Dear Profs, to solve this problem so that our research is not just left on shelves to gather dust, let me share.  I attended a national conference in 2013 where I presented a paper.  I did not have to pay to present the paper, but I was restricted to just 1 paper.  Some other teachers were selected to attend (free, paying only for their transportation) as participants.  At the presentation the sponsors asked if I could share my research with school teachers.  I was willing.  So I suggest that lab assistants, field assistants should be allowed to be present at conferences.  And we have to be willing to share: "it's in giving that we receive".

The following is essential 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/38764.html&ved=0CDkQFjAJODxqFQoTCMue3KGIhckCFQgYjgodJZ0DFA&usg=AFQjCNFfdmuiL6Xz0Gz4MOJtLJEPZB8q0w&sig2=6plQYX9nsaNllo5QtqiN9g

University/Institution-Industry linkage is important to take advantage of research!Universities’ research productivity appears to be crucial in determining the level of linkages with industry. 

Universities can contribute to technological innovation in several ways, including:

---conducting research in technological fields relevant to industry,

---providing technical assistance to local firms, educating well trained professionals, and

---supporting faculty to engage in consulting and commercialization activities.

In the corporate sector, there is a trend in high technology industries towards more and closer linkages with university research. Firms’ readiness to seek out multiple sources of knowledge is viewed as critical for their success in fiercely competitive markets. This drives large companies to establish more partnerships with research institutions.

http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDcQFjADahUKEwisgOaknIXJAhVIkI4KHRx8DRM&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aau.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fenglish%2FSHESRA%2FDraft%2520Report%2520on%2520University-Industry%2520Linkages%2520-%2520Sa.docx&usg=AFQjCNEDINoB6do0h6VzBTz8InKKcF5Mhg

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-662-47200-2_22#page-1

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11192-007-0204-7#/page-1

There can be good results and recommendations in researches but may not perform well in the field where conditions are less controlled. It is a fact that unless industry and marketing enter the domain, all these publications become sedentary in the library shelf. This will lead us to the difference between innovation and creativity.

I believe it is the role of both industry and educational institutions to bridge the gap between   the lab and the field.

The laboratory work is the first way to apply the results obtained in the field where it was encouraging the application of the right index. But certainly it will not be identical to the reason that the laboratory conditions can be controlled completely, while field conditions are subject to variable factors, but will not be a significant difference between the value of the two results. So the scientific researcher and scientific institutions has to work on bridging the gap between them, by scientific awareness through: Scientific releases - Conferences - Seminars -

Workshops, call from adopting these ideas as men of business, companies, factories, private and public. Here I think we were able to bridge the gap between the lab and the field, and we have achieved a great deal of creativity and innovation

Something that I have not seen in the previous answers: usefulness, that is, the results must be useful for someone performing activities to achieve a set of goals and support for these activities must be on the top-3 list of problem areas of whatever organization that is likely to translate lab results into practice. I have been lucky to stumble across this a couple of times in my research (in informatics) and then decisions can be made quickly (fastest is three days from idea to securing a budget, by sheer luck and NOTHING else, no silver bullets here!!). 

Usefulness might be obvious, BUT if you do not agree with whoever you want to collaborate with what this is and this is not part of the top-3 problem areas of a company, then the likelihood for collaboration is significantly reduced. 

No only industry must something do.

Both sides must strive for understanding and cooperation.

I think that the ideal would be internships of academics in industry and vice versa of people from the industry in those labs.

However, this requires a sufficient level of expertise on both sides.

Research projects should be sponsored by industry on topics they need to experiment upon at a nearby university. After the lab work is finished the researcher will work for that industry and further research will sponsor more students and so on

Research projects should be sponsored by industry on topics they need to experiment upon at a nearby university. After the lab work is finished the researcher will work for that industry and further research will sponsor more students and so on

The goals of industry and academia are not always the same, so this often creates the disconnect.

In industry, if you introduce new technology, it must be done to permit marketing a new product or service, or it must be to enhance an existing product or service. The "bean counters," meaning the money people, will forever create obstacles, unless you can demonstrate an adequate return on investment, in the near future. Just making something "better," or even something "really cool," does not sway these bean counters. Honestly, sometimes it seems like they simply don't get it.

In academia, research is useful if it is original, can be published, advances the knowledge base of the human race, and serves as catalyst for one or more PhD candidates to pursue their goals, and those of their academic advisor.

It's not always an easy fit. Very often, an academic excited about his current research will not understand why industry isn't pouncing on his work. But the guys from industry might simply not see where that work will solve their immediate, or even not-so-immediate needs. That's why so much basic research has to be funded by government grants, where an immediate return on investment is not paramount.

I've run into this myself. I get all excited about some new technology, but I can't apply it, because there's no EXISTING demand for the new features. But on multiple occasions I can think of, even if the wait is a few years long, eventually the occasion does present itself. And in my work, sometimes it has taken a lot of educating of the potential customer, a lot of lab testing, a lot of prototyping, before the efforts come to fruition.

High tech industries do have internal R&D budgets, thankfully. But even so, industry has to think in terms of convincing first the internal bean counters, and then paying customers, that a brand new idea, technology, whatever, is worth pursuing. Those R&D funds used in the initial work come from profits, after all.

Dear Mitra,

A very real time and a practical issue has been raised by you in your question. You are absolutely true. All the good researchers and their findings are not used by many in the industry due to the following reasons:-

1. The industry is not connected WELL with academics and vice versa.

2. There is a big practical GAP between academic research and practical fit for use in the industry.

3. Many of the industry policy makers and practitioners are not connected well with academic research outputs and its sources.

4. The language and the methodology used in academic areas are to a large extent theoretical and lacks practical approach.

Though the above comments are NOT TRUE to an extent for the WESTERN COUNTRIES who are relatively better connected with the industry, still developing and underdeveloped countries suffer SEVERELY in this area and MOST OF THE GOOD RESEARCH outcomes are not KNOWN to the industry and the INDUSTRY problems are NOT STUDIED by the academics.

Very recently, I have attended a SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE, where out of 100 SCHOLARS, only 2 industry people were present. Unless and otherwise, we have an equal participation of the ACADEMICS AND INDUSTRY, this question will remain unanswered to a greater extent.

Hope this little input helps.

Best Regards.

Sekar Gopal.