Determining the Obstacles of Collaboration of University and Industry In Terms of the Components of the Higher Education Administration of the City of Tehran

Published on May 2016 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 32 | Comments: 0 | Views: 157
of 14
Download PDF   Embed   Report

This research aims to recognize the obstacles to the collaboration of industry and university in terms of structural, socio-cultural, educational, managerial, and financial components in the city of Tehran. This research is considered an applied study in terms of its objectives, and a cross-sectional one in temporal terms, as the data collected for this research are related to the year 2012. For the collection of data, a survey-descriptive technique was applied. The statistical populations of this research consist of two groups. One group is composed of the universities located in Tehran, and the other group of the major industries established in this city. The data were analyzed using explanatory factor analysis method of inferential statistics and by LISREL software program. According to the results of this research, five main components (including structural, socio-cultural, educational, managerial, and financial) were recognized and the indices of each components were determined. These subcomponents can be used effectively to improve the collaboration between industry and university. In case of their absence, some obstacles may be created to prevent such collaboration.

Comments

Content

International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences, 2(10) October 2013, Pages: 885-898

TI Journals

International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences

ISSN
2306-7276

www.tijournals.com

Determining the Obstacles of Collaboration of University and
Industry In Terms of the Components of the Higher Education
Administration of the City of Tehran
Mehdi Noursina *1, Mahmoud Ghanadan 2
1
2

Department of Higher Education Administration, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Faculty member, University of Tehran, Iran.

AR TIC LE INF O

AB STR AC T

Keywords:

This research aims to recognize the obstacles to the collaboration of industry and university in
terms of structural, socio-cultural, educational, managerial, and financial components in the city of
Tehran. This research is considered an applied study in terms of its objectives, and a crosssectional one in temporal terms, as the data collected for this research are related to the year 2012.
For the collection of data, a survey-descriptive technique was applied. The statistical populations of
this research consist of two groups. One group is composed of the universities located in Tehran,
and the other group of the major industries established in this city. The data were analyzed using
explanatory factor analysis method of inferential statistics and by LISREL software program.
According to the results of this research, five main components (including structural, sociocultural, educational, managerial, and financial) were recognized and the indices of each
components were determined. These subcomponents can be used effectively to improve the
collaboration between industry and university. In case of their absence, some obstacles may be
created to prevent such collaboration.

Industry
University
Higher Education
Administration
Collaboration

© 2013 Int. j. econ. manag. soc. sci. All rights reserved for TI Journals.

1.

Introduction

Today’s world is the world of education and research and their relation with industry and society, as education and research play a great
role in the political, socio-cultural, and economic development of societies. The effect of the relation between industry and universities on
the development of higher education and its importance in national development are of considerable significance. The relation between
industry and universities in industrialized and developed countries is of great importance, while this is a complicated issue in most
developing or underdeveloped countries. That is mainly due to the different tastes of the responsible authorities, and because university is
an institution for science and research, while industry is an institution for economy and commerce. Therefore, no development is achieved
until the attitudes of these two institutions towards growth and progress are not synchronous for collaboration [18].
The relation between industry and university has its root in the need to the universities and institutes that are required to improve their
functions in the developing countries to keep pace with the rapidly changing conditions.
University and society are two key institutions of any society. As comprehensive development of societies and countries depends largely on
the capabilities of these two institutions in meeting their needs, policymakers and planners pay a special attention to the continuous and
optimal relation between industry and university. For this purpose, universities have started to learn how to make business and obtain
commercial interests, by directing their intellectual properties towards economic values [9].
The faculty members believe that higher education is experiencing a new historical cycle titled Silent Revolution. Slaugher and Lesli
(1997) has introduced this revolution as “academic capitalism” [4], and considered it as economic rationality of higher education that is
itself a result of the new economics of knowledge [20].
The study of the development of higher education in Iran has revealed that commercial processes and convergence of industry and
universities has started to emerge in different forms of common university-industry projects, establishment of industry and university
offices, offices for technology transfer, incorporation of newly built and spin-off companies by holding companies, and provision of
tuition-based practical trainings to other organizations.
This research aims to identify the factors and components affecting higher education administration in five structural, socio-cultural,
managerial, financial, and educational aspects in order to find the most important barriers preventing the collaboration between university
* Corresponding author.
Email address: [email protected]

Mehdi Noursina and Mahmoud Ghanadan

886

Int ernational Journal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Soci al Sci ences , 2(10) October 2013

and industry and thereby assist the development of such collaboration. The research problem aims therefore to find out the barriers
preventing the relation and collaboration between industry and university.
This research and others similar to this one are of great importance, since the findings of these researches reveals the obstacles to the
collaboration between industry and university, and recognition of such factors especially in the field of higher education administration and
industry can be employed to adopt more appropriate policies that can improve the mutual relation of industry and university.
Thus, the objective of this research is to identify the barriers to the collaboration of industry and university as regards structural, sociocultural, educational, managerial, financial components in the city of Tehran.

2.

Previous researches

In the US, the commercial bonds between university and business world started to grow increasingly during and after the American Civil
War. Yale Report of 1828 is a proof of this claim. According to this report, when the higher education of the United States was questioned
for its traditional programs, some trends were set for the realization of applied objectives in educational programs. On the other hand, the
need to educated and expert citizens in the applied sciences such as industries and agriculture led to the adoption of Morrill Land-Grant
Acts for the grant of lands [10;22].
In Germany, the emergence of research universities was a new model of academic rationality. The establishment of academic research
laboratories was also a result of such rationality. Some of these laboratories were founded by the aids of major charities and for the useful
application of academic researches. These laboratories were concentrated gradually in leading universities such as MIT and Michigan
University. This was the first close commercial relation of the academic world with industry as the first partner of the universities of the
first decades of the 20th century in the Europe and the United States. Considering the philosophy of knowledge as a valuable goods and
substitution of competitive conditions instead of military needs, a new act was adopted that required the government, universities, and
industries to interact. This was not experienced up to that time [15].
According to the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act, the public laboratories of the UK could obtain the license of collaboration
with private pharmaceutical companies. The purpose of such collaboration was to manufacture products by the process of
commercialization and application of the facilities of the public sector such as personnel, services and tangible properties [16]. Etzkowitz
and Leydesdorff (2003) introduced a dynamic model of university-industry-government relation in form of a triple helix, which is a
consolidated and evolutionary model revealing the interaction between university, industry, and government. This model also reveals the
environmental forces and different styles of participation employed by these three institutions. [8; 30]
Trilateral Networks & Consolidated Organizations

Government

Industry
University
Figure 1. The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government [13]

These scholars indicate that the Bayh-Dole Act1 is the response of the government to the pressures arising out of global competitions, and
the reorganization of relations and transactions between university and industrial institutions was a reaction to the pressures imposed by the
government to participate in this process [30]
Feldman (2007) studied, in his PhD thesis titled the Commercialization of Public Higher Education: Balancing Academic, Fiscal, and
Market Values, submitted to the University of New Mexico for the field of study of educational leadership, the background of academic
capitalism that was developed in some newly established higher educational institutes, and surveyed the enormous impacts of commercial
values on higher education as a higher hypothesis.
Based on the studies of Bok (2003), Feldman claimed that commercialization has clear effects on today’s universities.

1

The adoption of Bayh-Dole Act in the US has provided the opportunity for the government, university, and industry, to meet their needs by employing commercialization and
pave the way for the issuance of patent to secure the rights of the researchers by private organizations, industries and universities. By this act, the universities became also able to
receive the patent rights of the inventions that were invested by the government. This made many higher education institutes to put the transfer of technology on their agenda and
incorporate special offices for the encouragement of their faculty members to file patents for their inventions.

Determining the Obstacles of Collaboration of University and Industry In Terms of the Components of the Higher Education …

887

Internat ional Jour nal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Social Sciences , 2(10) October 2013

Table 1. Traditional Academic Values versus Commercial Academic Values
z

Traditional Academic Values
Liberal educations
Higher education as a public product
Educating learners for achieving the characteristics of democratic citizens
Research for providing services to the society
Provide identical opportunities for having access to training and more social activities
Higher opportunities for political participations
Respecting scientific freedom
Education based on democracy
Liberal educational program
Education based on human sciences and priorities of the faculty
Educating learners
Face to face education
University
Student
Educational department
Grading system
Traditional financing
Public supports
Funding by public sector
The government, foundations, and private sector supporting universities
Public funds are use cohesively to support higher education
Receiving tuitions and taxes based on the solvency of the payer
Investment in academic values

Commercial Academic Values
Academic capitalism
Higher education as a private product
Educating learners for working in the market
Directing researches towards the needs of the government, market, and industry
Limited access to education of little opportunities for social activities
Little opportunities for participation in political affairs
The submission of scientific freedom to the government, industry, and market
Education based on the market
Educational program is directed towards global economy and market needs
The movement of the faculty towards entrepreneurship
Skill acquisition
Technology – based education
Research university or knowledge factory
Customer or consumer
Income center
Pleasing customers
Financing by entrepreneurial methods
Public assistance
Funding by private and business sector
Companies, private sector, and foundations support universities
Continuous decrease in the investment of the government in higher education
Continuous increase in tuitions and taxes
Continuous increase in commercial activities

Source: [15]

Their main purpose was to describe and explain the effect of cooperative culture and changes in academic values and behaviors in a public
research university. The result of this study revealed the changes in the mission and decisions as regards entrepreneurial values, which
formed a part of the scientific perspective of universities in 1980s.
In a study conducted by Allen Consulting Group in Australia under the title “Building Effective Systems for the Commercialization of
University Research (2004), the following factors were introduced as the main drives of the commercialization of research:
-

Legal frameworks for intellectual properties
The commercialization management structures and systems in place within universities
The quality of research being produced by universities
The availability of early stage venture finance by technology
The presence of strong local businesses for receiving technology
The behavior of participants within the research commercialization systems

Gonzales- Walker (2003) studied the effects of such collaboration on four organizational systems of higher education institutes in a
qualitative research titled “Higher Education Institutions in Educational Partnerships with Corporations: Impact on Organizational
Systems”. This research was consisted of three case studies conducted on Iowa University, Massachusetts University, and Rhode Island
University of the US.
The researcher classified the organizational systems of higher education institutes into four social, technological, managerial, and
institutional groups based on the notions of the famous experts of the field of higher education such as, Scott , Birnbaum and Albrecht and
studied the effects of educational collaboration between university, industrial and nonindustrial organizations on the above-mentioned
systems.
In conclusion, she could found 6 aspects of effects as the most important findings of her research on the collaboration between university
and organizations.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

The effects of the above-mentioned relation on the faculty and management are different (managers and faculty members have
different experiences in this regard).
The faculty plays an important role in the continuation of this vital relation.
Managerial system is the most effective factor in the enhancement of this relation and preservation of academic standards.
The adult learning models are the top educational philosophy of this collaboration.
The improvement of this relation has no effect on the academic standards.
In general, this study evaluates the collaboration between university and industry positive in the development, and participation
of university to the unknown domains [17].

Behrens and Gray (2001) have conducted a research titled “the Unintended Consequences of Cooperative Research: Impact of Industry
Sponsorship on Climate for Academic Freedom and other Graduate Student Outcome”. This study not only counts the numerous studied on
the advantages of the cooperative researches of industry and university, but also takes into account the shortages of empirical researches on
the costs or consequences as regards academic graduates and their impacts on the scientific liberal atmosphere. That is, the advantages of

Mehdi Noursina and Mahmoud Ghanadan

888

Int ernational Journal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Soci al Sci ences , 2(10) October 2013

cooperative researches of industry and university were compared with its costs. The main purpose of this research was to study the impacts
of investment sources (industry or government) and type of investment (one source, consortium, without investment) on research processes
and its impacts especially on the vulnerable academic population (graduates). The results of this research show that there is no evidence
proving the negative impacts of the sponsorship of industry or government on academic researches and the experiences of graduates.
However, the heuristic analyses of this research have shown the several variables affecting the scientific liberal atmosphere of the
universities [6].
According to the studies conducted on the relation system of industry and university for the development of technology in Iran, around 60
percent of the companies entered into twenty research contracts with Tehran universities of technology within less than one year. The types
of research relation of these companies with the universities have been presented in the table 2.
Table 2 . The Research Relation between Universities and Industries
Technical collaboration to improve, modify, and change the existing product
Technical collaboration in the development of new products
Technical collaboration in the improvement, modification, and change of the manufacturing processes
Technical collaboration in the development of new manufacturing processes
Collaboration in the improvement of the quality of products and processes
Collaboration in reducing manufacturing wastes and costs
Temporary exchange of experts, engineers, and specialists
Participation in specialized workshops and seminars
Cooperative use of laboratories and technical equipments
Implementation of researches cooperatively
Source: [5]

In the master dissertation of Soroush (2012) titled “the Recognition of Key Factors of Success in the Commercialization of Academic
Researches: An Academic Study of the Faculty of Engineering of the University of Yazd, it has been expressed that for having access to a
knowledge-based economy it is required to pave the way for innovation and originality, in order to convert ideas to products by investment
and manufacture of new products. The main sources of new ideas and innovations are academic researches and scholars.
In Amini’s master dissertation titled “the Preparation of Knowledge-based Companies for the Commercialization of the Research Results in
Health Domain” (2011), the preparation of knowledge-based companies for the commercialization of the research results in health domain
(considering the comprehensive and scientific map of health) has been studied. The analysis of the data has prioritized the preparation
indices according to the experts into the managerial, financial, economic, technological, legal, political, environmental, and social factors as
well as market conditions.
In 2008, Fakour and Hajihosseini published a paper titled “the Academic Entrepreneurship and Commercialization of Research Results in
Iranian Universities”, which was an extract from the research project titled “the Study of the Factors Paving the Way for the Establishment
of Spin-off Companies in the Academic Sector of Iran”, and conducted in Iran Industrial and Scientific Research Organization. In this
paper, the researchers studied the factors effective in the approaches of the universities to entrepreneurial university. For this purpose, they
studied in 2006 the performance of seven universities in terms of the registration, legal protection, licensing, and transfer of the ownership
of research results, as well as the establishment of academic spin-off companies, and the results of the contractual and cooperative
researches conducted in collaboration with industry and other organizations. The results of this research showed that cooperative researches
and contracts entered into with industry in the studied universities were implemented in a stable manner, and the registration and legal
protection of research results were started recently. However, other activities including licensing, and transfer of ownership rights as well as
the establishment of academic spin-off companies were not usual among universities.

3.

Research question

Considering the title and objective of this research, the following question is to be answered:
What are the obstacles preventing the collaboration between industry and university in terms of structural, socio-cultural,
educational, managerial, and financial components?

4.

Research method

This research is an applied study in terms of its objective, as its results are applied as answers to the practical problems in the real world,
and its variables are of qualitative type. In temporal terms, this research uses a cross-sectional research design, since the data about one or
several attributes were collected within in a definite section of time by taking samples from the society. The data and information of this
research were collected from those ones of 2012. Finally, this research uses survey-descriptive design in terms of data collection [23].
4.1. Question Testing
To test the data of this research, the statistical method of explanatory factor analysis was applied. In this method, the researcher tries to
explore the underlying structure of a relatively broad set of variables. The primary presupposition of this research states that any variable

Determining the Obstacles of Collaboration of University and Industry In Terms of the Components of the Higher Education …

889

Internat ional Jour nal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Social Sciences , 2(10) October 2013

may be related to any factor [21]. It must be noted that the factor load obtained is to be higher than 0.5, in order to reduce the variables and
consider them as latent variables.
Explanatory analysis includes four main outputs:
Kaiser – Meyer - Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (KMO) and Bartlett’s test
Table of intersections
Total Variable Explained Table
The rotated factor matrix of independent variables
In general, varimax rotation was applied to obtain rotated matrix for the questionnaire in order to interpret and recognize the factors.
Moreover, in all explanatory analyses, extraction method is considered as the main component analysis method.
In this research, industry and university have been selected as the two statistical populations of this research. To recognize five main factors
of this research including (structural, socio-cultural, educational, managerial, and financial factors), 48 items were inserted in a
questionnaire prepared for this purpose. Nine items were used for the assessment of structural factors, 10 items for the assessment of sociocultural factors, 15 items for educational factors, 8 items for managerial factors, and finally 6 items for financial factors. The variables were
recognized, separated, and confirmed by explanatory factor analysis. Considering that the present research has been conducted on two
statistical populations of industry and university, we conducted explanatory analysis on each statistical population separately.
4.1.1. Explanatory Analysis of the Statistical Population “University”
For factor analysis, it is firstly required to ensure that the existing data can be applied for the analysis. In addition, Bartlett’s test was used
to ensure the adequacy of sampling. This index varies from 0 to 1. If the value of the index tends to 1, the intended data are appropriate for
factor analysis, otherwise, the results of the practical analysis is not proper for the data [21].
Table 3. Table of Intersection
Factors

Primary Intersections

Extractive Intersection

S2

1.000

0.571

S3

1.000

0.564

S4

1.000

0.734

S5

1.000

0.748

S7

1.000

0.654

S8

1.000

0.611

S9

1.000

0.540

C1

1.000

0.689

C2

1.000

0.707

C3

1.000

0.511

C4

1.000

0.651

C7

1.000

0.570

C9

1.000

0.684

C10

1.000

0.584

E1

1.000

0.522

E4

1.000

0.524

E5

1.000

0.568

E6

1.000

0.773

E7

1.000

0.776

E8

1.000

0.523

E10

1.000

0.524

E11

1.000

0.663

E12

1.000

0.601

E14

1.000

0.504

E15

1.000

0.614

M1

1.000

0.646

M2

1.000

0.646

M3

1.000

0.584

M4

1.000

0.766

M5

1.000

0.716

M8

1.000

0.610

F1

1.000

0.538

F2

1.000

0.569

F3

1.000

0.572

F4

1.000

0.538

F6

1.000

0.626

Mehdi Noursina and Mahmoud Ghanadan

890

Int ernational Journal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Soci al Sci ences , 2(10) October 2013

Considering the primary and extractive intersections table 3 that shows the extraction of factors step by step and through factor deletion, the
final intersections of the statistical population of university were obtained.
The total variance explained table 4 shows that there are in general five main factors. This table indicates also that the first factor explains
23.164 percent of the variance, the second factor 15.194 percent, the third factor 9.525 percent, the fourth factor 6.961 percent, and finally
the fifth factor 6.883 percent of the variance. In general, these five factors can explain 62 percent of the variance. As the variance explained
is higher than 0.5, it indicates a convergent validity.
Table 4. Total Variance
Total Special Amount

Factors

Special Amount of Extractive Factors without Rotation

Special Amount of Extractive Factors with Rotation

Total

Percent of the Variance

Percent of Total

Total

Percent of the Variance

Percent of Total

Total

Percent of the Variance

Percent of Total

1

9.372

26.033

26.033

9.372

26.033

26.033

8.339

23.164

23.164

2

6.276

17.434

43.467

6.276

17.434

43.467

5.470

15.194

38.358

3

2.851

7.920

51.387

2.851

7.920

51.387

3.429

9.525

47.883

4

1.887

5.242

56.629

1.887

5.242

56.629

2.506

6.961

54.844

5

1.835

5.097

61.727

1.835

5.097

61.727

2.478

6.883

61.727

6

1.298

3.606

65.332

7

1.206

3.351

68.683

8

1.112

3.089

71.771

9

0.959

2.665

74.436

10

0.874

2.427

76.863

11

0.786

2.184

79.046

12

0.700

1.943

80.989

13

0.628

1.743

82.733

14

0.616

1.712

84.444

15

0.564

1.565

86.010

16

0.524

1.454

87.464

17

0.504

1.399

88.863

18

0.459

1.276

90.139

19

0.412

1.144

91.283

20

0.383

1.063

92.346

21

0.348

0.968

93.314

22

0.303

0.842

94.156

23

0.290

0.807

94.963

24

0.265

0.736

95.698

25

0.247

0.686

96.385

26

0.225

0.625

97.010

27

0.189

0.525

97.535

28

0.175

0.485

98.021

29

0.167

0.465

98.485

30

0.126

0.350

98.836

31

0.104

0.290

99.126

32

0.084

0.234

99.360

33

0.073

0.204

99.563

34

0.071

0.197

99.760

35

0.054

0.149

99.909

36

0.033

0.091

100.000

The rotated factor matrix of the table 5 shows that five factors have been recognized as the main factors, which are named based on the
review of the literature and predesigned conceptual model as follows: 1) structural factors, 2) socio-cultural factors, 3) educational factors,
4) managerial factors, and 5) financial factors.

Determining the Obstacles of Collaboration of University and Industry In Terms of the Components of the Higher Education …

891

Internat ional Jour nal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Social Sciences , 2(10) October 2013

Table 5. The Rotated Factor Matrix of Independent Variables
Factors
Factors

Structural Factors

Socio-Cultural Factors

Educational Factors

Managerial Factors

Financial Factors

S2
S3

0.711

0.122

0-.210

0.062

-0.056

0.631

-0.214

0.063

0.269

-0.209

S4

0.853

0.023

0.013

-0.007

0.073

S5

0.728

-0.183

0.186

-0.193

-0.334

S7

0.700

-0.276

-0.008

-0.145

-0.257

S8

0.510

0.247

0.258

0.181

-0.437

S9

0.509

0.092

-0.303

0.317

0.284

C1

-0.244

0.789

0.011

0.025

-0.082

C2

-0.222

0.788

-0.029

-0.128

0.140

C3

-0.163

0.438

0.329

0.429

0.012

C4

0.236

0.511

-0.236

-0.232

0.475

C7

-0.213

0.497

0.448

0.257

0.107

C9

-0.045

0.725

0.188

0.331

0.108

C10

-0.187

0.563

-0.133

0.464

0.005

E1

-0.011

0.157

0.559

0.224

0.368

E4

-0.068

0.377

0.436

0.341

0.266

E5

0.245

0.143

0.574

0.376

0.129

E6

-0.045

-0.073

0.806

0.269

0.207

E7

-0.169

-0.177

0.824

0.188

0.042

E8

0.047

0.372

0.609

0.038

0.103

E10

-0.043

0.400

0.580

-0.119

-0.105

E11

-0.008

0.121

0.785

-0.082

0.157

E12

-0.072

-0.030

0.746

0.124

0.150

E14

-0.221

0.284

0.547

0.146

0.231

E15

-0.204

0.008

0.636

0.298

0.282

M1

-0.207

0.385

-0.043

0.623

0.254

M2

-0.158

-0.168

-0.166

0.750

-0.055

M3

-0.019

0.109

-0.076

0.752

0.031

M4

0.147

-0.058

-0.132

0.848

-0.062

M5

-0.180

0.519

0.224

0.603

0.014

M8

-0.206

0.205

0.010

0.598

0.410

F1

0.024

0.100

-0.049

0.241

0.683

F2

0.081

0.187

-0.258

-0.233

0.638

F3

-0.165

-0.090

-0.094

-0.076

0.723

F4

-0.208

0.319

-0.053

-0.083

0.619

F6

0.001

-0.039

0.275

0.257

0.695

4.1.2. Explanatory Analysis of the Statistical Population “Industry”
Just like the statistical population of university, the explanatory analysis was conducted on the statistical population of industry. The second
output of the explanatory analysis conducted on the population industry, is the table of intersections. This table was obtained after the stepby-step deletion of the factors, whose extraction intersection was less than 0.5. Indeed, we started the explanatory analysis with 48 factors,
and after deleting some factors, the table 6 was achieved, in which no factor with the extraction intersection less than 0.5 is found. It must
be noted that the factors with inappropriate extraction intersection were deleted during the step-by-step deletion.

Mehdi Noursina and Mahmoud Ghanadan

892

Int ernational Journal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Soci al Sci ences , 2(10) October 2013

Table 6. Table of Intersections in Population of Industry
Factors

Primary Intersection

Extractive Intersection

S1

1.000

0.629

S2

1.000

0.773

S3

1.000

0.539

S4

1.000

0.667

S5

1.000

0.644

S7

1.000

0.663

S8

1.000

0.786

S9

1.000

0.670

C1

1.000

0.832

C2

1.000

0.778

C3

1.000

0.624

C4

1.000

0.603

C5

1.000

0.777

C6

1.000

0.524

C7

1.000

0.799

C8

1.000

0.660

C9

1.000

0.594

C10

1.000

0.650

E1

1.000

0.842

E2

1.000

0.780

E3

1.000

0.556

E4

1.000

0.840

E5

1.000

0.698

E6

1.000

0.741

E7

1.000

0.550

E9

1.000

0.833

E10

1.000

0.586

E11

1.000

0.535

E12

1.000

0.617

E13

1.000

0.702

E14

1.000

0.678

E15

1.000

0.758

M2

1.000

0.671

M4

1.000

0.693

M5

1.000

0.768

M6

1.000

0.569

M7

1.000

0.635

M8

1.000

0.653

F2

1.000

0.624

F4

1.000

0.746

F6

1.000

0.760

Considering the rotated factor matrix (Varimax) of the table 7, it can be seen that five factors have been recognized as the main factors,
which were named according to the literature of the research and predesigned conceptual model as follows: 1) structural factors, 2) sociocultural factors, 3), educational factors, 4) managerial factors, 5) financial factors.

Determining the Obstacles of Collaboration of University and Industry In Terms of the Components of the Higher Education …

893

Internat ional Jour nal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Social Sciences , 2(10) October 2013

Table 7. The Rotated Factor Matrix (Varimax) of Independent Variables
Factors
Factors

Structural
Factors

Socio-Cultural
Factors

Educational
Factors

Managerial
Factors

Financial
Factors

S1

0.689

0.189

-0.043

-0.096

0.328

S2

0.813

0.231

-0.202

-0.115

0.064

S3

0.561

0.561

-0.116

0.168

0.428

S4

0.745

-0.327

0.065

0.001

0.014

S5

0.535

0.466

-0.352

-0.052

0.118

S7

0.613

0.502

-0.157

0.103

-0.002

S8

0.732

0.409

-0.112

0.246

0.098

S9

0.759

0.017

-0.135

0.271

-0.044

C1

0.380

0.680

-0.074

0.431

-0.186

C2

0.229

0.728

-0.324

0.141

0.265

C3

-0.311

0.565

0.244

0.321

0.215

C4

0.069

0.685

-0.090

-0.137

-0.319

C5

0.339

0.604

0.118

-0.533

-0.010

C6

0.136

0.615

0.149

-0.321

0.045

C7

-0.465

0.535

0.500

0.079

-0.201

C8

0.225

0.548

-0.083

-0.116

-0.537

C9

-0.383

0.590

0.284

-0.058

0.123

C10

-0.088

0.752

0.276

-0.031

0.011

E1

-0.290

0.193

0.824

0.204

-0.013

E2

-0.287

0.023

0.831

0.031

0.074

E3

-0.246

-0.109

0.288

-0.078

-0.629

E4

-0.126

-0.088

0.899

-0.066

0.064

E5

0.532

-0.156

0.575

0.176

0.171

E6

-0.096

-0.139

0.673

0.506

0.056

E7

0.062

-0.019

0.565

0.184

0.439

E9

-0.080

0.303

0.854

-0.062

0.037

E10

-0.403

0.257

0.461

-0.295

0.243

E11

-0.008

-0.081

0.699

-0.105

-0.170

E12

-0.225

-0.367

0.645

-0.100

-0.072

E13

-0.083

-0.113

0.808

0.045

-0.164

E14

0.342

-0.204

0.636

0.322

0.104

E15

-0.335

0.246

0.665

-0.150

0.348

M2

-0.038

0.389

-0.047

0.712

0.101

M4

0.391

0.436

0.059

0.582

-0.085

M5

-0.027

0.270

-0.228

0.786

0.153

M6

-0.029

0.138

0.142

0.710

0.156

M7

-0.167

-0.108

0.113

0.700

0.304

M8

0.075

0.036

0.128

0.794

0.008

F2

0.399

0.201

0.344

-0.165

0.528

F4

-0.348

0.275

0.267

-0.443

0.530

F6

-0.302

0.103

0.634

-0.149

0.635

4.2. Scope of the research
In this research, the statistical population was consisted of two groups of the universities located in the city of Tehran, and the major
industries of this city. The first group consists of the universities located in the city of Tehran including public universities (25 ones),
Islamic Azad Universities (19 branches), Universities of Applied Sciences (79 ones), and Payam Nour Universities (18 ones). They are
totally 141 universities.
The second group consists of the major industries of the city of Tehran. That is, the industries that are probably related to or in
collaboration with universities. They are 63 factories and industrial companies.

Mehdi Noursina and Mahmoud Ghanadan

894

Int ernational Journal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Soci al Sci ences , 2(10) October 2013

4.3. Sample
In this research, our sample has been classified into the first and second groups.
The sample of the first group: considering the existing documents and research literature in the universities,, the big and top universities
of Tehran were selected, and from them samples were taken as follows:
-

-

-

Eight public universities including Tehran University, Amir Kabir (Polytechnic) University, Sharif University of Technology,
Shahid Beheshti University, University of Science and Technology, Khajeh Nassir al-Din Toosi University, Tarbiat Modares
University, and Allameh Tabatabai University.
5 branches of the Islamic Azad University including Science and Research Branch of Tehran, North Tehran branch, South Tehran
Branch, West Tehran Branch, and Central Tehran branch of the Islamic Azad University.
Five branches of the University of Applied Science and Technology including Tehran Food Industry Center of Applied Science,
Iran Industries Research and Education Center of Applied Science, the Research and Education Center of the Ministry of Mine
and Industry, Tehran branch of Iran University of Mine and Industry, and Iran Industrial Research Center of Applied Science.
Three branches of Payam Nour Universities including South Tehran Branch, East Tehran Branch, and West Tehran Branch.
The sample included 21 universities, which were given questionnaires and their personnel were interviewed face-to-face (table 8).
Table 8. The List of Sampled Universities

No.

University

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

Tehran University
Sharif University of Technology
Amir Kabir (Polytechnic) University
Shahid Beheshti University
University of Science and Technology
Tarbiat Modares University
Khajeh Nassir al-Din Toosi University
Allameh Tabatabai University
Islamic Azad University: Science and Research Branch of Tehran
Islamic Azad University: North Tehran branch
Islamic Azad University: South Tehran Branch
Islamic Azad University: West Tehran Branch
Islamic Azad University: Central Tehran branch
Payam Noor: South Tehran Branch
Payam Noor: East Tehran Branch
Payam Noor: West Tehran Branch
Tehran Food Industry Center of Applied Science
Iran Industries Research and Education Center of Applied Science
the Research and Education Center of the Ministry of Mine and Industry
Tehran branch of Iran University of Mine and Industry
Iran Industrial Research Center of Applied Science

Number of the
Questionnaires Sent
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face

Number Of the Ques. Received
& deemed appropriate
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4

The sample of the second group: considering the existing documents, 63 industrial companies that cooperated with universities were
taken as sample members based on the two following characteristics. The questionnaires were filled by 33 companies in face-to-face form,
and the others were mailed to the companies (table 9).
The sample members were taken based on: 1) the number of personnel of the industrial companies which must be more than 500
employees, 2) the capital of the industrial company that must be higher than 5 billion Tomans.
4.4. Source of Data
In this research, triangulation technique was used for the collection of data. This technique is necessarily for qualitative cross validation and
an attempt to have access to convergent information [11].
For the purpose of triangulation technique, three techniques of library method (books, dissertations, papers, and related publications
existing in the internet) for the collection of secondary data to formulate the theoretical framework and literature of the research, interview,
and questionnaire for the collection of the primary data of the research (that were not existed before) have been employed.

Interview

Questionnair

Library
Method

Determining the Obstacles of Collaboration of University and Industry In Terms of the Components of the Higher Education …
Internat ional Jour nal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Social Sciences , 2(10) October 2013

Table 9. The List of Sampled Industrial Companies
No.

Industrial Company

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69

Iran Tire Company
Dezhpad Company
Kashi Irana Company
Tarkhineh Company
Hawilux Company
Minoo Industrial Group
Pars Electric Company
Abad Rah-haye Pars Company
Gusht Iran Company
Shahab Khodro Company
Lamp Tasvir Iran Company
Jaygah Saz Company
Mihan Ice Cream Company
Razak Company
Electronic Industry Company
Iran Khordo Industrial Group
200 Kar Kia Cooperative Company
SAIPA industrial group
Kaveh Glassware and Crystal Company
Pooyandegan Rah Saadat Company
Tehran Telecommunication Company
Ifa Afzoon Company
Iran Tobacco Company
Persia Gas and Oil Digging Company
Educational Industry Company
Mimas Dairy Company
Arj Company
Jaber ibn Hayyan Pharmaceutical Company
Darou Pakhsh Company
Behnoush Company
Iran Printing and Pubishing Company
Jamegaran
Gordafarin Clothing Company
Ara Poushesh Tehran Company
Pars Tel
Paya Communication Industrial Company
Lastic Alborz – Kian Tyre Company
Venous Shisheh Company
Jame Iman Glassware Manufacturing Company
Fasan Company
Jaygah Saz Company (repeated)
Azaran Industrial Structures Company
Kanrood Sazeh Tehran Company
Omran Sooleh Company
Shahriar Metal Structures Company
Akam Felez Company
Roof Terrace Company
Sedad Machine Company
Nooshab Company
Shahriar Dam Pak Industrial Slaughterhouse
Golestan Tee Company
Dorna Cake Company
Mihan Ice Cream Company (repeated)
Aviation Organization
Darou Pakhsh Company (repeated)
Iran Trasfor Company
Iran Kenaf Company
Rahavardhaye Tazrighi Iran Company
Pars Electric Company (repeated)
Absaal Company
Osveh Iran Consulting Engineering Company
Mobin Net
Pars Auto Manufacturing Company
Behrouz Food Industrial Company
Emersan Indsutrial Company
Iran Hormone Company
Alhavi Pharmaceutical Company
Paksan Company
Absaal Company (repeated)

No. of the Questionnaires
Sent
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
3- sent via mail
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face
5 face-to-face

No. Of the Ques. Received &
deemed appropriate
4
3
4
3
3
4
3
3
3
4
3
3
Failing to cooperate
3
3
5
3
7
4
3
4
3
5
1
1
4
2
5
Failing to cooperate
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
Failing to cooperate
1
1
1
Failing to cooperate
1
2
Failing to cooperate

895

Mehdi Noursina and Mahmoud Ghanadan

896

Int ernational Journal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Soci al Sci ences , 2(10) October 2013

5.

Results and discussion

The results of the explanatory factor analysis employed in this research were led to the recognition of the obstacles to the collaboration
between university and industry. These obstacles were classified into five components including structural, socio-cultural, educational,
managerial, and financial components, which were divided into the following subclasses.
Certainly, the weakness of the factors that are specifically important in the interaction between industry and university can create obstacles
to such an interaction, and therefore these weaknesses are of importance. The presence or absence of such factors may be a barrier or a
facility for the collaboration between these two institutions. We have summarized the results of this research in the following:
5.1. Structural Factors
Few number of higher research centers for the collaboration between industry and university.
Weakness of the regulations and instructions governing the relation between industry and university
Insufficient number of knowledge-based companies in universities and industries
Failing to vest powers and authorities to the executive officials responsible for such collaboration in universities and industries
5.2. Socio-cultural Factors
The age of students and artisans
The problem in the feeling of pride by students and artisans for economic products
Lack of promotions for commercialization in universities and scientific products in industries
Little participation of the media in cultural, scientific, and industrial promotions
The problem of globalization of universities and industries.
The problem of virtualization of professional educations required for industries.
5.3. Educational Factors
Shortage of mutual knowledge and attitudes of university and industry of and towards each others.
Lack of educational and applied programs for the collaboration of academic lecturers with industry sector
Shortage of patent papers written by academic researchers
Shortage of the graduates of the fields of study required for industry
Incompliance of technological educations with the needs of the society and industry
Problems of the promotion system of faculty members and lack of attention to the researching activities.
Shortcomings of the applied training courses for the students of technological sciences
The shortage of technological trainings and business models in universities
The absence of experts of industry in education and research fields of the universities.
5.4. Managerial Factors
The weakness of public regulations governing the relation between industry and university.
Shortage of scientific education of industrial managers in universities
Illegal leakage of information by universities to the similar industrial competitors.
Conflict of interests between industry and university
Shortage of original researches in industrially specialized environment
The weakness in the policy of intellectual properties of the inventors
5.6. Financial Factors
Shortage of financial incentives for applied-scientific researches
Shortage of research funds for industry
Shortage of educational scholarship and research grants provided by industries to the universities and vice-versa.

6.

Conclusion

The obstacles to the collaboration between industry and university are classified into four domains, which have been studied in Iran by
other researchers such as Shafiei (2006), Arasteh (2004), Konecny et al (2009), Bagherinejhad (2008), Sharghi (2004a , 2004b), and
Taghavinia (2011) in an incoherent and scattered forms. The results of their researches are in accordance with the results of this research.
However, the results of this research have been classified in a more coherent and ordered forms, and more components have been
recognized.
-

Few number of higher research centers for the collaboration between industry and university.
Weakness of the regulations and instructions governing the relation between industry and university
Insufficient number of knowledge-based companies in universities and industries
Failing to vest powers and authorities to the executive officials responsible for such collaboration in universities and industries
The age of students and artisans
The problem in the feeling of pride by students and artisans for economic products

Determining the Obstacles of Collaboration of University and Industry In Terms of the Components of the Higher Education …

897

Internat ional Jour nal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Social Sciences , 2(10) October 2013

-

Lack of promotions for commercialization in universities and scientific products in industries
Little participation of the media in cultural, scientific, and industrial promotions
The problem of globalization of universities and industries.
The problem of virtualization of professional educations required for industries.
Shortage of mutual knowledge and attitudes of university and industry of and towards each others.
Lack of educational and applied programs for the collaboration of academic lecturers with industry sector
Shortage of patent papers written by academic researchers
Shortage of the graduates of the fields of study required for industry
Incompliance of technological educations with the needs of the society and industry
Problems of the promotion system of faculty members and lack of attention to the researching activities.
Shortcomings of the applied training courses for the students of technological sciences
The shortage of technological trainings and business models in universities
The absence of experts of industry in education and research fields of the universities.
The weakness of public regulations governing the relation between industry and university.
Shortage of scientific education of industrial managers in universities
Illegal leakage of information by universities to the similar industrial competitors.
Conflict of interests between industry and university
Shortage of original researches in industrially specialized environment
The weakness in the policy of intellectual properties of the inventors
Shortage of financial incentives for applied-scientific researches
Shortage of research funds for industry
Shortage of educational scholarship and research grants provided by industries to the universities and vice-versa.

References
[1]
[2]

[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]

[18]

[19]
[20]
[21]

Allen consulting group, 2004. "Building effective systems for the commercialization of university research", prepared for business council of
Australia & Australian vice chancellor’s committee.
Amini, Elham,2011. “The Study of Preparation of Knowledge-based Companies for the Commercialization of the Research Results of Health Field
(based on the Comprehensive Health Map)”, Unpublished Master Dissertation in the Field of Study of Marketing Management. Kish Campus:
Tehran University Press.
Arasteh, H. R., 2004. “the Relation between Industry and University”. Higher Education Research and Planning Quarterly. 10th Year, Issue. No. 3.
Pp. 57-92.
Awbery, S.M, 2006. "Marketing the invisible hand visible: the case of dialogue about academic capitalism". Research policy ,vol. 13. pp. 21-36.
Bagherinejhad, J.2008. “the Relation System of Industry and University for the Technological Development in Iran: Mechanisms and
Recommendations”. Science and Technology Policies Quarterly. 1st Year, No. 1, pp. 1-13.
Behrens, R. and Gray, N ,2001. "Unitended conseguences of cooperative research: Impact of industry sponsorship on climate for academic freedom
and other graduate student outcome", research policy. pp. 179-190.
Bok, D, 2003. "Roots of Commercialization", universities in the market place: the commercialization of higher education, Princeton university press,
pp. 1-17. Avail at: http//press.Princeton. Edu/chpters/S7484.pdf.
Corely, E.A., Boardman, P.C., Bozeman, B, 2006. "Design and the management of multi-institutional research collaborations: Theoretical
implication form two case studies", research policy, Vol. 35. pp. 975-993.
Danaifard, H. 2004. “Knowledge-Based Economy and Preservation of Institutional Integrity of University”, Tehran: Roshd Publishing House.
Decter, M. 2007. "University to business technology transfer- UK and USA comparison", journal of Technology vation. Vo.l 25. pp 45-155.
Delavar, H. 2004. “Scientific and Theoretical Fundamentals of Research in Human and Social Sciences”, Tehran: Roshd Publishing House.
Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, 2003. "The future of the university and the university of future: evaluation of iory tower to entrepreneurial
paradigm", research policy, Vol. 29 pp. 20-31.
Etzkowitz, H, 1998. "The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university- industry linkage", research policy, Vol. 27 pp.
823-833.
Fakour, B. & Hajihosseini,H. 2008. “Academic Entrepreneurship and Commercialization of Research Results in the Universities of Iran: A case
study conducted on Seven Important Universities of Iran”. Rahyaft Quarterly, No. 2. pp. 59-70.
Feldman K.S, 2007. "The commercialization of public higher education: Balancing academic, fiscal and market values", A dissertation submitted in
partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of doctor of education: Educational leadership. The university of New Mexico.
Fersco, R.S. and Merabet, H, 2005. "Sponsored research and the public right to know". Journal of Drug development research, Vol. 63 pp. 103-111.
Gonzales- Wlaker, R.M, 2003. "Higher education institutions in educational partnerships with corporations: impact on organizational systems". A
dissertation submitted to the office of graduate studies and research, in partial fulfillment of the requirement for degree of doctor of education.
University of Massachusetts, Boston.
Hashemidaran, H. & Ghaed Mohammadi, M.J. 2007. “The Significance of the Relation between Industry and University for Higher Education
Development in the Third Millennium”. The Conference on Higher Education in the Third Millennium . Rudehen: Young Researchers Club of the
Islamic Azad University of Rudehen Branch. p. 2.
Konecny, I. et al, 2009.” Universities and Industrial Research”. Trans. Masoud Shafiei. Tehran: Amir Kabir University of Technology Press.
Kutinalahti, P, 2005. "University approaching market: intertwining scientific and entrepreneurial goal VTT publication", A dissertation submitted in
partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of doctor education: educational leadership. University of Australia.
Momeni, M.& Fa’al Ghayomi, A. 2009.” Statistical Analyses using SPSS”. Tehran: Ketab Nou Publishing House.

898

Mehdi Noursina and Mahmoud Ghanadan
Int ernational Journal of Economy, Mana ge ment and Soci al Sci ences , 2(10) October 2013

[22]

[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]

[29]
[30]

Powers. J.B, 2000. "Academic entrepreneur ship in higher education: institutional effects on performance of university technology transfer".
Submitter to the faculty of the university graduate school in partial fulfillment of requirement for the degree doctor of philosophy in the school of
business and education. Indiana university.
Sarmad, Z., Bazargan, A., Hejazi,E. 2008.” Research Methods in Behavioral Science”. 15th Ed., Tehran: Agah Publishing House.
Shafiei, M. 2006.” The Relation between Industry and University: A Brilliant Future, an Opaque Past”. 5th ed. Tehran: Amir Kabir University of
Technology Press.
Sharghi, A. 2004. “International Communications and Scientific Development”. In Higher Education Encyclopedia. The Great Persian Encyclopedia
Foundation.
Sharghi, A. 2004. “International Scientific Collaborations in Higher Education”. In Higher Education Encyclopedia. The Great Persian Encyclopedia
Foundation.
Slaugher, S. & Leslie, L.L, 1997. “Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies, and the Entrepreneurial University”. Baltimore, MD. The Jone Hopkins
University Press.
Soroush, A.R. 2012.” Recognition of Key Factors of Success in the Commercialization of Academic Researches: A Case Study the Faculty of
Engineering of Yazd University”. Unpublished Master Dissertation in the Field of Entrepreneurship Management submitted to the Faculty of
Management of Tehran University.
Taghavinia, K., 2011.” How Aware are the Inventors to the Commercialization of Inventions”. Unpublished Master Dissertation in the Field of
Study of Entrepreneurship Management submitted to the Faculty of Management of Tehran University.
Wyne, K.T, 2004. "Commercial determinants of successful university technology transfer: A resource dependency perspective", A dissertation
submitted to the school of business and entrepreneurship in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of doctor of business
administration. Nova South Eastern University.

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close