Academic Journal of Business & Management, 2025, 7(7); doi: 10.25236/AJBM.2025.070725.
Chenyu Xia1, Weipeng Sun2
1Business School, Geely University of China, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China
2Institute of Intelligent Networking and New Energy Vehicles, Geely University of China, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China
Chengdu is rich in scientific research resources but inefficient in the transformation of achievements, which is rooted in the rigidity of the management system of traditional public institutions, the lack of incentive mechanism and the poor market docking. In view of the core problems of scientific research institutions, such as the administrative structure, the ambiguity of achievement attribution, the lack of flexibility of the management system, and the lack of market channels, this study proposes an optimization scheme for the path of enterprise transformation: establish a classified and hierarchical governance mechanism, and implement a dual-track system of corporate governance and target performance; Improve the distribution of income from the transformation of achievements, break the compilation restrictions, and build a market-oriented multiple evaluation system; strengthened institutional safeguards; Cultivate specialized transfer institutions, implement the dual team collaboration of "scientific research transformation", and develop the technology manager system and the construction of regional collaborative ecology. The study emphasizes the need to promote the transformation of scientific research institutions from administrative dependence to market-oriented entities through systematic mechanism reconstruction and policy empowerment, and activate the driving force of Chengdu's scientific and technological innovation.
Chengdu; Scientific Research Institutions; Corporate-Style Reform; Path Optimization
Chenyu Xia, Weipeng Sun. Research on the Path Optimization of Corporate-Style Reform for Scientific Research Institutions in Chengdu. Academic Journal of Business & Management (2025), Vol. 7, Issue 7: 191-196. https://doi.org/10.25236/AJBM.2025.070725.
[1] Bercovitz J, Feldman M. Academic entrepreneurs: organizational change at the individual level [J]. Organization Science, 2008, 19(1): 69-89.
[2] Perkmann M, Tartari V, McKelvey M, et al. Academic engagement and commercialisation: a review of the literature on university–industry relations [J]. Research Policy, 2013, 42(2): 423-442.
[3] Siegel D S, Wright M. Academic entrepreneurship: time for a rethink? [J]. British Journal of Management, 2015, 26(4): 582–595.
[4] Grimaldi R, Kenney M, Siegel D S, et al. 30 years after Bayh–Dole: reassessing academic entrepreneurship [J]. Research Policy, 2011, 40(8): 1045-1057.
[5] Thursby J, Jensen R, Thursby M. Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: a survey of major U.S. universities [J]. Journal of Technology Transfer, 2001, 26(1-2): 59–72.
[6] Walter A, Aitken J M, Barry B. University technology transfer: current practice and regional economic development implications [J]. Journal of Technology Transfer, 2021, 46(4): 1022–1045.
[7] Ouellette L L, Tutt A. How do patent incentives affect university researchers [J]. International Review of Law and Economics, 2020, 61: 105883.
[8] Gong Min, Liu Xin. Construction of Incentive Mechanism for Scientific Research Achievements Transfer Based on the Whole-chain Perspective [J]. Science and Management Research, 2023, 41(2): 88-96.
[9] Liu Xin, Li Sheng. Path Dependence and Governance Mechanism of the Evolution of Intellectual Property Incentive Policies [J]. Science Research Management, 2023, 43(1): 55-64.
[10] Gu Zhiheng. Practical Dilemmas and Optimization Strategies of the Current Incentive Mechanism for Technology Transfer in Universities [J]. Research in Educational Development, 2022(10): 71-78.