Examines innovation gaps in ICT patents by university and industry in the Netherlands, suggesting strategies to enhance collaboration.
University–industry collaboration is widely regarded as a critical driver of innovation in fast-evolving fields like information and communication technologies (ICT). Patent filings offer a valuable window into this innovation landscape, as they capture codified technological outputs and knowledge transfer activities. In this study, we focus on the Netherlands as a case study, given its strong academic research base and active ICT sector, to examine the gap between university and industry contributions to ICT-related patents. We adopt a dual-theory framework of Absorptive Capacity and Optimal Distinctiveness to interpret collaboration dynamics. Absorptive Capacity theory highlights the ability of firms to assimilate and exploit external knowledge, while Optimal Distinctiveness theory addresses the need for organizations (like universities and firms) to balance conformity and uniqueness in collaborations. We assembled a dataset of 2022 ICT-related patents (2014–2024) from the Lens database, classified by CPC technology categories. The results reveal significant collaboration gaps. Universities in the Netherlands exhibit substantial innovative activity in certain ICT domains (e.g., artificial intelligence and computer vision), yet lag behind industry in others (e.g., hardware technologies), indicating a misalignment in focus. Co-applicant university–industry patents are relatively scarce, suggesting that academic and corporate inventors often work in parallel rather than jointly. These findings underscore a persistent collaboration gap in the Dutch ICT patent landscape. By applying Absorptive Capacity and Optimal Distinctiveness as lenses, we argue that this gap reflects both limited knowledge absorption between sectors and challenges in balancing academic distinctiveness with industrial relevance. The study highlights the need for strategies to enhance knowledge exchange and bridge university–industry divides in technology innovation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ghorbani et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: