Investigating the effect of university enterprise collaboration on individual innovation in underdeveloped regions

Hui Liu; Khunanan Sukpasjaroen; Xuesong Zhai; Hui Liu; Khunanan Sukpasjaroen; Xuesong Zhai

doi:10.3934/steme.2023010

STEM Education

2023, Volume 3, Issue 3: 148-170. doi: 10.3934/steme.2023010

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Investigating the effect of university enterprise collaboration on individual innovation in underdeveloped regions

1.
Chakrabongse Bhuvanarth International Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies, Rajamangala University of Technology Tawan-ok (RMUTTO), Bangkok, 10220, Thailand; hui.liu@rmutto.ac.th
2.
Chakrabongse Bhuvanarth International Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies, Rajamangala University of Technology Tawan-ok (RMUTTO), Bangkok, 10220, Thailand; khunanan_su@rmutto.ac.th
3.
Education Building 617, Zijingang Campus, Zhejiang University, China; xszhai@zju.edu.cn

Academic Editor: Qingguo Zhou

Received: 06 May 2023 Revised: 11 July 2023 Accepted: 19 July 2023 Published: 31 July 2023

The innovation capability index of underdeveloped regions lags far behind that of the eastern coastal areas. This imbalance in innovation capability poses a critical challenge for underdeveloped regions in implementing its innovation-driven development strategy and economic transformation. Individual collaborative innovation ability is an essential skill that allows individuals to transform knowledge and resources into economic value. Presently, research on individual collaborative innovation capability focuses only on the external environment, cooperation mode and benefit allocation. This approach fails to reveal how organizational factors affect individual collaborative innovation capability, and there is a lack of research on underdeveloped regions. Collaborative innovation theory proposes that deep cooperation between industries or institutions through acquiring resources and knowledge can have a positive impact on other environments. Improving individual collaborative innovation capabilities must be achieved through the integration of heterogeneous innovation resources owned by the two core innovation entities, to achieve full integration of innovation elements. Therefore, collaborative innovation theory can effectively address this problem. This article adopts a quantitative research method. A sample of 911 teachers was selected from thirty vocational colleges in Inner Mongolia. The data were analyzed using the Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) model and the proposed relationship was validated. The research findings indicate that cognitive, social and geographical proximity have significant positive effects on collaborative behavior. Collaborative behavior has a significant positive impact on individual collaborative innovation ability. Collaborative behavior plays a mediating role between multidimensional proximity and individual collaborative innovation ability. This study will add information on the collaborative innovation theory, help to understand the formation and impact mechanism of cooperative relationships in school-enterprise cooperation in underdeveloped regions, and thus promote the development of STEM education in underdeveloped areas.
- collaborative innovation,
- multi-dimensional proximity,
- collaborative behavior,
- STEM education,
- individual collaborative innovation ability
Citation: Hui Liu, Khunanan Sukpasjaroen, Xuesong Zhai. Investigating the effect of university enterprise collaboration on individual innovation in underdeveloped regions[J]. STEM Education, 2023, 3(3): 148-170. doi: 10.3934/steme.2023010

Related Papers:

Abstract

The innovation capability index of underdeveloped regions lags far behind that of the eastern coastal areas. This imbalance in innovation capability poses a critical challenge for underdeveloped regions in implementing its innovation-driven development strategy and economic transformation. Individual collaborative innovation ability is an essential skill that allows individuals to transform knowledge and resources into economic value. Presently, research on individual collaborative innovation capability focuses only on the external environment, cooperation mode and benefit allocation. This approach fails to reveal how organizational factors affect individual collaborative innovation capability, and there is a lack of research on underdeveloped regions. Collaborative innovation theory proposes that deep cooperation between industries or institutions through acquiring resources and knowledge can have a positive impact on other environments. Improving individual collaborative innovation capabilities must be achieved through the integration of heterogeneous innovation resources owned by the two core innovation entities, to achieve full integration of innovation elements. Therefore, collaborative innovation theory can effectively address this problem. This article adopts a quantitative research method. A sample of 911 teachers was selected from thirty vocational colleges in Inner Mongolia. The data were analyzed using the Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) model and the proposed relationship was validated. The research findings indicate that cognitive, social and geographical proximity have significant positive effects on collaborative behavior. Collaborative behavior has a significant positive impact on individual collaborative innovation ability. Collaborative behavior plays a mediating role between multidimensional proximity and individual collaborative innovation ability. This study will add information on the collaborative innovation theory, help to understand the formation and impact mechanism of cooperative relationships in school-enterprise cooperation in underdeveloped regions, and thus promote the development of STEM education in underdeveloped areas.

References

[1]	National STEM School Education Strategy 2016—2026. Available from: https://oese.ed.gov/files/2016/09/AIR-STEM2026_Report_2016.pdf
[2]	Qin, J.R. and Fu, G.S., STEM Education: Interdisciplinary Education Based on Real Problem Scenarios. China Educational Technology, 2017, 4: 67‒74.
[3]	Morrison, J.S., TIES STEM Education Mongraph Series Attributes of STEM Education, 2006.
[4]	Mahdad, M., Minh, T.T., Bogers, M.L.A.M. and Piccaluga, A., Joint university-industry laboratories through the lens of proximity dimensions: moving beyond geographical proximity. International Journal of Innovation Science, 2020, 12(4): 433–456. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-10-2019-0096 doi: 10.1108/IJIS-10-2019-0096
[5]	Li W. and Guo, W., Analysing responses of Year-12 students to a hands-on IT workshop: Implications for increasing participation in tertiary IT education in regional Australia. STEM Education, 2023, 3(1): 43‒56.
[6]	Deits, T., An Approach to Advancing Economic Development Through Entrepreneurship. STEM Promotion and Fostering Innovation and Collaboration, 2013.
[7]	Amabile, T.M., Nayak, R.C. and Agarwal, R., A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. International Journal of Transformations in Business Management (IJTBM), 2011, 1(1): 1‒8.
[8]	Shalley, C.E., Zhou, J. and Oldham, G.R., The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where should we go from here? Journal of management, 2004, 30(6): 933‒958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.007
[9]	Oldham, G.R. and Cummings, A., Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of management journal, 1996, 39(3): 607‒634. https://doi.org/10.2307/256657 doi: 10.2307/256657
[10]	Rego, A., Machado, F., Leal, S. and Cunha, M.P.E., Are hopeful employees more creative? An empirical study. Creativity Research Journal, 2009, 21(2-3): 223‒231.
[11]	Tierney, P., Farmer, S.M. and Graen, G.B., An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel psychology, 1999, 52(3): 591‒620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00173.x doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00173.x
[12]	Crescenzi, R., Nathan, M. and Rodriguez⁃Pose, A., Do inventors talk to strangers? On proximity and collaborative knowledge creation. Research Policy, 2016, 45(1): 177‒194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.07.003 doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2015.07.003
[13]	Meiling, G., Guofeng, Z. and Zengguang, F., The integrated construction of the collaborative innovation element system between applied and vocational colleges. Heilongjiang Higher Education Research, 2020, (07): 130‒134.
[14]	Yunci, S., Construction of a Support System for Innovation and Entrepreneurship Education in Local Universities - Based on the Full Chain Integration of Industry. University, and Research Collaboration Chinese University Science and Technology, 2020, (12): 72‒76.
[15]	Jingjing, D., Analysis on the current situation of regional economic. Development in Inner Mongolia Marketing, 2019, (20): 11‒13.
[16]	Arsawan, I.W.E., Koval, V., Rajiani, I., Rustiarini, N.W., Supartha, W.G. and Suryantini, N.P.S., Leveraging knowledge sharing and innovation culture into SMEs sustainable competitive advantage. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 2022, 71(2): 405–428. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-04-2020-0192 doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-04-2020-0192
[17]	Capone, F. and Zampi, V., Proximity and centrality in inter-organisational collaborations for innovation: A study on an aerospace cluster in Italy. Management Decision, 2020, 58(2): 239–254. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-01-2019-0086 doi: 10.1108/MD-01-2019-0086
[18]	Statistics of Inner Mongolia Science and Technology Bureau, 2023. Available from: https://kjt.nmg.gov.cn/zwgk/sjfb/
[19]	Braunerhjelm, P., Ding, D. and Thulin, P., The knowledge spillover theory of intrapreneurship. Small Business Economics, 2018, 51(1): 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9928-9 doi: 10.1007/s11187-017-9928-9
[20]	Ganguly, A., Talukdar, A. and Chatterjee, D., Evaluating the role of social capital, tacit knowledge sharing, knowledge quality and reciprocity in determining innovation capability of an organization. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2019, 23(6): 1105‒1135. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-03-2018-0190 doi: 10.1108/JKM-03-2018-0190
[21]	Wenhui, L., Chuhong, W., and Anning, Analysis on the subject object relationship and its mode of industry university research cooperation under the innovation system. Science and Technology Management Research, 2014, (06): 4‒5.
[22]	Park, J.H. and Kim, C.Y., Social enterprises, job creation, and social open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 2020, 6(4): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6040120 doi: 10.3390/joitmc6040120
[23]	Zhao, S., Zhang, B., Shao, D. and Wang, S., Can top management teams' academic experience promote green innovation output: Evidence from Chinese enterprises. Sustainability (Switzerland), 2021, 13(20). https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011453
[24]	National Science Foundation, NSF Strategic Plan for 2018-2022. 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2018/nsf18045/nsf18045.pdf
[25]	Koopmann, T., Stubbemann, M., Kapa, M., Paris, M., Buenstorf, G., Hanika, T., et al., Proximity dimensions and the emergence of collaboration: a HypTrails study on German AI research. Scientometrics, 2021,126(12): 9847–9868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03922-1 doi: 10.1007/s11192-021-03922-1
[26]	Davids, M. and Frenken, K., Proximity, knowledge base and the innovation process: towards an integrated framework. Regional Studies, 2018, 52(1): 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2017.1287349 doi: 10.1080/00343404.2017.1287349
[27]	Dyer, J.H., Singh, H. and Hesterly, W.S., The relational view revisited: A dynamic perspective on value creation and value capture. Strategic management journal, 2018, 39(12): 3140‒3162. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2785 doi: 10.1002/smj.2785
[28]	Reuer, J.J., Zollo, M. and Singh, H., Post‐formation dynamics in strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 2002, 23(2): 135‒151. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.214 doi: 10.1002/smj.214
[29]	Bruneel, J., d'Este, P. and Salter, A., Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university–industry collaboration. Research policy, 2010, 39(7): 858‒868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.03.006 doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2010.03.006
[30]	Bercovitz, J. and Feldman, M., The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: Composition, social networks, and geography. Research policy, 2011, 40(1): 81‒93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.09.008 doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2010.09.008
[31]	Balland, P.A., Boschma, R. and Frenken, K., Proximity and innovation: From statics to dynamics. Regional studies, 2015, 49(6): 907‒920. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.883598 doi: 10.1080/00343404.2014.883598
[32]	Meng, X., Di, K., Su, H., Jin, X., Lv, W., Huang, X., et al., The relationship between the interactive behaviour of industry–university–research subjects and the cooperative innovation performance: The mediating role of knowledge absorptive capacity. Frontiers in Psychology, 2023, 13: 1077614. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1077614 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1077614
[33]	Das, T. and Rahman, N., Determinants of partner opportunism in strategic alliances: a conceptual framework. Journal of Business and Psychology, 2010, 25: 55‒74.
[34]	O' Connor, M., Doran, J. and McCarthy, N., Cognitive proximity and innovation performance: are collaborators equal? European Journal of Innovation Management, 2020, 24(3): 637–654. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-11-2019-0347 doi: 10.1108/EJIM-11-2019-0347
[35]	Shan, H., Li, Y. and Shi, J., Influence of supply chain collaborative innovation on sustainable development of supply chain: A study on Chinese enterprises. Sustainability (Switzerland), 2020, 12(7): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072978
[36]	Cedefop, European guidelines for validating non-formal and informal learning 2015 update: Education, Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency. 2016.
[37]	Bulley, C. and Gormley, K., The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial intention outcomes: A study of education students in Scotland. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 2020, 44(3): 407-423.
[38]	Antonelli, C., Collective knowledge communication and innovation: the evidence of technological districts. Regional studies, 2000, 34(6): 535‒547. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400050085657 doi: 10.1080/00343400050085657
[39]	Torre, A. and Rallet, A., Proximity and localization. Regional Studies, 2005, 39 (1): 47‒59. https://doi.org/10.1080/0034340052000320842 doi: 10.1080/0034340052000320842
[40]	Ooms, W., Werker, C. and Caniëls, M., Personal and social proximity empowering collaborations: The glue of knowledge networks. Industry and Innovation, 2018, 25(9): 833–840. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2018.1493983 doi: 10.1080/13662716.2018.1493983
[41]	Goethner, M. and Wyrwich, M., Cross-faculty proximity and academic entrepreneurship: the role of business schools. Journal of Technology Transfer, 2020, 45(4): 1016–1062. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09725-0 doi: 10.1007/s10961-019-09725-0
[42]	Knickel, M., Neuberger, S., Klerkx, L., Knickel, K., Brunori, G. and Saatkamp, H., Strengthening the role of academic institutions and innovation brokers in agri-food innovation: Towards hybridisation in cross-border cooperation. Sustainability (Switzerland), 2021, 13(9): 4899. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094899
[43]	Cantner, U., Hinzmann, S., Wolf, T., The coevolution of innovative ties, proximity, and competencies: Toward a dynamic approach to innovation cooperation. Knowledge and Networks, 2017,337‒372. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45023-0_16 doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-45023-0_16
[44]	Cohen, M.D., Levinthal, D.A., Warglien, M.J.I. and Change, C., Collective performance: modeling the interaction of habit-based actions. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2014, 23(2): 329‒360. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtu005 doi: 10.1093/icc/dtu005
[45]	Haihua, W., Lijuan, X. and Fuji, X., Institutional proximity, technological proximity and the performance of industry university collaborative innovation -- a study based on the data of industry university joint patents. Scientific research, 2017, (05), 782‒791.
[46]	Zhao, Y., Xiao, Y. and Lyu, J., The Effect of Proximity on Enterprise Innovation Performance in the Innovation Ecosystem. IEEE Access, 2023, 11: 20923‒20939. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3250344 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3250344
[47]	Bouncken, R. and Aslam, M.M., Understanding knowledge exchange processes among diverse users of coworking-spaces. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2019, 23(10): 2067‒2085. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-05-2018-0316 doi: 10.1108/JKM-05-2018-0316
[48]	Yin, S and Li, B., Academic research institutes-construction enterprises linkages for the development of urban green building: Selecting management of green building technologies innovation partner. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2019, 48: 101555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101555 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2019.101555
[49]	Mishra, S. and Shah, T., Developing individual collaborative innovation capability. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2009, 13(6): 425‒437.
[50]	Sof, N. and Grimpe, C., Partner Selection for Open Innovation: The Role of Expected Future Interaction Signaling. R & D Management, 2010, 40(2): 154‒165. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00576.x doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00576.x
[51]	Song L., Analysis of the Application of Industrial Education Resources in the Construction of Collaborative Innovation Platforms in Higher Vocational Colleges. Education Modernization, 2019, (12): 88‒90.
[52]	Contractor, N.S., Wasserman, S. and Faust, K., Testing multitheoretical, multilevel hypotheses about organizational networks: An analytic framework and empirical example. Academy of management review, 2006, 31(3): 681‒703. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.21318925 doi: 10.5465/amr.2006.21318925
[53]	Cantner, U., Hinzmann, S., Wolf, T., The coevolution of innovative ties, proximity, and competencies: Toward a dynamic approach to innovation cooperation. Knowledge and Networks, 2017, 11: 337–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45023-0_16 doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-45023-0_16
[54]	Addy, N.A. and Dubé, L., Addressing complex societal problems: Enabling multiple dimensions of proximity to sustain partnerships for collective impact in Quebec. Sustainability (Switzerland), 2018, 10(4): 980. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040980
[55]	Cao, Z., Yan, Y. and Tang, K., Path optimization of open collaborative innovation of energy industry in urban agglomeration based on particle swarm optimization algorithm. Energy Reports, 2022, 8: 5533–5540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.04.020 doi: 10.1016/j.egyr.2022.04.020
[56]	Tremblay, D., Touati, N., Usher, S.E. and Cournoyer, J., Dimensions of Proximity: An Actionable Framework to Better Understand Integrated Practices in Cancer Networks. International Journal of Integrated Care, 2022, 22(3): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.6434 doi: 10.5334/ijic.6434
[57]	Storper, M. and Venables, A., Buzz: face-to-face contact and the urban economy. Journal of economic geography, 2004, 4(4): 351–370. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlecg/lbh027 doi: 10.1093/jnlecg/lbh027
[58]	Dhanaraj, C. and Parkhe, A., Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of management review, 2006, 31(3), 659‒669. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.21318923 doi: 10.5465/amr.2006.21318923
[59]	Cantner, U., Joel, K. and Schmidt, T., The effects of knowledge management on innovative success–An empirical analysis of German firms. Research policy, 2011, 40(10): 1453–1462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.06.003 doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.06.003
[60]	Sarstedt, M., Hair, J.F., Pick, M., Liengaard, B.D., Radomir, L. and Ringle, C.M., Progress in partial least squares structural equation modeling use in marketing research in the last decade. Psychology and Marketing, 2022, 39(5): 1035–1064. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21640 doi: 10.1002/mar.21640
[61]	Baghaei, P. and Ravand, H., Modeling local item dependence in cloze and reading comprehension test items using testlet response theory. Psicológica, 2016, 37(1): 85‒104.
[62]	De Leeuw, J. and Kreft, I.G., Questioning multilevel models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 1995, 20(2): 171‒189. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986020002171 doi: 10.3102/10769986020002171
[63]	Nawaz, A., Chen, J. and Su, X., Factors in critical management practices for construction projects waste predictors to C & DW minimization and maximization. Journal of King Saud University - Science, 2023, 35(2): 102512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksus.2022.102512 doi: 10.1016/j.jksus.2022.102512
[64]	Sandra Marcelline, T.R., Chengang, Y., Ralison Ny Avotra, A.A., Hussain, Z., Zonia, J.E. and Nawaz, A., Impact of Green Construction Procurement on Achieving Sustainable Economic Growth Influencing Green Logistic Services Management and Innovation Practices. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 2022, 9: 815928. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2021.815928 doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2021.815928
[65]	Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F., SEM with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 1981, 18(3): 382–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800313 doi: 10.1177/002224378101800313
[66]	Hair, J.F. and Sarstedt, M., Data, measurement, and causal inferences in machine learning: opportunities and challenges for marketing. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 2021, 29(1): 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2020.1860683 doi: 10.1080/10696679.2020.1860683
[67]	Bliese, P.D., Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis, 2000.
[68]	James, L.R., Demaree, R.G. and Wolf, G., Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984, 69(1): 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.69.1.85 doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.69.1.85
[69]	Hamdollah, R. and Baghaei, P., Partial least squares structural equation modeling with R. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 2016, 21(1): 1–16.
[70]	Hang, C., He, C. and Zhai, X., The approach of hierarchical linear model to exploring individual and team creativity: A perspective of cultural intelligence and team trust. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2020, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2025140 doi: 10.1155/2020/2025140

Author's biography Master Liu Hui is a PhD student of Chakrabongse Bhuvanarth International Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies, Rajamangala University of Technology Tawan-ok, Bangkok, Thailand. She is specialized in education management; Dr. Khunanan Sukpasjaroen is a professor of Chakrabongse Bhuvanarth International Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies, Rajamangala University of Technology Tawan-ok, Bangkok, Thailand. He is specialized in management; Dr. Xuesong Zhai is a specially appointed researcher and doctoral supervisor in the field of educational technology at the School of Education, Zhejiang University, China. He is specialized in Smart learning environment. His research interests include artificial intelligence education application, education information system, education technology and equipment, intelligent learning environment construction, affective computing, etc. He is employed as the Regional Editor of EAI Transaction on e-learning at the European Innovation Society

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)