scholarly journals Why Most University-Industry Partnerships Fail to Endure and How to Create Value and Gain Competitive Advantage through Collaboration – A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arlindo Marinho ◽  
Rui G. Silva ◽  
Gilberto Santos
Keyword(s):  
Competitive Advantage ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Collaborative Work ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Life Cycles ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Industry Partnerships ◽  
The University ◽  
University Industry

<p><strong>Purpose</strong>: The collaborative work between universities and enterprises is increasingly important given the growing competitive environment, transformed by intense global competition, rapid technological change and shorter product life cycles. In this article several case studies are analysed, as well as relevant academic literature, to get an insight concerning the current relationship status between enterprises and universities.</p><p><strong>Methodology/Approach</strong>: The methodology is grounded on the literature review on University-Industry Partnerships, selected from indexed sources, and targeted to case-based experiences where practical feedback is given.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>It is shown that university-industry knowledge transfer contributes significantly to an increase of quality, productivity and economic value of businesses. It is found that the lack of controlling mechanisms and lack of efficient communication paths have a strong negative impact in collaboration. Key collaboration factors that support stronger relationships were compiled and discussed in support of better mitigation strategies.</p><p><strong>Research Limitation/implication</strong>: The limited availability of case studies reporting on operative improvements introduced by policy changes hinders the effectiveness of the findings.</p><strong>Originality/Value of paper</strong>: The paper analyses the collaboration of the university with industry based on case studies with a focus on value creation and how to gain a competitive advantage through collaboration.

Who Controls Whom?

2015 ◽  
pp. 173-186
Author(s):  
Ainurul Rosli ◽  
Peter Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Transfer ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Knowledge Exchange ◽  
Full Understanding ◽  
Boundary Spanner ◽  
Enterprise Network ◽  
The University ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
University Industry

This chapter looks into the importance of having a clear identity of a boundary spanner in determining the role of the partners in a university-industry knowledge transfer programme. It highlights issues around the relationship between the business and the graduate as the boundary spanner, where the university's level of control differs between two programmes: Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) and Knowledge Exchange and Enterprise Network (KEEN) programme. The four case studies illustrate interesting points since the university is the employer for the KTPs associate and the business is the employer for the KEEN associate, whilst successful KTP and KEEN projects rely on a full understanding of the role of the graduate within the business.

The Inherent Tensions of University—Industry Master Agreements

1997 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 213-217
Author(s):  
Irene Johnston Petrick ◽  
Michael M. Reischman
Keyword(s):  
Competitive Advantage ◽  
Core Competencies ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The Other ◽  
Strategic Partnerships ◽  
University Cooperation ◽  
University Partnership ◽  
The University ◽  
University Industry

Strategic partnerships between industry and universities are an area of major growth in US universities. Successful partnerships require that both parties understand the needs and goals of the other, and that the legal framework underlying the partnership reflects these needs and goals. A master agreement under which individual projects can be accomplished facilitates industry–university cooperation. Yet the concept of a single document to formalize a multidimensional industry–university relationship directly contradicts the notion of core competencies within the university and the evolving role that different university units play in the R&D/commercialization process. To be successful, colleges of engineering must evaluate their contribution to an industry–university partnership and must develop agreements which capture protection for and benefit from their sources of competitive advantage.

scholarly journals Knowledge Transfer Partnerships and the entrepreneurial university

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 267-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Wynn ◽  
Peter Jones
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Transfer ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Qualitative Case Study ◽  
Entrepreneurial University ◽  
Case Study Approach ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
Business Practitioners ◽  
The University ◽  
University Industry

This article outlines one way in which less research-intensive universities can contribute to entrepreneurship by examining the achievements of several Knowledge Transfer Partnerships (KTPs) in the University of Gloucestershire. The article adopts a qualitative case study approach: four case studies of KTPs at, respectively, Beacons Business Interiors, Dowty Propellers, Energist UK and Muddy Boots Software (all of which have operating bases within 40 miles of the University) are researched and analysed. The findings reveal that these four KTPs delivered various benefits for the companies, the University and the staff directly involved in the projects, and more generally that the KTPs successfully met their initial aims. The authors identify a number of challenges involved in maximizinig the benefits of KTP activity in the University and suggest how KTPs can actively foster the development of an entrepreneurial university. This article is an accessible review of KTP initiatives in the University of Gloucestershire and as such will interest academics and business practitioners who are looking to develop university–industry partnerships. It also offers reflections on how a programme of KTPs can advance entrepreneurial development and support Growth Hub initiatives.

scholarly journals Economic Storytelling, Tourism Improvement Districts and University Partnerships

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Mark R. Testa ◽  
Lori J. Sipe
Keyword(s):  
Student Experiences ◽  
State University ◽  
Business Improvement Districts ◽  
University Partnerships ◽  
Tourism Marketing ◽  
Industry Partnerships ◽  
History Of ◽  
San Diego State University ◽  
The University ◽  
University Industry

Business Improvement Districts (BID), sometimes called Tourism Marketing Districts (TMD) are innovative initiatives that levy assessments as a means of funding what might be traditionally paid for by local government. A recent increase in such organizations internationally may provide universities with an opportunity for a variety of positive benefits including revenue, research, educational improvement, and impactful student experiences. Universities and colleges have a history of partnering with industry, often referred to as University-Industry Partnerships (UIC), as a means for confronting ever-increasing economic challenges and shrinking budgets. Indeed, as funding for public universities continues to decrease, schools and departments within the university are forced to seek alternative revenue streams. The goal of the current study is to provide a conceptual model for understanding and engaging in economic storytelling as the research arm of such organizations. A case study of the partnership between San Diego State University and San Diego’s Tourism Marketing District is assessed against a model of best practices in partnering. Results highlight the value of the model and provide direction for other University-Industry Partnerships (UIC).

scholarly journals Joining Voices: University – Industry Partnerships in the Humanities

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 15
Author(s):  
Lynne Siemens ◽  
The INKE Research Group
Keyword(s):  
Time Travel ◽  
Staff Time ◽  
Grant Application ◽  
Grant Funding ◽  
New Knowledge ◽  
Industry Partnerships ◽  
Application Industry ◽  
The University ◽  
University Industry

University-industry partnerships are common in the Sciences, but less so in the Humanities. As a result, there is little understanding of how they work in the Humanities. Using the Implementing New Knowledge Environments: Networked Open Social Scholarship (INKE:NOSS) initiative as a case study, this paper contributes to this discussion by examining the nature of the university-industry partnership with libraries and academic-adjacent organizations, and associated benefits, challenges, measures of success, and outcomes. Interviews were conducted with the collaboration’s industry partners. After several years of collaboration on the development of a grant application, industry partners have found the experience of working with academics to be a positive one overall. Industry partners are contributing primarily in-kind resources in the form of staff time, travel to meetings, and reading and commenting on documents. They have also been able to realize benefits while negotiating the challenges. Using qualitative standards, measures of success and desired outcomes are being articulated. This work developing the partnership should stand the larger INKE:NOSS team in good stead if they are successful with securing grant funding.

scholarly journals Building and Supporting Humanities-Based University–industry Partnerships: View from the Academics

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynne Siemens
Keyword(s):  
Policy Intervention ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Not For Profit ◽  
Industry Collaboration ◽  
New Knowledge ◽  
Industry Partnerships ◽  
The Many ◽  
The University ◽  
University Industry

University–industry partnerships are rare on the humanities side of campus in contrast to the sciences. As a result, little is known about these partnerships, which tend to be with libraries and other not-for-profit organizations. Using the Implementing New Knowledge Environments: Network Open Social Scholarship (INKE:NOSS) as a case study, this research examines a humanities-based university–industry partnership from the academics’ perspective. It explores the nature of the collaboration, associated benefits and challenges, and measures of success and desired outcomes. Overall, building upon several years of working with the partners, the interviewed researchers found that the benefits of collaborating outweighed the challenges. The benefits included the potential to move research towards production-orientated results. Among the many challenges, there was some hesitation about the ability to achieve publications and presentations needed for tenure and promotion. The academics contributed students, and in-kind and cash resources from their own research funds and those of the university to the partnership. At this point, the measures of success and desirable outcomes have not been quantified and instead focus on policy intervention and movement towards open social scholarship. These understandings about the nature of such a university–industry collaboration should provide a good foundation if partnership is funded.

Working at the Crossroads: A Guide for Border Crossing

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
John Mckiernan-González
Keyword(s):  
American Studies ◽  
Collaborative Work ◽  
Border Crossing ◽  
Keynote Address ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Entry Points ◽  
Academic Labor ◽  
Boyle Heights ◽  
The University ◽  
The Impact

This article discusses the impact of George J. Sánchez’s keynote address “Working at the Crossroads” in making collaborative cross-border projects more academically legitimate in American studies and associated disciplines. The keynote and his ongoing administrative labor model the power of public collaborative work to shift research narratives. “Working at the Crossroads” demonstrated how historians can be involved—as historians—in a variety of social movements, and pointed to the ways these interactions can, and maybe should, shape research trajectories. It provided a key blueprint and key examples for doing historically informed Latina/o studies scholarship with people working outside the university. Judging by the success of Sánchez’s work with Boyle Heights and East LA, projects need to establish multiple entry points, reward participants at all levels, and connect people across generations.I then discuss how I sought to emulate George Sánchez’s proposals in my own work through partnering with labor organizations, developing biographical public art projects with students, and archiving social and cultural histories. His keynote address made a back-and-forth movement between home communities and academic labor seem easy and professionally rewarding as well as politically necessary, especially in public universities. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document