University industry interaction

Baer, Walter S. Strengthening University-Industry Interactions. Santa Monica, California RAND Corporation, January 1980. 

Analyzes policy objectives of attempts to increase flow of university-industry interactions, and examines current state of knowledge regarding effects of three broad types of university-industry relationships upon industrial innovation. Sets forth eight policy options. Bibliography. 

Battenburg is with the Corporate Research Department of the Eaton Corporation of Michigan. The paper examines the problems associated with university-industry interactions. "Gap size" factors are listed, l.e., those tending to widen or reduce the gap between the sectors. Ten types of mechanisms to promote closer relationships are listed and briefly discussed. Specific first steps for initiating contracts—both for universities and companies—are suggested. 

Bement, A. L. "DARPA s Experience with University-Industrial Interactions In Materials Research." Notes and slides for a presentation at DOE/IRI Conference on Mechanisms of University-Industry Interactions, Reston, Virginia, December 7-8, 1978. 

The Vice President for Corporate Research at the Xerox Corporation presents a good typology of mechanisms for university-industry interaction. They include ... 

Science Council of Canada. "University-Industry Interaction, Statement of the Chairman, Dr. Claude Fortier." In Annual Review 1981 (Cat. No. SSl-2/1981), pp. 21-44. 

Shapero, Albert. University-Industry Interactions Recurring Expectations, Unwarranted Assumptions and Feasible Policies (prepared for NSF/STIA/PRA under PO-SP-79-0991). Columbus, Ohio Ohio State University, July 31, 1979. 

The quote refers to the behind-the-scenes work of CCR s University/Industry Interaction Committee. 

Meyer-Krahmer, F. and U. Schmoch 1998. Science-based technologies university-industry interactions in four fields. Research Policy. 27 835-852. 

Kenneth A. Pickar, from the California Institute of Technology, discussed the growing importance of university-industry collaboration. Corporate central R D laboratories have been in decline, which has driven industry s need for academic research partners. Such interactions present equally compelling benefits to the university these include the capture of economic value, an environment attractive to young faculty, and contributions to the economic viability of the local community. 

The early rise of chemical engineering as an academic discipline was characterized by an intimate association between the university and industry in several different ways and at various critical periods in U.S. history. This interaction was especially important in influencing the Course in Chemical Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the centennial of which we celebrate. In this paper, I trace the development of the program at MIT and the role played by academic-industrial interaction. I have divided this early development into two time periods, 1888-1920 and 1920-1941, because each was associated with a single dominant personality, William H. Walker and Warren K. Lewis, respectively. 

Another specific mechanism for Interaction could be the proposed Institute of Chemical Education at the University of Wisconsin. The staff there, led by Professor Shakashlrl, are actively developing plans for such an Institute. The ACS Division of Chemical Education, the Society Committee on Education, and the Board of Directors have endorsed the plan seemingly Its time has come. Industry should also support the concept of this institute this is a logical focus for academic-Industrial interaction. This kind of institute, common in the research area, would be a very real plus in developing new approaches in chemical education. 

The focal point of CCR s activities is the Fall annual meeting. Meetings have been held across the United States for the past 10 years, hosted by local member industries and universities. The annual meeting provides an opportunity for the entire membership to interact in programs focusing on areas of mutual interest to university, industrial, and government scientific decision makers. 

The 1989 annual meeting had education as one of its themes. The 1990 meeting had programs dealing with environmental control in the 90 s, frontiers in chemical sciences and technology, and university/industrial/ government interactions in research. 

Industrial Perspectives on Innovation and Interactions with Universities Summary of Interviews with Senior Industrial Officials. Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable, (forthcoming. Spring 1991). 

There is a huge and still growing literature focusing on university-industry relationships. The objective of this section is to show how our contribution relates to this literature. We do not pretend that our scheme is exhaustive, but we think that an appropriate way to present the different approaches is to focus on the three elements that characterise university-industry relationships. The first element concerns firms. Several studies have looked at the economic impact of scientific research on the private sector the importance of the university as an external source of information used by firms to innovate and the characteristics of firms that benefit from academic research. The second approach is to study the channels used by both actors - university and industry -to exchange information, and the conditions favouring or blocking these interactions. The third approach focuses on universities and analyses the influence of these alliances on their evolution. 

This chapter provides orientation and an introduction to the subject of air quality. As a part of this introduction, we begin exploring the options for ensuring high quality air in the environment. The focus of this book is on industrial air pollution problems, and hence, the term environment refers to the universal ecosystem that humans live and interact in, as well as the workplace. 

Many academic and industrial scientists serve as advisors to various federal agency programs in materials science. For example, the evaluation board for the Materials Science and Engineering Laboratory (MSEL) at NIST contains representatives from Bell Laboratories, DuPont, General Electric, Allied Signal, and numerous universities. The private sector would like to improve the interactions at the strategic policy level, but some bureaucratic handicaps must be overcome. 

---