Academic spin-offs, corporate spin-outs and company internal start-ups as technology transfer approach

As a rule, a technology transfer gap exists between research and development and the commercialisation of the results. This article investigates the role of new ventures for technology transfer from universities and research institutions as well as between or within companies to close this gap. Based on case studies in Germany and Switzerland, different examples of this technology transfer approach have been analysed. Academic spin-offs can help to transfer technology from universities and research institutions to industry especially if there is the need for additional funding to further develop the technology. Corporate spin-outs can be used for technology transfer between companies as an alternative to closing operations should these no longer fit into the parent organisation. Internal start-ups were identified as a new approach for company internal technology transfer from research departments to business units focused on commercial operations to overcome innovation barriers within companies.     

Who Develops a University Invention? The Impact of Tacit Knowledge and Licensing Policies

In this paper, I propose a theoretical model to illustrate how the inventor know-how affects whether the inventor starts a firm to develop her idea or licenses an invention to an established firm for development. Inventor start-ups are characterized as development organizations that serve a temporary role in the invention–innovation process, developing an invention until they can sell the developed invention to an established firm that owns requisite complementary assets for commercialization. This model is then used to analyze the role and impact of a university technology transfer office (TTO) on this process to understand how TTO’s may both positively and negatively impact the transaction. The model posits a general theory of inventor–entrepreneur behavior in university and corporate research labs based on two factors: the importance of know-how and the distribution of inventors’ personal costs to transfer that know-how.     

The strategic value of new university technology and its impact on exclusivity of licensing transactions: An empirical study

Commercialization of new university technology within the new product development process is an important tool by which established firms can expand their innovative capabilities. The strategic importance of the university technology to the firm, however, can vary considerably. An exclusivity agreement is a useful tool to protect the firm’s investment and help ensure that value is appropriated through the commercialization process. An empirical study of 66 technology transfer projects in the information and communications technology industry reveals that licensing transactions are usually secured by some form of exclusivity agreements when the product innovation enabled by the new university technology is new-to-the-firm or new-to-the-market and the firm’s perception of the strategic value of the new technologies is high.      

Transferring technology transfer into an Air Force unit

This article describes barriers to technology transfer and changes that occurred when a technology—artificial intelligence—was introduced in an applied high-technology setting at the Deputate of Communications-Computers. Electronic Security Command, US Air Force, San Antonio, TX. The authors, who were responsible for transferring the technology, based their method on an accepted model that focuses on the ability of individuals to bring about change. They regard technology transfer as the introduction and communication of a technology for practical application. Transfer into an organization entails an appreciation by the transfer agent and the recipient of how the technology will be received, used, and applied; how it will affect the recipient's management style; and how the transfer process is designed to meet the needs of the organization. Identifying, infusing, and marketing technologies often causes hostile reactions by the targeted receiver, partly because it is a challenge to the status quo and partly because the organization's technical and non-technical people don't see eye-to-eye. This has been true in our setting. Specialists have been too adamant to accept contrary views and management has not taken the need for specialists and their new technologies seriously enough. He is Chief, Rapid Prototyping Section, and he heads artificial-intelligence development.     

Research expenditures,technology transfer activity,and university licensing revenue

In this paper we relate university licensing revenues to both university research expenditures and characteristics of the university and the university technology transfer office. We apply the Hausman–Taylor estimator for panel data with time-invariant explanatory variables and the Arellano–Bover dynamic panel model to unbalanced panels for the years 1991–2003 and balanced panels for the years 1995–2003. We find conflicting evidence regarding the short-term impacts of research expenditures on licensing revenues. On the other hand, both early initiation of technology transfer programs and staff size increase expected licensing revenues. Staff size and early entry appear to be substitutes, however. One-year lagged licensing revenue has strong predictive power for current licensing revenue. Further research is necessary to analyze changes in technology transfer office efficiency over time and the contribution of technology transfer to larger university missions.     

Cost-sharing — A necessary component for successful technology transfer

The general objective of this paper is to propose the establishment of a federal cost-sharing policy for reducing risk in transferring technology from the R&D stage to commercialization. Minimization of this risk barrier is expected to encourage diverse groups to participate in technology transfer. Section II focuses on specific barriers that impede technology transfer efforts and it presents policy options to minimize identified barriers. Section III introduces objectives of cost-sharing experiments from which cost-sharing policies can be formulated. In addition, we also identify specific cost-sharing participation criteria and success variables for the policy.     

Barriers and Bridges for Successful Environmental Technology Transfer

Governmental policy, social factors, individual behavior, and technology play critical roles in improving the environment. The Department of Defense is not immune to these factors as its actions have, and will continue, to impact its operational environments.This research analyzes the technological aspect of improving environmental conditions. Of particular interest, are the barriers encountered when laboratories transfer environmental technology to an end-user, and the bridges used to mitigate these barriers. A case study methodology is utilized analyzing five environmental technology transfers within the U.S. Air Force.Several key barriers and bridges are specific to the transfer of environmental technologies. They include environmental regulatory agency oversight, difficulty in clearly defining the end-user, and the need to demonstrate technologies to potential end-users. However, many barriers and bridges encountered in the environmental technology transfer, are also encountered in the transfer of other technologies. Based on these findings, recommendations are provided for improving the environmental technology transfer process.     

A technology-utilization framework for developing countries

The International Development Research Centre, an agency created two decades ago by the Canadian Parliament and operated by an international board of governors, supports and funds research and development activities outside Canada. Initially it concentrated on building research capacity in developing countries and funding research projects. In the mid-1980s a significant part of the centre's attention shifted to technology transfer. In response to this new emphasis, the author developed what he calls a framework—a set of elements to consider in formulating research projects—for the purpose of improving the chances of transferring and implementing the research results. This article describes the utilization framework, using past research projects to illustrate its eight elements, and briefly describes how the centre has applied it. J. Andre Potworowski, until recently a consultant to the International Development Research Centre in the areas of technology transfer and research utilization, now is a principle with the Hickling Corporation in the management of technology. He has a Ph.D. in physical chemistry from the University of Toronto and an MBA from the Harvard Business School. He also has had various advisory positions with the Science Council of Canada; the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources; the Ministry of State for Science and Technology; and the Secretariat of the Prime Minister's National Advisory Board on Science and Technology.     

The mismatch between the in-country determinants of technology transfer,and the scope of technology transfer initiatives under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

Despite decades of international political emphasis, little is known about the in-country determinants of technology transfer for climate change mitigation. We draw upon the conclusions of a series of standardised, official governmental statements of technology priorities, coupled with questionnaire-based data collection, to shed light on the nature of those determinants. We find that there is a disconnect between what developing country governments perceive as the key enablers of, and barriers to, technology transfer, and what bilateral and multilateral technology transfer programmes can offer, given budgetary constraints and the logic of development aid spending. We show that the well-established notion of making climate change mitigation actions an integral part of sound development plans is especially relevant for technology transfer. We offer pointers as to how this might be done in practice, in the context of the ‘technology action plans’ developed as part of the United Nations-sponsored technology needs assessment process.     

Return on Investment in Innovation: Implications for Institutions and National Agencies*

Commercial success in universities in the USA and Canada has resulted in many other countries taking steps to emulate this performance and major technology transfer and commercialisation support programmes have been launched in UK, Europe, Australia, Japan and many other countries—including South Africa. Unrealistic expectations have, however, been generated by the spectacular successes of a relatively few institutions and it is not always realised that the success from commercialisation is proportional to the magnitude of the investment in research. Without a well funded, high quality research system, it is not possible for technology transfer to make any significant contribution to economic development. The possible economic returns to higher education institutions from commercialisation of research can be estimated using international benchmarks. This forecast uses a combination of an institutional return on investment model and a simple economic projection. The model is generic and can be adapted for use in any institution. As more data becomes available from local (and international) sources, the model will be refined to give better estimates. The model is dynamic and shows, quantitatively, why it can take up to 10 years for an institution, and 20 years nationally, to attain a positive rate of return from an investment in research and technology transfer. The model enables the long-term impact of policy decisions, in an institution and nationally, to be examined and alternative scenarios explored. The performance of individual institutions is, however, highly variable and unpredictable. This is even for those institutions that are comparable in size and maturity. A large portfolio of patents and licences is required to give a reasonable probability of positive returns. This may be possible at a national level, but is problematic in smaller institutions—and smaller countries. Because the benefits of the innovation system are captured largely at national level, with institutions having a high uncertainty, public sector support to reduce the institutional risk is necessary to assist institutions to make the necessary investments. Technology transfer is of course only one element of the overall research and innovation value chain. All elements must be functioning effectively to derive the economic and social benefits from research. In addition to a strong research system, adequate incentives must exist to encourage academics to participate, particularly with regard to the crucial initial step of invention disclosure. After disclosure, sufficient institutional capacity must be in place to take an idea, evaluate it, protect the intellectual property appropriately and then seek a path to commercialisation through either licensing or start-up company formation. *Based on the paper “Return on Investment in Innovation: Implications for Institutions and National Agencies” presented at The First Globelics Conference on Innovation Systems and Development Strategies for the Third Millennium, Rio de Janeiro, November 2003.     

The commercialization of academic patents: black boxes,pipelines, and Rubik’s cubes

Drawing on histories of technological innovation originating from research by faculty at The Pennsylvania State University and Johns Hopkins University, this paper presents evidence for a “technology” as well as an “intellectual property rights” research approach to the commercialization of academic patents. By describing how inventor and firm activities and strategies affect the technical development and commercial positioning of university patents, a technology focus adds depth to the general proposition that university patents are embryonic technologies. It likewise serves as an analytical probe to reconsider other mainstream propositions about university technology transfer.     

IP: It's also about trust and French chefs

There is a principle in the law known as ‘admission againstinterest’. Here is my own admission. While we are delightedto bring together this collection of quality articles aboutthe multifaceted world of IP licensing and technology transfer,something is missing: we need to broaden our coverage aboutthe diverse ways that IP rights are licensed and transferred. To judge from the professional literature, licensing and technologytransfer primarily address the exploitation of patents, copyright,and trade marks. Each of these rights is based upon disclosureand     

Barriers to technology transfer and their elimination

An analogy between the flow of technology and the flow of electricity is used as a method to analyze technology transfer. This effort is expanded by an analogy to the Lewin's field theory in Social Science. An effort is then made to understand better the types of barriers to technology transfer. Several classes of barriers are identified and are then discussed in detail.     

Overcoming barriers to technology transfer between small business assistance agencies and their clients: Third world style

This paper presents the results of an empirical examination of the methods small business assistance agencies in the Dominican Republic use to overcome technology transfer barriers. The availability and the methods agencies use to access the world's business knowledge are examined, as well as how the agencies disseminate the information to clients. The discussion identifies barriers that inhibit the flow of client information between (1) the knowledge pool and the agencies and (2) the agencies and the client. The strategies that agencies use to overcome barriers are characterized as push or pull, and informal or formal. Pull strategies begin with marketplace need and work toward the technology to solve the problem. Push strategies begin with specific business information and work toward its acceptance and use in the marketplace by clients. Personal interviews were conducted in Spanish with heads of the 13 assistance agencies in the country. Survey participants were asked about the processes, procedures, and techniques they used to gain and transfer business skills. The study identifies specific activities in which the agencies engage in order to effectively overcome barriers to the transfer of business knowledge.     

How scientists commercialise new knowledge via entrepreneurship

In this paper, we explore how university-based scientists overcome the barriers to appropriating the returns from new knowledge via entrepreneurship; and we examine how a university-based technology transfer office (TTO), with an incubation facility, can assist scientists in the commercialisation process. We identify how scientists overcome three barriers to commercialisation. First, we find that scientists take account of traditional academic rewards when considering the pay-offs of commercialisation activity. Second, scientists recognise the commercial value of new knowledge when market-related knowledge is embedded in their research context, and/or when they develop external contacts with those with market knowledge. Third, the deliberate efforts of scientists to acquire market information results in individuals or organisations with market knowledge learning of the new knowledge developed by the scientists; and intermediaries can help individuals or organisations with resources learn of new knowledge developed by scientists. We find that the TTO, principally through an enterprise development programme (CCDP), played an important role in the commercialisation process. The principal benefit of the TTO is in the domain of putting external resource providers in contact with scientists committed to commercialisation. Our findings have important implications for scientists and for those interested in promoting commercialisation via entrepreneurship.

Facilitating public-to-private technology transfer through consortia: initial evidence from Korea

Korean public research institutes (PRIs) are experimenting with a consortia approach for promoting public-to-private technology transfer. This research examines the effectiveness of five regional technology transfer consortia operating in Korea from 2002 to 2006 and explores their characteristics including motivations, facilitators, barriers, and challenges. The paper reports both quantitative and qualitative evidence. Archival and survey data were collected on the effectiveness and characteristics of the technology transfer consortia. The proposition was supported that membership in these consortia can enhance the technology transfer performance of participating PRIs. Reasons on how consortia increase PRI performance are discussed and four key drivers are seen as being critical to increasing the effectiveness of consortia. Conclusions focus on lessons learned for policy makers, PRIs, and consortia.     

Universities and Technology Transfer in Japan: Recent Reforms in Historical Perspective

The Japanese government has embarked on a series of reforms aimed at stimulating technology transfer from universities to industry. As a result, technology licensing offices are springing up at many national universities. Advocates hope that these reforms will increase the level of university patenting and licensing, which historically has not been a common mode of technology transfer in Japan. Their model is the technology licensing process in the United States, which acquired its present form after passage of the Bayh-Dole Technology Transfer Act of 1980. Such changes face serious historical and institutional barriers. Academic researchers, especially in engineering and physical science, have a long record of collaborative research with industry. Decisions about patenting, however, were usually left to the corporate partner; universities rarely filed for patents under their own name, nor have they, until recently, encouraged or assisted faculty researchers in doing so. Consequently, we believe that current reforms, by going against the grain of past practices, will take time to achieve the hoped for results.     

State sponsored large scale technology transfer projects in a developing country context

Technology transfer can be seen as an effective mechanism to advance the flow of technological development in a developing country’s economy. Though normally small-scale technology transfer projects are initiated and managed by private organizations, the large-scale technology transfer projects in a developing country are sponsored by the state itself, given the complexity level of and resource requirements for such projects. The purpose of this paper is to identify and discuss the critical elements of a successful large-scale technology transfer process framework in a developing country context. Four components are highlighted that facilitate a successful large-scale technology transfer process. These are: (i) understanding and selecting technology components; (ii) selecting a technology transfer mode; (iii) negotiating effective process; and (iv) developing capability. Aspects of negotiation and adoption/assimilation capability development are stressed in this paper, which is commonly missed out in conventional technology transfer framework. Accordingly a comprehensive and goal oriented technology transfer framework has been presented in the paper linking all the core elements. A Libyan case study is discussed to illustrate the framework.      

The Evidence-Based Policing Matrix

The next phase of evidence-based policing requires both scholars and practitioners to move from lists of specific studies about “what works” to using that information strategically. This requires developing generalizations or principles on the nature of effective police strategies and translating the field of police evaluation research into digestible forms that can be used to alter police tactics, strategies, accountability systems, and training. In this article, we present a tool intended for such use: the Evidence-Based Policing Matrix. The Matrix is a consistently updated, research-to-practice translation tool that categorizes and visually bins all experimental and quasi-experimental research on police and crime reduction into intersections between three common dimensions of crime prevention—the nature of the target, the extent to which the strategy is proactive or reactive, and the specificity or generality of the strategy. Our mapping and visualization of 97 police evaluation studies conducted through December 31, 2009, indicate that proactive, place-based, and specific policing approaches appear much more promising in reducing crime than individual-based, reactive, and general ones. We conclude by discussing how the Matrix can be used to guide future research and facilitate the adoption of evidence-based policing.     

Technology transfer offices and university patenting in Sweden and Germany

This paper analyses the factors that impact on the decision of researchers to patent their research results. Particular emphasis is put on the role of technology transfer offices. It builds on a survey of university professors in Sweden and Germany. The regression results show that researchers that received support from the public infrastructure and researchers that have experience with the patenting system—through own previous patents or joint patent applications with firms—are much more likely to apply for patents.