<p>Research collaborations between science and society require that differing sectoral logics and objectives are reconciled, which creates potential for conflict. Suitable collaboration contracts are an important means to handle such conflicts and therefore crucial for collaboration success. Despite academics’ relevance for these collaborations and their latitude in deciding whether and how to engage with society, their influence on the design of collaboration contracts has been largely neglected. This paper investigates how two ways in which academics differ, namely, their motives behind cooperating with society and the orientation of their research toward either more basic or more applied questions, influence the design of contracts for the research collaborations they are involved in. Drawing on transaction cost theory reasoning, hypotheses on the influence of the two factors are developed and subsequently tested empirically using survey data from 2,048 professors in Germany. In line with the hypotheses, the empirical results show that coordination and control mechanisms are specified more comprehensively in collaboration contracts when professors’ motives and research orientation deepen the line of conflict between partners’ objectives and increase the uncertainties related to a collaboration project. A closer consideration of academics’ influence on the design of contracts for research collaborations thus appears relevant for further research as well as policy and management efforts directed at exchange relations between science and society.</p>