TY - JOUR
T1 - Innovation intermediaries and collaboration
T2 - knowledge–based practices and internal value creation
AU - De Silva, Muthu
AU - Howells, Jeremy
AU - Meyer, Martin
N1 - Funding Information:
The empirical base is a study of EU based RTOs that investigated how knowledge-based practices adopted by innovation intermediaries influence the generation of financial and non-financial value during their engagement in EU funded projects, undertaken in collaboration with businesses, universities, public research organisations and RTOs ( Andersen and Blanc, 2013 ). RTOs are a particular form of innovation intermediaries with origins around public ownership and the need to support the transfer of knowledge between science and industry. Hales (2001, p.4) has defined them as “organisations with significant core government funding which supply services to firms individually or collectively in support of scientific and technological innovation and which devote much of their capability to remaining integrated with the science base”. Most RTOs, such as the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, were created to facilitate the transfer of knowledge from the science base to firms and have an applied research focus ( van Lente et al., 2003 ). The majority of RTOs operate between a technical science base, on the one hand, and manufacturing industries, on the other; what they define as “hard intermediary” functions, such as technology testing. However, the functions of RTOs have broadened over time ( Miller, 2014 ) to include more soft forms, such as business service activities around networking and consultancy ( EARTO, 2017, 1 ). Research has highlighted that there is no single ‘ideal type’ RTO, and that each must be tailored to its innovation environment ( Miller, 2014 ). Thus, RTOs are a significant type of innovation intermediary and key actors within the wider European system of innovation. RTOs receive about 30% of their income from government, 30% from competitive public and private grants and the rest from industry as contract income ( Martínez-Vela, 2016 ). RTOs also coordinated a third of all EU research and innovation projects ( Arnold et al., 2010 ) and led some 258 Horizon 2020 projects in 2015 ( EARTO, 2017, 7 ). RTOs engage in a range of tasks in these EU projects, ranging from bringing parties together for collaboration to providing applied research to the consortium. A database of RTOs compiled by the Big Innovation Centre has identified that there are 122 European RTOs in total distributed across the seven EU member states with eight types of organisation ( Andersen and Blanc, 2013 ) was the empirical base for the survey. A mixed method approach to improve the validity of the overall study ( = 2.217, 0.818 > 0.05], sector of operation of RTOs [X = 1.546, 0.672 > 0.05], turnover of RTOs (i.e. categorised as small medium and large) [X = 3.308, 0.191 > 0.05], and number of employees (i.e. categorised as small medium and large) [X = 1.272, 0.529 > 0.05]. Tashakkori and Teddlie, 1998; Bisbe et al., 2007 ) was adopted with three main stages: (1) an initial qualitative data gathering stage; (2) an online, quantitative survey; and, (3) a follow-up, in-depth interview phase. The data gathered through initial interviews were checked against theoretical explanations to validate the conceptual framework and to develop the questionnaire survey, which was important since the paper addresses an underexplored topic ( Edmondson and Mcmanus, 2007; Autio et al., 2013 ). A total of 68 responses were received back, of which 59 were then usable after data cleaning, representing a response rate of 48.3%. The non-response bias test revealed that there is no significant difference between respondent RTOs and the full empirical base of 122 RTOs in terms of type of centre [X 2 (5, 179) p = 2 (3, 179) p = 2 (2, 179) p = 2 (2, 179) p = The third phase interviews generated context-specific and in-depth understanding of the causality derived from the survey data ( Downward and Mearman, 2007 ). Finally, a validation event with survey participants and a group of their collaborators, representing the ecosystem, was conducted to further verify the study findings. The adoption of this sequential mixed method design improved the validity and reliability of the overall study. 4.2
Funding Information:
Authors would like to acknowledge the financial assistance provided by the InnovateUK for this study. We would like to thank the editor, Prof Ben Martin, and three anonymous reviewers for immensely valuable feedback and advice in the preparation of this article. Our gratitude also goes to the Big Innovation Centre for supporting data collection. Also, we express our sincere thank to Dr. Zaheer Khan and Dr. George Chryssochoidis for providing us with extremely valuable guidance and insights to improve the paper. We are also thankful for the support of Santander Bank and Kellogg College, University of Oxford. Appendix A
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017
PY - 2018/2/1
Y1 - 2018/2/1
N2 - This paper analyses how knowledge-based practices adopted by innovation intermediaries enable them to generate value for themselves when collaborating with their clients. While the literature focuses on value creation for their client organisations, little is known about how innovation intermediaries create internal value even though this is essential for ensuring their long-term survival and sustaining their key facilitating role in the innovation system. This understudied issue is explored using empirical evidence from a sub-set of innovation intermediaries, Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs). The results indicate that by capitalising on existing knowledge vested in employees and collaborators as well as understanding and shaping the knowledge base of the innovation ecosystem, innovation intermediaries generate internal value from their involvement in collaborative innovation, which range from different financial to non-financial types of value. Implications for intermediaries, their collaborators and for policymakers are then discussed.
AB - This paper analyses how knowledge-based practices adopted by innovation intermediaries enable them to generate value for themselves when collaborating with their clients. While the literature focuses on value creation for their client organisations, little is known about how innovation intermediaries create internal value even though this is essential for ensuring their long-term survival and sustaining their key facilitating role in the innovation system. This understudied issue is explored using empirical evidence from a sub-set of innovation intermediaries, Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs). The results indicate that by capitalising on existing knowledge vested in employees and collaborators as well as understanding and shaping the knowledge base of the innovation ecosystem, innovation intermediaries generate internal value from their involvement in collaborative innovation, which range from different financial to non-financial types of value. Implications for intermediaries, their collaborators and for policymakers are then discussed.
KW - European union
KW - Innovation intermediaries
KW - Knowledge based practices
KW - Knowledge capitalization
KW - Research and technology organisations
KW - Value creation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85030842820&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.respol.2017.09.011
DO - 10.1016/j.respol.2017.09.011
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85030842820
SN - 0048-7333
VL - 47
SP - 70
EP - 87
JO - Research Policy
JF - Research Policy
IS - 1
ER -