Управление портфелем научно-исследовательских разработок: опыт Сколковского института науки и технологий

Dmitriy Yu. Katalevsky; Natalia V. Kosmodemianskaya; Andrey G. Grishin

doi:10.21638/spbu18.2024.401

Authors

Dmitriy Yu. Katalevsky Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Russia; Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Russia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3920-5041
Natalia V. Kosmodemianskaya Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Russia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7373-7976
Andrey G. Grishin Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Russia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4401

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu18.2024.401

Abstract

Purpose: to determine how the presence of a balanced technology portfolio, including projects at various stages of Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs), affects the success of a university’s industrial cooperation.

Metodology: an analysis was conducted on 755 Skoltech projects implemented during the indicated period. For each project, the initial and final TRLs have been identified; projects have been classified according to the institute’s priority technological domains.

Findings: the study revealed that the success of Skoltech’s research directions is due to the Institutes’ balanced project portfolio that includes projects at various stages of technological maturity, as well as sustainable cooperation with the industry and academic community. Special attention is given to the areas of artificial intelligence and oil and gas research, which demonstrate high productiveness under this approach.

Originality and contribution: this is the first detailed analysis of a university’s technological portfolio from the TRL perspective, enabling the development of methodological approaches to the creation of balanced project portfolios in higher education institutions. The results have practical value for university leaders and research institutions for the strategic planning of research activities as well as developing technological competencies that are in high demand by the industry.

Keywords:

research and development, technology readiness level, technology portfolio, technology development, university management

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Литература на русском языке

Былинская А. А. 2023. Внутренний аудит инновационной деятельности вуза с использованием матрицы портфеля исследовательских направлений (research doman portfolio matrix). В сб. IX Всероссийской научно-практической конференции: Актуальные проблемы управления. Нижний Новгород: Национальный исследовательский Нижегородский государственный университет им. Н. И. Лобачевского; 284–289.

Каталевский Д., Космодемьянская Н., Арутюнян А., Клеман Ф. 2022. Университет 3.0: портфельный подход к управлению технологическими исследованиями и разработками. Форсайт 16 (2): 15–30.

Комаров А. В., Петров А. Н., Сартори А. В. 2018. Модель комплексной оценки технологической готовности инновационных научно-технологических проектов. Экономика науки 4 (1): 47–57.

Петров А. Н., Сартори А. В., Филимонов А. В. 2016. Комплексная оценка состояния научно-технических проектов через уровень готовности технологий. Экономика науки 2 (4): 244–260.

References in Latin Alphabet

Bigliardi B., Ferraro G., Filippelli S., Galati F. 2021. The past, present and future of open innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management 24 (4): 1130–1161.

Bogers M., Zobel A.-K., Afuah A., Almirall E., Brunswicker S. et al. 2017. The open innovation research landscape: Established perspectives and emerging themes across different levels of analysis. Industry and Innovation 24 (1): 8–40.

Chesbrough H. W. 2003. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business Press.

Chesbrough H. W., Appleyard M. M. 2007. Open innovation and strategy. California Management Review 50 (1): 57–76.

Crawley E., Hegarty J., Edström K., Sanchez J. C. G. 2020. Universities as Engines of Economic Development: Making Knowledge Exchange Work. Springer Nature.

Cunningham J. A., Lehmann E. E., Menter M., Seitz N. 2019. The impact of university focused technology transfer policies on regional innovation and entrepreneurship. The Journal of Technology Transfer 44: 1451–1475.

D'aveni R. A. 2010. Hypercompetition. Simon and Schuster.

Davey T., Meerman A., Muros V. G., Orazbayeva B., Baaken T. 2018. The state of university-business cooperation in Europe. Final Report. The European Commission. [Electronic resource]. https://publications.europa.eu/resource/cellar/1b03ee59-67a4-11e8-ab9c-01aa75ed71a1.0001.01/DOC_1 (accessed: 14.03.2024).

Etzkowitz H., Leydesdorff L. 2000. The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university — industry — government relations. Research Policy 29 (2): 109–123.

Fasi M. A. 2022. An Overview on patenting trends and technology commercialization practices in the university Technology Transfer Offices in USA and China. World Patent Information 68: 102097.

Goldstein H., Renault C. 2004. Contributions of universities to regional economic development: A quasi-experimental approach. Regional Studies 38 (7): 733–746.

Kumbhakar S. C., Ortega-Argilés R., Potters L., Vivarelli M., Voigt P. 2012. Corporate R&D and firm efficiency: Evidence from Europe’s top R&D investors. Journal of Productivity Analysis 37: 125–140.

Lantz J.-S., Sahut J. M. 2005. R&D Investment and the Financial Performance of Technological Firms. International Journal of Business 10 (3).

Lavoie J. R., Daim T. U. 2017. Technology readiness levels improving R&D management: A grounded theory analysis. In: Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology. IEEE: 1–9.

Morgan K. 2013. Path dependence and the state: the politics of novelty in old industrial regions. In book: Regional Development: Evolution, Innovation and Transition. Routledge; 318–340.

Olechowski A. L., Eppinger S. D., Joglekar N., Tomaschek K. 2020. Technology readiness levels: Shortcomings and improvement opportunities. Systems Engineering 23 (4): 395–408.

Ortega-Argilés R., Piva M., Vivarelli M. 2015. The productivity impact of R&D investment: Are high-tech sectors still ahead? Economics of Innovation and New Technology 24 (3): 204–222.

Pammolli F., Magazzini L., Riccaboni M. 2011. The productivity crisis in pharmaceutical R&D. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 10 (6): 428–438.

Parilla J., Haskins G. 2023. How research universities are evolving to strengthen regional economies. Brookings. [Electronic resource]. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-research-universities-are-evolving-to-strengthen-regional-economies/ (accessed: 18.03.2024).

Rücker S. P., Fischer B., Queiroz S. 2018. Beyond education: The role of research universities in innovation ecosystems. Foresight and STI Governance 12 (2): 50–61.

Rycroft R. W., Kash D. E. 2002. Path dependence in the innovation of complex technologies. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 14 (1): 21–35.

Schubert T., Bonaccorsi A, Brandt T., De Filippo D., Lepori B., Niederl A. 2014. Is there a European university model? New evidence on national path dependence and structural convergence. In book: Knowledge, Diversity and Performance in European Higher Education. Edward Elgar Publishing; 47–83.

Valero A., Van Reenen J. 2019. The economic impact of universities: Evidence from across the globe. Economics of Education Review 68: 53–67.

West J., Bogers M. 2014. Leveraging external sources of innovation: A review of research on open innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management 31 (4): 814–831.

Xu G., Wu Y., Minshall T., Zhou Y. 2018. Exploring innovation ecosystems across science, technology, and business: A case of 3D printing in China. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 136: 208–221.

Translation of references in Russian into English

Bylinskaya A. A. 2023. Internal audit of the university's innovation activities using the research doman portfolio matrix. In the collection of the IX All-Russian scientific and practical conference: Actual problems of management. National Research Nizhny Novgorod State University named after N. I. Lobachevsky: Nizhny Novgorod; 284–289. (In Russian)

Katalevsky D., Kosmodemianskaya N., Arutynyan A., Fortin C. 2022. University 3.0: A portfolio approach to the technology R&D management. Foresight and STI Governance 16 (2): 15–30. (In Russian)

Komarov A. V., Petrov A. N., Sartory A. V. 2018. The model of integrated assessment of technological readiness of innovative scientific and technological projects. Economics of Science 4 (1): 47– 57. (In Russian)

Petrov A. N., Sartory A. V., Filimonov A. V. 2016. Comprehensive assessment of the status scientific and technical projects using Technology Project Readiness Level. Economics of Science 2 (4):244–260. (In Russian)