Research vitality addresses the perseverance that faculty members in the organization sciences experience in maintaining their research quantity and quality over an extended period of time. The purpose of this paper is to offer a theoretical model of research vitality.
The authors propose a model consisting of individual and situational factors which influence the motivation and commitment of a professor to continue to conduct quality research over an extended period of time. Additionally, the authors identify benefits that may accrue when faculty members possess research vitality and discuss human resource management implications for schools engaged in hiring, tenuring, promoting, and socializing faculty members. A set of propositions about research vitality and contextual factors that influence this construct are presented and discussed.
Findings – An individual-level construct that represents a time related measure of the quality and quantity of individual contributions to the scholarly discipline of management is developed. Every individual in the organizational sciences field has the capability to contribute in a meaningful way.
Research limitations/implications – The model presented has a number of personal implications and departmental implications such as how to predict research vitality in junior faculty members.
Practical implications – The framework should be used for understanding one element of success in the organizational sciences.
Originality/value – The paper develops a model of research vitality to explain why some faculty continue to be productive, even in the face of a challenging research process.
J. Bruce Gilstrap, Jaron Harvey, Milorad M. Novicevic, M. Ronald Buckley, (2011) "Research vitality as sustained excellence: what keeps the plates spinning?", Career Development International, Vol. 16 Iss: 6, pp.616 - 644
DOI:10.1108/13620431111178353
This paper contributes to a growing literature on new public management in relation to academia in general but more specifically UK business schools. Following interviews with a range of staff in universities, we explore the impact that auditing and monitoring interventions have made on academics and their identities. In some senses, academic identities would appear to have changed as a result of managerialist practices of audit, league tables, research assessments, and other measures of accountability for performance. In exploring our data we were struck by the extent to which our respondents drew upon various narratives of love in accounting for their experiences and so we sought to frame our analysis around conceptions of romantic, unconditional and pragmatic love. We also found that with few exceptions, our respondents were complicit rather than resistant to new public management demands for audit, accountability and performance and we sought to understand this in terms of the management of academic identities. Despite their compliance, however, considerable disquiet and dissatisfaction was expressed such that the romantic notion of a ‘labour of love’ where work is an end in itself is being stretched to its limits as academics are increasingly subjected to loveless or instrumental demands.
source: A Labour of Love? Academics in Business Schools Caroline Clarkea, David Knightsb,Carol Jarvis The Open University, United Kingdomb University of the West of Scandinavian Journal of Management Volume 28, Issue 1, March 2012, Pages 5–15 
This insightful work looks at how companies can leverage their innovative capacity and access valuable knowledge and insights from Universities, using the main channels for knowledge and technology transfer: collaborative research, licensing and spinning out start ups. As our world demands considerable transformation to move to a more sustainable state, the case for effective partnerships between companies and universities is more compelling than ever. This indeed includes SMEs-small & medium-size companies. In this uniquely world-wide study, China & India are singled out as fast emerging of key sources of innovation for their dynamic markets, but also for the world. Primarily addressed to managers and to personnel involved in knowledge and technology transfer, this book will also appeal to all those interested in the innovation process.
From Science to Business How Firms Create Value by Partnering with Universities Georges Haour and Laurent Mieville Palgrave Macmillan 
AACSB's latest research report draws upon the experiences of ten business schools that volunteered to participate in an exploratory study following the release of the Final Report of the Impact of Research Task Force. The study was intended to determine the overall feasibility of schools undertaking more concerted efforts to assess the impact of intellectual contributions, assess the burden and costs to schools, and begin to explore appropriate measures of impact.
The findings are presented in three sections that correspond generally to objectives that a school might seek to achieve through such an exercise. The objectives and related insights build upon one another to suggest avenues and critical questions for schools that seek to define overall research expectations, produce evidence consistent with their practices and expectations, and then reflect on the relationship of the results to their missions and visions:
Fulltext:
The previous AACSB report on Impact of Research (2008) is here; http://www.aacsb.edu/publications/researchreports/currentreports/impact-of-research.pdf 
Universities can be major resources in a company’s innovation strategy. But to extract the most business value from research, companies need to follow these seven rules.
Most previous studies of industry-university collaboration have framed the analysis of such partnerships in terms of research project outcomes, defined here as a result that creates an opportunity for a company, such as guidance for the direction of technology development. From a business standpoint, however, research outcome is of only incidental importance. What matters is not outcome but impact— how the new knowledge derived from a collaboration with a university can contribute to a company’s performance. Are new products made possible? New and more effective manufacturing processes? Novel kinds of computer hardware or software that enable greater logistical efficiencies? Patentable materials, designs or processes that enhance competitive advantage?
Managers see working with academia as beneficial only to the extent that it advances the company toward its goals. The focus of our research, therefore, was on the impact of the collaboration on company products, processes or people, as evaluated both by the direct industry managers of university projects and by senior technical personnel with a view across projects. While constructing industry-university agreements is an important, and often lengthy, precursor to the collaboration, this article is concerned with specifically how those collaborations can best be carried out once the agreements are in place. In particular, it sought to determine, in a measurable way, “best practices” for the selection process — the management and the development of relationships that enable a company to capitalize on a research partnership with a university. The Leading Question How can companies best achieve competitive impact from industry-university research collaborations? Findings There is an outcome-impact gap in university collaborations: Promising outcomes of university projects often fail to translate into tangible impacts for the companies involved. Seven best practices can bridge this outcome-impact gap.
Source: Best Practices for Industry-University Collaboration By Julio A. Pertuzé, Edward S. Calder, Edward M. Greitzer and William A. Lucas June 26, 2010, MIT Sloan Management Review The authors collected data to test the suspicion that the scholarly research published in our best Source: Pearce, J. L. and Huang, L. (forthcoming) The decreasing value of our research to management education. Academy of Management Learning and Education. Fulltext: http://sites.uci.edu/jlpearce/files/2012/02/AMLEPearceHuangFinalCorrected10Feb2012.pdf 
What is it that business schools do? What are the mechanisms by which business schools interact with, and impact, different constituents and aspects of the communities they serve? The AACSB International Task Force on Business Schools and Innovation introduced a conceptual framework to define and describe business schools along several basic dimensions. The framework helps to illustrate the position of business schools within a societal structure, and to identify a few of the many dimensions along which schools can and do differentiate their activities and expected outcomes. The framework is intentionally abstract, in order to be applicable to a diverse set of business schools within a community, and across communities around the world. It is not intended to articulate “the” model for business schools. Instead, it demonstrates that there is no single model that captures the richness and diversity of business schools. Each business school must find its own unique interpretation of the framework. It is a foundation for individual schools to assess whether their activities have the intended (and needed) impacts on relevant constituents. It also is intended to guide further research on the impacts of business schools within society, by highlighting the numerous and related pathways through which they strive to add value. Framework with Complete Descriptions: http://www.aacsb.edu/resources/framework/applying-the-framework.pdf 
The Think Tanks and Civil Society Program at the University of Pennsylvania produces the annual Global Go-To Think Tank Index that ranks world’s leading think tanks with the help of a panel of over 1500 peer institutions and experts from the print and electronic media, academia, public and private donor institutions and policymakers. The report contains multiple listings, US, global, per reion etc. There are over 6500 (!) think tanks worldwide. Really insightful content
The report appiles the folowing Impact indicators of thinktanks: Recommendations considered or adopted by policymakers issue network centrality; advisory role to political parties, candidates, transition teams; awards granted; publication in or citation of publications in academic journals, public testimony and the success in challenging the conventional wisdom and
Beyond this quantitative assessment, an effective evaluation of impact should also involve NGOs, as well as members of the government and policymakers, to ascertain the degree to which they have utilized the grantee’s research output.
Fultext: http://www.gotothinktank.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2011-Global-Go-To-Think-Tanks-Report.pdf 
This paper reviews recent culture-change in British higher education (HE) and an increasing emphasis on academics evidencing, in meaningful and measurable ways, the value and contribution of their work to national societies. Discussion focuses on what is purported to be a shift from a focus on academics rationalizing the benefits of their work in terms of public engagement to a more contentious signifier of research worth, “impact”. The primary argument herein is that an impact agenda, framed in terms of assessment and by the upcoming Research Excellence Framework 2014, has not eclipsed an engagement initiative for HE in the UK but actually provided greater credence and tacit momentum. Where public engagement “pre-impact” was viewed by sections of the academic community as frivolous, faddish and tokenistic, it is now elevated as an integral component of impact-capture work and in plotting the pathways between research producer and research intermediary/end-user/collaborator. Where “impact” is a statement of the value of academic work, engagement is the method of its articulation and the means by which impacts are mobilized.(2012). From Engagement to Impact? Articulating the Public Value of Academic Research. Tertiary Education and Management. PreviewBuy now DOI:10.1080/13583883.2011.641578 Richard Watermeyera* 
Impact for all. Here is a list of free online courses published by the world's leading universities like Stanford, Yale, MIT, Harvard & Berkeley. This collection includes over 250 free courses in economics, business, philosophy, the liberal arts and sciences. Download these audio & video courses straight to your computer or mp3 player. 
In recent years, a trend has emerged in the behavioral sciences toward shorter and more rapidly published journal articles. These articles are often only a third the length of a standard paper, often describe only a single study and tend to include smaller data sets. Shorter formats are promoted by many journals, and limits on article length are stringent — in many cases as low as 2,000 words. This shift is partly a result of the pressure that academics now feel to generate measurable output. According to the cold calculus of “publish or perish,” in which success is often gauged by counting citations, three short articles can be preferable to a single longer one
The authors see a number of serious problems with the short-article format.
First, they dispute that short articles get more bang for the buck.
Second, they challenge the idea that shorter articles are easier and quicker to read.
Third, they worry that shorter, single-study articles can be poor models of science.
Finally, they are troubled by the link between small study size and publication bias.
The authors urge that editors demand more replication of unexpected findings and that the importance that the academic community gives to quantity of citations be balanced with a greater awareness of potential publication bias.
Source: Gray Matter The Perils of ‘Bite Size’ Science Henrik Drescher By Marco Bertamini and Marcus R. Munafò, psychologists at the University of Liverpool and the University of Bristol, respectively. Published: New York Times, January 28, 2012 
Higher education institutions (HEIs) worldwide are examining diverse sources of funding, such as philanthropy, as an alternative to State support. This paper argues that building lifelong relationships with alumni offers an HEI with a strategy to yield other residual benefits for the institution, which may also lead to philanthropy. The research offers a deeper understanding of the alumni–academy relationship using institutional advancement (IA) strategies. IA is defined as an approach to building relationship with stakeholders—including alumni—to increase support for an institution. By consulting specialist IA literature, this study develops an alumni relationship-building cycle for consideration by institutions. A case study of an Irish university is the vehicle to analyse this paradigm. The empirical evidence shows that applying IA strategies and building alumni relationships at each stage of the cycle offers the institution positive outcomes ultimately towards advancement. source: (2012). Beyond Philanthropy: Recognising the value of alumni to benefit higher education institutions. Tertiary Education and Management. DOI:10.1080/13583883.2011.611892 
Canadian science policy has increasingly linked the value of academic knowledge to its contribution to economic competitiveness. A market vision of scientific quality is embedded in new funding criteria which encourage academic scientists to collaborate with industry, generate intellectual property, and found companies. While the “Mode 2” thesis advanced by Gibbons and Nowotny asserts that quality criteria in science are changing to incorporate economic relevance, there is little empirical evidence to either refute or substantiate this claim. Using Bourdieu’s theory of practice, this study explores the responses of basic health scientists to market-oriented funding criteria. The goal of the study was to understand how scientists, occupying different positions of power in the scientific field, defined “good science” and pursued scientific prestige. Twenty semi-structured interviews were carried out with 11 scientists trained before and 9 trained after the rise of market-oriented science policy. Data derived from Curriculum Vitae and Background Information Forms were used to estimate the type and volume of capital each participant held. Scientific capital, as reflected in peer-reviewed publications and grants, was perceived as the dominant form of recognition of scientific quality. However, “entrepreneurial capital”, as reflected in patents, licenses, industry funding and company spin-offs, functioned as a new form of power in accessing resources. Study participants adopted different positions in a symbolic struggle over competing visions of “good science” and used different strategies to acquire scientific prestige. Some pursued a traditional strategy of accumulation of scientific capital, while others sought to accumulate and convert entrepreneurial capital into scientific capital.
Findings suggest that there is no longer a single symbolic order in the scientific field, but that the field is stratified according to a scientific and market logic. Hence, support is provided for both continuity with “Mode 1” and change towards “Mode 2” evaluation of academic quality.
Source: Constructing Quality in Academic Science: How Basic Scientists Respond to Canadian Market-Oriented Science Policy – A Bourdieusian Approach Fulltext: http://hdl.handle.net/1807/31862 
Find out how the leading research universities in the U.S. are shaping how we live, work, and play in a variety of ways. Most people, unless they’re in a research-based or academic field, don’t spend much time thinking about where the latest innovations in medicine, technology, science, or even the economy come from. While private sector businesses play a role, often the leading edge of research is found in America’s universities. Research labs at universities may not get much attention, but their impact on local communities as well as the nation as a whole can be quite large. In fact, you may not even realize the impact university research has had on your daily life, even if you live in a community close to a research center.
1: Research universities help support regional economies 2: Universities conduct the majority of basic research in the US 3: Start-up companies that emerge from research done at universities are more likely to be successful 4: University research is one of the biggest creators of jobs 5: They shape U.S. policies and regulations 6: Research universities are major producers of patents 7: University research is an amazing economic investment 8: Research universities often partner with businesses and industry 9: Many health breakthroughs have come from research universities 10: Much of what we understand about our universe is the product of university research 11: Research universities are focusing on green initiatives. 12: Top research universities draw in students from around the world 13: Many state economies have a large stake in research universities. 14: Academic research drives the national innovation system in the U.S 15: Research universities train the next generation of workers for high-tech and in-demand jobs
Source: http://www.onlinecolleges.net |
Universities in Europe are transforming into passively competing, more accountable organisations, catering for a growing mass market with a standard structure for awards characterising the Bologna protocols. Michael O'Mullane examines university leadership as a significant influence on the navigation of universities through emergent futures by exploring approaches to leadership, how leadership is formed, and its challenges. Through the use of interviews, this volume presents perceptions of these topics from a transect of leadership practitioners and those who support leadership in universities and university support organisations.
The author feeds the growing interest in how universities operate, their efficiency and effectiveness, and in some cases, their survival, and provides a a substantial, credible and defensible approach for readers concluding with a set of seven research recommendations for further inquiry.
Contents: - Organisational Leadership: Background and Framework for a Study Of European Universities
University Leadership Approaches, Formation and Challenges in Europe Michael O'Mullane Palgrave Macmillan, 2011
Impact indicators listed in the 2012 AACSB report on impact of research
The indicators were identified by schools that participated in the 2011-2012 exploratory study as potential indicators of research impact and/or alignment with expectations. The full list provided below is meant neither to be comprehensive (surely, schools will identify others not listed here, or find new variations) nor to be an endorsement of any particular indicator.
PRACTICE/COMMUNITY
ACADEMIC
DOCTORAL EDUCATION
TEACHING
UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION
EXECUTIVE EDUCATION
RESEARCH CENTERS
MISSION ALIGNM ENT
See appendix A , page 38 - 39 in the report: 
The focus of this report is to examine the ways in which universities can achieve successful outreach, highlighting current effective strategies that can be used and the challenges faced in engaging stakeholders of all ages and interests in the research and teaching activities of the university.
The Ulab Project, “European Laboratory for modelling the technical research University of tomorrow”, is an innovative think-tank of five leading Technical and Research-intensive European Universities, committed to work together to renew University policies in research, valorisation, entrepreneurship and outreach..
Project title European Laboratory for Modelling the Technical Research University of Tomorrow Call identifier FP7-SCIENCE-IN-SOCIETY-2010-UNIV Funding Scheme Coordination and Support Action Document ID Document reference D5.1 Title Best Practices on Outreach Due Date 30th September 2011 Delivery Date 13th October 2011 Document Author/s Monica Bulger, William Dutton, and Rebecca Eynon Document Reviewer David Sutcliffe Version 1.0 Dissemination level Public Abstract This document reports on current practices, difficulties and challenges for the future on Outreach (or Public Engagement) for European Universities and compiles different best practices of Ulab partners on these activities.
Fulltext report: http://www.ulab-fp7.eu/images/stories/misc/publicdeliverables/d5.1_best%20practices%20in%20outreach.pdf 
Among its many services, Thomson Reuters publishes the Essential Science Indicators’ (ESI) Highly Cited Papers List, featuring the top one percent most highly cited articles published in each discipline during a particular period (in this case, 2001-2011). For 2009 and 2010, Thomson Reuters included nine articles from a single author on its Highly Cited Papers List.
Is this simply the success story of a highly productive scholar? Or is it a much more complex and potentially disconcerting story of the systemic impact of a series “innovative”, and in some senses aberrant, decisions – decisions that appear to have the potential to alter the very essence of how scholarship and academia are perceived and valued. As the story is still unfolding, there is, as yet, no definitive answer.
Becoming an author of ESI Highly Cited Papers:
The hard way
Write up your results, and submit them for publication in a high-impact, top-quality journal. Then exhibit patience as you spend years in the grueling review process that has become an all-too-common precursor to publication in a leading journal. Then, if lucky enough to have the paper accepted for publication, wait another 1-2 years until the paper is formally published. Hope that enough other researchers cite your article in their work AND that they succeed in publishing their own papers quickly enough for your paper to meet the ESI threshold and to become a Highly Cited Paper.
Becoming an author of ESI Highly Cited Papers:
The easy way
Write up your results, making certain to cite yourself multiple times in the paper (and in all your other papers). Ask your co-authors and colleagues to also cite your work multiple times, especially in those papers that they are preparing for submission to one of the ISI-listed open-access journals. Submit your own article(s) to one of the ISI-listed open-access journals published by the Nigerian publisher Academic Journals. No need to wait. Academic Journals guarantees that your paper will be reviewed within three weeks, and, if accepted, that it will be published within eight weeks.
So, within two months of submission, your article(s), along with those of your colleagues who have cited your work, will, if accepted, be published. Publication-cycle time is reduced from years to weeks. Once you have achieved an adequate number of citations, other authors submitting to the same journal will likely notice your article (and its high citation rate) and will probably reason that citing it won’t hurt their chances of being published. Result: even more citations. Presto!!!
The Easy Plan brings almost instant success!!!
You can proceed to read this shocking story at the Harzing portal.
Anne-Wil Harzing is Professor in International Management and Associate Dean Research at the University of Melbourne.
Prof. Anne-Wil Harzing, University of Melbourne © Copyright 2012 Anne-Wil Harzing. All rights reserved. 
Purpose - This paper examines some challenges facing business schools and their continued legitimacy. It pays particular attention to the problems of accreditation, regulation and rankings and how these constrain strategic choice. Design/methodology/approach - The paper builds on existing literature to provide an analytical overview of the challenges currently facing business schools. Findings - The paper assesses the current context of business schools and assesses to what extent they are becoming less relevant both in terms of practice and theories. It suggests changes business schools might make in order to increase relevance. Research limitations/implications - The paper suggests that further research on the future of business schools is urgently needed. Practical implications - The paper suggests that business schools should change their central concerns to issues of central relevance to society and to policy. A wide range of such topics ranging from climate change to exogenous events is suggested. Originality/value - The value of the paper lies in identifying why busines schools are stuck in a rut and are failing to deliver relevant research and pedagogy.
Source: David Wilson, Howard Thomas, (2012) "The Legitimacy of the Business of Business Schools: What’s the Future?", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 31 Iss: 4 David C. Wilson, Department of Sociology, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK 
Europe’s universities are very well represented among the world’s top 200 universities, but almost absent in the top 50. They are economically, culturally and socially underexploited. There is an urgent need to alter the context for European universities to strengthen the European competitive position through economic innovation, increased social cohesion and a more vibrant cultural dynamism. The unbalanced demographics in the world – with a virtually constant supply of graduates in the developed West and a potentially fast increase in the number of graduates in developing countries – pose both new threats and new opportunities for European universities. Europe can cash in on these opportunities by reinventing its higher education, taking into account the lessons learned from effective education for an international labor market, from the valorization of knowledge but also from the matching and selection of students. Jozef Ritzen outlines a series of changes necessary to make European universities more successful:|Denationalization of the Bologna process with emphasis on European-wide accreditation and quality control;|Moving the organization of universities from the bureaucratic to the innovative;|Rebalancing the financing system so that the public budget cuts of the past decades can be met by private sources.
The book contains an interesting list of university identities: (chapter 6), which stimulates the thinking on the future of universities: The Oligarchic University
Book: Jo Ritzen Table of content: http://www.aup.nl/do.php?a=process_visitor_download&editorial_id=3014 
the author proposes five factors — peer review, open access, enriched content, available datasets and machine-readable metadata — as the Five Stars of Online Journal Articles, a constellation of five independent criteria within a multi-dimensional publishing universe against which online journal articles can be evaluated, to see how well they match up with current visions for enhanced research communications. Achievement along each of these publishing axes can vary, analogous to the different stars within the constellation shining with varying luminosities. I suggest a five-point scale for each, by which a journal article can be evaluated, and provide diagrammatic representations for such evaluations. While the criteria adopted for these scales are somewhat arbitrary, and while the rating of a particular article on each axis may involve elements of subjective judgment, these Five Stars of Online Journal Articles provide a conceptual framework by which to judge the degree to which any article achieves or falls short of the ideal, which should be useful to authors, editors and publishers. I exemplify such evaluations using my own recent publications of relevance to semantic publishing.
Source: David Shotton, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford D-Lib Magazine January/February 2012 doi:10.1045/january2012-shotton 
Combing perspectives from business school Deans from around the world, as well as scholars and business leaders, this book presents a unique discussion of the current and future challenges facing business schools today. Business schools are arguably some of the most influential institutions in contemporary society, heavily influencing the way much socioeconomic activity is conducted. The education they provide is an important theme to be considered in its own right – and perhaps even challenged. This exciting book explores the role of business schools in contemporary global society through 3 key dimensions: How business school legitimacy has been challenged by the recent economic crisis and corporate scandals; How business schools contribute to shaping and transforming business conduct; and How business schools, past and present, develop their identities to face the challenges presented by the ongoing globalization process. Combing perspectives from business school Deans from around the world, as well as scholars and business leaders, this book presents a unique discussion of the current and future challenges facing business schools today.
Book: Business Schools and their Contribution to Society Mette Morsing Copenhagen Business School, Denmark 280 pages SAGE Publications Ltd 2011. ISBN: 9780857023872 
There probably aren’t 31 clear flavours of research impact. How many are there? Maybe 5 or 7 or 12? We don’t know. But it would be a safe bet that, just like ice cream, our society needs them all. It depends whether we have a cone or a piece of apple pie. The goal isn’t to compare flavours: one flavour isn’t objectively better than another. They each have to be appreciated on their own merits for the needs they meet. To do this we have to be able to tell the flavours apart. Imagine that for ice cream all you had to go by was a sweetness metric. Not happening, right? So too, citations alone can’t fully inform what kind of difference a research paper has made on the world. Important, but not enough. We need more dimensions to distinguish the flavour clusters from each other. This is where #altmetrics comes in. By analyzing patterns in what people are reading, bookmarking, sharing, discussing, AND citing online we can figure out what kind – what flavour – of impact a research output is making. Unfortunately we can’t accurately derive the meaning of these activities by just thinking about them. What kind of impact *is* it if someone tweets about a paper a lot? Is it a titilating champagne giggle because the title was amusing, or a strawberry indication they were thrilled because someone just solved their method struggle? We need to do research to figure this out. Flavours are important for research outputs other than just papers, too. Some publicly available research datasets are used all the time in education but rarely research, others are used once or twice by really impactful projects, others across a field for calibration, etc. Understanding and recognizing these usage scenarios will be key in recognizing and rewarding the contributions of dataset creators.
source: Research Remix, Heather Piwowar 
In light of the challenges posed by the pending REF, RAND Europe and Ranmore Consulting Group have developed an analysis and advice package to support universities in their preparations and, crucially, to help them evaluate the impact of their research portfolios. At the core of this advice package is the RAND Europe ImpactFinder tool — a methodology for identifying impactful research. The ImpactFinder methodology was developed initially for the Arthritis Research Campaign and is now used by a number of research funders. The ImpactFinder provides an overview of research impact and a basis for more detailed examination of the ‘why and how’ of research translation. The tool is implemented as a web questionnaire and collects information across a range of social, cultural and economic impacts.
To give you an idea of where impacts are likely to fall please refer to this brief summary of what is included in the survey section for each research area:
1. Project/programme: This section asks what discipline(s) you are associated with, and what type(s) of research activities you have been involved in.
2. Wider engagement: This section asks if research projects involving engagement with individuals and/or groups outside of the university system have led to benefits for those outside of the university system. This asks about any collaborative research that has taken place, and any impacts that might have emerged as a result of collaborative activity.
3. Society and quality of life: This section asks about the dissemination activities and benefits associated with your research more widely in society and business. It first asks about dissemination activities to audiences outside of academia. It then asks about contributions to public knowledge creation, education and learning, business practices, and legal outcomes.
4. Public policy: This section asks about impacts your research may have had on policymaking. For example, if your work informed policymaking processes and/or decision making in policy entities (e.g. national government, European Union, industry, etc.)
5. Cultural benefits: This brief section asks about impacts on cultural activities, broadly defined, including contributions through cultural enrichment, public events, the creative industries and preservation of heritage.
6. Economic benefits: This section asks about the diversity of economic benefits that can be associated with your research, including employment opportunities, revenues, etc.
7. Inventions/Products: This section asks about long-term impacts through contributions to copy right/patented products and/or inventions.
The ImpactFinder, can be accessed at: http://demo.impactfinder.org/ 
Hoping it can help Europe to conquer the economic crisis and to secure Europe’s future position in the global economy, EU policy makers clearly aim for innovation. On different occasions the League of European Research Universities (LERU) has emphasized the particular role universities play in the innovation process. Crucial for that role are the universities’ technology transfer offices, whose functioning is investigated in LERU’s new advice paper The TTO, a university engine transforming science in innovation. In a first part the paper focusses on the role and relevance of the TTO in academia. It presents a model of three stage development, from TTOs as isolated islands of technology transfer activity within the university (stage 1) to an inclusive TTO operation operating across the research, teaching and innovation dimensions of the knowledge triangle (stage 3). “It is clear”, says Koen Debackere, Executive Director of KU Leuven Research & Development and author of the paper, “that strong and unambiguous university leadership support is critical to the continuous growth and development of a professional TTO operation.” In a second part of the paper the governance and organisation of the TTO are analysed. Governance aspects such as autonomy are crucial for the TTO to develop its activities successfully. Finally ten critical success factors (CSF) for an effective TTO operation are identified. They focus on the degree of autonomy of the TTO from the university and the mandate a TTO might need to operate in its region to build an effective spin-out operation, but also on the need for a supportive external environment. Other CSFs set out the incentives and code of conduct schemes TTOs can install for the academic community and give recommendations for TTO staff, the internal organisation of the office and the position of the TTO in the university.
Source: LERU. The League of European Research Universities (LERU) is as an association of leading research-intensive universities that share the values of high-quality teaching within an environment of internationally competitive research. Fulltext: http://www.leru.org/files/publications/TTO_paper_final.pdf 
American universities today serve as economic engines, performing the scientific research that will create new industries, drive economic growth, and keep the United States globally competitive. But only a few decades ago, these same universities self-consciously held themselves apart from the world of commerce. Creating the Market University is the first book to systematically examine why academic science made such a dramatic move toward the market. Drawing on extensive historical research, Elizabeth Popp Berman shows how the government--influenced by the argument that innovation drives the economy--brought about this transformation. Americans have a long tradition of making heroes out of their inventors. But before the 1960s and '70s neither policymakers nor economists paid much attention to the critical economic role played by innovation. However, during the late 1970s, a confluence of events--industry concern with the perceived deterioration of innovation in the United States, a growing body of economic research on innovation's importance, and the stagnation of the larger economy--led to a broad political interest in fostering invention. The policy decisions shaped by this change were diverse, influencing arenas from patents and taxes to pensions and science policy, and encouraged practices that would focus specifically on the economic value of academic science. By the early 1980s, universities were nurturing the rapid growth of areas such as biotech entrepreneurship, patenting, and university-industry research centers. Contributing to debates about the relationship between universities, government, and industry, Creating the Market University sheds light on how knowledge and politics intersect to structure the economy. Elizabeth Popp Berman is assistant professor of sociology at the University at Albany, State University of New York.
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Chapter 1: Academic Science as an Economic Engine 1 Chapter 2: Market Logic in the Era of Pure Science 19 Chapter 3: Innovation Drives the Economy-an Old Idea with New Implications 40 Chapter 4: Faculty Entrepreneurship in the Biosciences 58 Chapter 5: Patenting University Inventions 94 Chapter 6: Creating University-Industry Research Centers 119 Chapter 7: The Spread of Market Logic 146 Chapter 8: Conclusion 158
Link to chapter 1 fulltext:
|
| Previous |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  |
12 |
|
Next |
