Keywords: Knowledge Transfer, Knowledge Creation & Creating, Arbitrage REPLACING THE TRANSFER AGENDA – A PARADIGMATIC SHIFT TO A STRATEGY OF ARBITRAGE Technology Transfer Society Theme: Entrepreneurship & Innovation 28th – 30th October 2015 Conor Horan Dublin Institute of Technology Aungier St, Dublin 2, Ireland conor.horan@dit.ie John Finch Adam Smith Business School University of Glasgow Glasgow, United Kingdom john.finch@strath.ac.uk   Keywords: Knowledge Transfer, Knowledge Creation & Creating, Arbitrage

Objectives Objectives Conceptual/Theoretical Paper Questioning the Knowledge Transfer Agenda Arriving at a Knowledge Creating Agenda Broadening our attention from Technology as Objects to include Social Technologies beyond an agenda of Transfer.

Knowledge Transfer Knowledge Transfer traditionally focuses on causal, linear and deterministic approach to knowledge. Transfer gains more attention over creation. But ‘creation’ is discussed in terms of transfer. Transfer assumes knowledge already exists, is explicit & codified and is waiting to be distributed to those who need it. Reflects the information processing paradigm focus on inputs-processes-outputs (Simon 1973)

Knowledge Creation Tacit knowledge pre-exists but can be converted into explicit knowledge. The SECI Model views ‘knowledge creation’ as modes of conversion. (Nonaka 1994, Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995, Nonaka et al 2006) Assumes amplification as a basis for creation. Assumes ‘events’ of creation are similar to events of transfer (indeed transfer is analogous to creation) i.e. Patents (Agrawal 2001, 2002) NONAKA, I. 1994. A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science, 5, 14. NONAKA, I. & TAKEUCHI, H. 1995. The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press US

Knowledge Creating Attributes Knowledge Transfer Knowledge Creation Managerial Problem Improving the management of knowledge is a problem of transfer. Improving the management of knowledge is a problem of creation. Improving the management of knowledge is a problem of facilitating knowledge creating overtime . Management Goal Successful transfer, exchange or distribution of timely knowledge to those who need it. Events of transfer measured. Successful creation of knowledge. Assessed using criteria or measurements of events of creation i.e. Patents. Success knowledge creating is in facilitating the conditions for processual knowledge creating over time. Nature of Knowledge Knowledge assumed to pre-exist; to be explicit/objective knowledge or is capable of being codified ready for transferring . Knowledge often assumed to pre-exist in a tacit form but requires conversion into explicit knowledge and amplification beyond the individual. Knowledge does not necessarily pre-exist but is created and/or recombined processually over time and space i.e. knowledge creating, is not confined to explicit knowledge but includes tacit knowledge which might never be converted Research Methods & Data Data relied on is explicit, causal, deterministic and measurable reflecting events of transfer. Data is explicit & measurable as creation events. Tacit knowledge (input) requires conversion (process) into explicit knowledge (output) Focuses on non-linear processes, includes difficult to measure tacit knowledge. The focus is on how processes unfold rather than on the inputs and outputs. Conversion / Convertibility Transfer is of explicit knowledge i.e. knowledge that has already been converted to explicit codified knowledge. Creation of knowledge, conversion and amplification as creation. Creating - not reliant on conversion or amplification. Events Transfer is a measurable an event in time and space Creation is a measurable event in time and space i.e. ‘creatio ex nihilo’ . Creating - a process over time and space which may include but not dependent on an events of creation. Quality Control Transfer of measurable units of explicit knowledge Creation of measurable units of explicit knowledge. The evaluation & quality of knowledge is distributed across multiple stakeholders including users of research. Nature of Interaction Interaction is a uni-directional transfer or distribution of knowledge. Interaction is uni-directional focusing on the creation through conversion and amplification of knowledge. Interaction is understood as processual occurring over time and in multiple ways.

A Contribution An understanding of a concept of ‘knowledge creating’. How it might inform and expand the ‘tech transfer’ field. Creating as distinct from disadvantages of the transfer agenda.

University-Industry Relationships as a Context for ‘Knowledge Ceating’ 3 Overlapping Arguments #1 The Problem of Narrowing the Theory-Practice Divide. #2 The Problem of Addressing Gaps in the Academic-Practitioner Relationship. #3 The Difference between Pure and Applied Research. Proposed solutions have traditionally focus on... #1 & #2 a transfer problem. #1 & #2 the responsibility of the university. #2 & #3 a problem of relevance.

3 Threads of Literature Mode 2 Knowledge Production Traditionally focused on transfer but provides attributes for a processual perspective on knowledge creating. A Context of Application Inclusion of Multiple Stakeholders Focus on Applied Knowledge Quality of Knowledge (from multiple perspectives including users of research) Density of Communications Engaged Scholarship & Arbitrage Traditionally overcoming the dual hurdles or rigour and relevance as a transfer has been misunderstood. Engagement as Arbitrage NOT Transfer A Context of Implication Inclusion of Multiple Stakeholders Pluralism Dialectical Method of Inquiry Relevance of the Academy Repurposes & builds on Mode 2 arguments. Inclusion of Multiple Stakeholders to Ensure Relevance Increasing Dialogue Focus on Action

Attributes for ‘Knowledge Creating’ A Context of Application/Implication: the university-industry relationship is prominently highlighted as an appropriate context. Diverse & Multiple Stakeholders: multiple perspectives to be accommodated to ensure relevance. Processual Understanding of Knowledge: reflecting an emphasis on applied relevant knowledge for stakeholder including users of research. Accepts variability in the ‘quality’ of knowledge. Dialectical Engagement NOT Transfer: A relational approach to engagement, or a strategy of arbitrage, should be accommodated by adopting a dialectical method of inquiry within an increasing density of communications. Narrowing a theory-practice divide is a problem of engagement not transfer. Action: Knowledge creating is linked to action. Plurality of Methods: Pluralistic approaches, beyond simple functionalist approaches, needs to be considered consistent with the processual understandings, variability in ‘quality’ and multiple perspectives.

Technology Transfer – What’s Missing? Distinguishing Social from Physical Technology - discussing technology not just as physical technology but also its social/tacit aspects (Orlikowski 2007, Olikowski & Scott 2008). Objects and Technology - problem of narrowing the theory-practice divide by transferring physical technology or objects. Naturally informed by transfer / amplification. Naturally focuses on explicit/codified knowledge that is measurable. Responsibilities of Academic Institutions supplying society with its knowledge, and make it digestible and accessible.

Recommendations Managerial Relevance Research Implications Changes in University Activities Changes in Industry Activities

References AGRAWAL, A. 2001. University-to-industry Knowledge Transfer: Literature Review and Unanswered Questions. International Journal of Management Reviews, 3(4): 285. AGRAWAL A. 2002. Innovation, growth theory, and the role of knowledge spillovers. Innovation Analysis Bulletin, 4(3): 3-6. GIBBONS, M., LIMOGES, C., NOWOTNY, H., SCHWARTZMAN, S., SCOTT, P. & TROW, M. 1994. The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, London, Sage Publications. HUFF, A. S. & HUFF, J. O. 2001. Re-Focusing the Business School Agenda. British Journal of Management, 12, S49. NONAKA, I. 1994. A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science, 5, 14. NONAKA, I. & TAKEUCHI, H. 1995. The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press US. NONAKA, I., VON KROGH, G., & VOELPEL, S. 2006. Organizational Knowledge Creation Theory: Evolutionary Paths and Future Advances. Organization Studies, 27(8): 1179-1208. ORLIKOWSKI, W. J. 2007. Sociomaterial Practices: Exploring Technology at Work. Organization Studies (01708406), 28(9): 1435-1448. ORLIKOWSKI, W. J., & SCOTT, S. V. 2008. Chapter 10: Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization. Academy of Management Annals, 2: 433-474. SIMON, H. A. 1973. Applying Information Technology to Organization Design. Public Administration Review, 33(3): 268-278.