جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « ارتباط صنعت و دانشگاه » در نشریات گروه « علوم اجتماعی »

Boundary spanning is a critical strategy for fostering the growth and development of both industry and university institutions. This strategy necessitates identifying the requirements, drivers, and antecedents that influence the interaction between industry and university, ultimately leading to enhanced effectiveness for both parties. Moreover, as a collaborative strategy between industry and university, boundary spanning has significant impacts on various organizational components, resulting in consequences that contribute to the growth and development of both sectors. Previous research has examined the relationship between boundary spanning and specific variables on a case-by-case basis. Variables like academic motivation, deep understanding of organizational procedures, complex communication and interpersonal skills, organizational structure, environmental dynamics, organizational agility, and flexibility have been investigated in relation to boundary spanning. However, a comprehensive research effort that identifies the antecedent-consequence components of boundary spanning and elucidates the role of each variable in the industry-university relationship is lacking. To address this gap and provide a comprehensive model of boundary spanning variables in the context of industry and university, it is necessary to conduct a comprehensive review of previous studies and systematically examine the antecedents and consequences within a framework. Therefore, this research aimed to answer the following questions: 1) What are the antecedents of boundary spanning between industry and university? 2) What are the ramifications of boundary spanning between industry and university?

This research employed a qualitative study design, utilizing a systematic review approach and a mixed research synthesis approach. The research focused on English-language studies published between 2012 and 2023 sourced from various scientific databases. Sampling was conducted in a targeted manner. To achieve the research objectives, the 7-step model proposed by Sandelowski and Barroso (2007) was employed.

During the analysis of the selected studies, a total of 148 categories were identified and extracted. Subsequently, the number of categories was reduced to 94 through further analysis. Finally, these categories were classified into general categories, resulting in 16 thematic components. Among these components, 6 components fell under the broader category of Antecedents, while the remaining ten were categorized as Consequences.The research findings revealed that the antecedents of boundary spanning could be classified into 6 general categories: structural-technological antecedents, structural-organizational antecedents, individual-organizational antecedents, leadership style, psychological-individual antecedents, and team-building antecedents.The research findings indicated that the consequences of boundary spanning could be classified into 10 general categories. These included the development of knowledge management skills, promotion of organizational creativity and innovation, enhancement of social capital, establishment of effective communication networks, impact on organizational performance, fostering of psychological capital, individual career-related outcomes, personal development, promotion of organizational commitment, and potential organizational role damage.Furthermore, this study emphasized the importance of fulfilling specific requirements for the successful implementation of boundary spanning in the industry-university relationship. Neglecting these requirements could hinder favorable outcomes in terms of industry-university communication. To enhance and strengthen the interaction between industry and university, various solutions could be implemented, such as offering internship programs for students in the industry, organizing joint meetings between university faculty and industry officials, facilitating exchange visits between industry employees and university staff, recruiting graduates from the university, providing training opportunities for company employees in universities, facilitating researcher transfers between academia and industry, licensing university patents to companies, offering industry study opportunities, conducting joint research programs, and engaging in community-level problem-solving projects. Employing the boundary spanning strategy can greatly benefit these initiatives.

Since the university is considered as an educational and training center of human resources based on modern science in every country and that its task is to train educated and specialized human resources in a wide variety of sciences and skills. It is expected that the required forces will be selected and used from among university graduates according to the type of expertise and skills required for the industry and technology used. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to develop a strategic model to study and Analysis of factors affecting the relationship between industry and university (Case study: Islamic Azad University of Tehran).

In this research, the combined method of theme analysis- Network analysis process was used..

The research findings were obtained both quantitatively and qualitatively through interviews with 15 experts (who were university professors and industry experts) and the combined theme-process Network analysis process (ANP, using the theme analysis technique first. , A strategic model was developed to study and analyze the factors affecting the relationship between industry and university (Case study: Islamic Azad University of Tehran) and then the Network analysis process (ANP) technique was used to rank these criteria.

The data from the theme analysis led to the extraction of 26 sub-factors affecting the relationship between industry and academia, which are classified into 5 main groups or themes. Also, the output results of (ANP) method showed that among the criteria affecting the relationship between industry and academia, the criteria of industrialization of science with a score of (0.26), scientificization of industry with a score of (0.23), and politics, respectively. Scoring (0.19), rules and regulations with a score (0.18), transformation in education with a score (0.14) were ranked first to fifth, respectively.