MIT Sloan Management Review

for the importance of long-term industry-university relationships, as discussed in Practice 4.

Practice 4: Invest in Long-Term Relationships In-
dustry and academia do research on markedly different
time frames. Industry is driven by economic and prod-
uct cycles, while academic research project duration
depends largely on the time required for a graduate de-
gree program (a year and a half to two years for a
master’s degree, three to four years for a doctorate).
Both parties thus need to be upfront, and realistic,
about their time expectations. The creation of multi-
year collaboration programs addresses this mismatch
and improves the chance of a successful research out-
come. (The average duration of the collaborations
examined was two and a half years.) Over longer time
periods, members of research teams develop better
joint understanding of the research problem and com-
mon vocabulary in which to communicate the research
results. 6 The effect of duration can be contrasted with
that of project budget size, which did not have a signifi-
cant effect for the projects analyzed. As one project
manager recommended: “Set up longer-term funding
cycles. One year is too much pressure.”
A secondary finding relates to the presence of
long-term relationships. In nearly 80% of the ex-
amined collaboration projects, there had been a
declared previous connection between the com-
pany and the university group. The presence of this
previous relationship was positively correlated with
the outcome of the subsequent collaboration. There
is thus a benefit to developing and maintaining
such connections, even if they are at the personal
level and not contractual.

Practice 5: Establish Strong Communication Linkage With the University Team It is beneficial to have the university researchers visit the company and interact with company personnel. The more often these visits occur, the better the outcome and impact of the project. Such visits can facilitate the creation of strong personal relationships. Personal interactions are also crucial in the transmission of unwritten tacit knowledge7 such as details of design or development practices. Regular meetings at the company thus foster the success of the collaboration.

Companies can complement these personal interactions with regularly scheduled video and

telephone communications. These communications are used to established known and “routine” (as opposed to a special meeting) opportunities for the timely resolution of small problems. They also provide the company an opportunity to foster project discipline, helping to prevent the project from drifting away from its original purpose. Such tele-conferences alternatively allow the company to communicate changes in interests or strategy that the research could be adapted to address.

While companies located close to their university partners have apparent advantages in increasing the level of visits and interactions, geographic proximity did not differentiate the success of the examined collaborations. The most probable reason is that face-to-face visits were made with roughly the same frequency regardless of distance, and colocation has little value if the opportunity that it creates is not taken advantage of. Further, companies are increasing interaction with universities by sending company personnel on extended stays as visiting researchers, by providing opportunities for faculty sabbaticals and leaves at the company and by providing student internships. These activities depend little on geography.

Finally, with the objective of ensuring that face-to-face meetings happen regularly, companies can (and do) actively encourage project managers and other employees to meet researchers at the university. As summed up by a director of external research: “Our collaboration process is university centered. I encourage people to meet university researchers on their turf.”

Practice 6: Build Broad Awareness of the Project Within the Company Contact between university researchers and individuals in the company over and above the project manager increased the research’s impact for the company. University researchers who were introduced to professionals from different functional areas (for example, manufacturing, product development or sales) were able to share methods, lessons or discoveries on a broad front. As a result of this wider awareness, the university team received useful suggestions from other company perspectives than that of the project manager’s group.