Influencing scientists’ collaboration and productivity patterns through new institutions: University research centers and scientific and technical human capital

This paper analyzes the effect of university research centers on the productivity and collaboration patterns of university faculty. University research centers are an important subject for policy analysis insofar that they have become the predominant policy response to scientific and technical demands that have not been met by extant institutions, including academic departments, private firms, and government laboratories. Specifically, these centers aim to organize researchers from across the disciplines and sectors which, collectively as a research unit, possess the scientific and technical capacity relevant to scientific and technical goals of the sponsoring agencies. In this paper, we measure the productivity and collaboration patterns of university researchers affiliated with a relatively large-scale and “mature” university research center to discern the effects, if any, of the center mechanism on individual scientists and engineers. Based on an analysis of longitudinal bibliometric data, the results from this case study demonstrate affiliation with the center to be effective at enhancing overall productivity as well as at facilitating cross-discipline, cross-sector, and inter-institutional productivity and collaborations.     

Academic scientists’ affiliation with university research centers: Selection dynamics

University research centers have been institutionalized as a part of the science policy repertoire committed to strategic use of science and technology. Based on a representative sample of academic scientists and engineers in American research universities, this study investigates the selection dynamics, attempting to unfold the determinants of department-affiliated faculty members to be center affiliates. The findings suggest that university research centers select their affiliates on the basis of individual scientific and technical human capital. Scientists from prestigious departments are more likely to be center affiliates, so are prolific scientists, former postdoctoral scholars and the elder cohorts. In the meantime, university research centers are able to overcome the incentive incongruity with academic departments, as is evidenced by a higher likelihood among junior scientists to secure center connections. Dedicated to diversity and equity, university research centers provide a level playing field for women, minority and foreign-born scientists. The study concludes with a discussion of the scientific and technical human capital theory and policy implications in the science enterprise.     

Relational mechanisms governing multifaceted collaborative behavior of academic scientists in six fields of science and engineering

Norms of academic science and engineering are moving in the direction of broader applicability and transferability of knowledge beyond the borders of the university. In response, scientists are expected to engage in collaboration that includes both basic and applied collaborative activities. More specifically, the norms of science are beginning to change to allow for novel forms of collaboration that involve sharing of research ideas on multiple facets of collaborative work. This paper examines the extent to which multifaceted collaboration is attributable to relational aspects of individuals’ networks. Specifically, we ask the question: what relational aspects of social capital determine multifaceted collaboration among scientists in six fields of science and engineering? Borrowing literature from social capital and science and technology (S&T) human capital, this paper develops a multi-level model of multifaceted collaboration and presents a set of testable hypotheses. Then using data from a national survey of men and women faculty in six fields, we analyze the multi-level data: relationship or dyad level (level 1) and ego level (level 2) with hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) to predict multifaceted collaboration of academic scientists. Findings show that some relational characteristics explain multifaceted collaborative behavior as predicted, while others behave in unexpected ways. Conclusions place the findings in context for theory and policy.     

Scientists’ collaboration strategies: implications for scientific and technical human capital

“Scientific and technical human capital” (S&T human capital) has been defined as the sum of researchers’ professional network ties and their technical skills and resources [Int. J. Technol. Manage. 22 (7-8) (2001) 636]. Our study focuses on one particular means by which scientists acquire and deploy S&T human capital, research collaboration. We examine data from 451 scientists and engineers at academic research centers in the United States. The chief focus is on scientists’ collaboration choices and strategies. Since we are particularly interested in S&T human capital, we pay special attention to strategies that involve mentoring graduate students and junior faculty and to collaborating with women. We also examine collaboration “cosmopolitanism,” the extent to which scientists collaborate with those around them (one’s research group, one’s university) as opposed to those more distant in geography or institutional setting (other universities, researchers in industry, researchers in other nations). Our findings indicate that those who pursue a “mentor” collaboration strategy are likely to be tenured; to collaborate with women; and to have a favorable view about industry and research on industrial applications. Regarding the number of reported collaborators, those who have larger grants have more collaborators. With respect to the percentage of female collaborators, we found, not surprisingly, that female scientists have a somewhat higher percentage (36%) of female collaborators, than males have (24%). There are great differences, however, according to rank, with non-tenure track females having 84% of their collaborations with females. Regarding collaboration cosmopolitanism, we find that most researchers are not particularly cosmopolitan in their selection of collaborators—they tend to work with the people in their own work group. More cosmopolitan collaborators tend have large grants. A major policy implication is that there is great variance in the extent to which collaborations seem to enhance or generate S&T human capital. Not all collaborations are equal with respect to their “public goods” implications.     

Academic careers, patents, and productivity: industry experience as scientific and technical human capital

We examine career patterns within the industrial, academic, and governmental sectors and their relation to the publication and patent productivity of scientists and engineers working at university-based research centers in the United States. We hypothesize that among university scientists, intersectoral changes in jobs throughout the career provide access to new social networks and scientific and technical human capital, which will result in higher productivity. For this study, the curriculum vitae of 1200 research scientists and engineers were collected and coded. In addition, patent data were collected from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The overarching conclusion from our analysis is that the academic scientists’ and engineers’ research careers we studied are quite different than characterized in the research productivity literature that is a decade or more old. The wave of center creation activity that began in the early 1980s and continues today has resulted not only in greater ties between universities and industry, but also markedly different academic careers.     

Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry

We investigate how universities’ research quality shapes their engagement with industry. Previous research has predominantly found a positive relationship between academics’ research quality and their commercialization activities. Here we use industry involvement measures that are broader than commercialization and indicate actual collaboration, i.e. collaborative research, contract research and consulting. We hypothesise that the relationship between faculty quality and industry engagement differs across disciplines, depending on complementarities between industrial and academic work, and resource requirements. Using a dataset covering all UK universities, we find that in technology-oriented disciplines, departmental faculty quality is positively related to industry involvement. In the medical and biological sciences we find a positive effect of departmental faculty quality but establish that this does not apply to star scientists. In the social sciences, we find some support for a negative relationship between faculty quality and particularly the more applied forms of industry involvement. The implication for science policy makers and university managers is that differentiated approaches to promoting university-industry relationships are required.     

A view from the coal face: UK research student perceptions of successful and unsuccessful collaborative projects

Studies of the effectiveness of collaborative research partnerships between industrial and academic institutions rarely focus on understanding success as perceived by those involved in the research activities. We explore the extent to which three classes of potential success factor are correlated with perceived collaborative research success; supervisor characteristics, project management characteristics, and communication characteristics. Findings are based on a questionnaire-based survey of 348 doctoral students supported by the UK Research Councils’ Engineering Doctorate (EngD) and Co-operative Awards in Science & Engineering (CASE) schemes. Conclusions describe how the experience of collaboration as a process influences and how successful students consider the collaboration to be for themselves and the collaborating institutions.     

Commercial science, scientists’ values, and university biotechnology research agendas

Policies designed to promote the commercialization of university science have provoked concern that basic and publicly accessible research may be neglected. Commercialization policies have altered traditional institutional incentives and constraints, which raises new questions regarding the influence of scientists’ values on university research agendas. Our research builds on previous quantitative studies measuring changes in research outcomes and qualitative studies probing differentiation among scientists’ value orientations. We developed a nation-wide survey of 912 plant and animal biotechnology scientists at 60 research universities. Our analysis reveals that scientists’ value orientations on what we classify as “market” and “expert” science affect the amount of industry funding they receive, the proprietary nature of their discoveries, and the percentage of basic science research conducted in their laboratories. We also find that the percentage of industry funding is significantly associated with more applied research. Our findings provide insights for science and society theory and suggest that strong incentives for public-science research along with adequate public-research funds to preserve the university's vital role in conducting basic and non-proprietary research are needed to complement private-sector research investments at universities.     

Professional networks, scientific collaboration, and publication productivity in resource-constrained research institutions in a developing country

We test the hypothesis that scientific collaboration is associated with increased publication productivity. We differentiate our approach from other studies by (a) incorporating professional networks in the productivity model, (b) casting productivity and collaboration as distinct phenomena, and (c) examining these phenomena in the context of resource-constrained research institutions in a developing country. We use survey data and employ negative binomial regression models. Results indicate that publication productivity is significantly linked to professional network factors, but there is no evidence of any association with scientific collaboration. We observe that most scientists collaborate in research projects despite coordination difficulties, and without any measurable impact on their productivity. Our interviews reveal that a possible answer to this puzzle appears to be rooted in a practice that views collaborative research projects not mainly as a means to producing knowledge and gaining recognition, but for acquiring professional opportunities and extrinsic rewards. Our findings suggest a new way of modeling publication productivity, with implications for science and innovation policy in both the developed and the developing world.     

International research networks in pharmaceuticals: Structure and dynamics

Knowledge production and scientific research have become increasingly more collaborative and international, particularly in pharmaceuticals. We analyze this tendency in general and tie formation in international research networks on the country level in particular. Based on a unique dataset of scientific publications related to pharmaceutical research and applying social network analysis, we find that both the number of countries and their connectivity increase in almost all disease group specific networks. The cores of the networks consist of high income OECD countries and remain rather stable over time. Using network regression techniques to analyze the network dynamics our results indicate that accumulative advantages based on connectedness and multi-connectivity are positively related to changes in the countries’ collaboration intensity whereas various indicators on similarity between countries do not allow for unambiguous conclusions.     

产学研合作项目双中心社会网络研究

当前对产学研网络的研究较少关注产学研项目的社会网络特性,也缺乏准确表达项目利益相关方社会关系的工具和方法。本文通过对产学研项目中各方的社会网络关系进行分析,构建了以产业界、学研界为双中心的社会网络模型,并通过对结构洞、双中心网络属性指标的分析阐明了利益相关方在网络中的结构属性以及采取行为策略时的相互影响。研究表明政府、双中心点和其他利益相关方应根据整体网络态势和自身的属性指标不同,采取适合的行为策略以降低自身风险、保障项目成功。     

Research collaboration and research output: A longitudinal study of 65 biomedical scientists in a New Zealand university

Collaborative research has been increasingly celebrated by the science community, but the hypothesized positive relationship between research collaboration and research output is more assumed than rigorously tested. In this paper, we identify three methodological gaps in the literature: (a) hierarchical coding based on the ISI Web of Science database causes severe loss of information on local collaboration, (b) the relationship between research collaboration and research output is likely to be confounded by a common latent variable such as a scientist's ability, and (c) the lack of longitudinal analysis prevents causal inferences from being made. To address these methodological concerns, we constructed a longitudinal dataset of 65 biomedical scientists at a New Zealand university and coded collaboration variables by hand checking each of their publications in a period of 14 years. We found that at article level, both within-university collaboration and international collaboration are positively related to an article's quality and that, at scientist-year level, only international collaboration is positively related to a scientist's future research output.     

Divergent paths to commercial science: A comparison of scientists’ founding and advising activities

This paper investigates the difference in the profiles of university scientists who have founded or advised companies. We analyzed the commercial activities of a sample of 6138 university life scientists and found that the profiles of scientists who become academic entrepreneurs are different from those who become companies’ scientific advisors. Founding activity occurs earlier during a scientist's career than advising. Factors such as gender, research productivity, social networks and employer characteristics also differ in their effects on the propensity for founding and advising. In addition, regression analysis shows that being a company's scientific advisor decreases the probability of becoming an academic founder. Overall, evidence from our analysis suggests that founding and advising are two divergent paths for commercially oriented university scientists.     

产学研协同创新的知识协同影响因素实证研究

在对相关文献进行研究基础上,提出产学研协同创新的知识协同影响因素理论模型及相关假设。通过调查问卷数据统计研究表明,组织之间的协同意愿、知识异质性以及组织知识能力等影响因素对产学研协同创新的知识协同存在显著的正向影响;环境复杂性对知识协同绩效存在显著的负向影响;知识协同机制在各影响因素对知识协同绩效的影响过程中起到中介作用。研究结论为产学研协同创新实践工作提供了有益借鉴。     

Success breeds success: The linkage between relationship intensity and tangible outcomes in industry–university collaborative ventures

While advancing new technologies has not traditionally been a major focus of industry–university collaboration, this article stresses that industry–university alliances can be instrumental in facilitating the industrial firm's advancement of both knowledge and new technologies. To investigate this phenomenon, this study focuses on industry–university relationships within the context of university research centers. The results from this multi-method, cross-sectional study indicate that a positive, two-way linkage exists between the intensity of industry–university relationships and the level of tangible outcomes generated. Results also show that while organization size and length of relationship do not significantly affect these dynamics, the industrial firm's geographic proximity to the university research center does. The implications of these findings for both industrial firms and universities are discussed.     

Understanding life together: A brief history of collaboration in biology

The history of science shows a shift from single-investigator ‘little science’ to increasingly large, expensive, multinational, interdisciplinary and interdependent ‘big science’. In physics and allied fields this shift has been well documented, but the rise of collaboration in the life sciences and its effect on scientific work and knowledge has received little attention. Research in biology exhibits different historical trajectories and organisation of collaboration in field and laboratory – differences still visible in contemporary collaborations such as the Census of Marine Life and the Human Genome Project. We employ these case studies as strategic exemplars, supplemented with existing research on collaboration in biology, to expose the different motives, organisational forms and social dynamics underpinning contemporary large-scale collaborations in biology and their relations to historical patterns of collaboration in the life sciences. We find the interaction between research subject, research approach as well as research organisation influencing collaboration patterns and the work of scientists.     

国际科学合作研究状况综述/FONT

随着科学的迅速发展,科学研究中的合作关系日益成为影响科学生产能力发挥的巨大力量,引起越来越多的科学家以及科技管理人士的关注,对科学合作的研究也在逐渐深入。本文对国际科学合作的研究进展作以综述,以期发现科学合作活动的规律,为提高科学研究绩效提供信息。     

工程伦理学:跨学科协作研究的典范

跨学科研究已成为推动协同创新的重要方法和路径。工程伦理学已成为跨学科协作研究的典范。美国国家社会环境研究中心的成立运行,更是从制度、规范层面全面促进多学科协同创新,荣誉研讨课程也作为美国高等教育在课程教学中运行协作研究的重要方式。研究并借鉴美国工程伦理学、社会环境研究中心、荣誉研讨课的运行经验和管理规范,能够促进我国各类学校在科学研究、教育教学等方面的跨学科合作,推动协同创新发展。     

Organization of biomedical data for collaborative scientific research: A research information management system

Biomedical researchers often work with massive, detailed and heterogeneous datasets. These datasets raise new challenges of information organization and management for scientific interpretation, as they demand much of the researchers’ time and attention. The current study investigated the nature of the problems that researchers face when dealing with such data. Four major problems identified with existing biomedical scientific information management methods were related to data organization, data sharing, collaboration, and publications. Therefore, there is a compelling need to develop an efficient and user-friendly information management system to handle the biomedical research data. This study evaluated the implementation of an information management system, which was introduced as part of the collaborative research to increase scientific productivity in a research laboratory. Laboratory members seemed to exhibit frustration during the implementation process. However, empirical findings revealed that they gained new knowledge and completed specified tasks while working together with the new system. Hence, researchers are urged to persist and persevere when dealing with any new technology, including an information management system in a research laboratory environment.     

Commercializing university research in transition economies: Technology transfer offices or direct industrial funding?

There is a paucity of knowledge on research commercialization by university scientists worldwide. The objective of this paper is to identify the role that Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) and direct Industrial Funding play in university research commercialization in transition economies of Azerbaijan, Belarus and Kazakhstan during 2015–2017. We do this by developing a novel database and a multi-level model which explains how individual attributes, organizational and ecosystem characteristics explain the extent of knowledge commercialization.We apply the generalized Heckman approach to account for two selection biases, reducing the sample from 2602 to 272 scientists, and further use a mixed-method approach to analyse 27 face-to-face interviews with researchers and TTO managers. The results demonstrate that research commercialization is not associated with the existence and awareness of TTO or the establishment of commercialization contracts via TTO, but the direct industrial funding of university research. Taken together the findings have clear implications for scholars, scientific entrepreneurs, TTOs and investors who aim to exploit university knowledge in transition economies.