Search results

The study aims to test the success of university-industry (U-I) collaboration in terms of innovation process efficiency. Then, this study explores the moderating role of a set of organizational routines in the U-I relationship, which can help in overcoming the issues undermining the collaboration success.

The study is based on an international Open Innovation (OI) survey. The survey investigated the items to build the main variables of the conceptual framework, measured through seven-point Likert scales. Steps to ensure the reliability and validity of the variables were conducted. Then, hypotheses were tested with an ordinary least squares regression.

Results show that the higher the collaboration intensity (depth) with universities, the higher the innovation process efficiency. Furthermore, organizational routines aimed at improving firms' assimilation absorptive capacity further strengthen the positive effects of intensive collaboration on innovation process efficiency.

Findings indicate that R&D managers should strive to build deep collaborations with universities to enhance process efficiency and invest in the quality of these relationships. Managers should create and maintain an internal environment that further enhances the positive effects of intensive collaboration on innovation process efficiency.

The OI literature has not reached a shared view on the positive contribution of universities toward industrial firms' innovation performance. The study adopts a process-efficiency view, rarely used by other OI studies usually focused on output indicators; this study unpacks, respectively, the role of the intensity of collaboration and the organizational routines, thus disclosing the benefit of U-I collaboration on innovation efficiency.

The authors analyse the impact of European funding research programmes on the topic of Ambient Assisted Living by considering its status, future context, and the implications for prospective knowledge management.

The authors apply our variation of classical Systematic Literature Review – Systematic Literature Network Analysis, which also includes bibliographic networks – to identify the readership cliques of the associated technological publication outputs.

The authors’ main conclusion suggests that there was an increase in scientific production on AAL fields just after the start of the two EU funding programmes (2008 and 2014). Three main research directions were identified: activity and vital sign recognition, human-computer interaction and technology acceptance.

To date, previous reviews on Ambient Assisted Livig focus on specific aspects, such as the study of technology. The present review provides a complete overview of Ambient Assisted living technology and it grasps how the European funds have impacted on the development of this technology.

The measure of companies' Innovation Performance is fundamental for enhancing the value and decision-making processes of firms. The purpose of this paper is to present a new measure of Innovation Performance, called Innovation Patent Index (IPI), which makes it possible to quantitatively summarize different aspects of firms' innovation.

In order to define the IPI, a secondary source, i.e. patent data, has been used. The five dimensions of IPI, i.e. efficiency, time, diversification, quality and internationalization have been defined both analyzing the literature and applying three different machine learning algorithms (regularized least squares, deep neural networks and decision trees), considering patent forward citations as a proxy of the innovation performance.

Results show that the IPI index is a very useful tool, simple to use and very promptly. In fact, it is possible to get important results without making time consuming analysis with primary sources. It is a tool that can be used by managers, businessmen, policymakers, organizations, patent experts and financiers to evaluate and plan future activities, to enhance the innovation capability, to find financing and to support and improve innovation.

Patent data are not widely used in all the sectors. Moreover, the pure number of forward citations is not the only forward looking indicator suggested by the literature.

The demand for a useable Innovation Performance tool, as well as the lack of tools able to grasp different aspects of the innovation, highlight the need to develop new instruments. In fact, although previous studies provide several measures of Innovation Performance, these are often difficult for managers to use, do not appreciate different aspects of the innovation and are not forward looking.