Innovation Activity of Universities: Analysis of Practices of Cooperation with Business and Government
https://doi.org/10.15826/umpa.2025.03.0019
Abstract
This study focuses on analyzing the forms of cooperation between universities and business structures i n organizing innovation activities. The relevance of the work is determined by the need to identify effective configurations of interaction adapted to contemporary economic realities. The purpose of the article is to identify and systematize effective models of university–business partnership based on a comparative analysis of existing practices in Russian higher education. The methodological framework of the research combines qualitative, quantitative, and causal analysis. The empirical basis includes data from official state statistics and specialized analytical and statistical collections covering the period from 2019 to 2024. As a result of the study, a typology of the innovative university was developed, with the level of integration with the business environment and government institutions serving as the key criterion. Depending on the maturity of university–business partnerships, three main models were identified: entrepreneurial, cluster, and ecosystemic. A matrix of criteria was designed to assess the stages of the life cycle in the development of strategic partnerships. The analysis identified key barriers to effective cooperation, including insufficient engagement of the business community, lack of expertise in technology commercialization, and the absence of adaptive institutional and financial support mechanisms. The findings emphasize the necessity of adopting a differentiated approach to forming partnerships, taking into account sectoral, economic, and institutional contexts. Based on empirical data and case analysis, the study formulates practical recommendations for optimizing innovation management systems in Russian universities. The conclusions are valuable for university administrators, education and science policymakers, as well as researchers studying innovation development and technology transfer.
About the Author
A. Kh. Shelepaeva
Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Albina Kh. Shelepaeva – PhD (Pedagogy), Associate Professor of the Department of Business Informatics
49/2 Leningradsky ave., Moscow, 125167
References
1. Etzkowitz H. Leydesdorff L. The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 2000, vol. 29, nr 2, pp. 109–123. (In Eng.).
2. Gokhberg L. M., Ditkovskii K. A., Kotsemir M. N. i dr. Nauka. Tekhnologii. Innovatsii: 2022: kratkii statisticheskii sbornik [Science. Technology. Innovations: 2022, a statistical compilation]. Moscow, NIU VShE, 2022, 98 p. (In Russ.).
3. Baldwin C. Y., Clark K. B. Architectural Innovation and Dynamic Competition: The Smaller “Footprint” Strategy, Harvard Business School Working Paper, 2006, 54 p. (In Eng.).
4. Tidd J., Bessant J. Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market and organizational change, Wiley, 2018, 557 p. (In Eng.).
5. Tidd J., Bessant J. Managing Innovation Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change, Wiley, 2024, 668 p. (In Eng.).
6. Rothwell R. Towards the Fifth-Generation Innovation Process. International Marketing Review, 1994, vol. 11, nr 1, pp. 7–31. (In Eng.).
7. Dodgson, M., Gann, D. M., Phillips, N. The Oxford handbook of innovation management, OUP Oxford, 2014, 700 p. (In Eng.).
8. Gokhberg L., Fursov K., Roud V. Technology measurement in statistics and beyond: reviving technological innovation concept. In: Handbook of Innovation Indicators and Measurement, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2023, pp. 240–258. (In Eng.).
9. Ol’khovaya T. A., Dokashenko L. V. Poisk optimal’nykh modelei vzaimodeistviya universitetov i rabotodatelei: analiz rezul’tatov mezhdunarodnogo issledovatel’skogo proekta «UNILAB – ot universiteta k rynku truda XXI veka» [Search for the optimal models of interaction between universities and employers: analysis of the results of the international research project “UNILAB – from university to labor market of the 21st century”]. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya, 2024, vol. 6, pp. 69–72. (In Russ.).
10. Smirnova S. B., Shabanov D. M. O trendakh upravlencheskoi modeli sovremennogo universiteta [On the trends in the management model of a modern university]. Nauchnyi rezul’tat. Tekhnologii biznesa i servisa, 2024, vol. 10, nr 2, pp. 115–122. doi 10.18413/2408-9346-2024-10-2-0-9. (In Russ.).
11. Ambarova P. A., Zborovskii G. E. Universitetskoe upravlenie v zerkale zapadnoi sotsiologii vysshego obrazovaniya [University management in the mirror of Western sociology of higher education]. Obrazovanie i nauka, 2020, vol. 22, nr 5, pp. 37–66. doi 10.17853/1994-5639-2020-5-37-66. (In Russ.).
12. Etzkowitz H., Leydesdorff L. The Triple Helix—University-Industry-Government relations: A laboratory for knowledge-based economic development. EASST Review, 1995, vol. 14, nr 1, pp. 14–19. (In Eng.).
13. Carayannis E. G., Campbell D. F. J. “Mode 3” and “Quadruple Helix”: Toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, Strategic university management-institutes in the Chinese ICT sector. Scientometrics, 2014, vol. 2009, vol. 46, nr 3/4, pp. 201–234. (In Eng.).
14. Vissema I. G. Universitet tret’ego pokoleniya: Upravlenie universitetom v perekhodnyi period [Third Generation University: University Management in Transition]. Moscow, Izdatel’stvo «Olimp-Biznes», 2016, 432 p. (In Russ.).
15. Bradley S. R., Hayter C. S., Link A. N. Models and methods of university technology transfer. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 2013, vol. 9 (6), pp. 571–650. doi 10.1561/0300000048 (In Eng.).
16. Kerr C. The Uses of the University. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2001, 288 p. (In Eng.).
17. Chesbrough H. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2003, 227 p. (In Eng.).
18. Martin-Rubio I., Andina-Díaz E. University knowledge-transfer offices and social responsibility. European Journal of Education, 2016, vol. 51 (1), pp. 67–78. doi 10.1111/ejed.12162. (In Eng.).
19. Rybnicek R., Königsgruber R. What makes industry-university collaboration succeeds? A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Business Economics, 2019, vol. 89 (2), pp. 221–250. doi 10.1007/s11573-018-0916-6. (In Eng.).
20. Ćudić B., Alešnik P., Hazemali D. Factors impacting university–industry collaboration in European countries. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 2022, vol. 11. doi 10.1186/s13731-022-00226-3. (In Eng.).
21. Aiello F., Cardamone P., Pupo V. New evidence on the firm–university linkages in Europe. The role of meritocratic management practices. International Review of Applied Economics, 2019, vol. 33 (5), pp. 1–16. doi 10.1080/02692171.2019.1608917 (In Eng.).
22. Salimi N., Rezaei J. Measuring efficiency of university–industry PhD projects using best worst method. Scientometrics, 2016, vol. 109 (3), pp. 1911–1938. (In Eng.).
23. Xia G., Xi G., Jiancheng G. An analysis of the patenting activities and collaboration among industry–university-research Информация об авторе / Information about the author: 98(1), pp. 247–263. doi 10.1007/s11192-013-1048-y. (In Eng.).
24. D’Costa A. P. Exports, university–industry linkages, and innovation challenges in Bangalore, India, available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/185661468258311681 (accessed 07.04.2025). (In Eng.).
25. Hwang I. The effect of collaborative innovation on ICT-based technological convergence: A patent-based analysis. PLoS ONE, 2020, vol. 15 (2), pp. 1–20. doi 10.1371/journal.pone.0228616. (In Eng.).
26. Valentin F., Jensen R. Effects on academia–industry collaboration of extending university property rights. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 2007, vol. 32 (3), pp. 251–276. (In Eng.).
27. Kobicheva A. The Structures Interaction Model Of Universities And Business. In: Professional Сulture of the Specialist of the Future, vol 51, European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 2018, pp. 407–415. doi 10.15405/epsbs.2018.12.02.44. (In Eng.).
28. Kobicheva A., Baranova T., Tokareva E. The development of an interaction mechanism between universities and other innovation system actors: Its influence on university innovation activity effectiveness. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 2020, vol. 6, nr 4, pp. 1–20. doi 10.3390/joitmc6040109. (In Eng.).
29. Kline S. J., Rosenberg N. An overview of innovation. In: The positive sum strategy: Harnessing technology for economic growth, Washington, National Academy Press, 1986, pp. 275-305. (In Eng.).
30. Chesbrough H. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business School Press, 2003, 245 p. (In Eng.).
31. Rothwell R. Towards the fifth-generation innovation process. International Marketing Review, 1994, vol. 11, nr 1, pp. 7–31. (In Eng.).
32. Ezhegodnyi monitoring deyatel’nosti organizatsii vysshego obrazovaniya [Annual monitoring of the activities of higher education organizations], available at: https://monitoring.miccedu.ru/?m=vpo (accessed 27.06.2025). (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Shelepaeva A.Kh. Innovation Activity of Universities: Analysis of Practices of Cooperation with Business and Government. University Management: Practice and Analysis. 2025;29(3):36-49. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15826/umpa.2025.03.0019
Views:
91
Email this article 