在長期體制、社會與經濟的演進下，大學已朝向「科學-經濟」的架構發展，延續大學對於科普知識的創造、傳播的貢獻，並延伸知識商業化活動，加強大學對於社會與經濟貢獻的「創業型大學」發展現象，成為許多大學發展的目標。然而，大學系所作為最核心的發展組織，面對於大學體制、組織、學門等因素影響，目前對於大學系所要如何建構一個複合的組織發展支持其發展的研究仍然相當少。因此，本研究結合Stokes (1997)的巴斯德象限模型(Pasteur’s quadrant)與組織雙元(Organizational ambidexterity)構念發展一新組織發展傾向「巴斯德導向(Pasteurian orientation)」。透過台灣6所大學99個系所，共634份有效問卷收集，進行大學前置因子-巴斯德導向-系所績效關係衡量。研究結果顯示，大學建構差異化任務架構與增加組織彈性有助於大學系所朝向巴斯德導向發展。再者，大學系所發展巴斯德導向有助於提升系所主觀發展績效、期刊文章發表與專利獲證活動。然而，研究結果亦顯示大學提供良好發展前置因子確實有助於系所主觀發展績效提升，但必須配合系所「巴斯德導向」發展；換言之，大學系所的巴斯德導向發展是回應創業型大學發展的重要關鍵，巴斯德導向的組織發展有助於系所同時維持既有的大學任務與延伸至新的知識商業化活動。本研究除提供大學系所發展重要的實證研究之外，整合前置因子、組織與個人的衡量架構，對「創業型大學」發展現象研究能有更深入的探討。

This study focuses on the development of university departments which is triggered by the appearance of entrepreneurial university, a phenomenon in the long-term institutional evolution on the policy, economy, and society. The literature suggests that universities have adapted various responses from institutions to individuals by building a hybrid framework for knowledge production. This framework could sustainably increase scientific commons and simultaneously enforce industry linkage. However, explanations describing the responses of university departments are very few. The explanations have to consider the changes not only on organizational development but also on the rationale of university research. In an attempt to address this issue, this study develops an organizational perspective, ‘Pasteurian orientation’, which is employed Stokes (1997)’s Pasteur’s quadrant as a conceptual model. The relationships between university antecedents, Pasteurian orientation, and departmental performance are examined. Based on a postal questionnaire survey, a dataset of 99 departments from 6 universities in Taiwan is collected and analyzed by OLS regressions, negative binomial regressions and causal mediation analysis. Findings indicate that the development of Pasteurian orientation has a strong linkage with the antecedents provided by the university, and developing a Pasteurian orientation is beneficial for promoting departmental subjective performance, journal publications and patents. For university administration, besides of providing appropriate antecedents, encouraging departments to develop Pasteurian orientation is a key factor for promoting departmental performance in the rise of entrepreneurial university.

Agrawal, A., & Henderson, R. 2002. Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT. Management Science, 48(1): 44-60.
Aldwin, C. M. 1994. Stress, Coping, and Development: An Integrative Perspective. New York: Guilford Press.
Ambos, T. C., Mäkelä, K., Birkinshaw, J., & D'Este, P. 2008. When Does University Research Get Commercialized? Creating Ambidexterity in Research Institutions. Journal of Management Studies, 45(8): 1424-1447.
Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. 1992. Bridging the Boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4): 634-665.
Anselin, L., Varga, A., & Acs, Z. 1997. Local Geographic Spillovers between University Research and High Technology Innovations. Journal of Urban Economics, 42(3): 422-448.
Antonelli, C. 2006. The Business Governance of Localized Knowledge: An Information Economics Approach for the Economics of Knowledge. Industry and Innovation, 13(3): 227-261.
Antonelli, C. 2008. The new economics of the university: a knowledge governance approach. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(1): 1-22.
Antonelli, C., Franzoni, C., & Geuna, A. 2011. The organization, economics, and policy of scientific research: what we do know and what we don't know—an agenda for research. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(1): 201-213.
Arnold, D. 2008. Cultural Heritage As a Vehicle for Basic Research in Computing Science: Pasteur's Quadrant and a Use-Inspired Basic Research Agenda. Computer Graphics Forum, 27(8): 2188-2196.
Audretsch, D. B., Bozeman, B., Combs, K. L., Feldman, M., Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., Stephan, P., Tassey, G., & Wessner, C. 2002. The Economics of Science and Technology. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27(2): 155-203.
Auh, S., & Menguc, B. 2005. Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity. Journal of Business Research, 58(12): 1652-1661.
Baba, Y., Shichijo, N., & Sedita, S. R. 2009. How do collaborations with universities affect firms’ innovative performance? The role of “Pasteur scientists” in the advanced materials field. Research Policy, 38(5): 756-764.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1986. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6): 1173.
Bartunek, J. M., & Rynes, S. L. 2014. Academics and Practitioners Are Alike and Unlike: The Paradoxes of Academic–Practitioner Relationships. Journal of Management.
Beesley, L. G. A. 2003. Science policy in changing times: are governments poised to take full advantage of an institution in transition? Research Policy, 32(8): 1519-1531.
Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. 2006. Entpreprenerial Universities and Technology Transfer: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Knowledge-Based Economic Development. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1): 175-188.
Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. 2008. Academic Entrepreneurs: Organizational Change at the Individual Level. Organization Science, 19(1): 69.
Berman, E. M. 1990. The economic impact of industry-funded university R&D. Research Policy, 19(4): 349-355.
Bliese, P. D. 2000. Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein, & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions: 349-381. San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.
Bonaccorsi, A., & Piccaluga, A. 1994. A theoretical framework for the evaluation of university-industry relationships. R&D Management, 24(3): 229-247.
Bourelos, E., Magnusson, M., & McKelvey, M. 2012. Investigating the complexity facing academic entrepreneurs in science and engineering: the complementarities of research performance, networks and support structures in commercialisation. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36(3): 751-780.
Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., & Montobbio, F. 2008. University patenting and scientific productivity: a quantitative study of Italian academic inventors. European Management Review, 5(2): 91-109.
Brewer, M. B., Campbell, D. T., & Crano, W. D. 1970. Testing a Single-Factor Model as an Alternative to the Misuse of Partial Correlations in Hypothesis-Testing Research. Sociometry, 33(1): 1-11.
Brown, J. C. G. E. 1992. Guest Comment: The objectivity crisis. American Journal of Physics, 60(9): 779-781.
Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. 1986. Econometric models based on count data. Comparisons and applications of some estimators and tests. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 1(1): 29-53.
Chang, Y.-C., Chen, M.-H., Hua, M., & Yang, P. Y. 2006. Managing academic innovation in Taiwan: Towards a ‘scientific–economic’ framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(2): 199-213.
Chang, Y.-C., Chen, M.-H., Yang, P. Y., & Hua, M. 2008. Universities as patent- and licensing income-generating institutions: a survey in Taiwan. International Journal of Technology Management, 42(3): 290-309.
Chang, Y.-C., & Yang, P. Y. 2008. The impacts of academic patenting and licensing on knowledge production and diffusion: a test of the anti-commons effect in Taiwan. R&D Management, 38(3): 321-334.
Chang, Y.-C., Yang, P. Y., & Chen, M.-H. 2009. The determinants of academic research commercial performance: Towards an organizational ambidexterity perspective. Research Policy, 38(6): 936-946.
Chrisman, J. J., Hynes, T., & Fraser, S. 1995. Faculty entrepreneurship and economic development: The case of the University of Calgary. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(4): 267-281.
Clark, B. R. 1998. The entrepreneurial university: Demand and response. Tertiary Education and Management, 4(1): 5-16.
Clark, B. R. 2004. Sustaining change in universities: Continuities in case studies and concepts. Berkshire,England, UK: McGraw-Hill International.
Clarysse, B., Tartari, V., & Salter, A. 2011. The impact of entrepreneurial capacity, experience and organizational support on academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8): 1084-1093.
Colyvas, J., Crow, M., Gelijns, A., Mazzoleni, R., Nelson, R. R., Rosenberg, N., & Sampat, B. N. 2002. How do university inventions get into practice? Management Science, 48(1): 61-72.
Crespo, M., & Dridi, H. 2007. Intensification of university–industry relationships and its impact on academic research. Higher Education, 54(1): 61-84.
D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. 2011. Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3): 316-339.
David, P. A., Mowery, D., & Steinmueller, W. E. 1992. Analysing The Economic Payoffs From Basic Research. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 2(1): 73-90.
Deem, R., Mok, K. H., & Lucas, L. 2008. Transforming higher education in whose image? Exploring the concept of the ‘world-class’ university in Europe and Asia. Higher education policy, 21(1): 83-97.
Demeritt, D. 2000. The New Social Contract for Science: Accountability, Relevance,and Value in US and UK Science and Research Policy. Antipode, 32(3): 308-329.
Diamond, A. M. 1996. The economics of science. Knowledge and Policy, 9(2-3): 6-49.
Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.
Etzkowitz, H. 1983. Entrepreneurial scientists and entrepreneurial universities in American academic science. Minerva, 21(2-3): 198-233.
Etzkowitz, H. 1990. The Second Academic Revolution: The Role of the Research University in Economic Development. In S. E. Cozzens, P. Healey, A. Rip, & J. Ziman (Eds.), The Research System in Transition, Vol. 57: 109-124. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers

Etzkowitz, H. 1998. The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages. Research Policy, 27(8): 823-833.
Etzkowitz, H. 2003. Research groups as ‘quasi-firms’: the invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32(1): 109-121.
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.
Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. 2000. The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2): 313-330.
Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., & Healey, P. 1998. Capitalizing knowledge: New intersections of industry and academia. Albany, N. Y.: State University of New York Press.
Fabrizio, K. R., & Di Minin, A. 2008. Commercializing the laboratory: Faculty patenting and the open science environment. Research Policy, 37(5): 914-931.
Feldman, M., Feller, I., Bercovitz, J., & Burton, R. 2002. Equity and the Technology Transfer Strategies of American Research Universities. Management Science, 48(1): 105-121.
Feldman, M. P. 1999. The New Economics Of Innovation, Spillovers And Agglomeration: Areview Of Empirical Studies. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 8(1-2): 5-25.
Feller, I. 1990. Universities as engines of R&D-based economic growth: They think they can. Research Policy, 19(4): 335-348.
Feller, I. 2009. Performance Measurement and the Governance of American Academic Science. Minerva, 47(3): 323-344.
Friedman, J., & Silberman, J. 2003. University Technology Transfer: Do Incentives, Management, and Location Matter? The Journal of Technology Transfer, 28(1): 17-30.
Göktepe-Hultén, D. 2008. Academic inventors and research groups: entrepreneurial cultures at universities. Science and Public Policy, 35(9): 657-667.
Geuna, A., & Muscio, A. 2009. The Governance of University Knowledge Transfer: A Critical Review of the Literature. Minerva, 47(1): 93-114.
Gibbons, M. 1999. Science's new social contract with society. Nature, 402: C81-C84.
Gibbons, M., Scott, P., Nowotny, H., Limoges, C., Trow, M., & Schwartzman, S. 1994. The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London, UK: Sage Publications.
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. 2004. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of management Journal, 47(2): 209-226.
Gilbert, C. G. 2005. Unbundling the Structure of Inertia: Resource Versus Routine Rigidity. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5): 741-763.
Glick, W. H. 1985. Conceptualizing and Measuring Organizational and Psychological Climate: Pitfalls in Multilevel Research. Academy of Management Review, 10(3): 601-616.
Goldfarb, B. 2008. The effect of government contracting on academic research: Does the source of funding affect scientific output? Research Policy, 37(1): 41-58.
Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. 2011. 30 years after Bayh–Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40(8): 1045-1057.
Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J.-C. 2005. Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy, 34(6): 932-950.
Gustafsson, R., & Autio, E. 2011. A failure trichotomy in knowledge exploration and exploitation. Research Policy, 40(6): 819-831.
Hartigan, J. A. 1975. Clustering algorithms. New York, NY, US: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Hausman, J. A., Hall, B. H., & Griliches, Z. 1984. Econometric models for count data with an application to the patents-R&D relationship. Econometrica, 52(4): 909-938.
He, Z.-L., & Wong, P.-K. 2004. Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4): 481-494.
Heller, M. A., & Eisenberg, R. S. 1998. Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research. Science, 280(5364): 698-701.
Hessels, L. K., & van Lente, H. 2008. Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda. Research Policy, 37(4): 740-760.
Hindle, K., & Yencken, J. 2004. Public research commercialisation, entrepreneurship and new technology based firms: an integrated model. Technovation, 24(10): 793-803.
Hong, W., & Walsh, J. P. 2009. For Money or Glory?: Commercialization, Competition and Secrecy in the Entrepreneurial University. Sociological Quarterly, 50(1): 145-171.
Hughes, A., & Kitson, M. 2012. Pathways to impact and the strategic role of universities: new evidence on the breadth and depth of university knowledge exchange in the UK and the factors constraining its development. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36(3): 723-750.
Iversen, E., Gulbrandsen, M., & Klitkou, A. 2007. A baseline for the impact of academic patenting legislation in Norway. Scientometrics, 70(2): 393-414.
Jacob, M., Lundqvist, M., & Hellsmark, H. 2003. Entrepreneurial transformations in the Swedish University system: the case of Chalmers University of Technology. Research Policy, 32(9): 1555-1568.
Jain, S., George, G., & Maltarich, M. 2009. Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity. Research Policy, 38(6): 922-935.
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. 1993. rwg: An assessment of within-group interrater agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2): 306-309.
Jansen, J. J. P., Tempelaar, M. P., van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. 2009. Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4): 797-811.
Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. W. 2000. Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions. San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.
Kwon, K.-S. 2011. The co-evolution of universities' academic research and knowledge-transfer activities: the case of South Korea. Science and Public Policy, 38(6): 493-503.
Lach, S., & Schankerman, M. 2004. Royalty sharing and technology licensing in universities. Journal of the European Economic Association, 2(2-3): 252-264.
Langford, C. H., Hall, J., Josty, P., Matos, S., & Jacobson, A. 2006. Indicators and outcomes of Canadian university research: Proxies becoming goals? Research Policy, 35(10): 1586-1598.
Lant, T. K., & Mezias, S. J. 1992. An Organizational Learning Model of Convergence and Reorientation. Organization Science, 3(1): 47-71.
Larsen, M. T. 2011. The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence. Research Policy, 40(1): 6-19.
Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L. 2010. Exploration and Exploitation Within and Across Organizations. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1): 109-155.
Lawrence, P. R., Lorsch, J. W., & Garrison, J. S. 1967. Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Boston: Harvard University Press.
Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. 1996. Emergence of a Triple Helix of university—industry—government relations. Science and Public Policy, 23(5): 279-286.
Lubchenco, J. 1998. Entering the Century of the Environment: A New Social Contract for Science. Science, 279(5350): 491-497.
MacKinnon, D. P., & Dwyer, J. H. 1993. Estimating mediated effects in prevention studies. Evaluation review, 17(2): 144-158.
Mansfield, E. 1980. Basic Research and Productivity Increase in Manufacturing. The American Economic Review, 70(5): 863-873.
Markman, G. D., Gianiodis, P. T., Phan, P. H., & Balkin, D. B. 2005. Innovation speed: Transferring university technology to market. Research Policy, 34(7): 1058-1075.
Martínez, C., Azagra-Caro, J. M., & Maraut, S. 2013. Academic Inventors, Scientific Impact and the Institutionalisation of Pasteur's Quadrant in Spain. Industry and Innovation, 20(5): 438-455.
Martin, B. R. 2001. The changing social contract for science and the evolution of the university. In A. Geuna, A. J. Salter, W. E. Steinmueller, & Y. E. Hoffman (Eds.), Science and Innovation: Rethinking the Rationales for Funding and Governance: 7-29. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Martin, F. 1998. The economic impact of Canadian university R&D. Research Policy, 27(7): 677-687.
Mazzoleni, R. 2005. University patents, R&D competition, and social welfare. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 14(6): 499-515.
Mckelvey, M. 1997. Coevolution in Commercial Genetic Engineering. Industrial and Corporate Change, 6(3): 503-532.
Mendoza, P. 2009. Academic capitalism in the Pasteur’s quadrant. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 33(3): 301-311.
Merton, R. K. 1968. The Matthew effect in science. Science, 159(3810): 56-63.
MOE. 2013. Higher Education in Taiwan. Taipei: Ministry of Education.
Molas-Gallart, J. 2004. Measuring and funding the ‘third mission’: the UK policy debate. Academia-Business Links, European Policy Strategies and Lessons Learnt. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke: 74-89.
MOST. 2014. Academic Statistics Database Taipei: Ministry of Science and Technology.
Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., Sampat, B. N., & Ziedonis, A. A. 2001. The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh–Dole act of 1980. Research Policy, 30(1): 99-119.
Murray, F., & Stern, S. 2007. Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge?: An empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 63(4): 648-687.
Nelson, R. R. 1971. Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research, The. J. Reprints Antitrust L. & Econ., 3: 725.
Nelson, R. R. 2004. The market economy, and the scientific commons. Research Policy, 33(3): 455-471.
Nosella, A., Cantarello, S., & Filippini, R. 2012. The intellectual structure of organizational ambidexterity: A bibliographic investigation into the state of the art. Strategic Organization, 10(4): 450-465.
NSC. 2012. Indicator of Science and Technology Taiwan. Taipei: National Science Council Taiwan.
O'Reilly, C., & Tushman, M. 2013. Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present and future. The Academy of Management Perspectives: amp. 2013.0025.
Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. 2001. To Patent or Not: Faculty Decisions and Institutional Success at Technology Transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2): 99-114.
Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. 2003. The expanding role of university patenting in the life sciences: assessing the importance of experience and connectivity. Research Policy, 32(9): 1695-1711.
Partha, D., & David, P. A. 1994. Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23(5): 487-521.
Pavitt, K. 1991. What makes basic research economically useful? Research Policy, 20(2): 109-119.
Perkmann, M., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., Autio, E., Broström, A., D’Este, P., Fini, R., Geuna, A., Grimaldi, R., Hughes, A., Krabel, S., Kitson, M., Llerena, P., Lissoni, F., Salter, A., & Sobrero, M. 2013. Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy, 42(2): 423-442.
Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. 2009. The two faces of collaboration: impacts of university-industry relations on public research. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(6): 1033-1065.
Philpott, K., Dooley, L., O'Reilly, C., & Lupton, G. 2011. The entrepreneurial university: Examining the underlying academic tensions. Technovation, 31(4): 161-170.
Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. 2008. Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34(3): 375-409.
Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. 2009. Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science, 20(4): 685-695.
Reeves, T. C. 2006. Design research from a technology perspective. In J. Van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research: 52-66. New York, NY: Routledge.
Renault, C. 2006. Academic Capitalism and University Incentives for Faculty Entrepreneurship. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(2): 227-239.
Salter, A. J., & Martin, B. R. 2001. The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review. Research Policy, 30(3): 509-532.
Sent, E.-M. 1999. Economics of science: survey and suggestions. Journal of Economic Methodology, 6(1): 95-124.
Shane, S. 2004a. Academic entrepreneurship: university spinoffs and wealth creation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Shane, S. 2004c. Encouraging university entrepreneurship? The effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on university patenting in the United States. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1): 127-151.
Shibayama, S. 2012. Conflict between entrepreneurship and open science, and the transition of scientific norms. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(4): 508-531.
Sidhu, J. S., Volberda, H. W., & Commandeur, H. R. 2004. Exploring Exploration Orientation and its Determinants: Some Empirical Evidence*. Journal of Management Studies, 41(6): 913-932.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. 2003a. Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1): 27-48.
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E., & Link, A. N. 2003b. Commercial knowledge transfers from universities to firms: improving the effectiveness of university–industry collaboration. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14(1): 111-133.
Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. 2005. Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams. Organization Science, 16(5): 522-536.
Spinesi, L. 2012. Academic and industrial R&D: are they always complementary? A theoretical approach. Oxford Economic Papers.
Stankiewicz, R. 1986. Academics and entrepreneurs: developing university-industry relations. London, UK: St. Martin's Press.
Stephan, P. E. 1996. The Economics of Science. Journal of Economic Literature, 34(3): 1199-1235.
Stephan, P. E. 2004. Robert K. Merton's perspective on priority and the provision of the public good knowledge. Scientometrics, 60(1): 81-87.
Stevens, A. J. 2004. The Enactment of Bayh–Dole. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(1): 93-99.
Stokes, D. E. 1997. Pasteur's quadrant: basic science and technological innovation. Washington,D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Thomas, K. W., & Kilmann, R. H. 1975. The Social Desirability Variable in Organizational Research: An Alternative Explanation for Reported Findings. Academy of Management Journal, 18(4): 741-752.
Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. 2007. University licensing. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4): 620-639.
Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. 2011. Faculty participation in licensing: Implications for research. Research Policy, 40(1): 20-29.
Tierney, W. G., & Holley, K. A. 2008. Inside Pasteur’s quadrant: knowledge production in a profession. Educational Studies, 34(4): 289-297.
Tushman, M., & O'Reilly, C. 2007. Research and Relevance: Implications of Pasteur'S Quadrant for Doctoral Programs and Faculty Development. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4): 769-774.
Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly, C. A. 1996. Ambidextrous organizations: managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California management review, 38(4): 8-30.
Valeri, L., & VanderWeele, T. J. 2013. Mediation analysis allowing for exposure–mediator interactions and causal interpretation: Theoretical assumptions and implementation with SAS and SPSS macros. Psychological Methods, 18(2): 137-150.
Van Looy, B., Callaert, J., & Debackere, K. 2006. Publication and patent behavior of academic researchers: Conflicting, reinforcing or merely co-existing? Research Policy, 35(4): 596-608.
Van Looy, B., Landoni, P., Callaert, J., van Pottelsberghe, B., Sapsalis, E., & Debackere, K. 2011. Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs. Research Policy, 40(4): 553-564.
Van Looy, B., Ranga, M., Callaert, J., Debackere, K., & Zimmermann, E. 2004. Combining entrepreneurial and scientific performance in academia: towards a compounded and reciprocal Matthew-effect? Research Policy, 33(3): 425-441.
VanderWeele, T., & Vansteelandt, S. 2009. Conceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition. Statistics and its Interface, 2: 457-468.
VanderWeele, T. J., & Vansteelandt, S. 2010. Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome. American journal of epidemiology, 172(12): 1339-1348.
Vincett, P. S. 2010. The economic impacts of academic spin-off companies, and their implications for public policy. Research Policy, 39(6): 736-747.
Volberda, H. W. 1996. Toward the flexible form: how to remain vital in hypercompetitive environments. Organization Science, 7(4): 359-374.
Whitley, R. 2003. Competition and pluralism in the public sciences: the impact of institutional frameworks on the organisation of academic science. Research Policy, 32(6): 1015-1029.
Wooldridge, J. M. 2010. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. Cambridge: MIT Press.