Barjak, Franz
Lade...
E-Mail-Adresse
Geburtsdatum
Projekt
Organisationseinheiten
Berufsbeschreibung
Nachname
Barjak
Vorname
Franz
Name
Barjak, Franz
25 Ergebnisse
Suchergebnisse
Gerade angezeigt 1 - 10 von 25
- PublikationAn Emergent Quadruple Helix in Swiss Energy Sector?(2017) Gürtler, Stefan; Barjak, Franz; Lindeque, Johan Paul; Tynnhammar, Marcus [in: XXVIII ISPIM Innovation Conference, Vienna]04B - Beitrag Konferenzschrift
- PublikationInfluences of the regional and national economic environment on the technology transfer performance of academic institutions in Europe(Springer, 2016) Barjak, Franz; Es-Sadki, Nordine; Audretsch, David B.; Lehmann, Erik; Meoli, Michele; Vismara, Silvio [in: University Evolution, Entrepreneurial Activity and Regional Competitiveness]The paper looks how the national and regional environment influence the knowledge and technology transfer (KTT) performance of universities and public research institutes. We regress a number of institutional control variables, country dummies and variables for region size and economic structure, per capita income, technology intensity, andR&Dintensity on four different tech transfer performance measures (R&D agreements with companies, patent applications, start-ups, licence agreements). Drawing on data from a survey of more than 200 European institutions we find: (1) Country differences are related to differences in the institutional set-up of technology transfer and to the (regional) economic environment which suggests multi-level analyses to properly take these interactions into account. (2) Institutions in a country usually excel for one performance measure which we take as a supporting argument for the development of transfer strategies. (3) Having manufacturing companies and a large share of governmental R&D expenditure in the region matter more than the technology intensity and R&D intensity of the regional economy. The latter result is counterintuitive and indicates that further research is needed in order to understand better where the clients of university technologies actually come from.04 - Beitrag Sammelband oder Konferenzschrift
- PublikationBusiness model innovation as a composite type of innovation(25.06.2015) Barjak, Franz; Perrett, Pieter JanThe paper conceptualises business model innovations (BMI) as a fundamental change of the mechanisms and arrangements of how a company creates, delivers and captures value. It translates this definition into a composite innovation indicator that consists of a combination of radical product and radical process innovations, or radical product innovations combined with marketing and organisational innovations. Deepening our understanding of the construct by means of an exploratory analysis of 60 BMI case studies, we find that revenue model innovations have not been captured sufficiently in the CIS datasets. At the same time, they constitute an essential element and characterize a significant number of BMI cases. We suggest that innovation surveys should introduce questions on revenue model innovations and add a few further changes to better capture business model innovations in the future.06 - Präsentation
- PublikationThe effectiveness of policies for formal knowledge transfer from European universities and public research institutes to firms(Oxford University Press, 01/2015) Barjak, Franz; Es-Sadki, Nordine; Arundel, Anthony [in: Research Evaluation]We use survey data for 247 European universities and 40 public research organizations to investigate the effects of institutional policies on four outcomes of transfer performance (R&D agreements with companies, patent applications, licence agreements, and start-ups established). We find that the effects of policies to establish clear rules, improve transparency, and provide financial or non-finan- cial incentives vary by outcome. Improving transparency by publishing the policies for licencing or intellectual property are often negatively correlated with outcomes, particularly for licence agree- ments. Out of three non-financial incentives, only social rewards have a rather positive effect (on start-ups), but financial incentives are positively correlated with several outcomes. A higher salary is positively linked to the number of research agreements and patent applications, while giving in- ventors a share of revenue is positively correlated with licencing and start-ups. The results suggest that the type of incentive as well as the degree of transparency of transfer policies should be chosen to complement the main transfer channels and strategy of the institution.01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher Zeitschrift
- PublikationTech transfer needs bespoke solutions, not bandwagons(European Commission, 2015) Barjak, Franz [in: Research Europe]01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher Zeitschrift
- PublikationTowards the evaluation of research and innovation policies at system level(19.06.2014) Barjak, Franz; Perrett, Pieter Jan; Zagelmeyer, Stefan06 - Präsentation
- PublikationWie wirksam sind Innovationsfördermaßnahmen in der Schweiz?(2014) Barjak, Franz [in: fteval Journal for Research and Technology Policy Evaluation]Der vorliegende Beitrag fasst eine Sekundäranalyse von 16 Evaluationen und Studien der Innovationspolitik der Schweiz aus dem Zeitraum 1997-2012 zusammen (Barjak, 2013). Neben einem begleitenden Tracking und einer nachgelagerten Leistungsmessung sind periodische Synthesen einzelner Evaluationen sehr sinnvoll. Sie tragen zu einem differenzierteren Verständnis von Innovationsvorgängen in Unternehmen bei und beleuchten die Reaktionen der Akteure auf die Massnahmen zur Innovationsförderung (und ihre Evaluation). Erst die Zusammenschau von Einzelevaluationen ermöglicht es, die Wirksamkeit, Stärken und Schwächen der Innovationsförderung auf Systemebene und über einzelne Akteure und Interventionen hinweg zu diskutieren (Arnold, 2004; Edler, Ebersberger & Lo, 2008; Magro & Wilson, 2013). Sie hilft dabei, den aktuellen Kenntnisstand zur Innovationsförderung in einer Volkswirtschaft zu resümieren.01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher Zeitschrift
- PublikationPaving the way for a new composite indicator on business model innovations(Universiteit Leiden - CWTS, 2014) Barjak, Franz; Bill, Marc; Noyons, Ed [in: Proceedings of the Science and Technology Indicators Conference 2014 Leiden “Context Counts: Pathways to Master Big and Little Data”]The paper conceptualises business model innovations (BMI) as a fundamental change of the mechanisms and arrangements of how a company creates, delivers and captures value. It translates this definition into a composite innovation indicator that consists of a combination of radical product and radical process innovations, or radical product innovations combined with marketing and organisational innovations. Implementing this definition with empirical data from the Community Innovation Surveys (CIS) in Europe, we find that roughly one out of 20 SMEs has introduced a BMI in the three-year period preceding the surveys.04B - Beitrag Konferenzschrift
- PublikationThe Emerging Governance of E-Infrastructure(Wiley, 2013) Barjak, Franz; Eccles, Kathryn; Meyer, Eric; Robinson, Simon; Schroeder, Ralph [in: Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication]The paper studies the transition to ICT-based support systems for scientific research. These systems currently attempt the transition from the project stage to the more permanent stage of an infrastructure. The transition leads to several challenges, including in the area of establishing adequate governance regimes, which not all projects master successfully. Studying a set of cases from Europe and America, we look at patterns in the size and scope of the undertakings, embeddedness in user communities, aims and responsibilities, mechanisms of coordination, forms of governance, and time horizon and funding. We find that, though configurations and landscapes are somewhat diverse, successful projects typically follow distinctive paths, either large-scale or small-scale, and become what we term ‘stable metaorganizations’ or ‘established communities.’01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher Zeitschrift
- PublikationPolicies in support of high-growth innovative enterprises Part 2: Policy measures to improve the conditions for the growth of innovative enterprises(Publications Office of the European Union, 2013) Barjak, Franz; Korlaar, Leonique; Jansen, Matthijs; Meyer, Rolf; Lilischkis, StefanBackground and methodology There is a lack of knowledge about how policies can support thriving of high-growth innovative enterprises (HGIEs). This report analyses policies for HGIEs in eight countries: Germany, France, United Kingdom, Poland, Switzerland, USA, South Korea and Japan. Primary data was collected in March 2013 in a survey of 580 HGIEs in these countries. High growth was defined as at least one third increase in employment in three consecutive years in the past five years. Primary and secondary data was used for an analysis of national policies. Cross-country synthesis The HGIEs assessed most framework conditions for doing business as neutral or rather harmful – there is considerable room for policy improvements. Company taxation and labour market regulation were judged most critically. The majority of HGIEs saw some need or even strong need for governmental policy to improve business conditions. This applies particularly to innovation-related issues like skills development, enterprise R&D, and IP protection. A need for policy adjustments seem to be less pressing in Germany, the UK, Switzerland and the US and higher in France, Poland and Korea. 41% of HGIEs said they used specific state support measures. The share was found to be considerably higher in the EU countries (49%) than in the non-EU countries (27%). Almost all HGIEs assessed the support as helpful. Apparently, HGIEs welcome any type of support as long as it improves their balance sheet. 10% of the HGIEs reported to have been located in a science or research park; of these 74% found it helpful. 6% said they were located in an incubator or accelerator; thereof 62% found it helpful. No harmful experiences were reported for either location. Country results Germany‘s most notable measure for HGIEs is a high-tech startup fund. German HGIEs tended to assess framework conditions as neutral and they do not see much need for state policy. 55% made use of state support measures. A key characteristic of Germany’s enterprise landscape may be steadily growing “hidden champions” and a strong “Mittelstand” rather than HGIEs. France has been operating several policies for HGIEs and is currently redefining its support measures for HGIEs. The share of HGIEs using state support measures was the highest of all countries (62%). The country’s high share of HGIEs does however apparently not translate into high GDP growth. The United Kingdom has policies for HGIEs, focussing on access to finance and improving (management) skills. The share of HGIEs having used state support is well below average (33%). The UK is a sample country with a comprehensive approach for fostering HGIEs, notably with the recently introduced GrowthAccelerator programme. Poland is currently developing measures to support HGIEs. Polish HGIEs were particularly critical about business framework conditions in their country (regulation for starting, running and growing a firm in particular), except regulations about access to capital. There are no HGIE-specific policies in Switzerland but Swiss HGIEs were most positive about framework conditions in their country. The share of HGIEs having used state support was the lowest. Switzerland offers insightful cases of successful highgrowth coaching networks. US: The share of HGIEs that used state support was low (31%). US HGIEs tended to assess business framework conditions as more harmful than HGIEs in other countries. An unfavourable business cycle was found to be a more important barrier than elsewhere. The countries’ best-known HGIEs are not rooted in support programmes. HGIEs in Korea judged framework conditions more positive than in other countries but blamed policy focus on large firms. Use of state measures was below average. In recent years Korea has started shifting its policies away from fostering SMEs in general – which were found to reward staying small – towards HGIE support. Japan does not have specific policies for HGIEs. An SBIR programme introduced in 1999 was found to be rather ineffective. Conclusions Governments seeking to support HGIEs should consider HGIE characteristics such as older age, possible spin-off origin as well as national and sectoral specificities. Policies should be fine-tuned to improve framework conditions (in particular company taxation 8 and labour law), target key barriers for growth (especially regulations for starting and growing a company, difficult access to finance, a lack of skilled employees), and foster key growth factors (e.g. fostering the ability and readiness to actively target growth) as well as internationalisation of HGIEs (because most of them currently focus on national markets). A focus on highgrowth coaching and expanding related networks across Europe may be worthwhile considering. Tentatively, the following policy measures from the countries surveyed might be considered as good practice for fostering HGIEs: The High-Tech Start-up Fund in Germany, the GrowthAccelerator programme in the UK, and CTI Start-up coaching in Switzerland. However, a lack of policy evaluation is a key issue. There is as yet only little scientific evidence about the effectiveness and efficiency of specific HGIE support measures on which recommendations to adopt apparently successful measures from one country to another could be based. However, the number and scope of policy measures for HGIEs as well as the time of the policies’ establishment are increasing, and awareness for policy evaluation is apparently also enhancing. Thus the scientific base for assessing HGIE policies may become more solid soon.05 - Forschungs- oder Arbeitsbericht
- «
- 1 (current)
- 2
- 3
- »