Two emergent conceptual models for fostering the development of innovative technology through applied science at Cooperative Research Centers (CRCs) – the Triple Helix and the science of team science – have proved highly productive in stimulating research into how the innovation process works. Although the two arenas for fostering innovation have much in common, there has been relatively little synergy, or even interaction, between the researchers who study them. In this paper the authors discuss a programme of research that has attempted to blend the two, by shedding light on team processes within Triple Helix CRCs. They report findings from CRCs in relation to the comparative characteristics of single-scientist and multi-scientist, team-based partnerships; collaborative processes among CRC scientists, sometimes involving ‘serial’ collaboration; and the role of spatial factors in team-based processes. The paper also explores the possibilities for exploiting the synergies between Triple Helix and science of team science for public policy, innovative practices and future research.
AllenT. J. (1977), Managing the Flow of Technology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
2.
BoardmanC.GrayD.O. (in press), ‘The new science and engineering management: Cooperative research centers as government policies, industry strategies and organizations’, Journal of Technology Transfer.
3.
CohenW.FloridaR.GoeW. R. (1994), University–Industry Research Centers in the United States, Center for Economic Development, H. John Heinz III School of Public Policy and Management, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
4.
CummingsJ. N.KieslerS. (2007), ‘Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations’, Research Policy, Vol 36, No 10, pp 1620–1634.
5.
EtzkowitzH.LeydesdorffL. (1997), Universities and the Global Knowledge Economy: A Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations, Cassel Academic, London.
6.
EtzkowitzH.WebsterA.GebhardtC.TerraB. R. C. (2000), ‘The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm’, Research Policy, Vol 29, No 2, pp 313–330.
7.
FellerI. (1997), ‘Technology transfer from universities’, in SmartJ.C., ed, Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol 12, Agathon Press, New York.
8.
FriedmanR.S.FriedmanR.C. (1986), Sponsorship, Organization and Program Change at 100 Universities, Institute for Policy Research and Evaluation, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
9.
GrayD. O.JohnsonE.GidleyT. (1987), ‘Industry– University projects and centers: An empirical comparison of two federally funded models of cooperative science’, Evaluation Review, Vol 10, No 6, pp 776–793.
10.
GrayD. O.StewardM.GidleyT.BlakelyC. (1991), Self-sustaining Centers: Is There Life After NSF funding?, National Science Foundation, Washington, DC.
11.
GrayD. O. (2000), ‘Government-sponsored industry–university cooperative research: An analysis of cooperative research center evaluation approaches’, Research Evaluation, Vol 9, No 1, pp 57–67.
12.
GrayD. O. (2008), ‘Making team science better: Applying improvement-oriented evaluation principles to the evaluation of cooperative research centers’, New Directions for Evaluation, Vol 2008, Issue 118, pp 73–87.
13.
GrayD.O.McGowenL. (2008), NSF IUCRC Structural Information, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
14.
GrayD.O.RudolphJ. (2000), NSF IUCRC Process Outcome Survey Results for Industry and Faculty for 2000–2001, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
15.
GrayD.O.RiversD. (2007), NSF IUCRC Process Outcome Survey Results for Industry and Faculty for 2006–2007, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
16.
HallK. L.StokolsD.MoserR. P. (2008), ‘The collaboration readiness of transdisciplinary research teams and centers: Findings from the National Cancer Institute's TREC year-one evaluation study’, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol 35, No 2, pp S161–S172.
17.
HillierB.HansonJ. (1984), The Social Logic of Space, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
18.
McGowenL.GrayD.O. (2009), ‘R, T&D in context: Evaluating the indirect effects of self-sustaining cooperative research centers’, paper presented at the American Evaluation Association Annual Meeting, October 2009, Orlando, FL.
19.
Research Centers and Services Directory (2009), Thomson Gale, Farmington Hills, MI.
20.
RimoldiA. (2002), ‘Simultaneous product development: The move from serial collaboration to parallel co-development’, in CuginiU.WoznyM., eds, Kluwer International Federation for Information Processing Series, From Geometric Modeling to Shape Modeling, Kluwer Publishing, New York.
21.
ScottC. (2009), 2009 Compendium of Industry-Nominated Technology Breakthroughs of the NSF IUCRC, National Science Foundation, Washington, DC.
22.
StokolsD. (2006), ‘Toward a science of transdisciplinary action research’, American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol 38, Nos 1–2, pp 63–77.
23.
StokolsD.HallK. L.TaylorB. K.MoserR. P. (2008a), ‘The science of team science: An overview of the field and introduction to the supplement’, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol 35, No 2, pp S77–S93.
24.
StokolsD.MisraS.MoserR. P.HallK. L.TaylorB. K., (2008b), ‘The ecology of team science: Understanding contextual influences on transdisciplinary collaboration’, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol 35, No 2, pp S96–S115.
25.
SundstromE. (1986), Work Places: The Psychology of the Physical Environment in Offices and Factories, Cambridge University Press, New York.
26.
SundstromE. (2009), ‘Team science in cooperative research centers: Emerging research agenda’, in 7th Triple Helix International Conference Proceedings, Paper 3B3–3, Strathclyde University, Glasgow.
27.
SundstromE.AltmanI. (1989), ‘Physical environments and work-group effectiveness’, in CummingsL. L.StawB., eds, (1991), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol 11, pp 175–209, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
28.
Sundstrom, E., and Associates, (1999), Supporting Work Team Effectiveness: Best Management Practices for Fostering High Performance, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
29.
TokerU.GrayD.O. (2008), ‘Innovation spaces: Workspace planning and innovation in US university research centers’, Research Policy, Vol 37, No 2, pp 309–329.
30.
WagnerC. S.LeydesdorffL. (2005), ‘Network structure, self-organization and the growth of international collaboration in science’, Research Policy, Vol 34, No 10, pp 1608–1618.
