Trabajo presentado a la Triple Helix VII International Conference: "University, Industry and Government Linkages" celebrada en Madrid (España) del 20 al 22 de Octubre de 2010.Peer Reviewe

Bekkers, Rudi

Escribá Esteve, A.

Villanueva Félez, África

Digital.CSIC

355Madrid, October 20, 21 & 22 - 2010O-017Characterising Triple Helix linkages: Analysis of the flow of resources and thestrength of linkAfrica Villanueva-Felez, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV), Valencia, SpainAlejandro Escriba-Esteve, Management Department - Universidad de Valencia, SpainRudi Bekkers, Department of Industrial Engineering and Innovation Science (IEIS)-Eindhoven University of Technology,NetherlandsResearch TopicSocial relationships are central to Triple Helix, yet notably difficult to measure and analyse. The establishment of linkagesbetween the different types of actors has been considered as one of the processes through which knowledge flows acrossdifferent institutional spheres, but are also seen as an outcome of policies oriented to the improvement of these flows (Molas-Gallart, Tang & Morrow, 2000). It is understandable, then, that efforts to define and collect indicators of university-societyrelationships (so-called Third Mission indicators) have predominantly focused on clearly identifiable inputs (number of employeesin technology transfer, investments in spin-offs, etc.) and outputs (for instance, technology commercialisation indicators, incomefrom licences) of knowledge transfer activities. While such measures have their uses, we believe that the analysis of social linksremains a crucial yet understudied aspect of the efforts to measure Triple Helix Linkages, and to develop innovative indicators.In this sense, some relevant efforts have been made from the Social Network Perspective, addressing topics such as thestructure of collaborations in research projects and journal papers (Meyer & Bhattacharya, 2004), the identification of academicresearch networks that facilitate academic publications (Lowrie & McKnight, 2004), and the analysis of the relationship betweensocial networks and academic career (Etzkowitz, 2000).Paradoxically, most studies focus on the actors themselves and there are only very few studies taking individuals’ relationshipsas their unit of analysis (Link, Siegel, & Bozeman, 2007; Palmberg, 2008). The investigation of the characteristics of the linksbetween the individuals involved in knowledge creation on the one hand, and transfer processes on the other, deserves moreattention among the efforts to measure Triple Helix linkages.In this paper we propose an approach that focuses on the relational features of social linkages established by researchers in thefield of nano-materials. We expand the concepts of Granovetter (1973) and use them to measure the relationship between, onthe one hand, the ties which researchers establish with other academics, with governmental research organisations, and withfirms, and, on the other, the interchange of resources through those linkages.Methodology and dataThe paper studies the social relationships of researchers with other Triple Helix actors (i.e. academic and public researchorganisations, and firms), and examines whether the characteristics of these social links are related with the interchange ofresources in each relationship. In order to do so, we use primary data obtained using a survey, launched during April and July2008, conducted in Spain. The unit of analysis is the relationship between two agents. With the relationships reported weconstructed a dyadic data set.Drawing on this data we used cluster analysis to classify and characterise different types of social relationships, based on theflow of resources interchanged by the two agents involved in the social. The variety of resources considered to identify types ofrelationships include (1) information related to advances and discoveries in general, (2) information that is personalised oradapted to the receiver’s needs, (3) knowledge that the receiver consider difficult to acquire from another source, (4) professionaladvise, (5) access to other researchers, (6) access to funding, and (7) help to establish a reputation as a researcher. Weanalyse these relationships separately for each of the Triple Helix spheres (being university, government, and industry). Thepaper also develops and test measures of tie strength.Finally, we use non-parametric tests to study the relation between the different kinds of linkages (obtained through clusteranalyses) and their well-known indicators from social network studies, such as the degree of trust, friendship, frequency ofcommunication, etc. We search for significant differences in relational behaviours depending with whom and in which sphere theresearcher maintains a relationship. We also identify the relationships in each sphere which provide with more resources to theresearcher to accomplish his/her research and transfer activities.ResultsThe study identifies three main types of relationships developed by researchers, which repeat within each of the three institutionalspheres:1. Relationships with high levels of resources flow,2. Relationships with low levels of resources flow,3. Relationship with intermediate levels of resources flow.356Madrid, October 20, 21 & 22 - 2010Our results show a direct positive relation between the level of resources exchanged in each type of relationship and thestrength of the link as defined by Granovetter (1973). In fact, we observe a positive and significant relationship with some of linkstrength indicators, such as trust, friendship, and reciprocity.In this sense, our study provides interesting insights for the analysis and understanding of the influence of Triple Helix relationshipson knowledge creation and transfer. Our contribution is related to1. the proposal of new ways of measuring and classifying the relationship between different spheres of the Triple Helix, by usingsocial Network perspective2. the potential implications of these measures with regard to the understanding of the factors that have an impact on knowledgetransfer and creation through different actors.References- Etzkowitz, H. 2000. Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science. Port Chester, NY, USA: Cambridge UniversityPress.- Granovetter, M. S. 1973. The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6): 1360-1380.- Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Bozeman, B. 2007. An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informaluniversity technology transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4): 641-655.- Lowrie, A. & McKnight, P. J. 2004. Academic Research Networks: A Key to Enhancing Scholarly Standing. EuropeanManagement Journal, 22(4): 345-360.- Meyer, M. & Bhattacharya, S. 2004. Commonalities and differences between scholarly and technical collaboration.Scientometrics, 61(3): 443-456.- Molas-Gallart, J., Tang, P., & Morrow, S. 2000. Assessing the non-academic impact of grant-funded socio-economic research:results from a pilot study. Research Evaluation, 9(3): 171-182.- Palmberg, C. 2008. The transfer and commercialisation of nanotechnology: a comparative analysis of university and companyresearchers. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(6): 631-652.

Characterising Triple Helix linkages: Analysis of the flow of resources and the strength of link

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Digital.CSIC