This article explores the emerging institutionalization of collaborative university–industry networks in Russia. The Russian government has attempted to use a top-down public policy scheme to stimulate and promote network-building in the R&D sector. In order to understand the initial organizational responses that universities and companies select while structuring collaborations, the article utilizes conceptual perspectives from institutional theory, especially drawing on arguments from strategic choice, network-building, and network failure studies.
BarleySRTolbertPS (1997) Institutionalization and structuration: Studying the links between action and institution. Organization Studies18(1): 93–117.
2.
BattilanaJLecaBBoxenbaumE (2009) How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. The Academy of Management Annals3(1): 65–107.
3.
BiegelbauerPSBorrásS (eds) (2003) Innovation Policies in Europe and the US: The New Agenda. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company.
4.
BoardmanPC (2009) Government centrality to university-industry interactions: University research centres and the industry involvement of academic researchers. Research Policy38(10): 1505–1516.
5.
BradachJLEcclesRG (1989) Price, authority, and trust: From ideal types to plural forms. Annual Review of Sociology15: 97–118.
6.
ClarkBR (1998) Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation. Oxford: IAU Press and Pergamon Press.
7.
ColyvasJAPowellWW (2006) Roads to institutionalization: The remaking of boundaries between public and private science. Research in Organizational Behavior: An Annual Series of Analytical Essays and Critical Reviews27: 305–353.
8.
CoudercM-L (1996) Adaptation of some former research units to the new economic environment in Russia. Science and Public Policy23(6): 375–384.
9.
DiMaggioPJ (1988) Interest and agency in institutional theory. In: ZuckerLG (ed.) Institutional Patterns and Organizations: Culture and Environment. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company, 3–21.
10.
DiMaggioPJ (1997) Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology23: 263–287.
11.
DiMaggioPJPowellWW (1983) The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review48(2): 147–160.
12.
DykerDA (1998) Key actors in the process of innovation and technology transfer in the context of economic transition. Science and Public Policy25(4): 239–245.
13.
EgorovI (1995) The transformation of R&D potential in Ukraine. Europe-Asia Studies47(4): 651–668.
14.
EtzkowitzH (2008) The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action. New York: Routledge.
15.
EtzkowitzHZhouC (2008) Building the entrepreneurial university: A global perspective. Science and Public Policy35(9): 627–635.
FligsteinNMcAdamD (2012) A Theory of Fields. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
18.
GaponenkoN (1995) Transformation of the research system in a transitional society: The case of Russia. Social Studies of Science25(4): 685–703.
19.
GerberTPBallDY (2009) Scientists in a changed institutional environment: Subjective adaptation and social responsibility norms in Russia. Social Studies of Science39(4): 529–567.
20.
GershmanMAZininaTCRomanovMA (2015) Программы инновационного развития компаний с государственным участием: промежуточные итоги и приоритеты [Programs of Innovation Development for State Corporations: Outcomes and Tendencies]. Moscow: Higher School of Economics.
21.
GrahamLR (1993) Science in Russia and the Soviet Union: A Short History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22.
GrahamLRDezhinaI (2008) Science in the New Russia: Crisis, Aid, Reform. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
23.
GranovetterM (1985) Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology91(3): 481–510.
24.
GulatiR (1995) Social structure and alliance formation patterns: A longitudinal analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly40(4): 619–652.
25.
HirschmanAO (1970) Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations and States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26.
HwangVWHorowittG (2012) The Rainforest: The Secret to Building the Next Silicon Valley. Los Altos Hills, CA: Regenwald.
27.
KneenP (1995) Science in shock: Russian science policy in transition. Europe-Asia Studies47(2): 281–303.
28.
KnieALengwilerM (2008) Token endeavours: The significance of academic spin-offs in technology transfer and research policy in Germany. Science and Public Policy35(3): 171–182.
29.
Kommersant (2012) Принуждение к инновациям [Innovations by coercion]. Available at: http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1890579 (accessed 24 May 2016).
30.
LamA (2010) From ‘Ivory tower traditionalists’ to ‘entrepreneurial scientists?’ Academic scientists in fuzzy university-industry boundaries. Social Studies of Science40(2): 307–340.
31.
LawrenceTBLecaBZilberTB (2013) Institutional work: Current research, new directions and overlooked issues. Organization Studies34(8): 1023–1033.
32.
MalyginL (2011) Головоломка эффективности [Puzzle of efficiency]. Expert Severo-Zapad1: 32–33.
33.
Maximova-MentzoniT (2013) The Changing Russian University: From State to Market. Oxford: Routledge.
34.
MeyerJWRowanB (1977) Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology83(2): 340–363.
35.
MeyerJWRowanB (1983) The structure of educational organizations. In: MeyerJWScottWR (eds) Organizational Environments: Ritual and Rationality. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 71–97.
36.
MöllersN (2016) Shifting in and out of context: Technoscientific drama as technology of the self. Social Studies of Science (3): 351–373.
OliverC (1991) Strategic responses to institutional processes. The Academy of Management Review16(1): 145–179.
39.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (1992) Technology and the Economy: The Key Relationships. Paris: OECD.
40.
PerkmannMTartariVMcKelveyM. (2013) Academic engagement and commercialization: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy42(2): 423–442.
41.
PfefferJSalancikGR (1978) The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
42.
PodolnyJMPageKL (1998) Network forms of organization. Annual Review of Sociology24: 57–76.
43.
PowellWW (1988) Institutional effects on organizational structure and performance. In: ZuckerLG (ed.) Institutional Patterns and Organizations: Culture and Environment. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 115–136.
44.
PowellWW (1990) Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior12: 295–336.
45.
PowellWWBrantleyP (1992) Competitive cooperation in biotechnology: Learning through networks? In: NohriaNEcclesR (eds) Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School, 366–394.
46.
PowellWWKoputKWSmith-DoerrL (1996) Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly41(1): 116–145.
47.
RadosevicS (2011) Science-industry links in Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States: Conventional policy wisdom facing reality. Science and Public Policy38(5): 365–378.
48.
SabelCF (1993) Studied trust: Building new forms of cooperation in a volatile economy. Human Relations46(9): 1133–1170.
49.
SaxenianA (1994) Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.
50.
SchrankAWhitfordJ (2011) The anatomy of network failure. Sociological Theory29(3): 151–177.
51.
SlaughterSLeslieLL (1997) Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies and the Entrepreneurial University. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
52.
SoubbotinaTWeissC (2009) A new model of technological learning for Russia. Science and Public Policy36(4): 271–286.
53.
StarSLGriesemerJR (1989) Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science19(3): 387–420.
54.
StarkD (1996) Recombinant property in East European capitalism. American Journal of Sociology101(4): 993–1027.
55.
ThompsonJD (1967) Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative TheoryNew Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
56.
ThuneTGulbrandsenM (2011) Institutionalization of university-industry interaction: An empirical study of the impact of formal structures on collaboration patterns. Science and Public Policy38(2): 99–107.
57.
UzziB (1997) Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly42(1): 35–67.
58.
YusufS (2007) University-industry links: Policy dimensions. In: YusufSNabeshimaK (eds) How Universities Promote Economic Growth. Washington, DC: World Bank, 1–26.
59.
ZietsmaCLawrenceTB (2010) Institutional work in the transformation of an organizational field: The interplay of boundary work and practice work. Administrative Science Quarterly55(2): 189–221.
