Staff Publications

Staff Publications

  • external user (warningwarning)
  • Log in as
  • language uk
  • About

    'Staff publications' is the digital repository of Wageningen University & Research

    'Staff publications' contains references to publications authored by Wageningen University staff from 1976 onward.

    Publications authored by the staff of the Research Institutes are available from 1995 onwards.

    Full text documents are added when available. The database is updated daily and currently holds about 240,000 items, of which 72,000 in open access.

    We have a manual that explains all the features 

    Current refinement(s):

    Records 1 - 6 / 6

    • help
    • print

      Print search results

    • export

      Export search results

    Check title to add to marked list
    The growth of academic spin-offs : the management team’s absorptive capacity and facilitator support
    Khodaei, H. - \ 2015
    Wageningen University. Promotor(en): Onno Omta, co-promotor(en): Emiel Wubben; Victor Scholten. - Wageningen : Wageningen University - ISBN 9789462574885 - 148
    ondernemerschap - universiteiten - ondersteunende maatregelen - bedrijfsvoering - teams - prestatieniveau - entrepreneurship - universities - support measures - management - teams - performance

    The Growth of Academic Spin-offs

    The Management Team’s Absorptive Capacity and Facilitator Support

    Academic spin-offs are defined as new start-up firms that commercially exploit research developed within an academic environment to the benefit of economic, social, and regional development. These start-ups can be initiated by university employees, students or graduates, but also by external individuals grasping the opportunity to bring new knowledge to the market.

    Academic spin-offs often face difficulties in translating their initial idea to a business opportunity. In this thesis it is proposed that academic spin-offs can overcome these challenges by enhancing their absorptive capacity and by taking advantage of the guidance and resources provided by supporting organizations. Our findings can assist Academic spin-offs founders to develop their management team capabilities. They can also help university facilitators to optimize their support activities and policy makers to optimize the regional innovation ecosystem.

    Diagnose bijenziekten in de regio
    Cornelissen, B. - \ 2014
    Bijenhouden 8 (2014)6. - ISSN 1877-9786 - p. 24 - 24.
    bijenhouderij - bijenziekten - onderzoek - bemonsteren - werkgroepen - teams - diagnose - regionale centra - beekeeping - bee diseases - research - sampling - working groups - teams - diagnosis - central places
    Voor imkers onderzoekt bijen@wur al jaren bijen- en broedmonsters op een aantal veel voorkomende ziekten. In de laatste 20 jaar zijn bijna 3000 monsters onderzocht. Het herkennen van de symptomen van ziekten blijft een expertise van Bijen@wur, terwijl het beter zou zijn als bijenhouders dat zelf zouden kunnen. Om deze kennis beschikbaar te maken voor bijenhouders, is er dit jaar voor een andere opzet gekozen
    Use of an Interculturally Enriched Collaboration Script in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education
    Popov, V. ; Biemans, H.J.A. ; Kuznetsov, A.N. ; Mulder, M. - \ 2014
    Technology, Pedagogy and Education 23 (2014)3. - ISSN 1475-939X - p. 349 - 374.
    environment - behaviors - cognition - students - outcomes - culture - dyads - teams - cscl
    In this exploratory study, the authors introduced an interculturally enriched collaboration script (IECS) for working in culturally diverse groups within a computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment and then assessed student online collaborative behaviour, learning performance and experiences. The question was if and how these variables differed for the groups that used an IECS versus groups that used a general collaboration script (CS) that did not include intercultural elements. Using a web conferencing tool, 47 students from a university in Ukraine and a university in the Netherlands worked together in groups to develop project plans on an environmental problem. The groups in the IECS condition showed a higher frequency of so-called contributing behaviour but a lower frequency of planning behaviour, seeking input and social interaction than the groups in the CS condition. The IECS groups also produced better project plans than the CS groups. Future study using a similar experimental set-up but with larger samples is recommended to see if the present results can be replicated.
    Improving internal communication between marketing and technology functions for successful new food product development
    Jacobsen, L.F. ; Grunert, K.G. ; Søndergaard, H.A. ; Steenbekkers, B. ; Dekker, M. ; Lähteenmäki, L. - \ 2014
    Trends in Food Science and Technology 37 (2014)2. - ISSN 0924-2244 - p. 106 - 114.
    r-and-d - knowledge management - innovation - performance - integration - perspective - industry - projects - flows - teams
    In order to increase the new product development (NPD) success for novel food products, it is crucial to understand how information can be optimally disseminated within companies. This systematic literature review concentrates on factors influencing internal communication between market and technology experts within the NPD process from a food industry point of view. The review provides practical implications for improving internal communication in food companies and identifies knowledge gaps. By focussing on optimising organisational structure, team composition, management support, and knowledge management, food companies can enhance internal communication between market and technology functions during the NPD process.
    The visibility of trust: Exploring the connection between trust and interaction in a Dutch collaborative governance boardroom
    Oortmerssen, L.A. van; Woerkum, C. van; Aarts, N. - \ 2014
    Public Management Review 16 (2014)5. - ISSN 1471-9037 - p. 666 - 685.
    communication - negotiation - impact - cooperation - alliances - networks - outcomes - climate - teams
    In multi-stakeholder collaboration settings, trust plays a significant role. We explore the connection between trust and interaction over time in a collaborative governance board. To this end, we conducted a case study of the board of a collaborative governance arrangement in professional education. The results include an increase in trust within the board as well as three changes in the interaction pattern during board meetings: more openness, more responsiveness and more speed. It is argued that the increase in trust and the changes in interaction are related, implying that trust is visible in interaction content, interaction atmosphere and interaction process.
    Open innovation competence : towards a competence profile for inter-organizational collaboration innovation teams
    Chatenier, E. du - \ 2009
    Wageningen University. Promotor(en): Martin Mulder; Onno Omta, co-promotor(en): Harm Biemans; Jos Verstegen. - [S.l. : S.n. - ISBN 9789085854425 - 200
    organisaties - samenwerking - innovaties - teams - vakbekwaamheid - economische samenwerking - organizations - cooperation - innovations - teams - professional competence - economic cooperation

    Global competition and specialisation have resulted in an innovation trend called ‘open innovation’, in which companies develop new products, services or markets collaboratively, by using each others’ know-how, technology, licenses, brands or market channels. A complex form of open innovation is pooled R&D or co-development in strategic partnerships, i.e., open innovation teams. These partnerships embody mutual working relationships between two or more parties aimed at creating and delivering a new product, technology or service. Although inter-organizational collaboration has often proved to be a prerequisite for successful innovation processes, not each external collaboration results in a success story. It appears that the diversity of organizational backgrounds in open innovation teams can be a source of creativity, but also a source of social and communicative dilemmas resulting in conflicts and project failures. Success factors for (open) innovation projects have been investigated extensively, but most studies undervalue and under-investigate the human side. Therefore, the research presented in this PhD dissertation focussed on individual competence in open innovation teams. The concept of competence is used to describe the range of skills and personal qualities people need for a certain job or task. Competence consists of competencies: integrated capabilities, consisting of knowledge, skills and attitudes, which are necessarily conditional for task performance, and for being able to function effectively in a certain job or situation. The main research question guiding this research was: Which competencies do professionals in an open innovation team need in order to contribute to a successful co-development?
    A rationalistic multimethod-oriented approach was adopted to tackle the main research question. In line with this approach, five sub-questions were formulated, which addressed (1) the activities that need to be performed in open innovation teams, (2) competency elements needed to perform these activities (3) an optimal clustering of the competencies and competency elements in a competence profile (4) context variation of the resulting competence profile and (5) the link between open innovation competence and team performance. Multiple sources of evidence were gathered to answer the questions, combining qualitative, quantitative, objective and self-reported data to identify and assess competence. Three studies were conducted: an inter-disciplinary literature study, a qualitative study and a quantitative study. The literature study consisted of an extensive literature review combining literature on learning, (inter-) organizational learning, (open) innovation management, business alliances and networks in organizational, management, Human Resource (HR) and educational studies. The qualitative study consisted of explorative interviews and focus group discussions, which adopted the critical incidents technique and took place with professionals and experts from different organizations and intermediaries who had been working in or with open innovation teams (N=37). The quantitative study consisted of a cross-sectional online survey and group interviews with professionals from 15 open innovation teams from mainly prospector companies (N=73).
    The results showed that there are three main activities to perform in open innovation teams: managing the overall innovation process, managing the collaborative knowledge creation process (consisting of the four stages externalizing and sharing, interpreting and analysing, negotiating and revising, combining and creating), and dealing with the challenges caused by inter-organizational collaboration (consisting of being a good partner, but preventing free-riding; balancing openness and closure and building trust in a non-trusting environment; balancing individual and alliances interests, creating common meanings, goals and work plans; finding a balance between exerting influence and having no influence; fostering optimal dynamics; finding a balance between being in control and having no control; efficiently and effectively organizing teamwork; mobilizing commitment; balancing short- and long-term goals, stability and risk). The first two studies identified various competency elements to perform these activities, which were confirmed by the third study. Factor analysis on the data showed that the most optimal clustering of the competency elements resulted in thirteen competencies, which were: being able to ‘involve’, ‘influence’, ‘handle conflicts’, ‘create learning climate’, ‘take on’, ‘prevail’, ‘monitor’, ‘decide mindfully’, ‘communicate clearly’, ‘analyse’, ‘explore’, ‘combine’ and ‘compete’. Multiple regression analysis and one-way ANOVA on the data showed that the competencies ‘take on’, ‘prevail’ and ‘communicate clearly’ were perceived as more important in more complex forms of alliances types. Moreover, it appeared that professionals in charge of project management perceived the competencies ‘involve’, ‘influence’, ‘prevail’, ‘create learning climate’ and ‘monitor’ as more important for their role in the project, compared to professionals in charge of product development or process control. Another finding was that participants perceived the competencies as more important when the team had a good team climate, apart from competencies that dealt with competitive behaviour. However, although slight differences were found across different contexts, the competencies were generally perceived as being important; the competence profile can thus be said to be generic, at least within the research population. Multiple regression analysis on the data showed that the competencies significantly contributed to the success of general innovation processes and specific creation processes and were even stronger predictors of team performance than (some of the) environmental factors. More specifically, the reported application of the competency ‘monitor’ was significantly positively related to the success of general innovation and specific creation processes and the application of ‘compete’ was significantly negatively related to the success of general innovation processes. This study not only found a link between competence and team performance, but also found that the competencies explained much variance in the data. These outcomes suggest that for open innovation professionals in general the application of the competency ‘monitor’ will enhance open innovation team performance. The competency not only entails communicating well enough to do one’s job effectively, but also making results visible and trusting others.
    The findings contribute to the fields of (open) innovation management and HR in several ways. First, the collaborative knowledge creation model developed adds to the literature by clearly visualizing how knowledge is created at individual and group level, and how the participation and acquisition metaphor and different views on knowledge can be combined into one collaborative knowledge creation model. Second, the outcomes add to HR literature by eliciting information on real problems and challenges, which may occur in complex collaborative knowledge creation processes but were largely overlooked until now. Third, the developed open innovation competence profile adds a new perspective to studies on (open) innovation management that undervalued the human factor in collaborative knowledge creation and innovation processes. Fourth, the results contribute to the fields of (open) innovation and HR, by being one of the first studies that empirically reveals a link between individual competence and team performance controlled for factors at higher aggregation levels. Fifth, the most crucial competency that came out of this study, ‘monitor’, sheds another light on the concept of transparency and trust in inter-organizational alliances. It suggests that the knowledge that needs to be shared specifically concerns the results of one’s own work and that of the team, and sufficient communication to do one’s own work efficiently and effectively. Sixth, the findings confirm earlier suggestions that open innovation teams need strong leadership or a ‘heavyweight’ manager, and the importance of a good team climate in open innovation teams, by revealing a link between team climate and perceived importance of desired competencies. Seventh, the facts that the model contains opposing behaviours and a lack of strong differences across contexts confirm the theory of behavioural complexity. This implies that effective open innovation professionals are those who have, apart from the competencies mentioned in the profile, the capacity to recognize and react to paradox and complexity in their working environment. Finally, the open innovation competence profile covers a broad area of competencies applicable across contexts and describes certain specific behaviours in detail. This result contributes to competency modelling literature by showing that the rationalistic multimethod-oriented approach, results in a profile that contains both information specific to a certain context and at the same time is applicable across contexts.
    Future research should focus on comparing open innovation teams, closed innovation teams and other collaboration forms in organizations to reveal areas in which the competence profile can best be applied and the distinctiveness of open innovation competence. Moreover, further research should investigate the robustness of the open innovation competence profile in different situations and the impact of any specific situation in enhancing the use of open innovation competence. Finally, further research should investigate whether HR professionals should support open innovation competence and if so how they should do it. The developed competence profile is highly relevant to practice, since it can be used as a selection, diagnosis, and (self-) evaluation tool in open innovation teams. Organizations are advised to explore the possibility of involving HR professionals in open innovation processes.

    Check title to add to marked list

    Show 20 50 100 records per page

    Please log in to use this service. Login as Wageningen University & Research user or guest user in upper right hand corner of this page.