Accelerating Science-based Growth Through Co-innovation

Last registered on April 07, 2019


Trial Information

General Information

Accelerating Science-based Growth Through Co-innovation
Initial registration date
March 20, 2018

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
March 21, 2018, 2:22 PM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
April 07, 2019, 2:43 PM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.



Primary Investigator

University of Stuttgart

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Start date
End date
Secondary IDs
Does the participation in co-innovation training activities influence industry participants’ intentions to engage in university-industry co-innovation projects?
The aim of this pilot study is to explore the motivations of industry players to engage, or not, in collaborative innovation (co-innovation) projects. Training activities which engage university and industry participants can be a determinant for formal innovation and entrepreneurial projects. The trial objective is to determine the effects of tailored training programmes focused on modifying the co-innovation intention and its cognitive antecedents. This trial will be run in the border region of Southern Denmark.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Giones, Ferran. 2019. "Accelerating Science-based Growth Through Co-innovation." AEA RCT Registry. April 07.
Former Citation
Giones, Ferran. 2019. "Accelerating Science-based Growth Through Co-innovation." AEA RCT Registry. April 07.
Sponsors & Partners

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information
Experimental Details


The intervention is a half-day workshop for a group of randomly selected participants from industry.
Intervention Start Date
Intervention End Date

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Intention to engage in university-industry collaboration projects
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
This is a three item measure that captures different dimensions of the intention to engage in the behavior.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Response to a call to action to engage with a university researcher
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Participants will be invited to register for a co-innovation program via email. A stratified random selection of the participants will be allocated to the treatment group (workshop training); the rest will be in the control group (business as usual). Treatment and control group will receive a report based on the responses to the survey. There is a follow-up survey after the intervention for both groups.
Experimental Design Details
The randomization strategy should ensure that existing intentions to engage in co-innovation projects are equally distributed between the control and treatment groups. We plan to allocate in the treatment group about 50% of the overall number of participants.
Randomization Method
Randomization done by a computer in the office
Randomization Unit
Was the treatment clustered?

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
Invitation to registration and survey will be sent to 150 individuals (employees in start-up, SMEs or large companies in the region).
Sample size: planned number of observations
80 individuals
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
35 individuals in training (intervention), 45 individuals in control.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
The initial estimation of the required sample aims to observe significant differences (0.95) on the main outcome variable (the co-innovation intention) with statistical power (0.80). For an expected minimum detectable effect size (MDES) of 0.35 between the different groups measures, we would at least need 102 participants in each group to see significant differences. We are running this trial as a feasibility study to confirm if these assumptions are valid.

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
SDU Research Support
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number
Project - 95-482-74152
Analysis Plan

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information


Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information


Is the intervention completed?
Intervention Completion Date
June 01, 2018, 12:00 +00:00
Data Collection Complete
Data Collection Completion Date
June 30, 2018, 12:00 +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

The engagement with industry actors is a key element in the transition towards an entrepreneurial university model. The purpose of this paper is to explore the university-industry collaboration (UIC) drivers from the industry side. It analyses how, and to what extent, policy interventions could increase the engagement of industry actors in UICs.
An experimental research design involving a feasibility and pilot study (January to June 2018) with 36 firms. In a non-urban region context, with a satellite university campus. The pilot explores a randomized control trial (RCT) design, with a training intervention to a randomized group of participants in the pilot.
Firms involved in universities’ students (academic forms of UICs) might not necessarily consider the university as a research partner, even in a geographic proximity setting. In addition, there is a potential “dark-side” to proximity, when industry participants build their perceptions using second-hand experiences or indirect information. A training intervention facilitates to overcome pre-existing biases but does not trigger a substantial change in the UIC’s behaviour of the firms in the short-term.
The pilot study provides valuable insights for researchers interested in a larger randomized control trial. It also provides insights for university managers that want to understand the motivations of industry participants in UICs.
The experimental approach of the research generates evidence on the feasibility to intervene in the activation of UICs from an industry perspective, a central aspect in transition towards an entrepreneurial university model.
Giones, F. (2019), “University-Industry Collaborations: An Industry Perspective”, Management Decision, available at:

Reports & Other Materials