Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Systems Evaluation of University-Industry Collaboration Efficiency in Iran: Current Situation and Proposed Policy Framework

  • Published:
Journal of the Knowledge Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The research objective is to develop system models of the university-industry collaboration (UIC) element of a national innovation system and to evaluate its potential as a framework to inform economic policies. A UIC system model for Iran was developed and applied to explore key policy concerns, current performance, and barriers to development. A mixed-method approach was used. Firstly, a survey was used to scope system elements from the input of 94 expert stakeholders and to establish related issues. An insight of the difference between university and industry actors’ views regarding problems of UIC effectiveness was also formed. Secondly, 25 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders were used for building the conceptual model of the UIC system. Quantitative data were analyzed with Mann–Whitney U test, and for analyzing interviews, theme analysis was applied. Analysis of the causal relationships in the UIC model indicated there are a range of barriers that maintain a predominant negative behaviour pattern that limits UIC performance. This negative equilibrium is manifest as significant lack of trust at all interfaces in the system. The systems model is a complex interaction of reinforcing loops that emphasizes the scale of challenge policy-makers face in creating effective UIC outcomes. A set of policy choices informs an improvement agenda for UIC activities in Iran. This method is a framework to address the current lack of effective approaches to aid understanding of the complexity of behavioural forces that can help politicians to form coherent policies that address often hidden systematic biases.

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arenaz, J. J., & Gonzalez, D. (2018). Technology transfer models and elements in the university-industry collaboration. Administrative Science, 8(19), 3–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baghernejad, J. (2006). Cultivating technological innovations in Middle Eastern countries: Factors affecting firm’s technological innovation behaviour in Iran. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 13(4), 361–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bitzenis, A. (2003). What was behind the delay in the Bulgarian privatisation process? Determining incentives and barriers of privatisation as a way of foreign entry. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 39(5), 58–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodas Freitas, I. M., & Verspagen, B. (2017). The motivation, institutions and organisation of university-industry collaboration in the Netherlands. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 27, 379–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouhamed, A., Bouraoui, N., & Chaabouni, J. (2009). Triple Helix in Tunisia: Inhibitors to the creation of university-industry cooperation, Paper Presented at Triple Helix 7th Biennial International Conference on University, Industry and Government linkages, Glasgow.

  • Brown, R., & Smith, M. (2008). Polishing a rough diamond: Developing systemic approaches towards cluster evaluation. Unpublished paper for Scottish Enterprise.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cai, Y., & Etzkowitz, H. (2020). Theorizing the Triple Helix model: Past, present, and future. Triple Helix, 7, 189–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D. F. J., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018). The ecosystem as helix: An exploratory theory-building study of regional co-opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as Quadruple/Quintuple Helix Innovation Models. R&D Management, 48(1), 148–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. B. (1999). System thinking, system practice. John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. B., & Scholes, J. (1999). Soft systems methodology in action. John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, H. S. (1986). Science and technology policies for industrialization of developing countries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 29, 225–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, S. (2004). Partnership in Korean regional innovation systems. Public-Private Partnership, Seoul, Korea.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, S. (2004). Panic and panacea: Brain drain and science and technology human capital policy. Research Policy, 33(4), 617–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decter, M., Bennet, D., & Leseure, M. (2007). University to business technology transfer—UK and USA comparisons. Technovation, 27(3), 145–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degroof, J., & Roberts, E. B. (2004). Overcoming weak entrepreneurial infrastructures for academic spin-off ventures. Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3–4), 327–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doney, P. M., Cannon, J. P., & Mullen, M. R. (1998). Understanding the influence of national culture on the development of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 601–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dzisah, J., & Etzkowitz, H. (2008). Triple Helix circulation: The heart of innovation and development. International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development, 7(2), 101–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edson, R. (2008). Systems thinking. Applied. A primer. In: ASYST Institute (Ed.) Arlington, VA, Analytic Services.

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2005). The renewal of venture capital: Toward a counter-cyclical model. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 17(1), 73–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2008). The Triple Helix: University-industry-government innovation in action (1st ed.). Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. A. (1997). Universities and the global knowledge economy: A Triple Helix of university–industry– government relations. Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. A. (1998). The endless transition: A Triple Helix of university–industry–government. Minerva, 36(3), 203–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. A. (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 

  • Flett, P. (2001). The role of quality in the management of projects, (Doctoral Dissertation), University of Stirling.

  • Freeman, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic performance. Lessons from Japan. Pinter, London.

  • Freitas, I. M. B., Verspagen., B., & Merit, U. (2009). Overcoming institutional shortcomings for academic spin-offs policies in Brazil, Paper Presented at Triple Helix 7th Biennial International Conference on University, Industry and Government linkages, Glasgow.

  • Galanakis, K. (2006). Innovation process: Make sense using system thinking. Technovation, 26(11), 1222–1232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghalib, A. K. (2004). Systemic knowledge management: Developing a model for managing organizational assets for strategic and sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 5, 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghazinoory, S. (2003). Technology management system in Iran: Organisation, programs, challenges. Bu-Ali Sins University, Hamedan, Iran, Available at: www.tco.ir/research/10-Ghazinouri.pdf. Accessed 20 January 2020.

  • Gilandeh, A., Kharazmi, O. A., Yazdani, M. H., & Roshan Roudi, S. (2017). Evaluation of innovative city formation in Mashhad, Iran. Journal of Geography, Urban and Reginal Spatial Planning, 25, 1–18. (in Persian).

    Google Scholar 

  • Golichenko, O. G. (2016). The national innovation system from concept to research methodology. Problems of Economic Transition, 58(5), 463–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inzelt, A. (2004). The evolution of university–industry–government relationships during transition. Research Policy, 33, 975–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M. C. (2006). Creative holism: A critical systems approach to complex problem situations. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 23, 647–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M. C. (2010). Reflections on the development and contribution of critical systems thinking and practice. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 27, 133–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jankowska, B., Matysek-Jedrych, A., & Mroczek-Dabrowska, K. (2017). Efficiency of national innovation systems – Poland and Bulgaria in the context of the global innovation index. Comparative Economic Research, 20(3), 77–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kayal, A. A. (2008). National innovation systems a proposed framework for developing countries. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 8(1), 74–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kharazmi, O. A., & Nedayi, A. (2013). Evaluation of innovation infrastructure in Iran: Case of incubator centers in Mashhad City. Journal of Studies of Geography in Arid Regions, 3(12), 103–127. (in Persian).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kodama, T. (2008). The role of intermediation and absorptive capacity in facilitating university-industry linkages- An empirical study of TAMA in Japan. Research Policy, 37(8), 1224–1240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuwashima, K. (2018). Open innovation and the emergence of a new type of university–industry collaboration in Japan. Annals of Business Administrative Science, 17, 95–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, T. L., & Tunzelmann, N. V. (2005). A dynamic analytic approach to national innovation systems: The IC industry in Taiwan. Research Policy, 34(4), 425–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lima, J. C. F., Torkomian, A. L. V., Periera, S. C. F., Oprime, P. C., & Hashiba, L. H. (2021). Socioeconomic impacts of university–industry collaborations–A systematic review and conceptual model. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market and Complexity, 7(137), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, T. H. (2019). The philosophical views of national innovation system: The LED industry in Taiwan. Asia Pacific Management Review, 24(4), 291–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B. (Ed.). (1992). National innovation systems: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Frances Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macho-Stadler, I., Perez-Castrillo, D., & Veugelers, R. (2008). Designing contracts for university spin-offs. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 17(1), 185–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mani, S. (2004). A National system of innovation in the making: An analysis of the role of government with respect to promoting domestic innovations in the manufacturing sector of Iran. United Nations University, Available at: http://www.intech.unu.edu/publications/discussion-papers/2004-12.pdf. Accessed 20 January 2020.

  • Masoumzadeh, S. M. (2006). A Brief look on Iranian S&T indicators”, Country report for international conference on S&T policy research and statistical indicators. Colombo, Sri Lanka. Available at: www.mis.nsf.ac.lk/S&T/Iran%20Dr.%20S.M.%20Masoumzadeh.ppt. Accessed 14 February 2020.

  • McAdam, M., & Debackere, K. (2017). Beyond ‘Triple Helix’ toward ‘Quadruple Helix’ models in regional innovation systems: Implications for theory and practice. R&D Management, 48(1), 3–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meissner, D., Erdil, E., & Chataway, J. (2018). Innovation and entrepreneurial university. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, S., & Ramlogan, R. (2008). Innovation systems and the competitive process in developing economies. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 48(2), 433–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mirza, H., Al Sinawi, H., Al-Balushi, N., Al-Alawi, N., & Panchatcharam, S. M. (2020). Barriers to university-industry collaboration in an academic university department in London, United Kingdom. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing, 14(3), 445–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moradi, Y., & Noori, S. (2020). Entrepreneurial cooperation model between university and SMEs: A case study in Iran. Sustainability, 12(92140), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreira, A. C., Ferreira, A. M., & Zimmerman, R. A. (2018). Innovation and supply chain management. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, M. D. (2013). Qualitative research in business and management. Sage Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ney, S. (1999). Culture and national S&T performance: A framework for analyzing socio-institutional factors in RTD policy making. Innovation, 12(3), 353–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niosi, J., & Bas, T. G. (2001). The competencies of regions: Canada’s clusters in biotechnology. Small Business Economics, 17(1/2), 31–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obrenovic, B., & Jalilov, S. (2014). Building a better national innovation system through effective knowledge sharing: A case of Croatia. International Journal of Management Science and Business Administration, 1(1), 41–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (1997). National Innovation System. OECD Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Shaughnessy, N. (1996). Michael Porter’s competitive advantage revisited. Management Decision, 34(6), 12–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patching, D. (1990). Practical soft systems analysis. Pitman Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paya, A., & Baradaran Shoraka, H. R. (2009). Future studies in Iran: Learning through trial and error. Futures, 42(5), 484–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plewa, C., & Quester, P. (2007). Key drivers of university-industry relationships: The role of organisational compatibility and personal experience. Journal of Service Marketing, 21(5), 370–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Free Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrik, D. (2004). Rethinking growth policies in the developing world. Harvard University.

  • Saad, M., & Zawdie, G. (2005). From technology transfer to the emergence of a Triple Helix culture: The experience of Algeria in innovation and technological capability development. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 17(1), 89–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sala, A., Landoni, P., & Verganti, R. (2009). Policies to foster collaborations among SMEs and research organisations: An analysis of the voucher experience in Italy”, Paper Presented at Triple Helix 7th Biennial International Conference on University, Industry and Government linkages, Glasgow.

  • Santoro, M. D., & Bierly, P. E. (2006). Facilitators of knowledge transfer in university-industry collaborations: A knowledge-based perspective. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 53(4), 495–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research methods for business students (4th ed.). Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaveling, J., & Bryan, B. (2018). Making better decisions using systems thinking how to stop firefighting, deal with root causes and deliver permanent solutions. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline, the art and practice of the learning organisation (1st ed.). Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharif, N. (2006). Emergence and development of the national innovation systems concept. Research Policy, 35(5), 745–766.

    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(1/2), 115–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, S., & Peterka, S. O. (2009). From ignoring to leading changes- What role do universities play in developing countries? Case of Croatia, Paper Presented at Triple Helix 7th Biennial International Conference on University, Industry and Government linkages, Glasgow.

  • Thune, T. (2007). University-industry collaboration: The network embeddedness approach. Social and Public Policy, 34(3), 158–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tillmar, M. (2006). Swedish tribalism and Tanzanian entrepreneurship: Preconditions for trust formation. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 18(2), 91–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2005). One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34(8), 1203–1219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torbat, A. E. (2005). Impacts of the US trade and financial sanctions on Iran. The World Economy, 28(3), 407–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (2005). Science, technology and innovation policy review. The Islamic Republic of Iran. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Geneva, Available at: http://www.unctad.org/en/docs//iteipc20057_en.pdf. Accessed 28 February 2020.

  • United Nations. (2006). Summary of deliberations on the science, technology and innovation policy review of the Islamic Republic of Iran, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Geneva. Available at: http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/c2d69_en.pdf. Accessed 28 February 2020.

  • Watkins, A., Papaioannou, T., Mugwagwa, J., & Kale, D. (2015). National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: A critical review of the literature. Research Policy, 44(8), 1407–1418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, A., Kennedy, S., Philipp, F., & Whiteman, G. (2017). Systems thinking: A review of sustainability management research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 148, 866–881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirsich, A., Kock, A., Strumann, C., & Schultz, C. (2016). Effects of university–industry collaboration on technological newness of firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(6), 708–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Management, Work and Organisation, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK

    Gerry Edgar

  2. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

    Omid Ali Kharazmi

Authors
  1. Gerry Edgar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Omid Ali Kharazmi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Omid Ali Kharazmi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Edgar, G., Kharazmi, O.A. Systems Evaluation of University-Industry Collaboration Efficiency in Iran: Current Situation and Proposed Policy Framework. J Knowl Econ 14, 645–675 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00873-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00873-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation