Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-03190142.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Market-Pull Or Research Push? Effects Of Research Orientations On University-Industry Collaborative Ph.D. Projects' Performances

Author

Listed:
  • Quentin Plantec

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, INPI - Institut National de la Propriété Industrielle)

  • Benjamin Cabanes

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Pascal Le Masson

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Benoit Weil

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract
There is abundant literature on the consequences of academic engagement with the industry, on overall scientists' commercialization and scientific performances. Nevertheless, the literature remains silent on how those performances are contingent on the research orientation's choice at the project level. This paper aims to fill this gap by exploring different research orientations in the context of university-industry collaborative Ph.D., a topic of interest as private companies are becoming more involved in Ph.D. training. To do so, we relied on a unique dataset comprising of 635 Collaborative Ph.D. projects through the CIFRE program in France. We classified the projects' ex-ante research directions: market-pull-oriented (MPO), research-push-oriented (RPO), and simultaneous-discovery-invention-oriented (SDI), and we observed their ex-post performances. First, as expected, an orientation towards industry needs conduct to higher commercialization performances. However, counter-intuitively, those projects are also prone to have similar scientific performances than those oriented towards scientific discoveries. Second, while SDI projects were considered over-performing other research orientations, they led to more significant scientific performances than traditional orientations but generated as many patents as MPO projects. Finally, we highlight that initial research orientation is a crucial determinant variable of scientific and commercialization performances, and our paper opens rooms for further research to the literature on academic engagement, university-industry collaborations, and Collaborative Ph.D.

Suggested Citation

  • Quentin Plantec & Benjamin Cabanes & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2021. "Market-Pull Or Research Push? Effects Of Research Orientations On University-Industry Collaborative Ph.D. Projects' Performances," Post-Print halshs-03190142, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-03190142
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-03190142v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-03190142v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Valentina Tartari & Stefano Breschi, 2012. "Set them free: scientists' evaluations of the benefits and costs of university--industry research collaboration," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(5), pages 1117-1147, October.
    2. Butcher, Juliette & Jeffrey, Paul, 2007. "A view from the coal face: UK research student perceptions of successful and unsuccessful collaborative projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1239-1250, October.
    3. Etzkowitz, Henry & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 109-123, February.
    4. Carayol, Nicolas, 2003. "Objectives, agreements and matching in science-industry collaborations: reassembling the pieces of the puzzle," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 887-908, June.
    5. Pierre Azoulay & Joshua S. Graff Zivin & Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Incentives and creativity: evidence from the academic life sciences," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 42(3), pages 527-554, September.
    6. Levin, Sharon G & Stephan, Paula E, 1991. "Research Productivity over the Life Cycle: Evidence for Academic Scientists," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(1), pages 114-132, March.
    7. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lawson, Cornelia, 2017. "Fishing for complementarities: Research grants and research productivity," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-38.
    8. Gulbrandsen, Magnus & Smeby, Jens-Christian, 2005. "Industry funding and university professors' research performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 932-950, August.
    9. Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
    10. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Jofre-Bonet, Mireia & Lawson, Cornelia, 2015. "The double-edged sword of industry collaboration: Evidence from engineering academics in the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 1160-1175.
    11. Schuelke-Leech, Beth-Anne, 2013. "Resources and research: An empirical study of the influence of departmental research resources on individual STEM researchers involvement with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1667-1678.
    12. Negin Salimi & Rudi Bekkers & Koen Frenken, 2015. "Governance mode choice in collaborative Ph.D. projects," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 840-858, October.
    13. Dirk Czarnitzki & Christoph Grimpe & Andrew A. Toole, 2015. "Delay and secrecy: does industry sponsorship jeopardize disclosure of academic research?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(1), pages 251-279.
    14. Broström, Anders, 2019. "Academic breeding grounds: Home department conditions and early career performance of academic researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1647-1665.
    15. Albert Banal-Estañol & Mireia Jofre-Bonet & Cornelia Meissner, 2008. "Theimpact of industry collaboration on research: Evidence from engineering academics in the UK," Economics Working Papers 1190, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Aug 2010.
    16. Tartari, Valentina & Perkmann, Markus & Salter, Ammon, 2014. "In good company: The influence of peers on industry engagement by academic scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1189-1203.
    17. Rentocchini, Francesco & D'Este, Pablo & Manjarrés-Henríquez, Liney & Grimaldi, Rosa, 2014. "The relationship between academic consulting and research performance: Evidence from five Spanish universities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 70-83.
    18. Goldstein, Anna P. & Narayanamurti, Venkatesh, 2018. "Simultaneous pursuit of discovery and invention in the US Department of Energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1505-1512.
    19. Baruffaldi, Stefano & Visentin, Fabiana & Conti, Annamaria, 2016. "The productivity of science & engineering PhD students hired from supervisors’ networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 785-796.
    20. Gaughan, Monica & Robin, Stephane, 2004. "National science training policy and early scientific careers in France and the United States," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 569-581, May.
    21. Frank T. Rothaermel & Shanti D. Agung & Lin Jiang, 2007. "University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 691-791, August.
    22. Mangematin, V., 2000. "PhD job market: professional trajectories and incentives during the PhD," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 741-756, June.
    23. Chong Ju Choi & Carla C. J. M. Millar & Caroline Y. L. Wong, 2005. "Knowledge and the State," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Knowledge Entanglements, chapter 0, pages 19-38, Palgrave Macmillan.
    24. Iorio, Roberto & Labory, Sandrine & Rentocchini, Francesco, 2017. "The importance of pro-social behaviour for the breadth and depth of knowledge transfer activities: An analysis of Italian academic scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 497-509.
    25. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    26. Robert J. W. Tijssen, 2012. "Co-authored research publications and strategic analysis of public--private collaboration," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(3), pages 204-215, July.
    27. Chong Ju Choi & Carla C. J. M. Millar & Caroline Y. L. Wong, 2005. "Knowledge and Exchange," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Knowledge Entanglements, chapter 0, pages 65-76, Palgrave Macmillan.
    28. Meyer-Krahmer, Frieder & Schmoch, Ulrich, 1998. "Science-based technologies: university-industry interactions in four fields," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 835-851, December.
    29. Mansfield, Edwin, 1995. "Academic Research Underlying Industrial Innovations:," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(1), pages 55-65, February.
    30. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    31. Dovev Lavie & Israel Drori, 2012. "Collaborating for Knowledge Creation and Application: The Case of Nanotechnology Research Programs," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 704-724, June.
    32. Monica Gaughan & Stéphane Robin, 2004. "National science training policy and early scientific careers in France and the United States," Post-Print hal-00279013, HAL.
    33. Buenstorf, Guido & Heinisch, Dominik P., 2020. "When do firms get ideas from hiring PhDs?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(3).
    34. Lee Fleming & Olav Sorenson, 2004. "Science as a map in technological search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 909-928, August.
    35. Lee, Yong S, 2000. "The Sustainability of University-Industry Research Collaboration: An Empirical Assessment," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 111-133, June.
    36. Callaert, Julie & Landoni, Paolo & Van Looy, Bart & Verganti, Roberto, 2015. "Scientific yield from collaboration with industry: The relevance of researchers’ strategic approaches," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 990-998.
    37. Michaël Bikard & Keyvan Vakili & Florenta Teodoridis, 2019. "When Collaboration Bridges Institutions: The Impact of University–Industry Collaboration on Academic Productivity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 426-445, March.
    38. Taran Thune & Pål Børing, 2015. "Industry PhD Schemes: Developing Innovation Competencies in Firms?," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 6(2), pages 385-401, June.
    39. Van Looy, Bart & Callaert, Julie & Debackere, Koenraad, 2006. "Publication and patent behavior of academic researchers: Conflicting, reinforcing or merely co-existing?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 596-608, May.
    40. Andrew A. Toole & Dirk Czarnitzki, 2010. "Commercializing Science: Is There a University "Brain Drain" from Academic Entrepreneurship?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(9), pages 1599-1614, September.
    41. Abreu, Maria & Grinevich, Vadim, 2013. "The nature of academic entrepreneurship in the UK: Widening the focus on entrepreneurial activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 408-422.
    42. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic patenting: the importance of industry support," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 509-535, August.
    43. Perkmann, Markus & Salandra, Rossella & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Hughes, Alan, 2021. "Academic engagement: A review of the literature 2011-2019," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    44. Calderini, Mario & Franzoni, Chiara & Vezzulli, Andrea, 2007. "If star scientists do not patent: The effect of productivity, basicness and impact on the decision to patent in the academic world," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 303-319, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Plantec, Quentin & Cabanes, Benjamin & le Masson, Pascal & Weil, Benoit, 2023. "Early-career academic engagement in university–industry collaborative PhDs: Research orientation and project performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    2. Perkmann, Markus & Salandra, Rossella & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Hughes, Alan, 2021. "Academic engagement: A review of the literature 2011-2019," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    3. Quentin Plantec & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2021. "Another way to get the Nobel Prize: the role of the industry in the emergence of new scientific breakthroughs," Post-Print halshs-03278662, HAL.
    4. Quentin Plantec & Pascal Le Masson & Benoît Weil, 2022. "Nobel laurates and the role of the industry in the emergence of new scientific breakthroughs," Post-Print hal-03727378, HAL.
    5. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lawson, Cornelia, 2017. "Fishing for complementarities: Research grants and research productivity," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-38.
    6. Blandinieres, Florence & Pellens, Maikel, 2021. "Scientist's industry engagement and the research agenda: Evidence from Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-001, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Jofre-Bonet, Mireia & Lawson, Cornelia, 2015. "The double-edged sword of industry collaboration: Evidence from engineering academics in the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 1160-1175.
    8. Roman Fudickar & Hanna Hottenrott & Cornelia Lawson, 2018. "What’s the price of academic consulting? Effects of public and private sector consulting on academic research," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(4), pages 699-722.
    9. Fudickar, Roman & Hottenrott, Hanna & Lawson, Cornelia, 2016. "What's the price of consulting? Effects of public and private sector consulting on academic research," DICE Discussion Papers 212, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    10. Uwe Cantner & Martin Kalthaus & Indira Yarullina, 2024. "Outcomes of science-industry collaboration: factors and interdependencies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 542-580, April.
    11. Alessandra Scandura & Simona Iammarino, 2022. "Academic engagement with industry: the role of research quality and experience," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1000-1036, August.
    12. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Brigida Blasi & Carmela Anna Nappi & Sandra Romagnosi, 2022. "Quality of research as source and signal: revisiting the valorization process beyond substitution vs complementarity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 407-434, April.
    13. Ani Gerbin & Mateja Drnovsek, 2016. "Determinants and public policy implications of academic-industry knowledge transfer in life sciences: a review and a conceptual framework," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 979-1076, October.
    14. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic Inventions Outside the University: Investigating Patent Ownership in the UK," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 385-398, July.
    15. Ben Zhang & Xiaohong Wang, 2017. "Empirical study on influence of university-industry collaboration on research performance and moderating effect of social capital: evidence from engineering academics in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 257-277, October.
    16. Broström, Anders, 2019. "Academic breeding grounds: Home department conditions and early career performance of academic researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1647-1665.
    17. Perkmann, Markus & King, Zella & Pavelin, Stephen, 2011. "Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 539-552, May.
    18. Amara, Nabil & Olmos-Peñuela, Julia & Fernández-de-Lucio, Ignacio, 2019. "Overcoming the “lost before translation” problem: An exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 22-36.
    19. Victoria Galan-Muros & Todd Davey, 2019. "The UBC ecosystem: putting together a comprehensive framework for university-business cooperation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1311-1346, August.
    20. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    University-Industry collaborations; Ph.D.; Academic engagement; Doctoral education;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-03190142. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.