Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A conceptual framework for studying science research careers

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

Abstract

The emergence of open science and new data practices is changing the way research is done. Opportunities to access data through purpose built platforms and repositories, combined with emerging data and meta-data curation practices are expanding data availability in many fields. This paper presents a conceptual framework for studying scientific research careers, motivated by opportunities to link empirical datasets to construct new analyses that address remaining and emerging knowledge gaps. The research career conceptual framework (RCCF) emerges from a review of relevant theories and empirical findings regarding research careers. The paper reviews existing models and develops a typology of research careers. It also compiles a list of variables drawn from the literature on research careers. Two preliminary demonstrations of linking datasets to address empirical questions are outlined. The final discussion advocates an approach to emerging data opportunities that combines theories and models with empirical research questions as being superior to an approach that produces ad hoc explanations on the basis of ‘data fishing’ exercises.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The US National Science Foundation conducts nowadays four different surveys tracing careers of doctorate graduates: The Survey of Doctorate Recipients, the Survey of Earned Doctorates, the Early career doctorates and the Survey of Postdocs at Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (NSF: https://www.nsf.gov).

  2. Information regarding the RISIS infrastructure is available at: http://risis.eu/. The RISIS dataset portal may be accessed at: http://datasets.risis.eu/.

  3. Information regarding the UNESCO-OECD-EUROSTAT CDH project may be found at: http://www.oecd.org/innovation/inno/oecdunescoinstituteforstatisticseurostatcareersofdoctorateholderscdhproject.htm.

  4. POCARIM was a 7th Framework Programme project of the European Commission. It focused on mapping the population, careers, mobilities and impacts of advanced research degree graduates in the social sciences and humanities. More information may be found at: http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/101868_en.html.

  5. Of course, there are also models or maps of career stages that are implicit to much of the empirical work on research careers, usually based on sequences of jobs and promotions.

  6. This is similar to Bourdieu’s conception of the ‘stakes of the game’ (Bourdieu 1975) that structure scientific fields.

  7. http://www.elixir-europe.org.

  8. An example of ‘aggregation’ of two RISIS datasets is provided by Lepori et al. (2015) who link ETER and EUPRO (Database on European Framework Programmes) to address the link between the characteristics of higher education institutions and their participation in European Framework Programmes.

  9. Developing a new model of career stages and defining these could also be facilitated by the RCCF, whether this proceeds from a conceptual or an empirical starting point.

  10. See for example http://www.vitae.ac.uk.

  11. The degree to which mixed and hybrid research careers are prevalent in any national research system is itself an empirical question that requires attention.

  12. Of course, the RCCF does not try to prescribe a rational choice model of maximizing or satisficing on the decision-frame calculation (though this may be a relevant heuristic in some cases). It is perfectly possible that career defining choices are made without foregrounding the possible benefits and costs, or even without particularly well-informed consideration. Some careers ‘choices’ can also be colloquially described as ‘pushing on the only open door’.

References

  • Ackers, L., & Gill, B. (2008). Moving people and knowledge. Scientific mobility in an enlarging European Union. Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackers, L., & POCARIM Researchers. (2015). POCARIM final report. University of Salford, UK. Retrieved: http://usir.salford.ac.uk/34678/1/POCARIM%20D12%20FINAL%20REPORT.pdf. Last Accessed September 20, 2017.

  • Ambrasat, J., & Tesch, J. (2017). Structured Diversity - The changing landscape of doctoral training in Germany after the introduction of structured doctoral programs. Research Evaluation. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvx024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, M. B., Khapova, S. N., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2005). Career success in a boundaryless career world. Journal of Organizational Behavior,26(2), 177–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, M. B., & Rousseau, D. M. (1996). The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asknes, D. W., Rostard, K., Piro, F. N., & Sivertsen, G. (2013). Are mobile researchers more productive and cited than non-mobile researchers? A large-scale study of Norwegian scientists. Research Evaluation,22, 215–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auriol, L., Misu, L., & Freeman, R. A. (2013). Careers of doctorate holders: Analysis of labour market and mobility indicators. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2013/04. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5k43nxgs289w-en.

  • Balsmeier, B., & Pellens, M. (2014). Who makes, who breaks: Which scientists stay in academe? Economics Letters,122(2), 229–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2013.11.033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baruch, Y., & Hall, D. T. (2004). The academic career: A model for future careers in other sectors? Journal of Vocational Behavior,64(2), 241–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitz, J., Feldman, M., Feller, I., & Burton, R. (2001). Organizational structure as a determinant of academic patent and licensing behavior: An exploratory study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, and Pennsylvania State Universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer,26(1/2), 21–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernela, B. (2016). Géographie des carrières universitaires et construction des collaborations scientiques: une étude de cas en mathématiques. Géographie, Economie, Société,18, 235–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, G., & Stephan, P. E. (2010). The Economics of University Science and the Role of Foreign Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Scholars. American Universities in a Global Market (August): 12961.

  • Boardman, C. (2009). Government centrality to university–industry interactions: University research centers and the industry involvement of academic researchers. Research Policy,38, 1505–1516.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boardman, C., & Bozeman, B. (2007). role strain in university research centers. The Journal of Higher Education,78(4), 430–463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boardman, C., & Gray, D. (2010). The new science and engineering management: Cooperative research centers as government policies, industry strategies, and organizations. Journal of Technology Transfer,25, 445–459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Børing, P., Flanagan, K., Gagliardi, D., Kaloudis, A., & Karakasidou, A. (2015). International mobility: Findings from a survey of researchers in the EU. Science and Public Policy,42, 811–826.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulton, G. (2011). Harvesting talent: Strengthening research careers in Europe. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences,13, 3–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1975). The specificity of the scientific field and the social conditions of the progress of reason. Social Science Information,14(6), 19–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Boardman, C. (2004). The NSF engineering research centers and the university–industry research revolution: A brief history featuring an interview with Erich Bloch. Journal of Technology Transfer,29, 365–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Boardman, C. (2013). Academic faculty in university research centers: Neither capitalism’s slaves nor teaching fugitives. The Journal of Higher Education,84(1), 88–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Boardman, C. (2014). Research Collaboration and Team Science. A state of the art and review agenda. Springer Briefs in Entrepreneurship and Innovation. International Publishing.

  • Bozeman, B., & Bretschneider, S. (1994). The “Publicness Puzzle” in organization theory: A test of alternative explanations of differences between public and private organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,4(2), 197–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Corley, E. (2004). Scientists’ collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy,33(4), 599–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Crow, M. (1990). The environments of U.S. R&D laboratories: Political and market influences. Policy Sciences,23, 25–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., Dietz, J. S., & Gaughan, M. (2001). Scientific and technical human capital: An alternative model for research evaluation. International Journal of Technology Management,22(7/8), 716–740.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2007). Impacts of grants and contracts on academic researchers’ interactions with industry. Research Policy,36, 694–707.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2011). Job satisfaction among university faculty: Individual, work, and institutional determinants. The Journal of Higher Education,82(2), 154–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Ponomariov, B. (2009). Sector switching from a business to a government job: Fast-track career or fast track to nowhere? Public Administration Review,69, 77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Rogers, J. D. (2002). A churn model of scientific knowledge value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective. Research Policy,31(5), 769–794.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cañibano, C., D’Este, P., Otamendi, J., & Woolley, R. (2016). Scientific career phases and the mobility of European researchers. CRIEF Seminar Series, Université de Poitiers May 26th.

  • Cañibano, C., Fox, M. F., & Otamendi, J. (2015). Gender and patterns of temporary mobility among researchers. Science and Public Policy,43(3), 320–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cañibano, C., Vértesy, D., & Vezzulli, A. (2017). An inquiry into the return mobility of scientific researchers in Europe. EUR. https://doi.org/10.2760/54633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cañibano, C., & Woolley, R. (2015). Towards a socio-economics of the brain drain and distributed human capital. International Migration,53(1), 115–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coberly, B. M., & Gray, D. O. (2010). Cooperative research centers and faculty satisfaction: A multi-level predictive analysis. Journal of Technology Transfer,35(5), 547–565.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., Florida, R., Randazzese, L., & Walsh, J. (1998). Industry and the academy: Uneasy partners in the cause of technological advance. In R. Roll (Ed.), The future of the research university (pp. 171–200). Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Consoli, D., & Mina, A. (2009). An evolutionary perspective on health innovation systems. Journal of Evolutionary Economics,19(2), 297–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crow, M. M., & Bozeman, Barry. (1987). A new typology for R&D laboratories: Implications for policy analysis. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management,6(3), 328–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dany, F., Louvel, S., & Valette, A. (2011). Academic careers: The limits of the ‘Boundaryless Approach’ and the power of promotion scripts. Human Relations,64(7), 971–996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, P., & David, P. A. (1994). Towards a new economics of science. Research Policy,23, 487–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietz, J. S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). Academic careers, patents, and productivity: Industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy,34(3), 349–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edler, J., Fier, H., & Grimpe, C. (2011). International scientist mobility and the locus of technology transfer. Research Policy,40(6), 791–805.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enders, J., & Kaulisch, M. (2006). The binding and unbinding of academic careers. In U. Teichler (Ed.), The formative years of scholars. WennerGren International Series (Vol. 83, pp. 85–96). London: Portland Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ESF. n.d. Developing research careers in and beyond Europe : Enabling—Observing—Guiding and Going Global. Retrived http://archives.esf.org/uploads/media/mof_research_careers.pdf. Last Accessed October 25th, 2017.

  • 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, 109–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission, (2011a). “Open Data: An Engine for Innovation, Growth and Transparent Governance.” Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions COM(2011) 882 final. http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0882:FIN:EN:PDF. Last Accessed October 25th, 2017

  • European Commission. (2011b). Towards a European framework for research careers. Directorate General for Research &. Innovation, Brussels, July 21st. Retrieved http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess.

  • Fernández-Zubieta, A., Geuna, A., & Lawson, C. (2015). What do we know of the mobility of research scientists and impact on scientific production. In A. Guena (Ed.), Global mobility of research scientists (pp. 1–33). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernández-Zubieta, A., Geuna, A., & Lawson, C. (2016). Productivity pay-offs from academic mobility: Should I stay or should I go? Industrial and Corporate Change,25(1), 95–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzenberger, B., & Schulze, U. (2013). Up or out: Research incentives and career prospects of postdocs in Germany. German Economic Review,15(2), 287–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M. F., & Stephan, P. E. (2001). Careers of young scientists: Preferences, prospects and realities by gender and field. Social Studies of Science,31, 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franzoni, C., Scellato, G., & Stephan, P. (2012). Foreign-born scientists: Mobility patterns for 16 countries. Nature Biotechnology,30(12), 1250–1253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franzoni, C., Scellato, G., & Stephan, P. (2014). The Mover’s advantage: The superior performance of migrant scientists. Economics Letters,122(1), 879–893.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrett-Jones, S., Turpin, T., & Diment, K. (2010). Managing competition between individual and organizational goals in cross-sector research and development centers. Journal of Technology Transfer,35, 527–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrett-Jones, S., Turpin, T., & Diment, K. (2013). Careers and organisational objectives: Managing competing interests in cooperative research centres. In C. Boardman, D. O. Gray, & D. Rivers (Eds.), Cooperative research centres and technical innovation: Government policies, industry strategies and organizational dynamics (pp. 79–111). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaughan, M. (2009). Using the curriculum vitae for policy research: An evaluation of National Institutes of Health center and training support on career trajectories. Research Evaluation,18(2), 117–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaughan, M., & Bozeman, B. (2011). Job satisfaction among university faculty: Individual, work and institutional determinants. The Journal of Higher Education,82(2), 154–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaughan, M., & Corley, E. (2010). Industrial involvement of science and engineering faculty at U.S. research universities: The impacts of gender and university research center affiliation on industrial activities. Technovation,30, 215–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelijns, A., & Rosenberg, N. (1994). The dynamics of technological change in medicine. Health Affairs,13(3), 28–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerpott, T. J., Domsch, M., & Keller, R. T. (1988). Career orientations in different countries and companies: An empirical investigation of West German, British and US industrial R&D professionals. Journal of Management,25(5), 439–462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geuna, A., & Shibayama, S. (2015). Moving out of academic research : Why scientists stop doing research ? In A. Geuna (Ed.), Global mobility of research scientists (pp. 271–297). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, M., et al. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gläser, J. (2001). Macrostructures, careers and knowledge production: A neoinstitutionalist approach. International Journal of Technology Management,22(7/8), 698–715.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gläser, J., Aljets, E., Lettkemann, E., & Laudel, G. (2014). Where to go for a change: The impact of authority structures in universities and public research institutes on changes of research practices. In Organizational transformation and scientific change: The impact of institutional restructuring on universities and intellectual innovation (pp. 297–329). Retrieved http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/S0733-558X20140000042010.

  • Gläser, J., & Laudel, G. (2015) The three careers of an academic. Zentrum Technic und Geselshaft Discussion Paper 35/2015.

  • Gläser, Jochen, & Laudel, Grit. (2016). Governing science. European Journal of Sociology,57(1), 117–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, D., Sundstrom, E., Tornatzky, L. G., & McGowen, L. (2011). When triple helix unravels: A multi-case analysis of failures in industry–university cooperative research centres. Industry and Higher Education,25(5), 333–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauss, K., Kaulisch, M., & Tesch, J. (2015). Against all odds: Determinants of doctoral candidates’ intention to enter academia in Germany. International Journal for Researcher Development,6(2), 122–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heslin, P. (2005). Conseptualizing and evaluating career success. Journal of Organisational Behaviour,26(2), 113–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hessels, L. K., & van Lente, H. (2008). Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda. Research Policy,37(4), 740–760.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornbostel, S., Böhmer, S., Klingsporn, B., Neufeld, J., & Von Ins, M. (2009). Funding of young scientist and scientific excellence. Scientometrics,79(1), 171–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonkers, K. (2010). Mobility, migration and the Chinese scientific research system. Oxford: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaulisch, M., & Salerno, C. (2005). Comparing academic careers systems : The cases of Germany, England and US. In 30th ASHE conference (pp. 1–21). Philadelphia.

  • Keller, T. E., et al. (2014). Early career mentoring for translational researchers: Mentee perspectives on challenges and issues. Teaching and Learning in Medicine,26(3), 211–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khapova, S. N., & Arthur, M. B. (2011). Interdisciplinary approaches to contemporary career studies. Human Relations,64(1), 3–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knorr-Cetina, K. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lam, A. (2005). Work roles and careers of R&D scientists in network organizations. Industrial Relations,44(2), 242–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lam, A. (2011). University–industry collaboration: Careers and knowledge governance in hybrid organisational space. International Journal of Strategic Business Alliances,2(1/2), 135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lange, J., Lietz, A., Ambrasat, J., Tesch, J., & Wegner, A. (2016). The German doctoral candidates and doctorate holders study ProFile. Journal of Economics and Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1515/jbnst-2015-1037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laudel, G. (2005). Migration currents among the Scientific Elite. Minerva, 43, 377–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laudel, G., & Gläser, J. (2008). From apprentice to colleague: The metamorphosis of early career researchers. Higher Education,55(3), 387–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, C., & Shibayama, S. (2014). Appointment, promotion and mobility of bioscience researchers in Japan. Ch. 9 in A. Geuna (Ed.), Global mobility of research scientists: The economics of who goes where and why. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

  • Lawson, C., & Shibayama, S. (2015). International research visits and careers: An analysis of bioscience academics in Japan. Science and Public Policy,42(5), 690–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H. F., Miozzo, M., & Laredo, P. (2010). Career patterns and competences of PhDs in science and engineering in the knowledge economy: The case of graduates from a UK research-based university. Research Policy,39(7), 869–881.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, S. G., & Stephan, P. E. (1991). Research productivity over the life cycle: Evidence for academic scientists. Economic Review,81(1), 114–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, M. W., & Bozeman, B. (2006). Researchers’ industry experience and productivity in university–industry research centers: A ‘scientific and Technical Human Capital’ explanation. Journal of Technology Transfer,31(2), 269–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2005). Universities as partners in U.S. research joint ventures. Research Policy,34, 385–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahroum, S. (2000). Scientific mobility: An agent of scientific expansion and institutional empowerment. Science Communication,21(4), 367–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangematin, V. (2000). PhD job market: Professional trajectories and incentives during the PhD. Research Policy,29(6), 741–756.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. (1973). Sociology of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. M., & Feldman, M. P. (2014). The Sorcerer’s postdoc apprentice: Uncertain funding and contingent highly skilled labour. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society,7(April), 289–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., Aisati, M., & Plume, A. (2013). Studying scientific migration in Scopus. Scientometrics,94(3), 929–942.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moedas, C. (2015). Open innovation, open science, open to the world (22 June). In ‘A new start for Europe: Opening up to an ERA of Innovation’ conference.

  • Mowery, D. C., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2002). Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh–Dole act in the United States. Research Policy,31(3), 399–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, F. (2010). The Oncomouse That Roared: Hybrid exchange strategies as a source of distinction at the boundary of overlapping institutions. American Journal of Sociology,116(2), 341–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R., Buterbaugh, K., Perl, M., & Gelijns, A. (2011). How medical know-how progresses. Research Policy,40(10), 1339–1344.

    Google Scholar 

  • NordForsk. (2014). Crossing borders—Obstacles and incentives to researcher mobility. Oslo. Retrieved www.nordforsk.org.

  • OECD. (2010). “International Mobility.” in measuring innovation: a new perspective. OECD Publishing. Retrieved https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264059474-25-en.

  • Pelz, D. C., & Andrews, F. M. (1976). Scientists in organizations. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponomariov, B., & Boardman, P. C. (2008). The effect of informal industry contacts on the time university scientists allocate to collaborative research with industry. The Journal of Technology Transfer,33(3), 301–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponomariov, B., & Boardman, P. C. (2010). Influencing scientists’ collaboration and productivity patterns through new institutions: University research centers and scientific human capital. Research Policy,39, 613–624.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauermann, H., & Roach, M. (2012). Science PhD career preferences: Levels, changes, and advisor encouragement. PlosOne,7(5), e36307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauermann, H., & Roach, M. (2014). Not all scientists pay to be scientists: PhDs’ preferences for publishing in industrial employment. Research Policy,43(1), 32–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauermann, H., & Stephan, P. E. (2012). Conflicting logics? A multidimensional view of industrial and academic science. Organization Science,24(3), 889–909.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skovgaard Pedersen, H. (2014). New doctoral graduates in the knowledge economy: Trends and key issues. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management,36(6), 632–645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spivak l’Hoste, A., & Hubert, M. (2012). Mobilité scientifique et réflexivité des chercheurs. Comment les déplacements façonnent les modes de production de connaissances. Revue d’anthropoligie des connaissances,6(2), 357–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele, M. M., Fisman, S., & Davidson, B. (2013). Mentoring and role models in recruitment and retention: A Study of Junior Medical Faculty Perceptions. Medical Teacher,35(5), e1130–e1138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, P. (2008). Job market effects on scientific productivity. Conferences on New Political Economy,25(September), 31–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, P. (2010). The Economics of Science. Handbook of the Economics of Innovation,1(1 C), 217–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, P. (2013). The Economics of the Postdoctoral Position. Keynote address to the National Postdoctoral Association 11th Annual Meeting, Charleston March 15–17.

  • Stephan, P. E., & Levin, S. G. (1997). The critical importance of careers in collaborative scientific research. Revue d’économie industrielle,79(1), 45–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, D. (1997). Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington DC: Brookings Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Su, X., & Bozeman, B. (2009). Dynamics of sector switching: Hazard models predicting changes from private sector jobs to public and nonprofit sector jobs. Public Administration Review,69(December), 1106–1114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sumell, A., Stephan, P. E., & Adams, J. D. (2009). Capturing Knowledge The Location Decision of New Ph.D.s Working in Industry. In R. B. Freeman & D. Goroff (Eds.), Science and engineering careers in the United States: An analysis of markets and employment (pp. 257–287). NBER book: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teichler, U., Arimoto, A., & Cummings, W. (2013). The changing academic profession. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, Patricia A., et al. (2004). Results of an academic promotion and career path survey of faculty at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Academic Medicine,79(3), 258–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veugelers, R., & Van Bouwel, L. (2015). The effects of international mobility on European researchers: Comparing intra-EU and US mobility. Research in Higher Education,56, 360–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinck, D. (2014) Mapping the population, careers, mobilities and impacts of advanced research degree graduates in the social sciences and humanities (POCARIM). Policy Report 4. Working Outside Academia. Retrieved http://www.salford.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/532631/PR04-DV-Working-outside-the-Academy-171114.pdf.

  • Vohora, A., Wright, M., & Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy,33(1), 147–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, J. P., & Lee, Y. N. (2015). The bureaucratization of science. Research Policy,44(8), 1584–1600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, R., Gläser, J., & Engwall, L. (2010). Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation. Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolley, R., Cañibano, C., & Tesch, J. (2016). A functional review of literature on research careers. Working Paper No. 2016-05. INGENIO Working Paper Series. http://www.ingenio.upv.es/es/working-papers/functional-review-literature-research-careers.

  • Ziman, J. (1994). Prometheus bound: science in a dynamic “Steady State”. Cambridge: CUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, L. G., & Darby, M. R. (2006). Movement of star scientists and engineers and high-tech firm entry. NBER Working Paper 12172.

  • Zucker, L. G., Darby, M. R., & Torero, M. (2002). Labor mobility from academe to commerce. Journal of Labor Economics,20(3), 629–660.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge financial support from the European Commission’s project “Research Infrastructure for Research and Innovation Policy Studies” (RISIS, Grant Agreement Number: 313082). The research for this paper was conducted as part of the RISIS work package “Integrating framework and dataset for analysing research careers” (WP24). The authors would also like to thank Monica Gaughan for her advice and support in the development of the work package activities and her comments on this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. INGENIO, CSIC- Universitat Politècnica de Valencia, Ciudad Politécnica de la Innovación, Edif 8E, 4ª. Camino de Vera s/n, 46022, Valencia, Spain

    Carolina Cañibano & Richard Woolley

  2. NIFU (Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education), Økernveien 9, 0653, Oslo, Norway

    Eric J. Iversen

  3. DZHW (German Centre for Higher Education Research and Science Studies), Schützenstraße 6a, 10117, Berlin, Germany

    Sybille Hinze, Stefan Hornbostel & Jakob Tesch

Authors
  1. Carolina Cañibano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard Woolley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eric J. Iversen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sybille Hinze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stefan Hornbostel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jakob Tesch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carolina Cañibano.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Glossary

CDH

Careers of Doctorate Holders (OECD Project)

EC

European Commission

ERA

European Research Area

ESF

European Science Foundation

EUPRO

Database on European Framework Programs

ETER

The European Tertiary Education Register

HRST

Human Resources in Science and Technology

LERU

League of European Research Universities

MNE

Multinational Enterprise

MS

Member State (of the European Union)

NSF

National Science Foundation (USA)

POCARIM

Mapping the Population, Careers, Mobilities and Impacts of Advanced Degree Graduates in the Social Sciences and Humanities (European Project, 7th Framework Program)

RCCF

Research Career Conceptual Framework

RISIS

Research Infrastructure for Research and Innovation Policy Studies

RPO

Research Performing Organization

SSH

Social Sciences and Humanities

STHC

Scientific and Technological Human Capital

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cañibano, C., Woolley, R., Iversen, E.J. et al. A conceptual framework for studying science research careers. J Technol Transf 44, 1964–1992 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9659-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9659-3

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation