Corporate Satisfaction with Public Centers of Investigation: The CSIC

• José Antonio PEDRAZA RODRÍGUEZ ^[1] ; Manuel FERNÁNDEZ ESQUINAS ^[2] ; María Amalia TRILLO HOLGADO ^[1] ; José Luís CAÑADAS RECHE ^[1]
  1. [1] Universidad de Córdoba (Colombia)

     Universidad de Córdoba (Colombia)

     Colombia

     
  2. [2] CSIC
• Localización: Estudios Economicos Regionales y Sectoriales : EERS: Regional and sectoral economic studies : RSES, ISSN 1578-4460, Vol. 16, Nº. 1, 2016, págs. 55-70
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Resumen

  • The goal of this article is to analyze company satisfaction with intangible assets that have to do with collaborative work in Research Development activities between corporations and centers of investigation, while focusing ourselves particularly on the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC) case. Firstly, maintaining an approach focused mainly on the Intellectual Capital, this investigation extensively and thoroughly addresses corporate satisfaction with the CSIC. Secondly, by means of multiple logistic regression analysis, a study was conducted utilizing characteristics of both corporations and institutes of the CSIC that yielded a greater influence in the overall corporate satisfaction. The extensive analysis reveals that corporations prove to be satisfied with the three dimensions of Intellectual Capital, as a reference of worth and quality of its intangibles. Some aspects, however, can be greatly improved upon. The regression analysis indicates that the institutes’ source of revenue and companies’ chief financing market are characteristics that influence the companies’ satisfaction when participating in Research Development activities.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Arvanitis, S., Kubli, U., & Woerter, M. (2008). University-industry knowledge and technology transfer in Switzerland: What university...
  • Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2010). Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory. The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in...
  • Berkley, B. J., & Gupta, A. (1995). Identifying the information requirements to deliver quality service. International Journal of Service...
  • Bonaccorsi, A., & Piccaluga, A. (1994). A theoretical framework for the evaluation of university‐industry relationships. R&D Management,...
  • Bontis, N. (1999). Managing an organizational learning system by aligning stocks and flows of knowledge: An empirical examination of intellectual...
  • Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research policy, 29(4), 627-655.
  • Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. 2006. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. xiii.
  • Bueno Campos, E., & Moreno, C. M. (2007). El capital intelectual y la creación de empresas en la sociedad del conocimiento. Encuentros...
  • Bueno Campos, E., Del Real, H., Fernández, P., Longo, M., Merino, C., & Murcia, C. (2011). Modelo Intellectus de Medición, Gestión e Información...
  • Chesbrough, H. (2006). New puzzles and new findings. Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 15-33.
  • Christensen, C. M., & Eyring, H. J. (2011). How Disruptive Innovation is Remaking the University. Harvard Business School Newsletter.
  • Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2002). Links and impacts: the influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management...
  • Comisión Europea (2014). Horizon 2020 en breve. Recuperado de https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/sites/horizon2020/files/H2020_ES_KI0...
  • Davenport, S., Davies, J., & Grimes, C. (1998). Collaborative research programmes: building trust from difference. Technovation, 19(1),...
  • Edvinsson, L., & Malone, M. S. (1997). Intellectual Capital: Realizing Your Company's True Value by Finding Its Hidden Brainpower.
  • Elosua, P. & Zumbo, B. D. (2008). Coeficientes de fiabilidad para escalas de respuesta categórica ordenada. Psicothema, 20(4), 896-901.
  • Euroforum, E. (1998). Medición del Capital Intelectual, Modelo Intelect.
  • Fernández de Lucio, I., Vega Jurado, J. M., & Gutiérrez Gracia, A. (2011). Ciencia e innovación: una relación compleja y evolutiva. Arbor,...
  • Fernández Esquinas, M., Catalán, C. D., & Vielba, I. R. (2011). Evaluación y política científica en España: el origen y la implantación...
  • Ferrando, P. J. (1996). Evaluación de la unidimensionalidad de los ítems mediante análisis factorial. Psicothema, 8(2), 397-410.
  • Grönroos, C. (1984). A service quality model and its marketing implications. European Journal of marketing, 18(4), 36-44.
  • Gulbrandsen, M., Mowery, D., & Feldman, M. (2011). Introduction to the special section: Heterogeneity and university–industry relations....
  • Ittner, C. D., & Larcker, D. F. (1996). Measuring the impact of quality initiatives on firm financial performance. Advances in the management...
  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard: translating strategy into action. Harvard Business Press.
  • Lee, Y. S. (1998). University‐Industry Collaboration on Technology Transfer: Views from the Ivory Tower. Policy Studies Journal, 26(1),...
  • Martínez-Tur, V., Peiró, J. M., & Ramos, J. (2001). Calidad de servicio y satisfacción del ciudadano: una perspectiva psicosocial.
  • Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science: knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty (p. 12). Cambridge:...
  • OECD (2002). Benchmarking industry-science relationships. Technical report.
  • O’Connor, B. (2006). Cautions regarding item-level factor analyses. Recuperado desde: https://peop| e. ok. ubc. ca/brioconn/nfactors/¡ temanaly...
  • OECD (2011). Public Research Institutions: Mapping Sector Trends. OECD Publishing.
  • Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). Servqual. Journal of retailing, 64(1), 12-40.
  • Popkova, E. G., Yurev, V., Stepicheva, O., & Denisov, N. (2015). Transformation and Concentration Of Intellectual Capital As A Factor...
  • Rappert, B., Webster, A., & Charles, D. (1999). Making sense of diversity and reluctance: academic–industrial relations and intellectual...
  • Sábato, J., & Botana, N. (1968). La ciencia y la tecnología en el desarrollo futuro de América Latina. Revista de la Integración, 1(3),...
  • Santoro, M. D., & Chakrabarti, A. K. (2002). Firm size and technology centrality in industry–university interactions. Research policy,...
  • Schartinger, D., Schibany, A., & Gassler, H. (2001). Interactive relations between universities and firms: empirical evidence for Austria....
  • Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university...
  • Sullivan, P. H. (2000). Value driven intellectual capital: how to convert intangible corporate assets into market value. John Wiley &...
  • Sveiby, K. E. (1997). The intangible assets monitor. Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 2(1), 73-97.
  • Turpin, T., Garrett‐Jone, S., & Rankin, N. (1996). Bricoleurs and boundary riders: managing basic research and innovation knowledge...
  • Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). Problems and strategies in services marketing. The Journal of Marketing, 33-46.
  • Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1993). The nature and determinants of customer expectations of service. Journal of the...
  • Ziman, J. (1996). Knowledge with Networks and Norms. Science Studies, 9(1), 67fi80.