, 1
10570 
8594In today’s knowledge-driven economy era, when the open innovation has become the main paradigm, " Industry-University-Research Institute”（IUR）collaborations are expected to promote the production, transfer and application of science and technology（S&T）knowledge. Enhancing IUR collaborations has been deemed as a key strategy and approach for improving China’s innovative capability in several important released government documents. In this context, academic teams, as an important organization creating knowledge in the national innovation systems, are encouraged to jump into IUR collaborations to improve the innovation performance of enterprises and promote economic development. This raises an interesting and important topic: what impact do IUR collaborations have on the academic performance of academic teams? However, this issue is still subject to considerable controversy in academia. Moreover, compared to abundant studies that routinely investigate how the knowledge transfers from academic institutions to industry sectors and its effects on firms’ innovation performance, few studies have devoted attentions on what influence mechanisms and pathways between IUR collaborations and the academic performance of academic teams and thus leave a research gap.In this study, we take the academic teams that participate in IUR collaborations as the research sample, and adopt some related theories and previous studies, as well as practical IUR collaboration cases in China, as the theoretical and practical basis to sort out the logical relationships among IUR collaborations, research and development（R&D）behavior, and the academic performance of academic teams, which contributes to developing hypotheses and constructing a theoretical model. Furthermore, the questionnaire scale is developed to capture the data of IUR collaborations, R&D behavior and the academic performance of academic teams. After that, the multiple hierarchical regression analysis is employed to verify the hypotheses and the theoretical model.In this manner, the influence mechanism that IUR collaborations exert on the academic performance of academic teams is revealed, and we find that there are two influence paths that IUR collaborations affect the academic performance of academic teams, namely, IUR collaborations-basic research behavior-academic performance and IUR collaborations-technological development behavior-academic performance. More specifically, one path: IUR collaborations have an inverted U-shaped effect on the basic research behavior, and then the basic research behavior further has a linear and positive effect on the academic performance of academic teams, therefore resulting in an inverted U-shaped relationship between IUR collaborations and the academic performance of academic teams; the other path: IUR collaborations have a linear and positive effect on the technological development behavior, and then the technological development behavior has an inverted U-shaped effect on the academic performance of academic teams, therefore leading to an inverted U-shaped relationship between IUR collaborations and the academic performance of academic teams.This paper contributes to extant literature in the following ways: First, in sharp contrast to current studies that conventionally implement a brief analysis of the relationships between IUR collaborations-organizational performance, our study attempts to open the " black box” on the influence path between IUR collaborations and the academic performance of academic teams by making a deeper investigation on the influencing relationships among IUR collaborations, R&D behavior and academic performance. Thus, our study fills in the research gap in existing literature that rarely devotes to this research topic so far. Second, compared with current studies that mainly focus on how corporations’ performance is influenced by their being involved in IUR collaborations, this paper attempts to reveal what impact that IUR collaborations exert on the academic performance of academic organizations. Thus, our study enriches the empirical studies on IUR collaborations from the perspective of academic organizations rather than economic organizations. Third, this study explores how IUR collaborations affect the academic performance of academic teams and gets some important research findings, which may present some practical inspirations for academic teams to effectively manage the collaborative relationships with industries for achieving the best for the academic performance.
/ Journals / Foreign Economics & Management
Foreign Economics & Management
LiZengquan, Editor-in-Chief
ZhengChunrong, Vice Executive Editor-in-Chief
YinHuifang HeXiaogang LiuJianguo, Vice Editor-in-Chief
A Study on the Influence Path between IUR Collaborations and the Academic Performance of Academic Teams
Foreign Economics & Management Vol. 40, Issue 12, pp. 71 - 83 (2018) DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.fem.2018.12.005
Summary
References
Summary
[1] Cheng Qiang. A study on the impact of Enterprise-University-Institude collaboration heterogeneity on industry collaboration performance [D]. Guangzhou: South China University of Technology, 2015.
[2] Deng Yingxiang, Zhu Guilong. Researching on measuring the performance resulted from Industry–University–Research Institute collaborations [J]. Science and Technology Management Research, 2009,29(11B):468-470.
[3] Jin Furong, Luo Shougui. Researching on the performance evaluation index system of Industry-University-Research Institute collaboration [J]. Science Management Research, 2009, 27(3):43-46.
[4] Li Hao. A study on the network knowledge management framework and research progress from the social capital perspective [J]. Management World, 2012, (3):158-169.
[5] Lin Chunpei. The effects of external innovation networks of enterprises on incremental and radical innovation—an empirical study based on innovation-oriented enterprises in Guandong province [D]. Guangzhou: South China University of Technology, 2012.
[6] Lu Yanqiu，Ye Yingping. Impact of network routines on the innovation performance in industry—university— institute innovation[J]. Science Research Management, 2017, 38(3):11-17.
[7] Lv Tie, Hejun. Basic research and cutting-edge technology research should be strengthened in the post-high-speed railway era [J]. China Development Observation, 2016, (13):35-38.
[8] Ma Yingying. A study on the influence factors of university—industry collaborative performance of research team [D]. Guangzhou: South China University of Technology, 2011.
[9] Qi Wei, Chen Xiaojian, ZhangYan, et al. A study on the evaluation method of academic performance of China’s research university based on TOPSIS [J]. China Higher Education Research, 2010, (1):15-19.
[10] WEN Zhonglin, YE Baojuan. Analyses of mediating effects: The development of methods and models [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014, 22(5):731-745.
[11] Wu Minglong. SPSS statistical application practice: questionnaire analysis and application statistics[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2003.
[12] Zhang Yi. The Impact of Industry–University–Research Institute Collaboration Network on the Academic Performance of Academic Teams [D]. Guangzhou: South China University of Technology, 2017.
[13] Zhang Yi，Chen Kaihua，Zhu Guilong. The characteristics and the influences of industry－university－research institure collaborations of Chinese Academy of Sciences [J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2016, 34(3):404-417.
[14] Aguiar-Díaz I, Díaz-Díaz N L, Ballesteros-Rodríguez J L, et al. University–industry relations and research group production: Is there a bidirectional relationship?[J]. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2015, 25(4): 611-632.
[15] Arza V. Channels, benefits and risks of public—private interactions for knowledge transfer: Conceptual framework inspired by Latin America[J]. Science and Public Policy, 2010, 37(7): 473-484.
[16] Baron R M, Kenny D A. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 51(6): 1173-1182.
[17] Capaldo A. Network structure and innovation: The leveraging of a dual network as a distinctive relational capability[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2007, 28(6): 585-608.
[18] Chen K H, Zhang Y, Zhu G L, et al. Do research institutes benefit from their network positions in research collaboration networks with industries or/and universities?[J]. Technovation, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2017.10.005.
[19] D’Este P, Tang P, Mahdi S, et al. The pursuit of academic excellence and business engagement: Is it irreconcilable?[J]. Scientometrics, 2013, 95(2): 481-502.
[20] Fan X, Yang X W, Chen L M. Diversified resources and academic influence: Patterns of university–industry collaboration in Chinese research-oriented universities[J]. Scientometrics, 2015, 104(2): 489-509.
[21] Freitas I M B, Marques R A, de Paula e Silva E M. University–industry collaboration and innovation in emergent and mature industries in new industrialized countries[J]. Research Policy, 2013, 42(2): 443-453.
[22] Geiger S W, Makri M. Exploration and exploitation innovation processes: The role of organizational slack in R & D intensive firms[J]. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 2006, 17(1): 97-108.
[23] George G, Zahra S A, Wood D R Jr. The effects of business-university alliances on innovative output and financial performance: A study of publicly traded biotechnology companies[J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2002, 17(6): 577-609.
[24] Giuliani E, Morrison A, Pietrobelli C, et al. Who are the researchers that are collaborating with industry? An analysis of the wine sectors in Chile, South Africa and Italy[J]. Research Policy, 2010, 39(6): 748-761.
[25] Gonzalez-Brambila C N, Veloso F M, Krackhardt D. The impact of network embeddedness on research output[J]. Research Policy, 2013, 42(9): 1555-1567.
[26] Granovetter M S. The strength of weak ties[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 1973, 78(6): 1360-1380.
[27] Kafouros M, Wang C Q, Piperopoulos P, et al. Academic collaborations and firm innovation performance in China: The role of region-specific institutions[J]. Research Policy, 2015, 44(3): 803-817.
[28] Levin D Z, Cross R. The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer[J]. Management Science, 2004, 50(11): 1477-1490.
[29] Mathews J A, Hu M C. Enhancing the role of universities in building national innovative capacity in Asia: The case of Taiwan[J]. World Development, 2007, 35(6): 1005-1020.
[30] Perkmann M, Walsh K. The two faces of collaboration: Impacts of university-industry relations on public research[J]. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2009, 18(6): 1033-1065.
[31] Sidhu J S, Commandeur H R, Volberda H W. The multifaceted nature of exploration and exploitation: Value of supply, demand, and spatial search for innovation[J]. Organization Science, 2007, 18(1): 20-38.
[32] Welsh R, Glenna L, Lacy W, et al. Close enough but not too far: Assessing the effects of university-industry research relationships and the rise of academic capitalism[J]. Research Policy, 2008, 37(10): 1854-1864.
[33] Zhang Y, Chen K H, Zhu G L, et al. Inter-organizational scientific collaborations and policy effects: An ego-network evolutionary perspective of the Chinese Academy of Sciences[J]. Scientometrics, 2016, 108(3): 1383-1415.
[34] Zhao X S, Lynch J G, Chen Q M. Reconsidering baron and kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2010, 37(2): 197-206.
Cite this article
Zhang Yi, Long Minglian, Zhu Guilong. A Study on the Influence Path between IUR Collaborations and the Academic Performance of Academic Teams[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2018, 40(12): 71-83.
Export Citations as:
For
ISSUE COVER
RELATED ARTICLES
