University-Industry Collaboration in a National …...University-Industry Collaboration in a National Systems of Innovation: Generating Transition Policy Scenarios for Iran 1 By: Dr

University-Industry Collaboration in a National Systems of

Innovation: Generating Transition Policy Scenarios for Iran

1

By:

Dr. Gerry Edgar and Omid Ali Kharazmi

Division of Business and Marketing

Stirling School of Management

Conceptual Model

This research builds on the development of a

conceptual model of the relevant macro and micro

conditions for UIC (Edgar and Kharazmi, 2011)

This encapsulates the theoretical constructs from the

literature on systems of innovation theories including,

National Systems of Innovation, Porter‟s „Cluster‟ or

„Diamond‟ model, and the „Triple-Helix Model‟ of

university–industry-government interactions.

The role of culture and trust in different systems of

innovation theories was examined, and the role these

elements play in UIC activities was found to be

particularly important, though vague on process detail.

2

Context of the Study (Iran)

Strengths :

Second largest economy in the Middle East

population of 70 million

The literacy rate is about 90 per cent

Availability of university, different industry sectors, research institutions, Financial institutions and Stock exchange

Weaknesses:

Lack proper systems for IP protection

Lack of proper mechanism for University-Industry collaboration

Iran‟s industrial sector lacks effective competition

Unstable policy making

Embargo - Foreign trade regulations 3

Systems Modelling Technique

4

Hierarchy of Systems: Adapted from Patching, 1990.

Systems thinking is a framework developed more than fifty years ago to give a full clearer picture. Systems thinking is a tool for understanding how things work. It is a framework to look beyond events and scrutinise for patterns of behaviour (Senge, 1990).

Activities in systems thinking

Balle‟s (1994) introduced three activities for systems thinking:

Focus on the relationships rather than parts,

Detect patterns not just events,

The use of circular causality (archetypes)

According to Lee and Tunzelmann (2005) the dynamism of a

system depends on the availability of feedback (interaction),

without which, the system is static. In systems which develop

feedback mechanisms, the behaviour of an entity which includes

elements, attributes and relationships changes over time. The

intention in developing a dynamic model is to understand

possible feedback loops in the system. Such a dynamic model is

a more accurate reflection of the real-world problem situation.

5

Scenario methods

Of the many approaches in the literature for building scenarios, the

most popular are systems analysis, the Delphi technique,

projections, correlation methods, brainstorming, and decision trees.

The Delphi technique and systems thinking are widely accepted as

a methodological base for building scenarios (Garret in Slaughter,

1966; Mercer, 1995).

Scenarios might be described as a tool to project a potential future.

They are a combination of an estimation of what might happen,

with assumptions about what could happen; however, scenarios do

not forecast what actually will happen (Fahey and Randall, 1998).

Scenarios should be plausible, which means that they need to be

possible, credible and relevant. Plausible evidence should illustrate

that the projected narrative could happen in the future (be

possible), show how it could happen (be credible), and finally

indicate its meaning for the organization (be relevant) (Fahey and

Randall, 1998).

6

Scenario methods

Scenarios can be built using two methods:

The first, is the “Exploratory” scenario, and focuses on identifying

the current state of important driving forces and then analyzes the

combination of possible future trends over a period of time.

The second is “anticipatory” and starts with the future state and

the search is directed backwards as a method for uncovering the

series of events which leads to this occurrence (Ratcliffe, 2000;

Fuller-Love et al., 2006). In other words, futures are selected and

this attempts to find which path leads to them; the method is also

recognized as “future backward” (Fahey and Randall, 1998; Ratcliffe,

2000).

7

The Investigation

Develop a systems model to enable evaluation of policy

instruments for enhancement of university-industry

collaboration to transit Iran toward a knowledge-based

economy.

Methodology

The approach of this

study is structured as a

three-stage

methodology based on

the deconstructed

research question, for

developing scenarios

based on systems

thinking, to test and

evaluate policy

instruments for the

competitiveness and

UIC success and the

development of Iran‟s

economic make-up.

9

Stage one: Conceptual Model;

Literature

Stage two: Survey (logic for survey

based on first order impact factors in

conceptual model)

Stage two output (Systems

Model)

Stage three: Interview (logic for interview

instruments based on output of survey;

conceptual framework, and literature)

Stage three Output (Unified

Dynamic Systems Model and

three scenarios)

Methodology

Stage Two: Investigating UIC (Iran case)

Scope of t he study

Two industrial sectors (Automotive and Biotechnology) were selected to

focus the study on areas of the economy that are considered of national

importance for the transition of the country towards a higher technology

base. Both are Government priority growth industries, both are

economically significant with a large national demand market (Ghazinoory,

2003; United Nations, 2005), and are also strongly represented in a wide

range of industrial organizations (Ministry of Industry and Mines Portal,

http://www.mim.gov.ir/) and university research departments (Ministry of

Science, Research and Technology, www.msrt.ir, 2001)

Two regions of the country including Tehran (Capital city) and Mashhad

(second largest city) were chosen for this study due to their identified high

potential for cluster formation in both Biotechnology and Automotive-

related areas (Ministry of Industry and Mines Portal,

http://www.mim.gov.ir/). Four universities were selected in this study. 10

http://www.mim.gov.ir/









http://www.msrt.ir/

http://www.msrt.ir/

http://www.msrt.ir/

http://www.msrt.ir/

http://www.msrt.ir/










Methodology

Stage Two: Investigating UIC (Iran case)

The survey instrument

University collaboration with industry

Industry collaboration with universities

Individual academics collaboration with industry

Collaboration performance

Collaboration continuity

11

Methodology

Stage Two Outcomes

Analysis of questionnaires

12

Methodology

Stage Two Outcomes

Establishing the scenario logics:

Organizational Structures to Coordinate and Support Partnerships

(OS)

Asset Management (AST)

Leadership and Culture (LC)

Organizational Capabilities (OC)

Creation of an Enabling Environment by Government (GOV)

13

Methodology

Stage Two Outcomes

- Developing scenario themes:

Scenario theme A: Stagnation (current policy framework

+ 15 years)

Scenario theme B: Efficiency driven

Scenario theme C: Innovation driven

- Stage Two outcomes: Discerning patterns of

behaviour

14

Methodology

Stage Three

Dynamic modelling and scenario development

Interviewing key actors

Part 1: Dynamic Systems Model (DSM)

Part 2: What-if Questions

Key Actor Pool

15

Methodology

Stage Three Outcomes

16

Scenario one

(Stagnation)

Scenario two

(Efficiency-Driven)

Scenario three

(Innovation- Driven)

Time= 15 years. Time = 15 years

Results and Findings

Findings from the Questionnaire

A search for a simplified logical structure for the scenario led into a prolonged

discussion of the 34 out of 58 factors (for the university side) and 29 out of 45

factors (for industry) which are significant and can be grouped in the three upper

right quadrant of the Impact-Uncertainty matrix (scenario driving forces).

Organizational Structures to Coordinate and Support Partnerships (OS)

Asset Management (AST)

Leadership and Culture (LC)

Organizational Capabilities (OC)

Creation of an Enabling Environment by Government (GOV)

17

Findings from the Questionnaire

Factor groupings impact on UIC activities

18

Organizational

Structure (OS)

Asset Management

(AST)

Leadership and

Culture (LC)

Organizational

Capabilities (OC)

Creation of an Enabling

Environment by

Government (GOV)

Motivation of individuals within

universities to collaborate with

companies

Motivation of companies to

collaborate with universities

UIC

performance

Motivation of universities

to collaborate with industry

Findings from the Interviews

Constructing the Unified Dynamic Systems Model (DSM) of UIC

19

Organizational

Structure (OS)

AssetManagement

(AST)

Leadership and

Culture (LC)

Organizational

Capabilities (OC)

Creation of an Enabling

Environment by

Government (GOV)



companies



UIC

performance



Findings from the Interviews: Unified Dynamic Systems Model (DSM)

Organizational Structure sub-system consists of 3 key forces. These forces and their

connections are shown below:

20

Efficiency of Institutional

Policy on IPR (OS1)

Efficiency of institutional

policy on royalty sharing

(OS3)

Motivation of industry to

collaborate with

universities

Motivation of individuals

within universities to

collaborate with industry

UIC

performance The structure of TTO in

universities (OS2)

Degree of trust formation

between partners (LC6)

Degree of

commitment (LC7)

Efficiency of national policy on

IPR and strength of

enforcement laws (GOV5)Degree of university

autonomy from government

(GOV4)

Black= Organizational Structure (OS)

Red= Connection Between Sub-Systems

Findings from the Interviews: Unified Dynamic Systems Model

Asset Management sub-system consists of 2 key forces. These

forces and their connections are shown below:

21

UIC

performanceAvailability of various

skills in TTOs (AST2)

TTOs' spin-off creation

support strategy (AST3)

The structure of TTO in

universities (OS2)

Efficiency of venture

capital (GOV6)

Red= Connection Between Sub-Sytems

Light Blue= Asset Management (AST)


22







industry

UIC

performance

Degree of

commitment (LC7)

Degree of cultural

differences between

partners (LC 1,2&3)

Degree of lack of understanding

of partners from each other's

norms (LC 4&5)

Performance of research consortia

and other similar kind of

mechanisms for collaboration

(OC1)

Performance of

intermediary agents

(GOV8)

Degree of cooperation and

team working culture

(LC8)

Style of management

in SMEs (LC9)

R27

R28

R30

R31

R33

R34

R36 R37

R41

R42

R44

R45


Brown= Leadership and Culture (LC)

Efficiency of Institutional

Policy on IPR (OS1)

Pace of trust formation

between strangers

(LC10)

R= Reinforcing Loop

Leadership and Culture sub-system consists of 10 key forces. These forces and their connections are shown below:


Organizational capabilities sub-system consists of 9 key forces. These

forces and their connections are shown below:

23




(OC1)

Motivation of universities to


partner



UIC

performance

R1

R2

R3

R4 R5 R6 R7 R8

R9


IPR and strength of

enforcement laws (GOV5)

Efficiency of institutional

policy on IPR (OS1)

Style of management

in SMEs (LC9)



(LC8)

Degree of impact on

universities' capabilities

(OC3, OC4)

Degree of impact on

industry's capabilities (OC5,

OC6, OC7, OC8, OC9)

Degree of firms' absorptive

capacity on knowledge

transfer (OC2)


Green= Organizational Capabilities (OC)

R= Reinforcing loop


Government sub-system consists of 18 key forces.

24

Degree of access to

government funding

(GOV1)

Degree of embargos

imposed(GOV17)

Political situation and

probability of entry to the

WTO (GOV16)





UIC

performance


IPR and enforcement laws

(GOV5)

Efficiency of venture

capital(GOV6)

Performance of

intermediary agents

(GOV8)

Status of cluster formation and

favourability of entrepreneurial

environment (GOV9)

Status of brain drain

(GOV10)

Degree of efficiency of

privatisation policy

(GOV11)

Degree of stability of

government regulations

(GOV3)

Degree of government

monopolies in market

(GOV12)

Degree of university

autonomy from

government(GOV4)

Status of government

financing support system

(GOV7)

Amount of government's

natural resources income

(GOV14)

Degree of government

value people creativity

(GOV15)

Export opportunities and

the risk of investment

(GOV18)

Degree of corruption in

government in allocating

resources to entrepreuners

(GOV20)

Degree of trust between

government and

entrepreuners (GOV21) Motivation of individuals



R11

R12

R13

R14

R15

R16a

R17a

R16b

R17b

Efficiency of

institutional policy on

IPR (OS1)




(OC1)

Style of management

in SMEs (LC9)


team working culture(LC8)

R18a

R18b

R19

R20

R21

R26a

R26b

R47

R48

R49

R50

R51


Dark blue= Government (GOV)

R= Reinforcing loop

Degree of access to government

funding by universities (changing

university's allocated budget) if

collaborating with companies

(GOV1*)

R12*


Critical Infrastructural Forces in the DSM

25

Efficiency of institutional policy on IPR (OS1)

The structure of TTOs in universities (OS2)

Degree of trust formation between partners (LC6)

Degree of team working and cooperation culture (LC8)

Style of management in SMEs (LC9)

Pace of trust formation between strangers (LC10)

Performance of research consortia (OC1)

Degree of stability of government regulation regarding UIC activities

(GOV3)

Degree of university autonomy from government (GOV4)

Efficiency of national policy on IPR and enforcement of laws

(GOV5)

Efficiency of venture capital (GOV6)

Performance of intermediary agents (GOV8)

Status of cluster formation and favourability of entrepreneurial

environment (GOV9)

Degree of efficiency of privatisation policy (GOV11)

Degree of government monopolies in market (GOV12)

Political situation and probability of entry to the WTO (GOV16)

Degree of embargoes imposed (GOV17)

Degree of corruption in government (GOV20)


Scenario Theme A

Scenario Theme A: Stagnation: current policy framework + 15years)

26

Inefficiency of national policy on IPR and enforcement laws (GOV5)

Lack of university autonomy from government (GOV4)

Weakness of government financing support system (GOV7)

Inefficiency of VC (GOV6)

Instability of government regulations (GOV3)

Low level of access to government funding (deficiency of government

initiatives for collaboration) (GOV1)

No change to allocated budget of universities if collaborating with

companies (GOV1*)

Lack of government support from research consortia and intermediary

agents (OC11)

High level of government monopolies in market (GOV12)

Inefficiency of privatisation policy (GOV11)

High level of corruption in government in allocating resources to

entrepreneurs (GOV20)

Deficiency of government strategy to support cluster formation

(GOV9)

Deficiency of government policy to control brain-drain (GOV10)

Increasing embargoes imposed by the Western Governments (GOV17)

Weakness in political relation and less probability of Iran entry to the

WTO (GOV16)

Related policy elements forming Scenario Theme A are as follows:

Very weak institutional policy on IPR (OS1)

Very weak institutional policy on royalty sharing (OS3)

Weak structure of TTO in universities (OS2)

Insufficient skills in the TTO (AST2)

Inefficient TTOs strategy to support spin-off companies (AST3)

Findings from the Interviews: Scenario Theme A

Organizational Structure sub-system (OS)

27

Very weak Institutional

Policy on IPR (OS1)

Very weak institutional

policy on royalty sharing

(OS3)

Motivation of industry to

collaborate with

universities




UIC

performance Weak structure of TTO

in universities (OS2)

-

-

-

-

+

+

+

+



-

Degree of

commitment (LC7)-

Inefficiency of national policy on

IPR and weakness of


+

Lack of university

autonomy from

government (GOV4)

+

Black= Organizational Structure (OS)



Asset Management sub-system (AST)

28

UIC

performanceInsufficient skills in

TTOs (AST2)Weak TTOs' spin-off

creation support strategy

(AST3)

-

-

Weak structure of TTO

in universities (OS2)

+

Inefficiency of venture

capital (GOV6)+

Red= Connection Between Sub-Sytems

Light Blue= Asset Management (AST)


Leadership and Culture sub-system (LC)

29







industry

UIC

performance

+

+

+

+

Degree of

commitment (LC7)+

High level of cultural

differences between

partners (LC 1,2&3)

Lack of understanding of

partners from each other's

norms (LC 4&5)

-

-

Weak performance of research

consortia and other similar kind of

mechanisms for collaboration (OC1)

-

Weak performance of

intermediary

agents(GOV8)-

-

-

+

+

+

+

Lack of cooperation and


(LC8)

-

Traditional style of

management in SMEs

(LC9)

R27

R28

R30

R31

R33

R34R36

R37

R41

R42

R44

R45


Brown= Leadership and Culture (LC)

-

Weak Institutional

Policy on IPR (OS1)

-

-

-

Very slow process oftrust formation

between strangers(LC10)

-

R= Reinforcing Loop


Organizational Capabilities sub-system (OC)

30

Weak performance of research

consortia and other similar kind of

mechanisms for collaboration (OC1)





UIC

performance

+

+

-

R1

R2

R3

R4 R5 R6 R7 R8

R9

Inefficiency of national policy on

IPR and weakness of


+

Weak institutional

policy on IPR (OS1)

+


management in SMEs

(LC9)



(LC8)

+

+

Low impact on upgrading

universities' capabilities

(OC3, OC4)

Low impact on upgrading

industry's capabilities (OC5,

OC6, OC7, OC8, OC9)

+

+

-

-

-

Weak impact on firms'

absorptive capacity on

knowledge transfer (OC2)

+


Green= Organizational Capabilities (OC)

R= Reinforcing loop

Lack of government

support (OC11)

Weakness of

management in

collaboration (OC10)

+

+

-


Government sub-system (GOV)

31

Decrease access to

government funding

(GOV1)

Increasing embargos

imposed by the west

(GOV17)

Weakness in political relation and

less probability of Iranian entry to

the WTO (GOV16)





UIC

performance

Inefficiency of national policy

on IPR and enforcement laws

(GOV5)

Inefficiency of venture

capital (GOV6)

Weak performance of

intermediary

agents(GOV8)

Status of cluster formation and

favourability of entrepreneurial

environment (GOV9)

Increasing brain

drain (GOV10)

Inefficiency of

privatisation policy

(GOV11)

Instability of government

regulations (GOV3)

High level of government

monopolies in market

(GOV12)

Lack of university

autonomy from

government(GOV4)

-

-

+

-

+

+

-

-

-

+

-

-

-

-

-

+

+

---

Weakness ofgovernment financing

support system(GOV7)

+

--

+

-

High government's natural

resources income

(GOV14)

Decreasing government

value people creativity

(GOV15)

+

-

-

Decreasing export opportunities

and increasing the risk of

investment (GOV18)

+

-

-

High level of corruption in

government in allocating

resources to entrepreuners

(GOV20)

Decreasing trust between

government and

entrepreuners (GOV21)

+

-




+-

-

R11

R12

R13

R14

R15

R16a

R17a

+ R16b

R17b

+

+

Weak institutional

policy on IPR (OS1)+

Weak performance of researchconsortia and other similar kind of

mechanisms for collaboration(OC1)

--


management in SMEs

(LC9)


team working

culture(LC8)

-

-

+

+

+

+

-

-

R18a

R18b

R19

R20

R21

R26a

R26b

R47

R48

R49

R50

R51


Dark blue= Government (GOV)

R= Reinforcing loop

Weakness of

management in

collaboration

(GOV24)

+

Low probability of increasing

allocated budget of universities if

collaborate with companies

(GOV1*)

-

-

R12*

Conclusion

Method of Use Scenarios in this research were constructed using the DSM as a

platform.

Functional View

Structural View

Contribution ◦ Value of systems methods to incorporate behavioural elements

onto existing process and factor models.

◦ Systems method for incorporating non-quantitative behavioural

dimensions to uncover dynamical aspects.

32

Conclusion

Key Findings for Iranian Policy Development

National and institutional policy on IPR and enforcement laws

Government financial support and Venture Capital

Instability of government regulations

Autonomy of universities from government

Intermediary agents and research consortia

Political environment and Embargoes

Corruption, Monopolies, and Privatisation process

Cluster activities

33

34

THANK YOU

34

Documents

University-Industry Collaboration in a National …...University-Industry Collaboration in a National Systems of Innovation: Generating Transition Policy Scenarios for Iran 1 By: Dr