عنوان مقاله [English]
The present study aim to present a model of technological collaboration between university spin offs and ITC industries. Therefore, the authors of this study try to find the related factoes for proposing the model.
Althogh technological collaboration between university spin offs and industries is an important issue nowadays, there is little attention given to research on the factors shaping the model of collaboration. Thus, proposing this model was the main reason to carry out this study.
This study is related to Information Technology and Communication industries. After finding the factors, we proposed them to 30 experts and asked for their suggestions about the same.
Materials and Methods
The methodology of this study is the combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. First of all, we extracted the related factors by reviewing the literature and also by interviewing the experts. Then, we categorized the factors according to their similarities by thematic analysis. Then, we created a model of technological collaboration. We also used SPSS software and used Binomial test for analysis of data.
Discussion and Results
By reviewing the lelevant literature and interviewing with experts, we found 72 factors related to technological collaboration between university spin offs and industries. Then, we sorted these factors into 3 categories and proposed a model in this regards.
The proposed model of this study should be tested by future studies to be conformed or revised. Further, future studies can also expand the model of this study by proposing new factors which are effective on the technological collabortion between university spin offs and industries.
1-Al-Tabbaa, O., & Ankrah, S. (2016). Social capital to facilitate ‘engineered’ university–industry collaboration for technology transfer: A dynamic perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 104, 4, 1-15.
2-Ankrah, S., & Omar, A. T. (2015). Universities–industry collaboration: A systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31(3), 387-408.
3-Ansari, R. (2013). Technological collaboration: key concepts. Journal of growth centers, 30(8), 65-85. (In Persian)
4-Attride-Stirling, J. (2001), Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research 1(2), 385-405.
5-Azar,A., Zarei, B., Zarei, A. (2005). providing a method for simulation of communication between government agencies, the scientific journal - Journal of Daneshvar, Shahed University, 11(4), 60-73. (In Persian)
5-Boyatzis, R. E. (1998), Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development, Sage Publication, USA.
6-Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006), “Using thematic analysis in psychology”. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
7-Cheisa,V.,”R & D Strategy and Organization .Managing Technical change in Dynamic contexts”. Imperial College Press, 2001.
8-Danaeifard, H., Alvani,S.M., Azar, A. (2010).Quality research methodology in management. Tehran, Saffar Publication, Iran. (In Persian)
9-Daugherty, Patricia J (2006). Is collaboration paying off for firms? Business Horizons Publication, USA.
10-Dorner, M., Fryges, H., & Schopen, K. (2017). Wages in high-tech start-ups–Do academic spin-offs pay a wage premium?. Research Policy, 46(1), 1-18.
11-Ford,D. (1998). Developing your Technology Strategy, Long Range Planning, 21(5), 64-76.
12-George, G., Zahra, S. A., & Wood Jr, D. R. (2002). The effects of business–university alliances on innovative output and financial performance: a study of publicly traded biotechnology companies. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(6), 577-609.
13-Gilbert A. Lee, (1998). Negotiating Technology Acquisition: getting the tools you need to succeed, working paper, Nanyang Technology University Press, Singapore.
14-Giunta, A., Pericoli, F. M., & Pierucci, E. (2016). University–Industry collaboration in the biopharmaceuticals: the Italian case. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(8), 818-840.
15-Hekkert M.P, Negro S. (2009), Functions of innovation systems as a framework to understand sustainable technological change: Empirical evidence for earlier claims, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 76(10), 584-594.
16-Kenney, M., & Goe, W. R. (2004). The role of social embeddedness in professorial entrepreneurship: A comparison of electrical engineering and computer science at UC Berkeley and Stanford. Research Policy, 33(10), 691–707.
17-Lall, S, 2001, National strategies for technology adoption in the industrial sector: Lessons of recent experience in the developing region, University of Oxford, HR developing report, USA.
18-Lockett, A., Wright, M. & Franklin, S., 2003, Technology Transfer and Universities’ Spinout strategies. Small Business Economics, 20(8), 185-200.
19-Maietta, O. W. (2015). Determinants of university–firm R&D collaboration and its impact on innovation: A perspective from a low-tech industry. Research Policy, 44(7), 1341-1359.
20-Mueller,C.& Herstatt,C. (2000). Interfirm cooperation :a Brief overview of current Theoretical Findings and Issues for Future Research, Int.J.Human Resource Development and Management, 4(1), 65-78.
21-O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2007). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. Universities. Research Policy, 34(4), 994–1009.
22-Powers, J., & McDougall, P. (2005). University start-up formation and technology licensing with firms that go public: A resource based view of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(3), 291-311.
24-Tidd, J., Bessant. J. & H, Pavitt, K., (1996). Innovation Management: Integration technological and Market Approach. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
25-Wirsich, A., Kock, A., Strumann, C., & Schultz, C. (2016). Effects of University–Industry Collaboration on Technological Newness of Firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(6), 708-725.