Sigvald Harryson, Sandra Kliknaite and Max von Zedtwitz
The purpose of this paper is to assess how technology‐based university research drives innovation in Europe and China.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to assess how technology‐based university research drives innovation in Europe and China.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper draws on extensive theoretical research and literature reviews, and presents a framework based on theories on networking, knowledge creation and innovation. It then introduces three European cases to illustrate practical applications of the framework, and also links the findings to three Chinese cases to make comparative observations as well as recommendations related to Triple Helix concepts and their implications in the China context. It addresses the issue of how learning from universities can enhance company flexibility and performance in innovation, and outlines three different models of collaboration.
Findings
The framework and empirical research suggests that weak ties are useful for inspiration in exploration, but that strong industry‐university (I‐U) ties are required to support exploitation. This finding applies both to Europe and China in the industries covered.
Originality/value
This paper provides a new theoretical rationale for I‐U learning alliances as a natural way out from the managerial problem of trying to perform both exploration and exploitation within the same company boundaries. Through the theoretical framework, the academic science domain becomes a logical partner to handle the full phase of exploration and support the process of exploitation. The presented European cases of Bang & Olufsen, Combibloc and Porsche offer new insights into how to perform this act in practice, while the three China‐related cases allow us to cross analyse empirical findings and draw initial conclusions with policy implications for China.
Details
Keywords
It is all too easy in the hectic world of business to get too involved with the day‐to‐ day managing of processes and events. When this happens it is difficult tosee the wood for…
Abstract
It is all too easy in the hectic world of business to get too involved with the day‐to‐ day managing of processes and events. When this happens it is difficult to see the wood for the trees and the automatic pilot syndrome takes over. This does not suggest that you do not know what you are doing ‐ on the contrary you are probably as switched on to whatever activity you are managing as anyone could be. What you could be missing, however, is the explanation as to why you are doing it. If this sounds familiar to you, what might be needed is a detached period from your work. By this I mean stay on the high ground for a while so you can get an overview of what you are doing and, more importantly, why you are doing it. How many managers, I wonder, get the opportunity to question what they are doing? If you allow yourself to slip into complacency then you and your organization will soon lose competitive advantage.
It is all too easy in the hectic world of business to get too involved with the day‐to‐day managing of processes and events. When this happens it is difficult to see the wood for…
Abstract
It is all too easy in the hectic world of business to get too involved with the day‐to‐day managing of processes and events. When this happens it is difficult to see the wood for the trees and the automatic pilot syndrome takes over. This does not suggest that you do not know what you are doing ‐ on the contrary you are probably as switched on to whatever activity you are managing as anyone could be. What you could be missing, however, is the explanation as to why you are doing it. If this sounds familiar to you, what might be needed is a detached period from your work. By this I mean stay on the high ground for a while so you can get an overview of what you are doing and, more importantly, why you are doing it. How many managers, I wonder, get the opportunity to question what they are doing? If you allow yourself to slip into complacency then you and your organization will soon lose competitive advantage.
It is widely accepted that improvements in the management of employees can contribute to the competitive advantage of companies. Indeed, human resource management (HRM) holds that…
Abstract
It is widely accepted that improvements in the management of employees can contribute to the competitive advantage of companies. Indeed, human resource management (HRM) holds that the success of business strategy hinges on the development of a more strategic approach to the management of labour. Training is an element which is central to any assessment of the effectiveness of HRM strategies, and it is linked to HRM in three major ways: (1) Companies become dependent on the external labour market for their skills supply if they neglect it. (2) It creates an incentive to develop complementary aspects of HRM in order to protect the company’s investment. (3)Training has a symbolic value in so far as it demonstrates to employees the value the company places on them and can thus contribute to motivation.