Industry funding and university professors' research performance

By Magnus Gulbrandsen, Jens-Christian Smeby. 2005

813 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management of Technology and Innovation, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b363bf3de325572ba76ef633b7aac63266aaa5b0

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management of Technology and Innovation

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

The importance of pro-social behaviour for the breadth and depth of knowledge transfer activities: an analysis of Italian academic scientists (2017, background): “We also control for the amount of research funding that the academic scientist is able to attract because previous literature has shown that this funding can be an important determinant of the intensity of external engagement (Gulbrandsen and Smeby, 2005).”
Harnessing University Entrepreneurship for Economic Growth (2013, background): “…significant differences exist among spin-offs in information technologies, the life sciences, energy, software, and others that have implications for ease of commercialization and therefore, spin-off success (Bekkers et al., 2006; Golub, 2003; Gulbrandsen & Smeby, 2005; Lowe, 2002; Shane, 2004).”
Intensification of university–industry relationships and its impact on academic research (2007, background): “also found elsewhere (see Slaughter & Leslie, 1997; Gulbrandsen & Smeby, 2005 ).”
In good company: : The influence of peers on industry engagement by academic scientists (2012, background): “In many disciplines, large numbers of academic faculty routinely participate in collaborative engagement with industry via joint research, consulting, or contract research (D‟Este and Patel, 2007, Gulbrandsen and Smeby, 2005, Louis, Blumenthal, Gluck and Stoto, 1989).”
Breaking the Ivory Tower: Academic Entrepreneurship in the Life Sciences in UK and Germany (2011, background): “…for commercializing inventions (Czarnitzki et al., 2008), PRO budgets typically exhibit a high share of third-party funds, e.g., from industry, resulting in differences in scientists’ commercial activities compared to university-employed scientists (Gulbrandsen and Smeby, 2005; Edler et al., 2008).”
University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence (2006, background): “For instance, studies that will be discussed in the next section – i.e., Gulbrandsen and Smeby (2005) on Norway, and Ranga (2003) on Belgium – find some evidence of industrial funding of universities being positively associated with university patenting activity, although the direction of causatio”
The nexus between science and industry: evidence from faculty inventions (2012, background): “The overall finding is that successful research and patenting activities go together (van Looy et al. 2004; Gulbrandsen and Smedy 2005; Meyer 2006; Breschi et al. 2005, 2007, 2008; Calderini and Franzoni 2004; Czarnitzki et al. 2007).”
What drives the university use of technology transfer offices? Evidence from Italy (2010, background): “However, the benefits from university‐industry collaborations for businesses and universities are reciprocal: as well as supporting firms’ innovation activities, collaboration with industry has positive effects on academic research, improving the performance of researchers ( Guldbrandsen and Smeby 2”
University–industry partnerships for the provision of R&D services (2015, background): “Furthermore, working with businesses may improve the state of the art, andmay yield fresh ideas that lead to new basic research, improving researchers' performance (Guldbrandsen & Smeby, 2005).”
Impact of public and private research funding on scientific production: The case of nanotechnology (2012, background): “Gulbrandsen and Smeby (2005) find a positive correlation between private financing of Norwegian academics and the number of articles they publish.”