Firms frequently collaborate with universities to access novel scientific knowledge and technological expertise with an aim to develop superior new products. While previous research has highlighted the innovation potential of so-called university-industry-collaborations, a recent Journal of Marketing paper by Maier et al. highlights a so far neglected marketing potential of said collaborations. In particular, marketers may consider actively communicating to prospective customers how the product has been developed, an insight that is often overlooked by firms.
THE POSITIVE UNIVERSITY EFFECT
Across a series of controlled field, lab, and online experiments, this research identifies a positive university effect – consumers perceive a given product as more attractive when it is portrayed as developed in collaboration with a university. The evidence is based on data collected in four countries, and the dependent variables include ad engagement and click-through rates via an Instagram AB test, product recommendation and evaluation after an actual product trial, as well as behavioral product choice, incentive-compatible willingness-to-pay, and purchase intent measures. Importantly, the positive university effect is based on the general image of universities in society rather than on the specific reputation of a particular institution (e.g., MIT, Harvard, CTF, etc.).
UNIVERSITIES INFUSE SCIENTIFIC LEGITIMACY
The paper shows that collaborating with a university infuses the underlying firm with a stronger sense of scientific legitimacy (i.e., the ability to understand and effectively work with the latest scientific ideas in the field and thus being capable of developing cutting-edge technological innovations), thereby making the resulting product more attractive to consumers. In line with the scientific legitimacy account, the findings demonstrate that the positive university effect is more pronounced when the scientific legitimacy conferred by universities is more important to the (a) focal product (i.e., high-tech vs. low-tech), (b) underlying company (i.e., new vs. established), (c) project focus (i.e., technology vs. aesthetics), and (d) target customer (i.e., high vs. low belief in science).
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
The practical implications are immediate: firms that engage in open innovation practices with universities might leave some economic value on the table if they fail to broadly communicate said collaboration to their prospective customers. Using labels such as “co-developed with a university” or “university knowledge inside” might incrementally increase the underlying product’s market performance. Indeed, the strength of the effects found underscores the managerial significance of the positive university effect. For example, participants in one of the studies were willing to pay, on average, 65 percent more for the same product when it was portrayed as co-developed with a university.
Furthermore, the boundary conditions identified help managers anticipate when actively marketing university-industry collaborations will be more (vs. less) effective. Marketing products as co-developed with a university might be particularly promising for new firms, when the underlying product is high-tech, or the target customer scores high on belief in science (liberals, as opposed to conservatives, tend to belief more strongly in science).
Taken together, this research provides a novel perspective on university-industry collaborations and shows that collaborating with universities might be beneficial not only for innovation, but also for marketing purposes. It also offers actionable implications for managers by highlighting how and when marketing university-co-developed products as such to consumers might be beneficiary for firms. For scholars within universities, the research offers yet another reason why it might benefit industry to reach out.
Martin Schreier
Professor of Marketing and Head of the Department of Marketing and the Institute for Marketing Management at WU (Vienna University of Economics and business), and visiting professor at CTF
Reference:
