Technology transfer into capital-intensive industry: I. The paper industry by the year 2000

Traditionally, new technology has been slow to enter the paper industry, which turns over its capital stock in about 40 years. In this paper, we will examine some of the reasons for this long transition period and the implications of such a transition period for government policy. If the turnover time could be cut in half, the potential energy savings could be 4 quadrillion Btu (Quads) in 20 years. Examples of new technologies that will become prominent throughout the paper industry by the year 2000 include vapor recompression evaporation, oxygen bleaching, twin-wire forming and extended nip pressing. We present explicit projections of production shares (based on a computer model) for selected new technologies. New technology blends into an industry over a period of years. This paper examines some of the factors that accelerate or retard this transition in the capital-intensive (“heavy”) industries. For purposes of this article, our example is the paper industry, and so the examples of new innovations are drawn from pulp and paper-making processes. (Incidentally, we use the term “paper” throughout as a shorthand for SIC 26, Pulp, Paper and Paperboard.) The examination of paper-industry technology reported here is based to a great extent on a study of industrial energy use [1] conducted by the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) for the U.S. Congress. The OTA study examined the four most energy-intensive American industries (paper, steel, chemicals and petroleum refining), to identify technologies to improve energy efficiency, to project industrial energy use in each industry between now and the end of the century, and to assess the impact of various policies on energy use and energy efficiency. The study found remarkable similarities between the four industries. One notable commonality is the attitude of management towards introduction of new technology.     

Technology transfer in the navy: The historical background

This report reviews technology transfer in light of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980. Following a brief introduction, a section on “Definitions” explains the several meanings that the phrase “technology transfer” now carries in policy discussions. The next section, on “Passive Technology Transfer”, reviews traditional Department of Defense scientific and technical information programs that relate to technology transfer. A section on “Military Industrial Transfer” examines technology transfer from the Defense Department to private industry, expecially to defense contractors. A section on “The Stevenson-Wydler Act and Active Technology Transfer” describes the principal provisions of the new act and why Congress passed it. The next two sections, on “NASA’s Technology Transfer Program” and “The Federal Laboratory Consortium” outline the two existing Government programs Congress relied upon in developing ideas for the new law. A section on “Implementation of the Stevenson-Wydler Act”, discusses several important issues that must be considered by Navy laboratory management as the new law is put into effect in the Navy. Finally, a brief conclusion emphasizes the major point of the report: That Congress, in passing the Stevenson-Wydler Act, did not fully consider what relationship the new technology transfer programs it was requiring in the Executive Branch should bear to existing programs with similar purposes. If the public interest is to be served, the report argues, the Navy must consciously and carefully determine the proper nature of this relationship.     

Technology transfer legislation: An overview

This article provides an overview of the Federal legislation on technology transfer beginning with the Bayh-Dole and Stevenson-Wydler acts of 1980 and ending with the 1987 Executive Order, “Facilitating Access to Science and Technology.” The legislation and Executive Order provide the context for Federal laboratory technology transfer activities. The article covers the historic development of transfer legislation, the authorities given to laboratories, incentives for technology transfer provided by legislation, and the mandated duties and responsibilities of ORTAs, organizations, and agencies.     

Models for commercialization of technology from universities and research laboratories

One of the most admired aspects of U.S. technology has been the ability to assimilate and commercialize new science and technology. In light of the rising international competition, there has been new emphasis placed on the commercialization of U.S. science and technology developed in the federal laboratories. While research and development remains the focus of these laboratories, passage of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Act of 1980 and the Technology Transfer Act of 1986 has resulted in a means to further the exploitation of discoveries, patents, and copyrights developed within the laboratories. The transfer of technology to industrial partners and users is a complex task for a federal laboratory. Since the interaction with industry, as well as market knowledge and assessment of the needs of business users are beyond the charter of a federal laboratory, new organizational mechanisms are required in order to obtain full commercial value from the laboratories' efforts. A study was instituted to examine selected organizational and policy arrangements for achieving the optimum commercial value from the science and technology research at the research and development laboratories sponsored and funded by the U.S. government.     

Technology transfer: An overview as related to LDCs

The Technology Transfer issue has aroused much controversy in the last two decades among management researchers. This paper attempts to discuss the problems of Technology Transfer, the debate on this issue and some of the theories concerned. It also presents a suggested theoretical framework to assist the LDCs in determining need for, and receiving of, new technology.     

A decision support system model for technology transfer

Technology transfer is the process by which technology originating at one institutional setting is adapted for use in another. A major impediment to the implementation of new technologies to assist with mangerial decision-making problems is a lack of communication between the technology and management communities. Development of a tool designed to bridge the technology transfer gap was the goal of this research. The result is a prototype software package which may be used on an interactive computer terminal by a manager for assistance in designing a decision support system (DSS). The four primary research tasks were:

1. Develop a conceptual model of the DSS design process.
2. Select and adapt, or create, appropriate software to mechanize the model.
3. Develop a knowledge base to describe the interactiveness of various organization variables and managerial decision-making needs.
4. Collect and analyze interview data and implement resultant production rules on the model.

Tasks 1 and 2 were accomplished first to establish the feasibility of this effort. An interview instrument was developed for Task 3. And, corporate managers from several firms were interviewed to accomplish Task 4. Using this data, a prototype production rule model (called DECAIDS for DECISION AIDS) was constructed which supports managerial decision-making from the EMYCIN production rule system used at Stanford University. The purpose of this article is to introduce the need for a Decision Support System Model. A complete copy of this research can be obtained through University Microfilms International, 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106, from the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California 93940, or the Defense Technical Information Center, Cameron Station, Alexandria, Virginia 22314. The title is “An Interactive Decision Support System for Technology Transfer Pertaining to Organization and Management”, 1980.     

“TOTALS”: Transfer of technology approached logically and systematically

Most efforts in transferring technology to a specific location are carried out following essentially a research approach. However, imposing the research approach onto a situation for which a specific solution needs to be created or restructured represents an inappropriate transfer of technology. A planning and design approach (PDA) is called for. “TOTALS” is based on planning and design concepts adapted to solving the problems of technology transfer. It is composed of six time-based and repeating phases, comprised of nineteen steps. It is based on four important concepts: a systems view of technology, a Technology Transfer Equation, five different purposeful perspectives regarding technology transfer activities, and a holistic PDA. No particular approach, technique, model or body of knowledge can be said to be predominant.     

Technology transfer in the California Department of Corrections

A technology transfer project began in 1982 in the California Department of Corrections. They contracted with a research organization to assist them in the identification and evaluation of new technology in the areas of personal alarm systems, electronic perimeter security systems, and contraband control. In addition the contractor was to develop in the department the capacity to maintain an ongoing technology transfer process at the conclusion of the project. After two years positive results have been achieved in each of the three areas of technology. The department has also established a permanent Technology Transfer Committee and created a full-time position to provide staff services.     

NASA Technology Utilization Program: A concept paper on options

The NASA Technology Transfer Program has taken on a variety of roles during the past twenty years. This paper briefly reviews these roles. It presents then several organized approaches that could be adopted to maximize the cost/benefit of technology transfer from NASA to the private sector.     

The federal government and technology transfer implementing the 1986 act: Signs of progress

The Technology Transfer Act of 1986 clearly brought into focus the importance of technology-transfer activities in the federal government. Recognition of the potential benefit to be realized by access to results of federally sponsored research was acknowledged at the highest levels of government. While many departments and agencies had been transferring technology within the limits of existing authority and budgets, the act stimulated them as well as less-aggressive agencies to further strengthen their transfer operations. This paper reviews the status of selected agency technology transfer in 1985, describes important progress since passage of the act in 1986, and notes issues that remain to be resolved.     

Evaluation technology transfer: Some problems and solutions

Evaluation of technology transfer is an important part of the total transfer process. Sound results require a practical approach, which avoids use of the research model. The evaluation process is often expensive and time consuming. However, good evaluation will improve:motivation,knowledge,decisions, andaccountability. Evaluation must be based on use of reliable data. Technology transfer evaluation data can be classified — based on accuracy — aslow,medium, orhigh order — data. Evaluation problems can be designated — according to origin — as being related tonew information,human elements, orinstitutional structure. In each area, the more common evaluation problems can be solved with careful attention to detail. Technology transfer evaluation can be a complicated, but rewarding process. There is nosingle, correct way for Technology Transfer evaluation, but rather there is a wide variety of techniques which all have merit, depending on local circumstances.     

The Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 public law 96-480

The Stevenson Technology Innovation Act of 1980 has passed Congress and has been signed by the President. The legislation accomplishes two main functions. The first part establishes an Office of Industrial Technology in the Department of Commerce which will oversee the establishment of a wide variety of university-affiliated centers. The Centers will: 1) Perform research supportive of technological and industrial innovation including cooperative industry-university basic and applied research; 2) provide assistance to individuals and small businesses in the generation, evaluation and development of technological ideas supportive of industrial innovation and new business ventures; 3) provide technical assistance and advisory services to industry, particularly small businesses; and 4) provide curriculum development, training, and instruction in invention, entrepreneurship, and industrial innovation. The second part of the Act is concerned with the utilization of Federal Technology. Some of the provisions are: 1) Each Federal Laboratory shall establish an Office of Research and Technology Applications; 2) each Federal laboratory having a total annual budget exceeding $20,000,000 shall provide at least one professional individual full-time as staff for its Office of Research and Technology Application; and 3) after September 30, 1981 each Federal agency shall make available not less than 0.5 percent of the agency's research and development budget to support the technology transfer function of the Office of Research and Technology Applications. The legislation also establishes a Center for the Utilization of Federal Technology in the Department of Commerce to serve as a central clearinghouse for the collection, dissemination, and transfer of information on Federally owned or originated technology having potential application to State and local government and to private industry.     

Gauging the process of international technology transfer

A Technology Transfer Index is proposed for gauging the process of international technology transfer. The approach is based on the premise that the transferee in the process aims at achieving technological independence through gradual replacement of imported technological components by indigenous resources. By avoiding abstract concepts and concentrating on the end-results of the technology transfer process, the index can be computed from readily available statistics of production costs and international trade. The quantitative measure is expected to be a useful indicator for economic planning, aid program management and project evaluation and assessment.     

Application of Technology Transfer principles to managerial responsibilities

During the summer of 1985, LCDR Robert Cox completed a course entitled “Technology Transfer” at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California. The objectives of the course were to enhance the capability of course participants to take advantage of innovations, to move appropriate research and development results into use, and to gain insight into the Technology Transfer responsibilities of managers. LCDR Cox' paper was chosen from among several contributions as an example of the application of Technology Transfer principles to a manager's job.     

The linkers contribution to technology transfer

The role of an individual known as a ‘linker’ is examined and the similarities between his role and those of ‘gatekeeper’, ‘opinion leader’, and ‘innovator’ are discussed in detail. Not only are the similarities among these roles pointed out but also the unique characteristics of the ‘linker’ are clarified. A Linker Model for Technology Transfer is presented showing the value of a ‘linker’ to the parent and users organizations. Managerial endeavors to understand and promote technology transfer can be facilitated by the in-depth research presented.     

Maintaining the high-tech edge: Governmentindustry technology transfer and the federal laboratory system in California

One of the important resources to any state, such as California, is the technology that is available from the many federally operated and/or funded laboratories within its borders. In this age of technology a state needs to take advantage of applications of modern technology and innovative exploitation of human and natural resources. This article illuminates the importance of the Federal Government research laboratories. Many examples are presented to support the argument that the Federal Government research laboratories can be and often are substantial contributors to the storehouse of technology that finds its way to the private sector and public sector. Several types of technology transfer are discussed, i.e. primary technology, secondary applications, mission related, technical assistance and cooperative. In addition the article discusses the structure and logic of the Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer (FLC). The legislaltion that has helped to make the FLC effective is discussed. Included in the discussion are insights of how the FLC operates and how the private sector and public sector may use the FLC in order to locate process, product and service technology.     

Wave maker

In browsing through Columbia, the alumni magazine of Columbia University, we were struck by the article you see below because it has much to say about invention, technology development, and technology transfer. The story is well-known, the subject of several books. But we think Alvin Yudkoff's succinct treatment of it will be especially valuable to our readers. the Journal of Technology Transfer takes no sides in the historical controversies between Major Edwin Howard Armstrong, his rival inventors, and the companies and individuals who may have benefited from his inventions. We only wish they could have collaborated better or at all. Our thanks to Mr. Yudkoff and to Meg Dooley, editor-in-chief of Columbia, for their gracious permission to reprint the article.     

Mission and responsibility of the technology transfer agent

This paper was written while vacationing on Nantucket Island, Massachusetts. It deals with current conditions, shortcomings, and the potential improvement of the lots of its people through technology transfer. The authors' thoughts reflect a long-standing love affair with the Island and its people. They are unfinished but the message to the reader is clear. There is a hitherto overlooked dimension of Technology Transfer activities, the responsibility of the transfer agent to pursue his mission with wisdom and concern for all potential consequences of technological innovations.     

The contributions of invention management companies to technology transfer

A new type of organization which is explicitly dedicated to technology transfer has emerged in the United States: Companies which manage inventions produced by universities, independent inventors and other creative groups. This paper shows that these “Invention Management Companies” (IMCs) make important and unique contributions to technology transfer on legal issues (e.g., guarding against patent infringements), marketing (e.g., convincing a company to commercialize au invention) and advocating the invention against the organized opposition of established technologies. Given the contributions of IMCs to an emerging system for encouraging innovation (an “Inventive Society”), the paper recommends broadening the role of IMCs as information providers and linking them to incubators and venture capital companies.     

Sea grant — A new university-industry cooperative program for development of ocean technology

Companion papers by Drs. Horn and Doelling have described the objectives of the National Sea Grant College Program and the breadth of activities presently sponsored, ranging from research and education through information and technology transfer. Dr. Doelling in particular has dealt with the university-industry interface and a specific attempt at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to develop a mutually profitable dialog on current problems in ocean engineering and related university research. This paper deals with a planned program aimed at the development of new ocean technologies through university research in cooperation with industry.