5762 
6525科技成果转化是融通创新要素的一种方式，但学术界对该领域研究主题的细分、未来的研究方向缺乏系统地梳理和科学地判断。通过对发表在管理学权威期刊的143篇英文文献和191篇中文文献进行回顾，梳理出四个主要研究主题：大学转型与科技成果转化动力机制、学术创业企业的团队组建与绩效、政府支持与科技成果转化系统优化和大学—企业—政府之间的互动；识别出该领域能够为管理学做出理论贡献的三个重要特征，即目标多元性、制度复杂性和理论延展性。最后，本文从场景驱动的视角展望了未来研究方向。本文构建场景驱动的科技成果转化研究框架，不仅有助于发现科技成果转化的一般规律，促进技术商业化理论体系与管理学主流理论的融合，还有助于指导我国的科技成果转化实践活动、实现高水平的科技自立自强。
科技成果转化：研究评述与展望
摘要
参考文献
1 丁雪辰, 柳卸林. 创新生态系统战略对创业绩效的促进——基于中科院技术衍生企业的实证研究[J]. 管理评论,2021, 33(1): 120-132. DOI:10.14120/j.cnki.cn11-5057/f.2021.01.008
2 郭惠, 刘航. 政府研发资助对高校创新溢出的调节效应分析[J]. 科研管理,2021, 42(9): 184-192. DOI:10.19571/j.cnki.1000-2995.2021.09.023
3 李晓华, 李纪珍, 高旭东. 大学的第三使命: 从研究型大学向创业型大学的转型[J]. 科学学研究,2020, 38(12): 2131-2139. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-2053.2020.12.003
4 李晓华, 李纪珍, 高旭东. 角色认同与创业机会开发: 基于扎根理论的技术创业研究[J]. 南开管理评论,2022, 25(3): 73-84. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2022.03.008
5 李怡欣, 赵文红, 郭菊娥, 等. 从学者到创业者: 决策逻辑对学术创业过程的影响[J]. 科学学研究,2021, 39(4): 703-712. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-2053.2021.04.014
7 王晓红, 张少鹏, 张奔. 创新型城市试点政策与城市产学研知识流动——基于长三角城市群的空间DID模型分析[J]. 科学学研究,2021, 39(9): 1671-1682. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-2053.2021.09.015
9 Colombo M G, Meoli M, Vismara S. Signaling in science-based IPOs: The combined effect of affiliation with prestigious universities, underwriters, and venture capitalists[J]. Journal of Business Venturing,2019, 34(1): 141-177. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.04.009
10 D'Este P, Llopis O, Rentocchini F, et al. The relationship between interdisciplinarity and distinct modes of university-industry interaction[J]. Research Policy,2019, 48(9): 103799. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2019.05.008
11 Fini R, Rasmussen E, Wiklund J, et al. Theories from the lab: How research on science commercialization can contribute to management studies[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2019, 56(5): 865-894. DOI:10.1111/joms.12424
12 Fischer B B, Schaeffer P R, Vonortas N S. Evolution of university-industry collaboration in brazil from a technology upgrading perspective[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,2019, 145: 330-340. DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.05.001
13 Hahn D, Minola T, Eddleston K A. How do scientists contribute to the performance of innovative start-ups? An imprinting perspective on open innovation[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2019, 56(5): 895-928. DOI:10.1111/joms.12418
14 Hewitt-Dundas N, Gkypali A, Roper S. Does learning from prior collaboration help firms to overcome the ‘two-worlds’ paradox in university-business collaboration?[J]. Research Policy,2019, 48(5): 1310-1322. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2019.01.016
15 Iorio R, Labory S, Rentocchini F. The importance of pro-social behaviour for the breadth and depth of knowledge transfer activities: An analysis of Italian academic scientists[J]. Research Policy,2017, 46(2): 497-509. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2016.12.003
16 Kotha R, Crama P, Kim P H. Experience and signaling value in technology licensing contract payment structures[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2018, 61(4): 1307-1342. DOI:10.5465/amj.2015.1233
17 Kotha R, George G, Srikanth K. Bridging the mutual knowledge gap: Coordination and the commercialization of university science[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2013, 56(2): 498-524. DOI:10.5465/amj.2010.0948
18 Lehoux P, Daudelin G, Williams-Jones B, et al. How do business model and health technology design influence each other? Insights from a longitudinal case study of three academic spin-offs[J]. Research Policy,2014, 43(6): 1025-1038. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2014.02.001
19 Peifer J L, Johnson D R, Ecklund E H. The moral limits of the market: Science commercialization and religious traditions[J]. Journal of Business Ethics,2019, 157(1): 183-197. DOI:10.1007/s10551-017-3718-9
20 Perkmann M, McKelvey M, Phillips N. Protecting scientists from Gordon Gekko: How organizations use hybrid spaces to engage with multiple institutional logics[J]. Organization Science,2019, 30(2): 298-318. DOI:10.1287/orsc.2018.1228
21 Perkmann M, Salandra R, Tartari V, et al. Academic engagement: A review of the literature 2011-2019[J]. Research Policy,2021, 50(1): 104114. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2020.104114
22 Sohn E. How local industry R&D shapes academic research: Evidence from the agricultural biotechnology revolution[J]. Organization Science,2021, 32(3): 675-707. DOI:10.1287/orsc.2020.1407
23 Tartari V, Perkmann M, Salter A. In good company: The influence of peers on industry engagement by academic scientists[J]. Research Policy,2014, 43(7): 1189-1203. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2014.02.003
24 Thompson T A, Purdy J M, Ventresca M J. How entrepreneurial ecosystems take form: Evidence from social impact initiatives in Seattle[J]. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal,2018, 12(1): 96-116. DOI:10.1002/sej.1285
25 Zellmer-Bruhn M E, Forbes D P, Sapienza H J, et al. Lab, gig or enterprise? How scientist-inventors form nascent startup teams[J]. Journal of Business Venturing,2021, 36(1): 106074. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2020.106074
引用本文
李晓华, 李纪珍, 杨若鑫. 科技成果转化：研究评述与展望[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2023, 45(4): 119-136.
导出参考文献，格式为：
