Abstrakt:

Research and development (R&D) projects constitute a key mechanism for the development of research institutions, enabling knowledge creation, strengthening organizational capacity, and fostering collaboration with industry. The aim of this article is to identify and compare selected elements of management in national and European R&D projects in the rail sector, with particular emphasis on their role in supporting technology transfer and science–industry collaboration.

The study addresses the following research question: what are the main differences and similarities in the management of R&D projects at the national and European levels, and how do these differences influence the development of research institutions?

The article contributes to the existing literature by proposing a comparative framework of R&D project management models and by identifying their complementary role in enhancing both strategic capabilities and implementation effectiveness within research institutions. The research is based on a literature review, comparative analysis of project documentation, and a case study of projects implemented by the Railway Research Institute.
The results indicate that European projects strengthen internationalization, strategic competencies, and long-term innovation potential, whereas national projects support rapid implementation, technology transfer, and stronger relationships with domestic stakeholders. Despite the growing interest in R&D project management, relatively little attention has been paid in the literature to comparative analyses of projects implemented at national and European levels, particularly in the rail transport sector. There is also a limited number of studies examining these projects from the perspective of research institutions and their capacity for technology transfer and collaboration with industry.

The study also highlights the role of R&D projects as instruments of institutional marketing and relationship building with external stakeholders. The findings indicate that effective project management contributes not only to innovation performance but also to strengthening the visibility, credibility, and collaboration potential of research institutions in both national and international environments.

Abstrakt:

Purpose: This paper extends electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) theory beyond consumer markets to explain how reputations are formed for scientific and research organizations operating under conditions of uncertainty and limited observability.

Design/methodology/approach: Drawing on reputation theory and organizational justice, the study develops a conceptual framework that positions eWOM as a distributed, audience-driven mechanism through which evaluative judgments from heterogeneous stakeholders are aggregated into shared reputational beliefs.

Findings: The framework identifies three interrelated dimensions of eWOM-based reputation—competence, social contribution, and integrity—and explains how perceptions of organizational justice shape the legitimacy and influence of eWOM signals. Rather than merely transmitting information, eWOM actively constructs reputational meaning by stabilizing fragmented evaluations across digital environments.

Practical implications: The findings indicate that marketing scientific and research organizations requires sustained attention to how organizational actions are interpreted across online platforms. Effective reputation stewardship depends on consistency, transparency, and ethical engagement, rather than short-term image management or reliance on formal performance metrics alone.

Originality/value: This study advances eWOM theory by demonstrating its relevance in non-commercial contexts and contributes to reputation research by clarifying how audience-driven reputational beliefs emerge under uncertainty. It provides a conceptual foundation for understanding the marketing and legitimization of scientific and research organizations in contemporary digital landscapes.

Abstrakt:

Purpose: This paper analyzes competency asymmetries among academic researchers in Poland and their implications for R&D commercialization and technology transfer processes.

Design/methodology/approach: The study employs a mixed-methods design, combining a quantitative CAWI survey of researchers at Polish universities (N = 386) with qualitative in-depth interviews (N = 20). The analysis covers self-assessed research and transfer competencies relative to R&D project experience.

Findings: A persistent gap exists between research and commercialization skills, independent of discipline or career stage. Prior R&D experience does not eliminate this imbalance. Qualitative data show that this asymmetry functions as a systemic bottleneck reinforced by evaluation systems that reward publications and isolate researchers from direct market learning, associated with a capability trap.

Practical implications: Expanding support infrastructure alone is ineffective without redefining academic incentive systems. Measurable implementation outcomes must be included in staff evaluation criteria, while technology transfer centers should fully absorb legal-formal procedures. Furthermore, science managers should implement fast-track procedures and dedicated career paths for applied researchers to allow them to focus on direct industry engagement.

Originality/value: Unlike traditional analyses focusing on macro-institutional barriers, this study descends to the individual researcher level. It reconceptualizes competency asymmetries not as individual deficits, but as closely linked to the prevailing academic incentive structure.