Abstract: This paper explores academic entrepreneurship within the context of Chinese universities and research institutes,where the interrelationships among major institutional logics present a contrasting setting to the western context.In prevalent western scenarios,the science community has long been bound by the Mertonian norm of disinterestedness and communism,which encourages the free pursuit of knowledge and avoids direct commercial activity.As such,a significant issue when commercializing science is to increase legitimacy and redefine the boundary between academia and commerce.
The evolution of the Science & Technology system in China has undergone a substantial transformation in institutional logics.Prior to market reform,the state logic was dominant within Chinese universities and research institutes concerning all aspects of resource allocation,output goals,and human resource management.Universities and research institutes,under direct government control,functioned as instruments for training talent and providing technologies according to government demands.Therefore,technology transfer and utilization were legitimate within universities and research institutes from the onset.Scientists were allowed and instructed to apply their research outputs,albeit weakly connected to individual economic interests.Later,during the economic reform era,the state progressively shifted its administration role into macro guidance and oversight.Under state guidance,both professional logic and market logic emerged and prevailed within universities and research institutes.The market logic supplanted the state’s role in promoting the utilization of scientific outputs,further reconstructing the incentive system and utilization mechanisms towards commercialization.This change invigorated the economic incentives for academic scientists,requiring them to gain more knowledge and exposure to industrial activities to understand enterprises’ technological needs. Meanwhile,professional logic rose to take over governance within the academic community.With higher education reforms,contract systems and performance-driven reward systems gradually replaced permanent employment and fixed salaries in universities and research institutes.In relation to the state’s role,both the central and local governments assumed macro-level supervision responsibilities such as legislation,policymaking,and funding,while refraining from intervening in governance within individual universities or research institutes.

The unique interrelationships among state,market,and professional logics in the context of the Chinese science sector pave the way for new research agendas of academic entrepreneurship.The commercialization of science inherits legitimacy from the state planning period,when scientific discoveries were directed to be pragmatic and applicable,and further stabilizes it during the reform period.However,whether academic scientists can fully realize their potential to commercialize research outputs is unclear,as the co-existing state,market,and professional logics prescribe differing expectations for their behaviors.To solve this puzzle,this study combines the institutional logics perspective with identity control theory,demonstrating how academic scientists develop entrepreneurial or academic identities through an identity control process which links identity formation with each institutional logic’s expectations.The study proposes that institutional logics provide the guidelines and standards for forming academic and entrepreneurial identities.Scientists then verify their congruity or incongruity with each identity,guiding their commercialization activity.
This study utilized data from the third wave of the National Survey on Scientific and Technical Professionals in China,conducted by the China Association for Science and Technology (CAST) in 2013.By analyzing a representative sample of 1776 academic scientists in Beijing,the findings suggest that market logic has a direct effect on scientists,encouraging them to foster an entrepreneurial identity and to actively work towards commercializing their potentially valuable research achievements.Specifically,a scientist’s patenting ability is positively associated with the rate of research achievement commercialization.Furthermore,the influence of market logic is contingent on the impact of professional and state logics.Professional logic prescribes the standard for academic identity,while state logic sets expectations for both academic and entrepreneurial identities.In accordance with professional logic,satisfaction with the professional title appraisal system strengthens the academic identity,thus weakening the positive relationship between a scientist’s patenting ability and commercialization activity.
State logic exerts a dual effect on the impact of market logic:Facilitation by the state in strengthening entrepreneurial identity enhances the effect of market logic,while the intensification of academic identity as a result of professional or state influence diminishes the effect of market logic.The results suggest that academic scientists who receive more public funds from central and local governments are less engaged in realizing their potential for commercialization,while those who perceive more support from national Science and Technology policies are more likely to do so.These findings illuminate the mechanisms through which institutional logics influence individual behavior and deepen the understanding of commercialization activity in Chinese universities and research institutes.
This study contributes to both the academic entrepreneurship and institutional logics literature.First,it examines academic entrepreneurship in the relatively unexplored context of Chinese universities and research institutes,where institutional settings are markedly different from their western counterparts due to divergent historical trajectories.By introducing a new context in which the academic norm is not in contradiction with commerce,the study contributes to a new research agenda focused on scientists’ engagement in commercialization activity in the face of co-existing,yet not conflicting,logics.Second,by integrating institutional logics with identity control theory,the theoretical framework of this study provides a microfoundation for the gap between institutional logics and individual action.The proposed identity process also provides insights into embedded agency at the individual level,emphasizing the role of human agency.This suggests that individual actors could leverage co-existing institutional logics and manage their identities to optimize their career outcomes.