ACADEMIC RESEARCHERS MOTIVATION FACTORS: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32890/jtom2017.12.1.1Keywords:
Academic research commercialisation, extrinsic motivation factors, intrinsic motivation factors, prosocial motivation factorsAbstract
The Malaysian government has been striving to provide an environment conducive to research commercialisation in the country. Despite the efforts, the targeted research commercialisation rate has yet to be achieved. This paper explores the motivation of the academic researchers who had successfully commercialised their research. Literature classifies motivation factors as extrinsic, intrinsic, and prosocial, which might exist independently or in a combination (mixed-motivation). Within the academic research commercialisation context, a considerable number of existing studies have discussed the role of extrinsic motivation factors, while the issues of intrinsic and prosocial factors have not been much studied. Thus, this study proposed a conceptual framework to further understand the role of each motivation factor as well as the role of mixed-motivation factors among academic researchers who had successfully commercialised their research results. Finally, this research enriches the dearth of research commercialisation literature in Malaysian university settings.
Metrics
Metrics Loading ...
References
AIM. (2011). Innovating Malaysia (p. 31). Cyberjaya, Selangor: Agensi Inovasi Malaysia.
Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The Work Preference Inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5), 950–67. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8014837
Ambos, T. C., Mäkelä, K., Birkinshaw, J., & D’Este, P. (2008). When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1424–1447. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00804.x
Andersen, L. B., & Pallesen, T. (2008). “ Not just for the money?†How financial incentives affect the number of publications at Danish research institutions. International Public Management Journal, 11(1), 28–47. doi:10.1080/10967490801887889
Bains, W. (2005). How academics can make (extra) money out of their science. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 11(4), 353–363. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jcb.3040137
Baldini, N. (2010). Do royalties really foster university patenting activity? An answer from Italy. Technovation, 30(2), 109–116. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2009.09.007
Baldini, N. (2011). University patenting: Patterns of faculty motivations. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23(2), 103–121. doi:10.1080/09537325.2011.543329
Baldini, N., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2007). To patent or not to patent? A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives, and obstacles to university patenting. Scientometrics, 70(2), 333–354. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-0206-5
Baycan, T., & Stough, R. R. (2012). Bridging knowledge to commercialization: the good, the bad, and the challenging. The Annals of Regional Science. doi:10.1007/s00168-012-0510-8
Benedetti, A. A. (2012). Event-level intrinsic, extrinsic, and prosocial motivation: Effects on well-being (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Buchtel College of Arts and Sciences, The University of Akron, Ohio, USA.
Bengtsson, L., Nilsson, A. S., & Rickne, A. (2009, April). Why and how do researchers engage themselves in commercialization of research ?Paper presented at theInternational Conference on Organizational Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities (OLKC). Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Bhaduri, S., & Kumar, H. (2009). Tracing the motivation to innovate: A study of grassroot innovators in India. Jena, Germany: Max Planck Institute of Economics.
Bland, C. J., Seaquist, E., Pacala, J. T., & Finstad, D. (2002). One school’s strategy to assess and improve the vitality of its faculty. Academic Medicine, 77(5), 368–376.
Colyvas, J., Crow, M., Gelijns, A., Mazzoleni, R., Nelson, R. R., Rosenberg, N., & Sampat, B. N. (2002). How do university inventions get into practice ? Management Science, 48(1), 61–72.
D’Este, P., & Patel, P. (2007). University–industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry? Research Policy, 36(9), 1295–1313. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.05.002
D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2010). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316–339. doi:10.1007/s10961-010-9153-z
De Jong, J. P. J. (2006). The decision to innovate: Literature and propositions. Zoetermeer, The Netherlands: SCientific AnaLysis of Entrepreneurship and SMEs (SCALES)
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “ what †and “ why †of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psyshological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Diefendorff, J. M., & Chandler, M. M. (2010). Motivating Employees. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
EPU. (2006). Ninth Malaysia Plan 2006-2010. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Economic Planning Unit.
EPU. (2010). Tenth Malaysia Plan 2010-2015. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Economic Planning Unit.
Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2009). Factors fostering academics to start up new ventures: An assessment of Italian founders’ incentives. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 380–402. doi:10.1007/s10961-008-9093-z
Geuna, A., & Muscio, A. (2009). The Governance of university knowledge transfer: A critical review of the literature. Minerva, 47(1), 93–114. doi:10.1007/s11024-009-9118-2
Göktepe-Hulten, D., & Mahagaonkar, P. (2010). Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: In the expectation of money or reputation? Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(4), 401–423. doi:10.1007/s10961-009-9126-2
Grant, A. M. & Berg, J. M. (2010). Prosocial motivation at work: How making a difference makes a difference. In K. Cameron and G. Spreitzer (Eds.), Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship. Oxford University Press.
Grant, A. M. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 48–58. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.48
Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and posocial motivations, perpesctive taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54(1), 73–96. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2011.59215085
Ismail, K., Omar, W. Z. W., & Majid, I. A. (2011). The commercialisation process of patents by universities. African Journal of Business Management, 5(17), 7198–7208. doi:10.5897/AJBM09.255
Jensen, R. A., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. American Economic Review, 91(1), 240–259.
Jensen, R. A., Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2003). Disclosure and licensing of university inventions : “ The best we can do with the s ** t we get to work with .†International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 1271–1300. doi:10.1016/S0167-7187(03)00083-3
Lach, S., & Schankerman, M. (2008). Incentives and Invention in Universities. RAND Journal of Economics, 39(2), 403–433. doi:10.2139/ssrn.406921
Lam, A. (2011). What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: “Goldâ€, “ribbon†or “puzzleâ€? Research Policy, 40(10), 1354–1368. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.002
Lindenberg, S. (2001). Intrinsic motivation in a new light. Kyklos, 54(2/3), 317–342.
Markman, G. D., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2008). Research and technology commercialization. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1401–1423.
MASTIC. (2013). Kajian R&D Kebangsaan. Retrieved September 23, 2016, from http://www.mastic.gov.my/web/guest/statistik-kajian-rnd-kebangsaan
Merton, R. K. (1957). Priorities in scientific discovery: A chapter in the sociology of science. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 635–659.
MOHE. (2007). National Higher Education Plan 2007-2010. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Ministry of Higher Education.
MOSTI. (2009). Intellectual Property Commercialisation Policy for Research & Development (R&D) Projects Funded by the Government of Malaysia (p. 35). Putrajaya, Malaysia: Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.
OECD. (2013). Malaysia: Innovation profile. In Innovation in Southeast Asia (p. 348). Paris, France: OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264128712-en
Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001). To Patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 99–114.
Rosenberg, N. (1974). Science, invention and economic growth. The Economic Journal, 84(333), 90–108. doi:10.2307/2230485
Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691–791. doi:10.1093/icc/dtm023
Sauermann, H., & Roach, M. (2012). Taste for science, taste for commercialization, and hybrid scientists. Paper presented at the 34th DRUID Celebration Conference 2012. Copenhagen, Denmark.
Stephan, P. E. (1996). The economics of science. Journal of Economic Literature, 34(3), 1199–1235.
Stephan, P. E., & Levin, S. G. (1992). Striking the mother lode in science: The importance of age, place, and time (p. 194). New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
Tartari, V., & Breschi, S. (2012). Set them free : Scientists’ evaluations of the benefits and costs of university – industry research collaboration. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(5), 1–31. doi:10.1093/icc/dts004
Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major U.S. universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 59–72.
Walsh, J. P., & Hong, W. (2009). For money or glory? Commercialization, competition, and secrecy in the entrepreneurial university. The Sociological Quarterly, 50, 145–171.
Zbierowski, P., Weclawska, D., Tarnawa, A., Zadura-lichota, P., & Bratnicki, M. (2012). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: Poland. Radom, Poland: Global Entrepreneurship Monitor.
Powell, W. W., & Owen-Smith, J. (1998). Universities and the market for intellectual property in the life sciences. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 17(2), 253–277.
Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The Work Preference Inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5), 950–67. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8014837
Ambos, T. C., Mäkelä, K., Birkinshaw, J., & D’Este, P. (2008). When does university research get commercialized? Creating ambidexterity in research institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1424–1447. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00804.x
Andersen, L. B., & Pallesen, T. (2008). “ Not just for the money?†How financial incentives affect the number of publications at Danish research institutions. International Public Management Journal, 11(1), 28–47. doi:10.1080/10967490801887889
Bains, W. (2005). How academics can make (extra) money out of their science. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 11(4), 353–363. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jcb.3040137
Baldini, N. (2010). Do royalties really foster university patenting activity? An answer from Italy. Technovation, 30(2), 109–116. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2009.09.007
Baldini, N. (2011). University patenting: Patterns of faculty motivations. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23(2), 103–121. doi:10.1080/09537325.2011.543329
Baldini, N., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2007). To patent or not to patent? A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives, and obstacles to university patenting. Scientometrics, 70(2), 333–354. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-0206-5
Baycan, T., & Stough, R. R. (2012). Bridging knowledge to commercialization: the good, the bad, and the challenging. The Annals of Regional Science. doi:10.1007/s00168-012-0510-8
Benedetti, A. A. (2012). Event-level intrinsic, extrinsic, and prosocial motivation: Effects on well-being (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Buchtel College of Arts and Sciences, The University of Akron, Ohio, USA.
Bengtsson, L., Nilsson, A. S., & Rickne, A. (2009, April). Why and how do researchers engage themselves in commercialization of research ?Paper presented at theInternational Conference on Organizational Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities (OLKC). Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Bhaduri, S., & Kumar, H. (2009). Tracing the motivation to innovate: A study of grassroot innovators in India. Jena, Germany: Max Planck Institute of Economics.
Bland, C. J., Seaquist, E., Pacala, J. T., & Finstad, D. (2002). One school’s strategy to assess and improve the vitality of its faculty. Academic Medicine, 77(5), 368–376.
Colyvas, J., Crow, M., Gelijns, A., Mazzoleni, R., Nelson, R. R., Rosenberg, N., & Sampat, B. N. (2002). How do university inventions get into practice ? Management Science, 48(1), 61–72.
D’Este, P., & Patel, P. (2007). University–industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry? Research Policy, 36(9), 1295–1313. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.05.002
D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2010). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316–339. doi:10.1007/s10961-010-9153-z
De Jong, J. P. J. (2006). The decision to innovate: Literature and propositions. Zoetermeer, The Netherlands: SCientific AnaLysis of Entrepreneurship and SMEs (SCALES)
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “ what †and “ why †of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psyshological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Diefendorff, J. M., & Chandler, M. M. (2010). Motivating Employees. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
EPU. (2006). Ninth Malaysia Plan 2006-2010. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Economic Planning Unit.
EPU. (2010). Tenth Malaysia Plan 2010-2015. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Economic Planning Unit.
Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2009). Factors fostering academics to start up new ventures: An assessment of Italian founders’ incentives. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 380–402. doi:10.1007/s10961-008-9093-z
Geuna, A., & Muscio, A. (2009). The Governance of university knowledge transfer: A critical review of the literature. Minerva, 47(1), 93–114. doi:10.1007/s11024-009-9118-2
Göktepe-Hulten, D., & Mahagaonkar, P. (2010). Inventing and patenting activities of scientists: In the expectation of money or reputation? Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(4), 401–423. doi:10.1007/s10961-009-9126-2
Grant, A. M. & Berg, J. M. (2010). Prosocial motivation at work: How making a difference makes a difference. In K. Cameron and G. Spreitzer (Eds.), Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship. Oxford University Press.
Grant, A. M. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 48–58. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.48
Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and posocial motivations, perpesctive taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54(1), 73–96. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2011.59215085
Ismail, K., Omar, W. Z. W., & Majid, I. A. (2011). The commercialisation process of patents by universities. African Journal of Business Management, 5(17), 7198–7208. doi:10.5897/AJBM09.255
Jensen, R. A., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Proofs and prototypes for sale: The licensing of university inventions. American Economic Review, 91(1), 240–259.
Jensen, R. A., Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2003). Disclosure and licensing of university inventions : “ The best we can do with the s ** t we get to work with .†International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 1271–1300. doi:10.1016/S0167-7187(03)00083-3
Lach, S., & Schankerman, M. (2008). Incentives and Invention in Universities. RAND Journal of Economics, 39(2), 403–433. doi:10.2139/ssrn.406921
Lam, A. (2011). What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: “Goldâ€, “ribbon†or “puzzleâ€? Research Policy, 40(10), 1354–1368. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.002
Lindenberg, S. (2001). Intrinsic motivation in a new light. Kyklos, 54(2/3), 317–342.
Markman, G. D., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2008). Research and technology commercialization. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8), 1401–1423.
MASTIC. (2013). Kajian R&D Kebangsaan. Retrieved September 23, 2016, from http://www.mastic.gov.my/web/guest/statistik-kajian-rnd-kebangsaan
Merton, R. K. (1957). Priorities in scientific discovery: A chapter in the sociology of science. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 635–659.
MOHE. (2007). National Higher Education Plan 2007-2010. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Ministry of Higher Education.
MOSTI. (2009). Intellectual Property Commercialisation Policy for Research & Development (R&D) Projects Funded by the Government of Malaysia (p. 35). Putrajaya, Malaysia: Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.
OECD. (2013). Malaysia: Innovation profile. In Innovation in Southeast Asia (p. 348). Paris, France: OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264128712-en
Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2001). To Patent or not: Faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 99–114.
Rosenberg, N. (1974). Science, invention and economic growth. The Economic Journal, 84(333), 90–108. doi:10.2307/2230485
Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: A taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 691–791. doi:10.1093/icc/dtm023
Sauermann, H., & Roach, M. (2012). Taste for science, taste for commercialization, and hybrid scientists. Paper presented at the 34th DRUID Celebration Conference 2012. Copenhagen, Denmark.
Stephan, P. E. (1996). The economics of science. Journal of Economic Literature, 34(3), 1199–1235.
Stephan, P. E., & Levin, S. G. (1992). Striking the mother lode in science: The importance of age, place, and time (p. 194). New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
Tartari, V., & Breschi, S. (2012). Set them free : Scientists’ evaluations of the benefits and costs of university – industry research collaboration. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(5), 1–31. doi:10.1093/icc/dts004
Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major U.S. universities. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 59–72.
Walsh, J. P., & Hong, W. (2009). For money or glory? Commercialization, competition, and secrecy in the entrepreneurial university. The Sociological Quarterly, 50, 145–171.
Zbierowski, P., Weclawska, D., Tarnawa, A., Zadura-lichota, P., & Bratnicki, M. (2012). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: Poland. Radom, Poland: Global Entrepreneurship Monitor.
Powell, W. W., & Owen-Smith, J. (1998). Universities and the market for intellectual property in the life sciences. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 17(2), 253–277.
Downloads
Published
27-06-2017
How to Cite
Yaacob, N. A., Sarkam, S. F., & Othman, S. N. (2017). ACADEMIC RESEARCHERS MOTIVATION FACTORS: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK. Journal of Technology and Operations Management, 12(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.32890/jtom2017.12.1.1
Issue
Section
Articles
License
Disclaimer
The Journal of Technology and Operation Management (JTOM) has taken all reasonable measures to ensure that material contained in this website is the original work of the author(s). However, the Journal gives no warranty and accepts no responsibility for the accuracy or the completeness of the material; no reliance should be made by any user on the material. The user should check with the authors for confirmation. Articles published in the Journal of Technology and Operation Management (JTOM) do not represent the views held by the editors and members of the editorial board. Authors are responsible for all aspects of their articles except the editorial screen design.
