Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Innovation systems in Malaysia: a perspective of university—industry R&D collaboration

  • Open Forum
  • Published:
AI & SOCIETY Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Collaborative research and development (R&D) activities between public universities and industry are of importance for the sustainable development of the innovation ecosystem. However, policymakers especially in developing countries show little knowledge on the issues. In this paper, we analyse the level of university–industry collaboration in Malaysia. We further examine the fundamental conditions that hinder university–industry collaboration despite the government’s initiatives to improve such linkages. We show that the low collaboration  is a result of an R&D gap between the entities. While the universities engage in basic and fundamental R&D, the private sectors involved in incremental innovation that requires less R&D investments. The different nature of the industries’ R&D requires closer cooperation between firms namely buyers, suppliers and technical service providers and not the universities. Among others, the lack of an intermediary role, absorptive capacity and collaborative initiative by the industry also contribute to the problem. The study suggests that the collaborative activities can benefit both if deliberate and effective efforts on reducing the R&D mismatch are made between the universities and industry. Likewise, proper institutional arrangements in coordinating these activities are required. This result seems to reflect the nature of many developing countries’ national innovation systems, and therefore, lessons from Malaysia may serve as a good case study.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Extension of the triple helix concept by adding another dimension, society.

  2. Based on a university researcher survey by the National Science and Innovation Council in 2012.

  3. Please refer to Perkmann et al. (2013) for a complete review on the determinants of university–industry relationships.

  4. Creative productivity measures the new product creation, patent applications, patent approved, completed research projects, achievements and awards in R&D, paper publications, designed R&D projects, presentation of research outcome to professional and special interest groups.

  5. Cohen and Levinthal (1989, 1990) use R&D investment as a proxy to measure absorptive capacity. Our measures are more appropriate in the context of developing country since the measure takes into account different items and does not solely depend only on R&D investment. Indeed, process innovation or incremental innovation does not require sufficient R&D investments (Rasiah 1994).

References

  • Acs ZJ, Audretsch DB, Feldman MP (1994) R&D spillovers and innovative activity. Manag Decis Econ 15:131–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahn S (1995) A new program in cooperative research between academia and industry in Korea, involving centers of excellence. Technovation 15(4):241–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • AIM (2011) National innovation strategy: innovating Malaysia. Agensi Inovasi Malaysia, Putrajaya

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile TM, Conti R (1999) Changes in the work environment for creativity during downsizing. Acad Manag J 42(6):630–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arundel A, Geuna A (2004) Proximity and the use of public science by innovative European firms. Econ Innov New Technol 36(6):559–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arvanitis S, Kubli U, Woerter M (2008) University–industry knowledge and technology transfer in Switzerland: what university scientists think about cooperation with private enterprises. Res Policy 37:1865–1883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asheim BT, Coenen L (2005) Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: comparing Nordic clusters. Res Policy 34:1173–1190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayona C, Garcia T, Huerta E (2001) Firms’ motivations for cooperative R&D: an empirical analysis of Spanish firms. Res Policy 30(8):1289–1307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beise M, Stahl H (1999) Public research and industrial innovations in Germany. Res Policy 28:397–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bekkersa R, Freitas IMB (2008) Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: to what degree do sectors also matter? Res Policy 37:1837–1853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger M, Diez JR (2006) Technological capabilities and innovation in Southeast Asia. Sci Technol Soc 11(1):109–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks H (1994) The relationship between science and technology policy. Res Policy 25:477–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruneel J, D’Este P, Salter A (2010) Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university–industry collaboration. Res Policy 39(7):858–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassiman B, Veugelers R (2002) R&D cooperation and spillovers: some empirical evidence from Belgium. Am Econ Rev 92(4):1169–1184

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandran VGR, Farha AG, Veera P (2008) The commercialization of research results among researchers in public universities and research institutions. Asian Profile 36(3):235–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandran VGR, Farha AG, Veera P (2009) The role of collaboration, market and intellectual property rights awareness in university technology commercialization. Int J Innov Technol Manag 6(4):363–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen EY (1994) The evolution of university–industry technology transfer in Hong Kong. Technovation 14(7):449–459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1989) Innovation and learning: the two faces of R&D. Econ J 99:569–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm Sci Q 35(1):128–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh JP (2002) Links and impacts: the influence of public research on industrial R&D. Manag Sci 48(1):1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekvall G (1996) Organizational climate for creativity and innovation. Eur J Work Organ Psychol 5:105–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekvall G (1997) Organizational conditions and level of creativity. Creativ Innov Manag 6:195–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eom B-Y, Lee K (2010) Determinants of industry–academy linkages and, their impact on firm performance: the case of Korea as a latecomer in knowledge industrialization. Res Policy 39:625–639

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz H (1998) The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages. Res Policy 27:823–833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L (1999) The future location of research and technology transfer. J Technol Transf 24(2/3):111–123

    Article  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. Res Policy 29:109–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman C (1987) Technology policy and economic performance: the theory and an application to the semiconductor industry. Macmillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman C (1993) The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Camb J Econ 19(1):5–24

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Giroud A (2000) Japanese transnational corporations knowledge transfer to Southeast Asia: the case of the electrical and electronics sector in Malaysia. Int Bus Rev 9(5):571–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giroud A (2003) Transnational corporations, technology and economic development: backward linkages and knowledge transfer in South East Asia. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Giuliani E, Arza V (2009) What drives the formation of ‘valuable’ university–industry linkages? Insights from the wine industry. Res Policy 38(6):906–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn J, Link A, Vonortas N (2000) Research partnerships. Res Policy 29:567–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hashim MK (2007) SMEs in Malaysia: a brief handbook. August Publishing Sdn Bhd, Petaling Jaya

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobday M (1996) Innovation in South-East Asia: lessons for Europe. Manag Sci 34(9):71–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobday M (2003) Innovation in Asian industrialization: a Gerschenkronian perspective. Oxf Dev Stud 31(3):293–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobday M (2005) Firm-level innovation models: perspectives on research in developed and developing countries. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 17(2):121–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaksen SG (2007) The climate for transformation: lessons from leaders. Creativ Innov Manag 16(1):3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamien MI, Zang I (2000) Meet me halfway: research joint ventures and absorptive capacity. Int J Ind Organ 18(7):995–1012

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut B, Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities and the replication of technology. Organ Sci 3:383–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laredo P, Mustar P (2001) Research and innovation policies in the new global economy. Elgar, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff L, Etzkowitz H (1996) Emergence of a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Sci Public Policy 23:279–286

    Google Scholar 

  • Liyanage S (1995) Breeding innovation clusters through collaborative research networks. Technovation 15(9):553–567

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall BA (1992) National system of innovation. Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Pinter Publishers, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Malaysia (2010a) Tenth Malaysia plan (2011–2015). Government Printers, Kuala Lumpur

    Google Scholar 

  • Malaysia (2010b) New economic model for Malaysia. National Economic Advisory Council, Putrajaya

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield E, Lee JY (1996) The modern university: contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R&D support. Res Policy 25(7):1047–1058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsili O (2000) The anatomy and evolution of industries: technical change and industrial dynamics. Elgar, London

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller WL, Moriss L (1999) Fourth generation R&D. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • MOSTI (2006) National survey of innovation 2002–2004. Malaysian Science and Technology Information Centre, Putrajaya, Malaysia

    Google Scholar 

  • MOSTI (2012) National Survey of Research and Development 2008, Malaysian Science and Technology Information Centre, Putrajaya, Malaysia

  • Motohashi K, Yun X (2007) China’s innovation system reform and growing industry and science linkages. Res Policy 36:1251–1260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowery DC, Rosenberg N (1989) Technology and the pursuit of economic growth. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson RR (1993) National innovation systems: a comparative analysis. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt K (1984) Sectoral patterns of technical change—towards a taxonomy and a theory. Res Policy 13(6):343–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkmann M, Tartari V, McKelvey M et al (2013) Academic engagement and commercialisation: a review of the literature on university–industry relations. Res Policy 42:423–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philbin S (2008) Process model for university–industry research collaboration. Eur J Innov Manag 11(4):488–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poyago-Theotoky J, Beath J, Siegel DS (2002) Universities and fundamental research: reflections on the growth of university–industry partnership. Oxf Rev Econ Policy 18(1):10–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasiah R (1994) Flexible production systems and local machine tool subcontracting: electronics components transnational in Malaysia. Camb J Econ 18(3):279–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasiah R, Chandran VGR (2009) University–industry collaboration in the automotive, biotechnology and electronics firms in Malaysia. Seoul J Econ 22(4):529–550

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers EM, Yin J, Hoffmann J (2000) Assessing the effectiveness of technology transfer offices at U.S. research universities. Association of University Technology Managers

  • Salter AJ, Martin BR (2001) The economic benefits of publicly funded research: a critical review. Res Policy 30:509–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santhidran S (2010) Influences of employees’ motivation and work environment on creative productivity in research and development. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

  • Schumpeter JA (1965) Economic theory and entrepreneurial history. In: Aitken HG (ed) Explorations in enterprise. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel DS, Waldman D, Link AN (2002) Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Res Policy 31:1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sveiby K-E, Simaons R (2002) Collaborative climate and effectiveness of knowledge work: an empirical study. J Knowl Manag 6(5):420–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thursby JG, Thursby MC (2000) Who is selling the ivory tower? Sources of growth in university licensing. NBER Working Papers 7718, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc

  • Xiaolan F (2011) The dual role of universities in industrial innovation in emerging economies: a comparative study of China and the UK. Paper presented at the China Seminar, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Development Studies, Faculty of Economics and Administration, University of Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    V. G. R. Chandran

  2. Department of Business, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 85000, Segamat, Johor, Malaysia

    Veera Pandiyan Kaliani Sundram

  3. Faculty of Creative Industries, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, 46200, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia

    Sinnappan Santhidran

Authors
  1. V. G. R. Chandran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Veera Pandiyan Kaliani Sundram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sinnappan Santhidran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. G. R. Chandran.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chandran, V.G.R., Sundram, V.P.K. & Santhidran, S. Innovation systems in Malaysia: a perspective of university—industry R&D collaboration. AI & Soc 29, 435–444 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-013-0468-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-013-0468-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation