scholarly journals Working with the University Technology Transfer Office

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Fauzan ◽  
Nalaka Gooneratne
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
University Technology Transfer ◽  
Technology Transfer Office ◽  
University Technology ◽  
The University

Priority Challenges of University Technology Transfer with Interpretative Structural Modeling and MICMAC Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (05) ◽  
pp. 2050038
Author(s):  
Renissa S. Quiñones ◽  
June Anne A. Caladcad ◽  
Hubert G. Quiñones ◽  
Charena J. Castro ◽  
Shirley Ann A. Caballes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Geographic Distance ◽  
Structural Modeling ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
University Technology Transfer ◽  
Joint Research ◽  
Micmac Analysis ◽  
University Technology ◽  
The University

Translating university technology via the university–industry route faces an array of challenges. Subsequently, understanding the interrelationships of these challenges hopes to provide a better outlook on the complex nature of the university technology transfer (UTT) process. Such an agenda remains a gap in the domain literature. To advance this oversight, this study intends to identify the UTT challenges and determine their complex contextual relationships. The interpretative structural modeling, together with the MICMAC analysis, was sequentially adopted to derive the overarching structure of the challenges of UTT. A case study in a public university in the Philippines was conducted to carry out these objectives. Findings show that time constraints, knowledge being too theoretical, high costs of managing joint research projects, complex organizational structure, institutional bureaucracy, geographic distance, and lack of national benchmark are driving challenges that influence other challenges in impeding UTT in the representative Philippine university. These findings provide policy insights to key decision-makers and stakeholders on the success of technology transfers.

Information-based imitation of university commercialization strategies: The role of technology transfer office autonomy, age, and membership into an association

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 573-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Konstantinos Pitsakis ◽  
Claudio Giachetti
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Negative Relationship ◽  
University Technology Transfer ◽  
Internal Source ◽  
Technology Transfer Office ◽  
Technology Transfer Offices ◽  
University Technology ◽  
Source Of Information ◽  
Successful Technology

We investigate whether university technology transfer offices, that is, divisions responsible for the commercialization of academic research, imitate their industry peers when designing their commercialization strategy. We borrow from information-based theories of imitation and the literature on academic entrepreneurship to argue that given a technology transfer office’s autonomy to strategize independently from its parent university, information from within and outside the technology transfer office affects its propensity to imitate the commercialization strategy of the “most successful peers,” that is, those with the largest live spinoff portfolio and greatest revenues from spinoffs in the industry. We contend that a technology transfer office’s experience, that is, a function of its age, represents a key internal source of information for the technology transfer office when deciding whether to imitate or not; we also consider the technology transfer office’s embeddedness in a network where the most successful peer is also a member as a key external source of information. From data on 86 British university technology transfer offices and their commercialization strategies between 1993 and 2007 that were drawn from both secondary sources and in-depth interviews with technology transfer office managers, we find that there is a negative relationship between technology transfer offices’ autonomy and their level of imitation of the most successful technology transfer office’s strategy, and that this relationship is moderated by the technology transfer offices’ age and by their membership into an association where the most successful technology transfer office is also a member.

The university technology transfer revolution in Saudi Arabia

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 585-596 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed Alshumaimri ◽  
Taylor Aldridge ◽  
David B. Audretsch
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Technology Transfer ◽  
University Technology Transfer ◽  
University Technology ◽  
The University

scholarly journals Open Innovation with Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping for Modeling the Barriers of University Technology Transfer: A Philippine Scenario

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renissa Quiñones ◽  
June Anne Caladcad ◽  
Hubert Quiñones ◽  
Shirley Ann Caballes ◽  
Dharyll Prince Abellana ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Cognitive Mapping ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
University Technology Transfer ◽  
State University ◽  
Joint Research ◽  
Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping ◽  
University Technology ◽  
The University

The University technology transfer (UTT) process is hindered by various barriers to achieving a successful translation of innovative technologies from universities to industries and other partners. Identifying these various barriers and understanding their interrelationships would provide a better understanding of the complex nature of the UTT process, which may be considered as inputs to crucial decision-making initiatives. This paper addresses this gap by holistically determining UTT barriers and their intertwined relationships. Using the Delphi method and fuzzy cognitive mapping, a case study in a state university in the Philippines was conducted to carry out this objective. The Delphi process extracts 24 relevant barriers of UTT, out of 46 barriers obtained from a comprehensive review of the extant literature. The results show that misalignment between research and commercialization objectives is the barrier that was influenced most by the other barriers. In contrast, high costs of managing joint research projects in terms of time and money and institutional bureaucracy have the highest out-degree measures or are the barriers that influence other barriers the most. These findings provide guidelines to various stakeholders and decision-makers in understanding the existence of barriers in the formulation of strategies and initiatives for a successful UTT process.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document