Evaluation of internal and external channels as influencing factors for STP

Illustrated in Figure 37, the businesses defined as strong knowledge seekers generally rated the importance of the considered internal sources as well as external channels and platforms in terms of KNM instruments for the development and realization of knowledge ties to academia more strongly than the other two identified groups of STP resident firms.

For strong knowledge seekers, a broad range of internal and external channels are identi-fied as crucial sources for the creation and realization of knowledge relations to academia.

Figure 37: Evaluation of internal and external channels for knowledge interaction with academia by types of knowledge seekers (n=52)²⁰¹

Source: Author

Overall, the large majority of the 52 firms interviewed (77%) assessed that knowledge rela-tions to scientific actors originated from personal relarela-tionships. Among the distinct groups identified, almost all firms defined as strong knowledge seekers (95%) and moderate

201 The pooled share of firms (in %) is displayed that evaluated the respective variable as very important and important.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

INTERNAL CHANNELS Personal relations Requests by academic institutions

EXTERNAL CHANNELS & SETTINGS (KNOWLEDGE NETWORK MANAGEMENT)

STP-related knowledge marketing Local networking events Locally organized conferences Local university TTO STP management company Regional innovation promoting entities Local technology networks Public support schemes for industry-academia R&D

projects

All businesses (n=52) Strong knowledge seekers (n=21) Moderate knowledge seekers (n=18) Lame knowledge seekers (n=13)

knowledge seekers (100%) highlighted the fundamental function of social networks in this regard. A by comparison smaller share of lame knowledge seekers (54%) evaluated like-wise. Altogether, these findings coincide with observations of Thune (2009) and Polt et al.

(2009). Congruently, they point to the critical role of social embeddedness and social prox-imity, respectively, in knowledge relations, as Granovetter (1985) and many other scholars have highlighted.

In contrast, only approximately 27% of all companies stressed inquiries by researchers and scientific institutions as an important source for the creation and realization of interactive ties. Also Polt et al. (2009) have only rarely observed the initiation of such linkages by sci-entists. However, a disproportionate share of ca. 52% of strong knowledge seekers indi-cated a special significance to this direct channel in particular. On the one hand, this also punctuates the crucial role of personal networks and embeddedness as important enabling factors for firms’ knowledge ties to academia. On the other hand, it alludes to the im-portance of the firms’ structural embeddedness in specific networks or communities of practice in conjunction with networked reputation. Also, Menzel (2015) has underlined the important role of mediated trustworthiness among previously unrelated actors in networks.

In terms of external channels and platforms, i.e. ways through which collaborative relation-ships are formed without prior contact between firms and scientific institutions, the majority of firms (65%) stated the important function of publicly coordinated industry-academia R&D projects. Typically, support programmes run by regional and national governments (e.g.

German Ministry of Economy and the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation), as well as the European Commission (e.g. Framework Programme for Research and Innovation) manage such projects. Based on the geographical alignment of these programmes, in par-ticular non-local industry-academia knowledge relations are promoted. Coinciding with the specifically strong emphasis on extra-local knowledge relations, especially in terms of re-gional and national pipelines, firms categorized as strong knowledge seekers and moder-ate knowledge seekers emphasized publicly subsidized joint R&D projects disproportion-ately (86% and 67%, respectively). Lame knowledge seekers, who also put emphasis on interactive links to academia external to the STP to a significant degree, only ca. 31% of related businesses rated such public schemes either as important or very important. As emphasized in the literature, publicly subsidized R&D projects provide monetary incentives to stimulate industry-academia relations. Furthermore, they enable firms to gain access to new scientific knowledge and sophisticated scientific equipment, as well as to gain insights into emerging technologies. As a result, R&D collaborations with universities or non-university research institutions have been underlined as crucial settings for the creation

and acquisition of new knowledge that, in turn, enable companies to accelerate their tech-nological development processes and the development of new products (Caloghirou et al., 2001; Perkmann et al., 2011).

Second in importance as an external channel, for roughly 46% of the 52 firms were net-working events in STPs. In particular, many strong knowledge seekers (57.1%) stressed the importance of local networking events such as the Adlershof-based Academic Lunch and the Cartuja 93 Working Breakfast. On the other hand, moderate knowledge seekers and lame knowledge seekers underlined such gatherings to a smaller degree (44% and 31%, respectively). By comparison, only a considerably smaller fraction of about 29% of the interviewees overall stated that locally organized industry and scientific conferences are important platforms for the development and realization of knowledge relations to aca-demia, respectively. Notably, however, firms linked to the category of strong knowledge seekers regarded conferences substantially more important (52%) than businesses in the two other groups (17% and 8%, respectively). Thus, those STP resident firms with very strong local and non-local knowledge relations to scientific institutions particularly take ad-vantage of both KNM instruments, networking events and conferences, to form and strengthen linkages with scientific knowledge sources. While local networking events can be considered as gatherings of primarily, but not necessarily exclusively, STP residents, especially conferences with a supra-regional reputation tend to attract national or interna-tional knowledge organizations, as Bathelt and Cohendet (2014), among others, have pointed out. For the former, the results correspond to the important function of networking and social events in the development of personal ties and informal exchange of information in Silicon Valley, which has been emphasized by Dahl and Pedersen (2004). Also Harmaa-korpi and Melkas (2005) have noted that networking events and other kinds of organized social gatherings are important for initiating first informal personal interaction and increas-ing social cohesion among knowledge organizations in regional innovation networks. For the latter, the findings in regard to strong knowledge seekers reaffirm Polt et al. (2009), who have also identified conferences and congresses as very important sources for busi-nesses to initiate collaborative relations to scientific institutions. Moreover, the results point to the notion of conferences as temporary clusters (Maskell et al., 2004) and temporary trans-local knowledge nodes (Bathelt & Zakrzewski, 2007) that expose participants to in-formal flows of information, referred to as local and global buzz, and facilitate the develop-ment of knowledge relations to knowledge carriers worldwide.

Furthermore, about 40% of the 52 companies indicated that STP-based technology net-works, such as Technologiekreis Adlershof, Forum Adlershof and Círculo de Empresarios

de Cartuja, that comprise resident businesses and scientific are crucial sources of cross-institutional knowledge relations. Among the three categories of knowledge seekers, firms categorized as strong knowledge seekers in particular, namely ca. 62% of associated firms, emphasized this point. In contrast, only small fractions of the other two groups (33% and 15%, respectively) assigned a similar relevance to this KNM tool. Overall, the findings match to observations of other scholars (Brühöfener McCourt, 2009; Jähnke, 2009) who have stressed the positive impact of the formal networks Technologiekreis Adlershof and OpTecBB on local interactive relations in the Adlershof science park. Similarly, Longhi (1999) and Lazaric et al. (2004) have highlighted the positive effects of STP-bound profes-sional networks on local inter-organizational interaction at the Sophia-Antipolis technopole.

From the broader spectrum of organizations intermediating between the private sector and science examined for the KNM systems of the Adlershof and Cartuja science parks, the STP management organizations WISTA-MG and Cartuja 93 were evaluated as most im-portant intermediaries overall. About 39% of all interviewees in conjunction with similar fractions throughout the three specified types of knowledge seekers highlighted this KNM instrument.²⁰² In addition, approximately 35% of the 52 companies underlined the bounda-ry-spanning function of selected regional innovation promoting entities, for example, Berlin Partner and TSB for Berlin, as well as CTA, CITAndalucía and Agency IDEA for Andalu-sia.²⁰³ In this case, however, the evaluation of the different types of knowledge seekers diverges. Accordingly, an above average share of strong knowledge seekers (43%) and one third of the firms classified as moderate knowledge seekers emphasized their im-portant function as brokers between industry and academia. In contrast, only ca. 23% of lame knowledge seekers rated them as an important channel for interactive ties to scientific actors. By comparison, the interviewees contemplated the significance of the university TTO, Humboldt-Innovation of the HU-Berlin and OTRI/STCE of the University of Seville, as specialized industry-academia interfaces as marginal.²⁰⁴ Consequently, the management companies of both STPs and regional innovation promoting institutions are found to most likely meet the complex functions of industry-academia intermediaries, as the identification

202 Accordingly, ca. 43% of strong knowledge seekers, ca. 33% of moderate knowledge seekers and ca. 39%

of lame knowledge seekers evaluated the STP management company as important or very important chan-nel for the formation and realization of interactive links to academia.

203 The regional innovation promoting organizations Agency IDEA, CTA, CITAndalucía and FIDETIA maintain offices at the Cartuja science park. The Technologiestiftung Berlin had an office at the Adlershof science park between 1994 and 2010 (Expert interview with WISTA-MG, 15 January 2013).

204 Accordingly, ca. 17 of all firms, as well as ca. 24% of strong knowledge seekers, ca. 17% of moderate knowledge seekers and ca. 8% of lame knowledge seekers evaluated the university TTO as important or very important combined.

of appropriate cooperation partners and the mediation of relationships between prior unre-lated actors, among others (Howells, 2006). Overall, the observed varying effectiveness of different kinds of intermediary organizations in regard to their anticipated role as active facilitators in knowledge relations between companies and scientific institutions has also been reflected in various previous studies. For example, Fukugawa (2006, 2010) has highlighted the positive outcomes of knowledge brokering activities of incubation managers on interaction between resident firms and research centres in Japanese STPs. Especially the low relevance of university TTO as industry-academia intermediaries has also been pointed out by many scholars, for example, Schmoch (1999) and Polt et al. (2009).

Ultimately, only a small number of the interviewees overall (19%) and of the three defined groups rated STP-related knowledge marketing as important channel enabling the for-mation of interactive ties to scientific institutions. In comparative terms, especially lame knowledge seekers (23%) stressed this KNM instrument, which aims to facilitate the identi-fication of suitable knowledge and related local knowledge sources at the STP in particu-lar.²⁰⁵ Thus, the results do not reaffirm findings of Lazaric et al. (2004, 2008) that have em-phasized enhanced knowledge interaction in the ICT cluster of the Sophia-Antipolis nopole due to the STP’s improved knowledge marketing in terms of knowledge and tech-nology mapping. However, it has also been asserted that these positive effects were strongly affected by the active involvement of relevant resident organizations in the rede-sign process of the information management system.

In sum, in addition to personal networks as crucial sources for the STP resident firms’

knowledge relations to academia, specific KNM instruments function as important transfer channels and platforms, through which firms build interactive relations with previously unre-lated scientific institutions. This applies to publicly subsidized and coordinated R&D pro-jects, local networking events, local technology networks and selected intermediaries (i.e.

STP management firms and regional innovation agencies) in specifically. Furthermore, in-quiries by scientific institutions and locally organized conferences are additional crucial sources of strong knowledge seekers in particular. By comparison, firms specified as strong knowledge seekers more strongly take advantage of a broader range of enabling channels in terms of both internal sources and KNM instruments than the other two groups of STP resident companies. Figure 38 provides a simplified, comparative illustration of the internal and external channels that affect knowledge interaction with academia of the two

205 Ca. 19% and 17% of the firms identified as strong and moderate knowledge seekers, respectively, evaluat-ed STP-relatevaluat-ed knowlevaluat-edge marketing strongly.

clusters of strong knowledge seekers and moderate knowledge seekers (the weight of the arrows accords to the ratio, how many firms evaluated the specific channels enabling knowledge relations to academia as important and very important).

Figure 38: Enabling channels and settings utilized by strong knowledge seekers and moderate knowledge seekers

Source: Author