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.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Extension of the triple helix concept by adding another dimension, society.
Based on a university researcher survey by the National Science and Innovation Council in 2012.
Please refer to Perkmann et al. (2013) for a complete review on the determinants of university–industry relationships.
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.
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
Ahn S (1995) A new program in cooperative research between academia and industry in Korea, involving centers of excellence. Technovation 15(4):241–257
AIM (2011) National innovation strategy: innovating Malaysia. Agensi Inovasi Malaysia, Putrajaya
Amabile TM, Conti R (1999) Changes in the work environment for creativity during downsizing. Acad Manag J 42(6):630–640
Arundel A, Geuna A (2004) Proximity and the use of public science by innovative European firms. Econ Innov New Technol 36(6):559–580
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
Asheim BT, Coenen L (2005) Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: comparing Nordic clusters. Res Policy 34:1173–1190
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
Beise M, Stahl H (1999) Public research and industrial innovations in Germany. Res Policy 28:397–422
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
Berger M, Diez JR (2006) Technological capabilities and innovation in Southeast Asia. Sci Technol Soc 11(1):109–148
Brooks H (1994) The relationship between science and technology policy. Res Policy 25:477–486
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
Cassiman B, Veugelers R (2002) R&D cooperation and spillovers: some empirical evidence from Belgium. Am Econ Rev 92(4):1169–1184
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
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
Chen EY (1994) The evolution of university–industry technology transfer in Hong Kong. Technovation 14(7):449–459
Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1989) Innovation and learning: the two faces of R&D. Econ J 99:569–596
Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm Sci Q 35(1):128–152
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
Ekvall G (1996) Organizational climate for creativity and innovation. Eur J Work Organ Psychol 5:105–123
Ekvall G (1997) Organizational conditions and level of creativity. Creativ Innov Manag 6:195–205
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
Etzkowitz H (1998) The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages. Res Policy 27:823–833
Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L (1999) The future location of research and technology transfer. J Technol Transf 24(2/3):111–123
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
Freeman C (1987) Technology policy and economic performance: the theory and an application to the semiconductor industry. Macmillan, London
Freeman C (1993) The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Camb J Econ 19(1):5–24
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
Giroud A (2003) Transnational corporations, technology and economic development: backward linkages and knowledge transfer in South East Asia. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
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
Hagedoorn J, Link A, Vonortas N (2000) Research partnerships. Res Policy 29:567–586
Hashim MK (2007) SMEs in Malaysia: a brief handbook. August Publishing Sdn Bhd, Petaling Jaya
Hobday M (1996) Innovation in South-East Asia: lessons for Europe. Manag Sci 34(9):71–81
Hobday M (2003) Innovation in Asian industrialization: a Gerschenkronian perspective. Oxf Dev Stud 31(3):293–314
Hobday M (2005) Firm-level innovation models: perspectives on research in developed and developing countries. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 17(2):121–146
Isaksen SG (2007) The climate for transformation: lessons from leaders. Creativ Innov Manag 16(1):3–15
Kamien MI, Zang I (2000) Meet me halfway: research joint ventures and absorptive capacity. Int J Ind Organ 18(7):995–1012
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
Kogut B, Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities and the replication of technology. Organ Sci 3:383–397
Laredo P, Mustar P (2001) Research and innovation policies in the new global economy. Elgar, Cheltenham
Leydesdorff L, Etzkowitz H (1996) Emergence of a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Sci Public Policy 23:279–286
Liyanage S (1995) Breeding innovation clusters through collaborative research networks. Technovation 15(9):553–567
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
Lundvall BA (1992) National system of innovation. Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Pinter Publishers, London
Malaysia (2010a) Tenth Malaysia plan (2011–2015). Government Printers, Kuala Lumpur
Malaysia (2010b) New economic model for Malaysia. National Economic Advisory Council, Putrajaya
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
Marsili O (2000) The anatomy and evolution of industries: technical change and industrial dynamics. Elgar, London
Meyer-Krahmer F, Schmoch U (1998) Science-based technologies: university–industry interactions in four fields. Res Policy 27(8):835–851
Miller WL, Moriss L (1999) Fourth generation R&D. Wiley, New York
MOSTI (2006) National survey of innovation 2002–2004. Malaysian Science and Technology Information Centre, Putrajaya, Malaysia
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
Mowery DC, Rosenberg N (1989) Technology and the pursuit of economic growth. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Nelson RR (1993) National innovation systems: a comparative analysis. Oxford University Press, New York
Pavitt K (1984) Sectoral patterns of technical change—towards a taxonomy and a theory. Res Policy 13(6):343–373
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
Philbin S (2008) Process model for university–industry research collaboration. Eur J Innov Manag 11(4):488–521
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
Rasiah R (1994) Flexible production systems and local machine tool subcontracting: electronics components transnational in Malaysia. Camb J Econ 18(3):279–298
Rasiah R, Chandran VGR (2009) University–industry collaboration in the automotive, biotechnology and electronics firms in Malaysia. Seoul J Econ 22(4):529–550
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
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
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
Sveiby K-E, Simaons R (2002) Collaborative climate and effectiveness of knowledge work: an empirical study. J Knowl Manag 6(5):420–433
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
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights 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
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-013-0468-9