Explore the vast range of titles available.

Cooperation in research, development and innovation (RD&I) between universities or research institutes and industries plays a fundamental role in the economic development of a country. Industry benefits from state-of-the-art laboratories and technologies from academia, while institutes learn about business reality and market needs. Numerous barriers to the establishment and maintenance of these partnerships have been investigated and reported in the literature, but the information generated by these empirical studies is very fragmented and there is a need to consider the barriers systematically in order to clarify the topic. The aims of this systematic review were to analyze university-industry collaborations set up for the purpose of RD&I in an effort to recognize the barriers and facilitators of the process and to identify the approaches by which such barriers may be overcome. Following searches of the Scopus database and application of the exclusion criteria, 86 relevant articles were identified and submitted to bibliometric analysis. Subsequently, 75 articles were selected for in-depth content analysis, and the ideas embodied therein were presented in a structured and comprehensive manner. Barriers were evaluated according to three different theoretical perspectives, namely the triple helix and the entrepreneurial university, the relational social capital and value creation, and technology transfer and cultural differences. The facilitators were categorized as internal and external. The results obtained highlight the importance of fostering relational social capital and providing tax incentives to facilitate industry's pursuit of innovation through academia partnerships, and also show that collaborative barriers in RD&I may be overcome to some extent by starting with smaller projects and gradually increasing their complexity. Based on the findings outlined in this review, we propose various lines for future research.

This article documents the fact that ventures funded by two successful angel groups experience superior outcomes to rejected ventures: They have improved survival, exits, employment, patenting, Web traffic, and financing. We use strong discontinuities in angel-funding behavior over small changes in their collective interest levels to implement a regression discontinuity approach. We confirm the positive effects for venture operations, with qualitative support for a higher likelihood of successful exits. On the other hand, there is no difference in access to additional financing around the discontinuity. This might suggest that financing is not a central input of angel groups.

We create a culture dictionary using one of the latest machine learning techniques—the word embedding model—and 209,480 earnings call transcripts. We score the five corporate cultural values of innovation, integrity, quality, respect, and teamwork for 62,664 firm-year observations over the period 2001–2018. We show that an innovative culture is broader than the usual measures of corporate innovation – R&D expenses and the number of patents. Moreover, we show that corporate culture correlates with business outcomes, including operational efficiency, risk-taking, earnings management, executive compensation design, firm value, and deal making, and that the culture-performance link is more pronounced in bad times. Finally, we present suggestive evidence that corporate culture is shaped by major corporate events, such as mergers and acquisitions.

This article focuses on the relationship between external R&D and firm innovation output. Using a sample of Italian manufacturing firms over the period 2007–2009, we estimate the effect of R&D collaboration with the aim to detect differences between family and non-family firms. The study shows that the R&D acquired from external sources has a positive impact on innovative sales, especially for family firms. This result holds when using either the extensive or the intensive margins of R&D collaboration, thereby suggesting that family companies have a greater capacity to translate external R&D into tangible economic benefits. We also find that family firms benefit from the diversity of R&D collaboration.

We evaluate the role of intermediary organizations in fostering University–Industry (U–I) joint R&D by examining the characteristics of firms that interact with universities via these organizations vis-à-vis firms that interact directly with the university’s departments. We find that firms interacting via intermediary organizations are smaller, with less knowledge capabilities and geographically closer to the university, than counterparts. Thereby, our findings provide support to the view that intermediaries contribute to a broader diffusion of knowledge by enhancing U–I links with small firms. Cultural and organizational barriers are more significant among firms interacting directly with the university, whereas cognitive and cost barriers are more relevant among firms interacting via intermediaries. Geographic proximity has a preponderant role in U–I links highlighting the importance of mid-tier universities to regional growth in less technologically advanced regions.

Universities play an important role in regional development and innovation and engage with the industry through various channels. In this paper, we examine the role of heterogeneous characteristics of university research, in particular universities’ orientation towards basic or applied research and the quality of this research, in attracting firms’ R&D investment. We analyze the location decisions in the United States by foreign multinational firms at the level of metropolitan areas. We contrast research and development projects and explore whether they are driven by different factors. We find that the drivers of location choice differ importantly as a consequence of the type of the focal R&D investment of the firm. Universities with an orientation towards applied scientific research and exhibiting higher academic quality of applied research attract more R&D investment focusing on development activities. In contrast, firms’ investments in research activities are attracted by the academic quality of basic scientific research of local universities. Hence, increased university emphasis on academic engagement and applied research may have negative consequences for industrial research in the region.

Foreignness has long been a central construct in international business research, with research streams examining its conceptualizations, manifestations, and consequences. Researchers started by taking foreignness to be a liability, then later considered the possibility of its being an asset. A still more recent view is that foreignness is an organizational identity that a firm can purposefully manage. Broadly conceived, foreignness is an umbrella construct that directly or tangentially covers research on country of origin, institutional distance, firm-specific advantages, and the ownership–location–internalization eclectic paradigm. We review the body of research on foreignness and track the evolution of its four streams, liability of foreignness, asset of foreignness, drivers of foreignness, and firm responses to foreignness. We call for a clearer conceptualization and a sounder theoretical grounding of the foreignness construct, more integration of the liability of foreignness and the asset of foreignness research streams, greater attention to the multiple strategies firms use to manage foreignness, and the extension of the field to less-explored contexts such as emerging economies, digitalization, and de-globalization.

We analyse the outcomes for scientists from science-industry collaboration projects and study the conditions under which these outcomes emerge. While previous research analyses the motivations for scientists to collaborate and the characteristics of such collaborations, we focus on the generated outcomes. We provide a new conceptualisation of collaboration outcomes and distinguish three different types: scientific outcomes, commercialisable outcomes, and follow-up cooperation. We argue that scientific factors influence the generation of scientific outcomes, and economic factors the generation of commercialisable outcomes, accordingly; interaction factors are proposed to influence the emergence of follow-up cooperation. We further propose that these outcomes depend on each other and hence are co-generated. We test our propositions with survey data from scientists in the German state of Thuringia. We develop novel survey items about characteristics of scientists’ last collaboration with an industry partner and its outcomes. Multivariate probit estimations show that scientific factors positively relate to scientific outcomes, and interaction factors are relevant for follow-up cooperation. However, when it comes to economic factors, we find mixed evidence of their relation to commercialisable outcomes. The outcome interdependence exists between scientific outcomes and the other two types of outcomes but not between commercialisable outcomes and follow-up cooperation. Our results can be used by policymakers and science managers to design and strengthen the support for collaboration projects.

Suppose that a firm in charge of a business ecosystem is a firm in charge of a microeconomy. To achieve the highest growth rate, how open should that economy be? To encourage third-party developers, how long should their intellectual property interests last? We develop a sequential innovation model that addresses the trade-offs inherent in these two decisions: (i) Closing the platform increases the sponsor’s ability to charge for access, while opening the platform increases developer ability to build upon it. (ii) The longer third-party developers retain rights to their innovations, the higher the royalties they and the sponsor earn, but the sooner those developers’ rights expire, the sooner their innovations become a public good upon which other developers can build. Our model allows us to characterize the optimal levels of openness and of intellectual property (IP) duration in a platform ecosystem. We use standard Cobb–Douglas production technologies to derive our results. These findings can inform innovation strategy, choice of organizational form, IP noncompete decisions, and regulation policy. This paper was accepted by Chris Forman, information systems.