflection. The study consists of a bibliographic review of qualitative design, applying the technique of content analysis and interpretation to scientific documents, found in various databases. The results reveal that knowledge management is a process that acquires great relevance for Higher Education Institutions in their effort to successfully develop their substantive functions, however, there are some difficulties that limit their implementation process. To help overcome these challenges, a knowledge management model is proposed consisting of 4 phases: identification, creation, distribution and measurement; adequately adapted to the operation of these organizations. It is concluded that knowledge management is a pending task for them, but the proposed model can be a starting point to achieve significant results.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, it provides access to the diverse knowledge base of industry practitioners (D'Este and Patel, 2007;Iorio et al, 2017). Yet, a broad KT portfolio requires internal processes and infrastructure to support the different KT activities (Guerrero and Urbano, 2012).…”

Section: The Diversity and Intensity Of Knowledge-transfer Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining knowledge transfer activities in UK universities: advocating a PROMETHEE-based approach

Ishizaka

Pickernell

Huang

et al. 2020

IJEBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to examine the portfolio of knowledge transfer (KT) activities in 162 UK higher education institutions. In doing so, this study creates an index and ranking, but more importantly, it identifies specific groupings or strategic profiles of universities defined by different combinations and strengths of the individual KT activities from which the overall rankings are derived. Previous research, concentrating on entrepreneurial universities, shows that individual knowledge transfer (KT) activities vary substantially among UK universities. The broad portfolio of universities' KT activities, however, remains underexplored, creating gaps in terms of the relative strength, range, focus and combination of these activities, and the degree to which there are distinct university strategic KT profiles. By examining KT activities and grouping universities into KT “types”, this research allows universities and policymakers to better develop and measure clearer KT-strategies.Design/methodology/approachThe present study applied the Preference Ranking Organization Method for the Enrichment of Evaluations (PROMETHEE) to rank universities based on their portfolio of KT activities. It utilised data from the 2015–2016 Higher Education Business and Community Interaction Survey dataset.FindingsFindings show that universities differ substantially in their portfolios of KT activities. By using PROMETHEE, a new ranking of universities is generated, based on their KT portfolio. This paper also identifies four distinct types or groups of universities based on the diversity and intensity of their KT activities: Ambidextrous, broad, focused and indifferent.Originality/valueThe study contributes to the entrepreneurship literature, and more specifically entrepreneurial activities of universities through new knowledge generated concerning university KT activity. The research extends the existing literature on university archetypes (including those concerned with the Entrepreneurial University) and rankings using a new technique that allows for more detailed analysis of the range of university KT activities. By applying the PROMETHEE approach, results illustrate a more nuanced definition of university KT activities than before, by simultaneously evaluating their overall strength, range, focus and combination, allowing us to identify the universities' strategic profiles based on their KT portfolios. Implications of the findings for key stakeholders include a potential need for government higher education policymakers to take into account the different mixes of university archetypes in a region when considering how best to support higher education and its role in direct and indirect entrepreneurship promotion through regional policy goals.

show abstract

The importance of pro-social behaviour for the breadth and depth of knowledge transfer activities: An analysis of Italian academic scientists

Cited by 93 publications

References 83 publications

University–industry linkages and academic engagements: individual behaviours and firms’ barriers. Introduction to the special section

University–industry linkages and academic engagements: individual behaviours and firms’ barriers. Introduction to the special section

Gestión del conocimiento en Instituciones de Educación Superior: Caracterización desde una reflexión teórica

Examining knowledge transfer activities in UK universities: advocating a PROMETHEE-based approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About