When do Researchers Collaborate? Toward a Model of Collaboration Propensity in Science and Engineering Research

Geographically distributed and multidisciplinary collaborations have proven invaluable in answering a range of important scientific questions, such as understanding and controlling disease threats like SARS and AIDS or exploring the nature of matter in particle physics. Despite this, however, collaboration can often be problematic. There are institutional obstacles, collaboration tools may be poorly designed, and group coordination is difficult. To better design technologies to support research activities, we need an improved understanding of why scientists collaborate and how their collaborations work. To achieve this improved understanding, this study compares two theoretical approaches to collaboration propensity—that is, the extent to which collaboration is perceived as useful by individual researchers. On one hand, cultural comparisons of disciplines suggest that collaboration propensity will be higher in disciplinary cultures that have a more collectivist orientation, as indicated by low levels of competition for individual recognition and few concerns about secrecy related to commercialization and intellectual property. In contrast, an approach based on social and organizational psychology suggests that collaboration propensity will vary as a function of resource concentration, fieldwide focus on a well-defined set of problems, and the need for and availability of help when difficult problems are encountered in day-to-day work. To explore this question, a mail survey of 900 academic researchers in three fields was conducted, along with 100 interviews with practicing researchers at 17 sites in the field. Results support a focus on work attributes in interpreting collaboration propensity. That is, cultural factors such as competition for individual recognition and concerns about intellectual property were not perceived as significant impediments to collaboration. Instead, characteristics like resource concentration and the need for coordination were more important in determining collaboration propensity. Implications of these findings include a call for more careful examination of the day-to-day work of scientists and engineers, and a suggestion that concerns about scientific competition impeding collaboration may be unwarranted.Ph.D.InformationUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/39375/2/Birnholtz.dissertation_final.pd

A STUDY OF SCIENCE-INDUSTRY COLLABORATIVE PATTERNS IN A LARGE EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY.

This paper analyses the modalities according to which a large European university collaborates with firms by exploring its relational portfolio. We address this issue by exploiting a database listing more than 1000 firms having collaborated with the University Louis Pasteur between 1990 and 2002. First, using multi-correspondence analysis, we derive a four-classes typology of collaborative behaviours, each of them presenting a strong internal coherence. We obtain four distinct collaboration patterms, for which the frequency of interactions and the exclusive vs. open character of the relationships are discriminating features. Second, using a multinomial logit estimation, we show how this diversity is connected to some individual attributes of the firms: size, legal status, industrial sector and geographic distance from the public partner.Science-industry collaborations; Typology; Industrial collaboration patterns.

Coopetition and innovation. Lessons from worker cooperatives in the Spanish machine tool industry

This is an electronic version of the accepted paper in Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing[EN] Purpose – This paper aims to investigate how the implementation of the inter-cooperation principle among Spanish machine-tool cooperatives helps them to coopete–collaborate with competitors, in their innovation and internationalization processes and achieve collaborative advantages. Design/methodology/approach – The paper uses a multi-case approach based on interviews with 15 CEOs and research and development (R&D) managers, representing 14 Spanish machine tool firms and institutions. Eight of these organizations are worker-cooperatives.. Findings – Worker -cooperatives achieve advantages on innovation and internationalization via inter-cooperation (shared R&D units, joint sales offices, joint after-sale services, knowledge exchange and relocation of key R&D technicians and managers). Several mutual bonds and ties among cooperatives help to overcome the risk of opportunistic behaviour and knowledge leakage associated to coopetition. The obtained results give some clues explaining to what extent and under which conditions coopetitive strategies of cooperatives are transferable to other types of ownership arrangements across sectors. Practical implications – Firms seeking cooperation with competitors in their R&D and internationalization processes can learn from the coopetitive arrangements analyzed in the paper. Social implications – Findings can be valuable for sectoral associations and public bodies trying to promote coopetition and alliances between competitors as a means to benefit from collaborative advantages. Originality/value – Focusing on an “ideal type” of co-operation -cooperative organisationsand having access to primary sources, the paper shows to what extent (and how) strong coopetitive structures and processes foster innovation and internationalization

The Determinants of Faculty Patenting Behavior: Demographics or Opportunities?

We examine the individual, contextual, and institutional determinants of faculty patenting behavior in a panel dataset spanning the careers of 3,884 academic life scientists. Using a combination of discrete time hazard rate models and fixed effects logistic models, we find that patenting events are preceded by a flurry of publications, even holding constant time-invariant scientific talent and the latent patentability of a scientist's research. Moreover, the magnitude of the effect of this flurry is influenced by context --- such as the presence of coauthors who patent and the patent stock of the scientist's university. Whereas previous research emphasized that academic patenters are more accomplished on average than their non-patenting counterparts, our findings suggest that patenting behavior is also a function of scientific opportunities. This result has important implications for the public policy debate surrounding academic patenting.

Matching and Network Effects

This paper examines the existence and magnitude of network effects in the matching of workteams. We study the formation of co-author relations among economists over a thirty year period. Our principal finding is that a collaboration emerges faster among two authors if they are closer in the social network of economists. This proximity effect on collaboration is strong and robust but only affects initial collaboration. It has no positive influence on subsequent co-authorship. We also provide some evidence that matching depends on experience, junior authors being more likely to collaborate with senior authors.

Matching and network effects

The matching of individuals in teams is a key element in the functioning of an economy. The network of social ties can potentially transmit important information on abilities and reputations and also help mitigate matching frictions by facilitating interactions among ¿screened¿ individuals. We conjecture that the probability of i and j forming a team is falling in the distance between i and j in the network of existing social ties. The objective of this paper is to empirically test this conjecture. We examine the formation of coauthor relations among economists over a twenty year period. Our principal finding is that a new collaboration emerges faster among two researchers if they are ¿closer" in the existing coauthor network among economists. This proximity effect on collaboration is strong: being at a network distance of 2 instead of 3, for instance, raises the probability of initiating a collaboration by 27 percent. Research collaboration takes place in an environment where fairly detailed information concerning individual ability and productivity -reflected in publications, employment history, etc.- is publicly available. Our finding that social networks are powerful even in this setting suggests that they must affect matching processes more generally.coauthorship network, matching, network effects, network formation.

Technological activities and their impact on the financial performance of the firm: Exploitation and exploration within and between firms

This paper analyzes the consequences for financial performance of technology strategies categorized along two dimensions: (1) explorative versus exploitative and (2) solitary versus collaborative. The financial performance implications of firms’ positioning along these two dimensions has important managerial implications, but has received only limited attention in prior studies. Drawing on organizational learning theory and technology alliances literature, a set of hypotheses on the performance implications of firms’ technology strategies are derived. These hypotheses are tested empirically on a panel dataset (1996-2003) of 168 R&D-intensive firms based in Japan, the US and Europe and situated in five different industries (chemicals, pharmaceuticals, ICT, electronics, non-electrical machinery). Patent data are used to construct indicators of explorative versus exploitative technological activities (activities in new or existing technology domains) and collaborative versus solitary technological activities (joint versus single patent ownership). The financial performance of firms is measured via a market value indicator: Tobin’s Q index.Innovation, Tobin’s q, R&D collaboration, exploration & exploitation

A policy to boost R&D: Does the R&D tax credit work?

In this article we address various issues raised by the evaluation of the R&D tax credit policy. We first consider the studies that estimate the direct effects of the tax credit on R&D inputs. We discuss results obtained through different approaches and methods and show that they give a contrasted picture of the policy’s effectiveness. Next we argue that a comprehensive evaluation of the R&D tax credit should include other outcomes and present studies focussing on them. We also initiate a very tentative meta-analysis to obtain a more synthetic view on the various evaluation results. We finally conclude that harmonization and increased comparability in evaluation studies would be useful to bridge the gab between evaluation and policy design and implementation.R&D; R&D tax credit; R&D capital; capital use cost; evaluation; meta-analysis

R&D capital and economic growth: The empirical evidence

This paper reviews the empirical literature on rates of return on R&D and interprets the economic significance of these estimates using a semi-endogenous growth model with a calibrated knowledge production sector. We analyse how R&D subsidies, a reduction of entry barriers for start-ups and increasing high-skilled labour would contribute towards raising productivity and knowledge investment in the EU. The simulation results show that substantial efforts will have to be made if Europe wants to come close to achieving the Lisbon productivity and knowledge-investment targets. Achieving US standards in all three areas would reduce the productivity gap by about 50 percent. Improving the quality of tertiary education and increasing competition in non-manufacturing sectors would also help the EU to get to the productivity frontier.Productivity differences; endogenous growth; R&D; DSGE models