Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Nurture over nature: How do European universities support their collaboration with business?

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have been placed at the core of regional innovation ecosystems and encouraged to contribute to the social and economic development of the communities where they operate. In response to this change in the environment, HEIs have faced the need to adapt their organisational culture, practices and structures. In spite of the acknowledged relevance of university-business cooperation (UBC) as a source of HEI competitive advantage, and the recognition that appropriate interventions or supporting mechanisms can effectively foster UBC, there is still little systematic understanding of organizational mechanisms in the HEI management of UBC. In order to fill this gap, this paper identifies and evaluates the mechanisms that European HEIs are using to nurture industry collaboration at strategic and operational level and assess their relationship with seven UBC activities. With a sample of 2.157 HEI managers in 33 countries, the main results highlight the importance of the combination of support at both strategic and operational levels and the core role of the management commitment for all UBC activities. The paper concludes with the contribution to theory and the relevant implications for UBC managers and policy makers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Understood in this paper as synonym of university.

References

  • Aldridge, T. T., & Audretsch, D. (2011). The Bayh–Dole act and scientist entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1058–1067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambos, T. C., Mäkelä, K., Birkinshaw, J., & D’Este, P. (2008). When does university research get commercialised? Creating Ambidexterity in Research Institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1424–1447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arvanitis, S., Kubli, U., & Woerter, M. (2008). University–industry knowledge and technology transfer in Switzerland: What university scientists think about co-operation with private enterprises. Research Policy, 37(10), 1865–1883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bekkers, R., & Freitas, I. M. B. (2008). Analysing knowledge transfer channels between Universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter? Research Policy, 37(10), 1837–1853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., Fay, D., & Slade, C. P. (2013). Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: The state-of-the-art. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(1), 1–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busch, L., & Lacy, W. B. (1983). Science, agriculture, and the politics of research. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caniëls, M., & van den Bosch, H. (2011). The role of higher education institutions in building regional innovation systems. Papers in Regional Science, 90(2), 271–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayol, N. (2003). Objectives, agreements and matching in science–industry collaborations: Reassembling the pieces of the puzzle. Research Policy, 32(6), 887–908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. (1995). Places of inquiry: Research and advanced education in modern universities. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. New York, NY: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarysse, B., Tartari, V., & Salter, A. (2011). The impact of entrepreneurial capacity, experience and organizational support on academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1084–1093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Este, P., & Patel, P. (2007). University–industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry? Research Policy, 36(9), 1295–1313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2011). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davey, T., Baaken, T., Galán-Muros, V., & Meerman, A. (2011). Study on the cooperation between Higher Education Institutions and Public and Private Organisations in Europe. Brussels: European Commission, DG Education and Culture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Debackere, K., & Veugelers, R. (2005). The role of academic technology transfer organizational in improving industry science links. Research Policy, 34(3), 321–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dottore, A., Baaken, T., & Corkingdale, D. (2010). A partnering business model for technology transfer: The case of the Muenster University of Applied Sciences. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 12(2), 190–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enders, J. (2004). Higher education, internationalisation, and the nation-state: Recent developments and challenges to governance theory. Higher Education, 47(3), 361–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2001). The second academic revolution and the rise of entrepreneurial science. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 20(2), 18–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1997). Introduction: Universities in the global knowledge economy. In H. Etzkowitz & L. Leydesdorff (Eds.), Universities and the global knowledge economy: A triple helix of university–industry–government relations (pp. 1–8). London and Washington: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feller, I., & Feldman, M. (2010). The commercialization of academic patents: Black boxes, pipelines, and Rubik’s cubes. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 597–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., Santoni, S., & Sobrero, M. (2011). Complements or substitutes? The role of Universities and local context in supporting the creation of academic spin-offs. Research Policy, 40(8), 1113–1127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frey, B., & Neckermann, S. (2008). Academics appreciate awards—A new aspect of incentives in research. CESIFO Working Paper Series, 2531.

  • Friedman, J., & Silberman, J. (2003). University technology transfer: Do incentives, management, and location matter? Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1), 17–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geissler, M., Jahn, S., & Haefner, P. (2006). The entrepreneurial climate at universities: The impact of organisational factors. In D. Smallbone, J. Leitao, M. Raposo, & F. Welter (Eds.), The theory and practice of entrepreneurship—Frontiers in European entrepreneurship research. Cheltenham, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geuna, A., & Nesta, L. J. (2006). University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy, 35(6), 790–807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, S., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research contemporary societies. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goddard, J. B., & Chatterton, P. (1999). Regional development agencies and the knowledge economy: Harnessing the potential of universities. EPC Government and Policy, 17, 685–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Göktepe-Hulten, D., & Mahagaonkar, P. (2009). Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: In the expectation of money or reputation? Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(4), 401–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2011). 30 Years after Bayh–Dole: Assessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8), 1045–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grimpe, C., & Fier, H. (2010). Informal university technology transfer: A comparison between the United States and Germany. Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 637–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero, M., Cunningham, J. A., & Urbano, D. (2015). Economic impact of entrepreneurial universities’ activities: An exploratory study of the United Kingdom. Research Policy, 44(3), 748–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulbrandsen, M., & Slipersaeter, S. (2007). The third mission and the entrepreneurial university model. In A. Bonaccorsi & C. Daraio (Eds.), Universities and strategic knowledge creation—Specialization and performance in Europe (pp. 112–143). Cheltenham, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harryson, S. J. (2008). Entrepreneurship through relationships—Navigating from creativity to commercialization. R&D Management, 38(3), 290–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henrekson, M., & Rosenberg, N. (2001). Designing efficient institutions for science- based entrepreneurship: Lesson from the US and Sweden. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(3), 207–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, A. (2006). University–industry linkages and UK science and innovation policy. ESRC Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge. CBR Research Programme on Enterprise and Innovation, Working Paper 326.

  • Jacob, M., Lundqvist, M., & Hellsmark, H. (2003). Entrepreneurial transformations in the Swedish university system: the case of Chalmers university of Technology. Research Policy, 32(9), 1555–1568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jain, S., George, G., & Maltarich, M. (2009). Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity. Research Policy, 38(6), 922–935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, W. H. (2009). Intermediates in triple helix collaboration: The roles of 4th pillar organisations in public to private technology transfer. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 8(2–3), 142–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S. (2000). Scale-independent indicators and research evaluation. Science and Public Policy, 27(1), 23–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, A., & Tödtling, F. (2001). Science–industry interaction in the process of innovation: the importance of boundary-crossing between systems. Research Policy, 30(5), 791–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitagawa, F., & Lightowler, C. (2013). Knowledge exchange: A comparison of policies, strategies, and funding incentives in English and Scottish higher education. Research Evaluation, 22(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klofsten, M., & Jones-Evans, D. (2000). Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe—The case of Sweden and Ireland. Small Business Economics, 14(4), 299–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korff, N., Van der Sijde, P., Groenewegen, P., & Davey, T. (2014). Supporting university–industry linkages—A case study of the relationship between the organisational and individual levels. Industry and Higher Education, 28(4), 281–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruss, G., Aphane, M., Muller, L., & Manamela, A. (2011). Promoting higher education–industry partnerships and collaborations. South Africa: Research and Innovation Strategy Group, Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lach, S., & Schankerman, M. (2003). Incentives and invention in Universities. 9727. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.

  • Lam, A. (2011). What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: “Gold”, “ribbon” or “puzzle”? Research Policy, 40(10), 1354–1368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamichhane, S., & Sharma, T. N. (2013). University–industry relations: A thrust for transformation of knowledge and economic acceleration. Journal of Education and Research, 2, 59–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, A., & Siegel, D. (2005). Generating science-based growth: An econometric analysis of the impact of organizational incentives on university–industry technology transfer. The European Journal of Finance, 11(3), 169–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., Siegel, D., Wright, M., & Ensley, M. D. (2005). The creation of spin-off firms at public research institutions: Managerial and policy implications. Research Policy, 34(7), 981–993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loi, M., & Di Guardo, M. C. (2015). The third mission of universities: An investigation of the espoused values. Science and Public Policy,. doi:10.1093/scipol/scv012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubango, L. M., & Pouris, A. (2007). Industry work experience and inventive capacity of South African academic researchers. Technovation, 27(12), 788–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., Phan, P. H., & Balkin, D. B. (2004). Entrepreneurship from the ivory tower: Do incentive systems matter?—Universities role in regional innovation system. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 353–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathieu, M. (2003). An integrated approach to academic reinforcement systems. Higher Education Management and Policy, 15(3), 25–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer-Krahmer, F., & Schmoch, U. (1998). Science-based technologies: university–industry interactions in four fields. Research Policy, 27(8), 835–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitton, C., Adair, C. E., McKenzie, E., Patten, S. B., & Waye Perry, B. (2007). Knowledge transfer and exchange: Review and synthesis of the literature. The Milbank Quarterly, 85(4), 729–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D. C., & Sampat, B. N. (2006). Universities in national innovation systems. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muscio, A., & Pozzali, A. (2012). The effects of cognitive distance in university–industry collaborations: Some evidence from Italian universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(3), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, A. S., Rickne, A., & Bengtsson, L. (2010). Transfer of academic research: Uncovering the grey zone. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(6), 617–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2002). Benchmarking science–industry relationships, Paris. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/. Accessed 3 February, 2015.

  • Pajunen, K. (2008). The nature of organizational mechanisms. Organization Studies, 29(11), 1449–1468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Broström, A., D’Este, P., et al. (2013). Academic engagement and R&D commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy, 42(2), 423–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phan, P. H., & Siegel, D. S. (2006). The effectiveness of university technology transfer: Lessons learned from quantitative and qualitative research in the US and the UK. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 1–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plewa, C., Korff, N., Johnson, C., MacPherson, G., Baaken, T., & Rampersad, G. (2013). The evolution of university–industry linkages—A framework. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 30(1), 21–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plewa, C., Quester, P., & Baaken, T. (2006). Organisational culture differences and market orientation: an exploratory study of barriers to university–industry relationships. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 5(6), 373–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polt, W., Rammer, C., Gassler, H., Schibany, A., & Schartinger, D. (2001). Benchmarking industry–science relations: The role of framework conditions. Science and Public Policy, 28(4), 247–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponomariov, B. L. (2008). Effects of university characteristics on scientists’ interactions with the private sector: An exploratory assessment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(5), 485–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, E., Moen, Ø., & Gulbrandsen, M. (2006). Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge. Technovation, 26(4), 518–533.

  • Renault, C. S. (2006). Academic capitalism and university incentives for faculty entrepreneurship. Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 227–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roges, E. M. (2002). The nature of technology transfer. Science Communication, 23(3), 323–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossi, F., & Rosli, A. (2013). Indicators of university–industry knowledge transfer performance and university implications for Universities: evidence from the UK’s HE-BCI survey. Working Paper. Birkbeck College, London: university of London.

  • Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothaermel, F. T., & Thursby, M. (2005). University–incubator firm knowledge flows: Assessing tuniversityr impact on incubator firm performance. Research Policy, 34(3), 305–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santoro, M. D., & Chakrabarti, A. K. (2002). Firm size and technology centrality in industry–university interactions. Research Policy, 31(7), 1163–1180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santoro, M. D., & Gopalakrishnan, S. (2000). The institutionalization of knowledge transfer activities within industry–university collaborative ventures. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 17(3), 299–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Servos, J. W. (1980). The industrial relations of science chemical engineering at MIT, 1900–1939. Isis, 71(4), 531–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. A. (2004). Academic entrepreneurship: University spinoffs and wealth creation. Cheltenham, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., & Phan, P. H. (2005). Analyzing the effectiveness of university technology transfer: Implications for entrepreneurship education. Advances in the Study of Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Economic Growth, 16, 1–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Veugelers, R., & Wright, M. (2007a). Technology transfer offices and commercialization of university intellectual property: Performance and policy implications. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 640–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2003a). Commercial knowledge transfers from Universities to firms: Improving the effectiveness of university industry collaboration. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14(1), 111–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. (2004). Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: Qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 21(1), 115–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003b). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: An exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D. S., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2007b). The rise of entrepreneurial activity at Universities: Organizational and societal implications. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 489–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (1996). The emergence of a competitiveness research and development policy coalition and the commercialization of academic science and technology. Science, Technology and Human Values, 21(3), 303–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sporn, B. (2001). Building adaptive universities: Emerging organisational forms based on experiences of European and US Universities. Tertiary Education and Management, 7(2), 121–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ssebuwufu, J., Ludwick, T., & Béland, M. (2012). Strengthening university–industry linkages in Africa—A study on institutional capacities and gaps. Accra: Association of African Universities-Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, P. E. (2008). Science and the university: Challenges for future research. CESifo Economic Studies, 54(2), 313–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Social structure and organisation. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142–193). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, A. L. (1968). Constructing social theories. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace and World.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tartari, V., & Breschi, S. (2011). Set them free: Scientists’ evaluations of the benefits and costs of university–industry research collaboration. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(5), 1117–1147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teichler, U. (2008). Diversification? Trends and explanations of the shape and size of higher education. Higher Education, 56(3), 349–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, A., & Mota, L. (2012). A bibliometric portrait of the evolution, scientific roots and influence of the literature on university–industry links. Scientometrics, 93(3), 719–743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, G. N., Estabrooks, C. A., & Degner, L. F. (2006). Clarifying the concepts in knowledge transfer: A literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(6), 691–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thursby, J. G. A., Jensen, R. A., & Thursby, M. C. A. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major US Universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1), 59–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tornatsky, L. G., Waugaman, P. G., & O’Gray, D. (2002). Innovation U: New university roles in a knowledge economy. Research Triangle Park, NC: Southern Technology Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Sijde, P. (2012). Profiting from knowledge circulation: The gains from university–industry interaction. Industry and Higher Education, 26(1), 15–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Geenhuizen, M. (2010). Valorisation of knowledge: Preliminary results on valorisation paths and obstacles in bringing university knowledge to market. In: Proceedings of the eighteenth annual high technology small firms conference, university of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.

  • Van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Hessels, L. K. (2011). Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research Policy, 40(3), 463–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and Motivation. New York: Wiley.

  • Wilson, T. (2012). A review of business-university collaboration. London: Department for Business Innovation and Skills. UK Government https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32383/12-610-wilson-review-business-university-collaboration.pdf. Accessed 25 November, 2014.

  • Wissema, J. G. (2009). Towards the third generation university, managing the university in transition. Cheltenham, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yencken, J., & Ralston, L. (2005). Evaluation of incentives for R&D commercialisation of research in Australian Universities: A survey of selected Australian Universities. Australia: Department of Education, Science and Training.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The survey design and data collection for this study was funded by the European Commission DG Education and Culture, Public Tender (EAC/37/2009), but has not been involved in the data analysis or the paper writing.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Victoria Galán-Muros, Peter van der Sijde & Peter Groenewegen

  2. Science to Business Marketing Research Centre, Münster University of Applied Sciences, Correnstraße 25, 48149, Münster, Germany

    Victoria Galán-Muros & Thomas Baaken

Authors
  1. Victoria Galán-Muros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter van der Sijde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter Groenewegen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thomas Baaken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Victoria Galán-Muros.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Appendix: Results of the factor analysis of the UBC supporting mechanisms

Appendix: Results of the factor analysis of the UBC supporting mechanisms

1.1 Top management support (Cronbach α = .91)

  • A top-level management committed to UBC.

  • The presence of academics on company boards.

  • The presence of business people on the HEI board.

  • Board member or vice rector positions for UBC.

1.2 Communication (Cronbach α = .87)

  • A documented mission/vision embracing UBC.

  • The internal promotion of UBC.

  • The external promotion of UBC.

1.3 Incentives (Cronbach α = .85)

  • The dedication of resources (inc. funding). to support UBC.

  • The provision of incentives for academics to encourage UBC.

  • The inclusion of UBC as part of the assessment of work performance for academics.

1.4 Structures/offices (Cronbach α = .79)

  • Career offices within the HEI.

  • Internal agencies within the HEI dedicated to UBC.

  • Incubators for the development of new business.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Galán-Muros, V., van der Sijde, P., Groenewegen, P. et al. Nurture over nature: How do European universities support their collaboration with business?. J Technol Transf 42, 184–205 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9451-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9451-6

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation