The knowledge exchange intermediary as service provider: a discussion and an Australian case

Hine, Damian Charles, Parker, Rachel and Ireland, David (2010) The knowledge exchange intermediary as service provider: a discussion and an Australian case. Service Industries Journal, 30 5: 713-729. doi:10.1080/02642060802253892

Author Hine, Damian Charles
Parker, Rachel
Ireland, David
Title The knowledge exchange intermediary as service provider: a discussion and an Australian case
Journal name Service Industries Journal   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0264-2069
Publication date 2010-05
Year available 2009
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1080/02642060802253892
Open Access Status
Volume 30
Issue 5
Start page 713
End page 729
Total pages 17
Editor Gary Akehurst
Ronald Goldsmith
Domingo Ribeiro
Youjae Yi
Place of publication London, United Kingdom
Publisher Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
Collection year 2010
Language eng
Subject C1
150307 Innovation and Technology Management
910402 Management
Abstract The critical impact of innovation on national and the global economies has been discussed at length in the literature. Economic development requires the diffusion of innovations into markets. It has long been recognised that economic growth and development depends upon a constant stream of innovations. Governments have been keenly aware of the need to ensure this flow does not dry to a trickle and have introduced many and varied industry policies and interventions to assist in seeding, supporting and diffusing innovations. In Australia, as in many countries, Government support for the transfer of knowledge especially from publicly funded research has resulted in the creation of knowledge exchange intermediaries. These intermediaries are themselves service organisations, seeking innovative service offerings for their markets. The choice for most intermediaries is generally a dichotomous one, between market-pull and technology-push knowledge exchange programmes. In this article, we undertake a case analysis of one such innovative intermediary and its flagship programme. We then compare this case with other successful intermediaries in Europe. We put forward a research proposition that the design of intermediary programmes must match the service type they offer. That is, market-pull programmes require market-pull design, in close collaboration with industry, whereas technology programmes can be problem-solving innovations where demand is latent. The discussion reflects the need for an evolution in knowledge transfer policies and programmes beyond the first generation ushered in with the US Bayh-Dole Act (1980) and Stevenson-Wydler Act (1984). The data analysed is a case study comparison of market-pull and technology-push programmes, focusing on primary and secondary socio-economic benefits (using both Australian and international comparisons).
Keyword knowledge exchange intermediary
market pull
technology push
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: 2010 Higher Education Research Data Collection
UQ Business School Publications
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 6 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 8 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Fri, 30 Apr 2010, 09:47:25 EST by Karen Morgan on behalf of UQ Business School