Abstract
A programme for the promotion of science and doctoral studies called the Young Researchers Training Programme has been developed in Slovenia. Since it began, the programme has been substantially funded and over 6,000 young people have participated in it. However, no evaluation of the programme’s effectiveness has yet been conducted. In this study we identified young researchers’ motivation for entering the programme, their assessment of the training and links to knowledge transfer into practice as the principal idea behind the programme. Two training groups, university based young researchers and company based young researchers, are compared in order to assess whether the type of training affects knowledge transfer. The analyses show that young researchers in the economy are more involved in direct knowledge transfer and their motivation to do so is mainly intrinsic. On the other hand, university based young researchers need extrinsic incentives to cooperate in projects in economic sector, for their motivation is more oriented towards academic research. Implications for Slovenia, as well as for other countries’ higher education policies, are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amara, N., Landry, R., & Halilem, N. (2013). Faculty consulting in natural sciences and engineering: Between formal and informal knowledge transfer. Higher Education, 65(3), 359–384.
Baskerville, R., & Dulipovici, A. (2006). The theoretical foundations of knowledge management. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 4, 83–105.
Bowditch, J. L., Buono, A. F., & Stewart, M. M. (2008). A primer on organizational behavior (7th ed.). New Jersey: Wiley.
Carneiro, A. (2000). How does knowledge management influence innovation and competitiveness? Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(2), 87–98.
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 10(7). Retrieved August 12, 2013 from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=10&n=7.
Crespo, M., & Dridi, H. (2007). Intensification of university–industry relationship and its impact on academic research. Higher Education, 45, 61–84. doi:10.1007/s10734-006-9046-0.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: HarperCollins.
Decter, M. H. (2009). Comparative review of UK–USA industry–university relationships. Education + Training, 51(8/9), 624–634.
Dooley, L., & Kirk, D. (2007). University–industry collaboration: Grafting the entrepreneurial paradigm onto academic structures. European Journal of Innovation Management, 10(3), 316–332.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., & Lowe, A. (2007). Raziskovanje v managementu [Management research: An introduction]. Koper: Faculty of Management.
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from national system and mode 2 to a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.
Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Cantisano Terra, B. R. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313–330.
Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F. (1995). Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 286–299.
Fontana, R., Geuna, A., & Matt, M. (2006). Factors affecting university–industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signalling. Research Policy, 35(2), 309–323.
Gombač, J. (2009). Mladi raziskovalec – delovni konj na fakultetah? [Young researcher—A working horse at universities?]. Accessed November 20, 2012 from http://www.finance.si/264050/Mladi-raziskovalec—delovni-konj-na-fakultetah.
Grant, A. M. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 48–58.
Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J, Jr, Couper, M. R., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2009). Survey methodology. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley.
Hair, J. F, Jr. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Kobal Grum, D., & Musek, J. (2009). Perspektive motivacije [Perspectives of motivation]. Ljubljana: Faculty of Arts.
Košmrlj, K., & Arzenšek, A. (2012). The findings of the research project: An unpublished contribution to the conference “The young researchers: How to proceed?”. Ljubljana, May 30.
Levin, D. Z., Kurtzberg, T. R., Phillips, K. W., & Lount, R. B, Jr. (2010). The role of affect in knowledge transfer. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 14(2), 123–142.
Likar, B., Macur, M., & Trunk-Širca, N. (2006). Systemic approach for innovative education process. Kybernetes, 35(7/8), 1071–1086.
Lovitts, B. E. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: The causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Lovitts, B. E. (2005). Being a good course-taker is not enough: A theoretical perspective on the transition to independent research. Studies in higher education, 30(2), 137–154.
McClelland, D. C. (1961). The achieving society. New Jersey: Van Nostrand.
Miller, K., McAdam, R., Moffett, S., & Brennan, M. (2011). An exploratory study of retaining and maintaining knowledge in university technology transfer processes. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 17(6), 663–684.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). California: Sage.
Public Agency for Technology of the Republic of Slovenia. Public Notice “Young researchers from industry—The generation of 2008”. Accessed August 11, 2013 from http://www.tia.si/shared_files/Razpisi/2008/MR08/JavnirazpisMR08b.pdf.
Republic of Slovenia: Government office for local self- government and regional policy. Development Operational Programme for Human Resources for 2007–2013. Accessed August 13, 2013 from http://www.svlr.gov.si/fileadmin/svlsrp.gov.si/pageuploads/KOHEZIJA/Programski_dokumenti/OP-ESS-POTRJENO_21_11_07.pdf.
Schwarz, N., & Sudman, S. (1996). Answering questions: Methodology for determining cognitive and communicative processes in survey research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Senaratne, S., Kagioglou, M., Amaratunga, D., Baldry, D., Aouad, G., & Bowden, A. (2005). Research knowledge transfer into teaching in the built environment. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 12(6), 587–600.
Slovenian Research Agency. Young researchers. Accessed August 18, 2013 from http://www.arrs.gov.si/en/mr/predstavitev.asp.
Szulanski, G. (2000). The process of knowledge transfer: The diachronic analysis of stickiness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 9–27.
Whelan, E., & Carcary, M. (2011). Integrating talent and knowledge management: Where are the benefits? Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(4), 675–687.
Wilkesmann, M., & Wilkesmann, U. (2011). Knowledge transfer as interaction between experts and novices supported by technology. The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 41(2), 96–112.
Wilkesmann, U., Wilkesmann, M., & Virgillito, A. (2009). The absence of cooperation is not necessarily defection: Structural and motivational constraints of knowledge transfer in a social dilemma situation. Organization Studies, 30(10), 1141–1164.
Winter, D. G. (1988). The power motive in women and men. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(3), 510–519.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arzenšek, A., Košmrlj, K. & Širca, N.T. Slovenian young researchers’ motivation for knowledge transfer. High Educ 68, 185–206 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9702-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9702-0