Doing technology transfer in federal laboratories (Part 1)

According to data from the Congressional General Accounting Office and the Association of University Technology Managers, the federal laboratories seriously lag some universities in rates of technology transfer. This paper, based on interviews with technology-transfer professionals in federal laboratories and universities, discusses the phenomenon of technology transfer, highlighting subjects such as technology push and market pull, cooperative R&D, technology licensing, start-up companies, information-dissemination and technology-search programs, technology transfer and local development, models of technology-transfer programs, limits to federal technology transfer, and measurement of technology transfer. It concludes that the explanation for the difference in technology-transfer rates between federal laboratories and universities is due primarily to the way technology-transfer opportunities are marketed in the two sectors.     

Basic research and the success of federal lab-industry partnerships

This paper examines the role that basic research plays in the strategies pursued by industry in their interactions with federal labs. It draws on questionnaire-based data of 229 federal laboratory-industry joint R&D projects with 219 companies and 27 laboratories. The study documents the relative importance of basic research in the success of the interactions by comparing the incidence of basic research on several indicators of success. The study shows that, even though projects involving basic research tend to have higher costs, they also have a high percentage of product outputs in the short term. Typical high payoff strategies for partnership were those in which the company performed several technical roles and the federal laboratory was more narrowly focused. The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the National Science Foundation, Research on Science and Technology Program, Contract No. 9220125. The views expressed here are the authors' and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Science Foundation or any other institution.     

Company interactions with federal laboratories: What they do and why they do it

Focusing on responses from 229 companies that have worked with federal laboratories, the study examines companies' objectives and initial motivations for technical interaction between companies and federal laboratories. Companies come to the federal laboratories for many reasons: some try to enhance their training and human capital, others to build precompetitive knowledge not likely to show a quick return, and still others to avail themselves of unique lab facilities or seek technical assistance. One implication of these findings is that the traditional view of technology transfer may distort the nature of commercially relevant technical interactions, particularly in an era characterized by rampant “metricmania.” Any assessment of company-laboratory interactions failing to take into account the multiple objectives of many different technical interactions is likely to hinder as much as it helps.     

Federal laboratories & American industry: Fueling innovation

With a little-used gold mine of federal technical resources available to American industry, and adequate networking structure to expedite the transfer of valuable information is needed. The US government's laboratories have assisted some corporations, particularly those in defense-oriented industries, through collaborative research activities. To face the competition from abroad, a greater segment of American industry, of necessity, must tap the technical information and assistance available within the maze of federal laboratories to convert new and existing research into tangible, marketable products. NERAC has designed and tested an accessing model that matches the technological needs of American industry with federal experts through an existing network of federal-laboratory technology-transfer officers. The process is uncomplicated and direct. As a knowledgeable liaison, NERAC has developed a communication network to facilitate the transfer of often-unique material from the federal laboratories to American industry.     

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.     

Industry interactions with federal laboratories

This article is based on two surveys of US firms, all of them members of the Industrial Research Institute, on their interactions with university and federal laboratories. It covers mainly the federal part of the responses. Although questions remain to be answered (a followup survey is planned for mid-1991), the firms had a surprisingly high level of awareness of and interaction with the federal laboratories. Many of them plan to increase their external R&D funding. We believe the firms including such external resources in their strategic planning will achieve stronger competitive positions than those that do not. Director of the Graduate Program in Technology and Science Policy. Previously, he was principal scientist and group manager for Industrial Policy and Planning at the Solar Energy Research Institute in Golden, Colorado. He also served as policy analyst with the National Science Foundation's R&D Assessment Program and, subsequently, as acting leader of the Working Group on Innovation Processes and their Management. Roessner received degrees in electrical engineering from Brown University and Stanford University, and a master's degree and Ph.D. in Science, Technology and Public Policy at Case Western Reserve University. His research interests include the diffusion of technological innovations, national technology policy, government-industry relationships in technology development and use, the management of innovation in industry, and indicators of scientific and technological development.     

Social and economic impact of the commercialization of the Argus II artificial retina in the United States

Each year, the United States invests about $45 billion in research conducted by federal researchers within federal laboratories. These efforts generate extensive social benefits when results are transferred to the private sector. It is important that we effectively quantify the economic and societal impact of federal technology transfer activities to inform taxpayers and policymakers about the value of public investments in this form of research. The Argus II device, an artificial retina commercialized in the United States by Second Sight in 2013, provides a rich example of how private sector innovation can be enhanced by research collaborations with federal labs and academia. Over the 25-year journey from idea to product, Second Sight carried out research and development collaborations with six Department of Energy national laboratories and seven universities. The case of Argus II also offers valuable insight into (1) how private industry, academia, and government can work together to bring socially beneficial innovations to fruition and (2) the tradeoffs inherent in these public–private collaborations. In this paper, we use a Markov model to estimate the realized and potential future social benefits associated with Argus II. We provide an interactive tool that can be used to replicate our findings and modify assumptions using updated patient information as it becomes available. We also provide insight into the aspects of federal involvement surrounding the development of Argus II that contributed to its successful commercialization and discuss other spillover benefits from these public–private collaborations.     

Selling the technology-transfer function

Throughout the federal system, agency technical directors, laboratory managers, and laboratory scientists are faced with a combination of increasing opportunities and external interests in facilitating the transfer of federal technology to civil use. But this process is unlikely to be significantly strengthened or provided with the needed continuity of effort without a more organized and conscious effort to sell the technology-transfer function as one that is important to the US economy. This effort should no be limited to convincing industrial leaders and their laboratories. It needs to involve a more diverse leadership, including the media, professional and trade associations, and public interest groups. It also must be directed internally within federal agencies, to the laboratory management therein, and even to the bench-scientist level. Oftentimes the increased technologytransfer activity that one sees in federal agencies and laboratories belies the fact that there remains a good deal of confusion, misinformation, and lack of interest on the part of laboratory management, intermediate managers, and scientists concerning the value and importance of technology transfer to both the American economy and to the laboratories.     

R&D consortia: Impact on competitiveness?

This research examines the impact of research and development (R&D) consortia on the competitiveness of American companies. It also concludes that since passage of the 1984 National Collaborative Research Act, which allows companies to jointly perform research, only a few R&D consortia have been formed and they do not have much impact on companies through applications of new technology. It is suggested that R&D consortia may have more impact on firms that are catching-up technologically or for which the particular research is tangential to their core business. He holds a Ph.D. in public policy from the George Washington University (1988), and has worked for the National Science Foundation, the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, and the National Academy of Sciences. His interests focus on technology, economic competitiveness, and government policy. He has recently published on these topics in Research Policy (August 1990), and Policy Studies Review (Spring 1991, forthcoming).     

National laboratories as business incubators and region builders

Public sector labs do not appear to have generated as much regional business spinoff as universities and research-intensive businesses. This difference may be explained in large part by the disparate capabilities for and attitudes toward new-firm incubation on the part of parent institutions and other anchor tenants. We believe that federal lab personnel systems, research cultures, geographical isolation, management preferences, and complex public interest issues are responsible. These phenomena are explored in an intensive case study of startups associated with Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico. Interviews conducted with 33 firms confirm many barriers to incubation, but also reveal some advantages offered by public labs and suggest that changes in attitude, culture, and policy can make a difference. We explore the difficult issues of property rights assignment, public employee conflict-of-interest rules, and the use of public sector equity in spinoffs, and we conclude that startup efforts have been underfunded. Lab partnerships with large corporations in comparison are expensive, hoard labor, and are less effective at transferring technology. Recommendations for improvement of the incubation process include entrepreneurial leave and training, streamlining of conflict-of-interest, patent, and licensing procedures, and lab based efforts to connect would be entrepreneurs with sources of business assistance, space and capital.     

Federal technology transfer: Teaching it

This paper recommends development of teaching materials and cases on technology transfer for undergraduate and graduate courses in business and engineering. Its focus is the process of transferring technology from the federal laboratories to business organizations.     

Optimizing federal technology transfer to promote commercialization

Federal technology transfer programs have two primary purposes: (1) to transfer technology (including knowledge, know-how, and ideas, as well as hardware) to companies to strengthen the companies’ commercialization of products and (2) to transfer technology to a federal agency from another federal agency or the private sector so the agency can execute its congressionally designated mission more efficiently and at reduced cost to the taxpayer. In the selection of technology transfer projects for funding, agencies often require that both purposes be satisfied. This study emphasizes the principles of technology transfer to strengthen companies’ commercialization practices.     

Technology Transfer via the Internet: A Way to Link Public Science and Enterprises?

The Internet is receiving increasing attention as a medium for technology transfer between public research and the business sector. Technology policy hopes that Internet presentations of research activities at public institutions will facilitate the exploitation of research results, particularly from those institutions not engaged in technology transfer so far. Based on a survey of public research units in natural sciences and engineering in Germany, we analyze the determinants of firm contacts established via the Internet. Special attention is paid to the effect of experiences in firm interaction in the past. Estimation results suggest that Internet contact to firms is more likely to be established by public research units that are already well situated in the transfer market. Research units that orient their homepage design towards the business sector are more likely to build Internet-based contact with firms. However, there is no evidence that public research units that have not been engaged with firms so far, use the Internet more intensively to get into the transfer business. Our results show that the Internet has a certain potential for advancing technology transfer at public research, although this potential is not fully utilized yet, at least in the case of Germany.     

Electronic commerce and user-based design of a web site: Targeting the technology transfer audience

Web sites have the potential of playing a major role in the exchange of technology related information between federal laboratories and commercializers in the private sector. Most, if not all, Web site designs are developed based on the organization's perception of what the target audience wants from a Web site. This contribution addresses the issue of successful Web site design from the user's perspective in the context of technology transfer. The orientation takes into account important concepts and principles such as cost, marketing, diffusion, information retrieval, and strategic networking. The results of a survey of private sector technology transfer professionals offer insights to meet the target audience's needs, thus making a Web site a timely and cost-effective electronic linkage for interaction, information-seeking, and networking functions that enable technology transfer. This work was funded by United States Air Force contract number F30602-95-C-0240.     

Pathways to national economic benefits from ATP-funded technologies

An important component of the Advanced Technology Program’s (ATP) economic evaluation plan for tracking project progress and outcomes is the administration of an electronic survey on a regular basis to participants in all projects funded since 1993. Progress of projects is compared against business plans and projected economic benefit goals outlined in their proposals. The resulting Business Reporting System (BRS) database is used for ATP project management and for evaluation research. Based on BRS data compiled through December 31, 1996, filed by 480 companies in 210 projects, funded in 19 competitions, this paper provides an overview of pathways to achieving targeted commercial and broader economic goals. Progress reports for the group of projects provide a variety of evidence of (a) opportunities for economic spillovers and national economic benefit and (b) activities supporting technology diffusion.     

Promoting small business through public-sector technology transfer

It is generally concluded that small businesses are the most effective institutional mechanism for the execution of technological innovation in the United States. Federal legislation provides for special considerations to be rendered to small businesses when public-sector technology is to be transferred to the private sector. Nevertheless, the activities of many federal laboratories lag in the transfer of technology to small businesses relative to large businesses. This paper examines the reasons for the current low level of interaction between federal laboratories and small businesses including the constraints typically encountered in working with small businesses. Recommendations are made to enhance the lab/small-business relationship. Finally, a sample program at Sandia National Laboratory for assistance to small businesses is described.     

The effect of publicness on the energy technology decision process

Publicness, a concept developed by public administration theorists, is a measure of government influence on an organizational process. This study examines the effect of publicness on the flow and movement of the energy technology decision process. The study finds that technology service providers have the potential for adversely affecting the technology decision process of service recipients by increasing paperwork, conflict, and decision time. The study suggests that a greater understanding of the multiple forms of publicness can help technology service providers minimize disruptions and administrative costs for service recipients. It lays the groundwork for more extensive research into how economic development agencies, state universities, federal laboratories, and other service providers affect the technology decision process of private firms.     

Database considerations in a technology-transfer network

A computer-based network to support technology transfer between campuses of the California State University and local industry is described. Options associated with designing the database and configuring the hardware are evaluated. The TECHNET system involves 20 campuses of the state university system and is designed to support 1,000 industrial firms. The database consists of faculty expertise in the forms of resumes and company products and capabilities. Member companies may query the database to identify faculty (preferably at a local campus) and/or another company that can help them solve technological and business problems. The benefit of TECHNET to companies in addition to problem solving is new business opportunities and to faculty is consulting opportunities. The work is supported by the California Competitive Technology Project office of the California Department of Commerce.     

Federal laboratory missions,products, and competitiveness

A number of initiatives over the past decade have tried to increase the federal laboratory system's impact on U.S. competitiveness, largely based on assumptions that the system is a reservoir of readily available technology appropriate to industry's competitive needs. However, there is a virtual absence of empirical data on the nature of research and development in the national laboratory system and the character of its R&D “products.” This paper reviews the limited data on R&D in the national laboratory system available from the General Accounting Office, the National Science Foundation, and the National Comparative Research and Development Project. The findings suggest that technologies available within the system are likely to emerge from the most strongly mission-oriented R&D, and are therefore the least likely to spin off and diffuse throughout the industrial base. Once the hardware needs of the Department of Defense (DOD), the Department of Energy (DOE), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) are excluded, most of the system's R&D output is fundamental knowledge, which flows through public domain literature and requires substantial additional processing to become commercial products. The implications are (1) there is no reason to believe the current federal laboratory system can directly enhance U.S. competitiveness; (2) in order for labs to contribute to competitiveness, they must have more explicit missions to do so; and (3) policy expectations of commercial impacts are inconsistent with policy requirements that labs conduct precommercial basic and applied research.