Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Sources of Success in Advanced Materials Innovation:
The Role of “Core Researchers” in University-Industry Collaboration in Japan
Yasunori Baba*
Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology
University of Tokyo
Komaba 4-6-1, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8904, Japan
E-mail: [email protected]
Masaru Yarime
Graduate School of Frontier Sciences
University of Tokyo
Kashiwanoha 5-1-5, Kashiwa-shi, Chiba 277-8563, Japan
E-mail: [email protected]
Naohiro Shichijo
Interfaculty Initiative in Information Studies
University of Tokyo
7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku Tokyo 113-0033, Japan
Email: [email protected]
2
ABSTRACT This article aimed to identify the effect of university-industry collaborations on the
innovative performance of firms operating in the advanced materials field, and it proposed an
original classification of the research organization partners. The main contribution resides in
the estimation of the role played by collaborations with differently experienced corporate
researchers. In the advanced materials industry the most effective collaborations are driven
by “core researchers,” who have been involved in authoring scientific papers, in addition to
applying sizeable patents. The results of the case study focusing on partner firms
collaborating with “Pasteur scientists” such as Fujishima and Hashimoto of the University of
Tokyo confirm the idea that “core researchers” have the quality to work as boundary spanners
between science and technology, and their becoming heavy-weighted project leaders pushed
the firms’ R&D towards commercialization.
Key words: university-industry collaborations, “core researchers,” advanced materials,
innovation, Japan
3
1. Introduction
The role of university-industry (U-I) collaborations in shaping the innovative
performances of firms has been a key issue in the recent debate on determinants of innovation.
Specifically, intensive research has attempted to explain the effect of scientific research at
universities on firms’ industrial innovation (Powell, Koput et al. 1996; Zucker and Darby
1996; 2002; Cohen, Nelson et al. 2002; Feldman, Feller et al. 2002; Mowery, Sampat et al.
2002; Murray 2002; Owen-Smith, Riccaboni et al. 2002; Shane and Stuart 2002; Thursby and
Thursby 2002; Zucker, Darby et al. 2002). Among sectors that fall into the category of
“science-based” innovation, however, biotechnology and related pharmaceutical sectors are
the few industries where new ideas developed originally within universities are quickly
captured by industry (Cohen, Nelson et al. 2002). When utilizing advanced materials to
develop commercial products, it is of particular importance for firms to incorporate user
needs accurately (Niosi 1993; Maine and Garnsey 2006). Admittedly, there is little empirical
research that sheds light on how corporate researchers involved in U-I collaborations
contribute to the industrial innovation process.
This paper contributes to the literature on the effect of U-I collaborations on
innovation by examining the case of the advanced materials sector, namely the titanium
dioxide (TiO2) photocatalyst in Japan. We add to the previous research by providing insights
on the contribution to innovation of differently qualified corporate researchers. Specifically,
we focus on core corporate researchers as the key players of innovation in the field of
analysis. We designate as “core researchers” those corporate researchers who have been
involved in authoring scientific papers, in addition to applying for many patents. We argue
that advanced materials innovation tends to be achieved as the result of U-I collaborations
motivated and pursued by the “core researchers”: they have the quality to work as boundary
spanners between science and technology, and are equipped with entrepreneurship enabling
them to become heavy-weighted project leaders (Clark and Fujimoto 1991).
The case of the TiO2 photocatalyst is one of few successful university-industry
collaborations in the field of advanced materials in Japan. Among various types of advanced
materials, photocatalysts are considered to be particularly promising, because they activate
novel functions using only sunlight. When TiO2 absorbs ultraviolet light, the TiO2
photocatalyst produces very strong oxidation power that decomposes most organic
compounds adsorbed on the material’s surface. Such a photo-induced catalytic reaction is
called photocatalysis (Fujishima, Rao et al. 2000). These findings on the novel functions have
opened up a wide range of industrial applications of photocatalysts and brought about a series
4
of dominant product designs. The first dominant design utilizing oxidation power makes it
possible to develop anti-bacterial ceramic tiles and so forth; the second design, utilizing
super-hydrophilicity, develops self-cleaning building materials and anti-fogging window
glasses, leading to the creation of new markets (Fujishima, Hashimoto et al. 1997; Fujishima,
Hashimoto et al. 2000). The market size of commercial products is estimated to be 300
million US dollars in 2002 (Bureau of Industrial Technology and the Environment 2002).
For analysis of the innovation process, this paper focuses on the activities of
Professors Akira FUJISHIMA and Kazuhito HASHIMOTO of the University of Tokyo. They
made scientific breakthroughs, published academic articles extensively, and acquired
numerous patents, including those of fundamental importance. In terms of the cumulative
numbers of individual applications for Japanese patents on photocatalysts up to 2002,
Fujishima applied for 119 patents and Hashimoto for 117 patents, and they are ranked first
and second, respectively. Their achievement is remarkable, given that the number of patent
applications by the third-ranking university researcher was only 34 patents. Through a
comprehensive case study of the U-I collaborations undertaken by the two professors, this
paper examines the ways in which the collaborative activities of universities and firms brings
forth “core researchers” at firms and investigates how they contribute to the innovation
process in the advanced materials industry.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 illustrates the theoretical background
and methodologies of the paper. Section 3 describes the specificities of the research activities
of the Fujishima-Hashimoto laboratory and the details of the laboratory’s U-I collaborations.
Section 4 discusses the industrial performance of the firms partnered with the laboratory.
Section 5 examines the role the “core researchers” played in innovation. Section 6 provides
some concluding remarks.
2. Theoretical background and methodologies
For the purpose of clarifying the function of “two-way” interaction between
universities and industry, research tradition makes use of the patenting and publishing
performance of individual scientists and researchers (Narin and Breitzman 1995; Schmoch
1997; Murray 2002; Furukawa and Goto 2006; Furukawa and Goto 2006). The pioneering
work of Zucker and Darby (1995) demonstrated the significance of an individual researcher
as a unit of analysis and elected “Star scientists,” defined as those who had published 40 or
more genetic sequence discoveries in GenBank, as the best corporate partners in
biotechnology (Zucker and Darby 1995; Zucker and Darby 1996; Zucker, Darby et al. 1998;
5
Zucker and Darby 2001; Zucker, Darby et al. 2002). The authors of this paper designate as
“Pasteur scientists” those university scientists who have been involved in many patent
applications, in addition to authoring many high-quality scientific papers, as the best
corporate partners in advanced materials. Furukawa and Goto (2006; 2006), on the other
hand, identified “core scientists,” defined as corporate scientists who collected an
exceptionally large number of research papers and paper citations, as the most relevant firm
innovation drivers in pharmaceuticals and electronics.
In order to clarify the mechanism of knowledge interaction in advanced materials, this
paper analyzes the role of corporate researchers in addition to that of university scientists.
We define a concept of the “core researchers” in firms, who have experience of (i) jointly
publishing at least one research article with university scientists, (ii) jointly applying for at
least one patent with university scientists, and (iii) applying for more than 10 patents (full
account) independently at firms. The reasons for proposing this concept are as follows.
First, in addition to the degree of involvement measured by joint patent applications,
publishing joint research articles illustrates deepening of the social relationship between
university scientists and corporate researchers (Zucker and Darby 2001). In the United States,
firms distinguish between universities with which they conduct joint research for advanced
science and universities which they commission to do research for developing practical
technologies (Bercovitz and Feldman 2005; Bercovitz and Feldman 2006). On the university
side, a distinction is likely to emerge between the type of research collaboration whose
results are focused on publishing joint papers and the other type dealing mainly with patent
applications. In contrast, in Japan, the objectives that firms seek in conducting joint research
with universities were not clearly established, and firms seem not to consciously distinguish
between the different roles that universities could play in U-I collaboration (Florida and
Cohen 1999; Kneller 2003). In Japan, joint authorship of papers grows out of close social
relationships between university and industry, and sending corporate researchers to work in
university laboratories provides key opportunities for joint publications (Hicks, Isard et al.
1995). We posit that publishing at least one joint research article, in addition to joint patent
application, becomes an indicator identifying the level of social commitment where U-I
collaborations successfully provide firms with problem-solving abilities needed for the
innovation process.
Second, applying for more than 10 patents independently at firms represents an
active role of “core researchers” in R&D projects at firms. In terms of the definition of
absorptive capacity (i.e. identification, assimilation, and exploitation of external knowledge
(Cohen and Levinthal 1989; Cohen and Levinthal 1990), the record of “core researchers”’
6
applying for a significant number of patents is taken to indicate exploitation capacity for
external knowledge. Generally, even if a researcher playing the role of a gatekeeper identifies
and assimilates external knowledge for innovation, the firm fails to innovate without having
researchers who exploit the knowledge. The “core researchers” are assumed to be equipped
with entrepreneurship that enables them to become heavy-weighted project leaders.
In the field of advanced materials, it is vitally important for firms to obtain patents for
securing commercial profits. In order to examine the performance of partner firms that
engaged in collaborations with the Fujishima-Hashimoto (F-H) laboratory, all the firms that
had records of applying for joint patents with either of the professors were focused on. Firms
that did not achieve the stage of applying for any patent were excluded in this study, even if
they had partnered with F-H laboratory in some form. The subjects of analysis were patents
in the Japanese Official Gazette for Patent Applications (Kokai Tokkyo Koho) up to the fiscal
year 2002. Specifically, those patents that include “photocatalyst” in the abstract and
application fields were first extracted from the PATOLIS database, and the matching data
from the Industrial Property Digital Library (IPDL) was used to identify the organizational
belongings of the applicants and discoverers of the subject patents. Following our definition
of U-I collaborations, the periods during which Fujishima-Hashimoto laboratory collaborated
with partner firms were estimated based on the periods of their joint patent applications. The
database on scientific papers was provided by the Fujishima-Hashimoto laboratory, which
includes original English-language papers available on the Thomson ISI Web of Science, as
well as a number of original papers published in major Japanese scientific journals. By way
of using the database, the set criteria enabled us to identify 12 “core researchers” belonging
to 4 firms. Afterwards, from June to July 2003 we visited all the firms to which the “core
researchers” belonged and asked the (general) managers and researchers for the details of
their R&D on TiO2 photocatalysts.
3. Activities on TiO2 Photocatalysts at Fujishima-Hashimoto Laboratory In this section, we trace the collaborative relationships that the Fujishima-Hashimoto
(F-H) laboratory established with firms in the 1990s and examine how this novel technology
has been utilized for industrial applications in a wide range of markets. When utilizing TiO2
photocatalysts for industry, combining science with user needs becomes indispensable. In U-I
collaborations, this is achieved through close interactions between the university, which
creates a model for materials design and supplies the proof of concept, and the firm, which
understands the needs that the end user brings to the product.
In 1990, the F-H laboratory hit upon the idea of coating TiO2 photocatalysts on
7
two-dimensional solid surfaces, rather than mixing them with liquids as had been attempted
previously. They started to conduct joint research with a sanitary maker, TOTO, on the
coating of TiO2 photocatalysts on tiles and other building materials. When Hashimoto was
collaborating with the company, he initially proposed using photocatalyst to clean yellowing
of sanitary products. His partners at TOTO, however, insisted that just eliminating yellowing
would not make their products more competitive; without the effect of removing odor, they
argued, the products would not be marketable. Having gone through a process of intensive
information exchange, they soon discovered that TiO2 photocatalysts coated on solid surfaces
have anti-dirt and anti-bacterial functions, which resulted in joint applications for patents.
Based on these findings, TOTO developed anti-bacterial tiles for the first time in 1994.
In 1995 TOTO researchers collaborating with the F-H laboratory discovered another
novel function of photocatalysts: super-hydrophilicity. That opened up the possibility of
utilizing the material for a much wider range of applications, including, among others,
anti-fogging mirrors. They jointly applied for patents, and TOTO developed self-cleaning
tiles in the following year. Additionally, they published a paper in Nature in 1997 (Wang,
Hashimoto et al. 1997). In the middle of the 1990s we observed a strong influence on their
research activities of several funding institutions. Support from the Kanagawa Academy of
Science and Technology (KAST) enabled Fujishima and Hashimoto to extend their industrial
collaborations: with Toshiba Light & Technology and Nippon Soda, they developed
photocatalyst-coated glasses used for tunnel light covers, which were adopted later by the
Japan Public Road Corporation. As shown later, the number of collaborating firms that jointly
applied for patents with the two professors increased steadily throughout the 1990s.
In conducting U-I collaborations the two professors were engaged in collaborating with
as many corporate partners as possible and provided customized proofs of concept for each
company based on material designs derived theoretically. Even if they had a good product
concept, their laboratory’s capacity for process technology was limited, and the development
abilities of firms were necessary, playing a complementary role in the R&D process. Also, as
the research subjects of their laboratory students were set on basic research, it was crucial for
the two professors to work with corporate researchers in order to advance applied research.
The basic attitude they took toward the firms approaching them was, “Let’s not reject anyone
who comes our way.” This policy was reflected in Fujishima and Hashimoto’s efforts to
organize an open research community working on photocatalysts, with its members coming
from the public as well as private sectors.
From the perspective of firms, on the other hand, Fujishima and Hashimoto’s scientific
advice and evaluations of corporate product development were invaluable. In particular, the
8
proofs of concept Fujishima and Hashimoto supplied were often patentable, providing seeds
for corporate R&D. While public funding agencies were keen on directing support toward
photocatalytic R&D, collaborating with the university scientists renowned with the highest
esteem provided firms with the additional merit of receiving public funding.
4. Industrial Performance of Firms Collaborating with the Fujishima-Hashimoto Laboratory
With regard to the industrial performance of collaborating firms, we faced the hard
task of estimating the market size of emerging products for each firm. First of all, it might not
be realistic to postulate that any specific product has resulted from a particular patent, and it
is difficult to establish an exclusive connection between the patents applied for by a firm and
the products it has put on the market. Nevertheless, in this study, through careful examination
of patents and products using corporate information and product catalogs, patents and
products were paired together, and those pairs were confirmed through a series of corporate
interviews.
Second, it is hard to estimate which of the sampled firms actually created markets on a
substantial scale. A technical problem stems from the fact that, in the field of photocatalysts,
the mechanism by which technological development contributed to generating sales in a
market differs considerably depending on whether the product is a raw material, an
intermediate product, or a finished product1.
Taking these problems into account, we examined whether each of the partner firms
succeeded in creating a market (Appendix A gives the details of estimation results). In
addition to the estimated sales figures as of 2002, Table 1 shows the items of partner firms
such as i) the period of U-I collaborations (in years); ii) firms’ accumulated number of joint
patent applications; iii) firms’ accumulated number of jointly authored papers; iv) the number
of “core researchers”; and v) targeted products and commercialization (in year)). Companies
are shown in the order of the starting period of collaboration since the early 1990s.
Insert Table 1 here
1 For example, titanium dioxide can be both the raw material of photocatalyst and
intermediate coating agents, and as each of them has its own market, it is possible to calculate
sales figures for each of them. On the other hand, in the case of finished products, it is hard to
quantify the scale of the market created by the photocatalytic technology, as we can see in the
case of air purifiers installed with filters coated with photocatalyst.
9
Among the 25 partner firms collaborating with the Fujishima-Hashimoto laboratory in
the 1990s, six companies, namely, TOTO, Ishihara Sangyo, Nippon Soda, Toshiba Lighting
& Technology, YKK, and Seiwa Industries maintained long-term joint research and created
markets with a significant size. Indeed, of these successful firms, four firms—all except YKK
and Seiwa Industries—are shown to present a group of the “core researchers”2. In sharp
contrast, two categories were observed for the remaining corporations without “core
researchers”; that is, the companies that applied for patents based on joint research but did
not develop them into products, terminating the collaboration after a short period, and those
that developed products based on joint research but did not generate significant sales of those
products.
Looking at the chronology of university-industry collaborations, there were no firms
that applied for patents in the field of photocatalysts independently prior to beginning joint
research with the F-H laboratory; it was only after conducting joint research that the firms
started applying for patents. In the case of the firms that succeeded in innovation, the process
of applying for joint patents was maintained over a long period of time. Successfully
innovative firms initiated joint research in the early stages of Fujishima-Hashimoto’s U-I
collaborations. More precisely, firms belong to the up-stream and middle-stream industries
started to collaborate earlier, and those companies in the downstream industry followed after
intermediate goods became available.
Among the successful firms categorized by industrial type, the firm that belongs to the
upstream industry is Ishihara Sangyo, the main vendor in Japan for titanium dioxide as the
raw ingredient of photocatalysts. While the firm has a strong record of developing new types
of titanium dioxide and commercializing transparent photocatalytic coating materials, it has
not expanded its business into the downstream of the industry. There are two firms that
belong to the middle-stream industry, namely, Nippon Soda, which was initially a maker of 2 Although YKK and Seiwa industries employed few researchers who have experience of
co-authorship and co-patent application with Fujishima and Hashimoto, those corporate
researchers do not apply more than 10 patents independently at firms. Among six successful
companies, Seiwa Industries is the only small- and medium-sized company with 35
employees and 30 million yen capital. Having collaborated with the Fujishima-Hashimoto
laboratory, the company received 73 million yen in support funding for photocatalytic R&D
from the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST). By investing those funds in the
development of processing technologies, the company achieved successful commercialization
of photocatalytic air purifiers.
10
intermediate goods, and TOTO, which has expanded its business widely from the middle to
the downstream of the industry.
Ahead of other firms in undertaking U-I collaborations with the F-H laboratory in 1990,
TOTO has large-scale in-house R&D capabilities with abundant resources. With a clear
corporate strategy established for TiO2 photocatalysts, the president made a crucial decision
to develop processing technologies for coating titanium dioxide on tile surfaces in order to
commercialize antibacterial tiles. In particular, following the discovery of
super-hydrophilicity in the middle of the 1990s, the firm adopted an aggressive intellectual
property rights strategy, seeking to obtain both basic and applied patents related to
photocatalysts and to raise profits through patent licenses. The firm strengthened its R&D
department to such an extent that the number of inventors involved in patent applications
exceeded 1703.
There are two firms representing the downstream of the industry; namely, Toshiba
Lighting & Technology, which joined the KAST project and contributed to the development
of reflectors for use in tunnels; and YKK, which received a license from TOTO and
developed aluminum panels for construction.
In the meantime, influenced by the establishment of open research communities on
photocatalysts, a number of firms initiated joint research with the F-H laboratory in the
middle of the 1990s. Those firms in this category, however, rarely continued joint research
programs for a long time. Even though there are several firms with records of developing
products, a majority of them failed to increase market shares after putting their products on
the market. Moreover, a large number of commercialized products were in such categories as
filters and sheets coated with photocatalysts, whose markets are relatively easy to enter.
There were also other firms that entered into application fields where the use of
photocatalysts was theoretically difficult, such as coating the surfaces of curtains or teeth.
Overall, a strong tendency is observed that the firms focusing on their main fields of
business succeeded in innovation. It is essential for firms to accurately comprehend user 3 The firm’s sales figures for photocatalytic tiles were estimated to be approximately eight
billion yen in 2001, representing nearly 80 percent of the total sales for the tile category. In
addition, the firm supplies a package of related technologies, including manufacturing
know-how and consulting, to the German tile maker DSCB and also provides its technologies
to the US plate glass manufacturer PPG. In spite of these facts, at present, it is known that
TOTO has not yet secured sufficient profits to offset their heavy investment in photocatalytic
R&D.
11
needs, and firms are most familiar with users who have had a long-term relationship with the
firm in its main fields of business. Regarding personnel who can discover business
opportunities for a product, those who have “prior knowledge” on the market stand above the
rest (Shane 2000). In contrast, in cases where firms attempted to use photocatalysts to
diversify their business fields, a long period of trial and error was required4.
5. Impact of “Core Researchers” on the Performance of Partner Firms Having identified the “core researchers” in each of the four successfully innovative
firms, in this section, we argue for a possible explanation of the relationship between a firm’s
employment of “core researchers” and its overall innovation performance. The first question
we address is why Fujishima and Hashimoto co-authored with certain firms out of the group
of companies with which they conducted joint research.
For the purpose of tackling this puzzle, this paper postulates the possibility that
Fujishima and Hashimoto take a unique approach to university-industry joint paper
authorship. Publications of joint research articles by corporate researchers and university
scientists in Japan are known to represent sizeable social commitment of both parties (Hicks,
Isard et al. 1995). It is reported that joint research publication is ascribed to the secondment
of corporate researchers to university laboratories: more than one-third of jointly published
articles involve long-term (1 year or so) or short-term (several weeks to a few months)
personnel exchanges. Some exchanges are not motivated by the desire to access technical
opportunities, for example where a doctorate is obtained (Hicks, Isard et al. 1995).
Additionally, the co-authored papers are published with the commitments of former
employees, students or joint appointments.
Next, how can we explain the positive impact of “core researchers” on firms’ innovation
performance? One possible interpretation of the contribution is that a firm’s joint research
with the Fujishima-Hashimoto laboratory contributed to upgrading the firm’s
problem-solving capabilities from the technical to the scientific level. As Fujishima and
Hashimoto have reputations as excellent technical advisers for developing products, their
contributions could initially lead to patent applications filed together with partner firms. Once 4 In the field of photocatalysis, it is hard to overemphasize the importance of processing
technologies, without which the prototypes of product concepts cannot be produced and firms
cannot begin full-scale commercial development. If a firm lacks advanced processing
technologies in-house, it is difficult to maintain the competitiveness of its products in the
long run, no matter how good the characteristics of the products might be.
12
the professors become mid- or long-term research partners rather than just ad hoc advisers, it
is likely that the scientific aspects of joint research, including detailed investigations into the
mechanisms behind phenomena, are explored further, producing both patents and scientific
papers as a result.
With regard to the co-publication performance, Fujishima and Hashimoto published
four co-authored papers with TOTO, another four papers with Ishihara Sangyo, and one paper
with each of the remaining three firms. Among them, the article published in Nature, which
explains the mechanism of super-hydrophilicity that was discovered during the course of joint
research with TOTO, was of exceptionally high quality. On the other hand, the remaining
papers were average in quality, just summarizing the results of university-industry joint
research, and none of the impact factor of the journals in which they were published is as
impressive as the article in Nature. In other words, with the remarkable exception of the
paper published with TOTO, no significant scientific elements can be observed in the joint
papers, which makes it difficult to support the initial interpretation mentioned above.
Given that all other conditions are equal, the tendency for universities and industries
involved in joint projects to publish scientific papers is higher in cases where collaboration
between the two sides has progressed to the extent where the partners share researchers
(Hicks, Isard et al. 1995). Looking at the pattern of collaboration of the Fujishima-Hashimoto
laboratory with partner firms, joint paper authorship (and then the presence of “core
researchers”) became possible only when corporate researchers visited the university
laboratory frequently or stayed for a long period: researchers in the middle of their careers
stayed at the university laboratory for two years as visiting scholars; some stayed at the
laboratory for three years to pursue doctoral degrees.
Generally speaking, scientific knowledge is transferred from universities to firms as a
result of joint research. However, corporate researchers with sufficiently deep commitment to
publish papers jointly with Fujishima and Hashimoto do not simply gain scientific
knowledge; they also acquire a series of “code books” that are necessary to make effective
use of the information circulating in the R&D communities on photocatalysis. In order to
assimilate ideas provided by universities and link them to the creation of products, it is
necessary to find appropriate solutions to a series of problems that arise in the process of
commercialization, and the ability to make efficient use of the code books to suitably
interpret the relevant information becomes indispensable (Breschi and Lissoni 2001).
Accordingly, the presence of “core researchers” exerts invaluable impact on firms’ problem-
solving abilities for the innovation process.
Moreover, a series of interviews with “core researchers” collaborating with the F-H
13
laboratory indicate that these researchers spearheaded the development of photocatalytic
products at each firm, playing a key role as “heavy-weighted” project leaders (Clark and
Fujimoto 1991). While corporate “core scientists” with remarkable publishing and citation
records have been observed in Japan’s pharmaceutical and electronics industries, these
scientists’ performance in the area of patents tends to be merely average (Furukawa and Goto
2006; Furukawa and Goto 2006). In other words, the role that the firms expected of their
“core scientists” is generally to bring advanced scientific knowledge into the firm from the
R&D community, rather than to promote research as a part of product development. In
contrast, the firms analyzed in this paper utilized the “core researchers” effectively to succeed
in innovation.
6. Conclusion In this paper, we examined how scientific research and product development are
integrated through university-industry collaboration, leading to successful innovation in a
way particularly appropriate to the advanced materials sector. Based on our observations of
Japan’s titanium dioxide (TiO2) photocatalyst sector, we argued that the “core researchers,”
who have been involved in authoring scientific papers in addition to applying for many
patents, worked as boundary spanners between science and technology, and their becoming
heavy-weighted project leaders pushed the firms’ R&D towards commercialization. For the
formation of a robust market in the field of advanced materials, the authors of the paper
pointed out the contributions of “Pasteur scientists” like Fujishima and Hashimoto (Baba,
Shichijo and Sedita. 2009). However, the right type of corporate researchers was also
necessary for the process, because it was the problem-solving abilities of industry that linked
the university’s science to the formation of a market.
These findings provide policy implications for U-I collaborations in the
advanced materials sector. In industries such as in the life sciences, firms can procure crucial
knowledge for innovation through indirect contacts with “star scientists” through Technology
Licensing Offices (TLOs). The content of university-industry knowledge interaction is
mainly codified in nature, and corporate researchers do play a passive role in the
communication, as the “receivers” of some standard science-based knowledge. In contrast, in
industries such as in the field of advanced materials, the knowledge procurement strategy
must be based upon the building of appropriate channels for two-way knowledge interaction
between “Pasteur scientists” and corporate researchers. The ability of “Pasteur scientists”
leads to a kind of customization process of science-based knowledge, which takes place only
through a strong bilateral U-I communication, facilitated by a proactive attitude among the
14
“core researchers.” A common language and mutual understanding is in fact a prerequisite to
the nurturing of firms’ problem-solving abilities, which is sustained not only by formal
agreements, but by informal commitment rooted in friendship and reciprocal trust, as the case
of Fujishima and Hashimoto revealed.
Finally, we acknowledge some limitations in our work, which are mainly related to our
research design’s case of a single university laboratory and to the very narrow sector of
analysis: photocatalyst in Japan. Nevertheless, we believe that our findings contribute to the
present understanding of firms’ innovation strategies, pinpointing the role played by
corporate researchers in U-I collaborations. Further research like model estimation is needed
to evaluate the extent to which the results of our analysis can be extended to all the sample
firms in the industry, other industrial segments, and national systems of innovation.
Acknowledgements This study was partly supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) Program
(#17330082) and Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) (#19730166) from The Ministry of
Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of Japan. We thank Akira
Fujishima, Kazuhito Hashimoto, and participants of the International Schumpeter Society
Conference 2006 for their helpful comments in connection with the writing of this paper. The
usual disclaimer applies. We also wish to express our gratitude to the corporate scientists and
R&D managers who kindly agreed to be interviewed by us.
15
Table 1 Corporate Performance of U-I Collaborations with Fujishima-Hashimoto Laboratory
Firm Period of
collaboration (in years)
Joint Patent
Applications
Co-authored
Papers
Core-researchers
Estimated Sales as of 2002 (in Million
Yen)
Commercialization (Year)
TOTO 1991-2002 (12) 37 4 5 7,970 Anti-bacterial tiles (1994) Self-cleaning tiles (1996) Coatings for automobiles (1998) Films for door mirrors (1998)
Ishihara Sangyo
1993-2000 (8) 15 4 2 360 Coating materials (1996)
Takenaka Corporation
1993-1997 (5) 7 0 0 NA None
Mitsubishi Paper Mills
1993-1995 (3) 6 0 0 NA Filters (NA)
Seiwa Industries
1994-2002 (9) 5 1 0 20 Air cleaning equipment (2000)
Mitsui Mining & Smelting
1994-1996 (3) 5 0 0 NA None
YKK 1995-2000 (6) 17 1 0 30 Aluminum housing materials (1999)
Nippon Soda 1995-1998 (4) 9 1 3 1,500 Lighting equipment (1996) Coating materials for membrane structure (1997)
Toshiba Light & Technology
1995-1996 (2) 3 1 2 325 Lighting equipment (1996)
Kobe Steel 1995-1997 (3) 2 0 0 NA None Shimadzu 1995-1996 (2) 2 0 0 NA Air cleaning
equipment (NA) Daiko Electric
1995-1996 (2) 3 0 0 NA Lighting equipment (NA)
Nitto Denko 1996 (1)
1 0 0 NA Sheets (NA)
Photoscience Japan
1996-2001 (6) 4 0 0 NA None
Meidensha 1996-2001 (6) 6 0 0 NA Air cleaning equipment (NA)
16
Asahi Chemical Industry
1996-1997 (2) 3 0 0 NA None
Equos Research
1996-1997 (2) 4 0 0 NA None
Aisin AW 1996-1997 (2) 3 0 0 NA Filters (2001) Ube-Nitto Kasei
1997-2001 (5) 6 1 0 NA Films (2002)
Kyodo Printing
1998-2000 (3) 3 0 0 NA None
JUKI 1998 (1)
1 0 0 NA None
Ulvac-Riko 1998 (1)
3 0 0 NA Evaluation equipment (NA)
Nippon Telephone & Telegraph
1998 (1)
1 0 0 NA None
Fujitsu 1999-2001 (3) 2 0 0 NA None Molza 1999
(1) 1 0 0 NA Paper screens (NA)
17
Appendix A
Sales figures for individual firms in each industrial category of photocatalyst product
were estimated by consulting official information related to corporate activities in the field of
photocatalysis: the results of estimations made by the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade,
and Industry (Technology Evaluation and Research Division 2002) and the Japanese
Association of Photocatalyst Products (Japanese Association of Photocatalyst Products 2003),
as well as the results of market reports produced by marketing firms (Yano Economic
Research Institute 2001; Yano Economic Research Institute 2002). The results of estimation
are shown in the table below. While there were 35 firms in all, we consolidated the firms that
have sales in multiple industrial categories, with a total of 29 firms identified.
Table. Estimated Sales Figures of Photocatalyst Products in Japan in 2002
Product Company Sales (million yen)
Ishihara Sangyo* 360
Tayca* 144
Sakai Chemical Industry 72
Taki Chemical* 36
Titan Kogyo 36
Showa Denko* 36
Furukawa 36
Raw materials
Total 720
Toto* 5,520 Tiles, Glass
Total 5,520
Japan Hydrotect Coatings* 400
Kawasaki Steel Metal Products* 100
YKK* 30
Nisshin Steel 200
Matsushita Electric Works 100
Paints, Film, Building materials
Total 830
Taiyo Kogyo* 1,500
Nippon Soda* 1,500
Tent membranes
Total 3,000
Noise insulation walls Kawasaki Steel Metal Products* 40
18
Sekisui Jushi* 500
Total 540
Toshiba Lighting & Technology* 260 Lights (roads)
Total 260
Taiheiyo Cement 40
Okitsumo* 100
Paints
Total 140
Tachikawa* 200
Nichibei* 900
Molza 15
Blinds, Wallpaper
Total 1,115
Toto* 1,850 Tiles (interior materials)
Total 1,850
Daikin Industries* 1,350
Seiwa Industries* 20
Nippon Muki* 20
Toshiba Carrier 560
Sharp 610
Sanki 30
Toyoda Gosei 60
Air purifying equipment,
Water processing equipment
Total 2,650
Nippon Muki* 10 Greenhouse materials
Total 10
Toshiba Lighting & Technology* 65
Hitachi GE Lighting 780
TOTO* 400
Household electric appliances (lights, etc.),
Consumer products
(anti-fogging films, etc.) Total 1,245
Firms marked with an asterisk were members of the Japanese Association of Photocatalyst Products in 2002.
19
References
Agrawal, A. and R. Henderson (2002). "Putting patents in context: Exploring knowledge
transfer from MIT." Management Science 48(1): 44-60.
Baba, Y., N. Shichijo, and Sedita (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.
Bercovitz, J. and M. Feldman (2005). Fishing Upstream: Firm Innovation Strategy and
University Research Alliances. DRUID Tenth Anniversary Summer Conference 2005.
Copenhagen, Denmark, DRUID.
Bercovitz, J. and M. Feldman (2006). "Entrepreneurial Universities and Technology Transfer:
A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Knowledge-Based Economic
Development." Journal of Technology Transfer 31: 175-188.
Breschi, S. and F. Lissoni (2001). "Knowledge Spillovers and Local Innovation Systems: A
Critical Survey." Industrial and Corporate Change 10(4): 975-1005.
Bureau of Industrial Technology and the Environment (2002). Current State and Problems in
Industrializing Titanium Dioxide Photocatalyst, Ministry of Economy, Trade, and
Industry.
Clark, K. B. and T. Fujimoto (1991). Product Development Performance. Boston, Harvard
Business School.
Cohen, W. M. and D. A. Levinthal (1989). "Innovation and Learning - the 2 Faces of
R-and-D." Economic Journal 99(397): 569-596.
Cohen, W. M. and D. A. Levinthal (1990). "Absorptive-Capacity - a New Perspective on
Learning and Innovation." Administrative Science Quarterly 35(1): 128-152.
Cohen, W. M., R. R. Nelson, et al. (2002). "Links and impacts: The influence of public
research on industrial R&D." Management Science 48(1): 1-23.
Feldman, M., I. Feller, et al. (2002). "Equity and the technology transfer strategies of
American research universities." Management Science 48(1): 105-121.
Florida, R. and W. M. Cohen (1999). Engine or Infrastructure? The University Role in
Economic Development. Industrializing Knowledge: University-Industry Linkages in
Japan and the United States. L. M. Branscomb, F. Kodama and R. Florida. Cambridge,
Massachusetts, MIT Press.
Fujishima, A., K. Hashimoto, et al. (1997). Photo-Clean Revolution: Activating Titanium
Dioxide Photocatalysts. Tokyo, CMC.
20
Fujishima, A., K. Hashimoto, et al. (2000). The Mechanism of Photocatalysts. Tokyo, Nihon
Jitsugyo Shuppan-sha.
Fujishima, A., T. N. Rao, et al. (2000). "Titanium Dioxide Photocatalysis." Journal of
Photochemistry and Photobiology C: Photochemistry Reviews 1: 1-21.
Furukawa, R. and A. Goto (2006). "Core scientists and innovation in Japanese electronics
companies." Scientometrics 68(2): 227-240.
Furukawa, R. and A. Goto (2006). "Core Scientists and Innovation in Japanese Electronics
Companies." Scientometrics: forthcoming.
Furukawa, R. and A. Goto (2006). "The role of corporate scientists in innovation." Research
Policy 35(1): 24-36.
Furukawa, R. and A. Goto (2006). "The Role of Corporate Scientists in Innovation."
Research Policy 35: 24-36.
Hicks, D., P. A. Isard, et al. (1995). "A Morphology of Japanese and European Corporate
Research Networks." Research Policy 25: 359-378.
Japanese Association of Photocatalyst Products (2003). Market Survey on Photocatalyst
Products in 2002. Tokyo, Photocatalysis Industry Association of Japan.
Kneller, R. W. (2003). "University-Industry Cooperation and Technology Transfer in Japan
Compared with the US: Another Reason for Japan's Economic Malaise?" University
of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law 24(2): 329-449.
Maine, E. and E. Garnsey (2006). "Commercializing generic technology: The case of
advanced materials ventures." Research Policy 35(3): 375-393.
Mowery, D. C., B. N. Sampat, et al. (2002). "Learning to patent: Institutional experience,
learning, and the characteristics of US university patents after the Bayh-Dole Act,
1981-1992." Management Science 48(1): 73-89.
Murray, F. (2002). "Innovation as co-evolution of scientific and technological networks:
exploring tissue engineering." Research Policy 31(8-9): 1389-1403.
Narin, F. and A. Breitzman (1995). "Inventive Productivity." Research Policy 24(4): 507-519.
Niosi, J. (1993). "Strategic Partnerships in Canadian Advanced Materials." R & D
Management 23(1): 17-27.
Owen-Smith, J., M. Riccaboni, et al. (2002). "A comparison of US and European
university-industry relations in the life sciences." Management Science 48(1): 24-43.
Powell, W. W., K. W. Koput, et al. (1996). "Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of
innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology." Administrative Science
Quarterly 41(1): 116-145.
Schmoch, U. (1997). "Indicators and the relations between science and technology."
21
Scientometrics 38(1): 103-116.
Shane, S. (2000). "Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial Opportunities."
Organization Science 11(4): 448-469.
Shane, S. and T. Stuart (2002). "Organizational endowments and the performance of
university start-ups." Management Science 48(1): 154-170.
Technology Evaluation and Research Division (2002). Current Situation and Problems of
Industries Concerning Dioxide Photocatalyst. Tokyo, Industrial Science and
Technology Policy and Environment Bureau, Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade,
and Industry.
Thursby, J. G. and M. C. Thursby (2002). "Who is selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of
growth in university licensing." Management Science 48(1): 90-104.
Wang, R., K. Hashimoto, et al. (1997). "Light-Induced Amphiphilic Surfaces." Nature
388(6641): 431-432.
Yano Economic Research Institute (2001). "Applications of Photocatalyst and Their
Economics: Extension to Environmental Business and Its Problems in 2001." Market
Share Monthly(139): 75-84.
Yano Economic Research Institute (2002). "Photocatalyst Materials and Markets for
Application Products." Market Share Monthly(156): 73-80.
Zucker, L. G. and M. R. Darby (1995). "Virtuous Circles of Productivity: Star Bioscientists
and the Institutional Transformation of Industry." National Bureau of Economic
Research Working Paper Series No. 5342.
Zucker, L. G. and M. R. Darby (1996). "Star scientists and institutional transformation:
Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry."
Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences Of The United States Of America
93(23): 12709-12716.
Zucker, L. G. and M. R. Darby (2001). "Capturing Technological Opportunity Via Japan's
Star Scientists: Evidence from Japanese Firms' Biotech Patents and Products." The
Journal of Technology Transfer 26(1): 37-58.
Zucker, L. G., M. R. Darby, et al. (2002). "Commercializing knowledge: University science,
knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology." Management Science
48(1): 138-153.
Zucker, L. G., M. R. Darby, et al. (1998). "Intellectual human capital and the birth of US
biotechnology enterprises." American Economic Review 88(1): 290-306.
