Knowledge Management in Academic Industry Collaborations: how to best foster Innovation Capability?

Purpose Academic industry collaborations (AIC) are increasingly seen as a key part of national innovation policies as an approach to creating and exploiting knowledge. They, however, present a complex challenge in terms of knowledge management (KM). This is partly due to the wide range of stakeholders, the input of government policy, and also the different cultures, practices and expectations of those involved. The research questions are as follows: RQ1: How do participants perceive and experience knowledge creation and transfer in academic industry collaborations? RQ2: How can the intersection between knowledge management literature and AIC inform and improve both disciplines and practices? Methods (1) An analysis of KM literature in terms of AIC. (2) Exploratory in-depth interviews with participant stakeholders of AIC projects. (3) Findings are then analysed in terms of existing concepts in KM literature. Findings Initial findings suggest that a more in-depth acknowledgement of the role of power, tensions and differences between stakeholders is important in understanding and improving the innovation potential of AIC projects. A more nuanced understanding of knowledge transfer is also needed with tailored approaches for particular project stages and organisations. Practical Implications The role of academic industry collaborations in fostering innovation by facilitating knowledge creation and transfer is seen as increasingly important as a social and political priority but KM has so far not yet engaged fully with this. This paper suggests that extending KM from a primarily organisation level focus to a broader societal focus would be a useful development

Knowledge Management in Academic Industry Collaborations: how to best foster Innovation Capability?

Purpose Academic industry collaborations (AIC) are increasingly seen as a key part of national innovation policies as an approach to creating and exploiting knowledge. They, however, present a complex challenge in terms of knowledge management (KM). This is partly due to the wide range of stakeholders, the input of government policy, and also the different cultures, practices and expectations of those involved. The research questions are as follows: RQ1: How do participants perceive and experience knowledge creation and transfer in academic industry collaborations? RQ2: How can the intersection between knowledge management literature and AIC inform and improve both disciplines and practices? Methods (1) An analysis of KM literature in terms of AIC. (2) Exploratory in-depth interviews with participant stakeholders of AIC projects. (3) Findings are then analysed in terms of existing concepts in KM literature. Findings Initial findings suggest that a more in-depth acknowledgement of the role of power, tensions and differences between stakeholders is important in understanding and improving the innovation potential of AIC projects. A more nuanced understanding of knowledge transfer is also needed with tailored approaches for particular project stages and organisations. Practical Implications The role of academic industry collaborations in fostering innovation by facilitating knowledge creation and transfer is seen as increasingly important as a social and political priority but KM has so far not yet engaged fully with this. This paper suggests that extending KM from a primarily organisation level focus to a broader societal focus would be a useful development

"Hurling Against a Haystack": The Incentives and Challenges of Open Data in the Republic of Ireland

Comparative research on data practices is hampered by the difficulty of studying across cases. The Republic of Ireland, with its small geographical size and population, an economy that is highly leveraged in information technology investment, and a centralized funding model provides a unique “laboratory” for examining data infrastructures in social and cultural contexts. This project reports on a preliminary study of the Open Data movement in the Irish public sector with an eye to surfacing themes for understanding data practices and challenges across different sectors. Using semi-structured interviews with individuals (n=11) involved in open data administration across the Republic, the researchers discuss current implementation and ongoing practices. Initial findings with respect to difficulties in measuring success, the sustainability of data, and valuating data are discussed. Future work on understanding how culture may play a role in open data infrastructures, stated and implicit values and biases, and creating and measuring need and impact are briefly discussed.ye

New frontiers of peer review

This news article introduces a new COST Action entitled PEERE (TD1306), which stands for New Frontiers of Peer Review (PEERE). PEERE is a trans-domain proposal which brings together researchers from various different disciplines and science stake-holders for the purpose of reviewing the process of peer review. PEERE officially began in May 2014 and will end in May 2018. Thirty-one countries, including Malta, are currently participating in the Action. In order to set the context in which this COST Action was initiated, we first look very briefly at the history of the process of peer review and various models of peer review currently in use. We then share what this COST Action hopes to achieve.peer-reviewe

Studying the History of Social Science Data Archives as Knowledge Infrastructure

In this paper, we develop a brief history of Social Science Data Archives (SSDAs) and their implications for evolving scholarship on the sustainability and coordination of contemporary knowledge infrastructures.  We draw upon analyses of institutional and policy documents and interviews from active SSDAs as well as field level analyses of professional societies for staff and representatives of SSDAs.  We examine the history of SSDAs in shaping the social sciences of the latter part of the twentieth century, their strategies for remaining active and relevant through institutional and financial uncertainty, and conclude with implications for current STS scholarship in cyberinfrastructures and open data.Irish Research CouncilAlfred P. Sloan FoundationWisconsin Alumni Research FoundationASIS&T History and Foundations SIG History Fun

‘Pandemia’: a reckoning of UK universities’ corporate response to COVID-19 and its academic fallout:A reckoning of UK universities’ corporate response to COVID-19 and its academic fallout.

Universities in the UK, and in other countries like Australia and the USA, have responded to the operational and financial challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic by prioritising institutional solvency and enforcing changes to the work-practices and profiles of their staff. For academics, an adjustment to institutional life under COVID-19 has been dramatic and resulted in the overwhelming majority making a transition to prolonged remote-working. Many have endured significant work intensification; others have lost — or may soon lose — their jobs. The impact of the pandemic appears transformational and for the most part negative. This article reports the experiences of n=1,099 UK academics specific to the corporate response of institutional leadership to the COVID-19 crisis. We find articulated a story of universities in the grip of 'pandemia' and COVID-19 emboldening processes and protagonists of neoliberal governmentality and market-reform that pay little heed to considerations of human health and wellbeing

Sociotechnical Approaches to Fieldwork and Trace Data Integration

The 2015 Sociotech Workshop focuses attention to the possibilities of leveraging trace data (data that is created from the use or presence of digital artifacts and interactions) with data collected through fieldwork. This combination is sociotechnical both in its form and value to better engaging human/ machine interactions. To this end, the workshop provides a forum for: (1) introducing scholars to the basic conceptual premises of sociotechnical scholarship; (2) sociotech scholars to advance their own work and thinking relative to the opportunities of combining the various types of evidence gathered through fieldwork with the range of trace data possibilities that are emerging. Like the seven previous pre-iConference Sociotech Workshops, this event also provides participants an introduction to the Consortium for the Science of Sociotechnical Systems (CSST). The CSST serves a trans-disciplinary community, connecting like-minded scholars from many different intellectual communities whose interests are towards the mutual constitution of social and technological phenomena. A 250-word position paper is due March 9; see the iConference workshop web page for details.ye

Social Science Data Archives: Case Studies in Data Sustainability

There has been a sizeable investment in the development of large-scale data and appropriate infrastructures in the physical and biological sciences and increasingly in the social sciences and humanities. Concerns about data sustainability have attracted a great deal of attention as research project data collection represents a significant investment, and loss of subsequent use of that data represents a loss of potential value. In this poster, we focus on of the most long-lived examples of data archives: Social Science Data Archives (SSDAs). In this study, we report on preliminary research on the historical, institutional, and operational dimensions over SSDAs over time. Drawing upon analyses of institutional and policy documents and interviews with staff, depositors, and administrators, this poster briefly discusses current challenges to SSDA longevity and implications for next steps in expanding the study both theoretically and methodologically. Initial themes discussed in this poster include data archives making a market for themselves, configuring their products and their user base and ongoing tensions between the need to generate revenue and pressure for open access data.publishedye

Algorithmic governance: Developing a research agenda through the power of collective intelligence

We are living in an algorithmic age where mathematics and computer science are coming together in powerful new ways to influence, shape and guide our behaviour and the governance of our societies. As these algorithmic governance structures proliferate, it is vital that we ensure their effectiveness and legitimacy. That is, we need to ensure that they are an effective means for achieving a legitimate policy goal that are also procedurally fair, open and unbiased. But how can we ensure that algorithmic governance structures are both? This article shares the results of a collective intelligence workshop that addressed exactly this question. The workshop brought together a multidisciplinary group of scholars to consider (a) barriers to legitimate and effective algorithmic governance and (b) the research methods needed to address the nature and impact of specific barriers. An interactive management workshop technique was used to harness the collective intelligence of this multidisciplinary group. This method enabled participants to produce a framework and research agenda for those who are concerned about algorithmic governance. We outline this research agenda below, providing a detailed map of key research themes, questions and methods that our workshop felt ought to be pursued. This builds upon existing work on research agendas for critical algorithm studies in a unique way through the method of collective intelligence

Implementation Science to Accelerate Clean Cooking for Public Health

Clean cooking has emerged as a major concern for global health and development because of the enormous burden of disease caused by traditional cookstoves and fires. The World Health Organization has developed new indoor air quality guidelines that few homes will be able to achieve without replacing traditional methods with modern clean cooking technologies, including fuels and stoves. However, decades of experience with improved stove programs indicate that the challenge of modernizing cooking in impoverished communities includes a complex, multi-sectoral set of problems that require implementation research. The National Institutes of Health, in partnership with several government agencies and the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, has launched the Clean Cooking Implementation Science Network that aims to address this issue. In this article, our focus is on building a knowledge base to accelerate scale-up and sustained use of the cleanest technologies in low- and middle-income countries. Implementation science provides a variety of analytical and planning tools to enhance effectiveness of clinical and public health interventions. These tools are being integrated with a growing body of knowledge and new research projects to yield new methods, consensus tools, and an evidence base to accelerate improvements in health promised by the renewed agenda of clean cooking.Fil: Rosenthal, Joshua. National Institutes Of Health. Fogarty International Center; Estados UnidosFil: Balakrishnan, Kalpana. Sri Ramachandra University; IndiaFil: Bruce, Nigel. University of Liverpool; Reino UnidoFil: Chambers, David. National Institutes of Health. National Cancer Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Graham, Jay. The George Washington University; Estados UnidosFil: Jack, Darby. Columbia University; Estados UnidosFil: Kline, Lydia. National Institutes Of Health. Fogarty International Center; Estados UnidosFil: Masera, Omar Raul. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; MéxicoFil: Mehta, Sumi. Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves; Estados UnidosFil: Mercado, Ilse Ruiz. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; MéxicoFil: Neta, Gila. National Institutes of Health. National Cancer Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Pattanayak, Subhrendu. University of Duke; Estados UnidosFil: Puzzolo, Elisa. Global LPG Partnership; Estados UnidosFil: Petach, Helen. U.S. Agency for International Development; Estados UnidosFil: Punturieri, Antonello. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Rubinstein, Adolfo Luis. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Sage, Michael. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Estados UnidosFil: Sturke, Rachel. National Institutes Of Health. Fogarty International Center; Estados UnidosFil: Shankar, Anita. University Johns Hopkins; Estados UnidosFil: Sherr, Kenny. University of Washington; Estados UnidosFil: Smith, Kirk. University of California at Berkeley; Estados UnidosFil: Yadama, Gautam. Washington University in St. Louis; Estados Unido