/ Journals / Foreign Economics & Management
Foreign Economics & Management
LiZengquan, Editor-in-Chief
ZhengChunrong, Vice Executive Editor-in-Chief
YinHuifang HeXiaogang LiuJianguo, Vice Editor-in-Chief
Editorial Board  |  Read more about this journal »
AboutAll IssuesAuthors GuidePeer ReviewSubscribeContact Us
Home  >  All Issues  >  2023  >  No.04  >  Article Details
Scientific and Technological Achievement Transformation: A Literature Review and Prospects
Li Xiaohua1, Li Jizhen2, Yang Ruoxin3
Full Article  |  PDF Article(1331.7 KB)
Foreign Economics & Management Vol. 45, Issue 04, pp. 119 - 136 (2023)  DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.fem.20221108.401
First published at:Apr 20, 2023
Summary
References
Summary

Through the scientific retrieval on Web of Science and CNKI, we search the high-impact journals and obtain 143 English documents and 191 Chinese documents. After careful reading of each literature, we propose a framework based on the participants and key features in the field of scientific and technological achievement transformation.

First, based on themes and theoretical perspectives current literature adopted, four research contents are proposed: (1) The university transformation and the underlying mechanisms. We focus on four parts: the establishment of entrepreneurial universities, the institutional arrangements of universities’ scientific and technological achievement transformation, the antecedents and forms of researchers’ engagement in technology commercialization, and the interaction between technology commercialization and science. (2) Analysis on scientific and technological achievement transformation on firm level. Specifically, we compare academic spin-offs and other firms, describing the technology productization and business model of academic spin-offs. (3) The impact of governments’ support on scientific and technological achievement transformation. (4) The transformation system of scientific and technological achievements from the perspective of “university-enterprise-government” interaction. Second, based on the existing literature, the key features of scientific and technological achievement transformation are proposed, namely, the diversity of objectives, the complexity of systems, and the extensibility of theories. The three features provide implications for future research to refine the management theory from the perspective of “conceptualization”. Furthermore, we propose context-driven suggestions for scientific and technological achievement transformation, and list four important directions: research based on emerging economic systems, Industry-University-Research collaboration research based on the bridging perspective, academic entrepreneurship research based on the demand perspective, and research based on emerging technology commercialization..

This paper constructs a context-driven framework for scientific and technological achievement transformation, which not only helps to discover the general laws of this field, but also promotes to strengthen the link between technology commercialization and management theory. It also helps to “build the academic system, theoretical system, and discourse system of China’s institutional theory”. In addition, the context-driven findings will be further fed back into practice and promote the systematic optimization of scientific and technological achievement transformation in practice.

Keywords
scientific and technological achievement transformation; literature review; context-driven; emerging economy
[1] Ding Xuechen, Liu Xielin. The Positive Effect of Innovation Ecosystem Strategy on Entrepreneurial Performance —An Empirical Study Based on Technological Spin-offs in CAS [J]. Management Review， 2021， 33(1)： 120-132.
[2] Guo Hui, Liu Hang. An analysis of the regulation effect of government Ｒ＆D funding on university innovation spillover [J]. Science Research Management， 2021， 42(9)： 184-192.
[3] Li Xiaohua, Li Jizhen, Gao Xudong. Third mission of the university: Transform from research university to entrepreneurial university [J]. Studies in Science of Science， 2020， 38(12)： 2131-2139.
[4] Li Xiaohua, Li Jizhen, Gao Xudong. Role Identity and Entrepreneurial Opportunity Development: Research of Technology Start-ups based on Grounded Theory [J]. Naikai Business Review， 2022， 25(3)： 73-84.
[5] Li Yixin, Zhao Wenhong, Guo Jüe, et al. The influence of decision－making logics on academic entrepreneurship [J]. Studies in Science of Science，2021， 39(4)： 703-712.
[6] Wang Haijun, Chen Jin, Feng Junzheng. Evolution of the IURU collaborative innovation of leading enterprises with modularized embedding: Theory construction and case study [J]. Science Research Management，2020， 41(5)： 47-59.
[7] Wang Xiaohong, Zhang Shaopeng, Zhang Ben. Innovative City Pilot Policy and the Knowledge Flow of Urban Industry-University-Research—Spatial Difference-In-Difference Analysis Based on Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomeration [J]. Studies in Science of Science，2021， 39(9)： 1671-1682.
[8] Zhou Wei, Lin Nan, Zhang Xi. Academic entrepreneurship: a literature review and prospects [J]. Science Research Management， 2022， 43(1)： 14-21.
[9] Colombo M G, Meoli M, Vismara S. Signaling in science-based IPOs: The combined effect of affiliation with prestigious universities, underwriters, and venture capitalists[J]. Journal of Business Venturing,2019, 34(1): 141-177.
[10] D'Este P, Llopis O, Rentocchini F, et al. The relationship between interdisciplinarity and distinct modes of university-industry interaction[J]. Research Policy,2019, 48(9): 103799.
[11] Fini R, Rasmussen E, Wiklund J, et al. Theories from the lab: How research on science commercialization can contribute to management studies[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2019, 56(5): 865-894.
[12] Fischer B B, Schaeffer P R, Vonortas N S. Evolution of university-industry collaboration in brazil from a technology upgrading perspective[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,2019, 145: 330-340.
[13] Hahn D, Minola T, Eddleston K A. How do scientists contribute to the performance of innovative start-ups? An imprinting perspective on open innovation[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2019, 56(5): 895-928.
[14] Hewitt-Dundas N, Gkypali A, Roper S. Does learning from prior collaboration help firms to overcome the ‘two-worlds’ paradox in university-business collaboration?[J]. Research Policy,2019, 48(5): 1310-1322.
[15] Iorio R, Labory S, Rentocchini F. The importance of pro-social behaviour for the breadth and depth of knowledge transfer activities: An analysis of Italian academic scientists[J]. Research Policy,2017, 46(2): 497-509.
[16] Kotha R, Crama P, Kim P H. Experience and signaling value in technology licensing contract payment structures[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2018, 61(4): 1307-1342.
[17] Kotha R, George G, Srikanth K. Bridging the mutual knowledge gap: Coordination and the commercialization of university science[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2013, 56(2): 498-524.
[18] Lehoux P, Daudelin G, Williams-Jones B, et al. How do business model and health technology design influence each other? Insights from a longitudinal case study of three academic spin-offs[J]. Research Policy,2014, 43(6): 1025-1038.
[19] Peifer J L, Johnson D R, Ecklund E H. The moral limits of the market: Science commercialization and religious traditions[J]. Journal of Business Ethics,2019, 157(1): 183-197.
[20] Perkmann M, McKelvey M, Phillips N. Protecting scientists from Gordon Gekko: How organizations use hybrid spaces to engage with multiple institutional logics[J]. Organization Science,2019, 30(2): 298-318.
[21] Perkmann M, Salandra R, Tartari V, et al. Academic engagement: A review of the literature 2011-2019[J]. Research Policy,2021, 50(1): 104114.
[22] Sohn E. How local industry R&D shapes academic research: Evidence from the agricultural biotechnology revolution[J]. Organization Science,2021, 32(3): 675-707.
[23] Tartari V, Perkmann M, Salter A. In good company: The influence of peers on industry engagement by academic scientists[J]. Research Policy,2014, 43(7): 1189-1203.
[24] Thompson T A, Purdy J M, Ventresca M J. How entrepreneurial ecosystems take form: Evidence from social impact initiatives in Seattle[J]. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal,2018, 12(1): 96-116.
[25] Zellmer-Bruhn M E, Forbes D P, Sapienza H J, et al. Lab, gig or enterprise? How scientist-inventors form nascent startup teams[J]. Journal of Business Venturing,2021, 36(1): 106074.
Cite this article
Li Xiaohua, Li Jizhen, Yang Ruoxin. Scientific and Technological Achievement Transformation: A Literature Review and Prospects[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2023, 45(4): 119-136. 
Export Citations as: For   
Previous: Integrating Global Elements: A Research on Consumers’ Attitudes toward Global Consumer Culture Positioning for Chinese Brands
Next: Does Facial Attractiveness Bring Internet Traffic? A Study on the Relationship between the Release of Visual Annual Reports and Stock Liquidity
ISSUE COVER
2023, Issue 04
RELATED ARTICLES
The Microfoundations of Organizational Capability: A Review and Prospects
Li Weiwen, Li Xiaotong, Chen Yantai, et al
Big Data Audit: Theoretical Framework, Research Progress, and Future Prospects
Xu Ronghua, Zhu Jing, Dai Xinyu
A Review of Value Creation in Digital Industry Innovation Ecosystems
Qiu Rui, Yu Peili, Wang Cengceng
Bootlegging: A Literature Review and Prospects
Liu Weipeng, Jia Jianfeng, Yang Fu
Behavioral Strategies of Entrepreneurial Reentry after Failure: A Literature Review and Prospects
Wei Yuan, Fu Hui, Xu Min, et al
Hybrid Entrepreneurship: Research Schemes, Theoretical Foundations, and Future Prospects
Chen Liping, Chen Ying, Wang Guan
The Growth of SRDI Enterprises: A Review and Prospects
Zeng Xianju, Zeng Kai, Ren Hui, et al
Corporate Digital Capability: A Review and Prospects
Hu Yuchen, Hu Yonghao, Li Jie
Data Valued Process: A Review and Prospects
Zhu Xiumei, Lin Xiaoyue, Wang Tiandong, et al
A Review and Prospects of Institutional Work Literatures
Li Lei, Li Qian
Journals  |   Articles  |   Submission  |   Subscribe  |   Contact us
Copyright 2024 © Department of Academic Journals, SUFE    No. 321 Guoding Rd, Shanghai, China    P.O: 200433