University Research Centres: Organizational Structures and Performance

Isabel Edith Torres Zapata


Currently, there are different types of University Research Centres (URCs) around the world. This research is focused on organizational structure and its influence on better research performance in URCs. In this case, URCs located in Aragon, Spain have been studied. A data set was extracted from their STI (Science, technology and innovation) indicators from 2000 to 2016. Using a self-built data base, constructed from reports, web pages and the university’s data set, this information was analysed using a mixed-method approach, which involves data panel analysis and case studies, as a way of determining how these institutions are organized and how these influences on their performance. As a result, those URCs which showed a complex structure emerged has the best performers. This kind of structure similar to corporate governance at URCs promote better research performance within each URC.


University research centres; organizational structure; STI performance; Spain

Full Text:



Albahari, A., Pérez-Canto, S., Barge-Gil, A. & Modrego, A. (2017) Technology Parks Versus Science Parks: Does The University Make The Difference?. Technological Forecasting And Social Change, 116, 13-28.

Arellano – Gonzalez, M. & Bover, O. (1990). La econometría de Datos de Panel [The econometry of data pannel]. Investigaciones Económicas, 14(1), 3-45.

Baltagi, B. (2005). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. Third edition. Wiley, Chichester.

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management. 17(1), 99-120.

Boardman, C. & Bozeman, B. (2006). Implementing A 'Bottom-Up,' Multi-Sector Research Collaboration. Economics of Innovation and New Technology.15(1), 51-69.

Boardman, P. & Corley, E. (2008) University Research Centers and the composition of Research Collaborations. Research Policy, 37(5), 900-913.

Bok, D. (2003). Universities in the Marketplace: The Commercialization of Higher Education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Bozeman, B. & Boardman, C. (2013) Academic Faculty in University Research Centers: Neither Capitalism's Slaves Nor Teaching Fugitives. The Journal Of Higher Education, 84(1), 88-120.

Bozeman, B. & Rogers, J. (2002). A Churn Model of Scientific Knowledge Value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective. Research Policy, 31(5), 769-794.

Buesa, M. (1988). Estructura Industrial de España [Spanish industrial structure]. Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico.

Buesa, M., Heijs, J., Martinez Pellitero, M. & Baumert, T. (2006). Regional Systems of Innovation and the knowledge production function: The Spanish case. Technovation, 26(4), 463-472.

Buesa, M. (2012) El Sistema Nacional de Innovacion en España: Un panorama [The National Innovation System in Spain: An Outlook]. Innovacion y Competitividad ICE. 869, 7-41.

Corley, E., Boardman, C. & Bozeman, B. (2006). Design and the management of multi-institutional research collaborations: Theoretical implications from two case studies. Research Policy, 35, 975–993.

COTEC (2007). Las relaciones en el sistema español de Innovación [The relationship in the Spanish Innovation System]. Libro Blanco [White book]. Fundación COTEC para la Innovación Tecnológica [COTEC Fundation to the Technology Innovation]. Madrid: Spain.

De Rijcke, S., Wouters, P., Rushforth, A., Fransson, T. & Hammarfelt, B. (2016). Evaluation Practices and effects of indicator use - A literature review. Research Evaluation, 25(2), 161-169.

Dietz, J. & Bozeman, B. (2005). Academic careers, patents, and productivity: industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy 34, 349–367.

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.

EC (2010) European Commission, Assessing Europe’s University-Based Research, Expert Group on Assessment of University-Based Research. Directorate-General for Research. Belgium.

Falk, R. & Miller, N. (1992). A Primer for Soft Modelling. Akron OH: University of Akron Press.

Gaughan, M. (2005). Introduction to the Symposium: Women in Science. Journal of Technology Transfer, 30,339–342.

Gray, D., Lindblad, M. & Rudolph, J. (2001) Industry-University Research Centers: A multivariate analysis of member retention. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26,247-254.

Heinze, T., Shapira, P., Rogers, J. D., & Senkerd, J. (2009) Organizational and institutional influences on creativity in scientific research. Research Policy 38, 610–623.

Huisman, J., De Weert, E. & Bartelse, J. (2002) Academic Careers from an European Perspective: The declining desirability of the faculty position. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 141-160.

Hunter, E., Jansen Perry, S. & Currall, S. (2011). Inside multi-disciplinary science and engineering research centers: The impact of organizational climate on invention disclosures and patents. Research Policy, 40, 1226– 1239.

ICONO (2016). Indicadores del Sistema Español de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación [Indicators of Spanish system of Science, technology and innovation]. ICONO: Observatorio Español de I+D+i [Spanish Observatory of R+D+i]. FECYT : Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología [Spanish Fundation for Science and Technology]. Madrid: Spain.

König, B., Diehl, K., Tscherning, K., & Helming, K. (2013). A framework for structuring interdisciplinary research management. Research Policy, 42, 261– 272

LAW 9 (2003) Ley de fomento y coordinación de la investigación, el desarrollo y transferencia de conocimientos en Aragón [Law 9/2003, March 12, Foster and research coordination, development and knowledge transfer in Aragon]. Boletin Oficial de Aragon [Aragon Official Bulletin].

Lin, M. & Bozeman, B. (2006). Researchers’ industry experience and productivity in University–Industry Research Centers: A “Scientific and Technical Human Capital” explanation. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2), 269-290.

Magro, E. & Wilson, J. (2013). Complex Innovation Policy Systems: Towards an evaluation mix. Research Policy, 42(9), 1647-1656.

MINECON(2012). Estrategia española de Ciencia de Tecnologia y de Innovacion 2013-2020 [Spanish Strategy of Science, Technology and Innovation 2013-2020]. Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad del Gobierno de España [Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness of Spanish government]. Madrid: Spain.

Mowery, D. & Ziedonis, A. (2002) Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh–Dole act in the United States. Research Policy 31, 399–418.

NASEM (2017) National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Nelson, R. (1993). National Innovation Systems. Oxford Univ. Press, New York U.A.

OECD (1998). Corporate Governance: Improving competitiveness and access to capital in Global Markets. Paris: France.

OECD (1999). Managing National Innovation Systems. Paris: France.

Parker, L. (2011). University Corporatisation. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 22(4), 434-450.

Perkmann, M. & Walsh, K. (2007) University-industry relationships and open innovation: towards a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(4), 259-280.

Ponomariov, B. & Boardman, C. (2010) Influencing scientists’ collaboration and productivity patterns through new institutions: University research centers and scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy 39, 613–624.

Prewitt, K. (1993). America's Research Universities under Public Scrutiny. Daedalus, 122(4), 85-99. Retrieved from

Santoro, M. & Chakrabarti, A. (2001) Corporate Strategic Objectives for establishing relationships with University Research Centers. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 48(2), May, 157-163.

Stigler, S. (1993). Competition and the Research Universities. Daedalus, 122(4), 157-177. Retrieved from

Toker, U. & Gray, D. (2008) Innovation spaces: Workspace planning and innovation in U.S. University Research Centers, Research Policy 37, 309–329

Wildson, J. (2015). The Metric Tide: Report of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. Sage: London.

Yin, R. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. London, Thousand Oaks (CA) and New Dehli, Sage.

Copyright (c) 2019 Journal of Technology Management & Innovation

2019 © Universidad Alberto Hurtado - Facultad de Economía y Negocios. 
Erasmo Escala 1835 - Santiago, Chile.
Economic Analysis Review | Observatorio Económico | Gestión y Tendencias 

Journal Supported by