extant literature in research

2001; Philbin 2008; Plewa et al. (2013), but we did not find relevant papers in this period. Bjerregaard (2010) and Bruneel et al. We used the following steps and criteria (see Fig. Production Planning and Control, Journal of Technology Transfer, The process of doing a research proposal involves critical analysis of the extant literature in order to map out what is already known about the topic and to identify the gaps in knowledge (McGhee, Marland, & Atkinson, 2007; Dunne, 2011). Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, The Journal of Technology Transfer, . International Journal of Management Reviews, 2011;18(4):6-10. doi: 10.7748/nr2011.07.18.4.6.c8636. Cultural differences relating to the application of knowledge and willingness to share knowledge relates to the academic habit to publish results, while industrial partners rather keep knowledge secret. Mostly because it helps to see connections between different aspects of knowledge and this is an important way to reduce ambiguity. This can be justified when we follow the logic that academic engagement is a specific form of inter-organizational collaboration or alliance (see for example Galan-Muros and Plewa 2016). European Journal of Innovation Management, 2012). In that section we provide an overview of theoretical perspectives and activities that have been described in previous research. There remains uncertainty over the relevance of experience and management capabilities to solve transfer problems related to knowledge differences. This paper identifies practices that can facilitate knowledge transfer in university-industry (U-I) research partnerships by systematically reviewing extant literature. Rethinking the relationship between academia and industry: Qualitative case studies of MIT and Stanford. xb```f`d`e``)cb@ !6v@N#HPD88@m7+U@L4|b|%v,LRajiXc)91Lf|6zl2 Fs:$DeNN&F^7i_R* GSu[tt WYD66zdmP4t:+ -2+ >fcz@d n B^"KD79HmUz-&rTX3}2bVQ_/5FpyF@w:X 4$y0$W Similarity in knowledge backgrounds makes it easier to understand and absorb new knowledge that results from the collaboration. Trust in UI collaboration is affected by two things. The initial search strategy was to find papers discussing research partnership*, academic engagement or papers that combined scienc*, academi* or university with industry* or business, in combination with knowledge management, knowledge transfer or technology transfer. Even though the literature review typically precedes the primary research study in most instances, it is very common for research to oscillate between the primary research study and the extant information. Tacit knowledge transfer requires interaction to develop competence (Johnson and Johnston 2004) and more direct collaboration (Alexander and Childe 2013; Azevedo Ferreira and Rezende Ramos 2015; Daghfous 2004; Gertner et al. 2013a). The paper suggests that a thorough impact of FinTech on various stakeholders can be understood using three dimensions, namely, consumers, market players and regulatory front. 2016). (2014). 2014; Plewa et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9660-x, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9660-x. Trust increases with frequent communication. Regular contact during the collaboration is important to ensure that goals remain aligned (Buganza et al. Purpose. 0000016024 00000 n Henny J. van der Windt. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. L0dR'QL')t4V3Le*WM ?ESAPbY{OslJ>=X_^y9|>akE%Xm|Q{7nJYwY?,I4Sv-R~,gt]31)qSEi_\WazUX@8Y[,jlLc_D|,U*2Tz1F2ac?z~]UU=*|V=&t+~j!kw[Hk) 0000136159 00000 n We found that research into knowledge transfer in academic engagement is dispersed. The second important factor that influences knowledge absorption, is differences in knowledge background, referred to as cognitive and epistemic difference. Relationship dynamics between university research centres and industrial firms: Their impact on technology transfer activities. (2013) found that literature on academic engagement was mainly published after 2006. Making university/industry collaborative research succeed. Toward a new economics of science. Inter- and intra-organizational knowledge transfer: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and consequences. 0000002106 00000 n Using a synthesised technique for grounded theory in nursing research. Project management methodology for universityindustry collaborative projects. Wallin, J., Isaksson, O., Larsson, A., & Elfstrm, B. There seems to be agreement on the importance of general collaboration experience, organizational capabilities, and experience with the particular partners for overall collaboration success (Buganza et al. 0000175131 00000 n 29(4), 567586. Qualitative research in this field is often very descriptive and does not refer to theoretical concepts. Minerva, 47(1), 93114. Big data analytics capabilities: A systematic literature review and research agenda. 2012). For instance, the outplacement of personnel from the firm, secondment and employment of graduates (Galan-Muros and Plewa 2016; Gertner et al. Finally, looking for a higher common good can help to re-unite goals if there seems to be no common ground (Mesny and Mailhot 2007). And what practices facilitate the transfer of knowledge in academic engagement? The .gov means its official. The term cultural differences is used to indicate a lack of shared meaning and social conventions (Tsai and Ghoshal 1998). Up till now, the field is still behind in the development of theoretical perspectives. Shared goals are needed to reach a common understanding of the desired output and the interpretation of results (Tsai and Ghoshal 1998). Bloedon, R. V., & Stokes, D. R. (1994). 18(1), 4469. They result in ambiguity, problems with knowledge absorption and difficulties with the application of knowledge. sharing sensitive information, make sure youre on a federal International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 47(3), 400410. Research Policy, The use of prototypes and working in the facilities of the industrial partner helps to integrate knowledge and learn about implementation challenges (Daghfous 2004; Gertner et al. A good understanding of a partners needs helps to take these needs into account, also when novel directions are pursued, while open communication raises understanding. 1087 0 obj <>stream Furthermore, experience with academic engagement in general and the specific partner in particular will build understanding for the needs of industry and the particular partner more specifically. The difficult search for compromises in a Canadian industry/university research partnership. In this phase the selection of actual research questions, methods and resource allocation might provide problems, even if these matters seemed clear at the beginning (Estrada et al. These suggestions are based on open questions we encountered during our analysis and inconsistencies between the results in the papers discussed here. As a result, combining key words such as academic engagement or research partnerships with knowledge transfer or knowledge management provided limited results. Learning through joint ventures: A framework of knowledge acquisition. (2008) identified absorptive capacity and ambiguity as important factors. The effects of cognitive distance in universityindustry collaborations: Some evidence from Italian universities. 19(1), 3140. We developed a methodology that overall followed the analytical process of a systematic review but differs from other systematic reviews when it comes to searching and identifying relevant literature. First, we excluded papers that focus solely on entrepreneurial activities like patenting, liaison offices, science-hubs and other intermediary organisations. Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on universityindustry relations. 30(3), 509532. Careers. Novice researchers will have their own sets of circumstances when preparing their studies and should become aware of the different perspectives to make decisions that they can ultimately justify. We start with a general discussion on knowledge flows in academic engagement. Academic engagement, after all, aims to develop novel knowledge that benefits the academic and industrial partner. His hypotheses is that in the case of radically new technologies knowledge is so different from existing knowledge that knowing how to organize the implementation of new technologies becomes more relevant. Conclusion: They showed that technological relatedness and technological capability (which increases absorptive capacity) were the most important facilitators of knowledge transfer in UI collaborations. Also, the literature mainly focuses on problems in the implementation phase. Santoro, M. D., & Bierly, P. E. (2006). HHS Vulnerability Disclosure, Help International Journal of Technology Management, This way they manage to secure industrial funding. Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z., & Elmagarmid, A. 0000149127 00000 n This could be due to incoherence in terminology at all levels; from terminology to indicate the form of engagement to the factors and theoretical frames that are used to discuss knowledge transfer. 2007; Thune 2009). Perkmann, M., King, Z., & Pavelin, S. (2011). RayyanA web and mobile app for systematic reviews. (2000) and Hagedoorn (2002) concluded that there was a lack of research into transfer channels other than commercialization. Look for inspiration in published literature. This means that we will focus on research partnerships, collaborative research, contract research and consulting while collaborations with limited interaction or that require little or no new research are excluded. One moose, two moose. Third, we only included papers that gave theoretical explanations relating to effectiveness of knowledge transfer, papers that identified factors that influence knowledge transfer and papers that describe knowledge transfer practices and management practices that influence knowledge transfer. Most of this research studied academic entrepreneurship (Agrawal 2001; Shane 2005), which includes patenting, licensing, joint ventures, spin-offs and so forth. This requires the investment of time to develop a shared language and discourse (Al-Tabbaa and Ankrah 2016; Canhoto et al. After this, we turn to theoretical insights about how knowledge differences and characteristics influence the effectiveness of knowledge exchange and absorptive capacity. They sketch a much more dynamic exchange process, in which the industrial application of research outcomes directly influences academic research. This may conflict with making strict project plans and specifying deliverables that align with industrial needs. Collaborative research programmes: Building trust from difference. They relate to differences in knowledge background between the firm and the academics. Organization Science, The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the It is an aggregated term for various knowledge characteristics of which the tacit nature (Polanyi 1966), complexity and the limited possibilities for specification (Simonin 1999) are the most important. There is no extant literature in the English language in this era. While Muscio and Pozzali (2013) and Morandi (2013) found that more experience in interaction with firms does not change the perception of cognitive distance. Although partners expect to be informed, reports play a minor role in this and are usually only compiled at the end of each phase and perceived as archiving material (Chin et al. The paper reports that FinTech promises huge potential for further study by various stakeholders in the FinTech industry from academia to practitioners to regulators. Balancing diversity in innovation networks: Trading zones in universityindustry R&D collaboration. 0000175068 00000 n 0000187986 00000 n McCabe, A., Parker, R., & Cox, S. (2016). The Journal of Technology Transfer, 58(5), 637651. On the other hand, the limited statistical research on cultural differences indicates that cultural differences do affect collaboration success (Galan-Muros and Plewa 2016; Ghauri and Rosendo-Rios 2016). 2016). 41(4), 464476. Therefore, relatedness of prior knowledge and technological competence help to understand and integrate new knowledge (Daghfous 2004; Santoro and Bierly 2006) and reduces ambiguity. In our view, an increased understanding of when informal or formal management mechanisms are used is needed. 0000019218 00000 n R&D Management, Absorptive capacity, ambiguity and cognitive distance seem to be the most difficult barriers to be resolved. 2010). Third, we organized our literature in line with three themescognitive difference, institutional differences and social capital in a summarizing document that formed the basis for the analysis. 2013). Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(4), 4557. 2007; Wang and Lu 2007). Social capital to facilitate engineered universityindustry collaboration for technology transfer: A dynamic perspective. Polanyi, M. (1966). In exploring extant literature, the study shows that the concept of knowledge gap emanated from the mass media domain and has two distinct pillars or pathways such as differentials in awareness. Following previous research in the field of UI research (for example Perkmann et al. It can be wise to start with smaller projects, such as student internships or thesis research, to gain collaboration experience and to learn about the capabilities of a partner. Methods To examine the literature on charter schools, I reviewed research and scholarly studies available that reported evidence on the goals of the reform as outlined by the charter school concept. Making innovative use of academic knowledge to enhance corporate technology innovation impact. The debate also extends into the wider academic community, where no consensus exists. 2). Again, regardless of the chosen approach to qualitative research, your dissertation will have unique key features as listed below. The author attempts to conceptualize the terms of impairment to the phonological loop in a working memory. Spontaneously sharing interesting knowledge that is not directly related to the specific project, experience and successful previous collaborations make partners feel that the other is genuinely interested in what is needed and improves insight in the partners needs (Al-Tabbaa and Ankrah 2016; Pinheiro et al. 2014; Plewa et al. Michael T. Compton . 9(4), 259280. Time orientation relates to differences in what is considered an acceptable period to reach goals, punctuality in meeting deadlines and the continuity of personnel (Barnes et al. 2002; Chin et al. ; Exercises involving eccentric muscle contractions of the quadriceps on a decline board are strongly supported by extant literature. Institutional factors are cultural differences and shared goals. 2014). 2016). This research journal mainly explores the relationship between poor semantic short-term memories in the scanning paradigm. From the Cambridge English Corpus Generalizations from the extant literature about parental influences are based mainly on studies of parents and children where assessments are concurrent. Salter, A. J., & Martin, B. R. (2001). 0000137337 00000 n A complicating factor here is that differences in goals are often not recognized in the early, honeymoon, stage of a collaboration, they become clear during the engagement phase (Estrada et al. While trust is used to express the reliability of a partner (Hansen 1999). Slider with three articles shown per slide. The majority of the papers focuses on development and transfer of knowledge by the academic partner. k 12(2), 161176. 45(4), 830853. 2002; Morandi 2013). This was necessary as literature on research partnerships is widespread. Research that differentiates between cognitive or goal related differences and routine based differences indicates that these factors affect collaborations differently (Corley et al. 2014). Differences in goals originate from differences in market orientation (Ghauri and Rosendo-Rios 2016), priorities in norms (Al-Tabbaa and Ankrah 2016; Mesny and Mailhot 2007), and different logics for the sharing of knowledge (Steinmo 2015). We also identified the most relevant factors and practices for the mitigation of these differences. 15(4), 625647. Research Policy, As those have focussed on characteristics of researchers and institutions (Perkmann et al. =FHu$ktrksWw=SA>=TAecWvpXd$84*]vS Frequent meetings in the initiation stage also help to merge goals, keep them aligned and increase trust (Plewa et al. Second, we excluded papers that were not related to knowledge transfer. Extant literature identified knowledge differences and differences in goals resulting from different institutional cultures as important barriers to knowledge transfer. 2014). Gertner, D., Roberts, J., & Charles, D. (2011).

Explain The Importance Of Gathering Feedback From Different Sources, Articles E