scholarly journals Not in the job description: The commercial activities of academic scientists and engineers

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wesley Cohen ◽  
Henry Sauermann ◽  
Paula Stephan
Keyword(s):  
Job Description ◽  
Academic Scientists ◽  
Commercial Activities ◽  
Scientists And Engineers

Earnings of Academic Scientists and Engineers: Intersectionality of Gender and Race/Ethnicity Effects

2018 ◽  
Vol 62 (5) ◽  
pp. 625-644 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Tao
Keyword(s):  
African American Women ◽  
Asian American ◽  
Low Income ◽  
White Women ◽  
Asian American Women ◽  
American Women ◽  
Gender And Race ◽  
Academic Scientists ◽  
Scientists And Engineers ◽  
Race Ethnicity

While research increasingly examines the intersection of gender and race/ethnicity in science and engineering, not much is known regarding how they work together to affect career outcomes. This article examines gender earnings gaps among academic scientists and engineers by race/ethnicity. Using data from National Science Foundation’s Survey of Doctorate Recipients (2003, 2006, 2008, 2010, and 2013), I find that White women earned less than their male counterparts in 2003 and 2006, but the earnings gap closed over time. African American women did not earn less than their male counterparts in any year. Asian American women earned less only in 2013 (due to the high income of Asian American men), and Hispanic women earned less only in 2010 (due to their low income relative to other groups). The findings of relative improvement in gender earnings equality are analyzed in the context of disadvantages women face in other aspects of their careers.

scholarly journals Taste for science, academic boundary spanning, and inventive performance of scientists and engineers in industry

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 917-933 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Arts ◽  
Reinhilde Veugelers
Keyword(s):  
Survey Data ◽  
Boundary Spanning ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Academic Scientists ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Scientists And Engineers ◽  
Intellectual Challenge

Abstract Matching survey data on PhD scientists and engineers currently working in an R&D job in industry with publications and patents, we study the relation between their individual motives and the rate and nature of their inventive output. We find that individuals with a strong taste for science, that is motivated by intellectual challenge, autonomy, and contribution to society, create more novel and impactful patents in industry. These individuals are also more involved in academic boundary spanning, proxied by scientific publications co-authored with academic scientists, and this boundary spanning partially mediates the effect of taste for science on impactful inventive output. In contrast, individuals with a strong taste for salary and career collaborate less with academic scientists, fully mediating the negative effect of taste for salary and career on impactful inventive output.

scholarly journals Not in the Job Description: The Commercial Activities of Academic Scientists and Engineers

2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (9) ◽  
pp. 4108-4117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wesley M. Cohen ◽  
Henry Sauermann ◽  
Paula Stephan
Keyword(s):  
Potential Role ◽  
National Sample ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Physical Sciences ◽  
Scientific Enterprise ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Commercial Activities ◽  
Scientists And Engineers

Scholarly work seeking to understand academics’ commercial activities often draws on abstract notions of the academic reward system and the representative scientist. Few scholars have examined whether and how scientists’ motives to engage in commercial activities differ across fields. Similarly, efforts to understand academics’ choices have focused on three self-interested motives—recognition, challenge, and money—ignoring the potential role of the desire to have an impact on others. Using panel data for a national sample of over 2,000 academics employed at U.S. institutions, we examine how the four motives are related to commercial activity measured by patenting. We find that all four motives are correlated with patenting, but these relationships differ systematically between the life sciences, physical sciences, and engineering. These field differences are consistent with differences across fields in the rewards from commercial activities as well as in the degree of overlap between traditional and commercializable research, which affects the opportunity costs of time spent away from “traditional” academic work. We discuss potential implications for policy makers, administrators, and managers as well as for future research on the scientific enterprise. This paper was accepted by Toby Stuart, entrepreneurship and innovation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document