A model of institutional network dynamics and a comparative case analysis of information technology transfer

This paper examines the institutional network dynamics of information technology transfer with particular emphasis on the roles of publicly-funded centers for research and development at the national and regional policy-making levels. The conceptual model serves as a basis for qualitative case analysis and comparison of research management structures in two Canadian research centers located in Quebec Province. Conclusions are formulated regarding the complementarity of program and project dominant structures as well as the comparison of hierarchies and markets as technology transfer control mechanisms. Program dominant management appears appropriate to development of national innovation infrastructures, while project dominant management facilitates problem solving in regional innovation networks. The consequences of these conclusions for research management in global technological markets are discussed. This research was funded by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. The names of the research centers under study have been changed.     

Research centers in transition: patterns of convergence and diversity

Governments continue to play a central role in the way research is conducted and organized by defining new models for research centers. How do existing research centers adapt to changes in their environment? Institutional theory suggests that organizations pursue efficiency and legitimacy by conforming to isomorphic pressures in their organizational field, which will eventually lead to a reduction of diversity in organizational practices and strategies. Resource-dependence theory assumes a more active agency and calls attention to the diverse strategic responses of organizations to institutional processes. Based on funding microdata and qualitative information at center level, this study undertakes to analyze changes in two populations of Spanish research centers (government laboratories and technology centers) in a time of evolving policy paradigms, emergence of new models for research centers, and increasing competition in the field of R&D. We find that a large share of the existing government laboratories and technology centers have progressively conformed to a funding strategy based on diversifying sources and increasing competitive public funding, although both populations are still characterized by some degree of internal diversity regarding funding portfolios. Structural heterogeneity also remains as regards management practices such as research planning and agenda setting.     

Entrepreneurship research centers around the world: research orientation,knowledge transfer and performance

This work investigates entrepreneurship research centers, and analyzes their research performance. Studies on the determinants of performance of research centers have mainly focused on science and technology, while entrepreneurship has been so far neglected. Through an analysis of 46 centers worldwide, we focus on entrepreneurship research and the role of centers, by discussing how knowledge transfer mechanisms and research orientation affect research performance. Our findings contribute to shed light on the divergence of methodologies and approaches characterizing entrepreneurship research; they also corroborate the view that centers enable a “compound Matthew-effect”, according to which knowledge transfer to external stakeholders, after controlling for research orientation of the center, does foster and enrich research performance.     

Relationship Dynamics between University Research Centers and Industrial Firms: Their Impact on Technology Transfer Activities

In this study we focus on relationship-oriented factors such as trust, geographic proximity, communication, and university policies for intellectual property rights (IPR), patents and licenses and examine how these factors influence the technology transfer process between university research centers and their industrial partners. Data for this study were collected from 189 industrial firms working with 21 research centers affiliated with prominent research-oriented universities in the US. Our results showed that trust, geographic proximity, and flexible university policies for IPR, patents, and licenses were strongly associated with greater technology transfer activities. The implications for both researchers and practitioners are discussed.     

Academic/government/industry strategic research partnerships

Important factors for science to contribute to technological innovation are proper focus, scope, completeness, and timing. These are influenced by both the contexts and methodologies of research. In the context, there is a need to organize a bridging form between the sources of science and the implementors of technology. In the methodology, there is a need to adjust the approaches of science with the approaches of technological innovation. Cooperative research centers and next-generation-technology strategies have been shown to provide proper contexts and methodologies for coupling science with technology. National Science Foundation The opinions in this paper are solely those of the author and do not express official policy of the National Science Foundation.     

Coordinating a conscious geography: the role of research centers in multi-scalar innovation policy and economic development in the US and Canada

This article contributes to the debate about the role of the region in the placement and coordination of research centers linking technology-led economic development and science, technology, and innovation policy. Through a comparison of how a “conscious geography” has informed the organization of innovation + development (I + D) research centers in the US and Canada, this analysis focuses on the variation in the models of multi-scalar policy coordination deployed through the I + D research center frameworks in the US and Canada. This article begins with a discussion of the theoretical arguments behind territorial innovation systems. It continues by describing the different models of I + D research centers in the US and Canada and the role of the region in each set of policy frameworks. The third section discusses ways policy outcomes are influenced by the initial consideration of the spatial distribution of production and innovation. The article concludes with the case for a policy model which prioritizes a role for the region as a site of economic and geographic analysis and a partner in the design of a multi-scalar innovation policy.     

Modernizing small manufacturers in Japan: The role of local public technology centers

Japan's hundreds of thousands of small manufacturing enterprises not only provide high-quality inputs to large Japanese companies, but also are becoming innovators and growth generators in their own right. In addition to help from larger customers, small Japanese companies can call upon an array of public support mechanisms, including about 170 local Kohsetsushi examination and technology centers which provide research, testing, training, and guidance for firms with under 300 employees. With their intensive geographical coverage, broad range of technical services, and nominal fees, these centers offer small Japanese firms a readily available and effective source of assistance to improve their manufacturing operations, technology, and products. After reviewing the changing context for small manufacturers in Japan, the article examines the role of local Kohsetsushi centers in small firm modernization. This article considers the history, organization, and services of the Kohsetsushi system, explores the operation of five case study centers, and discusses how small Japanese firms benefit from Kohsetsushi services. Finally, there is an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the Kohsetsushi system.     

A longitudinal analysis of technical communication in research and development

A unique longitudinal study of the technical communication patterns of 184 engineers in a high technology research and development laboratory centers in the activities of technology gatekeepers. This two-step flow of technical information follows the literature as well as results from prior studies. Gatekeepers span the organizational boundary in the transfer of technology from outside the laboratory, while facilitating the distribution of technical information to colleagues within the organization. Sociometric data are analyzed over a five-year period with respect to changing organizational structures, new technical assignments and alterations in group composition. Despite these dynamic changes, the data reveal consistent results in gatekeeper identification and technical information flows.     

An applied technology transfer process

The applied technology transfer process is a communication process based on planning, marketing, and training. Planning is the single most important element, while pre-planning is also essential. The marketing part of applied technology transfer involves an in-depth knowledge of both consumers and products. A sound knowledge of media is also essential. The marketing step is the key delivery or transfer element. Applied technology transfer is a system that requires skills such as management and communication techniques which can be learned in traditional academic courses. However, other skills such as applied human relations are more easily learned under a supervised workshop approach. More complex technology transfer systems require additional training on a continuing education basis. The development of technology transfer learning centers can also be useful. Applied technology transfer is a research investment rather than a cost. It is the technology transfer process that insures the timely application of research effort. Research pay-off is derived from use of research products. Thus, applied technology transfer represents research delivery insurance.     

What Patent Data Reveal about Universities: The Case of Belgium

In recent years, there has been a surge in patenting by Belgian universities. It appears that this increase can be attributed to growth of biotechnology, where there is a greater propensity to patent, to a desire on the part of universities to enhance commercialization through technology transfer offices (TTOs), and to effective collaboration between universities and government-sponsored research centers. Our qualitative analysis reveals that patent statistics could be a misleading indicator of an individual university's technological productivity, since many inventions are developed at universities, yet applied by other institutions.     

Twenty-five years of science-industry collaboration: the emergence and evolution of policy-driven research networks across Europe

This paper aims at examining the collaborative networks established during the seven Framework Programmes on Research and Technological Development (1984–2009). These networks are the result of self-organized partnering by different participating entities (industry, universities, research centers and technology users) in subsidized research joint ventures selected on a competitive basis under the thematic priorities and funding rules imposed by the European Union. Social network analysis tools are employed in order to describe and assess the architecture, and the dynamics of the networks that were developed in the context of each Framework Programme. Analysis of organizations’ positioning in the network space will show whether there are some pivotal actors with significant policy implications for knowledge and technology transfer. Last but not least, understanding how these network are formed and how they have evolved over time may provide useful policy implications for the design and structure of the current and future EU Programmes aimed at shaping and creating a unified European Research Area.     

Scientists’ Participation in University Research Centers: What are the Gender Differences?

University-affiliated multidisciplinary research centers have grown in importance in academia. Most research to-date has focused on these centers from an institutional perspective, with recent work only beginning to explore the ways in which such centers affect the development of academic careers. Hence, little is known about how scientists who are center-affiliated differ from those who are not affiliated. Clearly, both selection and influence effects may be expected to operate in terms of research productivity, timing, and resources. A further puzzle is how center affiliation may differ between male and female scientists. In this study, we use a new, nationally representative dataset of scientists and engineers working in Carnegie Research Extensive universities to develop an understanding of how center-affiliated scientists differ from exclusively department-based academic scientists and engineers, and investigate the extent to which gender moderates the effects of centers. As expected, our national sample shows that women are younger, whiter, less likely to be tenured, and at a lower rank than their male colleagues. We find that women are as likely to join centers as men, and do so at a similar stage in their career. Most of the male–female differences observed in disciplinary settings are sustained in centers, but women appear to have greater research equality in them (compared to the departmental setting). In particular, men and women in centers spend the same amount of time writing grant proposals, conducting both grant-supported and unfunded research, and administering grants. This suggests that centers may constitute an institutional context in which some aspects of gender equity in science may be achieved.JEL Classification: C42, O32, Z13, E61     

Research needs of industry

This paper discusses the results of a study on the broad research and technology needs of industry. The study identifies the current sources of information, preferred sources, general areas of needs, expected impact of technology, some methods by which information on technology can be transferred, and the language style of the communications. The influence of firm size, and type of industry is also discussed. The study provides a basis for improving the transfer of information from the laboratory and research centers to executives engaged in the manufacturing and processing of materials and products. Included in the study are a variety of transfer agents including laboratories, universities, equipment suppliers, government, and others.     

Industry-University Cooperative Research Centers

This paper takes a first look at the effect of Industry-University Cooperative Research Centers (IUCRCs) on industrial R&D laboratories. IUCRCs are small academic centers designed to foster technology transfer between universities and firms. Since IUCRCs depend on industry support we expect them to further the research of member companies. Our findings suggest that IUCRCs promote industry-university technology transfer. We find strong associations between laboratory membership in IUCRCs and the importance of faculty consultants, co-authorship with faculty and hiring of graduate students to the laboratories. IUCRC membership contributes small increments, not always statistically significant, of 2% in laboratory patenting and research expenditures. Both estimates are larger for National Science Foundation IUCRCs, consistent with their quality and their sorting to larger laboratories. These results survive a simultaneous equation analysis of the joint decision to patent and join IUCRCs. Nevertheless more work is needed to separate the effect of the IUCRCs from the matching mechanism that assigns IUCRCs to R&D laboratories.     

Management knowledge and the organization of team science in university research centers

Increasingly, principal investigators are tasked by funding agencies not only to expand knowledge in a particular field of inquiry, but also to manage and coordinate sets of diverse actors, including researchers with different disciplinary backgrounds and with different institutional affiliations. This paper addresses how principal investigators organize and manage sets of diverse researchers in university research centers. The premise of the paper is that centers possessing “management knowledge”—as embodied in principal investigators themselves and in colleagues and subordinates (e.g. past experiences in centers, industry, formal management training and professional experience)—will demonstrate different structural and managerial characteristics when compared to centers without management knowledge. Based on interviews and documents for a purposive sample of centers established by the US National Science Foundation, the study investigates the organization and management of centers as a function of the presence and type of management knowledge of the center directors across multiple cases. Implications for addressing common challenges to team science in university research centers and comparable arrangements are discussed.     

Why do firms join consortial research centers? An empirical examination of firm,industry and environmental antecedents

The purpose of this study was to test 10 hypotheses for why firms join research centers that are consortial in nature. We describe research centers with a formal arrangement for accommodating external membership as being consortial research centers (CRC). Although traditional analysis of why firms form collaborative research arrangements have tended to focus upon firm level variables, this study takes a broader view on antecedent factors. We derive hypotheses from resource dependence theory, market forces theory, and strategic behavior model explanations for such firm behavior. Panel data from 503 firms, in 104 industries from 1978 through 1996 were used to test the hypotheses. The decision to join a CRC was modeled using multivariate binomial probit analysis. Results showed that industry competitiveness, technological opportunities and the production of complementary innovations are all positively related to propensity to join a CRC. Slack resources are related to joining propensity in a non-linear fashion.     

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.     

Transferring NBS technology to small manufacturers through state and local centers

Transferring research results from federal laboratories to small, local industries poses major conceptual as well as practical difficulties. To address the problem, this paper provides a model of a technology-transfer system in which a federal laboratory—the National Bureau of Standards's Automated Manufacturing Research Facility—is linked to small manufacturers through state-and community-based technology centers, where the various instituions in the system are matched along dimensions of (a) level of government, (b) stage in cycle of innovation, (C) education of prototypical worker, and (d) nature of capital-revenue base.     

The new stock in trade — technology or stewards of technology transfer — Dr. Dvorkovitz & Associates

A brief account of the growth of the “market” concept, as related to technology transfer, leads into the establishment of Dr. Dvorkovitz & Associates by its founder and owner, Vladimir Dvorkovitz, Ph.D., where the company has been, where it is at present, and plans for the immediate future, as related to the world wide dissemination of data on technology available for license from industry, government organizations, university and private research centers, and individual inventors. Company activities cover the computerized data bank, InstanTechEx; TechEx, the annual World Fair for Technology Exchange; the publication on licensing and technology transfer, UNIT.